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
Causes of the Great Depression In 1929 the stock market crashed, triggering the worst depression ever in U.S. history, which lasted for about a decade. During the 1920s, the unequal distribution of wealth and the stock market speculation combined to create an unstable economy by the end of the decade. The unequal distribution of the wealth had several outlets. Money was distributed between industry and agriculture within the U.S.; in social classes, between the rich and middle class; and lastly in world markets, between America and Europe. Due to the imbalance of the wealth, the economy became very unstable. The stock market crashed because of the excessive speculation in the 1920s, which made the stock market artificially high (Galbraith 175). The poor distribution of the wealth, excessive speculation, and the stock market crashes caused the U.S. economy to fail, signaling the start of the Great Depression. The 1920s were a time when the American people and the economy were thriving. This period of time was called the Roaring Twenties. Unemployment dropped as low as 3 percent, prices held steady, and the gross national product climbed from $70 billion in 1922 to nearly $100 billion in1929 (EV 525). However, the prosperity of the 1920s was not shared evenly among the social classes in America. A study conducted by the Brookings Institution stated, 78 percent of all American families had incomes of less than $3,000. Forty percent had family incomes of less than $1,500. Only 2.3 percent of the population enjoyed incomes of over $10,000. Sixty thousand American families held savings which amounted to the total held by the bottom 25 million families. (Goldston 26). The 40 percent of Americans at the lowest end of the economic scale received only 12 percent of the national income by 1929 (EV 549). This maldistribution of income between the rich and the middle class increased throughout the 1920s. A major reason for this large and growing gap between the upper class and the working class Americans was that the manufacturing output increased throughout this period. As the production costs fell, wages went up slowly, and prices for goods remained at a constant. The majority of the benefits created by increased productivity fell into the hands of corporate owners. The federal government also helped to make the growing gap between the upper and middle classes. President Calvin Coolidges administration favored business, and as a result, the wealthy invested in these businesses. An example of this type of legislation is the Revenue Act of 1926, which significantly reduced income and inheritance taxes (Goldston 23). The introduction of credit to the American public proved to choke the economy rather than to stimulate it. To make an economy run properly, the total demand must equal total supply. The economy of the 1920s produced an over supply of goods. It was not that the surplus products were not wanted, but that the people who needed them could not afford the products. The working class spent most of their money on things they needed: food, shelter, and clothes. They also purchased some luxury items, but their income limited them to only a few of these purchases. Meanwhile, the rich were enjoying their increased profits. While the vast majority did not have enough money to satisfy all of their material wants and needs, the manufactures continued to produce surplus goods. Recognizing that the surpluses could be sold if consumers were financially able to buy them, the concept of buying on credit was established. Credit was immediately popular. Nearing the end of the decade, 75 percent of all automobiles were purchased on credit (EV 526). The credit system created artificial demand for products which people could not usually buy. People could not spend their regular wages to purchase products, because much of their income went toward their credit payments. The poor distribution of wealth within the U.S extended to entire industries, helping one at the expense of another. The prosperity of the decade was not shared among the industries equally. While the automotive industry was thriving in the 1920s, some industries, such as agriculture, were declining steadily. Most of the industries that were prospering in the 1920s were in some	<urn:uuid:a182b6c6-3cb5-45a4-a9f1-57b5d13d504c>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://pennsylvaniaangerclass.com/causes-of-the-great-depression/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592261.1/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118052321-20200118080321-00185.warc.gz	en	0.984212	837	4.09375	4	[ 0.00536803575232625, 0.09010487794876099, 0.026308666914701462, -0.01247902400791645, 0.013684025034308434, 0.12678052484989166, -0.4663378596305847, 0.08366020023822784, -0.019457271322607994, -0.15580040216445923, 0.40252965688705444, 0.5001022815704346, 0.48919373750686646, 0.2378968149...	3	Causes of the Great Depression In 1929 the stock market crashed, triggering the worst depression ever in U.S. history, which lasted for about a decade. During the 1920s, the unequal distribution of wealth and the stock market speculation combined to create an unstable economy by the end of the decade. The unequal distribution of the wealth had several outlets. Money was distributed between industry and agriculture within the U.S.; in social classes, between the rich and middle class; and lastly in world markets, between America and Europe. Due to the imbalance of the wealth, the economy became very unstable. The stock market crashed because of the excessive speculation in the 1920s, which made the stock market artificially high (Galbraith 175). The poor distribution of the wealth, excessive speculation, and the stock market crashes caused the U.S. economy to fail, signaling the start of the Great Depression. The 1920s were a time when the American people and the economy were thriving. This period of time was called the Roaring Twenties. Unemployment dropped as low as 3 percent, prices held steady, and the gross national product climbed from $70 billion in 1922 to nearly $100 billion in1929 (EV 525). However, the prosperity of the 1920s was not shared evenly among the social classes in America. A study conducted by the Brookings Institution stated, 78 percent of all American families had incomes of less than $3,000. Forty percent had family incomes of less than $1,500. Only 2.3 percent of the population enjoyed incomes of over $10,000. Sixty thousand American families held savings which amounted to the total held by the bottom 25 million families. (Goldston 26). The 40 percent of Americans at the lowest end of the economic scale received only 12 percent of the national income by 1929 (EV 549). This maldistribution of income between the rich and the middle class increased throughout the 1920s. A major reason for this large and growing gap between the upper class and the working class Americans was that the manufacturing output increased throughout this period. As the production costs fell, wages went up slowly, and prices for goods remained at a constant. The majority of the benefits created by increased productivity fell into the hands of corporate owners. The federal government also helped to make the growing gap between the upper and middle classes. President Calvin Coolidges administration favored business, and as a result, the wealthy invested in these businesses. An example of this type of legislation is the Revenue Act of 1926, which significantly reduced income and inheritance taxes (Goldston 23). The introduction of credit to the American public proved to choke the economy rather than to stimulate it. To make an economy run properly, the total demand must equal total supply. The economy of the 1920s produced an over supply of goods. It was not that the surplus products were not wanted, but that the people who needed them could not afford the products. The working class spent most of their money on things they needed: food, shelter, and clothes. They also purchased some luxury items, but their income limited them to only a few of these purchases. Meanwhile, the rich were enjoying their increased profits. While the vast majority did not have enough money to satisfy all of their material wants and needs, the manufactures continued to produce surplus goods. Recognizing that the surpluses could be sold if consumers were financially able to buy them, the concept of buying on credit was established. Credit was immediately popular. Nearing the end of the decade, 75 percent of all automobiles were purchased on credit (EV 526). The credit system created artificial demand for products which people could not usually buy. People could not spend their regular wages to purchase products, because much of their income went toward their credit payments. The poor distribution of wealth within the U.S extended to entire industries, helping one at the expense of another. The prosperity of the decade was not shared among the industries equally. While the automotive industry was thriving in the 1920s, some industries, such as agriculture, were declining steadily. Most of the industries that were prospering in the 1920s were in some	916	ENGLISH	1
December 17, 1773 to April 19, 1775: “The Aftermath” Many of the Boston Tea Party participants fled Boston immediately after the destruction of the tea to avoid arrest. George Hewes remembered, “We then quietly retired to our several places of residence, without having any conversation with each other, or taking any measures to discover who were our associates… There appeared to be an understanding that each individual should volunteer his services, keep his own secret, and risk the consequence for himself. No disorder took place during that transaction, and it was observed at that time that the stillest night ensued that Boston had enjoyed for many months.” Only one member of the Sons of Liberty, Francis Akeley, was caught and imprisoned for his participation. He was the only person ever to be arrested for the Boston Tea Party. No one died during the Boston Tea Party. There was no violence and no confrontation between the Patriots, the Tories and the British soldiers garrisoned in Boston. None of the members of the crews of the Beaver, Dartmouth, or Eleanor were harmed. This was the first organized act of rebellion against British rule and the Sons of Liberty were very careful about how the Boston Tea Party was planned and executed.	<urn:uuid:31cfdd92-7a33-4e46-92f8-e6bff319fe79>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.bostonteapartyship.com/the-aftermath	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594705.17/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119180644-20200119204644-00514.warc.gz	en	0.991976	249	3.640625	4	[ -0.005804830696433783, -0.10139913856983185, 0.4245036840438843, -0.6364202499389648, -0.24035006761550903, 0.04114788770675659, 0.705532968044281, -0.1406306028366089, -0.07575342804193497, 0.19940096139907837, 0.09407595545053482, 0.16980919241905212, 0.21649648249149323, 0.0903569683432...	9	December 17, 1773 to April 19, 1775: “The Aftermath” Many of the Boston Tea Party participants fled Boston immediately after the destruction of the tea to avoid arrest. George Hewes remembered, “We then quietly retired to our several places of residence, without having any conversation with each other, or taking any measures to discover who were our associates… There appeared to be an understanding that each individual should volunteer his services, keep his own secret, and risk the consequence for himself. No disorder took place during that transaction, and it was observed at that time that the stillest night ensued that Boston had enjoyed for many months.” Only one member of the Sons of Liberty, Francis Akeley, was caught and imprisoned for his participation. He was the only person ever to be arrested for the Boston Tea Party. No one died during the Boston Tea Party. There was no violence and no confrontation between the Patriots, the Tories and the British soldiers garrisoned in Boston. None of the members of the crews of the Beaver, Dartmouth, or Eleanor were harmed. This was the first organized act of rebellion against British rule and the Sons of Liberty were very careful about how the Boston Tea Party was planned and executed.	256	ENGLISH	1
In Frankenstein, Mary Shelley creates many differences between Victor Frankenstein and his creation, but simultaneously creates parallels between the two. Victor’s siblings and parents are perfect in his eyes and never deny him anything, whereas everyone who sees him from the moment rejects the creature he begins breathing. Despite these differences, both characters develop problems as adults based on these childhood experiences, which ultimately cause others’ deaths as well as their own. Although Victor’s seemingly idyllic upbringing sharply contrasts with the creature’s neglected “childhood,” both of these scenarios lead to their mutual destruction. While Victor experiences a seemingly ideal, but in truth, overindulgent childhood, the creature is faced with constant rejection from the moment he is given life despite his inborn warmth and compassion. From the beginning of each existence, the two grow up under completely different influences. Victor’s parents respond to his birth as a gift from heaven, whereas from the moment the creature draws breath, Victor, his “father,” abhors him. Indicating that as a child he never experienced unhappiness to any degree, Victor explains that his earliest memories are his “mother’s tender caresses” and his father’s “smile of benevolent pleasure while regarding [him]” (33). When the creature is “born,” however, the first thing that happens to him is that his creator irrationally abandons the new being in his state of innocence because he is “unable to endure the aspect of the being [he] had created” (56). While Victor’s parent’s view him as “their plaything and their idol… bestowed on them by Heaven” (33), Victor, denying his creature all of the love that he himself was fortunate enough to have, regards the monster as a “wretch” and a “miserable monster” (57). Shelley even uses parallel scenes where both Victor and the creature reach out for a parent’s love and reassurance and meet opposite responses to demonstrate their differing childhood experiences. When the creature comes to life and he stretches out his hand in a natural attempt to receive affection, Victor teaches the monster that he cannot be loved by, instead of reciprocating his creation’s innocent gesture, feeling the need to “escape” and taking “refuge” (57) from him. Even though the creature does not remember his creator’s flight, his first recollections of being a “poor, helpless, miserable wretch” and “feeling pain invade [him] on all sides” result from this traumatic rejection (99). In stark contrast, when as an adult in jail Victor reaches out his hand towards his father in search of the same reassurance the creature instinctively desired, he continues to learn that even as an adult he will always be forgiven and there are no consequences to his actions because his father responds by calming him and appearing as his “good angel” (175). While Victor’s parents give him love and affection as a child and he selfishly denies these necessities to his creature, both childhood scenarios influence these characters’ development into adults. As a result of each character’s childhood circumstances, Victor becomes a selfish adult who does not understand consequences and the creature’s natural kindness develops into vengeful misery. Because Victor was never denied anything as a child, he grows up to be a self-centred being. While during his childhood he supposedly receives lessons of “patience, of charity, and of self-control, [he] was so guided by a silken cord that all seemed but one train of enjoyment to [him]”(33) and, as a result, he never makes any mistakes and does not learn that there are in fact consequences to his actions. The creation of the monster itself is a selfish act that results from his pampered childhood because he never considers that there might be ramifications of some sort for the rest of humanity or even for himself. Because he develops this feeling of his own invincibility, when he decides to “unfold to the world the deepest mysteries of creation” (47), he is really only thinking of his own personal glory as a scientist and fails to recognize the possible problems that controlling nature to this extent can present. His reaction to discovering his God-like ability to bestow the gift of life is “delight and rapture” in his own power (51), rather than concern about the far-reaching effects of such power. His arrogance extends further when he bestows life upon his creature and, instead of taking responsibility for his creation; he selfishly runs away and does not concern himself with the details of the creature’s whereabouts for almost a year. Once he does finally meet the creature, he has minimal compassion for him because he cannot understand the feelings of someone who has been repeatedly denied love, an essential that he has always had in abundance. Furthermore, Victor does not seem to truly understand the creature’s desire for a companion because he has had Elizabeth since childhood. His parents presented Elizabeth to him as his “promised gift” and he has always known that “till death she was to be [his] only” (35), so he has never felt the lonely desolation that the creature does constantly. On the contrary, Victor often chooses to isolate himself from those who love him and separates himself from the companionship that the creature craves. Also developing adult characteristics as a result of his childhood, the creature changes from his naturally kind state as a child to an angry, embittered adult because of his neglected “childhood”. In contrast to Victor, the creature is denied everything he needs, especially love and acceptance, necessities that Victor has in abundance. Once the creature grows up and learns the origins of his creation, he has already experienced much rejection based on his hideous appearance and is already miserable because of the companionship that he lacks. As he reads Victor’s journal detailing his creation, he becomes even angrier and refers to the “hateful day when [he] received life” and bitterly curses his creator (127). After experiencing further rejection from the De Lacey family and the father of the little girl who he saves, his anger intensifies and he becomes vengeful towards his creator. The creature’s misery and the events leading up to it are a direct result of Victor’s neglect to take responsibility both before and after the creature was given life. In the cases of both Victor and the creature, early life conditions negatively influence each character as an adult. Victor’s and the creature’s individual faults arising from their upbringings ultimately lead to their mutual destruction. Victor’s selfishness and the creature’s vengefulness as adults lead to the deaths of those close to Victor. Because Victor denies the creature everything from love and compassion to acceptance, the creature’s anger deepens and he is driven to kill Victor’s brother William as punishment. William’s death consequently causes the death of innocent Justine who is believed to be guilty of his murder. These deaths occur because Victor grew up without understanding of consequences and he, as a result, selfishly denied the creature of the necessities that would have prevented him from committing such abhorrent crimes. By killing Victor’s closest friend Clerval and then Elizabeth, his lifelong companion, the creature continues to act on his vengeful feelings because Victor continues to deny him necessities and destroys the monster’s own future companion before his eyes. The creature resorts to this life of despondency and violence because of his childhood of neglect and the resulting adult rejection he later experiences. Even after the monster has started to kill and he has expressed his bitter sentiments to Victor, Victor does realize that he has “drawn down a horrible curse upon [his] head,” but still sees himself as “guiltless” (157) and does not acknowledge that he could have prevented this misery if he had only taken responsibility for his actions and had not been out for scientific glory. The monster’s final revenge on Victor, leading him through the arctic regions of the north, eventually leads to both of their deaths. Because of Victor’s selfishness, the creature feels the need to lead him on a physically and emotionally draining journey that causes Victor’s health to decline and finally Victor’s death. Once Victor has died and the creature no longer has a reason to live in his loveless, companionless state of existence, he vows to put himself out of his misery and die. Victor’s overindulgent childhood and the monster’s emotionally dry upbringing lead to the destruction of those close to them and, eventually, their own tragic demise. While the creature’s barren childhood sharply differs from Victor’s supposedly ideal upbringing, both situations lead to problems for both characters as adults and ultimately lead to each destruction. Shelley presents these two opposing experiences, but she sets both the “ideal” and the blatantly horrific up to fail and lead to death and misery. She suggests that maybe what seems like an ideal child rearing method when the child is given everything he could ever want really raises an adult who is self-involved and inconsiderate of the world around him. Shelley further uses the far-reaching effects of these extreme childhoods through the entirety of the characters’ lives to imply the importance of a balanced upbringing to create a balanced adult. By portraying the two extreme possibilities in the creature and Victor, she indicates the necessity of teaching children from the moment that they are born not just unconditional love and acceptance, but also consequences and selflessness. Shelley expresses through her novel that it is essential to have all of these elements in order to survive in the world.	<urn:uuid:1b9e775b-c457-43ca-a3d6-5bf1a8645ca8>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://philosophyessays.net/balanced-adult/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250607118.51/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122131612-20200122160612-00257.warc.gz	en	0.9806	2,066	3.421875	3	[ -0.0901857540011406, 0.2020854353904724, 0.04316835105419159, -0.05690229684114456, -0.4044608175754547, 0.13016274571418762, 0.32351893186569214, -0.18729564547538757, -0.01569165289402008, -0.20604148507118225, -0.1578870713710785, 0.03905836492776871, 0.5863223671913147, -0.021245380863...	2	In Frankenstein, Mary Shelley creates many differences between Victor Frankenstein and his creation, but simultaneously creates parallels between the two. Victor’s siblings and parents are perfect in his eyes and never deny him anything, whereas everyone who sees him from the moment rejects the creature he begins breathing. Despite these differences, both characters develop problems as adults based on these childhood experiences, which ultimately cause others’ deaths as well as their own. Although Victor’s seemingly idyllic upbringing sharply contrasts with the creature’s neglected “childhood,” both of these scenarios lead to their mutual destruction. While Victor experiences a seemingly ideal, but in truth, overindulgent childhood, the creature is faced with constant rejection from the moment he is given life despite his inborn warmth and compassion. From the beginning of each existence, the two grow up under completely different influences. Victor’s parents respond to his birth as a gift from heaven, whereas from the moment the creature draws breath, Victor, his “father,” abhors him. Indicating that as a child he never experienced unhappiness to any degree, Victor explains that his earliest memories are his “mother’s tender caresses” and his father’s “smile of benevolent pleasure while regarding [him]” (33). When the creature is “born,” however, the first thing that happens to him is that his creator irrationally abandons the new being in his state of innocence because he is “unable to endure the aspect of the being [he] had created” (56). While Victor’s parent’s view him as “their plaything and their idol… bestowed on them by Heaven” (33), Victor, denying his creature all of the love that he himself was fortunate enough to have, regards the monster as a “wretch” and a “miserable monster” (57). Shelley even uses parallel scenes where both Victor and the creature reach out for a parent’s love and reassurance and meet opposite responses to demonstrate their differing childhood experiences. When the creature comes to life and he stretches out his hand in a natural attempt to receive affection, Victor teaches the monster that he cannot be loved by, instead of reciprocating his creation’s innocent gesture, feeling the need to “escape” and taking “refuge” (57) from him. Even though the creature does not remember his creator’s flight, his first recollections of being a “poor, helpless, miserable wretch” and “feeling pain invade [him] on all sides” result from this traumatic rejection (99). In stark contrast, when as an adult in jail Victor reaches out his hand towards his father in search of the same reassurance the creature instinctively desired, he continues to learn that even as an adult he will always be forgiven and there are no consequences to his actions because his father responds by calming him and appearing as his “good angel” (175). While Victor’s parents give him love and affection as a child and he selfishly denies these necessities to his creature, both childhood scenarios influence these characters’ development into adults. As a result of each character’s childhood circumstances, Victor becomes a selfish adult who does not understand consequences and the creature’s natural kindness develops into vengeful misery. Because Victor was never denied anything as a child, he grows up to be a self-centred being. While during his childhood he supposedly receives lessons of “patience, of charity, and of self-control, [he] was so guided by a silken cord that all seemed but one train of enjoyment to [him]”(33) and, as a result, he never makes any mistakes and does not learn that there are in fact consequences to his actions. The creation of the monster itself is a selfish act that results from his pampered childhood because he never considers that there might be ramifications of some sort for the rest of humanity or even for himself. Because he develops this feeling of his own invincibility, when he decides to “unfold to the world the deepest mysteries of creation” (47), he is really only thinking of his own personal glory as a scientist and fails to recognize the possible problems that controlling nature to this extent can present. His reaction to discovering his God-like ability to bestow the gift of life is “delight and rapture” in his own power (51), rather than concern about the far-reaching effects of such power. His arrogance extends further when he bestows life upon his creature and, instead of taking responsibility for his creation; he selfishly runs away and does not concern himself with the details of the creature’s whereabouts for almost a year. Once he does finally meet the creature, he has minimal compassion for him because he cannot understand the feelings of someone who has been repeatedly denied love, an essential that he has always had in abundance. Furthermore, Victor does not seem to truly understand the creature’s desire for a companion because he has had Elizabeth since childhood. His parents presented Elizabeth to him as his “promised gift” and he has always known that “till death she was to be [his] only” (35), so he has never felt the lonely desolation that the creature does constantly. On the contrary, Victor often chooses to isolate himself from those who love him and separates himself from the companionship that the creature craves. Also developing adult characteristics as a result of his childhood, the creature changes from his naturally kind state as a child to an angry, embittered adult because of his neglected “childhood”. In contrast to Victor, the creature is denied everything he needs, especially love and acceptance, necessities that Victor has in abundance. Once the creature grows up and learns the origins of his creation, he has already experienced much rejection based on his hideous appearance and is already miserable because of the companionship that he lacks. As he reads Victor’s journal detailing his creation, he becomes even angrier and refers to the “hateful day when [he] received life” and bitterly curses his creator (127). After experiencing further rejection from the De Lacey family and the father of the little girl who he saves, his anger intensifies and he becomes vengeful towards his creator. The creature’s misery and the events leading up to it are a direct result of Victor’s neglect to take responsibility both before and after the creature was given life. In the cases of both Victor and the creature, early life conditions negatively influence each character as an adult. Victor’s and the creature’s individual faults arising from their upbringings ultimately lead to their mutual destruction. Victor’s selfishness and the creature’s vengefulness as adults lead to the deaths of those close to Victor. Because Victor denies the creature everything from love and compassion to acceptance, the creature’s anger deepens and he is driven to kill Victor’s brother William as punishment. William’s death consequently causes the death of innocent Justine who is believed to be guilty of his murder. These deaths occur because Victor grew up without understanding of consequences and he, as a result, selfishly denied the creature of the necessities that would have prevented him from committing such abhorrent crimes. By killing Victor’s closest friend Clerval and then Elizabeth, his lifelong companion, the creature continues to act on his vengeful feelings because Victor continues to deny him necessities and destroys the monster’s own future companion before his eyes. The creature resorts to this life of despondency and violence because of his childhood of neglect and the resulting adult rejection he later experiences. Even after the monster has started to kill and he has expressed his bitter sentiments to Victor, Victor does realize that he has “drawn down a horrible curse upon [his] head,” but still sees himself as “guiltless” (157) and does not acknowledge that he could have prevented this misery if he had only taken responsibility for his actions and had not been out for scientific glory. The monster’s final revenge on Victor, leading him through the arctic regions of the north, eventually leads to both of their deaths. Because of Victor’s selfishness, the creature feels the need to lead him on a physically and emotionally draining journey that causes Victor’s health to decline and finally Victor’s death. Once Victor has died and the creature no longer has a reason to live in his loveless, companionless state of existence, he vows to put himself out of his misery and die. Victor’s overindulgent childhood and the monster’s emotionally dry upbringing lead to the destruction of those close to them and, eventually, their own tragic demise. While the creature’s barren childhood sharply differs from Victor’s supposedly ideal upbringing, both situations lead to problems for both characters as adults and ultimately lead to each destruction. Shelley presents these two opposing experiences, but she sets both the “ideal” and the blatantly horrific up to fail and lead to death and misery. She suggests that maybe what seems like an ideal child rearing method when the child is given everything he could ever want really raises an adult who is self-involved and inconsiderate of the world around him. Shelley further uses the far-reaching effects of these extreme childhoods through the entirety of the characters’ lives to imply the importance of a balanced upbringing to create a balanced adult. By portraying the two extreme possibilities in the creature and Victor, she indicates the necessity of teaching children from the moment that they are born not just unconditional love and acceptance, but also consequences and selflessness. Shelley expresses through her novel that it is essential to have all of these elements in order to survive in the world.	1,936	ENGLISH	1
As the English army enters with scaling ladders, Henry urges them on with a stirring speech. He tells them that in peace, passivity and humility are virtues, but in war it is necessary to be ruthless. They must overcome their natural feelings and make themselves hard. He reminds them they are descended from men who were tested by war and experienced in it, and who also fought in France. He urges his foot soldiers and archers to show their mettle, to demonstrate that they are worthy of their upbringing. He does not doubt that they are, and he sees nobility in their eyes. As he leads this latest assault, he encourages them to yell patriotic slogans as they scale the walls of the city. Henry V is sometimes studied in business schools to analyze the qualities that make for successful leadership. There is no doubt that Henry does a magnificent job of inspiring and leading his men here. He shows them what attitude of mind is needed, tells them how to attain it, fills them with pride in the exploits of their ancestors, shows he has complete confidence in them, and sends them off to battle with inspirational words ringing in their ears. No leader could do better than that.	<urn:uuid:4ca4a2e4-e876-4b5e-91ca-30598f168bb5>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.novelguide.com/henry-v/summaries/act3-scen1	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591431.4/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117234621-20200118022621-00489.warc.gz	en	0.989937	237	3.40625	3	[ -0.49551570415496826, 0.4829130172729492, 0.16396717727184296, -0.18558667600154877, -0.16650390625, -0.01150781475007534, 0.6090766191482544, 0.01949683576822281, -0.19981639087200165, -0.5082926154136658, -0.09679045528173447, -0.5283195972442627, 0.2433599978685379, 0.17240525782108307,...	5	As the English army enters with scaling ladders, Henry urges them on with a stirring speech. He tells them that in peace, passivity and humility are virtues, but in war it is necessary to be ruthless. They must overcome their natural feelings and make themselves hard. He reminds them they are descended from men who were tested by war and experienced in it, and who also fought in France. He urges his foot soldiers and archers to show their mettle, to demonstrate that they are worthy of their upbringing. He does not doubt that they are, and he sees nobility in their eyes. As he leads this latest assault, he encourages them to yell patriotic slogans as they scale the walls of the city. Henry V is sometimes studied in business schools to analyze the qualities that make for successful leadership. There is no doubt that Henry does a magnificent job of inspiring and leading his men here. He shows them what attitude of mind is needed, tells them how to attain it, fills them with pride in the exploits of their ancestors, shows he has complete confidence in them, and sends them off to battle with inspirational words ringing in their ears. No leader could do better than that.	237	ENGLISH	1
This object is a metal identification tag also known as a dog tag. This tag was worn by Jose M. Valdespino who enlisted in Sept 1942 at Duncan Field, in San Antonio. After training, he was assigned as the Ball Turret Gunner in a B-17 with the U.S. Army Air Corps in the the 367th Bomb Squadron, 306th Bomber Group, based in England. He flew 24 missions with “The Clay Pigeon’s” in a B-17, his missions included the bombing France which was occupied by Germany. Joe’s combat service ended when he was injured in a jeep accident. He was discharged in October 1945. Watch the following video to hear more about his story. Identification tags for the military have been used since around the 1850s. The earliest known example where dog tags were used was during the Taiping Revolt in China. The soldiers fighting in this rebellion wore wooden tags on their belt. The information on the tag included name, age, birthplace, unit and the date they were enlisted. In the days of the American Civil War more than 150,000 soldiers were unidentified. Some knew that if they were to perish in the war there was a possibility that they would not be identified. So many went to great lengths to have some sort of identification on them. Many attached notes to their bodies while others wrote their name on their belts, and some wrote their name on the bottom of their shoes. With the high demand for some type of identification tag, merchants started selling metal disks to soldiers. In many periodicals such as Harper’s Magazine there was advertisements for tags called “soldier’s pins” which were made of silver or gold with the soldiers name and unit. By the 1890s dog tags were being issued to the U.S. Army and Navy. By the time the United States entered WWI all soldiers were required to use a identification tag. During WWII a new type of tag was introduced, this new tag changed in style from a disk to a rectangle tag, known as the M1940. The rectangular tag had a notch at the end like the tag from our collections. It was during WWII that the tags got the nickname “dog tag.” The tags not only had the name of the soldier but also other information such as blood type, tetanus shot information, and religious preference. During WWII however, there was only 3 options for religious preference: Protestant, Catholic, and Hebrew. Since then more options have been added and soldiers even have the option to put “none” or “no religious preference.” Early versions of identification tags included the name and address of the soldier’s next of kin. During the war, the enemy used that information as a tool for psychological warfare, so the practice was discontinued by 1943. Silencers for the dog tags were also introduced during WWII. The silencers were used to prevent the dog tags from making noise when coming into contact with each other. The M1940 tag was in use until it was replaced by the M1967 which was made of a T304 stainless steel. This type of tag has no notch and is what is used today. With technology being so advanced, the future of dog tags looks promising. The U.S. Army is currently developing and testing dog tags that would use RFID, microchip, or USB technology. The dog tags would hold the soldiers medical information as well as dental records, which would make it easier if in identifying them. These dog tags would be worn in addition to the current ones. The Marine Corps is developing dog tags with advanced technology also including RFID and the possibility of even being able to use GPS data to help locate wounded soldiers. [Joscelynn Garcia] Maier, Larry B., and Joseph W. Stahl. Identification Discs of Union Soldiers in the Civil War: A Complete Classification Guide and Illustrated History. Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland & Co., Publishers, 2008.	<urn:uuid:da87ee9a-d3dc-4e32-b07e-e42955b7e65d>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.texancultures.com/object-dog-tag/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598726.39/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120110422-20200120134422-00281.warc.gz	en	0.982467	825	3.375	3	[ -0.5937395095825195, 0.14292028546333313, -0.027280034497380257, -0.008036021143198013, 0.5124284029006958, 0.042447321116924286, 0.5061348676681519, 0.403484582901001, -0.15912362933158875, 0.08198639750480652, 0.4540404975414276, -0.10201720148324966, 0.10520441830158234, 0.3614399433135...	9	This object is a metal identification tag also known as a dog tag. This tag was worn by Jose M. Valdespino who enlisted in Sept 1942 at Duncan Field, in San Antonio. After training, he was assigned as the Ball Turret Gunner in a B-17 with the U.S. Army Air Corps in the the 367th Bomb Squadron, 306th Bomber Group, based in England. He flew 24 missions with “The Clay Pigeon’s” in a B-17, his missions included the bombing France which was occupied by Germany. Joe’s combat service ended when he was injured in a jeep accident. He was discharged in October 1945. Watch the following video to hear more about his story. Identification tags for the military have been used since around the 1850s. The earliest known example where dog tags were used was during the Taiping Revolt in China. The soldiers fighting in this rebellion wore wooden tags on their belt. The information on the tag included name, age, birthplace, unit and the date they were enlisted. In the days of the American Civil War more than 150,000 soldiers were unidentified. Some knew that if they were to perish in the war there was a possibility that they would not be identified. So many went to great lengths to have some sort of identification on them. Many attached notes to their bodies while others wrote their name on their belts, and some wrote their name on the bottom of their shoes. With the high demand for some type of identification tag, merchants started selling metal disks to soldiers. In many periodicals such as Harper’s Magazine there was advertisements for tags called “soldier’s pins” which were made of silver or gold with the soldiers name and unit. By the 1890s dog tags were being issued to the U.S. Army and Navy. By the time the United States entered WWI all soldiers were required to use a identification tag. During WWII a new type of tag was introduced, this new tag changed in style from a disk to a rectangle tag, known as the M1940. The rectangular tag had a notch at the end like the tag from our collections. It was during WWII that the tags got the nickname “dog tag.” The tags not only had the name of the soldier but also other information such as blood type, tetanus shot information, and religious preference. During WWII however, there was only 3 options for religious preference: Protestant, Catholic, and Hebrew. Since then more options have been added and soldiers even have the option to put “none” or “no religious preference.” Early versions of identification tags included the name and address of the soldier’s next of kin. During the war, the enemy used that information as a tool for psychological warfare, so the practice was discontinued by 1943. Silencers for the dog tags were also introduced during WWII. The silencers were used to prevent the dog tags from making noise when coming into contact with each other. The M1940 tag was in use until it was replaced by the M1967 which was made of a T304 stainless steel. This type of tag has no notch and is what is used today. With technology being so advanced, the future of dog tags looks promising. The U.S. Army is currently developing and testing dog tags that would use RFID, microchip, or USB technology. The dog tags would hold the soldiers medical information as well as dental records, which would make it easier if in identifying them. These dog tags would be worn in addition to the current ones. The Marine Corps is developing dog tags with advanced technology also including RFID and the possibility of even being able to use GPS data to help locate wounded soldiers. [Joscelynn Garcia] Maier, Larry B., and Joseph W. Stahl. Identification Discs of Union Soldiers in the Civil War: A Complete Classification Guide and Illustrated History. Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland & Co., Publishers, 2008.	842	ENGLISH	1
This is an ancient limestone votive statue of a Ptolemaic ruler discovered in Voni. The Ptolemaic dynasty, sometimes also known as the Lagids, was a Macedonian Greek royal family, which ruled the Ptolemaic Kingdom in Egypt during the Hellenistic period. Their rule lasted for 275 years, from 305 to 30 BC. They were the last dynasty of ancient Egypt. Ptolemy, one of the seven somatophylakes (bodyguards) who served as Alexander the Great's generals and deputies, was appointed satrap of Egypt after Alexander's death in 323 BC. In 305 BC, he declared himself Ptolemy I, later known as Sōter "Saviour". The Egyptians soon accepted the Ptolemies as the successors to the pharaohs of independent Egypt. Ptolemy's family ruled Egypt until the Roman conquest of 30 BC. All the male rulers of the dynasty took the name, Ptolemy. Ptolemaic queens regnant, some of whom were married to their brothers, were usually called Cleopatra, Arsinoe or Berenice. The most famous member of the line was the last queen, Cleopatra VII, known for her role in the Roman political battles between Julius Caesar and Pompey, and later between Octavian and Mark Antony. Her apparent suicide at the conquest by Rome marked the end of the Ptolemaic rule in Egypt	<urn:uuid:42face4c-a6bb-47c1-92b1-8a4fa2ca9557>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.myminifactory.com/it/object/3d-print-votive-statue-of-a-ptolemaic-ruler-76417	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251684146.65/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126013015-20200126043015-00388.warc.gz	en	0.985367	306	3.375	3	[ -0.11662325263023376, 0.6501532793045044, 0.7485383749008179, -0.059946365654468536, -0.7803745269775391, -0.5806045532226562, 0.770988941192627, 0.3666733503341675, -0.032173704355955124, 0.22794006764888763, 0.15606464445590973, -0.7888871431350708, 0.188309907913208, 0.03673016279935837...	2	This is an ancient limestone votive statue of a Ptolemaic ruler discovered in Voni. The Ptolemaic dynasty, sometimes also known as the Lagids, was a Macedonian Greek royal family, which ruled the Ptolemaic Kingdom in Egypt during the Hellenistic period. Their rule lasted for 275 years, from 305 to 30 BC. They were the last dynasty of ancient Egypt. Ptolemy, one of the seven somatophylakes (bodyguards) who served as Alexander the Great's generals and deputies, was appointed satrap of Egypt after Alexander's death in 323 BC. In 305 BC, he declared himself Ptolemy I, later known as Sōter "Saviour". The Egyptians soon accepted the Ptolemies as the successors to the pharaohs of independent Egypt. Ptolemy's family ruled Egypt until the Roman conquest of 30 BC. All the male rulers of the dynasty took the name, Ptolemy. Ptolemaic queens regnant, some of whom were married to their brothers, were usually called Cleopatra, Arsinoe or Berenice. The most famous member of the line was the last queen, Cleopatra VII, known for her role in the Roman political battles between Julius Caesar and Pompey, and later between Octavian and Mark Antony. Her apparent suicide at the conquest by Rome marked the end of the Ptolemaic rule in Egypt	316	ENGLISH	1
Today is the 154th anniversary of Juneteenth, a historical event in history that marked the beginning of change for African American slaves and the African American community today. The history behind the date can be linked back to the days of the Civil War. The Emancipation Proclamation, which was signed in 1863 by Abraham Lincoln and stated that slaves in the rebellious states were free, was not enforced in some parts of the south, particularly Texas. This was due to the lack of Union soldier presence to enforce the Proclamation. It took two and a half years in order for it to become apparent that slaves, were in fact, free. In 1865, Major General Gordon Granger led an army of Union soldiers into Galveston, Texas, and read General Order No. 3, which stated: “The people of Texas are informed that, in accordance with a proclamation from the Executive of the United States, all slaves are free. This involves an absolute equality of personal rights and rights of property between former masters and slaves, and the connection heretofore existing between them becomes that between employer and hired labor. The freedmen are advised to remain quietly at their present homes and work for wages. They are informed that they will not be allowed to collect at military posts and that they will not be supported in idleness either there or elsewhere.” The reactions to this news differed from extreme excitement to pure shock and disbelief. Some African Americans stayed to learn what the new employer-employee dynamic would be like, while others simply fled and did not wait a second to learn about what the owners would have to offer. Some went to neighboring states in order to reunite with family, while others went to the north in attempts to start over. Either way, the news was thrilling to African Americans, and resulted in the celebration and creation of what is now known as Juneteenth. In the earlier days, Juneteenth celebrations consisted of cookouts, fishing, horseback riding, and more. They were usually held at parks or churches because of the resistance from white people and their defiance. After a few years, people began pulling money together and eventually managed to buy property to hold celebrations on. One of the first recorded purchases of land was Emancipation Park in Houston, Texas. The celebrations were very important for decades until the twenties, when the only way it could be celebrated was if it fell on a weekend. It wasn’t until the 50s and 60s during the Civil Rights movement that there was a resurgence of celebrations. In 1980, Texas made Juneteenth an official holiday. “All but four states celebrate Juneteenth as a holiday” Today celebrations continue in 45 out of 50 states, and we remember the emancipation of all slaves becoming finalized 154 years ago, as it represents the beginning of a long road of turmoil, resistance, persistence, and change for the African American community. It was the start of the path paved towards equality. The emancipation of slaves gave them their experience of freedom, even though that was not even close to true freedom. It is important to remember the struggle that African Americans faced throughout the many years of slavery, and thereafter. The injustice that they have faced in America is unforgettable, and we celebrate the strength that they all have had throughout challenges. The injustice that they have faced is unforgettable, and NYAP stands behind the inclusion of diversity across the globe.	<urn:uuid:3547c774-c4be-4e56-b9b2-b37883bf05c1>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://nyapinc.wordpress.com/2019/06/19/juneteenth-a-celebration-of-resilience-and-freedom/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251779833.86/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128153713-20200128183713-00087.warc.gz	en	0.983845	688	4.125	4	[ -0.12583158910274506, 0.16849792003631592, 0.10020580887794495, 0.33928313851356506, -0.029695972800254822, -0.08882094919681549, -0.30062517523765564, -0.36841651797294617, -0.4088849425315857, 0.12708353996276855, 0.3479446470737457, 0.2980871796607971, -0.28178560733795166, -0.108394980...	2	Today is the 154th anniversary of Juneteenth, a historical event in history that marked the beginning of change for African American slaves and the African American community today. The history behind the date can be linked back to the days of the Civil War. The Emancipation Proclamation, which was signed in 1863 by Abraham Lincoln and stated that slaves in the rebellious states were free, was not enforced in some parts of the south, particularly Texas. This was due to the lack of Union soldier presence to enforce the Proclamation. It took two and a half years in order for it to become apparent that slaves, were in fact, free. In 1865, Major General Gordon Granger led an army of Union soldiers into Galveston, Texas, and read General Order No. 3, which stated: “The people of Texas are informed that, in accordance with a proclamation from the Executive of the United States, all slaves are free. This involves an absolute equality of personal rights and rights of property between former masters and slaves, and the connection heretofore existing between them becomes that between employer and hired labor. The freedmen are advised to remain quietly at their present homes and work for wages. They are informed that they will not be allowed to collect at military posts and that they will not be supported in idleness either there or elsewhere.” The reactions to this news differed from extreme excitement to pure shock and disbelief. Some African Americans stayed to learn what the new employer-employee dynamic would be like, while others simply fled and did not wait a second to learn about what the owners would have to offer. Some went to neighboring states in order to reunite with family, while others went to the north in attempts to start over. Either way, the news was thrilling to African Americans, and resulted in the celebration and creation of what is now known as Juneteenth. In the earlier days, Juneteenth celebrations consisted of cookouts, fishing, horseback riding, and more. They were usually held at parks or churches because of the resistance from white people and their defiance. After a few years, people began pulling money together and eventually managed to buy property to hold celebrations on. One of the first recorded purchases of land was Emancipation Park in Houston, Texas. The celebrations were very important for decades until the twenties, when the only way it could be celebrated was if it fell on a weekend. It wasn’t until the 50s and 60s during the Civil Rights movement that there was a resurgence of celebrations. In 1980, Texas made Juneteenth an official holiday. “All but four states celebrate Juneteenth as a holiday” Today celebrations continue in 45 out of 50 states, and we remember the emancipation of all slaves becoming finalized 154 years ago, as it represents the beginning of a long road of turmoil, resistance, persistence, and change for the African American community. It was the start of the path paved towards equality. The emancipation of slaves gave them their experience of freedom, even though that was not even close to true freedom. It is important to remember the struggle that African Americans faced throughout the many years of slavery, and thereafter. The injustice that they have faced in America is unforgettable, and we celebrate the strength that they all have had throughout challenges. The injustice that they have faced is unforgettable, and NYAP stands behind the inclusion of diversity across the globe.	707	ENGLISH	1
This week, year 4 have been looking at different types of data in maths. We have looked at discrete data and how that can be represented, and then did the same for continuous data. We then collected our own data, decided which type of data it is and represented it in a graph/chart. Some children were asked to roll a dice 50 times and record what number was rolled each time, others were asked to jump for 2 and a half minutes, and record how many jumps they had done at 30 second intervals. I was so impressed with how Year 4 did this, and although they might have been slightly out of breath, they were able to collect their own data and represent this in a line graph or a bar chart. Can you tell which activity produces discrete data and which produces continuous?	<urn:uuid:78145b36-6b6e-400b-9543-7a469bb0709f>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.maplecross.herts.sch.uk/2020/01/15/continuous-and-discrete-data/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251688806.91/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126104828-20200126134828-00259.warc.gz	en	0.992301	162	3.984375	4	[ -0.24052731692790985, 0.06693415343761444, 0.23044942319393158, -0.3977898955345154, -0.005299373529851437, 0.36927276849746704, -0.06788291782140732, 0.18206487596035004, 0.28016114234924316, -0.01907343976199627, 0.22423425316810608, 0.20653730630874634, 0.206389918923378, 0.205377936363...	4	This week, year 4 have been looking at different types of data in maths. We have looked at discrete data and how that can be represented, and then did the same for continuous data. We then collected our own data, decided which type of data it is and represented it in a graph/chart. Some children were asked to roll a dice 50 times and record what number was rolled each time, others were asked to jump for 2 and a half minutes, and record how many jumps they had done at 30 second intervals. I was so impressed with how Year 4 did this, and although they might have been slightly out of breath, they were able to collect their own data and represent this in a line graph or a bar chart. Can you tell which activity produces discrete data and which produces continuous?	166	ENGLISH	1
Black Knight was a British launch vehicle to test and verify the design of a re-entry vehicle for the Blue Streak missile. The United Kingdom’s first indigenous rocketry project, Black Knight was manufactured by Saunders-Roe on the Isle of Wight, had its engines tested at The Needles and was launched at Woomera in Australia. Designed in 1955 by the Royal Aircraft Establishment and Saunders-Roe, 22 vehicles were fired between 1958 and 1965. The Gamma rocket engines were designed and built by Armstrong-Siddeley at Anstey, near Coventry. One of the men who designed the engine was C. Donald. The first two vehicles were ‘proving rounds’ – that is, launches without a payload in order to prove the design of the rocket. The third firing carried a re-entry vehicle. This flight showed that the chosen design for the re-entry body was a success. Further firings with different heads showed up some unusual phenomena, and further tests under the code names Gaslight and Dazzle were carried out in conjunction with the United States.	<urn:uuid:fef8659e-6d17-4a70-b17d-e8cf791692b8>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.gearthhacks.com/downloads/Black-Knight-(rocket)-Test-Site/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251779833.86/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128153713-20200128183713-00291.warc.gz	en	0.985325	230	3.5625	4	[ -0.3044619560241699, 0.30323469638824463, 0.1355918049812317, -0.2520870864391327, -0.3445013761520386, 0.17665253579616547, -0.06959803402423859, 0.051577359437942505, -0.4055626690387726, -0.2931341826915741, -0.13544192910194397, -0.4137597382068634, -0.2877415120601654, 0.2939178645610...	1	Black Knight was a British launch vehicle to test and verify the design of a re-entry vehicle for the Blue Streak missile. The United Kingdom’s first indigenous rocketry project, Black Knight was manufactured by Saunders-Roe on the Isle of Wight, had its engines tested at The Needles and was launched at Woomera in Australia. Designed in 1955 by the Royal Aircraft Establishment and Saunders-Roe, 22 vehicles were fired between 1958 and 1965. The Gamma rocket engines were designed and built by Armstrong-Siddeley at Anstey, near Coventry. One of the men who designed the engine was C. Donald. The first two vehicles were ‘proving rounds’ – that is, launches without a payload in order to prove the design of the rocket. The third firing carried a re-entry vehicle. This flight showed that the chosen design for the re-entry body was a success. Further firings with different heads showed up some unusual phenomena, and further tests under the code names Gaslight and Dazzle were carried out in conjunction with the United States.	228	ENGLISH	1
The Mexican Punjabis in California who turned quesadillas into a symbol of identity Half a century before chefs made gastronomic "fusions" fashionable, Hindus and settled Mexicans faced segregation through the taste buds. Sushi burritos, spaghetti-stuffed tamales... Nowadays, the most famous chefs on the planet are desperately trying to find the new hottest dish. But in the mid-50s, a California family from Yuba City, the Rasul's, came up with a revolutionary idea that made their restaurant famous: an original "roti quesadilla," also called the "Indian pizza." This way, their restaurant, El Ranchero, became the epicenter of culinary fusion, serving dishes that mixed green chili, beans or Spanish rice with curry and typical Indian parathas. Their intention was not to create something new, but to feed their clientele of Mexican Punjabis like themselves. Without intending to, they did much more than that: they managed to safeguard a culture that from the 1970s onwards was close to disappearing, according to Eater. The beginnings of this crossbreeding, however, is way older. From the late 19th century, remittances of men from Punjab in northwest India came to the west coast of the United States to work in tree-cutting or agriculture in California, often settling east of San Diego or making their way further north to settle in cities such as Yuba and Fresno. However, two laws stood in the way of their desire to prosper in the country: In 1913, "foreigners without the option for citizenship," including Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, and Hindus, were prohibited from leasing or buying land in the U.S. Later, in 1917, the Immigration Act restricted the entry of more Asians into the country, preventing these Punjabi farmers from bringing their families. The "roti quesadillas," known as "Indian pizza," are the tasty legacy of a forgotten part of history. According to Karen Leonard, professor of anthropology at the University of California in Irvine, nearly 2,000 Punjabi men lived in the state at the time in legal limbo, separated from their wives and children, and some of them chose to marry (or remarry) Hispanic women since marriage between people of different races was forbidden and Punjabis and Mexicans were considered "brown" alike. This was the origin of a mestizo community known as "Mexican Hindus" or "Mexican Punjabis," whose children were also called "half and half." When Gulam Rasul left his work in the fields to open El Ranchero (Rasul's) in Yuba with his wife Inez Aguirre Rasul in 1954, something had changed for the better in society: a few years earlier, in 1946, President Truman allowed the Indians to become citizens, making it easier for them to own land in their name. Also, the policies against mestizos were revoked and marriage was no longer subject to "races." Inez and her 13 children - one of whom, Ali, took over after his father's death - took care of Gulam's restaurant that became a meeting place for the Mexican Punjabi community in Yuba. Since it was a Mexican restaurant where they also cooked Punjabi meals for their neighbors and friends, customers began to order beans or chili and eat them with 'parathas' (tortillas), merging two cultures in one meal. After 1965, the immigration laws were softened and the new Punjabis who arrived in California preferred to marry Hindu women; they were much more purist, wanted to maintain their own traditions and culture at any cost and did not look kindly on the mestizaje of the Mexican Punjabis. The "roti quesadillas," dubbed "Indian pizza" – with its melted cheese, shredded beef, and curried chicken sauce in a 'paratha'– was on El Ranchero's menu from the start, and was so unique that, despite the internal division between "veteran" Punjabis and newcomers, they endured four decades as the tasty legacy of a forgotten part of history. A cultural crossbreeding, forced or not, reminds us that there is a ladder for every wall. Or maybe a curry burrito so spicy that the word "fusion" takes on a new and flamboyant meaning.	<urn:uuid:85e7b3f6-b15a-4bce-a459-755fee28ed6b>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://aldianews.com/articles/culture/social/mexican-punjabis-california-who-turned-quesadillas-symbol-identity/57241	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606975.49/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122101729-20200122130729-00505.warc.gz	en	0.981884	913	3.359375	3	[ -0.03538709133863449, 0.262561559677124, 0.37036973237991333, 0.10879519581794739, -0.2761422395706177, 0.035477206110954285, 0.20095905661582947, -0.0745987743139267, 0.055340476334095, -0.056950539350509644, 0.02616039663553238, -0.3185155391693115, 0.2950435280799866, 0.0703766942024231...	5	The Mexican Punjabis in California who turned quesadillas into a symbol of identity Half a century before chefs made gastronomic "fusions" fashionable, Hindus and settled Mexicans faced segregation through the taste buds. Sushi burritos, spaghetti-stuffed tamales... Nowadays, the most famous chefs on the planet are desperately trying to find the new hottest dish. But in the mid-50s, a California family from Yuba City, the Rasul's, came up with a revolutionary idea that made their restaurant famous: an original "roti quesadilla," also called the "Indian pizza." This way, their restaurant, El Ranchero, became the epicenter of culinary fusion, serving dishes that mixed green chili, beans or Spanish rice with curry and typical Indian parathas. Their intention was not to create something new, but to feed their clientele of Mexican Punjabis like themselves. Without intending to, they did much more than that: they managed to safeguard a culture that from the 1970s onwards was close to disappearing, according to Eater. The beginnings of this crossbreeding, however, is way older. From the late 19th century, remittances of men from Punjab in northwest India came to the west coast of the United States to work in tree-cutting or agriculture in California, often settling east of San Diego or making their way further north to settle in cities such as Yuba and Fresno. However, two laws stood in the way of their desire to prosper in the country: In 1913, "foreigners without the option for citizenship," including Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, and Hindus, were prohibited from leasing or buying land in the U.S. Later, in 1917, the Immigration Act restricted the entry of more Asians into the country, preventing these Punjabi farmers from bringing their families. The "roti quesadillas," known as "Indian pizza," are the tasty legacy of a forgotten part of history. According to Karen Leonard, professor of anthropology at the University of California in Irvine, nearly 2,000 Punjabi men lived in the state at the time in legal limbo, separated from their wives and children, and some of them chose to marry (or remarry) Hispanic women since marriage between people of different races was forbidden and Punjabis and Mexicans were considered "brown" alike. This was the origin of a mestizo community known as "Mexican Hindus" or "Mexican Punjabis," whose children were also called "half and half." When Gulam Rasul left his work in the fields to open El Ranchero (Rasul's) in Yuba with his wife Inez Aguirre Rasul in 1954, something had changed for the better in society: a few years earlier, in 1946, President Truman allowed the Indians to become citizens, making it easier for them to own land in their name. Also, the policies against mestizos were revoked and marriage was no longer subject to "races." Inez and her 13 children - one of whom, Ali, took over after his father's death - took care of Gulam's restaurant that became a meeting place for the Mexican Punjabi community in Yuba. Since it was a Mexican restaurant where they also cooked Punjabi meals for their neighbors and friends, customers began to order beans or chili and eat them with 'parathas' (tortillas), merging two cultures in one meal. After 1965, the immigration laws were softened and the new Punjabis who arrived in California preferred to marry Hindu women; they were much more purist, wanted to maintain their own traditions and culture at any cost and did not look kindly on the mestizaje of the Mexican Punjabis. The "roti quesadillas," dubbed "Indian pizza" – with its melted cheese, shredded beef, and curried chicken sauce in a 'paratha'– was on El Ranchero's menu from the start, and was so unique that, despite the internal division between "veteran" Punjabis and newcomers, they endured four decades as the tasty legacy of a forgotten part of history. A cultural crossbreeding, forced or not, reminds us that there is a ladder for every wall. Or maybe a curry burrito so spicy that the word "fusion" takes on a new and flamboyant meaning.	911	ENGLISH	1
Australian Concepts: The Merry-Go-Round in the Sea Australia’s national values such as having a ‘fair go’ and egalitarianism have been represented in a countless number of literary texts over the period of hundreds of years. The more subtle and traditional Australian beliefs, such as mateship and close family bonds, are slowly disappearing or being forgotten as the new modern era is taking place. The novel ‘The Merry Go Round in the Sea’, delves into subjects such as these, viewed by the main character, Rob Coram. Randolph Stow, the author has dramatically captured the environment of the life of a young boy, growing up in Australia during the wartime. The concept of Australia from the viewpoint of six year old Rob Coram at the start of ‘The Merry-Go-Round in the Sea’, is not actually about the country itself, but one that is solely based upon his immediate surroundings. The security of his family and of the land that is his home, are the things that provide him with safety and identity. ‘He thought, often, of himself, of who he was, and why. He would think: I am Australian, and wonder why. How had he come to be Rob Coram, living in this town?’ This quote is taken from the beginning of the book, where Rob is lost and often struggles to define his own identity. The continual presence of the large Maplestead clan that he belongs to is very important, as it signifies, what Rob comes to believes, is his place in the world. This quote is an example of the shelter and protection Rob feels with family. ‘After that, the boy stopped listening to his mother’s warnings of doom. But because no catastrophe was possible which she would not have foreseen, he felt secure with her, he felt that she could thwart any danger, except the one danger he really feared, which was made up of time and change and fragmentary talk of war.’ Rob is engrossed in Geraldton, his home. The single connection with the outside world he has is of the war, which links to him simply because of his cousin and idol, Rick, and having to move homes every now and then. The importance and value of close family bonds is a fundamental Australian belief that is still held today. Family is where we draws our base set of values and beliefs, and the frequent visits and gatherings Rob shares with his tens of aunts, uncles, grandparents and cousins is one of the elements that define his world. Australia is depicted in hundreds of literary texts by images of the ‘bush’ and outback. The landscape portrayed in most of the novel is set in more rural areas of Australia. Randolph Stow, the author, goes into a large amount of detail describing the scenery with its sights, smells and sounds, as demonstrated by the following quote: ‘In the gumtrees along the dry creek that wound almost to the river at Innisfail, cockatoos swirled like torn paper, catching the light. Rising from one tree, they flashed and screeched across the tiger striped sky to another, a quarter of a mile away. They infested the tree like migratory fruit-blossom, flapping, tearing, and quarrelling.’ Almost all of the descriptions are positive, painting the land in a beautiful and attractive light. The frequent mention of native animals and plants, together with descriptions of the vastness and emptiness of the terrain is undeniably Australian. Rob’s life throughout the novel revolves around school, the beach and most importantly, his cousin Rick. It is the relationship between the two that supports the entire novel. The effect of Rick’s character is complicated, as we see him largely through Rob’s point of view. Being absent for half the book, his character can be difficult to grasp. While Rob adores and idolizes Rick, the adults in the family are continually criticizing him after his return from the war. ‘Rick was immature. He was lazy. He was a narcissist. He used dirty language. He had stayed at the very bottom of the army. He refused to be a farmer. He talked like Hitler about the Bomb. He looked bored and... Please join StudyMode to read the full document	<urn:uuid:475e1737-d1e1-473b-92dd-e6dc051b8980>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.studymode.com/essays/Australian-Concepts-The-Merry-Go-Round-63752473.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783342.96/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128215526-20200129005526-00425.warc.gz	en	0.983661	885	3.296875	3	[ 0.35187530517578125, 0.15218687057495117, -0.13056974112987518, 0.041468389332294464, -0.18610942363739014, 0.27129536867141724, 0.09220319241285324, 0.13487662374973297, -0.19861993193626404, 0.17996399104595184, 0.14311164617538452, -0.4793817400932312, 0.3239603042602539, 0.206229686737...	1	Australian Concepts: The Merry-Go-Round in the Sea Australia’s national values such as having a ‘fair go’ and egalitarianism have been represented in a countless number of literary texts over the period of hundreds of years. The more subtle and traditional Australian beliefs, such as mateship and close family bonds, are slowly disappearing or being forgotten as the new modern era is taking place. The novel ‘The Merry Go Round in the Sea’, delves into subjects such as these, viewed by the main character, Rob Coram. Randolph Stow, the author has dramatically captured the environment of the life of a young boy, growing up in Australia during the wartime. The concept of Australia from the viewpoint of six year old Rob Coram at the start of ‘The Merry-Go-Round in the Sea’, is not actually about the country itself, but one that is solely based upon his immediate surroundings. The security of his family and of the land that is his home, are the things that provide him with safety and identity. ‘He thought, often, of himself, of who he was, and why. He would think: I am Australian, and wonder why. How had he come to be Rob Coram, living in this town?’ This quote is taken from the beginning of the book, where Rob is lost and often struggles to define his own identity. The continual presence of the large Maplestead clan that he belongs to is very important, as it signifies, what Rob comes to believes, is his place in the world. This quote is an example of the shelter and protection Rob feels with family. ‘After that, the boy stopped listening to his mother’s warnings of doom. But because no catastrophe was possible which she would not have foreseen, he felt secure with her, he felt that she could thwart any danger, except the one danger he really feared, which was made up of time and change and fragmentary talk of war.’ Rob is engrossed in Geraldton, his home. The single connection with the outside world he has is of the war, which links to him simply because of his cousin and idol, Rick, and having to move homes every now and then. The importance and value of close family bonds is a fundamental Australian belief that is still held today. Family is where we draws our base set of values and beliefs, and the frequent visits and gatherings Rob shares with his tens of aunts, uncles, grandparents and cousins is one of the elements that define his world. Australia is depicted in hundreds of literary texts by images of the ‘bush’ and outback. The landscape portrayed in most of the novel is set in more rural areas of Australia. Randolph Stow, the author, goes into a large amount of detail describing the scenery with its sights, smells and sounds, as demonstrated by the following quote: ‘In the gumtrees along the dry creek that wound almost to the river at Innisfail, cockatoos swirled like torn paper, catching the light. Rising from one tree, they flashed and screeched across the tiger striped sky to another, a quarter of a mile away. They infested the tree like migratory fruit-blossom, flapping, tearing, and quarrelling.’ Almost all of the descriptions are positive, painting the land in a beautiful and attractive light. The frequent mention of native animals and plants, together with descriptions of the vastness and emptiness of the terrain is undeniably Australian. Rob’s life throughout the novel revolves around school, the beach and most importantly, his cousin Rick. It is the relationship between the two that supports the entire novel. The effect of Rick’s character is complicated, as we see him largely through Rob’s point of view. Being absent for half the book, his character can be difficult to grasp. While Rob adores and idolizes Rick, the adults in the family are continually criticizing him after his return from the war. ‘Rick was immature. He was lazy. He was a narcissist. He used dirty language. He had stayed at the very bottom of the army. He refused to be a farmer. He talked like Hitler about the Bomb. He looked bored and... Please join StudyMode to read the full document	858	ENGLISH	1
Benjamin and the other students with disabilities were virtually indistinguishable from students without disabilities. They were thought of—and treated like—all the other students. All children were seen as "learners." Supports, accommodations, curriculum modifications, and assistive technology devices were provided to meet their needs. What is inclusive education? It depends on who you ask. While doing presentations around the country, I’ve heard a variety of definitions of “inclusion.” Parents have said, “My child is included in art, PE, and music.” But this is actually “visitation.” Some have said, “My child is fully included in regular classes with a full-time aide.” When questioned further, the mom reports that her child and the aide sit in the back of the room and the child has little, if any, interaction with the other students or the classroom teacher. This is “integration.” Other parents have said their children are included, but these children are actually in the regular classroom only for homeroom, and the rest of the day is spent in a special ed/resource room. And some educators have said their schools are inclusive since students with disabilities are in the same building as students without disabilities; these students never see the inside of a regular ed classroom, but they’re said to be included. I’m not sure what to call this! Inclusion could be compared to pregnancy: you either are or you’re not! Click here to continue. Inclusive Education: A Primer New Ways of Thinking and Revolutionary Common Sense	<urn:uuid:d34d4612-2574-4d64-a55a-f00bac274939>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.disabilityisnatural.com/inclusive-ed--primer.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594662.6/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119151736-20200119175736-00422.warc.gz	en	0.983418	334	4.09375	4	[ -0.10260061919689178, -0.2436780035495758, 0.26429617404937744, -0.2892220914363861, -0.3917394280433655, 0.12381172180175781, 0.18616299331188202, 0.2273024618625641, 0.07794556766748428, -0.286103218793869, 0.27546748518943787, 0.25105342268943787, -0.0014073305064812303, 0.1011151075363...	2	Benjamin and the other students with disabilities were virtually indistinguishable from students without disabilities. They were thought of—and treated like—all the other students. All children were seen as "learners." Supports, accommodations, curriculum modifications, and assistive technology devices were provided to meet their needs. What is inclusive education? It depends on who you ask. While doing presentations around the country, I’ve heard a variety of definitions of “inclusion.” Parents have said, “My child is included in art, PE, and music.” But this is actually “visitation.” Some have said, “My child is fully included in regular classes with a full-time aide.” When questioned further, the mom reports that her child and the aide sit in the back of the room and the child has little, if any, interaction with the other students or the classroom teacher. This is “integration.” Other parents have said their children are included, but these children are actually in the regular classroom only for homeroom, and the rest of the day is spent in a special ed/resource room. And some educators have said their schools are inclusive since students with disabilities are in the same building as students without disabilities; these students never see the inside of a regular ed classroom, but they’re said to be included. I’m not sure what to call this! Inclusion could be compared to pregnancy: you either are or you’re not! Click here to continue. Inclusive Education: A Primer New Ways of Thinking and Revolutionary Common Sense	304	ENGLISH	1
On this day in 1152, Eleanor of Aquitaine officially became a single woman. Her fourteen-year marriage had begun when she was just a teenager, now she was a mother of two daughters, and Duchess of Aquitaine in her own right. Her now former husband, King Louis VII of France, made sure that part of the divorce meant that Eleanor would have to ask his permission to remarry. Unfortunately for Louis, it wouldn't work out that way. Eleanor and Louis had married in July 1137, within months of her father's death. As the eldest surviving daughter, with no brothers, Eleanor was the new Duchess of Aquitaine. Prince Louis' father spotted an opportunity to increase his kingdom, and promptly dispatched his son and heir to marry her. Their marriage was not a happy one. There was a strong clash of personalities and cultures, there was a big difference between Louis' French court and the Aquitainian lifestyle that Eleanor was used to. Louis was also extremely devout, while Eleanor simply followed more traditional piety. They had one child, a daughter named Marie, before they went on Crusade together. While they were in Antioch, rumours flew around that Eleanor was having an affair with her uncle Raymond. Sources state that she suggested to Louis that they divorce, but he refused. On their eventual journey home they visited the Pope, who worked to reconcile the arguing couple. Eleanor became pregnant with her second child, which turned out to be another daughter. This little girl's birth is probably what saved her from continuing her marriage to Louis, as the French court helped persuade him to divorce her, so that he could marry another woman who would give him a son. The annulment was granted on 21st March 1152 on the grounds of consanguinity, meaning that the Church felt the couple were too closely related. Eleanor once again became Duchess of Aquitaine in her own right, but Louis had to approve any future marriage she might consider. Their daughters were also left to be raised in the French court, rather than sent to Aquitaine with their mother. Eleanor raced back to Aquitaine, escaping several attempts to capture her and force her in to marriage. The fact that she travelled as quickly as she did shows that she was well aware of the danger she was now in, while travelling at all shows just how brave and determined she was to make her own life from now on. In fact she was so determined that she ignored the requirement to see permission from Louis, and remarried eight weeks after her divorce. Her choice of groom was Duke Henry of Normandy, their marriage combined two large Duchies to create the kind of border problem that Louis had wanted to avoid. Henry was everything that Louis wasn't; brave, decisive, quick to take action. She and Henry would go on to have five sons and three daughters, and become King and Queen of England. While the ending of her marriage to Henry was far from positive, at least the start of it was better than her marriage to Louis. Fans of Eleanor of Aquitaine should check out her badge!	<urn:uuid:76e4c29a-eacb-4847-823f-f0036c20f2a0>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.creativehistorian.co.uk/blog/read_125874/annulment-of-eleanor-of-aquitaines-marriage.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594333.5/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119064802-20200119092802-00326.warc.gz	en	0.993129	634	3.6875	4	[ -0.31905126571655273, 0.37287628650665283, -0.2877335250377655, -0.2450067549943924, -0.26903143525123596, -0.055943552404642105, -0.3472857177257538, -0.03152485936880112, 0.34075528383255005, -0.17676617205142975, 0.39379575848579407, -0.2664794921875, 0.1195814311504364, -0.031443443149...	4	On this day in 1152, Eleanor of Aquitaine officially became a single woman. Her fourteen-year marriage had begun when she was just a teenager, now she was a mother of two daughters, and Duchess of Aquitaine in her own right. Her now former husband, King Louis VII of France, made sure that part of the divorce meant that Eleanor would have to ask his permission to remarry. Unfortunately for Louis, it wouldn't work out that way. Eleanor and Louis had married in July 1137, within months of her father's death. As the eldest surviving daughter, with no brothers, Eleanor was the new Duchess of Aquitaine. Prince Louis' father spotted an opportunity to increase his kingdom, and promptly dispatched his son and heir to marry her. Their marriage was not a happy one. There was a strong clash of personalities and cultures, there was a big difference between Louis' French court and the Aquitainian lifestyle that Eleanor was used to. Louis was also extremely devout, while Eleanor simply followed more traditional piety. They had one child, a daughter named Marie, before they went on Crusade together. While they were in Antioch, rumours flew around that Eleanor was having an affair with her uncle Raymond. Sources state that she suggested to Louis that they divorce, but he refused. On their eventual journey home they visited the Pope, who worked to reconcile the arguing couple. Eleanor became pregnant with her second child, which turned out to be another daughter. This little girl's birth is probably what saved her from continuing her marriage to Louis, as the French court helped persuade him to divorce her, so that he could marry another woman who would give him a son. The annulment was granted on 21st March 1152 on the grounds of consanguinity, meaning that the Church felt the couple were too closely related. Eleanor once again became Duchess of Aquitaine in her own right, but Louis had to approve any future marriage she might consider. Their daughters were also left to be raised in the French court, rather than sent to Aquitaine with their mother. Eleanor raced back to Aquitaine, escaping several attempts to capture her and force her in to marriage. The fact that she travelled as quickly as she did shows that she was well aware of the danger she was now in, while travelling at all shows just how brave and determined she was to make her own life from now on. In fact she was so determined that she ignored the requirement to see permission from Louis, and remarried eight weeks after her divorce. Her choice of groom was Duke Henry of Normandy, their marriage combined two large Duchies to create the kind of border problem that Louis had wanted to avoid. Henry was everything that Louis wasn't; brave, decisive, quick to take action. She and Henry would go on to have five sons and three daughters, and become King and Queen of England. While the ending of her marriage to Henry was far from positive, at least the start of it was better than her marriage to Louis. Fans of Eleanor of Aquitaine should check out her badge!	640	ENGLISH	1
Read this article - Access statistics - 655 article downloads - 1,557 complete issue downloads - Total: 2,212 (This article is republished from Economica, 1954, with permission.) The romantic language in which Edmund Burke clothed much of his philosophy might lead one to imagine that he was not interested in the ordinary affairs of mankind, and as economics is concerned with very little else, that he was not interested in economics. But Burke had a sound grasp of the central principles of political economy. On his entry to Parliament in 1766 Burke quickly established a reputation as an expert on problems relating to trade and commerce, and he was the first great English statesman to preach Free Trade. Burke and Adam Smith being friends, it might seem reasonable to conclude that Burke borrowed his ideas on economics from Smith. No doubt Smith did influence him, but, nevertheless, Burke appears to have reached his main conclusions independently. Smith respected Burke’s opinions on this subject and even consulted him on points. Burke is therefore entitled to be considered as a pioneer of economic science. Moreover, by his speeches in Parliament, he introduced the new principles of economics to the politicians of the day. The amazingly rapid success of The Wealth of Nations may have been, in part, due to the fact that Burke had prepared men’s minds for it.	<urn:uuid:9ee7e6e9-b56a-498b-84ac-3d8d41519743>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://econjwatch.org/articles/edmund-burke-as-an-economist	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591763.20/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118023429-20200118051429-00481.warc.gz	en	0.983006	271	3.390625	3	[ -0.14013439416885376, 0.3172118365764618, -0.0011929806787520647, 0.007930410094559193, 0.12187226116657257, -0.32819586992263794, 0.5309709906578064, 0.14416998624801636, -0.17674726247787476, 0.13029935956001282, 0.13963377475738525, -0.3359348177909851, 0.21587690711021423, 0.0824572071...	1	Read this article - Access statistics - 655 article downloads - 1,557 complete issue downloads - Total: 2,212 (This article is republished from Economica, 1954, with permission.) The romantic language in which Edmund Burke clothed much of his philosophy might lead one to imagine that he was not interested in the ordinary affairs of mankind, and as economics is concerned with very little else, that he was not interested in economics. But Burke had a sound grasp of the central principles of political economy. On his entry to Parliament in 1766 Burke quickly established a reputation as an expert on problems relating to trade and commerce, and he was the first great English statesman to preach Free Trade. Burke and Adam Smith being friends, it might seem reasonable to conclude that Burke borrowed his ideas on economics from Smith. No doubt Smith did influence him, but, nevertheless, Burke appears to have reached his main conclusions independently. Smith respected Burke’s opinions on this subject and even consulted him on points. Burke is therefore entitled to be considered as a pioneer of economic science. Moreover, by his speeches in Parliament, he introduced the new principles of economics to the politicians of the day. The amazingly rapid success of The Wealth of Nations may have been, in part, due to the fact that Burke had prepared men’s minds for it.	283	ENGLISH	1
FRIAR PAOLO SARPI, DEFENDER OF VENICE [Portrait thought to be of Paolo Sarpi, who was averse to having his likeness made] When the Venetians asked Paolo [born Pietro] Sarpi to defend its cause against Pope Paul V—who had placed their city under interdict—Sarpi requested time to study the request. A Servite friar known for his simple and holy life, he wanted to be sure he could accept the assignment with a clear conscience. Four months later he agreed. A polymath well-versed in canon law among a host of other subjects, Sarpi demonstrated the errors and heresies of the papal position. As part of the Venetian defense, he resurrected the arguments of Jean de Gerson, a fifteenth-century theologian who had led a French struggle against papal overreach. When Cardinal Bellarmine rejected Gerson’s reasoning, Sarpi wrote a defense of Gerson’s position. Meanwhile, he became such a master of Venice’s state papers that he could lay his hand on any document as soon as it was needed. He indexed these so others could benefit from his immense knowledge. The rulers of Venice had complete confidence in his decisions. Highly placed individuals from many nations came to pick his brain, including Protestants, which led to a charge against him that he was in conversation with heretics. Frustrated by Sarpi’s insurmountable defense, the pope ordered him to come to Rome. Sarpi demonstrated from canon law that the citation was illegal and refused to go. On 1 October 1607, five ruffians attacked him as he passed through the street. Although he was struck fifteen times, he emerged with only three serious wounds and survived. The assassins fled to the palace of Venice’s papal nuncio, from where they escaped to Rome. When they were not rewarded as they anticipated, they grumbled openly, leaving no doubt who had employed them to carry out the wicked deed. Later a group of cardinals attempted to poison Sarpi by the agency of a man who treated a persistent ailment of the friar. However, the plot was stymied when a letter discussing the conspiracy fell into friendly hands and its cypher was broken. Sarpi attempted to hush up the affair so as not to bring discredit on the Church of Rome. In the end the matter could not be hidden. The pope was finally forced to lift the interdict on Venice. This is considered the last significant attempt by Rome to interdict a major city. When Sarpi died of old age on this day 14 January 1623, pope Gregory XV rejoiced, saying it was God’s judgment on him. Catholics claimed he was a hypocrite because, although a practicing priest and a confessor known for his purity, he did not seem convinced of some tenets of Roman Catholic faith that had come under fire during the Reformation. For example, he did not invoke Mary during mass. He had also written a history of the Council of Trent that was not flattering to the papacy. However, the Venetians and his friends within the Servite Order lamented his loss, saying, “There will never come more among us another Friar Paul.”	<urn:uuid:8f581a53-b114-49b5-b02e-76726b859ee0>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://christianhistoryinstitute.org/it-happened-today/1/14	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251690095.81/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126165718-20200126195718-00120.warc.gz	en	0.988474	694	3.359375	3	[ -0.45683228969573975, -0.10412688553333282, -0.15642575919628143, -0.2642015218734741, -0.24229827523231506, -0.12641091644763947, 0.5418519377708435, 0.13552117347717285, 0.014273247681558132, 0.15825995802879333, -0.08254237473011017, -0.4040243327617645, 0.2029176950454712, 0.5083416700...	2	FRIAR PAOLO SARPI, DEFENDER OF VENICE [Portrait thought to be of Paolo Sarpi, who was averse to having his likeness made] When the Venetians asked Paolo [born Pietro] Sarpi to defend its cause against Pope Paul V—who had placed their city under interdict—Sarpi requested time to study the request. A Servite friar known for his simple and holy life, he wanted to be sure he could accept the assignment with a clear conscience. Four months later he agreed. A polymath well-versed in canon law among a host of other subjects, Sarpi demonstrated the errors and heresies of the papal position. As part of the Venetian defense, he resurrected the arguments of Jean de Gerson, a fifteenth-century theologian who had led a French struggle against papal overreach. When Cardinal Bellarmine rejected Gerson’s reasoning, Sarpi wrote a defense of Gerson’s position. Meanwhile, he became such a master of Venice’s state papers that he could lay his hand on any document as soon as it was needed. He indexed these so others could benefit from his immense knowledge. The rulers of Venice had complete confidence in his decisions. Highly placed individuals from many nations came to pick his brain, including Protestants, which led to a charge against him that he was in conversation with heretics. Frustrated by Sarpi’s insurmountable defense, the pope ordered him to come to Rome. Sarpi demonstrated from canon law that the citation was illegal and refused to go. On 1 October 1607, five ruffians attacked him as he passed through the street. Although he was struck fifteen times, he emerged with only three serious wounds and survived. The assassins fled to the palace of Venice’s papal nuncio, from where they escaped to Rome. When they were not rewarded as they anticipated, they grumbled openly, leaving no doubt who had employed them to carry out the wicked deed. Later a group of cardinals attempted to poison Sarpi by the agency of a man who treated a persistent ailment of the friar. However, the plot was stymied when a letter discussing the conspiracy fell into friendly hands and its cypher was broken. Sarpi attempted to hush up the affair so as not to bring discredit on the Church of Rome. In the end the matter could not be hidden. The pope was finally forced to lift the interdict on Venice. This is considered the last significant attempt by Rome to interdict a major city. When Sarpi died of old age on this day 14 January 1623, pope Gregory XV rejoiced, saying it was God’s judgment on him. Catholics claimed he was a hypocrite because, although a practicing priest and a confessor known for his purity, he did not seem convinced of some tenets of Roman Catholic faith that had come under fire during the Reformation. For example, he did not invoke Mary during mass. He had also written a history of the Council of Trent that was not flattering to the papacy. However, the Venetians and his friends within the Servite Order lamented his loss, saying, “There will never come more among us another Friar Paul.”	672	ENGLISH	1
Clothing is believed to have originated from our ancestors in the past using fur, leaves or leather to cover them up. These materials were tied or wrapped around body parts they wished to cover. This marked the beginning of clothing as we know it now. Over the years, clothing has undergone several changes and the final product is what you are wearing now. The exact date as to when our ancestors started dressing themselves up is being debated until today as clothing made of fur and leather normally deteriorate very quickly. Imagine if clothing had not been discovered and you had to be bare body in the cold winter, totally impossible right?! Clothing has several functions with the primary being covering our body and protecting us against cold or hot weathers. In cold regions, several layers of clothing are used to keep warm. In warm regions, clothing protects us against sunburns. Many countries today also have laws against indecent exposure to public which basically means not covering yourself up with clothing in public. Clothing today fulfills the role of social decency as if a person properly covered with clothes in public would portray decency. It is considered rude in most societies to indecently expose oneself, therefore the need for clothing. Clothing can also serve social aspects today. A group or clan of people may choose to dress in a similar way. With many fashion trends coming up every other day around the world, many people try their best to keep up with them. Social media has propelled fashion trends as people can discuss latest trends and get reviews about what’s cool and what’s not. In the olden days different classes of people are dressed in dissimilar ways. A kind would not be dressed in the same clothes as a soldier. Although kings these days don’t dress like kings in the past, clothing today still plays a role in the different social classes of people. An office worker would dress differently from a waiter. The rich and trendy would not wear the same clothes as a beggar. Although clothes tend to separate people into different classes, there is nothing one can do about it, as the rich would be willing to spend more on what they wear unlike the beggar. Clothing for different occasions also varies. One might wear formal attire to a wedding but when at a beach party, casual attire would be more comfortable. Uniforms used by some organizations try to eliminate any inequalities that might occur amongst the people there. For example, schools have rules for students to wear the same uniform. This is an attempt by the school to create a unique identity for the students as well as eliminate inequalities. Clothing today has come a long way from the time it was discovered. It is an essential part to living as we would not feel comfortable if we are exposed in an indecent manner.	<urn:uuid:a44e7ad6-f1c4-4581-8c41-2d857f316212>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://cheapnhljerseyswholesale.us/role-of-clothing.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606975.49/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122101729-20200122130729-00544.warc.gz	en	0.982036	554	3.40625	3	[ -0.16577652096748352, 0.4836735129356384, 0.269024133682251, -0.2588014006614685, 0.45029139518737793, 0.15746952593326569, 0.44804856181144714, -0.33275842666625977, -0.3536493480205536, -0.3091939091682434, 0.2273644208908081, 0.05401785299181938, -0.026783166453242302, 0.294922918081283...	13	Clothing is believed to have originated from our ancestors in the past using fur, leaves or leather to cover them up. These materials were tied or wrapped around body parts they wished to cover. This marked the beginning of clothing as we know it now. Over the years, clothing has undergone several changes and the final product is what you are wearing now. The exact date as to when our ancestors started dressing themselves up is being debated until today as clothing made of fur and leather normally deteriorate very quickly. Imagine if clothing had not been discovered and you had to be bare body in the cold winter, totally impossible right?! Clothing has several functions with the primary being covering our body and protecting us against cold or hot weathers. In cold regions, several layers of clothing are used to keep warm. In warm regions, clothing protects us against sunburns. Many countries today also have laws against indecent exposure to public which basically means not covering yourself up with clothing in public. Clothing today fulfills the role of social decency as if a person properly covered with clothes in public would portray decency. It is considered rude in most societies to indecently expose oneself, therefore the need for clothing. Clothing can also serve social aspects today. A group or clan of people may choose to dress in a similar way. With many fashion trends coming up every other day around the world, many people try their best to keep up with them. Social media has propelled fashion trends as people can discuss latest trends and get reviews about what’s cool and what’s not. In the olden days different classes of people are dressed in dissimilar ways. A kind would not be dressed in the same clothes as a soldier. Although kings these days don’t dress like kings in the past, clothing today still plays a role in the different social classes of people. An office worker would dress differently from a waiter. The rich and trendy would not wear the same clothes as a beggar. Although clothes tend to separate people into different classes, there is nothing one can do about it, as the rich would be willing to spend more on what they wear unlike the beggar. Clothing for different occasions also varies. One might wear formal attire to a wedding but when at a beach party, casual attire would be more comfortable. Uniforms used by some organizations try to eliminate any inequalities that might occur amongst the people there. For example, schools have rules for students to wear the same uniform. This is an attempt by the school to create a unique identity for the students as well as eliminate inequalities. Clothing today has come a long way from the time it was discovered. It is an essential part to living as we would not feel comfortable if we are exposed in an indecent manner.	550	ENGLISH	1
Throughout the early months of 69, Vespasian convened frequently with the Eastern generals. Gaius Licinius Mucianus was a notable ally. Governor of Syria and commander of three legions, Mucianus also held political connections to many of the most powerful Roman military commanders from Illyricum to Britannia by virtue of his service to the famous Neronian general Gnaeus Domitius Corbulo. In May 69, Mucianus formally implored Vespasian to challenge Vitellius. His appeal was followed by Vespasian’s official proclamation as Emperor in early July. Under instructions from the prefect Tiberius Alexander, the legions at Alexandria took an oath of loyalty to Vespasian on 1 July. They were swiftly followed by Vespasian’s Judaean legions on 3 July and thereafter by Mucianus’ Syrian legions on 15 July. Nevertheless, Vitellius, the occupant of the throne, had Rome‘s best troops on his side – the veteran legions of Gaul and the Rhineland. But the feeling in Vespasian’s favour quickly gathered strength, and the armies of Moesia, Pannonia, and Illyricum soon declared for him, and made him the de facto master of half of the Roman world. While Vespasian himself was in Egypt securing its grain supply, his troops entered Italy from the northeast under the leadership of Marcus Antonius Primus. They defeated Vitellius’ army (which had awaited him in Mevania) at Bedriacum, sacked Cremona and advanced on Rome. Vitellius hastily arranged a peace with Antonius, but the Emperor’s Praetorian Guard forced him to retain his seat. After furious fighting, Antonius’ army entered Rome. In the resulting confusion, the Capitol was destroyed by fire and Vespasian’s brother Sabinus was killed by a mob. On receiving the tidings of his rival’s defeat and death at Alexandria, the new emperor at once forwarded supplies of urgently-needed grain to Rome, along with an edict assuring he would reverse the laws of Nero, especially those relating to treason. While in Egypt, he visited the Temple of Serapis where he reportedly experienced a vision. Later, he was confronted by two labourers, who were convinced that he possessed a divine power that could work miracles. Vespasian was declared emperor by the Senate while he was in Egypt on 21 December 69; the Egyptians had declared him emperor in June. In the short-term, administration of the empire was given to Mucianus who was aided by Vespasian’s son, Domitian. Mucianus started off Vespasian’s rule with tax reform that was to restore the empire’s finances. After Vespasian arrived in Rome in mid-70, Mucianus continued to press Vespasian to collect as many taxes as possible. Vespasian and Mucianus renewed old taxes and instituted new ones, increased the tribute of the provinces, and kept a watchful eye upon the treasury officials. The Latin proverb “Pecunia non-olet” (“Money does not stink”) may have been created when he had introduced a urine tax on public toilets. Before Vespasian, this tax was imposed by Emperor Nero under the name of “vectigal urinae” in the 1st century AD. However the tax was removed after a while, it was re-enacted by Vespasian around 70 AD in order to fill the treasury. Vespasian’s policy was not well received by his son. Writing about Vespasian in their history books, Dio Cassius and Suetonius mentioned “When [Vespasian’s] son Titus blamed him for even laying a tax upon urine, he applied to his nose a piece of the money he received in the first instalment, and asked him if it stunk. And he replying no, ‘And yet,’ said he, ‘it is derived from urine”. Since then, this phrase “Money does not stink” has been used to whitewash dubious or illegal origin of money. In early 70 Vespasian was still in Egypt, the source of Rome’s grain supply, and had not yet left for Rome. According to Tacitus, his trip was delayed due to bad weather. Modern historians theorize that Vespasian had been and was continuing to consolidate support from the Egyptians before departing. Stories of a divine Vespasian healing people circulated in Egypt. During this period, protests erupted in Alexandria over his new tax policies and grain shipments were held up. Vespasian eventually restored order and grain shipments to Rome resumed.	<urn:uuid:32244bfc-14bf-4249-9c8f-86901b78260b>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://community.vcoins.com/vespasian-pecunia-non-olet-december-21-69-ad/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783621.89/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129010251-20200129040251-00092.warc.gz	en	0.984829	1,036	3.515625	4	[ -0.18141520023345947, 0.4382414221763611, 0.46741917729377747, -0.0025545922107994556, -0.7218908071517944, -0.33692243695259094, -0.1457674205303192, 0.04297633469104767, -0.19091089069843292, -0.10753312706947327, -0.10040897130966187, -0.8614097833633423, 0.22406309843063354, 0.02231385...	12	Throughout the early months of 69, Vespasian convened frequently with the Eastern generals. Gaius Licinius Mucianus was a notable ally. Governor of Syria and commander of three legions, Mucianus also held political connections to many of the most powerful Roman military commanders from Illyricum to Britannia by virtue of his service to the famous Neronian general Gnaeus Domitius Corbulo. In May 69, Mucianus formally implored Vespasian to challenge Vitellius. His appeal was followed by Vespasian’s official proclamation as Emperor in early July. Under instructions from the prefect Tiberius Alexander, the legions at Alexandria took an oath of loyalty to Vespasian on 1 July. They were swiftly followed by Vespasian’s Judaean legions on 3 July and thereafter by Mucianus’ Syrian legions on 15 July. Nevertheless, Vitellius, the occupant of the throne, had Rome‘s best troops on his side – the veteran legions of Gaul and the Rhineland. But the feeling in Vespasian’s favour quickly gathered strength, and the armies of Moesia, Pannonia, and Illyricum soon declared for him, and made him the de facto master of half of the Roman world. While Vespasian himself was in Egypt securing its grain supply, his troops entered Italy from the northeast under the leadership of Marcus Antonius Primus. They defeated Vitellius’ army (which had awaited him in Mevania) at Bedriacum, sacked Cremona and advanced on Rome. Vitellius hastily arranged a peace with Antonius, but the Emperor’s Praetorian Guard forced him to retain his seat. After furious fighting, Antonius’ army entered Rome. In the resulting confusion, the Capitol was destroyed by fire and Vespasian’s brother Sabinus was killed by a mob. On receiving the tidings of his rival’s defeat and death at Alexandria, the new emperor at once forwarded supplies of urgently-needed grain to Rome, along with an edict assuring he would reverse the laws of Nero, especially those relating to treason. While in Egypt, he visited the Temple of Serapis where he reportedly experienced a vision. Later, he was confronted by two labourers, who were convinced that he possessed a divine power that could work miracles. Vespasian was declared emperor by the Senate while he was in Egypt on 21 December 69; the Egyptians had declared him emperor in June. In the short-term, administration of the empire was given to Mucianus who was aided by Vespasian’s son, Domitian. Mucianus started off Vespasian’s rule with tax reform that was to restore the empire’s finances. After Vespasian arrived in Rome in mid-70, Mucianus continued to press Vespasian to collect as many taxes as possible. Vespasian and Mucianus renewed old taxes and instituted new ones, increased the tribute of the provinces, and kept a watchful eye upon the treasury officials. The Latin proverb “Pecunia non-olet” (“Money does not stink”) may have been created when he had introduced a urine tax on public toilets. Before Vespasian, this tax was imposed by Emperor Nero under the name of “vectigal urinae” in the 1st century AD. However the tax was removed after a while, it was re-enacted by Vespasian around 70 AD in order to fill the treasury. Vespasian’s policy was not well received by his son. Writing about Vespasian in their history books, Dio Cassius and Suetonius mentioned “When [Vespasian’s] son Titus blamed him for even laying a tax upon urine, he applied to his nose a piece of the money he received in the first instalment, and asked him if it stunk. And he replying no, ‘And yet,’ said he, ‘it is derived from urine”. Since then, this phrase “Money does not stink” has been used to whitewash dubious or illegal origin of money. In early 70 Vespasian was still in Egypt, the source of Rome’s grain supply, and had not yet left for Rome. According to Tacitus, his trip was delayed due to bad weather. Modern historians theorize that Vespasian had been and was continuing to consolidate support from the Egyptians before departing. Stories of a divine Vespasian healing people circulated in Egypt. During this period, protests erupted in Alexandria over his new tax policies and grain shipments were held up. Vespasian eventually restored order and grain shipments to Rome resumed.	998	ENGLISH	1
Harriet Tubman was a slave in Maryland who escaped to freedom in Pennsylvania. She could have fled to safety in Canada, but after years of enduring harsh treatment, she was determined to help other slaves to freedom. Becoming a “conductor” on the Underground Railroad, she delivered over 300 runaway slaves. Infuriated by her success, slave owners offered a $40,000 reward for her capture—dead or alive. Harriet was the first to acknowledge that her accomplishments were only possible with God. She would declare to Sarah Bradford, who wrote her biography, “Don’t I tell you, Missus, ’twasn’t me, ’twas de Lord!” And she said, “On my underground railroad, I never run my train off the track and I never lost a passenger.” As a child Harriet had learned to trust the Lord. This was necessary because she was rented out to cruel masters and mistresses. One flung a two-pound weight at another slave, but Harriet jumped in the way and took the blow, causing her lifelong hardship. Yet, enduring hard labor and little sleep caused Harriet to grow strong in body and spirit. Praying for Her Owner She often prayed for her owner, “Oh, dear Lord, change that man’s heart and make him a Christian.” But, when she heard that she was to be sent to a chain gang in the far South, she changed her prayer: “Lord, if you ain’t never going to change that man’s heart, kill him, Lord, and take him out of the way, so he won’t do no more mischief.” The master died suddenly, as wickedly as he had lived. Brokenhearted and full of guilt, Harriet began to pray to be washed of sin. “It ’peared like I would give the world full of silver and gold, if I had it, to bring that poor soul back, I would give myself; I would give everything! But he was gone, I couldn’t pray for him no more.” Following the North Star In 1849 she felt the Lord was telling her to flee north. Her brothers joined her, but soon turned back out of fear. Vowing never to be taken alive, Harriet kept going, praying, “Lord, I’m going to hold steady on to you and you’ve got to see me through.” Following the North Star, she escaped to freedom alone. “Oh, how I prayed then, lying on the cold, damp ground, ‘Oh, dear Lord, I ain’t got no friend but you. Come to my help, Lord, for I’m in trouble!’” Harriet came to a solemn resolution: She would make a home for her family in the North and, with the Lord’s help, bring them there. Night and day she worked, saving pennies, and when she had enough money, she slipped away from her home to rescue her family. It turned out her husband had taken up with another woman and was not interested in running north. Swallowing her disappointment, Harriet piloted others north. Nineteen times Harriet ventured into the South to lead fellow slaves to safety, prompting her nickname, “Moses.” She experienced many narrow escapes, but the Lord always sent help. Once a boatman eyed her suspiciously. He ordered her aside with a young woman she was helping to freedom using forged passes. Harriet knelt at the bow of the boat and prayed, “Oh, Lord! You’ve been with me in six troubles; don’t desert me in the seventh!” The boatman returned a few minutes later saying, “You can take your tickets now.” Another time the Lord led her to wade a flooded river. She did, and escaped being captured by slavers whom she later discovered had been hiding a short distance down the path. “I think slavery is the next thing to hell,” she said. “If a person would send another into bondage he would, it appears to me, be bad enough to send him to hell if he could.” Among those she helped to freedom in one of her trips were her own mom and dad. Prompted in her spirit, she raised money and headed south where she found her father was facing criminal charges for helping runaway slaves. She got them safely to Canada. During the Civil War, she acted as a scout for the Union and nursed wounded soldiers all without pay. Today, statues and plaques commemorate Harriet Tubman. On February 1, 1978, she became the first black woman honored on American postage. In 1990, President George H. W. Bush, acting on a Congressional resolution, proclaimed March 10 as Harriet Tubman Day. But during her old age, when a little financial assistance would have been welcome, Congress jeered at an attempt to award her a pension. Tubman lived to be about 93 years old, dying in extreme poverty on March 10, 1913, in a home for aged African-Americans that she had founded in Auburn, NY. Fittingly, she told those gathered at her death bed, “I go to prepare a place for you.” We have no doubt she did just that. The Torchlighters Heroes of the Faith episode on Harriet Tubman features her commitment to prayer, her miraculous escape to freedom, and her brave determination to follow God’s call back into danger to rescue others. Stream this 30-minute animated film or purchase the DVD (includes documentary). Make use of our free curriculum and Kid’s fun page to help children learn even more about this remarkable woman of faith.	<urn:uuid:3364eef1-7431-471f-a371-a5f50640f34f>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://torchlighters.org/harriet-tubman-the-moses-of-her-people/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251696046.73/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127081933-20200127111933-00501.warc.gz	en	0.982016	1,211	3.515625	4	[ -0.3297434449195862, 0.1854841709136963, 0.341313898563385, 0.08225221931934357, 0.03640671446919441, 0.025399137288331985, 0.3030041456222534, -0.06714272499084473, -0.127149760723114, 0.07757732272148132, 0.4447486400604248, 0.015106812119483948, -0.05717833340167999, -0.2095763236284256...	7	Harriet Tubman was a slave in Maryland who escaped to freedom in Pennsylvania. She could have fled to safety in Canada, but after years of enduring harsh treatment, she was determined to help other slaves to freedom. Becoming a “conductor” on the Underground Railroad, she delivered over 300 runaway slaves. Infuriated by her success, slave owners offered a $40,000 reward for her capture—dead or alive. Harriet was the first to acknowledge that her accomplishments were only possible with God. She would declare to Sarah Bradford, who wrote her biography, “Don’t I tell you, Missus, ’twasn’t me, ’twas de Lord!” And she said, “On my underground railroad, I never run my train off the track and I never lost a passenger.” As a child Harriet had learned to trust the Lord. This was necessary because she was rented out to cruel masters and mistresses. One flung a two-pound weight at another slave, but Harriet jumped in the way and took the blow, causing her lifelong hardship. Yet, enduring hard labor and little sleep caused Harriet to grow strong in body and spirit. Praying for Her Owner She often prayed for her owner, “Oh, dear Lord, change that man’s heart and make him a Christian.” But, when she heard that she was to be sent to a chain gang in the far South, she changed her prayer: “Lord, if you ain’t never going to change that man’s heart, kill him, Lord, and take him out of the way, so he won’t do no more mischief.” The master died suddenly, as wickedly as he had lived. Brokenhearted and full of guilt, Harriet began to pray to be washed of sin. “It ’peared like I would give the world full of silver and gold, if I had it, to bring that poor soul back, I would give myself; I would give everything! But he was gone, I couldn’t pray for him no more.” Following the North Star In 1849 she felt the Lord was telling her to flee north. Her brothers joined her, but soon turned back out of fear. Vowing never to be taken alive, Harriet kept going, praying, “Lord, I’m going to hold steady on to you and you’ve got to see me through.” Following the North Star, she escaped to freedom alone. “Oh, how I prayed then, lying on the cold, damp ground, ‘Oh, dear Lord, I ain’t got no friend but you. Come to my help, Lord, for I’m in trouble!’” Harriet came to a solemn resolution: She would make a home for her family in the North and, with the Lord’s help, bring them there. Night and day she worked, saving pennies, and when she had enough money, she slipped away from her home to rescue her family. It turned out her husband had taken up with another woman and was not interested in running north. Swallowing her disappointment, Harriet piloted others north. Nineteen times Harriet ventured into the South to lead fellow slaves to safety, prompting her nickname, “Moses.” She experienced many narrow escapes, but the Lord always sent help. Once a boatman eyed her suspiciously. He ordered her aside with a young woman she was helping to freedom using forged passes. Harriet knelt at the bow of the boat and prayed, “Oh, Lord! You’ve been with me in six troubles; don’t desert me in the seventh!” The boatman returned a few minutes later saying, “You can take your tickets now.” Another time the Lord led her to wade a flooded river. She did, and escaped being captured by slavers whom she later discovered had been hiding a short distance down the path. “I think slavery is the next thing to hell,” she said. “If a person would send another into bondage he would, it appears to me, be bad enough to send him to hell if he could.” Among those she helped to freedom in one of her trips were her own mom and dad. Prompted in her spirit, she raised money and headed south where she found her father was facing criminal charges for helping runaway slaves. She got them safely to Canada. During the Civil War, she acted as a scout for the Union and nursed wounded soldiers all without pay. Today, statues and plaques commemorate Harriet Tubman. On February 1, 1978, she became the first black woman honored on American postage. In 1990, President George H. W. Bush, acting on a Congressional resolution, proclaimed March 10 as Harriet Tubman Day. But during her old age, when a little financial assistance would have been welcome, Congress jeered at an attempt to award her a pension. Tubman lived to be about 93 years old, dying in extreme poverty on March 10, 1913, in a home for aged African-Americans that she had founded in Auburn, NY. Fittingly, she told those gathered at her death bed, “I go to prepare a place for you.” We have no doubt she did just that. The Torchlighters Heroes of the Faith episode on Harriet Tubman features her commitment to prayer, her miraculous escape to freedom, and her brave determination to follow God’s call back into danger to rescue others. Stream this 30-minute animated film or purchase the DVD (includes documentary). Make use of our free curriculum and Kid’s fun page to help children learn even more about this remarkable woman of faith.	1,161	ENGLISH	1
Miss Pitchford: November 2018 Last Thursday the children in Base 1 came to school all cosy in their hats, scalfs and gloves because it was frosty outside! After the register we decided to change our plans and go exploring outside as it was the first hard frost of the winter and there was so much to see. We talked about why the ground was white and looked very closely at the frost, we saw tiny cyrstals and sparkles in the sunlight! We also had to be very quiet as we listened to the sound of the grass as we walked across it, we heard crunching and it felt hard. We experimented with touching the frost and found out what happened when we put our hands on it — our hands got cold and the frost disappeared! We learnt what the word melting meant and also used it to describe what had happened to part of the field that was not frosty. It took a fair amount of investigation but we worked out that some of the frost on the field had been melted by the sun. When we got back inside, after warming up, we looked back at our photos and recounted what we had seen. We then drew pictures about our adventures and some children did some writing to explain what they had learnt. I hope you enjoy looking at these photos as much as we enjoyed our adventure outside! popular recent articlesAlso in the news Busy bees again in Base 5. In English we have been learning about the etymology of words- we discovered that many words stemmed from the Ancient Greeks! In maths we have really been developing our knowledge of decimals and fractions- we are becoming experts! We have also had great fun in our music lessons, learning new songs and singing in two parts- well done everyone. We have also be en... A huge effort from all of our pupils this week. Everyone has been working hard to show our achieve behaviours. Very well done to all our achieve, star learner and reading award winners.Congratulations to Red Team for earning the most house points and Base 1 for winning the golden ticket with 98.5 %... What a wonderful first week back we had in Base 4!We've been studying Viking and Anglo-Saxon artwork, learning how most of it was found on tools, clothes, armour and everyday objects. We studied the different designs, including some of the important shapes and symbols used to design our own printing blocks. We even had a go at cutting lino using special tools.We've started to look...	<urn:uuid:3c6aea02-a0ff-485e-87b1-793bee24154b>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.wrenburyschool.org.uk/school-news/base-1-go-exploring.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594101.10/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119010920-20200119034920-00211.warc.gz	en	0.984245	508	3.46875	3	[ -0.27982211112976074, -0.27425333857536316, 0.38737931847572327, -0.038010742515325546, 0.1746254563331604, 0.2507741153240204, 0.05034977197647095, -0.004828338045626879, -0.16879695653915405, -0.027996517717838287, 0.16524846851825714, -0.49364858865737915, 0.13044197857379913, 0.5264574...	1	Miss Pitchford: November 2018 Last Thursday the children in Base 1 came to school all cosy in their hats, scalfs and gloves because it was frosty outside! After the register we decided to change our plans and go exploring outside as it was the first hard frost of the winter and there was so much to see. We talked about why the ground was white and looked very closely at the frost, we saw tiny cyrstals and sparkles in the sunlight! We also had to be very quiet as we listened to the sound of the grass as we walked across it, we heard crunching and it felt hard. We experimented with touching the frost and found out what happened when we put our hands on it — our hands got cold and the frost disappeared! We learnt what the word melting meant and also used it to describe what had happened to part of the field that was not frosty. It took a fair amount of investigation but we worked out that some of the frost on the field had been melted by the sun. When we got back inside, after warming up, we looked back at our photos and recounted what we had seen. We then drew pictures about our adventures and some children did some writing to explain what they had learnt. I hope you enjoy looking at these photos as much as we enjoyed our adventure outside! popular recent articlesAlso in the news Busy bees again in Base 5. In English we have been learning about the etymology of words- we discovered that many words stemmed from the Ancient Greeks! In maths we have really been developing our knowledge of decimals and fractions- we are becoming experts! We have also had great fun in our music lessons, learning new songs and singing in two parts- well done everyone. We have also be en... A huge effort from all of our pupils this week. Everyone has been working hard to show our achieve behaviours. Very well done to all our achieve, star learner and reading award winners.Congratulations to Red Team for earning the most house points and Base 1 for winning the golden ticket with 98.5 %... What a wonderful first week back we had in Base 4!We've been studying Viking and Anglo-Saxon artwork, learning how most of it was found on tools, clothes, armour and everyday objects. We studied the different designs, including some of the important shapes and symbols used to design our own printing blocks. We even had a go at cutting lino using special tools.We've started to look...	507	ENGLISH	1
Zachary Taylor and Jane Austen have both been the subject of theories that their deaths were actually the result of poisoning by arsenic. You would not think that former U.S. president Zachary Taylor and English novelist Jane Austen would have anything in common, but they do. Both have been the subject of theories that their deaths, commonly attributed to natural causes, were actually the result of poisoning by arsenic. Taylor died in 1850, just 16 months after being elected president. On a hot Fourth of July, he had attended the groundbreaking ceremony for the Washington Monument and then headed back to the White House, where he consumed a large bowl of cherries and a glass of cold milk. By the evening, he began to feel unwell, and by the next morning, he was experiencing bloody diarrhea. Diagnosed with acute gastroenteritis or possibly cholera, he was treated with mercury chloride (calomel), ipecac and opium, according to current best practices. The calomel would have been useless, but opium can curtail diarrhea. Ipecac induces vomiting, which was believed to rid the body of whatever was invading it. There is also a good chance that the president would have been bled, a common treatment for all ailments at the time. If anything, these treatments hastened his death, which occurred just four days later. Posthumous diagnosis is notoriously treacherous and is usually based on a lot of conjecture. Judging by the rather sudden onset of symptoms, some sort of food poisoning, either by bacteria such as Salmonella in the cherries or in the unpasteurized milk, seems a possibility. However, author Clara Rising, after doing research on the president for a book she was writing about his life, introduced another theory. She claims that Taylor’s symptoms are consistent with arsenic poisoning and that the president had plenty of enemies who would have profited from his death. Security in those days in the White House was not tight and tainting some food with arsenic would not have been difficult. Although Taylor himself was a slave owner, he proposed that any new territories that joined the United States would be “free” states, a proposal that angered many Southerners. Rising made a case for her views in The Taylor File: The Mysterious Death of a President and managed to obtain approval from Taylor’s descendants for an exhumation and forensic autopsy. If arsenic were found, it would pretty well be an indication of poisoning because the body had not been embalmed, a process that in those days used arsenic. The president had been in a mausoleum, not buried in the ground, meaning no arsenic contamination from the soil. The autopsy found no arsenic and came to the conclusion that the cause of death was cholera or acute gastroenteritis, as Washington had open sewers and his food or drink may have been contaminated. But that did not satisfy Rising. She suggested that he may have been poisoned with cyanide or with mushrooms, neither of which would have left a trace after 140 years. If Rising’s allegations were correct, Taylor would have been the first U.S. president assassinated. However, history bestows that dubious honour on Abraham Lincoln. Jane Austen was one of the most famous novelists of the 19th century, rivalling Charles Dickens in popularity. Her Pride and Prejudice and Sense and Sensibility were widely read and there was great sadness when Austen died at the young age of 41. Cause of death has been attributed either to underactive adrenal glands (Addison’s disease), the autoimmune disease lupus, or to some form of cancer. As in the case of Taylor, a novelist has now suggested that arsenic killed Austen, albeit probably not by deliberate poisoning. Lindsay Ashford came across some of Jane Austen’s letters and was alerted by the sentence “I am considerably better now and am recovering my looks a little, which have been bad enough, black and white and every wrong colour.” Because Ashford was a crime writer and knew about poisons, she thought that the changes in pigmentation that Austen described smacked of arsenic poisoning. In the 18th and 19th centuries, various forms of arsenic were used as medicine. A 1 per cent solution of potassium arsenite, known as Fowler’s solution, was a common treatment for almost any ailment, despite being useless. Although there is no record of Austen having used this “remedy,” Ashford suggests that it is very likely because it was used for rheumatism, something that Austen complained of in her letters. Ashford receives some support for the theory of arsenic poisoning from Sandra Tuppen, a curator at the British Library. She bases her argument on three eyeglasses of different strength that belonged to Austen and are now displayed in the British Library. The argument is that Austen needed to get stronger and stronger glasses because she was suffering from cataracts, and, guess what, arsenic can cause cataracts. Seems like quite a stretch since there are many reasons why people’s eyesight can change. And unlike Zachary Taylor, we will never find out whether her body contains arsenic because Jane Austen will never be exhumed. She rests in peace under the floor of Winchester Cathedral. Joe Schwarcz is director of McGill University’s Office for Science & Society (mcgill.ca/oss). He hosts The Dr. Joe Show on CJAD Radio 800 AM every Sunday from 3 to 4 p.m.	<urn:uuid:17572047-9414-49f6-9e90-a613fa3a2a77>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://montrealgazette.com/opinion/columnists/the-right-chemistry-a-president-a-novelist-and-arsenic-poisoning	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251694908.82/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127051112-20200127081112-00121.warc.gz	en	0.983221	1,145	3.296875	3	[ -0.13988474011421204, 0.0873645469546318, 0.3399648666381836, 0.2078489512205124, 0.43808430433273315, -0.20776471495628357, 0.6053842306137085, 0.48257535696029663, -0.1190153956413269, -0.0024143196642398834, 0.326728880405426, -0.12434875965118408, 0.15175041556358337, 0.425145626068115...	1	Zachary Taylor and Jane Austen have both been the subject of theories that their deaths were actually the result of poisoning by arsenic. You would not think that former U.S. president Zachary Taylor and English novelist Jane Austen would have anything in common, but they do. Both have been the subject of theories that their deaths, commonly attributed to natural causes, were actually the result of poisoning by arsenic. Taylor died in 1850, just 16 months after being elected president. On a hot Fourth of July, he had attended the groundbreaking ceremony for the Washington Monument and then headed back to the White House, where he consumed a large bowl of cherries and a glass of cold milk. By the evening, he began to feel unwell, and by the next morning, he was experiencing bloody diarrhea. Diagnosed with acute gastroenteritis or possibly cholera, he was treated with mercury chloride (calomel), ipecac and opium, according to current best practices. The calomel would have been useless, but opium can curtail diarrhea. Ipecac induces vomiting, which was believed to rid the body of whatever was invading it. There is also a good chance that the president would have been bled, a common treatment for all ailments at the time. If anything, these treatments hastened his death, which occurred just four days later. Posthumous diagnosis is notoriously treacherous and is usually based on a lot of conjecture. Judging by the rather sudden onset of symptoms, some sort of food poisoning, either by bacteria such as Salmonella in the cherries or in the unpasteurized milk, seems a possibility. However, author Clara Rising, after doing research on the president for a book she was writing about his life, introduced another theory. She claims that Taylor’s symptoms are consistent with arsenic poisoning and that the president had plenty of enemies who would have profited from his death. Security in those days in the White House was not tight and tainting some food with arsenic would not have been difficult. Although Taylor himself was a slave owner, he proposed that any new territories that joined the United States would be “free” states, a proposal that angered many Southerners. Rising made a case for her views in The Taylor File: The Mysterious Death of a President and managed to obtain approval from Taylor’s descendants for an exhumation and forensic autopsy. If arsenic were found, it would pretty well be an indication of poisoning because the body had not been embalmed, a process that in those days used arsenic. The president had been in a mausoleum, not buried in the ground, meaning no arsenic contamination from the soil. The autopsy found no arsenic and came to the conclusion that the cause of death was cholera or acute gastroenteritis, as Washington had open sewers and his food or drink may have been contaminated. But that did not satisfy Rising. She suggested that he may have been poisoned with cyanide or with mushrooms, neither of which would have left a trace after 140 years. If Rising’s allegations were correct, Taylor would have been the first U.S. president assassinated. However, history bestows that dubious honour on Abraham Lincoln. Jane Austen was one of the most famous novelists of the 19th century, rivalling Charles Dickens in popularity. Her Pride and Prejudice and Sense and Sensibility were widely read and there was great sadness when Austen died at the young age of 41. Cause of death has been attributed either to underactive adrenal glands (Addison’s disease), the autoimmune disease lupus, or to some form of cancer. As in the case of Taylor, a novelist has now suggested that arsenic killed Austen, albeit probably not by deliberate poisoning. Lindsay Ashford came across some of Jane Austen’s letters and was alerted by the sentence “I am considerably better now and am recovering my looks a little, which have been bad enough, black and white and every wrong colour.” Because Ashford was a crime writer and knew about poisons, she thought that the changes in pigmentation that Austen described smacked of arsenic poisoning. In the 18th and 19th centuries, various forms of arsenic were used as medicine. A 1 per cent solution of potassium arsenite, known as Fowler’s solution, was a common treatment for almost any ailment, despite being useless. Although there is no record of Austen having used this “remedy,” Ashford suggests that it is very likely because it was used for rheumatism, something that Austen complained of in her letters. Ashford receives some support for the theory of arsenic poisoning from Sandra Tuppen, a curator at the British Library. She bases her argument on three eyeglasses of different strength that belonged to Austen and are now displayed in the British Library. The argument is that Austen needed to get stronger and stronger glasses because she was suffering from cataracts, and, guess what, arsenic can cause cataracts. Seems like quite a stretch since there are many reasons why people’s eyesight can change. And unlike Zachary Taylor, we will never find out whether her body contains arsenic because Jane Austen will never be exhumed. She rests in peace under the floor of Winchester Cathedral. Joe Schwarcz is director of McGill University’s Office for Science & Society (mcgill.ca/oss). He hosts The Dr. Joe Show on CJAD Radio 800 AM every Sunday from 3 to 4 p.m.	1,148	ENGLISH	1
To him mainly it was due that France was saved from dismemberment, and received a constitution which, to use his own words, " united crown and representatives of the people in a sense of common interests." The Itzas were one of the eighteen semi-independent Maya states, whose incessant internecine wars at length brought about the dismemberment of the empire of Xibalba and the destruction of Mayan civilization. Of England had in 1422 been proclaimed king of France at his father's grave at St Denis, Charles the dauphin (still uncrowned) was forced to watch the slow dismemberment of his kingdom. The energy of Danton, the organizing skill of Carnot, and the high spirit of the French nation, resolute at all costs to avoid dismemberment, had well employed the respite given by the sluggishness of the Allies. It was not necessary either to secure the lasting benefits of the Revolution or to save France from dismemberment; for nine Frenchmen out of ten were agreed on both of these points and were ready to lay down their lives for the national cause.	<urn:uuid:3a69ab6d-84e8-4aa9-9a0a-69b620b1f855>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.yourdictionary.com/dismemberment	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250613416.54/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123191130-20200123220130-00250.warc.gz	en	0.985312	233	3.390625	3	[ -0.5619757175445557, 0.7888942956924438, 0.24521423876285553, -0.16536827385425568, -0.024243677034974098, -0.1442737728357315, 0.305953711271286, 0.4200899600982666, -0.1279769390821457, -0.19981607794761658, -0.010009481571614742, -0.398648202419281, 0.04722578823566437, 0.22920656204223...	1	To him mainly it was due that France was saved from dismemberment, and received a constitution which, to use his own words, " united crown and representatives of the people in a sense of common interests." The Itzas were one of the eighteen semi-independent Maya states, whose incessant internecine wars at length brought about the dismemberment of the empire of Xibalba and the destruction of Mayan civilization. Of England had in 1422 been proclaimed king of France at his father's grave at St Denis, Charles the dauphin (still uncrowned) was forced to watch the slow dismemberment of his kingdom. The energy of Danton, the organizing skill of Carnot, and the high spirit of the French nation, resolute at all costs to avoid dismemberment, had well employed the respite given by the sluggishness of the Allies. It was not necessary either to secure the lasting benefits of the Revolution or to save France from dismemberment; for nine Frenchmen out of ten were agreed on both of these points and were ready to lay down their lives for the national cause.	228	ENGLISH	1
“Young Goodman Brown” is a short story by Nathaniel Hawthorne is an excellent piece that clearly illustrates Sigmund Freud theory of repression through Young Goodman Brown’s faith in his puritan religion. Brown in his unconscious mind is, however, challenged by the evils which surround him that he tries to repress and thus, a battle between good vs. evil surfaces. Growing up as a dedicated puritan, Young Goodman Brown was raised under strict religious guidelines that he must obey wholly according to his religion. He married a lovely woman named Faith within his deeply religious community. Faith is Young Goodman Browns dear wife, but also serves as a symbol for his commitment to the puritan religion. In Freud theory of repression, Faith and his religion serves as his repression in Goodman Browns mind. The story starts off with Young Goodman Brown heading out to the forest to run some errands. Faith tries to convince Goodman Brown not to go and stay here with her. With Faith’s gentle voice she whispers, “prithee put off your journey until sunrise and sleep in your own bed tonight.” That is just like Brown’s religious beliefs in his mind trying to stop himself from going into the forest. “Of all nights in the year, this one night must I tarry away from thee.” said brown- indicating he must head into the forest tonight but without any specific reason. The forest is symbolic door to Goodman Browns unconscious mind where Faith act as the repression, tries to stop Goodman Brown from going further into his mind. He disregards the repression and went ahead and opened that door into his unconscious or id. Inside his mind, he finds all these evil from his thoughts that he had repressed and locked away all these years cause of his strict...	<urn:uuid:5234f27a-5a83-4a16-a03d-ef758bd50ff2>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://brightkite.com/essay-on/goodman-brown	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592565.2/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118110141-20200118134141-00249.warc.gz	en	0.983407	364	3.484375	3	[ -0.1336783468723297, 0.10393853485584259, -0.08120371401309967, -0.08850383013486862, -0.0067490143701434135, 0.17366081476211548, -0.2674109935760498, -0.19619469344615936, 0.005736081395298243, -0.08378481864929199, -0.15092211961746216, -0.3252207040786743, -0.16600117087364197, 0.17392...	1	“Young Goodman Brown” is a short story by Nathaniel Hawthorne is an excellent piece that clearly illustrates Sigmund Freud theory of repression through Young Goodman Brown’s faith in his puritan religion. Brown in his unconscious mind is, however, challenged by the evils which surround him that he tries to repress and thus, a battle between good vs. evil surfaces. Growing up as a dedicated puritan, Young Goodman Brown was raised under strict religious guidelines that he must obey wholly according to his religion. He married a lovely woman named Faith within his deeply religious community. Faith is Young Goodman Browns dear wife, but also serves as a symbol for his commitment to the puritan religion. In Freud theory of repression, Faith and his religion serves as his repression in Goodman Browns mind. The story starts off with Young Goodman Brown heading out to the forest to run some errands. Faith tries to convince Goodman Brown not to go and stay here with her. With Faith’s gentle voice she whispers, “prithee put off your journey until sunrise and sleep in your own bed tonight.” That is just like Brown’s religious beliefs in his mind trying to stop himself from going into the forest. “Of all nights in the year, this one night must I tarry away from thee.” said brown- indicating he must head into the forest tonight but without any specific reason. The forest is symbolic door to Goodman Browns unconscious mind where Faith act as the repression, tries to stop Goodman Brown from going further into his mind. He disregards the repression and went ahead and opened that door into his unconscious or id. Inside his mind, he finds all these evil from his thoughts that he had repressed and locked away all these years cause of his strict...	347	ENGLISH	1
Women in the Middle Ages The Middle Ages was a period in European history that occurred around the 5th century to the 15th century. During the medieval period, women were socially and economically unappreciated, misjudged and misused. The purpose of this paper is to explore the ideals and beliefs of women in the Middle Ages and analyze how it affects today’s world. Were women satisfied with their lives in the Middle Ages? What were their expectations? Why did the church favor men? How does it affect women’s behavior nowadays? What has changed? I intend to use primary and secondary data to analyze these questions and have a better understanding of the key psychological factors that have changed within time. The value of women in the Middle Ages was acknowledged as an economical purpose due to the inequality of genders at the time. Women were viewed and perceived as child carriers and laborers. As their daily duty, women were expected to obey and abide by their father, brothers or any other male members of the family. Their views and perspectives were heard and interpreted neither by society nor by their husbands. Therefore, decisions were mainly made by the male in the household, in which women had to comply or they would be penalized. Marriages were arranged, education was rarely offered and accessible, and wages were underpaid for women. The church favored men and widowhood was their only escape to freedom. The history narrated about the achievements of the Middle Ages people features wealthy men. There was a rigid social stratification that did not allow inclusion of women and the poor in history. The worth of women to the society was undervalued and underestimated socially and economically (Lucas, 2007). Only the role of women as manual laborers and child bearers was acknowledged. Sometimes they worked together with men but would be paid lower wages than children (Fields, 2002). The church was a great oppressor to women since it restricted them to work in literate jobs. Professionally, women could only work as midwifes or as low paid laborers. Women also dominated the silk and textile industries. Though they virtually controlled the crafts, they were paid very insufficient amounts. Married women were expected to perform hard labor and still fulfill hose hold chores and duties (Lucas, 2007). The development of flour mills saved women’s time but led to an increase in the taxes that women were charged. Women therefore lost a substantial amount of the family food to taxes. The continuous exploitation of women pushed them into oblivion and hopelessness. Buy Women in the Middle Ages essay paper online * Final order price might be slightly different depending on the current exchange rate of chosen payment system. Evolution of guilds led to improvement of the labor conditions for women. Individual women began being hired by aristocrats and being paid in advance for their work. Highly skilled women in the textile industry enjoyed considerable high pay and patronage (LaBarge, 2010). It is probable that at some point in time, women were able to earn a living to sustain themselves and their families as depicted in the literature from that period. In The Canterbury Tales, the lead female character is portrayed as a semi-independent and hardworking woman. Still women were degraded; in the book the author described women as having three talents of spinning, weeping and deceit. The status of women in guilds improved remarkably. In places like Cologne, women shared similar privileges and rights with men (Fields, 2002). It is impossible to come up with an accurate estimate about the population of women in the Middle Ages. Women were not included in population records due to their low status in society. The most important duty was bearing children. Children were seen as an increased source of cheap laborer for wealthy aristocratic men. Women were viewed as baby-making machines and marriages were arranged to pair them together with fertile men. The birth process was dangerous for both women and children due to poor conditions (Gies & Gies, 2009). Infant mortality was very high during the period. The extreme pain and strain of child bearing, poor sanitary conditions, and hard labor made life short, cruel, and harsh for most child bearing women. The life expectancy of men was very high and they were likely to die at sixty while the life expectancy of women was very low since most of them die at twenty, while those who lived long enough died at forty. In the aristocratic classes, women were valued for the mount of dowry they could fetch in terms of monetary gains or land rather than their child bearing capabilities. Such women lived longer because they were not exposed to hard labor or the strenuous child bearing exercise. Aristocratic women were more likely to become widows since most aristocratic men married when they were very old. Widowhood empowered them nod gave them an opportunity to re-evaluate their roles and to help ther women in the society, There were a lot of discrepancies in ideologies and theories in treatment of women during medieval times. While aristocratic women were only valued for dowry purposes, women from the lower classes could not marry without the permission of the feudal lord (Lucas, 2007). Once the family received the dowry for the aristocratic woman, she became useless to both her husband and her male relatives. Women worked in the kitchen and the fields just for the mere sake of getting by. Domestic violence against women was common and it was widely accepted. The church endorsed wife beating and doctrines from the period, state that wives should be beaten and chastised by the men to correct their mistakes because they were his property. God chastised sinners and men had a similar right with God to chastise sinners over whom they had control (Erler & Kowaleski, 2008). Most men treated livestock in a better way than they treated women. This was due to the fact that they could obtain benefits and profits from livestock but could never benefit from a wife. The security of a wife depended on how well she could please her husband. The main objectives of a wife were to ensure that the husband enjoyed the maximum degree of comfort and to save her soul by refraining from sinning (Fields, 2002). Most men actually wrote down books which contained the instructions that they expected their wives to follow. For instance, in the fourteenth century, Le Menagier de Paris (The Goodman of Paris) wrote down instructions on what he expected from his young wife. According to the book, wives were expected to be patient, silent, thoughtful, obedient, humble and loving. If the wife failed to fulfill her duties and obligations, the man would usually stray and start having affairs with other women (LaBarge, 2010). Wives were expected to be totally submissive to their husbands. The people of the Middle Ages exercised a double standard for infidelity. Infidelity among women led to cruel punishment and expulsion from the society while infidelity among men was hailed and tolerated. Aristocratic men could offer their wives to other men as bribes in order to further their political ambitions. Rape was common and socially acceptable but children from illicit unions were labeled as bastards and were highly stigmatized. Women rejoiced at widow hood and considered it the redeemer of their unhappy lives. Upon the death of the husband, the wife took over the land and property of the husband. Only widows could inherit hand. They could also bequeath the land to people of their choice. Women could not participate in politics and did not have rights to occupy a parliamentary seat (Erler & Kowaleski, 2008). The Magna Carta contained various rights for widows and it provided that they did not have to remarry if they were no longer interested in marriage. The death of the husbands gave women freedom and wealth. The clergy had a spiritual domination over women. Women attended church in large numbers as they could only obtain solace and consolation from religion since they were prohibited from engaging in other social activities, The strong faith of women in religion played a major role in the growth of the influence and power of the church over the society in the Middle Ages. The church was however spiteful of women (Lucas, 2007). Women were the majority church members but the church continued to indoctrinate the women with the concept that they were inferior and filthy creatures that had led to the fall of man. The church constantly preached that women were more likely to sin because they were weak and could not control their desires. The church considered women to be slaves of vanity, deceit and gossip. The church’s philosophy of marriage portrayed a belief in the inferiority of women. Teachings from a priest of the period revealed that men were advised to avoid marriage to avoid being led onto the path of sin by the daughter of Eve (Lucas, 2007). The Lord Himself refrained from marrying a woman to avoid sin. Women who resisted sin were deemed to be virtuous hence the extreme praise placed on virginity by the church. The relationship between women, sex, love and the Medieval Church sparked high levels of controversy. Women who managed to exploit the conflict between the church and the society often became powerful. The church gave women who were tired of cheap labor an alternative in the form of convents. The choice to place daughters in convents was made by lazy and bored fathers who felt they could not waste money and time searching for husbands for their daughters (Gies & Gies, 2009). The simple solution was to place the girls in the nunnery in the belief that they were marrying them off to the church. Girls were considered to be fully grown at the age of fifteen so they were marrieed at the age of twelve and could become full nuns at the age of fourteen. Girls in nunneries were deemed dead by the rest of the medieval society. They became an asset of the church and lost all rights to inherit from their fathers. Fathers who did not want their daughters to inherit property often sent them off to convents. Women in convents enjoyed a relative amount of power and authority. They could hold leadership positions. They were subjected to eternal virginity and were indoctrinated to fear men. Their stay in the convents was characterized by extreme isolation from the rest of the society (LaBarge, 2010). In the Middle Ages, only women in convents could access education. However, the knowledge they received was heavily censored by the church to ensure that they remained mentally innocent so that they could not question the discriminative practices of the church. They were subjected to Draconian discipline and they had rules for looking at men, speaking, sitting, standing, and laughing (Fields, 2007). The spirituality of nunneries began to decline in the Middle Ages since they were viewed as centers for escape from poverty and as a stable source of economic welfare. Most nuns could not understand the sermons being given in the church at the time because they did not know Latin, which was the official language of the church. The nunneries began to embrace secularism and it was written that dogs, dresses, and dances would bring damnation to the nuns (LaBarge, 2010). This is depicted in medieval literature. In the Canterbury Tales, the Prioress enjoyed the company of dogs, jewelry, and designer clothes. Medieval nuns became empowered and sophisticated and became a reflection of women in leadership. Class differences played a big role in medieval society. Poor women were doomed to poverty and cheap labor for the rest of their lives. Aristocratic women could ascend to positions of power when their husbands went to fight in the war crusades. The roles of women changed over time during the Middle Ages. Women possessed considerable political and religious power in the High Middle Ages and the Late Middle Ages. Some women went on to become powerful and successful. Joan of Arc is the most renowned woman of the Middle Ages. She successfully led France to victory in war (LaBarge, 2010). The war crusades of the holy land put some women in positions of political power. Eleanor of Aquitaine became a powerful Countess and Duchess at the tender age of fifteen. Isabella 1 ruled the Kingdom of Aragon in conjunction with her husband. Prominent female writers such as Christine de Pizan emerged and she vehemently attacked misogyny and the inhumane treatment of women in society (LaBarge, 2010). Hildegard of Bingen earned fame as a linguist, composer, scientist, writer and prophet. She constantly rebelled against the church and it punished her by refusing to canonize her. Her punishment was however light as compared to the extreme punishments other nuns who disobeyed the church were subjected to. Women enjoyed freedom for only a short time as after the late stage of the Middle Ages; restrictions on female activities were imposed. Sex was considered necessary but immoral outside the context of marriage (Erler & Kowaleski, 2008). Women with medical knowledge could not practice as physicians. The male physicians considered the subject of women’s health to be mysterious. Husbands married virgins as that was the only assurance that the children borne were theirs since there were no paternity tests. The period was characterized by a lot of chivalry and romance in courtship. Prostitution was common in the Middle Ages and there were traditional brothels in major cities. Prostitutes had to dress differently so that they could be distinguished from virtuous women (Gies & Gies, 2009). Women did not get into prostitution out of choice; they did so to supplement the income that they earned from cheap labor (Lucas, 2007). The medieval society applied double standards when dealing with prostitution. It was considered an appropriate sexual relief for men but women who engaged in prostitution were regarded as vile and immoral creatures and were consistently degraded. Currently, the treatment of women by men and the society has improved a lot from the way it was in the Middle Ages. The feminist movement has led to the liberation of women. Women can own property and have equal rights with men. They can access education and choose to work in the field of the choice. They also earn wages based on the quality of their work though women are yet to attain equal pay with men at the work place. Women can hold political offices and there are several female presidents and parliamentarians in the world. Women have achieved a lot of victories but a lot of measures need to be put in place to end double standards, sexism and misogyny. Related history essays - The Secret Life of Kim Philby - The American National Anthem - Objectivity in History - Mahatma Gandhi - History about the Experience of Latin Americans Immigrants in the US - American Civil War - The History of China - The World War I and the World War II - American History - History about the Experience of Latin Americans Immigrants in the US Most popular orders	<urn:uuid:763215f0-5b0b-4dcf-9b5a-0342d8c499c1>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://prime-writings.com/essays/history/women-in-the-middle-ages.php	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250610004.56/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123101110-20200123130110-00366.warc.gz	en	0.988639	2,998	4.09375	4	[ -0.13315528631210327, 0.5548076033592224, 0.0036686197854578495, 0.11186988651752472, 0.010218405164778233, 0.34268128871917725, -0.1070823073387146, 0.2706318199634552, 0.1001216471195221, 0.012151757255196571, 0.16246196627616882, 0.06866917014122009, 0.20994801819324493, 0.0766304060816...	1	Women in the Middle Ages The Middle Ages was a period in European history that occurred around the 5th century to the 15th century. During the medieval period, women were socially and economically unappreciated, misjudged and misused. The purpose of this paper is to explore the ideals and beliefs of women in the Middle Ages and analyze how it affects today’s world. Were women satisfied with their lives in the Middle Ages? What were their expectations? Why did the church favor men? How does it affect women’s behavior nowadays? What has changed? I intend to use primary and secondary data to analyze these questions and have a better understanding of the key psychological factors that have changed within time. The value of women in the Middle Ages was acknowledged as an economical purpose due to the inequality of genders at the time. Women were viewed and perceived as child carriers and laborers. As their daily duty, women were expected to obey and abide by their father, brothers or any other male members of the family. Their views and perspectives were heard and interpreted neither by society nor by their husbands. Therefore, decisions were mainly made by the male in the household, in which women had to comply or they would be penalized. Marriages were arranged, education was rarely offered and accessible, and wages were underpaid for women. The church favored men and widowhood was their only escape to freedom. The history narrated about the achievements of the Middle Ages people features wealthy men. There was a rigid social stratification that did not allow inclusion of women and the poor in history. The worth of women to the society was undervalued and underestimated socially and economically (Lucas, 2007). Only the role of women as manual laborers and child bearers was acknowledged. Sometimes they worked together with men but would be paid lower wages than children (Fields, 2002). The church was a great oppressor to women since it restricted them to work in literate jobs. Professionally, women could only work as midwifes or as low paid laborers. Women also dominated the silk and textile industries. Though they virtually controlled the crafts, they were paid very insufficient amounts. Married women were expected to perform hard labor and still fulfill hose hold chores and duties (Lucas, 2007). The development of flour mills saved women’s time but led to an increase in the taxes that women were charged. Women therefore lost a substantial amount of the family food to taxes. The continuous exploitation of women pushed them into oblivion and hopelessness. Buy Women in the Middle Ages essay paper online * Final order price might be slightly different depending on the current exchange rate of chosen payment system. Evolution of guilds led to improvement of the labor conditions for women. Individual women began being hired by aristocrats and being paid in advance for their work. Highly skilled women in the textile industry enjoyed considerable high pay and patronage (LaBarge, 2010). It is probable that at some point in time, women were able to earn a living to sustain themselves and their families as depicted in the literature from that period. In The Canterbury Tales, the lead female character is portrayed as a semi-independent and hardworking woman. Still women were degraded; in the book the author described women as having three talents of spinning, weeping and deceit. The status of women in guilds improved remarkably. In places like Cologne, women shared similar privileges and rights with men (Fields, 2002). It is impossible to come up with an accurate estimate about the population of women in the Middle Ages. Women were not included in population records due to their low status in society. The most important duty was bearing children. Children were seen as an increased source of cheap laborer for wealthy aristocratic men. Women were viewed as baby-making machines and marriages were arranged to pair them together with fertile men. The birth process was dangerous for both women and children due to poor conditions (Gies & Gies, 2009). Infant mortality was very high during the period. The extreme pain and strain of child bearing, poor sanitary conditions, and hard labor made life short, cruel, and harsh for most child bearing women. The life expectancy of men was very high and they were likely to die at sixty while the life expectancy of women was very low since most of them die at twenty, while those who lived long enough died at forty. In the aristocratic classes, women were valued for the mount of dowry they could fetch in terms of monetary gains or land rather than their child bearing capabilities. Such women lived longer because they were not exposed to hard labor or the strenuous child bearing exercise. Aristocratic women were more likely to become widows since most aristocratic men married when they were very old. Widowhood empowered them nod gave them an opportunity to re-evaluate their roles and to help ther women in the society, There were a lot of discrepancies in ideologies and theories in treatment of women during medieval times. While aristocratic women were only valued for dowry purposes, women from the lower classes could not marry without the permission of the feudal lord (Lucas, 2007). Once the family received the dowry for the aristocratic woman, she became useless to both her husband and her male relatives. Women worked in the kitchen and the fields just for the mere sake of getting by. Domestic violence against women was common and it was widely accepted. The church endorsed wife beating and doctrines from the period, state that wives should be beaten and chastised by the men to correct their mistakes because they were his property. God chastised sinners and men had a similar right with God to chastise sinners over whom they had control (Erler & Kowaleski, 2008). Most men treated livestock in a better way than they treated women. This was due to the fact that they could obtain benefits and profits from livestock but could never benefit from a wife. The security of a wife depended on how well she could please her husband. The main objectives of a wife were to ensure that the husband enjoyed the maximum degree of comfort and to save her soul by refraining from sinning (Fields, 2002). Most men actually wrote down books which contained the instructions that they expected their wives to follow. For instance, in the fourteenth century, Le Menagier de Paris (The Goodman of Paris) wrote down instructions on what he expected from his young wife. According to the book, wives were expected to be patient, silent, thoughtful, obedient, humble and loving. If the wife failed to fulfill her duties and obligations, the man would usually stray and start having affairs with other women (LaBarge, 2010). Wives were expected to be totally submissive to their husbands. The people of the Middle Ages exercised a double standard for infidelity. Infidelity among women led to cruel punishment and expulsion from the society while infidelity among men was hailed and tolerated. Aristocratic men could offer their wives to other men as bribes in order to further their political ambitions. Rape was common and socially acceptable but children from illicit unions were labeled as bastards and were highly stigmatized. Women rejoiced at widow hood and considered it the redeemer of their unhappy lives. Upon the death of the husband, the wife took over the land and property of the husband. Only widows could inherit hand. They could also bequeath the land to people of their choice. Women could not participate in politics and did not have rights to occupy a parliamentary seat (Erler & Kowaleski, 2008). The Magna Carta contained various rights for widows and it provided that they did not have to remarry if they were no longer interested in marriage. The death of the husbands gave women freedom and wealth. The clergy had a spiritual domination over women. Women attended church in large numbers as they could only obtain solace and consolation from religion since they were prohibited from engaging in other social activities, The strong faith of women in religion played a major role in the growth of the influence and power of the church over the society in the Middle Ages. The church was however spiteful of women (Lucas, 2007). Women were the majority church members but the church continued to indoctrinate the women with the concept that they were inferior and filthy creatures that had led to the fall of man. The church constantly preached that women were more likely to sin because they were weak and could not control their desires. The church considered women to be slaves of vanity, deceit and gossip. The church’s philosophy of marriage portrayed a belief in the inferiority of women. Teachings from a priest of the period revealed that men were advised to avoid marriage to avoid being led onto the path of sin by the daughter of Eve (Lucas, 2007). The Lord Himself refrained from marrying a woman to avoid sin. Women who resisted sin were deemed to be virtuous hence the extreme praise placed on virginity by the church. The relationship between women, sex, love and the Medieval Church sparked high levels of controversy. Women who managed to exploit the conflict between the church and the society often became powerful. The church gave women who were tired of cheap labor an alternative in the form of convents. The choice to place daughters in convents was made by lazy and bored fathers who felt they could not waste money and time searching for husbands for their daughters (Gies & Gies, 2009). The simple solution was to place the girls in the nunnery in the belief that they were marrying them off to the church. Girls were considered to be fully grown at the age of fifteen so they were marrieed at the age of twelve and could become full nuns at the age of fourteen. Girls in nunneries were deemed dead by the rest of the medieval society. They became an asset of the church and lost all rights to inherit from their fathers. Fathers who did not want their daughters to inherit property often sent them off to convents. Women in convents enjoyed a relative amount of power and authority. They could hold leadership positions. They were subjected to eternal virginity and were indoctrinated to fear men. Their stay in the convents was characterized by extreme isolation from the rest of the society (LaBarge, 2010). In the Middle Ages, only women in convents could access education. However, the knowledge they received was heavily censored by the church to ensure that they remained mentally innocent so that they could not question the discriminative practices of the church. They were subjected to Draconian discipline and they had rules for looking at men, speaking, sitting, standing, and laughing (Fields, 2007). The spirituality of nunneries began to decline in the Middle Ages since they were viewed as centers for escape from poverty and as a stable source of economic welfare. Most nuns could not understand the sermons being given in the church at the time because they did not know Latin, which was the official language of the church. The nunneries began to embrace secularism and it was written that dogs, dresses, and dances would bring damnation to the nuns (LaBarge, 2010). This is depicted in medieval literature. In the Canterbury Tales, the Prioress enjoyed the company of dogs, jewelry, and designer clothes. Medieval nuns became empowered and sophisticated and became a reflection of women in leadership. Class differences played a big role in medieval society. Poor women were doomed to poverty and cheap labor for the rest of their lives. Aristocratic women could ascend to positions of power when their husbands went to fight in the war crusades. The roles of women changed over time during the Middle Ages. Women possessed considerable political and religious power in the High Middle Ages and the Late Middle Ages. Some women went on to become powerful and successful. Joan of Arc is the most renowned woman of the Middle Ages. She successfully led France to victory in war (LaBarge, 2010). The war crusades of the holy land put some women in positions of political power. Eleanor of Aquitaine became a powerful Countess and Duchess at the tender age of fifteen. Isabella 1 ruled the Kingdom of Aragon in conjunction with her husband. Prominent female writers such as Christine de Pizan emerged and she vehemently attacked misogyny and the inhumane treatment of women in society (LaBarge, 2010). Hildegard of Bingen earned fame as a linguist, composer, scientist, writer and prophet. She constantly rebelled against the church and it punished her by refusing to canonize her. Her punishment was however light as compared to the extreme punishments other nuns who disobeyed the church were subjected to. Women enjoyed freedom for only a short time as after the late stage of the Middle Ages; restrictions on female activities were imposed. Sex was considered necessary but immoral outside the context of marriage (Erler & Kowaleski, 2008). Women with medical knowledge could not practice as physicians. The male physicians considered the subject of women’s health to be mysterious. Husbands married virgins as that was the only assurance that the children borne were theirs since there were no paternity tests. The period was characterized by a lot of chivalry and romance in courtship. Prostitution was common in the Middle Ages and there were traditional brothels in major cities. Prostitutes had to dress differently so that they could be distinguished from virtuous women (Gies & Gies, 2009). Women did not get into prostitution out of choice; they did so to supplement the income that they earned from cheap labor (Lucas, 2007). The medieval society applied double standards when dealing with prostitution. It was considered an appropriate sexual relief for men but women who engaged in prostitution were regarded as vile and immoral creatures and were consistently degraded. Currently, the treatment of women by men and the society has improved a lot from the way it was in the Middle Ages. The feminist movement has led to the liberation of women. Women can own property and have equal rights with men. They can access education and choose to work in the field of the choice. They also earn wages based on the quality of their work though women are yet to attain equal pay with men at the work place. Women can hold political offices and there are several female presidents and parliamentarians in the world. Women have achieved a lot of victories but a lot of measures need to be put in place to end double standards, sexism and misogyny. Related history essays - The Secret Life of Kim Philby - The American National Anthem - Objectivity in History - Mahatma Gandhi - History about the Experience of Latin Americans Immigrants in the US - American Civil War - The History of China - The World War I and the World War II - American History - History about the Experience of Latin Americans Immigrants in the US Most popular orders	3,079	ENGLISH	1
Peace and order were the basic duties of Roman government. ‘Running the empire’ explains how these duties were achieved or unfulfilled. The reigns and styles of government of emperors such as Diocletian, Constantine and Theodosius I, are examined. What exactly were the powers of Roman emperors? Was he considered divine? Who else could acquire power, and what was the status of women within the empire? Why was it so important for the emperor to attend public games? The process of bureaucracy is surveyed — how do you run an empire on a daily basis, and how powerful were the most senior officials? Peace and order were the basic duties of Roman government, so that people could get on with their lives untroubled by invasions and civil wars and crime. Late antiquity is often taken to start with the emperor Diocletian (reigned 284–305), who did impose peace and order, after a long period of disruption with an exceptionally fast turnover of emperors. Diocletian's enemies said that his parents had been slaves; the army was his route to power, first as a successful soldier, then as leader of a military coup and victor in civil war. This may help to explain why, as emperor, he was surrounded by the ceremonial reverence of a court. He spent very little time in Rome. His armies were commanded by professional soldiers, and his advisory council was staffed by senior civil servants, who were also in the militia (‘the service’), not by senators from great Roman families. The council was called a ‘consistory’, literally a ‘standing’ committee, because it was not proper to sit in the presence of the emperor. Diocletian greatly increased the number of soldiers, and recognized that he had to pay for them. Like all managers with limited options, he restructured and standardized and tried to balance income and expenditure. Like all managers, he found that some problems persisted: too little cash, too many barbarians, and no easy way to increase productivity. p. 14The Roman empire was very big, and communication was slow. People travelling on official business could get permits to use the ‘public transport’ system, which required local officials to keep changes of horses at staging-posts along the major routes. This made travel faster, but was not much help in winter when storms made sailing dangerous and roads were blocked by snow or mud or flooding. Diocletian tried to improve efficiency by reorganizing administrative regions. Church tradition preserves their Greek name, ‘diocese’, and the Latin name ‘vicar’ (vicarius) for the local deputy of a senior official. Regions had a military commander (dux, ‘leader’, hence ‘duke’) and a civil governor (comes, ‘companion’ of the emperor, hence ‘count’). Separating troops from law and finance made both tasks manageable. It also reduced the risk of rebellion when a commander, his troops, or people in his region, decided that he could do a better job than the emperor. Diocletian, himself a successful rebel, tried to stabilize the situation with a tetrarchy (‘four-man rule’) of two senior generals, one based in the east and one in the west, with two junior generals in training to take over from them. This worked for a while, and Diocletian, exceptionally, was able to retire to his p. 15↵home town on the east coast of the Adriatic, instead of dying on the job. But military power remained decisive, succession crises and civil war persisted, and power was often divided among co-emperors. Some emperors achieved sole power. Among them was Constantine, who in the second half of his 30-year reign (307–37) added Rome's eastern Mediterranean territories to his western base, and developed a new capital at Constantinople which diverted resources from Rome. His enemies said that his own son was among the rebels he killed, so he had to be Christian, because nobody else would forgive him. At the end of the 4th century, Theodosius I (379–95) dominated his co-emperors, but his sons had different spheres of influence, one in the Greek-speaking east, the other in the Latin-speaking west, which extended into the Balkans and along the North African coast. This was probably not a long-term plan, but the pattern continued. From 395, the western empire lost territory outside Italy, and after 476 Italy too was ruled by non-Romans, though the Senate and the Pope, both based in Rome, continued to have influence. But the eastern empire survived, and in the 530s Justinian was able to reconquer some western territory from Vandals in North Africa and from Ostrogoths in Italy. Throughout these changes, Latin was an imperial, but not a global, language. Greek-speakers thought it was an inferior dialect of Greek, and saw no need to learn it unless they wanted a career in the imperial civil service: Latin remained the official language of law until Justinian, in the 530s, began to issue laws in Greek. For Latin-speakers, fluent Greek was a sign of culture, but some emperors needed an interpreter. Even when they spoke the same language, it was not in practice easy for two emperors and their officials to have the same priorities or even to keep each other informed. While an emperor retained power, he was at the top of the political system. Official rhetoric and visual imagery presented the earthly ruler as exceptionally close to the divine power which rules p. 16↵the universe. Diocletian, having no family claim to power, said he was emperor by the will of the gods, and took the additional name Jovius, ‘belonging to Jupiter’. Later historians said that those who approached him had to kiss the hem of his purple military cloak, as if he were a Persian king. Imperial purple was the most expensive form of a dye made from the murex shellfish; it was reserved for imperial use, and by the late 4th century actors were forbidden to wear purple on stage, even when playing the part of a king. The special status of the emperor is shown on a heavy silver plate (it weighs over 15 kilograms) commemorating the tenth regnal year of Theodosius I, in 388. The emperor, depicted in high relief, presents letters of authorization to an official who is half his size. The hands of the official are respectfully veiled to receive the gift, and the heads of Theodosius and his two co-emperors are surrounded by a nimbus, a representation of radiance like a halo. Everything about the emperor was ‘sacred’: there were chamberlains in charge of his ‘sacred bedchamber’, grants from his treasury were ‘sacred largesses’, his administrators worked in ‘sacred departments’, and his ‘sacred letters’ were received with formal veneration. Then, of course, business proceeded as usual. One 3rd-century papyrus preserves a hurried message to an agent: the divine fortune of our masters has ordered devaluation of the sestertius, so, quick, sell out Italian currency and buy whatever is available. Did anyone seriously believe that the emperor was especially close to the divine? In the 330s, the astrologer Firmicus Maternus claimed that the emperor was not bound by the decrees of fate, as ordinary human beings are, so it was not possible to cast his horoscope. Firmicus may have written this because investigating the emperor's horoscope was a capital offence: it could only mean that you wanted to know when he would die. In the late 4th century, the orator Themistius drew on a long tradition of argument, deriving from Plato, that the best rulers are those who p. 17↵understand the nature of the good. The emperor, he said, is ‘animate law’, the living representative of the divine law which governs the universe and which should be reflected in human law; so the emperor is above human law and can mitigate its harshness. The emperor could indeed intervene to show mercy, or could change the law, but some legal experts thought that he should submit to the present state of the law. Did anyone, including the orator, believe the claims made in speeches of praise? Augustine thought not. ‘How wretched I was on the day when I was preparing to declaim the praises of the emperor, in which I would tell many lies, and would win approval from people who knew I was lying!’ He was then professor of rhetoric at Milan, and the emperor, Valentinian II, was about ten years old, but any trained orator knew what could be said about the splendid ancestry and p. 18↵exceptional promise of someone who had yet to achieve anything. If there was no ancestry, the orator could refer to the favour of the gods. Rhetoric, in such ceremonial performances, was not expected to persuade: it was used to reaffirm consensus, as at party conferences. Some emperors were more relaxed and accessible than others, but all were surrounded by servants and courtiers and ceremonial, and so were at risk of being isolated from information. People at court could acquire power, not because they held office, but because they had access to the emperor as family members or personal servants. Women did not hold any official post, or have any official role in decision making, but some had considerable influence through their family status, their property, and their contacts. It is surprising that unofficial power-holders included court eunuchs, as in Persia. Roman law penalized castration as assault, except when it was done for certified medical reasons; this is not surprising, because the person castrated not only lost the legal and social status of a male, he was likely to die from shock or from infection. Most procedures were carried out on non-Romans and outside Roman territory. Eunuchs were doubly suspect as unmanly and un-Roman, so why were they household servants of the Roman emperor? There are two obvious advantages: pregnancy would not result from affairs with women of the imperial family, and eunuchs were personally dependent on the emperor because they did not have Roman social and family ties. But they could have godchildren or favourites, and they could transfer their loyalty to a rival. Perhaps it was also an advantage that Roman distaste made it easy to blame the eunuchs for whatever went wrong between the emperor and his officials or his people. The emperor at the games Because the emperor was isolated, it was very important for him to attend the public games. This showed that he shared the pleasures of ordinary people, and it was their one opportunity to p. 19↵shout slogans he would personally hear. When Constantine made the town Byzantion into ‘New Rome Constantinople’, one feature he added was the Hippodrome for chariot races, modelled on the Circus Maximus at Rome, with an imperial box and direct access from the palace. Leading charioteers had fan clubs of emotional supporters, as footballers do now. This led to some dramatic clashes between ordinary people and the forces of the state. In 390, at Thessalonica, the military commander Botheric arrested a popular charioteer, and was killed in the resultant riot. The death of an imperial official was a very serious offence, and Theodosius I ordered his troops to take action. Many innocent people were killed, and to make matters worse, Botheric was a Goth. He was a Christian serving in the Roman army, but Christian Goths were usually Arian. This theology, named for the p. 20↵theologian Arius of Alexandria, held that Jesus Christ, as Son of God, is greater than all created beings, but derives his being from the Father. It was not acceptable to ‘Nicene’ Christians who followed the Council of Nicaea (325) in holding that the Son is ‘of the same being as’ the Father, and who claimed to be the Catholic, that is the universal (Greek katholikos), church. Few chariot fans could have explained the difference, but in Thessalonica and elsewhere, it meant Them and Us. So a Catholic emperor was responsible for the deaths of innocent Catholic Romans, in reprisal for the death of an Arian Goth. What happened next can be interpreted in two ways: the most powerful man in the Roman world yields to the spiritual authority of a bishop, or a politically minded bishop offers the emperor a solution to his problem. At the time of the reprisals, the court was at Milan, whose bishop Ambrose was a Roman aristocrat and former governor of the region. Generations of historians accepted the version of events he wrote to his sister: Theodosius was responsible for the deaths of innocent people, and Ambrose refused him communion until he did penance. The National Gallery in London has Van Dyck's copy of a famous painting by Rubens, in which Ambrose, in full episcopal robes, bars from his cathedral a bare-headed Theodosius and his restive military escort. It seems a pity to spoil the story, but more sceptical historians see the ex-governor Ambrose as offering a ‘repentance opportunity’, which solved the problem of Thessalonica and allowed Theodosius to present himself as a pious emperor. Later emperors seem not to have accepted the principle that even an emperor was under the spiritual authority of the church. Ambrose could not solve the wider problem of fan clubs, the ‘circus factions’ who chanted for their team and fought rival supporters. They were easily mobilized to support one political leader or religious group against another, and easily identified by the colours of their preferred team: red, white, blue, green. Blues and Greens were especially active in Constantinople in the late 5th and early p. 21↵6th centuries, and their most spectacular conflict was the ‘Nika Riot’ of 532, ten days that ended in massacre. It began when the city prefect took action against rioters, arresting seven ringleaders and executing five. One Blue and one Green somehow escaped, and at the next races, the crowd appealed to the emperor to pardon them. Justinian, seated in his imperial box, did not respond, and they rioted again. Chanting ‘Nika’, ‘Win!’, as they did for their teams, they stormed and burned the prefect's headquarters. Still Justinian did not respond, and the demands became political: dismiss the city prefect and two other powerful officials, John the Cappadocian, who was charged with reforming administration, and Tribonian, who headed the commission to codify Roman law. Justinian, apparently, conceded this, but riot and arson continued, and he sent in the troops. When that failed, he made a public appearance in the hippodrome on a Sunday, holding a copy of the Gospels in an appeal to religious feeling. This too failed. Rival candidates for emperor were put forward, and there were rumours that Justinian had fled. The historian Procopius developed a splendid scene in which Justinian's wife Theodora pointed out that they had money and ships available for escape, but ‘royalty makes a fine shroud’. The riot was suppressed with great violence, loss of life, and destruction of property; and Justinian began a rebuilding programme which included the great domed church of Hagia Sophia, dedicated five years later. Was it a riot waiting to happen, a riot which could have been defused by a more skilful emperor, a riot exploited by political rivals or opponents of Justinian's reform programme? Nobody knows. Centuries after Justinian, representatives of the Blues and Greens were integrated into Byzantine court ceremonials. Between the exalted emperor and the people who could only shout slogans at him, or his officials, was an army of administrators. Running the Roman empire meant inspecting and reporting, p. 22↵keeping watch for disaffection, dealing with enquiries and petitions and embassies, drafting and publicizing regulations and laws, collecting taxes in money and kind, paying the army and the civil service. The most senior officials were very powerful. ‘Praetorian prefects’ of the east and west were commanders in chief, so called because they were in charge at the praetorium, that is, HQ. ‘Masters of the offices’ were in charge of the various officia, literally ‘responsibilities’, that is, departments of the civil service. These departments had subdivisions called scrinia, literally ‘book-boxes’, or bureaux. They used a distinctive ‘celestial script’ to discourage forgery of official documents. Regional governors also had staff. Some local administration was done by councils (curiae) of landowners, but they were always short of members because service was a major financial burden. Members of the imperial civil service were excused local service, and that made the career path even more attractive. Some people were exempted because they already made a contribution to the community, for example as publicly funded teachers and doctors. When Constantine added Christian clergy to the list of exemptions, there was, allegedly, a flood of new vocations, so that he had to backtrack and insist that churches should not choose people who had obligations to their councils unless the obligation was accepted by someone else. Some people pleaded poverty, which did not mean that they were destitute, only that they were below the property level for compulsory service. Others claimed that they were students, but, then as now, students did not always devote all their time to study. In 370, the Urban Prefect of Rome was told to check up on entry requirements and behaviour: The august Emperors Valentinian, Valens and Gratian to Olybrius, prefect of the city. All those who come to the city in the desire to learn shall first of all present to the Chief Tax Officer letters from the provincial judges who gave them permission to come. These letters shall contain the student's town, birth certificate, p. 23↵and reports of achievement. Second, the students shall declare on arrival which branch of study they propose to follow. Third, the Tax Office shall investigate in detail their places of residence, to ensure that they are devoting their effort to the subject they said they would study. These officials shall also warn the students that they shall all behave in gatherings as befits those who think it right to avoid a bad reputation and bad company, which we consider to be close to crime; nor should they make frequent visits to shows or seek out unseasonable parties. Indeed, we confer on you the power that if anyone does not behave in the city as the dignity of a liberal education requires, he shall be publicly flogged and immediately placed on a boat, expelled from the city and sent home. Augustine, teaching in Rome, found that students were better behaved than they had been in Carthage; the problem was that they did not pay their tuition fees. But in Athens, the ‘dignity of a liberal education’ was often at risk. There, town and gown were on such bad terms that teaching had to take place in private lecture rooms. Students of rival teachers fought in the streets, and new arrivals were forcibly recruited at the quayside, for teachers needed student fees even if they had publicly funded posts. Libanius, a leading teacher at Antioch, knew everyone who was anyone, and his immense correspondence includes references and recommendations for generations of students. He complained that his assistant teachers could barely afford a staff of three slaves, who despised the poverty of their owners. Most students could afford the time and money for higher education, but Prohaeresius, who became a famous teacher of rhetoric, reached Athens with one cloak, one shabby tunic, and a few threadbare blankets, shared with a friend. They took it in turns to stay in bed under the blankets or wear the tunic and cloak to lectures. At the other end of the economic range was a student remembered by his contemporary Gregory, later bishop of Nazianzus, as odd and uncoordinated, eager but confused, with a straggly beard and a prominent Adam's apple. This was the future p. 24↵emperor Julian, who after years of isolation was finally permitted to go to Athens. The emperors acknowledged such hard-working students: Those who do work industriously at their professions may stay in Rome until their twentieth year; but after that time, anyone who does not return of his own accord must be sent home in disgrace by the watchfulness of the Prefecture. So that these concerns are not perfunctorily treated, Your High Sincerity shall instruct the Tax Office to compile a monthly record of who has come from where and who, because their time is up, must return to Africa or another province; with the exception of those who are assigned to the obligations of guilds. Let such documents be sent every year to the departments of Our Mildness, so that we may judge from the achievements and training of each person whether and when we need them. This section of their letter illustrates two important aspects of late antique society. One is a rather charming manifestation of concern for rank: formal modes of address, like ‘Your Majesty’ or ‘Your Excellency’, but deploying a much wider range of abstract nouns to show the characteristics expected of the author and the addressee. The other is constraint, or attempted constraint. Most students were members of the social elite, and were needed for service on local councils; members of trade guilds were required to provide essential services. Romans still wanted bread and circuses, so people born into the guild of bakers could not marry out; shipowners could inherit an obligation to transport the grain for subsidized bread at Rome or Constantinople; and actors, born into public entertainment, could not escape the legal disadvantages of their degraded social status. In 371, Christian emperors conceded that performers could not be recalled to the stage if they made an unexpected recovery after deathbed baptism; but it had to be shown that they really were expected to die, and that the clergy approved of the baptism. Hierarchy and constraint seems an ominous combination, but in practice, there were many examples of social mobility; and there were not p. 25↵enough inspectors to check on all the students and bakers and stage performers in the empire, or to prevent tenant farmers from moving away from land which they had agreed to cultivate or where they were registered for tax. The laws which attempt to restrict movement are a response to complaints. Late antique bureaucracy often gets a bad press. Much to the annoyance of present-day historians, ‘Byzantine’ connotes obscure political intrigue or complex bureaucratic process. This may be a consequence of late antique history-writing: for many ancient authors, history consisted of manoeuvres and shifting alliances within the imperial household, just as for many present-day authors of political memoirs, history consists of politicians and civil servants in the Whitehall village or the Beltway. But bureaucrats gathered the information which was needed to run the empire, and to achieve some fairness in the administration of resources and of justice. Diocletian ordered a new census to find out how many people lived in the Roman empire, what land they owned, and what it could be expected to produce. These are the most obvious ways to tax people, and tax levels could be adjusted for a fixed period in accordance with the current need for troops. But the system had to be flexible, because marginal land left fallow, or unpredictable bad harvests, or bad weather, or epidemics, or war, greatly reduced the amount that could be collected in money or kind. In theory, local landowners on city councils were required to make up the shortfall, but they too were affected by these problems. They used their own rhetorical training, or asked their local teacher of rhetoric, to beg the emperor or the regional governor for tax remission. Diocletian also tried to stabilize and revalue the currency which was used for the payment of money taxes, and for the salaries of soldiers and civil servants. In principle, Rome had gold, silver, and p. 26↵copper (or copper alloy) coins, in a consistent relationship. In practice, the metal content varied. This did not matter if the face value of the coin was accepted, but in troubled times, people were more likely to hoard coins with a higher gold or silver content. Some local trade could continue without currency, but prices went up when the coinage was debased. Diocletian tried to halt inflation, and to reduce the effect of supply and demand, with a price edict which fixed the maximum price for a very wide range of goods, from basic foodstuffs to half-silk underwear with purple stripes to lions for public entertainment. It also set charges for transport over specific routes, and determined the standard wage for jobs ranging from sewer cleaner to teacher of rhetoric. Death was the penalty for taking goods off the market or otherwise breaking the law. The edict was displayed throughout the empire, and fragments have been found in over forty places. The price edict begins with a fine example of late antique legal rhetoric, designed to show the context for the decree and to convince people that it is right. Peace is achieved, thank the gods, and the barbarians are destroyed; now peace must be protected by justice, because, shocking though it is, some people are just out to make a profit. If self-restraint could check the ravages of greed, which rages without an end in sight, without respect for the human race, pursuing its own gain and increase not only every year and month and day but every hour and minute; if the general welfare could endure without disturbance this licence for riotous behaviour which does it so much harm; there would perhaps appear to be scope for keeping quiet and pretending it was not happening, in the hope that general forbearance would modify this appalling and monstrous situation. But the one desire of this untamed madness is to have no love for common humanity, and among the dishonest and arrogant it is almost a religious principle of greed, which grows and swells with sudden surges, to desist only when forced, not by choice, from rending the fortune of all. Late antique bureaucrats are also accused of being out to make a profit. They had usually paid money to get a post, their salaries were not enough to live on, and there were no pensions; so extra payments were routine, and some official documents specify the expected level. At Timgad in North Africa, during the brief reign of the emperor Julian, the governor put up an inscription in the marketplace, giving the rates for different services in bushels of wheat or the money equivalent. Clearly, he did not regard this as encouragement of bribery. It could be argued that, like university tuition fees, this system charged only the people who wanted the service. At least they knew what it would cost, and access to service would otherwise have depended even more on contacts and exchange of favours. Getting access to people in power is never easy: It is often said of me, ‘Why is he going to that potestas [power]? What does a bishop want with that potestas?’ But you all know that your needs make me go where I do not want to go, and watch, and stand at the door, and wait while worthy and unworthy people go in, and be announced, and finally get in, and put up with snubs, and ask, and sometimes succeed and sometimes go sadly away. Augustine's status as bishop did not get him privileged access. He used contacts when he had them, but there is no evidence that he used money. Cyril of Alexandria, a much more political bishop in a much richer diocese, provides one of the most spectacular examples of bribery. In 430, he sent ‘blessings’ to members of the imperial family, officials, and other influential persons in Constantinople, to ensure that they would support his theological position, rather than that of his opponent Nestorius. A letter to Cyril's agents reveals the importance of unofficial power-holders. The wife of the praetorian p. 28↵prefect of the east was offered 100 pounds of gold, the same amount that was given to two senior officials. Chryseros, a eunuch in charge of the sacred bedchamber, was opposed to Cyril, so he was offered double: 200 pounds of gold; six large and four medium tapestries; four large carpets and eight cushions; six each of table-cloths, large and small woven hangings, and stools; twelve throne covers, four large curtains, four thrones and four stools of ivory; six Persian drapes, six large ivory plaques, and six ostrich eggs. Charitable modern historians suggest that Cyril sincerely believed he was ensuring correct doctrine and peace in the church. Connections and favours were always important, but some of the evidence comes from legislation which sought to prevent bribery and to encourage whistleblowers: Emperor Constantine to the provincials: The rapacious hands of officials shall stop at once; they shall stop, I say; for if they do not stop when warned, they shall be cut off with swords. The judge's curtain [which screened access to his room] shall not be for sale. Entrance shall not be bought; his private office shall not be notorious for competing bids; the mere sight of the governor shall not come at a price; the ears of the judge shall be open equally to the poorest and to the rich. Introduction by the Head of Office shall be free from extortion; the assistants of the heads of office shall not exert pressure on litigants; the intolerable assaults of the centurions and other officials, who demand small or great sums, shall be crushed; the insatiable greed of those who supply court records to disputants shall be moderated. Let the industry of the governor keep constant watch so that nothing shall be taken from a litigant by these kinds of people. If the governor did not see what was happening at every level of judicial process, victims of extortion could give him information, and if he did not take action, they could complain to higher authority. Legislation, administration, and official scrutiny might actually help people who were not in a position to work the p. 29↵system, or who wanted to abide by the rules. There is also some evidence for attempts to reduce and simplify bureaucracy. Julian ordered cutbacks at court and in the number of inspectors, but with little effect. Almost two centuries later, Justinian carried out a major reorganization, including the use of Greek for legislation in the eastern empire. John of Cappadocia, his new reforming appointment, was widely unpopular, especially with traditional civil servants who disliked the arrival of the accountants. But perhaps if he had succeeded, ‘Byzantine’ would now connote efficient and transparent administration.	<urn:uuid:8376f552-af14-4c75-8d03-ebdfc6cee9d4>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.veryshortintroductions.com/view/10.1093/actrade/9780199546206.001.0001/actrade-9780199546206-chapter-2	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251687958.71/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126074227-20200126104227-00547.warc.gz	en	0.982891	6,500	3.90625	4	[ -0.28563278913497925, 0.4780476987361908, 0.7550904154777527, -0.5098696947097778, -0.3009614944458008, 0.0048465547151863575, 0.16668635606765747, 0.33665183186531067, 0.01829250529408455, -0.13209033012390137, 0.15111607313156128, -0.2833791971206665, -0.15267333388328552, 0.522453188896...	1	Peace and order were the basic duties of Roman government. ‘Running the empire’ explains how these duties were achieved or unfulfilled. The reigns and styles of government of emperors such as Diocletian, Constantine and Theodosius I, are examined. What exactly were the powers of Roman emperors? Was he considered divine? Who else could acquire power, and what was the status of women within the empire? Why was it so important for the emperor to attend public games? The process of bureaucracy is surveyed — how do you run an empire on a daily basis, and how powerful were the most senior officials? Peace and order were the basic duties of Roman government, so that people could get on with their lives untroubled by invasions and civil wars and crime. Late antiquity is often taken to start with the emperor Diocletian (reigned 284–305), who did impose peace and order, after a long period of disruption with an exceptionally fast turnover of emperors. Diocletian's enemies said that his parents had been slaves; the army was his route to power, first as a successful soldier, then as leader of a military coup and victor in civil war. This may help to explain why, as emperor, he was surrounded by the ceremonial reverence of a court. He spent very little time in Rome. His armies were commanded by professional soldiers, and his advisory council was staffed by senior civil servants, who were also in the militia (‘the service’), not by senators from great Roman families. The council was called a ‘consistory’, literally a ‘standing’ committee, because it was not proper to sit in the presence of the emperor. Diocletian greatly increased the number of soldiers, and recognized that he had to pay for them. Like all managers with limited options, he restructured and standardized and tried to balance income and expenditure. Like all managers, he found that some problems persisted: too little cash, too many barbarians, and no easy way to increase productivity. p. 14The Roman empire was very big, and communication was slow. People travelling on official business could get permits to use the ‘public transport’ system, which required local officials to keep changes of horses at staging-posts along the major routes. This made travel faster, but was not much help in winter when storms made sailing dangerous and roads were blocked by snow or mud or flooding. Diocletian tried to improve efficiency by reorganizing administrative regions. Church tradition preserves their Greek name, ‘diocese’, and the Latin name ‘vicar’ (vicarius) for the local deputy of a senior official. Regions had a military commander (dux, ‘leader’, hence ‘duke’) and a civil governor (comes, ‘companion’ of the emperor, hence ‘count’). Separating troops from law and finance made both tasks manageable. It also reduced the risk of rebellion when a commander, his troops, or people in his region, decided that he could do a better job than the emperor. Diocletian, himself a successful rebel, tried to stabilize the situation with a tetrarchy (‘four-man rule’) of two senior generals, one based in the east and one in the west, with two junior generals in training to take over from them. This worked for a while, and Diocletian, exceptionally, was able to retire to his p. 15↵home town on the east coast of the Adriatic, instead of dying on the job. But military power remained decisive, succession crises and civil war persisted, and power was often divided among co-emperors. Some emperors achieved sole power. Among them was Constantine, who in the second half of his 30-year reign (307–37) added Rome's eastern Mediterranean territories to his western base, and developed a new capital at Constantinople which diverted resources from Rome. His enemies said that his own son was among the rebels he killed, so he had to be Christian, because nobody else would forgive him. At the end of the 4th century, Theodosius I (379–95) dominated his co-emperors, but his sons had different spheres of influence, one in the Greek-speaking east, the other in the Latin-speaking west, which extended into the Balkans and along the North African coast. This was probably not a long-term plan, but the pattern continued. From 395, the western empire lost territory outside Italy, and after 476 Italy too was ruled by non-Romans, though the Senate and the Pope, both based in Rome, continued to have influence. But the eastern empire survived, and in the 530s Justinian was able to reconquer some western territory from Vandals in North Africa and from Ostrogoths in Italy. Throughout these changes, Latin was an imperial, but not a global, language. Greek-speakers thought it was an inferior dialect of Greek, and saw no need to learn it unless they wanted a career in the imperial civil service: Latin remained the official language of law until Justinian, in the 530s, began to issue laws in Greek. For Latin-speakers, fluent Greek was a sign of culture, but some emperors needed an interpreter. Even when they spoke the same language, it was not in practice easy for two emperors and their officials to have the same priorities or even to keep each other informed. While an emperor retained power, he was at the top of the political system. Official rhetoric and visual imagery presented the earthly ruler as exceptionally close to the divine power which rules p. 16↵the universe. Diocletian, having no family claim to power, said he was emperor by the will of the gods, and took the additional name Jovius, ‘belonging to Jupiter’. Later historians said that those who approached him had to kiss the hem of his purple military cloak, as if he were a Persian king. Imperial purple was the most expensive form of a dye made from the murex shellfish; it was reserved for imperial use, and by the late 4th century actors were forbidden to wear purple on stage, even when playing the part of a king. The special status of the emperor is shown on a heavy silver plate (it weighs over 15 kilograms) commemorating the tenth regnal year of Theodosius I, in 388. The emperor, depicted in high relief, presents letters of authorization to an official who is half his size. The hands of the official are respectfully veiled to receive the gift, and the heads of Theodosius and his two co-emperors are surrounded by a nimbus, a representation of radiance like a halo. Everything about the emperor was ‘sacred’: there were chamberlains in charge of his ‘sacred bedchamber’, grants from his treasury were ‘sacred largesses’, his administrators worked in ‘sacred departments’, and his ‘sacred letters’ were received with formal veneration. Then, of course, business proceeded as usual. One 3rd-century papyrus preserves a hurried message to an agent: the divine fortune of our masters has ordered devaluation of the sestertius, so, quick, sell out Italian currency and buy whatever is available. Did anyone seriously believe that the emperor was especially close to the divine? In the 330s, the astrologer Firmicus Maternus claimed that the emperor was not bound by the decrees of fate, as ordinary human beings are, so it was not possible to cast his horoscope. Firmicus may have written this because investigating the emperor's horoscope was a capital offence: it could only mean that you wanted to know when he would die. In the late 4th century, the orator Themistius drew on a long tradition of argument, deriving from Plato, that the best rulers are those who p. 17↵understand the nature of the good. The emperor, he said, is ‘animate law’, the living representative of the divine law which governs the universe and which should be reflected in human law; so the emperor is above human law and can mitigate its harshness. The emperor could indeed intervene to show mercy, or could change the law, but some legal experts thought that he should submit to the present state of the law. Did anyone, including the orator, believe the claims made in speeches of praise? Augustine thought not. ‘How wretched I was on the day when I was preparing to declaim the praises of the emperor, in which I would tell many lies, and would win approval from people who knew I was lying!’ He was then professor of rhetoric at Milan, and the emperor, Valentinian II, was about ten years old, but any trained orator knew what could be said about the splendid ancestry and p. 18↵exceptional promise of someone who had yet to achieve anything. If there was no ancestry, the orator could refer to the favour of the gods. Rhetoric, in such ceremonial performances, was not expected to persuade: it was used to reaffirm consensus, as at party conferences. Some emperors were more relaxed and accessible than others, but all were surrounded by servants and courtiers and ceremonial, and so were at risk of being isolated from information. People at court could acquire power, not because they held office, but because they had access to the emperor as family members or personal servants. Women did not hold any official post, or have any official role in decision making, but some had considerable influence through their family status, their property, and their contacts. It is surprising that unofficial power-holders included court eunuchs, as in Persia. Roman law penalized castration as assault, except when it was done for certified medical reasons; this is not surprising, because the person castrated not only lost the legal and social status of a male, he was likely to die from shock or from infection. Most procedures were carried out on non-Romans and outside Roman territory. Eunuchs were doubly suspect as unmanly and un-Roman, so why were they household servants of the Roman emperor? There are two obvious advantages: pregnancy would not result from affairs with women of the imperial family, and eunuchs were personally dependent on the emperor because they did not have Roman social and family ties. But they could have godchildren or favourites, and they could transfer their loyalty to a rival. Perhaps it was also an advantage that Roman distaste made it easy to blame the eunuchs for whatever went wrong between the emperor and his officials or his people. The emperor at the games Because the emperor was isolated, it was very important for him to attend the public games. This showed that he shared the pleasures of ordinary people, and it was their one opportunity to p. 19↵shout slogans he would personally hear. When Constantine made the town Byzantion into ‘New Rome Constantinople’, one feature he added was the Hippodrome for chariot races, modelled on the Circus Maximus at Rome, with an imperial box and direct access from the palace. Leading charioteers had fan clubs of emotional supporters, as footballers do now. This led to some dramatic clashes between ordinary people and the forces of the state. In 390, at Thessalonica, the military commander Botheric arrested a popular charioteer, and was killed in the resultant riot. The death of an imperial official was a very serious offence, and Theodosius I ordered his troops to take action. Many innocent people were killed, and to make matters worse, Botheric was a Goth. He was a Christian serving in the Roman army, but Christian Goths were usually Arian. This theology, named for the p. 20↵theologian Arius of Alexandria, held that Jesus Christ, as Son of God, is greater than all created beings, but derives his being from the Father. It was not acceptable to ‘Nicene’ Christians who followed the Council of Nicaea (325) in holding that the Son is ‘of the same being as’ the Father, and who claimed to be the Catholic, that is the universal (Greek katholikos), church. Few chariot fans could have explained the difference, but in Thessalonica and elsewhere, it meant Them and Us. So a Catholic emperor was responsible for the deaths of innocent Catholic Romans, in reprisal for the death of an Arian Goth. What happened next can be interpreted in two ways: the most powerful man in the Roman world yields to the spiritual authority of a bishop, or a politically minded bishop offers the emperor a solution to his problem. At the time of the reprisals, the court was at Milan, whose bishop Ambrose was a Roman aristocrat and former governor of the region. Generations of historians accepted the version of events he wrote to his sister: Theodosius was responsible for the deaths of innocent people, and Ambrose refused him communion until he did penance. The National Gallery in London has Van Dyck's copy of a famous painting by Rubens, in which Ambrose, in full episcopal robes, bars from his cathedral a bare-headed Theodosius and his restive military escort. It seems a pity to spoil the story, but more sceptical historians see the ex-governor Ambrose as offering a ‘repentance opportunity’, which solved the problem of Thessalonica and allowed Theodosius to present himself as a pious emperor. Later emperors seem not to have accepted the principle that even an emperor was under the spiritual authority of the church. Ambrose could not solve the wider problem of fan clubs, the ‘circus factions’ who chanted for their team and fought rival supporters. They were easily mobilized to support one political leader or religious group against another, and easily identified by the colours of their preferred team: red, white, blue, green. Blues and Greens were especially active in Constantinople in the late 5th and early p. 21↵6th centuries, and their most spectacular conflict was the ‘Nika Riot’ of 532, ten days that ended in massacre. It began when the city prefect took action against rioters, arresting seven ringleaders and executing five. One Blue and one Green somehow escaped, and at the next races, the crowd appealed to the emperor to pardon them. Justinian, seated in his imperial box, did not respond, and they rioted again. Chanting ‘Nika’, ‘Win!’, as they did for their teams, they stormed and burned the prefect's headquarters. Still Justinian did not respond, and the demands became political: dismiss the city prefect and two other powerful officials, John the Cappadocian, who was charged with reforming administration, and Tribonian, who headed the commission to codify Roman law. Justinian, apparently, conceded this, but riot and arson continued, and he sent in the troops. When that failed, he made a public appearance in the hippodrome on a Sunday, holding a copy of the Gospels in an appeal to religious feeling. This too failed. Rival candidates for emperor were put forward, and there were rumours that Justinian had fled. The historian Procopius developed a splendid scene in which Justinian's wife Theodora pointed out that they had money and ships available for escape, but ‘royalty makes a fine shroud’. The riot was suppressed with great violence, loss of life, and destruction of property; and Justinian began a rebuilding programme which included the great domed church of Hagia Sophia, dedicated five years later. Was it a riot waiting to happen, a riot which could have been defused by a more skilful emperor, a riot exploited by political rivals or opponents of Justinian's reform programme? Nobody knows. Centuries after Justinian, representatives of the Blues and Greens were integrated into Byzantine court ceremonials. Between the exalted emperor and the people who could only shout slogans at him, or his officials, was an army of administrators. Running the Roman empire meant inspecting and reporting, p. 22↵keeping watch for disaffection, dealing with enquiries and petitions and embassies, drafting and publicizing regulations and laws, collecting taxes in money and kind, paying the army and the civil service. The most senior officials were very powerful. ‘Praetorian prefects’ of the east and west were commanders in chief, so called because they were in charge at the praetorium, that is, HQ. ‘Masters of the offices’ were in charge of the various officia, literally ‘responsibilities’, that is, departments of the civil service. These departments had subdivisions called scrinia, literally ‘book-boxes’, or bureaux. They used a distinctive ‘celestial script’ to discourage forgery of official documents. Regional governors also had staff. Some local administration was done by councils (curiae) of landowners, but they were always short of members because service was a major financial burden. Members of the imperial civil service were excused local service, and that made the career path even more attractive. Some people were exempted because they already made a contribution to the community, for example as publicly funded teachers and doctors. When Constantine added Christian clergy to the list of exemptions, there was, allegedly, a flood of new vocations, so that he had to backtrack and insist that churches should not choose people who had obligations to their councils unless the obligation was accepted by someone else. Some people pleaded poverty, which did not mean that they were destitute, only that they were below the property level for compulsory service. Others claimed that they were students, but, then as now, students did not always devote all their time to study. In 370, the Urban Prefect of Rome was told to check up on entry requirements and behaviour: The august Emperors Valentinian, Valens and Gratian to Olybrius, prefect of the city. All those who come to the city in the desire to learn shall first of all present to the Chief Tax Officer letters from the provincial judges who gave them permission to come. These letters shall contain the student's town, birth certificate, p. 23↵and reports of achievement. Second, the students shall declare on arrival which branch of study they propose to follow. Third, the Tax Office shall investigate in detail their places of residence, to ensure that they are devoting their effort to the subject they said they would study. These officials shall also warn the students that they shall all behave in gatherings as befits those who think it right to avoid a bad reputation and bad company, which we consider to be close to crime; nor should they make frequent visits to shows or seek out unseasonable parties. Indeed, we confer on you the power that if anyone does not behave in the city as the dignity of a liberal education requires, he shall be publicly flogged and immediately placed on a boat, expelled from the city and sent home. Augustine, teaching in Rome, found that students were better behaved than they had been in Carthage; the problem was that they did not pay their tuition fees. But in Athens, the ‘dignity of a liberal education’ was often at risk. There, town and gown were on such bad terms that teaching had to take place in private lecture rooms. Students of rival teachers fought in the streets, and new arrivals were forcibly recruited at the quayside, for teachers needed student fees even if they had publicly funded posts. Libanius, a leading teacher at Antioch, knew everyone who was anyone, and his immense correspondence includes references and recommendations for generations of students. He complained that his assistant teachers could barely afford a staff of three slaves, who despised the poverty of their owners. Most students could afford the time and money for higher education, but Prohaeresius, who became a famous teacher of rhetoric, reached Athens with one cloak, one shabby tunic, and a few threadbare blankets, shared with a friend. They took it in turns to stay in bed under the blankets or wear the tunic and cloak to lectures. At the other end of the economic range was a student remembered by his contemporary Gregory, later bishop of Nazianzus, as odd and uncoordinated, eager but confused, with a straggly beard and a prominent Adam's apple. This was the future p. 24↵emperor Julian, who after years of isolation was finally permitted to go to Athens. The emperors acknowledged such hard-working students: Those who do work industriously at their professions may stay in Rome until their twentieth year; but after that time, anyone who does not return of his own accord must be sent home in disgrace by the watchfulness of the Prefecture. So that these concerns are not perfunctorily treated, Your High Sincerity shall instruct the Tax Office to compile a monthly record of who has come from where and who, because their time is up, must return to Africa or another province; with the exception of those who are assigned to the obligations of guilds. Let such documents be sent every year to the departments of Our Mildness, so that we may judge from the achievements and training of each person whether and when we need them. This section of their letter illustrates two important aspects of late antique society. One is a rather charming manifestation of concern for rank: formal modes of address, like ‘Your Majesty’ or ‘Your Excellency’, but deploying a much wider range of abstract nouns to show the characteristics expected of the author and the addressee. The other is constraint, or attempted constraint. Most students were members of the social elite, and were needed for service on local councils; members of trade guilds were required to provide essential services. Romans still wanted bread and circuses, so people born into the guild of bakers could not marry out; shipowners could inherit an obligation to transport the grain for subsidized bread at Rome or Constantinople; and actors, born into public entertainment, could not escape the legal disadvantages of their degraded social status. In 371, Christian emperors conceded that performers could not be recalled to the stage if they made an unexpected recovery after deathbed baptism; but it had to be shown that they really were expected to die, and that the clergy approved of the baptism. Hierarchy and constraint seems an ominous combination, but in practice, there were many examples of social mobility; and there were not p. 25↵enough inspectors to check on all the students and bakers and stage performers in the empire, or to prevent tenant farmers from moving away from land which they had agreed to cultivate or where they were registered for tax. The laws which attempt to restrict movement are a response to complaints. Late antique bureaucracy often gets a bad press. Much to the annoyance of present-day historians, ‘Byzantine’ connotes obscure political intrigue or complex bureaucratic process. This may be a consequence of late antique history-writing: for many ancient authors, history consisted of manoeuvres and shifting alliances within the imperial household, just as for many present-day authors of political memoirs, history consists of politicians and civil servants in the Whitehall village or the Beltway. But bureaucrats gathered the information which was needed to run the empire, and to achieve some fairness in the administration of resources and of justice. Diocletian ordered a new census to find out how many people lived in the Roman empire, what land they owned, and what it could be expected to produce. These are the most obvious ways to tax people, and tax levels could be adjusted for a fixed period in accordance with the current need for troops. But the system had to be flexible, because marginal land left fallow, or unpredictable bad harvests, or bad weather, or epidemics, or war, greatly reduced the amount that could be collected in money or kind. In theory, local landowners on city councils were required to make up the shortfall, but they too were affected by these problems. They used their own rhetorical training, or asked their local teacher of rhetoric, to beg the emperor or the regional governor for tax remission. Diocletian also tried to stabilize and revalue the currency which was used for the payment of money taxes, and for the salaries of soldiers and civil servants. In principle, Rome had gold, silver, and p. 26↵copper (or copper alloy) coins, in a consistent relationship. In practice, the metal content varied. This did not matter if the face value of the coin was accepted, but in troubled times, people were more likely to hoard coins with a higher gold or silver content. Some local trade could continue without currency, but prices went up when the coinage was debased. Diocletian tried to halt inflation, and to reduce the effect of supply and demand, with a price edict which fixed the maximum price for a very wide range of goods, from basic foodstuffs to half-silk underwear with purple stripes to lions for public entertainment. It also set charges for transport over specific routes, and determined the standard wage for jobs ranging from sewer cleaner to teacher of rhetoric. Death was the penalty for taking goods off the market or otherwise breaking the law. The edict was displayed throughout the empire, and fragments have been found in over forty places. The price edict begins with a fine example of late antique legal rhetoric, designed to show the context for the decree and to convince people that it is right. Peace is achieved, thank the gods, and the barbarians are destroyed; now peace must be protected by justice, because, shocking though it is, some people are just out to make a profit. If self-restraint could check the ravages of greed, which rages without an end in sight, without respect for the human race, pursuing its own gain and increase not only every year and month and day but every hour and minute; if the general welfare could endure without disturbance this licence for riotous behaviour which does it so much harm; there would perhaps appear to be scope for keeping quiet and pretending it was not happening, in the hope that general forbearance would modify this appalling and monstrous situation. But the one desire of this untamed madness is to have no love for common humanity, and among the dishonest and arrogant it is almost a religious principle of greed, which grows and swells with sudden surges, to desist only when forced, not by choice, from rending the fortune of all. Late antique bureaucrats are also accused of being out to make a profit. They had usually paid money to get a post, their salaries were not enough to live on, and there were no pensions; so extra payments were routine, and some official documents specify the expected level. At Timgad in North Africa, during the brief reign of the emperor Julian, the governor put up an inscription in the marketplace, giving the rates for different services in bushels of wheat or the money equivalent. Clearly, he did not regard this as encouragement of bribery. It could be argued that, like university tuition fees, this system charged only the people who wanted the service. At least they knew what it would cost, and access to service would otherwise have depended even more on contacts and exchange of favours. Getting access to people in power is never easy: It is often said of me, ‘Why is he going to that potestas [power]? What does a bishop want with that potestas?’ But you all know that your needs make me go where I do not want to go, and watch, and stand at the door, and wait while worthy and unworthy people go in, and be announced, and finally get in, and put up with snubs, and ask, and sometimes succeed and sometimes go sadly away. Augustine's status as bishop did not get him privileged access. He used contacts when he had them, but there is no evidence that he used money. Cyril of Alexandria, a much more political bishop in a much richer diocese, provides one of the most spectacular examples of bribery. In 430, he sent ‘blessings’ to members of the imperial family, officials, and other influential persons in Constantinople, to ensure that they would support his theological position, rather than that of his opponent Nestorius. A letter to Cyril's agents reveals the importance of unofficial power-holders. The wife of the praetorian p. 28↵prefect of the east was offered 100 pounds of gold, the same amount that was given to two senior officials. Chryseros, a eunuch in charge of the sacred bedchamber, was opposed to Cyril, so he was offered double: 200 pounds of gold; six large and four medium tapestries; four large carpets and eight cushions; six each of table-cloths, large and small woven hangings, and stools; twelve throne covers, four large curtains, four thrones and four stools of ivory; six Persian drapes, six large ivory plaques, and six ostrich eggs. Charitable modern historians suggest that Cyril sincerely believed he was ensuring correct doctrine and peace in the church. Connections and favours were always important, but some of the evidence comes from legislation which sought to prevent bribery and to encourage whistleblowers: Emperor Constantine to the provincials: The rapacious hands of officials shall stop at once; they shall stop, I say; for if they do not stop when warned, they shall be cut off with swords. The judge's curtain [which screened access to his room] shall not be for sale. Entrance shall not be bought; his private office shall not be notorious for competing bids; the mere sight of the governor shall not come at a price; the ears of the judge shall be open equally to the poorest and to the rich. Introduction by the Head of Office shall be free from extortion; the assistants of the heads of office shall not exert pressure on litigants; the intolerable assaults of the centurions and other officials, who demand small or great sums, shall be crushed; the insatiable greed of those who supply court records to disputants shall be moderated. Let the industry of the governor keep constant watch so that nothing shall be taken from a litigant by these kinds of people. If the governor did not see what was happening at every level of judicial process, victims of extortion could give him information, and if he did not take action, they could complain to higher authority. Legislation, administration, and official scrutiny might actually help people who were not in a position to work the p. 29↵system, or who wanted to abide by the rules. There is also some evidence for attempts to reduce and simplify bureaucracy. Julian ordered cutbacks at court and in the number of inspectors, but with little effect. Almost two centuries later, Justinian carried out a major reorganization, including the use of Greek for legislation in the eastern empire. John of Cappadocia, his new reforming appointment, was widely unpopular, especially with traditional civil servants who disliked the arrival of the accountants. But perhaps if he had succeeded, ‘Byzantine’ would now connote efficient and transparent administration.	6,456	ENGLISH	1
Texas Became the 28th State 174 Years Ago Today On March 2, 1836, Texas declared her independence from the Republic of Mexico. By April 21 of the following year, the war for Texas' independence was won, and the Republic of Texas was born. March 2 is celebrated across the state as Texas Independence Day, but today is a significant anniversary as well. On December 29, 1845, Texas was formally annexed into the United States. Many people in both the U.S. and Texas had been open to and even enthusiastic about the idea of Texas joining the Union. Among them was Sam Houston, who had defeated Santa Anna's forces at the Battle of San Jacinto and would go on to serve as the first President of the Republic of Texas. U.S. President Martin van Buren's administration, however, didn't move forward with efforts to annex Texas after her victory of Mexico because Mexico had threatened war if it happened. Texas and Mexico were still at odds over disputed territories. When U.S. President John Tyler with the support of President-elect James K. Polk finally got annexation through Congress and Texas joined the Union, Mexico restrained itself for a time after severing diplomatic relations. It didn't take long for tensions to boil over though, and on May 13, 1846, the U.S. declared war on Mexico following skirmishes in disputed territory and failed negotiations with Mexico to purchase much of the land. The Mexican-American war would end with victory for the U.S., which then annexed territories roughly the size of Western Europe. Texas entered the Union under contentious circumstances, and the state later declared its secession on February 1, 1861 with strong objections from Sam Houston, who refused to take an oath to the Confederacy. Houston passed away in 1863, never having the opportunity to see Texas fully restored to the Union in March of 1870. Not everyone favored Texas becoming a state, and even Sam Houston said that if the U.S. didn't make up its mind about annexation that the Republic would do just fine without her. We'll never know if that was true, but even today's Texans tend to be fiercely independent in spirit and proud of our state's unique history and culture born in the spirit of determining our own destiny. There's too much rich history here to condense into a single article, but I can recommend a great read if you'd like to dive more into Texas' history. Randolph B. Campbell's Gone to Texas: A History of the Lone Star State is a fantastic comprehensive look at the forces both human and natural that made Texas what it is today. It's often assigned as a textbook by Texas history professors, but it doesn't read like one and is a real page-turner.	<urn:uuid:c586bb59-7204-4e50-bdf5-d94c7017cd59>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://us105fm.com/texas-became-the-28th-state-174-years-ago-today/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598726.39/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120110422-20200120134422-00088.warc.gz	en	0.980672	561	3.625	4	[ -0.24422100186347961, 0.0708555057644844, 0.4593241810798645, 0.29324617981910706, -0.31380754709243774, 0.14305147528648376, -0.19547633826732635, 0.14227168262004852, -0.05179661512374878, -0.09255864471197128, 0.36585187911987305, 0.07128837704658508, 0.027862481772899628, 0.03101372532...	17	Texas Became the 28th State 174 Years Ago Today On March 2, 1836, Texas declared her independence from the Republic of Mexico. By April 21 of the following year, the war for Texas' independence was won, and the Republic of Texas was born. March 2 is celebrated across the state as Texas Independence Day, but today is a significant anniversary as well. On December 29, 1845, Texas was formally annexed into the United States. Many people in both the U.S. and Texas had been open to and even enthusiastic about the idea of Texas joining the Union. Among them was Sam Houston, who had defeated Santa Anna's forces at the Battle of San Jacinto and would go on to serve as the first President of the Republic of Texas. U.S. President Martin van Buren's administration, however, didn't move forward with efforts to annex Texas after her victory of Mexico because Mexico had threatened war if it happened. Texas and Mexico were still at odds over disputed territories. When U.S. President John Tyler with the support of President-elect James K. Polk finally got annexation through Congress and Texas joined the Union, Mexico restrained itself for a time after severing diplomatic relations. It didn't take long for tensions to boil over though, and on May 13, 1846, the U.S. declared war on Mexico following skirmishes in disputed territory and failed negotiations with Mexico to purchase much of the land. The Mexican-American war would end with victory for the U.S., which then annexed territories roughly the size of Western Europe. Texas entered the Union under contentious circumstances, and the state later declared its secession on February 1, 1861 with strong objections from Sam Houston, who refused to take an oath to the Confederacy. Houston passed away in 1863, never having the opportunity to see Texas fully restored to the Union in March of 1870. Not everyone favored Texas becoming a state, and even Sam Houston said that if the U.S. didn't make up its mind about annexation that the Republic would do just fine without her. We'll never know if that was true, but even today's Texans tend to be fiercely independent in spirit and proud of our state's unique history and culture born in the spirit of determining our own destiny. There's too much rich history here to condense into a single article, but I can recommend a great read if you'd like to dive more into Texas' history. Randolph B. Campbell's Gone to Texas: A History of the Lone Star State is a fantastic comprehensive look at the forces both human and natural that made Texas what it is today. It's often assigned as a textbook by Texas history professors, but it doesn't read like one and is a real page-turner.	586	ENGLISH	1
kidzsearch.com > wiki Explore:images videos games Richard III (play) Richard III is a history play written by William Shakespeare. It is one of Shakespeare's most famous and popular plays. Shakespeare probably wrote Richard III around the year 1593. The play was first printed in a book in 1597. Like other history plays written by Shakespeare, Richard III is about people and events from earlier in English history. The real Richard III was king of England from 1483 to 1485. Shakespeare used the history books of his own time to create his play, though many modern experts do not think those early histories, or Shakespeare's play, are accurate and free of bias. Richard III is different from many plays, because its leading character is a villain, not a hero. In his play, Shakespeare shows the king as a cruel tyrant who does many evil acts, before he is defeated in battle and killed by Henry Tudor. Tudor then becomes Henry VII of England, the next English king and the first of the Tudor dynasty. Shakespeare lived and wrote before modern ideas of freedom of speech and freedom of the press had become accepted. The English government of Shakespeare's day practiced censorship of books and plays. Elizabeth I of England, who was queen from 1558 to 1603, was the granddaughter of Henry VII and the last Tudor ruler. Her government saw Richard III as a villain and the man who replaced him, Henry VII, as a hero, and censored any other point of view. If Shakespeare had wanted to write a play with Richard III as a hero, he would not have been allowed to do so. A famous movie version of Richard III was made in 1955. Laurence Olivier directed the movie and played the leading role. Other movie and television versions, and many modern stage productions, have also been done.	<urn:uuid:7a66a8ba-3456-4ad2-a673-26af78294932>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://wiki.kidzsearch.com/wiki/Richard_III_(play)	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251689924.62/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126135207-20200126165207-00440.warc.gz	en	0.981491	374	3.671875	4	[ -0.07748953253030777, -0.016588350757956505, 0.47133538126945496, -0.019913773983716965, -0.32679611444473267, 0.10092780739068985, 0.10066819936037064, -0.11955075711011887, -0.03778110072016716, -0.27961045503616333, 0.062474604696035385, -0.005158646963536739, -0.11354873329401016, 0.12...	2	kidzsearch.com > wiki Explore:images videos games Richard III (play) Richard III is a history play written by William Shakespeare. It is one of Shakespeare's most famous and popular plays. Shakespeare probably wrote Richard III around the year 1593. The play was first printed in a book in 1597. Like other history plays written by Shakespeare, Richard III is about people and events from earlier in English history. The real Richard III was king of England from 1483 to 1485. Shakespeare used the history books of his own time to create his play, though many modern experts do not think those early histories, or Shakespeare's play, are accurate and free of bias. Richard III is different from many plays, because its leading character is a villain, not a hero. In his play, Shakespeare shows the king as a cruel tyrant who does many evil acts, before he is defeated in battle and killed by Henry Tudor. Tudor then becomes Henry VII of England, the next English king and the first of the Tudor dynasty. Shakespeare lived and wrote before modern ideas of freedom of speech and freedom of the press had become accepted. The English government of Shakespeare's day practiced censorship of books and plays. Elizabeth I of England, who was queen from 1558 to 1603, was the granddaughter of Henry VII and the last Tudor ruler. Her government saw Richard III as a villain and the man who replaced him, Henry VII, as a hero, and censored any other point of view. If Shakespeare had wanted to write a play with Richard III as a hero, he would not have been allowed to do so. A famous movie version of Richard III was made in 1955. Laurence Olivier directed the movie and played the leading role. Other movie and television versions, and many modern stage productions, have also been done.	392	ENGLISH	1
Recruiting the Armies At the beginning of the Civil Wars the only formed military units in the country were the Trayned Bands. These were infantry units made up of volunteers from the more well-to-do levels of society. Both sides appealed for the support of the Trayned Bands during the early weeks of the war. Parliament were lucky enough to gain the support of the London Trayned Bands at this early juncture, however the King was not so fortunate in his appeal to the Nottinghamshire Trayned Bands and on the basis of this disappointment disarmed them, along with other county levies which cost him a lot of his already weak popularity. Only the Cornish Trayned Bands rallied to the King's cause and even they would not fight outside of their county boundaries. Apart from the Trayned Bands infantry were raised by voluntary recruitment, either through a sense of commitment to a cause or the wages that were offered - and particularly after 1644, impressment, even the infantry of the New Model Army were predominantly raised using this method. However, cavalry recruitment was far harder as a cavalryman's equipment cost far more than a foot soldier's and took far more skill in its use. In the early part of the war the Parliamentarian horse were of very uneven quality but this was rectified by the emphasis both Cromwell and Fairfax placed on both discipline and fighting efficiency. The Royalist cavalry were led by Prince Rupert, a professional soldier. His impetuous leadership gave the King several brilliant successes during the early months of the war. The men he led were the followers and retainers of the noblemen and gentlemen who undertook to raise companies or entire regiments for the cause of Charles Stuart. An example of this is the Earl of Northampton who raised a troop of one hundred gentlemen who served at their own expense and then paid for a further forty out of his own pocket. This method of recruitment eventually exhausted its resources and had to give way to the public funded efficiency of the New Model Army. For the purposes of accommodation Civil War armies relied very heavily on the hospitality of the local populace - more often than not given under severe duress. There were official rates to pay for lodging and food consumed by the soldiers but there is plenty of evidence that these arrangements were breached more often than not. It is generally admitted amongst historians that most seventeenth century people thought of themselves as living in and belonging to a particular place and secondly as English. This meant that the Civil Wars took the form of struggles for power within particular localities and even between counties or regional areas within counties. London declared for Parliament very early in the war and in retrospect it can be seen that Charles failure to overturn this decision after the battle of Edgehill was of crucial importance. Other of the big cities were not so constant in their loyalties and switched to whichever side had the most power in their region at any one time, however, there were parts of the country that remained constant in their support for one side or the other. For the King the most loyal and dogged area of support was the West Country while for Parliament it was the counties of the Eastern association who were to provide the men that formed the backbone of the New Model Army when it was formed in 1645. As time went by the Royalists were forced to recruit mainly from Wales as they lost ground and the towns and cities invested by Parliament. Apart from considerations of loyalty this may have had something to do with the relative poverty of the area which would have made young men volunteer for the chance of pay or plunder. Article contributed by Guz	<urn:uuid:dd7fa1a4-099e-485c-a2b3-d388148641fb>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.blews-ltb.co.uk/recruitment-in-the-ecw	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251796127.92/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129102701-20200129132701-00302.warc.gz	en	0.990048	730	3.578125	4	[ -0.36187952756881714, 0.33246827125549316, 0.3983040750026703, -0.25932008028030396, -0.037814490497112274, -0.009621781297028065, -0.2083100974559784, -0.15180149674415588, -0.1004134863615036, -0.21403196454048157, 0.30657100677490234, -0.2805682122707367, 0.2099599689245224, 0.073499321...	12	Recruiting the Armies At the beginning of the Civil Wars the only formed military units in the country were the Trayned Bands. These were infantry units made up of volunteers from the more well-to-do levels of society. Both sides appealed for the support of the Trayned Bands during the early weeks of the war. Parliament were lucky enough to gain the support of the London Trayned Bands at this early juncture, however the King was not so fortunate in his appeal to the Nottinghamshire Trayned Bands and on the basis of this disappointment disarmed them, along with other county levies which cost him a lot of his already weak popularity. Only the Cornish Trayned Bands rallied to the King's cause and even they would not fight outside of their county boundaries. Apart from the Trayned Bands infantry were raised by voluntary recruitment, either through a sense of commitment to a cause or the wages that were offered - and particularly after 1644, impressment, even the infantry of the New Model Army were predominantly raised using this method. However, cavalry recruitment was far harder as a cavalryman's equipment cost far more than a foot soldier's and took far more skill in its use. In the early part of the war the Parliamentarian horse were of very uneven quality but this was rectified by the emphasis both Cromwell and Fairfax placed on both discipline and fighting efficiency. The Royalist cavalry were led by Prince Rupert, a professional soldier. His impetuous leadership gave the King several brilliant successes during the early months of the war. The men he led were the followers and retainers of the noblemen and gentlemen who undertook to raise companies or entire regiments for the cause of Charles Stuart. An example of this is the Earl of Northampton who raised a troop of one hundred gentlemen who served at their own expense and then paid for a further forty out of his own pocket. This method of recruitment eventually exhausted its resources and had to give way to the public funded efficiency of the New Model Army. For the purposes of accommodation Civil War armies relied very heavily on the hospitality of the local populace - more often than not given under severe duress. There were official rates to pay for lodging and food consumed by the soldiers but there is plenty of evidence that these arrangements were breached more often than not. It is generally admitted amongst historians that most seventeenth century people thought of themselves as living in and belonging to a particular place and secondly as English. This meant that the Civil Wars took the form of struggles for power within particular localities and even between counties or regional areas within counties. London declared for Parliament very early in the war and in retrospect it can be seen that Charles failure to overturn this decision after the battle of Edgehill was of crucial importance. Other of the big cities were not so constant in their loyalties and switched to whichever side had the most power in their region at any one time, however, there were parts of the country that remained constant in their support for one side or the other. For the King the most loyal and dogged area of support was the West Country while for Parliament it was the counties of the Eastern association who were to provide the men that formed the backbone of the New Model Army when it was formed in 1645. As time went by the Royalists were forced to recruit mainly from Wales as they lost ground and the towns and cities invested by Parliament. Apart from considerations of loyalty this may have had something to do with the relative poverty of the area which would have made young men volunteer for the chance of pay or plunder. Article contributed by Guz	727	ENGLISH	1
by Ed Sawicki November 20, 2015 This was in response to someone who asked, “How can we really know the age of the Earth?” during a discussion of Archbishop James Ussher estimated it to be 5654 years old in the year 1650. Today (2019), Ussher's estimate puts the age of the Earth at 6000 years. It took more than a century to arrive at the accurate age of the Earth. Darwin knew that it was far older than 4000 years based on his knowledge of natural selection and evolution of life. He never quoted numbers, as far as I can tell, but described it as "great expanses of time". Scientists in the 1800s (Lord Kelvin and others) estimated Earth's age by determining how long it would take a molten Earth to cool to its present temperature. They put it at between 20 and 400 million years. That's quite a range, but at least they knew it was millions of years older that Ussher's estimate. In the 1890s, radioactivity and radioactive elements were discovered by Marie Curie and others. Radiometric dating was then used to determine the age of things, such as rocks. In 1911, a rock was determined to be more than one billion years old. In 1956, rocks from Diablo Canyon in Arizona were found to be about 4.5 billion years old. Today, the state of the art in dating techniques ensures a better than 1 percent accuracy. So, the Earth is 4.54 billion years old. — END —	<urn:uuid:2e86c72b-fff2-4c22-a292-faa9dfe1b910>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://edsawicki.com/articles/earth_age.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598726.39/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120110422-20200120134422-00311.warc.gz	en	0.983289	316	3.296875	3	[ -0.33968406915664673, 0.3113724887371063, 0.21062779426574707, -0.11954842507839203, 0.15738219022750854, -0.05287623405456543, -0.008979243226349354, -0.14295125007629395, -0.1500653475522995, 0.14880819618701935, 0.30446749925613403, -0.18294988572597504, 0.2854655086994171, 0.2590878605...	2	by Ed Sawicki November 20, 2015 This was in response to someone who asked, “How can we really know the age of the Earth?” during a discussion of Archbishop James Ussher estimated it to be 5654 years old in the year 1650. Today (2019), Ussher's estimate puts the age of the Earth at 6000 years. It took more than a century to arrive at the accurate age of the Earth. Darwin knew that it was far older than 4000 years based on his knowledge of natural selection and evolution of life. He never quoted numbers, as far as I can tell, but described it as "great expanses of time". Scientists in the 1800s (Lord Kelvin and others) estimated Earth's age by determining how long it would take a molten Earth to cool to its present temperature. They put it at between 20 and 400 million years. That's quite a range, but at least they knew it was millions of years older that Ussher's estimate. In the 1890s, radioactivity and radioactive elements were discovered by Marie Curie and others. Radiometric dating was then used to determine the age of things, such as rocks. In 1911, a rock was determined to be more than one billion years old. In 1956, rocks from Diablo Canyon in Arizona were found to be about 4.5 billion years old. Today, the state of the art in dating techniques ensures a better than 1 percent accuracy. So, the Earth is 4.54 billion years old. — END —	356	ENGLISH	1
Editorial: The history behind Valentine’s Day As anyone with a child, a spouse, a lover, classmates, a girlfriend/boyfriend, or none of the above knows, Valentine’s Day is this Sunday. What with $75/dozen roses and the inundation of gift ads, it’s easy for a cynic to believe that Valentine’s Day was a creation of Madison Avenue, one of those “made up holidays” created by greeting card companies to generate business in an otherwise dull time of year. Not true. That honor goes to the Catholic Church, which, as it did on several occasions, combined some existing pagan rituals with some newer Christian ones. Throw in a saint and a goat, and, voilá! Valentine’s Day! Pope Gelasius first declared Feb. 14 to be St. Valentine’s Day in 498 A.D. But long before then, Romans had been celebrating the official beginning of spring in mid-February. It is said that priests who were members of the order of Luperci gathered at the entrance of a cave believed to have been the place where the infants Romulus and Remus were cared for by a she-wolf. A goat was sacrificed for fertility and a dog for purification. The hide of the goat was sliced into strips that were then dipped in blood. Men then took to the streets, gently slapping women and fields of crops with the bloody goathide strips. This was believed to make both women and fields fertile. Later in the day, the names of all the women in town were placed in an urn, and the bachelors would choose a name and be paired with that woman for the following year. Valentine himself is often believed to have been a romantic at heart, even though he was a priest. He lived in Rome under the rule of the emperor Claudius II, who outlawed marriage because he believed that single men made better soldiers. Valentine believed this decree to be unjust, and continued to wed young lovers until he was discovered, jailed, and eventually put to death for his crime. One legend says that Valentine fell in love with the daughter of his jailer, and sent her a letter, signed “from your Valentine,” just before he was put to death. And so was born the first “valentine.” Some would argue that Valentine’s Day, despite being created to honor a legitimate saint, is still a scam perpetrated by the multi-billion-dollar card industry. Most would agree, however, that today’s practices are still better than getting slapped with a bloody strip of goathide. — K.D.	<urn:uuid:5b0fc55f-bcad-4474-99f2-f12b7be0a48b>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.trumbulltimes.com/opinion/article/Editorial-The-history-behind-Valentine-s-Day-13929604.php	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592394.9/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118081234-20200118105234-00468.warc.gz	en	0.980423	566	3.296875	3	[ -0.03468786180019379, 0.3363780975341797, 0.1814352422952652, -0.10042159259319305, -0.19854551553726196, 0.08264955878257751, -0.014791554771363735, 0.3232078552246094, 0.23432864248752594, -0.02698315680027008, 0.10420249402523041, 0.5322094559669495, 0.23907527327537537, -0.031016299501...	3	Editorial: The history behind Valentine’s Day As anyone with a child, a spouse, a lover, classmates, a girlfriend/boyfriend, or none of the above knows, Valentine’s Day is this Sunday. What with $75/dozen roses and the inundation of gift ads, it’s easy for a cynic to believe that Valentine’s Day was a creation of Madison Avenue, one of those “made up holidays” created by greeting card companies to generate business in an otherwise dull time of year. Not true. That honor goes to the Catholic Church, which, as it did on several occasions, combined some existing pagan rituals with some newer Christian ones. Throw in a saint and a goat, and, voilá! Valentine’s Day! Pope Gelasius first declared Feb. 14 to be St. Valentine’s Day in 498 A.D. But long before then, Romans had been celebrating the official beginning of spring in mid-February. It is said that priests who were members of the order of Luperci gathered at the entrance of a cave believed to have been the place where the infants Romulus and Remus were cared for by a she-wolf. A goat was sacrificed for fertility and a dog for purification. The hide of the goat was sliced into strips that were then dipped in blood. Men then took to the streets, gently slapping women and fields of crops with the bloody goathide strips. This was believed to make both women and fields fertile. Later in the day, the names of all the women in town were placed in an urn, and the bachelors would choose a name and be paired with that woman for the following year. Valentine himself is often believed to have been a romantic at heart, even though he was a priest. He lived in Rome under the rule of the emperor Claudius II, who outlawed marriage because he believed that single men made better soldiers. Valentine believed this decree to be unjust, and continued to wed young lovers until he was discovered, jailed, and eventually put to death for his crime. One legend says that Valentine fell in love with the daughter of his jailer, and sent her a letter, signed “from your Valentine,” just before he was put to death. And so was born the first “valentine.” Some would argue that Valentine’s Day, despite being created to honor a legitimate saint, is still a scam perpetrated by the multi-billion-dollar card industry. Most would agree, however, that today’s practices are still better than getting slapped with a bloody strip of goathide. — K.D.	530	ENGLISH	1
freedom in Britain Vienna erupted in anti-Semitic violence immediately after the Nazi takeover on March 12, 1938. But according to Eli Kamlot, people were well aware of what was happening long before the Nazis marched across the border. Austria had a long history of anti- Semitism and was very happy to rid itself of Jews. In the first three months of occupation 18,000 Jews left the country,among them, Eli Kamlot. Escape meant traveling east. Eli and a group of his friends boarded trains and left the city in an attempt to reach Palestine. He got as far as Yugoslavia where he was caught, imprisoned and finally released on the Austrian border. Eli heroically walked back to Vienna and again attempted to leave the country. The Austrians enjoyed terrorizing the Jews. Fanni Kamlot and her father were arrested by the Viennese police and held in prison for days without food. She and other Jewish women were ordered by the police to scrub the streets of her native city. As members of a Zionist youth group, Eli and Fanni both made their way to England in 1939 and were married in 1940. Apart from the constant Nazi bombing of England, Eli has wonderful memories of the English people and their 11 years in the country. In 1962 Fanni and Eli came to the United States. The only other survivors from their families were Fanni's two sisters, one who left for Israel from Vienna at age 14 and the other who was shipped to Britain as part of a Kindertransport.	<urn:uuid:62fd6a77-0123-478e-87e5-683b8476ef82>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://transferofmemory.org/33.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251700675.78/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127112805-20200127142805-00228.warc.gz	en	0.987634	310	3.453125	3	[ -0.010951178148388863, 0.40244990587234497, 0.11746353656053543, -0.05539046227931976, 0.028402213007211685, 0.26676487922668457, 0.33754098415374756, 0.17288325726985931, 0.08790846168994904, 0.2232019603252411, 0.16429927945137024, -0.2863435447216034, 0.08375828713178635, -0.03626364842...	2	freedom in Britain Vienna erupted in anti-Semitic violence immediately after the Nazi takeover on March 12, 1938. But according to Eli Kamlot, people were well aware of what was happening long before the Nazis marched across the border. Austria had a long history of anti- Semitism and was very happy to rid itself of Jews. In the first three months of occupation 18,000 Jews left the country,among them, Eli Kamlot. Escape meant traveling east. Eli and a group of his friends boarded trains and left the city in an attempt to reach Palestine. He got as far as Yugoslavia where he was caught, imprisoned and finally released on the Austrian border. Eli heroically walked back to Vienna and again attempted to leave the country. The Austrians enjoyed terrorizing the Jews. Fanni Kamlot and her father were arrested by the Viennese police and held in prison for days without food. She and other Jewish women were ordered by the police to scrub the streets of her native city. As members of a Zionist youth group, Eli and Fanni both made their way to England in 1939 and were married in 1940. Apart from the constant Nazi bombing of England, Eli has wonderful memories of the English people and their 11 years in the country. In 1962 Fanni and Eli came to the United States. The only other survivors from their families were Fanni's two sisters, one who left for Israel from Vienna at age 14 and the other who was shipped to Britain as part of a Kindertransport.	330	ENGLISH	1
Despite its early instillation in Jackson, the church did not grow quickly and it did not boast significant membership until the 20th century. What growth did occur after the turn of the 20th century was largely due to mergers with other congregations. In 1918, the local German Lutheran Congregation merged with the Presbyterian congregation. In 1932, the local Welsh-Presbyterians merged with the First Presbyterian Church, and the congregation swelled to nearly six hundred members. In 1941, the church received the pipe organ that is still played during every Sunday service The Presbyterian Church originated in the 16th century from the Protestant teachings of John Calvin. The same doctrine established by Calvin formed the bases of the Anglican Church and Puritan congregationalism. The Puritans themselves were a radical offshoot of the Anglican church who believed that the church of England retained too many Roman Catholic influences and had to be purified so that the true religion could be taught. The name Presbyterian was derived from the church government structure. The Presbyterian structure is a system of government by representative assemblies called presbyteries. Structurally Presbyterianism is an alternative to Episcopal andCongregationalistt church systems. An Episcopal church system is one lead by bishops such as in the Catholic church, Lutheran Church, and Anglican church. Congregationalism is a system in which the church is run by the collective church members such as was advocated by the Puritans and is employed by Baptist and Pentecostal churches.	<urn:uuid:80cd5ff7-588d-4b3c-a97b-9730d975d85d>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.theclio.com/entry/60423	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251789055.93/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129071944-20200129101944-00027.warc.gz	en	0.985143	297	3.703125	4	[ -0.27584779262542725, 0.07579892128705978, 0.22577206790447235, -0.0917305126786232, -0.0980941578745842, -0.04839679226279259, -0.5820971727371216, 0.032655294984579086, 0.19383393228054047, 0.11706408113241196, 0.25421586632728577, -0.2188328057527542, 0.3738740384578705, -0.038637891411...	2	Despite its early instillation in Jackson, the church did not grow quickly and it did not boast significant membership until the 20th century. What growth did occur after the turn of the 20th century was largely due to mergers with other congregations. In 1918, the local German Lutheran Congregation merged with the Presbyterian congregation. In 1932, the local Welsh-Presbyterians merged with the First Presbyterian Church, and the congregation swelled to nearly six hundred members. In 1941, the church received the pipe organ that is still played during every Sunday service The Presbyterian Church originated in the 16th century from the Protestant teachings of John Calvin. The same doctrine established by Calvin formed the bases of the Anglican Church and Puritan congregationalism. The Puritans themselves were a radical offshoot of the Anglican church who believed that the church of England retained too many Roman Catholic influences and had to be purified so that the true religion could be taught. The name Presbyterian was derived from the church government structure. The Presbyterian structure is a system of government by representative assemblies called presbyteries. Structurally Presbyterianism is an alternative to Episcopal andCongregationalistt church systems. An Episcopal church system is one lead by bishops such as in the Catholic church, Lutheran Church, and Anglican church. Congregationalism is a system in which the church is run by the collective church members such as was advocated by the Puritans and is employed by Baptist and Pentecostal churches.	317	ENGLISH	1
In Science last half term Year 3 were learning about skeletons. We learnt the names of lots of our bones, found out what bones are made of and also why we need them. Mrs Martin kindly offered to come and talk to us about the skeletons of different animals. We looked at some real animal bones and some model bones and compared them. We learnt about how some animals have their bones on the inside, some on the outside and that some don’t even have bones at all. We also talked about why different animals skeletons have evolved as they have. It was a really interesting morning and we learnt lots. One of the best bits was handling the bones and looking at x-rays and scans. Before Christmas Year 3 held a Christmas Crafternoon where they invited their parents in to help them decorate their Christmas Dragon Eggs that they had made out of papier mache as part of our learning about the Vikings. In the run up to the afternoon the children had been working hard to design and stitch their own Christmas tree decorations. They had also baked gingerbread biscuits with Mrs Proctor which they shared with their parents during the afternoon. The afternoon was a great success. The children raised £43 which they decided they were going to use to buy some board games for wet play and choosing time in class. The class voted on which games they wanted to buy and then Mrs Turnbull went shopping. Here are some photos of the children playing with Headbandz and Snakes and Ladders! We are enjoying our class story 'How to Train Your Dragon'. So far we have looked at some of the characters and have evaluated how successful the opening is. We've also created some of our own dragons! In our Science lessons this half term we are learning to think scientifically. Our question for this week is 'Do people who have big hands have big feet?' We made our predictions and have started to investigate! We have achieved our first 50 class points and as a treat we had a 'Wheelly fun' session in the school playground. Welcome to our class page. We've had a very busy start to the year as you can see in these photographs. Our topic for this half term is The Stone Age. We are reading Stig of the Dump as our class story and have made dioramas of what we think Stig's cave looks like. We've also been exploring cave paintings and had a go at our very own. We went into the school grounds and collected natural materials that we could use to paint with. We even found some berries which we crushed to make natural paint. Today we've been out gathering more natural materials as we have designed our own tools and weapons that we think would have been useful in The Stone Age. In Science we are learning what nutrients our bodies need to keep us fit and healthy. We worked in pairs to design our own nutritionally balanced plate of food. This week we have thought about what a healthy lunch might look like. We decided to have a go at making our own nutritionally balanced wraps and pasta salads. We chose a filling that would provide us with protein and some salad ingredients to provide us with vitamins and minerals. We had great fun making them ... and even more fun eating them! On Thursday afternoon Mr Simpson put Year 3 through their paces with an hour long Commando Fitness Session. The children (and Mrs Turnbull!) had great fun in the mud completing a range of exercises - burpees, sit ups, leg raises, commando crawling and jogging to name a few! They then did a stretcher drill, a wall climb and finished off with a tug of war. The children showed their true Primrose Lane Learner attributes demonstrating enthusiasm, collaborative learning and ambition.	<urn:uuid:d6902474-d78d-4fa6-aa71-ad2f2d0da4a4>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://primroselane.leeds.sch.uk/page.php?id=9319	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251728207.68/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127205148-20200127235148-00289.warc.gz	en	0.984521	767	3.34375	3	[ -0.13273924589157104, 0.07209058105945587, 0.416154146194458, -0.11315199732780457, 0.022006163373589516, 0.028871653601527214, -0.3824346363544464, 0.4992908835411072, -0.19409048557281494, 0.2593374252319336, 0.35263505578041077, -0.38846543431282043, 0.15540140867233276, 0.3094391226768...	1	In Science last half term Year 3 were learning about skeletons. We learnt the names of lots of our bones, found out what bones are made of and also why we need them. Mrs Martin kindly offered to come and talk to us about the skeletons of different animals. We looked at some real animal bones and some model bones and compared them. We learnt about how some animals have their bones on the inside, some on the outside and that some don’t even have bones at all. We also talked about why different animals skeletons have evolved as they have. It was a really interesting morning and we learnt lots. One of the best bits was handling the bones and looking at x-rays and scans. Before Christmas Year 3 held a Christmas Crafternoon where they invited their parents in to help them decorate their Christmas Dragon Eggs that they had made out of papier mache as part of our learning about the Vikings. In the run up to the afternoon the children had been working hard to design and stitch their own Christmas tree decorations. They had also baked gingerbread biscuits with Mrs Proctor which they shared with their parents during the afternoon. The afternoon was a great success. The children raised £43 which they decided they were going to use to buy some board games for wet play and choosing time in class. The class voted on which games they wanted to buy and then Mrs Turnbull went shopping. Here are some photos of the children playing with Headbandz and Snakes and Ladders! We are enjoying our class story 'How to Train Your Dragon'. So far we have looked at some of the characters and have evaluated how successful the opening is. We've also created some of our own dragons! In our Science lessons this half term we are learning to think scientifically. Our question for this week is 'Do people who have big hands have big feet?' We made our predictions and have started to investigate! We have achieved our first 50 class points and as a treat we had a 'Wheelly fun' session in the school playground. Welcome to our class page. We've had a very busy start to the year as you can see in these photographs. Our topic for this half term is The Stone Age. We are reading Stig of the Dump as our class story and have made dioramas of what we think Stig's cave looks like. We've also been exploring cave paintings and had a go at our very own. We went into the school grounds and collected natural materials that we could use to paint with. We even found some berries which we crushed to make natural paint. Today we've been out gathering more natural materials as we have designed our own tools and weapons that we think would have been useful in The Stone Age. In Science we are learning what nutrients our bodies need to keep us fit and healthy. We worked in pairs to design our own nutritionally balanced plate of food. This week we have thought about what a healthy lunch might look like. We decided to have a go at making our own nutritionally balanced wraps and pasta salads. We chose a filling that would provide us with protein and some salad ingredients to provide us with vitamins and minerals. We had great fun making them ... and even more fun eating them! On Thursday afternoon Mr Simpson put Year 3 through their paces with an hour long Commando Fitness Session. The children (and Mrs Turnbull!) had great fun in the mud completing a range of exercises - burpees, sit ups, leg raises, commando crawling and jogging to name a few! They then did a stretcher drill, a wall climb and finished off with a tug of war. The children showed their true Primrose Lane Learner attributes demonstrating enthusiasm, collaborative learning and ambition.	749	ENGLISH	1
Sojourner Truth, born Isabella Baumfree, became an abolitionist and a women’s rights activist after being born into slavery. She was one of twelve children born to Elizabeth and James Baumfree in Ulster County, New York, in the town of Swartekill. As was typical of children born into slavery at the time, Truth’s birthdate was not recorded, however historians say she was born in the year of 1797. The family was owned by Colonel Hardenburgh and lived at the colonel’s estate in New York, almost a hundred miles north of New York City, in a town called Esopus. This area was under control of the Dutch at one time, so the Hardenburhg’s and the Baumfree family spoke Dutch. After the colonel died, ownership of the Baumfree family passed to his son and when the son died, the family was separated in 1806. Isabella Baumfree, then just known as Belle, was sold for one hundred dollars along with a flock of sheep to a man named John Neely. Sojourner Truth remembered him as being a harsh and violent man. She was not with him very long as she was sold two more times over the next two years and was finally sold to a man named John Dumont. It was with him that Baumfree learned to speak English for the first time. Sometime around 1815, Isabella Baumfree had fallen in love with Robert, a slave from a neighboring farm and was allowed to marry him and a daughter was soon born. However, when Robert’s owner found out that the daughter and any future children would become the property of John Dumont, he forbade Robert from seeing her again. In 1817, Dumont made Sojourner Truth marry an older slave named Thomas. Their relationship produced a son named Peter and two daughters named Elizabeth and Sophia. On July 4th, 1827, the state of New York had emancipated all slaves and a year before that, Sojourner Truth escaped from her owner because he went back on a promise to emancipate her. Truth escaped with her daughter Sophia and left her other daughter and her son behind. When she found out that her son Peter was illegally sold to a slave owner in Alabama, Sojourner Truth went to court and was eventually able to get her son back. This was the first case in which a black woman took a white man to court and won her case. It wasn’t until 1843, that Isabella Baumfree had changed her name to Sojourner Truth and devoted her life to Christianity in the Methodist religion and to the abolition of slavery. A year later she joined the Northampton Association of Education and Industry in Northampton, Massachusetts. The association was founded by abolitionists and supported a broad reform program including women’s rights. It was here at Northampton that Sojourner Truth met leading abolitionists such as David Ruggles, William Lloyd Garrison, and Fredrick Douglass. The organization disbanded in 1846 but Sojourner Truth kept on with her agenda. In 1850, Sojourner Truth published her memoirs under the title of The Narrative of Sojourner Truth: A Northern Slave. William Lloyd Garrison wrote the preface for the book. It was the same year that Sojourner Truth spoke at the first National Women’s Rights Convention in Worcester, Massachusetts. She soon began touring regularly with another abolitionist named George Thompson and spoke to large crowds on the subjects of human rights and slavery. In May of 1851, Sojourner Truth gave a famous speech at the Ohio Women’s Convention. The speech now known as “Ain’t I A Woman?”speech. Sojourner Truth spent the rest of her life speaking on women’s rights, slavery, and even prison reform. She passed away at her home in Battle Creek, Michigan in 1883 and is buried in the Oak Hill Cemetery in Battle Creek. Sojourner Truth will always be remembered as a leader in the abolition movement and an important cog in the machine of women’s rights. Editor's Picks Articles Top Ten Articles Content copyright © 2019 by Vance Rowe. All rights reserved. This content was written by Vance Rowe. If you wish to use this content in any manner, you need written permission. Contact Clare Stubbs for details.	<urn:uuid:eee574a0-8d6a-4589-8808-24af1a0569d5>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art181859.asp	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594101.10/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119010920-20200119034920-00454.warc.gz	en	0.981532	929	3.5625	4	[ 0.02707977592945099, 0.23536017537117004, -0.06252165883779526, 0.21966826915740967, -0.22328779101371765, -0.2654390037059784, 0.07124561816453934, -0.2553752660751343, -0.31414854526519775, -0.02678300067782402, -0.055188823491334915, -0.05547647923231125, -0.33078914880752563, 0.0044636...	2	Sojourner Truth, born Isabella Baumfree, became an abolitionist and a women’s rights activist after being born into slavery. She was one of twelve children born to Elizabeth and James Baumfree in Ulster County, New York, in the town of Swartekill. As was typical of children born into slavery at the time, Truth’s birthdate was not recorded, however historians say she was born in the year of 1797. The family was owned by Colonel Hardenburgh and lived at the colonel’s estate in New York, almost a hundred miles north of New York City, in a town called Esopus. This area was under control of the Dutch at one time, so the Hardenburhg’s and the Baumfree family spoke Dutch. After the colonel died, ownership of the Baumfree family passed to his son and when the son died, the family was separated in 1806. Isabella Baumfree, then just known as Belle, was sold for one hundred dollars along with a flock of sheep to a man named John Neely. Sojourner Truth remembered him as being a harsh and violent man. She was not with him very long as she was sold two more times over the next two years and was finally sold to a man named John Dumont. It was with him that Baumfree learned to speak English for the first time. Sometime around 1815, Isabella Baumfree had fallen in love with Robert, a slave from a neighboring farm and was allowed to marry him and a daughter was soon born. However, when Robert’s owner found out that the daughter and any future children would become the property of John Dumont, he forbade Robert from seeing her again. In 1817, Dumont made Sojourner Truth marry an older slave named Thomas. Their relationship produced a son named Peter and two daughters named Elizabeth and Sophia. On July 4th, 1827, the state of New York had emancipated all slaves and a year before that, Sojourner Truth escaped from her owner because he went back on a promise to emancipate her. Truth escaped with her daughter Sophia and left her other daughter and her son behind. When she found out that her son Peter was illegally sold to a slave owner in Alabama, Sojourner Truth went to court and was eventually able to get her son back. This was the first case in which a black woman took a white man to court and won her case. It wasn’t until 1843, that Isabella Baumfree had changed her name to Sojourner Truth and devoted her life to Christianity in the Methodist religion and to the abolition of slavery. A year later she joined the Northampton Association of Education and Industry in Northampton, Massachusetts. The association was founded by abolitionists and supported a broad reform program including women’s rights. It was here at Northampton that Sojourner Truth met leading abolitionists such as David Ruggles, William Lloyd Garrison, and Fredrick Douglass. The organization disbanded in 1846 but Sojourner Truth kept on with her agenda. In 1850, Sojourner Truth published her memoirs under the title of The Narrative of Sojourner Truth: A Northern Slave. William Lloyd Garrison wrote the preface for the book. It was the same year that Sojourner Truth spoke at the first National Women’s Rights Convention in Worcester, Massachusetts. She soon began touring regularly with another abolitionist named George Thompson and spoke to large crowds on the subjects of human rights and slavery. In May of 1851, Sojourner Truth gave a famous speech at the Ohio Women’s Convention. The speech now known as “Ain’t I A Woman?”speech. Sojourner Truth spent the rest of her life speaking on women’s rights, slavery, and even prison reform. She passed away at her home in Battle Creek, Michigan in 1883 and is buried in the Oak Hill Cemetery in Battle Creek. Sojourner Truth will always be remembered as a leader in the abolition movement and an important cog in the machine of women’s rights. Editor's Picks Articles Top Ten Articles Content copyright © 2019 by Vance Rowe. All rights reserved. This content was written by Vance Rowe. If you wish to use this content in any manner, you need written permission. Contact Clare Stubbs for details.	907	ENGLISH	1
Excavations in Lichfield Cathedral in 2003 uncovered this limestone fragment, decorated with the carved figure of an angel. The angel’s pose and gesture suggest that he represents the archangel Gabriel. The missing part of the scene would have depicted the Virgin Mary. The artwork seems to have been based on sixth-century, eastern Mediterranean models. Anglo-Saxon sculptures could be painted. This sculpture is remarkable for preserving some of its original, multi-coloured appearance. Pigment analysis has revealed that the angel’s robes were painted red and yellow to present a ‘red-gold’ appearance; this was the most prized type of gold among the Anglo-Saxons. The wings were delicately painted with shades of red, pink and white. The hair was yellow. The halo could have been gilded. The sculpture seems to have formed part of a house-shaped, stone shrine. It was probably constructed to enclose the wooden coffin-shrine that contained the body of St Chad (d. 672). Chad was the fifth bishop of Mercia and the first to establish his see in Lichfield. The cult of St Chad was heavily promoted at the turn of the 9th century, when Lichfield was briefly made into an archbishopric. This was probably when the Lichfield Angel was made. The fragment was found inside a structure which had been burned, which was in turn inside the remains of a stone Anglo-Saxon building. The sculpture seems to have been deliberately broken up and buried; remains of hammer-and-chisel marks can be seen in the break to the right of the angel. It is not known when or why the sculpture was destroyed, but a silver penny of King Edgar (r. 959–975) was found in the same area. This suggests it was buried before the end of the tenth century.	<urn:uuid:f0a6b210-850a-4600-9fef-94e2b9fd30f4>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/lichfield-angel	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251681412.74/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125191854-20200125221854-00394.warc.gz	en	0.98929	382	3.515625	4	[ -0.16209998726844788, 0.09832301735877991, 0.3822404444217682, 0.5009245872497559, -0.07250872254371643, 0.25127795338630676, -0.022426607087254524, 0.09546908736228943, 0.34428149461746216, -0.24553076922893524, -0.2854370176792145, -0.66011643409729, -0.287106454372406, 0.148198276758193...	5	Excavations in Lichfield Cathedral in 2003 uncovered this limestone fragment, decorated with the carved figure of an angel. The angel’s pose and gesture suggest that he represents the archangel Gabriel. The missing part of the scene would have depicted the Virgin Mary. The artwork seems to have been based on sixth-century, eastern Mediterranean models. Anglo-Saxon sculptures could be painted. This sculpture is remarkable for preserving some of its original, multi-coloured appearance. Pigment analysis has revealed that the angel’s robes were painted red and yellow to present a ‘red-gold’ appearance; this was the most prized type of gold among the Anglo-Saxons. The wings were delicately painted with shades of red, pink and white. The hair was yellow. The halo could have been gilded. The sculpture seems to have formed part of a house-shaped, stone shrine. It was probably constructed to enclose the wooden coffin-shrine that contained the body of St Chad (d. 672). Chad was the fifth bishop of Mercia and the first to establish his see in Lichfield. The cult of St Chad was heavily promoted at the turn of the 9th century, when Lichfield was briefly made into an archbishopric. This was probably when the Lichfield Angel was made. The fragment was found inside a structure which had been burned, which was in turn inside the remains of a stone Anglo-Saxon building. The sculpture seems to have been deliberately broken up and buried; remains of hammer-and-chisel marks can be seen in the break to the right of the angel. It is not known when or why the sculpture was destroyed, but a silver penny of King Edgar (r. 959–975) was found in the same area. This suggests it was buried before the end of the tenth century.	379	ENGLISH	1
Originally published December 2005. Updated December 2019. Traditional Farm Life & Landholding in Scotland The common unit of settlement in Scotland was a village, or township centering on a farm. Initially the size of the farm was determined by the area that a plow team of one horse or ox could cultivate. This type of township was universal throughout the Western and Northern Isles, and probably was similar to that in much of the arable lands of the Highlands. A farm-able base was essential even where most of the land was fit only for rough pasture, for the state of travel was such that any farming community had to be as self-sufficient as possible. Each farming township might have 10-12 tenant families, or households, although some were much larger, or as small as 1-2 tenants. An Englishman visiting the Isle of Lewis in 1630 to assess its possible value as a fishing center for Charles I wrote “The Lewis is divided into 4 parishes, in each of which there are some 20 towns, which towns are some half a score cottages built together near some piece of arable land where they make their abode in winter.” Within townships, holdings were not individually enclosed and run as separate units, but as in other parts of Scotland the ground lay open and was worked through various forms of shared cultivation. Beyond the arable lands of the township, lay an area of common grazing, which in hilly terrain might be quite extensive. In open-field farming the most troublesome task was to protect the crops from the livestock. The means of achieving this was the erection of dikes around the arable land, outside of which most animals could be kept during the growing season. These were known as “head dikes”. Milk cows might be kept nearby in enclosures called “folds,” or “pounds”. Animals of one farm were kept from straying on to the lands of another by the erection of “march dikes” along the boundaries, although this was not usual except in large areas of arable land where neighboring townships lay close together. Dikes where generally built of earth and turf, although detailed descriptions come only from later writers for whom they were a curiosity found in backward areas. Between 1760 and 1786: “in Tirey and other islands many of the fields are enclosed with walls of earth, very broad at the foundation, 5, or 6 feet high and covered with grass from top to bottom. They are perpetually crumbling to pieces and create to the husbandman a constant annual toil.“ Orkney and Shetland Country acts in Orkney and Shetland for 1615 have survived and identical provisions for the enforcement of good neighbors in each parish “in digging of their dikes yearly, and putting their swine to the hill” before April 15th each year, in “keeping and herding of their sheep” by the same date, and moving their horses and cattle by 1st May. Each township was to have a “poindfauld”, or enclosure to which animals found destroying crops where to be taken. Similarly by-laws made provision for destroyed crops to be assessed and compensation paid by the owner of the offending animal. The arable land itself was allotted in a number of ways. Over large parts of the Western Isles there is no evidence that tenants held any arable land as a permanent attachment to their holding. There were, however, occasional exceptions. Bylaws show that tenants were all supposed to have kailyards, and not only to plant kail, or cabbage there, but also to raise young trees to be transplanted later to suitable locations in their holdings. In the Northern Isles tenants were also granted a “toumal” (a Norse term) for a piece of ground permanently assigned to a particular house. This may often have been used to grow crops, or grains used to help pay rent. How the Land Was Worked As for the arable land itself, there seems to have been wide variety in the way it was worked. In a large township with good land each tenant may have been well off enough to own their own plow teams. In other areas, the land was worked in common by the tenants with everyone receiving a roughly equal share, or with each tenant receiving whatever was raised on the section delineated in their rent. Occasionally, as in other areas of Europe, the arable land was divided so that each tenant had a share of good and bad land proportionate to the size of their holding. In Canna, the land was divided into parts and lots were cast for them each Christmas. Within the head dikes of the township there was also a certain amount of pasture: Strips of grass dividing various fields as well as fields left unplanted for a season to let them recover, ground to wet/rocky, or otherwise unsuitable for cultivation. As well as meadow land that too wet for grain crops but growing rich natural grass for grazing, or making hay. These were the lands which the animals had to depend upon when not turned loose on the common grazing. These were often divided in ways similar to the land under crops. The rough hill grazing outside the head dike was held in common by all the tenants. Tenants were obliged to keep their animals outside the head dikes from May 1st (or about the time the oats began to sprout). They would be kept in the nearer hill pastures while the bear (barley) was sown and peat was being cut for winter fuel. Then in June they would be moved to the sheilings — the summer grazings where they lived tending the cattle and making butter and cheese until harvest, and fetching home the dried peat and recalled them to the farm. (Roughly mid-August in the Hebrides) In some period documents the farming township is referred to as “wintertoun”. On some of the Coast, or the Islands, the sheilings were by necessity fairly close to the arable land, since many of the men-folk would also be occupied at fishing during part of the growing season. Rent and Other Expenses The majority of households in each township would be renting their land. The landlord could be a local Laird, the laird’s underlings or tacksmen, or better-off farmers. The rent was the most important cost for the tenant farmers and was usually paid twice a year at Whitsunday (Pentecost) and Martinmas (November 11). The landlord’s chamberlain, with clerks as “serjeants” in attendance sat to receive the rents for several days. The rent was often paid in three parts: “maill”, or money-rent, “ferme”, or grain-rent, and small payments in kind, or “kane” made in poultry or cheese, or butter. The grain rent was paid using staple crops of bere (barley), oats, peas, and wheat. Wheat was not often used by farmers as food, but was raised for sale as a cash crop, or part of the rent. Occasionally rental agreements included “carriage,” i.e. transporting crops, or goods for the landlord when required. The farmer’s annual expenses did not end there. Autumn and winter, tenants were “thirled,” or obligated to bring their grain to be ground at the landlord’s mills. Thirlage continued throughout the 17th and much of the 18th centuries, and was greatly resented by the farmers. It was not only time-consuming to take the grain to the mill, and wait in line for it to be ground, but additional fees had to be paid as well. “Multure” was a tax on the amount of grain that was ground – paid in grain itself, and paid to the landlord, or tacksman who owned the mill; a portion went to the working miller himself, as well as a portion to the miller’s servant. To enforce the practice, the use of querns, or hand-mills was prosecuted. As a result, the miller was often an unpopular local figure because he operated a local monopoly, was often suspected of cheating, or was felt to be in league with the landlord. The next expense were the teinds, (tithes in English), or tenth part of all produce that was to be paid to the church. Before the Reformation, while monasteries still held some power, the local abbey may have been the farmers’ landlord as well. As a result of the payment of rents, as well as the teinds, the parish could often have a surplus of grain, or other farm produce, which was then sold back to the parishioners. In large parishes, further complications arose when the teinds was not collected directly, but were leased to a tacksman for collection in return for a percentage. This naturally led to all sorts of cheating, favoritism, or threats and assaults by the licensed collector. On top of the teinds, were also “Pasche (Easter) fines” that were special fees for the parish priest. In farming households that were large enough to have servants, or farmhands, the farmer had to pay servants’ fees at Whitsunday and perhaps a pair of shoes, linen, or garden space. To end, there were also the “occasional” payments that occurred at irregular intervals. These included “grassum”, which was whenever the tack, or lease, on the holding was due for renewal. This was in cash and could be equivalent to several years’ rent. “Entry-silver” was paid by new tenants, and heirs could be expected to pay double the annual fee when they inherited the family holding. The Crofter and the Laird Considering the poor farm land in many areas of Scotland, it is easy to see how a minor setback could result in going into debt, or losing the holding altogether. The book “The Crofter and the Laird,” gives a fairly clear picture of a tenant farmer in the islands. Although it was written during the 1960’s, it looks at one of the last crofters of Scotland who was attempting to maintain the traditional relationship between himself and his laird. It describes how, in addition to the farming, the crofter was forced to supplement his income and diet by collecting shellfish along the shore, shooting the occasional wild goat in the hills, (Sure-footed goats were encouraged to live in the hills. Being territorial, they would keep sheep away from the heights were they might fall and get killed) trapping lobsters for sale, as well as being on-call at the local ferry to help load and unload crops, or livestock being sent to mainland Scotland. He tells of a year when he lost forty head of sheep — the equivalent to four years savings — when the ferry bringing them to the mainland struck a rock and sank. McPhee, John. The Crofter and the Laird. NY: Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 1969. Sanderson, Margaret H.B. Mary Stewart’s People, Life in Mary Stewart’s Scotland. Tuscaloosa, Alabama: (Univ. of Alabama Press, 1987).	<urn:uuid:34b1ca45-e1cc-40fc-8a11-8db09f7f7450>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.kilts-n-stuff.com/Blog/traditional-farm-life-landholding-in-scotland/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250607596.34/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122221541-20200123010541-00139.warc.gz	en	0.9876	2,383	3.59375	4	[ -0.06525176763534546, -0.15494513511657715, 0.2944400906562805, 0.44164514541625977, 0.4465557336807251, -0.4055299758911133, -0.18739300966262817, 0.09388937056064606, -0.13730017840862274, 0.10391552746295929, -0.039711397141218185, -0.7067210674285889, 0.4055623412132263, 0.286525636911...	1	Originally published December 2005. Updated December 2019. Traditional Farm Life & Landholding in Scotland The common unit of settlement in Scotland was a village, or township centering on a farm. Initially the size of the farm was determined by the area that a plow team of one horse or ox could cultivate. This type of township was universal throughout the Western and Northern Isles, and probably was similar to that in much of the arable lands of the Highlands. A farm-able base was essential even where most of the land was fit only for rough pasture, for the state of travel was such that any farming community had to be as self-sufficient as possible. Each farming township might have 10-12 tenant families, or households, although some were much larger, or as small as 1-2 tenants. An Englishman visiting the Isle of Lewis in 1630 to assess its possible value as a fishing center for Charles I wrote “The Lewis is divided into 4 parishes, in each of which there are some 20 towns, which towns are some half a score cottages built together near some piece of arable land where they make their abode in winter.” Within townships, holdings were not individually enclosed and run as separate units, but as in other parts of Scotland the ground lay open and was worked through various forms of shared cultivation. Beyond the arable lands of the township, lay an area of common grazing, which in hilly terrain might be quite extensive. In open-field farming the most troublesome task was to protect the crops from the livestock. The means of achieving this was the erection of dikes around the arable land, outside of which most animals could be kept during the growing season. These were known as “head dikes”. Milk cows might be kept nearby in enclosures called “folds,” or “pounds”. Animals of one farm were kept from straying on to the lands of another by the erection of “march dikes” along the boundaries, although this was not usual except in large areas of arable land where neighboring townships lay close together. Dikes where generally built of earth and turf, although detailed descriptions come only from later writers for whom they were a curiosity found in backward areas. Between 1760 and 1786: “in Tirey and other islands many of the fields are enclosed with walls of earth, very broad at the foundation, 5, or 6 feet high and covered with grass from top to bottom. They are perpetually crumbling to pieces and create to the husbandman a constant annual toil.“ Orkney and Shetland Country acts in Orkney and Shetland for 1615 have survived and identical provisions for the enforcement of good neighbors in each parish “in digging of their dikes yearly, and putting their swine to the hill” before April 15th each year, in “keeping and herding of their sheep” by the same date, and moving their horses and cattle by 1st May. Each township was to have a “poindfauld”, or enclosure to which animals found destroying crops where to be taken. Similarly by-laws made provision for destroyed crops to be assessed and compensation paid by the owner of the offending animal. The arable land itself was allotted in a number of ways. Over large parts of the Western Isles there is no evidence that tenants held any arable land as a permanent attachment to their holding. There were, however, occasional exceptions. Bylaws show that tenants were all supposed to have kailyards, and not only to plant kail, or cabbage there, but also to raise young trees to be transplanted later to suitable locations in their holdings. In the Northern Isles tenants were also granted a “toumal” (a Norse term) for a piece of ground permanently assigned to a particular house. This may often have been used to grow crops, or grains used to help pay rent. How the Land Was Worked As for the arable land itself, there seems to have been wide variety in the way it was worked. In a large township with good land each tenant may have been well off enough to own their own plow teams. In other areas, the land was worked in common by the tenants with everyone receiving a roughly equal share, or with each tenant receiving whatever was raised on the section delineated in their rent. Occasionally, as in other areas of Europe, the arable land was divided so that each tenant had a share of good and bad land proportionate to the size of their holding. In Canna, the land was divided into parts and lots were cast for them each Christmas. Within the head dikes of the township there was also a certain amount of pasture: Strips of grass dividing various fields as well as fields left unplanted for a season to let them recover, ground to wet/rocky, or otherwise unsuitable for cultivation. As well as meadow land that too wet for grain crops but growing rich natural grass for grazing, or making hay. These were the lands which the animals had to depend upon when not turned loose on the common grazing. These were often divided in ways similar to the land under crops. The rough hill grazing outside the head dike was held in common by all the tenants. Tenants were obliged to keep their animals outside the head dikes from May 1st (or about the time the oats began to sprout). They would be kept in the nearer hill pastures while the bear (barley) was sown and peat was being cut for winter fuel. Then in June they would be moved to the sheilings — the summer grazings where they lived tending the cattle and making butter and cheese until harvest, and fetching home the dried peat and recalled them to the farm. (Roughly mid-August in the Hebrides) In some period documents the farming township is referred to as “wintertoun”. On some of the Coast, or the Islands, the sheilings were by necessity fairly close to the arable land, since many of the men-folk would also be occupied at fishing during part of the growing season. Rent and Other Expenses The majority of households in each township would be renting their land. The landlord could be a local Laird, the laird’s underlings or tacksmen, or better-off farmers. The rent was the most important cost for the tenant farmers and was usually paid twice a year at Whitsunday (Pentecost) and Martinmas (November 11). The landlord’s chamberlain, with clerks as “serjeants” in attendance sat to receive the rents for several days. The rent was often paid in three parts: “maill”, or money-rent, “ferme”, or grain-rent, and small payments in kind, or “kane” made in poultry or cheese, or butter. The grain rent was paid using staple crops of bere (barley), oats, peas, and wheat. Wheat was not often used by farmers as food, but was raised for sale as a cash crop, or part of the rent. Occasionally rental agreements included “carriage,” i.e. transporting crops, or goods for the landlord when required. The farmer’s annual expenses did not end there. Autumn and winter, tenants were “thirled,” or obligated to bring their grain to be ground at the landlord’s mills. Thirlage continued throughout the 17th and much of the 18th centuries, and was greatly resented by the farmers. It was not only time-consuming to take the grain to the mill, and wait in line for it to be ground, but additional fees had to be paid as well. “Multure” was a tax on the amount of grain that was ground – paid in grain itself, and paid to the landlord, or tacksman who owned the mill; a portion went to the working miller himself, as well as a portion to the miller’s servant. To enforce the practice, the use of querns, or hand-mills was prosecuted. As a result, the miller was often an unpopular local figure because he operated a local monopoly, was often suspected of cheating, or was felt to be in league with the landlord. The next expense were the teinds, (tithes in English), or tenth part of all produce that was to be paid to the church. Before the Reformation, while monasteries still held some power, the local abbey may have been the farmers’ landlord as well. As a result of the payment of rents, as well as the teinds, the parish could often have a surplus of grain, or other farm produce, which was then sold back to the parishioners. In large parishes, further complications arose when the teinds was not collected directly, but were leased to a tacksman for collection in return for a percentage. This naturally led to all sorts of cheating, favoritism, or threats and assaults by the licensed collector. On top of the teinds, were also “Pasche (Easter) fines” that were special fees for the parish priest. In farming households that were large enough to have servants, or farmhands, the farmer had to pay servants’ fees at Whitsunday and perhaps a pair of shoes, linen, or garden space. To end, there were also the “occasional” payments that occurred at irregular intervals. These included “grassum”, which was whenever the tack, or lease, on the holding was due for renewal. This was in cash and could be equivalent to several years’ rent. “Entry-silver” was paid by new tenants, and heirs could be expected to pay double the annual fee when they inherited the family holding. The Crofter and the Laird Considering the poor farm land in many areas of Scotland, it is easy to see how a minor setback could result in going into debt, or losing the holding altogether. The book “The Crofter and the Laird,” gives a fairly clear picture of a tenant farmer in the islands. Although it was written during the 1960’s, it looks at one of the last crofters of Scotland who was attempting to maintain the traditional relationship between himself and his laird. It describes how, in addition to the farming, the crofter was forced to supplement his income and diet by collecting shellfish along the shore, shooting the occasional wild goat in the hills, (Sure-footed goats were encouraged to live in the hills. Being territorial, they would keep sheep away from the heights were they might fall and get killed) trapping lobsters for sale, as well as being on-call at the local ferry to help load and unload crops, or livestock being sent to mainland Scotland. He tells of a year when he lost forty head of sheep — the equivalent to four years savings — when the ferry bringing them to the mainland struck a rock and sank. McPhee, John. The Crofter and the Laird. NY: Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 1969. Sanderson, Margaret H.B. Mary Stewart’s People, Life in Mary Stewart’s Scotland. Tuscaloosa, Alabama: (Univ. of Alabama Press, 1987).	2,330	ENGLISH	1
Hardly a pond at all, barely large enough to support a small family of beavers. Not knowing the pond would become nearly dry in lean years, beavers built a small lodge. Rain was scarce for a few years making it necessary for the beavers to abandon their home and move on. Life continued at Clark Pond without the beavers. The inactive lodge became a favorite habitat for many creatures. Geese would nest on its top; great blue herons perched on it patiently waiting for amphibians, fish, frogs, and other small animals; mink would scamper up, down and around, anxious for a meal of whatever they could flush out. Red fox would nose around hoping to catch a mouse, rabbit or unwary small bird. Winters came and went, the water froze to the shallow depths of the little pond and snow covered the ice. Tracks of fox, coyote, mink, raccoon, deer, and crows would criss cross the surface creating delicate lacy patterns. The seasons evolved and so did the pond. Brush grew thick along its edges, a few of the remaining trees grew to a considerable girth and the rains returned. All summer there was evidence that the beaver, industrious creatures that they are, were at work. The lodge grew in size with fresh mud and sticks appearing every day. Never a sighting of the beavers though, they were laboring between dusk and dawn. Distant young willow trees were expertly cut and pulled down hill to the pond. A path slick from the beavers coming and going was cut through the tall grass and brush. As summer turned to fall and the days shortened and became colder the lodge grew appendages of freshly cut branches. The beaver were preparing for winter and it looked like the lodge was large enough to house a good size family. November’s full moon is called the Full Beaver Moon, by a number of Native Americans, in honor of these diligent creatures. By November they should have stored enough food for the long, cold, months ahead. Being a fickle month, this November arrived like it was January, with many below freezing days and nights. A coating of ice covered Clark Pond. For all appearances it looked like the beaver had settled in for the winter, then the days warmed, the ice melted. For the first time since the beavers appeared on Clark Pond they were visible during the day! Within a few short days a tree was felled, providing more branches and sticks to add to their winter food supply. The beaver could be seen swimming back and forth from the pond banks to the lodge carrying branches. There were at least three good size beaver at work while two slightly smaller ones were on the edge of the pond chewing small branches. Occasionally, if all was quiet, the large paddle like tail could be heard slapping the water, as they dove under and chewing sounds echoed across the pond as they munched away. It is nearly the end of November. Can one hope to see the beaver sitting on the edge of their lodge or swimming across the little pond breaking a mere suggestion of thin ice_or_will we have to be content watching winter come again to Clark Pond; a pond frozen, silent, and sheltering a family of beavers, who are waiting patiently for another spring.	<urn:uuid:94da0385-70ce-4a5c-be22-8610c0d15535>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://laverneblack.wordpress.com/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251801423.98/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129164403-20200129193403-00535.warc.gz	en	0.983396	677	3.5625	4	[ -0.050806380808353424, -0.17848756909370422, 0.1370968520641327, 0.06555438041687012, -0.012843318283557892, -0.032503873109817505, 0.1336342692375183, 0.3483418822288513, -0.07939969003200531, 0.5884703397750854, 0.371417760848999, -0.3483635187149048, 0.4519713819026947, -0.0470974594354...	7	Hardly a pond at all, barely large enough to support a small family of beavers. Not knowing the pond would become nearly dry in lean years, beavers built a small lodge. Rain was scarce for a few years making it necessary for the beavers to abandon their home and move on. Life continued at Clark Pond without the beavers. The inactive lodge became a favorite habitat for many creatures. Geese would nest on its top; great blue herons perched on it patiently waiting for amphibians, fish, frogs, and other small animals; mink would scamper up, down and around, anxious for a meal of whatever they could flush out. Red fox would nose around hoping to catch a mouse, rabbit or unwary small bird. Winters came and went, the water froze to the shallow depths of the little pond and snow covered the ice. Tracks of fox, coyote, mink, raccoon, deer, and crows would criss cross the surface creating delicate lacy patterns. The seasons evolved and so did the pond. Brush grew thick along its edges, a few of the remaining trees grew to a considerable girth and the rains returned. All summer there was evidence that the beaver, industrious creatures that they are, were at work. The lodge grew in size with fresh mud and sticks appearing every day. Never a sighting of the beavers though, they were laboring between dusk and dawn. Distant young willow trees were expertly cut and pulled down hill to the pond. A path slick from the beavers coming and going was cut through the tall grass and brush. As summer turned to fall and the days shortened and became colder the lodge grew appendages of freshly cut branches. The beaver were preparing for winter and it looked like the lodge was large enough to house a good size family. November’s full moon is called the Full Beaver Moon, by a number of Native Americans, in honor of these diligent creatures. By November they should have stored enough food for the long, cold, months ahead. Being a fickle month, this November arrived like it was January, with many below freezing days and nights. A coating of ice covered Clark Pond. For all appearances it looked like the beaver had settled in for the winter, then the days warmed, the ice melted. For the first time since the beavers appeared on Clark Pond they were visible during the day! Within a few short days a tree was felled, providing more branches and sticks to add to their winter food supply. The beaver could be seen swimming back and forth from the pond banks to the lodge carrying branches. There were at least three good size beaver at work while two slightly smaller ones were on the edge of the pond chewing small branches. Occasionally, if all was quiet, the large paddle like tail could be heard slapping the water, as they dove under and chewing sounds echoed across the pond as they munched away. It is nearly the end of November. Can one hope to see the beaver sitting on the edge of their lodge or swimming across the little pond breaking a mere suggestion of thin ice_or_will we have to be content watching winter come again to Clark Pond; a pond frozen, silent, and sheltering a family of beavers, who are waiting patiently for another spring.	672	ENGLISH	1
To start a fire there has to be an ignition source. Possible sources could be faulty wires rubbing together causing friction and getting hot enough to start the fire, overloaded plugs and oil lamps etc. Some other sources could be cigarettes. They may not have been put out properly, matches and gas lighter. Another source could be computer/ other electrical items. If they are left on for a long period, they will become hot and possible trigger a fire. Christmas lights can also play a part in a ignition of a fire because they are also normally on for a long period causing the Christmas tree to become how and burst into flames. Items in the kitchen like ovens, kettles, chip fryers etc also have heat coming from them. If they are not working properly, they will also become a source of ignition. A drink placed near a electrical item can also start a fire. Lastly, arson could be an ignition source. If somebody wanted to have a financial gain, they could start the fire their self. Task 3 (D1) From studying the text I was given the main causes of the fire were people smoking. Because there were rags on the floor, when the fag was dropped/ attempted to be put out, it was not fully out and was the ignition source of the fire. Another cause may have been faulty wires/cables from the sewing machines. They may have been rubbing together causing friction, eventually making it hot enough to ignite and start the fire. Another reason may have been that the faulty cables/wires may have caused sparks which again could of caused the fire to start. Lastly, the only other thing I could find/ think of is, back in those days there may of been candles as lights and if one was to be knocked onto the floor where the rags were this again could have caused the fire to break out. The most likely explanation to the spread of the fire is that the hanging patterns, the rags on the floor and the shirts that were already made would be everywhere around the factory meaning it would spread very quickly. Lastly, in those day the factory may of only been small and if the fire started in a corner it would spread even quicker than it would of done if it was in the middle of the room. There are ways in which the fire could have been prevented. For example if the already make shirts were stored in a separate room, if the rags were pick up and put into a bin every time a bit was dropped or cut etc. Another way it could be prevented if people were not allowed to smoke in the work place and if the sewing machines were to be checked every so often and fixed if there were faults cables/wires.	<urn:uuid:70b304ae-7995-4a15-8c86-9fa45b8e3eef>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://paperap.com/paper-on-4172-christmas-lights/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251681412.74/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125191854-20200125221854-00062.warc.gz	en	0.98635	548	3.46875	3	[ -0.33547377586364746, 0.31923907995224, 0.27559709548950195, -0.2802783250808716, 0.4791257977485657, -0.037628449499607086, 0.1528627574443817, 0.10889708995819092, -0.2612959146499634, -0.10487982630729675, 0.165749192237854, 0.07693697512149811, -0.25336241722106934, 0.463284969329834, ...	2	To start a fire there has to be an ignition source. Possible sources could be faulty wires rubbing together causing friction and getting hot enough to start the fire, overloaded plugs and oil lamps etc. Some other sources could be cigarettes. They may not have been put out properly, matches and gas lighter. Another source could be computer/ other electrical items. If they are left on for a long period, they will become hot and possible trigger a fire. Christmas lights can also play a part in a ignition of a fire because they are also normally on for a long period causing the Christmas tree to become how and burst into flames. Items in the kitchen like ovens, kettles, chip fryers etc also have heat coming from them. If they are not working properly, they will also become a source of ignition. A drink placed near a electrical item can also start a fire. Lastly, arson could be an ignition source. If somebody wanted to have a financial gain, they could start the fire their self. Task 3 (D1) From studying the text I was given the main causes of the fire were people smoking. Because there were rags on the floor, when the fag was dropped/ attempted to be put out, it was not fully out and was the ignition source of the fire. Another cause may have been faulty wires/cables from the sewing machines. They may have been rubbing together causing friction, eventually making it hot enough to ignite and start the fire. Another reason may have been that the faulty cables/wires may have caused sparks which again could of caused the fire to start. Lastly, the only other thing I could find/ think of is, back in those days there may of been candles as lights and if one was to be knocked onto the floor where the rags were this again could have caused the fire to break out. The most likely explanation to the spread of the fire is that the hanging patterns, the rags on the floor and the shirts that were already made would be everywhere around the factory meaning it would spread very quickly. Lastly, in those day the factory may of only been small and if the fire started in a corner it would spread even quicker than it would of done if it was in the middle of the room. There are ways in which the fire could have been prevented. For example if the already make shirts were stored in a separate room, if the rags were pick up and put into a bin every time a bit was dropped or cut etc. Another way it could be prevented if people were not allowed to smoke in the work place and if the sewing machines were to be checked every so often and fixed if there were faults cables/wires.	542	ENGLISH	1
T. S. Eliot This article does not have any sources. (June 2014) Thomas Stearns Eliot OM, (26 September 1888 - 4 January 1965), was an American poet. He was one of the most influential poets of the 20th century. He also wrote plays and some important essays about literature. One famous book of his was written for children and is called The Old Possum's Book of Practical Cats. The songs in the Andrew Lloyd Webber musical Cats are based on poems in it. He also wrote "The Waste Land", a very mysterious, complicated poem that helped start a new style called Modernism. His friend, Ezra Pound, another Modern poet, helped him finish it. His poem "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock" and his play Murder in the Cathedral (about Thomas Becket) are also well known. The Noted Size Queen was married two times. He worked at a bank in England and later as the head editor of a famous publishing company in London that is now called Faber and Faber. In 1948, he won the Nobel Prize in Literature. He died of emphysema in London. \|Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: T. S. Eliot\|	<urn:uuid:ca8fed45-5e28-4b43-96a8-7181183c210d>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/T._S._Eliot	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591431.4/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117234621-20200118022621-00151.warc.gz	en	0.991868	258	3.265625	3	[ 0.2995075583457947, 0.10833249986171722, 0.20338456332683563, 0.2397093027830124, 0.16156795620918274, 0.08079172670841217, -0.12475217133760452, 0.5656219720840454, 0.04086274281144142, -0.2134663462638855, -0.05717634782195091, -0.3109418451786041, 0.036743126809597015, 0.087038733065128...	1	T. S. Eliot This article does not have any sources. (June 2014) Thomas Stearns Eliot OM, (26 September 1888 - 4 January 1965), was an American poet. He was one of the most influential poets of the 20th century. He also wrote plays and some important essays about literature. One famous book of his was written for children and is called The Old Possum's Book of Practical Cats. The songs in the Andrew Lloyd Webber musical Cats are based on poems in it. He also wrote "The Waste Land", a very mysterious, complicated poem that helped start a new style called Modernism. His friend, Ezra Pound, another Modern poet, helped him finish it. His poem "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock" and his play Murder in the Cathedral (about Thomas Becket) are also well known. The Noted Size Queen was married two times. He worked at a bank in England and later as the head editor of a famous publishing company in London that is now called Faber and Faber. In 1948, he won the Nobel Prize in Literature. He died of emphysema in London. \|Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: T. S. Eliot\|	275	ENGLISH	1
Yiddish was at one time the international language of Ashkenazic Jews from Central and Eastern Europe and their descendants. A hybrid of Hebrew and medieval German, Yiddish takes about three-quarters of its vocabulary from German, but borrows word liberally from Hebrew and many other languages from the many lands where Ashkenazic Jews have lived. It is generally believed that Yiddish became a language of its own some time between 900 and 100 C.E. Yiddish was primarily a spoken language rather than a written language. It has a grammatical structure all its own and is written in an alphabet based on Hebrew characters. Scholars and universities have classified Yiddish as a Germanic language. Yiddish was never part of Sephardic Jewish culture - the culture of the Jews of Spain, Portugal, the Balkans, North Africa and the Middle East. They had their own international language known as Ladino or Judesmo, which is a hybrid of medieval Spanish and Hebrew much in the same way that Yiddish combines German and Hebrew. At its height, less than a century ago, Yiddish was understood by an estimated 11 million of the world’s 18 million Jews, and many of them spoke Yiddish as their primary language. But Yiddish has fallen on hard times, a victim of both assimilation and murder. Today, less than a quarter of a million people in the United States speak Yiddish, about half of them in New York. Yiddish is referred to as “mame loshn”, which mean “mother tongue”. Mame loshn was the language of women and children, to be contrasted with loshn koydesh, the holy tongue of Hebrew that was studied only by men. The word “Yiddish” is the Yiddish word for “Jewish”, so it is technically correct to refer to the Yiddish language as “Jewish”.	<urn:uuid:d2951f9b-26a7-4acb-99e4-a56a25c12729>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://oyveybaby.com/blogs/news/first-post	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251788528.85/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129041149-20200129071149-00133.warc.gz	en	0.982189	414	3.9375	4	[ -0.20782436430454254, 0.10554350912570953, -0.11682597547769547, 0.2034691721200943, -0.38864922523498535, 0.09994654357433319, 0.26162007451057434, 0.13425150513648987, -0.23880957067012787, -0.2115853726863861, -0.1731000542640686, 0.14456762373447418, -0.24059319496154785, 0.21460647881...	12	Yiddish was at one time the international language of Ashkenazic Jews from Central and Eastern Europe and their descendants. A hybrid of Hebrew and medieval German, Yiddish takes about three-quarters of its vocabulary from German, but borrows word liberally from Hebrew and many other languages from the many lands where Ashkenazic Jews have lived. It is generally believed that Yiddish became a language of its own some time between 900 and 100 C.E. Yiddish was primarily a spoken language rather than a written language. It has a grammatical structure all its own and is written in an alphabet based on Hebrew characters. Scholars and universities have classified Yiddish as a Germanic language. Yiddish was never part of Sephardic Jewish culture - the culture of the Jews of Spain, Portugal, the Balkans, North Africa and the Middle East. They had their own international language known as Ladino or Judesmo, which is a hybrid of medieval Spanish and Hebrew much in the same way that Yiddish combines German and Hebrew. At its height, less than a century ago, Yiddish was understood by an estimated 11 million of the world’s 18 million Jews, and many of them spoke Yiddish as their primary language. But Yiddish has fallen on hard times, a victim of both assimilation and murder. Today, less than a quarter of a million people in the United States speak Yiddish, about half of them in New York. Yiddish is referred to as “mame loshn”, which mean “mother tongue”. Mame loshn was the language of women and children, to be contrasted with loshn koydesh, the holy tongue of Hebrew that was studied only by men. The word “Yiddish” is the Yiddish word for “Jewish”, so it is technically correct to refer to the Yiddish language as “Jewish”.	402	ENGLISH	1
Samuel Morse Biography, Life, Interesting Facts Died On : Also Known For : Birth Place : Samuel Morse was widely known as a remarkable painter and at the same time an inventor. He is precisely known for inventing a single-wired telegraph system. He was brought up by a well-to-do family, but he was fully recognized due to his artistic work. French aristocrat Marquis de Lafayette and President John Adams noticed his talent when he painted their portraits. Although he wanted to concentrate on the branch of physics, his wife’s demise made him change his mind. That is when he came up with an idea of contriving a gadget that authorized long distance communication. After several falls and fails, he finally created a system that drastically changed the world. He re-invented Morse codes that are still used to date. Childhood And Early life On April 27, 1791, Samuel Morse was born in Boston, Charlestown in Massachusetts to Elizabeth Ann Finley Breese and Jedidiah Morse. As a young lad, he joined Philips Academy and later went to Yale University. Here he studied mathematics, science, and religious philosophy. He then took a painting job just to bring basic needs. Morse graduated in 1810 with Phi Beta Kappa honors. He was advised to move to England due to his artistic work that was recognized by Washington Allston. Samuel’s Early Career While in England, Samuel Morse perfected in his painting career that he was accepted at the Royal Academy. Legend artist like Michelangelo inspired him to create Dying Hercules paint. The masterpiece illustrated the political views in British. He later went to the US in 1815 where he was summoned to paint great portraits of the so-called famous people such as President James Monroe and John Adams. Early in 1825, Samuel Morse painted a Lafayette portrait in Washington. The same year he received a letter that stated about his wife’s illness. He later received another letter about his wife’s demise. He arrived at her home where he found that he was already buried. This saddened him, and that’s where he came up with an electromagnetic device that gave a chance to further communication. Morse moved to the US in 1832 where he met Charles Thomas, a guru in electromagnetism. Thomas tried to explain to him different properties of the said subject. He then dropped off his painting job where he concentrated more on electromagnetism field. He invented the first Telegraph in 1835 where he submitted its final design to the United States Patent Office. Morse’s hard work spoke for itself when Samuel was supported by the New York University guru, Leonard Gale. They partnered together and came up with missing circuits that greatly helped to transmit messages far and beyond. An American inventor, Alfred Vail joined them where he funded the project until its end. In 1838, Samuel demonstrated his invented device to the public in New Jersey. He went to Washington to wait for another federal sponsorship without success. After wandering for some time, he gained financial support. This encouraged him to construct a telegraphic line that passed through Baltimore and Washington DC. The line was officially opened in 1844.Following immense success; it gave birth to Magnetic Telegraph Company in 1845.The company constructed new lines between Boston, New York, Mississippi, and Philadelphia. Morse became a happy man in 1847 where he received a license for his hard work. After two years, he was selected to chair for the Associate Fellow of the American Academy of Science and Arts. This gave him a chance to establish telegraphic lines across the world. After a long wait, Morse gained his recognition for the US government and other European countries. In 1858 he was chosen as the foreign member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. Absurdly, he retired from the public eye. This was seen due to a statue that was placed in the New York’s Central Park. Not to mention he last appeared at the New York Academy of Music where he conveyed the final message. During this time he participated in several works including sharing his income with charitable organizations. At the same time, he started to work on a connection between religion and science. Samuel Morse contribution in Science awarded him countable honors. He was mentioned in the Glory of Order Award by Sultan Mustafa. He later garnered the Great Golden Medal of Arts and Science under Emperor of Austria. The King of Denmark presented him with the Cross of a Knight of the Order, followed by The Commander of the Order of Isabella the Catholic. In 1896 he was presented with a silver certificate from the United States government. Samuel’s Personal Life And Legacy In his lifetime, Samuel married twice. In 1818 he married Lucretia Walker, and they were blessed with three children, James, Charles, and Susan. His first wife died in 1825. He then married Sarah Elizabeth in 1848.The couple was blessed with four children: William, Edward, and Cornella. Samuel breathed his last on 2nd-April 1872 in New York. Jan van Eyck Fra Filippo Lippi Henri De Toulouse-Lautrec Francisco De Zurbaran More People From Massachusetts Joseph P. Kennedy Jr. William Lloyd Garrison William Cullen Bryant	<urn:uuid:ad14f514-e477-439e-ae4c-3910136853a8>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.sunsigns.org/famousbirthdays/profile/samuel-morse/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250595787.7/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119234426-20200120022426-00203.warc.gz	en	0.981101	1,099	3.28125	3	[ -0.2885952591896057, 0.016245003789663315, 0.5205315351486206, -0.1703660786151886, -0.6986448764801025, 0.4349161982536316, 0.40810078382492065, 0.39085841178894043, -0.09665937721729279, 0.3024139106273651, 0.15379981696605682, 0.02641664445400238, 0.35252654552459717, 0.363522469997406,...	1	Samuel Morse Biography, Life, Interesting Facts Died On : Also Known For : Birth Place : Samuel Morse was widely known as a remarkable painter and at the same time an inventor. He is precisely known for inventing a single-wired telegraph system. He was brought up by a well-to-do family, but he was fully recognized due to his artistic work. French aristocrat Marquis de Lafayette and President John Adams noticed his talent when he painted their portraits. Although he wanted to concentrate on the branch of physics, his wife’s demise made him change his mind. That is when he came up with an idea of contriving a gadget that authorized long distance communication. After several falls and fails, he finally created a system that drastically changed the world. He re-invented Morse codes that are still used to date. Childhood And Early life On April 27, 1791, Samuel Morse was born in Boston, Charlestown in Massachusetts to Elizabeth Ann Finley Breese and Jedidiah Morse. As a young lad, he joined Philips Academy and later went to Yale University. Here he studied mathematics, science, and religious philosophy. He then took a painting job just to bring basic needs. Morse graduated in 1810 with Phi Beta Kappa honors. He was advised to move to England due to his artistic work that was recognized by Washington Allston. Samuel’s Early Career While in England, Samuel Morse perfected in his painting career that he was accepted at the Royal Academy. Legend artist like Michelangelo inspired him to create Dying Hercules paint. The masterpiece illustrated the political views in British. He later went to the US in 1815 where he was summoned to paint great portraits of the so-called famous people such as President James Monroe and John Adams. Early in 1825, Samuel Morse painted a Lafayette portrait in Washington. The same year he received a letter that stated about his wife’s illness. He later received another letter about his wife’s demise. He arrived at her home where he found that he was already buried. This saddened him, and that’s where he came up with an electromagnetic device that gave a chance to further communication. Morse moved to the US in 1832 where he met Charles Thomas, a guru in electromagnetism. Thomas tried to explain to him different properties of the said subject. He then dropped off his painting job where he concentrated more on electromagnetism field. He invented the first Telegraph in 1835 where he submitted its final design to the United States Patent Office. Morse’s hard work spoke for itself when Samuel was supported by the New York University guru, Leonard Gale. They partnered together and came up with missing circuits that greatly helped to transmit messages far and beyond. An American inventor, Alfred Vail joined them where he funded the project until its end. In 1838, Samuel demonstrated his invented device to the public in New Jersey. He went to Washington to wait for another federal sponsorship without success. After wandering for some time, he gained financial support. This encouraged him to construct a telegraphic line that passed through Baltimore and Washington DC. The line was officially opened in 1844.Following immense success; it gave birth to Magnetic Telegraph Company in 1845.The company constructed new lines between Boston, New York, Mississippi, and Philadelphia. Morse became a happy man in 1847 where he received a license for his hard work. After two years, he was selected to chair for the Associate Fellow of the American Academy of Science and Arts. This gave him a chance to establish telegraphic lines across the world. After a long wait, Morse gained his recognition for the US government and other European countries. In 1858 he was chosen as the foreign member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. Absurdly, he retired from the public eye. This was seen due to a statue that was placed in the New York’s Central Park. Not to mention he last appeared at the New York Academy of Music where he conveyed the final message. During this time he participated in several works including sharing his income with charitable organizations. At the same time, he started to work on a connection between religion and science. Samuel Morse contribution in Science awarded him countable honors. He was mentioned in the Glory of Order Award by Sultan Mustafa. He later garnered the Great Golden Medal of Arts and Science under Emperor of Austria. The King of Denmark presented him with the Cross of a Knight of the Order, followed by The Commander of the Order of Isabella the Catholic. In 1896 he was presented with a silver certificate from the United States government. Samuel’s Personal Life And Legacy In his lifetime, Samuel married twice. In 1818 he married Lucretia Walker, and they were blessed with three children, James, Charles, and Susan. His first wife died in 1825. He then married Sarah Elizabeth in 1848.The couple was blessed with four children: William, Edward, and Cornella. Samuel breathed his last on 2nd-April 1872 in New York. Jan van Eyck Fra Filippo Lippi Henri De Toulouse-Lautrec Francisco De Zurbaran More People From Massachusetts Joseph P. Kennedy Jr. William Lloyd Garrison William Cullen Bryant	1,108	ENGLISH	1
The United States of America had been through some tough times. However, never has the country been so divided by disparate interests, violence, racism, personal infighting, political conflict, and cynical self-advancement as during the presidency of Abraham Lincoln. And for Lincoln this was all within his unionist government, he still also had to deal with the break-away Confederate rebellion! Amazingly, Lincoln was able to lead the Union to victory, solvency, and better days during the darkest chapter in American history. Time and time again he was able to avert disaster and hold his nation and government together. Lesser leaders probably would have presided over the final dissolution of the US. This week in my Global Leadership and Perspectives Doctor of Ministry program at George Fox Seminary we read Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln and The Save Time Summary of the text, both by Doris Kearns Goodwin. As I read through Lincoln’s challenges and how he ably handled them, I was able to reflect on my last two years of studying leadership. Several themes begin to emerge about leadership that are evocative in Lincoln’s leadership style. These intersect with many of the findings of leadership gurus like Kets de Vries, Collins, Li, Friedman, Morse, Rath, and Clifton. For instance, Lincoln had amazing, almost prescient emotional intelligence, and knew how to unwind and help others unwind also. He knew how to encourage and motivate people, but he also actively encouraged criticism and dissent from all sides, listening well to those whose opinions differed from his. Below are just a few of the leadership qualities clearly manifested in Abraham Lincoln that aided in the preservation of the USA. - Lincoln built consensus. The first thing that Lincoln did during his presidency was to build his cabinet. He immediately sought out to appoint his major political rivals to important positions. Many of these men strongly disagreed with Lincoln and with each other on policy and politics, and some even had personal grudges against one another. But, Lincoln knew three important things. One, the country would need a strong show of unity and consensus to hold together and have everyone’s voice count. Two, disparate points of view would be healthy for coming to healthy and strong policy decisions. Three, you want the best, most capable people, not just the ones who agree with you. - Lincoln actively encouraged open discussion, debate, and criticism. Several of the men Lincoln tasked with major responsibilities initially declined the position citing that they disagreed strongly with Lincoln’s positions and politics. Lincoln went out of his way to encourage these men to openly communicate with him their disagreements, notifying them that he would always listen and take into consideration their points of view. Lincoln’s office was open to hear criticism, and he never squashed it. This created trust with certain key cabinet members, but also allowed for Lincoln to always have a bigger view of the situation. It also allowed for measured and informed decisions to be made, in which most eventually came to agreement. - Lincoln led with grace, kindness, and graciousness. Into the political cauldron of Civil War era intrigue and bickering, Lincoln gingerly stepped. Choosing a cabinet of political rivals only intensified the political stakes. Lincoln was able to diffuse much of this with his openness, but also with his incredible kindness and grace towards others. He always attempted to encourage and quickly forgive his subordinates. Moreover, he often agonized over letters and telegraphs he had to send, hoping to strike a balance between encouragement and censure. He had committed himself to never send a letter in anger. Lincoln also, whenever he felt he had been too harsh, sought out the party he offended to offer a personal apology. Even those he had to punish or remove, he often attempted to set them up in a situation where they could succeed. He was tremendously patient. For this, Lincoln engendered great trust and loyalty even from those who disagreed with him. This often helped to diffuse potentially fracturing political and policy conflicts during the intensity of the war. - Lincoln always took responsibility. Lincoln knew the buck stopped with him. For this he often took the responsibility and the blame for the failures of his government officials. He made sure that he ultimately protected their reputation and future. The men working with Lincoln knew that he had their backs, and once again this engendered great trust and loyalty. - Lincoln forgave generously. On several occasions subordinates apologized to Lincoln for failures and in some cases gross betrayal. Lincoln always quickly forgave and attempted to restore friendship and status to those who had wronged him. In some cases he appointed people to important positions who had clearly wronged him or looked down on him. In one case, it was revealed that his Postmaster General, Monty Blair, had written a derogatory letter about Lincoln. Blair, as an act of attrition apologized and offered to resign because of the betrayal. Lincoln simply said, “forget it and never mention or think of it again (loc 8773).” Most would have harbored grudges or resentment, but Lincoln’s policy of mercy further engendered respect, admiration, and ultimate loyalty. - Lincoln knew when to make decisive and unilateral decisions. Despite his kindness, Lincoln was no pushover. He held strong and with integrity pushed through those things he felt strongly about. When he felt that a decision had to be made that was essential to maintaining the future of the Union, he was not afraid to act. - Lincoln led with hope and vision. Despite the darkness and horror of the Civil War, Lincoln never wavered from the importance of maintaining the integrity of the Union for a brighter future of the nation and all mankind. He kept himself and his cabinet focused on the vision of America and the Constitution as the great hope of all humanity. After every set back (and the North experienced many) Lincoln was always there to continue to encourage his generals, his soldiers, and his cabinet with kindness and the hope of the future. He knew how to do this both explicitly and implicitly. Kearns explains: “As he had done so many times before, Lincoln withstood the storm of defeat by replacing anguish over an unchangeable past with hope in an unchartered future (loc 10631). Are you leading in a difficult and challenging situation? Do you have a divided and contentious team, church, or organization that you are in charge of? Lead like Lincoln.	<urn:uuid:7380c5e7-33e9-4a05-a96a-fd555e14274b>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://blogs.georgefox.edu/dminlgp/dare-to-lincoln/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250625097.75/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124191133-20200124220133-00369.warc.gz	en	0.984294	1,317	3.34375	3	[ -0.2621234655380249, 0.17675308883190155, 0.07490997016429901, 0.0819428488612175, -0.08269760757684708, 0.4495529234409332, 0.145521879196167, 0.1225595474243164, -0.1347723752260208, -0.2461017668247223, -0.1725936084985733, 0.1850847601890564, 0.21338742971420288, 0.3853941857814789, ...	2	The United States of America had been through some tough times. However, never has the country been so divided by disparate interests, violence, racism, personal infighting, political conflict, and cynical self-advancement as during the presidency of Abraham Lincoln. And for Lincoln this was all within his unionist government, he still also had to deal with the break-away Confederate rebellion! Amazingly, Lincoln was able to lead the Union to victory, solvency, and better days during the darkest chapter in American history. Time and time again he was able to avert disaster and hold his nation and government together. Lesser leaders probably would have presided over the final dissolution of the US. This week in my Global Leadership and Perspectives Doctor of Ministry program at George Fox Seminary we read Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln and The Save Time Summary of the text, both by Doris Kearns Goodwin. As I read through Lincoln’s challenges and how he ably handled them, I was able to reflect on my last two years of studying leadership. Several themes begin to emerge about leadership that are evocative in Lincoln’s leadership style. These intersect with many of the findings of leadership gurus like Kets de Vries, Collins, Li, Friedman, Morse, Rath, and Clifton. For instance, Lincoln had amazing, almost prescient emotional intelligence, and knew how to unwind and help others unwind also. He knew how to encourage and motivate people, but he also actively encouraged criticism and dissent from all sides, listening well to those whose opinions differed from his. Below are just a few of the leadership qualities clearly manifested in Abraham Lincoln that aided in the preservation of the USA. - Lincoln built consensus. The first thing that Lincoln did during his presidency was to build his cabinet. He immediately sought out to appoint his major political rivals to important positions. Many of these men strongly disagreed with Lincoln and with each other on policy and politics, and some even had personal grudges against one another. But, Lincoln knew three important things. One, the country would need a strong show of unity and consensus to hold together and have everyone’s voice count. Two, disparate points of view would be healthy for coming to healthy and strong policy decisions. Three, you want the best, most capable people, not just the ones who agree with you. - Lincoln actively encouraged open discussion, debate, and criticism. Several of the men Lincoln tasked with major responsibilities initially declined the position citing that they disagreed strongly with Lincoln’s positions and politics. Lincoln went out of his way to encourage these men to openly communicate with him their disagreements, notifying them that he would always listen and take into consideration their points of view. Lincoln’s office was open to hear criticism, and he never squashed it. This created trust with certain key cabinet members, but also allowed for Lincoln to always have a bigger view of the situation. It also allowed for measured and informed decisions to be made, in which most eventually came to agreement. - Lincoln led with grace, kindness, and graciousness. Into the political cauldron of Civil War era intrigue and bickering, Lincoln gingerly stepped. Choosing a cabinet of political rivals only intensified the political stakes. Lincoln was able to diffuse much of this with his openness, but also with his incredible kindness and grace towards others. He always attempted to encourage and quickly forgive his subordinates. Moreover, he often agonized over letters and telegraphs he had to send, hoping to strike a balance between encouragement and censure. He had committed himself to never send a letter in anger. Lincoln also, whenever he felt he had been too harsh, sought out the party he offended to offer a personal apology. Even those he had to punish or remove, he often attempted to set them up in a situation where they could succeed. He was tremendously patient. For this, Lincoln engendered great trust and loyalty even from those who disagreed with him. This often helped to diffuse potentially fracturing political and policy conflicts during the intensity of the war. - Lincoln always took responsibility. Lincoln knew the buck stopped with him. For this he often took the responsibility and the blame for the failures of his government officials. He made sure that he ultimately protected their reputation and future. The men working with Lincoln knew that he had their backs, and once again this engendered great trust and loyalty. - Lincoln forgave generously. On several occasions subordinates apologized to Lincoln for failures and in some cases gross betrayal. Lincoln always quickly forgave and attempted to restore friendship and status to those who had wronged him. In some cases he appointed people to important positions who had clearly wronged him or looked down on him. In one case, it was revealed that his Postmaster General, Monty Blair, had written a derogatory letter about Lincoln. Blair, as an act of attrition apologized and offered to resign because of the betrayal. Lincoln simply said, “forget it and never mention or think of it again (loc 8773).” Most would have harbored grudges or resentment, but Lincoln’s policy of mercy further engendered respect, admiration, and ultimate loyalty. - Lincoln knew when to make decisive and unilateral decisions. Despite his kindness, Lincoln was no pushover. He held strong and with integrity pushed through those things he felt strongly about. When he felt that a decision had to be made that was essential to maintaining the future of the Union, he was not afraid to act. - Lincoln led with hope and vision. Despite the darkness and horror of the Civil War, Lincoln never wavered from the importance of maintaining the integrity of the Union for a brighter future of the nation and all mankind. He kept himself and his cabinet focused on the vision of America and the Constitution as the great hope of all humanity. After every set back (and the North experienced many) Lincoln was always there to continue to encourage his generals, his soldiers, and his cabinet with kindness and the hope of the future. He knew how to do this both explicitly and implicitly. Kearns explains: “As he had done so many times before, Lincoln withstood the storm of defeat by replacing anguish over an unchangeable past with hope in an unchartered future (loc 10631). Are you leading in a difficult and challenging situation? Do you have a divided and contentious team, church, or organization that you are in charge of? Lead like Lincoln.	1,304	ENGLISH	1
Posted: November 1, 2019 How can a tiny, worm-like larva with no arms, legs, or wings leap into the air? Mike Wise is a scientist at Roanoke College in Salem, Virginia. He and some colleagues believe they have found the answer. Dr. Wise studies plants and how they defend themselves from hungry insects. He was working on galls (swellings) on goldenrod plants a few years ago. The galls form around maggot-like larvae of flies. He had spent an hour pulling out each rice-sized maggot. He put them into a little dish on his desk. He looked down. All of them were gone! His eye caught a little orange larva jumping across the desk. “I looked on the floor and there had been some that had jumped all the way to the wall,” he said. What was the trick? He brought bunches of goldenrod to the lab of Sheila Patek, a biologist at Duke University. She studies small, very fast things. “These creatures do stuff that engineers can only dream of,” she says. So people in her lab filmed the leaping larvae in action. This is what they saw: The wormy creatures start by curling into a loop. A patch of hair on their heads sticks to a patch of hair on their rear ends. Then the larvae push fluid through their bodies to stiffen up the part that’s on the ground. They keep doing that until there is enough force to unstick the hairs. That launches them into the air. She found that these squishy worms can jump over 30 body lengths! Sarah Bergbreiter is a mechanical engineer at Carnegie Mellon University. She believes that the way these larvae jump could become a model for a new kind of robot. She says, “The idea that a soft robot could kind of develop this appendagethat’s useful for the moment, is pretty cool.” All things were made through Him, and without Him was not any thing made that was made. — John 1:3	<urn:uuid:91174fa3-c81b-482c-a13d-a3e7a33093b0>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://kids.wng.org/node/4414	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598800.30/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120135447-20200120164447-00102.warc.gz	en	0.985228	434	4.0625	4	[ -0.36233535408973694, -0.2265397012233734, 0.23307310044765472, -0.0020883060060441494, -0.10479915142059326, 0.34973835945129395, 0.22404420375823975, 0.5287021994590759, -0.48272573947906494, 0.2809469997882843, 0.13975174725055695, -0.09488053619861603, 0.245266392827034, 0.186625987291...	2	Posted: November 1, 2019 How can a tiny, worm-like larva with no arms, legs, or wings leap into the air? Mike Wise is a scientist at Roanoke College in Salem, Virginia. He and some colleagues believe they have found the answer. Dr. Wise studies plants and how they defend themselves from hungry insects. He was working on galls (swellings) on goldenrod plants a few years ago. The galls form around maggot-like larvae of flies. He had spent an hour pulling out each rice-sized maggot. He put them into a little dish on his desk. He looked down. All of them were gone! His eye caught a little orange larva jumping across the desk. “I looked on the floor and there had been some that had jumped all the way to the wall,” he said. What was the trick? He brought bunches of goldenrod to the lab of Sheila Patek, a biologist at Duke University. She studies small, very fast things. “These creatures do stuff that engineers can only dream of,” she says. So people in her lab filmed the leaping larvae in action. This is what they saw: The wormy creatures start by curling into a loop. A patch of hair on their heads sticks to a patch of hair on their rear ends. Then the larvae push fluid through their bodies to stiffen up the part that’s on the ground. They keep doing that until there is enough force to unstick the hairs. That launches them into the air. She found that these squishy worms can jump over 30 body lengths! Sarah Bergbreiter is a mechanical engineer at Carnegie Mellon University. She believes that the way these larvae jump could become a model for a new kind of robot. She says, “The idea that a soft robot could kind of develop this appendagethat’s useful for the moment, is pretty cool.” All things were made through Him, and without Him was not any thing made that was made. — John 1:3	421	ENGLISH	1
During one of the French soldiers occupations of Egypt in July 15 1799, they discovered a stone with three different columns of writing. Each column of the Rosetta Stone was written in different languages, Hieroglyphics, Egyptian Demotic, and Greek. The stone had puzzled scholars for centuries. It was the key to deciphering hieroglyphics, few people know the translation. The Rosetta stone had been a part of a wall inside an ottoman fortress, and was written in 197 BC Months after its discovery, it was presented for inspection for no other than Napoleon. When the British defeated Napoleons forces in Alexandriain 1801, they seized many of the Egyptian artifacts the french had discovered during their occupation in Egypt, including the Rosetta stone. The British put the valuable stone in the British museum in 1802, and it has been there ever since.It didn’t take scholars long to translate the 52 lines of Greek and the 32 lines of Demotic. Though it did take them more than two decades to translate the Hieroglyphics. Part of the problem was prevailing an idea that Hieroglyphics was a symbolic writing system, but it was actually a largely phonetic one. By 1822 the Rosetta stone was fully translated.	<urn:uuid:fb9258c6-4a40-4e2b-becb-94d04ae26e61>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.joshuashistorycorner.com/2017/06/30/the-rosetta-stone/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250614086.44/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123221108-20200124010108-00221.warc.gz	en	0.982196	259	4.03125	4	[ -0.5999990105628967, 0.5668265223503113, 0.42180362343788147, 0.06457646936178207, -0.983567476272583, -0.39737173914909363, 0.2745017111301422, 0.13077178597450256, 0.04331773892045021, 0.14246605336666107, -0.17597897350788116, -0.5215932726860046, 0.019047988578677177, 0.044580571353435...	11	During one of the French soldiers occupations of Egypt in July 15 1799, they discovered a stone with three different columns of writing. Each column of the Rosetta Stone was written in different languages, Hieroglyphics, Egyptian Demotic, and Greek. The stone had puzzled scholars for centuries. It was the key to deciphering hieroglyphics, few people know the translation. The Rosetta stone had been a part of a wall inside an ottoman fortress, and was written in 197 BC Months after its discovery, it was presented for inspection for no other than Napoleon. When the British defeated Napoleons forces in Alexandriain 1801, they seized many of the Egyptian artifacts the french had discovered during their occupation in Egypt, including the Rosetta stone. The British put the valuable stone in the British museum in 1802, and it has been there ever since.It didn’t take scholars long to translate the 52 lines of Greek and the 32 lines of Demotic. Though it did take them more than two decades to translate the Hieroglyphics. Part of the problem was prevailing an idea that Hieroglyphics was a symbolic writing system, but it was actually a largely phonetic one. By 1822 the Rosetta stone was fully translated.	275	ENGLISH	1
Biography of Mir Taqi Mir \|born\|\|February 01, 1725\|\|Agra\| \|died\|\|September 21, 1810\|\|Lucknow\| Mir Taqi Mir (sometimes also spelt Meer Taqi Meer), whose pen name was Mir, was the leading Urdu poet of the 18th century, and one of the pioneers who gave shape to the Urdu poetry and Urdu language itself. He was one of the principal poets of the Delhi School of the Urdu ghazal and remains arguably the foremost name in Urdu poetry often remembered as Xudā-e suxan (god of poetry). His philosophy of life was formed primarily by his father, a religious man with a large following, whose emphasis on the importance of love and the value of compassion remained with Mir throughout his life and imbued his love poetry. Mir's father died while the poet was in his teens. He left Agra for Delhi a few years after his father's death, to finish his education and also to find patrons who offered him financial support. Mir Taqi Mir lived much of his life in Mughal Delhi. However, after Ahmad Shah Abdali's sack of Delhi each year starting 1748, he eventually moved to the court of Asaf-ud-Daulah in Lucknow, at the king's invitation. Mir migrated to Lucknow in 1782 and remained there for the remainder of his life.	<urn:uuid:f3a3c1e1-6b0a-48b4-bdae-273098655ab8>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.poetryverse.com/mir-taqi-mir-poems	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606269.37/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122012204-20200122041204-00119.warc.gz	en	0.990924	293	3.296875	3	[ -0.04819987341761589, 0.5859832167625427, 0.20595520734786987, 0.19716191291809082, -0.3023710250854492, 0.23808452486991882, 0.5535553097724915, 0.18053776025772095, 0.0060741351917386055, 0.0020956099033355713, 0.13418255746364594, -0.49720656871795654, 0.2841653525829315, 0.058173865079...	7	Biography of Mir Taqi Mir \|born\|\|February 01, 1725\|\|Agra\| \|died\|\|September 21, 1810\|\|Lucknow\| Mir Taqi Mir (sometimes also spelt Meer Taqi Meer), whose pen name was Mir, was the leading Urdu poet of the 18th century, and one of the pioneers who gave shape to the Urdu poetry and Urdu language itself. He was one of the principal poets of the Delhi School of the Urdu ghazal and remains arguably the foremost name in Urdu poetry often remembered as Xudā-e suxan (god of poetry). His philosophy of life was formed primarily by his father, a religious man with a large following, whose emphasis on the importance of love and the value of compassion remained with Mir throughout his life and imbued his love poetry. Mir's father died while the poet was in his teens. He left Agra for Delhi a few years after his father's death, to finish his education and also to find patrons who offered him financial support. Mir Taqi Mir lived much of his life in Mughal Delhi. However, after Ahmad Shah Abdali's sack of Delhi each year starting 1748, he eventually moved to the court of Asaf-ud-Daulah in Lucknow, at the king's invitation. Mir migrated to Lucknow in 1782 and remained there for the remainder of his life.	300	ENGLISH	1
Throughout American history there have been many ups and downs, especially in the beginning.When different groups from different parts of the world come together you are going to have conflicts no matter what the situation is.In the case of the American colonists revolting against Great Britain I feel that the American colonist had every right to be angry and wage war.The colonists were treated unfairly and they helped out in changing they way America was and they way it is today. In the beginning Great Britain wanted to tax the American colonist on top of what they had already were being taxed by the local governments.The American colonists did not feel that this was fair and did not want to pay the taxes.I agree with the colonists.There is no reason that they should be taxed twice for the same thing.I do realize that Great Britain was in debt a lot of money from coming to America and helping out to start the New World. I do not feel that they were wrong for what they were trying to do but it was not fair and they could have come up with other solutions. The revolt changed the country economically in many ways. First, the revolt had a huge affect on what was taxed and what was not taxed.I feel that it was appropriate for things to be taxed.With out taxation things can not be paid for to help the economy and help out in fixing things and paying government officials.I can not take the side of the colonist or Great Britain.I feel that they Britain had good intentions and the colonist were just upset because of all the taxation taking place at one time. The different taxes such as the tea tax, the stamp act, and other taxes were brilliant ideas in my mind to take care of the debt and for numerous other things.It is not possible for the government to have any authority without it.I feel that the revolt after it was all over brought many people together and helped to change the way peop	<urn:uuid:4a154b25-bef9-41c9-8620-ee231167a8d8>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://gemmarketingsolutions.com/colonist-revolt/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250601040.47/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120224950-20200121013950-00418.warc.gz	en	0.991081	391	3.296875	3	[ -0.22069087624549866, -0.1356234848499298, 0.602968692779541, -0.09172767400741577, -0.08240406960248947, -0.1569199413061142, -0.042119015008211136, 0.11021972447633743, -0.16290803253650665, 0.09141428768634796, 0.14222629368305206, 0.03358594700694084, -0.24605350196361542, 0.3523175418...	1	Throughout American history there have been many ups and downs, especially in the beginning.When different groups from different parts of the world come together you are going to have conflicts no matter what the situation is.In the case of the American colonists revolting against Great Britain I feel that the American colonist had every right to be angry and wage war.The colonists were treated unfairly and they helped out in changing they way America was and they way it is today. In the beginning Great Britain wanted to tax the American colonist on top of what they had already were being taxed by the local governments.The American colonists did not feel that this was fair and did not want to pay the taxes.I agree with the colonists.There is no reason that they should be taxed twice for the same thing.I do realize that Great Britain was in debt a lot of money from coming to America and helping out to start the New World. I do not feel that they were wrong for what they were trying to do but it was not fair and they could have come up with other solutions. The revolt changed the country economically in many ways. First, the revolt had a huge affect on what was taxed and what was not taxed.I feel that it was appropriate for things to be taxed.With out taxation things can not be paid for to help the economy and help out in fixing things and paying government officials.I can not take the side of the colonist or Great Britain.I feel that they Britain had good intentions and the colonist were just upset because of all the taxation taking place at one time. The different taxes such as the tea tax, the stamp act, and other taxes were brilliant ideas in my mind to take care of the debt and for numerous other things.It is not possible for the government to have any authority without it.I feel that the revolt after it was all over brought many people together and helped to change the way peop	380	ENGLISH	1
Leprosy mutilated her body more than 500 years ago, but this Scottish woman's likeness isn't lost to history; a new digital reconstruction of her face reveals what she looked like before her death at about age 40. In a new project, forensic artists digitally reconstructed 12 faces from skulls found in a cemetery at St. Giles Cathedral in Edinburgh, Scotland, including the woman with leprosy, who may have been a tailor, and a man who was likely a peasant. "We are revisiting a lot of old cases like this one, as we are very keen to put human faces on a lot of the human remains we have in our collections," John Lawson, an archaeologist with the City of Edinburgh Council Archaeology Service, said in a statement. "Some of the remains date back to when Edinburgh became a royal burgh at the start of the 12th century, when St. Giles' was first constructed." Archaeologists initially excavated the cathedral's cemeteries in the 1980s and 1990s, ahead of a construction project and subsequent archaeological investigations. In all, the researchers found more than 100 burials dating from the 12th to the mid-16th centuries. The skeletons were then archived for future study. However, only some of the human remains had an almost-complete skull, Karen Fleming, one of the two freelance forensic artists who worked on the project, told Live Science in an email. The skulls from the 12th century were falling apart, "so the main challenge was to carefully attach the pieces of bone back together," said Fleming, who is based in Scotland. "Many of the buried had bone problems, [for example] abscesses in the mouth, but one person in particular presented signs of suffering from leprosy." The woman with leprosy was likely between the ages of 35 and 40 when she died in the mid-15th to 16th century. The extent of her leprosy lesions suggests that she contracted the disease in adulthood, Fleming noted. "She showed signs of lesions under the right eye, which may have led to sight loss in this eye," Fleming said. "It is also important to note that ... this lady being buried within St. Giles next to the altar of St. Anne indicates that she had high status, possibly within the tailors guild." In contrast, the 12th-century man was likely a peasant, which is why forensic artist Lucrezia Rodella, who is based in Italy, covered his head with a hood, "as it was a very common form of clothing during this time period," Fleming said. The man's skull was missing its lower jaw, she added. "When something like that happens, it's not possible to predict what the lower part of the face was like (mouth and jaw line), which is why [Rodella] decided to cover this part of the face with a beard," Fleming said. The man was likely between the ages of 35 and 40 when he died and stood about 5.6 feet (1.7 meters) tall. To create the digital reconstructions, Fleming and Rodella took photos of the skulls and uploaded these images to Photoshop. The artists then looked for markers on the skulls that helped them measure tissue depth. "When these markers are added at various points of the skull, we get an idea of the face shape," Fleming said. "We can observe the skull's features and indicate how big the nose was, what kind of shape it was, the symmetry or asymmetry of the face, and so on. "Once we have an idea of the face shape, we use a database of facial images," Fleming continued. "This is used to select features that can be altered to fit the skull. Hair and eye color cannot be predicted unless the remains have been DNA tested, so we consider what might have been common coloring of people from that time period." The facial reconstructions were a collaboration with the City of Edinburgh Council and the Centre for Anatomy and Human Identification at the University of Dundee in Scotland. To see more of the digitally reconstructed faces from St. Giles Cathedral, go to Fleming's personal webpage. - Photos: The Reconstruction of Teen Who Lived 9,000 Years Ago - In Images: An Ancient Long-Headed Woman Reconstructed - Photos: 1,700-Year-Old Egyptian Mummy Revealed Originally published on Live Science.	<urn:uuid:4aa42356-82bc-421e-aa86-47bcd90bfd5c>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.livescience.com/facial-reconstruction-scotland.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251690095.81/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126165718-20200126195718-00486.warc.gz	en	0.980318	907	3.375	3	[ -0.41187772154808044, 0.20461982488632202, 0.23928077518939972, 0.26424577832221985, -0.21639716625213623, -0.09746500849723816, -0.08377858251333237, 0.08241279423236847, -0.07848784327507019, 0.27550849318504333, 0.4624934792518616, -0.4342564344406128, 0.12296818196773529, 0.23421870172...	9	Leprosy mutilated her body more than 500 years ago, but this Scottish woman's likeness isn't lost to history; a new digital reconstruction of her face reveals what she looked like before her death at about age 40. In a new project, forensic artists digitally reconstructed 12 faces from skulls found in a cemetery at St. Giles Cathedral in Edinburgh, Scotland, including the woman with leprosy, who may have been a tailor, and a man who was likely a peasant. "We are revisiting a lot of old cases like this one, as we are very keen to put human faces on a lot of the human remains we have in our collections," John Lawson, an archaeologist with the City of Edinburgh Council Archaeology Service, said in a statement. "Some of the remains date back to when Edinburgh became a royal burgh at the start of the 12th century, when St. Giles' was first constructed." Archaeologists initially excavated the cathedral's cemeteries in the 1980s and 1990s, ahead of a construction project and subsequent archaeological investigations. In all, the researchers found more than 100 burials dating from the 12th to the mid-16th centuries. The skeletons were then archived for future study. However, only some of the human remains had an almost-complete skull, Karen Fleming, one of the two freelance forensic artists who worked on the project, told Live Science in an email. The skulls from the 12th century were falling apart, "so the main challenge was to carefully attach the pieces of bone back together," said Fleming, who is based in Scotland. "Many of the buried had bone problems, [for example] abscesses in the mouth, but one person in particular presented signs of suffering from leprosy." The woman with leprosy was likely between the ages of 35 and 40 when she died in the mid-15th to 16th century. The extent of her leprosy lesions suggests that she contracted the disease in adulthood, Fleming noted. "She showed signs of lesions under the right eye, which may have led to sight loss in this eye," Fleming said. "It is also important to note that ... this lady being buried within St. Giles next to the altar of St. Anne indicates that she had high status, possibly within the tailors guild." In contrast, the 12th-century man was likely a peasant, which is why forensic artist Lucrezia Rodella, who is based in Italy, covered his head with a hood, "as it was a very common form of clothing during this time period," Fleming said. The man's skull was missing its lower jaw, she added. "When something like that happens, it's not possible to predict what the lower part of the face was like (mouth and jaw line), which is why [Rodella] decided to cover this part of the face with a beard," Fleming said. The man was likely between the ages of 35 and 40 when he died and stood about 5.6 feet (1.7 meters) tall. To create the digital reconstructions, Fleming and Rodella took photos of the skulls and uploaded these images to Photoshop. The artists then looked for markers on the skulls that helped them measure tissue depth. "When these markers are added at various points of the skull, we get an idea of the face shape," Fleming said. "We can observe the skull's features and indicate how big the nose was, what kind of shape it was, the symmetry or asymmetry of the face, and so on. "Once we have an idea of the face shape, we use a database of facial images," Fleming continued. "This is used to select features that can be altered to fit the skull. Hair and eye color cannot be predicted unless the remains have been DNA tested, so we consider what might have been common coloring of people from that time period." The facial reconstructions were a collaboration with the City of Edinburgh Council and the Centre for Anatomy and Human Identification at the University of Dundee in Scotland. To see more of the digitally reconstructed faces from St. Giles Cathedral, go to Fleming's personal webpage. - Photos: The Reconstruction of Teen Who Lived 9,000 Years Ago - In Images: An Ancient Long-Headed Woman Reconstructed - Photos: 1,700-Year-Old Egyptian Mummy Revealed Originally published on Live Science.	932	ENGLISH	1
The novel is divided into three books: sowing, reaping and garnering. For him, the lives of other people are only important to him if only they produce something. Louisa and Sissy point out the flaws of fact-philosophy. Due to this theme, the novel ends with many characters realising that a person needs more than just fact in their life. Another example that reveals Toms cunningness is when Tom decides to visit Louisa after having ignored her for a long period of time. Utilitarianism is the assumption that human beings act in a way that highlights their own self interest.Forty teeth, namely twenty-four grinders, four eye-teeth, and twelve incisive. The industrial workers have no chance of progress in life. Gradgrind, who winds up elected to office work for the benefit of the country but not its people. Sissys presence is noteworthy because it indicates that Sissy inspires Mrs Gradgrinds emotional being, something that the Gradgrinds were never exposed to before. Tom becomes a hedonist who has little regard for others, while Louisa remains unable to connect with others even though she has the desire to do so. At the end of the story, when Loiusa comes desperate to her father, Mr. In fact, the workers are only called "Hands", an indication of how objectified they are by the owners. Thomas Gradgrind, one can see the different classes that were industrial England. With her personality traits, she transmits her attributions to other people around her and makes people feel good as well. At that time, the government didn 't establish a minimum age, wage, or working hours. Bounderby in the novel; they were hired at the lowest prices, they were also made to work amazingly longer hours than they should and they were so vilified that which led to many sociological problems for them in life. Kids are not allowed to dream and engaging in an entertaining activity is seen as a shameful thing. When Charles Dickens took a trip to industrial towns 15 years ago before writing his piece, he had a chance to see the industrial towns with all their problems such as urban blight, environmental problems and also social problems that came along with the industrial revolution such as wrong implementation of utilitarianism among society and class divisions occurred due to the unbridgeable gap between the rich and the poor. In short, as mentioned above, Cissy Jupe represents an ideal person type with head, ability to reason and heart, ability to feel and think for other people other than their own. It also signifies that even thought Tom was brought up in a system that was believed to be infallible; this utilitarian system did not teach him other more important things such as how to be a good person.Soot and ash is all over the town; it is a dirty and suffocating place. This very word occupies a significant place throughout the novel and makes one of the major themes. A man of realities. The emphasis was helped by the speaker's square wall of forehead, which had his eyebrows for its base, while his eyes found commodious cellarage in two dark caves, overshadowed by the wall Teach these boys and girls nothing but Facts. Children in school are taught according to Utilitarianism philosophy — they should accept and live according to facts and facts alone, they are not allowed to fantasize or think for themselves. Lastly, Cissy Jupe or the girl number twenty symbolizes the ideal human of the system in the eyes of Dickens. I have often sat with Sissy near me, and thought about it p Accordingly to that information, each of these major elements used by Dickens to reflect the social conditions of the age will be examined in this very paper. Another critique, David Craig, also agrees that Dickens conveys is opinions his views on the utilitarian system through inspection of the Gradgrind family. She is monstrous and barely human, has to be kept hidden. Accordingly to that information, we can say nothing but Dickens had so explicitly portrayed that it drew the attention of many conservatives who were actually amongst the members of these capitalists and industrialists. Tom Gradgrind deviates in to a whole different path and appears as an evil figure that plots against people just to earn money. Bounderby gives us a clear image on how capitalist industrialists lived, behaved and thought during the time of industrial revolution. He exemplifies the evils of this kind of education and its flaws on his characters in the novel.	<urn:uuid:834a351c-ea84-4deb-9c4a-c5b3e29eb01f>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://pyhosahevabeb.dellrichards.com/industrialization-of-enlgand-in-charles-dickens-novel-hard-times492812852gi.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606696.26/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122042145-20200122071145-00224.warc.gz	en	0.982278	917	3.546875	4	[ 0.20737047493457794, 0.14254915714263916, 0.3015423119068146, 0.19893302023410797, -0.044566068798303604, -0.21374082565307617, -0.13417267799377441, 0.02696564607322216, 0.25407111644744873, -0.04977194219827652, 0.16580811142921448, 0.03296693041920662, 0.1625598818063736, 0.178226023912...	2	The novel is divided into three books: sowing, reaping and garnering. For him, the lives of other people are only important to him if only they produce something. Louisa and Sissy point out the flaws of fact-philosophy. Due to this theme, the novel ends with many characters realising that a person needs more than just fact in their life. Another example that reveals Toms cunningness is when Tom decides to visit Louisa after having ignored her for a long period of time. Utilitarianism is the assumption that human beings act in a way that highlights their own self interest.Forty teeth, namely twenty-four grinders, four eye-teeth, and twelve incisive. The industrial workers have no chance of progress in life. Gradgrind, who winds up elected to office work for the benefit of the country but not its people. Sissys presence is noteworthy because it indicates that Sissy inspires Mrs Gradgrinds emotional being, something that the Gradgrinds were never exposed to before. Tom becomes a hedonist who has little regard for others, while Louisa remains unable to connect with others even though she has the desire to do so. At the end of the story, when Loiusa comes desperate to her father, Mr. In fact, the workers are only called "Hands", an indication of how objectified they are by the owners. Thomas Gradgrind, one can see the different classes that were industrial England. With her personality traits, she transmits her attributions to other people around her and makes people feel good as well. At that time, the government didn 't establish a minimum age, wage, or working hours. Bounderby in the novel; they were hired at the lowest prices, they were also made to work amazingly longer hours than they should and they were so vilified that which led to many sociological problems for them in life. Kids are not allowed to dream and engaging in an entertaining activity is seen as a shameful thing. When Charles Dickens took a trip to industrial towns 15 years ago before writing his piece, he had a chance to see the industrial towns with all their problems such as urban blight, environmental problems and also social problems that came along with the industrial revolution such as wrong implementation of utilitarianism among society and class divisions occurred due to the unbridgeable gap between the rich and the poor. In short, as mentioned above, Cissy Jupe represents an ideal person type with head, ability to reason and heart, ability to feel and think for other people other than their own. It also signifies that even thought Tom was brought up in a system that was believed to be infallible; this utilitarian system did not teach him other more important things such as how to be a good person.Soot and ash is all over the town; it is a dirty and suffocating place. This very word occupies a significant place throughout the novel and makes one of the major themes. A man of realities. The emphasis was helped by the speaker's square wall of forehead, which had his eyebrows for its base, while his eyes found commodious cellarage in two dark caves, overshadowed by the wall Teach these boys and girls nothing but Facts. Children in school are taught according to Utilitarianism philosophy — they should accept and live according to facts and facts alone, they are not allowed to fantasize or think for themselves. Lastly, Cissy Jupe or the girl number twenty symbolizes the ideal human of the system in the eyes of Dickens. I have often sat with Sissy near me, and thought about it p Accordingly to that information, each of these major elements used by Dickens to reflect the social conditions of the age will be examined in this very paper. Another critique, David Craig, also agrees that Dickens conveys is opinions his views on the utilitarian system through inspection of the Gradgrind family. She is monstrous and barely human, has to be kept hidden. Accordingly to that information, we can say nothing but Dickens had so explicitly portrayed that it drew the attention of many conservatives who were actually amongst the members of these capitalists and industrialists. Tom Gradgrind deviates in to a whole different path and appears as an evil figure that plots against people just to earn money. Bounderby gives us a clear image on how capitalist industrialists lived, behaved and thought during the time of industrial revolution. He exemplifies the evils of this kind of education and its flaws on his characters in the novel.	915	ENGLISH	1
When author Emily Brontë wrote Wuthering Heights between 1845 and 1846, little could she have known the controversy that would erupt after its publication. The novel was published in 1847 by Thomas Newby, who recognised the brilliance of her flawed love story. Critics were divided by the stark relationship between orphan boy Heathcliff and beautiful but wild Catherine Earnshaw. While many recognised the novel’s imagination and power, in an era of strict Victorian ideals, they were shocked by its depiction of hypocrisy, morality, envy, resentment and the social class system. Wuthering Heights was Emily’s first and only novel, written when she was 27 years old. The fifth child of Patrick and Maria Brontë, she was one of the famous siblings who went on to write some of the most legendary novels in history. Emily and her siblings were home-educated, but despite their lack of formal education, they read a wide range of books by the famous authors and poets of the era, including Byron and Shelley. Emily, Charlotte, Anne and their brother Branwell formed a writers’ club as children and invented an imaginary world called Angria, populated by their toys and their real-life heroes, such as the Duke of Wellington and his sons. When she was 13, Emily withdrew from the group, but sadly, most of her individual works, written in her teens, weren’t preserved. When she finally had Wuthering Heights published, it looked as if she had a great career as an author ahead. Tragically, she died at the age of 30, after a severe cold turned into an inflammation of the lungs and eventually tuberculosis. Wuthering Heights remained her one and only masterpiece. Catherine and Heathcliff The two central characters had a flawed and dysfunctional relationship, which ultimately ended in tragedy. When Catherine met Heathcliff, both were young children, in the late 18th century. Catherine’s father, Mr Earnshaw, owned a remote farmhouse, Wuthering Heights, on the bleak Yorkshire moors. Travelling on business to Liverpool, he encountered a young orphan boy living on the streets. Earnshaw took pity on him, adopted him and gave him a home on the farm. The boy wouldn’t reveal his real name, so he became known as Heathcliff. Arriving home, Earnshaw introduced Heathcliff to Catherine and the two immediately became friends. However, Earnshaw’s biological son, Hindley, feared Heathcliff had replaced him in their father’s affections. Hindley was continually cruel to the boy, as a result of his intense jealousy. Catherine and Heathcliff spent hours every day playing on the moors and became inseparable. Hindley went away to university, but after his father’s death, he became the owner of Wuthering Heights. He permitted Heathcliff to continue living there, but only as a servant, making his life a misery. Heathcliff and Catherine walked to Thrushcross Grange, the home of their nearest neighbours – the wealthy Edgar Linton and his sister, Isabella – to see how the landed gentry lived. They were seen and ran away, but were caught. Catherine was injured by the Lintons’ dog and was invited into the house to recuperate. Heathcliff went home alone. Catherine’s head was turned by the rich Lintons’ lifestyle and she was influenced by their genteel manners and elegant appearance. On returning to Wuthering Heights, she had become more ladylike in her demeanour, but she had also become a snob and laughed at Heathcliff’s unkempt appearance. The situation at Wuthering Heights deteriorated after Hindley’s wife died and he descended into drunkenness. Edgar Linton continued his friendship with Catherine and she grew increasingly distant from Heathcliff. Edgar and Catherine began courting and he eventually proposed marriage. A massive misunderstanding occurred when Catherine told her companion, Nelly, that she was in turmoil. Although she wanted to become Edgar’s wife, because she liked the social standing, she said nothing would ever compare to her love for Heathcliff. Unfortunately, Heathcliff was eavesdropping, but overheard only the part where Catherine said she could never marry him, because of his low social status. He didn’t hear her declare her love for him and admit to using Edgar to help raise Heathcliff’s social standing. These themes went against the morality of the era and were among the reasons why Wuthering Heights shocked the genteel public when it was first published. Healthcliff ran away, disappearing with no trace, after overhearing the conversation. Devastated by what had happened, Catherine made herself ill and Edgar began looking after her and pandering to her whims, because he was scared she would fall sick again. After three years, they finally married. With no sign of Heathcliff, Catherine became lady of the manor but her domestic bliss was shattered by Heathcliff’s return. He had made his fortune and was now a wealthy gentleman. Edgar’s sister, Isabella, fell for him and although he secretly despised her, he encouraged her advances, only to wreak revenge on Catherine. Heathcliff and Catherine argued and Edgar banned him from the house as a result. Catherine found out she was pregnant with Edgar’s child and locked herself in her room, making herself ill again over Heathcliff. Meanwhile, Heathcliff began gambling with his arch-enemy, Hindley. Eventually, Heathcliff became the owner of Wuthering Heights, as Hindley was so badly in debt that he had to sign it over to his foster brother. Heathcliff eloped with Isabella to spite Catherine further, but it was an unhappy marriage and they returned to Wuthering Heights after only two months. Isabella’s life was intolerable when she realised Heathcliff had never loved her. When Heathcliff discovered that Catherine was dying, he visited her in secret to tell her how much he had always loved her. She gave birth to her baby daughter, Cathy, but was so weak that she died the following day. Isabella left Heathcliff after Catherine’s funeral. Heathcliff became master of Wuthering Heights, but lived a miserable existence, as he believed Catherine haunted the farm. He began to act in an odd manner and had many visions of Catherine. In poor health, he was found dead in her old room and was buried next to the love of his life. Although it caused a scandal in its day, when one critic described it as presenting a “shocking picture of the worst forms of humanity”, Wuthering Heights was later recognised as a classic. Films and TV There have been multiple film and TV adaptations, with perhaps the most famous and best-loved being the 1939 film, starring Merle Oberon as beautiful Catherine and Laurence Olivier as the brooding Heathcliff. It won the 1939 New York Film Critics’ Circle Best Film Award. Other famous adaptations included a 1967 BBC series starring Ian McShane as Heathcliff and Angela Scoular as Catherine; a 1970 film starring Timothy Dalton and Anna Calder-Marshall; an ITV series in 2009, starring Tom Hardy and Charlotte Riley; and multiple theatre adaptations. In 1977, singing superstar Kate Bush’s career was launched when she wrote the song Wuthering Heights based on the book. It was number one in the UK singles chart for four weeks. It is Bush’s most successful single to date. A simple meeting can change your life – let &Meetings find you the perfect venue by giving us a call on 0800 073 0499.	<urn:uuid:e238ff57-85f7-450d-8d5c-b37191bb53c5>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.andmeetings.com/blog/post/wuthering-heights-when-catherine-met-heathcliff	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592565.2/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118110141-20200118134141-00167.warc.gz	en	0.987905	1,640	3.46875	3	[ -0.20545552670955658, -0.00524289533495903, 0.24463647603988647, 0.44028863310813904, -0.29295703768730164, 0.23184366524219513, -0.4535521864891052, 0.21298499405384064, -0.014382956549525261, -0.4338732957839966, 0.3336312472820282, -0.22272621095180511, 0.3172850012779236, 0.08895027637...	10	When author Emily Brontë wrote Wuthering Heights between 1845 and 1846, little could she have known the controversy that would erupt after its publication. The novel was published in 1847 by Thomas Newby, who recognised the brilliance of her flawed love story. Critics were divided by the stark relationship between orphan boy Heathcliff and beautiful but wild Catherine Earnshaw. While many recognised the novel’s imagination and power, in an era of strict Victorian ideals, they were shocked by its depiction of hypocrisy, morality, envy, resentment and the social class system. Wuthering Heights was Emily’s first and only novel, written when she was 27 years old. The fifth child of Patrick and Maria Brontë, she was one of the famous siblings who went on to write some of the most legendary novels in history. Emily and her siblings were home-educated, but despite their lack of formal education, they read a wide range of books by the famous authors and poets of the era, including Byron and Shelley. Emily, Charlotte, Anne and their brother Branwell formed a writers’ club as children and invented an imaginary world called Angria, populated by their toys and their real-life heroes, such as the Duke of Wellington and his sons. When she was 13, Emily withdrew from the group, but sadly, most of her individual works, written in her teens, weren’t preserved. When she finally had Wuthering Heights published, it looked as if she had a great career as an author ahead. Tragically, she died at the age of 30, after a severe cold turned into an inflammation of the lungs and eventually tuberculosis. Wuthering Heights remained her one and only masterpiece. Catherine and Heathcliff The two central characters had a flawed and dysfunctional relationship, which ultimately ended in tragedy. When Catherine met Heathcliff, both were young children, in the late 18th century. Catherine’s father, Mr Earnshaw, owned a remote farmhouse, Wuthering Heights, on the bleak Yorkshire moors. Travelling on business to Liverpool, he encountered a young orphan boy living on the streets. Earnshaw took pity on him, adopted him and gave him a home on the farm. The boy wouldn’t reveal his real name, so he became known as Heathcliff. Arriving home, Earnshaw introduced Heathcliff to Catherine and the two immediately became friends. However, Earnshaw’s biological son, Hindley, feared Heathcliff had replaced him in their father’s affections. Hindley was continually cruel to the boy, as a result of his intense jealousy. Catherine and Heathcliff spent hours every day playing on the moors and became inseparable. Hindley went away to university, but after his father’s death, he became the owner of Wuthering Heights. He permitted Heathcliff to continue living there, but only as a servant, making his life a misery. Heathcliff and Catherine walked to Thrushcross Grange, the home of their nearest neighbours – the wealthy Edgar Linton and his sister, Isabella – to see how the landed gentry lived. They were seen and ran away, but were caught. Catherine was injured by the Lintons’ dog and was invited into the house to recuperate. Heathcliff went home alone. Catherine’s head was turned by the rich Lintons’ lifestyle and she was influenced by their genteel manners and elegant appearance. On returning to Wuthering Heights, she had become more ladylike in her demeanour, but she had also become a snob and laughed at Heathcliff’s unkempt appearance. The situation at Wuthering Heights deteriorated after Hindley’s wife died and he descended into drunkenness. Edgar Linton continued his friendship with Catherine and she grew increasingly distant from Heathcliff. Edgar and Catherine began courting and he eventually proposed marriage. A massive misunderstanding occurred when Catherine told her companion, Nelly, that she was in turmoil. Although she wanted to become Edgar’s wife, because she liked the social standing, she said nothing would ever compare to her love for Heathcliff. Unfortunately, Heathcliff was eavesdropping, but overheard only the part where Catherine said she could never marry him, because of his low social status. He didn’t hear her declare her love for him and admit to using Edgar to help raise Heathcliff’s social standing. These themes went against the morality of the era and were among the reasons why Wuthering Heights shocked the genteel public when it was first published. Healthcliff ran away, disappearing with no trace, after overhearing the conversation. Devastated by what had happened, Catherine made herself ill and Edgar began looking after her and pandering to her whims, because he was scared she would fall sick again. After three years, they finally married. With no sign of Heathcliff, Catherine became lady of the manor but her domestic bliss was shattered by Heathcliff’s return. He had made his fortune and was now a wealthy gentleman. Edgar’s sister, Isabella, fell for him and although he secretly despised her, he encouraged her advances, only to wreak revenge on Catherine. Heathcliff and Catherine argued and Edgar banned him from the house as a result. Catherine found out she was pregnant with Edgar’s child and locked herself in her room, making herself ill again over Heathcliff. Meanwhile, Heathcliff began gambling with his arch-enemy, Hindley. Eventually, Heathcliff became the owner of Wuthering Heights, as Hindley was so badly in debt that he had to sign it over to his foster brother. Heathcliff eloped with Isabella to spite Catherine further, but it was an unhappy marriage and they returned to Wuthering Heights after only two months. Isabella’s life was intolerable when she realised Heathcliff had never loved her. When Heathcliff discovered that Catherine was dying, he visited her in secret to tell her how much he had always loved her. She gave birth to her baby daughter, Cathy, but was so weak that she died the following day. Isabella left Heathcliff after Catherine’s funeral. Heathcliff became master of Wuthering Heights, but lived a miserable existence, as he believed Catherine haunted the farm. He began to act in an odd manner and had many visions of Catherine. In poor health, he was found dead in her old room and was buried next to the love of his life. Although it caused a scandal in its day, when one critic described it as presenting a “shocking picture of the worst forms of humanity”, Wuthering Heights was later recognised as a classic. Films and TV There have been multiple film and TV adaptations, with perhaps the most famous and best-loved being the 1939 film, starring Merle Oberon as beautiful Catherine and Laurence Olivier as the brooding Heathcliff. It won the 1939 New York Film Critics’ Circle Best Film Award. Other famous adaptations included a 1967 BBC series starring Ian McShane as Heathcliff and Angela Scoular as Catherine; a 1970 film starring Timothy Dalton and Anna Calder-Marshall; an ITV series in 2009, starring Tom Hardy and Charlotte Riley; and multiple theatre adaptations. In 1977, singing superstar Kate Bush’s career was launched when she wrote the song Wuthering Heights based on the book. It was number one in the UK singles chart for four weeks. It is Bush’s most successful single to date. A simple meeting can change your life – let &Meetings find you the perfect venue by giving us a call on 0800 073 0499.	1,606	ENGLISH	1
The Victorian Era was the period of Queen Victoria’s reign from 20th June, 1837, until her death on January 22nd, 1901. It was an era of great social inequality but the industrialisation brought rapid change in lives of people in all classes. The different traits of this era are portrayed in different forms of literature. Different authors explore the idea of how a good life can be lived or is lived in the Victorian Era. Different authors show their views on the different ways of how a good life can be lived in the Victorian Era. They are Charles Dickens, author of the book ‘A Christmas Carol’, Oscar Wilde, author of the story ‘A Picture of Dorian Gray’ and lastly Elizabeth Barrett Browning the author of the poem ‘The Cry of the Children’ . Charles Dickens perspective helps critique the idea of how the middle upper and lower class people live their lives in the book, ‘A Christmas Carol.’ He shows his opinion through different texts, like when a character says, “And the Union Workhouses?” demanded Scrooge. “Are they still in operation?” Scrooge is heartless and an inconsiderate soul especially around christmas time. People on the road fear him and try to avoid contact with him. He does not care about anything or anyone; he prefers to be alone. People come knocking at his door for a donation but he turns them away saying that if people die than at least the surplus population will decrease. And maybe there will be more place in the upper class for people like him, suffering in a lower class. On the other hand there was a man named Bob Cratchit, he wasn’t a rich man with a lot of things but he was still happy; sober and content with his family and life. He never asked for more or less, of course he had wishes that he wanted to come true but he made the most of what he had and was thankful for it. Unlike Scrooge who was a miser and only cared about himself. This showed how the middle class and lower class people had worse temperaments because of the way they were treated. However like Bob there were people who had made their peace with their situation and were happy, trying to make the best of it.In the poem, ‘The Cry of the Children’ the author Elizabeth Barrett Browning critiques the treatment of children and how their lives are lived. The poem shows how the children cry and how they are living a tamed and restricted life. They want to live freely and enjoy their lives like normal children. ‘”Our young feet,” they say, ” Are very weak.” “Few paces we have taken yet.” Such young children full of life are born down by the treatment of mankind and that happiness fades away. Cruelty and harshness is shown to the innocent just because of the class their born into. Truly how long can manipulation work? The author tells us that the children have been living a sheltered and sad life. All they want is to die. This poem focuses on the life of children during the Victorian era. The upper class children may have had comfortable lives but no matter what they all were subjected to the society and its rules. In ‘A Picture of Dorian Gray’ is a poem written by Oscar Wilde. He helps critique how the upper class people care about their beauty and youth. Dorian Gray is an upper class person who obsesses over his looks. “His friend Basil makes a portrait of him. After he gets the portrait he admires his beauty and wishes that the painting will age and not him.” He was interrupted by Lord Henry, who came to tell him that a girl had committed suicide. After his first outburst of pained surprise, Dorian wondered why he could not feel the tragedy as much as he wanted to; it all seemed like a wonderful play in which he had taken a great part, but by which he had not been wounded. Lord Henry consoled him with cynical words, until he ceased regretting even the marring of the beautiful portrait, and took pleasure in thinking at it would bear his sins, while his own beauty would not fade.” Dorian not only stopped caring about his feelings but his actions too. This depicts the careless nature with which the upper class citizens lived. Since their actions and words can almost always be overlooked thanks to their money they do not have to worry about all those things as average lower and middle class citizens do. The different authors from the different poems and stories show how the different classes of people live their lives and what they act like. A person’s lifestyle is defined based on how they live, how much they earn, what they do and where they’re seen. There’s a huge social difference based on the different classes of people. There are certain things it is unacceptable to do but the upper class can do it and is overlooked for it. In court cases the upper class had the upper hand in any trial against a person from a lower class. The classes were a method of segregation that only favored a certain type of class and left everyone else lower than the other.People should be treated equally. This idea of classes and what you can do based on your class has ruined the true meaning of equality. How can we have equality when the world is so unfair? The different authors themselves show how the class systems work and what effect they have on the people.	<urn:uuid:1abcd445-6f1f-44ae-a4c3-06c2412797fc>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://wallaceandjames.com/the-named-bob-cratchit-he-wasnt-a-rich/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251700988.64/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127143516-20200127173516-00214.warc.gz	en	0.986583	1,128	3.984375	4	[ -0.11689293384552002, 0.03623748570680618, 0.604874312877655, 0.12154141068458557, 0.21108151972293854, -0.027801532298326492, -0.2681179940700531, 0.06499513238668442, -0.22144293785095215, 0.09977124631404877, 0.2852911353111267, 0.10764740407466888, 0.007107661571353674, 0.0124348476529...	1	The Victorian Era was the period of Queen Victoria’s reign from 20th June, 1837, until her death on January 22nd, 1901. It was an era of great social inequality but the industrialisation brought rapid change in lives of people in all classes. The different traits of this era are portrayed in different forms of literature. Different authors explore the idea of how a good life can be lived or is lived in the Victorian Era. Different authors show their views on the different ways of how a good life can be lived in the Victorian Era. They are Charles Dickens, author of the book ‘A Christmas Carol’, Oscar Wilde, author of the story ‘A Picture of Dorian Gray’ and lastly Elizabeth Barrett Browning the author of the poem ‘The Cry of the Children’ . Charles Dickens perspective helps critique the idea of how the middle upper and lower class people live their lives in the book, ‘A Christmas Carol.’ He shows his opinion through different texts, like when a character says, “And the Union Workhouses?” demanded Scrooge. “Are they still in operation?” Scrooge is heartless and an inconsiderate soul especially around christmas time. People on the road fear him and try to avoid contact with him. He does not care about anything or anyone; he prefers to be alone. People come knocking at his door for a donation but he turns them away saying that if people die than at least the surplus population will decrease. And maybe there will be more place in the upper class for people like him, suffering in a lower class. On the other hand there was a man named Bob Cratchit, he wasn’t a rich man with a lot of things but he was still happy; sober and content with his family and life. He never asked for more or less, of course he had wishes that he wanted to come true but he made the most of what he had and was thankful for it. Unlike Scrooge who was a miser and only cared about himself. This showed how the middle class and lower class people had worse temperaments because of the way they were treated. However like Bob there were people who had made their peace with their situation and were happy, trying to make the best of it.In the poem, ‘The Cry of the Children’ the author Elizabeth Barrett Browning critiques the treatment of children and how their lives are lived. The poem shows how the children cry and how they are living a tamed and restricted life. They want to live freely and enjoy their lives like normal children. ‘”Our young feet,” they say, ” Are very weak.” “Few paces we have taken yet.” Such young children full of life are born down by the treatment of mankind and that happiness fades away. Cruelty and harshness is shown to the innocent just because of the class their born into. Truly how long can manipulation work? The author tells us that the children have been living a sheltered and sad life. All they want is to die. This poem focuses on the life of children during the Victorian era. The upper class children may have had comfortable lives but no matter what they all were subjected to the society and its rules. In ‘A Picture of Dorian Gray’ is a poem written by Oscar Wilde. He helps critique how the upper class people care about their beauty and youth. Dorian Gray is an upper class person who obsesses over his looks. “His friend Basil makes a portrait of him. After he gets the portrait he admires his beauty and wishes that the painting will age and not him.” He was interrupted by Lord Henry, who came to tell him that a girl had committed suicide. After his first outburst of pained surprise, Dorian wondered why he could not feel the tragedy as much as he wanted to; it all seemed like a wonderful play in which he had taken a great part, but by which he had not been wounded. Lord Henry consoled him with cynical words, until he ceased regretting even the marring of the beautiful portrait, and took pleasure in thinking at it would bear his sins, while his own beauty would not fade.” Dorian not only stopped caring about his feelings but his actions too. This depicts the careless nature with which the upper class citizens lived. Since their actions and words can almost always be overlooked thanks to their money they do not have to worry about all those things as average lower and middle class citizens do. The different authors from the different poems and stories show how the different classes of people live their lives and what they act like. A person’s lifestyle is defined based on how they live, how much they earn, what they do and where they’re seen. There’s a huge social difference based on the different classes of people. There are certain things it is unacceptable to do but the upper class can do it and is overlooked for it. In court cases the upper class had the upper hand in any trial against a person from a lower class. The classes were a method of segregation that only favored a certain type of class and left everyone else lower than the other.People should be treated equally. This idea of classes and what you can do based on your class has ruined the true meaning of equality. How can we have equality when the world is so unfair? The different authors themselves show how the class systems work and what effect they have on the people.	1,096	ENGLISH	1
We are now to study the first five books of the Bible, known as the Pentateuch. This word \|Pentateuch\| is not in the Bible; it is a Greek word signifying literally the Five-fold Work; from penta , five, and teuchos , which in the later Greek means roll or volume. The Jews in the time of our Lord always considered these five books as one connected work; they called the whole sometimes \|Torah,\| or \|The Law,\| sometimes \|The Law of Moses,\| sometimes \|The Five-fifths of the Law.\| It was originally one book, and it is not easy to determine at what time its division into five parts took place. Later criticism is also inclined to add to the Pentateuch the Book of Joshua, and to say that the first six books of the Bible were put into their present form by the same hand. \|The Hexateuch,\| or Six-fold Work, has taken the place in these later discussions of the Pentateuch, or Five-fold Work. Doubtless there is good reason for the new classification, but it will be more convenient to begin with the traditional division and speak first of the five books reckoned by the later Jews as the \|Torah,\| or the Five-fifths of the Law. Who wrote these books? Our modern Hebrew Bibles give them the general title, \|Quinque Libri Mosis.\| This means \|The Five Books of Moses.\| But Moses could never have given them this title, for these are Latin words, and it is not possible that Moses should have used the Latin language because there was no Latin language in the world until many hundreds of years after the day of Moses. The Latin title was given to them, of course, by the editors who compiled them. The preface and the explanatory notes in these Hebrew Bibles are also written in Latin. But over this Latin title in the Hebrew Bible is the Hebrew word \|Torah.\| This was the name by which these books were chiefly known among the Jews; it signifies simply \|The Law.\| This title gives us no information, then, concerning the authorship of these books. When we look at our English Bibles we find no separation, as in the Hebrew Bible, of these five books from the rest of the Old Testament writings, but we find over each one of them a title by which it is ascribed to Moses as its author, -- \|The First Book of Moses, commonly called Genesis;\| \|The Second Book of Moses, commonly called Exodus;\| and so on. But when I look into my Hebrew Bible again no such title is there. Nothing is said about Moses in the Hebrew title to Genesis. It is certain that if Moses wrote these books he did not call them \|Genesis,\| \|Exodus,\| \|Leviticus,\| \|Numbers,\| \|Deuteronomy;\| for these words, again, come from languages that he never heard. Four of them are Greek words, and one of them, Numbers, is a Latin word. These names were given to the several books at a very late day. What are their names in the Hebrew Bible? Each of them is called by the first word, or some of the first words in the book. The Jews were apt to name their books, as we name our hymns, by the initial word or words; thus they called the first of these five books, \|Bereshith,\| \|In the Beginning;\| the second one \|Veelleh Shemoth,\| \|Now these are the names;\| the third one \|Vayikra,\| \|And he called,\| and so on. The titles in our English Bible are much more significant and appropriate than these original Hebrew titles; thus Genesis signifies origin, and Genesis is the Book of Origins; Exodus means departure, and the book describes the departure of Israel from Egypt; Leviticus points out the fact that the book is mainly occupied with the Levitical legislation; Numbers gives a history of the numbering of the people, and Deuteronomy, which means the second law, contains what seems to be a recapitulation and reenactment of the legislation of the preceding books. But these English titles, which are partly translated and partly transferred to English from older Latin and Greek titles, tell us nothing trustworthy about the authorship of the books. How, then, you desire to know, did these books come to be known as the books of Moses? \|They were quoted,\| answer some, \|and thus accredited by our Lord and his apostles. They are frequently mentioned in the New Testament as inspired and authoritative books; they are referred to as the writings of Moses; we have the testimony of Jesus Christ and of his apostles to their genuineness and authenticity.\| Let us see how much truth this answer contains. It confronts us with a very important matter which may as well be settled before we go on. It is true, to begin with, that Jesus and the Evangelists do quote from these books, and that they ascribe to Moses some of the passages which they quote. The soundest criticism cannot impugn the honesty or the intelligence of such quotations. There is good reason, as we shall see, for believing that a large part of this literature was written in the time of Moses, and under the eye of Moses, if not by his hand. In a certain important sense, which will be clearer to us as we go on, this literature is all Mosaic. The reference to it by the Lord and his apostles is therefore legitimate. But this reference does by no means warrant the sweeping conclusion that the five books of the law were all and entire from the pen of the Lawgiver. Our Lord nowhere says that the first five books of the Old Testament were all written by Moses. Much less does he teach that the contents of these books are all equally inspired and authoritative. Indeed he quotes from them several times for the express purpose of repudiating their doctrines and repealing their legislation. In the very fore-front of his teaching stands a stern array of judgments in which undoubted commandments of the Mosaic law are expressly condemned and set aside, some of them because they are inadequate and superficial, some of them because they are morally defective. \|Ye have heard that it was said to them of old time\| thus and thus; \|but I say unto you\| -- and then follow words that directly contradict the old legislation. After quoting two of the commandments of the Decalogue and giving them an interpretation that wholly transforms them, he proceeds to cite several old laws from these Mosaic books, in order to set his own word firmly against them. One of these also is a law of the Decalogue itself. There can be little doubt that the third commandment is quoted and criticised by our Lord, in this discourse. That commandment forbids, not chiefly profanity, but perjury; by implication it permits judicial oaths. And Jesus expressly forbids judicial oaths. \|Swear not at all.\| I am aware that this is not the usual interpretation of these words, but I believe that it is the only meaning that the words will bear. Not to insist upon this, however, several other examples are given in the discourse concerning which there can be no question. Jesus quotes the law of divorce from Deuteronomy xxiv.1,2. \|When a man taketh a wife and marrieth her, then it shall be, if she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some unseemly thing in her, that he shall write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. And when she is departed out of his house she may go and be another man's wife.\| These are the words of a law which Moses is represented as uttering by the authority of Jehovah. This law, as thus expressed, Jesus Christ unqualifiedly repeals. \|I say unto you that every one that putteth away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, maketh her an adulteress, and whosoever shall marry her when she is put away committeth adultery.\| The law of revenge is treated in the same way. \|Ye have heard that it was said, An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.\| Who said this? Was it some rabbin of the olden time? It was Moses; nay, the old record says that this is the word of the Lord by Moses: \|The Lord spake unto Moses, saying [among other things], If a man cause a blemish in his neighbor, as he hath done so shall it be done to him; breach for breach, eye for eye, tooth for tooth; as he hath caused a blemish in a man, so shall it be rendered unto him.\| (Lev. xxiv.19,20.) So in Exodus xxi.24, \|Thou shalt give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.\| It is sometimes said that these retaliations were simply permitted under the Mosaic law, but this is a great error; they were enjoined: \|Thine eye shall not pity,\| it is said in another place (Deut. xix.21); \|life shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.\| This law of retaliation is an integral part of the moral legislation of the Pentateuch. It is no part of the ceremonial law; it is an ethical rule. It is clearly ascribed to Moses; it is distinctly said to have been enacted by command of God. But Christ in the most unhesitating manner condemns and countermands it. \|Ye have heard,\| he continues, \|that it was said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor and hate thine enemy; but I say unto you, Love your enemies, and pray for them that persecute you.\| \|But this,\| it is objected, \|is not a quotation from the Old Testament. These words do not occur in that old legislation.\| At any rate Jesus introduces them with the very same formula which he has all along been applying to the words which he has quoted from the Mosaic law. It is evident that he means to give the impression that they are part of that law. He is not careful in any of these cases to quote the exact words of the law, but he does give the meaning of it. He gives the exact meaning of it here. The Mosaic law commanded Jews to love their neighbors, members of their own tribe, but to hate the people of surrounding tribes: \|An Ammonite or a Moabite shall not enter into the assembly of the Lord; even to the tenth generation shall none belonging to them enter into the assembly of the Lord for ever.... Thou shalt not seek their peace nor their prosperity all thy days for ever.\| (Deut. xxiii.3-6.) \|When the Lord thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and shalt cast out many nations before thee, ... then thou shalt utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor show mercy unto them.\| (Deut. vii.1,2.) This is the spirit of much of this ancient legislation; and these laws were, if the record is true, literally executed, in after times, by Joshua and Samuel, upon the people of Canaan. And these bloody commands, albeit they have a \|Thus said the Lord\| behind every one of them, Jesus, in the great discourse which is the charter of his kingdom, distinctly repeals. Such is the method by which our Lord sometimes deals with the Old Testament. It is by no means true that he assumes this attitude toward all parts of it. Sometimes he quotes Lawgiver and Prophets in confirmation of his own words; often he refers to these ancient Scriptures as preparing the way for his kingdom and foreshadowing his person and his work. Nay, he even says of that law which we are now studying that not one jot or tittle shall in any wise pass from it till all things be accomplished. What he means by that we shall be able by and by to discover. But these passages which I have cited make it clear that Jesus Christ cannot be appealed to in support of the traditional view of the nature of these old writings. The common argument by which Christ is made a witness to the authenticity and infallible authority of the Old Testament runs as follows: Christ quotes Moses as the author of this legislation; therefore Moses must have written the whole Pentateuch. Moses was an inspired prophet; therefore all the teaching of the Pentateuch must be infallible. The facts are, that Jesus nowhere testifies that Moses wrote the whole of the Pentateuch; and that he nowhere guarantees the infallibility either of Moses or of the book. On the contrary, he sets aside as inadequate or morally defective certain laws which in this book are ascribed to Moses. It is needful, thus, on the threshold of our argument, to have a clear understanding respecting the nature of the testimony borne by our Lord and his apostles to this ancient literature. It is upon this that the advocates of the traditional view of the Old Testament wholly rely. \|Christ was authority,\| they say; \|the New Testament writers were inspired; you all admit this; now Christ and the New Testament writers constantly quote the Scriptures of the Old Testament as inspired and as authoritative. Therefore they must be the infallible word of God.\| To this it is sufficient to reply, Christ and the apostles do quote the Old Testament Scriptures; they find a great treasure of inspired and inspiring truth in them, and so can we; they recognize the fact that they are organically related to that kingdom which Christ came to found, and that they record the earlier stages of that great course of revelation which culminates in Christ; but they nowhere pronounce any of these writings free from error; there is not a hint or suggestion anywhere in the New Testament that any of the writings of the Old Testament are infallible; and Christ himself, as we have seen, clearly warns his disciples that they do not even furnish a safe rule of moral conduct. After this, the attempt to prove the inerrancy of the Old Testament by summoning as witnesses the writers of the New Testament may as well be abandoned. But did not Jesus say, \|Search the Scriptures, for in them ye think ye have eternal life, and they are they that testify of me?\| Well, if he had said that, it would not prove that the Scriptures they searched were errorless. The injunction would have all the force to-day that it ever had. One may very profitably study documents which are far from infallible. This was not, however, what our Lord said. If you will look into your Revised Version you will see that his words, addressed to the Jews, are not a command but an assertion: \|Ye search the Scriptures, for in them ye think ye have eternal life\| (John v.39); if you searched them carefully you would find some testimony there concerning me. It is not an injunction to search the Scriptures; it is simply the statement of the fact that the Jews to whom he was speaking did search the Scriptures, and searched them as many people in our own time do, to very little purpose. But does not Paul say, in his letter to Timothy, that \|All Scripture is given by inspiration of God?\| No, Paul does not say that. Look again at your Revised Version (2 Tim. iii.16): \|Every Scripture inspired of God is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction, which is in righteousness.\| Every writing inspired of God is profitable reading. That is the whole statement. But Paul says in the verses preceding, that Timothy had known from a child the Sacred Writings which were able to make him wise unto salvation through faith in Jesus Christ. Was there not, then, in his hands, a volume or collection of books, known as the Sacred Writings, with a definite table of contents; and did not Paul refer to this collection, and imply that all these writings were inspired of God and profitable for the uses specified? No, this is not the precise state of the case. These Sacred Writings had not at this time been gathered into a volume by themselves, with a fixed table of contents. What is called the Canon of the Old Testament had not yet been finally determined.[Footnote: See chapter xi] There were, indeed, as we saw in the last chapter, two collections of sacred writings, one in Hebrew and the other in Greek. The Hebrew collection was not at this time definitely closed; there was still a dispute among the Palestinian Jews as to whether two or three of the books which it now contains should go into it; that dispute was not concluded until half a century after the death of our Lord. The other collection, as I have said, was in the Greek language, and it included, not only our Old Testament books, but the books now known as the Old Testament Apocrypha. This was the collection, remember, most used by our Lord and his apostles. Which of these collections was in the hands of Timothy we do not certainly know. But the father of Timothy was a Greek, though his mother was a Jewess; and it is altogether probable that he had studied from his childhood the Greek version of the Old Testament writings. Shall we understand Paul, then, as certifying the authenticity and infallibility of this whole collection? Does he mean to say that the \|Story of Susanna\| and \|Bel and the Dragon,\| and all the rest of these fables and tales, are profitable for teaching and instruction in righteousness? This text, so interpreted, evidently proves too much. Doubtless Paul did mean to commend to Timothy the Old Testament Scriptures as containing precious and saving truth. But we must not force his language into any wholesale indorsement of every letter and word, or even of every chapter and book of these old writings. So far, therefore, as our Lord himself and his apostles are concerned, we have no decisive judgment either as to the authorship of these old writings or as to their absolute freedom from error. They handled these Scriptures, quoted from them, found inspired teaching in them; but the Scriptures which they chiefly handled, from which they generally quoted, in which they found their inspired teaching, contained, as we know, worthless matter. It is not to be assumed that they did not know this matter to be worthless; and if they knew this, it is not to be asserted that they intended to place upon the whole of it the stamp of their approval. We have wandered somewhat from the path of our discussion, but it was necessary in order to determine the significance of those references to the Old Testament with which the New Testament abounds. The question before us is, Why do we believe that Moses wrote the five books which bear his name in our Bibles? We have seen that the New Testament writers give us no decisive testimony on this point. On what testimony is the belief founded? Doubtless it rests wholly on the traditions of the Jews. Such was the tradition preserved among them in the time of our Lord. They believed that Moses wrote every word of these books; that God dictated the syllables to him and that he recorded them. But the traditions of the Jews are not, in other matters, highly regarded by Christians. Our Lord himself speaks more than once in stern censure of these traditions by which, as he charges, their moral sense was blunted and the law of God was made of none effect. Many of these old tales of theirs were extremely childish. One tradition ascribes, as we have seen, to Moses the authorship of the whole Pentateuch; another declares that when, during an invasion of the Chaldeans, all the books of the Scripture were destroyed by fire, Ezra wrote them all out from memory, in an incredibly short space of time; another tradition relates how the same Ezra one day heard a divine voice bidding him retire into the field with five swift amanuenses, -- \|how he then received a full cup, full as it were of water, but the color of it was like fire, ... and when he had drank of it, his heart uttered understanding and wisdom grew in his breast, for his spirit strengthened his memory, ... and his mouth was opened and shut no more and for forty days and nights he dictated without stopping till two hundred and four books were written down.\| [Footnote: 2 Esdras xiv. See, also, Stanley's Jewish Church, iii, 151.] These fables had wide currency among the Jews; they were believed by Irenaeus, Tertullian, Augustine, and others of the great fathers of the Christian Church; but they are not credited in these days. It is evident that Jewish tradition is not always to be trusted. We shall need some better reason than this for believing that Moses was the author of the Pentateuch. I do not know where else we can go for information except to the books themselves. A careful examination of them may throw some light upon the question of their origin. A great multitude of scholars have been before us in their examination; what is their verdict? First we have the verdict of the traditionalists, -- those, I mean, who accept the Jewish tradition, and believe with the rabbins that Moses wrote the whole of the first five books of the Bible. Some who hold this theory are ready to admit that there may be a few verses here and there interpolated into the record by later scribes; but they maintain that the books in their substance and entirety came in their present form from the hands of Moses. This is the theory which has been generally received by the Christian church. It is held to-day by very few eminent Christian scholars. Over against this traditional theory is the theory of the radical and destructive critics that Moses wrote nothing at all; that perhaps the ten commandments were given by him, but hardly anything more; that these books were not even written in the time of Moses, but hundreds of years after his death. Moses is supposed to have lived about 1400 B.C.; these writings, say the destructive critics, were first produced in part about 730 B.C., but were mainly written after the Exile (about 444 B.C.), almost a thousand years after the death of Moses. \|Strict and impartial investigation has shown,\| says Dr. Knappert, \|that ... nothing in the whole Law really comes from Moses himself except the ten commandments. And even these were not delivered by him in the same form as we find them now.\| [Footnote: The Religion of Israel, p.9.] This is, to my mind, an astounding statement. It illustrates the lengths to which destructive criticism can go. And I dare say that we shall find in our study of these books reason for believing that such views as these are as far astray on the one side as those of the traditionalists are on the other. Let us test these two theories by interrogating the books themselves. First, then, we find upon the face of the record several reasons for believing that the books cannot have come, in their present form, from the hand of Moses. Moses died in the wilderness, before the Israelites reached the Promised Land, before the Canaanites were driven out, and the land was divided among the tribes. It is not likely that he wrote the account of his own death and burial which we find in the last chapter of Deuteronomy. There are those, it is true, who assert that Moses was inspired to write this account of his own funeral; but this is going a little farther than the rabbins; they declare that this chapter was added by Joshua. It is conceivable that Moses might have left on record a prediction that he would die and be buried in this way; but the Spirit of the Lord could never inspire a man to put in the past tense a plain narrative of an event which is yet in the future. The statement when written would be false, and God is not the author of falsehood. It is not likely either that Moses wrote the words in Exodus xi.3: \|Moreover the man Moses was very great in the land of Egypt, in the sight of all the people;\| nor those in Numbers xii.3: \|Now the man Moses was very meek above all the men which were on the face of the earth.\| It has been said, indeed, that Moses was directed by inspiration to say such things about himself; but I do not believe that egotism is a supernatural product; men take that in the natural way. Other passages show upon the face of them that they must have been added to these books after the time of Moses. It is stated in Exodus xvi.35, that the Israelites continued to eat manna until they came to the borders of the land of Canaan. But Moses was not living when they entered that land. In Genesis xii.6, in connection with the story of Abraham's entrance into Palestine, the historical explanation is thrown in: \|And the Canaanite was then in the land.\| It would seem that this must have been written at a day when the Canaanite was no longer in the land, -- after the occupation of the land and the expulsion of the Canaanites. In Numbers xv.32, an incident is related which is prefaced by the words, \|While the children of Israel were in the wilderness.\| Does not this look back to a past time? Can we imagine that this was written by Moses? Again, in Deuteronomy iii.11, we have a description of the bedstead of Og, one of the giants captured and killed by the Israelites, just before the death of Moses; and this bedstead is referred to as if it were an antique curiosity; the village is mentioned in which it is kept. In Genesis xxxvi. we find a genealogy of the kings of Moab, running through several generations, prefaced with the words: \|These are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom before there reigned any king over the children of Israel.\| This is looking backward from a day when kings were reigning over the children of Israel. How could it have been written five hundred years before there ever was a king in Israel? In Genesis xiv.14, we read of the city of Dan; but in Judges xviii.29, we are told that this city did not receive its name until hundreds of years later, long after the time of Moses. Similarly the account of the naming of the villages of Jair, which we find in Deuteronomy iii.14, is quite inconsistent with another account in Judges x.3, 4. One of them must be erroneous, and it is probable that the passage in Deuteronomy is an anachronism. Most of these passages could be explained by the admission that the scribes in later years added sentences here and there by way of interpretation. But that admission would of course discredit the infallibility of the books. Other difficulties, however, of a much more serious kind, present themselves. In the first verse of the twentieth chapter of Numbers we read that the people came to Kadesh in the first month. The first month of what year? We look back, and the first note of time previous to this is the second month of the second year of the wandering in the wilderness. Their arrival at Kadesh described in the twentieth chapter would seem, then, to have been in the first month of the third year. In the twenty-second verse of this chapter the camp moves on to Mount Hor, and Aaron dies there. There is no note of any interval of time whatever; yet we are told in the thirty-third chapter of this book that Aaron died in the fortieth year of the wandering. Here is a skip of thirty-eight years in the history, without an indication of anything having happened meantime. On the supposition that this is a continuous history written by the man who was a chief actor in it, such a gap is inexplicable. There is a reasonable way of accounting for it, as we shall see, but it cannot be accounted for on the theory that the book in its present form came from the hand of Moses. Some of the laws also bear internal evidence of having originated at a later day than that of Moses. The law forbidding the removal of landmarks presupposes a long occupation of the land; and the law regulating military enlistments is more naturally explained on the theory that it was framed in the settled period of the Hebrew history, and not during the wanderings. This may, indeed, have been anticipatory legislation, but the explanation is not probable. Various repetitions of laws occur which are inexplicable on the supposition that these laws were all written by the hand of one person. Thus in Exodus xxxiv.17-26, there is a collection of legal enactments, all of which can be found, in the same order and almost the same words, in the twenty-third chapter of the same book. Thus, to quote the summary of Bleek, we find in both places, (a) that all the males shall appear before Jehovah three times in every year; (b) that no leavened bread shall be used at the killing of the Paschal Lamb, and that the fat shall be preserved until the next morning; (c) that the first of the fruits of the field shall be brought into the house of the Lord; (d) that the young kid shall not be seethed in its mother's milk.[Footnote: Introduction to the Old Testament, i.240.] We cannot imagine that one man, with a fairly good memory, much less an infallibly inspired man, should have written these laws twice over, in the same words, within so small a space, in the same legal document. In Leviticus we have a similar instance. If any one will take that book and carefully compare the eighteenth with the twentieth chapter, he will see some reason for doubting that both chapters could have been inserted by one hand in this collection of statutes. \|It is not probable,\| as Bleek has said, \|that Moses would have written the two chapters one after the other, and would so shortly after have repeated the same precepts which he had before given, only not so well arranged the second time.\| [Footnote: Introduction to the Old Testament, i.240.] There are also quite a number of inconsistencies and contradictions in the legislation, all of which may be easily explained, but not on the theory that the laws all came from the pen of one infallibly inspired lawgiver. We find also several historical repetitions and historical discrepancies, all of which make against the theory that Moses is the author of all this Pentateuchal literature. A single author, if he were a man of fair intelligence, good common sense, and reasonably firm memory, could not have written it. And unless tautology, anachronisms, and contradictions are a proof of inspiration, much less could it have been written by a single inspired writer. The traditional theory cannot therefore he true. We have appealed to the books themselves, and they bear swift witness against it. Now let us look at the other theory of the destructive critics which not only denies that Moses wrote any portion of the Pentateuch, but alleges that it was written in Palestine, none of it less than six or seven hundred years after he was dead and buried. In the first place the book expressly declares that Moses wrote certain portions of it. He is mentioned several times as having written certain historical records and certain words of the law. In Exodus xxiv., we are told that Moses not only rehearsed to the people the Covenant which the Lord had made with them, but that he wrote all the words of the Covenant in a book, and that he took the book of the Covenant and read it in the audience of all the people. After the idolatry of the people Moses was again commanded to write these words, \|and\| it is added, \|he wrote upon the tables the words of the Covenant, the ten commandments.\| In Exodus xvii.14, we are told that Moses wrote the narrative of the defeat of Amalek in a book; and again in Numbers xxxiii.21, we read that Moses recorded the various marches and halts of the Israelites in the wilderness. We have also in the Book of Deuteronomy (xxxi.24-26) a statement that Moses wrote \|the words of the law\| in a book, and put it in the ark of the covenant for preservation. Precisely how much of the law this statement is meant to cover is not clear. Some have interpreted it to cover the whole Pentateuch, but that interpretation, as we have seen, is inadmissible. We may concede that it does refer to a body or code of laws, -- probably that body or code on which the legislation of Deuteronomy is based. These are all the statements made in the writings themselves concerning their origin. They prove, if they are credible, that portions of these books were written by Moses; they do not prove that the whole of them came from his hand. I see no reason whatever to doubt that this is the essential fact. The theory of the destructive critics that this literature and this legislation was all produced in Palestine, about the eighth century before Christ, and palmed off upon the Jews as a pious fraud, does not bear investigation. In large portions of these laws we are constantly meeting with legal provisions and historical allusions that take us directly back to the time of the wandering in the wilderness, and cannot be explained on any other theory. \|When,\| says Bleek, \|we meet with laws which refer in their whole tenor to a state of things utterly unknown in the period subsequent to Moses, and to circumstances existing in the Mosaic age, and in that only, it is in the highest degree likely that these laws not only in their essential purport proceeded from Moses, but also that they were written down by Moses or at least in the Mosaic age. Of these laws which appear to carry with them such clear and exact traces of the Mosaic age, there are many occurring, especially in Leviticus, and also in Numbers and Exodus, which laws relate to situations and surrounding circumstances only existing whilst the people, as was the case in Moses' time, wandered in the wilderness and were dwellers in the close confinement of camps and tents.\| [Footnote: Vol. i. p.212.] It is not necessary to draw out this evidence at length; I will only refer to a few out of scores of instances. The first seven chapters of Leviticus, containing laws regulating the burnt offerings and meat offerings, constantly assume that the people are in the camp and in the wilderness. The refuse of the beasts offered in sacrifice was to be carried out of the camp to the public ash heap, and burned. The law of the Great Day of Atonement (Lev. xvi.) is also full of allusions to the fact that the people were in camp; the scapegoat was to be driven into the wilderness, and the man who drove it out was to wash his clothes and bathe, and afterward come into the camp; the bullock and the goat, slain for the sacrifice, were to be carried forth without the camp; he who bears them forth must also wash himself before he returns to the camp. Large parts of the legislation concerning leprosy are full of the same incidental references to the fact that the people were dwelling in camp. There are also laws requiring that all the animals killed for food should be slaughtered before the door of the Tabernacle. There was a reason for this law; it was intended to guard against a debasing superstition; but how would it have been possible to obey it when the people were scattered all over the land of Palestine? It was adapted only to the time when they were dwelling in a camp in the wilderness. Besides, it must not be overlooked that in all this legislation \|the priests are not at all referred to in general, but by name, as Aaron and his sons, or the sons of Aaron the priests.\| All the legislation respecting the construction of the tabernacle, the disposition of it in the camp, the transportation of it from place to place in the wilderness, the order of the march, the summoning of the people when camp was to be broken, with all its minute and circumstantial directions, would be destitute of meaning if it had been written while the people were living in Palestine, scattered all over the land, dwelling in their own houses, and engaged in agricultural pursuits. The simple, unforced, natural interpretation of these laws takes us back, I say, to the time of Moses, to the years of the wandering in the wilderness. The incidental references to the conditions of the wilderness life are far more convincing than any explicit statement would have been. Can any one conceive that a writer of laws, living in Palestine hundreds of years afterwards, could have fabricated these allusions to the camp life and the tent life of the people? Such a novelist did not exist among them; and I question whether Professor Kuenen and Professor Wellhausen, with all their wealth of imagination, could have done any such thing. Many of these laws were certainly written in the time of Moses; and I do not believe that any man was living in the time of Moses who was more competent to write such laws than was Moses himself. The conclusion of Bleek seems therefore to me altogether reasonable: \|Although the Pentateuch in its present state and extent may not have been composed by Moses, and also many of the single laws therein may be the product of a later age, still the legislation contained in it is genuinely Mosaic in its entire spirit and character.\| [Footnote: Vol. i. p.221.] We are brought, therefore, in our study, to these inevitable conclusions: 1. The Pentateuch could never have been written by any one man, inspired or otherwise. 2. It is a composite work, in which many hands have been engaged. The production of it extends over many centuries. 3. It contains writings which are as old as the time of Moses, and some that are much older. It is impossible to tell how much of it came from the hand of Moses, but there are considerable portions of it which, although they may have been somewhat modified by later editors, are substantially as he left them. I have said that the Pentateuch is a composite work. In the next chapter we shall find some curious facts concerning its component parts, and the way in which they have been put together. And although it did not come into being in the way in which we have been taught by the traditions of the rabbins, yet we shall see that it contains some wonderful evidence of the superintending care of God, -- of that continuous and growing manifestation of his truth and his love to the people of Israel, which is what we mean by revelation. Revelation, we shall be able to understand, is not the dictation by God of words to men that they may be written down in books; it is rather the disclosure of the truth and love of God to men in the processes of history, in the development of the moral order of the world. It is the Light that lighteth every man, shining in the paths that lead to righteousness and life. There is a moral leadership of God in history; revelation is the record of that leadership. It is by no means confined to words; its most impressive disclosures are in the field of action. \|Thus did the Lord,\| as Dr. Bruce has said, is a more perfect formula of revelation than \|Thus said the Lord.\| It is in that great historical movement of which the Bible is the record that we find the revelation of God to men.	<urn:uuid:35a4fa9d-cc0f-474d-a1c8-26eb1cd82afe>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.sermonindex.net/modules/bible_books/?view=book_chapter&chapter=70086	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250625097.75/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124191133-20200124220133-00281.warc.gz	en	0.981642	8,299	3.484375	3	[ -0.43262040615081787, 0.07584050297737122, 0.15341238677501678, -0.18118754029273987, -0.31885722279548645, -0.022240206599235535, -0.01749577187001705, 0.08216060698032379, 0.3379881978034973, -0.025549352169036865, -0.11447801440954208, -0.17151042819023132, -0.4139244556427002, 0.176002...	1	We are now to study the first five books of the Bible, known as the Pentateuch. This word \|Pentateuch\| is not in the Bible; it is a Greek word signifying literally the Five-fold Work; from penta , five, and teuchos , which in the later Greek means roll or volume. The Jews in the time of our Lord always considered these five books as one connected work; they called the whole sometimes \|Torah,\| or \|The Law,\| sometimes \|The Law of Moses,\| sometimes \|The Five-fifths of the Law.\| It was originally one book, and it is not easy to determine at what time its division into five parts took place. Later criticism is also inclined to add to the Pentateuch the Book of Joshua, and to say that the first six books of the Bible were put into their present form by the same hand. \|The Hexateuch,\| or Six-fold Work, has taken the place in these later discussions of the Pentateuch, or Five-fold Work. Doubtless there is good reason for the new classification, but it will be more convenient to begin with the traditional division and speak first of the five books reckoned by the later Jews as the \|Torah,\| or the Five-fifths of the Law. Who wrote these books? Our modern Hebrew Bibles give them the general title, \|Quinque Libri Mosis.\| This means \|The Five Books of Moses.\| But Moses could never have given them this title, for these are Latin words, and it is not possible that Moses should have used the Latin language because there was no Latin language in the world until many hundreds of years after the day of Moses. The Latin title was given to them, of course, by the editors who compiled them. The preface and the explanatory notes in these Hebrew Bibles are also written in Latin. But over this Latin title in the Hebrew Bible is the Hebrew word \|Torah.\| This was the name by which these books were chiefly known among the Jews; it signifies simply \|The Law.\| This title gives us no information, then, concerning the authorship of these books. When we look at our English Bibles we find no separation, as in the Hebrew Bible, of these five books from the rest of the Old Testament writings, but we find over each one of them a title by which it is ascribed to Moses as its author, -- \|The First Book of Moses, commonly called Genesis;\| \|The Second Book of Moses, commonly called Exodus;\| and so on. But when I look into my Hebrew Bible again no such title is there. Nothing is said about Moses in the Hebrew title to Genesis. It is certain that if Moses wrote these books he did not call them \|Genesis,\| \|Exodus,\| \|Leviticus,\| \|Numbers,\| \|Deuteronomy;\| for these words, again, come from languages that he never heard. Four of them are Greek words, and one of them, Numbers, is a Latin word. These names were given to the several books at a very late day. What are their names in the Hebrew Bible? Each of them is called by the first word, or some of the first words in the book. The Jews were apt to name their books, as we name our hymns, by the initial word or words; thus they called the first of these five books, \|Bereshith,\| \|In the Beginning;\| the second one \|Veelleh Shemoth,\| \|Now these are the names;\| the third one \|Vayikra,\| \|And he called,\| and so on. The titles in our English Bible are much more significant and appropriate than these original Hebrew titles; thus Genesis signifies origin, and Genesis is the Book of Origins; Exodus means departure, and the book describes the departure of Israel from Egypt; Leviticus points out the fact that the book is mainly occupied with the Levitical legislation; Numbers gives a history of the numbering of the people, and Deuteronomy, which means the second law, contains what seems to be a recapitulation and reenactment of the legislation of the preceding books. But these English titles, which are partly translated and partly transferred to English from older Latin and Greek titles, tell us nothing trustworthy about the authorship of the books. How, then, you desire to know, did these books come to be known as the books of Moses? \|They were quoted,\| answer some, \|and thus accredited by our Lord and his apostles. They are frequently mentioned in the New Testament as inspired and authoritative books; they are referred to as the writings of Moses; we have the testimony of Jesus Christ and of his apostles to their genuineness and authenticity.\| Let us see how much truth this answer contains. It confronts us with a very important matter which may as well be settled before we go on. It is true, to begin with, that Jesus and the Evangelists do quote from these books, and that they ascribe to Moses some of the passages which they quote. The soundest criticism cannot impugn the honesty or the intelligence of such quotations. There is good reason, as we shall see, for believing that a large part of this literature was written in the time of Moses, and under the eye of Moses, if not by his hand. In a certain important sense, which will be clearer to us as we go on, this literature is all Mosaic. The reference to it by the Lord and his apostles is therefore legitimate. But this reference does by no means warrant the sweeping conclusion that the five books of the law were all and entire from the pen of the Lawgiver. Our Lord nowhere says that the first five books of the Old Testament were all written by Moses. Much less does he teach that the contents of these books are all equally inspired and authoritative. Indeed he quotes from them several times for the express purpose of repudiating their doctrines and repealing their legislation. In the very fore-front of his teaching stands a stern array of judgments in which undoubted commandments of the Mosaic law are expressly condemned and set aside, some of them because they are inadequate and superficial, some of them because they are morally defective. \|Ye have heard that it was said to them of old time\| thus and thus; \|but I say unto you\| -- and then follow words that directly contradict the old legislation. After quoting two of the commandments of the Decalogue and giving them an interpretation that wholly transforms them, he proceeds to cite several old laws from these Mosaic books, in order to set his own word firmly against them. One of these also is a law of the Decalogue itself. There can be little doubt that the third commandment is quoted and criticised by our Lord, in this discourse. That commandment forbids, not chiefly profanity, but perjury; by implication it permits judicial oaths. And Jesus expressly forbids judicial oaths. \|Swear not at all.\| I am aware that this is not the usual interpretation of these words, but I believe that it is the only meaning that the words will bear. Not to insist upon this, however, several other examples are given in the discourse concerning which there can be no question. Jesus quotes the law of divorce from Deuteronomy xxiv.1,2. \|When a man taketh a wife and marrieth her, then it shall be, if she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some unseemly thing in her, that he shall write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. And when she is departed out of his house she may go and be another man's wife.\| These are the words of a law which Moses is represented as uttering by the authority of Jehovah. This law, as thus expressed, Jesus Christ unqualifiedly repeals. \|I say unto you that every one that putteth away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, maketh her an adulteress, and whosoever shall marry her when she is put away committeth adultery.\| The law of revenge is treated in the same way. \|Ye have heard that it was said, An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.\| Who said this? Was it some rabbin of the olden time? It was Moses; nay, the old record says that this is the word of the Lord by Moses: \|The Lord spake unto Moses, saying [among other things], If a man cause a blemish in his neighbor, as he hath done so shall it be done to him; breach for breach, eye for eye, tooth for tooth; as he hath caused a blemish in a man, so shall it be rendered unto him.\| (Lev. xxiv.19,20.) So in Exodus xxi.24, \|Thou shalt give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.\| It is sometimes said that these retaliations were simply permitted under the Mosaic law, but this is a great error; they were enjoined: \|Thine eye shall not pity,\| it is said in another place (Deut. xix.21); \|life shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.\| This law of retaliation is an integral part of the moral legislation of the Pentateuch. It is no part of the ceremonial law; it is an ethical rule. It is clearly ascribed to Moses; it is distinctly said to have been enacted by command of God. But Christ in the most unhesitating manner condemns and countermands it. \|Ye have heard,\| he continues, \|that it was said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor and hate thine enemy; but I say unto you, Love your enemies, and pray for them that persecute you.\| \|But this,\| it is objected, \|is not a quotation from the Old Testament. These words do not occur in that old legislation.\| At any rate Jesus introduces them with the very same formula which he has all along been applying to the words which he has quoted from the Mosaic law. It is evident that he means to give the impression that they are part of that law. He is not careful in any of these cases to quote the exact words of the law, but he does give the meaning of it. He gives the exact meaning of it here. The Mosaic law commanded Jews to love their neighbors, members of their own tribe, but to hate the people of surrounding tribes: \|An Ammonite or a Moabite shall not enter into the assembly of the Lord; even to the tenth generation shall none belonging to them enter into the assembly of the Lord for ever.... Thou shalt not seek their peace nor their prosperity all thy days for ever.\| (Deut. xxiii.3-6.) \|When the Lord thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and shalt cast out many nations before thee, ... then thou shalt utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor show mercy unto them.\| (Deut. vii.1,2.) This is the spirit of much of this ancient legislation; and these laws were, if the record is true, literally executed, in after times, by Joshua and Samuel, upon the people of Canaan. And these bloody commands, albeit they have a \|Thus said the Lord\| behind every one of them, Jesus, in the great discourse which is the charter of his kingdom, distinctly repeals. Such is the method by which our Lord sometimes deals with the Old Testament. It is by no means true that he assumes this attitude toward all parts of it. Sometimes he quotes Lawgiver and Prophets in confirmation of his own words; often he refers to these ancient Scriptures as preparing the way for his kingdom and foreshadowing his person and his work. Nay, he even says of that law which we are now studying that not one jot or tittle shall in any wise pass from it till all things be accomplished. What he means by that we shall be able by and by to discover. But these passages which I have cited make it clear that Jesus Christ cannot be appealed to in support of the traditional view of the nature of these old writings. The common argument by which Christ is made a witness to the authenticity and infallible authority of the Old Testament runs as follows: Christ quotes Moses as the author of this legislation; therefore Moses must have written the whole Pentateuch. Moses was an inspired prophet; therefore all the teaching of the Pentateuch must be infallible. The facts are, that Jesus nowhere testifies that Moses wrote the whole of the Pentateuch; and that he nowhere guarantees the infallibility either of Moses or of the book. On the contrary, he sets aside as inadequate or morally defective certain laws which in this book are ascribed to Moses. It is needful, thus, on the threshold of our argument, to have a clear understanding respecting the nature of the testimony borne by our Lord and his apostles to this ancient literature. It is upon this that the advocates of the traditional view of the Old Testament wholly rely. \|Christ was authority,\| they say; \|the New Testament writers were inspired; you all admit this; now Christ and the New Testament writers constantly quote the Scriptures of the Old Testament as inspired and as authoritative. Therefore they must be the infallible word of God.\| To this it is sufficient to reply, Christ and the apostles do quote the Old Testament Scriptures; they find a great treasure of inspired and inspiring truth in them, and so can we; they recognize the fact that they are organically related to that kingdom which Christ came to found, and that they record the earlier stages of that great course of revelation which culminates in Christ; but they nowhere pronounce any of these writings free from error; there is not a hint or suggestion anywhere in the New Testament that any of the writings of the Old Testament are infallible; and Christ himself, as we have seen, clearly warns his disciples that they do not even furnish a safe rule of moral conduct. After this, the attempt to prove the inerrancy of the Old Testament by summoning as witnesses the writers of the New Testament may as well be abandoned. But did not Jesus say, \|Search the Scriptures, for in them ye think ye have eternal life, and they are they that testify of me?\| Well, if he had said that, it would not prove that the Scriptures they searched were errorless. The injunction would have all the force to-day that it ever had. One may very profitably study documents which are far from infallible. This was not, however, what our Lord said. If you will look into your Revised Version you will see that his words, addressed to the Jews, are not a command but an assertion: \|Ye search the Scriptures, for in them ye think ye have eternal life\| (John v.39); if you searched them carefully you would find some testimony there concerning me. It is not an injunction to search the Scriptures; it is simply the statement of the fact that the Jews to whom he was speaking did search the Scriptures, and searched them as many people in our own time do, to very little purpose. But does not Paul say, in his letter to Timothy, that \|All Scripture is given by inspiration of God?\| No, Paul does not say that. Look again at your Revised Version (2 Tim. iii.16): \|Every Scripture inspired of God is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction, which is in righteousness.\| Every writing inspired of God is profitable reading. That is the whole statement. But Paul says in the verses preceding, that Timothy had known from a child the Sacred Writings which were able to make him wise unto salvation through faith in Jesus Christ. Was there not, then, in his hands, a volume or collection of books, known as the Sacred Writings, with a definite table of contents; and did not Paul refer to this collection, and imply that all these writings were inspired of God and profitable for the uses specified? No, this is not the precise state of the case. These Sacred Writings had not at this time been gathered into a volume by themselves, with a fixed table of contents. What is called the Canon of the Old Testament had not yet been finally determined.[Footnote: See chapter xi] There were, indeed, as we saw in the last chapter, two collections of sacred writings, one in Hebrew and the other in Greek. The Hebrew collection was not at this time definitely closed; there was still a dispute among the Palestinian Jews as to whether two or three of the books which it now contains should go into it; that dispute was not concluded until half a century after the death of our Lord. The other collection, as I have said, was in the Greek language, and it included, not only our Old Testament books, but the books now known as the Old Testament Apocrypha. This was the collection, remember, most used by our Lord and his apostles. Which of these collections was in the hands of Timothy we do not certainly know. But the father of Timothy was a Greek, though his mother was a Jewess; and it is altogether probable that he had studied from his childhood the Greek version of the Old Testament writings. Shall we understand Paul, then, as certifying the authenticity and infallibility of this whole collection? Does he mean to say that the \|Story of Susanna\| and \|Bel and the Dragon,\| and all the rest of these fables and tales, are profitable for teaching and instruction in righteousness? This text, so interpreted, evidently proves too much. Doubtless Paul did mean to commend to Timothy the Old Testament Scriptures as containing precious and saving truth. But we must not force his language into any wholesale indorsement of every letter and word, or even of every chapter and book of these old writings. So far, therefore, as our Lord himself and his apostles are concerned, we have no decisive judgment either as to the authorship of these old writings or as to their absolute freedom from error. They handled these Scriptures, quoted from them, found inspired teaching in them; but the Scriptures which they chiefly handled, from which they generally quoted, in which they found their inspired teaching, contained, as we know, worthless matter. It is not to be assumed that they did not know this matter to be worthless; and if they knew this, it is not to be asserted that they intended to place upon the whole of it the stamp of their approval. We have wandered somewhat from the path of our discussion, but it was necessary in order to determine the significance of those references to the Old Testament with which the New Testament abounds. The question before us is, Why do we believe that Moses wrote the five books which bear his name in our Bibles? We have seen that the New Testament writers give us no decisive testimony on this point. On what testimony is the belief founded? Doubtless it rests wholly on the traditions of the Jews. Such was the tradition preserved among them in the time of our Lord. They believed that Moses wrote every word of these books; that God dictated the syllables to him and that he recorded them. But the traditions of the Jews are not, in other matters, highly regarded by Christians. Our Lord himself speaks more than once in stern censure of these traditions by which, as he charges, their moral sense was blunted and the law of God was made of none effect. Many of these old tales of theirs were extremely childish. One tradition ascribes, as we have seen, to Moses the authorship of the whole Pentateuch; another declares that when, during an invasion of the Chaldeans, all the books of the Scripture were destroyed by fire, Ezra wrote them all out from memory, in an incredibly short space of time; another tradition relates how the same Ezra one day heard a divine voice bidding him retire into the field with five swift amanuenses, -- \|how he then received a full cup, full as it were of water, but the color of it was like fire, ... and when he had drank of it, his heart uttered understanding and wisdom grew in his breast, for his spirit strengthened his memory, ... and his mouth was opened and shut no more and for forty days and nights he dictated without stopping till two hundred and four books were written down.\| [Footnote: 2 Esdras xiv. See, also, Stanley's Jewish Church, iii, 151.] These fables had wide currency among the Jews; they were believed by Irenaeus, Tertullian, Augustine, and others of the great fathers of the Christian Church; but they are not credited in these days. It is evident that Jewish tradition is not always to be trusted. We shall need some better reason than this for believing that Moses was the author of the Pentateuch. I do not know where else we can go for information except to the books themselves. A careful examination of them may throw some light upon the question of their origin. A great multitude of scholars have been before us in their examination; what is their verdict? First we have the verdict of the traditionalists, -- those, I mean, who accept the Jewish tradition, and believe with the rabbins that Moses wrote the whole of the first five books of the Bible. Some who hold this theory are ready to admit that there may be a few verses here and there interpolated into the record by later scribes; but they maintain that the books in their substance and entirety came in their present form from the hands of Moses. This is the theory which has been generally received by the Christian church. It is held to-day by very few eminent Christian scholars. Over against this traditional theory is the theory of the radical and destructive critics that Moses wrote nothing at all; that perhaps the ten commandments were given by him, but hardly anything more; that these books were not even written in the time of Moses, but hundreds of years after his death. Moses is supposed to have lived about 1400 B.C.; these writings, say the destructive critics, were first produced in part about 730 B.C., but were mainly written after the Exile (about 444 B.C.), almost a thousand years after the death of Moses. \|Strict and impartial investigation has shown,\| says Dr. Knappert, \|that ... nothing in the whole Law really comes from Moses himself except the ten commandments. And even these were not delivered by him in the same form as we find them now.\| [Footnote: The Religion of Israel, p.9.] This is, to my mind, an astounding statement. It illustrates the lengths to which destructive criticism can go. And I dare say that we shall find in our study of these books reason for believing that such views as these are as far astray on the one side as those of the traditionalists are on the other. Let us test these two theories by interrogating the books themselves. First, then, we find upon the face of the record several reasons for believing that the books cannot have come, in their present form, from the hand of Moses. Moses died in the wilderness, before the Israelites reached the Promised Land, before the Canaanites were driven out, and the land was divided among the tribes. It is not likely that he wrote the account of his own death and burial which we find in the last chapter of Deuteronomy. There are those, it is true, who assert that Moses was inspired to write this account of his own funeral; but this is going a little farther than the rabbins; they declare that this chapter was added by Joshua. It is conceivable that Moses might have left on record a prediction that he would die and be buried in this way; but the Spirit of the Lord could never inspire a man to put in the past tense a plain narrative of an event which is yet in the future. The statement when written would be false, and God is not the author of falsehood. It is not likely either that Moses wrote the words in Exodus xi.3: \|Moreover the man Moses was very great in the land of Egypt, in the sight of all the people;\| nor those in Numbers xii.3: \|Now the man Moses was very meek above all the men which were on the face of the earth.\| It has been said, indeed, that Moses was directed by inspiration to say such things about himself; but I do not believe that egotism is a supernatural product; men take that in the natural way. Other passages show upon the face of them that they must have been added to these books after the time of Moses. It is stated in Exodus xvi.35, that the Israelites continued to eat manna until they came to the borders of the land of Canaan. But Moses was not living when they entered that land. In Genesis xii.6, in connection with the story of Abraham's entrance into Palestine, the historical explanation is thrown in: \|And the Canaanite was then in the land.\| It would seem that this must have been written at a day when the Canaanite was no longer in the land, -- after the occupation of the land and the expulsion of the Canaanites. In Numbers xv.32, an incident is related which is prefaced by the words, \|While the children of Israel were in the wilderness.\| Does not this look back to a past time? Can we imagine that this was written by Moses? Again, in Deuteronomy iii.11, we have a description of the bedstead of Og, one of the giants captured and killed by the Israelites, just before the death of Moses; and this bedstead is referred to as if it were an antique curiosity; the village is mentioned in which it is kept. In Genesis xxxvi. we find a genealogy of the kings of Moab, running through several generations, prefaced with the words: \|These are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom before there reigned any king over the children of Israel.\| This is looking backward from a day when kings were reigning over the children of Israel. How could it have been written five hundred years before there ever was a king in Israel? In Genesis xiv.14, we read of the city of Dan; but in Judges xviii.29, we are told that this city did not receive its name until hundreds of years later, long after the time of Moses. Similarly the account of the naming of the villages of Jair, which we find in Deuteronomy iii.14, is quite inconsistent with another account in Judges x.3, 4. One of them must be erroneous, and it is probable that the passage in Deuteronomy is an anachronism. Most of these passages could be explained by the admission that the scribes in later years added sentences here and there by way of interpretation. But that admission would of course discredit the infallibility of the books. Other difficulties, however, of a much more serious kind, present themselves. In the first verse of the twentieth chapter of Numbers we read that the people came to Kadesh in the first month. The first month of what year? We look back, and the first note of time previous to this is the second month of the second year of the wandering in the wilderness. Their arrival at Kadesh described in the twentieth chapter would seem, then, to have been in the first month of the third year. In the twenty-second verse of this chapter the camp moves on to Mount Hor, and Aaron dies there. There is no note of any interval of time whatever; yet we are told in the thirty-third chapter of this book that Aaron died in the fortieth year of the wandering. Here is a skip of thirty-eight years in the history, without an indication of anything having happened meantime. On the supposition that this is a continuous history written by the man who was a chief actor in it, such a gap is inexplicable. There is a reasonable way of accounting for it, as we shall see, but it cannot be accounted for on the theory that the book in its present form came from the hand of Moses. Some of the laws also bear internal evidence of having originated at a later day than that of Moses. The law forbidding the removal of landmarks presupposes a long occupation of the land; and the law regulating military enlistments is more naturally explained on the theory that it was framed in the settled period of the Hebrew history, and not during the wanderings. This may, indeed, have been anticipatory legislation, but the explanation is not probable. Various repetitions of laws occur which are inexplicable on the supposition that these laws were all written by the hand of one person. Thus in Exodus xxxiv.17-26, there is a collection of legal enactments, all of which can be found, in the same order and almost the same words, in the twenty-third chapter of the same book. Thus, to quote the summary of Bleek, we find in both places, (a) that all the males shall appear before Jehovah three times in every year; (b) that no leavened bread shall be used at the killing of the Paschal Lamb, and that the fat shall be preserved until the next morning; (c) that the first of the fruits of the field shall be brought into the house of the Lord; (d) that the young kid shall not be seethed in its mother's milk.[Footnote: Introduction to the Old Testament, i.240.] We cannot imagine that one man, with a fairly good memory, much less an infallibly inspired man, should have written these laws twice over, in the same words, within so small a space, in the same legal document. In Leviticus we have a similar instance. If any one will take that book and carefully compare the eighteenth with the twentieth chapter, he will see some reason for doubting that both chapters could have been inserted by one hand in this collection of statutes. \|It is not probable,\| as Bleek has said, \|that Moses would have written the two chapters one after the other, and would so shortly after have repeated the same precepts which he had before given, only not so well arranged the second time.\| [Footnote: Introduction to the Old Testament, i.240.] There are also quite a number of inconsistencies and contradictions in the legislation, all of which may be easily explained, but not on the theory that the laws all came from the pen of one infallibly inspired lawgiver. We find also several historical repetitions and historical discrepancies, all of which make against the theory that Moses is the author of all this Pentateuchal literature. A single author, if he were a man of fair intelligence, good common sense, and reasonably firm memory, could not have written it. And unless tautology, anachronisms, and contradictions are a proof of inspiration, much less could it have been written by a single inspired writer. The traditional theory cannot therefore he true. We have appealed to the books themselves, and they bear swift witness against it. Now let us look at the other theory of the destructive critics which not only denies that Moses wrote any portion of the Pentateuch, but alleges that it was written in Palestine, none of it less than six or seven hundred years after he was dead and buried. In the first place the book expressly declares that Moses wrote certain portions of it. He is mentioned several times as having written certain historical records and certain words of the law. In Exodus xxiv., we are told that Moses not only rehearsed to the people the Covenant which the Lord had made with them, but that he wrote all the words of the Covenant in a book, and that he took the book of the Covenant and read it in the audience of all the people. After the idolatry of the people Moses was again commanded to write these words, \|and\| it is added, \|he wrote upon the tables the words of the Covenant, the ten commandments.\| In Exodus xvii.14, we are told that Moses wrote the narrative of the defeat of Amalek in a book; and again in Numbers xxxiii.21, we read that Moses recorded the various marches and halts of the Israelites in the wilderness. We have also in the Book of Deuteronomy (xxxi.24-26) a statement that Moses wrote \|the words of the law\| in a book, and put it in the ark of the covenant for preservation. Precisely how much of the law this statement is meant to cover is not clear. Some have interpreted it to cover the whole Pentateuch, but that interpretation, as we have seen, is inadmissible. We may concede that it does refer to a body or code of laws, -- probably that body or code on which the legislation of Deuteronomy is based. These are all the statements made in the writings themselves concerning their origin. They prove, if they are credible, that portions of these books were written by Moses; they do not prove that the whole of them came from his hand. I see no reason whatever to doubt that this is the essential fact. The theory of the destructive critics that this literature and this legislation was all produced in Palestine, about the eighth century before Christ, and palmed off upon the Jews as a pious fraud, does not bear investigation. In large portions of these laws we are constantly meeting with legal provisions and historical allusions that take us directly back to the time of the wandering in the wilderness, and cannot be explained on any other theory. \|When,\| says Bleek, \|we meet with laws which refer in their whole tenor to a state of things utterly unknown in the period subsequent to Moses, and to circumstances existing in the Mosaic age, and in that only, it is in the highest degree likely that these laws not only in their essential purport proceeded from Moses, but also that they were written down by Moses or at least in the Mosaic age. Of these laws which appear to carry with them such clear and exact traces of the Mosaic age, there are many occurring, especially in Leviticus, and also in Numbers and Exodus, which laws relate to situations and surrounding circumstances only existing whilst the people, as was the case in Moses' time, wandered in the wilderness and were dwellers in the close confinement of camps and tents.\| [Footnote: Vol. i. p.212.] It is not necessary to draw out this evidence at length; I will only refer to a few out of scores of instances. The first seven chapters of Leviticus, containing laws regulating the burnt offerings and meat offerings, constantly assume that the people are in the camp and in the wilderness. The refuse of the beasts offered in sacrifice was to be carried out of the camp to the public ash heap, and burned. The law of the Great Day of Atonement (Lev. xvi.) is also full of allusions to the fact that the people were in camp; the scapegoat was to be driven into the wilderness, and the man who drove it out was to wash his clothes and bathe, and afterward come into the camp; the bullock and the goat, slain for the sacrifice, were to be carried forth without the camp; he who bears them forth must also wash himself before he returns to the camp. Large parts of the legislation concerning leprosy are full of the same incidental references to the fact that the people were dwelling in camp. There are also laws requiring that all the animals killed for food should be slaughtered before the door of the Tabernacle. There was a reason for this law; it was intended to guard against a debasing superstition; but how would it have been possible to obey it when the people were scattered all over the land of Palestine? It was adapted only to the time when they were dwelling in a camp in the wilderness. Besides, it must not be overlooked that in all this legislation \|the priests are not at all referred to in general, but by name, as Aaron and his sons, or the sons of Aaron the priests.\| All the legislation respecting the construction of the tabernacle, the disposition of it in the camp, the transportation of it from place to place in the wilderness, the order of the march, the summoning of the people when camp was to be broken, with all its minute and circumstantial directions, would be destitute of meaning if it had been written while the people were living in Palestine, scattered all over the land, dwelling in their own houses, and engaged in agricultural pursuits. The simple, unforced, natural interpretation of these laws takes us back, I say, to the time of Moses, to the years of the wandering in the wilderness. The incidental references to the conditions of the wilderness life are far more convincing than any explicit statement would have been. Can any one conceive that a writer of laws, living in Palestine hundreds of years afterwards, could have fabricated these allusions to the camp life and the tent life of the people? Such a novelist did not exist among them; and I question whether Professor Kuenen and Professor Wellhausen, with all their wealth of imagination, could have done any such thing. Many of these laws were certainly written in the time of Moses; and I do not believe that any man was living in the time of Moses who was more competent to write such laws than was Moses himself. The conclusion of Bleek seems therefore to me altogether reasonable: \|Although the Pentateuch in its present state and extent may not have been composed by Moses, and also many of the single laws therein may be the product of a later age, still the legislation contained in it is genuinely Mosaic in its entire spirit and character.\| [Footnote: Vol. i. p.221.] We are brought, therefore, in our study, to these inevitable conclusions: 1. The Pentateuch could never have been written by any one man, inspired or otherwise. 2. It is a composite work, in which many hands have been engaged. The production of it extends over many centuries. 3. It contains writings which are as old as the time of Moses, and some that are much older. It is impossible to tell how much of it came from the hand of Moses, but there are considerable portions of it which, although they may have been somewhat modified by later editors, are substantially as he left them. I have said that the Pentateuch is a composite work. In the next chapter we shall find some curious facts concerning its component parts, and the way in which they have been put together. And although it did not come into being in the way in which we have been taught by the traditions of the rabbins, yet we shall see that it contains some wonderful evidence of the superintending care of God, -- of that continuous and growing manifestation of his truth and his love to the people of Israel, which is what we mean by revelation. Revelation, we shall be able to understand, is not the dictation by God of words to men that they may be written down in books; it is rather the disclosure of the truth and love of God to men in the processes of history, in the development of the moral order of the world. It is the Light that lighteth every man, shining in the paths that lead to righteousness and life. There is a moral leadership of God in history; revelation is the record of that leadership. It is by no means confined to words; its most impressive disclosures are in the field of action. \|Thus did the Lord,\| as Dr. Bruce has said, is a more perfect formula of revelation than \|Thus said the Lord.\| It is in that great historical movement of which the Bible is the record that we find the revelation of God to men.	8,290	ENGLISH	1
Researchers have found over 4,000 bus-sized craters on the Seafloor in California, which were created by trash dumped by humans. The discoveries were made during a series of underwater autonomous vehicle surveys in 2018 and 2019. Eve Lundsten, the lead of the survey, said, “The pockmarks and micro-depressions in this area are both holes in the seafloor that occur in softer sediments, but they are morphologically distinct. The cause and persistence of the pockmarks still remains a mystery, but we find no evidence they were created from gas or fluid in the seafloor in the recent past.” Eve added, “The micro-depressions are recently formed erosional features; they are not ‘incipient pockmarks. Overall, a lot more work needs to be done to understand how all these features were formed, and this work is in progress.” The discoveries revealed that marine trash is responsible for the tiny pits that are the size of a bus. The tiny pits, which are also being called as craters, are filled with ropes, nets, plastics, and other garbage. The craters were spotted by researchers working with the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute in Moss Landing, California. The researchers initially set out to study the largest pockmark, which is a large crater that stretches 600 feet across and is nearly 16 feet deep, in North America. In 2017, a separate mapping survey of the seafloor off Big Sur found around 5200 pockmarks in around 500 square miles. Pockmarks have been found in other locations around the world, and researchers have linked them to the release of methane gas and other fluids that are present on the seafloor. Gas release makes the seafloor unstable, but the team found out that the crates, which were found recently, were not created by gas venting or gas. The tiny craters that were found have an average, which is 36 feet across, which is equivalent to the size of a bus. They are also 3 feet deep. The origin of the larger craters still remain a mystery, but gathering mapping and radiocarbon data indicate that the craters were created around 400,000 years ago. One thing about the craters is that they were excavated by debris, most of it was garbage lying on the seafloor. The American Geophysical Union released a statement about the discovery. The statement said, “About 20% of the surveyed MDs [micro-depressions] contain exotic material including cobbles, kelp holdfasts, and a whale skull.” The statement added, “Another 30% contain large anthropogenic objects, including filled trash bags, 5-gallon buckets, and a storage trunk, but no objects were observed outside the MDs.” Researchers believe that the trash could have fallen off from marine boats and even rafted out in kelp holdfasts. Eve and her colleagues are still in the process of going through their data, which has not yet been published. The researchers are still trying to find answers to some questions that they have.	<urn:uuid:1cc9909c-5c75-4a83-9834-4d0954908016>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://allindiaroundup.com/news/over-4000-bus-sized-craters-created-by-trash-found-on-the-seafloor-near-california/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594603.8/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119122744-20200119150744-00462.warc.gz	en	0.983059	663	3.40625	3	[ 0.06358859688043594, -0.2717643976211548, 0.5193361043930054, -0.12483371794223785, -0.29545295238494873, 0.1589459776878357, -0.11913540214300156, -0.0008724834769964218, -0.12899015843868256, 0.17317669093608856, 0.0709279254078865, -0.8471395373344421, -0.05108984187245369, 0.0816542357...	2	Researchers have found over 4,000 bus-sized craters on the Seafloor in California, which were created by trash dumped by humans. The discoveries were made during a series of underwater autonomous vehicle surveys in 2018 and 2019. Eve Lundsten, the lead of the survey, said, “The pockmarks and micro-depressions in this area are both holes in the seafloor that occur in softer sediments, but they are morphologically distinct. The cause and persistence of the pockmarks still remains a mystery, but we find no evidence they were created from gas or fluid in the seafloor in the recent past.” Eve added, “The micro-depressions are recently formed erosional features; they are not ‘incipient pockmarks. Overall, a lot more work needs to be done to understand how all these features were formed, and this work is in progress.” The discoveries revealed that marine trash is responsible for the tiny pits that are the size of a bus. The tiny pits, which are also being called as craters, are filled with ropes, nets, plastics, and other garbage. The craters were spotted by researchers working with the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute in Moss Landing, California. The researchers initially set out to study the largest pockmark, which is a large crater that stretches 600 feet across and is nearly 16 feet deep, in North America. In 2017, a separate mapping survey of the seafloor off Big Sur found around 5200 pockmarks in around 500 square miles. Pockmarks have been found in other locations around the world, and researchers have linked them to the release of methane gas and other fluids that are present on the seafloor. Gas release makes the seafloor unstable, but the team found out that the crates, which were found recently, were not created by gas venting or gas. The tiny craters that were found have an average, which is 36 feet across, which is equivalent to the size of a bus. They are also 3 feet deep. The origin of the larger craters still remain a mystery, but gathering mapping and radiocarbon data indicate that the craters were created around 400,000 years ago. One thing about the craters is that they were excavated by debris, most of it was garbage lying on the seafloor. The American Geophysical Union released a statement about the discovery. The statement said, “About 20% of the surveyed MDs [micro-depressions] contain exotic material including cobbles, kelp holdfasts, and a whale skull.” The statement added, “Another 30% contain large anthropogenic objects, including filled trash bags, 5-gallon buckets, and a storage trunk, but no objects were observed outside the MDs.” Researchers believe that the trash could have fallen off from marine boats and even rafted out in kelp holdfasts. Eve and her colleagues are still in the process of going through their data, which has not yet been published. The researchers are still trying to find answers to some questions that they have.	662	ENGLISH	1
Smt. Janki Devi Bajaj was a strong advocator of the Gandhian way of life. During the nationalist movement of India, she actively participated in the Swadeshi movement. She discarded foreign clothes and adapted to a Gandhinian way of lifestyle. She was born on 7th January, 1893 into a wealthy Vaishnav-Marwari family of Jaora in Madhya Pradesh. Despite being from a well to do family and later on being married into another, she was not hesitant even once to sacrifice her luxurious life in order to participate in India’s struggle for independence. A woman with a persona of her own, Janki Devi helped in the liberation and upliftment of many other women. She made immense efforts to eradicate discriminatory customs of ‘untouchability’ and the purdah system. At the age of around 12, Janki Devi was married to Jamnalal Bajaj in the year 1902. After her marriage, she shifted from Madhya Pradesh to Wardha, in Maharashtra. Although due to the contemporary social beliefs and traditions of those times, Janki didn’t receive any proper schooling, still she was very keen on reading and writing. Looking at this, her husband Jamnalal gave her homeschooling and even helped her become aware in life. Maharashtra. Although due to the contemporary social beliefs and traditions of those times, Janki didn’t receive any proper schooling, still she was very keen on reading and writing. Mahatma Gandhi played the role of a very influential figure in both Janki Devi and her husband’s life. Both of them were inspired by his efforts towards independence of their country and also towards social upliftment. Inspired by Gandhi, Jamnalal in the quest to find his right personality sacrificed his luxurious life in 191, and adapted the Gandhian way of life. Janki Devi too joined her husband in this journey. Hence, she became one of the women in India to work with Gandhiji towards social upliftment. A Step Towards Social Upliftment Janki Devi’s list of accomplishments began with relinquishing gold ornaments. She sacrificed all her gold ornaments to adopt the simplistic way for life. Then in 1919, Janki Devi took a revolutionary step and gave up the ‘purdah’—something which was considered as a symbol of “social grace” and “aristocracy”. She then motivated many other women to do the same; giving up the purdah became a symbol of courage, self-independence and unity. Then in the year 1921, following the steps of Mahatma Gandhi, Janki Devi too joined the wave of the Swadeshi movement. At the age of 28, she burnt all her foreign clothes and adapted Khadi. She spun the Khadi herself and even taught many other women how to use ‘Charkha’. She actively encouraged women to join the Swadeshi movement. With her efforts, she tried to bring a sense of self-sufficiency and courage to speak against injustice in the lives of many Indian women at that time. With her efforts, she tried to bring a sense of self-sufficiency and courage to speak against injustice in the lives of many Indian women at that time. Her efforts towards social upliftment only grew bigger. On 17th July, 1928 for the first time in India Harijans were allowed inside a temple. Janki Devi along with her husband opened the doors Lakshminarayan Temple at Wardha to everyone, irrespective of their caste. After continuously working for freedom struggle, there was nothing to stop Janki from progressing towards an emancipated society. Starting by liberating herself, Janki continuously moved towards liberating others. At the time, when women weren’t even allowed to step out of their houses, she stepped out to walk hundreds of miles to spread Gandhi’s message of freedom and upliftment. In this journey, she was put into jail many times, but this just made her more dedicated towards her noble cause. She also worked towards women’s education. She gave her tireless efforts with Saint Vinoba Bhave for Koopdan (gifting of wells), Gram Seva, Goseva and the well-known Bhoodan movement. Noteworthy, because of her passion for Goseva, she served as President of Akhil Bhartiya Goseva Sangh from 1942 to many more years. Janaki Devi through her ideas, inspired many women to come out of their houses and speak for themselves. She became the mirror that reflected the flame of courage and liberation for millions of other women. Revolution had become a way of life for Janki Devi. Her dedication inspired many others to fight against traditions and social evils. In an attempt to honour her, in 1956, the Government of India awarded her with the ‘Padma Vibhushan‘, which was conferred on her by President of India Dr Rajendra Prasad. Her dedication towards her work was seen in the fact that even during the last year of her life, she actively participated in agitation. On 21st of May, 1979, Janki Devi was laid to eternal rest at the ‘Geetai Mandir’, Gopuri in Wardha. Since her death, many foundations and awards have been started on her name to promote, support and honour the substantial work being done by women.	<urn:uuid:8746512c-cdb3-43fe-ab63-9a4434f969c0>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://feminisminindia.com/2019/12/11/janki-devi-woman-swadeshi-movement/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591234.15/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117205732-20200117233732-00021.warc.gz	en	0.984899	1,152	3.6875	4	[ 0.3795708417892456, 0.6018658876419067, -0.14466804265975952, -0.25267255306243896, -0.28000426292419434, 0.4056500792503357, 0.23207789659500122, 0.11275474727153778, -0.04271998256444931, -0.10830806940793991, 0.022603843361139297, -0.13068869709968567, 0.2571415305137634, 0.364118754863...	11	Smt. Janki Devi Bajaj was a strong advocator of the Gandhian way of life. During the nationalist movement of India, she actively participated in the Swadeshi movement. She discarded foreign clothes and adapted to a Gandhinian way of lifestyle. She was born on 7th January, 1893 into a wealthy Vaishnav-Marwari family of Jaora in Madhya Pradesh. Despite being from a well to do family and later on being married into another, she was not hesitant even once to sacrifice her luxurious life in order to participate in India’s struggle for independence. A woman with a persona of her own, Janki Devi helped in the liberation and upliftment of many other women. She made immense efforts to eradicate discriminatory customs of ‘untouchability’ and the purdah system. At the age of around 12, Janki Devi was married to Jamnalal Bajaj in the year 1902. After her marriage, she shifted from Madhya Pradesh to Wardha, in Maharashtra. Although due to the contemporary social beliefs and traditions of those times, Janki didn’t receive any proper schooling, still she was very keen on reading and writing. Looking at this, her husband Jamnalal gave her homeschooling and even helped her become aware in life. Maharashtra. Although due to the contemporary social beliefs and traditions of those times, Janki didn’t receive any proper schooling, still she was very keen on reading and writing. Mahatma Gandhi played the role of a very influential figure in both Janki Devi and her husband’s life. Both of them were inspired by his efforts towards independence of their country and also towards social upliftment. Inspired by Gandhi, Jamnalal in the quest to find his right personality sacrificed his luxurious life in 191, and adapted the Gandhian way of life. Janki Devi too joined her husband in this journey. Hence, she became one of the women in India to work with Gandhiji towards social upliftment. A Step Towards Social Upliftment Janki Devi’s list of accomplishments began with relinquishing gold ornaments. She sacrificed all her gold ornaments to adopt the simplistic way for life. Then in 1919, Janki Devi took a revolutionary step and gave up the ‘purdah’—something which was considered as a symbol of “social grace” and “aristocracy”. She then motivated many other women to do the same; giving up the purdah became a symbol of courage, self-independence and unity. Then in the year 1921, following the steps of Mahatma Gandhi, Janki Devi too joined the wave of the Swadeshi movement. At the age of 28, she burnt all her foreign clothes and adapted Khadi. She spun the Khadi herself and even taught many other women how to use ‘Charkha’. She actively encouraged women to join the Swadeshi movement. With her efforts, she tried to bring a sense of self-sufficiency and courage to speak against injustice in the lives of many Indian women at that time. With her efforts, she tried to bring a sense of self-sufficiency and courage to speak against injustice in the lives of many Indian women at that time. Her efforts towards social upliftment only grew bigger. On 17th July, 1928 for the first time in India Harijans were allowed inside a temple. Janki Devi along with her husband opened the doors Lakshminarayan Temple at Wardha to everyone, irrespective of their caste. After continuously working for freedom struggle, there was nothing to stop Janki from progressing towards an emancipated society. Starting by liberating herself, Janki continuously moved towards liberating others. At the time, when women weren’t even allowed to step out of their houses, she stepped out to walk hundreds of miles to spread Gandhi’s message of freedom and upliftment. In this journey, she was put into jail many times, but this just made her more dedicated towards her noble cause. She also worked towards women’s education. She gave her tireless efforts with Saint Vinoba Bhave for Koopdan (gifting of wells), Gram Seva, Goseva and the well-known Bhoodan movement. Noteworthy, because of her passion for Goseva, she served as President of Akhil Bhartiya Goseva Sangh from 1942 to many more years. Janaki Devi through her ideas, inspired many women to come out of their houses and speak for themselves. She became the mirror that reflected the flame of courage and liberation for millions of other women. Revolution had become a way of life for Janki Devi. Her dedication inspired many others to fight against traditions and social evils. In an attempt to honour her, in 1956, the Government of India awarded her with the ‘Padma Vibhushan‘, which was conferred on her by President of India Dr Rajendra Prasad. Her dedication towards her work was seen in the fact that even during the last year of her life, she actively participated in agitation. On 21st of May, 1979, Janki Devi was laid to eternal rest at the ‘Geetai Mandir’, Gopuri in Wardha. Since her death, many foundations and awards have been started on her name to promote, support and honour the substantial work being done by women.	1,149	ENGLISH	1
Ask people to name a famous lawyer in history and they would struggle. After all, the most prominent lawyers in English history – such as Sir Edward Coke and Lord Mansfield – are not exactly household names. In particular, advocacy is generally regarded as an ephemeral art, not least because once spoken, a lawyer’s words are neither recaptured nor recorded in full for subsequent generations. Instead, only fragments or soundbites survive. But when today’s lawyers read about the great men and women who went before them arguing their case in court, one historical figure stands head and shoulders above all others in the lawyers’ pantheon: Marcus Tullius Cicero. For his reputation to have endured for more than 2000 years, Cicero must have been quite special. And indeed, he was. Not just a lawyer, he was a polymath: statesman, orator, and philosopher, he also served as a consul. In the century before Jesus was born, he was the best-known lawyer of his day in the expanding Roman empire. The fact that his name has endured to the present day is a tribute to his lasting reputation, arguably making him the greatest lawyer who has ever lived. So who was Cicero? Born in 106BC, he came from a municipal family of the Roman equestrian order. Without great wealth and from relative obscurity, Cicero rose to fame at a time of conflict and chaos. Much of the 1st century BC was marked by civil war, which ultimately led to the rise of the soldier turned dictator, Julius Caesar. By contrast, Cicero favoured traditional republican government. Following Caesar’s death, Cicero attacked Mark Antony in several speeches. Labelled an enemy of the state, he was eventually executed in 43 BC, a year after Caesar’s celebrated demise. His severed hands and head were then put on public display as a deterrent to others. Were it not for the written word, Cicero might have become just a footnote in history. But critically, in addition to his other talents, he was also a prolific writer. And it is through his surviving written work that we can still appreciate Cicero’s immense talent. His writings included books of rhetoric, orations, philosophical and political treatises, and letters. His influence on the Latin language that he spoke so eloquently was enormous, cascading down the centuries right across Europe. Notably, he coined words in Latin for philosophical concepts that remain with us today: evidentia, humanitas, qualitas, quantitas, and essenti. Their contemporary English language equivalents are self-evident. Cicero’s letters were rediscovered in the fourteenth century by Petrarch, fuelling the Renaissance interest in Roman culture. According to one historian, “the Renaissance was above all things a revival of Cicero, and only after him and through him of the rest of Classical antiquity.” His prestige was further enhanced in the eighteenth century by the Enlightenment thinkers: Locke, Hume and Burke all championed his work, ranking it among the most influential in European culture. According to Plutarch, who wrote about Cicero in the first century AD, he most wanted to be remembered most for his philosophical writing: “And yet he often desired his friends not to call him orator, but philosopher, because he had made philosophy his business, and had only used rhetoric as an instrument for attaining his objects in public life. But the desire of glory has great power in washing the tinctures of philosophy out of the souls of men, and in imprinting the passions of the common people, by custom and conversation, in the minds of those that take a part in governing them, unless the politician be very careful so to engage in public affairs as to interest himself only in the affairs themselves, but not participate in the passions that are consequent to them.” Here, the greatest lawyer in Rome insists that he wanted to be remembered as a philosopher, not a lawyer. But it is as a lawyer that we now remember Cicero most. To appreciate his legal work, particularly as a public orator, we are remarkably fortunate to have 52 of his 88 recorded speeches on behalf of his clients. Cicero became a lawyer during his early twenties. His precocious talent soon made an impact. The first surviving speech is a private case (pro Quinctio), delivered when he was just 26, although he had already undertaken several defences by that time. Over more than three decades, his legal speeches contain arguments across a broad range of issues: provincial maladministration, usurpation of citizenship rights, violent dispossession, poisoning, bribery, and political offences. But murder is what made him famous. It was, of course, a routine fact of life in Ancient Rome. Cicero’s first big public case which survives is the defence of Sextus Roscius who was charged with the appalling crime of patricide. He took the risk of accusing other people of the murder, which could easily have led to his own death in revenge. But thanks to the power of his oratory, Roscius was acquitted. In another murder trial in front of a jury, Pro Roscio Amerino, Cicero highlighted the boldness and greed of two of the accusers, telling jurors that, motivated by greed, they were the more likely perpetrators of the crime. Through the power of his rhetoric, Cicero triumphed once more. Cicero’s most celebrated case, Pro Milone, was conducted in 52BC on behalf of his friend, Titus Annius Milo, who was accused of murdering Publius Clodius Pulcher on the Appian way. After delivering his defence speech, which was predicated on the argument that the killing of Clodius was lawful since it was an act of self-defence, Cicero then wrote it down for posterity. The speech includes an extensive character assassination of Clodius, whom he characterises as an invidious, malevolent, effeminate individual with a lust for power who organised an ambush on Milo. He also provides abundant supporting evidence to underpin his line of argument. By contrast, Milo is continuously depicted as a ‘saviour of Rome’ with a catalogue of virtuous actions. Even though Milo was eventually convicted by a margin of 38 votes to 13, and then exiled to Massilia (Marseille), the surviving text of his speech is widely considered as one of Cicero’s finest works: the centrepiece of his rhetorical repertoire sets out the facts, demonstrates his use of legal arguments, and reveals his exposition of character combined with emotional appeal. Cicero’s forensic speeches defined advocacy as an artform: designed to ensure that the person whom he defended was acquitted or the person he prosecuted was found guilty. Helpfully, he became the first lawyer to write down some of the essential rules of advocacy: - Speak clearly - Speak easily but not too much, especially when others want their turn - Do not interrupt - Be courteous - Deal seriously with serious matters and gracefully with lighter ones - Never criticise people behind their backs - Stick to subjects of general interest - Do not talk about yourself - Above all, never lose your temper. understood that if they are to succeed, there is a fine balance between art and logic which successful advocates must achieve. For any contemporary trial lawyer, these simple points are equally as valid in a court today as they were more than two millennia ago. Dominic Carman, journalist, writer and legal commentator. www.dominiccarman.com	<urn:uuid:3d4b3675-7442-4d1d-b047-553e6a7b163a>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.globallegalchronicle.com/cicero-the-simple-art-of-legal-advocacy/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250609478.50/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123071220-20200123100220-00161.warc.gz	en	0.983331	1,581	3.59375	4	[ -0.3318953514099121, 0.09812496602535248, 0.21050883829593658, -0.00505319656804204, -0.2938203811645508, -0.07233306765556335, 0.8382160663604736, -0.5312601327896118, -0.04862101003527641, -0.2632916569709778, -0.10328230261802673, 0.10715200006961823, -0.0515357181429863, 0.221220657229...	5	Ask people to name a famous lawyer in history and they would struggle. After all, the most prominent lawyers in English history – such as Sir Edward Coke and Lord Mansfield – are not exactly household names. In particular, advocacy is generally regarded as an ephemeral art, not least because once spoken, a lawyer’s words are neither recaptured nor recorded in full for subsequent generations. Instead, only fragments or soundbites survive. But when today’s lawyers read about the great men and women who went before them arguing their case in court, one historical figure stands head and shoulders above all others in the lawyers’ pantheon: Marcus Tullius Cicero. For his reputation to have endured for more than 2000 years, Cicero must have been quite special. And indeed, he was. Not just a lawyer, he was a polymath: statesman, orator, and philosopher, he also served as a consul. In the century before Jesus was born, he was the best-known lawyer of his day in the expanding Roman empire. The fact that his name has endured to the present day is a tribute to his lasting reputation, arguably making him the greatest lawyer who has ever lived. So who was Cicero? Born in 106BC, he came from a municipal family of the Roman equestrian order. Without great wealth and from relative obscurity, Cicero rose to fame at a time of conflict and chaos. Much of the 1st century BC was marked by civil war, which ultimately led to the rise of the soldier turned dictator, Julius Caesar. By contrast, Cicero favoured traditional republican government. Following Caesar’s death, Cicero attacked Mark Antony in several speeches. Labelled an enemy of the state, he was eventually executed in 43 BC, a year after Caesar’s celebrated demise. His severed hands and head were then put on public display as a deterrent to others. Were it not for the written word, Cicero might have become just a footnote in history. But critically, in addition to his other talents, he was also a prolific writer. And it is through his surviving written work that we can still appreciate Cicero’s immense talent. His writings included books of rhetoric, orations, philosophical and political treatises, and letters. His influence on the Latin language that he spoke so eloquently was enormous, cascading down the centuries right across Europe. Notably, he coined words in Latin for philosophical concepts that remain with us today: evidentia, humanitas, qualitas, quantitas, and essenti. Their contemporary English language equivalents are self-evident. Cicero’s letters were rediscovered in the fourteenth century by Petrarch, fuelling the Renaissance interest in Roman culture. According to one historian, “the Renaissance was above all things a revival of Cicero, and only after him and through him of the rest of Classical antiquity.” His prestige was further enhanced in the eighteenth century by the Enlightenment thinkers: Locke, Hume and Burke all championed his work, ranking it among the most influential in European culture. According to Plutarch, who wrote about Cicero in the first century AD, he most wanted to be remembered most for his philosophical writing: “And yet he often desired his friends not to call him orator, but philosopher, because he had made philosophy his business, and had only used rhetoric as an instrument for attaining his objects in public life. But the desire of glory has great power in washing the tinctures of philosophy out of the souls of men, and in imprinting the passions of the common people, by custom and conversation, in the minds of those that take a part in governing them, unless the politician be very careful so to engage in public affairs as to interest himself only in the affairs themselves, but not participate in the passions that are consequent to them.” Here, the greatest lawyer in Rome insists that he wanted to be remembered as a philosopher, not a lawyer. But it is as a lawyer that we now remember Cicero most. To appreciate his legal work, particularly as a public orator, we are remarkably fortunate to have 52 of his 88 recorded speeches on behalf of his clients. Cicero became a lawyer during his early twenties. His precocious talent soon made an impact. The first surviving speech is a private case (pro Quinctio), delivered when he was just 26, although he had already undertaken several defences by that time. Over more than three decades, his legal speeches contain arguments across a broad range of issues: provincial maladministration, usurpation of citizenship rights, violent dispossession, poisoning, bribery, and political offences. But murder is what made him famous. It was, of course, a routine fact of life in Ancient Rome. Cicero’s first big public case which survives is the defence of Sextus Roscius who was charged with the appalling crime of patricide. He took the risk of accusing other people of the murder, which could easily have led to his own death in revenge. But thanks to the power of his oratory, Roscius was acquitted. In another murder trial in front of a jury, Pro Roscio Amerino, Cicero highlighted the boldness and greed of two of the accusers, telling jurors that, motivated by greed, they were the more likely perpetrators of the crime. Through the power of his rhetoric, Cicero triumphed once more. Cicero’s most celebrated case, Pro Milone, was conducted in 52BC on behalf of his friend, Titus Annius Milo, who was accused of murdering Publius Clodius Pulcher on the Appian way. After delivering his defence speech, which was predicated on the argument that the killing of Clodius was lawful since it was an act of self-defence, Cicero then wrote it down for posterity. The speech includes an extensive character assassination of Clodius, whom he characterises as an invidious, malevolent, effeminate individual with a lust for power who organised an ambush on Milo. He also provides abundant supporting evidence to underpin his line of argument. By contrast, Milo is continuously depicted as a ‘saviour of Rome’ with a catalogue of virtuous actions. Even though Milo was eventually convicted by a margin of 38 votes to 13, and then exiled to Massilia (Marseille), the surviving text of his speech is widely considered as one of Cicero’s finest works: the centrepiece of his rhetorical repertoire sets out the facts, demonstrates his use of legal arguments, and reveals his exposition of character combined with emotional appeal. Cicero’s forensic speeches defined advocacy as an artform: designed to ensure that the person whom he defended was acquitted or the person he prosecuted was found guilty. Helpfully, he became the first lawyer to write down some of the essential rules of advocacy: - Speak clearly - Speak easily but not too much, especially when others want their turn - Do not interrupt - Be courteous - Deal seriously with serious matters and gracefully with lighter ones - Never criticise people behind their backs - Stick to subjects of general interest - Do not talk about yourself - Above all, never lose your temper. understood that if they are to succeed, there is a fine balance between art and logic which successful advocates must achieve. For any contemporary trial lawyer, these simple points are equally as valid in a court today as they were more than two millennia ago. Dominic Carman, journalist, writer and legal commentator. www.dominiccarman.com	1,555	ENGLISH	1
Parsha: VaYigash Haftarah: Ezekiel 37: 15-28 For the last number of weeks we have been reading about our ancestors, Jacob’s children. More specifically, we have read about Joseph’s trajectory from favoured son at home, to being a slave, and then to becoming viceroy of all Egypt. By the time he was thirty years old Joseph ruled Egypt. He ran the finances and oversaw all of Egypt’s policies. In this week’s Torah reading Joseph’s brothers still did not know that the leader they were speaking to was their brother. This parsha begins just after Benjamin had been “framed”. Joseph’s personal silver chalice had been “planted” in Benjamin’s belongings, and the Israelite brothers had been told that Benjamin would become enslaved to Pharaoh’s court as payment for the infraction. Joseph was playing a game with his brothers. Joseph could carry on the charade no longer. He cleared all the Egyptian attendants from the room. The text says, “And no man stood with him while Yosef made himself known to his brothers. And his voice cried out with weeping, and Egypt heard…” Joseph forgave his brothers. He feasted with them, gave them gifts of clothing and food, and convinced them to return to Egypt and live in comfort. He told them how to get land so they could raise cattle. Although the story had begun many years earlier with fraternal jealousy, the brothers reunited and rebuilt their family. This was contrary to the patterns we had seen before. Cain killed his brother Abel. Isaac grew up without his brother Ishmael. Jacob and Esau never truly reconciled. In this story we see Joseph and Judah build the unified family which would become a nation. The haftarah features the prophet Ezekiel. He lived from around 622 BCE – 570 BCE and was among the 8,000 Jews exiled to Babylonia. God told Ezekiel to take two beautiful branches, carve phrases on them and display them. One branch represented the nation of Judah and the other represented Joseph’s lineage, the nation of Ephraim. Ezekiel wrote phrases about the two Jewish nations onto the branches and held the two branches together. The action was to indicate that just as the branches could be rejoined, the Israelites could be reunited and grow together as one unified nation. photo by Yoni Lightstone, tour guide Ezekiel also told them that God would gather them from among all the nations and bring them back to their own land. The text reads, “Behold I will take the children of Israel from among the nations, whither they are gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them to their own land. I will make them one nation in the land, upon the mountains of Israel.” (v. 21, 22) Both readings are about unity. In every era and in every generation there are disagreements between different sectors of Jews. We are stronger as a united people. I hope we can learn to discuss, consider, and be united for the benefit of all. The painting “Reunited”, showing Ezekiel writing on a branch, is one of the images in my forthcoming book, “ILLUMINATIONS: The Art of Haftarah”. Stay tuned for more information! Shabbat Shalom, Laya	<urn:uuid:efe05282-110d-443e-84c4-82d18e390790>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://layacrust.wordpress.com/tag/torah-study/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594603.8/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119122744-20200119150744-00513.warc.gz	en	0.982111	715	3.40625	3	[ -0.015469720587134361, 0.552253246307373, -0.15643630921840668, -0.20882251858711243, -0.4111565947532654, -0.18149802088737488, 0.26987457275390625, 0.004302766174077988, -0.2224307805299759, 0.05750420689582825, -0.24350081384181976, -0.28954923152923584, 0.2900121808052063, 0.1197256222...	11	Parsha: VaYigash Haftarah: Ezekiel 37: 15-28 For the last number of weeks we have been reading about our ancestors, Jacob’s children. More specifically, we have read about Joseph’s trajectory from favoured son at home, to being a slave, and then to becoming viceroy of all Egypt. By the time he was thirty years old Joseph ruled Egypt. He ran the finances and oversaw all of Egypt’s policies. In this week’s Torah reading Joseph’s brothers still did not know that the leader they were speaking to was their brother. This parsha begins just after Benjamin had been “framed”. Joseph’s personal silver chalice had been “planted” in Benjamin’s belongings, and the Israelite brothers had been told that Benjamin would become enslaved to Pharaoh’s court as payment for the infraction. Joseph was playing a game with his brothers. Joseph could carry on the charade no longer. He cleared all the Egyptian attendants from the room. The text says, “And no man stood with him while Yosef made himself known to his brothers. And his voice cried out with weeping, and Egypt heard…” Joseph forgave his brothers. He feasted with them, gave them gifts of clothing and food, and convinced them to return to Egypt and live in comfort. He told them how to get land so they could raise cattle. Although the story had begun many years earlier with fraternal jealousy, the brothers reunited and rebuilt their family. This was contrary to the patterns we had seen before. Cain killed his brother Abel. Isaac grew up without his brother Ishmael. Jacob and Esau never truly reconciled. In this story we see Joseph and Judah build the unified family which would become a nation. The haftarah features the prophet Ezekiel. He lived from around 622 BCE – 570 BCE and was among the 8,000 Jews exiled to Babylonia. God told Ezekiel to take two beautiful branches, carve phrases on them and display them. One branch represented the nation of Judah and the other represented Joseph’s lineage, the nation of Ephraim. Ezekiel wrote phrases about the two Jewish nations onto the branches and held the two branches together. The action was to indicate that just as the branches could be rejoined, the Israelites could be reunited and grow together as one unified nation. photo by Yoni Lightstone, tour guide Ezekiel also told them that God would gather them from among all the nations and bring them back to their own land. The text reads, “Behold I will take the children of Israel from among the nations, whither they are gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them to their own land. I will make them one nation in the land, upon the mountains of Israel.” (v. 21, 22) Both readings are about unity. In every era and in every generation there are disagreements between different sectors of Jews. We are stronger as a united people. I hope we can learn to discuss, consider, and be united for the benefit of all. The painting “Reunited”, showing Ezekiel writing on a branch, is one of the images in my forthcoming book, “ILLUMINATIONS: The Art of Haftarah”. Stay tuned for more information! Shabbat Shalom, Laya	700	ENGLISH	1
The history of gold is not only made up of conquistadors and treasures hidden in pyramids, but also of the economic impact that some leaders have had on their time. The Emperor of Mali Mansa Musa the 1st is one of these men. Musa’s particularity is that he is almost systematically classified as the richest man who has ever lived in history. To measure his fortune, you have to travel back in time, to the 14th century, in Africa, under the reign of this African emperor. He built his power on the exploitation of gold mines, which made Mali the first producer of the precious yellow metal in the world at the time. The impact of Musa’s fortune can only be measured by remembering a particular episode in his life : his pilgrimage to Mecca and the catastrophic consequences of his fortune while visiting different regions of Africa and the Middle-East. Thus between 1324 and 1325, the emperor organized this trip, accompanied by 60,000 men, including 12,000 slaves each carrying 1.8 kg of gold, and 80 camels on which were placed bags of gold, weighing between 23 and 136 kg per animal. Musa’s generosity, who distributed this fortune throughout his pilgrimage, led to a drop in gold prices, especially in Cairo, Medina and Mecca. The Middle East had to wait about ten years before it could recover from the journey of the richest man in history.	<urn:uuid:59d64703-1b49-4589-a2fa-58e52a57a041>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://buyinggold.ch/how-the-richest-man-in-history-drove-down-the-price-of-gold-for-a-decade/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783000.84/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128184745-20200128214745-00036.warc.gz	en	0.980676	297	4.0625	4	[ -0.03289184719324112, 0.524760901927948, 0.42872506380081177, 0.25518155097961426, 0.0004903080407530069, -0.13299238681793213, 0.4039134681224823, 0.23003815114498138, -0.1795669049024582, 0.08750978112220764, 0.5497193336486816, -0.2680929899215698, 0.19081588089466095, 0.109447717666625...	14	The history of gold is not only made up of conquistadors and treasures hidden in pyramids, but also of the economic impact that some leaders have had on their time. The Emperor of Mali Mansa Musa the 1st is one of these men. Musa’s particularity is that he is almost systematically classified as the richest man who has ever lived in history. To measure his fortune, you have to travel back in time, to the 14th century, in Africa, under the reign of this African emperor. He built his power on the exploitation of gold mines, which made Mali the first producer of the precious yellow metal in the world at the time. The impact of Musa’s fortune can only be measured by remembering a particular episode in his life : his pilgrimage to Mecca and the catastrophic consequences of his fortune while visiting different regions of Africa and the Middle-East. Thus between 1324 and 1325, the emperor organized this trip, accompanied by 60,000 men, including 12,000 slaves each carrying 1.8 kg of gold, and 80 camels on which were placed bags of gold, weighing between 23 and 136 kg per animal. Musa’s generosity, who distributed this fortune throughout his pilgrimage, led to a drop in gold prices, especially in Cairo, Medina and Mecca. The Middle East had to wait about ten years before it could recover from the journey of the richest man in history.	311	ENGLISH	1
The Stone Age remains in Egypt are of very uncertain date; there are Palæolithic and then Neolithic remains. It is not certain whether the Neolithic pastoral people who left those remains were the direct ancestors of the later Egyptians. In many respects they differed entirely from their successors. They buried their dead, but before they buried them they cut up the bodies and apparently ate portions of the flesh. They seem to have done this out of a feeling of reverence for the departed; the dead were "eaten with honour" according to the phrase of Mr. Flinders Petrie. It may have been that the survivors hoped to retain thereby some vestige of the strength and virtue that had died. Traces of similar savage customs have been found in the long barrows that were scattered over western Europe before the spreading of the Aryan peoples, and they have pervaded negro Africa, where they are only dying out at the present time. About 5000 b.c., or earlier, the traces of these primitive peoples cease, and the true Egyptians appear on the scene. The former people were hut builders and at a comparatively low stage of Neolithic culture, the latter were already a civilized Neolithic people; they used brick and wood buildings instead of their predecessors' hovels, and they were working stone. Very soon they passed into the Bronze Age. They possessed a system of picture writing almost as developed as the contemporary writing of the Sumerians, but quite different in character. Possibly there was an irruption from southern Arabia by way of Aden, of a fresh people, who came into upper Egypt and descended slowly towards the delta of the Nile. Dr. Wallis Budge writes of them as "conquerors from the East." But their gods and	<urn:uuid:0936baaf-ebac-4d6e-aad9-a5a039079bf7>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:The_Outline_of_History_Vol_1.djvu/221	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594209.12/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119035851-20200119063851-00195.warc.gz	en	0.985283	353	3.625	4	[ -0.24891802668571472, 0.7925591468811035, 0.37380191683769226, 0.16541852056980133, -0.23740367591381073, -0.28320664167404175, 0.03216983750462532, -0.43376103043556213, -0.09751517325639725, 0.06619767844676971, 0.05235042795538902, -0.756470263004303, 0.1095976009964943, 0.2427669614553...	1	The Stone Age remains in Egypt are of very uncertain date; there are Palæolithic and then Neolithic remains. It is not certain whether the Neolithic pastoral people who left those remains were the direct ancestors of the later Egyptians. In many respects they differed entirely from their successors. They buried their dead, but before they buried them they cut up the bodies and apparently ate portions of the flesh. They seem to have done this out of a feeling of reverence for the departed; the dead were "eaten with honour" according to the phrase of Mr. Flinders Petrie. It may have been that the survivors hoped to retain thereby some vestige of the strength and virtue that had died. Traces of similar savage customs have been found in the long barrows that were scattered over western Europe before the spreading of the Aryan peoples, and they have pervaded negro Africa, where they are only dying out at the present time. About 5000 b.c., or earlier, the traces of these primitive peoples cease, and the true Egyptians appear on the scene. The former people were hut builders and at a comparatively low stage of Neolithic culture, the latter were already a civilized Neolithic people; they used brick and wood buildings instead of their predecessors' hovels, and they were working stone. Very soon they passed into the Bronze Age. They possessed a system of picture writing almost as developed as the contemporary writing of the Sumerians, but quite different in character. Possibly there was an irruption from southern Arabia by way of Aden, of a fresh people, who came into upper Egypt and descended slowly towards the delta of the Nile. Dr. Wallis Budge writes of them as "conquerors from the East." But their gods and	356	ENGLISH	1
Perhaps the most intriguing aspect of ancient Egyptian civilization was its inception from the ground up, as the ancient Egyptians had no prior civilization they could use as a template. In fact, ancient Egypt itself became a template for the civilizations that followed. The Greeks and the Romans were so impressed with Egyptian culture that they often attributed many attributes of their own culture - usually erroneously - to the Egyptians. To the ancient Egyptians, as was the case with any society made up of inquiring humans, the world was a confusing and often terrifying place of destruction, death, and unexplained phenomena. In order to make sense of such an existence, they resorted to teleological stories. Giving a phenomenon a story made it less horrifying, and it also helped them make sense of the world around them. Unsurprisingly, then, the ancient Egyptian gods permeated every aspect of existence. Baboons held a prestigious place in Egyptian religion. They were kept as sacred animals in many temples because contemporary Egyptians considered them the original religious observers, particularly with respect to the sun god Re. Ancient Egyptians took the wild baboons stretching on their hind legs, forelegs raised to the sky, to be an oration to the sun god at dawn. Furthermore, these ancient ancestors of the land of Egypt were greeted at dawn by the concatenations of the baboons nattering, which the religious-minded took to be an early-morning devotion. They even believed the baboons spoke the original language of religion, and a claim they could understand baboons was often one asserted by certain members of the priestly class. However, it is his association with the ibis that most defines Thoth’s visual imagery. Since the ancient Egyptians believed the universe arose from the swamplike waters of Nun, it was the water bird that garnered the most prestigious veneration. Birds like geese, herons, and the ibises were associated with this period of creation, and according to some beliefs, the world came about thanks to the great “honk” of a primordial goose, whose eggshell was said to be preserved in the temple of Thoth. It was believed Re created Thoth’s baboon form to be that of his “shining moon”, but his ibis form was that of a messenger between heaven and earth (although he was much more than this). Thoth: The History and Legacy of the Ancient Egyptian God Who Maintains the Universe looks at the mythology surrounding one of antiquity’s most famous deities. You will learn about Thoth like never before.	<urn:uuid:f67a0f02-c90e-4f02-b04a-0ec078b2915c>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://books.apple.com/au/audiobook/thoth-the-history-and-legacy-of-the-ancient-egyptian/id1420224737	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250604849.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121162615-20200121191615-00438.warc.gz	en	0.980289	525	3.71875	4	[ 0.13686060905456543, 0.8725584745407104, 0.1549701988697052, 0.13097688555717468, -0.5223113298416138, 0.06292843073606491, 0.39676058292388916, -0.03166290000081062, -0.1320803463459015, -0.16988854110240936, -0.46341538429260254, -0.674526572227478, 0.1386042833328247, 0.0850420594215393...	1	Perhaps the most intriguing aspect of ancient Egyptian civilization was its inception from the ground up, as the ancient Egyptians had no prior civilization they could use as a template. In fact, ancient Egypt itself became a template for the civilizations that followed. The Greeks and the Romans were so impressed with Egyptian culture that they often attributed many attributes of their own culture - usually erroneously - to the Egyptians. To the ancient Egyptians, as was the case with any society made up of inquiring humans, the world was a confusing and often terrifying place of destruction, death, and unexplained phenomena. In order to make sense of such an existence, they resorted to teleological stories. Giving a phenomenon a story made it less horrifying, and it also helped them make sense of the world around them. Unsurprisingly, then, the ancient Egyptian gods permeated every aspect of existence. Baboons held a prestigious place in Egyptian religion. They were kept as sacred animals in many temples because contemporary Egyptians considered them the original religious observers, particularly with respect to the sun god Re. Ancient Egyptians took the wild baboons stretching on their hind legs, forelegs raised to the sky, to be an oration to the sun god at dawn. Furthermore, these ancient ancestors of the land of Egypt were greeted at dawn by the concatenations of the baboons nattering, which the religious-minded took to be an early-morning devotion. They even believed the baboons spoke the original language of religion, and a claim they could understand baboons was often one asserted by certain members of the priestly class. However, it is his association with the ibis that most defines Thoth’s visual imagery. Since the ancient Egyptians believed the universe arose from the swamplike waters of Nun, it was the water bird that garnered the most prestigious veneration. Birds like geese, herons, and the ibises were associated with this period of creation, and according to some beliefs, the world came about thanks to the great “honk” of a primordial goose, whose eggshell was said to be preserved in the temple of Thoth. It was believed Re created Thoth’s baboon form to be that of his “shining moon”, but his ibis form was that of a messenger between heaven and earth (although he was much more than this). Thoth: The History and Legacy of the Ancient Egyptian God Who Maintains the Universe looks at the mythology surrounding one of antiquity’s most famous deities. You will learn about Thoth like never before.	511	ENGLISH	1
Civil War Soldiers Used Hair Dye to Improve Appearance In Pictures, Archaeologists Discover Recent excavations at Camp Nelson in Kentucky have uncovered evidence which suggests soldiers in the American Civil War used hair dye to improve their appearance in photos. The finds were discovered amongst the remains of a 150 year old photography studio, which had once been part of a Union camp during the Civil War. The discovery was made by a team of researchers from Transylvania University in Lexington who were working at the camp, which was once a hub for Union troops. While the researchers had originally believed the small glass bottles to have contained medicine, they noticed embossed lettering on the bottles when they were reconstructed. After researching the names ‘Christadoro’ and ‘Dr. Jaynes’, the archaeologists discovered that these were hair dye brands. Researcher Stephen McBride said that the dye ‘suggested that people were fixing up their hair before they had their photograph taken’. This could be because early photography methods meant that if you had light hair, the monochrome photograph would make your hair appear white or grey. The Civil War was the first war in the US to be photographed and it was common for new enlistees to have their photo taken before leaving to fight in the war. Many of the enlistees wished to be photographed to display their status as soldiers, and also for posterity in case they were injured or killed. We offer a chance to view the American Civil War from a variety of perspectives and locations. Learn more about the different tours which we offer here. Added: 12th December 2019	<urn:uuid:6872527c-7f36-493f-84f7-1b4bc9320dda>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.theculturalexperience.com/news/civil-war-soldiers-used-hair-dye-to-improve-appearance-in-pictures-archaeologists-discover/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250605075.24/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121192553-20200121221553-00242.warc.gz	en	0.985898	335	3.515625	4	[ -0.33497166633605957, 0.17827923595905304, 0.2805943489074707, 0.16330736875534058, 0.15638956427574158, 0.17212863266468048, 0.09833082556724548, -0.05547584220767021, -0.6176877021789551, 0.2077353298664093, 0.5770648121833801, -0.3480270802974701, -0.07111331075429916, 0.609659373760223...	10	Civil War Soldiers Used Hair Dye to Improve Appearance In Pictures, Archaeologists Discover Recent excavations at Camp Nelson in Kentucky have uncovered evidence which suggests soldiers in the American Civil War used hair dye to improve their appearance in photos. The finds were discovered amongst the remains of a 150 year old photography studio, which had once been part of a Union camp during the Civil War. The discovery was made by a team of researchers from Transylvania University in Lexington who were working at the camp, which was once a hub for Union troops. While the researchers had originally believed the small glass bottles to have contained medicine, they noticed embossed lettering on the bottles when they were reconstructed. After researching the names ‘Christadoro’ and ‘Dr. Jaynes’, the archaeologists discovered that these were hair dye brands. Researcher Stephen McBride said that the dye ‘suggested that people were fixing up their hair before they had their photograph taken’. This could be because early photography methods meant that if you had light hair, the monochrome photograph would make your hair appear white or grey. The Civil War was the first war in the US to be photographed and it was common for new enlistees to have their photo taken before leaving to fight in the war. Many of the enlistees wished to be photographed to display their status as soldiers, and also for posterity in case they were injured or killed. We offer a chance to view the American Civil War from a variety of perspectives and locations. Learn more about the different tours which we offer here. Added: 12th December 2019	324	ENGLISH	1
London: Researchers have discovered two 8,500-year-old human teeth, which had been used as pendants in a necklace or bracelet, at a prehistoric archaeological site in Turkey the first evidence of this practice in the Near East, a region that roughly encompasses Western Asia, Turkey, and Egypt. While evidence that human teeth were used for ornamental purposes have been found at European sites, this practice had never been documented before in the Near East during these, or subsequent time frames, the researchers from the University of Copenhagen said. Based on the rarity of the find, the study, published in the Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, said the human teeth were imbued with profound symbolic meaning for the people who wore them. During excavations at a site in Catalhoyuk in Turkey between 2013 and 2015, the researchers, including those from the University of Copenhagen in Denmark, found three 8,500-year-old-teeth. They said the unearthed teeth appeared to have been intentionally drilled to be worn as beads in a necklace or bracelet. On further analysis, the researchers confirmed that two of the teeth had indeed been used as beads or pendants. "Not only had the two teeth been drilled with a conically shaped microdrill similar to those used for creating the vast amounts of beads from animal bone and stone that we have found at the site, but they also showed signs of wear corresponding to extensive use as ornaments in a necklace or bracelet," said Scott Haddow, University of Copenhagen archaeologist and first author of the study. According to the study, the two teeth pendants were probably extracted from two mature individuals postmortem. "The wear on the teeth's chewing surfaces indicates that the individuals would have been between 30-50 years old. And since neither tooth seems to have been diseased-which would likely have caused the tooth to fall out during life, the most likely scenario is that both teeth were taken from skulls at the site," Haddow added. The most interesting insight from the study is the fact that human teeth and bone were not selected and modified more often, the researchers said. "Because of the rarity of the find, we find it very unlikely that these modified human teeth were used solely for aesthetic purposes but rather carried profound symbolic meaning for the people who wore them," Scott Haddow explained. Haddow added that burials at the site often contained beads and pendants made from animal bone/teeth and other materials, indicating that it may have been a deliberate choice not to include items made from human bone and teeth with burials. The researchers postulated that these human teeth pendants were perhaps related to specific - and rare - ritual taboos. Also Read: Whitening products can damage your teeth	<urn:uuid:92455a41-4b80-4389-bf90-55cd9b3efc01>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://in.news.yahoo.com/8-500-old-pendant-made-185412905.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251694071.63/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126230255-20200127020255-00360.warc.gz	en	0.980606	569	3.40625	3	[ -0.5085095167160034, 0.3741695284843445, 0.4163808226585388, 0.0018089276272803545, -0.4238854944705963, -0.33222857117652893, 0.12141163647174835, 0.21864132583141327, -0.14688663184642792, 0.18822458386421204, 0.24567711353302002, -0.5389111042022705, -0.13742484152317047, 0.553213357925...	1	London: Researchers have discovered two 8,500-year-old human teeth, which had been used as pendants in a necklace or bracelet, at a prehistoric archaeological site in Turkey the first evidence of this practice in the Near East, a region that roughly encompasses Western Asia, Turkey, and Egypt. While evidence that human teeth were used for ornamental purposes have been found at European sites, this practice had never been documented before in the Near East during these, or subsequent time frames, the researchers from the University of Copenhagen said. Based on the rarity of the find, the study, published in the Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, said the human teeth were imbued with profound symbolic meaning for the people who wore them. During excavations at a site in Catalhoyuk in Turkey between 2013 and 2015, the researchers, including those from the University of Copenhagen in Denmark, found three 8,500-year-old-teeth. They said the unearthed teeth appeared to have been intentionally drilled to be worn as beads in a necklace or bracelet. On further analysis, the researchers confirmed that two of the teeth had indeed been used as beads or pendants. "Not only had the two teeth been drilled with a conically shaped microdrill similar to those used for creating the vast amounts of beads from animal bone and stone that we have found at the site, but they also showed signs of wear corresponding to extensive use as ornaments in a necklace or bracelet," said Scott Haddow, University of Copenhagen archaeologist and first author of the study. According to the study, the two teeth pendants were probably extracted from two mature individuals postmortem. "The wear on the teeth's chewing surfaces indicates that the individuals would have been between 30-50 years old. And since neither tooth seems to have been diseased-which would likely have caused the tooth to fall out during life, the most likely scenario is that both teeth were taken from skulls at the site," Haddow added. The most interesting insight from the study is the fact that human teeth and bone were not selected and modified more often, the researchers said. "Because of the rarity of the find, we find it very unlikely that these modified human teeth were used solely for aesthetic purposes but rather carried profound symbolic meaning for the people who wore them," Scott Haddow explained. Haddow added that burials at the site often contained beads and pendants made from animal bone/teeth and other materials, indicating that it may have been a deliberate choice not to include items made from human bone and teeth with burials. The researchers postulated that these human teeth pendants were perhaps related to specific - and rare - ritual taboos. Also Read: Whitening products can damage your teeth	568	ENGLISH	1
Through his essays, poems, and lectures, Emerson established himself as a leading spokesman of transcendentalism and as a major figure in American literature. The writer's father, William Emerson, a descendant of New England clergymen, was minister of the First Unitarian Church in Boston. Emerson's early years were filled with books and a daily routine of studious and frugal homelife. After his father's death in 1811, his eccentric but brilliant aunt, Mary Moody Emerson, became his confidante and stimulated his independent thinking. At Harvard (1817–21) he began recording his thoughts in the famous Journal. Poor health hindered his studies at the Harvard divinity school in 1825, and in 1826, after being licensed to preach, he was forced to go south because of incipient tuberculosis. In 1829 he became pastor of the Old North Church in Boston (Second Unitarian). In the same year he married Ellen Tucker, whose death from tuberculosis in 1831 caused him great sorrow. Emerson's personal religious scruples and, in particular, his conviction that the Lord's Supper was not intended by Christ to be a permanent sacrament led him into conflict with his congregation. In 1832 he retired from his only pastorate. On a trip to Europe at this time he met Carlyle (who became a close friend), Coleridge, and Wordsworth. Through these notable English writers, Emerson's interest in transcendental thought began to blossom. Other strong influences on his philosophical thought, besides his own Unitarian background, were Plato and the Neoplatonists, the sacred books of the East, and the mystical writings of Swedenborg. He returned home in 1834, settled in Concord, Mass. and married (1835) his second wife, Lydia Jackson. During the early 1830s Emerson began an active career as writer and lecturer. In 1836 he published anonymously his essay Nature, based on his early lectures. It is in that piece that he first set forth the main principles of transcendentalism, expressing a firm belief in the mystical unity of nature. He attracted wide attention with “The American Scholar,” his Phi Beta Kappa oration at Harvard in 1837, in which he called for independence from European cultural leadership. In his lecture at the Harvard divinity school in 1838, his admonition that one could find redemption only in one's own soul was taken to mean that he repudiated Christianity. This caused such indignation that he was not invited to Harvard again until 1866, when the college granted him an LL.D. degree. In 1840 Emerson joined with others in publishing The Dial, a magazine intended to promulgate transcendental thought. One of the younger contributors to The Dial was Henry David Thoreau, who lived in the Emerson household from 1841 to 1843 and became Emerson's most famous disciple. The first collection of Emerson's poems appeared in 1847. In spite of his difficulty in writing structurally correct verse, he always regarded himself essentially as a poet. Among his best-known poems are “Threnody,” “Brahma,” “The Problem,” “The Rhodora,” and “The Concord Hymn.” It was his winter lecture tours, however, which first made Emerson famous among his contemporaries. These lectures received their final form in his series of Essays (1841; second series, 1844). The most notable among them are “The Over-Soul,” “Compensation,” and “Self-Reliance.” From 1845–47 he delivered a series of lectures published as Representative Men (1850). After a second trip to England, in 1847, he gave another series of lectures later published as English Traits (1856). During the 1850s he became strongly interested in abolitionism and was an active sympathizer with the North in the Civil War. His late lecture tours are contained in The Conduct of Life (1860) and Society and Solitude (1870). Though his last years were marked by a decline in his mental powers, his literary reputation rapidly continued to spread. Probably no writer has so profoundly influenced American thought as Emerson. See Emerson's letters (ed. by R. L. Rusk, 6 vol., 1939); biographies by Van Wyck Brooks (1932), Oliver Wendell Holmes (1885, repr. 1967), Edward Wagenknecht (1974), and Gay W. Allen (1981); studies by Jonathan Bishop (1964), Joel Porte (1966, repr. 1979), K. W. Cameron, ed. (1967), and S. E. Whicher (2d ed. 1971). Who2. Copyright © 1998-2006 by Who2?, LLC. All rights reserved. Also Born on May 25 Who Shares Your Birthday? The Day You Were Born The Year You Were Born	<urn:uuid:65559b8a-88e6-4e80-beb8-d2639dbdd7a1>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.infoplease.com/birthday/may-25	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598800.30/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120135447-20200120164447-00352.warc.gz	en	0.982543	1,015	3.546875	4	[ 0.06422489881515503, 0.25356489419937134, -0.10496623814105988, -0.3321918845176697, -0.31233593821525574, 0.019815796986222267, -0.1713104397058487, -0.0815490111708641, 0.15845732390880585, 0.06282791495323181, 0.1313764750957489, -0.040378209203481674, 0.2766774296760559, 0.151527017354...	3	Through his essays, poems, and lectures, Emerson established himself as a leading spokesman of transcendentalism and as a major figure in American literature. The writer's father, William Emerson, a descendant of New England clergymen, was minister of the First Unitarian Church in Boston. Emerson's early years were filled with books and a daily routine of studious and frugal homelife. After his father's death in 1811, his eccentric but brilliant aunt, Mary Moody Emerson, became his confidante and stimulated his independent thinking. At Harvard (1817–21) he began recording his thoughts in the famous Journal. Poor health hindered his studies at the Harvard divinity school in 1825, and in 1826, after being licensed to preach, he was forced to go south because of incipient tuberculosis. In 1829 he became pastor of the Old North Church in Boston (Second Unitarian). In the same year he married Ellen Tucker, whose death from tuberculosis in 1831 caused him great sorrow. Emerson's personal religious scruples and, in particular, his conviction that the Lord's Supper was not intended by Christ to be a permanent sacrament led him into conflict with his congregation. In 1832 he retired from his only pastorate. On a trip to Europe at this time he met Carlyle (who became a close friend), Coleridge, and Wordsworth. Through these notable English writers, Emerson's interest in transcendental thought began to blossom. Other strong influences on his philosophical thought, besides his own Unitarian background, were Plato and the Neoplatonists, the sacred books of the East, and the mystical writings of Swedenborg. He returned home in 1834, settled in Concord, Mass. and married (1835) his second wife, Lydia Jackson. During the early 1830s Emerson began an active career as writer and lecturer. In 1836 he published anonymously his essay Nature, based on his early lectures. It is in that piece that he first set forth the main principles of transcendentalism, expressing a firm belief in the mystical unity of nature. He attracted wide attention with “The American Scholar,” his Phi Beta Kappa oration at Harvard in 1837, in which he called for independence from European cultural leadership. In his lecture at the Harvard divinity school in 1838, his admonition that one could find redemption only in one's own soul was taken to mean that he repudiated Christianity. This caused such indignation that he was not invited to Harvard again until 1866, when the college granted him an LL.D. degree. In 1840 Emerson joined with others in publishing The Dial, a magazine intended to promulgate transcendental thought. One of the younger contributors to The Dial was Henry David Thoreau, who lived in the Emerson household from 1841 to 1843 and became Emerson's most famous disciple. The first collection of Emerson's poems appeared in 1847. In spite of his difficulty in writing structurally correct verse, he always regarded himself essentially as a poet. Among his best-known poems are “Threnody,” “Brahma,” “The Problem,” “The Rhodora,” and “The Concord Hymn.” It was his winter lecture tours, however, which first made Emerson famous among his contemporaries. These lectures received their final form in his series of Essays (1841; second series, 1844). The most notable among them are “The Over-Soul,” “Compensation,” and “Self-Reliance.” From 1845–47 he delivered a series of lectures published as Representative Men (1850). After a second trip to England, in 1847, he gave another series of lectures later published as English Traits (1856). During the 1850s he became strongly interested in abolitionism and was an active sympathizer with the North in the Civil War. His late lecture tours are contained in The Conduct of Life (1860) and Society and Solitude (1870). Though his last years were marked by a decline in his mental powers, his literary reputation rapidly continued to spread. Probably no writer has so profoundly influenced American thought as Emerson. See Emerson's letters (ed. by R. L. Rusk, 6 vol., 1939); biographies by Van Wyck Brooks (1932), Oliver Wendell Holmes (1885, repr. 1967), Edward Wagenknecht (1974), and Gay W. Allen (1981); studies by Jonathan Bishop (1964), Joel Porte (1966, repr. 1979), K. W. Cameron, ed. (1967), and S. E. Whicher (2d ed. 1971). Who2. Copyright © 1998-2006 by Who2?, LLC. All rights reserved. Also Born on May 25 Who Shares Your Birthday? The Day You Were Born The Year You Were Born	1,107	ENGLISH	1
There were many new developments in ceramics, along with the continuation of established traditions. Three major types of decoration emerged: monochromatic glazes, including celadon, red, green, and yellow; underglaze copper red and cobalt blue; and overglaze, or enamel painting, sometimes combined with underglaze blue. The latter, often called “blue and white,” was imitated in Vietnam, Japan, and, from the 17th century, in Europe. Much of this porcelain was produced in the huge factory at Jingdezhen in present-day Jiangsu province. One of the period’s most-influential wares was the stoneware of Yixing in Jiangsu province, which was exported in the 17th century to the West, where it was known as boccaro ware and imitated by such factories as Meissen. The Ming regime restored the former literary examinations for public office, which pleased the literary world, dominated by Southerners. In their own writing the Ming sought a return to classical prose and poetry styles and, as a result, produced writings that were imitative and generally of little consequence. Writers of vernacular literature, however, made real contributions, especially in novels and drama. Chinese traditional drama originating in the Song dynasty had been banned by the Mongols but survived underground in the South, and in the Ming era it was restored. This was chuanqi, a form of musical theatre with numerous scenes and contemporary plots. What emerged was kunqu style, less bombastic in song and accompaniment than other popular theatre. Under the Ming it enjoyed great popularity, indeed outlasting the dynasty by a century or more. It was adapted into a full-length opera form, which, although still performed today, was gradually replaced in popularity by jingxi (Peking opera) during the Qing dynasty. In the end, the greatest achievements accomplished during this time were on architecture. The Forbidden City in Beijing was crafted this time. Porcelain making was also relevant during this time, which contributed to arts of present day. Books were routinely banned, and theaters shut down.Despite this oppressive atmosphere, some creative work did gather attention, as with the poetry of Yuan Mei and Cao Xueqin’s novel Dream of the Red Chamber.Painting also managed to thrive. Former Ming clan members Zhu Da and Shi Tao became monks to escape governmental roles in Qing rule and became painters. Zhu Da embraced silence as he wandered across China and his depictions of nature and landscapes are imbued with manic energy. Shi Tao is considered an artistic rule-breaker, with Impressionist-style brush strokes and presentations that predated Surrealism. Opium was used medicinally in China for centuries, but by the 18th century it was popular recreationally. Following its conquest of India, Britain cultivated and exported opium to China, flooding the country with the drug. An addiction crisis followed. A ban was attempted, and smoking opium outlawed, but British traders worked with black marketers to bypass laws. Military confrontation became likely, and soon British forces shut down Chinese ports. Among many concessions during negotiations, China was forced to give up Hong Kong to the British. A second Opium War was waged from 1856 to 1860 against the British and the French, bringing more unequal agreements.Christian missionaries were allowed to flood the country, and western businessmen were free to open factories there. Ports were leased to foreign powers, allowing them to operate within China according to their own laws, and opium addiction rose.	<urn:uuid:d1aa161e-b461-48e3-9078-b56060520355>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.chinaexpeditiontours.com/china-guide/ming-and-qing-dynasty	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250604397.40/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121132900-20200121161900-00055.warc.gz	en	0.987129	733	3.34375	3	[ -0.12299440801143646, 0.033706940710544586, 0.5837541818618774, -0.033079423010349274, -0.13072526454925537, 0.12464726716279984, -0.06999801099300385, -0.01575488969683647, -0.11676618456840515, -0.08622241020202637, -0.1608690321445465, -0.16528594493865967, 0.1672717034816742, 0.4193658...	13	There were many new developments in ceramics, along with the continuation of established traditions. Three major types of decoration emerged: monochromatic glazes, including celadon, red, green, and yellow; underglaze copper red and cobalt blue; and overglaze, or enamel painting, sometimes combined with underglaze blue. The latter, often called “blue and white,” was imitated in Vietnam, Japan, and, from the 17th century, in Europe. Much of this porcelain was produced in the huge factory at Jingdezhen in present-day Jiangsu province. One of the period’s most-influential wares was the stoneware of Yixing in Jiangsu province, which was exported in the 17th century to the West, where it was known as boccaro ware and imitated by such factories as Meissen. The Ming regime restored the former literary examinations for public office, which pleased the literary world, dominated by Southerners. In their own writing the Ming sought a return to classical prose and poetry styles and, as a result, produced writings that were imitative and generally of little consequence. Writers of vernacular literature, however, made real contributions, especially in novels and drama. Chinese traditional drama originating in the Song dynasty had been banned by the Mongols but survived underground in the South, and in the Ming era it was restored. This was chuanqi, a form of musical theatre with numerous scenes and contemporary plots. What emerged was kunqu style, less bombastic in song and accompaniment than other popular theatre. Under the Ming it enjoyed great popularity, indeed outlasting the dynasty by a century or more. It was adapted into a full-length opera form, which, although still performed today, was gradually replaced in popularity by jingxi (Peking opera) during the Qing dynasty. In the end, the greatest achievements accomplished during this time were on architecture. The Forbidden City in Beijing was crafted this time. Porcelain making was also relevant during this time, which contributed to arts of present day. Books were routinely banned, and theaters shut down.Despite this oppressive atmosphere, some creative work did gather attention, as with the poetry of Yuan Mei and Cao Xueqin’s novel Dream of the Red Chamber.Painting also managed to thrive. Former Ming clan members Zhu Da and Shi Tao became monks to escape governmental roles in Qing rule and became painters. Zhu Da embraced silence as he wandered across China and his depictions of nature and landscapes are imbued with manic energy. Shi Tao is considered an artistic rule-breaker, with Impressionist-style brush strokes and presentations that predated Surrealism. Opium was used medicinally in China for centuries, but by the 18th century it was popular recreationally. Following its conquest of India, Britain cultivated and exported opium to China, flooding the country with the drug. An addiction crisis followed. A ban was attempted, and smoking opium outlawed, but British traders worked with black marketers to bypass laws. Military confrontation became likely, and soon British forces shut down Chinese ports. Among many concessions during negotiations, China was forced to give up Hong Kong to the British. A second Opium War was waged from 1856 to 1860 against the British and the French, bringing more unequal agreements.Christian missionaries were allowed to flood the country, and western businessmen were free to open factories there. Ports were leased to foreign powers, allowing them to operate within China according to their own laws, and opium addiction rose.	727	ENGLISH	1
The geopolitical tensions between the Western and the Eastern bloc – known as the Cold War – shaped the world history of the second half of the 20th century. Despite the name, the period of the Cold War was everything but cold. Although the two blocs never directly fought each other, proxy wars served as an indirect trial of strength. But the capitalist West and the communist East also fought each other by other means. The Space Race was a competition for power and superiority over the respective political system. Another such showdown was in sports. The Olympic Games became highly political, serving as a stage for political protest such as boycotts. In 1956 several nations boycotted the Olympic Summer Games in Melbourne due to the Soviet suppression of the Hungarian Revolution. In 1980, the United States and several other countries refused to attend the Summer Olympics in Moscow after the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan. In return, the Soviet Union stayed away from the next games in Los Angeles. Sport became an arena where the antagonists could prove their strength. After the Second World War, the Soviet Union had put a lot of money in the formation of a sporting elite that won an insane number of medals. In the popular team sports, however, the Soviet Union was less successful. In those sports, large organisations have emerged in the capitalist West employing professionals. The only exception was in ice hockey, where the Soviet Union managed to create a team that dominated international competition for several decades. Soviet ice hockey first appeared on the international stage in 1954 at the World Championship in Stockholm. The Russians did not have a long tradition in this sport. The state had forged a national team throughout the preceding years. The win of the gold medal in their very first World Cup was a huge surprise and granted them international attention. From then on, the Soviet team would dominate international competition, winning twenty-two out of thirty-two World Championships and seven out of nine Olympic Games. Crucial to the Soviet success was their coach Anatoli Tarasov. He created a unique style of play including elements and tactics from football and ballet. In contrast to the North American style of play, the Soviets relied less on physical strength, as on the class of the individual player. The Russian players were very talented skaters and emphasised passing and puck possession. Players would only shoot from a very promising position. Otherwise the puck would be passed and kept in possession until such a position was reached. The very unique style was often referred to as ‘collective ice hockey’, reflecting the communist ideology of collectivism. Indeed, Soviet ice hockey training included political indoctrination. The new style of play was difficult, and often frustrated the opponents. The core of the team played together throughout the year at the Central Army Sports Club in Moscow and seemed to get on blindly. However, Soviet success was controversial. In both the World Championships and the Olympic Games, only amateurs were allowed to play. Officially, professional sportsmen did not exist in the Soviet Union as they were all employed by a factory, the army or any other organ of security. Practically, however, they were full-time ice hockey players. Such bypassing of amateurism was especially criticised by the motherland of ice hockey, Canada. The best players from North America were all professionals playing in the National Hockey League and thus excluded from international competition. Despite those restrictions, Canada still managed to dominate international competition with selections of college players – until the rise of Soviet ice hockey. As their protests were unheard, Canada stayed absent from World Cups between 1970 and 1976. The ultimate battle on ice was the 1972 summit series where the Soviet team faced a Canadian national selection of NHL players. Four matches were held in Canada and four in Moscow. Before the series, everyone in North America expected Team Canada to sweep away the Russians as they could not compete with them in a professional game. The Soviets won the first game 7-3. Although Canada managed to win the series in an extremely tight last game, the series proved that the Russians could keep up with North America’s best players. The Red Machine continued dominating the international ice hockey stage until the decay of the Eastern Bloc – with one prominent exception. In 1980, the US national team consisting of college players managed to beat the highly favoured Red Giant during the Winter Olympics in Lake Placid. In the time of the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan, this “Miracle on Ice” caused national euphoria in the United States. The victory was seen as a proof that their way of life was the right one.	<urn:uuid:662dab72-3211-47e6-8878-958100da6d0d>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.seren.bangor.ac.uk/arts-culture/history/2019/12/12/cold-war-on-ice/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592394.9/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118081234-20200118105234-00216.warc.gz	en	0.980086	922	3.546875	4	[ -0.45893949270248413, 0.12479931861162186, 0.13068579137325287, -0.05757768824696541, 0.28244513273239136, 0.5396512746810913, 0.15057197213172913, 0.1804390549659729, -0.14160044491291046, 0.004845165181905031, -0.004687715787440538, -0.07088623940944672, 0.5194003582000732, 0.28623658418...	12	The geopolitical tensions between the Western and the Eastern bloc – known as the Cold War – shaped the world history of the second half of the 20th century. Despite the name, the period of the Cold War was everything but cold. Although the two blocs never directly fought each other, proxy wars served as an indirect trial of strength. But the capitalist West and the communist East also fought each other by other means. The Space Race was a competition for power and superiority over the respective political system. Another such showdown was in sports. The Olympic Games became highly political, serving as a stage for political protest such as boycotts. In 1956 several nations boycotted the Olympic Summer Games in Melbourne due to the Soviet suppression of the Hungarian Revolution. In 1980, the United States and several other countries refused to attend the Summer Olympics in Moscow after the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan. In return, the Soviet Union stayed away from the next games in Los Angeles. Sport became an arena where the antagonists could prove their strength. After the Second World War, the Soviet Union had put a lot of money in the formation of a sporting elite that won an insane number of medals. In the popular team sports, however, the Soviet Union was less successful. In those sports, large organisations have emerged in the capitalist West employing professionals. The only exception was in ice hockey, where the Soviet Union managed to create a team that dominated international competition for several decades. Soviet ice hockey first appeared on the international stage in 1954 at the World Championship in Stockholm. The Russians did not have a long tradition in this sport. The state had forged a national team throughout the preceding years. The win of the gold medal in their very first World Cup was a huge surprise and granted them international attention. From then on, the Soviet team would dominate international competition, winning twenty-two out of thirty-two World Championships and seven out of nine Olympic Games. Crucial to the Soviet success was their coach Anatoli Tarasov. He created a unique style of play including elements and tactics from football and ballet. In contrast to the North American style of play, the Soviets relied less on physical strength, as on the class of the individual player. The Russian players were very talented skaters and emphasised passing and puck possession. Players would only shoot from a very promising position. Otherwise the puck would be passed and kept in possession until such a position was reached. The very unique style was often referred to as ‘collective ice hockey’, reflecting the communist ideology of collectivism. Indeed, Soviet ice hockey training included political indoctrination. The new style of play was difficult, and often frustrated the opponents. The core of the team played together throughout the year at the Central Army Sports Club in Moscow and seemed to get on blindly. However, Soviet success was controversial. In both the World Championships and the Olympic Games, only amateurs were allowed to play. Officially, professional sportsmen did not exist in the Soviet Union as they were all employed by a factory, the army or any other organ of security. Practically, however, they were full-time ice hockey players. Such bypassing of amateurism was especially criticised by the motherland of ice hockey, Canada. The best players from North America were all professionals playing in the National Hockey League and thus excluded from international competition. Despite those restrictions, Canada still managed to dominate international competition with selections of college players – until the rise of Soviet ice hockey. As their protests were unheard, Canada stayed absent from World Cups between 1970 and 1976. The ultimate battle on ice was the 1972 summit series where the Soviet team faced a Canadian national selection of NHL players. Four matches were held in Canada and four in Moscow. Before the series, everyone in North America expected Team Canada to sweep away the Russians as they could not compete with them in a professional game. The Soviets won the first game 7-3. Although Canada managed to win the series in an extremely tight last game, the series proved that the Russians could keep up with North America’s best players. The Red Machine continued dominating the international ice hockey stage until the decay of the Eastern Bloc – with one prominent exception. In 1980, the US national team consisting of college players managed to beat the highly favoured Red Giant during the Winter Olympics in Lake Placid. In the time of the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan, this “Miracle on Ice” caused national euphoria in the United States. The victory was seen as a proof that their way of life was the right one.	932	ENGLISH	1
During the early nineteen hundreds, resided a young woman called Carrie Pollitzer. Her life in the us was much different in comparison to present day. Women didn’t have much freedom to be independent and their accomplishments were based primarily on gender. A woman would go to college to meet a spouse, stay at home with the small children, and would have trouble living a higher standard of life if not marrying. Economically, businesses were run by the white man. Men possessed the land and often acquired poor white women and African Americans working the farms. Industrially, the factories were possessed by men and many women that were unwed works in the factories. Politically, the white man ran the national and state. They were the only Americans who were permitted to vote. My study of the southern women has shown, culturally, there were many different ways of living and prospering in the south. One is the poor BLACK communities, where the people didn’t have anything. Another was the wealthy white plantation buying family members who only associated themselves with other rich upper-class plantation owners. This was a time when the civil war was and the African Americans were not slaves any longer over, so new problems were arising for the South since there was no longer free labor. Many women wrote characters to talk to their relatives and buddies. Our Service Can Write a Custom Essay on Carrie Pollitzer for you personally! The number 1 campaign in women’s suffrage was the to vote. In 1913 two-Charleston women made a decision to rebel and sign up for a newly shaped party, which would be known as the Country wide Women’s Party later. Both women’s names were Carrie and Mabel Pollitzer. Later their younger sister joined in the entire year 1916. Her name was Anita Pollitzer. The marketing campaign of the National Women’s Party was to win the to vote for women living in America and would change all three women’s lives. Carrie Pollitzer published many characters to her family and friends. Through her words, I have been able to take a step back in its history and experience what life may have been for her. She was created December 5, 1881 in Charleston, SC. She was the daughter of Gustave M. Pollitzer and Mrs. Clara Guinzburg Pollitzer. Her dad was the owner of the firm, G.M. Pollitzer & Company of Charleston and Beaufort. His company exported sea-island cotton and cotton seed. His family were German Jews who emigrated from Vienna to NY before Gustav was created. He made his way to Charleston when he was age sixteen. - January (45) - Experience integrating to third celebrations - Advertisements can’t be unfair - Printing of Tax Return - Consulting on digital information retention and security policies - Showing the ability to study from weaknesses, failures, and/or errors - Knowledge of another established UN language can be an advantage Carrie’s mother was from Baltimore and was the child of the rabbi. Her family got emigrated from Prague in 1848. She taught German having graduated from Hunter College before she was married. Carrie experienced two young sisters, Mabel and Anita Pollitzer. Anita, born October 31, 1894, was the youngest considered and blessed the smartest. She had discovered how to read, write, and play the piano before she even inserted school. She also graduated from Columbia University with a degree in art and education in 1916. Her middle sister Mabel was very helped and active Carrie with women’s suffrage. She organized the biology department at Memminger high and normal schools in 1906. She also established the Charleston Public Library in 1929, which required obtaining legislation. Her brother was a pediatrician who spent most of his life in Greenville. The Pollitzer family was very prominent and somewhat rich. There was an invitation to the president’s banquet at the Charleston hotel in 1903, found in the family letters. This implies Carrie’s father had an influence of an increased society. My impression is the family was a part of the elite class in Charleston so that as young women in the early nineteen hundreds; the Pollitzer sisters achieved the unusual for that point. On October 24 Carrie Pollitzer died, 1972, at the age of ninety-two. Carrie Pollitzer was the oldest so she got to set a good example and she really does. During the time when Carrie was a little girl, it was rare for girls to have gone beyond a higher college education. Carrie proved this to be something of history. She started at Miss Hutchet’s private college and moved on to public institutions. She graduated from Memminger Normal School in 1901. She was age twenty.	<urn:uuid:3c22ff19-8d5d-4e66-b4eb-9acc6bfd5254>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://chapv.com/she-was-the-age-of-twenty/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250589560.16/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117123339-20200117151339-00189.warc.gz	en	0.987835	978	3.3125	3	[ -0.11731167882680893, 0.07606223970651627, -0.050613246858119965, -0.009093279018998146, -0.2803434431552887, 0.5403879284858704, 0.133083313703537, -0.09949401021003723, -0.04464738816022873, 0.1721288561820984, 0.41185396909713745, 0.40604168176651, -0.012284427881240845, -0.246613651514...	4	During the early nineteen hundreds, resided a young woman called Carrie Pollitzer. Her life in the us was much different in comparison to present day. Women didn’t have much freedom to be independent and their accomplishments were based primarily on gender. A woman would go to college to meet a spouse, stay at home with the small children, and would have trouble living a higher standard of life if not marrying. Economically, businesses were run by the white man. Men possessed the land and often acquired poor white women and African Americans working the farms. Industrially, the factories were possessed by men and many women that were unwed works in the factories. Politically, the white man ran the national and state. They were the only Americans who were permitted to vote. My study of the southern women has shown, culturally, there were many different ways of living and prospering in the south. One is the poor BLACK communities, where the people didn’t have anything. Another was the wealthy white plantation buying family members who only associated themselves with other rich upper-class plantation owners. This was a time when the civil war was and the African Americans were not slaves any longer over, so new problems were arising for the South since there was no longer free labor. Many women wrote characters to talk to their relatives and buddies. Our Service Can Write a Custom Essay on Carrie Pollitzer for you personally! The number 1 campaign in women’s suffrage was the to vote. In 1913 two-Charleston women made a decision to rebel and sign up for a newly shaped party, which would be known as the Country wide Women’s Party later. Both women’s names were Carrie and Mabel Pollitzer. Later their younger sister joined in the entire year 1916. Her name was Anita Pollitzer. The marketing campaign of the National Women’s Party was to win the to vote for women living in America and would change all three women’s lives. Carrie Pollitzer published many characters to her family and friends. Through her words, I have been able to take a step back in its history and experience what life may have been for her. She was created December 5, 1881 in Charleston, SC. She was the daughter of Gustave M. Pollitzer and Mrs. Clara Guinzburg Pollitzer. Her dad was the owner of the firm, G.M. Pollitzer & Company of Charleston and Beaufort. His company exported sea-island cotton and cotton seed. His family were German Jews who emigrated from Vienna to NY before Gustav was created. He made his way to Charleston when he was age sixteen. - January (45) - Experience integrating to third celebrations - Advertisements can’t be unfair - Printing of Tax Return - Consulting on digital information retention and security policies - Showing the ability to study from weaknesses, failures, and/or errors - Knowledge of another established UN language can be an advantage Carrie’s mother was from Baltimore and was the child of the rabbi. Her family got emigrated from Prague in 1848. She taught German having graduated from Hunter College before she was married. Carrie experienced two young sisters, Mabel and Anita Pollitzer. Anita, born October 31, 1894, was the youngest considered and blessed the smartest. She had discovered how to read, write, and play the piano before she even inserted school. She also graduated from Columbia University with a degree in art and education in 1916. Her middle sister Mabel was very helped and active Carrie with women’s suffrage. She organized the biology department at Memminger high and normal schools in 1906. She also established the Charleston Public Library in 1929, which required obtaining legislation. Her brother was a pediatrician who spent most of his life in Greenville. The Pollitzer family was very prominent and somewhat rich. There was an invitation to the president’s banquet at the Charleston hotel in 1903, found in the family letters. This implies Carrie’s father had an influence of an increased society. My impression is the family was a part of the elite class in Charleston so that as young women in the early nineteen hundreds; the Pollitzer sisters achieved the unusual for that point. On October 24 Carrie Pollitzer died, 1972, at the age of ninety-two. Carrie Pollitzer was the oldest so she got to set a good example and she really does. During the time when Carrie was a little girl, it was rare for girls to have gone beyond a higher college education. Carrie proved this to be something of history. She started at Miss Hutchet’s private college and moved on to public institutions. She graduated from Memminger Normal School in 1901. She was age twenty.	987	ENGLISH	1
People who make their own music are composers. People who play or sing music are “performers”. It is important for both composers and performers to understand what makes the music sound the way it does. In the times of the Ancient Greeks the famous philosopher Pythagoras tried to explain how instruments are tuned. He understood the science of the good vibrations that the instruments make and explained how and why the octave is divided into twelve parts(in some cultures). In the Middle Ages there were several famous music theorists who wrote books about music theory. Their ideas are interesting for us because they tell us what people thought about music at that time. In the 18th century some composers wrote books on music theory. Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach (son of the famous Johann Sebastian Bach) wrote a book called: “An Essay on the true art of playing the Keyboard”. Leopold Mozart (the father of the famous Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart) wrote a book called The Art of Playing the Violin. Both these books were extremely well known in their day. In spite of their titles the first halves of these two books are both about a branch of music theory called "performance practice": They tell us a lot about how music was played in those days, how some rhythms were played quite freely and how ornaments in the music were played. Today people who want to compose will study music theory, perhaps at college or university school of music. In a conservatory program, they study harmony and counterpoint as well as form; in other programs, they spend less time on the theories of the past. They will be taught “rules”. These rules are not laws, they simply mean: the way that most great composers wrote music in the past. These rules describe what composers of the past did, rather than telling composers of today what to do -- in fact, music composed today can have completely different rules than the music of the past. Music theory is important for people who perform music because all these things help people to understand the music they are playing. Images for kids Music theory Facts for Kids. Kiddle Encyclopedia.	<urn:uuid:9ea97dbe-3489-4f73-805c-289944fa396b>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://kids.kiddle.co/Music_theorist	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594705.17/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119180644-20200119204644-00381.warc.gz	en	0.982958	446	3.875	4	[ 0.058639731258153915, -0.036242008209228516, 0.36517950892448425, -0.5095378160476685, -0.5915002226829529, 0.08486943691968918, 0.12763041257858276, -0.03602701053023338, 0.2569650709629059, -0.13908587396144867, 0.1208275556564331, 0.20449897646903992, -0.14383381605148315, 0.17942853271...	1	People who make their own music are composers. People who play or sing music are “performers”. It is important for both composers and performers to understand what makes the music sound the way it does. In the times of the Ancient Greeks the famous philosopher Pythagoras tried to explain how instruments are tuned. He understood the science of the good vibrations that the instruments make and explained how and why the octave is divided into twelve parts(in some cultures). In the Middle Ages there were several famous music theorists who wrote books about music theory. Their ideas are interesting for us because they tell us what people thought about music at that time. In the 18th century some composers wrote books on music theory. Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach (son of the famous Johann Sebastian Bach) wrote a book called: “An Essay on the true art of playing the Keyboard”. Leopold Mozart (the father of the famous Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart) wrote a book called The Art of Playing the Violin. Both these books were extremely well known in their day. In spite of their titles the first halves of these two books are both about a branch of music theory called "performance practice": They tell us a lot about how music was played in those days, how some rhythms were played quite freely and how ornaments in the music were played. Today people who want to compose will study music theory, perhaps at college or university school of music. In a conservatory program, they study harmony and counterpoint as well as form; in other programs, they spend less time on the theories of the past. They will be taught “rules”. These rules are not laws, they simply mean: the way that most great composers wrote music in the past. These rules describe what composers of the past did, rather than telling composers of today what to do -- in fact, music composed today can have completely different rules than the music of the past. Music theory is important for people who perform music because all these things help people to understand the music they are playing. Images for kids Music theory Facts for Kids. Kiddle Encyclopedia.	420	ENGLISH	1
The Aztec Empire’s capital city was Tenochtitlan which was founded in 1325. In the 15 and early 16 centuries ruled the empire which is now southern Mexico. Aztecs are so called from Aztlan which can also be called White land. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Aztec Culture and Society" essay for youCreate order They often referred themselves as Culhua-Mexica they call themselves this because they link themselves with the Colhacan. They were suggested to be a tribe of hunters and gathers. In 1428-1440 when they were under the ruling of Itzcoatl the Tenochtitlan formed alliances with the states of Texcoco and Tlacopan. Soon they had become the dominant power in central Mexico. The population of the Aztec had started off with a low number of people. In 1519 there were around 25,000,000 Aztec people. When the Spaniards came they killed many and also brought many diseases. The Spaniards brought diseases such as smallpox, mumps, tuberculosis which they did not have the right medicine to treat these diseases. The Aztec religion was syncretistic. It shared some of the cosmological beliefs from the earlier people. They also did human sacrifice they particularly did it by offering up the humans heart they sacrificed they heart to Tonatiuh. Their calendar which had eighteen months with twenty days in each month. In the center of the calendar there was usually was the face of the sun. It elaborated round rituals and ceremonies. At least once a month they had a to honor a god or gods. They mainly worshipped the sun god. They also sacrificed animals. Some of the animals they sacrificed were cats, birds, fish, snakes. They also sacrificed jaguars they did this rarely because this was considered a powerful religious symbol. Aztecs valued music. They used it also for their religious reasons. They used instruments sucks as horns, drums, whistles, rattles and bells. They were also hunters and gathers. They hunted deer, boars, birds, and they also fished/trapped other marine animals. They kept things such as turkey and ducks. They used these for eggs and meat. They also grew crops such as corn, chilies, pigweed, and beans. They drank water and polque. They had big markets. They used these markets to buy, sell, and trade things. They also had judges in case of theft or is any arguments to place. Some things they would trade were baskets, pots. Also they had luxury goods’ they would sell or trade some of them were cocoa beans, animal skins, and gold. Live animals were also sold at the market. Some of the Aztec merchants would travelon long trips to go get goods from distant lands. They often made their art for religious reasons. They made stone sculptures of their gods. They love to use colorful feathers. They used the feathers for headdresses and to decorate their shields. They also made pottery, carvings, stamps. They liked to make animals using art. They would make animals such as dogs, monkeys, and snakes. The Aztec games were not just played entertainment they were also played for their religious reasons. One game is patolli. This game is played on a rock board shaped as a cross. The four parts of the cross had cells or spaces. The first person to get around the whole board wins the game.Another popular game was Tlachtli. This game was played with two teams. This game was played on an H shaped field that was between two walls. With a rubber ball that was 8 to 10 pounds you had to get it to the other teams side. You could only use your hips and feet to get the ball through the stone ring. One other game was a gambling game known as totologue . What you had to do on this game was hit a target with a gold pellet. Jacks and Marbles was another game. You will toss a small rock trying to hit clay balls. The wealthy Aztecs built their homes out of adobe. Adobe was built out of adobe clay which they let the sun dry out into brick shapes. These houses had four rooms, one was for the family to sleep in , a shrine, a place to cook food, and a place where the family would eat. They would make the roof out of two things one would be a thatched roof and the other is a terraced roof. The poorer people lived in huts. Their temple were built similar to pyramids. They had steps on there pyramids. The men of families could often have more than one wife. Usually only the wealthy men had more than just one wife, the men that were poor often only had one wife. If a man had more than one wife only the primary wife would go through the ceremony. The men was the more dominate but women also had power. Some of the poor would sell their children or themselves as slaves to pay off their debts. They got their education from bot home and school. No matter what social status you or you family was every child was educated. None of the people wrote. The only people that would write were the priest and scribes. From the ages four and five the children would stay at home with the partens. The little girls would learn from their mothers how to keep a household running. The little boys would learned from their fathers how to get food also how to trade and make things. The children stayed at home with their parents till the age of fourteen learning what the need to know. The boys could go to one of two schools the Calmecac or the Telpochcalli. The Calmecac prepared the boys to work for the government or in temples. The Telpochcalli help teach boys the life as a potter, farmer, soldier, and metal worker. This all depended on your status in society. The lower classes did most of the labor and the upper classes worked in temples or for the government. At the top you had the king or emperor. The Aztec clothing often did not cover the whole body. They wore their clothes kinda loose. They made their clothes out of cotton and ayate fiber. Ayate fiber was made from a cactus plant called maguey cactus. The mean would wear a mantle which was tied on the right shoulder and a loincloth. The women would wear a cueltl or a huipil. Their hair would be worn in two braids which rose on the side of the head and looked like horns. War was not just known and fighting war the term ‘war’ was also used as a term of childbirth. The warriors carried projectile weapons. The lowest rank you had they only gave you a club and shield. The higher rank that you were the more decorated your shield was. Also as your rank got higher the better weapon you would receive. They type of weapons they had were bow and arrows, slings, blowguns, and clubs. The shield they used was made out of wood. The suit they wore was made out of two or three layers of cotton soaked in salt brine. Nahuah was one of the spoken languages by people in the area. It is said that the most dominate speakers were the Nahuatl speakers. Nahuatl is an agglutinant language. An agglutinant language is one were you make phrases or words by combining suffixes and prefixes. They only have four basic vowels. These vowels are i,e,a,o. They also counted by twenties. 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:7957a6c0-bcf2-413f-ba5a-a8c39d45a54e>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://studydriver.com/aztec-culture-and-society/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251778168.77/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128091916-20200128121916-00283.warc.gz	en	0.993314	1,600	3.671875	4	[ -0.09043268114328384, 0.4090949594974518, 0.2427312433719635, 0.18014873564243317, -0.1742326021194458, -0.21352562308311462, 0.3721846044063568, 0.37418901920318604, -0.19588646292686462, -0.3552395701408386, 0.29242366552352905, -0.44633638858795166, 0.060660459101200104, 0.0017763962969...	1	The Aztec Empire’s capital city was Tenochtitlan which was founded in 1325. In the 15 and early 16 centuries ruled the empire which is now southern Mexico. Aztecs are so called from Aztlan which can also be called White land. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Aztec Culture and Society" essay for youCreate order They often referred themselves as Culhua-Mexica they call themselves this because they link themselves with the Colhacan. They were suggested to be a tribe of hunters and gathers. In 1428-1440 when they were under the ruling of Itzcoatl the Tenochtitlan formed alliances with the states of Texcoco and Tlacopan. Soon they had become the dominant power in central Mexico. The population of the Aztec had started off with a low number of people. In 1519 there were around 25,000,000 Aztec people. When the Spaniards came they killed many and also brought many diseases. The Spaniards brought diseases such as smallpox, mumps, tuberculosis which they did not have the right medicine to treat these diseases. The Aztec religion was syncretistic. It shared some of the cosmological beliefs from the earlier people. They also did human sacrifice they particularly did it by offering up the humans heart they sacrificed they heart to Tonatiuh. Their calendar which had eighteen months with twenty days in each month. In the center of the calendar there was usually was the face of the sun. It elaborated round rituals and ceremonies. At least once a month they had a to honor a god or gods. They mainly worshipped the sun god. They also sacrificed animals. Some of the animals they sacrificed were cats, birds, fish, snakes. They also sacrificed jaguars they did this rarely because this was considered a powerful religious symbol. Aztecs valued music. They used it also for their religious reasons. They used instruments sucks as horns, drums, whistles, rattles and bells. They were also hunters and gathers. They hunted deer, boars, birds, and they also fished/trapped other marine animals. They kept things such as turkey and ducks. They used these for eggs and meat. They also grew crops such as corn, chilies, pigweed, and beans. They drank water and polque. They had big markets. They used these markets to buy, sell, and trade things. They also had judges in case of theft or is any arguments to place. Some things they would trade were baskets, pots. Also they had luxury goods’ they would sell or trade some of them were cocoa beans, animal skins, and gold. Live animals were also sold at the market. Some of the Aztec merchants would travelon long trips to go get goods from distant lands. They often made their art for religious reasons. They made stone sculptures of their gods. They love to use colorful feathers. They used the feathers for headdresses and to decorate their shields. They also made pottery, carvings, stamps. They liked to make animals using art. They would make animals such as dogs, monkeys, and snakes. The Aztec games were not just played entertainment they were also played for their religious reasons. One game is patolli. This game is played on a rock board shaped as a cross. The four parts of the cross had cells or spaces. The first person to get around the whole board wins the game.Another popular game was Tlachtli. This game was played with two teams. This game was played on an H shaped field that was between two walls. With a rubber ball that was 8 to 10 pounds you had to get it to the other teams side. You could only use your hips and feet to get the ball through the stone ring. One other game was a gambling game known as totologue . What you had to do on this game was hit a target with a gold pellet. Jacks and Marbles was another game. You will toss a small rock trying to hit clay balls. The wealthy Aztecs built their homes out of adobe. Adobe was built out of adobe clay which they let the sun dry out into brick shapes. These houses had four rooms, one was for the family to sleep in , a shrine, a place to cook food, and a place where the family would eat. They would make the roof out of two things one would be a thatched roof and the other is a terraced roof. The poorer people lived in huts. Their temple were built similar to pyramids. They had steps on there pyramids. The men of families could often have more than one wife. Usually only the wealthy men had more than just one wife, the men that were poor often only had one wife. If a man had more than one wife only the primary wife would go through the ceremony. The men was the more dominate but women also had power. Some of the poor would sell their children or themselves as slaves to pay off their debts. They got their education from bot home and school. No matter what social status you or you family was every child was educated. None of the people wrote. The only people that would write were the priest and scribes. From the ages four and five the children would stay at home with the partens. The little girls would learn from their mothers how to keep a household running. The little boys would learned from their fathers how to get food also how to trade and make things. The children stayed at home with their parents till the age of fourteen learning what the need to know. The boys could go to one of two schools the Calmecac or the Telpochcalli. The Calmecac prepared the boys to work for the government or in temples. The Telpochcalli help teach boys the life as a potter, farmer, soldier, and metal worker. This all depended on your status in society. The lower classes did most of the labor and the upper classes worked in temples or for the government. At the top you had the king or emperor. The Aztec clothing often did not cover the whole body. They wore their clothes kinda loose. They made their clothes out of cotton and ayate fiber. Ayate fiber was made from a cactus plant called maguey cactus. The mean would wear a mantle which was tied on the right shoulder and a loincloth. The women would wear a cueltl or a huipil. Their hair would be worn in two braids which rose on the side of the head and looked like horns. War was not just known and fighting war the term ‘war’ was also used as a term of childbirth. The warriors carried projectile weapons. The lowest rank you had they only gave you a club and shield. The higher rank that you were the more decorated your shield was. Also as your rank got higher the better weapon you would receive. They type of weapons they had were bow and arrows, slings, blowguns, and clubs. The shield they used was made out of wood. The suit they wore was made out of two or three layers of cotton soaked in salt brine. Nahuah was one of the spoken languages by people in the area. It is said that the most dominate speakers were the Nahuatl speakers. Nahuatl is an agglutinant language. An agglutinant language is one were you make phrases or words by combining suffixes and prefixes. They only have four basic vowels. These vowels are i,e,a,o. They also counted by twenties. 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	1,600	ENGLISH	1
is what makes everyone in the world different from one another. Many people have a misunderstanding of who discovered DNA. The answer isn’t as easy as saying a name. Technically, a man named Johannes Friedrich Miescher was the first person to discover DNA. He first noticed it while he was conducting an experiment, when he noticed that he didn’t know what the substance he saw was in a cell. This was DNA. This all took place in the 1860s, and Johannes didn’t have the equipment he needed at the time to further conclude what the purpose of DNA was. Today we know that DNA holds our genetic information, but back then people were confident that proteins did this. In the 1870s, Johannes published his findings. Gregor Mendel was a scientist that discovered specifics of genetics by looking at pea plants in the late 1850s. His findings included recessive and dominant traits and how genes come in pairs. His ideas weren’t acknowledged until they were brought up again in the early 1900s. A man named Walther Flemming was looking at chromosomes inside the nucleus of a cell. He helped contribute to answering questions in mitosis, such as the specific jobs these chromosomes carry out and how they divide. Walter Sutton and Theodor Boveri believed that all offspring had the same genetic information from their parents because of chromosomes. This went together with the Mendel’s discovery from years before. Theodor Boveri came up with the idea that chromosomes in sex cells were connected to heredity. Together they were both able to conclude that chromosomes carry genetic information inside them and they get passed down to offsprings. James Watson and Francis Crick were two people that played a part in what DNA looks like. They worked together in the University of Cambridge in an attempt to come up with a model that best represented what DNA looks like. They got most of their research from a scientist named Rosalind Franklin. She used X-ray crystallography, which is a technique used to identify a molecule’s structure. Together they were all able to figure out that DNA looks like, which is like a spiral. One of the main functions of DNA is carrying genetic material. This information gets passed down to the offsprings from both parents. This is how the results of DNA tests can be viewed because the DNA would be the same. DNA is a complex molecule that is organized in a way that makes this possible, so without being able to store genetic information, and since no other molecule can do this, then none of this would be able to pass down to offsprings. DNA also has the ability to make a copy of itself. This has to happen for mitosis to occur. If cells can’t perform mitosis then they won’t be able to divide and make more cells. DNA is also partly responsible for telling the cell what proteins should be made, and what job they should do. It helps make more cells for different organs. This happens constantly, so without DNA the cell would eventually die because it wouldn’t know what to do after a period of time. All organisms have DNA, and without it nothing would be able to function properly.	<urn:uuid:a99ddf7e-6012-4be7-bae2-34bf65bf8cac>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://firstnightdanbury.org/is-flemming-was-looking-at-chromosomes-inside/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251796127.92/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129102701-20200129132701-00338.warc.gz	en	0.982604	654	3.5	4	[ -0.12626346945762634, 0.28654640913009644, -0.11901307106018066, -0.03014272078871727, -0.05187087878584862, -0.16778001189231873, 0.8005284070968628, -0.03305825591087341, 0.0694374069571495, -0.08972924947738647, 0.35477232933044434, -0.2552698254585266, 0.19449865818023682, 0.2224881201...	1	is what makes everyone in the world different from one another. Many people have a misunderstanding of who discovered DNA. The answer isn’t as easy as saying a name. Technically, a man named Johannes Friedrich Miescher was the first person to discover DNA. He first noticed it while he was conducting an experiment, when he noticed that he didn’t know what the substance he saw was in a cell. This was DNA. This all took place in the 1860s, and Johannes didn’t have the equipment he needed at the time to further conclude what the purpose of DNA was. Today we know that DNA holds our genetic information, but back then people were confident that proteins did this. In the 1870s, Johannes published his findings. Gregor Mendel was a scientist that discovered specifics of genetics by looking at pea plants in the late 1850s. His findings included recessive and dominant traits and how genes come in pairs. His ideas weren’t acknowledged until they were brought up again in the early 1900s. A man named Walther Flemming was looking at chromosomes inside the nucleus of a cell. He helped contribute to answering questions in mitosis, such as the specific jobs these chromosomes carry out and how they divide. Walter Sutton and Theodor Boveri believed that all offspring had the same genetic information from their parents because of chromosomes. This went together with the Mendel’s discovery from years before. Theodor Boveri came up with the idea that chromosomes in sex cells were connected to heredity. Together they were both able to conclude that chromosomes carry genetic information inside them and they get passed down to offsprings. James Watson and Francis Crick were two people that played a part in what DNA looks like. They worked together in the University of Cambridge in an attempt to come up with a model that best represented what DNA looks like. They got most of their research from a scientist named Rosalind Franklin. She used X-ray crystallography, which is a technique used to identify a molecule’s structure. Together they were all able to figure out that DNA looks like, which is like a spiral. One of the main functions of DNA is carrying genetic material. This information gets passed down to the offsprings from both parents. This is how the results of DNA tests can be viewed because the DNA would be the same. DNA is a complex molecule that is organized in a way that makes this possible, so without being able to store genetic information, and since no other molecule can do this, then none of this would be able to pass down to offsprings. DNA also has the ability to make a copy of itself. This has to happen for mitosis to occur. If cells can’t perform mitosis then they won’t be able to divide and make more cells. DNA is also partly responsible for telling the cell what proteins should be made, and what job they should do. It helps make more cells for different organs. This happens constantly, so without DNA the cell would eventually die because it wouldn’t know what to do after a period of time. All organisms have DNA, and without it nothing would be able to function properly.	651	ENGLISH	1
Although many people supported Roosevelt’s programmes of reform and recovery after the Great Depression, there was also opposition to the New Deal. There were those on the Left who argued that New Deal policy was not going far enough to reform society. On the other hand, politicians and businessmen on the Right argued that the New Deal gave government too many powers. This opposition was reflected in a number of individuals and organisations. As a man from a wealthy background, the President was criticised by some of his peers for the fact that it was in fact the rich who were targeted by high taxes. Roosevelt was even reportedly excluded from his social club in the aftermath of the New Deal. However, the most notable person who opposed the New Deal was a Senator from Louisiana called Huey Long. Huey Long represented, in its most extreme form, the fears of many leftist critics as well as New Dealers. Long like many others accused Roosevelt’s plans of not going far enough in the assistance of the poorest members of society. As such, Long created his own alternative to the New Deal which was called "Share Our Wealth". Long came up the a promise that he would confiscate anybody’s personal fortune that exceeded $3 million and redistribute the wealth to American families. Long also promised further reforms including the introduction of pensions for the old, a new national minimum wage, and free education and cheap food. Long practically controlled the state of Louisiana and he was far from a squeaky clean character. It is well known that any politician who opposed him would be suitably dealt with. For example, he bribed members of the police force to gain control of the law while it is also reported that local elections were heavily fixed so he could not lose. In the state he was known as the "Kingfish". Long’s popularity was not limited to the South - there were over 27,000 Share Our Wealth clubs nationwide with about 8 million members. However, in 1935 he was killed. A bodyguard fired a shot at a man who was attempting to assassinated Long, but the bullet missed its target, instead ricocheting off of a corridor wall and hitting Long in the stomach. It is unlikely that Roosevelt would have attracted enough voters to the polls to beat Roosevelt in the 1936 election, but his huge popularity does highlight the concerns of many poor, agrarian Americans. Although Huey Long never offered a feasible alternative, he highlighted flaws in the New Deal. Revisionist historians recognise these weaknesses and argue that the excessive business influence on the NRA; the lack of redistributive taxation and a flawed social security system limited the success of FDR’s New Deal. Opposition to the New Deal also came in the form of Father Charles Coughlin. The Catholic priest had a radio show on which he attacked Roosevelt for the same reasons as Long had: not going far enough to help the poor. He also said that the president was “anti-God”. He set up the National Union for Justice and teamed up with Dr. Francis Townsend. Townsend devised the Townsend Act - a proposal for state-funded pensions. These two teamed up with Gerald Smith, who had taken over as the successor to Huey Long as the senator of Louisiana, and together the trio planned to try and win over the poor voters. The New Deal also faced a lot of opposition from the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court judges were primarily Republicans. This meant that it declared many of the acts passed by FDR unconstitutional. In 1935 it effectively declared the National Recovery Administration (NRA) illegal. In the following year it declared the Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA) unconstitutional. The point made by the Supreme Court was that any efforts made to help farmers should come at a state level and not federal level. It argued that the it went against the Constitution for federal government to take on so many powers. 11 out of the 16 Alphabet Laws were declared unconstitutional in cases heard by the Supreme Court. The 1936 election result illustrate that both the New Deal and Roosevelt faced opposition. In November 1936, Roosevelt won the election comfortably, but there was still over a third of voters who stood against him; the president received 27 million votes while Alf Landon, Roosevelt’s Republican oppositions, received 16 million votes (37 per cent) Roosevelt’s victory was still a landslide and was certainly recognised as such. After all, Maine and Vermont were the only two states that he lost. Nevertheless, the result indicate that a sizeable opposition still stood against him. See also: Was the New Deal a Success "Opposition to the New Deal". HistoryLearning.com. 2015. Web.	<urn:uuid:35c69d5a-dd2e-47c8-a14c-a2d65e107390>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://historylearning.com/modern-world-history/america-1918/new-deal-opposition/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250607118.51/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122131612-20200122160612-00041.warc.gz	en	0.984516	951	3.40625	3	[ -0.3745310306549072, -0.07716280221939087, -0.1406698226928711, 0.01022021658718586, 0.48654335737228394, 0.29594942927360535, -0.3274237811565399, -0.24674010276794434, -0.23974330723285675, -0.25312602519989014, 0.7309523224830627, 0.5458216667175293, 0.15669366717338562, -0.009136578999...	2	Although many people supported Roosevelt’s programmes of reform and recovery after the Great Depression, there was also opposition to the New Deal. There were those on the Left who argued that New Deal policy was not going far enough to reform society. On the other hand, politicians and businessmen on the Right argued that the New Deal gave government too many powers. This opposition was reflected in a number of individuals and organisations. As a man from a wealthy background, the President was criticised by some of his peers for the fact that it was in fact the rich who were targeted by high taxes. Roosevelt was even reportedly excluded from his social club in the aftermath of the New Deal. However, the most notable person who opposed the New Deal was a Senator from Louisiana called Huey Long. Huey Long represented, in its most extreme form, the fears of many leftist critics as well as New Dealers. Long like many others accused Roosevelt’s plans of not going far enough in the assistance of the poorest members of society. As such, Long created his own alternative to the New Deal which was called "Share Our Wealth". Long came up the a promise that he would confiscate anybody’s personal fortune that exceeded $3 million and redistribute the wealth to American families. Long also promised further reforms including the introduction of pensions for the old, a new national minimum wage, and free education and cheap food. Long practically controlled the state of Louisiana and he was far from a squeaky clean character. It is well known that any politician who opposed him would be suitably dealt with. For example, he bribed members of the police force to gain control of the law while it is also reported that local elections were heavily fixed so he could not lose. In the state he was known as the "Kingfish". Long’s popularity was not limited to the South - there were over 27,000 Share Our Wealth clubs nationwide with about 8 million members. However, in 1935 he was killed. A bodyguard fired a shot at a man who was attempting to assassinated Long, but the bullet missed its target, instead ricocheting off of a corridor wall and hitting Long in the stomach. It is unlikely that Roosevelt would have attracted enough voters to the polls to beat Roosevelt in the 1936 election, but his huge popularity does highlight the concerns of many poor, agrarian Americans. Although Huey Long never offered a feasible alternative, he highlighted flaws in the New Deal. Revisionist historians recognise these weaknesses and argue that the excessive business influence on the NRA; the lack of redistributive taxation and a flawed social security system limited the success of FDR’s New Deal. Opposition to the New Deal also came in the form of Father Charles Coughlin. The Catholic priest had a radio show on which he attacked Roosevelt for the same reasons as Long had: not going far enough to help the poor. He also said that the president was “anti-God”. He set up the National Union for Justice and teamed up with Dr. Francis Townsend. Townsend devised the Townsend Act - a proposal for state-funded pensions. These two teamed up with Gerald Smith, who had taken over as the successor to Huey Long as the senator of Louisiana, and together the trio planned to try and win over the poor voters. The New Deal also faced a lot of opposition from the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court judges were primarily Republicans. This meant that it declared many of the acts passed by FDR unconstitutional. In 1935 it effectively declared the National Recovery Administration (NRA) illegal. In the following year it declared the Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA) unconstitutional. The point made by the Supreme Court was that any efforts made to help farmers should come at a state level and not federal level. It argued that the it went against the Constitution for federal government to take on so many powers. 11 out of the 16 Alphabet Laws were declared unconstitutional in cases heard by the Supreme Court. The 1936 election result illustrate that both the New Deal and Roosevelt faced opposition. In November 1936, Roosevelt won the election comfortably, but there was still over a third of voters who stood against him; the president received 27 million votes while Alf Landon, Roosevelt’s Republican oppositions, received 16 million votes (37 per cent) Roosevelt’s victory was still a landslide and was certainly recognised as such. After all, Maine and Vermont were the only two states that he lost. Nevertheless, the result indicate that a sizeable opposition still stood against him. See also: Was the New Deal a Success "Opposition to the New Deal". HistoryLearning.com. 2015. Web.	957	ENGLISH	1
The Life and Work of Toni Morrison Toni Morrison, a premier contemporary American novelist, chronicles the African-American experience. Morrison has written six novels and a collection of essays and lectures. Her work has won national and international acclaim and has been translated into 14 languages. Her writing has been described as lyrical and she has been applauded for “writing prose with the luster of poetry.” Morrison won the prestigious Pulitzer Prize in 1988 for her novel Beloved and the coveted Nobel Prize for Literature in 1993. In a released statement, the Nobel Prize Committee of the Swedish Academy awarded the prize to Morrison “who in novels characterized by visionary force and poetic import, gives life to an essential aspect of American reality.” She is the first African-American writer to win the Nobel Prize, the first American woman to win in 55 years, and the eighth woman to win since the Nobel Prize was initiated in 1901. Morrison’s work, however, is not without controversy. In 1988, 48 African-American writers signed a letter protesting that her novel Beloved was overlooked for the National Book Award and the National Book Critics’ Circle Award. Many white authors and even some male African-American authors complained when she was selected for the Nobel Prize. They felt she received these awards due to preferential treatment based on race and sex. However, an overwhelming majority of the literary community agrees that such allegations are without merit. “The Nobel Prize in Literature is not awarded for gender or race,” says Nadine Gordimer, the last woman to win the prize in 1991. “If it were, many thousands of mediocre writers might qualify. The significance of Toni Morrison’s winning the prize is simply that she is recognized internationally as an outstandingly fine writer.” Often the controversy surrounding such prizes are due in part to fierce competition for the money and prestige that are guaranteed to the recipients. Morrison has been hailed by experts for her ability to “re-imagine the lost history of her people. Others have recognized the Faulknerian influences in her work or that her plots have the sorrow of Greek tragedies. Along with the honor of winning the the Nobel Prize comes a cash award of $825,000. Morrison is currently the Robert F. Goheen Professor in the Council of the Humanities at Princeton University. Toni Morrison was born Chole Anthony Wofford in Lorrain, Ohio in 1931 during the Great Depression. (Toni is her nickname; Morrison is the name of her ex-husband.) Her grandparents were former sharecroppers who migrated north from Alabama in 1910 to find a better life. Her family’s life was not without economic and racial hardships. They lived in a largely all-white town. Unpleasant memories of growing up there include being looked down upon because she was black. The only part-time job she could get at age 13 was cleaning people’s homes. In spite of these humble origins, Morrison received a B.A. from Howard University and a M.A. in English from Cornell University. Her master’s thesis was on writer William Faulkner, another Nobel Prize winner, whose work focused on life in the South. Upon graduation, one of her first round of jobs was teaching at Howard University. One of her students included writer Claude Brown who asked her to look at his 800 page manuscript. His book went on to become the classic urban autobiography Manchild in the Promised Land. Another one of her students who went on to fame was Stokely Carmichael, a student activist and leader in the Black Power Movement of the sixties. In fact, the idea for her first book, The Bluest Eye, came from the popular slogan “Black is Beautiful.” Morrison placed a twist on that theme by focusing on a little black girl who did not think she was beautiful. After her teaching stints and the end of her marriage, she raised two sons as a single parent and wrote in her spare time. Morrison was hired by Random House, where she... (The entire section is 2,080 words.)	<urn:uuid:19e7b2f5-023b-4620-ba0f-068cd35f16d1>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.enotes.com/topics/jazz	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250615407.46/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124040939-20200124065939-00505.warc.gz	en	0.982234	850	3.546875	4	[ 0.07285831868648529, 0.5100210905075073, 0.23052328824996948, 0.44239604473114014, -0.49545758962631226, 0.1574680358171463, 0.22763016819953918, 0.37629467248916626, -0.08553603291511536, 0.2961563467979431, 0.07280514389276505, -0.18549266457557678, -0.08906292915344238, 0.23824191093444...	2	The Life and Work of Toni Morrison Toni Morrison, a premier contemporary American novelist, chronicles the African-American experience. Morrison has written six novels and a collection of essays and lectures. Her work has won national and international acclaim and has been translated into 14 languages. Her writing has been described as lyrical and she has been applauded for “writing prose with the luster of poetry.” Morrison won the prestigious Pulitzer Prize in 1988 for her novel Beloved and the coveted Nobel Prize for Literature in 1993. In a released statement, the Nobel Prize Committee of the Swedish Academy awarded the prize to Morrison “who in novels characterized by visionary force and poetic import, gives life to an essential aspect of American reality.” She is the first African-American writer to win the Nobel Prize, the first American woman to win in 55 years, and the eighth woman to win since the Nobel Prize was initiated in 1901. Morrison’s work, however, is not without controversy. In 1988, 48 African-American writers signed a letter protesting that her novel Beloved was overlooked for the National Book Award and the National Book Critics’ Circle Award. Many white authors and even some male African-American authors complained when she was selected for the Nobel Prize. They felt she received these awards due to preferential treatment based on race and sex. However, an overwhelming majority of the literary community agrees that such allegations are without merit. “The Nobel Prize in Literature is not awarded for gender or race,” says Nadine Gordimer, the last woman to win the prize in 1991. “If it were, many thousands of mediocre writers might qualify. The significance of Toni Morrison’s winning the prize is simply that she is recognized internationally as an outstandingly fine writer.” Often the controversy surrounding such prizes are due in part to fierce competition for the money and prestige that are guaranteed to the recipients. Morrison has been hailed by experts for her ability to “re-imagine the lost history of her people. Others have recognized the Faulknerian influences in her work or that her plots have the sorrow of Greek tragedies. Along with the honor of winning the the Nobel Prize comes a cash award of $825,000. Morrison is currently the Robert F. Goheen Professor in the Council of the Humanities at Princeton University. Toni Morrison was born Chole Anthony Wofford in Lorrain, Ohio in 1931 during the Great Depression. (Toni is her nickname; Morrison is the name of her ex-husband.) Her grandparents were former sharecroppers who migrated north from Alabama in 1910 to find a better life. Her family’s life was not without economic and racial hardships. They lived in a largely all-white town. Unpleasant memories of growing up there include being looked down upon because she was black. The only part-time job she could get at age 13 was cleaning people’s homes. In spite of these humble origins, Morrison received a B.A. from Howard University and a M.A. in English from Cornell University. Her master’s thesis was on writer William Faulkner, another Nobel Prize winner, whose work focused on life in the South. Upon graduation, one of her first round of jobs was teaching at Howard University. One of her students included writer Claude Brown who asked her to look at his 800 page manuscript. His book went on to become the classic urban autobiography Manchild in the Promised Land. Another one of her students who went on to fame was Stokely Carmichael, a student activist and leader in the Black Power Movement of the sixties. In fact, the idea for her first book, The Bluest Eye, came from the popular slogan “Black is Beautiful.” Morrison placed a twist on that theme by focusing on a little black girl who did not think she was beautiful. After her teaching stints and the end of her marriage, she raised two sons as a single parent and wrote in her spare time. Morrison was hired by Random House, where she... (The entire section is 2,080 words.)	849	ENGLISH	1
William and Mary Dyer were citizens of Great Britain who emigrated to New England in 1635 and co-founded the colony of Providence Plantations and Rhode Island in 1638. They were born during the reign of King Charles I, lived under Cromwell’s rule in the 1640s and 1650s, and after Mary died in 1660, William lived during the reign of Charles II. Guest post © 2012 by Sarah Butterfield, used by permission Originally published on Sarah’s History, 18 December 2012 “It’s only seven sleeps until Christmas Day!” was my dawn chorus this morning. Tomorrow six, the next day five... My three children will be practically exploding with excitement on Christmas Eve as they go to bed full of anticipation for the wonderful day that lies ahead of them when they wake up in the morning. Christmas Day is, for those that celebrate it, a day of present exchanging, feasting and having fun. Imagine, then, if all of that was taken away. \|Charles I triple portrait, \| painted by Anthony Van Dyke The Wars of the Three Kingdoms in seventeenth-century Britain were a desperately unsettling time for the common people, as were the events that took place before them. Charles I believed in his divine right to rule very passionately, ruling without parliament for more than a decade. He also taxed his people to breaking point; enforcing ship money in peacetime away from coastal areas was one of his more unpopular moves. His poor rule over England and Scotland was one of the many complex reasons civil war broke out between the crown and parliament in the summer of 1642. At the same time, a form of Protestant Christianity known as puritanism was on the rise. Puritans believed in the simplicity of faith. To them, Christmas (among other celebrations) was an unnecessary Roman Catholic tradition; they disapproved of celebrating the feast day, and the gluttony, frivolity and excess that came with. In 1642, dedicated puritan soldiers and members of parliament did not celebrate Christmas. In 1643, the threat towards Christmas was more severe. The parliamentarian leaders had signed a treaty with the Scottish in the autumn, sealing themselves military support against the royalist army of Charles I. As part of this treaty, parliament promised to further reform religion in England, bringing the faith of England closer to that of Scotland. The Scottish had been practicing presbyterianism, another form of simple faith, as their national religion for several decades. In the late sixteenth century Christmas festivities had been stopped (save for a brief spell beginning in 1617 when James I reinstated them), and now England were expected to follow suit. one another: A Tub Lecture Preached” \| by John Taylor, warned that were a threat to the celebration of Christmas in January 1643. The English puritans followed the Scottish Presbyterian lead, treating Christmas Day in 1643 as a day like any other. Shops were opened and church doors closed. Puritan members of parliament went to work at the Houses of Parliament, leading where they expected subjects to follow. John Taylor’s satirical pamphlet ‘Tub Lecture,’ published earlier that year, had become a gloomy reality. Still, the civil war could have gone either way, and Christmas wasn’t legally banned—yet. In 1644, the non-celebration of Christmas became more extreme again, as the feast day clashed with a puritan fast day. Members of parliament favoured the fast over the feast; remembering their own sins as well as the sins of their ancestors for indulging themselves during the twelve days of Christmas. Parliamentary power was ever increasing by this time, and Charles’ power slipping away. Christmas 1645 was equally, if not more solemn than that of the year before. In 1645, Oliver Cromwell and Thomas Fairfax had created their New Model Army. Their army was structured, disciplined and puritan in the extreme. In addition to these qualities the army was incredibly powerful, and all but destroyed Charles’ royalist forces during two crucial battles—Naseby and Langport—that summer. Charles was captured and handed over to the Parliamentarian army. Decisions were to be made about Charles’ status now, but one thing was sure in the minds of parliament; they had won the war. Charles would be their puppet ruler. Earlier in 1645, parliament had issued their alternative to the Book of Common Prayer, ‘The New Directory for the Worship of God’; the book did not mention Christmas at all. With the king defeated, Christmas was gone. It was noted that man could walk the streets on Christmas Day in 1645, and have no idea that it was a Holy feast day. Taylor published another \| pamphlet in 1652, titled “The Vindication of Christmas,” supporting the continuing celebration of Christmas. Still, England’s Anglican subjects did not want to give up Christmas without a fight. John Taylor published another pro-Christmas pamphlet, ‘Complaint of Christmas’, persuading his fellow Christian men to continue celebrating Christmas in defiance of parliament. This the people did, and more besides. On Christmas Day 1646 men celebrated as normal, and attacked local tradesmen who had opened their shops for business as if it were a normal day. June 1647 saw an act pass through parliament. Christmas was now a banned celebration, and anyone caught celebrating could be lawfully punished. This act was highly unpopular throughout the country, and sparked the pro-Christmas riots that erupted all over the country on Christmas Day that year. Holly was hung in blatant defiance of the new law. Shops that were open for business were attacked and smashed to pieces and men were killed. Shortly after Christmas Day in 1647, Charles I opened communication with the Scottish to free himself from captivity and rule in his own way again. This sparked a second English civil war between parliament and crown; this time, however, the conflict was short-lived and parliament enjoyed a decisive victory the following August. Christmas 1648 passed with Charles imprisoned and parliament in charge. In January 1649, Charles was tried, found guilty and executed for high treason against his country. The war was over, and Christmas was gone. The parliamentary ban of Christmas held fast, with Oliver Cromwell continuing the law after he was named Lord Protector of England in 1653. Of course, just because Christmas was banned didn’t mean people didn’t celebrate it. They just did so in secrecy. \|Charles II: The king who brought back Christmas!\| In September 1658, Oliver Cromwell died and was replaced as Lord Protector by his son, Richard. (Interesting move for a man who was against the hereditary monarchy, but that’s a moan for another day.) Richard was an unsuccessful Lord Protector, and the people of England decided they wanted a monarch after all. Charles II was recalled from exile and restored to the throne in 1660. He brought with him the restoration of Christmas, which was a hugely popular and successful move. Hurrah for Charles II! No wonder he was such a popular king. “The Rise and Fall of Merry England: The Ritual Year 1400-1700″ by Ronald Hutton, Oxford University Press, 1994. “Cromwell: Our Chief of Men” by Antonia Fraser, Phoenix Books, 2008. “The English Civil Wars” by Blair Worden, Phoenix Books, 2009. PS: I know it wasn’t technically all Cromwell’s fault, I just thought that title sounded pretty cool. Sarah Butterfield is a history student living in Derbyshire, England. Visit her blog, Sarah’s History, for her studies in English history.	<urn:uuid:2edc8dac-5bf8-41f3-842a-61791fcb2668>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://marybarrettdyer.blogspot.com/2012/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592565.2/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118110141-20200118134141-00394.warc.gz	en	0.980913	1,615	3.71875	4	[ 0.03323279321193695, 0.08780929446220398, 0.5392922759056091, -0.393707811832428, 0.16736744344234467, -0.15957002341747284, -0.2773316204547882, 0.014504896476864815, 0.08051133155822754, 0.45589351654052734, -0.19917771220207214, 0.03948338329792023, -0.022624190896749496, 0.270227462053...	15	William and Mary Dyer were citizens of Great Britain who emigrated to New England in 1635 and co-founded the colony of Providence Plantations and Rhode Island in 1638. They were born during the reign of King Charles I, lived under Cromwell’s rule in the 1640s and 1650s, and after Mary died in 1660, William lived during the reign of Charles II. Guest post © 2012 by Sarah Butterfield, used by permission Originally published on Sarah’s History, 18 December 2012 “It’s only seven sleeps until Christmas Day!” was my dawn chorus this morning. Tomorrow six, the next day five... My three children will be practically exploding with excitement on Christmas Eve as they go to bed full of anticipation for the wonderful day that lies ahead of them when they wake up in the morning. Christmas Day is, for those that celebrate it, a day of present exchanging, feasting and having fun. Imagine, then, if all of that was taken away. \|Charles I triple portrait, \| painted by Anthony Van Dyke The Wars of the Three Kingdoms in seventeenth-century Britain were a desperately unsettling time for the common people, as were the events that took place before them. Charles I believed in his divine right to rule very passionately, ruling without parliament for more than a decade. He also taxed his people to breaking point; enforcing ship money in peacetime away from coastal areas was one of his more unpopular moves. His poor rule over England and Scotland was one of the many complex reasons civil war broke out between the crown and parliament in the summer of 1642. At the same time, a form of Protestant Christianity known as puritanism was on the rise. Puritans believed in the simplicity of faith. To them, Christmas (among other celebrations) was an unnecessary Roman Catholic tradition; they disapproved of celebrating the feast day, and the gluttony, frivolity and excess that came with. In 1642, dedicated puritan soldiers and members of parliament did not celebrate Christmas. In 1643, the threat towards Christmas was more severe. The parliamentarian leaders had signed a treaty with the Scottish in the autumn, sealing themselves military support against the royalist army of Charles I. As part of this treaty, parliament promised to further reform religion in England, bringing the faith of England closer to that of Scotland. The Scottish had been practicing presbyterianism, another form of simple faith, as their national religion for several decades. In the late sixteenth century Christmas festivities had been stopped (save for a brief spell beginning in 1617 when James I reinstated them), and now England were expected to follow suit. one another: A Tub Lecture Preached” \| by John Taylor, warned that were a threat to the celebration of Christmas in January 1643. The English puritans followed the Scottish Presbyterian lead, treating Christmas Day in 1643 as a day like any other. Shops were opened and church doors closed. Puritan members of parliament went to work at the Houses of Parliament, leading where they expected subjects to follow. John Taylor’s satirical pamphlet ‘Tub Lecture,’ published earlier that year, had become a gloomy reality. Still, the civil war could have gone either way, and Christmas wasn’t legally banned—yet. In 1644, the non-celebration of Christmas became more extreme again, as the feast day clashed with a puritan fast day. Members of parliament favoured the fast over the feast; remembering their own sins as well as the sins of their ancestors for indulging themselves during the twelve days of Christmas. Parliamentary power was ever increasing by this time, and Charles’ power slipping away. Christmas 1645 was equally, if not more solemn than that of the year before. In 1645, Oliver Cromwell and Thomas Fairfax had created their New Model Army. Their army was structured, disciplined and puritan in the extreme. In addition to these qualities the army was incredibly powerful, and all but destroyed Charles’ royalist forces during two crucial battles—Naseby and Langport—that summer. Charles was captured and handed over to the Parliamentarian army. Decisions were to be made about Charles’ status now, but one thing was sure in the minds of parliament; they had won the war. Charles would be their puppet ruler. Earlier in 1645, parliament had issued their alternative to the Book of Common Prayer, ‘The New Directory for the Worship of God’; the book did not mention Christmas at all. With the king defeated, Christmas was gone. It was noted that man could walk the streets on Christmas Day in 1645, and have no idea that it was a Holy feast day. Taylor published another \| pamphlet in 1652, titled “The Vindication of Christmas,” supporting the continuing celebration of Christmas. Still, England’s Anglican subjects did not want to give up Christmas without a fight. John Taylor published another pro-Christmas pamphlet, ‘Complaint of Christmas’, persuading his fellow Christian men to continue celebrating Christmas in defiance of parliament. This the people did, and more besides. On Christmas Day 1646 men celebrated as normal, and attacked local tradesmen who had opened their shops for business as if it were a normal day. June 1647 saw an act pass through parliament. Christmas was now a banned celebration, and anyone caught celebrating could be lawfully punished. This act was highly unpopular throughout the country, and sparked the pro-Christmas riots that erupted all over the country on Christmas Day that year. Holly was hung in blatant defiance of the new law. Shops that were open for business were attacked and smashed to pieces and men were killed. Shortly after Christmas Day in 1647, Charles I opened communication with the Scottish to free himself from captivity and rule in his own way again. This sparked a second English civil war between parliament and crown; this time, however, the conflict was short-lived and parliament enjoyed a decisive victory the following August. Christmas 1648 passed with Charles imprisoned and parliament in charge. In January 1649, Charles was tried, found guilty and executed for high treason against his country. The war was over, and Christmas was gone. The parliamentary ban of Christmas held fast, with Oliver Cromwell continuing the law after he was named Lord Protector of England in 1653. Of course, just because Christmas was banned didn’t mean people didn’t celebrate it. They just did so in secrecy. \|Charles II: The king who brought back Christmas!\| In September 1658, Oliver Cromwell died and was replaced as Lord Protector by his son, Richard. (Interesting move for a man who was against the hereditary monarchy, but that’s a moan for another day.) Richard was an unsuccessful Lord Protector, and the people of England decided they wanted a monarch after all. Charles II was recalled from exile and restored to the throne in 1660. He brought with him the restoration of Christmas, which was a hugely popular and successful move. Hurrah for Charles II! No wonder he was such a popular king. “The Rise and Fall of Merry England: The Ritual Year 1400-1700″ by Ronald Hutton, Oxford University Press, 1994. “Cromwell: Our Chief of Men” by Antonia Fraser, Phoenix Books, 2008. “The English Civil Wars” by Blair Worden, Phoenix Books, 2009. PS: I know it wasn’t technically all Cromwell’s fault, I just thought that title sounded pretty cool. Sarah Butterfield is a history student living in Derbyshire, England. Visit her blog, Sarah’s History, for her studies in English history.	1,648	ENGLISH	1
Akhenaten (; also spelled Echnaton, Akhenaton, Ikhnaton, and Khuenaten; meaning “Effective for Aten”), known before the fifth year of his reign as Amenhotep IV (sometimes given its Greek form, Amenophis IV, and meaning “Amun Is Satisfied”), was an ancient Egyptian pharaoh of the 18th Dynasty, who ruled for 17 years and died perhaps in 1336 BC or 1334 BC. He is noted for abandoning traditional Egyptian polytheism and introducing worship centered on the Aten, which is sometimes described as monolatristic, henotheistic, or even quasi-monotheistic. An early inscription likens the Aten to the sun as compared to stars, and later official language avoids calling the Aten a god, giving the solar deity a status above mere gods. Akhenaten tried to shift his culture from Egypt’s traditional religion, but the shifts were not widely accepted. After his death, his monuments were dismantled and hidden, his statues were destroyed, and his name excluded from the king lists. Traditional religious practice was gradually restored, and when some dozen years later rulers without clear rights of succession from the 18th Dynasty founded a new dynasty, they discredited Akhenaten and his immediate successors, referring to Akhenaten himself as “the enemy” or “that criminal” in archival records.He was all but lost from history until the discovery during the 19th century of the site of Akhetaten, the city he built and designed for the worship of Aten, at Amarna. Early excavations at Amarna by Flinders Petrie sparked interest in the enigmatic pharaoh, and a mummy found in the tomb KV55, which was unearthed in 1907 in a dig led by Edward R. Ayrton, is likely that of Akhenaten. DNA analysis has determined that the man buried in KV55 is the father of King Tutankhamun, but its identification as Akhenaten has been questioned.Modern interest in Akhenaten and his queen Nefertiti comes partly from his connection with Tutankhamun (even though Tutankhamun’s mother was not Nefertiti, but a woman named by archaeologists The Younger Lady), partly from the unique style and high quality of the pictorial arts he patronized, and partly from ongoing interest in the religion he attempted to establish.	<urn:uuid:8652bf49-2de8-4469-a6e1-0a1183f5f54d>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://goodquotes.me/authors/akhenaton/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250589861.0/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117152059-20200117180059-00186.warc.gz	en	0.981615	506	3.546875	4	[ -0.4288289248943329, 0.8029295206069946, 0.16354157030582428, 0.0057703726924955845, -0.5066677331924438, -0.2055264711380005, 0.6798272132873535, -0.18853823840618134, -0.35881277918815613, 0.005164389498531818, -0.3145647346973419, -0.6782150864601135, 0.11795219779014587, 0.260570019483...	2	Akhenaten (; also spelled Echnaton, Akhenaton, Ikhnaton, and Khuenaten; meaning “Effective for Aten”), known before the fifth year of his reign as Amenhotep IV (sometimes given its Greek form, Amenophis IV, and meaning “Amun Is Satisfied”), was an ancient Egyptian pharaoh of the 18th Dynasty, who ruled for 17 years and died perhaps in 1336 BC or 1334 BC. He is noted for abandoning traditional Egyptian polytheism and introducing worship centered on the Aten, which is sometimes described as monolatristic, henotheistic, or even quasi-monotheistic. An early inscription likens the Aten to the sun as compared to stars, and later official language avoids calling the Aten a god, giving the solar deity a status above mere gods. Akhenaten tried to shift his culture from Egypt’s traditional religion, but the shifts were not widely accepted. After his death, his monuments were dismantled and hidden, his statues were destroyed, and his name excluded from the king lists. Traditional religious practice was gradually restored, and when some dozen years later rulers without clear rights of succession from the 18th Dynasty founded a new dynasty, they discredited Akhenaten and his immediate successors, referring to Akhenaten himself as “the enemy” or “that criminal” in archival records.He was all but lost from history until the discovery during the 19th century of the site of Akhetaten, the city he built and designed for the worship of Aten, at Amarna. Early excavations at Amarna by Flinders Petrie sparked interest in the enigmatic pharaoh, and a mummy found in the tomb KV55, which was unearthed in 1907 in a dig led by Edward R. Ayrton, is likely that of Akhenaten. DNA analysis has determined that the man buried in KV55 is the father of King Tutankhamun, but its identification as Akhenaten has been questioned.Modern interest in Akhenaten and his queen Nefertiti comes partly from his connection with Tutankhamun (even though Tutankhamun’s mother was not Nefertiti, but a woman named by archaeologists The Younger Lady), partly from the unique style and high quality of the pictorial arts he patronized, and partly from ongoing interest in the religion he attempted to establish.	511	ENGLISH	1
Behind the Hymn: A Great and Mighty Wonder A great and mighty wonder is a little-known Christmas Carol. The hymn is German in origin. The hymn was written by St. Germanus I. He was born in Constantinople of a patrician family in 634 Greece. He was ordained in Constantinople and subsequently became bishop of Cyzicus. He was present at the Synod of Constantinople in 712, which restored the Monothelite heresy; but in after years he condemned it. He was made patriarch of Constantinople in 715. In 730 he was driven from the see, not without blows, for refusing to yield to the Iconoclastic Emperor Leo the Isaurian. He died shortly afterwards, at the age of one hundred years. He only wrote a few hymns including A Great and Mighty Wonder. John Mason Neale translated the carol. He was born in 1818 to an evangelical home. In 1942, he was ordained in the Church of England, but his ill health and support of the Oxford Movement kept him from ordinary parish ministry. He had sympathies towards Rome but was often in ill health and devoted his time to improving social conditions. So, Neale spent the years between 1846 and 1866 as a warden of Sackville College in East Grinstead, a retirement home for poor men. There he served the men faithfully and expanded Sackville’s ministry to indigent women and orphans. He also founded the Sisterhood of St. Margaret, which became one of the finest English training orders for nurses. He was often ignored or despised by his contemporaries but is lauded today for his contributions to the church and hymnody. He wrote several books and a variety of hymns. He also enjoyed translating Greek and Latin hymns into English. He claimed no rights to his texts and was pleased to contribute to hymnody as “common property of Christendom.” Many editors judged his translations as unsingable and amended his work. Neale died in 1866.	<urn:uuid:28b256b5-59cb-4486-b21f-dcbf8ff1c636>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://dianaleaghmatthews.com/a-great-and-mighty-wonder/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250599789.45/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120195035-20200120224035-00000.warc.gz	en	0.991958	420	3.46875	3	[ 0.019969692453742027, 0.36291831731796265, 0.028336256742477417, 0.1570594757795334, 0.08657322824001312, -0.16170479357242584, -0.016976911574602127, 0.452605664730072, -0.06067496910691261, -0.286024272441864, -0.16211964190006256, 0.36987733840942383, 0.2935960590839386, 0.1431089192628...	9	Behind the Hymn: A Great and Mighty Wonder A great and mighty wonder is a little-known Christmas Carol. The hymn is German in origin. The hymn was written by St. Germanus I. He was born in Constantinople of a patrician family in 634 Greece. He was ordained in Constantinople and subsequently became bishop of Cyzicus. He was present at the Synod of Constantinople in 712, which restored the Monothelite heresy; but in after years he condemned it. He was made patriarch of Constantinople in 715. In 730 he was driven from the see, not without blows, for refusing to yield to the Iconoclastic Emperor Leo the Isaurian. He died shortly afterwards, at the age of one hundred years. He only wrote a few hymns including A Great and Mighty Wonder. John Mason Neale translated the carol. He was born in 1818 to an evangelical home. In 1942, he was ordained in the Church of England, but his ill health and support of the Oxford Movement kept him from ordinary parish ministry. He had sympathies towards Rome but was often in ill health and devoted his time to improving social conditions. So, Neale spent the years between 1846 and 1866 as a warden of Sackville College in East Grinstead, a retirement home for poor men. There he served the men faithfully and expanded Sackville’s ministry to indigent women and orphans. He also founded the Sisterhood of St. Margaret, which became one of the finest English training orders for nurses. He was often ignored or despised by his contemporaries but is lauded today for his contributions to the church and hymnody. He wrote several books and a variety of hymns. He also enjoyed translating Greek and Latin hymns into English. He claimed no rights to his texts and was pleased to contribute to hymnody as “common property of Christendom.” Many editors judged his translations as unsingable and amended his work. Neale died in 1866.	444	ENGLISH	1
The people of Ancient Greece, though living in different polisesscattered over a large area, were connected by their commonorigins and language as well as by their religion. Their mythology was rich in strange and magical creatures, but the most important characters were certainly their gods. The gods of theHellenistic age played a leading role. They were the "Olympians," as it was on Mount Olympus where these twelveimmortals held their feasts. The supreme god of the Greek Pantheon was Zeus, son of the Titans Chronos and Rhea. Zeus was the god of the sky, storms and lightning. He was the father of numerous gods and demi-gods. He married his sister, Hera, the "cow-eyed" one, who was the goddess of marriage and childbirth. Zeus and his brothers divided the world among themselves; Poseidon became god of of the seas, while Hades became god of the underworld. There was a pair of twins among the Greek gods: Apollo was the god of poetry and prophecy, and his sister, Artemis, was the goddess of hunting and wild animals. Hermes, the messenger of the gods and the god of merchants and thieves was also Zeus´s son. Zeus' sister, Hestia, the goddess of the family hearth, was the most polite and modest of the gods. Ares, son of Zeus and Hera, was quite different as he was the god of war. Pallas Athena, who leapt out of Zeus' head, was the patron of Athens, but she is mainly known as the goddess of knowledge and wisdom. Aphrodite, the goddess of beauty and love, emerged from the sea. Hera's son, Hephaestos, was the god of fire and the blacksmith to the gods. The religion of Ancient Greece was polytheistic; the Greeks imagined their gods to look similar to humans and to possess similar attributes - these were anthropomorphicgods. They were, however, immortal.	<urn:uuid:d2d6e4a4-131b-4ddc-b6e0-0d0849813b20>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.mozaweb.com/en_US/Extra-3D_scenes-Greek_gods-170416	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251690095.81/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126165718-20200126195718-00286.warc.gz	en	0.992239	418	3.390625	3	[ 0.07662522047758102, 0.35255008935928345, 0.1144101470708847, -0.4018746316432953, -0.622195303440094, -0.34364014863967896, 0.2778935432434082, 0.28427428007125854, 0.10571199655532837, -0.08416770398616791, -0.45964160561561584, -0.5408347845077515, 0.10399113595485687, 0.402099221944808...	2	The people of Ancient Greece, though living in different polisesscattered over a large area, were connected by their commonorigins and language as well as by their religion. Their mythology was rich in strange and magical creatures, but the most important characters were certainly their gods. The gods of theHellenistic age played a leading role. They were the "Olympians," as it was on Mount Olympus where these twelveimmortals held their feasts. The supreme god of the Greek Pantheon was Zeus, son of the Titans Chronos and Rhea. Zeus was the god of the sky, storms and lightning. He was the father of numerous gods and demi-gods. He married his sister, Hera, the "cow-eyed" one, who was the goddess of marriage and childbirth. Zeus and his brothers divided the world among themselves; Poseidon became god of of the seas, while Hades became god of the underworld. There was a pair of twins among the Greek gods: Apollo was the god of poetry and prophecy, and his sister, Artemis, was the goddess of hunting and wild animals. Hermes, the messenger of the gods and the god of merchants and thieves was also Zeus´s son. Zeus' sister, Hestia, the goddess of the family hearth, was the most polite and modest of the gods. Ares, son of Zeus and Hera, was quite different as he was the god of war. Pallas Athena, who leapt out of Zeus' head, was the patron of Athens, but she is mainly known as the goddess of knowledge and wisdom. Aphrodite, the goddess of beauty and love, emerged from the sea. Hera's son, Hephaestos, was the god of fire and the blacksmith to the gods. The religion of Ancient Greece was polytheistic; the Greeks imagined their gods to look similar to humans and to possess similar attributes - these were anthropomorphicgods. They were, however, immortal.	408	ENGLISH	1
Odisha is hailed as a beautiful state for its rich culture and glorious history. Odisha was announced as an official state on April 1, 1936. Since then the Odisha day is celebrated to mark the sacrifices and contribution made by Odisha people during 1990’s. Odisha day is also known as Utkal Divas. Utkalamani Gopabandu Das, Raja Baikunthanath Dey, Fakir Mohan Senapati, Maharaja Shri Krishna,UtkalaGouraba Madhusudan Das, Maharaja ShriRamachandraBhanjadeo,Bhubanananda Das, Fakir Mohan Senapati,Pandita Nilakantha Das, are just a few of the activists who contributed a lot to helped Odisha to become a linguistic state. Later Odisha was split into 30 districts and 13 provinces. A few centuries back, Odisha was considered as a poor city with poor infrastructure. A lot of people was suffering from lack of food & nutrition. With the contribution of renowned people, Odisha has turned into a beautiful city and blessed with rich culture, greenish place, and rich infrastructure. The modern Odisha consists of 6 districts namely puri, Cuttack, Baleswar, Hubback, Ganjam, and Koraput. Odisha day is celebrated every year on 1 April 1936. In the ancient time, Odisha was held by Kalinga kingdom where king Ashoka conquered it. Later, Odisha was ruled by Mauryan Kings. After the fall of Kalinga kingdom, many traditional Hindu temples were built at Bhubaneswar, Konark, and puri. During 1950’s, Afghan invaders had visited this state. Following this, Mughals were defeated which led to the separation of Odisha into Marathas & Nawabs of Bengal. Odisha was renamed into Odisha & Oriya by Parliament of India in the year 2010. During 2nd Carnatic War, British had occupied southern coast of Odisha and incorporated into the Madras Presidency. After that, the British defeated the Marathas who was ruling the Puri-Cuttack region of this state during 2nd Anglo-Maratha War. The British had incorporated both the Western & Northern districts of Odisha into Bengal Presidency. It was during the time when people were suffering from lack of food and water. As a result of Odisha Famine of 1886, more than one million people passed away. After seeing the massive deaths, the British government undertook large-scale irrigation projects. Following this, UtkalSammilani organization was established to demand the fusion of Odisha speaking cities into one state. After the defeat of Last king MukundaDev, Odisha lost its political identity and thus is transformed into a linguistic state on 1 April 1936. Odissa was the center of the various kingdom in the ancient days. It was officially announced as a linguistic state before Independence. It is celebrated as a state holiday in Odisha. On this special occasion, various events, presentations, parties are organized in the various part of the city. Odisha food festival is celebrated during the Odisha days. some of the traditional Odisha dishes like kakara, genuine and Manda will be the Main attraction in these days. Odisha day is nourished with fun and enjoyment. Every year this special occasion is really enjoyed by a lot of people across the city.	<urn:uuid:b71bec06-f4da-41c6-9718-9782a590d00d>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.india2019-20.in/odisha-day/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251802249.87/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129194333-20200129223333-00183.warc.gz	en	0.982013	709	3.421875	3	[ 0.13903945684432983, 0.06729954481124878, 0.5913525819778442, 0.2589169144630432, -0.3137513995170593, -0.3365168273448944, 0.08442902565002441, 0.12263459712266922, -0.15995901823043823, 0.0989324226975441, 0.2531333565711975, -0.9053986072540283, 0.3191792964935303, 0.2276521772146225, ...	3	Odisha is hailed as a beautiful state for its rich culture and glorious history. Odisha was announced as an official state on April 1, 1936. Since then the Odisha day is celebrated to mark the sacrifices and contribution made by Odisha people during 1990’s. Odisha day is also known as Utkal Divas. Utkalamani Gopabandu Das, Raja Baikunthanath Dey, Fakir Mohan Senapati, Maharaja Shri Krishna,UtkalaGouraba Madhusudan Das, Maharaja ShriRamachandraBhanjadeo,Bhubanananda Das, Fakir Mohan Senapati,Pandita Nilakantha Das, are just a few of the activists who contributed a lot to helped Odisha to become a linguistic state. Later Odisha was split into 30 districts and 13 provinces. A few centuries back, Odisha was considered as a poor city with poor infrastructure. A lot of people was suffering from lack of food & nutrition. With the contribution of renowned people, Odisha has turned into a beautiful city and blessed with rich culture, greenish place, and rich infrastructure. The modern Odisha consists of 6 districts namely puri, Cuttack, Baleswar, Hubback, Ganjam, and Koraput. Odisha day is celebrated every year on 1 April 1936. In the ancient time, Odisha was held by Kalinga kingdom where king Ashoka conquered it. Later, Odisha was ruled by Mauryan Kings. After the fall of Kalinga kingdom, many traditional Hindu temples were built at Bhubaneswar, Konark, and puri. During 1950’s, Afghan invaders had visited this state. Following this, Mughals were defeated which led to the separation of Odisha into Marathas & Nawabs of Bengal. Odisha was renamed into Odisha & Oriya by Parliament of India in the year 2010. During 2nd Carnatic War, British had occupied southern coast of Odisha and incorporated into the Madras Presidency. After that, the British defeated the Marathas who was ruling the Puri-Cuttack region of this state during 2nd Anglo-Maratha War. The British had incorporated both the Western & Northern districts of Odisha into Bengal Presidency. It was during the time when people were suffering from lack of food and water. As a result of Odisha Famine of 1886, more than one million people passed away. After seeing the massive deaths, the British government undertook large-scale irrigation projects. Following this, UtkalSammilani organization was established to demand the fusion of Odisha speaking cities into one state. After the defeat of Last king MukundaDev, Odisha lost its political identity and thus is transformed into a linguistic state on 1 April 1936. Odissa was the center of the various kingdom in the ancient days. It was officially announced as a linguistic state before Independence. It is celebrated as a state holiday in Odisha. On this special occasion, various events, presentations, parties are organized in the various part of the city. Odisha food festival is celebrated during the Odisha days. some of the traditional Odisha dishes like kakara, genuine and Manda will be the Main attraction in these days. Odisha day is nourished with fun and enjoyment. Every year this special occasion is really enjoyed by a lot of people across the city.	735	ENGLISH	1
The History of the Pension Plan In financial advisor and radio personality Ric Edelman's book, The Truth About Retirement Plans and IRAs, he describes a monthly lifetime income benefit that was offered to soldiers during the American Revolution. If a soldier survived the war, the Continental Congress would reward them with income for life. It was called a pension, and it was offered again by the federal government in the Civil War and every U.S. war since. The structure, however, was not new. Soldiers who served in Ancient Rome were also guaranteed income after they retired. There is also evidence of pensions being offered to public sector workers throughout history. The First Modern U.S. Pension Plans The American Express Company established the first corporate pension in the U.S. in 1875. Before that, most companies were small or family-run businesses. The plan applied to workers who had been with the company for 20 years, had reached age 60, had been recommended for retirement by a manager, and had been approved by a committee along with the board of directors. Workers who made it received half of their annual salary in retirement, up to a maximum of $500 per year, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Banking and railroad companies were among the first to offer pensions to their employees. But by the turn of the 20th century, several large corporations began to grow and offer pensions. These included Standard Oil, U.S. Steel, AT&T, Eastman Kodak, Goodyear, and General Electric, all of which had adopted pension plans before 1930. Manufacturing companies were the last to adopt the new retirement plans. The Internal Revenue Act of 1921 helped to spur growth by exempting contributions made to employee pensions from federal corporate income tax. In the 1940s, labor unions became interested in pension plans and pushed to increase the benefits offered. By 1950, nearly 10 million Americans, or about 25% of the private sector workforce, had a pension. Ten years later, about half of the private sector workforce had one. After a few pensions began to fail, the government enacted the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), which made pension plans more secure by establishing legal participation, accountability, and disclosure requirements. It also included guidelines for vesting, limiting the vesting schedule to within 10 years or less. With ERISA came the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, which ensures employee benefits should a pension plan fail. The Rise of Defined Contribution Plans This type of guaranteed pension came to be known as a defined benefits plan. Workers knew exactly how much they would get in retirement because it was a defined dollar amount or percentage of salary. This was something workers could plan a life around. Workers who wanted to save extra dollars of their own could do so, but private investment accounts were supplemental to pension and Social Security benefits. Defined benefit plans are very different from what came after: defined contribution plans. In defined contribution plans, which include 401(k) plans, 403(b) plans, 457 plans, and Thrift Savings Plans, the employee makes the bulk of the contributions to the plan and directs the investments within. The employer may (or may not) match a portion of employee contributions. These plans entered the picture in the early 1980s, a tax-deferred gift to highly compensated employees who wanted to shelter more of their paycheck from taxes. But as they gained popularity, 401(k)s and other defined contribution options quickly surpassed the defined benefit pension as the plan of choice for large private sector companies.	<urn:uuid:3486f1fb-c072-4a0f-be43-61d9fe57d4a2>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.thebalance.com/the-history-of-the-pension-plan-2894374	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250614086.44/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123221108-20200124010108-00253.warc.gz	en	0.980167	721	3.40625	3	[ -0.5158860683441162, 0.3555167317390442, 0.11520671099424362, 0.109374038875103, -0.15255630016326904, 0.5100312829017639, -0.03591029345989227, -0.06803694367408752, -0.245303213596344, 0.020643657073378563, 0.4296129047870636, 0.35266852378845215, -0.0241113118827343, 0.11705990880727768...	5	The History of the Pension Plan In financial advisor and radio personality Ric Edelman's book, The Truth About Retirement Plans and IRAs, he describes a monthly lifetime income benefit that was offered to soldiers during the American Revolution. If a soldier survived the war, the Continental Congress would reward them with income for life. It was called a pension, and it was offered again by the federal government in the Civil War and every U.S. war since. The structure, however, was not new. Soldiers who served in Ancient Rome were also guaranteed income after they retired. There is also evidence of pensions being offered to public sector workers throughout history. The First Modern U.S. Pension Plans The American Express Company established the first corporate pension in the U.S. in 1875. Before that, most companies were small or family-run businesses. The plan applied to workers who had been with the company for 20 years, had reached age 60, had been recommended for retirement by a manager, and had been approved by a committee along with the board of directors. Workers who made it received half of their annual salary in retirement, up to a maximum of $500 per year, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Banking and railroad companies were among the first to offer pensions to their employees. But by the turn of the 20th century, several large corporations began to grow and offer pensions. These included Standard Oil, U.S. Steel, AT&T, Eastman Kodak, Goodyear, and General Electric, all of which had adopted pension plans before 1930. Manufacturing companies were the last to adopt the new retirement plans. The Internal Revenue Act of 1921 helped to spur growth by exempting contributions made to employee pensions from federal corporate income tax. In the 1940s, labor unions became interested in pension plans and pushed to increase the benefits offered. By 1950, nearly 10 million Americans, or about 25% of the private sector workforce, had a pension. Ten years later, about half of the private sector workforce had one. After a few pensions began to fail, the government enacted the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), which made pension plans more secure by establishing legal participation, accountability, and disclosure requirements. It also included guidelines for vesting, limiting the vesting schedule to within 10 years or less. With ERISA came the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, which ensures employee benefits should a pension plan fail. The Rise of Defined Contribution Plans This type of guaranteed pension came to be known as a defined benefits plan. Workers knew exactly how much they would get in retirement because it was a defined dollar amount or percentage of salary. This was something workers could plan a life around. Workers who wanted to save extra dollars of their own could do so, but private investment accounts were supplemental to pension and Social Security benefits. Defined benefit plans are very different from what came after: defined contribution plans. In defined contribution plans, which include 401(k) plans, 403(b) plans, 457 plans, and Thrift Savings Plans, the employee makes the bulk of the contributions to the plan and directs the investments within. The employer may (or may not) match a portion of employee contributions. These plans entered the picture in the early 1980s, a tax-deferred gift to highly compensated employees who wanted to shelter more of their paycheck from taxes. But as they gained popularity, 401(k)s and other defined contribution options quickly surpassed the defined benefit pension as the plan of choice for large private sector companies.	751	ENGLISH	1
The first iconic character in the novel known for her split personality She has a split personality? What the children failed to see in the beginning was what lied underneath those gruesome series of withdrawal fits - true moral courage. In the beginning of the novel, Scout mentioned that Jem had "never declined a dare" in his entire life, which exhibits his childish perceptions of courage, that courage was merely accepting to dares presented to him. A morally upright lawyer, a committed and loving father, and an overall good citizen, Finch is regarded highly by most citizens with a sense of justice. Dubose's fight to die free of her morphine addiction. Many of the characters in this movie are relevant such as Boo Radley, Tom Robinson, Jem, Bob Ewell, and Calpurnia; however, this movie is a representation of what was seen in the deep south during the depression era through the eyes of a six year old girl named Scout. Questions that you might want to consider include: If justice and fairness are so elusive, how can Atticus and Scout continue to believe in them? However, his perceptions of courage changed throughout the course of chapters 1 - 16, as he began to mature. WIth close reference to Chapters 1 - 16 of the novel, explain how the various types of courage are discussed.	<urn:uuid:821ea106-232c-485a-bd66-c6a1256b6d34>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://hisepudehuzabos.anygivenchildtulsa.com/thesis-statement-to-kill-a-mockingbird-courage24938398nk.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250614086.44/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123221108-20200124010108-00379.warc.gz	en	0.982822	266	3.296875	3	[ -0.19158555567264557, 0.32702985405921936, 0.09537649154663086, -0.16542507708072662, -0.1944805532693863, 0.35764437913894653, 0.27092066407203674, 0.04401622712612152, 0.10590022802352905, -0.4069305658340454, 0.1522347629070282, -0.03636122867465019, -0.1265406459569931, -0.017387257888...	2	The first iconic character in the novel known for her split personality She has a split personality? What the children failed to see in the beginning was what lied underneath those gruesome series of withdrawal fits - true moral courage. In the beginning of the novel, Scout mentioned that Jem had "never declined a dare" in his entire life, which exhibits his childish perceptions of courage, that courage was merely accepting to dares presented to him. A morally upright lawyer, a committed and loving father, and an overall good citizen, Finch is regarded highly by most citizens with a sense of justice. Dubose's fight to die free of her morphine addiction. Many of the characters in this movie are relevant such as Boo Radley, Tom Robinson, Jem, Bob Ewell, and Calpurnia; however, this movie is a representation of what was seen in the deep south during the depression era through the eyes of a six year old girl named Scout. Questions that you might want to consider include: If justice and fairness are so elusive, how can Atticus and Scout continue to believe in them? However, his perceptions of courage changed throughout the course of chapters 1 - 16, as he began to mature. WIth close reference to Chapters 1 - 16 of the novel, explain how the various types of courage are discussed.	271	ENGLISH	1
Salem Witch Trials In May-October 1692, in the town of Salem, in Massachusetts Bay Colony, several girls who were listening to the voodoo tales of a West Indian slave, Tituba, said they were possessed by devils. They then proceeded to accuse three women of witchcraft. All three along with sixteen other accused witches who were were accused of witchcraft were hanged. Nearly 150 were imprisoned. No one was burned to death. The government realized it was in error and stopped the trials. The episode permanently marked Salem, and to this day it is a favorite gathering place for people enamored of witchcraft. Salem in the 1690s Salem was a small Puritan settlement in the Massachusetts woods, not far from the coast. It was not a particularly successful settlement, with its villagers struggling to grow enough food to survive and always wary of the forest surrounding them - in their minds, the trees could be hiding angry Indians or demons or any number of evils. Thus, it was not a happy, cohesive community - this was not helped by the recent outbreak of smallpox and the Puritan's sexist practices of women being absolutely deferential to the men in their lives, and the belief that women were more susceptible to the Devil's charms. With everyone living in each others pockets, it was impossible to keep secrets - everyone knew everyone else's business. There was a lot of fear and tension in this village. Under the Puritan rule of the colony at the time, the existence of witches was accepted as clear fact on scriptural grounds. In accordance with Exodus 22:18, "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live," witchcraft was criminalized and considered a capital offense. Reports of witchcraft The catalyst for the fears that led to the trials was a black woman from Barbados - Tituba. She was a slave in the household of Reverend Samuel Parris, the village preacher. She had entertained Reverend Parris' daughter Betty (9 years old) and her cousin Abigail Williams (11 years old) during the winter of 1692 with stories from her life in Barbados, which apparently involved some sort of magic. It is believed she began demonstrating this magic to the girls, and some of their friends who had joined the group. Knowing these activities were forbidden by their religion, the girls felt guilty - it is then that they began the witchcraft hysteria. The girls began to exhibit strange behavior - they said strange things, screamed, threw things, crawled under furniture, complained of being pricked and cut by invisible pins and knives, and covered their ears during Reverend Parris' preaching as if it hurt them to hear it. The Reverend described their antics as "beyond the power of epileptic fits or natural disease to effect" - naturally, when the village doctor (William Griggs) could not find out what was wrong with them it was assumed that they had been bewitched. The girls soon began to accuse people of bewitching them - the first were Sarah Osborne (an invalid old woman who had married her servant), Sarah Good (a short-tempered beggar) and Tituba. They were all outcasts of the community, and so were easy targets - nobody stood up for them. Arrest warrants for these three were issued on February 29 1692, and they were quickly arrested and tried by Magistrates Jonathan Corwin and John Hathorne. More accusations followed the imprisonment of the first three accused. They included: Dorcas Good (4 year old daughter of Sarah Good), Abigail Hobbs, Deliverance Hobbs, Rebecca Nurse, Martha Corey (an outspoken woman who was openly skeptical about the girls' accusations), Elizabeth Proctor and John Proctor. These new accusations frightened the community, as Rebecca Nurse and Martha Corey had been virtuous, upstanding members of the Salem community - if these people were witches, then anyone could be. The number of accused in the jails of Boston, Salem and surrounding towns grew rapidly, until they were overflowing - having no real government, the villagers had no organized way to try all these accused witches. A new Governor, Sir William Phips, arrived in May of 1692 and began the Court of Oyer and Terminer ("to hear and determine") to try the masses of accused witches. It comprised 7 judges: Lieutenant Governor William Stoughton, Nathaniel Saltonstall, Bartholomew Gedney, Peter Sergeant, Samuel Sewall, Wait Still Winthrop, John Richards, John Hathorne and Jonathan Corwin. The first official session of Oyer and Terminer took place on June 2, 1692. The court based its decisions on 'evidence' such as confessions extracted under torture, 'witch marks' like moles and the reactions of the 'afflicted' girls. Three women were brought to trial and, under pressure, stated the names of others who were working together to possess the girls. The Puritans governing Salem then saw this as an opportunity to use the legal procedure of court trials to identify and uncover the ways of the occult. Public trials were held and testimony was elicited in an attempt to bring forth the workings of the devil. These three women, along with sixteen others who were were accused of witchcraft were hanged. Nearly 150 were imprisoned. Those who had reservations about the proceedings often found themselves to be accused. It is interesting to note that to avoid hanging, all the accused had to do was admit their guilt, but many refused. The refusal to admit guilt to save their lives may be attributed to the sturdy Puritan-based morality of the community at the time. One man would not even dignify the proceedings by entering a plea and was pressed to death. After many executions, a change in the rule of evidence for these trials excluded "spectral evidence," which was testimony by afflicted persons that they had been visited by a suspect's specter. With that change the subsequent trials resulted overwhelmingly in acquittals rather than convictions, and the later pardons were issued for several of those who had been convicted. The Court of Oyer and Terminer was active between June 2 and October 29, during which time they condemned 20 people to be hanged. Many more died in prison awaiting trial. After Governor Phips closed Oyer and Terminer, a new Supreme Court was begun and used to try any remaining witchcraft cases. This time no one was convicted - the Salem Witch Trials were over. June 10: The first official execution of the Salem Witch trials - Bridget Bishop is hanged. July 19: Susannah Martin, Elizabeth Howe, Sarah Good, Rebecca Nurse and Sarah Wildes. August 19: Martha Carrier, George Jacobs Sr., George Burroughs, John Proctor and John Willard. September 19: Giles Corey is pressed to death for refusing a trial. September 22: Margaret Scott, Martha Corey, Mary Easty, Ann Pudeator, Wilmott Redd, Alice Parker, Samuel Wardwell and Mary Parker. Ironically, due to the notoriety of the trial that has survived to this day, tourist influence has now made Salem known for a high density of occult-themed shops. Salem had the only mass witch hunt in American history. However there were 152 accused witches in over two dozen other communities. Latner (2008) challenges the traditional image of Salem as the site of a year-long epidemic of hysteria. Instead, accusations progressed as a sequence of limited and brief flare-ups and the accused were generally logical targets. Within most nearby communities, the witch-hunt passed quickly and the number of accused was small. Even in the high profile centers of the storm, such as Salem and Andover, the episode was limited in duration. The victims of 1692 most often resembled those who were traditionally associated with witchcraft in 17th-century England and New England, generally. Despite its reputation for irrationality and excess, the Salem witchcraft experience demonstrated the kind of constraints, limits, and coherence that scholars have found in other forms of collective violence. Such an approach helps explain how the outbreak spread to numerous communities as well as why the episode came to an end in relatively short order. - The Salem Witch Trials 1692: A Chronology of Events - Causes for the Outbreak of Witchcraft Hysteria in Salem - Chronology of Events Relating to the Salem Witchcraft Trials - Five men were convicted and hanged, and one man, Giles Corey, was pressed to death for refusing to cooperate with the court. - Richard Latner, "The Long and Short of Salem Witchcraft: Chronology and Collective Violence in 1692," Journal of Social History 2008 42(1): 137-156,	<urn:uuid:f6eb9781-e5b0-4d05-bf8f-2871629286b1>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Salem_Witch_Trials&oldid=712060	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592394.9/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118081234-20200118105234-00104.warc.gz	en	0.983768	1,764	3.296875	3	[ -0.054478101432323456, 0.2633844017982483, 0.05168154090642929, -0.04654825106263161, -0.018806520849466324, 0.17126230895519257, 0.31988486647605896, -0.27044424414634705, -0.30828285217285156, 0.20772671699523926, -0.16939117014408112, 0.0975058525800705, -0.6893342137336731, 0.257700949...	1	Salem Witch Trials In May-October 1692, in the town of Salem, in Massachusetts Bay Colony, several girls who were listening to the voodoo tales of a West Indian slave, Tituba, said they were possessed by devils. They then proceeded to accuse three women of witchcraft. All three along with sixteen other accused witches who were were accused of witchcraft were hanged. Nearly 150 were imprisoned. No one was burned to death. The government realized it was in error and stopped the trials. The episode permanently marked Salem, and to this day it is a favorite gathering place for people enamored of witchcraft. Salem in the 1690s Salem was a small Puritan settlement in the Massachusetts woods, not far from the coast. It was not a particularly successful settlement, with its villagers struggling to grow enough food to survive and always wary of the forest surrounding them - in their minds, the trees could be hiding angry Indians or demons or any number of evils. Thus, it was not a happy, cohesive community - this was not helped by the recent outbreak of smallpox and the Puritan's sexist practices of women being absolutely deferential to the men in their lives, and the belief that women were more susceptible to the Devil's charms. With everyone living in each others pockets, it was impossible to keep secrets - everyone knew everyone else's business. There was a lot of fear and tension in this village. Under the Puritan rule of the colony at the time, the existence of witches was accepted as clear fact on scriptural grounds. In accordance with Exodus 22:18, "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live," witchcraft was criminalized and considered a capital offense. Reports of witchcraft The catalyst for the fears that led to the trials was a black woman from Barbados - Tituba. She was a slave in the household of Reverend Samuel Parris, the village preacher. She had entertained Reverend Parris' daughter Betty (9 years old) and her cousin Abigail Williams (11 years old) during the winter of 1692 with stories from her life in Barbados, which apparently involved some sort of magic. It is believed she began demonstrating this magic to the girls, and some of their friends who had joined the group. Knowing these activities were forbidden by their religion, the girls felt guilty - it is then that they began the witchcraft hysteria. The girls began to exhibit strange behavior - they said strange things, screamed, threw things, crawled under furniture, complained of being pricked and cut by invisible pins and knives, and covered their ears during Reverend Parris' preaching as if it hurt them to hear it. The Reverend described their antics as "beyond the power of epileptic fits or natural disease to effect" - naturally, when the village doctor (William Griggs) could not find out what was wrong with them it was assumed that they had been bewitched. The girls soon began to accuse people of bewitching them - the first were Sarah Osborne (an invalid old woman who had married her servant), Sarah Good (a short-tempered beggar) and Tituba. They were all outcasts of the community, and so were easy targets - nobody stood up for them. Arrest warrants for these three were issued on February 29 1692, and they were quickly arrested and tried by Magistrates Jonathan Corwin and John Hathorne. More accusations followed the imprisonment of the first three accused. They included: Dorcas Good (4 year old daughter of Sarah Good), Abigail Hobbs, Deliverance Hobbs, Rebecca Nurse, Martha Corey (an outspoken woman who was openly skeptical about the girls' accusations), Elizabeth Proctor and John Proctor. These new accusations frightened the community, as Rebecca Nurse and Martha Corey had been virtuous, upstanding members of the Salem community - if these people were witches, then anyone could be. The number of accused in the jails of Boston, Salem and surrounding towns grew rapidly, until they were overflowing - having no real government, the villagers had no organized way to try all these accused witches. A new Governor, Sir William Phips, arrived in May of 1692 and began the Court of Oyer and Terminer ("to hear and determine") to try the masses of accused witches. It comprised 7 judges: Lieutenant Governor William Stoughton, Nathaniel Saltonstall, Bartholomew Gedney, Peter Sergeant, Samuel Sewall, Wait Still Winthrop, John Richards, John Hathorne and Jonathan Corwin. The first official session of Oyer and Terminer took place on June 2, 1692. The court based its decisions on 'evidence' such as confessions extracted under torture, 'witch marks' like moles and the reactions of the 'afflicted' girls. Three women were brought to trial and, under pressure, stated the names of others who were working together to possess the girls. The Puritans governing Salem then saw this as an opportunity to use the legal procedure of court trials to identify and uncover the ways of the occult. Public trials were held and testimony was elicited in an attempt to bring forth the workings of the devil. These three women, along with sixteen others who were were accused of witchcraft were hanged. Nearly 150 were imprisoned. Those who had reservations about the proceedings often found themselves to be accused. It is interesting to note that to avoid hanging, all the accused had to do was admit their guilt, but many refused. The refusal to admit guilt to save their lives may be attributed to the sturdy Puritan-based morality of the community at the time. One man would not even dignify the proceedings by entering a plea and was pressed to death. After many executions, a change in the rule of evidence for these trials excluded "spectral evidence," which was testimony by afflicted persons that they had been visited by a suspect's specter. With that change the subsequent trials resulted overwhelmingly in acquittals rather than convictions, and the later pardons were issued for several of those who had been convicted. The Court of Oyer and Terminer was active between June 2 and October 29, during which time they condemned 20 people to be hanged. Many more died in prison awaiting trial. After Governor Phips closed Oyer and Terminer, a new Supreme Court was begun and used to try any remaining witchcraft cases. This time no one was convicted - the Salem Witch Trials were over. June 10: The first official execution of the Salem Witch trials - Bridget Bishop is hanged. July 19: Susannah Martin, Elizabeth Howe, Sarah Good, Rebecca Nurse and Sarah Wildes. August 19: Martha Carrier, George Jacobs Sr., George Burroughs, John Proctor and John Willard. September 19: Giles Corey is pressed to death for refusing a trial. September 22: Margaret Scott, Martha Corey, Mary Easty, Ann Pudeator, Wilmott Redd, Alice Parker, Samuel Wardwell and Mary Parker. Ironically, due to the notoriety of the trial that has survived to this day, tourist influence has now made Salem known for a high density of occult-themed shops. Salem had the only mass witch hunt in American history. However there were 152 accused witches in over two dozen other communities. Latner (2008) challenges the traditional image of Salem as the site of a year-long epidemic of hysteria. Instead, accusations progressed as a sequence of limited and brief flare-ups and the accused were generally logical targets. Within most nearby communities, the witch-hunt passed quickly and the number of accused was small. Even in the high profile centers of the storm, such as Salem and Andover, the episode was limited in duration. The victims of 1692 most often resembled those who were traditionally associated with witchcraft in 17th-century England and New England, generally. Despite its reputation for irrationality and excess, the Salem witchcraft experience demonstrated the kind of constraints, limits, and coherence that scholars have found in other forms of collective violence. Such an approach helps explain how the outbreak spread to numerous communities as well as why the episode came to an end in relatively short order. - The Salem Witch Trials 1692: A Chronology of Events - Causes for the Outbreak of Witchcraft Hysteria in Salem - Chronology of Events Relating to the Salem Witchcraft Trials - Five men were convicted and hanged, and one man, Giles Corey, was pressed to death for refusing to cooperate with the court. - Richard Latner, "The Long and Short of Salem Witchcraft: Chronology and Collective Violence in 1692," Journal of Social History 2008 42(1): 137-156,	1,839	ENGLISH	1
During the Revolutionary War, there were many battles going on. Throughout the battles, there were a lot of armies who had to have a place to stay. The armies would all have their own campsite to live at. One of those places where an army could camp at was Valley Forge. The American Continental Army stayed at Valley Forge for the winter in 1777 and 1778. Valley Forge was a turning point for America. It was a turning point since it helped America gain independence from the British. Valley Forge is also known as the birthplace for the American Army. “Valley Forge was significant, not only for the reshaping Washington’s army, but for the dedication, endurance, and resilience demonstrated by the Americans in their cause for Independence” (Winter 1).”The American Continental army had just lost two important battles. The army lost in the Battle of Brandywine in September and also the Battle of Germantown in October” (Washington 1). The Patriots needed a place to stay for the winter to keep an eye on the British army. “The British army marched into Philadelphia the previous autumn and the Patriots couldn’t stop them from taking over the city. Philadelphia was the largest city in the colonies and the seat of political power” (Washington 1).Many people thought George Washington was a bad leader after that happened. He needed to find a place soon so he could convince and prove to the Continental Congress he was a good leader for the army. In the winter of 1777, the Continental Army headed to Valley Forge. Some of the soldier’s wives and kids also came along to camp at Valley Forge for the winter. They were known as Camp Followers “George Washington moved his army to Valley Forge since it’s close enough to where the British was camping. It was also far enough from them so the Patriots would have enough time to be ready and get prepared if the British attacked. It was also a good place to fight against the British army. The reason it was a good place to fight was because there was high areas to make fortifications. There was also a river, the Schuylkill river, that served as a barrier to the north. Valley Forge is in the southeastern part of Pennsylvania around twenty five miles northwest of Philadelphia” (American 1). The army got to Valley Forge on December 19, 1777. When they got there they were all starving, cold, and very tired. Valley Forge was a very dark place and it wasn’t a good place to stay at for the winter. Many of the soldiers didn’t have much clothes to stay warm. The soldiers also didn’t have shoes to wear during the winter at Valley Forge. They didn’t have shoes since they got ruined when they were on their journey to the camp. Since the soldiers didn’t have shoes, it caused them to leave bloody footprints in the snow. Martha Washington would bring baskets of socks to the soldiers that didn’t have shoes. Another thing they lacked was blankets. There were only a few blankets for the soldiers to use. This was only the beginning to a very cold, harsh and miserable winter. The patriots were running low on supplies, such as food, clothes, and medicine. Then there was the British army, they had enough food and water to survive. People would give the British food, but not the Patriots. The British also had warm cabins for everyone to live in and stay healthy unlike the Patriots. “The Patriots were living in cold, damp, and crowded log cabins which made matters even worse because it allowed disease and sickness to spread quickly throughout the camp. Diseases such as typhoid fever, pneumonia, and smallpox took the lives of many soldiers. Of the 10,000 men who began the winter at Valley Forge, around 2,500 died before the spring” (American 1). The soldiers who survived the winter stayed loyal to the army. ¨By February of 1778, the weather eased somewhat — moving from brutal to merely miserable¨ (Valley 1). George Washington knew the soldiers needed to get better with their fighting, so he asked for some help. In February, Baron Friedrich von Steuben came to Valley Forge. He helped the soldiers a lot, by training them Prussian style. He made them become more disciplined and a force that can keep fighting against the British. He also helped them become more confident with their skills. Then Marquis de Lafayette who joined the army at Valley Forge, also helped out the army after the brutal winter they had just gone through. He talked to the soldiers, and always made sure they gave their best effort. He was very helpful and dedicated to the soldiers and George Washington. He worked for no pay and never asked for special treatment from the army. The Patriots then became an ordered force with Baron Friedrich von Steuben and Marquis de Lafayette’s help. “News of a French alliance with the Americans came in May, 1778” (Winter 1). The French joined them in the Fight For Freedom by sending them military supplies and soldiers to help fight against the British. After hearing that news, George Washington could focus more on strategies and how the Patriots were going to defeat the British. Then in June, a more disciplined army left Valley Forge and headed to New Jersey. They felt stronger after being at Valley Forge, and more determined than ever to beat the British army. “Barely a week later, the Patriots forced the British from the field in the Battle of Monmouth” (Valley 1). The major events at Valley Forge play an important part in the American Revolution. It was important because it was the training camp for the American Continental Army . It was also a home for them during the winter. Also during the winter new strategies were made. They were later used during the war to help defeat the British army and gain our independence.	<urn:uuid:a2e9df3d-9edb-41db-9c7d-e2b802c83c53>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://firstnightdanbury.org/during-winter-in-1777-and-1778-valley/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250605075.24/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121192553-20200121221553-00241.warc.gz	en	0.989057	1,206	4.09375	4	[ -0.2578005790710449, 0.3715643286705017, 0.2582460045814514, 0.06774815917015076, -0.44674235582351685, 0.24218043684959412, -0.02700922265648842, 0.46348437666893005, -0.5023601651191711, -0.06757861375808716, 0.18318046629428864, -0.01987638510763645, 0.19092927873134613, 0.2543973922729...	2	During the Revolutionary War, there were many battles going on. Throughout the battles, there were a lot of armies who had to have a place to stay. The armies would all have their own campsite to live at. One of those places where an army could camp at was Valley Forge. The American Continental Army stayed at Valley Forge for the winter in 1777 and 1778. Valley Forge was a turning point for America. It was a turning point since it helped America gain independence from the British. Valley Forge is also known as the birthplace for the American Army. “Valley Forge was significant, not only for the reshaping Washington’s army, but for the dedication, endurance, and resilience demonstrated by the Americans in their cause for Independence” (Winter 1).”The American Continental army had just lost two important battles. The army lost in the Battle of Brandywine in September and also the Battle of Germantown in October” (Washington 1). The Patriots needed a place to stay for the winter to keep an eye on the British army. “The British army marched into Philadelphia the previous autumn and the Patriots couldn’t stop them from taking over the city. Philadelphia was the largest city in the colonies and the seat of political power” (Washington 1).Many people thought George Washington was a bad leader after that happened. He needed to find a place soon so he could convince and prove to the Continental Congress he was a good leader for the army. In the winter of 1777, the Continental Army headed to Valley Forge. Some of the soldier’s wives and kids also came along to camp at Valley Forge for the winter. They were known as Camp Followers “George Washington moved his army to Valley Forge since it’s close enough to where the British was camping. It was also far enough from them so the Patriots would have enough time to be ready and get prepared if the British attacked. It was also a good place to fight against the British army. The reason it was a good place to fight was because there was high areas to make fortifications. There was also a river, the Schuylkill river, that served as a barrier to the north. Valley Forge is in the southeastern part of Pennsylvania around twenty five miles northwest of Philadelphia” (American 1). The army got to Valley Forge on December 19, 1777. When they got there they were all starving, cold, and very tired. Valley Forge was a very dark place and it wasn’t a good place to stay at for the winter. Many of the soldiers didn’t have much clothes to stay warm. The soldiers also didn’t have shoes to wear during the winter at Valley Forge. They didn’t have shoes since they got ruined when they were on their journey to the camp. Since the soldiers didn’t have shoes, it caused them to leave bloody footprints in the snow. Martha Washington would bring baskets of socks to the soldiers that didn’t have shoes. Another thing they lacked was blankets. There were only a few blankets for the soldiers to use. This was only the beginning to a very cold, harsh and miserable winter. The patriots were running low on supplies, such as food, clothes, and medicine. Then there was the British army, they had enough food and water to survive. People would give the British food, but not the Patriots. The British also had warm cabins for everyone to live in and stay healthy unlike the Patriots. “The Patriots were living in cold, damp, and crowded log cabins which made matters even worse because it allowed disease and sickness to spread quickly throughout the camp. Diseases such as typhoid fever, pneumonia, and smallpox took the lives of many soldiers. Of the 10,000 men who began the winter at Valley Forge, around 2,500 died before the spring” (American 1). The soldiers who survived the winter stayed loyal to the army. ¨By February of 1778, the weather eased somewhat — moving from brutal to merely miserable¨ (Valley 1). George Washington knew the soldiers needed to get better with their fighting, so he asked for some help. In February, Baron Friedrich von Steuben came to Valley Forge. He helped the soldiers a lot, by training them Prussian style. He made them become more disciplined and a force that can keep fighting against the British. He also helped them become more confident with their skills. Then Marquis de Lafayette who joined the army at Valley Forge, also helped out the army after the brutal winter they had just gone through. He talked to the soldiers, and always made sure they gave their best effort. He was very helpful and dedicated to the soldiers and George Washington. He worked for no pay and never asked for special treatment from the army. The Patriots then became an ordered force with Baron Friedrich von Steuben and Marquis de Lafayette’s help. “News of a French alliance with the Americans came in May, 1778” (Winter 1). The French joined them in the Fight For Freedom by sending them military supplies and soldiers to help fight against the British. After hearing that news, George Washington could focus more on strategies and how the Patriots were going to defeat the British. Then in June, a more disciplined army left Valley Forge and headed to New Jersey. They felt stronger after being at Valley Forge, and more determined than ever to beat the British army. “Barely a week later, the Patriots forced the British from the field in the Battle of Monmouth” (Valley 1). The major events at Valley Forge play an important part in the American Revolution. It was important because it was the training camp for the American Continental Army . It was also a home for them during the winter. Also during the winter new strategies were made. They were later used during the war to help defeat the British army and gain our independence.	1,206	ENGLISH	1
Do Citizens have enough power over the country? As we know, Citizens can vote in General Elections about which politician will have control over their borough. However, those votes are counted by the majority. One voice can't change it to their way. Should this change? Should decisions be carried through by the one voice above the all the others? This post should help to forge your opinion. Citizens DO have enough power over the country because: - Every action must be voted in by the public before it is carried out. This means the majority get their opinion followed. - Strikes can be carried out and are not against the law. This means you can convince Government to make a change. - You can, in a general election, vote for which party you would like to have as leader of your borough. Then they can make a change as they have more power. Citizens DO NOT have enough power over the country because: - If it is a close majority, then almost half of the country have had their belief drowned. - Government vote for what they want too, that leaves the public out of the decision. - Children are still future Citizens, and they cannot vote for what happens during their life. I believe that Citizens DO have enough power over the country. Thank you for reading!	<urn:uuid:5bf34a39-5593-4e89-8154-f9233845db03>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://burnetnewsclub.com/issues/politicians-and-power/the-discussion/do-citizens-have-enough-power-over-the-country/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250626449.79/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124221147-20200125010147-00481.warc.gz	en	0.98463	269	3.34375	3	[ -0.28302091360092163, -0.24474939703941345, 0.2030085325241089, -0.662980854511261, -0.3030552864074707, 0.33705538511276245, 0.22227798402309418, 0.04303910583257675, -0.12487810850143433, 0.4260653853416443, 0.090552918612957, 0.13820020854473114, 0.04195293411612511, 0.14737103879451752...	9	Do Citizens have enough power over the country? As we know, Citizens can vote in General Elections about which politician will have control over their borough. However, those votes are counted by the majority. One voice can't change it to their way. Should this change? Should decisions be carried through by the one voice above the all the others? This post should help to forge your opinion. Citizens DO have enough power over the country because: - Every action must be voted in by the public before it is carried out. This means the majority get their opinion followed. - Strikes can be carried out and are not against the law. This means you can convince Government to make a change. - You can, in a general election, vote for which party you would like to have as leader of your borough. Then they can make a change as they have more power. Citizens DO NOT have enough power over the country because: - If it is a close majority, then almost half of the country have had their belief drowned. - Government vote for what they want too, that leaves the public out of the decision. - Children are still future Citizens, and they cannot vote for what happens during their life. I believe that Citizens DO have enough power over the country. Thank you for reading!	258	ENGLISH	1
The location was very advantageous: it was situated next to the Ashley River, which was a major traveling and shipping corridor into the colony's interior, and roads here connected to the city of Charleston. As a result, the town eventually became a thriving business hub (interestingly however, despite it being an important hub of economic activity, the population did not grow substantially). The town's decline began in 1756 when most residents fled a possible invasion by the French. The French did not invade but the British built a fort and a powder magazine in 1757, the ruins of which can still be seen today. During the American Revolution, American forces were stationed here but the British captured the fort in 1780. A year later, the British were driven out. Attempts to rebuild the church, which the British burned down, were unsuccessful as was reviving the town, which by then was overshadowed by the town of Summerville. And for a long time, bricks from Dorchester's buildings were used to build other structures. As a result, Dorchester was completely abandoned by 1788.	<urn:uuid:882bed0c-9d9a-4a7e-b501-6a9f8f40f957>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.theclio.com/entry/27370	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251788528.85/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129041149-20200129071149-00231.warc.gz	en	0.991906	217	3.359375	3	[ -0.0389595553278923, 0.05354594439268112, 0.4625619351863861, 0.024214765056967735, 0.06395117938518524, 0.0845552459359169, -0.009253703989088535, 0.1178082525730133, -0.37725430727005005, -0.0028692418709397316, 0.3509519100189209, -0.3459838926792145, 0.02626253105700016, 0.174171060323...	2	The location was very advantageous: it was situated next to the Ashley River, which was a major traveling and shipping corridor into the colony's interior, and roads here connected to the city of Charleston. As a result, the town eventually became a thriving business hub (interestingly however, despite it being an important hub of economic activity, the population did not grow substantially). The town's decline began in 1756 when most residents fled a possible invasion by the French. The French did not invade but the British built a fort and a powder magazine in 1757, the ruins of which can still be seen today. During the American Revolution, American forces were stationed here but the British captured the fort in 1780. A year later, the British were driven out. Attempts to rebuild the church, which the British burned down, were unsuccessful as was reviving the town, which by then was overshadowed by the town of Summerville. And for a long time, bricks from Dorchester's buildings were used to build other structures. As a result, Dorchester was completely abandoned by 1788.	230	ENGLISH	1
Pablo Christiani (or Paul Christian; né "Saúl" or " " ) was a controversial Sephardic Jew who, having converted to Christianity, used his position as a Dominican friar to endeavor to convert other Jews in Europe to Roman Catholicism. Saúl (Shaul ben ?) was born in 13th-Century Spain to a pious Jewish family, and he is believed to have been a student of Rabbi Eliezer of Tarascon. Having married a Jewish woman and fathered children with her, he took his children from his wife when he left her after he converted himself and the children to Roman Catholicism. He then joined the Dominican Order as a friar. Prior to the 1263 Disputation of Barcelona, he followed Nicholas Donin's lead in attempting to ban the Talmud, which he argued had "irrational" textual material. As for his participation in the Disputation, it was his attempt to convert Nahmanides and other fellow Jews to Christianity. The failure to convert anybody during the Disputation did not, however, discourage Christiani. Through the agency of Raymond de Penyafort and with letters of protection from King James I of Aragon, he went on missionary journeys and compelled Jews everywhere to listen to his speeches and answer his questions, both in synagogues and at wherever else he pleased. He even required his audiences to defray the expenses of his missions. In spite of the protection granted him by the king, Christiani did not meet with the success that he had expected on his missions. He therefore, in 1264, went to Pope Clement IV and denounced the Talmud, making assertions that it contained passages that were derogatory in regards to Jesus and Mary. He thus affected the pope to issue a bill that commanded the Bishop of Tarragona to submit all copies of the Talmud to the examination of the Dominicans and Franciscans. The Bishop of Tarragona then ordered King James to appoint a commission that consisted of Christiani and others whom would act as censors of the Talmud. Christiani and the rest of the commission hence redacted all of the passages which they deemed were hostile to Christianity. Five years later, Christiani interceded with King Louis IX of France and obtained from him the permission to enforcement of the canonical edict that required Jews to wear badges which would single them out as Jews.	<urn:uuid:4d39cee5-20d5-432b-b3f4-21ddb94302c3>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://popflock.com/learn?s=Paulus_Christiani	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251690379.95/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126195918-20200126225918-00121.warc.gz	en	0.983343	491	3.28125	3	[ -0.12535248696804047, 0.4850023090839386, -0.22925393283367157, -0.26413431763648987, -0.0471346341073513, -0.21057839691638947, 0.05455316603183746, 0.21314825117588043, 0.167218878865242, 0.21176597476005554, -0.14163009822368622, -0.21720241010189056, -0.16541501879692078, 0.39006626605...	1	Pablo Christiani (or Paul Christian; né "Saúl" or " " ) was a controversial Sephardic Jew who, having converted to Christianity, used his position as a Dominican friar to endeavor to convert other Jews in Europe to Roman Catholicism. Saúl (Shaul ben ?) was born in 13th-Century Spain to a pious Jewish family, and he is believed to have been a student of Rabbi Eliezer of Tarascon. Having married a Jewish woman and fathered children with her, he took his children from his wife when he left her after he converted himself and the children to Roman Catholicism. He then joined the Dominican Order as a friar. Prior to the 1263 Disputation of Barcelona, he followed Nicholas Donin's lead in attempting to ban the Talmud, which he argued had "irrational" textual material. As for his participation in the Disputation, it was his attempt to convert Nahmanides and other fellow Jews to Christianity. The failure to convert anybody during the Disputation did not, however, discourage Christiani. Through the agency of Raymond de Penyafort and with letters of protection from King James I of Aragon, he went on missionary journeys and compelled Jews everywhere to listen to his speeches and answer his questions, both in synagogues and at wherever else he pleased. He even required his audiences to defray the expenses of his missions. In spite of the protection granted him by the king, Christiani did not meet with the success that he had expected on his missions. He therefore, in 1264, went to Pope Clement IV and denounced the Talmud, making assertions that it contained passages that were derogatory in regards to Jesus and Mary. He thus affected the pope to issue a bill that commanded the Bishop of Tarragona to submit all copies of the Talmud to the examination of the Dominicans and Franciscans. The Bishop of Tarragona then ordered King James to appoint a commission that consisted of Christiani and others whom would act as censors of the Talmud. Christiani and the rest of the commission hence redacted all of the passages which they deemed were hostile to Christianity. Five years later, Christiani interceded with King Louis IX of France and obtained from him the permission to enforcement of the canonical edict that required Jews to wear badges which would single them out as Jews.	501	ENGLISH	1
Q-ships, also identified as Q-boats, decoy vessels, special service ships, or mystery ships were heavily armed merchant ships having concealed weaponry and were designed to bait enemy submarines into making surface attacks so that the Q-ships could then attack and sink or disable them. They were employed by the British Royal Navy, and the Kaiserliche Marine (Imperial German Navy) during the First World War, and by the Royal Navy, the Nazi Kriegsmarine (navy of Nazi Germany) , and the United States Navy during the Second World War. A surviving WWI example of the Q-ships was The United States’ USS Gold Star AK-12, a civilian cargo ship purchased in 1922. During the 1920s and 1930s Gold Star operated in the waters and far-flung ports of Asia. Though assigned as flagship of the US Navy at Guam she made frequent voyages to Japan, China, and the Philippines with cargo and passengers. Prior to World War II, much of her crew was made up of Chamorro, natives of Guam with American non-commissioned officers and commissioned officers. Gold Star became a communications intelligence ship and was moved from port to port in the Orient and she was assigned to monitor Japanese Fleet radio frequencies, and calculate radio direction finder (DF) frequency measurements. Her assignment began in 1933 during the rebuilding of the Japanese naval fleet by Tokyo and continued into the summer of 1941. Gold Star along with ground stations in Guam, Olongapo and Beijing provided significant intelligence prior to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. In January 12, 1942, the British Admiralty’s intelligence community had observed a “heavy concentration” of U-boats off the North American seaboard from New York to Cape Race, Newfoundland and passed along the information to the United States Navy. And, on that very day , the German submarine U-123 torpedoed and sank the British steamship Cyclops, inaugurating Paukenschlag “a strike on the kettledrum” and sometimes referred to in English as “Operation Drumbeat. This was during “The Second Happy Time”, also known among German submarine commanders as the” American shooting season”, was the informal name for a phase in the Battle of the Atlantic during which Axis submarines attacked merchant shipping and Allied naval vessels along the east coast of North America. The first “Happy Time” was in 1940–41 in the North Atlantic and North Sea. “U-boat commanders found peacetime conditions prevailing along the U.S. east coast as towns and cities were not blacked-out and navigational buoys remained lit; shipping followed normal routines and “carried the normal lights. This presented the opportunity for “wolf packs” of German U-Boats to begin patrolling the eastern coastline of the U.S. with specific orders; Attack and sink any and all sea worthy vessels they may encounter during their mission to help win the war by disrupting supply lines and everyday life in the U.S. “Paukenschlag” had caught the United States unprepared and so losses mounted rapidly. Then on January 20, 1942, Commander-in-Chief, United States Fleet (Cominch), requested the immediate consideration of the manning and fitting-out of “Queen” ships to be operated as an anti-submarine measure. And, the result was “Project LQ.”, the secret project initiated by President Franklin D. Roosevelt that specified the use of decoys disguised as merchant ships but were heavily armed warships again designated as “Q-ships.” Although, little information about them has been recorded over the past fifty years, its known that five vessels were acquired for the project and then were converted in secret at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, Kittery, Maine: They were the Boston beam trawler MS Wave, which briefly became the auxiliary minesweeper USS Eagle (AM-132) before becoming USS Captor (PYc-40), the SS Evelyn and Carolyn, identical cargo vessels that became USS Asterion (AK-100) and USS Atik (AK-101) respectively, the tanker SS Gulf Dawn, which became USS Big Horn (AO-45), And the schooner Irene Myrtle, which became USS Irene Forsyte (IX-93). Shakedown, for the Atik and the Asterion required them to operate independently in waters 200 miles off the United States Atlantic Coast. Enemy submarines had been attacking in the area under darkness and they were rarely seen until after a vessel was struck by a torpedo. Sadly, before the shakedown cruise was four days in, USS Atik (SS Carolyn) was attacked and sunk with all hands by a U-boat. The details of the battle are too scant. But, it is known that the Atik had been cruising in an area 300 miles east of Norfolk, Va. and that the Asterion had been cruising some 240 miles to the south of her. Then on March 26th at 2053, radio stations at Manasquan, New Jersey, and at Fire Island, New York, intercepted a distress message from SS Carolyn giving her location and stating that the ship was under torpedo attack, burning forward and required assistance. Early the next morning, an Army bomber was sent to search the area of Carolyn’s last reported position and the USS Noa DD-343 and the tug USS Sagamore AT-20 were sent to assist in the search. Later, the Army bomber returned and reported not sighting anything, and the tug and the destroyer encountered heavy weather so the tug was recalled; but the destroyer Noa continued the search until her fuel ran low and compelled her to return to New York on March 30th. Additional flights by Army and Navy planes were unsuccessful until two Army planes and one PBY-5A; Navy patrol bomber out of Norfolk reported that they had sighted wreckage ten miles south of the original reported position. Then, twelve days later the Commander Eastern Sea Frontier reported it was believed that there was little chance that any of Carolyn’s crew would be found alive so they were considered lost. So far as United States Q-ships were concerned in World War II, this was the first and the last action with U-boats that produced any positive results. It appears from this unsuccessful beginning that the Germans had become aware of the mission of the Q-ships and so the element of surprise which had made this type of vessel effective against submarines in World War I had been so completely lost that the Q-ships had become something of an anachronism. Nevertheless, the plan was continued, and the details of those later developments deserve a place in the history. The first cruise of USS Asterion (alias SS Evelyn) began with her shakedown and continued until April 18, 1942 when she had several contacts with Nazi U-boats, as well as the sighting of torpedoed merchant vessels and life boats, and rescued their survivors. However, the first cruise was concluded without any action against enemy submarines. Next, USS Asterion was given an overhaul. However, Inspection after her sixth uneventful cruise raised significant doubt as to her ability to remain afloat if hit by a single torpedo because she had only three large holds that if one became flooded was enough to sink her. And, a plan to install five more bulkheads proved too timely and costly. Consequently, on October 14, 1943, the decision was made that Asterion would discontinue her Q-ship duties and that she would be inspected by a Board of Inspection and Survey to determine “suitability for useful service” in some other capacity. Consequently, USS Asterion was converted for use as a weather-vessel in the North Atlantic. The various cruises of the beam trawler, MS Wave, commissioned USS Eagle (AM-132) were as futile as were those of USS Asterion. Her first cruise was intended for her to operate independently as a Q-ship in the general vicinity of the beam trawler commercial fishing fleet out of Boston, Massachusetts. Subsequently she entered the yards for a three-week overhaul and conversion before she began her first cruise and upon completion on May 19, 1942, her classification and name were changed from USS Eagle (AM-132) to USS Captor (PYC-40). Her new operation plan stipulated that she patrol in the area of Georges Bank and her first cruise began May 26, 1942. USS Captor continued to operate in the area during the next twelve months without seeing any action and when U-boat activities in those waters decreased significantly, the vessel was removed from her secret status and was assigned to the First Naval District as a regular armed patrol craft. The most formidable of the USN Q-ships was the tanker SS Gulf Dawn, and her conversion was begun in March 1942 at Bethlehem Shipbuilding, Brooklyn Yard and was continued at the Boston Navy Yard where the work was finally completed on July 22, 1942. Her armament comprised of five 4-inch .50 caliber single purpose guns, two .50 caliber machine guns, five “Tommy” guns, five sawed-off shotguns, as well as sonar equipment. She was commissioned USS Big Horn (AO-45) and she cleared the Boston Navy Yard on July 22, 1942 then proceeded to Casco Bay, Freeport, the Bahamas for training under Commander Destroyers, Atlantic Fleet. The training period was followed with a shakedown cruise completed on August 26, 1942; her complement was 13 officers and 157 enlisted men. The first cruise of USS Big Horn began on September 27, 1942, when the ship proceeded from New York as part of a convoy destined for Guantanamo, Cuba and taking a position as a “straggler”. However, the trip was completed without incident and thereafter the Big Horn was attached to Naval Operating Base, Trinidad, with orders to operate over the Bauxite route to and from ports where it was loaded. Many ships in this area had been sunk in the recent weeks and on October 16, 1942; the Big Horn sailed in convoy from Trinidad. That same afternoon, three U-boats attacked the convoy and the British steamer SS Castle Harbor was hit on the starboard side by a torpedo and quickly sunk. While simultaneously the United States steamer Winona, laden with coal, was struck forward on the starboard side however was able to limp back into Trinidad under her own power. Soon afterwards, lookouts on the Big Horn sighted a U-boat moving at periscope depth on their port beam, but in a position that no action could be taken without threatening friendly ships within the convoy. Thereafter, the cruise was continued without incident for several days and the Big Horn returned to port. Big Horn made multiple cruises without experiencing any action until on April 14, 1943 when she along with the three PC’s proceeded to sea with convoy #UGS-7A. Prior to their arrival in the vicinity of the Azores the group dropped astern of the convoy to proceed with Big Horn acting as straggler-with-escorts, however the escorts remained far enough astern of her so that they would not be visible allowing an enemy submarine to sight Big Horn. The cruise was uneventful during the first two weeks, until noon of May 3, 1943. Early that morning, a surfaced vessel had been sighted on the horizon and PC-618 sent in pursuit. Then, at 1104, PC-618 reported a submarine on the surface, range 6 miles. Next, at 1235, Big Horn got a sonar contact and launched a hedgehog attack after sighting a periscope on the starboard bow, followed by a heavy swirl as the U-boat dived to evade. Subsequently, a second attack was initiated but the contact was lost. Then, at 1540, the contact was regained at 3700 yards and with her speed 5 knots; the Big Horn launched a third attack. But five of her hedgehog projectiles detonated upon water entry, however the Big Horn proceed to drop depth charges on the enemy sub. Soon, a substantial amount of light oil was spotted on the water and it continued to spread on the sea surface for two hours. By 0100 on May 4th the slick was spread over an area of 200 to 300 yards, and by daylight that morning all traces of the oil slick had dispersed and contact with the sub was lost over the next 44 hours, so it was presumed that one submarine had been destroyed. One more routine cruise was made by the Big Horn in company with PC-617 and PC-618, following training exercises in the New London area from October 29th through November 10th then the Task Group returned to New York to refuel and resupply; on November 15th, the Task Group departed and proceeded on an eastward course until they had reached the hunting grounds north of the Azores. The search tactics were carried out for the next three weeks without success, and then the Task Group set course for the United States, arriving in Cape Cod Bay on December 31, 1943. In summarizing this cruise, the Commanding Officer of the Big Horn wrote, “It may be noted that during the period from 27 November to 1 December, this Task Group was in the midst of a group of from 10 to 15 U-boats. Nine contacts, sightings or attacks on U-boats took place in our immediate vicinity, so that it is most unlikely that we were not seen by some U-boats. Evidently the U-boats are wary of attacking an independent tanker. If the Q-ship program has contributed to this wariness, as is suggested in several prisoner-of-war statements, many independent merchant ships may thereby have escaped attack, and the Q-ship program has thus been of value.” Subsequently, new orders were that the Big Horn join the Asterion in the new assignment to Weather Patrol Duty in the North Atlantic, under the supervision of the Coast Guard and manned by Coast Guard officers and crew. The fifth vessel to be converted as a Q-ship was the three-masted schooner USS Irene Forsyte which after refit and shake-down reported for duty on September 24, 1943, and was then instructed to sail for Recife Brazil along the Maury Track. On the first leg of this cruise, the Irene Forsyte ran into heavy weather which opened up her hull seams and caused such serious flooding that the vessel nearly foundered before she could put in at Bermuda. Immediately, questions were raised as to why the vessel had been permitted to go to sea in such an obviously unseaworthy condition. The consequence of the situation was the appointment of a Board of Investigation to ascertain responsibility for material failure of the vessel. In commenting on the report of the Naval Inspector General wrote “The conversion of USS Irene Forsyte is an instance of misguided conception and misdirected zeal, which, coupled with inefficiency resulting from lack of supervision by competent authority; has cost the government nearly half a million dollars in money and a serious waste of effort”; thus, ending the short career of Irene Forsyte. The careers of all five ships were almost entirely unsuccessful and very short lived and all Q-ships patrols ended in 1943. But, despite their somewhat sketchy record of success Q-Ships have been celebrated in mainstream literature. In Ernest Hemingway’s novel “Islands in the Stream”, the main character Thomas Hudson commanded a US Navy Q-ship in Cuban waters as he searched for the survivors of a sunken German U-boat. And, in Malcolm Lowry’s novel “Under the Volcano” of 1947 he tells the story of Geoffrey Firmin, an alcoholic British consul living in the small Mexican town of Quauhnahuac, on the Day of the Dead, 2 November 1938, a Mexican holiday celebrated throughout Mexico that focuses on gatherings of family and friends to pray for and remember deceased friends and family members. Geoffrey Firmin reflects back to his time as a naval officer during World War I, when he was court-martialed and subsequently decorated for his actions aboard a Q-Ship. Too, as with other naval concepts, the idea of a Q-ship has also been applied to spacecraft in fictional works: Q-ships feature prominently in David Weber’s “Honor Harrington” series of books. Harrington destroys a Q-ship in the first novel, “On Basilisk Station”, and commands a squadron of Q-ships in the sixth novel, “Honor Among Enemies.” Harrington’s snotty cruise captain, Thomas Bachfisch, commands a pair of privately owned Q-ships in the tenth in the series, “War of Honor.” And, In Star Trek: Deep Space Nine episode “Return to Grace”, Major Kira and Gul Dukat converts a Cartesian freighter into a Q-ship to pursue a Klingon vessel which had destroyed an outpost. And lastly, in the “Star Fleet Universe” based on Star Trek, all major spacefaring races use Q-ships disguised as small and large freighters as convoy escorts to thwart attacks from enemy races and the Orion Pirates.	<urn:uuid:d8593187-d918-435b-b9d7-5887b91595bd>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.liboatingworld.com/single-post/2017/05/23/The-USN-Q-Ships-of-WWII	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250599789.45/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120195035-20200120224035-00222.warc.gz	en	0.981328	3,577	3.53125	4	[ -0.18592099845409393, 0.09115174412727356, 0.14039388298988342, -0.3437822461128235, 0.02409156784415245, 0.0268742423504591, 0.005380277056246996, 0.33372586965560913, -0.3291306495666504, -0.11652761697769165, 0.5998268127441406, -0.09494795650243759, -0.08498150110244751, 0.444943338632...	5	Q-ships, also identified as Q-boats, decoy vessels, special service ships, or mystery ships were heavily armed merchant ships having concealed weaponry and were designed to bait enemy submarines into making surface attacks so that the Q-ships could then attack and sink or disable them. They were employed by the British Royal Navy, and the Kaiserliche Marine (Imperial German Navy) during the First World War, and by the Royal Navy, the Nazi Kriegsmarine (navy of Nazi Germany) , and the United States Navy during the Second World War. A surviving WWI example of the Q-ships was The United States’ USS Gold Star AK-12, a civilian cargo ship purchased in 1922. During the 1920s and 1930s Gold Star operated in the waters and far-flung ports of Asia. Though assigned as flagship of the US Navy at Guam she made frequent voyages to Japan, China, and the Philippines with cargo and passengers. Prior to World War II, much of her crew was made up of Chamorro, natives of Guam with American non-commissioned officers and commissioned officers. Gold Star became a communications intelligence ship and was moved from port to port in the Orient and she was assigned to monitor Japanese Fleet radio frequencies, and calculate radio direction finder (DF) frequency measurements. Her assignment began in 1933 during the rebuilding of the Japanese naval fleet by Tokyo and continued into the summer of 1941. Gold Star along with ground stations in Guam, Olongapo and Beijing provided significant intelligence prior to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. In January 12, 1942, the British Admiralty’s intelligence community had observed a “heavy concentration” of U-boats off the North American seaboard from New York to Cape Race, Newfoundland and passed along the information to the United States Navy. And, on that very day , the German submarine U-123 torpedoed and sank the British steamship Cyclops, inaugurating Paukenschlag “a strike on the kettledrum” and sometimes referred to in English as “Operation Drumbeat. This was during “The Second Happy Time”, also known among German submarine commanders as the” American shooting season”, was the informal name for a phase in the Battle of the Atlantic during which Axis submarines attacked merchant shipping and Allied naval vessels along the east coast of North America. The first “Happy Time” was in 1940–41 in the North Atlantic and North Sea. “U-boat commanders found peacetime conditions prevailing along the U.S. east coast as towns and cities were not blacked-out and navigational buoys remained lit; shipping followed normal routines and “carried the normal lights. This presented the opportunity for “wolf packs” of German U-Boats to begin patrolling the eastern coastline of the U.S. with specific orders; Attack and sink any and all sea worthy vessels they may encounter during their mission to help win the war by disrupting supply lines and everyday life in the U.S. “Paukenschlag” had caught the United States unprepared and so losses mounted rapidly. Then on January 20, 1942, Commander-in-Chief, United States Fleet (Cominch), requested the immediate consideration of the manning and fitting-out of “Queen” ships to be operated as an anti-submarine measure. And, the result was “Project LQ.”, the secret project initiated by President Franklin D. Roosevelt that specified the use of decoys disguised as merchant ships but were heavily armed warships again designated as “Q-ships.” Although, little information about them has been recorded over the past fifty years, its known that five vessels were acquired for the project and then were converted in secret at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, Kittery, Maine: They were the Boston beam trawler MS Wave, which briefly became the auxiliary minesweeper USS Eagle (AM-132) before becoming USS Captor (PYc-40), the SS Evelyn and Carolyn, identical cargo vessels that became USS Asterion (AK-100) and USS Atik (AK-101) respectively, the tanker SS Gulf Dawn, which became USS Big Horn (AO-45), And the schooner Irene Myrtle, which became USS Irene Forsyte (IX-93). Shakedown, for the Atik and the Asterion required them to operate independently in waters 200 miles off the United States Atlantic Coast. Enemy submarines had been attacking in the area under darkness and they were rarely seen until after a vessel was struck by a torpedo. Sadly, before the shakedown cruise was four days in, USS Atik (SS Carolyn) was attacked and sunk with all hands by a U-boat. The details of the battle are too scant. But, it is known that the Atik had been cruising in an area 300 miles east of Norfolk, Va. and that the Asterion had been cruising some 240 miles to the south of her. Then on March 26th at 2053, radio stations at Manasquan, New Jersey, and at Fire Island, New York, intercepted a distress message from SS Carolyn giving her location and stating that the ship was under torpedo attack, burning forward and required assistance. Early the next morning, an Army bomber was sent to search the area of Carolyn’s last reported position and the USS Noa DD-343 and the tug USS Sagamore AT-20 were sent to assist in the search. Later, the Army bomber returned and reported not sighting anything, and the tug and the destroyer encountered heavy weather so the tug was recalled; but the destroyer Noa continued the search until her fuel ran low and compelled her to return to New York on March 30th. Additional flights by Army and Navy planes were unsuccessful until two Army planes and one PBY-5A; Navy patrol bomber out of Norfolk reported that they had sighted wreckage ten miles south of the original reported position. Then, twelve days later the Commander Eastern Sea Frontier reported it was believed that there was little chance that any of Carolyn’s crew would be found alive so they were considered lost. So far as United States Q-ships were concerned in World War II, this was the first and the last action with U-boats that produced any positive results. It appears from this unsuccessful beginning that the Germans had become aware of the mission of the Q-ships and so the element of surprise which had made this type of vessel effective against submarines in World War I had been so completely lost that the Q-ships had become something of an anachronism. Nevertheless, the plan was continued, and the details of those later developments deserve a place in the history. The first cruise of USS Asterion (alias SS Evelyn) began with her shakedown and continued until April 18, 1942 when she had several contacts with Nazi U-boats, as well as the sighting of torpedoed merchant vessels and life boats, and rescued their survivors. However, the first cruise was concluded without any action against enemy submarines. Next, USS Asterion was given an overhaul. However, Inspection after her sixth uneventful cruise raised significant doubt as to her ability to remain afloat if hit by a single torpedo because she had only three large holds that if one became flooded was enough to sink her. And, a plan to install five more bulkheads proved too timely and costly. Consequently, on October 14, 1943, the decision was made that Asterion would discontinue her Q-ship duties and that she would be inspected by a Board of Inspection and Survey to determine “suitability for useful service” in some other capacity. Consequently, USS Asterion was converted for use as a weather-vessel in the North Atlantic. The various cruises of the beam trawler, MS Wave, commissioned USS Eagle (AM-132) were as futile as were those of USS Asterion. Her first cruise was intended for her to operate independently as a Q-ship in the general vicinity of the beam trawler commercial fishing fleet out of Boston, Massachusetts. Subsequently she entered the yards for a three-week overhaul and conversion before she began her first cruise and upon completion on May 19, 1942, her classification and name were changed from USS Eagle (AM-132) to USS Captor (PYC-40). Her new operation plan stipulated that she patrol in the area of Georges Bank and her first cruise began May 26, 1942. USS Captor continued to operate in the area during the next twelve months without seeing any action and when U-boat activities in those waters decreased significantly, the vessel was removed from her secret status and was assigned to the First Naval District as a regular armed patrol craft. The most formidable of the USN Q-ships was the tanker SS Gulf Dawn, and her conversion was begun in March 1942 at Bethlehem Shipbuilding, Brooklyn Yard and was continued at the Boston Navy Yard where the work was finally completed on July 22, 1942. Her armament comprised of five 4-inch .50 caliber single purpose guns, two .50 caliber machine guns, five “Tommy” guns, five sawed-off shotguns, as well as sonar equipment. She was commissioned USS Big Horn (AO-45) and she cleared the Boston Navy Yard on July 22, 1942 then proceeded to Casco Bay, Freeport, the Bahamas for training under Commander Destroyers, Atlantic Fleet. The training period was followed with a shakedown cruise completed on August 26, 1942; her complement was 13 officers and 157 enlisted men. The first cruise of USS Big Horn began on September 27, 1942, when the ship proceeded from New York as part of a convoy destined for Guantanamo, Cuba and taking a position as a “straggler”. However, the trip was completed without incident and thereafter the Big Horn was attached to Naval Operating Base, Trinidad, with orders to operate over the Bauxite route to and from ports where it was loaded. Many ships in this area had been sunk in the recent weeks and on October 16, 1942; the Big Horn sailed in convoy from Trinidad. That same afternoon, three U-boats attacked the convoy and the British steamer SS Castle Harbor was hit on the starboard side by a torpedo and quickly sunk. While simultaneously the United States steamer Winona, laden with coal, was struck forward on the starboard side however was able to limp back into Trinidad under her own power. Soon afterwards, lookouts on the Big Horn sighted a U-boat moving at periscope depth on their port beam, but in a position that no action could be taken without threatening friendly ships within the convoy. Thereafter, the cruise was continued without incident for several days and the Big Horn returned to port. Big Horn made multiple cruises without experiencing any action until on April 14, 1943 when she along with the three PC’s proceeded to sea with convoy #UGS-7A. Prior to their arrival in the vicinity of the Azores the group dropped astern of the convoy to proceed with Big Horn acting as straggler-with-escorts, however the escorts remained far enough astern of her so that they would not be visible allowing an enemy submarine to sight Big Horn. The cruise was uneventful during the first two weeks, until noon of May 3, 1943. Early that morning, a surfaced vessel had been sighted on the horizon and PC-618 sent in pursuit. Then, at 1104, PC-618 reported a submarine on the surface, range 6 miles. Next, at 1235, Big Horn got a sonar contact and launched a hedgehog attack after sighting a periscope on the starboard bow, followed by a heavy swirl as the U-boat dived to evade. Subsequently, a second attack was initiated but the contact was lost. Then, at 1540, the contact was regained at 3700 yards and with her speed 5 knots; the Big Horn launched a third attack. But five of her hedgehog projectiles detonated upon water entry, however the Big Horn proceed to drop depth charges on the enemy sub. Soon, a substantial amount of light oil was spotted on the water and it continued to spread on the sea surface for two hours. By 0100 on May 4th the slick was spread over an area of 200 to 300 yards, and by daylight that morning all traces of the oil slick had dispersed and contact with the sub was lost over the next 44 hours, so it was presumed that one submarine had been destroyed. One more routine cruise was made by the Big Horn in company with PC-617 and PC-618, following training exercises in the New London area from October 29th through November 10th then the Task Group returned to New York to refuel and resupply; on November 15th, the Task Group departed and proceeded on an eastward course until they had reached the hunting grounds north of the Azores. The search tactics were carried out for the next three weeks without success, and then the Task Group set course for the United States, arriving in Cape Cod Bay on December 31, 1943. In summarizing this cruise, the Commanding Officer of the Big Horn wrote, “It may be noted that during the period from 27 November to 1 December, this Task Group was in the midst of a group of from 10 to 15 U-boats. Nine contacts, sightings or attacks on U-boats took place in our immediate vicinity, so that it is most unlikely that we were not seen by some U-boats. Evidently the U-boats are wary of attacking an independent tanker. If the Q-ship program has contributed to this wariness, as is suggested in several prisoner-of-war statements, many independent merchant ships may thereby have escaped attack, and the Q-ship program has thus been of value.” Subsequently, new orders were that the Big Horn join the Asterion in the new assignment to Weather Patrol Duty in the North Atlantic, under the supervision of the Coast Guard and manned by Coast Guard officers and crew. The fifth vessel to be converted as a Q-ship was the three-masted schooner USS Irene Forsyte which after refit and shake-down reported for duty on September 24, 1943, and was then instructed to sail for Recife Brazil along the Maury Track. On the first leg of this cruise, the Irene Forsyte ran into heavy weather which opened up her hull seams and caused such serious flooding that the vessel nearly foundered before she could put in at Bermuda. Immediately, questions were raised as to why the vessel had been permitted to go to sea in such an obviously unseaworthy condition. The consequence of the situation was the appointment of a Board of Investigation to ascertain responsibility for material failure of the vessel. In commenting on the report of the Naval Inspector General wrote “The conversion of USS Irene Forsyte is an instance of misguided conception and misdirected zeal, which, coupled with inefficiency resulting from lack of supervision by competent authority; has cost the government nearly half a million dollars in money and a serious waste of effort”; thus, ending the short career of Irene Forsyte. The careers of all five ships were almost entirely unsuccessful and very short lived and all Q-ships patrols ended in 1943. But, despite their somewhat sketchy record of success Q-Ships have been celebrated in mainstream literature. In Ernest Hemingway’s novel “Islands in the Stream”, the main character Thomas Hudson commanded a US Navy Q-ship in Cuban waters as he searched for the survivors of a sunken German U-boat. And, in Malcolm Lowry’s novel “Under the Volcano” of 1947 he tells the story of Geoffrey Firmin, an alcoholic British consul living in the small Mexican town of Quauhnahuac, on the Day of the Dead, 2 November 1938, a Mexican holiday celebrated throughout Mexico that focuses on gatherings of family and friends to pray for and remember deceased friends and family members. Geoffrey Firmin reflects back to his time as a naval officer during World War I, when he was court-martialed and subsequently decorated for his actions aboard a Q-Ship. Too, as with other naval concepts, the idea of a Q-ship has also been applied to spacecraft in fictional works: Q-ships feature prominently in David Weber’s “Honor Harrington” series of books. Harrington destroys a Q-ship in the first novel, “On Basilisk Station”, and commands a squadron of Q-ships in the sixth novel, “Honor Among Enemies.” Harrington’s snotty cruise captain, Thomas Bachfisch, commands a pair of privately owned Q-ships in the tenth in the series, “War of Honor.” And, In Star Trek: Deep Space Nine episode “Return to Grace”, Major Kira and Gul Dukat converts a Cartesian freighter into a Q-ship to pursue a Klingon vessel which had destroyed an outpost. And lastly, in the “Star Fleet Universe” based on Star Trek, all major spacefaring races use Q-ships disguised as small and large freighters as convoy escorts to thwart attacks from enemy races and the Orion Pirates.	3,664	ENGLISH	1
At the outbreak of World War II, the Port of London was the busiest port in the world. As such, a large proportion of supplies to the UK entered by ships navigating the Thames. The German Navy quickly sought to put a stranglehold on this route, and to this end, utilised a new secret weapon – the magnetic influence mine. Whilst there were different variants of this mine, in simplistic terms, the mine was detonated by the presence of a large magnetic object – such as a steel hulled ship – passing in close proximity, without having to make physical contact. So successful was this that in the first few months of the war, over one hundred ships were sunk in the Thames Estuary alone. It was clear that urgent action was needed to stem these losses, and as most mines were laid by aircraft, ships were requisitioned and used as mobile anti aircraft units. However, this was not altogether successful, and a more satisfactory solution was needed.In the early years of the war, Guy Maunsell, a civil engineer, had produced plans for offshore defences. At the time his ideas were considered somewhat eccentric, but he was asked to submit plans for an offshore fort as an effective means of dealing with the laying of the mines. Plans were drawn up, and after some modification, approval was given for the manufacture and installation of 3 sets of Army Forts and 4 Navy Forts in the Thames Estuary. As a result of German mining activity at the outbreak of war in September 1939, an urgent need arose to protect the waters of the Thames Estuary from small naval craft aircraft sowing magnetic mines. The initial answer was the placing of four Naval Sea Forts, each armed with two 3.7” Heavy AA guns and two 40mm Bofors guns, in the Estuary, located as follows: one 7 miles off Harwich, Essex, one 7 miles off Frinton on Sea, Essex, one 5 miles off Margate, Kent and one 12 miles off Herne Bay, Kent. Each of these Forts was manned by 120 men and three officers with crews rotating every six weeks to shore bases at Harwich for the Essex forts and Sheerness for the Kent Forts. Each fort accommodated up to 265 men. Both Army and Navy forts successfully acquitted themselves during the war years. The Thames forts shot down 22 planes, 30 flying bombs, and were instrumental in the loss of one U-boat, which was scuttled after coming under fire from Tongue sands tower. After the war the forts were placed on ‘care and maintenance’, however as the need for their continued use diminished, they were abandoned, and the guns removed from the Army forts, in 1956.The Nore fort was dismantled in 1959 being considered a hazard to shipping [two towers were lost following a collision in 1953] whilst one of the Shivering Sand towers was similarly lost in 1963.In 1964, Radio Caroline began broadcasting from a ship moored outside UK Territorial Waters. After the War After the war the forts were placed on ‘care and maintenance’. However as the need for their continued use diminished, they were abandoned, and the guns removed from the Army forts, in 1956.The Nore fort was dismantled in 1959 being considered a hazard to shipping [two towers were lost following a collision in 1953] whilst one of the Shivering Sand towers was similarly lost in 1963.In 1964, Radio Caroline began broadcasting from a ship moored outside UK Territorial Waters. Other broadcasters followed with pop star Screaming Lord Sutch establishing Radio Sutch on the Shivering Sand Towers – much to the embarrassment of the Government. Radio Sutch became Radio City, whilst other forts were occupied to become Radio 390 [Redsand], Radio Essex [Knock John], and Tower Radio [Sunk Head]. The forts fell silent after a number of prosecutions in late 1966/67. It was accepted that all were within territorial waters, other than Roughs and Sunk Head. Sunk Head was destroyed by the Royal Engineers shortly after the Marine Broadcasting Offences Act became law, although Roughs has been occupied since 1967 to this day as the quasi independent Principality of Sealand. Tongue Fort collapsed following a severe storm in 1996, although had been abandoned as long ago as 1947, after the reinforced pontoon base broke its back, and one of the legs developed a list.The remaining Army forts had their catwalks removed for safety reasons, and apart from some usage by the SAS as simulated oil rig assault training, all have remained largely unchanged, and are viewed from the coast as a curiosity on the horizon, by the casual observer. The maintenance crews were in occupation from May 1945 until April 1956 when it was decided to remove the guns and abandon the Forts. On March 1st 1953 a ship, the “Baalbeck” ran into the Nore group of towers in thick fog and knocked over the Bofors Tower and a gun tower killing four of the installed maintenance crew. The Army seemed more concerned with the loss of equipment, two Bofors guns, a 3.7” gun and a large amount of equipment and stores, than the personnel whose relatives were paid paltry sums as compensation for the loss of their loved ones. Subsequently in 1959 the Nore group of towers were removed and scrapped. Another accident happened in 1963 when in June a ship the “Riberborg” crashed into the Shivering Sand Fort and demolished a gun tower. Fortunately, no one was on board at the time and there were no casualties. Thus, Shivering Sand Fort today consists of only six towers. This left the Redsand and Shivering Sand Forts remaining out of the three sets and following a period of occupation by the Radio Pirates from 1964 to 1967 the Forts were sanitized by the Admiralty who removed access ladders and catwalks to deny people access. The towers were built at the Red Lion Wharf site in Gravesend, towed down river and lowered by hand winch onto the sea bed, each tower taking up to eight hours to be placed in position. The first set of towers were placed at the Nore between May and July 1943. Each tower was built off a reinforced concrete base of ‘Oxford picture frame’ design. Four hollow reinforced concrete legs of 3’ diameter supported the 36’ x 36’ steel house of two floors, with the military equipment installed on the top deck. Each fort comprised seven towers linked by tubular steel catwalks. Three forts were built in the Thames estuary, between May and December 1943. They were known as the Nore, Redsand and Shivering Sand Army Forts. Today, Redsand Fort as the only complete structure as built in wartime is the focus of attention by Project Redsand, a group of enthusiasts with the aim of reinstating the Fort to its original built condition. Having had an underwater survey carried out by the Port of London Authority at a cost of around £5,000, work has progressed to installing a new access system to the G1 tower thanks to the generosity of Mowlem Marine (now Carillion) of Northfleet. Built at a cost of approximately £40,000, the access system enables project members to board the tower to commence restoration. In time it is hoped a museum and other installations will enable the Fort to take its place as a monument to the ingenuity of Guy Maunsell who used the Army Fort design to pave the way for oil and gas exploration rigs in the North Sea in the 1950’s.	<urn:uuid:a09ef1d6-5e27-4336-9f91-9e25b37b30f3>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://project-redsand.com/sea-fort-history/army-forts	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251705142.94/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127174507-20200127204507-00412.warc.gz	en	0.983767	1,569	3.578125	4	[ 0.13466417789459229, 0.1543702483177185, 0.18059402704238892, -0.36592885851860046, 0.14489156007766724, -0.3870790898799896, -0.06512880325317383, 0.11892741918563843, -0.5129252076148987, -0.5171233415603638, -0.02441713772714138, -0.6619599461555481, -0.031948864459991455, 0.59956800937...	3	At the outbreak of World War II, the Port of London was the busiest port in the world. As such, a large proportion of supplies to the UK entered by ships navigating the Thames. The German Navy quickly sought to put a stranglehold on this route, and to this end, utilised a new secret weapon – the magnetic influence mine. Whilst there were different variants of this mine, in simplistic terms, the mine was detonated by the presence of a large magnetic object – such as a steel hulled ship – passing in close proximity, without having to make physical contact. So successful was this that in the first few months of the war, over one hundred ships were sunk in the Thames Estuary alone. It was clear that urgent action was needed to stem these losses, and as most mines were laid by aircraft, ships were requisitioned and used as mobile anti aircraft units. However, this was not altogether successful, and a more satisfactory solution was needed.In the early years of the war, Guy Maunsell, a civil engineer, had produced plans for offshore defences. At the time his ideas were considered somewhat eccentric, but he was asked to submit plans for an offshore fort as an effective means of dealing with the laying of the mines. Plans were drawn up, and after some modification, approval was given for the manufacture and installation of 3 sets of Army Forts and 4 Navy Forts in the Thames Estuary. As a result of German mining activity at the outbreak of war in September 1939, an urgent need arose to protect the waters of the Thames Estuary from small naval craft aircraft sowing magnetic mines. The initial answer was the placing of four Naval Sea Forts, each armed with two 3.7” Heavy AA guns and two 40mm Bofors guns, in the Estuary, located as follows: one 7 miles off Harwich, Essex, one 7 miles off Frinton on Sea, Essex, one 5 miles off Margate, Kent and one 12 miles off Herne Bay, Kent. Each of these Forts was manned by 120 men and three officers with crews rotating every six weeks to shore bases at Harwich for the Essex forts and Sheerness for the Kent Forts. Each fort accommodated up to 265 men. Both Army and Navy forts successfully acquitted themselves during the war years. The Thames forts shot down 22 planes, 30 flying bombs, and were instrumental in the loss of one U-boat, which was scuttled after coming under fire from Tongue sands tower. After the war the forts were placed on ‘care and maintenance’, however as the need for their continued use diminished, they were abandoned, and the guns removed from the Army forts, in 1956.The Nore fort was dismantled in 1959 being considered a hazard to shipping [two towers were lost following a collision in 1953] whilst one of the Shivering Sand towers was similarly lost in 1963.In 1964, Radio Caroline began broadcasting from a ship moored outside UK Territorial Waters. After the War After the war the forts were placed on ‘care and maintenance’. However as the need for their continued use diminished, they were abandoned, and the guns removed from the Army forts, in 1956.The Nore fort was dismantled in 1959 being considered a hazard to shipping [two towers were lost following a collision in 1953] whilst one of the Shivering Sand towers was similarly lost in 1963.In 1964, Radio Caroline began broadcasting from a ship moored outside UK Territorial Waters. Other broadcasters followed with pop star Screaming Lord Sutch establishing Radio Sutch on the Shivering Sand Towers – much to the embarrassment of the Government. Radio Sutch became Radio City, whilst other forts were occupied to become Radio 390 [Redsand], Radio Essex [Knock John], and Tower Radio [Sunk Head]. The forts fell silent after a number of prosecutions in late 1966/67. It was accepted that all were within territorial waters, other than Roughs and Sunk Head. Sunk Head was destroyed by the Royal Engineers shortly after the Marine Broadcasting Offences Act became law, although Roughs has been occupied since 1967 to this day as the quasi independent Principality of Sealand. Tongue Fort collapsed following a severe storm in 1996, although had been abandoned as long ago as 1947, after the reinforced pontoon base broke its back, and one of the legs developed a list.The remaining Army forts had their catwalks removed for safety reasons, and apart from some usage by the SAS as simulated oil rig assault training, all have remained largely unchanged, and are viewed from the coast as a curiosity on the horizon, by the casual observer. The maintenance crews were in occupation from May 1945 until April 1956 when it was decided to remove the guns and abandon the Forts. On March 1st 1953 a ship, the “Baalbeck” ran into the Nore group of towers in thick fog and knocked over the Bofors Tower and a gun tower killing four of the installed maintenance crew. The Army seemed more concerned with the loss of equipment, two Bofors guns, a 3.7” gun and a large amount of equipment and stores, than the personnel whose relatives were paid paltry sums as compensation for the loss of their loved ones. Subsequently in 1959 the Nore group of towers were removed and scrapped. Another accident happened in 1963 when in June a ship the “Riberborg” crashed into the Shivering Sand Fort and demolished a gun tower. Fortunately, no one was on board at the time and there were no casualties. Thus, Shivering Sand Fort today consists of only six towers. This left the Redsand and Shivering Sand Forts remaining out of the three sets and following a period of occupation by the Radio Pirates from 1964 to 1967 the Forts were sanitized by the Admiralty who removed access ladders and catwalks to deny people access. The towers were built at the Red Lion Wharf site in Gravesend, towed down river and lowered by hand winch onto the sea bed, each tower taking up to eight hours to be placed in position. The first set of towers were placed at the Nore between May and July 1943. Each tower was built off a reinforced concrete base of ‘Oxford picture frame’ design. Four hollow reinforced concrete legs of 3’ diameter supported the 36’ x 36’ steel house of two floors, with the military equipment installed on the top deck. Each fort comprised seven towers linked by tubular steel catwalks. Three forts were built in the Thames estuary, between May and December 1943. They were known as the Nore, Redsand and Shivering Sand Army Forts. Today, Redsand Fort as the only complete structure as built in wartime is the focus of attention by Project Redsand, a group of enthusiasts with the aim of reinstating the Fort to its original built condition. Having had an underwater survey carried out by the Port of London Authority at a cost of around £5,000, work has progressed to installing a new access system to the G1 tower thanks to the generosity of Mowlem Marine (now Carillion) of Northfleet. Built at a cost of approximately £40,000, the access system enables project members to board the tower to commence restoration. In time it is hoped a museum and other installations will enable the Fort to take its place as a monument to the ingenuity of Guy Maunsell who used the Army Fort design to pave the way for oil and gas exploration rigs in the North Sea in the 1950’s.	1,659	ENGLISH	1
Did a Delawarean give us the Electoral College? If someone were to tell you that John Dickinson played a crucial role in giving us the Electoral College, would you sing his praises or curse his memory? Before you answer, put aside today’s politics. Consider instead the realities of 1787. The times were uncertain. Tensions ran high. People divided against each other. Debts climbed and money was scarce. The proposed solution, a radical document dubbed the Constitution, was an unknown. What went through the minds of Delawareans when they considered approving it? A “yes” vote would be a true leap in the dark. Could the 13 states be united and free at the same time? Could they settle their differences, act as a single nation, and retain their identity as individual states? What protections did they have? Were they trading in a foreign-born king for a homegrown tyranny? Delaware’s ratification convention met in Dover’s Golden Fleece Tavern. The members, elected in special votes in all three counties, had to decide whether the Constitution would be good or bad for Delaware. After a long debate, they voted yes – 30 to 0. Delaware made the leap into the dark. On Dec. 7, 1787, Delaware became The First State. In some ways, the proposed Constitution was an easier choice for Delawareans than for other Americans. It offered protection from the surrounding larger states. Delaware no longer would have to pay tariffs on goods from other states. The new Senate would give tiny Delaware, with a population of around 60,000, a voice equal to that of Virginia, a giant with more than 700,000 people. Most of all, the new Constitution promised stability and an end to what many saw as a rising anarchy. That Delaware saw it that way was due in large measure to one man: John Dickinson. He was at the Golden Fleece for the Dec. 7 vote, just as he had been at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia the previous summer. Dickinson’s influence on both conventions was wide and positive – notwithstanding your feelings about the Electoral College. Dickinson had been a fixture in Delaware and Pennsylvania government since the 1760s. He was the author of the famed “Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania,” the earliest rallying cry against British infringements on American rights. He led the fight against the Stamp Act. He served as governor of Delaware and Pennsylvania. For two months in 1782, he actually was governor of both states at the same time. Dickinson wrote the first draft of the Articles of Confederation, arguing for religious freedom and fair treatment for Indians. He had become an opponent of slavery. At the onset of the American Revolution, he organized the defense of Philadelphia against British threats and served as a colonel in the militia. He carried a musket as a private at the Battle of the Brandywine. He served on multiple committees in the Continental Congress, writing state papers and debating the issues. And, for many months, he was the leading moderate in the debate on independence. He had come to see the break with Britain as inevitable, but he questioned the timing. The colonies were not ready, he argued in the Congress. They had no government to speak of, no foreign allies, and no method to pay for a war. Their army was untested and untrained. Its opponent, the British army, was the mightiest in the world. He was right, but his fellow delegates were eager for independence. Dickinson, a representative from Pennsylvania, stayed away from the final vote for independence on July 2, 1776. His absence made Pennsylvania a “yes” vote, thus making the decision for independence unanimous. Dickinson accepted the vote and went off with his militia unit to guard against the British. Yet for some, even a decade later, moderation still held no virtue. Despite his service before, during and after the Revolution, some inside the Philadelphia Constitutional Convention suspected him of disloyalty. Unlike others who voted against independence but went on to sign the Declaration, Dickinson stuck to his principles and declined to sign. Unlike the others, he actually went off to war. No matter. They saw him as a has-been, a man without influence. His critics were wrong. His personality, the power of his thinking and his diligence insured that his ideas would carry weight. Dickinson’s health, never strong, worked against him at the Philadelphia convention. He was often absent, suffering from severe headaches. But his ideas took hold. For example, he was, like the other framers of the Constitution, a student of the British form of government. England’s division between the monarch and legislative branches seemed to them, as Alexander Hamilton said, as close to perfection as possible. Even the British division between the House of Commons and the House of Lords made sense. Dickinson, looking for a similar arrangement for the new government, said America needed something like the barons of old England to counterbalance the power of the king. This was the source of the House of Lords. America would have no aristocracy, no hereditary powers, Dickinson said. Instead, its baronies, its counterbalance to the president would be the states. One house of the legislature would represent the people. The other would represent the states, Dickinson said. It would be a permanent counterbalance to the president and the individuals and factions of the House of Representatives. His concept was accepted and the Senate was born. Not all of his ideas took hold. His reading of ancient and British history made him distrust kings and would-be tyrants. He feared putting too much power in the hands of one person, the president. Therefore, he proposed a three-person presidency as a way of fending off corruption. His idea went nowhere and he gave up on it. However, he did not give up on giving the people a say in picking the president. The framers of the Constitution, like most of us, had a habit of putting off hard decisions. Eventually, time began to run out. Too many problems remained unsolved. Solving them became the job of a new panel, the “Committee on Postponed Parts.” The committee duly met and, one-by-one, solved the outstanding problems. Yet one, selecting a president, baffled them. The delegates disagreed. Some, like Dickinson, wanted the people to pick the president. Others, who distrusted the people, wanted state legislators to make the selection. As it happened, Dickinson’s health failed him during this period. He often would retreat to his home in Dover for days at a time. (The home, by the way, is still there and open to the public.) When his headaches subsided, Dickinson returned to the convention just as the Committee on Postponed Parts was about to sign off on a compromise solution: Let Congress pick the president. This was too much for Dickinson. As he later recalled, he told them the “powers which we have agreed to vest in the President were so many and so great,” the people would not agree to it unless they had a part in selecting the person. That killed the compromise. The committee sat down and developed a different answer. The solution called for special electors, not legislators or members of Congress, to select the president. These electors would represent their states, with one elector for each senator and House member a state has. They would meet in their state capitals, away from the intrigues of Congress and the sitting president. Most important, they would vote once and never meet again. This is the Electoral College. Should we praise or blame John Dickinson? Before you answer, think of what we would have if Dickinson didn’t intervene. John Sweeney is a Delaware writer.	<urn:uuid:b1f7d028-43cb-4c74-88b3-dcfdbd231c75>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.delawareonline.com/story/opinion/columnists/john-sweeney/2016/12/02/did-delawarean-give-us-electoral-college/94817974/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251796127.92/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129102701-20200129132701-00500.warc.gz	en	0.984398	1,603	3.4375	3	[ -0.41452211141586304, 0.40389591455459595, 0.37354782223701477, -0.17098920047283173, -0.11071881651878357, 0.24797263741493225, 0.2447032630443573, 0.2233702838420868, -0.20833685994148254, -0.1383102685213089, -0.21400637924671173, 0.2795650064945221, -0.044494785368442535, 0.07779445499...	6	Did a Delawarean give us the Electoral College? If someone were to tell you that John Dickinson played a crucial role in giving us the Electoral College, would you sing his praises or curse his memory? Before you answer, put aside today’s politics. Consider instead the realities of 1787. The times were uncertain. Tensions ran high. People divided against each other. Debts climbed and money was scarce. The proposed solution, a radical document dubbed the Constitution, was an unknown. What went through the minds of Delawareans when they considered approving it? A “yes” vote would be a true leap in the dark. Could the 13 states be united and free at the same time? Could they settle their differences, act as a single nation, and retain their identity as individual states? What protections did they have? Were they trading in a foreign-born king for a homegrown tyranny? Delaware’s ratification convention met in Dover’s Golden Fleece Tavern. The members, elected in special votes in all three counties, had to decide whether the Constitution would be good or bad for Delaware. After a long debate, they voted yes – 30 to 0. Delaware made the leap into the dark. On Dec. 7, 1787, Delaware became The First State. In some ways, the proposed Constitution was an easier choice for Delawareans than for other Americans. It offered protection from the surrounding larger states. Delaware no longer would have to pay tariffs on goods from other states. The new Senate would give tiny Delaware, with a population of around 60,000, a voice equal to that of Virginia, a giant with more than 700,000 people. Most of all, the new Constitution promised stability and an end to what many saw as a rising anarchy. That Delaware saw it that way was due in large measure to one man: John Dickinson. He was at the Golden Fleece for the Dec. 7 vote, just as he had been at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia the previous summer. Dickinson’s influence on both conventions was wide and positive – notwithstanding your feelings about the Electoral College. Dickinson had been a fixture in Delaware and Pennsylvania government since the 1760s. He was the author of the famed “Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania,” the earliest rallying cry against British infringements on American rights. He led the fight against the Stamp Act. He served as governor of Delaware and Pennsylvania. For two months in 1782, he actually was governor of both states at the same time. Dickinson wrote the first draft of the Articles of Confederation, arguing for religious freedom and fair treatment for Indians. He had become an opponent of slavery. At the onset of the American Revolution, he organized the defense of Philadelphia against British threats and served as a colonel in the militia. He carried a musket as a private at the Battle of the Brandywine. He served on multiple committees in the Continental Congress, writing state papers and debating the issues. And, for many months, he was the leading moderate in the debate on independence. He had come to see the break with Britain as inevitable, but he questioned the timing. The colonies were not ready, he argued in the Congress. They had no government to speak of, no foreign allies, and no method to pay for a war. Their army was untested and untrained. Its opponent, the British army, was the mightiest in the world. He was right, but his fellow delegates were eager for independence. Dickinson, a representative from Pennsylvania, stayed away from the final vote for independence on July 2, 1776. His absence made Pennsylvania a “yes” vote, thus making the decision for independence unanimous. Dickinson accepted the vote and went off with his militia unit to guard against the British. Yet for some, even a decade later, moderation still held no virtue. Despite his service before, during and after the Revolution, some inside the Philadelphia Constitutional Convention suspected him of disloyalty. Unlike others who voted against independence but went on to sign the Declaration, Dickinson stuck to his principles and declined to sign. Unlike the others, he actually went off to war. No matter. They saw him as a has-been, a man without influence. His critics were wrong. His personality, the power of his thinking and his diligence insured that his ideas would carry weight. Dickinson’s health, never strong, worked against him at the Philadelphia convention. He was often absent, suffering from severe headaches. But his ideas took hold. For example, he was, like the other framers of the Constitution, a student of the British form of government. England’s division between the monarch and legislative branches seemed to them, as Alexander Hamilton said, as close to perfection as possible. Even the British division between the House of Commons and the House of Lords made sense. Dickinson, looking for a similar arrangement for the new government, said America needed something like the barons of old England to counterbalance the power of the king. This was the source of the House of Lords. America would have no aristocracy, no hereditary powers, Dickinson said. Instead, its baronies, its counterbalance to the president would be the states. One house of the legislature would represent the people. The other would represent the states, Dickinson said. It would be a permanent counterbalance to the president and the individuals and factions of the House of Representatives. His concept was accepted and the Senate was born. Not all of his ideas took hold. His reading of ancient and British history made him distrust kings and would-be tyrants. He feared putting too much power in the hands of one person, the president. Therefore, he proposed a three-person presidency as a way of fending off corruption. His idea went nowhere and he gave up on it. However, he did not give up on giving the people a say in picking the president. The framers of the Constitution, like most of us, had a habit of putting off hard decisions. Eventually, time began to run out. Too many problems remained unsolved. Solving them became the job of a new panel, the “Committee on Postponed Parts.” The committee duly met and, one-by-one, solved the outstanding problems. Yet one, selecting a president, baffled them. The delegates disagreed. Some, like Dickinson, wanted the people to pick the president. Others, who distrusted the people, wanted state legislators to make the selection. As it happened, Dickinson’s health failed him during this period. He often would retreat to his home in Dover for days at a time. (The home, by the way, is still there and open to the public.) When his headaches subsided, Dickinson returned to the convention just as the Committee on Postponed Parts was about to sign off on a compromise solution: Let Congress pick the president. This was too much for Dickinson. As he later recalled, he told them the “powers which we have agreed to vest in the President were so many and so great,” the people would not agree to it unless they had a part in selecting the person. That killed the compromise. The committee sat down and developed a different answer. The solution called for special electors, not legislators or members of Congress, to select the president. These electors would represent their states, with one elector for each senator and House member a state has. They would meet in their state capitals, away from the intrigues of Congress and the sitting president. Most important, they would vote once and never meet again. This is the Electoral College. Should we praise or blame John Dickinson? Before you answer, think of what we would have if Dickinson didn’t intervene. John Sweeney is a Delaware writer.	1,588	ENGLISH	1
On April 25th, 2019, I taught my final lesson to the seventh grade class at McDonough Middle School in Hartford, CT. I was advised beforehand by the classroom teacher to create a lesson on biodiversity. This was the class’s first introduction to the topic so I had to create an introductory lesson that basically overviewed the topic, going over a few key concepts that are important to learn when discussing biodiversity. I wanted to create an interactive lesson that would get the class made up of about 15 students involved and excited about learning this new topic. This lesson revolved around an essential question based off of information provided to me by the classroom teacher: Why/how is biodiversity important to an ecosystem’s success? As well as a few key concepts I wanted to make sure I covered in class, Students will understand: - Organisms and populations are dependent on living and nonliving things - Relationships between organisms can be competitive, predatory & mutually beneficial. - Ecosystems’ components can be disrupted - Ecosystems (populations) can change over time The concepts were developed from Next Generation Science Standards, specifically MS-LS2-1, MS-LS2-2, and MS-LS2-4 which pertain to lessons on ecosystems mainly focusing on population growth which I felt would help students to understand why biodiversity is important to an ecosystem’s success (the essential question mentioned above) . From these standards, students are asked to be able to construct arguments based on evidence. The lesson included six activities to do just this: - Introduction to lesson with slideshow visual aid - Planet Earth Video - Writing Exercise - Global Warming Effects Video - Hands-On String “Web” - Wrap-up Online Quiz To begin the lesson I started off asking the students why they think it is important to have many different kinds of people in their community. I was glad to hear the response from a student giving the example of “if everyone in the community is a plumber, what would we do if the electricity went out?” This showed me that the students were in good shape to learn about biodiversity in that they already sort of understood the concept by relating it to their own lives. After my “launch,” I began to teach the lesson with a slideshow as visual aid for the students to follow along. I felt from previous experiences using slides to project information I was telling them was most effective. This time around, I had students read the information aloud to me in attempt to get everyone to participate and pay attention, as they would need to know this information to partake in the rest of the activities I had planned. After going over the essential information, I made sure students had an understanding to continue on with the lesson’s activities by reviewing the material before moving on. I asked them questions like “who can give me another example of a mutualistic relationship?” or “what was the example I gave of commensalism?” and also asking them to show me with their thumbs up, down, or in the middle what each relationship meant for each organisms involved, for example, parasitic relationship students showed me one thumb up and one thumb down. This was a way of using formative assessment. From here, we moved on to the next set of activities. First, I passed out five different worksheets to each table of students in the classroom. Each table was told to focus on the organism that was pictured on their sheet that would show up during the Planet Earth clip (iguana, crab, snake, algae or lizard). The clip demonstrated different kinds of relationships in a specific ecosystem, a beach in the Galapagos Islands. Before playing the clip, I pulled up an image of the Galapagos Islands on google maps to give students more of an idea about where we were zooming in to. Students began to fill out their worksheets as the clip played and they saw the organism they were assigned, which isn’t necessarily what I had planned but I was very glad they were so eager to see their organism come on to the screen and write down the part in played in the ecosystem. Once the clip ended, I set time to go to each table and see what students had wrote and also to answer any questions. I feel like individually approaching the students helps them to feel comfortable to ask for help as well as more confident to share what they already had written down. During this time, I saw some students who were on the right tract and some who needed a little more help to get there. Once I felt each student had a good handle on what their organism contributed to the relationships it was a part of in this particular ecosystem, I moved on to connect it all together, to show just why biodiversity is so important (again, going back to the essential question). First, I took the same images that were on their handouts and taped them to the board, starting with algae and asking the table of students who were assigned this one who they had a relationship with. We moved through the rest of the animals and relationships from here. The thought process behind drawing the web first was 1, to get students to share with me that they saw and understood the relationships of the organism they focused on and 2, to set up the next activity of creating a physical web using yarn, mimicking the one I had drawn on the board. Once the students organized the web, representing the different relationships shared between groups, I showed them a video on the effects of global warming on algae. The video included a neat feature to be able to scan the bottom of the ocean 360°. With this feature I scanned the ocean showing them what the healthy algae looked like and what the unhealthy algae looked like. The point of doing this was to cover the concept mentioned above that ecosystems’ components can be disrupted by things like global warming. After showing the class this, I asked them what they think will happen if the algae for the iguanas became unhealthy, to which they responded with the correct answer that the iguanas would be adversely affected. To demonstrate visually, I cut the string between the two groups which then in turn made me cut the string between the others, since we had determined beforehand that really all of the relationships depended on the iguana, which depended on the algae. I physically cut the string to really show students how the relationship and ecosystem was affected by a disruption. I was able to see that students had an understanding of the concept by asking questions like “what will happen to the crab group once I cut this string?” to which each student was able to answer correctly. My main form of assessment during this workshop was formative assessment, asking questions the entire way to make sure they were getting it and also to keep them focused. Lastly, I found a quiz online that covered everything I had taught during this last workshop. The quiz served as summative assessment. I decided to make it into a small competition, since I felt that would get middle schoolers motivated to answer the questions correctly, offering the winning team first pick at the variety of candies and treats I brought with me. This proved to work very well, because I saw the students team up and work together to come up with the right answer as quickly as they could in order to earn the most points to win. I was very happy with the results, as each team answered the majority of the questions correctly! In the end, I handed the winning team a bag of lollipops to choose from first and chocolates and popcorn to the other students as well. The final bell rang and the students were off into the hallway for the next class, their peers envious of the treats they worked hard for. Matters of equity were addressed in this lesson by using video clips I thought would appeal to the middle schoolers. I also made sure they had an understanding of where the Galapagos Islands were before we continued which I feel was necessary since not all students may have known where/what the Galapagos is. I also checked with the classroom teacher prior to the lesson to make sure enough students had phones to participate in the online quiz, which addressed the matter. Another way I tried to make this lesson equitable was by giving each student a chance to participate, both by encouraging them to ask questions when confused as well as share what they wrote down or observed from the videos I showed. I made myself available for each student by taking time to circulate the classroom, talking to each student individually, which I think also contributed to efforts to make this lesson equitable. By creating interactive as well as interesting activities and giving equal opportunity for students to participate, I was able to address matters of equity in this lesson. Walking in to my last workshop at McDonough Middle School, I was nervous and excited. I knew I had prepared a fun, interactive lesson that the students would enjoy, but nervous it wouldn’t go as planned. Luckily, I felt everything went very smoothly, maybe because I was now more comfortable in the front of the classroom and was confident in the lesson plan. At first it was tough to get the students to participate but as the class progressed more students were willing to read aloud and share ideas and observations. I saw student learning happening when I asked the students questions and requested they make their own examples of relationships. Student learning was also prevalent when I walked around the classroom and was able to talk one-on-one with each student, finding out what they had observed from the Planet Earth clip, helping me to see that they were beginning to understand biodiversity and why it is important for an ecosystem. Something I had not planned for, but was happy to see, was that students filled out their worksheets on their own during the clip without any instruction. This showed to me that they really were paying attention and were also eager to learn about their given organism, which would then help them participate further. Through use of mainly formative assessment, I was able to see learning happening throughout the hour-long class. I could also see that students learned based on their performance on the team quiz I planned for them to do at the end of class. This was more summative assessment. By seeing them respond to a majority of the questions correctly, I knew they had learned something in class. This made me proud and happy to see since I was the one who taught them! Reflecting on the lesson, I feel that students did meet the objective and were able to answer the essential question I posed at the beginning of class based on both formative and summative assessments. Another thing that worked well was using a reward/treat at the end. By telling students they would be able to play with their phones at the end to complete the quiz and that the winning team would get candy, they were definitely motivated more to pay attention and participate in order to get the reward. I think I will use this technique again with other teaching experiences I may take part in. It was also helpful for me to teach this lesson based on the past lessons I had done. It felt like a wrap-up of the workshops because it covered this broad topic, sort of zooming out from previous topics on energy flow and food webs in an ecosystem, and then population ecology. The students were able to take the information I had previously taught them (which I am very pleased they did remember!) and apply it to this final lesson. I am glad the lessons panned out the way they had, one building on top of the other in a way, because it made it feel as though I was teaching continuously as the classroom teacher would have. I have grown a great deal since the first workshop in February and was able to take that first experience and build on it, though I know there is always room for improvement. I can work more on creating a fun and interactive environment for students to learn since I have learned that these sort of lessons work best to appeal to students. Something else I can work on in the future is coming up with different ways to explain concepts if students did not understand the first time, this is something I felt I had a little bit of a hard time with when students expressed confusion. I am very thankful for this opportunity and I know I will take all that I learned both in class from professors as well as everything I learned from the seventh grade students with me in my next endeavors. I had no experience in a middle school classroom, except of course when I was the student, so this experience opened my mind to entertain the possibility of teaching or engaging in some way with middle schoolers which I had not really thought of doing before. Thanks to Core 4 at McDonough Middle School! A true mutualistic relationship:) Gunton, M., Hugh-Jones, T., Anderson, J., Charles, E., Devas, F., Hunter, C., . . . BBC Earth (Firm) (Directors). (2017). Planet earth ii [Video file]. BBC Earth. How Are Climate Change Affecting Our Oceans? (2018, May 03). Retrieved from https://www.oceans16mtsieeemonterey.org/how-are-climate-change-affecting-our-oceans/ (n.d.). Retrieved from https://create.kahoot.it/details/biodiversity/b33b489e-2437-4f01-b7d0-085f537bd421	<urn:uuid:61fbc76f-27c3-463e-a8e3-d6fda845c907>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://commons.trincoll.edu/alliereifler/2019/05/01/teaching-workshop-3-biodiversity/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250619323.41/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124100832-20200124125832-00354.warc.gz	en	0.985988	2,765	3.59375	4	[ -0.15821580588817596, -0.0206354558467865, 0.04923815280199051, -0.5094794034957886, -0.03755940496921539, 0.22733798623085022, -0.23692303895950317, 0.4817560613155365, -0.07154280692338943, 0.3365024924278259, 0.10687289386987686, -0.3494081497192383, 0.1468091607093811, 0.27880424261093...	2	On April 25th, 2019, I taught my final lesson to the seventh grade class at McDonough Middle School in Hartford, CT. I was advised beforehand by the classroom teacher to create a lesson on biodiversity. This was the class’s first introduction to the topic so I had to create an introductory lesson that basically overviewed the topic, going over a few key concepts that are important to learn when discussing biodiversity. I wanted to create an interactive lesson that would get the class made up of about 15 students involved and excited about learning this new topic. This lesson revolved around an essential question based off of information provided to me by the classroom teacher: Why/how is biodiversity important to an ecosystem’s success? As well as a few key concepts I wanted to make sure I covered in class, Students will understand: - Organisms and populations are dependent on living and nonliving things - Relationships between organisms can be competitive, predatory & mutually beneficial. - Ecosystems’ components can be disrupted - Ecosystems (populations) can change over time The concepts were developed from Next Generation Science Standards, specifically MS-LS2-1, MS-LS2-2, and MS-LS2-4 which pertain to lessons on ecosystems mainly focusing on population growth which I felt would help students to understand why biodiversity is important to an ecosystem’s success (the essential question mentioned above) . From these standards, students are asked to be able to construct arguments based on evidence. The lesson included six activities to do just this: - Introduction to lesson with slideshow visual aid - Planet Earth Video - Writing Exercise - Global Warming Effects Video - Hands-On String “Web” - Wrap-up Online Quiz To begin the lesson I started off asking the students why they think it is important to have many different kinds of people in their community. I was glad to hear the response from a student giving the example of “if everyone in the community is a plumber, what would we do if the electricity went out?” This showed me that the students were in good shape to learn about biodiversity in that they already sort of understood the concept by relating it to their own lives. After my “launch,” I began to teach the lesson with a slideshow as visual aid for the students to follow along. I felt from previous experiences using slides to project information I was telling them was most effective. This time around, I had students read the information aloud to me in attempt to get everyone to participate and pay attention, as they would need to know this information to partake in the rest of the activities I had planned. After going over the essential information, I made sure students had an understanding to continue on with the lesson’s activities by reviewing the material before moving on. I asked them questions like “who can give me another example of a mutualistic relationship?” or “what was the example I gave of commensalism?” and also asking them to show me with their thumbs up, down, or in the middle what each relationship meant for each organisms involved, for example, parasitic relationship students showed me one thumb up and one thumb down. This was a way of using formative assessment. From here, we moved on to the next set of activities. First, I passed out five different worksheets to each table of students in the classroom. Each table was told to focus on the organism that was pictured on their sheet that would show up during the Planet Earth clip (iguana, crab, snake, algae or lizard). The clip demonstrated different kinds of relationships in a specific ecosystem, a beach in the Galapagos Islands. Before playing the clip, I pulled up an image of the Galapagos Islands on google maps to give students more of an idea about where we were zooming in to. Students began to fill out their worksheets as the clip played and they saw the organism they were assigned, which isn’t necessarily what I had planned but I was very glad they were so eager to see their organism come on to the screen and write down the part in played in the ecosystem. Once the clip ended, I set time to go to each table and see what students had wrote and also to answer any questions. I feel like individually approaching the students helps them to feel comfortable to ask for help as well as more confident to share what they already had written down. During this time, I saw some students who were on the right tract and some who needed a little more help to get there. Once I felt each student had a good handle on what their organism contributed to the relationships it was a part of in this particular ecosystem, I moved on to connect it all together, to show just why biodiversity is so important (again, going back to the essential question). First, I took the same images that were on their handouts and taped them to the board, starting with algae and asking the table of students who were assigned this one who they had a relationship with. We moved through the rest of the animals and relationships from here. The thought process behind drawing the web first was 1, to get students to share with me that they saw and understood the relationships of the organism they focused on and 2, to set up the next activity of creating a physical web using yarn, mimicking the one I had drawn on the board. Once the students organized the web, representing the different relationships shared between groups, I showed them a video on the effects of global warming on algae. The video included a neat feature to be able to scan the bottom of the ocean 360°. With this feature I scanned the ocean showing them what the healthy algae looked like and what the unhealthy algae looked like. The point of doing this was to cover the concept mentioned above that ecosystems’ components can be disrupted by things like global warming. After showing the class this, I asked them what they think will happen if the algae for the iguanas became unhealthy, to which they responded with the correct answer that the iguanas would be adversely affected. To demonstrate visually, I cut the string between the two groups which then in turn made me cut the string between the others, since we had determined beforehand that really all of the relationships depended on the iguana, which depended on the algae. I physically cut the string to really show students how the relationship and ecosystem was affected by a disruption. I was able to see that students had an understanding of the concept by asking questions like “what will happen to the crab group once I cut this string?” to which each student was able to answer correctly. My main form of assessment during this workshop was formative assessment, asking questions the entire way to make sure they were getting it and also to keep them focused. Lastly, I found a quiz online that covered everything I had taught during this last workshop. The quiz served as summative assessment. I decided to make it into a small competition, since I felt that would get middle schoolers motivated to answer the questions correctly, offering the winning team first pick at the variety of candies and treats I brought with me. This proved to work very well, because I saw the students team up and work together to come up with the right answer as quickly as they could in order to earn the most points to win. I was very happy with the results, as each team answered the majority of the questions correctly! In the end, I handed the winning team a bag of lollipops to choose from first and chocolates and popcorn to the other students as well. The final bell rang and the students were off into the hallway for the next class, their peers envious of the treats they worked hard for. Matters of equity were addressed in this lesson by using video clips I thought would appeal to the middle schoolers. I also made sure they had an understanding of where the Galapagos Islands were before we continued which I feel was necessary since not all students may have known where/what the Galapagos is. I also checked with the classroom teacher prior to the lesson to make sure enough students had phones to participate in the online quiz, which addressed the matter. Another way I tried to make this lesson equitable was by giving each student a chance to participate, both by encouraging them to ask questions when confused as well as share what they wrote down or observed from the videos I showed. I made myself available for each student by taking time to circulate the classroom, talking to each student individually, which I think also contributed to efforts to make this lesson equitable. By creating interactive as well as interesting activities and giving equal opportunity for students to participate, I was able to address matters of equity in this lesson. Walking in to my last workshop at McDonough Middle School, I was nervous and excited. I knew I had prepared a fun, interactive lesson that the students would enjoy, but nervous it wouldn’t go as planned. Luckily, I felt everything went very smoothly, maybe because I was now more comfortable in the front of the classroom and was confident in the lesson plan. At first it was tough to get the students to participate but as the class progressed more students were willing to read aloud and share ideas and observations. I saw student learning happening when I asked the students questions and requested they make their own examples of relationships. Student learning was also prevalent when I walked around the classroom and was able to talk one-on-one with each student, finding out what they had observed from the Planet Earth clip, helping me to see that they were beginning to understand biodiversity and why it is important for an ecosystem. Something I had not planned for, but was happy to see, was that students filled out their worksheets on their own during the clip without any instruction. This showed to me that they really were paying attention and were also eager to learn about their given organism, which would then help them participate further. Through use of mainly formative assessment, I was able to see learning happening throughout the hour-long class. I could also see that students learned based on their performance on the team quiz I planned for them to do at the end of class. This was more summative assessment. By seeing them respond to a majority of the questions correctly, I knew they had learned something in class. This made me proud and happy to see since I was the one who taught them! Reflecting on the lesson, I feel that students did meet the objective and were able to answer the essential question I posed at the beginning of class based on both formative and summative assessments. Another thing that worked well was using a reward/treat at the end. By telling students they would be able to play with their phones at the end to complete the quiz and that the winning team would get candy, they were definitely motivated more to pay attention and participate in order to get the reward. I think I will use this technique again with other teaching experiences I may take part in. It was also helpful for me to teach this lesson based on the past lessons I had done. It felt like a wrap-up of the workshops because it covered this broad topic, sort of zooming out from previous topics on energy flow and food webs in an ecosystem, and then population ecology. The students were able to take the information I had previously taught them (which I am very pleased they did remember!) and apply it to this final lesson. I am glad the lessons panned out the way they had, one building on top of the other in a way, because it made it feel as though I was teaching continuously as the classroom teacher would have. I have grown a great deal since the first workshop in February and was able to take that first experience and build on it, though I know there is always room for improvement. I can work more on creating a fun and interactive environment for students to learn since I have learned that these sort of lessons work best to appeal to students. Something else I can work on in the future is coming up with different ways to explain concepts if students did not understand the first time, this is something I felt I had a little bit of a hard time with when students expressed confusion. I am very thankful for this opportunity and I know I will take all that I learned both in class from professors as well as everything I learned from the seventh grade students with me in my next endeavors. I had no experience in a middle school classroom, except of course when I was the student, so this experience opened my mind to entertain the possibility of teaching or engaging in some way with middle schoolers which I had not really thought of doing before. Thanks to Core 4 at McDonough Middle School! A true mutualistic relationship:) Gunton, M., Hugh-Jones, T., Anderson, J., Charles, E., Devas, F., Hunter, C., . . . BBC Earth (Firm) (Directors). (2017). Planet earth ii [Video file]. BBC Earth. How Are Climate Change Affecting Our Oceans? (2018, May 03). Retrieved from https://www.oceans16mtsieeemonterey.org/how-are-climate-change-affecting-our-oceans/ (n.d.). Retrieved from https://create.kahoot.it/details/biodiversity/b33b489e-2437-4f01-b7d0-085f537bd421	2,708	ENGLISH	1
I often start off a lesson with a class by simply saying at the beginning of the class What do you remember from the last English lesson? Now, perhaps that lesson was one or two days ago, perhaps it was last week, it may have been even two weeks ago, it doesn't matter. So, individually they have to stop and try to recall any words or phrases at all that they may remember. Usually, they say Oh but I don't remember, and you can say, Well, look, just for a few minutes I'm going to ask you to try and remember and write something down. I want two words or phrases from everybody in the class, it doesn't matter what it is, even if it's something very, very simple. And, if really necessary, remind them of the topic of the lesson. It's amazing what in fact they can remember. Next ask a few people to come out and write on the board what they can remember. When you have your board full of words and phrases, stop the class and ask everybody to look at it and check if the spellings are right and to remember the meanings or to try to use it in an example sentence. The final stage of using the board means there is a sense of shared memory in the class and a clear focus for the activity.	<urn:uuid:bb57f934-ace2-4b16-ac62-88980c46cdde>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/article/remember-last-class-revision-beginning-a-lesson?field_site_structure_tid%5B18846%5D=18846&order=title&sort=desc	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250604397.40/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121132900-20200121161900-00236.warc.gz	en	0.982521	269	3.59375	4	[ 0.058743301779031754, -0.038529105484485626, 0.3330816626548767, -0.3651905059814453, -0.330333411693573, -0.009093689732253551, 0.6583278775215149, 0.15728330612182617, 0.39907848834991455, -0.41167575120925903, -0.03753850236535072, 0.2443830668926239, 0.0587061308324337, 0.4416883289813...	5	I often start off a lesson with a class by simply saying at the beginning of the class What do you remember from the last English lesson? Now, perhaps that lesson was one or two days ago, perhaps it was last week, it may have been even two weeks ago, it doesn't matter. So, individually they have to stop and try to recall any words or phrases at all that they may remember. Usually, they say Oh but I don't remember, and you can say, Well, look, just for a few minutes I'm going to ask you to try and remember and write something down. I want two words or phrases from everybody in the class, it doesn't matter what it is, even if it's something very, very simple. And, if really necessary, remind them of the topic of the lesson. It's amazing what in fact they can remember. Next ask a few people to come out and write on the board what they can remember. When you have your board full of words and phrases, stop the class and ask everybody to look at it and check if the spellings are right and to remember the meanings or to try to use it in an example sentence. The final stage of using the board means there is a sense of shared memory in the class and a clear focus for the activity.	266	ENGLISH	1
Almost 2,000 years ago a young woman from the town of Nazareth named Mary was visited by an angel named Gabriel. Gabriel told the Jewish woman that she would have a son named Jesus and that he would be the Son of God. At this time, Mary was engaged to her soon-to-be husband Joseph. When told Joseph he was hurt and confused because he did not believe Mary. The angel Gabriel visited Joseph and told him that Mary would be pregnant from the Lord and that she would have a son named Jesus who would save the people from their sins. Mary and Joseph had to travel to Bethlehem because of an order from the Roman emperor that a census, or record, of all people be taken in their hometown. After traveling pregnant on a donkey for several days, Mary and Joseph arrived in Bethlehem and were told that there were no places to stay. The inns were full. Seeing that Mary was due at any moment, an owner of an inn told Joseph that they could stay in his stable. Mary and Joseph settled down on the hay in a stable with animals sleeping. Mary went into labor and Jesus was born in the stable. The only place for the sleeping baby to rest was most likely in the animals trough, known as the manger. During this time, an angel appeared to shepherds who were watching their flocks in the fields near Bethlehem. The angel told them the good news of the birth of the Savior and Messiah, Jesus Christ. The shepherds immediately went to find baby Jesus, which the angels told them they would find sleeping in the manger. After some time, three wise men, also known as magi, saw the brilliant star in that sky that rested over where Jesus was born. The three wise men traveled from a far eastern country to find the new king. During the wise mens trip, Herod the king of Judah, met with the wise men and told them to come back and let him know where the baby king was so that he could go worship him as well. The wise men continued to Bethlehem and found Jesus right where the star pointed. They knelt and worshipped the Savior and gave him gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh. They then traveled back home a different way knowing that King Herod was not intending to worship Jesus but that he planned to kill the baby. Today we celebrate the birth of Jesus and the coming of our Savior at Christmas time.	<urn:uuid:687e81ab-1ea8-4d3d-8cd5-8257f71f9b4d>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.olsparish.net/single-post/2017/11/19/December-Celebrating-the-birth-of-our-Savior	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592636.25/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118135205-20200118163205-00261.warc.gz	en	0.991807	494	3.328125	3	[ -0.026506507769227028, 0.13928182423114777, 0.031079499050974846, 0.2279815524816513, -0.02179597318172455, 0.3642684519290924, 0.23818723857402802, 0.19679799675941467, 0.1868644803762436, -0.070468969643116, -0.10647715628147125, 0.12032385170459747, -0.011077357456088066, 0.058971334248...	2	Almost 2,000 years ago a young woman from the town of Nazareth named Mary was visited by an angel named Gabriel. Gabriel told the Jewish woman that she would have a son named Jesus and that he would be the Son of God. At this time, Mary was engaged to her soon-to-be husband Joseph. When told Joseph he was hurt and confused because he did not believe Mary. The angel Gabriel visited Joseph and told him that Mary would be pregnant from the Lord and that she would have a son named Jesus who would save the people from their sins. Mary and Joseph had to travel to Bethlehem because of an order from the Roman emperor that a census, or record, of all people be taken in their hometown. After traveling pregnant on a donkey for several days, Mary and Joseph arrived in Bethlehem and were told that there were no places to stay. The inns were full. Seeing that Mary was due at any moment, an owner of an inn told Joseph that they could stay in his stable. Mary and Joseph settled down on the hay in a stable with animals sleeping. Mary went into labor and Jesus was born in the stable. The only place for the sleeping baby to rest was most likely in the animals trough, known as the manger. During this time, an angel appeared to shepherds who were watching their flocks in the fields near Bethlehem. The angel told them the good news of the birth of the Savior and Messiah, Jesus Christ. The shepherds immediately went to find baby Jesus, which the angels told them they would find sleeping in the manger. After some time, three wise men, also known as magi, saw the brilliant star in that sky that rested over where Jesus was born. The three wise men traveled from a far eastern country to find the new king. During the wise mens trip, Herod the king of Judah, met with the wise men and told them to come back and let him know where the baby king was so that he could go worship him as well. The wise men continued to Bethlehem and found Jesus right where the star pointed. They knelt and worshipped the Savior and gave him gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh. They then traveled back home a different way knowing that King Herod was not intending to worship Jesus but that he planned to kill the baby. Today we celebrate the birth of Jesus and the coming of our Savior at Christmas time.	494	ENGLISH	1
(Last Updated on : 22/06/2011) The administrative system of Aryans was headed by the king who played the pivotal role. The tribal kingdom (rashtra) consisted of tribes (jana), tribal units (vish) and villages (grama). The nucleus was the family known as kula which was governed by the eldest male member as its head or kulapa. The king was assisted by the elder members of the tribe and by the village headmen. The purohita or chief priest acted as the priest, astrologer, and adviser had an important role to play. Even the senani or military commander was responsible for the administration system. These two people remained much closer to the king. Spies and messengers were also employed by the king who was endowed with the duty to secretly obtain information about its enemies for the king. The administrative system also had other members like the charioteer, the treasurer, the steward, and the superintendent of dicing who acted under the king. The Aryans were divided into three social classes when they first came to India. The three major divisions were the warriors or aristocracy, the priests, and the common people. There was no consciousness of caste. Professions were not hereditary hence children had their free choice of occupations. There were also no rules that limited marriages within certain classes or taboos with whom one could eat. The three divisions simply facilitated social and economic organization. The first move in the direction of caste discrimination was taken when the Aryans treated the Dasas as beyond the social pale. It was probably done because of the fear of the Dasas and the fear that by assimilating with them would lead to a loss of Aryan identity. Apparently the distinction was largely based on that of colour as the Dasas were darker and of an alien culture. The Sanskrit word for caste is varna which literally means colour. The colour element of caste was stressed upon throughout this period. This system eventually became deep-rooted in north-Indian Aryan culture. Initially the division was between the Aryans and the non-Aryans. The Aryans were the dvija or twice-born castes, the first being physical birth and the second their initiation into caste status. The caste system consisted of the Kshatriya (warriors and aristocracy), the Brahmin (priests), and the Vaishya (cultivators); the fourth caste, the Sudras who were the Dasas and those of mixed Aryan-Dasa origin.	<urn:uuid:a3857d85-1bac-489d-a0d3-3646ea08bf9e>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.indianetzone.com/54/administrative_system_aryans.htm	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598726.39/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120110422-20200120134422-00109.warc.gz	en	0.988394	523	3.921875	4	[ -0.008920323103666306, 0.5215398669242859, -0.08942177891731262, -0.2227105349302292, -0.21704843640327454, 0.148370161652565, 0.5602666735649109, -0.17891047894954681, 0.21464215219020844, -0.0596463568508625, -0.12947197258472443, -0.387089341878891, 0.10198324918746948, 0.08321163803339...	3	(Last Updated on : 22/06/2011) The administrative system of Aryans was headed by the king who played the pivotal role. The tribal kingdom (rashtra) consisted of tribes (jana), tribal units (vish) and villages (grama). The nucleus was the family known as kula which was governed by the eldest male member as its head or kulapa. The king was assisted by the elder members of the tribe and by the village headmen. The purohita or chief priest acted as the priest, astrologer, and adviser had an important role to play. Even the senani or military commander was responsible for the administration system. These two people remained much closer to the king. Spies and messengers were also employed by the king who was endowed with the duty to secretly obtain information about its enemies for the king. The administrative system also had other members like the charioteer, the treasurer, the steward, and the superintendent of dicing who acted under the king. The Aryans were divided into three social classes when they first came to India. The three major divisions were the warriors or aristocracy, the priests, and the common people. There was no consciousness of caste. Professions were not hereditary hence children had their free choice of occupations. There were also no rules that limited marriages within certain classes or taboos with whom one could eat. The three divisions simply facilitated social and economic organization. The first move in the direction of caste discrimination was taken when the Aryans treated the Dasas as beyond the social pale. It was probably done because of the fear of the Dasas and the fear that by assimilating with them would lead to a loss of Aryan identity. Apparently the distinction was largely based on that of colour as the Dasas were darker and of an alien culture. The Sanskrit word for caste is varna which literally means colour. The colour element of caste was stressed upon throughout this period. This system eventually became deep-rooted in north-Indian Aryan culture. Initially the division was between the Aryans and the non-Aryans. The Aryans were the dvija or twice-born castes, the first being physical birth and the second their initiation into caste status. The caste system consisted of the Kshatriya (warriors and aristocracy), the Brahmin (priests), and the Vaishya (cultivators); the fourth caste, the Sudras who were the Dasas and those of mixed Aryan-Dasa origin.	525	ENGLISH	1
Jeanne d'Albret (1528–1572) Jeanne d'Albret (1528–1572) Jeanne d'Albret (1528–1572) One of the first members of the French nobility to convert to Protestantism, who became a leader of the Huguenot movement, and whose son Henry IV became king of England and founder of the Bourbon Dynasty. Name variations: Joan III, Queen of Navarre; Jeanne III d'Albret. Born in 1528; died in Paris in 1572; daughter of Henry or Henri II d'Albret, king of Navarre, and Margaret of Angoulême (1492–1549); niece of Francis I, king of France (r. 1515–1547); married Guillaume de la March also known as William, duke of Cleves, in 1541 (annulled); married Antoine also known as Anthony (1518–1562), duke of Bourbon and Vendôme, in 1548; children: (second marriage) Henri or Henry of Navarre (1553–1610, later Henry IV, king of France, r. 1589–1610); Catherine of Bourbon (c. 1555–1604). From the moment of her birth in 1528, Jeanne d'Albret seemed destined to become a pawn in the sophisticated game of French politics. Her mother was Margaret of Angoulême , sister of Renaissance French king Francis I. Her father, Henry II d'Albret, was king of Navarre, a title that had become a mere courtesy since 1512 when Ferdinand II of Aragon had annexed most of Navarre to his kingdom of Spain. Henry II d'Albret married Margaret in hopes that her brother Francis I would help him regain the lost provinces of Navarre. Francis arranged the marriage in hopes that it would prevent Henry d'Albret from coming to an agreement with the Spanish which would allow them to break through the Pyrenees into France. Thus, as was customary among the noble class in that day, Jeanne's parents were married for political convenience. It was expected that Jeanne's marriage would also be dictated by political expediency. When it became obvious that she was to be the only child of Henry d'Albret and Margaret to survive infancy, Jeanne's future was plotted with special care. Until she was ten, she lived a carefree life at her mother's castle in Angoulême, where she had the run of a large park as well as a bevy of animals and a little girl to entertain her. During these years, her father Henry d'Albret had repeatedly failed to persuade Francis I to send the promised soldiers to his aid, and so Henry d'Albret began plotting to obtain a betrothal between his daughter Jeanne and Prince Philip (II) of Spain. However, Henry d'Albret's wife Margaret had loyalties to her brother, not her ill-matched husband. Margaret lived mostly apart from her indifferent and often unfaithful spouse, and she remained determined to put Jeanne's future in the hands of her brother, Francis I. (Margaret of Angoulême's influence on Jeanne extended into literature, and Jeanne is credited with seeing that her mother's greatest work, L'Heptaméron, unfinished at the time of Margaret's death, was published true to her mother's concept. Of her own writing, Jeanne left a number of poems written in a form of French which was spoken in medieval times. She also left a manuscript of her memoirs.) When Francis negotiated a match for her, Jeanne showed the first spark of the inflexible will that she would later bravely exhibit as a mature woman. She was to be wed to William, duke of Cleves, a dull and ponderous young man whose only advantage lay in his connection to the German princes, with whom Francis I wished to ally against the formidable power of the Habsburg family. Under Charles V, the Habsburgs ruled the Holy Roman Empire, Spain, and the Low Countries. Thirteen-year-old Jeanne protested the match, but she was given no choice and, succumbing to dire threats, bowed to the inevitable. Dressed fabulously in cloth of gold, Jeanne was married to William in an elaborate ceremony in June 1541. In view of the bride's tender years, the marriage was not consummated, and Jeanne went back home to France while her new husband embarked on a military crusade to save his lands from Habsburg encroachment. Stubbornly refusing to accept the marriage, Jeanne had a document drafted, signed and witnessed in which she swore to have been coerced into the nuptials and never to have given her free consent. It was, however, a futile gesture. Her fortunes did take a turn for the better when William proved himself to be completely inept on the battlefield. Within a few years, Charles V forced William to publicly capitulate, and Francis I took immediate steps to have Jeanne's marriage annulled. Her document of protest was brought before the courts, which ruled that it provided sufficient evidence to invalidate the marriage. Now that Jeanne was free, her father Henry d'Albret reopened marriage negotiations with the Spanish. Meanwhile, Francis I died and was succeeded by his son Henry II. Catching wind of Henry d'Albret's plans, Henry II pressed his aunt Margaret to have Jeanne married quickly to a French suitor. Soon, Jeanne fell in love with one of her admirers, Antoine, duke of Bourbon. Though he was ten years her senior, she appreciated his quick mind and affectionate nature. Margaret was skeptical; although, as duke of Bourbon, Antoine was a Prince of the Blood (directly related to the French royal family), his family was neither wealthy nor powerful. But Henry II, delighted that Jeanne and Antoine showed such a liking for each other, convinced Jeanne's parents to acquiesce to the match by promising to send an army to her father Henry d'Albret to help him conquer Navarre and by providing him with a stipend of 15,000 livres. (In fact, the promised army never materialized, and the stipend was paid only once.) Jeanne was ecstatic over the surprising turn of events. Henry II noted at her wedding in 1548 that "she does nothing but laugh." The early years of Jeanne d'Albret's marriage were truly happy. Antoine was often absent, usually in the field fighting the Spanish on the border, but they exchanged many warm and tender letters. Antoine assured her, "I never would have believed that I should love you as much as I do," claiming that he could no more live without her than could a body without a soul. Within two years of their marriage, Jeanne gave birth to a son. Sadly, the child died in infancy, a tragedy all too common in an age when roughly one-third of all children did not survive to their fifth birthday. Queen of her people and the savior of the Huguenots, busying herself with their causes, righting their wrongs, pleading for compassion and toleration on their behalf. But Jeanne quickly conceived again. Her mother, suffering from chronic ill health, had died soon after the wedding. Her father, increasingly aware of his own mortality, became obsessed with the need for a male heir. Although he had shown little interest in his daughter except as a political pawn, he insisted that she travel to his seat in Bearn to have the child. Alarmed by persistent rumors that her father was considering marrying again in an attempt to produce a male heir, Jeanne dutifully traveled to his estate. Henry d'Albret drew up his will, leaving all of his estate to her, and placed it in a gold box. He promised to deliver the will to his daughter as soon as the baby was born, provided that, while she was in labor, she sing a traditional song sung by Bearnais women to the Virgin when praying for a son. In December 1553, when Jeanne gave birth to a fine, healthy boy, her father immediately snatched up the child, rubbed its lips with garlic, and put a cup of local Jurancon wine to its mouth. When the baby did not cry but wiggled his head with delight, Henry d'Albret gleefully exclaimed, "Thou wilt be a true Bearnais!" He fulfilled his promise and gave his will to his daughter. The baby was named Henry (of Navarre), in his honor. Old Henry d'Albret did not survive much longer, dying in May 1555. Since Antoine was still away most of the time, Jeanne threw herself into raising her son. Little Henry was nursed by the sturdy local peasant women, and when he was older he ran around barefoot with the local boys, living on black bread and cheese. From a young age, Henry of Navarre showed great energy, reckless courage, and a shrewd mind. When he was three, Jeanne and Antoine took him to Paris to present him to King Henry II and his queen Catherine de Medici . Henry II was impressed with the boy, and even made an informal agreement to betroth little Henry of Navarre to his daughter Margaret of Valois (1553–1615), then three-and-a-half. By 1559, the first tremors of the political upheavals which would eventually plunge France into civil war could be felt. While Henry II was jousting in a tournament held to celebrate the marriage of his eldest daughter Elizabeth of Valois to Philip of Spain, a lance slipped through his visor and penetrated his eye. After several days of torment, he died. Henry II left behind four young sons. The eldest, at 16, succeeded as Francis II. As a child, Francis had been married to Mary Stuart (1542–1587), queen of Scotland. Mary was the niece of the dukes of Guise, who led an ambitious faction intent on securing political power. Francis' accession gave the Guise their chance. Francis was declared old enough to rule without a regency, but the crown weighed heavily upon his young and sickly frame. Francis' mother Catherine de Medici was determined not to lose her influence over her son. In this struggle between Catherine and the Guise faction, the Princes of the Blood, including Jeanne's husband Antoine, were pushed away from their rightful place of influence. Antoine, like his late father-in-law, was concerned first and foremost with regaining the Navarre provinces. When he gave up all hope of obtaining help from the French Crown, Antoine began to look for other avenues to achieve his goals. One such which presented itself was through the "reformed religion," a growing faction in France that called themselves Huguenots. Huguenots were followers of John Calvin, a famous Reformation theologian who had set up a community of followers in Geneva, Switzerland. Calvin and his disciples broke away from the Catholic Church and established a new, congregational church structure as opposed to the hierarchical schema of the Catholic Church. Calvinists emphasized direct communication with God and preached the doctrine of election, wherein certain "elect" men and women are preordained to be saved. Although Calvinism was a harsh doctrine, it had great appeal because of its stress on sincere piety at a time when the bloated and corrupt Catholic Church was making little attempt to address the spiritual needs of its members. Throughout the 16th century, the number of Huguenots multiplied rapidly, and the reformed religion spread even into the aristocratic class. French nobles embraced the Huguenot religion for yet another reason—practicing Protestantism gave them leverage against the Roman Catholic Church and indirectly gave them a measure of independence from the authority of the Crown. But religious toleration did not exist in French law, and heretics were subjected to fines, imprisonment, and even burning at the stake. Calvinist leaders sent missionaries to France hoping to convert a sufficient number of the nobility to force a relaxation of the laws against Huguenots. One of the nobles they approached was Jeanne's husband Antoine de Bourbon. Although Antoine entertained the Huguenots' message with interest, he was not the man to champion the Protestant cause; an opportunist at heart, he was unwilling to suffer the consequences which a public conversion might bring. But Jeanne d'Albret, queen of Navarre in her own right, heard the message of the Huguenots and came to believe that they preached spiritual truth. On Christmas Day, 1561, she made her formal confession in the Calvinist faith and began openly worshipping as a Huguenot. Immediately, Jeanne became a guiding light in the Huguenot movement. She daily received preachers and leaders of the reformed religion in her home and helped plan an organization of Huguenots on a national scale. She was "receiv'd everywhere by the heretics with great enthusiasm, as though she were a messiah." The 1560s were a time of turmoil in France. Francis II died in December 1560, leaving the throne to his brother Charles IX. Catherine de Medici, desperately trying to maintain her power over her son, played the Huguenots against the Guise faction, which remained staunchly Catholic. In order to balance the Catholic faction against the Protestant faction, Catherine pushed through legislation guaranteeing religious liberty to the Huguenots. Furious, the Guise faction left the court and began plotting to undermine the recent Huguenot victories. They approached Antoine full of lush promises backed by Spain: Antoine was to have another kingdom to compensate him for the loss of Navarre—if only he would live as a faithful Catholic and bring his recalcitrant wife back into the Holy Mother Church. This would not be an easy task; Jeanne was a sincere convert to the Protestant faith. Antoine commanded her to attend mass. When she refused, he resorted to threats and finally banished her from court. Thus, Jeanne's religious conversion ended her happy relationship with Antoine. The price she paid for refusing to renounce her new faith was separation from her young son. Although only nine years old, little Henry of Navarre had learned much from his mother. She had admonished him to attend only the worship of the reformed religion. When his father tried to force him to attend Catholic mass, Henry of Navarre endured scoldings, threats and beatings for two months before finally bowing to the inevitable. Open warfare broke out between Catholics and Huguenots after the duke of Guise ordered the massacre of a Huguenot assembly at Vassey. The Prince of Condé, Antoine's brother, publicly announced his conversion and took over leadership of the Huguenot cause on the battlefield. In November 1562, Antoine died of battle wounds. After his death, Jeanne tried to regain custody of Henry of Navarre, but Catherine de Medici insisted that Henry of Navarre remain at court with his cousins in Paris. The duke of Guise was assassinated in the spring of 1763, and a temporary cease-fire was called. Soon after, Pope Pius V called Jeanne before the Inquisition, threatening excommunication and confiscation of her titles and property if she refused to appear. Help came from an unexpected quarter. Catherine de Medici wrote to the pope on Jeanne's behalf, threatening intervention of the French Crown if he dared try to exert his authority against a French subject. Jeanne, grateful for the queen mother's intervention, accepted her invitation to join the court, where she was allowed to see her son, although she could not take him to Huguenot services. Catherine de Medici continued to refuse Jeanne's request to take Henry of Navarre from the court until 1567. When mother and son finally left, civil war erupted anew. Charles IX revoked the edict of toleration, but this only encouraged the Huguenots to fight back with greater force. Jeanne joined her brother-in-law, the Prince of Condé, at the Huguenot stronghold at La Rochelle, where she gave Henry of Navarre over to his uncle for military training. Within months, Condé was killed by a group of Catholics after being taken prisoner following battle. Condé's death left 15-year-old Henry of Navarre as the nominal leader of the Huguenot faction. As the intermittent war raged on, a new duke of Guise, also named Henry, began to take control of the Catholic forces. Charles IX's younger brother, Henry de Valois, also distinguished himself as a military leader and completed the triumvirate which made up the War of the Three Henrys. By 1571, the country was heartily tired of the violence and destruction of civil war, and the royal treasury was empty. Despite the pope's continuing insistence that "there can be no harmony between light and darkness," Charles IX and Catherine de Medici began negotiating for peace with the Huguenots. A marriage between Jeanne's son Henry of Navarre and Catherine's daughter Margaret of Valois seemed a perfect means to secure tranquility. Although stalwart Huguenots and Catholics disapproved of a marriage between partners of different faiths, Charles IX favored the match as an omen of peace. On April 11, 1572, Charles IX, Catherine de Medici, and Jeanne d'Albret all signed a contract of marriage between Henry of Navarre and Margaret of Valois. The wedding was scheduled to take place that summer. To await her son's arrival and to make plans for the upcoming wedding, Jeanne traveled to the ancestral Bourbon home, where she fell seriously ill. By June, she took to her bed with a high fever. Rumors that she had been poisoned were carried to Paris; she, however, blamed her sudden illness on a chronic pulmonary disorder. By June 6, she was told she was dying. In her typical practical nature, she carefully prepared her will, including a codicil that her son must uphold the reformed religion and asking that he give protection to his younger sister Catherine of Bourbon . Two days later, Jeanne d'Albret was dead. According to her request, no candles were set at her casket, and her funeral was performed without the familiar Catholic rituals: "no priests, no cross, nor any holy water." Her death was sudden even by the standards of the day. When her son Henry of Navarre was informed of her death on June 13, he wrote: "I have just received the saddest news that has ever been brought to me, the death of the Queen my mother whom God called a few days ago." Henry was now king of Navarre and the undisputed leader of the Huguenot movement in France. He proclaimed: "Now that my mother is dead, I succeed her and must take as my duty all that was in her charge." The proposed wedding between Henry of Navarre and Margaret of Valois did not end the fighting between Catholics and Huguenots in France. No sooner were the festivities concluded in August, than Catherine de Medici and the Catholics hatched a plot to end the Huguenot movement in France once and for all. On the evening of St. Bartholomew's Day, the Catholics in Paris rose up in the middle of the night and attacked all the Huguenots who had come to Paris for the wedding. Thousands of Huguenots were massacred, and the streets ran with blood. Henry of Navarre escaped and fled to the countryside where he took control of the remaining Huguenot forces. The civil war raged until 1589. By the end of the War of the Three Henrys, both Henry, duke of Guise, and Henry de Valois (who had succeeded as Henry III after Charles IX's death) had been killed. Henry of Navarre was the closest heir to the throne, and he succeeded as Henry IV in August of 1589. Although it took nine more years of fighting and Henry IV's conversion to Catholicism to end the civil wars, eventually Jeanne d'Albret's son brought peace to France and founded the royal dynasty of Bourbon, which would rule France for almost two centuries, until the French Revolution in 1789. Mahoney, Irene. Royal Cousin: The Life of Henri IV of France. NY: Doubleday, 1970. Memoirs of Henry the Great and of the Court of France During His Reign. Vol. I. London: Harding, Triphook and Lepard, 1824. Roelker, Nancy Layman. Queen of Navarre: Jeanne d'Albret. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press, 1968. Sedgwick, Henry Dwight. Henry of Navarre. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill, 1930. Nabonne, Bernard. Jeanne d'Albret. Paris, 1945. Rochambeau, Marquis de. Lettres de Antoine de Bourbon et Jeanne d'Albret. Paris: Societe de l'Histoire de France, 1877. Kimberly Estep Spangler , Assistant Professor of History and Chair of the Division of Religion and Humanities at Friends University, Wichita, Kansas	<urn:uuid:6362a351-eb13-4a00-bd9e-2ba4617536a3>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.encyclopedia.com/women/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/jeanne-dalbret-1528-1572	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250628549.43/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125011232-20200125040232-00140.warc.gz	en	0.9813	4,422	3.46875	3	[ -0.6208332777023315, 0.19341592490673065, 0.1386413425207138, -0.45528697967529297, -0.2804242968559265, -0.0880567878484726, -0.09464801847934723, 0.1337050199508667, 0.345846563577652, -0.08694420754909515, 0.24115867912769318, -0.04685652256011963, 0.27275925874710083, -0.08267120271921...	1	Jeanne d'Albret (1528–1572) Jeanne d'Albret (1528–1572) Jeanne d'Albret (1528–1572) One of the first members of the French nobility to convert to Protestantism, who became a leader of the Huguenot movement, and whose son Henry IV became king of England and founder of the Bourbon Dynasty. Name variations: Joan III, Queen of Navarre; Jeanne III d'Albret. Born in 1528; died in Paris in 1572; daughter of Henry or Henri II d'Albret, king of Navarre, and Margaret of Angoulême (1492–1549); niece of Francis I, king of France (r. 1515–1547); married Guillaume de la March also known as William, duke of Cleves, in 1541 (annulled); married Antoine also known as Anthony (1518–1562), duke of Bourbon and Vendôme, in 1548; children: (second marriage) Henri or Henry of Navarre (1553–1610, later Henry IV, king of France, r. 1589–1610); Catherine of Bourbon (c. 1555–1604). From the moment of her birth in 1528, Jeanne d'Albret seemed destined to become a pawn in the sophisticated game of French politics. Her mother was Margaret of Angoulême , sister of Renaissance French king Francis I. Her father, Henry II d'Albret, was king of Navarre, a title that had become a mere courtesy since 1512 when Ferdinand II of Aragon had annexed most of Navarre to his kingdom of Spain. Henry II d'Albret married Margaret in hopes that her brother Francis I would help him regain the lost provinces of Navarre. Francis arranged the marriage in hopes that it would prevent Henry d'Albret from coming to an agreement with the Spanish which would allow them to break through the Pyrenees into France. Thus, as was customary among the noble class in that day, Jeanne's parents were married for political convenience. It was expected that Jeanne's marriage would also be dictated by political expediency. When it became obvious that she was to be the only child of Henry d'Albret and Margaret to survive infancy, Jeanne's future was plotted with special care. Until she was ten, she lived a carefree life at her mother's castle in Angoulême, where she had the run of a large park as well as a bevy of animals and a little girl to entertain her. During these years, her father Henry d'Albret had repeatedly failed to persuade Francis I to send the promised soldiers to his aid, and so Henry d'Albret began plotting to obtain a betrothal between his daughter Jeanne and Prince Philip (II) of Spain. However, Henry d'Albret's wife Margaret had loyalties to her brother, not her ill-matched husband. Margaret lived mostly apart from her indifferent and often unfaithful spouse, and she remained determined to put Jeanne's future in the hands of her brother, Francis I. (Margaret of Angoulême's influence on Jeanne extended into literature, and Jeanne is credited with seeing that her mother's greatest work, L'Heptaméron, unfinished at the time of Margaret's death, was published true to her mother's concept. Of her own writing, Jeanne left a number of poems written in a form of French which was spoken in medieval times. She also left a manuscript of her memoirs.) When Francis negotiated a match for her, Jeanne showed the first spark of the inflexible will that she would later bravely exhibit as a mature woman. She was to be wed to William, duke of Cleves, a dull and ponderous young man whose only advantage lay in his connection to the German princes, with whom Francis I wished to ally against the formidable power of the Habsburg family. Under Charles V, the Habsburgs ruled the Holy Roman Empire, Spain, and the Low Countries. Thirteen-year-old Jeanne protested the match, but she was given no choice and, succumbing to dire threats, bowed to the inevitable. Dressed fabulously in cloth of gold, Jeanne was married to William in an elaborate ceremony in June 1541. In view of the bride's tender years, the marriage was not consummated, and Jeanne went back home to France while her new husband embarked on a military crusade to save his lands from Habsburg encroachment. Stubbornly refusing to accept the marriage, Jeanne had a document drafted, signed and witnessed in which she swore to have been coerced into the nuptials and never to have given her free consent. It was, however, a futile gesture. Her fortunes did take a turn for the better when William proved himself to be completely inept on the battlefield. Within a few years, Charles V forced William to publicly capitulate, and Francis I took immediate steps to have Jeanne's marriage annulled. Her document of protest was brought before the courts, which ruled that it provided sufficient evidence to invalidate the marriage. Now that Jeanne was free, her father Henry d'Albret reopened marriage negotiations with the Spanish. Meanwhile, Francis I died and was succeeded by his son Henry II. Catching wind of Henry d'Albret's plans, Henry II pressed his aunt Margaret to have Jeanne married quickly to a French suitor. Soon, Jeanne fell in love with one of her admirers, Antoine, duke of Bourbon. Though he was ten years her senior, she appreciated his quick mind and affectionate nature. Margaret was skeptical; although, as duke of Bourbon, Antoine was a Prince of the Blood (directly related to the French royal family), his family was neither wealthy nor powerful. But Henry II, delighted that Jeanne and Antoine showed such a liking for each other, convinced Jeanne's parents to acquiesce to the match by promising to send an army to her father Henry d'Albret to help him conquer Navarre and by providing him with a stipend of 15,000 livres. (In fact, the promised army never materialized, and the stipend was paid only once.) Jeanne was ecstatic over the surprising turn of events. Henry II noted at her wedding in 1548 that "she does nothing but laugh." The early years of Jeanne d'Albret's marriage were truly happy. Antoine was often absent, usually in the field fighting the Spanish on the border, but they exchanged many warm and tender letters. Antoine assured her, "I never would have believed that I should love you as much as I do," claiming that he could no more live without her than could a body without a soul. Within two years of their marriage, Jeanne gave birth to a son. Sadly, the child died in infancy, a tragedy all too common in an age when roughly one-third of all children did not survive to their fifth birthday. Queen of her people and the savior of the Huguenots, busying herself with their causes, righting their wrongs, pleading for compassion and toleration on their behalf. But Jeanne quickly conceived again. Her mother, suffering from chronic ill health, had died soon after the wedding. Her father, increasingly aware of his own mortality, became obsessed with the need for a male heir. Although he had shown little interest in his daughter except as a political pawn, he insisted that she travel to his seat in Bearn to have the child. Alarmed by persistent rumors that her father was considering marrying again in an attempt to produce a male heir, Jeanne dutifully traveled to his estate. Henry d'Albret drew up his will, leaving all of his estate to her, and placed it in a gold box. He promised to deliver the will to his daughter as soon as the baby was born, provided that, while she was in labor, she sing a traditional song sung by Bearnais women to the Virgin when praying for a son. In December 1553, when Jeanne gave birth to a fine, healthy boy, her father immediately snatched up the child, rubbed its lips with garlic, and put a cup of local Jurancon wine to its mouth. When the baby did not cry but wiggled his head with delight, Henry d'Albret gleefully exclaimed, "Thou wilt be a true Bearnais!" He fulfilled his promise and gave his will to his daughter. The baby was named Henry (of Navarre), in his honor. Old Henry d'Albret did not survive much longer, dying in May 1555. Since Antoine was still away most of the time, Jeanne threw herself into raising her son. Little Henry was nursed by the sturdy local peasant women, and when he was older he ran around barefoot with the local boys, living on black bread and cheese. From a young age, Henry of Navarre showed great energy, reckless courage, and a shrewd mind. When he was three, Jeanne and Antoine took him to Paris to present him to King Henry II and his queen Catherine de Medici . Henry II was impressed with the boy, and even made an informal agreement to betroth little Henry of Navarre to his daughter Margaret of Valois (1553–1615), then three-and-a-half. By 1559, the first tremors of the political upheavals which would eventually plunge France into civil war could be felt. While Henry II was jousting in a tournament held to celebrate the marriage of his eldest daughter Elizabeth of Valois to Philip of Spain, a lance slipped through his visor and penetrated his eye. After several days of torment, he died. Henry II left behind four young sons. The eldest, at 16, succeeded as Francis II. As a child, Francis had been married to Mary Stuart (1542–1587), queen of Scotland. Mary was the niece of the dukes of Guise, who led an ambitious faction intent on securing political power. Francis' accession gave the Guise their chance. Francis was declared old enough to rule without a regency, but the crown weighed heavily upon his young and sickly frame. Francis' mother Catherine de Medici was determined not to lose her influence over her son. In this struggle between Catherine and the Guise faction, the Princes of the Blood, including Jeanne's husband Antoine, were pushed away from their rightful place of influence. Antoine, like his late father-in-law, was concerned first and foremost with regaining the Navarre provinces. When he gave up all hope of obtaining help from the French Crown, Antoine began to look for other avenues to achieve his goals. One such which presented itself was through the "reformed religion," a growing faction in France that called themselves Huguenots. Huguenots were followers of John Calvin, a famous Reformation theologian who had set up a community of followers in Geneva, Switzerland. Calvin and his disciples broke away from the Catholic Church and established a new, congregational church structure as opposed to the hierarchical schema of the Catholic Church. Calvinists emphasized direct communication with God and preached the doctrine of election, wherein certain "elect" men and women are preordained to be saved. Although Calvinism was a harsh doctrine, it had great appeal because of its stress on sincere piety at a time when the bloated and corrupt Catholic Church was making little attempt to address the spiritual needs of its members. Throughout the 16th century, the number of Huguenots multiplied rapidly, and the reformed religion spread even into the aristocratic class. French nobles embraced the Huguenot religion for yet another reason—practicing Protestantism gave them leverage against the Roman Catholic Church and indirectly gave them a measure of independence from the authority of the Crown. But religious toleration did not exist in French law, and heretics were subjected to fines, imprisonment, and even burning at the stake. Calvinist leaders sent missionaries to France hoping to convert a sufficient number of the nobility to force a relaxation of the laws against Huguenots. One of the nobles they approached was Jeanne's husband Antoine de Bourbon. Although Antoine entertained the Huguenots' message with interest, he was not the man to champion the Protestant cause; an opportunist at heart, he was unwilling to suffer the consequences which a public conversion might bring. But Jeanne d'Albret, queen of Navarre in her own right, heard the message of the Huguenots and came to believe that they preached spiritual truth. On Christmas Day, 1561, she made her formal confession in the Calvinist faith and began openly worshipping as a Huguenot. Immediately, Jeanne became a guiding light in the Huguenot movement. She daily received preachers and leaders of the reformed religion in her home and helped plan an organization of Huguenots on a national scale. She was "receiv'd everywhere by the heretics with great enthusiasm, as though she were a messiah." The 1560s were a time of turmoil in France. Francis II died in December 1560, leaving the throne to his brother Charles IX. Catherine de Medici, desperately trying to maintain her power over her son, played the Huguenots against the Guise faction, which remained staunchly Catholic. In order to balance the Catholic faction against the Protestant faction, Catherine pushed through legislation guaranteeing religious liberty to the Huguenots. Furious, the Guise faction left the court and began plotting to undermine the recent Huguenot victories. They approached Antoine full of lush promises backed by Spain: Antoine was to have another kingdom to compensate him for the loss of Navarre—if only he would live as a faithful Catholic and bring his recalcitrant wife back into the Holy Mother Church. This would not be an easy task; Jeanne was a sincere convert to the Protestant faith. Antoine commanded her to attend mass. When she refused, he resorted to threats and finally banished her from court. Thus, Jeanne's religious conversion ended her happy relationship with Antoine. The price she paid for refusing to renounce her new faith was separation from her young son. Although only nine years old, little Henry of Navarre had learned much from his mother. She had admonished him to attend only the worship of the reformed religion. When his father tried to force him to attend Catholic mass, Henry of Navarre endured scoldings, threats and beatings for two months before finally bowing to the inevitable. Open warfare broke out between Catholics and Huguenots after the duke of Guise ordered the massacre of a Huguenot assembly at Vassey. The Prince of Condé, Antoine's brother, publicly announced his conversion and took over leadership of the Huguenot cause on the battlefield. In November 1562, Antoine died of battle wounds. After his death, Jeanne tried to regain custody of Henry of Navarre, but Catherine de Medici insisted that Henry of Navarre remain at court with his cousins in Paris. The duke of Guise was assassinated in the spring of 1763, and a temporary cease-fire was called. Soon after, Pope Pius V called Jeanne before the Inquisition, threatening excommunication and confiscation of her titles and property if she refused to appear. Help came from an unexpected quarter. Catherine de Medici wrote to the pope on Jeanne's behalf, threatening intervention of the French Crown if he dared try to exert his authority against a French subject. Jeanne, grateful for the queen mother's intervention, accepted her invitation to join the court, where she was allowed to see her son, although she could not take him to Huguenot services. Catherine de Medici continued to refuse Jeanne's request to take Henry of Navarre from the court until 1567. When mother and son finally left, civil war erupted anew. Charles IX revoked the edict of toleration, but this only encouraged the Huguenots to fight back with greater force. Jeanne joined her brother-in-law, the Prince of Condé, at the Huguenot stronghold at La Rochelle, where she gave Henry of Navarre over to his uncle for military training. Within months, Condé was killed by a group of Catholics after being taken prisoner following battle. Condé's death left 15-year-old Henry of Navarre as the nominal leader of the Huguenot faction. As the intermittent war raged on, a new duke of Guise, also named Henry, began to take control of the Catholic forces. Charles IX's younger brother, Henry de Valois, also distinguished himself as a military leader and completed the triumvirate which made up the War of the Three Henrys. By 1571, the country was heartily tired of the violence and destruction of civil war, and the royal treasury was empty. Despite the pope's continuing insistence that "there can be no harmony between light and darkness," Charles IX and Catherine de Medici began negotiating for peace with the Huguenots. A marriage between Jeanne's son Henry of Navarre and Catherine's daughter Margaret of Valois seemed a perfect means to secure tranquility. Although stalwart Huguenots and Catholics disapproved of a marriage between partners of different faiths, Charles IX favored the match as an omen of peace. On April 11, 1572, Charles IX, Catherine de Medici, and Jeanne d'Albret all signed a contract of marriage between Henry of Navarre and Margaret of Valois. The wedding was scheduled to take place that summer. To await her son's arrival and to make plans for the upcoming wedding, Jeanne traveled to the ancestral Bourbon home, where she fell seriously ill. By June, she took to her bed with a high fever. Rumors that she had been poisoned were carried to Paris; she, however, blamed her sudden illness on a chronic pulmonary disorder. By June 6, she was told she was dying. In her typical practical nature, she carefully prepared her will, including a codicil that her son must uphold the reformed religion and asking that he give protection to his younger sister Catherine of Bourbon . Two days later, Jeanne d'Albret was dead. According to her request, no candles were set at her casket, and her funeral was performed without the familiar Catholic rituals: "no priests, no cross, nor any holy water." Her death was sudden even by the standards of the day. When her son Henry of Navarre was informed of her death on June 13, he wrote: "I have just received the saddest news that has ever been brought to me, the death of the Queen my mother whom God called a few days ago." Henry was now king of Navarre and the undisputed leader of the Huguenot movement in France. He proclaimed: "Now that my mother is dead, I succeed her and must take as my duty all that was in her charge." The proposed wedding between Henry of Navarre and Margaret of Valois did not end the fighting between Catholics and Huguenots in France. No sooner were the festivities concluded in August, than Catherine de Medici and the Catholics hatched a plot to end the Huguenot movement in France once and for all. On the evening of St. Bartholomew's Day, the Catholics in Paris rose up in the middle of the night and attacked all the Huguenots who had come to Paris for the wedding. Thousands of Huguenots were massacred, and the streets ran with blood. Henry of Navarre escaped and fled to the countryside where he took control of the remaining Huguenot forces. The civil war raged until 1589. By the end of the War of the Three Henrys, both Henry, duke of Guise, and Henry de Valois (who had succeeded as Henry III after Charles IX's death) had been killed. Henry of Navarre was the closest heir to the throne, and he succeeded as Henry IV in August of 1589. Although it took nine more years of fighting and Henry IV's conversion to Catholicism to end the civil wars, eventually Jeanne d'Albret's son brought peace to France and founded the royal dynasty of Bourbon, which would rule France for almost two centuries, until the French Revolution in 1789. Mahoney, Irene. Royal Cousin: The Life of Henri IV of France. NY: Doubleday, 1970. Memoirs of Henry the Great and of the Court of France During His Reign. Vol. I. London: Harding, Triphook and Lepard, 1824. Roelker, Nancy Layman. Queen of Navarre: Jeanne d'Albret. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press, 1968. Sedgwick, Henry Dwight. Henry of Navarre. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill, 1930. Nabonne, Bernard. Jeanne d'Albret. Paris, 1945. Rochambeau, Marquis de. Lettres de Antoine de Bourbon et Jeanne d'Albret. Paris: Societe de l'Histoire de France, 1877. Kimberly Estep Spangler , Assistant Professor of History and Chair of the Division of Religion and Humanities at Friends University, Wichita, Kansas	4,588	ENGLISH	1
My name is Brendan Chanthavong and I am a Patrick Henry High School student. We have been studying the arrival of Europeans in the Americas in our U.S. History class. I am aware that there is a statue of Christopher Columbus on the state capitol grounds and I believe this statue should be removed. This issue is important to me — the indigenous people were brutally kidnapped, maimed and sold as prisoners. Here are some specific facts from our class activities and my own research to support the need for removing the statue of Christopher Columbus on our state capitol grounds. Christians took over the land of the indigenous people, taking them as slaves, prisoners, and selling them off as objects. The torture continued on as the indigenous people were treated as if they weren’t humans. Bartholome’ De Las Casas gave evidence that Columbus kidnapped, maimed and killed the indigenous people. Columbus and his men did not spare anybody, no matter if they were children or pregnant. Columbus and his men then went from island to island in the Caribbean, capturing and killing the indigenous people. The indigenous people who did not give up gold had their hands cut off and bled to death. Natives were just subjects, while Columbus and his men declared their land. Columbus then regrouped with his men and sailed away with indigenous people as prisoners. I believe that my voice matters, particularly in issues of who we choose to honor in our nation’s history. For these reasons, I would like to see Minnesotans come together and remove the Columbus memorial on the state capitol grounds. Gunxang Brendan Chanthavong	<urn:uuid:46966cca-c791-4f17-ba07-2fb9a2510401>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.camdennews.org/2019/12/letter2/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251671078.88/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125071430-20200125100430-00056.warc.gz	en	0.98146	341	3.3125	3	[ 0.004413495305925608, 0.4436037838459015, 0.4582403600215912, 0.03351689130067825, 0.013657995499670506, -0.37077271938323975, 0.5588597059249878, 0.01439917553216219, 0.048535119742155075, 0.050392139703035355, 0.25137290358543396, -0.047374602407217026, -0.1580994874238968, 0.27798953652...	2	My name is Brendan Chanthavong and I am a Patrick Henry High School student. We have been studying the arrival of Europeans in the Americas in our U.S. History class. I am aware that there is a statue of Christopher Columbus on the state capitol grounds and I believe this statue should be removed. This issue is important to me — the indigenous people were brutally kidnapped, maimed and sold as prisoners. Here are some specific facts from our class activities and my own research to support the need for removing the statue of Christopher Columbus on our state capitol grounds. Christians took over the land of the indigenous people, taking them as slaves, prisoners, and selling them off as objects. The torture continued on as the indigenous people were treated as if they weren’t humans. Bartholome’ De Las Casas gave evidence that Columbus kidnapped, maimed and killed the indigenous people. Columbus and his men did not spare anybody, no matter if they were children or pregnant. Columbus and his men then went from island to island in the Caribbean, capturing and killing the indigenous people. The indigenous people who did not give up gold had their hands cut off and bled to death. Natives were just subjects, while Columbus and his men declared their land. Columbus then regrouped with his men and sailed away with indigenous people as prisoners. I believe that my voice matters, particularly in issues of who we choose to honor in our nation’s history. For these reasons, I would like to see Minnesotans come together and remove the Columbus memorial on the state capitol grounds. Gunxang Brendan Chanthavong	331	ENGLISH	1
The Battle of Tarakan was the first stage in the Borneo campaign of 1945. It began with an amphibious landing by Allied forces on 1 May, code-named Operation Oboe One; the Allied ground forces were drawn mainly from the Australian 26th Brigade, but included a small element of Netherlands East Indies personnel. The main objective of the landing was capture of the island's airfield. While the battle ended with success for the Allied forces over the Japanese defenders, this victory is generally regarded as having not justified its costs. The airfield was so heavily damaged that it ultimately could not be repaired in time to make it operational for other phases of the Allied campaign in Borneo. Tarakan is a triangle-shaped island 2.5 miles (4.0 km) off the coast of Borneo. The island is roughly 15 miles (24 km) long from its northernmost point to the southern tip and 11 miles (18 km) wide towards the north of the island. The small island of Sadau is located about 0.5 miles (0.80 km) off Tarakan's west coast. Almost all of Tarakan's coastline is swampy, and in 1945 mangroves on the northern half of the island stretched 1 mile (1.6 km) to 2 miles (3.2 km) inland. The coastal mangroves in the southern portion of the island were narrower. Inland from the swamps, most of central Tarakan comprised a series of steep and densely forested hills just over 100 feet (30 m) high. Tarakan is located three degrees north of the equator and has a tropical climate. The maximum temperature for most days is about 80 °F (27 °C), and relative humidity is consistently high at about 90 percent. In 1945, Tarakan Town was the main settlement of the island. This town was located 2,000 yards (1,800 m) inland, and was separated from the south-west coast by several small hills covered in low vegetation. Four piers used to dock oil tankers were located on this coastline at the settlement of Lingkas, and were connected to Tarakan Town by three surfaced roads. Tarakan airfield was located about 1 mile (1.6 km) north-west of Tarakan Town. Of the island's two oilfields, Sesanip Oilfield was located at the north-east edge of the airfield while the larger Djoeata or Juata Oilfield was 3 miles (4.8 km) to the north. The village of Djoeata was located on Tarakan's north-west coast and linked to Djoeata Oilfield by a track. Prior to World War II, Tarakan formed part of the Netherlands East Indies (NEI) and was an important oil production centre. The island's two oilfields produced 80,000 barrels of oil per month in 1941. Securing Tarakan's oilfields formed one of Japan's early objectives during the Pacific War. Japanese forces landed on the island's east coast on 11 January 1942 and defeated the small Dutch garrison in two days of fighting in which half the defenders were killed. While the oilfields were successfully sabotaged by the Dutch before their surrender, Japanese engineers were able to swiftly restore them to production and 350,000 barrels were extracted each month by early 1944. Following the Dutch surrender, Tarakan's 5,000 inhabitants suffered under Japan's occupation policies. The large number of troops stationed on the island caused food shortages and many civilians suffered from malnutrition as a result. The Japanese authorities brought 600 labourers to Tarakan from Java. The Japanese also forced an estimated 300 Javanese women to work as "comfort women" on Tarakan after enticing them to travel with false offers of clerical and clothes-making jobs. Tarakan's value to the Japanese evaporated with the rapid advance of Allied forces into the area during 1944. The last Japanese oil tanker left Tarakan in July 1944, and heavy Allied air raids later in the year destroyed the island's oil production and storage facilities. Hundreds of Indonesian civilians may have also been killed by these raids. The Allies also laid mines near Tarakan, which, combined with patrols by air and naval units, prevented Japanese merchant vessels and transports from docking at the island. In line with the island's declining importance, the Japanese garrison on Tarakan was reduced in early 1945. One of the two infantry battalions stationed on the island (the 454th Independent Infantry Battalion) was withdrawn to Balikpapan. This battalion was destroyed by the Australian 7th Division in July during the Battle of Balikpapan. The primary objective for the Allied attack on Tarakan (code-named "Oboe One") was to secure and develop the island's airstrip so that it could be used to provide air cover for subsequent landings in Brunei, Labuan and Balikpapan. The secondary objective for the operation was to secure Tarakan's oilfields and bring them into operation as a source of oil for the Allied forces in the theatre. The 3rd Company, Technical Battalion, KNIL was responsible for this. The 9th Division and 26th Brigade headquarters were responsible for planning the invasion of Tarakan. This work began in early March when both units had arrived at Morotai, and the final plans were completed on 24 April. The planners' work was hampered by poor working conditions and difficulties in communicating with General MacArthur's General Headquarters at Leyte. As part of the planning process each of Tarakan's hills was assigned a code name (for instance "Margy" and "Sykes"); during the Australian Army's campaigns in New Guinea geographic features had been named on an ad-hoc basis, and it was hoped that selecting names prior to the battle would improve the precision of subsequent planning and communications. The Allied plans anticipated that Tarakan would be secured quickly. It was expected that the operation would involve a short fight for the airfield followed by a 'consolidation' phase during which the island's airfield and port would be developed to support Allied operations. The planners did not foresee significant fighting in Tarakan's interior, and no plans were developed for operations in areas other than the landing beaches, Tarakan Town and airfield. The planners did, however, correctly anticipate that the Japanese would make their main stand in an area other than the invasion beach and would not be capable of mounting a large counterattack. The Allied plans also expected that Tarakan would be transformed into a major base within days of the landing. Under the pre-invasion planning it was intended that a wing of fighter aircraft would be based at Tarakan six days after the landing and this force would be expanded to include an attack wing nine days later and staging facilities for a further four squadrons of aircraft within 21 days of the landing. It was also expected that the 26th Brigade Group and its supporting beach group would be ready to leave Tarakan by 21 May and the RAAF units could be redeployed in mid-June after providing support for the landing at Balikpapan. The Allied planners possessed detailed intelligence on Tarakan and its defenders. This intelligence had been gathered from a variety of sources which included signals intelligence, photographic reconnaissance flights and Dutch colonial officials. Tarakan was the Australian Services Reconnaissance Department's (SRD) first priority from November 1944. Prior to the invasion, I Corps requested that the SRD provide intelligence on Japanese positions in northern and central Tarakan. A five-man strong party landed on the island on the night of 25/26 April and successfully reconnoitered the defences on Tarakan's north coast, though the operative who was assigned to the centre of the island became lost and did not reach this area. The SRD operatives withdrew from Tarakan on the night of 29/30 April and landed on the mainland of Borneo. They were unable to transmit the intelligence they had collected, however, as their radio set malfunctioned. Members of the party eventually landed within the Allied beachhead on Tarakan on 3 May to report to the 26th Brigade, but Whitehead was disappointed with the results of this operation and made no further use of SRD during the battle. The Allied force responsible for capturing Tarakan was centred around the very experienced Australian 26th Brigade Group of nearly 12,000 soldiers. The 26th Brigade had been formed in 1940 and had seen action in North Africa and New Guinea. The brigade's infantry component was the 2/23rd, 2/24th and 2/48th Battalions, also with much war experience. These battalions were joined by the 2/4th Commando Squadron and the 2/3rd Pioneer Battalion, which fought as infantry in this battle. The brigade group also included the 2/7th Field Regiment equipped with 24 25-pounder guns, a squadron from the 2/9th Armoured Regiment operating 18 Matilda tanks, a company of the 2/2nd Machine Gun Battalion, the 53rd Composite Anti-Aircraft Regiment and two engineer field squadrons. These combat units were supported by a large number of logistics and medical units, including the 2nd Beach Group whose role was to land supplies from the invasion fleet. While the 26th Brigade Group greatly outnumbered the known strength of Tarakan's Japanese defenders, the Allies committed this large force as their previous experience indicated that it would be difficult to defeat the Japanese force if it retreated into Tarakan's rugged interior. The 26th Brigade Group was supported by Allied air and naval units. The air units were drawn from the Australian First Tactical Air Force (1 TAF) and United States Thirteenth Air Force and included fighter and bomber squadrons. The naval force was drawn from the United States Seventh Fleet and included several Royal Australian Navy warships and transports. Since the main objective of attacking Tarakan was to use the island's airstrip, the invasion force also included a large number of Royal Australian Air Force ground units, including No. 61 Airfield Construction Wing comprising No. 1 and No. 8 Airfield Construction Squadrons. The force which landed on Tarakan included nearly a thousand United States and Dutch troops. The U.S. troops included the U.S. Army engineers who manned the invasion force's LCMs and LCVPs and the U.S. Army's 727th Amphibian Tractor Battalion, Co. A, who manned the LVTs and United States Navy Seabee detachments aboard the Landing Ship Tanks. The Dutch forces were organised into a company of Ambonese infantry commanded by Dutch officers and a civil affairs unit. At the time of the Allied landing, the Japanese force on Tarakan numbered 2,200 men drawn from the Imperial Japanese Army and Imperial Japanese Navy. The largest unit was the 740-man strong 455th Independent Infantry Battalion which was commanded by Major Tadao Tokoi (Japanese: ?). 150 Army support troops were also on Tarakan. The Navy's contribution to Tarakan's garrison comprised 980 seamen commanded by Commander Kaoru Kaharu. The main naval unit was the 600-strong 2nd Naval Garrison Force. This naval unit was trained to fight as infantry and operated several coastal defence guns. The 350 Japanese civilian oil workers on Tarakan were also expected to fight in the event of an Allied attack. The Japanese force included about 50 Indonesians serving in a home guard unit. Major Tokoi directed the overall defence of Tarakan, though relations between the Army and Navy were poor. The Japanese forces were concentrated around Lingkas, Tarakan's main port and the site of the only beaches suitable for landing troops. These defenders had spent the months before the invasion constructing defensive positions and laying mines. These fixed defences were used extensively during the battle, with Japanese tactics being focused on tenaciously defending pre-prepared positions. The Japanese did not conduct any large counter-attacks, and most offensive actions were limited to small parties of raiders which attempted to infiltrate the Australian lines. The Japanese force on Tarakan was warned of the impending invasion in April, before the Allies began their pre-invasion bombardment of the island. The island's commander received a radio signal warning him of imminent attack, and the commander of Tarakan's oil depot was ordered to destroy the oil wells on 15 April. It is possible that this warning may have been issued as a result of a security leak from either the Chinese Republican Army's representative to Australia or MacArthur's headquarters. This did not have any effect on the subsequent battle, however, as the Japanese had been preparing defences to resist invasion for several months and the Japanese were aware of the large Allied force which was being assembled at Morotai to attack Borneo. Prior to the arrival of the invasion force the Japanese garrison on Tarakan and Borneo was subjected to intensive air and naval attacks from 12 April to 29 April. The RAAF and USAAF also mounted air attacks against Japanese bases in China, French Indochina and the NEI to suppress Japanese air units throughout the region. These attacks destroyed all Japanese aircraft in the Tarakan area. The aerial bombing of Tarakan increased in intensity five days before the landing. These attacks were focused on the areas adjoining the planned landing beaches at Lingkas and sought to neutralise the Japanese defences in these areas. The oil storage tanks at Lingkas were a key objective as it was feared that the oil in these tanks could be ignited and used against Allied troops. These bombardments forced much of Tarakan's civilian population to flee inland. At least 100 civilians were killed or wounded. The Tarakan attack force was assembled at Morotai during March and April 1945. The 26th Brigade Group was transported from Australia to Morotai by United States Army transports and arrived in mid-April and began to prepare their equipment for an amphibious landing. Due to a shortage of shipping all units were ordered to leave non-essential vehicles at Morotai when they began to embark onto assault transports on 20 April. The commander of the 1st Tactical Air Force attempted to resist this order, but was over-ridden by his superior officer Air Vice Marshal William Bostock. Most units were embarked by 22 April and the assault troops practiced landing operations for several days. A small convoy of ships carrying a force ordered to capture Sadau Island off the coast of Tarakan left Morotai on 26 April, and the main invasion convoy of 150 ships sailed the next day. Due to the need to clear both the large number of naval mines which had been laid around Tarakan and the extensive beach obstacles at Lingkas, the Allies did not attempt a surprise landing. A group of United States Navy minesweepers and destroyers arrived off Tarakan on 27 April and began clearing mines, most of which had been originally laid by Allied aircraft. This operation was completed by 1 May at a cost of two small minesweepers damaged. USN PT boats also arrived off Tarakan on 28 April and illuminated and strafed the invasion beaches at night to prevent the Japanese from repairing their beach defences. The PT boats also attacked seven small Japanese freighters and luggers which were found anchored at Lingkas, sinking or damaging all but one of them. On 30 April, the 2/4th Commando Squadron and the 57th Battery of the 2/7th Field Regiment were landed on the nearby Sadau Island in order to support the engineers tasked with clearing the obstacles off the invasion beaches. This force rapidly secured the undefended island. The landing on Sadau Island was the first time Australian soldiers had landed on non-Australian territory in the Pacific since late 1941 (Australian participation in the New Guinea Campaign from 1942 onwards was limited to the Australian portion of New Guinea). The only Allied losses in this operation were aboard USS Jenkins, which was damaged when she struck a mine while supporting the landing. The task of clearing the beach obstacles at Lingkas was assigned to the 2/13th Field Company. These defences comprised rows of barbed wire, wooden posts and steel rails which extended 125 yards from the beach. At 11:00 on 30 April, eight parties of engineers went forward in LVTs and landing craft to clear the obstacles. The engineers were supported by the guns on Sadau Island and Allied warships and aircraft. Operating under Japanese fire the engineers cleared all the obstacles obstructing the landing beaches. While heavy casualties had been expected, the 2/13th completed their task without loss. The main invasion force arrived by sea off Tarakan in the early hours of 1 May. Supported by a heavy air and naval bombardment, the 2/23rd Battalion and the 2/48th Battalion made an amphibious landing at about 08:00. The 2/23rd Battalion disembarked from American LVTs into deep mud at "Green Beach" on the southern flank of the beachhead, and overcame several small Japanese positions in the hills around Lingkas. At nightfall it dug in along the main road to Tarakan Town (which had been designated the "Glenelg Highway" by the Australian planners). The 2/48th Battalion had a much easier landing at "Red Beach" on the northern end of the beachhead with most troops disembarking from their LVTs near dry land. The battalion pushed north along the "Anzac Highway" and nearby hills, and rapidly secured a number of pillboxes behind the beach as well as the oil storage tanks. By the end of the day the 2/48th held positions in the hills to the west of Tarakan Town. The 2/24th Battalion also began landing on Red Beach from 9.20 am, and spent most of the day in reserve. The unit received orders to advance north along the Anzac Highway late in the afternoon, but did not encounter any opposition. By nightfall the Australian beachhead extended for 2,800 yards (2,600 m) along the shore and up to 2,000 yards (1,800 m) inland. However, Japanese snipers were active within this perimeter during the night of 1/2 May, and the 2/2nd Pioneer Battalion (which formed the main unit of the 2nd Beach Group) fought several small battles with isolated Japanese forces. Allied casualties were lighter than expected, with 11 men killed and 35 wounded. The light Japanese resistance was attributed to the heavy pre-landing bombardment forcing Tarakan's defenders to abandon the formidable defences at Lingkas. While the infantry were successful in securing a beachhead, the landing was hampered by the poor beach conditions. Many Australian vehicles became bogged in Lingkas Beach's soft mud, and seven LSTs were stranded after their commanders misjudged the ships' beachings. The small amount of solid ground within the beachhead lead to severe congestion and resulted in none of 2/7th Field Regiment's guns being brought into action until the afternoon of the landing. The congestion was made worse by much of the RAAF ground force being landed on 1 May with large numbers of vehicles. The seven LSTs were not refloated until 13 May. After securing the beachhead, the 26th Brigade Group advanced east into Tarakan Town and north towards the airstrip. The Australians encountered increasingly determined Japanese resistance as they moved inland. The task of capturing Tarakan's airstrip was assigned to the 2/24th Battalion. The Battalion's initial attack on the airstrip on the night of 2 May was delayed when the Japanese set off large explosive charges, and the airstrip was not secured until 5 May. While the capture of the airfield achieved the 26th Brigade Group's main task, the Japanese still held Tarakan's rugged interior. During the first week of the invasion, 7,000 Indonesian refugees passed into the advancing Australian lines. This was a larger number than had been expected, and the refugees, many of whom were in poor health, overwhelmed the Dutch civil affairs unit. Despite the devastation caused by the Allied bombardment and invasion, most of the civilians welcomed the Australians as liberators. Hundreds of Indonesian civilians later worked as labourers and porters for the Allied force. General Thomas Blamey, the commander of the Australian Military Forces, made an inspection tour of Tarakan on 8 May. During a meeting with Whitehead, Blamey directed that the 26th Brigade Group should "proceed in a deliberate manner" in clearing the rest of the island now that the main objectives of the invasion had been completed. In order to secure the island and protect the airstrip from attack, the 26th Brigade Group was forced to clear the Japanese from Tarakan's heavily forested hills. Approximately 1,700 Japanese troops were dug into positions in the north and centre of the island. These positions were protected by booby traps and mines. While attacking these positions necessarily entailed costly infantry fighting, the Australian troops made heavy use of their available artillery and air support to minimise casualties. The Australian tanks could only provide limited support to the infantry as Tarakan's thick jungle, swamps and steep hills often confined their movement to tracks and roads. As a result, tanks generally could not be used to spearhead attacks, and their role was limited to providing supporting fire for infantry assaults, with artillery being the preferred source of direct support. The 2/3rd Pioneer Battalion and the NEI company were assigned responsibility for securing the south-eastern portion of Tarakan. The pioneers began advancing east of Tarakan Town on 7 May but encountered unexpectedly strong Japanese resistance. From 10 May, the battalion was halted at the 'Helen' feature, which was defended by about 200 Japanese troops. On 12 May Corporal John Mackey was killed after capturing three Japanese machine gun posts. Mackey was posthumously awarded the Victoria Cross for this act. During the fighting at 'Helen' B-24 Liberator heavy bombers were used for close air support for the first time, with P-38 Lightning fighters dropping napalm immediately after the bombing. This combination proved particularly effective, and became the standard form of air support requested by the Australians. The Japanese force withdrew from 'Helen' on 14 May after suffering approximately 100 casualties, and the 2/3rd Pioneer Battalion reached Tarakan's eastern shore on 16 May. The battalion suffered 20 killed and 46 wounded in this operation. During this period the NEI company secured the remainder of southern Tarakan, and encountered little resistance during its advance. The United States and Australian navies continued to support the invasion once the landing was complete. USN PT boats sank at least a dozen small craft off Tarakan and in rivers on the coast of Borneo between 1 and 10 May. The PT boats carried Netherlands Indies Civil Administration interpreters on most patrols who interrogated natives to gather information on Japanese movements. The Japanese battery at Cape Djoeata on Tarakan's north coast was also knocked out by USS Douglas A. Munro on 23 May. The Japanese garrison was gradually destroyed, with the survivors abandoning their remaining positions in the hills and withdrawing to the north of the island on 14 June. On this day 112 Chinese and Indonesian labourers left the Japanese-held area with a note from a senior Japanese officer asking that they be well treated. While Radio Tokyo announced that Tarakan had fallen on 15 June, the last organised Japanese resistance was encountered on 19 June and Whitehead did not declare the island secure until 21 June. While the infantry of the 26th Brigade Group fought the Japanese in the hills, the RAAF engineers of No. 61 Airfield Construction Wing were engaged in a desperate effort to bring Tarakan's airstrip into operation. As the airstrip had been heavily damaged by pre-invasion bombing and lay in marshy terrain it proved much more difficult to repair than had been expected, and it took eight weeks and not the expected single week to restore the strip to a usable state. Extensive use was made of Marston Mat, interlocking steel plates laid down like matting. Remnants of the plates still exist in the car park at Tarakan airport. While the airstrip was finally opened on 28 June, this was too late for it to play any role in supporting the landings in Brunei or Labuan (10 June), or the landings at Balikpapan. However No. 78 Wing RAAF was based on Tarakan from 28 June and flew in support of the Balikpapan operation until the end of the war. Efforts to restart production at Tarakan's oilfields were delayed by serious damage to the facilities and Japanese holdouts, and they did not become operational until after the war. Following the end of organised resistance the surviving Japanese on Tarakan split into small parties which headed to the north and east of the island. The 26th Brigade Group's main combat units were allocated sections of Tarakan which they swept for Japanese. Many Japanese attempted to cross the strait separating Tarakan from the mainland but were intercepted by Allied naval patrols. Allied troops also searched for Japanese on Bunyu Island, fifteen miles north-east of Tarakan. From the first week of July the surviving Japanese became short of food and attempted to return to their old positions in the centre of the island and raid Australian positions in search of food. As their hunger increased more Japanese surrendered. The Australian units continued to patrol in search of Japanese until the end of the war, with several Japanese being killed or surrendering each day. These operations cost the 26th Brigade Group a further 36 casualties between June 21 and August 15. Approximately 300 Japanese soldiers evaded the Allied patrols, and surrendered at the end of the war in mid-August. The 26th Brigade Group remained on Tarakan as an occupation force until 27 December 1945, though most of its units were disbanded in October. The Brigade's headquarters returned to Australia in early 1946 and was formally disbanded at Brisbane in January 1946. Tarakan's oilfields were swiftly repaired and brought back into production. Engineers and technicians arrived shortly after the Allied landing and the first oil pump was restored on 27 June. By October the island's oilfields were producing 8,000 barrels per day and providing employment for many Tarakanese civilians. The Allied units committed to the battle carried out their tasks with "skill and professionalism". In summing up the operation Samuel Eliot Morison wrote that "altogether this was a very well conducted amphibious operation which attained its objectives with minimum loss". The Battle of Tarakan emphasised the importance of combined arms warfare, and especially the need for infantry to cooperate with and be supported by tanks, artillery and engineers during jungle warfare. Despite Morison's judgement, the 26th Brigade Group's casualties were high in comparison to the other landings in the Borneo campaign. The Brigade suffered more than twice the casualties the 9th Division's other two Brigades suffered during their operations in North Borneo and 23 more fatalities than the 7th Division incurred at Balikpapan. The 26th Brigade Group's higher losses may be attributable to Tarakan's garrison not being able to withdraw as the garrisons in North Borneo and Balikpapan did. The landing force's achievements were nullified by the fact that the island's airfield could not be brought into action. The faulty intelligence assessment which led the RAAF planners to believe that the airfield could be repaired represented a major failing. Moreover, the RAAF's performance at Tarakan was often poor. This performance may have resulted from the low morale prevalent in many units and the 'Morotai Mutiny' disrupting 1 TAF's leadership. As with the rest of the Borneo campaign, the Australian operations on Tarakan remain controversial. Debate continues over whether the campaign was a meaningless "sideshow", or whether it was justified in the context of the planned operations to both invade Japan and liberate the rest of the Netherlands East Indies, which were both scheduled to begin in 1946. The Australian official historian Gavin Long's judgement that "the results achieved did not justify the cost of the Tarakan operation" is in accordance with the generally held view on the battle.	<urn:uuid:09d4d4da-fe39-470f-89e4-773b6f2bab2a>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://popflock.com/learn?s=Battle_of_Tarakan_(1945)	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594333.5/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119064802-20200119092802-00124.warc.gz	en	0.98109	5,800	3.28125	3	[ -0.0249127596616745, 0.44083499908447266, 0.06598533689975739, -0.5269042253494263, -0.02985391393303871, 0.17592117190361023, 0.029388295486569405, 0.0005405333358794451, -0.6668064594268799, -0.09104841947555542, 0.21602120995521545, -1.1075186729431152, -0.10229410231113434, 0.887346148...	1	The Battle of Tarakan was the first stage in the Borneo campaign of 1945. It began with an amphibious landing by Allied forces on 1 May, code-named Operation Oboe One; the Allied ground forces were drawn mainly from the Australian 26th Brigade, but included a small element of Netherlands East Indies personnel. The main objective of the landing was capture of the island's airfield. While the battle ended with success for the Allied forces over the Japanese defenders, this victory is generally regarded as having not justified its costs. The airfield was so heavily damaged that it ultimately could not be repaired in time to make it operational for other phases of the Allied campaign in Borneo. Tarakan is a triangle-shaped island 2.5 miles (4.0 km) off the coast of Borneo. The island is roughly 15 miles (24 km) long from its northernmost point to the southern tip and 11 miles (18 km) wide towards the north of the island. The small island of Sadau is located about 0.5 miles (0.80 km) off Tarakan's west coast. Almost all of Tarakan's coastline is swampy, and in 1945 mangroves on the northern half of the island stretched 1 mile (1.6 km) to 2 miles (3.2 km) inland. The coastal mangroves in the southern portion of the island were narrower. Inland from the swamps, most of central Tarakan comprised a series of steep and densely forested hills just over 100 feet (30 m) high. Tarakan is located three degrees north of the equator and has a tropical climate. The maximum temperature for most days is about 80 °F (27 °C), and relative humidity is consistently high at about 90 percent. In 1945, Tarakan Town was the main settlement of the island. This town was located 2,000 yards (1,800 m) inland, and was separated from the south-west coast by several small hills covered in low vegetation. Four piers used to dock oil tankers were located on this coastline at the settlement of Lingkas, and were connected to Tarakan Town by three surfaced roads. Tarakan airfield was located about 1 mile (1.6 km) north-west of Tarakan Town. Of the island's two oilfields, Sesanip Oilfield was located at the north-east edge of the airfield while the larger Djoeata or Juata Oilfield was 3 miles (4.8 km) to the north. The village of Djoeata was located on Tarakan's north-west coast and linked to Djoeata Oilfield by a track. Prior to World War II, Tarakan formed part of the Netherlands East Indies (NEI) and was an important oil production centre. The island's two oilfields produced 80,000 barrels of oil per month in 1941. Securing Tarakan's oilfields formed one of Japan's early objectives during the Pacific War. Japanese forces landed on the island's east coast on 11 January 1942 and defeated the small Dutch garrison in two days of fighting in which half the defenders were killed. While the oilfields were successfully sabotaged by the Dutch before their surrender, Japanese engineers were able to swiftly restore them to production and 350,000 barrels were extracted each month by early 1944. Following the Dutch surrender, Tarakan's 5,000 inhabitants suffered under Japan's occupation policies. The large number of troops stationed on the island caused food shortages and many civilians suffered from malnutrition as a result. The Japanese authorities brought 600 labourers to Tarakan from Java. The Japanese also forced an estimated 300 Javanese women to work as "comfort women" on Tarakan after enticing them to travel with false offers of clerical and clothes-making jobs. Tarakan's value to the Japanese evaporated with the rapid advance of Allied forces into the area during 1944. The last Japanese oil tanker left Tarakan in July 1944, and heavy Allied air raids later in the year destroyed the island's oil production and storage facilities. Hundreds of Indonesian civilians may have also been killed by these raids. The Allies also laid mines near Tarakan, which, combined with patrols by air and naval units, prevented Japanese merchant vessels and transports from docking at the island. In line with the island's declining importance, the Japanese garrison on Tarakan was reduced in early 1945. One of the two infantry battalions stationed on the island (the 454th Independent Infantry Battalion) was withdrawn to Balikpapan. This battalion was destroyed by the Australian 7th Division in July during the Battle of Balikpapan. The primary objective for the Allied attack on Tarakan (code-named "Oboe One") was to secure and develop the island's airstrip so that it could be used to provide air cover for subsequent landings in Brunei, Labuan and Balikpapan. The secondary objective for the operation was to secure Tarakan's oilfields and bring them into operation as a source of oil for the Allied forces in the theatre. The 3rd Company, Technical Battalion, KNIL was responsible for this. The 9th Division and 26th Brigade headquarters were responsible for planning the invasion of Tarakan. This work began in early March when both units had arrived at Morotai, and the final plans were completed on 24 April. The planners' work was hampered by poor working conditions and difficulties in communicating with General MacArthur's General Headquarters at Leyte. As part of the planning process each of Tarakan's hills was assigned a code name (for instance "Margy" and "Sykes"); during the Australian Army's campaigns in New Guinea geographic features had been named on an ad-hoc basis, and it was hoped that selecting names prior to the battle would improve the precision of subsequent planning and communications. The Allied plans anticipated that Tarakan would be secured quickly. It was expected that the operation would involve a short fight for the airfield followed by a 'consolidation' phase during which the island's airfield and port would be developed to support Allied operations. The planners did not foresee significant fighting in Tarakan's interior, and no plans were developed for operations in areas other than the landing beaches, Tarakan Town and airfield. The planners did, however, correctly anticipate that the Japanese would make their main stand in an area other than the invasion beach and would not be capable of mounting a large counterattack. The Allied plans also expected that Tarakan would be transformed into a major base within days of the landing. Under the pre-invasion planning it was intended that a wing of fighter aircraft would be based at Tarakan six days after the landing and this force would be expanded to include an attack wing nine days later and staging facilities for a further four squadrons of aircraft within 21 days of the landing. It was also expected that the 26th Brigade Group and its supporting beach group would be ready to leave Tarakan by 21 May and the RAAF units could be redeployed in mid-June after providing support for the landing at Balikpapan. The Allied planners possessed detailed intelligence on Tarakan and its defenders. This intelligence had been gathered from a variety of sources which included signals intelligence, photographic reconnaissance flights and Dutch colonial officials. Tarakan was the Australian Services Reconnaissance Department's (SRD) first priority from November 1944. Prior to the invasion, I Corps requested that the SRD provide intelligence on Japanese positions in northern and central Tarakan. A five-man strong party landed on the island on the night of 25/26 April and successfully reconnoitered the defences on Tarakan's north coast, though the operative who was assigned to the centre of the island became lost and did not reach this area. The SRD operatives withdrew from Tarakan on the night of 29/30 April and landed on the mainland of Borneo. They were unable to transmit the intelligence they had collected, however, as their radio set malfunctioned. Members of the party eventually landed within the Allied beachhead on Tarakan on 3 May to report to the 26th Brigade, but Whitehead was disappointed with the results of this operation and made no further use of SRD during the battle. The Allied force responsible for capturing Tarakan was centred around the very experienced Australian 26th Brigade Group of nearly 12,000 soldiers. The 26th Brigade had been formed in 1940 and had seen action in North Africa and New Guinea. The brigade's infantry component was the 2/23rd, 2/24th and 2/48th Battalions, also with much war experience. These battalions were joined by the 2/4th Commando Squadron and the 2/3rd Pioneer Battalion, which fought as infantry in this battle. The brigade group also included the 2/7th Field Regiment equipped with 24 25-pounder guns, a squadron from the 2/9th Armoured Regiment operating 18 Matilda tanks, a company of the 2/2nd Machine Gun Battalion, the 53rd Composite Anti-Aircraft Regiment and two engineer field squadrons. These combat units were supported by a large number of logistics and medical units, including the 2nd Beach Group whose role was to land supplies from the invasion fleet. While the 26th Brigade Group greatly outnumbered the known strength of Tarakan's Japanese defenders, the Allies committed this large force as their previous experience indicated that it would be difficult to defeat the Japanese force if it retreated into Tarakan's rugged interior. The 26th Brigade Group was supported by Allied air and naval units. The air units were drawn from the Australian First Tactical Air Force (1 TAF) and United States Thirteenth Air Force and included fighter and bomber squadrons. The naval force was drawn from the United States Seventh Fleet and included several Royal Australian Navy warships and transports. Since the main objective of attacking Tarakan was to use the island's airstrip, the invasion force also included a large number of Royal Australian Air Force ground units, including No. 61 Airfield Construction Wing comprising No. 1 and No. 8 Airfield Construction Squadrons. The force which landed on Tarakan included nearly a thousand United States and Dutch troops. The U.S. troops included the U.S. Army engineers who manned the invasion force's LCMs and LCVPs and the U.S. Army's 727th Amphibian Tractor Battalion, Co. A, who manned the LVTs and United States Navy Seabee detachments aboard the Landing Ship Tanks. The Dutch forces were organised into a company of Ambonese infantry commanded by Dutch officers and a civil affairs unit. At the time of the Allied landing, the Japanese force on Tarakan numbered 2,200 men drawn from the Imperial Japanese Army and Imperial Japanese Navy. The largest unit was the 740-man strong 455th Independent Infantry Battalion which was commanded by Major Tadao Tokoi (Japanese: ?). 150 Army support troops were also on Tarakan. The Navy's contribution to Tarakan's garrison comprised 980 seamen commanded by Commander Kaoru Kaharu. The main naval unit was the 600-strong 2nd Naval Garrison Force. This naval unit was trained to fight as infantry and operated several coastal defence guns. The 350 Japanese civilian oil workers on Tarakan were also expected to fight in the event of an Allied attack. The Japanese force included about 50 Indonesians serving in a home guard unit. Major Tokoi directed the overall defence of Tarakan, though relations between the Army and Navy were poor. The Japanese forces were concentrated around Lingkas, Tarakan's main port and the site of the only beaches suitable for landing troops. These defenders had spent the months before the invasion constructing defensive positions and laying mines. These fixed defences were used extensively during the battle, with Japanese tactics being focused on tenaciously defending pre-prepared positions. The Japanese did not conduct any large counter-attacks, and most offensive actions were limited to small parties of raiders which attempted to infiltrate the Australian lines. The Japanese force on Tarakan was warned of the impending invasion in April, before the Allies began their pre-invasion bombardment of the island. The island's commander received a radio signal warning him of imminent attack, and the commander of Tarakan's oil depot was ordered to destroy the oil wells on 15 April. It is possible that this warning may have been issued as a result of a security leak from either the Chinese Republican Army's representative to Australia or MacArthur's headquarters. This did not have any effect on the subsequent battle, however, as the Japanese had been preparing defences to resist invasion for several months and the Japanese were aware of the large Allied force which was being assembled at Morotai to attack Borneo. Prior to the arrival of the invasion force the Japanese garrison on Tarakan and Borneo was subjected to intensive air and naval attacks from 12 April to 29 April. The RAAF and USAAF also mounted air attacks against Japanese bases in China, French Indochina and the NEI to suppress Japanese air units throughout the region. These attacks destroyed all Japanese aircraft in the Tarakan area. The aerial bombing of Tarakan increased in intensity five days before the landing. These attacks were focused on the areas adjoining the planned landing beaches at Lingkas and sought to neutralise the Japanese defences in these areas. The oil storage tanks at Lingkas were a key objective as it was feared that the oil in these tanks could be ignited and used against Allied troops. These bombardments forced much of Tarakan's civilian population to flee inland. At least 100 civilians were killed or wounded. The Tarakan attack force was assembled at Morotai during March and April 1945. The 26th Brigade Group was transported from Australia to Morotai by United States Army transports and arrived in mid-April and began to prepare their equipment for an amphibious landing. Due to a shortage of shipping all units were ordered to leave non-essential vehicles at Morotai when they began to embark onto assault transports on 20 April. The commander of the 1st Tactical Air Force attempted to resist this order, but was over-ridden by his superior officer Air Vice Marshal William Bostock. Most units were embarked by 22 April and the assault troops practiced landing operations for several days. A small convoy of ships carrying a force ordered to capture Sadau Island off the coast of Tarakan left Morotai on 26 April, and the main invasion convoy of 150 ships sailed the next day. Due to the need to clear both the large number of naval mines which had been laid around Tarakan and the extensive beach obstacles at Lingkas, the Allies did not attempt a surprise landing. A group of United States Navy minesweepers and destroyers arrived off Tarakan on 27 April and began clearing mines, most of which had been originally laid by Allied aircraft. This operation was completed by 1 May at a cost of two small minesweepers damaged. USN PT boats also arrived off Tarakan on 28 April and illuminated and strafed the invasion beaches at night to prevent the Japanese from repairing their beach defences. The PT boats also attacked seven small Japanese freighters and luggers which were found anchored at Lingkas, sinking or damaging all but one of them. On 30 April, the 2/4th Commando Squadron and the 57th Battery of the 2/7th Field Regiment were landed on the nearby Sadau Island in order to support the engineers tasked with clearing the obstacles off the invasion beaches. This force rapidly secured the undefended island. The landing on Sadau Island was the first time Australian soldiers had landed on non-Australian territory in the Pacific since late 1941 (Australian participation in the New Guinea Campaign from 1942 onwards was limited to the Australian portion of New Guinea). The only Allied losses in this operation were aboard USS Jenkins, which was damaged when she struck a mine while supporting the landing. The task of clearing the beach obstacles at Lingkas was assigned to the 2/13th Field Company. These defences comprised rows of barbed wire, wooden posts and steel rails which extended 125 yards from the beach. At 11:00 on 30 April, eight parties of engineers went forward in LVTs and landing craft to clear the obstacles. The engineers were supported by the guns on Sadau Island and Allied warships and aircraft. Operating under Japanese fire the engineers cleared all the obstacles obstructing the landing beaches. While heavy casualties had been expected, the 2/13th completed their task without loss. The main invasion force arrived by sea off Tarakan in the early hours of 1 May. Supported by a heavy air and naval bombardment, the 2/23rd Battalion and the 2/48th Battalion made an amphibious landing at about 08:00. The 2/23rd Battalion disembarked from American LVTs into deep mud at "Green Beach" on the southern flank of the beachhead, and overcame several small Japanese positions in the hills around Lingkas. At nightfall it dug in along the main road to Tarakan Town (which had been designated the "Glenelg Highway" by the Australian planners). The 2/48th Battalion had a much easier landing at "Red Beach" on the northern end of the beachhead with most troops disembarking from their LVTs near dry land. The battalion pushed north along the "Anzac Highway" and nearby hills, and rapidly secured a number of pillboxes behind the beach as well as the oil storage tanks. By the end of the day the 2/48th held positions in the hills to the west of Tarakan Town. The 2/24th Battalion also began landing on Red Beach from 9.20 am, and spent most of the day in reserve. The unit received orders to advance north along the Anzac Highway late in the afternoon, but did not encounter any opposition. By nightfall the Australian beachhead extended for 2,800 yards (2,600 m) along the shore and up to 2,000 yards (1,800 m) inland. However, Japanese snipers were active within this perimeter during the night of 1/2 May, and the 2/2nd Pioneer Battalion (which formed the main unit of the 2nd Beach Group) fought several small battles with isolated Japanese forces. Allied casualties were lighter than expected, with 11 men killed and 35 wounded. The light Japanese resistance was attributed to the heavy pre-landing bombardment forcing Tarakan's defenders to abandon the formidable defences at Lingkas. While the infantry were successful in securing a beachhead, the landing was hampered by the poor beach conditions. Many Australian vehicles became bogged in Lingkas Beach's soft mud, and seven LSTs were stranded after their commanders misjudged the ships' beachings. The small amount of solid ground within the beachhead lead to severe congestion and resulted in none of 2/7th Field Regiment's guns being brought into action until the afternoon of the landing. The congestion was made worse by much of the RAAF ground force being landed on 1 May with large numbers of vehicles. The seven LSTs were not refloated until 13 May. After securing the beachhead, the 26th Brigade Group advanced east into Tarakan Town and north towards the airstrip. The Australians encountered increasingly determined Japanese resistance as they moved inland. The task of capturing Tarakan's airstrip was assigned to the 2/24th Battalion. The Battalion's initial attack on the airstrip on the night of 2 May was delayed when the Japanese set off large explosive charges, and the airstrip was not secured until 5 May. While the capture of the airfield achieved the 26th Brigade Group's main task, the Japanese still held Tarakan's rugged interior. During the first week of the invasion, 7,000 Indonesian refugees passed into the advancing Australian lines. This was a larger number than had been expected, and the refugees, many of whom were in poor health, overwhelmed the Dutch civil affairs unit. Despite the devastation caused by the Allied bombardment and invasion, most of the civilians welcomed the Australians as liberators. Hundreds of Indonesian civilians later worked as labourers and porters for the Allied force. General Thomas Blamey, the commander of the Australian Military Forces, made an inspection tour of Tarakan on 8 May. During a meeting with Whitehead, Blamey directed that the 26th Brigade Group should "proceed in a deliberate manner" in clearing the rest of the island now that the main objectives of the invasion had been completed. In order to secure the island and protect the airstrip from attack, the 26th Brigade Group was forced to clear the Japanese from Tarakan's heavily forested hills. Approximately 1,700 Japanese troops were dug into positions in the north and centre of the island. These positions were protected by booby traps and mines. While attacking these positions necessarily entailed costly infantry fighting, the Australian troops made heavy use of their available artillery and air support to minimise casualties. The Australian tanks could only provide limited support to the infantry as Tarakan's thick jungle, swamps and steep hills often confined their movement to tracks and roads. As a result, tanks generally could not be used to spearhead attacks, and their role was limited to providing supporting fire for infantry assaults, with artillery being the preferred source of direct support. The 2/3rd Pioneer Battalion and the NEI company were assigned responsibility for securing the south-eastern portion of Tarakan. The pioneers began advancing east of Tarakan Town on 7 May but encountered unexpectedly strong Japanese resistance. From 10 May, the battalion was halted at the 'Helen' feature, which was defended by about 200 Japanese troops. On 12 May Corporal John Mackey was killed after capturing three Japanese machine gun posts. Mackey was posthumously awarded the Victoria Cross for this act. During the fighting at 'Helen' B-24 Liberator heavy bombers were used for close air support for the first time, with P-38 Lightning fighters dropping napalm immediately after the bombing. This combination proved particularly effective, and became the standard form of air support requested by the Australians. The Japanese force withdrew from 'Helen' on 14 May after suffering approximately 100 casualties, and the 2/3rd Pioneer Battalion reached Tarakan's eastern shore on 16 May. The battalion suffered 20 killed and 46 wounded in this operation. During this period the NEI company secured the remainder of southern Tarakan, and encountered little resistance during its advance. The United States and Australian navies continued to support the invasion once the landing was complete. USN PT boats sank at least a dozen small craft off Tarakan and in rivers on the coast of Borneo between 1 and 10 May. The PT boats carried Netherlands Indies Civil Administration interpreters on most patrols who interrogated natives to gather information on Japanese movements. The Japanese battery at Cape Djoeata on Tarakan's north coast was also knocked out by USS Douglas A. Munro on 23 May. The Japanese garrison was gradually destroyed, with the survivors abandoning their remaining positions in the hills and withdrawing to the north of the island on 14 June. On this day 112 Chinese and Indonesian labourers left the Japanese-held area with a note from a senior Japanese officer asking that they be well treated. While Radio Tokyo announced that Tarakan had fallen on 15 June, the last organised Japanese resistance was encountered on 19 June and Whitehead did not declare the island secure until 21 June. While the infantry of the 26th Brigade Group fought the Japanese in the hills, the RAAF engineers of No. 61 Airfield Construction Wing were engaged in a desperate effort to bring Tarakan's airstrip into operation. As the airstrip had been heavily damaged by pre-invasion bombing and lay in marshy terrain it proved much more difficult to repair than had been expected, and it took eight weeks and not the expected single week to restore the strip to a usable state. Extensive use was made of Marston Mat, interlocking steel plates laid down like matting. Remnants of the plates still exist in the car park at Tarakan airport. While the airstrip was finally opened on 28 June, this was too late for it to play any role in supporting the landings in Brunei or Labuan (10 June), or the landings at Balikpapan. However No. 78 Wing RAAF was based on Tarakan from 28 June and flew in support of the Balikpapan operation until the end of the war. Efforts to restart production at Tarakan's oilfields were delayed by serious damage to the facilities and Japanese holdouts, and they did not become operational until after the war. Following the end of organised resistance the surviving Japanese on Tarakan split into small parties which headed to the north and east of the island. The 26th Brigade Group's main combat units were allocated sections of Tarakan which they swept for Japanese. Many Japanese attempted to cross the strait separating Tarakan from the mainland but were intercepted by Allied naval patrols. Allied troops also searched for Japanese on Bunyu Island, fifteen miles north-east of Tarakan. From the first week of July the surviving Japanese became short of food and attempted to return to their old positions in the centre of the island and raid Australian positions in search of food. As their hunger increased more Japanese surrendered. The Australian units continued to patrol in search of Japanese until the end of the war, with several Japanese being killed or surrendering each day. These operations cost the 26th Brigade Group a further 36 casualties between June 21 and August 15. Approximately 300 Japanese soldiers evaded the Allied patrols, and surrendered at the end of the war in mid-August. The 26th Brigade Group remained on Tarakan as an occupation force until 27 December 1945, though most of its units were disbanded in October. The Brigade's headquarters returned to Australia in early 1946 and was formally disbanded at Brisbane in January 1946. Tarakan's oilfields were swiftly repaired and brought back into production. Engineers and technicians arrived shortly after the Allied landing and the first oil pump was restored on 27 June. By October the island's oilfields were producing 8,000 barrels per day and providing employment for many Tarakanese civilians. The Allied units committed to the battle carried out their tasks with "skill and professionalism". In summing up the operation Samuel Eliot Morison wrote that "altogether this was a very well conducted amphibious operation which attained its objectives with minimum loss". The Battle of Tarakan emphasised the importance of combined arms warfare, and especially the need for infantry to cooperate with and be supported by tanks, artillery and engineers during jungle warfare. Despite Morison's judgement, the 26th Brigade Group's casualties were high in comparison to the other landings in the Borneo campaign. The Brigade suffered more than twice the casualties the 9th Division's other two Brigades suffered during their operations in North Borneo and 23 more fatalities than the 7th Division incurred at Balikpapan. The 26th Brigade Group's higher losses may be attributable to Tarakan's garrison not being able to withdraw as the garrisons in North Borneo and Balikpapan did. The landing force's achievements were nullified by the fact that the island's airfield could not be brought into action. The faulty intelligence assessment which led the RAAF planners to believe that the airfield could be repaired represented a major failing. Moreover, the RAAF's performance at Tarakan was often poor. This performance may have resulted from the low morale prevalent in many units and the 'Morotai Mutiny' disrupting 1 TAF's leadership. As with the rest of the Borneo campaign, the Australian operations on Tarakan remain controversial. Debate continues over whether the campaign was a meaningless "sideshow", or whether it was justified in the context of the planned operations to both invade Japan and liberate the rest of the Netherlands East Indies, which were both scheduled to begin in 1946. The Australian official historian Gavin Long's judgement that "the results achieved did not justify the cost of the Tarakan operation" is in accordance with the generally held view on the battle.	6,081	ENGLISH	1
After the worldwide Great Depression, all around the world, millions of people had lost their jobs and there was a need for strong leadership. In 1933, Germany saw Adolf Hitler rise to dictator power. Hitler was blaming the Jews for all of Germany’s problems. Next Lesson: Bill of Rights Continue learning. The transcript is for your convenience. Nazi soldiers started to arrest numerous Jews and send them to prison. In Italy, Germany’s ally, dictator Mussolini was the powerful man. They formed the “Axis Powers”. Britain, France, and Poland then formed the Allied Powers and in the year 1939, Hitler started to invade Poland. The Allies then declared war on Germany and World War II had begun. When the war started, most Americans were against fighting in Europe again. America Goes to War Japan joined the Axis Powers in 1940 as Japan wanted an expansion of its empire across Asia. Then in 1941, Japan attacked Pearl Harbor in Hawaii to destroy the U.S. Navy fleet that was stationed there. Thousands of American servicemen and civilians died and the United States couldn’t do anything but declare war on Japan. America joined the Allied Powers and subsequently, the Axis Powers were declaring war on the U.S. Many American young men were joining the military and now, most Americans were in support of the war. Americans were buying state-issued war bonds and many women were working in factories. Many Americans could be seen collecting metal for the production of war supplies but there were also Americans who feared that Japanese Americans might help Japan and the U.S. government locked up tens of thousands of Japanese Americans to live in so-called internment camps. Fighting the War World War II was fought in Europe, the Pacific, and North Africa. In May of 1945, Germany was finally forced to surrender and in August of that year, America dropped two atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. The bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima had killed some 100,000 people and Japan surrendered. World War II had come to an end. When WW II was over, Allied troops discovered that the German Nazis had forced millions of European Jews and other minority people into their “concentration camps” where, in total, more than 12 million people perished in the camps’ gas chambers. Some six million of these people were actually Jews. We refer to this Nazi mass murder as the Holocaust. Last Updated on	<urn:uuid:3ba976ea-61a3-433b-9cfb-956a206578fc>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://bestgedclasses.org/world-war-2/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251672440.80/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125101544-20200125130544-00002.warc.gz	en	0.982046	505	3.625	4	[ -0.4340132474899292, 0.5334332585334778, -0.07657106965780258, -0.16582709550857544, -0.0742984265089035, 0.26497718691825867, 0.02718961238861084, 0.19230757653713226, -0.01705515757203102, -0.13784843683242798, 0.45463040471076965, 0.1363900750875473, 0.17995485663414001, 0.4555467069149...	1	After the worldwide Great Depression, all around the world, millions of people had lost their jobs and there was a need for strong leadership. In 1933, Germany saw Adolf Hitler rise to dictator power. Hitler was blaming the Jews for all of Germany’s problems. Next Lesson: Bill of Rights Continue learning. The transcript is for your convenience. Nazi soldiers started to arrest numerous Jews and send them to prison. In Italy, Germany’s ally, dictator Mussolini was the powerful man. They formed the “Axis Powers”. Britain, France, and Poland then formed the Allied Powers and in the year 1939, Hitler started to invade Poland. The Allies then declared war on Germany and World War II had begun. When the war started, most Americans were against fighting in Europe again. America Goes to War Japan joined the Axis Powers in 1940 as Japan wanted an expansion of its empire across Asia. Then in 1941, Japan attacked Pearl Harbor in Hawaii to destroy the U.S. Navy fleet that was stationed there. Thousands of American servicemen and civilians died and the United States couldn’t do anything but declare war on Japan. America joined the Allied Powers and subsequently, the Axis Powers were declaring war on the U.S. Many American young men were joining the military and now, most Americans were in support of the war. Americans were buying state-issued war bonds and many women were working in factories. Many Americans could be seen collecting metal for the production of war supplies but there were also Americans who feared that Japanese Americans might help Japan and the U.S. government locked up tens of thousands of Japanese Americans to live in so-called internment camps. Fighting the War World War II was fought in Europe, the Pacific, and North Africa. In May of 1945, Germany was finally forced to surrender and in August of that year, America dropped two atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. The bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima had killed some 100,000 people and Japan surrendered. World War II had come to an end. When WW II was over, Allied troops discovered that the German Nazis had forced millions of European Jews and other minority people into their “concentration camps” where, in total, more than 12 million people perished in the camps’ gas chambers. Some six million of these people were actually Jews. We refer to this Nazi mass murder as the Holocaust. Last Updated on	509	ENGLISH	1
Biblical manuscripts, with a few exceptions that are minor as verses written on amulets and pots, are written using one of three materials: Papyrus, Parchment, and Paper. Each had benefits and drawbacks. Parchment (treated animal skins) had been probably the most durable, but additionally the highest priced, and it’s really tough to get more and more sheets regarding the size that is same color. Papyrus ended up being less costly, but wore down more quickly and, because it is damaged by damp, few copies survive to your current day, except from Egypt (and also those usually defectively damaged). Paper would not be available until relatively recently, and although it ended up being less expensive than parchment once paper mills had been established, the mills had high overhead expenses, so that they had been fairly few in number; paper had been in no way as low priced into the belated manuscript period as today (whenever paper is made of timber pulp in the place of rags). The sections that are following the different kinds of ancient writing materials and exactly how these people were ready. The initial fairly complete description of just how papyrus was prepared arises from Pliny’s normal History (xiii.11f.): “Papyrus the writing material is manufactured out of the papyrus plant by div > This declaration has its dubious parts — e.g. there is absolutely no proof that water through the Nile as such can be utilized being a glue, though it’s possible that some kind of glue could possibly be produced from some kind of soil found because of the Nile. Nevertheless the fundamental description is undoubtedly real: The stalks had been cut, set hand and hand, braced by having another layer of strips glued across them perpendicularly, squeezed, and dried. Continue reading	<urn:uuid:90f73b17-10c1-490e-90f8-eaa0c6d6dffe>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://advisorexclusive.com/category/college-essay-examples-common-app-2/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251796127.92/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129102701-20200129132701-00241.warc.gz	en	0.984824	370	3.828125	4	[ -0.4115304946899414, 0.3120459318161011, 0.33039945363998413, 0.15067192912101746, -0.24559594690799713, -0.3155069053173065, -0.37318429350852966, 0.21156945824623108, -0.12779857218265533, 0.37626323103904724, -0.2290874421596527, -0.06675288081169128, 0.044811446219682693, 0.03355355560...	2	Biblical manuscripts, with a few exceptions that are minor as verses written on amulets and pots, are written using one of three materials: Papyrus, Parchment, and Paper. Each had benefits and drawbacks. Parchment (treated animal skins) had been probably the most durable, but additionally the highest priced, and it’s really tough to get more and more sheets regarding the size that is same color. Papyrus ended up being less costly, but wore down more quickly and, because it is damaged by damp, few copies survive to your current day, except from Egypt (and also those usually defectively damaged). Paper would not be available until relatively recently, and although it ended up being less expensive than parchment once paper mills had been established, the mills had high overhead expenses, so that they had been fairly few in number; paper had been in no way as low priced into the belated manuscript period as today (whenever paper is made of timber pulp in the place of rags). The sections that are following the different kinds of ancient writing materials and exactly how these people were ready. The initial fairly complete description of just how papyrus was prepared arises from Pliny’s normal History (xiii.11f.): “Papyrus the writing material is manufactured out of the papyrus plant by div > This declaration has its dubious parts — e.g. there is absolutely no proof that water through the Nile as such can be utilized being a glue, though it’s possible that some kind of glue could possibly be produced from some kind of soil found because of the Nile. Nevertheless the fundamental description is undoubtedly real: The stalks had been cut, set hand and hand, braced by having another layer of strips glued across them perpendicularly, squeezed, and dried. Continue reading	365	ENGLISH	1
Egypt was part of the Abbasid Empire during the 9th century. This changed temporarily in 868, however, when the Abbasid Caliph assigned the Turkish officer Ahmad ibn Tulun as governor of Egypt. Tulun took advantage of the quarrels within the Abbasid Empire and declared Egypt independent. The Caliph never recognized this independence, but it was not before 905 that the Abbasids managed to regain control over the land on the Nile. The Tulunids issued coins following the style of the Abbasid currency. Their dinars were of fine workmanship and of consistent weights and gold contents. This is why they were readily accepted and widely used as trading coins throughout the Mediterranean. The reverse gave the name of the respective Tulunid ruler – the issuer of this dinar was Khumarawayh ibn Ahmad, the son of the founder of the dynasty.	<urn:uuid:1c776fad-e63e-43a4-ba4f-a4a958b9d9ae>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://moneymuseum.com/en/coins?id=1954	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250616186.38/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124070934-20200124095934-00000.warc.gz	en	0.980581	174	3.78125	4	[ -0.48478662967681885, 0.5780815482139587, 0.14746315777301788, -0.1154942438006401, -0.7313120365142822, -0.2867245376110077, 0.586915135383606, 0.0801454409956932, -0.41580766439437866, 0.3031235933303833, 0.05805664137005806, -0.442101389169693, 0.18227405846118927, 0.14219310879707336, ...	7	Egypt was part of the Abbasid Empire during the 9th century. This changed temporarily in 868, however, when the Abbasid Caliph assigned the Turkish officer Ahmad ibn Tulun as governor of Egypt. Tulun took advantage of the quarrels within the Abbasid Empire and declared Egypt independent. The Caliph never recognized this independence, but it was not before 905 that the Abbasids managed to regain control over the land on the Nile. The Tulunids issued coins following the style of the Abbasid currency. Their dinars were of fine workmanship and of consistent weights and gold contents. This is why they were readily accepted and widely used as trading coins throughout the Mediterranean. The reverse gave the name of the respective Tulunid ruler – the issuer of this dinar was Khumarawayh ibn Ahmad, the son of the founder of the dynasty.	181	ENGLISH	1
Nevertheless, Jews in that time settled almost exclusively in the commercial city of Trieste and, to a much smaller extent, in the town of Gorizia (now both part of Italy). The decree was overturned in 1817 by Francis I, and Jews were granted full civil and political right only with the Austrian constitution of 1867. According to the 1931 census, there were about 900 Jews in the Drava Banovina, mostly concentrated in Prekmurje, which was a part of the Kingdom of Hungary prior to 1919. This was the reason why in the mid-1930s Murska Sobota became the seat of the Jewish Community of Slovenia. The Estates of the single provinces (Carniola, Styria and Carinthia) began expelling their Jews already around the turn of the 16th century, and the last Jews were expelled by 1718.	<urn:uuid:778be432-9ed9-488a-95ec-9a3033664f2c>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://kumirproekt.ru/community--dating-site-slovenija-3106.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592394.9/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118081234-20200118105234-00493.warc.gz	en	0.985633	183	3.34375	3	[ 0.08779183775186539, 0.4110446870326996, 0.31426769495010376, -0.13595840334892273, -0.3796204626560211, -0.14619791507720947, 0.07397383451461792, 0.21491961181163788, -0.22413821518421173, 0.14914092421531677, 0.059455882757902145, -0.4092084467411041, -0.01759999804198742, 0.30526798963...	3	Nevertheless, Jews in that time settled almost exclusively in the commercial city of Trieste and, to a much smaller extent, in the town of Gorizia (now both part of Italy). The decree was overturned in 1817 by Francis I, and Jews were granted full civil and political right only with the Austrian constitution of 1867. According to the 1931 census, there were about 900 Jews in the Drava Banovina, mostly concentrated in Prekmurje, which was a part of the Kingdom of Hungary prior to 1919. This was the reason why in the mid-1930s Murska Sobota became the seat of the Jewish Community of Slovenia. The Estates of the single provinces (Carniola, Styria and Carinthia) began expelling their Jews already around the turn of the 16th century, and the last Jews were expelled by 1718.	200	ENGLISH	1
Mammoth Cave National Park, located in southern Kentucky features the world’s longest recorded cave system. In all, more than 360 miles of caves have been mapped and explored. Scientists believe there may be another 600 miles of caves yet to be explored. In addition to the amazing cave system, the park is located along the Green River, one of the most biologically diverse rivers (in terms of fish and invertebrates) in North America. Before Mammoth Cave became a national park, local farmers who owned nearby tracts of land waged what was called the Kentucky Cave Wars, a bitter competition between land owners to lure tourists to caves on their properties. "Cappers," as they came to known as, would trick tourists into believing the main caves were closed and would direct them toward lesser caves on their own property. American National Parks Click on a park labeled on the map above to learn more about each park.	<urn:uuid:7c50da4a-4df5-46da-b087-44c0cbd07d48>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://mrnussbaum.com/uploads/activities/nationalparks/mammoth-cave-national-park.htm	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251688806.91/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126104828-20200126134828-00202.warc.gz	en	0.983212	185	3.640625	4	[ -0.03827233985066414, -0.3003939986228943, 0.3737839162349701, 0.2405475378036499, -0.2121971845626831, 0.3422239422798157, 0.3627285063266754, -0.3131277561187744, -0.20845170319080353, 0.2122330665588379, 0.04331688582897186, -0.5204671621322632, 0.130441352725029, 0.22577956318855286, ...	5	Mammoth Cave National Park, located in southern Kentucky features the world’s longest recorded cave system. In all, more than 360 miles of caves have been mapped and explored. Scientists believe there may be another 600 miles of caves yet to be explored. In addition to the amazing cave system, the park is located along the Green River, one of the most biologically diverse rivers (in terms of fish and invertebrates) in North America. Before Mammoth Cave became a national park, local farmers who owned nearby tracts of land waged what was called the Kentucky Cave Wars, a bitter competition between land owners to lure tourists to caves on their properties. "Cappers," as they came to known as, would trick tourists into believing the main caves were closed and would direct them toward lesser caves on their own property. American National Parks Click on a park labeled on the map above to learn more about each park.	190	ENGLISH	1
Some of the links in this post may be affiliate links. If make a purchase through these links, we receive a commission at no extra cost to you. Please see our disclosure for more info. What you’ll get on this page: Winston Churchill was a famous British politician who was born on November 30th 1874 in Woodstock, England. His early life was spent in Dublin but he returned to England to attend school. Even though he didn’t excel in school, Churchill enrolled in the Royal Military College. After graduating, he joined the British Calvary. During his time in the military, he traveled extensively and wrote about his experiences. In 1908, he married Clementine Hozier, and the couple went on to have five children together. It was during this time that Churchill began his illustrious political career. He became a member of Parliament in 1900, and when Neville Chamberlain resigned in 1940 during the second World War, Churchill took his place as Prime Minister of England. It was thought that his leadership was the reason for the defeat of Hitler. Churchill lost the 1945 election, but regained his position as Prime Minister in 1951. In January 1965, Churchill died at the age of 90. His speeches during the war conveyed strength and courage to the population of Great Britain in the face of adversity, and with his candor and wit, he gained much favor among the British people. These dynamic Winston Churchill quotes prove he was a powerful force in the twentieth century and beyond.	<urn:uuid:059ef405-1496-49c5-8226-8ae10a4c8153>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.keepinspiring.me/winston-churchill-quotes/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251779833.86/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128153713-20200128183713-00088.warc.gz	en	0.993444	306	3.265625	3	[ -0.42277249693870544, 0.5574103593826294, 0.38711872696876526, -0.2540932893753052, -0.23411977291107178, 0.22077956795692444, 0.5259981155395508, -0.06041685491800308, -0.08635538816452026, 0.4201674461364746, 0.17133331298828125, -0.43325892090797424, 0.36434048414230347, 0.4961079359054...	1	Some of the links in this post may be affiliate links. If make a purchase through these links, we receive a commission at no extra cost to you. Please see our disclosure for more info. What you’ll get on this page: Winston Churchill was a famous British politician who was born on November 30th 1874 in Woodstock, England. His early life was spent in Dublin but he returned to England to attend school. Even though he didn’t excel in school, Churchill enrolled in the Royal Military College. After graduating, he joined the British Calvary. During his time in the military, he traveled extensively and wrote about his experiences. In 1908, he married Clementine Hozier, and the couple went on to have five children together. It was during this time that Churchill began his illustrious political career. He became a member of Parliament in 1900, and when Neville Chamberlain resigned in 1940 during the second World War, Churchill took his place as Prime Minister of England. It was thought that his leadership was the reason for the defeat of Hitler. Churchill lost the 1945 election, but regained his position as Prime Minister in 1951. In January 1965, Churchill died at the age of 90. His speeches during the war conveyed strength and courage to the population of Great Britain in the face of adversity, and with his candor and wit, he gained much favor among the British people. These dynamic Winston Churchill quotes prove he was a powerful force in the twentieth century and beyond.	328	ENGLISH	1
Marco Polo (1254 to January 8, 1324) was a Venetian explorer known for the book The Travels of Marco Polo, which describes his voyage to and experiences in Asia. Polo traveled extensively with his family, journeying from Europe to Asia from 1271 to 1295 and remaining in China for. Marco Polo was a merchant and explorer who traveled throughout the Far East and China for much of his life. His stories were the basis for what much of Europe . Marco Polo was an Italian merchant, explorer, and writer who travelled through Asia along the Life. Family origin. Corte del Milion is still named after the nickname of Polo, "Il Milione". Marco Polo was born in 1254 in (Young Adult novel). Marco Polo was the legendary Italian merchant, explorer and Read this biography to learn more about his profile, childhood, life and timeline.	<urn:uuid:52eb96f2-dbc4-4326-a221-1bfc0901aef2>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://navacerrada.info/adult09-2019-52/marco-polo-adult-life-83.php	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783342.96/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128215526-20200129005526-00257.warc.gz	en	0.985528	179	3.828125	4	[ -0.12436617910861969, -0.09432488679885864, 0.07035678625106812, -0.4449408948421478, -0.38212069869041443, -0.38729327917099, 0.548988401889801, 0.10252339392900467, -0.008063534274697304, -0.5423032641410828, 0.28148365020751953, -0.8534842729568481, 0.10928981006145477, 0.40174075961112...	2	Marco Polo (1254 to January 8, 1324) was a Venetian explorer known for the book The Travels of Marco Polo, which describes his voyage to and experiences in Asia. Polo traveled extensively with his family, journeying from Europe to Asia from 1271 to 1295 and remaining in China for. Marco Polo was a merchant and explorer who traveled throughout the Far East and China for much of his life. His stories were the basis for what much of Europe . Marco Polo was an Italian merchant, explorer, and writer who travelled through Asia along the Life. Family origin. Corte del Milion is still named after the nickname of Polo, "Il Milione". Marco Polo was born in 1254 in (Young Adult novel). Marco Polo was the legendary Italian merchant, explorer and Read this biography to learn more about his profile, childhood, life and timeline.	191	ENGLISH	1
Answered You can hire a professional tutor to get the answer. Your assignment is to prepare and submit a paper on why is abraham lincoln considered to be the nation€™s greatest president in your answer, be sure to analyze the essence of the lincoln legacy and co Your assignment is to prepare and submit a paper on why is abraham lincoln considered to be the nation€™s greatest president in your answer, be sure to analyze the essence of the lincoln legacy and consider how he lives on in american memory. Abraham Lincoln Abraham Lincoln was born was the president of the United s of America in the period 1861-1865. He was the 16th president, whoseterm in office was abruptly ended when he was assassinated. His assassination is recorded as being the first for a U.S. president. He is considered by many laymen and historians to be one of the greatest Americans who ever lived. This is in reference to his memorable speeches including the one inscribed in the Lincoln Memorial, and his numerous acts of bravery, dedication and leadership ability. Reasons for his being respected Lincoln was respected a lot because though he was from a poor family and had scant formal education, he saw to it that the nation held together during its worst crisis recorded in history. He not only won the civil war but ended the institution of slavery also. A leader with a fainter vision or a weaker will would not have achieved all these in such a short period. For these reasons, Lincoln is regarded by some people as ‘the great Emancipator’ and ‘the savior of the American Union’. He is even regarded as a martyr for the way he was assassinated. The Republican Party, of which Lincoln was leader, had campaigned against slavery during the elections and won the 1960 elections. This election victory resulted in seven southern states declaring their withdrawal from the U.S forming the confederacy which stood for Confederate States of America. In 1861, the confederate forces staged an attack on a U.S military installation to which Lincoln responded by calling for volunteer armies from all states. This call led to four more states declaring their withdrawal from the U.S. The civil war then started between the United States, known at that time as the Union, and the Confederate. In 1862, Abraham Lincoln made an emancipation proclamation which not only deterred the British from getting involved but also made the war have the goal of ending slavery in the southern states. The war continued with both sides reporting victories and losses. In April 1865 the Confederate suffered huge losses and surrendered to the Union. The war, being the worst war in American history, had claimed the lives of over 600,000 solders with an unknown number of civilians. The victory, under his leadership, of the U.S. resulted in the absolution of slavery to date, the coming together of all states and the strengthening of the position of the federal government. Abrahams Lincoln’s high status as the greatest president of the U.S. was well deserved for the way he led the war and won. Being a person of gentle spirit, he embraced the fact that only a spirited fight in the war would re-establish the Union. Lincoln’s will to emerge victorious never went down despite enormous political opposition and the huge number of casualties of the war. During the war, Abraham Lincoln surprised many with his military strategy. which eventually led to victory. In many people’s view, Abraham Lincoln was a man of unmatched integrity, and a superb political leader and manager who in spite of several risks strived to uphold democracy and to liberate his people both socially and politically.	<urn:uuid:27dfe2b3-4cb3-478c-bf1e-eb02c9252c16>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://studydaddy.com/question/your-assignment-is-to-prepare-and-submit-a-paper-on-why-is-abraham-lincoln-consi	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598800.30/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120135447-20200120164447-00368.warc.gz	en	0.983064	752	3.40625	3	[ -0.25487276911735535, 0.7780052423477173, 0.08988763391971588, -0.1387983113527298, -0.2750132977962494, 0.24885974824428558, 0.4806758165359497, 0.006420749705284834, -0.1664046347141266, 0.07060131430625916, 0.05103224143385887, 0.2599506676197052, 0.10928590595722198, 0.5511176586151123...	2	Answered You can hire a professional tutor to get the answer. Your assignment is to prepare and submit a paper on why is abraham lincoln considered to be the nation€™s greatest president in your answer, be sure to analyze the essence of the lincoln legacy and co Your assignment is to prepare and submit a paper on why is abraham lincoln considered to be the nation€™s greatest president in your answer, be sure to analyze the essence of the lincoln legacy and consider how he lives on in american memory. Abraham Lincoln Abraham Lincoln was born was the president of the United s of America in the period 1861-1865. He was the 16th president, whoseterm in office was abruptly ended when he was assassinated. His assassination is recorded as being the first for a U.S. president. He is considered by many laymen and historians to be one of the greatest Americans who ever lived. This is in reference to his memorable speeches including the one inscribed in the Lincoln Memorial, and his numerous acts of bravery, dedication and leadership ability. Reasons for his being respected Lincoln was respected a lot because though he was from a poor family and had scant formal education, he saw to it that the nation held together during its worst crisis recorded in history. He not only won the civil war but ended the institution of slavery also. A leader with a fainter vision or a weaker will would not have achieved all these in such a short period. For these reasons, Lincoln is regarded by some people as ‘the great Emancipator’ and ‘the savior of the American Union’. He is even regarded as a martyr for the way he was assassinated. The Republican Party, of which Lincoln was leader, had campaigned against slavery during the elections and won the 1960 elections. This election victory resulted in seven southern states declaring their withdrawal from the U.S forming the confederacy which stood for Confederate States of America. In 1861, the confederate forces staged an attack on a U.S military installation to which Lincoln responded by calling for volunteer armies from all states. This call led to four more states declaring their withdrawal from the U.S. The civil war then started between the United States, known at that time as the Union, and the Confederate. In 1862, Abraham Lincoln made an emancipation proclamation which not only deterred the British from getting involved but also made the war have the goal of ending slavery in the southern states. The war continued with both sides reporting victories and losses. In April 1865 the Confederate suffered huge losses and surrendered to the Union. The war, being the worst war in American history, had claimed the lives of over 600,000 solders with an unknown number of civilians. The victory, under his leadership, of the U.S. resulted in the absolution of slavery to date, the coming together of all states and the strengthening of the position of the federal government. Abrahams Lincoln’s high status as the greatest president of the U.S. was well deserved for the way he led the war and won. Being a person of gentle spirit, he embraced the fact that only a spirited fight in the war would re-establish the Union. Lincoln’s will to emerge victorious never went down despite enormous political opposition and the huge number of casualties of the war. During the war, Abraham Lincoln surprised many with his military strategy. which eventually led to victory. In many people’s view, Abraham Lincoln was a man of unmatched integrity, and a superb political leader and manager who in spite of several risks strived to uphold democracy and to liberate his people both socially and politically.	758	ENGLISH	1
Tiradentes Day in Brazil is celebrated every 21 April and commemorates the death of Joaquim Jose da Silva Xavier who was also known as Tiradentes. \|2020\|\|21 Apr\|\|Tue\|\|Tiradentes Day\| \|2021\|\|21 Apr\|\|Wed\|\|Tiradentes Day\| Joaquim Jose da Silva Xavier was born to a poor family in Pombal. After the death of his parents, he was adopted by his godfather and moved to Vila Rica where he was taught by a tutor who was also a surgeon. While Brazil was under Portuguese rule, the government levied heavy taxes on Brazilians. While in the military, Joaquim Jose da Silva Xavier witnessed exploitation of Brazilians by the Portuguese which led him to begin a liberation movement known as Inconfidencia Mineira, hoping to help Brazil gain independence from Portugal. He was influenced by the success of the American Revolution and he attempted to lead a rebellion when Portuguese officials attempted to collect taxes. His goal was to overthrow the government in February 1789, but one of the members of his group betrayed him. He was arrested along with others who were named as co-conspirators. The trial lasted three years, during which Xavier was given the name Tiradentes, one that was meant to be derogatory but which he embraced. Tiradentes maintained that he was the leader of the rebellion and took full responsibility. On 21 April, 1792, Tiradentes was hanged and quartered in a public ceremony in Rio de Janeiro. After dismemberment, his body was paraded throughout the region in an effort to discourage any further uprisings. Although all of his co-conspirators were also sentenced to death, his was the only death sentence carried out after the uprising. His brutal execution led him to be considered a martyr to those still fighting for independence. Today, he is regarded as a national hero despite the fact that his rebellion was unsuccessful. Many believe it was the start of what eventually led to Brazil’s independence, however. Portugal declared Brazil independent 32 years after the death of Tiradentes.	<urn:uuid:2175b0d0-6e54-4647-88ae-b2d03ba13704>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://publicholidays.com.br/tiradentes-day/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251788528.85/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129041149-20200129071149-00223.warc.gz	en	0.991178	445	3.65625	4	[ -0.2070450782775879, 0.35761985182762146, 0.9137694239616394, -0.051715221256017685, 0.05128815770149231, -0.0003623864322435111, 0.10609446465969086, 0.46794384717941284, 0.1652822494506836, 0.2677842974662781, 0.015672950074076653, -0.5794355273246765, -0.29047614336013794, 0.30620709061...	1	Tiradentes Day in Brazil is celebrated every 21 April and commemorates the death of Joaquim Jose da Silva Xavier who was also known as Tiradentes. \|2020\|\|21 Apr\|\|Tue\|\|Tiradentes Day\| \|2021\|\|21 Apr\|\|Wed\|\|Tiradentes Day\| Joaquim Jose da Silva Xavier was born to a poor family in Pombal. After the death of his parents, he was adopted by his godfather and moved to Vila Rica where he was taught by a tutor who was also a surgeon. While Brazil was under Portuguese rule, the government levied heavy taxes on Brazilians. While in the military, Joaquim Jose da Silva Xavier witnessed exploitation of Brazilians by the Portuguese which led him to begin a liberation movement known as Inconfidencia Mineira, hoping to help Brazil gain independence from Portugal. He was influenced by the success of the American Revolution and he attempted to lead a rebellion when Portuguese officials attempted to collect taxes. His goal was to overthrow the government in February 1789, but one of the members of his group betrayed him. He was arrested along with others who were named as co-conspirators. The trial lasted three years, during which Xavier was given the name Tiradentes, one that was meant to be derogatory but which he embraced. Tiradentes maintained that he was the leader of the rebellion and took full responsibility. On 21 April, 1792, Tiradentes was hanged and quartered in a public ceremony in Rio de Janeiro. After dismemberment, his body was paraded throughout the region in an effort to discourage any further uprisings. Although all of his co-conspirators were also sentenced to death, his was the only death sentence carried out after the uprising. His brutal execution led him to be considered a martyr to those still fighting for independence. Today, he is regarded as a national hero despite the fact that his rebellion was unsuccessful. Many believe it was the start of what eventually led to Brazil’s independence, however. Portugal declared Brazil independent 32 years after the death of Tiradentes.	448	ENGLISH	1
2. Both before and after Shakespeare, entertainment trumped historical accuracy In nearly all of his historical dramas, Shakespeare’s main objective was to produce a play which would entertain and be accepted by his audience. In his historical plays, timelines were compressed. Events were presented out of order or omitted entirely. Almost solely from Shakespeare comes King Richard III’s reputation as a twisted, evil tyrant, a dramatic license he took with the character. In the play of that name the title character is thoroughly corrupt, evil to his core. He is also remembered for being severely deformed, another device used by Shakespeare so that his physical appearance on stage was as vile as his character. Throughout the succeeding centuries Richard III had his share of both detractors and defenders. Several noted British scholars supported the Shakespearian view, while others argued that his character, and his deformity, had been exaggerated by his detractors. He remains a divisive character of British history, but more recent scholars and historians have revised their judgments of his life and reign. “Like most men, he was conditioned by the standards of his age”, wrote historian Charles Ross in a 1981 biography. The discovery and analysis of Richard’s skeletal remains in the 21st century revealed that he did suffer from scoliosis, with one shoulder noticeable higher than the other, but he was not the gnarled humpback as depicted in Shakespeare’s play.	<urn:uuid:8155e17d-72d6-4c83-8cfc-79b05b330189>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://historycollection.co/how-the-entertainment-industry-distorts-history/2/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250607596.34/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122221541-20200123010541-00083.warc.gz	en	0.992516	289	3.46875	3	[ -0.22050972282886505, 0.2177710235118866, 0.5710916519165039, -0.16354621946811676, -0.20239858329296112, -0.11736039072275162, 0.3539504408836365, 0.08176589012145996, -0.14506055414676666, -0.27284207940101624, 0.03326971083879471, 0.017153548076748848, -0.03184681758284569, 0.0600139088...	2	2. Both before and after Shakespeare, entertainment trumped historical accuracy In nearly all of his historical dramas, Shakespeare’s main objective was to produce a play which would entertain and be accepted by his audience. In his historical plays, timelines were compressed. Events were presented out of order or omitted entirely. Almost solely from Shakespeare comes King Richard III’s reputation as a twisted, evil tyrant, a dramatic license he took with the character. In the play of that name the title character is thoroughly corrupt, evil to his core. He is also remembered for being severely deformed, another device used by Shakespeare so that his physical appearance on stage was as vile as his character. Throughout the succeeding centuries Richard III had his share of both detractors and defenders. Several noted British scholars supported the Shakespearian view, while others argued that his character, and his deformity, had been exaggerated by his detractors. He remains a divisive character of British history, but more recent scholars and historians have revised their judgments of his life and reign. “Like most men, he was conditioned by the standards of his age”, wrote historian Charles Ross in a 1981 biography. The discovery and analysis of Richard’s skeletal remains in the 21st century revealed that he did suffer from scoliosis, with one shoulder noticeable higher than the other, but he was not the gnarled humpback as depicted in Shakespeare’s play.	288	ENGLISH	1

Subsets and Splits

No community queries yet

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