Split (1)

train · 729k rows

text string	id string	dump string	url string	file_path string	language string	language_score float64	token_count int64	score float64	int_score int64	embedding list	count int64	Content string	Tokens int64	Top_Lang string	Top_Conf float64
St. Margaret of Scotland FREE Catholic School Enroll Now St. Margaret of Scotland, or Margaret of Wessex, was an English princess born in Hungary to Princess Agatha of Hungary and English Prince Edward the Exile around 1045. Her siblings, Cristina and Edgar the Atheling were also born in Hungary around this time. Margaret and her family returned to England when she was 10-years-old and her father was called back as a potential successor to the throne. However, Edward died immediately after the family arrived, but Margaret and Edgar continued to reside at the English court. Margaret's family fled from William the Conqueror after his victory at the Battle of Hastings in 1066. Her widowed mother set out to take her children north to Northumbria. Tradition says, Agatha decided to leave Northumbria and return to the continent, but her family's ship got caught in a storm. The storm drove their ship even more north to Scotland, where they were shipwrecked in 1068. The spot they landed on is now known as "St. Margaret's Hope." Malcolm Canmore III, the king of Scotland, welcomed Margaret and her family and put them under his protection. He soon fell deeply in love with the beautiful and kind princess. Margaret and Malcolm became married in 1070 at the castle of Dunfermline. Together, they had eight children, six sons and two daughters. All of whom were raised with deep Catholic Christian faith. They lived as a holy family, a domestic church. Margaret's kind-nature and good heart was a strong influence on Malcolm's reign. She softened his temper and helped him become a virtuous King of Scotland. Together they prayed, fed the hungry, and offered a powerful example of living faith in action. Margaret was placed in charge of all domestic affairs and was often consulted with state matters, as well. She promoted the arts and education in Scotland. She encouraged Church synods and was involved in efforts to correct the religious abuses involving Bishops, priests and laypeople. Her impact in Scotland led her to being referred to as, "The Pearl of Scotland." She constantly worked to aid the poor Scotland. She encouraged people to live a devout life, grow in prayer, and grow in holiness. She helped to build churches, including the Abbey of Dunfermline, where a relic of the true Cross is kept. She was well-known for her deep life of prayer and piety. She set aside specific times for prayer and to read Scripture. She didn't eat often and slept very little so she would have more time for her devotions. She lived holiness of life as a wife, mother and lay woman; truly in love with Jesus Christ. Malcolm supported Margaret in all her endeavors and admired her religious devotion so much he had her books decorated in jewels, gold and silver. One of these decorated books, a gospel book with portraits of the four evangelists, is now kept in Oxford at the Bodleian Library after it was miraculously recovered from a river. In 1093, Malcolm and their oldest son were killed during the Battle of Alnwick. Already ill and worn from a life full of austerity and fasting, Margaret passed away four days after her husband, on November 16, 1093. Her body was buried before the high alter at Dunfermline. In 1250, Pope Innocent IV canonized Margaret as a Saint, acknowlegeing her life of holiness and extraordinary virtue. She was honored for her work for reform of the Church and her personal holiness. In 1259, Margaret's and Malcolm's bodies were transferred to a chapel in the eastern apse of Dunfermline Abbey. In 1560, Mary Queen of Scots came into possession of Margaret's head. It was kept as a relic. She insisted that it, and Margaret's prayers from heaven, helped assist her in childbirth. Her head later ended up with the Jesuits at the Scots' College, Douai, France, but was lost during the French Revolution. St. Margaret is the patron saint of Scotland and her feast day is celebrated on November 16. St. Faustina Kowalska Find SaintsPopular Saints Saints by Alphabet Saint of the Day Saint Feast Days by Month Patron Saints by Alphabet Copyright 2020 Catholic Online. All materials contained on this site, whether written, audible or visual are the exclusive property of Catholic Online and are protected under U.S. and International copyright laws, © Copyright 2020 Catholic Online. Any unauthorized use, without prior written consent of Catholic Online is strictly forbidden and prohibited. Catholic Online is a Project of Your Catholic Voice Foundation, a Not-for-Profit Corporation. Your Catholic Voice Foundation has been granted a recognition of tax exemption under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. Federal Tax Identification Number: 81-0596847. Your gift is tax-deductible as allowed by law.	<urn:uuid:249b9810-fb32-4e21-8948-d71ea2561b28>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=304	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251696046.73/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127081933-20200127111933-00427.warc.gz	en	0.981205	1,024	3.484375	3	[ -0.22538650035858154, 0.017232399433851242, 0.06835596263408661, -0.1603599637746811, -0.15253707766532898, -0.33093002438545227, -0.1584339141845703, 0.0480792336165905, 0.2863386869430542, -0.09483468532562256, 0.3552718758583069, -0.3666560649871826, 0.2041127234697342, -0.2173896133899...	1	St. Margaret of Scotland FREE Catholic School Enroll Now St. Margaret of Scotland, or Margaret of Wessex, was an English princess born in Hungary to Princess Agatha of Hungary and English Prince Edward the Exile around 1045. Her siblings, Cristina and Edgar the Atheling were also born in Hungary around this time. Margaret and her family returned to England when she was 10-years-old and her father was called back as a potential successor to the throne. However, Edward died immediately after the family arrived, but Margaret and Edgar continued to reside at the English court. Margaret's family fled from William the Conqueror after his victory at the Battle of Hastings in 1066. Her widowed mother set out to take her children north to Northumbria. Tradition says, Agatha decided to leave Northumbria and return to the continent, but her family's ship got caught in a storm. The storm drove their ship even more north to Scotland, where they were shipwrecked in 1068. The spot they landed on is now known as "St. Margaret's Hope." Malcolm Canmore III, the king of Scotland, welcomed Margaret and her family and put them under his protection. He soon fell deeply in love with the beautiful and kind princess. Margaret and Malcolm became married in 1070 at the castle of Dunfermline. Together, they had eight children, six sons and two daughters. All of whom were raised with deep Catholic Christian faith. They lived as a holy family, a domestic church. Margaret's kind-nature and good heart was a strong influence on Malcolm's reign. She softened his temper and helped him become a virtuous King of Scotland. Together they prayed, fed the hungry, and offered a powerful example of living faith in action. Margaret was placed in charge of all domestic affairs and was often consulted with state matters, as well. She promoted the arts and education in Scotland. She encouraged Church synods and was involved in efforts to correct the religious abuses involving Bishops, priests and laypeople. Her impact in Scotland led her to being referred to as, "The Pearl of Scotland." She constantly worked to aid the poor Scotland. She encouraged people to live a devout life, grow in prayer, and grow in holiness. She helped to build churches, including the Abbey of Dunfermline, where a relic of the true Cross is kept. She was well-known for her deep life of prayer and piety. She set aside specific times for prayer and to read Scripture. She didn't eat often and slept very little so she would have more time for her devotions. She lived holiness of life as a wife, mother and lay woman; truly in love with Jesus Christ. Malcolm supported Margaret in all her endeavors and admired her religious devotion so much he had her books decorated in jewels, gold and silver. One of these decorated books, a gospel book with portraits of the four evangelists, is now kept in Oxford at the Bodleian Library after it was miraculously recovered from a river. In 1093, Malcolm and their oldest son were killed during the Battle of Alnwick. Already ill and worn from a life full of austerity and fasting, Margaret passed away four days after her husband, on November 16, 1093. Her body was buried before the high alter at Dunfermline. In 1250, Pope Innocent IV canonized Margaret as a Saint, acknowlegeing her life of holiness and extraordinary virtue. She was honored for her work for reform of the Church and her personal holiness. In 1259, Margaret's and Malcolm's bodies were transferred to a chapel in the eastern apse of Dunfermline Abbey. In 1560, Mary Queen of Scots came into possession of Margaret's head. It was kept as a relic. She insisted that it, and Margaret's prayers from heaven, helped assist her in childbirth. Her head later ended up with the Jesuits at the Scots' College, Douai, France, but was lost during the French Revolution. St. Margaret is the patron saint of Scotland and her feast day is celebrated on November 16. St. Faustina Kowalska Find SaintsPopular Saints Saints by Alphabet Saint of the Day Saint Feast Days by Month Patron Saints by Alphabet Copyright 2020 Catholic Online. All materials contained on this site, whether written, audible or visual are the exclusive property of Catholic Online and are protected under U.S. and International copyright laws, © Copyright 2020 Catholic Online. Any unauthorized use, without prior written consent of Catholic Online is strictly forbidden and prohibited. Catholic Online is a Project of Your Catholic Voice Foundation, a Not-for-Profit Corporation. Your Catholic Voice Foundation has been granted a recognition of tax exemption under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. Federal Tax Identification Number: 81-0596847. Your gift is tax-deductible as allowed by law.	1,055	ENGLISH	1
A Story from Confucius ~ Folktale Stories for Kids A Folktale story from the philosopher Confucius, published in Chinese Fables and Folk Stories (1908), which explains losing one's temper and the art of self-control. Confucius once heard two of his pupils quarreling. One was of a gentle nature and was called by all the students a peaceful man. The other had a good brain and a kind heart, but was given to great anger. If he wished to do a thing, he did it, and no man could prevent; if any one tried to hinder him, he would show sudden and terrible rage. One day, after one of these fits of temper, the blood came from his mouth, and, in great fear, he went to Confucius. "What shall I do with my body?" he asked, "I fear I shall not live long. It may be better that I no longer study and work. I am your pupil and you love me as a father. Tell me what to do for my body." Confucius answered, "Tsze-Lu, you have a wrong idea about your body. It is not the study, not the work in school, but your great anger that causes the trouble. "I will help you to see this. You remember when you and Nou-Wui quarreled. He was at peace and happy again in a little time, but you were very long in overcoming your anger. You can not expect to live long if you do that way. Every time one of the pupils says a thing you do not like, you are greatly enraged. There are a thousand in this school. If each offends you only once, you will have a fit of temper a thousand times this year. And you will surely die, if you do not use more self-control. I want to ask you some questions:— "How many teeth have you?" "I have thirty-two, teacher." "How many tongues?" "How many teeth have you lost?" "I lost one when I was nine years old, and four when I was about twenty-six years old." "And your tongue—is it still perfect?" "You know Mun-Gun, who is quite old?" "Yes, I know him well." "How many teeth do you think he had at your age?" "I do not know." "How many has he now?" "Two, I think. But his tongue is perfect, though he is very old." "You see the teeth are lost because they are strong, and determined to have everything they desire. They are hard and hurt the tongue many times, but the tongue never hurts the teeth. Yet, it endures until the end, while the teeth are the first of man to decay. The tongue is peaceful and gentle with the teeth. It never grows angry and fights them, even when they are in the wrong. It always helps them do their work, in preparing man's food for him, although the teeth never help the tongue, and they always resist everything. "And so it is with man. The strongest to resist, is the first to decay; and you, Tsze-Lu, will be even so if you learn not the great lesson of self-control."	<urn:uuid:73db5627-8932-4550-bb53-9333d5fc644c>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.storiestogrowby.org/story/a-story-from-confucius-on-losing-ones-temper-folktale-stories-for-kids/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250589560.16/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117123339-20200117151339-00259.warc.gz	en	0.980191	689	3.46875	3	[ -0.02755798026919365, 0.036467697471380234, 0.3881649672985077, -0.15622176229953766, -0.2845923602581024, -0.03114103525876999, 0.34330374002456665, 0.19481374323368073, -0.26564982533454895, -0.14988330006599426, -0.02267475053668022, -0.16688308119773865, 0.29689428210258484, 0.30164694...	3	A Story from Confucius ~ Folktale Stories for Kids A Folktale story from the philosopher Confucius, published in Chinese Fables and Folk Stories (1908), which explains losing one's temper and the art of self-control. Confucius once heard two of his pupils quarreling. One was of a gentle nature and was called by all the students a peaceful man. The other had a good brain and a kind heart, but was given to great anger. If he wished to do a thing, he did it, and no man could prevent; if any one tried to hinder him, he would show sudden and terrible rage. One day, after one of these fits of temper, the blood came from his mouth, and, in great fear, he went to Confucius. "What shall I do with my body?" he asked, "I fear I shall not live long. It may be better that I no longer study and work. I am your pupil and you love me as a father. Tell me what to do for my body." Confucius answered, "Tsze-Lu, you have a wrong idea about your body. It is not the study, not the work in school, but your great anger that causes the trouble. "I will help you to see this. You remember when you and Nou-Wui quarreled. He was at peace and happy again in a little time, but you were very long in overcoming your anger. You can not expect to live long if you do that way. Every time one of the pupils says a thing you do not like, you are greatly enraged. There are a thousand in this school. If each offends you only once, you will have a fit of temper a thousand times this year. And you will surely die, if you do not use more self-control. I want to ask you some questions:— "How many teeth have you?" "I have thirty-two, teacher." "How many tongues?" "How many teeth have you lost?" "I lost one when I was nine years old, and four when I was about twenty-six years old." "And your tongue—is it still perfect?" "You know Mun-Gun, who is quite old?" "Yes, I know him well." "How many teeth do you think he had at your age?" "I do not know." "How many has he now?" "Two, I think. But his tongue is perfect, though he is very old." "You see the teeth are lost because they are strong, and determined to have everything they desire. They are hard and hurt the tongue many times, but the tongue never hurts the teeth. Yet, it endures until the end, while the teeth are the first of man to decay. The tongue is peaceful and gentle with the teeth. It never grows angry and fights them, even when they are in the wrong. It always helps them do their work, in preparing man's food for him, although the teeth never help the tongue, and they always resist everything. "And so it is with man. The strongest to resist, is the first to decay; and you, Tsze-Lu, will be even so if you learn not the great lesson of self-control."	655	ENGLISH	1
KNEELING on the prickly savannah, Bakhita Ahmed implores a stonyfaced Arab herder to release her brother. She and her sibling were both snatched and enslaved 11 years ago, when they were children. Recently freed, Bakhita wants to go home, to be with her people, the Dinka tribe of southern Sudan, even though she has been away long enough to forget their language and religion. She wants to take her sibling with her: “You have kept him long enough,” she says. Sudan's government hotly denies that there is slavery. But in the past two years, a joint tribal committee of Arab and Dinka elders has quietly arranged the return of 670 children from captivity in the Arab north to their families in the country's black, southern half. Slaves have long been seized during tribal clashes in Sudan. Traditionally, the numbers captured were relatively small, and many were returned to their families after the talks which ended each inter-tribal spat. But since the civil war reignited 19 years ago, such exchanges are rarer. The Dinka claim that 14,000 of their women and children have been kidnapped in the past decade. Most, like Bakhita, are renamed, obliged to become Muslims, and then forced to marry their captor or herd his animals. Eventually, they are accepted into his tribe as black—and therefore low caste—Arabs. Christian Solidarity International (CSI), a Swiss charity, estimates that there may be more than 200,000 slaves in Sudan. This is surely an exaggeration. CSI's numbers are warped by the group's habit of buying slaves in order to set them free. The charity, and others, have “redeemed” more than 100,000 “slaves” in recent years, at $35-75 a head. This is a lot of money in Sudan. Certainly it is incentive enough to prompt slavers to mount more raids, in order to capture more slaves to sell to CSI. But what aid workers think more likely is that many of the people being “redeemed” were never slaves in the first place. To con $35 out of a gullible westerner, many Sudanese would be happy to wear shackles for a few hours. For real slaves, however, life remains wretched. The Arab herder tells Bakhita that he will free her brother. But not for another three months, or maybe more. This article appeared in the Middle East and Africa section of the print edition under the headline "A funny way to end the slave trade"	<urn:uuid:fe4b9595-efd6-463d-b96c-5b553f6469c8>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.economist.com/middle-east-and-africa/2002/02/07/a-funny-way-to-end-the-slave-trade	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606226.29/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121222429-20200122011429-00514.warc.gz	en	0.982783	540	3.328125	3	[ -0.23115262389183044, 0.3958905339241028, -0.12184907495975494, -0.027075428515672684, 0.09971814602613449, 0.015309582464396954, -0.18761813640594482, -0.3136290907859802, -0.10614154487848282, 0.14880308508872986, 0.3748750686645508, -0.16812601685523987, 0.002364333486184478, 0.13897830...	1	KNEELING on the prickly savannah, Bakhita Ahmed implores a stonyfaced Arab herder to release her brother. She and her sibling were both snatched and enslaved 11 years ago, when they were children. Recently freed, Bakhita wants to go home, to be with her people, the Dinka tribe of southern Sudan, even though she has been away long enough to forget their language and religion. She wants to take her sibling with her: “You have kept him long enough,” she says. Sudan's government hotly denies that there is slavery. But in the past two years, a joint tribal committee of Arab and Dinka elders has quietly arranged the return of 670 children from captivity in the Arab north to their families in the country's black, southern half. Slaves have long been seized during tribal clashes in Sudan. Traditionally, the numbers captured were relatively small, and many were returned to their families after the talks which ended each inter-tribal spat. But since the civil war reignited 19 years ago, such exchanges are rarer. The Dinka claim that 14,000 of their women and children have been kidnapped in the past decade. Most, like Bakhita, are renamed, obliged to become Muslims, and then forced to marry their captor or herd his animals. Eventually, they are accepted into his tribe as black—and therefore low caste—Arabs. Christian Solidarity International (CSI), a Swiss charity, estimates that there may be more than 200,000 slaves in Sudan. This is surely an exaggeration. CSI's numbers are warped by the group's habit of buying slaves in order to set them free. The charity, and others, have “redeemed” more than 100,000 “slaves” in recent years, at $35-75 a head. This is a lot of money in Sudan. Certainly it is incentive enough to prompt slavers to mount more raids, in order to capture more slaves to sell to CSI. But what aid workers think more likely is that many of the people being “redeemed” were never slaves in the first place. To con $35 out of a gullible westerner, many Sudanese would be happy to wear shackles for a few hours. For real slaves, however, life remains wretched. The Arab herder tells Bakhita that he will free her brother. But not for another three months, or maybe more. This article appeared in the Middle East and Africa section of the print edition under the headline "A funny way to end the slave trade"	551	ENGLISH	1
The late educator and cultural critic, Neil Postmen, in his classic book “The Disappearance of Childhood”, writes, “Without secrets … there can be no such thing as childhood.” What does he mean by that? Postman was writing about the impact of television in particular, which at the time of his writing was the pervasive new visual medium to which children were fast becoming exposed. His point was that because television viewing requires no special skill, as does reading, it is readily accessible to children. They don’t have to break the code, as it were, to learn about things that adults believe they are not ready to see, hear or know. Our contemporary view of childhood as a special time, requiring special protection, supervision and education, is a relatively modern one. In earlier times, children were either infants or small adults, exposed in every way to adult life and behavior without any thought that they needed to be shielded from anything. Over time, numerous social and cultural influences contributed to the idea that children are different from adults, that they must mature into adulthood, and that adults have the responsibility for their growth and development. A child’s knowledge of life would be under the control of adults in accordance with his level of development. It is in that sense that education was intended to make information available to children in accordance with their developmental stage, their readiness to process certain material. It is this ability to give information in accordance with a child’s readiness to receive it that has been interrupted by the advent of first television, and now the newer media. When Postman writes of adult secrets, he is referring to the ability to withhold information from children that adults think they are not ready to have. In today’s world, parents find it increasingly impossible to withhold both personal and world information from their children. World news of a disturbing nature is disseminated widely through media that is all pervasive. Personal matters seem no longer to be private in the face of social media and its encouragement of self-exposure. In one sense, secrets - especially on the family level - cannot be kept from children. Information parents think would be disturbing to children is often something that disturbs the parents themselves. Children are sensitive to, and pick up, parents worries or upsets. When children don’t know the secret, they do know there is one, and the unknown is often more upsetting than the reality. Often, our “secrets” are matters we find too difficult to talk about. Because the information seems disturbing, it may be hard to find the appropriate language to use when talking to a child. We may have trouble translating “facts” from an adult point of view into a child’s world and way of thinking. We’re not sure what our children are ready to hear, and when they are ready to hear it. Children show in their behavior and with their questions, when they are ready to know about something. Most stories are told over time, with children changing the subject whenever they have heard as much as they want to know. In this way, even matters that may seem traumatic are processed a little at a time, becoming just accepted facts in children’s own story about themselves or their family. This is a different experience from learning something within an adult construct later in life. If we are thinking about protecting our children, we are best off being the ones to share our “secrets” ourselves, as our children show us they are ready to hear them. Elaine Heffner, LCSW, Ed.D., has written for Parents Magazine, Fox.com, Redbook, Disney online and PBS Parents, as well as other publications. She has appeared on PBS, ABC, Fox TV and other networks. Dr. Heffner is the author of “Goodenoughmothering: The Best of the Blog,” as well as “Mothering: The Emotional Experience of Motherhood after Freud and Feminism.” She is a psychotherapist and parent educator in private practice, as well as a senior lecturer of education in psychiatry at Weill Cornell Medical College. Dr. Heffner was a co-founder and served as director of the Nursery School Treatment Center at Payne Whitney Clinic, New York Hospital. And she blogs at goodenoughmothering.com.	<urn:uuid:a14d7ca6-3bae-4496-906a-f0b9098f6730>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.norwichbulletin.com/opinion/20191008/dr-elaine-heffner-sharing-secrets-with-children	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606696.26/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122042145-20200122071145-00211.warc.gz	en	0.980917	899	3.328125	3	[ 0.24650642275810242, 0.46793681383132935, 0.14107351005077362, -0.434367835521698, 0.1301518827676773, 0.4723037779331207, 0.19806604087352753, 0.10092008113861084, -0.024027444422245026, 0.05084514245390892, 0.22059950232505798, 0.17829442024230957, 0.3903909921646118, 0.42791321873664856...	1	The late educator and cultural critic, Neil Postmen, in his classic book “The Disappearance of Childhood”, writes, “Without secrets … there can be no such thing as childhood.” What does he mean by that? Postman was writing about the impact of television in particular, which at the time of his writing was the pervasive new visual medium to which children were fast becoming exposed. His point was that because television viewing requires no special skill, as does reading, it is readily accessible to children. They don’t have to break the code, as it were, to learn about things that adults believe they are not ready to see, hear or know. Our contemporary view of childhood as a special time, requiring special protection, supervision and education, is a relatively modern one. In earlier times, children were either infants or small adults, exposed in every way to adult life and behavior without any thought that they needed to be shielded from anything. Over time, numerous social and cultural influences contributed to the idea that children are different from adults, that they must mature into adulthood, and that adults have the responsibility for their growth and development. A child’s knowledge of life would be under the control of adults in accordance with his level of development. It is in that sense that education was intended to make information available to children in accordance with their developmental stage, their readiness to process certain material. It is this ability to give information in accordance with a child’s readiness to receive it that has been interrupted by the advent of first television, and now the newer media. When Postman writes of adult secrets, he is referring to the ability to withhold information from children that adults think they are not ready to have. In today’s world, parents find it increasingly impossible to withhold both personal and world information from their children. World news of a disturbing nature is disseminated widely through media that is all pervasive. Personal matters seem no longer to be private in the face of social media and its encouragement of self-exposure. In one sense, secrets - especially on the family level - cannot be kept from children. Information parents think would be disturbing to children is often something that disturbs the parents themselves. Children are sensitive to, and pick up, parents worries or upsets. When children don’t know the secret, they do know there is one, and the unknown is often more upsetting than the reality. Often, our “secrets” are matters we find too difficult to talk about. Because the information seems disturbing, it may be hard to find the appropriate language to use when talking to a child. We may have trouble translating “facts” from an adult point of view into a child’s world and way of thinking. We’re not sure what our children are ready to hear, and when they are ready to hear it. Children show in their behavior and with their questions, when they are ready to know about something. Most stories are told over time, with children changing the subject whenever they have heard as much as they want to know. In this way, even matters that may seem traumatic are processed a little at a time, becoming just accepted facts in children’s own story about themselves or their family. This is a different experience from learning something within an adult construct later in life. If we are thinking about protecting our children, we are best off being the ones to share our “secrets” ourselves, as our children show us they are ready to hear them. Elaine Heffner, LCSW, Ed.D., has written for Parents Magazine, Fox.com, Redbook, Disney online and PBS Parents, as well as other publications. She has appeared on PBS, ABC, Fox TV and other networks. Dr. Heffner is the author of “Goodenoughmothering: The Best of the Blog,” as well as “Mothering: The Emotional Experience of Motherhood after Freud and Feminism.” She is a psychotherapist and parent educator in private practice, as well as a senior lecturer of education in psychiatry at Weill Cornell Medical College. Dr. Heffner was a co-founder and served as director of the Nursery School Treatment Center at Payne Whitney Clinic, New York Hospital. And she blogs at goodenoughmothering.com.	852	ENGLISH	1
Adam Smith (16 June [O.S. 5 June] 1723 – 17 July 1790) was a Scottish economist, philosopher and author as well as a moral philosopher, a pioneer of political economy and a key figure during the Scottish Enlightenment, also known as ”The Father of Economics” or ”The Father of Capitalism”. Smith wrote two classic works, The Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759) and An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (1776). The latter, often abbreviated as The Wealth of Nations, is considered his magnum opus and the first modern work of economics. In his work, Adam Smith introduced his theory of absolute advantage.Smith studied social philosophy at the University of Glasgow and at Balliol College, Oxford, where he was one of the first students to benefit from scholarships set up by fellow Scot John Snell. After graduating, he delivered a successful series of public lectures at the University of Edinburgh, leading him to collaborate with David Hume during the Scottish Enlightenment. Smith obtained a professorship at Glasgow, teaching moral philosophy and during this time, wrote and published The Theory of Moral Sentiments. In his later life, he took a tutoring position that allowed him to travel throughout Europe, where he met other intellectual leaders of his day. Smith laid the foundations of classical free market economic theory. The Wealth of Nations was a precursor to the modern academic discipline of economics. In this and other works, he developed the concept of division of labour and expounded upon how rational self-interest and competition can lead to economic prosperity. Smith was controversial in his own day and his general approach and writing style were often satirised by writers such as Horace Walpole.	<urn:uuid:bc04d93a-5f61-4e23-913f-18bdf8774de3>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://goodquotes.me/authors/adam-smith/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250604849.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121162615-20200121191615-00406.warc.gz	en	0.984396	351	3.390625	3	[ -0.055550191551446915, 0.54998779296875, 0.020756684243679047, 0.2849152982234955, -0.09487944096326828, -0.029439641162753105, 0.33911269903182983, 0.2261863350868225, -0.14483371376991272, -0.0062474883161485195, -0.0006914706900715828, 0.030184702947735786, 0.21336239576339722, -0.07111...	2	Adam Smith (16 June [O.S. 5 June] 1723 – 17 July 1790) was a Scottish economist, philosopher and author as well as a moral philosopher, a pioneer of political economy and a key figure during the Scottish Enlightenment, also known as ”The Father of Economics” or ”The Father of Capitalism”. Smith wrote two classic works, The Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759) and An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (1776). The latter, often abbreviated as The Wealth of Nations, is considered his magnum opus and the first modern work of economics. In his work, Adam Smith introduced his theory of absolute advantage.Smith studied social philosophy at the University of Glasgow and at Balliol College, Oxford, where he was one of the first students to benefit from scholarships set up by fellow Scot John Snell. After graduating, he delivered a successful series of public lectures at the University of Edinburgh, leading him to collaborate with David Hume during the Scottish Enlightenment. Smith obtained a professorship at Glasgow, teaching moral philosophy and during this time, wrote and published The Theory of Moral Sentiments. In his later life, he took a tutoring position that allowed him to travel throughout Europe, where he met other intellectual leaders of his day. Smith laid the foundations of classical free market economic theory. The Wealth of Nations was a precursor to the modern academic discipline of economics. In this and other works, he developed the concept of division of labour and expounded upon how rational self-interest and competition can lead to economic prosperity. Smith was controversial in his own day and his general approach and writing style were often satirised by writers such as Horace Walpole.	358	ENGLISH	1
Governmental body of Athens and Sparta Spartans were the warriors. Athenians were the brains. This is what we learned in school as kids. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Governmental Body Of Athens And Sparta" essay for youCreate order We did delve into how these great cities worked. It has gone down in history that Athens was the birthplace of democracy. This makes many people believe that their was equality in Athens like their is in today’s democratic societies. However if you were not lucky enough to be born a rich Athenian male you were not allowed to hold political office. Spartans were the warriors everyone fear in Greece. They were known for their ruthlessness. Their military are till this day revered by countries. How did these societies work? If the Spartans were always away who ran the government? Who participated in the political aspects of these city-states? In this essay these questions will be answered and many others. Let’s delve into the ancient cities of Athens and Sparta. Athens and Sparta had a very strict and finite way that one could participate in Public life and make decisions for the Community. Although both Athens and Sparta had very similar rules. Sparta was very cut to and dry, If you were a free male citizen in Sparta you were part of the Assembly. The Assembly not only had the power to pick the annual Ephors they also had the power to pick the Gerousia when a position became available. The Assembly also were able to pass laws and were able to make decisions on war. However, the assembly had little power compared to the Ephors and the Gerousia. The Ephors were elected annually. Ephors could only serve one term in office. The Ephors combined with the two kings were considered the Executive branch in Sparta. (Brand, P. J. (n.d.).) The Gerousia were a more elite group that was harder to get into. Once a free male citizen became 60 they could become part of the Gerousia once a position became available. The Gerousia were the ones who ultimately made the decision as no laws could be passed without their approval. These three assemblies including the Kings are who made decisions that affected the community in Sparta. As for the right to participate in public life Spartan women were permitted the freedom to go out in public. This being mostly due to the fact the free male spartan were soldiers and could not be there to manage the households economic affairs. During Athens Archaic Period the power to participate in public life and make decisions were solely in the hand on the Aristocratic class. The Aristocratic class were the ones who controlled both the economy as well as the political government in Athens. The middle class would often fight for economic and political rights that were more favorable to them. Where as the poor class would fall so far in debt to the aristocratic class that they would end up selling themselves into slavery. This was first changed by Solon. His reform made it that the lower class could not sell themselves to forgo their debt. Cleisthenes is where democracy truly began in athens. Democracy in Athens however, did not differ very much from Sparta’s government. The only population that was allowed to participate in the political aspect of the government were free adult males who had athenian parent’s. When it came to seeking political office Athen’s still had a class based system. The richest men were known as 500 Bushel men (Brand, P. J. (n.d.). These men were given the freedom to apply for any political position. Which included the 10 anual generals that were elected for the military. The 300 bushel men(Brand, P. J. (n.d.)) as well as 200 bushel men(Brand, P. J. (n.d.)) could only serve for lower political offices. The lowest class 199 bushel men (Brand, P. J. (n.d.)) could not be assigned into a political office however, the could vote in the assembly. Everyone else which included women, slaves and metics ( Foreigners) were not allowed to participate in and part of the government politically.The popular Assembly consisted of all male athenian citizens 20 years or older. Higher political offices were only given to the wealthie male athenian citizen. These were mainly aristocrats. Although Sparta and Athens had very different systems their rules of who could participate in the Political aspect of their cities did not differ. In Sparta as well as Athens they only ones who were allowed to participate in their government were male citizens of their cities decent. However, where Sparta had a more all inclusive system of all Spartan male citizens were equal. Athens had a class based system. The richer you were the more power you held politically. Spartan society did not discriminate themselves into classes because they all believed to be superior over the helots. (Brand, P. J. (n.d.).) In conclusion, Athens and Sparta although different cities with different government had very similar rules. Sparta was known for their military. However their government were very equal. All free Spartan males were allowed to run for government positions. Athens although democratic were more judgmental with their own people. They had a class based system on who could and could not run for office. Spartan women were known for being outspoken and were able to run their household. All in all Although both city states had many differences in how things were run. They both had a downfall in the end due to not being a united country. 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:f73187ba-4d9b-4a3c-af2a-11a215781bcf>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://studydriver.com/governmental-body-of-athens-and-sparta/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250625097.75/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124191133-20200124220133-00183.warc.gz	en	0.993423	1,188	3.859375	4	[ -0.18809980154037476, 0.38490021228790283, 0.4538995027542114, -0.35176417231559753, -0.2846415638923645, -0.03933832049369812, 0.13381865620613098, 0.32957202196121216, -0.19617675244808197, 0.48065754771232605, -0.37586450576782227, -0.024416569620370865, -0.23776808381080627, 0.36200082...	1	Governmental body of Athens and Sparta Spartans were the warriors. Athenians were the brains. This is what we learned in school as kids. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Governmental Body Of Athens And Sparta" essay for youCreate order We did delve into how these great cities worked. It has gone down in history that Athens was the birthplace of democracy. This makes many people believe that their was equality in Athens like their is in today’s democratic societies. However if you were not lucky enough to be born a rich Athenian male you were not allowed to hold political office. Spartans were the warriors everyone fear in Greece. They were known for their ruthlessness. Their military are till this day revered by countries. How did these societies work? If the Spartans were always away who ran the government? Who participated in the political aspects of these city-states? In this essay these questions will be answered and many others. Let’s delve into the ancient cities of Athens and Sparta. Athens and Sparta had a very strict and finite way that one could participate in Public life and make decisions for the Community. Although both Athens and Sparta had very similar rules. Sparta was very cut to and dry, If you were a free male citizen in Sparta you were part of the Assembly. The Assembly not only had the power to pick the annual Ephors they also had the power to pick the Gerousia when a position became available. The Assembly also were able to pass laws and were able to make decisions on war. However, the assembly had little power compared to the Ephors and the Gerousia. The Ephors were elected annually. Ephors could only serve one term in office. The Ephors combined with the two kings were considered the Executive branch in Sparta. (Brand, P. J. (n.d.).) The Gerousia were a more elite group that was harder to get into. Once a free male citizen became 60 they could become part of the Gerousia once a position became available. The Gerousia were the ones who ultimately made the decision as no laws could be passed without their approval. These three assemblies including the Kings are who made decisions that affected the community in Sparta. As for the right to participate in public life Spartan women were permitted the freedom to go out in public. This being mostly due to the fact the free male spartan were soldiers and could not be there to manage the households economic affairs. During Athens Archaic Period the power to participate in public life and make decisions were solely in the hand on the Aristocratic class. The Aristocratic class were the ones who controlled both the economy as well as the political government in Athens. The middle class would often fight for economic and political rights that were more favorable to them. Where as the poor class would fall so far in debt to the aristocratic class that they would end up selling themselves into slavery. This was first changed by Solon. His reform made it that the lower class could not sell themselves to forgo their debt. Cleisthenes is where democracy truly began in athens. Democracy in Athens however, did not differ very much from Sparta’s government. The only population that was allowed to participate in the political aspect of the government were free adult males who had athenian parent’s. When it came to seeking political office Athen’s still had a class based system. The richest men were known as 500 Bushel men (Brand, P. J. (n.d.). These men were given the freedom to apply for any political position. Which included the 10 anual generals that were elected for the military. The 300 bushel men(Brand, P. J. (n.d.)) as well as 200 bushel men(Brand, P. J. (n.d.)) could only serve for lower political offices. The lowest class 199 bushel men (Brand, P. J. (n.d.)) could not be assigned into a political office however, the could vote in the assembly. Everyone else which included women, slaves and metics ( Foreigners) were not allowed to participate in and part of the government politically.The popular Assembly consisted of all male athenian citizens 20 years or older. Higher political offices were only given to the wealthie male athenian citizen. These were mainly aristocrats. Although Sparta and Athens had very different systems their rules of who could participate in the Political aspect of their cities did not differ. In Sparta as well as Athens they only ones who were allowed to participate in their government were male citizens of their cities decent. However, where Sparta had a more all inclusive system of all Spartan male citizens were equal. Athens had a class based system. The richer you were the more power you held politically. Spartan society did not discriminate themselves into classes because they all believed to be superior over the helots. (Brand, P. J. (n.d.).) In conclusion, Athens and Sparta although different cities with different government had very similar rules. Sparta was known for their military. However their government were very equal. All free Spartan males were allowed to run for government positions. Athens although democratic were more judgmental with their own people. They had a class based system on who could and could not run for office. Spartan women were known for being outspoken and were able to run their household. All in all Although both city states had many differences in how things were run. They both had a downfall in the end due to not being a united country. 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	1,179	ENGLISH	1
Octavius Augustus Ceasar is probably the most important person in the history of Rome. Octavius ruled from 27 BC to 14 AD. During his time as ruler, the Roman Empire experienced its longest time of peace. Because he knew his people, had a strong military background, knew how to solve problems, Patience, and created a new government, this is why Octavius “Augustus” Ceasar was a great leader. One reason Caesar was a good ruler was his strong military background. Despite Octavius being a sickly child, and short with pale complexion. Always having terrible teeth even as he got older he was always pale skinned and short. Octavius served with Julius Caesar in the Spanish expedition of 46 BC, and he was to take a command spot in Caesar's planned Parthian expedition of 44 BC even though at that time he was only an 18 year-old teenager. Octavius was with his friends completing his academic and military school when he heard about Caesar's death. Needless to say, he was upset about what happened and left for Rome as soon as he heard. Julius had adopted Octavius thus making him the next ruler in his will. Without a doubt this increased the urge to avenge his “father’s” murder. As Antony was deemed an enemy of the state, Octavius needed to defeat him. In the summer of 31 BC, Antony moved his army to Greece with Octavius not far behind. Octavius brought his head military advisor and long time friend Agrippa to take over his navy. Although Antony and Octavius’s armies were pretty even,	<urn:uuid:d08febdc-5a72-471b-ae03-7b1c09b2ca68>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.bartleby.com/essay/The-Importance-of-Octavius-Augustus-Ceasar-i-P3A6YCL4J8B6A	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251700675.78/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127112805-20200127142805-00137.warc.gz	en	0.99296	343	3.3125	3	[ -0.022761642932891846, 0.2228558510541916, 0.4545695185661316, 0.26062536239624023, -0.313183069229126, -0.41429001092910767, 0.23265759646892548, 0.40925538539886475, 0.041496917605400085, -0.1533176749944687, 0.0711885467171669, -0.4184733033180237, -0.35998770594596863, 0.31071314215660...	2	Octavius Augustus Ceasar is probably the most important person in the history of Rome. Octavius ruled from 27 BC to 14 AD. During his time as ruler, the Roman Empire experienced its longest time of peace. Because he knew his people, had a strong military background, knew how to solve problems, Patience, and created a new government, this is why Octavius “Augustus” Ceasar was a great leader. One reason Caesar was a good ruler was his strong military background. Despite Octavius being a sickly child, and short with pale complexion. Always having terrible teeth even as he got older he was always pale skinned and short. Octavius served with Julius Caesar in the Spanish expedition of 46 BC, and he was to take a command spot in Caesar's planned Parthian expedition of 44 BC even though at that time he was only an 18 year-old teenager. Octavius was with his friends completing his academic and military school when he heard about Caesar's death. Needless to say, he was upset about what happened and left for Rome as soon as he heard. Julius had adopted Octavius thus making him the next ruler in his will. Without a doubt this increased the urge to avenge his “father’s” murder. As Antony was deemed an enemy of the state, Octavius needed to defeat him. In the summer of 31 BC, Antony moved his army to Greece with Octavius not far behind. Octavius brought his head military advisor and long time friend Agrippa to take over his navy. Although Antony and Octavius’s armies were pretty even,	343	ENGLISH	1
Memorial Day is a national holiday in the United States. It is also a state holiday in many states. The holiday honors troops who have died in past wars like World War I and the Korean War. Memorial Day was first held in 1865 after the American Civil War. It was called Decoration Day at that time. The holiday was first called Memorial Day in 1882, and became a federal holiday in 1967. On June 28, 1968, the United States Congress made a law that said that the official Memorial Day holiday is May 30, but that Memorial Day was to be observed by Federal Employees as a paid holiday on the last Monday in May. Memorial Day is thought of by many Americans as being the start of summer. It was founded by John A. Logan(General).He fought in the Civil and Mexican–American War.	<urn:uuid:d8b30e43-c6bd-47dc-a5c4-b6b1ab3f6adc>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memorial_Day	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251778168.77/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128091916-20200128121916-00057.warc.gz	en	0.990896	167	3.71875	4	[ -0.3313763439655304, 0.3954258859157562, 0.5704184174537659, -0.037168290466070175, -0.2770688533782959, 0.18914324045181274, 0.2399776726961136, 0.15133342146873474, -0.07129527628421783, 0.06731219589710236, 0.13349387049674988, 0.5841822028160095, -0.11545457690954208, 0.650486886501312...	4	Memorial Day is a national holiday in the United States. It is also a state holiday in many states. The holiday honors troops who have died in past wars like World War I and the Korean War. Memorial Day was first held in 1865 after the American Civil War. It was called Decoration Day at that time. The holiday was first called Memorial Day in 1882, and became a federal holiday in 1967. On June 28, 1968, the United States Congress made a law that said that the official Memorial Day holiday is May 30, but that Memorial Day was to be observed by Federal Employees as a paid holiday on the last Monday in May. Memorial Day is thought of by many Americans as being the start of summer. It was founded by John A. Logan(General).He fought in the Civil and Mexican–American War.	185	ENGLISH	1
It’s that time of year. Parents are rushing to and fro, whether from store to store or website to website, to find the perfect gifts for their children. And children are making lists for Santa. They will write letters and make pleas for all the things their little hearts desire and mail them to a “jolly old elf” clad in red and white furs who lives at the North Pole. But wait. Santa Claus is also known as St. Nick. And Saint Nicholas didn’t call the North Pole home. He lived in modern-day Turkey. So when did Santa move to his new arctic digs? And just how old is he? Let’s follow the evolution of the legend and see what it can teach us about world-building. Here are 10 things you might not know about Santa Claus. - Nicholas, who would later be canonized as Saint Nicholas, was born sometime around 270 AD in a town that was at the time a part of Greece, but today is part of Turkey. He lost his parents at a young age, but was left with a large inheritance. Nicholas decided to dedicate his life to the Christian church and used his inheritance to help those in need whenever he could. The most famous account of this is when Nicholas secretly gave money to an indebted father of three daughters so he would have the money to pay their dowries. That meant the daughters could marry instead of becoming prostitutes to support themselves. The story goes that Nicholas, on three separate occasions (once for each daughter as she came of age) threw a small bag of gold through an open window into the family’s home during the night. The bags landed in shoes or socks that had been hung by the fire to dry. It didn’t take long for the story to spread and children began hanging up their socks to see if they, too, could wake up to life-altering gifts. - Nicholas was made Archbishop of Myra and served the post at a time when Rome was persecuting Christians. He was no stranger to imprisonment, and possibly even torture, but refused to abandon or renounce his faith. When Constantine came to power, he invited Nicholas to Nicea where he was part of the council that gave us the famous Nicene Creed. - Nicholas died on December 6th, 343 AD. Hence the reason December 6th is his Saint day. In fact, December 6th is still the day that many cultures exchange gifts–instead of Christmas Day. Fast forward to modern times and forensic scientists have been able to use his remains to create new models for what Nicholas actually looked like. Spoiler alert, it’s not the chubby, red-cheeked guy that pop culture depicts. It’s a man with dark olive-toned skin, deep brown eyes, and a gray beard. While the forensic picture the scientists came up with had to take some artistic license based on probability and common features of people in his area during his time, it still seems much more likely than the Scandinavian looking, blue-eyed version we know. What they can tell is that Nicholas had a crooked nose from a bad break that didn’t heal correctly (possibly from his tenure in prison courtesy of the Romans). - After Nicholas passed, the stories of his generosity lived on. The tradition of secretly leaving gifts during the night around Saint Nicholas Day became increasingly popular throughout Europe. The prevalence of the celebration continued to spread until a man named Martin Luther nailed 95 Theses to a wooden door. After the Protestant Reformation, celebrating saints largely fell out of favor in Europe. However, by then people didn’t want to give up the St. Nick traditions, so they secularized him. - Depending on which part of Europe we’re talking about, the new secular St. Nick took many forms. In some countries, he had taken on the abilities of old pagan deities/legends such as flight and immortality. In others, he not only delivered gifts in the night but also possessed the power to guide the hand of parents in disciplining their children whenever they misbehaved. In some areas, though, they dropped St. Nick altogether in favor of the “Christ Kind” or Christ Child giving gifts on Christmas day. However, the holy child didn’t seem one to be mean and discipline children, so he was given an accomplice who threatened to kidnap and/or beat bad children who didn’t deserve presents. What’s up, Krampus? In any case, and an ironic twist, the Germanic term Christ kind was eventually anglicized into Kris Kringle–another name for Saint Nicholas/Santa Claus. - As you can imagine, as Europeans traveled the globe (and colonized everything they touched) they took their traditions regarding St. Nick with them. The Dutch took Saint Nicholas or Sint Niklaas, often shortened to Sinterklaas to the “New World”. This too was eventually anglicized into, you guessed it, Santa Claus. - When the Dutch brought Sinterklaas to American shores, Christmas celebrations were not the family-friendly affairs we think of today. Unless you’re picturing rowdy and raucous holiday parties with heavy amounts of alcohol and at least one big bonfire. Then you’re totally on the right track. However, in the early 1800s it became the fashion for poets and novelists to write about Santa Claus and promote a much more heart-warming holiday. In 1809 Washington Irving gave Santa Claus a pipe and had him flying over rooftops in a wagon. In 1822, Clement Clark Moore, an Episcopalian minister and father of three young girls, wrote a poem for his children, “An Account of a Visit From St. Nicholas”. The minister was very hesitant to have the poem published because of its whimsical nature, but his family adored it and pushed for him to do it anyway. It was instantly popular. We better know the poem today as “The Night Before Christmas”. It is in this poem that we first see Santa with a sleigh, reindeer, sliding down chimneys and being jolly. - In 1881 Thomas Nast, a political cartoonist, gave us a rendering of Santa Claus in his now-iconic red color (though this depicted long johns instead of fur robes) with a fluffy white beard, an armload of toys and a red hat. The image was published in Harper’s Weekly and quickly became the accepted image of Old St. Nick. During the 1930s a man named Haddon Sundblom took the concept Nast had drawn and ran with it. He replaced Santa’s long johns with red and white fur and replaced his pipe with a bottle of Coca-Cola. This image had been commissioned by the soft drink company as part of their holiday ad campaign and has been in use ever since. - During World War II, American soldiers took their concept of Santa Claus with them across the ocean and the idea of a white-bearded, chubby, laughing, red-fur wearing Santa spread like wildfire. For a time, the Russian government even tried to bury Santa under the blue-fur wearing, New Year’s gift-giving, completely devoid of religious sentiment Grandfather Frost, but St. Nick persisted. - As for Santa’s home at the North Pole, it has been a little harder to trace, but from I can tell it seems to stem from a set of letters that J.R.R. Tolkien wrote to his children from St. Nick (and sometimes his side-kick North Polar Bear). The letters were eventually published and there was great detail about how the North Polar Bear once wreaked havoc on Santa’s workshop through a series of accidents that almost ruined Christmas. The bear even wrote to the children in “arctic” and they had to decipher the language since it was too difficult for the bear to become truly fluent in English. And that’s how a Turkish Archbishop gained immortality and moved to the North Pole. Is there a legend that the people in your fictional world believe? Perhaps it, too, evolved over time from something real to something fantastical. It might affect the way people celebrate or don’t celebrate something. Or it might add a touch of magic and evoke emotion. That’s why the Salvation Army began using Santas to ring bells to gather donations near Christmas. The tradition began in the early part of the 20th century when the organization needed to raise money to help pay for the meal they provided each year for families in need. They hired homeless and/or unemployed men to dress as Santa and ring bells on street corners to get attention. It was such a successful campaign that it continues today, though the bell ringers are now volunteers. A man who became a tradition. A tradition that became a poem. A poem that became an image. An image that became a legend. A legend that became an icon. Never underestimate the power of a person with a good story to tell.	<urn:uuid:b7d253b0-03a0-447c-98b5-ab2001f8a8a5>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://kswattsbooks.com/tag/santa-claus/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250593295.11/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118164132-20200118192132-00465.warc.gz	en	0.982505	1,880	3.34375	3	[ 0.09564510732889175, 0.34260258078575134, 0.5123257637023926, -0.38199806213378906, 0.08881181478500366, -0.3557416796684265, 0.07800360023975372, 0.18705272674560547, 0.01907319575548172, 0.029360685497522354, 0.007319357246160507, 0.5010524392127991, 0.11968068033456802, 0.26661133766174...	15	It’s that time of year. Parents are rushing to and fro, whether from store to store or website to website, to find the perfect gifts for their children. And children are making lists for Santa. They will write letters and make pleas for all the things their little hearts desire and mail them to a “jolly old elf” clad in red and white furs who lives at the North Pole. But wait. Santa Claus is also known as St. Nick. And Saint Nicholas didn’t call the North Pole home. He lived in modern-day Turkey. So when did Santa move to his new arctic digs? And just how old is he? Let’s follow the evolution of the legend and see what it can teach us about world-building. Here are 10 things you might not know about Santa Claus. - Nicholas, who would later be canonized as Saint Nicholas, was born sometime around 270 AD in a town that was at the time a part of Greece, but today is part of Turkey. He lost his parents at a young age, but was left with a large inheritance. Nicholas decided to dedicate his life to the Christian church and used his inheritance to help those in need whenever he could. The most famous account of this is when Nicholas secretly gave money to an indebted father of three daughters so he would have the money to pay their dowries. That meant the daughters could marry instead of becoming prostitutes to support themselves. The story goes that Nicholas, on three separate occasions (once for each daughter as she came of age) threw a small bag of gold through an open window into the family’s home during the night. The bags landed in shoes or socks that had been hung by the fire to dry. It didn’t take long for the story to spread and children began hanging up their socks to see if they, too, could wake up to life-altering gifts. - Nicholas was made Archbishop of Myra and served the post at a time when Rome was persecuting Christians. He was no stranger to imprisonment, and possibly even torture, but refused to abandon or renounce his faith. When Constantine came to power, he invited Nicholas to Nicea where he was part of the council that gave us the famous Nicene Creed. - Nicholas died on December 6th, 343 AD. Hence the reason December 6th is his Saint day. In fact, December 6th is still the day that many cultures exchange gifts–instead of Christmas Day. Fast forward to modern times and forensic scientists have been able to use his remains to create new models for what Nicholas actually looked like. Spoiler alert, it’s not the chubby, red-cheeked guy that pop culture depicts. It’s a man with dark olive-toned skin, deep brown eyes, and a gray beard. While the forensic picture the scientists came up with had to take some artistic license based on probability and common features of people in his area during his time, it still seems much more likely than the Scandinavian looking, blue-eyed version we know. What they can tell is that Nicholas had a crooked nose from a bad break that didn’t heal correctly (possibly from his tenure in prison courtesy of the Romans). - After Nicholas passed, the stories of his generosity lived on. The tradition of secretly leaving gifts during the night around Saint Nicholas Day became increasingly popular throughout Europe. The prevalence of the celebration continued to spread until a man named Martin Luther nailed 95 Theses to a wooden door. After the Protestant Reformation, celebrating saints largely fell out of favor in Europe. However, by then people didn’t want to give up the St. Nick traditions, so they secularized him. - Depending on which part of Europe we’re talking about, the new secular St. Nick took many forms. In some countries, he had taken on the abilities of old pagan deities/legends such as flight and immortality. In others, he not only delivered gifts in the night but also possessed the power to guide the hand of parents in disciplining their children whenever they misbehaved. In some areas, though, they dropped St. Nick altogether in favor of the “Christ Kind” or Christ Child giving gifts on Christmas day. However, the holy child didn’t seem one to be mean and discipline children, so he was given an accomplice who threatened to kidnap and/or beat bad children who didn’t deserve presents. What’s up, Krampus? In any case, and an ironic twist, the Germanic term Christ kind was eventually anglicized into Kris Kringle–another name for Saint Nicholas/Santa Claus. - As you can imagine, as Europeans traveled the globe (and colonized everything they touched) they took their traditions regarding St. Nick with them. The Dutch took Saint Nicholas or Sint Niklaas, often shortened to Sinterklaas to the “New World”. This too was eventually anglicized into, you guessed it, Santa Claus. - When the Dutch brought Sinterklaas to American shores, Christmas celebrations were not the family-friendly affairs we think of today. Unless you’re picturing rowdy and raucous holiday parties with heavy amounts of alcohol and at least one big bonfire. Then you’re totally on the right track. However, in the early 1800s it became the fashion for poets and novelists to write about Santa Claus and promote a much more heart-warming holiday. In 1809 Washington Irving gave Santa Claus a pipe and had him flying over rooftops in a wagon. In 1822, Clement Clark Moore, an Episcopalian minister and father of three young girls, wrote a poem for his children, “An Account of a Visit From St. Nicholas”. The minister was very hesitant to have the poem published because of its whimsical nature, but his family adored it and pushed for him to do it anyway. It was instantly popular. We better know the poem today as “The Night Before Christmas”. It is in this poem that we first see Santa with a sleigh, reindeer, sliding down chimneys and being jolly. - In 1881 Thomas Nast, a political cartoonist, gave us a rendering of Santa Claus in his now-iconic red color (though this depicted long johns instead of fur robes) with a fluffy white beard, an armload of toys and a red hat. The image was published in Harper’s Weekly and quickly became the accepted image of Old St. Nick. During the 1930s a man named Haddon Sundblom took the concept Nast had drawn and ran with it. He replaced Santa’s long johns with red and white fur and replaced his pipe with a bottle of Coca-Cola. This image had been commissioned by the soft drink company as part of their holiday ad campaign and has been in use ever since. - During World War II, American soldiers took their concept of Santa Claus with them across the ocean and the idea of a white-bearded, chubby, laughing, red-fur wearing Santa spread like wildfire. For a time, the Russian government even tried to bury Santa under the blue-fur wearing, New Year’s gift-giving, completely devoid of religious sentiment Grandfather Frost, but St. Nick persisted. - As for Santa’s home at the North Pole, it has been a little harder to trace, but from I can tell it seems to stem from a set of letters that J.R.R. Tolkien wrote to his children from St. Nick (and sometimes his side-kick North Polar Bear). The letters were eventually published and there was great detail about how the North Polar Bear once wreaked havoc on Santa’s workshop through a series of accidents that almost ruined Christmas. The bear even wrote to the children in “arctic” and they had to decipher the language since it was too difficult for the bear to become truly fluent in English. And that’s how a Turkish Archbishop gained immortality and moved to the North Pole. Is there a legend that the people in your fictional world believe? Perhaps it, too, evolved over time from something real to something fantastical. It might affect the way people celebrate or don’t celebrate something. Or it might add a touch of magic and evoke emotion. That’s why the Salvation Army began using Santas to ring bells to gather donations near Christmas. The tradition began in the early part of the 20th century when the organization needed to raise money to help pay for the meal they provided each year for families in need. They hired homeless and/or unemployed men to dress as Santa and ring bells on street corners to get attention. It was such a successful campaign that it continues today, though the bell ringers are now volunteers. A man who became a tradition. A tradition that became a poem. A poem that became an image. An image that became a legend. A legend that became an icon. Never underestimate the power of a person with a good story to tell.	1,825	ENGLISH	1
Authors: Meet Robert E Lee Tags: #Juvenile Nonfiction, #General, #United States, #Biography & Autobiography, #Military, #History, #Civil War Period (1850-1877) “They can stand almost anything,” said Jackson. Into battle they went. Still the Confederates could not push the Union men back. Lee turned to General John B. Hood. He asked him to lead a charge. Ahead of Hood’s men was a hill. There, three lines of Union riflemen waited. On top of the hill were Union cannons. Hood charged. The rifles cracked. The cannons roared. Many of Hood’s men fell. But the rest kept coming. They did not yell. They did not fire. They just ran. Up the hill they came. The Union soldiers dropped their guns and ran. Then Hood’s men fired. Union soldiers fell everywhere. The Union army had been pushed back. Lee had won his first battle. Lee drove the Union army away from Richmond. Now he had to push it out of Virginia. Lee’s soldiers wore rags. Some had no guns or shoes. They needed food. Union armies had guns and food. But still Lee won battle after battle. Lee’s “scarecrow army” fought bravely. And their general planned battles well. In the South he was a hero. Even in the North people said he was the best general in the war. Union soldiers were talking and playing cards. The sun was going down. The soldiers were sure Lee and Jackson would not attack today. The dinner call came. Soldiers put away their guns and went to eat. Just then deer jumped out of the woods and ran by. Rabbits hopped out after them. The men laughed and cheered. Suddenly rifle shots came from the woods. The cheering stopped. Out of the forest rushed Stonewall Jackson’s men, yelling as they came. The Union soldiers ran in terror. To the east, Stonewall heard the sound of firing. Lee was attacking the other side of the Union army. Lee’s battle plan was working well. The moon rose. Jackson wanted to see if the time was right for another attack. He and a few men rode ahead. They saw that the Union men were still running. They turned back toward the Confederate army. Suddenly there were shots. The Confederates were firing at them! They thought Jackson’s men were Union soldiers. Jackson was hit! The next day General Lee rode through the battlefield. When his soldiers saw him, they began to cheer. The cheering grew and grew. It had been General Lee’s greatest battle. The Union army was twice as big as his. But he and Stonewall had beaten it. It should have been a great day for Lee. But he was very sad. Many brave men had died. And in a little house a few miles away, his best general lay badly wounded. At first Jackson seemed to get better. But this did not last. One afternoon, in a fever, he began to call out orders to his men. Then he stopped and smiled. “Let us cross over the river,” he said, “and rest under the shade of the trees.” And then he died. The death of Stonewall Jackson was a terrible loss to General Lee. General Lee decided to fight in the North. He led his men into Pennsylvania. They met a Union army near the town of Gettysburg. This was not where Lee wanted to fight. It was not a battle he had planned. But he knew that if he won here, he might win the war. After two days of fighting, Lee decided it was time for a great attack. He rode out to see his men. This time they could not cheer him. That would show the Union army where they were. But as he passed, they quietly took off their hats. The Confederates were hidden behind some trees. In front of them were open fields. Across the fields was a line of hills. There the Union army waited. Out of the woods the Confederates charged. But this time the Union men did not run. They fired and kept on firing. Thousands of brave Confederates died in that terrible charge. The rest were driven back. A great cheer went up from the Union lines. They had beaten Lee! The next day a heavy rain began to fall. Sad and tired, Lee took his army back to Virginia. Now the North was sure it could win the war. And Lincoln thought he had found the man to do it. This general had beaten the Confederate armies in the West. His name was Ulysses S. Grant. In May, 1864 Grant was ready. A huge Union army moved toward Richmond. Lee was waiting. Grant lost 60,000 men in three terrible battles. Lee lost half that many. But Grant did not give up. Grant marched south. He planned to attack Richmond from the other side. But Lee hurried to stop him. To reach Richmond, Grant had to get by the town of Petersburg. There Lee met him. Line after line of Union soldiers charged Lee’s army. But Lee held them off. Still Grant did not give up. Lee’s army was in Petersburg, and Grant was not going to let it get away. He was going to keep on attacking until General Lee was beaten for good. “General, I have no shoes,” said a soldier. “I haven’t enough to eat,” said another. Lee rode sadly among his men. His brave army had just pushed Grant back again. But the men could not last much longer. It was the winter of 1865. For months Lee’s army had been under attack in Petersburg. Union cannons had fired without stop. Union men had even dug a tunnel under Lee’s lines and exploded a huge bomb. Still Lee’s men held Grant off. Grant lost thousands of men. But he could get more. Lee could not. By now Lee’s army was half as big as Grant’s. And many of his best generals had been killed. Lee’s men were weak from hunger. Many were barefoot in the snow. Many were sick. Some soldiers could stand no more and ran away. But most of the ragged little army kept on fighting. The men loved Lee. They would fight as long as he asked them to. Grant attacked again and again. Lee saw that he could not save Richmond. He had to escape. General Lee led his men out of Petersburg. He marched them toward a small town by a railroad. From there they could move by train out of Virginia. They would join a Confederate army in North Carolina. Then they could attack Grant again. But Grant and his men followed Lee out of Petersburg. Lee had ordered food for the army. But when the soldiers arrived in the town, no food was there. Lee led his starving army south. Grant’s army followed close behind. On April 6 Union soldiers caught up. They attacked. That night only 15,000 men were left in Lee’s army. But still they tramped on. Grant and 80,000 men came after them. Lee wanted to reach Appomattox Station. Food trains were waiting there. He could feed his army and escape. But by the time the army arrived, Union armies were all around the town. Lee was trapped. When Virginia had gone to war Lee had agreed to fight. But now he saw that his state would be ruined if the fighting went on. Most of his men would be killed. It was time to give up the fight. He would surrender. Appomattox: April 9, 1865 Ulysses S. Grant never looked like a great general. Today his beard was wild. His clothes were muddy from a long ride. He entered the farmhouse. Inside was a man in a fine uniform. A beautiful sword hung by his side. It was General Robert E. Lee. The two men shook hands. They sat down and General Grant wrote out the surrender. It was very fair. General Lee signed it. As General Lee left, Grant and his men raised their hats in salute. Lee rode back to his army. Sadly he told his men he had given up. The men crowded around Traveler to give their general a last cheer. They reached out to touch his hand. One soldier cried, “I love you just as well as ever, General Lee.” Tears were in Lee’s eyes as he rode away. Robert E. Lee had led the people of the South through the war. They would still turn to him for help in the hard years that followed. He told them to forget the war. He said they should work to build up their country again. A Confederate soldier told Lee he wanted to leave America. “Do not leave Virginia,” Lee begged. “Our country needs her young men now.”	<urn:uuid:64432e54-521d-410d-8e15-bb7f91cdf585>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://full-english-books.net/english-books/full-book-george-w-s-trow-read-online-chapter-4	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591763.20/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118023429-20200118051429-00159.warc.gz	en	0.993021	1,911	3.515625	4	[ -0.6718745231628418, 0.43814709782600403, 0.18713714182376862, 0.18078814446926117, 0.07337035238742828, 0.09585679322481155, 0.008350208401679993, -0.21123436093330383, -0.41517511010169983, -0.07327240705490112, 0.14800061285495758, 0.11422159522771835, 0.260364830493927, 0.1093075796961...	3	Authors: Meet Robert E Lee Tags: #Juvenile Nonfiction, #General, #United States, #Biography & Autobiography, #Military, #History, #Civil War Period (1850-1877) “They can stand almost anything,” said Jackson. Into battle they went. Still the Confederates could not push the Union men back. Lee turned to General John B. Hood. He asked him to lead a charge. Ahead of Hood’s men was a hill. There, three lines of Union riflemen waited. On top of the hill were Union cannons. Hood charged. The rifles cracked. The cannons roared. Many of Hood’s men fell. But the rest kept coming. They did not yell. They did not fire. They just ran. Up the hill they came. The Union soldiers dropped their guns and ran. Then Hood’s men fired. Union soldiers fell everywhere. The Union army had been pushed back. Lee had won his first battle. Lee drove the Union army away from Richmond. Now he had to push it out of Virginia. Lee’s soldiers wore rags. Some had no guns or shoes. They needed food. Union armies had guns and food. But still Lee won battle after battle. Lee’s “scarecrow army” fought bravely. And their general planned battles well. In the South he was a hero. Even in the North people said he was the best general in the war. Union soldiers were talking and playing cards. The sun was going down. The soldiers were sure Lee and Jackson would not attack today. The dinner call came. Soldiers put away their guns and went to eat. Just then deer jumped out of the woods and ran by. Rabbits hopped out after them. The men laughed and cheered. Suddenly rifle shots came from the woods. The cheering stopped. Out of the forest rushed Stonewall Jackson’s men, yelling as they came. The Union soldiers ran in terror. To the east, Stonewall heard the sound of firing. Lee was attacking the other side of the Union army. Lee’s battle plan was working well. The moon rose. Jackson wanted to see if the time was right for another attack. He and a few men rode ahead. They saw that the Union men were still running. They turned back toward the Confederate army. Suddenly there were shots. The Confederates were firing at them! They thought Jackson’s men were Union soldiers. Jackson was hit! The next day General Lee rode through the battlefield. When his soldiers saw him, they began to cheer. The cheering grew and grew. It had been General Lee’s greatest battle. The Union army was twice as big as his. But he and Stonewall had beaten it. It should have been a great day for Lee. But he was very sad. Many brave men had died. And in a little house a few miles away, his best general lay badly wounded. At first Jackson seemed to get better. But this did not last. One afternoon, in a fever, he began to call out orders to his men. Then he stopped and smiled. “Let us cross over the river,” he said, “and rest under the shade of the trees.” And then he died. The death of Stonewall Jackson was a terrible loss to General Lee. General Lee decided to fight in the North. He led his men into Pennsylvania. They met a Union army near the town of Gettysburg. This was not where Lee wanted to fight. It was not a battle he had planned. But he knew that if he won here, he might win the war. After two days of fighting, Lee decided it was time for a great attack. He rode out to see his men. This time they could not cheer him. That would show the Union army where they were. But as he passed, they quietly took off their hats. The Confederates were hidden behind some trees. In front of them were open fields. Across the fields was a line of hills. There the Union army waited. Out of the woods the Confederates charged. But this time the Union men did not run. They fired and kept on firing. Thousands of brave Confederates died in that terrible charge. The rest were driven back. A great cheer went up from the Union lines. They had beaten Lee! The next day a heavy rain began to fall. Sad and tired, Lee took his army back to Virginia. Now the North was sure it could win the war. And Lincoln thought he had found the man to do it. This general had beaten the Confederate armies in the West. His name was Ulysses S. Grant. In May, 1864 Grant was ready. A huge Union army moved toward Richmond. Lee was waiting. Grant lost 60,000 men in three terrible battles. Lee lost half that many. But Grant did not give up. Grant marched south. He planned to attack Richmond from the other side. But Lee hurried to stop him. To reach Richmond, Grant had to get by the town of Petersburg. There Lee met him. Line after line of Union soldiers charged Lee’s army. But Lee held them off. Still Grant did not give up. Lee’s army was in Petersburg, and Grant was not going to let it get away. He was going to keep on attacking until General Lee was beaten for good. “General, I have no shoes,” said a soldier. “I haven’t enough to eat,” said another. Lee rode sadly among his men. His brave army had just pushed Grant back again. But the men could not last much longer. It was the winter of 1865. For months Lee’s army had been under attack in Petersburg. Union cannons had fired without stop. Union men had even dug a tunnel under Lee’s lines and exploded a huge bomb. Still Lee’s men held Grant off. Grant lost thousands of men. But he could get more. Lee could not. By now Lee’s army was half as big as Grant’s. And many of his best generals had been killed. Lee’s men were weak from hunger. Many were barefoot in the snow. Many were sick. Some soldiers could stand no more and ran away. But most of the ragged little army kept on fighting. The men loved Lee. They would fight as long as he asked them to. Grant attacked again and again. Lee saw that he could not save Richmond. He had to escape. General Lee led his men out of Petersburg. He marched them toward a small town by a railroad. From there they could move by train out of Virginia. They would join a Confederate army in North Carolina. Then they could attack Grant again. But Grant and his men followed Lee out of Petersburg. Lee had ordered food for the army. But when the soldiers arrived in the town, no food was there. Lee led his starving army south. Grant’s army followed close behind. On April 6 Union soldiers caught up. They attacked. That night only 15,000 men were left in Lee’s army. But still they tramped on. Grant and 80,000 men came after them. Lee wanted to reach Appomattox Station. Food trains were waiting there. He could feed his army and escape. But by the time the army arrived, Union armies were all around the town. Lee was trapped. When Virginia had gone to war Lee had agreed to fight. But now he saw that his state would be ruined if the fighting went on. Most of his men would be killed. It was time to give up the fight. He would surrender. Appomattox: April 9, 1865 Ulysses S. Grant never looked like a great general. Today his beard was wild. His clothes were muddy from a long ride. He entered the farmhouse. Inside was a man in a fine uniform. A beautiful sword hung by his side. It was General Robert E. Lee. The two men shook hands. They sat down and General Grant wrote out the surrender. It was very fair. General Lee signed it. As General Lee left, Grant and his men raised their hats in salute. Lee rode back to his army. Sadly he told his men he had given up. The men crowded around Traveler to give their general a last cheer. They reached out to touch his hand. One soldier cried, “I love you just as well as ever, General Lee.” Tears were in Lee’s eyes as he rode away. Robert E. Lee had led the people of the South through the war. They would still turn to him for help in the hard years that followed. He told them to forget the war. He said they should work to build up their country again. A Confederate soldier told Lee he wanted to leave America. “Do not leave Virginia,” Lee begged. “Our country needs her young men now.”	1,818	ENGLISH	1
On January 3, 1521, Pope Leo X issues the papal bull Decet Romanum Pontificem, which excommunicates Martin Luther from the Catholic Church. Martin Luther, the chief catalyst of Protestantism, was a professor of biblical interpretation at the University of Wittenberg in Germany when he drew up his 95 theses condemning the Catholic Church for its corrupt practice of selling indulgences, or the forgiveness of sins. He followed up the revolutionary work with equally controversial and groundbreaking theological works, and his fiery words set off religious reformers all across Europe. In January 1521, Pope Leo X excommunicated Luther. Three months later, Luther was called to defend his beliefs before Holy Roman Emperor Charles V at the Diet of Worms, where he was famously defiant. For his refusal to recant his writings, the emperor declared him an outlaw and a heretic. Luther was protected by powerful German princes, however, and by his death in 1546, the course of Western civilization had been significantly altered. READ MORE: Reformation: Definition and History	<urn:uuid:c6737c4b-9e4c-43bd-aa53-71d51b42b2c0>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/martin-luther-excommunicated	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251694908.82/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127051112-20200127081112-00295.warc.gz	en	0.980591	217	3.9375	4	[ -0.28475746512413025, 0.3686302602291107, 0.34708264470100403, 0.17632706463336945, -0.40042585134506226, -0.22534868121147156, -0.23076975345611572, 0.5225992798805237, 0.16839759051799774, 0.10122574865818024, -0.39855265617370605, -0.44064727425575256, 0.08282995223999023, -0.3316253423...	13	On January 3, 1521, Pope Leo X issues the papal bull Decet Romanum Pontificem, which excommunicates Martin Luther from the Catholic Church. Martin Luther, the chief catalyst of Protestantism, was a professor of biblical interpretation at the University of Wittenberg in Germany when he drew up his 95 theses condemning the Catholic Church for its corrupt practice of selling indulgences, or the forgiveness of sins. He followed up the revolutionary work with equally controversial and groundbreaking theological works, and his fiery words set off religious reformers all across Europe. In January 1521, Pope Leo X excommunicated Luther. Three months later, Luther was called to defend his beliefs before Holy Roman Emperor Charles V at the Diet of Worms, where he was famously defiant. For his refusal to recant his writings, the emperor declared him an outlaw and a heretic. Luther was protected by powerful German princes, however, and by his death in 1546, the course of Western civilization had been significantly altered. READ MORE: Reformation: Definition and History	226	ENGLISH	1
Chapters 1 - 4 Questions and Answers 1. What is “the problem that has no name” of which Friedan writes? 2. When did the media begin paying attention to the issue of women’s identities as housewives and the pitfalls of that role? 3. What were women told to do about their dissatisfaction? 4. How did the media portray the role of women in the 1930s and 1940s, versus during the 1950s? 5. What does Betty Friedan mean by the terms “Occupation: Housewife” and “the feminine mystique”? 1. Women are dissatisfied with what they are told should make them happy, which is an identity formed and shaped by marriage, parenting, and housekeeping. They are discouraged from using their minds or asserting their independence, and the media both promotes this lifestyle and assumes that women don’t have any interests beyond their roles as spouses and mothers. 2. Friedan writes that in 1960 the media began reporting on the perceived problem of women’s identity as limited to that of mother, spouse, and domestic. 3. Women were told to be grateful for their protected status and that they didn’t have to go out in the world and compete, like men. Some argued that women wouldn’t have the attitude they do if they’d had less education—and that women don’t need education. 4. During the 1930s and very early 1940s, women were portrayed as “New Women”—career girls who struggled with forging their own futures. But by 1949, they saw their occupation as that of the housewife. During the 1950s and early 1960s, women were portrayed as the “Happy Housewife Heroine”—a woman who no longer questioned the fact that she was just a housewife, and, in fact, relished domestic adventures. 5. By the late 1940s, women’s magazines had begun to cover the ambivalence some women felt about lives led as housewives. The magazines usually published articles claiming that the job of housewife is noble and fulfilling, and that there was nothing wrong or intellectually understimulating about housework. The magazines, Friedan implies, taught women that being a housewife was their job and tried to placate them into submission.	<urn:uuid:842c396a-98fc-4e70-aea2-11f84f726a6a>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.enotes.com/topics/feminine-mystique/quiz	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598217.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120081337-20200120105337-00161.warc.gz	en	0.990211	488	3.453125	3	[ -0.06706419587135315, 0.2992333769798279, -0.11508075892925262, 0.08663947880268097, -0.1834297627210617, 0.31997156143188477, 0.13869984447956085, -0.08128654211759567, -0.09562437236309052, -0.07380927354097366, 0.1974955052137375, 0.21339823305606842, 0.17254342138767242, 0.290137261152...	2	Chapters 1 - 4 Questions and Answers 1. What is “the problem that has no name” of which Friedan writes? 2. When did the media begin paying attention to the issue of women’s identities as housewives and the pitfalls of that role? 3. What were women told to do about their dissatisfaction? 4. How did the media portray the role of women in the 1930s and 1940s, versus during the 1950s? 5. What does Betty Friedan mean by the terms “Occupation: Housewife” and “the feminine mystique”? 1. Women are dissatisfied with what they are told should make them happy, which is an identity formed and shaped by marriage, parenting, and housekeeping. They are discouraged from using their minds or asserting their independence, and the media both promotes this lifestyle and assumes that women don’t have any interests beyond their roles as spouses and mothers. 2. Friedan writes that in 1960 the media began reporting on the perceived problem of women’s identity as limited to that of mother, spouse, and domestic. 3. Women were told to be grateful for their protected status and that they didn’t have to go out in the world and compete, like men. Some argued that women wouldn’t have the attitude they do if they’d had less education—and that women don’t need education. 4. During the 1930s and very early 1940s, women were portrayed as “New Women”—career girls who struggled with forging their own futures. But by 1949, they saw their occupation as that of the housewife. During the 1950s and early 1960s, women were portrayed as the “Happy Housewife Heroine”—a woman who no longer questioned the fact that she was just a housewife, and, in fact, relished domestic adventures. 5. By the late 1940s, women’s magazines had begun to cover the ambivalence some women felt about lives led as housewives. The magazines usually published articles claiming that the job of housewife is noble and fulfilling, and that there was nothing wrong or intellectually understimulating about housework. The magazines, Friedan implies, taught women that being a housewife was their job and tried to placate them into submission.	491	ENGLISH	1
Running for the consulship for a second time after having lost at the first attempt, Catiline was an advocate for the cancellation of debts and land redistribution. There was apparently substantial evidence that he had bribed numerous senators to vote for him and engaged in other unethical conduct related to the election (such behaviour was, however, hardly unknown in the late Republic). Cicero, in indignation, issued a law prohibiting such machinations, and it seemed obvious to all that the law was directed at Catiline. Catiline, therefore, so Cicero claimed, conspired to murder Cicero and other key senators on the day of the election, in what became known as the Second Catilinarian conspiracy. Cicero announced that he had discovered the plan, and postponed the election to give the Senate time to discuss this supposed coup d'état. The day after that originally scheduled for the election, Cicero addressed the Senate on the matter, and Catiline's reaction was immediate and violent. In response to Catiline's behavior, the Senate issued a senatus consultum ultimum, a declaration of martial law. Ordinary law was suspended, and Cicero, as consul, was invested with absolute power. When the election was finally held, Catiline lost again. Anticipating the bad news, the conspirators had already begun to assemble an army, made up mostly of Lucius Cornelius Sulla's veteran soldiers. The nucleus of conspirators was also joined by some senators. The plan was to initiate an insurrection in all of Italy, put Rome to the torch and, according to Cicero, kill as many senators as they could. Through his own investigations, he was aware of the conspiracy. On November 8, Cicero called for a meeting of the Senate in the Temple of Jupiter Stator, near the forum, which was used for that purpose only when great danger was imminent. Catiline attended as well. It was then that Cicero delivered one of his most famous orations.	<urn:uuid:81dd1c05-c1a1-4278-a423-3f8f82b79f67>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.gradesaver.com/ciceros-orations/wikipedia/background	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251799918.97/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129133601-20200129163601-00334.warc.gz	en	0.988114	412	3.296875	3	[ -0.4726894497871399, -0.002319720573723316, -0.18940000236034393, -0.3308730721473694, -0.4292028248310089, -0.11854023486375809, 0.11642342060804367, 0.2794279456138611, -0.015398905612528324, 0.02643829770386219, 0.11463824659585953, -0.25076520442962646, 0.08809585124254227, 0.544589400...	1	Running for the consulship for a second time after having lost at the first attempt, Catiline was an advocate for the cancellation of debts and land redistribution. There was apparently substantial evidence that he had bribed numerous senators to vote for him and engaged in other unethical conduct related to the election (such behaviour was, however, hardly unknown in the late Republic). Cicero, in indignation, issued a law prohibiting such machinations, and it seemed obvious to all that the law was directed at Catiline. Catiline, therefore, so Cicero claimed, conspired to murder Cicero and other key senators on the day of the election, in what became known as the Second Catilinarian conspiracy. Cicero announced that he had discovered the plan, and postponed the election to give the Senate time to discuss this supposed coup d'état. The day after that originally scheduled for the election, Cicero addressed the Senate on the matter, and Catiline's reaction was immediate and violent. In response to Catiline's behavior, the Senate issued a senatus consultum ultimum, a declaration of martial law. Ordinary law was suspended, and Cicero, as consul, was invested with absolute power. When the election was finally held, Catiline lost again. Anticipating the bad news, the conspirators had already begun to assemble an army, made up mostly of Lucius Cornelius Sulla's veteran soldiers. The nucleus of conspirators was also joined by some senators. The plan was to initiate an insurrection in all of Italy, put Rome to the torch and, according to Cicero, kill as many senators as they could. Through his own investigations, he was aware of the conspiracy. On November 8, Cicero called for a meeting of the Senate in the Temple of Jupiter Stator, near the forum, which was used for that purpose only when great danger was imminent. Catiline attended as well. It was then that Cicero delivered one of his most famous orations.	402	ENGLISH	1
International Children’s Bible Pilate Questions Jesus 15 Very early in the morning, the leading priests, the Jewish elders, the teachers of the law, and all the Jewish council decided what to do with Jesus. They tied him, led him away, and turned him over to Pilate, the governor. 2 Pilate asked Jesus, “Are you the king of the Jews?” Jesus answered, “Yes, I am.” 3 The leading priests accused Jesus of many things. 4 So Pilate asked Jesus another question. He said, “You can see that these people are accusing you of many things. Why don’t you answer?” 5 But Jesus still said nothing. Pilate was very surprised at this. Pilate Tries to Free Jesus 6 Every year at the Passover time the governor would free one person from prison. He would free any person the people wanted him to free. 7 At that time, there was a man named Barabbas in prison. He was a rebel and had committed murder during a riot. 8 The crowd came to Pilate and asked him to free a prisoner as he always did. 9 Pilate asked them, “Do you want me to free the king of the Jews?” 10 Pilate knew that the leading priests had given Jesus to him because they were jealous of Jesus. 11 And the leading priests had persuaded the people to ask Pilate to free Barabbas, not Jesus. 12 Pilate asked the crowd again, “So what should I do with this man you call the king of the Jews?” 13 They shouted, “Kill him on a cross!” 14 Pilate asked, “Why? What wrong has he done?” But they shouted louder and louder, “Kill him on a cross!” 15 Pilate wanted to please the crowd. So he freed Barabbas for them. And Pilate told the soldiers to beat Jesus with whips. Then he gave Jesus to the soldiers to be killed on a cross. 16 Pilate’s soldiers took Jesus into the governor’s palace (called the Praetorium). They called all the other soldiers together. 17 They put a purple robe on Jesus. Then they used thorny branches to make a crown. They put it on his head. 18 Then they called out to him, “Hail, King of the Jews!” 19 The soldiers beat Jesus on the head many times with a stick. They also spit on him. Then they made fun of him by bowing on their knees and worshiping him. 20 After they finished making fun of him, the soldiers took off the purple robe and put his own clothes on him again. Then they led Jesus out of the palace to be killed on a cross. Jesus Is Killed on a Cross 21 There was a man from Cyrene coming from the fields to the city. The man was Simon, the father of Alexander and Rufus. The soldiers forced Simon to carry the cross for Jesus. 22 They led Jesus to the place called Golgotha. (Golgotha means the Place of the Skull.) 23 At Golgotha the soldiers tried to give Jesus wine to drink. This wine was mixed with myrrh. But he refused to drink it. 24 The soldiers nailed Jesus to a cross. Then they divided his clothes among themselves. They threw lots to decide which clothes each soldier would get. 25 It was nine o’clock in the morning when they nailed Jesus to the cross. 26 There was a sign with the charge against Jesus written on it. The sign read: “THE KING OF THE JEWS.” 27 They also put two robbers on crosses beside Jesus, one on the right, and the other on the left. 28 [And the Scripture came true that says, “They put him with criminals.”][a] 29 People walked by and insulted Jesus. They shook their heads, saying, “You said you could destroy the Temple and build it again in three days. 30 So save yourself! Come down from that cross!” 31 The leading priests and the teachers of the law were also there. They made fun of Jesus just as the other people did. They said among themselves, “He saved other people, but he can’t save himself. 32 If he is really the Christ, the king of Israel, then let him come down from the cross now. We will see this, and then we will believe in him.” The robbers who were being killed on the crosses beside Jesus also insulted him. 33 At noon the whole country became dark. This darkness lasted for three hours. 34 At three o’clock Jesus cried in a loud voice, “Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani.” This means, “My God, my God, why have you left me alone?” 35 Some of the people standing there heard this. They said, “Listen! He is calling Elijah.” 36 One man there ran and got a sponge. He filled the sponge with vinegar and tied it to a stick. Then he used the stick to give the sponge to Jesus to drink from it. The man said, “We should wait now and see if Elijah will come to take him down from the cross.” 37 Then Jesus cried in a loud voice and died. 38 When Jesus died, the curtain in the Temple[b] split into two pieces. The tear started at the top and tore all the way to the bottom. 39 The army officer that was standing there before the cross saw what happened when Jesus died.[c] The officer said, “This man really was the Son of God!” 40 Some women were standing at a distance from the cross, watching. Some of these women were Mary Magdalene, Salome, and Mary the mother of James and Joseph. (James was her youngest son.) 41 These were the women who followed Jesus in Galilee and cared for him. Many other women were also there who had come with Jesus to Jerusalem. Jesus Is Buried 42 This was Preparation Day. (That means the day before the Sabbath day.) It was becoming dark. 43 A man named Joseph from Arimathea was brave enough to go to Pilate and ask for Jesus’ body. Joseph was an important member of the Jewish council. He was one of the people who wanted the kingdom of God to come. 44 Pilate wondered if Jesus was already dead. Pilate called the army officer who guarded Jesus and asked him if Jesus had already died. 45 The officer told Pilate that he was dead. So Pilate told Joseph he could have the body. 46 Joseph bought some linen cloth, took the body down from the cross and wrapped it in the linen. He put the body in a tomb that was cut in a wall of rock. Then he closed the tomb by rolling a very large stone to cover the entrance. 47 And Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joseph saw the place where Jesus was laid. - 15:28 And . . . criminals. Some Greek copies do not contain the bracketed text which quotes from Isaiah 53:12. - 15:38 curtain in the Temple A curtain divided the Most Holy Place from the other part of the Temple. That was the special building in Jerusalem where God commanded the Jews to worship him. - 15:39 when Jesus died Some Greek copies read “when Jesus cried out and died.”	<urn:uuid:2c3552b0-6bc7-4190-b728-4cd2e9feab46>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://beta.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark+15&version=ICB	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250607314.32/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122161553-20200122190553-00522.warc.gz	en	0.987299	1,584	3.625	4	[ -0.19678719341754913, 0.5229592323303223, -0.14430999755859375, -0.44718486070632935, 0.024422261863946915, -0.5103249549865723, 0.3886747658252716, 0.23197579383850098, 0.416952908039093, 0.10655845701694489, 0.2663038671016693, -0.007957452908158302, -0.16820044815540314, 0.0800811797380...	4	International Children’s Bible Pilate Questions Jesus 15 Very early in the morning, the leading priests, the Jewish elders, the teachers of the law, and all the Jewish council decided what to do with Jesus. They tied him, led him away, and turned him over to Pilate, the governor. 2 Pilate asked Jesus, “Are you the king of the Jews?” Jesus answered, “Yes, I am.” 3 The leading priests accused Jesus of many things. 4 So Pilate asked Jesus another question. He said, “You can see that these people are accusing you of many things. Why don’t you answer?” 5 But Jesus still said nothing. Pilate was very surprised at this. Pilate Tries to Free Jesus 6 Every year at the Passover time the governor would free one person from prison. He would free any person the people wanted him to free. 7 At that time, there was a man named Barabbas in prison. He was a rebel and had committed murder during a riot. 8 The crowd came to Pilate and asked him to free a prisoner as he always did. 9 Pilate asked them, “Do you want me to free the king of the Jews?” 10 Pilate knew that the leading priests had given Jesus to him because they were jealous of Jesus. 11 And the leading priests had persuaded the people to ask Pilate to free Barabbas, not Jesus. 12 Pilate asked the crowd again, “So what should I do with this man you call the king of the Jews?” 13 They shouted, “Kill him on a cross!” 14 Pilate asked, “Why? What wrong has he done?” But they shouted louder and louder, “Kill him on a cross!” 15 Pilate wanted to please the crowd. So he freed Barabbas for them. And Pilate told the soldiers to beat Jesus with whips. Then he gave Jesus to the soldiers to be killed on a cross. 16 Pilate’s soldiers took Jesus into the governor’s palace (called the Praetorium). They called all the other soldiers together. 17 They put a purple robe on Jesus. Then they used thorny branches to make a crown. They put it on his head. 18 Then they called out to him, “Hail, King of the Jews!” 19 The soldiers beat Jesus on the head many times with a stick. They also spit on him. Then they made fun of him by bowing on their knees and worshiping him. 20 After they finished making fun of him, the soldiers took off the purple robe and put his own clothes on him again. Then they led Jesus out of the palace to be killed on a cross. Jesus Is Killed on a Cross 21 There was a man from Cyrene coming from the fields to the city. The man was Simon, the father of Alexander and Rufus. The soldiers forced Simon to carry the cross for Jesus. 22 They led Jesus to the place called Golgotha. (Golgotha means the Place of the Skull.) 23 At Golgotha the soldiers tried to give Jesus wine to drink. This wine was mixed with myrrh. But he refused to drink it. 24 The soldiers nailed Jesus to a cross. Then they divided his clothes among themselves. They threw lots to decide which clothes each soldier would get. 25 It was nine o’clock in the morning when they nailed Jesus to the cross. 26 There was a sign with the charge against Jesus written on it. The sign read: “THE KING OF THE JEWS.” 27 They also put two robbers on crosses beside Jesus, one on the right, and the other on the left. 28 [And the Scripture came true that says, “They put him with criminals.”][a] 29 People walked by and insulted Jesus. They shook their heads, saying, “You said you could destroy the Temple and build it again in three days. 30 So save yourself! Come down from that cross!” 31 The leading priests and the teachers of the law were also there. They made fun of Jesus just as the other people did. They said among themselves, “He saved other people, but he can’t save himself. 32 If he is really the Christ, the king of Israel, then let him come down from the cross now. We will see this, and then we will believe in him.” The robbers who were being killed on the crosses beside Jesus also insulted him. 33 At noon the whole country became dark. This darkness lasted for three hours. 34 At three o’clock Jesus cried in a loud voice, “Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani.” This means, “My God, my God, why have you left me alone?” 35 Some of the people standing there heard this. They said, “Listen! He is calling Elijah.” 36 One man there ran and got a sponge. He filled the sponge with vinegar and tied it to a stick. Then he used the stick to give the sponge to Jesus to drink from it. The man said, “We should wait now and see if Elijah will come to take him down from the cross.” 37 Then Jesus cried in a loud voice and died. 38 When Jesus died, the curtain in the Temple[b] split into two pieces. The tear started at the top and tore all the way to the bottom. 39 The army officer that was standing there before the cross saw what happened when Jesus died.[c] The officer said, “This man really was the Son of God!” 40 Some women were standing at a distance from the cross, watching. Some of these women were Mary Magdalene, Salome, and Mary the mother of James and Joseph. (James was her youngest son.) 41 These were the women who followed Jesus in Galilee and cared for him. Many other women were also there who had come with Jesus to Jerusalem. Jesus Is Buried 42 This was Preparation Day. (That means the day before the Sabbath day.) It was becoming dark. 43 A man named Joseph from Arimathea was brave enough to go to Pilate and ask for Jesus’ body. Joseph was an important member of the Jewish council. He was one of the people who wanted the kingdom of God to come. 44 Pilate wondered if Jesus was already dead. Pilate called the army officer who guarded Jesus and asked him if Jesus had already died. 45 The officer told Pilate that he was dead. So Pilate told Joseph he could have the body. 46 Joseph bought some linen cloth, took the body down from the cross and wrapped it in the linen. He put the body in a tomb that was cut in a wall of rock. Then he closed the tomb by rolling a very large stone to cover the entrance. 47 And Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joseph saw the place where Jesus was laid. - 15:28 And . . . criminals. Some Greek copies do not contain the bracketed text which quotes from Isaiah 53:12. - 15:38 curtain in the Temple A curtain divided the Most Holy Place from the other part of the Temple. That was the special building in Jerusalem where God commanded the Jews to worship him. - 15:39 when Jesus died Some Greek copies read “when Jesus cried out and died.”	1,568	ENGLISH	1
As the Christian movement began to accept non-Jewish members, it moved further away from the strict rules imposed on Jews. The early Christians were extreme bigots, filled with zeal and commanded to evangelize; expansion was built into Christianity. Commissioned in the 4th centuryit ranks as the first church built in Constantinopleand has its original atrium. Over the next hundred years or so, Christians were sporadically persecuted. He certainly took advantage of the resulting devastation of the city, building a lavish private palace on part of the site of the fire. The establishment of an independent patriarchate with nine subordinate metropoli contributed to a more favourable attitude by the Persian government, which no longer had to fear an ecclesiastical alliance with the common enemy, Rome. Paul's fate while in Rome is not known. Christianity appealed to the downtrodden masses. As well as this lack of stability at the head of the empire, social relations were in turmoil, and barbarian incursions were on a threatening scale. Christian missionaries to Germanic peoples: to the Goths. There were common languages in the Empire, Latin and Greek. As we have already seen, the faith had spread first among non-Persian elements in the population, Jews and Syrians.	<urn:uuid:2d750ce1-c8b2-4133-92f6-ee7a2fe6345f>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://fomalogaxapoxizot.whatshanesaid.com/the-history-of-christianity-in-the-roman-empire483998691sk.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250610004.56/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123101110-20200123130110-00167.warc.gz	en	0.980033	257	3.609375	4	[ -0.031211135908961296, 0.5460934042930603, -0.039736438542604446, -0.02404863014817238, -0.3974640965461731, 0.12070127576589584, -0.4891689419746399, 0.17592212557792664, 0.2793286144733429, -0.016793297603726387, -0.030852941796183586, 0.1438741832971573, -0.12091135233640671, 0.16061367...	1	As the Christian movement began to accept non-Jewish members, it moved further away from the strict rules imposed on Jews. The early Christians were extreme bigots, filled with zeal and commanded to evangelize; expansion was built into Christianity. Commissioned in the 4th centuryit ranks as the first church built in Constantinopleand has its original atrium. Over the next hundred years or so, Christians were sporadically persecuted. He certainly took advantage of the resulting devastation of the city, building a lavish private palace on part of the site of the fire. The establishment of an independent patriarchate with nine subordinate metropoli contributed to a more favourable attitude by the Persian government, which no longer had to fear an ecclesiastical alliance with the common enemy, Rome. Paul's fate while in Rome is not known. Christianity appealed to the downtrodden masses. As well as this lack of stability at the head of the empire, social relations were in turmoil, and barbarian incursions were on a threatening scale. Christian missionaries to Germanic peoples: to the Goths. There were common languages in the Empire, Latin and Greek. As we have already seen, the faith had spread first among non-Persian elements in the population, Jews and Syrians.	256	ENGLISH	1
A medieval mummer was a medieval entertainer who was an amateur actor. He performed at different plays in the villages that were held at the harvest time or on some religious occasion such as Christmas. Sometimes, these plays were specifically meant to preach the religious teachings but the main purpose remained entertainment. What skills did a Mummer have? What Plays did a medieval Mummer perform? Who did Mummers entertain? Where did a medieval Mummer perform? What did a mummer wear? Where did medieval Mummers live? While a medieval mummer was quite popular during the medieval times, the concept itself existed in the ancient world as well. Thus the history of mummers can be traced back to ancient civilisations of Egypt, Greece, and Rome. In Europe, they became particularly popular as medieval entertainers during the middle and late medieval times. Stamp shows the unusual masks and dress of medieval mummers Medieval Mummers Skills A medieval mummer possessed all the skills required for a sound medieval entertainer. Other than acting in plays, this included skills such as acrobatics, singing, mimicry, and other kinds of entertainment. Eventually they formed into travelling bands of actors with different actors possessing specialised acting skills. A variety of plays were enacted by a medieval mummer. One common form was a guises’ play which was mainly popular in the English speaking parts of Europe. This play was a comic performance mainly done is guise, although it was common to include various religious themes. In parts of Britain and Ireland, Plough Plays were also popular which were mainly performed on Plough Monday. Plays based on stories from the Bible became popular during the middle and late medieval times. It was also common to stage plays based on popular legends; One such legend was “St. George and the Dragon” and plays based on it were quite popular. The Medieval Mummer had his origins in the ancient world Mummers were most popular in the mid and late medieval times Mummers formed bands and worked with other actors Medieval mummers usually had specialised skill in a group (band) Most commonly, medieval mummers performed in open spaces where a stage could be set for the performers. Mummering parties were sometimes also held by nobles and monarchs in which case the plays took place indoors. Among English monarchs, Henry VII was famous for holding mummering parties where medieval entertainers enacted plays. Images shows the type of costumes worn by medieval mummers Medieval Mummers Costumes It was common for medieval mummers to wear outrageous costumes during their performances. For example, men could dress like women and vice versa. Sometimes, costumes resembling animals could also be worn. The costumes mainly depended on the kind of play and mostly had an element of humour. Mummers Medieval Christmas Christmas time during the medieval times was very important for medieval entertainers, just like everyone else. Medieval mummers performed various plays on Christmas Eve with predominantly religious themes. For instance, various stories from the Bible could be adapted into plays and performed. In the Christmas season, plays performed during the All Souls’ Day were called Souling or soul-caking and were quite popular in medieval Britain. Medieval Mummers Summary During the medieval times, a medieval mummer was an important medieval entertainer whose main vocation was acting. Thus a medieval mummer performed in various plays which were enacted for religious or social purposes. Other than acting, they also possessed skills like singing, dancing, mimicry, and acrobatics etc. During the late medieval times, medieval mummers formed into bands of travelling medieval entertainers with individuals possessing specific skills. Mummers performed in wide open spaces such as fields Medieval Royals and Barons held mummering parties Henry VII was famous for the mummering parties he held Medieval Christmas Eve mummer plays were very popular Mummers had many skills such as singing, dancing and mimicry We hope you enjoyed this article on Medieval Mummers and found it informative, we have tried to give the best facts and information on Medieval Mummers in this article, if you would like to add to your knowledge of medieval entertainers such as Medieval Mummers please look at the links at the bottom of this Medieval Mummers page that show other important medieval entertainers of the time.	<urn:uuid:6165ad1d-f335-4dcc-b461-a4c57363b61f>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.medievalchronicles.com/medieval-people/medieval-entertainers/medieval-mummers/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250599718.13/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120165335-20200120194335-00322.warc.gz	en	0.981633	895	3.40625	3	[ -0.03635586425662041, 0.24808171391487122, 0.16761165857315063, -0.5534403324127197, -0.15698611736297607, -0.049623191356658936, 0.10707966983318329, -0.22489464282989502, 0.02609403058886528, -0.2634938955307007, -0.35884198546409607, -0.1626259982585907, 0.08760649710893631, 0.202177748...	3	A medieval mummer was a medieval entertainer who was an amateur actor. He performed at different plays in the villages that were held at the harvest time or on some religious occasion such as Christmas. Sometimes, these plays were specifically meant to preach the religious teachings but the main purpose remained entertainment. What skills did a Mummer have? What Plays did a medieval Mummer perform? Who did Mummers entertain? Where did a medieval Mummer perform? What did a mummer wear? Where did medieval Mummers live? While a medieval mummer was quite popular during the medieval times, the concept itself existed in the ancient world as well. Thus the history of mummers can be traced back to ancient civilisations of Egypt, Greece, and Rome. In Europe, they became particularly popular as medieval entertainers during the middle and late medieval times. Stamp shows the unusual masks and dress of medieval mummers Medieval Mummers Skills A medieval mummer possessed all the skills required for a sound medieval entertainer. Other than acting in plays, this included skills such as acrobatics, singing, mimicry, and other kinds of entertainment. Eventually they formed into travelling bands of actors with different actors possessing specialised acting skills. A variety of plays were enacted by a medieval mummer. One common form was a guises’ play which was mainly popular in the English speaking parts of Europe. This play was a comic performance mainly done is guise, although it was common to include various religious themes. In parts of Britain and Ireland, Plough Plays were also popular which were mainly performed on Plough Monday. Plays based on stories from the Bible became popular during the middle and late medieval times. It was also common to stage plays based on popular legends; One such legend was “St. George and the Dragon” and plays based on it were quite popular. The Medieval Mummer had his origins in the ancient world Mummers were most popular in the mid and late medieval times Mummers formed bands and worked with other actors Medieval mummers usually had specialised skill in a group (band) Most commonly, medieval mummers performed in open spaces where a stage could be set for the performers. Mummering parties were sometimes also held by nobles and monarchs in which case the plays took place indoors. Among English monarchs, Henry VII was famous for holding mummering parties where medieval entertainers enacted plays. Images shows the type of costumes worn by medieval mummers Medieval Mummers Costumes It was common for medieval mummers to wear outrageous costumes during their performances. For example, men could dress like women and vice versa. Sometimes, costumes resembling animals could also be worn. The costumes mainly depended on the kind of play and mostly had an element of humour. Mummers Medieval Christmas Christmas time during the medieval times was very important for medieval entertainers, just like everyone else. Medieval mummers performed various plays on Christmas Eve with predominantly religious themes. For instance, various stories from the Bible could be adapted into plays and performed. In the Christmas season, plays performed during the All Souls’ Day were called Souling or soul-caking and were quite popular in medieval Britain. Medieval Mummers Summary During the medieval times, a medieval mummer was an important medieval entertainer whose main vocation was acting. Thus a medieval mummer performed in various plays which were enacted for religious or social purposes. Other than acting, they also possessed skills like singing, dancing, mimicry, and acrobatics etc. During the late medieval times, medieval mummers formed into bands of travelling medieval entertainers with individuals possessing specific skills. Mummers performed in wide open spaces such as fields Medieval Royals and Barons held mummering parties Henry VII was famous for the mummering parties he held Medieval Christmas Eve mummer plays were very popular Mummers had many skills such as singing, dancing and mimicry We hope you enjoyed this article on Medieval Mummers and found it informative, we have tried to give the best facts and information on Medieval Mummers in this article, if you would like to add to your knowledge of medieval entertainers such as Medieval Mummers please look at the links at the bottom of this Medieval Mummers page that show other important medieval entertainers of the time.	873	ENGLISH	1
Anyone who has ever watched The Last Samurai from start to finish will know how unimaginably cool a gatling gun can be when used against a larger force (or a smaller one). But if you haven’t seen the movie, we’ll ruin the ending for you: Tom Cruise’s idiot character decides to stand with a small group of samurai warriors in defense of the “old way.” Those defending the old way have swords and armor, and those trying to wipe it out have muskets and uniforms. And gatling guns. Against all odds, the last remaining samurai warriors break through the enemy lines to charge toward the commanders on horseback, only to be completely mowed down and slaughtered when the new wave employs gatling guns toward the rear. Considering the timeline of the movie, it made us ask a single simple question: were gatling guns ever used against Native Americans and to what effect? To put it into perspective, gatling guns were first patented in 1862. The Battle of the Little Bighorn took place in 1876. That’s plenty of time to implement even more genocidal tendencies than our armies had implemented before. So did we? The most important thing is that we had the option. More specifically — Custer had the option just before he went to his grave. He proposed that the guns would reduce mobility too much to make his force effective in battle. Whoops! Other military commanders agreed that gatling guns simply weren’t worth dragging into a mobile fight. They were heavy and unwieldy, and Native Americans often retreated to rough or mountainous terrain — which meant gatling guns could not follow. But they were used during some battles. For example, they were effective in taking down the Cheyenne in Oklahoma during conflicts in 1875. They were also used in the Red River War in Texas and the Nez Perce War, both of which occurred in the mid-to-late 1870s. Other uses occurred during the Sioux Wars and the Bannock War. The guns seemed to be used to limited effect, but little information is available to support any claims. More likely, it seems that the gatling guns probably prevented the Native Americans from launching any effective countermeasures. That’s because almost all US Army garrisons had support from the guns. Even if the Native Americans outnumbered American soldiers 10 to 1, the guns could probably provide enough fire support from a fortified location to defend against any attack. The offensive capabilities of the guns where they were most likely to be used were probably limited, however.	<urn:uuid:37bf2046-2638-43e5-a965-aef861fad539>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.custerbattle.com/were-gatling-guns-ever-used-against-the-native-americans/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594662.6/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119151736-20200119175736-00348.warc.gz	en	0.981466	540	3.359375	3	[ -0.5904632210731506, 0.26435014605522156, 0.002270815195515752, -0.2282530963420868, 0.3146803379058838, -0.2884368896484375, 0.09052961319684982, 0.06712649762630463, -0.32946375012397766, -0.4133039116859436, 0.04091303423047066, 0.07066431641578674, 0.01411336101591587, 0.35686868429183...	3	Anyone who has ever watched The Last Samurai from start to finish will know how unimaginably cool a gatling gun can be when used against a larger force (or a smaller one). But if you haven’t seen the movie, we’ll ruin the ending for you: Tom Cruise’s idiot character decides to stand with a small group of samurai warriors in defense of the “old way.” Those defending the old way have swords and armor, and those trying to wipe it out have muskets and uniforms. And gatling guns. Against all odds, the last remaining samurai warriors break through the enemy lines to charge toward the commanders on horseback, only to be completely mowed down and slaughtered when the new wave employs gatling guns toward the rear. Considering the timeline of the movie, it made us ask a single simple question: were gatling guns ever used against Native Americans and to what effect? To put it into perspective, gatling guns were first patented in 1862. The Battle of the Little Bighorn took place in 1876. That’s plenty of time to implement even more genocidal tendencies than our armies had implemented before. So did we? The most important thing is that we had the option. More specifically — Custer had the option just before he went to his grave. He proposed that the guns would reduce mobility too much to make his force effective in battle. Whoops! Other military commanders agreed that gatling guns simply weren’t worth dragging into a mobile fight. They were heavy and unwieldy, and Native Americans often retreated to rough or mountainous terrain — which meant gatling guns could not follow. But they were used during some battles. For example, they were effective in taking down the Cheyenne in Oklahoma during conflicts in 1875. They were also used in the Red River War in Texas and the Nez Perce War, both of which occurred in the mid-to-late 1870s. Other uses occurred during the Sioux Wars and the Bannock War. The guns seemed to be used to limited effect, but little information is available to support any claims. More likely, it seems that the gatling guns probably prevented the Native Americans from launching any effective countermeasures. That’s because almost all US Army garrisons had support from the guns. Even if the Native Americans outnumbered American soldiers 10 to 1, the guns could probably provide enough fire support from a fortified location to defend against any attack. The offensive capabilities of the guns where they were most likely to be used were probably limited, however.	539	ENGLISH	1
The Beothuks were the indigenous people of Newfoundland who were displaced and finally annihilated by the subsequent advent of the Micmacs, a tribe from Mainland Canada, and of the Europeans. Newfoundland and Labrador is the eastern-most Canadian province situated midway between North America and Western Europe. Newfoundland Island lies in the Bay of the St. Lawrence River and Labrador is connected to the Canadian mainland. The total area, 111,390 sq km for Newfoundland and 294,330 sq km for Labrador, is larger than that of Great Britain, and still possesses an extensive, unspoiled wilderness that is home to animals like Caribou, Moose, Polar Bears, Black Bears, Martens, Hares, Otters, Beavers, and Wolves. Originally populated by indigenous people until the arrival of the Vikings, who established the settlement at L’Anse aux Meadows, the Provinces were later discovered by the Venetian John Cabot. He sailed into Cape Bonavista in 1497 and was followed three years later, on St. John’s Day, by the Portuguese explorer Gaspar Corte Real, who named his landing place after the Saint. Their accounts of the land and its abundant resources soon brought an onslaught of other Europeans, and harbors to serve as bases for the summer fishery were set up all along the Eastern Coast from Cape Bonavista to Cape Race. Substantial cod and whale fishery was carried out by the Portuguese, the Spaniards, the French and the Basques, but their seasonal trade seemed to have precluded the idea of any permanent settlements. This was left to the English under King Henry VIII, and the first English Colony came about in 1527. The English were also the forerunners in the first postal exchange from the new region; this came about when the explorer John Rutt sent home a missive on a returning ship. Another Englishman, John Guy, pioneered a plantation in Cupid’s Cove in 1610. His wife was the one who taught English to the famous American Indian, Squantum, who later on, in the course of his rather interesting and eventful life, proved to be of invaluable assistance to the Mayflower Settlers. Another interesting character, exceedingly unpopular with the traders, was the infamous pirate Peter Easton. More English settlers arrived soon and many new English plantations were set up. The French now woke up to the need of both protecting their fishing trade and maintaining their presence in Newfoundland, and, by the orders of the then reigning Louis XIV, the first French Colony was founded at Placentia in 1662. The establishment of both English and French settlements was stoutly opposed not just by each other, but also by the ship fishermen who wanted the Provinces to remain solely fishing preserves. The ensuing strife and agitation lasted for a very long time, and the settlers, suffering much harassment, were not able to get legal rights until 1811. Self-government came in 1855, the first train in 1899, and the first newsprint mill in 1908. Later the Provinces provided the base for the first trans-Atlantic telegraph, the first trans-Atlantic air-crossing, and the first trans-Atlantic wireless broadcast. The fishing industry bonanza during the First World War brought great prosperity, but, with the Great Depression, hardships and unemployment followed on a massive scale. It took another World War and the installment of American troops here in its course for the economy to recover, and the standard of living once again went up. But the Newfoundlanders had learned from their experiences and, deciding they would be better off in the long run if they joined Canada, they did so in 1949. As has been the case in most parts of the world throughout history, the success of the new arrivals unfortunately undermined the existence and rights of the original inhabitants. The Beothuks were the indigenous people of Newfoundland who were displaced and finally annihilated by the subsequent advent of the Micmacs, a tribe from Mainland Canada, and of the Europeans. Probably the people that the Vikings described as the ‘Skraelings’, the Beothuks were descended from the Algonquian-speaking tribes of the Canadian Northeast, spoke a related language, and in appearance were of above-average height, with light brown skin, dark hair and eyes. The term ‘Red Indian’ was first used in reference to them on account of their practice of anointing themselves and their belongings with a mixture of tallow and the abundantly found iron-rich soil called red ochre. This was a mark of tribal identity into which an infant was initiated shortly after birth and a ceremonial application followed every year after that. It probably was supposed to invoke the protective or supernatural powers that they believed in like the sun, the moon, the ‘Great Spirit’, the ‘Powerful Monster’ from the sea and Aich-mud-yim, or ‘Black Man’. Since the Beothuk language is related to the Algonquian, it is assumed that their religious beliefs and rituals too were similar to those of the Algonquian tribes. These consisted mainly of respecting all animate and inanimate objects in nature as spiritual beings, and believing that they themselves originated from an arrow striking the ground. Weddings were celebrated with much feasting and, as far as is known, Monogamy was practiced. The decorative bone pendants and some bowl-and-dice gaming pieces that have been found probably had religious significance aside from the entertainment one. The Beothuks were hunters and fishermen, who traditionally made two annual migrations to the sea coast and the interior forests to avail of the seasonal food resources available in these areas, and who were in the habit of keeping aloof from other people, fiercely guarding their privacy and independence. This is the reason there is so little detailed knowledge about them today. The information we have now comes mainly from the letters and travel accounts of the Europeans of that period and from the few Beothuks that they managed to capture, like the young woman Shawnadithit or Nancy as she was renamed, Demasduit or Mary March, another one called Oubee and a few others. These latter sources, however, could neither provide extensive information due to both language and communication problems, nor did they agree to assist some of the fair-minded Europeans in establishing peaceful contacts with their tribe since it was the tribal principle to kill any member that had lived with the hated enemy. One reason for this was that the Beothuks had come to believe that the Europeans originated from a bad spirit that would affect anybody that interacted with them; and another reason was the belief that by sacrificing the tribe members so-afflicted the souls of those wantonly killed by the enemy would be assuaged. Other information has been obtained by Archaeologists from the excavated Beothuk village and burial sites. These latter have mostly been found along the sea-coast, the dead wrapped in birch rind and interred in various ways. In one, the body along with its earthly belongings was placed on a tall platform, and in another the body was bent together and enclosed in a box made of birch logs. Various items of everyday use have been found in most of these graves as the Beothuks believed that these would be needed on the journey to the island of the ‘good spirit’. Those left bare can be surmised as belonging to the Beothuks that had been sacrificed to the spirits of the dead (for making peace with the Europeans or the Micmacs) and so were barred from this island. Anyway, an idea of Beothuk life can be had from these places and the artifacts found. The Beothuks mainly subsided on a meat diet, either eaten raw or boiled or roasted on a fire made by the friction of iron pyrites. On the Coastal area, in Spring and Summer, they hunted Seals, Sea Duck, Cormorant, Black Bears, Whales, and Seabird Eggs. For this they used long, curve-ended canoes of slat-frameworks and leather coverings. In the Fall, when the Caribou Herds migrated, they moved inland and maintained mile-long ‘deer fences’ that directed the herds to specific hunting areas. Small game such as beaver, fox and ptarmigan were also hunted in this period, but the Caribou was the animal of prime importance. Its meat was preserved for the coming winter, and its skin used for a variety of useful purposes like making clothing and the coverings for their shelters, the ‘Mamateeks’, and the canoes. Various natural remedies derived from the surrounding forest as well as vapor baths were used for medicinal purposes. The Beothuk dress was a simple, sleeveless tunic of stitched-together skins that sometimes came with a hood. Together with this, they sometimes wore Caribou-skin leggings, arm coverings and moccasins. All these items were usually decorated with frills and painted with red ochre. Elaborately carved and incised bone and ivory pendants were worn either as decorative jewelry or as talismans of guardian spirits. There are no definite details about the Coastal habitats of the Beothuks. From the pits found in Bonavista Bay, it is assumed they were probably round-shaped. Better known are the winter habitats, the ‘Mamateeks’, which were conical structures constructed of straight fir poles that met at the top, leaving a central smoke hatch. This framework was mainly covered Caribou skin, but birch bark and cloth, if available, was often used too. The gaps were filled with moss and clay, and soil heaped on the outside edges to keep out the wind and snow. The Mamateeks were of various sizes and often multi-sided. Of prime importance inside was the fireplace for cooking and for keeping the inhabitants warm; they usually slept around it in dug-out sleeping pits. Crisscrossed beams above store the winter provisions and the weapons were hung within easy access on the walls. There were various types of weapons – bows and arrows, spear, harpoons – later on scavenged European utilitarian articles like fish-hooks, nails, scissors, spoons, forks and so on were also ingenuously converted into weapons. These primitive weapons, used successfully for hunting, were to prove completely inadequate before the fire-power of the Europeans and the Micmacs. The End of the Beothuks As the first Europeans were only seasonal visitors their presence doesn’t appear to have bothered the Beothuks initially. The first mutual contacts were established for trading purposes and both probably regarded the other as harmless. They had friendly meetings and traded by the silent barter method, where one party offered the items for sale and the other reciprocated with what they judged to be an adequate payment. Later arrivals however looked upon them as savage and sub-human and didn’t think twice about firing upon them. These Europeans were also intent on expanding the fishery and fur business and establishing permanent settlements, and they began by taking over the traditional Coastal campsites, in the process denying them access to the vital sea resources. The Beothuks, of course, retaliated and outright hostilities broke out. The 1720s were bad for them, with the Micmacs, with whom they previously had no quarrel, too entering the fray on European instigation and dislodging them from significant portions of their land. Some sort of uneasy truce was established for sometime after that, but this soon broke down and the conflict erupted once again. There were murders and swift reprisals from both sides, but, as had been the case before, the Beothuks were the ones to come out the worst. By the beginning of the nineteenth century, drastically reduced in numbers, they had been forced to eke out a meager living in the Interiors. With little or no food available at that time of the year, there was mass starvation, and the Beothuk Tribe, which had already only numbered about one thousand when the Europeans arrived, began to die out. Concerned with their plight and appalled by the injustices and harassment on their own part, a number of Europeans tried to stir up public opinion on their behalf, proposing both peace missions and the establishment of an Indian Reserve, none of which received government backing. The Beothuks too were not a forgiving lot and when the official policy changed later on none could be found for the peace talks. So much so a reward had to be announced for bringing in a live Beothuk, the rather naive assumption being that peace signals could be sent by heaping presents on him or her. A Beothuk woman was found eventually in 1803, but nobody really knew what to do her and the outpouring of presents must have bewildered if not outright frightened her. In any case, following her tribe’s policy, she never returned to them and so nothing came of that peace venture. Later on, in January 1811, an English Captain called David Buchan, leading an armed party, stumbled upon a Beothuk settlement at Red Indian Lake. It was an encountered that unnerved both groups, but Buchan managed to make his peaceful overtures understood and they were invited to partake of the Beothuks’ meal. It seemed friendly relations had been finally established and so, leaving two of his men behind as surety, Buchan returned to his camp to fetch presents. Unfortunately, his departure was viewed in the wrong light by the suspicious Beothuks. Their past experiences, of course, had given them no reason to trust the white man. So, in self-protective measure in case he was going to be returning with forces to wipe them out, they killed Buchan’s men and decamped from the place. Apparently this was celebrated as a tribal victory later. Buchan, despite this gory incident, made further attempts to contact them, but got nowhere. John Peyton Jr., later the Magistrate on Exploits Island, was more successful, if not remotely as altruistic. In retaliation for the stealing of his boats, he traced the Beothuk camp and launched a brutal attack in which the woman Demasduit (Mary March) was captured and her husband Nonosabasut killed defending her; her new-born baby died two days later. Demasduit was publicly displayed in St. John’s, where her elegant appearance and refined demeanor caused a significant change in the prevalent public opinion about the ‘savages’. In fact, there was even talk of returning her to her people, but she died of consumption before anything could be done. A few years later, European fur-trappers traveling through the forest rescued a Beothuk woman and her two daughters from a wretchedly starved condition and took them to John Peyton Jr.’s magisterial residence on Exploits Islands. Perhaps he had undergone a change of heart from his earlier antipathy towards the natives, because, although it was too late to save the mother and one sister, the surviving girl, Shanawdithit, was properly cared for and later taken into his household as a domestic servant. Later William Cormack, who had done much to raise awareness for the Beothuks’ cause, brought her to St. John’s in the hope that her intelligence and the language skills she had picked up in the Peyton household could be put to use in contacting her people. Although she never acceded to this request in the whole year that he was in Newfoundland, he learned much about her people from her conversation and drawings, in particular about the alarming dwindling in numbers of her tribe. Only about a dozen or so now, they were too few to maintain the ‘deer-fence’ and as they were unable to access the sea-resources either, their continuing survival wasn’t likely. As no other Beothuk was ever heard of after this it is assumed that this is indeed what tragically happened. Shanawdithit herself did not long survive her people. On 6 June 1829, merely five months after Cormack’s departure from Newfoundland, she succumbed to consumption, a disease that had proved to be the bane of most of her people. The valiant race of the Beothuks had become extinct.	<urn:uuid:a5397afb-a9bd-4003-a24e-94fd91cbb096>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://historyplex.com/the-beothuks-of-newfoundland	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250626449.79/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124221147-20200125010147-00520.warc.gz	en	0.984102	3,406	3.6875	4	[ -0.11568349599838257, 0.3711405396461487, 0.27280372381210327, -0.05797811597585678, -0.02592673897743225, -0.4396595060825348, -0.2350446730852127, 0.23656511306762695, -0.1881442815065384, 0.38281482458114624, 0.19186829030513763, -0.6831198930740356, 0.011513659730553627, 0.035171471536...	9	The Beothuks were the indigenous people of Newfoundland who were displaced and finally annihilated by the subsequent advent of the Micmacs, a tribe from Mainland Canada, and of the Europeans. Newfoundland and Labrador is the eastern-most Canadian province situated midway between North America and Western Europe. Newfoundland Island lies in the Bay of the St. Lawrence River and Labrador is connected to the Canadian mainland. The total area, 111,390 sq km for Newfoundland and 294,330 sq km for Labrador, is larger than that of Great Britain, and still possesses an extensive, unspoiled wilderness that is home to animals like Caribou, Moose, Polar Bears, Black Bears, Martens, Hares, Otters, Beavers, and Wolves. Originally populated by indigenous people until the arrival of the Vikings, who established the settlement at L’Anse aux Meadows, the Provinces were later discovered by the Venetian John Cabot. He sailed into Cape Bonavista in 1497 and was followed three years later, on St. John’s Day, by the Portuguese explorer Gaspar Corte Real, who named his landing place after the Saint. Their accounts of the land and its abundant resources soon brought an onslaught of other Europeans, and harbors to serve as bases for the summer fishery were set up all along the Eastern Coast from Cape Bonavista to Cape Race. Substantial cod and whale fishery was carried out by the Portuguese, the Spaniards, the French and the Basques, but their seasonal trade seemed to have precluded the idea of any permanent settlements. This was left to the English under King Henry VIII, and the first English Colony came about in 1527. The English were also the forerunners in the first postal exchange from the new region; this came about when the explorer John Rutt sent home a missive on a returning ship. Another Englishman, John Guy, pioneered a plantation in Cupid’s Cove in 1610. His wife was the one who taught English to the famous American Indian, Squantum, who later on, in the course of his rather interesting and eventful life, proved to be of invaluable assistance to the Mayflower Settlers. Another interesting character, exceedingly unpopular with the traders, was the infamous pirate Peter Easton. More English settlers arrived soon and many new English plantations were set up. The French now woke up to the need of both protecting their fishing trade and maintaining their presence in Newfoundland, and, by the orders of the then reigning Louis XIV, the first French Colony was founded at Placentia in 1662. The establishment of both English and French settlements was stoutly opposed not just by each other, but also by the ship fishermen who wanted the Provinces to remain solely fishing preserves. The ensuing strife and agitation lasted for a very long time, and the settlers, suffering much harassment, were not able to get legal rights until 1811. Self-government came in 1855, the first train in 1899, and the first newsprint mill in 1908. Later the Provinces provided the base for the first trans-Atlantic telegraph, the first trans-Atlantic air-crossing, and the first trans-Atlantic wireless broadcast. The fishing industry bonanza during the First World War brought great prosperity, but, with the Great Depression, hardships and unemployment followed on a massive scale. It took another World War and the installment of American troops here in its course for the economy to recover, and the standard of living once again went up. But the Newfoundlanders had learned from their experiences and, deciding they would be better off in the long run if they joined Canada, they did so in 1949. As has been the case in most parts of the world throughout history, the success of the new arrivals unfortunately undermined the existence and rights of the original inhabitants. The Beothuks were the indigenous people of Newfoundland who were displaced and finally annihilated by the subsequent advent of the Micmacs, a tribe from Mainland Canada, and of the Europeans. Probably the people that the Vikings described as the ‘Skraelings’, the Beothuks were descended from the Algonquian-speaking tribes of the Canadian Northeast, spoke a related language, and in appearance were of above-average height, with light brown skin, dark hair and eyes. The term ‘Red Indian’ was first used in reference to them on account of their practice of anointing themselves and their belongings with a mixture of tallow and the abundantly found iron-rich soil called red ochre. This was a mark of tribal identity into which an infant was initiated shortly after birth and a ceremonial application followed every year after that. It probably was supposed to invoke the protective or supernatural powers that they believed in like the sun, the moon, the ‘Great Spirit’, the ‘Powerful Monster’ from the sea and Aich-mud-yim, or ‘Black Man’. Since the Beothuk language is related to the Algonquian, it is assumed that their religious beliefs and rituals too were similar to those of the Algonquian tribes. These consisted mainly of respecting all animate and inanimate objects in nature as spiritual beings, and believing that they themselves originated from an arrow striking the ground. Weddings were celebrated with much feasting and, as far as is known, Monogamy was practiced. The decorative bone pendants and some bowl-and-dice gaming pieces that have been found probably had religious significance aside from the entertainment one. The Beothuks were hunters and fishermen, who traditionally made two annual migrations to the sea coast and the interior forests to avail of the seasonal food resources available in these areas, and who were in the habit of keeping aloof from other people, fiercely guarding their privacy and independence. This is the reason there is so little detailed knowledge about them today. The information we have now comes mainly from the letters and travel accounts of the Europeans of that period and from the few Beothuks that they managed to capture, like the young woman Shawnadithit or Nancy as she was renamed, Demasduit or Mary March, another one called Oubee and a few others. These latter sources, however, could neither provide extensive information due to both language and communication problems, nor did they agree to assist some of the fair-minded Europeans in establishing peaceful contacts with their tribe since it was the tribal principle to kill any member that had lived with the hated enemy. One reason for this was that the Beothuks had come to believe that the Europeans originated from a bad spirit that would affect anybody that interacted with them; and another reason was the belief that by sacrificing the tribe members so-afflicted the souls of those wantonly killed by the enemy would be assuaged. Other information has been obtained by Archaeologists from the excavated Beothuk village and burial sites. These latter have mostly been found along the sea-coast, the dead wrapped in birch rind and interred in various ways. In one, the body along with its earthly belongings was placed on a tall platform, and in another the body was bent together and enclosed in a box made of birch logs. Various items of everyday use have been found in most of these graves as the Beothuks believed that these would be needed on the journey to the island of the ‘good spirit’. Those left bare can be surmised as belonging to the Beothuks that had been sacrificed to the spirits of the dead (for making peace with the Europeans or the Micmacs) and so were barred from this island. Anyway, an idea of Beothuk life can be had from these places and the artifacts found. The Beothuks mainly subsided on a meat diet, either eaten raw or boiled or roasted on a fire made by the friction of iron pyrites. On the Coastal area, in Spring and Summer, they hunted Seals, Sea Duck, Cormorant, Black Bears, Whales, and Seabird Eggs. For this they used long, curve-ended canoes of slat-frameworks and leather coverings. In the Fall, when the Caribou Herds migrated, they moved inland and maintained mile-long ‘deer fences’ that directed the herds to specific hunting areas. Small game such as beaver, fox and ptarmigan were also hunted in this period, but the Caribou was the animal of prime importance. Its meat was preserved for the coming winter, and its skin used for a variety of useful purposes like making clothing and the coverings for their shelters, the ‘Mamateeks’, and the canoes. Various natural remedies derived from the surrounding forest as well as vapor baths were used for medicinal purposes. The Beothuk dress was a simple, sleeveless tunic of stitched-together skins that sometimes came with a hood. Together with this, they sometimes wore Caribou-skin leggings, arm coverings and moccasins. All these items were usually decorated with frills and painted with red ochre. Elaborately carved and incised bone and ivory pendants were worn either as decorative jewelry or as talismans of guardian spirits. There are no definite details about the Coastal habitats of the Beothuks. From the pits found in Bonavista Bay, it is assumed they were probably round-shaped. Better known are the winter habitats, the ‘Mamateeks’, which were conical structures constructed of straight fir poles that met at the top, leaving a central smoke hatch. This framework was mainly covered Caribou skin, but birch bark and cloth, if available, was often used too. The gaps were filled with moss and clay, and soil heaped on the outside edges to keep out the wind and snow. The Mamateeks were of various sizes and often multi-sided. Of prime importance inside was the fireplace for cooking and for keeping the inhabitants warm; they usually slept around it in dug-out sleeping pits. Crisscrossed beams above store the winter provisions and the weapons were hung within easy access on the walls. There were various types of weapons – bows and arrows, spear, harpoons – later on scavenged European utilitarian articles like fish-hooks, nails, scissors, spoons, forks and so on were also ingenuously converted into weapons. These primitive weapons, used successfully for hunting, were to prove completely inadequate before the fire-power of the Europeans and the Micmacs. The End of the Beothuks As the first Europeans were only seasonal visitors their presence doesn’t appear to have bothered the Beothuks initially. The first mutual contacts were established for trading purposes and both probably regarded the other as harmless. They had friendly meetings and traded by the silent barter method, where one party offered the items for sale and the other reciprocated with what they judged to be an adequate payment. Later arrivals however looked upon them as savage and sub-human and didn’t think twice about firing upon them. These Europeans were also intent on expanding the fishery and fur business and establishing permanent settlements, and they began by taking over the traditional Coastal campsites, in the process denying them access to the vital sea resources. The Beothuks, of course, retaliated and outright hostilities broke out. The 1720s were bad for them, with the Micmacs, with whom they previously had no quarrel, too entering the fray on European instigation and dislodging them from significant portions of their land. Some sort of uneasy truce was established for sometime after that, but this soon broke down and the conflict erupted once again. There were murders and swift reprisals from both sides, but, as had been the case before, the Beothuks were the ones to come out the worst. By the beginning of the nineteenth century, drastically reduced in numbers, they had been forced to eke out a meager living in the Interiors. With little or no food available at that time of the year, there was mass starvation, and the Beothuk Tribe, which had already only numbered about one thousand when the Europeans arrived, began to die out. Concerned with their plight and appalled by the injustices and harassment on their own part, a number of Europeans tried to stir up public opinion on their behalf, proposing both peace missions and the establishment of an Indian Reserve, none of which received government backing. The Beothuks too were not a forgiving lot and when the official policy changed later on none could be found for the peace talks. So much so a reward had to be announced for bringing in a live Beothuk, the rather naive assumption being that peace signals could be sent by heaping presents on him or her. A Beothuk woman was found eventually in 1803, but nobody really knew what to do her and the outpouring of presents must have bewildered if not outright frightened her. In any case, following her tribe’s policy, she never returned to them and so nothing came of that peace venture. Later on, in January 1811, an English Captain called David Buchan, leading an armed party, stumbled upon a Beothuk settlement at Red Indian Lake. It was an encountered that unnerved both groups, but Buchan managed to make his peaceful overtures understood and they were invited to partake of the Beothuks’ meal. It seemed friendly relations had been finally established and so, leaving two of his men behind as surety, Buchan returned to his camp to fetch presents. Unfortunately, his departure was viewed in the wrong light by the suspicious Beothuks. Their past experiences, of course, had given them no reason to trust the white man. So, in self-protective measure in case he was going to be returning with forces to wipe them out, they killed Buchan’s men and decamped from the place. Apparently this was celebrated as a tribal victory later. Buchan, despite this gory incident, made further attempts to contact them, but got nowhere. John Peyton Jr., later the Magistrate on Exploits Island, was more successful, if not remotely as altruistic. In retaliation for the stealing of his boats, he traced the Beothuk camp and launched a brutal attack in which the woman Demasduit (Mary March) was captured and her husband Nonosabasut killed defending her; her new-born baby died two days later. Demasduit was publicly displayed in St. John’s, where her elegant appearance and refined demeanor caused a significant change in the prevalent public opinion about the ‘savages’. In fact, there was even talk of returning her to her people, but she died of consumption before anything could be done. A few years later, European fur-trappers traveling through the forest rescued a Beothuk woman and her two daughters from a wretchedly starved condition and took them to John Peyton Jr.’s magisterial residence on Exploits Islands. Perhaps he had undergone a change of heart from his earlier antipathy towards the natives, because, although it was too late to save the mother and one sister, the surviving girl, Shanawdithit, was properly cared for and later taken into his household as a domestic servant. Later William Cormack, who had done much to raise awareness for the Beothuks’ cause, brought her to St. John’s in the hope that her intelligence and the language skills she had picked up in the Peyton household could be put to use in contacting her people. Although she never acceded to this request in the whole year that he was in Newfoundland, he learned much about her people from her conversation and drawings, in particular about the alarming dwindling in numbers of her tribe. Only about a dozen or so now, they were too few to maintain the ‘deer-fence’ and as they were unable to access the sea-resources either, their continuing survival wasn’t likely. As no other Beothuk was ever heard of after this it is assumed that this is indeed what tragically happened. Shanawdithit herself did not long survive her people. On 6 June 1829, merely five months after Cormack’s departure from Newfoundland, she succumbed to consumption, a disease that had proved to be the bane of most of her people. The valiant race of the Beothuks had become extinct.	3,367	ENGLISH	1
The making of AustraliaThe first people to inhabit Australia were the aborigines. They arrived from south-east asia about 40.000 years ago. Dutch explorers landed in Australia in the seventeenth century. They did not realise that it was a separate continent. In 1770, captain James Cook landed in botany bay on the east coast. He claimed the area for Britain and called it New South Wales. The artists on Cook’s ship made drawings of the amazing animals they saw. Britain described Australia as terra nullius ( uninhabited land). But it was not empty. About 750.000 Aborigines were already living there. After the American Revolution , Britain started to send its convicts to Australia instead of America. In 1788, eleven prison ships, carrying over 700 convicts, arrived in Botany Bay. Many convicts remained in Australia at the end of their sentences. Immigrants who were not convicts also came to Australia. They were attracted by the cheap land, convict labour and gold. Some became rich. Others had hard lives, living in rough huts in the bush. The aborigines were badly treated. They were pushed off their land and huge numbers were killed. They had no rights. In 1880 there were six British colonies on the continent of Australia. They united in 1901 to form the Commonwealth of Australia. This became independent in 1931.	<urn:uuid:05ae12c1-c56b-4ec3-be7b-aec17f56498c>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.skuola.net/civilta-inglese/the-making-of-australia.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598217.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120081337-20200120105337-00090.warc.gz	en	0.990771	281	3.828125	4	[ 0.20023266971111298, 0.2426992952823639, 0.19313497841358185, -0.039141956716775894, -0.17600522935390472, 0.222111314535141, 0.03545067831873894, -0.0020153557416051626, -0.3675849437713623, 0.17735397815704346, 0.18140119314193726, -0.7769820690155029, -0.09834473580121994, 0.42518705129...	1	The making of AustraliaThe first people to inhabit Australia were the aborigines. They arrived from south-east asia about 40.000 years ago. Dutch explorers landed in Australia in the seventeenth century. They did not realise that it was a separate continent. In 1770, captain James Cook landed in botany bay on the east coast. He claimed the area for Britain and called it New South Wales. The artists on Cook’s ship made drawings of the amazing animals they saw. Britain described Australia as terra nullius ( uninhabited land). But it was not empty. About 750.000 Aborigines were already living there. After the American Revolution , Britain started to send its convicts to Australia instead of America. In 1788, eleven prison ships, carrying over 700 convicts, arrived in Botany Bay. Many convicts remained in Australia at the end of their sentences. Immigrants who were not convicts also came to Australia. They were attracted by the cheap land, convict labour and gold. Some became rich. Others had hard lives, living in rough huts in the bush. The aborigines were badly treated. They were pushed off their land and huge numbers were killed. They had no rights. In 1880 there were six British colonies on the continent of Australia. They united in 1901 to form the Commonwealth of Australia. This became independent in 1931.	307	ENGLISH	1
The information gained from this paper will help people understand the past and be able to learn from their mistakes. This information can help people grow into better versions of themselves. Therefore, I wanted to research and find out more information leaders and their impact on the Civil Rights Movement. I began by scouring the internet and found the Civil Rights Movement and how long it was on The New Georgia Encyclopedia. I then, read the article and found out about the different people who helped and could be classified as leaders in the movement. I searched up each of their names and found articles on them, such as Martin Luther King Jr., John Lewis, and Malcolm X (etc.). I asked myself questions like; who are they? How do they show leadership? What did they do to impact the civil right movement? I began researching those question and came up with answers. According to The New Dictionary of Culture and Literacy the Civil Rights Movement is known as The national effort made by African Americans and their supporters in the 1950s and 1960s to eliminate segregation and gain equal rights (2005). That’s the dictionary definition of the Civil Rights Movement but, it means a lot of different things to a lot of different people. For example; for African Americans it was a time where they were fighting for equality, for white supremacists it was a time of fighting and hatred. There were those people who stood out among the rest and took up the role of a leader to gain rights and equality. There were those people who stood up for what they believed in and fought to the bitter end. Some of them didn’t even see their goal accomplished but, they still tried. When people think Civil Rights, what’s the first thing that pops into their head? Martin Luther King Jr. Well at least for most. For some people its segregation or other leaders. Leaders in this time were all shapes, sizes, and genders. Rosa Parks for example. John Lewis is another. John Lewis was always risking everything, including his life, for the Civil Right Movement. He fought battles, real and figuratively, always being arrested. He was part of Freedom Rides, which is where he and a small group of people would protest against the busses. Soon after, in 1963, he was given a place in the SNCC. This is a Civil Rights organization. Now he is a U.S. Representative for Georgia’s 5th congressional district. (Georgia Humanities and the University of the Georgia Press, 2004-2018) Elaine Brown is another great example. Elaine Brown was a chairwomen in the Black Panther Party. The Black Panther Party was made by Bobby Seale and was called the Black Panther Part only for self-defense. Elaine Brown was first introduced to the Black Panther Party when she started writing for the Black Congress Newspaper. They only then started to take notice of her when appeals for the Huey Newton Legal Defense Fund came in. It was long after in the end of April 1968 she went to her first official Black Panther meeting. She became the editor for The Black Panther. This was a huge achievement for her because after that she became the first elected female of the Panther central community. She helped lead other to do the same. (In the article, Brown, Elaine 1941-, 2017-2018). Martin Luther King Jr. A man who helped everyone and anyone. He believed the way to get his and others rights was to have peaceful protests and no violence. He participated from anything to protests to boycotts. After Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat on the public Montgomery bus people started to plan a boycott. Martin being the leader he was joined along with boycott. Originally the boycott was supposed to be one day but, it ended up being 381 days. Before the boycott Martin had been asked to join the MIA. He agreed and ended up leading the whole thing. The boycott still continued even though lots of people were being arrested.(Georgia Humanities and The University of the Georgia Press, 2004, 2018). Having doubts about how to write your paper correctly? Our editors will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!	<urn:uuid:0ae6900b-a13d-413d-8a75-0795da3592d1>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://studydriver.com/how-did-leaders-impact-the-civil-rights/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251778168.77/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128091916-20200128121916-00068.warc.gz	en	0.982084	841	3.828125	4	[ -0.6334158778190613, -0.016505619511008263, 0.4149668216705322, 0.03910692408680916, -0.11318223178386688, 0.31149056553840637, 0.4732007086277008, -0.18053431808948517, -0.2585756182670593, 0.27108263969421387, 0.10679224133491516, 0.6535406112670898, 0.1615075170993805, -0.19627603888511...	1	The information gained from this paper will help people understand the past and be able to learn from their mistakes. This information can help people grow into better versions of themselves. Therefore, I wanted to research and find out more information leaders and their impact on the Civil Rights Movement. I began by scouring the internet and found the Civil Rights Movement and how long it was on The New Georgia Encyclopedia. I then, read the article and found out about the different people who helped and could be classified as leaders in the movement. I searched up each of their names and found articles on them, such as Martin Luther King Jr., John Lewis, and Malcolm X (etc.). I asked myself questions like; who are they? How do they show leadership? What did they do to impact the civil right movement? I began researching those question and came up with answers. According to The New Dictionary of Culture and Literacy the Civil Rights Movement is known as The national effort made by African Americans and their supporters in the 1950s and 1960s to eliminate segregation and gain equal rights (2005). That’s the dictionary definition of the Civil Rights Movement but, it means a lot of different things to a lot of different people. For example; for African Americans it was a time where they were fighting for equality, for white supremacists it was a time of fighting and hatred. There were those people who stood out among the rest and took up the role of a leader to gain rights and equality. There were those people who stood up for what they believed in and fought to the bitter end. Some of them didn’t even see their goal accomplished but, they still tried. When people think Civil Rights, what’s the first thing that pops into their head? Martin Luther King Jr. Well at least for most. For some people its segregation or other leaders. Leaders in this time were all shapes, sizes, and genders. Rosa Parks for example. John Lewis is another. John Lewis was always risking everything, including his life, for the Civil Right Movement. He fought battles, real and figuratively, always being arrested. He was part of Freedom Rides, which is where he and a small group of people would protest against the busses. Soon after, in 1963, he was given a place in the SNCC. This is a Civil Rights organization. Now he is a U.S. Representative for Georgia’s 5th congressional district. (Georgia Humanities and the University of the Georgia Press, 2004-2018) Elaine Brown is another great example. Elaine Brown was a chairwomen in the Black Panther Party. The Black Panther Party was made by Bobby Seale and was called the Black Panther Part only for self-defense. Elaine Brown was first introduced to the Black Panther Party when she started writing for the Black Congress Newspaper. They only then started to take notice of her when appeals for the Huey Newton Legal Defense Fund came in. It was long after in the end of April 1968 she went to her first official Black Panther meeting. She became the editor for The Black Panther. This was a huge achievement for her because after that she became the first elected female of the Panther central community. She helped lead other to do the same. (In the article, Brown, Elaine 1941-, 2017-2018). Martin Luther King Jr. A man who helped everyone and anyone. He believed the way to get his and others rights was to have peaceful protests and no violence. He participated from anything to protests to boycotts. After Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat on the public Montgomery bus people started to plan a boycott. Martin being the leader he was joined along with boycott. Originally the boycott was supposed to be one day but, it ended up being 381 days. Before the boycott Martin had been asked to join the MIA. He agreed and ended up leading the whole thing. The boycott still continued even though lots of people were being arrested.(Georgia Humanities and The University of the Georgia Press, 2004, 2018). Having doubts about how to write your paper correctly? Our editors will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!	871	ENGLISH	1
William Howard Taft was born in Cincinnati, Ohio, on September 15, 1857. He was raised by Louisa Maria Torrey and Alphonso Taft on a farm. Taft was one of six children in the family. Taft’s father, Alphonso Taft served under Ulysses S. Grant. William grew up attending a private school, and then at Yale University like his father. He graduated from Yale in 1878. After he graduated from Yale, he went to the University of Cincinnati College of Law, then he was admitted to the Ohio State Bar Association in 1880. Soon after, he fell in love with Helen ” Nellie” Herron, an old school friend of his only sister. Taft and Nellie met at a sledding party. Taft and Nellie got married on June 19, 1886. They had three kids. Robert A. Taft, Charles Phelps Taft II, and Helen Taft Manning. William Howard Taft became the 27th President of the United States of America on September 15, 1857 and he served from September 15, 1857- Mach 8, 1930. He served as chief justice from 1921-1930. He was the only person to serve as both. Taft was taking a bath in a tub in the White House and got stuck because he weighed 350 pounds. His Justice department had to break the tub so that they would be able to get him out. In the early 1900, President William McKinley called Taft to Washington and asked him with setting up a civilian government in the Philippines, which has become a U.S. protectorate after the Spanish- American War (1898). After President McKinley was assassinated in 1901, President Theodore Roosevelt twice offered Taft a Supreme Court appointment, but he declined in order to stay in the Philippines. William Howard Taft died on March 08, 1930. He died of Cardiovascular disease. I chose William Howard Taft for my essay because, when we were in the fourth grade Mr. Johnson taught about some of the things that had happened to Taft. I wanted to learn more about William Howard Taft and how he became President. This essay was an opportunity to learn more about him. I hope you enjoyed this essay as much as I did writing it.	<urn:uuid:23e694c7-6a42-413a-a05d-6c97ad81a69a>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://johnnyfavourit.com/william-as-both-taft-was-taking-a-bath/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250601628.36/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121074002-20200121103002-00472.warc.gz	en	0.991261	470	3.46875	3	[ -0.14846429228782654, 0.2622031271457672, 0.12537139654159546, -0.0486600324511528, -0.2560599446296692, 0.3230464458465576, 0.5412883162498474, -0.19152872264385223, -0.05951973795890808, 0.024391235783696175, -0.027627067640423775, 0.16047541797161102, 0.3469330966472626, 0.3231501877307...	1	William Howard Taft was born in Cincinnati, Ohio, on September 15, 1857. He was raised by Louisa Maria Torrey and Alphonso Taft on a farm. Taft was one of six children in the family. Taft’s father, Alphonso Taft served under Ulysses S. Grant. William grew up attending a private school, and then at Yale University like his father. He graduated from Yale in 1878. After he graduated from Yale, he went to the University of Cincinnati College of Law, then he was admitted to the Ohio State Bar Association in 1880. Soon after, he fell in love with Helen ” Nellie” Herron, an old school friend of his only sister. Taft and Nellie met at a sledding party. Taft and Nellie got married on June 19, 1886. They had three kids. Robert A. Taft, Charles Phelps Taft II, and Helen Taft Manning. William Howard Taft became the 27th President of the United States of America on September 15, 1857 and he served from September 15, 1857- Mach 8, 1930. He served as chief justice from 1921-1930. He was the only person to serve as both. Taft was taking a bath in a tub in the White House and got stuck because he weighed 350 pounds. His Justice department had to break the tub so that they would be able to get him out. In the early 1900, President William McKinley called Taft to Washington and asked him with setting up a civilian government in the Philippines, which has become a U.S. protectorate after the Spanish- American War (1898). After President McKinley was assassinated in 1901, President Theodore Roosevelt twice offered Taft a Supreme Court appointment, but he declined in order to stay in the Philippines. William Howard Taft died on March 08, 1930. He died of Cardiovascular disease. I chose William Howard Taft for my essay because, when we were in the fourth grade Mr. Johnson taught about some of the things that had happened to Taft. I wanted to learn more about William Howard Taft and how he became President. This essay was an opportunity to learn more about him. I hope you enjoyed this essay as much as I did writing it.	530	ENGLISH	1
FOR MOST of Western history, childhood was nasty, brutish and short, or even non-existent. Before modern medicine and public-health standards, many infants did not live to see their first birthday—and if they did, they were expected to grow up at the double. In the two millennia from antiquity to the 17th century, children were mostly seen as imperfect adults. Medieval works of art typically depict them as miniature grown-ups. In 1960 one of the first historians of childhood, Philippe Ariès, declared that in medieval Europe the idea of childhood did not exist. Most people were not even sure of their own age. For much of that time newborns were considered intrinsically evil, burdened with original sin from which they had to be redeemed through instruction and education. That changed in the 17th century, when children instead began to be seen as innocents who must be protected from harm and corruption by the adult world. Childhood came to be regarded as a separate stage of life. John Locke, a 17th-century English thinker, saw the mind of a newborn child as a blank sheet, to be filled in by its elders and betters. A few decades later Jean-Jacques Rousseau, a Swiss philosopher, argued that children had their own way of seeing, thinking, feeling and reasoning and should be left to develop as nature intended. In the late 18th and early 19th century the Romantics went one better, crediting children with deeper wisdom than adults. Parents’ relative lack of interest in their children in the Middle Ages may have been a rational response to a distressingly high infant mortality rate, reckoned to have been around 200-300 per 1,000 live births in the first year of life, compared with single figures per 1,000 in rich countries now. Many others were wiped out by diseases and accidents before the age of ten. Parents would not want to get too attached to a child who might not be around for long. Besides, in the absence of reliable birth control, families tended to be large, so less attention would be focused on each individual sibling. Young children were encouraged to take part in adult activities as soon as they were able, usually starting between the ages of five and seven, and begin to work alongside grown-ups as they became more capable. In agrarian societies they had always been expected to help out at home and in the fields from an early age. In post-revolutionary America they were expected to become independent as soon as possible because labour was in short supply, which made the relationship between the generations less hierarchical than in Europe. The Industrial Revolution turned children into an indispensable source of income for many poor families, often before they were fully grown. In Britain a parliamentary report in 1818-19 on children in cotton mills around Stockport and Manchester put the average age for starting work at around 11½. But by the end of the 19th century the state had begun to clamp down on the exploitation of children in the West. Education for the younger age groups became mandatory in ever more countries. Children were seen as in need of protection, and their period of economic dependency lengthened in both Europe and America. The scene was set for the emergence of what Viviana Zelizer, a sociologist at Princeton, has memorably described as “the economically useless but emotionally priceless child”. - Why children’s lives have changed radically in just a few decades - In the Middle Ages there was no such thing as childhood - The continuing importance of the family - The early years are getting increasing attention - How children interact with digital media - The art and science of parenting - Parenting methods are exacerbating social divisions - Sources and acknowledgments This article appeared in the Special report section of the print edition under the headline "In the Middle Ages there was no such thing as childhood"	<urn:uuid:5688fb31-3231-4109-8a6b-e1124e01a479>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.economist.com/special-report/2019/01/03/in-the-middle-ages-there-was-no-such-thing-as-childhood	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250601241.42/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121014531-20200121043531-00292.warc.gz	en	0.984774	792	3.53125	4	[ -0.18426170945167542, 0.351718008518219, 0.25217628479003906, -0.3558381199836731, -0.3999797999858856, 0.4209385812282562, -0.6149826049804688, 0.22184914350509644, -0.04962015897035599, -0.03888048604130745, 0.1608034372329712, 0.16374030709266663, 0.17843598127365112, 0.3262476325035095...	1	FOR MOST of Western history, childhood was nasty, brutish and short, or even non-existent. Before modern medicine and public-health standards, many infants did not live to see their first birthday—and if they did, they were expected to grow up at the double. In the two millennia from antiquity to the 17th century, children were mostly seen as imperfect adults. Medieval works of art typically depict them as miniature grown-ups. In 1960 one of the first historians of childhood, Philippe Ariès, declared that in medieval Europe the idea of childhood did not exist. Most people were not even sure of their own age. For much of that time newborns were considered intrinsically evil, burdened with original sin from which they had to be redeemed through instruction and education. That changed in the 17th century, when children instead began to be seen as innocents who must be protected from harm and corruption by the adult world. Childhood came to be regarded as a separate stage of life. John Locke, a 17th-century English thinker, saw the mind of a newborn child as a blank sheet, to be filled in by its elders and betters. A few decades later Jean-Jacques Rousseau, a Swiss philosopher, argued that children had their own way of seeing, thinking, feeling and reasoning and should be left to develop as nature intended. In the late 18th and early 19th century the Romantics went one better, crediting children with deeper wisdom than adults. Parents’ relative lack of interest in their children in the Middle Ages may have been a rational response to a distressingly high infant mortality rate, reckoned to have been around 200-300 per 1,000 live births in the first year of life, compared with single figures per 1,000 in rich countries now. Many others were wiped out by diseases and accidents before the age of ten. Parents would not want to get too attached to a child who might not be around for long. Besides, in the absence of reliable birth control, families tended to be large, so less attention would be focused on each individual sibling. Young children were encouraged to take part in adult activities as soon as they were able, usually starting between the ages of five and seven, and begin to work alongside grown-ups as they became more capable. In agrarian societies they had always been expected to help out at home and in the fields from an early age. In post-revolutionary America they were expected to become independent as soon as possible because labour was in short supply, which made the relationship between the generations less hierarchical than in Europe. The Industrial Revolution turned children into an indispensable source of income for many poor families, often before they were fully grown. In Britain a parliamentary report in 1818-19 on children in cotton mills around Stockport and Manchester put the average age for starting work at around 11½. But by the end of the 19th century the state had begun to clamp down on the exploitation of children in the West. Education for the younger age groups became mandatory in ever more countries. Children were seen as in need of protection, and their period of economic dependency lengthened in both Europe and America. The scene was set for the emergence of what Viviana Zelizer, a sociologist at Princeton, has memorably described as “the economically useless but emotionally priceless child”. - Why children’s lives have changed radically in just a few decades - In the Middle Ages there was no such thing as childhood - The continuing importance of the family - The early years are getting increasing attention - How children interact with digital media - The art and science of parenting - Parenting methods are exacerbating social divisions - Sources and acknowledgments This article appeared in the Special report section of the print edition under the headline "In the Middle Ages there was no such thing as childhood"	809	ENGLISH	1
Tonight, we’ll read a chapter from "Three Hundred Things a Bright Boy Can Do", titled "Ventriloquism and Polyphony", written by “Many Hands” and published in 1914. Ventriloquy, an act of stagecraft in which a person changes their voice so that it appears that the voice is coming from elsewhere, usually a puppet, known as a “dummy". Originally, ventriloquism was a religious practice among the ancient Greeks. The noises produced by the stomach, for example were thought to be the voices of the unliving, who took up residence in the stomach of the ventriloquist. The ventriloquist would then interpret the sounds, as they were thought to be able to speak to the dead, as well as foretell the future.	<urn:uuid:0891094a-ea83-4a41-9ca3-3020a259fdcd>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.snoozecast.com/podcast/ventriloquism-and-polyphony	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250597230.18/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120023523-20200120051523-00024.warc.gz	en	0.986223	169	3.46875	3	[ -0.09788879007101059, -0.06751088052988052, 0.31567028164863586, -0.5361805558204651, -0.35478824377059937, -0.19767451286315918, 0.13806140422821045, 0.3171502649784088, -0.20635712146759033, -0.22673065960407257, -0.2563856840133667, -0.3684006333351135, -0.14918647706508636, 0.011270520...	4	Tonight, we’ll read a chapter from "Three Hundred Things a Bright Boy Can Do", titled "Ventriloquism and Polyphony", written by “Many Hands” and published in 1914. Ventriloquy, an act of stagecraft in which a person changes their voice so that it appears that the voice is coming from elsewhere, usually a puppet, known as a “dummy". Originally, ventriloquism was a religious practice among the ancient Greeks. The noises produced by the stomach, for example were thought to be the voices of the unliving, who took up residence in the stomach of the ventriloquist. The ventriloquist would then interpret the sounds, as they were thought to be able to speak to the dead, as well as foretell the future.	166	ENGLISH	1
Collection Storage Facility Purchase in 1982 J. B. Doré & Frère began producing agricultural machinery in La Prairie, Quebec, in the mid nineteenth century. At the beginning of the twentieth century, the company had become E. Doré & Fils and was also producing mining equipment, as well as threshers and other agricultural implements. Threshing machines separate grain from the harvested plant, which is reduced to straw and chaff. The first threshing machines were stationary: powered by hand or treadmill, they increased the amount of grain a farmer could separate in a day. Wheeled threshing machines began to replace stationary threshers in the 1860s and further mechanized grain harvesting. Threshers were initially built of wood and powered by horse-powered windlasses; they were later built of steel and powered by steam traction engines and gas tractors. Threshers were in turn replaced through the twentieth century by combine harvesters, which merged harvesting and threshing operations in one machine. This stationary thresher is equipped with a vibrating riddle, technology that supplanted endless aprons in the late 1880s. Mounted on skids, this thresher has a 28-inch cylinder that would have been powered by horse power or treadmill. Stationary threshers were commonly made by eastern Canadian manufacturers to satisfy local markets and smaller farms, which could not afford the larger wheeled threshers that were then on the market.	<urn:uuid:772bd906-98b1-46b2-bf9b-bdeeb276dc33>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://ingeniumcanada.org/artifact/e-dore-fils-stationary-thresher	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250593295.11/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118164132-20200118192132-00510.warc.gz	en	0.985173	300	3.578125	4	[ -0.4588049352169037, 0.27338770031929016, 0.2462678700685501, 0.3763083517551422, 0.24700823426246643, -0.0884588286280632, -0.2231752872467041, 0.23585651814937592, -0.25260084867477417, 0.12475895881652832, -0.16242530941963196, -0.5531638264656067, 0.11625684797763824, 0.217509269714355...	6	Collection Storage Facility Purchase in 1982 J. B. Doré & Frère began producing agricultural machinery in La Prairie, Quebec, in the mid nineteenth century. At the beginning of the twentieth century, the company had become E. Doré & Fils and was also producing mining equipment, as well as threshers and other agricultural implements. Threshing machines separate grain from the harvested plant, which is reduced to straw and chaff. The first threshing machines were stationary: powered by hand or treadmill, they increased the amount of grain a farmer could separate in a day. Wheeled threshing machines began to replace stationary threshers in the 1860s and further mechanized grain harvesting. Threshers were initially built of wood and powered by horse-powered windlasses; they were later built of steel and powered by steam traction engines and gas tractors. Threshers were in turn replaced through the twentieth century by combine harvesters, which merged harvesting and threshing operations in one machine. This stationary thresher is equipped with a vibrating riddle, technology that supplanted endless aprons in the late 1880s. Mounted on skids, this thresher has a 28-inch cylinder that would have been powered by horse power or treadmill. Stationary threshers were commonly made by eastern Canadian manufacturers to satisfy local markets and smaller farms, which could not afford the larger wheeled threshers that were then on the market.	298	ENGLISH	1
Women`s Suffrage What is women`s suffrage? Women`s suffrage is ... women. Later, in 1890, Wyoming only agreed to join the Union as a state if women would be allowed In 1893, Colorado became the first state to adopt an amendment that granted women voting rights. Soon other western states followed including Utah and Idaho in 1896 and Washington State in 1910 ... Inter-American Commission of Women The Inter-American Commission of Women (CIM) is an organization that falls within the Organization of American States. It was established in 1928 by the Sixth Pan-American Conference and is composed of one female representative from each Republic in the Union. It was continued in 1933 and in 1938 was made a permanent organization, with the goal of studying and addressing women’s issues in the Americas. It was the first intergovernmental organization designed specifically to address the civil and political needs of women.It was the first international organization ever to present a resolution for international suffrage for women in 1933. It was the first organization to submit a treaty which was adopted concerning women's rights—the 1933 Convention on the Nationality of Women, which provided that upon marriage did not effect nationality. The women of the CIM submitted a resolution and attained the first international acknowledgement of women's political and civil rights (1938). They also researched and prepared the first ever resolution on violence against women which was approved as the 1994 Convention of Belém do Pará. These firsts were based upon a strategy that has been followed by the women delegates of the CIM. By attaining international agreements, they are able to pressure change in their home countries to comply with those resolutions.	<urn:uuid:8ec4f443-07c1-44e9-8c6c-a5ef3ae7f1ca>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://studyres.com/concepts/17827/inter-american-commission-of-women	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250608295.52/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123041345-20200123070345-00357.warc.gz	en	0.981467	340	4.03125	4	[ -0.31334176659584045, -0.24655799567699432, 0.25796663761138916, 0.3330952823162079, -0.4399428069591522, 0.15667152404785156, 0.19284401834011078, 0.2817823886871338, 0.07495589554309845, -0.08725091814994812, 0.008253143168985844, -0.10500367730855942, 0.1198909804224968, 0.0941891744732...	5	Women`s Suffrage What is women`s suffrage? Women`s suffrage is ... women. Later, in 1890, Wyoming only agreed to join the Union as a state if women would be allowed In 1893, Colorado became the first state to adopt an amendment that granted women voting rights. Soon other western states followed including Utah and Idaho in 1896 and Washington State in 1910 ... Inter-American Commission of Women The Inter-American Commission of Women (CIM) is an organization that falls within the Organization of American States. It was established in 1928 by the Sixth Pan-American Conference and is composed of one female representative from each Republic in the Union. It was continued in 1933 and in 1938 was made a permanent organization, with the goal of studying and addressing women’s issues in the Americas. It was the first intergovernmental organization designed specifically to address the civil and political needs of women.It was the first international organization ever to present a resolution for international suffrage for women in 1933. It was the first organization to submit a treaty which was adopted concerning women's rights—the 1933 Convention on the Nationality of Women, which provided that upon marriage did not effect nationality. The women of the CIM submitted a resolution and attained the first international acknowledgement of women's political and civil rights (1938). They also researched and prepared the first ever resolution on violence against women which was approved as the 1994 Convention of Belém do Pará. These firsts were based upon a strategy that has been followed by the women delegates of the CIM. By attaining international agreements, they are able to pressure change in their home countries to comply with those resolutions.	368	ENGLISH	1
Buy Confucianism essay paper online Confucius was a Chinese philosopher who lived between 551 and 479 BCE. He was also a teacher and a politician. During his time, he developed a philosophy that he believed would make the world a better place (Fingarette, 1972). All his works and emphasis were geared towards harmonizing the relationships between people, be it within family set-ups, social setups and even the interaction between leaders and their subjects. He insisted o the importance of developing an ethical society, which he, and his students, believed would have been the best ways to ensure that there was peace and harmony among the people. His teachings were applauded by many and were the basis of a new system that was known as Confucianism. His students were always on top in competitions which further created respect to him. His students believed in his teachings and took after him to further develop his work. Some of his disciples included such people as Mencius (Fingarette, 1972). Ren is a virtue that demanded that human beings treated other human being in a selfless and humane way. They were not supposed to reciprocate ethically and the general rule was that people should do unto others what they would be done unto them (Xinzhong, 2000). He insisted that all humans were naturally similar but their practices drift them apart. He argued that there was need for people to cultivate people’s behavior because naturally, people will do anything to achieve what they believe in. Therefore, there is need to instill a belief to the people so that they can believe in ethical achievements (Fingarette, 1972). Filial piety (xiao shun) Some scholars have described this virtue as the greatest among those that were developed by Confucius. It did not only demand that respect be shown to the living, but to the dead as well. Within the virtue, he described five different relationships within which he outlined the responsibilities of each of the partners in the relationship (Xinzhong, 2000). The relationships included ruler to the subjects, father to son, elder brother to younger brother, friend to friend, and husband to wife. The relationships were always inclined towards a certain direction where the senior person would get less punishment than the junior in case they had an unethical incident. These relationships later formed the basis for the legal system of the Chinese people. Performance of Rituals (li) Confucius stated that rituals were very important in the development of a society and that there was need for the people to have them in the best and ethical ways. According to him, ‘li’ would be used to mean all the secular occurrences that occurred within a society (Xinzhong, 2000). It included education and music and politeness was a key ingredient to them. He considered rituals as the things that people do every day as opposed by periodic occurrences within one’s life. The Gentleman (Shi ) This has been more used in the classical Confucianism, where people should struggle to become perfect. Confucianism states that a perfect person is the one who is a gentleman, scholar, and saint all at once (Xinzhong, 2000). Gentlemen were supposed to be morally upright, and upheld all the other virtues stated by Confucianism. Confucius tried to become the gentleman in these terms but he failed to get the high position where he wanted to show how possible it was to become a gentleman. Reflections on the Teachings These teachings could be very beneficial in the modern society because they are geared towards making the world a better place to live. They are however based on a belief rather than a fact that all people are similar naturally whereas we know that ever person is unique. They are therefore very hard to include in the present world as people have evolved from different cultures and beliefs. Related Free Philosophy Essays - Catholics On The Sacrament Of Eucharist - Reaching the Unreached People - Philosophy Ethical Paper - How Power Leads to Corruption - Philosophy Ethics Paper - The Existence of God Essay - History And Theories Of The Built Environment - To What Extent Can We Speak African Islam in West Africa? - The Mind-Body Relationship - Christianity in the Middle East Most popular orders	<urn:uuid:2fa74de1-6caa-4ae7-a9ed-2cfe776e9895>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://exclusivepapers.com/essays/philosophy/confucianism.php	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251681625.83/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125222506-20200126012506-00341.warc.gz	en	0.986133	884	4.03125	4	[ -0.2526281774044037, 0.3307454586029053, 0.07372593879699707, -0.2543713450431824, -0.43392643332481384, 0.10967139899730682, 0.3916266858577728, 0.39672863483428955, 0.1831241101026535, -0.12201764434576035, 0.1747477650642395, -0.2520678639411926, 0.549623966217041, 0.30993786454200745, ...	1	Buy Confucianism essay paper online Confucius was a Chinese philosopher who lived between 551 and 479 BCE. He was also a teacher and a politician. During his time, he developed a philosophy that he believed would make the world a better place (Fingarette, 1972). All his works and emphasis were geared towards harmonizing the relationships between people, be it within family set-ups, social setups and even the interaction between leaders and their subjects. He insisted o the importance of developing an ethical society, which he, and his students, believed would have been the best ways to ensure that there was peace and harmony among the people. His teachings were applauded by many and were the basis of a new system that was known as Confucianism. His students were always on top in competitions which further created respect to him. His students believed in his teachings and took after him to further develop his work. Some of his disciples included such people as Mencius (Fingarette, 1972). Ren is a virtue that demanded that human beings treated other human being in a selfless and humane way. They were not supposed to reciprocate ethically and the general rule was that people should do unto others what they would be done unto them (Xinzhong, 2000). He insisted that all humans were naturally similar but their practices drift them apart. He argued that there was need for people to cultivate people’s behavior because naturally, people will do anything to achieve what they believe in. Therefore, there is need to instill a belief to the people so that they can believe in ethical achievements (Fingarette, 1972). Filial piety (xiao shun) Some scholars have described this virtue as the greatest among those that were developed by Confucius. It did not only demand that respect be shown to the living, but to the dead as well. Within the virtue, he described five different relationships within which he outlined the responsibilities of each of the partners in the relationship (Xinzhong, 2000). The relationships included ruler to the subjects, father to son, elder brother to younger brother, friend to friend, and husband to wife. The relationships were always inclined towards a certain direction where the senior person would get less punishment than the junior in case they had an unethical incident. These relationships later formed the basis for the legal system of the Chinese people. Performance of Rituals (li) Confucius stated that rituals were very important in the development of a society and that there was need for the people to have them in the best and ethical ways. According to him, ‘li’ would be used to mean all the secular occurrences that occurred within a society (Xinzhong, 2000). It included education and music and politeness was a key ingredient to them. He considered rituals as the things that people do every day as opposed by periodic occurrences within one’s life. The Gentleman (Shi ) This has been more used in the classical Confucianism, where people should struggle to become perfect. Confucianism states that a perfect person is the one who is a gentleman, scholar, and saint all at once (Xinzhong, 2000). Gentlemen were supposed to be morally upright, and upheld all the other virtues stated by Confucianism. Confucius tried to become the gentleman in these terms but he failed to get the high position where he wanted to show how possible it was to become a gentleman. Reflections on the Teachings These teachings could be very beneficial in the modern society because they are geared towards making the world a better place to live. They are however based on a belief rather than a fact that all people are similar naturally whereas we know that ever person is unique. They are therefore very hard to include in the present world as people have evolved from different cultures and beliefs. Related Free Philosophy Essays - Catholics On The Sacrament Of Eucharist - Reaching the Unreached People - Philosophy Ethical Paper - How Power Leads to Corruption - Philosophy Ethics Paper - The Existence of God Essay - History And Theories Of The Built Environment - To What Extent Can We Speak African Islam in West Africa? - The Mind-Body Relationship - Christianity in the Middle East Most popular orders	906	ENGLISH	1
Etymology of the Months January - The month of January is named from the Roman god, Janus. Janus was the keeper of the gates of Heaven and he had two faces. The one at the back represented the old year and the one at the front represented the new year. Hence the month is the first month of the new year. There is, however, a St. Januarius San Genarro, who is the patron saint of Naples, Italy, but the month is not known to be named from him. February - Februaria is the name that Juno (or Hera, according to the Hellenic mythology) was given as the goddess of fertility. February is named after the Latin februum which means purification. The Februa ceremonies were held on February 15th in the old lunar Roman Calendar. January and February were added last to the Roman calendar. This was because winter was originally the monthless period. A man by the name of Numa Pompilius in around 713 BC added them to the calendar. February remained the last month of the calendar year, until about 450 BC, when it became the second month. February originally had 29 days, but the Romans took one from it to give it to July so that it wouldn't be inferior to August! March - In the old Roman days, March was the first month of the New Year. March is named from the Roman god of war, Mars. April - The Romans named April after the flower buds that open, from the Latin word aperia, which means opening. May - May may have originally gotten its name from Maia, the goddess of Spring and fertility or to honor the Maiores, the early Roman Senate. June - According to one theory, one of ancient Rome's leading class, the Junius family, had a month named after them. The poet Ovidio also says that the month is named from the goddess Juno, who is also the goddess of marriage. July - This month is named after Julius Caesar. It was Marc Antony who named the month in honor of Julius Caesar, because it was the month Caesar was born in. It used to be called Quintillis (5th) and August was Sextillis (6th), as these months would have been the fifth and sixth months in the Roman lunar calendar. By the way, until around 1800 July was pronounced "julie." August - Now you see why the Romans took one day from February to make July and August equal. For August is named after Caesar Augustus. Augustus means "majestic" as well as "venerable" in Latin. September - September is from the Latin word for seven, septem. October - October is from the Latin for eight, octem, derived from the hellenic one οκτώ. November - November is from the Latin word for nine, novem. December - December is from the Latin for ten, decem, derived from the hellenic one δέκα. Excerpts from The Facts on File Encyclopedia of Words and Phrase Origins. Checkmark Books: New York 2000 by Hendrickson, Robert & Commentary - Editing by Irene Doura-Kavadia	<urn:uuid:25c1abbb-e864-4c25-9c7f-6aa99e59aebb>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.irenedoura-academy.com/etymology-of-the-months	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591431.4/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117234621-20200118022621-00393.warc.gz	en	0.987476	673	3.453125	3	[ -0.07524625957012177, 0.34541189670562744, 0.2885087728500366, 0.14403975009918213, -0.37245115637779236, -0.2398909330368042, 0.033633384853601456, 0.12434552609920502, 0.36492764949798584, -0.007395505905151367, 0.15509474277496338, -0.25986701250076294, 0.0000761884730309248, 0.18656790...	13	Etymology of the Months January - The month of January is named from the Roman god, Janus. Janus was the keeper of the gates of Heaven and he had two faces. The one at the back represented the old year and the one at the front represented the new year. Hence the month is the first month of the new year. There is, however, a St. Januarius San Genarro, who is the patron saint of Naples, Italy, but the month is not known to be named from him. February - Februaria is the name that Juno (or Hera, according to the Hellenic mythology) was given as the goddess of fertility. February is named after the Latin februum which means purification. The Februa ceremonies were held on February 15th in the old lunar Roman Calendar. January and February were added last to the Roman calendar. This was because winter was originally the monthless period. A man by the name of Numa Pompilius in around 713 BC added them to the calendar. February remained the last month of the calendar year, until about 450 BC, when it became the second month. February originally had 29 days, but the Romans took one from it to give it to July so that it wouldn't be inferior to August! March - In the old Roman days, March was the first month of the New Year. March is named from the Roman god of war, Mars. April - The Romans named April after the flower buds that open, from the Latin word aperia, which means opening. May - May may have originally gotten its name from Maia, the goddess of Spring and fertility or to honor the Maiores, the early Roman Senate. June - According to one theory, one of ancient Rome's leading class, the Junius family, had a month named after them. The poet Ovidio also says that the month is named from the goddess Juno, who is also the goddess of marriage. July - This month is named after Julius Caesar. It was Marc Antony who named the month in honor of Julius Caesar, because it was the month Caesar was born in. It used to be called Quintillis (5th) and August was Sextillis (6th), as these months would have been the fifth and sixth months in the Roman lunar calendar. By the way, until around 1800 July was pronounced "julie." August - Now you see why the Romans took one day from February to make July and August equal. For August is named after Caesar Augustus. Augustus means "majestic" as well as "venerable" in Latin. September - September is from the Latin word for seven, septem. October - October is from the Latin for eight, octem, derived from the hellenic one οκτώ. November - November is from the Latin word for nine, novem. December - December is from the Latin for ten, decem, derived from the hellenic one δέκα. Excerpts from The Facts on File Encyclopedia of Words and Phrase Origins. Checkmark Books: New York 2000 by Hendrickson, Robert & Commentary - Editing by Irene Doura-Kavadia	669	ENGLISH	1
A male crayfish with larger-than-normal claws typically needs only to flash his menacing weapons to drive opponents away. Now researchers find these critters are frequently bluffing—the enlarged claws often aren't stronger at all. These findings raise the question of how often males in the animal kingdom are just bluffing with their natural weaponry. "Dishonesty during disputes may be far more prevalent that we previously imagined," said researcher Robbie Wilson, a zoologist at the University of Queensland in Australia. Death or dismemberment Wilson and an international team of researchers investigated the Australian slender crayfish (Cherax dispar). The small, lobster-like crustaceans are extraordinarily aggressive beasts, with combat often resulting in death or the loss of a limb. "When you pick them up, they'll want to take your finger off right away," Wilson said. These two- to three-inch long creatures were collected from the creeks on the sand islands off southeast Queensland. Crayfish are freshwater creatures, while lobsters are marine animals. The bluffing finding emerged when the scientists randomly pit 32 adult male crayfish against each other, two at a time, in plastic aquariums. They recorded how often competitive bouts led either to chases or fights. The crayfish were taken out after 10 minutes, to prevent any serious harm. "It felt more like watching sport than doing work," Wilson told LiveScience. "It did seem like we were setting up boxing matches." Squeeze this Wilson and his colleagues also investigated how strong each claw was by getting crayfish to squeeze metal plates in a custom-built sensor. "When you present them with the sensors, they're so aggressive they'll squeeze them as hard as they can, which is luckily what you want to test their strength," Wilson said. Claw size most often determined which crayfish won—if the claws of one crayfish were significantly larger than another's, the other would simply turn and run. "Like most animals, the size of their weapons seemed to determine everything in these crayfish," Wilson said. Pincers reached up to a third of the length of each combatant's body. However, larger claws were not always the strongest pincers, suggesting these weapons are most often used for intimidation rather than combat. "When the claws of each crayfish are roughly the same size, then whoever's stronger prevails," Wilson said. The team's results are detailed in the August issue of the journal American Naturalist. "Such dishonesty is probably more common in nature than most researchers now think," Wilson said. But rooting it out in other creatures might prove difficult. "If such dishonest signals are hard for other competitors to detect, they will be very hard for researchers to detect," he said. - Top 10: Secret Weapons - Amazing Animal Abilities - Image Gallery: Small Sea Monsters	<urn:uuid:fbbe0320-202f-4774-9c81-6eba5e841ac1>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.livescience.com/4543-crayfish-fighting-art-bluffing.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591763.20/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118023429-20200118051429-00345.warc.gz	en	0.980058	588	3.453125	3	[ -0.09773779660463333, -0.24099239706993103, -0.0441768616437912, -0.05518611520528793, -0.12722715735435486, 0.18436409533023834, 0.39942651987075806, 0.37780332565307617, -0.3046278655529022, -0.05845067277550697, 0.3184781074523926, -0.33457526564598083, 0.5941811800003052, 0.30864647030...	9	A male crayfish with larger-than-normal claws typically needs only to flash his menacing weapons to drive opponents away. Now researchers find these critters are frequently bluffing—the enlarged claws often aren't stronger at all. These findings raise the question of how often males in the animal kingdom are just bluffing with their natural weaponry. "Dishonesty during disputes may be far more prevalent that we previously imagined," said researcher Robbie Wilson, a zoologist at the University of Queensland in Australia. Death or dismemberment Wilson and an international team of researchers investigated the Australian slender crayfish (Cherax dispar). The small, lobster-like crustaceans are extraordinarily aggressive beasts, with combat often resulting in death or the loss of a limb. "When you pick them up, they'll want to take your finger off right away," Wilson said. These two- to three-inch long creatures were collected from the creeks on the sand islands off southeast Queensland. Crayfish are freshwater creatures, while lobsters are marine animals. The bluffing finding emerged when the scientists randomly pit 32 adult male crayfish against each other, two at a time, in plastic aquariums. They recorded how often competitive bouts led either to chases or fights. The crayfish were taken out after 10 minutes, to prevent any serious harm. "It felt more like watching sport than doing work," Wilson told LiveScience. "It did seem like we were setting up boxing matches." Squeeze this Wilson and his colleagues also investigated how strong each claw was by getting crayfish to squeeze metal plates in a custom-built sensor. "When you present them with the sensors, they're so aggressive they'll squeeze them as hard as they can, which is luckily what you want to test their strength," Wilson said. Claw size most often determined which crayfish won—if the claws of one crayfish were significantly larger than another's, the other would simply turn and run. "Like most animals, the size of their weapons seemed to determine everything in these crayfish," Wilson said. Pincers reached up to a third of the length of each combatant's body. However, larger claws were not always the strongest pincers, suggesting these weapons are most often used for intimidation rather than combat. "When the claws of each crayfish are roughly the same size, then whoever's stronger prevails," Wilson said. The team's results are detailed in the August issue of the journal American Naturalist. "Such dishonesty is probably more common in nature than most researchers now think," Wilson said. But rooting it out in other creatures might prove difficult. "If such dishonest signals are hard for other competitors to detect, they will be very hard for researchers to detect," he said. - Top 10: Secret Weapons - Amazing Animal Abilities - Image Gallery: Small Sea Monsters	575	ENGLISH	1
Please note that the content of this book primarily consists of articles available from Wikipedia or other free sources online. The Battle of Bong Son was the second major battle for the US 1st Cavalry Division, an airmobile unit of divisional strength, during the Vietnam War. It also was called Operation Irving A month earlier in 1965, in the Battle of the Ia Drang, the 1st Cavalry used all the division infantry, but one brigade at a time. One of the realizations that affected Bong Son was that with adequate helicopter lift, the traditional need to keep a strong reserve was less required the least involved unit usually could break away and go where it was needed.At the operational level, it was began as a pursuit of the Vietnam People's Army (PAVN) 2nd, 18th, and 22nd Regiments (forming the NVA 3rd Division) by the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN) 22nd Division, commanded by Brigadier General Nguyen Thanh Sang and assisted by the Republic of Korea Capital Division. The NVA fought back strongly and Sang asked for reinforcements by two ARVN airborne battalions, which still were not enough.	<urn:uuid:b8fd20d0-5292-4bc2-ba29-b6038a5b263d>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.bambusbong.de/browse?q=Battle	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250615407.46/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124040939-20200124065939-00090.warc.gz	en	0.980202	242	3.3125	3	[ -0.19393320381641388, 0.5178377628326416, 0.07465872168540955, -0.2199667990207672, -0.13954724371433258, 0.2731001377105713, -0.057366371154785156, 0.20233003795146942, -0.3658503592014313, 0.0009576211450621486, 0.13782964646816254, -0.3425329029560089, 0.24641984701156616, 0.47692838311...	1	Please note that the content of this book primarily consists of articles available from Wikipedia or other free sources online. The Battle of Bong Son was the second major battle for the US 1st Cavalry Division, an airmobile unit of divisional strength, during the Vietnam War. It also was called Operation Irving A month earlier in 1965, in the Battle of the Ia Drang, the 1st Cavalry used all the division infantry, but one brigade at a time. One of the realizations that affected Bong Son was that with adequate helicopter lift, the traditional need to keep a strong reserve was less required the least involved unit usually could break away and go where it was needed.At the operational level, it was began as a pursuit of the Vietnam People's Army (PAVN) 2nd, 18th, and 22nd Regiments (forming the NVA 3rd Division) by the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN) 22nd Division, commanded by Brigadier General Nguyen Thanh Sang and assisted by the Republic of Korea Capital Division. The NVA fought back strongly and Sang asked for reinforcements by two ARVN airborne battalions, which still were not enough.	254	ENGLISH	1
I suppose the best way to answer this would be to look at the rationale behind the ratification of the Twelfth Amendment to the US Constitution. This amendment was accepted in 1804 and was in place in effect for that year's presidential election. Notably, this was the fifth presidential election under this Constitution. That is to say, there were four previous elections under the old rules for electing the president and vice president. So, let's look at how things worked in those four elections. However, before delving into that, we should probably look at the electoral rules before and after the Twelfth Amendment. Original Electoral Rules Article II, Section 1, Clause 3: Electors - Each elector casts two votes for president. - If the candidate who received the most votes also received votes from a majority of all electors (i.e. the winning candidate was voted on by at least 50% of the electors), that candidate is elected as president. - If the candidate who received the most votes did not receive votes from the majority of all electors, the House of Representatives would vote on who would be elected president. - After the president has been determined, the vice president is the individual not elected president who received the most votes. Twelfth Amendment Electoral Rules - Each elector casts one vote for president and one vote for vice president. These votes are counted up on separate ballots: one for president and the other for vice president. - If the candidate for president who received the most votes also received a majority of all votes (i.e. the winning candidate received at least 50% of the votes), that candidate is elected as president. - If the candidate for president who received the most votes did not receive the majority of all votes, the House of Representatives (with one vote per state) would vote on who would be elected president. - If the candidate for vice president who received the most votes also received a majority of all votes (i.e. the winning candidate received at least 50% of the votes), that candidate is elected as vice president. - If the candidate for vice president who received the most votes did not receive the majority of all votes, the Senate would vote on who would be elected vice president. This was the first presidential election, and it resulted in George Washington winning 69 electoral votes and John Adams was the runner-up with 34 electoral votes. Washington was very popular and the Constitutional framers presumed that he would be elected unopposed. There were no parties at the time, but there were some rudimentary factions: the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. Both sides supported Washington, so there wasn't really a question on who would be president. However, since there really wasn't any other candidate, there was still a question of who would be vice president. Ultimately, the electors settled on a few different choices for who their second vote would go to, but John Adams received most of these second-choice votes and thus became the vice president. By this election, the political parties became more defined. The Federalist faction became the Federalist party and the Anti-Federalist faction became the Democratic-Republican party. Both parties were happy with George Washington and intended to re-elect him for president. Washington wanted to retire after his first term, but political leaders from these new parties convinced him to stay on so as to help bridge the political divides that were starting to form. Ultimately, Washington once again solidly won the presidency and John Adams won the more-contested vice presidency. This was the first election not involving George Washington. So this is also the first truly contested election where there was an actual race for president, and the vice president would actually be the loser of the election. Thus, this is the first election where the process laid out in the Constitution would actually be tested. One consequence of the process laid out in the Constitution is that there was an incentive for each party to field multiple candidates as the parties would ideally like both the presidency and the vice presidency to be held by similarly minded people. For the Federalists, the obvious nominee was John Adams as he had twice been elected vice president in the past. They ultimately chose Thomas Pinckney as their other nominee. The Democratic-Republicans chose Thomas Jefferson as their main nominee and Aaron Burr as their second-choice nominee. The election itself was a bit complicated as the parties needed to ensure that their primary choice for president actually won the election. If they all voted for the same president and vice president, the two nominees would tie and the election would have to go to the House for a vote. So there was a lot of background discussion amongst the electors for who they would actually vote for second. Alexander Hamilton, a Federalist, actually wanted Pinckney to be elected as president over Adams, so he was speaking to Democratic-Republican electors to try to get them to vote for Pinckney as their second choice while also trying to convince the Federalist electors to vote for Pinckney as their second choice. Ultimately, Adams secured a very narrow majority with 71 electoral votes (one more than was required for a majority) and Jefferson secured second place with 68 electoral votes. Thus, although the electoral strategy was convoluted and complicated, the Electoral College was able to elect a president without having the House of Representatives step in to decide. However, Jefferson ended up being elected as vice president. So in this situation, the president and vice president were politically opposed to each other. In future elections, the parties would try to be smarter with their votes so that they could ensure that they won both the presidency and the vice presidency. This election is ultimately where the original process fell apart. The primary candidates were once again John Adams for the Federalists and Thomas Jefferson for the Democratic-Republicans. This time, Adams ran alongside Charles Pinckney (Thomas Pinckney's brother) and Jefferson alongside Aaron Burr. The main candidates were the same as in the prior election, but this time, the parties had a bit better understanding of how the electoral process would work and coordinated their votes more successfully. The Federalists designated just one elector who would defect from their second-choice candidate and instead cast a vote for John Adams and John Jay, while the rest would vote for Adams and Pinckney. The Democratic-Republicans had the same plan, but it failed and everybody cast their two votes for the same two candidates: Jefferson and Burr. Thus, Jefferson and Burr both tied as winner with 73 electoral votes each. Since there was a tie, the election would then move to the House of Representatives to decide the president and vice president. In the House of Representatives, each state gets one vote. There were sixteen states, so to win the presidency, the candidate needed to secure at least nine states' vote. In this situation, the House of Representatives was dominated by the Federalist party, but the two leading candidates in the presidential election were both Democratic-Republicans. Jefferson was the leading face of the party, so the Federalists in the House were more in favor of Aaron Burr. So when it came to voting, the Federalists typically voted for Burr and the Democratic-Republicans voted for Jefferson. In states that were evenly split in representation, they ended up sending in blank ballots and voting for neither in the initial election, so neither Jefferson nor Burr won in this first round of voting. In the second round of voting, there was a fear that Burr would actually end up as president, even though he had been elected as the presumptive vice president candidate. Ultimately, Hamilton, a prominent Federalist threw his support behind Jefferson, and the House voted for Jefferson to be president with Burr then becoming the vice president. The election of 1800 showed how difficult the election process was under the original framing of the Constitution. In the prior election, the result was that the president and vice president were political opponents. In this election, the electors tried to be smarter with their votes so that their two preferred candidates would actually be elected. However, through a failure in execution of this strategy, they nearly ended up in a situation where the actual nominee for president almost became the vice president and the actual nominee for vice president actually became the president. This was untenable. So they amended the constitution so that the president and vice president would actually be elected separately and directly by the electors. If we went back to the original process for electing president, we would likely see these same faults. It is in each party's interest to control both the presidency and vice presidency, so it is in their interest to nominate multiple candidates. The electors would then need to work together to ensure that they cast their votes properly so that the right person is elected to each position. In the end, the Twelfth Amendment didn't change much of the overall strategy. It just made it easier not to screw up. Both before and after the amendment, electors were trying to fill the vice presidency with a specific person.	<urn:uuid:8e364a2b-d8fd-434f-a3cc-356dd7ac9f08>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/47709/what-are-the-negative-consequences-of-returning-to-the-practice-of-assigning-the	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251688806.91/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126104828-20200126134828-00357.warc.gz	en	0.988023	1,812	4.25	4	[ -0.44081568717956543, 0.07470081746578217, 0.02042207308113575, -0.45457953214645386, -0.3771740794181824, 0.34111377596855164, 0.11377225816249847, 0.0026701518800109625, 0.4856441617012024, 0.375971257686615, 0.2717571258544922, 0.10092929005622864, 0.030435793101787567, -0.0956003740429...	3	I suppose the best way to answer this would be to look at the rationale behind the ratification of the Twelfth Amendment to the US Constitution. This amendment was accepted in 1804 and was in place in effect for that year's presidential election. Notably, this was the fifth presidential election under this Constitution. That is to say, there were four previous elections under the old rules for electing the president and vice president. So, let's look at how things worked in those four elections. However, before delving into that, we should probably look at the electoral rules before and after the Twelfth Amendment. Original Electoral Rules Article II, Section 1, Clause 3: Electors - Each elector casts two votes for president. - If the candidate who received the most votes also received votes from a majority of all electors (i.e. the winning candidate was voted on by at least 50% of the electors), that candidate is elected as president. - If the candidate who received the most votes did not receive votes from the majority of all electors, the House of Representatives would vote on who would be elected president. - After the president has been determined, the vice president is the individual not elected president who received the most votes. Twelfth Amendment Electoral Rules - Each elector casts one vote for president and one vote for vice president. These votes are counted up on separate ballots: one for president and the other for vice president. - If the candidate for president who received the most votes also received a majority of all votes (i.e. the winning candidate received at least 50% of the votes), that candidate is elected as president. - If the candidate for president who received the most votes did not receive the majority of all votes, the House of Representatives (with one vote per state) would vote on who would be elected president. - If the candidate for vice president who received the most votes also received a majority of all votes (i.e. the winning candidate received at least 50% of the votes), that candidate is elected as vice president. - If the candidate for vice president who received the most votes did not receive the majority of all votes, the Senate would vote on who would be elected vice president. This was the first presidential election, and it resulted in George Washington winning 69 electoral votes and John Adams was the runner-up with 34 electoral votes. Washington was very popular and the Constitutional framers presumed that he would be elected unopposed. There were no parties at the time, but there were some rudimentary factions: the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. Both sides supported Washington, so there wasn't really a question on who would be president. However, since there really wasn't any other candidate, there was still a question of who would be vice president. Ultimately, the electors settled on a few different choices for who their second vote would go to, but John Adams received most of these second-choice votes and thus became the vice president. By this election, the political parties became more defined. The Federalist faction became the Federalist party and the Anti-Federalist faction became the Democratic-Republican party. Both parties were happy with George Washington and intended to re-elect him for president. Washington wanted to retire after his first term, but political leaders from these new parties convinced him to stay on so as to help bridge the political divides that were starting to form. Ultimately, Washington once again solidly won the presidency and John Adams won the more-contested vice presidency. This was the first election not involving George Washington. So this is also the first truly contested election where there was an actual race for president, and the vice president would actually be the loser of the election. Thus, this is the first election where the process laid out in the Constitution would actually be tested. One consequence of the process laid out in the Constitution is that there was an incentive for each party to field multiple candidates as the parties would ideally like both the presidency and the vice presidency to be held by similarly minded people. For the Federalists, the obvious nominee was John Adams as he had twice been elected vice president in the past. They ultimately chose Thomas Pinckney as their other nominee. The Democratic-Republicans chose Thomas Jefferson as their main nominee and Aaron Burr as their second-choice nominee. The election itself was a bit complicated as the parties needed to ensure that their primary choice for president actually won the election. If they all voted for the same president and vice president, the two nominees would tie and the election would have to go to the House for a vote. So there was a lot of background discussion amongst the electors for who they would actually vote for second. Alexander Hamilton, a Federalist, actually wanted Pinckney to be elected as president over Adams, so he was speaking to Democratic-Republican electors to try to get them to vote for Pinckney as their second choice while also trying to convince the Federalist electors to vote for Pinckney as their second choice. Ultimately, Adams secured a very narrow majority with 71 electoral votes (one more than was required for a majority) and Jefferson secured second place with 68 electoral votes. Thus, although the electoral strategy was convoluted and complicated, the Electoral College was able to elect a president without having the House of Representatives step in to decide. However, Jefferson ended up being elected as vice president. So in this situation, the president and vice president were politically opposed to each other. In future elections, the parties would try to be smarter with their votes so that they could ensure that they won both the presidency and the vice presidency. This election is ultimately where the original process fell apart. The primary candidates were once again John Adams for the Federalists and Thomas Jefferson for the Democratic-Republicans. This time, Adams ran alongside Charles Pinckney (Thomas Pinckney's brother) and Jefferson alongside Aaron Burr. The main candidates were the same as in the prior election, but this time, the parties had a bit better understanding of how the electoral process would work and coordinated their votes more successfully. The Federalists designated just one elector who would defect from their second-choice candidate and instead cast a vote for John Adams and John Jay, while the rest would vote for Adams and Pinckney. The Democratic-Republicans had the same plan, but it failed and everybody cast their two votes for the same two candidates: Jefferson and Burr. Thus, Jefferson and Burr both tied as winner with 73 electoral votes each. Since there was a tie, the election would then move to the House of Representatives to decide the president and vice president. In the House of Representatives, each state gets one vote. There were sixteen states, so to win the presidency, the candidate needed to secure at least nine states' vote. In this situation, the House of Representatives was dominated by the Federalist party, but the two leading candidates in the presidential election were both Democratic-Republicans. Jefferson was the leading face of the party, so the Federalists in the House were more in favor of Aaron Burr. So when it came to voting, the Federalists typically voted for Burr and the Democratic-Republicans voted for Jefferson. In states that were evenly split in representation, they ended up sending in blank ballots and voting for neither in the initial election, so neither Jefferson nor Burr won in this first round of voting. In the second round of voting, there was a fear that Burr would actually end up as president, even though he had been elected as the presumptive vice president candidate. Ultimately, Hamilton, a prominent Federalist threw his support behind Jefferson, and the House voted for Jefferson to be president with Burr then becoming the vice president. The election of 1800 showed how difficult the election process was under the original framing of the Constitution. In the prior election, the result was that the president and vice president were political opponents. In this election, the electors tried to be smarter with their votes so that their two preferred candidates would actually be elected. However, through a failure in execution of this strategy, they nearly ended up in a situation where the actual nominee for president almost became the vice president and the actual nominee for vice president actually became the president. This was untenable. So they amended the constitution so that the president and vice president would actually be elected separately and directly by the electors. If we went back to the original process for electing president, we would likely see these same faults. It is in each party's interest to control both the presidency and vice presidency, so it is in their interest to nominate multiple candidates. The electors would then need to work together to ensure that they cast their votes properly so that the right person is elected to each position. In the end, the Twelfth Amendment didn't change much of the overall strategy. It just made it easier not to screw up. Both before and after the amendment, electors were trying to fill the vice presidency with a specific person.	1,830	ENGLISH	1
Compare and contrast a child from younger age group with a child from an older age group. For the younger age group, I observed a 6-month-old, boy infant, called Manden, in my friend’s home. 1. Adult/Teacher Interaction: In an adult interaction, the child I observed were more engaged with the people around him by infant-directed speech. His mom and I were basically called his name by rhythm, and he responded to us by smiling and being excited. As I observe in terms of turn-taking, I realize Manden responded to the people around him after everyone is done talking to him. For example, he looked at the person who he believed is talking to him. After the person was done, he will smile or laugh. This matched the research by Jasnow and Feldstein, where they said mother and infants take turns with one another much more than speaking at the same time (Steinberg et al., 2011, pp. 142). 2. Physical Development: For Manden physical development, he did not start to crawl yet. However, he is actively rolling over his body while playing with his mother or sister. Other than that, whenever we put him in the baby’s chair, he needs the support, or else his head might fall down to the front. Based on the researches, Manden has not yet reached the norms of motor development, either gross motor or fine motor, for his age group (Steinberg et al., 2011, p. 109). 3. Language Development: In terms of language development, I did not hear any verbal communication from Manden along my observation. However, he can already recognize his own name and responded to it by smiling or wriggling. This is what I expected for a 6-month-old infant in their language development. Nevertheless, I did not hear Manden’s babbling like what is expected from infant in his group age (Senia, J., HDFS 102 notes, 2014, Spring). 4. Cognitive Development: During my observation for cognitive development, I played peek-a-boo with Manden. He really enjoyed playing the games. I realize that whenever I hid my face from him, his face looked natural, he was not trying to find where did I go. However, when I appear in front of him, he smiled and giggled. This is consistent with Manden normative development where he can recognize familiar faces and respond to the sound of people around him (Arnold K., 2013). Other than that, he also has started to put things in his mouth. According to his mother, Manden also has started to eat gentle baby food. Referring to Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development, Manden is in the sensorimotor stage based on his action towards the objects around him (Steinberg et al., 2011, p. 126-127). 5. Social Interactions/Development: There are not too much I expected to see in Manden’s social interaction in my observation. At first, Manden was really attached to his mother. He was afraid when other people tried to take him from his mother. After a while, he can accept people around him and did not cry when separated from his mother. He also looked happy when other...	<urn:uuid:47836fde-bb36-4072-8119-51be14b2c99d>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://brightkite.com/essay-on/child-development-observation-report	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594209.12/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119035851-20200119063851-00213.warc.gz	en	0.988065	684	3.34375	3	[ -0.2303323745727539, -0.15792731940746307, 0.0025766328908503056, -0.2683797776699066, -0.6686091423034668, 0.22379538416862488, 0.5490913987159729, -0.09911241382360458, -0.2264968901872635, -0.43857234716415405, -0.0299377478659153, -0.12597297132015228, 0.34678250551223755, 0.1942348927...	1	Compare and contrast a child from younger age group with a child from an older age group. For the younger age group, I observed a 6-month-old, boy infant, called Manden, in my friend’s home. 1. Adult/Teacher Interaction: In an adult interaction, the child I observed were more engaged with the people around him by infant-directed speech. His mom and I were basically called his name by rhythm, and he responded to us by smiling and being excited. As I observe in terms of turn-taking, I realize Manden responded to the people around him after everyone is done talking to him. For example, he looked at the person who he believed is talking to him. After the person was done, he will smile or laugh. This matched the research by Jasnow and Feldstein, where they said mother and infants take turns with one another much more than speaking at the same time (Steinberg et al., 2011, pp. 142). 2. Physical Development: For Manden physical development, he did not start to crawl yet. However, he is actively rolling over his body while playing with his mother or sister. Other than that, whenever we put him in the baby’s chair, he needs the support, or else his head might fall down to the front. Based on the researches, Manden has not yet reached the norms of motor development, either gross motor or fine motor, for his age group (Steinberg et al., 2011, p. 109). 3. Language Development: In terms of language development, I did not hear any verbal communication from Manden along my observation. However, he can already recognize his own name and responded to it by smiling or wriggling. This is what I expected for a 6-month-old infant in their language development. Nevertheless, I did not hear Manden’s babbling like what is expected from infant in his group age (Senia, J., HDFS 102 notes, 2014, Spring). 4. Cognitive Development: During my observation for cognitive development, I played peek-a-boo with Manden. He really enjoyed playing the games. I realize that whenever I hid my face from him, his face looked natural, he was not trying to find where did I go. However, when I appear in front of him, he smiled and giggled. This is consistent with Manden normative development where he can recognize familiar faces and respond to the sound of people around him (Arnold K., 2013). Other than that, he also has started to put things in his mouth. According to his mother, Manden also has started to eat gentle baby food. Referring to Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development, Manden is in the sensorimotor stage based on his action towards the objects around him (Steinberg et al., 2011, p. 126-127). 5. Social Interactions/Development: There are not too much I expected to see in Manden’s social interaction in my observation. At first, Manden was really attached to his mother. He was afraid when other people tried to take him from his mother. After a while, he can accept people around him and did not cry when separated from his mother. He also looked happy when other...	693	ENGLISH	1
1934 On March 9th, in Klushino (now Gagarin), Russia, Yuri Gagarin was born, also known as: “first man in space”. He was the son of a carpenter in a collective farm. 1951 Gagarin graduated a trade school near Moscow. He continued his studies at the Industrial High School in Saratov, and attended in the same time a flight course. 1957 He graduated Soviet Air Forces Academy and put on him the astronaut suit in 1960 for the first time. After his flight, he remained famous wearing that suit. 1961 On April, 12th, Yuri Gagarin flew into orbit, in the Soviet spacecraft called Vostok I, becoming the first man in space. He orbited one time around the Earth (his capsule was managed from the ground), before coming to land on safe conditions in Soviet Union, almost 90 minutes later. The flight made him an international hero. He was decorated with Lenin Distinction and he was made deputy in the Sovietic Parliament. The flight was also considered a political victory for the Union, because the U.S.A had not sent any man into space until Alan Shepard, on May 5th, 1961. Many monuments were built in the Soviet Union, and the streets were renamed into his honour. Throw the springboard, Gagarin stopped to empty the bladder. This fact became a tradition, all the next astronauts urinated on the rear wheel of the bus that transported them [en.wikipedia.org]. Gagarin had never entered the space after that, but he had an active role in training other astronauts. He made many tournaments in other countries, after his historic flight. 1968 Gagarin died after the plane he was in crashed. It seems it was a training flight, a routine one. His ash was put in a niche into Kremlin wall. There were elements which doubt the time and the date of the catastrophe, but also its circumstances. The results of the report have not been publicly until now; these, together with wreckage, stored in Research Institute No. 13 of Ministry of Defence, were classified. During the years, more possible tracks were launched, tracks which made the pilot disappear prematurely. In short time after SSRU unravelling, many specialists who took part in investigation declared that the plane had gone into a tailspin. Another hypothesis sustains that the plane would have hit a weather balloon. There were other hypotheses, too, but less plausible, and other references were made regarding a pilot error corroborated to a technical malfunction of the plane, a murdering ordered by Leonid Brejnev [ro.wikipedia.org]. Gagarin was followed into space by a Russian dog, Laika. - Created on . - Last updated on . - Hits: 1998	<urn:uuid:c3a60f04-47a4-4865-8d14-8bf602ef9924>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://en.biography.name/astronauts/30-russia/8-yuri-gagarin-1934-1968	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592261.1/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118052321-20200118080321-00412.warc.gz	en	0.987828	580	3.265625	3	[ -0.31498491764068604, 0.26892006397247314, 0.3440544903278351, -0.08220168948173523, -0.27712154388427734, 0.10615599155426025, 0.4054730236530304, 0.5352828502655029, 0.21377328038215637, -0.31375187635421753, -0.09430208802223206, 0.17903852462768555, 0.3064097464084625, 0.69128459692001...	1	1934 On March 9th, in Klushino (now Gagarin), Russia, Yuri Gagarin was born, also known as: “first man in space”. He was the son of a carpenter in a collective farm. 1951 Gagarin graduated a trade school near Moscow. He continued his studies at the Industrial High School in Saratov, and attended in the same time a flight course. 1957 He graduated Soviet Air Forces Academy and put on him the astronaut suit in 1960 for the first time. After his flight, he remained famous wearing that suit. 1961 On April, 12th, Yuri Gagarin flew into orbit, in the Soviet spacecraft called Vostok I, becoming the first man in space. He orbited one time around the Earth (his capsule was managed from the ground), before coming to land on safe conditions in Soviet Union, almost 90 minutes later. The flight made him an international hero. He was decorated with Lenin Distinction and he was made deputy in the Sovietic Parliament. The flight was also considered a political victory for the Union, because the U.S.A had not sent any man into space until Alan Shepard, on May 5th, 1961. Many monuments were built in the Soviet Union, and the streets were renamed into his honour. Throw the springboard, Gagarin stopped to empty the bladder. This fact became a tradition, all the next astronauts urinated on the rear wheel of the bus that transported them [en.wikipedia.org]. Gagarin had never entered the space after that, but he had an active role in training other astronauts. He made many tournaments in other countries, after his historic flight. 1968 Gagarin died after the plane he was in crashed. It seems it was a training flight, a routine one. His ash was put in a niche into Kremlin wall. There were elements which doubt the time and the date of the catastrophe, but also its circumstances. The results of the report have not been publicly until now; these, together with wreckage, stored in Research Institute No. 13 of Ministry of Defence, were classified. During the years, more possible tracks were launched, tracks which made the pilot disappear prematurely. In short time after SSRU unravelling, many specialists who took part in investigation declared that the plane had gone into a tailspin. Another hypothesis sustains that the plane would have hit a weather balloon. There were other hypotheses, too, but less plausible, and other references were made regarding a pilot error corroborated to a technical malfunction of the plane, a murdering ordered by Leonid Brejnev [ro.wikipedia.org]. Gagarin was followed into space by a Russian dog, Laika. - Created on . - Last updated on . - Hits: 1998	590	ENGLISH	1
The Britons could not keep their land free for a long time. The Germanic tribes from Western Europe-the Angles, Saxons and Jutes—attacked the coasts of Вritain and after long wars with the Britons settled on the British Isles. The Britons fought bravely against the enemies and defended their land. But the enemies were stronger. They took houses, fields and cattle from the Britons. The Angles got most of the land and became the strongest tribe. The Britons went to the mountains in the west of the Isles and settled there. This part of Britain is called Wales now. As time went on the two peoples - the Angles and the Saxons - grew into one and were called Anglo-Saxons. They called their speech English, and their country England - that is, the Land of the English. The Anglo-Saxons formed many kingdoms-Kent, Essex, Wessex, which now are counties of Great Britain. These kingdoms were at war with one another. The stronger kings took the land from the smaller kingdoms .	<urn:uuid:62a18ed6-0391-4383-91c1-9fd45358b4be>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://ref.by/list/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1044&Itemid=38	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250589560.16/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117123339-20200117151339-00107.warc.gz	en	0.982416	214	4.125	4	[ -0.16771788895130157, 0.2283126264810562, 0.5040167570114136, 0.04764820262789726, -0.013721046037971973, -0.1999950259923935, 0.07732266187667847, -0.2831798493862152, -0.09642411023378372, -0.03632964938879013, -0.34135133028030396, -0.7723766565322876, 0.09915310144424438, 0.00842113792...	5	The Britons could not keep their land free for a long time. The Germanic tribes from Western Europe-the Angles, Saxons and Jutes—attacked the coasts of Вritain and after long wars with the Britons settled on the British Isles. The Britons fought bravely against the enemies and defended their land. But the enemies were stronger. They took houses, fields and cattle from the Britons. The Angles got most of the land and became the strongest tribe. The Britons went to the mountains in the west of the Isles and settled there. This part of Britain is called Wales now. As time went on the two peoples - the Angles and the Saxons - grew into one and were called Anglo-Saxons. They called their speech English, and their country England - that is, the Land of the English. The Anglo-Saxons formed many kingdoms-Kent, Essex, Wessex, which now are counties of Great Britain. These kingdoms were at war with one another. The stronger kings took the land from the smaller kingdoms .	217	ENGLISH	1
Opera and Mozart Wolfgang Amadeus Fetishistic Mozart Knolling Amadeus Mozart was born on the 27th of January 1756 in Salisbury, Austria. He began taking piano lessons from his father, who was a musician at the age of four and he began composing when he was five. In 1762 his father took him to Munich and Vienna to introduce him to the public In Vienna Mozart played for the Emperor of Austria and it was around this time that Mozart learned to play the violin and the organ without having lessons. In 1763 he traveled to Paris with his family, and he had his first compositions published.Mozart was constantly traveling, and before he was 25 he had seen most of the major cities of Europe. When he was visiting England in 1763, he composed some sonatas for the violin and the harpsichord. He also composed a number of symphonies. He was only eight. In 1769, on a visit to Rome, Mozart went to hear the Sistine choir sing, and when he got home, he put the entire Nor on paper from memory. Mozart father was in service to the Archbishop of Salisbury for most of his life, so Mozart was appointed concert master to the archbishop for a small amount of time.	<urn:uuid:fd220ebf-a019-4c31-a28b-b3b6dc91e50c>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://newyorkessays.com/essay-opera-and-mozart-wolfgang-amadeus-3207/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251689924.62/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126135207-20200126165207-00195.warc.gz	en	0.995789	273	3.421875	3	[ 0.5580973029136658, 0.31963351368904114, 0.2347668558359146, -0.5171493887901306, -1.0622016191482544, 0.3112106919288635, 0.16260498762130737, 0.2849498689174652, 0.1992388367652893, -0.5242499709129333, 0.010447331704199314, -0.454813688993454, 0.24162648618221283, 0.29698482155799866, ...	5	Opera and Mozart Wolfgang Amadeus Fetishistic Mozart Knolling Amadeus Mozart was born on the 27th of January 1756 in Salisbury, Austria. He began taking piano lessons from his father, who was a musician at the age of four and he began composing when he was five. In 1762 his father took him to Munich and Vienna to introduce him to the public In Vienna Mozart played for the Emperor of Austria and it was around this time that Mozart learned to play the violin and the organ without having lessons. In 1763 he traveled to Paris with his family, and he had his first compositions published.Mozart was constantly traveling, and before he was 25 he had seen most of the major cities of Europe. When he was visiting England in 1763, he composed some sonatas for the violin and the harpsichord. He also composed a number of symphonies. He was only eight. In 1769, on a visit to Rome, Mozart went to hear the Sistine choir sing, and when he got home, he put the entire Nor on paper from memory. Mozart father was in service to the Archbishop of Salisbury for most of his life, so Mozart was appointed concert master to the archbishop for a small amount of time.	278	ENGLISH	1
August 6th, 1945, 70,000 lives were ended in a matter of seconds. The United States had dropped an atomic bomb on the city of Hiroshima. Today many argue over whether or not the US should have taken such a drastic measure. Was it entirely necessary that we drop such a devastating weapon? Yes, it was. First, we must look at what was going on at the time the decision was made. The US had been fighting a massive war since 1941. Morale was most likely low, and resources were probably at the same level as morale. However, each side continued to fight, and both were determined to win. Obviously, the best thing that could have possibly have happened would have been to bring the war to a quick end, with a minimum of casualties. What would have happened had the A-bomb not been used? The most obvious thing is that the war would have continued. US forces; therefore, would have had to invade the home island of Imagine the number of casualties that could have occurred if this would have happened! Also, our forces would not only have to fight off the Japanese military, but they would have to defend themselves against the civilians of Japan as well. It was also a fact that the Japanese government had been equipping the commoners with any kind of weapon they could get their hands on. It is true that this could mean a Japanese citizen could have anything from a gun to a spear, but many unsuspecting soldiers might have fallen victim to a surprise spear attack! The number of deaths that would have occurred would have been much greater, and an invasion would have taken a much longer period of time. The Japanese would have continued to fight the US with all of what they had; spears, guns, knives, whatever they could get their hands on, just as long as they continued to fight the enemy. As mentioned before, it is a fact that some civilians had been ready to fight our military with spears! What made it possible that the Japanese would resort to using spears? Why wouldn’t they use guns or other weapons? Well, the truth was, the government just didn’t have the resources to give out a gun to just any citizen. US naval blockades are one of the major reasons that Japan was so low on resources, and a main point opponents of the decision to drop the bomb constantly bring up. Japan obviously was very low on resources. Japanese civilians were ready to die with spears in their hands, surely the military would do the same. Besides, the Japanese military did still have some resources to go on. So again I must bring out the fact that Japan could have continued to fight, and they would have. And I’m sure anyone can realize what would happen if the war continued; more deaths. Admiral William Leahy, Chief of Staff to President Roosevelt and President Truman, wrote, “By the beginning of September 1944, Japan was almost completely defeated through a practically complete sea and air blockade. ” If that was true, how could they have continued to fight and rack up enemy kills? If the Chief of Staff to the President figured they would soon surrender around September 1944; why were they still fighting almost a year later? And how can we be so sure that any other estimates on when the war would end would be correct? Basically, we can’t. For all anyone knows, Japan would have kept fighting. It was the atomic bomb that forced Japan to surrender and in turn saved thousands if not millions of lives. How can anyone be so sure that Japan would continue to fight? No one can say exactly what would have happened, because let’s face it, no one really knows. It’s possible Japan was just about to surrender, but most evidence would not agree with that statement. I’m sure most have heard of a group of men called the Kamikaze. Kamikaze were “suicide” pilots. They would load an airplane up with explosives and try to nose-dive it into an enemy target. Think about what must be on this pilot’s mind. Imagine the undying love he must have for his country. He would fight until the end, for his emperor and his country. The scary thing about this is the majority of the Japanese military thought The fact that the enemy is ready to die so long as you die with him is not something a soldier wants to think about before going into battle. .	<urn:uuid:a62c168a-f549-4930-bcc6-02522a9be6f5>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://artscolumbia.org/essays/atomic-bomb-necessary-essay-106166/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250604397.40/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121132900-20200121161900-00044.warc.gz	en	0.987203	984	3.296875	3	[ -0.5349971652030945, 0.15550854802131653, 0.16888955235481262, -0.2786218523979187, 0.41681107878685, 0.31101423501968384, 0.15115807950496674, 0.3837416172027588, 0.06935088336467743, 0.09925204515457153, 0.5446221828460693, 0.01140565425157547, 0.3049800992012024, 0.7604057788848877, 0...	3	August 6th, 1945, 70,000 lives were ended in a matter of seconds. The United States had dropped an atomic bomb on the city of Hiroshima. Today many argue over whether or not the US should have taken such a drastic measure. Was it entirely necessary that we drop such a devastating weapon? Yes, it was. First, we must look at what was going on at the time the decision was made. The US had been fighting a massive war since 1941. Morale was most likely low, and resources were probably at the same level as morale. However, each side continued to fight, and both were determined to win. Obviously, the best thing that could have possibly have happened would have been to bring the war to a quick end, with a minimum of casualties. What would have happened had the A-bomb not been used? The most obvious thing is that the war would have continued. US forces; therefore, would have had to invade the home island of Imagine the number of casualties that could have occurred if this would have happened! Also, our forces would not only have to fight off the Japanese military, but they would have to defend themselves against the civilians of Japan as well. It was also a fact that the Japanese government had been equipping the commoners with any kind of weapon they could get their hands on. It is true that this could mean a Japanese citizen could have anything from a gun to a spear, but many unsuspecting soldiers might have fallen victim to a surprise spear attack! The number of deaths that would have occurred would have been much greater, and an invasion would have taken a much longer period of time. The Japanese would have continued to fight the US with all of what they had; spears, guns, knives, whatever they could get their hands on, just as long as they continued to fight the enemy. As mentioned before, it is a fact that some civilians had been ready to fight our military with spears! What made it possible that the Japanese would resort to using spears? Why wouldn’t they use guns or other weapons? Well, the truth was, the government just didn’t have the resources to give out a gun to just any citizen. US naval blockades are one of the major reasons that Japan was so low on resources, and a main point opponents of the decision to drop the bomb constantly bring up. Japan obviously was very low on resources. Japanese civilians were ready to die with spears in their hands, surely the military would do the same. Besides, the Japanese military did still have some resources to go on. So again I must bring out the fact that Japan could have continued to fight, and they would have. And I’m sure anyone can realize what would happen if the war continued; more deaths. Admiral William Leahy, Chief of Staff to President Roosevelt and President Truman, wrote, “By the beginning of September 1944, Japan was almost completely defeated through a practically complete sea and air blockade. ” If that was true, how could they have continued to fight and rack up enemy kills? If the Chief of Staff to the President figured they would soon surrender around September 1944; why were they still fighting almost a year later? And how can we be so sure that any other estimates on when the war would end would be correct? Basically, we can’t. For all anyone knows, Japan would have kept fighting. It was the atomic bomb that forced Japan to surrender and in turn saved thousands if not millions of lives. How can anyone be so sure that Japan would continue to fight? No one can say exactly what would have happened, because let’s face it, no one really knows. It’s possible Japan was just about to surrender, but most evidence would not agree with that statement. I’m sure most have heard of a group of men called the Kamikaze. Kamikaze were “suicide” pilots. They would load an airplane up with explosives and try to nose-dive it into an enemy target. Think about what must be on this pilot’s mind. Imagine the undying love he must have for his country. He would fight until the end, for his emperor and his country. The scary thing about this is the majority of the Japanese military thought The fact that the enemy is ready to die so long as you die with him is not something a soldier wants to think about before going into battle. .	971	ENGLISH	1
- EducationDay in the life of a convict - Part 1: 1788–1815The convicts’ colony - Part 2: 1815–1822For the civic good - Part 3: 1822–1826Back to business - Part 4: 1826–1837A world of pain - Part 5: 1837–1848The turning tide When the bell in the Barracks courtyard rang at sunrise, it told the men to get out of bed and head downstairs for breakfast. The second time the bell rang it told them it was time to go to work. There was a huge amount of work to do around the town of Sydney, and most of it was done by convicts who did lots of different jobs. Working for the government was part of the punishment of transportation and they had to work hard all day, six days a week. Before they left the Barracks, the convicts lined up in the yard so the Superintendent could check that everyone was present, and in case they had any stolen goods. Many of the convicts who lived at the Barracks were skilled tradesmen, so they were valuable to the government. Some were trained to make bricks, build walls, carve stone, cut down trees and work the timber, while others were trained to make buckets and water barrels and to make wheels. Many were skilled carpenters, blacksmiths or cobblers (shoemakers). At the Side note: , convicts worked to turn large wooden logs into smaller timber planks for buildings. They also made doors, window frames, shutters and roof shingles. Down at the edge of Sydney Harbour, convicts built boats and made rope and sails for ships. Other convicts transported water and food stores, or loaded and unloaded ships that had arrived from other parts of the world. Some convicts worked on the water as boatmen, cut grass to feed cattle, or drove bullock teams (large wagons pulled by cattle) around the town, delivering goods to different businesses, work sites, and warehouses. A lot of the work that convicts around the colony affected Aboriginal people, their way of life and their close connection to their country. Cutting down trees and clearing land destroyed traditional hunting grounds. Catching fish and collecting oysters from the waterways meant there was less available for Aboriginal people to feed their families. Building farms and fences made it harder for Aboriginal people to travel across, care for and camp in areas that they had used and nurtured for many years. Convicts who did not have a special skill worked outdoors as labourers. They cleared land, ploughed fields, harvested crops, worked in Object: or built fences. They cut up wood for fires and Side note: from rivers and waterways to crush for lime mortar, an important building material. Some men worked in road gangs, building roads and bridges, while others worked in stone yards, breaking rocks down into smaller, more useful pieces. Long Bay Bakery vs convict bakery How did convicts make bricks? Convict Joseph Smyth (Smith) is a master brick maker working for the government and he has a tough job ahead of him. Governor Macquarie has an ambitious building project for Sydney and thousands of bricks are needed. Joseph has to teach two newly arrived convicts how to make clay bricks as part of a brick gang. Building the Barracks Hundreds of convicts were needed to build the Hyde Park Barracks itself. Work started in April 1817, and it was finished just over two years later, opening to house the first groups of convicts in May/June 1819. The place chosen for the Barracks had long been used by Aboriginal people for camping and was on the track between Warrane (Sydney Cove) and Woccanmagully (Farm Cove). Once work started on the building, it became much harder for Aboriginal people to use the area. This is an example of how the growth of the colony of Sydney affected the lives of the local Aboriginal people, as they were forced off their traditional tracks, camping sites and hunting grounds. To begin with, the scrubby bushland had to be cleared. The plan for the Barracks was then marked out on the ground using string and wooden posts. Long, heavy timber beams were put in place to make the scaffolding, and then convict workers started to lay thousands and thousands of bricks, building solid walls that had decorative arches and doorways. Slowly the building took shape. Everything had to be cut, made and Object: . Smaller timber planks were used for the floors and ceiling, with hand-cut shingles laid down to cover the roof. Stonemasons also cut and shaped large sandstone blocks to build an outer wall that was meant to keep the convicts from escaping. Joseph Smith – convict brickmaker Joseph was a trained brickmaker, worked at the brickfields – a very busy and dusty place. He had been sentenced to death in London in July 1817, but his sentence was reduced to transportation ‘for life’. Before he left England for NSW, Joseph had Object: as a keepsake for his wife, Mary Ann Smith. He arrived in Sydney in April 1818 – while the Barracks was being built. Joseph’s skill as a brickmaker would have been extremely valuable to the government, and he probably made many of the bricks that were used to build the Barracks walls. Working at the Barracks Not all of the convicts left the Barracks in the morning to go to work, with old, sick or frail men staying behind to work. They Object: the gravel yard, swept out the sleeping wards, opened the windows to let in fresh air, and shook out all the dusty blankets and folded them neatly. Other men worked in the bakery, making the bread that the convicts ate for breakfast and dinner. Some convicts were employed as overseers, to control the gangs of convict workers, and others were even paid to do more responsible jobs, like being a constable, a guard, or a scourger – the man who whipped the other convicts as punishment! In 1826, a shoe- and clothes-making workshop was opened at the Barracks. Up to 23 trained leatherworkers worked there, making convict shoes. Another 20 men made convict clothes and police uniforms.	<urn:uuid:9850d550-873f-4b62-826d-4d5b3ae0c439>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://sydneylivingmuseums.com.au/convict-sydney/what-work-did-convicts-do	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594101.10/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119010920-20200119034920-00074.warc.gz	en	0.984743	1,323	3.890625	4	[ 0.1121588945388794, 0.43377020955085754, 0.5139669179916382, 0.2623768150806427, -0.09800169616937637, -0.05552501603960991, 0.30822306871414185, 0.019380811601877213, -0.3876989483833313, -0.13409438729286194, 0.09741561114788055, -0.3446192145347595, -0.16606025397777557, 0.4717969894409...	6	- EducationDay in the life of a convict - Part 1: 1788–1815The convicts’ colony - Part 2: 1815–1822For the civic good - Part 3: 1822–1826Back to business - Part 4: 1826–1837A world of pain - Part 5: 1837–1848The turning tide When the bell in the Barracks courtyard rang at sunrise, it told the men to get out of bed and head downstairs for breakfast. The second time the bell rang it told them it was time to go to work. There was a huge amount of work to do around the town of Sydney, and most of it was done by convicts who did lots of different jobs. Working for the government was part of the punishment of transportation and they had to work hard all day, six days a week. Before they left the Barracks, the convicts lined up in the yard so the Superintendent could check that everyone was present, and in case they had any stolen goods. Many of the convicts who lived at the Barracks were skilled tradesmen, so they were valuable to the government. Some were trained to make bricks, build walls, carve stone, cut down trees and work the timber, while others were trained to make buckets and water barrels and to make wheels. Many were skilled carpenters, blacksmiths or cobblers (shoemakers). At the Side note: , convicts worked to turn large wooden logs into smaller timber planks for buildings. They also made doors, window frames, shutters and roof shingles. Down at the edge of Sydney Harbour, convicts built boats and made rope and sails for ships. Other convicts transported water and food stores, or loaded and unloaded ships that had arrived from other parts of the world. Some convicts worked on the water as boatmen, cut grass to feed cattle, or drove bullock teams (large wagons pulled by cattle) around the town, delivering goods to different businesses, work sites, and warehouses. A lot of the work that convicts around the colony affected Aboriginal people, their way of life and their close connection to their country. Cutting down trees and clearing land destroyed traditional hunting grounds. Catching fish and collecting oysters from the waterways meant there was less available for Aboriginal people to feed their families. Building farms and fences made it harder for Aboriginal people to travel across, care for and camp in areas that they had used and nurtured for many years. Convicts who did not have a special skill worked outdoors as labourers. They cleared land, ploughed fields, harvested crops, worked in Object: or built fences. They cut up wood for fires and Side note: from rivers and waterways to crush for lime mortar, an important building material. Some men worked in road gangs, building roads and bridges, while others worked in stone yards, breaking rocks down into smaller, more useful pieces. Long Bay Bakery vs convict bakery How did convicts make bricks? Convict Joseph Smyth (Smith) is a master brick maker working for the government and he has a tough job ahead of him. Governor Macquarie has an ambitious building project for Sydney and thousands of bricks are needed. Joseph has to teach two newly arrived convicts how to make clay bricks as part of a brick gang. Building the Barracks Hundreds of convicts were needed to build the Hyde Park Barracks itself. Work started in April 1817, and it was finished just over two years later, opening to house the first groups of convicts in May/June 1819. The place chosen for the Barracks had long been used by Aboriginal people for camping and was on the track between Warrane (Sydney Cove) and Woccanmagully (Farm Cove). Once work started on the building, it became much harder for Aboriginal people to use the area. This is an example of how the growth of the colony of Sydney affected the lives of the local Aboriginal people, as they were forced off their traditional tracks, camping sites and hunting grounds. To begin with, the scrubby bushland had to be cleared. The plan for the Barracks was then marked out on the ground using string and wooden posts. Long, heavy timber beams were put in place to make the scaffolding, and then convict workers started to lay thousands and thousands of bricks, building solid walls that had decorative arches and doorways. Slowly the building took shape. Everything had to be cut, made and Object: . Smaller timber planks were used for the floors and ceiling, with hand-cut shingles laid down to cover the roof. Stonemasons also cut and shaped large sandstone blocks to build an outer wall that was meant to keep the convicts from escaping. Joseph Smith – convict brickmaker Joseph was a trained brickmaker, worked at the brickfields – a very busy and dusty place. He had been sentenced to death in London in July 1817, but his sentence was reduced to transportation ‘for life’. Before he left England for NSW, Joseph had Object: as a keepsake for his wife, Mary Ann Smith. He arrived in Sydney in April 1818 – while the Barracks was being built. Joseph’s skill as a brickmaker would have been extremely valuable to the government, and he probably made many of the bricks that were used to build the Barracks walls. Working at the Barracks Not all of the convicts left the Barracks in the morning to go to work, with old, sick or frail men staying behind to work. They Object: the gravel yard, swept out the sleeping wards, opened the windows to let in fresh air, and shook out all the dusty blankets and folded them neatly. Other men worked in the bakery, making the bread that the convicts ate for breakfast and dinner. Some convicts were employed as overseers, to control the gangs of convict workers, and others were even paid to do more responsible jobs, like being a constable, a guard, or a scourger – the man who whipped the other convicts as punishment! In 1826, a shoe- and clothes-making workshop was opened at the Barracks. Up to 23 trained leatherworkers worked there, making convict shoes. Another 20 men made convict clothes and police uniforms.	1,332	ENGLISH	1
In recent times, camps have existed in many parts of the world for groups of displaced people including for refugees in the Darfur region of Sudan, and for Palestinians in Lebanon and Jordan, as well as for Afghan refugees in Pakistan. Such camps are now generally known as refugee camps. DP camps following World War II Combat operations, ethnic cleansing, and the fear of genocide resulted in millions of people being uprooted from their homes in the course of World War II. Between 11 million and 20 million people were displaced. The majority were inmates of Nazi concentration camps, Labor camps and prisoner-of-war camps that were freed by the Allied armies. In portions of Eastern Europe, both civilians and military personnel fled their home countries in fear of advancing Soviet armies, who were preceded by widespread reports of mass rape, pillaging, looting, and murder. The term was first widely used during World War II and the resulting refugee outflows from Eastern Europe, when it was used to specifically refer to one removed from his or her native country as a refugee, prisoner or a slave laborer. The meaning has significantly broadened in the past half-century. A displaced person may also be referred to as a forced migrant. The term "refugee" is also commonly used as a synonym for displaced person, causing confusion between the general descriptive class of anyone who has left their home and the subgroup of legally defined refugees who enjoy specified international legal protection. Most of the victims of war, political refugees and DPs of the immediate post-Second World War period were Ukrainians, Poles, other Slavs, as well as citizens of the Baltic states - Lithuanians, Latvians, and Estonians, who refused to return to Soviet-dominated eastern Europe. Displaced Persons is a 1985 Australian TV movie about refugees arriving in Australia in 1945. It was the first script written by Louis Nowra, who was inspired by a book he read about displaced people in Australia after World War Two. He wrote it in three days and sent it to the ABC who agreed to make it. The movie was well received and Nowra went on to write a number of works for the ABC.	<urn:uuid:62db2d06-f853-4d65-8ace-9e6934311563>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://wn.com/Displaced_persons_camp	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598726.39/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120110422-20200120134422-00107.warc.gz	en	0.984576	440	3.84375	4	[ -0.09982798993587494, 0.3345978856086731, -0.08857721090316772, 0.022006560117006302, 0.19236263632774353, 0.1062915176153183, -0.012344867922365665, -0.2606275677680969, -0.05227111652493477, -0.022379422560334206, 0.6908448338508606, -0.1782970130443573, -0.012923678383231163, 0.25159537...	1	In recent times, camps have existed in many parts of the world for groups of displaced people including for refugees in the Darfur region of Sudan, and for Palestinians in Lebanon and Jordan, as well as for Afghan refugees in Pakistan. Such camps are now generally known as refugee camps. DP camps following World War II Combat operations, ethnic cleansing, and the fear of genocide resulted in millions of people being uprooted from their homes in the course of World War II. Between 11 million and 20 million people were displaced. The majority were inmates of Nazi concentration camps, Labor camps and prisoner-of-war camps that were freed by the Allied armies. In portions of Eastern Europe, both civilians and military personnel fled their home countries in fear of advancing Soviet armies, who were preceded by widespread reports of mass rape, pillaging, looting, and murder. The term was first widely used during World War II and the resulting refugee outflows from Eastern Europe, when it was used to specifically refer to one removed from his or her native country as a refugee, prisoner or a slave laborer. The meaning has significantly broadened in the past half-century. A displaced person may also be referred to as a forced migrant. The term "refugee" is also commonly used as a synonym for displaced person, causing confusion between the general descriptive class of anyone who has left their home and the subgroup of legally defined refugees who enjoy specified international legal protection. Most of the victims of war, political refugees and DPs of the immediate post-Second World War period were Ukrainians, Poles, other Slavs, as well as citizens of the Baltic states - Lithuanians, Latvians, and Estonians, who refused to return to Soviet-dominated eastern Europe. Displaced Persons is a 1985 Australian TV movie about refugees arriving in Australia in 1945. It was the first script written by Louis Nowra, who was inspired by a book he read about displaced people in Australia after World War Two. He wrote it in three days and sent it to the ABC who agreed to make it. The movie was well received and Nowra went on to write a number of works for the ABC.	446	ENGLISH	1
Earth was colder In geologic terms, a million years ago was the Pleistocene age (2.5 million years BC to 11,711 years BC), and Earth was five to 10 degrees colder than it is today. Prolonged glaciation periods occurred during this time, Lower sea levels The sea levels were much lower. Geologists estimate that difference in sea level between glacial epochs was as much as almost 400 feet. Bering Strait land bridge Because of lowered sea levels, the narrow Bering Strait of today might have had a land bridge, allowing migration from Asia to North America. The idea of a land bridge has fascinated people for hundreds of years. The first written record that suggested the existence of such a bridge was recorded in 1590 by Spanish missionary Fray JosÃ© de Acosta. The British Isles were connected to Europe There was once a land bridge between Britain and continental Europe before rising seas submerged it. The ice age lowered sea levels dramatically, exposing the sea bed. The area between much of the northern coast of Europe and Britain was called Doggerland and provided a route for animals to go to the warmer climes of southern Europe. No Baltic Sea There was no Baltic Sea a million years ago. The Baltic Sea is the youngest seas in the world, appearing between 10,000 and 15,000 years ago as the ice sheets from the ice age retreated.	<urn:uuid:388d63bc-50c8-4d28-94ee-67c8477bd3e7>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://247wallst.com/special-report/2019/09/20/what-the-world-was-like-a-million-years-ago/2/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250589861.0/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117152059-20200117180059-00386.warc.gz	en	0.981247	289	3.65625	4	[ -0.24486032128334045, -0.08970088511705399, 0.4320981204509735, -0.2210647314786911, 0.10517504811286926, -0.0052236588671803474, -0.35832956433296204, -0.05809558928012848, -0.21606674790382385, 0.10234007984399796, 0.33853960037231445, -0.5426110029220581, 0.16239647567272186, 0.39780813...	1	Earth was colder In geologic terms, a million years ago was the Pleistocene age (2.5 million years BC to 11,711 years BC), and Earth was five to 10 degrees colder than it is today. Prolonged glaciation periods occurred during this time, Lower sea levels The sea levels were much lower. Geologists estimate that difference in sea level between glacial epochs was as much as almost 400 feet. Bering Strait land bridge Because of lowered sea levels, the narrow Bering Strait of today might have had a land bridge, allowing migration from Asia to North America. The idea of a land bridge has fascinated people for hundreds of years. The first written record that suggested the existence of such a bridge was recorded in 1590 by Spanish missionary Fray JosÃ© de Acosta. The British Isles were connected to Europe There was once a land bridge between Britain and continental Europe before rising seas submerged it. The ice age lowered sea levels dramatically, exposing the sea bed. The area between much of the northern coast of Europe and Britain was called Doggerland and provided a route for animals to go to the warmer climes of southern Europe. No Baltic Sea There was no Baltic Sea a million years ago. The Baltic Sea is the youngest seas in the world, appearing between 10,000 and 15,000 years ago as the ice sheets from the ice age retreated.	304	ENGLISH	1
Near this location the Battle of Cibecue Creek was fought in August 30, 1881 between the United States and White Mountain Apaches in Arizona, at Cibecue Creek on the Fort Apache Indian Reservation. After an army expedition of scouts and soldiers arrested a prominent medicine man, they were taking the prisoner back to the fort when ambushed by hostile Apaches. During the conflict, soldiers killed the wounded medicine man, and most of the twenty-three Apache scouts mutinied, in the largest such action in United States history. The soldiers retreated to Fort Apache and on the following day, the Apache mounted a counterattack. The events sparked general unrest and led Apache warriors to leave the reservation and join Geronimo. PRELUDE TO BATTLE: Nock-ay-det-klinne was a respected Apache medicine man among his people and chief of the Cañon Creek band of the Cibecue Apaches, a group of the Western Apache. He often counseled leading warriors such as Cochise and Geronimo. Due to corruption and unhealthy conditions at the Fort Apache Indian Reservation in eastern Arizona, Nock-ay-det-klinne began holding ceremonies known as ghost dances at the village of Cibecue. It was part of a late nineteenth-century spiritual revival among native Americans struggling to deal with the disruption of their societies as they were pushed onto reservations. The ceremonies often included heavy drinking and the use of hallucinogenic plants, such as peyote. Through them the Apache expressed and united under their discontent with conditions of reservation life. The American settlers of the region grew alarmed about the dances, which they thought were related to preparations for war. The United States Army came to investigate the situation and remove the medicine man from his followers. The soldiers stationed at Fort Apache included Troops D and E, 6th Cavalry; Company D, 12th Infantry; and Company A, Indian scouts. Captain Edmund Clarence Hentig was transferred to Fort Apache in 1876. He was the Captain and commanded company D. Second Lieutenant Thomas Cruse commanded Company A. Of his twenty-five scouts, twelve were from Chief Pedro's band and thirteen were Cibecue Apache; Nock-ay-det-klinne was one of their own chiefs and medicine men. With the permission of the military, the scouts serving with the troops often attended Nock-ay-det-klinne’s dances near Fort Apache. On about August 10, Colonel Eugene Asa Carr asked Cruse for his opinion of the loyalty of the scouts. Cruse had noticed their changes in attitude and conduct. He also told Carr that the main participants in any local uprising would be friends and relatives of the scouts and, even if the scouts did not turn against the military, they would be of no use in conflict. Most officers at the post and Sam Bowman had the same opinion. Permission was granted for the discharge, but the telegraph line went down before Carr received it. He did not hear from the department for two and a half weeks, after he and his troops had returned from being ambushed at the Cibecue. Routinely, every Sunday morning the officers inspected the scout company. Carr directed Cruse to take the scouts’ guns after the August 14 inspection. Cruse was to tell the scouts that he would keep their arms in his office to protect them from the rain. The guns were regularly kept in the orderly room; the officers issued them only to men on herd duty, soldiers and scouts sent out on detached service, and to all men on Saturday evenings for Sunday morning inspections. The scouts took the removal of the guns as a sign of distrust, but Cruse tried to have the interpreter smooth the matter over, and thought they were satisfied. Carr decided to take his cavalry and Cruse’s scouts to the Cibecue and leave the infantry at Fort Apache. He did not feel comfortable bringing the scouts but had little choice. On Sunday morning, August 28, shortly after the scout Chapeau returned to Fort Apache without Nock-ay-det-klinne, Carr told Cruse to let the scouts keep their guns after their inspection and to prepare to leave the next morning to arrest the medicine man. John Byrnes, a Dublin-born Irishman assigned to Company A, knew of the respect which the Apache scouts had for Nock-ay-det-klinne and was alarmed. Byrnes warned Cruse that the scouts should not be armed, as they could not be trusted. Byrnes had earlier counseled Carr against permitting the scouts to keep their guns. Cruse told Byrnes he was acting under Carr's orders. About 10:00 am the next day, Carr left Fort Apache with five officers, seventy-nine enlisted soldiers from Troops D and E, 6th Cavalry, and twenty-three scouts from Company A, to make the arrest. Cruse took Byrnes as his guide. Carr also took Charles Hurrle, interpreter; Charles Nat Nobles, chief packer; one cargador, the principal assistant to the chief packer,; four packers; and Clark Carr. Sixty soldiers, mostly of Company D, 12th Infantry, and several civilians remained at Fort Apache, with Major Cochran in command of the post. Just before they left. Carr scribbled a message for General Willcox: I sent word to Nock-ay-det-klinne that l wanted to see him. He does not seem likely to come and I am searching for his place on Cibicu to try to catch him. Because the telegraph line was down, Willcox did not receive the message until three days later. It was not generally known that an expedition to Nock-ay-det-klinne's camp was planned. Carr had been secretive about the purpose and destination of the march. The scouts were not told which way to go until the force was moving out. After they were notified they were going out on a march, the scouts suspected the destination was the Cibecue. After the columnn crossed the White River, just outside Fort Apache, and reached the mesa on the other side, some Apaches living along the river rode up and spoke to the scouts. Carr called these natives and the scouts together and told them where the command was going and what he was going to do. He said he was not going to hurt Nock-ay-det-klinne, but wanted him to come in with him. He told the curious natives to go and tell their friends not to be alarmed as he was not going to bother them and there would be no trouble. Stanton were ordered out on a scout under Colonel Eugene A. Carr, directed to go to Cibecue Creek and arrest the medicine man. The command arrested the Indian then camped for the night on Cibecue Creek, despite the general excitement the operation had aroused among Apache followers of the medicine man. Carr took the Verde Trail to the Cibecue. Although this was the shortest route, the trail was rough, passing through mountainous country covered mostly with timber. The trail may have been boggy at places, but the region was then in the third day of a nine-day period without rain. On the first day, Carr and his battalion traveled about twenty-nine miles. They were winding through deep canyons with rocky sides. They camped for the night in a canyon where the trail crossed Carrizo Creek. That evening, after supper, Carr issued each scout twenty rounds of ammunition. About one and a half miles from the Cibecue and three miles from Nock-ay-det-klinne‘s village, a trail branched from the Verde Trail. This secondary trail ran diagonally up the valley, across high, open ground, through a grassy slope that stretched from the hills to the timber along the Cibecue. It was the shorter route to Nock-ay-det-klinne's village. From this fork, the Verde Trail crossed rocky and rolling country directly to Cibecue Creek. The place where it crossed the creek was known as the Verde Crossing. On the other side of the creek another secondary trail ran up the creek, just outside the bushes and undergrowth of the creek bottom, to Nock-ay-det-klinne's lodge. In this area, cornfields were scattered about in the creek bottom. Where the Indians had not cleared the bottom for cultivation, there was brush. In many places it was thick. The banks of the creek, which were sometimes steep, extended ten to twelve feet above the creek bottom, on top of which was an open plain with a scattering of junipers but no heavy timber or thick bushes. About one or two o'clock in the afternoon, Cruse, Byrnes, and the scouts reached the fork. The Apache scouts urged Cruse to take the Verde Trail. John Byrnes, the troop's guide who was suspicious of the scouts, cautioned Cruse to be wary. Cruse decided to wait until Carr's approach, but before Carr arrived, Cruse changed his mind and started his command along the Verde Trail. When Carr reached the fork, he realized Cruse had taken the longer route, having learned the previous night from Mose that Nock-ay-det-klinne lived two or three miles above the Verde Crossing. Carr had thought the Indian scouts just wanted to stay on the Verde Trail to get to water more quickly. He did not know they had stopped to drink when they passed water about two miles back. Rather than take the longer route, Carr sent Hurrle to tell Cruse and his men to take the trail to the right. Cruse’s troop had gone about a third of a mile past the fork when Hurrle reached them and gave Cruse the message. The group switched to the other trail. The scouts seemed dismayed, leading Byrnes to speculate to Cruse that the scouts had been leading the troop into an ambush. Cruse did not report their dissatisfaction to Carr. Several officers who studied the situation later agreed with Byrnes that the scouts had been trying to lead the force into an ambush which the White Mountain Apaches had set up along the creek bottom. Carr had been more concerned with looking for a place to make camp later in the afternoon after he made his arrest. He thought the open area just ahead, next to the creek and just north of the Verde Crossing, would make a good campsite. Before the command changed its direction, there were no Apaches, other than the scouts, in sight. Once it did, natives started to come out of the creek bottom in groups of two and three. Most headed toward Nock-ay-det-klinne's village. When the command was about two miles from the village, the leader of the Carrizo Creek band of the Cibecue Apaches, Sanchez, whose band of about 250 people lived on Carrizo Creek, twelve miles north of Carrizo Crossing, came up from the creek bottom. He was unarmed and riding a white pony. His face was painted red, but that was an ordinary occurrence. Indians frequently came into Fort Apache with painted faces. Sanchez shook hands with Carr and told Hurrle that he was going home. He rode to the rear of the columnn and then back to the creek bottom. Later, when Carr‘s officers and key civilians thought back on the events, they believed Sanchez was counting the soldiers when he rode down their columnn. As Sanchez rode back to the creek bottom, Hurrle told Carr that he was not heading in the right direction to go to his home. Carr then looked back and saw him riding toward the bottom. Carr thought he might be returning to the creek bottom to get some of his family or friends. In any event, Carr did not want to show the natives any signs of distrust. Before the command reached the Cibecue, they stopped on a little knoll to rest. They were about a mile from Nock-ay-det-klinne's camp. As the command approached the point where the trail crossed the Cibecue, the scouts asked Carr to stop and camp before crossing the creek. They said the grass was better on this side and there were cornfields across the creek; the scouts did not want the command's horses and mules to eat the Apaches' corn. Carr responded that he had come a long distance to get Nock-ay-det-klinne before setting up camp. The command continued onward, directed by Chapeau. After crossing the stream, which was not quite belly deep, the force moved the short distance to Nock-ay-det-klinne‘s village. From their approach, the village sat on a low mesa, about twenty feet above the creek bottom and eight to ten feet higher than the plain on that side of the creek. This mesa extended up the creek as far as the men could see. The trail to Nock-ay-det-klinne's lodge ran between the bluff on which the village was situated and the bushes of the creek bottom. Here the path was narrow because the bushes came up against the foot of the bluff. Cruse, Byrnes and the scouts reached Nock-ay-det-klinne’s wickiup ﬁrst. When they arrived, Mose came out with Nock-ay-det-klinne and introduced them. After they shook hands, Cruse told Nock-ay-det-klinne that Carr wanted to see him. The medicine man then asked where Carr was. Cruse said he was on his way. Carr soon arrived with his troops. As Carr prepared to leave Nock-ay-det-klinne‘s camp, he told his officers the command was going to proceed down the creek to find a camping place. He knew almost exactly where they were going to camp since he had noted the ground at the Verde Crossing earlier that day. He directed Troop D to follow behind him, then the pack train, followed by Nock-ay-det-klinne and his guard, then Troop E. Carr ordered Cruse, with his Apache scouts, to travel beside Nock-ay-det-klinne. Byrnes and the officers’ suspicions of the scouts had diminished somewhat because they appeared altogether indifferent about the taking of the medicine man. Carr turned his command around, by file, to leave the area. Only one native showed some signs of hostility. He was about one hundred yards from Nock-ay-det-klinne’s lodge. He was totally naked, obviously drunk on tizwin. As Carr left, he had the bugler sound the call to forward. His headquarters staff, Troop D, and the pack train followed directly behind him. At that point, a break in his columnn occurred. Nock-ay-det-klinne delayed the rest of the columnn while he got his personal belongings and a horse, and then entered his lodge and began to eat. When First Lieutenant William Stanton realized what was happening, he urged Sergeant McDonald to move out with his prisoner at once. McDonald got Nock-ay-det-klinne to mount his horse and move forward. During this delay of about ten minutes, Carr and the front half of his command followed the trail through its narrow part, then disappeared around a sharp turn and entered the heavy growth of cottonwood trees, high willows, and underbrush in the Creek bottom. The sharp turn, which was on the trail they had come in on, was about a quarter of a mile from Nock-ay-det-klinne's camp. About when Carr turned toward the creek, a scout named Sergeant Dead Shot came up to him and complained that the guard would not let Nock-ay-det-klinne's friends travel with him. Carr said that some of his friends could come in and see him after camp was made. Dead Shot returned to his company. Carr and the group traveling with him followed the trail through the creek bottom, winding in and out of the trees. It was about two hundred yards from the sharp turn to the point where the trail crossed the creek. At the creek, Carr had the bugler sound the water call. The trail was rather steep, and the soldiers had to crowd into the river to water their stock and go up the bank single file. After passing through the creek bottom, Carr left the trail he had been following. He turned south on an old trail that went around the growth, past an old ranch, and down the east side of the creek to the campsite he observed earlier. The campground was about two miles south of Nock-ay-det-klinne's lodge. Aside from the Indian scout that he took with them, Carr was also joined by famed scouts Al Sieber and Tom Horn. As the latter half of Carr's command waited for Nock-ay-det-klinne to get ready, about fifteen armed Apaches approached. As the columnn departed, Cruse and Byrnes were in front, followed by the guard and Nock-ay-det-klinne, with the scouts in front and behind them, then Troop E. Before this group reached the narrow portion of the trail, more Apaches came up from down the creek and also moved along with them. All the natives were armed; most were mounted. As a precaution, while Cruse, the scouts, and Nock-ay-det-klinne and his guard stayed on the trail, which was on the flat below the mesa, Stanton and his men turned to the right and went up on the mesa and passed through the village. There Stanton saw many women and children but few men. He traveled about 300 yards on the plateau of the mesa before descending back to the flat. At the start of the sharp turn in the trail, an old trail departed from it and ran down the west side of the creek. While Stanton was on top of the mesa, Cruse inadvertently missed the turn and took the old trail. Shortly thereafter, Stanton and his troop came down to the flat and united with Cruse’s party. Stanton and Cruse discussed missing the turn. When they talked about it with the scouts, they said there was a better crossing a short distance downstream. The two men decided to continue to the better crossing. After the two officers conversed, Stanton and his troop marched on Cruse’s flank. As they moved down the creek, several more parties of armed natives from downstream came up and traveled with their columnn. Others came out from the adjacent bluffs and ravines. They crowded around Nock-ay-det-klinne and his guard and Troop E. As each new party arrived, there was hurried conversation and excited talking. Generally, when the Apache fought, they stripped off all their clothes except their breechclouts. Most of the followers who arrived were wearing only a breechclout and a belt of cartridges. As the skirmish erupted and as suspected, the scouts mutinied. The attacking Apaches mostly kept their distance so the battle was fought mainly at rifle range. However, when the scouts turned against the soldiers, a brief close range engagement occurred. Hentig was shot in the back and the bullet passed through to his heart killing him instantly. He was the first killed. Pvt. John Sullivan was still mounted on his horse and was shot through the head, killing him instantly. He was the 6th man killed. Scouts under Sieber and Horn however, have managed to get on top of a small hill. The scouts then repulsed the Apaches with their rifles, rescuing the cavalry, before giving them support as they finally launch a counter-attack that killed many of the Indians. As night fell, Carr queried his officers, Byrnes, the chief packer, and others for their opinion about what to do next. Carr also saw no object in remaining. He decided it was best to get back to Fort Apache as soon as practicable. From the dispatch he had received from Cochran that morning, he knew there was great alarm at the fort. He also knew that a few hostiles could set up an effective ambush along the trail back to the post, and any wait would give them more time to do so. After dark, the soldiers gathered the bodies of the dead. Hampered by the darkness and the high brush, they could not find Private Miller, who had been killed in the creek bottom. Carr directed that a broad grave be dug under his tent to bury the corpses. The grave was widened twice, for Privates Sonderegger and Bird, who died while it was being dug. After burying their comrades, the soldiers needed time to get supper, arrange the packs, and pack the mules. Since there were not enough mules remaining to carry all their supplies and march rapidly, some items had to be left behind. They left flour, bacon, canned goods, saddles, aparejos, and other equipment of the pack train. Preference was given to leaving the goods belonging to Cruse’s scout company. Before leaving, they cut the flour bags and spread the flour on the ground. They destroyed all other goods and equipment that were to remain. All serviceable arms and ammunition that could be found were taken. The force left the battle site about 11:00 pm. Since the Apaches had stolen about half their horses, most of the men of Troop D had to walk. Carr placed Cruse in charge of the advance guard, which consisted of Mose, as guide, and some dismounted men of Troop D. Carr, Carter, and the headquarters staff, along with the remainder of Troop D, came next. Then came the pack train with the ammunition and other supplies and Troop E with the three wounded men under McCreery's care. Stanton was with the rear guard, which was composed of six or eight men. The wounded men were Private Baege, shot in the shoulder; Private Thomas J. F. Foran, shot through the intestines and bowels; and Sergeant John McDonald, shot in the leg. They rode on horses with men behind them to hold and steady them in their saddles. These attendants were relieved every few minutes. Before the command reached Fort Apache, probably when it was near Cedar Creek, it met two prospectors on the trail. They told Carr that only one native named Severiano had preceded them toward the fort. The columnn arrived back at Fort Apache at about 3:00 pm. On the military side, seven soldiers were killed and two wounded, and forty-two horses and seven pack mules were killed, wounded, or missing. All the men who had been struck belonged to Troop D, except McDonald, who was detailed from Troop E. Byrnes killed the wounded Nock-ay-det-klinne under Carr’s orders, he was one of eighteen Apaches killed in the engagement. Carr estimated that fewer than sixty natives, including the scouts, attacked his command at the onset of the battle and fewer than 200 fought his force at any time during the fight. Almost all damage done to his command occurred in the first volleys, while the Apaches were close to their camp. The bullets passed through the bodies of all the killed and wounded. Until the moment before the attack, all the officers with the command thought the Apaches' conduct was docile. The battle ended with a strategic Apache victory, despite their inability to rescue their leader, due to the soldiers retreat. After the battle, the American army buried six soldiers, Nochaydelklinne, his wife, and young son, who was killed while riding into battle on his father's pony. One dead soldier was never found in the dark, and another died of his wounds the following day. Two United States Army troops were reported to have been wounded. Colonel Carr made it back to Fort Apache with most of his remaining force intact; two days later the Apaches attacked the fort in retaliation for the death of the medicine man. Four United States soldiers were decorated with the Medal of Honor for their actions during the hostilities. The Cibecue affair touched off a regional Apache uprising, in which the leading warriors of the Chiricahua and Warm Springs Apache, such as Naiche, Juh, and Geronimo, left the reservation. They went to war, trying to drive out the European Americans in Arizona, New Mexico, and northern Mexico. The warfare lasted about two years, ultimately ending in the US defeat of the Apache.	<urn:uuid:b864ed78-f93d-49a6-98a0-90e7f2a1b451>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.theclio.com/entry/17319	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251773463.72/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128030221-20200128060221-00533.warc.gz	en	0.984879	5,162	3.578125	4	[ -0.18238165974617004, 0.19272516667842865, 0.1428220123052597, 0.29637354612350464, -0.1710951328277588, -0.24151186645030975, 0.19375669956207275, 0.16859276592731476, -0.4324893057346344, -0.04142407327890396, 0.16862744092941284, -0.2784034013748169, -0.023484723642468452, 0.13182730972...	2	Near this location the Battle of Cibecue Creek was fought in August 30, 1881 between the United States and White Mountain Apaches in Arizona, at Cibecue Creek on the Fort Apache Indian Reservation. After an army expedition of scouts and soldiers arrested a prominent medicine man, they were taking the prisoner back to the fort when ambushed by hostile Apaches. During the conflict, soldiers killed the wounded medicine man, and most of the twenty-three Apache scouts mutinied, in the largest such action in United States history. The soldiers retreated to Fort Apache and on the following day, the Apache mounted a counterattack. The events sparked general unrest and led Apache warriors to leave the reservation and join Geronimo. PRELUDE TO BATTLE: Nock-ay-det-klinne was a respected Apache medicine man among his people and chief of the Cañon Creek band of the Cibecue Apaches, a group of the Western Apache. He often counseled leading warriors such as Cochise and Geronimo. Due to corruption and unhealthy conditions at the Fort Apache Indian Reservation in eastern Arizona, Nock-ay-det-klinne began holding ceremonies known as ghost dances at the village of Cibecue. It was part of a late nineteenth-century spiritual revival among native Americans struggling to deal with the disruption of their societies as they were pushed onto reservations. The ceremonies often included heavy drinking and the use of hallucinogenic plants, such as peyote. Through them the Apache expressed and united under their discontent with conditions of reservation life. The American settlers of the region grew alarmed about the dances, which they thought were related to preparations for war. The United States Army came to investigate the situation and remove the medicine man from his followers. The soldiers stationed at Fort Apache included Troops D and E, 6th Cavalry; Company D, 12th Infantry; and Company A, Indian scouts. Captain Edmund Clarence Hentig was transferred to Fort Apache in 1876. He was the Captain and commanded company D. Second Lieutenant Thomas Cruse commanded Company A. Of his twenty-five scouts, twelve were from Chief Pedro's band and thirteen were Cibecue Apache; Nock-ay-det-klinne was one of their own chiefs and medicine men. With the permission of the military, the scouts serving with the troops often attended Nock-ay-det-klinne’s dances near Fort Apache. On about August 10, Colonel Eugene Asa Carr asked Cruse for his opinion of the loyalty of the scouts. Cruse had noticed their changes in attitude and conduct. He also told Carr that the main participants in any local uprising would be friends and relatives of the scouts and, even if the scouts did not turn against the military, they would be of no use in conflict. Most officers at the post and Sam Bowman had the same opinion. Permission was granted for the discharge, but the telegraph line went down before Carr received it. He did not hear from the department for two and a half weeks, after he and his troops had returned from being ambushed at the Cibecue. Routinely, every Sunday morning the officers inspected the scout company. Carr directed Cruse to take the scouts’ guns after the August 14 inspection. Cruse was to tell the scouts that he would keep their arms in his office to protect them from the rain. The guns were regularly kept in the orderly room; the officers issued them only to men on herd duty, soldiers and scouts sent out on detached service, and to all men on Saturday evenings for Sunday morning inspections. The scouts took the removal of the guns as a sign of distrust, but Cruse tried to have the interpreter smooth the matter over, and thought they were satisfied. Carr decided to take his cavalry and Cruse’s scouts to the Cibecue and leave the infantry at Fort Apache. He did not feel comfortable bringing the scouts but had little choice. On Sunday morning, August 28, shortly after the scout Chapeau returned to Fort Apache without Nock-ay-det-klinne, Carr told Cruse to let the scouts keep their guns after their inspection and to prepare to leave the next morning to arrest the medicine man. John Byrnes, a Dublin-born Irishman assigned to Company A, knew of the respect which the Apache scouts had for Nock-ay-det-klinne and was alarmed. Byrnes warned Cruse that the scouts should not be armed, as they could not be trusted. Byrnes had earlier counseled Carr against permitting the scouts to keep their guns. Cruse told Byrnes he was acting under Carr's orders. About 10:00 am the next day, Carr left Fort Apache with five officers, seventy-nine enlisted soldiers from Troops D and E, 6th Cavalry, and twenty-three scouts from Company A, to make the arrest. Cruse took Byrnes as his guide. Carr also took Charles Hurrle, interpreter; Charles Nat Nobles, chief packer; one cargador, the principal assistant to the chief packer,; four packers; and Clark Carr. Sixty soldiers, mostly of Company D, 12th Infantry, and several civilians remained at Fort Apache, with Major Cochran in command of the post. Just before they left. Carr scribbled a message for General Willcox: I sent word to Nock-ay-det-klinne that l wanted to see him. He does not seem likely to come and I am searching for his place on Cibicu to try to catch him. Because the telegraph line was down, Willcox did not receive the message until three days later. It was not generally known that an expedition to Nock-ay-det-klinne's camp was planned. Carr had been secretive about the purpose and destination of the march. The scouts were not told which way to go until the force was moving out. After they were notified they were going out on a march, the scouts suspected the destination was the Cibecue. After the columnn crossed the White River, just outside Fort Apache, and reached the mesa on the other side, some Apaches living along the river rode up and spoke to the scouts. Carr called these natives and the scouts together and told them where the command was going and what he was going to do. He said he was not going to hurt Nock-ay-det-klinne, but wanted him to come in with him. He told the curious natives to go and tell their friends not to be alarmed as he was not going to bother them and there would be no trouble. Stanton were ordered out on a scout under Colonel Eugene A. Carr, directed to go to Cibecue Creek and arrest the medicine man. The command arrested the Indian then camped for the night on Cibecue Creek, despite the general excitement the operation had aroused among Apache followers of the medicine man. Carr took the Verde Trail to the Cibecue. Although this was the shortest route, the trail was rough, passing through mountainous country covered mostly with timber. The trail may have been boggy at places, but the region was then in the third day of a nine-day period without rain. On the first day, Carr and his battalion traveled about twenty-nine miles. They were winding through deep canyons with rocky sides. They camped for the night in a canyon where the trail crossed Carrizo Creek. That evening, after supper, Carr issued each scout twenty rounds of ammunition. About one and a half miles from the Cibecue and three miles from Nock-ay-det-klinne‘s village, a trail branched from the Verde Trail. This secondary trail ran diagonally up the valley, across high, open ground, through a grassy slope that stretched from the hills to the timber along the Cibecue. It was the shorter route to Nock-ay-det-klinne's village. From this fork, the Verde Trail crossed rocky and rolling country directly to Cibecue Creek. The place where it crossed the creek was known as the Verde Crossing. On the other side of the creek another secondary trail ran up the creek, just outside the bushes and undergrowth of the creek bottom, to Nock-ay-det-klinne's lodge. In this area, cornfields were scattered about in the creek bottom. Where the Indians had not cleared the bottom for cultivation, there was brush. In many places it was thick. The banks of the creek, which were sometimes steep, extended ten to twelve feet above the creek bottom, on top of which was an open plain with a scattering of junipers but no heavy timber or thick bushes. About one or two o'clock in the afternoon, Cruse, Byrnes, and the scouts reached the fork. The Apache scouts urged Cruse to take the Verde Trail. John Byrnes, the troop's guide who was suspicious of the scouts, cautioned Cruse to be wary. Cruse decided to wait until Carr's approach, but before Carr arrived, Cruse changed his mind and started his command along the Verde Trail. When Carr reached the fork, he realized Cruse had taken the longer route, having learned the previous night from Mose that Nock-ay-det-klinne lived two or three miles above the Verde Crossing. Carr had thought the Indian scouts just wanted to stay on the Verde Trail to get to water more quickly. He did not know they had stopped to drink when they passed water about two miles back. Rather than take the longer route, Carr sent Hurrle to tell Cruse and his men to take the trail to the right. Cruse’s troop had gone about a third of a mile past the fork when Hurrle reached them and gave Cruse the message. The group switched to the other trail. The scouts seemed dismayed, leading Byrnes to speculate to Cruse that the scouts had been leading the troop into an ambush. Cruse did not report their dissatisfaction to Carr. Several officers who studied the situation later agreed with Byrnes that the scouts had been trying to lead the force into an ambush which the White Mountain Apaches had set up along the creek bottom. Carr had been more concerned with looking for a place to make camp later in the afternoon after he made his arrest. He thought the open area just ahead, next to the creek and just north of the Verde Crossing, would make a good campsite. Before the command changed its direction, there were no Apaches, other than the scouts, in sight. Once it did, natives started to come out of the creek bottom in groups of two and three. Most headed toward Nock-ay-det-klinne's village. When the command was about two miles from the village, the leader of the Carrizo Creek band of the Cibecue Apaches, Sanchez, whose band of about 250 people lived on Carrizo Creek, twelve miles north of Carrizo Crossing, came up from the creek bottom. He was unarmed and riding a white pony. His face was painted red, but that was an ordinary occurrence. Indians frequently came into Fort Apache with painted faces. Sanchez shook hands with Carr and told Hurrle that he was going home. He rode to the rear of the columnn and then back to the creek bottom. Later, when Carr‘s officers and key civilians thought back on the events, they believed Sanchez was counting the soldiers when he rode down their columnn. As Sanchez rode back to the creek bottom, Hurrle told Carr that he was not heading in the right direction to go to his home. Carr then looked back and saw him riding toward the bottom. Carr thought he might be returning to the creek bottom to get some of his family or friends. In any event, Carr did not want to show the natives any signs of distrust. Before the command reached the Cibecue, they stopped on a little knoll to rest. They were about a mile from Nock-ay-det-klinne's camp. As the command approached the point where the trail crossed the Cibecue, the scouts asked Carr to stop and camp before crossing the creek. They said the grass was better on this side and there were cornfields across the creek; the scouts did not want the command's horses and mules to eat the Apaches' corn. Carr responded that he had come a long distance to get Nock-ay-det-klinne before setting up camp. The command continued onward, directed by Chapeau. After crossing the stream, which was not quite belly deep, the force moved the short distance to Nock-ay-det-klinne‘s village. From their approach, the village sat on a low mesa, about twenty feet above the creek bottom and eight to ten feet higher than the plain on that side of the creek. This mesa extended up the creek as far as the men could see. The trail to Nock-ay-det-klinne's lodge ran between the bluff on which the village was situated and the bushes of the creek bottom. Here the path was narrow because the bushes came up against the foot of the bluff. Cruse, Byrnes and the scouts reached Nock-ay-det-klinne’s wickiup ﬁrst. When they arrived, Mose came out with Nock-ay-det-klinne and introduced them. After they shook hands, Cruse told Nock-ay-det-klinne that Carr wanted to see him. The medicine man then asked where Carr was. Cruse said he was on his way. Carr soon arrived with his troops. As Carr prepared to leave Nock-ay-det-klinne‘s camp, he told his officers the command was going to proceed down the creek to find a camping place. He knew almost exactly where they were going to camp since he had noted the ground at the Verde Crossing earlier that day. He directed Troop D to follow behind him, then the pack train, followed by Nock-ay-det-klinne and his guard, then Troop E. Carr ordered Cruse, with his Apache scouts, to travel beside Nock-ay-det-klinne. Byrnes and the officers’ suspicions of the scouts had diminished somewhat because they appeared altogether indifferent about the taking of the medicine man. Carr turned his command around, by file, to leave the area. Only one native showed some signs of hostility. He was about one hundred yards from Nock-ay-det-klinne’s lodge. He was totally naked, obviously drunk on tizwin. As Carr left, he had the bugler sound the call to forward. His headquarters staff, Troop D, and the pack train followed directly behind him. At that point, a break in his columnn occurred. Nock-ay-det-klinne delayed the rest of the columnn while he got his personal belongings and a horse, and then entered his lodge and began to eat. When First Lieutenant William Stanton realized what was happening, he urged Sergeant McDonald to move out with his prisoner at once. McDonald got Nock-ay-det-klinne to mount his horse and move forward. During this delay of about ten minutes, Carr and the front half of his command followed the trail through its narrow part, then disappeared around a sharp turn and entered the heavy growth of cottonwood trees, high willows, and underbrush in the Creek bottom. The sharp turn, which was on the trail they had come in on, was about a quarter of a mile from Nock-ay-det-klinne's camp. About when Carr turned toward the creek, a scout named Sergeant Dead Shot came up to him and complained that the guard would not let Nock-ay-det-klinne's friends travel with him. Carr said that some of his friends could come in and see him after camp was made. Dead Shot returned to his company. Carr and the group traveling with him followed the trail through the creek bottom, winding in and out of the trees. It was about two hundred yards from the sharp turn to the point where the trail crossed the creek. At the creek, Carr had the bugler sound the water call. The trail was rather steep, and the soldiers had to crowd into the river to water their stock and go up the bank single file. After passing through the creek bottom, Carr left the trail he had been following. He turned south on an old trail that went around the growth, past an old ranch, and down the east side of the creek to the campsite he observed earlier. The campground was about two miles south of Nock-ay-det-klinne's lodge. Aside from the Indian scout that he took with them, Carr was also joined by famed scouts Al Sieber and Tom Horn. As the latter half of Carr's command waited for Nock-ay-det-klinne to get ready, about fifteen armed Apaches approached. As the columnn departed, Cruse and Byrnes were in front, followed by the guard and Nock-ay-det-klinne, with the scouts in front and behind them, then Troop E. Before this group reached the narrow portion of the trail, more Apaches came up from down the creek and also moved along with them. All the natives were armed; most were mounted. As a precaution, while Cruse, the scouts, and Nock-ay-det-klinne and his guard stayed on the trail, which was on the flat below the mesa, Stanton and his men turned to the right and went up on the mesa and passed through the village. There Stanton saw many women and children but few men. He traveled about 300 yards on the plateau of the mesa before descending back to the flat. At the start of the sharp turn in the trail, an old trail departed from it and ran down the west side of the creek. While Stanton was on top of the mesa, Cruse inadvertently missed the turn and took the old trail. Shortly thereafter, Stanton and his troop came down to the flat and united with Cruse’s party. Stanton and Cruse discussed missing the turn. When they talked about it with the scouts, they said there was a better crossing a short distance downstream. The two men decided to continue to the better crossing. After the two officers conversed, Stanton and his troop marched on Cruse’s flank. As they moved down the creek, several more parties of armed natives from downstream came up and traveled with their columnn. Others came out from the adjacent bluffs and ravines. They crowded around Nock-ay-det-klinne and his guard and Troop E. As each new party arrived, there was hurried conversation and excited talking. Generally, when the Apache fought, they stripped off all their clothes except their breechclouts. Most of the followers who arrived were wearing only a breechclout and a belt of cartridges. As the skirmish erupted and as suspected, the scouts mutinied. The attacking Apaches mostly kept their distance so the battle was fought mainly at rifle range. However, when the scouts turned against the soldiers, a brief close range engagement occurred. Hentig was shot in the back and the bullet passed through to his heart killing him instantly. He was the first killed. Pvt. John Sullivan was still mounted on his horse and was shot through the head, killing him instantly. He was the 6th man killed. Scouts under Sieber and Horn however, have managed to get on top of a small hill. The scouts then repulsed the Apaches with their rifles, rescuing the cavalry, before giving them support as they finally launch a counter-attack that killed many of the Indians. As night fell, Carr queried his officers, Byrnes, the chief packer, and others for their opinion about what to do next. Carr also saw no object in remaining. He decided it was best to get back to Fort Apache as soon as practicable. From the dispatch he had received from Cochran that morning, he knew there was great alarm at the fort. He also knew that a few hostiles could set up an effective ambush along the trail back to the post, and any wait would give them more time to do so. After dark, the soldiers gathered the bodies of the dead. Hampered by the darkness and the high brush, they could not find Private Miller, who had been killed in the creek bottom. Carr directed that a broad grave be dug under his tent to bury the corpses. The grave was widened twice, for Privates Sonderegger and Bird, who died while it was being dug. After burying their comrades, the soldiers needed time to get supper, arrange the packs, and pack the mules. Since there were not enough mules remaining to carry all their supplies and march rapidly, some items had to be left behind. They left flour, bacon, canned goods, saddles, aparejos, and other equipment of the pack train. Preference was given to leaving the goods belonging to Cruse’s scout company. Before leaving, they cut the flour bags and spread the flour on the ground. They destroyed all other goods and equipment that were to remain. All serviceable arms and ammunition that could be found were taken. The force left the battle site about 11:00 pm. Since the Apaches had stolen about half their horses, most of the men of Troop D had to walk. Carr placed Cruse in charge of the advance guard, which consisted of Mose, as guide, and some dismounted men of Troop D. Carr, Carter, and the headquarters staff, along with the remainder of Troop D, came next. Then came the pack train with the ammunition and other supplies and Troop E with the three wounded men under McCreery's care. Stanton was with the rear guard, which was composed of six or eight men. The wounded men were Private Baege, shot in the shoulder; Private Thomas J. F. Foran, shot through the intestines and bowels; and Sergeant John McDonald, shot in the leg. They rode on horses with men behind them to hold and steady them in their saddles. These attendants were relieved every few minutes. Before the command reached Fort Apache, probably when it was near Cedar Creek, it met two prospectors on the trail. They told Carr that only one native named Severiano had preceded them toward the fort. The columnn arrived back at Fort Apache at about 3:00 pm. On the military side, seven soldiers were killed and two wounded, and forty-two horses and seven pack mules were killed, wounded, or missing. All the men who had been struck belonged to Troop D, except McDonald, who was detailed from Troop E. Byrnes killed the wounded Nock-ay-det-klinne under Carr’s orders, he was one of eighteen Apaches killed in the engagement. Carr estimated that fewer than sixty natives, including the scouts, attacked his command at the onset of the battle and fewer than 200 fought his force at any time during the fight. Almost all damage done to his command occurred in the first volleys, while the Apaches were close to their camp. The bullets passed through the bodies of all the killed and wounded. Until the moment before the attack, all the officers with the command thought the Apaches' conduct was docile. The battle ended with a strategic Apache victory, despite their inability to rescue their leader, due to the soldiers retreat. After the battle, the American army buried six soldiers, Nochaydelklinne, his wife, and young son, who was killed while riding into battle on his father's pony. One dead soldier was never found in the dark, and another died of his wounds the following day. Two United States Army troops were reported to have been wounded. Colonel Carr made it back to Fort Apache with most of his remaining force intact; two days later the Apaches attacked the fort in retaliation for the death of the medicine man. Four United States soldiers were decorated with the Medal of Honor for their actions during the hostilities. The Cibecue affair touched off a regional Apache uprising, in which the leading warriors of the Chiricahua and Warm Springs Apache, such as Naiche, Juh, and Geronimo, left the reservation. They went to war, trying to drive out the European Americans in Arizona, New Mexico, and northern Mexico. The warfare lasted about two years, ultimately ending in the US defeat of the Apache.	5,039	ENGLISH	1
Researchers found that kids' genes and their parents' education and wealth were big predictors of school success. They analysed data from 5,000 children born in the U.K. between 1994 and 1996, including test results at key stages of their education and their parents' wealth and levels of education. The results suggest that while genes have a significant effect on academic success, having wealthy, highly educated parents is even more important. While 47% of kids with a high genetic propensity for education but poorer parents made it to university, the rate was 62% among those with a low genetic propensity but wealthier parents. Kids with both a high genetic propensity and wealthy, well-educated parents had the greatest advantage – with 77% going to university. The rate was 21% among children who had both low genetic propensity and poorer families. The findings, published recently in the journal Developmental Science, could help identify kids who are at greatest risk of poor educational outcomes, according to the study authors. "Genetics and socioeconomic status capture the effects of both nature and nurture, and their influence is particularly dramatic for children at the extreme ends of distribution," said lead author Sophie von Stumm, professor of psychology in education at the University of York in the U.K. "However, our study also highlights the potentially protective effect of a privileged background. Having a genetic makeup that makes you more inclined to education does make a child from a disadvantaged background more likely to go to university, but not as likely as a child with a lower genetic propensity from a more advantaged background," she added in a university news release. von Stumm noted that the findings are observational and suggest that kids don't have equal opportunity in education because of their different genetics and family backgrounds. "Where you come from has a huge impact on how well you do in school," she said in the release.	<urn:uuid:16ff63ce-b19e-40b6-a792-5a9476331138>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.health24.com/Medical/Genetics/News/could-genes-and-family-be-key-predictors-of-school-success-20191229	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251671078.88/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125071430-20200125100430-00469.warc.gz	en	0.981011	380	3.34375	3	[ 0.2609764039516449, 0.17158685624599457, 0.1423332244157791, -0.29650449752807617, 0.05134877189993858, 0.43002453446388245, -0.25281238555908203, 0.09024186432361603, 0.014382993802428246, 0.03134329989552498, 0.23921890556812286, 0.09828759729862213, 0.3015654981136322, 0.098920561373233...	3	Researchers found that kids' genes and their parents' education and wealth were big predictors of school success. They analysed data from 5,000 children born in the U.K. between 1994 and 1996, including test results at key stages of their education and their parents' wealth and levels of education. The results suggest that while genes have a significant effect on academic success, having wealthy, highly educated parents is even more important. While 47% of kids with a high genetic propensity for education but poorer parents made it to university, the rate was 62% among those with a low genetic propensity but wealthier parents. Kids with both a high genetic propensity and wealthy, well-educated parents had the greatest advantage – with 77% going to university. The rate was 21% among children who had both low genetic propensity and poorer families. The findings, published recently in the journal Developmental Science, could help identify kids who are at greatest risk of poor educational outcomes, according to the study authors. "Genetics and socioeconomic status capture the effects of both nature and nurture, and their influence is particularly dramatic for children at the extreme ends of distribution," said lead author Sophie von Stumm, professor of psychology in education at the University of York in the U.K. "However, our study also highlights the potentially protective effect of a privileged background. Having a genetic makeup that makes you more inclined to education does make a child from a disadvantaged background more likely to go to university, but not as likely as a child with a lower genetic propensity from a more advantaged background," she added in a university news release. von Stumm noted that the findings are observational and suggest that kids don't have equal opportunity in education because of their different genetics and family backgrounds. "Where you come from has a huge impact on how well you do in school," she said in the release.	387	ENGLISH	1
Benin was a large and varied kingdom. Some people lived in villages and small towns, but most people lived and worked in Benin City. The most important person in the kingdom was the king, known as the Oba. Hundreds of men and women lived at the royal court, and devoted their lives to looking after the Oba and his family. Some people at court had very special jobs, working as acrobats, sorcerers or leopard hunters. Most people in the countryside worked as farmers but there were also potters and blacksmiths. They made simple pots, weapons and tools for the villagers.The people of Benin traded with merchants from Europe and with other African kingdoms. Instead of using money they exchanged goods. Many people in Benin lived in villages in the rainforest. They cleared away the trees to grow vegetables and they built their houses from mud, wood and palm leaves. Benin was famous for its craft workers. Specialists in a craft (like ivory-carvers) formed groups called guilds. All the members of a guild lived and worked together. There were more than 40 guilds in Benin City and each guild had to perform a special duty for the Oba. Not all the guilds were for craft workers. Doctors, drummers, acrobats and dancers had their own guilds too. Men from all over the kingdom served the Oba as soldiers. Warriors went into battle armed with swords, spears and crossbows, and by the 1600s they had guns as well. Some brave boys trained as hunters. They started their training very young and the bravest of all became elephant hunters.	<urn:uuid:68cb34d3-31e3-4010-b1ea-cc348360ba63>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.birchwoodprimary.co.uk/wow-7/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250607118.51/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122131612-20200122160612-00527.warc.gz	en	0.993708	338	3.4375	3	[ -0.15106721222400665, 0.5556478500366211, 0.4403853118419647, -0.4503532350063324, -0.24548904597759247, -0.3410298228263855, 0.5976611375808716, -0.10381833463907242, -0.25115275382995605, -0.007965161465108395, -0.0687224417924881, -0.6882895231246948, 0.21199724078178406, 0.182886540889...	4	Benin was a large and varied kingdom. Some people lived in villages and small towns, but most people lived and worked in Benin City. The most important person in the kingdom was the king, known as the Oba. Hundreds of men and women lived at the royal court, and devoted their lives to looking after the Oba and his family. Some people at court had very special jobs, working as acrobats, sorcerers or leopard hunters. Most people in the countryside worked as farmers but there were also potters and blacksmiths. They made simple pots, weapons and tools for the villagers.The people of Benin traded with merchants from Europe and with other African kingdoms. Instead of using money they exchanged goods. Many people in Benin lived in villages in the rainforest. They cleared away the trees to grow vegetables and they built their houses from mud, wood and palm leaves. Benin was famous for its craft workers. Specialists in a craft (like ivory-carvers) formed groups called guilds. All the members of a guild lived and worked together. There were more than 40 guilds in Benin City and each guild had to perform a special duty for the Oba. Not all the guilds were for craft workers. Doctors, drummers, acrobats and dancers had their own guilds too. Men from all over the kingdom served the Oba as soldiers. Warriors went into battle armed with swords, spears and crossbows, and by the 1600s they had guns as well. Some brave boys trained as hunters. They started their training very young and the bravest of all became elephant hunters.	337	ENGLISH	1
Comparing John Proctor and Arthur Dimmesdale John Proctor and Arthur Dimmesdale are exceptionally similar characters despite the fact that each was written about in very different eras. Both characters lived in the same time period, however, The Scarlet Letter was written in the late 1800’s, and The Crucible was written in the 1950’s. One cannot look at the qualities of Proctor and Dimmesdale without discussing each author and the time period in which each story was written. Despite minor differences, Proctor and Dimmesdale are very similar characters. Proctor and Dimmesdale both live in late 17th century New England. This is a time when religion is the only basis of government and moral standards. Everyone believes so deeply in the Bible. Both Proctor and Dimmesdale are high figures in their respective societies. Dimmesdale is the minister in his town, and Proctor is a highly respected townsman. In addition to the similarities in their personalities, Proctor and Dimmesdale are very similar in their physical characteristics. Both men are roughly thirty years old. They are both tall, attractive, and in good physical condition. Both men have also committed a sin. They have committed adultery. Dimmesdale has had sex with Hester Prynne, a woman in the town who has a husband back in England, and Proctor has engaged in sexual congress with Abigail Williams, who had previously been Proctor’s servant. Both men, due to their high stature in their respective communities, must keep their sins concealed from the public. Dimmesdale is the minister of the town, and therefore, the moral leader of the people. Every Sunday, he leads the townspeople in worship and tells them to confess their sins. If people knew that he had committed adultery, not only would his image and name have been destroyed, the judicial punishment would have been death. Proctor, who is very religious but does not attend Church regularly, will lose his status in the eyes of the townsmen if his sin is revealed to them. Proctor does not attend Church because he does not like the minister in his town. It has nothing to do with his involvement in the religion. He would be banished from the community, as would his family, and his name would be destroyed. Proctor and Dimmesdale, despite having very similar personalities, were written about in extremely different time periods. The Crucible was written in the 1950’s, at a time when many people were McCarthyists. McCarthyism was a belief that the United States should be purified of all people who were involved with Communism. Anyone who was suspected of being communistic could have been arrested. Miller wrote The Crucible at this time to show the American people the ignorance of their acts. The Americans in the 1950’s were behaving almost exactly like the 17th century townspeople in The Crucible. Miller made his point by demonstrating to the Americans the absurdity of their actions using the ridiculous witch-hunts. One...	<urn:uuid:099e43ec-1079-4f5d-a568-4c883939638d>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://brightkite.com/essay-on/comparing-john-proctor-and-arthur-dimmesdale-through-the-scarlet-letter	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251705142.94/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127174507-20200127204507-00322.warc.gz	en	0.990901	618	3.3125	3	[ -0.1596279889345169, 0.21207788586616516, 0.10748100280761719, -0.013687344267964363, -0.4436946213245392, 0.26879802346229553, 0.13315895199775696, 0.005644551943987608, 0.12357506155967712, -0.40817907452583313, -0.473978191614151, -0.0636269599199295, 0.5161392688751221, 0.0005428747972...	1	Comparing John Proctor and Arthur Dimmesdale John Proctor and Arthur Dimmesdale are exceptionally similar characters despite the fact that each was written about in very different eras. Both characters lived in the same time period, however, The Scarlet Letter was written in the late 1800’s, and The Crucible was written in the 1950’s. One cannot look at the qualities of Proctor and Dimmesdale without discussing each author and the time period in which each story was written. Despite minor differences, Proctor and Dimmesdale are very similar characters. Proctor and Dimmesdale both live in late 17th century New England. This is a time when religion is the only basis of government and moral standards. Everyone believes so deeply in the Bible. Both Proctor and Dimmesdale are high figures in their respective societies. Dimmesdale is the minister in his town, and Proctor is a highly respected townsman. In addition to the similarities in their personalities, Proctor and Dimmesdale are very similar in their physical characteristics. Both men are roughly thirty years old. They are both tall, attractive, and in good physical condition. Both men have also committed a sin. They have committed adultery. Dimmesdale has had sex with Hester Prynne, a woman in the town who has a husband back in England, and Proctor has engaged in sexual congress with Abigail Williams, who had previously been Proctor’s servant. Both men, due to their high stature in their respective communities, must keep their sins concealed from the public. Dimmesdale is the minister of the town, and therefore, the moral leader of the people. Every Sunday, he leads the townspeople in worship and tells them to confess their sins. If people knew that he had committed adultery, not only would his image and name have been destroyed, the judicial punishment would have been death. Proctor, who is very religious but does not attend Church regularly, will lose his status in the eyes of the townsmen if his sin is revealed to them. Proctor does not attend Church because he does not like the minister in his town. It has nothing to do with his involvement in the religion. He would be banished from the community, as would his family, and his name would be destroyed. Proctor and Dimmesdale, despite having very similar personalities, were written about in extremely different time periods. The Crucible was written in the 1950’s, at a time when many people were McCarthyists. McCarthyism was a belief that the United States should be purified of all people who were involved with Communism. Anyone who was suspected of being communistic could have been arrested. Miller wrote The Crucible at this time to show the American people the ignorance of their acts. The Americans in the 1950’s were behaving almost exactly like the 17th century townspeople in The Crucible. Miller made his point by demonstrating to the Americans the absurdity of their actions using the ridiculous witch-hunts. One...	627	ENGLISH	1
Artist David Adickes designed this 67-foot tall sculpture of Texas leaders Sam Houston. The monument honors Houston's leadership during the Texas Revolution and his defeat of Mexican General Santa Anna. The statue is named “A Tribute to Courage” and is the second largest freestanding statue in the U.S., second only to New York's Statue of Liberty. The statue was created in 1994 and is located next to the Huntsville Visitors Center, who advertise the monument as the “World’s Tallest Statue of an American Hero.” Although Houston is regarded as an effective military leader and statesman by most historians, it is important to know that many Texans despised the former governor for his opposition to secession. Despite Governor Sam Houston's opposition to leaving the Union, Texas joined the Confederate States of America during the Civil War. Drivers on on I-45 near Huntsville can't help but notice this towering statue of Sam Houston, one of the most important figures in early Texas history. The statue is located next to the local visitor's center, providing a nice place to stop and relax, take pictures, and learn the history of Texas and the often controversial leadership of Sam Houston. Widely-regarded as an effective leader by most who study Texas history, Houston's tactics were heavily criticized as Mexican General Santa Anna's army marched virtually unopposed throughout southern Texas. Recognizing his army's weakness, Huston avoided a pitched battle, allowed Santa Anna's army to destroy the Alamo, and also avoided concentrating his small rebel force until Santa Anna had divided his own force. Given the unlikelihood that the Texas rebels could have defeated Santa Anna's large army prior to their ultimate victory over his scattered forces, military historians credit Houston's Fabian tactics of avoiding battle. monumental Sam Houston statue stands at 67 feet tall and is named “A Tribute to Courage.” It is the world’s tallest statue of an American Hero. It was completed in 1994 with 30 tons of concrete and steel and then set atop a 10 foot high granite base. The vast monument was sculpted by artist David Adickes. The monument was dedicated on October 22, 1994. The entrance gift shop sells tiny reproductions of the statue. Houston became the first president of the Republic of Texas in 1836 and was re-elected in 1841. Houston's rise to political office followed his role as a military leader, defeated Santa Anna's forces at the Battle of San Jacinto after months of defeats and atrocities by the Mexican army. Sam Houston opposed secession during the Civil War and attempted to keep Texas in the Union. He died in 1863 in Huntsville, Texas, with his wife Margaret by his side. Sam Houston died quietly with his devoted wife, Margaret by his side. Houston’s last words were, “Texas, Texas. Margaret”. Sam Houston's poem reads, Texas --- Women is lovely to the sight, as gentle as the dews of eve, as bright as mornings earliest light, And spotless in the snow of Heaven. - Sam Houston Sam Houston was Buried in Huntsville, Texas in the Oakwood Cemetery. Houston chose this location. It was across the street from where the Steamboat House once stood. To access the grave site, Exit right on 19th Street as you leave the park. Go to Avenue O (the first stop sign) and turn right. Continue on Avenue O until 11th Street. At 11th Street turn right. Travel six blocks to the intersection of Avenue I and 11th. Turn left and go three blocks to the grave site.	<urn:uuid:0eac9de7-eeeb-4d88-99a0-cdbfdf509018>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.theclio.com/entry/18160	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251789055.93/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129071944-20200129101944-00548.warc.gz	en	0.981866	749	3.359375	3	[ -0.30223339796066284, 0.10056179761886597, 0.4167569875717163, 0.05691344290971756, -0.3336050510406494, 0.2729153633117676, 0.048605188727378845, 0.020910434424877167, -0.07488586008548737, -0.3075644373893738, 0.3764929175376892, 0.1535501778125763, 0.4427729547023773, 0.1523391008377075...	3	Artist David Adickes designed this 67-foot tall sculpture of Texas leaders Sam Houston. The monument honors Houston's leadership during the Texas Revolution and his defeat of Mexican General Santa Anna. The statue is named “A Tribute to Courage” and is the second largest freestanding statue in the U.S., second only to New York's Statue of Liberty. The statue was created in 1994 and is located next to the Huntsville Visitors Center, who advertise the monument as the “World’s Tallest Statue of an American Hero.” Although Houston is regarded as an effective military leader and statesman by most historians, it is important to know that many Texans despised the former governor for his opposition to secession. Despite Governor Sam Houston's opposition to leaving the Union, Texas joined the Confederate States of America during the Civil War. Drivers on on I-45 near Huntsville can't help but notice this towering statue of Sam Houston, one of the most important figures in early Texas history. The statue is located next to the local visitor's center, providing a nice place to stop and relax, take pictures, and learn the history of Texas and the often controversial leadership of Sam Houston. Widely-regarded as an effective leader by most who study Texas history, Houston's tactics were heavily criticized as Mexican General Santa Anna's army marched virtually unopposed throughout southern Texas. Recognizing his army's weakness, Huston avoided a pitched battle, allowed Santa Anna's army to destroy the Alamo, and also avoided concentrating his small rebel force until Santa Anna had divided his own force. Given the unlikelihood that the Texas rebels could have defeated Santa Anna's large army prior to their ultimate victory over his scattered forces, military historians credit Houston's Fabian tactics of avoiding battle. monumental Sam Houston statue stands at 67 feet tall and is named “A Tribute to Courage.” It is the world’s tallest statue of an American Hero. It was completed in 1994 with 30 tons of concrete and steel and then set atop a 10 foot high granite base. The vast monument was sculpted by artist David Adickes. The monument was dedicated on October 22, 1994. The entrance gift shop sells tiny reproductions of the statue. Houston became the first president of the Republic of Texas in 1836 and was re-elected in 1841. Houston's rise to political office followed his role as a military leader, defeated Santa Anna's forces at the Battle of San Jacinto after months of defeats and atrocities by the Mexican army. Sam Houston opposed secession during the Civil War and attempted to keep Texas in the Union. He died in 1863 in Huntsville, Texas, with his wife Margaret by his side. Sam Houston died quietly with his devoted wife, Margaret by his side. Houston’s last words were, “Texas, Texas. Margaret”. Sam Houston's poem reads, Texas --- Women is lovely to the sight, as gentle as the dews of eve, as bright as mornings earliest light, And spotless in the snow of Heaven. - Sam Houston Sam Houston was Buried in Huntsville, Texas in the Oakwood Cemetery. Houston chose this location. It was across the street from where the Steamboat House once stood. To access the grave site, Exit right on 19th Street as you leave the park. Go to Avenue O (the first stop sign) and turn right. Continue on Avenue O until 11th Street. At 11th Street turn right. Travel six blocks to the intersection of Avenue I and 11th. Turn left and go three blocks to the grave site.	763	ENGLISH	1
Everyone agrees that the American Loyalists had a hard time of it. Not only were they on the losing side in a long and cruel war — in their case rendered particularly bitter by virtue of being a civil war — but when hostilities ended they found themselves deprived of possessions, forced into exile, severed from relations and friends, and obliged to adapt to unfamiliar customs and surroundings. For those who took refuge in what remained of British North America, as approximately half of them did — some 40,000 in all — starting over again involved special difficulties. Winters there were long and cold, and the territories in which they found themselves were mostly still in a state of nature, uncultivated, unmapped, and in some cases virtually unexplored. Indeed, how suitable these lands were for settlement was at first by no means clear. “ Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Canada,” observed William Cobbett, who visited the Maritimes shortly after the arrival of the first exiles, “ are the horns, the head, the neck, the shins and the hoof of the ox, and the United States are the ribs, the sirloin, the kidneys, and the rest of the body.” This was not entirely true, but it was a notion which must have crossed the minds of many of the refugees themselves as, wintering in their camps, they contemplated the wilderness around them.	<urn:uuid:20359c8b-a5cf-406e-88c3-25a81c25dfe8>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://core-cms.prod.aop.cambridge.org/core/search?filters%5BauthorTerms%5D=HOWARD%20TEMPERLEY&eventCode=SE-AU	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251671078.88/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125071430-20200125100430-00423.warc.gz	en	0.988541	284	3.703125	4	[ -0.09162941575050354, 0.2651572525501251, 0.43086180090904236, -0.16155043244361877, 0.17331425845623016, -0.029662761837244034, 0.057646989822387695, -0.36096692085266113, -0.20450058579444885, 0.026075387373566628, 0.25825035572052, -0.2611064016819, 0.5182688236236572, 0.252576112747192...	1	Everyone agrees that the American Loyalists had a hard time of it. Not only were they on the losing side in a long and cruel war — in their case rendered particularly bitter by virtue of being a civil war — but when hostilities ended they found themselves deprived of possessions, forced into exile, severed from relations and friends, and obliged to adapt to unfamiliar customs and surroundings. For those who took refuge in what remained of British North America, as approximately half of them did — some 40,000 in all — starting over again involved special difficulties. Winters there were long and cold, and the territories in which they found themselves were mostly still in a state of nature, uncultivated, unmapped, and in some cases virtually unexplored. Indeed, how suitable these lands were for settlement was at first by no means clear. “ Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Canada,” observed William Cobbett, who visited the Maritimes shortly after the arrival of the first exiles, “ are the horns, the head, the neck, the shins and the hoof of the ox, and the United States are the ribs, the sirloin, the kidneys, and the rest of the body.” This was not entirely true, but it was a notion which must have crossed the minds of many of the refugees themselves as, wintering in their camps, they contemplated the wilderness around them.	284	ENGLISH	1
14 December 1812 Birth of Lord Canning, the first Viceroy of India Charles Canning, 1st Earl Canning was born on 14 December 1812 at Brompton, near London. He went on to become the first Viceroy and Governor-General of India after the East India Company’s rule over British India ended and the reign came directly under the British monarch. - Lord Canning was educated at Oxford University from where he obtained a BA in classics and mathematics. - He served in various administrative posts in Britain before being selected for the post of Governor-General of India. The post was open after the departure of Lord Dalhousie. - He assumed the post of the Governor-General of India on 28 February 1856. - Unlike some of his predecessors, he followed a policy of reconciliation with the Indian princes. But, the resentment that had started brewing among the Indians during the time of Lord Dalhousie due to his authoritarian dealings including the much-hated and unjust Doctrine of Lapse blew into an all-out rebellion against the British during Canning’s tenure as Governor-General. - The Revolt of 1857 happened during Canning’s rule of India. During the rebellion at Oudh, he forfeited the lands of the province, angering many British people at that time. - After the rebellion, the reign of British India passed on from the Company to the British Crown. The Government of India Act 1858 was passed to this effect. This Act also made Lord Canning the first Viceroy and Governor-General of India. - As Viceroy, he abolished the Doctrine of Lapse and also proclaimed that there would be no further extension of territories. This decision was made because the mutiny was caused due to, among other factors, resentment among the Indian princes who were deprived of their kingdoms. - The Viceroy’s council was now the Imperial Legislative Council. In this council, there were different members who were heading different departments like finance, law, defence, etc. This was called the ‘Canning model of business’. - In 1859, he was made Earl Canning. - During his tenure, the Indian Councils Act, 1861; the Indian Civil Services Act 1861; the Indian High Courts Act, 1861; and the Indian Penal Code, 1862 were passed. - The Indian Civil Services Act provided that both Indians and British were eligible for appointment to any of the offices except covenanted civil service which was reserved for the British. - The income tax was introduced during his rule over India. - Canning also introduced some reforms in the agriculture and army. - He was nicknamed ‘Clemency Canning’ by the British for his policy of toleration towards Indians after the 1857 revolt. - He left office in March 1862 and returned to England where he died soon after in June 1862. - He was succeeded as Viceroy by the Earl of Elgin. Also on this day	<urn:uuid:0486a4e5-e908-4093-b912-2236da188ff4>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://byjus.com/free-ias-prep/this-day-in-history-dec14/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250601628.36/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121074002-20200121103002-00517.warc.gz	en	0.984063	630	3.6875	4	[ 0.012791118584573269, -0.022638265043497086, 0.7646132111549377, -0.650822639465332, -0.33812186121940613, -0.6295161843299866, 0.5619912147521973, -0.27415207028388977, -0.09486672282218933, -0.10922306776046753, 0.23649421334266663, -0.48615193367004395, -0.12875576317310333, 0.323311746...	4	14 December 1812 Birth of Lord Canning, the first Viceroy of India Charles Canning, 1st Earl Canning was born on 14 December 1812 at Brompton, near London. He went on to become the first Viceroy and Governor-General of India after the East India Company’s rule over British India ended and the reign came directly under the British monarch. - Lord Canning was educated at Oxford University from where he obtained a BA in classics and mathematics. - He served in various administrative posts in Britain before being selected for the post of Governor-General of India. The post was open after the departure of Lord Dalhousie. - He assumed the post of the Governor-General of India on 28 February 1856. - Unlike some of his predecessors, he followed a policy of reconciliation with the Indian princes. But, the resentment that had started brewing among the Indians during the time of Lord Dalhousie due to his authoritarian dealings including the much-hated and unjust Doctrine of Lapse blew into an all-out rebellion against the British during Canning’s tenure as Governor-General. - The Revolt of 1857 happened during Canning’s rule of India. During the rebellion at Oudh, he forfeited the lands of the province, angering many British people at that time. - After the rebellion, the reign of British India passed on from the Company to the British Crown. The Government of India Act 1858 was passed to this effect. This Act also made Lord Canning the first Viceroy and Governor-General of India. - As Viceroy, he abolished the Doctrine of Lapse and also proclaimed that there would be no further extension of territories. This decision was made because the mutiny was caused due to, among other factors, resentment among the Indian princes who were deprived of their kingdoms. - The Viceroy’s council was now the Imperial Legislative Council. In this council, there were different members who were heading different departments like finance, law, defence, etc. This was called the ‘Canning model of business’. - In 1859, he was made Earl Canning. - During his tenure, the Indian Councils Act, 1861; the Indian Civil Services Act 1861; the Indian High Courts Act, 1861; and the Indian Penal Code, 1862 were passed. - The Indian Civil Services Act provided that both Indians and British were eligible for appointment to any of the offices except covenanted civil service which was reserved for the British. - The income tax was introduced during his rule over India. - Canning also introduced some reforms in the agriculture and army. - He was nicknamed ‘Clemency Canning’ by the British for his policy of toleration towards Indians after the 1857 revolt. - He left office in March 1862 and returned to England where he died soon after in June 1862. - He was succeeded as Viceroy by the Earl of Elgin. Also on this day	646	ENGLISH	1
Thomas Jefferson was born on April 13, 1743. He is the third of eight children for Peter Jefferson and Jane Randolph. His father took personal charge of William Randolph’s estate, an old friend, as well as his infant son Thomas Randolph, Jr. That year they relocated to Tuckahoe where they remained for several years before returning to Albemarle. Thomas’s father was given the position of Colonelcy, an important position at that time. Jefferson began attending a local school in 1752, which was run by a Scottish minister. When he was nine he began studying Latin, Greek, and French. When he was 14 years old, his father died and Jefferson inherited about 5,000 acres of land and dozens of slaves. He built his home there, which eventually became known as Monticello. After his father’s death he attended the school of the learned minister James Maury from 1758 to 1760. The school was near Gordonsville, Virginia, twelve miles (19 km) from Shadwell, and Jefferson boarded with Maury’s family. There he received a classical education and studied history and science. At the age of 16 Jefferson entered the College of William & Mary in Williamsburg. He studied there for two years, graduating with highest honors in 1762. He had enrolled in the philosophy school and studied mathematics, metaphysics, and philosophy. He then read law with George Wythe and was admitted to the Virginia bar in 1767. Jefferson went on to handle many cases as a lawyer in colonial Virginia, managing more than a hundred cases each year between 1768 and 1773 in General Court alone. Jefferson’s client list included members of the Virginia’s elite families, including members of his mother’s family and the Randolph’s. Besides practicing law, Jefferson represented Albemarle County in the Virginia House of Burgesses beginning in 1769. In 1774 he wrote a set of resolutions against the acts, which were expanded into A Summary View of the Rights of British America, his first published work. Jefferson served as a delegate to the Second Continental Congress beginning in June 1775, soon after the outbreak of the American Revolutionary War. When Congress began considering a resolution of independence in June 1776, Jefferson was appointed to a five-man committee to prepare a declaration to accompany the resolution. The committee selected Jefferson to write the first draft probably because of his reputation as a writer. Jefferson showed his draft to the committee, which made some final revisions, and then presented it to Congress on June 28, 1776. After voting in favor of the resolution of independence on July 2, Congress turned its attention to the declaration. Over several days of debate, Congress made a few changes in wording and deleted nearly a fourth of the text, most notably a passage critical of the slave trade, changes that Jefferson resented. On July 4, 1776, the wording of the Declaration of Independence was approved. The Declaration would eventually become Jefferson’s major claim to fame, and his eloquent preamble became an enduring statement of human rights. He went on to become the Third President of the United States from March 4, 1801 – March 4, 1809. In 1772, at age 29 Jefferson married the 23-year-old widow Martha Wayles Skelton. They had six children: Martha Jefferson Randolph (1772–1836), Jane Randolph (1774–1775), a stillborn or unnamed son (1777), Mary Jefferson Eppes (1778–1804), Lucy Elizabeth (1780–1781), and another Lucy Elizabeth (1782–1785). Martha died on September 6, 1782, after the birth of her last child. Jefferson never remarried; although he is alleged to have had a long-term, intimate relationship with one of his slaves, Sally Hemings, a quadroon, who was believed to have been a half-sister to Jefferson’s late wife. During the administration of President Jefferson, journalists and others alleged that he had fathered several children with Hemings after his wife’s death. Late twentieth century DNA testing indicated that a male in Jefferson’s line, possibly Thomas Jefferson himself, was the father of at least one of Sally Hemings’s children.	<urn:uuid:9fc9be56-9228-41b8-8374-bc7d9b21db0d>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.biographyarchive.com/biography-of-thomas-jefferson.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251696046.73/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127081933-20200127111933-00210.warc.gz	en	0.984331	888	3.375	3	[ -0.22843074798583984, 0.3009462058544159, 0.17419855296611786, -0.642426073551178, -0.3326963782310486, 0.07129142433404922, -0.033571381121873856, 0.09130993485450745, 0.11507454514503479, 0.1340702772140503, 0.15909749269485474, -0.06128392741084099, -0.47666996717453003, -0.111552253365...	9	Thomas Jefferson was born on April 13, 1743. He is the third of eight children for Peter Jefferson and Jane Randolph. His father took personal charge of William Randolph’s estate, an old friend, as well as his infant son Thomas Randolph, Jr. That year they relocated to Tuckahoe where they remained for several years before returning to Albemarle. Thomas’s father was given the position of Colonelcy, an important position at that time. Jefferson began attending a local school in 1752, which was run by a Scottish minister. When he was nine he began studying Latin, Greek, and French. When he was 14 years old, his father died and Jefferson inherited about 5,000 acres of land and dozens of slaves. He built his home there, which eventually became known as Monticello. After his father’s death he attended the school of the learned minister James Maury from 1758 to 1760. The school was near Gordonsville, Virginia, twelve miles (19 km) from Shadwell, and Jefferson boarded with Maury’s family. There he received a classical education and studied history and science. At the age of 16 Jefferson entered the College of William & Mary in Williamsburg. He studied there for two years, graduating with highest honors in 1762. He had enrolled in the philosophy school and studied mathematics, metaphysics, and philosophy. He then read law with George Wythe and was admitted to the Virginia bar in 1767. Jefferson went on to handle many cases as a lawyer in colonial Virginia, managing more than a hundred cases each year between 1768 and 1773 in General Court alone. Jefferson’s client list included members of the Virginia’s elite families, including members of his mother’s family and the Randolph’s. Besides practicing law, Jefferson represented Albemarle County in the Virginia House of Burgesses beginning in 1769. In 1774 he wrote a set of resolutions against the acts, which were expanded into A Summary View of the Rights of British America, his first published work. Jefferson served as a delegate to the Second Continental Congress beginning in June 1775, soon after the outbreak of the American Revolutionary War. When Congress began considering a resolution of independence in June 1776, Jefferson was appointed to a five-man committee to prepare a declaration to accompany the resolution. The committee selected Jefferson to write the first draft probably because of his reputation as a writer. Jefferson showed his draft to the committee, which made some final revisions, and then presented it to Congress on June 28, 1776. After voting in favor of the resolution of independence on July 2, Congress turned its attention to the declaration. Over several days of debate, Congress made a few changes in wording and deleted nearly a fourth of the text, most notably a passage critical of the slave trade, changes that Jefferson resented. On July 4, 1776, the wording of the Declaration of Independence was approved. The Declaration would eventually become Jefferson’s major claim to fame, and his eloquent preamble became an enduring statement of human rights. He went on to become the Third President of the United States from March 4, 1801 – March 4, 1809. In 1772, at age 29 Jefferson married the 23-year-old widow Martha Wayles Skelton. They had six children: Martha Jefferson Randolph (1772–1836), Jane Randolph (1774–1775), a stillborn or unnamed son (1777), Mary Jefferson Eppes (1778–1804), Lucy Elizabeth (1780–1781), and another Lucy Elizabeth (1782–1785). Martha died on September 6, 1782, after the birth of her last child. Jefferson never remarried; although he is alleged to have had a long-term, intimate relationship with one of his slaves, Sally Hemings, a quadroon, who was believed to have been a half-sister to Jefferson’s late wife. During the administration of President Jefferson, journalists and others alleged that he had fathered several children with Hemings after his wife’s death. Late twentieth century DNA testing indicated that a male in Jefferson’s line, possibly Thomas Jefferson himself, was the father of at least one of Sally Hemings’s children.	949	ENGLISH	1
Jupiter is the biggest planet of our solar system that is why it is often considered as the “king of planets”. It is massive compared to other planets and one of the major components behind its making is gas. And this makes scientists hard to understand what other things are there under the thick cloud cover. Juno spacecraft of NASA was sent to study Jupiter closely and it has been doing that for the past 8 years. Juno has now returned and has brought some interesting observations concerning the core of Jupiter. Images brought back by Juno has been scanned which showed that Jupiter’s core is not quite what was thought before by scientists. The core is in fact hardly dense but that has made the task even more challenging for researchers to find out. Andrea Isella who has been co-authoring the study said that this is very confusing. It is being thought that something had happened which had shaken the core, so the impact has become even more massive. To unravel the mystery, the team conducted computer simulations of the initial stage of Jupiter to understand what the planet has been through leading to its current state. What they understood was a huge impact in the early formation days of the planet must have led to this state at present. Isella described that since it is dense and has huge energy within it; the impacting object would hit it really hard and must have passed straight through the core surrounded by its dense atmosphere. Prior to the impact, the core was highly dense and after the collision, the core must have been diluted scattering things even more. Simulations also indicated that the planet which might have hit Jupiter had to be huge and almost 10 times bigger than Earth which is why Jupiter still does not have dense core which scientists had considered it to have.	<urn:uuid:28937c7f-33b5-4934-9d74-7e889d1ae24c>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.lincolntrailpublishing.com/133613/jupiter-was-likely-to-hit-by-a-planet-4-5-billion-years-ago/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591234.15/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117205732-20200117233732-00386.warc.gz	en	0.991908	355	3.71875	4	[ 0.06742813438177109, 0.03680071979761124, 0.08089563250541687, -0.3310694098472595, 0.03368240222334862, -0.18352419137954712, 0.14821526408195496, 0.5650331974029541, 0.03133082762360573, -0.12954869866371155, 0.06410478055477142, -0.3447316884994507, 0.058203890919685364, 0.2873549759387...	1	Jupiter is the biggest planet of our solar system that is why it is often considered as the “king of planets”. It is massive compared to other planets and one of the major components behind its making is gas. And this makes scientists hard to understand what other things are there under the thick cloud cover. Juno spacecraft of NASA was sent to study Jupiter closely and it has been doing that for the past 8 years. Juno has now returned and has brought some interesting observations concerning the core of Jupiter. Images brought back by Juno has been scanned which showed that Jupiter’s core is not quite what was thought before by scientists. The core is in fact hardly dense but that has made the task even more challenging for researchers to find out. Andrea Isella who has been co-authoring the study said that this is very confusing. It is being thought that something had happened which had shaken the core, so the impact has become even more massive. To unravel the mystery, the team conducted computer simulations of the initial stage of Jupiter to understand what the planet has been through leading to its current state. What they understood was a huge impact in the early formation days of the planet must have led to this state at present. Isella described that since it is dense and has huge energy within it; the impacting object would hit it really hard and must have passed straight through the core surrounded by its dense atmosphere. Prior to the impact, the core was highly dense and after the collision, the core must have been diluted scattering things even more. Simulations also indicated that the planet which might have hit Jupiter had to be huge and almost 10 times bigger than Earth which is why Jupiter still does not have dense core which scientists had considered it to have.	350	ENGLISH	1
Thursday, October 30, The Captivity Narrative as a Reflection of Reality The captivity narrative was a form of literature that was popular throughout New America, from the early seventeenth to late nineteenth centuries. These stories bear strong elements of European ethnocentrism, and helped to serve as a justification for the overall conquest of Native America. This exaggerated perspective however, allows the reader to catch a glimpse into the reality and truth of how the Natives treated their captives and what can be said about their ultimate humanity. The Narrative of the Captivity and the Restoration of Mrs. Mary Rowlandson The sovereignty and goodness of GOD, together with the faithfulness of his promises displayed, being a narrative of the captivity and restoration of Mrs. Mary Rowlandson, commended by her, to all that desires to know the Lord's doings to, and dealings with her. Especially to her dear children and relations. The second Addition [sic] Corrected and amended. Written by her own hand for her private use, and now made public at the earnest desire of some friends, and for the benefit of the afflicted. See now that I, even I am he, and there is no Reflection of mary rowlandsons captivity with me, I kill and I make alive, I wound and I heal, neither is there any can deliver out of my hand. On the tenth of Februarycame the Indians with great numbers upon Lancaster: There were five persons taken in one house; the father, and the mother and a sucking child, they knocked on the head; the other two they took and carried away alive. There were two others, who being out of their garrison upon some occasion were set upon; one was knocked on the head, the other escaped; another there was who running along was shot and wounded, and fell down; he begged of them his life, promising them money as they told me but they would not hearken to him but knocked him in head, and stripped him naked, and split open his bowels. Another, seeing many of the Indians about his barn, ventured and went out, but was quickly shot down. There were three others belonging to the same garrison who were killed; the Indians getting up upon the roof of the barn, had advantage to shoot down upon them over their fortification. Thus these murderous wretches went on, burning, and destroying before them. At length they came and beset our own house, and quickly it was the dolefulest day that ever mine eyes saw. The house stood upon the edge of a hill; some of the Indians got behind the hill, others into the barn, and others behind anything that could shelter them; from all which places they shot against the house, so that the bullets seemed to fly like hail; and quickly they wounded one man among us, then another, and then a third. About two hours according to my observation, in that amazing time they had been about the house before they prevailed to fire it which they did with flax and hemp, which they brought out of the barn, and there being no defense about the house, only two flankers at two opposite corners and one of them not finished ; they fired it once and one ventured out and quenched it, but they quickly fired it again, and that took. Now is the dreadful hour come, that I have often heard of in time of war, as it was the case of othersbut now mine eyes see it. Some in our house were fighting for their lives, others wallowing in their blood, the house on fire over our heads, and the bloody heathen ready to knock us on the head, if we stirred out. Now might we hear mothers and children crying out for themselves, and one another, "Lord, what shall we do? We had six stout dogs belonging to our garrison, but none of them would stir, though another time, if any Indian had come to the door, they were ready to fly upon him and tear him down. The Lord hereby would make us the more acknowledge His hand, and to see that our help is always in Him. But out we must go, the fire increasing, and coming along behind us, roaring, and the Indians gaping before us with their guns, spears, and hatchets to devour us. No sooner were we out of the house, but my brother-in-law being before wounded, in defending the house, in or near the throat fell down dead, whereat the Indians scornfully shouted, and hallowed, and were presently upon him, stripping off his clothes, the bullets flying thick, one went through my side, and the same as would seem through the bowels and hand of my dear child in my arms. One of my elder sisters' children, named William, had then his leg broken, which the Indians perceiving, they knocked him on [his] head. Thus were we butchered by those merciless heathen, standing amazed, with the blood running down to our heels. My eldest sister being yet in the house, and seeing those woeful sights, the infidels hauling mothers one way, and children another, and some wallowing in their blood: I hope she is reaping the fruit of her good labors, being faithful to the service of God in her place. In her younger years she lay under much trouble upon spiritual accounts, till it pleased God to make that precious scripture take hold of her heart, "And he said unto me, my Grace is sufficient for thee" 2 Corinthians More than twenty years after, I have heard her tell how sweet and comfortable that place was to her. Oh the doleful sight that now was to behold at this house! There were twelve killed, some shot, some stabbed with their spears, some knocked down with their hatchets. When we are in prosperity, Oh the little that we think of such dreadful sights, and to see our dear friends, and relations lie bleeding out their heart-blood upon the ground. There was one who was chopped into the head with a hatchet, and stripped naked, and yet was crawling up and down. It is a solemn sight to see so many Christians lying in their blood, some here, and some there, like a company of sheep torn by wolves, all of them stripped naked by a company of hell-hounds, roaring, singing, ranting, and insulting, as if they would have torn our very hearts out; yet the Lord by His almighty power preserved a number of us from death, for there were twenty-four of us taken alive and carried captive. I had often before this said that if the Indians should come, I should choose rather to be killed by them than taken alive, but when it came to the trial my mind changed; their glittering weapons so daunted my spirit, that I chose rather to go along with those as I may say ravenous beasts, than that moment to end my days; and that I may the better declare what happened to me during that grievous captivity, I shall particularly speak of the several removes we had up and down the wilderness. The First Remove Now away we must go with those barbarous creatures, with our bodies wounded and bleeding, and our hearts no less than our bodies. About a mile we went that night, up upon a hill within sight of the town, where they intended to lodge. There was hard by a vacant house deserted by the English before, for fear of the Indians. I asked them whether I might not lodge in the house that night, to which they answered, "What, will you love English men still? Oh the roaring, and singing and dancing, and yelling of those black creatures in the night, which made the place a lively resemblance of hell. And as miserable was the waste that was there made of horses, cattle, sheep, swine, calves, lambs, roasting pigs, and fowl which they had plundered in the townsome roasting, some lying and burning, and some boiling to feed our merciless enemies; who were joyful enough, though we were disconsolate. To add to the dolefulness of the former day, and the dismalness of the present night, my thoughts ran upon my losses and sad bereaved condition.The Matron and the Minister: Duality of Voice in Mary Rowlandson's Captivity Narrative. By Kathleen J. Canavan. In reading the incredibly moving text of The Sovereignty and Goodness of God, a detailed narrative of Mary Rowlandson's eleven week captivity among Narragansett Indians, one cannot help but become aware of the presence of . Mar 05, · “Lot’s Wife’s Temptation”: Mourning in Mary Rowlandson’s Captivity Narrative by Bethany Prenevost During Mary Rowlandson’s eleven month captivity as chronicled in her narrative, The Sovereignty and Goodness of God, she endured the loss of family members and her home, starvation, involuntary servitude, physical affliction, . The Rowlandsons settled in Concord for some time before Rev. Rowlandson was called to serve a town in Connecticut. It was there in that Mrs. Rowlandson published a record of her experience. A Narrative of the Captivity and Restoration of Mrs. Mary Rowlandson quickly became a colonial bestseller. Captivity narratives fared extremely well. 1. Title page of Mary White Rowlandson, A True History of the Captivity and Restoration of Mrs. Mary Rowlandson (London, ). Courtesy of the American . Mary’s husband Joseph Rowlandson had assumed his wife and family had been killed, as any man would have thought arriving at his home and village that had been . Jun 21, · Narrative of the Captivity and Restoration of Mrs. Mary Rowlandson Mary Rowlandson’s captivity narrative describes her experience as a captive of the Native Americans during the King Philips War in Reviews: 4.	<urn:uuid:b0453258-7074-4ae2-8f38-1c3d10795e5f>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://wowuhocakyhivi.webkandii.com/reflection-of-mary-rowlandsons-captivity-38576at.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251788528.85/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129041149-20200129071149-00013.warc.gz	en	0.98416	2,073	3.578125	4	[ -0.18937769532203674, 0.3807232081890106, 0.16635048389434814, 0.18688511848449707, 0.045200102031230927, 0.009888317435979843, 0.04046454280614853, 0.17244532704353333, 0.0269464161247015, -0.12593472003936768, 0.1250445544719696, -0.09565145522356033, -0.09793289005756378, 0.316926836967...	1	Thursday, October 30, The Captivity Narrative as a Reflection of Reality The captivity narrative was a form of literature that was popular throughout New America, from the early seventeenth to late nineteenth centuries. These stories bear strong elements of European ethnocentrism, and helped to serve as a justification for the overall conquest of Native America. This exaggerated perspective however, allows the reader to catch a glimpse into the reality and truth of how the Natives treated their captives and what can be said about their ultimate humanity. The Narrative of the Captivity and the Restoration of Mrs. Mary Rowlandson The sovereignty and goodness of GOD, together with the faithfulness of his promises displayed, being a narrative of the captivity and restoration of Mrs. Mary Rowlandson, commended by her, to all that desires to know the Lord's doings to, and dealings with her. Especially to her dear children and relations. The second Addition [sic] Corrected and amended. Written by her own hand for her private use, and now made public at the earnest desire of some friends, and for the benefit of the afflicted. See now that I, even I am he, and there is no Reflection of mary rowlandsons captivity with me, I kill and I make alive, I wound and I heal, neither is there any can deliver out of my hand. On the tenth of Februarycame the Indians with great numbers upon Lancaster: There were five persons taken in one house; the father, and the mother and a sucking child, they knocked on the head; the other two they took and carried away alive. There were two others, who being out of their garrison upon some occasion were set upon; one was knocked on the head, the other escaped; another there was who running along was shot and wounded, and fell down; he begged of them his life, promising them money as they told me but they would not hearken to him but knocked him in head, and stripped him naked, and split open his bowels. Another, seeing many of the Indians about his barn, ventured and went out, but was quickly shot down. There were three others belonging to the same garrison who were killed; the Indians getting up upon the roof of the barn, had advantage to shoot down upon them over their fortification. Thus these murderous wretches went on, burning, and destroying before them. At length they came and beset our own house, and quickly it was the dolefulest day that ever mine eyes saw. The house stood upon the edge of a hill; some of the Indians got behind the hill, others into the barn, and others behind anything that could shelter them; from all which places they shot against the house, so that the bullets seemed to fly like hail; and quickly they wounded one man among us, then another, and then a third. About two hours according to my observation, in that amazing time they had been about the house before they prevailed to fire it which they did with flax and hemp, which they brought out of the barn, and there being no defense about the house, only two flankers at two opposite corners and one of them not finished ; they fired it once and one ventured out and quenched it, but they quickly fired it again, and that took. Now is the dreadful hour come, that I have often heard of in time of war, as it was the case of othersbut now mine eyes see it. Some in our house were fighting for their lives, others wallowing in their blood, the house on fire over our heads, and the bloody heathen ready to knock us on the head, if we stirred out. Now might we hear mothers and children crying out for themselves, and one another, "Lord, what shall we do? We had six stout dogs belonging to our garrison, but none of them would stir, though another time, if any Indian had come to the door, they were ready to fly upon him and tear him down. The Lord hereby would make us the more acknowledge His hand, and to see that our help is always in Him. But out we must go, the fire increasing, and coming along behind us, roaring, and the Indians gaping before us with their guns, spears, and hatchets to devour us. No sooner were we out of the house, but my brother-in-law being before wounded, in defending the house, in or near the throat fell down dead, whereat the Indians scornfully shouted, and hallowed, and were presently upon him, stripping off his clothes, the bullets flying thick, one went through my side, and the same as would seem through the bowels and hand of my dear child in my arms. One of my elder sisters' children, named William, had then his leg broken, which the Indians perceiving, they knocked him on [his] head. Thus were we butchered by those merciless heathen, standing amazed, with the blood running down to our heels. My eldest sister being yet in the house, and seeing those woeful sights, the infidels hauling mothers one way, and children another, and some wallowing in their blood: I hope she is reaping the fruit of her good labors, being faithful to the service of God in her place. In her younger years she lay under much trouble upon spiritual accounts, till it pleased God to make that precious scripture take hold of her heart, "And he said unto me, my Grace is sufficient for thee" 2 Corinthians More than twenty years after, I have heard her tell how sweet and comfortable that place was to her. Oh the doleful sight that now was to behold at this house! There were twelve killed, some shot, some stabbed with their spears, some knocked down with their hatchets. When we are in prosperity, Oh the little that we think of such dreadful sights, and to see our dear friends, and relations lie bleeding out their heart-blood upon the ground. There was one who was chopped into the head with a hatchet, and stripped naked, and yet was crawling up and down. It is a solemn sight to see so many Christians lying in their blood, some here, and some there, like a company of sheep torn by wolves, all of them stripped naked by a company of hell-hounds, roaring, singing, ranting, and insulting, as if they would have torn our very hearts out; yet the Lord by His almighty power preserved a number of us from death, for there were twenty-four of us taken alive and carried captive. I had often before this said that if the Indians should come, I should choose rather to be killed by them than taken alive, but when it came to the trial my mind changed; their glittering weapons so daunted my spirit, that I chose rather to go along with those as I may say ravenous beasts, than that moment to end my days; and that I may the better declare what happened to me during that grievous captivity, I shall particularly speak of the several removes we had up and down the wilderness. The First Remove Now away we must go with those barbarous creatures, with our bodies wounded and bleeding, and our hearts no less than our bodies. About a mile we went that night, up upon a hill within sight of the town, where they intended to lodge. There was hard by a vacant house deserted by the English before, for fear of the Indians. I asked them whether I might not lodge in the house that night, to which they answered, "What, will you love English men still? Oh the roaring, and singing and dancing, and yelling of those black creatures in the night, which made the place a lively resemblance of hell. And as miserable was the waste that was there made of horses, cattle, sheep, swine, calves, lambs, roasting pigs, and fowl which they had plundered in the townsome roasting, some lying and burning, and some boiling to feed our merciless enemies; who were joyful enough, though we were disconsolate. To add to the dolefulness of the former day, and the dismalness of the present night, my thoughts ran upon my losses and sad bereaved condition.The Matron and the Minister: Duality of Voice in Mary Rowlandson's Captivity Narrative. By Kathleen J. Canavan. In reading the incredibly moving text of The Sovereignty and Goodness of God, a detailed narrative of Mary Rowlandson's eleven week captivity among Narragansett Indians, one cannot help but become aware of the presence of . Mar 05, · “Lot’s Wife’s Temptation”: Mourning in Mary Rowlandson’s Captivity Narrative by Bethany Prenevost During Mary Rowlandson’s eleven month captivity as chronicled in her narrative, The Sovereignty and Goodness of God, she endured the loss of family members and her home, starvation, involuntary servitude, physical affliction, . The Rowlandsons settled in Concord for some time before Rev. Rowlandson was called to serve a town in Connecticut. It was there in that Mrs. Rowlandson published a record of her experience. A Narrative of the Captivity and Restoration of Mrs. Mary Rowlandson quickly became a colonial bestseller. Captivity narratives fared extremely well. 1. Title page of Mary White Rowlandson, A True History of the Captivity and Restoration of Mrs. Mary Rowlandson (London, ). Courtesy of the American . Mary’s husband Joseph Rowlandson had assumed his wife and family had been killed, as any man would have thought arriving at his home and village that had been . Jun 21, · Narrative of the Captivity and Restoration of Mrs. Mary Rowlandson Mary Rowlandson’s captivity narrative describes her experience as a captive of the Native Americans during the King Philips War in Reviews: 4.	2,019	ENGLISH	1
A Hero Named Janusz Korczak God loves children. His heart especially goes out to orphans, and He commands us, “Defend the fatherless” (Isa. 1:17). During the Holocaust, one man in particular did just that. He was born Henryk Goldszmit in 1878 in Warsaw, Poland. Henryk’s parents were ethnically Jewish but practiced little Judaism. They were also wealthy. However, Henryk’s childhood was anything but pleasant. His father verbally abused him. His mother pampered and stifled him. And when Henryk was 11, his father began to have a series of nervous breakdowns, impoverishing the family. When Henryk was 18, his father died in a mental asylum. These experiences shaped Henryk’s lifelong cause. He despised the tyranny the powerful often exercise over the weak, the rich over the poor, adults over children; and he made it his mission to reform society and help those in need. To fulfill his mission, Henryk went into medicine, specializing in pediatrics. While studying at the university, he would charge exorbitant fees to his wealthy patients so he could go into the slums and treat the poor at little cost. During these days, Henryk also began to write and publish his experiences among the destitute, bringing attention to their plight. He also adopted the more Polish-sounding name of Janusz Korczak, by which he became known throughout Poland as a caring doctor and advocate for children. “I tell you,” he wrote, “I’ve never seen a crueler sight than a drunk beating a child or a kid begging in a tavern, ‘Papa, come home.’”1 In 1912 Korczak made the difficult decision to leave his practice at a children’s clinic to become the doctor and director of a new Jewish orphanage in Warsaw that housed 100 children. After World War I, he added a second orphanage to his responsibilities, one for non-Jewish children. Korczak ran his orphanages according to the “Children’s Republic” he outlined in his famous work, How to Love a Child, in which he stressed the importance of respecting children and allowing them to govern themselves. Although some of his methods may be questionable for use in the home, they proved successful in his orphanages. A survey spanning 20 years showed 98 percent of the orphans he worked with grew up to be productive, stable citizens. Korczak wrote, taught, and gave anonymous radio addresses regarding children and their needs. He visited the Holy Land twice and was planning a third visit, possibly to stay, when in September 1939 Germany invaded Poland. When Warsaw was overthrown, Korczak was forced to move his orphans into the newly created Warsaw Ghetto. Five hundred thousand Jews (100,000 of them children) were squeezed into an area only one square mile in size. For two years Korczak and his staff attempted to care for his children. He scrounged for food, went door-to-door begging for donations, and improvised medical treatments. To retain some semblance of normalcy and keep morale up, Korczak maintained daily routines, even giving recitals and play performances. In 1942 Korczak kept a three-month diary. It was found years later. In it he wrote, “I exist not to be loved and admired, but myself to act and love. It is not the duty of those around to help me but I am duty-bound to look after the world, after man.”2 In July 1942 the Nazis began transporting the ghetto’s inhabitants to the Treblinka death camp. On August 5, with himself in the lead, Korczak and his 200 orphans marched four abreast, heads held high, to the awaiting trains. Despite earlier offers of personal exemption and escort to safety, Korczak remained with his charges. “You do not leave a child at night who is sick or in need. I have two hundred orphans; in a time like this I will stay by them every minute,” he said.3 Korczak was last seen helping his children once more—onto the trains. Though never married, Korczak left a lasting legacy. The apostle James wrote, “Pure and undefiled religion before God and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their trouble” (Jas. 1:27). Janusz Korczak, although not a Christian, nor even a practicing Jew, certainly exemplified the spirit of this verse and set an example for all to follow. - Cited in Mark Bernheim, Father of the Orphans: The Story of Janusz Korczak (New York: E.P. Dutton, 1989), 66. - Janusz Korczak, Ghetto Diary (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003), 69. - Bernheim, 131.	<urn:uuid:2c0c2bde-106e-4563-afed-1a3412aaf390>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://israelmyglory.org/article/a-hero-named-janusz-korczak/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606872.19/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122071919-20200122100919-00266.warc.gz	en	0.980477	1,044	3.28125	3	[ -0.05177375301718712, 0.7075445055961609, -0.36839237809181213, 0.10435804724693298, -0.17682389914989471, -0.1624602973461151, 0.3362731337547302, 0.5691431760787964, -0.41680335998535156, -0.223018616437912, 0.16436055302619934, 0.10129424929618835, -0.15376316010951996, 0.20036104321479...	10	A Hero Named Janusz Korczak God loves children. His heart especially goes out to orphans, and He commands us, “Defend the fatherless” (Isa. 1:17). During the Holocaust, one man in particular did just that. He was born Henryk Goldszmit in 1878 in Warsaw, Poland. Henryk’s parents were ethnically Jewish but practiced little Judaism. They were also wealthy. However, Henryk’s childhood was anything but pleasant. His father verbally abused him. His mother pampered and stifled him. And when Henryk was 11, his father began to have a series of nervous breakdowns, impoverishing the family. When Henryk was 18, his father died in a mental asylum. These experiences shaped Henryk’s lifelong cause. He despised the tyranny the powerful often exercise over the weak, the rich over the poor, adults over children; and he made it his mission to reform society and help those in need. To fulfill his mission, Henryk went into medicine, specializing in pediatrics. While studying at the university, he would charge exorbitant fees to his wealthy patients so he could go into the slums and treat the poor at little cost. During these days, Henryk also began to write and publish his experiences among the destitute, bringing attention to their plight. He also adopted the more Polish-sounding name of Janusz Korczak, by which he became known throughout Poland as a caring doctor and advocate for children. “I tell you,” he wrote, “I’ve never seen a crueler sight than a drunk beating a child or a kid begging in a tavern, ‘Papa, come home.’”1 In 1912 Korczak made the difficult decision to leave his practice at a children’s clinic to become the doctor and director of a new Jewish orphanage in Warsaw that housed 100 children. After World War I, he added a second orphanage to his responsibilities, one for non-Jewish children. Korczak ran his orphanages according to the “Children’s Republic” he outlined in his famous work, How to Love a Child, in which he stressed the importance of respecting children and allowing them to govern themselves. Although some of his methods may be questionable for use in the home, they proved successful in his orphanages. A survey spanning 20 years showed 98 percent of the orphans he worked with grew up to be productive, stable citizens. Korczak wrote, taught, and gave anonymous radio addresses regarding children and their needs. He visited the Holy Land twice and was planning a third visit, possibly to stay, when in September 1939 Germany invaded Poland. When Warsaw was overthrown, Korczak was forced to move his orphans into the newly created Warsaw Ghetto. Five hundred thousand Jews (100,000 of them children) were squeezed into an area only one square mile in size. For two years Korczak and his staff attempted to care for his children. He scrounged for food, went door-to-door begging for donations, and improvised medical treatments. To retain some semblance of normalcy and keep morale up, Korczak maintained daily routines, even giving recitals and play performances. In 1942 Korczak kept a three-month diary. It was found years later. In it he wrote, “I exist not to be loved and admired, but myself to act and love. It is not the duty of those around to help me but I am duty-bound to look after the world, after man.”2 In July 1942 the Nazis began transporting the ghetto’s inhabitants to the Treblinka death camp. On August 5, with himself in the lead, Korczak and his 200 orphans marched four abreast, heads held high, to the awaiting trains. Despite earlier offers of personal exemption and escort to safety, Korczak remained with his charges. “You do not leave a child at night who is sick or in need. I have two hundred orphans; in a time like this I will stay by them every minute,” he said.3 Korczak was last seen helping his children once more—onto the trains. Though never married, Korczak left a lasting legacy. The apostle James wrote, “Pure and undefiled religion before God and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their trouble” (Jas. 1:27). Janusz Korczak, although not a Christian, nor even a practicing Jew, certainly exemplified the spirit of this verse and set an example for all to follow. - Cited in Mark Bernheim, Father of the Orphans: The Story of Janusz Korczak (New York: E.P. Dutton, 1989), 66. - Janusz Korczak, Ghetto Diary (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003), 69. - Bernheim, 131.	1,052	ENGLISH	1
At the beginning of King Zedekiah’s reign, he submitted to Babylon. But as he did not humble himself before God, it was only a matter of time before that rebellion broke out before his earthly overlord, Nebuchadnezzar, also. In order to shake off the yoke of the Babylonians, he sought an alliance with Egypt. Nebuchadnezzar, for the fourth time, besieged Jerusalem, and at the end of two and a half years, it fell to the Babylonians (588 bc). Nebuchadnezzar had by this time had enough of the rebellions of Josiah’s sons. He slew Zedekiah’s children before his eyes, then blinded him — so that his last sight on earth was the death of his children — and took him captive to Babylon, where he died in prison. Fire raged through the city, and nearly everything was burned to the ground, including the beautiful Temple that Solomon had built. Furthermore, the city walls were all torn down. Jerusalem, that once proud and prosperous city, was left a desolate ruin. Now the Babylonians would have liked to carry off all the population of Jerusalem captive to Babylon, but the Jews, as they were now called (meaning, of Judah), had suffered so much during the long siege, that only eight hundred and thirty- two persons were strong enough to stand the long journey. The rest were left in Judea and Samaria, to farm the land and take care of the vineyards. The country was under a Babylonian governor appointed by Nebuchadnezzar, who was advised by Jeremiah. The prophet told the people to be patient and to submit, and at first they were so weak and so tired of war, that they were only too ready to obey. But as soon they recovered their strength, they again revolted from Babylonian rule, choosing a prince of Jewish blood to be their leader. After murdering the governor whom Nebuchadnezzar had given them, the Jews suddenly began fearing the wrath of the Babylonians. Hoping to escape it, they fled to Egypt, forcibly taking Jeremiah with them. The prophet, however, warned them that Egypt would soon also fall into Nebuchadnezzar’s hands. The prophecy came true before long, for he made another campaign to subdue his rebellious western provinces. Nebuchadnezzar first became master of Tyre, after a siege of more than thirteen years, and from there went on to conquer Egypt also (571 bc). When the Babylonians went home, they took with them long caravans of captives, including the Jews who had taken refuge in Egypt, and left all of Judah a desert. These new arrivals joined with their brethren already captive in Babylon: the noble Judean youths who were the first to arrive, among whom was Daniel; the ten thousand priests and craftsmen who were the second to arrive, among whom was Ezekiel and Mordecai; and the eight hundred and thirty- two who survived the destruction of Jerusalem. Thus none escaped the Babylonian captivity prophesied by Jeremiah, even though some of them fled the country in order to escape it. However, God did not leave His people completely without hope, for throughout Israel’s history, even though He has chastened Israel for her sins, He has never punished them so that they ceased to be a people. He has always preserved His remnant, and Chronicles ends with the hope of restoration for the Jews. 🙂	<urn:uuid:f2c6c2fc-13df-4015-9850-e64d62c40d95>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.alittleperspective.com/2-chronicles-36/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251789055.93/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129071944-20200129101944-00190.warc.gz	en	0.990255	722	3.421875	3	[ -0.29774659872055054, 0.6437250375747681, 0.14856500923633575, -0.3535715937614441, -0.5844284296035767, -0.2006530463695526, -0.11468422412872314, 0.2301838994026184, 0.10469894856214523, -0.12027344107627869, -0.29027947783470154, -0.04570998623967171, 0.22468766570091248, 0.090744271874...	13	At the beginning of King Zedekiah’s reign, he submitted to Babylon. But as he did not humble himself before God, it was only a matter of time before that rebellion broke out before his earthly overlord, Nebuchadnezzar, also. In order to shake off the yoke of the Babylonians, he sought an alliance with Egypt. Nebuchadnezzar, for the fourth time, besieged Jerusalem, and at the end of two and a half years, it fell to the Babylonians (588 bc). Nebuchadnezzar had by this time had enough of the rebellions of Josiah’s sons. He slew Zedekiah’s children before his eyes, then blinded him — so that his last sight on earth was the death of his children — and took him captive to Babylon, where he died in prison. Fire raged through the city, and nearly everything was burned to the ground, including the beautiful Temple that Solomon had built. Furthermore, the city walls were all torn down. Jerusalem, that once proud and prosperous city, was left a desolate ruin. Now the Babylonians would have liked to carry off all the population of Jerusalem captive to Babylon, but the Jews, as they were now called (meaning, of Judah), had suffered so much during the long siege, that only eight hundred and thirty- two persons were strong enough to stand the long journey. The rest were left in Judea and Samaria, to farm the land and take care of the vineyards. The country was under a Babylonian governor appointed by Nebuchadnezzar, who was advised by Jeremiah. The prophet told the people to be patient and to submit, and at first they were so weak and so tired of war, that they were only too ready to obey. But as soon they recovered their strength, they again revolted from Babylonian rule, choosing a prince of Jewish blood to be their leader. After murdering the governor whom Nebuchadnezzar had given them, the Jews suddenly began fearing the wrath of the Babylonians. Hoping to escape it, they fled to Egypt, forcibly taking Jeremiah with them. The prophet, however, warned them that Egypt would soon also fall into Nebuchadnezzar’s hands. The prophecy came true before long, for he made another campaign to subdue his rebellious western provinces. Nebuchadnezzar first became master of Tyre, after a siege of more than thirteen years, and from there went on to conquer Egypt also (571 bc). When the Babylonians went home, they took with them long caravans of captives, including the Jews who had taken refuge in Egypt, and left all of Judah a desert. These new arrivals joined with their brethren already captive in Babylon: the noble Judean youths who were the first to arrive, among whom was Daniel; the ten thousand priests and craftsmen who were the second to arrive, among whom was Ezekiel and Mordecai; and the eight hundred and thirty- two who survived the destruction of Jerusalem. Thus none escaped the Babylonian captivity prophesied by Jeremiah, even though some of them fled the country in order to escape it. However, God did not leave His people completely without hope, for throughout Israel’s history, even though He has chastened Israel for her sins, He has never punished them so that they ceased to be a people. He has always preserved His remnant, and Chronicles ends with the hope of restoration for the Jews. 🙂	722	ENGLISH	1
His Revolutionary Spirit Though there was discontent sewn amongst the colonists in government against the heavy handed power plays of their English masters, some saw Paine as dangerous to their long term goals. As a prolific pamphleteer, the blogger of his day, he penned many critical and incendiary words that some of the Founding Fathers found to be excessive and belligerent. The lawyer, and eventual co-signer of the Declaration of Independence, John Adams, would attack Paine’s character by calling him “democratic,” a word that was used as a pejorative against those that advocated for chaos and mob rule. Paine’s ideas were viewed as extreme, including his stance against slavery. Shortly before his death, he helped negotiate the sale of Louisiana in what became the Louisiana Purchase. Afterward, he proposed to Thomas Jefferson that upon acquiring the new parcel of land, that no new slaves would be added to any new colonial territories. Jefferson, eager to get his profitable sugar plantations started, refused to agree to those terms. Thomas Paine and his revolutionary spirit was a little too much to handle for some. He was described as a rather prickly personality, especially in his writings, but was an otherwise moral, honest and fair man. The events of December 16, 1773, though, would bring him to the American colonies and help spark the coming War of Independence.	<urn:uuid:2caa9db5-0c95-43ca-a059-b0616474d868>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.bostonteapartyship.com/thomas-paine	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251694071.63/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126230255-20200127020255-00108.warc.gz	en	0.989826	282	3.640625	4	[ -0.2298821657896042, 0.37788650393486023, 0.5238549113273621, -0.041268326342105865, -0.14036034047603607, 0.023222817108035088, 0.3701600134372711, 0.01621975004673004, -0.26316124200820923, -0.08147779107093811, 0.0466499999165535, 0.3220764398574829, -0.10353383421897888, -0.01720084808...	8	His Revolutionary Spirit Though there was discontent sewn amongst the colonists in government against the heavy handed power plays of their English masters, some saw Paine as dangerous to their long term goals. As a prolific pamphleteer, the blogger of his day, he penned many critical and incendiary words that some of the Founding Fathers found to be excessive and belligerent. The lawyer, and eventual co-signer of the Declaration of Independence, John Adams, would attack Paine’s character by calling him “democratic,” a word that was used as a pejorative against those that advocated for chaos and mob rule. Paine’s ideas were viewed as extreme, including his stance against slavery. Shortly before his death, he helped negotiate the sale of Louisiana in what became the Louisiana Purchase. Afterward, he proposed to Thomas Jefferson that upon acquiring the new parcel of land, that no new slaves would be added to any new colonial territories. Jefferson, eager to get his profitable sugar plantations started, refused to agree to those terms. Thomas Paine and his revolutionary spirit was a little too much to handle for some. He was described as a rather prickly personality, especially in his writings, but was an otherwise moral, honest and fair man. The events of December 16, 1773, though, would bring him to the American colonies and help spark the coming War of Independence.	286	ENGLISH	1
For centuries domestic pigeons were kept in dovecotes, also dovecots, which were often referred to as a columbaria, pigeonnaire, or pigeon house. Domestic pigeons were easy to breed and provided a meat considered to be a delicacy by the wealthy and their manure was considered to be the best fertilizer available. Pigeon dung has a very high nitrogen content and has to be allowed to compost before it can be used otherwise it “burns” plants. The increasing use of gunpowder in warfare after the mid-1300’s also made pigeon dung very valuable due to its high nitrate content as it was then one of the few sources of the saltpeter [potassium nitrate] needed to manufacture gunpowder. Saltpeter became so valuable in the 16th and 17th centuries that dovecotes were often guarded to prevent the theft of the dung. Pigeon dung continued to be an important source of saltpeter until well into the 1700’s. Dove feathers were also a valued resource and used for stuffing mattresses and pillows. After the Norman invasion and occupation of England after 1066 the keeping of domestic pigeons, which were descended from rock doves, gradually became common among the aristocracy and gentry. The building of a dovecote was a feudal right [Droit de Colombier – the privilege of possessing a dovecote] restricted to the upper classes, including lords of the manor and the heads of religious institutions. The pigeons were allowed to fly freely over the surrounding countryside and feed where ever food was to be found. This was often to the detriment of the local inhabitants crops, but they just had to accept it as a lord’s feudal right although they were allowed to scare the birds away, but not to kill them. There is no known record of the Colkyns of Esole having a dovecote, but records regarding their property during their tenure at Esole and Freydevill are few and far between, but as lords of the manor they would have been entitled to have one. The 1349 St. Alban’s Abbey manorial rent roll for Esole records Sir John de Beauchamp as having “a messuage with dovecote”, as does Sir John’s Post Mortem Inquisition of 1360. The right to build a dovecote was a visible sign of the high status of its owner, and they were usually built in front of the owner’s house to be seen by visitors and passers-by. In my previous article on the Esole dovecote I speculated that the Esole dovecote was therefore probably under what is now Beauchamps Wood, which was then the forstall, or open space, in front of the Esole manor house, and a recent discovery at the Beauchamps excavation appears to confirm the location of the dovecote recorded during Sir John de Beauchamp’s tenure at Esole from the mid-1340’s to his death at Calais in December of 1360. The following is taken from a longer article regarding recent discoveries at Beauchamps written by Peter Hobbs of Old St. Alban’s Court, the present owner of Beauchamps, and the driving force behind the ongoing archaeological excavations there. “We put in another trench to confirm the continuation to the North East of what we now believed to be a 1798 ditch and bank around Beauchamps Wood – which it did –but in so doing to our astonishment exposed another rectangular building just below ground level. Finely built with stone corners and knapped flint, the breadth of the walls suggested it was more than one storey high. Unlike our other buildings, there was no floor other than earth but the mix of flint with some tile and fragments of yellow brick was similar to the construction of one of the earlier buildings we had excavated on site. Too small to be domestic accommodation, we concluded that we had probably found the dovecot that was recorded on site in 1349 and again in 1360. Dovecots then (and until the time of Charles 1) required royal permission to erect and were a significant statement of both the importance as well as the wealth of their owners. Ours certainly does that and of course at the time they were not just a source of eggs and meat but also were the principal source of the saltpetre for gunpowder for the fleet and royal artillery. If our assessment is correct, this would be the earliest recorded domestic example of its kind as far as we can research in East Kent. But who built it? Clive Webb has researched who was sufficiently rich and important at the time to be allowed to erect it. (We suspect it was later dismantled but further excavation will be required to throw more light on that.) One clue is that the Abbot of St Albans had managed to secure possession of that piece of the Manor of Easole ( whilst the de Say family still retained lordship) in or just after 1346 whilst it seems Sir John purchased the land and buildings from the Colkyn family who had held them for 50 years or so at about the same time. He then paid the Abbot a manorial rent of £2 12shillings and 6pence pa (an indexed £2000 or more realistically in labour terms £38000 and in comparitive income terms £75000. Given what a mess the Abbey was making of it’s main finances at the time, they had a pretty astute estate manager – the Cellarer – then. ). The land holding arrangements involved in all this are complex in our terms and not worth describing here even if I understood them fully. Sir John was a famous name: bearer of the Royal Standard at the Battle of Crecy, member of the Garter together with the Black Prince, highly successful general against the French, Governor of Calais and Admiral of the fleet and extremely wealthy. We believe he probably demolished most of the existing buildings and erected a new two storey house and other buildings like the dovecot as well as digging the ditch which separated his land from the rest of the estate lying to the South. Given his likely sources of intelligence, he may well have been aware of the plague which we know as the Black Death which was sweeping through European cities and made preparations to base himself close to Dover (fast route to Calais) and Sandwich (harbour for all his troops and supplies for France) but clear of those urban centres and their potential risks. Our site was ideal being equidistant from both but still close to the main roads. Certainly he was an highly able and intelligent and successful man and if anybody could see trouble, he would have been the man and was making the best provision he could. (Brexit anyone?) We have a manorial roll for 1349 and whilst Canterbury had already lost more than a third of its inhabitants to the plague, including the Lord Mayor, Nonington appears untouched so his foresight was borne out – although the plague still got him in 1360 in Calais where he had been dispatched by the King to rescue John of Gaunt who had been trapped by the French when he was on a plundering raid. Of course, this discovery persuaded us to test whether the 1798 ditch, driven straight through the foundations of our probable dovecot, had also cut through the roadway into the site from the West that we had previously tentatively identified. Indeed it did but the excavations are revealing further walling again on a different axis to everything else we had as well as shallow piles of flint which are being investigated to see what, if anything, lies underneath. There are some weeks at least of work to try to bottom what may have been on this part of the site. So having over a year ago assumed that we had most if not all the information available to us in the ground outside Beauchamps Wood, events have shown how wrong we are! One further observation: the supreme disinterest in what is going on by the vast majority of those passing by. May be they feel sufficiently informed by these articles? (Um. Ask the Editor) But there is one interest – virtually all the metal rods we use to mark out the site and tape off areas have disappeared which is a pity. The Dover Archaeological Group is professionally led but the members are all volunteers and the Group receive no funding whilst they uncover so much of which was completely unknown in our local history so these sorts of mean actions are a disappointment”. The following gallery contains photographs of the newly discovered and excavated Esole dovecote taken by Clive Webb in May of 2019. Fourteenth century dovecotes were often built from stone and flint, with the nesting holes, which had to be dark, private and dry, built into the flint walls from the bottom to the top. After the arrival of the omnivorous brown rat into England in the early 1700’s, which replaced the mainly vegetarian black rat, the first row of nest holes were built a couple of feet or more above ground level to prevent the predatory brown rats from getting into the holes and destroying the eggs and squabs. Existing dovecotes had the nest holes in the lower couple of feet of the wall blocked up. The inside walls of dovecotes were often plastered and painted white as the birds are attracted by white surfaces, and this helped to encourage them to stay. Some dovecotes had L shaped nesting holes, they are thought to have been made in that shape to accommodate the birds’ tails and in imitation of the nesting hole shape most favoured by wild birds. There was usually a ledge just below the entrance to the nesting hole which provided a perch for the birds. A ladder was obviously needed to reach the nesting boxes to harvest the eggs and squabs, and for centuries a traditional ladder was used in dovecotes of all shapes and sizes. One innovation came into common use in England in the early 18th century onwards when larger circular dovecotes were fitted with a revolving ladder, often referred to as a potence. This was a revolving wooden pole mounted on a plinth which had arms onto which ladders could be attached and suspended a few feet off the ground. Instead of having to continually move a conventional ladder around the wall the harvester could simply rotate the potence through 360 degrees to move round to fresh nesting boxes. Pigeon meat was considered a delicacy with usually only the young birds, known as squabs, being eaten. In the 14th century humorist medical books stated that squab was “hot and moist” food, but the meat of older pigeons was hot, dry, and “barely edible”. Pigeons feed their young on regurgitated “pigeon milk” which means they can begin to hatch their young as early as March and continue on into October or even early November. The squabs were harvested when they were around 28-30 days old, as they were by then large enough to eat but unable to fly and therefore easy to catch. A number of birds were allowed to mature to provide future breeding stock. Various fourteenth and fifteenth century, and later, household accounts indicate that peak harvest times were April and May, and then from August to early December. There would almost certainly be no squabs from December to late March so the de Beauchamps and their successors at Esole would have enjoyed a ready supply of squabs for nine or so months of the year. Restrictions of the ownership of dovecotes were enforced until the early 1600’s, after which time they began to be built by all classes from aristocrats to country cottagers and many examples of sixteenth to nineteenth century dovecotes are still to be found. The keeping of pigeons for food declined in the nineteenth century as much cheaper meat became more readily available all year round.	<urn:uuid:cc5baf73-7a09-4d8e-92e6-af1ddf1d7ff1>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.nonington.org.uk/the-esole-manor-dovecote-nonington-new-discoveries-with-picture-gallery-revised-5-8-19/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250608295.52/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123041345-20200123070345-00355.warc.gz	en	0.986991	2,459	3.546875	4	[ -0.12567450106143951, 0.21878504753112793, 0.31280434131622314, 0.0740114152431488, 0.5196458697319031, -0.044031109660863876, 0.4951767325401306, -0.0505237802863121, -0.07660896331071854, 0.14915287494659424, -0.6591437458992004, -0.6122470498085022, 0.029351476579904556, 0.2466704696416...	2	For centuries domestic pigeons were kept in dovecotes, also dovecots, which were often referred to as a columbaria, pigeonnaire, or pigeon house. Domestic pigeons were easy to breed and provided a meat considered to be a delicacy by the wealthy and their manure was considered to be the best fertilizer available. Pigeon dung has a very high nitrogen content and has to be allowed to compost before it can be used otherwise it “burns” plants. The increasing use of gunpowder in warfare after the mid-1300’s also made pigeon dung very valuable due to its high nitrate content as it was then one of the few sources of the saltpeter [potassium nitrate] needed to manufacture gunpowder. Saltpeter became so valuable in the 16th and 17th centuries that dovecotes were often guarded to prevent the theft of the dung. Pigeon dung continued to be an important source of saltpeter until well into the 1700’s. Dove feathers were also a valued resource and used for stuffing mattresses and pillows. After the Norman invasion and occupation of England after 1066 the keeping of domestic pigeons, which were descended from rock doves, gradually became common among the aristocracy and gentry. The building of a dovecote was a feudal right [Droit de Colombier – the privilege of possessing a dovecote] restricted to the upper classes, including lords of the manor and the heads of religious institutions. The pigeons were allowed to fly freely over the surrounding countryside and feed where ever food was to be found. This was often to the detriment of the local inhabitants crops, but they just had to accept it as a lord’s feudal right although they were allowed to scare the birds away, but not to kill them. There is no known record of the Colkyns of Esole having a dovecote, but records regarding their property during their tenure at Esole and Freydevill are few and far between, but as lords of the manor they would have been entitled to have one. The 1349 St. Alban’s Abbey manorial rent roll for Esole records Sir John de Beauchamp as having “a messuage with dovecote”, as does Sir John’s Post Mortem Inquisition of 1360. The right to build a dovecote was a visible sign of the high status of its owner, and they were usually built in front of the owner’s house to be seen by visitors and passers-by. In my previous article on the Esole dovecote I speculated that the Esole dovecote was therefore probably under what is now Beauchamps Wood, which was then the forstall, or open space, in front of the Esole manor house, and a recent discovery at the Beauchamps excavation appears to confirm the location of the dovecote recorded during Sir John de Beauchamp’s tenure at Esole from the mid-1340’s to his death at Calais in December of 1360. The following is taken from a longer article regarding recent discoveries at Beauchamps written by Peter Hobbs of Old St. Alban’s Court, the present owner of Beauchamps, and the driving force behind the ongoing archaeological excavations there. “We put in another trench to confirm the continuation to the North East of what we now believed to be a 1798 ditch and bank around Beauchamps Wood – which it did –but in so doing to our astonishment exposed another rectangular building just below ground level. Finely built with stone corners and knapped flint, the breadth of the walls suggested it was more than one storey high. Unlike our other buildings, there was no floor other than earth but the mix of flint with some tile and fragments of yellow brick was similar to the construction of one of the earlier buildings we had excavated on site. Too small to be domestic accommodation, we concluded that we had probably found the dovecot that was recorded on site in 1349 and again in 1360. Dovecots then (and until the time of Charles 1) required royal permission to erect and were a significant statement of both the importance as well as the wealth of their owners. Ours certainly does that and of course at the time they were not just a source of eggs and meat but also were the principal source of the saltpetre for gunpowder for the fleet and royal artillery. If our assessment is correct, this would be the earliest recorded domestic example of its kind as far as we can research in East Kent. But who built it? Clive Webb has researched who was sufficiently rich and important at the time to be allowed to erect it. (We suspect it was later dismantled but further excavation will be required to throw more light on that.) One clue is that the Abbot of St Albans had managed to secure possession of that piece of the Manor of Easole ( whilst the de Say family still retained lordship) in or just after 1346 whilst it seems Sir John purchased the land and buildings from the Colkyn family who had held them for 50 years or so at about the same time. He then paid the Abbot a manorial rent of £2 12shillings and 6pence pa (an indexed £2000 or more realistically in labour terms £38000 and in comparitive income terms £75000. Given what a mess the Abbey was making of it’s main finances at the time, they had a pretty astute estate manager – the Cellarer – then. ). The land holding arrangements involved in all this are complex in our terms and not worth describing here even if I understood them fully. Sir John was a famous name: bearer of the Royal Standard at the Battle of Crecy, member of the Garter together with the Black Prince, highly successful general against the French, Governor of Calais and Admiral of the fleet and extremely wealthy. We believe he probably demolished most of the existing buildings and erected a new two storey house and other buildings like the dovecot as well as digging the ditch which separated his land from the rest of the estate lying to the South. Given his likely sources of intelligence, he may well have been aware of the plague which we know as the Black Death which was sweeping through European cities and made preparations to base himself close to Dover (fast route to Calais) and Sandwich (harbour for all his troops and supplies for France) but clear of those urban centres and their potential risks. Our site was ideal being equidistant from both but still close to the main roads. Certainly he was an highly able and intelligent and successful man and if anybody could see trouble, he would have been the man and was making the best provision he could. (Brexit anyone?) We have a manorial roll for 1349 and whilst Canterbury had already lost more than a third of its inhabitants to the plague, including the Lord Mayor, Nonington appears untouched so his foresight was borne out – although the plague still got him in 1360 in Calais where he had been dispatched by the King to rescue John of Gaunt who had been trapped by the French when he was on a plundering raid. Of course, this discovery persuaded us to test whether the 1798 ditch, driven straight through the foundations of our probable dovecot, had also cut through the roadway into the site from the West that we had previously tentatively identified. Indeed it did but the excavations are revealing further walling again on a different axis to everything else we had as well as shallow piles of flint which are being investigated to see what, if anything, lies underneath. There are some weeks at least of work to try to bottom what may have been on this part of the site. So having over a year ago assumed that we had most if not all the information available to us in the ground outside Beauchamps Wood, events have shown how wrong we are! One further observation: the supreme disinterest in what is going on by the vast majority of those passing by. May be they feel sufficiently informed by these articles? (Um. Ask the Editor) But there is one interest – virtually all the metal rods we use to mark out the site and tape off areas have disappeared which is a pity. The Dover Archaeological Group is professionally led but the members are all volunteers and the Group receive no funding whilst they uncover so much of which was completely unknown in our local history so these sorts of mean actions are a disappointment”. The following gallery contains photographs of the newly discovered and excavated Esole dovecote taken by Clive Webb in May of 2019. Fourteenth century dovecotes were often built from stone and flint, with the nesting holes, which had to be dark, private and dry, built into the flint walls from the bottom to the top. After the arrival of the omnivorous brown rat into England in the early 1700’s, which replaced the mainly vegetarian black rat, the first row of nest holes were built a couple of feet or more above ground level to prevent the predatory brown rats from getting into the holes and destroying the eggs and squabs. Existing dovecotes had the nest holes in the lower couple of feet of the wall blocked up. The inside walls of dovecotes were often plastered and painted white as the birds are attracted by white surfaces, and this helped to encourage them to stay. Some dovecotes had L shaped nesting holes, they are thought to have been made in that shape to accommodate the birds’ tails and in imitation of the nesting hole shape most favoured by wild birds. There was usually a ledge just below the entrance to the nesting hole which provided a perch for the birds. A ladder was obviously needed to reach the nesting boxes to harvest the eggs and squabs, and for centuries a traditional ladder was used in dovecotes of all shapes and sizes. One innovation came into common use in England in the early 18th century onwards when larger circular dovecotes were fitted with a revolving ladder, often referred to as a potence. This was a revolving wooden pole mounted on a plinth which had arms onto which ladders could be attached and suspended a few feet off the ground. Instead of having to continually move a conventional ladder around the wall the harvester could simply rotate the potence through 360 degrees to move round to fresh nesting boxes. Pigeon meat was considered a delicacy with usually only the young birds, known as squabs, being eaten. In the 14th century humorist medical books stated that squab was “hot and moist” food, but the meat of older pigeons was hot, dry, and “barely edible”. Pigeons feed their young on regurgitated “pigeon milk” which means they can begin to hatch their young as early as March and continue on into October or even early November. The squabs were harvested when they were around 28-30 days old, as they were by then large enough to eat but unable to fly and therefore easy to catch. A number of birds were allowed to mature to provide future breeding stock. Various fourteenth and fifteenth century, and later, household accounts indicate that peak harvest times were April and May, and then from August to early December. There would almost certainly be no squabs from December to late March so the de Beauchamps and their successors at Esole would have enjoyed a ready supply of squabs for nine or so months of the year. Restrictions of the ownership of dovecotes were enforced until the early 1600’s, after which time they began to be built by all classes from aristocrats to country cottagers and many examples of sixteenth to nineteenth century dovecotes are still to be found. The keeping of pigeons for food declined in the nineteenth century as much cheaper meat became more readily available all year round.	2,492	ENGLISH	1
An ossuary is a chest, building, or site made to serve as the final resting place of human skeletal remains. In first-century Judaism, when space for burials was scarce, the use of ossuaries became common because of limited space for tombs; once a body had become skeletonised, the bones were collected and placed in an ossuary. The ossuary of the high priest Caiaphas has been discovered from these times. In 2002, an ossuary allegedly belonging to St. James the brother of Jesus was brought to public attention; its authenticity is uncertain (according to the article on St. James, it was shown to be a modern forgery in a report published in June 2003, and the forger was arrested). In Europe, limited cemetery space or other unusual needs in some areas again led to the reuse of burial plots and the recovery of human remains to be stored in ossuaries. One celebrated such site is the Sedlec ossuary in the Czech Republic.	<urn:uuid:ba527c39-7d13-489b-8463-a0651547857f>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.infomutt.com/o/os/ossuary.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598800.30/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120135447-20200120164447-00068.warc.gz	en	0.983374	211	3.34375	3	[ -0.305878609418869, 0.3325527608394623, -0.02783622220158577, -0.3967943787574768, 0.10647905617952347, -0.21469885110855103, -0.20753809809684753, -0.033336445689201355, 0.024477902799844742, 0.02775747887790203, 0.1373397707939148, -0.7702491283416748, 0.04302533343434334, 0.417916744947...	3	An ossuary is a chest, building, or site made to serve as the final resting place of human skeletal remains. In first-century Judaism, when space for burials was scarce, the use of ossuaries became common because of limited space for tombs; once a body had become skeletonised, the bones were collected and placed in an ossuary. The ossuary of the high priest Caiaphas has been discovered from these times. In 2002, an ossuary allegedly belonging to St. James the brother of Jesus was brought to public attention; its authenticity is uncertain (according to the article on St. James, it was shown to be a modern forgery in a report published in June 2003, and the forger was arrested). In Europe, limited cemetery space or other unusual needs in some areas again led to the reuse of burial plots and the recovery of human remains to be stored in ossuaries. One celebrated such site is the Sedlec ossuary in the Czech Republic.	208	ENGLISH	1
Many of the traditions of the Inuit people, including language, beliefs, customs, and so on, have develop over thousands of years. They believe that humans, animals, and forces of nature had spirits, and when something went wrong, the spirits were not happy. The Inuit people have a long tradition of oral literature and storytelling. Before they had a writing system, they passed stories from one generation to another. And that is how they preserved their own tradition and culture. Inuit legends and history was kept alive by storytelling, and that is how we learn about their tradition nowadays. As mentioned previously, the Inuit religion is “animism”. They believe that all living and non-living things have a spirit. That includes humans, animals, forces of nature, but also inanimate objects. When a spirit dies, the spirit continues to live in a different world, the one Inuit people call the spirit world. Powerful religious leaders like Shamans have enough power to control the spirits. They use charms and dances as a way to communicate with the spirit world. Shamans wore cared masks, in most cases representing an animal while performing the ritual. The Inuit people believed that the masks have power to enable the Shaman to communicate with the spirits. In order to please the spirits, Shamans often recommended that the Inuit people offer gifts to the spirits. Let’s talk more about the Spirits of the Inuit people. There were certain guidelines that they were supposed to follow to make the spirits happy. Illnesses, bad hunt, and bad weather, all of these conditions were blamed on displeased spirits. The Inuit people had a ritual for hunting and eating food, all just so they can please the spirits living in the animals. While hunting, the Inuit people had to pay a deep respect to the spirit of the animal, just so that the spirit would reappear in another animal. If they did not pay their respect, it was believed that the spirit would reappear as a demon. Souls, or spirits of humans could also be lost and stolen due to madness and illness. In the belief system of the Inuit, the human was made of three parts: body, name, and soul. When an individual dies, the body was the only part to die. The spirit and the name continue to live in a new body. Names of dead relatives were given to babies to ensure that the soul and name could continue living. There were many ceremonies that helped the Inuit people practice their religion and belief system. The main instrument of the ceremonies was dancing and one-sided drum. The drums were made of walrus stomach, walrus bladder, or caribou skin stretched over a wooden hoop. Drum dances occurred inside large snow houses (called igloos) with up to 60 people. During the singing and dancing, Inuit people told stories of the spirits. There were dances of different nature. Some were religious, others were for welcoming travelers or celebrating a hunt. In terms of religious rituals, Shamans performed healing rituals in ceremonial houses called Kashims. After a large hunt, the ceremony called “Bladder Dance” was performed. The Inuit people believed that the soul of the animals was inside the bladder so they honored the bladder, and returned it to the sea so it can find a new body. The most important spirit in the Inuit world, tradition, religion, and culture was the Goddess of the Sea, called Sedna. They believed she lived at the bottom of the ocean and controlled the seal, whales, and other sea animals. If they made Sedna happy, she would provide food for them. She is also known as the “lubricious one”. Her representation is different, depending on the region where the Inuit people live. The Romanovs were a high-ranking family in Russia during the 16th and 17th century. In 1613, Mikhail Romanov became the first Romanov czar of Russia, following a fifteen-year...	<urn:uuid:9ea65668-712f-4f35-a429-c8d51b8e6a56>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.documentarytube.com/articles/the-tradition-and-rituals-of-the-inuit-people	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251690379.95/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126195918-20200126225918-00356.warc.gz	en	0.981502	832	3.8125	4	[ 0.04251455143094063, 0.674413800239563, 0.13968941569328308, 0.011202423833310604, -0.2323867529630661, -0.06493480503559113, 0.5893144011497498, -0.1492786556482315, -0.12731009721755981, 0.29503244161605835, -0.006503930315375328, -0.06686678528785706, -0.05291202664375305, -0.0253660716...	1	Many of the traditions of the Inuit people, including language, beliefs, customs, and so on, have develop over thousands of years. They believe that humans, animals, and forces of nature had spirits, and when something went wrong, the spirits were not happy. The Inuit people have a long tradition of oral literature and storytelling. Before they had a writing system, they passed stories from one generation to another. And that is how they preserved their own tradition and culture. Inuit legends and history was kept alive by storytelling, and that is how we learn about their tradition nowadays. As mentioned previously, the Inuit religion is “animism”. They believe that all living and non-living things have a spirit. That includes humans, animals, forces of nature, but also inanimate objects. When a spirit dies, the spirit continues to live in a different world, the one Inuit people call the spirit world. Powerful religious leaders like Shamans have enough power to control the spirits. They use charms and dances as a way to communicate with the spirit world. Shamans wore cared masks, in most cases representing an animal while performing the ritual. The Inuit people believed that the masks have power to enable the Shaman to communicate with the spirits. In order to please the spirits, Shamans often recommended that the Inuit people offer gifts to the spirits. Let’s talk more about the Spirits of the Inuit people. There were certain guidelines that they were supposed to follow to make the spirits happy. Illnesses, bad hunt, and bad weather, all of these conditions were blamed on displeased spirits. The Inuit people had a ritual for hunting and eating food, all just so they can please the spirits living in the animals. While hunting, the Inuit people had to pay a deep respect to the spirit of the animal, just so that the spirit would reappear in another animal. If they did not pay their respect, it was believed that the spirit would reappear as a demon. Souls, or spirits of humans could also be lost and stolen due to madness and illness. In the belief system of the Inuit, the human was made of three parts: body, name, and soul. When an individual dies, the body was the only part to die. The spirit and the name continue to live in a new body. Names of dead relatives were given to babies to ensure that the soul and name could continue living. There were many ceremonies that helped the Inuit people practice their religion and belief system. The main instrument of the ceremonies was dancing and one-sided drum. The drums were made of walrus stomach, walrus bladder, or caribou skin stretched over a wooden hoop. Drum dances occurred inside large snow houses (called igloos) with up to 60 people. During the singing and dancing, Inuit people told stories of the spirits. There were dances of different nature. Some were religious, others were for welcoming travelers or celebrating a hunt. In terms of religious rituals, Shamans performed healing rituals in ceremonial houses called Kashims. After a large hunt, the ceremony called “Bladder Dance” was performed. The Inuit people believed that the soul of the animals was inside the bladder so they honored the bladder, and returned it to the sea so it can find a new body. The most important spirit in the Inuit world, tradition, religion, and culture was the Goddess of the Sea, called Sedna. They believed she lived at the bottom of the ocean and controlled the seal, whales, and other sea animals. If they made Sedna happy, she would provide food for them. She is also known as the “lubricious one”. Her representation is different, depending on the region where the Inuit people live. The Romanovs were a high-ranking family in Russia during the 16th and 17th century. In 1613, Mikhail Romanov became the first Romanov czar of Russia, following a fifteen-year...	816	ENGLISH	1
The Great Depression, which generally is considered to have begun with the stock market crash in October 1929, changed the way America worked 12. At the end of the Roaring Twenties when the stock market and the economy soared, the crash appeared inevitable in retrospect. More goods were being produced than were needed, and without people to buy them, jobs disappeared. The event was a part of a spiral that ended with production of materials for World War II. Deflation, the opposite of inflation, occurs when the basic value of money goes up. When too many goods are available, the price goes down, so money essentially is worth more. For example, during the 1920s, there was a dramatic expansion of office space in cities, particularly New York City. This meant that office space could be found all around the city, so prices went down--but no one was occupying the space. A prime example is the Empire State Building, begun in 1930 and opened in 1931. Its 102 stories went largely unoccupied throughout the Depression, and the building did not become profitable until 1950 12. During the 1920s, the United States was furiously producing products from automobiles to radios that were being purchased largely on credit. By 1929, the markets were saturated with such products and demand began to fall. Because of the runs on banks and the frantic sell-off of stocks, credit became hard to get even for those wanting a new car. Once there was a major backlog of products no one was buying, there was little money coming into the companies that made the products. This resulted in massive layoffs of workers throughout the country. Without income--and there was no unemployment insurance before Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal in the 1930s--people began to lose their homes and had little money to buy anything other than food. Demand for products and services dried up, which led to even more unemployment. Because no one had any money to buy products, the people who built the products were out of work. They also had little money to buy anything, and the spiral continued. Social programs were not government-run at the time, so there were few places to turn to for help other than religious and other charities. They, too, were strained by the sheer numbers of people turning up for bread and soup. The companies had no money coming in, so many of them folded. Those that remained had few workers. By 1933, nearly 25 percent of the workforce was unemployed. - Fox Photos/Hulton Archive/Getty Images	<urn:uuid:64502397-8504-44af-9de7-4f5d8e331c0e>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://healthfully.com/the-three-major-causes-of-the-great-depression-3513044.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250605075.24/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121192553-20200121221553-00312.warc.gz	en	0.990737	506	3.96875	4	[ -0.05363273620605469, -0.10752768814563751, 0.2619827687740326, 0.16393303871154785, -0.20992612838745117, 0.055906184017658234, -0.31138911843299866, 0.2756965756416321, -0.21117708086967468, -0.16795827448368073, 0.47176021337509155, 0.6451815366744995, 0.07567591965198517, 0.23096980154...	1	The Great Depression, which generally is considered to have begun with the stock market crash in October 1929, changed the way America worked 12. At the end of the Roaring Twenties when the stock market and the economy soared, the crash appeared inevitable in retrospect. More goods were being produced than were needed, and without people to buy them, jobs disappeared. The event was a part of a spiral that ended with production of materials for World War II. Deflation, the opposite of inflation, occurs when the basic value of money goes up. When too many goods are available, the price goes down, so money essentially is worth more. For example, during the 1920s, there was a dramatic expansion of office space in cities, particularly New York City. This meant that office space could be found all around the city, so prices went down--but no one was occupying the space. A prime example is the Empire State Building, begun in 1930 and opened in 1931. Its 102 stories went largely unoccupied throughout the Depression, and the building did not become profitable until 1950 12. During the 1920s, the United States was furiously producing products from automobiles to radios that were being purchased largely on credit. By 1929, the markets were saturated with such products and demand began to fall. Because of the runs on banks and the frantic sell-off of stocks, credit became hard to get even for those wanting a new car. Once there was a major backlog of products no one was buying, there was little money coming into the companies that made the products. This resulted in massive layoffs of workers throughout the country. Without income--and there was no unemployment insurance before Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal in the 1930s--people began to lose their homes and had little money to buy anything other than food. Demand for products and services dried up, which led to even more unemployment. Because no one had any money to buy products, the people who built the products were out of work. They also had little money to buy anything, and the spiral continued. Social programs were not government-run at the time, so there were few places to turn to for help other than religious and other charities. They, too, were strained by the sheer numbers of people turning up for bread and soup. The companies had no money coming in, so many of them folded. Those that remained had few workers. By 1933, nearly 25 percent of the workforce was unemployed. - Fox Photos/Hulton Archive/Getty Images	542	ENGLISH	1
Willem de Kooning If Jackson Pollock was the public face of the New York avant-garde, Willem de Kooning could be described as an artist’s artist, who was perceived by many of his peers as its leader. He was born in Rotterdam, where he grew up in an impoverished household and attended the Rotterdam Academy, training in fine and commercial arts. In 1926, the adventurous young artist stowed away on a ship bound for Argentina. While the ship was docked in Virginia, de Kooning slipped off, skirted immigration, and made his way to New Jersey—and so began the rest of his life. In New Jersey, de Kooning found work as a house painter. Large brushes and fluid paints were the tools of this trade, ones that he would continue to utilize throughout his artistic career. His dual foundations in drawing and craftsmanship underlay all of his work, even his most abstract paintings. De Kooning’s next stop was New York, where he forged his artistic career. The Jazz Age was in full swing when he moved to the city, and he quickly fell under the sway of the lyrical freedom of jazz and the abstract art made by other artists under its influence. New York also brought him into contact with the work of Henri Matisse and with contemporaries including John Graham and Arshile Gorky, with whom he developed a particularly close and inspiring friendship. In 1929, the Great Depression brought the Jazz Age to a crashing end. As part of President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s Works Progress Administration (WPA) program, in the 1930s de Kooning was commissioned to design public murals; he worked under Fernand Léger, who proved to be an important influence. Though his studies for the murals were never realized, they were among his first abstractions, and the experience of working on this project spurred him to pursue art making full-time. By the 1940s, de Kooning had gained prominence as an artist. Over the course of a career lasting nearly seven decades, he would work through a wide array of styles, eventually cementing himself as a crucial link from New York School painting to European modernism. Physical labor and countless revisions were constants in his work, which ranged from abstraction to figuration, often merging the two. “I never was interested in how to make a good painting…,” he once said. “I didn’t work on it with the idea of perfection, but to see how far one could go…”1 The female figure was an especially fertile subject for the artist. His paintings of women were among his most controversial works during his lifetime and continue to be debated today. Introduction by Karen Kedmey, independent art historian and writer, 2017 The Long Run Nov 11, 2017– May 5, 2019 Robert Rauschenberg: Among Friends Sep 17, 2017 Painting and Sculpture Changes 2013 Dec 31, 2013 Eyes Closed/Eyes Open: Recent Acquisitions in Drawings Aug 9, 2012– Jan 25, 2013 de Kooning: A Retrospective Sep 18, 2011– Jan 9, 2012 - Willem de Kooning has online.	<urn:uuid:4154815b-7667-4db3-bf47-8ffc840e4f92>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.moma.org/artists/3213	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251796127.92/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129102701-20200129132701-00304.warc.gz	en	0.985537	682	3.28125	3	[ -0.2322995364665985, 0.25604158639907837, 0.28709378838539124, -0.007192549295723438, 0.10043895244598389, 0.1132669746875763, 0.060637179762125015, 0.19416366517543793, -0.2719546854496002, -0.1827438771724701, 0.16024565696716309, 0.002185661345720291, -0.18658745288848877, 0.64863932132...	2	Willem de Kooning If Jackson Pollock was the public face of the New York avant-garde, Willem de Kooning could be described as an artist’s artist, who was perceived by many of his peers as its leader. He was born in Rotterdam, where he grew up in an impoverished household and attended the Rotterdam Academy, training in fine and commercial arts. In 1926, the adventurous young artist stowed away on a ship bound for Argentina. While the ship was docked in Virginia, de Kooning slipped off, skirted immigration, and made his way to New Jersey—and so began the rest of his life. In New Jersey, de Kooning found work as a house painter. Large brushes and fluid paints were the tools of this trade, ones that he would continue to utilize throughout his artistic career. His dual foundations in drawing and craftsmanship underlay all of his work, even his most abstract paintings. De Kooning’s next stop was New York, where he forged his artistic career. The Jazz Age was in full swing when he moved to the city, and he quickly fell under the sway of the lyrical freedom of jazz and the abstract art made by other artists under its influence. New York also brought him into contact with the work of Henri Matisse and with contemporaries including John Graham and Arshile Gorky, with whom he developed a particularly close and inspiring friendship. In 1929, the Great Depression brought the Jazz Age to a crashing end. As part of President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s Works Progress Administration (WPA) program, in the 1930s de Kooning was commissioned to design public murals; he worked under Fernand Léger, who proved to be an important influence. Though his studies for the murals were never realized, they were among his first abstractions, and the experience of working on this project spurred him to pursue art making full-time. By the 1940s, de Kooning had gained prominence as an artist. Over the course of a career lasting nearly seven decades, he would work through a wide array of styles, eventually cementing himself as a crucial link from New York School painting to European modernism. Physical labor and countless revisions were constants in his work, which ranged from abstraction to figuration, often merging the two. “I never was interested in how to make a good painting…,” he once said. “I didn’t work on it with the idea of perfection, but to see how far one could go…”1 The female figure was an especially fertile subject for the artist. His paintings of women were among his most controversial works during his lifetime and continue to be debated today. Introduction by Karen Kedmey, independent art historian and writer, 2017 The Long Run Nov 11, 2017– May 5, 2019 Robert Rauschenberg: Among Friends Sep 17, 2017 Painting and Sculpture Changes 2013 Dec 31, 2013 Eyes Closed/Eyes Open: Recent Acquisitions in Drawings Aug 9, 2012– Jan 25, 2013 de Kooning: A Retrospective Sep 18, 2011– Jan 9, 2012 - Willem de Kooning has online.	724	ENGLISH	1
The Battle of Little Bighorn was one filled with negligence. Custer was the head of the 7th Cavalry and was tasked with helping keep the Native Americans in line and on their reservations, especially since some Natives had become militant in face of what they viewed as wrongs persecuted unto them by the government. As we all know now, they were correct; they were being wronged. George Armstrong Custer Custer had bad intel to start things out. He had been told of 800 hostiles, but there would eventually be nearly 2000. Although he would later ascertain information hinting at a larger enemy force, he decided not to make changes to his approach. Custer would go on to separate his men into 4 smaller detachments because he feared the Natives might try to escape, thus leaving each detachment even more extremely outnumbered. Moreover, when given the opportunity to accept reinforcements, he also turned them down, saying that his men could handle anything the Native Americans could throw at him. Spoiler Alert: The Battle of Little Bighorn was also known as Custer’s Last Stand. Sitting Bull, a Lakota Holy man, is said to have prophesied the victory. Of all the battles on this list, it is by far of the smallest scale. Because of this, it seemingly takes on more personal traits. The stories relating to the pivotal characters have room to breath. The battle is not so overly complicated by documents that try to account for the whereabouts of thousands of troops at any given time that it obfuscates the larger picture. The battle site wasn’t particularly large; its smaller scale gives it focus. The men in Custer’s detachment were slaughtered so thoroughly that no one lived to tell of it first hand, thus lending it an air of mystery. You can imagine the Native American’s plight and you can imagine the last moments as Custer and his men made their last stand. And yet, in some ways, you have to imagine what happened, because no one can say exactly what happened that day, just that it resulted in the slaughtering of Custer’s men.	<urn:uuid:61e5627a-2fcd-4400-8eef-1cc0411adcb9>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.gameskinny.com/0jq9i/5-battles-you-can-and-should-recreate-in-ultimate-epic-battle-simulator/4	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250589560.16/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117123339-20200117151339-00134.warc.gz	en	0.98717	438	3.375	3	[ -0.3489697575569153, 0.20994040369987488, 0.027259567752480507, -0.049176692962646484, -0.1252661496400833, -0.33147427439689636, -0.05889016017317772, -0.025651143863797188, -0.37373611330986023, -0.26020458340644836, 0.24867664277553558, -0.19372732937335968, 0.2188257873058319, 0.102241...	4	The Battle of Little Bighorn was one filled with negligence. Custer was the head of the 7th Cavalry and was tasked with helping keep the Native Americans in line and on their reservations, especially since some Natives had become militant in face of what they viewed as wrongs persecuted unto them by the government. As we all know now, they were correct; they were being wronged. George Armstrong Custer Custer had bad intel to start things out. He had been told of 800 hostiles, but there would eventually be nearly 2000. Although he would later ascertain information hinting at a larger enemy force, he decided not to make changes to his approach. Custer would go on to separate his men into 4 smaller detachments because he feared the Natives might try to escape, thus leaving each detachment even more extremely outnumbered. Moreover, when given the opportunity to accept reinforcements, he also turned them down, saying that his men could handle anything the Native Americans could throw at him. Spoiler Alert: The Battle of Little Bighorn was also known as Custer’s Last Stand. Sitting Bull, a Lakota Holy man, is said to have prophesied the victory. Of all the battles on this list, it is by far of the smallest scale. Because of this, it seemingly takes on more personal traits. The stories relating to the pivotal characters have room to breath. The battle is not so overly complicated by documents that try to account for the whereabouts of thousands of troops at any given time that it obfuscates the larger picture. The battle site wasn’t particularly large; its smaller scale gives it focus. The men in Custer’s detachment were slaughtered so thoroughly that no one lived to tell of it first hand, thus lending it an air of mystery. You can imagine the Native American’s plight and you can imagine the last moments as Custer and his men made their last stand. And yet, in some ways, you have to imagine what happened, because no one can say exactly what happened that day, just that it resulted in the slaughtering of Custer’s men.	436	ENGLISH	1
An introduction to the importance of the truman doctrine It echoed the " quarantine the aggressor " policy Truman's predecessor, Franklin D. Truman Depending on how old you are, it is possible that you have experienced many great presidents throughout your lifetime. Truman doctrine containment No matter how people perceived him, Truman had industrial-strength; he stood his ground on his beliefs. President Harry S. As a result, in , President Truman issued the Truman Doctrine which stated that the United States would supply aid to any country as long as they pledged to be democratic. Many historians consider his speech to Congress as the words that officially started the Cold War. Stevenson from Illinois that was helped by liberals of Eleanor Roosevelt organized labor and had Sen. His mother greatly supported his ideas and desires and wished him the best. Truman will be remembered in history for all his contributions and hard work put into our war effort and helping international economy. The medical metaphor extended beyond the immediate aims of the Truman Doctrine in that the imagery combined with fire and flood imagery evocative of disaster provided the United States with an easy transition to direct military confrontation in later years with communist forces in Korea and Vietnam. He also ended racial segregation in the civil service and the armed forces in These were the two influential people in the outcome of the Korean War. Faulkner August 3, The successes, or lack of success, of an American president is tied to the effectiveness of their presidential leadership. President Truman presidency was marked throughout by important foreign policy initiatives. Truman was faced with the difficult task of ending the war and caring for his country during the aftermath. Truman doctrine facts Roosevelt , had sought to impose to contain German and Japanese expansion in "quarantine" suggested the role of public health officials handling an infectious disease. He was born into the family of Martha Ellen Truman and John Anderson Truman, who was a mule trader as well as a farmer. While President Truman assumed office while inexperienced in global affairs, the doctrine demonstrated his firm stewardship on foreign policy. Truman was faced with the difficult task of ending the war and caring for his country during the aftermath. Truman was Democratic and Eisenhower was Republican. Roosevelt, in April His life would take him one of the most elaborate rides one could experience. These were the two influential people in the outcome of the Korean War. So far, the United States has gone through 42 Presidents who have all offered many new ideas that have aided our country tremendously. The Truman Doctrine was a major break from U. Taking over the office during the cold war, he fiercely protected his country and his allies against Harry S. Was the truman doctrine successful Roosevelt on April 12, It was in these ways a major step. After the British warned that they could no longer help Greece, and following Prime Minister Konstantinos Tsaldaris 's visit to Washington in December to ask for American assistance, the U. As the Turkish government would not submit to the Soviet Union's requests, tensions arose in the region, leading to a show of naval force on the side of the Soviets. This belief of America being a promiseland is shown today when the United States continually forces itself into wars in an attempt to press its ideology onto foreign nations. Unbenounced to the public, however, the real threat was not in any foreign nation, but in the domestic government. Truman will be remembered in history for all his contributions and hard work put into our war effort and helping international economy. All of these sections were assigned and questions were asked in class covering most of the readings. Despite becoming aware of the Nuclear weapon at Potsdam, it was not until Truman announced that he was going to use it on the Japanese did the fight for balance of power intensify. Since British assistance to Turkey had ended in , the U. His impact on international relations was key as he bridged the gap between the end of WW2 and the beginning of the Cold War. He argued that a Communist victory in the Greek Civil War would endanger the political stability of Turkey, which would undermine the political stability of the Middle East. based on 3 review	<urn:uuid:9121aa63-f909-4bab-b013-143cccabd671>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://katedyxezyzal.dellrichards.com/an-introduction-to-the-importance-of-the-truman-doctrine199479659rc.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251700988.64/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127143516-20200127173516-00337.warc.gz	en	0.980451	836	3.6875	4	[ -0.49862033128738403, 0.2829344868659973, 0.2972540259361267, -0.26529204845428467, 0.36326369643211365, 0.3310353755950928, 0.38231202960014343, 0.04732707515358925, -0.446340411901474, -0.2875249981880188, 0.22606261074543, 0.5578535795211792, 0.3807128667831421, 0.5410582423210144, 0....	1	An introduction to the importance of the truman doctrine It echoed the " quarantine the aggressor " policy Truman's predecessor, Franklin D. Truman Depending on how old you are, it is possible that you have experienced many great presidents throughout your lifetime. Truman doctrine containment No matter how people perceived him, Truman had industrial-strength; he stood his ground on his beliefs. President Harry S. As a result, in , President Truman issued the Truman Doctrine which stated that the United States would supply aid to any country as long as they pledged to be democratic. Many historians consider his speech to Congress as the words that officially started the Cold War. Stevenson from Illinois that was helped by liberals of Eleanor Roosevelt organized labor and had Sen. His mother greatly supported his ideas and desires and wished him the best. Truman will be remembered in history for all his contributions and hard work put into our war effort and helping international economy. The medical metaphor extended beyond the immediate aims of the Truman Doctrine in that the imagery combined with fire and flood imagery evocative of disaster provided the United States with an easy transition to direct military confrontation in later years with communist forces in Korea and Vietnam. He also ended racial segregation in the civil service and the armed forces in These were the two influential people in the outcome of the Korean War. Faulkner August 3, The successes, or lack of success, of an American president is tied to the effectiveness of their presidential leadership. President Truman presidency was marked throughout by important foreign policy initiatives. Truman was faced with the difficult task of ending the war and caring for his country during the aftermath. Truman doctrine facts Roosevelt , had sought to impose to contain German and Japanese expansion in "quarantine" suggested the role of public health officials handling an infectious disease. He was born into the family of Martha Ellen Truman and John Anderson Truman, who was a mule trader as well as a farmer. While President Truman assumed office while inexperienced in global affairs, the doctrine demonstrated his firm stewardship on foreign policy. Truman was faced with the difficult task of ending the war and caring for his country during the aftermath. Truman was Democratic and Eisenhower was Republican. Roosevelt, in April His life would take him one of the most elaborate rides one could experience. These were the two influential people in the outcome of the Korean War. So far, the United States has gone through 42 Presidents who have all offered many new ideas that have aided our country tremendously. The Truman Doctrine was a major break from U. Taking over the office during the cold war, he fiercely protected his country and his allies against Harry S. Was the truman doctrine successful Roosevelt on April 12, It was in these ways a major step. After the British warned that they could no longer help Greece, and following Prime Minister Konstantinos Tsaldaris 's visit to Washington in December to ask for American assistance, the U. As the Turkish government would not submit to the Soviet Union's requests, tensions arose in the region, leading to a show of naval force on the side of the Soviets. This belief of America being a promiseland is shown today when the United States continually forces itself into wars in an attempt to press its ideology onto foreign nations. Unbenounced to the public, however, the real threat was not in any foreign nation, but in the domestic government. Truman will be remembered in history for all his contributions and hard work put into our war effort and helping international economy. All of these sections were assigned and questions were asked in class covering most of the readings. Despite becoming aware of the Nuclear weapon at Potsdam, it was not until Truman announced that he was going to use it on the Japanese did the fight for balance of power intensify. Since British assistance to Turkey had ended in , the U. His impact on international relations was key as he bridged the gap between the end of WW2 and the beginning of the Cold War. He argued that a Communist victory in the Greek Civil War would endanger the political stability of Turkey, which would undermine the political stability of the Middle East. based on 3 review	836	ENGLISH	1
March 6, 2017 Dred held his wife’s hand as they looked into each other’s eyes. They had been fighting this battle for eleven years. They held out hope for a victory, but realized the odds were against them. Five of the nine judges were from the South. Another, from Pennsylvania, was pro-slavery. They were not the first to sue for their freedom, but they prayed their outcome would be a victory for all. Dred Scott was born in Southampton County, Virginia, shortly before 1800. His owner, Peter Blow, eventually took the Scott family with him to St. Louis, Missouri. After Blow died sometime in the early 1830’s, U.S. Army surgeon, John Emerson, purchased him. Beginning in 1834, Scott accompanied the Emerson family during several transfers that took them from the slave state of Missouri to Illinois, a free state, and Wisconsin Territory, which was also free. In 1838, the roughly 40-year-old Scott married 21-year-old Harriet Robinson. The slave of another army doctor, her ownership was transferred to Emerson. They all returned to Missouri in the early 1840’s, where Emerson died in 1843. With the doctor gone, Scott and his family wanted their freedom. Since they had lived several years in free areas, they believed they had earned their release. Scott tried to purchase their freedom from his widow, Irene, in 1846, but she refused. Scott had no choice but to sue. Scott was victorious with his first lawsuit. However, Emerson appealed to the Missouri Supreme Court, which ruled in her favor. During this time, she moved to Massachusetts and transferred ownership to her brother, John Sanford of New York. This allowed Scott to take his appeal to Federal Court, which he again lost. His next step: the Supreme Court. While all these lawsuits were transpiring, Congress administered changes on a national level. As I explained in , the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 forced abolitionists to form the Republican Party. The fight between slave states and free states already began drawing blood. Democrat President-elect James Buchanan prepared to enter the White House as the Supreme Court heard the Dred Scott vs. Sanford case. In what seemed equivalent to the president invoking his opinion onto the court, Buchanan contacted several justices asking for a vote for slavery. He wanted to try to secure several favorable outcomes. First, Buchanan wanted the winning decision to have votes from both the North and the South. As five justices were Southern and former slave owners, it seemed likely Scott would loose. Buchanan concluded a vote from a Northern justice would prevent push back from abolitionist. He did achieve some Northern votes. The Democrat ones. The only two dissenters were also the only two Republicans. Second, Buchanan sought a ruling that would end the slavery battle for good. Chief Justice Roger B. Taney obliged, using the court to push the Democrat agenda even further. Taney swore-in his fellow Andrew Jackson Administration colleague two days before the court released their verdict. (see ). Having already been tipped off to the result, Buchanan proclaimed the slavery issue would be “speedily and finally settled.” He continued, “To their decision, in common with all good citizens, I shall cheerfully submit, whatever this may be.” Not a bold statement considering he already knew the decision. On March 6, 1857, the Supreme Court ruled that Scott was not a citizen and therefore not legally able to sue. Yet Taney’s written decision proceeds way beyond the scope of the case. It attempted to cement slavery in the United States forever. The majority ruling decided that Scott, as a slave, had no right to sue as he was not a citizen. This could have been enough to satisfy the case. However, Taney did not stop there in his written opinion. He rendered a citizenship verdict on all Africans, past, present and future. Taney laid out a case claiming the Founders never meant for Africans to be citizens, ever. Except, in Justice Benjamin R. Curtis’ dissent, he clearly refutes this claim as several states recognized Africans as citizens with voting rights at the time of the . But Taney was only just getting started. He cited the , which prohibits denying a person’s property rights without due process. Therefore, even in a state where slavery was illegal, Taney argued slaves could not be taken from their owner nor considered free. To go even further, he inserted that Congress had no authority to prohibit territories from allowing slaves, rendering the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional. Taney believed his opinion put to rest the issues of slavery forever. In reality, it opened Pandora’s Box. Abolitionists, Republicans, and Northern states revolted. They immediately saw the ripple effects of Taney’s declarations. For people fighting to give blacks equal rights, Taney not only denied that goal forever, he took away the citizenship of blacks who already enjoyed it. Taney apologists argue he was trying to take the slavery issue out of Congress’ hands and giving it back to the states when he limited their authority. However, by also involving the , it was taking it out the states’ hands as well. Those states that already voted against slavery were now forced to allow slaveholders to enter with their slaves. Before long, Southerners would be settling in all states, regardless of the state’s slavery stance. With a stroke of a pen, Taney ensured slavery would infest the entire country with no hope for its abolishment. For the next three years, Republicans gained traction with Northerners, running on a platform to end slavery. Abraham Lincoln’s election meant a declaration of war for the South. Even though Lincoln said he would not abolish slavery, they seceded. (see ) Buchanan thought he won the battle. All he did was ensure a war. The overreach of Democrats to make slavery permanent forced the Civil War, which abolished slavery permanently. Liberty, there are times in life where it does seem like Satan is winning battle after battle. We fight hard only to be bloodied and injured. But our strength comes not from ourselves, but by knowing that the war is already won. As we approach Easter, during Lenten Season, we focus on Christ crucified realizing we don’t deserve to be victorious. (see ) But because of grace, God’s sweet and amazing grace, we stand on the battlefield knowing sin, death and the devil have been defeated once and for all. (see ) Immediately following the Supreme Court’s Dred Scott Decision, the Blow family bought Dred and Harriet and filed to release them. The Scott’s received their freedom on May 26, 1857. Dred died 18 months later from tuberculosis, but it was as a free man. Harriet survived through the Civil War, and lived long enough to see all slaves freed with the (1865), receive citizenship with the (1868) and witness black men receive voting rights with the (1870). (see ) Harriet died in June of 1876 knowing their fight was a victory for all. That’s my 2 cents. DREADFUL SCOTT DECISION	<urn:uuid:990b886e-0397-4cd3-8f8c-03ddb8bb76d7>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.thefactspaper.com/liberatingletters/2017/dreadful-scott-decision.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251779833.86/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128153713-20200128183713-00435.warc.gz	en	0.985501	1,500	3.59375	4	[ -0.5430344343185425, 0.46861234307289124, 0.06920260190963745, -0.3271372616291046, -0.30143657326698303, -0.005620036739856005, 0.14377336204051971, 0.01417645812034607, -0.14936593174934387, 0.14746856689453125, 0.2292669713497162, 0.306024432182312, -0.04900314658880234, 0.1715589463710...	3	March 6, 2017 Dred held his wife’s hand as they looked into each other’s eyes. They had been fighting this battle for eleven years. They held out hope for a victory, but realized the odds were against them. Five of the nine judges were from the South. Another, from Pennsylvania, was pro-slavery. They were not the first to sue for their freedom, but they prayed their outcome would be a victory for all. Dred Scott was born in Southampton County, Virginia, shortly before 1800. His owner, Peter Blow, eventually took the Scott family with him to St. Louis, Missouri. After Blow died sometime in the early 1830’s, U.S. Army surgeon, John Emerson, purchased him. Beginning in 1834, Scott accompanied the Emerson family during several transfers that took them from the slave state of Missouri to Illinois, a free state, and Wisconsin Territory, which was also free. In 1838, the roughly 40-year-old Scott married 21-year-old Harriet Robinson. The slave of another army doctor, her ownership was transferred to Emerson. They all returned to Missouri in the early 1840’s, where Emerson died in 1843. With the doctor gone, Scott and his family wanted their freedom. Since they had lived several years in free areas, they believed they had earned their release. Scott tried to purchase their freedom from his widow, Irene, in 1846, but she refused. Scott had no choice but to sue. Scott was victorious with his first lawsuit. However, Emerson appealed to the Missouri Supreme Court, which ruled in her favor. During this time, she moved to Massachusetts and transferred ownership to her brother, John Sanford of New York. This allowed Scott to take his appeal to Federal Court, which he again lost. His next step: the Supreme Court. While all these lawsuits were transpiring, Congress administered changes on a national level. As I explained in , the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 forced abolitionists to form the Republican Party. The fight between slave states and free states already began drawing blood. Democrat President-elect James Buchanan prepared to enter the White House as the Supreme Court heard the Dred Scott vs. Sanford case. In what seemed equivalent to the president invoking his opinion onto the court, Buchanan contacted several justices asking for a vote for slavery. He wanted to try to secure several favorable outcomes. First, Buchanan wanted the winning decision to have votes from both the North and the South. As five justices were Southern and former slave owners, it seemed likely Scott would loose. Buchanan concluded a vote from a Northern justice would prevent push back from abolitionist. He did achieve some Northern votes. The Democrat ones. The only two dissenters were also the only two Republicans. Second, Buchanan sought a ruling that would end the slavery battle for good. Chief Justice Roger B. Taney obliged, using the court to push the Democrat agenda even further. Taney swore-in his fellow Andrew Jackson Administration colleague two days before the court released their verdict. (see ). Having already been tipped off to the result, Buchanan proclaimed the slavery issue would be “speedily and finally settled.” He continued, “To their decision, in common with all good citizens, I shall cheerfully submit, whatever this may be.” Not a bold statement considering he already knew the decision. On March 6, 1857, the Supreme Court ruled that Scott was not a citizen and therefore not legally able to sue. Yet Taney’s written decision proceeds way beyond the scope of the case. It attempted to cement slavery in the United States forever. The majority ruling decided that Scott, as a slave, had no right to sue as he was not a citizen. This could have been enough to satisfy the case. However, Taney did not stop there in his written opinion. He rendered a citizenship verdict on all Africans, past, present and future. Taney laid out a case claiming the Founders never meant for Africans to be citizens, ever. Except, in Justice Benjamin R. Curtis’ dissent, he clearly refutes this claim as several states recognized Africans as citizens with voting rights at the time of the . But Taney was only just getting started. He cited the , which prohibits denying a person’s property rights without due process. Therefore, even in a state where slavery was illegal, Taney argued slaves could not be taken from their owner nor considered free. To go even further, he inserted that Congress had no authority to prohibit territories from allowing slaves, rendering the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional. Taney believed his opinion put to rest the issues of slavery forever. In reality, it opened Pandora’s Box. Abolitionists, Republicans, and Northern states revolted. They immediately saw the ripple effects of Taney’s declarations. For people fighting to give blacks equal rights, Taney not only denied that goal forever, he took away the citizenship of blacks who already enjoyed it. Taney apologists argue he was trying to take the slavery issue out of Congress’ hands and giving it back to the states when he limited their authority. However, by also involving the , it was taking it out the states’ hands as well. Those states that already voted against slavery were now forced to allow slaveholders to enter with their slaves. Before long, Southerners would be settling in all states, regardless of the state’s slavery stance. With a stroke of a pen, Taney ensured slavery would infest the entire country with no hope for its abolishment. For the next three years, Republicans gained traction with Northerners, running on a platform to end slavery. Abraham Lincoln’s election meant a declaration of war for the South. Even though Lincoln said he would not abolish slavery, they seceded. (see ) Buchanan thought he won the battle. All he did was ensure a war. The overreach of Democrats to make slavery permanent forced the Civil War, which abolished slavery permanently. Liberty, there are times in life where it does seem like Satan is winning battle after battle. We fight hard only to be bloodied and injured. But our strength comes not from ourselves, but by knowing that the war is already won. As we approach Easter, during Lenten Season, we focus on Christ crucified realizing we don’t deserve to be victorious. (see ) But because of grace, God’s sweet and amazing grace, we stand on the battlefield knowing sin, death and the devil have been defeated once and for all. (see ) Immediately following the Supreme Court’s Dred Scott Decision, the Blow family bought Dred and Harriet and filed to release them. The Scott’s received their freedom on May 26, 1857. Dred died 18 months later from tuberculosis, but it was as a free man. Harriet survived through the Civil War, and lived long enough to see all slaves freed with the (1865), receive citizenship with the (1868) and witness black men receive voting rights with the (1870). (see ) Harriet died in June of 1876 knowing their fight was a victory for all. That’s my 2 cents. DREADFUL SCOTT DECISION	1,492	ENGLISH	1
Carthage was a rich, flourishing Phoenician city-state that intended to dominate the Mediterranean area. The two cities were allies in the times of Pyrrhus, who was a menace to both, but with Rome's hegemony in mainland Italy and the Carthaginian thalassocracythese cities became the two major powers in the Western Mediterranean and their contention over the Mediterranean led to conflict. Then philosophy migrated from every direction to Athens itself, at the center, the wealthiest commercial power and the most famous democracy of the time [ note ]. Socrates, although uninterested in wealth himself, nevertheless was a creature of the marketplace, where there were always people to meet and where he could, in effect, bargain over definitions rather than over prices. Similarly, although Socrates avoided participation in democratic politics, it is hard to imagine his idiosyncratic individualism, and the uncompromising self-assertion of his defense speech, without either wealth or birth to justify his privileges, occurring in any other political context. If a commercial democracy like Athens provided the social and intellectual context that fostered the development of philosophy, we might expect that philosophy would not occur in the kind of Greek city that was neither commercial nor democratic. As it happens, the great rival of Athens, Sparta, was just such a city. Sparta had a peculiar, oligarchic constitution, with two kings and a small number of enfranchised citizens. Most of the subjects of the Spartan state had little or no political power, and many of them were helots, who were essentially held as slaves and could be killed by a Spartan citizen at any time for any reason -- annual war was formally declared on the helots for just that purpose. The whole business of the Spartan citizenry was war. Unlike Athens, Sparta had no nearby seaport. It was not engaged in or interested in commerce. It had no resident alien population like Athens -- there was no reason for foreigners of any sort to come to Sparta. Spartan citizens were allowed to possess little money, and Spartan men were expected, officially, to eat all their meals at a common mess, where the food was legendarily bad -- all to toughen them up. Spartans had so little to say that the term "Laconic," from Laconia, the environs of Sparta, is still used to mean "of few words" -- as "Spartan" itself is still used to mean simple and ascetic. While this gave Sparta the best army in Greece, regarded by all as next to invincible, and helped Sparta defeat Athens in the Peloponnesian Warwe do not find at Sparta any of the accoutrements otherwise normally associated with Classical Greek civilization: Socrates would have found few takers for his conversation at Sparta -- and it is hard to imagine the city tolerating his questions for anything like the thirty or more years that Athens did. Next to nothing remains at the site of Sparta to attract tourists the nearby Mediaeval complex at Mistra is of much greater interestwhile Athens is one of the major tourist destinations of the world. Indeed, we basically wouldn't even know about Sparta were it not for the historians e. Thucydides and philosophers e. Plato and Aristotle at Athens who write about her. In the end, philosophy made the fortune of Athens, which essentially became the University Town of the Roman Empire only Alexandria came close as a center of learning ; but even Sparta's army eventually failed her, as Spartan hegemony was destroyed at the battle of Leuctra in by the brilliant Theban general Epaminondas,who killed a Spartan king, Cleombrotus, for the first time since King Leonidas was killed by the Persians at Thermopylae in A story about Thales throws a curious light on the polarization between commercial culture and its opposition. It was said that Thales was not a practical person, sometimes didn't watch where he was walking, fell into a well according to Platowas laughed at, and in general was reproached for not taking money seriously like everyone else. Finally, he was sufficiently irked by the derision and criticisms that he decided to teach everyone a lesson. By studying the stars according to Aristotlehe determined that there was to be an exceptionally large olive harvest that year. Borrowing some money, he secured all the olive presses used to get the oil, of course in Miletus, and when the harvest came in, he took advantage of his monopoly to charge everyone dearly. After making this big financial killing, Thales announced that he could do this anytime and so, if he otherwise didn't do so and seemed impractical, it was because he simply did not value the money in the first place. This story curiously contains internal evidence of its own falsehood. One cannot determine the nature of the harvest by studying the stars; otherwise astrologers would make their fortunes on the commodities markets, not by selling their analyses to the public [ note ]. So if Thales did not monopolize the olive presses with the help of astrology, and is unlikely to have done what this story relates, we might ask if he was the kind of impractical person portrayed in the story in the first place. It would not seem so from all the other accounts we have about him. The tendency of this evidence goes in two directions: First, Thales seems to engage in activities that would be consistent with any other Milesian engaged in business. The story about him going to Egypt, although later assimilated to fabulous stories about Greeks learning the mysteries of the Egyptians who don't seem to have had any such mysteries, and would not have been teaching them to Greeks anywayis perfectly conformable to what many Greeks actually were doing in Egypt, i. Indeed, the Greeks had another basic export besides olive oil and wine, and that was warriors. Since the Greek cities fought among themselves all the time, the occasional peace left many of them seeking to continue the wars by other means.The Greek mythology is one of the most fascinating mythological accounts of the ancient world. The Greek myths were actually efforts of the people to explain the creation of the world, the nature around them, weather conditions and generally any superhuman that was happening in their daily life. At. Ancient Greek Gods, like man, have been known to love and lust, to be jealous and seek revenge, to be bitter and even petty, characteristics common to everyday man, making them memorable. The Greeks would relate the stories of these omnipotent entities who act capriciously, frivolously, and even immorally, making them unforgettable, their . Even though the gods display their characteristics much more drastically than humans do, the similarities are obvious. In Rosenberg and Bakers book, the Greek gods have many human characteristics such as vengeance, jealously, and love. An example of a human trait is that the Greek gods and goddess displayed excessive vengeance. Ancient Greek Deities and Their Human Characteristics The ancient Greek Gods and their myths have existed in the human imagination and spirit for as long as man has had the ability to pass down their fables. It was one of the rules which, above all others, made Doctor Franklin the most amiable of men in society, "never to contradict anybody." If he was urged to announce an opinion, he did it rather by asking questions, as if for information, or by suggesting doubts. In historiography, ancient Rome is Roman civilization from the founding of the city of Rome in the 8th century BC to the collapse of the Western Roman Empire in the 5th century AD, encompassing the Roman Kingdom, Roman Republic and Roman Empire until the fall of the western empire. The term is sometimes used to refer only to the kingdom and republic periods, excluding the subsequent empire.	<urn:uuid:05418edc-7530-42c0-9a00-5a45ed6e39c4>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://widytugucomunyq.iridis-photo-restoration.com/ancient-greek-deities-and-their-human-characteristics-essay-17744ae.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591763.20/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118023429-20200118051429-00556.warc.gz	en	0.980681	1,598	3.734375	4	[ -0.23730215430259705, 0.415046751499176, 0.18381790816783905, -0.36074864864349365, -0.5478028059005737, -0.40006202459335327, 0.3336162269115448, 0.581723690032959, -0.2566984295845032, 0.03177890554070473, -0.24643424153327942, -0.25598064064979553, 0.04155416041612625, 0.287268519401550...	1	Carthage was a rich, flourishing Phoenician city-state that intended to dominate the Mediterranean area. The two cities were allies in the times of Pyrrhus, who was a menace to both, but with Rome's hegemony in mainland Italy and the Carthaginian thalassocracythese cities became the two major powers in the Western Mediterranean and their contention over the Mediterranean led to conflict. Then philosophy migrated from every direction to Athens itself, at the center, the wealthiest commercial power and the most famous democracy of the time [ note ]. Socrates, although uninterested in wealth himself, nevertheless was a creature of the marketplace, where there were always people to meet and where he could, in effect, bargain over definitions rather than over prices. Similarly, although Socrates avoided participation in democratic politics, it is hard to imagine his idiosyncratic individualism, and the uncompromising self-assertion of his defense speech, without either wealth or birth to justify his privileges, occurring in any other political context. If a commercial democracy like Athens provided the social and intellectual context that fostered the development of philosophy, we might expect that philosophy would not occur in the kind of Greek city that was neither commercial nor democratic. As it happens, the great rival of Athens, Sparta, was just such a city. Sparta had a peculiar, oligarchic constitution, with two kings and a small number of enfranchised citizens. Most of the subjects of the Spartan state had little or no political power, and many of them were helots, who were essentially held as slaves and could be killed by a Spartan citizen at any time for any reason -- annual war was formally declared on the helots for just that purpose. The whole business of the Spartan citizenry was war. Unlike Athens, Sparta had no nearby seaport. It was not engaged in or interested in commerce. It had no resident alien population like Athens -- there was no reason for foreigners of any sort to come to Sparta. Spartan citizens were allowed to possess little money, and Spartan men were expected, officially, to eat all their meals at a common mess, where the food was legendarily bad -- all to toughen them up. Spartans had so little to say that the term "Laconic," from Laconia, the environs of Sparta, is still used to mean "of few words" -- as "Spartan" itself is still used to mean simple and ascetic. While this gave Sparta the best army in Greece, regarded by all as next to invincible, and helped Sparta defeat Athens in the Peloponnesian Warwe do not find at Sparta any of the accoutrements otherwise normally associated with Classical Greek civilization: Socrates would have found few takers for his conversation at Sparta -- and it is hard to imagine the city tolerating his questions for anything like the thirty or more years that Athens did. Next to nothing remains at the site of Sparta to attract tourists the nearby Mediaeval complex at Mistra is of much greater interestwhile Athens is one of the major tourist destinations of the world. Indeed, we basically wouldn't even know about Sparta were it not for the historians e. Thucydides and philosophers e. Plato and Aristotle at Athens who write about her. In the end, philosophy made the fortune of Athens, which essentially became the University Town of the Roman Empire only Alexandria came close as a center of learning ; but even Sparta's army eventually failed her, as Spartan hegemony was destroyed at the battle of Leuctra in by the brilliant Theban general Epaminondas,who killed a Spartan king, Cleombrotus, for the first time since King Leonidas was killed by the Persians at Thermopylae in A story about Thales throws a curious light on the polarization between commercial culture and its opposition. It was said that Thales was not a practical person, sometimes didn't watch where he was walking, fell into a well according to Platowas laughed at, and in general was reproached for not taking money seriously like everyone else. Finally, he was sufficiently irked by the derision and criticisms that he decided to teach everyone a lesson. By studying the stars according to Aristotlehe determined that there was to be an exceptionally large olive harvest that year. Borrowing some money, he secured all the olive presses used to get the oil, of course in Miletus, and when the harvest came in, he took advantage of his monopoly to charge everyone dearly. After making this big financial killing, Thales announced that he could do this anytime and so, if he otherwise didn't do so and seemed impractical, it was because he simply did not value the money in the first place. This story curiously contains internal evidence of its own falsehood. One cannot determine the nature of the harvest by studying the stars; otherwise astrologers would make their fortunes on the commodities markets, not by selling their analyses to the public [ note ]. So if Thales did not monopolize the olive presses with the help of astrology, and is unlikely to have done what this story relates, we might ask if he was the kind of impractical person portrayed in the story in the first place. It would not seem so from all the other accounts we have about him. The tendency of this evidence goes in two directions: First, Thales seems to engage in activities that would be consistent with any other Milesian engaged in business. The story about him going to Egypt, although later assimilated to fabulous stories about Greeks learning the mysteries of the Egyptians who don't seem to have had any such mysteries, and would not have been teaching them to Greeks anywayis perfectly conformable to what many Greeks actually were doing in Egypt, i. Indeed, the Greeks had another basic export besides olive oil and wine, and that was warriors. Since the Greek cities fought among themselves all the time, the occasional peace left many of them seeking to continue the wars by other means.The Greek mythology is one of the most fascinating mythological accounts of the ancient world. The Greek myths were actually efforts of the people to explain the creation of the world, the nature around them, weather conditions and generally any superhuman that was happening in their daily life. At. Ancient Greek Gods, like man, have been known to love and lust, to be jealous and seek revenge, to be bitter and even petty, characteristics common to everyday man, making them memorable. The Greeks would relate the stories of these omnipotent entities who act capriciously, frivolously, and even immorally, making them unforgettable, their . Even though the gods display their characteristics much more drastically than humans do, the similarities are obvious. In Rosenberg and Bakers book, the Greek gods have many human characteristics such as vengeance, jealously, and love. An example of a human trait is that the Greek gods and goddess displayed excessive vengeance. Ancient Greek Deities and Their Human Characteristics The ancient Greek Gods and their myths have existed in the human imagination and spirit for as long as man has had the ability to pass down their fables. It was one of the rules which, above all others, made Doctor Franklin the most amiable of men in society, "never to contradict anybody." If he was urged to announce an opinion, he did it rather by asking questions, as if for information, or by suggesting doubts. In historiography, ancient Rome is Roman civilization from the founding of the city of Rome in the 8th century BC to the collapse of the Western Roman Empire in the 5th century AD, encompassing the Roman Kingdom, Roman Republic and Roman Empire until the fall of the western empire. The term is sometimes used to refer only to the kingdom and republic periods, excluding the subsequent empire.	1,592	ENGLISH	1
The Anti-Federalist had many reviews that were plenty unique than what the Federalist had. one of the dissimilarities that became very crucial was the who the Anti-Federalist view and it was the human beings of the nation the locals. Anti-Federalist has taken into consideration that normal human beings can be functioning with their government by including them it allows them to have a say within the laws the government places on them as the laws are intended to defend the citizens. This regular man involvement was unbreakable by means of how the Anti-Federalist desired to have a government that’s more all the way down to earth more local. by going with Smith’s public standards as an establishment this text demonstrates the Anti-Federalist view is how united states of America is intertwined with, such a lot of unique human beings and that representation need to be primarily based on the modifications as opposed to just a specific population. The Federalists’ method to this was to only have the chosen people have the ability to select representative the Anti-Federalists noticed the need to call attention this portrayal and how it might not be for the benefit of all people within the nation. Crafted by the Anti-Federalists giving us an eye view that they desired to have an extensive variety of men be represented in government. By each class of men having an active role in their government, a process is created to able to prevent one class from overruling others for their own benefit. This is important to the Anti-Federalists because they think that each type of man should be considered equal. This hunger for equality leads us to see that the Anti-Federalists believe that all men should be able to be part of government without having to qualify based on where they stand economically. For this system of multiple classes to work, the different groups of men would have had to learn to compromise with each other. “How Far the power to lay and collect duties and excises, may operate to dissolve the state governments, and oppress the people, its is impossible to say”.To make laws that are good for the American society, it is essential for the general population to cooperate between the social classes. This implies privileged people that possess vast territories of land and hard workers who claim little estates ought to have a similar measure of power in government. The Anti-Federalists trusted that the representatives ought to speak to all men, including the men of the lesser classes. In Brutus Essay II it is apparent that the Anti-Federalists see the requirement for representatives to demonstrate decent variety. It states “If we may collect the sentiments of the people of America… they hold this truth as self-evident, that all men are by nature free. No one man, therefore, or any class of men, have a right, by the law of nature, or of God, to assume or exercise authority over their fellows” The Anti-Federalists saw that there was a need for a government, and that this government could not include all people. This need for government means that the people will need to be represented by a small group of men. According to the Anti Federalists, the people wanting to be in power will need to have other men that want them in power. To do this, it is critical for the aspirants to power to make the people feel as if they are united with one another. The best way to make the people feel like they are united is to have the person that represents them be someone that has the same worries and wishes as them. Therefore, the Anti-Federalists felt the need for there to be representative from every line of work, from farm owner to blacksmiths. If the representatives were people from a variety of the occupational backgrounds, it would create an environment that the representatives could debate about what their constituents need. The Anti-Federalists realized that is was very important for every type of man to be represented in government; this might have been the reason that they thought it was best to have the state governments hold more power than the federal government.”The Anti-Federalists held strong to their ideas that the people should bestow more power to the state governments than to the federal government. By keeping the state government more powerful, the men that were part of the government would be able to spend more time with his constituents and get to know their needs and desires better. This helps demonstrate that the fact that Anti-Federalists believed that all men, weather rich or poor, should have a voice in the government. The last way that the Anti-Federalists showed that the common man needed more power in the government was through the Bill of Rights. The Federalists did not see the need for a Bill of Rights, because the constitution already protected the upper class. The Anti-Federalists did not think that this protection was broad enough to protect the everyday man. The Bill of Rights would protect rights that were “necessary to be reserved, such as, that elections should be free, and that the liberty of the press should be held sacred”.Many individuals disliked having representatives from each state since one man can’t deliver a wide range of assessments. Anti-federalists trust that freedom just is available when there are few individuals and they can get their voice anticipated. In a vast populace, similar to America, the residents don’t get singular opportunity and are denied of their rights. However, Madison a federalist expressed that in a little republic, oppression could be considerably more available since it is simpler to command others. Not at all like in an expansive republic which is comprised of many perspectives though it is less possibility that a couple can overwhelm others. Indeed, even in singular states, it is anything but difficult to choose authorities since individuals can be effectively controlled when there aren’t many individuals. At the end of the day, the more the general population, the less possibility of pay off and affectation. Another advantage of a bigger republic is that there would be an assortment of individuals representing them and there would be many contenders to pick from.	<urn:uuid:c3dcac90-6268-4961-8b0c-43a2c21b0583>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://taxteaparty.com/the-is-important-to-the-anti-federalists-because-they/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592636.25/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118135205-20200118163205-00181.warc.gz	en	0.981596	1,234	3.53125	4	[ -0.23727869987487793, 0.07474838197231293, -0.12890277802944183, 0.018835095688700676, 0.2717452049255371, 0.3149959444999695, 0.3723379373550415, 0.39339327812194824, -0.4029706120491028, 0.13324055075645447, -0.05879794433712959, 0.27279579639434814, -0.1307935118675232, 0.15444642305374...	1	The Anti-Federalist had many reviews that were plenty unique than what the Federalist had. one of the dissimilarities that became very crucial was the who the Anti-Federalist view and it was the human beings of the nation the locals. Anti-Federalist has taken into consideration that normal human beings can be functioning with their government by including them it allows them to have a say within the laws the government places on them as the laws are intended to defend the citizens. This regular man involvement was unbreakable by means of how the Anti-Federalist desired to have a government that’s more all the way down to earth more local. by going with Smith’s public standards as an establishment this text demonstrates the Anti-Federalist view is how united states of America is intertwined with, such a lot of unique human beings and that representation need to be primarily based on the modifications as opposed to just a specific population. The Federalists’ method to this was to only have the chosen people have the ability to select representative the Anti-Federalists noticed the need to call attention this portrayal and how it might not be for the benefit of all people within the nation. Crafted by the Anti-Federalists giving us an eye view that they desired to have an extensive variety of men be represented in government. By each class of men having an active role in their government, a process is created to able to prevent one class from overruling others for their own benefit. This is important to the Anti-Federalists because they think that each type of man should be considered equal. This hunger for equality leads us to see that the Anti-Federalists believe that all men should be able to be part of government without having to qualify based on where they stand economically. For this system of multiple classes to work, the different groups of men would have had to learn to compromise with each other. “How Far the power to lay and collect duties and excises, may operate to dissolve the state governments, and oppress the people, its is impossible to say”.To make laws that are good for the American society, it is essential for the general population to cooperate between the social classes. This implies privileged people that possess vast territories of land and hard workers who claim little estates ought to have a similar measure of power in government. The Anti-Federalists trusted that the representatives ought to speak to all men, including the men of the lesser classes. In Brutus Essay II it is apparent that the Anti-Federalists see the requirement for representatives to demonstrate decent variety. It states “If we may collect the sentiments of the people of America… they hold this truth as self-evident, that all men are by nature free. No one man, therefore, or any class of men, have a right, by the law of nature, or of God, to assume or exercise authority over their fellows” The Anti-Federalists saw that there was a need for a government, and that this government could not include all people. This need for government means that the people will need to be represented by a small group of men. According to the Anti Federalists, the people wanting to be in power will need to have other men that want them in power. To do this, it is critical for the aspirants to power to make the people feel as if they are united with one another. The best way to make the people feel like they are united is to have the person that represents them be someone that has the same worries and wishes as them. Therefore, the Anti-Federalists felt the need for there to be representative from every line of work, from farm owner to blacksmiths. If the representatives were people from a variety of the occupational backgrounds, it would create an environment that the representatives could debate about what their constituents need. The Anti-Federalists realized that is was very important for every type of man to be represented in government; this might have been the reason that they thought it was best to have the state governments hold more power than the federal government.”The Anti-Federalists held strong to their ideas that the people should bestow more power to the state governments than to the federal government. By keeping the state government more powerful, the men that were part of the government would be able to spend more time with his constituents and get to know their needs and desires better. This helps demonstrate that the fact that Anti-Federalists believed that all men, weather rich or poor, should have a voice in the government. The last way that the Anti-Federalists showed that the common man needed more power in the government was through the Bill of Rights. The Federalists did not see the need for a Bill of Rights, because the constitution already protected the upper class. The Anti-Federalists did not think that this protection was broad enough to protect the everyday man. The Bill of Rights would protect rights that were “necessary to be reserved, such as, that elections should be free, and that the liberty of the press should be held sacred”.Many individuals disliked having representatives from each state since one man can’t deliver a wide range of assessments. Anti-federalists trust that freedom just is available when there are few individuals and they can get their voice anticipated. In a vast populace, similar to America, the residents don’t get singular opportunity and are denied of their rights. However, Madison a federalist expressed that in a little republic, oppression could be considerably more available since it is simpler to command others. Not at all like in an expansive republic which is comprised of many perspectives though it is less possibility that a couple can overwhelm others. Indeed, even in singular states, it is anything but difficult to choose authorities since individuals can be effectively controlled when there aren’t many individuals. At the end of the day, the more the general population, the less possibility of pay off and affectation. Another advantage of a bigger republic is that there would be an assortment of individuals representing them and there would be many contenders to pick from.	1,212	ENGLISH	1
The motive power depot (MPD, or railway depot) is the place where locomotives are usually housed, repaired and maintained when not being used. They were originally known as "running sheds", "engine sheds", or, for short, just sheds. Facilities are provided for refueling and replenishing water, lubricating oil and grease and, for steam engines, disposal of the ash. There are often workshops for day to day repairs and maintenance, although locomotive building and major overhauls are usually carried out in the locomotive works. (Note: In American English, the term depot is used to refer to passenger stations or goods (freight) facilities, and not to vehicle maintenance facilities.) MPDs in Britain are now often known as traction maintenance depots (TMDs). The equivalent of such depots in German-speaking countries is the Bahnbetriebswerk or Bw which has similar functions, with major repairs and overhauls being carried out at Ausbesserungswerke. The number of these reduced drastically on the changeover from steam to diesel and electric traction and most modern Bw in Germany are specialised depots, often responsible for a single rail class. Engine sheds in the steam era Engine sheds could be found in many towns and cities as well as in rural locations. They were built by the railway companies to provide accommodation for their locomotives that provided their local train services. Each engine shed would have an allocation of locomotives that would reflect the duties carried out by that depot. Most depots had a mixture of passenger, freight and shunting locomotives but some such as Mexborough had predominantly freight locomotives reflecting the industrial nature of that area in South Yorkshire. Others, such as Kings Cross engine shed in London, predominantly provided locomotives for passenger workings. Nearly all depots at this time had a number of shunting locomotives. Normally 0-4-0T or 0-6-0T tank engines, these would be allocated to shunt turns and could be found in goods yards, carriage sidings, goods depots and docks. Many large rail connected industrial sites also had engine sheds primarily using shunting locomotives. Each railway company had its own architectural design of engine shed but there were three basic designs of shed: - Roundhouse - where the tracks would radiate from a turntable - Straight - a number of tracks that would be accessible from either end - Dead End - a number of sidings accessible from one end only The turntables for straight and dead end sheds were generally outside. Those in roundhouses could be inside (such as those at York in the UK) or outside such as that at the East Broad Top Railroad & Coal Company in Rockhill, Pennsylvania, USA. There were six primary activities that took place at the sheds. When a steam engine arrived on shed it would drop its fire and the ash that had built up would be removed. Disposal of the ash was a filthy job and carried out at quiet times although some bigger depots had facilities for disposing of ash more efficiently. Study of photographs from the steam era show it was not uncommon for piles of ash to be scattered around the depot site. After completing their last duty and arriving on shed locomotives would have a regular boiler washout to remove scale, improve efficiency and protect safety.:31 Locomotives generally ran on coal. Initially this job was done by hand and many depots had significant coal stacks on site. These would be neatly constructed with the outer walls constructed of dry blocks much in the style of a dry stone wall with smaller pieces behind these.:222–3 As technology advanced and the bigger sheds got busier this process became mechanised and huge coaling towers above the neighbourhoods indicated where the engine shed was. The sheds were not clean places to work. The large London depot of Stratford had an engineman’s dormitory and its occupants would “wake up with a layer of coal dust covering them and the bed”.:20 LMS 4-6-0 5690 LEANDER at Carnforth in the UK under the mechanical coaling tower. Another key requirement of the steam engine is a supply of water which is carried in the tenders or tanks of the engines. In Australia water was also carried in water gins (a water tank mounted on a wagon) due to longer distances covered and scarcer water resources. In depots where the limescale content of water was high (known in some areas as ‘Hard Water) water softening plants were introduced. At Norwich engine shed in the UK the sludge was discharged into a tank and emptied every three years or so with the sludge being dumped into the sea at Lowestoft.:71 Tender locomotives required turning so they were facing the right way before their next duty. In the early days these were typically around 45 feet long. As the technology improved and engines got bigger, then the turntables got longer. In order to turn a locomotive the engine had to be balanced quite precisely on the turntable and it could then be literally pushed around. Some turntables could be powered by fixing the vacuum brake of the engine to the turntable and using that to turn the engine. Later turntables were electrically operated. Many diesel locomotives in the UK have a cab at each end removing the need for the turntables. However, in Australia and America there are a number of single ended locomotives and turntables are still in use. Details of the vacuum operating system. The clutch lever can be seen in the foreground. The works plate informs us that the turntable was manufactured by "Cowans Sheldon & Co. Ltd. of Carlisle. (Cowans Sheldon invented the loco brake system vacuum operating mechanism),Stewarts Lane TMD, UK. Engine sheds would carry out basic maintenance and the bigger sheds would carry out more complex repairs. Locomotives that required further repair were sent to the company’s locomotive works. Withdrawn locomotives could often be found at some depots before their final trips to the scrapyard. In the UK the general practice is that one shed would have a number of smaller sub-sheds where there were fewer facilities. When engines allocated to sub-sheds required repairs they were often exchanged for a similar engine or perhaps just visiting the main depot on a Sunday when traffic levels were considerably lower. In terms of locomotive allocation it seems to have been the practice that for some railways locomotives were all allocated to the main shed but in others each shed had its specific allocation of locomotives. A list of the British sub-sheds can be found here. The drivers and fireman were the visible face of the engine shed and as such certain sheds had reputations for clean locomotives thanks to the dedication of those men. Many companies allocated a specific main line locomotive to a crew and they would usually take a personal interest in the cleanliness of their engine, some companies offered a prize to the crew of the best kept engine. Many drivers would spend their own time on improving their knowledge and sharing best practice with younger drivers. The footplate staff (as drivers and fireman were known) were unionised from the 19th century and in the Uk were generally in the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants (later ASLEF) whilst other shed staff tended to be in the National Union of Railwaymen. Many engine shed workers put up with very poor conditions for many years. In the 1950s and 1960s the rise of manufacturing industry saw many staff leaving the railway for better working conditions (and pay) and many railways started to modernise as a result. Engine sheds in the modern era The maintenance of the new diesel locomotives in filthy steam sheds soon proved difficult and although some old sheds survived, many new diesel depots were built on new sites or on the sites of the old steam sheds. The major problem was the disposal of oil which initially was left lying around causing pollution and safety issues. The new depots were equipped to deal with diesel fuel and the ability to access the underside as well as upper body work was improved. The tasks were not that much different in that diesel locomotives were fuelled rather than coaled (although they did require water as early diesels were equipped with steam generators for train heating purposes). Since privatisation in the UK, some depots are now operated by the train builders who maintain the trains under contract with train operators. Stabling and fuelling points Around railway networks there are locations just used for the coaling/fuelling of locomotives and the stabling of stock either overnight or between duties. These are generally not regarded as engine sheds. - Bus garage - List of British Railways shed codes - Traction maintenance depot - Ipswich engine shed - Stratford TMD - York engine sheds and locomotive works \|Wikimedia Commons has media related to Railway depots.\|	<urn:uuid:5fd1e66c-2807-423a-a222-3795a578d6cc>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://wiki-offline.jakearchibald.com/wiki/Railway_depot	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591763.20/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118023429-20200118051429-00557.warc.gz	en	0.98371	1,872	3.421875	3	[ -0.06242678314447403, 0.04850634187459946, 0.63714599609375, -0.09015996754169464, 0.083470419049263, 0.002155965194106102, -0.32952117919921875, -0.11000432074069977, -0.49526655673980713, -0.35541272163391113, -0.005285918712615967, -0.7610653042793274, 0.03490321338176727, 0.25909018516...	1	The motive power depot (MPD, or railway depot) is the place where locomotives are usually housed, repaired and maintained when not being used. They were originally known as "running sheds", "engine sheds", or, for short, just sheds. Facilities are provided for refueling and replenishing water, lubricating oil and grease and, for steam engines, disposal of the ash. There are often workshops for day to day repairs and maintenance, although locomotive building and major overhauls are usually carried out in the locomotive works. (Note: In American English, the term depot is used to refer to passenger stations or goods (freight) facilities, and not to vehicle maintenance facilities.) MPDs in Britain are now often known as traction maintenance depots (TMDs). The equivalent of such depots in German-speaking countries is the Bahnbetriebswerk or Bw which has similar functions, with major repairs and overhauls being carried out at Ausbesserungswerke. The number of these reduced drastically on the changeover from steam to diesel and electric traction and most modern Bw in Germany are specialised depots, often responsible for a single rail class. Engine sheds in the steam era Engine sheds could be found in many towns and cities as well as in rural locations. They were built by the railway companies to provide accommodation for their locomotives that provided their local train services. Each engine shed would have an allocation of locomotives that would reflect the duties carried out by that depot. Most depots had a mixture of passenger, freight and shunting locomotives but some such as Mexborough had predominantly freight locomotives reflecting the industrial nature of that area in South Yorkshire. Others, such as Kings Cross engine shed in London, predominantly provided locomotives for passenger workings. Nearly all depots at this time had a number of shunting locomotives. Normally 0-4-0T or 0-6-0T tank engines, these would be allocated to shunt turns and could be found in goods yards, carriage sidings, goods depots and docks. Many large rail connected industrial sites also had engine sheds primarily using shunting locomotives. Each railway company had its own architectural design of engine shed but there were three basic designs of shed: - Roundhouse - where the tracks would radiate from a turntable - Straight - a number of tracks that would be accessible from either end - Dead End - a number of sidings accessible from one end only The turntables for straight and dead end sheds were generally outside. Those in roundhouses could be inside (such as those at York in the UK) or outside such as that at the East Broad Top Railroad & Coal Company in Rockhill, Pennsylvania, USA. There were six primary activities that took place at the sheds. When a steam engine arrived on shed it would drop its fire and the ash that had built up would be removed. Disposal of the ash was a filthy job and carried out at quiet times although some bigger depots had facilities for disposing of ash more efficiently. Study of photographs from the steam era show it was not uncommon for piles of ash to be scattered around the depot site. After completing their last duty and arriving on shed locomotives would have a regular boiler washout to remove scale, improve efficiency and protect safety.:31 Locomotives generally ran on coal. Initially this job was done by hand and many depots had significant coal stacks on site. These would be neatly constructed with the outer walls constructed of dry blocks much in the style of a dry stone wall with smaller pieces behind these.:222–3 As technology advanced and the bigger sheds got busier this process became mechanised and huge coaling towers above the neighbourhoods indicated where the engine shed was. The sheds were not clean places to work. The large London depot of Stratford had an engineman’s dormitory and its occupants would “wake up with a layer of coal dust covering them and the bed”.:20 LMS 4-6-0 5690 LEANDER at Carnforth in the UK under the mechanical coaling tower. Another key requirement of the steam engine is a supply of water which is carried in the tenders or tanks of the engines. In Australia water was also carried in water gins (a water tank mounted on a wagon) due to longer distances covered and scarcer water resources. In depots where the limescale content of water was high (known in some areas as ‘Hard Water) water softening plants were introduced. At Norwich engine shed in the UK the sludge was discharged into a tank and emptied every three years or so with the sludge being dumped into the sea at Lowestoft.:71 Tender locomotives required turning so they were facing the right way before their next duty. In the early days these were typically around 45 feet long. As the technology improved and engines got bigger, then the turntables got longer. In order to turn a locomotive the engine had to be balanced quite precisely on the turntable and it could then be literally pushed around. Some turntables could be powered by fixing the vacuum brake of the engine to the turntable and using that to turn the engine. Later turntables were electrically operated. Many diesel locomotives in the UK have a cab at each end removing the need for the turntables. However, in Australia and America there are a number of single ended locomotives and turntables are still in use. Details of the vacuum operating system. The clutch lever can be seen in the foreground. The works plate informs us that the turntable was manufactured by "Cowans Sheldon & Co. Ltd. of Carlisle. (Cowans Sheldon invented the loco brake system vacuum operating mechanism),Stewarts Lane TMD, UK. Engine sheds would carry out basic maintenance and the bigger sheds would carry out more complex repairs. Locomotives that required further repair were sent to the company’s locomotive works. Withdrawn locomotives could often be found at some depots before their final trips to the scrapyard. In the UK the general practice is that one shed would have a number of smaller sub-sheds where there were fewer facilities. When engines allocated to sub-sheds required repairs they were often exchanged for a similar engine or perhaps just visiting the main depot on a Sunday when traffic levels were considerably lower. In terms of locomotive allocation it seems to have been the practice that for some railways locomotives were all allocated to the main shed but in others each shed had its specific allocation of locomotives. A list of the British sub-sheds can be found here. The drivers and fireman were the visible face of the engine shed and as such certain sheds had reputations for clean locomotives thanks to the dedication of those men. Many companies allocated a specific main line locomotive to a crew and they would usually take a personal interest in the cleanliness of their engine, some companies offered a prize to the crew of the best kept engine. Many drivers would spend their own time on improving their knowledge and sharing best practice with younger drivers. The footplate staff (as drivers and fireman were known) were unionised from the 19th century and in the Uk were generally in the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants (later ASLEF) whilst other shed staff tended to be in the National Union of Railwaymen. Many engine shed workers put up with very poor conditions for many years. In the 1950s and 1960s the rise of manufacturing industry saw many staff leaving the railway for better working conditions (and pay) and many railways started to modernise as a result. Engine sheds in the modern era The maintenance of the new diesel locomotives in filthy steam sheds soon proved difficult and although some old sheds survived, many new diesel depots were built on new sites or on the sites of the old steam sheds. The major problem was the disposal of oil which initially was left lying around causing pollution and safety issues. The new depots were equipped to deal with diesel fuel and the ability to access the underside as well as upper body work was improved. The tasks were not that much different in that diesel locomotives were fuelled rather than coaled (although they did require water as early diesels were equipped with steam generators for train heating purposes). Since privatisation in the UK, some depots are now operated by the train builders who maintain the trains under contract with train operators. Stabling and fuelling points Around railway networks there are locations just used for the coaling/fuelling of locomotives and the stabling of stock either overnight or between duties. These are generally not regarded as engine sheds. - Bus garage - List of British Railways shed codes - Traction maintenance depot - Ipswich engine shed - Stratford TMD - York engine sheds and locomotive works \|Wikimedia Commons has media related to Railway depots.\|	1,845	ENGLISH	1
The Influence of the Greeks on American Democracy "Tyranny is the rule of one man to the advantage of the ruler, oligarchy to the advantage of the rich, democracy to the advantage of the poor." -Aristotle Democracy: a form of government that makes political decisions directly exercised by the whole body of citizens, under procedures of majority rule. This type of democracy is know as a direct democracy, however the form of government that citizens exercise the same right not in person but through elected representatives is known as a representative democracy. Today in the United States of America we have a representative democracy in which we appoint "representatives" through election. The founders of democracy in Athens exercised decisions through a direct democracy in which all male citizens were allowed to have direct influence on the decisions. Although in the United States today we accept democracy as a form of life it had its early beginnings in the city-states of Ancient Greece. The form of government known as democracy had its early roots in Ancient Greece but its influence has a direct connection with the type of government we have today in the United States. The Greek city-states of antiquity did not always live a lifestyle with the cooperation of democracy. The civilizations of Greece passed through many stages of government. In the 8th and 7th centuries the government was known as an oligarchy. An oligarchy is the rule of the city-state by a selected few usually consisting of wealthy landowners. These representatives made decisions based on their own ideals without the consideration of the people. Decisions were made not with the interest of the majority but with the interests of the few. Since the oligarchy was primarily run by wealthy landowners, the interests of the poor were often ignored. However, tensions began to arise between these wealthy landowners which left the majority of the public in a state of discontent and fury.	<urn:uuid:00184cc7-c228-4f0e-966a-07690e8d2d68>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.exampleessays.com/viewpaper/69540.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251700675.78/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127112805-20200127142805-00054.warc.gz	en	0.985168	367	4.0625	4	[ -0.11450200527906418, -0.06214515492320061, 0.4549333453178406, -0.3114524185657501, -0.1416904777288437, -0.0303029902279377, 0.4273679256439209, 0.41076165437698364, -0.07489321380853653, 0.32370489835739136, -0.45857685804367065, 0.12373410165309906, -0.11867740750312805, 0.164242595434...	1	The Influence of the Greeks on American Democracy "Tyranny is the rule of one man to the advantage of the ruler, oligarchy to the advantage of the rich, democracy to the advantage of the poor." -Aristotle Democracy: a form of government that makes political decisions directly exercised by the whole body of citizens, under procedures of majority rule. This type of democracy is know as a direct democracy, however the form of government that citizens exercise the same right not in person but through elected representatives is known as a representative democracy. Today in the United States of America we have a representative democracy in which we appoint "representatives" through election. The founders of democracy in Athens exercised decisions through a direct democracy in which all male citizens were allowed to have direct influence on the decisions. Although in the United States today we accept democracy as a form of life it had its early beginnings in the city-states of Ancient Greece. The form of government known as democracy had its early roots in Ancient Greece but its influence has a direct connection with the type of government we have today in the United States. The Greek city-states of antiquity did not always live a lifestyle with the cooperation of democracy. The civilizations of Greece passed through many stages of government. In the 8th and 7th centuries the government was known as an oligarchy. An oligarchy is the rule of the city-state by a selected few usually consisting of wealthy landowners. These representatives made decisions based on their own ideals without the consideration of the people. Decisions were made not with the interest of the majority but with the interests of the few. Since the oligarchy was primarily run by wealthy landowners, the interests of the poor were often ignored. However, tensions began to arise between these wealthy landowners which left the majority of the public in a state of discontent and fury.	370	ENGLISH	1
The story of Orpheus is very deep. As all archetypal symbols are, one can never exhaust their meanings. This tragic saga is one of the primary myths of depth psychology. According to Robert Romanyshyn, “Orpheus is…the poet of the gap, the poet of the border realms.” 1 Soul is the mediatrix between spirit and matter. This is the realm of the mundus imaginalis, Corbin’s world of the imaginal. Orpheus is its poet. This realm is also the territory where one is haunted by knowing and unknowing, where one discovers something only to realize that one has lost it again. I will deal more with this in my next article. According to legend, Orpheus was born the son of Oeagrus, king of Thrace, and the Muse, Calliope. Other versions of the story say Apollo was his father. The Thracians were the most musical of all the Greeks, so it was natural that Orpheus would become a gifted musician. Not only this, but he became the most gifted of all musicians. It was said he had no rival, except for the Gods themselves. He was the “Lord of the seven-stringed lyre.” 2 His music brought a harmonious state of being to all things within earshot of his voice and lyre. Stones and trees would move themselves to be closer to the sounds emanating from him, and animals would lay silently and peacefully at his feet. It is said his music had the power to divert the course of rivers. Even the creatures in the Underworld were enraptured by his playing. Because his fame as a musician had become widespread, the Greek hero, Jason, asked him to accompany him and his Argonauts on their quest for the Golden Fleece. Jason had made a wise decision. On the return journey they traveled past the islands of the Sirens, the same Sirens encountered by Odysseus in the Odyssey. The Sirens used their enticing voices to lure unsuspecting sailors to their deaths upon their rocky shores. As soon as Orpheus heard their bewitching voices, he began to strum his lyre with music so loud and so beautiful that he drowned out their enchantments so that the Argonauts could not hear them. It is said in another version of the story that Orpheus used his musical gifts to lull to sleep the dragon of Colchis, the guardian of the Golden Fleece, thus enabling Jason and his crew to escape with it. Many came from near and far to hear the melodious sounds produced by Orpheus’ playing and singing. On many occasions, large crowds would gather. One such day, Orpheus caught sight of a lovely wood nymph named Eurydice. Immediately, he fell in love with her and she with him. The beautiful and shy Eurydice was said to be one of the daughters of Apollo, the god of music. These two became madly enraptured with one another, star-crossed from the start. They married soon afterwards. After the wedding celebration, while on their way home, a shepherd named Aristaeus lay in wait to kill Orpheus and take Eurydice for himself. Orpheus was playing his lyre while Eurydice danced merrily through the fields. Suddenly, Aristaeus emerged from behind a bush and fell upon Orpheus. Orpheus managed to avoid him, and, grabbing Eurydice’s hand, the two began running swiftly through the meadow and into the nearby forest. Aristaeus followed close behind them. As the Fates would have it, Eurydice stepped accidentally upon a den of venomous serpents. She was bitten numerous times and fell, dead, upon the forest floor. Seeing this, Aristaeus gave up the chase, realizing its futility. Orpheus was overcome with grief. The death of his beloved wife haunted him day and night. His mourning was overwhelming. His playing and singing were so sad that all of Nature wept for him. Orpheus implored Apollo to allow him passage to the Underworld where he could consult with Hades and beg for his wife’s return. Apollo consented, and the gates of Hades opened freely before the enchanting sounds of his lyre. Even Cerberus was lulled to sleep by the music. Then, Orpheus made his way to the palace of Hades. His music and singing caused Hades and Persephone to weep profusely, as it did all of the denizens of the Underworld, to the point where Hades agreed to allow Eurydice to return with him to the upper regions. There was one condition, however, that Orpheus would have to meet. While Eurydice followed him back to the world of light, at no time could Orpheus turn and look upon her until she was, once again, in the upper world. Elated, Orpheus agreed, and he and his wife began the journey home, Eurydice following behind. As Orpheus stepped into the light of the Dayworld, he made the ultimate mistake. He turned and looked to see if Eurydice had yet emerged from the darkness, but she had not. He barely caught a glimpse of her before she was taken back into the deep places of the earth. After this, Orpheus was broken and disheartened. There are differing stories concerning Orpheus’ death. One claims that Dionysus ordered the Maenads to kill Orpheus. Thus they did by dismembering him. His shade descended to Hades, where he was reunited with his beloved, Eurydice. In my next article, I will discuss some of the symbolism in this tragic saga. This post has been read 5343 times!	<urn:uuid:027d767d-8137-44d2-9259-2e5bd9b60fa6>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://soulspelunker.com/2014/12/the-tragedy-of-orpheus.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250601241.42/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121014531-20200121043531-00271.warc.gz	en	0.987033	1,195	3.4375	3	[ 0.1651042103767395, 0.0016617914661765099, 0.06854546070098877, 0.12763850390911102, -0.6297444105148315, -0.04719323664903641, 0.2982906103134155, 0.1682197004556656, 0.11375013738870621, -0.16174930334091187, -0.08116132766008377, -0.07452209293842316, -0.24912500381469727, 0.15220922231...	1	The story of Orpheus is very deep. As all archetypal symbols are, one can never exhaust their meanings. This tragic saga is one of the primary myths of depth psychology. According to Robert Romanyshyn, “Orpheus is…the poet of the gap, the poet of the border realms.” 1 Soul is the mediatrix between spirit and matter. This is the realm of the mundus imaginalis, Corbin’s world of the imaginal. Orpheus is its poet. This realm is also the territory where one is haunted by knowing and unknowing, where one discovers something only to realize that one has lost it again. I will deal more with this in my next article. According to legend, Orpheus was born the son of Oeagrus, king of Thrace, and the Muse, Calliope. Other versions of the story say Apollo was his father. The Thracians were the most musical of all the Greeks, so it was natural that Orpheus would become a gifted musician. Not only this, but he became the most gifted of all musicians. It was said he had no rival, except for the Gods themselves. He was the “Lord of the seven-stringed lyre.” 2 His music brought a harmonious state of being to all things within earshot of his voice and lyre. Stones and trees would move themselves to be closer to the sounds emanating from him, and animals would lay silently and peacefully at his feet. It is said his music had the power to divert the course of rivers. Even the creatures in the Underworld were enraptured by his playing. Because his fame as a musician had become widespread, the Greek hero, Jason, asked him to accompany him and his Argonauts on their quest for the Golden Fleece. Jason had made a wise decision. On the return journey they traveled past the islands of the Sirens, the same Sirens encountered by Odysseus in the Odyssey. The Sirens used their enticing voices to lure unsuspecting sailors to their deaths upon their rocky shores. As soon as Orpheus heard their bewitching voices, he began to strum his lyre with music so loud and so beautiful that he drowned out their enchantments so that the Argonauts could not hear them. It is said in another version of the story that Orpheus used his musical gifts to lull to sleep the dragon of Colchis, the guardian of the Golden Fleece, thus enabling Jason and his crew to escape with it. Many came from near and far to hear the melodious sounds produced by Orpheus’ playing and singing. On many occasions, large crowds would gather. One such day, Orpheus caught sight of a lovely wood nymph named Eurydice. Immediately, he fell in love with her and she with him. The beautiful and shy Eurydice was said to be one of the daughters of Apollo, the god of music. These two became madly enraptured with one another, star-crossed from the start. They married soon afterwards. After the wedding celebration, while on their way home, a shepherd named Aristaeus lay in wait to kill Orpheus and take Eurydice for himself. Orpheus was playing his lyre while Eurydice danced merrily through the fields. Suddenly, Aristaeus emerged from behind a bush and fell upon Orpheus. Orpheus managed to avoid him, and, grabbing Eurydice’s hand, the two began running swiftly through the meadow and into the nearby forest. Aristaeus followed close behind them. As the Fates would have it, Eurydice stepped accidentally upon a den of venomous serpents. She was bitten numerous times and fell, dead, upon the forest floor. Seeing this, Aristaeus gave up the chase, realizing its futility. Orpheus was overcome with grief. The death of his beloved wife haunted him day and night. His mourning was overwhelming. His playing and singing were so sad that all of Nature wept for him. Orpheus implored Apollo to allow him passage to the Underworld where he could consult with Hades and beg for his wife’s return. Apollo consented, and the gates of Hades opened freely before the enchanting sounds of his lyre. Even Cerberus was lulled to sleep by the music. Then, Orpheus made his way to the palace of Hades. His music and singing caused Hades and Persephone to weep profusely, as it did all of the denizens of the Underworld, to the point where Hades agreed to allow Eurydice to return with him to the upper regions. There was one condition, however, that Orpheus would have to meet. While Eurydice followed him back to the world of light, at no time could Orpheus turn and look upon her until she was, once again, in the upper world. Elated, Orpheus agreed, and he and his wife began the journey home, Eurydice following behind. As Orpheus stepped into the light of the Dayworld, he made the ultimate mistake. He turned and looked to see if Eurydice had yet emerged from the darkness, but she had not. He barely caught a glimpse of her before she was taken back into the deep places of the earth. After this, Orpheus was broken and disheartened. There are differing stories concerning Orpheus’ death. One claims that Dionysus ordered the Maenads to kill Orpheus. Thus they did by dismembering him. His shade descended to Hades, where he was reunited with his beloved, Eurydice. In my next article, I will discuss some of the symbolism in this tragic saga. This post has been read 5343 times!	1,207	ENGLISH	1
Biography of Edgar Degas Edgar Degas was born in Paris in 1834, his father a wealthy banker and his mother an emigre from New Orleans. Despite his privileged upbringing, Degas was a difficult person. He was opinionated, demanding and (at least in later life) anti-Semitic. As Caillebotte said during preparations for one of the impressionist exhibitions, “He is quite intolerable. But we have to concede that he is extremely talented.” To make matters worse, Degas had an eye condition identified during the Franco-Prussian war of 1870 that made him extremely sensitive to sunlight and resulted in his near-total blindness from 1901. But Degas was indeed a genius. He focused on classical technique in the early years of his career, though his famous work from this era Spartan Girls Challenging Boys has a number of modern touches. Degas also exhibited in seven of the eight impressionist exhibitions, more than many of the key impressionists such as Manet, Monet, Cezanne and Renoir. Today he is best known for his works of ballerinas and jockeys. His works of the ballet are particularly striking: they are incredibly beautiful, they are unusual (often painted from unusual angles), and they also depict the reality of the lives lived by working class dancers—rehearsal, exhaustion, exploitation. Degas is also rightly famous for a number of works of the New Orleans cotton exchange run by his mother’s family, which he visited in the early 1870s. 1. Degas early years Edgar Degas was born on 19 July 1834 at 8, Rue Saint Georges in Paris. He was the eldest of his parents' five children Degas’ father, Augustin, was a wealthy banker and his mother a Creole emigre from New Orleans. Degas attended a good Lycee and graduated with a baccalaureate in 1853. He then studied law for a while, but it became increasingly clear that art was his true vocation. Unlike Monet, Degas’ father was a source of encouragement and advice. Degas enrolled at the Louvre as a copyist and spent large chunks of the 1850s in Italy, staying in Florence and Rome in particular, copying Renaissance masterpieces. Degas’ early style Degas’ early style might be said to be classical, and it is certainly true that he was inspired by Ingres and old masters such as Titian. But two aspects of Degas’ work suggested from an early age that he was destined for greatness. First, Degas was a hard-worker. By 1860, he has produced 700 copies of older works. Secondly, and more importantly, Degas did not copy works unthinkingly. He would, for example, focus on a small part of a masterpiece rather than seek to reproduce the whole. And Degas committed his thinking on painting, together with many of his innermost thoughts, to a meticulous diary. Degas’ early works Degas’ unique insight can be seen in three of his earliest works, The Suffering of New Orleans, Spartan Girls Challenging Boys and The Bellelli Family. (1) The Suffering of New Orleans is ostensibly an historical painting in classical style. But it seeks to depict a modern event, the capture of New Orleans by Union Troops in 1862 (representing a major turning-point in the American Civil War). The result is decidedly odd: nude females lie around in agony, whilst another is shot by an archer on horseback. The only ostensible reference to New Orleans is what appears to be a fairly small fire to the top right of the painting. But these oddities don't much matter: the important thing is that Degas was thinking about his art and trying to be different. Degas was disappointed when Suffering received scant attention during the 1865 Salon, where all other works were overshadowed by Manet’s Olympia (a painting of a naked prostitute staring brazenly out from the canvas). Competed in 1865, the Suffering now hangs in Paris’ Musee d’Orsay. (2) Spartan Girls Challenging Boys is another fascinating work. Sparta was a warrior society in ancient Greece, and this painting shows a group of nude adolescent girls taunting a similar group of boys. But, again, the picture seems to add a touch of modernity: were the girls really from a Spartan age or were they, as one critic put it, “skinny urban brats”.Though substantially completed in 1860, Degas did not show this painting until the impressionist exhibition of 1879 and kept it in his studio throughout his life. It now hangs in London’s National Gallery. (3) The Bellelli Family is a family portrait with a difference. The father, Baron Bellelli, is placed to the right of the picture and with his back to the viewer, as if to remove him from the family centre. The Bellelli’s younger daughter, Giulia, is pictured with her left leg tucked underneath her body in an informal stance that would be frowned upon by traditionalists. And the matriarch is pictured staring into space, as if she is biting her tongue. This is, then, an ambitious psychological work. Painted between 1858 and 1869, The Bellelli Family now hangs in the Musee d’Orsay. 2. Degas and the Impressionists Degas met Edouard Manet in 1862 and became a central figure in the impressionist movement. He exhibited in seven of the eight impressionist exhibitions, and was often involved in their organisation. Degas and Manet Manet bumped into Degas when Degas was painting as a copyist in the Louvre in 1862. Legend has it that Manet made a quip about Degas etching directly only an engraving plate. But the meeting was a turning point in Degas' career. Manet was fast becoming the leader of the avant-garde artistic movement in Paris, a position he cemented when his Olympia was accepted by the Salon in 1865 and caused uproar. Manet and Degas became firm friends, frequently painting together and socialising with the rest of the impressionist group at the Cafe Guerbois. They were from the same social strata and were both-quick witted, though Degas was more acidic and uncompromising in his views. Their friendship endured, though it had its ups and downs. The nadir came when Degas painted Manet lying on a sofa listening to his wife playing the piano. Manet so objected to Degas' depiction of his wife's features that he slashed the painting (see the top picture). When Degas learned what had happened he recovered the work and returned a Manet still-life that he had been given in return. The two men became friends again before too long, but the episode tells us a good deal about Manet's affection for his wife and the rivalry that existed between the two painters. The Franco-Prussian war Degas, like Manet, was a real patriot and volunteered for infantry service during the 1870/1 Franco-Prussian war. Manet did a similar thing, and Renoir and Bazille also joined up. By contrast, Monet left France with his wife and young son and spent war in London; and Cezanne his from the authorities in a small village outside of Aix-en-Provence. During marksmanship training, a serious eye condition which was to afflict Degas greatly in later life was identified. Bazille was the only impressionist to die during the war. But a communist Commune was declared over Paris in the aftermath of the war, which led to a bloody civil war. Degas sensibly travelled to New Orleans via London and New York in 1872, where his uncle Michel Musson ran a cotton business. He painted some remarkable works, returning after five months in February 1873. He later said that he liked America but that "The lack of opera is a real torment to me." The 1874 Impressionist Exhibition By late 1873, plans were being hatched by most of the leading impressionists to hold their own independent exhibition. They were fed up of being rejected by the Salon or ignored by reviewers. By the end of the year, they had incorporated the Société Anonyme Coopérative des Artistes, Peintres, Sculpteurs, Graveurs (the Anonymous Society of Artists, Painters, Sculptors and Engravers). The first exhibition was to open in April 1874, with Degas exhibiting ten works. They included the colourful A Carriage at the Races and Rehearsal of a Ballet on Stage. The reviews were generally hostile, though Degas escaped more lightly than many of the others (Cezanne was singled out for particular ridicule). By way of example, the following 'notification' appeared in the Paris press shortly before the first exhibition drew to a close: “There is an exhibition of the intransigents in the Boulevard des Capucines, or rather, you might say, of the lunatics, of which I have already given you a report. If you would like to be amused, and have a moment to spare, don’t miss it.” The Later Impressionist Exhibitions Degas went on to exhibit at all but one of the eight independent impressionist exhibitions. He typically chose works that showed off the variety of his paintings, including The Cotton Exchange at New Orleans (exhibited in 1876), Absinthe (1876) and the wonderfully named Mlle La La at the Circus Fernando (1879). Degas' commitment to the independent exhibitions is remarkable given his testy character and his often-repeated criticisms of certain of the impressionists. He exhibited 24 works at the second exhibition in 1876 and 25 at the third exhibition the next year. He even helped organise some of the exhibitions. But, as the above quote shows, the other impressionists often found him "intolerable". The Difficult Degas Degas quarrelled with the other impressionists for a number of reasons. First, he was primarily a portraitist and did not see the virtues of the en plein air (outdoor) landscape paintings of Monet, Renoir, Pissarro, Cezanne and others. Degas once remarked: "You know what I think of people who work out in the open. If I were the government I would have a special brigade of gendarmes to keep an eye on artists who paint landscapes from nature. Oh, I don't mean to kill anyone; just a little dose of bird-shot now and then as a warning." Secondly, he did not have much in common with the other impressionists except for Manet (who refused to participate in the independent exhibitions), coming from a different social class. Thirdly, he abhorred the term 'impressionist' and insisted that non-impressionists such as John-Louis Forain be able to participate in the independent exhibitions. 3. Ballerinas and Jockeys Degas' most famous works are of jockeys and ballerinas. Horseracing, a recent import from England, was something of a novelty in mid-19th century France. It was much encouraged by Emperor Napoleon III, who owned horses, was responsible for the construction of the Longchamp racecourse, and who even helped draw up the rules. Before long, the sport became a major attraction with thousands of Parisians flocking to the races. They included Degas and Manet—on one occasion, Degas even drew Manet at Longchamp. Degas' had a life-long fascination with horse-racing, though his most important paintings of this genre were produced between the early 1860s and the late 1870s. His works are fascinating because they often focus on events other than the race. For example, Degas' most famous works include horses and their jockeys milling about in Horses in Front of the Stands (1866-68, pictured), a family and their dog enjoying a day out in A Carriage at the Races (1869-72) and the tension before the start of a race in Gentleman's Race: Before the Start (1862). This is more evidence of Degas being a free-thinker, willing to challenge the orthodoxy. That character trait is also noticeable in his works of the ballet. Degas' first love was painting. But his second loves were opera and the ballet. As noted above, opera was the thing he missed most about Paris during his five-month stint in New Orleans. Degas was a season ticket holder at the Paris Opera, where the city's ballet also performed, and was allowed behind-the-scenes access unavailable to the general public. Degas was therefore able to paint scenes of ballet rehearsals, ballet examinations, ballerinas practicing at the bar, and unusual views of the stage. On a number of occasions he painted the stage in the background, barely visible through the hubbub of the orchestra; on others, he painted the action on stage at the centre of his canvas but included bored ballerinas waiting in the wings. Degas did not seek to glamorise the ballet. Many of the dancers he paints are looking bored (Ballet Rehearsal), tired (Dancer in Repose) or doing things like scratching, stretching, drinking, chatting, putting their dresses on, fastening their pointe shoes or yawning! The focus on rehearsals and examinations also highlights the laborious and monotonous life of a dancer. And many pictures emphasise the discipline imposed on dancers, who were usually from the working classes, with choreographers wielding large sticks with which they beat out the time. Indeed, some pictures even hint at the fact that many ballerinas were sexually exploited. See, for instance, a top-hatted gentleman leering at a ballerina in Dancers Backstage. Not that Degas had a particular affection for the ballerinas who made his name: he often referred to them as "little monkey girls". There was another reason Degas painted ballerinas: they sold well. This was important because the De Gas bank, the source of his family's wealth, failed in the early 1870s, meaning that Degas—for the first time in his life—had to be self-sufficient. We have selected Degas' Dancing Class as one of our top 10 impressionist works. 4. Degas' Later Life Degas' later life was not particularly happy: he never married; his eyesight failed; he became embroiled in an anti-Semitic scandal; and he became even more difficult. Degas' later works Degas continued to paint the ballet and the occasional jockey in his later years. But he also devoted substantial attention to new topics, including women doing the laundry, lady's hat shops and sculpture. Degas' first laundry painting was completed in 1869, but by the turn of century he had finished 14 works on this topic (four in 1884 alone). The pictured Women Ironing (1884) depicts the intensity of the work and the exhaustion it caused. A more glamorous topic was the Milliner (a lady's hat shop). Degas was introduced to this subject by Mary Cassatt, the American impressionist with whom he struck up an unlikely friendship. She took him to hat shops and on occasion posed as his model, allowing him to produce ravishing works of fleeting moments of surprise or disappointment when a new hat is tried on. Overall, he painted 20 canvasses on this theme. Degas and sculpture After his death over 150 small sculptures were found in Degas' studio. This was a surprise: Degas had only once shown a sculpture, at the sixth impressionist exhibition held in 1881, and had attracted mixed reviews. For some, his Little Fourteen Year-Old Dancer was an "ideal of ugliness"; for others it represented a "sculptural revolution". Degas' lack of training in sculpture meant that his figures, supported on improvised frames, were always in risk of collapsing! Degas' sculptures are predominantly of ballerinas and horses and are highly regarded today. The English sculptor Paul Tucker even rates him above Rodin. Degas and nudes Between the mid-1880s and 1905 Degas painted a series of nudes, his work becoming less detailed and more abstract as his eyesight deteriorated. They include two works entitled The Tub (1885-6 and 1886) and another two called Woman Combing her Hair (1888-90 and 1905). Degas did not paint his women in classical positions, but doing everyday things like bathing. This left him open to the charge of voyeurism (even from friends such as George Moore). But Degas did not care. As he said: "My women are simple human beings, but honest: they are merely looking after their bodies. This one is washing her feet. It is as if one were watching through a keyhole." Degas and marriage Degas' views on marriage changed over the years. At the end of his time in New Orleans in 1872/3, he was quite attracted to the idea, writing: "... a good woman. A few children of my own, would that be excessive? ... It's the right moment, just right".But later on he expressed his opposition in sarcastic terms, noting that: "I have perhaps too often considered woman as an animal." Degas and the Dreyfus Affair Despite having a number of Jewish friends, Degas revealed his anti-Semitic views during the Dreyfus Affair, a political scandal that rocked France in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Evidence was discovered by a French spy showing that military secrets were being leaked to the Germans. The evidence was a ripped-up letter with handwriting said to resemble that of a Jewish artillery captain, Alfred Dreyfus. Dreyfus was quickly court-martialled and convicted, and sent to Devil's Island to serve his term of imprisonment. To make matters worse, evidence that another man was guilty was suppressed by the French army. This led to a major schism in French society, between those who thought Dreyfus innocent and those who considered him guilty. Those falling into the latter category was often anti-Semitic, ignoring the overwhelming evidence in Dreyfus' favour and the lack of due process leading to his conviction. This split was reflected in the impressionists. Monet, Pissarro and Emile Zola (a leading writer and supporter of the impressionist cause) were pro-Dreyfus. Renoir, Cezanne and Degas were anti. But Degas was the most outspoken in his anti-Semitic views. When a model in Degas’ studio suggested that Dreyfus may not be guilty, Degas screamed at her “you are Jewish … you are Jewish … get out”.Degas also broke off long-standing relationships with his Jewish friends. By 1901 Degas' eyesight was so bad that he could only work on large formats using broad strokes of chalk. By 1908 he was so blind that he could no longer draw. But Degas still liked to get out into the Parisian streets. He died on 27 September 1917 and is buried in the family grave in Montmartre cemetery. Degas requested that only a single statement be uttered at his grave: "He very much loved drawing."	<urn:uuid:74f2b4cc-6618-4c7c-8788-556500596370>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://impressionistarts.com/edgar-degas-biography.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250604397.40/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121132900-20200121161900-00330.warc.gz	en	0.98439	4,168	3.390625	3	[ 0.04702182859182358, 0.4936850070953369, 0.7087461948394775, 0.09319901466369629, -0.18964555859565735, 0.1463850736618042, 0.15774860978126526, -0.009352842345833778, -0.29172566533088684, -0.5477285385131836, -0.08568902313709259, -0.448739230632782, -0.04353465139865875, 0.2713391780853...	1	Biography of Edgar Degas Edgar Degas was born in Paris in 1834, his father a wealthy banker and his mother an emigre from New Orleans. Despite his privileged upbringing, Degas was a difficult person. He was opinionated, demanding and (at least in later life) anti-Semitic. As Caillebotte said during preparations for one of the impressionist exhibitions, “He is quite intolerable. But we have to concede that he is extremely talented.” To make matters worse, Degas had an eye condition identified during the Franco-Prussian war of 1870 that made him extremely sensitive to sunlight and resulted in his near-total blindness from 1901. But Degas was indeed a genius. He focused on classical technique in the early years of his career, though his famous work from this era Spartan Girls Challenging Boys has a number of modern touches. Degas also exhibited in seven of the eight impressionist exhibitions, more than many of the key impressionists such as Manet, Monet, Cezanne and Renoir. Today he is best known for his works of ballerinas and jockeys. His works of the ballet are particularly striking: they are incredibly beautiful, they are unusual (often painted from unusual angles), and they also depict the reality of the lives lived by working class dancers—rehearsal, exhaustion, exploitation. Degas is also rightly famous for a number of works of the New Orleans cotton exchange run by his mother’s family, which he visited in the early 1870s. 1. Degas early years Edgar Degas was born on 19 July 1834 at 8, Rue Saint Georges in Paris. He was the eldest of his parents' five children Degas’ father, Augustin, was a wealthy banker and his mother a Creole emigre from New Orleans. Degas attended a good Lycee and graduated with a baccalaureate in 1853. He then studied law for a while, but it became increasingly clear that art was his true vocation. Unlike Monet, Degas’ father was a source of encouragement and advice. Degas enrolled at the Louvre as a copyist and spent large chunks of the 1850s in Italy, staying in Florence and Rome in particular, copying Renaissance masterpieces. Degas’ early style Degas’ early style might be said to be classical, and it is certainly true that he was inspired by Ingres and old masters such as Titian. But two aspects of Degas’ work suggested from an early age that he was destined for greatness. First, Degas was a hard-worker. By 1860, he has produced 700 copies of older works. Secondly, and more importantly, Degas did not copy works unthinkingly. He would, for example, focus on a small part of a masterpiece rather than seek to reproduce the whole. And Degas committed his thinking on painting, together with many of his innermost thoughts, to a meticulous diary. Degas’ early works Degas’ unique insight can be seen in three of his earliest works, The Suffering of New Orleans, Spartan Girls Challenging Boys and The Bellelli Family. (1) The Suffering of New Orleans is ostensibly an historical painting in classical style. But it seeks to depict a modern event, the capture of New Orleans by Union Troops in 1862 (representing a major turning-point in the American Civil War). The result is decidedly odd: nude females lie around in agony, whilst another is shot by an archer on horseback. The only ostensible reference to New Orleans is what appears to be a fairly small fire to the top right of the painting. But these oddities don't much matter: the important thing is that Degas was thinking about his art and trying to be different. Degas was disappointed when Suffering received scant attention during the 1865 Salon, where all other works were overshadowed by Manet’s Olympia (a painting of a naked prostitute staring brazenly out from the canvas). Competed in 1865, the Suffering now hangs in Paris’ Musee d’Orsay. (2) Spartan Girls Challenging Boys is another fascinating work. Sparta was a warrior society in ancient Greece, and this painting shows a group of nude adolescent girls taunting a similar group of boys. But, again, the picture seems to add a touch of modernity: were the girls really from a Spartan age or were they, as one critic put it, “skinny urban brats”.Though substantially completed in 1860, Degas did not show this painting until the impressionist exhibition of 1879 and kept it in his studio throughout his life. It now hangs in London’s National Gallery. (3) The Bellelli Family is a family portrait with a difference. The father, Baron Bellelli, is placed to the right of the picture and with his back to the viewer, as if to remove him from the family centre. The Bellelli’s younger daughter, Giulia, is pictured with her left leg tucked underneath her body in an informal stance that would be frowned upon by traditionalists. And the matriarch is pictured staring into space, as if she is biting her tongue. This is, then, an ambitious psychological work. Painted between 1858 and 1869, The Bellelli Family now hangs in the Musee d’Orsay. 2. Degas and the Impressionists Degas met Edouard Manet in 1862 and became a central figure in the impressionist movement. He exhibited in seven of the eight impressionist exhibitions, and was often involved in their organisation. Degas and Manet Manet bumped into Degas when Degas was painting as a copyist in the Louvre in 1862. Legend has it that Manet made a quip about Degas etching directly only an engraving plate. But the meeting was a turning point in Degas' career. Manet was fast becoming the leader of the avant-garde artistic movement in Paris, a position he cemented when his Olympia was accepted by the Salon in 1865 and caused uproar. Manet and Degas became firm friends, frequently painting together and socialising with the rest of the impressionist group at the Cafe Guerbois. They were from the same social strata and were both-quick witted, though Degas was more acidic and uncompromising in his views. Their friendship endured, though it had its ups and downs. The nadir came when Degas painted Manet lying on a sofa listening to his wife playing the piano. Manet so objected to Degas' depiction of his wife's features that he slashed the painting (see the top picture). When Degas learned what had happened he recovered the work and returned a Manet still-life that he had been given in return. The two men became friends again before too long, but the episode tells us a good deal about Manet's affection for his wife and the rivalry that existed between the two painters. The Franco-Prussian war Degas, like Manet, was a real patriot and volunteered for infantry service during the 1870/1 Franco-Prussian war. Manet did a similar thing, and Renoir and Bazille also joined up. By contrast, Monet left France with his wife and young son and spent war in London; and Cezanne his from the authorities in a small village outside of Aix-en-Provence. During marksmanship training, a serious eye condition which was to afflict Degas greatly in later life was identified. Bazille was the only impressionist to die during the war. But a communist Commune was declared over Paris in the aftermath of the war, which led to a bloody civil war. Degas sensibly travelled to New Orleans via London and New York in 1872, where his uncle Michel Musson ran a cotton business. He painted some remarkable works, returning after five months in February 1873. He later said that he liked America but that "The lack of opera is a real torment to me." The 1874 Impressionist Exhibition By late 1873, plans were being hatched by most of the leading impressionists to hold their own independent exhibition. They were fed up of being rejected by the Salon or ignored by reviewers. By the end of the year, they had incorporated the Société Anonyme Coopérative des Artistes, Peintres, Sculpteurs, Graveurs (the Anonymous Society of Artists, Painters, Sculptors and Engravers). The first exhibition was to open in April 1874, with Degas exhibiting ten works. They included the colourful A Carriage at the Races and Rehearsal of a Ballet on Stage. The reviews were generally hostile, though Degas escaped more lightly than many of the others (Cezanne was singled out for particular ridicule). By way of example, the following 'notification' appeared in the Paris press shortly before the first exhibition drew to a close: “There is an exhibition of the intransigents in the Boulevard des Capucines, or rather, you might say, of the lunatics, of which I have already given you a report. If you would like to be amused, and have a moment to spare, don’t miss it.” The Later Impressionist Exhibitions Degas went on to exhibit at all but one of the eight independent impressionist exhibitions. He typically chose works that showed off the variety of his paintings, including The Cotton Exchange at New Orleans (exhibited in 1876), Absinthe (1876) and the wonderfully named Mlle La La at the Circus Fernando (1879). Degas' commitment to the independent exhibitions is remarkable given his testy character and his often-repeated criticisms of certain of the impressionists. He exhibited 24 works at the second exhibition in 1876 and 25 at the third exhibition the next year. He even helped organise some of the exhibitions. But, as the above quote shows, the other impressionists often found him "intolerable". The Difficult Degas Degas quarrelled with the other impressionists for a number of reasons. First, he was primarily a portraitist and did not see the virtues of the en plein air (outdoor) landscape paintings of Monet, Renoir, Pissarro, Cezanne and others. Degas once remarked: "You know what I think of people who work out in the open. If I were the government I would have a special brigade of gendarmes to keep an eye on artists who paint landscapes from nature. Oh, I don't mean to kill anyone; just a little dose of bird-shot now and then as a warning." Secondly, he did not have much in common with the other impressionists except for Manet (who refused to participate in the independent exhibitions), coming from a different social class. Thirdly, he abhorred the term 'impressionist' and insisted that non-impressionists such as John-Louis Forain be able to participate in the independent exhibitions. 3. Ballerinas and Jockeys Degas' most famous works are of jockeys and ballerinas. Horseracing, a recent import from England, was something of a novelty in mid-19th century France. It was much encouraged by Emperor Napoleon III, who owned horses, was responsible for the construction of the Longchamp racecourse, and who even helped draw up the rules. Before long, the sport became a major attraction with thousands of Parisians flocking to the races. They included Degas and Manet—on one occasion, Degas even drew Manet at Longchamp. Degas' had a life-long fascination with horse-racing, though his most important paintings of this genre were produced between the early 1860s and the late 1870s. His works are fascinating because they often focus on events other than the race. For example, Degas' most famous works include horses and their jockeys milling about in Horses in Front of the Stands (1866-68, pictured), a family and their dog enjoying a day out in A Carriage at the Races (1869-72) and the tension before the start of a race in Gentleman's Race: Before the Start (1862). This is more evidence of Degas being a free-thinker, willing to challenge the orthodoxy. That character trait is also noticeable in his works of the ballet. Degas' first love was painting. But his second loves were opera and the ballet. As noted above, opera was the thing he missed most about Paris during his five-month stint in New Orleans. Degas was a season ticket holder at the Paris Opera, where the city's ballet also performed, and was allowed behind-the-scenes access unavailable to the general public. Degas was therefore able to paint scenes of ballet rehearsals, ballet examinations, ballerinas practicing at the bar, and unusual views of the stage. On a number of occasions he painted the stage in the background, barely visible through the hubbub of the orchestra; on others, he painted the action on stage at the centre of his canvas but included bored ballerinas waiting in the wings. Degas did not seek to glamorise the ballet. Many of the dancers he paints are looking bored (Ballet Rehearsal), tired (Dancer in Repose) or doing things like scratching, stretching, drinking, chatting, putting their dresses on, fastening their pointe shoes or yawning! The focus on rehearsals and examinations also highlights the laborious and monotonous life of a dancer. And many pictures emphasise the discipline imposed on dancers, who were usually from the working classes, with choreographers wielding large sticks with which they beat out the time. Indeed, some pictures even hint at the fact that many ballerinas were sexually exploited. See, for instance, a top-hatted gentleman leering at a ballerina in Dancers Backstage. Not that Degas had a particular affection for the ballerinas who made his name: he often referred to them as "little monkey girls". There was another reason Degas painted ballerinas: they sold well. This was important because the De Gas bank, the source of his family's wealth, failed in the early 1870s, meaning that Degas—for the first time in his life—had to be self-sufficient. We have selected Degas' Dancing Class as one of our top 10 impressionist works. 4. Degas' Later Life Degas' later life was not particularly happy: he never married; his eyesight failed; he became embroiled in an anti-Semitic scandal; and he became even more difficult. Degas' later works Degas continued to paint the ballet and the occasional jockey in his later years. But he also devoted substantial attention to new topics, including women doing the laundry, lady's hat shops and sculpture. Degas' first laundry painting was completed in 1869, but by the turn of century he had finished 14 works on this topic (four in 1884 alone). The pictured Women Ironing (1884) depicts the intensity of the work and the exhaustion it caused. A more glamorous topic was the Milliner (a lady's hat shop). Degas was introduced to this subject by Mary Cassatt, the American impressionist with whom he struck up an unlikely friendship. She took him to hat shops and on occasion posed as his model, allowing him to produce ravishing works of fleeting moments of surprise or disappointment when a new hat is tried on. Overall, he painted 20 canvasses on this theme. Degas and sculpture After his death over 150 small sculptures were found in Degas' studio. This was a surprise: Degas had only once shown a sculpture, at the sixth impressionist exhibition held in 1881, and had attracted mixed reviews. For some, his Little Fourteen Year-Old Dancer was an "ideal of ugliness"; for others it represented a "sculptural revolution". Degas' lack of training in sculpture meant that his figures, supported on improvised frames, were always in risk of collapsing! Degas' sculptures are predominantly of ballerinas and horses and are highly regarded today. The English sculptor Paul Tucker even rates him above Rodin. Degas and nudes Between the mid-1880s and 1905 Degas painted a series of nudes, his work becoming less detailed and more abstract as his eyesight deteriorated. They include two works entitled The Tub (1885-6 and 1886) and another two called Woman Combing her Hair (1888-90 and 1905). Degas did not paint his women in classical positions, but doing everyday things like bathing. This left him open to the charge of voyeurism (even from friends such as George Moore). But Degas did not care. As he said: "My women are simple human beings, but honest: they are merely looking after their bodies. This one is washing her feet. It is as if one were watching through a keyhole." Degas and marriage Degas' views on marriage changed over the years. At the end of his time in New Orleans in 1872/3, he was quite attracted to the idea, writing: "... a good woman. A few children of my own, would that be excessive? ... It's the right moment, just right".But later on he expressed his opposition in sarcastic terms, noting that: "I have perhaps too often considered woman as an animal." Degas and the Dreyfus Affair Despite having a number of Jewish friends, Degas revealed his anti-Semitic views during the Dreyfus Affair, a political scandal that rocked France in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Evidence was discovered by a French spy showing that military secrets were being leaked to the Germans. The evidence was a ripped-up letter with handwriting said to resemble that of a Jewish artillery captain, Alfred Dreyfus. Dreyfus was quickly court-martialled and convicted, and sent to Devil's Island to serve his term of imprisonment. To make matters worse, evidence that another man was guilty was suppressed by the French army. This led to a major schism in French society, between those who thought Dreyfus innocent and those who considered him guilty. Those falling into the latter category was often anti-Semitic, ignoring the overwhelming evidence in Dreyfus' favour and the lack of due process leading to his conviction. This split was reflected in the impressionists. Monet, Pissarro and Emile Zola (a leading writer and supporter of the impressionist cause) were pro-Dreyfus. Renoir, Cezanne and Degas were anti. But Degas was the most outspoken in his anti-Semitic views. When a model in Degas’ studio suggested that Dreyfus may not be guilty, Degas screamed at her “you are Jewish … you are Jewish … get out”.Degas also broke off long-standing relationships with his Jewish friends. By 1901 Degas' eyesight was so bad that he could only work on large formats using broad strokes of chalk. By 1908 he was so blind that he could no longer draw. But Degas still liked to get out into the Parisian streets. He died on 27 September 1917 and is buried in the family grave in Montmartre cemetery. Degas requested that only a single statement be uttered at his grave: "He very much loved drawing."	4,176	ENGLISH	1
Biography of King Charles II Charles II became King of England, Scotland and Ireland in 1660 at the time of the restoration of the monarchy, following 11 years when the nation was a Commonwealth. His life was shaped by his father’s, King Charles I, defeat in the English civil war and his subsequent execution. Charles II lived many of his formative years in exile before returning home following the collapse of the republican government. His reign as King was marked by the disasters of the Great Plague and the Great Fire of London, as well as religious distrust, with many of his protestant countryman fearing Charles II was Catholic at heart. His reign saw a rise in colonial interests and trade in places such as India, the East Indies and America. Known as ‘The Merry Monarch’, the court of King Charles II was known to enjoy a hedonistic lifestyle. He was considered charming and affable with an exuberant nature, though his charm could not prevent frequent quarrels with his Parliament. 1. Early Life Charles II was born at St. James Palace in London on May 29th, 1630, a son to King Charles I and Henrietta Maria. He was educated by the Bishop of Chichester and the Earl of Newcastle in an early childhood which befitted a King’s son and was given the title of Prince of Wales when aged eight. However political unrest was already brewing and when the civil war began in 1642 his formal education came to an abrupt end. His father wholeheartedly believed in a king’s divine right to rule, something his son would also believe as King Charles II. However this conflict of power between monarchy and parliament was to spill over on to the battlefield in a civil war, which over a series of engagements was to last nine years. The young Charles was to support his father against the Parliamentary forces and when still only 14 years of age was made nominal commander of the English forces in the West country. The Royalist cause was all but lost in 1645 and as heir to the throne young Charles was helped to flee the country. He joined his mother in France via the Scilly Isles and Jersey, before taking up residence at The Hague in the Netherlands. It was here he was informed of his father’s execution in 1649, before one more plot was hatched to try and save the embattled monarchy. 2. Exile and Restoration Following the execution of the king, Scotland proclaimed the exiled prince as King Charles II. As part of the deal Charles had to accept Presbyterian church governance in the British Isles and in 1650 he landed in Scotland from where he led an invading force across the border in to England. However, their defeat at the Battle of Worcester in 1651 by Oliver Cromwell’s Parliamentary army signalled the end of the civil war. Charles II managed to escape capture, hiding in an oak tree to avoid Roundhead troops according to folklore, before returning to exile with the help of subjects who remained loyal to the crown. Exile was hard for Charles as Oliver Cromwell, Lord Protector of the newly formed Commonwealth, put pressure on those looking to host the exiled king in waiting. He initially joined his mother in Paris, before moving to Cologne for diplomatic reasons and then Bruges in the Spanish Netherlands, as Charles increasingly looked to Spain for help in winning back his crown. In 1658 Oliver Cromwell died and although his son Richard was named Lord Protector he lacked his father’s authority. As a power struggle developed within England which threatened to return the country to turmoil, many saw the return of the monarchy as the only chance to bring peace and stability back to the nation. Chief among these was General Monck who had been one of Cromwell’s leading Generals. In 1660, with the help of chief adviser Edward Hyde, Charles issued the Declaration of Breda in which he promised a pardon for crimes committed during the civil war to those who now recognised him as King. In May 1660 Charles II was proclaimed King and on 30th May he entered London, five days after landing back in England at Dover. 3. The Reign of King Charles II The new King was to realise early on that he was not going to get everything his own way with Parliament. His attempts to introduce toleration for Catholics were repeatedly rebuffed and indeed the Clarendon Code was passed which discouraged non-conformity to the Church of England. Suspicions about Charles II being an uncommitted Anglican dogged his reign and were not helped by his marriage in 1662 to the catholic Catherine of Braganza as part of an alliance with Portugal. In the space of two years King Charles II faced two of the biggest challenges of his reign. The year 1665 saw the Great Plague of London decimate the city, with death tolls of up to 7000 every week as the disease spread without means of control. The King and his family escaped London, ultimately taking up residence in Oxford. By early 1666 cases of the plague had dropped and there were sporadic outbursts until the second disaster struck the city in September that year. The Great Fire of London destroyed a huge swathe of London, including St Paul’s Cathedral, but is also often seen as the end point to the Great Plague. King Charles II and his brother James were highly visible for this tragedy, riding around the stricken city organising the response on the ground. In 1670 Charles agreed a controversial secret treaty with the French king Louis XIV, where he agreed to convert to Catholicism and support the French war effort against the Dutch in return for financial assistance which would help him in his dealings with Parliament. Although Charles ensured the terms remained secret and only converted on his deathbed, it was still a clause the French King could hold over him for influence. The Popish Plot of 1678 ramped up the pressure on a King whose religious inclinations were already doubted by many of his subjects. Based around a Catholic plot to kill the King, allegedly uncovered by Titus Oates, a former Anglican Cleric, it was all complete fiction which all too easily tapped in to a population’s anti-catholic sentiment. The plot would put Charles’ brother James, who had already converted to the Catholic church, on the throne. It triggered the exclusion crisis as parliament looked to exclude James from the succession. In response to the crisis King Charles II dissolved parliament in 1681 and ruled the nation for the remainder of his reign as an absolute monarch. He died on February 6th 1685 at Whitehall Palace in London, converting to Catholicism on his death bed, to be succeeded by his brother James. 4. King Charles II's Legacy The marriage between Charles II and Catherine of Braganza bore no children and the Catholic James succeeded to the throne. During his lifetime King Charles II had a number of high profile mistresses including Lucy Walter, Barbara Villiers, Louise de Keroualle and Nell Gwyn. He fathered many children through these affairs, but only one, James Crofts, was to become involved in the world of politics. A favourite of Charles II, James Crofts was made Duke of Monmouth in 1663. As a protestant Monmouth was a strong opponent of James’ succession to the throne and led an unsuccessful rebellion in 1685. However the daughters of James had been raised as Anglican on the wishes of King Charles II and the eldest, Mary, was married to the Protestant William of Orange in 1677. The Glorious Revolution of 1689 saw William and Mary crowned joint monarchs after invading England in 1688, which saw James flee abroad. Although referred to as ‘The Merry Monarch’ who overlooked a lively court which indulged in pleasure at every opportunity, King Charles II was also a patron of the arts and took an interest in science. During his reign he commissioned the Royal Observatory at Greenwich and supported the Royal Society, giving it royal approval in 1663. A notable achievement of the reign of King Charles II was the rebuilding of London following the Great Fire in 1665, in which Christopher Wren oversaw much of the process including the later design and rebuilding of St. Paul’s Cathedral. The King teamed up with Wren once more when the architect brought to life the monarch’s wish for a hospital for veteran soldiers. A royal warrant was issued in 1681 to build the Royal Hospital Chelsea, a project which was completed in 1692. The Chelsea Pensioners remain well known across the world and a statue of the king which was commissioned around the same time still stands in the hospital grounds today. For all the disputes between parliament and King Charles II, plus his subjects concern over his religious toleration, he is viewed as a generally popular King having brought stability back to the country after the collapse of the Commonwealth. He certainly liked the finer things in life and loved regaling the tale of his escape following the battle of Worcester, particularly revelling in how he was able to easily disguise himself and pass as a common man. King Charles II was buried in Westminster Abbey in a ceremony which was low-key, possibly due to his death bed conversion to the Catholic church. A life size wax effigy was made of the King in 1686 and is displayed in the Islip chapel.	<urn:uuid:55a1db1b-9218-498f-b22d-7e8e55c9894b>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://greatestbritons.com/king-charles-ii-biography.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251681412.74/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125191854-20200125221854-00464.warc.gz	en	0.985707	1,916	3.875	4	[ -0.11981390416622162, 0.787263035774231, 0.3171534538269043, -0.2047889530658722, -0.4105069041252136, -0.3007813096046448, 0.41739869117736816, 0.02127225510776043, -0.12202168256044388, -0.013800480403006077, -0.2700812816619873, -0.2756215035915375, 0.4755169153213501, 0.214924454689025...	1	Biography of King Charles II Charles II became King of England, Scotland and Ireland in 1660 at the time of the restoration of the monarchy, following 11 years when the nation was a Commonwealth. His life was shaped by his father’s, King Charles I, defeat in the English civil war and his subsequent execution. Charles II lived many of his formative years in exile before returning home following the collapse of the republican government. His reign as King was marked by the disasters of the Great Plague and the Great Fire of London, as well as religious distrust, with many of his protestant countryman fearing Charles II was Catholic at heart. His reign saw a rise in colonial interests and trade in places such as India, the East Indies and America. Known as ‘The Merry Monarch’, the court of King Charles II was known to enjoy a hedonistic lifestyle. He was considered charming and affable with an exuberant nature, though his charm could not prevent frequent quarrels with his Parliament. 1. Early Life Charles II was born at St. James Palace in London on May 29th, 1630, a son to King Charles I and Henrietta Maria. He was educated by the Bishop of Chichester and the Earl of Newcastle in an early childhood which befitted a King’s son and was given the title of Prince of Wales when aged eight. However political unrest was already brewing and when the civil war began in 1642 his formal education came to an abrupt end. His father wholeheartedly believed in a king’s divine right to rule, something his son would also believe as King Charles II. However this conflict of power between monarchy and parliament was to spill over on to the battlefield in a civil war, which over a series of engagements was to last nine years. The young Charles was to support his father against the Parliamentary forces and when still only 14 years of age was made nominal commander of the English forces in the West country. The Royalist cause was all but lost in 1645 and as heir to the throne young Charles was helped to flee the country. He joined his mother in France via the Scilly Isles and Jersey, before taking up residence at The Hague in the Netherlands. It was here he was informed of his father’s execution in 1649, before one more plot was hatched to try and save the embattled monarchy. 2. Exile and Restoration Following the execution of the king, Scotland proclaimed the exiled prince as King Charles II. As part of the deal Charles had to accept Presbyterian church governance in the British Isles and in 1650 he landed in Scotland from where he led an invading force across the border in to England. However, their defeat at the Battle of Worcester in 1651 by Oliver Cromwell’s Parliamentary army signalled the end of the civil war. Charles II managed to escape capture, hiding in an oak tree to avoid Roundhead troops according to folklore, before returning to exile with the help of subjects who remained loyal to the crown. Exile was hard for Charles as Oliver Cromwell, Lord Protector of the newly formed Commonwealth, put pressure on those looking to host the exiled king in waiting. He initially joined his mother in Paris, before moving to Cologne for diplomatic reasons and then Bruges in the Spanish Netherlands, as Charles increasingly looked to Spain for help in winning back his crown. In 1658 Oliver Cromwell died and although his son Richard was named Lord Protector he lacked his father’s authority. As a power struggle developed within England which threatened to return the country to turmoil, many saw the return of the monarchy as the only chance to bring peace and stability back to the nation. Chief among these was General Monck who had been one of Cromwell’s leading Generals. In 1660, with the help of chief adviser Edward Hyde, Charles issued the Declaration of Breda in which he promised a pardon for crimes committed during the civil war to those who now recognised him as King. In May 1660 Charles II was proclaimed King and on 30th May he entered London, five days after landing back in England at Dover. 3. The Reign of King Charles II The new King was to realise early on that he was not going to get everything his own way with Parliament. His attempts to introduce toleration for Catholics were repeatedly rebuffed and indeed the Clarendon Code was passed which discouraged non-conformity to the Church of England. Suspicions about Charles II being an uncommitted Anglican dogged his reign and were not helped by his marriage in 1662 to the catholic Catherine of Braganza as part of an alliance with Portugal. In the space of two years King Charles II faced two of the biggest challenges of his reign. The year 1665 saw the Great Plague of London decimate the city, with death tolls of up to 7000 every week as the disease spread without means of control. The King and his family escaped London, ultimately taking up residence in Oxford. By early 1666 cases of the plague had dropped and there were sporadic outbursts until the second disaster struck the city in September that year. The Great Fire of London destroyed a huge swathe of London, including St Paul’s Cathedral, but is also often seen as the end point to the Great Plague. King Charles II and his brother James were highly visible for this tragedy, riding around the stricken city organising the response on the ground. In 1670 Charles agreed a controversial secret treaty with the French king Louis XIV, where he agreed to convert to Catholicism and support the French war effort against the Dutch in return for financial assistance which would help him in his dealings with Parliament. Although Charles ensured the terms remained secret and only converted on his deathbed, it was still a clause the French King could hold over him for influence. The Popish Plot of 1678 ramped up the pressure on a King whose religious inclinations were already doubted by many of his subjects. Based around a Catholic plot to kill the King, allegedly uncovered by Titus Oates, a former Anglican Cleric, it was all complete fiction which all too easily tapped in to a population’s anti-catholic sentiment. The plot would put Charles’ brother James, who had already converted to the Catholic church, on the throne. It triggered the exclusion crisis as parliament looked to exclude James from the succession. In response to the crisis King Charles II dissolved parliament in 1681 and ruled the nation for the remainder of his reign as an absolute monarch. He died on February 6th 1685 at Whitehall Palace in London, converting to Catholicism on his death bed, to be succeeded by his brother James. 4. King Charles II's Legacy The marriage between Charles II and Catherine of Braganza bore no children and the Catholic James succeeded to the throne. During his lifetime King Charles II had a number of high profile mistresses including Lucy Walter, Barbara Villiers, Louise de Keroualle and Nell Gwyn. He fathered many children through these affairs, but only one, James Crofts, was to become involved in the world of politics. A favourite of Charles II, James Crofts was made Duke of Monmouth in 1663. As a protestant Monmouth was a strong opponent of James’ succession to the throne and led an unsuccessful rebellion in 1685. However the daughters of James had been raised as Anglican on the wishes of King Charles II and the eldest, Mary, was married to the Protestant William of Orange in 1677. The Glorious Revolution of 1689 saw William and Mary crowned joint monarchs after invading England in 1688, which saw James flee abroad. Although referred to as ‘The Merry Monarch’ who overlooked a lively court which indulged in pleasure at every opportunity, King Charles II was also a patron of the arts and took an interest in science. During his reign he commissioned the Royal Observatory at Greenwich and supported the Royal Society, giving it royal approval in 1663. A notable achievement of the reign of King Charles II was the rebuilding of London following the Great Fire in 1665, in which Christopher Wren oversaw much of the process including the later design and rebuilding of St. Paul’s Cathedral. The King teamed up with Wren once more when the architect brought to life the monarch’s wish for a hospital for veteran soldiers. A royal warrant was issued in 1681 to build the Royal Hospital Chelsea, a project which was completed in 1692. The Chelsea Pensioners remain well known across the world and a statue of the king which was commissioned around the same time still stands in the hospital grounds today. For all the disputes between parliament and King Charles II, plus his subjects concern over his religious toleration, he is viewed as a generally popular King having brought stability back to the country after the collapse of the Commonwealth. He certainly liked the finer things in life and loved regaling the tale of his escape following the battle of Worcester, particularly revelling in how he was able to easily disguise himself and pass as a common man. King Charles II was buried in Westminster Abbey in a ceremony which was low-key, possibly due to his death bed conversion to the Catholic church. A life size wax effigy was made of the King in 1686 and is displayed in the Islip chapel.	1,962	ENGLISH	1
On this day almost 2000 years ago, Jesus was spending time meeting people, healing them, teaching them, and connecting with them. Meanwhile, across town, Judah Iscariot is exchanging an opportunity of betrayal to make some money. His scheme is to hand Jesus over to the temple guard in order for Him to be tried by the religious elite, and put some coin in his pocket. In first century Israel, 30 pieces of silver was about a month’s wages. It was also equivalent to the cost of a slave or servant. Judas Iscariot, who had been with Jesus and his fellow disciples for almost 3 years at this point, uncovers one of the most common heart issues of followers of Jesus…that being near Jesus is somehow equal to knowing Jesus. You see, being with him 24/7 for that amount of time would mean Judas, and the other disciples, would know what type of fish he liked best. What type of trees he preferred to rest under. And maybe which baker made the best bread, according to Jesus. However, none of these things are equal to knowing Jesus. Those are simply facts gleaned from being near Him. Knowing Jesus is to look at His heart, His ministry, His calling, and His purpose. Based on what we see in the Gospel accounts, it’s fairly obvious that Judas had spent almost 3 years near Jesus without knowing who He truly was. Or, even worse, he did know and betrayed Jesus anyways. But in Judas’s mind, he valued Jesus so low that he was selling Him to the temple authorities at the same level as a slave. The good news is that this is not the end. It is just the beginning. To start at the beginning of the Easter/Holy Week series, click here Next day: click here	<urn:uuid:78c81cf8-4b0f-4981-92b1-bb77f96a11f9>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://bradflack.com/2017/04/11/tuesday-of-easter-week/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598726.39/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120110422-20200120134422-00091.warc.gz	en	0.98488	374	3.296875	3	[ -0.20995669066905975, 0.06840325146913528, 0.08056513220071793, -0.06407385319471359, -0.07427942007780075, -0.22648543119430542, 0.13253149390220642, 0.13162189722061157, 0.09645672887563705, 0.1229749396443367, 0.27901574969291687, 0.1231844574213028, 0.15160515904426575, 0.3345951139926...	12	On this day almost 2000 years ago, Jesus was spending time meeting people, healing them, teaching them, and connecting with them. Meanwhile, across town, Judah Iscariot is exchanging an opportunity of betrayal to make some money. His scheme is to hand Jesus over to the temple guard in order for Him to be tried by the religious elite, and put some coin in his pocket. In first century Israel, 30 pieces of silver was about a month’s wages. It was also equivalent to the cost of a slave or servant. Judas Iscariot, who had been with Jesus and his fellow disciples for almost 3 years at this point, uncovers one of the most common heart issues of followers of Jesus…that being near Jesus is somehow equal to knowing Jesus. You see, being with him 24/7 for that amount of time would mean Judas, and the other disciples, would know what type of fish he liked best. What type of trees he preferred to rest under. And maybe which baker made the best bread, according to Jesus. However, none of these things are equal to knowing Jesus. Those are simply facts gleaned from being near Him. Knowing Jesus is to look at His heart, His ministry, His calling, and His purpose. Based on what we see in the Gospel accounts, it’s fairly obvious that Judas had spent almost 3 years near Jesus without knowing who He truly was. Or, even worse, he did know and betrayed Jesus anyways. But in Judas’s mind, he valued Jesus so low that he was selling Him to the temple authorities at the same level as a slave. The good news is that this is not the end. It is just the beginning. To start at the beginning of the Easter/Holy Week series, click here Next day: click here	377	ENGLISH	1
Memorial Day is observed in America on the last Monday of May, and it is a day to commemorate and remember the men and women who lost their lives while in service for the US military. It is a federal holiday, and as such, businesses and schools are closed, and most people have the day off work. Originally named Decoration Day, it was officially made into a federal holiday in 1971. Traditionally, people will visit cemeteries and memorials for American soldiers, and there are several parades around the country. It also unofficially marks the beginning of the summer season. The origins of Memorial Day It is unclear where Memorial Day was first observed, but the day was created right after the end of the Civil War, in 1865. At the time, the American Civil War was the event that took more lives in U.S. history, it is estimated that around 620,000 soldiers died during it. As such, in the late 1860s, people began organizing tributes to the lost soldiers, by decorating their graves and paying their respects. While it is unknown where Memorial Day started, several independent communities and states likely put up their own memorials. However, records show that the earliest commemoration of the fallen soldiers was held by recently freed slaves. Officially, Waterloo, New York is known as “The Birthplace of Memorial Day” as it was there that the first annual, wide event was held on May 5th in 1966. On May 5th 1868, General John A. Logan, alongside a group of Nothern Civil War Veterans, pushed for a national day of remembrance for the lost soldiers of the conflict. He chose the 30th of May for this purpose, proclaiming that people should show respect by decorating the graves of the dead, thus why it was called Decoration Day. The 30th of May was chosen to honor this day, as it was a date that didn’t mark any significant battles in history. The first time that this day was celebrated, a total of 5,000 participants decorated the graves of 20,000 soldiers. All Northern Days followed this tradition, and by 1890 all of them had made it into a state holiday. However, Southern States did not acknowledge Decoration Day until World War I, when the day was meant to celebrate all of those who sacrificed their lives for the country in American wars, and not just those fallen during the Civil War. How Decoration Day became Memorial Day After the loss of life in World War I, it was necessary to have a day to commemorate all members of the American Military who died while in service. In 1968, the Uniform Monday Holiday Act was passed by congress, and Memorial Day went from being celebrated on the 30th of May, to be celebrated on the last Monday of May, to give American workers a three day weekend. Hence why the end of May is also known as Memorial Day Weekend. This was officialized in 1971 when Memorial Day was also made into a federal holiday. How Memorial Day is celebrated During Memorial Day, all American flags must be flown at half staff until noon, after which they should be raised until sunset. In December of 2000, the National Moment of Remembrance was instated, encouraging Americans to observe a moment of respect and silence at 3 p.m in honor of all who lost their lives in battle. People commemorate this day by visiting cemeteries and memorials and laying wreaths and American flags on the graves of soldiers. Most also wear a Red Poppy, which gained meaning as a symbol of remembrance by the World War I poem “In Flanders Fields”. As this day usually announces the arrival of Summer, people also take the long weekend to travel, throw parties and enjoy barbecues with friends and family. The biggest Memorial Day parades can be observed in Chicago, New York and Washington D.C.	<urn:uuid:686d5837-ad1c-4f8e-8318-3325ee3838d9>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.calendarr.com/united-states/memorial-day/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783342.96/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128215526-20200129005526-00146.warc.gz	en	0.983758	806	3.640625	4	[ -0.20838125050067902, 0.3648173213005066, 0.46521860361099243, -0.10435973107814789, -0.30641448497772217, 0.2288656085729599, 0.1628837138414383, 0.0751703605055809, 0.056712131947278976, 0.030600639060139656, 0.2195906937122345, 0.5581132173538208, -0.06488277018070221, 0.642818152904510...	8	Memorial Day is observed in America on the last Monday of May, and it is a day to commemorate and remember the men and women who lost their lives while in service for the US military. It is a federal holiday, and as such, businesses and schools are closed, and most people have the day off work. Originally named Decoration Day, it was officially made into a federal holiday in 1971. Traditionally, people will visit cemeteries and memorials for American soldiers, and there are several parades around the country. It also unofficially marks the beginning of the summer season. The origins of Memorial Day It is unclear where Memorial Day was first observed, but the day was created right after the end of the Civil War, in 1865. At the time, the American Civil War was the event that took more lives in U.S. history, it is estimated that around 620,000 soldiers died during it. As such, in the late 1860s, people began organizing tributes to the lost soldiers, by decorating their graves and paying their respects. While it is unknown where Memorial Day started, several independent communities and states likely put up their own memorials. However, records show that the earliest commemoration of the fallen soldiers was held by recently freed slaves. Officially, Waterloo, New York is known as “The Birthplace of Memorial Day” as it was there that the first annual, wide event was held on May 5th in 1966. On May 5th 1868, General John A. Logan, alongside a group of Nothern Civil War Veterans, pushed for a national day of remembrance for the lost soldiers of the conflict. He chose the 30th of May for this purpose, proclaiming that people should show respect by decorating the graves of the dead, thus why it was called Decoration Day. The 30th of May was chosen to honor this day, as it was a date that didn’t mark any significant battles in history. The first time that this day was celebrated, a total of 5,000 participants decorated the graves of 20,000 soldiers. All Northern Days followed this tradition, and by 1890 all of them had made it into a state holiday. However, Southern States did not acknowledge Decoration Day until World War I, when the day was meant to celebrate all of those who sacrificed their lives for the country in American wars, and not just those fallen during the Civil War. How Decoration Day became Memorial Day After the loss of life in World War I, it was necessary to have a day to commemorate all members of the American Military who died while in service. In 1968, the Uniform Monday Holiday Act was passed by congress, and Memorial Day went from being celebrated on the 30th of May, to be celebrated on the last Monday of May, to give American workers a three day weekend. Hence why the end of May is also known as Memorial Day Weekend. This was officialized in 1971 when Memorial Day was also made into a federal holiday. How Memorial Day is celebrated During Memorial Day, all American flags must be flown at half staff until noon, after which they should be raised until sunset. In December of 2000, the National Moment of Remembrance was instated, encouraging Americans to observe a moment of respect and silence at 3 p.m in honor of all who lost their lives in battle. People commemorate this day by visiting cemeteries and memorials and laying wreaths and American flags on the graves of soldiers. Most also wear a Red Poppy, which gained meaning as a symbol of remembrance by the World War I poem “In Flanders Fields”. As this day usually announces the arrival of Summer, people also take the long weekend to travel, throw parties and enjoy barbecues with friends and family. The biggest Memorial Day parades can be observed in Chicago, New York and Washington D.C.	833	ENGLISH	1
In 1494, a European named Christopher Columbus visited the Jamaica and described it as "the fairest island that eyes have beheld." Soon after, he enslaved the Taino people and due to harsh treatment and diseases, they were all wiped out by the 17th century. The next visitors to the island were the Spaniards and they brought with them slaves from Africa and ruled the island until the British seized it in 1655. The Tainos/Arawaks were the first inhabitants of Jamaica and they traveled to the island from South America during the seventh century. They observed the island's lush green forestry and its hundreds of fast flowing rivers and called the island Xaymaca which means "land of wood and water." The slaves were put to work on sugar plantains and endured harsh treatment from plantation owners. In the 18th century, Jamaica was one of the largest slave markets for the Western Hemisphere. There were a lot of Rebellions as slaves fought for their freedom. Slavery was finally abolished August 1, 1838, and it is celebrated each year as Emancipation Day. Jamaica became independent on August 6, 1962. They grew cassava, sweet potatoes, maize (corn), fruits, vegetables, cotton and tobacco. Tobacco was grown on a large scale as smoking was their most popular pastime. They built their villages all over the island but most of them settled on the coasts and near rivers as they fished to get food. Fish was also a major part of their diet. The Arawaks led quiet and peaceful lives until they were destroyed by the Spaniards some years after Christopher Columbus discovered the island in 149	<urn:uuid:6f06e115-f43a-4b49-9591-e3dc6d290da4>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.reggaereggaevibes.com/jamaican-history	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251696046.73/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127081933-20200127111933-00253.warc.gz	en	0.989264	336	3.890625	4	[ -0.07621383666992188, 0.19735297560691833, 0.46386173367500305, -0.1748204380273819, 0.05643777921795845, -0.24864934384822845, 0.029495151713490486, -0.3371460735797882, -0.19729992747306824, 0.06584271043539047, 0.187321737408638, -0.11576882004737854, -0.33106017112731934, 0.40313905477...	7	In 1494, a European named Christopher Columbus visited the Jamaica and described it as "the fairest island that eyes have beheld." Soon after, he enslaved the Taino people and due to harsh treatment and diseases, they were all wiped out by the 17th century. The next visitors to the island were the Spaniards and they brought with them slaves from Africa and ruled the island until the British seized it in 1655. The Tainos/Arawaks were the first inhabitants of Jamaica and they traveled to the island from South America during the seventh century. They observed the island's lush green forestry and its hundreds of fast flowing rivers and called the island Xaymaca which means "land of wood and water." The slaves were put to work on sugar plantains and endured harsh treatment from plantation owners. In the 18th century, Jamaica was one of the largest slave markets for the Western Hemisphere. There were a lot of Rebellions as slaves fought for their freedom. Slavery was finally abolished August 1, 1838, and it is celebrated each year as Emancipation Day. Jamaica became independent on August 6, 1962. They grew cassava, sweet potatoes, maize (corn), fruits, vegetables, cotton and tobacco. Tobacco was grown on a large scale as smoking was their most popular pastime. They built their villages all over the island but most of them settled on the coasts and near rivers as they fished to get food. Fish was also a major part of their diet. The Arawaks led quiet and peaceful lives until they were destroyed by the Spaniards some years after Christopher Columbus discovered the island in 149	353	ENGLISH	1
Scientists believe that plants scream when they’re stressed One experiment showed a plant that let out a distress call when its stem was cut. If a plant screams in the forest and nobody is there to hear it, did it actually scream? The answer to that, it can now be determined, is a resounding yes. That's according to new research from Itzhak Khait of Tel Aviv University in Israel. Khait and his colleagues of plant communication experts placed microphones near tomato and tobacco plants. Were the plants gossiping with each other? Well, sort of. The microphones picked up ultrasonic sounds that could be heard by animals and insects – but not by the human ear, unless the humans were using high-end audio equipment. (Sorry, you won't be hearing any plant screams on Spotify anytime soon.) Their study found something remarkable: A plant that's suffering from a drought can emit a sound, warning an animal like a moth that this particular plant is not the best place to lay an egg. It may even serve as a warning to other plants that there is an insufficient amount of water in the area. They apparently hear the "water stressed" screams of the plant. In another experiment, a plant let out a distress call after its stem was cut. "Our results suggest that animals, humans, and possibly even other plants could use sounds emitted by a plant to gain information about the plant’s condition," they wrote. The authors point out that the behavior is actually in line with the natural order of things, considering that a plant's ability to sense its environment and respond to it is critical for its survival. So, it would seem, plants have some sort of consciousness. Charles Darwin was actually one of the first scientists to pose this notion, and his theories eventually led to a field known as plant neurobiology. Later research has found that plants can actually see, smell and hear. Japanese botanists used anesthesia on plants to see if they would "wake up" when the drugs wore off. They did. A honeybee flying to a pink Nemesia flower. (Photo: Sumikophoto / Shutterstock) Plants have even been known to show some learning behavior. In a study done last year by the same team of zoologists and plant scientists in Israel, they found that flowers can actually hear the buzzing of bees. The plants hear bees approaching and attempt to lure them in with sweeter nectar. In several experiments, they found you didn't even need actual bees. They simply played audio recordings of buzzing bees around certain flowers. Those recordings caused the sugar concentration in the nectar to rise by about 20% in less than five minutes. Such a rapid reaction by plants to sound had never previously been reported. Plants can even hear human voices. In a 2009 study, Britain's Royal Horticultural Society found that women's voices help make plants grow faster. In that experiment, tomato plants were found to grow up to two inches taller when they were tended to by a female gardener. "The findings vindicate comments made by Prince Charles that he talks to his plants, although they suggest that for maximum results he would be better off recruiting the Duchess of Cornwall," wrote The Telegraph at the time. So the next time you're in the forest and think you're alone, think again. Those plants are listening – and may even be trying to talk to you. MORE FROM THE GRAPEVINE: Related Topics: Science	<urn:uuid:3e76290e-599c-4d25-acba-af57a5647706>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.fromthegrapevine.com/nature/plants-scream-stressed-conscious-itzhak-khait-tel-aviv-university	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250605075.24/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121192553-20200121221553-00406.warc.gz	en	0.98034	710	3.640625	4	[ 0.16852517426013947, -0.11343107372522354, 0.2810537815093994, 0.19509267807006836, 0.4467807114124298, -0.16166892647743225, 0.6050300598144531, 0.11948253214359283, 0.04625041410326958, 0.11833834648132324, 0.04185625910758972, -0.26408013701438904, 0.11609013378620148, 0.262124538421630...	7	Scientists believe that plants scream when they’re stressed One experiment showed a plant that let out a distress call when its stem was cut. If a plant screams in the forest and nobody is there to hear it, did it actually scream? The answer to that, it can now be determined, is a resounding yes. That's according to new research from Itzhak Khait of Tel Aviv University in Israel. Khait and his colleagues of plant communication experts placed microphones near tomato and tobacco plants. Were the plants gossiping with each other? Well, sort of. The microphones picked up ultrasonic sounds that could be heard by animals and insects – but not by the human ear, unless the humans were using high-end audio equipment. (Sorry, you won't be hearing any plant screams on Spotify anytime soon.) Their study found something remarkable: A plant that's suffering from a drought can emit a sound, warning an animal like a moth that this particular plant is not the best place to lay an egg. It may even serve as a warning to other plants that there is an insufficient amount of water in the area. They apparently hear the "water stressed" screams of the plant. In another experiment, a plant let out a distress call after its stem was cut. "Our results suggest that animals, humans, and possibly even other plants could use sounds emitted by a plant to gain information about the plant’s condition," they wrote. The authors point out that the behavior is actually in line with the natural order of things, considering that a plant's ability to sense its environment and respond to it is critical for its survival. So, it would seem, plants have some sort of consciousness. Charles Darwin was actually one of the first scientists to pose this notion, and his theories eventually led to a field known as plant neurobiology. Later research has found that plants can actually see, smell and hear. Japanese botanists used anesthesia on plants to see if they would "wake up" when the drugs wore off. They did. A honeybee flying to a pink Nemesia flower. (Photo: Sumikophoto / Shutterstock) Plants have even been known to show some learning behavior. In a study done last year by the same team of zoologists and plant scientists in Israel, they found that flowers can actually hear the buzzing of bees. The plants hear bees approaching and attempt to lure them in with sweeter nectar. In several experiments, they found you didn't even need actual bees. They simply played audio recordings of buzzing bees around certain flowers. Those recordings caused the sugar concentration in the nectar to rise by about 20% in less than five minutes. Such a rapid reaction by plants to sound had never previously been reported. Plants can even hear human voices. In a 2009 study, Britain's Royal Horticultural Society found that women's voices help make plants grow faster. In that experiment, tomato plants were found to grow up to two inches taller when they were tended to by a female gardener. "The findings vindicate comments made by Prince Charles that he talks to his plants, although they suggest that for maximum results he would be better off recruiting the Duchess of Cornwall," wrote The Telegraph at the time. So the next time you're in the forest and think you're alone, think again. Those plants are listening – and may even be trying to talk to you. MORE FROM THE GRAPEVINE: Related Topics: Science	701	ENGLISH	1
by Joshua Kim (A Nisei is a person of Japanese descent born in the U.S. with immigrant parents. Nisei directly translates to “second generation” in Japanese.) “At the outbreak of the war, 112,000 of these good people were taken from their homes, businesses, farms, schools, and churches and put into ten relocation camps throughout the midwest. Of these there were 70,000 American citizens by birth.” T. Eugene West, University of Richmond Class of 1927. In his piece for the Richmond Alumni Bulletin, alum T. Eugene West passionately spoke on behalf of the Japanese American community and the horrors they faced during WWII, specifically the repercussions of Executive Order 9066. Shortly after the bombing of Pearl Harbor, president Franklin D. Roosevelt issued Executive Order 9066 on February 19, 1942. With this executive order, Roosevelt marked the Japanese American community as public enemy No. 01, and the order acted as a stamp of approval for nationwide hate crimes and anti-Japanese violence. Anti-Japanese sentiment was quite common since early Japanese immigration to the U.S. Many of the early Japanese immigrants were from the countryside and often came with very little money. They were targeted — along with the Chinese, the Koreans, and the Filipinos — as a cheap labor source. Many of these immigrants faced harsh resentment from the white working class as they were seen as competition for employment. Yet, employment competition was not the only reason for anti-Japanese sentiment. In 1905, Japan defeated Russia in the Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905) after failed negotiations to split Manchuria and Korea into spheres of influence. This was the first major defeat of a Western power by an Asian country in a long, long time, and caused an uproar back in the U.S. The Asiatic Exclusionary League (1904-post WWII) was a white supremacist group that focused itself on opposing Japanese, Korean, and later Hindu Indian immigration to the U.S. They played a large role in many of the anti-Japanese legislation that was passed during this time: - 1907 – Pressured president Theodore Roosevelt to tighten Japanese immigration - 1924 – Successfully lobbied Japanese immigration restrictions under president Calvin Coolidge with the Immigration Act of 1924 - 1942 – President Franklin D. Roosevelt issued Executive Order 9066, sparking relocation of Japanese Americans to internment camps Japanese Americans would not be considered true American citizens — along with Asians in general — until 1965 when president Lyndon B. Johnson signed an immigration reform bill that would make people of Asian descent have equal citizen status as people of European descent (here’s an enlightening article on the complexities of this reform). The purpose of me detailing this brief history of anti-Japanese American sentiment in the U.S. is to emphasize how surprising it was to see West writing in their defense. Under the 1790 Naturalization Act, Ozawa v. United States (1922), and Wong Kim Ark v. United States (1898), Japanese Americans were not eligible for naturalized citizenship. This was largely based on the premises that being “white” was specific only to those of the “Caucasian” race. With this in mind, we can then use this information as a basis for why there was so much Japanese-American backlash vs. German-American backlash. After the bombing of Pearl Harbor, all of this anti-Japanese sentiment finally appeared justified. Unlike the Germans, the Japanese empire was bold enough to attack the U.S. in open warfare. And although there was evidence that the U.S. government knew of the atrocities that the Germans were committing, because they did not present a “direct threat” to the U.S., the U.S. government was able to turn a blind eye to the Germans. So when President Roosevelt issued Executive Order 9066, it faced little opposition throughout the U.S. A Los Angeles Times editorial piece described the public opinion best: “A viper is nonetheless a viper wherever the egg is hatched — so a Japanese American, born of Japanese parents — grows up to be a Japanese, not an American.” (The original article could not be found, but here is a link to the site that led me to this quote). So as I mentioned previously, it was incredibly surprising to see such an article at the time in DEFENSE of the Japanese American community, especially one written by a white male. As someone who has quite extensively searched within the University of Richmond archives, I am confident in saying that white people during this time were not afraid to use problematic language. For example, from my own investigation of the Richmond Collegian newspaper, there is evidence of white people openly using the terms “Negro,” “Oriental,” “Beaner,” and much more, well into the 1990s — without realizing the problematic nature of such usage. Throughout his article, West gave an accurate history of the hardship Japanese Americans faced during the war, and their contributions to the U.S. military during it. And, in a way, he was doing the work that the Race & Racism Project is doing today — using his privilege to tell the stories of the underrepresented, and that’s why I appreciate this piece of writing so much. Furthermore, this wasn’t a typical piece that was progressive for its time, but filled with problematic language or ideas that were “normal.” He used respectful language throughout, and never exoticized the Japanese Americans he spoke of. What pleased me even more was how candid he was when speaking about how poorly the U.S. treated Japanese Americans, particularly after the war: “I was with him [Japanese-American WWII veteran] when one leg was amputated, and the other will never be of any service…He showed me a picture recently of his once lovely home in California. It is now only a chimney. The house was burned by civilians who left a note saying, ‘We hate Japs.’ Another was denied membership in the ‘Veterans of Foreign Wars,’… Another was literally kicked out of a barber shop in Arizona, while dressed in his uniform on which was pinned a purple heart and several other decorations.” From his writing, you could really feel his outrage. To him, the Japanese Americans were heroes; they were his fellow brothers and sisters that helped win the war against the Axis Powers, and they deserved so much more than they were given. As an Asian-American, I felt a sense of gratitude toward this author. Although I am not Japanese American, I know how it feels to be hated for my race. I have been harassed in public, told to “go home,” and been bullied for being outside of the white-washed norm. So what West wrote was very refreshing to see, especially since a lot of this research has consisted of reading blatantly racist ideologies that UR alumni have had in the past and present. To speak out against what many at the time saw as logical, he showed himself to be a real ally to the Japanese American community when few were willing to do so. “When I was a boy and I would see scary things in the news, my mother would say to me, ‘Look for the helpers. You will always find people who are helping’.” – Fred Rogers Like Mr. Rogers said, despite seeing so much scary hatred within the archives, I was able to find a “helper” after all. Thank you T. Eugene West. Spider, neighbor, and friend. Joshua Hasulchan Kim is from Colonial Heights, Virginia. He is a junior at the University of Richmond who is double majoring in Journalism and French. Joshua is involved in various clubs on campus: He is the co-president of Block Crew dance crew, the opinions editor for the Collegian newspaper, and is the Co-Director of Operations for the Multicultural Lounge Building Committee. Joshua joined the project as part of the Spring 2017 independent study (RHCS 387) and expanded upon this research with the support of an A&S Summer Research Fellowship during Summer 2017.	<urn:uuid:90316a95-cd41-4dd4-9f5e-00634b833838>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://blog.richmond.edu/memory/2017/10/25/against-the-norm/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251690095.81/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126165718-20200126195718-00363.warc.gz	en	0.983631	1,703	3.578125	4	[ -0.31343376636505127, 0.314297080039978, 0.002335004508495331, -0.2803531289100647, 0.04887966066598892, 0.6234961748123169, -0.04522592946887016, 0.20347139239311218, -0.12866118550300598, -0.024701423943042755, 0.33005672693252563, 0.36322182416915894, 0.38592758774757385, 0.510453224182...	3	by Joshua Kim (A Nisei is a person of Japanese descent born in the U.S. with immigrant parents. Nisei directly translates to “second generation” in Japanese.) “At the outbreak of the war, 112,000 of these good people were taken from their homes, businesses, farms, schools, and churches and put into ten relocation camps throughout the midwest. Of these there were 70,000 American citizens by birth.” T. Eugene West, University of Richmond Class of 1927. In his piece for the Richmond Alumni Bulletin, alum T. Eugene West passionately spoke on behalf of the Japanese American community and the horrors they faced during WWII, specifically the repercussions of Executive Order 9066. Shortly after the bombing of Pearl Harbor, president Franklin D. Roosevelt issued Executive Order 9066 on February 19, 1942. With this executive order, Roosevelt marked the Japanese American community as public enemy No. 01, and the order acted as a stamp of approval for nationwide hate crimes and anti-Japanese violence. Anti-Japanese sentiment was quite common since early Japanese immigration to the U.S. Many of the early Japanese immigrants were from the countryside and often came with very little money. They were targeted — along with the Chinese, the Koreans, and the Filipinos — as a cheap labor source. Many of these immigrants faced harsh resentment from the white working class as they were seen as competition for employment. Yet, employment competition was not the only reason for anti-Japanese sentiment. In 1905, Japan defeated Russia in the Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905) after failed negotiations to split Manchuria and Korea into spheres of influence. This was the first major defeat of a Western power by an Asian country in a long, long time, and caused an uproar back in the U.S. The Asiatic Exclusionary League (1904-post WWII) was a white supremacist group that focused itself on opposing Japanese, Korean, and later Hindu Indian immigration to the U.S. They played a large role in many of the anti-Japanese legislation that was passed during this time: - 1907 – Pressured president Theodore Roosevelt to tighten Japanese immigration - 1924 – Successfully lobbied Japanese immigration restrictions under president Calvin Coolidge with the Immigration Act of 1924 - 1942 – President Franklin D. Roosevelt issued Executive Order 9066, sparking relocation of Japanese Americans to internment camps Japanese Americans would not be considered true American citizens — along with Asians in general — until 1965 when president Lyndon B. Johnson signed an immigration reform bill that would make people of Asian descent have equal citizen status as people of European descent (here’s an enlightening article on the complexities of this reform). The purpose of me detailing this brief history of anti-Japanese American sentiment in the U.S. is to emphasize how surprising it was to see West writing in their defense. Under the 1790 Naturalization Act, Ozawa v. United States (1922), and Wong Kim Ark v. United States (1898), Japanese Americans were not eligible for naturalized citizenship. This was largely based on the premises that being “white” was specific only to those of the “Caucasian” race. With this in mind, we can then use this information as a basis for why there was so much Japanese-American backlash vs. German-American backlash. After the bombing of Pearl Harbor, all of this anti-Japanese sentiment finally appeared justified. Unlike the Germans, the Japanese empire was bold enough to attack the U.S. in open warfare. And although there was evidence that the U.S. government knew of the atrocities that the Germans were committing, because they did not present a “direct threat” to the U.S., the U.S. government was able to turn a blind eye to the Germans. So when President Roosevelt issued Executive Order 9066, it faced little opposition throughout the U.S. A Los Angeles Times editorial piece described the public opinion best: “A viper is nonetheless a viper wherever the egg is hatched — so a Japanese American, born of Japanese parents — grows up to be a Japanese, not an American.” (The original article could not be found, but here is a link to the site that led me to this quote). So as I mentioned previously, it was incredibly surprising to see such an article at the time in DEFENSE of the Japanese American community, especially one written by a white male. As someone who has quite extensively searched within the University of Richmond archives, I am confident in saying that white people during this time were not afraid to use problematic language. For example, from my own investigation of the Richmond Collegian newspaper, there is evidence of white people openly using the terms “Negro,” “Oriental,” “Beaner,” and much more, well into the 1990s — without realizing the problematic nature of such usage. Throughout his article, West gave an accurate history of the hardship Japanese Americans faced during the war, and their contributions to the U.S. military during it. And, in a way, he was doing the work that the Race & Racism Project is doing today — using his privilege to tell the stories of the underrepresented, and that’s why I appreciate this piece of writing so much. Furthermore, this wasn’t a typical piece that was progressive for its time, but filled with problematic language or ideas that were “normal.” He used respectful language throughout, and never exoticized the Japanese Americans he spoke of. What pleased me even more was how candid he was when speaking about how poorly the U.S. treated Japanese Americans, particularly after the war: “I was with him [Japanese-American WWII veteran] when one leg was amputated, and the other will never be of any service…He showed me a picture recently of his once lovely home in California. It is now only a chimney. The house was burned by civilians who left a note saying, ‘We hate Japs.’ Another was denied membership in the ‘Veterans of Foreign Wars,’… Another was literally kicked out of a barber shop in Arizona, while dressed in his uniform on which was pinned a purple heart and several other decorations.” From his writing, you could really feel his outrage. To him, the Japanese Americans were heroes; they were his fellow brothers and sisters that helped win the war against the Axis Powers, and they deserved so much more than they were given. As an Asian-American, I felt a sense of gratitude toward this author. Although I am not Japanese American, I know how it feels to be hated for my race. I have been harassed in public, told to “go home,” and been bullied for being outside of the white-washed norm. So what West wrote was very refreshing to see, especially since a lot of this research has consisted of reading blatantly racist ideologies that UR alumni have had in the past and present. To speak out against what many at the time saw as logical, he showed himself to be a real ally to the Japanese American community when few were willing to do so. “When I was a boy and I would see scary things in the news, my mother would say to me, ‘Look for the helpers. You will always find people who are helping’.” – Fred Rogers Like Mr. Rogers said, despite seeing so much scary hatred within the archives, I was able to find a “helper” after all. Thank you T. Eugene West. Spider, neighbor, and friend. Joshua Hasulchan Kim is from Colonial Heights, Virginia. He is a junior at the University of Richmond who is double majoring in Journalism and French. Joshua is involved in various clubs on campus: He is the co-president of Block Crew dance crew, the opinions editor for the Collegian newspaper, and is the Co-Director of Operations for the Multicultural Lounge Building Committee. Joshua joined the project as part of the Spring 2017 independent study (RHCS 387) and expanded upon this research with the support of an A&S Summer Research Fellowship during Summer 2017.	1,689	ENGLISH	1
The Shelling of Scarborough in 1914 On Wednesday 16 December 1914, the inhabitants of Scarborough in North Yorkshire awoke to find a heavy mist hanging over their seaside town – and three German warships sailing rapidly towards them. The devastating attack that followed on Scarborough, together with Hartlepool and Whitby, was the first time civilians had been targeted on English soil during the First World War. It so shocked the nation that ‘Remember Scarborough’ became a rallying cry for a huge recruitment campaign. An ordinary morning On 16 December 1914, Britain had been at war for four months. In Scarborough, just before 8am, people were getting up and going about their routines. Mothers woke their children, maids prepared breakfast, postmen and delivery drivers were out on the streets. As shops opened for business, a young Boy Scout ran to buy a newspaper to see if there was a report on Lord Baden-Powell's recent visit to the town. Up at the castle, on the rocky promontory overlooking the town, Police Constable Hunter was on duty with two coastguards at the coastal station. Despite their elevated position, their view was hampered by heavy mist and fog. Anchored in the bay below was the steam trawler St Cloud. Her captain had sailed into the bay earlier that morning, and was having trouble finding the town because of the fog. The lighthouse had not been lit since war was declared. The shelling begins The captain of the St Cloud was among the first to see the three warships as they rounded Castle Hill into the bay, heading swiftly and surely towards Scarborough. He was surprised to see what he at first took to be British warships far closer to the shore than any he had seen before. But his surprise soon turned to horror when he saw one of them hoist the German war flag and open fire on the undefended town. A few minutes later, further up the coast, German warships also began an attack on Hartlepool, which had a garrison and three naval guns. As soon as the St Cloud’s captain realised that the ships were German, he fled into the harbour and, although fired at, managed to reach it safely. The Germans, however, had their sights on other prey – with the castle being one of their main targets. The castle under fire There has been a castle at Scarborough since the mid-12th century, occupying a commanding position that had been inhabited and fortified intermittently since Neolithic times. It became one of the great medieval fortresses of England, ranking with Dover and Nottingham in importance. Before 1914, its greatest time of trial came when Parliamentarian forces besieged it in 1645, during the Civil War. So intense was that assault that during a three-day bombardment the walls of the 12th-century great tower split in two, causing half the building to collapse. Now, as the Germans trained their guns on the castle, the coastguards’ lookout shelter was destroyed. The coastguards and PC Hunter had only left it moments earlier to summon help, but as shells rained down, they were forced to shelter beside an 18th-century water tank in an underground vault. The castle’s great tower and south-facing walls were damaged and an 18th-century barracks built into the ruins of a medieval royal lodging was damaged beyond any hope of repair. The attack on the town Meanwhile, in the town, more than 500 high explosive shells fell in about 20 minutes, inflicting terrible damage on buildings of every description – shops, houses, hotels, churches, schools and hospitals. The German ships then moved off at speed towards Whitby, which suffered a brief bombardment. In total, 17 people were killed in Scarborough that morning, with two others dying later of their wounds. More than 80 were seriously wounded. Overall, in Scarborough, Whitby and Hartlepool, 137 people died. Although Hartlepool suffered more casualties and greater destruction, it was the civilian deaths in Scarborough that caused the greatest outrage. News soon spread of those who had been killed going about their everyday lives. The victims included postman Mr Beal, as he delivered letters, and maid Miss Crosby, as she prepared breakfast for her employers. The last person to be hit was 15-year-old George Taylor, on his way to buy his newspaper. He was the only Boy Scout to be killed in the First World War. A popular seaside resort, Scarborough had no defences, only an ancient castle and a small naval wireless station. One US reporter wrote: Three quiet, peaceful towns have felt the rain of shells; almost five score non-combatants, men, women, children perhaps, have met death from hurtling missiles. This is not warfare, this is murder. As First Lord of the Admiralty, Winston Churchill faced criticism for the lack of preparedness and ineffective response of the British Navy. In a rousing speech, he branded the Germans ‘the baby killers of Scarborough’. It was a mark of the outrage felt at the attack on defenceless civilians that ‘Remember Scarborough!’ became a rallying cry for recruiting officers across the nation. The attack featured on a range of recruitment posters, which prompted men to enlist in large numbers. In this, the fourth month of the First World War – the war that people believed would be over by Christmas – innocence was shattered, as the war was brought right into the undefended homes of British people. The shelling of Scarborough was a foretaste of what was to come. History of Scarborough Castle Read a full history of the castle, from its origins in the mid-12th century through its dramatic Civil War siege to the present day. The Richmond Sixteen How 16 First World War conscientious objectors detained at Richmond Castle were taken to France and sentenced to death for refusing to obey orders. The WWI Stonehenge aerodrome As they travel from the Stonehenge visitor centre to the stones, few of today’s visitors realise that they’re crossing the site of a WWI airfield. FORTRESS DOVER AND THE FIRST WORLD WAR Use this virtual tour to explore a building at Dover Castle that played a vital role in safeguarding Dover in the First World War.	<urn:uuid:5e4dbf9e-cc87-422e-ad91-bbffc8665a45>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/visit/places/scarborough-castle/history/shelling-of-scarborough/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591763.20/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118023429-20200118051429-00436.warc.gz	en	0.984547	1,287	3.265625	3	[ 0.2079291045665741, 0.22882476449012756, 0.18793150782585144, 0.05872233957052231, 0.11934540420770645, -0.03052634932100773, -0.12332293391227722, 0.1500212550163269, 0.05455052852630615, -0.3146628737449646, 0.06900404393672943, -0.2929169833660126, 0.10667196661233902, 0.353204071521759...	10	The Shelling of Scarborough in 1914 On Wednesday 16 December 1914, the inhabitants of Scarborough in North Yorkshire awoke to find a heavy mist hanging over their seaside town – and three German warships sailing rapidly towards them. The devastating attack that followed on Scarborough, together with Hartlepool and Whitby, was the first time civilians had been targeted on English soil during the First World War. It so shocked the nation that ‘Remember Scarborough’ became a rallying cry for a huge recruitment campaign. An ordinary morning On 16 December 1914, Britain had been at war for four months. In Scarborough, just before 8am, people were getting up and going about their routines. Mothers woke their children, maids prepared breakfast, postmen and delivery drivers were out on the streets. As shops opened for business, a young Boy Scout ran to buy a newspaper to see if there was a report on Lord Baden-Powell's recent visit to the town. Up at the castle, on the rocky promontory overlooking the town, Police Constable Hunter was on duty with two coastguards at the coastal station. Despite their elevated position, their view was hampered by heavy mist and fog. Anchored in the bay below was the steam trawler St Cloud. Her captain had sailed into the bay earlier that morning, and was having trouble finding the town because of the fog. The lighthouse had not been lit since war was declared. The shelling begins The captain of the St Cloud was among the first to see the three warships as they rounded Castle Hill into the bay, heading swiftly and surely towards Scarborough. He was surprised to see what he at first took to be British warships far closer to the shore than any he had seen before. But his surprise soon turned to horror when he saw one of them hoist the German war flag and open fire on the undefended town. A few minutes later, further up the coast, German warships also began an attack on Hartlepool, which had a garrison and three naval guns. As soon as the St Cloud’s captain realised that the ships were German, he fled into the harbour and, although fired at, managed to reach it safely. The Germans, however, had their sights on other prey – with the castle being one of their main targets. The castle under fire There has been a castle at Scarborough since the mid-12th century, occupying a commanding position that had been inhabited and fortified intermittently since Neolithic times. It became one of the great medieval fortresses of England, ranking with Dover and Nottingham in importance. Before 1914, its greatest time of trial came when Parliamentarian forces besieged it in 1645, during the Civil War. So intense was that assault that during a three-day bombardment the walls of the 12th-century great tower split in two, causing half the building to collapse. Now, as the Germans trained their guns on the castle, the coastguards’ lookout shelter was destroyed. The coastguards and PC Hunter had only left it moments earlier to summon help, but as shells rained down, they were forced to shelter beside an 18th-century water tank in an underground vault. The castle’s great tower and south-facing walls were damaged and an 18th-century barracks built into the ruins of a medieval royal lodging was damaged beyond any hope of repair. The attack on the town Meanwhile, in the town, more than 500 high explosive shells fell in about 20 minutes, inflicting terrible damage on buildings of every description – shops, houses, hotels, churches, schools and hospitals. The German ships then moved off at speed towards Whitby, which suffered a brief bombardment. In total, 17 people were killed in Scarborough that morning, with two others dying later of their wounds. More than 80 were seriously wounded. Overall, in Scarborough, Whitby and Hartlepool, 137 people died. Although Hartlepool suffered more casualties and greater destruction, it was the civilian deaths in Scarborough that caused the greatest outrage. News soon spread of those who had been killed going about their everyday lives. The victims included postman Mr Beal, as he delivered letters, and maid Miss Crosby, as she prepared breakfast for her employers. The last person to be hit was 15-year-old George Taylor, on his way to buy his newspaper. He was the only Boy Scout to be killed in the First World War. A popular seaside resort, Scarborough had no defences, only an ancient castle and a small naval wireless station. One US reporter wrote: Three quiet, peaceful towns have felt the rain of shells; almost five score non-combatants, men, women, children perhaps, have met death from hurtling missiles. This is not warfare, this is murder. As First Lord of the Admiralty, Winston Churchill faced criticism for the lack of preparedness and ineffective response of the British Navy. In a rousing speech, he branded the Germans ‘the baby killers of Scarborough’. It was a mark of the outrage felt at the attack on defenceless civilians that ‘Remember Scarborough!’ became a rallying cry for recruiting officers across the nation. The attack featured on a range of recruitment posters, which prompted men to enlist in large numbers. In this, the fourth month of the First World War – the war that people believed would be over by Christmas – innocence was shattered, as the war was brought right into the undefended homes of British people. The shelling of Scarborough was a foretaste of what was to come. History of Scarborough Castle Read a full history of the castle, from its origins in the mid-12th century through its dramatic Civil War siege to the present day. The Richmond Sixteen How 16 First World War conscientious objectors detained at Richmond Castle were taken to France and sentenced to death for refusing to obey orders. The WWI Stonehenge aerodrome As they travel from the Stonehenge visitor centre to the stones, few of today’s visitors realise that they’re crossing the site of a WWI airfield. FORTRESS DOVER AND THE FIRST WORLD WAR Use this virtual tour to explore a building at Dover Castle that played a vital role in safeguarding Dover in the First World War.	1,303	ENGLISH	1
REIVE: Vb. (Military) (intr) dialect Scot and Northern English; to rob or plunder, to go on a plundering raid. Reivers is the name given to those clans and families on both sides of the Anglo-Scottish border who lived, loved and died from the late 13th century to the 17th century in one of the most lawless areas in British history. Cattle rustling, feuding, arson, murder, pillaging, kidnapping, extortion and robbery were commonplace and a way of life. The Reivers homelands fell into three regional areas, which covered both sides of the borders. These were known as the Marches and were defined by West, Middle and East and by the country in which they sat e.g. English East March to the south east of the border and the Scottish West March to the northwest. These regions and the lawlessness basically came to an end, just after the Union of the Crowns in 1707 and become known as the Middle Shires. This came about through the unification of Scotland and England by James VI of Scotland who was to become James I of the united kingdom’s or as it was to be known; Great Britain. The country in which they lived and the loyalty to the same, did not supersede the loyalty they felt towards their own blood, and in some cases a ‘Name’ would be represented in both Scotland and England. It is recorded that at the Battle of Pinkie Cleugh in 1547, an observer (William Patten) noticed that the Scottish and English borderers were talking to each other in the midst of battle, and on being spotted by their officers, only put on a show of fighting each other. Reivers fighting as levied soldiers played extremely important parts at the battles of Flodden Field and Solway Moss. When fighting as part of larger English or Scottish armies, Borderers were known to be difficult to control as many had relatives on both sides of the border, This was despite laws forbidding cross-border marriage. They could therefore claim to be of either nationality, describing themselves as; Scottish if forced, English at will and a Reiver by the grace of blood. They were badly behaved in camp, frequently plundered for their own benefit instead of obeying orders, and there were always questions about how loyal they were to the leaders or the cause. Life wasn’t easy for them, the lands they lived on were harsh and made worse due to the constant war between the two countries. This was especially in and around the West March. Reiving therefore became the norm by which the family were fed, a necessity that turned into a way of life. It is interesting to note that those involved in reiving crossed the full class spectrum, from great landowners carrying titles, to the common farm labourer, as both were as skilled as the other when it came to horsemanship. As soldiers, the Border Reivers were considered among the finest light cavalry in all of Europe. It is reported that after meeting one Reiver (the Bold Buccleugh), Queen Elizabeth I is quoted as having said, “with ten thousand such men, James (VI) could shake any throne in Europe.” Reivers also served as mercenaries, or were forced to serve in English and Scots armies in the Low Countries and in Ireland. Such service was often handed down as a penalty in lieu of that of death upon their families. They were used in many cases also for their skills in guerrilla warfare, which at least on their home ground, was based on their local knowledge of the highways and byways of the land in which they existed. The horse of choice and now extinct was small, sturdy and fast. The ‘hobbler’ as they were called, had superb manoeuvrability and turns of speed. If Carruthers were ever to have a ‘clan’ horse, or in fact any other Reiver family, it would have been this. Some have suggested that the hobbler used by the Reivers, was in fact the Irish ‘hobelar’, however there are others who suggest it was a distinct breed taken from the Galloway Pony, which, originated from the neighbouring shire. As an aside, there is a misconception that ‘Border Collies’, were used by the reivers and in fact our own family. These dogs originated in Northumberland and were bred to herd sheep and cattle, but only from the late 1800’s, long after the reivers were history. The Collie breed come from a sire called ‘old Hemp’ who was bred from two existing sheepdogs of the time and is claimed that he was progenitor of the Border Collie. It is of course more than possible and in fact highly likely, that our family used different breeds of dogs to hunt and to herd, as well as to track down other reivers or outlaws. The latter of course was known to be the now extinct ‘sleuth hound’ (slewe dogge), a Scottish canine, which looked a bit like the English Bloodhound, but with differences. These dogs were originally bred for hunting deer and boar but since the Middle ages, people. It was this dog that it is chronicled as having been used to hunt both Sir Willam Wallace and Robert the Bruce. However, there is really no such thing as a ‘Clan Dog’ as some would incorrectly claim and most certainly not in our family. Reiver Clothing and Weapons Progressively, one part of the Reiver attire was what was to become their tag line; the steel bonnet. This was accompanied by a quilted leather jacket, which was worn high on the neck, called a Jack or brigandean. The Jack was further reinforced by metal plates or pieces of horn stitched between the linings. This offered a lighter and more flexible alternative to chainmail, important for light cavalry, which offered some protection against a lance or sword but less so against a musket or pistol shot. It is said that in some old sales inventories, that a good jack would be worth as much as a good horse. Reivers NEVER, ever wore kilts, nor in fact tartan as a sign of family and it was only in the early 1800’s that any tartan was ‘registered’ against the name of a border family, that being Armstrong. They did however wear close fitting, thick, naturally oiled woollen breeches with a cod piece over the groin for added protection. As riding families, they wore leather thigh high riding boots, again offering some protection in any conflict. Their weapons of choice, excluding the ‘Lang Spear or Pricker’ which they were famous for, were either rapiers if one could afford them, or back swords made in the cavalry style. Both of these were usually foreign made and passed from one generation to the next. The sword would normally have been used in the right hand while the left held a dagger called a ‘main gauche’, the hilt being designed to protect against and lock an attacking blade. The move away from the heavier broad swords was progressive and specific to the change in fighting styles, both on and off the horse. No longer were heavy weapons needed to deal with the heavier armour so lighter styles came into play. Not all chose swords and/or prickers, some chose the jeddart axe, a type of polearm weapon with a glaive like blade on the end. In the latter stages crossbows, pistols and muskets were used by those who could afford them. Reiving therefore, was not specifically the Scots against the English, but also Scots against Scots, and English against English. It was simply a way of life for the border clans where alliances and allegiances to include those between the English and Scots themselves, were in some cases as fluid as the rivers that ran through the countryside. Because of their constant preparedness for war and their knowledge of the terrain, any reive/raid would have been planned with military precision. This would be whether small incursions of hours or long raids of many days, going deep into the territories of their chosen victims. For many years, the governments of both countries, attempted to establish law and order under the direction of the Wardens of the Marches, but politics, family ties and allegiances played their role. Some borderers do not enjoy by classed as clans as they see that collective term, which was historically interchangeable throughout Scotland to describe family groups, as being used by the ‘rough uncouth highlanders’ in the north. Yet the life of the Reiver was no less violent or lawless. Both the Highlanders and Borderers were subject to ‘clearances”, both fought for their blood kin before country and both were considered troublesome by the Scottish Crown. The latter of which led to the Unruly Clans Act of 1587, naming both Highland and Island Clans and Border Clans of the West and Middle Marches. Conversly to this however, was that the Reivers were seen as a solid barrier against English insurgency, especially up the west coast and into and through the West March. Tjhis led them to be seen on occasions as a necessary evil by the Scottish Crown. Carruthers, the Reivers: Accepting yDNA testing can only go back 1000 years or so, to mirror the onset of surnames in Scotland, and accepting Carruthers is a topographical name first recorded in the 12th century, we are lucky enough to have recorded evidence of who and what we are. We can therefore say, with total conviction, that Carruthers are a Scottish Border Reiver Clan and Family, having been in and around the area known as Carruthers for many centuries. As far back as 1398, Sir John of Carruthers appeared as a bond to Douglas along with other knights such as Sir John of Johnston, Sir John of Carlisle, Sir William Stewart of Castlemilk as well as some others for breaking their bonds with the King, through the act of reiving. In 1535, according to the ‘charge sheets’, Robert Carruthers was part of a raid led by Thomas of Mangerton, of Clan Armstrong and denounced as a rebel for ‘riding under the cover of night’ on John Cockburn of Ormiston to the East of Edinburgh. This was a fair trek on horseback in those days yet they took 70 oxen and 30 cows, while stripping three hostages of their clothes, purses and money. As one would suspect, this was all taken as ‘breaking the bonds made to the King’ and thus a criminal offence. What began and continued through the existence of the House of Mouswald up to July 1548, was continued by the new chiefly line; John the 5th of the House of Holmains, and of course their cadet lines. In 1607, John Carruthers of Holmends (Holmains), was part of a group ‘confined or removed from their present homes’ by the Border Commissioners and was sent to St Andrews in Fife. Amongst those ‘named’ as the ‘last of the border backguards’ in 1618, which records show they weren’t to be, were listed William Carruthers of Danebie (Denbie) and his son John. It seems that throughout the 300 plus years of the tumultuous Reiver history, Carruthers appeared quite a bit through the list of ‘pledges’ for their deeds. In 1623, Tom Carruthers in Mutham, was hanged for reiving along with members of other Reiver families such as the Elliots, Bells and Johnstons. In fact, as previously alluded to, Carruthers still remained on the wanted list in 1642. The names of George Carruthers, Ludovic Carruthers of Wormibie and John ‘Jock” Carruthers of Raffles were listed as some of the most notorious, still being sought by the law at that time. There is a great possibility therefore that all ten Chiefs of Carruthers of Mouswald were Reivers, and probably a large percentage of the House of Holmains culminating in John the 8th whose second wife was the sister of the first Earl of Queensbury. His grandson John the 9th, who succeeded his grandfather in 1659, was the Chief who moved the seat of the clan from Holmains to Kirkwood and registered the Chiefly arms with the Crown after the Lyon Act in 1672. These Arms have always remained the property of the Chief of our clan, and are currently held by Simon Peter Carruthers of Holmains. The Act of Unruly Clans One cannot talk about the reivers without mentioning the ‘Act’. The Act of 1587 names Carruthers as a ‘clan headed by a Chief’ as even before the 16th century, the appellation “Clan” began to be used by the authorities to describe Scottish family units in other than the Highlands. The list under “Elleventh Parliament of King James the Sext, xxix of Juli, 1587,” gives the name of the Clan and indicates that the Carruthers were under Patriarchal Chiefs rather than Feudal Superiors and this was taken into account in August of 2019, when the Lord Lyon confirmed our Chief, the most senior descendant of the House of Holmains. The Act was passed “for the quieting and keeping in obedience of the disorderit and subjectis inhabitants of the Borders, Highlands and Isles” and contains “The Roll of the Names of the Landislords and Baillies of Landes dwelling on the Bordoures and in the Hielandes, quhair broken men hes dwelt and presently dwellis. To the quhilk Roll, the 95 Acte of this Parliament is relative.” Then follows, “The Rolle of the Clannes that hes Captaines and Chieftaines, quhom on they dependes, of times against the willes of their Landes Lordes, alsweill on the Bordoures, as Hielandes, and of sum special persons of Braunches of the saidis Clannes, West Marche, Scottes of Eusdaill, Beatisonnes, Littles, Thomsonnes, Glendunninges, Irvinges, Belles, Carrutheres, Grahames, Johnstones, Jardines, Moffettes and Latimers.” (Reference APS, III, p 466). As a clan and family, CARRUTHERS are exceptionally proud of their Scottish Heritage, history and our culture. According to historical researchers, it would seem that our people have been in Scotland since the earliest migrations and are predominately of Celtic and Brythonic descent. We have inhabited the area around King Ruther’s fort (Caer Ruthers) since well before the Norman invasion and were in the dale of Annan along with the oldest families of the area: Armstrong, Kirkpatrick and Irving and well before some famous names in Scottish history. These include Bruce, Comyn and Stewart and to name but a few and we can rightly say with a great deal of pride that Scotland is deep set in our blood. However, as a Society we try and work with the current evidence rather than assumptions and the records show the first mention of Carruthers was, like many other clans and families in the area, taken from the time surnames started to be used in Scotland, in the 12th Century. What is known without any doubt, was that we were also Reivers of the West March, we were part of that culture and we fought and died for family first, country second, The last chief od Mouswald, Sir Simon Carruthers was killed on a border raid in 1548, bringing to the end the House of Mouswald and passing the Chiefly line to Carruthers of Holmains. What also remains interesting is that according to the author Jon Tate (Dick, the Devil’s Bairns), Carruthers were still ‘named’ as Reivers and listed as wanted men by the authorities as late as 1642. As the reader can see, our history dictates that we an ancient Scottish family, retaining pride in that fact to this day and are happy to proclaim that our family were Scottish Border Reivers of the West March with all that comes with it. The Clan Carruthers Society International (CCSI) was founded in January 2017 and is officially recognised by the Chief of Carruthers as representing the worldwide Carruthers family. It is non-commercial, apolitical and non-partisan and is open to any member of the international Carruthers family and derivatives of that name. The Society is based in the United Kingdom, but is represented by an international Executive Council.	<urn:uuid:618ec99b-2eff-4b16-9103-a1e1ced59e43>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://clancarrutherssociety.org/2019/11/29/clan-carruthers-reivers-our-history/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598800.30/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120135447-20200120164447-00542.warc.gz	en	0.985475	3,548	3.796875	4	[ -0.2905868887901306, -0.04155714437365532, 0.1549651026725769, 0.26845911145210266, 0.029342595487833023, -0.22634583711624146, 0.1497369110584259, -0.10997132211923599, -0.11421020328998566, 0.02625785395503044, -0.06572645902633667, -0.5550824403762817, 0.41140633821487427, -0.0101780910...	2	REIVE: Vb. (Military) (intr) dialect Scot and Northern English; to rob or plunder, to go on a plundering raid. Reivers is the name given to those clans and families on both sides of the Anglo-Scottish border who lived, loved and died from the late 13th century to the 17th century in one of the most lawless areas in British history. Cattle rustling, feuding, arson, murder, pillaging, kidnapping, extortion and robbery were commonplace and a way of life. The Reivers homelands fell into three regional areas, which covered both sides of the borders. These were known as the Marches and were defined by West, Middle and East and by the country in which they sat e.g. English East March to the south east of the border and the Scottish West March to the northwest. These regions and the lawlessness basically came to an end, just after the Union of the Crowns in 1707 and become known as the Middle Shires. This came about through the unification of Scotland and England by James VI of Scotland who was to become James I of the united kingdom’s or as it was to be known; Great Britain. The country in which they lived and the loyalty to the same, did not supersede the loyalty they felt towards their own blood, and in some cases a ‘Name’ would be represented in both Scotland and England. It is recorded that at the Battle of Pinkie Cleugh in 1547, an observer (William Patten) noticed that the Scottish and English borderers were talking to each other in the midst of battle, and on being spotted by their officers, only put on a show of fighting each other. Reivers fighting as levied soldiers played extremely important parts at the battles of Flodden Field and Solway Moss. When fighting as part of larger English or Scottish armies, Borderers were known to be difficult to control as many had relatives on both sides of the border, This was despite laws forbidding cross-border marriage. They could therefore claim to be of either nationality, describing themselves as; Scottish if forced, English at will and a Reiver by the grace of blood. They were badly behaved in camp, frequently plundered for their own benefit instead of obeying orders, and there were always questions about how loyal they were to the leaders or the cause. Life wasn’t easy for them, the lands they lived on were harsh and made worse due to the constant war between the two countries. This was especially in and around the West March. Reiving therefore became the norm by which the family were fed, a necessity that turned into a way of life. It is interesting to note that those involved in reiving crossed the full class spectrum, from great landowners carrying titles, to the common farm labourer, as both were as skilled as the other when it came to horsemanship. As soldiers, the Border Reivers were considered among the finest light cavalry in all of Europe. It is reported that after meeting one Reiver (the Bold Buccleugh), Queen Elizabeth I is quoted as having said, “with ten thousand such men, James (VI) could shake any throne in Europe.” Reivers also served as mercenaries, or were forced to serve in English and Scots armies in the Low Countries and in Ireland. Such service was often handed down as a penalty in lieu of that of death upon their families. They were used in many cases also for their skills in guerrilla warfare, which at least on their home ground, was based on their local knowledge of the highways and byways of the land in which they existed. The horse of choice and now extinct was small, sturdy and fast. The ‘hobbler’ as they were called, had superb manoeuvrability and turns of speed. If Carruthers were ever to have a ‘clan’ horse, or in fact any other Reiver family, it would have been this. Some have suggested that the hobbler used by the Reivers, was in fact the Irish ‘hobelar’, however there are others who suggest it was a distinct breed taken from the Galloway Pony, which, originated from the neighbouring shire. As an aside, there is a misconception that ‘Border Collies’, were used by the reivers and in fact our own family. These dogs originated in Northumberland and were bred to herd sheep and cattle, but only from the late 1800’s, long after the reivers were history. The Collie breed come from a sire called ‘old Hemp’ who was bred from two existing sheepdogs of the time and is claimed that he was progenitor of the Border Collie. It is of course more than possible and in fact highly likely, that our family used different breeds of dogs to hunt and to herd, as well as to track down other reivers or outlaws. The latter of course was known to be the now extinct ‘sleuth hound’ (slewe dogge), a Scottish canine, which looked a bit like the English Bloodhound, but with differences. These dogs were originally bred for hunting deer and boar but since the Middle ages, people. It was this dog that it is chronicled as having been used to hunt both Sir Willam Wallace and Robert the Bruce. However, there is really no such thing as a ‘Clan Dog’ as some would incorrectly claim and most certainly not in our family. Reiver Clothing and Weapons Progressively, one part of the Reiver attire was what was to become their tag line; the steel bonnet. This was accompanied by a quilted leather jacket, which was worn high on the neck, called a Jack or brigandean. The Jack was further reinforced by metal plates or pieces of horn stitched between the linings. This offered a lighter and more flexible alternative to chainmail, important for light cavalry, which offered some protection against a lance or sword but less so against a musket or pistol shot. It is said that in some old sales inventories, that a good jack would be worth as much as a good horse. Reivers NEVER, ever wore kilts, nor in fact tartan as a sign of family and it was only in the early 1800’s that any tartan was ‘registered’ against the name of a border family, that being Armstrong. They did however wear close fitting, thick, naturally oiled woollen breeches with a cod piece over the groin for added protection. As riding families, they wore leather thigh high riding boots, again offering some protection in any conflict. Their weapons of choice, excluding the ‘Lang Spear or Pricker’ which they were famous for, were either rapiers if one could afford them, or back swords made in the cavalry style. Both of these were usually foreign made and passed from one generation to the next. The sword would normally have been used in the right hand while the left held a dagger called a ‘main gauche’, the hilt being designed to protect against and lock an attacking blade. The move away from the heavier broad swords was progressive and specific to the change in fighting styles, both on and off the horse. No longer were heavy weapons needed to deal with the heavier armour so lighter styles came into play. Not all chose swords and/or prickers, some chose the jeddart axe, a type of polearm weapon with a glaive like blade on the end. In the latter stages crossbows, pistols and muskets were used by those who could afford them. Reiving therefore, was not specifically the Scots against the English, but also Scots against Scots, and English against English. It was simply a way of life for the border clans where alliances and allegiances to include those between the English and Scots themselves, were in some cases as fluid as the rivers that ran through the countryside. Because of their constant preparedness for war and their knowledge of the terrain, any reive/raid would have been planned with military precision. This would be whether small incursions of hours or long raids of many days, going deep into the territories of their chosen victims. For many years, the governments of both countries, attempted to establish law and order under the direction of the Wardens of the Marches, but politics, family ties and allegiances played their role. Some borderers do not enjoy by classed as clans as they see that collective term, which was historically interchangeable throughout Scotland to describe family groups, as being used by the ‘rough uncouth highlanders’ in the north. Yet the life of the Reiver was no less violent or lawless. Both the Highlanders and Borderers were subject to ‘clearances”, both fought for their blood kin before country and both were considered troublesome by the Scottish Crown. The latter of which led to the Unruly Clans Act of 1587, naming both Highland and Island Clans and Border Clans of the West and Middle Marches. Conversly to this however, was that the Reivers were seen as a solid barrier against English insurgency, especially up the west coast and into and through the West March. Tjhis led them to be seen on occasions as a necessary evil by the Scottish Crown. Carruthers, the Reivers: Accepting yDNA testing can only go back 1000 years or so, to mirror the onset of surnames in Scotland, and accepting Carruthers is a topographical name first recorded in the 12th century, we are lucky enough to have recorded evidence of who and what we are. We can therefore say, with total conviction, that Carruthers are a Scottish Border Reiver Clan and Family, having been in and around the area known as Carruthers for many centuries. As far back as 1398, Sir John of Carruthers appeared as a bond to Douglas along with other knights such as Sir John of Johnston, Sir John of Carlisle, Sir William Stewart of Castlemilk as well as some others for breaking their bonds with the King, through the act of reiving. In 1535, according to the ‘charge sheets’, Robert Carruthers was part of a raid led by Thomas of Mangerton, of Clan Armstrong and denounced as a rebel for ‘riding under the cover of night’ on John Cockburn of Ormiston to the East of Edinburgh. This was a fair trek on horseback in those days yet they took 70 oxen and 30 cows, while stripping three hostages of their clothes, purses and money. As one would suspect, this was all taken as ‘breaking the bonds made to the King’ and thus a criminal offence. What began and continued through the existence of the House of Mouswald up to July 1548, was continued by the new chiefly line; John the 5th of the House of Holmains, and of course their cadet lines. In 1607, John Carruthers of Holmends (Holmains), was part of a group ‘confined or removed from their present homes’ by the Border Commissioners and was sent to St Andrews in Fife. Amongst those ‘named’ as the ‘last of the border backguards’ in 1618, which records show they weren’t to be, were listed William Carruthers of Danebie (Denbie) and his son John. It seems that throughout the 300 plus years of the tumultuous Reiver history, Carruthers appeared quite a bit through the list of ‘pledges’ for their deeds. In 1623, Tom Carruthers in Mutham, was hanged for reiving along with members of other Reiver families such as the Elliots, Bells and Johnstons. In fact, as previously alluded to, Carruthers still remained on the wanted list in 1642. The names of George Carruthers, Ludovic Carruthers of Wormibie and John ‘Jock” Carruthers of Raffles were listed as some of the most notorious, still being sought by the law at that time. There is a great possibility therefore that all ten Chiefs of Carruthers of Mouswald were Reivers, and probably a large percentage of the House of Holmains culminating in John the 8th whose second wife was the sister of the first Earl of Queensbury. His grandson John the 9th, who succeeded his grandfather in 1659, was the Chief who moved the seat of the clan from Holmains to Kirkwood and registered the Chiefly arms with the Crown after the Lyon Act in 1672. These Arms have always remained the property of the Chief of our clan, and are currently held by Simon Peter Carruthers of Holmains. The Act of Unruly Clans One cannot talk about the reivers without mentioning the ‘Act’. The Act of 1587 names Carruthers as a ‘clan headed by a Chief’ as even before the 16th century, the appellation “Clan” began to be used by the authorities to describe Scottish family units in other than the Highlands. The list under “Elleventh Parliament of King James the Sext, xxix of Juli, 1587,” gives the name of the Clan and indicates that the Carruthers were under Patriarchal Chiefs rather than Feudal Superiors and this was taken into account in August of 2019, when the Lord Lyon confirmed our Chief, the most senior descendant of the House of Holmains. The Act was passed “for the quieting and keeping in obedience of the disorderit and subjectis inhabitants of the Borders, Highlands and Isles” and contains “The Roll of the Names of the Landislords and Baillies of Landes dwelling on the Bordoures and in the Hielandes, quhair broken men hes dwelt and presently dwellis. To the quhilk Roll, the 95 Acte of this Parliament is relative.” Then follows, “The Rolle of the Clannes that hes Captaines and Chieftaines, quhom on they dependes, of times against the willes of their Landes Lordes, alsweill on the Bordoures, as Hielandes, and of sum special persons of Braunches of the saidis Clannes, West Marche, Scottes of Eusdaill, Beatisonnes, Littles, Thomsonnes, Glendunninges, Irvinges, Belles, Carrutheres, Grahames, Johnstones, Jardines, Moffettes and Latimers.” (Reference APS, III, p 466). As a clan and family, CARRUTHERS are exceptionally proud of their Scottish Heritage, history and our culture. According to historical researchers, it would seem that our people have been in Scotland since the earliest migrations and are predominately of Celtic and Brythonic descent. We have inhabited the area around King Ruther’s fort (Caer Ruthers) since well before the Norman invasion and were in the dale of Annan along with the oldest families of the area: Armstrong, Kirkpatrick and Irving and well before some famous names in Scottish history. These include Bruce, Comyn and Stewart and to name but a few and we can rightly say with a great deal of pride that Scotland is deep set in our blood. However, as a Society we try and work with the current evidence rather than assumptions and the records show the first mention of Carruthers was, like many other clans and families in the area, taken from the time surnames started to be used in Scotland, in the 12th Century. What is known without any doubt, was that we were also Reivers of the West March, we were part of that culture and we fought and died for family first, country second, The last chief od Mouswald, Sir Simon Carruthers was killed on a border raid in 1548, bringing to the end the House of Mouswald and passing the Chiefly line to Carruthers of Holmains. What also remains interesting is that according to the author Jon Tate (Dick, the Devil’s Bairns), Carruthers were still ‘named’ as Reivers and listed as wanted men by the authorities as late as 1642. As the reader can see, our history dictates that we an ancient Scottish family, retaining pride in that fact to this day and are happy to proclaim that our family were Scottish Border Reivers of the West March with all that comes with it. The Clan Carruthers Society International (CCSI) was founded in January 2017 and is officially recognised by the Chief of Carruthers as representing the worldwide Carruthers family. It is non-commercial, apolitical and non-partisan and is open to any member of the international Carruthers family and derivatives of that name. The Society is based in the United Kingdom, but is represented by an international Executive Council.	3,515	ENGLISH	1
reaths are circular decorations usually made of flowers, vines, leaves, or other materials fashioned in the shape of leaves or flowers. In modern times wreaths have most often been used as a household decoration, displayed on a table or hung on a door. However, in ancient Greece, beginning around the sixth century b.c.e., wreaths were a common personal adornment. Worn on the head as a sort of crown, wreaths not only served as decoration but often indicated a great honor, such as a victory in war or an achievement in work or study. Since ancient times wreaths have also been used to honor the dead. In ancient Greece people felt their connection with nature deeply, and nature was given importance in the religions of the day. For the Greeks of around 500 b.c.e., many flowers and plants had special meanings, and often gods and goddesses were identified with certain plants. Therefore, the wearing of plants had a certain significance. Though women did weave some flowers and leaves into wreaths to wear in their hair as simple decoration, other wreaths were only worn on certain special occasions. For example, those who celebrated the wild rites of Dionysus, the god of wine and merrymaking, often wore wreaths of grape leaves and ivy. Leaves of the grapevine were also used to make the wreaths worn by actors who performed in the famous Greek theaters, and laurel wreaths were placed on the heads of poets and scholars who were honored for their work. Another occasion that called for wreaths was athletic competition. The most famous of these were the Olympic games, which were held every four years in the city of Olympia in honor of Zeus, the most powerful of the Greek gods. Young men came from all over Greece to compete in the games, and winners were honored with crowns of olive leaves. There were other games around Greece, and each had its own particular wreath. Winners of the Pythian games, which honored the god Apollo, received wreaths of laurel, which was sacred to the god. The Isthmian games, held in the city of Isthmia, featured victory wreaths made of pine needles, while the Nemean games, held in Nemea, a valley northwest of Argos, offered leaves of wild parsley. Victorious generals were crowned with wreaths, as were priests and priestesses performing religious rituals. Along with living heroes the Greeks also adorned statues of gods, goddesses, and famous mortals with wreaths. An olive wreath hung on a Greek door during the fifth or sixth centuries b.c.e. announced the birth of a baby boy. It was fashionable at the time for Greek women to adorn their hair with elaborate jewelry, and some wore wreaths made of gold leaves. Was this article helpful?	<urn:uuid:def6120d-81d0-41f4-a6ef-1a14112c8a74>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.martelnyc.com/body-decorations/wr.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251689924.62/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126135207-20200126165207-00015.warc.gz	en	0.99114	591	3.75	4	[ 0.1463637501001358, 0.5569382905960083, 0.4136130213737488, -0.08238689601421356, -0.26759085059165955, -0.4268754720687866, 0.12143082171678543, 0.2851443886756897, -0.04709797352552414, 0.20128943026065826, -0.478273868560791, -0.1366444081068039, -0.14307862520217896, 0.1264629364013672...	1	reaths are circular decorations usually made of flowers, vines, leaves, or other materials fashioned in the shape of leaves or flowers. In modern times wreaths have most often been used as a household decoration, displayed on a table or hung on a door. However, in ancient Greece, beginning around the sixth century b.c.e., wreaths were a common personal adornment. Worn on the head as a sort of crown, wreaths not only served as decoration but often indicated a great honor, such as a victory in war or an achievement in work or study. Since ancient times wreaths have also been used to honor the dead. In ancient Greece people felt their connection with nature deeply, and nature was given importance in the religions of the day. For the Greeks of around 500 b.c.e., many flowers and plants had special meanings, and often gods and goddesses were identified with certain plants. Therefore, the wearing of plants had a certain significance. Though women did weave some flowers and leaves into wreaths to wear in their hair as simple decoration, other wreaths were only worn on certain special occasions. For example, those who celebrated the wild rites of Dionysus, the god of wine and merrymaking, often wore wreaths of grape leaves and ivy. Leaves of the grapevine were also used to make the wreaths worn by actors who performed in the famous Greek theaters, and laurel wreaths were placed on the heads of poets and scholars who were honored for their work. Another occasion that called for wreaths was athletic competition. The most famous of these were the Olympic games, which were held every four years in the city of Olympia in honor of Zeus, the most powerful of the Greek gods. Young men came from all over Greece to compete in the games, and winners were honored with crowns of olive leaves. There were other games around Greece, and each had its own particular wreath. Winners of the Pythian games, which honored the god Apollo, received wreaths of laurel, which was sacred to the god. The Isthmian games, held in the city of Isthmia, featured victory wreaths made of pine needles, while the Nemean games, held in Nemea, a valley northwest of Argos, offered leaves of wild parsley. Victorious generals were crowned with wreaths, as were priests and priestesses performing religious rituals. Along with living heroes the Greeks also adorned statues of gods, goddesses, and famous mortals with wreaths. An olive wreath hung on a Greek door during the fifth or sixth centuries b.c.e. announced the birth of a baby boy. It was fashionable at the time for Greek women to adorn their hair with elaborate jewelry, and some wore wreaths made of gold leaves. Was this article helpful?	570	ENGLISH	1
National Freedom Day National Freedom Day is an observance in the United States and is celebrated every year on February 1st. The day commemorates the signing by Abraham Lincoln of a resolution for the 13th amendment to the American Constitution, that proposed the abolishment of slavery. It is not a public holiday, therefore businesses follow normal working hours. History of National Freedom Day On the 1st of February 1865, the American House and Senate passed a joint resolution that would later become the 13th amendment to the constitution of the United States. This amendment was signed by Abraham Lincoln, who was the President at the time, effectively outlawing slavery in America. Although the signing happened in February, it wasn’t until December 6th 1865 that the amendment was approved, and thus added to the constitution. However, February 1st was chosen as the day to celebrate, as it was the first official step in the direction of freedom from slavery. Who created National Freedom Day? Major Richard Rober Wright Sr. had been a slave for 9 years at the time that the amendment was signed. After gaining back his freedom, he attended a school for freedmen and went on to become a Veteran in the Spanish-American War, a banker, and a teacher. Known and respected as a leader in his community, Major Wright was the one who first thought that there should be an official day to celebrate the abolishment of slavery. After creating the National Freedom Day Association, he lobbied in Congress for the recognition of National Freedom Day in the American holidays’ calendar. The first unofficial celebration of the day took place on February 1st 1942. However, Major Richard Wright would never see his wish come to fruition, as it wasn’t until 1947, a year after his death, that Congress passed a bill making National Freedom Day an observance. This was officialized by President Harry Truman who signed the bill on June 30th 1948. National Freedom Day celebrations Every year it is the President of the United States who decides whether National Freedom Day should be celebrated. Many towns in America hold their festivals and celebrations to observe this day. It is mostly a day for Americans to reflect on the freedom that their country provides them, as well as on the freedom of their fellow nationals. Some still follow the tradition started in 1942 of laying a wreath of flowers on the Liberty Bell, which has become one of the biggest American symbols of freedom.	<urn:uuid:9691695f-c6c2-456d-878c-455cbf14256b>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.calendarr.com/united-states/national-freedom-day/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783342.96/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128215526-20200129005526-00515.warc.gz	en	0.982937	494	3.859375	4	[ -0.36539217829704285, 0.3258434534072876, 0.257797509431839, -0.1676338016986847, -0.23905988037586212, 0.12900754809379578, 0.1754257082939148, 0.036750148981809616, -0.33155980706214905, 0.15229915082454681, 0.1498343050479889, 0.7869840860366821, 0.10767683386802673, 0.17939792573451996...	6	National Freedom Day National Freedom Day is an observance in the United States and is celebrated every year on February 1st. The day commemorates the signing by Abraham Lincoln of a resolution for the 13th amendment to the American Constitution, that proposed the abolishment of slavery. It is not a public holiday, therefore businesses follow normal working hours. History of National Freedom Day On the 1st of February 1865, the American House and Senate passed a joint resolution that would later become the 13th amendment to the constitution of the United States. This amendment was signed by Abraham Lincoln, who was the President at the time, effectively outlawing slavery in America. Although the signing happened in February, it wasn’t until December 6th 1865 that the amendment was approved, and thus added to the constitution. However, February 1st was chosen as the day to celebrate, as it was the first official step in the direction of freedom from slavery. Who created National Freedom Day? Major Richard Rober Wright Sr. had been a slave for 9 years at the time that the amendment was signed. After gaining back his freedom, he attended a school for freedmen and went on to become a Veteran in the Spanish-American War, a banker, and a teacher. Known and respected as a leader in his community, Major Wright was the one who first thought that there should be an official day to celebrate the abolishment of slavery. After creating the National Freedom Day Association, he lobbied in Congress for the recognition of National Freedom Day in the American holidays’ calendar. The first unofficial celebration of the day took place on February 1st 1942. However, Major Richard Wright would never see his wish come to fruition, as it wasn’t until 1947, a year after his death, that Congress passed a bill making National Freedom Day an observance. This was officialized by President Harry Truman who signed the bill on June 30th 1948. National Freedom Day celebrations Every year it is the President of the United States who decides whether National Freedom Day should be celebrated. Many towns in America hold their festivals and celebrations to observe this day. It is mostly a day for Americans to reflect on the freedom that their country provides them, as well as on the freedom of their fellow nationals. Some still follow the tradition started in 1942 of laying a wreath of flowers on the Liberty Bell, which has become one of the biggest American symbols of freedom.	519	ENGLISH	1
January 17, 2019 It has been two years since severe drought forced twenty nine-year old Amena and her four children to leave their village Petaw Qol in Waras. Now, they reside in Bamyan city. “My husband is blind and I was responsible for the farming. Wells gradually dried up and the river, one of our only sources of water, began to dry up too. I brought animals to carry water over long distances, but gradually there was not enough water for the animals either,” she said. “Once I had to carry many heavy water containers and miscarried at four months pregnant. When we discovered that our lands were turning to dust, and there was not enough drinking water to survive, we had to leave the village.”Afghanistan’s worst drought this century affected the central provinces like Bamyan and Daikundi. Lack of precipitation in Bamyan has left most of its farming and grazing land parched, officials at the International Office of Migration (IOM) at Bamyan have said. According to their assessment, drought has affected around 26,200 families in Bamyan and around 128 families in Daikundi. Waras, one of the biggest districts in Bamyan, is this year facing its most severe drought in decades as the cumulative effect of several years of low rainfall has led agriculture to collapse. The signs of the coming drought were evident as far back as March 2018, when NASA satellites measured the lowest snowpack amount since 2001. Unlike most of the other countries of South Asia, Afghanistan does not get most of its rain in the monsoon. It is, therefore, critically dependent on the snow that falls during the winter months, and which feeds its rivers during the planting season. By October the effects of the low rainfall had become evident, with reports suggesting that the drought had displaced more people in 2018 than the ongoing violence. Decades of war have critically degraded Afghanistan’s infrastructure, but it has also had a disastrous impact on managing data. Records during war years, especially from outlying provinces, just do not exist, which makes it hard to plan for eventualities, even those that are apparent in advance. Long term problems In the case of the continuing drought in Afghanistan, though, both satellite data and scientific models predicted less low snowfall would hit Afghanistan’s food supply. But this year’s conflict, in which the Taliban attacked the Afghanistan government’s capabilities in all regions, also limited the ability to mount effective counter-drought measures. In some parts of Afghanistan, displaced people had to resort to selling their children to deal with drought. The situation in Bamyan was not that critical, but it was bad enough. Mohammad Tahir Zuhair, the governor of Bamyan, said that there were, “four districts of Bamyan that are highly affected by drought: Panjab, Sayghan, Yakawlang 2 and Waras.” Sometimes, when families saw their wheat crop failing and wells drying up, they had to sell their livestock at a very cheap price and join farmers migrating elsewhere. Zohair said, “Drinking water and food have been distributed among the affected families in Bamyan with the help of ministry of agriculture, and other related local and international organisations but we are working on how to overcome of this challenge in the long term.” Qurban Ali Sharifi, from Shew Qol in Waras district, left his village and went Bamyan, the provincial capital, with seven of his family members. “Most of my relatives and neighbours left Waras as living there without water was impossible. Some families had to buy 2,000 metre pipes to bring water into their house for their basic needs, and it took around an hour to fill up a very small container of water. Some other families had to buy water brought in by cars. But all of these options were too expensive for my family. During the past three years, around 80% of the farm produce failed because of the drought,” he says. Aziza, another migrant from Waras, came to Bamyan with her husband and two-year-old son. She said, “My husband was a government employee in the city and I was responsible for farming in our village last year. Drought affected our farms and the wells dried up gradually, so we struggled to get enough clean drinking water. Our wheat farms failed and we could not make money. I was worried for my child’s health.”Climate change bites The governor told thethirdpole.net that there has been some support for the affected families but they are trying to come up with the long term-solutions to overcome of this issue. Unfortunately this is not a problem with an easy solution. The increasing irregular weather patterns brought on by climate change will continue to affect snowfall, and thus water availability, for Afghanistan into the future. In the meanwhile the conflict continues to eat away at critical resources, and the availability of professional help, to deal with the problem. While 2019 may see more rainfall for Afghanistan than 2018, the deep underlying problems of trying to rebuild agriculture in a country ravaged by war, and increasingly affected by climate change, are not going to go away soon. This piece was first published in January 2019	<urn:uuid:c9ee8cc0-b88c-4737-8654-376ec08b0cb3>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.thethirdpole.net/en/2019/12/23/best-of-2019-drought-and-war-bring-afghanistan-to-crisis/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250628549.43/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125011232-20200125040232-00307.warc.gz	en	0.982743	1,092	3.28125	3	[ -0.22252678871154785, 0.3057534396648407, 0.3804546594619751, 0.17748259007930756, 0.4593007564544678, -0.28649261593818665, -0.6621916890144348, -0.13857094943523407, -0.18041199445724487, 0.06125302612781525, 0.012268823571503162, -0.19694362580776215, 0.5969445705413818, 0.1698704659938...	1	January 17, 2019 It has been two years since severe drought forced twenty nine-year old Amena and her four children to leave their village Petaw Qol in Waras. Now, they reside in Bamyan city. “My husband is blind and I was responsible for the farming. Wells gradually dried up and the river, one of our only sources of water, began to dry up too. I brought animals to carry water over long distances, but gradually there was not enough water for the animals either,” she said. “Once I had to carry many heavy water containers and miscarried at four months pregnant. When we discovered that our lands were turning to dust, and there was not enough drinking water to survive, we had to leave the village.”Afghanistan’s worst drought this century affected the central provinces like Bamyan and Daikundi. Lack of precipitation in Bamyan has left most of its farming and grazing land parched, officials at the International Office of Migration (IOM) at Bamyan have said. According to their assessment, drought has affected around 26,200 families in Bamyan and around 128 families in Daikundi. Waras, one of the biggest districts in Bamyan, is this year facing its most severe drought in decades as the cumulative effect of several years of low rainfall has led agriculture to collapse. The signs of the coming drought were evident as far back as March 2018, when NASA satellites measured the lowest snowpack amount since 2001. Unlike most of the other countries of South Asia, Afghanistan does not get most of its rain in the monsoon. It is, therefore, critically dependent on the snow that falls during the winter months, and which feeds its rivers during the planting season. By October the effects of the low rainfall had become evident, with reports suggesting that the drought had displaced more people in 2018 than the ongoing violence. Decades of war have critically degraded Afghanistan’s infrastructure, but it has also had a disastrous impact on managing data. Records during war years, especially from outlying provinces, just do not exist, which makes it hard to plan for eventualities, even those that are apparent in advance. Long term problems In the case of the continuing drought in Afghanistan, though, both satellite data and scientific models predicted less low snowfall would hit Afghanistan’s food supply. But this year’s conflict, in which the Taliban attacked the Afghanistan government’s capabilities in all regions, also limited the ability to mount effective counter-drought measures. In some parts of Afghanistan, displaced people had to resort to selling their children to deal with drought. The situation in Bamyan was not that critical, but it was bad enough. Mohammad Tahir Zuhair, the governor of Bamyan, said that there were, “four districts of Bamyan that are highly affected by drought: Panjab, Sayghan, Yakawlang 2 and Waras.” Sometimes, when families saw their wheat crop failing and wells drying up, they had to sell their livestock at a very cheap price and join farmers migrating elsewhere. Zohair said, “Drinking water and food have been distributed among the affected families in Bamyan with the help of ministry of agriculture, and other related local and international organisations but we are working on how to overcome of this challenge in the long term.” Qurban Ali Sharifi, from Shew Qol in Waras district, left his village and went Bamyan, the provincial capital, with seven of his family members. “Most of my relatives and neighbours left Waras as living there without water was impossible. Some families had to buy 2,000 metre pipes to bring water into their house for their basic needs, and it took around an hour to fill up a very small container of water. Some other families had to buy water brought in by cars. But all of these options were too expensive for my family. During the past three years, around 80% of the farm produce failed because of the drought,” he says. Aziza, another migrant from Waras, came to Bamyan with her husband and two-year-old son. She said, “My husband was a government employee in the city and I was responsible for farming in our village last year. Drought affected our farms and the wells dried up gradually, so we struggled to get enough clean drinking water. Our wheat farms failed and we could not make money. I was worried for my child’s health.”Climate change bites The governor told thethirdpole.net that there has been some support for the affected families but they are trying to come up with the long term-solutions to overcome of this issue. Unfortunately this is not a problem with an easy solution. The increasing irregular weather patterns brought on by climate change will continue to affect snowfall, and thus water availability, for Afghanistan into the future. In the meanwhile the conflict continues to eat away at critical resources, and the availability of professional help, to deal with the problem. While 2019 may see more rainfall for Afghanistan than 2018, the deep underlying problems of trying to rebuild agriculture in a country ravaged by war, and increasingly affected by climate change, are not going to go away soon. This piece was first published in January 2019	1,086	ENGLISH	1
The trials of the Pendle witches in 1612 are among the most famous witch trials in English history, and some of the best recorded of the 17th century. The twelve accused lived in the area surrounding Pendle Hill in Lancashire, and were charged with the murders of ten people by the use of witchcraft. All but two were tried at Lancaster Assizes on 18–19 August 1612, along with the Samlesbury witchesThe Samlesbury witches were three women from the Lancashire village of Samlesbury – Jane Southworth, Jennet Bierley, and Ellen Bierley – accused by a 14-year-old girl, Grace Sowerbutts, of practising witchcraft. Their trial at Lancaster Assizes in England on 19 August 1612 was one in a series of witch trials held there over two days. All three women were acquitted. The Samlesbury witches were three women from the Lancashire village of Samlesbury – Jane Southworth, Jennet Bierley, and Ellen Bierley – accused by a 14-year-old girl, Grace Sowerbutts, of practising witchcraft. Their trial at Lancaster Assizes in England on 19 August 1612 was one in a series of witch trials held there over two days. All three women were acquitted. and others, in a series of trials that have become known as the Lancashire witch trials. One was tried at York Assizes on 27 July 1612, and another died in prison. Of the eleven who went to trial – nine women and two men – ten were found guilty and executed by hanging; one was found not guilty. The official publication of the proceedings by the clerk to the court, Thomas Potts, in his The Wonderfull Discoverie of Witches in the Countie of LancasterThe Wonderfull Discoverie of Witches in the Countie of Lancaster is the account of a series of English witch trials that took place on 18–19 August 1612, commonly known as the Lancashire witch trials. , and the number of witches hanged together – nine at Lancaster and one at York – make the trials unusual for England at that time. It has been estimated that all the English witch trials between the early 15th and early 18th centuries resulted in fewer than 500 executions; this series of trials accounts for more than two per cent of that total. Six of the Pendle witches came from one of two families, each at the time headed by a woman in her eighties: Elizabeth Southerns (a.k.a. Demdike[a]The appellation “Demdike” derives from “demon woman”, suggesting that she was “feared and loathed within the community”.), her daughter Elizabeth Device, and her grandchildren James and Alizon Device; Anne Whittle (a.k.a. Chattox), and her daughter Anne Redferne. The others accused were Jane Bulcock and her son John Bulcock, Alice NutterAlice Nutter was one of the 11 men and women found guilty of causing harm by witchcraft in the Pendle witch trials of 1612. She was unique among the accused in being a respectable wealthy widow. Alice Nutter was one of the 11 men and women found guilty of causing harm by witchcraft in the Pendle witch trials of 1612. She was unique among the accused in being a respectable wealthy widow. , Katherine Hewitt, Alice Grey, and Jennet Preston. The outbreaks of witchcraft in and around Pendle may demonstrate the extent to which people could make a living by posing as witches. Many of the allegations resulted from accusations that members of the Demdike and Chattox families made against each other, perhaps because they were in competition, both trying to make a living from healing, begging, and extortion. Religious and political background The accused witches lived in the area around Pendle Hill in Lancashire, a county which, at the end of the 16th century, was regarded by the authorities as a wild and lawless region: an area “fabled for its theft, violence and sexual laxity, where the church was honoured without much understanding of its doctrines by the common people”. The nearby Cistercian abbey at Whalley had been dissolved by Henry VIII in 1537, a move strongly resisted by the local people, over whose lives the abbey had until then exerted a powerful influence. Despite the abbey’s closure, and the execution of its abbot, the people of Pendle remained largely faithful to their Roman Catholic beliefs and were quick to revert to Catholicism on Queen Mary’s accession to the throne in 1553. When Mary’s Protestant half-sister Elizabeth came to the throne in 1558 Catholic priests once again had to go into hiding, but in remote areas such as Pendle they continued to celebrate Mass in secret. In 1562, early in her reign, Elizabeth passed a law in the form of An Act Against Conjurations, Enchantments and Witchcrafts (5 Eliz. I c. 16). This demanded the death penalty, but only where harm had been caused; lesser offences were punishable by a term of imprisonment. The Act provided that anyone who should “use, practise, or exercise any Witchcraft, Enchantment, Charm, or Sorcery, whereby any person shall happen to be killed or destroyed”, was guilty of a felony without benefit of clergy, and was to be put to death. On Elizabeth’s death in 1603 she was succeeded by James I. Strongly influenced by Scotland’s separation from the Catholic Church during the Scottish Reformation, James was intensely interested in Protestant theology, focusing much of his curiosity on the theology of witchcraft. By the early 1590s he had become convinced that he was being plotted against by Scottish witches. After a visit to Denmark, he had attended the trial in 1590 of the North Berwick witches, who were convicted of using witchcraft to send a storm against the ship that carried James and his wife Anne back to Scotland. In 1597 he wrote a book, Daemonologie, instructing his followers that they must denounce and prosecute any supporters or practitioners of witchcraft. One year after James acceded to the English throne, a law was enacted imposing the death penalty in cases where it was proven that harm had been caused through the use of magic, or corpses had been exhumed for magical purposes. James was, however, sceptical of the evidence presented in witch trials, even to the extent of personally exposing discrepancies in the testimonies presented against some accused witches. In early 1612, the year of the trials, every justice of the peace (JP) in Lancashire was ordered to compile a list of recusants in their area, i.e. those who refused to attend the English Church and to take communion, a criminal offence at that time. Roger Nowell of Read Hall, on the edge of Pendle Forest, was the JP for Pendle. It was against this background of seeking out religious nonconformists that, in March 1612, Nowell investigated a complaint made to him by the family of John Law, a pedlar, who claimed to have been injured by witchcraft. Many of those who subsequently became implicated as the investigation progressed did indeed consider themselves to be witches, in the sense of being village healers who practised magic, probably in return for payment, but such men and women were common in 16th-century rural England, an accepted part of village life. It was perhaps difficult for the judges charged with hearing the trials – Sir James Altham and Sir Edward Bromley – to understand King James’s attitude towards witchcraft. The king was head of the judiciary, and Bromley was hoping for promotion to a circuit nearer London. Altham was nearing the end of his judicial career, but he had recently been accused of a miscarriage of justice at the York Assizes, which had resulted in a woman being sentenced to death by hanging for witchcraft. The judges may have been uncertain whether the best way to gain the King’s favour was by encouraging convictions, or by “sceptically testing the witnesses to destruction”. Events leading up to the trials One of the accused, Demdike, had been regarded in the area as a witch for fifty years, and some of the deaths the witches were accused of had happened many years before Roger Nowell started to take an interest in 1612. The event that seems to have triggered Nowell’s investigation, culminating in the Pendle witch trials, occurred on 21 March 1612. On her way to Trawden Forest, Demdike’s granddaughter, Alizon Device, encountered John Law, a pedlar from Halifax, and asked him for some pins. Seventeenth-century metal pins were handmade and relatively expensive, but they were frequently needed for magical purposes such as in healing – particularly for treating warts – divination, and for love magic, which may have been why Alizon was so keen to get hold of them and why Law was so reluctant to sell them to her. Whether she meant to buy them, as she claimed, and Law refused to undo his pack for such a small transaction, or whether she had no money and was begging for them, as Law’s son Abraham claimed, is unclear. A few minutes after their encounter Alizon saw Law stumble and fall, perhaps because he suffered a stroke; he managed to regain his feet and reach a nearby inn. Initially Law made no accusations against Alizon, but she appears to have been convinced of her own powers; when Abraham Law took her to visit his father a few days after the incident, she reportedly confessed and asked for his forgiveness. Alizon Device, her mother Elizabeth, and her brother James were summoned to appear before Nowell on 30 March 1612. Alizon confessed that she had sold her soul to the Devil, and that she had told him to lame John Law after he had called her a thief. Her brother, James, stated that his sister had also confessed to bewitching a local child. Elizabeth was more reticent, admitting only that her mother, Demdike, had a mark on her body, something that many, including Nowell, would have regarded as having been left by the Devil after he had sucked her blood. When questioned about Anne Whittle (Chattox), the matriarch of the other family reputedly involved in witchcraft in and around Pendle, Alizon perhaps saw an opportunity for revenge. There may have been bad blood between the two families, possibly dating from 1601, when a member of Chattox’s family broke into Malkin Tower, the home of the Devices, and stole goods worth about £1, equivalent to about £100 as of 2008. Alizon accused Chattox of murdering four men by witchcraft, and of killing her father, John Device, who had died in 1601. She claimed that her father had been so frightened of Old Chattox that he had agreed to give her 8 pounds (3.6 kg) of oatmeal each year in return for her promise not to hurt his family. The meal was handed over annually until the year before John’s death; on his deathbed John claimed that his sickness had been caused by Chattox because they had not paid for protection. On 2 April 1612, Demdike, Chattox, and Chattox’s daughter Anne Redferne, were summoned to appear before Nowell. Both Demdike and Chattox were by then blind and in their eighties, and both provided Nowell with damaging confessions. Demdike claimed that she had given her soul to the Devil 20 years previously, and Chattox that she had given her soul to “a Thing like a Christian man”, on his promise that “she would not lack anything and would get any revenge she desired”. Although Anne Redferne made no confession, Demdike said that she had seen her making clay figures. Margaret Crooke, another witness seen by Nowell that day, claimed that her brother had fallen sick and died after having had a disagreement with Redferne, and that he had frequently blamed her for his illness Based on the evidence and confessions he had obtained, Nowell committed Demdike, Chattox, Anne Redferne and Alizon Device to Lancaster Gaol, to be tried for maleficiumMaleficium is an act of sorcery, historically usually performed by a witch, intended to cause harm or injury. – causing harm by witchcraft – at the next assizes. Meeting at Malkin Tower The committal and subsequent trial of the four women might have been the end of the matter, had it not been for a meeting organised by Elizabeth Device at Malkin TowerMalkin Tower was the home of Elizabeth Southerns, also known as Demdike, and her granddaughter Alizon Device, two of the chief protagonists in the Lancashire witch trials of 1612. , the home of the Demdikes, held on Good Friday 10 April 1612. To feed the party, James Device stole a neighbour’s sheep. Friends and others sympathetic to the family attended, and when word of the meeting reached Roger Nowell he decided to investigate. On 27 April 1612, an inquiry was held before Nowell and another magistrate, Nicholas Bannister, to determine the purpose of the meeting at Malkin Tower, who had attended, and what had happened there. As a result of the inquiry, eight more people were accused of witchcraft and committed for trial: Elizabeth Device, James Device, Alice NutterAlice Nutter was one of the 11 men and women found guilty of causing harm by witchcraft in the Pendle witch trials of 1612. She was unique among the accused in being a respectable wealthy widow. Alice Nutter was one of the 11 men and women found guilty of causing harm by witchcraft in the Pendle witch trials of 1612. She was unique among the accused in being a respectable wealthy widow. , Katherine Hewitt, John Bulcock, Jane Bulcock, Alice Grey and Jennet Preston. Preston lived across the border in Yorkshire, so she was sent for trial at York Assizes; the others were sent to Lancaster Gaol to join the four already imprisoned there. Malkin Tower is believed to have been near the village of Newchurch in Pendle, or possibly in Blacko on the site of present-day Malkin Tower Farm, and to have been demolished soon after the trials. The Pendle witches were tried in a group that also included the Samlesbury witches, Jane Southworth, Jennet Brierley, and Ellen Brierley, the charges against whom included child murder and cannibalism; Margaret PearsonMargaret Pearson was a convicted witch who escaped the death penalty because she had caused no harm to anyone., the so-called Padiham witch, who was facing her third trial for witchcraft, this time for killing a horse; and Isobel Robey from Windle, accused of using witchcraft to cause sickness. Some of the accused Pendle witches, such as Alizon Device, seem to have genuinely believed in their guilt, but others protested their innocence to the end. Jennet Preston was the first to be tried, at York Assizes. York Assizes, 27 July 1612 Jennet Preston lived in Gisburn, which was then in Yorkshire, so she was sent to York Assizes for trial. Her judges were Sir James Altham and Sir Edward Bromley. Jennet was charged with the murder by witchcraft of a local landowner, Thomas Lister of Westby Hall, to which she pleaded not guilty. She had already appeared before Bromley in 1611, accused of murdering a child by witchcraft, but had been found not guilty. The most damning evidence given against her was that when she had been taken to see Lister’s body, the corpse “bled fresh bloud presently, in the presence of all that were there present” after she touched it. According to a statement made to Nowell by James Device on 27 April, Jennet had attended the Malkin Tower meeting to seek help with Lister’s murder. She was found guilty and sentenced to death by hanging; her execution took place on 29 July on the Knavesmire, the present site of York Racecourse. All the other accused lived in Lancashire, so they were sent to Lancaster Assizes for trial, where the judges were once again Altham and Bromley. The prosecutor was local magistrate Roger Nowell, who had been responsible for collecting the various statements and confessions from the accused. Nine-year-old Jennet Device was a key witness for the prosecution, something that would not have been permitted in many other 17th-century criminal trials. However, King James had made a case for suspending the normal rules of evidence for witchcraft trials in his Daemonologie. As well as identifying those who had attended the Malkin Tower meeting, Jennet also gave evidence against her mother, brother, and sister. Nine of the accused – Alizon Device, Elizabeth Device, James Device, Anne Whittle, Anne Redferne, Alice Nutter, Katherine Hewitt, John Bulcock and Jane Bulcock – were found guilty during the two-day trial and hanged at Gallows Hill[b]Gallows Hill is on the moors close to the site of present-day Williamson Park. in Lancaster on 20 August 1612; Elizabeth Southerns died while awaiting trial. Only one of the accused, Alice Grey, was found not guilty. Anne Whittle (Chattox) was accused of the murder of Robert Nutter. She pleaded not guilty, but the confession she had made to Roger Nowell was read out in court, and evidence against her was presented by James Robinson, who had lived with the Chattox family 20 years earlier. He claimed to remember that Nutter had accused Chattox of turning his beer sour, and that she was commonly believed to be a witch. Chattox broke down and admitted her guilt, calling on God for forgiveness and the judges to be merciful to her daughter, Anne Redferne. Elizabeth Device was charged with the murders of James Robinson, John Robinson and, together with Alice Nutter and Demdike, the murder of Henry Mitton. Elizabeth Device vehemently maintained her innocence. Potts records that “this odious witch” suffered from a facial deformity resulting in her left eye being set lower than her right. The main witness against Device was her daughter, Jennet, who was about nine years old. When Jennet was brought into the courtroom and asked to stand up and give evidence against her mother, Elizabeth, confronted with her own child making accusations that would lead to her execution, began to curse and scream at her daughter, forcing the judges to have her removed from the courtroom before the evidence could be heard. Jennet was placed on a table and stated that she believed her mother had been a witch for three or four years. She also said her mother had a familiar called Ball, who appeared in the shape of a brown dog. Jennet claimed to have witnessed conversations between Ball and her mother, in which Ball had been asked to help with various murders. James Device also gave evidence against his mother, saying he had seen her making a clay figure of one of her victims, John Robinson. Elizabeth Device was found guilty. James Device pleaded not guilty to the murders by witchcraft of Anne Townley and John Duckworth. However he, like Chattox, had earlier made a confession to Nowell, which was read out in court. That, and the evidence presented against him by his sister Jennet, who said that she had seen her brother asking a black dog he had conjured up to help him kill Townley, was sufficient to persuade the jury to find him guilty. The trials of the three Samlesbury witchesThe Samlesbury witches were three women from the Lancashire village of Samlesbury – Jane Southworth, Jennet Bierley, and Ellen Bierley – accused by a 14-year-old girl, Grace Sowerbutts, of practising witchcraft. Their trial at Lancaster Assizes in England on 19 August 1612 was one in a series of witch trials held there over two days. All three women were acquitted. The Samlesbury witches were three women from the Lancashire village of Samlesbury – Jane Southworth, Jennet Bierley, and Ellen Bierley – accused by a 14-year-old girl, Grace Sowerbutts, of practising witchcraft. Their trial at Lancaster Assizes in England on 19 August 1612 was one in a series of witch trials held there over two days. All three women were acquitted. were heard before Anne Redferne’s first appearance in court, late in the afternoon, charged with the murder of Robert Nutter. The evidence against her was considered unsatisfactory, and she was acquitted. Anne Redferne was not so fortunate the following day, when she faced her second trial, for the murder of Robert Nutter’s father, Christopher, to which she pleaded not guilty. Demdike’s statement to Nowell, which accused Anne of having made clay figures of the Nutter family, was read out in court. Witnesses were called to testify that Anne was a witch “more dangerous than her Mother”. But she refused to admit her guilt to the end, and had given no evidence against any others of the accused. Anne Redferne was found guilty. Jane Bulcock and her son John Bulcock, both from Newchurch in Pendle, were accused and found guilty of the murder by witchcraft of Jennet Deane. Both denied that they had attended the meeting at Malkin Tower, but Jennet Device identified Jane as having been one of those present, and John as having turned the spit to roast the stolen sheep, the centrepiece of the Good Friday meeting at the Demdike’s home. Alice Nutter was unusual among the accused in being comparatively wealthy, the widow of a tenant yeoman farmer. She made no statement either before or during her trial, except to enter her plea of not guilty to the charge of murdering Henry Mitton by witchcraft. The prosecution alleged that she, together with Demdike and Elizabeth Device, had caused Mitton’s death after he had refused to give Demdike a penny she had begged from him. The only evidence against Alice seems to have been that James Device claimed Demdike had told him of the murder, and Jennet Device in her statement said that Alice had been present at the Malkin Tower meeting. Alice may have called in on the meeting at Malkin Tower on her way to a secret (and illegal) Good Friday Catholic service, and refused to speak for fear of incriminating her fellow Catholics. Many of the Nutter family were Catholics, and two had been executed as Jesuit priests, John Nutter in 1584 and his brother Robert in 1600. Alice Nutter was found guilty. Katherine Hewitt (a.k.a. Mould-Heeles) was charged and found guilty of the murder of Anne Foulds. She was the wife of a clothier from Colne, and had attended the meeting at Malkin Tower with Alice Grey. According to the evidence given by James Device, both Hewitt and Grey told the others at that meeting that they had killed a child from Colne, Anne Foulds. Jennet Device also picked Katherine out of a line-up, and confirmed her attendance at the Malkin Tower meeting. Alice Grey was accused with Katherine Hewitt of the murder of Anne Foulds. Potts does not provide an account of Alice Grey’s trial, simply recording her as one of the Samlesbury witches – which she was not, as she was one of those identified as having been at the Malkin Tower meeting – and naming her in the list of those found not guilty. Alizon Device, whose encounter with John Law had triggered the events leading up to the trials, was charged with causing harm by witchcraft. Uniquely among the accused, Alizon was confronted in court by her alleged victim, John Law. She seems to have genuinely believed in her own guilt; when Law was brought into court Alizon fell to her knees in tears and confessed. She was found guilty. The Wonderfull Discoverie Main article: The Wonderfull Discoverie of Witches in the Countie of LancasterThe Wonderfull Discoverie of Witches in the Countie of Lancaster is the account of a series of English witch trials that took place on 18–19 August 1612, commonly known as the Lancashire witch trials. Almost everything that is known about the trials comes from a report of the proceedings written by Thomas Potts, the clerk to the Lancaster Assizes. Potts was instructed to write his account by the trial judges, and had completed the work by 16 November 1612, when he submitted it for review. Bromley revised and corrected the manuscript before its publication in 1613, declaring it to be “truly reported” and “fit and worthie to be published”. Although written as an apparently verbatim account, The Wonderfull Discoverie of Witches in the Countie of Lancaster is not a report of what was actually said at the trial but is instead reflecting what happened. Nevertheless, Potts “seems to give a generally trustworthy, although not comprehensive, account of an Assize witchcraft trial, provided that the reader is constantly aware of his use of written material instead of verbatim reports”. The trials took place not quite seven years after the Gunpowder Plot to blow up the Houses of Parliament in an attempt to kill King James and the Protestant aristocracy had been foiled. It was alleged that the Pendle witches had hatched their own gunpowder plot to blow up Lancaster Castle, although historian Stephen Pumfrey has suggested that the “preposterous scheme” was invented by the examining magistrates and simply agreed to by James Device in his witness statement. It may therefore be significant that Potts dedicated The Wonderfull Discoverie to Thomas Knyvet and his wife Elizabeth; Knyvet was the man credited with apprehending Guy Fawkes and thus saving the King. It has been estimated that all the English witch trials between the early 15th and early 18th centuries resulted in fewer than 500 executions, so this one series of trials in July and August 1612 accounts for more than two per cent of that total. Court records show that Lancashire was unusual in the north of England for the frequency of its witch trials. Neighbouring Cheshire, for instance, also suffered from economic problems and religious activists, but there only 47 people were indicted for causing harm by witchcraft between 1589 and 1675, of whom 11 were found guilty. Pendle was part of the parish of Whalley, an area covering 180 square miles (470 km2), too large to be effective in preaching and teaching the doctrines of the Church of England: both the survival of Catholicism and the upsurge of witchcraft in Lancashire have been attributed to its over-stretched parochial structure. Until its dissolution, the spiritual needs of the people of Pendle and surrounding districts had been served by nearby Whalley Abbey, but its closure in 1537 left a moral vacuum. Many of the allegations made in the Pendle witch trials resulted from members of the Demdike and Chattox families making accusations against each other. Historian John Swain has said that the outbreaks of witchcraft in and around Pendle demonstrate the extent to which people could make a living either by posing as a witch, or by accusing or threatening to accuse others of being a witch. Although it is implicit in much of the literature on witchcraft that the accused were victims, often mentally or physically abnormal, for some at least, it may have been a trade like any other, albeit one with significant risks. There may have been bad blood between the Demdike and Chattox families because they were in competition with each other, trying to make a living from healing, begging, and extortion. The Demdikes are believed to have lived close to Newchurch in Pendle, and the Chattox family about two miles (3.2 km) away, near the village of Fence. Aftermath and legacy Altham continued with his judicial career until his death in 1617, and Bromley achieved his desired promotion to the Midlands Circuit in 1616. Potts was given the keepership of Skalme Park by James in 1615, to breed and train the king’s hounds. In 1618, he was given responsibility for “collecting the forfeitures on the laws concerning sewers, for twenty-one years”. Having played her part in the deaths of her mother, brother, and sister, Jennet Device may eventually have found herself accused of witchcraft. A woman with that name was listed in a group of 20 tried at Lancaster Assizes on 24 March 1634, although it cannot be certain that it was the same Jennet Device. The charge against her was the murder of Isabel Nutter, William Nutter’s wife. In that series of trials the chief prosecution witness was a ten-year-old boy, Edmund Robinson. All but one of the accused were found guilty, but the judges refused to pass death sentences, deciding instead to refer the case to the king, Charles I. Under cross-examination in London, Robinson admitted that he had fabricated his evidence, but even though four of the accused were eventually pardoned, they all remained incarcerated in Lancaster Gaol, where it is likely that they died. An official record dated 22 August 1636 lists Jennet Device as one of those still held in the prison. These later Lancashire witchcraft trials were the subject of a contemporary play written by Thomas Heywood and Richard Brome, The Late Lancashire Witches. In modern times the witches have become the inspiration for Pendle’s tourism and heritage industries, with local shops selling a variety of witch-motif gifts. Burnley’s Moorhouse’s produces a beer called Pendle Witches Brew, and there is a Pendle Witch Trail running from Pendle Heritage Centre to Lancaster Castle, where the accused witches were held before their trial. The X43 bus route run by Burnley Bus Company has been branded The Witch Way, with some of the vehicles operating on it named after the witches in the trial. Pendle Hill, which dominates the landscape of the area, continues to be associated with witchcraft, and hosts a hilltop gathering every Halloween. A petition was presented to UK Home Secretary Jack Straw in 1998 asking for the witches to be pardoned, but it was decided that their convictions should stand. Ten years later another petition was organised in an attempt to obtain pardons for Chattox and Demdike. It followed the Swiss government’s pardon earlier that year of Anna Göldi, beheaded in 1782, thought to be the last person in Europe to be executed as a witch. William Harrison Ainsworth, a Victorian novelist considered in his day the equal of Dickens, wrote a romanticised account of the Pendle witches published in 1849. The Lancashire Witches is the only one of his 40 novels never to have been out of print. The British writer Robert Neill dramatised the events of 1612 in his novel Mist over Pendle, first published in 1951. The writer and poet Blake Morrison treated the subject in his suite of poems Pendle Witches, published in 1996, and in 2011 poet Simon Armitage narrated a documentary on BBC Four, The Pendle Witch Child. Events to mark the 400th anniversary of the trials in 2012 included an exhibition, “A Wonderful Discoverie: Lancashire Witches 1612–2012”, at Gawthorpe Hall staged by Lancashire County Council. The Fate of Chattox, a piece by David Lloyd-Mostyn for clarinet and piano and taking its theme from the events leading to Chattox’s demise, has been featured in a BBC Radio 4 documentary. A life-size statue of Alice Nutter, by sculptor David Palmer, was unveiled in her home village, Roughlee. In August, a world record for the largest group dressed as witches was set by 482 people who walked up Pendle Hill, on which the date “1612” had been installed in 400-foot-tall numbers by artist Philippe Handford using horticultural fleece. The Bishop of Burnley, the Rt Rev John Goddard, expressed concern about marking the anniversary on the side of the hill. Publications in 2012 inspired by the trials include two novellas, The Daylight Gate by Jeanette Winterson and Malkin Child by Livi Michael. Blake Morrison published a volume of poetry on the events of 1612, which he named A Discoverie of Witches. - p. 204 - p. 5 - pp. 8–9 - pp. 3–4 - p. 23 - p. 96 - pp. 23–24 - p. 7 - pp. 1–2 - p. 67 - p. 24 - p. 12 - p. 11 - p. 1 - p. 9 - pp. 5, 19 - p. 83 - p. 11 - p. 23 - p. 10 - p. 11 - p. 80 - p. 15 - p. 15 - pp. 17–19 - p. 16 - p. 19 - p. 2 - p. 22 - p. 60 - p. 286 - p. 2 - p. 23 - p. 171 - p. 59 - p. 179 - p. 60 - p. 177 - p. 20 - p. 149 - p. 22 - p. 28 - p. 29 - p. 34 - pp. 27–28 - p. 193 - p. 55 - p. 52 - p. 29 - pp. 65, 70 - p. 27 - p. 33 - pp. 27–28 - p. 108 - p. 131 - p. 29 - p. 34 - p. 116 - p. 124 - p. 75 - p. 36 - pp. 29, 167 - p. 37 - p. 139 - p. xli - p. 48 - p. 50 - pp. 37–38 - p. 139 - p. 3 - p. 10 - pp. 88–89 - p. 85 - p. 38 - pp. 146–148 - p. 42 - p. 151 - p. 251 - p. 146 - p. 166 Notes [ + ]	<urn:uuid:e8b7c1ef-e3e6-411e-ae5a-14b850904fd6>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://engole.info/pendle-witches/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592394.9/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118081234-20200118105234-00166.warc.gz	en	0.984921	7,233	3.40625	3	[ 0.18175911903381348, -0.10138207674026489, 0.14617550373077393, -0.017295055091381073, -0.05533318966627121, 0.33809566497802734, 0.15868043899536133, -0.1923518180847168, 0.1984180361032486, -0.38841694593429565, -0.2742392420768738, -0.29205936193466187, -0.42880159616470337, -0.02939116...	1	The trials of the Pendle witches in 1612 are among the most famous witch trials in English history, and some of the best recorded of the 17th century. The twelve accused lived in the area surrounding Pendle Hill in Lancashire, and were charged with the murders of ten people by the use of witchcraft. All but two were tried at Lancaster Assizes on 18–19 August 1612, along with the Samlesbury witchesThe Samlesbury witches were three women from the Lancashire village of Samlesbury – Jane Southworth, Jennet Bierley, and Ellen Bierley – accused by a 14-year-old girl, Grace Sowerbutts, of practising witchcraft. Their trial at Lancaster Assizes in England on 19 August 1612 was one in a series of witch trials held there over two days. All three women were acquitted. The Samlesbury witches were three women from the Lancashire village of Samlesbury – Jane Southworth, Jennet Bierley, and Ellen Bierley – accused by a 14-year-old girl, Grace Sowerbutts, of practising witchcraft. Their trial at Lancaster Assizes in England on 19 August 1612 was one in a series of witch trials held there over two days. All three women were acquitted. and others, in a series of trials that have become known as the Lancashire witch trials. One was tried at York Assizes on 27 July 1612, and another died in prison. Of the eleven who went to trial – nine women and two men – ten were found guilty and executed by hanging; one was found not guilty. The official publication of the proceedings by the clerk to the court, Thomas Potts, in his The Wonderfull Discoverie of Witches in the Countie of LancasterThe Wonderfull Discoverie of Witches in the Countie of Lancaster is the account of a series of English witch trials that took place on 18–19 August 1612, commonly known as the Lancashire witch trials. , and the number of witches hanged together – nine at Lancaster and one at York – make the trials unusual for England at that time. It has been estimated that all the English witch trials between the early 15th and early 18th centuries resulted in fewer than 500 executions; this series of trials accounts for more than two per cent of that total. Six of the Pendle witches came from one of two families, each at the time headed by a woman in her eighties: Elizabeth Southerns (a.k.a. Demdike[a]The appellation “Demdike” derives from “demon woman”, suggesting that she was “feared and loathed within the community”.), her daughter Elizabeth Device, and her grandchildren James and Alizon Device; Anne Whittle (a.k.a. Chattox), and her daughter Anne Redferne. The others accused were Jane Bulcock and her son John Bulcock, Alice NutterAlice Nutter was one of the 11 men and women found guilty of causing harm by witchcraft in the Pendle witch trials of 1612. She was unique among the accused in being a respectable wealthy widow. Alice Nutter was one of the 11 men and women found guilty of causing harm by witchcraft in the Pendle witch trials of 1612. She was unique among the accused in being a respectable wealthy widow. , Katherine Hewitt, Alice Grey, and Jennet Preston. The outbreaks of witchcraft in and around Pendle may demonstrate the extent to which people could make a living by posing as witches. Many of the allegations resulted from accusations that members of the Demdike and Chattox families made against each other, perhaps because they were in competition, both trying to make a living from healing, begging, and extortion. Religious and political background The accused witches lived in the area around Pendle Hill in Lancashire, a county which, at the end of the 16th century, was regarded by the authorities as a wild and lawless region: an area “fabled for its theft, violence and sexual laxity, where the church was honoured without much understanding of its doctrines by the common people”. The nearby Cistercian abbey at Whalley had been dissolved by Henry VIII in 1537, a move strongly resisted by the local people, over whose lives the abbey had until then exerted a powerful influence. Despite the abbey’s closure, and the execution of its abbot, the people of Pendle remained largely faithful to their Roman Catholic beliefs and were quick to revert to Catholicism on Queen Mary’s accession to the throne in 1553. When Mary’s Protestant half-sister Elizabeth came to the throne in 1558 Catholic priests once again had to go into hiding, but in remote areas such as Pendle they continued to celebrate Mass in secret. In 1562, early in her reign, Elizabeth passed a law in the form of An Act Against Conjurations, Enchantments and Witchcrafts (5 Eliz. I c. 16). This demanded the death penalty, but only where harm had been caused; lesser offences were punishable by a term of imprisonment. The Act provided that anyone who should “use, practise, or exercise any Witchcraft, Enchantment, Charm, or Sorcery, whereby any person shall happen to be killed or destroyed”, was guilty of a felony without benefit of clergy, and was to be put to death. On Elizabeth’s death in 1603 she was succeeded by James I. Strongly influenced by Scotland’s separation from the Catholic Church during the Scottish Reformation, James was intensely interested in Protestant theology, focusing much of his curiosity on the theology of witchcraft. By the early 1590s he had become convinced that he was being plotted against by Scottish witches. After a visit to Denmark, he had attended the trial in 1590 of the North Berwick witches, who were convicted of using witchcraft to send a storm against the ship that carried James and his wife Anne back to Scotland. In 1597 he wrote a book, Daemonologie, instructing his followers that they must denounce and prosecute any supporters or practitioners of witchcraft. One year after James acceded to the English throne, a law was enacted imposing the death penalty in cases where it was proven that harm had been caused through the use of magic, or corpses had been exhumed for magical purposes. James was, however, sceptical of the evidence presented in witch trials, even to the extent of personally exposing discrepancies in the testimonies presented against some accused witches. In early 1612, the year of the trials, every justice of the peace (JP) in Lancashire was ordered to compile a list of recusants in their area, i.e. those who refused to attend the English Church and to take communion, a criminal offence at that time. Roger Nowell of Read Hall, on the edge of Pendle Forest, was the JP for Pendle. It was against this background of seeking out religious nonconformists that, in March 1612, Nowell investigated a complaint made to him by the family of John Law, a pedlar, who claimed to have been injured by witchcraft. Many of those who subsequently became implicated as the investigation progressed did indeed consider themselves to be witches, in the sense of being village healers who practised magic, probably in return for payment, but such men and women were common in 16th-century rural England, an accepted part of village life. It was perhaps difficult for the judges charged with hearing the trials – Sir James Altham and Sir Edward Bromley – to understand King James’s attitude towards witchcraft. The king was head of the judiciary, and Bromley was hoping for promotion to a circuit nearer London. Altham was nearing the end of his judicial career, but he had recently been accused of a miscarriage of justice at the York Assizes, which had resulted in a woman being sentenced to death by hanging for witchcraft. The judges may have been uncertain whether the best way to gain the King’s favour was by encouraging convictions, or by “sceptically testing the witnesses to destruction”. Events leading up to the trials One of the accused, Demdike, had been regarded in the area as a witch for fifty years, and some of the deaths the witches were accused of had happened many years before Roger Nowell started to take an interest in 1612. The event that seems to have triggered Nowell’s investigation, culminating in the Pendle witch trials, occurred on 21 March 1612. On her way to Trawden Forest, Demdike’s granddaughter, Alizon Device, encountered John Law, a pedlar from Halifax, and asked him for some pins. Seventeenth-century metal pins were handmade and relatively expensive, but they were frequently needed for magical purposes such as in healing – particularly for treating warts – divination, and for love magic, which may have been why Alizon was so keen to get hold of them and why Law was so reluctant to sell them to her. Whether she meant to buy them, as she claimed, and Law refused to undo his pack for such a small transaction, or whether she had no money and was begging for them, as Law’s son Abraham claimed, is unclear. A few minutes after their encounter Alizon saw Law stumble and fall, perhaps because he suffered a stroke; he managed to regain his feet and reach a nearby inn. Initially Law made no accusations against Alizon, but she appears to have been convinced of her own powers; when Abraham Law took her to visit his father a few days after the incident, she reportedly confessed and asked for his forgiveness. Alizon Device, her mother Elizabeth, and her brother James were summoned to appear before Nowell on 30 March 1612. Alizon confessed that she had sold her soul to the Devil, and that she had told him to lame John Law after he had called her a thief. Her brother, James, stated that his sister had also confessed to bewitching a local child. Elizabeth was more reticent, admitting only that her mother, Demdike, had a mark on her body, something that many, including Nowell, would have regarded as having been left by the Devil after he had sucked her blood. When questioned about Anne Whittle (Chattox), the matriarch of the other family reputedly involved in witchcraft in and around Pendle, Alizon perhaps saw an opportunity for revenge. There may have been bad blood between the two families, possibly dating from 1601, when a member of Chattox’s family broke into Malkin Tower, the home of the Devices, and stole goods worth about £1, equivalent to about £100 as of 2008. Alizon accused Chattox of murdering four men by witchcraft, and of killing her father, John Device, who had died in 1601. She claimed that her father had been so frightened of Old Chattox that he had agreed to give her 8 pounds (3.6 kg) of oatmeal each year in return for her promise not to hurt his family. The meal was handed over annually until the year before John’s death; on his deathbed John claimed that his sickness had been caused by Chattox because they had not paid for protection. On 2 April 1612, Demdike, Chattox, and Chattox’s daughter Anne Redferne, were summoned to appear before Nowell. Both Demdike and Chattox were by then blind and in their eighties, and both provided Nowell with damaging confessions. Demdike claimed that she had given her soul to the Devil 20 years previously, and Chattox that she had given her soul to “a Thing like a Christian man”, on his promise that “she would not lack anything and would get any revenge she desired”. Although Anne Redferne made no confession, Demdike said that she had seen her making clay figures. Margaret Crooke, another witness seen by Nowell that day, claimed that her brother had fallen sick and died after having had a disagreement with Redferne, and that he had frequently blamed her for his illness Based on the evidence and confessions he had obtained, Nowell committed Demdike, Chattox, Anne Redferne and Alizon Device to Lancaster Gaol, to be tried for maleficiumMaleficium is an act of sorcery, historically usually performed by a witch, intended to cause harm or injury. – causing harm by witchcraft – at the next assizes. Meeting at Malkin Tower The committal and subsequent trial of the four women might have been the end of the matter, had it not been for a meeting organised by Elizabeth Device at Malkin TowerMalkin Tower was the home of Elizabeth Southerns, also known as Demdike, and her granddaughter Alizon Device, two of the chief protagonists in the Lancashire witch trials of 1612. , the home of the Demdikes, held on Good Friday 10 April 1612. To feed the party, James Device stole a neighbour’s sheep. Friends and others sympathetic to the family attended, and when word of the meeting reached Roger Nowell he decided to investigate. On 27 April 1612, an inquiry was held before Nowell and another magistrate, Nicholas Bannister, to determine the purpose of the meeting at Malkin Tower, who had attended, and what had happened there. As a result of the inquiry, eight more people were accused of witchcraft and committed for trial: Elizabeth Device, James Device, Alice NutterAlice Nutter was one of the 11 men and women found guilty of causing harm by witchcraft in the Pendle witch trials of 1612. She was unique among the accused in being a respectable wealthy widow. Alice Nutter was one of the 11 men and women found guilty of causing harm by witchcraft in the Pendle witch trials of 1612. She was unique among the accused in being a respectable wealthy widow. , Katherine Hewitt, John Bulcock, Jane Bulcock, Alice Grey and Jennet Preston. Preston lived across the border in Yorkshire, so she was sent for trial at York Assizes; the others were sent to Lancaster Gaol to join the four already imprisoned there. Malkin Tower is believed to have been near the village of Newchurch in Pendle, or possibly in Blacko on the site of present-day Malkin Tower Farm, and to have been demolished soon after the trials. The Pendle witches were tried in a group that also included the Samlesbury witches, Jane Southworth, Jennet Brierley, and Ellen Brierley, the charges against whom included child murder and cannibalism; Margaret PearsonMargaret Pearson was a convicted witch who escaped the death penalty because she had caused no harm to anyone., the so-called Padiham witch, who was facing her third trial for witchcraft, this time for killing a horse; and Isobel Robey from Windle, accused of using witchcraft to cause sickness. Some of the accused Pendle witches, such as Alizon Device, seem to have genuinely believed in their guilt, but others protested their innocence to the end. Jennet Preston was the first to be tried, at York Assizes. York Assizes, 27 July 1612 Jennet Preston lived in Gisburn, which was then in Yorkshire, so she was sent to York Assizes for trial. Her judges were Sir James Altham and Sir Edward Bromley. Jennet was charged with the murder by witchcraft of a local landowner, Thomas Lister of Westby Hall, to which she pleaded not guilty. She had already appeared before Bromley in 1611, accused of murdering a child by witchcraft, but had been found not guilty. The most damning evidence given against her was that when she had been taken to see Lister’s body, the corpse “bled fresh bloud presently, in the presence of all that were there present” after she touched it. According to a statement made to Nowell by James Device on 27 April, Jennet had attended the Malkin Tower meeting to seek help with Lister’s murder. She was found guilty and sentenced to death by hanging; her execution took place on 29 July on the Knavesmire, the present site of York Racecourse. All the other accused lived in Lancashire, so they were sent to Lancaster Assizes for trial, where the judges were once again Altham and Bromley. The prosecutor was local magistrate Roger Nowell, who had been responsible for collecting the various statements and confessions from the accused. Nine-year-old Jennet Device was a key witness for the prosecution, something that would not have been permitted in many other 17th-century criminal trials. However, King James had made a case for suspending the normal rules of evidence for witchcraft trials in his Daemonologie. As well as identifying those who had attended the Malkin Tower meeting, Jennet also gave evidence against her mother, brother, and sister. Nine of the accused – Alizon Device, Elizabeth Device, James Device, Anne Whittle, Anne Redferne, Alice Nutter, Katherine Hewitt, John Bulcock and Jane Bulcock – were found guilty during the two-day trial and hanged at Gallows Hill[b]Gallows Hill is on the moors close to the site of present-day Williamson Park. in Lancaster on 20 August 1612; Elizabeth Southerns died while awaiting trial. Only one of the accused, Alice Grey, was found not guilty. Anne Whittle (Chattox) was accused of the murder of Robert Nutter. She pleaded not guilty, but the confession she had made to Roger Nowell was read out in court, and evidence against her was presented by James Robinson, who had lived with the Chattox family 20 years earlier. He claimed to remember that Nutter had accused Chattox of turning his beer sour, and that she was commonly believed to be a witch. Chattox broke down and admitted her guilt, calling on God for forgiveness and the judges to be merciful to her daughter, Anne Redferne. Elizabeth Device was charged with the murders of James Robinson, John Robinson and, together with Alice Nutter and Demdike, the murder of Henry Mitton. Elizabeth Device vehemently maintained her innocence. Potts records that “this odious witch” suffered from a facial deformity resulting in her left eye being set lower than her right. The main witness against Device was her daughter, Jennet, who was about nine years old. When Jennet was brought into the courtroom and asked to stand up and give evidence against her mother, Elizabeth, confronted with her own child making accusations that would lead to her execution, began to curse and scream at her daughter, forcing the judges to have her removed from the courtroom before the evidence could be heard. Jennet was placed on a table and stated that she believed her mother had been a witch for three or four years. She also said her mother had a familiar called Ball, who appeared in the shape of a brown dog. Jennet claimed to have witnessed conversations between Ball and her mother, in which Ball had been asked to help with various murders. James Device also gave evidence against his mother, saying he had seen her making a clay figure of one of her victims, John Robinson. Elizabeth Device was found guilty. James Device pleaded not guilty to the murders by witchcraft of Anne Townley and John Duckworth. However he, like Chattox, had earlier made a confession to Nowell, which was read out in court. That, and the evidence presented against him by his sister Jennet, who said that she had seen her brother asking a black dog he had conjured up to help him kill Townley, was sufficient to persuade the jury to find him guilty. The trials of the three Samlesbury witchesThe Samlesbury witches were three women from the Lancashire village of Samlesbury – Jane Southworth, Jennet Bierley, and Ellen Bierley – accused by a 14-year-old girl, Grace Sowerbutts, of practising witchcraft. Their trial at Lancaster Assizes in England on 19 August 1612 was one in a series of witch trials held there over two days. All three women were acquitted. The Samlesbury witches were three women from the Lancashire village of Samlesbury – Jane Southworth, Jennet Bierley, and Ellen Bierley – accused by a 14-year-old girl, Grace Sowerbutts, of practising witchcraft. Their trial at Lancaster Assizes in England on 19 August 1612 was one in a series of witch trials held there over two days. All three women were acquitted. were heard before Anne Redferne’s first appearance in court, late in the afternoon, charged with the murder of Robert Nutter. The evidence against her was considered unsatisfactory, and she was acquitted. Anne Redferne was not so fortunate the following day, when she faced her second trial, for the murder of Robert Nutter’s father, Christopher, to which she pleaded not guilty. Demdike’s statement to Nowell, which accused Anne of having made clay figures of the Nutter family, was read out in court. Witnesses were called to testify that Anne was a witch “more dangerous than her Mother”. But she refused to admit her guilt to the end, and had given no evidence against any others of the accused. Anne Redferne was found guilty. Jane Bulcock and her son John Bulcock, both from Newchurch in Pendle, were accused and found guilty of the murder by witchcraft of Jennet Deane. Both denied that they had attended the meeting at Malkin Tower, but Jennet Device identified Jane as having been one of those present, and John as having turned the spit to roast the stolen sheep, the centrepiece of the Good Friday meeting at the Demdike’s home. Alice Nutter was unusual among the accused in being comparatively wealthy, the widow of a tenant yeoman farmer. She made no statement either before or during her trial, except to enter her plea of not guilty to the charge of murdering Henry Mitton by witchcraft. The prosecution alleged that she, together with Demdike and Elizabeth Device, had caused Mitton’s death after he had refused to give Demdike a penny she had begged from him. The only evidence against Alice seems to have been that James Device claimed Demdike had told him of the murder, and Jennet Device in her statement said that Alice had been present at the Malkin Tower meeting. Alice may have called in on the meeting at Malkin Tower on her way to a secret (and illegal) Good Friday Catholic service, and refused to speak for fear of incriminating her fellow Catholics. Many of the Nutter family were Catholics, and two had been executed as Jesuit priests, John Nutter in 1584 and his brother Robert in 1600. Alice Nutter was found guilty. Katherine Hewitt (a.k.a. Mould-Heeles) was charged and found guilty of the murder of Anne Foulds. She was the wife of a clothier from Colne, and had attended the meeting at Malkin Tower with Alice Grey. According to the evidence given by James Device, both Hewitt and Grey told the others at that meeting that they had killed a child from Colne, Anne Foulds. Jennet Device also picked Katherine out of a line-up, and confirmed her attendance at the Malkin Tower meeting. Alice Grey was accused with Katherine Hewitt of the murder of Anne Foulds. Potts does not provide an account of Alice Grey’s trial, simply recording her as one of the Samlesbury witches – which she was not, as she was one of those identified as having been at the Malkin Tower meeting – and naming her in the list of those found not guilty. Alizon Device, whose encounter with John Law had triggered the events leading up to the trials, was charged with causing harm by witchcraft. Uniquely among the accused, Alizon was confronted in court by her alleged victim, John Law. She seems to have genuinely believed in her own guilt; when Law was brought into court Alizon fell to her knees in tears and confessed. She was found guilty. The Wonderfull Discoverie Main article: The Wonderfull Discoverie of Witches in the Countie of LancasterThe Wonderfull Discoverie of Witches in the Countie of Lancaster is the account of a series of English witch trials that took place on 18–19 August 1612, commonly known as the Lancashire witch trials. Almost everything that is known about the trials comes from a report of the proceedings written by Thomas Potts, the clerk to the Lancaster Assizes. Potts was instructed to write his account by the trial judges, and had completed the work by 16 November 1612, when he submitted it for review. Bromley revised and corrected the manuscript before its publication in 1613, declaring it to be “truly reported” and “fit and worthie to be published”. Although written as an apparently verbatim account, The Wonderfull Discoverie of Witches in the Countie of Lancaster is not a report of what was actually said at the trial but is instead reflecting what happened. Nevertheless, Potts “seems to give a generally trustworthy, although not comprehensive, account of an Assize witchcraft trial, provided that the reader is constantly aware of his use of written material instead of verbatim reports”. The trials took place not quite seven years after the Gunpowder Plot to blow up the Houses of Parliament in an attempt to kill King James and the Protestant aristocracy had been foiled. It was alleged that the Pendle witches had hatched their own gunpowder plot to blow up Lancaster Castle, although historian Stephen Pumfrey has suggested that the “preposterous scheme” was invented by the examining magistrates and simply agreed to by James Device in his witness statement. It may therefore be significant that Potts dedicated The Wonderfull Discoverie to Thomas Knyvet and his wife Elizabeth; Knyvet was the man credited with apprehending Guy Fawkes and thus saving the King. It has been estimated that all the English witch trials between the early 15th and early 18th centuries resulted in fewer than 500 executions, so this one series of trials in July and August 1612 accounts for more than two per cent of that total. Court records show that Lancashire was unusual in the north of England for the frequency of its witch trials. Neighbouring Cheshire, for instance, also suffered from economic problems and religious activists, but there only 47 people were indicted for causing harm by witchcraft between 1589 and 1675, of whom 11 were found guilty. Pendle was part of the parish of Whalley, an area covering 180 square miles (470 km2), too large to be effective in preaching and teaching the doctrines of the Church of England: both the survival of Catholicism and the upsurge of witchcraft in Lancashire have been attributed to its over-stretched parochial structure. Until its dissolution, the spiritual needs of the people of Pendle and surrounding districts had been served by nearby Whalley Abbey, but its closure in 1537 left a moral vacuum. Many of the allegations made in the Pendle witch trials resulted from members of the Demdike and Chattox families making accusations against each other. Historian John Swain has said that the outbreaks of witchcraft in and around Pendle demonstrate the extent to which people could make a living either by posing as a witch, or by accusing or threatening to accuse others of being a witch. Although it is implicit in much of the literature on witchcraft that the accused were victims, often mentally or physically abnormal, for some at least, it may have been a trade like any other, albeit one with significant risks. There may have been bad blood between the Demdike and Chattox families because they were in competition with each other, trying to make a living from healing, begging, and extortion. The Demdikes are believed to have lived close to Newchurch in Pendle, and the Chattox family about two miles (3.2 km) away, near the village of Fence. Aftermath and legacy Altham continued with his judicial career until his death in 1617, and Bromley achieved his desired promotion to the Midlands Circuit in 1616. Potts was given the keepership of Skalme Park by James in 1615, to breed and train the king’s hounds. In 1618, he was given responsibility for “collecting the forfeitures on the laws concerning sewers, for twenty-one years”. Having played her part in the deaths of her mother, brother, and sister, Jennet Device may eventually have found herself accused of witchcraft. A woman with that name was listed in a group of 20 tried at Lancaster Assizes on 24 March 1634, although it cannot be certain that it was the same Jennet Device. The charge against her was the murder of Isabel Nutter, William Nutter’s wife. In that series of trials the chief prosecution witness was a ten-year-old boy, Edmund Robinson. All but one of the accused were found guilty, but the judges refused to pass death sentences, deciding instead to refer the case to the king, Charles I. Under cross-examination in London, Robinson admitted that he had fabricated his evidence, but even though four of the accused were eventually pardoned, they all remained incarcerated in Lancaster Gaol, where it is likely that they died. An official record dated 22 August 1636 lists Jennet Device as one of those still held in the prison. These later Lancashire witchcraft trials were the subject of a contemporary play written by Thomas Heywood and Richard Brome, The Late Lancashire Witches. In modern times the witches have become the inspiration for Pendle’s tourism and heritage industries, with local shops selling a variety of witch-motif gifts. Burnley’s Moorhouse’s produces a beer called Pendle Witches Brew, and there is a Pendle Witch Trail running from Pendle Heritage Centre to Lancaster Castle, where the accused witches were held before their trial. The X43 bus route run by Burnley Bus Company has been branded The Witch Way, with some of the vehicles operating on it named after the witches in the trial. Pendle Hill, which dominates the landscape of the area, continues to be associated with witchcraft, and hosts a hilltop gathering every Halloween. A petition was presented to UK Home Secretary Jack Straw in 1998 asking for the witches to be pardoned, but it was decided that their convictions should stand. Ten years later another petition was organised in an attempt to obtain pardons for Chattox and Demdike. It followed the Swiss government’s pardon earlier that year of Anna Göldi, beheaded in 1782, thought to be the last person in Europe to be executed as a witch. William Harrison Ainsworth, a Victorian novelist considered in his day the equal of Dickens, wrote a romanticised account of the Pendle witches published in 1849. The Lancashire Witches is the only one of his 40 novels never to have been out of print. The British writer Robert Neill dramatised the events of 1612 in his novel Mist over Pendle, first published in 1951. The writer and poet Blake Morrison treated the subject in his suite of poems Pendle Witches, published in 1996, and in 2011 poet Simon Armitage narrated a documentary on BBC Four, The Pendle Witch Child. Events to mark the 400th anniversary of the trials in 2012 included an exhibition, “A Wonderful Discoverie: Lancashire Witches 1612–2012”, at Gawthorpe Hall staged by Lancashire County Council. The Fate of Chattox, a piece by David Lloyd-Mostyn for clarinet and piano and taking its theme from the events leading to Chattox’s demise, has been featured in a BBC Radio 4 documentary. A life-size statue of Alice Nutter, by sculptor David Palmer, was unveiled in her home village, Roughlee. In August, a world record for the largest group dressed as witches was set by 482 people who walked up Pendle Hill, on which the date “1612” had been installed in 400-foot-tall numbers by artist Philippe Handford using horticultural fleece. The Bishop of Burnley, the Rt Rev John Goddard, expressed concern about marking the anniversary on the side of the hill. Publications in 2012 inspired by the trials include two novellas, The Daylight Gate by Jeanette Winterson and Malkin Child by Livi Michael. Blake Morrison published a volume of poetry on the events of 1612, which he named A Discoverie of Witches. - p. 204 - p. 5 - pp. 8–9 - pp. 3–4 - p. 23 - p. 96 - pp. 23–24 - p. 7 - pp. 1–2 - p. 67 - p. 24 - p. 12 - p. 11 - p. 1 - p. 9 - pp. 5, 19 - p. 83 - p. 11 - p. 23 - p. 10 - p. 11 - p. 80 - p. 15 - p. 15 - pp. 17–19 - p. 16 - p. 19 - p. 2 - p. 22 - p. 60 - p. 286 - p. 2 - p. 23 - p. 171 - p. 59 - p. 179 - p. 60 - p. 177 - p. 20 - p. 149 - p. 22 - p. 28 - p. 29 - p. 34 - pp. 27–28 - p. 193 - p. 55 - p. 52 - p. 29 - pp. 65, 70 - p. 27 - p. 33 - pp. 27–28 - p. 108 - p. 131 - p. 29 - p. 34 - p. 116 - p. 124 - p. 75 - p. 36 - pp. 29, 167 - p. 37 - p. 139 - p. xli - p. 48 - p. 50 - pp. 37–38 - p. 139 - p. 3 - p. 10 - pp. 88–89 - p. 85 - p. 38 - pp. 146–148 - p. 42 - p. 151 - p. 251 - p. 146 - p. 166 Notes [ + ]	7,614	ENGLISH	1
The History Cat Classroom Firing on Fort Sumter April 1861- July 1861 Hanging over the nation like a guillotine were questions such as would the Union respect the Fugitive Slave Act? Did the Confederate States have to pay back their debts? And most importantly, what would happen to federal property that was now technically on enemy soil? As soon the Confederacy was formed, they began taking over federal mints (and not the chocolate kind), arsenals, and forts that were now located on Confederate territory. The Siege of Fort Sumter "Sir, We Have the Honor to Notify You… We Will Open Fire in One Hour." Ah, the good old days…when a man would shake your hand before unloading grapeshot from a Parrott Gun into your backside. This was how Major Robert Anderson received word that his command at Fort Sumter was about to be attacked ushering in the opening salvo of the U.S. Civil War. How did a relatively small fort manned by only 127 men play such a pivotal role in the start of such a devastating conflict? Ft. Sumter was built in 1829 and followed the most modern design plan for a coastal fortification. Built so that it jutted out into Charleston Harbor, its fifty foot high five sided walls were meant to allow cannon to be brought to bear on the decks of passing enemy ships. The fort was part of a series of land-based fortifications that protected the city of Charleston, South Carolina. The five foot thick walls had three levels for cannon and could boast up to 135 pieces. These were never put in place and the entire fortress was not even completed before the first shots rang out. But this does not explain why this particular fort was so important. It had to do with location. South Carolina was one of seven states that seceded from the Union after the election of Abraham Lincoln. While James Buchanan was president he was unsure of his Constitutional role in regards to dealing with the rebellious southern states. He decided to take baby steps for fear of further antagonizing the newly established Confederacy. The wisdom of the placement of Washington D.C. probably weighed heavily on him at that point. He ordered the re-supply of Ft. Sumter when the Confederates threatened to overtake it. Major Anderson, on his own initiative, moved his men and supplies from their land base to Ft. Sumter and took stock of their supplies. The man who commanded the army in South Carolina was Brigadier General P.G.T. Beauregard a man who had just given up his position as commandant of West Point to fight for the Confederacy. Interestingly, General Beauregard had been a student in Major Anderson’s Artillery class at West Point. Spoiler Alert: Major Anderson was a good instructor. The supply ships President Buchanan sent to the fort came under fire from the shore and were forced back. By the time Abraham Lincoln took the oath of office in March the fort had only six weeks of food left. This was the first crisis of Lincoln’s presidency. Neither side wanted to be seen as starting the war but southern delegations were rebuffed by the president as he felt they had no authority. Even the treasonous, secret meetings his Secretary of State William Seward had were of no avail. Lincoln pledged to resupply the fort. Major Anderson make a public refusal to surrender his post but privately he wrote “…we shall be starved out in a few days.” The Confederates had no idea that the fort was so poorly manned and armed. Even the newly appointed Secretary of State said that attacking the fort “…will only strike a hornets nest.” But at 1 am on April 12th PGT Beauregard sent a message to the fort politely asking if the commander would, “…tell us when you will evacuate and we will abstain from firing on you.” The reply came, “We will evacuate on April 15th.” Southern hospitality notwithstanding, PGT Beauregard felt this was too late and must be a trick. When the last message was passed to Confederate officers, Major Anderson stoically added, “If we never meet in this world again, God grant that we meet in the next.” He then looked around to make certain someone wrote that bossness down. “We will open fire in…in one hour,” was the answer he received. At 4:30 am Lt. Henry Farley fired a 10” mortar (siege cannon used for indirect fire) to signal everyone on shore to open up on Fort Sumter. Forty-Three cannon from two forts and even a barge commenced firing. Major Anderson refused to order his soldiers to their posts until they had eaten breakfast. At 7 am they started counter-battery fire. The first shot was made by Abner Doubleday, the fellow erroneously credited with inventing baseball. He struck out. They all did. The Union did not have fuses for their shot. Fuses make the cannon balls explode. Without fuses you are hitting your enemy with a ball of iron instead of an explosion of pancreas splintering shrapnel. It is a bit like trying to shoot a flying bird with a rifle. If you hit it, that bird is going to die but a shotgun is so much easier. Or how about this one? It is easier to kill an enemy with a grenade that explodes than forgetting to pull the pin and just throwing it really, really hard. Major Anderson also refused to let his soldiers man the best cannon on the top of the fortress. These cannon had the best range and could shoot down on the enemy. But the soldiers would be exposed to enemy fire and the Major feared for their safety. How quaint. They were forced to use shorter range cannon and only twenty one were facing in the right direction. It didn’t really matter, they did not have enough ammunition for an extended siege. Cannon back then were loaded with a cloth sack of powder which was rammed down the barrel along with the iron shot. They ran out of cloth so the gunners began using their socks. This is the origin of baseball teams named after socks. Remember the part about Abner Doubleday? O.K. that was historically inaccurate but I will make no more baseball jokes I am totally being World Serious about it. . For a while Major Anderson’s plan seemed to work. No one had been hit yet and a naval relief expedition arrived to offer men and ammunition. They were forced back due to heavy fire and then had to wait another day due to rough seas. The Confederates changed tactics knowing that they had to deliver a killing blow before Sumter could be resupplied. They hit on the idea of “hot shot.” You take a solid iron cannon ball and heat it until it is red hot in an oven. Then you carefully put it in your cannon, light fuse and get away. This shot started the wooden buildings in Sumter on fire. By noon on April 13th the building the remaining ammunition was stored in caught fire. Soldiers bravely grabbed burning barrels of gunpowder and flung them into the sea. The current pushed then against the walls of the fortress and the Confederates had a field day acting like the guy in Doom II shooting barrels. At 1pm the flagpole in the center of the fort was shot down. There was confusion because no one yelled checkmate. A Confederate Colonel tied a white handkerchief on his sword and rowed out to Sumter. “You have defended your flag nobly” he yelled as he hiked up his pants that were just barely holding the steel testicles he must have had. The guns fell silent. No less than 3000 enemy rounds had been fired at Fort Sumter. The formal surrender was agreed to at 2:30 pm on the 13th. To assuage his guilt for losing the fort Major Anderson asked for and received permission to fire a 100 gun salute, apparently fifty guys had not yet handed over their socks. Before they got to fifty one of the guns exploded and killed two soldiers and wounded others. Ironically these were the only deaths in the entire affair. Most of the Union soldiers were allowed to return home. Fort Sumter became a symbol. For the Confederacy it showed that they could stand up to the Union, to the North it nudged them into action. The flag that flew during the battle was paraded around the north and volunteers flocked to join the war. It was said that 75,000 men tried to volunteer from Ohio alone while four southern states decided to join the Confederacy. The war was on…Or should I say, play ball? Attempts to retake Fort Sumter for pride purposes alone were ineffective until General William Tecumseh Sherman marched his troops through the south and into South Carolina. The fort fell to the Union on February 17th, 1865 with little fanfare and almost as an afterthought. Fort Sumter was again rearmed when the war with Spain heated up but by then large caliber rifled naval guns made anything but the best fortresses glorified lighthouses.	<urn:uuid:71743a8d-bf26-4221-b3ee-0e2bed0e5213>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.thehistorycat.com/fort-sumter	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251788528.85/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129041149-20200129071149-00296.warc.gz	en	0.985972	1,890	3.765625	4	[ -0.22789505124092102, 0.2763592004776001, 0.5655883550643921, -0.031069528311491013, -0.04796719551086426, -0.055605754256248474, 0.4683108925819397, 0.07699760794639587, -0.34530726075172424, 0.012671119533479214, 0.2929924726486206, -0.09739542007446289, 0.06474970281124115, 0.3983265161...	6	The History Cat Classroom Firing on Fort Sumter April 1861- July 1861 Hanging over the nation like a guillotine were questions such as would the Union respect the Fugitive Slave Act? Did the Confederate States have to pay back their debts? And most importantly, what would happen to federal property that was now technically on enemy soil? As soon the Confederacy was formed, they began taking over federal mints (and not the chocolate kind), arsenals, and forts that were now located on Confederate territory. The Siege of Fort Sumter "Sir, We Have the Honor to Notify You… We Will Open Fire in One Hour." Ah, the good old days…when a man would shake your hand before unloading grapeshot from a Parrott Gun into your backside. This was how Major Robert Anderson received word that his command at Fort Sumter was about to be attacked ushering in the opening salvo of the U.S. Civil War. How did a relatively small fort manned by only 127 men play such a pivotal role in the start of such a devastating conflict? Ft. Sumter was built in 1829 and followed the most modern design plan for a coastal fortification. Built so that it jutted out into Charleston Harbor, its fifty foot high five sided walls were meant to allow cannon to be brought to bear on the decks of passing enemy ships. The fort was part of a series of land-based fortifications that protected the city of Charleston, South Carolina. The five foot thick walls had three levels for cannon and could boast up to 135 pieces. These were never put in place and the entire fortress was not even completed before the first shots rang out. But this does not explain why this particular fort was so important. It had to do with location. South Carolina was one of seven states that seceded from the Union after the election of Abraham Lincoln. While James Buchanan was president he was unsure of his Constitutional role in regards to dealing with the rebellious southern states. He decided to take baby steps for fear of further antagonizing the newly established Confederacy. The wisdom of the placement of Washington D.C. probably weighed heavily on him at that point. He ordered the re-supply of Ft. Sumter when the Confederates threatened to overtake it. Major Anderson, on his own initiative, moved his men and supplies from their land base to Ft. Sumter and took stock of their supplies. The man who commanded the army in South Carolina was Brigadier General P.G.T. Beauregard a man who had just given up his position as commandant of West Point to fight for the Confederacy. Interestingly, General Beauregard had been a student in Major Anderson’s Artillery class at West Point. Spoiler Alert: Major Anderson was a good instructor. The supply ships President Buchanan sent to the fort came under fire from the shore and were forced back. By the time Abraham Lincoln took the oath of office in March the fort had only six weeks of food left. This was the first crisis of Lincoln’s presidency. Neither side wanted to be seen as starting the war but southern delegations were rebuffed by the president as he felt they had no authority. Even the treasonous, secret meetings his Secretary of State William Seward had were of no avail. Lincoln pledged to resupply the fort. Major Anderson make a public refusal to surrender his post but privately he wrote “…we shall be starved out in a few days.” The Confederates had no idea that the fort was so poorly manned and armed. Even the newly appointed Secretary of State said that attacking the fort “…will only strike a hornets nest.” But at 1 am on April 12th PGT Beauregard sent a message to the fort politely asking if the commander would, “…tell us when you will evacuate and we will abstain from firing on you.” The reply came, “We will evacuate on April 15th.” Southern hospitality notwithstanding, PGT Beauregard felt this was too late and must be a trick. When the last message was passed to Confederate officers, Major Anderson stoically added, “If we never meet in this world again, God grant that we meet in the next.” He then looked around to make certain someone wrote that bossness down. “We will open fire in…in one hour,” was the answer he received. At 4:30 am Lt. Henry Farley fired a 10” mortar (siege cannon used for indirect fire) to signal everyone on shore to open up on Fort Sumter. Forty-Three cannon from two forts and even a barge commenced firing. Major Anderson refused to order his soldiers to their posts until they had eaten breakfast. At 7 am they started counter-battery fire. The first shot was made by Abner Doubleday, the fellow erroneously credited with inventing baseball. He struck out. They all did. The Union did not have fuses for their shot. Fuses make the cannon balls explode. Without fuses you are hitting your enemy with a ball of iron instead of an explosion of pancreas splintering shrapnel. It is a bit like trying to shoot a flying bird with a rifle. If you hit it, that bird is going to die but a shotgun is so much easier. Or how about this one? It is easier to kill an enemy with a grenade that explodes than forgetting to pull the pin and just throwing it really, really hard. Major Anderson also refused to let his soldiers man the best cannon on the top of the fortress. These cannon had the best range and could shoot down on the enemy. But the soldiers would be exposed to enemy fire and the Major feared for their safety. How quaint. They were forced to use shorter range cannon and only twenty one were facing in the right direction. It didn’t really matter, they did not have enough ammunition for an extended siege. Cannon back then were loaded with a cloth sack of powder which was rammed down the barrel along with the iron shot. They ran out of cloth so the gunners began using their socks. This is the origin of baseball teams named after socks. Remember the part about Abner Doubleday? O.K. that was historically inaccurate but I will make no more baseball jokes I am totally being World Serious about it. . For a while Major Anderson’s plan seemed to work. No one had been hit yet and a naval relief expedition arrived to offer men and ammunition. They were forced back due to heavy fire and then had to wait another day due to rough seas. The Confederates changed tactics knowing that they had to deliver a killing blow before Sumter could be resupplied. They hit on the idea of “hot shot.” You take a solid iron cannon ball and heat it until it is red hot in an oven. Then you carefully put it in your cannon, light fuse and get away. This shot started the wooden buildings in Sumter on fire. By noon on April 13th the building the remaining ammunition was stored in caught fire. Soldiers bravely grabbed burning barrels of gunpowder and flung them into the sea. The current pushed then against the walls of the fortress and the Confederates had a field day acting like the guy in Doom II shooting barrels. At 1pm the flagpole in the center of the fort was shot down. There was confusion because no one yelled checkmate. A Confederate Colonel tied a white handkerchief on his sword and rowed out to Sumter. “You have defended your flag nobly” he yelled as he hiked up his pants that were just barely holding the steel testicles he must have had. The guns fell silent. No less than 3000 enemy rounds had been fired at Fort Sumter. The formal surrender was agreed to at 2:30 pm on the 13th. To assuage his guilt for losing the fort Major Anderson asked for and received permission to fire a 100 gun salute, apparently fifty guys had not yet handed over their socks. Before they got to fifty one of the guns exploded and killed two soldiers and wounded others. Ironically these were the only deaths in the entire affair. Most of the Union soldiers were allowed to return home. Fort Sumter became a symbol. For the Confederacy it showed that they could stand up to the Union, to the North it nudged them into action. The flag that flew during the battle was paraded around the north and volunteers flocked to join the war. It was said that 75,000 men tried to volunteer from Ohio alone while four southern states decided to join the Confederacy. The war was on…Or should I say, play ball? Attempts to retake Fort Sumter for pride purposes alone were ineffective until General William Tecumseh Sherman marched his troops through the south and into South Carolina. The fort fell to the Union on February 17th, 1865 with little fanfare and almost as an afterthought. Fort Sumter was again rearmed when the war with Spain heated up but by then large caliber rifled naval guns made anything but the best fortresses glorified lighthouses.	1,889	ENGLISH	1
Deadly Storm Changes UK Coastline The 14th of December 1287 AD We are used to great leaders, battles and inventions changing history, but in 1287 a massive storm changed not only our coastline but also by extension the nature of our economic development. The impact of the December storm was far greater in the Netherlands, where what is known as St Lucia’s Flood killed more than 50,000 and created the Zuider Zee. But in East Anglia it is thought some 500 people died in the flooding, with 180 deaths recorded at Hickling alone. Such was the power of the storm combined with what is believed to have been a tidal surge that enormous changes were wrought on the South and East Coasts of England. Dunwich in Suffolk was one of the great ports of England at this time; the storm began the inexorable silting up of the harbour, and swept many houses and other buildings away, signalling the town’s decline. The old city of Winchelsea in East Sussex stood on a great shingle bank, and it fared worse than Dunwich, destroyed by the floods, eventually to be replaced by rebuilding on the new site. Hastings lost part of its castle, the cliff on which it stood collapsing into its port thereby filling much of it in; New Romney likewise was no longer a port as vast quantities of silt, sand and mud engulfed it; and adding to the damage to trade there the town was robbed of its river, the Rother. The economic map of England was thus redrawn with the geographic. Most significantly the Cinque Ports had suffered a blow to their power and their long-term financial health. More famous dates here 11043 views since 22nd November 2010 On this day:	<urn:uuid:68914934-f71b-4966-8339-1cab3ed48b86>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.information-britain.co.uk/famdates.php?id=1205	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783342.96/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128215526-20200129005526-00537.warc.gz	en	0.982557	360	3.5625	4	[ 0.27004531025886536, -0.31852251291275024, 0.6141993403434753, -0.12588445842266083, 0.48258545994758606, 0.10856131464242935, -0.07839009165763855, -0.0889710783958435, -0.13139556348323822, -0.06488583981990814, -0.03111136332154274, -0.6138662099838257, 0.16079550981521606, -0.114208720...	1	Deadly Storm Changes UK Coastline The 14th of December 1287 AD We are used to great leaders, battles and inventions changing history, but in 1287 a massive storm changed not only our coastline but also by extension the nature of our economic development. The impact of the December storm was far greater in the Netherlands, where what is known as St Lucia’s Flood killed more than 50,000 and created the Zuider Zee. But in East Anglia it is thought some 500 people died in the flooding, with 180 deaths recorded at Hickling alone. Such was the power of the storm combined with what is believed to have been a tidal surge that enormous changes were wrought on the South and East Coasts of England. Dunwich in Suffolk was one of the great ports of England at this time; the storm began the inexorable silting up of the harbour, and swept many houses and other buildings away, signalling the town’s decline. The old city of Winchelsea in East Sussex stood on a great shingle bank, and it fared worse than Dunwich, destroyed by the floods, eventually to be replaced by rebuilding on the new site. Hastings lost part of its castle, the cliff on which it stood collapsing into its port thereby filling much of it in; New Romney likewise was no longer a port as vast quantities of silt, sand and mud engulfed it; and adding to the damage to trade there the town was robbed of its river, the Rother. The economic map of England was thus redrawn with the geographic. Most significantly the Cinque Ports had suffered a blow to their power and their long-term financial health. More famous dates here 11043 views since 22nd November 2010 On this day:	378	ENGLISH	1
Benito Mussolini was a man of many contradictions but with one driving ambition: to rule Italy and restore it to the power and splendor of the ancient Roman Empire, with himself as the new Caesar. He became the founder of the Fascist movement and dictator of all of Italy. The son of a poor blacksmith who was an ardent Socialist, Mussolini grew up in an atmosphere of political agitation. He taught school for a brief time and then became a fiery journalist, attacking the government with a violence that caused him to be imprisoned eleven times before he was thirty. He was a genuine idealist, but he was also an opportunist. Mussolini used his influence to get Italy into World War I by accepting a bribe from France, thus betraying his cause. Mussolini’s weaknesses were dramatically revealed by the fantastic blunders he committed during the war and by the swift collapse of his Fascist party under pressure. As defeat followed defeat, he was arrested but escaped to northern Italy, where he became head of a puppet government set up by Hitler. When World War II ended, he was executed. Get a FREE e-book by joining our mailing list today! Get our latest book recommendations, author news, competitions, offers, and other information right to your inbox. By clicking 'Sign me up' I confirm that I'd like to receive updates, special offers, including partner offers, and other information from Simon & Schuster Inc. and the Simon & Schuster family of companies. I understand I can change my preference through my account settings or unsubscribe directly from any marketing communications at any time. We will send you an email with instructions on how to redeem your free eBook, and associated terms.	<urn:uuid:dbd28127-5ec4-4379-97cd-6d95f755ebe6>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.simonandschuster.co.uk/books/Twentieth-Century-Caesar-Benito-Mussolini/Jules-Archer/Jules-Archer-History-for-Young-Readers/9781634501996	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251694176.67/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127020458-20200127050458-00488.warc.gz	en	0.981805	350	3.375	3	[ -0.3134230077266693, 0.6739375591278076, 0.10185915231704712, 0.06222904473543167, -0.35650673508644104, -0.08705834299325943, 0.4664226472377777, 0.17973333597183228, 0.0040567126125097275, 0.042837221175432205, 0.13970139622688293, -0.041659727692604065, 0.37015971541404724, 0.7206750512...	1	Benito Mussolini was a man of many contradictions but with one driving ambition: to rule Italy and restore it to the power and splendor of the ancient Roman Empire, with himself as the new Caesar. He became the founder of the Fascist movement and dictator of all of Italy. The son of a poor blacksmith who was an ardent Socialist, Mussolini grew up in an atmosphere of political agitation. He taught school for a brief time and then became a fiery journalist, attacking the government with a violence that caused him to be imprisoned eleven times before he was thirty. He was a genuine idealist, but he was also an opportunist. Mussolini used his influence to get Italy into World War I by accepting a bribe from France, thus betraying his cause. Mussolini’s weaknesses were dramatically revealed by the fantastic blunders he committed during the war and by the swift collapse of his Fascist party under pressure. As defeat followed defeat, he was arrested but escaped to northern Italy, where he became head of a puppet government set up by Hitler. When World War II ended, he was executed. Get a FREE e-book by joining our mailing list today! Get our latest book recommendations, author news, competitions, offers, and other information right to your inbox. By clicking 'Sign me up' I confirm that I'd like to receive updates, special offers, including partner offers, and other information from Simon & Schuster Inc. and the Simon & Schuster family of companies. I understand I can change my preference through my account settings or unsubscribe directly from any marketing communications at any time. We will send you an email with instructions on how to redeem your free eBook, and associated terms.	343	ENGLISH	1
(Last Updated on : 20/03/2014) The Muslim conquest of Deccan region by Ala ud-Din Khilji led to a gradual differentiation between north and south Indian music is noticed. Although orthodox Islam frowned upon music, the acceptance of the Sufi doctrines (in which music was often an integral part) by Islam made it possible for many Muslim rulers and noblemen to extend their patronage to this art. History evidences that musicians from Iran, Afghanistan, and Kashmir were at the courts of the Mughal Emperors Akbar , and Shah Jahan in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. It is quite evident that it was Indian music which captured the imagination of the Muslim rulers. Famous Indian musicians such as Svami Haridas, Tansen, and Baiju Bavra have left their impress on the history of north Indian music as performers and innovators. Muslim musicians took to the performance of Indian music and added to the repertoire by inventing new ragas, taals, and musical forms, as well as musical instruments. This Muslim influence was largely effective in the north of India and undoubtedly helped to further the differentiation between north and south Indian music, the two classical systems which are now generally referred to as Hindustani and Karnatak (Carnatic) music, respectively. The Muslim patronage of music has had two main effects on the music of north India. The first was to de-emphasize the importance of the words of classical songs, which were originally composed in Sanskrit. Sanskrit songs were gradually replaced by compositions in various dialects such as Bhojpuri and Dakhani. There were also compositions in Urdu and Persian, some of which can still be heard. The textual themes of the songs were often based on Hindu mythology and yet Muslim musicians sang these songs and the songs were well accepted by the listeners and singers as well. On the reverse side of it, the Hindu musicians sometimes sang songs dedicated to Muslim saints. The best example of this attitude is to be seen in the poetry of the Muslim ruler Ibrahim Adil Shah II of the Deccan, who, in his Kitah-i-Nauras, composed at the beginning of the seventeenth century, wrote poems in praise of both Hindu deities and Muslim saints. These poems were sung in specified ragas by both Hindu and Muslim musicians. The second effect of court patronage on Indian music was to produce an atmosphere of competition between musicians, which placed no little emphasis on display of virtuosity and technique. A great deal of importance was also placed on the creative imagination of the performing musician and gradually the emphasis shifted from what he was performing to how he was performing it. Traditional themes remain the basis of Indian music, but, in north India particularly, it is the performers interpretation, imagination, and skill in rendering these that provide the main substance of modern Indian music. Beginning about the sixteenth century, a direct connection between the textual literature and modern performance practice was seen. An important feature of most of these texts is that a new system of classifying ragas in terms of scales was introduced. These scales are called mela in south India and that in north India. The north Indian music was evolving through its contact with the Muslims and the north Indian musicians were little influenced by the musical literature written in Sanskrit because many of them were Muslim and had no background in the language. In addition, most Hindu musicians were unable to understand Sanskrit, which had become a scholarly language in north India. South India had, however, become the centre of Hindu learning, and Sanskrit literature continued to play an important part in the development of its music. Thus north Indian music seems to have developed, for the most part, quite intuitionally during this period, and it is only in this century that musical theory has once again begun to come to grips with performance practice and to influence its development. There are about ten more scales used in north Indian music. In north Indian music, the beginnings of a different method of raga classification are observed. There a number of ragas are given generic names, such as Kalyan, Malhar, and Kanhara, with specific names used to distinguish the various ragas within the same genus.	<urn:uuid:8763d65f-e35f-447b-9f9b-8417bb8d11bd>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.indianetzone.com/42/north_indian_classical_music.htm	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594209.12/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119035851-20200119063851-00006.warc.gz	en	0.983547	860	3.703125	4	[ 0.05057176575064659, 0.19510982930660248, 0.05620065703988075, -0.40334266424179077, -0.2864469289779663, 0.11502772569656372, 0.21363383531570435, -0.13018688559532166, 0.25175267457962036, -0.27323001623153687, -0.043507784605026245, 0.1395224928855896, 0.3263963460922241, 0.050358712673...	1	(Last Updated on : 20/03/2014) The Muslim conquest of Deccan region by Ala ud-Din Khilji led to a gradual differentiation between north and south Indian music is noticed. Although orthodox Islam frowned upon music, the acceptance of the Sufi doctrines (in which music was often an integral part) by Islam made it possible for many Muslim rulers and noblemen to extend their patronage to this art. History evidences that musicians from Iran, Afghanistan, and Kashmir were at the courts of the Mughal Emperors Akbar , and Shah Jahan in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. It is quite evident that it was Indian music which captured the imagination of the Muslim rulers. Famous Indian musicians such as Svami Haridas, Tansen, and Baiju Bavra have left their impress on the history of north Indian music as performers and innovators. Muslim musicians took to the performance of Indian music and added to the repertoire by inventing new ragas, taals, and musical forms, as well as musical instruments. This Muslim influence was largely effective in the north of India and undoubtedly helped to further the differentiation between north and south Indian music, the two classical systems which are now generally referred to as Hindustani and Karnatak (Carnatic) music, respectively. The Muslim patronage of music has had two main effects on the music of north India. The first was to de-emphasize the importance of the words of classical songs, which were originally composed in Sanskrit. Sanskrit songs were gradually replaced by compositions in various dialects such as Bhojpuri and Dakhani. There were also compositions in Urdu and Persian, some of which can still be heard. The textual themes of the songs were often based on Hindu mythology and yet Muslim musicians sang these songs and the songs were well accepted by the listeners and singers as well. On the reverse side of it, the Hindu musicians sometimes sang songs dedicated to Muslim saints. The best example of this attitude is to be seen in the poetry of the Muslim ruler Ibrahim Adil Shah II of the Deccan, who, in his Kitah-i-Nauras, composed at the beginning of the seventeenth century, wrote poems in praise of both Hindu deities and Muslim saints. These poems were sung in specified ragas by both Hindu and Muslim musicians. The second effect of court patronage on Indian music was to produce an atmosphere of competition between musicians, which placed no little emphasis on display of virtuosity and technique. A great deal of importance was also placed on the creative imagination of the performing musician and gradually the emphasis shifted from what he was performing to how he was performing it. Traditional themes remain the basis of Indian music, but, in north India particularly, it is the performers interpretation, imagination, and skill in rendering these that provide the main substance of modern Indian music. Beginning about the sixteenth century, a direct connection between the textual literature and modern performance practice was seen. An important feature of most of these texts is that a new system of classifying ragas in terms of scales was introduced. These scales are called mela in south India and that in north India. The north Indian music was evolving through its contact with the Muslims and the north Indian musicians were little influenced by the musical literature written in Sanskrit because many of them were Muslim and had no background in the language. In addition, most Hindu musicians were unable to understand Sanskrit, which had become a scholarly language in north India. South India had, however, become the centre of Hindu learning, and Sanskrit literature continued to play an important part in the development of its music. Thus north Indian music seems to have developed, for the most part, quite intuitionally during this period, and it is only in this century that musical theory has once again begun to come to grips with performance practice and to influence its development. There are about ten more scales used in north Indian music. In north Indian music, the beginnings of a different method of raga classification are observed. There a number of ragas are given generic names, such as Kalyan, Malhar, and Kanhara, with specific names used to distinguish the various ragas within the same genus.	865	ENGLISH	1
Gandhi Journal Article-II (February 2016) Gandhi, Parchure and Stigma of leprosy By Pragji Dosa During his Satyagraha campaign in South Africa, Gandhiji was addressing a gathering at Natal on the occasion of the founding of the Indian Congress. He noticed a few people standing at a distance under a tree listening to him intently. In spite of his beckoning them to come forward and join the crowd, they did not come. So Gandhi decided to go to them. As he started walking towards them, one of them cried out, “Gandhibhai, do not come near us, we are lepers.” Even after hearing this, Gandhi went to meet them. Some of them had lost their fingers, some their toes, some had no hair left of their heads. Gandhi asked them about the treatment they were receiving for their ailments. Their answer shocked Gandhi. They said, “No doctor was willing to treat us, we treat ourselves with the juice of bitter neem.” When asked if that was helping, they replied in the negative and said they were dying a slow death. READ FULL ARTICLE	<urn:uuid:c9ff390b-6949-498b-b437-d09a69ec4e9a>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.gandhitopia.org/profiles/blogs/gandhi-journal-article-ii-february-2016-gandhi-parchure-and	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251672537.90/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125131641-20200125160641-00118.warc.gz	en	0.991368	246	3.265625	3	[ -0.04771474003791809, 0.7847212553024292, -0.04388156905770302, -0.05338127911090851, -0.12070691585540771, -0.1361914724111557, 0.8732321858406067, 0.12858140468597412, 0.12505309283733368, 0.027710484340786934, 0.5141647458076477, -0.1632571965456009, 0.2854622006416321, 0.40119677782058...	1	Gandhi Journal Article-II (February 2016) Gandhi, Parchure and Stigma of leprosy By Pragji Dosa During his Satyagraha campaign in South Africa, Gandhiji was addressing a gathering at Natal on the occasion of the founding of the Indian Congress. He noticed a few people standing at a distance under a tree listening to him intently. In spite of his beckoning them to come forward and join the crowd, they did not come. So Gandhi decided to go to them. As he started walking towards them, one of them cried out, “Gandhibhai, do not come near us, we are lepers.” Even after hearing this, Gandhi went to meet them. Some of them had lost their fingers, some their toes, some had no hair left of their heads. Gandhi asked them about the treatment they were receiving for their ailments. Their answer shocked Gandhi. They said, “No doctor was willing to treat us, we treat ourselves with the juice of bitter neem.” When asked if that was helping, they replied in the negative and said they were dying a slow death. READ FULL ARTICLE	240	ENGLISH	1
Brighton, Lewes and Hastings Railway The Brighton, Lewes and Hastings Railway was an early railway in southern England running between the three East Sussex towns mentioned in its name. The company existed from February 1844 but only operated trains for a few weeks during June and July 1846 before it was amalgamated with other companies to form the London Brighton and South Coast Railway (LB&SCR) on 27 July 1846. The 1837 Act of Parliament establishing the London and Brighton Railway (LBR), authorised the construction of branch lines to Shoreham and to Newhaven (East Sussex), but only the first of these was built. A new company was created in 1844 to build the second such a line, with an extension to join the South Eastern Railway at Hastings, which would be operated by the LBR. The new company received Parliamentary approval on 29 July 1844, with permission for the directors to sell their concern to the LBR. The sale took place in 1845, although the company continued as a separate entity. Construction and openingEdit The line involved constructing the London Road viaduct at Brighton, together with a long bank and tunnel at Falmer. The engineer was John Urpeth Rastrick. Construction started in September 1844 and the section between Brighton and Lewes was opened on 8 June 1846. The company ceased to exist when it was merged with others to form the London Brighton and South Coast Railway the following month. Further work on the line was completed by the LB&SCR.	<urn:uuid:b94c4266-2327-4cde-be51-4a49fced5419>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brighton_Lewes_and_Hastings_Railway	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250603761.28/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121103642-20200121132642-00291.warc.gz	en	0.984914	311	3.296875	3	[ -0.0812527984380722, -0.004824317060410976, 0.35608547925949097, -0.3459298312664032, -0.10847309976816177, 0.22195424139499664, -0.6758429408073425, -0.23217499256134033, -0.11870381981134415, -0.18968290090560913, 0.11857014149427414, -0.4671590328216553, 0.03480686619877815, 0.065125375...	1	Brighton, Lewes and Hastings Railway The Brighton, Lewes and Hastings Railway was an early railway in southern England running between the three East Sussex towns mentioned in its name. The company existed from February 1844 but only operated trains for a few weeks during June and July 1846 before it was amalgamated with other companies to form the London Brighton and South Coast Railway (LB&SCR) on 27 July 1846. The 1837 Act of Parliament establishing the London and Brighton Railway (LBR), authorised the construction of branch lines to Shoreham and to Newhaven (East Sussex), but only the first of these was built. A new company was created in 1844 to build the second such a line, with an extension to join the South Eastern Railway at Hastings, which would be operated by the LBR. The new company received Parliamentary approval on 29 July 1844, with permission for the directors to sell their concern to the LBR. The sale took place in 1845, although the company continued as a separate entity. Construction and openingEdit The line involved constructing the London Road viaduct at Brighton, together with a long bank and tunnel at Falmer. The engineer was John Urpeth Rastrick. Construction started in September 1844 and the section between Brighton and Lewes was opened on 8 June 1846. The company ceased to exist when it was merged with others to form the London Brighton and South Coast Railway the following month. Further work on the line was completed by the LB&SCR.	339	ENGLISH	1
For a parent the thought of telling your children that you and their other parent are separating is incredibly hard to imagine not alone do. It is however crucially important that parents talk with their children as soon as possible once a decision to separate has been made. Very young children from two years of age need parents to sit with them and help them to understand that the family form is about to change. They need support and to be told how much they are loved. and will try to ensure moving forward that they will remain central to every decision their parents make. Telling children 2-4 years old If you have decided to separate and you are still in the same home but living separately or one parent is about to move out it is time to tell your child. Children are very observant and as much as you might think they do not notice that things have changed, they do. Children will be the first to notice and feel that something is different and they need your support to understand what this change is so they are not left feeling worried, anxious, scared and upset trying to figure out a feeling or a sense they have that is beyond their capacity to understand in so many ways. Here are some helpful tips: - Sit with them as you play dolls or imaginative play and create two houses, two tents to play in. Introduce the concept of Mummy in one house and Daddy in the other house and then play a game of the child coming to spend time in each house. Help them to build the tent, what it looks like, what they would have in each tent to make it nice and safe, and a place they would like to be. What would Mummy need in her tent and Daddy in his tent? When the tents are built, talk with your child about what it would be like if there really were two tents, like two houses and that one parent was going to live in a new house, just like the tent and it would be safe and secure and the child would be part of that new house/tent. Hear what your child has to say. Gently explore what they come up with. - Children will have many practical concerns at this age about living in two homes around toys, belongings etc. Remember children at this age are still very egocentric and life is all about them and their needs. Talk with them gently about how you might be able to meet those concerns for them. - Allow the conversation to continue by using story books and art work. Draw images of family and home as you know it now and then again introduce two homes and what would they look like. - Tell your child clearly that Mummy and Daddy are going to live in two separate houses and build on this depending on how much capacity your child has to understand. Start with the truth and go from there. Helping your child have the space to explore the practical change that separation would bring is key at this age. The conversation will need to go on after it is initiated and the children encouraged to play the game over and over so they can process how this might all work for them. Playing this game with your young child will help you as a parent to understand what their needs are, what they are worried about and what you as their parent need to do in order to support them through this major family life change. Telling your children aged 5- 9 years old Children of this age are a little wiser to the world. They are in school and they understand more clearly that children all have parents or carers. They will at this stage have a long enough history of living with both of their parents to really value what that offers to them. Children of this age notice everything and are sensitive to change. In their own lives they are managing so much in school as they engage with the community there, with extracurricular activities and the larger community. Introducing a family change can be very hard for them as they feel it emotionally more so than their younger counter parts as they are starting to understand emotions and how they feel and they can in many ways express it more clearly to us as parents. Some helpful tips: - At this age group it is best for both parents to sit the children down together and tell them, for example, ‘Mummy and Daddy no longer want to live in the same house. You may have noticed we fight more than we should and we don’t think this is the best way for our family to be. We have decided that we are going to have two homes and live separately where you will live with us.’ It is really important to be clear with the children, do not leave them confused in the message you give to them. - Be very clear and direct with this age group, do not tell them false truths and do not blame one parent for the separation. Children love parents equally regardless of what either of you might do, they are loyal to both parents, so do not ask them to take sides, as in the long run you will create emotional turmoil for them. The issues of why the separation happened are for you as parents to figure out; it is your intimate relationship. What is necessary is that you accept that you are both parents of your young children and you are both going to move forward allowing each other to take a very active role in parenting and continuing to parent your child. - Allow your child to ask you questions. They may be shocked, as much as you might think they noticed something was changing, they will still be saddened to hear you say the change is going to actually happen. - Talk with your child about how two homes is going to happen. Do not allow them to witness a situation where one parent packs and says goodbye, this is heartbreaking for children to see a parent walk out the door, the sense of abandonment and hurt can be felt for many years. - Plan with your child, as much as you may not want to, around the next steps. Allow them be involved in making the changes as this will support them to understand it more clearly. By understanding what is happening they will develop the language to talk about it with you and with others. - Support children to know the separation is not a secret. They can tell their close friends if they wish to and talk to relatives about it. As parents it is really important to tell the school. Schools will notice a change in your child and they need to understand the background. This will also allow the school to be more sensitive to the issue in class work and activities. - Create plenty of opportunity for your child to talk about what is happening. Do not try to justify the changes or fix them. Just listen and tell your children you are happy they can talk about what worries them with you. As two parents separating you need to take this on board when arranging a shared parenting agreement, keeping your child central to the decisions you make going forward. - On the day you share this news with your child, try to ensure both parents can be around for them for the remainder of the day. Do something nurturing with them, reading a story, bath time, art work. Allow them time to go away and play and to find you again for more questions or a cuddle. Children will need a lot of reassurance that both parents still love them and will be there for them. Children aged 10- 14 years Children of this age can be very mature and portray an image that they can cope with a lot more than their age would suggest. However when it comes to matters of the heart, they are still children and will need a lot of support to understand and cope with family separation. At this age children are at a critical stage of change in their own development so adding a family change can bring great turmoil for them. This age group are very concerned with what others think and know about them. They will fear bullying, whispering and others talking about their family. Children of this age could be acutely aware that the parental relationship was not working well, that there was conflict or unhappiness; however they may also have no other experience of family life so accept this is family life. They may be relieved that the conflict will end with the separation if the parents can manage to agree how to share parenting and move forward, unfortunately many parents do not stop the conflict at separation. Children can become very confused as to the benefit of the separation for anyone. Some helpful tips: - Both parents sit down with your children and tell them very clearly that you have decided to separate and will no longer continue to live in the same home. Children may walk away when you tell them this, overwhelmed with emotion and unable to talk or ask questions. It is important for parents to be available to them for the remainder of the day. - Allow your children to ask questions, many will be about their own needs and just hear this. Children will worry about change and who will notice the change. They will usually be well connected into the greater community at this age so will worry about getting to activities and the costs involved. They will worry about where everyone will live and how big the changes are going to be. - At this stage it is important as two parents to reassure your children you are going to work with each other to find the best solutions to all of these worries as you both love your children and want the best for them. Try not to make promises at this time until you have both talked and agreed what the plan will be. - Children of this age will want to have a clear voice in what happens after separation and it is vitally important to listen to this. If a partner is not a good partner they may be the best parent and remember your child only has two parents and loves you both equally. They do not need to know what happened or be involved in the intimacy of what happened in the relationship. The relationship they have with you as their parent is very separate to the one you have with their other parent. Children will however want to know their can be agreements reached and harmony. - Plan with your children how the two homes will be created and how and when one parent will leave. Children will remember this event for life so try to ensure you are not adding to the grief they will feel by the way you carry this out. As much as you may resent the other parent, remember if you have decided to separate it is now about the business of sharing parenting and putting the children first. For all parents regardless of child’s age: - Always be honest with children in an age appropriate way. Build on the truth. - Children are only interested in your relationship with them and how the separation will impact that. - Do not tell children one parent is to blame for the separation. Two people form a relationship and at the time of separation a lot of support may be required by both parents to help them explore and understand what went wrong in their relationship. Children cannot be caught in the middle of this. - Stop the conflict. If conflict formed a serious part of life leading up to the separation you need to seek professional support around how to learn to communicate more effectively with each other. Children do not suffer negatively because of family separation but they do with prolonged chronic parental conflict. - Ensure there is no gap in your child seeing the other parent, the parent who leaves the family home. Children need constant reassurance at this stage that both parents are there for them and they need to see each parent to know they are okay. - Look after yourself as you will need a vast amount of energy moving forward to build a positive parenting relationship with the other parent that will support your children moving forward positively. - Be open to creating a shared parenting plan that works for your children. Try not to listen to what others have done or what you think the norm is. Every family is unique and therefore the shared parenting plan should be unique to your family, ensuring your child’s needs are met within it. All plans will need to be adjusted over time as children grow and life changes and this should be expected and supported. The article was writing by our Director of Parenting Services Geraldine Kelly. If you need support on separation, parenting through separation and sharing parenting contact One Family parenting supports at 01-662 9212 or email: firstname.lastname@example.org For confidential information and listening support call the askonefamily helpline on lo-call: 1890 662 212	<urn:uuid:12e8a089-53e2-4118-8175-863f2945701a>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://onefamily.ie/category/parenting/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250595787.7/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119234426-20200120022426-00441.warc.gz	en	0.980463	2,527	3.640625	4	[ 0.21707838773727417, -0.10108408331871033, 0.15872722864151, -0.3330730199813843, -0.015293056145310402, 0.44162219762802124, 0.10503537952899933, -0.3340318202972412, -0.013863054104149342, -0.015187825076282024, 0.06169313192367554, 0.06740979105234146, -0.1893511414527893, 0.37433201074...	9	For a parent the thought of telling your children that you and their other parent are separating is incredibly hard to imagine not alone do. It is however crucially important that parents talk with their children as soon as possible once a decision to separate has been made. Very young children from two years of age need parents to sit with them and help them to understand that the family form is about to change. They need support and to be told how much they are loved. and will try to ensure moving forward that they will remain central to every decision their parents make. Telling children 2-4 years old If you have decided to separate and you are still in the same home but living separately or one parent is about to move out it is time to tell your child. Children are very observant and as much as you might think they do not notice that things have changed, they do. Children will be the first to notice and feel that something is different and they need your support to understand what this change is so they are not left feeling worried, anxious, scared and upset trying to figure out a feeling or a sense they have that is beyond their capacity to understand in so many ways. Here are some helpful tips: - Sit with them as you play dolls or imaginative play and create two houses, two tents to play in. Introduce the concept of Mummy in one house and Daddy in the other house and then play a game of the child coming to spend time in each house. Help them to build the tent, what it looks like, what they would have in each tent to make it nice and safe, and a place they would like to be. What would Mummy need in her tent and Daddy in his tent? When the tents are built, talk with your child about what it would be like if there really were two tents, like two houses and that one parent was going to live in a new house, just like the tent and it would be safe and secure and the child would be part of that new house/tent. Hear what your child has to say. Gently explore what they come up with. - Children will have many practical concerns at this age about living in two homes around toys, belongings etc. Remember children at this age are still very egocentric and life is all about them and their needs. Talk with them gently about how you might be able to meet those concerns for them. - Allow the conversation to continue by using story books and art work. Draw images of family and home as you know it now and then again introduce two homes and what would they look like. - Tell your child clearly that Mummy and Daddy are going to live in two separate houses and build on this depending on how much capacity your child has to understand. Start with the truth and go from there. Helping your child have the space to explore the practical change that separation would bring is key at this age. The conversation will need to go on after it is initiated and the children encouraged to play the game over and over so they can process how this might all work for them. Playing this game with your young child will help you as a parent to understand what their needs are, what they are worried about and what you as their parent need to do in order to support them through this major family life change. Telling your children aged 5- 9 years old Children of this age are a little wiser to the world. They are in school and they understand more clearly that children all have parents or carers. They will at this stage have a long enough history of living with both of their parents to really value what that offers to them. Children of this age notice everything and are sensitive to change. In their own lives they are managing so much in school as they engage with the community there, with extracurricular activities and the larger community. Introducing a family change can be very hard for them as they feel it emotionally more so than their younger counter parts as they are starting to understand emotions and how they feel and they can in many ways express it more clearly to us as parents. Some helpful tips: - At this age group it is best for both parents to sit the children down together and tell them, for example, ‘Mummy and Daddy no longer want to live in the same house. You may have noticed we fight more than we should and we don’t think this is the best way for our family to be. We have decided that we are going to have two homes and live separately where you will live with us.’ It is really important to be clear with the children, do not leave them confused in the message you give to them. - Be very clear and direct with this age group, do not tell them false truths and do not blame one parent for the separation. Children love parents equally regardless of what either of you might do, they are loyal to both parents, so do not ask them to take sides, as in the long run you will create emotional turmoil for them. The issues of why the separation happened are for you as parents to figure out; it is your intimate relationship. What is necessary is that you accept that you are both parents of your young children and you are both going to move forward allowing each other to take a very active role in parenting and continuing to parent your child. - Allow your child to ask you questions. They may be shocked, as much as you might think they noticed something was changing, they will still be saddened to hear you say the change is going to actually happen. - Talk with your child about how two homes is going to happen. Do not allow them to witness a situation where one parent packs and says goodbye, this is heartbreaking for children to see a parent walk out the door, the sense of abandonment and hurt can be felt for many years. - Plan with your child, as much as you may not want to, around the next steps. Allow them be involved in making the changes as this will support them to understand it more clearly. By understanding what is happening they will develop the language to talk about it with you and with others. - Support children to know the separation is not a secret. They can tell their close friends if they wish to and talk to relatives about it. As parents it is really important to tell the school. Schools will notice a change in your child and they need to understand the background. This will also allow the school to be more sensitive to the issue in class work and activities. - Create plenty of opportunity for your child to talk about what is happening. Do not try to justify the changes or fix them. Just listen and tell your children you are happy they can talk about what worries them with you. As two parents separating you need to take this on board when arranging a shared parenting agreement, keeping your child central to the decisions you make going forward. - On the day you share this news with your child, try to ensure both parents can be around for them for the remainder of the day. Do something nurturing with them, reading a story, bath time, art work. Allow them time to go away and play and to find you again for more questions or a cuddle. Children will need a lot of reassurance that both parents still love them and will be there for them. Children aged 10- 14 years Children of this age can be very mature and portray an image that they can cope with a lot more than their age would suggest. However when it comes to matters of the heart, they are still children and will need a lot of support to understand and cope with family separation. At this age children are at a critical stage of change in their own development so adding a family change can bring great turmoil for them. This age group are very concerned with what others think and know about them. They will fear bullying, whispering and others talking about their family. Children of this age could be acutely aware that the parental relationship was not working well, that there was conflict or unhappiness; however they may also have no other experience of family life so accept this is family life. They may be relieved that the conflict will end with the separation if the parents can manage to agree how to share parenting and move forward, unfortunately many parents do not stop the conflict at separation. Children can become very confused as to the benefit of the separation for anyone. Some helpful tips: - Both parents sit down with your children and tell them very clearly that you have decided to separate and will no longer continue to live in the same home. Children may walk away when you tell them this, overwhelmed with emotion and unable to talk or ask questions. It is important for parents to be available to them for the remainder of the day. - Allow your children to ask questions, many will be about their own needs and just hear this. Children will worry about change and who will notice the change. They will usually be well connected into the greater community at this age so will worry about getting to activities and the costs involved. They will worry about where everyone will live and how big the changes are going to be. - At this stage it is important as two parents to reassure your children you are going to work with each other to find the best solutions to all of these worries as you both love your children and want the best for them. Try not to make promises at this time until you have both talked and agreed what the plan will be. - Children of this age will want to have a clear voice in what happens after separation and it is vitally important to listen to this. If a partner is not a good partner they may be the best parent and remember your child only has two parents and loves you both equally. They do not need to know what happened or be involved in the intimacy of what happened in the relationship. The relationship they have with you as their parent is very separate to the one you have with their other parent. Children will however want to know their can be agreements reached and harmony. - Plan with your children how the two homes will be created and how and when one parent will leave. Children will remember this event for life so try to ensure you are not adding to the grief they will feel by the way you carry this out. As much as you may resent the other parent, remember if you have decided to separate it is now about the business of sharing parenting and putting the children first. For all parents regardless of child’s age: - Always be honest with children in an age appropriate way. Build on the truth. - Children are only interested in your relationship with them and how the separation will impact that. - Do not tell children one parent is to blame for the separation. Two people form a relationship and at the time of separation a lot of support may be required by both parents to help them explore and understand what went wrong in their relationship. Children cannot be caught in the middle of this. - Stop the conflict. If conflict formed a serious part of life leading up to the separation you need to seek professional support around how to learn to communicate more effectively with each other. Children do not suffer negatively because of family separation but they do with prolonged chronic parental conflict. - Ensure there is no gap in your child seeing the other parent, the parent who leaves the family home. Children need constant reassurance at this stage that both parents are there for them and they need to see each parent to know they are okay. - Look after yourself as you will need a vast amount of energy moving forward to build a positive parenting relationship with the other parent that will support your children moving forward positively. - Be open to creating a shared parenting plan that works for your children. Try not to listen to what others have done or what you think the norm is. Every family is unique and therefore the shared parenting plan should be unique to your family, ensuring your child’s needs are met within it. All plans will need to be adjusted over time as children grow and life changes and this should be expected and supported. The article was writing by our Director of Parenting Services Geraldine Kelly. If you need support on separation, parenting through separation and sharing parenting contact One Family parenting supports at 01-662 9212 or email: firstname.lastname@example.org For confidential information and listening support call the askonefamily helpline on lo-call: 1890 662 212	2,505	ENGLISH	1
How Smooth Must Be The Language Of The Whites – Black Hawk, Sauk Leader How smooth must be the language of the whites, when they can make right look like wrong, and wrong like right. – Black Hawk, Sauk Black Hawk, born Ma-ka-tai-me-she-kia-kiak, (1767 – October 3, 1838) was a band leader and warrior of the Sauk American Indian tribe in what is now the Midwest of the United States. Although he had inherited an important historic sacred bundle from his father, he was not a hereditary civil chief. Black Hawk earned his status as a war chief or captain by his actions: leading raiding and war parties as a young man, and a band of Sauk warriors during the Black Hawk War of 1832. During the War of 1812, Black Hawk had fought on the side of the British against the U.S., hoping to push white American settlers away from Sauk territory. Later he led a band of Sauk and Fox warriors, known as the British Band, against European-American settlers in Illinois and present-day Wisconsin in the 1832 Black Hawk War. After the war, he was captured by U.S. forces and taken to the eastern U.S. He and other war leaders were taken on a tour of several cities. Shortly before being released from custody, Black Hawk told his story to an interpreter; aided also by a newspaper reporter, he published Autobiography of Ma-Ka-Tai-Me-She-Kia-Kiak, or Black Hawk, Embracing the Traditions of his Nation… in 1833 in Cincinnati, Ohio. The first Native American autobiography to be published in the U.S., his book became an immediate bestseller and has gone through several editions. Black Hawk died in 1838 (at age 70 or 71) in what is now southeastern Iowa. He has been honored by an enduring legacy: his book, many eponyms, and other tributes. Important Quotes by Black Hawk HERE	<urn:uuid:0cc8d7d9-1119-4f88-81b7-e219638de559>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://bluefeatherspirit.wordpress.com/2019/08/14/how-smooth-must-be-the-language-of-the-whites-black-hawk-sauk-leader/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250589560.16/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117123339-20200117151339-00422.warc.gz	en	0.984868	420	3.359375	3	[ -0.002954415511339903, 0.34017425775527954, -0.4749267101287842, -0.06185983121395111, -0.7881710529327393, 0.011468319222331047, 0.22806710004806519, -0.04681828245520592, -0.275265097618103, -0.1144629716873169, -0.06957609951496124, -0.43266966938972473, -0.1121162623167038, 0.179946988...	3	How Smooth Must Be The Language Of The Whites – Black Hawk, Sauk Leader How smooth must be the language of the whites, when they can make right look like wrong, and wrong like right. – Black Hawk, Sauk Black Hawk, born Ma-ka-tai-me-she-kia-kiak, (1767 – October 3, 1838) was a band leader and warrior of the Sauk American Indian tribe in what is now the Midwest of the United States. Although he had inherited an important historic sacred bundle from his father, he was not a hereditary civil chief. Black Hawk earned his status as a war chief or captain by his actions: leading raiding and war parties as a young man, and a band of Sauk warriors during the Black Hawk War of 1832. During the War of 1812, Black Hawk had fought on the side of the British against the U.S., hoping to push white American settlers away from Sauk territory. Later he led a band of Sauk and Fox warriors, known as the British Band, against European-American settlers in Illinois and present-day Wisconsin in the 1832 Black Hawk War. After the war, he was captured by U.S. forces and taken to the eastern U.S. He and other war leaders were taken on a tour of several cities. Shortly before being released from custody, Black Hawk told his story to an interpreter; aided also by a newspaper reporter, he published Autobiography of Ma-Ka-Tai-Me-She-Kia-Kiak, or Black Hawk, Embracing the Traditions of his Nation… in 1833 in Cincinnati, Ohio. The first Native American autobiography to be published in the U.S., his book became an immediate bestseller and has gone through several editions. Black Hawk died in 1838 (at age 70 or 71) in what is now southeastern Iowa. He has been honored by an enduring legacy: his book, many eponyms, and other tributes. Important Quotes by Black Hawk HERE	434	ENGLISH	1
Germany, until the late 19th century, was little more than a loose union of fragmented states. Dominating these states was Austria, the Hapsburg largest stronghold. Unfortunately for Austria, its involvement in the Crimean War forced it out of the major spotlight in European power politics, making it a minor presence in the continent. This left a power vacuum in Germany which was quickly filled by Prussia, a military state with a history of strong rulers. Essay Example on Bismarck Unites Germany However, Prussia realized Germany’s vulnerability, seeing how its loose union and its central geographical spot in the continent made it vulnerable to attack from strong neighbors like France and Russia. So, Prussia set out to unify Germany to form one large, stronger state. However, this unification could not have been possible without Otto von Bismarck, a Prussian noble who had risen through the ranks to become a major political fugue and the driving force behind German unification. The question is begged, however: how did Bismarck do it? How did he rise to power and unite these fragmented pieces into one union? Well, for one, Bismarck had connections. A noble by birth, Bismarck had high social standing, but no governmental or military background that would facilitate a career in politics. Nonetheless, he befriended two military generals by the names of Helmut von Molted and Albrecht von Iron. Molted and Iron, both cunning military minds and dedicated ideologues, rose up the Prussian power ladder. In 1859, Iron was appointed minister of war, allowing him a direct link to the king. A strong believer in Bismarck potential, Iron lobbied the king to appoint Bismarck to a high post. It was a success, and in September 1862, Bismarck was appointed minister- president. Now that Bismarck had reached high office, It was up to him to use his power wisely. This is where Bismarck political cunning comes Into play. Soon after receiving his position, Bismarck began winning the king over. Within a short while, Bismarck had maneuvered himself to basically be the ruler of Prussia, making his wan decisions and not fearing reprimand from the king, as he had become but a figurehead ruler. Thus, by his own force of will, Bismarck, now In control of the most powerful state In Germany, had the ability to force all others to fall In line and support unification. In all, Bismarck was able to complete unification by a combination of making powerful friends and maneuvering himself Into the power seat In Prussian, and by extension German, politics. How did Bismarck Unite Germany? By incremental 2 fragmented states. Dominating these states was Austria, the Hapsburg largest president. Now that Bismarck had reached high office, it was up to him to use his power wisely. This is where Bismarck political cunning comes into play. Soon after figurehead ruler. Thus, by his own force of will, Bismarck, now in control of the most powerful state in Germany, had the ability to force all others to fall in line and combination of making powerful friends and maneuvering himself into the power seat in Prussian, and by extension German, politics.	<urn:uuid:87259812-a93c-4901-a9c5-17ff0b1d45a8>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://paperap.com/paper-on-how-did-bismarck-unite-germany/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250603761.28/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121103642-20200121132642-00212.warc.gz	en	0.980419	694	3.796875	4	[ -0.516638994216919, 0.6042965650558472, -0.1724197268486023, -0.10339530557394028, -0.24977456033229828, -0.05645424872636795, -0.021319691091775894, 0.15682485699653625, -0.10925866663455963, -0.32365483045578003, 0.2853574752807617, -0.6390120983123779, 0.28080594539642334, 0.08506461977...	2	Germany, until the late 19th century, was little more than a loose union of fragmented states. Dominating these states was Austria, the Hapsburg largest stronghold. Unfortunately for Austria, its involvement in the Crimean War forced it out of the major spotlight in European power politics, making it a minor presence in the continent. This left a power vacuum in Germany which was quickly filled by Prussia, a military state with a history of strong rulers. Essay Example on Bismarck Unites Germany However, Prussia realized Germany’s vulnerability, seeing how its loose union and its central geographical spot in the continent made it vulnerable to attack from strong neighbors like France and Russia. So, Prussia set out to unify Germany to form one large, stronger state. However, this unification could not have been possible without Otto von Bismarck, a Prussian noble who had risen through the ranks to become a major political fugue and the driving force behind German unification. The question is begged, however: how did Bismarck do it? How did he rise to power and unite these fragmented pieces into one union? Well, for one, Bismarck had connections. A noble by birth, Bismarck had high social standing, but no governmental or military background that would facilitate a career in politics. Nonetheless, he befriended two military generals by the names of Helmut von Molted and Albrecht von Iron. Molted and Iron, both cunning military minds and dedicated ideologues, rose up the Prussian power ladder. In 1859, Iron was appointed minister of war, allowing him a direct link to the king. A strong believer in Bismarck potential, Iron lobbied the king to appoint Bismarck to a high post. It was a success, and in September 1862, Bismarck was appointed minister- president. Now that Bismarck had reached high office, It was up to him to use his power wisely. This is where Bismarck political cunning comes Into play. Soon after receiving his position, Bismarck began winning the king over. Within a short while, Bismarck had maneuvered himself to basically be the ruler of Prussia, making his wan decisions and not fearing reprimand from the king, as he had become but a figurehead ruler. Thus, by his own force of will, Bismarck, now In control of the most powerful state In Germany, had the ability to force all others to fall In line and support unification. In all, Bismarck was able to complete unification by a combination of making powerful friends and maneuvering himself Into the power seat In Prussian, and by extension German, politics. How did Bismarck Unite Germany? By incremental 2 fragmented states. Dominating these states was Austria, the Hapsburg largest president. Now that Bismarck had reached high office, it was up to him to use his power wisely. This is where Bismarck political cunning comes into play. Soon after figurehead ruler. Thus, by his own force of will, Bismarck, now in control of the most powerful state in Germany, had the ability to force all others to fall in line and combination of making powerful friends and maneuvering himself into the power seat in Prussian, and by extension German, politics.	705	ENGLISH	1
In ancient Rome, a gens ( or ), plural gentes, was a family consisting of all those individuals who shared the same nomen and who claimed descent from a common ancestor. A branch of a gens was called a stirps (plural stirpes). The gens was an important social structure at Rome and throughout Italia during the period of the Roman Republic. Much of individuals' social standing depended on the gens to which they belonged. Certain gentes were classified as patrician, others as plebeian; some had both patrician and plebeian branches. The importance of membership in a gens declined considerably in imperial times, although the gentilicium continued to be used and defined the origins and dynasties of Roman emperors. The word gens is sometimes translated as "race", or "nation", meaning a people descended from a common ancestor (rather than sharing a common physical trait). It can also be translated as "clan", "kin", or "tribe", although the word tribus has a separate and distinct meaning in Roman culture. A gens could be as small as a single family, or could include hundreds of individuals. According to tradition, in 479 BC the gens Fabia alone were able to field a militia consisting of three hundred and six men of fighting age. The concept of the gens was not uniquely Roman, but was shared with communities throughout Italy, including those who spoke Italic languages such as Latin, Oscan, and Umbrian as well as the Etruscans. All of these peoples were eventually absorbed into the sphere of Roman culture. The oldest gentes were said to have originated before the foundation of Rome (traditionally 753 BC), and claimed descent from mythological personages as far back as the time of the Trojan War (traditionally ended 1184 BC). However, the establishment of the gens cannot long predate the adoption of hereditary surnames. The nomen gentilicium, or "gentile name", was its distinguishing feature, for a Roman citizen's nomen indicated his membership in a gens. The nomen could be derived from any number of things, such as the name of an ancestor, a person's occupation, physical appearance, behavior, or characteristics, or town of origin. Because some of these things were fairly common, it was possible for unrelated families to bear the same nomen, and over time to become confused. Persons could be adopted into a gens and acquire its nomen. A libertus, or "freedman", usually assumed the nomen (and sometimes also the praenomen) of the person who had manumitted him, and a naturalized citizen usually took the name of the patron who granted his citizenship. Freedmen and newly enfranchised citizens were not technically part of the gentes whose names they shared, but within a few generations it often became impossible to distinguish their descendants from the original members. In practice this meant that a gens could acquire new members and even new branches, either by design or by accident. Different branches or stirpes of a gens were usually distinguished by their cognomina, additional surnames following the nomen, which could be either personal or hereditary. Some particularly large stirpes themselves became divided into multiple branches, distinguished by additional cognomina. Most gentes regularly employed a limited number of personal names, or praenomina, the selection of which helped to distinguish members of one gens from another. Sometimes different branches of a gens would vary in their names of choice. The most conservative gentes would sometimes limit themselves to three or four praenomina, while others made regular use of six or seven. There were two main reasons for this limited selection: first, it was traditional to pass down family names from one generation to the next; such names were always preferred. Second, most patrician families limited themselves to a small number of names as a way of distinguishing themselves from the plebeians, who often employed a wider variety of names, including some that were seldom used by the patricians. However, several of the oldest and most noble patrician houses frequently used rare and unusual praenomina. Certain families also deliberately avoided particular praenomina. In at least some cases, this was because of traditions concerning disgraced or dishonored members of the gens bearing a particular name. For example, the gens Junia carefully avoided the praenomina Titus and Tiberius after two members with these names were executed for treason. A similar instance supposedly led the assembly of the gens Manlia to forbid its members from bearing the praenomen Marcus, although this prohibition does not seem to have been strictly observed. In theory, each gens functioned as a state within a state, governed by its own elders and assemblies, following its own customs, and carrying out its own religious rites. Certain cults were traditionally associated with specific gentes. The gentile assemblies had the responsibility of adoption and guardianship for their members. If a member of a gens died intestate and without immediate family, his property was distributed to the rest of the gens. The decisions of a gens were theoretically binding on all of its members. However, no public enactment is recorded as having been passed by the assembly of a gens. As a group, the gentes had considerable influence on the development of Roman law and religious practices, but comparatively little influence on the political and constitutional history of Rome. Certain gentes were considered patrician, and others plebeian. According to tradition, the patricians were descended from the "city fathers", or patres; that is, the heads of family at the time of its foundation by Romulus, the first King of Rome. Other noble families which came to Rome during the time of the kings were also admitted to the patriciate, including several who emigrated from Alba Longa after that city was destroyed by Tullus Hostilius. The last known instance of a gens being admitted to the patriciate prior to the 1st century BC was when the Claudii were added to the ranks of the patricians after coming to Rome in 504 BC, five years after the establishment of the Republic. Numerous sources describe two classes amongst the patrician gentes, known as the gentes maiores, or major gentes, and the gentes minores, or minor gentes. No definite information has survived concerning which families were numbered amongst the gentes maiores, or even how many there were. However, they almost certainly included the Aemilii, Claudii, Cornelii, Fabii, Manlii, and Valerii. Nor is it certain whether this distinction was of any practical importance, although it has been suggested that the princeps senatus, or speaker of the Senate, was usually chosen from their number. For the first several decades of the Republic, it is not entirely certain which gentes were considered patrician and which plebeian. However, a series of laws promulgated in 451 and 450 BC as the Twelve Tables attempted to codify a rigid distinction between the classes, formally excluding the plebeians from holding any of the major magistracies from that time until the passage of the Lex Licinia Sextia in 367 BC. The law forbidding the intermarriage of patricians and plebeians was repealed after only a few years, by the Lex Canuleia in 445 BC. Despite the formal reconciliation of the orders in 367, the patrician houses, which as time passed represented a smaller and smaller percentage of the Roman populace, continued to hold on to as much power as possible, resulting in frequent conflict between the orders over the next two centuries. Certain patrician families regularly opposed the sharing of power with the plebeians, while others favored it, and some were divided. Many gentes included both patrician and plebeian branches. These may have arisen through adoption or manumission, or when two unrelated families bearing the same nomen became confused. It may also be that individual members of a gens voluntarily left or were expelled from the patriciate, along with their descendants. In some cases, gentes that must originally have been patrician, or which were so regarded during the early Republic, were later known only by their plebeian descendants. By the first century BC, the practical distinction between the patricians and the plebeians was minimal. Nonetheless, with the rise of imperial authority, several plebeian gentes were raised to the patriciate, replacing older patrician families that had faded into obscurity, and were no longer represented in the Roman senate. Although both the concept of the gens and of the patriciate survived well into imperial times, both gradually lost most of their significance. In the final centuries of the Western Empire, patricius was used primarily as an individual title, rather than a class to which an entire family belonged.	<urn:uuid:1d57f624-a8cc-4d81-8af4-369117dcd5d0>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://popflock.com/learn?s=Gens	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250604397.40/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121132900-20200121161900-00483.warc.gz	en	0.981128	1,863	4.09375	4	[ -0.0642966479063034, 0.39709973335266113, 0.19432762265205383, -0.14126050472259521, -0.30681082606315613, -0.3821955919265747, -0.009528951719403267, -0.08180109411478043, 0.22598494589328766, -0.10103920102119446, 0.22310754656791687, -0.6319791078567505, 0.24179086089134216, 0.093275763...	1	In ancient Rome, a gens ( or ), plural gentes, was a family consisting of all those individuals who shared the same nomen and who claimed descent from a common ancestor. A branch of a gens was called a stirps (plural stirpes). The gens was an important social structure at Rome and throughout Italia during the period of the Roman Republic. Much of individuals' social standing depended on the gens to which they belonged. Certain gentes were classified as patrician, others as plebeian; some had both patrician and plebeian branches. The importance of membership in a gens declined considerably in imperial times, although the gentilicium continued to be used and defined the origins and dynasties of Roman emperors. The word gens is sometimes translated as "race", or "nation", meaning a people descended from a common ancestor (rather than sharing a common physical trait). It can also be translated as "clan", "kin", or "tribe", although the word tribus has a separate and distinct meaning in Roman culture. A gens could be as small as a single family, or could include hundreds of individuals. According to tradition, in 479 BC the gens Fabia alone were able to field a militia consisting of three hundred and six men of fighting age. The concept of the gens was not uniquely Roman, but was shared with communities throughout Italy, including those who spoke Italic languages such as Latin, Oscan, and Umbrian as well as the Etruscans. All of these peoples were eventually absorbed into the sphere of Roman culture. The oldest gentes were said to have originated before the foundation of Rome (traditionally 753 BC), and claimed descent from mythological personages as far back as the time of the Trojan War (traditionally ended 1184 BC). However, the establishment of the gens cannot long predate the adoption of hereditary surnames. The nomen gentilicium, or "gentile name", was its distinguishing feature, for a Roman citizen's nomen indicated his membership in a gens. The nomen could be derived from any number of things, such as the name of an ancestor, a person's occupation, physical appearance, behavior, or characteristics, or town of origin. Because some of these things were fairly common, it was possible for unrelated families to bear the same nomen, and over time to become confused. Persons could be adopted into a gens and acquire its nomen. A libertus, or "freedman", usually assumed the nomen (and sometimes also the praenomen) of the person who had manumitted him, and a naturalized citizen usually took the name of the patron who granted his citizenship. Freedmen and newly enfranchised citizens were not technically part of the gentes whose names they shared, but within a few generations it often became impossible to distinguish their descendants from the original members. In practice this meant that a gens could acquire new members and even new branches, either by design or by accident. Different branches or stirpes of a gens were usually distinguished by their cognomina, additional surnames following the nomen, which could be either personal or hereditary. Some particularly large stirpes themselves became divided into multiple branches, distinguished by additional cognomina. Most gentes regularly employed a limited number of personal names, or praenomina, the selection of which helped to distinguish members of one gens from another. Sometimes different branches of a gens would vary in their names of choice. The most conservative gentes would sometimes limit themselves to three or four praenomina, while others made regular use of six or seven. There were two main reasons for this limited selection: first, it was traditional to pass down family names from one generation to the next; such names were always preferred. Second, most patrician families limited themselves to a small number of names as a way of distinguishing themselves from the plebeians, who often employed a wider variety of names, including some that were seldom used by the patricians. However, several of the oldest and most noble patrician houses frequently used rare and unusual praenomina. Certain families also deliberately avoided particular praenomina. In at least some cases, this was because of traditions concerning disgraced or dishonored members of the gens bearing a particular name. For example, the gens Junia carefully avoided the praenomina Titus and Tiberius after two members with these names were executed for treason. A similar instance supposedly led the assembly of the gens Manlia to forbid its members from bearing the praenomen Marcus, although this prohibition does not seem to have been strictly observed. In theory, each gens functioned as a state within a state, governed by its own elders and assemblies, following its own customs, and carrying out its own religious rites. Certain cults were traditionally associated with specific gentes. The gentile assemblies had the responsibility of adoption and guardianship for their members. If a member of a gens died intestate and without immediate family, his property was distributed to the rest of the gens. The decisions of a gens were theoretically binding on all of its members. However, no public enactment is recorded as having been passed by the assembly of a gens. As a group, the gentes had considerable influence on the development of Roman law and religious practices, but comparatively little influence on the political and constitutional history of Rome. Certain gentes were considered patrician, and others plebeian. According to tradition, the patricians were descended from the "city fathers", or patres; that is, the heads of family at the time of its foundation by Romulus, the first King of Rome. Other noble families which came to Rome during the time of the kings were also admitted to the patriciate, including several who emigrated from Alba Longa after that city was destroyed by Tullus Hostilius. The last known instance of a gens being admitted to the patriciate prior to the 1st century BC was when the Claudii were added to the ranks of the patricians after coming to Rome in 504 BC, five years after the establishment of the Republic. Numerous sources describe two classes amongst the patrician gentes, known as the gentes maiores, or major gentes, and the gentes minores, or minor gentes. No definite information has survived concerning which families were numbered amongst the gentes maiores, or even how many there were. However, they almost certainly included the Aemilii, Claudii, Cornelii, Fabii, Manlii, and Valerii. Nor is it certain whether this distinction was of any practical importance, although it has been suggested that the princeps senatus, or speaker of the Senate, was usually chosen from their number. For the first several decades of the Republic, it is not entirely certain which gentes were considered patrician and which plebeian. However, a series of laws promulgated in 451 and 450 BC as the Twelve Tables attempted to codify a rigid distinction between the classes, formally excluding the plebeians from holding any of the major magistracies from that time until the passage of the Lex Licinia Sextia in 367 BC. The law forbidding the intermarriage of patricians and plebeians was repealed after only a few years, by the Lex Canuleia in 445 BC. Despite the formal reconciliation of the orders in 367, the patrician houses, which as time passed represented a smaller and smaller percentage of the Roman populace, continued to hold on to as much power as possible, resulting in frequent conflict between the orders over the next two centuries. Certain patrician families regularly opposed the sharing of power with the plebeians, while others favored it, and some were divided. Many gentes included both patrician and plebeian branches. These may have arisen through adoption or manumission, or when two unrelated families bearing the same nomen became confused. It may also be that individual members of a gens voluntarily left or were expelled from the patriciate, along with their descendants. In some cases, gentes that must originally have been patrician, or which were so regarded during the early Republic, were later known only by their plebeian descendants. By the first century BC, the practical distinction between the patricians and the plebeians was minimal. Nonetheless, with the rise of imperial authority, several plebeian gentes were raised to the patriciate, replacing older patrician families that had faded into obscurity, and were no longer represented in the Roman senate. Although both the concept of the gens and of the patriciate survived well into imperial times, both gradually lost most of their significance. In the final centuries of the Western Empire, patricius was used primarily as an individual title, rather than a class to which an entire family belonged.	1,848	ENGLISH	1
Assembly lines didn't exist in the 1600s and 1700s. Gunsmiths were skilled craftsmen who made weapons one at a time. While gun prices seem cheap by today's standards, they represented a much larger investment at the time. Historians have debated the colonial gunsmith's income and whether it would be possible for an American to make a living as a gunsmith. Colonial gunsmiths were independent businessmen who earned money per gun, rather than a regular salary. Exact prices varied depending on location, the customers and whether the weapon was a flintlock pistol or a longbore rifle. A pair of pistols in mid-1700s Virginia, for example, could cost £3 15s or so. One rifle sale to an Indian tribe a century earlier earned the seller 20 beaver pelts. Gunsmiths also made money by repairing damaged guns -- a more affordable choice for most gun owners than buying a new one. Translating gun sales from the 1600s and 1700s into a modern equivalent is a challenge. Hard cash was scarce in colonial times, so colonists did a lot of business by barter. When they did pay cash it could just as easily be a French sous or Spanish coins as British pounds. The £3 pound pair of pistols would have cost around $340 in 21st century money; because the colonial era had no income tax, we have few records that would show gunsmiths' total annual income. Historian Michael Bellesiles argues that guns were a luxury item in colonial America: They were expensive enough that few colonists could afford one, and gunsmiths could barely make a living. Legal scholars James Lindgren and Justin Lee Heather, on the other hand, make the counterargument that the evidence shows gun ownership was widespread: While not something a poor man could afford, middle and upper class colonists included many gun owners. One historian estimates that perhaps 1 percent of the colonists were primarily professional gunsmiths, but smiths who specialized in other fields of metalwork may have had the skills to carry out gun-making or repair as well. Likewise, many expert gunsmiths probably accepted nongun jobs to make ends meet, making an income estimate even harder. One gunsmith, for example also worked as an inventory clerk, an executor and drafted legal documents on the side.	<urn:uuid:f88eb57d-9be4-4bf7-8910-b2f4e1f3ccb7>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://careertrend.com/how-much-money-would-colonial-gunsmiths-get-paid-13661137.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592394.9/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118081234-20200118105234-00099.warc.gz	en	0.983065	477	3.65625	4	[ -0.39904457330703735, 0.07716501504182816, 0.3259046971797943, -0.04222332313656807, -0.04054971784353256, -0.44901198148727417, 0.10994400084018707, 0.015251162461936474, -0.40436506271362305, -0.06512802839279175, 0.12838071584701538, 0.1013026311993599, -0.060440000146627426, 0.26943194...	2	Assembly lines didn't exist in the 1600s and 1700s. Gunsmiths were skilled craftsmen who made weapons one at a time. While gun prices seem cheap by today's standards, they represented a much larger investment at the time. Historians have debated the colonial gunsmith's income and whether it would be possible for an American to make a living as a gunsmith. Colonial gunsmiths were independent businessmen who earned money per gun, rather than a regular salary. Exact prices varied depending on location, the customers and whether the weapon was a flintlock pistol or a longbore rifle. A pair of pistols in mid-1700s Virginia, for example, could cost £3 15s or so. One rifle sale to an Indian tribe a century earlier earned the seller 20 beaver pelts. Gunsmiths also made money by repairing damaged guns -- a more affordable choice for most gun owners than buying a new one. Translating gun sales from the 1600s and 1700s into a modern equivalent is a challenge. Hard cash was scarce in colonial times, so colonists did a lot of business by barter. When they did pay cash it could just as easily be a French sous or Spanish coins as British pounds. The £3 pound pair of pistols would have cost around $340 in 21st century money; because the colonial era had no income tax, we have few records that would show gunsmiths' total annual income. Historian Michael Bellesiles argues that guns were a luxury item in colonial America: They were expensive enough that few colonists could afford one, and gunsmiths could barely make a living. Legal scholars James Lindgren and Justin Lee Heather, on the other hand, make the counterargument that the evidence shows gun ownership was widespread: While not something a poor man could afford, middle and upper class colonists included many gun owners. One historian estimates that perhaps 1 percent of the colonists were primarily professional gunsmiths, but smiths who specialized in other fields of metalwork may have had the skills to carry out gun-making or repair as well. Likewise, many expert gunsmiths probably accepted nongun jobs to make ends meet, making an income estimate even harder. One gunsmith, for example also worked as an inventory clerk, an executor and drafted legal documents on the side.	500	ENGLISH	1
Ancient Roman Doctors The 'doctors' in ancient Rome were not nearly as highly regarded as the doctors in Greece. The profession itself, outside of the legions, was considered a low social position, fit for slaves, freedmen and non-latin citizens, mainly Greeks. While there were some who were respected, most were considered just as they were, cheaters, liars and quacks. The bulk of doctors, at least early on, were self-taught or apprenticed practitioners who simply claimed to be healers, with little basis in real medical knowledge. Many doctors did try to find effective treatments and perform a valuable service to the community, but even more were simply in it to con and cheat their patients. As there were no licensing boards, no formal requirements or education for entrance to the profession, anyone could call himself a doctor. If his methods were successful, he attracted more patients, if not, they simply moved on to another career. Wealthier, and more respected physicians, set up shop like any normal practice today, with an office and staff. Others simply advertised their services on the streets, going so far as to perform simple surgeries in front of crowds to increase their notoriety. Others acted as 'snake oil' salesmen, selling any number of products along with their treatments. Beauty supplies and cosmetics were commonly purchased from doctors. Nearly all would attempt to treat any ailment provided the price was right, knowing their treatments did little good, if not more harm. There is even evidence of doctors acting as assassins, willingly poisoning patients in the guise of giving them care, though this was rare and would lead to a short professional career. With the introduction of a medical school in the 1st century AD, the health care of ancient world become more uniform and practical; but for the average citizen, life was better without the need for a doctor. Surgeons however, especially those in the legions, were highly skilled and coveted in private life. Research and advances made by doctors on the battlefield became the mainstay of human medicine for nearly 2 millenium. Women also performed an important service to the field of medicine. As a tradition last lasted for centuries, midwives delivered babies and became experts in women's health. These skilled medical care givers often filled the void left by the ignorance of doctors, and despite high birth mortality rates, went a long way towards providing quality service to Roman women. Although the so called doctors of the day were mostly inadequate at best, Roman surgeons were highly advanced and skilled professionals. A detailed knowledge of anatomy and its functions, thanks primarily to having to deal with military wounds, led to many surgical operations in line with success rates enjoyed in the modern era. Most surgeries in the ancient world were likely of the low impact variety such as tumor removal and hernia operations, while more extensive surgeries certainly occurred under military care. Trepanation was a form of brain surgery designed to relieve pressure and cure headaches. Using a drill, a hole in the skull not only worked to relieve the pressure, but patients had a high survival rate. Cataract surgery was also known. A thin needle was pushed though the eye to break up the cataract and the remaining pieces suctioned out through a long tube. Evidence suggests this procedure at least had a moderate rate of vision improvement success. A form of ancient cosmetic surgery was also practiced. Excess skin or tissues could be trimmed from various parts to improve the appearance. Freed slaves also were common customers of branding removal. While an expensive procedure, being able to mask the history of service as a slave was a valuable operation in Roman society. Did you know... The best known Roman doctor, Galen, studied medicine in Alexandria, Egypt and became the surgeon to a school of gladiators. Unusually for a Greek, he moved to Rome, where he revived Hippocrates' view on diseases. Did you know... Evidence provided by a skeleton found at Cappadocia indicates that the earliest brain surgery (trepanation) known in the world was performed over 6,000 years ago.	<urn:uuid:fe8249d3-3453-4b0d-a6ec-08e27c5a3e57>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.unrv.com/culture/ancient-roman-doctors.php	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594333.5/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119064802-20200119092802-00032.warc.gz	en	0.987305	836	3.390625	3	[ -0.18967753648757935, 0.5952119827270508, 0.45991840958595276, 0.16305485367774963, -0.22840768098831177, -0.3517397940158844, -0.08193233609199524, 0.5722761750221252, -0.18092960119247437, -0.15280704200267792, 0.005168202333152294, -0.2826368510723114, -0.1855708658695221, 0.43612393736...	6	Ancient Roman Doctors The 'doctors' in ancient Rome were not nearly as highly regarded as the doctors in Greece. The profession itself, outside of the legions, was considered a low social position, fit for slaves, freedmen and non-latin citizens, mainly Greeks. While there were some who were respected, most were considered just as they were, cheaters, liars and quacks. The bulk of doctors, at least early on, were self-taught or apprenticed practitioners who simply claimed to be healers, with little basis in real medical knowledge. Many doctors did try to find effective treatments and perform a valuable service to the community, but even more were simply in it to con and cheat their patients. As there were no licensing boards, no formal requirements or education for entrance to the profession, anyone could call himself a doctor. If his methods were successful, he attracted more patients, if not, they simply moved on to another career. Wealthier, and more respected physicians, set up shop like any normal practice today, with an office and staff. Others simply advertised their services on the streets, going so far as to perform simple surgeries in front of crowds to increase their notoriety. Others acted as 'snake oil' salesmen, selling any number of products along with their treatments. Beauty supplies and cosmetics were commonly purchased from doctors. Nearly all would attempt to treat any ailment provided the price was right, knowing their treatments did little good, if not more harm. There is even evidence of doctors acting as assassins, willingly poisoning patients in the guise of giving them care, though this was rare and would lead to a short professional career. With the introduction of a medical school in the 1st century AD, the health care of ancient world become more uniform and practical; but for the average citizen, life was better without the need for a doctor. Surgeons however, especially those in the legions, were highly skilled and coveted in private life. Research and advances made by doctors on the battlefield became the mainstay of human medicine for nearly 2 millenium. Women also performed an important service to the field of medicine. As a tradition last lasted for centuries, midwives delivered babies and became experts in women's health. These skilled medical care givers often filled the void left by the ignorance of doctors, and despite high birth mortality rates, went a long way towards providing quality service to Roman women. Although the so called doctors of the day were mostly inadequate at best, Roman surgeons were highly advanced and skilled professionals. A detailed knowledge of anatomy and its functions, thanks primarily to having to deal with military wounds, led to many surgical operations in line with success rates enjoyed in the modern era. Most surgeries in the ancient world were likely of the low impact variety such as tumor removal and hernia operations, while more extensive surgeries certainly occurred under military care. Trepanation was a form of brain surgery designed to relieve pressure and cure headaches. Using a drill, a hole in the skull not only worked to relieve the pressure, but patients had a high survival rate. Cataract surgery was also known. A thin needle was pushed though the eye to break up the cataract and the remaining pieces suctioned out through a long tube. Evidence suggests this procedure at least had a moderate rate of vision improvement success. A form of ancient cosmetic surgery was also practiced. Excess skin or tissues could be trimmed from various parts to improve the appearance. Freed slaves also were common customers of branding removal. While an expensive procedure, being able to mask the history of service as a slave was a valuable operation in Roman society. Did you know... The best known Roman doctor, Galen, studied medicine in Alexandria, Egypt and became the surgeon to a school of gladiators. Unusually for a Greek, he moved to Rome, where he revived Hippocrates' view on diseases. Did you know... Evidence provided by a skeleton found at Cappadocia indicates that the earliest brain surgery (trepanation) known in the world was performed over 6,000 years ago.	831	ENGLISH	1
The tradition of shipbuilding and navigating on the St. Lawrence River dates back to the 17th century. Master shipwrights who had sailed over from France passed on their knowledge to craftsmen born in New France, with the locals then adapting it to their surroundings. For more than three centuries, on the islands and along the shores of the St. Lawrence, families and sometimes entire villages came to specialize in the maritime industry. The Lachance family was one of them. As François-Xavier Lachance was settling in Saint-Laurent, the village was already home to a number of families of seasoned sailors and shipwrights, as were Saint-Jean-de-l’Île-d’Orléans, Isle-aux-Grues, L’Islet, Petite-Rivière-Saint-François, Isle-aux-Coudres, and other towns and villages along the St. Lawrence. This was still a time when boats were built with wood, a material that was widely available all along the river, and that local craftsmen were skilled at working with.	<urn:uuid:31984f56-fc99-465d-994f-3a6d3f44381d>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.virtualmuseum.ca/community-stories_histoires-de-chez-nous/francois-xavier-lachance-construction-navale_shipbuilding/story/a-st-lawrence-estuary-tradition/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250611127.53/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123160903-20200123185903-00416.warc.gz	en	0.981423	235	3.375	3	[ 0.2982363998889923, 0.29653313755989075, 0.38916268944740295, -0.665006160736084, 0.06586063653230667, -0.5651550889015198, -0.01400790736079216, 0.3105209767818451, -0.21110789477825165, -0.18320994079113007, 0.11176951229572296, -0.2924136519432068, -0.4350920617580414, 0.115829154849052...	3	The tradition of shipbuilding and navigating on the St. Lawrence River dates back to the 17th century. Master shipwrights who had sailed over from France passed on their knowledge to craftsmen born in New France, with the locals then adapting it to their surroundings. For more than three centuries, on the islands and along the shores of the St. Lawrence, families and sometimes entire villages came to specialize in the maritime industry. The Lachance family was one of them. As François-Xavier Lachance was settling in Saint-Laurent, the village was already home to a number of families of seasoned sailors and shipwrights, as were Saint-Jean-de-l’Île-d’Orléans, Isle-aux-Grues, L’Islet, Petite-Rivière-Saint-François, Isle-aux-Coudres, and other towns and villages along the St. Lawrence. This was still a time when boats were built with wood, a material that was widely available all along the river, and that local craftsmen were skilled at working with.	219	ENGLISH	1
American history resonates with the names of great African American men and women. The smallest school child to the oldest adult can rattle off the names of well-known figures like Harriet Tubman, Booker T. Washington, Rosa Parks or Malcolm X. But what of the lesser-known men and women who have contributed significantly to black history in America, the individuals who have achieved greatness but have rarely been recognized? Here are five men and women who may not be household names, but who made their mark on history – in many cases as the first black Americans to succeed in their chosen fields. Mary Ellen Pleasant: Entrepreneur and Activist Mary Ellen Pleasant’s exact origins are fuzzy. She may have begun her life as a slave in 1810s Georgia, but it’s equally possible that she was born free in Philadelphia. We do know that she was indentured early in life to a Nantucket shopkeeper from whom she learned the basics of running a business. She also learned about the abolitionist movement, since the shopkeeper’s family were diehard abolitionists. A marriage to a wealthy free landowner named J.J. Smith, who was also an abolitionist, both solidified her fortune and advanced the cause. The Smiths worked to help slaves escape to the North and funded abolitionist causes (including, it is said, John Brown’s raid on Harper’s Ferry). After Pleasant’s husband died young, she headed west to San Francisco, which at the time was an almost lawless town. She worked as a cook and servant in rich people’s homes until she was able to start her own boardinghouse, which would be the first of many. Pleasant was a familiar fixture in the houses of the wealthy during the period of the Gold Rush, as were the servants she began to train and place there, and it’s said that she used the information she gained from her proximity to wealth to increase her own assets. She cannily invested her money and soon amassed a startling personal fortune based on stocks, real estate, and a series of businesses (including laundries and food establishments) that made her one of the growing city’s major entrepreneurs. At her peak, she was estimated to be worth $30 million dollars, an astonishing sum for the period. As Pleasant became a powerful woman, she continued her work for civil rights, often in the courts. Shortly after the Civil War, she sued one streetcar company for not allowing blacks on their line and sued another that permitted segregation. She won both cases. She became known in the black community for her philanthropy and very public support for civil rights, which was unusual for a woman and doubly unusual for a woman of color. She used her money to defend wronged blacks and spent thousands in legal fees, becoming a hero to a generation of African Americans in California. Unfortunately, Pleasant’s later life was tough. She supported the case of a woman engaged in a marriage dispute with a senator from Nevada, which hurt her financially and politically when the woman lost. The death of her financial partner Thomas Bell threw her affairs into turmoil, and his widow challenged Pleasant’s right to most of her holdings. Yellow journalists branded her “Mammy Pleasant,” accusing her of everything from murdering Thomas Bell to putting entire households under voodoo spells (Pleasant, it is said, once maintained a friendship with New Orleans voodoo queen Marie LaVeau). Pleasant’s vast fortune was lost and she died in poverty in 1904. Fortunately, her sullied reputation as “Mammy” has not defined her life; today, she is more commonly remembered as “The Mother of Civil Rights in California.” Bessie Coleman: Pioneer Aviatrix Bessie Coleman was born in a one-room shack in Texas in 1892. An intelligent young girl, she attended school faithfully and was active in her Baptist church – that is, when she was not needed in the cotton fields to help her large family survive (there were 13 Coleman children altogether). She worked as a laundress to save money to attend college in Oklahoma, but her money ran out after only one semester. Hoping for better things, she moved north to Chicago to stay with her older brother. Although she found life there difficult, with her work as a manicurist neither lucrative or fulfilling, she overheard and was entranced by the stories of pilots who had recently returned from the airfields of World War I. She made up her mind to be a pilot. In 1918, except for the occasional wealthy socialite, female pilots were rare and African American female pilots were non-existent. Coleman was stonewalled by sexism and racism from American pilots who scoffed at her desire to fly. Hearing of her woes, black newspaperman Robert Abbott, the publisher of The Chicago Defender, encouraged her to go to France to learn how to fly. He financed a trip to Paris in 1920, and for seven months, Coleman trained with some of the best pilots in Europe. Despite being the only black person in her class, she was treated with respect and earned her international pilot’s license by 1921. When she returned to America, newspapers caught wind of the unusual story and she became a minor celebrity almost overnight. In the early 1920s, commercial aviation was still in its infancy, so most active fliers were stunt fliers who performed at air shows. Coleman sought out the best in the field (again, in Europe) for training, and she took to the air show circuit, where she was a big hit. Nicknamed “Queen Bess,” Coleman was known for her daredevil aerial tricks, and her race and her gender became a selling point instead of a liability. For five years, she barnstormed around the country, making a good living. It was a hard living, however, filled with risks; in 1923, for instance, she ended up in the hospital with a broken leg when her plane crashed from mechanical failure. A later, more serious mechanical failure would lead to Coleman’s premature demise in 1926. She purchased a replacement plane for the one she’d lost in 1923, and her co-pilot, a man named William D. Wills, flew the “crate” from Texas to Florida, the location of the next air show. The plane had mechanical problems during the journey and was in desperate need of an overhaul, but Wills and Coleman unwisely took it up on April 30th to survey the ground for the parachute jump that Coleman planned for the next day. The plane failed once again, but this time it could not be piloted safely to the ground; Wills was killed on impact, and Coleman, who had not been wearing a seatbelt so she could look at the landscape over the side of the plane, was pitched from her seat and died instantly. Coleman had hoped to inspire other young African Americans to take to the skies by establishing a flight school. Her dream to start a school would never be realized, but by being the first black American woman to fly, she inspired countless young men and women to do the same, including the person discussed next. Jesse LeRoy Brown: Navy Pilot Like Coleman, Jesse LeRoy Brown was born into very modest circumstances. Born a few months after Coleman’s last flight, Brown was raised in different parts of Mississippi, depending on where his father secured employment. Brown was a determined young person, and he excelled in his schoolwork, graduating from his high school with honors. The flying bug caught him early; at the age of six, his father took him to an air show, and it determined the course of his life. He read about aviation constantly and learned that black pilots did indeed exist (one of the pilots he learned about was Coleman). At that point, no African American pilots had yet been admitted to the U.S. military, and the brash young Brown even wrote a letter to President Franklin D. Roosevelt to question this state of affairs. Brown applied to an integrated college, Ohio State, and supported himself in his studies by working several part-time jobs. In 1945, he learned that the U.S. Navy was recruiting pilots, and he applied. Despite meeting resistance because of his race, Brown was admitted to the program because his entrance exams were of such high quality. In 1947, he completed three phases of naval officer training in Illinois, Iowa, and Florida, including advanced flight training. Soon he was skilled at flying fighter aircraft, and in 1948, he received his Naval Aviator Badge. He received his navy commission and became an officer in 1949. The newspapers paid attention to Brown’s progress, and his status as a commissioned naval officer made him a symbol of black achievement in black and white publications alike (he would be profiled in both The Chicago Defender and Life). In the summer of 1950, the Korean War broke out, and Brown’s ship, the carrier USS Leyte, was sent to the Korean peninsula. Brown and his fellow pilots flew daily missions to protect troops threatened by China’s entrance into the war that November. On December 4th, flying with his squadron of six planes over enemy targets, Brown discovered that he was losing fuel, probably the result of Chinese infantry fire. He crash landed his plane and survived the crash, but his leg was pinned under the debris of his plane and he could not free it. Brown’s wingman Thomas Hudner, the pilot closest to him in the air, spotted Brown and took the unusual step of crash landing his own aircraft to try to save him. However, Brown had lost a lot of blood and was already falling in and out of consciousness. An attempt to bring in a helicopter failed as night fell, and by the morning it was undeniable that Brown was dead. Although Brown died young, his story would inspire many African-Americans to become military pilots. Furthermore, the dedication evinced by Hudner, a white man, for his squadron leader in the heat of war proved just how irrelevant matters of race could be in the military, which had so often been a historically volatile arena for race relations. Matthew Henson: Arctic Explorer Matthew Henson was born in Maryland just after the Civil War and had a hard-luck childhood. Both of his parents died when he was a boy, and Henson lived with an uncle in Washington, D.C. before striking out on his own at the age of 11. He traveled by foot to Baltimore, where he hoped he could get work on a ship. He succeeded, and he became a cabin boy on a freighter. He saw the world (China, Europe, North Africa) and learned how to read and write thanks to the ship’s kindly captain, who saw that the young boy was bright and eager to learn. After six years of sailing the ocean, Henson’s captain died; grieving for the man who had done so much for him, Henson returned to Washington and took a job as a store clerk in a furrier’s shop. It was at the store that Henson met navy lieutenant Robert Edwin Peary, who was selling some pelts and took a shine to the young man as they discussed their various adventures. Peary gave him a job as his assistant on an upcoming survey trip of Nicaragua. Henson, missing the adventure of travel, soon became a permanent member of Peary’s crew. When Peary announced plans to reach the top of Greenland in 1891, Henson happily joined the officer on his journey. Through the 1890s, Peary and his team would return to Greenland several times, battling extreme weather, loss of team members, and starvation to achieve their goal (on one journey, they were forced to eat the dogs pulling their sleds). Peary grew to count on Henson, whose carpentry, mechanical, and dog-driving skills were second to none. By the turn of the century, Peary had become determined to reach the North Pole. Over the next several years, Peary, always with Henson at his side, would make attempt after attempt, each one unsuccessful due to the harshness of the conditions. In 1908, they decided to make one final attempt since time was running against them (Peary was 50, Henson 40). Previous attempts had been hampered by difficult communication with the native Eskimos; Henson learned their language so he could talk to them, the only member of the team to do so. By gaining the Eskimos’ confidence and trust, Henson paved the way for the success of the expedition (as did a special ice-cutting boat built especially for the expedition). Henson actually arrived closest to the Pole in advance of Peary, but it was Peary himself who trudged the last few miles to plant the American flag. Peary seemed to resent Henson for arriving ahead of him, and their relations on the return trip were strained and never quite the same afterward. Commander Peary, of course, was celebrated for his achievement upon his return to America; although Henson had technically gotten there first, he did not receive the same attention, and in short order, he had to find new work. He ended up parking cars in New York. Fortunately, friends lobbied on his behalf, and Henson’s fortunes began to change. He received a civil service appointment from President Taft that gave him a more comfortable living. He published an autobiography in 1912, and a subsequent biography made Henson’s role in the North Pole expeditions more widely known. He received a Congressional Medal in 1944 and a Presidential Citation in 1950. By the time he died in 1955, Matthew Henson could rest easy, having been recognized as the co-founder of the North Pole. William H. Hastie: Lawyer and Judge William Hastie was born in Knoxville, Tennessee in 1904, and like Coleman or Brown, he showed precocious intelligence and an early determination to succeed. His parents, a government clerk and a teacher, were in a better position than most to help their son excel, and he attended Amherst College in Massachusetts, where he graduated at the top of his class. Inspired by his cousin Charles Houston, who had a position at the Howard University School of Law, Hastie decided to enroll in law school. After an exceptional academic career, he passed the bar exam and became a practicing lawyer and a teacher at Howard. In 1933, he returned to Harvard to obtain his doctorate in judicial studies. It was at this point that the new administration of President Roosevelt took notice of the young man, who now called Washington, D.C. his home. He was one of the first African Americans appointed by the administration, serving as a lawyer with the Department of the Interior. As part of his work there, he drafted a constitution for the Virgin Islands, which had become an American territory after World War I. Taking note of his work, Roosevelt appointed Hastie to the federal court in the Virgin Islands, effectively making him the first federal African-American judge in history. He wouldn’t stay very long, however, because of the outbreak of World War II – Hastie left for a job in the War Department, where he hoped to promote the integration of training units. Unfortunately, his attempts to do so were frustrated, and the idea would not take hold until after he had moved on. Hastie’s outspokenness, however, had much to do with spurring public debate on the subject. Hastie returned to the Virgin Islands when Congress passed an act assigning a governor to the region, which until that point had been loosely governed by the Department of the Interior and the military. Roosevelt appointed Hastie to be that first governor, making him the very first black governor of a U.S. state or territory to serve a full term (back in 1872, Pinckney Pinchback had served 35 days when the governor of Louisiana was impeached, making him technically the first African American governor in history, but his service was a stopgap measure). Hastie’s first love remained the law, however, and he returned to the mainland in 1949 to accept President Harry Truman’s nomination of him to the federal court of appeals. Although there was resistance to his nomination in the Senate, which took six months to confirm him, Truman’s support carried the day and Hastie became a federal judge in 1950. He would hold the position until his retirement in 1971. As the highest-ranking black federal judge, Hastie was able to speak openly about racism and segregation and support decisions that combatted them. Of course, he also addressed innumerable cases that had nothing to do with race, and he became one of the most respected members of the bench. It seemed likely for a time that he would be nominated for the Supreme Court, but although this nomination never came to pass (Thurgood Marshall would become the first black Supreme Court justice in 1967), Hastie left behind a record of public service that few could better. After retirement, Hastie became an activist for black causes and a lawyer for public interest groups until his death in 1976.	<urn:uuid:aaf2a304-271c-42da-a34f-79b9860428e3>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.biography.com/news/african-american-firsts-history	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250599718.13/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120165335-20200120194335-00322.warc.gz	en	0.99005	3,539	3.8125	4	[ -0.1515095978975296, 0.34304943680763245, 0.23219968378543854, 0.2942326068878174, -0.36933255195617676, 0.2396150380373001, 0.08841540664434433, -0.22791633009910583, -0.1555836796760559, 0.14244398474693298, 0.1377895474433899, 0.14244434237480164, -0.16628578305244446, 0.005307821556925...	2	American history resonates with the names of great African American men and women. The smallest school child to the oldest adult can rattle off the names of well-known figures like Harriet Tubman, Booker T. Washington, Rosa Parks or Malcolm X. But what of the lesser-known men and women who have contributed significantly to black history in America, the individuals who have achieved greatness but have rarely been recognized? Here are five men and women who may not be household names, but who made their mark on history – in many cases as the first black Americans to succeed in their chosen fields. Mary Ellen Pleasant: Entrepreneur and Activist Mary Ellen Pleasant’s exact origins are fuzzy. She may have begun her life as a slave in 1810s Georgia, but it’s equally possible that she was born free in Philadelphia. We do know that she was indentured early in life to a Nantucket shopkeeper from whom she learned the basics of running a business. She also learned about the abolitionist movement, since the shopkeeper’s family were diehard abolitionists. A marriage to a wealthy free landowner named J.J. Smith, who was also an abolitionist, both solidified her fortune and advanced the cause. The Smiths worked to help slaves escape to the North and funded abolitionist causes (including, it is said, John Brown’s raid on Harper’s Ferry). After Pleasant’s husband died young, she headed west to San Francisco, which at the time was an almost lawless town. She worked as a cook and servant in rich people’s homes until she was able to start her own boardinghouse, which would be the first of many. Pleasant was a familiar fixture in the houses of the wealthy during the period of the Gold Rush, as were the servants she began to train and place there, and it’s said that she used the information she gained from her proximity to wealth to increase her own assets. She cannily invested her money and soon amassed a startling personal fortune based on stocks, real estate, and a series of businesses (including laundries and food establishments) that made her one of the growing city’s major entrepreneurs. At her peak, she was estimated to be worth $30 million dollars, an astonishing sum for the period. As Pleasant became a powerful woman, she continued her work for civil rights, often in the courts. Shortly after the Civil War, she sued one streetcar company for not allowing blacks on their line and sued another that permitted segregation. She won both cases. She became known in the black community for her philanthropy and very public support for civil rights, which was unusual for a woman and doubly unusual for a woman of color. She used her money to defend wronged blacks and spent thousands in legal fees, becoming a hero to a generation of African Americans in California. Unfortunately, Pleasant’s later life was tough. She supported the case of a woman engaged in a marriage dispute with a senator from Nevada, which hurt her financially and politically when the woman lost. The death of her financial partner Thomas Bell threw her affairs into turmoil, and his widow challenged Pleasant’s right to most of her holdings. Yellow journalists branded her “Mammy Pleasant,” accusing her of everything from murdering Thomas Bell to putting entire households under voodoo spells (Pleasant, it is said, once maintained a friendship with New Orleans voodoo queen Marie LaVeau). Pleasant’s vast fortune was lost and she died in poverty in 1904. Fortunately, her sullied reputation as “Mammy” has not defined her life; today, she is more commonly remembered as “The Mother of Civil Rights in California.” Bessie Coleman: Pioneer Aviatrix Bessie Coleman was born in a one-room shack in Texas in 1892. An intelligent young girl, she attended school faithfully and was active in her Baptist church – that is, when she was not needed in the cotton fields to help her large family survive (there were 13 Coleman children altogether). She worked as a laundress to save money to attend college in Oklahoma, but her money ran out after only one semester. Hoping for better things, she moved north to Chicago to stay with her older brother. Although she found life there difficult, with her work as a manicurist neither lucrative or fulfilling, she overheard and was entranced by the stories of pilots who had recently returned from the airfields of World War I. She made up her mind to be a pilot. In 1918, except for the occasional wealthy socialite, female pilots were rare and African American female pilots were non-existent. Coleman was stonewalled by sexism and racism from American pilots who scoffed at her desire to fly. Hearing of her woes, black newspaperman Robert Abbott, the publisher of The Chicago Defender, encouraged her to go to France to learn how to fly. He financed a trip to Paris in 1920, and for seven months, Coleman trained with some of the best pilots in Europe. Despite being the only black person in her class, she was treated with respect and earned her international pilot’s license by 1921. When she returned to America, newspapers caught wind of the unusual story and she became a minor celebrity almost overnight. In the early 1920s, commercial aviation was still in its infancy, so most active fliers were stunt fliers who performed at air shows. Coleman sought out the best in the field (again, in Europe) for training, and she took to the air show circuit, where she was a big hit. Nicknamed “Queen Bess,” Coleman was known for her daredevil aerial tricks, and her race and her gender became a selling point instead of a liability. For five years, she barnstormed around the country, making a good living. It was a hard living, however, filled with risks; in 1923, for instance, she ended up in the hospital with a broken leg when her plane crashed from mechanical failure. A later, more serious mechanical failure would lead to Coleman’s premature demise in 1926. She purchased a replacement plane for the one she’d lost in 1923, and her co-pilot, a man named William D. Wills, flew the “crate” from Texas to Florida, the location of the next air show. The plane had mechanical problems during the journey and was in desperate need of an overhaul, but Wills and Coleman unwisely took it up on April 30th to survey the ground for the parachute jump that Coleman planned for the next day. The plane failed once again, but this time it could not be piloted safely to the ground; Wills was killed on impact, and Coleman, who had not been wearing a seatbelt so she could look at the landscape over the side of the plane, was pitched from her seat and died instantly. Coleman had hoped to inspire other young African Americans to take to the skies by establishing a flight school. Her dream to start a school would never be realized, but by being the first black American woman to fly, she inspired countless young men and women to do the same, including the person discussed next. Jesse LeRoy Brown: Navy Pilot Like Coleman, Jesse LeRoy Brown was born into very modest circumstances. Born a few months after Coleman’s last flight, Brown was raised in different parts of Mississippi, depending on where his father secured employment. Brown was a determined young person, and he excelled in his schoolwork, graduating from his high school with honors. The flying bug caught him early; at the age of six, his father took him to an air show, and it determined the course of his life. He read about aviation constantly and learned that black pilots did indeed exist (one of the pilots he learned about was Coleman). At that point, no African American pilots had yet been admitted to the U.S. military, and the brash young Brown even wrote a letter to President Franklin D. Roosevelt to question this state of affairs. Brown applied to an integrated college, Ohio State, and supported himself in his studies by working several part-time jobs. In 1945, he learned that the U.S. Navy was recruiting pilots, and he applied. Despite meeting resistance because of his race, Brown was admitted to the program because his entrance exams were of such high quality. In 1947, he completed three phases of naval officer training in Illinois, Iowa, and Florida, including advanced flight training. Soon he was skilled at flying fighter aircraft, and in 1948, he received his Naval Aviator Badge. He received his navy commission and became an officer in 1949. The newspapers paid attention to Brown’s progress, and his status as a commissioned naval officer made him a symbol of black achievement in black and white publications alike (he would be profiled in both The Chicago Defender and Life). In the summer of 1950, the Korean War broke out, and Brown’s ship, the carrier USS Leyte, was sent to the Korean peninsula. Brown and his fellow pilots flew daily missions to protect troops threatened by China’s entrance into the war that November. On December 4th, flying with his squadron of six planes over enemy targets, Brown discovered that he was losing fuel, probably the result of Chinese infantry fire. He crash landed his plane and survived the crash, but his leg was pinned under the debris of his plane and he could not free it. Brown’s wingman Thomas Hudner, the pilot closest to him in the air, spotted Brown and took the unusual step of crash landing his own aircraft to try to save him. However, Brown had lost a lot of blood and was already falling in and out of consciousness. An attempt to bring in a helicopter failed as night fell, and by the morning it was undeniable that Brown was dead. Although Brown died young, his story would inspire many African-Americans to become military pilots. Furthermore, the dedication evinced by Hudner, a white man, for his squadron leader in the heat of war proved just how irrelevant matters of race could be in the military, which had so often been a historically volatile arena for race relations. Matthew Henson: Arctic Explorer Matthew Henson was born in Maryland just after the Civil War and had a hard-luck childhood. Both of his parents died when he was a boy, and Henson lived with an uncle in Washington, D.C. before striking out on his own at the age of 11. He traveled by foot to Baltimore, where he hoped he could get work on a ship. He succeeded, and he became a cabin boy on a freighter. He saw the world (China, Europe, North Africa) and learned how to read and write thanks to the ship’s kindly captain, who saw that the young boy was bright and eager to learn. After six years of sailing the ocean, Henson’s captain died; grieving for the man who had done so much for him, Henson returned to Washington and took a job as a store clerk in a furrier’s shop. It was at the store that Henson met navy lieutenant Robert Edwin Peary, who was selling some pelts and took a shine to the young man as they discussed their various adventures. Peary gave him a job as his assistant on an upcoming survey trip of Nicaragua. Henson, missing the adventure of travel, soon became a permanent member of Peary’s crew. When Peary announced plans to reach the top of Greenland in 1891, Henson happily joined the officer on his journey. Through the 1890s, Peary and his team would return to Greenland several times, battling extreme weather, loss of team members, and starvation to achieve their goal (on one journey, they were forced to eat the dogs pulling their sleds). Peary grew to count on Henson, whose carpentry, mechanical, and dog-driving skills were second to none. By the turn of the century, Peary had become determined to reach the North Pole. Over the next several years, Peary, always with Henson at his side, would make attempt after attempt, each one unsuccessful due to the harshness of the conditions. In 1908, they decided to make one final attempt since time was running against them (Peary was 50, Henson 40). Previous attempts had been hampered by difficult communication with the native Eskimos; Henson learned their language so he could talk to them, the only member of the team to do so. By gaining the Eskimos’ confidence and trust, Henson paved the way for the success of the expedition (as did a special ice-cutting boat built especially for the expedition). Henson actually arrived closest to the Pole in advance of Peary, but it was Peary himself who trudged the last few miles to plant the American flag. Peary seemed to resent Henson for arriving ahead of him, and their relations on the return trip were strained and never quite the same afterward. Commander Peary, of course, was celebrated for his achievement upon his return to America; although Henson had technically gotten there first, he did not receive the same attention, and in short order, he had to find new work. He ended up parking cars in New York. Fortunately, friends lobbied on his behalf, and Henson’s fortunes began to change. He received a civil service appointment from President Taft that gave him a more comfortable living. He published an autobiography in 1912, and a subsequent biography made Henson’s role in the North Pole expeditions more widely known. He received a Congressional Medal in 1944 and a Presidential Citation in 1950. By the time he died in 1955, Matthew Henson could rest easy, having been recognized as the co-founder of the North Pole. William H. Hastie: Lawyer and Judge William Hastie was born in Knoxville, Tennessee in 1904, and like Coleman or Brown, he showed precocious intelligence and an early determination to succeed. His parents, a government clerk and a teacher, were in a better position than most to help their son excel, and he attended Amherst College in Massachusetts, where he graduated at the top of his class. Inspired by his cousin Charles Houston, who had a position at the Howard University School of Law, Hastie decided to enroll in law school. After an exceptional academic career, he passed the bar exam and became a practicing lawyer and a teacher at Howard. In 1933, he returned to Harvard to obtain his doctorate in judicial studies. It was at this point that the new administration of President Roosevelt took notice of the young man, who now called Washington, D.C. his home. He was one of the first African Americans appointed by the administration, serving as a lawyer with the Department of the Interior. As part of his work there, he drafted a constitution for the Virgin Islands, which had become an American territory after World War I. Taking note of his work, Roosevelt appointed Hastie to the federal court in the Virgin Islands, effectively making him the first federal African-American judge in history. He wouldn’t stay very long, however, because of the outbreak of World War II – Hastie left for a job in the War Department, where he hoped to promote the integration of training units. Unfortunately, his attempts to do so were frustrated, and the idea would not take hold until after he had moved on. Hastie’s outspokenness, however, had much to do with spurring public debate on the subject. Hastie returned to the Virgin Islands when Congress passed an act assigning a governor to the region, which until that point had been loosely governed by the Department of the Interior and the military. Roosevelt appointed Hastie to be that first governor, making him the very first black governor of a U.S. state or territory to serve a full term (back in 1872, Pinckney Pinchback had served 35 days when the governor of Louisiana was impeached, making him technically the first African American governor in history, but his service was a stopgap measure). Hastie’s first love remained the law, however, and he returned to the mainland in 1949 to accept President Harry Truman’s nomination of him to the federal court of appeals. Although there was resistance to his nomination in the Senate, which took six months to confirm him, Truman’s support carried the day and Hastie became a federal judge in 1950. He would hold the position until his retirement in 1971. As the highest-ranking black federal judge, Hastie was able to speak openly about racism and segregation and support decisions that combatted them. Of course, he also addressed innumerable cases that had nothing to do with race, and he became one of the most respected members of the bench. It seemed likely for a time that he would be nominated for the Supreme Court, but although this nomination never came to pass (Thurgood Marshall would become the first black Supreme Court justice in 1967), Hastie left behind a record of public service that few could better. After retirement, Hastie became an activist for black causes and a lawyer for public interest groups until his death in 1976.	3,560	ENGLISH	1
In Upper Key Stage Two, their adventure took them to the ancient Mayan civilisation. They travelled in a time machine to learn first-hand what their lives were like all those years ago. At one point in the adventure, the children made a fascinating discovery in the ‘Yukutan rainforest’. They went outside to imagineer they were in the humid rainforest searching for hidden artefacts. Around the grounds, they found parts of two Mayan pots and managed to put them back together. After making the discovery, they decided to write a newspaper article to inform people. To do so, they looked at an example newspaper and found the key features; decided on the 5Ws; created a quote from a classmate; and then wrote their final newspaper article. When learning about the different roles in the Mayan society, they found out about Mayan warriors and farmers who used weapons. They heard from a Mayan craftsman (teacher in role) who was going to a market to sell his weapons but wanted their help to sell them. First, they completed a gallery walk to answer some key questions about the weapons and then wrote fact files about some of these after reading some information about them. Next, they chose one weapon to focus on and wrote a persuasive post it for it. Their SPAG objective was to use modal verbs and higher-level verbs so they completed a burn 2 learn to sort them. Finally came their finished advert. The children found out that the Mayans wore headdresses as a sign of status and power. After learning about what the different groups of society would wear, they had to design one with a particular type of Mayan in mind. Following their design, they made elaborate headdresses. After making their creations, they gave opinions on others for what they liked and what they would improve. Using this, they wrote detailed evaluations following a set of questions. Towards the end of the adventure, the children went on a trip to Cadbury World where they learnt about the Mayans association with chocolate. Following the trip, they wrote recounts by ordering the main parts of the day and looking at using past tense correctly.	<urn:uuid:b56c6db2-f6aa-4028-bb6e-116376a14f3f>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.westwood.leeds.sch.uk/upper-ks2-mysterious-mayan-mission/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250593937.27/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118193018-20200118221018-00378.warc.gz	en	0.985283	442	3.8125	4	[ -0.3780938386917114, 0.3295983076095581, 0.4597431719303131, 0.14697758853435516, 0.041374512016773224, 0.14084888994693756, 0.15713204443454742, 0.038156989961862564, -0.5600800514221191, -0.23183146119117737, 0.0933731272816658, -0.11302541941404343, 0.010570566169917583, 0.1249935254454...	5	In Upper Key Stage Two, their adventure took them to the ancient Mayan civilisation. They travelled in a time machine to learn first-hand what their lives were like all those years ago. At one point in the adventure, the children made a fascinating discovery in the ‘Yukutan rainforest’. They went outside to imagineer they were in the humid rainforest searching for hidden artefacts. Around the grounds, they found parts of two Mayan pots and managed to put them back together. After making the discovery, they decided to write a newspaper article to inform people. To do so, they looked at an example newspaper and found the key features; decided on the 5Ws; created a quote from a classmate; and then wrote their final newspaper article. When learning about the different roles in the Mayan society, they found out about Mayan warriors and farmers who used weapons. They heard from a Mayan craftsman (teacher in role) who was going to a market to sell his weapons but wanted their help to sell them. First, they completed a gallery walk to answer some key questions about the weapons and then wrote fact files about some of these after reading some information about them. Next, they chose one weapon to focus on and wrote a persuasive post it for it. Their SPAG objective was to use modal verbs and higher-level verbs so they completed a burn 2 learn to sort them. Finally came their finished advert. The children found out that the Mayans wore headdresses as a sign of status and power. After learning about what the different groups of society would wear, they had to design one with a particular type of Mayan in mind. Following their design, they made elaborate headdresses. After making their creations, they gave opinions on others for what they liked and what they would improve. Using this, they wrote detailed evaluations following a set of questions. Towards the end of the adventure, the children went on a trip to Cadbury World where they learnt about the Mayans association with chocolate. Following the trip, they wrote recounts by ordering the main parts of the day and looking at using past tense correctly.	430	ENGLISH	1
Kate Chopin – The Awakening In the novel, “The Awakening,” Kate Chopin demonstrates how women were “caged” in the late 18th century and were typically unable to express themselves as individuals. Chopin enunciates the hardship faced by those who feel trapped by the constraints placed on them by society and how they must first overcome it within themselves. By symbolizing women as birds, Chopin shows a better understanding of the Victorian women and how the different representations of birds contribute to this novel as a whole. The very first line in The Awakening, Chopin mentions “a green and yellow parrot, which hung in a cage” (5). Edna Pontellier is this parrot for she is imprisoned and cannot fly away. She is expected to be nothing other than a wife and mother to her children and live the same retinues as other women do during this time period. Being that the parrot is caged, it speaks “a language which nobody understood, unless it was the mocking-bird that hung on the other side of the door” (5). The fact that no one could understand the parrot, symbolizes that nobody understands Edna and she does not fit well in this society. Edna’s actions are ones that are unusual to the Creole women, other than Madame Reisz. Madame Reisz is the only woman who does not follow the traditional routine and who understands Edna and her whereabouts. It is shown that the mocking-bird, being the only one to understand the parrot, is Madame Reisz. Even though Edna is the main character that resembles a bird throughout the whole novel, the entrapment of the Victorian women is characterized to resemble birds as well. The Creole women were caged not only by society, but by their husbands, children, and other women around them. They have been so ignorant to the live they live and the duties they perform, that they know no better. The women at Grand Isle are “Fluttering about with extended, protecting wings when any harm, real or imaginary, threatened their precious brood” (14). Just like birds, they are protective of the ones they love, and would do anything for them, but they do not do for themselves. They have beautiful wings but they are imprisoned. The women’s only duty is to sustained the roles of a wife and mother, and have their wings only to be looked and glimmered upon, but never to fly and show its wings to society. Chopin states, “Esteemed it a holy privilege to efface themselves as individuals and grow wings as ministering angels” (14). Therefore, they are confined to this existence because their only purpose in life is to uphold family tasks and responsibilities. As an escape from her former life as a mother and wife, Edna finds herself moving into another house she can call her own, “The Pigeon House”. But what she does not realize at the moment is she has just put herself in another cage. When talking to Madame Reisz, Edna tells her she will be moving “just two steps away” (113). Edna feels that by moving, she will gain a sense of control over her life and independence as an individual, but she is still found suck within a cage where she cannot completely fly away from the society which she is living in. With the move, Madame Reisz educates Edna that in order for her to find what she wants and needs in life; she must have the courage and strength to do so. She put her arms around me and felt my shoulder blades, to see if my wings were strong” (119). The Pigeon House is supposed to give Edna her freedom and insouciance but with Madame Reisz, informing Edna on her own difficulties, knows Edna will be able to overcome the struggles she is facing, but it is not going to be an easy battle; for she says, “The bird that would soar above the level plain of tradition and prejudice must have strong wings. It is a sad spectacle to see the weaklings bruised, exhausted, fluttering back to earth” (119). She wants to see Edna succeed with the choices she has made, but does not want to see her become broken from them. By the end of the novel, Edna fears she will never be able to fully be free and escape the Victorian women society. Because of this, she decides to go down to the beach to “dip her toes in” (163) the water. When she gets down there, she thinks about her husband, children, and the other Creole women and realizes she will never be limitless from any of them. She looks up and sees, “A bird with a broken wing beating the air above, reeling, fluttering, circling disabled down, down to the water” (164). This bird is symbolizing Edna and her unsuccessful attempt to release herself and find her own path. Like Madame Reisz said, Edna had to have strong wings if she was going to conquer what she had set out to do, but she ended up failing in the end. She goes out into the ocean, swimming, remembering, coming at ease, and then realizes she has lost her strength which causes her to drown. Edna saw that her death was the only way for her to be completely free of everyone and everything around her. She is no longer a possession of anything, and this was the first choice she had made as an individual where she was able to fly and show her wings to society. The imagery and symbolism of birds throughout this novel, shows us a better understanding at how Chopin relates these birds to real life. Birds have wings where they can soar and travel anywhere they would want to go, but most times they stick around in one area because it is familiar and comfortable to them. Women of this time had the same opportunity of exploring and discovering new plans for their selves, but they were scared to leave what they knew and what they had always been taught. Therefore, everyone went with what they had always known, and thought no different, with the exception of Edna. She was determined to spread her wings and make a new life for herself, but remained futile. As Chopin states, “Perhaps it is better to wake up after all, even to suffer, rather than to remain a dupe to illusions all one’s life” (160).	<urn:uuid:1b9cd0c3-e04e-4add-a791-fda2c2384179>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://freebooksummary.com/kate-chopin-the-awakening-essay	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250593937.27/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118193018-20200118221018-00358.warc.gz	en	0.982802	1,354	3.4375	3	[ -0.38095349073410034, 0.011624944396317005, 0.32061880826950073, 0.5268651247024536, -0.1912270188331604, 0.22442032396793365, 0.3946981430053711, 0.12605440616607666, 0.2172594666481018, -0.12889701128005981, -0.13952139019966125, 0.1032504290342331, -0.09824083745479584, -0.0414878353476...	1	Kate Chopin – The Awakening In the novel, “The Awakening,” Kate Chopin demonstrates how women were “caged” in the late 18th century and were typically unable to express themselves as individuals. Chopin enunciates the hardship faced by those who feel trapped by the constraints placed on them by society and how they must first overcome it within themselves. By symbolizing women as birds, Chopin shows a better understanding of the Victorian women and how the different representations of birds contribute to this novel as a whole. The very first line in The Awakening, Chopin mentions “a green and yellow parrot, which hung in a cage” (5). Edna Pontellier is this parrot for she is imprisoned and cannot fly away. She is expected to be nothing other than a wife and mother to her children and live the same retinues as other women do during this time period. Being that the parrot is caged, it speaks “a language which nobody understood, unless it was the mocking-bird that hung on the other side of the door” (5). The fact that no one could understand the parrot, symbolizes that nobody understands Edna and she does not fit well in this society. Edna’s actions are ones that are unusual to the Creole women, other than Madame Reisz. Madame Reisz is the only woman who does not follow the traditional routine and who understands Edna and her whereabouts. It is shown that the mocking-bird, being the only one to understand the parrot, is Madame Reisz. Even though Edna is the main character that resembles a bird throughout the whole novel, the entrapment of the Victorian women is characterized to resemble birds as well. The Creole women were caged not only by society, but by their husbands, children, and other women around them. They have been so ignorant to the live they live and the duties they perform, that they know no better. The women at Grand Isle are “Fluttering about with extended, protecting wings when any harm, real or imaginary, threatened their precious brood” (14). Just like birds, they are protective of the ones they love, and would do anything for them, but they do not do for themselves. They have beautiful wings but they are imprisoned. The women’s only duty is to sustained the roles of a wife and mother, and have their wings only to be looked and glimmered upon, but never to fly and show its wings to society. Chopin states, “Esteemed it a holy privilege to efface themselves as individuals and grow wings as ministering angels” (14). Therefore, they are confined to this existence because their only purpose in life is to uphold family tasks and responsibilities. As an escape from her former life as a mother and wife, Edna finds herself moving into another house she can call her own, “The Pigeon House”. But what she does not realize at the moment is she has just put herself in another cage. When talking to Madame Reisz, Edna tells her she will be moving “just two steps away” (113). Edna feels that by moving, she will gain a sense of control over her life and independence as an individual, but she is still found suck within a cage where she cannot completely fly away from the society which she is living in. With the move, Madame Reisz educates Edna that in order for her to find what she wants and needs in life; she must have the courage and strength to do so. She put her arms around me and felt my shoulder blades, to see if my wings were strong” (119). The Pigeon House is supposed to give Edna her freedom and insouciance but with Madame Reisz, informing Edna on her own difficulties, knows Edna will be able to overcome the struggles she is facing, but it is not going to be an easy battle; for she says, “The bird that would soar above the level plain of tradition and prejudice must have strong wings. It is a sad spectacle to see the weaklings bruised, exhausted, fluttering back to earth” (119). She wants to see Edna succeed with the choices she has made, but does not want to see her become broken from them. By the end of the novel, Edna fears she will never be able to fully be free and escape the Victorian women society. Because of this, she decides to go down to the beach to “dip her toes in” (163) the water. When she gets down there, she thinks about her husband, children, and the other Creole women and realizes she will never be limitless from any of them. She looks up and sees, “A bird with a broken wing beating the air above, reeling, fluttering, circling disabled down, down to the water” (164). This bird is symbolizing Edna and her unsuccessful attempt to release herself and find her own path. Like Madame Reisz said, Edna had to have strong wings if she was going to conquer what she had set out to do, but she ended up failing in the end. She goes out into the ocean, swimming, remembering, coming at ease, and then realizes she has lost her strength which causes her to drown. Edna saw that her death was the only way for her to be completely free of everyone and everything around her. She is no longer a possession of anything, and this was the first choice she had made as an individual where she was able to fly and show her wings to society. The imagery and symbolism of birds throughout this novel, shows us a better understanding at how Chopin relates these birds to real life. Birds have wings where they can soar and travel anywhere they would want to go, but most times they stick around in one area because it is familiar and comfortable to them. Women of this time had the same opportunity of exploring and discovering new plans for their selves, but they were scared to leave what they knew and what they had always been taught. Therefore, everyone went with what they had always known, and thought no different, with the exception of Edna. She was determined to spread her wings and make a new life for herself, but remained futile. As Chopin states, “Perhaps it is better to wake up after all, even to suffer, rather than to remain a dupe to illusions all one’s life” (160).	1,324	ENGLISH	1
The Renaissance was a time of a new revival of humanism and individualism, allowing people to express their opinions and ideas more freely than ever before. This revival caused a growth in the amount of secular music being produced, and with this new music came new and controversial styles of dancing. In this paper I will examine, in great detail, the music, composers, and numerous styles of dancing that came about during the Renaissance. The Renaissance Era, spanning from 1450 to 1600 AD, experienced a growth in humanism and individualism among various forms of art, including music. In fact, the word “Renaissance” means “reconstruction” or “rebirth”. The increase in creativity and freedom gave artists the chance to stray away from the extremely controlled ideas of the Medieval Era. Much of the art produced during this time was rooted in ancient Greek ideas. Artists of the Renaissance were often recognized and praised during their lifetimes, rather than years after their deaths. As new printing methods were developed, music was more easily distributed to the people and could be preserved. Much of the most important music of the Renaissance era is polyphonic, meaning the music was created by multiple melodies played simultaneously. As in the Medieval Era, sacred music was of great importance, however, secular music was becoming more and more common. Because of this, both sacred music and secular madrigals began to claim a polyphonic style. As the style of music was evolving, instruments were also improved and refined, and many new instruments were invented to create new sounds that were never heard before in the musical community. A few of these new instruments included the virginal and the clavichord, which were both keyboard instruments. The lute became a very popular instrument during the era and was the most common instrument for household use and family music making. During the Medieval Era, sacred music was the most common and important music of the time. Sacred music was able to maintain its importance during the Renaissance, but the style of this music took on a more polyphonic style. Most sacred music came in the forms of masses and motets, and did not require instrumental accompaniment. However, sacred music was often still accompanied by a small instrumental group or by the lute. Secular music during the Medieval Era was very uncommon, as the culture of the time only found music acceptable within the church. However, as humanism and individualism came and the Renaissance began, secular music became much more common to the everyday household. Vocal forms of secular music included madrigals, motets, and songs. Instrumental music was normally a short polyphonic piece for dancing. The polyphonic sound of the Renaissance was rather harmonious, as opposed to the monophonic sounds of medieval style. Many composers began to use the method of imitation, making music more elaborate and coherent, giving listeners a greater appreciation...	<urn:uuid:12e9daee-67aa-4de7-a340-35890e83ccaf>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://brightkite.com/essay-on/renaissance-dances-and-their-music	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251700988.64/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127143516-20200127173516-00007.warc.gz	en	0.986572	599	3.953125	4	[ -0.19602060317993164, -0.07020474970340729, 0.01180712878704071, -0.41451317071914673, -0.26410821080207825, 0.40759122371673584, -0.43765780329704285, 0.11196693032979965, 0.25531163811683655, -0.126501202583313, 0.020645789802074432, 0.11585788428783417, 0.2633991837501526, -0.1452919840...	1	The Renaissance was a time of a new revival of humanism and individualism, allowing people to express their opinions and ideas more freely than ever before. This revival caused a growth in the amount of secular music being produced, and with this new music came new and controversial styles of dancing. In this paper I will examine, in great detail, the music, composers, and numerous styles of dancing that came about during the Renaissance. The Renaissance Era, spanning from 1450 to 1600 AD, experienced a growth in humanism and individualism among various forms of art, including music. In fact, the word “Renaissance” means “reconstruction” or “rebirth”. The increase in creativity and freedom gave artists the chance to stray away from the extremely controlled ideas of the Medieval Era. Much of the art produced during this time was rooted in ancient Greek ideas. Artists of the Renaissance were often recognized and praised during their lifetimes, rather than years after their deaths. As new printing methods were developed, music was more easily distributed to the people and could be preserved. Much of the most important music of the Renaissance era is polyphonic, meaning the music was created by multiple melodies played simultaneously. As in the Medieval Era, sacred music was of great importance, however, secular music was becoming more and more common. Because of this, both sacred music and secular madrigals began to claim a polyphonic style. As the style of music was evolving, instruments were also improved and refined, and many new instruments were invented to create new sounds that were never heard before in the musical community. A few of these new instruments included the virginal and the clavichord, which were both keyboard instruments. The lute became a very popular instrument during the era and was the most common instrument for household use and family music making. During the Medieval Era, sacred music was the most common and important music of the time. Sacred music was able to maintain its importance during the Renaissance, but the style of this music took on a more polyphonic style. Most sacred music came in the forms of masses and motets, and did not require instrumental accompaniment. However, sacred music was often still accompanied by a small instrumental group or by the lute. Secular music during the Medieval Era was very uncommon, as the culture of the time only found music acceptable within the church. However, as humanism and individualism came and the Renaissance began, secular music became much more common to the everyday household. Vocal forms of secular music included madrigals, motets, and songs. Instrumental music was normally a short polyphonic piece for dancing. The polyphonic sound of the Renaissance was rather harmonious, as opposed to the monophonic sounds of medieval style. Many composers began to use the method of imitation, making music more elaborate and coherent, giving listeners a greater appreciation...	590	ENGLISH	1
Hoplites were citizen-soldiers of Ancient Greek city-states who were primarily armed with spears andshields. Their main tactic was the phalanx formation. The hoplites were primarily free citizens—propertied farmers and artisans—who were able to afford the bronze armor suit and weapons (estimated at a third to a half of its able-bodied adult male population). Hoplites generally received basic military training. In the 8th or 7th century BC Greek armies adopted a military innovation known as the phalanxformation. This tactic proved successful in defeating the Persians when employed by the Athenians at the Battle of Marathon in 490 BC during the First Greco-Persian War. The Persian archers and light troops who fought in the Battle of Marathon failed, in part, because their bows were too weak for their arrows to penetrate the Greek shields and armor, and their own armor and shields could not stand up to the longer spears and swords of the Greeks. The phalanx was also successfully employed by the Greeks at the Battle of Thermopylae in 480 BC and at the Battle of Plataea in 479 BC during the Second Greco-Persian War. The word hoplite (Greek: ὁπλίτης hoplitēs; pl. ὁπλῖται hoplitai) derives from hoplon (ὅπλον, pluralhopla ὅπλα), the type of shield used by the soldiers. There is however considerable debate about this as the shield was more commonly known as an aspis. Although, as a word, hopla could also denote the soldiers' weapons or even their full armament. In the modern Hellenic Army, the word hoplite (Greek: oπλίτης) is used to refer to an infantryman.	<urn:uuid:0921e0e4-ad28-4b4a-b3c0-674466430730>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.warandpeacesoldiers.co.uk/product-page/fespiysky-hoplite	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251687725.76/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126043644-20200126073644-00425.warc.gz	en	0.980234	394	4.1875	4	[ -0.3573284149169922, 0.5879096388816833, 0.546430230140686, -0.08855552226305008, -0.4205966591835022, -0.4478932023048401, 0.08399071544408798, 0.6838607788085938, -0.46331438422203064, -0.1713775247335434, -0.1858127862215042, -0.6179659962654114, -0.4379024803638458, 0.4115149974822998,...	1	Hoplites were citizen-soldiers of Ancient Greek city-states who were primarily armed with spears andshields. Their main tactic was the phalanx formation. The hoplites were primarily free citizens—propertied farmers and artisans—who were able to afford the bronze armor suit and weapons (estimated at a third to a half of its able-bodied adult male population). Hoplites generally received basic military training. In the 8th or 7th century BC Greek armies adopted a military innovation known as the phalanxformation. This tactic proved successful in defeating the Persians when employed by the Athenians at the Battle of Marathon in 490 BC during the First Greco-Persian War. The Persian archers and light troops who fought in the Battle of Marathon failed, in part, because their bows were too weak for their arrows to penetrate the Greek shields and armor, and their own armor and shields could not stand up to the longer spears and swords of the Greeks. The phalanx was also successfully employed by the Greeks at the Battle of Thermopylae in 480 BC and at the Battle of Plataea in 479 BC during the Second Greco-Persian War. The word hoplite (Greek: ὁπλίτης hoplitēs; pl. ὁπλῖται hoplitai) derives from hoplon (ὅπλον, pluralhopla ὅπλα), the type of shield used by the soldiers. There is however considerable debate about this as the shield was more commonly known as an aspis. Although, as a word, hopla could also denote the soldiers' weapons or even their full armament. In the modern Hellenic Army, the word hoplite (Greek: oπλίτης) is used to refer to an infantryman.	390	ENGLISH	1
The Nile in Ancient Egypt was practically everything to them. They didn’t have to use extra resources for roads. Instead, they built boats and traveled the Nile (Nelson, 2018). Boats were so important they also made their way into many different aspects of Egyptian mythology. The first boats were made of papyrus reeds and held together by rope made of papyrus (Ganeri, 1999). When they went north, they used oars because that is the way the Nile flows. As time went on and they needed to travel South, they made sails to harness the wind and built wooden boats to better support the sails (Nelson, 2018). They didn’t use nails because they were invented until the 1600’s and weren’t mass produced until the 1800’s (Visser). Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Ancient Egyptian Boats" essay for youCreate order Around 1100 B.C., Ancient Egypt was attacked from the mouth of the Nile by the Sea Peoples. King Ramesses III built warships and sent them out to defend Egypt (Ganeri 1999). The way that they succeeded was all because they had both oars and sails and they could maneuver a lot better. The Sea People only had ships with sails (Ganeri, 1999). The wooden boats were made with acacia, found in Egypt, or cedar wood from Lebanon (Nelson, 2018). They were more powerful than the papyrus boats. These boats made of wood were also the most popular funeral boats for the rich (Ganeri, 1999). Boats played a big part in Egyptian mythology Egyptians believed that the souls of the dead got ferried into the underworld by boat (Ganeri, 1999). They believed that Ra the sun god, or the sun itself, rode a boat through the sky and at night rode through the underworld (Nelson, 2018). Most Ancient Egyptians were buried with tiny models of boats to help their soul travel to the underworld. King Tut was buried with 35 different boats (Nelson, 2018). Regardless of their everyday importance, most of their boats did not survive. A lot of the research is based on drawings and religious works. There were only a handful of wooden boats that were discovered and studied (Nelson, 2018). Imagine the time it took to make all of Tut’s boat’s. In conclusion, the Nile River was the main way the Ancient Egyptians did anything. Because of this, boats were the main mode of transportation. They were known to carry all kinds of stuff from food to funerals. They were even used to explain where they went when they died and how the sun traveled through the sky. These boats kept Ancient Egypt together, but the only thing holding the boats together were rope and papyrus reeds. 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:ead3cd7d-b284-4976-8239-8bc6e1e1404d>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://studydriver.com/ancient-egyptian-boats/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250601628.36/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121074002-20200121103002-00430.warc.gz	en	0.985971	614	3.875	4	[ 0.024366484954953194, 0.6210827827453613, 0.26680880784988403, -0.39997225999832153, -0.5241268873214722, -0.0575452521443367, 0.16931498050689697, -0.1001744344830513, -0.08578787744045258, 0.1302606165409088, 0.060499534010887146, -0.3745853304862976, -0.2628878951072693, 0.0322998315095...	1	The Nile in Ancient Egypt was practically everything to them. They didn’t have to use extra resources for roads. Instead, they built boats and traveled the Nile (Nelson, 2018). Boats were so important they also made their way into many different aspects of Egyptian mythology. The first boats were made of papyrus reeds and held together by rope made of papyrus (Ganeri, 1999). When they went north, they used oars because that is the way the Nile flows. As time went on and they needed to travel South, they made sails to harness the wind and built wooden boats to better support the sails (Nelson, 2018). They didn’t use nails because they were invented until the 1600’s and weren’t mass produced until the 1800’s (Visser). Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Ancient Egyptian Boats" essay for youCreate order Around 1100 B.C., Ancient Egypt was attacked from the mouth of the Nile by the Sea Peoples. King Ramesses III built warships and sent them out to defend Egypt (Ganeri 1999). The way that they succeeded was all because they had both oars and sails and they could maneuver a lot better. The Sea People only had ships with sails (Ganeri, 1999). The wooden boats were made with acacia, found in Egypt, or cedar wood from Lebanon (Nelson, 2018). They were more powerful than the papyrus boats. These boats made of wood were also the most popular funeral boats for the rich (Ganeri, 1999). Boats played a big part in Egyptian mythology Egyptians believed that the souls of the dead got ferried into the underworld by boat (Ganeri, 1999). They believed that Ra the sun god, or the sun itself, rode a boat through the sky and at night rode through the underworld (Nelson, 2018). Most Ancient Egyptians were buried with tiny models of boats to help their soul travel to the underworld. King Tut was buried with 35 different boats (Nelson, 2018). Regardless of their everyday importance, most of their boats did not survive. A lot of the research is based on drawings and religious works. There were only a handful of wooden boats that were discovered and studied (Nelson, 2018). Imagine the time it took to make all of Tut’s boat’s. In conclusion, the Nile River was the main way the Ancient Egyptians did anything. Because of this, boats were the main mode of transportation. They were known to carry all kinds of stuff from food to funerals. They were even used to explain where they went when they died and how the sun traveled through the sky. These boats kept Ancient Egypt together, but the only thing holding the boats together were rope and papyrus reeds. 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	649	ENGLISH	1
We have already shown how Shakespeare was inadvertently influenced by contemporary or earlier events in setting details – names, events, badges or physical resemblance – for his Hamlet, King Lear and Richard III. What of Romeo and Juliet, thought to have been written between 1591-5 and first published, in quarto form, in 1597? The most notable point is that Romeo’s family name is Montague. The barony of Montagu was a courtesy title of the Earldoms of Salisbury and Warwick and Henry Pole, the last holder, was executed in 1538-9, as we have shown. His grandson, Henry Hastings, Earl of Huntingdon and a prominent figure for two thirds of Elizabeth I’s reign, died in 1595. Is that why Shakespeare chose a particular surname for the male lead character that doesn’t sound very Italian? We all know the amazing reconstruction of the head of Richard III, and the confirmation it gave of how he really had looked. Forget Shakespeare’s Richard III, the real man had been young, good-looking and altogether normal, except for scoliosis that affected his spine. But when he was dressed, it wouldn’t have shown, especially in the sumptuous clothes of the 15th century. So, no murderous, hump-backed monster he. Ricardians always knew it, but the reconstruction from his skull was final, undeniable proof. I have always been fascinated by the actual appearance of great figures from the past, and want to know if my imagination is creating something even remotely close to the truth. Take Richard Neville, Earl of Warwick. I can imagine so much about him, but all I really know of his physical appearance is from his stone likeness of the tomb of his Beauchamp father-in-law in Warwick. There he is, one of many hooded weepers around the tomb, but does that rather grim face really bear any resemblance? Frustratingly, we will probably never know. Now, while Richard III was the first king I could ever have called my favourite, he now has a companion, his predecessor with the same name, Richard II. And for Richard II, we have what is reckoned to be the first true painted likeness of a King of England – the full-length portrait that now hangs in Westminster Abbey. Richard II’s looks would seem to have been almost oriental, with heavy-lidded, almond-shaped eyes, but his complexion is pale and his curling hair a tumble of auburn curls that is decidedly not oriental. There is another likeness of him, as an older man, taken from his tomb, which bears a marked resemblance to the Westminster Abbey portrait. Richard III’s portraits were eventually proved to be very like the real man. But would the same be said of Richard II’s portraits, if we were to be fortunate enough to see a reconstruction of his head? To me, Richard II is visually unlike any other king, but then, we don’t actually know what his predecessors (and some of his successors) really looked like. I think we can be sure from Richard III, Henry VII and onward, but before then, the likenesses we have are rather standard, as if selected from a pattern book. For instance, we have no true portrait of Richard’s father, the “Black Prince”, unless we count his tomb effigy in Canterbury Cathedral. But as this depicts him in full armour, with close-fitting headwear that rather confines and squashes his features, it’s hard to say what he was really like. However, we surely have a credible image of Richard’s grandfather, the great Edward III, because his tomb effigy is based upon this death mask. And so we see a handsome old man with long hair and matching beard, and a slight droop of the mouth that is reckoned to be proof of a stroke. But we still do not have an actual portrait of him. His grandson’s likeness in Westminster Abbey holds the honour of being the first. So, did Richard II look like his Westminster Abbey portrait and effigy? In the case of Richard III, we had his skull and sufficient advance in scientific and artistic knowledge to recreate his head. We may not have the skull of Richard II, but we do have the next best thing, because his tomb was opened in 1871, and very detailed drawings were made of his skull, complete with measurements. Thought to have been lost, those drawings have been rediscovered in the basement in the National Portrait Gallery, together with a cigarette box containing what are believed to be relics from Richard’s tomb—fragments of wood, probably from the coffin, and a piece of leather thought to have been part of the king’s glove. The find was made by archivists who were cataloguing the papers of the Gallery’s first director, Sir George Scharf, who had been invited to witness the opening of royal tombs (Richard II, Edward VI, Henry VII, James I and Elizabeth of York) and the date on the cigarette box containing the relics matches that of Sir George’s visit—31st August 1871. One thing the drawings prove is that Richard was not bludgeoned to death, for there is no sign of damage to the skull. So Shakespeare was wrong about that! He’s wrong about a lot of things when it comes to kings by the name of Richard. After centuries of slanders about Richard III, always named as “the hunchbacked king”, it was finally proved that he just suffered from scoliosis. He was not born with this condition but he probably started to suffer with it in his adolescence between 10 and 15. This is the so-called idiopathic scoliosis that can be, in some cases, very painful and in very rare cases can even be fatal. This kind of scoliosis can’t be prevented, as the cause is unknown but the culprit could be the growth hormone or a genetic predisposition. This condition can be mild or severe. In the latter, it can affect the appearance of the person and obviously can create embarrassment, low self-esteem and sometimes depression in addition to physical distress, headache, a very thin shape, stomach problems and lung dysfunction. Severe scoliosis is visible if the person wears tight clothes and, if it doesn’t stop developing, it can cause excruciating pain due to nerve pressure. However, people affected by scoliosis have a normal life and can practice sports, do exercise and every normal, daily activity. Richard III is probably the most famous person affected by idiopathic scoliosis, along with Princess Eugenie of York, the runner Usain Bolt, the actress Liz Taylor, the singers Kurt Cobain and Liza Minnelli, the tennis star, James Blake, among others. Today, it is easy to treat this condition thanks to braces and, in the worst cases, with surgery but, unfortunately, these treatments were not available at the time of Richard III and medieval remedies were almost useless, very painful and often they even worsened the situation. For people affected by mild scoliosis, there were some massage techniques used in Turkish baths along with the application of ointments made with herbs and plants. In other cases, these massages were made in preparation for another treatment. One of the most common ‘remedies’ was traction. The equipment for this treatment was very expensive, so only rich people and the nobility could afford it. As Richard was a member of one of the wealthiest families in England and a noble as well, it is highly probable that he would have gone through traction. The instrument used for this purpose was similar to the ‘rack’ used to torture people. The patient was lying on his back and tied by armpits and calves by a rope to a wooden roller and literally pulled to stretch the spine. The treatment could last for hours and it is not difficult to imagine how horribly painful it was and, unfortunately, it was of no benefit. Richard’s family would have had the best physicians of the time and these should have been aware of this treatment so it is likely that, unfortunately, he had to undergo traction. It is difficult to imagine that Richard’s family wouldn’t have tried to cure his spine, being such highly-ranked people. However, scoliosis was not just a physical issue. A person affected by scoliosis was seen as the incarnation of evil and a sinner, while a straight spine represented morality, goodness and beauty. The Shakespearean character of Richard III was associated with wickedness and immorality because of his physical deformity, sharpened to the maximum to create an unscrupulous monster capable of any crime. Richard managed to hide his condition for his whole life because he very well knew this could have been a reason for being painted as a bad person, twisted in his body and, therefore, also in his mind. After his death at Bosworth, he was stripped naked and his secret revealed. Shakespeare exaggerated his condition in order to misrepresent Richard and to blame him for every possible crime. His scoliosis became a hunchback with the addition of a withered arm and a limp. With the discovery of his skeleton under the car park in Leicester, it appeared very clear that Richard had just a scoliosis and the evil hunchbacked king created by Shakespeare was just Tudor propaganda, that made Richard the most maligned king in English history. This discovery helped to reveal Richard in a new light and called into question all the atrocities he has been accused of. There are many reasons to believe that the truth will eventually come to light. Do you want to know a very strange coincidence? In Ipswich, where the sales office of the Richard III Society is located, there is a surgeon, expert in spinal surgery: his name is Robert Lovell (top)! I do not like including images of Richard’s remains, but the above double-image is from this article, in which Professor Sarah Hainsworth, who has given a talk to 10-11 year olds from Turves Green School. I quote from the article:- “….World renowned forensic scientist and engineer, Professor Hainsworth, Pro-Vice-Chancellor and Executive Dean of the School of Engineering and Applied Science at Aston University shared her expertise with 80 Yr10 and Yr11 students from Turves Green Girls’ School on 23rd October. “….Professor Hainsworth led the research into the final death blows of King Richard III during her time at the University of Leicester. She spoke about her scientific analysis of the wounds found on the skeleton of King Richard III. This related the tool marks to possible weapons and identified through the study of forensics the exact nature of his death at the Battle of Bosworth, 1485. She also explained how scientists proved that his curvature of the spine, made famous by Shakespeare’s hunched backed king, was in fact the bone disease scoliosis….” The students were apparently shocked by the bloody details of his terrible death, but let’s hope that the talk inspires them to not only want to know more about our history, but about Richard in particular. Too little history is taught in our schools these days, and the next generation is in danger of losing touch with its roots. It’s a rot that should be stopped! NOW! As an osteopath, Richard’s scoliosis is another aspect of his life that fascinates me. It came to my attention that a contestant on Britain’s Got Talent, Julia Carlile, aged 16, had a scoliosis treated privately in the USA, which was paid for by Simon Cowell ($175,000) The Mersey Girls on Britain’s Got Talent – Julia is in the front, first from R-L This was interesting, but even more intriguing was the way it was treated. Scoliosis is usually treated by inserting metal rods each side of the spine. The operation is very invasive, involves large scars and leaves the patient with a spine which is very stiff, although straighter than it was. The old way would have meant Julia would never dance again, which is why Simon Cowell stepped in when he heard that the new technique would allow the spine to still be flexible enough to dance. The operation is called vertebral body tethering, although the place in the USA that formulated the technique prefer to call it ‘Anterior Scoliosis Correction’. It involves screws being fixed along a cord inside the back. The recovery time is just six weeks and the operation is reversible if it doesn’t work. Here is a link to the place that pioneered the technique if you want to find out more: Here Just imagine if Richard had had access to this kind of treatment! Seven years ago, before this blog officially began, a letter was published in the Ricardian Bulletin about the common Edward III descent of the Duke and Duchess, as she soon became, of Cambridge through the Gascoigne-Fairfax line. This, about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s mutual ancestry, followed this March. Now it is clear that Princess Eugenie, the former scoliosis sufferer and daughter of the Duke of York, and her partner Jack Brooksbank are closely related through Edward III and James II (the Scottish one). They will marry at St. George’s Chapel, Windsor on 12 October. Having examined the evidence, this document and shows that they have a most recent common ancestor: Thomas Coke, 2nd Earl of Leicester (1822-1909). Coke’s simplest royal descent is from Charles II. Brooksbank is descended from Edward III via Robert Devereux (2nd Earl of Essex, through four of Edward III’s sons, although I have chosen the senior Mortimer line) to Coke’s second wife, Lady Georgiana Cavendish, although there is probably other Edward III ancestry. Lady Georgiana’s grandmother was Lady Catherine Gordon, daughter of the Marquess of Huntly and this line descends from James IV, who is obviously more recent than his grandfather, but through his mistress not his “Tudor” wife. He, of course, was James II’s grandson. This document shows that Lady Georgiana was descended from the first Earl of Harewood, Edward Lascelles, whose wife was descended through the Bowes and Lumley lines from Edward IV. Furthermore, as this picture shows, Princess Eugenie wore a backless dress to show her scoliosis scar. This article is very interesting, because it re-examines Shakespeare’s perverted version of Richard III. Yes, it’s about the play, and a production of it, but toward the end it deals with the REAL Richard, and how he has been damned by the Tudors and their propaganda. Well worth a read. In a previous post, we explored the theory that Shakespeare’s Richard III was actually based on the Elizabethan politician, Robert Cecil. Here is another discussion of the subject, Richard III and Robert Cecil, with references to the hypothesis that Shakespeare was actually the 17th Earl of Oxford, a descendant of the previous Earls of Oxford who were such thorns in the side of the Yorkist kings and one of whom was a major factor in Richard’s defeat at Bosworth. If this is true, it is no wonder that ‘Shakespeare’ was happy to blacken Richard’s name. There are a few misconceptions in the linked article, notably the assertion that Richard executed the 12th Earl and his oldest son; since Richard was only nine years of age on the date Oxford was executed (26th February 1462) this is obviously erroneous and it was, in fact, John Tiptoft who would have presided over Oxford’s execution, being Constable of England at that time (a position he occupied until 1469). Such distortions of age and timing also occur in Shakespeare, of course, placing Richard at the first battle of St Alban’s, when he would only have been two and a half years old! In fact, he took part in neither of the St Alban’ s battles. Edward II (left), traditionally dated a year before his own 1593 death. In it, he fuels the myth of Edward meeting his end by a red-hot poker. This is cited by Starkey in his (Channel Four series) Monarchy, who called Edward’s rear his “fundament”, showing again why he should not roam from his “Tudor” area of expertise. Marlowe’s legacy of influence in this is obviously less than Shakespeare’s with regard to Richard III, but the parallels are obvious. In quoting earlier “historians”, Shakespeare transferred the kyphosis of another contemporary figure to Richard, which some naive people still believe, whilst Richard’s disinterment demonstrated him to suffer from scoliosis instead. Indeed, the Starkey acolyte Dan Jones seems untroubled by the facts in either case.	<urn:uuid:05ab9453-ae77-40cc-a815-1ea33e5c277a>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://murreyandblue.wordpress.com/tag/scoliosis/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250614880.58/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124011048-20200124040048-00038.warc.gz	en	0.980238	3,599	3.59375	4	[ -0.2761021852493286, -0.085455521941185, 0.4822646975517273, 0.216519296169281, -0.5425688028335571, -0.07787521183490753, 0.5268887281417847, 0.15549875795841217, -0.20332634449005127, -0.20803280174732208, 0.15609514713287354, -0.3897208273410797, 0.22950652241706848, 0.13483954966068268...	1	We have already shown how Shakespeare was inadvertently influenced by contemporary or earlier events in setting details – names, events, badges or physical resemblance – for his Hamlet, King Lear and Richard III. What of Romeo and Juliet, thought to have been written between 1591-5 and first published, in quarto form, in 1597? The most notable point is that Romeo’s family name is Montague. The barony of Montagu was a courtesy title of the Earldoms of Salisbury and Warwick and Henry Pole, the last holder, was executed in 1538-9, as we have shown. His grandson, Henry Hastings, Earl of Huntingdon and a prominent figure for two thirds of Elizabeth I’s reign, died in 1595. Is that why Shakespeare chose a particular surname for the male lead character that doesn’t sound very Italian? We all know the amazing reconstruction of the head of Richard III, and the confirmation it gave of how he really had looked. Forget Shakespeare’s Richard III, the real man had been young, good-looking and altogether normal, except for scoliosis that affected his spine. But when he was dressed, it wouldn’t have shown, especially in the sumptuous clothes of the 15th century. So, no murderous, hump-backed monster he. Ricardians always knew it, but the reconstruction from his skull was final, undeniable proof. I have always been fascinated by the actual appearance of great figures from the past, and want to know if my imagination is creating something even remotely close to the truth. Take Richard Neville, Earl of Warwick. I can imagine so much about him, but all I really know of his physical appearance is from his stone likeness of the tomb of his Beauchamp father-in-law in Warwick. There he is, one of many hooded weepers around the tomb, but does that rather grim face really bear any resemblance? Frustratingly, we will probably never know. Now, while Richard III was the first king I could ever have called my favourite, he now has a companion, his predecessor with the same name, Richard II. And for Richard II, we have what is reckoned to be the first true painted likeness of a King of England – the full-length portrait that now hangs in Westminster Abbey. Richard II’s looks would seem to have been almost oriental, with heavy-lidded, almond-shaped eyes, but his complexion is pale and his curling hair a tumble of auburn curls that is decidedly not oriental. There is another likeness of him, as an older man, taken from his tomb, which bears a marked resemblance to the Westminster Abbey portrait. Richard III’s portraits were eventually proved to be very like the real man. But would the same be said of Richard II’s portraits, if we were to be fortunate enough to see a reconstruction of his head? To me, Richard II is visually unlike any other king, but then, we don’t actually know what his predecessors (and some of his successors) really looked like. I think we can be sure from Richard III, Henry VII and onward, but before then, the likenesses we have are rather standard, as if selected from a pattern book. For instance, we have no true portrait of Richard’s father, the “Black Prince”, unless we count his tomb effigy in Canterbury Cathedral. But as this depicts him in full armour, with close-fitting headwear that rather confines and squashes his features, it’s hard to say what he was really like. However, we surely have a credible image of Richard’s grandfather, the great Edward III, because his tomb effigy is based upon this death mask. And so we see a handsome old man with long hair and matching beard, and a slight droop of the mouth that is reckoned to be proof of a stroke. But we still do not have an actual portrait of him. His grandson’s likeness in Westminster Abbey holds the honour of being the first. So, did Richard II look like his Westminster Abbey portrait and effigy? In the case of Richard III, we had his skull and sufficient advance in scientific and artistic knowledge to recreate his head. We may not have the skull of Richard II, but we do have the next best thing, because his tomb was opened in 1871, and very detailed drawings were made of his skull, complete with measurements. Thought to have been lost, those drawings have been rediscovered in the basement in the National Portrait Gallery, together with a cigarette box containing what are believed to be relics from Richard’s tomb—fragments of wood, probably from the coffin, and a piece of leather thought to have been part of the king’s glove. The find was made by archivists who were cataloguing the papers of the Gallery’s first director, Sir George Scharf, who had been invited to witness the opening of royal tombs (Richard II, Edward VI, Henry VII, James I and Elizabeth of York) and the date on the cigarette box containing the relics matches that of Sir George’s visit—31st August 1871. One thing the drawings prove is that Richard was not bludgeoned to death, for there is no sign of damage to the skull. So Shakespeare was wrong about that! He’s wrong about a lot of things when it comes to kings by the name of Richard. After centuries of slanders about Richard III, always named as “the hunchbacked king”, it was finally proved that he just suffered from scoliosis. He was not born with this condition but he probably started to suffer with it in his adolescence between 10 and 15. This is the so-called idiopathic scoliosis that can be, in some cases, very painful and in very rare cases can even be fatal. This kind of scoliosis can’t be prevented, as the cause is unknown but the culprit could be the growth hormone or a genetic predisposition. This condition can be mild or severe. In the latter, it can affect the appearance of the person and obviously can create embarrassment, low self-esteem and sometimes depression in addition to physical distress, headache, a very thin shape, stomach problems and lung dysfunction. Severe scoliosis is visible if the person wears tight clothes and, if it doesn’t stop developing, it can cause excruciating pain due to nerve pressure. However, people affected by scoliosis have a normal life and can practice sports, do exercise and every normal, daily activity. Richard III is probably the most famous person affected by idiopathic scoliosis, along with Princess Eugenie of York, the runner Usain Bolt, the actress Liz Taylor, the singers Kurt Cobain and Liza Minnelli, the tennis star, James Blake, among others. Today, it is easy to treat this condition thanks to braces and, in the worst cases, with surgery but, unfortunately, these treatments were not available at the time of Richard III and medieval remedies were almost useless, very painful and often they even worsened the situation. For people affected by mild scoliosis, there were some massage techniques used in Turkish baths along with the application of ointments made with herbs and plants. In other cases, these massages were made in preparation for another treatment. One of the most common ‘remedies’ was traction. The equipment for this treatment was very expensive, so only rich people and the nobility could afford it. As Richard was a member of one of the wealthiest families in England and a noble as well, it is highly probable that he would have gone through traction. The instrument used for this purpose was similar to the ‘rack’ used to torture people. The patient was lying on his back and tied by armpits and calves by a rope to a wooden roller and literally pulled to stretch the spine. The treatment could last for hours and it is not difficult to imagine how horribly painful it was and, unfortunately, it was of no benefit. Richard’s family would have had the best physicians of the time and these should have been aware of this treatment so it is likely that, unfortunately, he had to undergo traction. It is difficult to imagine that Richard’s family wouldn’t have tried to cure his spine, being such highly-ranked people. However, scoliosis was not just a physical issue. A person affected by scoliosis was seen as the incarnation of evil and a sinner, while a straight spine represented morality, goodness and beauty. The Shakespearean character of Richard III was associated with wickedness and immorality because of his physical deformity, sharpened to the maximum to create an unscrupulous monster capable of any crime. Richard managed to hide his condition for his whole life because he very well knew this could have been a reason for being painted as a bad person, twisted in his body and, therefore, also in his mind. After his death at Bosworth, he was stripped naked and his secret revealed. Shakespeare exaggerated his condition in order to misrepresent Richard and to blame him for every possible crime. His scoliosis became a hunchback with the addition of a withered arm and a limp. With the discovery of his skeleton under the car park in Leicester, it appeared very clear that Richard had just a scoliosis and the evil hunchbacked king created by Shakespeare was just Tudor propaganda, that made Richard the most maligned king in English history. This discovery helped to reveal Richard in a new light and called into question all the atrocities he has been accused of. There are many reasons to believe that the truth will eventually come to light. Do you want to know a very strange coincidence? In Ipswich, where the sales office of the Richard III Society is located, there is a surgeon, expert in spinal surgery: his name is Robert Lovell (top)! I do not like including images of Richard’s remains, but the above double-image is from this article, in which Professor Sarah Hainsworth, who has given a talk to 10-11 year olds from Turves Green School. I quote from the article:- “….World renowned forensic scientist and engineer, Professor Hainsworth, Pro-Vice-Chancellor and Executive Dean of the School of Engineering and Applied Science at Aston University shared her expertise with 80 Yr10 and Yr11 students from Turves Green Girls’ School on 23rd October. “….Professor Hainsworth led the research into the final death blows of King Richard III during her time at the University of Leicester. She spoke about her scientific analysis of the wounds found on the skeleton of King Richard III. This related the tool marks to possible weapons and identified through the study of forensics the exact nature of his death at the Battle of Bosworth, 1485. She also explained how scientists proved that his curvature of the spine, made famous by Shakespeare’s hunched backed king, was in fact the bone disease scoliosis….” The students were apparently shocked by the bloody details of his terrible death, but let’s hope that the talk inspires them to not only want to know more about our history, but about Richard in particular. Too little history is taught in our schools these days, and the next generation is in danger of losing touch with its roots. It’s a rot that should be stopped! NOW! As an osteopath, Richard’s scoliosis is another aspect of his life that fascinates me. It came to my attention that a contestant on Britain’s Got Talent, Julia Carlile, aged 16, had a scoliosis treated privately in the USA, which was paid for by Simon Cowell ($175,000) The Mersey Girls on Britain’s Got Talent – Julia is in the front, first from R-L This was interesting, but even more intriguing was the way it was treated. Scoliosis is usually treated by inserting metal rods each side of the spine. The operation is very invasive, involves large scars and leaves the patient with a spine which is very stiff, although straighter than it was. The old way would have meant Julia would never dance again, which is why Simon Cowell stepped in when he heard that the new technique would allow the spine to still be flexible enough to dance. The operation is called vertebral body tethering, although the place in the USA that formulated the technique prefer to call it ‘Anterior Scoliosis Correction’. It involves screws being fixed along a cord inside the back. The recovery time is just six weeks and the operation is reversible if it doesn’t work. Here is a link to the place that pioneered the technique if you want to find out more: Here Just imagine if Richard had had access to this kind of treatment! Seven years ago, before this blog officially began, a letter was published in the Ricardian Bulletin about the common Edward III descent of the Duke and Duchess, as she soon became, of Cambridge through the Gascoigne-Fairfax line. This, about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s mutual ancestry, followed this March. Now it is clear that Princess Eugenie, the former scoliosis sufferer and daughter of the Duke of York, and her partner Jack Brooksbank are closely related through Edward III and James II (the Scottish one). They will marry at St. George’s Chapel, Windsor on 12 October. Having examined the evidence, this document and shows that they have a most recent common ancestor: Thomas Coke, 2nd Earl of Leicester (1822-1909). Coke’s simplest royal descent is from Charles II. Brooksbank is descended from Edward III via Robert Devereux (2nd Earl of Essex, through four of Edward III’s sons, although I have chosen the senior Mortimer line) to Coke’s second wife, Lady Georgiana Cavendish, although there is probably other Edward III ancestry. Lady Georgiana’s grandmother was Lady Catherine Gordon, daughter of the Marquess of Huntly and this line descends from James IV, who is obviously more recent than his grandfather, but through his mistress not his “Tudor” wife. He, of course, was James II’s grandson. This document shows that Lady Georgiana was descended from the first Earl of Harewood, Edward Lascelles, whose wife was descended through the Bowes and Lumley lines from Edward IV. Furthermore, as this picture shows, Princess Eugenie wore a backless dress to show her scoliosis scar. This article is very interesting, because it re-examines Shakespeare’s perverted version of Richard III. Yes, it’s about the play, and a production of it, but toward the end it deals with the REAL Richard, and how he has been damned by the Tudors and their propaganda. Well worth a read. In a previous post, we explored the theory that Shakespeare’s Richard III was actually based on the Elizabethan politician, Robert Cecil. Here is another discussion of the subject, Richard III and Robert Cecil, with references to the hypothesis that Shakespeare was actually the 17th Earl of Oxford, a descendant of the previous Earls of Oxford who were such thorns in the side of the Yorkist kings and one of whom was a major factor in Richard’s defeat at Bosworth. If this is true, it is no wonder that ‘Shakespeare’ was happy to blacken Richard’s name. There are a few misconceptions in the linked article, notably the assertion that Richard executed the 12th Earl and his oldest son; since Richard was only nine years of age on the date Oxford was executed (26th February 1462) this is obviously erroneous and it was, in fact, John Tiptoft who would have presided over Oxford’s execution, being Constable of England at that time (a position he occupied until 1469). Such distortions of age and timing also occur in Shakespeare, of course, placing Richard at the first battle of St Alban’s, when he would only have been two and a half years old! In fact, he took part in neither of the St Alban’ s battles. Edward II (left), traditionally dated a year before his own 1593 death. In it, he fuels the myth of Edward meeting his end by a red-hot poker. This is cited by Starkey in his (Channel Four series) Monarchy, who called Edward’s rear his “fundament”, showing again why he should not roam from his “Tudor” area of expertise. Marlowe’s legacy of influence in this is obviously less than Shakespeare’s with regard to Richard III, but the parallels are obvious. In quoting earlier “historians”, Shakespeare transferred the kyphosis of another contemporary figure to Richard, which some naive people still believe, whilst Richard’s disinterment demonstrated him to suffer from scoliosis instead. Indeed, the Starkey acolyte Dan Jones seems untroubled by the facts in either case.	3,480	ENGLISH	1
Apollo was the god of archery, music and dance, truth and prophecy, healing and diseases, the Sun and light, poetry, and more. The Roman worship of Apollo was adopted from the Greeks. As a quintessentially Greek god, Apollo had no direct Roman equivalent. There was a tradition that the Delphic oracle was consulted as early as the period of the kings of Rome during the reign of Tarquinius Superbus. On the occasion of a pestilence in the 430s BC, Apollo’s first temple at Rome was established in the Flaminian fields, replacing an older cult site there known as the “Apollinare”. During the Second Punic War in 212 BC, the Ludi Apollinares were instituted in his honour, on the instructions of a prophecy attributed to one Marcius. In the time of Augustus, who considered himself under the special protection of Apollo and was even said to be his son, his worship developed and he became one of the chief gods of Rome. After the Battle of Actium, which was fought near a sanctuary of Apollo, Augustus enlarged Apollo’s temple, dedicated a portion of the spoils to him, and instituted quinquennial games in his honour. He also erected a new temple to the god on the Palatine Hill. Sacrifices and prayers on the Palatine to Apollo and Diana formed the culmination of the Secular Games, held in 17 BC to celebrate the dawn of a new era.	<urn:uuid:2c03a531-154c-4120-a0cc-28506412c55e>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://digitalmapsoftheancientworld.com/mythology/roman-mythology/dii-selecti/apollo-2/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250614880.58/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124011048-20200124040048-00419.warc.gz	en	0.981574	312	3.65625	4	[ -0.02084903046488762, 0.5374971628189087, 0.45320454239845276, -0.28167909383773804, -0.8527897000312805, 0.0354456789791584, 0.12013117969036102, 0.3012886345386505, 0.27615466713905334, -0.3664141595363617, -0.3101489543914795, -0.5335260629653931, -0.11962491273880005, 0.529819190502166...	11	Apollo was the god of archery, music and dance, truth and prophecy, healing and diseases, the Sun and light, poetry, and more. The Roman worship of Apollo was adopted from the Greeks. As a quintessentially Greek god, Apollo had no direct Roman equivalent. There was a tradition that the Delphic oracle was consulted as early as the period of the kings of Rome during the reign of Tarquinius Superbus. On the occasion of a pestilence in the 430s BC, Apollo’s first temple at Rome was established in the Flaminian fields, replacing an older cult site there known as the “Apollinare”. During the Second Punic War in 212 BC, the Ludi Apollinares were instituted in his honour, on the instructions of a prophecy attributed to one Marcius. In the time of Augustus, who considered himself under the special protection of Apollo and was even said to be his son, his worship developed and he became one of the chief gods of Rome. After the Battle of Actium, which was fought near a sanctuary of Apollo, Augustus enlarged Apollo’s temple, dedicated a portion of the spoils to him, and instituted quinquennial games in his honour. He also erected a new temple to the god on the Palatine Hill. Sacrifices and prayers on the Palatine to Apollo and Diana formed the culmination of the Secular Games, held in 17 BC to celebrate the dawn of a new era.	311	ENGLISH	1
First Forest School Session Wednesday, 11 June 2014 The children at Bolton School’s Nursery were treated to their first official ‘forest school’ session. To start the day, they were prepared with a story: "Miss Twigley was setting up in the woods when she heard an almighty roar! She didn't see anything, but a little bird told her that very small ‘Cowboys’ and ‘Indians’ live in the woods ..." While walking across to the forest school site, the children eagerly chatted about the roar, and about the Cowboys and Indians they might meet. Once they arrived at the site, all of the children were asked to close their eyes for a minute and think about what they could hear, then each took a turn to describe the sounds: cars, wind, birds, trees, leaves, and the rustling of wet suits. The children were then asked to repeat the activity but think of what they could feel; they talked about the warmth of the sun and the wind brushing past them. Finally, they all looked around and explained what they could see, from the tall trees and leaves, to the birds, to the sun, sky, and clouds high above! Afterwards some children decided to make teepees or ranches to help the Cowboys and Indians. A group worked with Mr Cornthwaite to create a large teepee, using ivy to connect all the branches together. Others wanted to make signs to warn others of the big dragon or dinosaur that they thought might have caused the huge roar! All of the children had the opportunity to help Miss Twigley with making lunch: they collected twigs while learning how to safely build and light a fire. Afterwards, everyone gathered for lunch and ate sausage barms, which were cooked on the fire they had built! When they had finished eating, each child was able to carefully toast marshmallows over the fire and watch popcorn pop. After lunch, the children thanked the fire for helping to make the food by pouring water over it. They then talked about what they had enjoyed about the day so far. The more adventurous in the group wanted to spend the afternoon looking for the cowboys and Indians, or even the creature that had been roaring earlier! Others wanted to finish off their teepees or to make bows and arrows. The children who wanted to make a bow and arrow were told to find a stick that was long enough to fit from their foot to their hip or shoulder, and also quite bendy. They used mathematical and descriptive language while trying to find a stick in the right shape – one that was not too short, too thick, too thin, or too long! Once the children successfully made their bows, they were left to find a suitably straight twig to be their arrow. Once they had found their ‘arrows’, they then learnt archery skills with Mr Cornthwaite – with special attention to the main rule of archery, which is to shoot away from other people. The children finished their forest school session with swinging in the tree hammock. Throughout the day, the children were confident enough to take small risks and ask curious questions. They thoroughly enjoyed their day and learnt a wide variety of skills within a natural outdoor environment.	<urn:uuid:904e434a-d045-4ee3-8575-66ba44472d8b>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.boltonschool.org/nursery/news/first-forest-school-session/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783621.89/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129010251-20200129040251-00262.warc.gz	en	0.987552	674	3.265625	3	[ 0.2178836166858673, -0.2239808738231659, 0.1307472586631775, -0.12259513884782791, 0.05215757340192795, 0.08444331586360931, -0.31187331676483154, -0.07861370593309402, -0.012032954953610897, -0.2711574137210846, 0.19122295081615448, -0.2209475040435791, 0.04277816414833069, 0.424538969993...	1	First Forest School Session Wednesday, 11 June 2014 The children at Bolton School’s Nursery were treated to their first official ‘forest school’ session. To start the day, they were prepared with a story: "Miss Twigley was setting up in the woods when she heard an almighty roar! She didn't see anything, but a little bird told her that very small ‘Cowboys’ and ‘Indians’ live in the woods ..." While walking across to the forest school site, the children eagerly chatted about the roar, and about the Cowboys and Indians they might meet. Once they arrived at the site, all of the children were asked to close their eyes for a minute and think about what they could hear, then each took a turn to describe the sounds: cars, wind, birds, trees, leaves, and the rustling of wet suits. The children were then asked to repeat the activity but think of what they could feel; they talked about the warmth of the sun and the wind brushing past them. Finally, they all looked around and explained what they could see, from the tall trees and leaves, to the birds, to the sun, sky, and clouds high above! Afterwards some children decided to make teepees or ranches to help the Cowboys and Indians. A group worked with Mr Cornthwaite to create a large teepee, using ivy to connect all the branches together. Others wanted to make signs to warn others of the big dragon or dinosaur that they thought might have caused the huge roar! All of the children had the opportunity to help Miss Twigley with making lunch: they collected twigs while learning how to safely build and light a fire. Afterwards, everyone gathered for lunch and ate sausage barms, which were cooked on the fire they had built! When they had finished eating, each child was able to carefully toast marshmallows over the fire and watch popcorn pop. After lunch, the children thanked the fire for helping to make the food by pouring water over it. They then talked about what they had enjoyed about the day so far. The more adventurous in the group wanted to spend the afternoon looking for the cowboys and Indians, or even the creature that had been roaring earlier! Others wanted to finish off their teepees or to make bows and arrows. The children who wanted to make a bow and arrow were told to find a stick that was long enough to fit from their foot to their hip or shoulder, and also quite bendy. They used mathematical and descriptive language while trying to find a stick in the right shape – one that was not too short, too thick, too thin, or too long! Once the children successfully made their bows, they were left to find a suitably straight twig to be their arrow. Once they had found their ‘arrows’, they then learnt archery skills with Mr Cornthwaite – with special attention to the main rule of archery, which is to shoot away from other people. The children finished their forest school session with swinging in the tree hammock. Throughout the day, the children were confident enough to take small risks and ask curious questions. They thoroughly enjoyed their day and learnt a wide variety of skills within a natural outdoor environment.	657	ENGLISH	1
Frankenstein by Mary Shelley This is a novel written by Mary Shelley which uses the protagonists Frankenstein and Walton to explore issues that are experienced by people. The novel is really about Frankenstein a young scientist who is disillusioned with life as a result of his failures. The novel is written from a first person point of view where Frankenstein tells his life story to Walton. The preliminary of the novel is written using epistle form of witting where the character who introduces us to Frankenstein writes letters to his sister telling her of his journey and experiences. Frankenstein is introduced into the novel as a sickly man but one who is on the verge of destruction. Floating on an iceberg in the sea, Walton’s men try to convince him to go aboard to avert a disaster. Frankenstein refuses adamantly to go in until he is convinced to do so by the ships captain Walton. After being nursed for two days, he starts telling his story to Walton. This essay tries to answer the question ‘can science go too far?’ by analyzing how science defines life and death. In this essay, the power of science in trying to blur the separation between life and death is addressed while focusing on the differences between faith and science. Buy Frankenstein by Mary Shelley essay paper online * Final order price might be slightly different depending on the current exchange rate of chosen payment system. Frankenstein ruin was as a result of pursuing science in trying to discover the fantasies of earlier scientists like Agrippa. He was interested in discovering how he could banish disease and human suffering from people (Shelley 32). Frankenstein claimed to have discovered how to make life out of lifeless matter. Despite being brought up in church he asserts that with his enthusiasm in science, the spiritual meaning of life lost ground because to him, the church yard was just a place full of dead people (Shelley 40). In his understanding, life and death were reliant upon each other for either to prosper. The theme of discovery is predominant in the novel because when Frankenstein is introduced into the novel, he inquires as to where the captain was headed. Upon hearing that he was headed to discovery of a place, he agrees to board the ship. This is very strange for a man in his situation to be bothered by where the ship was going as opposed to his well being. This shows that Frankenstein despite being ruined by his enthusiasm to discover still craves to discover what the captain and his friend Walton wishes to discover. In his endeavor to discover the causeof life, Frankenstein denied himself of essentials such as food and rest and ended up being sick. In the name of science, Frankenstein was able to with stand his loathing towards the materials of his creation (Shelley 43). This is in devotion to his belief that his discovery would do good to society despite the time it took and the pain it inflicted on his being. Shelley uses irony to account for the theme of discovery. Frankenstein gave all including his health into discovering how to give life to lifeless matter. He tortured his body to endure long working hours and failure to nourish his body. It is ironical that such a learned fellow would fail to realize that a body needs food and rest to live. In his path to discovery of life, he condemned himself to death because by the time he finished creating his creature, his body was almost giving up due to lack of sustenance. His friends and family were dead to his memory because he did not find time to write to them and assure them of his well being. Ironic to his vast knowledge of natural philosophy, his mind was dead to reason because it was ruled by the sole obsession of creating life. Using irony, Shelley shows how Frankenstein was tormented by the sight of the creature he had created to the brink of madness. The writer also uses poetry to emphasize on the magnitude of discovery through science (Shelley 46). Frankenstein feared the creature he had created such that he spent the night in the cold and went on a brisk walk towards the bus stop. He walked stealthily as a man who was running away from his past knowing that what he feared was behind him and daring not too look back. Use of poetry in this section shows how scientific discovery can result in trouble for the scientist as well as the whole humankind. According to critics, the ethical issues addressed by Shelley in her novel still haunt science and technological advancement today. They argue that innovativeness in science is engendered by a drive to benefit the human race. However, along the way, many scientists lose site of the noble goals and are swept in materialistic nature of science and discovery (Hosgette 532). They go after fame seeking to be scientists who are hailed for discovery rather than applicability in the society. They also argue that Shelley was trying to show how scientists believe they have the ultimate power to disregard natural philosophhy and the place of God in humankind. Other critics see Frankenstein’s actions of creating a monster being ungodly as one states that “victor doesn’t go to the authorities to confess of his ungodly actions,” (Lunsford 176).The definition of life and death from science perspective according to Shelley is so thin almost non existence because in creating life, Frankenstein ultimately creates death in his ruin and the ruin of his family. According to Shelley, if science disregards the place of God and the role of man and woman in creation, it only leads to disaster for the human race. The very people Frankenstein wanted to save from death ends up being killed in one way or another by the monster he created. Ethically, he does not relinquish the dreams of being a great scientist by disclosing the truth to his friends or family about the danger of his creation. He is concerned with his personal reputation as he refuses to disclose his actions because he thinks people would deduce insanity. Shelley also explores the possibility that science unlike God is not able to accept everything it creates. Frankenstein was unable to accept the creature which he had taken time to make beautiful. He even refuses to give the creature a name and bolts out of the door for fear of the creature (Shelley 45). When he is introduced into the novel, Frankenstein is perceived to be a handsome young man with good manners by Captain Walton. The definition of beautiful according to Frankenstein is different because in his creation, the creature’s interior organs are visible through its so called skin. To anyone’s imagination, this is horrifying. This brings the central question and the source of disagreement between science and religion home. Clearly, science does not have the power to create life from void and its power therefore is minute when measured against the power of God. Other critics argue that the novel is based on the fight between two opposing poles of the social order. The conflict between the creator and the creature he creates (Benford 327). They argue that the social order and values are divided along wage and material possession in society. Frankenstein was unable to accept the creature because it was not socially acceptable. To date, scientists do not own up to their mistakes which sometimes prove costly and a danger to human life. Related literature essays - 'For My Daughter' by Weldon Kees - Poetry Project Paper - Limited Omniscient Narration - The Major Themes in the Odyssey of Homer and Inferno of Dante - Modern Meaning of "Equity" - An Affair with no Strings Attached - New Testament - Robert Browning's Dramatic Monologues - Three Stories, Three Different Views - A Glimpse in Mossacio's Works Most popular orders	<urn:uuid:0ca772bc-fa4c-475f-9eea-896f0e26b043>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://prime-writing.com/essays/literature/frankenstein-by-mary-shelley.php	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591431.4/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117234621-20200118022621-00070.warc.gz	en	0.983081	1,553	3.328125	3	[ 0.07154712080955505, 0.3056153655052185, 0.09949329495429993, -0.10165733098983765, -0.008199481293559074, -0.07531638443470001, 0.1947147399187088, 0.20143400132656097, 0.003134733997285366, -0.1613931655883789, 0.07323416322469711, -0.08786514401435852, 0.26604923605918884, 0.05035600811...	2	Frankenstein by Mary Shelley This is a novel written by Mary Shelley which uses the protagonists Frankenstein and Walton to explore issues that are experienced by people. The novel is really about Frankenstein a young scientist who is disillusioned with life as a result of his failures. The novel is written from a first person point of view where Frankenstein tells his life story to Walton. The preliminary of the novel is written using epistle form of witting where the character who introduces us to Frankenstein writes letters to his sister telling her of his journey and experiences. Frankenstein is introduced into the novel as a sickly man but one who is on the verge of destruction. Floating on an iceberg in the sea, Walton’s men try to convince him to go aboard to avert a disaster. Frankenstein refuses adamantly to go in until he is convinced to do so by the ships captain Walton. After being nursed for two days, he starts telling his story to Walton. This essay tries to answer the question ‘can science go too far?’ by analyzing how science defines life and death. In this essay, the power of science in trying to blur the separation between life and death is addressed while focusing on the differences between faith and science. Buy Frankenstein by Mary Shelley essay paper online * Final order price might be slightly different depending on the current exchange rate of chosen payment system. Frankenstein ruin was as a result of pursuing science in trying to discover the fantasies of earlier scientists like Agrippa. He was interested in discovering how he could banish disease and human suffering from people (Shelley 32). Frankenstein claimed to have discovered how to make life out of lifeless matter. Despite being brought up in church he asserts that with his enthusiasm in science, the spiritual meaning of life lost ground because to him, the church yard was just a place full of dead people (Shelley 40). In his understanding, life and death were reliant upon each other for either to prosper. The theme of discovery is predominant in the novel because when Frankenstein is introduced into the novel, he inquires as to where the captain was headed. Upon hearing that he was headed to discovery of a place, he agrees to board the ship. This is very strange for a man in his situation to be bothered by where the ship was going as opposed to his well being. This shows that Frankenstein despite being ruined by his enthusiasm to discover still craves to discover what the captain and his friend Walton wishes to discover. In his endeavor to discover the causeof life, Frankenstein denied himself of essentials such as food and rest and ended up being sick. In the name of science, Frankenstein was able to with stand his loathing towards the materials of his creation (Shelley 43). This is in devotion to his belief that his discovery would do good to society despite the time it took and the pain it inflicted on his being. Shelley uses irony to account for the theme of discovery. Frankenstein gave all including his health into discovering how to give life to lifeless matter. He tortured his body to endure long working hours and failure to nourish his body. It is ironical that such a learned fellow would fail to realize that a body needs food and rest to live. In his path to discovery of life, he condemned himself to death because by the time he finished creating his creature, his body was almost giving up due to lack of sustenance. His friends and family were dead to his memory because he did not find time to write to them and assure them of his well being. Ironic to his vast knowledge of natural philosophy, his mind was dead to reason because it was ruled by the sole obsession of creating life. Using irony, Shelley shows how Frankenstein was tormented by the sight of the creature he had created to the brink of madness. The writer also uses poetry to emphasize on the magnitude of discovery through science (Shelley 46). Frankenstein feared the creature he had created such that he spent the night in the cold and went on a brisk walk towards the bus stop. He walked stealthily as a man who was running away from his past knowing that what he feared was behind him and daring not too look back. Use of poetry in this section shows how scientific discovery can result in trouble for the scientist as well as the whole humankind. According to critics, the ethical issues addressed by Shelley in her novel still haunt science and technological advancement today. They argue that innovativeness in science is engendered by a drive to benefit the human race. However, along the way, many scientists lose site of the noble goals and are swept in materialistic nature of science and discovery (Hosgette 532). They go after fame seeking to be scientists who are hailed for discovery rather than applicability in the society. They also argue that Shelley was trying to show how scientists believe they have the ultimate power to disregard natural philosophhy and the place of God in humankind. Other critics see Frankenstein’s actions of creating a monster being ungodly as one states that “victor doesn’t go to the authorities to confess of his ungodly actions,” (Lunsford 176).The definition of life and death from science perspective according to Shelley is so thin almost non existence because in creating life, Frankenstein ultimately creates death in his ruin and the ruin of his family. According to Shelley, if science disregards the place of God and the role of man and woman in creation, it only leads to disaster for the human race. The very people Frankenstein wanted to save from death ends up being killed in one way or another by the monster he created. Ethically, he does not relinquish the dreams of being a great scientist by disclosing the truth to his friends or family about the danger of his creation. He is concerned with his personal reputation as he refuses to disclose his actions because he thinks people would deduce insanity. Shelley also explores the possibility that science unlike God is not able to accept everything it creates. Frankenstein was unable to accept the creature which he had taken time to make beautiful. He even refuses to give the creature a name and bolts out of the door for fear of the creature (Shelley 45). When he is introduced into the novel, Frankenstein is perceived to be a handsome young man with good manners by Captain Walton. The definition of beautiful according to Frankenstein is different because in his creation, the creature’s interior organs are visible through its so called skin. To anyone’s imagination, this is horrifying. This brings the central question and the source of disagreement between science and religion home. Clearly, science does not have the power to create life from void and its power therefore is minute when measured against the power of God. Other critics argue that the novel is based on the fight between two opposing poles of the social order. The conflict between the creator and the creature he creates (Benford 327). They argue that the social order and values are divided along wage and material possession in society. Frankenstein was unable to accept the creature because it was not socially acceptable. To date, scientists do not own up to their mistakes which sometimes prove costly and a danger to human life. Related literature essays - 'For My Daughter' by Weldon Kees - Poetry Project Paper - Limited Omniscient Narration - The Major Themes in the Odyssey of Homer and Inferno of Dante - Modern Meaning of "Equity" - An Affair with no Strings Attached - New Testament - Robert Browning's Dramatic Monologues - Three Stories, Three Different Views - A Glimpse in Mossacio's Works Most popular orders	1,571	ENGLISH	1

Subsets and Splits

No community queries yet

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