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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Odysseus – An Epic Hero
My definition of a literary epic hero is “a character who is clever, brave, and a good fighter. ” In the epic poem “The Odyssey,” the main character, Odysseus, fits this definition perfectly. Odysseus is incredibly clever, like in the episode “The Cyclops. ” He is also brave. The episode “Sailing from Troy” showed that. Finally, the episode called “Odysseus’s Revenge” proves that he is a strong fighter. Odysseus can be considered an epic hero because he has some of the characteristics necessary to be one.
In the episode “The Cyclops,” Odysseus is shown having the epic trait of cleverness. Odysseus and his men were sailing home from fighting in the Trojan War, when a sudden wind and current change sent them off course. After fighting the Cicones on the island Ismarus and being tempted by sleep-inducing lotus flowers, they find themselves landed on the beaches of the Island of Cyclopes. They go to explore one’s cave, but they get trapped. To escape, Odysseus gets the Cyclops drunk, and then stabs his eyes so that he’s blinded.
Then, Odysseus and his men hide under the Cyclops’ sheep. The poem says, “I tied them silently together, twining cords of willow from the ogre’s bed, then slung a man under each middle one to ride there safely, shielded on the left and right. So three sheep could convey each man” (378-392). This idea worked well because the Cyclops couldn’t see them, he depended on his hearing and sense of touch to find them in case they try to escape. This was very clever because, since they’re underneath the sheep, though, he cannot hear or feel them passing by him.
Now they have a perfect escape route back to the ship. This proves that Odysseus is very clever. He’s not only clever, though, but also incredibly brave. The episode “Sailing from Troy” proved that Odysseus had another trait of an epic hero: bravery. In this episode, he and his men had just won the Trojan War, and were on their way home when a sudden gust of wind blew their ship slightly off course. Eventually, they landed on the island of the Cicones, called Ismarus. At that point in the poem, the ship was running low on supplies, so they decided to raid the islanders.
In the poem, Odysseus says, “I stormed that place and killed the men who fought. Plunder we took, and we enslaved the women; to make division, equal shares to all” (43-45). As the poem states, Odysseus was brave during the attack, and refused to back down. He could have been killed at any second by one of the Cicones! He knew that they needed supplies, though, so he and the crew kept fighting until they won. Thanks to his bravery, and even some of his fighting skills, Odysseus was not killed in the battle, and they still got some supplies.
A third trait of an epic hero that Odysseus had was his strong fighting skills, shown in the episode “Odysseus’s Revenge. ” He has finally reached his home in Ithaca after twenty years of fighting in the Trojan War and passing through difficult obstacles that tried to stop him. He meets up with the goddess Athena, who informs him that there are suitors in his house that are trying to steal his wife, Penelope, and kill his son, Telemachus. She disguises him as a beggar and he sneaks in.
Penelope tells him and the suitors that whoever can string Odysseus’ bow and shoot an arrow with it through twelve axe handle sockets will win her hand in marriage. Odysseus was the only one who completed the challenge. Then, the poem talks about him killing the suitors, saying, “While he had arrows, he aimed and shot, and every shot brought down one of his enemies” (1523-1524). Then, it said, “Aided by Athena, Odysseus, Telemachus, Eumaeus, and another faithful herdsman kill all the suitors.
And Odysseus looked around him, narrow-eyed, for any others who lain hidden while death’s black fury passed. In blood and dust, he saw that crowd all fallen, many, many lain” (insert under 1530-1534). With only Athena, Telemachus, Eumaeus, and another herdsman to help him, Odysseus killed every suitor, even though it was just five of them against over a hundred suitors! Against all odds, they won the battle with Odysseus’ great skill with his bow. If he hadn’t stopped the suitors, they would’ve taken Penelope and succeeded in killing Telemachus.
Odysseus’ amazing fighting skills show how much of an epic hero he really is. Clearly, Odysseus is an epic hero, because he has some of the characteristics of one. Some of the characteristics he has shown throughout the story include his bravery, cleverness, and excellent fighting skills. His cleverness helped him and his men escape from the Cyclops, and his bravery kept him from backing down to the Cicones when they needed supplies to get home. Thanks to his fighting skills, he saved his wife, son, and home from the suitors. Odysseus truly is an epic hero. | <urn:uuid:4c8d5a8a-ade9-452d-a94d-e60aec9aa491> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://freebooksummary.com/odysseus-an-epic-hero-essay | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251672440.80/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125101544-20200125130544-00373.warc.gz | en | 0.980278 | 1,231 | 3.859375 | 4 | [
-0.4018520712852478,
-0.018559183925390244,
0.18948864936828613,
0.23166386783123016,
-0.3981815278530121,
-0.6376994252204895,
0.4064284563064575,
0.6593184471130371,
-0.04301417991518974,
-0.1426268070936203,
-0.22534143924713135,
-0.3408302962779999,
-0.1632063239812851,
0.2634039223194... | 1 | Odysseus – An Epic Hero
My definition of a literary epic hero is “a character who is clever, brave, and a good fighter. ” In the epic poem “The Odyssey,” the main character, Odysseus, fits this definition perfectly. Odysseus is incredibly clever, like in the episode “The Cyclops. ” He is also brave. The episode “Sailing from Troy” showed that. Finally, the episode called “Odysseus’s Revenge” proves that he is a strong fighter. Odysseus can be considered an epic hero because he has some of the characteristics necessary to be one.
In the episode “The Cyclops,” Odysseus is shown having the epic trait of cleverness. Odysseus and his men were sailing home from fighting in the Trojan War, when a sudden wind and current change sent them off course. After fighting the Cicones on the island Ismarus and being tempted by sleep-inducing lotus flowers, they find themselves landed on the beaches of the Island of Cyclopes. They go to explore one’s cave, but they get trapped. To escape, Odysseus gets the Cyclops drunk, and then stabs his eyes so that he’s blinded.
Then, Odysseus and his men hide under the Cyclops’ sheep. The poem says, “I tied them silently together, twining cords of willow from the ogre’s bed, then slung a man under each middle one to ride there safely, shielded on the left and right. So three sheep could convey each man” (378-392). This idea worked well because the Cyclops couldn’t see them, he depended on his hearing and sense of touch to find them in case they try to escape. This was very clever because, since they’re underneath the sheep, though, he cannot hear or feel them passing by him.
Now they have a perfect escape route back to the ship. This proves that Odysseus is very clever. He’s not only clever, though, but also incredibly brave. The episode “Sailing from Troy” proved that Odysseus had another trait of an epic hero: bravery. In this episode, he and his men had just won the Trojan War, and were on their way home when a sudden gust of wind blew their ship slightly off course. Eventually, they landed on the island of the Cicones, called Ismarus. At that point in the poem, the ship was running low on supplies, so they decided to raid the islanders.
In the poem, Odysseus says, “I stormed that place and killed the men who fought. Plunder we took, and we enslaved the women; to make division, equal shares to all” (43-45). As the poem states, Odysseus was brave during the attack, and refused to back down. He could have been killed at any second by one of the Cicones! He knew that they needed supplies, though, so he and the crew kept fighting until they won. Thanks to his bravery, and even some of his fighting skills, Odysseus was not killed in the battle, and they still got some supplies.
A third trait of an epic hero that Odysseus had was his strong fighting skills, shown in the episode “Odysseus’s Revenge. ” He has finally reached his home in Ithaca after twenty years of fighting in the Trojan War and passing through difficult obstacles that tried to stop him. He meets up with the goddess Athena, who informs him that there are suitors in his house that are trying to steal his wife, Penelope, and kill his son, Telemachus. She disguises him as a beggar and he sneaks in.
Penelope tells him and the suitors that whoever can string Odysseus’ bow and shoot an arrow with it through twelve axe handle sockets will win her hand in marriage. Odysseus was the only one who completed the challenge. Then, the poem talks about him killing the suitors, saying, “While he had arrows, he aimed and shot, and every shot brought down one of his enemies” (1523-1524). Then, it said, “Aided by Athena, Odysseus, Telemachus, Eumaeus, and another faithful herdsman kill all the suitors.
And Odysseus looked around him, narrow-eyed, for any others who lain hidden while death’s black fury passed. In blood and dust, he saw that crowd all fallen, many, many lain” (insert under 1530-1534). With only Athena, Telemachus, Eumaeus, and another herdsman to help him, Odysseus killed every suitor, even though it was just five of them against over a hundred suitors! Against all odds, they won the battle with Odysseus’ great skill with his bow. If he hadn’t stopped the suitors, they would’ve taken Penelope and succeeded in killing Telemachus.
Odysseus’ amazing fighting skills show how much of an epic hero he really is. Clearly, Odysseus is an epic hero, because he has some of the characteristics of one. Some of the characteristics he has shown throughout the story include his bravery, cleverness, and excellent fighting skills. His cleverness helped him and his men escape from the Cyclops, and his bravery kept him from backing down to the Cicones when they needed supplies to get home. Thanks to his fighting skills, he saved his wife, son, and home from the suitors. Odysseus truly is an epic hero. | 1,191 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The term History Play is commonly used to denote the plays (whether tragedies or comedies) in which the action and the major themes of the play are primarily political rather than individual or social. Though Shakespeare did not distinguish between the genres of his plays, when the collected works of Shakespeare was published by his own colleagues in the Chamberlain's- King's company as the First Folio in 1623, the plays, the editors divided them into Comedies, Histories and Tragedies. Though some historical plays show the characteristics of tragedy or comedy, they are different from the regular tragedies and comedies in that they deal only with political matters without straying into other social or metaphysical matters. Thus only the political dimensions of the actions and relationships alone are presented.
Shakespeare wrote ten plays dealing English history and four with Roman history. Though the Roman plays can also be included under history plays, usually those plays which represent the political history of England were termed history plays. The history plays developed from the Morality plays of the early centuries. It was the patriotic spirit which prevailed during the reign of Queen Elizabeth because of the defeat of the Spanish Armada and the threat of foreign invasion, which gave rise to this form of drama. The history plays were popularized by the University wits during this time. Shakespeare's professional rivalry with these dramatists like Marlowe, Greene and others made him try his
hand in this field. These plays were also known as chronicle plays as they were based upon the English Chronicles of Raphael Holinshed and others.
The history plays were more realistic than the other plays of Shakespeare because their plots and major characters were part of history. In his plays Shakespeare omitted some minor characters or gave life to some irrelevant historical figures or he altered some minor historical events and introduced some incidents and characters, which had no historic authenticity. He often distorted chronology and events were condensed. But all these changes were aimed at an effective presentation for the stage and for a sense of veracity. Instead of a mere reproduction of facts, Shakespeare aimed in his history plays to represent a realistic picture of the past.
The ten history plays of Shakespeare were divided into two groups of four plays each (the tetralogies) and two single plays unrelated to either group. The First History Cycle written in the early days of Shakespeare's career consists of the three parts of Henry VI and Richard III. The Second History Cycle consisted of Richard II, Henry IV-Part 1, Henry IV Part 2 and Henry VI and was written late in his career. The two unrelated plays were King John and Henry VIII. Shakespeare wrote the two four-play sequences dealing with the full story of the Wars of the Roses.
The minor tetralogy or the First History Cycle consisted of the three Henry VI... | <urn:uuid:1405feb0-24c6-4bcf-8b34-0a9ed45b1611> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://brightkite.com/essay-on/the-history-plays-of-shakespeare | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606696.26/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122042145-20200122071145-00380.warc.gz | en | 0.98433 | 562 | 3.984375 | 4 | [
0.17912256717681885,
0.049229130148887634,
0.745328962802887,
-0.16543105244636536,
-0.2850345969200134,
0.2591707706451416,
0.09894482046365738,
-0.05417037755250931,
0.06240246072411537,
-0.2816759943962097,
-0.10356321185827255,
-0.06914997100830078,
-0.0340852215886116,
0.2839571833610... | 1 | The term History Play is commonly used to denote the plays (whether tragedies or comedies) in which the action and the major themes of the play are primarily political rather than individual or social. Though Shakespeare did not distinguish between the genres of his plays, when the collected works of Shakespeare was published by his own colleagues in the Chamberlain's- King's company as the First Folio in 1623, the plays, the editors divided them into Comedies, Histories and Tragedies. Though some historical plays show the characteristics of tragedy or comedy, they are different from the regular tragedies and comedies in that they deal only with political matters without straying into other social or metaphysical matters. Thus only the political dimensions of the actions and relationships alone are presented.
Shakespeare wrote ten plays dealing English history and four with Roman history. Though the Roman plays can also be included under history plays, usually those plays which represent the political history of England were termed history plays. The history plays developed from the Morality plays of the early centuries. It was the patriotic spirit which prevailed during the reign of Queen Elizabeth because of the defeat of the Spanish Armada and the threat of foreign invasion, which gave rise to this form of drama. The history plays were popularized by the University wits during this time. Shakespeare's professional rivalry with these dramatists like Marlowe, Greene and others made him try his
hand in this field. These plays were also known as chronicle plays as they were based upon the English Chronicles of Raphael Holinshed and others.
The history plays were more realistic than the other plays of Shakespeare because their plots and major characters were part of history. In his plays Shakespeare omitted some minor characters or gave life to some irrelevant historical figures or he altered some minor historical events and introduced some incidents and characters, which had no historic authenticity. He often distorted chronology and events were condensed. But all these changes were aimed at an effective presentation for the stage and for a sense of veracity. Instead of a mere reproduction of facts, Shakespeare aimed in his history plays to represent a realistic picture of the past.
The ten history plays of Shakespeare were divided into two groups of four plays each (the tetralogies) and two single plays unrelated to either group. The First History Cycle written in the early days of Shakespeare's career consists of the three parts of Henry VI and Richard III. The Second History Cycle consisted of Richard II, Henry IV-Part 1, Henry IV Part 2 and Henry VI and was written late in his career. The two unrelated plays were King John and Henry VIII. Shakespeare wrote the two four-play sequences dealing with the full story of the Wars of the Roses.
The minor tetralogy or the First History Cycle consisted of the three Henry VI... | 565 | ENGLISH | 1 |
As the quest to understand our present has us piecing together as many parts of the past as we can find, a new fossil emerged of an ancient snake with legs.
And just as the paleontologists who dug it up hoped, this fossil illustrated one of our planet’s many incredible stories of its ever-evolving species.
For a long time, researchers have been sitting on certain questions about snakes – such as their origins, and how they lost their legs and limbs. Although there was relative certainty that snakes had evolved from their limbed fellow lizard reptiles, and aquatic snakes were already known to have limbs, this fossil from Argentina’s Río Negro Province was the missing evidence that they were waiting for of land snakes with a history of limbs.
In fact, they had the rear-limbed body of this specimen, and suspected it was a snake. But its quintessential snake skull was the only way they could be certain.
Snake skulls provide the species with their unique ability to both capture and consume food without limbs, which enabled them to survive without them in the first place. But for a long time now, it was hypothesized that snakes had evolved from small, worm-like burrowing lizards, and that their skulls grew to compensate for their dietary survival. But a bone (called the jugal) which was found in this old fossil skull with not one but two of the same parts as its lizard ancestors, linking it to both lizards and to modern-day snakes which retain only one part, prove otherwise.
Their skulls were, in fact, large first – like lizards – and because of the predatory advantage it gave them, their bodies were able to shrink around it. Essentially, we can see from Najash is that snakes were evolving towards the skull mobility necessary to ingest larger prey items – the landmark feature of most modern snakes.
Unlike the marine snake fossils, this specimen was not flattened by the weight of overlying sediments as it would have been in water, but was amazingly preserved in three dimensions. | <urn:uuid:f3fee5e8-f41d-4283-892b-4a13b9e243a2> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.ninjajournalist.com/science/everyone-wrong-snake-leg-fossil/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783342.96/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128215526-20200129005526-00166.warc.gz | en | 0.989763 | 416 | 3.84375 | 4 | [
-0.6794402599334717,
0.15973007678985596,
0.4681561291217804,
0.12503784894943237,
-0.1571512520313263,
-0.13779889047145844,
0.09940534085035324,
0.1886841505765915,
-0.1616065353155136,
0.43314310908317566,
0.26376891136169434,
-0.4866319000720978,
0.4086868166923523,
0.19499196112155914... | 14 | As the quest to understand our present has us piecing together as many parts of the past as we can find, a new fossil emerged of an ancient snake with legs.
And just as the paleontologists who dug it up hoped, this fossil illustrated one of our planet’s many incredible stories of its ever-evolving species.
For a long time, researchers have been sitting on certain questions about snakes – such as their origins, and how they lost their legs and limbs. Although there was relative certainty that snakes had evolved from their limbed fellow lizard reptiles, and aquatic snakes were already known to have limbs, this fossil from Argentina’s Río Negro Province was the missing evidence that they were waiting for of land snakes with a history of limbs.
In fact, they had the rear-limbed body of this specimen, and suspected it was a snake. But its quintessential snake skull was the only way they could be certain.
Snake skulls provide the species with their unique ability to both capture and consume food without limbs, which enabled them to survive without them in the first place. But for a long time now, it was hypothesized that snakes had evolved from small, worm-like burrowing lizards, and that their skulls grew to compensate for their dietary survival. But a bone (called the jugal) which was found in this old fossil skull with not one but two of the same parts as its lizard ancestors, linking it to both lizards and to modern-day snakes which retain only one part, prove otherwise.
Their skulls were, in fact, large first – like lizards – and because of the predatory advantage it gave them, their bodies were able to shrink around it. Essentially, we can see from Najash is that snakes were evolving towards the skull mobility necessary to ingest larger prey items – the landmark feature of most modern snakes.
Unlike the marine snake fossils, this specimen was not flattened by the weight of overlying sediments as it would have been in water, but was amazingly preserved in three dimensions. | 404 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The First Martyrs of the Holy Roman Church (Feast: June 30)
In July of the year 64, more than half of Rome was destroyed by a fire that lasted for nine days. Rumor blamed the tragedy on the Emperor Nero, who was said to have set flame to the grand city.
On the third day of the fire, dressed in theatrical costume and singing with his lyre, he surveyed the flaming ruins (“Nero fiddled while Rome burned” is the often-used phrase).
More and more people began to blame Nero for the desolation. Alarmed, the emperor shifted the blame to the Christians, and had them seized and tortured to death in public. Some were burned as living torches at evening banquets, some crucified and others were fed to wild animals.
Though the Romans were hardened to cruelty by the display of the gladiator’s arena, the brutality toward the Christians caused horror and pity in many of those who witnessed the scenes.
According to the historian Tacitus, many Christians were put to death even though no one believed them to be guilty.
DAILY QUOTE for January 29, 2020
SAINT OF THE DAY
St. Gildas the Wise
Many centuries ago, three young nuns lived together in a convent. Day after day, they took their meals together, they went to chapel together, and they prayed and sang together. | <urn:uuid:8ddb38bb-8249-44d5-a2d5-eb9e7d05f167> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.americaneedsfatima.org/Saints-Heroes/the-first-martyrs-of-the-holy-roman-church.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251799918.97/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129133601-20200129163601-00478.warc.gz | en | 0.984341 | 289 | 3.375 | 3 | [
-0.32478705048561096,
0.5894385576248169,
0.28504836559295654,
-0.157396137714386,
0.1715334802865982,
-0.05302717909216881,
-0.26298075914382935,
0.42219728231430054,
0.44466930627822876,
-0.32690152525901794,
0.04627231881022453,
-0.11234957724809647,
-0.12411186844110489,
0.394306927919... | 1 | The First Martyrs of the Holy Roman Church (Feast: June 30)
In July of the year 64, more than half of Rome was destroyed by a fire that lasted for nine days. Rumor blamed the tragedy on the Emperor Nero, who was said to have set flame to the grand city.
On the third day of the fire, dressed in theatrical costume and singing with his lyre, he surveyed the flaming ruins (“Nero fiddled while Rome burned” is the often-used phrase).
More and more people began to blame Nero for the desolation. Alarmed, the emperor shifted the blame to the Christians, and had them seized and tortured to death in public. Some were burned as living torches at evening banquets, some crucified and others were fed to wild animals.
Though the Romans were hardened to cruelty by the display of the gladiator’s arena, the brutality toward the Christians caused horror and pity in many of those who witnessed the scenes.
According to the historian Tacitus, many Christians were put to death even though no one believed them to be guilty.
DAILY QUOTE for January 29, 2020
SAINT OF THE DAY
St. Gildas the Wise
Many centuries ago, three young nuns lived together in a convent. Day after day, they took their meals together, they went to chapel together, and they prayed and sang together. | 288 | ENGLISH | 1 |
World War II as a Time of Opportunities for American Women
World War II was the catalyst that changed the opportunities available to women and eventually the way they were regarded as a viable workforce. Suddenly women throughout the United States were pushing themselves to their limits to support the war effort. Women were fulfilling jobs and responsibilities that many previously believed to be impossible for their gender. Opportunities were opened in steel plants, ammunition factories, and even the United States military. As the war progressed the number of male workers declined dramatically. Society had no choice but to turn to the mothers, sisters, and daughters of our nation for help. The results for each woman varied but the nation was to be forever changed in how it looked at women in the work force. Although employment opportunities after the war were significantly reduced for women due to the return of the male soldiers, the effort and abilities women displayed during these difficult times had far reaching effects. Women's actions in small communities like the Hunter Chemical Plant in Huntsville, Alabama and Bridge and Steel Industrial Plant in Mt Vernon, Ohio changed the way men viewed their physical abilities. The creation of the Women's Air Force Service Pilots (WASP) resulted in changing the way the government viewed women as a viable asset and led the way for the women who serve proudly in today's military. In this paper I will address the change in the attitudes of society and the way small communities and the government itself viewed the physical capabilities of women.
In order to fully recognize and appreciate the changes which occurred in the working environment during this time, we must first understand the employment situation in the United States prior to World War II. ?Government intervention during the depression had mainly given jobs to men, especially in the ?better? jobs like teaching, civil service. Men worked in manufacturing and dominated the professions. Women did clerical work, or worked on the lower scale in a factory, or worked as domestics in other people?s homes.? (Dr Strom and Wood, pg. 1) More married women were at work in the 1930?s than in the 1920?s but they held the lowest paying jobs.
Society at this time did not view women as equals and the pay they received reflected this attitude. ?In 1939 male teachers made an average salary of $1,953 while female teachers were paid a mere 1,394; male social workers averaged $1,718 while their female counterparts received a salary of $1,442. There was an expectation that women worked until they married then their husband would support the family.? (Chafe, pg. 63) This attitude was seen in the salaries women throughout America received prior to and during the early part of the war in small communities and the United States Government.
Even when faced with a shortage of man power most factories were reluctant to... | <urn:uuid:db3396c1-2f15-4095-ad69-47767eaeee43> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://brightkite.com/essay-on/world-war-ii-as-a-period-of-opportunities-for-american-women | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251688806.91/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126104828-20200126134828-00546.warc.gz | en | 0.986556 | 568 | 3.9375 | 4 | [
-0.3508504033088684,
0.31775158643722534,
0.08631588518619537,
0.13012099266052246,
0.001975761726498604,
0.45857274532318115,
-0.143887460231781,
0.1801244020462036,
-0.1665184050798416,
-0.10811492800712585,
0.34422552585601807,
0.2142091542482376,
0.12746071815490723,
0.2427626103162765... | 1 | World War II as a Time of Opportunities for American Women
World War II was the catalyst that changed the opportunities available to women and eventually the way they were regarded as a viable workforce. Suddenly women throughout the United States were pushing themselves to their limits to support the war effort. Women were fulfilling jobs and responsibilities that many previously believed to be impossible for their gender. Opportunities were opened in steel plants, ammunition factories, and even the United States military. As the war progressed the number of male workers declined dramatically. Society had no choice but to turn to the mothers, sisters, and daughters of our nation for help. The results for each woman varied but the nation was to be forever changed in how it looked at women in the work force. Although employment opportunities after the war were significantly reduced for women due to the return of the male soldiers, the effort and abilities women displayed during these difficult times had far reaching effects. Women's actions in small communities like the Hunter Chemical Plant in Huntsville, Alabama and Bridge and Steel Industrial Plant in Mt Vernon, Ohio changed the way men viewed their physical abilities. The creation of the Women's Air Force Service Pilots (WASP) resulted in changing the way the government viewed women as a viable asset and led the way for the women who serve proudly in today's military. In this paper I will address the change in the attitudes of society and the way small communities and the government itself viewed the physical capabilities of women.
In order to fully recognize and appreciate the changes which occurred in the working environment during this time, we must first understand the employment situation in the United States prior to World War II. ?Government intervention during the depression had mainly given jobs to men, especially in the ?better? jobs like teaching, civil service. Men worked in manufacturing and dominated the professions. Women did clerical work, or worked on the lower scale in a factory, or worked as domestics in other people?s homes.? (Dr Strom and Wood, pg. 1) More married women were at work in the 1930?s than in the 1920?s but they held the lowest paying jobs.
Society at this time did not view women as equals and the pay they received reflected this attitude. ?In 1939 male teachers made an average salary of $1,953 while female teachers were paid a mere 1,394; male social workers averaged $1,718 while their female counterparts received a salary of $1,442. There was an expectation that women worked until they married then their husband would support the family.? (Chafe, pg. 63) This attitude was seen in the salaries women throughout America received prior to and during the early part of the war in small communities and the United States Government.
Even when faced with a shortage of man power most factories were reluctant to... | 582 | ENGLISH | 1 |
BEFORE THE CAR WAS A ‘HUMAN CAR’
By Our Reporter
Since time immemorial, comfort has been everything. No wonder transportation is almost never just about getting from point A-Z. The means one uses therefore ought to matter, especially if said person has royalty flowing through their blood. See, by virtue of their status, Kings and queens will use the
best of the best. But there was a time before engines, a time when humans had to be the transport that was needed.
In fact, in Africa, historians will insist it was different before the colonialists stepped foot in the country. They will also argue that this was partly because there were no paved highways that were sizeable or smooth enough to accommodate cars. But we had a solution; a litter, a human car!
A litter is a class of human-powered transport operated the same way as stretchers. Typically, most took the shape of an open chair or bed sheltered by single doored umbrellas made of plant fiber or leaves. They were supported by two parallel handles made of hardwood that doesn’t break easily, like mahogany. Kings would be ferried by two or more subjects depending on his weight. Though most subjects preferred placing the carrying poles on their shoulders as it was effective. Occasionally they carried it by hand especially if the king in question had a fright for landing hard on the ground—in situations where porters miscalculated their strides or slid.
These were popular among the Iru, Kiga and Bunyoro Kingdoms and came in two types. One for the rainy seasons and one for the dry. Whilst the shelter of the former was usually thatched tightly to prevent easy penetration of water, the latter was made of colourful hand woven reeds. To ensure that the King got the best litter there was, powerhouse artists in the kingdom were usually tasked with designing the most durable and colourful samples. From their collection, the best was picked. In appreciation, its maker was awarded with cattle, especially among the pastoral tribe. If from a farming tribe, they were usually awarded with chunks of Agricultural land. In comparison to the kings, the queen’s litters were more airy with small compartments where their snacks and necessities would be kept.
Tribal crafts of Uganda by Margaret trowel and K.P Braunholtz
Lango i kara acon (Lango before colonialism), Father Angelo Tarantino | <urn:uuid:7303279b-9f42-4b2d-9fbd-70da4e1ae277> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.viewuganda.ug/blog-uganda/lifestyle/282-before-the-car-was-a-human-car.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251728207.68/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127205148-20200127235148-00286.warc.gz | en | 0.987342 | 501 | 3.453125 | 3 | [
-0.06006868556141853,
0.601945698261261,
0.7089564800262451,
0.3486061096191406,
0.09269464015960693,
0.207602396607399,
0.5603360533714294,
-0.09441940486431122,
-0.12157879769802094,
0.24907615780830383,
-0.03867468982934952,
-0.051840174943208694,
0.030193673446774483,
0.661164820194244... | 2 | BEFORE THE CAR WAS A ‘HUMAN CAR’
By Our Reporter
Since time immemorial, comfort has been everything. No wonder transportation is almost never just about getting from point A-Z. The means one uses therefore ought to matter, especially if said person has royalty flowing through their blood. See, by virtue of their status, Kings and queens will use the
best of the best. But there was a time before engines, a time when humans had to be the transport that was needed.
In fact, in Africa, historians will insist it was different before the colonialists stepped foot in the country. They will also argue that this was partly because there were no paved highways that were sizeable or smooth enough to accommodate cars. But we had a solution; a litter, a human car!
A litter is a class of human-powered transport operated the same way as stretchers. Typically, most took the shape of an open chair or bed sheltered by single doored umbrellas made of plant fiber or leaves. They were supported by two parallel handles made of hardwood that doesn’t break easily, like mahogany. Kings would be ferried by two or more subjects depending on his weight. Though most subjects preferred placing the carrying poles on their shoulders as it was effective. Occasionally they carried it by hand especially if the king in question had a fright for landing hard on the ground—in situations where porters miscalculated their strides or slid.
These were popular among the Iru, Kiga and Bunyoro Kingdoms and came in two types. One for the rainy seasons and one for the dry. Whilst the shelter of the former was usually thatched tightly to prevent easy penetration of water, the latter was made of colourful hand woven reeds. To ensure that the King got the best litter there was, powerhouse artists in the kingdom were usually tasked with designing the most durable and colourful samples. From their collection, the best was picked. In appreciation, its maker was awarded with cattle, especially among the pastoral tribe. If from a farming tribe, they were usually awarded with chunks of Agricultural land. In comparison to the kings, the queen’s litters were more airy with small compartments where their snacks and necessities would be kept.
Tribal crafts of Uganda by Margaret trowel and K.P Braunholtz
Lango i kara acon (Lango before colonialism), Father Angelo Tarantino | 486 | ENGLISH | 1 |
In Terezin Concentration Camp, Hitler transported thousands of Jews to "protect them" from the vagaries and stresses of the war. Although Terezin was not a death camp compared to Auschwitz; the people were not gassed or murdered in many ways and to the survivors, it seemed as a place to avoid a worse fate. It took on the role as more of a prison than a death camp. During the peak of the war, Terezin had over 55,000 Jews in the camp. With the high number in the camps, Terezin developed a feeling of family and a sense of deepened community. Also, because of the high population, thousands died from malnutrition and exposure.
The Red Cross was allowed to visit Terezin once but the Nazis had staged the camp to look more presentable; some of the inmates were dressed up, bakeries were suddenly full of baked goods, and candy shops were filled with bon-bons and other goods. After their visit, the Red Cross said that the Jews were treated alright. Large numbers of families were sent to Terezin and then another large number of families would but transported out of Terezin to Auschwitz, to the east of Terezin. Some of the people who were sent to Terezin were musicians, artists, political prisoners, and more. Some of the artists were sent there for having stole paper to record life in Terezin. Six thousand drawings were hidden and later successfully retrieved. | <urn:uuid:9f75603c-591e-4bb5-9d47-70fe5803a506> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://holocaustproject01.weebly.com/terezin-theresienstadt.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251690095.81/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126165718-20200126195718-00376.warc.gz | en | 0.989689 | 299 | 4.09375 | 4 | [
-0.3876515030860901,
0.684779167175293,
-0.1298413723707199,
0.033509813249111176,
0.13183097541332245,
0.3387067914009094,
0.3864113688468933,
0.0054657491855323315,
-0.21309852600097656,
-0.2587159276008606,
-0.2039339691400528,
0.05021718144416809,
-0.1172909215092659,
0.314368963241577... | 2 | In Terezin Concentration Camp, Hitler transported thousands of Jews to "protect them" from the vagaries and stresses of the war. Although Terezin was not a death camp compared to Auschwitz; the people were not gassed or murdered in many ways and to the survivors, it seemed as a place to avoid a worse fate. It took on the role as more of a prison than a death camp. During the peak of the war, Terezin had over 55,000 Jews in the camp. With the high number in the camps, Terezin developed a feeling of family and a sense of deepened community. Also, because of the high population, thousands died from malnutrition and exposure.
The Red Cross was allowed to visit Terezin once but the Nazis had staged the camp to look more presentable; some of the inmates were dressed up, bakeries were suddenly full of baked goods, and candy shops were filled with bon-bons and other goods. After their visit, the Red Cross said that the Jews were treated alright. Large numbers of families were sent to Terezin and then another large number of families would but transported out of Terezin to Auschwitz, to the east of Terezin. Some of the people who were sent to Terezin were musicians, artists, political prisoners, and more. Some of the artists were sent there for having stole paper to record life in Terezin. Six thousand drawings were hidden and later successfully retrieved. | 303 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Imagine learning to read when you’re nearly 100!
Meet Clarence Brazier. Mortified on his first day of school when he couldn’t spell his name (he hadn’t learned the alphabet) and was mocked by other pupils, Clarence ran home and never returned. Shortly afterward, Clarence’s father was blinded in an accident, and the boy took over the family farm. Before Clarence married, he confided his illiteracy to his fiancee, making her promise to tell no one. When his wife died, Clarence was 93, alone, and lost; how would he manage? He taught himself to read, devising homemade primers from mail and packaging. Eventually, he told his daughter, a retired teacher, and she tutored him. Clarence died in 2012, aged 105. This is a well-written ode to motivation, perseverance, and the idea that it’s never too late, but readers may wonder why no one taught Clarence to read outside of school or why his wife did not teach him—these points are not raised in the story. Nevertheless, youngsters who are readers should feel empowered, and those who are not—yet—will take hope. The soft shades of the charming, textured, expressive illustrations aptly convey an old-time–y feel. Clarence is white; a final scene depicts him reading to diverse schoolkids. An informative author’s note includes a photograph of Clarence and sobering data about worldwide illiteracy.
Commendably inspires respect for an older person but leaves some questions unanswered. (Picture book/biography. 5-8) | <urn:uuid:85125f06-c034-4172-9567-15ee82d94487> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-reviews/roy-macgregor/clarences-big-secret/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606975.49/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122101729-20200122130729-00551.warc.gz | en | 0.981194 | 330 | 3.28125 | 3 | [
-0.3183198571205139,
0.21253958344459534,
0.17726851999759674,
-0.3798960745334625,
-0.4633834660053253,
0.36647218465805054,
0.12728789448738098,
0.1463671177625656,
0.12866248190402985,
-0.17371384799480438,
0.1702917367219925,
-0.11475683003664017,
0.1122141182422638,
0.3062241673469543... | 1 | Imagine learning to read when you’re nearly 100!
Meet Clarence Brazier. Mortified on his first day of school when he couldn’t spell his name (he hadn’t learned the alphabet) and was mocked by other pupils, Clarence ran home and never returned. Shortly afterward, Clarence’s father was blinded in an accident, and the boy took over the family farm. Before Clarence married, he confided his illiteracy to his fiancee, making her promise to tell no one. When his wife died, Clarence was 93, alone, and lost; how would he manage? He taught himself to read, devising homemade primers from mail and packaging. Eventually, he told his daughter, a retired teacher, and she tutored him. Clarence died in 2012, aged 105. This is a well-written ode to motivation, perseverance, and the idea that it’s never too late, but readers may wonder why no one taught Clarence to read outside of school or why his wife did not teach him—these points are not raised in the story. Nevertheless, youngsters who are readers should feel empowered, and those who are not—yet—will take hope. The soft shades of the charming, textured, expressive illustrations aptly convey an old-time–y feel. Clarence is white; a final scene depicts him reading to diverse schoolkids. An informative author’s note includes a photograph of Clarence and sobering data about worldwide illiteracy.
Commendably inspires respect for an older person but leaves some questions unanswered. (Picture book/biography. 5-8) | 327 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Colonization of the New World Essay Example
Colonization of the “New World” was very important to those in England, France, and Spain. The countries all wanted to thrive and when they colonized, many things were different. From approximately 1493-1658, the colonization of England, France, and Spain differed in ways such as, how the people lived, how they dressed, and how they behaved.
To commence, Spain was one of the first countries to colonize and started off with more land. The people that lived in the Spanish colonies were treated a bit more on the negative side. In the beginning of the colonization, the Spaniards believed the Indians would be great servants because they were intelligent and could catch on easily. But, as they years went on, they treated them/ had them living as barbarians, dull witted, and stupid. There wasn’t any clothing for the Indians to wear. Most of them would walk around naked, some women would use as much as a plant leaf to cover their parts. As years passed, the Natives were getting more and more furious. They killed the maese de campo and few others and the Spaniards didn’t fight back, even though the natives wanted them to. The colonization by Spain wasn’t a positive experience for the Natives.
On the other hand, England was quite bad but wasn’t as bad. Immigrants were allowed in the colonized areas. The way of living wasn’t good for the Natives. There were a lot of deaths occurring because of disease. There wasn’t much for the people of England to do. They were able to wear clothing but, it wasn’t protecting. They slept on rough mats that made their diseases worse. There were many lonely and poor people in these colonies. Not many people had as much as others had. The colonization by England wasn’t as bad because they didn’t have much negative behavior by the Natives and they tried to make them feel as comfortable as they could.
France was probably the most successful in the colonization of the “New World”. They were second to colonized and ended up with the most states that were colonized mostly in the East. The life style of the Natives wasn’t as hard as they were in Spain and England. The Natives had clothing. They had clothes and shoes of great patterns that they were able to wear. The “savages” would wear shielding and protective clothing from things like rain and snow. The behavior on the other hand wasn’t well. In the later years, the Natives were thought of as violent and cruel by the people of France. Overall, France did their best to keep the Natives in their colonies safe and happy.
In conclusion, the colonization by the three countries differed by how their people lived, behaved, and dressed. In Spain, the natives were thought of as “great servants” and were violent people. Also, they couldn’t wear clothing, expect a plant leaf to cover some parts. In England, there was a lot of disease and death. There were also many lonely and poor people, but the people of England tried to make them as comfortable as they could. Finally, in France, the Natives were able to be clothed and protected. They were also quite violent and cruel to the people of France but, they were kept safe. The colonization from each country was done in a very different way but each country did it in a way that they felt would best benefit themselves and the people living in their colonies.
- A School Lunch Essay Example
- Auschwitz: The Camp of Tears
- Clinical Versus Counseling Psychology Essay Example
- Essay on Colonial Women in New England
- Essay on Hard Power Utilization
- Gods and Heroes in Greek Mythology Essay Example
- My undergraduate experience
- Sumer Civilization Essay Example
- The Discovery of Christopher Columbus
- Walt Whitman Essay Example | <urn:uuid:62677ca2-985e-47fd-ba64-6ff298f13685> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://samples.essaytopicsmasters.com/informative/colonization-of-the-new-world-essay-example | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606696.26/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122042145-20200122071145-00430.warc.gz | en | 0.992058 | 834 | 3.546875 | 4 | [
-0.0690104216337204,
0.0851755291223526,
0.6279622316360474,
-0.059166319668293,
0.11100578308105469,
-0.34645384550094604,
-0.2359563708305359,
0.3552738428115845,
0.01905188150703907,
-0.09175670146942139,
0.3053399622440338,
-0.1519128978252411,
-0.12475200742483139,
0.3574380874633789,... | 1 | Colonization of the New World Essay Example
Colonization of the “New World” was very important to those in England, France, and Spain. The countries all wanted to thrive and when they colonized, many things were different. From approximately 1493-1658, the colonization of England, France, and Spain differed in ways such as, how the people lived, how they dressed, and how they behaved.
To commence, Spain was one of the first countries to colonize and started off with more land. The people that lived in the Spanish colonies were treated a bit more on the negative side. In the beginning of the colonization, the Spaniards believed the Indians would be great servants because they were intelligent and could catch on easily. But, as they years went on, they treated them/ had them living as barbarians, dull witted, and stupid. There wasn’t any clothing for the Indians to wear. Most of them would walk around naked, some women would use as much as a plant leaf to cover their parts. As years passed, the Natives were getting more and more furious. They killed the maese de campo and few others and the Spaniards didn’t fight back, even though the natives wanted them to. The colonization by Spain wasn’t a positive experience for the Natives.
On the other hand, England was quite bad but wasn’t as bad. Immigrants were allowed in the colonized areas. The way of living wasn’t good for the Natives. There were a lot of deaths occurring because of disease. There wasn’t much for the people of England to do. They were able to wear clothing but, it wasn’t protecting. They slept on rough mats that made their diseases worse. There were many lonely and poor people in these colonies. Not many people had as much as others had. The colonization by England wasn’t as bad because they didn’t have much negative behavior by the Natives and they tried to make them feel as comfortable as they could.
France was probably the most successful in the colonization of the “New World”. They were second to colonized and ended up with the most states that were colonized mostly in the East. The life style of the Natives wasn’t as hard as they were in Spain and England. The Natives had clothing. They had clothes and shoes of great patterns that they were able to wear. The “savages” would wear shielding and protective clothing from things like rain and snow. The behavior on the other hand wasn’t well. In the later years, the Natives were thought of as violent and cruel by the people of France. Overall, France did their best to keep the Natives in their colonies safe and happy.
In conclusion, the colonization by the three countries differed by how their people lived, behaved, and dressed. In Spain, the natives were thought of as “great servants” and were violent people. Also, they couldn’t wear clothing, expect a plant leaf to cover some parts. In England, there was a lot of disease and death. There were also many lonely and poor people, but the people of England tried to make them as comfortable as they could. Finally, in France, the Natives were able to be clothed and protected. They were also quite violent and cruel to the people of France but, they were kept safe. The colonization from each country was done in a very different way but each country did it in a way that they felt would best benefit themselves and the people living in their colonies.
- A School Lunch Essay Example
- Auschwitz: The Camp of Tears
- Clinical Versus Counseling Psychology Essay Example
- Essay on Colonial Women in New England
- Essay on Hard Power Utilization
- Gods and Heroes in Greek Mythology Essay Example
- My undergraduate experience
- Sumer Civilization Essay Example
- The Discovery of Christopher Columbus
- Walt Whitman Essay Example | 791 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Known for his battlefield heroics during the late 1840s United States Invasion of Mexico, he is also remembered as Mexico's eleventh President. He assumed the presidency in 1839 and was again in power in 1846 and from 1842 to 1843.
During the second decade of the Nineteenth century, he fought with legendary soldier Hermenegildo Galeana in the Mexican War of Independence.
In 1822, he became Regent of the Mexican Empire; from 1824 to 1827, he served as Vice President of Mexico.
He and his wife died in Guerrero, Mexico on the same day.
During the 1847 Battle of Chapultepec, he became an American prisoner-of-war after being captured by a United States army that included, in its lower ranks, future American Civil War Confederate General Robert E. Lee. | <urn:uuid:bc4edea2-3dab-40e1-b105-c7aaf116695d> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.famousbirthdays.com/people/nicolas-bravo.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251801423.98/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129164403-20200129193403-00461.warc.gz | en | 0.983985 | 172 | 3.34375 | 3 | [
-0.05986730381846428,
0.8827592134475708,
0.6141839623451233,
0.29009810090065,
-0.33924174308776855,
0.04021620750427246,
0.5000497698783875,
0.2179114818572998,
0.2557083070278168,
-0.3907385766506195,
0.29981729388237,
0.028564536944031715,
0.12217989563941956,
0.43939119577407837,
0.... | 3 | Known for his battlefield heroics during the late 1840s United States Invasion of Mexico, he is also remembered as Mexico's eleventh President. He assumed the presidency in 1839 and was again in power in 1846 and from 1842 to 1843.
During the second decade of the Nineteenth century, he fought with legendary soldier Hermenegildo Galeana in the Mexican War of Independence.
In 1822, he became Regent of the Mexican Empire; from 1824 to 1827, he served as Vice President of Mexico.
He and his wife died in Guerrero, Mexico on the same day.
During the 1847 Battle of Chapultepec, he became an American prisoner-of-war after being captured by a United States army that included, in its lower ranks, future American Civil War Confederate General Robert E. Lee. | 194 | ENGLISH | 1 |
In the first decades of the nineteenth century Dundee had been established as an important manufacturing town and port. The topography of the area presented a challenge in gaining access to the agricultural hinterland. Strathmore forms a broad and fertile plain running from northeast to southwest, following the Dean Water and River Isla flowing to the River Tay. Hilly land is located immediately behind Dundee, and a steep and unproductive range of hills, the Sidlaws, presents a second barrier separating Dundee from Strathmore. The need for connection came from both ends: Dundee needed access to Strathmore for processing its jute and hemp products: flax was imported from the Baltic states on a scale unmatched anywhere in Scotland, and the agriculture of Strathmore needed access to a sea port. The sea port might not necessarily be Dundee, and that fact motivated the Burgh Council of Dundee to consider a transport link.
A canal had been proposed in 1817, but a more realistic idea was formed in 1825 when Dundee Burgh Council decided to fund a survey for a railway. Charles Landale was commissioned to undertake the survey. (He was later described as "an apothecary" by General Pasley. Landale proposed a route that passed through a gap in the hills formed by the Glack of Newtyle; the summit of the route was to be at 532 feet (162 m) above sea level. Railway locomotives were primitive and inefficient at this early date and Landale's route involved rope-worked inclined planes: one (the Law Incline) climbing immediately from the Dundee terminal, a level section, a second climb (the Balbeuchly incline), another level section, and a third incline (the Hatton incline) descending to Newtyle. There was no community at Newtyle at that time; the location was simply a railhead. Moreover, the Dundee terminal was not close to the harbour, or even the waterfront, at Dundee.
A Parliamentary Bill was submitted for the line and it was enacted on 26 May 1826; it was the first railway in the north of Scotland.
The line was built with fish-bellied rails on stone blocks, with the rare track gauge of 4 ft 6 1⁄2 in (1,384 mm); the rails were rather light at 28 lbs per foot (42 kg/m). 600 shares were issued at £50 each, that is £30,000, with authorised borrowings of £10,000. These were quickly taken up. The estimated cost of the line was to be £25,600 including £3,700 for the supply of the three stationary steam engines for the inclines, but excluding the cost of land acquisition.
The tunnel in Dundee under the eastern flank of The Law seems to have been added as an afterthought, and difficult tunnelling conditions proved expensive; moreover land acquisition was considerably more expensive than had been allowed for. The Law Tunnel was completed on 21 January 1829, but later in the year the works generally were reported as at a standstill. Landale was dismissed from the service of the company, amid criticisms that he failed to control the contractors properly, and that the estimates had been considerably overspent. The company had exhausted all its capital, and amid considerable acrimony, it decided to seek authorisation for additional capital and for borrowing powers, and these were granted by Act of 29 May 1830: £10,000 in additional shares and £20,000 in borrowing. The Act also conferred powers to extend the line in Dundee to the waterfront, "through the streets", and "the additional funds enabled completion of the line".
The Dundee terminal was at Ward Road on the north side of the town, and immediately ascended Law Hill by a 1 in 10 incline, 1,060 yards (969 m) long; at the top it entered Law Tunnel, about 330 yards (302 m) long; the tunnel was ten feet wide and 10 ft 2in high (3.05 by 3.10 m). There was a level section of 4.75 miles (7.6 km) long, after which the Balbeuchly incline rose at 1 in 25 for 1,700 yards (1,544 m). A further level section followed, also of 4.75 miles (7.6 km) to Hatton. The final incline descended to Newtyle at 1 in 13 for 1,000 yards (914 m).
The track gauge was 4 ft 6 1⁄2 in (1,384 mm) and fish-bellied rails were used, of 28 to 35 lbs per yard (14 to 17.5 kg/m) on stone blocks.
The inclines were all straight; the Law incline was laid with three rails at the top, four in the central section and two at the lower end; a 40 hp (30 kW) high pressure engine was provided. The Balbeuchly incline had only a single track and was worked by a 20 hp (15 kW) condensing engine; the Hatton incline also had a single track and had a similar engine.
A newspaper advertisement stated that the line had been opened for traffic on 16 December 1831, but this was only on the upper levels, not including the Law and Hatton inclines; the extension to the full extent of the line was reported to have taken place on 3 April 1832. 2,645 passengers were carried during April 1832.
The original estimates for the line had assumed a dominant goods traffic, approximately balanced from Dundee and to Dundee. In fact passenger traffic became remarkably buoyant, notwithstanding the lack of attraction at Newtyle. The company introduced a variety of season tickets, and workmen's fares conveying sheep shearers at cheap rates as well as excursionists. The original passenger coaches were said to be old stage coach bodies set on trucks. "Outside" passengers travelled on the roof of the coaches. In fact Marshall states that two old "Tally-Ho" coaches that had been operating on the Perth turnpike, which were fixed to a wagon chassis.
Whishaw described the carriages differently: there were first class carriages and mixed carriages; the latter "resemble an ordinary stage coach, with the addition of an entirely open compartment both before and behind; the middle compartment, which holds only four passengers, is called the extra first class; and each of the open compartments holds eight passengers; altogether twenty." There were about 100 wagons.
There was a sophisticated system of signalling on the inclines: a white board with a black centre was fixed at the foot of the Law Incline, and was turned to face the engine house (at the head of the incline) five minutes before departure time. The engine operator had to wait for the board to be turned before commencing the ascent. A bell was rung in fog, and red and white lights were used at night.
The stations were very crude affairs, and in these early days were more comparable with the places at which stage coaches might pick up and set down; they were at:Ward station, Dundee;
Off-set at back of Law, later known as the Cross Roads;
Off-set at Flour Mill, St Mary's Road, later known as Baldovan;
Off-set at Baldragon;
Foot of Balbeuchly incline;
Top of Balbeuchly incline;
Off-set at Auchterhouse;
The train service consisted of mixed trains leaving both Dundee and Newtyle at 8.00 a.m., 10.00 a.m. and 4.00 p.m. with an additional goods service at 1.00 p.m.
The company was evidently unhappy about the state of the engineering of its line, and in 1832 it commissioned the engineer Nicholas Wood to review it. In fact he generally approved the situation, only commenting that horse traction should be continued "until the traffic should be more developed", and that he "looked forward to the early extension of the line at both ends, particularly at Dundee." This referred to the 1830 authorisation to extend to the harbour in Dundee; in fact this was not carried out until 1836. However he recommended contracting out the management of the operation of the line, clearly a criticism of the current management.
Horse traction was used on the level sections between the inclined planes. From September 1833 steam locomotives were introduced: no. 1, Earl of Airlie and no. 2, Lord Wharncliffe were delivered (on 20 and 25 September respectively) from J & C Carmichael of Dundee. They had the 0-2-4 wheel arrangement. They had single-acting vertical cylinders driving the front wheels through bell cranks; the trailing wheels were mounted in a bogie, a very early implementation of that construction. A third locomotive, no. 3, nicknamed Trotter was delivered from Stirling & Co on 3 March 1834; it was similar to the earlier engines, but a little smaller. A fourth engine, named John Bull, was acquired from Robert Stephenson & Co in April 1836. It was an 0-4-0 of the Planet type. The four locomotives cost about £3,300.
The Earl of Airlie entered service on 29 September 1833 on the level section below Balbeuchly incline.
The introduction of locomotives, and therefore somewhat faster speeds, now showed up the deficiencies in the engineering of the line. Passenger trains averaged 15 mph (24 kph).
Early in 1832 Lord Wharncliffe, as the landlord of the small settlement at Newtyle. offered a prize for the best plan for development of a village there; George Matthewson of Dundee won the prize and his scheme was implemented between 1832 and 1838, somewhat enlarging the community and providing roads and drainage, and water supplies; however the expansion did not materially affect the income of the railway.
The original line had its Dundee terminus at Ward, some considerable distance from the harbour, the principal origin of much of its goods traffic. In 1834 definite plans were prepared for an extension to the harbour; this had been authorised in principle by the original Act. The Burgh was enhancing its dock facilities at the time and wished to encourage railway access, and therefore agreed to the extension through the streets: the line was to run down Lindsay Street, across Nethegate to Yeaman Shire, then turning east to join the Dundee Harbour internal railway lines. There were to be steep inclines: up to 1 in 24: and horse traction was to move two wagons at a time. The extension was completed in February 1837. The Yeaman Shore section was moved from street running to railway property in 1847.
The construction of the line had not been well executed, and maintenance costs were considerable; in addition the three stationary engines were expensive to operate. The shortage of capital at the time of building the line had resulted in heavy loans being taken. The agricultural traffic from Strathmore had not developed as much as had been forecast, so that the lower income and the weekly burden of the outgoings was a serious problem. Operating expenses were high, at 83% of gross revenue; every train required five engines: the three stationary engines and two on the level sections. The outgoings left inadequate funds to service the loan debt.
The company obtained a further Act of Parliament in July 1836 to issue a further 2,000 shares of £50, which would generate £100,000 of new capital. In the event investors were unwilling to buy shares in a loss-making concern, and the shares could only be allocated at a 40% discount; in fact many shares were allocated to creditors.
The Dundee and Newtyle line connected Dundee with Strathmore, but ended there in a deserted location; it covered the difficult terrain crossing the Sidlaw Hills but failed to reach any settlement. Within Strathmore, railway construction would be easy, and in 1835 two small companies were authorised to build outwards from Newtyle. The Newtyle and Coupar Angus Railway was authorised on 21 July 1835 and the Newtyle and Glammiss Railway was authorised on 30 July 1835. (Glammiss is nowadays spelt Glamis.)
The railways were to build a line jointly from the Dundee and Newtyle station at Newtyle northwards and then diverge; the Coupar Angus line then ran west-south-west to that town, opening in February 1837. The Glammiss line would run east-north-east; it opened for goods traffic in 1837, and for passengers on 4 June 1838. The line from Newtyle station to the point of divergence descended at 1 in 100, but it was worked by horse traction, occasionally supplemented by locomotives. The two lines had the same gauge as the Dundee line and were worked in effect as branches of it. Marshall observes that "Neither line was ... successful in bringing in new business."
The Dundee Weekly News of 5 November 1898 carried a report from William M'Intosh who stated that from 1837 to about 1841, during windy weather, a tarpaulin was lashed to the end of the passenger carriage, propelling it by wind power at from 10 to 20 mph.
In 1841 the Dundee and Newtyle had taken a lease of the Coupar Angus line, but they found that they were quite unable to pay the lease charge.
Towards the end of 1844 the company was exploring means of leasing the line, but this was unsuccessful too. Finally in 1846 the Dundee and Perth Railway agreed to lease the line, probably in order to keep the Scottish Midland Junction Railway out. This was authorised by the Dundee and Perth Railway (Amendment) Act of 27 July 1846: the line was leased to the Dundee and Perth for 999 years for £1,400 per annum.
The lease was effective from October 1846. The D&PR took some time to assess its new property, but in 1847 it obtained the Dundee and Newtyle Railway (Widening, Altering and Improving) Act on 2 July 1847. This permitted the opening out of the Law Tunnel and the construction of a deviation by-passing Balbeuchly incline. These works were not in fact carried out at this stage, although in 1849 work was undertaken to convert the gauge to standard gauge. The line closed during October 1849 for the work to be carried out. The opportunity was taken to ease the worst sharp curves. The locomotives Earl of Airlie, Lord Wharnclife and Trotter were converted, but John Bull was sold to contractors.
The Scottish Midland Junction Railway was authorised in 1845 to construct a main line railway from Perth to Forfar, joining Arbroath and Forfar Railway giving ultimate access to Aberdeen. Its intended route through Strathmore meant that the unremunerative Newtyle and Coupar Angus Railway and the Newtyle and Glammiss Railway routes lay directly along a suitable alignment. The SMHR acquired those two small railways, and closed them for upgrading to main line standards, and providing double track. The Eassie to Glamis section closed in July 1846, with the remainder of that line closing in October 1847; the Coupar Angus line closed in November 1847. The SMJR opened from Perth to Forfar on 2 August 1848; a short connecting line was provided at Meigle to join the two routes.
Returning to the Dundee and Newtyle line, an Act was obtained on 21 July 1859 to build by-pass lines. The Balbeuchly incline was avoided by the construction of a line from Rosemill to Auchterhouse; it had a new station at Dronley and Auchterhouse station was relocated. It opened on 1 November 1860. The Lochee deviation ran from Ninewells Junction to Fairmuir Junction, opening on 10 June 1861. This long westward sweep avoided the Law tunnel and incline, and gave better access to the harbour through the Dundee and Perth station in Union Street. Crossroads and Ward stations were closed, and new stations were opened on the deviation at Lochee, Lochee West, Liff.
For the time being the Newtyle incline continued in use, until the Scottish Central Railway took over the Dundee and Perth line in 1863. The new owner obtained powers in 1864 to build a new line past Hatton to a new Newtyle station. In fact the Caledonian Railway absorbed the SCR in 1865, and the work was not completed until 31 August 1868. The original Newtyle station was retained as a goods depot.
Towards the final decades of the nineteenth century, Dundee had expanded northwards and there was a demand for goods facilities in that part of the Burgh. In 1885 a short branch was opened to a goods station at Fairmuir, located in the angle between Clepington Road and Strathmartin Road. It left the main line at Fairmuir Junction, a little to the west of the original incline route, and crossed that route. Fairmuir Junction was aligned to permit through running from Dundee to Fairmuir.
In 1890 the branch was extended eastwards to Maryfield, a further goods station located at Mains Loan and Clepington Road.
The three Newtyle lines had been conceived to carry materials and passengers between Dundee and Strathmore. The Coupar Angus and Glamis lines were now part of the through main line between Perth and Aberdeen, and the importance of traffic to and from Dundee was much reduced: Newtyle and the other locations on the line were simply small rural settlements. (Newtyle had a population of 1,139 in 1861, 883 in 1921 and 766 in 1981.) In the early years of the twentieth century, Dundee was growing in importance, and in size, and travelling to work by train was rising in significance. However, the Newtyle line made wide sweeps to reduce the gradients and the trains were slow and infrequent. When street-running passenger tramways were introduced they abstracted considerable traffic from the line, and decline set in. The Caledonian Railway, as owner of the line, was a constituent of the new London Midland and Scottish Railway under the Railways Act 1921, and the remote and eccentric backwater line was even less significant.
Nationalisation followed in 1948, and road motor transport became more efficient and cheaper, and the railway declined further. Passenger trains between Dundee and Newtyle ceased on 1 October 1955. The Newtyle to Auchterhouse section was closed to goods traffic on 5 May 1958, and the entire line closed on 6 November 1967.
The Strathmore main line remained in use as an express route between Perth and Aberdeen; the closure of wayside stations simplified express train running. The streamlined A4 class pacifics were displaced from East Coast main line passenger express services by diesel locomotives, and found a final duty for some years in the 1960s running three-hour expresses from Glasgow to Aberdeen over the route. This started on 18 June 1962; these were the last steam hauled trains timed at 60 mph (97 km/h) in Britain. The last such steam run was on 14 September 1966. The rationalisation imposed following the Beeching report resulted in only one route between central Scotland and Aberdeen being retained: the route through Dundee and Arbroath. The Strathmore route, between Stanley (north of Perth) and Kinnaber Junction (north of Montrose) closed on 3 April 1967 for through freight and 3 September 1967 for passenger traffic. Stub goods services continued to Brechin and Forfar for some years.
The original Dundee and Newtyle Railway line opened on 16 December 1831 on the upper levels, and throughout on 3 April 1832. At this early date formal stations were not established and passenger stopping places were made where convenient; they were referred to as offsets, that is, setting down places, in many instances. The names used changed from time to time. Balbeuchly was spelt Balbeuchley locally at certain times.
Dundee and Newtyle first main line:Newtyle; opened 3 April 1832; closed 31 August 1868;
Hatton; opened 16 December 1831; closed October 1965;
Auchterhouse; opened 16 December 1831; closed 1 November 1860;
Balbeuchly (Top); opened 16 December 1831; closed 1 November 1860;
Balbeuchly (Foot); closed July 1855;
Baldragon; opened 16 December 1831; closed 1 January 1917; reopened 1 February 1919; closed 10 January 1955;
Flour Depot St Mary's Road Offset; opened 16 December 1831; soon renamed Baldovan; renamed Baldovan and Downfield 1905; closed 10 January 1955;
Back of Law; occasionally also referred to as Top of Law, and Cross Roads; opened 16 December 1831; closed July 1855;
West Ward; variously known and Dundee Ward, and Ward Street; opened 3 April 1832; closed 10 June 1861;
Dundee Harbour; goods only.
Dundee and Newtyle (Caledonian Railway) after opening of the deviations:Newtyle; new station opened 31 August 1868; closed 10 January 1955;
Auchterhouse; opened 1 November 1860;
Dronley; opened 1 November 1860; closed 10 January 1955;
Baldragon; see above;
Baldovan; see Flour Depot above;
Lochee; opened 10 June 1861; closed 10 January 1955;
Victoria; opened 10 June 1861; renamed Camperdown 1862; renamed Lochee West 1896; closed 1 January 1917;
Liff; opened 10 January 1861; closed 10 January 1955;
Ninewells Junction; converging with line from Perth to Dundee.
Newtyle and Coupar Angus Railway:Coupar Angus; opened 24 February 1837; closed 6 September 1847; reopened 2 August 1848; closed 4 September 1967
Ardler; opened 24 February 1837; closed 6 September 1847; reopened 2 August 1848; closed 11 June 1956;
Washington; opened 24 February 1837; closed 6 September 1847;
Newtyle; Dundee and Newtyle station; see above.
Newtyle and Glammiss Railway:Newtyle; Dundee and Newtyle Railway; see above;
Meigle; opened 1861; renamed Alyth Junction 1876; closed 4 September 1967;
Kirkinch; opened 4 June 1838; closed 1847;
Leason Hill; opened 4 June 1838; closed 1847;
Eassie; opened 4 June 1838; closed October 1847; reopened 2 August 1848; closed 11 June 1956;
Glammiss; opened 4 June 1838; name changed to Glamis at uncertain date; closed July 1846; reopened 2 August 1848; closed 11 June 1956.
The archives of the Dundee and Newtyle Railway Company including its minute books are held by Archive Services at the University of Dundee. The same institution also holds the research papers of Professor Stanley Jones relating to the railway and papers gathered on the railway's history by the late Tom Craigie. | <urn:uuid:47e2e8b8-7968-4cc9-b5d2-2063d9c6da94> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://alchetron.com/Dundee-and-Newtyle-Railway | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250610004.56/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123101110-20200123130110-00092.warc.gz | en | 0.984247 | 4,877 | 3.578125 | 4 | [
0.12001842260360718,
-0.43098533153533936,
0.022153031080961227,
-0.09635405987501144,
0.031524717807769775,
-0.2845986783504486,
-0.34923940896987915,
-0.06894653290510178,
-0.3130529522895813,
-0.16265243291854858,
0.03455912694334984,
-0.770927369594574,
0.061288293451070786,
0.33877864... | 1 | In the first decades of the nineteenth century Dundee had been established as an important manufacturing town and port. The topography of the area presented a challenge in gaining access to the agricultural hinterland. Strathmore forms a broad and fertile plain running from northeast to southwest, following the Dean Water and River Isla flowing to the River Tay. Hilly land is located immediately behind Dundee, and a steep and unproductive range of hills, the Sidlaws, presents a second barrier separating Dundee from Strathmore. The need for connection came from both ends: Dundee needed access to Strathmore for processing its jute and hemp products: flax was imported from the Baltic states on a scale unmatched anywhere in Scotland, and the agriculture of Strathmore needed access to a sea port. The sea port might not necessarily be Dundee, and that fact motivated the Burgh Council of Dundee to consider a transport link.
A canal had been proposed in 1817, but a more realistic idea was formed in 1825 when Dundee Burgh Council decided to fund a survey for a railway. Charles Landale was commissioned to undertake the survey. (He was later described as "an apothecary" by General Pasley. Landale proposed a route that passed through a gap in the hills formed by the Glack of Newtyle; the summit of the route was to be at 532 feet (162 m) above sea level. Railway locomotives were primitive and inefficient at this early date and Landale's route involved rope-worked inclined planes: one (the Law Incline) climbing immediately from the Dundee terminal, a level section, a second climb (the Balbeuchly incline), another level section, and a third incline (the Hatton incline) descending to Newtyle. There was no community at Newtyle at that time; the location was simply a railhead. Moreover, the Dundee terminal was not close to the harbour, or even the waterfront, at Dundee.
A Parliamentary Bill was submitted for the line and it was enacted on 26 May 1826; it was the first railway in the north of Scotland.
The line was built with fish-bellied rails on stone blocks, with the rare track gauge of 4 ft 6 1⁄2 in (1,384 mm); the rails were rather light at 28 lbs per foot (42 kg/m). 600 shares were issued at £50 each, that is £30,000, with authorised borrowings of £10,000. These were quickly taken up. The estimated cost of the line was to be £25,600 including £3,700 for the supply of the three stationary steam engines for the inclines, but excluding the cost of land acquisition.
The tunnel in Dundee under the eastern flank of The Law seems to have been added as an afterthought, and difficult tunnelling conditions proved expensive; moreover land acquisition was considerably more expensive than had been allowed for. The Law Tunnel was completed on 21 January 1829, but later in the year the works generally were reported as at a standstill. Landale was dismissed from the service of the company, amid criticisms that he failed to control the contractors properly, and that the estimates had been considerably overspent. The company had exhausted all its capital, and amid considerable acrimony, it decided to seek authorisation for additional capital and for borrowing powers, and these were granted by Act of 29 May 1830: £10,000 in additional shares and £20,000 in borrowing. The Act also conferred powers to extend the line in Dundee to the waterfront, "through the streets", and "the additional funds enabled completion of the line".
The Dundee terminal was at Ward Road on the north side of the town, and immediately ascended Law Hill by a 1 in 10 incline, 1,060 yards (969 m) long; at the top it entered Law Tunnel, about 330 yards (302 m) long; the tunnel was ten feet wide and 10 ft 2in high (3.05 by 3.10 m). There was a level section of 4.75 miles (7.6 km) long, after which the Balbeuchly incline rose at 1 in 25 for 1,700 yards (1,544 m). A further level section followed, also of 4.75 miles (7.6 km) to Hatton. The final incline descended to Newtyle at 1 in 13 for 1,000 yards (914 m).
The track gauge was 4 ft 6 1⁄2 in (1,384 mm) and fish-bellied rails were used, of 28 to 35 lbs per yard (14 to 17.5 kg/m) on stone blocks.
The inclines were all straight; the Law incline was laid with three rails at the top, four in the central section and two at the lower end; a 40 hp (30 kW) high pressure engine was provided. The Balbeuchly incline had only a single track and was worked by a 20 hp (15 kW) condensing engine; the Hatton incline also had a single track and had a similar engine.
A newspaper advertisement stated that the line had been opened for traffic on 16 December 1831, but this was only on the upper levels, not including the Law and Hatton inclines; the extension to the full extent of the line was reported to have taken place on 3 April 1832. 2,645 passengers were carried during April 1832.
The original estimates for the line had assumed a dominant goods traffic, approximately balanced from Dundee and to Dundee. In fact passenger traffic became remarkably buoyant, notwithstanding the lack of attraction at Newtyle. The company introduced a variety of season tickets, and workmen's fares conveying sheep shearers at cheap rates as well as excursionists. The original passenger coaches were said to be old stage coach bodies set on trucks. "Outside" passengers travelled on the roof of the coaches. In fact Marshall states that two old "Tally-Ho" coaches that had been operating on the Perth turnpike, which were fixed to a wagon chassis.
Whishaw described the carriages differently: there were first class carriages and mixed carriages; the latter "resemble an ordinary stage coach, with the addition of an entirely open compartment both before and behind; the middle compartment, which holds only four passengers, is called the extra first class; and each of the open compartments holds eight passengers; altogether twenty." There were about 100 wagons.
There was a sophisticated system of signalling on the inclines: a white board with a black centre was fixed at the foot of the Law Incline, and was turned to face the engine house (at the head of the incline) five minutes before departure time. The engine operator had to wait for the board to be turned before commencing the ascent. A bell was rung in fog, and red and white lights were used at night.
The stations were very crude affairs, and in these early days were more comparable with the places at which stage coaches might pick up and set down; they were at:Ward station, Dundee;
Off-set at back of Law, later known as the Cross Roads;
Off-set at Flour Mill, St Mary's Road, later known as Baldovan;
Off-set at Baldragon;
Foot of Balbeuchly incline;
Top of Balbeuchly incline;
Off-set at Auchterhouse;
The train service consisted of mixed trains leaving both Dundee and Newtyle at 8.00 a.m., 10.00 a.m. and 4.00 p.m. with an additional goods service at 1.00 p.m.
The company was evidently unhappy about the state of the engineering of its line, and in 1832 it commissioned the engineer Nicholas Wood to review it. In fact he generally approved the situation, only commenting that horse traction should be continued "until the traffic should be more developed", and that he "looked forward to the early extension of the line at both ends, particularly at Dundee." This referred to the 1830 authorisation to extend to the harbour in Dundee; in fact this was not carried out until 1836. However he recommended contracting out the management of the operation of the line, clearly a criticism of the current management.
Horse traction was used on the level sections between the inclined planes. From September 1833 steam locomotives were introduced: no. 1, Earl of Airlie and no. 2, Lord Wharncliffe were delivered (on 20 and 25 September respectively) from J & C Carmichael of Dundee. They had the 0-2-4 wheel arrangement. They had single-acting vertical cylinders driving the front wheels through bell cranks; the trailing wheels were mounted in a bogie, a very early implementation of that construction. A third locomotive, no. 3, nicknamed Trotter was delivered from Stirling & Co on 3 March 1834; it was similar to the earlier engines, but a little smaller. A fourth engine, named John Bull, was acquired from Robert Stephenson & Co in April 1836. It was an 0-4-0 of the Planet type. The four locomotives cost about £3,300.
The Earl of Airlie entered service on 29 September 1833 on the level section below Balbeuchly incline.
The introduction of locomotives, and therefore somewhat faster speeds, now showed up the deficiencies in the engineering of the line. Passenger trains averaged 15 mph (24 kph).
Early in 1832 Lord Wharncliffe, as the landlord of the small settlement at Newtyle. offered a prize for the best plan for development of a village there; George Matthewson of Dundee won the prize and his scheme was implemented between 1832 and 1838, somewhat enlarging the community and providing roads and drainage, and water supplies; however the expansion did not materially affect the income of the railway.
The original line had its Dundee terminus at Ward, some considerable distance from the harbour, the principal origin of much of its goods traffic. In 1834 definite plans were prepared for an extension to the harbour; this had been authorised in principle by the original Act. The Burgh was enhancing its dock facilities at the time and wished to encourage railway access, and therefore agreed to the extension through the streets: the line was to run down Lindsay Street, across Nethegate to Yeaman Shire, then turning east to join the Dundee Harbour internal railway lines. There were to be steep inclines: up to 1 in 24: and horse traction was to move two wagons at a time. The extension was completed in February 1837. The Yeaman Shore section was moved from street running to railway property in 1847.
The construction of the line had not been well executed, and maintenance costs were considerable; in addition the three stationary engines were expensive to operate. The shortage of capital at the time of building the line had resulted in heavy loans being taken. The agricultural traffic from Strathmore had not developed as much as had been forecast, so that the lower income and the weekly burden of the outgoings was a serious problem. Operating expenses were high, at 83% of gross revenue; every train required five engines: the three stationary engines and two on the level sections. The outgoings left inadequate funds to service the loan debt.
The company obtained a further Act of Parliament in July 1836 to issue a further 2,000 shares of £50, which would generate £100,000 of new capital. In the event investors were unwilling to buy shares in a loss-making concern, and the shares could only be allocated at a 40% discount; in fact many shares were allocated to creditors.
The Dundee and Newtyle line connected Dundee with Strathmore, but ended there in a deserted location; it covered the difficult terrain crossing the Sidlaw Hills but failed to reach any settlement. Within Strathmore, railway construction would be easy, and in 1835 two small companies were authorised to build outwards from Newtyle. The Newtyle and Coupar Angus Railway was authorised on 21 July 1835 and the Newtyle and Glammiss Railway was authorised on 30 July 1835. (Glammiss is nowadays spelt Glamis.)
The railways were to build a line jointly from the Dundee and Newtyle station at Newtyle northwards and then diverge; the Coupar Angus line then ran west-south-west to that town, opening in February 1837. The Glammiss line would run east-north-east; it opened for goods traffic in 1837, and for passengers on 4 June 1838. The line from Newtyle station to the point of divergence descended at 1 in 100, but it was worked by horse traction, occasionally supplemented by locomotives. The two lines had the same gauge as the Dundee line and were worked in effect as branches of it. Marshall observes that "Neither line was ... successful in bringing in new business."
The Dundee Weekly News of 5 November 1898 carried a report from William M'Intosh who stated that from 1837 to about 1841, during windy weather, a tarpaulin was lashed to the end of the passenger carriage, propelling it by wind power at from 10 to 20 mph.
In 1841 the Dundee and Newtyle had taken a lease of the Coupar Angus line, but they found that they were quite unable to pay the lease charge.
Towards the end of 1844 the company was exploring means of leasing the line, but this was unsuccessful too. Finally in 1846 the Dundee and Perth Railway agreed to lease the line, probably in order to keep the Scottish Midland Junction Railway out. This was authorised by the Dundee and Perth Railway (Amendment) Act of 27 July 1846: the line was leased to the Dundee and Perth for 999 years for £1,400 per annum.
The lease was effective from October 1846. The D&PR took some time to assess its new property, but in 1847 it obtained the Dundee and Newtyle Railway (Widening, Altering and Improving) Act on 2 July 1847. This permitted the opening out of the Law Tunnel and the construction of a deviation by-passing Balbeuchly incline. These works were not in fact carried out at this stage, although in 1849 work was undertaken to convert the gauge to standard gauge. The line closed during October 1849 for the work to be carried out. The opportunity was taken to ease the worst sharp curves. The locomotives Earl of Airlie, Lord Wharnclife and Trotter were converted, but John Bull was sold to contractors.
The Scottish Midland Junction Railway was authorised in 1845 to construct a main line railway from Perth to Forfar, joining Arbroath and Forfar Railway giving ultimate access to Aberdeen. Its intended route through Strathmore meant that the unremunerative Newtyle and Coupar Angus Railway and the Newtyle and Glammiss Railway routes lay directly along a suitable alignment. The SMHR acquired those two small railways, and closed them for upgrading to main line standards, and providing double track. The Eassie to Glamis section closed in July 1846, with the remainder of that line closing in October 1847; the Coupar Angus line closed in November 1847. The SMJR opened from Perth to Forfar on 2 August 1848; a short connecting line was provided at Meigle to join the two routes.
Returning to the Dundee and Newtyle line, an Act was obtained on 21 July 1859 to build by-pass lines. The Balbeuchly incline was avoided by the construction of a line from Rosemill to Auchterhouse; it had a new station at Dronley and Auchterhouse station was relocated. It opened on 1 November 1860. The Lochee deviation ran from Ninewells Junction to Fairmuir Junction, opening on 10 June 1861. This long westward sweep avoided the Law tunnel and incline, and gave better access to the harbour through the Dundee and Perth station in Union Street. Crossroads and Ward stations were closed, and new stations were opened on the deviation at Lochee, Lochee West, Liff.
For the time being the Newtyle incline continued in use, until the Scottish Central Railway took over the Dundee and Perth line in 1863. The new owner obtained powers in 1864 to build a new line past Hatton to a new Newtyle station. In fact the Caledonian Railway absorbed the SCR in 1865, and the work was not completed until 31 August 1868. The original Newtyle station was retained as a goods depot.
Towards the final decades of the nineteenth century, Dundee had expanded northwards and there was a demand for goods facilities in that part of the Burgh. In 1885 a short branch was opened to a goods station at Fairmuir, located in the angle between Clepington Road and Strathmartin Road. It left the main line at Fairmuir Junction, a little to the west of the original incline route, and crossed that route. Fairmuir Junction was aligned to permit through running from Dundee to Fairmuir.
In 1890 the branch was extended eastwards to Maryfield, a further goods station located at Mains Loan and Clepington Road.
The three Newtyle lines had been conceived to carry materials and passengers between Dundee and Strathmore. The Coupar Angus and Glamis lines were now part of the through main line between Perth and Aberdeen, and the importance of traffic to and from Dundee was much reduced: Newtyle and the other locations on the line were simply small rural settlements. (Newtyle had a population of 1,139 in 1861, 883 in 1921 and 766 in 1981.) In the early years of the twentieth century, Dundee was growing in importance, and in size, and travelling to work by train was rising in significance. However, the Newtyle line made wide sweeps to reduce the gradients and the trains were slow and infrequent. When street-running passenger tramways were introduced they abstracted considerable traffic from the line, and decline set in. The Caledonian Railway, as owner of the line, was a constituent of the new London Midland and Scottish Railway under the Railways Act 1921, and the remote and eccentric backwater line was even less significant.
Nationalisation followed in 1948, and road motor transport became more efficient and cheaper, and the railway declined further. Passenger trains between Dundee and Newtyle ceased on 1 October 1955. The Newtyle to Auchterhouse section was closed to goods traffic on 5 May 1958, and the entire line closed on 6 November 1967.
The Strathmore main line remained in use as an express route between Perth and Aberdeen; the closure of wayside stations simplified express train running. The streamlined A4 class pacifics were displaced from East Coast main line passenger express services by diesel locomotives, and found a final duty for some years in the 1960s running three-hour expresses from Glasgow to Aberdeen over the route. This started on 18 June 1962; these were the last steam hauled trains timed at 60 mph (97 km/h) in Britain. The last such steam run was on 14 September 1966. The rationalisation imposed following the Beeching report resulted in only one route between central Scotland and Aberdeen being retained: the route through Dundee and Arbroath. The Strathmore route, between Stanley (north of Perth) and Kinnaber Junction (north of Montrose) closed on 3 April 1967 for through freight and 3 September 1967 for passenger traffic. Stub goods services continued to Brechin and Forfar for some years.
The original Dundee and Newtyle Railway line opened on 16 December 1831 on the upper levels, and throughout on 3 April 1832. At this early date formal stations were not established and passenger stopping places were made where convenient; they were referred to as offsets, that is, setting down places, in many instances. The names used changed from time to time. Balbeuchly was spelt Balbeuchley locally at certain times.
Dundee and Newtyle first main line:Newtyle; opened 3 April 1832; closed 31 August 1868;
Hatton; opened 16 December 1831; closed October 1965;
Auchterhouse; opened 16 December 1831; closed 1 November 1860;
Balbeuchly (Top); opened 16 December 1831; closed 1 November 1860;
Balbeuchly (Foot); closed July 1855;
Baldragon; opened 16 December 1831; closed 1 January 1917; reopened 1 February 1919; closed 10 January 1955;
Flour Depot St Mary's Road Offset; opened 16 December 1831; soon renamed Baldovan; renamed Baldovan and Downfield 1905; closed 10 January 1955;
Back of Law; occasionally also referred to as Top of Law, and Cross Roads; opened 16 December 1831; closed July 1855;
West Ward; variously known and Dundee Ward, and Ward Street; opened 3 April 1832; closed 10 June 1861;
Dundee Harbour; goods only.
Dundee and Newtyle (Caledonian Railway) after opening of the deviations:Newtyle; new station opened 31 August 1868; closed 10 January 1955;
Auchterhouse; opened 1 November 1860;
Dronley; opened 1 November 1860; closed 10 January 1955;
Baldragon; see above;
Baldovan; see Flour Depot above;
Lochee; opened 10 June 1861; closed 10 January 1955;
Victoria; opened 10 June 1861; renamed Camperdown 1862; renamed Lochee West 1896; closed 1 January 1917;
Liff; opened 10 January 1861; closed 10 January 1955;
Ninewells Junction; converging with line from Perth to Dundee.
Newtyle and Coupar Angus Railway:Coupar Angus; opened 24 February 1837; closed 6 September 1847; reopened 2 August 1848; closed 4 September 1967
Ardler; opened 24 February 1837; closed 6 September 1847; reopened 2 August 1848; closed 11 June 1956;
Washington; opened 24 February 1837; closed 6 September 1847;
Newtyle; Dundee and Newtyle station; see above.
Newtyle and Glammiss Railway:Newtyle; Dundee and Newtyle Railway; see above;
Meigle; opened 1861; renamed Alyth Junction 1876; closed 4 September 1967;
Kirkinch; opened 4 June 1838; closed 1847;
Leason Hill; opened 4 June 1838; closed 1847;
Eassie; opened 4 June 1838; closed October 1847; reopened 2 August 1848; closed 11 June 1956;
Glammiss; opened 4 June 1838; name changed to Glamis at uncertain date; closed July 1846; reopened 2 August 1848; closed 11 June 1956.
The archives of the Dundee and Newtyle Railway Company including its minute books are held by Archive Services at the University of Dundee. The same institution also holds the research papers of Professor Stanley Jones relating to the railway and papers gathered on the railway's history by the late Tom Craigie. | 5,459 | ENGLISH | 1 |
To read the texts click on the texts: Ezek 34:11-12,15-17; 1 Cor 15:20-26, 28; Mt 25:31-46
Quas Primas (Latin for “In the first”) was an encyclical of Pope Pius XI promulgated on December 11, 1925. It introduced the Feast of Christ the King. World War I (1914-1918) had ended, and had not brought real peace, but more hatred, anger and violence. Coming as it did after the end of the War, the encyclical sought to give the world, as a whole, a new idea of kingship by asking it to look at Christ the Universal King, and how he lived out his kingship. Christ is a King who totally identifies with his subjects, particularly the marginalized – the poorest of the poor.
This identification is made explicit not only in the Gospel text for the feast but also in the first reading of today.
In the first reading, Ezekiel talks about God as the shepherd of Israel. The kings of Israel were regarded as God’s visible representatives and were given the divine title of shepherd. But many of them did not live up to this responsibility. Their leadership style differed from that of God’s. God’s style was that of giving priority of attention to the needs of the disadvantaged, especially their need for justice and empowerment. First God raised up prophets, like Ezekiel, to warn the kings. When they failed to listen, God decided to get rid of the ungodly kings and their beneficiaries, and promised that he would shepherd the flock himself. The defeat of Israel by her enemies, in which the big people, the royalty and the nobility, were banished into exile, was seen as God’s way of getting rid of the bad leadership.
The Gospel text which continues the theme of the first reading is not so much about the kingship of Jesus. Rather, it is a passage about the “kingdom” of God, about all those who kin to God, and, therefore, who are kin to each other. We are all kin to one another. We are all indeed one. The deepest expression of this truth, on this side of life, is a spirituality in which there is no split between our devotion and our deed; no split between mystery and commandment,; no split between piety and ethics and no split between being and doing. Like mystery and commandment, interwoven as they are, Jesus is one with the hungry and the thirsty, is one with the stranger and the prisoner, and is one with the naked and the sick. To care for these is to care for Jesus. To care for them is to reach back into the very essence of life and to touch the God who is in and with the hungry, the thirsty…” And then the king will answer them, “Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these, who are members of my family, you did it to me.”
The text, thus, is not so much God’s condemnation of some people, as it is about the universal vision of the love of God, about the very scope of God’s love in Jesus for the whole world. Jesus remains the model of unconditional and eternal love. This was shown in the most powerful of ways by Jesus himself, when in total obedience to the Father, he dared to spread his arms on the Cross in total surrender of self. Therefore, God raised him.
This understanding is important to avoid any kind of misinterpretation that might arise due to a person thinking that it is his/her deeds that earn merit and reward. The righteous who reached out to the least of their brothers and sisters, did so because they understood it was necessity to help, love, serve, visit and feed. They dared to listen to the promptings of the Spirit and responded to these promptings. They did not do what they did for reward. They did not earn the kingdom but inherited it. Inheritance is determined by the giver not the receiver. The kingdom remains a free gift of God.
Though the unrighteous also addresses Jesus as Lord, it is not enough. Their address remains at the theoretical level and is not translated into action. They did not act because they did not believe that God could hide himself in the poorest of the poor. They did not realize that our God had been made visible in Jesus, who taught all who were willing to listen, that God was primarily a God of the poor, and that though he was king, he came only to serve.
The sufferings borne by the last of our brothers and sisters continue to summon and challenge us as Church today. They continue to ask us to dare to be credible and authentic witnesses of the Gospel. However, what we need is not merely more action, more doing for the sake of doing. No! What our King demands is a universal unity of love and togetherness. It is a togetherness that transcends all of our frontiers, the frontiers of our mind and of our heart, the frontiers of our creeds and doctrines – all of those externals that keep us apart, that keep us apart that keep us separated and split.
The challenge for us today is to forget our own needs and reach out in love to make someone else, who may be in greater need, happy. For whatever we do to the least needy children of God, these brothers and sisters of Jesus, we do to him. | <urn:uuid:75eeee89-c718-4a96-9b1c-6a40e2227d81> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://errolsj.blogspot.com/2017/11/sunday-november-26-2017-jesus-christ.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598217.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120081337-20200120105337-00545.warc.gz | en | 0.981462 | 1,141 | 3.265625 | 3 | [
-0.17611727118492126,
0.595086395740509,
-0.021046042442321777,
-0.1881999373435974,
-0.2268606573343277,
-0.32671836018562317,
-0.14498227834701538,
0.26739996671676636,
0.38846856355667114,
0.17416498064994812,
-0.19310593605041504,
-0.016048496589064598,
0.188886821269989,
0.03021737933... | 3 | To read the texts click on the texts: Ezek 34:11-12,15-17; 1 Cor 15:20-26, 28; Mt 25:31-46
Quas Primas (Latin for “In the first”) was an encyclical of Pope Pius XI promulgated on December 11, 1925. It introduced the Feast of Christ the King. World War I (1914-1918) had ended, and had not brought real peace, but more hatred, anger and violence. Coming as it did after the end of the War, the encyclical sought to give the world, as a whole, a new idea of kingship by asking it to look at Christ the Universal King, and how he lived out his kingship. Christ is a King who totally identifies with his subjects, particularly the marginalized – the poorest of the poor.
This identification is made explicit not only in the Gospel text for the feast but also in the first reading of today.
In the first reading, Ezekiel talks about God as the shepherd of Israel. The kings of Israel were regarded as God’s visible representatives and were given the divine title of shepherd. But many of them did not live up to this responsibility. Their leadership style differed from that of God’s. God’s style was that of giving priority of attention to the needs of the disadvantaged, especially their need for justice and empowerment. First God raised up prophets, like Ezekiel, to warn the kings. When they failed to listen, God decided to get rid of the ungodly kings and their beneficiaries, and promised that he would shepherd the flock himself. The defeat of Israel by her enemies, in which the big people, the royalty and the nobility, were banished into exile, was seen as God’s way of getting rid of the bad leadership.
The Gospel text which continues the theme of the first reading is not so much about the kingship of Jesus. Rather, it is a passage about the “kingdom” of God, about all those who kin to God, and, therefore, who are kin to each other. We are all kin to one another. We are all indeed one. The deepest expression of this truth, on this side of life, is a spirituality in which there is no split between our devotion and our deed; no split between mystery and commandment,; no split between piety and ethics and no split between being and doing. Like mystery and commandment, interwoven as they are, Jesus is one with the hungry and the thirsty, is one with the stranger and the prisoner, and is one with the naked and the sick. To care for these is to care for Jesus. To care for them is to reach back into the very essence of life and to touch the God who is in and with the hungry, the thirsty…” And then the king will answer them, “Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these, who are members of my family, you did it to me.”
The text, thus, is not so much God’s condemnation of some people, as it is about the universal vision of the love of God, about the very scope of God’s love in Jesus for the whole world. Jesus remains the model of unconditional and eternal love. This was shown in the most powerful of ways by Jesus himself, when in total obedience to the Father, he dared to spread his arms on the Cross in total surrender of self. Therefore, God raised him.
This understanding is important to avoid any kind of misinterpretation that might arise due to a person thinking that it is his/her deeds that earn merit and reward. The righteous who reached out to the least of their brothers and sisters, did so because they understood it was necessity to help, love, serve, visit and feed. They dared to listen to the promptings of the Spirit and responded to these promptings. They did not do what they did for reward. They did not earn the kingdom but inherited it. Inheritance is determined by the giver not the receiver. The kingdom remains a free gift of God.
Though the unrighteous also addresses Jesus as Lord, it is not enough. Their address remains at the theoretical level and is not translated into action. They did not act because they did not believe that God could hide himself in the poorest of the poor. They did not realize that our God had been made visible in Jesus, who taught all who were willing to listen, that God was primarily a God of the poor, and that though he was king, he came only to serve.
The sufferings borne by the last of our brothers and sisters continue to summon and challenge us as Church today. They continue to ask us to dare to be credible and authentic witnesses of the Gospel. However, what we need is not merely more action, more doing for the sake of doing. No! What our King demands is a universal unity of love and togetherness. It is a togetherness that transcends all of our frontiers, the frontiers of our mind and of our heart, the frontiers of our creeds and doctrines – all of those externals that keep us apart, that keep us apart that keep us separated and split.
The challenge for us today is to forget our own needs and reach out in love to make someone else, who may be in greater need, happy. For whatever we do to the least needy children of God, these brothers and sisters of Jesus, we do to him. | 1,147 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The English modal verbs "must", "have to", "have got to", "can't" and "couldn't" are used to express deduction and contention. Modal verbs are used to state how sure the speaker is about something.
English modals of deduction Wikipedia
"Must" can be used when the speaker feels sure that something is real because he sees strong evidence of it."You're shivering" => "you must be cold".
"Must have" is used with a past participle when the speaker is not totally sure about something."Someone must have taken the key, because it is not here."
"I didn't order ten books. This has to be a mistake."
"These aren't mine, they've got to be yours."
"Can't" is used to say that the speaker thinks something is not right.It can't be a burglar. All the doors and windows are locked.
"Can't have" + past participle is used for things that the speaker is sure did not occur in the past.I can't have left my phone at work. You called me when I was running to my car. That’s it. It must be in the car.
You can't have seen him this morning. He was with me all the time.
She can't have liked the show. She dislikes musicals.
If he wasn't there, he couldn't have committed the murder. | <urn:uuid:282023c6-3c2b-49e4-b3ec-38502d725a5c> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://alchetron.com/English-modals-of-deduction | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598800.30/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120135447-20200120164447-00431.warc.gz | en | 0.986306 | 300 | 3.375 | 3 | [
-0.41040071845054626,
-0.32071244716644287,
0.4692932367324829,
-0.4351482689380646,
-0.07000713050365448,
0.03336750715970993,
0.6227909922599792,
0.18306215107440948,
0.1148548573255539,
-0.2141733020544052,
0.027941536158323288,
-0.1353503316640854,
0.26051783561706543,
0.42675673961639... | 1 | The English modal verbs "must", "have to", "have got to", "can't" and "couldn't" are used to express deduction and contention. Modal verbs are used to state how sure the speaker is about something.
English modals of deduction Wikipedia
"Must" can be used when the speaker feels sure that something is real because he sees strong evidence of it."You're shivering" => "you must be cold".
"Must have" is used with a past participle when the speaker is not totally sure about something."Someone must have taken the key, because it is not here."
"I didn't order ten books. This has to be a mistake."
"These aren't mine, they've got to be yours."
"Can't" is used to say that the speaker thinks something is not right.It can't be a burglar. All the doors and windows are locked.
"Can't have" + past participle is used for things that the speaker is sure did not occur in the past.I can't have left my phone at work. You called me when I was running to my car. That’s it. It must be in the car.
You can't have seen him this morning. He was with me all the time.
She can't have liked the show. She dislikes musicals.
If he wasn't there, he couldn't have committed the murder. | 281 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The 1916 Presidential election pitted incumbent Democratic President Woodrow Wilson against Republican Supreme Court Justice Charles Evans Hughes. The election was a very close one and had significant ramifications for the “progressive” movement.
Woodrow Wilson was President of Princeton University from 1902 until early 1910, when he resigned from Princeton University to run for Governor of New Jersey. Wilson won the governorship and focused on an agenda of reform. In 1912, he ran for President of the United States. The Democratic Convention was one of the most dramatic and closest in history. After 46 ballots, Wilson was finally nominated as the candidate. In the general election in 1912, Wilson faced the incumbent Republican President William Howard Taft, and also former President Teddy Roosevelt, who had formed the Progressive Party (Bull Moose Party). Eugene Debs rounded out the ballot on the Socialist Party ticket. As Taft and Roosevelt divided support among Republican voters, Wilson won with more than 40% of the popular vote and 435 electoral votes.
President Wilson took office as the only Democrat other than Grover Cleveland elected President since 1856, and the first Southerner to occupy the White House since 1869, when Andrew Johnson left the White House (the last elected Southerner was in 1849). During his first term, Wilson focused on banking reform and keeping the United States out of World War I. On a personal level, his first wife died during his first term. Wilson remarried and became reenergized as the 1916 election approached.
Like Wilson, Charles Evans Hughes’ entry into governmental service was as a state governor. Hughes taught at New York Law School with Wilson for a short period of time. He was elected Governor of New York in 1907 and served until 1910. Hughes focused on reform of government processes as well as expanding general governmental, police and welfare powers. In 1910, Hughes was nominated by President Taft as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. On June 10, 1916, Hughes resigned his justiceship to accept the Republican nomination for president. Hughes was also overwhelmingly endorsed by the Progressive Party. Hughes became the first and only Supreme Court justice to be nominated for president by a major political party.
The Election of 1916
The Democrats used the slogan, “He Kept Us out of War,” warning the country that war in Europe and in Mexico was almost certain should the Republican candidate, Hughes, be elected. Hughes pushed back on this attack, noting that the Wilson administration had intervened in the Mexican Civil War. Hughes’ campaign was boosted by strong support from former President Roosevelt, but Hughes failed to obtain the active support of influential California Governor Hiram Johnson.
The election was one of the closest in American presidential history. The nation waited for several days for the western states to report final results. When the dust had settled, Wilson had won the Electoral College, 277-254, and won 30 of the 48 states. At the time, 266 electoral votes were needed to win; had Hughes carried California with its 13 electoral votes, he would have been elected. Wilson became only the second president in our history to win re-election with a lower electoral percentage than his initial victory (James Madison was the other president with a decline in re-election). Wilson also became the first president to receive fewer overall electoral votes in re-election (only Presidents Franklin Roosevelt and Barack Obama would have similar results).
Constitutional Impact of 1916 Election
The 1916 election had no direct impact on the United States Constitution, but did as noted, mark the emergence of the progressives in the political landscape. However, Hughes’ defeat would eventually have consequences for the judicial branch. On February 3, 1930, President Herbert Hoover made his first of three Supreme Court nominations when he nominated Hughes to become Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Hughes was confirmed by the United States Senate on February 13, 1930, replacing Chief Justice Taft, who had also lost a presidential election to Wilson. President Taft had nominated Hughes to his position as Associate Justice of the Supreme Court.
Faced with President Franklin Roosevelt’s court packing plan (stemming from FDR’s frustration with the Supreme Court’s hostile treatment of his New Deal initiatives), Hughes worked behind the scenes to make sure that new Congressional acts quickly moved up to the Supreme Court for review and were found to be constitutional. One element of Hughes’ work to slow Roosevelt’s attempts to revamp the Court became known as the “Switch in time that saved nine”- Justice Owen Roberts and Hughes had discussed Roberts’ positions before the court packing plan had been unveiled, and Roberts began to side with the four more liberal justices.
Had Hughes defeated Wilson in 1916 and become President, it is unlikely he would have become the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Hughes presided over the Supreme Court during a time when the Court had become more progressive, and Hughes joined his brethren in voting that way. For 11 years, he served as Chief Justice and earned a reputation as one of the greatest chief justices of the Supreme Court. A few electoral votes’ difference in the fall of 1916 would have altered Supreme Court history to a significant extent.
Dan Cotter is a Partner at Butler Rubin Saltarelli & Boyd LLP and an Adjunct Professor at The John Marshall Law School, where he teaches SCOTUS Judicial Biographies. He is also Immediate Past President of The Chicago Bar Association. The article contains his opinions and is not to be attributed to Butler Rubin or any of its clients, The Chicago Bar Association, or John Marshall. | <urn:uuid:6edb0052-8dbc-4340-b3ce-ef46c647e647> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://constitutingamerica.org/1916-woodrow-wilson-defeats-charles-evans-hughes-guest-essayist-daniel-a-cotter/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591234.15/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117205732-20200117233732-00361.warc.gz | en | 0.985353 | 1,124 | 3.84375 | 4 | [
-0.28544431924819946,
0.23362037539482117,
-0.14591044187545776,
-0.12948228418827057,
0.008001549169421196,
0.40973156690597534,
-0.07498370110988617,
0.07752742618322372,
0.05191954970359802,
0.1890193521976471,
0.20510542392730713,
0.5293072462081909,
0.09102281928062439,
0.344870269298... | 14 | The 1916 Presidential election pitted incumbent Democratic President Woodrow Wilson against Republican Supreme Court Justice Charles Evans Hughes. The election was a very close one and had significant ramifications for the “progressive” movement.
Woodrow Wilson was President of Princeton University from 1902 until early 1910, when he resigned from Princeton University to run for Governor of New Jersey. Wilson won the governorship and focused on an agenda of reform. In 1912, he ran for President of the United States. The Democratic Convention was one of the most dramatic and closest in history. After 46 ballots, Wilson was finally nominated as the candidate. In the general election in 1912, Wilson faced the incumbent Republican President William Howard Taft, and also former President Teddy Roosevelt, who had formed the Progressive Party (Bull Moose Party). Eugene Debs rounded out the ballot on the Socialist Party ticket. As Taft and Roosevelt divided support among Republican voters, Wilson won with more than 40% of the popular vote and 435 electoral votes.
President Wilson took office as the only Democrat other than Grover Cleveland elected President since 1856, and the first Southerner to occupy the White House since 1869, when Andrew Johnson left the White House (the last elected Southerner was in 1849). During his first term, Wilson focused on banking reform and keeping the United States out of World War I. On a personal level, his first wife died during his first term. Wilson remarried and became reenergized as the 1916 election approached.
Like Wilson, Charles Evans Hughes’ entry into governmental service was as a state governor. Hughes taught at New York Law School with Wilson for a short period of time. He was elected Governor of New York in 1907 and served until 1910. Hughes focused on reform of government processes as well as expanding general governmental, police and welfare powers. In 1910, Hughes was nominated by President Taft as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. On June 10, 1916, Hughes resigned his justiceship to accept the Republican nomination for president. Hughes was also overwhelmingly endorsed by the Progressive Party. Hughes became the first and only Supreme Court justice to be nominated for president by a major political party.
The Election of 1916
The Democrats used the slogan, “He Kept Us out of War,” warning the country that war in Europe and in Mexico was almost certain should the Republican candidate, Hughes, be elected. Hughes pushed back on this attack, noting that the Wilson administration had intervened in the Mexican Civil War. Hughes’ campaign was boosted by strong support from former President Roosevelt, but Hughes failed to obtain the active support of influential California Governor Hiram Johnson.
The election was one of the closest in American presidential history. The nation waited for several days for the western states to report final results. When the dust had settled, Wilson had won the Electoral College, 277-254, and won 30 of the 48 states. At the time, 266 electoral votes were needed to win; had Hughes carried California with its 13 electoral votes, he would have been elected. Wilson became only the second president in our history to win re-election with a lower electoral percentage than his initial victory (James Madison was the other president with a decline in re-election). Wilson also became the first president to receive fewer overall electoral votes in re-election (only Presidents Franklin Roosevelt and Barack Obama would have similar results).
Constitutional Impact of 1916 Election
The 1916 election had no direct impact on the United States Constitution, but did as noted, mark the emergence of the progressives in the political landscape. However, Hughes’ defeat would eventually have consequences for the judicial branch. On February 3, 1930, President Herbert Hoover made his first of three Supreme Court nominations when he nominated Hughes to become Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Hughes was confirmed by the United States Senate on February 13, 1930, replacing Chief Justice Taft, who had also lost a presidential election to Wilson. President Taft had nominated Hughes to his position as Associate Justice of the Supreme Court.
Faced with President Franklin Roosevelt’s court packing plan (stemming from FDR’s frustration with the Supreme Court’s hostile treatment of his New Deal initiatives), Hughes worked behind the scenes to make sure that new Congressional acts quickly moved up to the Supreme Court for review and were found to be constitutional. One element of Hughes’ work to slow Roosevelt’s attempts to revamp the Court became known as the “Switch in time that saved nine”- Justice Owen Roberts and Hughes had discussed Roberts’ positions before the court packing plan had been unveiled, and Roberts began to side with the four more liberal justices.
Had Hughes defeated Wilson in 1916 and become President, it is unlikely he would have become the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Hughes presided over the Supreme Court during a time when the Court had become more progressive, and Hughes joined his brethren in voting that way. For 11 years, he served as Chief Justice and earned a reputation as one of the greatest chief justices of the Supreme Court. A few electoral votes’ difference in the fall of 1916 would have altered Supreme Court history to a significant extent.
Dan Cotter is a Partner at Butler Rubin Saltarelli & Boyd LLP and an Adjunct Professor at The John Marshall Law School, where he teaches SCOTUS Judicial Biographies. He is also Immediate Past President of The Chicago Bar Association. The article contains his opinions and is not to be attributed to Butler Rubin or any of its clients, The Chicago Bar Association, or John Marshall. | 1,199 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The crashing and stank of inequality. There was
The people of France overthrew their absolutist government in 1789. What caused this revolt over the French government? The American Revolution and the Enlightenment had brought upon new ideas as to what a fair government should look like. Although the French Revolution is very complex, three main reasons can be pinpointed. The cause of the French Revolution was the need for equality.
First off, France’s government ruled by absolutism. This meant that the king had unlimited power and no one had any say in what he could or could not do. King Louis XVI, was an untrustworthy king. He was not elected by the people and he ruled by absolutism. He claimed that he received his right to govern by God. The king was able to imprison anyone without a trial because of “Lettres De Cachet”, which were letters that were signed by the king and his ministers that could warrant for anyone’s arrest. Along with this, he was able to declare war and peace and could appoint military officials. Since his power was not limited, he was able to charge taxes as he pleased and spent the taxpayers money as he wanted. The country of France was still recovering from helping fund the American Revolution, and the reckless spending of tax money by the king and queen outraged the people.
Another cause of the french revolution was the inequalities in the first, second, and third estates. The king heavly censored the people as well. The First and Second Estates consisted of clergymen, royalty, and nobles. All of these people looked down on the third estate, which consisted of the “common” people. The third estate was taxed very heavily while the two other estates were exempt from taxation. This caused basic necessities, such as bread, to be expensive and people were unable to pay for it. There was still leftover influence from “the feudal system of the Middle Ages”. Because of this, nobles would give land to peasants for having them serve this. Although, the peasants still had to pay dues to the nobles. Along with this, rabbits and other forms of wildlife might destroy peasant’s farms but they were not allowed to take action and get rid of the pests because “they were protected for the lord’s hunting.”
The economy? Before the french revolution was crashing and stank of inequality. There was a taille on the land perpetuated by the king (one of the money reasons why the people HATED the king) Taxes, they were bad. The third estate had to pay dues to the nobles (because of the leftovers of the feudal system from the middle ages) AND had to pay dues to the church as well. They were taxed unevenly, but they were the only estate out of the three that were taxed. During this time, there was a decline in agriculture as well which caused the tax on food to be unreasonably high, more than the people could afford. As Arthur young said, “The poor people seem very poor indeed. The children are terribly ragged. ” Finally, the French people, especially in the Third Estate were fed up with all the inequality and took matters into their own hands and created the “Declaration of Rights of Man and Citizen” in 1789.
In conclusion, the peopbecause of the need for equality. The people of France were tired of the constant social, economic, and political inequality that occured within their government. | <urn:uuid:e8a6b5c0-4877-4df1-8f16-5a0cabd2dde6> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://weatherbird.net/the-crashing-and-stank-of-inequality-there-was/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251689924.62/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126135207-20200126165207-00016.warc.gz | en | 0.993487 | 724 | 3.703125 | 4 | [
-0.36400964856147766,
0.3347073793411255,
-0.1555163860321045,
-0.5376150608062744,
-0.20111572742462158,
0.1481122076511383,
0.3221140503883362,
0.4240427613258362,
0.040921349078416824,
0.24880605936050415,
0.15526431798934937,
-0.12105833739042282,
0.08343227207660675,
0.241957902908325... | 1 | The crashing and stank of inequality. There was
The people of France overthrew their absolutist government in 1789. What caused this revolt over the French government? The American Revolution and the Enlightenment had brought upon new ideas as to what a fair government should look like. Although the French Revolution is very complex, three main reasons can be pinpointed. The cause of the French Revolution was the need for equality.
First off, France’s government ruled by absolutism. This meant that the king had unlimited power and no one had any say in what he could or could not do. King Louis XVI, was an untrustworthy king. He was not elected by the people and he ruled by absolutism. He claimed that he received his right to govern by God. The king was able to imprison anyone without a trial because of “Lettres De Cachet”, which were letters that were signed by the king and his ministers that could warrant for anyone’s arrest. Along with this, he was able to declare war and peace and could appoint military officials. Since his power was not limited, he was able to charge taxes as he pleased and spent the taxpayers money as he wanted. The country of France was still recovering from helping fund the American Revolution, and the reckless spending of tax money by the king and queen outraged the people.
Another cause of the french revolution was the inequalities in the first, second, and third estates. The king heavly censored the people as well. The First and Second Estates consisted of clergymen, royalty, and nobles. All of these people looked down on the third estate, which consisted of the “common” people. The third estate was taxed very heavily while the two other estates were exempt from taxation. This caused basic necessities, such as bread, to be expensive and people were unable to pay for it. There was still leftover influence from “the feudal system of the Middle Ages”. Because of this, nobles would give land to peasants for having them serve this. Although, the peasants still had to pay dues to the nobles. Along with this, rabbits and other forms of wildlife might destroy peasant’s farms but they were not allowed to take action and get rid of the pests because “they were protected for the lord’s hunting.”
The economy? Before the french revolution was crashing and stank of inequality. There was a taille on the land perpetuated by the king (one of the money reasons why the people HATED the king) Taxes, they were bad. The third estate had to pay dues to the nobles (because of the leftovers of the feudal system from the middle ages) AND had to pay dues to the church as well. They were taxed unevenly, but they were the only estate out of the three that were taxed. During this time, there was a decline in agriculture as well which caused the tax on food to be unreasonably high, more than the people could afford. As Arthur young said, “The poor people seem very poor indeed. The children are terribly ragged. ” Finally, the French people, especially in the Third Estate were fed up with all the inequality and took matters into their own hands and created the “Declaration of Rights of Man and Citizen” in 1789.
In conclusion, the peopbecause of the need for equality. The people of France were tired of the constant social, economic, and political inequality that occured within their government. | 700 | ENGLISH | 1 |
How Yellow Fever Turned New Orleans Into The 'City Of The Dead'
By Leah Donnella
7 - 9 minutes
Some people say New Orleans is haunted because of witches. Others say it's haunted by vampires, or ghosts, or all those swamps. But if you were around between 1817 and 1905, you might say the city was haunted by death. And that death, in large part, was caused by yellow fever.
Yellow fever was fatal. It was gruesome. And in epidemic years, during the months between July and October, it could wipe out 10 percent of the city's population. Eventually, it earned New Orleans the nickname "Necropolis" — city of the dead.
Yellow fever didn't just kill. It created an entire social structure based on who had survived the virus, who was likely to survive it and who was not long for this world. And that structure had everything to do with immigration and slavery, according to Kathryn Olivarius, a history professor at Stanford University.
And it wasn't a pretty way to die. Victims would experience a host of unpleasant symptoms: jaundice, chills, nausea, headaches, fever, convulsions, delirium. Then, there was the blood.
"Eventually, patients or victims will start to bleed through their eyes, nose, ears," Olivarius says. "I've seen examples of people bleeding through their toes." Then, right before dying, victims would vomit partially coagulated blood.
Olivarius says it was an illness that could turn even holy men away from God. "I have many examples of reverends and ministers screaming before they died," she says. "Even pious victims screamed profanities as the end neared."
Today, yellow fever is mostly gone from the U.S. It still plagues parts of Africa and South America, but there's a vaccine that can help prevent it. Back in the day, though, the only way to develop immunity to the virus was to survive it.
As a result, Olivarius explains, a social hierarchy developed in New Orleans around who was "acclimated" (people who had lived through yellow fever) and "unacclimated" (people who hadn't).
"If you're unacclimated, you basically languish in professional and social purgatory," says Olivarius, who is writing a book about how the disease shaped the city's social structure. "Bosses will not hire clerks and bookkeepers who are not expressly acclimated. Women will not marry men not described as acclimated. You can't live in certain neighborhoods, and people will not rent rooms unless you're acclimated. Certain social circles will exclude you. And so this creates this hierarchy where you have people who are actively seeking to get sick."
The tricky part, she says, is that there was no real physical way to tell whether someone was acclimated. So people had to find ways to demonstrate that they were. That often involved showcasing how deep their ties were to New Orleans. People who had grown up in the city were more likely to have survived a mild case of yellow fever as a child.
But the city's many European immigrants, who hadn't been around the virus before, were considered bigger liabilities. Olivarius says they often arrived in New Orleans with already compromised immune systems and lived in neighborhoods with no herd immunity. That's part of the reason, she says, that yellow fever was nicknamed the "Stranger's Disease."
Still, immigrants were flocking to the city. Olivarius says that New Orleans in the 19th century was a bit like Silicon Valley today: "It was the place where, if you were an ambitious white man, you went to make your fortune." People came from far and wide to try to break into the booming cotton industry, maybe eventually buy themselves some land and slaves. But first, they had to prove they weren't going to up and die.
"I have examples, for example, of Irish immigrants literally seeking to get sick to really just give themselves the edge in what is otherwise a very competitive job market in New Orleans," explains Olivarius. "It was so important to the social hierarchy of this place that people would say, 'You are an undocumented stranger' or 'You are an acclimated citizen.' "
As widespread as yellow fever was, it was also hugely misunderstood.
There were tons of myths and misinformation floating around about how to protect yourself, or who was most likely to die: "You have old wives' tales of people saying that people who eat a lot of tomatoes will get yellow fever. Or people saying, 'If you eat too much fruit you'll get yellow fever.' And other people saying, 'If you don't eat enough fruit, you'll get yellow fever.' "
But the most prevalent myth — and possibly the most insidious — was that you couldn't get it if you were black.
Prominent doctors in the South spread the lie that black people had a natural immunity to the disease, Olivarius says. That lie, she adds, was used to justify slavery.
"If black people are naturally resistant to yellow fever, black slavery is natural, even humanitarian, because it protects white people from spaces and labor that would kill them." In other words, the belief was that black people could work outside in hot, swampy spaces that were prone to yellow fever, without any risk.
Advocates of slavery argued that God had made black people immune to expand the cotton industry and the national economy, and to save white people from death.
But here's the thing: Even then, many people knew that black folks weren't really immune. In fact, at slave markets, few were willing buy a person who wasn't already acclimated. Acclimated slaves sold for 25 to 50 percent more than unacclimated slaves, Olivarius says. "So, you're dealing with a Gordian knot of contradictions that all ended up furthering the cause of white supremacy and the expansion of racial slavery."
As if the idea of a disease that kills thousands, scapegoats immigrants and upholds white supremacy isn't scary enough already, Olivarius reminds us that these dynamics are not necessarily a thing of the past. | <urn:uuid:b0527232-d4ad-4dc3-babc-00627107ce0f> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.tefter.io/bookmarks/55551/readable | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250601040.47/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120224950-20200121013950-00238.warc.gz | en | 0.986457 | 1,282 | 3.859375 | 4 | [
-0.45261406898498535,
0.009360156022012234,
0.3971084952354431,
0.09933794289827347,
0.41259774565696716,
0.19177143275737762,
0.5783640742301941,
0.16036447882652283,
-0.01843942701816559,
-0.07473129034042358,
0.11710602045059204,
0.22634616494178772,
-0.3816480040550232,
0.2098147273063... | 1 | How Yellow Fever Turned New Orleans Into The 'City Of The Dead'
By Leah Donnella
7 - 9 minutes
Some people say New Orleans is haunted because of witches. Others say it's haunted by vampires, or ghosts, or all those swamps. But if you were around between 1817 and 1905, you might say the city was haunted by death. And that death, in large part, was caused by yellow fever.
Yellow fever was fatal. It was gruesome. And in epidemic years, during the months between July and October, it could wipe out 10 percent of the city's population. Eventually, it earned New Orleans the nickname "Necropolis" — city of the dead.
Yellow fever didn't just kill. It created an entire social structure based on who had survived the virus, who was likely to survive it and who was not long for this world. And that structure had everything to do with immigration and slavery, according to Kathryn Olivarius, a history professor at Stanford University.
And it wasn't a pretty way to die. Victims would experience a host of unpleasant symptoms: jaundice, chills, nausea, headaches, fever, convulsions, delirium. Then, there was the blood.
"Eventually, patients or victims will start to bleed through their eyes, nose, ears," Olivarius says. "I've seen examples of people bleeding through their toes." Then, right before dying, victims would vomit partially coagulated blood.
Olivarius says it was an illness that could turn even holy men away from God. "I have many examples of reverends and ministers screaming before they died," she says. "Even pious victims screamed profanities as the end neared."
Today, yellow fever is mostly gone from the U.S. It still plagues parts of Africa and South America, but there's a vaccine that can help prevent it. Back in the day, though, the only way to develop immunity to the virus was to survive it.
As a result, Olivarius explains, a social hierarchy developed in New Orleans around who was "acclimated" (people who had lived through yellow fever) and "unacclimated" (people who hadn't).
"If you're unacclimated, you basically languish in professional and social purgatory," says Olivarius, who is writing a book about how the disease shaped the city's social structure. "Bosses will not hire clerks and bookkeepers who are not expressly acclimated. Women will not marry men not described as acclimated. You can't live in certain neighborhoods, and people will not rent rooms unless you're acclimated. Certain social circles will exclude you. And so this creates this hierarchy where you have people who are actively seeking to get sick."
The tricky part, she says, is that there was no real physical way to tell whether someone was acclimated. So people had to find ways to demonstrate that they were. That often involved showcasing how deep their ties were to New Orleans. People who had grown up in the city were more likely to have survived a mild case of yellow fever as a child.
But the city's many European immigrants, who hadn't been around the virus before, were considered bigger liabilities. Olivarius says they often arrived in New Orleans with already compromised immune systems and lived in neighborhoods with no herd immunity. That's part of the reason, she says, that yellow fever was nicknamed the "Stranger's Disease."
Still, immigrants were flocking to the city. Olivarius says that New Orleans in the 19th century was a bit like Silicon Valley today: "It was the place where, if you were an ambitious white man, you went to make your fortune." People came from far and wide to try to break into the booming cotton industry, maybe eventually buy themselves some land and slaves. But first, they had to prove they weren't going to up and die.
"I have examples, for example, of Irish immigrants literally seeking to get sick to really just give themselves the edge in what is otherwise a very competitive job market in New Orleans," explains Olivarius. "It was so important to the social hierarchy of this place that people would say, 'You are an undocumented stranger' or 'You are an acclimated citizen.' "
As widespread as yellow fever was, it was also hugely misunderstood.
There were tons of myths and misinformation floating around about how to protect yourself, or who was most likely to die: "You have old wives' tales of people saying that people who eat a lot of tomatoes will get yellow fever. Or people saying, 'If you eat too much fruit you'll get yellow fever.' And other people saying, 'If you don't eat enough fruit, you'll get yellow fever.' "
But the most prevalent myth — and possibly the most insidious — was that you couldn't get it if you were black.
Prominent doctors in the South spread the lie that black people had a natural immunity to the disease, Olivarius says. That lie, she adds, was used to justify slavery.
"If black people are naturally resistant to yellow fever, black slavery is natural, even humanitarian, because it protects white people from spaces and labor that would kill them." In other words, the belief was that black people could work outside in hot, swampy spaces that were prone to yellow fever, without any risk.
Advocates of slavery argued that God had made black people immune to expand the cotton industry and the national economy, and to save white people from death.
But here's the thing: Even then, many people knew that black folks weren't really immune. In fact, at slave markets, few were willing buy a person who wasn't already acclimated. Acclimated slaves sold for 25 to 50 percent more than unacclimated slaves, Olivarius says. "So, you're dealing with a Gordian knot of contradictions that all ended up furthering the cause of white supremacy and the expansion of racial slavery."
As if the idea of a disease that kills thousands, scapegoats immigrants and upholds white supremacy isn't scary enough already, Olivarius reminds us that these dynamics are not necessarily a thing of the past. | 1,277 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The idea of eating three meals a day is one of the cornerstones of traditional nutrition. This concept has guided people’s everyday eating habits for centuries, and at this point, no one gives them a whole lot of thought. We take it for granted that we are supposed to eat three meals a day, even if many of us do not strictly follow that structure.
How Did The Traditional Meal Structure Get Started?
As far as we can see, the traditional three-meal structure is not that old of a concept. The ancient Romans, for instance, would only eat one meal per day. Even if that one meal might have been quite large, they considered it gluttonous to eat more than once a day.
In the middle ages, life came to be arranged around a particular routine, and the meal schedules were set accordingly. For religious reasons, nothing was supposed to be eaten before morning mass. A lot of people don’t understand why we call it “breakfast.” We call it by this name because it represents the breaking of a religious fast. From dinner until morning mass, a person was supposed to observe a fasting period. Many religions see this as a measure of atonement and a way of giving thanks to higher powers.
Breakfast was considered to be a privilege of the elite for a long time. The ordinary person might have a small snack before beginning the day’s work, but the idea of eating a full meal in the morning was reserved for those with a little more leisure time. Breakfast was also an important time for the nobility to consult with other nobles and discuss the important events of the day. It wasn’t until the 17th century that breakfast became a staple among the common folk.
It makes sense that this practice would come to be adopted at the tail end of the middle ages. By this time, the industrial revolution had removed some of the prestige and relevance of the old aristocratic class. As such, many customs that had formerly been the province of nobles became common among working people. Also, the end of the feudal system gave people the chance to attain levels of prosperity that just weren’t possible before. Feudal landlords often kept people poor and hungry as a means of control, and the end of the feudal system thus had a substantial effect on the eating habits of the general population.
The idea of a midday meal during a break from work has evolved into the modern concept of lunch. People had to work hard, but you can’t expect someone to work at their best on an empty stomach. Thus, even the harshest of employers would allow their workers to stop at mid-day (about noon) to eat some food and replenish their energy. It was also customary at one point for workers to be given a ration of beer with their midday meal. To this day, we have continued the tradition of taking a meal break at noon.
Another good reason for the timing of lunch comes from the realities of the weather. Even in Europe (which is relatively cold in comparison to other parts of the world), noon is the hottest part of the day. Working under the beating hot sun has a way of sapping your energy and reducing your effectiveness as a worker. Thus, it was a matter of practicality to allow workers to rest during the hottest part of the day.
No one seems to know where the term “lunch” originated. Most people seem to believe that it originated with the old Anglo-Saxon word “nuncheon.” This word denoted a quick snack that a person might eat between meals as a pick-me-up. The word lunch did not enter common usage until the 19th century or so.
We mentioned that some groups of ancient people (like the Romans) only ate one meal per day. Well, this was the meal. There isn’t much to tell about this one, as it is perfectly natural to eat a meal in the evening. You finished your work for the day, you are settling in for the night, and it makes sense to enjoy an evening repast. Besides, it serves as a self-reward at the end of a busy day. However, ancient Romans would usually eat their dinner a bit earlier.
Dinner has always had an important social role in western society, as well. Dinner is the time when you gather around with the family and talk about the events of your day. Thus, it makes sense that industrialization pushed the dinner hour further into the evening. In early industrialized societies, that would have been the only time at which the entirety of a hard-working family could get together with everyone present.
Arguments Against This Traditional Structure
Many people argue against the traditional meal structure these days. In some ways, their arguments have merit, because the conventional three-meal plan is not based around the natural or biological needs of the human body. Instead, this is a structure created to balance the needs of the body with the requirements of society. Since we no longer have it so hard, it makes sense that we would re-evaluate our eating habits.
If you want to use a more natural diet structure, you can simply model your eating habits after those of the animal kingdom. Animals eat whenever they get hungry, but they are limited by the amount of food in their environment. They tend to find food in small amounts throughout the day, and that means they eat small amounts throughout the day. This structure provides a small and steady stream of nutrition rather than giving three big doses of nutrition.
We hope that this short history of the 3-meal structure has given you a better understanding of the subject. Though this is only a brief overview, hopefully, it gave you a little more knowledge about the meal structure that most people follow to this day. By understanding where it came from, and where its limits lie, you can make an informed decision as to whether or not you want to stick with tradition or try something new. Either way, we hope that you will follow us on Facebook using the link below. | <urn:uuid:4d03c7c9-3d8a-45cb-9d48-80e612662bfd> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://gasparinutrition.com/blogs/fitness-facts/why-do-we-eat-3-meals-a-day | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250597230.18/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120023523-20200120051523-00418.warc.gz | en | 0.98213 | 1,239 | 3.515625 | 4 | [
-0.06307011842727661,
0.20882417261600494,
-0.15839144587516785,
0.16243448853492737,
-0.1687539517879486,
0.006028503179550171,
-0.091407909989357,
-0.2905505895614624,
-0.18493863940238953,
-0.12211515009403229,
-0.0393194779753685,
-0.11305256187915802,
0.009904514998197556,
0.019742196... | 13 | The idea of eating three meals a day is one of the cornerstones of traditional nutrition. This concept has guided people’s everyday eating habits for centuries, and at this point, no one gives them a whole lot of thought. We take it for granted that we are supposed to eat three meals a day, even if many of us do not strictly follow that structure.
How Did The Traditional Meal Structure Get Started?
As far as we can see, the traditional three-meal structure is not that old of a concept. The ancient Romans, for instance, would only eat one meal per day. Even if that one meal might have been quite large, they considered it gluttonous to eat more than once a day.
In the middle ages, life came to be arranged around a particular routine, and the meal schedules were set accordingly. For religious reasons, nothing was supposed to be eaten before morning mass. A lot of people don’t understand why we call it “breakfast.” We call it by this name because it represents the breaking of a religious fast. From dinner until morning mass, a person was supposed to observe a fasting period. Many religions see this as a measure of atonement and a way of giving thanks to higher powers.
Breakfast was considered to be a privilege of the elite for a long time. The ordinary person might have a small snack before beginning the day’s work, but the idea of eating a full meal in the morning was reserved for those with a little more leisure time. Breakfast was also an important time for the nobility to consult with other nobles and discuss the important events of the day. It wasn’t until the 17th century that breakfast became a staple among the common folk.
It makes sense that this practice would come to be adopted at the tail end of the middle ages. By this time, the industrial revolution had removed some of the prestige and relevance of the old aristocratic class. As such, many customs that had formerly been the province of nobles became common among working people. Also, the end of the feudal system gave people the chance to attain levels of prosperity that just weren’t possible before. Feudal landlords often kept people poor and hungry as a means of control, and the end of the feudal system thus had a substantial effect on the eating habits of the general population.
The idea of a midday meal during a break from work has evolved into the modern concept of lunch. People had to work hard, but you can’t expect someone to work at their best on an empty stomach. Thus, even the harshest of employers would allow their workers to stop at mid-day (about noon) to eat some food and replenish their energy. It was also customary at one point for workers to be given a ration of beer with their midday meal. To this day, we have continued the tradition of taking a meal break at noon.
Another good reason for the timing of lunch comes from the realities of the weather. Even in Europe (which is relatively cold in comparison to other parts of the world), noon is the hottest part of the day. Working under the beating hot sun has a way of sapping your energy and reducing your effectiveness as a worker. Thus, it was a matter of practicality to allow workers to rest during the hottest part of the day.
No one seems to know where the term “lunch” originated. Most people seem to believe that it originated with the old Anglo-Saxon word “nuncheon.” This word denoted a quick snack that a person might eat between meals as a pick-me-up. The word lunch did not enter common usage until the 19th century or so.
We mentioned that some groups of ancient people (like the Romans) only ate one meal per day. Well, this was the meal. There isn’t much to tell about this one, as it is perfectly natural to eat a meal in the evening. You finished your work for the day, you are settling in for the night, and it makes sense to enjoy an evening repast. Besides, it serves as a self-reward at the end of a busy day. However, ancient Romans would usually eat their dinner a bit earlier.
Dinner has always had an important social role in western society, as well. Dinner is the time when you gather around with the family and talk about the events of your day. Thus, it makes sense that industrialization pushed the dinner hour further into the evening. In early industrialized societies, that would have been the only time at which the entirety of a hard-working family could get together with everyone present.
Arguments Against This Traditional Structure
Many people argue against the traditional meal structure these days. In some ways, their arguments have merit, because the conventional three-meal plan is not based around the natural or biological needs of the human body. Instead, this is a structure created to balance the needs of the body with the requirements of society. Since we no longer have it so hard, it makes sense that we would re-evaluate our eating habits.
If you want to use a more natural diet structure, you can simply model your eating habits after those of the animal kingdom. Animals eat whenever they get hungry, but they are limited by the amount of food in their environment. They tend to find food in small amounts throughout the day, and that means they eat small amounts throughout the day. This structure provides a small and steady stream of nutrition rather than giving three big doses of nutrition.
We hope that this short history of the 3-meal structure has given you a better understanding of the subject. Though this is only a brief overview, hopefully, it gave you a little more knowledge about the meal structure that most people follow to this day. By understanding where it came from, and where its limits lie, you can make an informed decision as to whether or not you want to stick with tradition or try something new. Either way, we hope that you will follow us on Facebook using the link below. | 1,210 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Several factors contributed to the breakdown of the social order, most of which were results of Jacks actions. When word broke out that there was a beast roaming about the island who would eat little children, most of the boys feared of going up the mountain where the beast was thought to live. Since the boys were too terrified of going near the beast, the signal fire on the mountain, ceased to burn and hope of rescue among the boys quickly diminished, despite Ralphs efforts to rally the boys to continue the signal fire. After Jack and Ralph fled the mountain top after seeing a beast-like object, Jack accused Ralph of being a coward and to be unfit for the position of chief. This began unrest among the boys and soon some were beginning to consider choosing Jack as their leader.
Ever since the boys found themselves trapped on the island, Jack felt he should rightfully be the chief of the boys because he was the head boy and chapter chorister in his choir. Thus he tried to sway the groups preference of leaders to him at all chances he could attain, and questioning Ralphs leadership and acting somewhat rebellious. In one case, Jack takes the two boys who were tending to the signal fire on a hunt, meanwhile a ship passed by the island unaware of the groups presence because the signal fire was dead. When Ralph confronts Jack about letting the fire go out, Jack retorted by saying they needed meat and to hunt. When Jack has a feast, he invites the other boys to follow him, saying that they will hunt and have fun while they are on the island.
The situation that occurs in the novel, could have arisen had there been only a group of boys in question, who were obedient to those older than them. This is because the younger boys would show more respect and obey orders of the older boys such as Ralph and Jack.
Due to the two opposing sides constantly agitating each other, breakdown of social order was to be expected. | <urn:uuid:30817c19-a9e2-46b0-8d9d-2f8f37e3feff> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://guidedcollective.com/lord-of-the-flies-essay-idea/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250601615.66/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121044233-20200121073233-00508.warc.gz | en | 0.985327 | 392 | 3.265625 | 3 | [
-0.2742459774017334,
0.23752976953983307,
0.20872950553894043,
-0.22340251505374908,
0.26382458209991455,
-0.008500426076352596,
0.20419694483280182,
-0.1482074111700058,
-0.1810557246208191,
-0.014833317138254642,
0.14490456879138947,
0.08967768400907516,
0.49097833037376404,
0.3084051012... | 5 | Several factors contributed to the breakdown of the social order, most of which were results of Jacks actions. When word broke out that there was a beast roaming about the island who would eat little children, most of the boys feared of going up the mountain where the beast was thought to live. Since the boys were too terrified of going near the beast, the signal fire on the mountain, ceased to burn and hope of rescue among the boys quickly diminished, despite Ralphs efforts to rally the boys to continue the signal fire. After Jack and Ralph fled the mountain top after seeing a beast-like object, Jack accused Ralph of being a coward and to be unfit for the position of chief. This began unrest among the boys and soon some were beginning to consider choosing Jack as their leader.
Ever since the boys found themselves trapped on the island, Jack felt he should rightfully be the chief of the boys because he was the head boy and chapter chorister in his choir. Thus he tried to sway the groups preference of leaders to him at all chances he could attain, and questioning Ralphs leadership and acting somewhat rebellious. In one case, Jack takes the two boys who were tending to the signal fire on a hunt, meanwhile a ship passed by the island unaware of the groups presence because the signal fire was dead. When Ralph confronts Jack about letting the fire go out, Jack retorted by saying they needed meat and to hunt. When Jack has a feast, he invites the other boys to follow him, saying that they will hunt and have fun while they are on the island.
The situation that occurs in the novel, could have arisen had there been only a group of boys in question, who were obedient to those older than them. This is because the younger boys would show more respect and obey orders of the older boys such as Ralph and Jack.
Due to the two opposing sides constantly agitating each other, breakdown of social order was to be expected. | 390 | ENGLISH | 1 |
WWII Soviet tank holds off German forces for an entire day
During the Battle of Raseiniai in WWII, one Soviet tank held off German troops for 24 hours. The men inside were injured, hungry, and were deep behind enemy lines. There would be no reinforcements. Only the grit and determination of the soldiers inside.
Germany infiltrates Russian territory
The Battle of Raseiniai was a large tank battle that took place in June of 1941. It was part of Operation Barbarossa, Germany’s invasion of the Soviet Union. The battle took place in Lithuania, 47 miles northwest of Kaunas.
The Red Army’s 3rd and 12th Mechanized Corps did all they could to prevent the German 4th Panzer Group from crossing the Neman River, but they were unable to halt the advance. On June 23, Germany encountered Soviet KV heavy tanks for the first time. Germany’s anti-tank weapons were ineffective against them.
One tank with a big heart
As Germany continued to press into Lithuania, the majority of the Red Army’s mechanized forces were forced to pull back. One Soviet KV tank had plans of its own. It advanced far behind German lines, attacking a column of German trucks.
The Soviet tank stopped on the road and was heavily assaulted by the 6th Panzer Division anti-tank battalion. It took a beating but continued to return fire, disabling all four German guns. Night fell. German combat engineers tried to disable the tank with satchel charges. They damaged the tracks but failed to destroy the tank.
A blood-red sun
In the early morning, German infantry advanced. The KV tank opened heavy machine-gun fire, but it soon became clear that there would be no halting the advance. German tanks fired on the KV from the woods while an 88 mm gun assaulted it from the rear. German troops managed to toss grenades into the tank’s hatches.
German soldiers buried the Soviet crew with full military honors. The Battle of Raseiniai destroyed the majority of the Soviet’s Northwestern Front armored forces. Despite the heroic efforts of the KV tank, the path was cleared for the Germans to continue their attack into Russian territory. | <urn:uuid:0bacf355-fa62-4d54-aa01-bfbb8c16a72c> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.history101.com/wwii-soviet-tank-german-forces/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251684146.65/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126013015-20200126043015-00426.warc.gz | en | 0.981453 | 459 | 3.453125 | 3 | [
-0.6164771914482117,
0.2557603418827057,
0.20850883424282074,
0.14178189635276794,
0.05115922912955284,
0.005444972310215235,
0.05334972217679024,
0.3208500146865845,
-0.29142847657203674,
-0.32449182868003845,
0.056833188980817795,
-0.15280714631080627,
0.4250495135784149,
0.3756344914436... | 5 | WWII Soviet tank holds off German forces for an entire day
During the Battle of Raseiniai in WWII, one Soviet tank held off German troops for 24 hours. The men inside were injured, hungry, and were deep behind enemy lines. There would be no reinforcements. Only the grit and determination of the soldiers inside.
Germany infiltrates Russian territory
The Battle of Raseiniai was a large tank battle that took place in June of 1941. It was part of Operation Barbarossa, Germany’s invasion of the Soviet Union. The battle took place in Lithuania, 47 miles northwest of Kaunas.
The Red Army’s 3rd and 12th Mechanized Corps did all they could to prevent the German 4th Panzer Group from crossing the Neman River, but they were unable to halt the advance. On June 23, Germany encountered Soviet KV heavy tanks for the first time. Germany’s anti-tank weapons were ineffective against them.
One tank with a big heart
As Germany continued to press into Lithuania, the majority of the Red Army’s mechanized forces were forced to pull back. One Soviet KV tank had plans of its own. It advanced far behind German lines, attacking a column of German trucks.
The Soviet tank stopped on the road and was heavily assaulted by the 6th Panzer Division anti-tank battalion. It took a beating but continued to return fire, disabling all four German guns. Night fell. German combat engineers tried to disable the tank with satchel charges. They damaged the tracks but failed to destroy the tank.
A blood-red sun
In the early morning, German infantry advanced. The KV tank opened heavy machine-gun fire, but it soon became clear that there would be no halting the advance. German tanks fired on the KV from the woods while an 88 mm gun assaulted it from the rear. German troops managed to toss grenades into the tank’s hatches.
German soldiers buried the Soviet crew with full military honors. The Battle of Raseiniai destroyed the majority of the Soviet’s Northwestern Front armored forces. Despite the heroic efforts of the KV tank, the path was cleared for the Germans to continue their attack into Russian territory. | 451 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Newton became an Arian around 1672. First let us explain the Arian doctrine. It is a Christian heresy first proposed early in the 4th century by the Alexandrian Arius which, based on a study of the Bible, stated the belief that Jesus was more than man, but less than God. In other words Arians do not believe in the identification of God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost, so they do not believe in the doctrine of the Trinity.
Newton's Arian beliefs
Newton came to believe that the Roman Catholic Church was misguided in its interpretation of Christianity, and had returned to idolatry. Although he partly approved of the Protestant Reformation, he felt it had not gone nearly far enough to return Christianity to its original state. Now if Newton did not believe in the Trinity, he had to consider the First Epistle of John Chapter 2, verse 7, which reads (in the King James version):-
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.Now Newton, who felt that his mission was more to study religion than science, certainly did not stop at reading the King James version of the Bible, but rather read all original versions he could, learning the necessary ancient languages. He discovered that the final phrase 'and these three are one' was not present in any Greek version that he studied. Newton came to the conclusion that it was a deliberate addition to the text to provide justification for the doctrine of the Trinity. He wrote down a list of twelve reasons why he was an Arian. Now of course it was not acceptable for people to hold views considered heresy by the Church, so after Newton's death this list, and his other theological writings, were marked "Not fit to be printed". They were stored and were not read by anyone until Keynes acquired them in 1936.
[See Keynes' Newton]
Here is Newton's list:-
- The word God is nowhere in the scriptures used to signify more than one of the three persons at once.
- The word God put absolutely without restriction to the Son or Holy Ghost doth always signify the Father from one end of the scriptures to the other.
- Whenever it is said in the scriptures that there is but one God, it is meant the Father.
- When, after some heretics had taken Christ for a mere man and others for the supreme God, St John in his Gospel endeavoured to state his nature so that men might have from thence a right apprehension of him and avoid those heresies and to that end calls him the word or logos: we must suppose that he intended that term in the sense that it was taken in the world before he used it when in like manner applied to an intelligent being. For if the Apostles had not used words as they found them how could they expect to have been rightly understood. Now the term logos before St John wrote, was generally used in the sense of the Platonists, when applied to an intelligent being and the Arians understood it in the same sense, and therefore theirs is the true sense of St John.
- The Son in several places confesseth his dependence on the will of the Father.
- The Son confesseth the Father greater, then calls him his God etc.
- The Son acknowledgeth the original prescience of all future things to be in the Father only.
- There is nowhere mention of a human soul in our Saviour besides the word, by the meditation of which the word should be incarnate. But the word itself was made flesh and took upon him the form of a servant.
- It was the son of God which He sent into the world and not a human soul that suffered for us. If there had been such a human soul in our Saviour, it would have been a thing of too great consequence to have been wholly omitted by the Apostles.
- It is a proper epithet of the Father to be called almighty. For by God almighty we always understand the Father. Yet this is not to limit the power of the Son. For he doth whatsoever he seeth the Father do; but to acknowledge that all power is originally in the Father and that the Son hath power in him but what he derives fro the Father, for he professes that of himself he can do nothing.
- The Son in all things submits his will to the will of the Father, which could be unreasonable if he were equal to the Father.
- The union between him and the Father he interprets to be like that of the saints with one another. That is in agreement of will and counsel.
Below the list of twelve points, Newton wrote 13. but did not write anything for this thirteenth point. | <urn:uuid:47c4c1bf-7ad5-4f99-8c52-b2784c2f72f4> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://mathshistory.st-andrews.ac.uk/Extras/Newton_Arian.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251694176.67/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127020458-20200127050458-00001.warc.gz | en | 0.98157 | 981 | 3.453125 | 3 | [
0.11395077407360077,
0.4357094168663025,
-0.1917279064655304,
-0.23872724175453186,
-0.3809887766838074,
-0.13360491394996643,
-0.42081117630004883,
0.3943212628364563,
0.02945457026362419,
0.23212182521820068,
-0.3134573698043823,
-0.43459993600845337,
-0.15307673811912537,
-0.01117891073... | 1 | Newton became an Arian around 1672. First let us explain the Arian doctrine. It is a Christian heresy first proposed early in the 4th century by the Alexandrian Arius which, based on a study of the Bible, stated the belief that Jesus was more than man, but less than God. In other words Arians do not believe in the identification of God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost, so they do not believe in the doctrine of the Trinity.
Newton's Arian beliefs
Newton came to believe that the Roman Catholic Church was misguided in its interpretation of Christianity, and had returned to idolatry. Although he partly approved of the Protestant Reformation, he felt it had not gone nearly far enough to return Christianity to its original state. Now if Newton did not believe in the Trinity, he had to consider the First Epistle of John Chapter 2, verse 7, which reads (in the King James version):-
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.Now Newton, who felt that his mission was more to study religion than science, certainly did not stop at reading the King James version of the Bible, but rather read all original versions he could, learning the necessary ancient languages. He discovered that the final phrase 'and these three are one' was not present in any Greek version that he studied. Newton came to the conclusion that it was a deliberate addition to the text to provide justification for the doctrine of the Trinity. He wrote down a list of twelve reasons why he was an Arian. Now of course it was not acceptable for people to hold views considered heresy by the Church, so after Newton's death this list, and his other theological writings, were marked "Not fit to be printed". They were stored and were not read by anyone until Keynes acquired them in 1936.
[See Keynes' Newton]
Here is Newton's list:-
- The word God is nowhere in the scriptures used to signify more than one of the three persons at once.
- The word God put absolutely without restriction to the Son or Holy Ghost doth always signify the Father from one end of the scriptures to the other.
- Whenever it is said in the scriptures that there is but one God, it is meant the Father.
- When, after some heretics had taken Christ for a mere man and others for the supreme God, St John in his Gospel endeavoured to state his nature so that men might have from thence a right apprehension of him and avoid those heresies and to that end calls him the word or logos: we must suppose that he intended that term in the sense that it was taken in the world before he used it when in like manner applied to an intelligent being. For if the Apostles had not used words as they found them how could they expect to have been rightly understood. Now the term logos before St John wrote, was generally used in the sense of the Platonists, when applied to an intelligent being and the Arians understood it in the same sense, and therefore theirs is the true sense of St John.
- The Son in several places confesseth his dependence on the will of the Father.
- The Son confesseth the Father greater, then calls him his God etc.
- The Son acknowledgeth the original prescience of all future things to be in the Father only.
- There is nowhere mention of a human soul in our Saviour besides the word, by the meditation of which the word should be incarnate. But the word itself was made flesh and took upon him the form of a servant.
- It was the son of God which He sent into the world and not a human soul that suffered for us. If there had been such a human soul in our Saviour, it would have been a thing of too great consequence to have been wholly omitted by the Apostles.
- It is a proper epithet of the Father to be called almighty. For by God almighty we always understand the Father. Yet this is not to limit the power of the Son. For he doth whatsoever he seeth the Father do; but to acknowledge that all power is originally in the Father and that the Son hath power in him but what he derives fro the Father, for he professes that of himself he can do nothing.
- The Son in all things submits his will to the will of the Father, which could be unreasonable if he were equal to the Father.
- The union between him and the Father he interprets to be like that of the saints with one another. That is in agreement of will and counsel.
Below the list of twelve points, Newton wrote 13. but did not write anything for this thirteenth point. | 978 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Music is a great form of a historical source that tells us about people, places and histories of different civilizations and generations. Songs are generally divided into 3 categories: classical, popular and folk. The word song is divided into two categories; music which is the common ground between all songs and rendition which refers to the performance of the song. A song is not simply composed of lyrics and tunes, but the context in which the song is created is also extremely important. A key factor for songs is the enjoyment of its listeners and the factors that contributed to make the listener like the song. .
American history is greatly reflected in music that started since the arrival of Europeans and Africans. The first American popular song tradition was the minstrel show, with songs that survived over 60 years and are still sung today. These songs emerged from the styles of African-Americans. Eventually African Americans eventually created its own all-black minstrel show. However African culture was not the only influence on American popular music, Irish and Italian cultures also greatly contributed to American music. Mid 19th Century American music changed to appeal to the commercial markets. At first they sold sheet music so that song could be enjoyed within a person's home, but with the changing technology music was sold in a form of sound recordings and played on radios. Music became some of the most profitable items on market that was sold both within the United States and exported to other countries. At this point song writing and performing became extremely culturally diverse. Today music is used in almost every industry, and has become a colossal industry all on its own. One of the biggest purposes of pop songs is for the function of profit. Very often pop music is written to send out a message that is usually hard to put into word. .
One type of popular music is minstrel music, which was a show usually performed by white men pretending to be black and making derogatory statements toward the African American community. | <urn:uuid:6eb20ae7-451f-4a2f-8b0e-226cb53ec88f> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.exampleessays.com/viewpaper/100852.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783621.89/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129010251-20200129040251-00074.warc.gz | en | 0.98373 | 389 | 3.703125 | 4 | [
0.28565889596939087,
-0.040448158979415894,
0.18271183967590332,
-0.0971449613571167,
0.05413806438446045,
0.3818844258785248,
-0.13579751551151276,
-0.1152505949139595,
0.16479338705539703,
-0.11328524351119995,
-0.03643731400370598,
0.3471924960613251,
-0.042710430920124054,
0.1023492291... | 2 | Music is a great form of a historical source that tells us about people, places and histories of different civilizations and generations. Songs are generally divided into 3 categories: classical, popular and folk. The word song is divided into two categories; music which is the common ground between all songs and rendition which refers to the performance of the song. A song is not simply composed of lyrics and tunes, but the context in which the song is created is also extremely important. A key factor for songs is the enjoyment of its listeners and the factors that contributed to make the listener like the song. .
American history is greatly reflected in music that started since the arrival of Europeans and Africans. The first American popular song tradition was the minstrel show, with songs that survived over 60 years and are still sung today. These songs emerged from the styles of African-Americans. Eventually African Americans eventually created its own all-black minstrel show. However African culture was not the only influence on American popular music, Irish and Italian cultures also greatly contributed to American music. Mid 19th Century American music changed to appeal to the commercial markets. At first they sold sheet music so that song could be enjoyed within a person's home, but with the changing technology music was sold in a form of sound recordings and played on radios. Music became some of the most profitable items on market that was sold both within the United States and exported to other countries. At this point song writing and performing became extremely culturally diverse. Today music is used in almost every industry, and has become a colossal industry all on its own. One of the biggest purposes of pop songs is for the function of profit. Very often pop music is written to send out a message that is usually hard to put into word. .
One type of popular music is minstrel music, which was a show usually performed by white men pretending to be black and making derogatory statements toward the African American community. | 391 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The two pro-slavery articles gave support to the idea that slavery was right and it benefited the economy. They backed up their argument by mentioning that the North paid the immigrants less money to grow their industries; they also gave them shelters that were in horrible condition. They believed that the way immigrants were treated was worse than slavery. The article “The Charleston Courier” by a Carolinian pointed out that when a Northerner buys indentured servants, they were not considered guilty of the same crime when a Southerner buys slaves. He also stated that a Northerner gave immigrants low incomes for their hard work although they knew that it was insufficient for their family. The bottom line of the author 's argument was that he believed the South’s labor system was a “re...
... middle of paper ...
...d that most slaves in the South were happy and treated well by their masters. He also believed that moral values were taught to the slaves in an attempt to keep the slaves grateful and happy. The other two testimonies were from the Northern immigrants who had a bad experience in the labor system. The two immigrants that moved to New York for labor were treated poorly by their employers. They moved to America because they heard there was a boom in the industries. They were paid less for their hard work and the industries did not care if it was not enough. The immigrants were not fed properly and they lived in homes that were in bad condition. As a result, the immigrants were disappointed because of the false accusation. All these testimonies supported the arguments of the pro-slavery authors. The authors were right about the immigrants treated horribly in the North.
Need Writing Help?
Get feedback on grammar, clarity, concision and logic instantly.Check your paper »
- Slavery was a dominant part of the political and social arenas of 1800’s America. However, it was not homogenous as it divided America into two distinct groups: those who supported it and those who did not. Traditionally, the states in the north had been anti-slavery while the states in the south had been pro-slavery. Southern life and economy depended on slavery and therefore staunchly supported the continued legal status of slavery. The northern states on the other hand recognized the inhumane nature of slavery and campaigned to establish equality for all citizens.... [tags: anti-slavery, pro-slavery, theology, equality]
1362 words (3.9 pages)
- The south was very passionate about slavery. They were willing to give up everything in order to keep it. This is something that seems crazy to me, because when we look back onto slavery and it seems so terrible. The south became extremely dependent upon slavery very quickly. Cash crops started becoming more popular which made the need for land rise greatly.Plantations, and farms were far too large for their owners alone to take care of. In the south the cotton industry was on an all-time high. As the cash crops were on the rise the needs for workers were also.... [tags: American Civil War, Slavery in the United States]
744 words (2.1 pages)
- Slavery was woven in to American traditions just as tightly as the laws abiding to the Constitution. A cycle of dependency had been created within slavery that made the process of transitioning from it, a difficult and long drawn out process. Slave owners had conditioned African Americans into believing they had no other option but to live under the control of their “masters” by the use of family ties and fear. Then the slave owners themselves had invested such a large amount of need for their slaves to help aid in their successes by doing their farming for them.... [tags: Slavery in the United States, Slavery]
1232 words (3.5 pages)
- Slave narratives were extremely important in gathering the support of the white northerners for the abolition of slavery. Former slaves such as Frederick Douglass, Harriet Tubman, Sojourner Truth, and many others gave speeches, published pamphlets, and wrote autobiographies depicting the horrific conditions under which they lived as slaves. The detailed stories of the living conditions and atrocities suffered by these former slaves helped gain support for the anti-slavery movement. Not everyone living in the North condoned slavery and even some of those living in the South were influenced by the stories told by former slaves as well as what they witnessed themselves firsthand.... [tags: Slavery in the United States, Abolitionism]
1288 words (3.7 pages)
- ... Samuel Cartwright was a physician and pro-slavery advocate during the 1800’s and is well known for his diagnosis of drapetomania, a supposed disease that made slaves runaway. He concluded that the reason African slaves sought to escape was because they were treated inadequately by their masters. Delving deeper in his writings it is discovered he too, like George Fitzhugh, approved of enslavement. Both men advocated the issue and have similar analyzes on how slaves are or should be treated. Cartwright expresses to his audience that slaves will most likely run (drapetomania) if they are treated poorly by their master; “according to my experience, the "genu flexit"--the awe and reverence, m... [tags: positions, goals, party, slavery]
1248 words (3.6 pages)
- Similar to any hotly debated topic, slavery was surrounded with many different view points. Many students are led to believe there were only two sides to the slavery debate: those who wanted slavery and those who did not. In general, this was correct. There were actually sub groups of people within these two sides. Different theorists had different ideas about why slavery needed to be upheld or why slavery needed to be abolished. These arguments persisted throughout the United States until they eventual led to the Civil War.... [tags: Slavery in the United States, Compromise of 1850]
901 words (2.6 pages)
- Slavery in the South A large majority of whites in the South supported slavery even though fewer of a quarter of them owned slaves because they felt that it was a necessary evil and that it was an important Southern institution. In 1800 the population of the United States included 893,602 slaves, of which only 36,505 were in the northern states. Vermont, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, and New Jersey provided for the emancipation of their slaves before 1804, most of them by gradual measures.... [tags: Slavery Essays]
683 words (2 pages)
- Support of Slavery by the Christian Church The belief in some higher presence, other than our own, has existed since man can recollect. Religion was established from this belief, and it can survive and flourish because of this belief. Christianity, one of several forms of religion that exist today, began sometime during the middle of the first century. Christians believe in a higher presence that they call "God." This belief in God is based on faith, not fact; faith is "unquestioning belief that does not require proof or evidence." (Webster's New World College Dictionary, 1996, p.... [tags: Slavery Essays]
2850 words (8.1 pages)
- Slavery in Colonial America The first arrivals of Africans in America were treated similarly to the indentured servants in Europe. Black servants were treated differently from the white servants and by 1740 the slavery system in colonial America was fully developed. Slavery as it existed in America was a practice founded on the chattel principle. Slaves were treated as human chattel to be traded, sold, used, and ranked not among beings, but among things, as an article of property to the owner or possessor.... [tags: Slavery Essays]
791 words (2.3 pages)
- One of the most unique situations during the period of the Civil War in America was the involvement of the state of Texas in the Confederacy. Although it was once its own Republic separate from the United States of America through annexation, Texas was not entirely unique when it came to the institution of slavery. Just like in all other southern states, slavery, and the use of slave labor, was a major factor of the states agricultural economy. During the years around and through the Civil War, Texas became a home for many transient southerners in search of sanctuary from the almost enviable furthering of emancipation.... [tags: Slavery Essays]
2384 words (6.8 pages) | <urn:uuid:434a780a-70ea-4417-b0b3-30eee14000cd> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.123helpme.com/pro-slavery-and-anti-slavery-preview.asp?id=645030 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251705142.94/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127174507-20200127204507-00164.warc.gz | en | 0.984495 | 1,763 | 3.625 | 4 | [
-0.4307866394519806,
0.2924478054046631,
-0.2547730803489685,
-0.05848018825054169,
0.13285142183303833,
0.1868179440498352,
-0.2854192852973938,
-0.19579629600048065,
-0.24135002493858337,
0.24474655091762543,
0.06634688377380371,
0.4384652376174927,
-0.11610761284828186,
0.10316973924636... | 1 | The two pro-slavery articles gave support to the idea that slavery was right and it benefited the economy. They backed up their argument by mentioning that the North paid the immigrants less money to grow their industries; they also gave them shelters that were in horrible condition. They believed that the way immigrants were treated was worse than slavery. The article “The Charleston Courier” by a Carolinian pointed out that when a Northerner buys indentured servants, they were not considered guilty of the same crime when a Southerner buys slaves. He also stated that a Northerner gave immigrants low incomes for their hard work although they knew that it was insufficient for their family. The bottom line of the author 's argument was that he believed the South’s labor system was a “re...
... middle of paper ...
...d that most slaves in the South were happy and treated well by their masters. He also believed that moral values were taught to the slaves in an attempt to keep the slaves grateful and happy. The other two testimonies were from the Northern immigrants who had a bad experience in the labor system. The two immigrants that moved to New York for labor were treated poorly by their employers. They moved to America because they heard there was a boom in the industries. They were paid less for their hard work and the industries did not care if it was not enough. The immigrants were not fed properly and they lived in homes that were in bad condition. As a result, the immigrants were disappointed because of the false accusation. All these testimonies supported the arguments of the pro-slavery authors. The authors were right about the immigrants treated horribly in the North.
Need Writing Help?
Get feedback on grammar, clarity, concision and logic instantly.Check your paper »
- Slavery was a dominant part of the political and social arenas of 1800’s America. However, it was not homogenous as it divided America into two distinct groups: those who supported it and those who did not. Traditionally, the states in the north had been anti-slavery while the states in the south had been pro-slavery. Southern life and economy depended on slavery and therefore staunchly supported the continued legal status of slavery. The northern states on the other hand recognized the inhumane nature of slavery and campaigned to establish equality for all citizens.... [tags: anti-slavery, pro-slavery, theology, equality]
1362 words (3.9 pages)
- The south was very passionate about slavery. They were willing to give up everything in order to keep it. This is something that seems crazy to me, because when we look back onto slavery and it seems so terrible. The south became extremely dependent upon slavery very quickly. Cash crops started becoming more popular which made the need for land rise greatly.Plantations, and farms were far too large for their owners alone to take care of. In the south the cotton industry was on an all-time high. As the cash crops were on the rise the needs for workers were also.... [tags: American Civil War, Slavery in the United States]
744 words (2.1 pages)
- Slavery was woven in to American traditions just as tightly as the laws abiding to the Constitution. A cycle of dependency had been created within slavery that made the process of transitioning from it, a difficult and long drawn out process. Slave owners had conditioned African Americans into believing they had no other option but to live under the control of their “masters” by the use of family ties and fear. Then the slave owners themselves had invested such a large amount of need for their slaves to help aid in their successes by doing their farming for them.... [tags: Slavery in the United States, Slavery]
1232 words (3.5 pages)
- Slave narratives were extremely important in gathering the support of the white northerners for the abolition of slavery. Former slaves such as Frederick Douglass, Harriet Tubman, Sojourner Truth, and many others gave speeches, published pamphlets, and wrote autobiographies depicting the horrific conditions under which they lived as slaves. The detailed stories of the living conditions and atrocities suffered by these former slaves helped gain support for the anti-slavery movement. Not everyone living in the North condoned slavery and even some of those living in the South were influenced by the stories told by former slaves as well as what they witnessed themselves firsthand.... [tags: Slavery in the United States, Abolitionism]
1288 words (3.7 pages)
- ... Samuel Cartwright was a physician and pro-slavery advocate during the 1800’s and is well known for his diagnosis of drapetomania, a supposed disease that made slaves runaway. He concluded that the reason African slaves sought to escape was because they were treated inadequately by their masters. Delving deeper in his writings it is discovered he too, like George Fitzhugh, approved of enslavement. Both men advocated the issue and have similar analyzes on how slaves are or should be treated. Cartwright expresses to his audience that slaves will most likely run (drapetomania) if they are treated poorly by their master; “according to my experience, the "genu flexit"--the awe and reverence, m... [tags: positions, goals, party, slavery]
1248 words (3.6 pages)
- Similar to any hotly debated topic, slavery was surrounded with many different view points. Many students are led to believe there were only two sides to the slavery debate: those who wanted slavery and those who did not. In general, this was correct. There were actually sub groups of people within these two sides. Different theorists had different ideas about why slavery needed to be upheld or why slavery needed to be abolished. These arguments persisted throughout the United States until they eventual led to the Civil War.... [tags: Slavery in the United States, Compromise of 1850]
901 words (2.6 pages)
- Slavery in the South A large majority of whites in the South supported slavery even though fewer of a quarter of them owned slaves because they felt that it was a necessary evil and that it was an important Southern institution. In 1800 the population of the United States included 893,602 slaves, of which only 36,505 were in the northern states. Vermont, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, and New Jersey provided for the emancipation of their slaves before 1804, most of them by gradual measures.... [tags: Slavery Essays]
683 words (2 pages)
- Support of Slavery by the Christian Church The belief in some higher presence, other than our own, has existed since man can recollect. Religion was established from this belief, and it can survive and flourish because of this belief. Christianity, one of several forms of religion that exist today, began sometime during the middle of the first century. Christians believe in a higher presence that they call "God." This belief in God is based on faith, not fact; faith is "unquestioning belief that does not require proof or evidence." (Webster's New World College Dictionary, 1996, p.... [tags: Slavery Essays]
2850 words (8.1 pages)
- Slavery in Colonial America The first arrivals of Africans in America were treated similarly to the indentured servants in Europe. Black servants were treated differently from the white servants and by 1740 the slavery system in colonial America was fully developed. Slavery as it existed in America was a practice founded on the chattel principle. Slaves were treated as human chattel to be traded, sold, used, and ranked not among beings, but among things, as an article of property to the owner or possessor.... [tags: Slavery Essays]
791 words (2.3 pages)
- One of the most unique situations during the period of the Civil War in America was the involvement of the state of Texas in the Confederacy. Although it was once its own Republic separate from the United States of America through annexation, Texas was not entirely unique when it came to the institution of slavery. Just like in all other southern states, slavery, and the use of slave labor, was a major factor of the states agricultural economy. During the years around and through the Civil War, Texas became a home for many transient southerners in search of sanctuary from the almost enviable furthering of emancipation.... [tags: Slavery Essays]
2384 words (6.8 pages) | 1,765 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The Árpáds (Hungarian: Árpádok, Slovak: Arpádovci, Croatian: Arpadovići) were a dynasty ruling in historic Hungary from the late 9th century to 1301 (with some interruptions, e. g. 1038-46).
They were chieftains (dukes, Princes) till c. 970, Geza (c. 970–997) as well as till 1000 his son Stephen were Grand Princes, from c. 1000 onwards they were Kings. The seniority principle was replaced by the primogeniture, which led to struggles for the throne between 997–1163. The line was extinguished by 1301/1338.
Árpád (died after 900), the founder of the dynasty who brought the proto-Hungarians to present-day Hungary in 896, was probably succeeded by his nephew, dux Szabolcs, who in turn was succeeded by Árpád’s grandson Fajsz (Fales, Falitzi). These two chieftains/dukes, who however did not control all proto-Hungarians yet, undertook almost fifty campaigns, by which they forced the Lombardy (905-950), the Saxons (924-932), the Byzantine Empire and Bulgaria (934_957) to pay tribute to them. They also destroyed Great Moravia probably around 907. The first two Hungarian chieftains/dukes (Bulcsu and Gylas) were baptized in the Byzantine Empire in 950.
After the defeat of the Hungarians at the Lech in 955, the Hungarian dukes Lél, Bulcsú and Sur, who were not Árpáds, were executed (after they have been captured by the Germans) and their possessions were occupied by the Árpáds, who were led by Taksony at that time (c. 955_c. 971). Since the Nitrian principality (southwestern Slovakia) had been ruled by Lél since the 920s, it thus became part of the Árpáds' domain in 955. In addition, after 955, the defeated Hungarians decided to stay in what is present_day Hungary (more exactly Transdanubia) and adjacent regions, and to stop their raids in Europe, so that a gradual unification of proto-Hungarian tribes led by numerous local chieftains/dukes began.
While Taksony (c. 955–c. 971) ruled present-day Hungary, his father Zoltan, Árpád‘s son, ruled present-day southwestern Slovakia (the Nitrian principality) and probably had to accept the supremacy of Bohemia in western Slovakia (c. 955 – c. 970). According to less reliable sources, Taksony and then his son Geza (see below) were the rulers of Nitra before 971 instead.
In 971, Geza (c. 971–997), the son of Taksony, became a „Grand Prince“, moved his seat to Esztergom and began to form a unified Hungarian state (hence the “grand” ) – a task completed only later by his son. Transdanubia was ruled by himself, the Nitrian principality was given in fief to his brother Michael (ruled there 971–995, see below), influence in Transylvania was gained through Geza’s marriage with the daughter of the Transylvanian duke Gyula I, but local proto-Hunagrian chieftains/dukes still ruled in other parts of present-day Hungary.
Although Geza was de facto only the ruler of Transdanubia, he is said to have made the Árpád dynasty the ruling dynasty of Hungary. Pushed by Henry II. the Quarrelsome (Heinrich II. der Zänker), under Geza the Hungarians had to leave Ostarrîchi (Austria) and make peace with Otto I and Otto II (in 972). In 995, Geza brought a Latin (i. e. not Byzantine) bishop to Hungary (namely Adalbert, the Bishop of Prague) and was introducing Christianity by force.
Geza’s brother Michael was married to Adelajda (Adelhaid) the „Beleknegini“, the daughter of the Polish Prince Mieszko I. By various deals with Slovak nobles, Michael managed to expand the Hungarian territory to some further parts of present-day Slovakia. Since Michael became too powerful, Geza had him killed in 995, and Michael's sons Vazul and Ladislaus the Bold fled abroad (see below).
In the same year, Geza’s son Vajk (after his baptism called Stephen) was made, by his father, the ruler of the Nitrian Principality (southern Slovakia) within Hungary. He probably brought his Christian wife Gisela (the date of marriage is disputed, most probable are 995/996) to the old Christian center of Nitra, and that is why he became an ardent Christianizer first in the Nitrian principality, later in whole Hungary. His marriage of Gisela promoted the influence of Bavarian clerics and nobles in Hungary. He also established friendly relationships with Slovak nobles in present-day Slovakia (esp. the Poznans and the Hunts), who helped him in 997 to defeat Koppány (the duke of Somogy, member of a collateral branch of the Árpáds), who, supported by old Hungarian chieftain families, claimed Hungarian leadership after Geza’s death.
On December 25, 1000 (other sources: January 1, 1001), the Grand Prince Stephen was crowned (the first) King of Hungary (1000–1038) by order of Pope Sylvester II. Between 997 and c. 1006, he managed to unify Hungary, by subjugating Transylvania and other domains that had been ruled by Hungarian tribal chieftains. He introduced the county (comitatus) system, founded an ecclesiastic organization with ten bishoprics and the archbishopric of Esztergom, and introduced taxes for common people, the minting of coins (initially in Bratislava), and the official use of Latin, which remained the official language of Hungary till 1836. He moved his seat from Esztergom to Székesfehérvár.
In 1001, Stephen lost the Nitrian principality to Poland. The Polish ruler made Stephen’s cousins Ladislaus the Bold (1001–1029) and Vazul (1029–1030), who had fled Hungary in 995, the rulers of the Nitrian principality (Slovakia) within the Polish principality. In 1030, Stephen reconquered Slovakia from Poland, Vazul was imprisoned, and in 1031 (when Stephen’s only son Imre died) he was blinded in Nitra so that he wouldn't succeed to the Hungarian throne.
However, Vazul’s three sons (Levente, and the two future kings Andrew and Béla, and Domoslav (Bonuslaus), son of Ladislaus the Bold, managed to flee abroad. As a result, it were Stephen’s nephews from the female line, Peter Urseolo (1038–41 and 1044–46) and Samuel Aba (1041–1044), who were fighting for the throne. Peter Urseolo, supported by the German king Henry III, was expelled by the brothers Andrew and Béla, who returned to Hungary from abroad. These two Árpáds were the ancestors of all the following Árpád rulers of Hungary. Domoslav, in turn, was temporarily installed as the ruler of western Slovakia in 1042, when the territory was conquered by Bretislav I and Henry III.
The Hungarian king Andrew I (1046–63) had his son Solomon marry Judith, the daughter of Henry III, in order to stop the continuing German attacks (1042–1052). In 1048, Andrew shared power with his brother Béla by making him apanage ruler of one-third of Hungary („tercia pars regni“, Ducatus, Nitrian Frontier Principality), the capital of which was Nitra, and which consisted of Southern Slovakia (Nitrian Principality) and north-eastern historic Hungary (called Bihar, however not identical with the later Bihar). Béla received the title “duke” (1048-1063).
All the following dukes of Nitra were members of the Árpád dynasty and most of them were future Hungarian kings. Especially before 1077, the dukes had an independent foreign and internal policy and the duchy was accepted as a separate entity not only by Hungary, but also by the Pope and by the German emperor. For example, when King Andrew I was in conflict with Byzantium, the Byzantine emperor contacted Béla. In 1059, Béla fled to Poland to his brother-in-law Boleslaus II, after king Andrew I had his own son Solomon crowned future king in 1057 (to be able to engage him with Judith).
In 1060, Béla returned to Hungary and defeated King Andrew I. The wounded Andrew sent his son Solomon to Germany, then he died (in 1061). Béla I (1061–1063) became the new king of Hungary and parallelly remained the duke of Nitra. After Béla's death in 1063, Henry installed Solomon as the new king of Hungary and Béla's sons Geza, Ladislaus and Lampert fled to Poland (to their kin, Boleslaus II). When Henry left Hungary, Boleslaus II attacked Solomon, defeated him and forced him to accept Geza as the king of Hungary.
Finally, however, in 1064, peace was made between Solomon and the sons of Béla, under which Solomon (1063–1074) remained king and Geza and Ladislaus received the Nitrian Frontier Duchy; more precisely, Géza became the Duke of Slovakia (11 counties), Ladislaus received Bihar (4 counties) and Lampert stayed in Nitra together with Geza without receiving own domains. New conflicts arose again soon and in 1074, Geza, Ladislaus and Lampert defeated Solomon. As a result, Geza I (1074–1077) became the new king of Hungary. His brother Ladislaus became the new Duke of the Nitrian Frontier Duchy (incl. Bihar) and later, in 1077, he succeeded his brother as the king of Hungary.
Under Ladislaus I (1077–1095) and Coloman (1095–1116), Hungary annexed the coastal regions of old Croatia, Dalmatia, Bosnian territories to the south of the Sava river, and northern western and central Slovakia. Ladislaus managed to defeat the Pecenegs and Cumanians.
The Arpadian kings usually supported the reform Popes in quarrels between Rome and Germany. Ladislaus founded the bishoprics of Oradea and Zagreb, and unified the Greek bishopric of Bács with the Latin archbishopric of Kalocsa. Coloman founded the (renewed) bishopric of Nitra (1110, other sources: c. 1085). Ladislaus consolidated the proprietary relations by stricter penal laws; Coloman improved the organization of the kingdom. In 1077, Lampert became the new Duke of Nitra, however Ladislaus considerably restrained Lampert's powers and deprived him of an own army. In 1081, Ladislaus put an end to Solomon's rule in Bratislava, which the former king Solomon occupied in 1074, and Solomon renounced the throne.
Coloman's brother Álmos was the duke of the newly conquered eastern Croatia (conquered 1081; duke since 1084) and later – on the request of the Croats – the king of eastern Croatia (1091–1095). In 1095, he was then dethroned by Coloman and appointed the duke of the Nitrian Frontier Duchy instead. A conflict arose between King Coloman and Álmos, who was supported by Germany and Bohemia, in 1098, after Coloman had even declared himself the king of Croatia in 1097 (crowned in 1102).
Finally in 1108, peace was made between the two brothers, but Coloman violated it and had Almos (and his son Béla) blinded and imprisoned in 1108 or 1109 to prevent him from becoming the future king. This act also marks the end of the Nitrian Frontier Duchy and thus a full integration of the territory of Slovakia into Hungary.
Coloman's childless son, Stephen II was enganged in a number of unnecessary wars (1116 Bohemia, 1123 Russia, 1127-29 Byzantium). He appointed Bela II the Blind (1131-41, see above) his successor. However Boris, the illegitimate brother of Stephen (whom his father Coloman did not legitimize), also wanted to become king and in 1132, supported by Polish and Russian troops, invaded the country, but was defeated (later once again in 1146). Since Béla was blind, his wife, the Serbian Ilona of Serbia, and his brother-in-law Ban Belos ruled instead of him. They had the supporters of Coloman killed during a Diet meeting, but as for international politics, they were good rulers. Béla II also became King of Bosnia.
Under Béla’s son Géza II (1141–1161), Hungary became one of the most powerful countries in Europe for about a century. Géza successfully won battles in favor of his brother-in-law Izjaslav (Prince of Kiew 1148–52), and defeated his kin Manuel Komnenos (Byzantine Emperor 1152–56), who had attacked Hungary. It was Geza who (around 1150) invited the first German (Saxon) settlers to Slovakia (esp. Spis) and Transylvania. Also, the Knights of St. John of Jerusalem (Knights of Malta) and the Knights of the Cross got to Hungary.
Géza's son Stephen III (1162-72) had to fight against Manuel I Comnenus all the time, who supported the rival uncles of Stephen and managed to make them kings for a short time (Ladislaus II (1162–63) and Stephen IV (1163)), during which Stephen III controlled only the region around Bratislava.
Finally, it was Béla III (educated in the Byzantium by Manuel) who became the new Hungarian king (1172-96). Béla III annexed Dalmatia and Croatia to Hungary again, reformed the financial system of the country, and founded Cistercian monasteries with his second wife Margaret Capet.
The elder son of Béla III Imre (1196–1204) married Constance of Aragon and his other son Andrew II (1205–1235) married Gertrude of Meran. Under these two kings, Western European influence was increasing in Hungary. The organization of the royal castles and court started to dissolve, the arising towns (mostly in Slovakia), received further foreign settlers (colonists). Under Imre's rule there were conflicts between the king and his brother Andrew (who was at that time the duke of Dalmatia and Croatia), so that Imre had Andrew even imprisoned in 1203. Under Andrew's rule (1205–1235), the international position of Hungary was improved, but within Hungary there were fights between the higher and lower gentry and the church. As a result, the king issued the Golden Bull, the Magna Carta of Hungary, in 1222 (revised in 1231).
The rule of his son Béla IV (1235–1270) was characterized by granting of the first civic privileges (town charter, town status) to arising towns in Hungary (in 1238 to Trnava, Banská Štiavnica/Selmecbánya), Krupina/Korpona and Zvolen/Zólyom), and by the disastrous invasion of the Mongols (wrongly called: Tartars) in 1241-1242 and the subsequent reconstruction of the country. As a result of the invasion, the king promoted the construction of castles made of stone and he also invited people living in Hungary, as well as foreign settlers, to settle in the depopulated territories (the Great Colonization). The nomadic Cumanians were settled in present-day central Slovakia and to Transsylvania.
By his decree of 1267, Béla also started to increase the power of lower gentry, which also triggered the change of the traditional Hungarian royal counties into quasi-autonomous territories under the control of certain nobles. The king had his ambitious son Stephen (duke of Transylvania between 1257–1259 and after 1260, duke of Styria between 1259–1260) marry the Cumanian princess Elizabeth and in 1262 he granted him the title Rex iunior and the eastern part of Hungary as fief, which entailed fightings between Béla and Stephen. As a result, Hungary was divided in two till Béla’s death in 1270, after which Stephen became the new king of whole Hungary.
The short rule of Stephen V (1270–1272) was followed by the rule of his son, the young Ladislaus IV (1272–1290), who was influenced by his Cumanian mother and her surroundings, which brought about royal conflicts with the church and the oligarchs. The oligarchs were certain magnate families in Hungary that started to behave like independent rulers on their respective territories (eastern present-day Hungary, western present-day Hungary, western Slovakia, eastern Slovakia, Transylvania, and Croatia) from the 1270s – 1280s onwards. There were also fights against Austria and against the Mongols.
After Ladislaus's death, Andrew III (1290–1301), an Árpád from Italy, was made king. He was a grandson of Andrew II by his third wife (but it is possible that his father was illegitimate). Due to the continuing rule of the oligarchs, total anarchy arose in the country in the late 1290s. The death of Andrew III on January 14, 1301 ended the male line of the Árpáds and his only daughter Elizabeth died in the Dominican monastery in Töss (Switzerland) on 6 May 1338. After a short interregnum the Angevin dynasty seized power and Charles Robert (grandson of Maria, sister of Ladislaus IV) became the new king. | <urn:uuid:9cf800d3-4164-4c67-8e8e-3efcd1e71bcc> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.statemaster.com/encyclopedia/Arpads | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250607118.51/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122131612-20200122160612-00223.warc.gz | en | 0.980461 | 4,041 | 3.34375 | 3 | [
-0.3326869010925293,
0.7814573645591736,
-0.20839948952198029,
-0.1535959392786026,
-0.21216952800750732,
-0.07661288976669312,
0.04629306122660637,
0.15884870290756226,
-0.008660487830638885,
0.3505975008010864,
-0.17076662182807922,
-0.5216455459594727,
0.42153361439704895,
0.41693142056... | 1 | The Árpáds (Hungarian: Árpádok, Slovak: Arpádovci, Croatian: Arpadovići) were a dynasty ruling in historic Hungary from the late 9th century to 1301 (with some interruptions, e. g. 1038-46).
They were chieftains (dukes, Princes) till c. 970, Geza (c. 970–997) as well as till 1000 his son Stephen were Grand Princes, from c. 1000 onwards they were Kings. The seniority principle was replaced by the primogeniture, which led to struggles for the throne between 997–1163. The line was extinguished by 1301/1338.
Árpád (died after 900), the founder of the dynasty who brought the proto-Hungarians to present-day Hungary in 896, was probably succeeded by his nephew, dux Szabolcs, who in turn was succeeded by Árpád’s grandson Fajsz (Fales, Falitzi). These two chieftains/dukes, who however did not control all proto-Hungarians yet, undertook almost fifty campaigns, by which they forced the Lombardy (905-950), the Saxons (924-932), the Byzantine Empire and Bulgaria (934_957) to pay tribute to them. They also destroyed Great Moravia probably around 907. The first two Hungarian chieftains/dukes (Bulcsu and Gylas) were baptized in the Byzantine Empire in 950.
After the defeat of the Hungarians at the Lech in 955, the Hungarian dukes Lél, Bulcsú and Sur, who were not Árpáds, were executed (after they have been captured by the Germans) and their possessions were occupied by the Árpáds, who were led by Taksony at that time (c. 955_c. 971). Since the Nitrian principality (southwestern Slovakia) had been ruled by Lél since the 920s, it thus became part of the Árpáds' domain in 955. In addition, after 955, the defeated Hungarians decided to stay in what is present_day Hungary (more exactly Transdanubia) and adjacent regions, and to stop their raids in Europe, so that a gradual unification of proto-Hungarian tribes led by numerous local chieftains/dukes began.
While Taksony (c. 955–c. 971) ruled present-day Hungary, his father Zoltan, Árpád‘s son, ruled present-day southwestern Slovakia (the Nitrian principality) and probably had to accept the supremacy of Bohemia in western Slovakia (c. 955 – c. 970). According to less reliable sources, Taksony and then his son Geza (see below) were the rulers of Nitra before 971 instead.
In 971, Geza (c. 971–997), the son of Taksony, became a „Grand Prince“, moved his seat to Esztergom and began to form a unified Hungarian state (hence the “grand” ) – a task completed only later by his son. Transdanubia was ruled by himself, the Nitrian principality was given in fief to his brother Michael (ruled there 971–995, see below), influence in Transylvania was gained through Geza’s marriage with the daughter of the Transylvanian duke Gyula I, but local proto-Hunagrian chieftains/dukes still ruled in other parts of present-day Hungary.
Although Geza was de facto only the ruler of Transdanubia, he is said to have made the Árpád dynasty the ruling dynasty of Hungary. Pushed by Henry II. the Quarrelsome (Heinrich II. der Zänker), under Geza the Hungarians had to leave Ostarrîchi (Austria) and make peace with Otto I and Otto II (in 972). In 995, Geza brought a Latin (i. e. not Byzantine) bishop to Hungary (namely Adalbert, the Bishop of Prague) and was introducing Christianity by force.
Geza’s brother Michael was married to Adelajda (Adelhaid) the „Beleknegini“, the daughter of the Polish Prince Mieszko I. By various deals with Slovak nobles, Michael managed to expand the Hungarian territory to some further parts of present-day Slovakia. Since Michael became too powerful, Geza had him killed in 995, and Michael's sons Vazul and Ladislaus the Bold fled abroad (see below).
In the same year, Geza’s son Vajk (after his baptism called Stephen) was made, by his father, the ruler of the Nitrian Principality (southern Slovakia) within Hungary. He probably brought his Christian wife Gisela (the date of marriage is disputed, most probable are 995/996) to the old Christian center of Nitra, and that is why he became an ardent Christianizer first in the Nitrian principality, later in whole Hungary. His marriage of Gisela promoted the influence of Bavarian clerics and nobles in Hungary. He also established friendly relationships with Slovak nobles in present-day Slovakia (esp. the Poznans and the Hunts), who helped him in 997 to defeat Koppány (the duke of Somogy, member of a collateral branch of the Árpáds), who, supported by old Hungarian chieftain families, claimed Hungarian leadership after Geza’s death.
On December 25, 1000 (other sources: January 1, 1001), the Grand Prince Stephen was crowned (the first) King of Hungary (1000–1038) by order of Pope Sylvester II. Between 997 and c. 1006, he managed to unify Hungary, by subjugating Transylvania and other domains that had been ruled by Hungarian tribal chieftains. He introduced the county (comitatus) system, founded an ecclesiastic organization with ten bishoprics and the archbishopric of Esztergom, and introduced taxes for common people, the minting of coins (initially in Bratislava), and the official use of Latin, which remained the official language of Hungary till 1836. He moved his seat from Esztergom to Székesfehérvár.
In 1001, Stephen lost the Nitrian principality to Poland. The Polish ruler made Stephen’s cousins Ladislaus the Bold (1001–1029) and Vazul (1029–1030), who had fled Hungary in 995, the rulers of the Nitrian principality (Slovakia) within the Polish principality. In 1030, Stephen reconquered Slovakia from Poland, Vazul was imprisoned, and in 1031 (when Stephen’s only son Imre died) he was blinded in Nitra so that he wouldn't succeed to the Hungarian throne.
However, Vazul’s three sons (Levente, and the two future kings Andrew and Béla, and Domoslav (Bonuslaus), son of Ladislaus the Bold, managed to flee abroad. As a result, it were Stephen’s nephews from the female line, Peter Urseolo (1038–41 and 1044–46) and Samuel Aba (1041–1044), who were fighting for the throne. Peter Urseolo, supported by the German king Henry III, was expelled by the brothers Andrew and Béla, who returned to Hungary from abroad. These two Árpáds were the ancestors of all the following Árpád rulers of Hungary. Domoslav, in turn, was temporarily installed as the ruler of western Slovakia in 1042, when the territory was conquered by Bretislav I and Henry III.
The Hungarian king Andrew I (1046–63) had his son Solomon marry Judith, the daughter of Henry III, in order to stop the continuing German attacks (1042–1052). In 1048, Andrew shared power with his brother Béla by making him apanage ruler of one-third of Hungary („tercia pars regni“, Ducatus, Nitrian Frontier Principality), the capital of which was Nitra, and which consisted of Southern Slovakia (Nitrian Principality) and north-eastern historic Hungary (called Bihar, however not identical with the later Bihar). Béla received the title “duke” (1048-1063).
All the following dukes of Nitra were members of the Árpád dynasty and most of them were future Hungarian kings. Especially before 1077, the dukes had an independent foreign and internal policy and the duchy was accepted as a separate entity not only by Hungary, but also by the Pope and by the German emperor. For example, when King Andrew I was in conflict with Byzantium, the Byzantine emperor contacted Béla. In 1059, Béla fled to Poland to his brother-in-law Boleslaus II, after king Andrew I had his own son Solomon crowned future king in 1057 (to be able to engage him with Judith).
In 1060, Béla returned to Hungary and defeated King Andrew I. The wounded Andrew sent his son Solomon to Germany, then he died (in 1061). Béla I (1061–1063) became the new king of Hungary and parallelly remained the duke of Nitra. After Béla's death in 1063, Henry installed Solomon as the new king of Hungary and Béla's sons Geza, Ladislaus and Lampert fled to Poland (to their kin, Boleslaus II). When Henry left Hungary, Boleslaus II attacked Solomon, defeated him and forced him to accept Geza as the king of Hungary.
Finally, however, in 1064, peace was made between Solomon and the sons of Béla, under which Solomon (1063–1074) remained king and Geza and Ladislaus received the Nitrian Frontier Duchy; more precisely, Géza became the Duke of Slovakia (11 counties), Ladislaus received Bihar (4 counties) and Lampert stayed in Nitra together with Geza without receiving own domains. New conflicts arose again soon and in 1074, Geza, Ladislaus and Lampert defeated Solomon. As a result, Geza I (1074–1077) became the new king of Hungary. His brother Ladislaus became the new Duke of the Nitrian Frontier Duchy (incl. Bihar) and later, in 1077, he succeeded his brother as the king of Hungary.
Under Ladislaus I (1077–1095) and Coloman (1095–1116), Hungary annexed the coastal regions of old Croatia, Dalmatia, Bosnian territories to the south of the Sava river, and northern western and central Slovakia. Ladislaus managed to defeat the Pecenegs and Cumanians.
The Arpadian kings usually supported the reform Popes in quarrels between Rome and Germany. Ladislaus founded the bishoprics of Oradea and Zagreb, and unified the Greek bishopric of Bács with the Latin archbishopric of Kalocsa. Coloman founded the (renewed) bishopric of Nitra (1110, other sources: c. 1085). Ladislaus consolidated the proprietary relations by stricter penal laws; Coloman improved the organization of the kingdom. In 1077, Lampert became the new Duke of Nitra, however Ladislaus considerably restrained Lampert's powers and deprived him of an own army. In 1081, Ladislaus put an end to Solomon's rule in Bratislava, which the former king Solomon occupied in 1074, and Solomon renounced the throne.
Coloman's brother Álmos was the duke of the newly conquered eastern Croatia (conquered 1081; duke since 1084) and later – on the request of the Croats – the king of eastern Croatia (1091–1095). In 1095, he was then dethroned by Coloman and appointed the duke of the Nitrian Frontier Duchy instead. A conflict arose between King Coloman and Álmos, who was supported by Germany and Bohemia, in 1098, after Coloman had even declared himself the king of Croatia in 1097 (crowned in 1102).
Finally in 1108, peace was made between the two brothers, but Coloman violated it and had Almos (and his son Béla) blinded and imprisoned in 1108 or 1109 to prevent him from becoming the future king. This act also marks the end of the Nitrian Frontier Duchy and thus a full integration of the territory of Slovakia into Hungary.
Coloman's childless son, Stephen II was enganged in a number of unnecessary wars (1116 Bohemia, 1123 Russia, 1127-29 Byzantium). He appointed Bela II the Blind (1131-41, see above) his successor. However Boris, the illegitimate brother of Stephen (whom his father Coloman did not legitimize), also wanted to become king and in 1132, supported by Polish and Russian troops, invaded the country, but was defeated (later once again in 1146). Since Béla was blind, his wife, the Serbian Ilona of Serbia, and his brother-in-law Ban Belos ruled instead of him. They had the supporters of Coloman killed during a Diet meeting, but as for international politics, they were good rulers. Béla II also became King of Bosnia.
Under Béla’s son Géza II (1141–1161), Hungary became one of the most powerful countries in Europe for about a century. Géza successfully won battles in favor of his brother-in-law Izjaslav (Prince of Kiew 1148–52), and defeated his kin Manuel Komnenos (Byzantine Emperor 1152–56), who had attacked Hungary. It was Geza who (around 1150) invited the first German (Saxon) settlers to Slovakia (esp. Spis) and Transylvania. Also, the Knights of St. John of Jerusalem (Knights of Malta) and the Knights of the Cross got to Hungary.
Géza's son Stephen III (1162-72) had to fight against Manuel I Comnenus all the time, who supported the rival uncles of Stephen and managed to make them kings for a short time (Ladislaus II (1162–63) and Stephen IV (1163)), during which Stephen III controlled only the region around Bratislava.
Finally, it was Béla III (educated in the Byzantium by Manuel) who became the new Hungarian king (1172-96). Béla III annexed Dalmatia and Croatia to Hungary again, reformed the financial system of the country, and founded Cistercian monasteries with his second wife Margaret Capet.
The elder son of Béla III Imre (1196–1204) married Constance of Aragon and his other son Andrew II (1205–1235) married Gertrude of Meran. Under these two kings, Western European influence was increasing in Hungary. The organization of the royal castles and court started to dissolve, the arising towns (mostly in Slovakia), received further foreign settlers (colonists). Under Imre's rule there were conflicts between the king and his brother Andrew (who was at that time the duke of Dalmatia and Croatia), so that Imre had Andrew even imprisoned in 1203. Under Andrew's rule (1205–1235), the international position of Hungary was improved, but within Hungary there were fights between the higher and lower gentry and the church. As a result, the king issued the Golden Bull, the Magna Carta of Hungary, in 1222 (revised in 1231).
The rule of his son Béla IV (1235–1270) was characterized by granting of the first civic privileges (town charter, town status) to arising towns in Hungary (in 1238 to Trnava, Banská Štiavnica/Selmecbánya), Krupina/Korpona and Zvolen/Zólyom), and by the disastrous invasion of the Mongols (wrongly called: Tartars) in 1241-1242 and the subsequent reconstruction of the country. As a result of the invasion, the king promoted the construction of castles made of stone and he also invited people living in Hungary, as well as foreign settlers, to settle in the depopulated territories (the Great Colonization). The nomadic Cumanians were settled in present-day central Slovakia and to Transsylvania.
By his decree of 1267, Béla also started to increase the power of lower gentry, which also triggered the change of the traditional Hungarian royal counties into quasi-autonomous territories under the control of certain nobles. The king had his ambitious son Stephen (duke of Transylvania between 1257–1259 and after 1260, duke of Styria between 1259–1260) marry the Cumanian princess Elizabeth and in 1262 he granted him the title Rex iunior and the eastern part of Hungary as fief, which entailed fightings between Béla and Stephen. As a result, Hungary was divided in two till Béla’s death in 1270, after which Stephen became the new king of whole Hungary.
The short rule of Stephen V (1270–1272) was followed by the rule of his son, the young Ladislaus IV (1272–1290), who was influenced by his Cumanian mother and her surroundings, which brought about royal conflicts with the church and the oligarchs. The oligarchs were certain magnate families in Hungary that started to behave like independent rulers on their respective territories (eastern present-day Hungary, western present-day Hungary, western Slovakia, eastern Slovakia, Transylvania, and Croatia) from the 1270s – 1280s onwards. There were also fights against Austria and against the Mongols.
After Ladislaus's death, Andrew III (1290–1301), an Árpád from Italy, was made king. He was a grandson of Andrew II by his third wife (but it is possible that his father was illegitimate). Due to the continuing rule of the oligarchs, total anarchy arose in the country in the late 1290s. The death of Andrew III on January 14, 1301 ended the male line of the Árpáds and his only daughter Elizabeth died in the Dominican monastery in Töss (Switzerland) on 6 May 1338. After a short interregnum the Angevin dynasty seized power and Charles Robert (grandson of Maria, sister of Ladislaus IV) became the new king. | 4,296 | ENGLISH | 1 |
We have had a wonderful time this term in 3H. We have looked at poems by Michael Rosen and some lucky children went to see him at the Theatre. Those of us left behind explored his chocolate cake poem whilst actually eating one! Yum! We have designed our own chocolate factories and writing stories connected with our book this term ‘Charlie and the Chocolate Factory’. In Maths we have been using multiplication and division for the 3,4 and 8 times table. Our Science work has kept us busy by exploring forces and magnets. We even invented our own magnetic games.
In Year 3, we have been reading Charlie and the Chocolate Factory by Roald Dahl. We have enjoyed exploring Mr Wonka’s factory and designing our own!
As part of our home learning, we bought our factories to life by creating our own chocolate rooms! Some of us even decided to use real chocolates and sweets! We have displayed them in our corridor, although it is very tempting to go and eat them!
As part of our Understanding the world we have been learning about the Romans. We learnt about Roman mosaics and how they made them. We tried to use a similar technique and created our own.
In Science we have been learning about different forces. We went outside to play on the equipment to explore what different forces we were using. We found that climbing up the ladder used the force push and pull.
We celebrated Michael Rosen Day and learnt about all the different books and poems he has written. We read his poem chocolate cake which was very funny! We then wrote our own chocolate cake poem, and to give us some inspiration, ate some chocolate cake too! | <urn:uuid:a3daf548-8467-4683-a1ff-6a67b12defce> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.birchington-primary.com/class-3h/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592565.2/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118110141-20200118134141-00472.warc.gz | en | 0.981686 | 340 | 3.34375 | 3 | [
-0.15103216469287872,
-0.1582721620798111,
0.3747202754020691,
0.5265765190124512,
-0.2889597415924072,
-0.017094392329454422,
0.15908558666706085,
0.28150612115859985,
-0.35154977440834045,
0.0879187062382698,
-0.03963524103164673,
-0.6217043399810791,
-0.007185977417975664,
0.09589666128... | 1 | We have had a wonderful time this term in 3H. We have looked at poems by Michael Rosen and some lucky children went to see him at the Theatre. Those of us left behind explored his chocolate cake poem whilst actually eating one! Yum! We have designed our own chocolate factories and writing stories connected with our book this term ‘Charlie and the Chocolate Factory’. In Maths we have been using multiplication and division for the 3,4 and 8 times table. Our Science work has kept us busy by exploring forces and magnets. We even invented our own magnetic games.
In Year 3, we have been reading Charlie and the Chocolate Factory by Roald Dahl. We have enjoyed exploring Mr Wonka’s factory and designing our own!
As part of our home learning, we bought our factories to life by creating our own chocolate rooms! Some of us even decided to use real chocolates and sweets! We have displayed them in our corridor, although it is very tempting to go and eat them!
As part of our Understanding the world we have been learning about the Romans. We learnt about Roman mosaics and how they made them. We tried to use a similar technique and created our own.
In Science we have been learning about different forces. We went outside to play on the equipment to explore what different forces we were using. We found that climbing up the ladder used the force push and pull.
We celebrated Michael Rosen Day and learnt about all the different books and poems he has written. We read his poem chocolate cake which was very funny! We then wrote our own chocolate cake poem, and to give us some inspiration, ate some chocolate cake too! | 332 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Tutankhamun was succeeded in 1352 B.C. by Aye (Ephraim), his great-uncle, protector and, ultimately, the avenger of his death. It was only four years before Aye, too, disappeared mysteriously from the scene, to be replaced by Horemheb (c. 1348-1335 B.C.), an army general, who secured his right to the throne by marrying Mutnezmet, the sister of Nefertiti.
We find Horemheb mentioned in the Old Testament as "a new king over Egypt which knew not Joseph" (Exodus 1:8), a description that cannot be applied to any of the four Amarna rulers, Akhenaten, Semenkhkare, Tutankhamun and Aye, all descendants of Joseph the Patriarch (Yuya), who brought the tribes of Israel down from Canaan to live in Egypt.
Horemheb inherited the religious revolution begun by Akhenaten, to which he was totally opposed. Worship of the Aten was abolished, and the names of the Amarna kings were excised from king-lists and monuments in a studied campaign to try to remove all traces of their rule from Egyptian memory. The task was carried out thoroughly, as was made clear once hieroglyphics were finally deciphered in comparatively modern times. A brilliant young French philologist, Francois Champollion (1790-1832), translated various Egyptian texts that had hitherto been a complete mystery to historians. Among them were the cartouches of the kings-list on the walls of the Osiris temple at Abydos in Upper Egypt. The list, which included the names of the kings of the Eighteenth Dynasty, made no mention of the four Amarna rulers. In the circumstances it is not surprising that when, in the middle of the last century, archaeologists came across the strangely drawn figure of Akhenaten at Amarna they were not sure initially what to make of him. Some thought that, like Queen Hatshepsut, this newly discovered Pharaoh was a woman who disguised herself as a king. Further cause for conjecture arose from the fact that Akhenaten had ascended to the throne as Amenhotep IV and later changed his name. Were they dealing with one Pharaoh or two?
Horemheb also made it a crime, punishable by death, even to mention the name of Akhenaten (Moses). I believe that the origin of the name Moses lies in this ban. Freud, as we saw earlier, pointed out that mos was an Egyptian word meaning "child," but it also had a wider legal meaning, "the rightful son and heir." This is clear from the inscriptions in a tomb at Sakkara about a dispute over a piece of land that lasted over a long period during reigns of different kings of the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Dynasties. The plaintiff in the case was a scribe named Khayri, who having been named once is afterward referred to as Mos to indicate his claim to be the rightful inheritor. Consequently, it seems to me that an alternative, a type of codename, had to be found that followers of Akhenaten (Moses) could refer to him. Therefore they called him Mos, the son, to indicate that he was the legitimate son of Amenhotep III and the rightful heir to his father's throne. Later, the biblical editor, who may not have had any knowledge of the original name of the greatest Israelite leader, attempted to put forward a Hebrew explanation of the Egyptian word Moses in order to sever any possible link between Moses and Egypt.
As we saw earlier, from a philological point of view, in Ancient Egyptian, which had no vowels, the written word meaning a child or son consists of two consonants, m and s, although the vowels were pronounced. It is consequently easy to see that the Hebrew word came from the Egyptian word. As for the final "s" of Moses, this derives from the Greek translation of the biblical name.
By the time Horemheb came to the throne, many Egyptians had adopted the Atenist faith and, as a result, were looked upon, in the words of Manetho, the native Egyptian historian of the third century B.C., as "polluted persons." Horemheb persecuted them. He turned the area around the fortified frontier city of Zarw, where Akhenaten (Moses) had been born, into a prison. There he gathered the mass of Akhenaten's followers, both Israelite and Egyptian, plus a variety of criminals, who lived in villages outside the city walls. Horemheb appointed Pa-Ramses (later Ramses I, the first ruler of the Nineteenth Dynasty) as his chief minister, Commander of the Troops, Overseer of Foreign Countries, Overseer of the Fortress of
Zarw and Master of the Horse. Pa-Ramses was therefore the most powerful man in Egypt after Horemheb, and it was he, on Horemheb's orders, who inflicted harsh labor on the Israelites and other prisoners by forcing them to rebuild Zarw as well as a new residence for himself, known later as Pi-Ramses, which, according to the Old Testament, was the starting point of the Exodus.
The length of Horemheb's reign has been the subject of considerable dispute, with estimates ranging from as low as 8 years to as high as 59. Manetho assigned 12 years and 3 months to Horemheb's reign. Support for Manetho's view is provided by two large storage jars, which bear hieratic dockets and were found in fairly recent times in Horemheb's tomb. One of them is dated to "Year 13, third month of Inundation" and is said to have contained "very good quality wine from the vineyard of the estate of Horemheb, beloved of Amun ..." As this is the last sure date we have for him and it agrees with the Manethonian tradition, it should be accepted as indicating the time he died.
The death of Horemheb in 1335 B.C., aged about 70, left Egypt without a legitimate heir to the Eighteenth Dynasty. Pa-Ramses, his chief minister, by now an old man, therefore prepared to claim the throne for himself as the first ruler of a new dynasty, the Nineteenth. It was at this point that Akhenaten (Moses), who had been in exile in the wilderness for about a quarter of a century, decided to try to reclaim his throne—at a time when, according to the Old Testament, the Lord assured him that "all the men are dead which sought thy life" (Exodus 4:19).
The biblical account of these events begins with the appearance of the Lord to Moses in a burning bush on the mount of God, Mount Sinai. The Lord said to him: "I have surely seen the affliction of my people which are in Egypt, and have heard their cry by reason of their taskmasters . . . And I am come down to deliver them out of the hands of the Egyptians, and to bring them up out of that land . . . unto a land flowing with milk and honey . . . Come now therefore, and I will send thee unto Pharaoh, that thou mayest bring forth my people the children of Israel out of Egypt..." (Exodus 3:7-8, 10).
Moses protested that the Israelites would not listen to him. The Lord said to him: "What is that in thine hand? And he said, A rod. And he said, Cast it on the ground. And he cast it on the ground, and it became a serpent . . . And the Lord said unto Moses, Put forth thine hand, and take it by the tail. And he put forth his hand and caught it, and it became a rod in his hand . . . And the Lord said furthermore unto him, Put now thine hand into thine bosom. And he put his hand into his bosom: and when he took it out, behold, his hand was leprous as snow. And he said, Put thine hand into thine bosom again. And he put his hand into his bosom again; and plucked it out of his bosom, and, behold, it was turned again as his other flesh. And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe thee, neither hearken to the voice of the first sign, that they will believe the voice of the latter sign. And it shall come to pass that, if they will not believe also these two signs, neither hearken unto thy voice, that thou shalt take of the water of the river, and pour it upon the dry land: and the water which thou tak-est out of the river shall become blood upon the dry land" (4:2—4, 6-9).
Moses was still unwilling to undertake the mission. He protested that he was "slow of speech and of a slow tongue" (4:10). However, the Lord replied "Is not Aaron the Levite thy brother? I know that he can speak well. And also, behold, he cometh forth to meet thee ... he shall be thy spokesman unto the people ... he shall be to thee instead of a mouth, and thou shalt be to him instead of God. And thou shalt take this rod in thine hand, wherewith thou shalt do signs" (4:14, 16-17).
Moses and Aaron made their way to Egypt where "Aaron spake all the words which the Lord had spoken unto Moses, and did the signs in the sight of the people. And the people believed . . . they bowed their heads and worshipped" (4:30-31). However, the oppression begun by Horemheb continued under his successor, Ramses I. When Moses and Aaron sought permission for the Israelites to spend three days in the wilderness to hold a feast to their God, Pharaoh not only refused but increased the harsh treatment of the Israelites: "Behold the people of the land now are many, and ye make them rest from their burdens. And Pharaoh commanded the same day the taskmasters of the people, and their officers, saying, Ye shall no more give the people straw to make bricks, as heretofore: let them go and gather straw for themselves. And the tale [number] of bricks, which they did make heretofore, ye shall lay upon them; ye shall not diminish ought thereof: for they be idle; therefore they cry, saying, Let us go and sacrifice to our God" (5:5-8).
Faced with this hostility, Moses and Aaron sought permission for the Israelites to leave Egypt altogether. It was refused, whereupon the Lord told Moses that when Pharaoh asked him to perform a miracle he was to instruct Aaron to "take thy rod, and cast it before Pharaoh, and it shall become a serpent . . . Then Pharaoh also called the wise men and the sorcerers: now the magicians of Egypt, they also did in a like manner with their enchantments. For they cast down every man his rod, and they became serpents: but Aaron's rod swallowed up their rods ..." (7:9-12).
When permission to leave Egypt was still withheld Aaron "lifted up the rod, and smote the waters that were in the river, in the sight of Pharaoh, and in the sight of his servants, and all the waters that were in the river turned to blood. And the fish that was in the river died; and the river stank, and the Egyptians could not drink of the water of the river; and there was blood throughout all the land of Egypt" (7:20-21). The white-hand ritual is not mentioned in this biblical account of events after the return of Moses to Egypt although it appears in the Koran. However, we are told how his "magic rod" was used to cause a whole series of plagues on the country— frogs, lice, flies, the death of cattle, boils, hail, flooding, locusts and darkness—that resulted eventually in the granting of permission for the Exodus.
The events that inspired this fanciful biblical account are much more mundane. On learning of the death of Horemheb, the implacable enemy of the Amarna kings and the monotheistic Aten, Akhenaten (Moses) decided to return to Egypt to reclaim his throne. If he was born in 1394 B.C. he would have been rising 60 years of age at the time. As he was "slow of tongue"—unable to address Israelites in their Hebrew language—he enlisted the aid of Aaron, his "feeding brother," both of whose parents were Israelites, to help him. He made his way to Zarw, his birthplace, where his challenge as Mos, the rightful ruler, had to be decided by Egyptian priests and elders. In support of his case he took with him his symbol of Pharaonic power—a scepter topped by a brass serpent. This was the "magic rod" of the biblical account. The Hebrew word used in the Bible to indicate the rod of Moses is nahash, which has the meanings of both "serpent" and "brass." In addition, the Haggadah, the legendary part of the Talmud, confirms the royal character of Moses's rod: "The rod which Moses used . . . was shaped and engraved in the image of a sceptre [a staff borne as a symbol of personal sovereignty]."
Akhenaten (Moses) did not simply produce his rod in support of his claim but performed before the priests and elders some secret rituals— secret, that is, from ordinary people—used by Pharaohs in their sed festivals for the purpose of rejuvenating their power, usually in their Year 30. Among them were the use of the serpent rod and the hand ritual described—with some embellishments—in the Exodus account of these events. For instance, in the tomb of Kheruef, one of Queen Tiye's stewards, a throne scene shows the queen with her husband, Amenhotep III. Under the dais of the throne we see Kheruef and other officials, each holding something that he is about to hand to the king so that he can use it during the sedfestival celebrations of his Year 30. In one scene, Kheruef is followed by eight palace officials, the first of whom is wearing an apron. He puts his right arm across his chest and his hand over his left shoulder while he holds his own forearm with the left hand. The fourth of these officials holds a bundle of clothes in his right hand and a curved scepter with serpent's head in his left.
The Koranic account of events after the return of (Akhenaten) Moses to Egypt gives more details than are to be found in the Book of Exodus, since the biblical narrator had a different interpretation of these events. It also presents the confrontation in such a precise way that one wonders if some of the details were left out of the biblical account deliberately. Here Moses sounds less like a magician, more like someone who presents evidence of his authority that convinces the wise men of Egypt, who throw themselves at his feet and thus earn the punishment of Pharaoh. One can only suspect that the biblical editor exercised care to avoid any Egyptian involvement with the Israelite Exodus, even to the extent of replacing Moses by Aaron in the performance of the rituals:
Moses said: "O Pharaoh! I am an apostle from The Lord of the Worlds,— One for whom it is right To say nothing but truth About Allah. Now have I Come unto you (people), from Your Lord with a clear (Sign) So let the Children of Israel Depart along with me."
(Pharaoh) said: "If indeed Thou hast come with a Sign, Show it forth, If thou tellest the truth."
Then (Moses) threw his rod, And behold! it was A serpent, plain (for all to see)! And he drew out his hand And behold! it was white To all beholders!
Said the Chiefs of the people Of Pharaoh: "This is indeed A sorcerer well-versed.
"His plan is to get you out Of your land: then What is it ye counsel?" They said "Keep him And his brother in suspense (For a while); and send To the cities men to collect—
"And bring up to thee
All (our) sorcerers well-versed."
So there came
The sorcerers to Pharaoh:
They said, "Of course
We shall have a (suitable)
Reward if we win!"
He said: "Yea, (and more),— For ye shall in that case Be (raised to posts) Nearest (to my person)."
They said: "O Moses Wilt thou throw (first), Or shall we have The (first) throw?"
Said Moses: "Throw ye (first)." So when they threw, They bewitched the eyes Of the people, and struck Terror into them: for they Showed a great (feat of) magic.
We put it into Moses's mind By inspiration: "Throw (now)
Thy rod": and behold! It swallows up straightaway All the falsehoods Which they fake.
Thus truth was confirmed, And all that they did Was made of no effect.
So the (great ones) were vanquished There and then, and were Made to look small.
But the sorcerers fell down Prostrate in adoration, Saying: "We believe In the Lord of the Worlds,—
"The Lord of Moses and Aaron."
Said Pharaoh: "Believe ye In Him before I give
You permission? Surely This is a trick which ye Have planned in the City To drive out its people: But soon shall ye know (The consequences).
"Be sure I will cut off Your hands and your feet On opposite sides, and I Will cause you all To die on the cross."
So Akhenaten (Moses) was not using magic but seeking to establish his royal authority, and the biblical story relates a political challenge for power in a mythological way. As for the promise that the Nile would turn red, this should be seen as indicating the time of the year. During the season of
Inundation, the Nile waters become reddish, and, if these events took place in the Eastern Delta, this would suggest the late days of summer, by which time this change of color would have begun to affect the lower reaches of the river. Similarly, the various plagues said to have been inflicted on Pharaoh and his country are to be seen as natural occurrences that would manifest themselves in the course of an Egyptian year.
Once they saw the scepter of royal authority and Akhenaten had performed the sed-festival rituals, the wise men "fell down prostrate in adoration," as the Koran puts it, confirming that his was the superior right to the throne. However, Pa-Ramses, who controlled the army, used his power to frustrate the verdict of the priests and elders and retained the right to rule by a kind of coup d'etat. Akhenaten (Moses) was left with no choice but to flee from Egypt with his followers—the Israelites and those Egyptians who had embraced the Atenist faith. So began the Exodus, the first stage of what would prove a long journey to the Promised Land of Canaan.
Akhenaten (Moses) and his followers made their way to Sinai via the marshy area to the south of Zarw and north of Lake Temsah and present-day Ismaelia. This watery route was chosen to hinder pursuit: Egyptian chariots would become stuck in the mud whereas the Israelites, traveling on foot, would be able to cross safely. This is the possible time and location for the biblical account of the pursuing Pharaoh who was drowned. Egyptian sources provide no evidence of this event, but it is certain that the short reign of Ramses I (c. 1335-1333 B.C.) came to an end with his death at this very time. Now faced with the problem of a large number of followers in need of food and water, Akhenaten abandoned his plan to head for Mount Sinai, and instead, went north on the ancient Road of Horus that connected Zarw on the borders of Egypt with the Canaanite city of Gaza. Along the road were settlements with water wells, guarded by military posts. According to the Book of Deuteronomy, Moses was eventually not allowed to enter the Promised Land and was killed by the Lord because "ye trespassed against me ... at the waters of Meribah-Kadesh in the wilderness ..." (32:51). Moses had not been forbidden to obtain water for his followers, which cannot in any case be regarded as a sinful act. The implication is that Akhenaten secured water from the wells along the Road of Horus. This could have been done easily by force although it seems more likely that force was not necessary: he still had his brass scepter of authority, and it is hardly to be imagined that a garrison commander would challenge the wishes of a former king whom he regarded as the Son of Ra.
Realizing that a fertile land was needed to feed his large following, Akhenaten next marched north toward Gaza and attempted to storm the city, seemingly joined by some of his bedouin Shasu allies (the Midianites of the Bible) in the assault. News of these events was reported to Egypt. Seti I (c. 1333-1304 B.C.), the son and successor of the elderly Ramses I, did not even wait for his late father's mummification before marching against Akhenaten, the Israelites and the Shasu. He met and defeated them at many locations on the Horus road as well as central Sinai. There was great slaughter among the Shasu, large numbers of whom were also captured and taken back to Egypt to be sacrificed at the feet of the god Amun-Ra at the Karnak temple. It is likely that Moses was killed by Seti himself in the course of these military operations (with the body either buried in the sand at the place of death, or left there to rot), and that it was his quest for water and food that much later, when the first five books of the Old Testament were written, inspired the waters of Meribah-Kadesh story.
Was this article helpful?
Magick is the art and practice of moving natural energies to effect needed or wanted change. Magick is natural, there is absolutely nothing supernatural about it. What is taught here are various techniques of magick for beginners. Magick is natural and simple and the techniques to develop abilities should be simple and natural as well. What is taught on this site is not only the basics of magick, but the basics of many things. | <urn:uuid:403d0153-3277-4bc2-a485-94a9abb5c368> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.wilmingtonfavs.com/ancient-egyptian/exodus.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594101.10/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119010920-20200119034920-00301.warc.gz | en | 0.980352 | 4,777 | 3.71875 | 4 | [
-0.499645471572876,
0.5557584762573242,
0.3465612232685089,
-0.059270456433296204,
-0.6946916580200195,
0.05512803792953491,
0.6021407246589661,
0.20573961734771729,
-0.17312157154083252,
0.32314711809158325,
0.028284015133976936,
-0.775749683380127,
0.24171680212020874,
0.0687395781278610... | 2 | Tutankhamun was succeeded in 1352 B.C. by Aye (Ephraim), his great-uncle, protector and, ultimately, the avenger of his death. It was only four years before Aye, too, disappeared mysteriously from the scene, to be replaced by Horemheb (c. 1348-1335 B.C.), an army general, who secured his right to the throne by marrying Mutnezmet, the sister of Nefertiti.
We find Horemheb mentioned in the Old Testament as "a new king over Egypt which knew not Joseph" (Exodus 1:8), a description that cannot be applied to any of the four Amarna rulers, Akhenaten, Semenkhkare, Tutankhamun and Aye, all descendants of Joseph the Patriarch (Yuya), who brought the tribes of Israel down from Canaan to live in Egypt.
Horemheb inherited the religious revolution begun by Akhenaten, to which he was totally opposed. Worship of the Aten was abolished, and the names of the Amarna kings were excised from king-lists and monuments in a studied campaign to try to remove all traces of their rule from Egyptian memory. The task was carried out thoroughly, as was made clear once hieroglyphics were finally deciphered in comparatively modern times. A brilliant young French philologist, Francois Champollion (1790-1832), translated various Egyptian texts that had hitherto been a complete mystery to historians. Among them were the cartouches of the kings-list on the walls of the Osiris temple at Abydos in Upper Egypt. The list, which included the names of the kings of the Eighteenth Dynasty, made no mention of the four Amarna rulers. In the circumstances it is not surprising that when, in the middle of the last century, archaeologists came across the strangely drawn figure of Akhenaten at Amarna they were not sure initially what to make of him. Some thought that, like Queen Hatshepsut, this newly discovered Pharaoh was a woman who disguised herself as a king. Further cause for conjecture arose from the fact that Akhenaten had ascended to the throne as Amenhotep IV and later changed his name. Were they dealing with one Pharaoh or two?
Horemheb also made it a crime, punishable by death, even to mention the name of Akhenaten (Moses). I believe that the origin of the name Moses lies in this ban. Freud, as we saw earlier, pointed out that mos was an Egyptian word meaning "child," but it also had a wider legal meaning, "the rightful son and heir." This is clear from the inscriptions in a tomb at Sakkara about a dispute over a piece of land that lasted over a long period during reigns of different kings of the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Dynasties. The plaintiff in the case was a scribe named Khayri, who having been named once is afterward referred to as Mos to indicate his claim to be the rightful inheritor. Consequently, it seems to me that an alternative, a type of codename, had to be found that followers of Akhenaten (Moses) could refer to him. Therefore they called him Mos, the son, to indicate that he was the legitimate son of Amenhotep III and the rightful heir to his father's throne. Later, the biblical editor, who may not have had any knowledge of the original name of the greatest Israelite leader, attempted to put forward a Hebrew explanation of the Egyptian word Moses in order to sever any possible link between Moses and Egypt.
As we saw earlier, from a philological point of view, in Ancient Egyptian, which had no vowels, the written word meaning a child or son consists of two consonants, m and s, although the vowels were pronounced. It is consequently easy to see that the Hebrew word came from the Egyptian word. As for the final "s" of Moses, this derives from the Greek translation of the biblical name.
By the time Horemheb came to the throne, many Egyptians had adopted the Atenist faith and, as a result, were looked upon, in the words of Manetho, the native Egyptian historian of the third century B.C., as "polluted persons." Horemheb persecuted them. He turned the area around the fortified frontier city of Zarw, where Akhenaten (Moses) had been born, into a prison. There he gathered the mass of Akhenaten's followers, both Israelite and Egyptian, plus a variety of criminals, who lived in villages outside the city walls. Horemheb appointed Pa-Ramses (later Ramses I, the first ruler of the Nineteenth Dynasty) as his chief minister, Commander of the Troops, Overseer of Foreign Countries, Overseer of the Fortress of
Zarw and Master of the Horse. Pa-Ramses was therefore the most powerful man in Egypt after Horemheb, and it was he, on Horemheb's orders, who inflicted harsh labor on the Israelites and other prisoners by forcing them to rebuild Zarw as well as a new residence for himself, known later as Pi-Ramses, which, according to the Old Testament, was the starting point of the Exodus.
The length of Horemheb's reign has been the subject of considerable dispute, with estimates ranging from as low as 8 years to as high as 59. Manetho assigned 12 years and 3 months to Horemheb's reign. Support for Manetho's view is provided by two large storage jars, which bear hieratic dockets and were found in fairly recent times in Horemheb's tomb. One of them is dated to "Year 13, third month of Inundation" and is said to have contained "very good quality wine from the vineyard of the estate of Horemheb, beloved of Amun ..." As this is the last sure date we have for him and it agrees with the Manethonian tradition, it should be accepted as indicating the time he died.
The death of Horemheb in 1335 B.C., aged about 70, left Egypt without a legitimate heir to the Eighteenth Dynasty. Pa-Ramses, his chief minister, by now an old man, therefore prepared to claim the throne for himself as the first ruler of a new dynasty, the Nineteenth. It was at this point that Akhenaten (Moses), who had been in exile in the wilderness for about a quarter of a century, decided to try to reclaim his throne—at a time when, according to the Old Testament, the Lord assured him that "all the men are dead which sought thy life" (Exodus 4:19).
The biblical account of these events begins with the appearance of the Lord to Moses in a burning bush on the mount of God, Mount Sinai. The Lord said to him: "I have surely seen the affliction of my people which are in Egypt, and have heard their cry by reason of their taskmasters . . . And I am come down to deliver them out of the hands of the Egyptians, and to bring them up out of that land . . . unto a land flowing with milk and honey . . . Come now therefore, and I will send thee unto Pharaoh, that thou mayest bring forth my people the children of Israel out of Egypt..." (Exodus 3:7-8, 10).
Moses protested that the Israelites would not listen to him. The Lord said to him: "What is that in thine hand? And he said, A rod. And he said, Cast it on the ground. And he cast it on the ground, and it became a serpent . . . And the Lord said unto Moses, Put forth thine hand, and take it by the tail. And he put forth his hand and caught it, and it became a rod in his hand . . . And the Lord said furthermore unto him, Put now thine hand into thine bosom. And he put his hand into his bosom: and when he took it out, behold, his hand was leprous as snow. And he said, Put thine hand into thine bosom again. And he put his hand into his bosom again; and plucked it out of his bosom, and, behold, it was turned again as his other flesh. And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe thee, neither hearken to the voice of the first sign, that they will believe the voice of the latter sign. And it shall come to pass that, if they will not believe also these two signs, neither hearken unto thy voice, that thou shalt take of the water of the river, and pour it upon the dry land: and the water which thou tak-est out of the river shall become blood upon the dry land" (4:2—4, 6-9).
Moses was still unwilling to undertake the mission. He protested that he was "slow of speech and of a slow tongue" (4:10). However, the Lord replied "Is not Aaron the Levite thy brother? I know that he can speak well. And also, behold, he cometh forth to meet thee ... he shall be thy spokesman unto the people ... he shall be to thee instead of a mouth, and thou shalt be to him instead of God. And thou shalt take this rod in thine hand, wherewith thou shalt do signs" (4:14, 16-17).
Moses and Aaron made their way to Egypt where "Aaron spake all the words which the Lord had spoken unto Moses, and did the signs in the sight of the people. And the people believed . . . they bowed their heads and worshipped" (4:30-31). However, the oppression begun by Horemheb continued under his successor, Ramses I. When Moses and Aaron sought permission for the Israelites to spend three days in the wilderness to hold a feast to their God, Pharaoh not only refused but increased the harsh treatment of the Israelites: "Behold the people of the land now are many, and ye make them rest from their burdens. And Pharaoh commanded the same day the taskmasters of the people, and their officers, saying, Ye shall no more give the people straw to make bricks, as heretofore: let them go and gather straw for themselves. And the tale [number] of bricks, which they did make heretofore, ye shall lay upon them; ye shall not diminish ought thereof: for they be idle; therefore they cry, saying, Let us go and sacrifice to our God" (5:5-8).
Faced with this hostility, Moses and Aaron sought permission for the Israelites to leave Egypt altogether. It was refused, whereupon the Lord told Moses that when Pharaoh asked him to perform a miracle he was to instruct Aaron to "take thy rod, and cast it before Pharaoh, and it shall become a serpent . . . Then Pharaoh also called the wise men and the sorcerers: now the magicians of Egypt, they also did in a like manner with their enchantments. For they cast down every man his rod, and they became serpents: but Aaron's rod swallowed up their rods ..." (7:9-12).
When permission to leave Egypt was still withheld Aaron "lifted up the rod, and smote the waters that were in the river, in the sight of Pharaoh, and in the sight of his servants, and all the waters that were in the river turned to blood. And the fish that was in the river died; and the river stank, and the Egyptians could not drink of the water of the river; and there was blood throughout all the land of Egypt" (7:20-21). The white-hand ritual is not mentioned in this biblical account of events after the return of Moses to Egypt although it appears in the Koran. However, we are told how his "magic rod" was used to cause a whole series of plagues on the country— frogs, lice, flies, the death of cattle, boils, hail, flooding, locusts and darkness—that resulted eventually in the granting of permission for the Exodus.
The events that inspired this fanciful biblical account are much more mundane. On learning of the death of Horemheb, the implacable enemy of the Amarna kings and the monotheistic Aten, Akhenaten (Moses) decided to return to Egypt to reclaim his throne. If he was born in 1394 B.C. he would have been rising 60 years of age at the time. As he was "slow of tongue"—unable to address Israelites in their Hebrew language—he enlisted the aid of Aaron, his "feeding brother," both of whose parents were Israelites, to help him. He made his way to Zarw, his birthplace, where his challenge as Mos, the rightful ruler, had to be decided by Egyptian priests and elders. In support of his case he took with him his symbol of Pharaonic power—a scepter topped by a brass serpent. This was the "magic rod" of the biblical account. The Hebrew word used in the Bible to indicate the rod of Moses is nahash, which has the meanings of both "serpent" and "brass." In addition, the Haggadah, the legendary part of the Talmud, confirms the royal character of Moses's rod: "The rod which Moses used . . . was shaped and engraved in the image of a sceptre [a staff borne as a symbol of personal sovereignty]."
Akhenaten (Moses) did not simply produce his rod in support of his claim but performed before the priests and elders some secret rituals— secret, that is, from ordinary people—used by Pharaohs in their sed festivals for the purpose of rejuvenating their power, usually in their Year 30. Among them were the use of the serpent rod and the hand ritual described—with some embellishments—in the Exodus account of these events. For instance, in the tomb of Kheruef, one of Queen Tiye's stewards, a throne scene shows the queen with her husband, Amenhotep III. Under the dais of the throne we see Kheruef and other officials, each holding something that he is about to hand to the king so that he can use it during the sedfestival celebrations of his Year 30. In one scene, Kheruef is followed by eight palace officials, the first of whom is wearing an apron. He puts his right arm across his chest and his hand over his left shoulder while he holds his own forearm with the left hand. The fourth of these officials holds a bundle of clothes in his right hand and a curved scepter with serpent's head in his left.
The Koranic account of events after the return of (Akhenaten) Moses to Egypt gives more details than are to be found in the Book of Exodus, since the biblical narrator had a different interpretation of these events. It also presents the confrontation in such a precise way that one wonders if some of the details were left out of the biblical account deliberately. Here Moses sounds less like a magician, more like someone who presents evidence of his authority that convinces the wise men of Egypt, who throw themselves at his feet and thus earn the punishment of Pharaoh. One can only suspect that the biblical editor exercised care to avoid any Egyptian involvement with the Israelite Exodus, even to the extent of replacing Moses by Aaron in the performance of the rituals:
Moses said: "O Pharaoh! I am an apostle from The Lord of the Worlds,— One for whom it is right To say nothing but truth About Allah. Now have I Come unto you (people), from Your Lord with a clear (Sign) So let the Children of Israel Depart along with me."
(Pharaoh) said: "If indeed Thou hast come with a Sign, Show it forth, If thou tellest the truth."
Then (Moses) threw his rod, And behold! it was A serpent, plain (for all to see)! And he drew out his hand And behold! it was white To all beholders!
Said the Chiefs of the people Of Pharaoh: "This is indeed A sorcerer well-versed.
"His plan is to get you out Of your land: then What is it ye counsel?" They said "Keep him And his brother in suspense (For a while); and send To the cities men to collect—
"And bring up to thee
All (our) sorcerers well-versed."
So there came
The sorcerers to Pharaoh:
They said, "Of course
We shall have a (suitable)
Reward if we win!"
He said: "Yea, (and more),— For ye shall in that case Be (raised to posts) Nearest (to my person)."
They said: "O Moses Wilt thou throw (first), Or shall we have The (first) throw?"
Said Moses: "Throw ye (first)." So when they threw, They bewitched the eyes Of the people, and struck Terror into them: for they Showed a great (feat of) magic.
We put it into Moses's mind By inspiration: "Throw (now)
Thy rod": and behold! It swallows up straightaway All the falsehoods Which they fake.
Thus truth was confirmed, And all that they did Was made of no effect.
So the (great ones) were vanquished There and then, and were Made to look small.
But the sorcerers fell down Prostrate in adoration, Saying: "We believe In the Lord of the Worlds,—
"The Lord of Moses and Aaron."
Said Pharaoh: "Believe ye In Him before I give
You permission? Surely This is a trick which ye Have planned in the City To drive out its people: But soon shall ye know (The consequences).
"Be sure I will cut off Your hands and your feet On opposite sides, and I Will cause you all To die on the cross."
So Akhenaten (Moses) was not using magic but seeking to establish his royal authority, and the biblical story relates a political challenge for power in a mythological way. As for the promise that the Nile would turn red, this should be seen as indicating the time of the year. During the season of
Inundation, the Nile waters become reddish, and, if these events took place in the Eastern Delta, this would suggest the late days of summer, by which time this change of color would have begun to affect the lower reaches of the river. Similarly, the various plagues said to have been inflicted on Pharaoh and his country are to be seen as natural occurrences that would manifest themselves in the course of an Egyptian year.
Once they saw the scepter of royal authority and Akhenaten had performed the sed-festival rituals, the wise men "fell down prostrate in adoration," as the Koran puts it, confirming that his was the superior right to the throne. However, Pa-Ramses, who controlled the army, used his power to frustrate the verdict of the priests and elders and retained the right to rule by a kind of coup d'etat. Akhenaten (Moses) was left with no choice but to flee from Egypt with his followers—the Israelites and those Egyptians who had embraced the Atenist faith. So began the Exodus, the first stage of what would prove a long journey to the Promised Land of Canaan.
Akhenaten (Moses) and his followers made their way to Sinai via the marshy area to the south of Zarw and north of Lake Temsah and present-day Ismaelia. This watery route was chosen to hinder pursuit: Egyptian chariots would become stuck in the mud whereas the Israelites, traveling on foot, would be able to cross safely. This is the possible time and location for the biblical account of the pursuing Pharaoh who was drowned. Egyptian sources provide no evidence of this event, but it is certain that the short reign of Ramses I (c. 1335-1333 B.C.) came to an end with his death at this very time. Now faced with the problem of a large number of followers in need of food and water, Akhenaten abandoned his plan to head for Mount Sinai, and instead, went north on the ancient Road of Horus that connected Zarw on the borders of Egypt with the Canaanite city of Gaza. Along the road were settlements with water wells, guarded by military posts. According to the Book of Deuteronomy, Moses was eventually not allowed to enter the Promised Land and was killed by the Lord because "ye trespassed against me ... at the waters of Meribah-Kadesh in the wilderness ..." (32:51). Moses had not been forbidden to obtain water for his followers, which cannot in any case be regarded as a sinful act. The implication is that Akhenaten secured water from the wells along the Road of Horus. This could have been done easily by force although it seems more likely that force was not necessary: he still had his brass scepter of authority, and it is hardly to be imagined that a garrison commander would challenge the wishes of a former king whom he regarded as the Son of Ra.
Realizing that a fertile land was needed to feed his large following, Akhenaten next marched north toward Gaza and attempted to storm the city, seemingly joined by some of his bedouin Shasu allies (the Midianites of the Bible) in the assault. News of these events was reported to Egypt. Seti I (c. 1333-1304 B.C.), the son and successor of the elderly Ramses I, did not even wait for his late father's mummification before marching against Akhenaten, the Israelites and the Shasu. He met and defeated them at many locations on the Horus road as well as central Sinai. There was great slaughter among the Shasu, large numbers of whom were also captured and taken back to Egypt to be sacrificed at the feet of the god Amun-Ra at the Karnak temple. It is likely that Moses was killed by Seti himself in the course of these military operations (with the body either buried in the sand at the place of death, or left there to rot), and that it was his quest for water and food that much later, when the first five books of the Old Testament were written, inspired the waters of Meribah-Kadesh story.
Was this article helpful?
Magick is the art and practice of moving natural energies to effect needed or wanted change. Magick is natural, there is absolutely nothing supernatural about it. What is taught here are various techniques of magick for beginners. Magick is natural and simple and the techniques to develop abilities should be simple and natural as well. What is taught on this site is not only the basics of magick, but the basics of many things. | 4,813 | ENGLISH | 1 |
kidzsearch.com > wiki Explore:images videos games
The Spanish-American War was a war fought between Spain and the United States of America in the year 1898. This war was fought in part because a lot of people wanted Cuba to become independent and also because many Americans wanted their country to get a colonial empire. Spain lost the sea war and had to give up its colonies of Cuba, the Philippines, Puerto Rico, and part of Guam. All of these colonies, except for Cuba, would become U.S. colonies at the end of the war.
Following reports of Spanish abuse and killing of Cubans, the United States sent warships to Cuba. Spain was losing control of Cuba and had been putting Cubans into concentration camps. The United States sent ships to Cuba to try to force Spain to give up Cuba. The U.S. battleship Maine exploded in Cuban waters, killing about 260 people on board. U.S. newspapers blamed Spain for the explosion. Spain tried to avoid going to war, but pressure from U.S. newspapers, called "yellow journalism," and ordinary people, persuaded U.S. government to go to war. Some of these people just wanted Cuba to become independent, but others hoped that the United States could build a colonial empire overseas, like many European countries had done.
A major attack occurred in the Philippines. An American fleet commanded by George Dewey destroyed the Spanish fleet. Ground battles took place in Cuba and Puerto Rico.
The war was won by the United States and they soon began to occupy and take control of these colonies after Spain surrendered. Almost 400 American soldiers died during fighting, but more than 4,000 Americans died from diseases such as yellow fever, typhoid, and malaria.
End of war | <urn:uuid:0571ede2-20a7-4b9c-9650-77f114d4c894> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://wiki.kidzsearch.com/wiki/Spanish-American_War | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251689924.62/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126135207-20200126165207-00223.warc.gz | en | 0.980864 | 357 | 3.4375 | 3 | [
-0.21191821992397308,
0.033175304532051086,
0.3180727958679199,
-0.2509106695652008,
0.11202839761972427,
-0.15321901440620422,
-0.0789654329419136,
0.14910125732421875,
-0.2494484931230545,
0.04388297721743584,
0.25505077838897705,
0.005177703686058521,
-0.536175549030304,
0.6154002547264... | 1 | kidzsearch.com > wiki Explore:images videos games
The Spanish-American War was a war fought between Spain and the United States of America in the year 1898. This war was fought in part because a lot of people wanted Cuba to become independent and also because many Americans wanted their country to get a colonial empire. Spain lost the sea war and had to give up its colonies of Cuba, the Philippines, Puerto Rico, and part of Guam. All of these colonies, except for Cuba, would become U.S. colonies at the end of the war.
Following reports of Spanish abuse and killing of Cubans, the United States sent warships to Cuba. Spain was losing control of Cuba and had been putting Cubans into concentration camps. The United States sent ships to Cuba to try to force Spain to give up Cuba. The U.S. battleship Maine exploded in Cuban waters, killing about 260 people on board. U.S. newspapers blamed Spain for the explosion. Spain tried to avoid going to war, but pressure from U.S. newspapers, called "yellow journalism," and ordinary people, persuaded U.S. government to go to war. Some of these people just wanted Cuba to become independent, but others hoped that the United States could build a colonial empire overseas, like many European countries had done.
A major attack occurred in the Philippines. An American fleet commanded by George Dewey destroyed the Spanish fleet. Ground battles took place in Cuba and Puerto Rico.
The war was won by the United States and they soon began to occupy and take control of these colonies after Spain surrendered. Almost 400 American soldiers died during fighting, but more than 4,000 Americans died from diseases such as yellow fever, typhoid, and malaria.
End of war | 361 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Recent work on the mummies of working people at Deir El-Medina in Egypt suggest that tattoos were much more common than previously thought 3,000 years ago. In the local cemetery, seven mummified women have been identified with tattoos. One had over 30!
The subject of the tattoos included sacred motifs such as Wadjet eyes, baboons, cobras, cows, scarab beetles, and lotus flowers. Some tattoos appear to have religious meaning, while others appear to offer healing or protection. Just like today, ancient Egyptians got tattoos for many reasons.
This may be a female shaman.
This fragment of an earthenware vessel inscribed with a possible drawing of
a woman shaman wearing a bird costume was uncovered in western Japan at
Shimizukaze, a site dating to the middle of the Yayoi Period, around
Nineteen other earthen vessels inscribed with human figures with
outstretched arms have been unearthed across Japan, but this is the
first to appear to have breasts.
Her eyes, nose, mouth, and one arm with five fingers are also visible on
the fragment, which measures just 5 inches by 6.5 inches.
Oda Tokuhime, the daughter of Oda Nobunaga, married Tokugawa Ieyasu’s five-year-old son Nobuyasu in 1563, when she herself was just five years old. The marriage, though for political advantage, became a happy one. The was just one problem: Tokuhime’s mother-in-law.
Lady Tsukiyama was so jealous and quarrelsome that even her husband had difficulty dealing with her. Among other things, she took a made a retainer’s daughter Nobuyasu’s concubine because Tokuhime had produced no sons by age 20 – although their two daughters would suggest that Tokuhime was certainly fertile enough.
At some point, Tokuhime decided she could not like with Tsukiyama anymore. She wrote an anonymous letter to her father, the very powerful Oda Nobunaga, and accused Lady Tsukiyama of treason. Tokugawa Ieyasu imprisoned his wife as a result, then to protect his alliance with Nobunaga, had her executed. But what would Nobuyasu, Tokuhime’s husband, do? Everyone was very concerned that he would seek an honorable revenge against Oda Nobunaga for the death of his mother. So Ieyasu ordered Nobuyasu to commit suicide by seppuku: his own son killed himself, to protect his father’s most important alliance. Tokuhime accidentally got rid of her husband while she was trying to get rid of her mother-in-law. Tokuhime lived another 50 years and never remarried.
This is Meritamun. Her name means “beloved of Amun,” the great Egyptian creator/sun god. She lived in ancient Egypt, sometime between 1500 BCE and 331 BCE, and was likely high status judging by the quality of the linens she was mummified with. Meritamun was between 18 and 25 when she died. | <urn:uuid:94e568bb-89d1-4281-a95c-fa0b3e07e254> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://history.blogberth.com/category/women/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251801423.98/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129164403-20200129193403-00525.warc.gz | en | 0.985413 | 658 | 3.296875 | 3 | [
-0.30450117588043213,
0.5917916297912598,
0.1214708462357521,
0.15718623995780945,
-0.32311004400253296,
0.012779416516423225,
0.6025804877281189,
0.05517024174332619,
-0.11281117796897888,
-0.013355194590985775,
0.14138486981391907,
-0.37356996536254883,
-0.08972901105880737,
0.5181551575... | 1 | Recent work on the mummies of working people at Deir El-Medina in Egypt suggest that tattoos were much more common than previously thought 3,000 years ago. In the local cemetery, seven mummified women have been identified with tattoos. One had over 30!
The subject of the tattoos included sacred motifs such as Wadjet eyes, baboons, cobras, cows, scarab beetles, and lotus flowers. Some tattoos appear to have religious meaning, while others appear to offer healing or protection. Just like today, ancient Egyptians got tattoos for many reasons.
This may be a female shaman.
This fragment of an earthenware vessel inscribed with a possible drawing of
a woman shaman wearing a bird costume was uncovered in western Japan at
Shimizukaze, a site dating to the middle of the Yayoi Period, around
Nineteen other earthen vessels inscribed with human figures with
outstretched arms have been unearthed across Japan, but this is the
first to appear to have breasts.
Her eyes, nose, mouth, and one arm with five fingers are also visible on
the fragment, which measures just 5 inches by 6.5 inches.
Oda Tokuhime, the daughter of Oda Nobunaga, married Tokugawa Ieyasu’s five-year-old son Nobuyasu in 1563, when she herself was just five years old. The marriage, though for political advantage, became a happy one. The was just one problem: Tokuhime’s mother-in-law.
Lady Tsukiyama was so jealous and quarrelsome that even her husband had difficulty dealing with her. Among other things, she took a made a retainer’s daughter Nobuyasu’s concubine because Tokuhime had produced no sons by age 20 – although their two daughters would suggest that Tokuhime was certainly fertile enough.
At some point, Tokuhime decided she could not like with Tsukiyama anymore. She wrote an anonymous letter to her father, the very powerful Oda Nobunaga, and accused Lady Tsukiyama of treason. Tokugawa Ieyasu imprisoned his wife as a result, then to protect his alliance with Nobunaga, had her executed. But what would Nobuyasu, Tokuhime’s husband, do? Everyone was very concerned that he would seek an honorable revenge against Oda Nobunaga for the death of his mother. So Ieyasu ordered Nobuyasu to commit suicide by seppuku: his own son killed himself, to protect his father’s most important alliance. Tokuhime accidentally got rid of her husband while she was trying to get rid of her mother-in-law. Tokuhime lived another 50 years and never remarried.
This is Meritamun. Her name means “beloved of Amun,” the great Egyptian creator/sun god. She lived in ancient Egypt, sometime between 1500 BCE and 331 BCE, and was likely high status judging by the quality of the linens she was mummified with. Meritamun was between 18 and 25 when she died. | 660 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Unlike the past when women were confined in their houses as house wives and were not allowed to work, get proper education or vote, modern women have access to all these. However, this is only in some countries such as the western countries. Women in South Western Asia, and their counterparts in North Africa have been denied their rights for long and their future in terms of rights doesn’t seem to be bright. In light with this observation, this article will comprehensively discuss the rights of women in the named regions with the purpose of bringing this issue in the open.
One characteristic of the North African region and the South Western Asia region is that these regions have been growing more than other regions especially those in the developing nations. For example, infant mortality has decreased and so is life expectancy. In addition, literacy rates especially among females have increased with a large percentage. Women have also increased their involvement in politics, economic life and making of decisions. Although this is the case, women education does not correlate with involvement in public life and their empowerment. Women’s public involvement and their economic still remains the lowest when compared to that in the world. When other countries boast about women rights and freedom, this region has little to celebrate.
One of the reasons that have seen this drag in women involvement is the harsh societal norms that downgrade women to inferior status. Instead of these norms diminishing, they are progressing. More so, governments in these regions have not been willing to address these inequalities through different legislations and policies. Instead, some pursue policies that oppress women. A look at the laws that protect women against abuses such as spousal abuses and marital rape are also not present in this region. Killing of women and their different abuses also continue and remain rooted in political and educational institutions in this region.
There have been various efforts of increasing the rights of women in this region but the efforts have been hindered by the lack of independence in the judiciary and other helpful institutions. The governments and the clergy have also exerted strong resistance on any efforts to increase women rights in these regions.
However, some regions have seen some improvements since women can vote and in some regions, women are now allowed to serve in parliaments. For example, in Kuwait, women were not allowed to vote, but now they can. This was also the same case with regions like Bahrain where obtaining of passports was not possible without approval by their males. However, there have been some tremendous increase in women rights and involvement in these societies.
Due to this problem, the region is suffering. Continual gender inequalities bring upon the region high costs and hinder the region from good governance and sustainable economic growth.
A Short Biography That Details the Problem in This Area
Although I have suffered from this problem, I have seen older adults suffering from this problem and one of them is my aunt. As a school teacher, my aunt suffered greatly because of her gender. To start with, my aunt is educated than most of the teachers in her school. However, she has never been allowed to teach classes in the higher level. Instead, she has only been allowed to teach students in the lower classes because they believe that this is her role.
The problem did not start from the school. Instead, it started when she decided to enroll in a local college. Her father was not for this idea, but the mother felt since my aunt was an educated woman; she could save the family from poverty if she gained education.
At one time, she was assigned the role of teaching a class of boys who were very naughty. She was happy that her time for earning more had come but she did not last long in that class. The young boys had been brainwashed by the society and they couldn’t believe that a woman could teach them. She was therefore permanently forced to teach students in the lower class levels.
Constantly in her career, my aunt used to receive various threats from the male teachers who thought that she was a threat to their jobs. For example, the schools’ administrators who were largely composed of men always discouraged her. Sometimes, she was forced to pay for other people’s mistakes after being implicated. She was once told that her position was not in the school but was in the house as a wife and a mother.
My aunt also reported of having been sexually harassed. Most of the male teachers that she worked with viewed her as a sexual object. Although she was a respectable woman, she had to deal with various sexual advances from people who were already married. Some did not take her firm standing lightly and they threatened to get back to her when they had a chance. Sometimes, the sexual advances came from the students who as seen earlier, had been brainwashed by the society to believe that women did not have a position in the society.
I remember that when my aunt narrated her life story, I saw it as a joke. However, I have come to realize that this is a problem in this region based from what I see on the TV and what my friends narrate to me. Stories of rape, women degradation, stoning and the like have increased and this has forced people into action. As for me, I would love to be an activist who can help in improving women’s rights in these and other regions.
What has be Done and What Can Be Done
As mentioned earlier, women groups in this region has been working towards their rights for long. Since their efforts have not been successful, it is the high time that international groups joined in to help these women in fighting for their rights. This is mainly because of the power that most of these NGOs hold, which can help pushing governments in this region into action. International governments can also help in promoting the rights of women in this region. For example, the US, which has power, can talk governments in this region towards accepting and implementing rules that support women’s rights.
Although this is a good strategy, it is important to note that power can only come from within. Governments in this region need to align their gender equality standards with those of international standards. They should also ensure that these standards are implemented and that relevant accountability measures are set in order to achieve a full capacity in terms of gender equality reforms.
Governments also need to come up with institutions that will advocate for gender equality in this region. The institutions should have clearly defined roles with the purpose of advancing gender equality. The institutions should also help in coordinating mechanisms in this area so as to achieve the gender equality objectives. Some of these institutions include ministries, independent institutions and other equality commissions. Parliament too should assume its role in promoting equality among its citizens.
The best institution, however, is a single ministry or a single agency that has a gender minister in order to open the people’s eyes on the need for equality in this region. In order to make sure that the institution is powerful, it should be given the mandate and also sufficient resources together with political leadership to effectively place gender related policies in the limelight.
Since the regions are vast, there should be an institution that combines the efforts in all these countries. This is with the aim of fighting for women’s rights as a group to promote coherence and coordination. The institutions should be associated with the governments in all these regions and advisory institutions set under the same institution.
The region also needs proper policy co-ordination so as to ensure that reforms related to gender are on track. Governments should make sure that they are involved in the policies whereby all involved institutions take their initiative to make sure that the efforts are successful.
Other efforts that can help in improving women’s right in these regions is through the efforts of increasing women’ access to different services such as education and health care. This should be done with a higher emphasis on quality of the services provided. Qualified staff that showcases gender equality should be used in providing these services. Adequate monetary support should also be provided in making sure that such efforts are successful.
International NGOs should also be supported in their efforts of bringing equality in this region. For example, for a long time, the UN has been working hard to empower women in some of these regions such as Afghanistan. What the organization lacks is proper support from the government and the society. Such organizations should also be respected in terms of autonomy and independence even when consulting activists, civil society and when appointing officials to represent them from the nations.
Another strategy that can be used in strengthening women’s rights is through providing the media and journalists with freedom when expressing themselves. This is because the freedom allows them to report issues without being harassed by the government’s officials and those that support the governments in discriminating women.
International communities, on their part, should continue donating money and other resources to the local organizations that fight for women’s rights. The organizations should also work to provide education and training to societies in these regions in order to teach them of the ills and effects of discriminating against women. When the justice systems need support in their fight against women discrimination, local and international donors should be ready to help them through funding and through other means.
Governments should also monitor all cases of gender inequality and bring those involved into justice. National security plans should be implemented and women promotion in their participation in elections should be ensured.
Women’s rights in South Western Asia/ North Africa have been continually violated despite the regions’ increased development in some human related areas such as mortality. There have been various efforts of increasing the rights of women in this region but the efforts have been hindered by lack of independence in the judiciary and other helpful institutions. The governments and the clergy have also exerted strong resistance on any efforts to increase women rights in these regions. Because of this, the regions have lagged behind some other regions since women would play some roles in their developments. Therefore, the governments and other parties such international NGOs and local organizations should join hands in making sure that women’s rights are promoted. This can be done through increased education and increased policies that allow women participation among other efforts. | <urn:uuid:0ecd9995-c70e-4050-932c-ea78c6cb1913> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://best-writing-service.com/essays/informative/women-rights-in-south-western-asia-and-north-africa | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598217.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120081337-20200120105337-00100.warc.gz | en | 0.983544 | 2,049 | 3.421875 | 3 | [
-0.13815626502037048,
0.19068825244903564,
0.059134356677532196,
-0.02837172895669937,
0.1712193489074707,
0.3453184962272644,
-0.23650002479553223,
0.16159866750240326,
0.05930560082197189,
0.19960790872573853,
0.027274735271930695,
0.08108595013618469,
0.3003450632095337,
-0.054260656237... | 11 | Unlike the past when women were confined in their houses as house wives and were not allowed to work, get proper education or vote, modern women have access to all these. However, this is only in some countries such as the western countries. Women in South Western Asia, and their counterparts in North Africa have been denied their rights for long and their future in terms of rights doesn’t seem to be bright. In light with this observation, this article will comprehensively discuss the rights of women in the named regions with the purpose of bringing this issue in the open.
One characteristic of the North African region and the South Western Asia region is that these regions have been growing more than other regions especially those in the developing nations. For example, infant mortality has decreased and so is life expectancy. In addition, literacy rates especially among females have increased with a large percentage. Women have also increased their involvement in politics, economic life and making of decisions. Although this is the case, women education does not correlate with involvement in public life and their empowerment. Women’s public involvement and their economic still remains the lowest when compared to that in the world. When other countries boast about women rights and freedom, this region has little to celebrate.
One of the reasons that have seen this drag in women involvement is the harsh societal norms that downgrade women to inferior status. Instead of these norms diminishing, they are progressing. More so, governments in these regions have not been willing to address these inequalities through different legislations and policies. Instead, some pursue policies that oppress women. A look at the laws that protect women against abuses such as spousal abuses and marital rape are also not present in this region. Killing of women and their different abuses also continue and remain rooted in political and educational institutions in this region.
There have been various efforts of increasing the rights of women in this region but the efforts have been hindered by the lack of independence in the judiciary and other helpful institutions. The governments and the clergy have also exerted strong resistance on any efforts to increase women rights in these regions.
However, some regions have seen some improvements since women can vote and in some regions, women are now allowed to serve in parliaments. For example, in Kuwait, women were not allowed to vote, but now they can. This was also the same case with regions like Bahrain where obtaining of passports was not possible without approval by their males. However, there have been some tremendous increase in women rights and involvement in these societies.
Due to this problem, the region is suffering. Continual gender inequalities bring upon the region high costs and hinder the region from good governance and sustainable economic growth.
A Short Biography That Details the Problem in This Area
Although I have suffered from this problem, I have seen older adults suffering from this problem and one of them is my aunt. As a school teacher, my aunt suffered greatly because of her gender. To start with, my aunt is educated than most of the teachers in her school. However, she has never been allowed to teach classes in the higher level. Instead, she has only been allowed to teach students in the lower classes because they believe that this is her role.
The problem did not start from the school. Instead, it started when she decided to enroll in a local college. Her father was not for this idea, but the mother felt since my aunt was an educated woman; she could save the family from poverty if she gained education.
At one time, she was assigned the role of teaching a class of boys who were very naughty. She was happy that her time for earning more had come but she did not last long in that class. The young boys had been brainwashed by the society and they couldn’t believe that a woman could teach them. She was therefore permanently forced to teach students in the lower class levels.
Constantly in her career, my aunt used to receive various threats from the male teachers who thought that she was a threat to their jobs. For example, the schools’ administrators who were largely composed of men always discouraged her. Sometimes, she was forced to pay for other people’s mistakes after being implicated. She was once told that her position was not in the school but was in the house as a wife and a mother.
My aunt also reported of having been sexually harassed. Most of the male teachers that she worked with viewed her as a sexual object. Although she was a respectable woman, she had to deal with various sexual advances from people who were already married. Some did not take her firm standing lightly and they threatened to get back to her when they had a chance. Sometimes, the sexual advances came from the students who as seen earlier, had been brainwashed by the society to believe that women did not have a position in the society.
I remember that when my aunt narrated her life story, I saw it as a joke. However, I have come to realize that this is a problem in this region based from what I see on the TV and what my friends narrate to me. Stories of rape, women degradation, stoning and the like have increased and this has forced people into action. As for me, I would love to be an activist who can help in improving women’s rights in these and other regions.
What has be Done and What Can Be Done
As mentioned earlier, women groups in this region has been working towards their rights for long. Since their efforts have not been successful, it is the high time that international groups joined in to help these women in fighting for their rights. This is mainly because of the power that most of these NGOs hold, which can help pushing governments in this region into action. International governments can also help in promoting the rights of women in this region. For example, the US, which has power, can talk governments in this region towards accepting and implementing rules that support women’s rights.
Although this is a good strategy, it is important to note that power can only come from within. Governments in this region need to align their gender equality standards with those of international standards. They should also ensure that these standards are implemented and that relevant accountability measures are set in order to achieve a full capacity in terms of gender equality reforms.
Governments also need to come up with institutions that will advocate for gender equality in this region. The institutions should have clearly defined roles with the purpose of advancing gender equality. The institutions should also help in coordinating mechanisms in this area so as to achieve the gender equality objectives. Some of these institutions include ministries, independent institutions and other equality commissions. Parliament too should assume its role in promoting equality among its citizens.
The best institution, however, is a single ministry or a single agency that has a gender minister in order to open the people’s eyes on the need for equality in this region. In order to make sure that the institution is powerful, it should be given the mandate and also sufficient resources together with political leadership to effectively place gender related policies in the limelight.
Since the regions are vast, there should be an institution that combines the efforts in all these countries. This is with the aim of fighting for women’s rights as a group to promote coherence and coordination. The institutions should be associated with the governments in all these regions and advisory institutions set under the same institution.
The region also needs proper policy co-ordination so as to ensure that reforms related to gender are on track. Governments should make sure that they are involved in the policies whereby all involved institutions take their initiative to make sure that the efforts are successful.
Other efforts that can help in improving women’s right in these regions is through the efforts of increasing women’ access to different services such as education and health care. This should be done with a higher emphasis on quality of the services provided. Qualified staff that showcases gender equality should be used in providing these services. Adequate monetary support should also be provided in making sure that such efforts are successful.
International NGOs should also be supported in their efforts of bringing equality in this region. For example, for a long time, the UN has been working hard to empower women in some of these regions such as Afghanistan. What the organization lacks is proper support from the government and the society. Such organizations should also be respected in terms of autonomy and independence even when consulting activists, civil society and when appointing officials to represent them from the nations.
Another strategy that can be used in strengthening women’s rights is through providing the media and journalists with freedom when expressing themselves. This is because the freedom allows them to report issues without being harassed by the government’s officials and those that support the governments in discriminating women.
International communities, on their part, should continue donating money and other resources to the local organizations that fight for women’s rights. The organizations should also work to provide education and training to societies in these regions in order to teach them of the ills and effects of discriminating against women. When the justice systems need support in their fight against women discrimination, local and international donors should be ready to help them through funding and through other means.
Governments should also monitor all cases of gender inequality and bring those involved into justice. National security plans should be implemented and women promotion in their participation in elections should be ensured.
Women’s rights in South Western Asia/ North Africa have been continually violated despite the regions’ increased development in some human related areas such as mortality. There have been various efforts of increasing the rights of women in this region but the efforts have been hindered by lack of independence in the judiciary and other helpful institutions. The governments and the clergy have also exerted strong resistance on any efforts to increase women rights in these regions. Because of this, the regions have lagged behind some other regions since women would play some roles in their developments. Therefore, the governments and other parties such international NGOs and local organizations should join hands in making sure that women’s rights are promoted. This can be done through increased education and increased policies that allow women participation among other efforts. | 2,000 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Honeycombs are made out of hexagonal cells. This makes them pretty to look at, but it begs the question of why. Why hexagons and not, for example, squares, or triangles?
The answer is to do with the fact that the dividing walls between the cells are made out of wax, and that wax is expensive to produce for the bees. To make one pound of it, they would have to collectively consume about six pounds of honey and they would need to fly the equivalent of nine times around the world to collect enough pollen to make that much honey.
This is why it makes sense for bees to choose a grid in which the total length of the dividing walls between cells is as small as possible. And this is the case for the honeycomb grid: out of all the grids that divide the plane into cells of (a given) equal area, the honeycomb has the smallest perimeter, that is, the smallest total length of dividing lines.
People have known this since at least 300 AD when the Greek mathematician Pappus of Alexandria wrote about it in On the sagacity of bees. Proving the statement mathematically, however, was another story. It took over 2000 years, until 1999, when a general proof was finally provided by the mathematician Thomas Hales. Mathematicians were overjoyed that the millennia old problem had finally been solved. What the bees thought of the proof we do not know.
Return to the Plus advent calendar 2019. | <urn:uuid:f99cdd04-94de-4a2f-a7ed-5a3e8d688527> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://plus.maths.org/content/plus-advent-calendar-door-24-sagacity-bees | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606975.49/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122101729-20200122130729-00442.warc.gz | en | 0.980319 | 300 | 3.71875 | 4 | [
-0.026520783081650734,
-0.16131752729415894,
0.14308476448059082,
-0.4503803551197052,
-0.13795040547847748,
0.37721309065818787,
-0.010662472806870937,
0.3728785514831543,
0.11312359571456909,
0.10957484692335129,
0.0778769701719284,
-0.5237835645675659,
0.2916058599948883,
0.277455389499... | 4 | Honeycombs are made out of hexagonal cells. This makes them pretty to look at, but it begs the question of why. Why hexagons and not, for example, squares, or triangles?
The answer is to do with the fact that the dividing walls between the cells are made out of wax, and that wax is expensive to produce for the bees. To make one pound of it, they would have to collectively consume about six pounds of honey and they would need to fly the equivalent of nine times around the world to collect enough pollen to make that much honey.
This is why it makes sense for bees to choose a grid in which the total length of the dividing walls between cells is as small as possible. And this is the case for the honeycomb grid: out of all the grids that divide the plane into cells of (a given) equal area, the honeycomb has the smallest perimeter, that is, the smallest total length of dividing lines.
People have known this since at least 300 AD when the Greek mathematician Pappus of Alexandria wrote about it in On the sagacity of bees. Proving the statement mathematically, however, was another story. It took over 2000 years, until 1999, when a general proof was finally provided by the mathematician Thomas Hales. Mathematicians were overjoyed that the millennia old problem had finally been solved. What the bees thought of the proof we do not know.
Return to the Plus advent calendar 2019. | 314 | ENGLISH | 1 |
17 Jul Soup Kitchens and the Great Hunger.
The great hunger.
There had been Famines before it and Famines after it. Without a doubt, the worse was the Great Irish Famine 1846-1851. This period especially 1846 and 1847 was affected by Government propaganda and revisionist and national historians and much of what they wrote have been compounded by extant historians.
The winter of 1846 was one of the worst in Ireland for growing potatoes [potatoes and bread was the stable diet for the Irish rural and poor population]. Potatoes were either rotting in the ground [it was estimated that nine million potatoes were rotting] or suffered ‘potato blight’. At the start, there was plenty of National responsibility by the English population, but this changed with the election of the laissez-faire Whig government in 1847. Prior to that, the conservative government of Sir Robert Peel accepted the responsibility of feeding the poor of Ireland. Doing this through the Poor Act and giving outdoor relief.
The main relief was cornmeal, although the Government was importing corn and maize and selling it at the market price cornmeal’s were very unpopular with the Irish poor claiming relief. On the 24th March 1847, the United Kingdom held a national day of fasting and humiliation. This was marked by a general stoppage of work in shops and businesses, the churches opened and general collections for the poor and hungry of Ireland was established. However, the Metropolitan poor viewed that day as a day of fun. The fast day and support for the Irish proved very ephemeral and could be one of the reasons why in the UK on 24th March 1847 General Election Peel’s Tory party lost and the Whig’s Laissez-Faire Party under Sir John Russel gained the day, which will affect the poor in Ireland in a very big way.
The Whig government put in place Charles Trevelyan to oversee the Irish Famine quickly decided to stop importing corn and maize, thereby stopping cornmeals. They also decided that they should end ‘outdoor relief’ and encourage the use of local workhouses. [Remember it was a previous Whig government that bought in The New Poor Act in 1834]. Trevelyan favourite saying, “The Judgement of God sent the calamity to teach the Irish a lesson that calamity must not be migrated”. To the Whig government, it was a matter of costs and they intended to reduce them. They had already decided that the Irish poor should be given ‘free soup’ through soup-kitchens which were to be funded by generous benefactors. They expected wealthy landowners to donate to the government through ‘poor law rate’. Before 1838 when it was parochial rates. Although they grumbled, they tended to pay them. However, when parishes were gathered together to form unions, they objected in stating there was not enough land or property owners to pay the poor law rates. Trevelyan thought soup-kitchens was the cheapest way to deal with the famine. Therefore, the Government brought out the 1847 Soup Kitchen Act
Enter Alexis Soyer.
Soyer had designed a soup-kitchen which he had called Soyer’s Parochial Kitchen and had one installed in Bethnal Green and Spitalfields. His mentor the duchess of Sutherland knew about his soup kitchens and asked him to meet Lord Bessborough, the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. On meeting Bessborough who then asked Alexis if he would take his design to Dublin Ireland and show people how a soup kitchen worked. Alexis agreed but needed permission from the Reform Club who at first gave him permission for 4 weeks and then allowed a further 2 weeks extension. With his soup kitchens in Spitalfields and Bethnal Green, Alexis had felt that the soup that was being given out was not so much soup for the poor but poor soup for the poor. Alexis had then put his mind to creating some beneficial soup for the poor which he practised on Reform Club Members and most approved the soup. Alexis thought he would be able to bring these soup receipts with him. Alexis’ soups cost ¾d a quart to make however he was quickly informed that he could not use his receipt’s as they were too costly. Even before he got to Ireland his there were complaints about his soups. Prior to Alexis even going to Ireland and setting up a soup kitchen, an article appeared in The Lancet. It accused Alexis of ‘soup-quackery’. It appears that somehow Alexis had upset someone. The article in The Lancet was written by an unnamed author, who was taking issue with Alexis’ claim that: “A bellyful of my soup, once a day, together with a biscuit, will be more than sufficient to sustain the strength of a strong and healthy man”. Alexis had devised some Famine Soups and was trying them at the Reform Club; his critic must have tasted the soups there – leading one to suppose that he must have been a Reform Club member. On arriving in Dublin, he heard mumblings about his soup This was the first time – other than from the odd Reform Club member – that Alexis faced criticism. The critics seemed to resent a chef from a rich man’s club coming to oversee the soup kitchens for the poor.
For Alexis, the criticism had to be stopped, or the whole venture would be a failure. A suggestion came from the small band of critics – that the Famine soups should be tested by an independent nutritionist. One was appointed by The Royal Dublin Society, his name was John Aldridge, who was a Professor of Chemistry. He based his report – which was very long and wordy – first on animals that eat vegetables. How much they ate and how much they wasted through body-waste and what weight loss, if any, took place. He then transposed these figures to a human being and worked out what a four stone child would need in nourishment to remain the same weight. On testing Alexis’ soups on May 6th, 1847, he readily agreed with Alexis that the fact his soups contained all the vegetable including any leaf or topping, added important nutrients to the diet. Alexis showed Aldridge how he had considered the extra needs of children and planned to give them beef soup, pea panada and rice curry. Aldridge, who partook of the pea panada, though it was extremely palatable and very nutritious – he personally felt that it would benefit with some onions.
Aldridge tested other soups besides Alexis’ but admitted that all Alexis’ soups would help a man keep alive for quite some time. (It must be remembered that the ‘normal’ diet of the Irish poor was potatoes, bread and water.) Aldridge claimed the most nutritious and cheapest soup was Soyer Fish soup No 6-famine soup. He also added: “In the name of the Irish people I thank M. Soyer for what I believe to be his purely philanthropic intentions towards them. He has given to us two boons of no ordinary value, a model dispensing kitchen of great ingenuity, and a method of economic cooking far superior to any to which the poorer order of out countrymen has hitherto been accustomed”. Alexis proclaimed through local Irish papers that indeed his soup was nourishing, it would not replace the main meal, but people could survive with just his soup and they could do so for several weeks. This seemed to stop all the critics in one fell swoop. He challenged anyone who could do better to do so. There were no takers.
Several Irish historians recant about Soyer his soup kitchen and his bad soup in doing this they always reference a book The History of the Great Irish Famine of 1847 by John O’Rourke who had written about people complaining about Soyer’s soups, But he did not write about Alexis demanding that his soups were to be tested. Historians needed to read Paddy’s Lament by Thomas Gallagher to learn about prof’ Aldridge testing Alexis’ soups
Finally, the Soup kitchen was completed in The Royal Barracks Esplanade, Dublin and on the 4th April 1847, it was opened to the public. George, Prince of Cambridge, came and was very impressed and tried some of Soyer’s soup. I have come across several descriptions of the kitchen. The one I prefer is the following that Alexis told to The Illustrated London News:
“The exterior and covering are of a temporary nature, being formed of boards and canvass, enclosing a space of forty-five feet long, and forty feet wide. The interior consists of a steam-boiler, on wheels, thirteen feet long, and four feet wide, with a glaze-pan over it, capable of containing three hundred gallons; and at the end an oven to bake one hundredweight of bread at a time; and all heated by the same fire. Under the boiler is an excavation to contain coals and round it an elevated platform to give access to the glaze-pan. At the distance of eight feet, round the boiler, are eight iron bain marie pans with covers, six feet long and twenty-two inches wide, on wheels, and made double, to be boiled, by steam, and contain, together, one thousand gallons. At each end, extending between the pans, are the cutting tables – at one end the meat, and at the other, the vegetables; and under which are placed wooden soaking tubs, on wheels, and chopping blocks for the meat drawers and sliding shelf. Four feet beyond these are placed a row of tables, eighteen inches wide, in which a hole is cut, and therein placed a quart iron white enamelled basin, with a metal spoon attached thereto by a neat chain; there are one hundred of these, and the table forms the outer boundary of the kitchen; leaving a space of two feet six inches between it and the wall. Inside the table are fastened tin water-cases, at the distance of ten feet apart, containing a sponge &c, to clean out the soup basins.
Round the two supports of the roof are circular tin boxes for the condiments. Seven feet from the ground at each corner is placed a safe five feet square and seven feet high, with sides of the wire, for ventilation, which contains, respectively, meat, vegetables, grain and condiments. At the same elevation as the safes are sixteen butts, containing 1792 gallons of water.
At the entrance in the centre, is the weighing machine. The fire being lighted, a certain quantity of fat or dripping is placed in the glaze-pan, and in the soup-pans the farinaceous ingredients, or thickening, along with the water. As soon as the fat is melted in the glaze-pan, the vegetables, cut into thin slices, or dice, are placed therein; after the lapse of ten minutes, the meat, which has been previously cut into small pieces, is added, and allowed gradually to fry, until the juice is extracted, and a good glaze formed, which will be in about thirty-five minutes.
The condiments are then added, and the glaze is removed and distributed equally in the bain marie pans; it is boiled for twenty minutes, and the soup or food is complete; this is the time used in making the soup, when such farinaceous ingredients or flour, oatmeal, and rice or barley, previously soaked, are employed; but peas, Indian corn meal, and many other ingredients, will take longer boiling. It is ready to be removed by ladies into the basins in the surrounding tables. Outside the table is a zigzag passage capable of containing one hundred persons in a small place in the open air; at the entrance is a checker-clerk, and an indicator; or machine which numbers every person that passes; and on the other side is a bread and biscuit room, where those who have partaken of the soup, and are departing, receive on passing a quarter of a pound of bread or savoury biscuit; as I prefer giving it then, instead of with the soup or food, it being sufficient for one meal without, and will not only save time, but when eaten afterwards, will be more wholesome, and act more generously on the system, than when eaten in haste. When the soup or food is ready, notice is given by ringing the bell, and the one hundred people are admitted and take their places at the table – the basins, being previously filled, grace is said – the bell is again rang for them to begin, and a sufficient time is allowed them to eat their quart of food. During the time they are emptying their basins the outside passage is again filling; as soon as they are done, and are going out at the other side, the basin and spoon are cleaned, and again filled; the bell rings, and a fresh number admitted; this continuing every successive six minutes, feeding one thousand persons every hour; but as there are three thousand quarts more to distribute, which occupies only seventy minutes to make, other means must be used for distributing the food for which purpose a door is provided at the entrance of the kitchen, to which persons come with tickets, which are given to them by district visitors or subscribers; or, if not with tickets, to purchase the food, and which they take home with them. There are also provided carts and barrows for either horse, donkeys, or men to draw, containing from twenty-five gallons to two hundred gallons each, with fires attached, so that the soup or food contained in them should be hot or cooking on its way to the place of distribution. Such is a brief description of the kitchen. I also propose to change the diet every day, according to the provisions obtainable, and on fast days to give meagre food.
It cannot be stressed enough how important Alexis’ kitchen was for Ireland, allowing many more people to be fed. His kitchen in some semblance or other was copied in most towns. It did not resolve the politics of Ireland, nor cure the potato famine but it did save lives. Alexis already mentioned the benefits that besides serving soup it could distribute it as well, allowing small villages and obscure houses to benefit from the soup. Of the people who complained about the soup, not one was in need or even partook of the soup. Those that did, the poor, were grateful for the soup and that is all Alexis cared about. However, the poverty that Alexis saw had a great effect on him.
Alexis left Ireland on Sunday 11th April 1847 and on the night before; several of his friends gave a dinner in his honour, at the Freemason’s Hall, College Green. He was thanked for all that he had done for Ireland. He was presented with a very elegant snuffbox, with the inscription. “Presented to M. Alexis Soyer, in testimony of the high sense entertained of his valuable scientific and philanthropic services while engaged in this country on his mission of good in behalf of the destitute poor, by some of his admiring friends, who gladly avail themselves of an early opportunity to mark their regard for himself personally, and the esteem in which his beneficent and truly useful labours have been held by them, Dublin, 10th April 1847.” On the 10th April 1847, the Model Kitchen was handed over to the ladies of the South Union Relief Committee of Dublin, who ran it very successfully until the end of autumn when all soup kitchens in Ireland were closed, although the need for them was still required in 1848. The British Government in its infinite wisdom decided not to open them again. They considered the soup kitchens as outdoor relief which they were trying to stop, they felt the poor should go into workhouses.
However, after Alexis left Ireland people started to complain about his style of soup kitchens. Such as plates and cutlery being nailed to the tables. How they only had about 4 minutes to eat their food. How they had to join long queues and then being allowed in the soup kitchens, a certain amount of people. They simply felt their dignity and pride was taken away from them. Also, there is a word that most present-day Irish hate and that is “Souperism”. Quite a few soup kitchens were run by the Protestant church and organisations and they would refuse to give the Catholic poor any soup unless they proselytise to the protestant faith. The Catholic poor became very weary protestant do-gooders and would seek help elsewhere. Souperism helped the government close all the soup kitchens, up to the end of July outdoor relief was costing the government £3,020,712 per month by closing the soup-kitchens spending on relief was £505,984. It is estimated that a million people died during the Great Famine, that two million people emigrated leaving an Irish population of some five million people.
In my research of the daily newspapers during Alexis’ time in Ireland, they were all very supportive The Cork Examiner in an article in 1848, summarising the effects of the famine on Ireland to date, pointed out that 340 doctors had died through starvation. They also credited Alexis Soyer with saving hundreds of lives, with his Famine Soups. | <urn:uuid:8eea78f7-166b-496e-a6ff-857a21b56a6e> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://alexis-soyer.com/soup-kitchens/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606975.49/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122101729-20200122130729-00113.warc.gz | en | 0.983898 | 3,609 | 3.375 | 3 | [
-0.21636897325515747,
0.19602535665035248,
0.24754732847213745,
0.07087668776512146,
0.26530921459198,
-0.18356306850910187,
-0.3389614522457123,
-0.4169280529022217,
-0.4785972237586975,
-0.03765534609556198,
0.05130799114704132,
-0.20974555611610413,
0.21061834692955017,
0.19405095279216... | 9 | 17 Jul Soup Kitchens and the Great Hunger.
The great hunger.
There had been Famines before it and Famines after it. Without a doubt, the worse was the Great Irish Famine 1846-1851. This period especially 1846 and 1847 was affected by Government propaganda and revisionist and national historians and much of what they wrote have been compounded by extant historians.
The winter of 1846 was one of the worst in Ireland for growing potatoes [potatoes and bread was the stable diet for the Irish rural and poor population]. Potatoes were either rotting in the ground [it was estimated that nine million potatoes were rotting] or suffered ‘potato blight’. At the start, there was plenty of National responsibility by the English population, but this changed with the election of the laissez-faire Whig government in 1847. Prior to that, the conservative government of Sir Robert Peel accepted the responsibility of feeding the poor of Ireland. Doing this through the Poor Act and giving outdoor relief.
The main relief was cornmeal, although the Government was importing corn and maize and selling it at the market price cornmeal’s were very unpopular with the Irish poor claiming relief. On the 24th March 1847, the United Kingdom held a national day of fasting and humiliation. This was marked by a general stoppage of work in shops and businesses, the churches opened and general collections for the poor and hungry of Ireland was established. However, the Metropolitan poor viewed that day as a day of fun. The fast day and support for the Irish proved very ephemeral and could be one of the reasons why in the UK on 24th March 1847 General Election Peel’s Tory party lost and the Whig’s Laissez-Faire Party under Sir John Russel gained the day, which will affect the poor in Ireland in a very big way.
The Whig government put in place Charles Trevelyan to oversee the Irish Famine quickly decided to stop importing corn and maize, thereby stopping cornmeals. They also decided that they should end ‘outdoor relief’ and encourage the use of local workhouses. [Remember it was a previous Whig government that bought in The New Poor Act in 1834]. Trevelyan favourite saying, “The Judgement of God sent the calamity to teach the Irish a lesson that calamity must not be migrated”. To the Whig government, it was a matter of costs and they intended to reduce them. They had already decided that the Irish poor should be given ‘free soup’ through soup-kitchens which were to be funded by generous benefactors. They expected wealthy landowners to donate to the government through ‘poor law rate’. Before 1838 when it was parochial rates. Although they grumbled, they tended to pay them. However, when parishes were gathered together to form unions, they objected in stating there was not enough land or property owners to pay the poor law rates. Trevelyan thought soup-kitchens was the cheapest way to deal with the famine. Therefore, the Government brought out the 1847 Soup Kitchen Act
Enter Alexis Soyer.
Soyer had designed a soup-kitchen which he had called Soyer’s Parochial Kitchen and had one installed in Bethnal Green and Spitalfields. His mentor the duchess of Sutherland knew about his soup kitchens and asked him to meet Lord Bessborough, the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. On meeting Bessborough who then asked Alexis if he would take his design to Dublin Ireland and show people how a soup kitchen worked. Alexis agreed but needed permission from the Reform Club who at first gave him permission for 4 weeks and then allowed a further 2 weeks extension. With his soup kitchens in Spitalfields and Bethnal Green, Alexis had felt that the soup that was being given out was not so much soup for the poor but poor soup for the poor. Alexis had then put his mind to creating some beneficial soup for the poor which he practised on Reform Club Members and most approved the soup. Alexis thought he would be able to bring these soup receipts with him. Alexis’ soups cost ¾d a quart to make however he was quickly informed that he could not use his receipt’s as they were too costly. Even before he got to Ireland his there were complaints about his soups. Prior to Alexis even going to Ireland and setting up a soup kitchen, an article appeared in The Lancet. It accused Alexis of ‘soup-quackery’. It appears that somehow Alexis had upset someone. The article in The Lancet was written by an unnamed author, who was taking issue with Alexis’ claim that: “A bellyful of my soup, once a day, together with a biscuit, will be more than sufficient to sustain the strength of a strong and healthy man”. Alexis had devised some Famine Soups and was trying them at the Reform Club; his critic must have tasted the soups there – leading one to suppose that he must have been a Reform Club member. On arriving in Dublin, he heard mumblings about his soup This was the first time – other than from the odd Reform Club member – that Alexis faced criticism. The critics seemed to resent a chef from a rich man’s club coming to oversee the soup kitchens for the poor.
For Alexis, the criticism had to be stopped, or the whole venture would be a failure. A suggestion came from the small band of critics – that the Famine soups should be tested by an independent nutritionist. One was appointed by The Royal Dublin Society, his name was John Aldridge, who was a Professor of Chemistry. He based his report – which was very long and wordy – first on animals that eat vegetables. How much they ate and how much they wasted through body-waste and what weight loss, if any, took place. He then transposed these figures to a human being and worked out what a four stone child would need in nourishment to remain the same weight. On testing Alexis’ soups on May 6th, 1847, he readily agreed with Alexis that the fact his soups contained all the vegetable including any leaf or topping, added important nutrients to the diet. Alexis showed Aldridge how he had considered the extra needs of children and planned to give them beef soup, pea panada and rice curry. Aldridge, who partook of the pea panada, though it was extremely palatable and very nutritious – he personally felt that it would benefit with some onions.
Aldridge tested other soups besides Alexis’ but admitted that all Alexis’ soups would help a man keep alive for quite some time. (It must be remembered that the ‘normal’ diet of the Irish poor was potatoes, bread and water.) Aldridge claimed the most nutritious and cheapest soup was Soyer Fish soup No 6-famine soup. He also added: “In the name of the Irish people I thank M. Soyer for what I believe to be his purely philanthropic intentions towards them. He has given to us two boons of no ordinary value, a model dispensing kitchen of great ingenuity, and a method of economic cooking far superior to any to which the poorer order of out countrymen has hitherto been accustomed”. Alexis proclaimed through local Irish papers that indeed his soup was nourishing, it would not replace the main meal, but people could survive with just his soup and they could do so for several weeks. This seemed to stop all the critics in one fell swoop. He challenged anyone who could do better to do so. There were no takers.
Several Irish historians recant about Soyer his soup kitchen and his bad soup in doing this they always reference a book The History of the Great Irish Famine of 1847 by John O’Rourke who had written about people complaining about Soyer’s soups, But he did not write about Alexis demanding that his soups were to be tested. Historians needed to read Paddy’s Lament by Thomas Gallagher to learn about prof’ Aldridge testing Alexis’ soups
Finally, the Soup kitchen was completed in The Royal Barracks Esplanade, Dublin and on the 4th April 1847, it was opened to the public. George, Prince of Cambridge, came and was very impressed and tried some of Soyer’s soup. I have come across several descriptions of the kitchen. The one I prefer is the following that Alexis told to The Illustrated London News:
“The exterior and covering are of a temporary nature, being formed of boards and canvass, enclosing a space of forty-five feet long, and forty feet wide. The interior consists of a steam-boiler, on wheels, thirteen feet long, and four feet wide, with a glaze-pan over it, capable of containing three hundred gallons; and at the end an oven to bake one hundredweight of bread at a time; and all heated by the same fire. Under the boiler is an excavation to contain coals and round it an elevated platform to give access to the glaze-pan. At the distance of eight feet, round the boiler, are eight iron bain marie pans with covers, six feet long and twenty-two inches wide, on wheels, and made double, to be boiled, by steam, and contain, together, one thousand gallons. At each end, extending between the pans, are the cutting tables – at one end the meat, and at the other, the vegetables; and under which are placed wooden soaking tubs, on wheels, and chopping blocks for the meat drawers and sliding shelf. Four feet beyond these are placed a row of tables, eighteen inches wide, in which a hole is cut, and therein placed a quart iron white enamelled basin, with a metal spoon attached thereto by a neat chain; there are one hundred of these, and the table forms the outer boundary of the kitchen; leaving a space of two feet six inches between it and the wall. Inside the table are fastened tin water-cases, at the distance of ten feet apart, containing a sponge &c, to clean out the soup basins.
Round the two supports of the roof are circular tin boxes for the condiments. Seven feet from the ground at each corner is placed a safe five feet square and seven feet high, with sides of the wire, for ventilation, which contains, respectively, meat, vegetables, grain and condiments. At the same elevation as the safes are sixteen butts, containing 1792 gallons of water.
At the entrance in the centre, is the weighing machine. The fire being lighted, a certain quantity of fat or dripping is placed in the glaze-pan, and in the soup-pans the farinaceous ingredients, or thickening, along with the water. As soon as the fat is melted in the glaze-pan, the vegetables, cut into thin slices, or dice, are placed therein; after the lapse of ten minutes, the meat, which has been previously cut into small pieces, is added, and allowed gradually to fry, until the juice is extracted, and a good glaze formed, which will be in about thirty-five minutes.
The condiments are then added, and the glaze is removed and distributed equally in the bain marie pans; it is boiled for twenty minutes, and the soup or food is complete; this is the time used in making the soup, when such farinaceous ingredients or flour, oatmeal, and rice or barley, previously soaked, are employed; but peas, Indian corn meal, and many other ingredients, will take longer boiling. It is ready to be removed by ladies into the basins in the surrounding tables. Outside the table is a zigzag passage capable of containing one hundred persons in a small place in the open air; at the entrance is a checker-clerk, and an indicator; or machine which numbers every person that passes; and on the other side is a bread and biscuit room, where those who have partaken of the soup, and are departing, receive on passing a quarter of a pound of bread or savoury biscuit; as I prefer giving it then, instead of with the soup or food, it being sufficient for one meal without, and will not only save time, but when eaten afterwards, will be more wholesome, and act more generously on the system, than when eaten in haste. When the soup or food is ready, notice is given by ringing the bell, and the one hundred people are admitted and take their places at the table – the basins, being previously filled, grace is said – the bell is again rang for them to begin, and a sufficient time is allowed them to eat their quart of food. During the time they are emptying their basins the outside passage is again filling; as soon as they are done, and are going out at the other side, the basin and spoon are cleaned, and again filled; the bell rings, and a fresh number admitted; this continuing every successive six minutes, feeding one thousand persons every hour; but as there are three thousand quarts more to distribute, which occupies only seventy minutes to make, other means must be used for distributing the food for which purpose a door is provided at the entrance of the kitchen, to which persons come with tickets, which are given to them by district visitors or subscribers; or, if not with tickets, to purchase the food, and which they take home with them. There are also provided carts and barrows for either horse, donkeys, or men to draw, containing from twenty-five gallons to two hundred gallons each, with fires attached, so that the soup or food contained in them should be hot or cooking on its way to the place of distribution. Such is a brief description of the kitchen. I also propose to change the diet every day, according to the provisions obtainable, and on fast days to give meagre food.
It cannot be stressed enough how important Alexis’ kitchen was for Ireland, allowing many more people to be fed. His kitchen in some semblance or other was copied in most towns. It did not resolve the politics of Ireland, nor cure the potato famine but it did save lives. Alexis already mentioned the benefits that besides serving soup it could distribute it as well, allowing small villages and obscure houses to benefit from the soup. Of the people who complained about the soup, not one was in need or even partook of the soup. Those that did, the poor, were grateful for the soup and that is all Alexis cared about. However, the poverty that Alexis saw had a great effect on him.
Alexis left Ireland on Sunday 11th April 1847 and on the night before; several of his friends gave a dinner in his honour, at the Freemason’s Hall, College Green. He was thanked for all that he had done for Ireland. He was presented with a very elegant snuffbox, with the inscription. “Presented to M. Alexis Soyer, in testimony of the high sense entertained of his valuable scientific and philanthropic services while engaged in this country on his mission of good in behalf of the destitute poor, by some of his admiring friends, who gladly avail themselves of an early opportunity to mark their regard for himself personally, and the esteem in which his beneficent and truly useful labours have been held by them, Dublin, 10th April 1847.” On the 10th April 1847, the Model Kitchen was handed over to the ladies of the South Union Relief Committee of Dublin, who ran it very successfully until the end of autumn when all soup kitchens in Ireland were closed, although the need for them was still required in 1848. The British Government in its infinite wisdom decided not to open them again. They considered the soup kitchens as outdoor relief which they were trying to stop, they felt the poor should go into workhouses.
However, after Alexis left Ireland people started to complain about his style of soup kitchens. Such as plates and cutlery being nailed to the tables. How they only had about 4 minutes to eat their food. How they had to join long queues and then being allowed in the soup kitchens, a certain amount of people. They simply felt their dignity and pride was taken away from them. Also, there is a word that most present-day Irish hate and that is “Souperism”. Quite a few soup kitchens were run by the Protestant church and organisations and they would refuse to give the Catholic poor any soup unless they proselytise to the protestant faith. The Catholic poor became very weary protestant do-gooders and would seek help elsewhere. Souperism helped the government close all the soup kitchens, up to the end of July outdoor relief was costing the government £3,020,712 per month by closing the soup-kitchens spending on relief was £505,984. It is estimated that a million people died during the Great Famine, that two million people emigrated leaving an Irish population of some five million people.
In my research of the daily newspapers during Alexis’ time in Ireland, they were all very supportive The Cork Examiner in an article in 1848, summarising the effects of the famine on Ireland to date, pointed out that 340 doctors had died through starvation. They also credited Alexis Soyer with saving hundreds of lives, with his Famine Soups. | 3,596 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Cardboard is the unsung hero of STEM education.
It’s cheap to get, easy to work with, and your imagination really is the limit of what you can make with it. With so many different ways to use cardboard in the classroom, we set out to challenge four educators to see what their students would create.
We sent them this FabricationStation Deluxe Makerspace Kit, which comes with cardboard, scissors, storage caddies, markers, a paper roll, and more. Plus everything fit on a wheeled cart that teachers and students can easily move. Then we told them to create!
Yep, there were no set rules or instructions. We wanted students to dream up something great and then make it. We had no idea what to expect, but we are WOWED by the results. Here’s a look at the four teachers who took on the challenge with their students.
Windmills give a lesson in design and engineering.
Carol Davis is an elementary STEM teacher at a magnet school in Decatur, Alabama, and she challenged each of her students to create a windmill, complete with working cardboard blades.
“This is a large project (in size) compared to a lot of our STEM projects,” Davis says. “My students were excited about having a big challenge to think about and complete. They really put a lot of thought into the design and putting all the pieces together.”
The only requirement Davis gave her fifth graders was this: The base needed to be 12 inches wide. Then the rest, including creating a working windmill challenge, was up to them. This allowed her students to really customize the project and make it their own, experimenting with tall designs, short options, and everything in between. The entire project lasted a few different class segments. Each student had to put their math and engineering skills to the test, since they had to measure, design, and test every step of the way.
Students worked together to build cars with working wheels.
Hannah Schrempp does a lot of hands-on activities with her sixth graders in Minneapolis, Minnesota, and she used this project to help meet their state engineering standards.
“This was not an easy project,” Schrempp says. “The students had to work together to show a step-by-step process of building a car and record changes they made along the way. It was challenging, and there was a lot of problem-solving happening, but they loved that they were able to dream up a car.”
Schrempp set up the makerspace cart so that each student team had a designated organization bin. She said this really gave her students ownership in having a designated STEM area. Then they could come and go as needed to get their tools, supplies, and materials.
Schrempp says it’s important to remember that STEM is not easy for all students. This is why hands-on projects like this one can really help in reinforcing concepts and putting ideas into action. “STEM allows students to use a different part of their brain to successfully complete a challenge,” she says.
She plans to keep using lessons like this to reinforce her sixth grade standards. And she’ll be using her STEM cart every Friday to give her students a new challenge.
Kindergarteners made their own puppet stage.
Even the youngest of learners loved the STEM cart and supplies. Stephanie Machado is a STEM-focused teacher in Winter Garden, Florida. She works with students all over her elementary school, and she chose to have some of her youngest learners take on this challenge.
“I’m so happy I tried it with my kindergarteners,” Manchado says. “Initially it seems like something for older students, but it really allowed these students to create. They were cutting, measuring, and working together for their puppet show theatre.”
This project truly combined STEM with the arts. Machado says after her students constructed the main stage, they decorated the theatre and imagined (and crafted) puppets so they could later play pretend.
Since Machado works with students all over the school, she’s looking forward to wheeling the mobile cart into other grades and areas of the school to keep her students thinking critically and creating.
STEM meets history in this student-led project.
When Danielle Donaldson received her cart and supplies, she challenged her fourth graders to think about what they wanted to create. Since they recently studied the Trail of Tears, students decided they wanted to make visual representations of Native American houses.
Before they started any building, students researched the housing style from the period. Then they studied the climate, region, soil, and other factors that related to the house before they starting building. It was a good lesson in science and history.
Then when they got to the building part, they had plenty of other learning opportunities “The math was most challenging,” Donaldson says. “The groups had to draw and measure each individual part of their house. Some groups struggled with getting it exact, and they had to redo, but I explained to them that this is part of the engineering process.”
Even though it was an involved project and had challenges, Donaldson was impressed that her students stuck to it until the very end. She says it’s often big projects like this where she can really see her students grow and work together.
“Students need space where they can try different approaches, make mistakes, and have the opportunity to always try again,” she says.
All the teachers loved having a designated cart so their supplies were in one spot. It made it easy for students to take ownership of their learning. You can learn more about the items from this project right here.
What would your students create? | <urn:uuid:a5b719bc-b60e-454c-be86-468ba134ecf7> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.weareteachers.com/stem-cardboard-ideas/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250608062.57/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123011418-20200123040418-00466.warc.gz | en | 0.982942 | 1,211 | 3.578125 | 4 | [
-0.11764436215162277,
0.20004317164421082,
0.4148549437522888,
0.02428336814045906,
-0.4648159146308899,
0.09036307036876678,
-0.4589868187904358,
0.3525226414203644,
-0.42206433415412903,
0.10134400427341461,
0.04906897991895676,
-0.06060858815908432,
-0.1494848132133484,
0.27658352255821... | 2 | Cardboard is the unsung hero of STEM education.
It’s cheap to get, easy to work with, and your imagination really is the limit of what you can make with it. With so many different ways to use cardboard in the classroom, we set out to challenge four educators to see what their students would create.
We sent them this FabricationStation Deluxe Makerspace Kit, which comes with cardboard, scissors, storage caddies, markers, a paper roll, and more. Plus everything fit on a wheeled cart that teachers and students can easily move. Then we told them to create!
Yep, there were no set rules or instructions. We wanted students to dream up something great and then make it. We had no idea what to expect, but we are WOWED by the results. Here’s a look at the four teachers who took on the challenge with their students.
Windmills give a lesson in design and engineering.
Carol Davis is an elementary STEM teacher at a magnet school in Decatur, Alabama, and she challenged each of her students to create a windmill, complete with working cardboard blades.
“This is a large project (in size) compared to a lot of our STEM projects,” Davis says. “My students were excited about having a big challenge to think about and complete. They really put a lot of thought into the design and putting all the pieces together.”
The only requirement Davis gave her fifth graders was this: The base needed to be 12 inches wide. Then the rest, including creating a working windmill challenge, was up to them. This allowed her students to really customize the project and make it their own, experimenting with tall designs, short options, and everything in between. The entire project lasted a few different class segments. Each student had to put their math and engineering skills to the test, since they had to measure, design, and test every step of the way.
Students worked together to build cars with working wheels.
Hannah Schrempp does a lot of hands-on activities with her sixth graders in Minneapolis, Minnesota, and she used this project to help meet their state engineering standards.
“This was not an easy project,” Schrempp says. “The students had to work together to show a step-by-step process of building a car and record changes they made along the way. It was challenging, and there was a lot of problem-solving happening, but they loved that they were able to dream up a car.”
Schrempp set up the makerspace cart so that each student team had a designated organization bin. She said this really gave her students ownership in having a designated STEM area. Then they could come and go as needed to get their tools, supplies, and materials.
Schrempp says it’s important to remember that STEM is not easy for all students. This is why hands-on projects like this one can really help in reinforcing concepts and putting ideas into action. “STEM allows students to use a different part of their brain to successfully complete a challenge,” she says.
She plans to keep using lessons like this to reinforce her sixth grade standards. And she’ll be using her STEM cart every Friday to give her students a new challenge.
Kindergarteners made their own puppet stage.
Even the youngest of learners loved the STEM cart and supplies. Stephanie Machado is a STEM-focused teacher in Winter Garden, Florida. She works with students all over her elementary school, and she chose to have some of her youngest learners take on this challenge.
“I’m so happy I tried it with my kindergarteners,” Manchado says. “Initially it seems like something for older students, but it really allowed these students to create. They were cutting, measuring, and working together for their puppet show theatre.”
This project truly combined STEM with the arts. Machado says after her students constructed the main stage, they decorated the theatre and imagined (and crafted) puppets so they could later play pretend.
Since Machado works with students all over the school, she’s looking forward to wheeling the mobile cart into other grades and areas of the school to keep her students thinking critically and creating.
STEM meets history in this student-led project.
When Danielle Donaldson received her cart and supplies, she challenged her fourth graders to think about what they wanted to create. Since they recently studied the Trail of Tears, students decided they wanted to make visual representations of Native American houses.
Before they started any building, students researched the housing style from the period. Then they studied the climate, region, soil, and other factors that related to the house before they starting building. It was a good lesson in science and history.
Then when they got to the building part, they had plenty of other learning opportunities “The math was most challenging,” Donaldson says. “The groups had to draw and measure each individual part of their house. Some groups struggled with getting it exact, and they had to redo, but I explained to them that this is part of the engineering process.”
Even though it was an involved project and had challenges, Donaldson was impressed that her students stuck to it until the very end. She says it’s often big projects like this where she can really see her students grow and work together.
“Students need space where they can try different approaches, make mistakes, and have the opportunity to always try again,” she says.
All the teachers loved having a designated cart so their supplies were in one spot. It made it easy for students to take ownership of their learning. You can learn more about the items from this project right here.
What would your students create? | 1,130 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Otto Eulenstein was born in Berlin in 1917. He worked as a Siemens laboratory assistant and was called up to the Wehrmacht in 1938. Hoping to evade military service, he simulated a suicide attempt at the beginning of the war. Eulenstein went absent without leave from the Wehrmacht near Kharkiv in the summer of 1942, surviving incognito behind the lines of the eastern front for some time by hiding among the Russian civilian population. He also provided several other deserters with false papers. In early 1944, he and Kurt Henschel made their way to Berlin, where he was able to hide in his family home. The two men were arrested on February 12, 1944 and sentenced to death in a joint trial before a court martial in mid-June 1944. The court accused them of “shirking” the grueling defensive battles on the eastern front for several months and enjoying the “good life” in the occupied hinterland. Otto Eulenstein and Kurt Henschel were murdered in Brandenburg-Görden penitentiary on July 24, 1944.
Eulenstein’s mother and his wife, whom the Gestapo accused of having a “communist standpoint against the state,” were sentenced to imprisonment for aiding desertion in September 1944, as they had hidden the two men.
During his desertion, Eulenstein had written to his wife: “...One day the time will come when this cruelest of all wars will be over and everyone will be able to sleep in peace again...” | <urn:uuid:8d23dd3f-e10e-4ab7-abe0-b0608079f075> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.gdw-berlin.de/en/recess/biographies/index_of_persons/biographie/view-bio/otto-eulenstein/?no_cache=1 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251690379.95/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126195918-20200126225918-00009.warc.gz | en | 0.986496 | 330 | 3.421875 | 3 | [
-0.36591601371765137,
0.6032387018203735,
-0.22864991426467896,
0.10724231600761414,
0.33817151188850403,
0.0401444137096405,
0.34218138456344604,
0.06551266461610794,
-0.3189231753349304,
-0.08192117512226105,
0.30608290433883667,
-0.19028393924236298,
0.1290225386619568,
0.32761251926422... | 6 | Otto Eulenstein was born in Berlin in 1917. He worked as a Siemens laboratory assistant and was called up to the Wehrmacht in 1938. Hoping to evade military service, he simulated a suicide attempt at the beginning of the war. Eulenstein went absent without leave from the Wehrmacht near Kharkiv in the summer of 1942, surviving incognito behind the lines of the eastern front for some time by hiding among the Russian civilian population. He also provided several other deserters with false papers. In early 1944, he and Kurt Henschel made their way to Berlin, where he was able to hide in his family home. The two men were arrested on February 12, 1944 and sentenced to death in a joint trial before a court martial in mid-June 1944. The court accused them of “shirking” the grueling defensive battles on the eastern front for several months and enjoying the “good life” in the occupied hinterland. Otto Eulenstein and Kurt Henschel were murdered in Brandenburg-Görden penitentiary on July 24, 1944.
Eulenstein’s mother and his wife, whom the Gestapo accused of having a “communist standpoint against the state,” were sentenced to imprisonment for aiding desertion in September 1944, as they had hidden the two men.
During his desertion, Eulenstein had written to his wife: “...One day the time will come when this cruelest of all wars will be over and everyone will be able to sleep in peace again...” | 349 | ENGLISH | 1 |
What motivated Mr. White to tell his son to listen to the wind?
At the beginning of W. W. Jacob's classic short story "The Monkey's Paw," Mr. White is playing his son, Herbert, in a game of chess and puts his king in "unnecessary perils." In an attempt to distract Herbert from noticing his costly mistake, Mr. White calls his attention to the harsh wind. However, Herbert does not fall for his father's trick and continues to survey the chessboard. Herbert then recognizes his father's mistake and wins the game by putting him in check.
Mr. White's chess performance is significant to the story and portrays him as a reckless individual who is willing to make careless, costly mistakes. Chess is a game that requires foresight and caution, which are attributes that Mr. White does not possess. Later on, Mr. White will once again demonstrate his reckless nature and poor decision making by wishing upon the magic monkey's paw, which has disastrous implications.
check Approved by eNotes Editorial | <urn:uuid:6a4a714e-b894-4e99-bde1-0294f6c380ba> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.enotes.com/homework-help/what-motivated-mr-white-to-tell-his-son-to-listen-2019633 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606696.26/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122042145-20200122071145-00091.warc.gz | en | 0.981654 | 210 | 3.453125 | 3 | [
-0.13960134983062744,
0.4044743776321411,
0.11058088392019272,
-0.35634079575538635,
0.04351125657558441,
0.40958765149116516,
0.7969359159469604,
0.17765285074710846,
0.2763473093509674,
0.11526565253734589,
-0.08323512971401215,
0.09480713307857513,
0.06804025918245316,
0.474173367023468... | 1 | What motivated Mr. White to tell his son to listen to the wind?
At the beginning of W. W. Jacob's classic short story "The Monkey's Paw," Mr. White is playing his son, Herbert, in a game of chess and puts his king in "unnecessary perils." In an attempt to distract Herbert from noticing his costly mistake, Mr. White calls his attention to the harsh wind. However, Herbert does not fall for his father's trick and continues to survey the chessboard. Herbert then recognizes his father's mistake and wins the game by putting him in check.
Mr. White's chess performance is significant to the story and portrays him as a reckless individual who is willing to make careless, costly mistakes. Chess is a game that requires foresight and caution, which are attributes that Mr. White does not possess. Later on, Mr. White will once again demonstrate his reckless nature and poor decision making by wishing upon the magic monkey's paw, which has disastrous implications.
check Approved by eNotes Editorial | 206 | ENGLISH | 1 |
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources.
They refused to drink British tea and used their skills to weave yarn and wool into cloth, which made America less dependent on British textiles. The most zealous Daughters refused to receive gentleman callers who were not sympathetic to the patriot cause. The habits of a vigorous mind are formed in contending with difficulties.
Great necessities call out great virtues. They were relevant in the shaping of our American history. During wartime, women have historically been called upon to show their patriotism by scrimping and saving.
In many cases, as in the Revolutionary War, food and resources were very scarce because Daughters of liberty Colonies were still largely an agrarian economy, and most men who worked in the fields were away fighting.
The Daughters of Liberty consisted of women who displayed their patriotism by participating in boycotts of British goods following the passage of the Townshend Acts.
Since women often purchased consumer goods for the home, they became instrumental in upholding the boycott, and ensured that women did not purchase British goods, particularly tea. In support of the nonimportation movements of andthe Daughters used their traditional skills to weave yarn and wool into homemade Daughters of liberty they called homespun, which made America less dependent on British textiles.
Mass spinning bees were organized in various colonial cities, and the Daughters advanced that cause most effectively. In JanuaryBoston women signed an agreement, vowing not to drink tea as long as it was taxed. Discoveries like boiled basil leaves to make a tea-like drink helped lift spirits.
Inthese women helped influence a decision made by Continental Congress to boycott all British goods, which was due in large part to the Daughters of Liberty, who were determined to reach demands for homemade clothing. Although it is not often recognized, the organizations formed by women were very also influential during the war.
Revolutionary Women Women also played a large role during the war. Clothing and other materials were needed to clothe Patriot soldiers, so women got together to spin and sew uniforms. When militias appealed to the public for uniforms and food, homespun garments and farm crops came from patriotic women.
Women also stepped forth to fill holes left by fighting Continental soldiers, and performed tasks formerly reserved for their husbands, such as farming and running a business. Many men would have returned to bankruptcy after the war had it not been for the efforts of their spouses.
These newly independent women also had to stand up for themselves and their families when confronted by British soldiers. After the men went off to fight in the war, American women, children, and the elderly were frequently faced with the occupation of their homes, churches, and government buildings by British soldiers.
With all the war, violence, and fighting between the French, English, Americans and Native Americans in the past, colonial women had learned some sort of self-defense. They knew how to threaten force and even kill someone if necessary. Guns were owned by few, so women grew accustomed to using axes, knifes, gardening and household tools for protection.
The country which we lately traversed, about fifty miles in extent, is called neutral ground, but the miserable inhabitants who remain are not much favored with the privileges which their neutrality ought to secure to them. They are continually exposed to the ravages and insults of infamous banditti, composed of royal refugees and Tories.
There are within the British lines lawless villains, who devote themselves to the most cruel pillage and robbery among the defenseless inhabitants between the lines, many of whom they carry off to New York, after plundering their houses and farms.
These shameless marauders have received the names of Cow-boys and Skinners. By their atrocious deeds they have become a scourge and terror to the people.
Numerous instances have been related of these miscreants subjecting defenseless persons to cruel torture, to compel them to deliver up their money, or to disclose the places where it has been secreted.
It is not uncommon for them to hang a man by his neck till apparently dead, then restore him, and repeat the experiment, and leave him for dead.
Her brother, Nathaniel Bradlee, was a patriot and many meetings were held in his home. Hickey had been convinced to join the British side and was conspiring to kill Washington. She informed Washington and in the presence of Hickey, he threw the poisoned peas out an open window into the yard.
Chickens ate the peas and died immediately.
Hickey was convicted of conspiring to kill the General and was hung. Young women also fought in the war, wrote pieces for the local newspapers about the war, held scrap drives, and even made cartridges.
Sybil Ludingtonthe year-old daughter of a patriot general, commanded a Patriot militia unit and rode over 40 miles in the dark of the night to wake the Minutemen. Rebecca Flower Young supported her family by making flags at her shop in Philadelphia.Daughters of Liberty's Legacy, North White Plains, New York.
likes · 16 talking about this. Formed for the purpose of promoting patriotism and 5/5(4). Historical Significance The roles of the Sons and Daughters of Liberty was vital to American history because they influenced America’s independence from Britain. For instance, the Sons of Liberty created chaos in the colonies by publicly protesting the Stamp Act.
Start studying daughters of liberty. Learn vocabulary, terms, and more with flashcards, games, and other study tools.
The Daughters of Liberty was a group of political dissidents that formed in the North American British colonies during the early days of the American Revolution. The Daughters of Liberty signifies the formal women Patriot association that was formed in to protest the Stamp Act and later the Townshend Acts, as well as a general term for women who identified themselves as fighting for liberty during the American Revolution.
The Daughters of Liberty displayed their loyalty by supporting the nonimportation of British goods during the American Revolution. They refused to drink British tea and used their skills to weave yarn and wool into cloth, which made America less dependent on British textiles. | <urn:uuid:b04e6149-0751-4774-9f73-0f7766bf2419> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://jofijay.ashio-midori.com/daughters-of-liberty-56433ea.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250601628.36/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121074002-20200121103002-00427.warc.gz | en | 0.981587 | 1,270 | 3.875 | 4 | [
0.024485759437084198,
0.3678824305534363,
0.2884153425693512,
-0.22481976449489594,
0.2306065857410431,
0.2360546737909317,
0.3290659785270691,
0.24773330986499786,
-0.4191623032093048,
-0.1727895438671112,
0.1566256880760193,
-0.0481712743639946,
0.039692725986242294,
0.03281068056821823,... | 1 | This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources.
They refused to drink British tea and used their skills to weave yarn and wool into cloth, which made America less dependent on British textiles. The most zealous Daughters refused to receive gentleman callers who were not sympathetic to the patriot cause. The habits of a vigorous mind are formed in contending with difficulties.
Great necessities call out great virtues. They were relevant in the shaping of our American history. During wartime, women have historically been called upon to show their patriotism by scrimping and saving.
In many cases, as in the Revolutionary War, food and resources were very scarce because Daughters of liberty Colonies were still largely an agrarian economy, and most men who worked in the fields were away fighting.
The Daughters of Liberty consisted of women who displayed their patriotism by participating in boycotts of British goods following the passage of the Townshend Acts.
Since women often purchased consumer goods for the home, they became instrumental in upholding the boycott, and ensured that women did not purchase British goods, particularly tea. In support of the nonimportation movements of andthe Daughters used their traditional skills to weave yarn and wool into homemade Daughters of liberty they called homespun, which made America less dependent on British textiles.
Mass spinning bees were organized in various colonial cities, and the Daughters advanced that cause most effectively. In JanuaryBoston women signed an agreement, vowing not to drink tea as long as it was taxed. Discoveries like boiled basil leaves to make a tea-like drink helped lift spirits.
Inthese women helped influence a decision made by Continental Congress to boycott all British goods, which was due in large part to the Daughters of Liberty, who were determined to reach demands for homemade clothing. Although it is not often recognized, the organizations formed by women were very also influential during the war.
Revolutionary Women Women also played a large role during the war. Clothing and other materials were needed to clothe Patriot soldiers, so women got together to spin and sew uniforms. When militias appealed to the public for uniforms and food, homespun garments and farm crops came from patriotic women.
Women also stepped forth to fill holes left by fighting Continental soldiers, and performed tasks formerly reserved for their husbands, such as farming and running a business. Many men would have returned to bankruptcy after the war had it not been for the efforts of their spouses.
These newly independent women also had to stand up for themselves and their families when confronted by British soldiers. After the men went off to fight in the war, American women, children, and the elderly were frequently faced with the occupation of their homes, churches, and government buildings by British soldiers.
With all the war, violence, and fighting between the French, English, Americans and Native Americans in the past, colonial women had learned some sort of self-defense. They knew how to threaten force and even kill someone if necessary. Guns were owned by few, so women grew accustomed to using axes, knifes, gardening and household tools for protection.
The country which we lately traversed, about fifty miles in extent, is called neutral ground, but the miserable inhabitants who remain are not much favored with the privileges which their neutrality ought to secure to them. They are continually exposed to the ravages and insults of infamous banditti, composed of royal refugees and Tories.
There are within the British lines lawless villains, who devote themselves to the most cruel pillage and robbery among the defenseless inhabitants between the lines, many of whom they carry off to New York, after plundering their houses and farms.
These shameless marauders have received the names of Cow-boys and Skinners. By their atrocious deeds they have become a scourge and terror to the people.
Numerous instances have been related of these miscreants subjecting defenseless persons to cruel torture, to compel them to deliver up their money, or to disclose the places where it has been secreted.
It is not uncommon for them to hang a man by his neck till apparently dead, then restore him, and repeat the experiment, and leave him for dead.
Her brother, Nathaniel Bradlee, was a patriot and many meetings were held in his home. Hickey had been convinced to join the British side and was conspiring to kill Washington. She informed Washington and in the presence of Hickey, he threw the poisoned peas out an open window into the yard.
Chickens ate the peas and died immediately.
Hickey was convicted of conspiring to kill the General and was hung. Young women also fought in the war, wrote pieces for the local newspapers about the war, held scrap drives, and even made cartridges.
Sybil Ludingtonthe year-old daughter of a patriot general, commanded a Patriot militia unit and rode over 40 miles in the dark of the night to wake the Minutemen. Rebecca Flower Young supported her family by making flags at her shop in Philadelphia.Daughters of Liberty's Legacy, North White Plains, New York.
likes · 16 talking about this. Formed for the purpose of promoting patriotism and 5/5(4). Historical Significance The roles of the Sons and Daughters of Liberty was vital to American history because they influenced America’s independence from Britain. For instance, the Sons of Liberty created chaos in the colonies by publicly protesting the Stamp Act.
Start studying daughters of liberty. Learn vocabulary, terms, and more with flashcards, games, and other study tools.
The Daughters of Liberty was a group of political dissidents that formed in the North American British colonies during the early days of the American Revolution. The Daughters of Liberty signifies the formal women Patriot association that was formed in to protest the Stamp Act and later the Townshend Acts, as well as a general term for women who identified themselves as fighting for liberty during the American Revolution.
The Daughters of Liberty displayed their loyalty by supporting the nonimportation of British goods during the American Revolution. They refused to drink British tea and used their skills to weave yarn and wool into cloth, which made America less dependent on British textiles. | 1,240 | ENGLISH | 1 |
John C. Calhoun
$19.95 Buy and instantly download this paper now
This paper presents a look at John C. Calhoun, controversial Southern politician, and his political views on slavery. The author explores several of his speeches as well as his life to explain where he came from and how he became such a controversial politician. The paper explains his reasons for encouraging the continuation of slavery in the South.
From the Paper:"Throughout American history there have been many people who had had an influence in the course the nation took. John C. Calhoun was one such individual. He was a man who rose to great heights in the political arena and was well known for his controversial views on many issues, Holst, 2001. He was the champion for the south when it came to the issue of slavery and he spoke loud and clear when it came to representing what it was his constituents wanted done about it. Calhoun was a man who was bright, ambitious and goal oriented. He spent his life working for what he believed in. Whether we agree or disagree with his actual views we are hard pressed to say he did not try."
Cite this Essay:
John C. Calhoun (2003, September 20) Retrieved January 29, 2020, from https://www.academon.com/essay/john-c-calhoun-3535/
"John C. Calhoun" 20 September 2003. Web. 29 January. 2020. <https://www.academon.com/essay/john-c-calhoun-3535/> | <urn:uuid:80e4f145-9932-40a9-8fee-fb29249d3651> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.academon.com/essay/john-c-calhoun-3535/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251788528.85/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129041149-20200129071149-00123.warc.gz | en | 0.98589 | 321 | 3.390625 | 3 | [
-0.9086543321609497,
0.5665866136550903,
0.18153925240039825,
-0.15495017170906067,
0.2437075525522232,
0.2830994427204132,
0.21769677102565765,
0.030947206541895866,
-0.49851682782173157,
-0.3410756289958954,
0.47562697529792786,
0.28450822830200195,
-0.11841926723718643,
0.47537025809288... | 1 | John C. Calhoun
$19.95 Buy and instantly download this paper now
This paper presents a look at John C. Calhoun, controversial Southern politician, and his political views on slavery. The author explores several of his speeches as well as his life to explain where he came from and how he became such a controversial politician. The paper explains his reasons for encouraging the continuation of slavery in the South.
From the Paper:"Throughout American history there have been many people who had had an influence in the course the nation took. John C. Calhoun was one such individual. He was a man who rose to great heights in the political arena and was well known for his controversial views on many issues, Holst, 2001. He was the champion for the south when it came to the issue of slavery and he spoke loud and clear when it came to representing what it was his constituents wanted done about it. Calhoun was a man who was bright, ambitious and goal oriented. He spent his life working for what he believed in. Whether we agree or disagree with his actual views we are hard pressed to say he did not try."
Cite this Essay:
John C. Calhoun (2003, September 20) Retrieved January 29, 2020, from https://www.academon.com/essay/john-c-calhoun-3535/
"John C. Calhoun" 20 September 2003. Web. 29 January. 2020. <https://www.academon.com/essay/john-c-calhoun-3535/> | 347 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Who was Aaron in the Bible?
Question: "Who was Aaron in the Bible?"
Answer: Aaron is best known for his role in the exodus and for being the first of the Levitical, or Aaronic, priesthood. He was born to a family of Levites during Israel’s enslavement in Egypt and was Moses' older brother, three years his senior (Exodus 7:7). We are first introduced to Aaron in Exodus 4 when God tells Moses that He will send Aaron, Moses' brother, with him to free the Israelites from Pharaoh.
The Israelites remained in Egypt after Joseph and his generation died, and they became quite numerous. A new Pharaoh feared the Israelites would rise up against the Egyptians, so he put slave masters over them and enacted harsh laws (Exodus 1:8–14). He also ordered the Hebrew midwives to kill all the baby boys as soon as they were born. When the midwives refused, Pharaoh ordered all the people to throw the Hebrew male infants into the Nile. These laws had been enacted by the time Moses was born. Presumably Aaron was born prior to the laws, or he escaped death because the midwives feared God rather than obeyed Pharaoh (Exodus 1:15–22). We read nothing of Aaron until God sends him to the eighty-year-old Moses.
When God spoke to Moses through a burning bush, calling him to go back to Egypt and demand that Pharaoh free the Israelites (Exodus 3—4), Moses gave reasons why he was not a good choice for the job. Moses eventually requested that God send someone else (Exodus 4:13). "Then the LORD’s anger burned against Moses and he said, 'What about your brother, Aaron the Levite? I know he can speak well. He is already on his way to meet you, and he will be glad to see you’" (Exodus 4:14). God went on to tell Moses that Aaron would be Moses' spokesperson (Exodus 4:15–17).
God also spoke to Aaron, telling him to meet Moses in the wilderness. Aaron obediently went. Moses told Aaron what God had said, including God’s instructions about the signs they would perform in front of Pharaoh. In Egypt, Moses and Aaron gathered the elders of the Israelites, and Aaron told them what God had said to Moses (Exodus 4:27–31). It is interesting to note how quickly Aaron responded to God in obedience and how he quickly believed what Moses told him. Aaron seemed to be up to the task to which God called him without question, willingly helping his brother and speaking to the people on his behalf. Aaron perhaps also served as an intermediary between Moses and the Israelites, since Moses had been living apart from his people all his life—first in the Egyptian courts and then as a fugitive in Midian.
As the exodus story unfolds, we see both Moses and Aaron before Pharaoh, making their requests for Pharaoh to let the people go and performing many signs. God used Aaron’s staff in many of the signs and plagues. The men were obedient to God’s instructions, and the Israelites were ultimately freed.
Aaron continued to lead with Moses during the Israelites' desert wandering, serving somewhat as his aid and spokesperson. When the Israelites grumbled against Moses and Aaron (Exodus 16:2), "Moses and Aaron said to all the Israelites, 'In the evening you will know that it was the Lord who brought you out of Egypt, and in the morning you will see the glory of the LORD, because he has heard your grumbling against him. Who are we, that you should grumble against us?'" (Exodus 16:6–8). Moses told Aaron to call the people together to come before the Lord, and the glory of the Lord appeared before them in a cloud (Exodus 16:10). It was at this time that God provided quail and manna. God instructed Moses to keep an omer of manna in a jar that would be kept for generations to come; Moses asked Aaron to collect it (Exodus 16:32–35).
In the aftermath of Korah’s rebellion against Moses and Aaron, God performed a miracle to confirm that Aaron and his descendants were indeed chosen to minister before the Lord’s presence. Twelve staffs were collected, one from each tribe. The staff representing the tribe of Levi had Aaron’s name inscribed on it. The staffs were laid in the tabernacle in front of the ark of the covenant overnight, and the next morning Aaron’s staff “had not only sprouted but had budded, blossomed and produced almonds” (Numbers 17:8). God commanded Moses to place Aaron’s staff inside the ark as well, saying, “This will put an end to their grumbling against me” (verse 10).
During a battle with the Amelekites, Joshua, the commander of the Israelite army, had victory only when Moses' hands were raised. Moses became fatigued, so Aaron and Hur put a stone under him and held up his hands. In many ways, this is a picture of much of Aaron’s service to Moses. He supported his brother, whom God had chosen to lead the Israelites out of captivity.
At Mount Sinai, God warned the people to keep their distance as God met with Moses and gave him the Law. On one of Moses’ ascents, God told him to bring Aaron with him (Exodus 19:24). Later, when Moses stayed on the mountain with God, he put Aaron and Hur in charge to handle any disputes that might arise (Exodus 24:14).
Unfortunately, things did not go well for Aaron while he was in charge. The people became impatient waiting for Moses to return and asked Aaron to make them a god. Seemingly without resistance to the people’s urge, Aaron requested their golden jewelry, formed it into the shape of a calf, and created an idol. Aaron even built an altar in front of the calf and announced a festival for it (Exodus 32:1–6). It may seem difficult to understand how a man who had so willingly obeyed God’s call to help his brother lead the people out of Egypt, seen God’s amazing works firsthand, and just recently seen God on Mount Sinai could do such a thing. Aaron’s failure is a demonstration of our human natures. We don't know Aaron’s motivation, but it is not hard to imagine that he might have doubted God and feared the people.
When God told Moses what was happening with the people and the golden calf, He threatened to destroy the people and make a great nation out of Moses instead. Moses intervened on behalf of the people and returned to them (Exodus 32:7–18). When Moses actually saw what was occurring, "his anger burned and he threw the tablets out of his hands, breaking them to pieces at the foot of the mountain" (Exodus 32:19). The tablets contained God’s covenant; it seems Moses destroyed them not just in a moment of anger, but also because the people had broken the covenant through their disobedience. Moses burned the idol, scattered its ashes in the water, and made the Israelites drink it (Exodus 32:20). When Moses asked Aaron why the people had done this and why he'd led them into it, Aaron was honest about the people’s complaining and request for him to make a god, but he was not forthcoming about his own role. Aaron admitted to his collection of their jewelry but claimed that, when he "threw it into the fire, . . . out came this calf!" (Exodus 32:24). "Moses saw that the people were running wild and that Aaron had let them get out of control and so become a laughingstock to their enemies" (Exodus 32:25). Moses called those who were for the Lord to him. The Levites rallied to him, and then Moses instructed them to kill some of the people. Moses, again, interceded for the people. God reassured Moses but also sent a plague on the people for their sin (Exodus 32:33–35).
The golden calf incident was not Aaron’s only blunder. In Numbers 12 Aaron and Miriam (Aaron and Moses' sister) oppose Moses: "Miriam and Aaron began to talk against Moses because of his Cushite wife, for he had married a Cushite. ‘Has the Lord spoken only through Moses?' they asked. 'Hasn't he also spoken through us?'" (Numbers 12:1–2). Such pride is not godly, but it is a common danger among leaders; many of us perhaps relate with Aaron. God called the three siblings out to meet Him, defended Moses to Aaron and Miriam, and asked why Aaron and Miriam hadn't been afraid to speak against him. When the cloud from which the Lord spoke lifted, Miriam was leprous. Aaron pleaded with Moses on her behalf; Moses cried out to God, and, after seven days outside the camp, Miriam was healed (Numbers 12:3–16). It is interesting that Miriam suffered leprosy whereas Aaron did not. It is also interesting to see Aaron’s plea to Moses, acknowledging his foolish sin and asking him not to allow Miriam to suffer. It seems that Aaron was truly repentant.
Aaron and his sons were appointed by God to be priests for the people, and Aaron was the first high priest. God gave Moses commandments about the priesthood, including how to consecrate priests and what garments they should wear, on Mount Sinai. God told Moses that the priesthood would belong to Aaron and his descendants by lasting ordinance (Exodus 29:9). Aaron was made the high priest, and his family line continued to serve as priests until the destruction of the temple in AD 70. The New Testament book of Hebrews spends much time comparing Jesus’ permanent priesthood to the Aaronic priesthood. Priests of the Levitical line had to offer sacrifices for their own sins and sacrifices on behalf of the people continually. Jesus was without sin, and His sacrifice on behalf of the people was made once and is finished (see Hebrews 4—10).
While Aaron’s sons did follow him into the priesthood, two of his sons—Nadab and Abihu—were killed by God when they offered "unauthorized fire before the LORD, contrary to his command" (Leviticus 10:1). When Moses told Aaron that this is what God meant when He said He would be proved holy, Aaron remained silent (Leviticus 10:3). Aaron did not try to defend his sons, nor did he accuse God of wrongdoing. It seems Aaron truly understood God’s holiness and accepted His judgment on his sons.
Like Moses, Aaron was not permitted to enter the Promised Land due to their sin at Meribah (Numbers 20:23). God instructed Moses, Aaron, and Aaron’s son Eleazar to go up Mount Hor. There Eleazer would be made high priest, and Aaron would die (Numbers 20:26–29).
Aaron’s life is a demonstration of God’s holiness and His grace. Aaron began as an obedient and faithful servant, willingly going to Moses and serving as an intermediary. He also faithfully served as a priest in the sacrificial system God used as a picture for His ultimate plan of salvation in Jesus Christ. Like any other human, Aaron was a sinner. After having seen God’s mighty work, he still made the golden calf and led the people in worshipping it. But Aaron seems to have learned and grown, admitting his sin in speaking against Moses and accepting the deaths of his unfaithful sons. From Aaron we learn about serving others, sharing in the responsibility of leadership, and submitting to God.
Recommended Resource: The Great Lives from God’s Word Series by Chuck Swindoll
More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!
What is the Aaronic Blessing?
Who were Nadab and Abihu?
Who was Moses in the Bible?
What can we learn from the relationship of Moses and Aaron?
Who was Hur in the Bible?
Questions about People in the Bible
Who was Aaron in the Bible? | <urn:uuid:6490ff48-930c-41e0-a6c8-b8d3a7c9cd3d> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.gotquestions.org/life-Aaron.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598800.30/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120135447-20200120164447-00408.warc.gz | en | 0.985181 | 2,576 | 3.265625 | 3 | [
-0.533251166343689,
0.7543074488639832,
0.014085507020354271,
-0.1009235829114914,
-0.515933096408844,
-0.28696057200431824,
0.5834178924560547,
-0.04903886094689369,
0.1393924355506897,
0.15012405812740326,
-0.23098325729370117,
-0.31921353936195374,
-0.34993457794189453,
-0.0186144560575... | 1 | Who was Aaron in the Bible?
Question: "Who was Aaron in the Bible?"
Answer: Aaron is best known for his role in the exodus and for being the first of the Levitical, or Aaronic, priesthood. He was born to a family of Levites during Israel’s enslavement in Egypt and was Moses' older brother, three years his senior (Exodus 7:7). We are first introduced to Aaron in Exodus 4 when God tells Moses that He will send Aaron, Moses' brother, with him to free the Israelites from Pharaoh.
The Israelites remained in Egypt after Joseph and his generation died, and they became quite numerous. A new Pharaoh feared the Israelites would rise up against the Egyptians, so he put slave masters over them and enacted harsh laws (Exodus 1:8–14). He also ordered the Hebrew midwives to kill all the baby boys as soon as they were born. When the midwives refused, Pharaoh ordered all the people to throw the Hebrew male infants into the Nile. These laws had been enacted by the time Moses was born. Presumably Aaron was born prior to the laws, or he escaped death because the midwives feared God rather than obeyed Pharaoh (Exodus 1:15–22). We read nothing of Aaron until God sends him to the eighty-year-old Moses.
When God spoke to Moses through a burning bush, calling him to go back to Egypt and demand that Pharaoh free the Israelites (Exodus 3—4), Moses gave reasons why he was not a good choice for the job. Moses eventually requested that God send someone else (Exodus 4:13). "Then the LORD’s anger burned against Moses and he said, 'What about your brother, Aaron the Levite? I know he can speak well. He is already on his way to meet you, and he will be glad to see you’" (Exodus 4:14). God went on to tell Moses that Aaron would be Moses' spokesperson (Exodus 4:15–17).
God also spoke to Aaron, telling him to meet Moses in the wilderness. Aaron obediently went. Moses told Aaron what God had said, including God’s instructions about the signs they would perform in front of Pharaoh. In Egypt, Moses and Aaron gathered the elders of the Israelites, and Aaron told them what God had said to Moses (Exodus 4:27–31). It is interesting to note how quickly Aaron responded to God in obedience and how he quickly believed what Moses told him. Aaron seemed to be up to the task to which God called him without question, willingly helping his brother and speaking to the people on his behalf. Aaron perhaps also served as an intermediary between Moses and the Israelites, since Moses had been living apart from his people all his life—first in the Egyptian courts and then as a fugitive in Midian.
As the exodus story unfolds, we see both Moses and Aaron before Pharaoh, making their requests for Pharaoh to let the people go and performing many signs. God used Aaron’s staff in many of the signs and plagues. The men were obedient to God’s instructions, and the Israelites were ultimately freed.
Aaron continued to lead with Moses during the Israelites' desert wandering, serving somewhat as his aid and spokesperson. When the Israelites grumbled against Moses and Aaron (Exodus 16:2), "Moses and Aaron said to all the Israelites, 'In the evening you will know that it was the Lord who brought you out of Egypt, and in the morning you will see the glory of the LORD, because he has heard your grumbling against him. Who are we, that you should grumble against us?'" (Exodus 16:6–8). Moses told Aaron to call the people together to come before the Lord, and the glory of the Lord appeared before them in a cloud (Exodus 16:10). It was at this time that God provided quail and manna. God instructed Moses to keep an omer of manna in a jar that would be kept for generations to come; Moses asked Aaron to collect it (Exodus 16:32–35).
In the aftermath of Korah’s rebellion against Moses and Aaron, God performed a miracle to confirm that Aaron and his descendants were indeed chosen to minister before the Lord’s presence. Twelve staffs were collected, one from each tribe. The staff representing the tribe of Levi had Aaron’s name inscribed on it. The staffs were laid in the tabernacle in front of the ark of the covenant overnight, and the next morning Aaron’s staff “had not only sprouted but had budded, blossomed and produced almonds” (Numbers 17:8). God commanded Moses to place Aaron’s staff inside the ark as well, saying, “This will put an end to their grumbling against me” (verse 10).
During a battle with the Amelekites, Joshua, the commander of the Israelite army, had victory only when Moses' hands were raised. Moses became fatigued, so Aaron and Hur put a stone under him and held up his hands. In many ways, this is a picture of much of Aaron’s service to Moses. He supported his brother, whom God had chosen to lead the Israelites out of captivity.
At Mount Sinai, God warned the people to keep their distance as God met with Moses and gave him the Law. On one of Moses’ ascents, God told him to bring Aaron with him (Exodus 19:24). Later, when Moses stayed on the mountain with God, he put Aaron and Hur in charge to handle any disputes that might arise (Exodus 24:14).
Unfortunately, things did not go well for Aaron while he was in charge. The people became impatient waiting for Moses to return and asked Aaron to make them a god. Seemingly without resistance to the people’s urge, Aaron requested their golden jewelry, formed it into the shape of a calf, and created an idol. Aaron even built an altar in front of the calf and announced a festival for it (Exodus 32:1–6). It may seem difficult to understand how a man who had so willingly obeyed God’s call to help his brother lead the people out of Egypt, seen God’s amazing works firsthand, and just recently seen God on Mount Sinai could do such a thing. Aaron’s failure is a demonstration of our human natures. We don't know Aaron’s motivation, but it is not hard to imagine that he might have doubted God and feared the people.
When God told Moses what was happening with the people and the golden calf, He threatened to destroy the people and make a great nation out of Moses instead. Moses intervened on behalf of the people and returned to them (Exodus 32:7–18). When Moses actually saw what was occurring, "his anger burned and he threw the tablets out of his hands, breaking them to pieces at the foot of the mountain" (Exodus 32:19). The tablets contained God’s covenant; it seems Moses destroyed them not just in a moment of anger, but also because the people had broken the covenant through their disobedience. Moses burned the idol, scattered its ashes in the water, and made the Israelites drink it (Exodus 32:20). When Moses asked Aaron why the people had done this and why he'd led them into it, Aaron was honest about the people’s complaining and request for him to make a god, but he was not forthcoming about his own role. Aaron admitted to his collection of their jewelry but claimed that, when he "threw it into the fire, . . . out came this calf!" (Exodus 32:24). "Moses saw that the people were running wild and that Aaron had let them get out of control and so become a laughingstock to their enemies" (Exodus 32:25). Moses called those who were for the Lord to him. The Levites rallied to him, and then Moses instructed them to kill some of the people. Moses, again, interceded for the people. God reassured Moses but also sent a plague on the people for their sin (Exodus 32:33–35).
The golden calf incident was not Aaron’s only blunder. In Numbers 12 Aaron and Miriam (Aaron and Moses' sister) oppose Moses: "Miriam and Aaron began to talk against Moses because of his Cushite wife, for he had married a Cushite. ‘Has the Lord spoken only through Moses?' they asked. 'Hasn't he also spoken through us?'" (Numbers 12:1–2). Such pride is not godly, but it is a common danger among leaders; many of us perhaps relate with Aaron. God called the three siblings out to meet Him, defended Moses to Aaron and Miriam, and asked why Aaron and Miriam hadn't been afraid to speak against him. When the cloud from which the Lord spoke lifted, Miriam was leprous. Aaron pleaded with Moses on her behalf; Moses cried out to God, and, after seven days outside the camp, Miriam was healed (Numbers 12:3–16). It is interesting that Miriam suffered leprosy whereas Aaron did not. It is also interesting to see Aaron’s plea to Moses, acknowledging his foolish sin and asking him not to allow Miriam to suffer. It seems that Aaron was truly repentant.
Aaron and his sons were appointed by God to be priests for the people, and Aaron was the first high priest. God gave Moses commandments about the priesthood, including how to consecrate priests and what garments they should wear, on Mount Sinai. God told Moses that the priesthood would belong to Aaron and his descendants by lasting ordinance (Exodus 29:9). Aaron was made the high priest, and his family line continued to serve as priests until the destruction of the temple in AD 70. The New Testament book of Hebrews spends much time comparing Jesus’ permanent priesthood to the Aaronic priesthood. Priests of the Levitical line had to offer sacrifices for their own sins and sacrifices on behalf of the people continually. Jesus was without sin, and His sacrifice on behalf of the people was made once and is finished (see Hebrews 4—10).
While Aaron’s sons did follow him into the priesthood, two of his sons—Nadab and Abihu—were killed by God when they offered "unauthorized fire before the LORD, contrary to his command" (Leviticus 10:1). When Moses told Aaron that this is what God meant when He said He would be proved holy, Aaron remained silent (Leviticus 10:3). Aaron did not try to defend his sons, nor did he accuse God of wrongdoing. It seems Aaron truly understood God’s holiness and accepted His judgment on his sons.
Like Moses, Aaron was not permitted to enter the Promised Land due to their sin at Meribah (Numbers 20:23). God instructed Moses, Aaron, and Aaron’s son Eleazar to go up Mount Hor. There Eleazer would be made high priest, and Aaron would die (Numbers 20:26–29).
Aaron’s life is a demonstration of God’s holiness and His grace. Aaron began as an obedient and faithful servant, willingly going to Moses and serving as an intermediary. He also faithfully served as a priest in the sacrificial system God used as a picture for His ultimate plan of salvation in Jesus Christ. Like any other human, Aaron was a sinner. After having seen God’s mighty work, he still made the golden calf and led the people in worshipping it. But Aaron seems to have learned and grown, admitting his sin in speaking against Moses and accepting the deaths of his unfaithful sons. From Aaron we learn about serving others, sharing in the responsibility of leadership, and submitting to God.
Recommended Resource: The Great Lives from God’s Word Series by Chuck Swindoll
More insights from your Bible study - Get Started with Logos Bible Software for Free!
What is the Aaronic Blessing?
Who were Nadab and Abihu?
Who was Moses in the Bible?
What can we learn from the relationship of Moses and Aaron?
Who was Hur in the Bible?
Questions about People in the Bible
Who was Aaron in the Bible? | 2,588 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Hidden women of history: Neaera, the Athenian child slave raised to be a courtesan
The ancient worlds of Greece and Rome have perhaps never been as popular as they presently are. There are numerous television series and one-off documentaries covering both “big picture” perspectives and stories of ordinary people.
Neaera was a woman from fourth century BCE Athens whose life is significant and sorrowful – worthy to be remembered – but may never feature in a glossy biopic.
Possibly born in Corinth, a place where she lived from at least a young age, Neaera was raised by a brothel-keeper by the name of Nicarete.
Her predicament was the result of her being enslaved to Nicarete. While we don’t know the reason for this, we do know that foundlings were common in antiquity. The parents of baby Neaera, for whatever reason, left her to fate – to die by exposure or be collected by a stranger.
From a young age, Neaera was trained by Nicarete for the life of a hetaira (a Classical Greek term for “courtesan”). It was Nicarete who also named her, giving her a typical courtesan title: “Neaera” meaning “Fresh One”.
Ancient sources reveal Naeara’s life in the brothel. In a legal speech by the Athenian politician and forensic orator, Apollodorus, the following description is provided: “There were seven young girls who were purchased when they were small children by Nicarete … She had the talent to recognise the potential beauty of little girls and knew how to raise them and educate them with expertise – for it was from this that she had made a profession and from this came her livelihood.
“She called them ‘daughters’ so that, by displaying them as freeborn, she could obtain the highest prices from the men wishing to have intercourse with them. After that, when she had enjoyed the profit from their youth, she sold every single one of them …”
The occasion for the passage from Apollodorus is a court case that was brought against Neaera in approximately 343 BCE. Neaera was around 50-years-old by the time of her prosecution, which took place in Athens.
Trafficking and abuse
The circumstances of her trial are complicated, involving the buying, selling, trafficking and abuse of Neaera from a very young age.
Piecing together the evidence from Apollodorus’ prosecution speech, which has come down to us with the title, “Against Neaera”, it transpires that two of her clients, who shared joint ownership of her, allowed her to buy her freedom around 376 BCE.
Afterwards, she moved to Athens with one Phrynion, but his brutal treatment of her saw Neaera leave for Megara, where circumstances caused her to return to sex work.
Further intrigues involving men and sex work saw Neaera eventually face trial on the charge of falsely representing herself as a free Athenian woman by pretending to be married to a citizen.
The charge of fraud was based on the law that a foreigner could not live as a common law “spouse” to a freeborn Athenian. The fact that Neaera also had three children, a daughter by the name of Phano, and two sons, further complicated the trial and its range of legal entanglements.
While we never discover the outcome of the trial, nor what happened to Neaera, the speech of the prosecutor remains, and reveals much about her life. Unfortunately, the speech of the defence is lost.
We do know, however, that the man with whom Neaera cohabitated, Stephanus, delivered the defence. Of course, he was not only defending Neaera – he was defending himself! Should Neaera have been found guilty, Stephanus would have forfeited his citizenship and the rights that attended it.
Stephanus had a history of legal disputes with the prosecutor, Apollodorus. He also had a history of being in trouble with the law. For example, he had illegally married off Phano – not once, but twice – to Athenian citizens. Shady “get rich quick” schemes motivated such activities, and it seems that Stephanus was adept at using both his “wife” and his “daughter’ for bartering and personal profit.
Another accusation revealed during the trial alleged that Stephanus arranged for Neaera to lure men to his house, engage them in sex, and then bribe them. And while Apollodorus provides no evidence for such a scam ever having taken place, judging by Stephanus’ track-record, it does not seem implausible.
Reading through the long, complex and damnatory speech of Apollodorus, we risk losing sight of the woman at the centre of it. Caught amid petty politics, sex scandals, and personal vendettas is a woman who becomes peripheral to the machismo being played out in court.
Yet, somewhat ironically, this is the only ancient source we have that records not only Neaera and the life she was forced to lead – but the life of a hetaira from infancy, girlhood, middle-age and, ultimately, past her "use by” date.
Had she not been taken to court as part of the factional fighting of ancient Athens, had she not had her reputation annihilated so publicly, we would have never known about Neaera.
Were it not for Apollodorus and his ancient version of “slut-shaming”, Neaera’s story would have been lost.
But it hasn’t been lost. Somewhere, amid the male rhetoric, her story endures. Unfortunately, her voice is not preserved. All we can read in the speech, “Against Neaera” are the voices of men; her prosecutor and the witnesses he calls to the stand.
Ironically, these testimonies and accusations - so casually introduced in ancient Athens, but received so differently today - emphasise the inhumanity of the sex trade in an antiquity too often and too unthinkingly valorised.
The document known as “Against Neaera” is the only record we have of this (almost) hidden woman. It prompts us to remember. And it’s important to remember Neaera.
Written by Marguerite Johnson. Republished with permission from The Conversation.
Join our community of over 40,000-plus members today and get the latest Over60 news, offers and articles.
Get all the latest Over60 news, offers and articles. | <urn:uuid:fa4ea2e0-8ec5-4939-93b0-220df19d6f85> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.oversixty.co.nz/entertainment/art/hidden-women-of-history-neaera-the-athenian-child-slave-raised-to-be-a-courtesan | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250608295.52/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123041345-20200123070345-00141.warc.gz | en | 0.981625 | 1,410 | 3.265625 | 3 | [
-0.18133950233459473,
0.5757094621658325,
0.36980748176574707,
0.21427199244499207,
-0.4379839301109314,
-0.13505536317825317,
0.13688427209854126,
0.0728183463215828,
-0.21916648745536804,
0.11471614241600037,
-0.46968674659729004,
-0.31096428632736206,
-0.2335931956768036,
0.266656994819... | 1 | Hidden women of history: Neaera, the Athenian child slave raised to be a courtesan
The ancient worlds of Greece and Rome have perhaps never been as popular as they presently are. There are numerous television series and one-off documentaries covering both “big picture” perspectives and stories of ordinary people.
Neaera was a woman from fourth century BCE Athens whose life is significant and sorrowful – worthy to be remembered – but may never feature in a glossy biopic.
Possibly born in Corinth, a place where she lived from at least a young age, Neaera was raised by a brothel-keeper by the name of Nicarete.
Her predicament was the result of her being enslaved to Nicarete. While we don’t know the reason for this, we do know that foundlings were common in antiquity. The parents of baby Neaera, for whatever reason, left her to fate – to die by exposure or be collected by a stranger.
From a young age, Neaera was trained by Nicarete for the life of a hetaira (a Classical Greek term for “courtesan”). It was Nicarete who also named her, giving her a typical courtesan title: “Neaera” meaning “Fresh One”.
Ancient sources reveal Naeara’s life in the brothel. In a legal speech by the Athenian politician and forensic orator, Apollodorus, the following description is provided: “There were seven young girls who were purchased when they were small children by Nicarete … She had the talent to recognise the potential beauty of little girls and knew how to raise them and educate them with expertise – for it was from this that she had made a profession and from this came her livelihood.
“She called them ‘daughters’ so that, by displaying them as freeborn, she could obtain the highest prices from the men wishing to have intercourse with them. After that, when she had enjoyed the profit from their youth, she sold every single one of them …”
The occasion for the passage from Apollodorus is a court case that was brought against Neaera in approximately 343 BCE. Neaera was around 50-years-old by the time of her prosecution, which took place in Athens.
Trafficking and abuse
The circumstances of her trial are complicated, involving the buying, selling, trafficking and abuse of Neaera from a very young age.
Piecing together the evidence from Apollodorus’ prosecution speech, which has come down to us with the title, “Against Neaera”, it transpires that two of her clients, who shared joint ownership of her, allowed her to buy her freedom around 376 BCE.
Afterwards, she moved to Athens with one Phrynion, but his brutal treatment of her saw Neaera leave for Megara, where circumstances caused her to return to sex work.
Further intrigues involving men and sex work saw Neaera eventually face trial on the charge of falsely representing herself as a free Athenian woman by pretending to be married to a citizen.
The charge of fraud was based on the law that a foreigner could not live as a common law “spouse” to a freeborn Athenian. The fact that Neaera also had three children, a daughter by the name of Phano, and two sons, further complicated the trial and its range of legal entanglements.
While we never discover the outcome of the trial, nor what happened to Neaera, the speech of the prosecutor remains, and reveals much about her life. Unfortunately, the speech of the defence is lost.
We do know, however, that the man with whom Neaera cohabitated, Stephanus, delivered the defence. Of course, he was not only defending Neaera – he was defending himself! Should Neaera have been found guilty, Stephanus would have forfeited his citizenship and the rights that attended it.
Stephanus had a history of legal disputes with the prosecutor, Apollodorus. He also had a history of being in trouble with the law. For example, he had illegally married off Phano – not once, but twice – to Athenian citizens. Shady “get rich quick” schemes motivated such activities, and it seems that Stephanus was adept at using both his “wife” and his “daughter’ for bartering and personal profit.
Another accusation revealed during the trial alleged that Stephanus arranged for Neaera to lure men to his house, engage them in sex, and then bribe them. And while Apollodorus provides no evidence for such a scam ever having taken place, judging by Stephanus’ track-record, it does not seem implausible.
Reading through the long, complex and damnatory speech of Apollodorus, we risk losing sight of the woman at the centre of it. Caught amid petty politics, sex scandals, and personal vendettas is a woman who becomes peripheral to the machismo being played out in court.
Yet, somewhat ironically, this is the only ancient source we have that records not only Neaera and the life she was forced to lead – but the life of a hetaira from infancy, girlhood, middle-age and, ultimately, past her "use by” date.
Had she not been taken to court as part of the factional fighting of ancient Athens, had she not had her reputation annihilated so publicly, we would have never known about Neaera.
Were it not for Apollodorus and his ancient version of “slut-shaming”, Neaera’s story would have been lost.
But it hasn’t been lost. Somewhere, amid the male rhetoric, her story endures. Unfortunately, her voice is not preserved. All we can read in the speech, “Against Neaera” are the voices of men; her prosecutor and the witnesses he calls to the stand.
Ironically, these testimonies and accusations - so casually introduced in ancient Athens, but received so differently today - emphasise the inhumanity of the sex trade in an antiquity too often and too unthinkingly valorised.
The document known as “Against Neaera” is the only record we have of this (almost) hidden woman. It prompts us to remember. And it’s important to remember Neaera.
Written by Marguerite Johnson. Republished with permission from The Conversation.
Join our community of over 40,000-plus members today and get the latest Over60 news, offers and articles.
Get all the latest Over60 news, offers and articles. | 1,351 | ENGLISH | 1 |
After his stunning victory at Chancellorsville, General Lee invaded the North. He hoped to seize badly needed food and supplies and create a surge of antiwar sentiment in the North. Lee knew that President Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865; see entry) would not be able to continue the war against the South if he did not have the support of the Northern people.
As Lee's Confederate Army pushed through Virginia's Shenandoah Valley into Northern territory, Stuart's cavalry troops worked to screen their movements from a large Union army in the area. On June 23, Lee ordered Stuart to take his cavalry on a scouting and raiding mission around the Union forces. Over the next several days, Stuart's efforts to maneuver his cavalry past the Union Army undetected were repeatedly delayed by enemy troop movements. Once he reached the lightly defended area behind the advancing Union forces, he captured more than one hundred supply wagons. But his decision to return to Lee with the supply wagons greatly slowed his progress.
In the meantime, Lee struggled to keep track of the approaching Union Army. The general had always relied heavily on Stuart's cavalrymen to scout out enemy locations and movements. Their absence made it difficult for Lee to determine the strength and whereabouts of Union forces in the region. Lee's knowledge of enemy movements grew shakier with each passing day, and the Confederate general became anxious for Stuart's return. He admitted that without Stuart's cavalry reports, "I am in ignorance as to what we have in front of us here."
In the final days of June, Lee suddenly learned that the Union Army, which was led by General George Meade (1815-1872; see entry), had drawn dangerously close. The Confederate general hastily gathered his army together at Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, to prepare for battle. A few days later, the famous Battle of Gettysburg began. From July 1 to July 3, Meade's Army of the Potomac and Lee's Army of Northern Virginia fought for control of the Pennsylvania countryside. For the first day and a half of the battle, Lee fought without the use of Stuart's cavalry. Stuart and his men finally returned from their mission on the evening of July 2, but their arrival was not enough to bring victory to the Confederacy. After one final day of warfare, Lee's battered rebel army retreated back to the South in defeat.
Stuart's extended absence from Lee's side has been cited by many historians as a major factor in the Union victory at the Battle of Gettysburg. Some people argue that Stuart's long absence was Lee's fault. They argue that Lee's orders to Stuart were too confusing, and that he never should have ordered his scouts so far away. Many other historians, though, contend that Stuart was far too slow in returning from his mission. In any case, Lee badly missed Stuart's cavalry.
Was this article helpful? | <urn:uuid:d32da712-d767-4e23-8ce0-8041f3807f5f> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.minecreek.info/southern-states/jeb-stuart-and-the-battle-of-gettysburg.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251700675.78/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127112805-20200127142805-00311.warc.gz | en | 0.981167 | 584 | 3.734375 | 4 | [
-0.3663293719291687,
0.3908630609512329,
0.002120007760822773,
0.35828840732574463,
0.06392638385295868,
0.27305251359939575,
-0.11415477097034454,
-0.03875922039151192,
-0.3385515809059143,
-0.06179444491863251,
0.07562296837568283,
0.04040583595633507,
0.34607404470443726,
0.215215280652... | 1 | After his stunning victory at Chancellorsville, General Lee invaded the North. He hoped to seize badly needed food and supplies and create a surge of antiwar sentiment in the North. Lee knew that President Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865; see entry) would not be able to continue the war against the South if he did not have the support of the Northern people.
As Lee's Confederate Army pushed through Virginia's Shenandoah Valley into Northern territory, Stuart's cavalry troops worked to screen their movements from a large Union army in the area. On June 23, Lee ordered Stuart to take his cavalry on a scouting and raiding mission around the Union forces. Over the next several days, Stuart's efforts to maneuver his cavalry past the Union Army undetected were repeatedly delayed by enemy troop movements. Once he reached the lightly defended area behind the advancing Union forces, he captured more than one hundred supply wagons. But his decision to return to Lee with the supply wagons greatly slowed his progress.
In the meantime, Lee struggled to keep track of the approaching Union Army. The general had always relied heavily on Stuart's cavalrymen to scout out enemy locations and movements. Their absence made it difficult for Lee to determine the strength and whereabouts of Union forces in the region. Lee's knowledge of enemy movements grew shakier with each passing day, and the Confederate general became anxious for Stuart's return. He admitted that without Stuart's cavalry reports, "I am in ignorance as to what we have in front of us here."
In the final days of June, Lee suddenly learned that the Union Army, which was led by General George Meade (1815-1872; see entry), had drawn dangerously close. The Confederate general hastily gathered his army together at Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, to prepare for battle. A few days later, the famous Battle of Gettysburg began. From July 1 to July 3, Meade's Army of the Potomac and Lee's Army of Northern Virginia fought for control of the Pennsylvania countryside. For the first day and a half of the battle, Lee fought without the use of Stuart's cavalry. Stuart and his men finally returned from their mission on the evening of July 2, but their arrival was not enough to bring victory to the Confederacy. After one final day of warfare, Lee's battered rebel army retreated back to the South in defeat.
Stuart's extended absence from Lee's side has been cited by many historians as a major factor in the Union victory at the Battle of Gettysburg. Some people argue that Stuart's long absence was Lee's fault. They argue that Lee's orders to Stuart were too confusing, and that he never should have ordered his scouts so far away. Many other historians, though, contend that Stuart was far too slow in returning from his mission. In any case, Lee badly missed Stuart's cavalry.
Was this article helpful? | 601 | ENGLISH | 1 |
With her whimsical and informative illustrations and timelines Foster has magnificently captured a remarkable age and a remarkable man. Originally published in 1944, Foster earned her reputation by her masterful display of "horizontal history"—telling the story of world events in the geo-political sphere, while giving as much importance to advances in science, medicine, music, literature, and exploration.
Thus, while Abe Lincoln was a boy romping the woods of Kentucky, Thomas Jefferson was completing his eighth year as president, George III reigned in Great Britain and Napoleon was about to meet his Waterloo. Beethoven and Sir Walter Scott were at the height of their creative powers, while Victor Hugo was staging plays at school. By the time Lincoln was old enough to help his father chop wood, other young boys and girls were being prepared for the future parts they would play.
Harriet Beecher was reading anything she could get her hands on, Charles Darwin was collecting toads, crabs and shells, and the impoverished boy Dickens was working in a shoe blacking factory in London. When Lincoln opened his shop in Salem, David Livingstone was opening up deepest Africa, and thousands of Americans were opening up the West on the Oregon Trail. The spirit of freedom was moving around the globe as the abolitionist movement gained power in the States and serfdom saw its demise in Russia. Technologically the world was bursting with the invention of the telegraph, the railroad and the steamboat.
About the Author:
Genevieve Foster began her career as a commercial artist, illustrator, and advertiser. In the late 1930s it occurred to Foster to write about history in a "horizontal" versus "vertical" fashion, i.e., that national histories should not be taught in isolation from one another. She said that the way history was traditionally taught was "about as dull and unsatisfying, as a play might be, if only one character appeared upon the stage, while the others faintly mumbled their lines in the wings, out of sight of the audience."
She was at the forefront of this new method of historical writing, which viewed history as a cross section of intertwined events and looked at a person in their worldwide historical context. In her books, she integrated global historical events into the telling of a person's life. Her purpose was to make historical figures "alive for children". During her career she wrote 19 nonfiction children's books. Foster traveled extensively and most of her books were translated into 12 languages and were distributed by the U.S. State Department. | <urn:uuid:34ebe35d-9230-4848-a3b4-f133dcfe2a99> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.bfbooks.com/Abraham-Lincolns-World-by-Foster | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250607118.51/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122131612-20200122160612-00448.warc.gz | en | 0.986529 | 520 | 3.375 | 3 | [
-0.013434240594506264,
0.3370649516582489,
0.6195331811904907,
0.11899606138467789,
-0.36305755376815796,
0.13414448499679565,
-0.3051026165485382,
0.1672682911157608,
-0.27199044823646545,
0.15537357330322266,
-0.006543939467519522,
0.548299252986908,
0.047432396560907364,
0.4131450653076... | 15 | With her whimsical and informative illustrations and timelines Foster has magnificently captured a remarkable age and a remarkable man. Originally published in 1944, Foster earned her reputation by her masterful display of "horizontal history"—telling the story of world events in the geo-political sphere, while giving as much importance to advances in science, medicine, music, literature, and exploration.
Thus, while Abe Lincoln was a boy romping the woods of Kentucky, Thomas Jefferson was completing his eighth year as president, George III reigned in Great Britain and Napoleon was about to meet his Waterloo. Beethoven and Sir Walter Scott were at the height of their creative powers, while Victor Hugo was staging plays at school. By the time Lincoln was old enough to help his father chop wood, other young boys and girls were being prepared for the future parts they would play.
Harriet Beecher was reading anything she could get her hands on, Charles Darwin was collecting toads, crabs and shells, and the impoverished boy Dickens was working in a shoe blacking factory in London. When Lincoln opened his shop in Salem, David Livingstone was opening up deepest Africa, and thousands of Americans were opening up the West on the Oregon Trail. The spirit of freedom was moving around the globe as the abolitionist movement gained power in the States and serfdom saw its demise in Russia. Technologically the world was bursting with the invention of the telegraph, the railroad and the steamboat.
About the Author:
Genevieve Foster began her career as a commercial artist, illustrator, and advertiser. In the late 1930s it occurred to Foster to write about history in a "horizontal" versus "vertical" fashion, i.e., that national histories should not be taught in isolation from one another. She said that the way history was traditionally taught was "about as dull and unsatisfying, as a play might be, if only one character appeared upon the stage, while the others faintly mumbled their lines in the wings, out of sight of the audience."
She was at the forefront of this new method of historical writing, which viewed history as a cross section of intertwined events and looked at a person in their worldwide historical context. In her books, she integrated global historical events into the telling of a person's life. Her purpose was to make historical figures "alive for children". During her career she wrote 19 nonfiction children's books. Foster traveled extensively and most of her books were translated into 12 languages and were distributed by the U.S. State Department. | 520 | ENGLISH | 1 |
America’s first military action in Korea was in 1871 during what is known as the General Sherman Incident. The General Sherman was an American flagged vessel that sailed to Korea in 1866 and was destroyed by Korean forces. With no diplomatic solution reached, an American naval squadron sailed to Korea and on June 10, 1871 landed a force of Marines that attacked and occupied several forts near the Han River. The American force withdrew and sailed away in July. American military forces were again in Korea during the later stages of World War II. Russian forces were also driving into Korea and the Allies eventually agreed to divide the country into two zones at the 38th parallel. By 1948 the de facto establishment of North Korea and South Korea occurred, both claiming sovereignty over the entire peninsula. These competing political agendas led to active hostiles in 1950 when the North invaded the South drawing the United States, and the Marines, into another war on the Korean peninsula. | <urn:uuid:6c1f1434-3c5a-4e98-b333-1fa3ad030caa> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://valoroustv.com/video/first-to-fight-ep-101-shinmiyangyo/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251688806.91/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126104828-20200126134828-00242.warc.gz | en | 0.981367 | 189 | 3.921875 | 4 | [
0.04901508241891861,
0.363311231136322,
0.4007907807826996,
-0.595957338809967,
-0.16885407269001007,
-0.05034331604838371,
-0.06208956241607666,
0.12276815623044968,
-0.09192732721567154,
-0.01617428846657276,
0.3709811866283417,
-0.20721766352653503,
0.06298183649778366,
0.59011447429656... | 8 | America’s first military action in Korea was in 1871 during what is known as the General Sherman Incident. The General Sherman was an American flagged vessel that sailed to Korea in 1866 and was destroyed by Korean forces. With no diplomatic solution reached, an American naval squadron sailed to Korea and on June 10, 1871 landed a force of Marines that attacked and occupied several forts near the Han River. The American force withdrew and sailed away in July. American military forces were again in Korea during the later stages of World War II. Russian forces were also driving into Korea and the Allies eventually agreed to divide the country into two zones at the 38th parallel. By 1948 the de facto establishment of North Korea and South Korea occurred, both claiming sovereignty over the entire peninsula. These competing political agendas led to active hostiles in 1950 when the North invaded the South drawing the United States, and the Marines, into another war on the Korean peninsula. | 207 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The foraging Lenape had no permanent settlements and no villages, and the "Jerseys" in the historic period may have had a similar settlement pattern. The Munsee built small villages similar to those of the Iroquois. Each Lenape band dispersed into nuclear family units for winter hunting. In the spring these families regathered at a summer station near the mouth of the stream that served as the focus of their band's territory. About a dozen such bands can be recognized, each averaging nearly twenty-five members. All the various Lenape bands gathered in late fall for annual renewal rites, just before dispersing for winter hunting. Families or individuals often operated alone even in aboriginal times, and after 1675 this pattern of independence and entrepreneurial activity became pronounced.
From several historic descriptions we know that each aboriginal Lenape family lived in a wigwam, less than nine feet in diameter and under five feet high. The walls were formed from thin bent poles tied at the top. These were covered with bark and grass, as well as with mats woven from reeds. A hearth area occupied the center of the floor area. Such shelters must have served the Lenape traditionalists well into the nineteenth century, although those Lenape who were becoming more sedentary were building cabins as early as the late eighteenth century. | <urn:uuid:1aa62909-839c-483d-8a7b-17680227f4bd> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.everyculture.com/North-America/Delaware-Settlements.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250597230.18/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120023523-20200120051523-00270.warc.gz | en | 0.982558 | 265 | 4.1875 | 4 | [
-0.20842911303043365,
0.07981418073177338,
0.5893898010253906,
-0.09991760551929474,
0.07560206949710846,
-0.14122633635997772,
-0.22649052739143372,
-0.04339289292693138,
-0.5848022699356079,
-0.028265900909900665,
0.3593478202819824,
-0.08236801624298096,
0.3029549717903137,
0.3621907830... | 3 | The foraging Lenape had no permanent settlements and no villages, and the "Jerseys" in the historic period may have had a similar settlement pattern. The Munsee built small villages similar to those of the Iroquois. Each Lenape band dispersed into nuclear family units for winter hunting. In the spring these families regathered at a summer station near the mouth of the stream that served as the focus of their band's territory. About a dozen such bands can be recognized, each averaging nearly twenty-five members. All the various Lenape bands gathered in late fall for annual renewal rites, just before dispersing for winter hunting. Families or individuals often operated alone even in aboriginal times, and after 1675 this pattern of independence and entrepreneurial activity became pronounced.
From several historic descriptions we know that each aboriginal Lenape family lived in a wigwam, less than nine feet in diameter and under five feet high. The walls were formed from thin bent poles tied at the top. These were covered with bark and grass, as well as with mats woven from reeds. A hearth area occupied the center of the floor area. Such shelters must have served the Lenape traditionalists well into the nineteenth century, although those Lenape who were becoming more sedentary were building cabins as early as the late eighteenth century. | 271 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Japan and the Soviet Union shared a common border in Manchuria and the German invasion of the Soviet Union weakened the Soviets greatly. In view of the advantages to Japan in seeing the Soviet Union defeated (not to mention the resources available in Siberia) and the fact that Japan had large Kwantung Army stationed there essentially doing nothing, why didn't Japan attack?
We have to delve into two spheres to address this question, the political and the military.
Militarily, the Japanese fought a series of border skirmishes with the Soviet Union at Khalkhin Gol (located along the Manchurian - Mongolian border, Mongolia then being a "People's Republic" and puppet of the Soviet Union) through early summer to early autumn 1939, with the main battle happening on August 20th-31st. Georgy Zhukov (who later went on to lead large formations in Europe, but then a Corps Commander) launched a coordinated combined arms attack which stunned the patently inferior Japanese, leading to a prompt ceasefire and cessation of hostilities on September 15, 1939.
Politically, the Japanese military cadres were always divided along two opposed doctrines: the Northern Expansion Doctrine (in which the Japanese Empire would expand north into Siberia) and the Southern Expansion Doctrine (in which the Japanese Empire would instead focus on South-East Asia and the greater Pacific) favored by the Army and Navy respectively. The thorough paddling that the Imperial Japanese Army and the Kwantung Army received at Khalkhin Gol discredited the Northern Expansion Doctrine.
There are indications that the Japanese would have struck the Soviet Union had Operation Typhoon succeeded and Moscow taken by the Germans, but this obviously never materialized. What a difference 50km can make!
Japan was interested in extending its influence in Asia and for that it had to confront either USSR or USA. While I don't think that the exact reason for choosing USA is known, Japan was at a clear disadvantage when battling USSR: while the Soviet Union had established overland supply line for its troops in the far east (Trans-Siberian Railway) the Japanese had to supply their troops and transport reinforcements by sea. This already proved fatal for Japan in the Russo-Japanese War and only the civil unrest in Russia that eventually led to the 1905 Russian Revolutiоn saved Japan from a defeat. The history repeated itself in the Battles of Khalkhin Gol in 1939 and I guess that the Japanese learned their lesson.
The United States on the other hand could only defend their interests in Asia and Pacific by sea, same as Japan itself. So the chances here were equal and the attack on Pearl Harbor temporarily gave Japan a significant advantage - something that they couldn't achieve against Soviet Union.
The Soviets kept a strong army in the Far East at all times, in case of Japanese attack, and the Japanese had come out a distinct second best in earlier battles. Opening up a front meant committing the Kwantung Army to battle, with all the logistics (never Japan's strong point) that implies, and a battle that the Japanese could not necessarily pull back from.
Further, there weren't all that many resources being exploited in Siberia, and Siberia's a very big place. After what was available near Manchuria, it was a very long trip to the Irkutsk area, the next place worth conquering.
One important reason that Japan chose to go to war with the United States rather than the Soviet Union was because its navy was the stronger of its two arms.
The Japanese navy was quite competitive with the U.S. navy, even before Pearl Harbor (until the 1943 U.S. shipbuilding program kicked in). Not so the Japanese army, which had been defeated by Soviet forces on the Mongolian border in 1938, and lacked tanks and other heavy equipment.
Furthermore, Japan didn't have the logistics to fight a "two front" war, one on land and one at sea.
They had a treaty beginning in 1941, after a few skirmishes along the area in question. They were also a member of the Tripartite Pact, which they remainded a member of even after Germany attacked the Soviet Union
US oil sanctions were crippling Japan and they came after the US to try and force FDR into negotiations and cripple our Navy that he had moved from San Diego to Honolulu, the only force capable of stopping the Japanese from taking the oil fields in the Indies. In other words they were desperate for oil and had to remove the threat of the US Navy before they could think about war with Russia.
In August 1939, while Japan and the USSR were skirmishing, Germany and the USSR signed a Non-Aggression Pact that allowed Stalin to put some more focus on Japan (among other things). By early 1941, Japan decided it was time to focus on securing its oil supply in Indonesia and so shifted to its Pacific strategy. Hence they signed a neutrality pact with the USSR in April 1941. Germany showed no signs of a policy shift until June 22, 1941, when it abruptly attacked the Soviet Union.
With regard to the USSR, Germany was like "we got this." All through 1941 while Japan was prepping Pearl Harbor, Germany was wailing on Russia. When Pearl Harbor happened, the Wehrmacht was at the gates of Moscow. The Nazi leaders were debating whether to start killing the Jews right away, or "in the spring, after the war" meaning 1942. Likewise, Japan expected its expansion in 1941-42 to present the West with a fait accompli, that the USA would have neither the resources nor the willpower to fight, and that if they did, it would take several years to recover from Pearl Harbor and present a new threat in the Pacific. In other words, they could focus on China, and the USSR if they wanted, later. It did not work out that way.
They did attack the USSR a few times, but lost badly and decided to sign a treaty with the USSR. They quit with Russia because they wanted to expand farther into the Pacific to which Russia wasn't a threat to that goal. That's perhaps the biggest reason for the Raid on Pearl Harbor, Japan was worried that America would intervene and cause issues to the plan. They decided to launch a first strike to neutralize the possibility, by destroying the American fleet and holding us off for awhile. This however didn't happen because the main targets being our aircraft carriers were out to sea at the time of the attack.
The Invasion of Pearl Harbor ,History Channel
Imperial Japan WOULD have declared war on USSR had it been successful at Midway, as it was successful at Pearl and in invading Philippines. The US essentially kicked in the door to Japan at Midway. US had agreed to a "Europe first" policy with its European allies upon declaring war against both Japan and Germany. The problem is that European theater was simply not ready to utilize American forces.
After Midway, Japan was no immediate threat to the US, and US could have delayed further action against Japan for a considerable time, had we still had an essentially isolationist sentiment, simply because Europe wasn't prepared for US the brunt of US effort. That brunt most immediately went to the Pacific War. Had it not, Japan could have and may well have moved against the USSR. This was particularly opportune when the manufacturing capacity of USSR was packed up and moved by Stalin east, away from Moscow, and re-assembled closer to the eastern front.
An attack by Japan in the fall of 1942 was quite possible, since the USSR essentially had no defenses deployed on its eastern front, and the destruction of its mfg capacity would have doomed the USSR to the residual Nazi attack, and would have cost Japan very little, assuming the US had not advanced in the Pacific after Midway. Because the US did advance with all its might, Japan simply could never have mounted an attack on the USSR, even had it weakened or diminished its efforts in Burma, the Malay Peninsula, etc.
It has become popular in the past 20-30 years to credit USSR with defeating the Nazis, but this disregards the effect of the US' offensive against Japan in keeping the Japanese from opening a front against the USSR.
As was stated in another answer, there were a number of skirmishes/battles that occurred in 1939, such as the Battles of Khalkin Gol, but it essentially concluded when it became apparent that Japan was not a military match against the Russians. This basically guaranteed that Germany and Japan would never link up as allies on land.
For more information about the battle, I'm going to forward you to the Wikipedia article on Battles of Khalkhin Gol.
The Japanese primary strategy was to create an East-Asia Prosperity sphere of influence, including SE Asia, parts of China and Indonesia. This also fit in with their desperation for resources, especially oil (see, for instance, the book The Prize by Daniel Yergin). SE Asia also had bauxite for Aluminum refining (as did the Caroline Islands, see Aluminum Ore: The Political Economy of the Global Bauxite Industry) and Japan was also desperate for Aluminum imports, which had come from the U.S. but were cut off due to the bad press from Japanese atrocities in China. In many ways, the attack on Pearl Harbor was a distractions and disaster, and an attack on Russia would have been, also.
Japan and Germany had a political and military alliance during World War 2, as Japan was part of the Axis powers. When Japan attacked Pearl Harbor on December 7th, 1941, the U.S. declared war on Japan the following day. As you would expect, Germany (Japan's faithful ally) then declared war on the United States on December 11th, 1941. So yes, when Germany invaded the Soviet Union, it's puzzling that Japan did not honor its alliance by attacking the U.S.S.R. Such an arrangement would have divided the Soviet military in two and assured a victorious invasion for Hitler.
So, why on EARTH would Japan cross the Pacific to fight a neutral United States when its own ally was at war with neighboring Soviet Union?
Recent details have come to light that finally answer the question. In the mid 1990's, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, certain KGB archives revealed that Soviet spycraft actually engineered the war between the United States and Japan. This new information, stemming from the Venona Project, shows that Soviet penetration of the U.S. State Department and Treasury Department played a key role. Specifically, Harry Dexter White, a senior economist at the U.S. Treasury, was instructed to author key conditions during diplomatic exchanges between the U.S. and Japan. The key conditions were designed to start a war. The main condition was the demand that Imperial Japan withdrawn from all occupied territories This condition in particular convinced Japan that the U.S. was committed to war in the Pacific. In essence, Japan felt that they HAD to fight the United States. (Check out 'The Venona Secrets' by Herbert Romerstein & Eric Breindel as well as 'The Battle of Bretton Woods' by Benn Steil).
Once the Soviet Union was assured that their American agents had issued the hardline conditions, the Soviets could confidently focus on a one-front war instead of a two-front war. On December 4th, three days BEFORE the attack on Pearl Harbor, the Soviet Union confidently moved nearly all of its eastern land forces...forces that would have fought against Japan...into the western front to counter Hitler's fast-moving invasion. From a military standpoint, its dangerous to turn your back on the ally of your enemy (Japan) unless you are absolutely certain they will not attack.
Militarily, Japan had MUCH better chances fighting a country that was right next door and already heavily engaged in fighting Nazi Germany, which happened to be Japan's military ally. It is truly a miracle of statecraft that Japan was tricked into attacking a neutral nation nearly 3,000 miles away.
Also of interest...the Soviet Union, who was supposedly an ally of the United States in fighting Hitler...never declared war on Japan until AFTER the atomic bomb was dropped in 1945. After that, the Soviets moved their forces back to the east and promptly invaded Manchuria. Pretty nifty spycraft. | <urn:uuid:cadda97a-4c3b-4414-8b58-3ac1a0bee9ab> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/27/why-didnt-imperial-japan-attack-the-soviet-union-during-world-war-2/42 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250626449.79/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124221147-20200125010147-00220.warc.gz | en | 0.983359 | 2,504 | 3.453125 | 3 | [
-0.5376356244087219,
-0.23966945707798004,
0.3320920169353485,
0.38246381282806396,
0.18196269869804382,
0.1337892711162567,
0.21760475635528564,
0.26967695355415344,
-0.24399009346961975,
-0.08925879001617432,
0.20031052827835083,
-0.19511094689369202,
0.5573590993881226,
0.61364895105361... | 3 | Japan and the Soviet Union shared a common border in Manchuria and the German invasion of the Soviet Union weakened the Soviets greatly. In view of the advantages to Japan in seeing the Soviet Union defeated (not to mention the resources available in Siberia) and the fact that Japan had large Kwantung Army stationed there essentially doing nothing, why didn't Japan attack?
We have to delve into two spheres to address this question, the political and the military.
Militarily, the Japanese fought a series of border skirmishes with the Soviet Union at Khalkhin Gol (located along the Manchurian - Mongolian border, Mongolia then being a "People's Republic" and puppet of the Soviet Union) through early summer to early autumn 1939, with the main battle happening on August 20th-31st. Georgy Zhukov (who later went on to lead large formations in Europe, but then a Corps Commander) launched a coordinated combined arms attack which stunned the patently inferior Japanese, leading to a prompt ceasefire and cessation of hostilities on September 15, 1939.
Politically, the Japanese military cadres were always divided along two opposed doctrines: the Northern Expansion Doctrine (in which the Japanese Empire would expand north into Siberia) and the Southern Expansion Doctrine (in which the Japanese Empire would instead focus on South-East Asia and the greater Pacific) favored by the Army and Navy respectively. The thorough paddling that the Imperial Japanese Army and the Kwantung Army received at Khalkhin Gol discredited the Northern Expansion Doctrine.
There are indications that the Japanese would have struck the Soviet Union had Operation Typhoon succeeded and Moscow taken by the Germans, but this obviously never materialized. What a difference 50km can make!
Japan was interested in extending its influence in Asia and for that it had to confront either USSR or USA. While I don't think that the exact reason for choosing USA is known, Japan was at a clear disadvantage when battling USSR: while the Soviet Union had established overland supply line for its troops in the far east (Trans-Siberian Railway) the Japanese had to supply their troops and transport reinforcements by sea. This already proved fatal for Japan in the Russo-Japanese War and only the civil unrest in Russia that eventually led to the 1905 Russian Revolutiоn saved Japan from a defeat. The history repeated itself in the Battles of Khalkhin Gol in 1939 and I guess that the Japanese learned their lesson.
The United States on the other hand could only defend their interests in Asia and Pacific by sea, same as Japan itself. So the chances here were equal and the attack on Pearl Harbor temporarily gave Japan a significant advantage - something that they couldn't achieve against Soviet Union.
The Soviets kept a strong army in the Far East at all times, in case of Japanese attack, and the Japanese had come out a distinct second best in earlier battles. Opening up a front meant committing the Kwantung Army to battle, with all the logistics (never Japan's strong point) that implies, and a battle that the Japanese could not necessarily pull back from.
Further, there weren't all that many resources being exploited in Siberia, and Siberia's a very big place. After what was available near Manchuria, it was a very long trip to the Irkutsk area, the next place worth conquering.
One important reason that Japan chose to go to war with the United States rather than the Soviet Union was because its navy was the stronger of its two arms.
The Japanese navy was quite competitive with the U.S. navy, even before Pearl Harbor (until the 1943 U.S. shipbuilding program kicked in). Not so the Japanese army, which had been defeated by Soviet forces on the Mongolian border in 1938, and lacked tanks and other heavy equipment.
Furthermore, Japan didn't have the logistics to fight a "two front" war, one on land and one at sea.
They had a treaty beginning in 1941, after a few skirmishes along the area in question. They were also a member of the Tripartite Pact, which they remainded a member of even after Germany attacked the Soviet Union
US oil sanctions were crippling Japan and they came after the US to try and force FDR into negotiations and cripple our Navy that he had moved from San Diego to Honolulu, the only force capable of stopping the Japanese from taking the oil fields in the Indies. In other words they were desperate for oil and had to remove the threat of the US Navy before they could think about war with Russia.
In August 1939, while Japan and the USSR were skirmishing, Germany and the USSR signed a Non-Aggression Pact that allowed Stalin to put some more focus on Japan (among other things). By early 1941, Japan decided it was time to focus on securing its oil supply in Indonesia and so shifted to its Pacific strategy. Hence they signed a neutrality pact with the USSR in April 1941. Germany showed no signs of a policy shift until June 22, 1941, when it abruptly attacked the Soviet Union.
With regard to the USSR, Germany was like "we got this." All through 1941 while Japan was prepping Pearl Harbor, Germany was wailing on Russia. When Pearl Harbor happened, the Wehrmacht was at the gates of Moscow. The Nazi leaders were debating whether to start killing the Jews right away, or "in the spring, after the war" meaning 1942. Likewise, Japan expected its expansion in 1941-42 to present the West with a fait accompli, that the USA would have neither the resources nor the willpower to fight, and that if they did, it would take several years to recover from Pearl Harbor and present a new threat in the Pacific. In other words, they could focus on China, and the USSR if they wanted, later. It did not work out that way.
They did attack the USSR a few times, but lost badly and decided to sign a treaty with the USSR. They quit with Russia because they wanted to expand farther into the Pacific to which Russia wasn't a threat to that goal. That's perhaps the biggest reason for the Raid on Pearl Harbor, Japan was worried that America would intervene and cause issues to the plan. They decided to launch a first strike to neutralize the possibility, by destroying the American fleet and holding us off for awhile. This however didn't happen because the main targets being our aircraft carriers were out to sea at the time of the attack.
The Invasion of Pearl Harbor ,History Channel
Imperial Japan WOULD have declared war on USSR had it been successful at Midway, as it was successful at Pearl and in invading Philippines. The US essentially kicked in the door to Japan at Midway. US had agreed to a "Europe first" policy with its European allies upon declaring war against both Japan and Germany. The problem is that European theater was simply not ready to utilize American forces.
After Midway, Japan was no immediate threat to the US, and US could have delayed further action against Japan for a considerable time, had we still had an essentially isolationist sentiment, simply because Europe wasn't prepared for US the brunt of US effort. That brunt most immediately went to the Pacific War. Had it not, Japan could have and may well have moved against the USSR. This was particularly opportune when the manufacturing capacity of USSR was packed up and moved by Stalin east, away from Moscow, and re-assembled closer to the eastern front.
An attack by Japan in the fall of 1942 was quite possible, since the USSR essentially had no defenses deployed on its eastern front, and the destruction of its mfg capacity would have doomed the USSR to the residual Nazi attack, and would have cost Japan very little, assuming the US had not advanced in the Pacific after Midway. Because the US did advance with all its might, Japan simply could never have mounted an attack on the USSR, even had it weakened or diminished its efforts in Burma, the Malay Peninsula, etc.
It has become popular in the past 20-30 years to credit USSR with defeating the Nazis, but this disregards the effect of the US' offensive against Japan in keeping the Japanese from opening a front against the USSR.
As was stated in another answer, there were a number of skirmishes/battles that occurred in 1939, such as the Battles of Khalkin Gol, but it essentially concluded when it became apparent that Japan was not a military match against the Russians. This basically guaranteed that Germany and Japan would never link up as allies on land.
For more information about the battle, I'm going to forward you to the Wikipedia article on Battles of Khalkhin Gol.
The Japanese primary strategy was to create an East-Asia Prosperity sphere of influence, including SE Asia, parts of China and Indonesia. This also fit in with their desperation for resources, especially oil (see, for instance, the book The Prize by Daniel Yergin). SE Asia also had bauxite for Aluminum refining (as did the Caroline Islands, see Aluminum Ore: The Political Economy of the Global Bauxite Industry) and Japan was also desperate for Aluminum imports, which had come from the U.S. but were cut off due to the bad press from Japanese atrocities in China. In many ways, the attack on Pearl Harbor was a distractions and disaster, and an attack on Russia would have been, also.
Japan and Germany had a political and military alliance during World War 2, as Japan was part of the Axis powers. When Japan attacked Pearl Harbor on December 7th, 1941, the U.S. declared war on Japan the following day. As you would expect, Germany (Japan's faithful ally) then declared war on the United States on December 11th, 1941. So yes, when Germany invaded the Soviet Union, it's puzzling that Japan did not honor its alliance by attacking the U.S.S.R. Such an arrangement would have divided the Soviet military in two and assured a victorious invasion for Hitler.
So, why on EARTH would Japan cross the Pacific to fight a neutral United States when its own ally was at war with neighboring Soviet Union?
Recent details have come to light that finally answer the question. In the mid 1990's, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, certain KGB archives revealed that Soviet spycraft actually engineered the war between the United States and Japan. This new information, stemming from the Venona Project, shows that Soviet penetration of the U.S. State Department and Treasury Department played a key role. Specifically, Harry Dexter White, a senior economist at the U.S. Treasury, was instructed to author key conditions during diplomatic exchanges between the U.S. and Japan. The key conditions were designed to start a war. The main condition was the demand that Imperial Japan withdrawn from all occupied territories This condition in particular convinced Japan that the U.S. was committed to war in the Pacific. In essence, Japan felt that they HAD to fight the United States. (Check out 'The Venona Secrets' by Herbert Romerstein & Eric Breindel as well as 'The Battle of Bretton Woods' by Benn Steil).
Once the Soviet Union was assured that their American agents had issued the hardline conditions, the Soviets could confidently focus on a one-front war instead of a two-front war. On December 4th, three days BEFORE the attack on Pearl Harbor, the Soviet Union confidently moved nearly all of its eastern land forces...forces that would have fought against Japan...into the western front to counter Hitler's fast-moving invasion. From a military standpoint, its dangerous to turn your back on the ally of your enemy (Japan) unless you are absolutely certain they will not attack.
Militarily, Japan had MUCH better chances fighting a country that was right next door and already heavily engaged in fighting Nazi Germany, which happened to be Japan's military ally. It is truly a miracle of statecraft that Japan was tricked into attacking a neutral nation nearly 3,000 miles away.
Also of interest...the Soviet Union, who was supposedly an ally of the United States in fighting Hitler...never declared war on Japan until AFTER the atomic bomb was dropped in 1945. After that, the Soviets moved their forces back to the east and promptly invaded Manchuria. Pretty nifty spycraft. | 2,572 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Cathedrals in the middle ages were typically large churches and were considered the center church of the bishop’s throne. In the medieval times, monumental cathedrals were built to symbolize of faith and a display of creativity within the middle ages society in Europe.
The laws of the Church established that the throne of a bishop was not to be in a church village but within a church in the city. This explains the presence of larger churches in the city as compared to those in the villages. Nevertheless, developing large churches in the European cities was not problematic because Christians whose influence spread to neighboring districts already inhabited most of the cities.
However, cities such as the British Isles faced some difficulties in establishing cathedrals due to a scarcity of towns. As such, bishops presided over few sections of the city and most of the time they exercised their jurisdiction over small tribes.
Canon law recognized the bishop as the minister and head of the cathedrals and his diocese would be his parochial. With regard to this, legal specialists in canon law describe the cathedral of the middle ages as the single bishopric church and all other churches were simply related to the cathedral. The middle ages also saw the rise of the co-cathedral in which two cathedrals shared the same bishop.
In 10th and 11th centuries, the clergy structure within the cathedral was better organized and they divided themselves into categories. The first one was monastic and comprised Benedictine monks. The second category as made up of clergy who were not bound by vows other than those they took during their ordaining. Canonical laws governed this latter category of cathedral clergy. The two categories led to the differentiation between the secular and the monastic cathedrals.
In some parts of medieval Europe such as German and in England most of the cathedrals were monastic. These types of cathedrals in the middle ages comprised of an internal governance structure and dignitaries all of whom were bound by law to their respective cathedrals. The secular cathedral comprised of four or more dignitaries, canons and a dean who played a significant role in the internal governance and management of the cathedral.
n spite of these obvious differences between secular and monastic cathedrals, there was no difference in how they related to the bishop and the diocese. Both categories had chapters that the bishop had to consult with concerning any crucial issues before a bishopric decision is made.
In medieval England, King Henry VIII abolished all monastic cathedral systems and replaced them with secular ones. For example, the cathedrals at Durham and Canterbury had twelve canons and a dean while the one at Carlisle had four canons and a dean in charge.
Religious authorities and institutions were in charge of building cathedrals in the Middle Ages. However, the community played a great role in the physical construction and the day-to-day running of the cathedral. In the 12th century, the Church began absolving people of their sins if they participated in the construction of the cathedrals.
During this time, the Crusades were raging and many people were leaving their towns to participate in these wars. Although the Church played a significant role in the Crusades, other religious authorities called for people to stay back and help build the churches.
A lot of money was put in constructing the monumental cathedrals in the middle ages. There was some degree of disproval from some sections of the clergy who frowned upon the amount of money that went into building and decorating the cathedral.
However, a large majority of the society was enthusiastic about the building of these lavish structures. During this time, it took years and even decades to construct a cathedral and most people did not except to see the completion of the large churches within their lifetime.
In medieval times, the Cathedral chapter was in charge of financing the construction and decoration of the cathedral. The senior clergymen who made up the cathedral chapter raised money for construction by urging their congregations to contribute. They also arranged for tours and pilgrimages for relics or fined clerics for offenses such as not keeping time. Bishops were not required to contribute directly but they would do so out of their own free will.
The laborers who were involved in building cathedrals in the Middle Ages had different skills. At the bottom were those who transported construction material, dug and cleared earth. These laborers were usually paid daily. At the top of the scale were builders that are more skilled including mortar-markers, quarrymen, masons and plasterers.
Transporting construction material such as stones was expensive. The quarrymen would shape the stones at the quarry before they were brought to the construction site. Although dressing the stones happened all year round, laying stones halted during the winter frost that would keep the motors from affixing the stones together.
Cathedral stonecutters moved between construction sites looking for work and they would be paid according to the pieces of stones they worked on or on a daily basis. Novice artisans usually carried out the piecework and they would calculate how much they ought to be paid by branding each stone they cut with their unique mark.
What set cathedrals apart from other religious structures was their size and the interior design. Careful attention was given to decorating each section of the cathedral from the interior roof, the windows, floors and doors. The builders usually used frescoes to decorate the internal parts of the building. Stone sculpturing was also a popular method of designing and decorating the cathedral.
Medieval methods of constructing the cathedral evolved, as builders and skilled craftsmen perfected their craft. Improvements in architecture and technology made it easier for communities to build their cathedrals faster and to decorate them with diverse elements. One architectural change was the shift from frescoes to stained and highly colorful glass to decorate the cathedrals in the middle ages | <urn:uuid:1ece8973-556e-464c-8b3b-c2fadb187164> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.thefinertimes.com/Middle-Ages/cathedrals-in-the-middle-ages.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250614086.44/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123221108-20200124010108-00098.warc.gz | en | 0.984969 | 1,198 | 4.03125 | 4 | [
0.11654478311538696,
0.23514845967292786,
-0.19176723062992096,
-0.2640249729156494,
-0.14147204160690308,
-0.013590684160590172,
-0.2538840174674988,
-0.11601398140192032,
0.16705423593521118,
0.06348051130771637,
-0.512548565864563,
-0.09149407595396042,
0.10372164845466614,
0.0988212004... | 13 | Cathedrals in the middle ages were typically large churches and were considered the center church of the bishop’s throne. In the medieval times, monumental cathedrals were built to symbolize of faith and a display of creativity within the middle ages society in Europe.
The laws of the Church established that the throne of a bishop was not to be in a church village but within a church in the city. This explains the presence of larger churches in the city as compared to those in the villages. Nevertheless, developing large churches in the European cities was not problematic because Christians whose influence spread to neighboring districts already inhabited most of the cities.
However, cities such as the British Isles faced some difficulties in establishing cathedrals due to a scarcity of towns. As such, bishops presided over few sections of the city and most of the time they exercised their jurisdiction over small tribes.
Canon law recognized the bishop as the minister and head of the cathedrals and his diocese would be his parochial. With regard to this, legal specialists in canon law describe the cathedral of the middle ages as the single bishopric church and all other churches were simply related to the cathedral. The middle ages also saw the rise of the co-cathedral in which two cathedrals shared the same bishop.
In 10th and 11th centuries, the clergy structure within the cathedral was better organized and they divided themselves into categories. The first one was monastic and comprised Benedictine monks. The second category as made up of clergy who were not bound by vows other than those they took during their ordaining. Canonical laws governed this latter category of cathedral clergy. The two categories led to the differentiation between the secular and the monastic cathedrals.
In some parts of medieval Europe such as German and in England most of the cathedrals were monastic. These types of cathedrals in the middle ages comprised of an internal governance structure and dignitaries all of whom were bound by law to their respective cathedrals. The secular cathedral comprised of four or more dignitaries, canons and a dean who played a significant role in the internal governance and management of the cathedral.
n spite of these obvious differences between secular and monastic cathedrals, there was no difference in how they related to the bishop and the diocese. Both categories had chapters that the bishop had to consult with concerning any crucial issues before a bishopric decision is made.
In medieval England, King Henry VIII abolished all monastic cathedral systems and replaced them with secular ones. For example, the cathedrals at Durham and Canterbury had twelve canons and a dean while the one at Carlisle had four canons and a dean in charge.
Religious authorities and institutions were in charge of building cathedrals in the Middle Ages. However, the community played a great role in the physical construction and the day-to-day running of the cathedral. In the 12th century, the Church began absolving people of their sins if they participated in the construction of the cathedrals.
During this time, the Crusades were raging and many people were leaving their towns to participate in these wars. Although the Church played a significant role in the Crusades, other religious authorities called for people to stay back and help build the churches.
A lot of money was put in constructing the monumental cathedrals in the middle ages. There was some degree of disproval from some sections of the clergy who frowned upon the amount of money that went into building and decorating the cathedral.
However, a large majority of the society was enthusiastic about the building of these lavish structures. During this time, it took years and even decades to construct a cathedral and most people did not except to see the completion of the large churches within their lifetime.
In medieval times, the Cathedral chapter was in charge of financing the construction and decoration of the cathedral. The senior clergymen who made up the cathedral chapter raised money for construction by urging their congregations to contribute. They also arranged for tours and pilgrimages for relics or fined clerics for offenses such as not keeping time. Bishops were not required to contribute directly but they would do so out of their own free will.
The laborers who were involved in building cathedrals in the Middle Ages had different skills. At the bottom were those who transported construction material, dug and cleared earth. These laborers were usually paid daily. At the top of the scale were builders that are more skilled including mortar-markers, quarrymen, masons and plasterers.
Transporting construction material such as stones was expensive. The quarrymen would shape the stones at the quarry before they were brought to the construction site. Although dressing the stones happened all year round, laying stones halted during the winter frost that would keep the motors from affixing the stones together.
Cathedral stonecutters moved between construction sites looking for work and they would be paid according to the pieces of stones they worked on or on a daily basis. Novice artisans usually carried out the piecework and they would calculate how much they ought to be paid by branding each stone they cut with their unique mark.
What set cathedrals apart from other religious structures was their size and the interior design. Careful attention was given to decorating each section of the cathedral from the interior roof, the windows, floors and doors. The builders usually used frescoes to decorate the internal parts of the building. Stone sculpturing was also a popular method of designing and decorating the cathedral.
Medieval methods of constructing the cathedral evolved, as builders and skilled craftsmen perfected their craft. Improvements in architecture and technology made it easier for communities to build their cathedrals faster and to decorate them with diverse elements. One architectural change was the shift from frescoes to stained and highly colorful glass to decorate the cathedrals in the middle ages | 1,196 | ENGLISH | 1 |
After the death of Aurangzeb in 1707, the Mughal Empire fell apart and declined in its ability to tax or govern most of the Indian subcontinent. In the northwestern region, particularly the Punjab, the creation of the Khalsa community of Sikh warriors by Guru Gobind Singh accelerated the decay and fragmentation of the Mughal power in the region. Raiding Afghans attacked the Indus river valleys but met resistance from both organised armies of the Khalsa Sikhs as well as irregular Khalsa militias based in villages. The Sikhs had appointed their own zamindars, replacing the previous Muslim revenue Collectors, which provided resources to feed and strengthen the warriors aligned with Sikh interests. Meanwhile, colonial traders and the East India Company had begun operations in India on its eastern and western coasts.
According to Ishtiaq Ahmed, Ranjit Singh's rule led to further persecution of Muslims in Kashmir, expanding the previously selective persecution of Shia Muslims and Hindus by Afghan Sunni Muslim rulers between 1752 and 1819 before Kashmir became part of his Sikh Empire. Bikramjit Hasrat describes Ranjit Singh as a "benevolent despot".
Ranjit Singh was born on 13 November 1780, to Maha Singh Sukerchakia and Raj Kaur – the daughter of Raja Gajpat Singh of Jind, in Gujranwala, in the Majha region of Punjab (now in Pakistan). His birth name was Buddh Singh, after his ancestor who was a disciple of Guru Gobind Singh, a Khalsa, and whose descendants created the Sukerchakia misl before the birth of Ranjit Singh, which became the most powerful of many small Sikh kingdoms in northwestern Southern Asia in the wake of the disintegrating Mughal Empire. The child's name was changed to Ranjit (literally, "victor in battle") by his father to commemorate his army's victory over the Muslim Chatha chieftain Pir Muhammad.
Ranjit Singh's fame grew in 1797, at age 17, when the Afghan Muslim ruler Shah Zaman, of the Ahmad Shah Abdali dynasty, attempted to annex Panjab region into his control through his general Shahanchi Khan and 12,000 Soldiers. The battle was fought in the territory that fell in Ranjit Singh controlled misl, whose regional knowledge and warrior expertise helped resist the invading army. This victory gained him recognition. In 1798, the Afghan ruler sent in another army, which Ranjit Singh did not resist. He let them enter Lahore, then encircled them with his army, blocked off all food and supplies, burnt all crops and food sources that could have supported the Afghan army. Much of the Afghan army retreated back to Afghanistan.
At age 15, Ranjit Singh married his first wife Mehtab Kaur, the only daughter of Gurbaksh Singh Kanhaiya and his wife Sada Kaur, and the granddaughter of Jai Singh Kanhaiya, the founder of the Kanhaiya Misl. This marriage was pre-arranged in an attempt to reconcile warring Sikh misls, wherein Mahtab Kaur was betrothed to Ranjit Singh. However, the marriage failed, with Mehtab Kaur never forgiving the fact that her father had been killed by Ranjit Singh's father and she mainly lived with her mother after marriage. The separation became complete when Ranjit Singh married his second wife Raj Kaur of Nakai Misl in 1798. Mehtab Kaur died in 1813.
In 1799, Raja Ranjit Singh's army of 25,000 Khalsa, supported by another 25,000 Khalsa led by his mother-in-law Rani Sada Kaur of Kanhaiya misl, in a joint operation attacked the region controlled by Bhangi Sikhs centered around Lahore. The rulers escaped, marking Lahore as the first major conquest of Ranjit Singh. The Sufi Muslim and Hindu population of Lahore welcomed the rule of Ranjit Singh. In 1800, the ruler of Jammu region ceded control of his region to Ranjit Singh.
Ranjit Singh ensured that Panjab manufactured and was self-sufficient in all weapons, equipment and munitions his army needed. His government invested in infrastructure in the 1800s and thereafter, established raw materials mines, cannon foundries, gunpowder and arm factories. Some of these operations were owned by the state, others operated by private Sikh operatives.
In 1801, Ranjit Singh proclaimed himself as the "Maharaja of Punjab", and agreed to a formal investiture ceremony, which was carried out by Baba Sahib Singh Bedi - a descendant of Guru Nanak. On the day of his coronation, prayers were performed across mosques, temples and gurudwaras in his territories for his long life. Ranjit Singh called his rule as "Sarkar Khalsa", and his court as "Darbar Khalsa". He ordered new coins to be issued in the name of Guru Nanak named the "NanakShahi" ("of the Emperor Nanak").
In 1802 Ranjit Singh, aged 22, took Amritsar from the Bhangi Sikh misl, paid homage at the Harmandir Sahib temple, which had previously been attacked and desecrated by the invading Afghan army, and announced that he would renovate and rebuild it with marble and gold.
On 1 January 1806, Ranjit Singh signed a treaty with the British officials of the East India Company, in which he agreed that his Sikh forces would not attempt to expand south of the Sutlej river, and the Company agreed that it would not attempt to militarily cross the Sutlej river into the Sikh territory.
In 1807, Ranjit Singh's forces attacked the Muslim ruled misl of Kasur and, after a month of fierce fighting, defeated the Afghan chief Qutb-ud-Din, thus expanding his empire North West towards Afghanistan. He took Multan in 1818, and the whole Bari Doab came under his rule with that conquest. In 1819, he successfully defeated the Afghan Sunni Muslim rulers and annexed Srinagar and Kashmir, stretching his rule into the north and the Jhelum valley, beyond the foothills of the Himalayas.
Ratan Kaur and Daya Kaur were wives of Sahib Singh Bhangi of Gujrat (a misl north of Lahore, not to be confused the state of Gujarat). After Sahib Singh's death, Ranjit Singh took them under his protection in 1811 by marrying them via the rite of chādar andāzī, in which a cloth sheet was unfurled over each of their heads. Ratan Kaur gave birth to Multana Singh in 1819, and Daya Kaur gave birth to Kashmira Singh in 1819 and to Pashaura Singh in 1821.
In 1813–14, Ranjit Singh's first attempt to expand into Kashmir was foiled by Afghan forces led by General Azim Khan, due to a heavy downpour, the spread of cholera, and poor food supply to his troops.
In July 1818, an army from the Punjab defeated Jabbar Khan, a younger brother of governor of Kashmir Azim Khan, and acquired Kashmir, along with a yearly revenue of Rs seventy lacs. Dewan Moti Ram was appointed governor of Kashmir.
In November 1819, Dost Mohammed accepted the sovereignty of the Maharaja over Peshawar, along with a revenue payment of Rs one lac a year. The Maharaja specifically ordered his forces not to harass or molest any civilian. In 1820 and 1821, Dera Ghazi Khan, Hazara and Mankera, with huge tracts of land between Jhelum and Indus, Singh Sagar Daob, were also annexed. The victories of Kashmir, Peshwar and Multan were celebrated by naming three newborns after them. Prince Kashmira Singh, Peshaura Singh and Prince Multana Singh were born to Daya Kaur and Ratan Kaur, wives of Ranjit Singh.
In 1823, Ranjit Singh defeated a large army of Yusufzai north of the Kabul River.
Singh allowed men from different religions and races to serve in his army and his government in various positions of authority. His army included a few Europeans, such as Jean-François Allard, but he did not employ British people, who were attempting to create a colony in the Indian subcontinent. Despite not employing them, he did maintain a diplomatic channel with the British; in 1828, he sent gifts to George IV and in 1831, he sent a mission to Simla to confer with the British Governor General, william Bentinck; while in 1838, he cooperated with them in removing the hostile Islamic Sultan in Afghanistan.
In 1834, Mohammed Azim Khan once again marched towards Peshawar with an army of 25,000 Khattak and Yasufzai tribesmen in the name of jihad, to fight against infidels. The Maharaja defeated the forces. Yar Mohammad was pardoned and was reinvested as governor of Peshawar with an annual revenue of Rs one lac ten thousand to Lahore Darbar.
The army under Ranjit Singh was not limited to the Sikh community. The Soldiers and troop officers included Sikhs, but also included Hindus, Muslims and Europeans. Hindu Brahmins and people of all creeds and castes served his army, while the composition in his government also reflected a religious diversity. His army included Polish, Russian, Spanish, Prussian and French officers. In 1835, as his relationship with the British warmed up, he hired a British officer named Foulkes.
In 1837, the Battle of Jamrud and his march through Kabul in 1838, in cooperation with the colonial British army stationed in Sindh, became the last confrontation between the Sikhs led by him and the Afghans, which helped extend and establish the western boundaries of the Sikh Empire.
Singh is remembered for uniting Sikhs and founding the prosperous Sikh Empire. He is also remembered for his conquests and building a well-trained, self-sufficient Khalsa army to protect the empire. He amassed considerable wealth, including gaining the possession of the Koh-i-Noor Diamond from Shuja Shah Durrani of Afghanistan, which he left to Jagannath Temple in Puri, Odisha in 1839.
The Muslim accounts of Ranjit Singh's rule were questioned by Sikh historians of the same era. For Example, Ratan Singh Bhangu in 1841 wrote that these accounts were not accurate, and according to Anne Murphy, he remarked, "when would a Musalman praise the Sikhs?" In contrast, the colonial era British military officer Hugh Pearse in 1898 criticised Ranjit Singh's rule, as one founded on "violence, treachery and blood". Sohan Seetal disagrees with this account and states that Ranjit Singh had encouraged his army to respond with a "tit for tat" against the enemy, violence for violence, blood for blood, plunder for plunder.
Ranjit Singh's policies were based on respect for all communities, Muslim, Hindu and Sikh. . A devoted Sikh, Ranjit Singh restored and built historic Sikh Gurdwaras – most famously, the Harmandir Sahib, and used to celebrate his victories by offering thanks at the Harmandar. He also joined the Hindus in their temples, prohibited cow slaughter out of respect for Hindu sentiments , and visited Sufi mosques and holy places. He ordered his Soldiers to neither loot nor molest civilians.
Towards the end of 18th century, the five most powerful misls were those of Sukkarchakkia, Kanhayas, Nakkais, Ahluwalias and Bhangi Sikhs. Ranjit Singh belonged to the first, and through marriage had a reliable alliance with Kanhayas and Nakkais. Among the smaller misls, some such as the Phulkias misl had switched loyalties in the late 18th century and supported the Afghan army invasion against their Khalsa brethren. The Kasur region, ruled by Rajput-Muslim, always supported the Afghan invasion forces and joined them in plundering Sikh misls during the war.
The mid 19th-century Muslim historians, such as Shahamat Ali who experienced the Sikh Empire first hand, presented a different view on Ranjit Singh's Empire and governance. According to Ali, Ranjit Singh's government was despotic, and he was a mean monarch in contrast to the Mughals. The initial momentum for the Empire building in these accounts is stated to be Ranjit Singh led Khalsa army's "insatiable appetite for plunder", their Desire for "fresh cities to pillage", and entirely eliminating the Mughal era "revenue intercepting intermediaries between the peasant-cultivator and the treasury". | <urn:uuid:ea4d3441-519c-4a4a-8e50-57f45cbee381> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.idolnetworth.com/maharaja-ranjit-singh-net-worth-56020 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594101.10/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119010920-20200119034920-00529.warc.gz | en | 0.980088 | 2,668 | 3.890625 | 4 | [
-0.08881959319114685,
0.5862517952919006,
0.3967334032058716,
0.19440850615501404,
-0.3287311792373657,
-0.2605568766593933,
0.4691777527332306,
-0.3011416494846344,
-0.04703027755022049,
-0.4023510217666626,
0.5320035219192505,
-0.6054850816726685,
0.15670937299728394,
-0.0830789729952812... | 1 | After the death of Aurangzeb in 1707, the Mughal Empire fell apart and declined in its ability to tax or govern most of the Indian subcontinent. In the northwestern region, particularly the Punjab, the creation of the Khalsa community of Sikh warriors by Guru Gobind Singh accelerated the decay and fragmentation of the Mughal power in the region. Raiding Afghans attacked the Indus river valleys but met resistance from both organised armies of the Khalsa Sikhs as well as irregular Khalsa militias based in villages. The Sikhs had appointed their own zamindars, replacing the previous Muslim revenue Collectors, which provided resources to feed and strengthen the warriors aligned with Sikh interests. Meanwhile, colonial traders and the East India Company had begun operations in India on its eastern and western coasts.
According to Ishtiaq Ahmed, Ranjit Singh's rule led to further persecution of Muslims in Kashmir, expanding the previously selective persecution of Shia Muslims and Hindus by Afghan Sunni Muslim rulers between 1752 and 1819 before Kashmir became part of his Sikh Empire. Bikramjit Hasrat describes Ranjit Singh as a "benevolent despot".
Ranjit Singh was born on 13 November 1780, to Maha Singh Sukerchakia and Raj Kaur – the daughter of Raja Gajpat Singh of Jind, in Gujranwala, in the Majha region of Punjab (now in Pakistan). His birth name was Buddh Singh, after his ancestor who was a disciple of Guru Gobind Singh, a Khalsa, and whose descendants created the Sukerchakia misl before the birth of Ranjit Singh, which became the most powerful of many small Sikh kingdoms in northwestern Southern Asia in the wake of the disintegrating Mughal Empire. The child's name was changed to Ranjit (literally, "victor in battle") by his father to commemorate his army's victory over the Muslim Chatha chieftain Pir Muhammad.
Ranjit Singh's fame grew in 1797, at age 17, when the Afghan Muslim ruler Shah Zaman, of the Ahmad Shah Abdali dynasty, attempted to annex Panjab region into his control through his general Shahanchi Khan and 12,000 Soldiers. The battle was fought in the territory that fell in Ranjit Singh controlled misl, whose regional knowledge and warrior expertise helped resist the invading army. This victory gained him recognition. In 1798, the Afghan ruler sent in another army, which Ranjit Singh did not resist. He let them enter Lahore, then encircled them with his army, blocked off all food and supplies, burnt all crops and food sources that could have supported the Afghan army. Much of the Afghan army retreated back to Afghanistan.
At age 15, Ranjit Singh married his first wife Mehtab Kaur, the only daughter of Gurbaksh Singh Kanhaiya and his wife Sada Kaur, and the granddaughter of Jai Singh Kanhaiya, the founder of the Kanhaiya Misl. This marriage was pre-arranged in an attempt to reconcile warring Sikh misls, wherein Mahtab Kaur was betrothed to Ranjit Singh. However, the marriage failed, with Mehtab Kaur never forgiving the fact that her father had been killed by Ranjit Singh's father and she mainly lived with her mother after marriage. The separation became complete when Ranjit Singh married his second wife Raj Kaur of Nakai Misl in 1798. Mehtab Kaur died in 1813.
In 1799, Raja Ranjit Singh's army of 25,000 Khalsa, supported by another 25,000 Khalsa led by his mother-in-law Rani Sada Kaur of Kanhaiya misl, in a joint operation attacked the region controlled by Bhangi Sikhs centered around Lahore. The rulers escaped, marking Lahore as the first major conquest of Ranjit Singh. The Sufi Muslim and Hindu population of Lahore welcomed the rule of Ranjit Singh. In 1800, the ruler of Jammu region ceded control of his region to Ranjit Singh.
Ranjit Singh ensured that Panjab manufactured and was self-sufficient in all weapons, equipment and munitions his army needed. His government invested in infrastructure in the 1800s and thereafter, established raw materials mines, cannon foundries, gunpowder and arm factories. Some of these operations were owned by the state, others operated by private Sikh operatives.
In 1801, Ranjit Singh proclaimed himself as the "Maharaja of Punjab", and agreed to a formal investiture ceremony, which was carried out by Baba Sahib Singh Bedi - a descendant of Guru Nanak. On the day of his coronation, prayers were performed across mosques, temples and gurudwaras in his territories for his long life. Ranjit Singh called his rule as "Sarkar Khalsa", and his court as "Darbar Khalsa". He ordered new coins to be issued in the name of Guru Nanak named the "NanakShahi" ("of the Emperor Nanak").
In 1802 Ranjit Singh, aged 22, took Amritsar from the Bhangi Sikh misl, paid homage at the Harmandir Sahib temple, which had previously been attacked and desecrated by the invading Afghan army, and announced that he would renovate and rebuild it with marble and gold.
On 1 January 1806, Ranjit Singh signed a treaty with the British officials of the East India Company, in which he agreed that his Sikh forces would not attempt to expand south of the Sutlej river, and the Company agreed that it would not attempt to militarily cross the Sutlej river into the Sikh territory.
In 1807, Ranjit Singh's forces attacked the Muslim ruled misl of Kasur and, after a month of fierce fighting, defeated the Afghan chief Qutb-ud-Din, thus expanding his empire North West towards Afghanistan. He took Multan in 1818, and the whole Bari Doab came under his rule with that conquest. In 1819, he successfully defeated the Afghan Sunni Muslim rulers and annexed Srinagar and Kashmir, stretching his rule into the north and the Jhelum valley, beyond the foothills of the Himalayas.
Ratan Kaur and Daya Kaur were wives of Sahib Singh Bhangi of Gujrat (a misl north of Lahore, not to be confused the state of Gujarat). After Sahib Singh's death, Ranjit Singh took them under his protection in 1811 by marrying them via the rite of chādar andāzī, in which a cloth sheet was unfurled over each of their heads. Ratan Kaur gave birth to Multana Singh in 1819, and Daya Kaur gave birth to Kashmira Singh in 1819 and to Pashaura Singh in 1821.
In 1813–14, Ranjit Singh's first attempt to expand into Kashmir was foiled by Afghan forces led by General Azim Khan, due to a heavy downpour, the spread of cholera, and poor food supply to his troops.
In July 1818, an army from the Punjab defeated Jabbar Khan, a younger brother of governor of Kashmir Azim Khan, and acquired Kashmir, along with a yearly revenue of Rs seventy lacs. Dewan Moti Ram was appointed governor of Kashmir.
In November 1819, Dost Mohammed accepted the sovereignty of the Maharaja over Peshawar, along with a revenue payment of Rs one lac a year. The Maharaja specifically ordered his forces not to harass or molest any civilian. In 1820 and 1821, Dera Ghazi Khan, Hazara and Mankera, with huge tracts of land between Jhelum and Indus, Singh Sagar Daob, were also annexed. The victories of Kashmir, Peshwar and Multan were celebrated by naming three newborns after them. Prince Kashmira Singh, Peshaura Singh and Prince Multana Singh were born to Daya Kaur and Ratan Kaur, wives of Ranjit Singh.
In 1823, Ranjit Singh defeated a large army of Yusufzai north of the Kabul River.
Singh allowed men from different religions and races to serve in his army and his government in various positions of authority. His army included a few Europeans, such as Jean-François Allard, but he did not employ British people, who were attempting to create a colony in the Indian subcontinent. Despite not employing them, he did maintain a diplomatic channel with the British; in 1828, he sent gifts to George IV and in 1831, he sent a mission to Simla to confer with the British Governor General, william Bentinck; while in 1838, he cooperated with them in removing the hostile Islamic Sultan in Afghanistan.
In 1834, Mohammed Azim Khan once again marched towards Peshawar with an army of 25,000 Khattak and Yasufzai tribesmen in the name of jihad, to fight against infidels. The Maharaja defeated the forces. Yar Mohammad was pardoned and was reinvested as governor of Peshawar with an annual revenue of Rs one lac ten thousand to Lahore Darbar.
The army under Ranjit Singh was not limited to the Sikh community. The Soldiers and troop officers included Sikhs, but also included Hindus, Muslims and Europeans. Hindu Brahmins and people of all creeds and castes served his army, while the composition in his government also reflected a religious diversity. His army included Polish, Russian, Spanish, Prussian and French officers. In 1835, as his relationship with the British warmed up, he hired a British officer named Foulkes.
In 1837, the Battle of Jamrud and his march through Kabul in 1838, in cooperation with the colonial British army stationed in Sindh, became the last confrontation between the Sikhs led by him and the Afghans, which helped extend and establish the western boundaries of the Sikh Empire.
Singh is remembered for uniting Sikhs and founding the prosperous Sikh Empire. He is also remembered for his conquests and building a well-trained, self-sufficient Khalsa army to protect the empire. He amassed considerable wealth, including gaining the possession of the Koh-i-Noor Diamond from Shuja Shah Durrani of Afghanistan, which he left to Jagannath Temple in Puri, Odisha in 1839.
The Muslim accounts of Ranjit Singh's rule were questioned by Sikh historians of the same era. For Example, Ratan Singh Bhangu in 1841 wrote that these accounts were not accurate, and according to Anne Murphy, he remarked, "when would a Musalman praise the Sikhs?" In contrast, the colonial era British military officer Hugh Pearse in 1898 criticised Ranjit Singh's rule, as one founded on "violence, treachery and blood". Sohan Seetal disagrees with this account and states that Ranjit Singh had encouraged his army to respond with a "tit for tat" against the enemy, violence for violence, blood for blood, plunder for plunder.
Ranjit Singh's policies were based on respect for all communities, Muslim, Hindu and Sikh. . A devoted Sikh, Ranjit Singh restored and built historic Sikh Gurdwaras – most famously, the Harmandir Sahib, and used to celebrate his victories by offering thanks at the Harmandar. He also joined the Hindus in their temples, prohibited cow slaughter out of respect for Hindu sentiments , and visited Sufi mosques and holy places. He ordered his Soldiers to neither loot nor molest civilians.
Towards the end of 18th century, the five most powerful misls were those of Sukkarchakkia, Kanhayas, Nakkais, Ahluwalias and Bhangi Sikhs. Ranjit Singh belonged to the first, and through marriage had a reliable alliance with Kanhayas and Nakkais. Among the smaller misls, some such as the Phulkias misl had switched loyalties in the late 18th century and supported the Afghan army invasion against their Khalsa brethren. The Kasur region, ruled by Rajput-Muslim, always supported the Afghan invasion forces and joined them in plundering Sikh misls during the war.
The mid 19th-century Muslim historians, such as Shahamat Ali who experienced the Sikh Empire first hand, presented a different view on Ranjit Singh's Empire and governance. According to Ali, Ranjit Singh's government was despotic, and he was a mean monarch in contrast to the Mughals. The initial momentum for the Empire building in these accounts is stated to be Ranjit Singh led Khalsa army's "insatiable appetite for plunder", their Desire for "fresh cities to pillage", and entirely eliminating the Mughal era "revenue intercepting intermediaries between the peasant-cultivator and the treasury". | 2,794 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Turner's skills as a draughtsman were best uncovered by the discovery of his many sketchbooks. There were hundreds of preparatory works found boxed up in his studio and most were later bequeathed to the state. Drawings and watercolours filled the majority of these and this section introduces the key drawing-based sketchbooks.
The artist went to considerable length when preparing his work. Not all of his sketchbooks were purchased "off the shelf" for example. He would get some custom bound to precisely his own requirements. He continued this level of precision into every medium in which he was involved. Beyond these collections, there were also many drawings discovered after his death that were loosely stored. Some may have originally been part of a bound book and then later separated.
Pencil sketches would dominate more than half of the sketchbooks. He also used chalk and ink on other occasions, as well as watercolours, of which there were many. His level of detail used would vary greatly from one sketchbook to the next, even from one page to the next. There be rough outlines to help remind him of items at a later date all the way through to complex drawings that could be considered as completed artworks in their own right.
The books when studied as a collective offer an insight into how the artist’s methods changed over time. He was both ambitious and also curious, never willing to settle on what had gone before. Another interesting element displayed by these study pieces is that he would different approaches at the same time. He may handle a single object, such as a particular landscape scene, and produce multiple variants of it across different mediums or styles.
Whilst making use of different size books, Turner tended to prefer smaller ones for his pencil sketches. Years of practice had taught the artist how to make his necessary shapes and outlines at an impressive speed, as if writing in shorthand. He could then re-use these at a later date for a larger artwork or instead add greater detail and develop it into something more considerable. Context was also key to how he completed drawings, where if he was travelling to somewhere new he may wish to concentrate on the shapes of new trees that he had not come across before, or perhaps remember a particular landscape scene more clearly. | <urn:uuid:4d0455d5-326b-4197-aa3b-8a705f8d05bf> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.williamturner.org/drawings/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250595787.7/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119234426-20200120022426-00342.warc.gz | en | 0.991453 | 462 | 3.828125 | 4 | [
0.15664042532444,
0.18435604870319366,
0.1108584925532341,
0.11031555384397507,
-0.43705978989601135,
0.5682852268218994,
-0.12673158943653107,
-0.06035676598548889,
0.09819844365119934,
0.14085954427719116,
0.007757301442325115,
-0.16400820016860962,
-0.07217045873403549,
0.37494704127311... | 8 | Turner's skills as a draughtsman were best uncovered by the discovery of his many sketchbooks. There were hundreds of preparatory works found boxed up in his studio and most were later bequeathed to the state. Drawings and watercolours filled the majority of these and this section introduces the key drawing-based sketchbooks.
The artist went to considerable length when preparing his work. Not all of his sketchbooks were purchased "off the shelf" for example. He would get some custom bound to precisely his own requirements. He continued this level of precision into every medium in which he was involved. Beyond these collections, there were also many drawings discovered after his death that were loosely stored. Some may have originally been part of a bound book and then later separated.
Pencil sketches would dominate more than half of the sketchbooks. He also used chalk and ink on other occasions, as well as watercolours, of which there were many. His level of detail used would vary greatly from one sketchbook to the next, even from one page to the next. There be rough outlines to help remind him of items at a later date all the way through to complex drawings that could be considered as completed artworks in their own right.
The books when studied as a collective offer an insight into how the artist’s methods changed over time. He was both ambitious and also curious, never willing to settle on what had gone before. Another interesting element displayed by these study pieces is that he would different approaches at the same time. He may handle a single object, such as a particular landscape scene, and produce multiple variants of it across different mediums or styles.
Whilst making use of different size books, Turner tended to prefer smaller ones for his pencil sketches. Years of practice had taught the artist how to make his necessary shapes and outlines at an impressive speed, as if writing in shorthand. He could then re-use these at a later date for a larger artwork or instead add greater detail and develop it into something more considerable. Context was also key to how he completed drawings, where if he was travelling to somewhere new he may wish to concentrate on the shapes of new trees that he had not come across before, or perhaps remember a particular landscape scene more clearly. | 450 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Potosí & Silver Mines
At a height of over 4,000 meters, Potosí, capital of the Bolivian state of the same name, is one of the highest cities in the world. But even an elevation as high as this does not stop the nearby Cerro Potosí from dominating the surrounding landscape.
Also known as Cerro Rico (Spanish for "Rich Mountain"), the peak's huge supply of silver has led to both immense riches and appalling suffering.
Potosí was founded as a mining town in 1546, while Bolivia was still part of the Viceroyalty of Peru. Over the next 200 years, more than 40,000 tons of silver were shipped out of the town, making the Spanish Empire one of the richest the world had ever seen. But such vast wealth also came at a price. Thousands of the indigenous people were forced to work at the mines, where many perished through accidents, brutal treatment, or poisoning by the mercury used in the extraction process. Around 30,000 African slaves were also brought to the city, where they were forced to work and die as human mules.
In 1672, Potosí became the site of the Spanish Colonial Mint and, with a population of around 200,000, was one of the richest cities in the world. But by the time that Bolivia declared independence in 1825, the silver had largely run out, leaving tin as the main product.
To this day, a workers' collective extracts minerals from the mine. Due to the lack of protective equipment, the work is still very dangerous. Many miners die in cave-ins or from silicosis, a serious disease that damages the lungs, and there's been recent concern of the whole mine collapsing. Because of the hellish conditions, many of the miners survive by drinking extremely strong alcohol, chewing coca leaves, and worshiping Tio — a god of the underworld who holds the power of life and death between his fingers. El Tio, meaning "the Uncle," appears as a devilish creature, and his statues in the mines are given offerings of cigarettes, strong alcohol, and coca leaves.
Quick Links: Bolivia | <urn:uuid:cc0cf550-14e1-4c59-9e78-984acf2138c8> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.journeys-international.com/bolivia2016-potosi | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594662.6/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119151736-20200119175736-00039.warc.gz | en | 0.980803 | 443 | 3.421875 | 3 | [
-0.18771308660507202,
-0.23150157928466797,
0.40195754170417786,
-0.09649667888879776,
0.1361570656299591,
-0.059394463896751404,
0.5279220938682556,
-0.25096389651298523,
-0.22916510701179504,
-0.3024884760379791,
-0.17992351949214935,
-0.3392658233642578,
-0.27812665700912476,
0.41804420... | 2 | Potosí & Silver Mines
At a height of over 4,000 meters, Potosí, capital of the Bolivian state of the same name, is one of the highest cities in the world. But even an elevation as high as this does not stop the nearby Cerro Potosí from dominating the surrounding landscape.
Also known as Cerro Rico (Spanish for "Rich Mountain"), the peak's huge supply of silver has led to both immense riches and appalling suffering.
Potosí was founded as a mining town in 1546, while Bolivia was still part of the Viceroyalty of Peru. Over the next 200 years, more than 40,000 tons of silver were shipped out of the town, making the Spanish Empire one of the richest the world had ever seen. But such vast wealth also came at a price. Thousands of the indigenous people were forced to work at the mines, where many perished through accidents, brutal treatment, or poisoning by the mercury used in the extraction process. Around 30,000 African slaves were also brought to the city, where they were forced to work and die as human mules.
In 1672, Potosí became the site of the Spanish Colonial Mint and, with a population of around 200,000, was one of the richest cities in the world. But by the time that Bolivia declared independence in 1825, the silver had largely run out, leaving tin as the main product.
To this day, a workers' collective extracts minerals from the mine. Due to the lack of protective equipment, the work is still very dangerous. Many miners die in cave-ins or from silicosis, a serious disease that damages the lungs, and there's been recent concern of the whole mine collapsing. Because of the hellish conditions, many of the miners survive by drinking extremely strong alcohol, chewing coca leaves, and worshiping Tio — a god of the underworld who holds the power of life and death between his fingers. El Tio, meaning "the Uncle," appears as a devilish creature, and his statues in the mines are given offerings of cigarettes, strong alcohol, and coca leaves.
Quick Links: Bolivia | 466 | ENGLISH | 1 |
As a woman of African descent, I was interested in looking at Baptist history from the lens of Africans and African-Americans. Some of the questions I pondered were: Who were the first Black Baptists? Where was the first African-American Baptist church? How were African slaves converted to become Christians, and more specifically Baptists? Why was the Baptist theology of Christianity appealing to African-Americans? How are our current traditions like those of historical Black Baptists? I am seeking to answer these things in this paper.
In August 1619, the first recorded Africans, approximately 20, arrived in Jamestown. Two notable names are Antoney and Isabella who are noted as marrying and bearing the “first black child born in British colonial America.” It is further recorded that they baptized their son in the Church of England and lived as Christians who were indentured servants because “it was morally unacceptable to enslave Christians.” These early Africans arrived before the system of slavery was fully functioning. Therefore, they were eventually able to work off their debt, buy their freedom and purchase land. Those who became “free landowners of African descent initially had the right to vote and even held office. In fact, they had about the same economic opportunities as their free white counterparts who they toiled side-by-side with as indentured servants.”
Unfortunately, blacks even owned other blacks as servants. Eventually, the white colonists found it more economically beneficial to own African servants than European servants because Europeans had support from and could appeal to the king. Africans had nowhere to go for help and “could not blend into populations of they escaped, and this distinction made their recapture easier.” As Christianity grew in the United States, and particularly Baptists for the purposes of this paper, there were mixed emotions among Baptists about whether to share the gospel with slaves. Many southern Baptists were slaveholders and used scripture to justify keeping other humans in bondage. Slaveholders cited racial inequity as expressed in their minds through the Bible story about Noah and Ham.
Blacks were naturally inferior because of the darkness of their skin and therefore destined to be servants. They believed that they were called to enslave “heathens” to bring them under submission to Christianity. Other Baptists believed and stood firmly on the premise that slavery was wrong. They “insisted that it should be abolished as soon as pragmatically possible. They urged the evangelization of slaves and called upon masters to observe scriptural admonitions regarding ‘Christian’ treatment of those in bondage” Others, however, disagreed with evangelizing slaves because they feared losing their economic viability of their “property” if they began to see themselves as equal to their masters and desire freedom.
Many Anglican masters wanted slaves to denounce their African heritage and traditions. In the early 1700’s, Francis Le Jau, one who desired to religiously educate slaves compromised with slave owners by saying that admission of Africans into the Church of England through baptism meant that they “must instantly, and unconditionally, abandon their cultural and religious traditions as well as give up all hope of securing their secular freedom.” Some slave owners agreed with Le Jau’s plan. They believed Christianity would make their slaves more docile, subservient, and obedient. Others were not in agreement with sharing Christianity with Blacks, such as refusal of “one man to take Communion when enslaved Africans were at the Holy Table and queries from a woman about whether she would be forced to see her slaves in heaven.” Though slave owners eventually gave in and seemingly “permitted” their slaves to worship, it was not a freedom that slaves enjoyed. Oftentimes, black Baptists whether slave or free, “were required to sit apart from whites in the galleries, and because of limited seating, many black parishioners were physically unable to fit in church.”
As more and more Blacks were converted to Christianity, autonomy in Baptist traditions and ways of life appealed to them. One could start a congregation without approval or jurisdiction from a higher group or authority. Many slaves were converted to Christianity during the revivals and camp meetings of the Great Awakening. The singing and excitement of worship appealed to them emotionally and culturally.
Baptism was also a big draw because it was similar to African water rites. Most importantly, the messages of egalitarianism and equality in the eyes of God resonated with them. Messages about God’s deliverance of the children of Israel gave them hope that they were not destined to be oppressed forever. God would soon deliver them as well. For some, conversion to Christianity became a form of resistance. It was a way to “express defiance of the authority of the master and opposition to slavery…for slave women, ‘who no longer wished to allow themselves to be abused for sinful purposes,’ conversion was a desperate act of defense against the lust of white masters.” Preachers, such as Nat Turner and others, rose up and led rebellion against the status quo of slavery.
Over time, black Baptists began to pull away from white parishioners. They wanted a space that was their own where they could truly worship without judgment or hindrance. George Liele was one of the first Black Baptists in Georgia. He was later ordained and created the first African American Baptist Church in America. In addition to traditional church settings, slaves also sought out private spaces to worship away from the masters. Many call these settings “invisible institutions”. Locations included swamps and spaces set off in the woods where they could not be located. Theses safe spaces allowed them to commune together and, for a short time, forget all their trials and suffering. Blacks listen to other Blacks preach and affirm their identity and their humanity. They also “sang spirituals that spoke of sorrow, joy, justice, salvation, and liberation.” Music was used as a coping mechanism as well to express emotions, share messages and process through pain. It is difficult to think about the use of the gospel to oppress and incite fear.
When I think about the church being the center of the Black community throughout the most challenging eras of our history, it makes perfect sense. Africans were taken from their land, stripped of their heritage and culture, separated from their families and “force-fed” a faith that was intended to keep them down. However, the message of Christ and the cross permeated their hearts and served as a source of inspiration and purpose. The gospel truth cut through the deepest places of pain and oppression to bring life to a people that were in the perpetual darkness of slavery. Even in pain, community was established and hope was fueled.
Today, the Baptist church – and the church at large – is still a place of refuge, of community, of safety. However, it saddens me to think that in some ways we still use the gospel as a tool to ostracize others instead of a resource to spread the love of Christ to all humanity. | <urn:uuid:3a52bb68-6b7c-4474-9733-2126bad7a4b4> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://essayhub.net/essays/the-look-at-baptist-history-through-the-lens-of-africans-and-african-americans | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250605075.24/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121192553-20200121221553-00345.warc.gz | en | 0.98614 | 1,442 | 3.6875 | 4 | [
-0.23338299989700317,
0.4194227159023285,
-0.2802523970603943,
-0.03177899867296219,
-0.1261681318283081,
-0.17510797083377838,
-0.25217902660369873,
-0.18877804279327393,
0.1035885363817215,
0.4987648129463196,
-0.032070454210042953,
-0.1788080483675003,
-0.2509692907333374,
-0.0830176621... | 3 | As a woman of African descent, I was interested in looking at Baptist history from the lens of Africans and African-Americans. Some of the questions I pondered were: Who were the first Black Baptists? Where was the first African-American Baptist church? How were African slaves converted to become Christians, and more specifically Baptists? Why was the Baptist theology of Christianity appealing to African-Americans? How are our current traditions like those of historical Black Baptists? I am seeking to answer these things in this paper.
In August 1619, the first recorded Africans, approximately 20, arrived in Jamestown. Two notable names are Antoney and Isabella who are noted as marrying and bearing the “first black child born in British colonial America.” It is further recorded that they baptized their son in the Church of England and lived as Christians who were indentured servants because “it was morally unacceptable to enslave Christians.” These early Africans arrived before the system of slavery was fully functioning. Therefore, they were eventually able to work off their debt, buy their freedom and purchase land. Those who became “free landowners of African descent initially had the right to vote and even held office. In fact, they had about the same economic opportunities as their free white counterparts who they toiled side-by-side with as indentured servants.”
Unfortunately, blacks even owned other blacks as servants. Eventually, the white colonists found it more economically beneficial to own African servants than European servants because Europeans had support from and could appeal to the king. Africans had nowhere to go for help and “could not blend into populations of they escaped, and this distinction made their recapture easier.” As Christianity grew in the United States, and particularly Baptists for the purposes of this paper, there were mixed emotions among Baptists about whether to share the gospel with slaves. Many southern Baptists were slaveholders and used scripture to justify keeping other humans in bondage. Slaveholders cited racial inequity as expressed in their minds through the Bible story about Noah and Ham.
Blacks were naturally inferior because of the darkness of their skin and therefore destined to be servants. They believed that they were called to enslave “heathens” to bring them under submission to Christianity. Other Baptists believed and stood firmly on the premise that slavery was wrong. They “insisted that it should be abolished as soon as pragmatically possible. They urged the evangelization of slaves and called upon masters to observe scriptural admonitions regarding ‘Christian’ treatment of those in bondage” Others, however, disagreed with evangelizing slaves because they feared losing their economic viability of their “property” if they began to see themselves as equal to their masters and desire freedom.
Many Anglican masters wanted slaves to denounce their African heritage and traditions. In the early 1700’s, Francis Le Jau, one who desired to religiously educate slaves compromised with slave owners by saying that admission of Africans into the Church of England through baptism meant that they “must instantly, and unconditionally, abandon their cultural and religious traditions as well as give up all hope of securing their secular freedom.” Some slave owners agreed with Le Jau’s plan. They believed Christianity would make their slaves more docile, subservient, and obedient. Others were not in agreement with sharing Christianity with Blacks, such as refusal of “one man to take Communion when enslaved Africans were at the Holy Table and queries from a woman about whether she would be forced to see her slaves in heaven.” Though slave owners eventually gave in and seemingly “permitted” their slaves to worship, it was not a freedom that slaves enjoyed. Oftentimes, black Baptists whether slave or free, “were required to sit apart from whites in the galleries, and because of limited seating, many black parishioners were physically unable to fit in church.”
As more and more Blacks were converted to Christianity, autonomy in Baptist traditions and ways of life appealed to them. One could start a congregation without approval or jurisdiction from a higher group or authority. Many slaves were converted to Christianity during the revivals and camp meetings of the Great Awakening. The singing and excitement of worship appealed to them emotionally and culturally.
Baptism was also a big draw because it was similar to African water rites. Most importantly, the messages of egalitarianism and equality in the eyes of God resonated with them. Messages about God’s deliverance of the children of Israel gave them hope that they were not destined to be oppressed forever. God would soon deliver them as well. For some, conversion to Christianity became a form of resistance. It was a way to “express defiance of the authority of the master and opposition to slavery…for slave women, ‘who no longer wished to allow themselves to be abused for sinful purposes,’ conversion was a desperate act of defense against the lust of white masters.” Preachers, such as Nat Turner and others, rose up and led rebellion against the status quo of slavery.
Over time, black Baptists began to pull away from white parishioners. They wanted a space that was their own where they could truly worship without judgment or hindrance. George Liele was one of the first Black Baptists in Georgia. He was later ordained and created the first African American Baptist Church in America. In addition to traditional church settings, slaves also sought out private spaces to worship away from the masters. Many call these settings “invisible institutions”. Locations included swamps and spaces set off in the woods where they could not be located. Theses safe spaces allowed them to commune together and, for a short time, forget all their trials and suffering. Blacks listen to other Blacks preach and affirm their identity and their humanity. They also “sang spirituals that spoke of sorrow, joy, justice, salvation, and liberation.” Music was used as a coping mechanism as well to express emotions, share messages and process through pain. It is difficult to think about the use of the gospel to oppress and incite fear.
When I think about the church being the center of the Black community throughout the most challenging eras of our history, it makes perfect sense. Africans were taken from their land, stripped of their heritage and culture, separated from their families and “force-fed” a faith that was intended to keep them down. However, the message of Christ and the cross permeated their hearts and served as a source of inspiration and purpose. The gospel truth cut through the deepest places of pain and oppression to bring life to a people that were in the perpetual darkness of slavery. Even in pain, community was established and hope was fueled.
Today, the Baptist church – and the church at large – is still a place of refuge, of community, of safety. However, it saddens me to think that in some ways we still use the gospel as a tool to ostracize others instead of a resource to spread the love of Christ to all humanity. | 1,392 | ENGLISH | 1 |
At a Glance
George Eliot, whose real name was Mary Anne Evans, may have been called ugly by the author Henry James, but James also admitted that Eliot was so intelligent that he couldn’t help but fall in love with her. That second part is certainly true: readers have been falling in love with Eliot and her work ever since her first story, “Amos Barton,” was published in 1857. She had previously been a journalist and a translator, but once Eliot began to write novels, she turned fiction on its head with richly textured works such as The Mill on the Floss and Middlemarch. Unlike many writers before her, she was interested not so much in what her characters did but how they thought and felt—an interest that paved the way for modern novels that were more experimental than Eliot’s, but perhaps never quite as beautiful.
Facts and Trivia
- When Eliot’s first novel, Adam Bede, became a success, several men claimed to have written the book. Eliot was forced to come forward as the rightful author.
- When the reading public discovered that Eliot was a woman, they didn’t know whether to condemn her for being an arrogant woman who thought she could write, or praise her for writing so well.
- For over thirty years, Eliot lived with philosopher George Henry Lewes, although they never married because Lewes was unable to divorce his wife (who had four children with another man, as well as three with Lewes).
- Upon Lewes' death, Eliot married John Cross, a man 20 years younger than her.
- It has been suggested that Herbert Spencer, a famed British philosopher, had an affair with Eliot and then broke up with her. Afterward, he wrote an essay on the repugnancy of ugly women. All of Eliot’s friends knew whom he was writing about.
- British author Virginia Woolf said that Eliot’s Middlemarch was the first novel written for grown-ups.
Article abstract: Because of her philosophical profundity and her mastery of fictional technique, Eliot won a reputation as one of the world’s great novelists and helped establish the novel as an appropriate vehicle for the serious exploration of ideas.
The woman who wrote her novels under the pseudonym George Eliot was born Mary Ann Evans on November 22, 1819, on Arbury Farm, near Coventry in the rich farming district of central England. Her father, a man with an almost legendary reputation for integrity and competence, worked as an estate agent, or general overseer, on the extensive lands of the aristocratic Newdigate family. Her upbringing in the evangelical traditions of the Church of England gave her strong moral convictions that remained with her all of her life and formed the basic moral imperatives of her fiction.
When Evans was twenty-two, she and her father, who had retired from active work, moved to a house just outside Coventry. Evans’ closest friends in Coventry were Charles and Cara Bray and Cara’s sister Sara Hennell. Like many others who took part in the intellectual and religious ferment of early Victorian England, the Brays questioned the validity of Christian theology, although they had no serious reservations about the value of Christian moral teachings. Contact with them reinforced the doubts about her evangelical religion which Evans had already begun to entertain. In 1844, she began translating Das Leben Jesu by the German theologian David Friedrich Strauss, which she published two years later under the title The Life of Jesus, Critically Examined. Her work on Strauss further undermined her Christian orthodoxy.
Shortly after her father’s death in 1849, Mary Ann Evans, who was now spelling her name Marian, became associated with John Chapman, editor of the Westminster Review , a prestigious intellectual quarterly whose first editor had been John Stuart Mill. Although the social customs of Victorian England made it impossible for a woman to bear the title of editor of an important journal of opinion addressed largely to a male audience, Evans exercised...
(The entire section is 4,362 words.) | <urn:uuid:835b82b8-e61e-4da3-aa1d-dc51be4414d3> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.enotes.com/topics/george-eliot | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592565.2/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118110141-20200118134141-00091.warc.gz | en | 0.984553 | 842 | 3.28125 | 3 | [
-0.011522469110786915,
-0.008987288922071457,
0.2889072299003601,
0.3760797381401062,
-0.1288231760263443,
0.2392473816871643,
-0.18763728439807892,
0.1523619294166565,
0.1288648545742035,
-0.2966635227203369,
-0.073063924908638,
-0.1601966768503189,
0.16278065741062164,
0.0947868451476097... | 1 | At a Glance
George Eliot, whose real name was Mary Anne Evans, may have been called ugly by the author Henry James, but James also admitted that Eliot was so intelligent that he couldn’t help but fall in love with her. That second part is certainly true: readers have been falling in love with Eliot and her work ever since her first story, “Amos Barton,” was published in 1857. She had previously been a journalist and a translator, but once Eliot began to write novels, she turned fiction on its head with richly textured works such as The Mill on the Floss and Middlemarch. Unlike many writers before her, she was interested not so much in what her characters did but how they thought and felt—an interest that paved the way for modern novels that were more experimental than Eliot’s, but perhaps never quite as beautiful.
Facts and Trivia
- When Eliot’s first novel, Adam Bede, became a success, several men claimed to have written the book. Eliot was forced to come forward as the rightful author.
- When the reading public discovered that Eliot was a woman, they didn’t know whether to condemn her for being an arrogant woman who thought she could write, or praise her for writing so well.
- For over thirty years, Eliot lived with philosopher George Henry Lewes, although they never married because Lewes was unable to divorce his wife (who had four children with another man, as well as three with Lewes).
- Upon Lewes' death, Eliot married John Cross, a man 20 years younger than her.
- It has been suggested that Herbert Spencer, a famed British philosopher, had an affair with Eliot and then broke up with her. Afterward, he wrote an essay on the repugnancy of ugly women. All of Eliot’s friends knew whom he was writing about.
- British author Virginia Woolf said that Eliot’s Middlemarch was the first novel written for grown-ups.
Article abstract: Because of her philosophical profundity and her mastery of fictional technique, Eliot won a reputation as one of the world’s great novelists and helped establish the novel as an appropriate vehicle for the serious exploration of ideas.
The woman who wrote her novels under the pseudonym George Eliot was born Mary Ann Evans on November 22, 1819, on Arbury Farm, near Coventry in the rich farming district of central England. Her father, a man with an almost legendary reputation for integrity and competence, worked as an estate agent, or general overseer, on the extensive lands of the aristocratic Newdigate family. Her upbringing in the evangelical traditions of the Church of England gave her strong moral convictions that remained with her all of her life and formed the basic moral imperatives of her fiction.
When Evans was twenty-two, she and her father, who had retired from active work, moved to a house just outside Coventry. Evans’ closest friends in Coventry were Charles and Cara Bray and Cara’s sister Sara Hennell. Like many others who took part in the intellectual and religious ferment of early Victorian England, the Brays questioned the validity of Christian theology, although they had no serious reservations about the value of Christian moral teachings. Contact with them reinforced the doubts about her evangelical religion which Evans had already begun to entertain. In 1844, she began translating Das Leben Jesu by the German theologian David Friedrich Strauss, which she published two years later under the title The Life of Jesus, Critically Examined. Her work on Strauss further undermined her Christian orthodoxy.
Shortly after her father’s death in 1849, Mary Ann Evans, who was now spelling her name Marian, became associated with John Chapman, editor of the Westminster Review , a prestigious intellectual quarterly whose first editor had been John Stuart Mill. Although the social customs of Victorian England made it impossible for a woman to bear the title of editor of an important journal of opinion addressed largely to a male audience, Evans exercised...
(The entire section is 4,362 words.) | 836 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Leonard Wood Biography, Life, Interesting Facts
Died On :
Also Known For :
Birth Place :
Leonard Wood was born in Winchester, New Hampshire, on October 9, 1860. He was the son of Charles Jewett Wood and Caroline E. Hagar Wood. He was also the descendant of four people who originally came over to America on the Mayflower ship. These four people were named William White, Stephen Hopkins, Francis Cooke, and Richard Warren.
Leonard Wood didn’t start out being a military man. He began his career in an entirely different place, and that was as an army doctor working out on the frontier. Wood got his medical degree in medicine from Harvard in 1884. He did his medical internship at Boston City Hospital.
He received a Medal of Honor during Spanish-American War.
Leonard Wood was in charge of the Rough Riders, which was a regiment of soldiers under the United States Army that was given this nickname. They were initially known as being the 1st United States Volunteer Cavalry. The Rough Rider was one among three regiments that came into being to address the Spanish-American War in 1898. They were also the only regiment that did manage to see any action on the battlefront.
At this specific moment in time, the United States Army was still very small and understaffed in troops, and that was something that did pale in comparison to their status during the American Civil War which was close to thirty years before. President William McKinley recognizing the need for more soldiers did call upon the help of 125,000 volunteers to assist in the war efforts. Thus, came into being the Rough Riders, which was commanded by Leonard Wood.
The Rough Riders weren’t called the Rough Riders at first. They were also known as “Wood’s Weary Walkers,” and that was to honor its first commander. The commander was Colonel Leonard Wood. Theodore Roosevelt was made Colonel Wood’s second-in-command during the Spanish-American War. Colonel Leonard Wood did receive the Medal of Honor for his highly active participation in the Apache Wars. The Apache Wars was a group of armed conflicts that occurred between the United States Army and different Apache nations that did take up arms and fight in the southwest between the years of 1849 and 1886.
Leonard Wood was an energetic soldier that helped to transform the US Army into modern fighting force. Leonard Wood had many unusual facets that made him an extraordinary personage. One of the most important of all things was his sense of adventure and aggressiveness that helped him to mold this military branch of service into what it was meant to become. Though he was originally born to be a doctor like his father, he was destined to go into another line of work, and that line of action was to serve in the military.
Leonard Wood had a love of adventure that encouraged him to take a contract medical position with the Army in 1885. The very first assignment that Wood did get was to go to Fort Huachuca. Fort Huachuca was in Arizona, and the next appointment, which he did have was in the following year. It was the last campaign against Geronimo. In 1898, Wood was recognized for his gallantry and outstanding service as both a physician and line officer. He got a Medal of Honor as a reward.
The reason that Leonard Wood was such a remarkable soldier was that of his doctoring ability. He did serve in numerous medical positions from 1887 to 1898. One of the very last medical spots that he did have was that of personal physician to President William McKinley and his family. War with Spain started to break out in 1898 and Wood immediately sought out a line command for himself. He was then given the role of leadership of the Rough Riders or the 1st Volunteer Calvary as they were officially known by the military.
General Wood was always there for his men. He led them bravely at Las Guasimas and San Juan Hill. For the remainder of the war, he ended up leading the 2nd Calvary Brigade, and when the hostilities did cease, he stood in Cuba and became the Military Governor there from 1900 to 1902. In the position of Military Governor in Cuba, he was able to put into place, some fundamental changes that were political, educational, and social reforms in the description. What he also did for the island of Cuba was to make a lot of other significant improvements as well. Some of these improvements had to do with the medical and sanitary conditions that were significantly improved because of his efforts.
Leonard Wood served in numerous leadership positions after the Spanish-American War
Some of these leadership positions were that of the commander of the Philippines Division and the leader of the Department of the East. He was also the only medical officer on record to ever be offered the Chief of Staff position in the Army and to hold that position. In the Chief of Staff position, Wood was genuinely able to make a whole lot of outstanding contributions, which would be beneficial to both the Army and the Nation.
Not only was Leonard Wood able to strengthen the General Staff, but he was also able to establish the Chief of Staff as being the senior officer for the Army. What was also lessened by Wood’s presence was the influence that did go along with the old bureau system that has stopped many military reforms from ever taking place. Some of the other things that Wood did do was to develop the Maneuver Division and the idea of the Mobile Army as well. Because of the changes that Wood had inspired, the US Army was able to do amazing things, and one of them was to combine its arms divisions for the very first time in its history as a military outfit.
After World War I, Leonard Wood was made a Republican candidate for the Presidential nomination, but somehow or other the Republican Convention got deadlocked. The party ended up choosing another compromise candidate whose name was no different than Warren Harding. Warren Harding did win the Presidential election in 1920. Leonard Wood retired from military service in 1921 and accepted the post of Governor-General in the Philippines from 1921 to 1927.
More People From New Hampshire
Robert E. Jones
Thomas Bailey Aldrich
Charles Greeley Abbot | <urn:uuid:65a75e05-1782-41f9-b6e1-32967b0f4316> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.sunsigns.org/famousbirthdays/profile/leonard-wood/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250624328.55/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124161014-20200124190014-00318.warc.gz | en | 0.993017 | 1,272 | 3.484375 | 3 | [
-0.10949641466140747,
0.31888464093208313,
0.3248349130153656,
-0.3883513808250427,
-0.2429227977991104,
0.068243607878685,
0.18066129088401794,
-0.0876888781785965,
-0.01384748611599207,
0.00003015785478055477,
0.14681632816791534,
-0.07150916755199432,
-0.14417919516563416,
0.80680215358... | 1 | Leonard Wood Biography, Life, Interesting Facts
Died On :
Also Known For :
Birth Place :
Leonard Wood was born in Winchester, New Hampshire, on October 9, 1860. He was the son of Charles Jewett Wood and Caroline E. Hagar Wood. He was also the descendant of four people who originally came over to America on the Mayflower ship. These four people were named William White, Stephen Hopkins, Francis Cooke, and Richard Warren.
Leonard Wood didn’t start out being a military man. He began his career in an entirely different place, and that was as an army doctor working out on the frontier. Wood got his medical degree in medicine from Harvard in 1884. He did his medical internship at Boston City Hospital.
He received a Medal of Honor during Spanish-American War.
Leonard Wood was in charge of the Rough Riders, which was a regiment of soldiers under the United States Army that was given this nickname. They were initially known as being the 1st United States Volunteer Cavalry. The Rough Rider was one among three regiments that came into being to address the Spanish-American War in 1898. They were also the only regiment that did manage to see any action on the battlefront.
At this specific moment in time, the United States Army was still very small and understaffed in troops, and that was something that did pale in comparison to their status during the American Civil War which was close to thirty years before. President William McKinley recognizing the need for more soldiers did call upon the help of 125,000 volunteers to assist in the war efforts. Thus, came into being the Rough Riders, which was commanded by Leonard Wood.
The Rough Riders weren’t called the Rough Riders at first. They were also known as “Wood’s Weary Walkers,” and that was to honor its first commander. The commander was Colonel Leonard Wood. Theodore Roosevelt was made Colonel Wood’s second-in-command during the Spanish-American War. Colonel Leonard Wood did receive the Medal of Honor for his highly active participation in the Apache Wars. The Apache Wars was a group of armed conflicts that occurred between the United States Army and different Apache nations that did take up arms and fight in the southwest between the years of 1849 and 1886.
Leonard Wood was an energetic soldier that helped to transform the US Army into modern fighting force. Leonard Wood had many unusual facets that made him an extraordinary personage. One of the most important of all things was his sense of adventure and aggressiveness that helped him to mold this military branch of service into what it was meant to become. Though he was originally born to be a doctor like his father, he was destined to go into another line of work, and that line of action was to serve in the military.
Leonard Wood had a love of adventure that encouraged him to take a contract medical position with the Army in 1885. The very first assignment that Wood did get was to go to Fort Huachuca. Fort Huachuca was in Arizona, and the next appointment, which he did have was in the following year. It was the last campaign against Geronimo. In 1898, Wood was recognized for his gallantry and outstanding service as both a physician and line officer. He got a Medal of Honor as a reward.
The reason that Leonard Wood was such a remarkable soldier was that of his doctoring ability. He did serve in numerous medical positions from 1887 to 1898. One of the very last medical spots that he did have was that of personal physician to President William McKinley and his family. War with Spain started to break out in 1898 and Wood immediately sought out a line command for himself. He was then given the role of leadership of the Rough Riders or the 1st Volunteer Calvary as they were officially known by the military.
General Wood was always there for his men. He led them bravely at Las Guasimas and San Juan Hill. For the remainder of the war, he ended up leading the 2nd Calvary Brigade, and when the hostilities did cease, he stood in Cuba and became the Military Governor there from 1900 to 1902. In the position of Military Governor in Cuba, he was able to put into place, some fundamental changes that were political, educational, and social reforms in the description. What he also did for the island of Cuba was to make a lot of other significant improvements as well. Some of these improvements had to do with the medical and sanitary conditions that were significantly improved because of his efforts.
Leonard Wood served in numerous leadership positions after the Spanish-American War
Some of these leadership positions were that of the commander of the Philippines Division and the leader of the Department of the East. He was also the only medical officer on record to ever be offered the Chief of Staff position in the Army and to hold that position. In the Chief of Staff position, Wood was genuinely able to make a whole lot of outstanding contributions, which would be beneficial to both the Army and the Nation.
Not only was Leonard Wood able to strengthen the General Staff, but he was also able to establish the Chief of Staff as being the senior officer for the Army. What was also lessened by Wood’s presence was the influence that did go along with the old bureau system that has stopped many military reforms from ever taking place. Some of the other things that Wood did do was to develop the Maneuver Division and the idea of the Mobile Army as well. Because of the changes that Wood had inspired, the US Army was able to do amazing things, and one of them was to combine its arms divisions for the very first time in its history as a military outfit.
After World War I, Leonard Wood was made a Republican candidate for the Presidential nomination, but somehow or other the Republican Convention got deadlocked. The party ended up choosing another compromise candidate whose name was no different than Warren Harding. Warren Harding did win the Presidential election in 1920. Leonard Wood retired from military service in 1921 and accepted the post of Governor-General in the Philippines from 1921 to 1927.
More People From New Hampshire
Robert E. Jones
Thomas Bailey Aldrich
Charles Greeley Abbot | 1,301 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Essay on women who influence contributes to the ideas of gender changing in society
A family is a social unit that includes parents and children that live together in a household. It has to be noted that there are many differences with regards to the different cultures and their definition of a family unit. For instance, in many countries, children tend to live with their parents even into their adulthood, which means that the family includes grandparents as well. In some cultures, it means that several offspring stay in the same house, which each of them having their own families within that single household as well. This is why even though the main concept of the family unit is the same, we find that the sub-definitions can be different depending on how the households are formed and structured. In this regard, we find that it would be useful to consider two countries – Pakistan and China – with regards to how the family units tend to be different as well as the different family issues that tend to be there for the family members. For example, we find that the family issues in Pakistan include such problems as arranged marriages, patriarchy, domestic abuse, as well as divorce being something that is looked down upon. In China, the family issues have to do with the changing of family values, as well as in terms of how the new generation is seeing the family unit. It would be useful to look at these issues in more details.
Two of the theories that can be used to consider the family issues in both these countries can be the family systems theory as well as the family developmental theory. According to the Family Systems Theory, we find that it is depicted that understanding a family means that it must be conceptualized as a complex system that includes various dynamic and changing parts (Saltzman et al., 2018). These also include several subsystems as well as the family members. In this regard, if a researcher wants to understand the family and try to see what the issues are in the family, he or she must consider various different aspects of the family, such as the family structure, the way that the various family members interact with each other, etc. It has to be noted that various aspects about a family can put the strain on the family system, such as a new baby, financial conflict, differences in religious beliefs, etc. Another theoretical perspective can be depicted as the family developmental theory, which can be used to explain the patterns of change, as well as the dynamic nature of the families. This theory can also be used to show how various changes tend to occur within the life cycle of the family (Rago, 2016). Eight stages have been identified in a family, which include a couple getting married and starting a family; families that have children aged between 0 and two and a half years old; the third stage being families where the oldest child is between two and a half and six years old; then the families with the oldest child between six and thirteen; with the fifth stage being families where the oldest child is a teenager. The sixth stage of the family is when the oldest child leaves the house until the youngest one leaves the house. The seventh stage is when the parents become middle aged and it continues until they retire, with the eight stage being the family that ages until one of the spouse dies. This theory can be depicted as describing the Western description of the family; however, it can be used to show how the Chinese families and their structures are also changing.
Looking at the families in Pakistan, we find that since Pakistan is an Islamic country where the people tend to follow Islamic laws, the families are also based on Islamic values. Pakistanis tend to consider the family unit as being an extremely important part of their lives. Many of the families that have young daughters want their daughters to be married off to nice families as soon as they reach adulthood. In this regard, we find that in many of the areas of Pakistan, especially in the rural areas, we find that the concept of arranged marriages exist. This is where the parents of the bride and groom decide the marriage of their children. In some of the modern areas, the men and women are allowed to meet each other before marriage; however in some of the most conservative areas, the bride and groom only meet for the first time on their wedding day. Other than that, it is also depicted the groom’s family has the upper hand in any marriage, which is because of Pakistan being a patriarchal society. Women are expected to stay at home and take care of their husbands and children (Arshad & Gill, 2018). In some of the rural areas, families end up selling their daughters in marriage, which can be seen as being quite problematic.
Another issue with regards to the family in Pakistan is how divorce is something that is considered to be taboo. Other than that, we find that a woman cannot initiate divorce according to Islamic rules (Zakar, Zakar & Abbas, 2016). This means that women tend to get stuck in various problematic aspects of their marriage, such as a woman getting stuck in a toxic relationship. If a woman finds that she is being abused, she usually does not have many avenues to turn to. In this regard, we find that domestic abuse as well as the women not being able to get their divorce and freedom can be depicted as important family issues in the context of the Pakistani families (Hadi, 2017). In many of the rural areas, women also end up getting pregnant one after the other, as there is no concept of birth control or women’s rights and a family can end up having many children that the family is then unable to adequately care for. This is why the population of Pakistan is very high and there is rampant poverty there as well.
Looking at China, we find that there are many issues that families are facing there today as well. For instance, we find that traditionally, the value of the family has been quite high in the Chinese culture. However, China has seen a lot of economic growth over the past few years and this has led to many social changes as well. Earlier, there was a tradition in which three generations tended to live under one roof; however, this is something that has changed quite a lot. The traditional family structure is changing, as many of the young people are leaving their parents as well as their family homes to go work in the cities. Since most of the Chinese traditional families were living in the rural areas and we find that more jobs are opening up in the cities, there is another change that has been occurring, which is that the Chinese men are leaving their families behind, as they go to work in the cities. In many cases, the men do not return and abandon their families, which leaves the women and the children at home to work to sustain themselves (Hu & Scott, 2016).
It has to be noted that China’s family planning policy is something that has also impacted the Chinese family structure. For instance, we find that since there was a one-child policy for the longest time in China, it has resulted in many families having only one child, who was spoiled to the fullest, since the family only had one child to use their attention on. This means that many of these children do not end up learning proper manners, values, and ethics and this can make them extremely problematic in terms of getting along with others (Hu & To, 2018). Such people tend to grow up to be selfish and stubborn as well as not being able to act socially with others. Moreover, the birth control policies tend to also negatively affect the natural propagation of the families and this is something that can be seen in China as well.
Thus, in conclusion, it can be said that both Pakistan and China have several different issues with regards to their families and this can be said to be cause for concern for the overall society and culture of the two countries. The thing to note is that solution for both the countries rest on spreading information and awareness. It is extremely important, for instance, for the Pakistani government to ensure that the men are not indulging in any violence against women and at the same time, it is important for the Chinese government to ensure that the men are not abandoning their families. In this regard, we find that this is something that would require a lot of awareness to be spread by both the governments and it is important that such messages are embedded in the society to ensure that these problems and issues can be solved.
Arshad, F. M. A. K. I., & Gill, S. (2018). Work-family Conflict: An Innovative
Exploration of Factors Affecting Female Workforce in Pakistan. Work, 10(16).
Hadi, A. (2017). Patriarchy and gender-based violence in Pakistan. European Journal of
Social Science Education and Research, 4(4), 297-304.
Hu, Y., & Scott, J. (2016). Family and gender values in China: Generational, geographic,
and gender differences. Journal of Family Issues, 37(9), 1267-1293.
Hu, Y., & To, S. (2018). Family Relations and Remarriage Postdivorce and
Postwidowhood in China. Journal of Family Issues, 39(8), 2286-2310.
Rago, M. (2016). Family Development Theory. Encyclopedia of Family Studies, 1-6.
Saltzman, J. A., Fiese, B. H., Bost, K. K., & McBride, B. A. (2018). Development of
appetite self‐regulation: Integrating perspectives from attachment and family systems theory. Child Development Perspectives, 12(1), 51-57.
Zakar, R., Zakar, M. Z., & Abbas, S. (2016). Domestic violence against rural women in
Pakistan: an issue of health and human rights. Journal of family violence, 31(1), 15-25 | <urn:uuid:a082fef8-3f07-4f28-a11a-0018d4f21e17> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://essayclip.com/samples/essay-women-who-influence-contributes-ideas-gender-changing-society | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251776516.99/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128060946-20200128090946-00081.warc.gz | en | 0.980196 | 2,021 | 3.359375 | 3 | [
0.029610896483063698,
0.287811815738678,
0.34265264868736267,
-0.2084392011165619,
0.21747377514839172,
0.24443398416042328,
0.16962599754333496,
0.26906752586364746,
0.1093028113245964,
-0.16444501280784607,
0.45688846707344055,
-0.03562280535697937,
0.4173813760280609,
0.0198590531945228... | 3 | Essay on women who influence contributes to the ideas of gender changing in society
A family is a social unit that includes parents and children that live together in a household. It has to be noted that there are many differences with regards to the different cultures and their definition of a family unit. For instance, in many countries, children tend to live with their parents even into their adulthood, which means that the family includes grandparents as well. In some cultures, it means that several offspring stay in the same house, which each of them having their own families within that single household as well. This is why even though the main concept of the family unit is the same, we find that the sub-definitions can be different depending on how the households are formed and structured. In this regard, we find that it would be useful to consider two countries – Pakistan and China – with regards to how the family units tend to be different as well as the different family issues that tend to be there for the family members. For example, we find that the family issues in Pakistan include such problems as arranged marriages, patriarchy, domestic abuse, as well as divorce being something that is looked down upon. In China, the family issues have to do with the changing of family values, as well as in terms of how the new generation is seeing the family unit. It would be useful to look at these issues in more details.
Two of the theories that can be used to consider the family issues in both these countries can be the family systems theory as well as the family developmental theory. According to the Family Systems Theory, we find that it is depicted that understanding a family means that it must be conceptualized as a complex system that includes various dynamic and changing parts (Saltzman et al., 2018). These also include several subsystems as well as the family members. In this regard, if a researcher wants to understand the family and try to see what the issues are in the family, he or she must consider various different aspects of the family, such as the family structure, the way that the various family members interact with each other, etc. It has to be noted that various aspects about a family can put the strain on the family system, such as a new baby, financial conflict, differences in religious beliefs, etc. Another theoretical perspective can be depicted as the family developmental theory, which can be used to explain the patterns of change, as well as the dynamic nature of the families. This theory can also be used to show how various changes tend to occur within the life cycle of the family (Rago, 2016). Eight stages have been identified in a family, which include a couple getting married and starting a family; families that have children aged between 0 and two and a half years old; the third stage being families where the oldest child is between two and a half and six years old; then the families with the oldest child between six and thirteen; with the fifth stage being families where the oldest child is a teenager. The sixth stage of the family is when the oldest child leaves the house until the youngest one leaves the house. The seventh stage is when the parents become middle aged and it continues until they retire, with the eight stage being the family that ages until one of the spouse dies. This theory can be depicted as describing the Western description of the family; however, it can be used to show how the Chinese families and their structures are also changing.
Looking at the families in Pakistan, we find that since Pakistan is an Islamic country where the people tend to follow Islamic laws, the families are also based on Islamic values. Pakistanis tend to consider the family unit as being an extremely important part of their lives. Many of the families that have young daughters want their daughters to be married off to nice families as soon as they reach adulthood. In this regard, we find that in many of the areas of Pakistan, especially in the rural areas, we find that the concept of arranged marriages exist. This is where the parents of the bride and groom decide the marriage of their children. In some of the modern areas, the men and women are allowed to meet each other before marriage; however in some of the most conservative areas, the bride and groom only meet for the first time on their wedding day. Other than that, it is also depicted the groom’s family has the upper hand in any marriage, which is because of Pakistan being a patriarchal society. Women are expected to stay at home and take care of their husbands and children (Arshad & Gill, 2018). In some of the rural areas, families end up selling their daughters in marriage, which can be seen as being quite problematic.
Another issue with regards to the family in Pakistan is how divorce is something that is considered to be taboo. Other than that, we find that a woman cannot initiate divorce according to Islamic rules (Zakar, Zakar & Abbas, 2016). This means that women tend to get stuck in various problematic aspects of their marriage, such as a woman getting stuck in a toxic relationship. If a woman finds that she is being abused, she usually does not have many avenues to turn to. In this regard, we find that domestic abuse as well as the women not being able to get their divorce and freedom can be depicted as important family issues in the context of the Pakistani families (Hadi, 2017). In many of the rural areas, women also end up getting pregnant one after the other, as there is no concept of birth control or women’s rights and a family can end up having many children that the family is then unable to adequately care for. This is why the population of Pakistan is very high and there is rampant poverty there as well.
Looking at China, we find that there are many issues that families are facing there today as well. For instance, we find that traditionally, the value of the family has been quite high in the Chinese culture. However, China has seen a lot of economic growth over the past few years and this has led to many social changes as well. Earlier, there was a tradition in which three generations tended to live under one roof; however, this is something that has changed quite a lot. The traditional family structure is changing, as many of the young people are leaving their parents as well as their family homes to go work in the cities. Since most of the Chinese traditional families were living in the rural areas and we find that more jobs are opening up in the cities, there is another change that has been occurring, which is that the Chinese men are leaving their families behind, as they go to work in the cities. In many cases, the men do not return and abandon their families, which leaves the women and the children at home to work to sustain themselves (Hu & Scott, 2016).
It has to be noted that China’s family planning policy is something that has also impacted the Chinese family structure. For instance, we find that since there was a one-child policy for the longest time in China, it has resulted in many families having only one child, who was spoiled to the fullest, since the family only had one child to use their attention on. This means that many of these children do not end up learning proper manners, values, and ethics and this can make them extremely problematic in terms of getting along with others (Hu & To, 2018). Such people tend to grow up to be selfish and stubborn as well as not being able to act socially with others. Moreover, the birth control policies tend to also negatively affect the natural propagation of the families and this is something that can be seen in China as well.
Thus, in conclusion, it can be said that both Pakistan and China have several different issues with regards to their families and this can be said to be cause for concern for the overall society and culture of the two countries. The thing to note is that solution for both the countries rest on spreading information and awareness. It is extremely important, for instance, for the Pakistani government to ensure that the men are not indulging in any violence against women and at the same time, it is important for the Chinese government to ensure that the men are not abandoning their families. In this regard, we find that this is something that would require a lot of awareness to be spread by both the governments and it is important that such messages are embedded in the society to ensure that these problems and issues can be solved.
Arshad, F. M. A. K. I., & Gill, S. (2018). Work-family Conflict: An Innovative
Exploration of Factors Affecting Female Workforce in Pakistan. Work, 10(16).
Hadi, A. (2017). Patriarchy and gender-based violence in Pakistan. European Journal of
Social Science Education and Research, 4(4), 297-304.
Hu, Y., & Scott, J. (2016). Family and gender values in China: Generational, geographic,
and gender differences. Journal of Family Issues, 37(9), 1267-1293.
Hu, Y., & To, S. (2018). Family Relations and Remarriage Postdivorce and
Postwidowhood in China. Journal of Family Issues, 39(8), 2286-2310.
Rago, M. (2016). Family Development Theory. Encyclopedia of Family Studies, 1-6.
Saltzman, J. A., Fiese, B. H., Bost, K. K., & McBride, B. A. (2018). Development of
appetite self‐regulation: Integrating perspectives from attachment and family systems theory. Child Development Perspectives, 12(1), 51-57.
Zakar, R., Zakar, M. Z., & Abbas, S. (2016). Domestic violence against rural women in
Pakistan: an issue of health and human rights. Journal of family violence, 31(1), 15-25 | 2,081 | ENGLISH | 1 |
[Image not available for copyright reasons]
Born April 29, 1901
Died January 7, 1989
124th emperor of Japan
Hirohito's reign as emperor of Japan—the longest of any monarch in modern times—was a period of great turmoil and change. Although he chose as the name for his reign the word "Showa," which means "Enlightened Peace," he ruled during one of the least peaceful periods in history. Hirohito's enemies considered him the head of a brutal, militaristic country and felt that he should be punished as a war criminal for atrocities (extreme cruelty and violence) committed by the Japanese military against Chinese citizens during World War II. But others now argue that Hirohito was powerless to prevent the war with the Allies, that he was not in charge of the military campaigns, and that he personally opposed the war. He was a shy, self-conscious person whose life had been devoted not to governing a country but to playing the mainly symbolic role of emperor.
A privileged but lonely childhood
Born at Aoynama Palace in Tokyo, Hirohito was the son of Crown Prince Yoshihito and grandson of Mutsuhito, known as the Meiji ("Enlightened Ruler") Emperor. His mother was Princess Sadako, a member of a family that had provided royal brides for many centuries. When he was less than three months old, Hirohito was sent to live with foster parents, the Count and Countess Kawamura Sumyoshi. In accordance with a long-standing custom, he was to be raised in a normal family away from the ceremonial trappings of palace life, and he was to be treated (and disciplined) like any other child of that family.
Count Kawamura Sumyoshi died when Hirohito was five years old, and the boy was returned to his parents' official residence, Akasaka Palace, which had been modeled after France's famous Versailles palace. But Hirohito and his two brothers rarely saw their parents. Growing up in the palace, he had little contact with children outside the family. Hirohito was a small, weak, very shy little boy with a shuffling walk and an extremely solemn manner.
Two schools for royalty
At the age of eight, Hirohito was sent to the Peers' School and became a member of a class of twelve boys whose parents were also members of the Japanese royalty. There he studied modern languages, military and technical sciences, politics, and history. He developed a special (and, as it turned out, lifelong) interest in marine biology, and when he complained that he could not conduct field work with so many servants and other people hanging around him, he was allowed to go out alone in a little boat to collect specimens. Hirohito's beloved headmaster, Count Maresuki Nogi, taught him to practice the values of discipline, hard work, loyalty, and bravery.
With the death of the Meiji Emperor, Hirohito's father took the throne and Hirohito became the crown prince. Hirohito graduated from the Peers' School in 1914 and went on to the Crown Prince's Institute, located right on the palace grounds. His class was made up of five other royal students. It was during these seven years of study that Hirohito expressed some doubt that his family really was descended from gods, a belief that was rooted in Shinto (the dominant religion) tradition.
Engagement and overseas travel
In 1918 Hirohito became engaged to Princess Nagako. This was a somewhat controversial match, because she was not a member of the famous bride-supplying family, like his mother. Nevertheless, after a six-year engagement (during which they met only nine times, and never without a chaper-one) the two were married. Over the years they had seven children (one of whom died at age two).
After graduating from the Crown Prince's Institute in 1921, Hirohito broke with tradition by becoming the first crown prince to go on a six-month tour of Europe. Following stops in Hong Kong, Singapore, and Cairo, he visited Belgium, France, and Italy. But his favorite place was England, where the family of King George V warmly welcomed the shy, bespectacled prince. Hirohito was especially impressed with Great Britain's constitutional monarchy, in which the role of royalty was mostly to put the stamp of approval on policies determined by other government leaders. This model strongly influenced Hirohito's ideas about his own role in Japan.
A reign of "enlightened peace"?
Returning from his journey in November 1921, Hirohito found his father in poor health, and he was appointed regent (acting emperor). Yoshihito died in late 1926, and Hirohito took the throne as the latest in a line of divinely descended emperors that stretched back more than two thousand years. He chose Showa, "Enlightened Peace," as the name of his reign. No longer was he to be treated as an ordinary mortal—now doctors used silk gloves when they treated him, tailors were not allowed to touch his body, and food tasters tested his food before he ate.
Soon after Hirohito became emperor, Japan's economy went into a slump. At the same time, the military was growing in strength and hoping to extend Japan's reach into other parts of Asia, especially China. Meanwhile, although Hirohito was emperor, his role in governing the country was limited to his silent attendance at "Imperial Conferences," where his presence meant that the "Imperial Will" approved of whatever policy was being discussed. Government matters were decided by the prime minister and other government and military leaders, without Hirohito's involvement. Hirohito did take a more active role on a few occasions. For instance, in 1936 he recommended quick and harsh punishment for some military officers and soldiers who had tried to take over the government.
Moving toward war
With Hirohito's approval, Japan went to war against China in July 1937; in fact, he took a great interest in the military conflict. In September 1939 Germany started World War II by invading Poland, and Japan's military leaders and aggressive prime minister, Hideki Tojo (1884-1948; see entry) began to make their own plans for war against the West. Their main target was the United States, which had been trying to stop Japan from expanding its empire. The Japanese military believed that through aggressive actions they could force the United States into allowing Japan to control East Asia.
During an Imperial Conference on December 1, 1941, Hirohito's advisors recommended going to war against the United States. He approved the plan, but he later said that this did not reflect his own wishes. Ever since his visit to Great Britain as a young man, Hirohito had believed in cooperation with Western powers, including the United States. But according to his own ideal of constitutional monarchy, he did not think it was his right to intervene; in later years, he wrote that he was also sure he would have been assassinated if he protested.
President Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882-1945; see entry) sent Hirohito a personal note on December 6, urging Japan to keep the peace. Tojo rejected the note, and Hirohito did not have a chance to reply. The next day, Japan attacked the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, destroying many ships and airplanes and killing thousands of people. Hirohito's request that the United States be given notice of the attack had been ignored, so it came as a complete surprise.
The war goes downhill
During the war, Hirohito remained on the palace grounds in Tokyo, despite frequent bombings by Allied planes. He was often confined to a stuffy, thick-walled air raid shelter that was adjacent to the royal library. By June 1942, Japan had suffered several major defeats in battle, and it appeared they might lose the war. Tojo wanted the Japanese people to try harder to win, so he began to mention the emperor often in his public announcements, calling on citizens to make sacrifices in Hirohito's name.
By the summer of 1945 it was obvious that Japan could not win the war, but many Japanese leaders wanted to continue the fight. On August 6, the United States dropped an atomic bomb on the city of Hiroshima, with immediate and devastating effects. Another bomb fell on Nagasaki on August 9, and on the same day Soviet forces (the Soviets were fighting with the Allies) invaded Japanese-held Manchuria in northern China.
In Tokyo, leaders debated about Japan's next step: surrender or keep fighting. Finally, in a meeting that took place in the emperor's air raid shelter, Tojo asked Hirohito to make the most important decision of his life. Convinced that Japan would be completely destroyed if the war continued, Hirohito chose surrender. His own fate, he knew, would be in the hands of whatever Allied commander led the forces that would occupy Japan.
Japan surrenders and rebuilds
At 7:21 A.M. on August 15, the Japanese people were informed that, for the first time in history, they were about to hear the voice of their emperor. In a poor but audible radio transmission, Hirohito told his people that they must "endure the unendurable" and surrender to the Allies.
The officer chosen to head the occupation government in Tokyo and to put Japan on the path toward a democratic society was U.S. general Douglas MacArthur (1880-1964; see entry). There had been much talk around the world about whether Hirohito would be tried as a war criminal, but MacArthur had already decided that Hirohito should not be punished—that his respected position with the Japanese people could be used to enforce the reforms that would have to be introduced.
Hirohito, however, did not know that MacArthur had already made a decision on this issue. He asked MacArthur to meet with him, and at their meeting made the following statement: "I come to you, General MacArthur, to offer myself to the powers you represent as the one to bear sole responsibility for every political and military decision made and action taken by my people in the conduct of the war."
MacArthur later wrote that he was "moved … to the very marrow of my bones" by "this courageous assumption of a responsibility" that could lead to Hirohito's death, since many war criminals were executed. The general informed Hirohito that he would not be held responsible for the war, but that he would play an important role in Japan's recovery. Over the next few years, the two men met often, and MacArthur gave Hirohito credit for helping his people adjust to a new kind of government and way of life.
Japan's new constitution abolished Shintoism as the official state religion, and on January 1, 1946, Hirohito made a public statement declaring that he was not a descendant of gods. (This was actually a relief to Hirohito, who considered himself a scientist and had never believed the myth anyway.) Instead, the emperor was now "a symbol of the state and of the unity of the people."
A peaceful twilight
During the rest of Hirohito's life, the Japanese government tried to bring the emperor into much closer contact with his people. Still shy, awkward, and self-conscious, Hirohito made many public appearances. He also found time for his study of marine biology; he published the first of his several books on the subject in 1962. In 1959, another long-standing Japanese tradition was broken when Hirohito's son, Crown Prince Akihito, married a woman who was a commoner (not royalty).
When Hirohito traveled to Europe in late 1971 and early 1972 (the first Japanese emperor to go abroad) he found that there were some people around the world who still considered him a war criminal. But he had a friendly reception from U. S. president Richard M. Nixon, whom he met during a stopover in Anchorage, Alaska. In 1975, Hirohito made an official state visit to the United States. He was given a Mickey Mouse watch as a gift, and this watch—along with his beloved microscope—was buried along with him when he died of stomach cancer in 1989.
Where to Learn More
Behr, Edward. Hirohito: Beyond the Myth. New York: Villard Books, 1989.
Crump, Thomas. Death of an Emperor: Japan at the Crossroads. Oxford:Oxford University Press, 1991.
Hoobler, Dorothy and Thomas Hoobler. Showa: The Age of Hirohito. New York: Walker, 1990.
Hoyt, Edwin P. Hirohito: The Emperor and the Man. New York: Praeger, 1992.
Mosley, Leonard. Hirohito, Emperor of Japan. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1966.
Powerless to prevent his country from entering World War II, Hirohito played an important role in Japan's surrender to the Allies in 1945.
The Shinto Religion
Shinto is the traditional religion of Japan. It has existed since ancient times, even before the arrival of Buddhism (another major religion practiced in Japan), and is still practiced today. After World War II, however, when a new constitution calledfor the separation of church and state and freedom of religion, the role of the Shinto religion in Japanese life changed.
Shinto involves the worship of a variety of gods and forces called kami, which are honored with ceremonies performed in shrines as well as festivals and other activities. The most important deity is Amaterasu, the "great heavenly illuminating goddess." Although there are no specific doctrines (official beliefs) or scriptures (written documents), followers of Shinto believe that their religion creates unity and harmony among the people of Japan.
From ancient times until the reign of Hirohito, Japanese emperors were considered direct descendants of Amaterasu, and their duties included not only political activities but religious service. In the nineteenth century, the Meiji government took steps to make Shinto a national religion (even though the Japanese constitution guaranteed freedom of religion) by building shrines, teaching about Shinto in public schools, and making Shinto festivals national holidays. By 1945, there were 218 national shrines in Japan.
At the end of World War II, an occupation government arrived in Japan to help the country rebuild itself as a democracy, which meant that church and state would have to exist separately. Hirohito had to announce to his people that he was not, in fact, a descendant of a Shinto goddess. The Japanese government had to break its ties (including giving public funds) with the shrines.
Some Japanese felt that this change went too much against Japan's cultural traditions, while others tried to find ways to keep the important role of Shinto in Japanese life strong without threatening religious freedom. By the 1980s, there were about 80,000 Shinto shrines in Japan, and about 75 million believers.
Hirohito (1901-1989) was the 124th emperor of Japan. He reigned during a period of internal turmoil, foreign expansion, international war, and national defeat, and presided over the transformation of the Japanese monarchy into a purely symbolic institution. As the occupant of Japan's throne for 63 years, he was the longest living monarch in modern history.
Childhood and Education
Hirohito was born on April 29, 1901. He was the first son of Crown Prince Yoshihito, who later became the Taisho emperor, and the grandson of Mutsuhito, the Meiji emperor. Following long-established custom, Hirohito was separated from his parents shortly after birth. He was cared for under the guardianship of a vice admiral in the imperial navy until November 1904, when he returned to the Akasaka Palace, his parents' official residence.
Even from early years, Hirohito was trained to act with the dignity, reserve, and sense of responsibility his future role would require. He grew into a shy and grave young boy. In April 1908 he was enrolled at the Gakushuin (Peers School) in a special class of 12 boys, among them two of his imperial cousins. The head of the school was Gen. Maresuke Nogi, a celebrated soldier of the Russo-Japanese War. He took a personal interest in the education of the young prince and attempted to instill in him respect for the virtues of stoicism, hard work, and devotion to the nation.
Appointed Heir to Throne
Hirohito was appointed heir apparent on September 9, 1912, shortly after the death of his grandfather Mutsushito and the accession of his father Yoshihito to the throne. Hirohito lost his mentor when Nogi and his wife committed ritual suicide on the day of Mutsuhito's funeral. His education was continued under another military hero, Adm. Heihachiro Togo, who had won the victory over the Russian navy in 1905. But Hirohito never became as close to Togo as he had been to Nogi. In his studies he also had little patience with his tutor in history, who taught that the early myth of the founding of Japan by the sun-goddess was historical fact. Skeptical by nature and scientific in his interest, he found natural history more to his liking. Under the guidance of his natural-history tutor, who remained a lifelong mentor, he began to develop an interest in marine biology, a field in which he became an acknowledged expert.
Crown Prince and Regent
On February 4, 1918, Hirohito became engaged to Princess Nagako, daughter of Prince Kuniyoshi Kuninomiya. Aritomo Yamagata and others raised objections to the match on the grounds that Nagako was descended from the daimyos of Satsuma, who had a strain of color blindness. The defect, they said, would taint the imperial line. But the imperial wedding finally took place on January 26, 1924. The imperial couple later had five daughters, the first born in December 1926, and two sons, the first born in December 1933.
In March 1921 Hirohito, accompanied by a large retinue, set off for a tour of Europe. The event was unprecedented, for it was the first time a crown prince of Japan had visited abroad. Although Hirohito traveled in France, the Netherlands, and Italy, his visit to England made the deepest impression on him. He was attracted by the freedom and informality of the English royal family. On Hirohito's first day at Buckingham Palace, King George V paid him an unexpected breakfast visit in suspenders and carpet slippers, and Edward, Prince of Wales, played golf with him and accompanied him on a round of official gatherings.
On November 25, 1921, shortly after his return to Japan, Hirohito was appointed to serve as regent for his father, who had begun to show increasing signs of mental derangement. In December 1923 Hirohito escaped an attempt on his life by a young radical.
Emperor of a Restless Nation
Hirohito acceded to the throne on December 25, 1926, and his formal enthronement took place in accord with ancient rituals in November 1928. He took as his reign name Showa ("Enlightened Peace"), and he was formally known as Showa Tenno.
The choice of reign name proved highly ironic for, shortly after Hirohito became emperor, Japan's relations with the outside world began to deteriorate. In 1927 Japanese army officers arranged the assassination of Marshal Chang Tso-lin, warlord of Manchuria, in hopes of provoking a Japanese takeover of the area. The young emperor, angered at the event, urged Premier Giichi Tanaka to discover and punish the culprits. He was equally indignant in September 1931, when elements in the Japanese army engineered the occupation of southern Manchuria under their own initiative. Encouraged by advisers like Count Nobuaki Makino and Prince Kimmochi Saionji, the Emperor privately urged moderation and caution on the army as it continued to deepen Japan's military involvement on the Asian mainland.
The Manchurian incident ushered in a period of profound domestic unrest. Dissident young military officers, often with the covert encouragement of their superiors, allied with civilian right-wing radicals to plot a series of unsuccessful coups d'etat and a number of successful assassinations. They hoped to overthrow party cabinets in order to establish a military regime that could govern in the name of "direct imperial rule."
Hirohito, however, believed himself to be a thoroughly human monarch, bound by the constitution his grandfather had promulgated in 1889. He saw himself as an organ of state rather than a personal autocrat and believed that the leaders of government should be men of moderation and non-militaristic in outlook.
During the military insurrection of February 26, 1936, when elements of the First Division occupied large areas of downtown Tokyo and assassination bands murdered many leading public officials, the Emperor urged swift suppression and punishment of the mutinous soldiers and the assassins. The uprising was crushed, and a number of ranking generals who were thought to have encouraged the rebels were forced into retirement.
Road to War
The country nevertheless continued its drift toward war. In July 1937 hostilities with China broke out. During the late 1930s Hirohito's advisers in the palace bureaucracy had urged him to remain aloof from direct intervention in politics lest he compromise the position of the imperial family. The Emperor followed this advice, giving his consent to whatever policies the increasingly belligerent governments decided upon.
There is every evidence that the Emperor felt uneasy about the unfolding of events, particularly after 1940. He did not favor the alliance with Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy, but he made no effort to oppose it. Similarly, he had grown distrustful of the judgments of the military leaders who kept assuring him of a quick end to the war in China. But when the final decision on war with the United States was made on September 6, 1941, his opposition was confined to an oblique reference to one of his grandfather's poems, which expressed hope for peace.
During the war Hirohito refused to leave the imperial palace at Tokyo, even after air raids began to demolish the city and fires destroyed many buildings on the palace grounds. He wished to share the hardships of his subjects.
By the summer of 1945 it was clear to most informed public officials, including many military leaders, that defeat was inevitable. But the decision to surrender did not come until after atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. At a historic imperial conference on August 9, 1945, the Emperor made clear his determination to "endure the unendurable" and expressed his opinion in favor of surrendering to the Allies.
Following Japan's formal surrender in September 1945, there was much speculation about whether the Emperor would be punished as a war criminal. Hirohito himself frequently expressed his willingness to abdicate as a token of his responsibility for the war. But the American authorities, including Gen. Douglas MacArthur, decided that it would better serve the goals of domestic stability and internal reform of Japan to let him remain as ruler. On January 1, 1946, however, the Emperor once and for all gave up any claims to being a sacred monarch by issuing a rescript that denied his divinity as a descendant of the sun-goddess.
Emperor's Life as a Mortal
During the years of the occupation and afterward, every effort was made to "democratize" the throne by having the Emperor mingle with the people. At first, the Emperor was inept and ill at ease when he met his subjects. He won the nickname "Mr. Is-that-so?" because of his perfunctory comments on visits to factories and schools. Even though he was personally aloof and somewhat awkward in public, the Emperor nevertheless became a popular figure. Pictures of the imperial family and stories of their activities became steady grist for weekly magazine and newspaper copy.
A respected marine biologist with a number of books on that subject to his credit, the Emperor lived a modest, sober, and retiring life when not engaged in official functions. His son Crown Prince Akihito married a commoner in 1959, and the line of succession was assured through their son Prince Hiro. In 1972 Hirohito traveled to Europe and was met with hostile demonstrations. A 1975 trip to the United States resulted in a more friendly reception. Hirohito died on January 7, 1989, at the age of 87. Symbolic of his interest in science and in modernizing his country, Hirohito reportedly was buried with his microscope and a Mickey Mouse watch.
The most complete biography of Hirohito in English is by Leonard Mosley, Hirohito, Emperor of Japan (1966). A journalistic sketch of Hirohito was written during the war by Willard Price, entitled Japan and the Son of Heaven (1945). Reading on the troubled years of the 1930s is provided by Robert J. C. Butow, Tojo and the Coming of the War (1961), and James B. Crowley, Japan's Quest for Autonomy: National Security and Foreign Policy (1966). The Emperor's role in the surrender decision is related in Robert J. C. Butow, Japan's Decision to Surrender (1954).
In 1996, Time published two retrospective articles by Carl Posey about Hirohito's life: "The God-Emperor Who Became a Man" and "From Militarist to Beloved Monarch." Time, Oct. 21, 1996.
Large, Stephen S. Emperors of the Rising Sun: Three Biographies, Kodansha International, 1997 [biographies of Hirohito, his father, and his grandfather]. □
Hirohito was the 124th emperor of Japan. He reigned during a period of internal unrest, foreign expansion, international war, and national defeat. As the occupant of Japan's throne for sixty-three years, he was the longest living ruler in modern history.
Childhood and education
Hirohito was born on April 29, 1901. He was the first son of Crown Prince Yoshihito, who later became the Taisho emperor, and the grandson of Mutsuhito, the Meiji emperor. Following long-established custom, Hirohito was separated from his parents shortly after birth. He was cared for by a vice admiral in the imperial (of the empire) navy until November 1904, when he returned to the Akasaka Palace, his parents' official residence. Even after his return to the palace, he was only allowed to see his mother once a week and hardly ever spent time with his father.
From early on, Hirohito was trained to act with the dignity, reserve, and sense of responsibility his future role would require and he grew into a shy and serious young boy. In April 1908 he was enrolled at the Gakushuin (Peers School) in a special class of twelve boys. The head of the school was General Maresuke Nogi, a celebrated soldier of the Russo-Japanese War (1904–05; a conflict with Russia over Manchuria and Korea). He took a personal interest in the education of the young prince and attempted to introduce him to respect the virtues of hard work, the importance of devotion to the nation, and the practice of stoicism (the ability to ignore pleasure or pain).
In 1912 Mutsishito died and paved the way for Hirohito's father Yoshihito to take the throne. Hirohito then began an intense study of natural history. Under the guidance of his natural history tutor, he developed an interest in marine biology, a field in which he became an acknowledged expert.
On February 4, 1918, Hirohito became engaged to Princess Nagako, daughter of Prince Kuniyoshi Kuninomiya. The imperial wedding finally took place on January 26, 1924. The imperial couple later had five daughters, the first born in December 1926, and two sons, the first born in December 1933.
In March 1921 Hirohito, accompanied by a large group of attendants, set off for a tour of Europe. Never before had a crown prince of Japan visited countries abroad. Although Hirohito traveled in France, the Netherlands, and Italy, his visit to England made the deepest impression on him. He was attracted by the freedom and informality (without ceremony) of the English royal family.
On November 25, 1921, shortly after his return to Japan, Hirohito was appointed to serve as regent (acting ruler) for his father, who had begun to show increasing signs of mental instability. In December 1923 Hirohito escaped an attempt on his life by a young radical.
Emperor of a restless nation
Hirohito took the throne on December 25, 1926. He took as his reign name Showa ("Enlightened Peace"), and he was formally known as Showa Tenno. However, the choice of reign name would not hold true. Shortly after Hirohito became emperor, Japan's relations with the outside world began to fall apart. In 1927 Japanese army officers, without the agreement of Emperor Hirohito, sparked conflict with Manchuria and later occupied parts of that country. Hirohito soon found his military deeply involved on the Asian mainland.
The Manchurian incident ushered in a period of serious unrest within Japan. Young military officers plotted a series of unsuccessful takeovers as well as a number of successful assassinations (secretly planned murders). They hoped to overthrow parts of the government in order to establish a military regime that could govern in the name of "direct imperial rule." In other words, Hirohito would still be called emperor and would be the head of the government, but the military would actually be in control. Hirohito, however, saw himself as part of the state rather than a sole ruler and believed that the leaders of government should be men of moderation and nonmilitaristic in outlook.
During the military revolt of February 26, 1936, elements of the First Division occupied large areas of downtown Tokyo, and assassination bands murdered many leading public officials. Emperor Hirohito urged swift end to the revolt and punished those involved. The uprising was crushed, and a number of ranking generals who were thought to have encouraged the rebels were forced into retirement.
Road to war
Nevertheless the country continued to drift toward war. In July 1937 hostilities with China broke out. During the late 1930s Hirohito's advisers in the palace urged him to stay away from direct involvement in politics or be forced to compromise the position of the imperial family. The emperor followed this advice, and agreed to whatever policies the governments decided upon.
There is every evidence that the emperor felt uneasy about the unfolding of events, particularly after 1940. He did not favor the alliance with Germany and Italy in World War II (1939–45), but he made no effort to oppose it. Similarly, he had grown distrustful of the judgments of the military leaders who kept assuring him of a quick end to the war in China. But when the final decision on war with the United States was made on September 6, 1941, he barely opposed it.
During the war Hirohito refused to leave the imperial palace at Tokyo, even after air raids began to demolish the city and fires destroyed many buildings on the palace grounds. He wished to share the hardships of his subjects.
By the summer of 1945 it was clear that defeat was at hand. But the decision to surrender did not come until after atomic bombs were dropped on the Japanese towns of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. At a historic imperial conference on August 9, 1945, the emperor made clear his opinion in favor of surrendering to the allied powers led by the United States.
Following Japan's formal surrender in September 1945, there was much discussion about whether Emperor Hirohito should be punished as a war criminal. Hirohito himself frequently expressed his willingness to step down as a token of his responsibility for the war. But the U.S. authorities, including General Douglas MacArthur (1880–1964), decided that it would better serve the goals of Japanese stability to let him remain as ruler. On January 1, 1946, however, the emperor once and for all gave up any claims to being a sacred ruler by issuing a law that denied his god-like status as a descendant of the sun goddess.
Emperor's life as a mortal
During the years of the occupation and afterward, every effort was made to "democratize" the throne by having the emperor mingle with the people. Even though he was personally distant and somewhat awkward in public, the emperor nevertheless became a popular figure. Pictures of the imperial family and stories of their activities became a steady part of weekly magazine and newspaper copy.
A respected marine biologist with a number of books on that subject to his credit, Emperor Hirohito lived a modest, sober, and retired life when not involved in official functions. In 1972 he traveled to Europe and was met with hostile demonstrations. A 1975 trip to the United States resulted in a more friendly reception. Hirohito died on January 7, 1989, at the age of eighty-seven. Symbolic of his interest in science and in modernizing his country, Hirohito reportedly was buried with his microscope and a Mickey Mouse watch.
For More Information
Bix, Herbert P. Hirohito and the Making of Modern Japan. New York: HarperCollins, 2000.
Hoyt, Edwin Palmer. Hirohito: The Emperor and the Man. New York: Praeger, 1992.
Mosley, Leonard. Hirohito, Emperor of Japan. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1966.
Severns, Karen. Hirohito. New York: Chelsea House, 1988.
Hirohito privately but unsuccessfully opposed Japan's undeclared war with China, beginning in July 1937, and Japan's entry into the Tripartite Pact with Germany and Italy in September 1940, fearing that this would lead Japan into an unwanted war with the United States and Great Britain. However, he was a nationalist, not the pacifist some accounts imply, and when the United States ended oil exports to Japan on 1 August 1941 in retaliation for Japan's military occupation of French Indochina, Hirohito eventually accepted that war was inevitable. That Japan formally declared war on the United States only after it attacked the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941 had not been his intention.
During the Pacific War, even as he publicly exhorted his countrymen to sacrifice their lives for victory, Hirohito instructed Prime Minister Tōjō Hideki to work for peace. Ironically, Hirohito may have prolonged the war, first by protecting the die‐hard Tōjō, upon whom he relied politically, from critics until Tōjō finally resigned in July 1944 following the fall of Saipan; and second, by advocating the last “decisive” Battle of Okinawa, which he hoped would strengthen Japan's position in any forthcoming peace negotiations.
Ultimately, when the war was clearly lost, but with the government deadlocked over whether to accept the Allies' Potsdam Proclamation (26 July 1945) calling for Japan's “unconditional surrender,” Hirohito personally intervened and Japan capitulated 15 August 1945. In September, when he first met Gen. Douglas MacArthur, Supreme Allied Commander in Japan, Hirohito offered to take responsibility for the war. However, he was exempted from standing trial as a war criminal and retained on the throne so that the occupation could use his authority in the demilitarization and democratization of Japan. The new 1947 Constitution stripped him of all prerogatives, leaving a purely ceremonial role.
Despite Hirohito's formal apology for the war, made years later (1975) during a state visit to the United States, many Americans regard him as a controversial figure. However, there is no evidence that Hirohito knew in advance of, or sanctioned, the great many atrocities committed by Japanese forces during the Pacific War.
[See also Japan, Peace Treaty with; Pearl Harbor, Attack on; Potsdam Conference; World War II, U.S. Air Operations in: The Air War Against Japan; World War II, U.S. Naval Operations in: The Pacific.]
Toshiaki Kawahara , Hirohito and His Times: A Japanese Perspective, 1990.
Stephen S. Large , Emperor Hirohito and Shōwa Japan: A Political Biography, 1992.
Stephen S. Large
Hirohito was the emperor of Japan from 1926 to 1989. His reign encompassed a period of Japanese
militarism that resulted in Japan's participation in world war ii, the United States' dropping of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and the United States' military occupation of Japan following Japan's defeat. After World War II, Hirohito's authority changed, and he was reduced to a ceremonial figure.
Hirohito was born in Tokyo on April 29, 1901, and was educated in Japan. He became emperor on December 25, 1926, at a time when Japanese parliamentary government suggested that democracy and international cooperation would continue to grow. However, forces within the military sought to dominate the government and embark on a course of expansionism within Asia. Though he had private misgivings about the rise of militarism, Hirohito took no action to stop the generals. His advisers were concerned that imperial opposition would lead to the military overthrow of the monarchy.
As the 124th direct descendant of Japan's first emperor, Jimmu, Hirohito was considered sacred and was referred to as Tenno Heika, meaning "son of heaven." Because Hirohito was unwilling to exercise his divine authority against the military, the Japanese army invaded China in 1937 and in 1940 joined in a military alliance with the Axis powers. The alliance led to Japan's participation in World War II and its attack on Pearl Harbor and the United States on December 7, 1941.
The attack on the United States led to severe consequences for Japanese Americans. On February 19, 1942, President franklin d. roosevelt issued executive order No. 9066, forcing the relocation of all 112,000 Japanese Americans living on the West Coast (including 70,000 U.S. citizens) to detention camps in places such as Jerome, Arkansas, and Heart Mountain, Wyoming. Roosevelt issued the order after U.S. military leaders, worried about a Japanese invasion, argued that national security required such drastic action.
The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the forced relocation in korematsu v. united states, 323 U.S. 214, 65 S. Ct. 193, 89 L. Ed. 194 (1944). Justice hugo l. black noted that curtailing the rights of a single racial group is constitutionally suspect, but in this case military necessity justified the exclusion of Japanese Americans from the West Coast. In retrospect historians have characterized the removal and detention as the most drastic invasion of individual civil rights by the government in U.S. history.
Hirohito gradually became more open, within the inner circles of government, about his desire to end the war, especially after the United States inflicted numerous military defeats on Japan. But many members of the military wished to fight until the very end. With the United States' dropping of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945, Hirohito pushed for the surrender of Japan. On August 15 he broadcast Japan's surrender to the Allied forces. He broadcast to the Japanese people additional messages that were credited for the smooth transfer of power from Japan to the U.S. military occupation force, under the leadership of General Douglas MacArthur.
Although Hirohito was implicated in Japanese war plans, he was exonerated in the war crimes trials of 1946–48. He had changed the importance of the monarchy in 1946, when he publicly renounced his divine authority. The 1947 constitution that was written for Japan by MacArthur and his advisers had transformed Hirohito from a sovereign with supreme authority into a "symbol of the state," and placed control of the government in the hands of elected officials. Hirohito had endorsed the change, which reduced the emperor to a ceremonial figure.
Hirohito embraced the ceremonial role. He traveled widely and became more accessible. He also pursued his interest in marine biology. He died on January 7, 1989.
Bix, Herbert P. 2000. Hirohito and the Making of Modern Japan. New York, N.Y.: HarperCollins.
Executive Order No. 9066. 1942. Federal Register 7:1407. | <urn:uuid:551ae403-b9e1-4f69-8e91-06264c08a340> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.encyclopedia.com/people/history/japanese-history-biographies/hirohito | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250589861.0/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117152059-20200117180059-00183.warc.gz | en | 0.982212 | 8,416 | 3.4375 | 3 | [
-0.4705915153026581,
0.7193248271942139,
0.5451699495315552,
-0.26714134216308594,
-0.28320184350013733,
0.37342649698257446,
0.2380329668521881,
0.09955663979053497,
0.013251243159174919,
-0.14463362097740173,
-0.060843609273433685,
-0.17573027312755585,
0.40226033329963684,
0.67536950111... | 5 | [Image not available for copyright reasons]
Born April 29, 1901
Died January 7, 1989
124th emperor of Japan
Hirohito's reign as emperor of Japan—the longest of any monarch in modern times—was a period of great turmoil and change. Although he chose as the name for his reign the word "Showa," which means "Enlightened Peace," he ruled during one of the least peaceful periods in history. Hirohito's enemies considered him the head of a brutal, militaristic country and felt that he should be punished as a war criminal for atrocities (extreme cruelty and violence) committed by the Japanese military against Chinese citizens during World War II. But others now argue that Hirohito was powerless to prevent the war with the Allies, that he was not in charge of the military campaigns, and that he personally opposed the war. He was a shy, self-conscious person whose life had been devoted not to governing a country but to playing the mainly symbolic role of emperor.
A privileged but lonely childhood
Born at Aoynama Palace in Tokyo, Hirohito was the son of Crown Prince Yoshihito and grandson of Mutsuhito, known as the Meiji ("Enlightened Ruler") Emperor. His mother was Princess Sadako, a member of a family that had provided royal brides for many centuries. When he was less than three months old, Hirohito was sent to live with foster parents, the Count and Countess Kawamura Sumyoshi. In accordance with a long-standing custom, he was to be raised in a normal family away from the ceremonial trappings of palace life, and he was to be treated (and disciplined) like any other child of that family.
Count Kawamura Sumyoshi died when Hirohito was five years old, and the boy was returned to his parents' official residence, Akasaka Palace, which had been modeled after France's famous Versailles palace. But Hirohito and his two brothers rarely saw their parents. Growing up in the palace, he had little contact with children outside the family. Hirohito was a small, weak, very shy little boy with a shuffling walk and an extremely solemn manner.
Two schools for royalty
At the age of eight, Hirohito was sent to the Peers' School and became a member of a class of twelve boys whose parents were also members of the Japanese royalty. There he studied modern languages, military and technical sciences, politics, and history. He developed a special (and, as it turned out, lifelong) interest in marine biology, and when he complained that he could not conduct field work with so many servants and other people hanging around him, he was allowed to go out alone in a little boat to collect specimens. Hirohito's beloved headmaster, Count Maresuki Nogi, taught him to practice the values of discipline, hard work, loyalty, and bravery.
With the death of the Meiji Emperor, Hirohito's father took the throne and Hirohito became the crown prince. Hirohito graduated from the Peers' School in 1914 and went on to the Crown Prince's Institute, located right on the palace grounds. His class was made up of five other royal students. It was during these seven years of study that Hirohito expressed some doubt that his family really was descended from gods, a belief that was rooted in Shinto (the dominant religion) tradition.
Engagement and overseas travel
In 1918 Hirohito became engaged to Princess Nagako. This was a somewhat controversial match, because she was not a member of the famous bride-supplying family, like his mother. Nevertheless, after a six-year engagement (during which they met only nine times, and never without a chaper-one) the two were married. Over the years they had seven children (one of whom died at age two).
After graduating from the Crown Prince's Institute in 1921, Hirohito broke with tradition by becoming the first crown prince to go on a six-month tour of Europe. Following stops in Hong Kong, Singapore, and Cairo, he visited Belgium, France, and Italy. But his favorite place was England, where the family of King George V warmly welcomed the shy, bespectacled prince. Hirohito was especially impressed with Great Britain's constitutional monarchy, in which the role of royalty was mostly to put the stamp of approval on policies determined by other government leaders. This model strongly influenced Hirohito's ideas about his own role in Japan.
A reign of "enlightened peace"?
Returning from his journey in November 1921, Hirohito found his father in poor health, and he was appointed regent (acting emperor). Yoshihito died in late 1926, and Hirohito took the throne as the latest in a line of divinely descended emperors that stretched back more than two thousand years. He chose Showa, "Enlightened Peace," as the name of his reign. No longer was he to be treated as an ordinary mortal—now doctors used silk gloves when they treated him, tailors were not allowed to touch his body, and food tasters tested his food before he ate.
Soon after Hirohito became emperor, Japan's economy went into a slump. At the same time, the military was growing in strength and hoping to extend Japan's reach into other parts of Asia, especially China. Meanwhile, although Hirohito was emperor, his role in governing the country was limited to his silent attendance at "Imperial Conferences," where his presence meant that the "Imperial Will" approved of whatever policy was being discussed. Government matters were decided by the prime minister and other government and military leaders, without Hirohito's involvement. Hirohito did take a more active role on a few occasions. For instance, in 1936 he recommended quick and harsh punishment for some military officers and soldiers who had tried to take over the government.
Moving toward war
With Hirohito's approval, Japan went to war against China in July 1937; in fact, he took a great interest in the military conflict. In September 1939 Germany started World War II by invading Poland, and Japan's military leaders and aggressive prime minister, Hideki Tojo (1884-1948; see entry) began to make their own plans for war against the West. Their main target was the United States, which had been trying to stop Japan from expanding its empire. The Japanese military believed that through aggressive actions they could force the United States into allowing Japan to control East Asia.
During an Imperial Conference on December 1, 1941, Hirohito's advisors recommended going to war against the United States. He approved the plan, but he later said that this did not reflect his own wishes. Ever since his visit to Great Britain as a young man, Hirohito had believed in cooperation with Western powers, including the United States. But according to his own ideal of constitutional monarchy, he did not think it was his right to intervene; in later years, he wrote that he was also sure he would have been assassinated if he protested.
President Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882-1945; see entry) sent Hirohito a personal note on December 6, urging Japan to keep the peace. Tojo rejected the note, and Hirohito did not have a chance to reply. The next day, Japan attacked the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, destroying many ships and airplanes and killing thousands of people. Hirohito's request that the United States be given notice of the attack had been ignored, so it came as a complete surprise.
The war goes downhill
During the war, Hirohito remained on the palace grounds in Tokyo, despite frequent bombings by Allied planes. He was often confined to a stuffy, thick-walled air raid shelter that was adjacent to the royal library. By June 1942, Japan had suffered several major defeats in battle, and it appeared they might lose the war. Tojo wanted the Japanese people to try harder to win, so he began to mention the emperor often in his public announcements, calling on citizens to make sacrifices in Hirohito's name.
By the summer of 1945 it was obvious that Japan could not win the war, but many Japanese leaders wanted to continue the fight. On August 6, the United States dropped an atomic bomb on the city of Hiroshima, with immediate and devastating effects. Another bomb fell on Nagasaki on August 9, and on the same day Soviet forces (the Soviets were fighting with the Allies) invaded Japanese-held Manchuria in northern China.
In Tokyo, leaders debated about Japan's next step: surrender or keep fighting. Finally, in a meeting that took place in the emperor's air raid shelter, Tojo asked Hirohito to make the most important decision of his life. Convinced that Japan would be completely destroyed if the war continued, Hirohito chose surrender. His own fate, he knew, would be in the hands of whatever Allied commander led the forces that would occupy Japan.
Japan surrenders and rebuilds
At 7:21 A.M. on August 15, the Japanese people were informed that, for the first time in history, they were about to hear the voice of their emperor. In a poor but audible radio transmission, Hirohito told his people that they must "endure the unendurable" and surrender to the Allies.
The officer chosen to head the occupation government in Tokyo and to put Japan on the path toward a democratic society was U.S. general Douglas MacArthur (1880-1964; see entry). There had been much talk around the world about whether Hirohito would be tried as a war criminal, but MacArthur had already decided that Hirohito should not be punished—that his respected position with the Japanese people could be used to enforce the reforms that would have to be introduced.
Hirohito, however, did not know that MacArthur had already made a decision on this issue. He asked MacArthur to meet with him, and at their meeting made the following statement: "I come to you, General MacArthur, to offer myself to the powers you represent as the one to bear sole responsibility for every political and military decision made and action taken by my people in the conduct of the war."
MacArthur later wrote that he was "moved … to the very marrow of my bones" by "this courageous assumption of a responsibility" that could lead to Hirohito's death, since many war criminals were executed. The general informed Hirohito that he would not be held responsible for the war, but that he would play an important role in Japan's recovery. Over the next few years, the two men met often, and MacArthur gave Hirohito credit for helping his people adjust to a new kind of government and way of life.
Japan's new constitution abolished Shintoism as the official state religion, and on January 1, 1946, Hirohito made a public statement declaring that he was not a descendant of gods. (This was actually a relief to Hirohito, who considered himself a scientist and had never believed the myth anyway.) Instead, the emperor was now "a symbol of the state and of the unity of the people."
A peaceful twilight
During the rest of Hirohito's life, the Japanese government tried to bring the emperor into much closer contact with his people. Still shy, awkward, and self-conscious, Hirohito made many public appearances. He also found time for his study of marine biology; he published the first of his several books on the subject in 1962. In 1959, another long-standing Japanese tradition was broken when Hirohito's son, Crown Prince Akihito, married a woman who was a commoner (not royalty).
When Hirohito traveled to Europe in late 1971 and early 1972 (the first Japanese emperor to go abroad) he found that there were some people around the world who still considered him a war criminal. But he had a friendly reception from U. S. president Richard M. Nixon, whom he met during a stopover in Anchorage, Alaska. In 1975, Hirohito made an official state visit to the United States. He was given a Mickey Mouse watch as a gift, and this watch—along with his beloved microscope—was buried along with him when he died of stomach cancer in 1989.
Where to Learn More
Behr, Edward. Hirohito: Beyond the Myth. New York: Villard Books, 1989.
Crump, Thomas. Death of an Emperor: Japan at the Crossroads. Oxford:Oxford University Press, 1991.
Hoobler, Dorothy and Thomas Hoobler. Showa: The Age of Hirohito. New York: Walker, 1990.
Hoyt, Edwin P. Hirohito: The Emperor and the Man. New York: Praeger, 1992.
Mosley, Leonard. Hirohito, Emperor of Japan. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1966.
Powerless to prevent his country from entering World War II, Hirohito played an important role in Japan's surrender to the Allies in 1945.
The Shinto Religion
Shinto is the traditional religion of Japan. It has existed since ancient times, even before the arrival of Buddhism (another major religion practiced in Japan), and is still practiced today. After World War II, however, when a new constitution calledfor the separation of church and state and freedom of religion, the role of the Shinto religion in Japanese life changed.
Shinto involves the worship of a variety of gods and forces called kami, which are honored with ceremonies performed in shrines as well as festivals and other activities. The most important deity is Amaterasu, the "great heavenly illuminating goddess." Although there are no specific doctrines (official beliefs) or scriptures (written documents), followers of Shinto believe that their religion creates unity and harmony among the people of Japan.
From ancient times until the reign of Hirohito, Japanese emperors were considered direct descendants of Amaterasu, and their duties included not only political activities but religious service. In the nineteenth century, the Meiji government took steps to make Shinto a national religion (even though the Japanese constitution guaranteed freedom of religion) by building shrines, teaching about Shinto in public schools, and making Shinto festivals national holidays. By 1945, there were 218 national shrines in Japan.
At the end of World War II, an occupation government arrived in Japan to help the country rebuild itself as a democracy, which meant that church and state would have to exist separately. Hirohito had to announce to his people that he was not, in fact, a descendant of a Shinto goddess. The Japanese government had to break its ties (including giving public funds) with the shrines.
Some Japanese felt that this change went too much against Japan's cultural traditions, while others tried to find ways to keep the important role of Shinto in Japanese life strong without threatening religious freedom. By the 1980s, there were about 80,000 Shinto shrines in Japan, and about 75 million believers.
Hirohito (1901-1989) was the 124th emperor of Japan. He reigned during a period of internal turmoil, foreign expansion, international war, and national defeat, and presided over the transformation of the Japanese monarchy into a purely symbolic institution. As the occupant of Japan's throne for 63 years, he was the longest living monarch in modern history.
Childhood and Education
Hirohito was born on April 29, 1901. He was the first son of Crown Prince Yoshihito, who later became the Taisho emperor, and the grandson of Mutsuhito, the Meiji emperor. Following long-established custom, Hirohito was separated from his parents shortly after birth. He was cared for under the guardianship of a vice admiral in the imperial navy until November 1904, when he returned to the Akasaka Palace, his parents' official residence.
Even from early years, Hirohito was trained to act with the dignity, reserve, and sense of responsibility his future role would require. He grew into a shy and grave young boy. In April 1908 he was enrolled at the Gakushuin (Peers School) in a special class of 12 boys, among them two of his imperial cousins. The head of the school was Gen. Maresuke Nogi, a celebrated soldier of the Russo-Japanese War. He took a personal interest in the education of the young prince and attempted to instill in him respect for the virtues of stoicism, hard work, and devotion to the nation.
Appointed Heir to Throne
Hirohito was appointed heir apparent on September 9, 1912, shortly after the death of his grandfather Mutsushito and the accession of his father Yoshihito to the throne. Hirohito lost his mentor when Nogi and his wife committed ritual suicide on the day of Mutsuhito's funeral. His education was continued under another military hero, Adm. Heihachiro Togo, who had won the victory over the Russian navy in 1905. But Hirohito never became as close to Togo as he had been to Nogi. In his studies he also had little patience with his tutor in history, who taught that the early myth of the founding of Japan by the sun-goddess was historical fact. Skeptical by nature and scientific in his interest, he found natural history more to his liking. Under the guidance of his natural-history tutor, who remained a lifelong mentor, he began to develop an interest in marine biology, a field in which he became an acknowledged expert.
Crown Prince and Regent
On February 4, 1918, Hirohito became engaged to Princess Nagako, daughter of Prince Kuniyoshi Kuninomiya. Aritomo Yamagata and others raised objections to the match on the grounds that Nagako was descended from the daimyos of Satsuma, who had a strain of color blindness. The defect, they said, would taint the imperial line. But the imperial wedding finally took place on January 26, 1924. The imperial couple later had five daughters, the first born in December 1926, and two sons, the first born in December 1933.
In March 1921 Hirohito, accompanied by a large retinue, set off for a tour of Europe. The event was unprecedented, for it was the first time a crown prince of Japan had visited abroad. Although Hirohito traveled in France, the Netherlands, and Italy, his visit to England made the deepest impression on him. He was attracted by the freedom and informality of the English royal family. On Hirohito's first day at Buckingham Palace, King George V paid him an unexpected breakfast visit in suspenders and carpet slippers, and Edward, Prince of Wales, played golf with him and accompanied him on a round of official gatherings.
On November 25, 1921, shortly after his return to Japan, Hirohito was appointed to serve as regent for his father, who had begun to show increasing signs of mental derangement. In December 1923 Hirohito escaped an attempt on his life by a young radical.
Emperor of a Restless Nation
Hirohito acceded to the throne on December 25, 1926, and his formal enthronement took place in accord with ancient rituals in November 1928. He took as his reign name Showa ("Enlightened Peace"), and he was formally known as Showa Tenno.
The choice of reign name proved highly ironic for, shortly after Hirohito became emperor, Japan's relations with the outside world began to deteriorate. In 1927 Japanese army officers arranged the assassination of Marshal Chang Tso-lin, warlord of Manchuria, in hopes of provoking a Japanese takeover of the area. The young emperor, angered at the event, urged Premier Giichi Tanaka to discover and punish the culprits. He was equally indignant in September 1931, when elements in the Japanese army engineered the occupation of southern Manchuria under their own initiative. Encouraged by advisers like Count Nobuaki Makino and Prince Kimmochi Saionji, the Emperor privately urged moderation and caution on the army as it continued to deepen Japan's military involvement on the Asian mainland.
The Manchurian incident ushered in a period of profound domestic unrest. Dissident young military officers, often with the covert encouragement of their superiors, allied with civilian right-wing radicals to plot a series of unsuccessful coups d'etat and a number of successful assassinations. They hoped to overthrow party cabinets in order to establish a military regime that could govern in the name of "direct imperial rule."
Hirohito, however, believed himself to be a thoroughly human monarch, bound by the constitution his grandfather had promulgated in 1889. He saw himself as an organ of state rather than a personal autocrat and believed that the leaders of government should be men of moderation and non-militaristic in outlook.
During the military insurrection of February 26, 1936, when elements of the First Division occupied large areas of downtown Tokyo and assassination bands murdered many leading public officials, the Emperor urged swift suppression and punishment of the mutinous soldiers and the assassins. The uprising was crushed, and a number of ranking generals who were thought to have encouraged the rebels were forced into retirement.
Road to War
The country nevertheless continued its drift toward war. In July 1937 hostilities with China broke out. During the late 1930s Hirohito's advisers in the palace bureaucracy had urged him to remain aloof from direct intervention in politics lest he compromise the position of the imperial family. The Emperor followed this advice, giving his consent to whatever policies the increasingly belligerent governments decided upon.
There is every evidence that the Emperor felt uneasy about the unfolding of events, particularly after 1940. He did not favor the alliance with Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy, but he made no effort to oppose it. Similarly, he had grown distrustful of the judgments of the military leaders who kept assuring him of a quick end to the war in China. But when the final decision on war with the United States was made on September 6, 1941, his opposition was confined to an oblique reference to one of his grandfather's poems, which expressed hope for peace.
During the war Hirohito refused to leave the imperial palace at Tokyo, even after air raids began to demolish the city and fires destroyed many buildings on the palace grounds. He wished to share the hardships of his subjects.
By the summer of 1945 it was clear to most informed public officials, including many military leaders, that defeat was inevitable. But the decision to surrender did not come until after atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. At a historic imperial conference on August 9, 1945, the Emperor made clear his determination to "endure the unendurable" and expressed his opinion in favor of surrendering to the Allies.
Following Japan's formal surrender in September 1945, there was much speculation about whether the Emperor would be punished as a war criminal. Hirohito himself frequently expressed his willingness to abdicate as a token of his responsibility for the war. But the American authorities, including Gen. Douglas MacArthur, decided that it would better serve the goals of domestic stability and internal reform of Japan to let him remain as ruler. On January 1, 1946, however, the Emperor once and for all gave up any claims to being a sacred monarch by issuing a rescript that denied his divinity as a descendant of the sun-goddess.
Emperor's Life as a Mortal
During the years of the occupation and afterward, every effort was made to "democratize" the throne by having the Emperor mingle with the people. At first, the Emperor was inept and ill at ease when he met his subjects. He won the nickname "Mr. Is-that-so?" because of his perfunctory comments on visits to factories and schools. Even though he was personally aloof and somewhat awkward in public, the Emperor nevertheless became a popular figure. Pictures of the imperial family and stories of their activities became steady grist for weekly magazine and newspaper copy.
A respected marine biologist with a number of books on that subject to his credit, the Emperor lived a modest, sober, and retiring life when not engaged in official functions. His son Crown Prince Akihito married a commoner in 1959, and the line of succession was assured through their son Prince Hiro. In 1972 Hirohito traveled to Europe and was met with hostile demonstrations. A 1975 trip to the United States resulted in a more friendly reception. Hirohito died on January 7, 1989, at the age of 87. Symbolic of his interest in science and in modernizing his country, Hirohito reportedly was buried with his microscope and a Mickey Mouse watch.
The most complete biography of Hirohito in English is by Leonard Mosley, Hirohito, Emperor of Japan (1966). A journalistic sketch of Hirohito was written during the war by Willard Price, entitled Japan and the Son of Heaven (1945). Reading on the troubled years of the 1930s is provided by Robert J. C. Butow, Tojo and the Coming of the War (1961), and James B. Crowley, Japan's Quest for Autonomy: National Security and Foreign Policy (1966). The Emperor's role in the surrender decision is related in Robert J. C. Butow, Japan's Decision to Surrender (1954).
In 1996, Time published two retrospective articles by Carl Posey about Hirohito's life: "The God-Emperor Who Became a Man" and "From Militarist to Beloved Monarch." Time, Oct. 21, 1996.
Large, Stephen S. Emperors of the Rising Sun: Three Biographies, Kodansha International, 1997 [biographies of Hirohito, his father, and his grandfather]. □
Hirohito was the 124th emperor of Japan. He reigned during a period of internal unrest, foreign expansion, international war, and national defeat. As the occupant of Japan's throne for sixty-three years, he was the longest living ruler in modern history.
Childhood and education
Hirohito was born on April 29, 1901. He was the first son of Crown Prince Yoshihito, who later became the Taisho emperor, and the grandson of Mutsuhito, the Meiji emperor. Following long-established custom, Hirohito was separated from his parents shortly after birth. He was cared for by a vice admiral in the imperial (of the empire) navy until November 1904, when he returned to the Akasaka Palace, his parents' official residence. Even after his return to the palace, he was only allowed to see his mother once a week and hardly ever spent time with his father.
From early on, Hirohito was trained to act with the dignity, reserve, and sense of responsibility his future role would require and he grew into a shy and serious young boy. In April 1908 he was enrolled at the Gakushuin (Peers School) in a special class of twelve boys. The head of the school was General Maresuke Nogi, a celebrated soldier of the Russo-Japanese War (1904–05; a conflict with Russia over Manchuria and Korea). He took a personal interest in the education of the young prince and attempted to introduce him to respect the virtues of hard work, the importance of devotion to the nation, and the practice of stoicism (the ability to ignore pleasure or pain).
In 1912 Mutsishito died and paved the way for Hirohito's father Yoshihito to take the throne. Hirohito then began an intense study of natural history. Under the guidance of his natural history tutor, he developed an interest in marine biology, a field in which he became an acknowledged expert.
On February 4, 1918, Hirohito became engaged to Princess Nagako, daughter of Prince Kuniyoshi Kuninomiya. The imperial wedding finally took place on January 26, 1924. The imperial couple later had five daughters, the first born in December 1926, and two sons, the first born in December 1933.
In March 1921 Hirohito, accompanied by a large group of attendants, set off for a tour of Europe. Never before had a crown prince of Japan visited countries abroad. Although Hirohito traveled in France, the Netherlands, and Italy, his visit to England made the deepest impression on him. He was attracted by the freedom and informality (without ceremony) of the English royal family.
On November 25, 1921, shortly after his return to Japan, Hirohito was appointed to serve as regent (acting ruler) for his father, who had begun to show increasing signs of mental instability. In December 1923 Hirohito escaped an attempt on his life by a young radical.
Emperor of a restless nation
Hirohito took the throne on December 25, 1926. He took as his reign name Showa ("Enlightened Peace"), and he was formally known as Showa Tenno. However, the choice of reign name would not hold true. Shortly after Hirohito became emperor, Japan's relations with the outside world began to fall apart. In 1927 Japanese army officers, without the agreement of Emperor Hirohito, sparked conflict with Manchuria and later occupied parts of that country. Hirohito soon found his military deeply involved on the Asian mainland.
The Manchurian incident ushered in a period of serious unrest within Japan. Young military officers plotted a series of unsuccessful takeovers as well as a number of successful assassinations (secretly planned murders). They hoped to overthrow parts of the government in order to establish a military regime that could govern in the name of "direct imperial rule." In other words, Hirohito would still be called emperor and would be the head of the government, but the military would actually be in control. Hirohito, however, saw himself as part of the state rather than a sole ruler and believed that the leaders of government should be men of moderation and nonmilitaristic in outlook.
During the military revolt of February 26, 1936, elements of the First Division occupied large areas of downtown Tokyo, and assassination bands murdered many leading public officials. Emperor Hirohito urged swift end to the revolt and punished those involved. The uprising was crushed, and a number of ranking generals who were thought to have encouraged the rebels were forced into retirement.
Road to war
Nevertheless the country continued to drift toward war. In July 1937 hostilities with China broke out. During the late 1930s Hirohito's advisers in the palace urged him to stay away from direct involvement in politics or be forced to compromise the position of the imperial family. The emperor followed this advice, and agreed to whatever policies the governments decided upon.
There is every evidence that the emperor felt uneasy about the unfolding of events, particularly after 1940. He did not favor the alliance with Germany and Italy in World War II (1939–45), but he made no effort to oppose it. Similarly, he had grown distrustful of the judgments of the military leaders who kept assuring him of a quick end to the war in China. But when the final decision on war with the United States was made on September 6, 1941, he barely opposed it.
During the war Hirohito refused to leave the imperial palace at Tokyo, even after air raids began to demolish the city and fires destroyed many buildings on the palace grounds. He wished to share the hardships of his subjects.
By the summer of 1945 it was clear that defeat was at hand. But the decision to surrender did not come until after atomic bombs were dropped on the Japanese towns of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. At a historic imperial conference on August 9, 1945, the emperor made clear his opinion in favor of surrendering to the allied powers led by the United States.
Following Japan's formal surrender in September 1945, there was much discussion about whether Emperor Hirohito should be punished as a war criminal. Hirohito himself frequently expressed his willingness to step down as a token of his responsibility for the war. But the U.S. authorities, including General Douglas MacArthur (1880–1964), decided that it would better serve the goals of Japanese stability to let him remain as ruler. On January 1, 1946, however, the emperor once and for all gave up any claims to being a sacred ruler by issuing a law that denied his god-like status as a descendant of the sun goddess.
Emperor's life as a mortal
During the years of the occupation and afterward, every effort was made to "democratize" the throne by having the emperor mingle with the people. Even though he was personally distant and somewhat awkward in public, the emperor nevertheless became a popular figure. Pictures of the imperial family and stories of their activities became a steady part of weekly magazine and newspaper copy.
A respected marine biologist with a number of books on that subject to his credit, Emperor Hirohito lived a modest, sober, and retired life when not involved in official functions. In 1972 he traveled to Europe and was met with hostile demonstrations. A 1975 trip to the United States resulted in a more friendly reception. Hirohito died on January 7, 1989, at the age of eighty-seven. Symbolic of his interest in science and in modernizing his country, Hirohito reportedly was buried with his microscope and a Mickey Mouse watch.
For More Information
Bix, Herbert P. Hirohito and the Making of Modern Japan. New York: HarperCollins, 2000.
Hoyt, Edwin Palmer. Hirohito: The Emperor and the Man. New York: Praeger, 1992.
Mosley, Leonard. Hirohito, Emperor of Japan. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1966.
Severns, Karen. Hirohito. New York: Chelsea House, 1988.
Hirohito privately but unsuccessfully opposed Japan's undeclared war with China, beginning in July 1937, and Japan's entry into the Tripartite Pact with Germany and Italy in September 1940, fearing that this would lead Japan into an unwanted war with the United States and Great Britain. However, he was a nationalist, not the pacifist some accounts imply, and when the United States ended oil exports to Japan on 1 August 1941 in retaliation for Japan's military occupation of French Indochina, Hirohito eventually accepted that war was inevitable. That Japan formally declared war on the United States only after it attacked the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941 had not been his intention.
During the Pacific War, even as he publicly exhorted his countrymen to sacrifice their lives for victory, Hirohito instructed Prime Minister Tōjō Hideki to work for peace. Ironically, Hirohito may have prolonged the war, first by protecting the die‐hard Tōjō, upon whom he relied politically, from critics until Tōjō finally resigned in July 1944 following the fall of Saipan; and second, by advocating the last “decisive” Battle of Okinawa, which he hoped would strengthen Japan's position in any forthcoming peace negotiations.
Ultimately, when the war was clearly lost, but with the government deadlocked over whether to accept the Allies' Potsdam Proclamation (26 July 1945) calling for Japan's “unconditional surrender,” Hirohito personally intervened and Japan capitulated 15 August 1945. In September, when he first met Gen. Douglas MacArthur, Supreme Allied Commander in Japan, Hirohito offered to take responsibility for the war. However, he was exempted from standing trial as a war criminal and retained on the throne so that the occupation could use his authority in the demilitarization and democratization of Japan. The new 1947 Constitution stripped him of all prerogatives, leaving a purely ceremonial role.
Despite Hirohito's formal apology for the war, made years later (1975) during a state visit to the United States, many Americans regard him as a controversial figure. However, there is no evidence that Hirohito knew in advance of, or sanctioned, the great many atrocities committed by Japanese forces during the Pacific War.
[See also Japan, Peace Treaty with; Pearl Harbor, Attack on; Potsdam Conference; World War II, U.S. Air Operations in: The Air War Against Japan; World War II, U.S. Naval Operations in: The Pacific.]
Toshiaki Kawahara , Hirohito and His Times: A Japanese Perspective, 1990.
Stephen S. Large , Emperor Hirohito and Shōwa Japan: A Political Biography, 1992.
Stephen S. Large
Hirohito was the emperor of Japan from 1926 to 1989. His reign encompassed a period of Japanese
militarism that resulted in Japan's participation in world war ii, the United States' dropping of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and the United States' military occupation of Japan following Japan's defeat. After World War II, Hirohito's authority changed, and he was reduced to a ceremonial figure.
Hirohito was born in Tokyo on April 29, 1901, and was educated in Japan. He became emperor on December 25, 1926, at a time when Japanese parliamentary government suggested that democracy and international cooperation would continue to grow. However, forces within the military sought to dominate the government and embark on a course of expansionism within Asia. Though he had private misgivings about the rise of militarism, Hirohito took no action to stop the generals. His advisers were concerned that imperial opposition would lead to the military overthrow of the monarchy.
As the 124th direct descendant of Japan's first emperor, Jimmu, Hirohito was considered sacred and was referred to as Tenno Heika, meaning "son of heaven." Because Hirohito was unwilling to exercise his divine authority against the military, the Japanese army invaded China in 1937 and in 1940 joined in a military alliance with the Axis powers. The alliance led to Japan's participation in World War II and its attack on Pearl Harbor and the United States on December 7, 1941.
The attack on the United States led to severe consequences for Japanese Americans. On February 19, 1942, President franklin d. roosevelt issued executive order No. 9066, forcing the relocation of all 112,000 Japanese Americans living on the West Coast (including 70,000 U.S. citizens) to detention camps in places such as Jerome, Arkansas, and Heart Mountain, Wyoming. Roosevelt issued the order after U.S. military leaders, worried about a Japanese invasion, argued that national security required such drastic action.
The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the forced relocation in korematsu v. united states, 323 U.S. 214, 65 S. Ct. 193, 89 L. Ed. 194 (1944). Justice hugo l. black noted that curtailing the rights of a single racial group is constitutionally suspect, but in this case military necessity justified the exclusion of Japanese Americans from the West Coast. In retrospect historians have characterized the removal and detention as the most drastic invasion of individual civil rights by the government in U.S. history.
Hirohito gradually became more open, within the inner circles of government, about his desire to end the war, especially after the United States inflicted numerous military defeats on Japan. But many members of the military wished to fight until the very end. With the United States' dropping of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945, Hirohito pushed for the surrender of Japan. On August 15 he broadcast Japan's surrender to the Allied forces. He broadcast to the Japanese people additional messages that were credited for the smooth transfer of power from Japan to the U.S. military occupation force, under the leadership of General Douglas MacArthur.
Although Hirohito was implicated in Japanese war plans, he was exonerated in the war crimes trials of 1946–48. He had changed the importance of the monarchy in 1946, when he publicly renounced his divine authority. The 1947 constitution that was written for Japan by MacArthur and his advisers had transformed Hirohito from a sovereign with supreme authority into a "symbol of the state," and placed control of the government in the hands of elected officials. Hirohito had endorsed the change, which reduced the emperor to a ceremonial figure.
Hirohito embraced the ceremonial role. He traveled widely and became more accessible. He also pursued his interest in marine biology. He died on January 7, 1989.
Bix, Herbert P. 2000. Hirohito and the Making of Modern Japan. New York, N.Y.: HarperCollins.
Executive Order No. 9066. 1942. Federal Register 7:1407. | 8,958 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The Greek called their country and themselves, Hellenes. With the arrival of the Romans, they called themselves Gracias. The Greeks were not the natives of Hellas, and there were other people who were called the (Protogreeks). They had dark skin and black or brown hair with brown or black eyes. Their origin is not known but they immigrated to Greece in 2200 BC and they lived there for several centuries until they made a civilization called the Mycenaean civilization in 1400 BC. The Mycenaean Civilization had many centers (such as Macedonia, Argos and Daphne). Their civilization lasted for 200 years, until a sudden death in 1200BC. At this point, the history of the Greeks begins with the Sea People (Dorians) invasion. The Dorian might have come from Central Europe.
Dates in the Greek history:
1-The Greek Dark Ages extended from 1200BC to 800/750 BC .We did not find any thing dating back to this period.
2-The Archaic period took place from 800 /759 to 550 /500 BC .the Greek history began when they invented the writing and the basics of their civilization.
3-The Hellenic Period extended from 550/500 to 334/323/305BC. In 334 BC, Alexander, the Great left Macedonia to go eastwards with the aim of fighting the Persians. In 323 BC, Alexander, the Great died. The year 305 BC is known in history as the year of kings as when Alexander, the Great died leaving his empire to his generals without an heir, his generals or leaders divided his empire between them and Egypt was taken by Ptolemy I).
4-The Hellenistic Period extended from 334/323/305 to 31 BC. It began with the Roman leader, Octavious, defeating Cleopatra and joining Egypt to his empire, the Roman Empire, in 27 BC (the time of Alexander the Great, to 31 BC, the time of the Roman conquest of the Eastern Mediterranean).
The Sea People
Between 1000 and 500B.C, people living around the Mediterranean Sea became civilized. They organized themselves into city-states. Three of these people came to have particular significance, namely the Carthaginians, the Etruscans and the Hellenes. Each of the Sea People developed independently, with individual characteristics of living that grew out of their geographical and historical circumstances. The Hellenes were particularly fortune as they were close enough to the civilized East to be in touch with it.
The Hellenes were a mixed people descending from two main groups of ancestors who differed physically and culturally. One branch came from the Bronze Age Sea People, including people of Crete, Cyprus and Phoenicia, most of whom had a delicate small bone structure, coppery skin that easily took on brownish-red tones when exposed to the Sun and wide dark eyes.
The other ancestral group was the IndoEuropean people including the Dorians and the Ionians.
1-The Dorians: they were the original invaders who refused to mix with the native people (the Protogreeks) and kept their race. They were blond with blue eyes. They were good warriors and their most famous city was Sparta.
2-The Ionians: they were the Dorians who married from the Protogreeks. They were dark-skinned with black or brown eyes and hair. Compared with the Dorians, they were more and their most famous city was Athens.
Greece is divided into two distinct parts separated by a narrow strip of land known as Isthmus of Corinth. The southern portion was known as Pelephesseus and the Northern as Attica. Greece was not a united country but it consisted of several cities called 'Polis' which means 'a city-state'. The number of citizens in the polis should not be less than 5000 to 10000 persons, with the exception of Athens the population of which reached 20000 citizens.
Though all were Greeks, people of the polis can be divided into 3 main categories:
1-The citizens: they were the natives who were born in the polis. They enjoyed their own freedom on the condition that they avoid threatening the polis' safety and if this condition was broken, punishment would be what they reaped. Besides, they enjoyed many rights, the most important of which were as follows:
A- The right of voting: the king of any polis couldn’t take any decision before the acceptance of his people through voting. Afterwards, the king had to do what people chose, even if it was against his desire.
B- The right of joining the army during the war: if any one refused, he would be turned to a slave.
C-Paying taxes: resembling privilege, taxes were not paid in the form of money but everyone was responsible for undertaking something, a person might be responsible, for example, for building a temple. D-Participation in the official worship of the city: each city had an altar around which citizens gathered in the city's official ceremony.
2-The non- citizens: the large majority of the non-citizens were merchants, traders and craftsmen. Though free, they didn’t have any of the rights enjoyed by the citizens. That is, if a non-citizen stayed in a polis, he would never have the citizenship of this polis.
3-The slaves: one could be taken into slavery once failing to pay back a sum of money he had borrowed. When caught as a thief, a citizen was taken as a slave, and if caught again, he was to be expelled. Plus, the father inside a family had the right to sell any of the family members as a slave.
Government in the Hellas Polis
Each polis had merely one king, with the sole exception of Sparta that had two. Kingship could be hereditary or by election for a limited period of time then, the king was to be elected again by people. The king also could be elected once for his life time, having the duties of leading the army during war, running the polis' affaires, summoning citizens for voting on important issues and leading them during the official worship. In some polises, the noblemen expelled the king and took over his office, and therefore were called tyrants.
Religion in the Hellenic polis
As much as religion was concerned, Greeks were very tolerant believing that any element in life had a spirit, therefore; minor deities for all elements of life rose. However, there were also universal deities and Zeus was the king of gods. These universal deities were known as the Olympic Gods because they used to dwell on the top of the mountain Columbus. All Greek gods and goddesses were represented in human form acting like human beings, yet, they were different from the human beings in two main points: A-They enjoyed superpower and extraordinary abilities. B-They were immortals. Worship wasn’t a private affair in Ancient Hellas, so each polis had only one altar around which citizens gathered.
Greek Gods and Goddesses
1-Zeus: for the Greeks, Zeus was the King of Gods whose voice was the thunder and his messengers to the human beings were the rainbow and the eagles.
2-Hera: representing the motherly virtue, Hera was the wife of Zeus.
3- Poesidon: he was a brother of god Zeus and the god of the sea.
4-Artemis: she was the goddess of wood and hunting.
5- Hermes: he was the messenger of the deities and he led the deceased to the after life.
6-Appolo: he represented man's virtues and beauty.
7-Dionysis: he was the god of wine and celebration.
8- Aphrodite: created from the sea foam, Aphrodite was the goddess of love and beauty of woman.
9-Haphaestus: he was the god of industries and black smiths.
10-Hades: he was the god of the afterlife (and the afterlife was thus called Hades. ( The Ancient Greeks believed a sea separated between the world and the afterlife, therefore; the soul of the deceased should be ferried across by a ferry man called Charon.
The Rise of Hellas Kingdom
Bigger in size, Macedonia was situated to the northwest of Hellas as a united country ruled by a sole king. Macedonia was famous for its good quality wood so, the Greeks imported wood from there to build ships and as a result Macedonia was the only foreign country invited to the Olympic Games. The Macedonian people spoke a different accent of the Greek language never considering themselves Greeks and the Greeks never considered them Greeks because they were less cultured and civilized than the Greeks. Macedonia was also less developed than Hellas. However, the first Macedonian family claimed itself of Greek origin but the Greeks refused such a claim, so the first known Macedonian king (Alexander) claimed that he was a descendant of god Zeus.
Alexander II ruled for a short period and since he was childless, he was followed by his brother. Predicass ruled for a limited number of years but he had a son called Amyntas III who was still a minor king so he was placed under the regency of his uncle Philip II.
After a short period of time, he killed his nephew Amyntas III and claimed himself as king in 359BC. When aging 17 years, he fell in captivity for 3 years in the polis of Thebes as a prisoner of war. During his stay in Thebes, he noted that the Greeks were more advanced than his own people. One of his dreams was to make Macedonia as advanced as Hellas, so he studied the new military technique which was called phalanxes. After being freed, he became the king of Macedonia. He decided to build a strong army and to train the army in the phalanx technique.
The main dream of Philip II was to unite the Greek polises (cities) under his leadership, the leadership of Macedonia to fight the Persians who were their common enemy. In order to achieve his dream he followed 3 main means:- 1-The political mean: he sent messengers to all the Greek polises calling on them to join him in the wars against Persia, but only very few cities accepted his offer. 2-The bribery mean: By using this means, a large number of cities joined Macedonia. 3-The military mean: he declared war against the polis which refused to join Macedonia by the first 2 means and he succeeded in defeating them by force, and finally he succeeded in uniting the Greek cities under the leadership of Macedonia. He prepared a joint army of Greeks and Macedonians that was ready to start to fight the Persians. Before his departure, he decided that his daughter should marry, and during her wedding, one of his army officers killed him for a personal dispute in 336BC.
Philip II was married to a Greek princess (called Olympus) who was rough-natured, so they were not on good terms. She gave him children among whom was Alexander III. With the advance of time, their relationship deteriorated and the children sided with their mother. So the relationship between Alexander and Philip II (his father) was tense. However, Philip II provided his son, Alexander III with the best military training and brought Aristotle to be his personal tutor as he provided his son with the best education. When the relationship between them became very bad, Philip exiled some of Alexander's friends outside Macedonia believing that they were the reason for this bad relationship.
Among these friends was Ptolemy, son of Lagos, who was brought up with Alexander in the royal palace and was 10 years older than him. When Alexander III became the king of Macedonia, he asked his friend Ptolemy to return back to Macedonia and appointed him as an officer in the army. Ptolemy, son of Lagos, proved his ability and became one of the 7 top generals of the army who were the bodyguards of Alexander III.
Alexander III (Alexander the Great)
He was born in 356 BC and became the king of Macedonia in 336 BC at the age of twenty. He had a fair complexion and had the figure of a real athlete as he received the best military training and education. As soon as he became the King of Macedonia, he reduced taxes on the Macedonian people promising them that he would follow the political system of his father, Philip II. He summoned the Greek polises to meet him to renew their loyalty for him but some Greek cities – led by Sparta – refused to meet him. Before taking any decision against them, on the borders of Macedonia, a trouble had broken out by the semi-private tribes, Ghol.
After preparing the army, Alexander III defeated them and restored law and order. During his fight against these tribes, rumors spread in Greece that Alexander, the Great was killed. Such rumors arouse a number of Greek polises – headed by Thebes – to revolt against Macedonia. When Alexander III returned to his capital and knew about the Greek revolution, he marched with his army very fast until he reached Thebes and surrounded it. He asked the polis to surrender and to join Macedonia once more, but the citizens refused. With their refusal, he didn’t wait; rather, he attacked the polis without giving any chance for his army to have a rest. By morning, all men were killed and both women and children were taken as slaves. He destroyed the whole city with the exception of its temples. When the news of Thebes reached the other Greek polises, they declared their loyalty for Alexander, the Great. Once more, he prepared a joint army of Macedonian and Greeks headed by him and went towards eastwards to fight the Persians in 334 BC. The first encounter between Alexander III and the Persians was a battle near a river called Eranicus in Asia Minor. The Persian army was led by a Persian satrap. After a short-timed battle, Alexander III defeated the Persian army and defeated their forces towards Persia. Then, the news reached Alexander III about the presence of another Persian army at Issus on the northern Syrian coast under the command of the Persian king. So Alexander III moved with his army to Issus meeting for the second time with another Persian army. After a fierce battle, he succeeded in defeating the Persian army and the defeated forces escaped to Persia. At this time Alexander had two options to choose from:
1- To follow the defeated Persian army in order to finish it off before getting improved.
2-To occupy the east of the Mediterranean Sea and Egypt to prevent the strong Persian fleet there from receiving orders or supplies and thus, this fleet could be defeated without having to fight them.
Alexander chose the second option by occupying the east of the Mediterranean Sea and continuing his march to Egypt in 332 BC. Egypt at that time was under the 7-year second Persian occupation. The Egyptian welcomed the arrival of Alexander the Great believing that he came to help them getting out of the Persian occupation but Alexander III had another idea in his mind. He was crowned as the new Pharaoh of Egypt by the priest of god ptah in their famous temple H.t-k3-ptH at Memphis then he decided to consult the famous oracle of god Amun at Siwa Oasis. He followed the Canope branch of the Nile until he reached the Mediterranean Sea then headed west to Marsa Matrouh and south to Siwa Oasis. Reaching the Mediterranean Sea, he noticed the strategy of the site of the Ancient Egyptian village that was located there so he ordered his chief architect, Dinocratis, to build a new city carrying his name and so the city of Alexandria was found. Then he reached Siwa Oasis and consulted the oracle of Amon. He sent a letter to his mother Olympius telling her that she would be the first one to know what Amon told him. Alexander the Great never returned back to Memphis and he appointed Clemenes (a Greek banker) from Naucratis a chief administrator of Egypt. Alexander III left Egypt and continued his conquest against the Persian Empire that he succeeded to demolish.
Alexander the Great married to a Persian princess called Roxona. On the night of his wedding, 5000-9000 Greek and Macedonian officers and soldiers married to Eastern women, among them was Ptolemy, Son of Lagos. This night is known in the history as the great wedding night. Alexander III continued his conquest until he reached the Indian borders but his army refused to proceed any further, so; he was forced to retreat back. On his way back at Babylon, he fell in suffering from swamp fever. After a short period of the illness, Alexander III died in 13th of June 323 BC, leaving behind him his pregnant wife, Roxona, and his half brother, Phillip Arthemidis.
After the death of Alexander the Great, his army's leaders decided to hold a conference (which is known as the Babylon conference) to decide the future of the newly created empire. After a long debate, they reached the following decisions:
1- Alexander III's body should be mummified.
2-His mummy should be buried at Pella, the capital of Macedonia.
3-Pella should be the capital of the new empire.
4- Alexander III should be succeeded by his half brother, Phillip Arthemides, and his son (if Roxona gave birth to a baby boy).
In fact three months later, Roxona gave birth to a baby boy called Alexander IV. 5-Minor kings should be under the regency of the army's oldest ruler who was called Predicass. The countries of the Empire were divided among the other leaders of the army to rule them as satraps in the name of the family of Alexander the Great.
You can get more information here. | <urn:uuid:48ee6d98-4f62-4aa8-80ee-a0348f5305b6> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://egyptopia.com/en/articles/Egypt/Greek-History-of-Egypt.s.29.13256/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250613416.54/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123191130-20200123220130-00272.warc.gz | en | 0.988416 | 3,690 | 3.65625 | 4 | [
0.02246774733066559,
0.19850695133209229,
0.28704285621643066,
-0.4038260579109192,
-0.474380761384964,
-0.8074524402618408,
-0.06450910121202469,
0.2741028666496277,
-0.1613367795944214,
-0.12844887375831604,
0.006017135456204414,
-0.7205072641372681,
-0.21536597609519958,
0.1839230060577... | 4 | The Greek called their country and themselves, Hellenes. With the arrival of the Romans, they called themselves Gracias. The Greeks were not the natives of Hellas, and there were other people who were called the (Protogreeks). They had dark skin and black or brown hair with brown or black eyes. Their origin is not known but they immigrated to Greece in 2200 BC and they lived there for several centuries until they made a civilization called the Mycenaean civilization in 1400 BC. The Mycenaean Civilization had many centers (such as Macedonia, Argos and Daphne). Their civilization lasted for 200 years, until a sudden death in 1200BC. At this point, the history of the Greeks begins with the Sea People (Dorians) invasion. The Dorian might have come from Central Europe.
Dates in the Greek history:
1-The Greek Dark Ages extended from 1200BC to 800/750 BC .We did not find any thing dating back to this period.
2-The Archaic period took place from 800 /759 to 550 /500 BC .the Greek history began when they invented the writing and the basics of their civilization.
3-The Hellenic Period extended from 550/500 to 334/323/305BC. In 334 BC, Alexander, the Great left Macedonia to go eastwards with the aim of fighting the Persians. In 323 BC, Alexander, the Great died. The year 305 BC is known in history as the year of kings as when Alexander, the Great died leaving his empire to his generals without an heir, his generals or leaders divided his empire between them and Egypt was taken by Ptolemy I).
4-The Hellenistic Period extended from 334/323/305 to 31 BC. It began with the Roman leader, Octavious, defeating Cleopatra and joining Egypt to his empire, the Roman Empire, in 27 BC (the time of Alexander the Great, to 31 BC, the time of the Roman conquest of the Eastern Mediterranean).
The Sea People
Between 1000 and 500B.C, people living around the Mediterranean Sea became civilized. They organized themselves into city-states. Three of these people came to have particular significance, namely the Carthaginians, the Etruscans and the Hellenes. Each of the Sea People developed independently, with individual characteristics of living that grew out of their geographical and historical circumstances. The Hellenes were particularly fortune as they were close enough to the civilized East to be in touch with it.
The Hellenes were a mixed people descending from two main groups of ancestors who differed physically and culturally. One branch came from the Bronze Age Sea People, including people of Crete, Cyprus and Phoenicia, most of whom had a delicate small bone structure, coppery skin that easily took on brownish-red tones when exposed to the Sun and wide dark eyes.
The other ancestral group was the IndoEuropean people including the Dorians and the Ionians.
1-The Dorians: they were the original invaders who refused to mix with the native people (the Protogreeks) and kept their race. They were blond with blue eyes. They were good warriors and their most famous city was Sparta.
2-The Ionians: they were the Dorians who married from the Protogreeks. They were dark-skinned with black or brown eyes and hair. Compared with the Dorians, they were more and their most famous city was Athens.
Greece is divided into two distinct parts separated by a narrow strip of land known as Isthmus of Corinth. The southern portion was known as Pelephesseus and the Northern as Attica. Greece was not a united country but it consisted of several cities called 'Polis' which means 'a city-state'. The number of citizens in the polis should not be less than 5000 to 10000 persons, with the exception of Athens the population of which reached 20000 citizens.
Though all were Greeks, people of the polis can be divided into 3 main categories:
1-The citizens: they were the natives who were born in the polis. They enjoyed their own freedom on the condition that they avoid threatening the polis' safety and if this condition was broken, punishment would be what they reaped. Besides, they enjoyed many rights, the most important of which were as follows:
A- The right of voting: the king of any polis couldn’t take any decision before the acceptance of his people through voting. Afterwards, the king had to do what people chose, even if it was against his desire.
B- The right of joining the army during the war: if any one refused, he would be turned to a slave.
C-Paying taxes: resembling privilege, taxes were not paid in the form of money but everyone was responsible for undertaking something, a person might be responsible, for example, for building a temple. D-Participation in the official worship of the city: each city had an altar around which citizens gathered in the city's official ceremony.
2-The non- citizens: the large majority of the non-citizens were merchants, traders and craftsmen. Though free, they didn’t have any of the rights enjoyed by the citizens. That is, if a non-citizen stayed in a polis, he would never have the citizenship of this polis.
3-The slaves: one could be taken into slavery once failing to pay back a sum of money he had borrowed. When caught as a thief, a citizen was taken as a slave, and if caught again, he was to be expelled. Plus, the father inside a family had the right to sell any of the family members as a slave.
Government in the Hellas Polis
Each polis had merely one king, with the sole exception of Sparta that had two. Kingship could be hereditary or by election for a limited period of time then, the king was to be elected again by people. The king also could be elected once for his life time, having the duties of leading the army during war, running the polis' affaires, summoning citizens for voting on important issues and leading them during the official worship. In some polises, the noblemen expelled the king and took over his office, and therefore were called tyrants.
Religion in the Hellenic polis
As much as religion was concerned, Greeks were very tolerant believing that any element in life had a spirit, therefore; minor deities for all elements of life rose. However, there were also universal deities and Zeus was the king of gods. These universal deities were known as the Olympic Gods because they used to dwell on the top of the mountain Columbus. All Greek gods and goddesses were represented in human form acting like human beings, yet, they were different from the human beings in two main points: A-They enjoyed superpower and extraordinary abilities. B-They were immortals. Worship wasn’t a private affair in Ancient Hellas, so each polis had only one altar around which citizens gathered.
Greek Gods and Goddesses
1-Zeus: for the Greeks, Zeus was the King of Gods whose voice was the thunder and his messengers to the human beings were the rainbow and the eagles.
2-Hera: representing the motherly virtue, Hera was the wife of Zeus.
3- Poesidon: he was a brother of god Zeus and the god of the sea.
4-Artemis: she was the goddess of wood and hunting.
5- Hermes: he was the messenger of the deities and he led the deceased to the after life.
6-Appolo: he represented man's virtues and beauty.
7-Dionysis: he was the god of wine and celebration.
8- Aphrodite: created from the sea foam, Aphrodite was the goddess of love and beauty of woman.
9-Haphaestus: he was the god of industries and black smiths.
10-Hades: he was the god of the afterlife (and the afterlife was thus called Hades. ( The Ancient Greeks believed a sea separated between the world and the afterlife, therefore; the soul of the deceased should be ferried across by a ferry man called Charon.
The Rise of Hellas Kingdom
Bigger in size, Macedonia was situated to the northwest of Hellas as a united country ruled by a sole king. Macedonia was famous for its good quality wood so, the Greeks imported wood from there to build ships and as a result Macedonia was the only foreign country invited to the Olympic Games. The Macedonian people spoke a different accent of the Greek language never considering themselves Greeks and the Greeks never considered them Greeks because they were less cultured and civilized than the Greeks. Macedonia was also less developed than Hellas. However, the first Macedonian family claimed itself of Greek origin but the Greeks refused such a claim, so the first known Macedonian king (Alexander) claimed that he was a descendant of god Zeus.
Alexander II ruled for a short period and since he was childless, he was followed by his brother. Predicass ruled for a limited number of years but he had a son called Amyntas III who was still a minor king so he was placed under the regency of his uncle Philip II.
After a short period of time, he killed his nephew Amyntas III and claimed himself as king in 359BC. When aging 17 years, he fell in captivity for 3 years in the polis of Thebes as a prisoner of war. During his stay in Thebes, he noted that the Greeks were more advanced than his own people. One of his dreams was to make Macedonia as advanced as Hellas, so he studied the new military technique which was called phalanxes. After being freed, he became the king of Macedonia. He decided to build a strong army and to train the army in the phalanx technique.
The main dream of Philip II was to unite the Greek polises (cities) under his leadership, the leadership of Macedonia to fight the Persians who were their common enemy. In order to achieve his dream he followed 3 main means:- 1-The political mean: he sent messengers to all the Greek polises calling on them to join him in the wars against Persia, but only very few cities accepted his offer. 2-The bribery mean: By using this means, a large number of cities joined Macedonia. 3-The military mean: he declared war against the polis which refused to join Macedonia by the first 2 means and he succeeded in defeating them by force, and finally he succeeded in uniting the Greek cities under the leadership of Macedonia. He prepared a joint army of Greeks and Macedonians that was ready to start to fight the Persians. Before his departure, he decided that his daughter should marry, and during her wedding, one of his army officers killed him for a personal dispute in 336BC.
Philip II was married to a Greek princess (called Olympus) who was rough-natured, so they were not on good terms. She gave him children among whom was Alexander III. With the advance of time, their relationship deteriorated and the children sided with their mother. So the relationship between Alexander and Philip II (his father) was tense. However, Philip II provided his son, Alexander III with the best military training and brought Aristotle to be his personal tutor as he provided his son with the best education. When the relationship between them became very bad, Philip exiled some of Alexander's friends outside Macedonia believing that they were the reason for this bad relationship.
Among these friends was Ptolemy, son of Lagos, who was brought up with Alexander in the royal palace and was 10 years older than him. When Alexander III became the king of Macedonia, he asked his friend Ptolemy to return back to Macedonia and appointed him as an officer in the army. Ptolemy, son of Lagos, proved his ability and became one of the 7 top generals of the army who were the bodyguards of Alexander III.
Alexander III (Alexander the Great)
He was born in 356 BC and became the king of Macedonia in 336 BC at the age of twenty. He had a fair complexion and had the figure of a real athlete as he received the best military training and education. As soon as he became the King of Macedonia, he reduced taxes on the Macedonian people promising them that he would follow the political system of his father, Philip II. He summoned the Greek polises to meet him to renew their loyalty for him but some Greek cities – led by Sparta – refused to meet him. Before taking any decision against them, on the borders of Macedonia, a trouble had broken out by the semi-private tribes, Ghol.
After preparing the army, Alexander III defeated them and restored law and order. During his fight against these tribes, rumors spread in Greece that Alexander, the Great was killed. Such rumors arouse a number of Greek polises – headed by Thebes – to revolt against Macedonia. When Alexander III returned to his capital and knew about the Greek revolution, he marched with his army very fast until he reached Thebes and surrounded it. He asked the polis to surrender and to join Macedonia once more, but the citizens refused. With their refusal, he didn’t wait; rather, he attacked the polis without giving any chance for his army to have a rest. By morning, all men were killed and both women and children were taken as slaves. He destroyed the whole city with the exception of its temples. When the news of Thebes reached the other Greek polises, they declared their loyalty for Alexander, the Great. Once more, he prepared a joint army of Macedonian and Greeks headed by him and went towards eastwards to fight the Persians in 334 BC. The first encounter between Alexander III and the Persians was a battle near a river called Eranicus in Asia Minor. The Persian army was led by a Persian satrap. After a short-timed battle, Alexander III defeated the Persian army and defeated their forces towards Persia. Then, the news reached Alexander III about the presence of another Persian army at Issus on the northern Syrian coast under the command of the Persian king. So Alexander III moved with his army to Issus meeting for the second time with another Persian army. After a fierce battle, he succeeded in defeating the Persian army and the defeated forces escaped to Persia. At this time Alexander had two options to choose from:
1- To follow the defeated Persian army in order to finish it off before getting improved.
2-To occupy the east of the Mediterranean Sea and Egypt to prevent the strong Persian fleet there from receiving orders or supplies and thus, this fleet could be defeated without having to fight them.
Alexander chose the second option by occupying the east of the Mediterranean Sea and continuing his march to Egypt in 332 BC. Egypt at that time was under the 7-year second Persian occupation. The Egyptian welcomed the arrival of Alexander the Great believing that he came to help them getting out of the Persian occupation but Alexander III had another idea in his mind. He was crowned as the new Pharaoh of Egypt by the priest of god ptah in their famous temple H.t-k3-ptH at Memphis then he decided to consult the famous oracle of god Amun at Siwa Oasis. He followed the Canope branch of the Nile until he reached the Mediterranean Sea then headed west to Marsa Matrouh and south to Siwa Oasis. Reaching the Mediterranean Sea, he noticed the strategy of the site of the Ancient Egyptian village that was located there so he ordered his chief architect, Dinocratis, to build a new city carrying his name and so the city of Alexandria was found. Then he reached Siwa Oasis and consulted the oracle of Amon. He sent a letter to his mother Olympius telling her that she would be the first one to know what Amon told him. Alexander the Great never returned back to Memphis and he appointed Clemenes (a Greek banker) from Naucratis a chief administrator of Egypt. Alexander III left Egypt and continued his conquest against the Persian Empire that he succeeded to demolish.
Alexander the Great married to a Persian princess called Roxona. On the night of his wedding, 5000-9000 Greek and Macedonian officers and soldiers married to Eastern women, among them was Ptolemy, Son of Lagos. This night is known in the history as the great wedding night. Alexander III continued his conquest until he reached the Indian borders but his army refused to proceed any further, so; he was forced to retreat back. On his way back at Babylon, he fell in suffering from swamp fever. After a short period of the illness, Alexander III died in 13th of June 323 BC, leaving behind him his pregnant wife, Roxona, and his half brother, Phillip Arthemidis.
After the death of Alexander the Great, his army's leaders decided to hold a conference (which is known as the Babylon conference) to decide the future of the newly created empire. After a long debate, they reached the following decisions:
1- Alexander III's body should be mummified.
2-His mummy should be buried at Pella, the capital of Macedonia.
3-Pella should be the capital of the new empire.
4- Alexander III should be succeeded by his half brother, Phillip Arthemides, and his son (if Roxona gave birth to a baby boy).
In fact three months later, Roxona gave birth to a baby boy called Alexander IV. 5-Minor kings should be under the regency of the army's oldest ruler who was called Predicass. The countries of the Empire were divided among the other leaders of the army to rule them as satraps in the name of the family of Alexander the Great.
You can get more information here. | 3,746 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Medical practice in ancient Egypt was so developed that many of the observations and routine procedures the Western world could not surpass for centuries after the fall of the Roman Empire. It was ancient Egyptian medicine that became a source of knowledge for doctors of ancient Greece and Rome.
The Egyptians understood that the disease can be treated with pharmaceuticals, recognized the therapeutic potential of massage and aromatherapy, attached great importance to purity in the treatment of patients.
The fact that bacteria and bacteria can become a source of diseases and infections Known even after the invention of the microscope – only in the XIX century, when this theory was confirmed by Louis Pasteur and proved by the work of the British surgeon Joseph Lister. However, even before their statements, Hungarian physician Ignaz Semmelweis in the XIX century suggested that doctors can reduce the death rate among patients by simply washing their hands before examination or an operation.
The ancient Egyptians would certainly agree with the idea of Semmelweis, since they highly appreciated the purity. In Ancient Egypt, mortality after medical procedures was probably less than in any European hospital during the Christian era.
The Egyptians were well aware of how to cope with injuries, but with illnesses everything was much more complicated. When a person is injured, it is easy to trace the cause and effect, and then cure. However, when a person is sick, the cause is less clear, and diagnosis was a big problem.
The cause of the disease was usually understood as the consequence of sin or the attack of demons. Therefore, the first “doctors” tried to save the patient from the ailment by casting spells. In addition, amulets, offerings to the gods, tattoos and statuettes designed to drive away evil spirits or soothe the gods that caused the disease went into the process.
Since that time, many papyri surviving spells have been preserved. In some of them you can find and practical ways of treatment. For example, a papyrus dating from 1200 BC, prescribes the use of marijuana for cancer patients.
Another papyrus, written by scientists in the years 1570-1069 BC, describes the first-ever methods of contraception and pregnancy tests.
Infectious diseases were widespread in the densely populated Nile Valley. Virtually the entire population of Egypt then lived on a narrow strip of land along the river, which was sometimes only a few hundred meters wide. Diseases could be distinguished depending on the season.
Smallpox, dysentery, typhoid and jaundice most often overtook the Egyptians in spring and summer. Every year, the goddess Isis shed tears for her late husband Osiris, and the water level of the Nile rose from mid-July to September. Together with the fertile mud that helped the Egyptians survive, the river brought with it a specific set of diseases, the main one of which probably was malaria – the main cause of death in late autumn. The cooler weather in the winter favored the onset of respiratory diseases.
One of the most common complaints among the Egyptians were eye infections. We fought with it with the help of bactericidal eye paint and drugs from the human brain. This is how one of the universal recipes looks like, which should have been relieved not only of eye infection, but also of all the problems in the body: “Divide the human brain into two halves, mix half with honey, smear on the eye in the evening. Dry the second half, sift, smear the eye in the morning. ”
Heavy physical labor caused great damage to the joints and bones of workers. Those who lived to be old were victims of the same ailments that older people still suffer: cardiovascular diseases, arthritis and probably dementia.
A limited diet caused or aggravated a number of diseases, and in some cases even led to death. In ancient Egyptian history there were times when famine spread throughout the country. The data of ancient dentistry papyri testify that during most of such periods the health of the population deteriorated significantly, but with more active introduction of agriculture these problems were brought to nothing.
The scanty diet influenced the growth of the Egyptians. The average height of men did not exceed 160 cm, women – 150 cm.
Nothing definite is known about how doctors received their medical knowledge. Historians suggest that after the Egyptian received the profession of a scribe, he became a disciple of a practicing healer. There is also the opinion that the “houses of life” associated with the goddess Sekhmet, the patroness of doctors, were training centers for doctors.
Goddess Sekhmet, bas-relief
Healers in ancient Egypt could be both men and women. The first doctor, later deified, was Imhotep, who combined the writing of medical labors with the construction of the stepped pyramid of Djoser in Sakkara and was also a famous architect.
It was Imhotep who became the ancestor of secular medicine: he claimed that the disease originated in a natural way and was in no way connected with the spirits or revenge of the gods.
Statue of Imhotep
The doctor was supposed to be not only literate, but also a pure soul and body. In Egypt they were called “wabau” – ritually pure: they had to bathe as often and carefully as the high priests.
Each doctor had his own specialty, but there were “suna” – general practitioners, and “sau”, who specialized in magical rituals. Midwives, masseurs, nurses, attendants and visionaries also helped the doctor.
Obstetrics, apparently, was the only female profession in ancient Egypt. After studying medical texts written mostly by men, scientists found that they had a lot of information on gynecology in general, but none described obstetrics. In addition, men have never been portrayed in childbirth scenes.
There are no certificates of medical training for midwives. In the Ancient Kingdom (during the reign of the Pharaohs of the III-VI dynasty), the word “midwife” is associated with nurses who helped the doctor, but after this period the connection between these two professions has been lost. Midwives could be female relatives, friends or neighbors. Apparently, they were not considered medical specialists.
Both men and women could perform the work of nurses. The Egyptians greatly respected the nurses, although, like in the case of midwives, there is nowhere any evidence of school or vocational training. Most of all, nursing nurses were valued.
Women regularly died during childbirth, and in legal documents of that time there were agreements between wet nurses and families about the care of a newborn in the event of the mother’s death. Nurses who helped with the upbringing of children were given such respect that during the New Kingdom (the era of the highest heyday of the ancient Egyptian state) they were associated with the divine.
Ancient Egyptian dentistry grew out of the established medical profession, but it did not develop particularly widely. Ancient Egyptians suffered from dental problems throughout the history of civilization, but why dentists were not enough (or mentioned too seldom), is still not clear.
The first known dentist in the world became Hesire – the chief dentist at the court of Djoser (circa 2700 BC). Problems with the teeth arose mainly because of the consumption of rough bread and the inability to completely remove sand from their food. Dentists used to treat the teeth of honey and herbs, presumably to stop the infection or alleviate the pain. Some mummies have found tooth bridges and gold teeth. It is not known whether they were in the mouth during the life of the owner, or were added in the process of embalming.
The ruler of Hatshepsut (1479 -1458 BC) died of an abscess of the tooth. Such cases were not uncommon among her subjects. It was assumed that toothaches and other problems were caused by a toothworm, which had to be cast out by magical spells. This belief, most likely, arose in Mesopotamia, in particular among the Sumerians, whose cuneiform records found spells against the toothworm.
In addition to magic, Egyptian dentists used the healing power of herbs in their work. So, to rid their patients of bad breath, they prepared chewing gum from honey, cinnamon, myrrh, incense and pignon. There is evidence of tooth extraction with opium used as an anesthetic.
Faith in magic was deeply rooted in Egyptian culture and was considered natural and normal, like any other aspect of life. The god of magic Huck was also the god of medicine. On all the images he carries a staff, entwined with two snakes. This symbol subsequently passed to the Greeks, who associated him with the god of healing Asclepius, who is today known as the caduceus of the medical profession. And although the caduceus, no doubt, traveled from Egypt to Greece, he also appeared in Sumer as the staff of Ninazu, the son of the Sumerian goddess of healing Gul.
In addition to Huck, there were many other important healing gods, such as Sekhmet, Serket (also known as Selket) , Sebek and Nefertum. The Serketa priests were all doctors, although not every doctor was a member of her cult. To Sobek, the god of crocodiles, he was treated during surgical operations and invasive procedures. Nefertum, the god of spirits associated with lotus and healing, was called for in procedures that today would be called aromatherapy.
Pharmaceutical preparations of ancient Egyptian medical priests included antacids, copper salts, turpentine, alum, astringents, alkaline laxatives, diuretics, sedatives, spasmalytics, calcium carbonate and magnesia. The dosage of medicines was carefully prescribed in medical papyri, the way the medicine should be taken orally (for example, with wine or food) was indicated.
Surgical procedures were common, and many instruments of that time in one form or another Are used today. The Egyptians had flint and metal scalpels, pliers, bone saws, probes, catheters, clamps to stop bleeding, speckles, tweezers, vein lancets, sponges, scissors, vials, linen bands and scales for calculating medicinal doses.
Surgical operations were most often successful, as evidenced by mummies and other found remains that survived amputation and even operations on the brain. Also, prostheses, usually carved from a tree, were found.
However, not all medical practices were the same in Egypt. For example, circumcision was a religious ritual in which boys between the ages of 10 and 14 were subjected to surgery, and meant a transition from adolescence to masculine. Usually it was performed by doctors who at the same time were priests of the temple. They used a silicon blade and cast spells, but despite all the precautions, this procedure still sometimes led to infection.
Because the nature of the infection was unknown to the Egyptians, it was considered the result of supernatural influence. This approach, most likely, led to the death of many young people.
Egyptian physicians were in great demand in the Ancient World, despite the fact that, probably, little new knowledge appeared after 2000 BC. Their treatment was based on examination and diagnosis. The description of the case – the most demanding work of a doctor – lasted longer than the diagnosis or recommended treatment.
In general, the treatment was conservative: if the medicine for the disease was unknown, then the doctor took some steps that would not jeopardize the patient’s life or removed the symptoms. For example, some head wounds, which were then considered incurable, were treated with an ointment that prevents infection.
Although the embalmers of Egypt came to understand how the organs they removed from the bodies were related to each other, this knowledge was not shared with the doctors. These two professions developed in completely different directions, and the fact that each of them did work in its direction was not considered relevant for another.
A special attitude among the ancient Egyptians has developed with such an organ of the human body as the heart. In addition to being recognized as a “pump”, the heart was also considered the center of emotions, personality and intellect. For this reason, the hearts of the deceased were preserved, and the brain was scraped and discarded, as a useless organ.
Although they recognized liver disease, the Egyptians did not have an understanding of its functions. In ancient Egypt, regularly engaged in problems of miscarriages and infertility, but the mechanism of these processes were very vague ideas. The support of the whole culture for the supernatural help of the gods prevented the Egyptians from exploring more immediate and practical solutions to the medical problems they faced every day.
Nevertheless, the Egyptian physician was highly respected for his skills and knowledge, was called to the court by pharaohs and Nobles of other nations. The Greeks especially admired the Egyptian doctors, and adopted a number of beliefs and methods from them. Later such famous physicians of Rome and Greece as Galen and Hippocrates studied Egyptian texts and symbols, thus transferring traditions and knowledge to our days. | <urn:uuid:db2627ab-553e-4071-88d6-c29266db6964> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.myviralbox.com/history-of-medicine-egypt-geektimes/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251779833.86/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128153713-20200128183713-00061.warc.gz | en | 0.98096 | 2,718 | 3.71875 | 4 | [
-0.21658974885940552,
0.8803925514221191,
0.4713067412376404,
-0.023963894695043564,
-0.3835577368736267,
-0.12691298127174377,
0.4269537031650543,
0.42180192470550537,
0.048341166228055954,
-0.041103608906269073,
-0.18834781646728516,
-0.49527525901794434,
-0.08846333622932434,
0.18741765... | 2 | Medical practice in ancient Egypt was so developed that many of the observations and routine procedures the Western world could not surpass for centuries after the fall of the Roman Empire. It was ancient Egyptian medicine that became a source of knowledge for doctors of ancient Greece and Rome.
The Egyptians understood that the disease can be treated with pharmaceuticals, recognized the therapeutic potential of massage and aromatherapy, attached great importance to purity in the treatment of patients.
The fact that bacteria and bacteria can become a source of diseases and infections Known even after the invention of the microscope – only in the XIX century, when this theory was confirmed by Louis Pasteur and proved by the work of the British surgeon Joseph Lister. However, even before their statements, Hungarian physician Ignaz Semmelweis in the XIX century suggested that doctors can reduce the death rate among patients by simply washing their hands before examination or an operation.
The ancient Egyptians would certainly agree with the idea of Semmelweis, since they highly appreciated the purity. In Ancient Egypt, mortality after medical procedures was probably less than in any European hospital during the Christian era.
The Egyptians were well aware of how to cope with injuries, but with illnesses everything was much more complicated. When a person is injured, it is easy to trace the cause and effect, and then cure. However, when a person is sick, the cause is less clear, and diagnosis was a big problem.
The cause of the disease was usually understood as the consequence of sin or the attack of demons. Therefore, the first “doctors” tried to save the patient from the ailment by casting spells. In addition, amulets, offerings to the gods, tattoos and statuettes designed to drive away evil spirits or soothe the gods that caused the disease went into the process.
Since that time, many papyri surviving spells have been preserved. In some of them you can find and practical ways of treatment. For example, a papyrus dating from 1200 BC, prescribes the use of marijuana for cancer patients.
Another papyrus, written by scientists in the years 1570-1069 BC, describes the first-ever methods of contraception and pregnancy tests.
Infectious diseases were widespread in the densely populated Nile Valley. Virtually the entire population of Egypt then lived on a narrow strip of land along the river, which was sometimes only a few hundred meters wide. Diseases could be distinguished depending on the season.
Smallpox, dysentery, typhoid and jaundice most often overtook the Egyptians in spring and summer. Every year, the goddess Isis shed tears for her late husband Osiris, and the water level of the Nile rose from mid-July to September. Together with the fertile mud that helped the Egyptians survive, the river brought with it a specific set of diseases, the main one of which probably was malaria – the main cause of death in late autumn. The cooler weather in the winter favored the onset of respiratory diseases.
One of the most common complaints among the Egyptians were eye infections. We fought with it with the help of bactericidal eye paint and drugs from the human brain. This is how one of the universal recipes looks like, which should have been relieved not only of eye infection, but also of all the problems in the body: “Divide the human brain into two halves, mix half with honey, smear on the eye in the evening. Dry the second half, sift, smear the eye in the morning. ”
Heavy physical labor caused great damage to the joints and bones of workers. Those who lived to be old were victims of the same ailments that older people still suffer: cardiovascular diseases, arthritis and probably dementia.
A limited diet caused or aggravated a number of diseases, and in some cases even led to death. In ancient Egyptian history there were times when famine spread throughout the country. The data of ancient dentistry papyri testify that during most of such periods the health of the population deteriorated significantly, but with more active introduction of agriculture these problems were brought to nothing.
The scanty diet influenced the growth of the Egyptians. The average height of men did not exceed 160 cm, women – 150 cm.
Nothing definite is known about how doctors received their medical knowledge. Historians suggest that after the Egyptian received the profession of a scribe, he became a disciple of a practicing healer. There is also the opinion that the “houses of life” associated with the goddess Sekhmet, the patroness of doctors, were training centers for doctors.
Goddess Sekhmet, bas-relief
Healers in ancient Egypt could be both men and women. The first doctor, later deified, was Imhotep, who combined the writing of medical labors with the construction of the stepped pyramid of Djoser in Sakkara and was also a famous architect.
It was Imhotep who became the ancestor of secular medicine: he claimed that the disease originated in a natural way and was in no way connected with the spirits or revenge of the gods.
Statue of Imhotep
The doctor was supposed to be not only literate, but also a pure soul and body. In Egypt they were called “wabau” – ritually pure: they had to bathe as often and carefully as the high priests.
Each doctor had his own specialty, but there were “suna” – general practitioners, and “sau”, who specialized in magical rituals. Midwives, masseurs, nurses, attendants and visionaries also helped the doctor.
Obstetrics, apparently, was the only female profession in ancient Egypt. After studying medical texts written mostly by men, scientists found that they had a lot of information on gynecology in general, but none described obstetrics. In addition, men have never been portrayed in childbirth scenes.
There are no certificates of medical training for midwives. In the Ancient Kingdom (during the reign of the Pharaohs of the III-VI dynasty), the word “midwife” is associated with nurses who helped the doctor, but after this period the connection between these two professions has been lost. Midwives could be female relatives, friends or neighbors. Apparently, they were not considered medical specialists.
Both men and women could perform the work of nurses. The Egyptians greatly respected the nurses, although, like in the case of midwives, there is nowhere any evidence of school or vocational training. Most of all, nursing nurses were valued.
Women regularly died during childbirth, and in legal documents of that time there were agreements between wet nurses and families about the care of a newborn in the event of the mother’s death. Nurses who helped with the upbringing of children were given such respect that during the New Kingdom (the era of the highest heyday of the ancient Egyptian state) they were associated with the divine.
Ancient Egyptian dentistry grew out of the established medical profession, but it did not develop particularly widely. Ancient Egyptians suffered from dental problems throughout the history of civilization, but why dentists were not enough (or mentioned too seldom), is still not clear.
The first known dentist in the world became Hesire – the chief dentist at the court of Djoser (circa 2700 BC). Problems with the teeth arose mainly because of the consumption of rough bread and the inability to completely remove sand from their food. Dentists used to treat the teeth of honey and herbs, presumably to stop the infection or alleviate the pain. Some mummies have found tooth bridges and gold teeth. It is not known whether they were in the mouth during the life of the owner, or were added in the process of embalming.
The ruler of Hatshepsut (1479 -1458 BC) died of an abscess of the tooth. Such cases were not uncommon among her subjects. It was assumed that toothaches and other problems were caused by a toothworm, which had to be cast out by magical spells. This belief, most likely, arose in Mesopotamia, in particular among the Sumerians, whose cuneiform records found spells against the toothworm.
In addition to magic, Egyptian dentists used the healing power of herbs in their work. So, to rid their patients of bad breath, they prepared chewing gum from honey, cinnamon, myrrh, incense and pignon. There is evidence of tooth extraction with opium used as an anesthetic.
Faith in magic was deeply rooted in Egyptian culture and was considered natural and normal, like any other aspect of life. The god of magic Huck was also the god of medicine. On all the images he carries a staff, entwined with two snakes. This symbol subsequently passed to the Greeks, who associated him with the god of healing Asclepius, who is today known as the caduceus of the medical profession. And although the caduceus, no doubt, traveled from Egypt to Greece, he also appeared in Sumer as the staff of Ninazu, the son of the Sumerian goddess of healing Gul.
In addition to Huck, there were many other important healing gods, such as Sekhmet, Serket (also known as Selket) , Sebek and Nefertum. The Serketa priests were all doctors, although not every doctor was a member of her cult. To Sobek, the god of crocodiles, he was treated during surgical operations and invasive procedures. Nefertum, the god of spirits associated with lotus and healing, was called for in procedures that today would be called aromatherapy.
Pharmaceutical preparations of ancient Egyptian medical priests included antacids, copper salts, turpentine, alum, astringents, alkaline laxatives, diuretics, sedatives, spasmalytics, calcium carbonate and magnesia. The dosage of medicines was carefully prescribed in medical papyri, the way the medicine should be taken orally (for example, with wine or food) was indicated.
Surgical procedures were common, and many instruments of that time in one form or another Are used today. The Egyptians had flint and metal scalpels, pliers, bone saws, probes, catheters, clamps to stop bleeding, speckles, tweezers, vein lancets, sponges, scissors, vials, linen bands and scales for calculating medicinal doses.
Surgical operations were most often successful, as evidenced by mummies and other found remains that survived amputation and even operations on the brain. Also, prostheses, usually carved from a tree, were found.
However, not all medical practices were the same in Egypt. For example, circumcision was a religious ritual in which boys between the ages of 10 and 14 were subjected to surgery, and meant a transition from adolescence to masculine. Usually it was performed by doctors who at the same time were priests of the temple. They used a silicon blade and cast spells, but despite all the precautions, this procedure still sometimes led to infection.
Because the nature of the infection was unknown to the Egyptians, it was considered the result of supernatural influence. This approach, most likely, led to the death of many young people.
Egyptian physicians were in great demand in the Ancient World, despite the fact that, probably, little new knowledge appeared after 2000 BC. Their treatment was based on examination and diagnosis. The description of the case – the most demanding work of a doctor – lasted longer than the diagnosis or recommended treatment.
In general, the treatment was conservative: if the medicine for the disease was unknown, then the doctor took some steps that would not jeopardize the patient’s life or removed the symptoms. For example, some head wounds, which were then considered incurable, were treated with an ointment that prevents infection.
Although the embalmers of Egypt came to understand how the organs they removed from the bodies were related to each other, this knowledge was not shared with the doctors. These two professions developed in completely different directions, and the fact that each of them did work in its direction was not considered relevant for another.
A special attitude among the ancient Egyptians has developed with such an organ of the human body as the heart. In addition to being recognized as a “pump”, the heart was also considered the center of emotions, personality and intellect. For this reason, the hearts of the deceased were preserved, and the brain was scraped and discarded, as a useless organ.
Although they recognized liver disease, the Egyptians did not have an understanding of its functions. In ancient Egypt, regularly engaged in problems of miscarriages and infertility, but the mechanism of these processes were very vague ideas. The support of the whole culture for the supernatural help of the gods prevented the Egyptians from exploring more immediate and practical solutions to the medical problems they faced every day.
Nevertheless, the Egyptian physician was highly respected for his skills and knowledge, was called to the court by pharaohs and Nobles of other nations. The Greeks especially admired the Egyptian doctors, and adopted a number of beliefs and methods from them. Later such famous physicians of Rome and Greece as Galen and Hippocrates studied Egyptian texts and symbols, thus transferring traditions and knowledge to our days. | 2,686 | ENGLISH | 1 |
He was born in the small city of Urbino in the Italian Marches, where his father Giovanni was court painter. Raphael must have begun his training there. Growing up, he would have known works by Mantegna, Uccello, Piero della Francesca and Signorelli. His earliest paintings were also greatly influenced by Perugino.
From 1500 – when he became an independent master – until 1508, Raphael worked throughout central Italy, particularly in Florence. He became a noted portraitist and painter of Madonnas. This, and his personal charm, brought him early fame. In 1508 Raphael was called to Rome, to work for Pope Julius II. Here he evolved into an artist of universal talents, as successful as an architect and designer as a painter. He died in Rome in 1520, aged only 37. | <urn:uuid:f9fcd0bd-a2db-44d7-8ca4-d643bb369fcc> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/visiting/floorplans/level-2/room-61 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250603761.28/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121103642-20200121132642-00420.warc.gz | en | 0.995872 | 173 | 3.453125 | 3 | [
-0.010588928125798702,
0.1979360580444336,
0.2868342995643616,
-0.08548715710639954,
-0.6080037951469421,
0.5579295754432678,
0.33425942063331604,
-0.045177310705184937,
0.17757253348827362,
-0.17821039259433746,
-0.24734154343605042,
-0.34557560086250305,
0.21116836369037628,
0.3883855938... | 1 | He was born in the small city of Urbino in the Italian Marches, where his father Giovanni was court painter. Raphael must have begun his training there. Growing up, he would have known works by Mantegna, Uccello, Piero della Francesca and Signorelli. His earliest paintings were also greatly influenced by Perugino.
From 1500 – when he became an independent master – until 1508, Raphael worked throughout central Italy, particularly in Florence. He became a noted portraitist and painter of Madonnas. This, and his personal charm, brought him early fame. In 1508 Raphael was called to Rome, to work for Pope Julius II. Here he evolved into an artist of universal talents, as successful as an architect and designer as a painter. He died in Rome in 1520, aged only 37. | 184 | ENGLISH | 1 |
In the construction industry, it’s safe to say that women are underrepresented. Even when compared to traditionally male dominated sectors, women have yet to break through in many areas of construction. Just 9% of U.S. construction workers are female. I find it disturbing that as an industry we miss out on this huge pool of talent. Let’s look back on some of the powerful women in history that helped to pave the way for the women today who want to be given a chance.
Emily Roebline (1834-1903)
The first woman field engineer is credited for her role in the completion of the Brooklyn bridge. She took on the project after her husband who was leading the project became bed-ridden from developing caisson disease. She was the supervisor and took over the planning. Upon completion, she was named as the Chief Engineer of the Brooklyn Bridge. Her work in this highly technical engineering feat helped create empowerment that women could perform in areas outside of the factories that were common in those days.
Lillian Gilbreth (1878-1972)
Known as the woman of modern management, Lillian Gilbreth had the education, the career, and 12 children of her own. This mother applied herself to a scientific approach to workplace efficiency and management. She was a government consultant during the Great Depression and WWII, able to apply creative solutions to complex problems. She invented shelving in refrigerator doors and the foot-pedal garbage can. For construction, her application of science to the workplace streamlined processes and helped increase productivity.
Mary Kenney O’Sullivan (1864-1943)
This American labor leader worked tirelessly to improve factory conditions through the organization of unions. Starting out in the 1800’s as an apprentice dressmaker, she took her distaste for the bad conditions in factories to eventually become the founder of the Women’s Trade Union League. She brought together professional, affluent, and working women to improve conditions for women in factories. She was a factory inspector in a government branch from 1914 until she retired in 1934. Her work in unions has helped women in construction to this day find support and representation.
Working her way through the ranks of the Associated General Contractors of America, Kris Young served as President in 2011. In her Iowa chapter, she started as Treasurer in 1992 and worked to become President of the chapter, a title which she held for many years. She was also the President and CEO of Miller the Driller in Des Moines, Iowa. Young was one woman that we can say can juggle it all. She has a strong connection to her Church, engages in hobbies that included gardening and scrapbooking, and continues to push for employee rights with her work in many committees such as the Labor Policy Committee and the EEO/DBE Advisory Council. She has over 40 years in the business.
Frances Perkins (1880-1965)
Frances Perkins was FDR’s Secretary of Labor and first woman to serve as cabinet secretary. This self-made woman credits her grandmother for her power, and is quoted saying that “being a woman has only bothered me in climbing trees”. Yes, she never let anything stop her from pushing for benefits for the construction industry. She defended the minimum wage and helped develop the Fair Labor Standards Act. Her work in government illustrated a determination not only break new ground, but excel at her endeavors.
Who is an important woman in your life? No doubt we all can think of many. Never underestimate their influence and reach. It would be a loss on any business to count them out. So, lift up, trust, and empower the women in your life to keep pushing through. For construction, the jobs are there. Get your OSHA 10 or 30 training and get to work! | <urn:uuid:bdef06a9-af7d-46dd-9861-cfdf1f82dfc9> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.360training.com/blog/a-history-of-powerful-women-in-construction/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250595787.7/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119234426-20200120022426-00554.warc.gz | en | 0.981613 | 776 | 3.609375 | 4 | [
-0.27574723958969116,
0.2514590919017792,
0.21569272875785828,
0.4037811756134033,
-0.2874316871166229,
0.21660467982292175,
0.1503784954547882,
0.07003723829984665,
-0.2605467736721039,
-0.08200232684612274,
-0.018811741843819618,
-0.1905517280101776,
0.11029976606369019,
0.13350287079811... | 2 | In the construction industry, it’s safe to say that women are underrepresented. Even when compared to traditionally male dominated sectors, women have yet to break through in many areas of construction. Just 9% of U.S. construction workers are female. I find it disturbing that as an industry we miss out on this huge pool of talent. Let’s look back on some of the powerful women in history that helped to pave the way for the women today who want to be given a chance.
Emily Roebline (1834-1903)
The first woman field engineer is credited for her role in the completion of the Brooklyn bridge. She took on the project after her husband who was leading the project became bed-ridden from developing caisson disease. She was the supervisor and took over the planning. Upon completion, she was named as the Chief Engineer of the Brooklyn Bridge. Her work in this highly technical engineering feat helped create empowerment that women could perform in areas outside of the factories that were common in those days.
Lillian Gilbreth (1878-1972)
Known as the woman of modern management, Lillian Gilbreth had the education, the career, and 12 children of her own. This mother applied herself to a scientific approach to workplace efficiency and management. She was a government consultant during the Great Depression and WWII, able to apply creative solutions to complex problems. She invented shelving in refrigerator doors and the foot-pedal garbage can. For construction, her application of science to the workplace streamlined processes and helped increase productivity.
Mary Kenney O’Sullivan (1864-1943)
This American labor leader worked tirelessly to improve factory conditions through the organization of unions. Starting out in the 1800’s as an apprentice dressmaker, she took her distaste for the bad conditions in factories to eventually become the founder of the Women’s Trade Union League. She brought together professional, affluent, and working women to improve conditions for women in factories. She was a factory inspector in a government branch from 1914 until she retired in 1934. Her work in unions has helped women in construction to this day find support and representation.
Working her way through the ranks of the Associated General Contractors of America, Kris Young served as President in 2011. In her Iowa chapter, she started as Treasurer in 1992 and worked to become President of the chapter, a title which she held for many years. She was also the President and CEO of Miller the Driller in Des Moines, Iowa. Young was one woman that we can say can juggle it all. She has a strong connection to her Church, engages in hobbies that included gardening and scrapbooking, and continues to push for employee rights with her work in many committees such as the Labor Policy Committee and the EEO/DBE Advisory Council. She has over 40 years in the business.
Frances Perkins (1880-1965)
Frances Perkins was FDR’s Secretary of Labor and first woman to serve as cabinet secretary. This self-made woman credits her grandmother for her power, and is quoted saying that “being a woman has only bothered me in climbing trees”. Yes, she never let anything stop her from pushing for benefits for the construction industry. She defended the minimum wage and helped develop the Fair Labor Standards Act. Her work in government illustrated a determination not only break new ground, but excel at her endeavors.
Who is an important woman in your life? No doubt we all can think of many. Never underestimate their influence and reach. It would be a loss on any business to count them out. So, lift up, trust, and empower the women in your life to keep pushing through. For construction, the jobs are there. Get your OSHA 10 or 30 training and get to work! | 796 | ENGLISH | 1 |
From available literature, it appears that Renaissance dramatists did not create a variety of female roles. This is explained by a few factors. First of all, women were seen as ‘others’ in the times of Shakespeare. Literature exploring that period of theatre development mentions women roles as ‘others’ on stage along with the roles of bastards, homosexuals, or foreigners. It still remains unclear why. That was the society of men, where everything was for men. It means that women were in the periphery as the part of the society whose perspective or interest was not important. Despite the fact there were many females among the audience, on the stage most roles were male.
Buy Is it true to say that Renaissance dramatists created a variety of roles for women? essay paper online
Secondly, lack of female roles could probably be attributed to the fact that a woman on the stage was considered something indecent and all roles were created to be played by boys anyway. Young males wore wigs and dresses and performed the roles of women so that the women’s chastity was not compromised. Yet, knowing that boys would perform the roles may have prevented playwrights from elaborating female roles in their plays. Indeed, however good a young man might perform, he lacked femininity and would seem not that natural.
Thirdly, Renaissance dramatists did not create many female roles since women were excluded from the stage, which was probably also because women did not have enough oratorical training. Also, the morality of the patriarchal society was so harsh that by creating diverse roles of women, depicted in various (comic) situations, playwrights risked coming into a lot of criticism.
Besides, it may have been the Puritan-based and ideal vision of a woman as a housewife responsible for the running of the household above all. In addition, women were seen as imperfect beings in comparison to men. This deficiency prevented many playwrights from creating sophisticated roles of women.
This is evident by the fact that in Renaissance drama one may come across female characters who continually regret that they have been born women. They would rather like to be men and have all what men had. In Much Ado about Nothing (IV.i. 304), Beatrice is not able to show her solidarity with the hero because her being a woman robs her of the ability to act. She says, “Oh, God, that I were a man.” Similarly, Desdemona expresses a wish that “heaven had made her… a man” (Othello, I.iii. 163). Thus, it is possible to assume that the characters of women were not developed as independent and unique entities but created as projections of male’s vision of women as inferior beings.
The lack of female characters development is well illustrated by Shakespeare’s plays. In his plays, as critics have found, women characters are portrayed in two ways: either as witty, lively and cheerful characters that even outperform men – in comedies, and as somber, morally ugly and nightmare characters – in tragedies. There is not a character fully developed, which would reflect the real personality of a woman.
Let us explore roles of women in Shakespeare’s plays “The Taming of the Shrew” and “King Lear”. Katherine, the heroine of “The Taming of the Shrew”, is a woman character, which at a closer look is underdeveloped. While the plot revolves around Petruchio’s treatment of Katherine as a woman that needs to be changed in order to be a good companion to Petruchio, the very recognition of the fact that he succeeds in imposing his valued on her is too restrictive for Katherine’s character. A woman with a vigorous spirit and independent thinking becomes tamed and limited by the societal view.
Besides, it is a bit unrealistic that the woman is tamed through such weird methods which would otherwise lead to even greater confrontation. Especially, if to think that Petruchio tames Kate with some weird seriousness, as if she were some commodity of his. This leads to feeling a bit confused about the reality of the methods he chooses. As for the other women in the play, they are repressed towards its ending. This again exposes the lack of a variety of female characters. They are a mass, subject to societal norms and expectations of their role in running the house and raising children. The characters of Kate and Beatrice, which are portrayed in contrast, are just two of the vivid female characters in the whole play.
As for “King Lear”, there is a variety of female characters there, yet they suffer from some deficiencies, too. First of all, these characters are all subject to the patriarchal ideology, which at times deprives them even of humanity. The play was written so that the reader identifies himelf with King Lear who suffers from his daughters’ ingratitude.
It seems King Lear understands humanity as something attributive to males, expressing his antipathy to women. This attitude to women destroys 3 female characters till the end. This is how lack of elaboration of female characters subjects the play to one-sidedness. And, again the characters of women are ugly and more primitive than the character of their father.
To sum up, Renaissance dramatists did not create a variety of female roles due to a number of factors. Of course, there were certain roles, as illustrated by Shakespeare’s plays, but they were much less developed than those of men. That was a result of the societal order and ideology at that time.
Related Free Humanities Essays
- Art History
- Giuseppe Castiglione (Lang Shining)
- Death as a Psychosocial Event
- The Significance of Edward Said’s Orientalism for Developmental Studies
- Empire of the Sun
- The Rise of Teotihuacan
- Colonial America and the American Revolution
- Renaissance Writers
- Alvin Ailey and Twyla Tharp
- Mystery of the Mayan Civilization
Most popular orders | <urn:uuid:15dcf561-9622-4de3-b7cc-1b66370ba785> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://exclusivepapers.com/essays/humanities/is-it-true-to-say-that-renaissance-dramatists.php | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251801423.98/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129164403-20200129193403-00367.warc.gz | en | 0.982704 | 1,258 | 3.515625 | 4 | [
0.18898630142211914,
-0.05595367029309273,
0.14490363001823425,
-0.2957770824432373,
-0.38621288537979126,
0.3275768756866455,
0.08312870562076569,
0.652657151222229,
0.04592149332165718,
0.1106378585100174,
0.22980383038520813,
-0.3635425865650177,
0.24461057782173157,
-0.1250084340572357... | 1 | From available literature, it appears that Renaissance dramatists did not create a variety of female roles. This is explained by a few factors. First of all, women were seen as ‘others’ in the times of Shakespeare. Literature exploring that period of theatre development mentions women roles as ‘others’ on stage along with the roles of bastards, homosexuals, or foreigners. It still remains unclear why. That was the society of men, where everything was for men. It means that women were in the periphery as the part of the society whose perspective or interest was not important. Despite the fact there were many females among the audience, on the stage most roles were male.
Buy Is it true to say that Renaissance dramatists created a variety of roles for women? essay paper online
Secondly, lack of female roles could probably be attributed to the fact that a woman on the stage was considered something indecent and all roles were created to be played by boys anyway. Young males wore wigs and dresses and performed the roles of women so that the women’s chastity was not compromised. Yet, knowing that boys would perform the roles may have prevented playwrights from elaborating female roles in their plays. Indeed, however good a young man might perform, he lacked femininity and would seem not that natural.
Thirdly, Renaissance dramatists did not create many female roles since women were excluded from the stage, which was probably also because women did not have enough oratorical training. Also, the morality of the patriarchal society was so harsh that by creating diverse roles of women, depicted in various (comic) situations, playwrights risked coming into a lot of criticism.
Besides, it may have been the Puritan-based and ideal vision of a woman as a housewife responsible for the running of the household above all. In addition, women were seen as imperfect beings in comparison to men. This deficiency prevented many playwrights from creating sophisticated roles of women.
This is evident by the fact that in Renaissance drama one may come across female characters who continually regret that they have been born women. They would rather like to be men and have all what men had. In Much Ado about Nothing (IV.i. 304), Beatrice is not able to show her solidarity with the hero because her being a woman robs her of the ability to act. She says, “Oh, God, that I were a man.” Similarly, Desdemona expresses a wish that “heaven had made her… a man” (Othello, I.iii. 163). Thus, it is possible to assume that the characters of women were not developed as independent and unique entities but created as projections of male’s vision of women as inferior beings.
The lack of female characters development is well illustrated by Shakespeare’s plays. In his plays, as critics have found, women characters are portrayed in two ways: either as witty, lively and cheerful characters that even outperform men – in comedies, and as somber, morally ugly and nightmare characters – in tragedies. There is not a character fully developed, which would reflect the real personality of a woman.
Let us explore roles of women in Shakespeare’s plays “The Taming of the Shrew” and “King Lear”. Katherine, the heroine of “The Taming of the Shrew”, is a woman character, which at a closer look is underdeveloped. While the plot revolves around Petruchio’s treatment of Katherine as a woman that needs to be changed in order to be a good companion to Petruchio, the very recognition of the fact that he succeeds in imposing his valued on her is too restrictive for Katherine’s character. A woman with a vigorous spirit and independent thinking becomes tamed and limited by the societal view.
Besides, it is a bit unrealistic that the woman is tamed through such weird methods which would otherwise lead to even greater confrontation. Especially, if to think that Petruchio tames Kate with some weird seriousness, as if she were some commodity of his. This leads to feeling a bit confused about the reality of the methods he chooses. As for the other women in the play, they are repressed towards its ending. This again exposes the lack of a variety of female characters. They are a mass, subject to societal norms and expectations of their role in running the house and raising children. The characters of Kate and Beatrice, which are portrayed in contrast, are just two of the vivid female characters in the whole play.
As for “King Lear”, there is a variety of female characters there, yet they suffer from some deficiencies, too. First of all, these characters are all subject to the patriarchal ideology, which at times deprives them even of humanity. The play was written so that the reader identifies himelf with King Lear who suffers from his daughters’ ingratitude.
It seems King Lear understands humanity as something attributive to males, expressing his antipathy to women. This attitude to women destroys 3 female characters till the end. This is how lack of elaboration of female characters subjects the play to one-sidedness. And, again the characters of women are ugly and more primitive than the character of their father.
To sum up, Renaissance dramatists did not create a variety of female roles due to a number of factors. Of course, there were certain roles, as illustrated by Shakespeare’s plays, but they were much less developed than those of men. That was a result of the societal order and ideology at that time.
Related Free Humanities Essays
- Art History
- Giuseppe Castiglione (Lang Shining)
- Death as a Psychosocial Event
- The Significance of Edward Said’s Orientalism for Developmental Studies
- Empire of the Sun
- The Rise of Teotihuacan
- Colonial America and the American Revolution
- Renaissance Writers
- Alvin Ailey and Twyla Tharp
- Mystery of the Mayan Civilization
Most popular orders | 1,212 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Galileo Galilei was both a Christian, and a scientist. Galileo Galilei was an Italian polymath. Galileo is a central figure in the transition from natural philosophy to modern science and in the transformation of the scientific Renaissance into a scientific revolution. Galileo Galilei, famous for his scientific achievements in astronomy, mathematics, and physics, and infamous for his controversy with the church was, in fact, a Christian. Galileo was born on February 15, 1564. He was born in Pisa, Italy. He was the first of six born to a musician father. In 1574, the family moved to Florence, where Galileo started his formal education at the Camaldolese monastery in Vallombrosa. In 1583, Galileo entered the University of Pisa to study medication, but became interested in a wide variety of subjects, including math and physics. Galileo is known for multiple things. A few main things include, Kinematics, the Telescope, Analytical Dynamics, and Heliocentrism. Kinematics is a branch of classical mechanics that describes the motion of points, bodies, and systems of bodies without considering the mass of each or the forces that caused the motion. A small telescope is generally considered by professional astronomers to be any reflector-type telescope with a primary mirror of less than 2 metres diameter. In classical mechanics, analytical dynamics, or more briefly dynamics, is concerned with the relationship between motion of bodies and its causes, namely the forces acting on the bodies and the properties of the bodies. Heliocentrism is the astronomical model in which the Earth and planets revolve around the Sun at the center of the Solar System. All of these things are still very relevant today. Kinematics is used in astrophysics to describe the motion of celestial bodies and collections of such bodies. In mechanical engineering, robotics, and biomechanics kinematics is used to describe the motion of systems composed of joined parts such as an engine, a robotic arm or the human skeleton. The telescope is used by many people across the world, for studying astronomy, or if you just want to look at the stars. Dynamics continue to be considered the two pillars of classical mechanics. Dynamics is still included in mechanical, aerospace, and other engineering curricula because of its importance in machine design, the design of land, sea, air and space vehicles and other applications. Heliocentrism is still a basis of astronomy. Many of Galileo’s ideas conflicted with the church, and that as a whole, changed people’s views and beliefs. Galileo said “God is known by nature in his works, and by doctrine in his revealed word.”. Galileo was also quoted saying that nothing discovered in nature could contradict the deep truth written in the Holy Bible. Galileo held the belief that the primary aim of scripture was to not scientific truths, but to worship God and save souls. He used scripture as the basis for many of his scientific discoveries. Galileo’s faith greatly impacted his work. He is somewhat infamous for going against the church, although he was Catholic. When Galileo built his telescope, in 1604, he began noticing that the moon was not a smooth sphere, that Jupiter had moons, and that Venus had phases, indicating it orbited the sun. He began collecting evidence, and openly supporting the copernican theory, that the earth and planets revolve around the sun. The problem was, this theory challenged the doctrine of Aristotle and also the established order set by the Catholic Church. Galileo was ordered to not advocate the copernican theory, but proceeded to do it anyways. The church reacted, was convicted of heresy (after being threatened with torture), and was sentenced to house arrest. He was ordered to not have any visitors, and also not to publish any of his works outside of italy. He ignored both of these, and had copies of his works published in Holland. Also, he wrote “Two New Sciences” and published that in Holand. Galileo’s works were affected by his faith, even though he was going against the normal beliefs, and he was even in trouble with the church (what is suppose to be representing his faith) and still persevered in his works. As I quoted previously, Galileo claimed that studying science only increased his faith, and said how it couldn’t decrease it, as nothing in nature could contradict the Bible. The whole situation with the church did bring new achievements, as he had something to prove, but it also held him back, as he was attempted to be silenced. The purpose of science is not to verify nor to add to inspired Scripture, but science can help us eliminate improper ways of reading it. Although, there are many things that can point back to God. The Bible even talks about studied the things God has made, take Psalms 111:2 for example. It says “Great are the works of the LORD; They are studied by all who delight in them.”. This (in my opinion) is one of the most clearest examples stating that you can be both a christian and a scientist. Another example is how God speaks to us through creation (Romans 1:18-20) so studying creation and using science, could only help in the evangelization of the world. | <urn:uuid:c812256d-77ce-465c-af3a-3aa73cca878b> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://maryelizabethbodycare.com/galileo-christian-galileo-was-born-on-february-15-1564/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250601040.47/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120224950-20200121013950-00317.warc.gz | en | 0.985575 | 1,077 | 3.359375 | 3 | [
0.15447570383548737,
0.063150554895401,
0.09998450428247452,
-0.3475894331932068,
-0.6943116188049316,
-0.0897739976644516,
0.15368278324604034,
0.3319029211997986,
0.4460471272468567,
-0.05733105540275574,
-0.08165568113327026,
-0.558966875076294,
-0.1302272081375122,
0.38958650827407837,... | 7 | Galileo Galilei was both a Christian, and a scientist. Galileo Galilei was an Italian polymath. Galileo is a central figure in the transition from natural philosophy to modern science and in the transformation of the scientific Renaissance into a scientific revolution. Galileo Galilei, famous for his scientific achievements in astronomy, mathematics, and physics, and infamous for his controversy with the church was, in fact, a Christian. Galileo was born on February 15, 1564. He was born in Pisa, Italy. He was the first of six born to a musician father. In 1574, the family moved to Florence, where Galileo started his formal education at the Camaldolese monastery in Vallombrosa. In 1583, Galileo entered the University of Pisa to study medication, but became interested in a wide variety of subjects, including math and physics. Galileo is known for multiple things. A few main things include, Kinematics, the Telescope, Analytical Dynamics, and Heliocentrism. Kinematics is a branch of classical mechanics that describes the motion of points, bodies, and systems of bodies without considering the mass of each or the forces that caused the motion. A small telescope is generally considered by professional astronomers to be any reflector-type telescope with a primary mirror of less than 2 metres diameter. In classical mechanics, analytical dynamics, or more briefly dynamics, is concerned with the relationship between motion of bodies and its causes, namely the forces acting on the bodies and the properties of the bodies. Heliocentrism is the astronomical model in which the Earth and planets revolve around the Sun at the center of the Solar System. All of these things are still very relevant today. Kinematics is used in astrophysics to describe the motion of celestial bodies and collections of such bodies. In mechanical engineering, robotics, and biomechanics kinematics is used to describe the motion of systems composed of joined parts such as an engine, a robotic arm or the human skeleton. The telescope is used by many people across the world, for studying astronomy, or if you just want to look at the stars. Dynamics continue to be considered the two pillars of classical mechanics. Dynamics is still included in mechanical, aerospace, and other engineering curricula because of its importance in machine design, the design of land, sea, air and space vehicles and other applications. Heliocentrism is still a basis of astronomy. Many of Galileo’s ideas conflicted with the church, and that as a whole, changed people’s views and beliefs. Galileo said “God is known by nature in his works, and by doctrine in his revealed word.”. Galileo was also quoted saying that nothing discovered in nature could contradict the deep truth written in the Holy Bible. Galileo held the belief that the primary aim of scripture was to not scientific truths, but to worship God and save souls. He used scripture as the basis for many of his scientific discoveries. Galileo’s faith greatly impacted his work. He is somewhat infamous for going against the church, although he was Catholic. When Galileo built his telescope, in 1604, he began noticing that the moon was not a smooth sphere, that Jupiter had moons, and that Venus had phases, indicating it orbited the sun. He began collecting evidence, and openly supporting the copernican theory, that the earth and planets revolve around the sun. The problem was, this theory challenged the doctrine of Aristotle and also the established order set by the Catholic Church. Galileo was ordered to not advocate the copernican theory, but proceeded to do it anyways. The church reacted, was convicted of heresy (after being threatened with torture), and was sentenced to house arrest. He was ordered to not have any visitors, and also not to publish any of his works outside of italy. He ignored both of these, and had copies of his works published in Holland. Also, he wrote “Two New Sciences” and published that in Holand. Galileo’s works were affected by his faith, even though he was going against the normal beliefs, and he was even in trouble with the church (what is suppose to be representing his faith) and still persevered in his works. As I quoted previously, Galileo claimed that studying science only increased his faith, and said how it couldn’t decrease it, as nothing in nature could contradict the Bible. The whole situation with the church did bring new achievements, as he had something to prove, but it also held him back, as he was attempted to be silenced. The purpose of science is not to verify nor to add to inspired Scripture, but science can help us eliminate improper ways of reading it. Although, there are many things that can point back to God. The Bible even talks about studied the things God has made, take Psalms 111:2 for example. It says “Great are the works of the LORD; They are studied by all who delight in them.”. This (in my opinion) is one of the most clearest examples stating that you can be both a christian and a scientist. Another example is how God speaks to us through creation (Romans 1:18-20) so studying creation and using science, could only help in the evangelization of the world. | 1,095 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Close your eyes. Picture your closest friend. Maybe you see her blue eyes, long nose, brown hair. Perhaps even her smile.
If you saw her walking down the street it would match your imagined vision. But what if you saw nothing at all?
James Cooke, 66, of Islip, N.Y., can’t recognize other people. When he meets someone on the street, he offers a generic “hello” because he can’t be sure if he’s ever met that person before. “I see eyes, nose, cheekbones, but no face,” he said. “I’ve even passed by my son and daughter without recognizing them.”
He is not the only one. Those with prosopagnosia, also known as face blindness, can see perfectly well, but their brains are unable to piece together the information needed to understand that a collection of features represents an individual’s face. The condition is a neurological mystery, but new research has shed light on this strange malady.
One of the keys to understanding face recognition, it seems, is understanding how the brain comes to recognize voices. Some scientists had believed that faces and voices, the two main ways people recognize one another, were processed separately by the brain. Indeed, a condition parallel to prosopagnosia, called phonagnosia, similarly leaves a person unable to distinguish a familiar voice from an unfamiliar one.
But by testing for these two conditions simultaneously, researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences in Germany recently found evidence that face and voice recognition may be linked in a novel person-recognition system.
Using M.R.I., the scientists looked at the brain activity of 19 healthy volunteers as they were led through tasks that tested their ability to recognize both faces and voices. The researchers found that regions of the brain already associated with facial recognition, like the fusiform face area in the occipital lobe, are directly linked to regions responsible for voice recognition, mostly in the temporal lobe.
This research helps explain why a person with prosopagnosia may still have difficulty determining who a person is even after she has begun to speak. “People with prosopagnosia don’t have the benefit of learning voices with faces,” said Katharina von Kriegstein, author of the study, which was published in September in The Journal of Neuroscience.
The challenge for scientists is to find out where this system breaks down. Are these connections in the brain missing entirely, or are people unable to recognize faces and voices simply unable to use these links in some way?
It is unclear how many people have these conditions. Many don’t even realize they have problems with facial or voice recognition. While some develop these difficulties after a brain injury or trauma, others develop it in childhood.
For Mr. Cooke, who lives with his two grown children, face blindness first surfaced after brain surgery for an unrelated condition. Three physicians stood by his bed in the hospital the day after surgery to ask how he was feeling. Mr. Cooke didn’t think he had met the doctors before, so he gave some generic responses. After the doctors left, Mr. Cooke’s mother came in to find out what his surgeon had to say.
Mr. Cooke was shocked to discover he had just been speaking with his own doctor. “I didn’t recognize that I didn’t recognize him,” he said.
He went home, and the face blindness continued. Months later, he still couldn’t recognize his son, let alone his son’s friends when they visited. The cashiers at the grocery store had turned into strangers. Neighbors’ faces were completely foreign.
He went from neurologist to neurologist until one recognized that he had prosopagnosia, most likely a side effect of his surgery.
While there is no treatment or cure for Mr. Cooke, figuring out why he was no longer able to recognize his own children was a relief. “It was good to hear that what I was experiencing was real and not in my imagination,” he said.
Dori Frame, 51, of Brooklyn, is less certain about the cause of her face blindness, as she doesn’t remember having difficulty recalling faces as a child. She did suffer a severe head injury at age 16 while horseback riding, but it is unclear whether that caused her prosopagnosia as an adult.
“My eyes see just fine,” said Ms. Frame. “But when I look away, I can’t recall the picture in my mind.”
Ms. Frame didn’t realize she had a problem until she learned about prosopagnosia in a psychology class. “It’s like colorblindness,” she said. “You don’t realize you see colors differently than anyone else until someone points it out to you.”
Brad Duchaine, who researches face blindness at Dartmouth, says that after giving talks about prosopagnosia, he is often approached by audience members who have just realized that their difficulty keeping movie characters straight or identifying co-workers on the street may be more than just a quirk. “I think there’s a lot of people who have difficulty and just don’t know it,” he said.
With no treatments, those with face blindness have to rely on simple coping strategies. “They use all those other cues that everyone else uses, just to a greater degree,” Dr. Duchaine said.
For example, Ms. Frame can recall a person’s hairstyle and body type and how they move. “But when my husband gets a haircut, it takes me a while to reconcile that,” she said.
Mr. Cooke has his own strategies. He knows that if he sees a tall, blond man in his kitchen, it’s most likely his son. A tall, blonde woman cleaning the house is probably his daughter. “However, I have mistaken my kids’ friends for them,” he said.
The condition has unexpected social consequences. How do you explain to everyone you meet that you may not recognize them later? “I live in fear of making people feel unimportant by not recognizing them,” Ms. Frame said.
Mr. Cooke was once on a date with a brunette who knew about his condition, he said, when he excused himself to use the restroom. Returning, he saw a pretty, brown-haired woman sitting alone, so he slipped into the chair across from hers. “My date came running across the restaurant to tell me I was at the wrong table,” he said.
Ms. Frame isn’t as open about her face blindness. Whenever she is meeting someone, she arrives early, so her friend has to find her. Still, even with prosopagnosia often at the forefront of her mind, Ms. Frame often forgets her difficulties. “It still seems bizarre to me,” she said. “You mistake yourself for someone else in the mirror, and you feel so silly when you realize it’s you.” | <urn:uuid:c5e87211-9142-4402-aad1-e6da1605fcc1> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/27/health/views/face-and-voice-recognition-may-be-linked-in-the-brain-research-suggests.html?pagewanted=all | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251690095.81/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126165718-20200126195718-00024.warc.gz | en | 0.980623 | 1,521 | 3.8125 | 4 | [
-0.0029632174409925938,
-0.34384262561798096,
-0.031592242419719696,
0.12910495698451996,
-0.425647109746933,
0.3136303424835205,
1.0389630794525146,
0.018975045531988144,
-0.20761916041374207,
-0.17824457585811615,
0.20819562673568726,
-0.3572850227355957,
-0.005356976762413979,
0.3396981... | 2 | Close your eyes. Picture your closest friend. Maybe you see her blue eyes, long nose, brown hair. Perhaps even her smile.
If you saw her walking down the street it would match your imagined vision. But what if you saw nothing at all?
James Cooke, 66, of Islip, N.Y., can’t recognize other people. When he meets someone on the street, he offers a generic “hello” because he can’t be sure if he’s ever met that person before. “I see eyes, nose, cheekbones, but no face,” he said. “I’ve even passed by my son and daughter without recognizing them.”
He is not the only one. Those with prosopagnosia, also known as face blindness, can see perfectly well, but their brains are unable to piece together the information needed to understand that a collection of features represents an individual’s face. The condition is a neurological mystery, but new research has shed light on this strange malady.
One of the keys to understanding face recognition, it seems, is understanding how the brain comes to recognize voices. Some scientists had believed that faces and voices, the two main ways people recognize one another, were processed separately by the brain. Indeed, a condition parallel to prosopagnosia, called phonagnosia, similarly leaves a person unable to distinguish a familiar voice from an unfamiliar one.
But by testing for these two conditions simultaneously, researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences in Germany recently found evidence that face and voice recognition may be linked in a novel person-recognition system.
Using M.R.I., the scientists looked at the brain activity of 19 healthy volunteers as they were led through tasks that tested their ability to recognize both faces and voices. The researchers found that regions of the brain already associated with facial recognition, like the fusiform face area in the occipital lobe, are directly linked to regions responsible for voice recognition, mostly in the temporal lobe.
This research helps explain why a person with prosopagnosia may still have difficulty determining who a person is even after she has begun to speak. “People with prosopagnosia don’t have the benefit of learning voices with faces,” said Katharina von Kriegstein, author of the study, which was published in September in The Journal of Neuroscience.
The challenge for scientists is to find out where this system breaks down. Are these connections in the brain missing entirely, or are people unable to recognize faces and voices simply unable to use these links in some way?
It is unclear how many people have these conditions. Many don’t even realize they have problems with facial or voice recognition. While some develop these difficulties after a brain injury or trauma, others develop it in childhood.
For Mr. Cooke, who lives with his two grown children, face blindness first surfaced after brain surgery for an unrelated condition. Three physicians stood by his bed in the hospital the day after surgery to ask how he was feeling. Mr. Cooke didn’t think he had met the doctors before, so he gave some generic responses. After the doctors left, Mr. Cooke’s mother came in to find out what his surgeon had to say.
Mr. Cooke was shocked to discover he had just been speaking with his own doctor. “I didn’t recognize that I didn’t recognize him,” he said.
He went home, and the face blindness continued. Months later, he still couldn’t recognize his son, let alone his son’s friends when they visited. The cashiers at the grocery store had turned into strangers. Neighbors’ faces were completely foreign.
He went from neurologist to neurologist until one recognized that he had prosopagnosia, most likely a side effect of his surgery.
While there is no treatment or cure for Mr. Cooke, figuring out why he was no longer able to recognize his own children was a relief. “It was good to hear that what I was experiencing was real and not in my imagination,” he said.
Dori Frame, 51, of Brooklyn, is less certain about the cause of her face blindness, as she doesn’t remember having difficulty recalling faces as a child. She did suffer a severe head injury at age 16 while horseback riding, but it is unclear whether that caused her prosopagnosia as an adult.
“My eyes see just fine,” said Ms. Frame. “But when I look away, I can’t recall the picture in my mind.”
Ms. Frame didn’t realize she had a problem until she learned about prosopagnosia in a psychology class. “It’s like colorblindness,” she said. “You don’t realize you see colors differently than anyone else until someone points it out to you.”
Brad Duchaine, who researches face blindness at Dartmouth, says that after giving talks about prosopagnosia, he is often approached by audience members who have just realized that their difficulty keeping movie characters straight or identifying co-workers on the street may be more than just a quirk. “I think there’s a lot of people who have difficulty and just don’t know it,” he said.
With no treatments, those with face blindness have to rely on simple coping strategies. “They use all those other cues that everyone else uses, just to a greater degree,” Dr. Duchaine said.
For example, Ms. Frame can recall a person’s hairstyle and body type and how they move. “But when my husband gets a haircut, it takes me a while to reconcile that,” she said.
Mr. Cooke has his own strategies. He knows that if he sees a tall, blond man in his kitchen, it’s most likely his son. A tall, blonde woman cleaning the house is probably his daughter. “However, I have mistaken my kids’ friends for them,” he said.
The condition has unexpected social consequences. How do you explain to everyone you meet that you may not recognize them later? “I live in fear of making people feel unimportant by not recognizing them,” Ms. Frame said.
Mr. Cooke was once on a date with a brunette who knew about his condition, he said, when he excused himself to use the restroom. Returning, he saw a pretty, brown-haired woman sitting alone, so he slipped into the chair across from hers. “My date came running across the restaurant to tell me I was at the wrong table,” he said.
Ms. Frame isn’t as open about her face blindness. Whenever she is meeting someone, she arrives early, so her friend has to find her. Still, even with prosopagnosia often at the forefront of her mind, Ms. Frame often forgets her difficulties. “It still seems bizarre to me,” she said. “You mistake yourself for someone else in the mirror, and you feel so silly when you realize it’s you.” | 1,395 | ENGLISH | 1 |
United States Geological Survey
Your nine-year-old nephew draws a picture of a plesiosaur, which is a large, extinct marine reptile, some of which had long necks and well-developed fins. This plesiosaur is accurately depicted as swimming in an ocean, and in the sky above are a few pterosaurs, which were flying reptiles. One of the pterosaurs, however, is carrying a cow in its claws. Your nephew patiently explains to you that the "dinosaur" in the water is like the Loch Ness monster, and the "dinosaurs" flying overhead saw some cows in a field. One of them was hungry and wanted to feed its babies, so it captured the cow and was carrying it off to its nest.
How do you explain to him, without crushing his imagination or ego, some of the scientific inaccuracies of what he has illustrated and told you?
Was this article helpful? | <urn:uuid:744de925-d39f-43c4-a8d0-27ef74fea015> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.fossilhunters.xyz/defining-dinosaurs/usgs.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250613416.54/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123191130-20200123220130-00257.warc.gz | en | 0.988309 | 191 | 3.46875 | 3 | [
0.22155804932117462,
-0.12583951652050018,
0.13489806652069092,
-0.04378275200724602,
-0.39527568221092224,
-0.22519247233867645,
0.4144183397293091,
0.41069495677948,
-0.11971356719732285,
0.08447275310754776,
0.18146276473999023,
-0.5304168462753296,
0.24602222442626953,
0.11052808910608... | 1 | United States Geological Survey
Your nine-year-old nephew draws a picture of a plesiosaur, which is a large, extinct marine reptile, some of which had long necks and well-developed fins. This plesiosaur is accurately depicted as swimming in an ocean, and in the sky above are a few pterosaurs, which were flying reptiles. One of the pterosaurs, however, is carrying a cow in its claws. Your nephew patiently explains to you that the "dinosaur" in the water is like the Loch Ness monster, and the "dinosaurs" flying overhead saw some cows in a field. One of them was hungry and wanted to feed its babies, so it captured the cow and was carrying it off to its nest.
How do you explain to him, without crushing his imagination or ego, some of the scientific inaccuracies of what he has illustrated and told you?
Was this article helpful? | 189 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Put those mediocre B-minus essays on the trash pile and level up to A-plus quality. Hopefully, with a little bit of guidance, you can successfully transition from a good writer, to a fantastic one. So put a bit of thinking into your projects, work a little harder, and don’t be afraid to try a few new strategies to turn your essay into a piece that will impress your teacher.
Basketball game can be traced in 1891. The game was invented in Springfield. The inventor of the game was Canadian James Naismith and who was an instructor in physical education. Compared to football, James Naismith found out that the basketball game was less injurious to the players. The game got popularity in 20th century and its popularity continued to increase. The game was later introduced in colleges and it became a professional game just like football or any other games. The growth in popularity began in America and then seen spreading to other countries and nations.
James Naismith is the instructor in Physical Education that will be forever remembered for the invention of the basketball game. The initial invention aim was to find young athletes a game they could play especially when it is cold and to come up with a less injurious game for the youths. Basketball game originally had thirteen rules. Smith organized a team of 18 players with which he divided into to make the learning and teaching process easier. There were fruit baskets in the gym nailed in the balcony. The game involved throwing the ball into these baskets. After a score, the game had to halt to have the ball retrieved back. Later the basket bottoms were removed. The initial or first game was played on March 1892 in Springfield.
Throwing the ball using either one or both or both hands were allowed. Batting the ball using one hand or both was allowed. Running with the ball was not permitted. Players were allowed to use hands to hold the ball and not arm or the body. Tripping, holding, shouldering, striking and tripping were fouls. Using the fist to strike the ball was also a foul. In case a team made three consecutive fouls, opponents earned a score. A goal was made after the ball is thrown and enters the basket. If the ball is batted from the ground and gets into the basket, a goal was earned. Game time was thirty minutes; two halves of fifteen minutes each with five minutes break between the halves. Considered the winner was the side that made more scores. Throughout the game, the umpire was the judge and was to notify the judge on fouls made. In case the ball went out of the playing field it was thrown back and the one who first touches it continues to play.
© Copyright 2009-2020. The-Kings-Speech.com all rights reserved | <urn:uuid:ebc874f5-a58f-42ff-8759-5a2c4d94e9c5> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.the-kings-speech.com/essay-on-the-history-of-basketball/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251669967.70/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125041318-20200125070318-00481.warc.gz | en | 0.987069 | 567 | 3.71875 | 4 | [
-0.3233492374420166,
0.05794180929660797,
0.1480211317539215,
-0.47087761759757996,
-0.2614794969558716,
-0.010226432234048843,
0.48547592759132385,
0.2664473056793213,
0.12124519795179367,
0.11787120252847672,
-0.2930440604686737,
-0.3185742497444153,
0.3049964904785156,
-0.04905350133776... | 3 | Put those mediocre B-minus essays on the trash pile and level up to A-plus quality. Hopefully, with a little bit of guidance, you can successfully transition from a good writer, to a fantastic one. So put a bit of thinking into your projects, work a little harder, and don’t be afraid to try a few new strategies to turn your essay into a piece that will impress your teacher.
Basketball game can be traced in 1891. The game was invented in Springfield. The inventor of the game was Canadian James Naismith and who was an instructor in physical education. Compared to football, James Naismith found out that the basketball game was less injurious to the players. The game got popularity in 20th century and its popularity continued to increase. The game was later introduced in colleges and it became a professional game just like football or any other games. The growth in popularity began in America and then seen spreading to other countries and nations.
James Naismith is the instructor in Physical Education that will be forever remembered for the invention of the basketball game. The initial invention aim was to find young athletes a game they could play especially when it is cold and to come up with a less injurious game for the youths. Basketball game originally had thirteen rules. Smith organized a team of 18 players with which he divided into to make the learning and teaching process easier. There were fruit baskets in the gym nailed in the balcony. The game involved throwing the ball into these baskets. After a score, the game had to halt to have the ball retrieved back. Later the basket bottoms were removed. The initial or first game was played on March 1892 in Springfield.
Throwing the ball using either one or both or both hands were allowed. Batting the ball using one hand or both was allowed. Running with the ball was not permitted. Players were allowed to use hands to hold the ball and not arm or the body. Tripping, holding, shouldering, striking and tripping were fouls. Using the fist to strike the ball was also a foul. In case a team made three consecutive fouls, opponents earned a score. A goal was made after the ball is thrown and enters the basket. If the ball is batted from the ground and gets into the basket, a goal was earned. Game time was thirty minutes; two halves of fifteen minutes each with five minutes break between the halves. Considered the winner was the side that made more scores. Throughout the game, the umpire was the judge and was to notify the judge on fouls made. In case the ball went out of the playing field it was thrown back and the one who first touches it continues to play.
© Copyright 2009-2020. The-Kings-Speech.com all rights reserved | 574 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The Machaeroides are a genus of dog-size carnivores that lived during the early Eocene, about 50 million years ago. They lived before the nimravidae family developed, and are likely the oldest mammals with saber teeth, Tseng said.
Some of the Machaeroides had serrated sabers, he added.
"If it was totally smooth, without serrations, the teeth might get stuck," he said, "With a serration, you can cut through [the prey]."
The genus Homotherium migrated from Eurasia to North America. But though its remains are also found in the La Brea Tar Pits,Homotherium is far less common than the saber-toothed cat, according to a 1993 study in the journal PaleoBios.
Homotherium is also known as the scimitar-toothed cat (after the sword), largely because its upper canines were long, but not long enough to pass its lower jaw, according to Prehistoric Wildlife. Its sabers were also serrated, but relatively fragile, and would have plunged into prey in a vertical, not horizontal, motion. | <urn:uuid:4406702c-1685-4e99-9034-ad5d2b71e9bd> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.livescience.com/54130-saber-toothed-animals/2.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251779833.86/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128153713-20200128183713-00042.warc.gz | en | 0.980078 | 239 | 3.65625 | 4 | [
0.04739909619092941,
-0.0535905621945858,
0.3508700132369995,
0.4908948540687561,
-0.08666528761386871,
-0.2534599304199219,
-0.21405307948589325,
0.6608017683029175,
-0.2658184766769409,
0.28772813081741333,
0.0904310867190361,
-0.7398725748062134,
0.1462155431509018,
0.22788769006729126,... | 3 | The Machaeroides are a genus of dog-size carnivores that lived during the early Eocene, about 50 million years ago. They lived before the nimravidae family developed, and are likely the oldest mammals with saber teeth, Tseng said.
Some of the Machaeroides had serrated sabers, he added.
"If it was totally smooth, without serrations, the teeth might get stuck," he said, "With a serration, you can cut through [the prey]."
The genus Homotherium migrated from Eurasia to North America. But though its remains are also found in the La Brea Tar Pits,Homotherium is far less common than the saber-toothed cat, according to a 1993 study in the journal PaleoBios.
Homotherium is also known as the scimitar-toothed cat (after the sword), largely because its upper canines were long, but not long enough to pass its lower jaw, according to Prehistoric Wildlife. Its sabers were also serrated, but relatively fragile, and would have plunged into prey in a vertical, not horizontal, motion. | 239 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Marco Polo was a renaissance era Venetian merchant who has changed world travel in his time era and our era by not only exploring other parts of the world but also documenting his travels to china for all to read. I. Marco Polo
A. Born in 1254, died in 1324, Venetian merchant, mother died while he was young, didn’t meet dad until he was 17, traveled china and documented his travels. B. Italy was separated into 4 regions, polo was from the east region of Venice, there society was based on merchant and commerce, Venice had the largest trade out of all of Italy, it was called the gateway to the East. II. Most famous European to travel to china knew many Asian languages, served the great Kublai Kahn for 17 years. A. Biological factors.
i. Was not even born yet when his father left for his first journey. Mother died young and he was raised by his aunt and uncle. His father returned when Marco was 17.
ii. His father returned Marco his father and uncle set out on a vogage to china. Marco met Kublai Kahn who sent him to Chinese cities on government business. iii. Upon return polo was sent to fight Genoa his boat was overruled and him captured this is where his travels were documented. After he was released he got sick and died on January 9th 1324. B. Notoriety
i. Traveled to china.
ii. Very well educated and skilled in merchant subjects such as foreign currency, appraising, and the handling of cargo ships. iii. Became one of Khan’s helpers on Chinese government. C. Significant factors
i. He had a way of traveling better than most he knew about money and how to deal with foreign people. ii. He was capable of being a good leader though he didn’t need to because his father and uncle had traveled before. III. Critics review on Marco Polo and his contributions.
A. What significant effect did he have on civilization/culture? i. Travel that was documented.
ii. Good trading skills.
B. What are critics opinion on his contribution to his culture and country based on this research? i. Some believe that his stories were made up and exaggerated. ii. Others believe that what he spoke about was true.
IV. Marco polo has one of the most outstanding impacts on civilization to this day. He opened the world of travel and he intrigued others to do the same.
Marco Polo was a renaissance era Venetian merchant who has changed world travel in his time era and our era by not only exploring other parts of the world but also documenting his travels to china for all to read. Marco Polo is one of the most well-known heroic travelers and traders around the world. In my paper I will discuss with you Marco Polo’s life, his travels, and his visit to China to see the great Khan. Marco Polo was born in c.1254 in Venice. He was a Venetian explorer and merchant whose account of his travels in Asia was the primary source for the European image of the Far East until the late 19th century. Marco's father, Niccolò, and his uncle Maffeo had traveled to China (1260-69) as merchants. When they left (1271) Venice to return to China, they were accompanied by 17-year-old Marco and two priests. Despite his enduring fame, very little was known about the personal life of Marco Polo. It is known that he was born into a Venetian family of merchants. He also lived during a propitious time in world history, “when the height of Venice’s influence as a city-state coincided with the greatest extent of Mongol conquest of Asia.”(Li Man Kin9) Ruled by Kublai Khan, the Mongol Empire stretched all the way from China to Russia and the Levant. The Mongol hordes also threatened other parts of Europe, particularly Poland and Hungary, inspiring fear everywhere by their bloodthirsty advances. Yet the ruthless methods brought a measure of stability to the lands they controlled, opening up trade routes such as the famous Silk Road. “Eventually, the Mongols discovered that it was more profitable to collect tribute from people than to kill them outright, and this policy too stimulated trade.”(Hull 23) Into this favorable atmosphere a number of European traders ventured, including the family of Marco Polo. The Polo’s had long-established ties in the Levant and around the Black Sea: for example, they owned property in Constantinople. “Marco’s uncle, for whom he was named, had a home in Sudak in the Crimea.” (Rugoff 8) Around 1260 Maffeo, Marco and Marco’s father, Niccolò, made a trading visit into Mongol territory, the land of the Golden Horde(Russia), ruled by Berke Khan. While they were there, a war broke out between Berke and the Cowan of Levant, blocking their return home. Thus Niccolò and Maffeo traveled deeper into Mongol territory, moving southeast to Bukhara, which was ruled by a third Cowan. While waiting there, they met an emissary traveling farther eastward who invited them to accompany him to the court of the great Cowan, Kublai, in Cathay (modern China). “In Cathay, Kublai Khan gave the Polo’s a friendly reception, appointed them his emissaries to the pope, and ensured their safe travel back to Europe.”(Steffof 10) They were to return to Cathay with one hundred learned men who could instruct the Mongols in the Christian religion and the liberal arts. In 1269, Niccolò and Maffeo Polo arrived back in Venice, where “Niccolò found out his wife had died while he was gone.”(Rugoff 5). Their son, Marco, who was only about fifteen years old, had been only six or younger when his father left home. Marco was raised primarily by his mother and the extended Polo family-and the streets of Venice. “After his mother’s death, Marco had probably begun to think of himself as something of a orphan.“(Rugoff 6) Then his father and uncle suddenly reappeared, as if from the dead, after nine years of traveling in far-off, romantic lands. “These experiences were the formative influences on young Marco, and one can see their effects mirrored in his character: a combination of sensitivity and toughness, independence and loyalty, motivated by an eagerness for adventure, a love of stories, and a desire to please or impress.”(Li Man Kin 10) In 1268, Pope Clement IV died, and a two- or three-year delay while another pope was being elected gave young Marco time to mature and to absorb the tales of his father and uncle. “Marco was seventeen years old when he, his father and uncle finally set out for the court of Kublai Khan.”(Stefoff 13) They were accompanied not by one hundred wise men but by two Dominican friars, and the two good friars turned back at the first sign of adversity, another local war in the Levant. Aside from the pope’s messages, the only spiritual gift Europe was able to furnish the great Kublai Khan was oil from the lamp burning at Jesus Christ’s supposed tomb in Jerusalem. Yet, in a sense, young Marco, the only new person in the Polo’s" party, was himself a fitting representative of the spirit of European civilization on the eve of the Renaissance, and “the lack of one hundred learned Europeans guaranteed that he would catch the eye of the Cowan, who was curious about Latins."(Hull 29). On the way to the khan’s court, Marco had the opportunity to complete his education. The journey took three and a half years by horseback through some of the world’s most rugged terrain, including snowy mountain ranges, such as the Pamirs, and parching deserts, such as the Gobi. Marco and his party encountered such hazards as wild beasts and brigands; they also met with beautiful women, in whom young Marco took a special interest. “The group traveled numerous countries and cultures, noting food, dress, and religion unique to each.”(Li Man Kin 17) In particular, under the khan’s protection the Polo’s were able to observe a large portion of the Islamic world at close range, as few if any European Christians had. By the time they reached the khan’s court in Khanbalik, Marco had become a hardened traveler. He had also received a unique education and had been initiated into manhood. Kublai Khan greeted the Polo’s warmly and invited them to stay on in his court. Here, if Marco’s account is to be believed, the Polo’s became great favorites of the khan, and “Kublai eventually made Marco one of his most trusted emissaries.” (Great Lives from History 16765) On these points Marco has been accused of gross exaggeration, and the actual status of the Polo’s at the court of the khan is much disputed. If at first it appears unlikely that Kublai would make young Marco an emissary, upon examination this seems quite reasonable. For political reasons, the khan was in the habit of appointing foreigners to administer conquered lands, particularly China, where the tenacity of the Chinese bureaucracy was legendary. The khan could also observe for himself that young Marco was a good candidate. Finally, Marco reported back so successfully from his fist mission-informing the khan not only on business details but also on colorful customs and other interesting trivia-that his further appointment was confirmed. “The journeys specifically mentioned in Marco’s book, involving travel across China and a sea voyage to India, suggests that the khan did indeed trust him with some of the most difficult missions.”(Rugoff 25) The Polo’s stayed on for seventeen years, another indication of how valued they were in the khan’s court. “Marco, his father, and his uncle not only survived-itself an achievement amid the political hazards of the time-but also prospered.” (Great Lives from History 1678) Apparently, the elder Polo’s carried on their trading while Marco was performing his missions; yet seventeen years is a long time to trade without returning home to family and friends. According to Macro, “because the khan held them in such high regard, he would not let them return home, but as the khan aged the Polo’s began to fear what would happen after his death.”(Hull 18) Finally an opportunity to leave presented itself when trusted emissaries were needed to accompany a Mongol princess on a wedding voyage by sea to Persia, where she was promised to the local khan. The Polo’s sailed from Cathay with a fleet of fourteen ships and a wedding party of six hundred people, not counting the sailors. Only a few members of the wedding entourage survived the journey of almost two years, but luckily the survivors included the Polo’s and the princess. “Fortunately, too, the Polo’s duly delivered the princess not to the old khan of Persia, who had meanwhile died, but to his son.”(Li Man Kin 21) From Persia, the Polo’s made their way back to Venice. They were robbed as soon as they got into Christian territory, but they still managed to reach home in 1295, with plenty of rich goods. According to Giovanni Battista Ramusio, one of the early editors of Marco’s book, “the Polo’s strode into Venice looking like rugged Mongols.” (Stefoff 17) Having thought them dead, their relatives at first did not recognize them, then were astounded, and then were disgusted by their shabby appearance. Yet, according to Ramusio, “the scorn changed to delight when the returned travelers invited everyone to a homecoming banquet, ripped apart their old clothes, and let all the hidden jewels clatter to the table.” (Great Lives from History 1676) The rest of the world might have learned little about the Polo’s travels if fate had not intervened in Marco’s life. In his early forties, Marco was not yet ready to settle down. Perhaps he was restless for further adventure, or perhaps he felt obliged to fulfill his civic duties to his native city-state. In any event, he became involved in naval warfare between Venetians and their trading rivals, the Genoese, and was captured. In 1298, the great traveler across Asia and emissary of the khan found himself rotting in a prison in Genoa an experience that could have ended tragically but instead took a lucky turn. “In prison Marco met a man named Rustichello from Persia, who was a writer of romances.”(Stefoff 21) To pass the time, Marco dictated his observations about Asia to Rustichello, who, in writing them down, probably employed the Italianized Old French that was the language of medieval romances. Their book was soon circulating, since “Marco remained in prison only a year or so, very likely gaining his freedom when the Venetians and Genoese made peace in 1299.”(Rugoff 32) After his prison experience, Marco was content to lead a quiet life in Venice with the rest of his family and bask in his almost instant literary fame. He married Donata Badoer, a member of the Venetian aristocracy. Thus Marco seems to have spent the last part of his life moving in Venetian aristocratic circles. After living what was then a long life, Marco died in 1324, only seventy years of age. In his will he left most of his modest wealth to his three daughters, a legacy that included goods which he had brought back from Asia. “His will also set free a Tartar slave, who had remained with him since his return from the court of the great khan.”(Li Man Kin 25)
Great Lives from History. Ancient and Medieval Series. Pasadena,
California: Salem Press, 1988. 2: 1675-1680.
Hull, Mary. The Travels of Marco Polo. California: Lucent Books Inc.,
Li Man Kin. Marco Polo in China. Hong Kong: Kingsway International
Rugoff, Milton. Marco Polo's Adventures In China. New York: American
Heritage Publishing Co., 1964.
Stefoff, Rebecca. Marco Polo and the Medieval Explorers. Chelsea House Publishers, 1992. | <urn:uuid:58b23227-4455-4e1c-8c3c-75ee986fbcb8> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.studymode.com/essays/Marco-Polo-63803224.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251694908.82/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127051112-20200127081112-00317.warc.gz | en | 0.985232 | 3,099 | 3.5625 | 4 | [
-0.19411703944206238,
-0.1754104346036911,
0.21516238152980804,
-0.3817535638809204,
-0.34974202513694763,
-0.23536038398742676,
0.6003365516662598,
0.22948315739631653,
-0.09809724241495132,
-0.17618328332901,
0.2813003957271576,
-0.41132429242134094,
0.13312631845474243,
0.32024282217025... | 1 | Marco Polo was a renaissance era Venetian merchant who has changed world travel in his time era and our era by not only exploring other parts of the world but also documenting his travels to china for all to read. I. Marco Polo
A. Born in 1254, died in 1324, Venetian merchant, mother died while he was young, didn’t meet dad until he was 17, traveled china and documented his travels. B. Italy was separated into 4 regions, polo was from the east region of Venice, there society was based on merchant and commerce, Venice had the largest trade out of all of Italy, it was called the gateway to the East. II. Most famous European to travel to china knew many Asian languages, served the great Kublai Kahn for 17 years. A. Biological factors.
i. Was not even born yet when his father left for his first journey. Mother died young and he was raised by his aunt and uncle. His father returned when Marco was 17.
ii. His father returned Marco his father and uncle set out on a vogage to china. Marco met Kublai Kahn who sent him to Chinese cities on government business. iii. Upon return polo was sent to fight Genoa his boat was overruled and him captured this is where his travels were documented. After he was released he got sick and died on January 9th 1324. B. Notoriety
i. Traveled to china.
ii. Very well educated and skilled in merchant subjects such as foreign currency, appraising, and the handling of cargo ships. iii. Became one of Khan’s helpers on Chinese government. C. Significant factors
i. He had a way of traveling better than most he knew about money and how to deal with foreign people. ii. He was capable of being a good leader though he didn’t need to because his father and uncle had traveled before. III. Critics review on Marco Polo and his contributions.
A. What significant effect did he have on civilization/culture? i. Travel that was documented.
ii. Good trading skills.
B. What are critics opinion on his contribution to his culture and country based on this research? i. Some believe that his stories were made up and exaggerated. ii. Others believe that what he spoke about was true.
IV. Marco polo has one of the most outstanding impacts on civilization to this day. He opened the world of travel and he intrigued others to do the same.
Marco Polo was a renaissance era Venetian merchant who has changed world travel in his time era and our era by not only exploring other parts of the world but also documenting his travels to china for all to read. Marco Polo is one of the most well-known heroic travelers and traders around the world. In my paper I will discuss with you Marco Polo’s life, his travels, and his visit to China to see the great Khan. Marco Polo was born in c.1254 in Venice. He was a Venetian explorer and merchant whose account of his travels in Asia was the primary source for the European image of the Far East until the late 19th century. Marco's father, Niccolò, and his uncle Maffeo had traveled to China (1260-69) as merchants. When they left (1271) Venice to return to China, they were accompanied by 17-year-old Marco and two priests. Despite his enduring fame, very little was known about the personal life of Marco Polo. It is known that he was born into a Venetian family of merchants. He also lived during a propitious time in world history, “when the height of Venice’s influence as a city-state coincided with the greatest extent of Mongol conquest of Asia.”(Li Man Kin9) Ruled by Kublai Khan, the Mongol Empire stretched all the way from China to Russia and the Levant. The Mongol hordes also threatened other parts of Europe, particularly Poland and Hungary, inspiring fear everywhere by their bloodthirsty advances. Yet the ruthless methods brought a measure of stability to the lands they controlled, opening up trade routes such as the famous Silk Road. “Eventually, the Mongols discovered that it was more profitable to collect tribute from people than to kill them outright, and this policy too stimulated trade.”(Hull 23) Into this favorable atmosphere a number of European traders ventured, including the family of Marco Polo. The Polo’s had long-established ties in the Levant and around the Black Sea: for example, they owned property in Constantinople. “Marco’s uncle, for whom he was named, had a home in Sudak in the Crimea.” (Rugoff 8) Around 1260 Maffeo, Marco and Marco’s father, Niccolò, made a trading visit into Mongol territory, the land of the Golden Horde(Russia), ruled by Berke Khan. While they were there, a war broke out between Berke and the Cowan of Levant, blocking their return home. Thus Niccolò and Maffeo traveled deeper into Mongol territory, moving southeast to Bukhara, which was ruled by a third Cowan. While waiting there, they met an emissary traveling farther eastward who invited them to accompany him to the court of the great Cowan, Kublai, in Cathay (modern China). “In Cathay, Kublai Khan gave the Polo’s a friendly reception, appointed them his emissaries to the pope, and ensured their safe travel back to Europe.”(Steffof 10) They were to return to Cathay with one hundred learned men who could instruct the Mongols in the Christian religion and the liberal arts. In 1269, Niccolò and Maffeo Polo arrived back in Venice, where “Niccolò found out his wife had died while he was gone.”(Rugoff 5). Their son, Marco, who was only about fifteen years old, had been only six or younger when his father left home. Marco was raised primarily by his mother and the extended Polo family-and the streets of Venice. “After his mother’s death, Marco had probably begun to think of himself as something of a orphan.“(Rugoff 6) Then his father and uncle suddenly reappeared, as if from the dead, after nine years of traveling in far-off, romantic lands. “These experiences were the formative influences on young Marco, and one can see their effects mirrored in his character: a combination of sensitivity and toughness, independence and loyalty, motivated by an eagerness for adventure, a love of stories, and a desire to please or impress.”(Li Man Kin 10) In 1268, Pope Clement IV died, and a two- or three-year delay while another pope was being elected gave young Marco time to mature and to absorb the tales of his father and uncle. “Marco was seventeen years old when he, his father and uncle finally set out for the court of Kublai Khan.”(Stefoff 13) They were accompanied not by one hundred wise men but by two Dominican friars, and the two good friars turned back at the first sign of adversity, another local war in the Levant. Aside from the pope’s messages, the only spiritual gift Europe was able to furnish the great Kublai Khan was oil from the lamp burning at Jesus Christ’s supposed tomb in Jerusalem. Yet, in a sense, young Marco, the only new person in the Polo’s" party, was himself a fitting representative of the spirit of European civilization on the eve of the Renaissance, and “the lack of one hundred learned Europeans guaranteed that he would catch the eye of the Cowan, who was curious about Latins."(Hull 29). On the way to the khan’s court, Marco had the opportunity to complete his education. The journey took three and a half years by horseback through some of the world’s most rugged terrain, including snowy mountain ranges, such as the Pamirs, and parching deserts, such as the Gobi. Marco and his party encountered such hazards as wild beasts and brigands; they also met with beautiful women, in whom young Marco took a special interest. “The group traveled numerous countries and cultures, noting food, dress, and religion unique to each.”(Li Man Kin 17) In particular, under the khan’s protection the Polo’s were able to observe a large portion of the Islamic world at close range, as few if any European Christians had. By the time they reached the khan’s court in Khanbalik, Marco had become a hardened traveler. He had also received a unique education and had been initiated into manhood. Kublai Khan greeted the Polo’s warmly and invited them to stay on in his court. Here, if Marco’s account is to be believed, the Polo’s became great favorites of the khan, and “Kublai eventually made Marco one of his most trusted emissaries.” (Great Lives from History 16765) On these points Marco has been accused of gross exaggeration, and the actual status of the Polo’s at the court of the khan is much disputed. If at first it appears unlikely that Kublai would make young Marco an emissary, upon examination this seems quite reasonable. For political reasons, the khan was in the habit of appointing foreigners to administer conquered lands, particularly China, where the tenacity of the Chinese bureaucracy was legendary. The khan could also observe for himself that young Marco was a good candidate. Finally, Marco reported back so successfully from his fist mission-informing the khan not only on business details but also on colorful customs and other interesting trivia-that his further appointment was confirmed. “The journeys specifically mentioned in Marco’s book, involving travel across China and a sea voyage to India, suggests that the khan did indeed trust him with some of the most difficult missions.”(Rugoff 25) The Polo’s stayed on for seventeen years, another indication of how valued they were in the khan’s court. “Marco, his father, and his uncle not only survived-itself an achievement amid the political hazards of the time-but also prospered.” (Great Lives from History 1678) Apparently, the elder Polo’s carried on their trading while Marco was performing his missions; yet seventeen years is a long time to trade without returning home to family and friends. According to Macro, “because the khan held them in such high regard, he would not let them return home, but as the khan aged the Polo’s began to fear what would happen after his death.”(Hull 18) Finally an opportunity to leave presented itself when trusted emissaries were needed to accompany a Mongol princess on a wedding voyage by sea to Persia, where she was promised to the local khan. The Polo’s sailed from Cathay with a fleet of fourteen ships and a wedding party of six hundred people, not counting the sailors. Only a few members of the wedding entourage survived the journey of almost two years, but luckily the survivors included the Polo’s and the princess. “Fortunately, too, the Polo’s duly delivered the princess not to the old khan of Persia, who had meanwhile died, but to his son.”(Li Man Kin 21) From Persia, the Polo’s made their way back to Venice. They were robbed as soon as they got into Christian territory, but they still managed to reach home in 1295, with plenty of rich goods. According to Giovanni Battista Ramusio, one of the early editors of Marco’s book, “the Polo’s strode into Venice looking like rugged Mongols.” (Stefoff 17) Having thought them dead, their relatives at first did not recognize them, then were astounded, and then were disgusted by their shabby appearance. Yet, according to Ramusio, “the scorn changed to delight when the returned travelers invited everyone to a homecoming banquet, ripped apart their old clothes, and let all the hidden jewels clatter to the table.” (Great Lives from History 1676) The rest of the world might have learned little about the Polo’s travels if fate had not intervened in Marco’s life. In his early forties, Marco was not yet ready to settle down. Perhaps he was restless for further adventure, or perhaps he felt obliged to fulfill his civic duties to his native city-state. In any event, he became involved in naval warfare between Venetians and their trading rivals, the Genoese, and was captured. In 1298, the great traveler across Asia and emissary of the khan found himself rotting in a prison in Genoa an experience that could have ended tragically but instead took a lucky turn. “In prison Marco met a man named Rustichello from Persia, who was a writer of romances.”(Stefoff 21) To pass the time, Marco dictated his observations about Asia to Rustichello, who, in writing them down, probably employed the Italianized Old French that was the language of medieval romances. Their book was soon circulating, since “Marco remained in prison only a year or so, very likely gaining his freedom when the Venetians and Genoese made peace in 1299.”(Rugoff 32) After his prison experience, Marco was content to lead a quiet life in Venice with the rest of his family and bask in his almost instant literary fame. He married Donata Badoer, a member of the Venetian aristocracy. Thus Marco seems to have spent the last part of his life moving in Venetian aristocratic circles. After living what was then a long life, Marco died in 1324, only seventy years of age. In his will he left most of his modest wealth to his three daughters, a legacy that included goods which he had brought back from Asia. “His will also set free a Tartar slave, who had remained with him since his return from the court of the great khan.”(Li Man Kin 25)
Great Lives from History. Ancient and Medieval Series. Pasadena,
California: Salem Press, 1988. 2: 1675-1680.
Hull, Mary. The Travels of Marco Polo. California: Lucent Books Inc.,
Li Man Kin. Marco Polo in China. Hong Kong: Kingsway International
Rugoff, Milton. Marco Polo's Adventures In China. New York: American
Heritage Publishing Co., 1964.
Stefoff, Rebecca. Marco Polo and the Medieval Explorers. Chelsea House Publishers, 1992. | 3,057 | ENGLISH | 1 |
David Malouf's novel Ransom, which is based upon Homer's Iliad, is divided into five parts.
Achilles is looking out to sea. He thinks of his mother, the goddess Thetis, and how he has become separated from her over the years. He has spent the last nine years fighting at Troy, and this war has removed him from his family, including his young son, Neoptolemus, but also from the land and the sea. He thinks of the death that he knows is coming and of the two men who loom largest in his mind: his dearest friend, Patroclus; and his bitterest enemy, Hector.
At the age of thirteen, Patroclus came to live at the court of Phthia, where Peleus, the father of Achilles, was and remains king. Patroclus had been exiled from his native land for killing another boy while they were playing. Achilles was three years younger than Patroclus, and they soon became like brothers. They came to fight at Troy together, and when Achilles withdrew from the fighting after a quarrel with Agamemnon, the commander-in-chief, Patroclus supported him. Soon, however, Patroclus became appalled by the scale of the Greek casualties and returned to the battle, wearing the armor of Achilles. Hector killed him, and Achilles, mad with grief, returned to battle and killed Hector. Achilles now keeps Hector’s corpse in his camp, refusing to bury it and dragging it behind his chariot to pollute the body. However, it is miraculously restored to a pristine condition after he does this, increasing Achilles’s fury and showing that the gods are against him.
In his palace in Troy, King Priam is unable to sleep, plagued by nightmares of the city burning. He broods on the death of Hector and Achilles’s mistreatment of his corpse, which he himself has witnessed from the walls of Troy. The rainbow goddess, Iris, appears to him and shows him a vision of himself in a cart loaded with treasure, going to ransom Hector’s body from Achilles. He shares this vision with his wife, Hecuba, saying that he intends to follow the vision and ransom the corpse. Hecuba opposes this notion on several grounds, thinking it will never work, that Priam will not return, and that, in any case, the king of Troy should not place himself in this humiliating position.
Priam replies by telling her the story of his own ransom from Heracles, who attacked Troy when he was a child. Hecuba asks him to take advice from his sons and his counselors, which he does the next morning. They share Hecuba's views, but Priam will not be dissuaded. He has a cart loaded with treasure and chooses a simple man called Somax to drive him, instead of proceeding with his customary retinue and herald. Priam takes leave of his wife and sons and departs from the city in the cart.
Priam and Somax stop by the side of the Scamander River. Somax persuades Priam to eat and drink and to wash his feet in the water. Priam is momentarily distracted from his grief and enjoys these simple pleasures. He begins to think that his life as a king, bounded on every side by formal rules and customs, has been limiting and has cut him off from the rest of humanity. The two men talk, and Priam discovers that Somax has lost all his sons. He reflects that these losses must have been even worse for Somax than they were for him, since Priam had a rather distant relationship with his sons (besides having a great many of them, some of whom remain alive).
A young man who calls himself Orchilus approaches the cart and seems to be about to steal the treasure. Priam and Somax do not trust him, but he stays with them as they ford the river. When they have crossed, Priam realizes that Orchilus is actually Hermes, the messenger of the gods. Hermes confirms his identity and says that he has come to help them on their journey to find Achilles.
Achilles is in his hut with his lieutenants when he sees a figure approaching....
(The entire section is 1,052 words.) | <urn:uuid:d2846e60-dd0b-49ed-8b72-bdb85c3ec06d> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.enotes.com/topics/ransom-david-malouf | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598217.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120081337-20200120105337-00362.warc.gz | en | 0.990262 | 890 | 3.421875 | 3 | [
-0.2904195785522461,
0.2248353511095047,
-0.046324048191308975,
0.0058157844468951225,
-0.0362994447350502,
-0.6861521005630493,
-0.1774250566959381,
0.5011413097381592,
0.4179229140281677,
-0.03564973920583725,
0.018280580639839172,
-0.699894368648529,
0.056915298104286194,
0.527717173099... | 2 | David Malouf's novel Ransom, which is based upon Homer's Iliad, is divided into five parts.
Achilles is looking out to sea. He thinks of his mother, the goddess Thetis, and how he has become separated from her over the years. He has spent the last nine years fighting at Troy, and this war has removed him from his family, including his young son, Neoptolemus, but also from the land and the sea. He thinks of the death that he knows is coming and of the two men who loom largest in his mind: his dearest friend, Patroclus; and his bitterest enemy, Hector.
At the age of thirteen, Patroclus came to live at the court of Phthia, where Peleus, the father of Achilles, was and remains king. Patroclus had been exiled from his native land for killing another boy while they were playing. Achilles was three years younger than Patroclus, and they soon became like brothers. They came to fight at Troy together, and when Achilles withdrew from the fighting after a quarrel with Agamemnon, the commander-in-chief, Patroclus supported him. Soon, however, Patroclus became appalled by the scale of the Greek casualties and returned to the battle, wearing the armor of Achilles. Hector killed him, and Achilles, mad with grief, returned to battle and killed Hector. Achilles now keeps Hector’s corpse in his camp, refusing to bury it and dragging it behind his chariot to pollute the body. However, it is miraculously restored to a pristine condition after he does this, increasing Achilles’s fury and showing that the gods are against him.
In his palace in Troy, King Priam is unable to sleep, plagued by nightmares of the city burning. He broods on the death of Hector and Achilles’s mistreatment of his corpse, which he himself has witnessed from the walls of Troy. The rainbow goddess, Iris, appears to him and shows him a vision of himself in a cart loaded with treasure, going to ransom Hector’s body from Achilles. He shares this vision with his wife, Hecuba, saying that he intends to follow the vision and ransom the corpse. Hecuba opposes this notion on several grounds, thinking it will never work, that Priam will not return, and that, in any case, the king of Troy should not place himself in this humiliating position.
Priam replies by telling her the story of his own ransom from Heracles, who attacked Troy when he was a child. Hecuba asks him to take advice from his sons and his counselors, which he does the next morning. They share Hecuba's views, but Priam will not be dissuaded. He has a cart loaded with treasure and chooses a simple man called Somax to drive him, instead of proceeding with his customary retinue and herald. Priam takes leave of his wife and sons and departs from the city in the cart.
Priam and Somax stop by the side of the Scamander River. Somax persuades Priam to eat and drink and to wash his feet in the water. Priam is momentarily distracted from his grief and enjoys these simple pleasures. He begins to think that his life as a king, bounded on every side by formal rules and customs, has been limiting and has cut him off from the rest of humanity. The two men talk, and Priam discovers that Somax has lost all his sons. He reflects that these losses must have been even worse for Somax than they were for him, since Priam had a rather distant relationship with his sons (besides having a great many of them, some of whom remain alive).
A young man who calls himself Orchilus approaches the cart and seems to be about to steal the treasure. Priam and Somax do not trust him, but he stays with them as they ford the river. When they have crossed, Priam realizes that Orchilus is actually Hermes, the messenger of the gods. Hermes confirms his identity and says that he has come to help them on their journey to find Achilles.
Achilles is in his hut with his lieutenants when he sees a figure approaching....
(The entire section is 1,052 words.) | 877 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Essay PreviewMore ↓
Robert E. Lee was the best General for the South, and out witted every Union General that was put against him. To Southerners, General Robert E. Lee is like a god figure to them. He inspired southerners even when the North dominated on the battle field, and is still praised by some radical believers in the confederate states. To the North, Robert E. Lee was a traitor to the United States and even lost his citizenship. Although he lost the war, Robert E. Lee is still a major face in history.
Robert E. Lee was born in Stratford, Virginia. Robert was the fourth child of Major General Henry Lee III, Governor of Virginia, and of his mother, Anne Hill Carter who was an ancestor of Thomas Moore and King Robert II of Scotland through the Earls of Crawford.(Brasington Jr.,Larry) Robert was mainly brought up by his mother who taught him about authority, tolerance, and order. Robert was exposed to Christianity at an early age and learned to accept it devotedly. In 1825, Robert was accepted to West Point. There he learned about warfare and how it was fought. In 1829, Robert graduated 2nd of 46 in his class, but even more extraordinary is that he never got a demerit while attending West Point. Afterward, Lee was appointed to Superintendent at West Point from 1852 to 1855. After he served his appointment, Lee left West Point to become a Lieutenant Colonel in the 2nd Calvary of the Lone Star State (Texas).
(Robert E. Lee. The National Archives) John Brown was an abolitionist who wanted to kill as many slave holders as possible and create an anti-slavery army. On October 16, 1859, John Brown seized the federal armament of 100,000 muskets and rifles from Harper’s Ferry, modern day West Virginia. Within 36 hours, Robert E. Lee was at Harper’s Ferry where he attacked and captured John Brown and the other rebels. This was a major victory for Robert E. Lee and would open up many opportunities for him.
After Harper’s Ferry, Robert was assigned to General Winfield Scott as a staff officer. In 1845, the United States of America and Mexico went to war. Lee’s duties as staff officer were to map the landscape ahead and separate the line of advancement for the United States troops.
How to Cite this Page
"Robert E. Lee." 123HelpMe.com. 18 Jan 2020
Need Writing Help?
Get feedback on grammar, clarity, concision and logic instantly.Check your paper »
- Robert E. Lee was the best General for the South, and out smarted every Union General that was put against him. To The South, Lee is like a godly figure to them. He inspired The South even when the North controlled the battlefield, and is still thought highly of by some people in the confederate states. To the North, Lee was a traitor and even lost his citizenship. Although he lost, Lee is still a giant face in history. Lee was born in Stratford, Virginia. Lee was the fourth child of General Henry Lee III, Governor of Virginia, and his mother, Anne Hill Carter, Lee was raised by his mother who taught him about authority, tolerance, and order.... [tags: robert lee, union general, civil war]
680 words (1.9 pages)
- Fighting against the odds, Robert Edward Lee became one of the most beloved generals in American history. His accomplishments have traveled through history as being unmatched by any other American general in history. His respect was earned by a life full of hard work and discipline. He was a leader by example, and would never ask his men to do something he himself would not do; because of this, Robert Edward Lee pushed the limits and became one of the most memorable generals in the Civil War. The youngest of four children, Robert Edward Lee was born on January 9th, 1807, in a large manor home located in Stratford, Virginia.... [tags: Robert E. Lee, USA, history, generals, civil war, ]
1236 words (3.5 pages)
- Educators in Arms Stonewall Jackson and Robert E. Lee are best known for their careers in leading the Confederate Army. Few people know anything about them beyond battles fought and wars lost. History is written by the victors, and the victors have essentially extinguished all perceived importance of these two fallen leaders. However, both were not only soldiers fighting for a lost cause, but also educators. Both taught many of those who would fight alongside and against them in the war that ripped the United States of America in half.... [tags: Robert E. Lee, Confederate States of America]
1098 words (3.1 pages)
- Biography of Robert E. Lee Robert E. Lee was born in Stratford Hall, near Montross, Virginia, on January 19, 1807. He grew up with a great love of all country life and his state. This stayed with him for the rest of his life. He was a very serious boy and spent many hours in his father's library. He loved to play with some his friends, swim, and he loved to hunt. Lee looked up to his father and always wanted to know what he was doing. George Washington and his father, "Light-Horse Harry Lee," were his heroes.... [tags: American History Presidents Robert E Lee Essays]
2094 words (6 pages)
- Robert Edward Lee was born in Westmoreland County, Virginia at Stratford Hall Plantation in 1807. He is the son of Major General Henry Lee the third, Governor of Virginia, and Anne Hill Carter, who is Henry’s second wife. Lee 's family is one of the first families to originally arrive in Virginia from England in the early 1600s, starting with the arrival of Richard Lee I. Robert did not know much of his father, Henry Lee the third, because his father died when he was a child. Robert E. Lee was an American soldier best known for commanding the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia in the American Civil War from 1862 until his surrender in 1865.... [tags: Robert E. Lee, Confederate States of America]
1508 words (4.3 pages)
- Robert Lee Frost was a classic American poet. His work, however, did not first receive recognition in the states, it all started in England. Robert Frost was born March 26, 1874 in San Francisco, California. He was the son of William Prescott Frost, Jr., a journalist, and Isabelle Moodie. For the first eleven years of his childhood, Robert lived in California. His father suffered from tuberculosis, until his fight sadly came to an end on May 5, 1885. With nowhere to go, his mother resorted to moving to New England with their grandparents.... [tags: American poet, poetry, England, America]
960 words (2.7 pages)
- Robert Lee Yates seemed to be an ordinary man. He had five children, had served for many years in both the U.S. Army and Washington Air National Guard. During this time he accumulated numerous military awards. He was described by his comrades as “a true professional who was very proficient in his job.” (King). On the outside he appeared to be an average guy who had a family and worked hard. However, Yates was not what he appeared to be on the surface. He was a rapist and a killer, who was charged with the murder of thirteen women, and the attempted murder of a fourteenth woman in Spokane, Washington.... [tags: Murder, Capital punishment, DNA]
1617 words (4.6 pages)
- Robert Frost was described as one of the greatest poets in the 20th century and became a sensation for poetry. It is not just his poems that interest the reader, but also his quotes can fulfill your compassion. This quote for example, “No tears in the writer, no tears in the reader. No surprise in the writer, no surprise in the reader” (Frost), shows that Frost will not feel a connection with the reader if the reader does not connect with his poetry. Frost presented a poem called “The Gift Outright” at John F.... [tags: Writer, Poetry]
515 words (1.5 pages)
- Biography of Robert Lee Frost Biography of Robert Lee Frost "A poem begins with a lump in the throat, a home-sickness or a love-sickness. It is a reaching-out toward expression; an effort to find fulfillment. A complete poem is one where an emotion has found its thought and the thought has found the words" Robert Lee Frost once said. Robert Frost is widely admired and recognized for his literary works. He was an honored poet of the twentieth century. Frost may have lived a troubling life, but that never seemed to interfere with his goals and devotion to writing.... [tags: Papers]
646 words (1.8 pages)
- Robert Lee Frost The mark of a great poet is his ability to engage the reader so that they analyse their own lives. Robert Lee Frost (1874 – 1963) – an influential American poet often associated with rural New England – is brilliant at this and uses poetry as a platform for the expression of his own general ideology. Frost’s belief that human society was often chaotic and stressful and that the meaning of life is elusive, has been promoted in his poetry. Frost looked to nature, whose undying beauty and simplicity did not force him into a strict, moulded society, but represented freedom from life and its constant stresses of family and work as a metaphor to show the stark comparison.... [tags: Poet Poem Frost Essays]
1456 words (4.2 pages)
In 1848, the American & Mexico War was over. America had won and had received a large amount of land. After the war, Lee returned to service as an Army engineer. Lee liked to spend as much time as he could in Washington, D.C. and moved into a local residence called the Curtis Mansion. This mansion is now a monument and it over looks Arlington Cemetery.
General Lee’s first military campaign was in West Virginia during the Civil War. There he commanded the Eastern Army of Virginia only after General Johnson was injured. Lee was greatly out numbered by the northern Union Army. Lee decided to make up for his numbers by attacking General McClellan’s army with audacity. In the next several days there were a number of skirmishes between Lee’s advancing forces against McClellan’s retreating army which became know as the Days Battle. After Lee’s success at the Days Battle, Lee gained control of the Northern Virginia Army, the biggest army in Virginia.
The battle of Chancellorsville was considered by many to be Lee’s greatest victory that showed his cunning and tactical mastermind on the battlefield. In May of 1868, Lee was facing a larger army led by Joe Hooker. Lee and his most trusted Lieutenant Stone Wall Jackson divided their forces between themselves and marched around Hooker’s flanks and attacked his vulnerable rear. This victory and Lee’s many successes led Lee to consider a second invasion of the north.
The battle of Gettysburg was the greatest land battle in the Western Hemisphere. It was fought at Gettysburg, Pennsylvania on July 1st through July 3rd, 1863. The two armies that fought in the battle of Gettysburg was the Army of Northern Virginia led by General Robert E. Lee and the Army of the Potomac led by the newly appointed General George Meade. The battle began with an encounter between Lee’s advanced brigade and a federal cavalry division. The fighting was inconclusive and the federal troops retired their forward positions to Culp’s Hill. On day 2 of the battle, General Meade took up defensive positions running from Culp’s Hill southward along Cemetery Ridge to Little Round Top. Lee had tried to flank General Meade to his right. Lee advanced his troops on the hill but could not take it because Meade had his reserves sent to the hill. This battle became known as the Battle of Little Round Top. (“Robert E. Lee” Wikipedia.). On the 3rd day, Lee ordered a charge on the center of Meade’s front line that became known as Pickets charge. Picket’s Charge ended in disaster for the south and weaken the already out numbered Southern Army. After the Battle of Gettysburg was lost, Lee retreated to the south.
In 1864 the newly appointed General-in-chief of the Union Lieutenant General Ulysses S. Grant, sought to destroy the last of Lee’s army. Grant pinned Lee down at the Confederate’s capital, Richmond, Virginia. Lee repelled each attack that Grant sent against him, but with superior numbers and reinforcements Lee was fighting for a lost cause. Lee repelled an attack by Grant to capture Petersburg, a major supplier to Richmond. Lee entrenched himself around Petersburg. Lee attempted to end the stale mate by sending Judal A. Early on a raid through the Shenandoah Valley to Washington D.C.. On the way he was defeated by Philip Sheridan. The seize on Petersburg lasted from June 1864 until April 1865. On January 31, 1865, Lee was promoted to General-in-chief of the Confederate forces. With a Union attack on Petersburg on April 2 1865 forced Lee to abandoned Richmond and retreated west. His forces were surrounded. Lee with overwhelming odds surrendered to Grant on April 9th 1865 at Appomattox Court House, Virginia. After Lee surrendered to Grant other Confederate armies followed suit and the war came to an end.
After the war, Lee was tried as a traitor by the Union but after his trail he only got his civil rights taken from him. Lee took the post as President at Washington University, where he served until his death in 1870. The school is now renamed Washington and Lee. On September 28,1870, Lee suffered a stroke that made him unable to speek. On October 12, 1870, two weeks after Lee’s stoke, Lee died at Lexington, Virginia due to effects of pneumonia. Lee was buried underneath Lee Chapel at Washington and Lee University where his body remains today. | <urn:uuid:45266a1e-8683-4e24-85fe-3754504733ba> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.123helpme.com/robert-e-lee-view.asp?id=162220 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594101.10/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119010920-20200119034920-00199.warc.gz | en | 0.985888 | 2,972 | 3.328125 | 3 | [
-0.3903324604034424,
0.11067605018615723,
0.08117775619029999,
-0.06171877682209015,
0.19141070544719696,
0.20879027247428894,
0.2049216777086258,
-0.22167757153511047,
-0.3535446226596832,
0.1393395960330963,
0.4154597818851471,
0.22867856919765472,
0.3143431842327118,
0.1538352072238922,... | 1 | Essay PreviewMore ↓
Robert E. Lee was the best General for the South, and out witted every Union General that was put against him. To Southerners, General Robert E. Lee is like a god figure to them. He inspired southerners even when the North dominated on the battle field, and is still praised by some radical believers in the confederate states. To the North, Robert E. Lee was a traitor to the United States and even lost his citizenship. Although he lost the war, Robert E. Lee is still a major face in history.
Robert E. Lee was born in Stratford, Virginia. Robert was the fourth child of Major General Henry Lee III, Governor of Virginia, and of his mother, Anne Hill Carter who was an ancestor of Thomas Moore and King Robert II of Scotland through the Earls of Crawford.(Brasington Jr.,Larry) Robert was mainly brought up by his mother who taught him about authority, tolerance, and order. Robert was exposed to Christianity at an early age and learned to accept it devotedly. In 1825, Robert was accepted to West Point. There he learned about warfare and how it was fought. In 1829, Robert graduated 2nd of 46 in his class, but even more extraordinary is that he never got a demerit while attending West Point. Afterward, Lee was appointed to Superintendent at West Point from 1852 to 1855. After he served his appointment, Lee left West Point to become a Lieutenant Colonel in the 2nd Calvary of the Lone Star State (Texas).
(Robert E. Lee. The National Archives) John Brown was an abolitionist who wanted to kill as many slave holders as possible and create an anti-slavery army. On October 16, 1859, John Brown seized the federal armament of 100,000 muskets and rifles from Harper’s Ferry, modern day West Virginia. Within 36 hours, Robert E. Lee was at Harper’s Ferry where he attacked and captured John Brown and the other rebels. This was a major victory for Robert E. Lee and would open up many opportunities for him.
After Harper’s Ferry, Robert was assigned to General Winfield Scott as a staff officer. In 1845, the United States of America and Mexico went to war. Lee’s duties as staff officer were to map the landscape ahead and separate the line of advancement for the United States troops.
How to Cite this Page
"Robert E. Lee." 123HelpMe.com. 18 Jan 2020
Need Writing Help?
Get feedback on grammar, clarity, concision and logic instantly.Check your paper »
- Robert E. Lee was the best General for the South, and out smarted every Union General that was put against him. To The South, Lee is like a godly figure to them. He inspired The South even when the North controlled the battlefield, and is still thought highly of by some people in the confederate states. To the North, Lee was a traitor and even lost his citizenship. Although he lost, Lee is still a giant face in history. Lee was born in Stratford, Virginia. Lee was the fourth child of General Henry Lee III, Governor of Virginia, and his mother, Anne Hill Carter, Lee was raised by his mother who taught him about authority, tolerance, and order.... [tags: robert lee, union general, civil war]
680 words (1.9 pages)
- Fighting against the odds, Robert Edward Lee became one of the most beloved generals in American history. His accomplishments have traveled through history as being unmatched by any other American general in history. His respect was earned by a life full of hard work and discipline. He was a leader by example, and would never ask his men to do something he himself would not do; because of this, Robert Edward Lee pushed the limits and became one of the most memorable generals in the Civil War. The youngest of four children, Robert Edward Lee was born on January 9th, 1807, in a large manor home located in Stratford, Virginia.... [tags: Robert E. Lee, USA, history, generals, civil war, ]
1236 words (3.5 pages)
- Educators in Arms Stonewall Jackson and Robert E. Lee are best known for their careers in leading the Confederate Army. Few people know anything about them beyond battles fought and wars lost. History is written by the victors, and the victors have essentially extinguished all perceived importance of these two fallen leaders. However, both were not only soldiers fighting for a lost cause, but also educators. Both taught many of those who would fight alongside and against them in the war that ripped the United States of America in half.... [tags: Robert E. Lee, Confederate States of America]
1098 words (3.1 pages)
- Biography of Robert E. Lee Robert E. Lee was born in Stratford Hall, near Montross, Virginia, on January 19, 1807. He grew up with a great love of all country life and his state. This stayed with him for the rest of his life. He was a very serious boy and spent many hours in his father's library. He loved to play with some his friends, swim, and he loved to hunt. Lee looked up to his father and always wanted to know what he was doing. George Washington and his father, "Light-Horse Harry Lee," were his heroes.... [tags: American History Presidents Robert E Lee Essays]
2094 words (6 pages)
- Robert Edward Lee was born in Westmoreland County, Virginia at Stratford Hall Plantation in 1807. He is the son of Major General Henry Lee the third, Governor of Virginia, and Anne Hill Carter, who is Henry’s second wife. Lee 's family is one of the first families to originally arrive in Virginia from England in the early 1600s, starting with the arrival of Richard Lee I. Robert did not know much of his father, Henry Lee the third, because his father died when he was a child. Robert E. Lee was an American soldier best known for commanding the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia in the American Civil War from 1862 until his surrender in 1865.... [tags: Robert E. Lee, Confederate States of America]
1508 words (4.3 pages)
- Robert Lee Frost was a classic American poet. His work, however, did not first receive recognition in the states, it all started in England. Robert Frost was born March 26, 1874 in San Francisco, California. He was the son of William Prescott Frost, Jr., a journalist, and Isabelle Moodie. For the first eleven years of his childhood, Robert lived in California. His father suffered from tuberculosis, until his fight sadly came to an end on May 5, 1885. With nowhere to go, his mother resorted to moving to New England with their grandparents.... [tags: American poet, poetry, England, America]
960 words (2.7 pages)
- Robert Lee Yates seemed to be an ordinary man. He had five children, had served for many years in both the U.S. Army and Washington Air National Guard. During this time he accumulated numerous military awards. He was described by his comrades as “a true professional who was very proficient in his job.” (King). On the outside he appeared to be an average guy who had a family and worked hard. However, Yates was not what he appeared to be on the surface. He was a rapist and a killer, who was charged with the murder of thirteen women, and the attempted murder of a fourteenth woman in Spokane, Washington.... [tags: Murder, Capital punishment, DNA]
1617 words (4.6 pages)
- Robert Frost was described as one of the greatest poets in the 20th century and became a sensation for poetry. It is not just his poems that interest the reader, but also his quotes can fulfill your compassion. This quote for example, “No tears in the writer, no tears in the reader. No surprise in the writer, no surprise in the reader” (Frost), shows that Frost will not feel a connection with the reader if the reader does not connect with his poetry. Frost presented a poem called “The Gift Outright” at John F.... [tags: Writer, Poetry]
515 words (1.5 pages)
- Biography of Robert Lee Frost Biography of Robert Lee Frost "A poem begins with a lump in the throat, a home-sickness or a love-sickness. It is a reaching-out toward expression; an effort to find fulfillment. A complete poem is one where an emotion has found its thought and the thought has found the words" Robert Lee Frost once said. Robert Frost is widely admired and recognized for his literary works. He was an honored poet of the twentieth century. Frost may have lived a troubling life, but that never seemed to interfere with his goals and devotion to writing.... [tags: Papers]
646 words (1.8 pages)
- Robert Lee Frost The mark of a great poet is his ability to engage the reader so that they analyse their own lives. Robert Lee Frost (1874 – 1963) – an influential American poet often associated with rural New England – is brilliant at this and uses poetry as a platform for the expression of his own general ideology. Frost’s belief that human society was often chaotic and stressful and that the meaning of life is elusive, has been promoted in his poetry. Frost looked to nature, whose undying beauty and simplicity did not force him into a strict, moulded society, but represented freedom from life and its constant stresses of family and work as a metaphor to show the stark comparison.... [tags: Poet Poem Frost Essays]
1456 words (4.2 pages)
In 1848, the American & Mexico War was over. America had won and had received a large amount of land. After the war, Lee returned to service as an Army engineer. Lee liked to spend as much time as he could in Washington, D.C. and moved into a local residence called the Curtis Mansion. This mansion is now a monument and it over looks Arlington Cemetery.
General Lee’s first military campaign was in West Virginia during the Civil War. There he commanded the Eastern Army of Virginia only after General Johnson was injured. Lee was greatly out numbered by the northern Union Army. Lee decided to make up for his numbers by attacking General McClellan’s army with audacity. In the next several days there were a number of skirmishes between Lee’s advancing forces against McClellan’s retreating army which became know as the Days Battle. After Lee’s success at the Days Battle, Lee gained control of the Northern Virginia Army, the biggest army in Virginia.
The battle of Chancellorsville was considered by many to be Lee’s greatest victory that showed his cunning and tactical mastermind on the battlefield. In May of 1868, Lee was facing a larger army led by Joe Hooker. Lee and his most trusted Lieutenant Stone Wall Jackson divided their forces between themselves and marched around Hooker’s flanks and attacked his vulnerable rear. This victory and Lee’s many successes led Lee to consider a second invasion of the north.
The battle of Gettysburg was the greatest land battle in the Western Hemisphere. It was fought at Gettysburg, Pennsylvania on July 1st through July 3rd, 1863. The two armies that fought in the battle of Gettysburg was the Army of Northern Virginia led by General Robert E. Lee and the Army of the Potomac led by the newly appointed General George Meade. The battle began with an encounter between Lee’s advanced brigade and a federal cavalry division. The fighting was inconclusive and the federal troops retired their forward positions to Culp’s Hill. On day 2 of the battle, General Meade took up defensive positions running from Culp’s Hill southward along Cemetery Ridge to Little Round Top. Lee had tried to flank General Meade to his right. Lee advanced his troops on the hill but could not take it because Meade had his reserves sent to the hill. This battle became known as the Battle of Little Round Top. (“Robert E. Lee” Wikipedia.). On the 3rd day, Lee ordered a charge on the center of Meade’s front line that became known as Pickets charge. Picket’s Charge ended in disaster for the south and weaken the already out numbered Southern Army. After the Battle of Gettysburg was lost, Lee retreated to the south.
In 1864 the newly appointed General-in-chief of the Union Lieutenant General Ulysses S. Grant, sought to destroy the last of Lee’s army. Grant pinned Lee down at the Confederate’s capital, Richmond, Virginia. Lee repelled each attack that Grant sent against him, but with superior numbers and reinforcements Lee was fighting for a lost cause. Lee repelled an attack by Grant to capture Petersburg, a major supplier to Richmond. Lee entrenched himself around Petersburg. Lee attempted to end the stale mate by sending Judal A. Early on a raid through the Shenandoah Valley to Washington D.C.. On the way he was defeated by Philip Sheridan. The seize on Petersburg lasted from June 1864 until April 1865. On January 31, 1865, Lee was promoted to General-in-chief of the Confederate forces. With a Union attack on Petersburg on April 2 1865 forced Lee to abandoned Richmond and retreated west. His forces were surrounded. Lee with overwhelming odds surrendered to Grant on April 9th 1865 at Appomattox Court House, Virginia. After Lee surrendered to Grant other Confederate armies followed suit and the war came to an end.
After the war, Lee was tried as a traitor by the Union but after his trail he only got his civil rights taken from him. Lee took the post as President at Washington University, where he served until his death in 1870. The school is now renamed Washington and Lee. On September 28,1870, Lee suffered a stroke that made him unable to speek. On October 12, 1870, two weeks after Lee’s stoke, Lee died at Lexington, Virginia due to effects of pneumonia. Lee was buried underneath Lee Chapel at Washington and Lee University where his body remains today. | 3,035 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Here is an analysis of Langston Hughes’ poem I, Too, which is an incredibly personal poem Hughes wrote, expressing how he felt as though he is an unforgotten American because of his skin color. In the short poem, Hughes proclaims that he, too, is an American, even though the dominant members of society are constantly pushing him aside and hiding him away because he is African American. Even though Hughes feels ostracized because of his race, he still sings as an American. Hughes turned to poetry in order to speak out against the blatant racism and oppression surrounding African Americans, and this poem is no exception. Although short in length, it delivers a powerful message about how many African Americans felt—and still feel—in America. Langston Hughes’ poem, I, Too, can be read in full here.
I, Too Summary
In this poem, the speaker, who is probably Hughes himself, is proclaiming to the world that he, too, is an American. He, too, sings America. He refers to himself as “the darker brother,” and even though he is not allowed to be seen as an equal among men in his country,—he is continually hidden away by the white majority– he is still an important and integral part of America. Even though the poem is dealing with a very painful subject—racism—the poet and speaker are still hopeful that one day soon, the powers that be will be ashamed of the way they have treated African Americans, and they will see that they are also a part of the country.
Breakdown Analysis of I, Too
Hughes utilizes free verse here. The poem is very brief, containing only five stanzas, two of which are only one line long. In total, there are only eighteen lines to the work. The simplicity of the poem, however, does not detract from the powerful message of the work. Instead, it emphasizes it even more.
The first line of the poem, which is also the first stanza, says “I, too, sing America.” The use of the pronoun “I” shows the reader that this is a very personal poem, and it can be inferred that our poet, Hughes, is also our speaker. This is his anthem. One cannot help but compare this line—and indeed, the entire poem—to another cherished American classic, Walt Whitman’s I Hear America Singing, written in 1867, where Whitman describes all sorts of Americans who collectively make up the song of America. Hughes seems to be telling Whitman that he has forgotten—either intentionally or not—to include the African American, who also plays a vital, albeit different, role in the country.
The second stanza, comprised of seven lines, is where the speaker identifies himself. He writes, “I am the darker brother.” It is in this line that the reader discovers that the poem’s speaker is probably African American, as he identifies himself by the color of his skin. In the second line of this stanza, the speaker uses another pronoun, “they,” to separate himself from the country’s majority. The third and fourth lines of the poem detail what the white majority does to the African American: “They send me to eat in the kitchen/When company comes.” These two lines depict the conditions of separation and segregation of Black Americans. Even after slavery was abolished in the States, many African Americans were still forced to work for the white man, and many of these men paid Black Americans to work in their houses as butlers, cooks, maids, and drivers. Hughes also seems to be calling out the hypocrisy African Americans are forced to endure. Hughes calls himself a “brother,” and perhaps many whites have recognized the abolition of slavery, but they still do not want to be seen as equals to African Americans. When company comes over, they force their Black “brothers” to hide away in the kitchen to eat by themselves. Hughes is quick to let the reader know that hope is not lost. In the last three lines of the second stanza, he writes, “But I laugh,/ And eat well,/ And grow strong.” In spite of his treatment, the speaker refuses to be kept down. He is still happy. He is still healthy. And he is still able to grow, both physically and mentally.
The second stanza was written in the present tense, whereas the third stanza looks toward the future. The eighth line of the poem simply reads “Tomorrow,” and the reader can assume the speaker does not literally mean tomorrow, but perhaps some time in the near future. “Tomorrow,” the speaker says, “I’ll sit at the table/When company comes.” The speaker is hopeful that he will not always be hidden away, and some day, he will be able to sit at the table with the other Americans. At some point, the speaker knows that the African American will finally be seen as the white man’s equal.
The fourth stanza, comprised of only three lines, is a continuation of the third. Hughes takes the thoughts expressed in the third stanza one step further in the fourth. Not only will he and other African Americans finally be seen as equal, but those who had oppressed them for hundreds of years will finally feel ashamed for what they did. They will recognize the beauty and vitality of the African American and realize their wrongs.
Just as he began with a one-line stanza, Hughes ends his poem with one, as well. He writes, “I, too, am America.” While the first line could possibly represent the patriotism he feels as an American, this declaration is even stronger—he, too, is America. The use of this metaphor to end the poem has a very powerful result, and he is proclaiming to his reader that he is just as important as everyone else in the country, and he will not be denied.
Langston Hughes was born in 1902 and died in 1967, and during the span of his lifetime, he saw America grow and evolve when it came to equal rights for minorities. Even though slavery had been abolished years before he was born, Hughes still encountered blatant racism and oppression as a Black man. His writings often represent this oppression, and through his poetry, he fights the majority and sings the praises of his fellow African Americans. Fortunately, Hughes lived long enough to see the Civil Rights Act of 1964 become law; however, the struggles of African Americans and other minority groups continue to exist in the United States today. | <urn:uuid:61431ea0-06ae-4b5f-9097-3f1ba8ebac19> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://poemanalysis.com/langston-hughes/i-too | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250604849.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121162615-20200121191615-00003.warc.gz | en | 0.98337 | 1,364 | 3.421875 | 3 | [
-0.38372480869293213,
0.08503420650959015,
-0.042563460767269135,
0.2586362957954407,
-0.11070319265127182,
0.07583322376012802,
0.6565823554992676,
-0.23417608439922333,
-0.041216395795345306,
-0.2328931838274002,
-0.1280541568994522,
0.15453994274139404,
-0.1841300129890442,
0.2436441034... | 2 | Here is an analysis of Langston Hughes’ poem I, Too, which is an incredibly personal poem Hughes wrote, expressing how he felt as though he is an unforgotten American because of his skin color. In the short poem, Hughes proclaims that he, too, is an American, even though the dominant members of society are constantly pushing him aside and hiding him away because he is African American. Even though Hughes feels ostracized because of his race, he still sings as an American. Hughes turned to poetry in order to speak out against the blatant racism and oppression surrounding African Americans, and this poem is no exception. Although short in length, it delivers a powerful message about how many African Americans felt—and still feel—in America. Langston Hughes’ poem, I, Too, can be read in full here.
I, Too Summary
In this poem, the speaker, who is probably Hughes himself, is proclaiming to the world that he, too, is an American. He, too, sings America. He refers to himself as “the darker brother,” and even though he is not allowed to be seen as an equal among men in his country,—he is continually hidden away by the white majority– he is still an important and integral part of America. Even though the poem is dealing with a very painful subject—racism—the poet and speaker are still hopeful that one day soon, the powers that be will be ashamed of the way they have treated African Americans, and they will see that they are also a part of the country.
Breakdown Analysis of I, Too
Hughes utilizes free verse here. The poem is very brief, containing only five stanzas, two of which are only one line long. In total, there are only eighteen lines to the work. The simplicity of the poem, however, does not detract from the powerful message of the work. Instead, it emphasizes it even more.
The first line of the poem, which is also the first stanza, says “I, too, sing America.” The use of the pronoun “I” shows the reader that this is a very personal poem, and it can be inferred that our poet, Hughes, is also our speaker. This is his anthem. One cannot help but compare this line—and indeed, the entire poem—to another cherished American classic, Walt Whitman’s I Hear America Singing, written in 1867, where Whitman describes all sorts of Americans who collectively make up the song of America. Hughes seems to be telling Whitman that he has forgotten—either intentionally or not—to include the African American, who also plays a vital, albeit different, role in the country.
The second stanza, comprised of seven lines, is where the speaker identifies himself. He writes, “I am the darker brother.” It is in this line that the reader discovers that the poem’s speaker is probably African American, as he identifies himself by the color of his skin. In the second line of this stanza, the speaker uses another pronoun, “they,” to separate himself from the country’s majority. The third and fourth lines of the poem detail what the white majority does to the African American: “They send me to eat in the kitchen/When company comes.” These two lines depict the conditions of separation and segregation of Black Americans. Even after slavery was abolished in the States, many African Americans were still forced to work for the white man, and many of these men paid Black Americans to work in their houses as butlers, cooks, maids, and drivers. Hughes also seems to be calling out the hypocrisy African Americans are forced to endure. Hughes calls himself a “brother,” and perhaps many whites have recognized the abolition of slavery, but they still do not want to be seen as equals to African Americans. When company comes over, they force their Black “brothers” to hide away in the kitchen to eat by themselves. Hughes is quick to let the reader know that hope is not lost. In the last three lines of the second stanza, he writes, “But I laugh,/ And eat well,/ And grow strong.” In spite of his treatment, the speaker refuses to be kept down. He is still happy. He is still healthy. And he is still able to grow, both physically and mentally.
The second stanza was written in the present tense, whereas the third stanza looks toward the future. The eighth line of the poem simply reads “Tomorrow,” and the reader can assume the speaker does not literally mean tomorrow, but perhaps some time in the near future. “Tomorrow,” the speaker says, “I’ll sit at the table/When company comes.” The speaker is hopeful that he will not always be hidden away, and some day, he will be able to sit at the table with the other Americans. At some point, the speaker knows that the African American will finally be seen as the white man’s equal.
The fourth stanza, comprised of only three lines, is a continuation of the third. Hughes takes the thoughts expressed in the third stanza one step further in the fourth. Not only will he and other African Americans finally be seen as equal, but those who had oppressed them for hundreds of years will finally feel ashamed for what they did. They will recognize the beauty and vitality of the African American and realize their wrongs.
Just as he began with a one-line stanza, Hughes ends his poem with one, as well. He writes, “I, too, am America.” While the first line could possibly represent the patriotism he feels as an American, this declaration is even stronger—he, too, is America. The use of this metaphor to end the poem has a very powerful result, and he is proclaiming to his reader that he is just as important as everyone else in the country, and he will not be denied.
Langston Hughes was born in 1902 and died in 1967, and during the span of his lifetime, he saw America grow and evolve when it came to equal rights for minorities. Even though slavery had been abolished years before he was born, Hughes still encountered blatant racism and oppression as a Black man. His writings often represent this oppression, and through his poetry, he fights the majority and sings the praises of his fellow African Americans. Fortunately, Hughes lived long enough to see the Civil Rights Act of 1964 become law; however, the struggles of African Americans and other minority groups continue to exist in the United States today. | 1,312 | ENGLISH | 1 |
President Abraham Lincoln is such a beloved presence in American history that it seems as if his mythical status was inevitable. But Lincoln’s journey was not preordained. As the war ground on into its fourth year in 1864, Lincoln assumed voters would throw him out of the White House. What happened? Historian S.C. Gwynne chronicles the turnarounds in his fascinating and immensely readable “Hymns of the Republic: The Story of the Final Year of the American Civil War.” He talked with Monitor correspondent Randy Dotinga.
Q: What is the state of the Civil War in early 1864 as a presidential election looms?
It’s less certain than ever what is going to happen to the country, and it’s all about whether Lincoln is going to win or lose at the ballot box. He had two requirements: The Union gets put back together again and slavery is abolished. If Lincoln wins, then everybody knows he’s going to pursue the war until it’s won. But let’s say Lincoln loses. In that case, the assumption is that there’s going to be peace. It’s not clear what kind of peace, but people are going to come together and stop the fighting. So it all comes down to one guy.
Q: Why isn’t the war a cakewalk for the North, which has more men and resources?
One reason is Robert E. Lee. The Confederacy’s Army of Northern Virginia is the closest thing in American history to an invincible force. They’d won many battles when they had been outnumbered 2:1. At some point, the idea of Lee as indomitable becomes as potent as his army in a lot of ways. But the more Lee wins – or doesn’t lose – the more the South is destroyed. And the war doesn’t end. You see the rise of guerrilla and anti-civilian warfare, the rise of these horrible prison camps. The economic destruction of the South arises from its essential failure to lose the war.
Q: What is the key to the success of Gen. Ulysses S. Grant?
Lincoln had this problem finding a general who is willing basically to go in and hammer, and just keep hammering, and fight a war of attrition. Grant was that general. The rap on Grant is that he’s a butcher who’s just going to shove these guys into battles and have them cut into pieces. I admire Grant very much and think he was a decent guy, but there was something about him that you can’t deny: He didn’t mind sacrificing men.
Q: How bad did things get for Lincoln?
If you had polled the nation and certainly [if you had asked those in] the corridors of power in August of 1864, a few months before the November election, Lincoln would have lost by a significant margin. [Critics said] he was mismanaging this terrible war and messing with civil liberties. Hundreds of thousands of people were dying, and everything was going just horribly. Lincoln himself was convinced he was going to lose. He was trying to figure out how to plan the transition in such a way that he could end the war before the new president came in.
Q: What lessons can we learn from Lincoln?
He had this absolute steadfastness. There were so many places where he could have wavered, given in a little bit, and said, “Let’s get together at the peace table, and we’ll work it out and stop this war.” He wouldn’t do it. He wanted to treat the Southerners in a kindly way after the war. But he just simply wouldn’t budge on the question of abolition of slavery. His success came after perseverance that was almost unimaginable. | <urn:uuid:6ee51a03-94d5-49c7-a99d-ed2f050d7fd5> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.csmonitor.com/Books/2020/0108/Q-A-with-S.C.-Gwynne-author-of-Hymns-of-the-Republic | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251681625.83/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125222506-20200126012506-00326.warc.gz | en | 0.981562 | 804 | 3.34375 | 3 | [
-0.34555310010910034,
0.38299158215522766,
0.15434350073337555,
0.29386967420578003,
-0.1932997703552246,
0.2500474154949188,
0.20291441679000854,
0.05571281164884567,
-0.2375895380973816,
0.17272374033927917,
-0.08235174417495728,
0.17997436225414276,
-0.0187908336520195,
0.51955980062484... | 2 | President Abraham Lincoln is such a beloved presence in American history that it seems as if his mythical status was inevitable. But Lincoln’s journey was not preordained. As the war ground on into its fourth year in 1864, Lincoln assumed voters would throw him out of the White House. What happened? Historian S.C. Gwynne chronicles the turnarounds in his fascinating and immensely readable “Hymns of the Republic: The Story of the Final Year of the American Civil War.” He talked with Monitor correspondent Randy Dotinga.
Q: What is the state of the Civil War in early 1864 as a presidential election looms?
It’s less certain than ever what is going to happen to the country, and it’s all about whether Lincoln is going to win or lose at the ballot box. He had two requirements: The Union gets put back together again and slavery is abolished. If Lincoln wins, then everybody knows he’s going to pursue the war until it’s won. But let’s say Lincoln loses. In that case, the assumption is that there’s going to be peace. It’s not clear what kind of peace, but people are going to come together and stop the fighting. So it all comes down to one guy.
Q: Why isn’t the war a cakewalk for the North, which has more men and resources?
One reason is Robert E. Lee. The Confederacy’s Army of Northern Virginia is the closest thing in American history to an invincible force. They’d won many battles when they had been outnumbered 2:1. At some point, the idea of Lee as indomitable becomes as potent as his army in a lot of ways. But the more Lee wins – or doesn’t lose – the more the South is destroyed. And the war doesn’t end. You see the rise of guerrilla and anti-civilian warfare, the rise of these horrible prison camps. The economic destruction of the South arises from its essential failure to lose the war.
Q: What is the key to the success of Gen. Ulysses S. Grant?
Lincoln had this problem finding a general who is willing basically to go in and hammer, and just keep hammering, and fight a war of attrition. Grant was that general. The rap on Grant is that he’s a butcher who’s just going to shove these guys into battles and have them cut into pieces. I admire Grant very much and think he was a decent guy, but there was something about him that you can’t deny: He didn’t mind sacrificing men.
Q: How bad did things get for Lincoln?
If you had polled the nation and certainly [if you had asked those in] the corridors of power in August of 1864, a few months before the November election, Lincoln would have lost by a significant margin. [Critics said] he was mismanaging this terrible war and messing with civil liberties. Hundreds of thousands of people were dying, and everything was going just horribly. Lincoln himself was convinced he was going to lose. He was trying to figure out how to plan the transition in such a way that he could end the war before the new president came in.
Q: What lessons can we learn from Lincoln?
He had this absolute steadfastness. There were so many places where he could have wavered, given in a little bit, and said, “Let’s get together at the peace table, and we’ll work it out and stop this war.” He wouldn’t do it. He wanted to treat the Southerners in a kindly way after the war. But he just simply wouldn’t budge on the question of abolition of slavery. His success came after perseverance that was almost unimaginable. | 766 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Two heads are better than one - but not if you're feeling vulnerable and defenseless. In a new University of Haifa study, lone lab rats that were made to feel helpless learned to avoid uncontrollable situations that create such feelings better than rats that were exposed to uncontrollable conditions in pairs. The results were counterintuitive, as the researchers were certain rats would cope better with feelings of helplessness if they were part of a pair, rather than alone. The way laboratory rats react to uncontrollable situations - in which their behaviors have no influence on subsequent events - has been researched in the past. Results show that rats exposed to small electric shocks that they can't escape have a more difficult time learning how to avoid them in the future than rats never exposed to situations of helplessness - a phenomenon known as "learned helplessness." Researchers choose to experiment with rats because they are known as social animals whose brains work in a way similar to human brains. However, most of the research done until now was done on rats exposed to uncontrollable conditions when they are alone. In his doctoral dissertation, Dr. Qutaiba Agbaria (working under the supervision of Dr. Richard Shuster) examined the differences in learned helplessness among rats exposed to uncontrollable conditions alone and in pairs. The researcher began with the hypothesis that rats would learn to be more adaptable in social situations (being one of a couple). However, the research results revealed a very different picture. Rats exposed to uncontrollable conditions in pairs coped more poorly when they were no longer in uncontrollable situations than rats that were exposed to these situations alone. The next phase of the research examined the influence of a rat that had never been exposed to an uncontrollable situation on a rat that had. These pairs of rats showed greater adaptability than pairs in which both rats had been exposed to helplessness as individuals or in pairs. In addition, the researchers did not find outstanding differences between the learning ability of these pairs of rats - where one had been exposed to uncontrollable conditions and the other had not - and pairs that were never exposed to uncontrollable conditions, which means that the effects of "learned helplessness" were effectively erased. "Now that we have seen that [learned helplessness can be unlearned,]" said Agbaria, "we should continue to examine whether this change is a result of exposure to a rat that was not exposed to helplessness or rather that the social behavior between the two animals has another meaning." | <urn:uuid:b4961d79-87dc-4fab-9ee8-92100a4427f4> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.jpost.com/Health-and-Sci-Tech/Science-And-Environment/Its-easier-to-cope-when-youre-a-lone-rat | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250616186.38/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124070934-20200124095934-00459.warc.gz | en | 0.985496 | 503 | 3.5 | 4 | [
-0.037425652146339417,
-0.17247307300567627,
0.16803038120269775,
0.2051345705986023,
0.10040973871946335,
0.2068384885787964,
0.4841505289077759,
0.056911107152700424,
-0.10580097138881683,
-0.352153480052948,
0.07516374439001083,
-0.04925961792469025,
0.2870020866394043,
0.42107233405113... | 3 | Two heads are better than one - but not if you're feeling vulnerable and defenseless. In a new University of Haifa study, lone lab rats that were made to feel helpless learned to avoid uncontrollable situations that create such feelings better than rats that were exposed to uncontrollable conditions in pairs. The results were counterintuitive, as the researchers were certain rats would cope better with feelings of helplessness if they were part of a pair, rather than alone. The way laboratory rats react to uncontrollable situations - in which their behaviors have no influence on subsequent events - has been researched in the past. Results show that rats exposed to small electric shocks that they can't escape have a more difficult time learning how to avoid them in the future than rats never exposed to situations of helplessness - a phenomenon known as "learned helplessness." Researchers choose to experiment with rats because they are known as social animals whose brains work in a way similar to human brains. However, most of the research done until now was done on rats exposed to uncontrollable conditions when they are alone. In his doctoral dissertation, Dr. Qutaiba Agbaria (working under the supervision of Dr. Richard Shuster) examined the differences in learned helplessness among rats exposed to uncontrollable conditions alone and in pairs. The researcher began with the hypothesis that rats would learn to be more adaptable in social situations (being one of a couple). However, the research results revealed a very different picture. Rats exposed to uncontrollable conditions in pairs coped more poorly when they were no longer in uncontrollable situations than rats that were exposed to these situations alone. The next phase of the research examined the influence of a rat that had never been exposed to an uncontrollable situation on a rat that had. These pairs of rats showed greater adaptability than pairs in which both rats had been exposed to helplessness as individuals or in pairs. In addition, the researchers did not find outstanding differences between the learning ability of these pairs of rats - where one had been exposed to uncontrollable conditions and the other had not - and pairs that were never exposed to uncontrollable conditions, which means that the effects of "learned helplessness" were effectively erased. "Now that we have seen that [learned helplessness can be unlearned,]" said Agbaria, "we should continue to examine whether this change is a result of exposure to a rat that was not exposed to helplessness or rather that the social behavior between the two animals has another meaning." | 503 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Paint by number: Understanding how color patterns arise in nature using science and art
November 21, 2016
Erick Bayala once had a professor tell him he had a problem—he was a good artist and a good scientist, so he had to choose between them. "Well, I didn't think I had to choose," said Bayala.
"Many people have the idea that art and science are two things that will never mix," said Bayala, a graduate student in the Department of Organismal Biology and Anatomy at the University of Chicago. "A lot of the first greatest scientists were also really good artists and the reason why we still learn about their science today is because of their art back then."
While working on organisms that were unfamiliar to most people, Bayala would draw schematics to explain his research. Some of his professors suggested that he think about scientific illustration as a career possibility after graduate school.
"Some people think that scientific illustration died a long time ago because now people can just take pictures," said Bayala. "The role of a scientific illustrator is to not only draw an image of what they see, but to take the knowledge of something and convert it into an image that people can relate to."
Bayala uses scientific illustration to compile his data into representative images that can help people understand his research.
"Scientific illustrators have to know both the science and the art behind an image," said Bayala.
As a scientist-artist Bayala was interested in pursuing biological questions related to color patterns of animals for his graduate work.
"Color patterns completely appealed to my artistic eye. I wanted to understand how these pieces of art in nature are formed," said Bayala.
Bayala's research in the lab of Marcus Kronforst, PhD, assistant professor in the Department of Ecology and Evolution, focuses on how color patterns are encoded during the development of an organism and how these complex processes are regulated.
"One thing we see a lot in nature is how animals have stripes, circles, and all of these beautiful color patterns, but we don't really know how during development they acquire all of that information to produce the pattern."
Bayala uses butterfly species as model organisms to understand how color patterns, which are important for reproduction, camouflage, and survival, are established and how they evolve. He wants to understand what happens during development that allows a particular color to be in a particular location.
"Butterflies have magnificent and diverse color patterns," said Bayala. "I want to know how in development tweaking these mechanisms of establishing the colors can allow for much of the diversity we see in the animal world." | <urn:uuid:e98e7c1d-3ec4-4b92-80c6-c55a4b24c058> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.uchicagomedicine.org/forefront/biological-sciences-articles/paint-by-number-understanding-how-color-patterns-arise-in-nature-using-science-and-art | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250608295.52/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123041345-20200123070345-00040.warc.gz | en | 0.983054 | 542 | 3.515625 | 4 | [
-0.24664881825447083,
-0.3379475772380829,
-0.2131778597831726,
-0.005314687266945839,
-0.2902732491493225,
0.3762730658054352,
0.31979525089263916,
0.026142975315451622,
-0.08558794856071472,
0.38675034046173096,
0.03476531803607941,
-0.3518419861793518,
0.12287113070487976,
0.54994904994... | 9 | Paint by number: Understanding how color patterns arise in nature using science and art
November 21, 2016
Erick Bayala once had a professor tell him he had a problem—he was a good artist and a good scientist, so he had to choose between them. "Well, I didn't think I had to choose," said Bayala.
"Many people have the idea that art and science are two things that will never mix," said Bayala, a graduate student in the Department of Organismal Biology and Anatomy at the University of Chicago. "A lot of the first greatest scientists were also really good artists and the reason why we still learn about their science today is because of their art back then."
While working on organisms that were unfamiliar to most people, Bayala would draw schematics to explain his research. Some of his professors suggested that he think about scientific illustration as a career possibility after graduate school.
"Some people think that scientific illustration died a long time ago because now people can just take pictures," said Bayala. "The role of a scientific illustrator is to not only draw an image of what they see, but to take the knowledge of something and convert it into an image that people can relate to."
Bayala uses scientific illustration to compile his data into representative images that can help people understand his research.
"Scientific illustrators have to know both the science and the art behind an image," said Bayala.
As a scientist-artist Bayala was interested in pursuing biological questions related to color patterns of animals for his graduate work.
"Color patterns completely appealed to my artistic eye. I wanted to understand how these pieces of art in nature are formed," said Bayala.
Bayala's research in the lab of Marcus Kronforst, PhD, assistant professor in the Department of Ecology and Evolution, focuses on how color patterns are encoded during the development of an organism and how these complex processes are regulated.
"One thing we see a lot in nature is how animals have stripes, circles, and all of these beautiful color patterns, but we don't really know how during development they acquire all of that information to produce the pattern."
Bayala uses butterfly species as model organisms to understand how color patterns, which are important for reproduction, camouflage, and survival, are established and how they evolve. He wants to understand what happens during development that allows a particular color to be in a particular location.
"Butterflies have magnificent and diverse color patterns," said Bayala. "I want to know how in development tweaking these mechanisms of establishing the colors can allow for much of the diversity we see in the animal world." | 529 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Historic Poverty Bay and the East Coast, N.I., N.Z.
Banks Describes the Natives
Banks Describes the Natives
An excellent description of the natives is furnished by Banks:
“The people were in general of a midling size,” he says, “though there was one who measured more than six feet. Their colour was dark brown; their lips were stained with something put under the skin (as in the Otaheite tattow); and their faces mark'd with deeply engraved furrows, coloured also black, and formed in regular spirals. Of these, the oldest people had much the greatest quantity and deepest channel'd—in some not less than one-sixteenth part of an inch.
“Their hair, always black, was tied on the Tops of their heads in a little knot, in which was stuck feathers of various birds in different tastes, according to the humour of the wearer, but, generally, stuck into the knot, sometimes one on each side of the temples pointing forwards, which made a most disagreeable appearance. In their ears, they generally wear a large bunch of the down of some bird, milk white.page 42
“The faces of some were painted with a red colour in oil—some all over; others in parts only. In their hair was much Oil that had very little smell; more lice than ever I saw before and on most of them a small comb neatly enough made, sometimes of wood and sometimes of bone, which they seemed to prize much. Some few had on their faces and arms regular scars, as if made with a Sharp Instrument— such as I have seen on the faces of negroes.
“The inferior sort were clothed in something that very much resembled hemp. The loose strings of this were fastened together at the Top and hung down about two feet long like a peticoat. Of these garments they wore two—one round their shoulders and the other round their waists. The richer had garments probably of a finer sort of the same stuff, most beautifully made in exactly the same manner as the South American Indians at this day—as fine or finer than one of them which I have by me that I bought at Rio de Janeiro for 36 shillings and was esteemed uncommonly cheap at that price.
“Their boats were not large but well made—something in the form of our whaleboats but longer. Their bottom was the trunk of a tree, hollowed and very thin. This was raised by a board on each side, sewed on with a strip of wood sewed over the seam to make it tight. On the head of every one was carved the head of a Man with an enormous tong reaching out of his Mouth. These grotesque figures were some at least very well executed. Some had Eyes inlaid of something that shone very much. The whole served to give us an idea of their taste as well as ingenuity in execution; much superior to anything we have yet seen.”
“Their behaviour while on board shewed every sign of friendship. They invited us very cordially to come back to our old bay [Poverty Bay] or to a small cove which they showed us nearer to us. I could not help wishing that we had done so, but the Captain chose rather to Stand on in the search of a better harbour than any we have yet seen….”
Banks also says that, after a stay of about two hours, most of the natives went away, but, “by some means or other, three were left on board and not one boat would put back to take them in and, what was more surprising, those left aboard did not seem at all uneasy with their situation.” With the aid of a light nor'-wester, the Endeavour steered along shore under an easy sail until midnight and brought to off Table Cape [Mahia]. In the morning, when their guests noted that the ship had sailed some leagues, they began to lament and weep very much. About 7 o'clock, a canoe with an old man, who seemed to be a chief, came out and took away the ship's guests “much to their, as well as to our, satisfaction.” | <urn:uuid:b0034833-9279-40cb-ae79-8633ef3e7697> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-MacHist-t1-body-d5-d3.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250593994.14/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118221909-20200119005909-00477.warc.gz | en | 0.992406 | 875 | 3.40625 | 3 | [
0.07854339480400085,
0.08511413633823395,
0.023315800353884697,
-0.1997697949409485,
0.18104241788387299,
-0.3157077431678772,
0.42246025800704956,
-0.2593439817428589,
-0.1709931492805481,
-0.052210282534360886,
0.14892372488975525,
-0.47596871852874756,
-0.1768929660320282,
0.37231492996... | 3 | Historic Poverty Bay and the East Coast, N.I., N.Z.
Banks Describes the Natives
Banks Describes the Natives
An excellent description of the natives is furnished by Banks:
“The people were in general of a midling size,” he says, “though there was one who measured more than six feet. Their colour was dark brown; their lips were stained with something put under the skin (as in the Otaheite tattow); and their faces mark'd with deeply engraved furrows, coloured also black, and formed in regular spirals. Of these, the oldest people had much the greatest quantity and deepest channel'd—in some not less than one-sixteenth part of an inch.
“Their hair, always black, was tied on the Tops of their heads in a little knot, in which was stuck feathers of various birds in different tastes, according to the humour of the wearer, but, generally, stuck into the knot, sometimes one on each side of the temples pointing forwards, which made a most disagreeable appearance. In their ears, they generally wear a large bunch of the down of some bird, milk white.page 42
“The faces of some were painted with a red colour in oil—some all over; others in parts only. In their hair was much Oil that had very little smell; more lice than ever I saw before and on most of them a small comb neatly enough made, sometimes of wood and sometimes of bone, which they seemed to prize much. Some few had on their faces and arms regular scars, as if made with a Sharp Instrument— such as I have seen on the faces of negroes.
“The inferior sort were clothed in something that very much resembled hemp. The loose strings of this were fastened together at the Top and hung down about two feet long like a peticoat. Of these garments they wore two—one round their shoulders and the other round their waists. The richer had garments probably of a finer sort of the same stuff, most beautifully made in exactly the same manner as the South American Indians at this day—as fine or finer than one of them which I have by me that I bought at Rio de Janeiro for 36 shillings and was esteemed uncommonly cheap at that price.
“Their boats were not large but well made—something in the form of our whaleboats but longer. Their bottom was the trunk of a tree, hollowed and very thin. This was raised by a board on each side, sewed on with a strip of wood sewed over the seam to make it tight. On the head of every one was carved the head of a Man with an enormous tong reaching out of his Mouth. These grotesque figures were some at least very well executed. Some had Eyes inlaid of something that shone very much. The whole served to give us an idea of their taste as well as ingenuity in execution; much superior to anything we have yet seen.”
“Their behaviour while on board shewed every sign of friendship. They invited us very cordially to come back to our old bay [Poverty Bay] or to a small cove which they showed us nearer to us. I could not help wishing that we had done so, but the Captain chose rather to Stand on in the search of a better harbour than any we have yet seen….”
Banks also says that, after a stay of about two hours, most of the natives went away, but, “by some means or other, three were left on board and not one boat would put back to take them in and, what was more surprising, those left aboard did not seem at all uneasy with their situation.” With the aid of a light nor'-wester, the Endeavour steered along shore under an easy sail until midnight and brought to off Table Cape [Mahia]. In the morning, when their guests noted that the ship had sailed some leagues, they began to lament and weep very much. About 7 o'clock, a canoe with an old man, who seemed to be a chief, came out and took away the ship's guests “much to their, as well as to our, satisfaction.” | 850 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The Paleozoic era, which happened and extended from about 542 million years ago to 251 million years ago, was a time when there were many important changes on Earth. The era began with the rupture of a super continent known as Pannotia, and the formation of a new one. Plants spread and evolved, and the first vertebrate animals that existed colonized the earth.
The Paleozoic era also known as Primary Era, is the division of the geological scale that began with the disintegration of the Pannotia and ended with the formation of the Pangea, the super-continent, which was later divided into several smaller continents.
The Paleozoic era was an era of transit between the different forms of primitive life that existed, between vertebrate animals and invertebrates, of marine life and land, which was conquered by plants and animals. At this time, invertebrates evolved and grew in number. During the first years, sea life was limited to small animals, but then, vertebrate fish began to appear, which were fish covered with bony shells.
The first vegetables appeared on earth as ferns and conifers, and the atmosphere reached the oxygen levels we have today. Insects, amphibians and reptiles made their appearance, and there was great activity geologically speaking. Pangea began to separate and the lands emerging from the process were surrounded by sea.
Some important characteristics of the Paleozoic era are mentioned below:
The Paleozoic era is divided into five different periods:
Because plant and animal life had not fully evolved, it has been difficult to find climate information in continental fossil records, so the climate was considered oceanic and temperate, and had almost no seasonal differences. It is believed that at the beginning of the Silurian period there was the first great extinction due to the great glaciation that occurred.
New aquatic life forms, such as algae, corals, mollusks, sharks, emerged. The first insects emerged at this time as did the echinoderms, although there was a massive extinction in that era. There was the Cambrian explosion, which suggested that animals had evolved by creating improvements in their systems.
During the Ordovician period, temperatures increased, and humidity increased, creating an atmosphere rich in carbon dioxide, facilitating the plant growth and the colonization of the continents by plants. The first vascular plants with rigid stems appeared. Large forests with large trees and swamps also emerged.
Volcano activity was very intense during the Paleozoic era, giving rise to new lands through land tectonic plates movement. Through telluric movements, the lands began to elevate giving rise to mountains and large ferns forests. | <urn:uuid:4331cddf-c31f-4581-a68d-8766f909418e> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.euston96.com/en/paleozoic-era/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251696046.73/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127081933-20200127111933-00514.warc.gz | en | 0.982534 | 556 | 4.21875 | 4 | [
-0.16063760221004486,
0.05568011850118637,
0.6774624586105347,
-0.009267473593354225,
-0.16225388646125793,
-0.04485081881284714,
-0.13987073302268982,
0.041152507066726685,
-0.023214634507894516,
0.07010786235332489,
0.24404984712600708,
-0.5019497871398926,
0.30784904956817627,
0.2431655... | 3 | The Paleozoic era, which happened and extended from about 542 million years ago to 251 million years ago, was a time when there were many important changes on Earth. The era began with the rupture of a super continent known as Pannotia, and the formation of a new one. Plants spread and evolved, and the first vertebrate animals that existed colonized the earth.
The Paleozoic era also known as Primary Era, is the division of the geological scale that began with the disintegration of the Pannotia and ended with the formation of the Pangea, the super-continent, which was later divided into several smaller continents.
The Paleozoic era was an era of transit between the different forms of primitive life that existed, between vertebrate animals and invertebrates, of marine life and land, which was conquered by plants and animals. At this time, invertebrates evolved and grew in number. During the first years, sea life was limited to small animals, but then, vertebrate fish began to appear, which were fish covered with bony shells.
The first vegetables appeared on earth as ferns and conifers, and the atmosphere reached the oxygen levels we have today. Insects, amphibians and reptiles made their appearance, and there was great activity geologically speaking. Pangea began to separate and the lands emerging from the process were surrounded by sea.
Some important characteristics of the Paleozoic era are mentioned below:
The Paleozoic era is divided into five different periods:
Because plant and animal life had not fully evolved, it has been difficult to find climate information in continental fossil records, so the climate was considered oceanic and temperate, and had almost no seasonal differences. It is believed that at the beginning of the Silurian period there was the first great extinction due to the great glaciation that occurred.
New aquatic life forms, such as algae, corals, mollusks, sharks, emerged. The first insects emerged at this time as did the echinoderms, although there was a massive extinction in that era. There was the Cambrian explosion, which suggested that animals had evolved by creating improvements in their systems.
During the Ordovician period, temperatures increased, and humidity increased, creating an atmosphere rich in carbon dioxide, facilitating the plant growth and the colonization of the continents by plants. The first vascular plants with rigid stems appeared. Large forests with large trees and swamps also emerged.
Volcano activity was very intense during the Paleozoic era, giving rise to new lands through land tectonic plates movement. Through telluric movements, the lands began to elevate giving rise to mountains and large ferns forests. | 548 | ENGLISH | 1 |
A famous opera singer and suffragist, the first American woman to achieve international recognition during the “Golden Age” of Opera.
Born as Lillian Allen Norton in Farmington, ME, the youngest of four daughters. Her interest in music began at a young age, listening to the sounds of running brooks and singing birds. When she was 8 years old, the family moved to Boston, MA, for the musical education of her sister Wilhelmina. Nordica used to listen to her sister’s practice and imitated her. After Wilhelmina died of Typhoid fever at age 17, the focus turned to Lillian, and she began her formal musical education.
Soon after graduating from the New England Conservatory of Music, Nordica was invited to tour in Europe and decided to stay in Milan, Italy. There, her music coach gave her the stage name “Giglia Nordica” (Lily of the North) as a more suitable name for a diva. After she enchanted the Italian audience, she traveled through Europe, performing in front of royalties and presidents in the greatest musical venues, including The Royal Opera House in London, The Bayreuth Festival in Germany, and the Imperial Opera in Saint Petersburg. She returned for a short time to the US as a member of Her Majesty’s Opera Company, touring across the country.
At age 38, Nordica settled in NYC, where she was a recurring performer at the Metropolitan Opera House for almost 20 years. She was known for her extensive vocal range, able to perform coloratura showpieces as well as dramatic solos. Throughout the years, she performed in many iconic operas, including Aida, La Traviata, Faust, and La Gioconda, but she was mainly recognized for her roles in Wagnerian operas.
Nordica was also a women’s rights advocate, speaking against the paying gap between male and female singers. She gave concerts to raise funds for the woman’s suffrage movement, and in 1911, a day before the vote for the women’s right in CA, she spoke from an open streetcar in San Francisco, encouraging women to vote.
In 1913, after performing in Melbourne, Australia, her ship hit a coral reef and was stuck for a few days. She suffered hypothermia and developed pneumonia. Her health continued to deteriorate, and she died a year later at the age of 57.
More Interesting Anecdotes:
- She wrote two essays: “Hints to Singers” and “How to Sing a Ballad.”
- There is a rumor at the University of Maine at Farmington that Nordica’s ghost is roaming the auditorium, which named after her.
- Nordica was married three times and never had children.
- At age 48, she became a model for Coca-Cola, appearing on posters and merchandise like trays. She was one of the first celebrities to become a presenter of the company.
- Her childhood home in Farmington, ME, is a museum and historic site. | <urn:uuid:9b88cf74-6d03-4f98-b372-cc3141cc3045> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://wanderwomenproject.com/women/lillian-nordica/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250605075.24/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121192553-20200121221553-00356.warc.gz | en | 0.981816 | 644 | 3.265625 | 3 | [
0.1716059148311615,
-0.1868371069431305,
0.4412457048892975,
0.1941661238670349,
-0.6823292970657349,
0.6129428148269653,
-0.06432390213012695,
0.32533299922943115,
0.20273171365261078,
-0.03631118685007095,
-0.01213790476322174,
0.2818349003791809,
0.2657015025615692,
0.1443103849887848,
... | 3 | A famous opera singer and suffragist, the first American woman to achieve international recognition during the “Golden Age” of Opera.
Born as Lillian Allen Norton in Farmington, ME, the youngest of four daughters. Her interest in music began at a young age, listening to the sounds of running brooks and singing birds. When she was 8 years old, the family moved to Boston, MA, for the musical education of her sister Wilhelmina. Nordica used to listen to her sister’s practice and imitated her. After Wilhelmina died of Typhoid fever at age 17, the focus turned to Lillian, and she began her formal musical education.
Soon after graduating from the New England Conservatory of Music, Nordica was invited to tour in Europe and decided to stay in Milan, Italy. There, her music coach gave her the stage name “Giglia Nordica” (Lily of the North) as a more suitable name for a diva. After she enchanted the Italian audience, she traveled through Europe, performing in front of royalties and presidents in the greatest musical venues, including The Royal Opera House in London, The Bayreuth Festival in Germany, and the Imperial Opera in Saint Petersburg. She returned for a short time to the US as a member of Her Majesty’s Opera Company, touring across the country.
At age 38, Nordica settled in NYC, where she was a recurring performer at the Metropolitan Opera House for almost 20 years. She was known for her extensive vocal range, able to perform coloratura showpieces as well as dramatic solos. Throughout the years, she performed in many iconic operas, including Aida, La Traviata, Faust, and La Gioconda, but she was mainly recognized for her roles in Wagnerian operas.
Nordica was also a women’s rights advocate, speaking against the paying gap between male and female singers. She gave concerts to raise funds for the woman’s suffrage movement, and in 1911, a day before the vote for the women’s right in CA, she spoke from an open streetcar in San Francisco, encouraging women to vote.
In 1913, after performing in Melbourne, Australia, her ship hit a coral reef and was stuck for a few days. She suffered hypothermia and developed pneumonia. Her health continued to deteriorate, and she died a year later at the age of 57.
More Interesting Anecdotes:
- She wrote two essays: “Hints to Singers” and “How to Sing a Ballad.”
- There is a rumor at the University of Maine at Farmington that Nordica’s ghost is roaming the auditorium, which named after her.
- Nordica was married three times and never had children.
- At age 48, she became a model for Coca-Cola, appearing on posters and merchandise like trays. She was one of the first celebrities to become a presenter of the company.
- Her childhood home in Farmington, ME, is a museum and historic site. | 624 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Here is a 17th century Russian icon. It depicts:
СВЯТЫЙ СВЯЩЕННОМУЧЕНИК КЛИМЕНТ ПАПА РИМСКИЙ
SVYATUIY SVYASHCHENNOMUCHENIK KLIMENT, PAPA RIMSKIY
“Holy Priest-martyr Clement, Pope of Rome”
A priest-martyr is also often termed a “hieromartyr” — which means basically the same thing.
The posture used in this icon — a saint bending to one side, with the face near but not entirely in profile — was popular in the 17th century. The icon depicts Clement in a landscape with miniature background scenes from his traditional life, instead of placing them in separate border cells as is common in many other icons.
Though it is rather difficult to see in the photo, Clement holds the fingers of his right hand in the position favored by the Old Believers, who split from the State Orthodox Church in the middle of the 1600s (or perhaps it is more accurate to say the State Church split from the Old Believers). Clement looks up at an angle toward the image of the New Testament Trinity on the left.
Now you may wonder what a Roman Pope is doing in a Russian Orthodox icon, given the historical antipathy of Russian Orthodoxy toward Roman Catholicism. Well, the answer is that at the time when Clement is said to have lived — the first century c.e. — the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches had not yet separated. That is why Eastern Orthodoxy may recognize some Catholic saints prior to the Great Schism of 1054, but not after.
Given that almost no reliable evidence concerning Kliment/Clement is known, there was wide space left for hagiographic embroidery of his life and deeds.
Clement was supposedly born into a noble and wealthy family. He lost touch with his mother and two brothers — Faustinus and Faustinian — who were driven off-course by a storm during a sea voyage. His father disappeared too, on going to look for them.
Later, when Clement went to Alexandria in Egypt seeking his family, he met the apostle Barnabas, and not only found his two brothers there — who had become followers of St. Peter — but when he went to Palestine, he also met St. Peter, who was able to turn up Clement’s old mother and father as well.
The tradition relates that Clement was consecrated as bishop of Rome by St. Peter, following the bishoprics of Linus (67-79) and Anacletus (79-91). Clement supposedly was bishop from 92-101, though dates in the sources vary, and he is sometimes said to have died about 98 c.e.
Many stories are told of Clement: he supposedly baptized 424 people on an Easter, then earned the wrath of Emperor Trajan by scorning the gods. First Trajan sent an officer named Sissinius to arrest Clement, but he and his men were miraculously blinded, and mistakenly dragged a column to the prison instead of Clement. Then Trajan had Clement exiled to a quarry in Crimea, near the city of Cherson. Supposedly many of his disciples followed him into exile there.
In the quarry there was a severe lack of water. Tradition says that Clement prayed, and Jesus appeared to him in the form of a lamb on a hill. The lamb struck at the ground with one hoof, and when Clement hit the spot with his pickaxe, a spring gushed forth that turned into a veritable river, resulting in another mass conversion. A church was even built for him in the quarries.
All this supposedly only irritated Trajan more, so the Emperor ordered Clement to be drowned in the sea, an anchor tied to his neck. And so Clement died. But thanks to the prayers of Bishop Cornelius, St. Fibius and others, the sea miraculously pulled back some three miles to reveal Clement’s remains, which were found in a church-shaped “angelic” undersea cave. After that, the waters would miraculously withdraw every year on the anniversary of his martyrdom, and remain back for a week, in order to make his relics available for Christian veneration. Once a child was caught in the sea when it came flooding back over the site, but he was found alive on the spot the next year, when the waters again withdrew.
It is said that in reign of the Byzantine Emperor Nicephorus (802-811), God did not allow the sea to withdraw for 50 years, and so the Christians could not get to the submerged church-cave.
Later in the 9th century, the missionaries to the Slavs Cyril and Methodius and a number of others supposedly prayed at midnight for Clement’s relics to appear, and the relics miraculously did so. This time they were taken to the Church of the Apostles in Constantinople. Later some of the remains were taken to Rome, and the head of Clement was taken to Kyiv by St. Vladimir — the fellow who converted Kievan Rus’ to Eastern Orthodoxy by edict. There they — along with the relics of St. Fibius of Rome/Фива Римский/Fiva Rimskiy — were placed in the Church of the Tithes (Десятинна церква/Desyatinna tserkva) — the first stone church in Kyiv/Kiev. At present the head of Clement is said to be kept in the caves of the Pecherskaya Lavra at Kyiv.
Now obviously there is a lot of nonsense and uncertainty in all this. An anonymous letter (1 Clement) is generally attributed to Clement. But so were a number of other writings that are now considered to be misattributed to him. And though Clement is called “Pope of Rome,” the title is anachronistic; it did not exist at that time. Some vague early references to a “Clement” were applied to Clement of Rome, including that of Paul in Philippians 4:3:
” And I intreat you also, true yoke-fellow, help those women who labored with me in the Gospel, with Clement also, and with other my fellow laborers, whose names are in the book of life.”
and that found in The Shepherd of Hermas, 4:3:
“You shall therefore write two little books, and shall send one to Clement, and one to Grapte. So Clement shall send to the foreign cities, for this is his duty; while Grapte shall instruct the widows and the orphans.”
The earliest references to Clement in Eusebius and Jerome do not mention that he was martyred. The tale that he was drowned with an anchor tied to his neck is found no earlier than the 4th century, and many modern scholars believe that Clement’s martyrdom is the result of confusing him with another Roman saint of a similar name who was a martyr, Titus Flavius Clemens. Nonetheless, the anchor became the symbol of “Pope Clement I” in Catholic Christianity.
As for his relics, there is an account that in 868 St. Cyril, while in the Crimea, found some bones and an anchor buried in a mound, which he identified as the bones of Clement of Rome. They were brought to Rome, and placed as Clement’s relics in the Basilica of St. Clement/San Clemente. But as we know from history, tales of saints’ relics are highly unreliable in any case, as there was a very large market in fake relics to meet the vast demand.
Here is another icon of “Clement, Pope of Rome,” depicting him in the more conventional frontal pose, with scenes from his hagiographic life in the borders: | <urn:uuid:5d6b5bd3-77fd-4c42-b953-76939bd9f994> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://russianicons.wordpress.com/2019/12/12/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606872.19/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122071919-20200122100919-00127.warc.gz | en | 0.981956 | 1,716 | 3.3125 | 3 | [
0.08224686235189438,
0.11640452593564987,
-0.11730498820543289,
-0.030171435326337814,
-0.4960393011569977,
-0.21701963245868683,
0.022084038704633713,
0.8135679960250854,
0.521239161491394,
0.048707615584135056,
0.12040108442306519,
-0.2770419120788574,
0.04420938342809677,
-0.22824348509... | 2 | Here is a 17th century Russian icon. It depicts:
СВЯТЫЙ СВЯЩЕННОМУЧЕНИК КЛИМЕНТ ПАПА РИМСКИЙ
SVYATUIY SVYASHCHENNOMUCHENIK KLIMENT, PAPA RIMSKIY
“Holy Priest-martyr Clement, Pope of Rome”
A priest-martyr is also often termed a “hieromartyr” — which means basically the same thing.
The posture used in this icon — a saint bending to one side, with the face near but not entirely in profile — was popular in the 17th century. The icon depicts Clement in a landscape with miniature background scenes from his traditional life, instead of placing them in separate border cells as is common in many other icons.
Though it is rather difficult to see in the photo, Clement holds the fingers of his right hand in the position favored by the Old Believers, who split from the State Orthodox Church in the middle of the 1600s (or perhaps it is more accurate to say the State Church split from the Old Believers). Clement looks up at an angle toward the image of the New Testament Trinity on the left.
Now you may wonder what a Roman Pope is doing in a Russian Orthodox icon, given the historical antipathy of Russian Orthodoxy toward Roman Catholicism. Well, the answer is that at the time when Clement is said to have lived — the first century c.e. — the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches had not yet separated. That is why Eastern Orthodoxy may recognize some Catholic saints prior to the Great Schism of 1054, but not after.
Given that almost no reliable evidence concerning Kliment/Clement is known, there was wide space left for hagiographic embroidery of his life and deeds.
Clement was supposedly born into a noble and wealthy family. He lost touch with his mother and two brothers — Faustinus and Faustinian — who were driven off-course by a storm during a sea voyage. His father disappeared too, on going to look for them.
Later, when Clement went to Alexandria in Egypt seeking his family, he met the apostle Barnabas, and not only found his two brothers there — who had become followers of St. Peter — but when he went to Palestine, he also met St. Peter, who was able to turn up Clement’s old mother and father as well.
The tradition relates that Clement was consecrated as bishop of Rome by St. Peter, following the bishoprics of Linus (67-79) and Anacletus (79-91). Clement supposedly was bishop from 92-101, though dates in the sources vary, and he is sometimes said to have died about 98 c.e.
Many stories are told of Clement: he supposedly baptized 424 people on an Easter, then earned the wrath of Emperor Trajan by scorning the gods. First Trajan sent an officer named Sissinius to arrest Clement, but he and his men were miraculously blinded, and mistakenly dragged a column to the prison instead of Clement. Then Trajan had Clement exiled to a quarry in Crimea, near the city of Cherson. Supposedly many of his disciples followed him into exile there.
In the quarry there was a severe lack of water. Tradition says that Clement prayed, and Jesus appeared to him in the form of a lamb on a hill. The lamb struck at the ground with one hoof, and when Clement hit the spot with his pickaxe, a spring gushed forth that turned into a veritable river, resulting in another mass conversion. A church was even built for him in the quarries.
All this supposedly only irritated Trajan more, so the Emperor ordered Clement to be drowned in the sea, an anchor tied to his neck. And so Clement died. But thanks to the prayers of Bishop Cornelius, St. Fibius and others, the sea miraculously pulled back some three miles to reveal Clement’s remains, which were found in a church-shaped “angelic” undersea cave. After that, the waters would miraculously withdraw every year on the anniversary of his martyrdom, and remain back for a week, in order to make his relics available for Christian veneration. Once a child was caught in the sea when it came flooding back over the site, but he was found alive on the spot the next year, when the waters again withdrew.
It is said that in reign of the Byzantine Emperor Nicephorus (802-811), God did not allow the sea to withdraw for 50 years, and so the Christians could not get to the submerged church-cave.
Later in the 9th century, the missionaries to the Slavs Cyril and Methodius and a number of others supposedly prayed at midnight for Clement’s relics to appear, and the relics miraculously did so. This time they were taken to the Church of the Apostles in Constantinople. Later some of the remains were taken to Rome, and the head of Clement was taken to Kyiv by St. Vladimir — the fellow who converted Kievan Rus’ to Eastern Orthodoxy by edict. There they — along with the relics of St. Fibius of Rome/Фива Римский/Fiva Rimskiy — were placed in the Church of the Tithes (Десятинна церква/Desyatinna tserkva) — the first stone church in Kyiv/Kiev. At present the head of Clement is said to be kept in the caves of the Pecherskaya Lavra at Kyiv.
Now obviously there is a lot of nonsense and uncertainty in all this. An anonymous letter (1 Clement) is generally attributed to Clement. But so were a number of other writings that are now considered to be misattributed to him. And though Clement is called “Pope of Rome,” the title is anachronistic; it did not exist at that time. Some vague early references to a “Clement” were applied to Clement of Rome, including that of Paul in Philippians 4:3:
” And I intreat you also, true yoke-fellow, help those women who labored with me in the Gospel, with Clement also, and with other my fellow laborers, whose names are in the book of life.”
and that found in The Shepherd of Hermas, 4:3:
“You shall therefore write two little books, and shall send one to Clement, and one to Grapte. So Clement shall send to the foreign cities, for this is his duty; while Grapte shall instruct the widows and the orphans.”
The earliest references to Clement in Eusebius and Jerome do not mention that he was martyred. The tale that he was drowned with an anchor tied to his neck is found no earlier than the 4th century, and many modern scholars believe that Clement’s martyrdom is the result of confusing him with another Roman saint of a similar name who was a martyr, Titus Flavius Clemens. Nonetheless, the anchor became the symbol of “Pope Clement I” in Catholic Christianity.
As for his relics, there is an account that in 868 St. Cyril, while in the Crimea, found some bones and an anchor buried in a mound, which he identified as the bones of Clement of Rome. They were brought to Rome, and placed as Clement’s relics in the Basilica of St. Clement/San Clemente. But as we know from history, tales of saints’ relics are highly unreliable in any case, as there was a very large market in fake relics to meet the vast demand.
Here is another icon of “Clement, Pope of Rome,” depicting him in the more conventional frontal pose, with scenes from his hagiographic life in the borders: | 1,630 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Frederick Madison Allen is synonymous with the ‘starvation diet’, which he devised before the discovery of insulin to extend the lives of diabetes patients.
Alle, a physician, theorised that restricted calorie intake and engaging in regular exercise would prolong the life of insulin-producing beta cells
Among those who supported Allen’s work was Dr. Elliot Proctor Joslin , but Allen also had his critics who claimed that some of his patients died of starvation rather than diabetes.
Alle, who was born in Iowa, studied medicine at the University of California. He attended Harvard Medical School between 1909 and 1912 and thanks to his father’s financing, published Studies Concerning Glycosuria and Diabetes in 1913.
The 1,179-page book provided an exhaustive review of diabetes, containing his research on animals, where he concluded that hyperglycemia did not cause lowered resistance to infection or proteinuria.
Allen also reported that on a low-carbohydrate diet – or an Eskimo diet, as he called it – dogs with diabetes remained relatively well. Allen put forward that people with diabetes should reduce their food intake until there was no glucose left in patient’s urine. This is known as glycosuria.
Allen was offered a junior position at the Rockefeller Institute in 1914, where he was able to test on human diabetes patients. Alongside a starvation diet, Allen insisted his patients receive plenty of exercise.
As some patients died from starvation, critics viewed his treatment as cruel, but Allen argued that on his diet, life was tolerable for patients.
In 1919, Allen published Total Dietary Regulation in the Treatment of Diabetes, which contained records of 76 of his patients who were treated with dietary changes.
Two years later, the British Medical Journal said of the book: “Allen’s case records have real practical value. The reader can match them with cases from his own experience, and he can see exactly what was done and note the result.”
Allen left Rockefeller in 1919 and set up the Psychiatric Institute, New York. The centre was designed to focus entirely on diabetes research, with payment from patients dependent on what treatment they wanted to receive. Even before insulin therapy, his centre achieved great success in extending patients’ lives.
Allen worked seven-day weeks for most of his life. After his centre went bankrupt in 1936, he pursued further research into hypertension and cancer. Allen died in Maine on 14 April 1957. | <urn:uuid:2b8bd0f2-01bd-4971-bfcf-02553d1f46a4> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.diabetes.co.uk/pioneers/frederick-madison-allen.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250601241.42/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121014531-20200121043531-00530.warc.gz | en | 0.98026 | 502 | 3.390625 | 3 | [
-0.4000980854034424,
0.3982711732387543,
0.39805033802986145,
0.39981502294540405,
-0.05693607032299042,
0.2160758227109909,
0.08275312930345535,
0.23020528256893158,
-0.45807766914367676,
-0.06576406210660934,
0.15315334498882294,
-0.5578583478927612,
-0.0037389956414699554,
0.37103575468... | 4 | Frederick Madison Allen is synonymous with the ‘starvation diet’, which he devised before the discovery of insulin to extend the lives of diabetes patients.
Alle, a physician, theorised that restricted calorie intake and engaging in regular exercise would prolong the life of insulin-producing beta cells
Among those who supported Allen’s work was Dr. Elliot Proctor Joslin , but Allen also had his critics who claimed that some of his patients died of starvation rather than diabetes.
Alle, who was born in Iowa, studied medicine at the University of California. He attended Harvard Medical School between 1909 and 1912 and thanks to his father’s financing, published Studies Concerning Glycosuria and Diabetes in 1913.
The 1,179-page book provided an exhaustive review of diabetes, containing his research on animals, where he concluded that hyperglycemia did not cause lowered resistance to infection or proteinuria.
Allen also reported that on a low-carbohydrate diet – or an Eskimo diet, as he called it – dogs with diabetes remained relatively well. Allen put forward that people with diabetes should reduce their food intake until there was no glucose left in patient’s urine. This is known as glycosuria.
Allen was offered a junior position at the Rockefeller Institute in 1914, where he was able to test on human diabetes patients. Alongside a starvation diet, Allen insisted his patients receive plenty of exercise.
As some patients died from starvation, critics viewed his treatment as cruel, but Allen argued that on his diet, life was tolerable for patients.
In 1919, Allen published Total Dietary Regulation in the Treatment of Diabetes, which contained records of 76 of his patients who were treated with dietary changes.
Two years later, the British Medical Journal said of the book: “Allen’s case records have real practical value. The reader can match them with cases from his own experience, and he can see exactly what was done and note the result.”
Allen left Rockefeller in 1919 and set up the Psychiatric Institute, New York. The centre was designed to focus entirely on diabetes research, with payment from patients dependent on what treatment they wanted to receive. Even before insulin therapy, his centre achieved great success in extending patients’ lives.
Allen worked seven-day weeks for most of his life. After his centre went bankrupt in 1936, he pursued further research into hypertension and cancer. Allen died in Maine on 14 April 1957. | 513 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Post-medieval cistern at Coombe Abbey.
The remains of a post-medieval circular, brick-built cistern were identified during the excavation of trial trenches. The site lay west of the Abbeygate buildings at Coombe Abbey. This was originally interpreted as an icehouse.
1 The remains of a post-medieval circular, brick-built icehouse were identified during the excavation of trial trenches prior to the proposed new extension to the hotel. The walls were constructed in a concave shape, bowed outwards and at its widest surviving course the structure measured 3.50m in diameter. The wall had survived to 10 courses, a height of 0.80m. The roof structure, which would have been domed, had been robbed out.
2This area was excavated between 2007 and 2008 (Area A). The postulated icehouse was found to be a circular brick cistern with a sloping wall decreasing in diameter towards the base, with a series of inlet and outlet culverts. The cistern seems to have been short-lived. It was infilled with a loam that contained pottery from the 1820s and 1830s, and brick and mortar fragments. | <urn:uuid:16bc4419-2671-45f9-b752-772c1c0db6c9> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.ourwarwickshire.org.uk/content/catalogue_her/post-medieval-cistern-at-coombe-abbey | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250601040.47/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120224950-20200121013950-00308.warc.gz | en | 0.98866 | 247 | 3.453125 | 3 | [
-0.1935388296842575,
0.23724697530269623,
0.16157802939414978,
0.3094397187232971,
0.10662095993757248,
0.257597416639328,
-0.2926737368106842,
0.042803194373846054,
-0.09319519251585007,
-0.30722007155418396,
0.24351640045642853,
-0.7419580221176147,
0.29789358377456665,
0.203017517924308... | 3 | Post-medieval cistern at Coombe Abbey.
The remains of a post-medieval circular, brick-built cistern were identified during the excavation of trial trenches. The site lay west of the Abbeygate buildings at Coombe Abbey. This was originally interpreted as an icehouse.
1 The remains of a post-medieval circular, brick-built icehouse were identified during the excavation of trial trenches prior to the proposed new extension to the hotel. The walls were constructed in a concave shape, bowed outwards and at its widest surviving course the structure measured 3.50m in diameter. The wall had survived to 10 courses, a height of 0.80m. The roof structure, which would have been domed, had been robbed out.
2This area was excavated between 2007 and 2008 (Area A). The postulated icehouse was found to be a circular brick cistern with a sloping wall decreasing in diameter towards the base, with a series of inlet and outlet culverts. The cistern seems to have been short-lived. It was infilled with a loam that contained pottery from the 1820s and 1830s, and brick and mortar fragments. | 261 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Baby spiders like to mingle, but adult spiders tend to eat each other.
New research published in PLOS Biology found that adult spiders seem to forget how to behave with each other after being alone too long, which causes them to become aggressive. These findings could help researchers understand why some spider species like to hang out together their whole lives but most would eat another spider if given the chance.
Regardless of how you feel about spiders, they're an important part of many ecosystems. Despite that, they are often misunderstood, said Violette Chiara, a graduate student at the University of Toulouse, France, who led the study.
"Spiders are not just aggressive, cannibalistic monsters," Chiara said. "There are spiders that are social at the beginning of their lives, and there are also some species that remain social during their whole lives."
A friendly start in life
Baby spiders, known as spiderlings, begin their lives cozied up to their siblings — sometimes as many as several hundred. But when they grow up, they tend to live alone. Of the more than 40,000 known spider species, all but 30 lead solitary lives in adulthood.
It's not clear why so few spider species remain social their whole lives. Many researchers believe that spiders become more aggressive as they grow, which drives them to avoid each other. Chiara decided to test which comes first: aggressive behavior or social isolation.
Chiara and team members Felipe Ramon Portugal and Raphael Jeanson studied labyrinth spiders, which are common in France. They observed that baby labyrinth spiders started to move away from each other five days after emerging from their eggs, which the researchers initially thought pointed to a natural increase in aggression.
However, they found that even spiderlings raised alone started to move around more after five days. In other words, the spiders weren't fleeing from their siblings because they were worried they'd get eaten, they were just stretching their (many) legs and becoming more mobile as they grew.
If an increase in aggressive behavior doesn't happen naturally as the spiders age, something must cause it. To test this, the researchers raised some spiders alone and others in groups. They then brought together pairs of spiders that weren't familiar with each other to see if they reacted peacefully or violently.
Spiders that were raised in groups almost never tried to eat the unfamiliar spider, but those raised alone went on the attack 40% of the time. The more time they had spent alone, the more likely they were to try to eat the unfamiliar spider. The researchers concluded that isolation causes spiders to become aggressive and not the other way around.
Jonathan Pruitt, an evolutionary ecologist who was not involved in the research, said that the study was a good example of "going back and scrutinizing what a lot of people have assumed but don't even realize that they've assumed, and questioning it and finding a very different story."
The researchers hope to learn what happens to the loners that makes them more likely to attack other spiders they encounter.
"We know that they're more aggressive, but from a cognitive point of view, what is the change?" said co-author Raphael Jeanson.
One possibility is that when spiders spend too much time away from other spiders, they forget how to read social cues — in this case, chemicals in their "skin" that help them recognize each other. The researchers hope to explore this possibility by studying a species that is closely related to labyrinth spiders, but lives in groups all their lives.
Leticia Aviles, a specialist in social spiders who was not involved in the study, agreed that the lack of social interactions could lead spiders to become more aggressive.
"When they remain together, they are familiar with each other, they have these chemical cues that they can read from each other, so they remain tolerant. But when they have been isolated, the familiarity is lost, and that's what leads to this intolerant and aggressive behavior," Aviles said. "I think that has implications for all kinds of systems, not just spiders." | <urn:uuid:5956fd79-f122-4046-b072-3ace1491a2f3> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.voanews.com/science-health/study-finds-even-spiders-get-grumpy-when-theyre-alone-too-long | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251669967.70/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125041318-20200125070318-00375.warc.gz | en | 0.983956 | 830 | 3.625 | 4 | [
-0.21093860268592834,
-0.23808300495147705,
0.0033978817518800497,
0.009984545409679413,
0.059538304805755615,
-0.08903145790100098,
0.3032491207122803,
0.07742318511009216,
0.019758278504014015,
-0.11822596192359924,
0.33177876472473145,
-0.02507317066192627,
0.14049874246120453,
0.246541... | 6 | Baby spiders like to mingle, but adult spiders tend to eat each other.
New research published in PLOS Biology found that adult spiders seem to forget how to behave with each other after being alone too long, which causes them to become aggressive. These findings could help researchers understand why some spider species like to hang out together their whole lives but most would eat another spider if given the chance.
Regardless of how you feel about spiders, they're an important part of many ecosystems. Despite that, they are often misunderstood, said Violette Chiara, a graduate student at the University of Toulouse, France, who led the study.
"Spiders are not just aggressive, cannibalistic monsters," Chiara said. "There are spiders that are social at the beginning of their lives, and there are also some species that remain social during their whole lives."
A friendly start in life
Baby spiders, known as spiderlings, begin their lives cozied up to their siblings — sometimes as many as several hundred. But when they grow up, they tend to live alone. Of the more than 40,000 known spider species, all but 30 lead solitary lives in adulthood.
It's not clear why so few spider species remain social their whole lives. Many researchers believe that spiders become more aggressive as they grow, which drives them to avoid each other. Chiara decided to test which comes first: aggressive behavior or social isolation.
Chiara and team members Felipe Ramon Portugal and Raphael Jeanson studied labyrinth spiders, which are common in France. They observed that baby labyrinth spiders started to move away from each other five days after emerging from their eggs, which the researchers initially thought pointed to a natural increase in aggression.
However, they found that even spiderlings raised alone started to move around more after five days. In other words, the spiders weren't fleeing from their siblings because they were worried they'd get eaten, they were just stretching their (many) legs and becoming more mobile as they grew.
If an increase in aggressive behavior doesn't happen naturally as the spiders age, something must cause it. To test this, the researchers raised some spiders alone and others in groups. They then brought together pairs of spiders that weren't familiar with each other to see if they reacted peacefully or violently.
Spiders that were raised in groups almost never tried to eat the unfamiliar spider, but those raised alone went on the attack 40% of the time. The more time they had spent alone, the more likely they were to try to eat the unfamiliar spider. The researchers concluded that isolation causes spiders to become aggressive and not the other way around.
Jonathan Pruitt, an evolutionary ecologist who was not involved in the research, said that the study was a good example of "going back and scrutinizing what a lot of people have assumed but don't even realize that they've assumed, and questioning it and finding a very different story."
The researchers hope to learn what happens to the loners that makes them more likely to attack other spiders they encounter.
"We know that they're more aggressive, but from a cognitive point of view, what is the change?" said co-author Raphael Jeanson.
One possibility is that when spiders spend too much time away from other spiders, they forget how to read social cues — in this case, chemicals in their "skin" that help them recognize each other. The researchers hope to explore this possibility by studying a species that is closely related to labyrinth spiders, but lives in groups all their lives.
Leticia Aviles, a specialist in social spiders who was not involved in the study, agreed that the lack of social interactions could lead spiders to become more aggressive.
"When they remain together, they are familiar with each other, they have these chemical cues that they can read from each other, so they remain tolerant. But when they have been isolated, the familiarity is lost, and that's what leads to this intolerant and aggressive behavior," Aviles said. "I think that has implications for all kinds of systems, not just spiders." | 816 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Just like many countries in the world, Somalia is a patriarchal society, where men control the system of society and government. In such a setting, women are limited from accessing many opportunities to establish themselves and are exposed to various levels of violations.
Over the years, many people have been on the forefront trying to establish a society that treats both men and women equally in all sectors. While this has gained momentum in recent years, it traces its roots as far back as AD 15 when Somalia was under Queen Ebla Awad, also known as Araweelo.
Araweelo is believed to have been the daughter of an unknown king who only sired daughters. She was the firstborn and thus, the apparent heir to her father’s kingdom.
However, around the same time, there was an inter-clan feud that cost thousands of lives. Her husband died in the feud and her two children died of starvation.
The young and destitute woman quickly left her husband’s family and went home only to be rejected by her own family as she was considered useless for she would not bring dowry. She would not get married to another man as the community considered it a taboo to marry a widow.
With fate against her, Araweelo met with other women in her situation and together, they lived in the wilderness, hunting and gathering food for their existence. They also had to face constant attacks from men who wanted to disrupt their way of life.
Araweelo showed her bravery and toughness and was soon chosen as the leader of the group. Over time, the group became famous and more widows and other minorities – especially groups seeking protection from bigger clans – in Somalia joined them.
In no time, Araweelo and her group became one of the formidable forces in the country. She was then named the Queen of Peace and Prosperity and her first duty was to stop the feud between the different clans.
She came up with a three-point strategy:
- Approach the fighting parties and offer them an impartial reconciliation,
- If they refused, give them a warning, and
- If they still refused, declare war on them.
She built an army as she negotiated with the different factions, and before she went into war, she oversaw the construction of a huge prison. The prison came to be the home of many clan elders who refused her peace proposition.
Many rumours started spreading about why the men were not going home after meeting with the queen. One of the most popular is that she castrated all of them. Upon hearing this, Araweelo quickly encouraged more people to spread the rumour. It not only helped make people more afraid of her but also discouraged young Somali men from taking part in the feuds.
With this little trick, Araweelo was able to maintain a peaceful Somalia until her death years later at the hand of one warlord known as Oday Biqay. Biqay killed her when she was attending the burial of one of the revered members of the group. She was just 40 years old.
Araweelo’s story still inspires girls and women in Somalia, and she has been revered as a symbol of strength and courage as most assertive girls are nicknamed Araweelo.
Unfortunately, the castration rumour also found itself in post-Araweelo Somalia and was used as a way to portray women leaders as men-haters in a bid to prevent them from accessing leadership opportunities and keep them subdued.
An area in the Erigavo, Sanaag region in Somalia, believed to be the gravesite of the ancient queen, attracts many interested people, with men throwing rocks at and women laying flowers on her grave.
In some versions, the existence of Araweelo is considered a fairy tale as most of Somali stories are passed down orally from one generation to another.
Credit: Face2face Africa | <urn:uuid:c44590ac-b906-4063-94ca-05667710b823> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.biladd.com/2019/02/25/870/araweelo-the-brave-queen-who-who-ruled-ancient-somalia/society/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251694176.67/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127020458-20200127050458-00444.warc.gz | en | 0.986611 | 799 | 3.765625 | 4 | [
-0.40328946709632874,
0.80052649974823,
-0.06319677829742432,
-0.09386534988880157,
-0.0801667720079422,
-0.11705012619495392,
0.03777190297842026,
-0.2938482463359833,
0.15920156240463257,
0.14088650047779083,
0.4929999113082886,
-0.35488009452819824,
0.399688184261322,
0.0884926319122314... | 1 | Just like many countries in the world, Somalia is a patriarchal society, where men control the system of society and government. In such a setting, women are limited from accessing many opportunities to establish themselves and are exposed to various levels of violations.
Over the years, many people have been on the forefront trying to establish a society that treats both men and women equally in all sectors. While this has gained momentum in recent years, it traces its roots as far back as AD 15 when Somalia was under Queen Ebla Awad, also known as Araweelo.
Araweelo is believed to have been the daughter of an unknown king who only sired daughters. She was the firstborn and thus, the apparent heir to her father’s kingdom.
However, around the same time, there was an inter-clan feud that cost thousands of lives. Her husband died in the feud and her two children died of starvation.
The young and destitute woman quickly left her husband’s family and went home only to be rejected by her own family as she was considered useless for she would not bring dowry. She would not get married to another man as the community considered it a taboo to marry a widow.
With fate against her, Araweelo met with other women in her situation and together, they lived in the wilderness, hunting and gathering food for their existence. They also had to face constant attacks from men who wanted to disrupt their way of life.
Araweelo showed her bravery and toughness and was soon chosen as the leader of the group. Over time, the group became famous and more widows and other minorities – especially groups seeking protection from bigger clans – in Somalia joined them.
In no time, Araweelo and her group became one of the formidable forces in the country. She was then named the Queen of Peace and Prosperity and her first duty was to stop the feud between the different clans.
She came up with a three-point strategy:
- Approach the fighting parties and offer them an impartial reconciliation,
- If they refused, give them a warning, and
- If they still refused, declare war on them.
She built an army as she negotiated with the different factions, and before she went into war, she oversaw the construction of a huge prison. The prison came to be the home of many clan elders who refused her peace proposition.
Many rumours started spreading about why the men were not going home after meeting with the queen. One of the most popular is that she castrated all of them. Upon hearing this, Araweelo quickly encouraged more people to spread the rumour. It not only helped make people more afraid of her but also discouraged young Somali men from taking part in the feuds.
With this little trick, Araweelo was able to maintain a peaceful Somalia until her death years later at the hand of one warlord known as Oday Biqay. Biqay killed her when she was attending the burial of one of the revered members of the group. She was just 40 years old.
Araweelo’s story still inspires girls and women in Somalia, and she has been revered as a symbol of strength and courage as most assertive girls are nicknamed Araweelo.
Unfortunately, the castration rumour also found itself in post-Araweelo Somalia and was used as a way to portray women leaders as men-haters in a bid to prevent them from accessing leadership opportunities and keep them subdued.
An area in the Erigavo, Sanaag region in Somalia, believed to be the gravesite of the ancient queen, attracts many interested people, with men throwing rocks at and women laying flowers on her grave.
In some versions, the existence of Araweelo is considered a fairy tale as most of Somali stories are passed down orally from one generation to another.
Credit: Face2face Africa | 785 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The world has a strange history; the need for tribes was recognized when a man came to realize the benefits he would derive from sticking together in forms of large groups which later became nations, countries, cities. Likewise, the need for an organization working in the favors of minorities and trying its best to contain peace throughout the world has been recognized after mass killings and brutal wars.
Some say that World War I caused an end to The Great Depression of the 1920s while some believe that the reason riots started breaking out, which later lead to the war, was the depression itself. The effects of the war left marks on people’s souls, killing them, destroying them morally and changing their views about life forever. When Hitler rose to power in the 1930-1932 elections, little did the world know what horizons of cruelty was the man capable of displaying?
In 1933, when the Nazis rose to influence, their primary targets were the disabled ones with genetic disorders. Hitler considered them harmful for the German society and thus ordered all of them to be killed while the veil of sterilization camps kept the inhumane action hidden by the local people.
Meanwhile, socialists, priests and many people with liberal stance were arrested and punished for their ideas and were forced to work to death under severe conditions in Dachau camp.
The group of people oppressed largely by the Nazis was the Jews in the country. Along with other minorities like Gypsies, Slavs, Russians or anti-Nazi Germans were sent to torture camps in Poland, Siberia, where they were forced to work for the German war industry.
Huge number of prisoners were transported in trucks to the camps and many lost their lives on the journey, subjected to hunger, thirst, cold or physical harassment. The people in the camps were brutally punished for minor errors, experimented upon and tortured to death in front of their families. The children and women were treated no differently; the women were gang-raped in front of crowds, and children used as grounds to carry out medical experiments. Many lost their lives or senses under the cruel actions carried out upon them.
The main objective of the torture carried out by the Nazis was to break the person’s spirit and bring him into an animal-like state. The defense mechanism to be used to protect one’s self was to not think at all; to not think about the past, the family, the torture and do not think about the next day either. The people who were seen discussing their pasts were killed. Thus, the survival of the prisoners depended on the strength of the human spirit-and luck. If a person was lucky enough to escape selection for gassing or being picked out by a guard, or if he did not freeze to death, starve to death and kept his head low and his thoughts to himself, there was greater chance of him surviving the holocaust.
Thus, to conclude, the defense mechanism to be used was to shut out all memories that may make a person weak. A person’s survival depended upon how strong his spirit was, and how long could the spirit, not the body, bare the torture. The human body has some natural defense mechanisms, for example, in some cases, when a person is badly injured, the brain veils the pain under another emotion, for example, anger, excitement, guilt or shock. Thus, the defense mechanism by both, the body and the brain were needed to survive the inhumane tortures carried out under the Nazi’s reign.
H. Lynn, R.M. Thomas, H.R. Barbara, G.S. Bonnie. The Making of the West
3rd Edition. Web. 26 June 2011. | <urn:uuid:09396ca3-2769-448e-a971-b634189ffb62> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://freebookessay.com/free-essay-examples/the-making-of-the-west-research-paper-example/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250593937.27/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118193018-20200118221018-00223.warc.gz | en | 0.980578 | 752 | 3.34375 | 3 | [
-0.286432147026062,
0.8465325236320496,
0.2861693203449249,
0.24759390950202942,
0.06895946711301804,
0.12940768897533417,
0.06830053776502609,
0.18308931589126587,
-0.030268734320998192,
-0.044093057513237,
0.5755289793014526,
0.146169051527977,
0.02230384200811386,
0.4035993218421936,
... | 2 | The world has a strange history; the need for tribes was recognized when a man came to realize the benefits he would derive from sticking together in forms of large groups which later became nations, countries, cities. Likewise, the need for an organization working in the favors of minorities and trying its best to contain peace throughout the world has been recognized after mass killings and brutal wars.
Some say that World War I caused an end to The Great Depression of the 1920s while some believe that the reason riots started breaking out, which later lead to the war, was the depression itself. The effects of the war left marks on people’s souls, killing them, destroying them morally and changing their views about life forever. When Hitler rose to power in the 1930-1932 elections, little did the world know what horizons of cruelty was the man capable of displaying?
In 1933, when the Nazis rose to influence, their primary targets were the disabled ones with genetic disorders. Hitler considered them harmful for the German society and thus ordered all of them to be killed while the veil of sterilization camps kept the inhumane action hidden by the local people.
Meanwhile, socialists, priests and many people with liberal stance were arrested and punished for their ideas and were forced to work to death under severe conditions in Dachau camp.
The group of people oppressed largely by the Nazis was the Jews in the country. Along with other minorities like Gypsies, Slavs, Russians or anti-Nazi Germans were sent to torture camps in Poland, Siberia, where they were forced to work for the German war industry.
Huge number of prisoners were transported in trucks to the camps and many lost their lives on the journey, subjected to hunger, thirst, cold or physical harassment. The people in the camps were brutally punished for minor errors, experimented upon and tortured to death in front of their families. The children and women were treated no differently; the women were gang-raped in front of crowds, and children used as grounds to carry out medical experiments. Many lost their lives or senses under the cruel actions carried out upon them.
The main objective of the torture carried out by the Nazis was to break the person’s spirit and bring him into an animal-like state. The defense mechanism to be used to protect one’s self was to not think at all; to not think about the past, the family, the torture and do not think about the next day either. The people who were seen discussing their pasts were killed. Thus, the survival of the prisoners depended on the strength of the human spirit-and luck. If a person was lucky enough to escape selection for gassing or being picked out by a guard, or if he did not freeze to death, starve to death and kept his head low and his thoughts to himself, there was greater chance of him surviving the holocaust.
Thus, to conclude, the defense mechanism to be used was to shut out all memories that may make a person weak. A person’s survival depended upon how strong his spirit was, and how long could the spirit, not the body, bare the torture. The human body has some natural defense mechanisms, for example, in some cases, when a person is badly injured, the brain veils the pain under another emotion, for example, anger, excitement, guilt or shock. Thus, the defense mechanism by both, the body and the brain were needed to survive the inhumane tortures carried out under the Nazi’s reign.
H. Lynn, R.M. Thomas, H.R. Barbara, G.S. Bonnie. The Making of the West
3rd Edition. Web. 26 June 2011. | 753 | ENGLISH | 1 |
During the late 18th century, both France and the British colonies in America experienced wars the opened the eyes of nations. The French Revolution and American Revolution drastically changed political thinking. In the French Revolution, monarchism was abandoned and political power was given to the people until the country became out of control, and a military dictatorship was necessary to regain control of France. In the American Revolution, a new nation was formed as the British colonies tore themselves away from the English monarchy. In the end, both France and the new United States of America moved away from absolute rule by a king or queen and wanted to put the political power in the hands of their people. However, there are
…show more content…
France’s government also became bankrupt. Starting with King Louis XIV, the monarchy was spending too much without taking in enough money. The money problems finally caught up to France with King Louis XVI and his queen Marie Antoinette. The monarchy lived a lavish lifestyle and did not care about the amount of money that was spent frivolously. Lastly, Enlightenment thinkers influenced the ideas of the people to overthrow the king. Writers like Locke, Rousseau, and Voltaire urged people to question what was always accepted as truth, to question old ideas, and urged people to become active in their government. Consequently, the common people of France wanted a place in their government. Commoners were tired of being dirt poor citizens, while everyone else in France lived a lifestyle of luxury without a care in the world about the lower class citizens.
Unlike the French Revolution, the American Revolution had only one main cause. The British government wanted control of the colonies without giving the colonies representation in parliament. While England was in complete control of the colonies, the colonies did not have any representation in the way they were governed, which caused the colonies to feel oppressed by their government. The English colonies were used to Enlightenment thinking such as having the right to participate in government and having the natural | <urn:uuid:f7d4d67a-1411-404e-96ef-ab2294e31418> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.cram.com/essay/the-american-and-french-revolution/PKCALH4NSJ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251801423.98/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129164403-20200129193403-00340.warc.gz | en | 0.983704 | 394 | 3.59375 | 4 | [
-0.07381840795278549,
0.3871687948703766,
0.3390271067619324,
-0.4827856719493866,
0.10716850310564041,
0.3437268137931824,
0.00529486546292901,
0.2846166789531708,
0.08593273907899857,
0.22496239840984344,
0.1749630570411682,
0.1955217570066452,
-0.031664423644542694,
0.2668635845184326,
... | 1 | During the late 18th century, both France and the British colonies in America experienced wars the opened the eyes of nations. The French Revolution and American Revolution drastically changed political thinking. In the French Revolution, monarchism was abandoned and political power was given to the people until the country became out of control, and a military dictatorship was necessary to regain control of France. In the American Revolution, a new nation was formed as the British colonies tore themselves away from the English monarchy. In the end, both France and the new United States of America moved away from absolute rule by a king or queen and wanted to put the political power in the hands of their people. However, there are
…show more content…
France’s government also became bankrupt. Starting with King Louis XIV, the monarchy was spending too much without taking in enough money. The money problems finally caught up to France with King Louis XVI and his queen Marie Antoinette. The monarchy lived a lavish lifestyle and did not care about the amount of money that was spent frivolously. Lastly, Enlightenment thinkers influenced the ideas of the people to overthrow the king. Writers like Locke, Rousseau, and Voltaire urged people to question what was always accepted as truth, to question old ideas, and urged people to become active in their government. Consequently, the common people of France wanted a place in their government. Commoners were tired of being dirt poor citizens, while everyone else in France lived a lifestyle of luxury without a care in the world about the lower class citizens.
Unlike the French Revolution, the American Revolution had only one main cause. The British government wanted control of the colonies without giving the colonies representation in parliament. While England was in complete control of the colonies, the colonies did not have any representation in the way they were governed, which caused the colonies to feel oppressed by their government. The English colonies were used to Enlightenment thinking such as having the right to participate in government and having the natural | 392 | ENGLISH | 1 |
William Shakespeare was born in April 1564 in the town of Stratford-upon-Avon, on England’s Avon River. When he was eighteen, he married Anne Hathaway. The couple had three children—an older daughter Susanna and twins, Judith and Hamnet. Hamnet, Shakespeare’s only son, died in childhood. The bulk of Shakespeare’s working life was spent in the theater world of London, where he established himself professionally by the early 1590s. He enjoyed success not only as a playwright and poet, but also as an actor and shareholder in an acting company. Although some think that sometime between 1610 and 1613 Shakespeare retired from the theater and returned home to Stratford, where he died in 1616, others believe that he may have continued to work in London until close to his death.
Join our mailing list!
Get our latest staff recommendations, Indie Next picks and exclusive offers of ARCs and galleys right to your inbox. | <urn:uuid:1f047e7e-7bb1-4b4d-9b85-dce1425fce93> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.simonandschuster.biz/authors/William-Shakespeare/402774 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250604397.40/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121132900-20200121161900-00211.warc.gz | en | 0.985138 | 205 | 3.40625 | 3 | [
-0.04034348949790001,
-0.15823884308338165,
0.667023241519928,
-0.12145217508077621,
-0.5297489762306213,
-0.10188878327608109,
0.18154509365558624,
0.17573314905166626,
-0.2632291615009308,
-0.3829943537712097,
0.15357619524002075,
-0.46990224719047546,
0.07815083116292953,
0.176322743296... | 4 | William Shakespeare was born in April 1564 in the town of Stratford-upon-Avon, on England’s Avon River. When he was eighteen, he married Anne Hathaway. The couple had three children—an older daughter Susanna and twins, Judith and Hamnet. Hamnet, Shakespeare’s only son, died in childhood. The bulk of Shakespeare’s working life was spent in the theater world of London, where he established himself professionally by the early 1590s. He enjoyed success not only as a playwright and poet, but also as an actor and shareholder in an acting company. Although some think that sometime between 1610 and 1613 Shakespeare retired from the theater and returned home to Stratford, where he died in 1616, others believe that he may have continued to work in London until close to his death.
Join our mailing list!
Get our latest staff recommendations, Indie Next picks and exclusive offers of ARCs and galleys right to your inbox. | 209 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The story about the Christmas truce during WWI is one of the most heartwarming in history, but some parts of it just don’t match and aren’t talked about that often.
You've probably heard about the Christmas miracle that occurred in WWI when British and German soldiers who were stuck in a trench on Christmas Eve decided to make a peace truce to celebrate the festivity. In case you didn't know about it, it goes like this.
It was Christmas Eve 1914. Both sides of the western front were tired from the war and melancholic about having to spend another Christmas apart from their families. All of a sudden, on one side of the line, soldiers started singing Christmas carols to warm their hearts. They were heard on the enemy trench, and to everybody’s surprise, they joined in. Then, one thing led to another, and suddenly, soldiers from both sides came out and gathered in no man's land to celebrate the holiday together, thus starting one of the most heartwarming Christmas stories of all time. But how did this happen, and is the story actually true?
There’s no solid evidence
Although it’s a story we all take for granted, the truth is there is no solid evidence to prove this ever happened. All we know about this Christmas peace truce comes from diary entries, letters, and newspapers from the time. However, almost all of these are third-hand accounts, meaning that most of it is merely rumors, which takes us to our next point.
The truce didn’t happen throughout the entire front line
Unlike what many would think, according to the evidence, the truce only happened in some bits of the front line. All along the line, there were officials in charge of their own battalions, and it all depended on their holiday spirit if they were to join the unexpected truce.
Though we remember the peaceful part of the truce, it also sparked a lot of violence
According to various accounts, in some places, officials saw it as treason and shot those who left the trenches to make contact with the enemy. In some parts of the front line, the distance between both sides was so short, that some officials saw it as a threat, since it allowed their subordinates to hear the enemy and realize they were merely pawns in other people’s game. This was extremely dangerous for the war efforts because soon many soldiers embraced an attitude that came to be known as the “live and let live system.”
It wasn’t as spontaneous people like to think
In September of that year, the recently anointed Pope Benedict XV asked the leaders of the world powers to make a peace truce during Christmas to give soldiers and their families the chance to be together during the holidays. Everybody thought that the war was going to last only a couple of months, so he was sure that this peace truce would finally help them see reason and stop the conflict. It didn’t happen, of course, and the bloodshed lasted about four more years.
The duration of the truce depended on each battalion
As the story goes, this unusual peace truce was only for Christmas Day. However, according to some diary entries and letters, it’s believed that the duration of the truce varied along the front line. For instance, in some spots, it was only a matter of hours, during which both sides allowed the other to bury their dead on no man’s land. For others, the truce was extended until New Year’s Day, giving the soldiers time to rest and celebrate in peace.
There’s no significant evidence of the famous football match
One of the most famous parts of the Christmas truce story is the football match that took place between both sides. In England, there’s even a memorial statue in honor of the alleged match. However, even with the third-hand evidence available, there isn’t a single account that talks about this match in particular. There are letters that talk about matches happening in their own trenches, or even stories of promised matches between the Germans and the British, but these are just suppositions and rumors. The story was in the press, but not in direct accounts.
We can say that there was definitely a peace truce during that cold winter of 1914, but it wasn’t as magical as we've been led to believe. The question here is, if it was such heartwarming proof of humanity, why wasn’t this an annual thing during the four years the war lasted? There are many answers to this question. The first one is what we talked about before: these friendly interactions were seen as threats to the war effort, and leaders knew this was something that couldn’t happen again.
Another fact that we must keep in mind is that this was the first Christmas of this horrible war, and the war was supposed to be over in a couple of months. But technology and the trench system helped make this event a long and violent war that took the lives of millions throughout Europe. The longer the soldiers stayed down in the trenches not really gaining anything, the more they realized they might never go back to their loved ones. We can see in their letters and accounts that, as the war progressed the spirits and hopes of the soldiers were gradually shattered. Who wants to celebrate when all you see around you is devastation and death?
Write for us!
Do you have an idea for an article like this? Are you a History nerd? Do you have a story to tell? Read our submissions guidelines and send us a 500-word article to [email protected].
You might like these: | <urn:uuid:742310cc-2c17-47ca-a455-0b1443e7b5b5> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://culturacolectiva.com/history/christmas-truce-wwi-real-story-facts | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250601241.42/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121014531-20200121043531-00102.warc.gz | en | 0.981875 | 1,153 | 3.640625 | 4 | [
0.10458099097013474,
0.2754683792591095,
0.15529075264930725,
-0.054807111620903015,
0.14478181302547455,
0.04674215614795685,
0.1609705090522766,
0.16036227345466614,
0.28370216488838196,
-0.09583838284015656,
0.14723291993141174,
0.19715046882629395,
0.1910635381937027,
0.467017859220504... | 2 | The story about the Christmas truce during WWI is one of the most heartwarming in history, but some parts of it just don’t match and aren’t talked about that often.
You've probably heard about the Christmas miracle that occurred in WWI when British and German soldiers who were stuck in a trench on Christmas Eve decided to make a peace truce to celebrate the festivity. In case you didn't know about it, it goes like this.
It was Christmas Eve 1914. Both sides of the western front were tired from the war and melancholic about having to spend another Christmas apart from their families. All of a sudden, on one side of the line, soldiers started singing Christmas carols to warm their hearts. They were heard on the enemy trench, and to everybody’s surprise, they joined in. Then, one thing led to another, and suddenly, soldiers from both sides came out and gathered in no man's land to celebrate the holiday together, thus starting one of the most heartwarming Christmas stories of all time. But how did this happen, and is the story actually true?
There’s no solid evidence
Although it’s a story we all take for granted, the truth is there is no solid evidence to prove this ever happened. All we know about this Christmas peace truce comes from diary entries, letters, and newspapers from the time. However, almost all of these are third-hand accounts, meaning that most of it is merely rumors, which takes us to our next point.
The truce didn’t happen throughout the entire front line
Unlike what many would think, according to the evidence, the truce only happened in some bits of the front line. All along the line, there were officials in charge of their own battalions, and it all depended on their holiday spirit if they were to join the unexpected truce.
Though we remember the peaceful part of the truce, it also sparked a lot of violence
According to various accounts, in some places, officials saw it as treason and shot those who left the trenches to make contact with the enemy. In some parts of the front line, the distance between both sides was so short, that some officials saw it as a threat, since it allowed their subordinates to hear the enemy and realize they were merely pawns in other people’s game. This was extremely dangerous for the war efforts because soon many soldiers embraced an attitude that came to be known as the “live and let live system.”
It wasn’t as spontaneous people like to think
In September of that year, the recently anointed Pope Benedict XV asked the leaders of the world powers to make a peace truce during Christmas to give soldiers and their families the chance to be together during the holidays. Everybody thought that the war was going to last only a couple of months, so he was sure that this peace truce would finally help them see reason and stop the conflict. It didn’t happen, of course, and the bloodshed lasted about four more years.
The duration of the truce depended on each battalion
As the story goes, this unusual peace truce was only for Christmas Day. However, according to some diary entries and letters, it’s believed that the duration of the truce varied along the front line. For instance, in some spots, it was only a matter of hours, during which both sides allowed the other to bury their dead on no man’s land. For others, the truce was extended until New Year’s Day, giving the soldiers time to rest and celebrate in peace.
There’s no significant evidence of the famous football match
One of the most famous parts of the Christmas truce story is the football match that took place between both sides. In England, there’s even a memorial statue in honor of the alleged match. However, even with the third-hand evidence available, there isn’t a single account that talks about this match in particular. There are letters that talk about matches happening in their own trenches, or even stories of promised matches between the Germans and the British, but these are just suppositions and rumors. The story was in the press, but not in direct accounts.
We can say that there was definitely a peace truce during that cold winter of 1914, but it wasn’t as magical as we've been led to believe. The question here is, if it was such heartwarming proof of humanity, why wasn’t this an annual thing during the four years the war lasted? There are many answers to this question. The first one is what we talked about before: these friendly interactions were seen as threats to the war effort, and leaders knew this was something that couldn’t happen again.
Another fact that we must keep in mind is that this was the first Christmas of this horrible war, and the war was supposed to be over in a couple of months. But technology and the trench system helped make this event a long and violent war that took the lives of millions throughout Europe. The longer the soldiers stayed down in the trenches not really gaining anything, the more they realized they might never go back to their loved ones. We can see in their letters and accounts that, as the war progressed the spirits and hopes of the soldiers were gradually shattered. Who wants to celebrate when all you see around you is devastation and death?
Write for us!
Do you have an idea for an article like this? Are you a History nerd? Do you have a story to tell? Read our submissions guidelines and send us a 500-word article to [email protected].
You might like these: | 1,129 | ENGLISH | 1 |
From the Roman Empire to Italian unification, Italy has been home to plenty of artistic geniuses over the centuries.
Our list of the top 5 Italian artists includes one poet and 4 painters. Of course, a special mention goes out to a large number of the Renaissance painters including Piero della Francesca, Giorgio Vasari, and Filippino Lippi. Since Italy is home to so many famous artists, no one article could ever do them all justice. However, we hope you like the 5 we've picked out in this article.
Towards the end of the Middle Ages, this poet helped bring Italy together hundreds of years before the unification. His writing helped Tuscan (and the Florentine subdialect) gain popularity across Italy and become the official language of the Italian government in the 19th century.
Dante Alighieri was born in Florence in 1265 and died in Ravenna in 1321 where you can visit his grave. He is one of three literary crowns.
Just like the works Petrarch and Boccaccio, Dante’s Divine Comedy was written in Florentine rather than Latin. This was a huge decision since most texts at the time would have been written in Latin, a language which was considered much more prestigious than Florentine at the time.
However, Dante was a humanist and wanted his work to be read and understood by all rather than just the educated elites. While the text was written in Florentine, he also borrowed vocabulary from a number of the different dialects spoken in and around Italy so that even more people could understand it.
In addition to the general quality of the text, you can’t help but admire the author’s intelligence in drawing upon ancient notions in order to express the complex events of the time: battles between the Pontiff and the Emperor, the Guelphs, and the Ghibellines.
Dante managed to find a living relative to the “Courtly Love” notion in the character of Beatrice. Contemporary Italian literature probably wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t for this literature in the Middles Ages.
It’s hardly surprising that Matteo Renzi, the former Prime Minister of Italy, said that: “Dante is omnipresent in History & Italian lessons and in schools and universities... The names of streets haven’t forgotten him, either...”
Is Dante Alighieri one of our 16 famous Italians?
Leonardo da Vinci (1456-1519)
People are still appreciating this artist’s works nearly 500 years after he died. Leonardo da Vinci was born in Tuscany in 1456 and died three years after being brought to France in Amboise in 1519.
He was an extraordinary Renaissance architect and the double spiral staircase in Château de Chambord is thought to be his work. When you combine scientific knowledge and remarkable works of art, you end up with a man who helped make Italy one of the most flourishing nations of the time.
Whether painting on canvas or walls, his painting was famous for its realism. In fact, this is characterised in his most famous painting, the Mona Lisa. The shadows around her mouth have made Mona Lisa’s smile the subject of much debate in the art world.
If you'd like to see the Mona Lisa, you can do so in the Louvre in Paris. However, since this is arguably the most famous painting in the world, expect long lines of other tourists waiting to see it, too.
Leonardo da Vinci avoided classic techniques and preferred egg tempera where an egg yolk is used to bind coloured pigments. When painting on walls, he preferred gesso.
Following the Neoplatonic Florentine Academy and a renewed interest in the arts, Michelangelo was an unrivalled talent during the Italian Renaissance.
Michelangelo di Lodovico Buonarroti Simoni (to use his full name) was born on 6th March, 1476, in the Republic of Florence. He died at the age of 88 in Rome shortly after the Council of Trent.
He was a jack of all trades and a master of all. He could paint on any surface and created masterpieces both on canvas and in the form of frescoes. His work on the ceiling on the Sistine Chapel in the Vatican is arguably his famous piece. However, his sculptures are just as famous: the Pietà in St. Peter’s Basilica, for example.
Rome also put in its fair share of orders for Michelangelo’s work. In addition to commissions by the Popes Julius II, Clement VII, and Paul III, Lorenzo dei Medici, a very influential man during the Renaissance, also commissioned works.
His works can be distinguished by his realistic representation of the naked human form. Daniele de Volterra is famous for having “covered up” some of Michelangelo’s work. However, the movement of the forms are almost hypnotic and the coloured fabrics are nuanced and fascinating.
Titian is sometimes overshadowed by other more famous Italian artists. However, he is just as worthy of this list as any of the others.
Ludovico Dolce, an Italian theorist of painting, was full of praise for his friend Titian and said that his work “contains at once the grandeur of Michael Angelo, the pleasing grace and venustas of Raphael, together with the proper colouring of nature.”
Additionally, Dolce wasn't too fond of Michelangelo and would regularly criticise his work. Can you imagine a time where an artist as talented as Michelangelo could still be hated by some?
Born in the area surrounding Venice in 1490, towards the end of the Quattrocento, he disappeared on 27th August 1576 in the Republic of Venice’s capital.
The Venetian painter owes a lot to Giorgione who collaborated with him. He specialised in frescoes. He also took inspiration from Antonio da Correggio, especially half-tone backgrounds.
He favoured a process known as colorito in which paint is used to progressively give a painting body, layer by layer. Darker colours are usually applied first and the lighter and brighter colours are applied later.
This artistic freedom is a large part of the Renaissance’s humanism which resulted in daring new subjects such as The Rokeby Venus which would directly inspire Manet’s Olympia three centuries later. This idea would be later picked back up by the visual arts and contemporary art in general.
Ancient themes such as those from Roman myths are gladly revisited. There are plenty of examples of religious commissions. Much like Michelangelo, Titian was regularly commissioned by religious institutions to pain works for them.
This Venetian artist set himself apart from the moral conventions of the yesteryear by bringing both art and morality into the modern age.
Caravaggio was successful 100 years after Michelangelo. He was born on 29 September 1571, in Milan and died on 18 July 1610 in Tuscany on his way to Rome.
With Caravaggio, the realism of the Renaissance became naturalism which was powerful and dramatic. He used pronounced chiaroscuro, which later became known as tenebrism.
Roberto Longhi, an Italian art expert, classifies this artist in the Lombard art style. The striking contrast between light and dark would later become an essential part of the Baroque style, a product of the Counter-Reformation.
Caravaggio matured as an artist in spiritual surroundings at the time of Charles Borromeo and Saint Philip Romolo Neri, the founder of the Oratorians. They came along after a myriad of saints including Francis of Assisi.
As an outlaw, he was forced to roam Italy. He headed to Naples and Sicily. His influence on Italian art and history came to be known as Caravaggism. What did he do? Well, he was famous for starting fights in bars. Who would have thought it?
His style would become popular throughout the first half of the 17th century.
It’s undeniable that the greatest painters existed during the Renaissance.
Sandro Botticelli (c. 1445 - 1510)
Sandro Botticelli was born in the mid-1440s in Florence, Italy. As a young man, he apprenticed as a goldsmith and then went on to study with master painter Filippo Lippi. By his forties, Botticelli was himself a master painter and contributed to many of the decoration of the Sistine Chapel in Rome.
At the height of his fame, the Florentine painter and draughtsman were one of the most esteemed artists in Italy. His graceful pictures of the Madonna and Child, and more of his work such as altarpieces and life-size mythological paintings brought to immense fame during his lifetime.
His best-known work is The Birth of Venus. It is thought that it was probably made in the mid-1480s. It represents the goddess Venus arriving at the shore after her birth when she had emerged from the oceans fully-grown (a version of the goddess called Venus Anadyomene and often represented in the art). The painting is in the Uffizi Gallery in Florence, Italy.
Although the two are not a pair, this painting is inevitably discussed with Botticelli's other very large mythological painting, the Primavera, also in the Uffizi. They are some of the most famous paintings in the world and icons of the Italian Renaissance art movement.
Donatello (c. 1386 - 1466)
It is commonly thought that Donato di Niccolo di Betto Bardi (referred to as Donatello) was born in 1386 in Florence. However, his origins remain obscure and the date is only hypothetical, based on a declaration of tax submitted by the artist in 1433, stating his age at 47.
He received his childhood education in the house of the Martelli family, one of Florence's wealthiest families.
Donatello's father was part of the wool merchants guild Arte della Lana, which was one of seven imports guilds in 14th century Florence. Florence's system of governance was nominally democratic, with the guilds playing an important role in the running of the city.
Like other Florentine sculptors such as Ghiberti and Cellini, Donatello received his early artistic training in the workshop of a goldsmith.
His first important exposure as an artist arrived when he competed for the famous 1401 competition for the design of the Baptistery doors in Florence. Afterwards, he worked briefly in the studio run by Ghiberti, winner of the Baptistery door competition, whose influential workshop provided training for a number of young Italian artists.
From 1402-1404, Donatello studied with his friend and colleague Brunelleschi. According to Brunelleschi's biography, the pair travelled to the city of Rome, where they excavated and studied ancient ruins. This time marked the beginning of the Humanist movement in Florence, which favoured the classical art of ancient Greece and Rome over the stiff and formal style of the Medieval and Gothic periods.
Donatello and Brunelleschi were the first to systematically study ancient ruins for a source of inspiration. Donatello funded this time of artistic exploration by working as a goldsmith.
Donatello had maintained a close and lucrative relationship with Cosimo de’ Medici in Florence. In 1430, the eminent art patron commissioned Donatello to do yet another statue of David, this time in bronze.
This piece of work is probably Donatello’s most famous accomplishments. The sculpture is fully independent of any architectural surroundings or support. Standing a little over five feet tall, David represents an allegory of civic virtue winning over brutality and irrationality.
In 1443, Donatello was called to the city of Padua by the family of the famous mercenary Erasmo da Narni, who had died earlier that year. In 1450, Donatello completed a bronze statue called Gattamelata, showing Erasmo riding a horse in full battle dress, only missing a helmet.
This was the first equestrian statue cast in bronze since the Romans era. The sculpture created many controversies, as most equestrian statues were reserved for rulers or kings, not mere condottiere. This work became the prototype for other equestrian monuments created in Italy and Europe in the following centuries.
Matteo Giovanetti (c.1322 - 1368)
Matteo Giovannetti was an Italian painter who belonged to the Simone Martini school and was a friend of Petrarch.
in 1944 he was summoned to Avignon in France by Pope Clement VI to decorate the Palais des Papes (Palace of Popes) there. He led teams of painters and artists from right across Europe.
Giovanni Bellini (c. 1430 - 1516)
Giovanni Bellini is often regarded as the father of the Venetian Renaissance. His exceptional rendering of colour and light helped herald in a period of overwhelming creativity in Venice, and arguably all of Europe. He was known for his religiously intense images of the Madonna and Christ, as well as his talent to convey the complexity of human sentiments.
Bellini was born and died in Venice during a time when the La Serenissima, or the Venetian Republic, was a redoubtable trading power and centres of Europe. During his life, Venice remained an essential player in the Mediterranean and even world commerce.
Although he may never have ventured far away from Venice, Bellini was by no means secluded from other artists. Rather, he analysed the style of Northern European painters and embraced visitors from all across Europe. As he aged, he even took suggestions from his pupils in order to further hone his talents.
Giovanni Bellini was born into a famous family of painters around the year 1430. His father, Jacopo, was conducive in bringing the Italian Renaissance to Venice and attempted to ensure that his sons, Giovanni and Gentile, would become excellent painters too.
Giovanni and his elder brother, Gentile, presumably began their careers as apprentices in their father's workshop, mastering valuable skills and techniques from him and his pupils. One of these pupils, the Paduan artist, Andrea Mantegna, would become Bellini's brother-in-law and a great influence on his early artwork.
Once Bellini had made a name for himself through his portraitures and stunning depictions of Biblical events, he began to break with the older paint style of tempera in favour of oil paints around the 1470s. The use of oil paints served in unleashing Bellini's eye for colours and light and his compositions took on an even more life-like quality.
Many of his altarpieces are so precise and convincing, it is said, that people sitting in the back pew can feel the passion etched on the face of each subject.
It was also during this time that Bellini was awarded a prestigious position at the Doge's Palace in Venice. He painted panels in the palace's great hall, likenesses and altarpieces, and oversaw further work for the rest of his life.
Bellini composed actively up until his death at the age of almost 90 in 1516. During the last fifteen years of his life, he was overwhelmed with commissions to paint his breathtaking altarpieces, portraits and mythologies - all with thoughtful consideration to landscape detail.
Although he was a master painter, recognised by many to be the best in Venice, Bellini was always eager to learn new methods and techniques from younger painters and his students, and he worked to hone his skills until his death.
Andrea Mantegna (c. 1431 – 1506)
Andrea Mantegna was a North Italian Renaissance painter, a scholar of Roman archaeology, and son in law of Jacopo Bellini.
Like other artists of the time, Mantegna experimented with viewpoint, e.g., by lowering the horizon in order to create a sense of greater monumentality. His callous, metallic landscapes and somewhat stony characters give evidence of a fundamentally sculptural way to painting. He also led a class that was the leading generator of prints in Venice before 1500.
Mantegna was born in Isola di Carturo, close to Padua in the Republic of Venice, second son of a craftsman, Biagio. At the age of eleven, he became the student of Francesco Squarcione, a Paduan painter. Squarcione, whose real vocation was tailoring, seems to have had a remarkable passion for ancient art, and a talent for acting.
Like his famous compatriot Petrarca, Squarcione was something of a zealot for ancient Rome: he travelled in Italy, and possibly Greece, amassing antique statues, bas-reliefs, vases, etc., forming a collection of such works, then making etchings from them himself, and forcing open his stores for others to examine. All the while, he continued undertaking works on commission for which his pupils no less than himself were made free.
As many as 137 painters and pictorial disciples passed through Squarcione's school, which had been established towards 1440 and which became renowned all over Italy. Padua was attractive for artists coming not only from Veneto but also from Tuscany, such as Paolo Uccello, Filippo Lippi and Donatello.
Mantegna's early career was moulded indeed by impressions of Florentine works. At the time, Mantegna was said to be a favourite pupil; Squarcione taught him Latin, and instructed him to study pieces of Roman sculpture. The master also favoured forced perspective, the lingering results of which may account for some of Mantegna's later innovations.
However, at the age of seventeen, Mantegna parted himself from Squarcione. He later claimed that Squarcione had gained from his work without paying the rights.
If so many big names came from Italy, why stop there? There are plenty of people who could have made this list like classical, baroque, and opera composers (Clementi, Giuseppe, Verdi, Puccini, etc.), Italian directors (Visconti, for example) and many more. We could even have included Italian singers.
When it comes to music, Italy basically wrote the book on it. So many musical terms come from Italy and there are so many genres in which the Italians excel. If you're wanting to improve your Italian, listening to music could be a great way to do it.
There have been so many amazing Italians throughout history that we’d need an entire library to fairly represent them.
With all that said, it's not just poets and painters who belong in the hall of fame. Italy has a rich cinematic landscape. In fact, during the 1950s and 60s, Rome became known as Hollywood on the Tiber due to the immense number of quality films being produced there.
To round off your knowledge of Italian culture, why not check out these Italian films?
Find a private tutor for Italian lessons to help you master the Italian language: | <urn:uuid:25328617-1d60-424f-af91-a5d0b550a94c> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.superprof.co.uk/blog/learn-italian-artists-and-writers/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251728207.68/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127205148-20200127235148-00193.warc.gz | en | 0.982426 | 4,062 | 3.296875 | 3 | [
-0.4841400980949402,
-0.020152531564235687,
0.3814751207828522,
0.12289560586214066,
-0.6335740089416504,
0.027641478925943375,
0.13638505339622498,
0.15470455586910248,
0.20186063647270203,
-0.287572979927063,
0.01086876355111599,
-0.015184937044978142,
-0.06484156847000122,
0.53526532649... | 2 | From the Roman Empire to Italian unification, Italy has been home to plenty of artistic geniuses over the centuries.
Our list of the top 5 Italian artists includes one poet and 4 painters. Of course, a special mention goes out to a large number of the Renaissance painters including Piero della Francesca, Giorgio Vasari, and Filippino Lippi. Since Italy is home to so many famous artists, no one article could ever do them all justice. However, we hope you like the 5 we've picked out in this article.
Towards the end of the Middle Ages, this poet helped bring Italy together hundreds of years before the unification. His writing helped Tuscan (and the Florentine subdialect) gain popularity across Italy and become the official language of the Italian government in the 19th century.
Dante Alighieri was born in Florence in 1265 and died in Ravenna in 1321 where you can visit his grave. He is one of three literary crowns.
Just like the works Petrarch and Boccaccio, Dante’s Divine Comedy was written in Florentine rather than Latin. This was a huge decision since most texts at the time would have been written in Latin, a language which was considered much more prestigious than Florentine at the time.
However, Dante was a humanist and wanted his work to be read and understood by all rather than just the educated elites. While the text was written in Florentine, he also borrowed vocabulary from a number of the different dialects spoken in and around Italy so that even more people could understand it.
In addition to the general quality of the text, you can’t help but admire the author’s intelligence in drawing upon ancient notions in order to express the complex events of the time: battles between the Pontiff and the Emperor, the Guelphs, and the Ghibellines.
Dante managed to find a living relative to the “Courtly Love” notion in the character of Beatrice. Contemporary Italian literature probably wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t for this literature in the Middles Ages.
It’s hardly surprising that Matteo Renzi, the former Prime Minister of Italy, said that: “Dante is omnipresent in History & Italian lessons and in schools and universities... The names of streets haven’t forgotten him, either...”
Is Dante Alighieri one of our 16 famous Italians?
Leonardo da Vinci (1456-1519)
People are still appreciating this artist’s works nearly 500 years after he died. Leonardo da Vinci was born in Tuscany in 1456 and died three years after being brought to France in Amboise in 1519.
He was an extraordinary Renaissance architect and the double spiral staircase in Château de Chambord is thought to be his work. When you combine scientific knowledge and remarkable works of art, you end up with a man who helped make Italy one of the most flourishing nations of the time.
Whether painting on canvas or walls, his painting was famous for its realism. In fact, this is characterised in his most famous painting, the Mona Lisa. The shadows around her mouth have made Mona Lisa’s smile the subject of much debate in the art world.
If you'd like to see the Mona Lisa, you can do so in the Louvre in Paris. However, since this is arguably the most famous painting in the world, expect long lines of other tourists waiting to see it, too.
Leonardo da Vinci avoided classic techniques and preferred egg tempera where an egg yolk is used to bind coloured pigments. When painting on walls, he preferred gesso.
Following the Neoplatonic Florentine Academy and a renewed interest in the arts, Michelangelo was an unrivalled talent during the Italian Renaissance.
Michelangelo di Lodovico Buonarroti Simoni (to use his full name) was born on 6th March, 1476, in the Republic of Florence. He died at the age of 88 in Rome shortly after the Council of Trent.
He was a jack of all trades and a master of all. He could paint on any surface and created masterpieces both on canvas and in the form of frescoes. His work on the ceiling on the Sistine Chapel in the Vatican is arguably his famous piece. However, his sculptures are just as famous: the Pietà in St. Peter’s Basilica, for example.
Rome also put in its fair share of orders for Michelangelo’s work. In addition to commissions by the Popes Julius II, Clement VII, and Paul III, Lorenzo dei Medici, a very influential man during the Renaissance, also commissioned works.
His works can be distinguished by his realistic representation of the naked human form. Daniele de Volterra is famous for having “covered up” some of Michelangelo’s work. However, the movement of the forms are almost hypnotic and the coloured fabrics are nuanced and fascinating.
Titian is sometimes overshadowed by other more famous Italian artists. However, he is just as worthy of this list as any of the others.
Ludovico Dolce, an Italian theorist of painting, was full of praise for his friend Titian and said that his work “contains at once the grandeur of Michael Angelo, the pleasing grace and venustas of Raphael, together with the proper colouring of nature.”
Additionally, Dolce wasn't too fond of Michelangelo and would regularly criticise his work. Can you imagine a time where an artist as talented as Michelangelo could still be hated by some?
Born in the area surrounding Venice in 1490, towards the end of the Quattrocento, he disappeared on 27th August 1576 in the Republic of Venice’s capital.
The Venetian painter owes a lot to Giorgione who collaborated with him. He specialised in frescoes. He also took inspiration from Antonio da Correggio, especially half-tone backgrounds.
He favoured a process known as colorito in which paint is used to progressively give a painting body, layer by layer. Darker colours are usually applied first and the lighter and brighter colours are applied later.
This artistic freedom is a large part of the Renaissance’s humanism which resulted in daring new subjects such as The Rokeby Venus which would directly inspire Manet’s Olympia three centuries later. This idea would be later picked back up by the visual arts and contemporary art in general.
Ancient themes such as those from Roman myths are gladly revisited. There are plenty of examples of religious commissions. Much like Michelangelo, Titian was regularly commissioned by religious institutions to pain works for them.
This Venetian artist set himself apart from the moral conventions of the yesteryear by bringing both art and morality into the modern age.
Caravaggio was successful 100 years after Michelangelo. He was born on 29 September 1571, in Milan and died on 18 July 1610 in Tuscany on his way to Rome.
With Caravaggio, the realism of the Renaissance became naturalism which was powerful and dramatic. He used pronounced chiaroscuro, which later became known as tenebrism.
Roberto Longhi, an Italian art expert, classifies this artist in the Lombard art style. The striking contrast between light and dark would later become an essential part of the Baroque style, a product of the Counter-Reformation.
Caravaggio matured as an artist in spiritual surroundings at the time of Charles Borromeo and Saint Philip Romolo Neri, the founder of the Oratorians. They came along after a myriad of saints including Francis of Assisi.
As an outlaw, he was forced to roam Italy. He headed to Naples and Sicily. His influence on Italian art and history came to be known as Caravaggism. What did he do? Well, he was famous for starting fights in bars. Who would have thought it?
His style would become popular throughout the first half of the 17th century.
It’s undeniable that the greatest painters existed during the Renaissance.
Sandro Botticelli (c. 1445 - 1510)
Sandro Botticelli was born in the mid-1440s in Florence, Italy. As a young man, he apprenticed as a goldsmith and then went on to study with master painter Filippo Lippi. By his forties, Botticelli was himself a master painter and contributed to many of the decoration of the Sistine Chapel in Rome.
At the height of his fame, the Florentine painter and draughtsman were one of the most esteemed artists in Italy. His graceful pictures of the Madonna and Child, and more of his work such as altarpieces and life-size mythological paintings brought to immense fame during his lifetime.
His best-known work is The Birth of Venus. It is thought that it was probably made in the mid-1480s. It represents the goddess Venus arriving at the shore after her birth when she had emerged from the oceans fully-grown (a version of the goddess called Venus Anadyomene and often represented in the art). The painting is in the Uffizi Gallery in Florence, Italy.
Although the two are not a pair, this painting is inevitably discussed with Botticelli's other very large mythological painting, the Primavera, also in the Uffizi. They are some of the most famous paintings in the world and icons of the Italian Renaissance art movement.
Donatello (c. 1386 - 1466)
It is commonly thought that Donato di Niccolo di Betto Bardi (referred to as Donatello) was born in 1386 in Florence. However, his origins remain obscure and the date is only hypothetical, based on a declaration of tax submitted by the artist in 1433, stating his age at 47.
He received his childhood education in the house of the Martelli family, one of Florence's wealthiest families.
Donatello's father was part of the wool merchants guild Arte della Lana, which was one of seven imports guilds in 14th century Florence. Florence's system of governance was nominally democratic, with the guilds playing an important role in the running of the city.
Like other Florentine sculptors such as Ghiberti and Cellini, Donatello received his early artistic training in the workshop of a goldsmith.
His first important exposure as an artist arrived when he competed for the famous 1401 competition for the design of the Baptistery doors in Florence. Afterwards, he worked briefly in the studio run by Ghiberti, winner of the Baptistery door competition, whose influential workshop provided training for a number of young Italian artists.
From 1402-1404, Donatello studied with his friend and colleague Brunelleschi. According to Brunelleschi's biography, the pair travelled to the city of Rome, where they excavated and studied ancient ruins. This time marked the beginning of the Humanist movement in Florence, which favoured the classical art of ancient Greece and Rome over the stiff and formal style of the Medieval and Gothic periods.
Donatello and Brunelleschi were the first to systematically study ancient ruins for a source of inspiration. Donatello funded this time of artistic exploration by working as a goldsmith.
Donatello had maintained a close and lucrative relationship with Cosimo de’ Medici in Florence. In 1430, the eminent art patron commissioned Donatello to do yet another statue of David, this time in bronze.
This piece of work is probably Donatello’s most famous accomplishments. The sculpture is fully independent of any architectural surroundings or support. Standing a little over five feet tall, David represents an allegory of civic virtue winning over brutality and irrationality.
In 1443, Donatello was called to the city of Padua by the family of the famous mercenary Erasmo da Narni, who had died earlier that year. In 1450, Donatello completed a bronze statue called Gattamelata, showing Erasmo riding a horse in full battle dress, only missing a helmet.
This was the first equestrian statue cast in bronze since the Romans era. The sculpture created many controversies, as most equestrian statues were reserved for rulers or kings, not mere condottiere. This work became the prototype for other equestrian monuments created in Italy and Europe in the following centuries.
Matteo Giovanetti (c.1322 - 1368)
Matteo Giovannetti was an Italian painter who belonged to the Simone Martini school and was a friend of Petrarch.
in 1944 he was summoned to Avignon in France by Pope Clement VI to decorate the Palais des Papes (Palace of Popes) there. He led teams of painters and artists from right across Europe.
Giovanni Bellini (c. 1430 - 1516)
Giovanni Bellini is often regarded as the father of the Venetian Renaissance. His exceptional rendering of colour and light helped herald in a period of overwhelming creativity in Venice, and arguably all of Europe. He was known for his religiously intense images of the Madonna and Christ, as well as his talent to convey the complexity of human sentiments.
Bellini was born and died in Venice during a time when the La Serenissima, or the Venetian Republic, was a redoubtable trading power and centres of Europe. During his life, Venice remained an essential player in the Mediterranean and even world commerce.
Although he may never have ventured far away from Venice, Bellini was by no means secluded from other artists. Rather, he analysed the style of Northern European painters and embraced visitors from all across Europe. As he aged, he even took suggestions from his pupils in order to further hone his talents.
Giovanni Bellini was born into a famous family of painters around the year 1430. His father, Jacopo, was conducive in bringing the Italian Renaissance to Venice and attempted to ensure that his sons, Giovanni and Gentile, would become excellent painters too.
Giovanni and his elder brother, Gentile, presumably began their careers as apprentices in their father's workshop, mastering valuable skills and techniques from him and his pupils. One of these pupils, the Paduan artist, Andrea Mantegna, would become Bellini's brother-in-law and a great influence on his early artwork.
Once Bellini had made a name for himself through his portraitures and stunning depictions of Biblical events, he began to break with the older paint style of tempera in favour of oil paints around the 1470s. The use of oil paints served in unleashing Bellini's eye for colours and light and his compositions took on an even more life-like quality.
Many of his altarpieces are so precise and convincing, it is said, that people sitting in the back pew can feel the passion etched on the face of each subject.
It was also during this time that Bellini was awarded a prestigious position at the Doge's Palace in Venice. He painted panels in the palace's great hall, likenesses and altarpieces, and oversaw further work for the rest of his life.
Bellini composed actively up until his death at the age of almost 90 in 1516. During the last fifteen years of his life, he was overwhelmed with commissions to paint his breathtaking altarpieces, portraits and mythologies - all with thoughtful consideration to landscape detail.
Although he was a master painter, recognised by many to be the best in Venice, Bellini was always eager to learn new methods and techniques from younger painters and his students, and he worked to hone his skills until his death.
Andrea Mantegna (c. 1431 – 1506)
Andrea Mantegna was a North Italian Renaissance painter, a scholar of Roman archaeology, and son in law of Jacopo Bellini.
Like other artists of the time, Mantegna experimented with viewpoint, e.g., by lowering the horizon in order to create a sense of greater monumentality. His callous, metallic landscapes and somewhat stony characters give evidence of a fundamentally sculptural way to painting. He also led a class that was the leading generator of prints in Venice before 1500.
Mantegna was born in Isola di Carturo, close to Padua in the Republic of Venice, second son of a craftsman, Biagio. At the age of eleven, he became the student of Francesco Squarcione, a Paduan painter. Squarcione, whose real vocation was tailoring, seems to have had a remarkable passion for ancient art, and a talent for acting.
Like his famous compatriot Petrarca, Squarcione was something of a zealot for ancient Rome: he travelled in Italy, and possibly Greece, amassing antique statues, bas-reliefs, vases, etc., forming a collection of such works, then making etchings from them himself, and forcing open his stores for others to examine. All the while, he continued undertaking works on commission for which his pupils no less than himself were made free.
As many as 137 painters and pictorial disciples passed through Squarcione's school, which had been established towards 1440 and which became renowned all over Italy. Padua was attractive for artists coming not only from Veneto but also from Tuscany, such as Paolo Uccello, Filippo Lippi and Donatello.
Mantegna's early career was moulded indeed by impressions of Florentine works. At the time, Mantegna was said to be a favourite pupil; Squarcione taught him Latin, and instructed him to study pieces of Roman sculpture. The master also favoured forced perspective, the lingering results of which may account for some of Mantegna's later innovations.
However, at the age of seventeen, Mantegna parted himself from Squarcione. He later claimed that Squarcione had gained from his work without paying the rights.
If so many big names came from Italy, why stop there? There are plenty of people who could have made this list like classical, baroque, and opera composers (Clementi, Giuseppe, Verdi, Puccini, etc.), Italian directors (Visconti, for example) and many more. We could even have included Italian singers.
When it comes to music, Italy basically wrote the book on it. So many musical terms come from Italy and there are so many genres in which the Italians excel. If you're wanting to improve your Italian, listening to music could be a great way to do it.
There have been so many amazing Italians throughout history that we’d need an entire library to fairly represent them.
With all that said, it's not just poets and painters who belong in the hall of fame. Italy has a rich cinematic landscape. In fact, during the 1950s and 60s, Rome became known as Hollywood on the Tiber due to the immense number of quality films being produced there.
To round off your knowledge of Italian culture, why not check out these Italian films?
Find a private tutor for Italian lessons to help you master the Italian language: | 4,020 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Neanderthals were subspecies of archaic humans who lived in Eurasia and went extinct around 40,000 years ago due to climate change, disease and extermination by modern humans.
Over the years, researchers archaeologists have found the skeletal remains of Neanderthals and have revealed scores of important details like their Phylum, Kingdom, Class, Order, Family, and Tribe.
But a recent study has revealed facts that state they were capable of carrying out activities that are generally linked to modern-day humans. Researchers believe Neanderthals enjoyed spending time at the beach and could even dive 13-feet into the water to collect shells from the seafloor.
The study published in the journal PLOS further reveals the tools Neanderthals made from seashells were not just from the ones they collected from the shore but also included the ones from the seabed.
The research, conducted with help from the University of Colorado at Boulder in the US, involved the analysis of over 170 Neanderthal shell tools that were unearthed from a cave in Italy.
The scientists distinguished the tools picked up from shores and seabeds by studying the abrasions on the surface. A closer look revealed that nearly three-quarters of the shells had opaque and slightly abraded exteriors, indicating they had been sanded down over time. The rest of the shells were smooth and shiny.
Scientists believe the shiny shells may have been picked up by Neanderthals the seafloor. "It's quite possible that the Neanderthals were collecting shells as far down as two to four metres. Of course, they did not have scuba equipment," said Paola Villa, co-author of the research.
The cave, where the shells were found, is located on the western coast of Italy and was discovered in the 1930s.
The seashells, however, were unearthed in 1949 during an expedition in the area. Subsequent research revealed the cave was inhabited by Neanderthals, who modified the shells into tools.
The study is significant because it strengths the hypotheses that Neanderthals may have known how to swim.
U.P ADG Prashant Kumar on charge against Meerut top cop who was seen asking protesters to 'go to Pakistan' in a viral video.
Row over Meerut top cop's viral video, BSP chief Mayawati demands probe into the matter.
TIMES NOW’s Prashant with details. Watch! | <urn:uuid:61391883-c036-412e-961a-fc6c0ef274b1> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.timesnownews.com/the-buzz/article/neanderthals-could-swim-dive-13-feet-to-collect-shells-from-sea-floor-study/540872 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251681412.74/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125191854-20200125221854-00530.warc.gz | en | 0.982623 | 503 | 4.09375 | 4 | [
-0.32115638256073,
0.20458589494228363,
0.20781956613063812,
0.32969146966934204,
-0.05908234417438507,
-0.3553255796432495,
0.3161212205886841,
0.036268629133701324,
-0.46242132782936096,
0.07084940373897552,
0.11323462426662445,
-0.5715011954307556,
0.3840818703174591,
0.5772780179977417... | 1 | Neanderthals were subspecies of archaic humans who lived in Eurasia and went extinct around 40,000 years ago due to climate change, disease and extermination by modern humans.
Over the years, researchers archaeologists have found the skeletal remains of Neanderthals and have revealed scores of important details like their Phylum, Kingdom, Class, Order, Family, and Tribe.
But a recent study has revealed facts that state they were capable of carrying out activities that are generally linked to modern-day humans. Researchers believe Neanderthals enjoyed spending time at the beach and could even dive 13-feet into the water to collect shells from the seafloor.
The study published in the journal PLOS further reveals the tools Neanderthals made from seashells were not just from the ones they collected from the shore but also included the ones from the seabed.
The research, conducted with help from the University of Colorado at Boulder in the US, involved the analysis of over 170 Neanderthal shell tools that were unearthed from a cave in Italy.
The scientists distinguished the tools picked up from shores and seabeds by studying the abrasions on the surface. A closer look revealed that nearly three-quarters of the shells had opaque and slightly abraded exteriors, indicating they had been sanded down over time. The rest of the shells were smooth and shiny.
Scientists believe the shiny shells may have been picked up by Neanderthals the seafloor. "It's quite possible that the Neanderthals were collecting shells as far down as two to four metres. Of course, they did not have scuba equipment," said Paola Villa, co-author of the research.
The cave, where the shells were found, is located on the western coast of Italy and was discovered in the 1930s.
The seashells, however, were unearthed in 1949 during an expedition in the area. Subsequent research revealed the cave was inhabited by Neanderthals, who modified the shells into tools.
The study is significant because it strengths the hypotheses that Neanderthals may have known how to swim.
U.P ADG Prashant Kumar on charge against Meerut top cop who was seen asking protesters to 'go to Pakistan' in a viral video.
Row over Meerut top cop's viral video, BSP chief Mayawati demands probe into the matter.
TIMES NOW’s Prashant with details. Watch! | 508 | ENGLISH | 1 |
This week the kids were given 6 items to analyze. They were assigned to order them by weight, first by guessing, and then by measuring the weights with a scale. The kids were pretty surprised by how wrong their guesses were. We wondered why it was that some things, like say, a large piece of styrofoam "feel" lighter than others when they actually weigh more. We got some clues when we moved on to part two of the lab: testing each item to see if it floats or sinks in water. Wouldn't you know it, the things the kids thought were light, were floaters, and the things they thought were heavy, were sinkers. However, contrary to our expectations, whether something sinks is NOT simply about weight.
Then each kid was given a lump of clay. After observing that it too was a sinker, they were challenged to build a boat out of said sinking clay, and not just that, but a boat that could carry cargo (any number of marbles, also sinkers). After some trial and error, the kids figured out which shapes worked best. | <urn:uuid:3b8befbf-c2a4-42d2-ba70-7439a13707d1> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://lab.en.mbtnua.com/2010/02/general-science-whatever-floats-your.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783621.89/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129010251-20200129040251-00260.warc.gz | en | 0.995057 | 224 | 3.421875 | 3 | [
0.07245099544525146,
0.033178023993968964,
0.1544203758239746,
-0.30604419112205505,
-0.2828212082386017,
-0.08328089118003845,
0.33115696907043457,
0.10626032203435898,
-0.2877369821071625,
0.061027925461530685,
0.39084726572036743,
-0.2143956422805786,
-0.18713970482349396,
0.46609181165... | 3 | This week the kids were given 6 items to analyze. They were assigned to order them by weight, first by guessing, and then by measuring the weights with a scale. The kids were pretty surprised by how wrong their guesses were. We wondered why it was that some things, like say, a large piece of styrofoam "feel" lighter than others when they actually weigh more. We got some clues when we moved on to part two of the lab: testing each item to see if it floats or sinks in water. Wouldn't you know it, the things the kids thought were light, were floaters, and the things they thought were heavy, were sinkers. However, contrary to our expectations, whether something sinks is NOT simply about weight.
Then each kid was given a lump of clay. After observing that it too was a sinker, they were challenged to build a boat out of said sinking clay, and not just that, but a boat that could carry cargo (any number of marbles, also sinkers). After some trial and error, the kids figured out which shapes worked best. | 224 | ENGLISH | 1 |
A recent study claims that consuming walnuts can help reduce BP if consumed in a diet that’s saturated fats-deficient.PSU scientists announced that this study is among the first, which shows a relation between walnut properties and heart health. The research was funded by CWC and published in American Heart Association’s journal.
ALA, which is an omega-3 compound contained in walnut, was researched to see if it could help those with cardiovascular disease risks. Polyphenols, another component of walnuts, were also researched for this purpose. Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in adults in USA, killing 840000 people in 2016, as per the AHA, with half of the population having some type of the disease.
Increase in people with high BP levels has led to this. However, the increase is also in part due to change in high BP measurement guidelines.45 obese or overweight participants aged between 30 and 65 were studied. They had a similar diet for two weeks to ensure equal starting points. 3 groups were formed, with 3 different diets for each group, changed at time periods of 6 weeks. The diets included one with whole walnuts, another with same amounts of polyunsaturated fat-based acids and ALA but no walnuts, and another with ALA partially replaced by oleic acids.
In the end, all 3 groups were found with enhanced health conditions. Cardiovascular benefits were seen to ensure by taking in unsaturated fats in place of saturated fats. The group with walnut based diets had a lower BP rate than other groups. Eating walnuts saw the participants derive higher benefits than having a diet having similar nutrition, said Prof Penny Etherton, the leading co-author.
The reduction in central BP levels could reduce cardiovascular risks, as per the researchers. However, due to the small size of the research pool, further studies are required to confirm findings. Walnuts and skim milk are suggested for those with cardiovascular disease risks instead of dairy products or red meat. | <urn:uuid:9725d337-c210-421b-82f2-d0d73e39feaa> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://newsindustry24.com/654/eating-walnuts-new-remedy-to-reduce-blood-pressure/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251672537.90/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125131641-20200125160641-00472.warc.gz | en | 0.981235 | 412 | 3.328125 | 3 | [
-0.26406046748161316,
-0.09768104553222656,
0.06505618989467621,
0.10856375843286514,
0.204352006316185,
-0.07360529899597168,
-0.18744416534900665,
0.3951181471347809,
-0.14220161736011505,
-0.217658132314682,
0.38623592257499695,
-0.9180569648742676,
0.14061491191387177,
-0.1337372213602... | 2 | A recent study claims that consuming walnuts can help reduce BP if consumed in a diet that’s saturated fats-deficient.PSU scientists announced that this study is among the first, which shows a relation between walnut properties and heart health. The research was funded by CWC and published in American Heart Association’s journal.
ALA, which is an omega-3 compound contained in walnut, was researched to see if it could help those with cardiovascular disease risks. Polyphenols, another component of walnuts, were also researched for this purpose. Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in adults in USA, killing 840000 people in 2016, as per the AHA, with half of the population having some type of the disease.
Increase in people with high BP levels has led to this. However, the increase is also in part due to change in high BP measurement guidelines.45 obese or overweight participants aged between 30 and 65 were studied. They had a similar diet for two weeks to ensure equal starting points. 3 groups were formed, with 3 different diets for each group, changed at time periods of 6 weeks. The diets included one with whole walnuts, another with same amounts of polyunsaturated fat-based acids and ALA but no walnuts, and another with ALA partially replaced by oleic acids.
In the end, all 3 groups were found with enhanced health conditions. Cardiovascular benefits were seen to ensure by taking in unsaturated fats in place of saturated fats. The group with walnut based diets had a lower BP rate than other groups. Eating walnuts saw the participants derive higher benefits than having a diet having similar nutrition, said Prof Penny Etherton, the leading co-author.
The reduction in central BP levels could reduce cardiovascular risks, as per the researchers. However, due to the small size of the research pool, further studies are required to confirm findings. Walnuts and skim milk are suggested for those with cardiovascular disease risks instead of dairy products or red meat. | 413 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Based upon twenty years of exhaustive research, this is the biography of a woman who was in the forefront of every human rights movement of her time. Caroline was an abolitionist, a suffragist, an advocate for women's health and women physicians, a peace activist, and a socialist. She was a leader of the suffrage movement before the Civil War and afterward lived to vote in an American presidential election.
Born in western New York when it was the frontier of the United States, she ended her life on another western frontier, in Los Angeles, California. She has been recognized as one of the "builders of the city of Los Angeles." She witnessed the opening of the Erie Canal, and more than eighty years later, the first air show ever held in Los Angeles. Always advocating the rights of women and realizing their potential as full citizens, she was a founder of the Women's Club Movement, which, far from being a purely social movement, was designed to allow women to discover that they had brains and leadership abilities. This movement was instrumental in the final passage of the Nineteenth Amendment, guaranteeing women the right to vote. | <urn:uuid:1897ec5d-f89d-46b7-8b4a-309f85b7db83> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/caroline-severance-virginia-elwood-akers/1100368857 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250624328.55/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124161014-20200124190014-00531.warc.gz | en | 0.980003 | 227 | 3.625 | 4 | [
0.020515665411949158,
-0.00564522435888648,
0.3173746168613434,
0.3862755000591278,
-0.2256375253200531,
0.779149055480957,
0.19823819398880005,
0.10821270942687988,
-0.2440994381904602,
0.10865504294633865,
0.04761817306280136,
0.21538983285427094,
-0.006303335074335337,
-0.10845501720905... | 1 | Based upon twenty years of exhaustive research, this is the biography of a woman who was in the forefront of every human rights movement of her time. Caroline was an abolitionist, a suffragist, an advocate for women's health and women physicians, a peace activist, and a socialist. She was a leader of the suffrage movement before the Civil War and afterward lived to vote in an American presidential election.
Born in western New York when it was the frontier of the United States, she ended her life on another western frontier, in Los Angeles, California. She has been recognized as one of the "builders of the city of Los Angeles." She witnessed the opening of the Erie Canal, and more than eighty years later, the first air show ever held in Los Angeles. Always advocating the rights of women and realizing their potential as full citizens, she was a founder of the Women's Club Movement, which, far from being a purely social movement, was designed to allow women to discover that they had brains and leadership abilities. This movement was instrumental in the final passage of the Nineteenth Amendment, guaranteeing women the right to vote. | 228 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Why Did We Drop the First Atomic Bomb Ever since the historical event occurred on August 6 of 1945, when the United States dropped the first atomic bomb on a city, people have asked why. There are different explanations of why the bomb was dropped from historians, from the individuals who made the decision to drop the bomb, and from general populations alike. The atomic bomb was dropped to make the rest of the world aware, especially the Soviet Union, of the United States supremacy. Also little boy and fat man, the names of the two bombs dropped, were dropped because they were there; a new bomb that was never before field tested.
The unawareness that the decision makers had of the real effects and magnitude of the bomb also played a role in the fact that the bomb was dropped. A war in Europe had just ended and the one in the Pacific was coming to its end, but who would come out as the country that would be able to practically mold the world to their own liking Both the United States and the Soviet Union would have a great amount of power, the only question is which would have more, and the answer would be the United States and this was because of the atomic bomb. Truman was the president and had two other men standing beside him and advising him throughout the entire decision. The more influential of the two was James Byrns, Mr. Atomic Bomb; he felt that he knew what was best for the country and that he had correct ideas about the atomic bomb.
Byrns was also the man to edit the Potsdam Declaration that was given to the Japanese and was to supposedly warn them of the bomb and that the Russians were to enter the war. Byrns removed both of these ideas from the document making it too vague for the Japanese to even consider surrendering under what it stated. Through many things that Byrns said he also suggested that he was for atomic diplomacy, the persuasion of countries with the in direc use of the threat of the atomic bomb. If Byrns had simply wanted the end of the war in the pacific then he could have warned the Japanese by not editing the Potsdam Declaration in the way he did. Then he could have justly hoped for their surrender, but instead he did not give them as many reasons to surrender and therefore, gave himself, more reasons to use the bomb. The dropping would show Japan, the USSR, and the rest of the world how advanced and superior the United States was with their unique new bomb and this was one of Byrns and other politicians purposes for the bomb.
The fact that this bomb was new and the most powerful in the world's history was another reason why it was dropped. If one were to give a small child the best, brand new toy available one could not expect the child to not want to play with it; this is the same concept. The United States had a new bomb that had never previously been tested on an actual target, and of course the military would want to test the new bomb. They had a weapon that no one else had, and one that many others did not even know about and they wanted to use it, to see its capabilities. But as with every new bomb the military is not fully aware of the bomb's power until it is actually used on a target. So it was reasoned that the bomb should be used on Japan to see its capabilities, the military even set aside cities that were to be bombed so that there would be no previously made damage to the cities.
The decision makers were ignorant about the true power of the bomb, and this clouded the decision to drop the bomb itself. If they did not really know what this bomb could do then how could they be able to make the judgment on whether or not to drop the bomb The final word to drop the bomb came from President Truman, and of course he was advised on the topic by people like Byrns, but it was still his final decision and he was in favor of dropping the bomb. Before Hiroshima or Nagasaki had even occurred he had written in his journal that he did not want any, "women or children", to die with the use of the bomb. He obviously did not know of the complete strength of the bomb, statements like these prove that. If the top decision maker did not truthfully know of what would happen with the use of the bomb then it is also possible that the other key members, who finally came to the conclusion that dropping the bomb was the correct decision, may have not known of its power either. Being na ve about the effects of the bomb is another reason it was dropped, knowing how harmful the bomb would be and how destructive it was may have had a great effect on the usage of the atomic bomb.
The atomic bomb was dropped, not to end the war with the Japanese, but to show the world how mighty the United States, the government, the military, the technology, and the American people were. The fact that it was a new bomb, the first type of its kind ever created, also created an eagerness to use the bomb and see how it would truly work. And the people who were behind the decision of dropping the bomb were also unwitting about the actual intensity and strength the bomb had. These three key factors are the reasons behind why the United States dropped the dreaded atomic bomb on Japan, as they unknowingly and unintentionally began the Cold War and the nuclear age. | <urn:uuid:a2f9ec93-3724-47fa-9add-25d6833d5a04> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://essaypride.com/ex/first-atomic-bomb-on-a-city-d577e | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251696046.73/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127081933-20200127111933-00459.warc.gz | en | 0.991237 | 1,091 | 3.390625 | 3 | [
-0.557755708694458,
0.35440629720687866,
0.04400952532887459,
-0.20781558752059937,
0.43252140283584595,
0.13660559058189392,
0.42662671208381653,
0.5122422575950623,
0.09870606660842896,
-0.07316188514232635,
0.34875747561454773,
0.3494108319282532,
0.23606754839420319,
0.5757249593734741... | 1 | Why Did We Drop the First Atomic Bomb Ever since the historical event occurred on August 6 of 1945, when the United States dropped the first atomic bomb on a city, people have asked why. There are different explanations of why the bomb was dropped from historians, from the individuals who made the decision to drop the bomb, and from general populations alike. The atomic bomb was dropped to make the rest of the world aware, especially the Soviet Union, of the United States supremacy. Also little boy and fat man, the names of the two bombs dropped, were dropped because they were there; a new bomb that was never before field tested.
The unawareness that the decision makers had of the real effects and magnitude of the bomb also played a role in the fact that the bomb was dropped. A war in Europe had just ended and the one in the Pacific was coming to its end, but who would come out as the country that would be able to practically mold the world to their own liking Both the United States and the Soviet Union would have a great amount of power, the only question is which would have more, and the answer would be the United States and this was because of the atomic bomb. Truman was the president and had two other men standing beside him and advising him throughout the entire decision. The more influential of the two was James Byrns, Mr. Atomic Bomb; he felt that he knew what was best for the country and that he had correct ideas about the atomic bomb.
Byrns was also the man to edit the Potsdam Declaration that was given to the Japanese and was to supposedly warn them of the bomb and that the Russians were to enter the war. Byrns removed both of these ideas from the document making it too vague for the Japanese to even consider surrendering under what it stated. Through many things that Byrns said he also suggested that he was for atomic diplomacy, the persuasion of countries with the in direc use of the threat of the atomic bomb. If Byrns had simply wanted the end of the war in the pacific then he could have warned the Japanese by not editing the Potsdam Declaration in the way he did. Then he could have justly hoped for their surrender, but instead he did not give them as many reasons to surrender and therefore, gave himself, more reasons to use the bomb. The dropping would show Japan, the USSR, and the rest of the world how advanced and superior the United States was with their unique new bomb and this was one of Byrns and other politicians purposes for the bomb.
The fact that this bomb was new and the most powerful in the world's history was another reason why it was dropped. If one were to give a small child the best, brand new toy available one could not expect the child to not want to play with it; this is the same concept. The United States had a new bomb that had never previously been tested on an actual target, and of course the military would want to test the new bomb. They had a weapon that no one else had, and one that many others did not even know about and they wanted to use it, to see its capabilities. But as with every new bomb the military is not fully aware of the bomb's power until it is actually used on a target. So it was reasoned that the bomb should be used on Japan to see its capabilities, the military even set aside cities that were to be bombed so that there would be no previously made damage to the cities.
The decision makers were ignorant about the true power of the bomb, and this clouded the decision to drop the bomb itself. If they did not really know what this bomb could do then how could they be able to make the judgment on whether or not to drop the bomb The final word to drop the bomb came from President Truman, and of course he was advised on the topic by people like Byrns, but it was still his final decision and he was in favor of dropping the bomb. Before Hiroshima or Nagasaki had even occurred he had written in his journal that he did not want any, "women or children", to die with the use of the bomb. He obviously did not know of the complete strength of the bomb, statements like these prove that. If the top decision maker did not truthfully know of what would happen with the use of the bomb then it is also possible that the other key members, who finally came to the conclusion that dropping the bomb was the correct decision, may have not known of its power either. Being na ve about the effects of the bomb is another reason it was dropped, knowing how harmful the bomb would be and how destructive it was may have had a great effect on the usage of the atomic bomb.
The atomic bomb was dropped, not to end the war with the Japanese, but to show the world how mighty the United States, the government, the military, the technology, and the American people were. The fact that it was a new bomb, the first type of its kind ever created, also created an eagerness to use the bomb and see how it would truly work. And the people who were behind the decision of dropping the bomb were also unwitting about the actual intensity and strength the bomb had. These three key factors are the reasons behind why the United States dropped the dreaded atomic bomb on Japan, as they unknowingly and unintentionally began the Cold War and the nuclear age. | 1,099 | ENGLISH | 1 |
It’s not clear how many of the nineteenth-century settlers on the American prairie celebrated the official Thanksgiving holiday, which was not established until 1863. Many families must have had harvest feasts when they were finished gathering in what the land had produced, and as most settlers were religious in their orientation, they probably gave thanks to God.
But the truth is, prairie harvests were often not that bountiful. Most settlers planted a cash crop – usually wheat – and many planted some corn and alfalfa to feed their livestock, as well as garden vegetables that would keep through the winter, such as potatoes, turnips, squash and beans. The success of those crops, however, could be highly variable. The cash crop mattered most, because they needed money for goods like cornmeal, clothing and coal. Wood was not plentiful on the prairie, and could not be relied on as a source of heat. They sometimes burned dung, and occasionally twists of hay, but they would have needed coal to survive the harsh winters.
It’s no surprise, then, that the wheat harvest often mean the difference between life and death, and was notoriously fickle. Everything from birds to grasshoppers to windstorms to hail could damage wheat and seriously reduce the yield. If there was drought, crops could fail completely, and then the family had only what they could pull from gardens watered by hand and what they could buy after selling items from their sparsely furnished homes. Family heirlooms brought from across the ocean often met that fate.
Haying in the late summer and fall was also critical. Families dropped everything when it was time to hay, sending all hands into the fields to gather the cuttings before it rained and the hay moldered on the ground. They also would have been busy hunting in the fall. Most game was scarce, but migrating birds could be hunted and smoked, as well as fish, if there was a lake or stream nearby. Overall, however, prairie life was a hand-to-mouth existence.
As we approach another Thanksgiving in our bountiful twenty-first century, I find myself imagining how difficult harvest time must have been for prairie families as they counted their take for the season. Because once the harvest and haying was done, they would have known whether or not they would survive. Every summer was a race against time and weather to pull from the land enough to sustain them through the unpredictable winters and the early spring, which was known as “the starving time,” as that was when supplies were gone and the land was not yet producing. So harvest time must have been a period of stress and trepidation as they sorted their root vegetables, weighed their wheat and stacked their hay. Some years the harvest feasts may have been meager.
When I give thanks this Thanksgiving, I will also thank those courageous, vulnerable pioneers who persevered and somehow managed to grow a rich agricultural tradition from the plains. And be thankful that I don’t need to worry whether my harvest is enough to feed my children.
Wendy Swallow, Nov. 27, 2019
- Nora’s New Year’s Resolution - January 9, 2020
- The Julenisse - December 21, 2019
- Missing Family Stories - December 13, 2019
- Solvi and her Camera - December 3, 2019
- Harvest Time on the Prairie - November 27, 2019
- National Novel Writing Month - November 20, 2019
- In the Land of Lutefisk - November 13, 2019
- Channeling Ibsen - November 4, 2019
- Historical Fiction and Disappearing Birds - October 29, 2019
- Ten Traits of a Great Book Club Book - October 22, 2019 | <urn:uuid:d05b64c1-304d-4e4d-8414-f8994534defa> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://searchingfornora.com/harvest-time-on-the-prairie/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250597458.22/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120052454-20200120080454-00358.warc.gz | en | 0.985515 | 772 | 3.625 | 4 | [
0.13745757937431335,
0.05088941752910614,
0.2374085932970047,
-0.0903790071606636,
0.4609071612358093,
-0.4146274924278259,
-0.14290200173854828,
0.08679289370775223,
-0.35906538367271423,
0.004666181281208992,
0.0378153957426548,
-0.23451997339725494,
0.14207211136817932,
0.26054212450981... | 1 | It’s not clear how many of the nineteenth-century settlers on the American prairie celebrated the official Thanksgiving holiday, which was not established until 1863. Many families must have had harvest feasts when they were finished gathering in what the land had produced, and as most settlers were religious in their orientation, they probably gave thanks to God.
But the truth is, prairie harvests were often not that bountiful. Most settlers planted a cash crop – usually wheat – and many planted some corn and alfalfa to feed their livestock, as well as garden vegetables that would keep through the winter, such as potatoes, turnips, squash and beans. The success of those crops, however, could be highly variable. The cash crop mattered most, because they needed money for goods like cornmeal, clothing and coal. Wood was not plentiful on the prairie, and could not be relied on as a source of heat. They sometimes burned dung, and occasionally twists of hay, but they would have needed coal to survive the harsh winters.
It’s no surprise, then, that the wheat harvest often mean the difference between life and death, and was notoriously fickle. Everything from birds to grasshoppers to windstorms to hail could damage wheat and seriously reduce the yield. If there was drought, crops could fail completely, and then the family had only what they could pull from gardens watered by hand and what they could buy after selling items from their sparsely furnished homes. Family heirlooms brought from across the ocean often met that fate.
Haying in the late summer and fall was also critical. Families dropped everything when it was time to hay, sending all hands into the fields to gather the cuttings before it rained and the hay moldered on the ground. They also would have been busy hunting in the fall. Most game was scarce, but migrating birds could be hunted and smoked, as well as fish, if there was a lake or stream nearby. Overall, however, prairie life was a hand-to-mouth existence.
As we approach another Thanksgiving in our bountiful twenty-first century, I find myself imagining how difficult harvest time must have been for prairie families as they counted their take for the season. Because once the harvest and haying was done, they would have known whether or not they would survive. Every summer was a race against time and weather to pull from the land enough to sustain them through the unpredictable winters and the early spring, which was known as “the starving time,” as that was when supplies were gone and the land was not yet producing. So harvest time must have been a period of stress and trepidation as they sorted their root vegetables, weighed their wheat and stacked their hay. Some years the harvest feasts may have been meager.
When I give thanks this Thanksgiving, I will also thank those courageous, vulnerable pioneers who persevered and somehow managed to grow a rich agricultural tradition from the plains. And be thankful that I don’t need to worry whether my harvest is enough to feed my children.
Wendy Swallow, Nov. 27, 2019
- Nora’s New Year’s Resolution - January 9, 2020
- The Julenisse - December 21, 2019
- Missing Family Stories - December 13, 2019
- Solvi and her Camera - December 3, 2019
- Harvest Time on the Prairie - November 27, 2019
- National Novel Writing Month - November 20, 2019
- In the Land of Lutefisk - November 13, 2019
- Channeling Ibsen - November 4, 2019
- Historical Fiction and Disappearing Birds - October 29, 2019
- Ten Traits of a Great Book Club Book - October 22, 2019 | 815 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The hurricane destroyed 70% of the countries crops.
Around 70-80% of the transport infrastructure was severely damaged.
35 000 houses were destroyed and 50 000 more were damaged.
20% of schools were damaged as well as 117 health centres and six hospitals.
In 1998 the GDP grew by 4% which was less than estimated.
Exports of rice and corn went down because crops were damaged by the hurricane. This meant people earnt less money so were poorer and the government had less money to spend on development.
The total damage caused by the hurricane is estimated to be $1.2 billion
The education of children suffered- the number of children that worked rather than went to school increased by 8.1%
In 1998 money from agriculture made up 27% of the country's GDP. In 2000 this had fallen to 18% because of the damage to crops. This reduced the quality of life for people who worked in agriculture because they made less money.
GDP was estimated to grow 5% in 1998 but it only grew by 3% due to the hurricane. This meant less money was available for development.
The cost of repairing and repairing houses, schools and hospitals was estimated to be $439 million- this money could have been used to develop the country.
All these things set back development- the Honduran President claimed hurricane mitch destroyed 5o years of progress.
Moving from rural areas to urban areas- things like water, food and jobs are easier to get in towns and cities.
Some people improve their quality of life by improving their environment e.g their houses.
Communities can work together to improve the quality of life for everyone in the community, e.g some communities build and run services like schools
Some people are trying to improve their own quality of life
Fair trade is all about getting a fair price for goods produced in poorer countries.
Companies who want to sell products labelled as fair trade have to pay produces a fair price .
Buyers also pay extra on top of the fair trade price to help develop the area the goods come from.
Only producers that treat their employees well can take part in the scheme.
Producers in a fair trade scheme often produce a lot because of the prices Ė this can lead them to produce too much. An excess will make world prices fall and cause producers who aren't in a fair trade scheme to lose out. | <urn:uuid:faf68e81-0dc9-4727-b03b-45003de5f5a7> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.sliderbase.com/spitem-487-7.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251687958.71/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126074227-20200126104227-00551.warc.gz | en | 0.983706 | 490 | 3.359375 | 3 | [
-0.22177712619304657,
-0.3643219769001007,
0.40185195207595825,
0.11044194549322128,
0.5708056092262268,
0.33832716941833496,
-0.35274311900138855,
0.1201930120587349,
-0.0448174849152565,
0.07600963115692139,
0.0927160233259201,
-0.3736637234687805,
0.3335549533367157,
0.10654201358556747... | 1 | The hurricane destroyed 70% of the countries crops.
Around 70-80% of the transport infrastructure was severely damaged.
35 000 houses were destroyed and 50 000 more were damaged.
20% of schools were damaged as well as 117 health centres and six hospitals.
In 1998 the GDP grew by 4% which was less than estimated.
Exports of rice and corn went down because crops were damaged by the hurricane. This meant people earnt less money so were poorer and the government had less money to spend on development.
The total damage caused by the hurricane is estimated to be $1.2 billion
The education of children suffered- the number of children that worked rather than went to school increased by 8.1%
In 1998 money from agriculture made up 27% of the country's GDP. In 2000 this had fallen to 18% because of the damage to crops. This reduced the quality of life for people who worked in agriculture because they made less money.
GDP was estimated to grow 5% in 1998 but it only grew by 3% due to the hurricane. This meant less money was available for development.
The cost of repairing and repairing houses, schools and hospitals was estimated to be $439 million- this money could have been used to develop the country.
All these things set back development- the Honduran President claimed hurricane mitch destroyed 5o years of progress.
Moving from rural areas to urban areas- things like water, food and jobs are easier to get in towns and cities.
Some people improve their quality of life by improving their environment e.g their houses.
Communities can work together to improve the quality of life for everyone in the community, e.g some communities build and run services like schools
Some people are trying to improve their own quality of life
Fair trade is all about getting a fair price for goods produced in poorer countries.
Companies who want to sell products labelled as fair trade have to pay produces a fair price .
Buyers also pay extra on top of the fair trade price to help develop the area the goods come from.
Only producers that treat their employees well can take part in the scheme.
Producers in a fair trade scheme often produce a lot because of the prices Ė this can lead them to produce too much. An excess will make world prices fall and cause producers who aren't in a fair trade scheme to lose out. | 515 | ENGLISH | 1 |
From the series The Great Artists Collection
Grade Range: 7th – 12th
Page Count: 64
Lexile Level: 1260L
In the latter part of the 19th century and the first two decades of the 20th century, Gustav Klimt (1862-1918) was a forerunner of the Art Nouveau movement in Vienna, Austria. This new movement brought forth one of the most decorative, leading European artists, and greatest exponent of erotic art that the world had ever seen. Klimt began his career as a highly renowned academic painter, but he was propelled toward modern trends in art, which saw a development of the erotic, fantastical and eclectic. This led Klimt to co-found the Vienna Secession of which he became the first president. At the start of his career, the Austrian artist was commissioned to paint a number of public buildings, producing friezes and murals. However, the development of his own style would lead him to scandal, and accusations that his works were distasteful and pornographic in their portrayal of his themes and motifs. Klimt was greatly influenced by Greek, Egyptian and Byzantine art (evidence of which is found in works of his Golden Period or Phase), and he borrowed a number of motifs from these mediums. Klimt is often described as a Symbolist painter while another renowned feature of his works is his treatment of the erotic and his fascination with the female form.
Lightswitch Learning © 2020 All rights reserved. | Sitemap | <urn:uuid:3dd1dde1-f322-41bd-888f-050893c2fa72> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://lightswitchlearning.com/product/klimt/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250604849.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121162615-20200121191615-00436.warc.gz | en | 0.989079 | 312 | 3.78125 | 4 | [
0.13207079470157623,
0.4223935306072235,
0.5761350393295288,
-0.26320043206214905,
0.04846348240971565,
0.09219428151845932,
-0.0886363834142685,
0.24042175710201263,
0.13812097907066345,
-0.11649899929761887,
0.20008045434951782,
-0.384380042552948,
0.015003438107669353,
0.598209440708160... | 5 | From the series The Great Artists Collection
Grade Range: 7th – 12th
Page Count: 64
Lexile Level: 1260L
In the latter part of the 19th century and the first two decades of the 20th century, Gustav Klimt (1862-1918) was a forerunner of the Art Nouveau movement in Vienna, Austria. This new movement brought forth one of the most decorative, leading European artists, and greatest exponent of erotic art that the world had ever seen. Klimt began his career as a highly renowned academic painter, but he was propelled toward modern trends in art, which saw a development of the erotic, fantastical and eclectic. This led Klimt to co-found the Vienna Secession of which he became the first president. At the start of his career, the Austrian artist was commissioned to paint a number of public buildings, producing friezes and murals. However, the development of his own style would lead him to scandal, and accusations that his works were distasteful and pornographic in their portrayal of his themes and motifs. Klimt was greatly influenced by Greek, Egyptian and Byzantine art (evidence of which is found in works of his Golden Period or Phase), and he borrowed a number of motifs from these mediums. Klimt is often described as a Symbolist painter while another renowned feature of his works is his treatment of the erotic and his fascination with the female form.
Lightswitch Learning © 2020 All rights reserved. | Sitemap | 330 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The Palisade Glacier is located on the northeast side of the Palisades within the John Muir Wilderness in the central Sierra Nevada of California. The glacier descends from the flanks of four mountain peaks over 14,000ft (4,300m) in elevation of which North Palisade (14,242ft (4,341m)) is third highest peak in the Sierra Nevada Range.
The cirque containing the Palisade Glacier has a history of thousands of years of glaciation. The modern glacier attained its last maximum extent during the Little Ice Age, between 250 and 170 years ago (a period also known as the Matthes glaciation in the Sierra Nevada). It currently has an area of .31sqmi (0.80km2) and the glacier is .81mi (1.30km) long and .50mi (0.80km) wide. It is located between 13,400 and 12,000ft (4,100 and 3,700m) and moves at a rate of 20ft (6.1m) per year, although it is also retreating. Palisade Glacier is one of the few glaciers in California that terminates in a proglacial lake dammed by its former moraine and the lake is turquoise colored from the glacial powder suspended in the water. The Big Pine Lakes below the glacier are also the same color. Another feature of the glacier is a moulin, which was formed in a drought during 1977, and a bergschrund.
A palisade—sometimes called a stakewall or a paling—is typically a fence or wall made from wooden stakes or tree trunks and used as a defensive structure or enclosure.
Typical construction consisted of small or mid-sized tree trunks aligned vertically, with no free space in between. The trunks were sharpened or pointed at the top, and were driven into the ground and sometimes reinforced with additional construction. The height of a palisade ranged from a few feet to nearly ten feet. As a defensive structure, palisades were often used in conjunction with earthworks.
Palisades were an excellent option for small forts or other hastily constructed fortifications. Since they were made of wood, they could often be quickly and easily built from readily available materials. They proved to be effective protection for short-term conflicts and were an effective deterrent against small forces. However, because they were wooden constructions they were also vulnerable to fire and siege weapons. | <urn:uuid:36af349a-beb1-4b31-be96-14e218cd8bef> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://wn.com/Palisade_Glaciers | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251696046.73/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127081933-20200127111933-00225.warc.gz | en | 0.981121 | 513 | 3.8125 | 4 | [
0.23085691034793854,
0.13390079140663147,
0.07024843990802765,
-0.064133420586586,
0.13352252542972565,
0.02670358680188656,
-0.38160377740859985,
-0.02050827071070671,
-0.02368680201470852,
-0.009962054900825024,
0.3801129162311554,
-0.5427210330963135,
0.4376642107963562,
0.4553070068359... | 1 | The Palisade Glacier is located on the northeast side of the Palisades within the John Muir Wilderness in the central Sierra Nevada of California. The glacier descends from the flanks of four mountain peaks over 14,000ft (4,300m) in elevation of which North Palisade (14,242ft (4,341m)) is third highest peak in the Sierra Nevada Range.
The cirque containing the Palisade Glacier has a history of thousands of years of glaciation. The modern glacier attained its last maximum extent during the Little Ice Age, between 250 and 170 years ago (a period also known as the Matthes glaciation in the Sierra Nevada). It currently has an area of .31sqmi (0.80km2) and the glacier is .81mi (1.30km) long and .50mi (0.80km) wide. It is located between 13,400 and 12,000ft (4,100 and 3,700m) and moves at a rate of 20ft (6.1m) per year, although it is also retreating. Palisade Glacier is one of the few glaciers in California that terminates in a proglacial lake dammed by its former moraine and the lake is turquoise colored from the glacial powder suspended in the water. The Big Pine Lakes below the glacier are also the same color. Another feature of the glacier is a moulin, which was formed in a drought during 1977, and a bergschrund.
A palisade—sometimes called a stakewall or a paling—is typically a fence or wall made from wooden stakes or tree trunks and used as a defensive structure or enclosure.
Typical construction consisted of small or mid-sized tree trunks aligned vertically, with no free space in between. The trunks were sharpened or pointed at the top, and were driven into the ground and sometimes reinforced with additional construction. The height of a palisade ranged from a few feet to nearly ten feet. As a defensive structure, palisades were often used in conjunction with earthworks.
Palisades were an excellent option for small forts or other hastily constructed fortifications. Since they were made of wood, they could often be quickly and easily built from readily available materials. They proved to be effective protection for short-term conflicts and were an effective deterrent against small forces. However, because they were wooden constructions they were also vulnerable to fire and siege weapons. | 544 | ENGLISH | 1 |
According to researchers at University of California, Berkeley, squirrels are a lot craftier than they’re given credit for. Besides their ability to figure out how to get seeds and nuts from bird feeders that have essentially been squirrel proofed, it seems that at least fox squirrels sort and categorize the nuts they forage for storage. Using a technique known as chunking, an organizational act that sorts collections into more manageable groups, they are thought to — depending on the circumstances — store by quality, variety and perhaps even preference.
The study, conducted over a two-year period, tracked the behavior of 45 fox squirrels, both male and female, as they stashed their caches across the UC Berkeley campus. The creatures are known to stockpile between 3,000 to 10,000 nuts a year. What wasn’t known before now was whether there was a method to their madness or if their efforts were more random in behavior. After plying the animals with an assortment of nuts and employing GPS navigational tools, it was determined there is a method after all.
During the course of the investigation feeding locales and techniques were changed up. The nuts were offered in organized groups and also randomly. Some squirrels were fed at the spot where they’d stashed the last nut offered them, while others were fed at just one spot that they’d need to come back to if they wanted more nuts. The group found that squirrels that hunted for nuts in one spot often organized their booty by type and buried them in individual categories. Squirrels fed in more than one spot were found to avoid storing in areas they’d already stashed nuts in.
While it may not be groundbreaking information, it does provide evidence that squirrels, like most animals, have far more intelligence and possess reasoning skills far beyond what many humans attribute to them. All the team at UCB had to do was ask somebody with a bird feeder. They could have told them in two minutes or less.
Source: Science Daily | <urn:uuid:57779829-4339-4668-b06e-8e098821b6c8> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://petslady.com/article/discerning-fox-squirrels-capable-categorizing-nuts-storage | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250619323.41/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124100832-20200124125832-00072.warc.gz | en | 0.985854 | 415 | 3.53125 | 4 | [
0.04387626424431801,
-0.250437468290329,
-0.011003118939697742,
-0.3563270568847656,
0.4266238808631897,
0.08958408981561661,
0.27913039922714233,
0.13710284233093262,
0.0009108904632739723,
0.05587773397564888,
0.07107770442962646,
-0.23934359848499298,
0.22870120406150818,
0.227099254727... | 2 | According to researchers at University of California, Berkeley, squirrels are a lot craftier than they’re given credit for. Besides their ability to figure out how to get seeds and nuts from bird feeders that have essentially been squirrel proofed, it seems that at least fox squirrels sort and categorize the nuts they forage for storage. Using a technique known as chunking, an organizational act that sorts collections into more manageable groups, they are thought to — depending on the circumstances — store by quality, variety and perhaps even preference.
The study, conducted over a two-year period, tracked the behavior of 45 fox squirrels, both male and female, as they stashed their caches across the UC Berkeley campus. The creatures are known to stockpile between 3,000 to 10,000 nuts a year. What wasn’t known before now was whether there was a method to their madness or if their efforts were more random in behavior. After plying the animals with an assortment of nuts and employing GPS navigational tools, it was determined there is a method after all.
During the course of the investigation feeding locales and techniques were changed up. The nuts were offered in organized groups and also randomly. Some squirrels were fed at the spot where they’d stashed the last nut offered them, while others were fed at just one spot that they’d need to come back to if they wanted more nuts. The group found that squirrels that hunted for nuts in one spot often organized their booty by type and buried them in individual categories. Squirrels fed in more than one spot were found to avoid storing in areas they’d already stashed nuts in.
While it may not be groundbreaking information, it does provide evidence that squirrels, like most animals, have far more intelligence and possess reasoning skills far beyond what many humans attribute to them. All the team at UCB had to do was ask somebody with a bird feeder. They could have told them in two minutes or less.
Source: Science Daily | 408 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Celtic military leader Brian Boru (c. 940-1014) was the first king of a united Ireland.
Through shrewd military acumen Brian Boru became the first king of a united Ireland, in an era when the isle was little more than a verdant home to Celtic peoples whose society still reflected much of the traditions of the late Iron Age. During his reign, domestic political stability invigorated Ireland, and religious and cultural life was able to flourish. "Brian Boru was remarkable in the Ireland of his time," wrote Máire and Liam de Paor in Early Christian Ireland, "because he seems to have thought in terms of the feudal organization which had already developed in Europe rather than in terms of the primitive and unstable kingship-system of Ireland." His achievement has earned him comparisons with another great uniter of warring lands, the Holy Roman Emperor Charlemagne.
Ireland Before Brian
The Irish were a Celtic people, a population that dominated central Europe after the fifth century B.C.E. Known as fierce warriors, they migrated to the British Isles and retained many aspects of their past there for centuries after Celtic culture in Europe was supplanted by Roman and other civilizations. In Ireland, they organized into groups of related families called tuaths, fought other tuaths viciously on horseback, and possessed a social hierarchy that was dominated by Druid priests and chief-like kings called ri. Christianity was introduced in the fifth century C.E. by Ireland's legendary St. Patrick, but it was a religion imposed on an unsettled, agrarian land with few urban centers. Instead, Ireland's repositories of culture were its monasteries, which dotted the countryside. There, monks lived austere, simple lives but wrote treatises on religious topics and transcribed Celtic mythology in Latin.
Sea-faring Vikings from various parts of Scandinavia started to plunder Ireland beginning in 795. Like other settlements near coastal waters in northern Europe, the Irish feared the sudden onslaught of Viking ships and the ruthlessness of their men, who quickly sacked towns and loaded livestock and anything else of value onto their ships. In their own lands, some of these Scandinavians had been subdued by Frankish conquerors in the name of Charlemagne and Christianity, and it made them determined foes of any Christian people. The Scandinavians found much of Ireland's artistic treasures-ceremonial metalwork and a wealth of other precious-metal handicrafts in a unique, curvilinear style-in its monasteries and plundered them as well; many of these ornamental swords or belts were later excavated from graves in Norway. Over the next few decades, these Vikings also began to winter over in Ireland instead of returning home; they built walled towns such as DublLinnhe (Dublin), whose origins date to 840. Both Dublin and other coastal towns became hubs of commercial activity as the Vikings set up lucrative trade monopolies. Organized Irish military resistance to Viking rule was successful only in the north. In the south, warring tuaths and provinces could not muster the same unity of forces to do battle.
By 940 C.E., roughly the time of Brian's birth, Ireland was segregated into five provinces of connected tuaths known as the Five Fifths. These were Ulster, Connacht, Meath, Munster, and Leinster. Since the fifth century C.E., varying kings of the first three provinces dominated the northern lands, and sometimes claimed all of Ireland in name; in reality, however, the ard ri, or high king, held true power only in the north, leaving Munster and Leinster quite sovereign. The north's royal seat was at Tara. In the south, a ri of the Eogannacht tuath reigned at Cashel in Munster, near present-day Tipperary.
Brian Boru and the Dal Chais
Brian Boru was, with his brother Mahon, prince of a tribe in Munster called the Dal Chais. Their home ground was an area known as Thomond at the mouth of the River Shannon, in what is now County Clare. The tribe and the brothers gained a reputation as astute, fierce mercenaries, and in 964 Mahon decided to battle the Eogannacht family for the throne of Cashel. This center of power in the south of Ireland was located between Viking settlements at Limerick and the seaside city of Waterford. Mahon emerged victorious and took the Eogannacht crown for himself, but a Viking settlement at Limerick effectively sundered him at Cashel from the Dal Chais lands at Thomond.
At Brian's urging, plans were made to oust the Vikings from Limerick, beginning with raids on the outer settlements. The first serious battle came at Sulcoit and the settlement was sacked. Brian, at the age of 26, then stormed Limerick on his brother's behalf. Typical of the skirmishes of the time and place, men on each side were clad in mail and did battle on horseback with swords, spears, and axes. The Irish were known to behead their enemies, and they also rounded up Scandinavians and immediately slaughtered anyone who was fit to fight.
The beginning of Brian's eventual vanquish of Viking power came with this victory at Limerick in 968. When Mahon was murdered, Brian became king of Munster, and over the next few years consolidated his power in the rest of the south. He constructed a fleet of ships and kept them anchored on the River Shannon, and sent out plundering raids to the north. He overwhelmed the Vikings in Waterford and rid them from the surrounding islands as well. He then set his sights on attacking the Viking king in Dublin. To do so he allied with Meath's ruler, his onetime rival Malachy, to do battle with the King of Leinster, who was allied with Dublin. After a decisive and bloody fight, Brian entered Dublin victorious in 1000 C.E. The Vikings were allowed to stay, but hefty tribute was levied from them.
Now Brian firmly controlled Munster and Leinster, and set his sights farther north. He assembled an army of Irish and Danes and rode to Tara, where the high king of Ireland, the Ui Neill ri, sat. By this point Brian's reputation was so widespread that the north capitulated with almost no resistance. Brian further consolidated power by marrying Gormflaith, the sister of the King of Leinster. However, Gormflaith was also mother of Sitric, the former Viking leader in Dublin; to complicate matters, Sitric then married Brian's sister.
In 1002 Brian deposed Malachy and thus became true ard ri of all Ireland. Historical corroboration of this comes from his signature, written for him by his scribe in 1004, in the Book of Armagh. The manuscript, which also contained the Confessio, or autobiographical writing of St. Patrick, was the treasure of Armagh, the seat of the Christian Church in Ireland at the time. Brian paid 20 ounces of gold to the church fathers there in exchange for being allowed to sign, "Brian, Imperator Scottorum" (meaning "king of the Scots," from the Latin writings of the day that named the Celts of the British Isles Scoti), in the sacred manuscript.
Brian's reign as king of Ireland lasted twelve years, and the country prospered during his rule. Monasteries and schools that had previously been sacked and closed as a result of continuous warfare were reopened, or rebuilt. He decreed the construction of roads and bridges, and built many churches along the Shannon, a symbolic statement since the river had once been the main highway for the Vikings and their plundering inland raids. Bronze artistry, which had fallen into decline, also experienced a revival. Trade increased, and emissaries were even sent across the sea to Scotland and Wales to extract tribute.
The Battle of Clontarf
The end of Brian's rule and his own demise had its origins in a quarrel between the King of Leinster and Brian's son Murrough over a chess game in 1013. When the King stormed out of Brian's Kincora castle, his sister Gormflaith went with him. She then rallied her son Sitric along with some Vikings from the Isle of Man and Hebrides, and assembled a fleet at mouth of the Liffey. The Vikings also sent out word back home for reinforcements, and Scandinavian mercenaries arrived in huge numbers. The actual battle took place at Clontarf, near Dublin, on Good Friday, 1014. It lasted from dawn to sunset. Brian was now 74, and since it was a holy day he remained in a tent near the rear of the battle site and prayed. The Irish were victorious: Brian's army slew 7,000 Vikings, while only 4,000 Irish lost their lives. Both Brian's son and grandson died on the field, however. As the Vikings fled to the sea, the flanks guarding Brian's encampment scattered, and he was surprised by a Viking king, Brodar of the Isle of Man. Brodar was able to ride into the tent, and Brian reacted by cutting Brodar's leg off below the knee; Brodar then split Brian's skull, killing him with the blow.
Brian's body was carried to Armagh in a solemn cortege. Yet his 1014 victory at Clontarf remains a momentous date in Irish history, the year that marked the end of Viking aggression in Ireland. Though Ireland lapsed back into disunion for some time afterward, it would not be invaded for another 150 years until Anglo-Saxons from England set their sights on its green hills. Most of the Vikings that remained in Ireland converted to Christianity and inter-married; they would never dominate the Irish again. Brian's descendants are the O'Brien clan. One of them later married a Norman noble, and an offspring of this union was Elizabeth de Burgh. She later married the Duke of Clarence, who was the son of English king Edward III, and from their union came the York kings and the mother of Henry VIII.
de Paor, Máire and Liam, Early Christian Ireland, Thames and Hudson, 1958.
Edwards-Rees, Désirée, Ireland's Story, Barnes & Noble, 1967.
Newark, Tim, Celtic Warriors: 400 B.C.-1600 A.D., Blandford Press, 1986.
Irish king who briefly united his land against the Danes. In 999 he won the capital city of Dublin, and in 1002 became king of all Ireland. By then more than 60 years old, he turned his attention from battle to administration, seeking to solidify his position through a strong alliance with the Catholic Church. Brian instituted a system of church schools to strengthen education throughout the country, and modeled his reforms on those undertaken by Charlemagne (742-814). He was killed in a battle with the Danes, and his vision of Irish unity died with him. | <urn:uuid:9bf857ec-3611-4250-aa32-86186898e7dc> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.encyclopedia.com/people/history/british-and-irish-history-biographies/brian-boru | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251672537.90/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125131641-20200125160641-00028.warc.gz | en | 0.980317 | 2,283 | 3.703125 | 4 | [
-0.023011833429336548,
0.51561039686203,
-0.11239929497241974,
-0.19877175986766815,
-0.18418926000595093,
-0.3530689477920532,
-0.08472751080989838,
-0.16824141144752502,
0.15662765502929688,
-0.5301365852355957,
-0.1671728491783142,
-0.5480387210845947,
0.16041786968708038,
0.32783180475... | 4 | Celtic military leader Brian Boru (c. 940-1014) was the first king of a united Ireland.
Through shrewd military acumen Brian Boru became the first king of a united Ireland, in an era when the isle was little more than a verdant home to Celtic peoples whose society still reflected much of the traditions of the late Iron Age. During his reign, domestic political stability invigorated Ireland, and religious and cultural life was able to flourish. "Brian Boru was remarkable in the Ireland of his time," wrote Máire and Liam de Paor in Early Christian Ireland, "because he seems to have thought in terms of the feudal organization which had already developed in Europe rather than in terms of the primitive and unstable kingship-system of Ireland." His achievement has earned him comparisons with another great uniter of warring lands, the Holy Roman Emperor Charlemagne.
Ireland Before Brian
The Irish were a Celtic people, a population that dominated central Europe after the fifth century B.C.E. Known as fierce warriors, they migrated to the British Isles and retained many aspects of their past there for centuries after Celtic culture in Europe was supplanted by Roman and other civilizations. In Ireland, they organized into groups of related families called tuaths, fought other tuaths viciously on horseback, and possessed a social hierarchy that was dominated by Druid priests and chief-like kings called ri. Christianity was introduced in the fifth century C.E. by Ireland's legendary St. Patrick, but it was a religion imposed on an unsettled, agrarian land with few urban centers. Instead, Ireland's repositories of culture were its monasteries, which dotted the countryside. There, monks lived austere, simple lives but wrote treatises on religious topics and transcribed Celtic mythology in Latin.
Sea-faring Vikings from various parts of Scandinavia started to plunder Ireland beginning in 795. Like other settlements near coastal waters in northern Europe, the Irish feared the sudden onslaught of Viking ships and the ruthlessness of their men, who quickly sacked towns and loaded livestock and anything else of value onto their ships. In their own lands, some of these Scandinavians had been subdued by Frankish conquerors in the name of Charlemagne and Christianity, and it made them determined foes of any Christian people. The Scandinavians found much of Ireland's artistic treasures-ceremonial metalwork and a wealth of other precious-metal handicrafts in a unique, curvilinear style-in its monasteries and plundered them as well; many of these ornamental swords or belts were later excavated from graves in Norway. Over the next few decades, these Vikings also began to winter over in Ireland instead of returning home; they built walled towns such as DublLinnhe (Dublin), whose origins date to 840. Both Dublin and other coastal towns became hubs of commercial activity as the Vikings set up lucrative trade monopolies. Organized Irish military resistance to Viking rule was successful only in the north. In the south, warring tuaths and provinces could not muster the same unity of forces to do battle.
By 940 C.E., roughly the time of Brian's birth, Ireland was segregated into five provinces of connected tuaths known as the Five Fifths. These were Ulster, Connacht, Meath, Munster, and Leinster. Since the fifth century C.E., varying kings of the first three provinces dominated the northern lands, and sometimes claimed all of Ireland in name; in reality, however, the ard ri, or high king, held true power only in the north, leaving Munster and Leinster quite sovereign. The north's royal seat was at Tara. In the south, a ri of the Eogannacht tuath reigned at Cashel in Munster, near present-day Tipperary.
Brian Boru and the Dal Chais
Brian Boru was, with his brother Mahon, prince of a tribe in Munster called the Dal Chais. Their home ground was an area known as Thomond at the mouth of the River Shannon, in what is now County Clare. The tribe and the brothers gained a reputation as astute, fierce mercenaries, and in 964 Mahon decided to battle the Eogannacht family for the throne of Cashel. This center of power in the south of Ireland was located between Viking settlements at Limerick and the seaside city of Waterford. Mahon emerged victorious and took the Eogannacht crown for himself, but a Viking settlement at Limerick effectively sundered him at Cashel from the Dal Chais lands at Thomond.
At Brian's urging, plans were made to oust the Vikings from Limerick, beginning with raids on the outer settlements. The first serious battle came at Sulcoit and the settlement was sacked. Brian, at the age of 26, then stormed Limerick on his brother's behalf. Typical of the skirmishes of the time and place, men on each side were clad in mail and did battle on horseback with swords, spears, and axes. The Irish were known to behead their enemies, and they also rounded up Scandinavians and immediately slaughtered anyone who was fit to fight.
The beginning of Brian's eventual vanquish of Viking power came with this victory at Limerick in 968. When Mahon was murdered, Brian became king of Munster, and over the next few years consolidated his power in the rest of the south. He constructed a fleet of ships and kept them anchored on the River Shannon, and sent out plundering raids to the north. He overwhelmed the Vikings in Waterford and rid them from the surrounding islands as well. He then set his sights on attacking the Viking king in Dublin. To do so he allied with Meath's ruler, his onetime rival Malachy, to do battle with the King of Leinster, who was allied with Dublin. After a decisive and bloody fight, Brian entered Dublin victorious in 1000 C.E. The Vikings were allowed to stay, but hefty tribute was levied from them.
Now Brian firmly controlled Munster and Leinster, and set his sights farther north. He assembled an army of Irish and Danes and rode to Tara, where the high king of Ireland, the Ui Neill ri, sat. By this point Brian's reputation was so widespread that the north capitulated with almost no resistance. Brian further consolidated power by marrying Gormflaith, the sister of the King of Leinster. However, Gormflaith was also mother of Sitric, the former Viking leader in Dublin; to complicate matters, Sitric then married Brian's sister.
In 1002 Brian deposed Malachy and thus became true ard ri of all Ireland. Historical corroboration of this comes from his signature, written for him by his scribe in 1004, in the Book of Armagh. The manuscript, which also contained the Confessio, or autobiographical writing of St. Patrick, was the treasure of Armagh, the seat of the Christian Church in Ireland at the time. Brian paid 20 ounces of gold to the church fathers there in exchange for being allowed to sign, "Brian, Imperator Scottorum" (meaning "king of the Scots," from the Latin writings of the day that named the Celts of the British Isles Scoti), in the sacred manuscript.
Brian's reign as king of Ireland lasted twelve years, and the country prospered during his rule. Monasteries and schools that had previously been sacked and closed as a result of continuous warfare were reopened, or rebuilt. He decreed the construction of roads and bridges, and built many churches along the Shannon, a symbolic statement since the river had once been the main highway for the Vikings and their plundering inland raids. Bronze artistry, which had fallen into decline, also experienced a revival. Trade increased, and emissaries were even sent across the sea to Scotland and Wales to extract tribute.
The Battle of Clontarf
The end of Brian's rule and his own demise had its origins in a quarrel between the King of Leinster and Brian's son Murrough over a chess game in 1013. When the King stormed out of Brian's Kincora castle, his sister Gormflaith went with him. She then rallied her son Sitric along with some Vikings from the Isle of Man and Hebrides, and assembled a fleet at mouth of the Liffey. The Vikings also sent out word back home for reinforcements, and Scandinavian mercenaries arrived in huge numbers. The actual battle took place at Clontarf, near Dublin, on Good Friday, 1014. It lasted from dawn to sunset. Brian was now 74, and since it was a holy day he remained in a tent near the rear of the battle site and prayed. The Irish were victorious: Brian's army slew 7,000 Vikings, while only 4,000 Irish lost their lives. Both Brian's son and grandson died on the field, however. As the Vikings fled to the sea, the flanks guarding Brian's encampment scattered, and he was surprised by a Viking king, Brodar of the Isle of Man. Brodar was able to ride into the tent, and Brian reacted by cutting Brodar's leg off below the knee; Brodar then split Brian's skull, killing him with the blow.
Brian's body was carried to Armagh in a solemn cortege. Yet his 1014 victory at Clontarf remains a momentous date in Irish history, the year that marked the end of Viking aggression in Ireland. Though Ireland lapsed back into disunion for some time afterward, it would not be invaded for another 150 years until Anglo-Saxons from England set their sights on its green hills. Most of the Vikings that remained in Ireland converted to Christianity and inter-married; they would never dominate the Irish again. Brian's descendants are the O'Brien clan. One of them later married a Norman noble, and an offspring of this union was Elizabeth de Burgh. She later married the Duke of Clarence, who was the son of English king Edward III, and from their union came the York kings and the mother of Henry VIII.
de Paor, Máire and Liam, Early Christian Ireland, Thames and Hudson, 1958.
Edwards-Rees, Désirée, Ireland's Story, Barnes & Noble, 1967.
Newark, Tim, Celtic Warriors: 400 B.C.-1600 A.D., Blandford Press, 1986.
Irish king who briefly united his land against the Danes. In 999 he won the capital city of Dublin, and in 1002 became king of all Ireland. By then more than 60 years old, he turned his attention from battle to administration, seeking to solidify his position through a strong alliance with the Catholic Church. Brian instituted a system of church schools to strengthen education throughout the country, and modeled his reforms on those undertaken by Charlemagne (742-814). He was killed in a battle with the Danes, and his vision of Irish unity died with him. | 2,338 | ENGLISH | 1 |
ROME V. ETRUSCANY
Before the Etruscan s crossed the Tiber river in 750 BC, Rome was described as a loose group or agricultural villages. It was not long before this loose group of villages, with some help from the Etruscan way, was transformed into the world s most dominant city. Many say the Romans conquering success was all the thanks of the Etruscan s, however, the Romans strongly disagree and give them absolutely no credit. This being for it was not the cultural influences of Etruscany which made them such a huge success, yet their never say die attitude which helped them prevail for almost a thousand years.
From the time Etruscany began to expand they were tagged with defeat. As they expanded south from Rome into the Greek city of Cumane they were humiliatingly defeated and never recovered for the next fifty years in the south of Italy. The Etruscans did then move north and rule the northern lands for around a hundred years, however they were again swiftly defeated by wild tribes of Gauls once more adding to their long history of defeat. It can not be argued that the most dominant society and most successful organisation in the world could come from such a long line of degrading and humiliating defeats.
When the Etruscans crossed the Tiber River and entered Rome they did not have anything but invasion on the agenda. It was not the choice of the Romans for the Etruscans to cross the river therefor no acknowledgment is required as the Romans were never given a chance to develop themselves on their own terms. All Etruscan influences were forced on Rome with or without the consent of the roman community. The Etruscans, in the end did give them a city, yet the city and influences that were delivered did not have any significance as to the rule on the world the romans had for a period of almost a thousand years. Consequently the romans owe the Etruscans a city, yet they owe nothing in regards to the success and dominance in which were later experienced.
In the 4th century BC the romans drove out the last Etruscan king. It wasn t until now that the romans really started to show the world their real strength. The Roman Empire expanded into Central Italy and throughout mainland Italy into foreign lands. Later the romans moved south into Greece, the Middle East and Northern Africa. The question which comes after this huge expansion is, was the Etruscans laid back way of life actually holding the romans back? As it becomes more and more obvious that the answer is a possible yes it also becomes more and more obvious that the romans indeed owe nothing to the Etruscans. From the very beginning in the story of Romulus and Remus the romans have been described as ruthless killers with the power to murder even their own brother in the name of success. Can such a desire for dominance and a never say die attitude in which the romans pride themselves of come from the small cultural influence of the Etruscan society, a society which was defeated in both the south and north of Italy? Even today Etruscany (Tuscany) is completely Romanised for that reason it is not the Romans who owe the Etruscans everything but maybe the Etruscans who owe the Romans for sparing their society.
As stated before the romans indeed owe the Etruscans a city yet owe them nothing to their success as their influence did not have any significance in respect to the rule on the world the romans had for almost ten centuries. In the end it was the romans that took over the world not the Etruscans and if this was truly all the teachings and influence of the Etruscan society why did the Etruscan way rule for such little time? Leadership can not come from the teachings of one of life s losers . With strong armies. Battleships and strong leadership, the romans not only drove out all other invaders but conquered all the lands from Britain to the Sahara desert and from Spain to Syria (Pamela Odijk, The Romans p.9). It was the Romans who held the world in their hands, not the Etruscans and for this reason they owe nothing. | <urn:uuid:473b5621-1537-4334-8317-39042cc43d5a> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://essay.ua-referat.com/Romans_And_The_Etruscans | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250609478.50/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123071220-20200123100220-00077.warc.gz | en | 0.982503 | 876 | 3.5 | 4 | [
-0.1221952736377716,
0.21777696907520294,
0.42581188678741455,
0.11457125097513199,
-0.28116756677627563,
-0.3087117671966553,
-0.19953244924545288,
0.18889690935611725,
0.02252635732293129,
0.013382328674197197,
-0.012099044397473335,
-0.4716583788394928,
0.05315355956554413,
-0.014664684... | 3 | ROME V. ETRUSCANY
Before the Etruscan s crossed the Tiber river in 750 BC, Rome was described as a loose group or agricultural villages. It was not long before this loose group of villages, with some help from the Etruscan way, was transformed into the world s most dominant city. Many say the Romans conquering success was all the thanks of the Etruscan s, however, the Romans strongly disagree and give them absolutely no credit. This being for it was not the cultural influences of Etruscany which made them such a huge success, yet their never say die attitude which helped them prevail for almost a thousand years.
From the time Etruscany began to expand they were tagged with defeat. As they expanded south from Rome into the Greek city of Cumane they were humiliatingly defeated and never recovered for the next fifty years in the south of Italy. The Etruscans did then move north and rule the northern lands for around a hundred years, however they were again swiftly defeated by wild tribes of Gauls once more adding to their long history of defeat. It can not be argued that the most dominant society and most successful organisation in the world could come from such a long line of degrading and humiliating defeats.
When the Etruscans crossed the Tiber River and entered Rome they did not have anything but invasion on the agenda. It was not the choice of the Romans for the Etruscans to cross the river therefor no acknowledgment is required as the Romans were never given a chance to develop themselves on their own terms. All Etruscan influences were forced on Rome with or without the consent of the roman community. The Etruscans, in the end did give them a city, yet the city and influences that were delivered did not have any significance as to the rule on the world the romans had for a period of almost a thousand years. Consequently the romans owe the Etruscans a city, yet they owe nothing in regards to the success and dominance in which were later experienced.
In the 4th century BC the romans drove out the last Etruscan king. It wasn t until now that the romans really started to show the world their real strength. The Roman Empire expanded into Central Italy and throughout mainland Italy into foreign lands. Later the romans moved south into Greece, the Middle East and Northern Africa. The question which comes after this huge expansion is, was the Etruscans laid back way of life actually holding the romans back? As it becomes more and more obvious that the answer is a possible yes it also becomes more and more obvious that the romans indeed owe nothing to the Etruscans. From the very beginning in the story of Romulus and Remus the romans have been described as ruthless killers with the power to murder even their own brother in the name of success. Can such a desire for dominance and a never say die attitude in which the romans pride themselves of come from the small cultural influence of the Etruscan society, a society which was defeated in both the south and north of Italy? Even today Etruscany (Tuscany) is completely Romanised for that reason it is not the Romans who owe the Etruscans everything but maybe the Etruscans who owe the Romans for sparing their society.
As stated before the romans indeed owe the Etruscans a city yet owe them nothing to their success as their influence did not have any significance in respect to the rule on the world the romans had for almost ten centuries. In the end it was the romans that took over the world not the Etruscans and if this was truly all the teachings and influence of the Etruscan society why did the Etruscan way rule for such little time? Leadership can not come from the teachings of one of life s losers . With strong armies. Battleships and strong leadership, the romans not only drove out all other invaders but conquered all the lands from Britain to the Sahara desert and from Spain to Syria (Pamela Odijk, The Romans p.9). It was the Romans who held the world in their hands, not the Etruscans and for this reason they owe nothing. | 876 | ENGLISH | 1 |
4 Facts about Women's Equality Day in the US
It seems almost unrealistic and most certainly unreasonable that women were not allowed to vote till the 1920s. However, many people considered the 19th Amendment a controversial topic. Nowadays, Women's Equality Day is celebrated on August 26th, so let’s look at the journey that brought us to the modern state of affairs.
- It took the suffragette movement 40 years to achieve their goal. The amendment was first introduced in 1878. Its author, the legendary Susan B. Anthony, was famous at the time for voting in 1972 and getting arrested for it.
- Technically, the 15th Amendment, which was passed in 1870, allowed any citizen of the United States of America to vote. However, women were still arrested trying to exercise their right to suffrage. Their ballots were not accepted in most states.
- The importance of the 19th Amendment is often underappreciated. However, without it, women would have no opportunity to influence the policies that directly affect them.
- Officially, the Women's Equality Day was established in 1971. Bella Abzug, popularly known as “Battling Bella” for her courageous support of women’s movement, proposed the establishment of the holiday. Till now, various women’s organizations honor this day through helpful workshops and seminars.
Take advantage of this day to learn more about women’s organizations and initiatives in your area! | <urn:uuid:f54ed522-3a78-41f2-b2ae-9f48e4d792e9> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://original-essays.org/blog/4-facts-about-womens-equality-day-in-the-us | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251671078.88/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125071430-20200125100430-00401.warc.gz | en | 0.986416 | 303 | 3.8125 | 4 | [
-0.4042464792728424,
-0.27864062786102295,
-0.11836815625429153,
0.23411725461483002,
-0.5044677257537842,
0.45081156492233276,
-0.11608841270208359,
0.16200964152812958,
-0.17133022844791412,
0.3549649119377136,
0.21189071238040924,
0.18484365940093994,
0.19982649385929108,
0.027660017833... | 4 | 4 Facts about Women's Equality Day in the US
It seems almost unrealistic and most certainly unreasonable that women were not allowed to vote till the 1920s. However, many people considered the 19th Amendment a controversial topic. Nowadays, Women's Equality Day is celebrated on August 26th, so let’s look at the journey that brought us to the modern state of affairs.
- It took the suffragette movement 40 years to achieve their goal. The amendment was first introduced in 1878. Its author, the legendary Susan B. Anthony, was famous at the time for voting in 1972 and getting arrested for it.
- Technically, the 15th Amendment, which was passed in 1870, allowed any citizen of the United States of America to vote. However, women were still arrested trying to exercise their right to suffrage. Their ballots were not accepted in most states.
- The importance of the 19th Amendment is often underappreciated. However, without it, women would have no opportunity to influence the policies that directly affect them.
- Officially, the Women's Equality Day was established in 1971. Bella Abzug, popularly known as “Battling Bella” for her courageous support of women’s movement, proposed the establishment of the holiday. Till now, various women’s organizations honor this day through helpful workshops and seminars.
Take advantage of this day to learn more about women’s organizations and initiatives in your area! | 315 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Julius Caesar is one of the most important figures in the history of the Roman Republic and Roman Empire. Caesar was a prominent politician, military general and leader in Rome, and had a profound impact on its history. In fact, he is one of the most famous Roman leaders from the time period of Ancient Rome, especially in relation to his rise to power and eventual assassination.
EARLY LIFE OF JULIUS CAESAR
Julius Caesar was born ‘Gaius Julius Caesar’ on July 13th, 100 BC in the city of Rome. At the time, the city of Rome was at the heart of the Roman Republic, which extended throughout much of modern Italy, Greece, Spain and a small portion of Northern Africa. Little information was recorded about Caesar’s early childhood, other than the fact that he was born to a Patrician (ruling) family in Ancient Rome. His father, who was also named Gaius Julius Caesar, ruled over the province of ‘Asia’, which today is western Turkey. Furthermore, his uncle, Gaius Marius, one of the most prominent figures in the and military leader in the Roman Republic. As well, his mother came from a prominent family in Ancient Rome. When he was just 16, Caesar’s father died, and this meant that he became the head of the family. Soon after this, civil war broke out in Rome, and in order to stay safe, and away from the conflicts, Caesar joined the military and moved away from Rome. It was also at this time, that Caesar married Cornelia, who was the daughter of a close ally to Gaius Marius. Caesar’s time in the army saw him fight in the eastern sections of the Roman Republic. In fact, his actions at this time earned him the Civic Crown for him role in the Siege of Mytilene. The Civic Crown was one of the highest distinctions a person in the Roman Republic could receive.
It wasn’t until 76 BC that Caesar thought it was safe enough to return to Rome, following the death of Lucius Cornelius Sulla. Sulla was a prominent figure in the earlier mentioned civil war, and openly criticized Julius Caesar and his allies. When Caesar returned to Rome, he moved into a neighborhood of Rome called Subura. Here he began working as a legal advocate and gained a reputation for his speaking skills.
RISE TO POWER OF JULIUS CAESAR
Caesar began his rise to prominence in the political scene of Ancient Rome when he was elected military tribune. In Ancient Rome, the position of military tribune was an officer of the Roman Army, and was oftend held by Roman men before they entered the Roman Senate. In that same year (69 BC) Julius Caesar was also elected as quaestor, which was another prominent position in the Roman Republic. It was also this time that his wife, Cornelia, died. He was then briefly married to Pompeia, a granddaughter of Sulla. However, they divorced in 61 BC.
Julius Caesar continued his rise to power in 63 BC, when he was elected to a magistrate position called a curule aedile. He used this position to stage a set of games that were grand in nature. In Ancient Rome, public games of entertainment were referred to as ‘Ludi’ and where often held in large amphitheaters. These types of games often included horse races, and theatrical competitions. When Caesar staged these games as the curule aedile, he gained widespread support from the Roman people and improved his standing and popularity in the Roman Republic. As such, when he ran for the position of Pontifex Maximus in 63 BC, he won easily against two other rivals. The Pontifex Maximus was the highest position in the Roman religious structure and gave Caesar a much higher standing in the Roman Empire.
In 62 BC, Caesar was appointed as governor of the western Iberian Peninsula, which is today modern Spain. At the time, Caesar was struggling financially and was burdened with many debts to his name. As a result, he asked and received help from Marcus Licinius Crassus, who was one of the wealthiest men in the Roman Republic. Crassus paid many of Caesar’s debts in exchange for political support. As well, as governor, Caesar led campaigns of conquest on the Iberian Peninsula, which caused him to gain recognition and support. In fact, Caesar was made Imperator in 60 BC. The title of Imperator was given to a military commander after an impressive victory or series of victories and was an important step towards a Roman military officer joining the Roman Senate. 60 BC was also significant because it was when Caesar along with his allies formed the First Triumvirate.
The First Triumvirate was an informal alliance between Julius Caesar, Marcus Licinius Crassus and Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus. Caesar and Crassus were still connected from when Crassus helped Caesar handle his many debts just a few years earlier. Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus (or just ‘Pompey’) was an influential military and political figure in the Roman Republic. In fact, Pompey and Crassus had clashed earlier in their lives, but Caesar saw the opportunity to unite them together, along with himself, to create a powerful alliance. This alliance was further strengthened when Caesar’s daughter, Julia, married Pompey. Julia was Caesar’s daughter from his first marriage to Cornelia. The alliance of the three men became known as the ‘First Triumvirate’. Their combined wealth and political power made them a formidable force at the time. For instance, they used their influence in the army to intimidate their rivals and enemies in the Roman Senate.
JULIUS CAESAR AND GAUL
Soon after the establishment of the First Triumvirate, Julius Caesar was made governor over Gaul, which was a region in northern Italy and modern France. While there, he commanded four legions of the Roman Army and used them to conquer larger sections of territory for the Roman Republic. In fact, Caesar and his armies conquered tribes throughout modern France, Germany and Belgium. With these lands conquered, he launched an attack against Britain by crossing the English Channel. He made inroads into Britain but struggled to make any major gains. However, at the same time that he was in Britain, his daughter Julia died while giving birth. This was significant because Julia was married to Pompey, Caesar’s ally in the First Triumvirate. With the death of Julia, Caesar realized that the alliance of the First Triumvirate was weakened. This was made worse with the death of Crassus in 53 BC and the marriage of Pompey to the daughter of a political rival to Caesar. In reality, Pompey was worried about the growing strength and influence of Caesar due to his many victories in Gaul. All of this combined to cause the end of the alliance of the First Triumvirate.
Despite the chaos back in Rome, Julius Caesar remained in Gaul and carried several major conflicts against the Gallic tribes. These conflicts included the Battle of Gergovia and Battle of Alesia in 52 BC. With the battle of Alesia, Caesar defeated the last of the Gallic resistance in Gaul and focused his attention on Rome and Pompey.
JULIUS CAESAR VERSUS POMPEY
While Caesar had been in Gaul, Pompey had effectively gained control of the Roman Senate and enjoyed a considerable amount of power. Pompey used that power in 50 BC to order the return of Julius Caesar to Rome. Caesar was suspicious of Pompey’s intent, as he had also ordered Caesar to disband his army in Gaul before returning. In return, Pompey had the Roman Senate formally accuse Caesar of treason and a new civil war erupted for the power over the Roman Republic.
Caesar responded to Pompey’s challenges in 49 BC when he had his army cross the Rubicon River, on the northern border of Italy, and launch an attack against Pompey and the Senate. Caesar’s soldiers quickly moved south through the Italian Peninsula and overwhelmed Pompey and his own army. This caused Pompey and his supporters from the Roman Senate to flee to Spain with his remaining soldiers.
Caesar wasted no time, and left Rome with his own armies in pursuit of Pompey. While he was gone, Caesar left Rome under the leader ship of one of his allies – Mark Antony. Caesar and his armies arrived in Spain just 27 days later after a grueling march and set straight away to battling and defeating Pompey’s forces. Caesar then travelled to Illyria, which is modern Greece, in search of Pompey. In Illyria, the forces of Caesar and Pompey participated in a series of battles that ultimately ended the civil war. First, Caesar and his soldiers were nearly defeated at the Battle of Dyrrhachium on July 10th, 48 BC. Pompey led his forces at the battle but failed to deliver the decisive blow to Caesar. As a result, later that summer, on August 9th, Caesar and his army defeated Pompey’s forces at the Battle of Pharsalus. Pompey survived the battle and fled to Egypt. Caesar returned to Rome a victor and was appointed the dictator of Rome, but did not stay long as he soon left for Egypt after Pompey.
JULIUS CAESAR IN EGYPT
As stated above, Caesar followed Pompey to Egypt in 48 BC. When he arrived, Caesar was presented with the severed head of Pompey from the Pharaoh of Egypt - Ptolemy XIII. The pharaoh had Pompey assassinated, likely as a gesture to gain favor from Caesar. However, despite being his rival for many years, Caesar was horrified when he saw Pompey’s severed head.
Egypt was in the midst of a power struggle and civil war when Caesar arrived in Egypt. Pharaoh Ptolemy XIII was in battle for power over Egypt with his sister, Queen Cleopatra. At first, Caesar worked to end the struggle between the two, but soon sided with Cleopatra and worked to defend her against the pharaoh. During this time, he and Cleopatra began a relationship that resulted in the birth of their son, Caesarion, on June 23rd, 47 BC. Furthermore, Caesar’s soldiers battled the pharaoh’s forces at the Siege of Alexandria and later at the Battle of the Nile. The Battle of the Nile occurred in 47 BC and saw the combined forces of Caesar and Cleopatra defeat the armies of Ptolemy XIII. As a result of this, Cleopatra was made the new ruler over Egypt. Ptolemy XIII died shortly after from drowning in the Nile River. The relationship between Caesar and Cleopatra continued in the years after, and she joined him on his return to Rome. In fact, she remained connected to Caesar until the time of his assassination in 44 BC.
After his victory in Egypt, Caesar fought several more battles throughout the Middle East and Africa. These battles focused on finishing off the last of Pompey’s supporters and consolidating even more power in the hands of Caesar. When he returned to Rome in 46 BC, he more powerful than he had ever been and appointed dictator of the Roman Republic again.
JULIUS CAESAR THE DICTATOR
As stated above, Julius Caesar was appointed the dictator of the Roman Republic in 46 BC. In fact, his term as dictator of Rome was for a period of ten years. In general, Caesar was celebrated by the people of Rome when he returned and assumed command of the government. With that said, he still had many political rivals, and his appointment of ten years angered many.
Regardless, Caesar undertook several significant legislative policies at this time. For instance, he introduced a new constitution. He used this constitution to gain more power and authority for himself and ensure the unity of the vast Roman Republic. Furthermore, Caesar oversaw several major reforms, including: land distributions to veterans, elimination of certain elements of Roman taxes, reduction of debt, incentives for Roman families to have more children, creation of a police force, and changes to the Roman calendar system.
Caesar’s reform of the Roman calendar system was likely his most significant. At the time, the Roman calendar was based on the movements of the moon. Caesar changed this and introduced the Julian Calendar on January 1st, 45 BC. The Julian Calendar is essentially similar to the modern calendar used in western countries today. It was based on twelve months and 365 days a year.
While many of his reforms were popular, there still remained an element of political opposition for Caesar in the Roman Senate. In fact, Caesar carried out a series of actions that worried other prominent Roman politicians. For instance, he limited the powers of the Senate and arranged the political structure of Rome such that he gained more authority. In fact, he had himself made dictator of Rome for the rest of his life in 44 BC. Furthermore, he began to project an image of himself that his rivals likened more to a King. This angered many in the Roman Senate, as they resented the types of authority associated with monarchs. As a result, this led to a growing sense of anger among members of the Roman Senate, which led to the eventual assassination of Julius Caesar.
ASSASSINATION OF JULIUS CAESAR
Julius Caesar was assassinated on March 15th in 44 BC (which was the ‘Ides of March’ in the Roman calendar) by rivals in the Roman Senate. More specifically, the assassination of Caesar was planned and carried out by three main Roman senators: Marcus Junius Brutus, Cassius Longinus, and Decimus Brutus. Upset with Caesar’s authority, they arranged to assassinate him during a session of the Roman Senate on March 15th. When he arrived in the Senate, approximately 60 angered senators surrounded him and began stabbing him with daggers. It was recorded that Caesar was stabbed 23 times. He was 55 years old when he died.
The assassination of Julius Caesar was an important event in the history of Ancient Rome. For instance, the death of Caesar effectively ended the Roman Republic and led to the Roman Empire. Mark Anthony, Caesar’s supporter led a series of civil wars that resulted in the rise to power of Octavian. Octavian was Julius Caesar’s nephew and later became Augustus, the first emperor of the Roman Empire.
CITE THIS ARTICLE | <urn:uuid:0d6e1a27-2c8c-4e90-b952-ad5bbaa72e4f> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.historycrunch.com/julius-caesar-ancient-rome.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592565.2/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118110141-20200118134141-00180.warc.gz | en | 0.986468 | 3,005 | 4.09375 | 4 | [
-0.1025766059756279,
0.38603779673576355,
0.6345417499542236,
0.017583318054676056,
-0.6109637022018433,
0.0251145139336586,
0.43549713492393494,
0.17977841198444366,
0.4350627362728119,
-0.043577179312705994,
0.026090601459145546,
-0.24721957743167877,
-0.15948373079299927,
0.475510358810... | 16 | Julius Caesar is one of the most important figures in the history of the Roman Republic and Roman Empire. Caesar was a prominent politician, military general and leader in Rome, and had a profound impact on its history. In fact, he is one of the most famous Roman leaders from the time period of Ancient Rome, especially in relation to his rise to power and eventual assassination.
EARLY LIFE OF JULIUS CAESAR
Julius Caesar was born ‘Gaius Julius Caesar’ on July 13th, 100 BC in the city of Rome. At the time, the city of Rome was at the heart of the Roman Republic, which extended throughout much of modern Italy, Greece, Spain and a small portion of Northern Africa. Little information was recorded about Caesar’s early childhood, other than the fact that he was born to a Patrician (ruling) family in Ancient Rome. His father, who was also named Gaius Julius Caesar, ruled over the province of ‘Asia’, which today is western Turkey. Furthermore, his uncle, Gaius Marius, one of the most prominent figures in the and military leader in the Roman Republic. As well, his mother came from a prominent family in Ancient Rome. When he was just 16, Caesar’s father died, and this meant that he became the head of the family. Soon after this, civil war broke out in Rome, and in order to stay safe, and away from the conflicts, Caesar joined the military and moved away from Rome. It was also at this time, that Caesar married Cornelia, who was the daughter of a close ally to Gaius Marius. Caesar’s time in the army saw him fight in the eastern sections of the Roman Republic. In fact, his actions at this time earned him the Civic Crown for him role in the Siege of Mytilene. The Civic Crown was one of the highest distinctions a person in the Roman Republic could receive.
It wasn’t until 76 BC that Caesar thought it was safe enough to return to Rome, following the death of Lucius Cornelius Sulla. Sulla was a prominent figure in the earlier mentioned civil war, and openly criticized Julius Caesar and his allies. When Caesar returned to Rome, he moved into a neighborhood of Rome called Subura. Here he began working as a legal advocate and gained a reputation for his speaking skills.
RISE TO POWER OF JULIUS CAESAR
Caesar began his rise to prominence in the political scene of Ancient Rome when he was elected military tribune. In Ancient Rome, the position of military tribune was an officer of the Roman Army, and was oftend held by Roman men before they entered the Roman Senate. In that same year (69 BC) Julius Caesar was also elected as quaestor, which was another prominent position in the Roman Republic. It was also this time that his wife, Cornelia, died. He was then briefly married to Pompeia, a granddaughter of Sulla. However, they divorced in 61 BC.
Julius Caesar continued his rise to power in 63 BC, when he was elected to a magistrate position called a curule aedile. He used this position to stage a set of games that were grand in nature. In Ancient Rome, public games of entertainment were referred to as ‘Ludi’ and where often held in large amphitheaters. These types of games often included horse races, and theatrical competitions. When Caesar staged these games as the curule aedile, he gained widespread support from the Roman people and improved his standing and popularity in the Roman Republic. As such, when he ran for the position of Pontifex Maximus in 63 BC, he won easily against two other rivals. The Pontifex Maximus was the highest position in the Roman religious structure and gave Caesar a much higher standing in the Roman Empire.
In 62 BC, Caesar was appointed as governor of the western Iberian Peninsula, which is today modern Spain. At the time, Caesar was struggling financially and was burdened with many debts to his name. As a result, he asked and received help from Marcus Licinius Crassus, who was one of the wealthiest men in the Roman Republic. Crassus paid many of Caesar’s debts in exchange for political support. As well, as governor, Caesar led campaigns of conquest on the Iberian Peninsula, which caused him to gain recognition and support. In fact, Caesar was made Imperator in 60 BC. The title of Imperator was given to a military commander after an impressive victory or series of victories and was an important step towards a Roman military officer joining the Roman Senate. 60 BC was also significant because it was when Caesar along with his allies formed the First Triumvirate.
The First Triumvirate was an informal alliance between Julius Caesar, Marcus Licinius Crassus and Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus. Caesar and Crassus were still connected from when Crassus helped Caesar handle his many debts just a few years earlier. Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus (or just ‘Pompey’) was an influential military and political figure in the Roman Republic. In fact, Pompey and Crassus had clashed earlier in their lives, but Caesar saw the opportunity to unite them together, along with himself, to create a powerful alliance. This alliance was further strengthened when Caesar’s daughter, Julia, married Pompey. Julia was Caesar’s daughter from his first marriage to Cornelia. The alliance of the three men became known as the ‘First Triumvirate’. Their combined wealth and political power made them a formidable force at the time. For instance, they used their influence in the army to intimidate their rivals and enemies in the Roman Senate.
JULIUS CAESAR AND GAUL
Soon after the establishment of the First Triumvirate, Julius Caesar was made governor over Gaul, which was a region in northern Italy and modern France. While there, he commanded four legions of the Roman Army and used them to conquer larger sections of territory for the Roman Republic. In fact, Caesar and his armies conquered tribes throughout modern France, Germany and Belgium. With these lands conquered, he launched an attack against Britain by crossing the English Channel. He made inroads into Britain but struggled to make any major gains. However, at the same time that he was in Britain, his daughter Julia died while giving birth. This was significant because Julia was married to Pompey, Caesar’s ally in the First Triumvirate. With the death of Julia, Caesar realized that the alliance of the First Triumvirate was weakened. This was made worse with the death of Crassus in 53 BC and the marriage of Pompey to the daughter of a political rival to Caesar. In reality, Pompey was worried about the growing strength and influence of Caesar due to his many victories in Gaul. All of this combined to cause the end of the alliance of the First Triumvirate.
Despite the chaos back in Rome, Julius Caesar remained in Gaul and carried several major conflicts against the Gallic tribes. These conflicts included the Battle of Gergovia and Battle of Alesia in 52 BC. With the battle of Alesia, Caesar defeated the last of the Gallic resistance in Gaul and focused his attention on Rome and Pompey.
JULIUS CAESAR VERSUS POMPEY
While Caesar had been in Gaul, Pompey had effectively gained control of the Roman Senate and enjoyed a considerable amount of power. Pompey used that power in 50 BC to order the return of Julius Caesar to Rome. Caesar was suspicious of Pompey’s intent, as he had also ordered Caesar to disband his army in Gaul before returning. In return, Pompey had the Roman Senate formally accuse Caesar of treason and a new civil war erupted for the power over the Roman Republic.
Caesar responded to Pompey’s challenges in 49 BC when he had his army cross the Rubicon River, on the northern border of Italy, and launch an attack against Pompey and the Senate. Caesar’s soldiers quickly moved south through the Italian Peninsula and overwhelmed Pompey and his own army. This caused Pompey and his supporters from the Roman Senate to flee to Spain with his remaining soldiers.
Caesar wasted no time, and left Rome with his own armies in pursuit of Pompey. While he was gone, Caesar left Rome under the leader ship of one of his allies – Mark Antony. Caesar and his armies arrived in Spain just 27 days later after a grueling march and set straight away to battling and defeating Pompey’s forces. Caesar then travelled to Illyria, which is modern Greece, in search of Pompey. In Illyria, the forces of Caesar and Pompey participated in a series of battles that ultimately ended the civil war. First, Caesar and his soldiers were nearly defeated at the Battle of Dyrrhachium on July 10th, 48 BC. Pompey led his forces at the battle but failed to deliver the decisive blow to Caesar. As a result, later that summer, on August 9th, Caesar and his army defeated Pompey’s forces at the Battle of Pharsalus. Pompey survived the battle and fled to Egypt. Caesar returned to Rome a victor and was appointed the dictator of Rome, but did not stay long as he soon left for Egypt after Pompey.
JULIUS CAESAR IN EGYPT
As stated above, Caesar followed Pompey to Egypt in 48 BC. When he arrived, Caesar was presented with the severed head of Pompey from the Pharaoh of Egypt - Ptolemy XIII. The pharaoh had Pompey assassinated, likely as a gesture to gain favor from Caesar. However, despite being his rival for many years, Caesar was horrified when he saw Pompey’s severed head.
Egypt was in the midst of a power struggle and civil war when Caesar arrived in Egypt. Pharaoh Ptolemy XIII was in battle for power over Egypt with his sister, Queen Cleopatra. At first, Caesar worked to end the struggle between the two, but soon sided with Cleopatra and worked to defend her against the pharaoh. During this time, he and Cleopatra began a relationship that resulted in the birth of their son, Caesarion, on June 23rd, 47 BC. Furthermore, Caesar’s soldiers battled the pharaoh’s forces at the Siege of Alexandria and later at the Battle of the Nile. The Battle of the Nile occurred in 47 BC and saw the combined forces of Caesar and Cleopatra defeat the armies of Ptolemy XIII. As a result of this, Cleopatra was made the new ruler over Egypt. Ptolemy XIII died shortly after from drowning in the Nile River. The relationship between Caesar and Cleopatra continued in the years after, and she joined him on his return to Rome. In fact, she remained connected to Caesar until the time of his assassination in 44 BC.
After his victory in Egypt, Caesar fought several more battles throughout the Middle East and Africa. These battles focused on finishing off the last of Pompey’s supporters and consolidating even more power in the hands of Caesar. When he returned to Rome in 46 BC, he more powerful than he had ever been and appointed dictator of the Roman Republic again.
JULIUS CAESAR THE DICTATOR
As stated above, Julius Caesar was appointed the dictator of the Roman Republic in 46 BC. In fact, his term as dictator of Rome was for a period of ten years. In general, Caesar was celebrated by the people of Rome when he returned and assumed command of the government. With that said, he still had many political rivals, and his appointment of ten years angered many.
Regardless, Caesar undertook several significant legislative policies at this time. For instance, he introduced a new constitution. He used this constitution to gain more power and authority for himself and ensure the unity of the vast Roman Republic. Furthermore, Caesar oversaw several major reforms, including: land distributions to veterans, elimination of certain elements of Roman taxes, reduction of debt, incentives for Roman families to have more children, creation of a police force, and changes to the Roman calendar system.
Caesar’s reform of the Roman calendar system was likely his most significant. At the time, the Roman calendar was based on the movements of the moon. Caesar changed this and introduced the Julian Calendar on January 1st, 45 BC. The Julian Calendar is essentially similar to the modern calendar used in western countries today. It was based on twelve months and 365 days a year.
While many of his reforms were popular, there still remained an element of political opposition for Caesar in the Roman Senate. In fact, Caesar carried out a series of actions that worried other prominent Roman politicians. For instance, he limited the powers of the Senate and arranged the political structure of Rome such that he gained more authority. In fact, he had himself made dictator of Rome for the rest of his life in 44 BC. Furthermore, he began to project an image of himself that his rivals likened more to a King. This angered many in the Roman Senate, as they resented the types of authority associated with monarchs. As a result, this led to a growing sense of anger among members of the Roman Senate, which led to the eventual assassination of Julius Caesar.
ASSASSINATION OF JULIUS CAESAR
Julius Caesar was assassinated on March 15th in 44 BC (which was the ‘Ides of March’ in the Roman calendar) by rivals in the Roman Senate. More specifically, the assassination of Caesar was planned and carried out by three main Roman senators: Marcus Junius Brutus, Cassius Longinus, and Decimus Brutus. Upset with Caesar’s authority, they arranged to assassinate him during a session of the Roman Senate on March 15th. When he arrived in the Senate, approximately 60 angered senators surrounded him and began stabbing him with daggers. It was recorded that Caesar was stabbed 23 times. He was 55 years old when he died.
The assassination of Julius Caesar was an important event in the history of Ancient Rome. For instance, the death of Caesar effectively ended the Roman Republic and led to the Roman Empire. Mark Anthony, Caesar’s supporter led a series of civil wars that resulted in the rise to power of Octavian. Octavian was Julius Caesar’s nephew and later became Augustus, the first emperor of the Roman Empire.
CITE THIS ARTICLE | 3,004 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Following the War of 1812, the United States Army Corps of Engineers proposed that a fort be built on Hog Island Ledge, in Casco Bay at the entrance to the harbor at Portland, Maine. Named for the colonial proprietor of Maine, Sir Ferdinando Gorges, it was constructed to support existing forts, including Fort Preble in South Portland and Fort Scammel built on nearby House Island in 1808. Congress, however, did not fund construction of Fort Gorges until 1857. The walls of the fort were begun the next year, and when the American Civil War broke out in 1861, work quickly advanced.
The fort was designed by Colonel Reuben Staples Smart. The chief architect in charge of construction was Thomas Lincoln Casey, who later became Chief of Engineers. It is similar in size and construction to Fort Sumter, but is built of granite instead of brick.
The fort was completed in 1865 as the war ended. Modern explosives made the fort obsolete by the time it was completed. A modernization plan was begun in 1869, but funding was cut off in 1876, with the third level of the fort still unfinished. During the modernization project, sod-covered sand was added to the top level of the fort to protect gun encasements and powder magazines from attacks.
The fort was last used by the military during World War II, when it was used to store submarine mines. It was acquired by the city of Portland in 1960 and placed on the National Register of Historic Places. Owing to a large number of injuries on the fort, it is widely considered to be unsafe to visit. | <urn:uuid:7ad61280-da53-498a-95d5-c54dd462c7d9> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.gearthhacks.com/downloads/Fort-Gorges,-Portland,-Maine/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250611127.53/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123160903-20200123185903-00454.warc.gz | en | 0.984349 | 331 | 3.546875 | 4 | [
-0.11708498001098633,
0.38752663135528564,
0.6555049419403076,
0.015584439039230347,
-0.16617783904075623,
-0.07797420024871826,
-0.15447808802127838,
0.1078973188996315,
-0.6836541891098022,
0.14462459087371826,
0.32315489649772644,
-0.3482186496257782,
0.08067665994167328,
0.341677337884... | 5 | Following the War of 1812, the United States Army Corps of Engineers proposed that a fort be built on Hog Island Ledge, in Casco Bay at the entrance to the harbor at Portland, Maine. Named for the colonial proprietor of Maine, Sir Ferdinando Gorges, it was constructed to support existing forts, including Fort Preble in South Portland and Fort Scammel built on nearby House Island in 1808. Congress, however, did not fund construction of Fort Gorges until 1857. The walls of the fort were begun the next year, and when the American Civil War broke out in 1861, work quickly advanced.
The fort was designed by Colonel Reuben Staples Smart. The chief architect in charge of construction was Thomas Lincoln Casey, who later became Chief of Engineers. It is similar in size and construction to Fort Sumter, but is built of granite instead of brick.
The fort was completed in 1865 as the war ended. Modern explosives made the fort obsolete by the time it was completed. A modernization plan was begun in 1869, but funding was cut off in 1876, with the third level of the fort still unfinished. During the modernization project, sod-covered sand was added to the top level of the fort to protect gun encasements and powder magazines from attacks.
The fort was last used by the military during World War II, when it was used to store submarine mines. It was acquired by the city of Portland in 1960 and placed on the National Register of Historic Places. Owing to a large number of injuries on the fort, it is widely considered to be unsafe to visit. | 352 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The word ‘lepra’ indicates essentially any disease producing scaly lesions on the skin. It was not clearly known at which point the word was refer-red to leprosy. The medical writings of antiquity contained partial descriptions of this disease.
In the middle of the second century AD, the description of leprosy was first given by Aretaeus of ‘Cappadocia’. He referred to the disease as “elephantiasis”.
There are two possibilities of mode of spread of leprosy to Europe. Alexander and his men were probably responsible for the spread of leprosy from India to Europe and the Near East. Persians had introduced the disease into Europe during their invasions.
During the high medieval period there were medical writings in which leprosy was clearly described, as it is known today. Two polar forms were also described and it was considered that only one form required hospitalization.
Hospitals for leprosy patients were called as ‘leprosaria’ and were founded by noble families. There were many such hospitals in the 12th to 13th centuries. By the thirteenth century leprosy patient could not share anything in life or dead. A ‘leper’ was excluded from all contacts with other persons. Legally he was considered as a dead person. Leprosy was conceived as a punishment for sin.
Moller-Christensen's work revealed that 80 percent of the skeletons excavated at Naestved in Denmark showed the pathognomonic bony changes. There were lot of discrepancies in the incidence, age group and clinical features among the various countries. The Naestved study revealed that many patients acquired the disease during childhood and the incidence was around 20 per1000 persons per year.
There was a relationship between plague and leprosy. Many leprosy patients died of plague. Isolation of leprosy patients in the leprosarium was responsible for the decline in the incidence of the disease.
A Jesuit priest founded San Lazarus Hospital at Havana in 1677, and persons with leprosy were isolated at this hospital.
Leprosy was spread to the United States from Canada and African countries by slavery. In 1919, a National Leprosy Hospital was established at Florida.
Norway forms a classical example for the control of the disease. Over 8,000 patients were registered in Norway between 1855 and 1950. The highest prevalence occurred before the 1860s. There were no new cases after 1950s at which time only 11 cases remained. Isolation of the patients and emphasis on birth control measures might have played a crucial role in elimination of the disease from that country.
Rafael Lucio of Mexico (1819–86) was a distin-guished leprologist of that country after whom Lucio leprosy and Lucio phenomenon were named.
Leprosy in India has been mentioned in Vedic writings dated around 1400 BC. In Sushruta and Samhita of 600 BC one could find a reasonable account of clinical features and treatment of leprosy. A ‘leper’ was regarded as a most sinful person. In the 15th century an Indian physician named Gopal Krishna produced a comprehensive work on the Materia Medica of India in which he described about ‘galita kushtari rasa’, which was used for the treatment of leprosy. It was a combination of mercury, sulfur, iron, copper and vegetable oils.
For several centuries leprosy was a dreaded disease all over the world, including India. The Dutch built the first asylum for lepers in Cochin of Kerala state in 1728. Chaulmoogra oil was applied externally and taken internally as a cure for leprosy. Door to door survey was first carried out in the year 1951 in India.
Mouat, a British surgeon of the Indian Medical Service in 1859 formally introduced ‘chaulmoogra oil’ as a therapy for leprosy. Remedial treatment was begun largely through Christian missionaries.
In the middle age, when leprosy was at its peak in Europe, every country brought ruthless laws to isolate leprosy patients in an attempt to protect the community against the spread of the disease. At that time the hereditary theory predominated in the European medical circles. Boeck and Danielssen who were the two leading Norwegian clinicians were also of the same view.
In the year 1868 a young physician Gerhard Henrik Armauer Hansen (1841–1912) (Fig. 1.1) was appointed to assist Danielessen. He was convinced that leprosy was an infectious disease but was unable to change Danielssen's view. Hansen was reappointed in 1871 by the Norwegian Medical Society to study the cause of leprosy. During this period he made an effort to prove his infectious theory and demonstrated the rod-shaped bodies in stained preparations made from nodules of leprosy patients. His observations were first published in 1874 under the title ‘Causes of Leprosy’ in the Journal of Norwegian Medical Society. This publication was in the form of an annual report for 1873, thus establishing 1873 as the year of discovery of leprosy bacillus. It was recorded on 28 February, 1873. The discovery of tubercle bacillus followed that of leprosy bacillus by 9 years. Hence, the Mycobacterium leprae (M.leprae) has become the first bacterium to be identified. Hansen was the first person, who made an attempt to culture M. leprae in animals but all his efforts to infect animals have failed. This was possible only in 1960 by Shepard who successfully transmitted M. leprae into animals. M. leprae is the only human pathogenic bacterium, which is yet to be cultured. Hansen married his own professor's daughter as a gift for his discovery. The Norwegian medical society banned Hansen from practice as he inoculated M. leprae into a woman's eye who subsequently lost her vision.
In 1882 Ehrlich described the property of acid fastness but its mechanism was unclear.
In 1908 Fromm and Wittmann synthesized Dapsone for the treatment of leprosy. However, adequate studies were not done to determine its margin of safety and it was considered to be highly toxic and was returned to the shelf for several years. In 1940, while working as a medical officer at Carville, Louisiana, Guy H. Faget first tried sulfones in leprosy. In 1943, promin treatment in leprosy was reported successfully. While Cochrane in 1949 prescribed dapsone intramuscularly, it was Lowe and Smith in the same year, used dapsone orally.
Pettit and Rees first reported dapsone resistance in 1964. Browne and Hogerzeil in 1962 from Nigeria effectively administered clofazimine. Opromolla in 1963 administrated rifampicin intra-muscularly in ten patients with leprosy. Jacobson and Hastings detected M. leprae resistance to rifampicin.
Sheskin in 1965 prescribed thalidomide as a sedative in ENL patients and incidentally found that ENL lesions improved.
World Health Organization (WHO) in 1981 recommended the combination of drugs to over-come resistance.
In an article in 1955 Yeoli traced the origin of leprosy to 1411–1314 BC. He described the finding of a clay jar in a section of the Amenophis III temple. On this jar, a face similar to advanced nodular leprosy was depicted.
The Hebrew word “saraath” was translated as ‘leprosy’. It covered a large number of skin conditions.
The word ‘leprosy’ translated in Biblical writings should be rendered ‘defiled’ or ‘cursed’ and it had no bearing on the disease we know as leprosy today.
In Babylonian time the word ‘leprosy’ has been translated as covered with dust or scaly.
Munro in his article in Edinburgh Medical Journal in 1877, referred to an Egyptian record of 1350 BC of leprosy occurring “among Negro slaves” from Sudan.
Hippocrates was born in 467 BC. From a study of translation of his work it was doubtful whether the father of modern medicine really recognized leprosy.
Leprosy was mentioned in the Vedic writings in India. It was mentioned as Kustha in the Vedas in about 1400 BC. Dharmendra in 1960 stated that in ‘Sushruta and Samhita’ (600 BC) one can find a reasonably good account of features and treatment of the disease.
Similarly references to leprosy in China appeared in 600 BC. Leprosy was known in China over five thousand years ago.
It can be concluded that leprosy was introduced into the Mediterranean countries somewhere between the time of Hippocrates (467 BC) and the time of Galen (131 AD) and that by 150 AD it was a well-known disease. Evidence of the disease in India and China dates back to 600 BC and in China possibly much further back. At least one thing is certain; leprosy is an ancient disease and has been the dread and horror of mankind for many centuries. | <urn:uuid:eb177903-3db4-44f1-9041-2f189ff6e4d1> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.jaypeedigital.com/eReader/chapter/9788180615283/ch1 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251802249.87/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129194333-20200129223333-00409.warc.gz | en | 0.981102 | 1,975 | 4.1875 | 4 | [
-0.25035759806632996,
0.09736131131649017,
0.060438238084316254,
0.021189028397202492,
0.013056575320661068,
-0.43981242179870605,
0.6400431394577026,
0.43283867835998535,
-0.1600913107395172,
0.3067372739315033,
0.44007378816604614,
-0.3184069097042084,
-0.09704329818487167,
0.15358288586... | 1 | The word ‘lepra’ indicates essentially any disease producing scaly lesions on the skin. It was not clearly known at which point the word was refer-red to leprosy. The medical writings of antiquity contained partial descriptions of this disease.
In the middle of the second century AD, the description of leprosy was first given by Aretaeus of ‘Cappadocia’. He referred to the disease as “elephantiasis”.
There are two possibilities of mode of spread of leprosy to Europe. Alexander and his men were probably responsible for the spread of leprosy from India to Europe and the Near East. Persians had introduced the disease into Europe during their invasions.
During the high medieval period there were medical writings in which leprosy was clearly described, as it is known today. Two polar forms were also described and it was considered that only one form required hospitalization.
Hospitals for leprosy patients were called as ‘leprosaria’ and were founded by noble families. There were many such hospitals in the 12th to 13th centuries. By the thirteenth century leprosy patient could not share anything in life or dead. A ‘leper’ was excluded from all contacts with other persons. Legally he was considered as a dead person. Leprosy was conceived as a punishment for sin.
Moller-Christensen's work revealed that 80 percent of the skeletons excavated at Naestved in Denmark showed the pathognomonic bony changes. There were lot of discrepancies in the incidence, age group and clinical features among the various countries. The Naestved study revealed that many patients acquired the disease during childhood and the incidence was around 20 per1000 persons per year.
There was a relationship between plague and leprosy. Many leprosy patients died of plague. Isolation of leprosy patients in the leprosarium was responsible for the decline in the incidence of the disease.
A Jesuit priest founded San Lazarus Hospital at Havana in 1677, and persons with leprosy were isolated at this hospital.
Leprosy was spread to the United States from Canada and African countries by slavery. In 1919, a National Leprosy Hospital was established at Florida.
Norway forms a classical example for the control of the disease. Over 8,000 patients were registered in Norway between 1855 and 1950. The highest prevalence occurred before the 1860s. There were no new cases after 1950s at which time only 11 cases remained. Isolation of the patients and emphasis on birth control measures might have played a crucial role in elimination of the disease from that country.
Rafael Lucio of Mexico (1819–86) was a distin-guished leprologist of that country after whom Lucio leprosy and Lucio phenomenon were named.
Leprosy in India has been mentioned in Vedic writings dated around 1400 BC. In Sushruta and Samhita of 600 BC one could find a reasonable account of clinical features and treatment of leprosy. A ‘leper’ was regarded as a most sinful person. In the 15th century an Indian physician named Gopal Krishna produced a comprehensive work on the Materia Medica of India in which he described about ‘galita kushtari rasa’, which was used for the treatment of leprosy. It was a combination of mercury, sulfur, iron, copper and vegetable oils.
For several centuries leprosy was a dreaded disease all over the world, including India. The Dutch built the first asylum for lepers in Cochin of Kerala state in 1728. Chaulmoogra oil was applied externally and taken internally as a cure for leprosy. Door to door survey was first carried out in the year 1951 in India.
Mouat, a British surgeon of the Indian Medical Service in 1859 formally introduced ‘chaulmoogra oil’ as a therapy for leprosy. Remedial treatment was begun largely through Christian missionaries.
In the middle age, when leprosy was at its peak in Europe, every country brought ruthless laws to isolate leprosy patients in an attempt to protect the community against the spread of the disease. At that time the hereditary theory predominated in the European medical circles. Boeck and Danielssen who were the two leading Norwegian clinicians were also of the same view.
In the year 1868 a young physician Gerhard Henrik Armauer Hansen (1841–1912) (Fig. 1.1) was appointed to assist Danielessen. He was convinced that leprosy was an infectious disease but was unable to change Danielssen's view. Hansen was reappointed in 1871 by the Norwegian Medical Society to study the cause of leprosy. During this period he made an effort to prove his infectious theory and demonstrated the rod-shaped bodies in stained preparations made from nodules of leprosy patients. His observations were first published in 1874 under the title ‘Causes of Leprosy’ in the Journal of Norwegian Medical Society. This publication was in the form of an annual report for 1873, thus establishing 1873 as the year of discovery of leprosy bacillus. It was recorded on 28 February, 1873. The discovery of tubercle bacillus followed that of leprosy bacillus by 9 years. Hence, the Mycobacterium leprae (M.leprae) has become the first bacterium to be identified. Hansen was the first person, who made an attempt to culture M. leprae in animals but all his efforts to infect animals have failed. This was possible only in 1960 by Shepard who successfully transmitted M. leprae into animals. M. leprae is the only human pathogenic bacterium, which is yet to be cultured. Hansen married his own professor's daughter as a gift for his discovery. The Norwegian medical society banned Hansen from practice as he inoculated M. leprae into a woman's eye who subsequently lost her vision.
In 1882 Ehrlich described the property of acid fastness but its mechanism was unclear.
In 1908 Fromm and Wittmann synthesized Dapsone for the treatment of leprosy. However, adequate studies were not done to determine its margin of safety and it was considered to be highly toxic and was returned to the shelf for several years. In 1940, while working as a medical officer at Carville, Louisiana, Guy H. Faget first tried sulfones in leprosy. In 1943, promin treatment in leprosy was reported successfully. While Cochrane in 1949 prescribed dapsone intramuscularly, it was Lowe and Smith in the same year, used dapsone orally.
Pettit and Rees first reported dapsone resistance in 1964. Browne and Hogerzeil in 1962 from Nigeria effectively administered clofazimine. Opromolla in 1963 administrated rifampicin intra-muscularly in ten patients with leprosy. Jacobson and Hastings detected M. leprae resistance to rifampicin.
Sheskin in 1965 prescribed thalidomide as a sedative in ENL patients and incidentally found that ENL lesions improved.
World Health Organization (WHO) in 1981 recommended the combination of drugs to over-come resistance.
In an article in 1955 Yeoli traced the origin of leprosy to 1411–1314 BC. He described the finding of a clay jar in a section of the Amenophis III temple. On this jar, a face similar to advanced nodular leprosy was depicted.
The Hebrew word “saraath” was translated as ‘leprosy’. It covered a large number of skin conditions.
The word ‘leprosy’ translated in Biblical writings should be rendered ‘defiled’ or ‘cursed’ and it had no bearing on the disease we know as leprosy today.
In Babylonian time the word ‘leprosy’ has been translated as covered with dust or scaly.
Munro in his article in Edinburgh Medical Journal in 1877, referred to an Egyptian record of 1350 BC of leprosy occurring “among Negro slaves” from Sudan.
Hippocrates was born in 467 BC. From a study of translation of his work it was doubtful whether the father of modern medicine really recognized leprosy.
Leprosy was mentioned in the Vedic writings in India. It was mentioned as Kustha in the Vedas in about 1400 BC. Dharmendra in 1960 stated that in ‘Sushruta and Samhita’ (600 BC) one can find a reasonably good account of features and treatment of the disease.
Similarly references to leprosy in China appeared in 600 BC. Leprosy was known in China over five thousand years ago.
It can be concluded that leprosy was introduced into the Mediterranean countries somewhere between the time of Hippocrates (467 BC) and the time of Galen (131 AD) and that by 150 AD it was a well-known disease. Evidence of the disease in India and China dates back to 600 BC and in China possibly much further back. At least one thing is certain; leprosy is an ancient disease and has been the dread and horror of mankind for many centuries. | 2,067 | ENGLISH | 1 |
I. The Irish migration was not just because of the potato famine.
A. There was more than just one potato famine in the 19th century.
1. The British government helped the Irish out of the first famine.
2. How they helped during the first famine.
B. The British government did not help during the second famine.
1. The reason they did not help was political.
2. The result was the death of thousands.
C. Getting from Ireland to the United States was not easy.
1. The trip across the Atlantic Ocean was arduous.
2. Many died on the way over.
D. There were many Irish that came, and many Americans did not welcome them.
1. Most Irish were Catholic.
2. Most Americans were Protestant, and did not welcome them here.
E. The derogatory names given them.
1. What the names they were given as a group.
2. Where these names came from.
II. The German immigration was not religious or political.
A. The reason for migration was for land.
1. How the available land was divided by family members in Germany.
2. How the effects of the lack of land available was the cause for immigration.
B. There were no religious or political reasons for leaving at the time.
1. Religions in Germany were not at odds with one another.
2. Politically Germany was stable in these years.
III. Italian immigrants left for political reasons.
A. The government was oppressing their people.
1. How the oppression affected Italy’s population.
2. How this created the mass immigration to the United States.
B. The Italians as the Irish flocked in huge numbers to the United States.
1. How they came to Ellis Island from Italy.
2. What their dreams were about the living in the United States.
C. The Americans looked down on these immigrants.
1. They were used for cheap labor.
2. The result was large ghetto areas being developed.
D. The derogatory names given to the Italians.
1. What these names were.
2. Why they were given these names.
IV. The immigration of the big three was a hardship to them all when they came.
A. Explain how many overcame the hardships.
1. By assimilating into the American population.
2. Contributions of the Irish, German and Italians to the American way of life.
B. How these immigrants and their descendents now consider themselves as Americans first.
1. The immigrants fought in wars to keep us free from oppression.
2. There rolls in these wars. (Civil, WWI and WWII)
The most effective arguments of my essay will be placed in the ending body paragraphs. The reason I have chosen to place them here, is to show how the Irish, German and Italian immigrants overcame adversity to become Americans and to give to their children a better future and life than they had. The arguments will show historical facts from the appropriate eras, and hopefully (depending on what I can find) the testimonials of those that were there at the time. This will help to reinforce my argument in the reader’s minds and make the essay more memorable. | <urn:uuid:7c76d583-c2f2-43e5-9a59-ebfd407aa648> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.studymode.com/essays/Full-Sentence-Outline-63641917.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251689924.62/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126135207-20200126165207-00455.warc.gz | en | 0.983441 | 678 | 3.890625 | 4 | [
-0.16359996795654297,
0.12963604927062988,
-0.08597354590892792,
-0.08080677688121796,
0.16587521135807037,
0.01210564374923706,
-0.06492191553115845,
-0.2823542058467865,
-0.17994675040245056,
-0.22621963918209076,
-0.011266455054283142,
-0.09579139947891235,
0.18457847833633423,
0.059138... | 1 | I. The Irish migration was not just because of the potato famine.
A. There was more than just one potato famine in the 19th century.
1. The British government helped the Irish out of the first famine.
2. How they helped during the first famine.
B. The British government did not help during the second famine.
1. The reason they did not help was political.
2. The result was the death of thousands.
C. Getting from Ireland to the United States was not easy.
1. The trip across the Atlantic Ocean was arduous.
2. Many died on the way over.
D. There were many Irish that came, and many Americans did not welcome them.
1. Most Irish were Catholic.
2. Most Americans were Protestant, and did not welcome them here.
E. The derogatory names given them.
1. What the names they were given as a group.
2. Where these names came from.
II. The German immigration was not religious or political.
A. The reason for migration was for land.
1. How the available land was divided by family members in Germany.
2. How the effects of the lack of land available was the cause for immigration.
B. There were no religious or political reasons for leaving at the time.
1. Religions in Germany were not at odds with one another.
2. Politically Germany was stable in these years.
III. Italian immigrants left for political reasons.
A. The government was oppressing their people.
1. How the oppression affected Italy’s population.
2. How this created the mass immigration to the United States.
B. The Italians as the Irish flocked in huge numbers to the United States.
1. How they came to Ellis Island from Italy.
2. What their dreams were about the living in the United States.
C. The Americans looked down on these immigrants.
1. They were used for cheap labor.
2. The result was large ghetto areas being developed.
D. The derogatory names given to the Italians.
1. What these names were.
2. Why they were given these names.
IV. The immigration of the big three was a hardship to them all when they came.
A. Explain how many overcame the hardships.
1. By assimilating into the American population.
2. Contributions of the Irish, German and Italians to the American way of life.
B. How these immigrants and their descendents now consider themselves as Americans first.
1. The immigrants fought in wars to keep us free from oppression.
2. There rolls in these wars. (Civil, WWI and WWII)
The most effective arguments of my essay will be placed in the ending body paragraphs. The reason I have chosen to place them here, is to show how the Irish, German and Italian immigrants overcame adversity to become Americans and to give to their children a better future and life than they had. The arguments will show historical facts from the appropriate eras, and hopefully (depending on what I can find) the testimonials of those that were there at the time. This will help to reinforce my argument in the reader’s minds and make the essay more memorable. | 638 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Centuries ago, artists and musicians were often supported by patrons. They would devote the majority of their work to one person or group who paid for their home, food and other necessities. This system enabled them to create without worrying about earthly matters, and the patron was able to call upon them whenever the need arose for their services. Many of these patrons were wealthy landowners or part of the aristocracy, but the Roman Catholic Church was also a patron of many.
Many of today’s religious musical pieces were written during this era by musicians who were supported by the church, but some were simply part of the musician’s tithe. Europe was mostly Christian, and writing music for the church was considered prestigious. There were many famous musicians who wrote music for masses and special events, and they include Vivaldi , Beethoven, Haydn, Rossini, Liszt and Berlioz. | <urn:uuid:ef7c845b-6ef5-4777-acf8-4414ad6a629b> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.sarability.org.uk/the-music-of-patronage | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594391.21/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119093733-20200119121733-00350.warc.gz | en | 0.994837 | 182 | 3.8125 | 4 | [
0.14182190597057343,
0.22593644261360168,
0.23508484661579132,
-0.6973008513450623,
-0.2770880460739136,
0.09023557603359222,
-0.15260986983776093,
0.11194372177124023,
0.43373703956604004,
-0.30510324239730835,
-0.12407974153757095,
0.4557202160358429,
0.015623359009623528,
-0.12252019345... | 12 | Centuries ago, artists and musicians were often supported by patrons. They would devote the majority of their work to one person or group who paid for their home, food and other necessities. This system enabled them to create without worrying about earthly matters, and the patron was able to call upon them whenever the need arose for their services. Many of these patrons were wealthy landowners or part of the aristocracy, but the Roman Catholic Church was also a patron of many.
Many of today’s religious musical pieces were written during this era by musicians who were supported by the church, but some were simply part of the musician’s tithe. Europe was mostly Christian, and writing music for the church was considered prestigious. There were many famous musicians who wrote music for masses and special events, and they include Vivaldi , Beethoven, Haydn, Rossini, Liszt and Berlioz. | 178 | ENGLISH | 1 |
King Tut, aka Tutankhamun, was an Egyptian pharaoh who lived over 3,000-years-ago. People had been hearing about King Tut for years, but nobody knew what happened to his remains. When an Englishman decided to dedicate his life to finding King Tut’s tomb. He hoped to be the person to find the tomb, so he scoured Egypt looking for it. Finally, in 1992, he made a history-changing discovery. Unfortunately, he didn’t pay attention to any of the obvious warnings.
History says that King Tut took the throne when he was just 10-years-old in 1323 BCE. He ruled for just eight years. Unfortunately, he had to deal with many health issues during his life because his parents were brother and sister. He had genetic neck issues that made turning difficult. He also suffered from multiple cases of malaria and needed a cane to walk. His life wasn’t as glamorous as many people believed.
When he was just 18-years-old, King Tut passed away. He had no heirs to leave the throne to. He and his wife bore two stillborn daughters. The next in line for the throne was his Grand Vizier Ay, who married King Tut’s widowed wife, and took control of the kingdom. Sadly, the Tutankhamun family line had died.
Locked In a Tomb
When King Tut passed away, he was placed in a tomb with all of his worldly belongings. The tomb was sealed off, and over thousands of years of sandstorms, King Tut’s tomb vanished. For over 3,000 years, the tomb went unseen and untouched. This was until Howard Carter from England came along. He was a collector of Egyptian artifacts, and he knew that finding King Tut’s tomb would complete his collection.
Ever since Howard was young, he had an interest in pieces of history. When he was just 17-years-old, he left his home in England for his first expedition. The only thing he had with him was the chisel that his grandmother had given him. Shortly after Howard arrived in Egypt, he crossed paths with a very wealthy man named George Herbert, who was known as the 5th Earl of Carnavon. This was where Howard’s life changed, as well as King Tut’s legacy.
When the Earl met Howard, he saw right away how seriously he took his quest. He decided to fund Howard’s search, and for 15-years, the Earl kept funding the search, even though Howard kept coming up empty. Howard became desperate to find something, and he needed results to keep getting funding, so he grid mapped the entire Valley of Kings. He planned to search every single one. Finally, 30 years after he began his search, he came to the last square. When he began excavating a tomb that belonged to Ramses VI, he found a set of stairs that led beneath the earth. He couldn’t believe it. Had he finally found King Tut’s tomb?
Howard dug until he came to a sealed door. He knew that he had found something amazing, so he sent the Earl a telegram to tell him to come at once. While waiting for him to arrive, Howard started to notice warning signs. First, a messenger let Howard know that a cobra had gotten into his home, and ate his canary. This is said to be a symbol of peace. This scared Howard so much that he was ready to quit.
Howard decided that maybe he was being silly, so he didn’t abandon the mission. Three weeks later, the Earl and his daughter, Lady Evelyn, arrived. They met up with Howard and his assistant, Arthur Callender to discuss Howard’s find. It was time to get into the tomb to find out if it did, in fact, belong to King Tut.
Howard didn’t want to wait for the proper protocol, so he smashed the door open. The tomb was divided into four different rooms, and each was filled with ceremonial objects that were designed to guide Tut in the afterlife. They found gold, massive statutes, and even a pharaoh’s throne. On his face was an intricate death mask. There were also hieroglyphics painted on the wall designed to be a warning. It read, “Death shall come on swift wings to him who disturbs the peace of the King.” Howard ignored it. He wanted the jeweled amulets on the mummified body, but they were stuck in resin. Howard ordered that Tut be dismembered to retrieve the jewels.
Soon after King Tut’s tomb was unsealed, a weird series of phenomena began to occur. When the Earl was shaving, he nicked a mosquito bite on his face, that happened to be in the same spot where King Tut had a car. The cut got infected, poisoned his blood, and then killed him. Next, his dog was peacefully sleeping when he yelped and died instantly. Word got out about the curse, and people started flocking to Egypt. People still weren’t taking it seriously, and when a tom visitor became sick from an aggressive fever and died, it was determined that King Tut had been stricken with the same fever. An Egyptian noble, Prince Ali Kamel Fahmy Bey was shot by his wife while visiting the tomb. Later, the British Governor-General of Sudan was assassinated. Anyone who entered the tomb ended up dead. Was it King Tut causing these things to occur, or were they just crazy coincidences? | <urn:uuid:c3062f64-5448-48b7-9285-29e01483dd94> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://factsverse.com/soon-after-king-tuts-tomb-was-unsealed-a-weird-series-of-phenomena-began-to-occur/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591431.4/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117234621-20200118022621-00358.warc.gz | en | 0.991882 | 1,153 | 3.28125 | 3 | [
-0.2657492160797119,
0.7702261209487915,
0.7058413624763489,
-0.11659826338291168,
-0.578396201133728,
-0.06794844567775726,
0.8029344081878662,
0.15663811564445496,
-0.2421404868364334,
-0.04699099436402321,
0.21723158657550812,
-0.5745922923088074,
0.2960064113140106,
0.2896767258644104,... | 5 | King Tut, aka Tutankhamun, was an Egyptian pharaoh who lived over 3,000-years-ago. People had been hearing about King Tut for years, but nobody knew what happened to his remains. When an Englishman decided to dedicate his life to finding King Tut’s tomb. He hoped to be the person to find the tomb, so he scoured Egypt looking for it. Finally, in 1992, he made a history-changing discovery. Unfortunately, he didn’t pay attention to any of the obvious warnings.
History says that King Tut took the throne when he was just 10-years-old in 1323 BCE. He ruled for just eight years. Unfortunately, he had to deal with many health issues during his life because his parents were brother and sister. He had genetic neck issues that made turning difficult. He also suffered from multiple cases of malaria and needed a cane to walk. His life wasn’t as glamorous as many people believed.
When he was just 18-years-old, King Tut passed away. He had no heirs to leave the throne to. He and his wife bore two stillborn daughters. The next in line for the throne was his Grand Vizier Ay, who married King Tut’s widowed wife, and took control of the kingdom. Sadly, the Tutankhamun family line had died.
Locked In a Tomb
When King Tut passed away, he was placed in a tomb with all of his worldly belongings. The tomb was sealed off, and over thousands of years of sandstorms, King Tut’s tomb vanished. For over 3,000 years, the tomb went unseen and untouched. This was until Howard Carter from England came along. He was a collector of Egyptian artifacts, and he knew that finding King Tut’s tomb would complete his collection.
Ever since Howard was young, he had an interest in pieces of history. When he was just 17-years-old, he left his home in England for his first expedition. The only thing he had with him was the chisel that his grandmother had given him. Shortly after Howard arrived in Egypt, he crossed paths with a very wealthy man named George Herbert, who was known as the 5th Earl of Carnavon. This was where Howard’s life changed, as well as King Tut’s legacy.
When the Earl met Howard, he saw right away how seriously he took his quest. He decided to fund Howard’s search, and for 15-years, the Earl kept funding the search, even though Howard kept coming up empty. Howard became desperate to find something, and he needed results to keep getting funding, so he grid mapped the entire Valley of Kings. He planned to search every single one. Finally, 30 years after he began his search, he came to the last square. When he began excavating a tomb that belonged to Ramses VI, he found a set of stairs that led beneath the earth. He couldn’t believe it. Had he finally found King Tut’s tomb?
Howard dug until he came to a sealed door. He knew that he had found something amazing, so he sent the Earl a telegram to tell him to come at once. While waiting for him to arrive, Howard started to notice warning signs. First, a messenger let Howard know that a cobra had gotten into his home, and ate his canary. This is said to be a symbol of peace. This scared Howard so much that he was ready to quit.
Howard decided that maybe he was being silly, so he didn’t abandon the mission. Three weeks later, the Earl and his daughter, Lady Evelyn, arrived. They met up with Howard and his assistant, Arthur Callender to discuss Howard’s find. It was time to get into the tomb to find out if it did, in fact, belong to King Tut.
Howard didn’t want to wait for the proper protocol, so he smashed the door open. The tomb was divided into four different rooms, and each was filled with ceremonial objects that were designed to guide Tut in the afterlife. They found gold, massive statutes, and even a pharaoh’s throne. On his face was an intricate death mask. There were also hieroglyphics painted on the wall designed to be a warning. It read, “Death shall come on swift wings to him who disturbs the peace of the King.” Howard ignored it. He wanted the jeweled amulets on the mummified body, but they were stuck in resin. Howard ordered that Tut be dismembered to retrieve the jewels.
Soon after King Tut’s tomb was unsealed, a weird series of phenomena began to occur. When the Earl was shaving, he nicked a mosquito bite on his face, that happened to be in the same spot where King Tut had a car. The cut got infected, poisoned his blood, and then killed him. Next, his dog was peacefully sleeping when he yelped and died instantly. Word got out about the curse, and people started flocking to Egypt. People still weren’t taking it seriously, and when a tom visitor became sick from an aggressive fever and died, it was determined that King Tut had been stricken with the same fever. An Egyptian noble, Prince Ali Kamel Fahmy Bey was shot by his wife while visiting the tomb. Later, the British Governor-General of Sudan was assassinated. Anyone who entered the tomb ended up dead. Was it King Tut causing these things to occur, or were they just crazy coincidences? | 1,121 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.