Split (1)

train · 729k rows

text string	id string	dump string	url string	file_path string	language string	language_score float64	token_count int64	score float64	int_score int64	embedding list	count int64	Content string	Tokens int64	Top_Lang string	Top_Conf float64
Historic Poverty Bay and the East Coast, N.I., N.Z. A Strange Misconception A Strange Misconception To all who are familiar with the coast in the vicinity of Poverty Bay—backed as it is by high ranges—it must seem strange that Young Nick's Head is given by two of the voyagers as the point of land that was first seen. This misconception can be accounted for only by the fact that, some time after the high land had been sighted, this headland was found to lie directly ahead, and that it was named after Nicholas Young. Parkinson was under the impression that Young Nick's Head was the part of the land that was first sighted. He says: “About 2 o'clock in the afternoon, one of our people, Nicholas Young, the surgeon's boy, descried a point of land of New Zealand from the starboard bow at about nine leagues distance bearing west by north. We bore up to it and, at sunset, we had a good view of it. The land was high and appeared like an island. We regaled ourselves in the evening on the occasion. The land was called ‘Young Nick's Head,’ and the boy received his reward.” Cook did not mention the headland by name until after he had left Poverty Bay on the 12th (corrected date). “At noon,” he says, in his entry for that date, “the S.W. point of Poverty Bay which I have named Young Nick's Head (after the boy who first saw this land) bore….” Nowhere in his journal does Cook state that it was the first point of land to come into view. The opening to Poverty Bay was not seen until twenty-seven hours after land was first sighted. Another voyager who believed that Young Nick's Head received its name because it was the first land sighted was James Roberts, of Banks's suite. His journal entry regarding the first attempt that was made—on 9 October—to sail into Poverty Bay states: “At 11 tack'd ship within 2 miles of a bluff head caul'd Yong Nicks Head from its being the first land seen by Nicholas Yong a boy.” Roberts's entry seems to have been belatedly made. Whilst Professor E. E. Morris, Litt.D. of Melbourne (who was a noted authority on Captain Cook) was on a visit to Poverty Bay in 1901 (Transactions of the New Zealand Institute, Vol. 33, pp. 499–514), he agreed with W. L. Williams that the first land sighted must have been the high ranges in the interior. Cook, in his reference to the naming of Young Nick's Head had, he added, merely said that he had called it “after the boy who first saw this land,” meaning, presumably, New Zealand.page 20 There is no mention in any account of the voyage of the sighting of cliffs on 7 October (the day on which land first came into view from the masthead). The Canberra logbook says that the land appeared west by north “in the form of low hummocks,” and that it was then eight or nine leagues away. Becket (Anon. 1771) uses a similar term. At sunset, Banks, after having been aloft, described it as “like an island or islands, but seemed large.” The first reference to cliffs is made in the noon entery in the Canberra logbook on 8 October: that, at a distance of from thirteen to fourteen miles, “several smokes and white cliffs” could be seen. The southernmost land [Mahia Peninsula] then appeared “like an island.” Early on the evening of 8 October, Banks supplies a realistic word-picture: “In the evening a pleasant Breeze. At Sunset, all hands at the Mast head. Land still Distant 7 or 8 leagues; appears larger than ever. In many parts, 3, 4, and 5 ranges of hills are seen one over the other, and a chain of mountains over all, some of which appear enormously high. Much difference of opinion and many conjectures about Islands, Rivers, Inlets, etc., but all hands seem to agree that this is certainly the continent we are in search of.”	<urn:uuid:8e8dec1f-1068-4cff-8113-f7d450913ee1>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-MacHist-t1-body-d3-d3.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594705.17/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119180644-20200119204644-00507.warc.gz	en	0.982275	905	3.34375	3	[ 0.03398347645998001, -0.013905096799135208, 0.10022087395191193, -0.030405446887016296, 0.14248323440551758, -0.1687680184841156, 0.2631928324699402, -0.11544127762317657, -0.2631218433380127, -0.111398845911026, 0.3105926811695099, -0.42133545875549316, -0.045578569173812866, 0.5780090093...	5	Historic Poverty Bay and the East Coast, N.I., N.Z. A Strange Misconception A Strange Misconception To all who are familiar with the coast in the vicinity of Poverty Bay—backed as it is by high ranges—it must seem strange that Young Nick's Head is given by two of the voyagers as the point of land that was first seen. This misconception can be accounted for only by the fact that, some time after the high land had been sighted, this headland was found to lie directly ahead, and that it was named after Nicholas Young. Parkinson was under the impression that Young Nick's Head was the part of the land that was first sighted. He says: “About 2 o'clock in the afternoon, one of our people, Nicholas Young, the surgeon's boy, descried a point of land of New Zealand from the starboard bow at about nine leagues distance bearing west by north. We bore up to it and, at sunset, we had a good view of it. The land was high and appeared like an island. We regaled ourselves in the evening on the occasion. The land was called ‘Young Nick's Head,’ and the boy received his reward.” Cook did not mention the headland by name until after he had left Poverty Bay on the 12th (corrected date). “At noon,” he says, in his entry for that date, “the S.W. point of Poverty Bay which I have named Young Nick's Head (after the boy who first saw this land) bore….” Nowhere in his journal does Cook state that it was the first point of land to come into view. The opening to Poverty Bay was not seen until twenty-seven hours after land was first sighted. Another voyager who believed that Young Nick's Head received its name because it was the first land sighted was James Roberts, of Banks's suite. His journal entry regarding the first attempt that was made—on 9 October—to sail into Poverty Bay states: “At 11 tack'd ship within 2 miles of a bluff head caul'd Yong Nicks Head from its being the first land seen by Nicholas Yong a boy.” Roberts's entry seems to have been belatedly made. Whilst Professor E. E. Morris, Litt.D. of Melbourne (who was a noted authority on Captain Cook) was on a visit to Poverty Bay in 1901 (Transactions of the New Zealand Institute, Vol. 33, pp. 499–514), he agreed with W. L. Williams that the first land sighted must have been the high ranges in the interior. Cook, in his reference to the naming of Young Nick's Head had, he added, merely said that he had called it “after the boy who first saw this land,” meaning, presumably, New Zealand.page 20 There is no mention in any account of the voyage of the sighting of cliffs on 7 October (the day on which land first came into view from the masthead). The Canberra logbook says that the land appeared west by north “in the form of low hummocks,” and that it was then eight or nine leagues away. Becket (Anon. 1771) uses a similar term. At sunset, Banks, after having been aloft, described it as “like an island or islands, but seemed large.” The first reference to cliffs is made in the noon entery in the Canberra logbook on 8 October: that, at a distance of from thirteen to fourteen miles, “several smokes and white cliffs” could be seen. The southernmost land [Mahia Peninsula] then appeared “like an island.” Early on the evening of 8 October, Banks supplies a realistic word-picture: “In the evening a pleasant Breeze. At Sunset, all hands at the Mast head. Land still Distant 7 or 8 leagues; appears larger than ever. In many parts, 3, 4, and 5 ranges of hills are seen one over the other, and a chain of mountains over all, some of which appear enormously high. Much difference of opinion and many conjectures about Islands, Rivers, Inlets, etc., but all hands seem to agree that this is certainly the continent we are in search of.”	886	ENGLISH	1
James Watt, FRS, FRSE (30 January 1736 (19 January 1736 OS) – 25 August 1819) was a Scottish inventor and mechanical engineer whose Watt steam engine, an improvement of the Newcomen steam engine, was fundamental to the changes brought by the Industrial Revolution in both his native Great Britain and the rest of the world.While working as an instrument maker at the University of Glasgow, Watt became interested in the technology of steam engines. He realised that contemporary engine designs wasted a great deal of energy by repeatedly cooling and reheating the cylinder. Watt introduced a design enhancement, the separate condenser, which avoided this waste of energy and radically improved the power, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness of steam engines. Eventually he adapted his engine to produce rotary motion, greatly broadening its use beyond pumping water.Watt attempted to commercialise his invention, but experienced great financial difficulties until he entered a partnership with Matthew Boulton in 1775. The new firm of Boulton and Watt was eventually highly successful and Watt became a wealthy man. In his retirement, Watt continued to develop new inventions though none was as significant as his steam engine work. He died in 1819 at the age of 83.He developed the concept of horsepower, and the SI unit of power, the watt, was named after him.	<urn:uuid:acf15fe8-c76b-4d5a-8884-c016464b2040>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://studyres.com/concepts/17604/james-watt	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251681412.74/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125191854-20200125221854-00093.warc.gz	en	0.98619	270	3.53125	4	[ -0.12532232701778412, 0.3340354263782501, 0.7935947775840759, -0.024417657405138016, -0.31006863713264465, 0.08727382868528366, -0.21934308111667633, 0.19696789979934692, -0.12654858827590942, 0.1071600541472435, -0.21205486357212067, -0.33333447575569153, 0.5243471264839172, -0.1330414116...	3	James Watt, FRS, FRSE (30 January 1736 (19 January 1736 OS) – 25 August 1819) was a Scottish inventor and mechanical engineer whose Watt steam engine, an improvement of the Newcomen steam engine, was fundamental to the changes brought by the Industrial Revolution in both his native Great Britain and the rest of the world.While working as an instrument maker at the University of Glasgow, Watt became interested in the technology of steam engines. He realised that contemporary engine designs wasted a great deal of energy by repeatedly cooling and reheating the cylinder. Watt introduced a design enhancement, the separate condenser, which avoided this waste of energy and radically improved the power, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness of steam engines. Eventually he adapted his engine to produce rotary motion, greatly broadening its use beyond pumping water.Watt attempted to commercialise his invention, but experienced great financial difficulties until he entered a partnership with Matthew Boulton in 1775. The new firm of Boulton and Watt was eventually highly successful and Watt became a wealthy man. In his retirement, Watt continued to develop new inventions though none was as significant as his steam engine work. He died in 1819 at the age of 83.He developed the concept of horsepower, and the SI unit of power, the watt, was named after him.	286	ENGLISH	1
“He noticed that the rocks he was excavating were arranged in layers,” author Simon Winchester would later write. “More important, he could see quite clearly that the fossils found in one layer were very different from those found in another. And out of that realization came an epiphany: that by following the fossils, one could trace layers of rocks as they dipped and rose and fell — clear across England and, indeed, clear across the world.” The result would be “the map that changed the world,” as Winchester wrote in his best-selling 2001 book of the same name. “It is a map that heralded the beginnings of a whole new science,” he wrote. “It is a document that laid the groundwork for the making of great fortunes — in oil, in iron, in coal, and in other countries in diamonds, tin, platinum, and silver — that were won by explorers who used such maps. It is a map that laid the foundations of a field of study that culminated in the work of Charles Darwin.” Around 200 years later, a rare first edition copy of his seminal work was unearthed. It’s thought to be only one of 70 in existence, and it could possibly be worth six figures. The newly discovered copy of the map was digitized and put on display for the first time to celebrate its bicentennial this week. According to the Geological Society of London, there were geological maps that came before Smith’s, but they only identified rocks by type. Smith’s map attempted to classify rock by age and deposition, essentially showing people what is under their feet. John Henry, chairman of the history of geology group at the Geological Society, explained to LiveScience: He was the very first to realize that fossils had particular detailed characteristics that he could then tie to certain geological strata. … [Before Smith] people just thought fossils were decorations and ornaments … Nobody thought they were a key to making a sensible order of the geological structure, or using them to predict where economic materials were. “It’s very exciting — you don’t find things like this very often,” Henry told Live Science. The rare map was tucked inside a leather sleeve case not seen for 40 or 50 years. Archive assistant Victoria Woodcock found the map last year. “The map was found among completely unrelated material, so at first I didn’t realise the significance of what I’d uncovered,” she said in a press release. “I was astonished. It’s the kind of thing that anyone working in archives dreams of.” The hand-colored map is thought to be one of the first 10 produced by Smith, who only made approximately 370 copies.”These maps are extremely rare,” Henry said in a press release. “Each one is a treasure, and to have one of the very first produced is tremendously exciting.” In Smith’s time, the Geological Society was reluctant to accept his vision and disliked his working-class background. The map, published in 1815, didn’t gain acclaim for 10 years. During that time Smith had money problems, but found work with large landowners, surveying their land for water usage and for coal. Eventually, the Geological Society changed its mind about Smith and the value of his work. Although he was never a member, in 1831 the society awarded Smith its highest honor, the Wollaston Medal, and named him the “Father of English Geology.” On Monday, in honor of Smith, Sir David Attenborough unveiled a plaque at his former residence in London.	<urn:uuid:6355c191-4bc4-4135-8c88-183973e96786>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/03/25/see-the-famous-map-that-changed-the-world/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251687958.71/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126074227-20200126104227-00053.warc.gz	en	0.982156	768	3.734375	4	[ -0.3117777109146118, 0.2948390245437622, 0.378338098526001, 0.09918762743473053, -0.14850153028964996, -0.024843094870448112, 0.017597975209355354, -0.056076906621456146, -0.41289621591567993, 0.015460165217518806, 0.05387667566537857, -0.22225713729858398, 0.14726319909095764, 0.426928073...	1	“He noticed that the rocks he was excavating were arranged in layers,” author Simon Winchester would later write. “More important, he could see quite clearly that the fossils found in one layer were very different from those found in another. And out of that realization came an epiphany: that by following the fossils, one could trace layers of rocks as they dipped and rose and fell — clear across England and, indeed, clear across the world.” The result would be “the map that changed the world,” as Winchester wrote in his best-selling 2001 book of the same name. “It is a map that heralded the beginnings of a whole new science,” he wrote. “It is a document that laid the groundwork for the making of great fortunes — in oil, in iron, in coal, and in other countries in diamonds, tin, platinum, and silver — that were won by explorers who used such maps. It is a map that laid the foundations of a field of study that culminated in the work of Charles Darwin.” Around 200 years later, a rare first edition copy of his seminal work was unearthed. It’s thought to be only one of 70 in existence, and it could possibly be worth six figures. The newly discovered copy of the map was digitized and put on display for the first time to celebrate its bicentennial this week. According to the Geological Society of London, there were geological maps that came before Smith’s, but they only identified rocks by type. Smith’s map attempted to classify rock by age and deposition, essentially showing people what is under their feet. John Henry, chairman of the history of geology group at the Geological Society, explained to LiveScience: He was the very first to realize that fossils had particular detailed characteristics that he could then tie to certain geological strata. … [Before Smith] people just thought fossils were decorations and ornaments … Nobody thought they were a key to making a sensible order of the geological structure, or using them to predict where economic materials were. “It’s very exciting — you don’t find things like this very often,” Henry told Live Science. The rare map was tucked inside a leather sleeve case not seen for 40 or 50 years. Archive assistant Victoria Woodcock found the map last year. “The map was found among completely unrelated material, so at first I didn’t realise the significance of what I’d uncovered,” she said in a press release. “I was astonished. It’s the kind of thing that anyone working in archives dreams of.” The hand-colored map is thought to be one of the first 10 produced by Smith, who only made approximately 370 copies.”These maps are extremely rare,” Henry said in a press release. “Each one is a treasure, and to have one of the very first produced is tremendously exciting.” In Smith’s time, the Geological Society was reluctant to accept his vision and disliked his working-class background. The map, published in 1815, didn’t gain acclaim for 10 years. During that time Smith had money problems, but found work with large landowners, surveying their land for water usage and for coal. Eventually, the Geological Society changed its mind about Smith and the value of his work. Although he was never a member, in 1831 the society awarded Smith its highest honor, the Wollaston Medal, and named him the “Father of English Geology.” On Monday, in honor of Smith, Sir David Attenborough unveiled a plaque at his former residence in London.	725	ENGLISH	1
7 Noah was another who trusted God. When he heard God’s warning about the future, Noah believed him even though there was then no sign of a flood, and wasting no time, he built the ark and saved his family. Noah’s belief in God was in direct contrast to the sin and disbelief of the rest of the world—which refused to obey—and because of his faith he became one of those whom God has accepted. 8 Abraham trusted God, and when God told him to leave home and go far away to another land that he promised to give him, Abraham obeyed. Away he went, not even knowing where he was going. 9 And even when he reached God’s promised land, he lived in tents like a mere visitor as did Isaac and Jacob, to whom God gave the same promise.Read full chapter	<urn:uuid:aa8fa110-f5af-439d-93c9-e1a58cd39767>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://beta.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%2011:7-9&version=TLB	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251681625.83/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125222506-20200126012506-00492.warc.gz	en	0.988338	174	3.265625	3	[ -0.09647127985954285, 0.4238811731338501, -0.48874369263648987, -0.08612238615751266, -0.058789052069187164, 0.2930493950843811, 0.49625521898269653, 0.12020403146743774, 0.06572845578193665, 0.30347055196762085, -0.1560211032629013, -0.3787575364112854, -0.06101692467927933, 0.09104389697...	1	7 Noah was another who trusted God. When he heard God’s warning about the future, Noah believed him even though there was then no sign of a flood, and wasting no time, he built the ark and saved his family. Noah’s belief in God was in direct contrast to the sin and disbelief of the rest of the world—which refused to obey—and because of his faith he became one of those whom God has accepted. 8 Abraham trusted God, and when God told him to leave home and go far away to another land that he promised to give him, Abraham obeyed. Away he went, not even knowing where he was going. 9 And even when he reached God’s promised land, he lived in tents like a mere visitor as did Isaac and Jacob, to whom God gave the same promise.Read full chapter	164	ENGLISH	1
Belva Lockwood, a graduate in 1873 of the the the National University Law School (now the GW Law School), became the first woman to argue a case before the Supreme Court. Once she had completed her course work, the law school refused to grant her a diploma, without which she could not practice law. She petitioned President U.S. Grant, in his role as president ex officio of the law school, to issue her diploma; she received it one week later. Lockwood set up her practice in the District and, although Lockwood was admitted to the District of Columbia bar, some judges refused to allow her to appear in their courtrooms because she was a married woman. She was also denied membership in the Maryland bar. She petitioned Congress to pass an anti-discrimination law that would permit a women to appear in any court in the District, including the Supreme Court. The law was passed in 1879; Lockwood was admitted to the Supreme Court bar later that year. Lockwood first ran for President in 1884 and again in 1888 on the National Equal Rights Party ticket. She received several thousand votes, unusual since women did not have the right to vote. For the remainder of her life, Lockwood fought for equal rights for both women and minorities. She died in 1917, just a few years before universal suffrage became reality with the 19th Amendment. Read more about Lockwood: Jill Nogren, Belva Lockwood: The Woman Who Would be President Mary Virginia Fox, Lady for the Defense: A Biography of Belva Lockwood	<urn:uuid:205f8788-509d-419f-a224-336be3f8cf3e>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://blogs.law.gwu.edu/gwlawlibrary/2016/07/28/belva-lockwood-for-president/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250626449.79/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124221147-20200125010147-00365.warc.gz	en	0.983373	326	3.734375	4	[ -0.3150097727775574, 0.19071218371391296, 0.04041765257716179, 0.06254807114601135, -0.3216363191604614, 0.11623439937829971, 0.06599552929401398, -0.007223380729556084, 0.07162115722894669, 0.15926288068294525, 0.060927893966436386, 0.09818841516971588, -0.27632591128349304, 0.12115651369...	1	Belva Lockwood, a graduate in 1873 of the the the National University Law School (now the GW Law School), became the first woman to argue a case before the Supreme Court. Once she had completed her course work, the law school refused to grant her a diploma, without which she could not practice law. She petitioned President U.S. Grant, in his role as president ex officio of the law school, to issue her diploma; she received it one week later. Lockwood set up her practice in the District and, although Lockwood was admitted to the District of Columbia bar, some judges refused to allow her to appear in their courtrooms because she was a married woman. She was also denied membership in the Maryland bar. She petitioned Congress to pass an anti-discrimination law that would permit a women to appear in any court in the District, including the Supreme Court. The law was passed in 1879; Lockwood was admitted to the Supreme Court bar later that year. Lockwood first ran for President in 1884 and again in 1888 on the National Equal Rights Party ticket. She received several thousand votes, unusual since women did not have the right to vote. For the remainder of her life, Lockwood fought for equal rights for both women and minorities. She died in 1917, just a few years before universal suffrage became reality with the 19th Amendment. Read more about Lockwood: Jill Nogren, Belva Lockwood: The Woman Who Would be President Mary Virginia Fox, Lady for the Defense: A Biography of Belva Lockwood	338	ENGLISH	1
The difficulties of New Zealand’s first towns did not deter the founding of others. As before, new towns were a mix of private and government initiatives. Most were on the coast, but in 1854 New Zealand’s first inland town, Greytown, was founded. As the Crown continued to buy (or confiscate) Māori land, more inland towns were built. New towns were generally market, mining, milling, port, military or construction towns. Some started life in one or more categories and grew into others. Other settlements initially boomed, but then faded away. Also called country towns, market towns serviced farming hinterlands and were the most common type. They supplied farmers with goods and services – from food and machinery to stock-and-station and banking services – and acted as processing and transportation points for farm products. Market towns both followed and preceded settlement of hinterlands. For instance, pastoralists were already farming in the area when William and George Rhodes laid out the town of Timaru in 1853. Conversely, Masterton was founded in 1854 to promote farming in Wairarapa. Usually towns were founded by either the government or private enterprise. Timaru was established by both. In 1853 the Rhodes brothers surveyed a town behind Caroline Bay; three years later the government surveyed its own town south of the Rhodes’ settlement. North Street divided the settlements – which eventually merged. Mining and milling towns Towns arose near natural resources – gold, coal, timber – that could be profitably extracted. Alexandra mushroomed when gold was discovered nearby in 1862. Brunner developed as a coal town from 1864. Dargaville grew rapidly from 1872 as a base for kauri timber and gum extraction. When resources were exhausted, mining and milling towns declined unless they found a new economic base. Dargaville prospered because its hinterland converted to farming; Alexandra survived as a horticultural town, but Brunner was abandoned. Port towns developed as fishing and shipping centres. The South Island’s first town, Riverton, began as a whaling port in the 1830s. When whaling declined in the 1840s it shipped timber, flax, gold and wool sourced from its hinterland. A port town often grew by developing its infrastructure. During the 1870s Ōamaru (also a market town) built an expensive breakwater port, enabling it to surpass the rival ports of Kakanui and Moeraki. Some port towns were satellites of larger towns or cities. Dunedin’s shallow harbour prevented a deep-water port beside the settlement, so Port Chalmers – close to the harbour entrance – became the city’s main port. Parihaka was unique in being a Māori town. Founded in the late 1860s by Te Whiti o Rongomai and Tohu Kākahi, its purpose was to peacefully resist Pākehā colonisation. By the late 1870s it had its own bank and police force, and a permanent population of 1,500. In 1880 it was described by 19-year-old Mary Dobie as an ‘enormous native town of quiet and imposing character … [with] regular streets of houses’.1 However, Parihaka was also the centre of a Māori protest movement over land loss, and in 1881 the government invaded the settlement, arresting some of its inhabitants and driving tmany away. New Zealand had few military towns. From the 1840s fortifications were erected in towns like Auckland, Whanganui and New Plymouth to resist Māori attack, but trade remained their life blood. The 1860s New Zealand wars led to the founding of small towns like Pātea, where two large Crown redoubts were erected. Hamilton also began as a military post, and became a hub for the Pākehā colonisation of the Waikato. Both subsequently developed as market towns. Some towns developed as bases for major infrastructure projects. In the early 1900s Ohakune became a permanent camp for the completion of the North Island main trunk railway. Between 1940 and 1980 several towns were built to house workers building hydroelectric power stations. These were designed to be dismantled once individual projects were completed. But workers in some towns wanted to stay on, so settlements like Mangakino and Twizel survived.	<urn:uuid:f923ee85-3405-4fd7-9abb-f6854a162b69>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://teara.govt.nz/en/city-history-and-people/page-2	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250614086.44/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123221108-20200124010108-00351.warc.gz	en	0.984073	913	3.421875	3	[ -0.08050701022148132, -0.11352762579917908, -0.037793710827827454, 0.055117830634117126, 0.036027006804943085, -0.10024192929267883, -0.06354093551635742, -0.35537245869636536, -0.2634546160697937, -0.012751011177897453, 0.2302575409412384, -0.4041745662689209, 0.29701200127601624, 0.48984...	16	The difficulties of New Zealand’s first towns did not deter the founding of others. As before, new towns were a mix of private and government initiatives. Most were on the coast, but in 1854 New Zealand’s first inland town, Greytown, was founded. As the Crown continued to buy (or confiscate) Māori land, more inland towns were built. New towns were generally market, mining, milling, port, military or construction towns. Some started life in one or more categories and grew into others. Other settlements initially boomed, but then faded away. Also called country towns, market towns serviced farming hinterlands and were the most common type. They supplied farmers with goods and services – from food and machinery to stock-and-station and banking services – and acted as processing and transportation points for farm products. Market towns both followed and preceded settlement of hinterlands. For instance, pastoralists were already farming in the area when William and George Rhodes laid out the town of Timaru in 1853. Conversely, Masterton was founded in 1854 to promote farming in Wairarapa. Usually towns were founded by either the government or private enterprise. Timaru was established by both. In 1853 the Rhodes brothers surveyed a town behind Caroline Bay; three years later the government surveyed its own town south of the Rhodes’ settlement. North Street divided the settlements – which eventually merged. Mining and milling towns Towns arose near natural resources – gold, coal, timber – that could be profitably extracted. Alexandra mushroomed when gold was discovered nearby in 1862. Brunner developed as a coal town from 1864. Dargaville grew rapidly from 1872 as a base for kauri timber and gum extraction. When resources were exhausted, mining and milling towns declined unless they found a new economic base. Dargaville prospered because its hinterland converted to farming; Alexandra survived as a horticultural town, but Brunner was abandoned. Port towns developed as fishing and shipping centres. The South Island’s first town, Riverton, began as a whaling port in the 1830s. When whaling declined in the 1840s it shipped timber, flax, gold and wool sourced from its hinterland. A port town often grew by developing its infrastructure. During the 1870s Ōamaru (also a market town) built an expensive breakwater port, enabling it to surpass the rival ports of Kakanui and Moeraki. Some port towns were satellites of larger towns or cities. Dunedin’s shallow harbour prevented a deep-water port beside the settlement, so Port Chalmers – close to the harbour entrance – became the city’s main port. Parihaka was unique in being a Māori town. Founded in the late 1860s by Te Whiti o Rongomai and Tohu Kākahi, its purpose was to peacefully resist Pākehā colonisation. By the late 1870s it had its own bank and police force, and a permanent population of 1,500. In 1880 it was described by 19-year-old Mary Dobie as an ‘enormous native town of quiet and imposing character … [with] regular streets of houses’.1 However, Parihaka was also the centre of a Māori protest movement over land loss, and in 1881 the government invaded the settlement, arresting some of its inhabitants and driving tmany away. New Zealand had few military towns. From the 1840s fortifications were erected in towns like Auckland, Whanganui and New Plymouth to resist Māori attack, but trade remained their life blood. The 1860s New Zealand wars led to the founding of small towns like Pātea, where two large Crown redoubts were erected. Hamilton also began as a military post, and became a hub for the Pākehā colonisation of the Waikato. Both subsequently developed as market towns. Some towns developed as bases for major infrastructure projects. In the early 1900s Ohakune became a permanent camp for the completion of the North Island main trunk railway. Between 1940 and 1980 several towns were built to house workers building hydroelectric power stations. These were designed to be dismantled once individual projects were completed. But workers in some towns wanted to stay on, so settlements like Mangakino and Twizel survived.	948	ENGLISH	1
Read the below article to know about Tsar of Russia- Alexander I in detail. Alexander I - Russian Tsar Who Resisted Napoleon Tsar Alexander I was the Tsar of Russia in dramatic times. The Russian Empire would be faced with the problem of how to defeat France for much of his life time. Alexander I, who was the oldest grandson of the Empress Catherine the Great was born in 1777. The young Alexander became Tsar in 1801 after the death of his unpopular father, Paul I. Alexander I came to the throne during the French Revolutionary Wars. Naturally enough as the head of the world's largest autocracy Alexander was keen to defeat the French in alliance with Austria, Great Britain, and Prussia. Unfortunately for Alexander, Napoleon was astute enough to prevent the Austrians, the Prussians, and the Russians from joining their forces together. Napoleon fought and defeated the Allied armies individually, forcing their governments to sue for peace. That often left the British fighting on alone. Alexander had no option but to make peace with the French with the Treaty of Tilsit in 1805. Although unhappy with this treaty he kept to its terms as he realised that Russia could not defeat France by itself. Napoleon's rash invasion of Russia in 1812 revived the Russian alliance with Austria, Great Britain, and Prussia. The French got as far as Moscow yet their long retreat home led to their eventual defeat. In the end the sheer size of the country and determined Russian resistance had delayed Napoleon long enough for the winter to intervene. The Grand Armee got to the outskirts of Moscow before winter forced it to retreat. The Russians followed the French as they retreated west. Joining the Russians were the Austrians and the Prussians, while the British advanced from Spain. The French surrendered in 1814, with Napoleon going into exile. For a 100 days the French Empire was restored. The Russians played no part in the Allied victory at Waterloo. Alexander believed that Russia never received enough credit for the defeat of France. It made only modest gains at the Congress of Vienna, largely increasing it's share of Polish territory. When Alexander died unexpectdly without children in 1825 it caused a short dynastic crisis. Dijon is the Capital of Burgundy, France, and is located between the cities of Lyon and Paris. Dijon is rich in culture and history, and is known as a city in which art and international gastronomy thrive.. Raid on Scarborough, was attack by german navy on Scarborough. Read the below given article to know about it in detail.. The Vedas are landmarks of Indian culture and literature. Read about them below..	<urn:uuid:01ee6a5d-4c92-4d47-b1d3-7e931c4c723e>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://travelandculture.expertscolumn.com/alexander-i	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251700988.64/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127143516-20200127173516-00072.warc.gz	en	0.98184	549	3.34375	3	[ -0.3183761239051819, 0.15871673822402954, 0.24215391278266907, 0.042531028389930725, -0.19664643704891205, -0.43101152777671814, -0.03114730305969715, 0.6658493876457214, 0.01896083727478981, -0.052895933389663696, 0.10226669162511826, -0.4039074182510376, 0.08694025874137878, 0.1793959140...	1	Read the below article to know about Tsar of Russia- Alexander I in detail. Alexander I - Russian Tsar Who Resisted Napoleon Tsar Alexander I was the Tsar of Russia in dramatic times. The Russian Empire would be faced with the problem of how to defeat France for much of his life time. Alexander I, who was the oldest grandson of the Empress Catherine the Great was born in 1777. The young Alexander became Tsar in 1801 after the death of his unpopular father, Paul I. Alexander I came to the throne during the French Revolutionary Wars. Naturally enough as the head of the world's largest autocracy Alexander was keen to defeat the French in alliance with Austria, Great Britain, and Prussia. Unfortunately for Alexander, Napoleon was astute enough to prevent the Austrians, the Prussians, and the Russians from joining their forces together. Napoleon fought and defeated the Allied armies individually, forcing their governments to sue for peace. That often left the British fighting on alone. Alexander had no option but to make peace with the French with the Treaty of Tilsit in 1805. Although unhappy with this treaty he kept to its terms as he realised that Russia could not defeat France by itself. Napoleon's rash invasion of Russia in 1812 revived the Russian alliance with Austria, Great Britain, and Prussia. The French got as far as Moscow yet their long retreat home led to their eventual defeat. In the end the sheer size of the country and determined Russian resistance had delayed Napoleon long enough for the winter to intervene. The Grand Armee got to the outskirts of Moscow before winter forced it to retreat. The Russians followed the French as they retreated west. Joining the Russians were the Austrians and the Prussians, while the British advanced from Spain. The French surrendered in 1814, with Napoleon going into exile. For a 100 days the French Empire was restored. The Russians played no part in the Allied victory at Waterloo. Alexander believed that Russia never received enough credit for the defeat of France. It made only modest gains at the Congress of Vienna, largely increasing it's share of Polish territory. When Alexander died unexpectdly without children in 1825 it caused a short dynastic crisis. Dijon is the Capital of Burgundy, France, and is located between the cities of Lyon and Paris. Dijon is rich in culture and history, and is known as a city in which art and international gastronomy thrive.. Raid on Scarborough, was attack by german navy on Scarborough. Read the below given article to know about it in detail.. The Vedas are landmarks of Indian culture and literature. Read about them below..	558	ENGLISH	1
They dressed chiefly in skins, but they also made a rough cloth of flax. Fragments of that flaxen cloth have been discovered. Their nets were made of flax; they had as yet no knowledge of hemp and hempen rope. With the coming of bronze, their pins and ornaments increased in number. There is reason to believe they set great store upon their hair, wearing it in large shocks with pins of bone and afterwards of metal. To judge from the absence of realistic carvings or engravings or paintings, they either did not decorate their garments or decorated them with plaids, spots, interlacing designs, or similar conventional ornament. Before the coming of bronze there is no evidence of stools or tables; the Neolithic people probably squatted on their clay floors. There were no cats in these lake dwellings; no mice or rats had yet adapted themselves to human dwellings; the cluck of the hen was not as yet added to the sounds of human life, nor the domestic egg to its diet. The chief tool and weapon of Neolithic man was his axe; his next the bow and arrow. His arrow heads were of flint, beautifully made, and he lashed them tightly to their shafts. Probably he prepared the ground for his sowing with a pole, or a pole upon which he had stuck a stag's horn. Fish he hooked or harpooned. These implements no doubt stood about in the interior of the house, from the walls of which hung his fowling-nets. On the floor, which was of clay or trodden cow-dung (after the fashion of hut floors in India to-day), stood pots and jars and woven baskets containing grain, milk, and such-like food. Some of the pots and pans hung by rope loops to the walls. At one end of the room, and helping to keep it warm in winter by their animal heat, stabled the beasts. The children took the cows and goats out to graze, and brought them in at night before the wolves and bears came prowling. - Poultry and hens' eggs were late additions to the human cuisine, in spite of the large part they now play in our dietary. The hen is not mentioned in the Old Testament (but note the allusion to an egg, Job vi, 6) nor by Homer. Up to about 1500 b.c. the only fowls in the world were jungle denizens in India and Burmah. The crowing of jungle cocks is noted by Glasfurd in his admirable accounts of tiger shooting as the invariable preliminary of dawn in the Indian jungle. Probably poultry were first domesticated in Burmah. They got to China, according to the records, only about 1100 b.c. They reached Greece via Persia before the time of Socrates. In the New Testament the crowing of the cock reproaches Peter for his desertion of the Master.	<urn:uuid:70e49f3d-2592-48e8-86b4-bc8b02554dae>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:The_Outline_of_History_Vol_1.djvu/138	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594705.17/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119180644-20200119204644-00392.warc.gz	en	0.983294	602	3.296875	3	[ -0.16744905710220337, 0.337118923664093, 0.3459222912788391, 0.24399060010910034, 0.43125712871551514, 0.09796067327260971, 0.4607715308666229, 0.011550167575478554, -0.15240783989429474, -0.15069492161273956, 0.1799893081188202, -0.43249839544296265, 0.1075298860669136, 0.4283235073089599...	1	They dressed chiefly in skins, but they also made a rough cloth of flax. Fragments of that flaxen cloth have been discovered. Their nets were made of flax; they had as yet no knowledge of hemp and hempen rope. With the coming of bronze, their pins and ornaments increased in number. There is reason to believe they set great store upon their hair, wearing it in large shocks with pins of bone and afterwards of metal. To judge from the absence of realistic carvings or engravings or paintings, they either did not decorate their garments or decorated them with plaids, spots, interlacing designs, or similar conventional ornament. Before the coming of bronze there is no evidence of stools or tables; the Neolithic people probably squatted on their clay floors. There were no cats in these lake dwellings; no mice or rats had yet adapted themselves to human dwellings; the cluck of the hen was not as yet added to the sounds of human life, nor the domestic egg to its diet. The chief tool and weapon of Neolithic man was his axe; his next the bow and arrow. His arrow heads were of flint, beautifully made, and he lashed them tightly to their shafts. Probably he prepared the ground for his sowing with a pole, or a pole upon which he had stuck a stag's horn. Fish he hooked or harpooned. These implements no doubt stood about in the interior of the house, from the walls of which hung his fowling-nets. On the floor, which was of clay or trodden cow-dung (after the fashion of hut floors in India to-day), stood pots and jars and woven baskets containing grain, milk, and such-like food. Some of the pots and pans hung by rope loops to the walls. At one end of the room, and helping to keep it warm in winter by their animal heat, stabled the beasts. The children took the cows and goats out to graze, and brought them in at night before the wolves and bears came prowling. - Poultry and hens' eggs were late additions to the human cuisine, in spite of the large part they now play in our dietary. The hen is not mentioned in the Old Testament (but note the allusion to an egg, Job vi, 6) nor by Homer. Up to about 1500 b.c. the only fowls in the world were jungle denizens in India and Burmah. The crowing of jungle cocks is noted by Glasfurd in his admirable accounts of tiger shooting as the invariable preliminary of dawn in the Indian jungle. Probably poultry were first domesticated in Burmah. They got to China, according to the records, only about 1100 b.c. They reached Greece via Persia before the time of Socrates. In the New Testament the crowing of the cock reproaches Peter for his desertion of the Master.	602	ENGLISH	1
Made of 1,5 mm and 2,5 mm thick cowhide leather. A plague doctor was a medical physician who treated victims of the plague. They were specifically hired by towns that had many plague victims in times of epidemics. Since the city was paying their salary, they treated everyone: both the wealthy and the poor. However, some plague doctors were known to charge patients and their families additional fees for special treatments and/or false cures. Typically they were not professionally trained nor experienced physicians or surgeons, but rather they were often either second-rate doctors unable to otherwise run a successful medical practice or young physicians seeking to establish themselves. These doctors rarely cured their patients; rather, they served to record a count of the number of people contaminated for demographic purposes. Plague doctors by their covenant treated plague patients and were known as municipal or "community plague doctors", whereas "general practitioners" were separate doctors and both might be in the same European city or town at the same time. In France and the Netherlands, plague doctors often lacked medical training and were referred to as "empirics". In one case, a plague doctor had been a fruit salesman before his employment as a physician. In the seventeenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth centuries, some doctors wore a beak-like mask which was filled with aromatic items. The masks were designed to protect them from putrid air, which (according to the miasmatic theory of disease) was seen as the cause of infection. The design of these costumes has been attributed to Charles de Lorme, the chief physician to Louis XIII.	<urn:uuid:c5a12b2d-c93e-4e15-9bb0-1b6caece2a55>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.hirotarsworkshop.com/p/maska-moroveho-doktora-12/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251688806.91/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126104828-20200126134828-00108.warc.gz	en	0.989865	324	3.40625	3	[ 0.1402619183063507, 0.5107135772705078, 0.4928973615169525, -0.05188451334834099, 0.013454986736178398, -0.3982159495353699, 0.3400723934173584, 0.32405027747154236, -0.5269702672958374, 0.08841229230165482, -0.2134297490119934, -0.25068971514701843, -0.12517599761486053, 0.250254839658737...	1	Made of 1,5 mm and 2,5 mm thick cowhide leather. A plague doctor was a medical physician who treated victims of the plague. They were specifically hired by towns that had many plague victims in times of epidemics. Since the city was paying their salary, they treated everyone: both the wealthy and the poor. However, some plague doctors were known to charge patients and their families additional fees for special treatments and/or false cures. Typically they were not professionally trained nor experienced physicians or surgeons, but rather they were often either second-rate doctors unable to otherwise run a successful medical practice or young physicians seeking to establish themselves. These doctors rarely cured their patients; rather, they served to record a count of the number of people contaminated for demographic purposes. Plague doctors by their covenant treated plague patients and were known as municipal or "community plague doctors", whereas "general practitioners" were separate doctors and both might be in the same European city or town at the same time. In France and the Netherlands, plague doctors often lacked medical training and were referred to as "empirics". In one case, a plague doctor had been a fruit salesman before his employment as a physician. In the seventeenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth centuries, some doctors wore a beak-like mask which was filled with aromatic items. The masks were designed to protect them from putrid air, which (according to the miasmatic theory of disease) was seen as the cause of infection. The design of these costumes has been attributed to Charles de Lorme, the chief physician to Louis XIII.	320	ENGLISH	1
Alonso de Ojeda FREE Catholic Classes Explorer; b. at Cuenca, Spain, about 1466; d. on the island of Santo Domingo , about 1508. He came of an impoverished noble family, but had the good fortune to start his career in the household of the Dukes of Medina Sidonia. He early gained the patronage of Juan Rodríguez de Fonseca, Bishop of Burgos and later Patriarch of the Indies, who made it possible for Ojeda to accompany Columbus in his second voyage to the New World. Ojeda distinguished himself there by his daring in battle with the natives, towards whom, however, he was unduly harsh and vindictive. He returned to Spain in 1496. After three years he again journeyed to the New World with three vessels on his own account, accompanied by the cosmographer Juan de La Cosa and Amerigo Vespucci. In a little over three weeks he sighted the mainland near the mouth of the Orinoco, and after landing on Trinidad and at other places, discovered a harbour which he called Venezuela (little Venice ), from its resemblance to the bay of Venice. After some further exploration, he made his way to the island of Hispaniola, where he was not received cordially, because it was thought that he was infringing upon the exploring privileges of Columbus. On his return to Spain in 1500, he took with him many captives whom he sold as slaves. Having still influential friends at home, he was able to fit out a new expedition, which left Cadiz in 1502 and made a landing on the American continent at a place which he named Santa Cruz. There he established a colony which did not last long because of the improvidence of his companions and their extreme cruelty towards the Indians. Chafing under his leadership, these companions turned against him and sent him back a prisoner to Spain, accusing him of having appropriated the royal revenues. He was tried and sentenced to pay a heavy fine. Upon his appeal, however, he was acquitted of all culpability, but was now reduced to poverty. In some way or other he made his way back to Hispaniola, where his former associate Cosa also was. There he conceived the idea of establishing colonies on the mainland between Cabo de Vela and the Golfo de Uraba, and after some time spent in petitioning the Government, finally the two comrades obtained the necessary permission. He went back to Spain and organized his third and last expedition, only after great effort. Among the persons who embarked in his four vessels was Pizarro, the future conqueror of Peru. Cortes, who was later to dominate Mexico, would have been among the soldiers of fortune engaged in this adventure, had not a sudden illness prevented him from sailing. When he reached his destination, Ojeda found the natives very hostile; they attacked his force and slew every man except Ojeda and one other. The two escaped to the shore, where they were succoured by those whom he had left in charge of the ships. Not yet despairing, he founded a new colony at San Sebastian. It soon became necessary for him to proceed to Hispaniola to obtain supplies for the settlement, in charge of which he left Pizarro. He was shipwrecked on the way, and only after suffering great privations did he finally reach Santo Domingo, where he died. Copyright 2020 Catholic Online. All materials contained on this site, whether written, audible or visual are the exclusive property of Catholic Online and are protected under U.S. and International copyright laws, © Copyright 2020 Catholic Online. Any unauthorized use, without prior written consent of Catholic Online is strictly forbidden and prohibited. Catholic Online is a Project of Your Catholic Voice Foundation, a Not-for-Profit Corporation. Your Catholic Voice Foundation has been granted a recognition of tax exemption under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. Federal Tax Identification Number: 81-0596847. Your gift is tax-deductible as allowed by law.	<urn:uuid:60e53f91-7a81-498a-95db-2b4719948988>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=8686	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251681625.83/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125222506-20200126012506-00356.warc.gz	en	0.983957	834	3.859375	4	[ 0.15511274337768555, 0.11668787896633148, 0.3585079610347748, -0.20077234506607056, -0.02683256007730961, -0.34917303919792175, 0.03564587980508804, 0.2817496657371521, 0.02019774541258812, -0.3714149594306946, 0.0952891856431961, -0.4467194080352783, -0.7431700825691223, 0.472979009151458...	2	Alonso de Ojeda FREE Catholic Classes Explorer; b. at Cuenca, Spain, about 1466; d. on the island of Santo Domingo , about 1508. He came of an impoverished noble family, but had the good fortune to start his career in the household of the Dukes of Medina Sidonia. He early gained the patronage of Juan Rodríguez de Fonseca, Bishop of Burgos and later Patriarch of the Indies, who made it possible for Ojeda to accompany Columbus in his second voyage to the New World. Ojeda distinguished himself there by his daring in battle with the natives, towards whom, however, he was unduly harsh and vindictive. He returned to Spain in 1496. After three years he again journeyed to the New World with three vessels on his own account, accompanied by the cosmographer Juan de La Cosa and Amerigo Vespucci. In a little over three weeks he sighted the mainland near the mouth of the Orinoco, and after landing on Trinidad and at other places, discovered a harbour which he called Venezuela (little Venice ), from its resemblance to the bay of Venice. After some further exploration, he made his way to the island of Hispaniola, where he was not received cordially, because it was thought that he was infringing upon the exploring privileges of Columbus. On his return to Spain in 1500, he took with him many captives whom he sold as slaves. Having still influential friends at home, he was able to fit out a new expedition, which left Cadiz in 1502 and made a landing on the American continent at a place which he named Santa Cruz. There he established a colony which did not last long because of the improvidence of his companions and their extreme cruelty towards the Indians. Chafing under his leadership, these companions turned against him and sent him back a prisoner to Spain, accusing him of having appropriated the royal revenues. He was tried and sentenced to pay a heavy fine. Upon his appeal, however, he was acquitted of all culpability, but was now reduced to poverty. In some way or other he made his way back to Hispaniola, where his former associate Cosa also was. There he conceived the idea of establishing colonies on the mainland between Cabo de Vela and the Golfo de Uraba, and after some time spent in petitioning the Government, finally the two comrades obtained the necessary permission. He went back to Spain and organized his third and last expedition, only after great effort. Among the persons who embarked in his four vessels was Pizarro, the future conqueror of Peru. Cortes, who was later to dominate Mexico, would have been among the soldiers of fortune engaged in this adventure, had not a sudden illness prevented him from sailing. When he reached his destination, Ojeda found the natives very hostile; they attacked his force and slew every man except Ojeda and one other. The two escaped to the shore, where they were succoured by those whom he had left in charge of the ships. Not yet despairing, he founded a new colony at San Sebastian. It soon became necessary for him to proceed to Hispaniola to obtain supplies for the settlement, in charge of which he left Pizarro. He was shipwrecked on the way, and only after suffering great privations did he finally reach Santo Domingo, where he died. Copyright 2020 Catholic Online. All materials contained on this site, whether written, audible or visual are the exclusive property of Catholic Online and are protected under U.S. and International copyright laws, © Copyright 2020 Catholic Online. Any unauthorized use, without prior written consent of Catholic Online is strictly forbidden and prohibited. Catholic Online is a Project of Your Catholic Voice Foundation, a Not-for-Profit Corporation. Your Catholic Voice Foundation has been granted a recognition of tax exemption under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. Federal Tax Identification Number: 81-0596847. Your gift is tax-deductible as allowed by law.	857	ENGLISH	1
The first buildings used for theatrical performances in Britain were amphitheatres introduced by the Romans, who copied theatres from ancient Greece. These were semi-circular structures, constructed of wood initially and later stone. They were open to the air with banked seating surrounding a raised stage. Medieval theatre was presented on elaborate temporary stages inside great halls, barns, or in the open courtyards of galleried inns. It was from these that Elizabethan timber-framed open-air theatres took their form, such as the Globe in London. They were often multi-sided buildings, with a covered platform stage against one side. The audience sat or stood in covered galleries around the other sides or in the open courtyard. All the performances took place in daylight. Interest in theatre increased during the Stuart period. Many rich courtiers and aristocrats hosted touring theatrical productions in their homes. Masques too were a popular form of recreation for the royal court and the very rich, often commissioned for celebrations. They would involve music, dance and elaborate costumes and scenery. The architect Inigo Jones devised the sets for several royal masques, and later went on to design theatre buildings. He had toured Italy and France and was heavily influenced by their designs. He is also attributed with introducing the first proscenium arch – a decorative architectural frame over a thrust stage. After the execution of Charles I in 1642, theatrical performances were outlawed owing to the threat of civil unrest. Theatres closed and many were demolished. Following the restoration of the monarchy twenty years later, interest in theatre resumed. In reward for their loyalty to the Crown, Charles II issued patents to two theatre companies in London, Davenant and Killigrew, to stage drama. They presented at various sites across the city before they set up permanent theatres in Drury Lane and Covent Garden. Later, the King issued limited patents to a few more theatres in London. However, by this time, theatre buildings began to change, influenced by those in Europe. They were now roofed, with stages for changeable scenery that was slid into position using grooves in their floors. Other scenery was flown in from above. To accommodate these elaborate stage sets more space was needed behind the stage. The Licensing Act of 1737 tightened censorship of drama, placing it under the control of the Lord Chamberlain. Only patent theatres were able to perform drama – known as legitimate theatre. Non-patent theatres performed melodrama, pantomime, ballet, opera and music hall (burlesque). As these involved music or musical interludes they could not be classed as plays and were regarded as illegitimate theatre so were not subject to the Licensing Act. Later, a series of royal patents were granted to cities outside London. These became known as “Theatres Royal”. Many still operate and were built in a restrained neo-classical style. Also in the eighteenth century, companies of players began to travel on regular circuits between market towns. They set up their own theatres, called playhouses, which were similar in shape and size. This enabled stock scenery to be easily erected and reused, which made touring easier. Hundreds were built, of modest size and exterior. Their interiors were simple, consisting of a rectangular flat-floored room with a stage that projected into the audience. People sat on benched seating on the floor in front of the stage, or on balconies against the three remaining walls supported by columns or wooden posts. Any scenery was placed at the rear of the stage. The rich could pay a little more in order to sit on the stage, not only for better viewing, but also to be seen by the rest of the audience and the cast. These theatres were open for limited periods, and when not needed for performances could be used for other functions, for example as assembly rooms or ballrooms. Theatres had mainly wooden interiors which were always at risk of fire. In 1794 the Drury Lane Theatre, London introduced the first iron safety curtain, which would eventually become a statutory requirement in all large theatres. It also had a large water tank on its roof – a feature that was adopted by other theatres – to extinguish fire in the stage area. The theatre also began to make its scenery more fire-resistant. By the end of the century the façades of many city theatres were built in the more imposing classical style. Some even had porticoes, similar to those seen on the front of large city homes or country houses. They were added mainly for show, but a few enabled the rich to descend from their carriages and enter the theatre without being exposed to any inclement weather. [Source: Theatres Trust – original article] [Pictures: Theatres Trust/Ian Grundy]	<urn:uuid:0a961b69-18af-4d17-839e-b190c8697a53>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://blumano.com/how-has-the-design-of-theatre-buildings-changed-over-time/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251681412.74/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125191854-20200125221854-00197.warc.gz	en	0.986787	997	3.859375	4	[ -0.004517492838203907, 0.22472086548805237, 0.6037212610244751, -0.25217586755752563, -0.23616671562194824, 0.27007967233657837, -0.29644516110420227, 0.12869837880134583, 0.27946770191192627, -0.2765013873577118, -0.15300852060317993, 0.050479091703891754, 0.14030855894088745, 0.163382112...	4	The first buildings used for theatrical performances in Britain were amphitheatres introduced by the Romans, who copied theatres from ancient Greece. These were semi-circular structures, constructed of wood initially and later stone. They were open to the air with banked seating surrounding a raised stage. Medieval theatre was presented on elaborate temporary stages inside great halls, barns, or in the open courtyards of galleried inns. It was from these that Elizabethan timber-framed open-air theatres took their form, such as the Globe in London. They were often multi-sided buildings, with a covered platform stage against one side. The audience sat or stood in covered galleries around the other sides or in the open courtyard. All the performances took place in daylight. Interest in theatre increased during the Stuart period. Many rich courtiers and aristocrats hosted touring theatrical productions in their homes. Masques too were a popular form of recreation for the royal court and the very rich, often commissioned for celebrations. They would involve music, dance and elaborate costumes and scenery. The architect Inigo Jones devised the sets for several royal masques, and later went on to design theatre buildings. He had toured Italy and France and was heavily influenced by their designs. He is also attributed with introducing the first proscenium arch – a decorative architectural frame over a thrust stage. After the execution of Charles I in 1642, theatrical performances were outlawed owing to the threat of civil unrest. Theatres closed and many were demolished. Following the restoration of the monarchy twenty years later, interest in theatre resumed. In reward for their loyalty to the Crown, Charles II issued patents to two theatre companies in London, Davenant and Killigrew, to stage drama. They presented at various sites across the city before they set up permanent theatres in Drury Lane and Covent Garden. Later, the King issued limited patents to a few more theatres in London. However, by this time, theatre buildings began to change, influenced by those in Europe. They were now roofed, with stages for changeable scenery that was slid into position using grooves in their floors. Other scenery was flown in from above. To accommodate these elaborate stage sets more space was needed behind the stage. The Licensing Act of 1737 tightened censorship of drama, placing it under the control of the Lord Chamberlain. Only patent theatres were able to perform drama – known as legitimate theatre. Non-patent theatres performed melodrama, pantomime, ballet, opera and music hall (burlesque). As these involved music or musical interludes they could not be classed as plays and were regarded as illegitimate theatre so were not subject to the Licensing Act. Later, a series of royal patents were granted to cities outside London. These became known as “Theatres Royal”. Many still operate and were built in a restrained neo-classical style. Also in the eighteenth century, companies of players began to travel on regular circuits between market towns. They set up their own theatres, called playhouses, which were similar in shape and size. This enabled stock scenery to be easily erected and reused, which made touring easier. Hundreds were built, of modest size and exterior. Their interiors were simple, consisting of a rectangular flat-floored room with a stage that projected into the audience. People sat on benched seating on the floor in front of the stage, or on balconies against the three remaining walls supported by columns or wooden posts. Any scenery was placed at the rear of the stage. The rich could pay a little more in order to sit on the stage, not only for better viewing, but also to be seen by the rest of the audience and the cast. These theatres were open for limited periods, and when not needed for performances could be used for other functions, for example as assembly rooms or ballrooms. Theatres had mainly wooden interiors which were always at risk of fire. In 1794 the Drury Lane Theatre, London introduced the first iron safety curtain, which would eventually become a statutory requirement in all large theatres. It also had a large water tank on its roof – a feature that was adopted by other theatres – to extinguish fire in the stage area. The theatre also began to make its scenery more fire-resistant. By the end of the century the façades of many city theatres were built in the more imposing classical style. Some even had porticoes, similar to those seen on the front of large city homes or country houses. They were added mainly for show, but a few enabled the rich to descend from their carriages and enter the theatre without being exposed to any inclement weather. [Source: Theatres Trust – original article] [Pictures: Theatres Trust/Ian Grundy]	982	ENGLISH	1
They numbered only six and were selected from noble Roman families at an early age, between six and 10 years old. They would tend the sacred fire in the Temple of Vesta and remain virgins for the duration of their tenure, which would stretch long into womanhood, lasting at least 30 years. Credit: Carole Raddato Wikimedia Commons. Jeremy Alexander. Picture this: It is about years before Jesus was born, and you are Numa. You are Numa Pompilius, the king of Rome. At varying times there were four to six priestesses employed. They were the only full-time clergy collegia of a Roman deity which attests to the high regard in which the goddess was held. They also ritually prepared the herbs sprinkled on sacrifices and made the bread pane which was offered on feast days such as March 1st, which was the Roman New Year. They prepared the mola salsa that was used in all state sacrifices. Originally, there were 2, then 4 in Plutarch's timeand then 6 Vestal Virgins. They were proceeded by lictors, who carried the rods and ax that could be used to inflict punishments on the people, if necessary. Vestal virgins were women priestesses to the goddess of Hearth, Vesta, in Ancient Rome. The main duty they must perform was to guard the fire of Vesta. With this they would be endowed with many honors and rights that a normal female would not have at that time. The College of the Vestals and its well-being were regarded as fundamental to the continuance and security of Rome. They cultivated the sacred fire that was not allowed to go out. The Vestals were freed of the usual social obligations to marry and bear children and took a year vow of chastity in order to devote themselves to the study and correct observance of state rituals that were forbidden to the colleges of male priests. There was, however, one Roman religious college that was off limits to men, even to the pious emperor himself. This was the College of the Vestals, popularly known as Vestal Virgins, which only had women amongst its ranks. The College of the Vestals was an important institution that served to ensure the well-being and security of Rome. All rights reserved. Marcus Licinius Crassus was one of the richest and most powerful Roman citizen in the first century B. Yet he nearly lost it all, his life included, when he was accused of being too intimate with Licinia, a Vestal Virgin. The priestesses of the goddess Vesta were known as the Vestal Virgins. They were responsible for maintaining the sacred fire within the Temple of Vesta on the Forum Romanum. Other duties included performing rituals in regards to the Goddess Vesta, and baking the sacred salt cake to be used at numerous ceremonies in the year. For thousands of years in ancient Rome, young women were chosen to devote their entire lives to make sure a fire in the Temple of Vesta never went out. These were the Vestal Virgins, chosen for their purity at a young age to keep the gods happy in order to bring prosperity to Roman civilization. If the fire continued to burn, the city of Rome would continue to prosper during battle, but if it ever went out, civilization would fall into turmoil. This is why there needed to be someone tending to the fire at all hours of the day and night.	<urn:uuid:f08689f7-b7d2-4d8d-9fca-38f3abfc0363>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://uocmas.info/wife-sex/who-were-the-vestal-virgins.php	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250607407.48/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122191620-20200122220620-00332.warc.gz	en	0.989444	704	3.671875	4	[ -0.11057838797569275, 0.6058858633041382, 0.2722697854042053, -0.39001232385635376, -0.44154536724090576, 0.35848286747932434, -0.05892374739050865, 0.10318969935178757, 0.49015283584594727, -0.28487488627433777, 0.13486072421073914, -0.30935612320899963, -0.22863179445266724, 0.0642588585...	1	They numbered only six and were selected from noble Roman families at an early age, between six and 10 years old. They would tend the sacred fire in the Temple of Vesta and remain virgins for the duration of their tenure, which would stretch long into womanhood, lasting at least 30 years. Credit: Carole Raddato Wikimedia Commons. Jeremy Alexander. Picture this: It is about years before Jesus was born, and you are Numa. You are Numa Pompilius, the king of Rome. At varying times there were four to six priestesses employed. They were the only full-time clergy collegia of a Roman deity which attests to the high regard in which the goddess was held. They also ritually prepared the herbs sprinkled on sacrifices and made the bread pane which was offered on feast days such as March 1st, which was the Roman New Year. They prepared the mola salsa that was used in all state sacrifices. Originally, there were 2, then 4 in Plutarch's timeand then 6 Vestal Virgins. They were proceeded by lictors, who carried the rods and ax that could be used to inflict punishments on the people, if necessary. Vestal virgins were women priestesses to the goddess of Hearth, Vesta, in Ancient Rome. The main duty they must perform was to guard the fire of Vesta. With this they would be endowed with many honors and rights that a normal female would not have at that time. The College of the Vestals and its well-being were regarded as fundamental to the continuance and security of Rome. They cultivated the sacred fire that was not allowed to go out. The Vestals were freed of the usual social obligations to marry and bear children and took a year vow of chastity in order to devote themselves to the study and correct observance of state rituals that were forbidden to the colleges of male priests. There was, however, one Roman religious college that was off limits to men, even to the pious emperor himself. This was the College of the Vestals, popularly known as Vestal Virgins, which only had women amongst its ranks. The College of the Vestals was an important institution that served to ensure the well-being and security of Rome. All rights reserved. Marcus Licinius Crassus was one of the richest and most powerful Roman citizen in the first century B. Yet he nearly lost it all, his life included, when he was accused of being too intimate with Licinia, a Vestal Virgin. The priestesses of the goddess Vesta were known as the Vestal Virgins. They were responsible for maintaining the sacred fire within the Temple of Vesta on the Forum Romanum. Other duties included performing rituals in regards to the Goddess Vesta, and baking the sacred salt cake to be used at numerous ceremonies in the year. For thousands of years in ancient Rome, young women were chosen to devote their entire lives to make sure a fire in the Temple of Vesta never went out. These were the Vestal Virgins, chosen for their purity at a young age to keep the gods happy in order to bring prosperity to Roman civilization. If the fire continued to burn, the city of Rome would continue to prosper during battle, but if it ever went out, civilization would fall into turmoil. This is why there needed to be someone tending to the fire at all hours of the day and night.	708	ENGLISH	1
By: REBECCA JUN “It’ll all be over by Christmas.” In 1939, the British Empire held onto this mantra until Christmas day actually came. In September, the Empire entered World War II, and the British were hopeful the war would be short-lived, in the same way those in World War I anticipated the end of war by Christmas 1914. However, this was just the beginning as the Empire would celebrate five Christmases under the heavy veil of war. Christmas 1939 stirred great ache among families as younger men were “somewhere in France,” and hundreds of thousands of city children were evacuated from their homes to be sent out to the countryside due to bombings. King George VI would continue a tradition his father, King George V, launched in 1932: an annual Christmas message to all people in Britain. But on this particular day, the glory and joy of Christmas Day struggled to outshine the gloom of death and dispersed families. King George VI was an unexpected candidate to soothe the Empire’s fears about the new year. He sat in front of two microphones in a naval uniform at Sandringham as people all over the country carefully listened in. He began the message: “I speak now from my home and from my heart to you all; to men and women so cut off by the snows, the desert, or the sea, that only voices out of the air can reach them.” “A new year is at hand. We cannot tell what it will bring. If it brings peace, how thankful we shall all be. If it brings us continued struggle we shall remain undaunted.” King George VI was an unlikely man to be behind the microphone. From a young age, he developed a stammer and suffered from knock knees. As a child, he was often ill and easily frightened, prone to tears and tantrums, traits he had throughout his adult life. He unexpectedly became King following the abdication of his brother, King Edward VI, in December 1936. Conscientious and dedicated, but reserved by nature, King George VI had an opportunity to speak over his Empire. While he was not known for his eloquence nor his natural leadership abilities, he spoke to Britain’s greatest need to hear any message of hope as the world faced an uncertain future. He delicately eased the tension between the hope of Christmas and disparity of war, not making empty promises but inciting perseverance no matter what 1940 would bring. He framed the future as opportunities to grow as an Empire, and this was the message that needed to be shared on Christmas. This speech incited such a strong response among listeners; since then, the Christmas speech has been ingrained as an annual event, still carried on today by his daughter, Queen Elizabeth II. Each of her broadcasts reflects current issues and concerns. She articulates what Christmas means to her and for many of her listeners, her broadcasts act as a chronicle of global, national, and personal events that affect the people’s leader. In her 2018 Christmas speech, she echoed her father and called the British Empire to “peace on earth and goodwill to all” because they are “needed as much as ever.” King George’s words serve as a reminder that looking forward, we are called to gratitude and perseverance no matter what will come during this holiday season and in the new year.	<urn:uuid:17a7c4bf-ba10-49a0-a3ec-485a19056661>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.traffickinginstitute.org/incontext-king-george-vi/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250589560.16/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117123339-20200117151339-00192.warc.gz	en	0.980114	708	3.59375	4	[ 0.024034392088651657, 0.5785682201385498, 0.48013460636138916, -0.3972940444946289, -0.1440671980381012, -0.34721601009368896, 0.10212363302707672, 0.1416887789964676, -0.058273907750844955, -0.050113409757614136, 0.22848263382911682, 0.13522376120090485, 0.0221928171813488, 0.415379047393...	9	By: REBECCA JUN “It’ll all be over by Christmas.” In 1939, the British Empire held onto this mantra until Christmas day actually came. In September, the Empire entered World War II, and the British were hopeful the war would be short-lived, in the same way those in World War I anticipated the end of war by Christmas 1914. However, this was just the beginning as the Empire would celebrate five Christmases under the heavy veil of war. Christmas 1939 stirred great ache among families as younger men were “somewhere in France,” and hundreds of thousands of city children were evacuated from their homes to be sent out to the countryside due to bombings. King George VI would continue a tradition his father, King George V, launched in 1932: an annual Christmas message to all people in Britain. But on this particular day, the glory and joy of Christmas Day struggled to outshine the gloom of death and dispersed families. King George VI was an unexpected candidate to soothe the Empire’s fears about the new year. He sat in front of two microphones in a naval uniform at Sandringham as people all over the country carefully listened in. He began the message: “I speak now from my home and from my heart to you all; to men and women so cut off by the snows, the desert, or the sea, that only voices out of the air can reach them.” “A new year is at hand. We cannot tell what it will bring. If it brings peace, how thankful we shall all be. If it brings us continued struggle we shall remain undaunted.” King George VI was an unlikely man to be behind the microphone. From a young age, he developed a stammer and suffered from knock knees. As a child, he was often ill and easily frightened, prone to tears and tantrums, traits he had throughout his adult life. He unexpectedly became King following the abdication of his brother, King Edward VI, in December 1936. Conscientious and dedicated, but reserved by nature, King George VI had an opportunity to speak over his Empire. While he was not known for his eloquence nor his natural leadership abilities, he spoke to Britain’s greatest need to hear any message of hope as the world faced an uncertain future. He delicately eased the tension between the hope of Christmas and disparity of war, not making empty promises but inciting perseverance no matter what 1940 would bring. He framed the future as opportunities to grow as an Empire, and this was the message that needed to be shared on Christmas. This speech incited such a strong response among listeners; since then, the Christmas speech has been ingrained as an annual event, still carried on today by his daughter, Queen Elizabeth II. Each of her broadcasts reflects current issues and concerns. She articulates what Christmas means to her and for many of her listeners, her broadcasts act as a chronicle of global, national, and personal events that affect the people’s leader. In her 2018 Christmas speech, she echoed her father and called the British Empire to “peace on earth and goodwill to all” because they are “needed as much as ever.” King George’s words serve as a reminder that looking forward, we are called to gratitude and perseverance no matter what will come during this holiday season and in the new year.	698	ENGLISH	1
In June 2019, Humanities Texas held a teacher institute in Houston in partnership with Rice University titled "Teaching Shakespeare." Catherine Loomis, professor of English at the Rochester Institute of Technology, presented this lecture examining the teenage experience in early modern England and how events in Shakespeare's teenage years give us a better understanding of his works. The Oxford English Dictionary, my favorite go-to source for definitions, defines "teen" as "something vexatious, a cause of annoyance, a trouble." I am sure most of you recognize that definition, which began in the year 971. "Affliction, trouble, suffering, grief, woe"—that's what the word "teen" meant to Shakespeare. The first use of "teen" as in "age" wasn't until the year 1664, and the word "teenager" didn't come into use until 1941, so, in some ways, Shakespeare never was a teenager. In early modern times, the term for this age for young men was "youth" or "stripling." If you were insulting a teenager, you could call him "boy." Young women were called "maids" or "virgins." In The Passions of the Mind (1601), Thomas Wright said that young people "lack the use of reason and are guided by an internal imagination, following nothing else but that [which] pleases their senses, even after the same manner of brute beasts do." Most of your students will be familiar with the Droeshout etching from Shakespeare's First Folio, where we see Shakespeare as a balding old man, but the most recently discovered portraits are making him younger and younger. We have a more recent one (the Cobbe portrait), finally identified as being Shakespeare, and the Sanders portrait—the most recently discovered; people are still working on the full attribution—where Shakespeare looks quite young, witty, engaging, and interesting. What made Shakespeare into Shakespeare would have been things that happened to him in his childhood and as a young man. These are some of the things I'd like to talk about today. When Shakespeare was very, very young, traveling actors visited Stratford-upon-Avon, the town where Shakespeare was born in 1564. Because Shakespeare's father was a town official at that time, Shakespeare would have seen these traveling players. One of the arguments about how "Shakespeare couldn't be Shakespeare," is how could he know so much about drama, having lived way out in the middle of the country? Well, it is because these traveling players stopped by. In 1575, when Shakespeare was an impressionable eleven years old, Queen Elizabeth visited Kenilworth, which is not too far from Stratford, on her annual summer progress. There were plays, there were pageants, there were speeches. Elizabeth spent the night at Charlecote, which is the great house nearest to Stratford. Shakespeare's father, again, was a public official and would have been invited to at least be present, if not participate, in some of these events. Entertaining the queen was a big fancy business, so the pageantry at Kenilworth, if Shakespeare had witnessed that, would have been absolutely spectacular. It's certainly possible that Shakespeare got to see this pageantry, and he does seem to be referring to it in A Midsummers Night's Dream. Also, in Coventry, which is another town near Stratford, in 1579, they were still performing mystery plays. There is some evidence that Shakespeare's family may still have been Catholic, despite the official English conversion to Anglicanism, so he may have seen those mystery plays as well. The point is that, as a young man, Shakespeare had lots of opportunities to see plays being performed by professional troupes, not only by amateur actors. We have some great accounts of traveling players visiting villages, such as this one from Richard Norwood's Confessions (1640) after having seen a play: "From that time forwards, I went no more to school to any purpose, not meeting with an able schoolmaster and my father much decaying in his estate. When I was near fifteen years of age, being drawn in by other young men of the town, I acted a woman's part in a stage-play. I was so much affected with that practice that had not the Lord prevented it, I should've chosen it before any other course of life." We would like to think that Shakespeare may have caught the acting bug in the very same way as Norwood, who was the same age as Shakespeare. Boy actors were a very important part, obviously, of the Elizabethan theatre. They were extremely competent, and acting and taking part in plays was part of the school curriculum. It was thought to help with public speaking and behaving like an adult. Boys who were very good at it could be basically kidnapped and brought to London to be part of acting troupes. It is possible that Shakespeare saw professional performances, did some acting in school, and may have seen other boy actors at work. Shakespeare liked to make use of traveling players in his plays: a troupe of them visit Elsinore in Hamlet, and they also appear in the induction of The Taming of the Shrew. Just before the Queen's Men visited Stratford in 1587, John Towne, one of their actors, killed his fellow actor William Knell in Oxfordshire and was arrested and pulled out of the acting troupe. Samuel Schoenbaum, one of Shakespeare's biographers, writes that it is a "pleasing fancy" that Shakespeare may have been recruited into the troupe. So, the Queen's Men arrived in Stratford in 1587 and looked around the town, asking, "Is there anybody here who's good with words who can do a little acting?" And they say, "Hey, that Shakespeare kid, c'mon, come with us." That may be how Shakespeare was introduced to acting. This, unfortunately, is all speculation. If you ever uncover a diary that gives us some evidence of that, please contact the Folger Shakespeare Library immediately. But we do know that Shakespeare was an actor, and one of the reasons I think he is a good playwright is that he probably wasn't a great actor. If he had been a great actor, he would've been acting in other people's plays. I think he could appreciate great acting but maybe not do it. One of the reasons we know he was an actor is the title page of one of Ben Jonson's comedies, Every Man in His Humour (1598). The principle comedians (the list of the actors) shows William Shakespeare, number one. So, we do have evidence that he acted as well. One of the things that happened to Shakespeare as a teenager is he saw some acting—and possibly did some acting—and that contributed to his adulthood. A question that often comes up is: how much education did Shakespeare have? In Shakespeare's time, the dame school, or petty school, was for four- and five-year-olds, and that is where they learned to read and possibly to cipher. They may not have learned to write, though. Shakespeare's own father could not write his name, but, when he needed to sign a document, he would draw a geometry compass, which was a tool of his trade—that was his mark. So, that marked him as illiterate, but people often learned to read without learning to write. They needed to read so they could read the Bible, but they didn't need to write necessarily. We now believe previous literacy numbers are not correct and that, probably, many more people [in Shakespeare's time] could read than we used to think. At the time Shakespeare would have started school, his father was a bailiff, a very important public figure. He was entitled, as the bailiff's son, to go to the King Edward VI Grammar School, which is still standing in Stratford. We know that Shakespeare quotes grammar school textbooks in his plays. Students memorized their textbooks in this period. That was how they did their lessons. They had to actually memorize a page of the book or more every day. We know that Shakespeare read Latin. Some of the Ovid that he quotes is not any English translation but from, apparently, his own translation of the Latin. And the plays feature many, often very sad, references to school boys, so he seems to have known what it was like to be one. It is highly likely that Shakespeare went to school. Most of the records for this period are lost, so we do not have his name on a class roll, but it is not unusual for records of that age to have been lost. . . . Boys would be breeched at around age seven. That meant they could put pants on. Until then, they wore gowns as girls did. Boys were sent out to service around age seven, apprenticed at fourteen, and married, on average, at age twenty-six. If educated, they went to a dame school when they were four or five, a grammar school from seven to thirteen, and then on to university. In 1583, Phillips Stubbs wrote, "Every scurvy boy of twelve, sixteen, or twenty years will make no conscience of it to have two or three or peradventure half a dozen several women with child at once." So, not fine reputations. Teenage boys enacted lude stratagems. They broke windows, they overthrew milkmaids' pails, they pulled down stalls, they crushed up the street lights. Terrible things those boys got up to. London had twenty thousand apprentices in a city of two hundred thousand people. They were very rowdy, and there were conduct books that attempted to regulate their behavior. Shakespeare was working with those apprentices in his audience, so his plays are designed to keep them quiet; that is why once every three lines there is a dirty joke. Shakespeare probably went to the King Edward VI Grammar School and probably did not go to university. He left Stratford and did not seem to be apprenticed to his father. There is a very attractive story that he poached a deer, one or more, and got run out of town. There is also some growing evidence that he was a tutor in the household of the Hoghton family. In 1581, a William Shakeshaft, which is a version of the name that Shakespeare's grandfather used, was left some things in a will that indicated he was an actor. That family was linked to Lord Ferdinando Strange, who was the patron of a London acting company. The very attractive narrative is that Shakespeare went to work in that household as a tutor and, through that household, got to London to be part of an acting company. Girls could go to the dame school, but then they would almost immediately be sent out as servants around age seven. We have a long list of their daily tasks, a long and terrible list. Girls had conduct books for guidance, and virginity was emphasized. Their average age at marriage was twenty-four, and about 25 percent of brides at that time were already pregnant. We have very few portraits of little girls. Most portraits of teenage girls are marriage portraits. They are made to emphasize their virginity with pearls and their fidelity with a little dog to make them look eligible for engagement. The little red bow, again, emphasizes her virginity and purity. Thomas Underdown says in "A Rule for Women to Bring Up Their Daughters" in 1566: Ye mothers that your daughters will Bring up and nurture well, These rules do keep, and them observe, Which I shall here now tell. If they will go or gad abroad, Their legs let broken be; Put out their eyes if they will look Or gaze indecently. Pretty strict stuff. This poem goes on and on. There were efforts to control women's behavior very strictly, but then there is this lovely song about a fourteen-year-old girl that is singing about how much she wants to get married. Suddenly, at the very end, one of the verses says, "My mother bids me go to school." So, there is some counter narrative there. One of the reasons that Shakespeare may have left school was that he apprenticed to his father, which would have been the normal course of events for a family of their class. The normal pattern was not to go to school and then go to university—that was reserved for a very tiny number of boys. Most would either be made pages or servants of some kind or go on to be apprenticed. So, was Shakespeare apprentice to his father? We do not know. John Aubrey, who, in the seventeenth century, talked to some people who knew people who knew Shakespeare (so not exactly first-hand information) said this: "His father was a butcher"—wrong— "and I had been told here-to-fore by some of the neighbors, that when he was a boy, he exercised his father's trade," he worked as a butcher's apprentice, "but when he killed a calf, he would do it in a high style and make a speech." If you're teaching Julius Caesar, this is a great anecdote because of all of the things that go on with the stabbing. Imagine Shakespeare killing a calf and giving some of those great speeches. But, sorry, his father was a glover and did not deal with butchering at all. . . . There were some other options, as Shakespeare explains in The Two Gentleman of Verona. Here is someone talking to a young man: "He wondered that your lordship Would suffer him to spend his youth at home, While other men of slender reputation, Put forth their sons to seek preferment out, Some to the wars, to try their fortune there, Some to discover islands far away, Some to studious universities." (I.iii.5–11) So, there were options other than being apprenticed to your father. But running off to London to become an actor was not high on the list. Did Shakespeare get a university education? Scholarships were available. Christopher Marlowe, Shakespeare's great fellow playwright, had one. He was a shoemaker's son, very much like Shakespeare in terms of social class, and he went to Cambridge on a full scholarship. There is no record that Shakespeare attended a university, and the university records are actually fairly good for this period, so we don't have any evidence that he did. Shakespeare's father was a glover, so he made small leather goods like gloves and purses. He would have had a shop [in Stratford], and the family would have lived there. Shakespeare would have been born in that very house. Shakespeare's father started out as a farmer's son, moved to Stratford, and became a glover, or what was also called a "whyttawer." He was also a wool dealer, dealing with all kinds of sheep parts. He became the ale taster in 1556. His job was to make sure that when people were selling beer or ale that it was what it claimed to be. He became the constable in 1558. For those of you who teach Much Ado About Nothing, Dogberry and Verges may have been portraits of John Shakespeare or his contemporaries. He was the affeeror in 1559 and a burgess possibly in 1560, but we know that after that he was alderman, bailiff, then chief alderman. You can see he is moving on up. Bailiff was the equivalent of mayor, so a very high position. Then, all of a sudden, he stopped attending the council meetings in 1576. His fellow councilors were very careful to word this in a way that would not get him arrested. They obviously liked him; they felt sorry for him for some reason. He was having serious financial and legal troubles. We have some of the legal trouble documents from 1576 to 1583—all through Shakespeare's adolescence. John was no longer on the town council as of 1586. In 1591, he stopped attending church—which was against the law and resulted in huge fines—and he died in 1601. So, we know that Shakespeare and his family experienced this great disruption. Just last year, at the Public Records Office in London, Glyn Perry [professor at the University of Roehampton] found twenty-one new documents. It's just amazing; there is still a lot of stuff to find out there. These new documents show that two informers caused John's financial and legal trouble until about 1583. You start to see the link between Shakespeare's life and the kind of spying and informing that goes on in the history plays. This is right out of Richard III. The trouble continued until 1583, when William was nineteen. They include multiple writs against John that recorded his debts to the crown, including one for 132£, which is the equivalent of 20,000£ today, about $35,000. His property remained at risk of seizure by the crown, hampering his credit as an entrepreneur. He was engaged in a business that depended on being able to establish credit, and this debt prevented him from doing that. This has given us a much more nuanced look at why those financial problems happened and also shows some of the links to Shakespeare's work. When Shakespeare was fourteen, his seven-year-old sister Anne died. If you imagine Shakespeare as someone who is sensitive and aware of the world, that must have been a terrible trauma, as it would be for anyone. The Stratford-upon-Avon parish register records births and deaths. It lists the name and the date but nothing else. It doesn't tell you why someone died, so we don't know if Anne died of an illness or an accident or what happened to her. We also know from other public records that, between 1578 and 1582, Shakespeare lost two aunts and a young cousin. This is not an uncommon number of deaths—the mortality rates in this period are absolutely shocking when you study them—but this is something that he was going through regularly as a teenager. . . . When Shakespeare was fifteen, Katherine Hamlett drowned in a nearby village. The coroner in this case was Henry Rogers of Stratford, so Shakespeare, through his father, would have heard the details of this. This is what the coroner's report says, translated from the Latin: "That the aforesaid Katherine Hamlett, on the seventeenth day of December in the twenty-second year of the reign of the aforesaid lady the Queen, going with a certain vessel, in English a pail, to draw water at the river called Avon in Tiddington aforesaid, it so happened that the aforesaid Katherine, standing on the bank of the same river, suddenly and by accident slipped and fell into the river aforesaid, and there, in the water of the same river on the said seventeenth day of December in the year aforesaid at Tiddington aforesaid in the County aforesaid by accident was drowned, and not otherwise nor in any other fashion came by her death." What is this trying to say? That it was not suicide. It sounds like there was something very suspicious about the death, and so the coroner's report very carefully emphasizes she had a pail with her, that she must have been going to draw water, so it couldn't possibly be suicide. You can again see the links between things that happened in Shakespeare's lifetime— this woman named Katherine Hamlett—and the death of Ophelia in Hamlet, which is not in any of Shakespeare's source texts. In the source texts, Ophelia lives happily ever after. But here, again, in Gertrude's account of Ophelia's death in Hamlet, is this effort to claim this is not a suicide. Gertrude says Ophelia was climbing up a tree to hang up a wreath she had woven, and she fell, and her clothes got wet, and that pulled her down into the water. "Her garments, heavy with their drink, pulled the poor wretch from her melodious lay to muddy death." Whether or not Shakespeare knew Katherine Hamlett personally—it's likely that he did because it was a very small world in and around Stratford—he makes this same effort in his play to prove that this was not a suicide. In the year that Shakespeare turned sixteen, his brother Edmund was born. John and Mary Shakespeare had eight children. They had two daughters, who died in infancy, in 1558 and 1562. We know the first one died, even though there is not a record of her death in the parish register, because they reused the name in 1569. William was the first child who survived. It is kind of unusual that he did because he was born in April. Then, in July, in the parish register, is the most terrifying phrase you can find in a parish register: hic incipit pestis. "Here begins the plague." There is an outbreak of bubonic plague in July 1564 that killed two hundred people, which was one-third of Stratford's population. William did not die, and that tells us something, I think, about Mary Arden. He had a brother, Gilbert, who was born in 1566, who died before William did, in 1612. He had a sister, Joan, who survived him, and her descendants are the living link to Shakespeare. His sister Anne died in 1579, and his brother Richard died in 1613. His brother Edmund, who became an actor and also a character in King Lear, died in December 1607, and Shakespeare paid for a very lavish funeral for him. When Shakespeare was eighteen, he got married to Anne Hathaway. Sonnet 145 is a very oddball sonnet, not quite as sophisticated as the rest. This is a sonnet that we think Shakespeare wrote to Anne Hathaway because the couplet at the end says, "'I hate,' from hate away she threw." That is her name, "Hate-away, Hathaway," pronounced the same way. "And saved my life, saying 'not you.'" Instead of saying I love you, "I hate not you." Teenagers really like this sonnet. Please take the hand of someone near you, just like you are shaking hands, and repeat after me: "I plight thee my troth." You are now legally married to the person whose hand you are holding. That was all you needed for a legal marriage: you have looked at each other, you have spoken the present tense, and there was a witness. The fact that Anne Hathaway was pregnant when they had their church wedding does not mean that they were not married; they may have had this handfast marriage. But there were some complications. Shakespeare was a minor. He was eighteen, not twenty-one. The bride was pregnant. It was Advent. So they had to have a special license with the big financial guarantee that the child that would result from this pregnancy would not become a burden to the parish. The clerk wrote the bride's name as Anne Whateley, and this has lead to centuries of speculation about a conspiracy theory that Shakespeare was in love with another Anne and forced to marry Anne Hathaway. But the most likely explanation is a careless clerk. There are tons of mistakes that he made that scholars have tracked; he seems to have had a lot of trouble with names. Thomas Deloney writes in Jack of Newbury (1597), "It is not wisdom for a young man that can scantily keep himself to take a wife; therefore I hold it the best way is to lead a single life; for I have heard say that many sorrows follow marriage, especially where want remains." The advice for William and Anne would have been, "No, don't do that until you can support her." Then Shakespeare himself writes in Twelfth Night: "Let still the woman take / An elder than herself: so wears she to him, / So sways she level in her husband's heart." Anne was twenty-six; Shakespeare was eighteen. Then we have Anthony Copley in Wits, Fits, and Fancies (1614): "One used to say: who so hath a daughter but twenty years old, well may he bestow her upon her better; if twenty-five, upon her equal; if above twenty-five, then upon whosoever list to have her." Finally, we have, from The Tempest: "If thou dost break her virgin knot before All sanctimonious ceremonies may With full and holy rite be ministered, No sweet aspersion shall the heavens let fall To make this contract grow, but barren hate, Sour-eyed disdain, and discord shall bestrew The union of your bed with weeds so loathly That you shall hate it both." (IV.i.15–22) In other words: "Don't sleep with her before marriage, that will make for a very unhappy marriage." This is thought to be Shakespeare's own commentary on his marriage, but it actually fits in within the story of the play. Why are Romeo and Juliet so young? Aristocrats often arranged marriages at a much younger age, and also the boy actor playing Juliet would have been thirteen or fourteen, so needed to be young. When Shakespeare was nineteen, his daughter was born. His daughter, Susanna, married a physician, John Hall. She had a daughter, Elizabeth. Susanna was known to be witty above her sex. Her daughter Elizabeth died without issue, so there are no direct descendants from that line. Then Anne Hathaway had twins, Hamnet and Judith, in 1585. Hamnet died in August 1596 at age eleven. Again, no cause was given. Judith married the town rogue in 1616, causing Shakespeare to change his will. William Davenant, a playwright born in 1606, claims that he is Shakespeare's illegitimate son. When Susanna turned thirteen in 1596, Shakespeare was writing, or had written, Romeo and Juliet and A Midsummers Night's Dream, so that is a good thing to keep in mind: he had a daughter that age. By 1598, he was the father of two teenage girls. This is what we have as a result of those teenage years. Something happened to turn Shakespeare into the person about whom we say, "So long as men can breathe or eyes can see, so long lives this and this gives life to thee." There is a willow grows aslant a brook That shows his hoar leaves in the glassy stream. There with fantastic garlands did she come Of crowflowers, nettles, daisies, and long purples, That liberal shepherds give a grosser name, But our cold maids do “dead men’s fingers” call them. There, on the pendant boughs her coronet weeds Clambering to hang, an envious sliver broke, When down her weedy trophies and herself Fell in the weeping brook. Her clothes spread wide, And mermaid-like a while they bore her up, Which time she chanted snatches of old lauds As one incapable of her own distress, Or like a creature native and indued Unto that element. But long it could not be Till that her garments, heavy with their drink, Pulled the poor wretch from her melodious lay To muddy death. (IV.vii.162–179)	<urn:uuid:a6ed294a-2596-4817-a00d-e30d3b393d14>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.humanitiestexas.org/news/articles/shakespeare-teenager	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250599718.13/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120165335-20200120194335-00180.warc.gz	en	0.988563	5,740	3.703125	4	[ 0.06502661108970642, -0.23007962107658386, 0.577271580696106, -0.12042507529258728, -0.41298532485961914, -0.3270242214202881, 0.17503933608531952, 0.295215904712677, -0.030980020761489868, -0.3334906995296478, 0.1976715326309204, -0.059838149696588516, 0.09855017066001892, 0.2400542795658...	14	In June 2019, Humanities Texas held a teacher institute in Houston in partnership with Rice University titled "Teaching Shakespeare." Catherine Loomis, professor of English at the Rochester Institute of Technology, presented this lecture examining the teenage experience in early modern England and how events in Shakespeare's teenage years give us a better understanding of his works. The Oxford English Dictionary, my favorite go-to source for definitions, defines "teen" as "something vexatious, a cause of annoyance, a trouble." I am sure most of you recognize that definition, which began in the year 971. "Affliction, trouble, suffering, grief, woe"—that's what the word "teen" meant to Shakespeare. The first use of "teen" as in "age" wasn't until the year 1664, and the word "teenager" didn't come into use until 1941, so, in some ways, Shakespeare never was a teenager. In early modern times, the term for this age for young men was "youth" or "stripling." If you were insulting a teenager, you could call him "boy." Young women were called "maids" or "virgins." In The Passions of the Mind (1601), Thomas Wright said that young people "lack the use of reason and are guided by an internal imagination, following nothing else but that [which] pleases their senses, even after the same manner of brute beasts do." Most of your students will be familiar with the Droeshout etching from Shakespeare's First Folio, where we see Shakespeare as a balding old man, but the most recently discovered portraits are making him younger and younger. We have a more recent one (the Cobbe portrait), finally identified as being Shakespeare, and the Sanders portrait—the most recently discovered; people are still working on the full attribution—where Shakespeare looks quite young, witty, engaging, and interesting. What made Shakespeare into Shakespeare would have been things that happened to him in his childhood and as a young man. These are some of the things I'd like to talk about today. When Shakespeare was very, very young, traveling actors visited Stratford-upon-Avon, the town where Shakespeare was born in 1564. Because Shakespeare's father was a town official at that time, Shakespeare would have seen these traveling players. One of the arguments about how "Shakespeare couldn't be Shakespeare," is how could he know so much about drama, having lived way out in the middle of the country? Well, it is because these traveling players stopped by. In 1575, when Shakespeare was an impressionable eleven years old, Queen Elizabeth visited Kenilworth, which is not too far from Stratford, on her annual summer progress. There were plays, there were pageants, there were speeches. Elizabeth spent the night at Charlecote, which is the great house nearest to Stratford. Shakespeare's father, again, was a public official and would have been invited to at least be present, if not participate, in some of these events. Entertaining the queen was a big fancy business, so the pageantry at Kenilworth, if Shakespeare had witnessed that, would have been absolutely spectacular. It's certainly possible that Shakespeare got to see this pageantry, and he does seem to be referring to it in A Midsummers Night's Dream. Also, in Coventry, which is another town near Stratford, in 1579, they were still performing mystery plays. There is some evidence that Shakespeare's family may still have been Catholic, despite the official English conversion to Anglicanism, so he may have seen those mystery plays as well. The point is that, as a young man, Shakespeare had lots of opportunities to see plays being performed by professional troupes, not only by amateur actors. We have some great accounts of traveling players visiting villages, such as this one from Richard Norwood's Confessions (1640) after having seen a play: "From that time forwards, I went no more to school to any purpose, not meeting with an able schoolmaster and my father much decaying in his estate. When I was near fifteen years of age, being drawn in by other young men of the town, I acted a woman's part in a stage-play. I was so much affected with that practice that had not the Lord prevented it, I should've chosen it before any other course of life." We would like to think that Shakespeare may have caught the acting bug in the very same way as Norwood, who was the same age as Shakespeare. Boy actors were a very important part, obviously, of the Elizabethan theatre. They were extremely competent, and acting and taking part in plays was part of the school curriculum. It was thought to help with public speaking and behaving like an adult. Boys who were very good at it could be basically kidnapped and brought to London to be part of acting troupes. It is possible that Shakespeare saw professional performances, did some acting in school, and may have seen other boy actors at work. Shakespeare liked to make use of traveling players in his plays: a troupe of them visit Elsinore in Hamlet, and they also appear in the induction of The Taming of the Shrew. Just before the Queen's Men visited Stratford in 1587, John Towne, one of their actors, killed his fellow actor William Knell in Oxfordshire and was arrested and pulled out of the acting troupe. Samuel Schoenbaum, one of Shakespeare's biographers, writes that it is a "pleasing fancy" that Shakespeare may have been recruited into the troupe. So, the Queen's Men arrived in Stratford in 1587 and looked around the town, asking, "Is there anybody here who's good with words who can do a little acting?" And they say, "Hey, that Shakespeare kid, c'mon, come with us." That may be how Shakespeare was introduced to acting. This, unfortunately, is all speculation. If you ever uncover a diary that gives us some evidence of that, please contact the Folger Shakespeare Library immediately. But we do know that Shakespeare was an actor, and one of the reasons I think he is a good playwright is that he probably wasn't a great actor. If he had been a great actor, he would've been acting in other people's plays. I think he could appreciate great acting but maybe not do it. One of the reasons we know he was an actor is the title page of one of Ben Jonson's comedies, Every Man in His Humour (1598). The principle comedians (the list of the actors) shows William Shakespeare, number one. So, we do have evidence that he acted as well. One of the things that happened to Shakespeare as a teenager is he saw some acting—and possibly did some acting—and that contributed to his adulthood. A question that often comes up is: how much education did Shakespeare have? In Shakespeare's time, the dame school, or petty school, was for four- and five-year-olds, and that is where they learned to read and possibly to cipher. They may not have learned to write, though. Shakespeare's own father could not write his name, but, when he needed to sign a document, he would draw a geometry compass, which was a tool of his trade—that was his mark. So, that marked him as illiterate, but people often learned to read without learning to write. They needed to read so they could read the Bible, but they didn't need to write necessarily. We now believe previous literacy numbers are not correct and that, probably, many more people [in Shakespeare's time] could read than we used to think. At the time Shakespeare would have started school, his father was a bailiff, a very important public figure. He was entitled, as the bailiff's son, to go to the King Edward VI Grammar School, which is still standing in Stratford. We know that Shakespeare quotes grammar school textbooks in his plays. Students memorized their textbooks in this period. That was how they did their lessons. They had to actually memorize a page of the book or more every day. We know that Shakespeare read Latin. Some of the Ovid that he quotes is not any English translation but from, apparently, his own translation of the Latin. And the plays feature many, often very sad, references to school boys, so he seems to have known what it was like to be one. It is highly likely that Shakespeare went to school. Most of the records for this period are lost, so we do not have his name on a class roll, but it is not unusual for records of that age to have been lost. . . . Boys would be breeched at around age seven. That meant they could put pants on. Until then, they wore gowns as girls did. Boys were sent out to service around age seven, apprenticed at fourteen, and married, on average, at age twenty-six. If educated, they went to a dame school when they were four or five, a grammar school from seven to thirteen, and then on to university. In 1583, Phillips Stubbs wrote, "Every scurvy boy of twelve, sixteen, or twenty years will make no conscience of it to have two or three or peradventure half a dozen several women with child at once." So, not fine reputations. Teenage boys enacted lude stratagems. They broke windows, they overthrew milkmaids' pails, they pulled down stalls, they crushed up the street lights. Terrible things those boys got up to. London had twenty thousand apprentices in a city of two hundred thousand people. They were very rowdy, and there were conduct books that attempted to regulate their behavior. Shakespeare was working with those apprentices in his audience, so his plays are designed to keep them quiet; that is why once every three lines there is a dirty joke. Shakespeare probably went to the King Edward VI Grammar School and probably did not go to university. He left Stratford and did not seem to be apprenticed to his father. There is a very attractive story that he poached a deer, one or more, and got run out of town. There is also some growing evidence that he was a tutor in the household of the Hoghton family. In 1581, a William Shakeshaft, which is a version of the name that Shakespeare's grandfather used, was left some things in a will that indicated he was an actor. That family was linked to Lord Ferdinando Strange, who was the patron of a London acting company. The very attractive narrative is that Shakespeare went to work in that household as a tutor and, through that household, got to London to be part of an acting company. Girls could go to the dame school, but then they would almost immediately be sent out as servants around age seven. We have a long list of their daily tasks, a long and terrible list. Girls had conduct books for guidance, and virginity was emphasized. Their average age at marriage was twenty-four, and about 25 percent of brides at that time were already pregnant. We have very few portraits of little girls. Most portraits of teenage girls are marriage portraits. They are made to emphasize their virginity with pearls and their fidelity with a little dog to make them look eligible for engagement. The little red bow, again, emphasizes her virginity and purity. Thomas Underdown says in "A Rule for Women to Bring Up Their Daughters" in 1566: Ye mothers that your daughters will Bring up and nurture well, These rules do keep, and them observe, Which I shall here now tell. If they will go or gad abroad, Their legs let broken be; Put out their eyes if they will look Or gaze indecently. Pretty strict stuff. This poem goes on and on. There were efforts to control women's behavior very strictly, but then there is this lovely song about a fourteen-year-old girl that is singing about how much she wants to get married. Suddenly, at the very end, one of the verses says, "My mother bids me go to school." So, there is some counter narrative there. One of the reasons that Shakespeare may have left school was that he apprenticed to his father, which would have been the normal course of events for a family of their class. The normal pattern was not to go to school and then go to university—that was reserved for a very tiny number of boys. Most would either be made pages or servants of some kind or go on to be apprenticed. So, was Shakespeare apprentice to his father? We do not know. John Aubrey, who, in the seventeenth century, talked to some people who knew people who knew Shakespeare (so not exactly first-hand information) said this: "His father was a butcher"—wrong— "and I had been told here-to-fore by some of the neighbors, that when he was a boy, he exercised his father's trade," he worked as a butcher's apprentice, "but when he killed a calf, he would do it in a high style and make a speech." If you're teaching Julius Caesar, this is a great anecdote because of all of the things that go on with the stabbing. Imagine Shakespeare killing a calf and giving some of those great speeches. But, sorry, his father was a glover and did not deal with butchering at all. . . . There were some other options, as Shakespeare explains in The Two Gentleman of Verona. Here is someone talking to a young man: "He wondered that your lordship Would suffer him to spend his youth at home, While other men of slender reputation, Put forth their sons to seek preferment out, Some to the wars, to try their fortune there, Some to discover islands far away, Some to studious universities." (I.iii.5–11) So, there were options other than being apprenticed to your father. But running off to London to become an actor was not high on the list. Did Shakespeare get a university education? Scholarships were available. Christopher Marlowe, Shakespeare's great fellow playwright, had one. He was a shoemaker's son, very much like Shakespeare in terms of social class, and he went to Cambridge on a full scholarship. There is no record that Shakespeare attended a university, and the university records are actually fairly good for this period, so we don't have any evidence that he did. Shakespeare's father was a glover, so he made small leather goods like gloves and purses. He would have had a shop [in Stratford], and the family would have lived there. Shakespeare would have been born in that very house. Shakespeare's father started out as a farmer's son, moved to Stratford, and became a glover, or what was also called a "whyttawer." He was also a wool dealer, dealing with all kinds of sheep parts. He became the ale taster in 1556. His job was to make sure that when people were selling beer or ale that it was what it claimed to be. He became the constable in 1558. For those of you who teach Much Ado About Nothing, Dogberry and Verges may have been portraits of John Shakespeare or his contemporaries. He was the affeeror in 1559 and a burgess possibly in 1560, but we know that after that he was alderman, bailiff, then chief alderman. You can see he is moving on up. Bailiff was the equivalent of mayor, so a very high position. Then, all of a sudden, he stopped attending the council meetings in 1576. His fellow councilors were very careful to word this in a way that would not get him arrested. They obviously liked him; they felt sorry for him for some reason. He was having serious financial and legal troubles. We have some of the legal trouble documents from 1576 to 1583—all through Shakespeare's adolescence. John was no longer on the town council as of 1586. In 1591, he stopped attending church—which was against the law and resulted in huge fines—and he died in 1601. So, we know that Shakespeare and his family experienced this great disruption. Just last year, at the Public Records Office in London, Glyn Perry [professor at the University of Roehampton] found twenty-one new documents. It's just amazing; there is still a lot of stuff to find out there. These new documents show that two informers caused John's financial and legal trouble until about 1583. You start to see the link between Shakespeare's life and the kind of spying and informing that goes on in the history plays. This is right out of Richard III. The trouble continued until 1583, when William was nineteen. They include multiple writs against John that recorded his debts to the crown, including one for 132£, which is the equivalent of 20,000£ today, about $35,000. His property remained at risk of seizure by the crown, hampering his credit as an entrepreneur. He was engaged in a business that depended on being able to establish credit, and this debt prevented him from doing that. This has given us a much more nuanced look at why those financial problems happened and also shows some of the links to Shakespeare's work. When Shakespeare was fourteen, his seven-year-old sister Anne died. If you imagine Shakespeare as someone who is sensitive and aware of the world, that must have been a terrible trauma, as it would be for anyone. The Stratford-upon-Avon parish register records births and deaths. It lists the name and the date but nothing else. It doesn't tell you why someone died, so we don't know if Anne died of an illness or an accident or what happened to her. We also know from other public records that, between 1578 and 1582, Shakespeare lost two aunts and a young cousin. This is not an uncommon number of deaths—the mortality rates in this period are absolutely shocking when you study them—but this is something that he was going through regularly as a teenager. . . . When Shakespeare was fifteen, Katherine Hamlett drowned in a nearby village. The coroner in this case was Henry Rogers of Stratford, so Shakespeare, through his father, would have heard the details of this. This is what the coroner's report says, translated from the Latin: "That the aforesaid Katherine Hamlett, on the seventeenth day of December in the twenty-second year of the reign of the aforesaid lady the Queen, going with a certain vessel, in English a pail, to draw water at the river called Avon in Tiddington aforesaid, it so happened that the aforesaid Katherine, standing on the bank of the same river, suddenly and by accident slipped and fell into the river aforesaid, and there, in the water of the same river on the said seventeenth day of December in the year aforesaid at Tiddington aforesaid in the County aforesaid by accident was drowned, and not otherwise nor in any other fashion came by her death." What is this trying to say? That it was not suicide. It sounds like there was something very suspicious about the death, and so the coroner's report very carefully emphasizes she had a pail with her, that she must have been going to draw water, so it couldn't possibly be suicide. You can again see the links between things that happened in Shakespeare's lifetime— this woman named Katherine Hamlett—and the death of Ophelia in Hamlet, which is not in any of Shakespeare's source texts. In the source texts, Ophelia lives happily ever after. But here, again, in Gertrude's account of Ophelia's death in Hamlet, is this effort to claim this is not a suicide. Gertrude says Ophelia was climbing up a tree to hang up a wreath she had woven, and she fell, and her clothes got wet, and that pulled her down into the water. "Her garments, heavy with their drink, pulled the poor wretch from her melodious lay to muddy death." Whether or not Shakespeare knew Katherine Hamlett personally—it's likely that he did because it was a very small world in and around Stratford—he makes this same effort in his play to prove that this was not a suicide. In the year that Shakespeare turned sixteen, his brother Edmund was born. John and Mary Shakespeare had eight children. They had two daughters, who died in infancy, in 1558 and 1562. We know the first one died, even though there is not a record of her death in the parish register, because they reused the name in 1569. William was the first child who survived. It is kind of unusual that he did because he was born in April. Then, in July, in the parish register, is the most terrifying phrase you can find in a parish register: hic incipit pestis. "Here begins the plague." There is an outbreak of bubonic plague in July 1564 that killed two hundred people, which was one-third of Stratford's population. William did not die, and that tells us something, I think, about Mary Arden. He had a brother, Gilbert, who was born in 1566, who died before William did, in 1612. He had a sister, Joan, who survived him, and her descendants are the living link to Shakespeare. His sister Anne died in 1579, and his brother Richard died in 1613. His brother Edmund, who became an actor and also a character in King Lear, died in December 1607, and Shakespeare paid for a very lavish funeral for him. When Shakespeare was eighteen, he got married to Anne Hathaway. Sonnet 145 is a very oddball sonnet, not quite as sophisticated as the rest. This is a sonnet that we think Shakespeare wrote to Anne Hathaway because the couplet at the end says, "'I hate,' from hate away she threw." That is her name, "Hate-away, Hathaway," pronounced the same way. "And saved my life, saying 'not you.'" Instead of saying I love you, "I hate not you." Teenagers really like this sonnet. Please take the hand of someone near you, just like you are shaking hands, and repeat after me: "I plight thee my troth." You are now legally married to the person whose hand you are holding. That was all you needed for a legal marriage: you have looked at each other, you have spoken the present tense, and there was a witness. The fact that Anne Hathaway was pregnant when they had their church wedding does not mean that they were not married; they may have had this handfast marriage. But there were some complications. Shakespeare was a minor. He was eighteen, not twenty-one. The bride was pregnant. It was Advent. So they had to have a special license with the big financial guarantee that the child that would result from this pregnancy would not become a burden to the parish. The clerk wrote the bride's name as Anne Whateley, and this has lead to centuries of speculation about a conspiracy theory that Shakespeare was in love with another Anne and forced to marry Anne Hathaway. But the most likely explanation is a careless clerk. There are tons of mistakes that he made that scholars have tracked; he seems to have had a lot of trouble with names. Thomas Deloney writes in Jack of Newbury (1597), "It is not wisdom for a young man that can scantily keep himself to take a wife; therefore I hold it the best way is to lead a single life; for I have heard say that many sorrows follow marriage, especially where want remains." The advice for William and Anne would have been, "No, don't do that until you can support her." Then Shakespeare himself writes in Twelfth Night: "Let still the woman take / An elder than herself: so wears she to him, / So sways she level in her husband's heart." Anne was twenty-six; Shakespeare was eighteen. Then we have Anthony Copley in Wits, Fits, and Fancies (1614): "One used to say: who so hath a daughter but twenty years old, well may he bestow her upon her better; if twenty-five, upon her equal; if above twenty-five, then upon whosoever list to have her." Finally, we have, from The Tempest: "If thou dost break her virgin knot before All sanctimonious ceremonies may With full and holy rite be ministered, No sweet aspersion shall the heavens let fall To make this contract grow, but barren hate, Sour-eyed disdain, and discord shall bestrew The union of your bed with weeds so loathly That you shall hate it both." (IV.i.15–22) In other words: "Don't sleep with her before marriage, that will make for a very unhappy marriage." This is thought to be Shakespeare's own commentary on his marriage, but it actually fits in within the story of the play. Why are Romeo and Juliet so young? Aristocrats often arranged marriages at a much younger age, and also the boy actor playing Juliet would have been thirteen or fourteen, so needed to be young. When Shakespeare was nineteen, his daughter was born. His daughter, Susanna, married a physician, John Hall. She had a daughter, Elizabeth. Susanna was known to be witty above her sex. Her daughter Elizabeth died without issue, so there are no direct descendants from that line. Then Anne Hathaway had twins, Hamnet and Judith, in 1585. Hamnet died in August 1596 at age eleven. Again, no cause was given. Judith married the town rogue in 1616, causing Shakespeare to change his will. William Davenant, a playwright born in 1606, claims that he is Shakespeare's illegitimate son. When Susanna turned thirteen in 1596, Shakespeare was writing, or had written, Romeo and Juliet and A Midsummers Night's Dream, so that is a good thing to keep in mind: he had a daughter that age. By 1598, he was the father of two teenage girls. This is what we have as a result of those teenage years. Something happened to turn Shakespeare into the person about whom we say, "So long as men can breathe or eyes can see, so long lives this and this gives life to thee." There is a willow grows aslant a brook That shows his hoar leaves in the glassy stream. There with fantastic garlands did she come Of crowflowers, nettles, daisies, and long purples, That liberal shepherds give a grosser name, But our cold maids do “dead men’s fingers” call them. There, on the pendant boughs her coronet weeds Clambering to hang, an envious sliver broke, When down her weedy trophies and herself Fell in the weeping brook. Her clothes spread wide, And mermaid-like a while they bore her up, Which time she chanted snatches of old lauds As one incapable of her own distress, Or like a creature native and indued Unto that element. But long it could not be Till that her garments, heavy with their drink, Pulled the poor wretch from her melodious lay To muddy death. (IV.vii.162–179)	5,789	ENGLISH	1
I pose this question to the students after they gather at the community center. "How would you be able to locate a hidden wire inside of a cardboard envelop?" Next, I have the students discuss with their shoulder partners what they think they might do to locate the wire without opening the envelop in anyway. As they discuss, I will listen in to detect the use of terms like: source, receiver, complete circuit, wires, and pathway. When the students have finished their brainstorming with each other, I show them the supply table available to them (batteries, wires, lightbulbs, motors, circuit boards, and switches). I also show them 8 different "envelopes" that contain a wire inside. These "envelopes" are actually two pieces of cardboard that have 4 brads in them, each labeled with A, B, C, or D. A wire is connected between two of the brads between cardboard, so it is hidden. You can make these board easily. My school purchases the FOSS lessons and materials, so mine were supplied. I do not tell the students, in anyway, how to figure out where the wires should be placed, nor do I tell them what materials they will need. I simply begin the active engagement by stating their challenge: "Draw a schematic depicting where the hidden wires are in these boards without looking in them or changing the board in any way." If they locate the hidden wire in one board, they are to trade with another group and keep testing until the time is up. However, I am assuming we will need two sessions for this activity. As the students begin to devise their plans and begin investigations, I circulate and guide, converse, and prompt. In this video, the students are struggling to work as a group. This is my first task. I ask them to stop "doing" and start talking. When they do, they are able to discuss a plan and then explain why they think it will be successful. It is so easy for students to get excited and just begin a trial and error approach. My intervention here helped them slow down and do some thinking up front. I was impressed with this group, as they were testing their circuit before they even put the mystery board in the mix. I liked that they were problem solving the circuit success first, as they were actually controlling variables. This group had a very systematic way of testing their board. However, they were not met with success. They went on to test the components of their circuit, which did work, so they came to me saying the mystery board was "defective". I asked them think about what they could do during the next session to solve this problem. Their solution: "You should take it apart Ms. Marcus, and make sure the connections are tight"! What a great response. This lesson is done in two parts, as I assumed the majority of the first session would be planning. I was happy that the kids took time to test their circuits before actually testing the mystery boards. As a closing, I asked two teams to merge and discuss successes and challenges they had today. I will then have them discuss what they will do during our next session.	<urn:uuid:1c325dd5-4177-4235-a45c-bf44124fa43f>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://betterlesson.com/lesson/640504/mystery-conductors-day-1?from=master_teacher_curriculum	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251773463.72/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128030221-20200128060221-00031.warc.gz	en	0.983035	656	3.578125	4	[ -0.026990359649062157, 0.10680359601974487, 0.31683558225631714, -0.042317382991313934, -0.16027411818504333, 0.008317038416862488, 0.22714687883853912, 0.4973382353782654, -0.2975066304206848, 0.11466546356678009, 0.12478505074977875, 0.046169400215148926, -0.20959928631782532, 0.14312222...	1	I pose this question to the students after they gather at the community center. "How would you be able to locate a hidden wire inside of a cardboard envelop?" Next, I have the students discuss with their shoulder partners what they think they might do to locate the wire without opening the envelop in anyway. As they discuss, I will listen in to detect the use of terms like: source, receiver, complete circuit, wires, and pathway. When the students have finished their brainstorming with each other, I show them the supply table available to them (batteries, wires, lightbulbs, motors, circuit boards, and switches). I also show them 8 different "envelopes" that contain a wire inside. These "envelopes" are actually two pieces of cardboard that have 4 brads in them, each labeled with A, B, C, or D. A wire is connected between two of the brads between cardboard, so it is hidden. You can make these board easily. My school purchases the FOSS lessons and materials, so mine were supplied. I do not tell the students, in anyway, how to figure out where the wires should be placed, nor do I tell them what materials they will need. I simply begin the active engagement by stating their challenge: "Draw a schematic depicting where the hidden wires are in these boards without looking in them or changing the board in any way." If they locate the hidden wire in one board, they are to trade with another group and keep testing until the time is up. However, I am assuming we will need two sessions for this activity. As the students begin to devise their plans and begin investigations, I circulate and guide, converse, and prompt. In this video, the students are struggling to work as a group. This is my first task. I ask them to stop "doing" and start talking. When they do, they are able to discuss a plan and then explain why they think it will be successful. It is so easy for students to get excited and just begin a trial and error approach. My intervention here helped them slow down and do some thinking up front. I was impressed with this group, as they were testing their circuit before they even put the mystery board in the mix. I liked that they were problem solving the circuit success first, as they were actually controlling variables. This group had a very systematic way of testing their board. However, they were not met with success. They went on to test the components of their circuit, which did work, so they came to me saying the mystery board was "defective". I asked them think about what they could do during the next session to solve this problem. Their solution: "You should take it apart Ms. Marcus, and make sure the connections are tight"! What a great response. This lesson is done in two parts, as I assumed the majority of the first session would be planning. I was happy that the kids took time to test their circuits before actually testing the mystery boards. As a closing, I asked two teams to merge and discuss successes and challenges they had today. I will then have them discuss what they will do during our next session.	648	ENGLISH	1
Silver is defined as precious shiny grayish-white transition metal. the key word in this definition is precious. Silver was the great start of global trade. In the 1550s, silver mined in the Americas became available to Spain, then to the rest of western Europe, as well as to China directly by way of Spanish galleon voyages across the Pacific Ocean. Silver financed Europe’s increasing involvement in the economy of maritime Asia and subsequently provided the basis of the emergence of an Atlantic-centered world economy by 1800. Chinese silver production was declining by the 1430s, and the nation was silver-hungry by the time that dramatic new supplies began coming in from Japan around 1530, just before the arrival of the Europeans. From the 1530s to the 1570s, Japan was China’s major source of silver. Massive amounts flowed into China, mainly in exchange for silk, but gold and jewels were also exported, and china and porcelain were often used as valuable ballast. At first, the silver trade with Japan was illegal, as the Ming Emperors tried to impose state control over it, but certainly in the 1540s there was a flourishing smuggling trade along most of the Chinese coast. When the Ming made a determined effort to stop smuggling around 1540 they realized that there were literally hundreds of smuggling boats operating out of illicit ports. Because of the illegality of much of this trade, it is practically impossible to find details of amounts. Around 1610 the supply of silver began to drop off, partly because of the arrival of large numbers of Dutch and English pirates and traders. The dramatic increase of silver production at Potosi dates from when they arrived in Manila in 1571, and immediately began trade with Chinese merchants, once again exchanging New World silver for silks, gold, and porcelain (they also traded for spices, but within the Philippines). As early as 1573 two Spanish galleons sailed from Manila to Acapulco with cargoes of silk and porcelain, and a galleon seized by the English raider Thomas Cavendish in 1587 was carrying silks worth 30 tonnes of silver. It’s clear, then, that the Spanish dramatically added to the supply of silver reaching Ming China, beginning in the 1570s and probably increasing dramatically after that. With all the silver being traded the Chinese had come to want people to pay their taxes in silver. This was hard for those farmers who relied on paying their taxes in crops to having to find silver to pay taxes with. Therefore china had a huge part in the silver trade. imagine being taken from your family at the age of eight, this for many affricans was a devastating thing. When most of the Native Americans died of mining for silver, african slaves where casted to take their place. In tight ships they were brought over to mine for silver when the got off the boat the were placed in groups with people that did not speak their language so it was very hard to plan an escape with those who don’t understand you. An estimated total of 30,000 African slaves were taken to Potosi during the colonial era. Since mules would die after a couple of months pushing the mills, the colonists replaced the four mules with twenty African slaves. this was just cruel and unfair but the African salves did not speak up.	<urn:uuid:d4693e9e-7af5-429f-9038-4fa8fd7edd3b>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://indybedbugpros.com/silver-trade-4915/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592636.25/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118135205-20200118163205-00214.warc.gz	en	0.984377	693	3.71875	4	[ -0.11438165605068207, -0.20180821418762207, 0.20142991840839386, -0.1835782527923584, 0.16074813902378082, -0.05882726237177849, 0.2876113951206207, -0.29205411672592163, 0.14510414004325867, 0.1295597404241562, 0.45128676295280457, -0.3341844081878662, 0.05724577605724335, 0.3285143673419...	1	Silver is defined as precious shiny grayish-white transition metal. the key word in this definition is precious. Silver was the great start of global trade. In the 1550s, silver mined in the Americas became available to Spain, then to the rest of western Europe, as well as to China directly by way of Spanish galleon voyages across the Pacific Ocean. Silver financed Europe’s increasing involvement in the economy of maritime Asia and subsequently provided the basis of the emergence of an Atlantic-centered world economy by 1800. Chinese silver production was declining by the 1430s, and the nation was silver-hungry by the time that dramatic new supplies began coming in from Japan around 1530, just before the arrival of the Europeans. From the 1530s to the 1570s, Japan was China’s major source of silver. Massive amounts flowed into China, mainly in exchange for silk, but gold and jewels were also exported, and china and porcelain were often used as valuable ballast. At first, the silver trade with Japan was illegal, as the Ming Emperors tried to impose state control over it, but certainly in the 1540s there was a flourishing smuggling trade along most of the Chinese coast. When the Ming made a determined effort to stop smuggling around 1540 they realized that there were literally hundreds of smuggling boats operating out of illicit ports. Because of the illegality of much of this trade, it is practically impossible to find details of amounts. Around 1610 the supply of silver began to drop off, partly because of the arrival of large numbers of Dutch and English pirates and traders. The dramatic increase of silver production at Potosi dates from when they arrived in Manila in 1571, and immediately began trade with Chinese merchants, once again exchanging New World silver for silks, gold, and porcelain (they also traded for spices, but within the Philippines). As early as 1573 two Spanish galleons sailed from Manila to Acapulco with cargoes of silk and porcelain, and a galleon seized by the English raider Thomas Cavendish in 1587 was carrying silks worth 30 tonnes of silver. It’s clear, then, that the Spanish dramatically added to the supply of silver reaching Ming China, beginning in the 1570s and probably increasing dramatically after that. With all the silver being traded the Chinese had come to want people to pay their taxes in silver. This was hard for those farmers who relied on paying their taxes in crops to having to find silver to pay taxes with. Therefore china had a huge part in the silver trade. imagine being taken from your family at the age of eight, this for many affricans was a devastating thing. When most of the Native Americans died of mining for silver, african slaves where casted to take their place. In tight ships they were brought over to mine for silver when the got off the boat the were placed in groups with people that did not speak their language so it was very hard to plan an escape with those who don’t understand you. An estimated total of 30,000 African slaves were taken to Potosi during the colonial era. Since mules would die after a couple of months pushing the mills, the colonists replaced the four mules with twenty African slaves. this was just cruel and unfair but the African salves did not speak up.	719	ENGLISH	1
Reconstruction in Practice Slave Society and Culture The conditions slaves faced depended on the size of Slave life in the south plantation or farm where they worked, the work they had to do, and, of course, the whim of their master. If caught carrying a gun, the slave received 39 lashes and forfeited the gun. They were well laid on, at arm's length, but with no appearance of angry excitement on the part of the overseer. The ideal man respected his family and treated women with high regard. The southern woman was genteel and gracious. Even if they or their loved ones were never sold, slaves had to live with the constant threat that they could be. Slaves could be awarded as prizes in raffles, wagered in gambling, offered as security for loans, and transferred as gifts from one person to another. They were constantly under the scrutiny of their masters and mistresses, and could be called on for service at any time. Slaves could not assemble without a white person present. At all times, patrols were set up to enforce the codes. Some slaves worked as domestics, providing services for the master's or overseer's families. Whether her story was true or false, could have been ascertained in two minutes by riding on to the gang with which her father was at work, but the overseer had made up his mind. These feelings often led to violence. In most situations, young children of both races played together on farms and plantations. Kansas-Nebraska Act Inanother tenuous compromise was negotiated to resolve the question of slavery in territories won during the Mexican-American War. I glanced again at the perfectly passionless but rather grim business-like face of the overseer, and again at the young gentleman, who had turned away; if not indifferent he had evidently not the faintest sympathy with my emotion. But after the Revolutionary Warthe new U. She knew how to entertain guests and tenaciously defended her husband and children. Slave religion and culture. Selling wives away from husbands or children from parents was common, as was the sexual abuse of slave women. Black women carried the additional burden of caring for their families by cooking and taking care of the children, as well as spinning, weaving, and sewing. In many cases, a class system developed within the slave community. Life on large plantations with a cruel overseer was oftentimes the worst. A lucky few were at the top, with land holdings as far as the eyes could see. This was a tremendous undertaking for people whose lives were ruled by domination and forced labor. Unlike New England, who required public schooling by law, the difficulties of travel and the distances between prospective students impeded the growth of such schools in the South. Bythe South was exporting over one million tons of cotton annually to the hungry textile mills of England. Cotton Gin In the late 18th century, with the land used to grow tobacco nearly exhausted, the South faced an economic crisis, and the continued growth of slavery in America seemed in doubt. Blacks were held incompetent as witnesses in legal cases involving whites. But the masters and slaves never approached equality. Any slave found guilty of arson, rape of a white woman, or conspiracy to rebel was put to death. By the time the nation's Constitution was ratified 13 years later; five states had abolished the practice. The girls studied in the summer to allow time for weaving during the colder months. Subtly or overtly, enslaved African Americans found ways to sabotage the system in which they lived. By it had reached nearly 4 million, with more than half living in the cotton-producing states of the South. However, since the slave woman was chattel, a white man who raped her was guilty only of a trespass on the master's property. Female slaves and indentured servants were often the victims of aggressive male masters. The difference between the overseer and the driver was simple:Slave Life on a Southern Plantation First, let’s take a look at the daily life of a slave on a tobacco plantation in South Carolina. In the morning, slaves worked in the fields. In the afternoon, they worked in the Slave women did all the cooking, cleaning, washing of clothes, milking, iron polishing. The Slave Community: Plantation Life in the Antebellum South is a book written by American historian John W. Blassingame. Published init is one of the first historical studies of slavery in the United States to be presented from the perspective of. An illustration of slave’s life from a song book published in (Wikimedia Commons) After all the narratives have been read, hold a class discussion on what seemed to be the worst part of slavery in the American South. This. Slave Life and Slave Codes. The Colonial Williamsburg Foundation. Interpretation of Slave Quarter, Carter's Grove Plantation, Williamsburg As the Peculiar Institution spread across the South, many states passed "slave codes," which outlined the rights of slaves and the acceptable treatment and rules regarding slaves. Slave codes varied. Conditions of antebellum slavery By slavery was primarily located in the South, where it existed in many different forms. Slave. Slave life varied greatly depending on many factors. Life on the fields meant working sunup to sundown six days a week and having food sometimes not suitable for an animal to eat. Plantation slaves lived in small shacks with a dirt floor and little or no furniture. Life on large plantations with a cruel overseer was oftentimes the worst.Download	<urn:uuid:c79c0df0-7347-40f9-a1ff-b256e0bb492f>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://pedekut.kaleiseminari.com/slave-life-in-the-south-56288co.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251700988.64/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127143516-20200127173516-00057.warc.gz	en	0.980647	1,145	3.90625	4	[ -0.050289370119571686, 0.5489193201065063, 0.31329861283302307, -0.02364465966820717, 0.176143079996109, 0.0346992164850235, 0.06502849608659744, -0.39188557863235474, -0.3764348328113556, -0.08813939988613129, 0.33063197135925293, 0.08625510334968567, 0.0682993084192276, 0.170707568526268...	1	Reconstruction in Practice Slave Society and Culture The conditions slaves faced depended on the size of Slave life in the south plantation or farm where they worked, the work they had to do, and, of course, the whim of their master. If caught carrying a gun, the slave received 39 lashes and forfeited the gun. They were well laid on, at arm's length, but with no appearance of angry excitement on the part of the overseer. The ideal man respected his family and treated women with high regard. The southern woman was genteel and gracious. Even if they or their loved ones were never sold, slaves had to live with the constant threat that they could be. Slaves could be awarded as prizes in raffles, wagered in gambling, offered as security for loans, and transferred as gifts from one person to another. They were constantly under the scrutiny of their masters and mistresses, and could be called on for service at any time. Slaves could not assemble without a white person present. At all times, patrols were set up to enforce the codes. Some slaves worked as domestics, providing services for the master's or overseer's families. Whether her story was true or false, could have been ascertained in two minutes by riding on to the gang with which her father was at work, but the overseer had made up his mind. These feelings often led to violence. In most situations, young children of both races played together on farms and plantations. Kansas-Nebraska Act Inanother tenuous compromise was negotiated to resolve the question of slavery in territories won during the Mexican-American War. I glanced again at the perfectly passionless but rather grim business-like face of the overseer, and again at the young gentleman, who had turned away; if not indifferent he had evidently not the faintest sympathy with my emotion. But after the Revolutionary Warthe new U. She knew how to entertain guests and tenaciously defended her husband and children. Slave religion and culture. Selling wives away from husbands or children from parents was common, as was the sexual abuse of slave women. Black women carried the additional burden of caring for their families by cooking and taking care of the children, as well as spinning, weaving, and sewing. In many cases, a class system developed within the slave community. Life on large plantations with a cruel overseer was oftentimes the worst. A lucky few were at the top, with land holdings as far as the eyes could see. This was a tremendous undertaking for people whose lives were ruled by domination and forced labor. Unlike New England, who required public schooling by law, the difficulties of travel and the distances between prospective students impeded the growth of such schools in the South. Bythe South was exporting over one million tons of cotton annually to the hungry textile mills of England. Cotton Gin In the late 18th century, with the land used to grow tobacco nearly exhausted, the South faced an economic crisis, and the continued growth of slavery in America seemed in doubt. Blacks were held incompetent as witnesses in legal cases involving whites. But the masters and slaves never approached equality. Any slave found guilty of arson, rape of a white woman, or conspiracy to rebel was put to death. By the time the nation's Constitution was ratified 13 years later; five states had abolished the practice. The girls studied in the summer to allow time for weaving during the colder months. Subtly or overtly, enslaved African Americans found ways to sabotage the system in which they lived. By it had reached nearly 4 million, with more than half living in the cotton-producing states of the South. However, since the slave woman was chattel, a white man who raped her was guilty only of a trespass on the master's property. Female slaves and indentured servants were often the victims of aggressive male masters. The difference between the overseer and the driver was simple:Slave Life on a Southern Plantation First, let’s take a look at the daily life of a slave on a tobacco plantation in South Carolina. In the morning, slaves worked in the fields. In the afternoon, they worked in the Slave women did all the cooking, cleaning, washing of clothes, milking, iron polishing. The Slave Community: Plantation Life in the Antebellum South is a book written by American historian John W. Blassingame. Published init is one of the first historical studies of slavery in the United States to be presented from the perspective of. An illustration of slave’s life from a song book published in (Wikimedia Commons) After all the narratives have been read, hold a class discussion on what seemed to be the worst part of slavery in the American South. This. Slave Life and Slave Codes. The Colonial Williamsburg Foundation. Interpretation of Slave Quarter, Carter's Grove Plantation, Williamsburg As the Peculiar Institution spread across the South, many states passed "slave codes," which outlined the rights of slaves and the acceptable treatment and rules regarding slaves. Slave codes varied. Conditions of antebellum slavery By slavery was primarily located in the South, where it existed in many different forms. Slave. Slave life varied greatly depending on many factors. Life on the fields meant working sunup to sundown six days a week and having food sometimes not suitable for an animal to eat. Plantation slaves lived in small shacks with a dirt floor and little or no furniture. Life on large plantations with a cruel overseer was oftentimes the worst.Download	1,117	ENGLISH	1
The Thomas Edison mine, as the name implies, was developed by the famous inventor and entrepreneur Thomas Edison. While Edison is better known for inventions such as the first practical light bulb, he was also very involved in the mining industry. Edison pioneered new geophysical techniques, mineral extraction technologies, and developed the battery powered miners’ head lamp. He was instrumental in the discovery of nickel at Falconbridge, Ontario and also had interests in iron ore in New Jersey, and gold in New Mexico. Edison was heavily involved with the original Cobalt, Ontario silver rush, however it was not the silver he was after. At the turn of the 20th century, Edison was developing a new cobalt-Iron battery (US patent No. US678722A). Similar to today, Edison had difficulty sourcing sufficient supplies of cobalt. In order to keep the price down, Edison sent undercover representatives to Cobalt, Ontario to buy cobalt bearing minerals, which were produced as a by-products from silver mining in the area, for his battery manufacturing facility in New Jersey. He also used these representatives to attempt to buy high-grade cobalt silver mines and prospects. Eventually Edison acquired the Darby property (now the Thomas Edison Mine) in 1905. From 1905 to 1907 Edison remotely directed operations at the mine which included sinking two shafts to 150 feet, which were connected by an adit, as well as several exploration drifts and crosscuts. Between 6 and 8 tons of ore of unknown grade are reported to have been extracted, but no commercial production is recorded.	<urn:uuid:c991fa43-b246-45ed-a98f-fa15986bd0ab>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://edisoncobalt.com/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250625097.75/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124191133-20200124220133-00016.warc.gz	en	0.987723	314	3.390625	3	[ -0.22101862728595734, 0.5238942503929138, 0.2197243571281433, 0.11756255477666855, -0.08296562731266022, 0.04474395886063576, 0.5185440182685852, 0.18517856299877167, -0.43030816316604614, -0.19435033202171326, 0.17602460086345673, 0.06801240891218185, 0.008423860184848309, 0.2786714136600...	9	The Thomas Edison mine, as the name implies, was developed by the famous inventor and entrepreneur Thomas Edison. While Edison is better known for inventions such as the first practical light bulb, he was also very involved in the mining industry. Edison pioneered new geophysical techniques, mineral extraction technologies, and developed the battery powered miners’ head lamp. He was instrumental in the discovery of nickel at Falconbridge, Ontario and also had interests in iron ore in New Jersey, and gold in New Mexico. Edison was heavily involved with the original Cobalt, Ontario silver rush, however it was not the silver he was after. At the turn of the 20th century, Edison was developing a new cobalt-Iron battery (US patent No. US678722A). Similar to today, Edison had difficulty sourcing sufficient supplies of cobalt. In order to keep the price down, Edison sent undercover representatives to Cobalt, Ontario to buy cobalt bearing minerals, which were produced as a by-products from silver mining in the area, for his battery manufacturing facility in New Jersey. He also used these representatives to attempt to buy high-grade cobalt silver mines and prospects. Eventually Edison acquired the Darby property (now the Thomas Edison Mine) in 1905. From 1905 to 1907 Edison remotely directed operations at the mine which included sinking two shafts to 150 feet, which were connected by an adit, as well as several exploration drifts and crosscuts. Between 6 and 8 tons of ore of unknown grade are reported to have been extracted, but no commercial production is recorded.	333	ENGLISH	1
Lady Anne Clifford’s lineage had a profound influence on her life course. She was the only child of Countess Margaret Russell and George Clifford. Anne’s father was the Earl of Cumberland; the Clifford properties were under his name, and he had the right to bequeath them to whomever he saw fit. However, when making this decision, he had to follow an entail that kept the family property in the line of the oldest heir. In the year 1605, the Earl passed away and unjustly willed the family estate to his brother and nephew. It was this injustice that strengthened Lady Anne’s resolve to fight for her rights. People with the greatest impact Anne’s mother had the greatest influence on her life. Shortly after the Earl of Cumberland’s death in 1605, Margaret made claims on her daughter’s behalf for the family estate. This set the pace for what was to follow when Anne grew older. Although the court rejected those pleas in 1606, it soon upturned this decision in 1607 following Margaret’s work. She looked up the archival records of the Clifford family and made the case for Anne’s right to inherit the property. Regardless of the judges’ decision, Lady Anne’s uncle was unrelenting in his claim over the estates; he refused to hand them over to Anne. It was Margaret’s strong resolve that set the pace for what her daughter would eventually take up during her entire life (Williamson 41). Margaret stood by her daughter when all other parties opposed her. It was her mother who strengthened her resolve to fight the injustice that her father had accorded to her (Clifford 59). This parent emphasized the fact that her husband had broken the entail. She also spoke candidly to her daughter by telling her the realities of the situation, and her chances of success. At the time, her father had willed the property to his brother and nephew if the earl’s brother died. Throughout her life, Lady Anne’s cousin was only a few younger than her. Further, his father was alive at the time when the lady was contesting the will. It was highly unlikely that she would ever own the lands if she followed her father’s will. Lady Anne’s mother made these intricacies quite clear to her daughter and supported her throughout the battles. When Lady Anne’s mother passed away, Anne was deeply devastated by the death. She felt that the only person who supported her life’s quest was gone. Additionally, she emphasized the great values that her mother had instilled in her. In fact, Lady Anne asserted that her mother’s influence was of much greater importance to her than any nobility or lineage that other people desired. This explains why Anne went through great trouble to arrange for her mother’s burial. Several entries in her diaries reveal the pride that she had in her lineage. She documented even the most trivial deeds demonstrated by her kinsmen. It was her mother who initially informed her about this history. However, Anne did a lot of personal research regarding this issue, as well. Her mother ignited a passion for Westmorland during her early days. She was her educator and primary source of information regarding their family (Clifford 9). Even during the last portion of her journey, she was still able to instill a sense of pride in the land. Generally, Lady Anne’s life was influenced by her parents. In legal terms, she descended from a line of wealthy Clifford’s, most of who controlled a series of castles in the kingdom. Her parents’ decision to marry each other set the stage for what her life would become in the future. Nonetheless, the Lord of Cumberland, Anne’s father, was an extravagant man whose voyages left his family in profound debt. It appears that this senior Clifford made the decision to will his brother and nephew prior to his death because of these problems. He felt that his brother was wealthy enough to remove the Clifford properties from debt. Alternatively, it could be his bias towards female heirs that caused him to overlook his daughter in the will. Whichever the reason, the Earl of Cumberland affected his child’s life course by making a life-altering decision during her childhood. Lady Anne’s husbands had less impact on her life than did her parents. This partly stems from the nature of the relationship she had with them as well as the fact that they were two in number. Her first husband, Lord Dorset, felt that his wife was a lovable woman, but she lost her sense of reason whenever she focused on the family property (Clifford 33). Dorset cared little for the rich history and heritage of Lady Clifford’s family. He felt that it was troublesome to manage properties as tenants were stubborn and claimants to the properties were relentless. Instead, he felt that his wife ought to reach a compromise that would grant her vast sums of money in exchange for her birthright. It is for this reason that her husband became a negative force in her life. The Court of Commons held that all the lands that belonged to Lady Anne’s father were to be given to her uncle and cousin. Her husband tried to persuade her to abide by these rulings. Unlike her mother, who supported her and urged her to fight for her birthright, her husband sided with her foes in this matter (Williamson 12). He merely wanted a speedy conclusion to the dispute and possibly some monetary rewards. It was only through Lady Anne’s stubbornness that the Court failed to exert its decision upon her. She refused to sign the award and affirmed that the decision was not binding to her. On the 1st of January 1616, Lady Anne met the Archbishop of Canterbury. He tried as much as possible to persuade her to agree to the court’s decision. However, the Lady was adamant with regard to the matter. The clergyman came with a series of Lords and noblemen to convince her to sign the award. After much convincing, Lady Anne decided that she would buy more time by seeking counsel from her mother. She had to do this by the 22nd of March. At the time, Lord Dorset made it clear that she had to sign the award. He used all manner of tactics to get her to make this decision. For instance, on their way to her mother’s location, Westmoreland, her husband got into a bitter argument with her and even abandoned her in the midst of the journey. During this same period of time, he instructed his servants to leave his wife alone unless she chose to go back to London (Williamson 78). It was only her mother’s support that got her through such difficult times. As a result, her first husband did little to impact her life positively. He was a force of regression in her attempt to reclaim her inheritance. The threats of separation from her husband caused this noblewoman to think twice about her businesses as she wanted to preserve the marriage. Nonetheless, her commitment to the family fortune supplanted loyalty to an unsupportive husband. Her second husband was just as toxic as the first. However, he had some legal use to her that her first husband did not. While Anne’s mother had a more personal impact on her daughter, her second husband provided a legal one. Society, at the time, placed disproportionate value on a man’s opinion. Consequently, even though Phillip Herbert, the Lord of Pembroke, subjected Anne to profound stress, his opinions protected her. It was widely acknowledged that Herbert was deeply involved in politics. He believed in the strength of parliament over that of the crown. Conversely, Anne leaned more towards the crown than parliament. It is her husband’s inclinations that caused parliament to keep away from her inheritance. Therefore, her second husband’s impact on her life was more of a statement than a daily factor. Almost all the family members in Anne’s background opposed her right to inherit the family estates. Her father bequeathed it to someone else; her two husbands encouraged her to give it up while her uncle and nephew fought hard to own it. It was her mother who was the only family member that supported her claims. She initiated the battle in her early days and then nudged Anne on when all others opposed her. Therefore, it was her parent who had the greatest impact upon her. Clifford, Anne. The diaries of Lady Anne Clifford. London: The History Press, 2003. Print. Williamson, George. Lady Anne Clifford, her life, letters and work. 2010. Web.	<urn:uuid:b218eea4-c8ac-48c0-997e-0ac305238002>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://ivypanda.com/essays/lady-anne-clifford/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251799918.97/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129133601-20200129163601-00189.warc.gz	en	0.989218	1,803	3.484375	3	[ -0.4659997224807739, 0.4258047342300415, 0.2558329403400421, -0.35701799392700195, -0.27670538425445557, 0.17577089369297028, 0.25002115964889526, -0.10777800530195236, -0.11762725561857224, 0.0027876286767423153, 0.3130585551261902, -0.13141974806785583, 0.089443638920784, -0.010340237058...	1	Lady Anne Clifford’s lineage had a profound influence on her life course. She was the only child of Countess Margaret Russell and George Clifford. Anne’s father was the Earl of Cumberland; the Clifford properties were under his name, and he had the right to bequeath them to whomever he saw fit. However, when making this decision, he had to follow an entail that kept the family property in the line of the oldest heir. In the year 1605, the Earl passed away and unjustly willed the family estate to his brother and nephew. It was this injustice that strengthened Lady Anne’s resolve to fight for her rights. People with the greatest impact Anne’s mother had the greatest influence on her life. Shortly after the Earl of Cumberland’s death in 1605, Margaret made claims on her daughter’s behalf for the family estate. This set the pace for what was to follow when Anne grew older. Although the court rejected those pleas in 1606, it soon upturned this decision in 1607 following Margaret’s work. She looked up the archival records of the Clifford family and made the case for Anne’s right to inherit the property. Regardless of the judges’ decision, Lady Anne’s uncle was unrelenting in his claim over the estates; he refused to hand them over to Anne. It was Margaret’s strong resolve that set the pace for what her daughter would eventually take up during her entire life (Williamson 41). Margaret stood by her daughter when all other parties opposed her. It was her mother who strengthened her resolve to fight the injustice that her father had accorded to her (Clifford 59). This parent emphasized the fact that her husband had broken the entail. She also spoke candidly to her daughter by telling her the realities of the situation, and her chances of success. At the time, her father had willed the property to his brother and nephew if the earl’s brother died. Throughout her life, Lady Anne’s cousin was only a few younger than her. Further, his father was alive at the time when the lady was contesting the will. It was highly unlikely that she would ever own the lands if she followed her father’s will. Lady Anne’s mother made these intricacies quite clear to her daughter and supported her throughout the battles. When Lady Anne’s mother passed away, Anne was deeply devastated by the death. She felt that the only person who supported her life’s quest was gone. Additionally, she emphasized the great values that her mother had instilled in her. In fact, Lady Anne asserted that her mother’s influence was of much greater importance to her than any nobility or lineage that other people desired. This explains why Anne went through great trouble to arrange for her mother’s burial. Several entries in her diaries reveal the pride that she had in her lineage. She documented even the most trivial deeds demonstrated by her kinsmen. It was her mother who initially informed her about this history. However, Anne did a lot of personal research regarding this issue, as well. Her mother ignited a passion for Westmorland during her early days. She was her educator and primary source of information regarding their family (Clifford 9). Even during the last portion of her journey, she was still able to instill a sense of pride in the land. Generally, Lady Anne’s life was influenced by her parents. In legal terms, she descended from a line of wealthy Clifford’s, most of who controlled a series of castles in the kingdom. Her parents’ decision to marry each other set the stage for what her life would become in the future. Nonetheless, the Lord of Cumberland, Anne’s father, was an extravagant man whose voyages left his family in profound debt. It appears that this senior Clifford made the decision to will his brother and nephew prior to his death because of these problems. He felt that his brother was wealthy enough to remove the Clifford properties from debt. Alternatively, it could be his bias towards female heirs that caused him to overlook his daughter in the will. Whichever the reason, the Earl of Cumberland affected his child’s life course by making a life-altering decision during her childhood. Lady Anne’s husbands had less impact on her life than did her parents. This partly stems from the nature of the relationship she had with them as well as the fact that they were two in number. Her first husband, Lord Dorset, felt that his wife was a lovable woman, but she lost her sense of reason whenever she focused on the family property (Clifford 33). Dorset cared little for the rich history and heritage of Lady Clifford’s family. He felt that it was troublesome to manage properties as tenants were stubborn and claimants to the properties were relentless. Instead, he felt that his wife ought to reach a compromise that would grant her vast sums of money in exchange for her birthright. It is for this reason that her husband became a negative force in her life. The Court of Commons held that all the lands that belonged to Lady Anne’s father were to be given to her uncle and cousin. Her husband tried to persuade her to abide by these rulings. Unlike her mother, who supported her and urged her to fight for her birthright, her husband sided with her foes in this matter (Williamson 12). He merely wanted a speedy conclusion to the dispute and possibly some monetary rewards. It was only through Lady Anne’s stubbornness that the Court failed to exert its decision upon her. She refused to sign the award and affirmed that the decision was not binding to her. On the 1st of January 1616, Lady Anne met the Archbishop of Canterbury. He tried as much as possible to persuade her to agree to the court’s decision. However, the Lady was adamant with regard to the matter. The clergyman came with a series of Lords and noblemen to convince her to sign the award. After much convincing, Lady Anne decided that she would buy more time by seeking counsel from her mother. She had to do this by the 22nd of March. At the time, Lord Dorset made it clear that she had to sign the award. He used all manner of tactics to get her to make this decision. For instance, on their way to her mother’s location, Westmoreland, her husband got into a bitter argument with her and even abandoned her in the midst of the journey. During this same period of time, he instructed his servants to leave his wife alone unless she chose to go back to London (Williamson 78). It was only her mother’s support that got her through such difficult times. As a result, her first husband did little to impact her life positively. He was a force of regression in her attempt to reclaim her inheritance. The threats of separation from her husband caused this noblewoman to think twice about her businesses as she wanted to preserve the marriage. Nonetheless, her commitment to the family fortune supplanted loyalty to an unsupportive husband. Her second husband was just as toxic as the first. However, he had some legal use to her that her first husband did not. While Anne’s mother had a more personal impact on her daughter, her second husband provided a legal one. Society, at the time, placed disproportionate value on a man’s opinion. Consequently, even though Phillip Herbert, the Lord of Pembroke, subjected Anne to profound stress, his opinions protected her. It was widely acknowledged that Herbert was deeply involved in politics. He believed in the strength of parliament over that of the crown. Conversely, Anne leaned more towards the crown than parliament. It is her husband’s inclinations that caused parliament to keep away from her inheritance. Therefore, her second husband’s impact on her life was more of a statement than a daily factor. Almost all the family members in Anne’s background opposed her right to inherit the family estates. Her father bequeathed it to someone else; her two husbands encouraged her to give it up while her uncle and nephew fought hard to own it. It was her mother who was the only family member that supported her claims. She initiated the battle in her early days and then nudged Anne on when all others opposed her. Therefore, it was her parent who had the greatest impact upon her. Clifford, Anne. The diaries of Lady Anne Clifford. London: The History Press, 2003. Print. Williamson, George. Lady Anne Clifford, her life, letters and work. 2010. Web.	1,740	ENGLISH	1
History Of St. Margaret's Church The History of St Margaret’s Church The ancient Parish of Ifield covered about 4,000 acres (1,600 ha) of rural land in the north of Sussex, up to the border with Surrey. It was attached to the priory at nearby Rusper by the mid-13th century. The church was built in the centre of the small settlement of Ifield, which was recorded in the Doomsday Book of 1086.The present stone building is believed to stand on the site of an older wooden church—possibly dating from the 10th or 11th century. St Margaret's Church, Ifield By the 13th century, the church had a stone-built nave and chancel; the latter survives in the present building, as does a 12th-century font which was probably taken from the building in place at that time. A chancel arch was inserted between the nave and chancel in about 1300. The dedication to Saint Margaret is later: it was first recorded in 1489. Aisles were added to the nave in the 14th century, first on the north side and then on the south, doubling the seating capacity. More windows were also installed in the nave. A century later, a timber porch was built on the north side, the chancel arch was widened and a rood screen was installed, a standard feature of churches in the medieval era, as were wall decoration and paintings. Ecclesiastical feeling moved in favour of austere, whitewashed walls, screens and pillars by the 17th century, and Parliament decreed these changes in the 1640s. The vicar of Ifield, Reverend Robert Goddin, was a strict Protestant who was strongly opposed to Catholic-style worship, ceremony and church decoration, and he enforced the new style rigorously. The rood screen and all internal decoration were removed at this time. The next major work took place in 1760, when a gallery was built for the choir and the pews were replaced with large box-pews taken from St Margaret’s Church, Westminster (the parish church of the Palace of Westminster in London). More restoration took place in 1785. In 1847, the roof was improved and a vestry was built, incorporating wood from one of Crawley’s famous old trees, the “County Oak”, which had been cut down at that time. (The tree marked the ancient county boundary between Sussex and Surrey.) A barrel organ was installed in 1850. Between 1883 and 1884, architect and archaeologist Somers Clarke and fellow architect J. T. Micklethwait built a tall, substantial tower at the west end to replace an earlier small tower over the porch (which had itself replaced the much older bell turret); lengthened the nave; and removed a gallery at the west end of the church. The exterior walls are of rough-hewn stone, but this has been hidden under modern layers of cement. The church is approached from the east through a Lychgate at the churchyard entrance, at the end of Ifield Street, the ancient village street.	<urn:uuid:1103f172-6681-4759-8849-a5a4ae792b0b>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.ifieldparish.org/history-of-st-margaret-s-church	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250620381.59/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124130719-20200124155719-00402.warc.gz	en	0.986114	648	3.359375	3	[ 0.22541402280330658, 0.04978545755147934, 0.2786305546760559, -0.16205286979675293, 0.03315369784832001, -0.1484920084476471, -0.7405598163604736, 0.057410791516304016, 0.2933064103126526, -0.12744104862213135, 0.06262354552745819, -0.4721490740776062, 0.20059457421302795, 0.18382532894611...	7	History Of St. Margaret's Church The History of St Margaret’s Church The ancient Parish of Ifield covered about 4,000 acres (1,600 ha) of rural land in the north of Sussex, up to the border with Surrey. It was attached to the priory at nearby Rusper by the mid-13th century. The church was built in the centre of the small settlement of Ifield, which was recorded in the Doomsday Book of 1086.The present stone building is believed to stand on the site of an older wooden church—possibly dating from the 10th or 11th century. St Margaret's Church, Ifield By the 13th century, the church had a stone-built nave and chancel; the latter survives in the present building, as does a 12th-century font which was probably taken from the building in place at that time. A chancel arch was inserted between the nave and chancel in about 1300. The dedication to Saint Margaret is later: it was first recorded in 1489. Aisles were added to the nave in the 14th century, first on the north side and then on the south, doubling the seating capacity. More windows were also installed in the nave. A century later, a timber porch was built on the north side, the chancel arch was widened and a rood screen was installed, a standard feature of churches in the medieval era, as were wall decoration and paintings. Ecclesiastical feeling moved in favour of austere, whitewashed walls, screens and pillars by the 17th century, and Parliament decreed these changes in the 1640s. The vicar of Ifield, Reverend Robert Goddin, was a strict Protestant who was strongly opposed to Catholic-style worship, ceremony and church decoration, and he enforced the new style rigorously. The rood screen and all internal decoration were removed at this time. The next major work took place in 1760, when a gallery was built for the choir and the pews were replaced with large box-pews taken from St Margaret’s Church, Westminster (the parish church of the Palace of Westminster in London). More restoration took place in 1785. In 1847, the roof was improved and a vestry was built, incorporating wood from one of Crawley’s famous old trees, the “County Oak”, which had been cut down at that time. (The tree marked the ancient county boundary between Sussex and Surrey.) A barrel organ was installed in 1850. Between 1883 and 1884, architect and archaeologist Somers Clarke and fellow architect J. T. Micklethwait built a tall, substantial tower at the west end to replace an earlier small tower over the porch (which had itself replaced the much older bell turret); lengthened the nave; and removed a gallery at the west end of the church. The exterior walls are of rough-hewn stone, but this has been hidden under modern layers of cement. The church is approached from the east through a Lychgate at the churchyard entrance, at the end of Ifield Street, the ancient village street.	678	ENGLISH	1
Male elephants will shake their ears more when they are ready to mate than at other times, this allows them to spread their scent by a wider distance to attract potential female partners. Older males, 40 to 50 years old are the most likely to mate with females. The females are ready to reproduce around 14 years of age. There is much aggression between males for the rights of the couple and therefore to reproduction, the younger can not compete with the strength of the older elephants, which is why they do not get to mate until they are much more mature. This is a fact, however, that tends to make it more difficult to increase the number of existing elephants. Males rarely physically harm each other when they are fighting for the right to mate or reproduce. Most of the time the younger males flee from the older ones. There are opinions that this behavior is not out of fear but out of respect and admiration for the elderly. However, there have been documented cases of male elephants practicing sexual activities among themselves due to their need to reproduce, but not being able to do so due to lack of females at their disposal. This is the reason why in most zoos they often have one male and one female or two females instead of two males. Elephants have the longest record of time from conception until the offspring is born, this period is 22 months. They can weigh up to 260 pounds at birth, and these young elephants are extremely cute with their long ears and long tails. You may not realize it, but they are blind at birth. They are well cared for within the herd of elephants. Your own mother, as well as the other females will make sure that the baby is well protected. Babies often follow their mothers when the flock is moving, to ensure that in many cases they wrap the mother's tail with their trunks. Females who do not have elephant babies tend to the young as if they were their own. This happens so that mothers can feed themselves as they need to to produce enough milk for the young. A young elephant can drink up to 10 liters of this milk every day. It is believed that elephant calves do not have the same high level of survival instincts as other animals, which is why they are so dependent on their mothers and the other females in the herd. They are quicker to learn new skills through observation, are praised when they do well and can be scolded when they do not follow the rules. Mothers give milk to their children for about 4 years, although if they get pregnant in that period of time she will wean them earlier. So that the mothers can get enough food to create the milk, they nurse their young for part of the day and then other females of the herd watch the young. Although babies can begin to consume plants when they are about one year old, they need the nutritional value of milk to grow and thrive.	<urn:uuid:ef05034a-ef51-44fc-9b2a-180e2d329fd9>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://blog-city.info/en/theelephants.php?Page=3	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250615407.46/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124040939-20200124065939-00347.warc.gz	en	0.980231	589	3.421875	3	[ -0.08464423567056656, -0.07411690056324005, 0.15845008194446564, -0.1358916312456131, -0.20695775747299194, 0.23041827976703644, 0.021617740392684937, -0.19638456404209137, 0.08039107918739319, 0.17422005534172058, 0.2457730919122696, -0.703408420085907, 0.13718774914741516, 0.066791281104...	2	Male elephants will shake their ears more when they are ready to mate than at other times, this allows them to spread their scent by a wider distance to attract potential female partners. Older males, 40 to 50 years old are the most likely to mate with females. The females are ready to reproduce around 14 years of age. There is much aggression between males for the rights of the couple and therefore to reproduction, the younger can not compete with the strength of the older elephants, which is why they do not get to mate until they are much more mature. This is a fact, however, that tends to make it more difficult to increase the number of existing elephants. Males rarely physically harm each other when they are fighting for the right to mate or reproduce. Most of the time the younger males flee from the older ones. There are opinions that this behavior is not out of fear but out of respect and admiration for the elderly. However, there have been documented cases of male elephants practicing sexual activities among themselves due to their need to reproduce, but not being able to do so due to lack of females at their disposal. This is the reason why in most zoos they often have one male and one female or two females instead of two males. Elephants have the longest record of time from conception until the offspring is born, this period is 22 months. They can weigh up to 260 pounds at birth, and these young elephants are extremely cute with their long ears and long tails. You may not realize it, but they are blind at birth. They are well cared for within the herd of elephants. Your own mother, as well as the other females will make sure that the baby is well protected. Babies often follow their mothers when the flock is moving, to ensure that in many cases they wrap the mother's tail with their trunks. Females who do not have elephant babies tend to the young as if they were their own. This happens so that mothers can feed themselves as they need to to produce enough milk for the young. A young elephant can drink up to 10 liters of this milk every day. It is believed that elephant calves do not have the same high level of survival instincts as other animals, which is why they are so dependent on their mothers and the other females in the herd. They are quicker to learn new skills through observation, are praised when they do well and can be scolded when they do not follow the rules. Mothers give milk to their children for about 4 years, although if they get pregnant in that period of time she will wean them earlier. So that the mothers can get enough food to create the milk, they nurse their young for part of the day and then other females of the herd watch the young. Although babies can begin to consume plants when they are about one year old, they need the nutritional value of milk to grow and thrive.	592	ENGLISH	1
In Les Miserables, why does Marius not live with his father, Georges Pontmercy? Marius lives with his grandfather, a royalist, who considers the boy's father, George Pontmercy "a leper" because of his having been a heroic soldier, but one who served Napoleon. As a child, Marius heard the whisperings about his father, and he grew to think of his father with shame. Whenever Pontmercy wrote letters to Marius, his grandfather threw them away. But, after his father dies, Marius learns the truth as old M. Mabeuf, the churchwarden, tells Marius that his father came every Sunday to watch his son as he was accompanied by his aunt who took him to Mass. Further, M. Mabeuf informs Marius that his father loved his son deeply, but "sacrificed himself for the sake of his son's future happiness" as the family threatened to disinherit the boy if he had any contact with his parent. When, therefore, Marius went to Paris and the library of the School of Law and asked to see the file of his father, he begins "to worship his father." In contrast to what he has been told, Marius forms a true picture of the gallant and gentle-hearted man, a mingling of a lion and lamb, who had been his father. In addition, Marius realizes, too, that he does not know his country, either. But, now he admires his father and adores his country."What had been for him a sunset was now a dawn." In fact, he so admires his father now that he wears "something that hung by a black ribbon" on the blue medal of the Legion d'Honneur. check Approved by eNotes Editorial	<urn:uuid:9fe9bcb7-4631-4b8b-9f8c-977fb0d27d58>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.enotes.com/homework-help/why-doesnt-marius-live-with-his-father-pontmercy-378974	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250607407.48/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122191620-20200122220620-00015.warc.gz	en	0.994742	379	3.28125	3	[ -0.08807346969842911, 0.8181659579277039, 0.19200573861598969, -0.6659030914306641, -0.24089904129505157, -0.24580875039100647, 0.3406829535961151, 0.16036154329776764, 0.18593621253967285, -0.48018571734428406, 0.3449792265892029, -0.09076079726219177, 0.15461421012878418, 0.4673084914684...	1	In Les Miserables, why does Marius not live with his father, Georges Pontmercy? Marius lives with his grandfather, a royalist, who considers the boy's father, George Pontmercy "a leper" because of his having been a heroic soldier, but one who served Napoleon. As a child, Marius heard the whisperings about his father, and he grew to think of his father with shame. Whenever Pontmercy wrote letters to Marius, his grandfather threw them away. But, after his father dies, Marius learns the truth as old M. Mabeuf, the churchwarden, tells Marius that his father came every Sunday to watch his son as he was accompanied by his aunt who took him to Mass. Further, M. Mabeuf informs Marius that his father loved his son deeply, but "sacrificed himself for the sake of his son's future happiness" as the family threatened to disinherit the boy if he had any contact with his parent. When, therefore, Marius went to Paris and the library of the School of Law and asked to see the file of his father, he begins "to worship his father." In contrast to what he has been told, Marius forms a true picture of the gallant and gentle-hearted man, a mingling of a lion and lamb, who had been his father. In addition, Marius realizes, too, that he does not know his country, either. But, now he admires his father and adores his country."What had been for him a sunset was now a dawn." In fact, he so admires his father now that he wears "something that hung by a black ribbon" on the blue medal of the Legion d'Honneur. check Approved by eNotes Editorial	368	ENGLISH	1
Despite great obstacles, Jews throughout occupied Europe attempted armed resistance against the Germans and their Axis partners. They faced overwhelming odds and desperate scenarios, including lack of weapons and training, operating in hostile zones, parting from family members, and facing an ever-present Nazi terror. Yet thousands resisted by joining or forming partisan units. Among them was Sam Lato. Sam Lato was born in the town of Baranovichi, Poland, on February 24, 1925. East of Warsaw, Baranovichi became part of Soviet-annexed Poland in 1939. Sam and his family would not have direct contact with the Nazis until the German invasion of the Soviet Union. In the summer of 1941, his town was occupied. A few months later the Baranovichi ghetto was created. Sam became a part of the resistance in the ghetto before he learned about the partisans. In Baranovichi, he made cigarette lighters to barter on the black market, and smuggled in medicine and bullets. In the spring of 1942, the first major massacres began in Baranovichi. Through luck, Sam was spared from death numerous times, but in the autumn, in the wake of a second major slaughter, he decided to take his chances and flee into the forest. Many of the other young men in the Baranovichi ghetto had the same idea; when Sam finally reached a partisan encampment he learned that there were already more than a hundred Jews from Baranovichi in the brigade. On one of his first missions, Sam met a young female partisan who made a deep impression on him. They bonded quickly, and within months they were conducting missions together as husband and wife. Initially Sam’s brigade suffered from a lack of supplies—they had no explosives to carry out sabotage and the camp itself was ravaged with typhus-infected lice. But in the spring of 1943 they began to receive direct support from Moscow. New clothes, weapons, and medicine were air dropped to them by Russian planes and elite Soviet paratroopers were sent in to help them coordinate their activities. Sam was chosen as a paratrooper auxiliary, accompanying the Russians on their missions. In 1944, Sam was liberated by the Russians and joined the Red Army in their advance to the Baltic Sea. Sam and his wife remained in the Soviet Union for several years following the war, but eventually they defected and fled to West Germany, ultimately immigrating to the United States, where Sam lives today. Critical Thinking Questions - What pressures and motivations may have influenced Sam Lato's decisions and actions? Are these factors unique to this history or universal? - How can societies, communities, and individuals reinforce and strengthen the willingness to stand up for others?	<urn:uuid:1a5116e8-82e1-4729-8c50-7e39258a3ee9>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/sam-lato	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606975.49/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122101729-20200122130729-00042.warc.gz	en	0.984506	555	3.65625	4	[ -0.4116393029689789, 0.3977244794368744, -0.15325112640857697, 0.18866334855556488, 0.21971280872821808, 0.21935239434242249, 0.1344752013683319, 0.3626508116722107, -0.2221914827823639, -0.218118816614151, 0.07703188806772232, 0.09236953407526016, 0.2869073748588562, 0.480581134557724, ...	13	Despite great obstacles, Jews throughout occupied Europe attempted armed resistance against the Germans and their Axis partners. They faced overwhelming odds and desperate scenarios, including lack of weapons and training, operating in hostile zones, parting from family members, and facing an ever-present Nazi terror. Yet thousands resisted by joining or forming partisan units. Among them was Sam Lato. Sam Lato was born in the town of Baranovichi, Poland, on February 24, 1925. East of Warsaw, Baranovichi became part of Soviet-annexed Poland in 1939. Sam and his family would not have direct contact with the Nazis until the German invasion of the Soviet Union. In the summer of 1941, his town was occupied. A few months later the Baranovichi ghetto was created. Sam became a part of the resistance in the ghetto before he learned about the partisans. In Baranovichi, he made cigarette lighters to barter on the black market, and smuggled in medicine and bullets. In the spring of 1942, the first major massacres began in Baranovichi. Through luck, Sam was spared from death numerous times, but in the autumn, in the wake of a second major slaughter, he decided to take his chances and flee into the forest. Many of the other young men in the Baranovichi ghetto had the same idea; when Sam finally reached a partisan encampment he learned that there were already more than a hundred Jews from Baranovichi in the brigade. On one of his first missions, Sam met a young female partisan who made a deep impression on him. They bonded quickly, and within months they were conducting missions together as husband and wife. Initially Sam’s brigade suffered from a lack of supplies—they had no explosives to carry out sabotage and the camp itself was ravaged with typhus-infected lice. But in the spring of 1943 they began to receive direct support from Moscow. New clothes, weapons, and medicine were air dropped to them by Russian planes and elite Soviet paratroopers were sent in to help them coordinate their activities. Sam was chosen as a paratrooper auxiliary, accompanying the Russians on their missions. In 1944, Sam was liberated by the Russians and joined the Red Army in their advance to the Baltic Sea. Sam and his wife remained in the Soviet Union for several years following the war, but eventually they defected and fled to West Germany, ultimately immigrating to the United States, where Sam lives today. Critical Thinking Questions - What pressures and motivations may have influenced Sam Lato's decisions and actions? Are these factors unique to this history or universal? - How can societies, communities, and individuals reinforce and strengthen the willingness to stand up for others?	577	ENGLISH	1
Across much of the South, the month of April has long been celebrated as Confederate History or Heritage Month. Some states have debated whether or not to continue the tradition of honoring their Confederate ancestors due to political correctness. Like everything related to the Confederacy, certain groups are trying to erase history by expecting Southerners to stop honoring their ancestors. After the war concluded, very few Southern soldiers expressed regret for fighting for the Confederacy. On the contrary, most were proud to have fought against northern aggression. The way they saw it, they were not fighting for the continuation of slavery, but for the preservation of state’s rights. General Robert E. Lee, who was commissioned with the U.S. Army when the war broke out, resigned because he decided it was better to side with his state than to fight for the U.S. government as a whole. Colonel John S. Mosby was quoted after the war as saying, “I am not ashamed of having fought on the side of slavery – a soldier fights for his country – right or wrong – he is not responsible for the political merits of the course he fights in.” This sentiment holds true throughout the course of time, and is still true today. So who are we to judge the sentiments of soldiers who served 150 years ago? Beliefs were very different then, but they shouldn’t be considered as right or wrong. That is merely the way it was. On this, the final day of Confederate Heritage Month, we should take a moment to consider all the suffering and sacrifice that Southern soldiers went through to protect and defend their homeland. One hundred and fifty years ago, the war they fought in to preserve their heritage came to a close. Hopefully, the tradition of Confederate History Month won’t come to a close as well.	<urn:uuid:4910c1ae-240a-44ff-a6c8-b320dc8e16e5>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://jdrhawkins.com/tag/northern-agression/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251689924.62/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126135207-20200126165207-00265.warc.gz	en	0.98189	369	3.421875	3	[ -0.44965091347694397, 0.6973533034324646, 0.36673104763031006, -0.22725337743759155, -0.08385519683361053, 0.03748168796300888, -0.1739504337310791, -0.3071736991405487, -0.40184977650642395, 0.10627053678035736, 0.11446287482976913, 0.24887704849243164, 0.1977313756942749, 0.3931795656681...	4	Across much of the South, the month of April has long been celebrated as Confederate History or Heritage Month. Some states have debated whether or not to continue the tradition of honoring their Confederate ancestors due to political correctness. Like everything related to the Confederacy, certain groups are trying to erase history by expecting Southerners to stop honoring their ancestors. After the war concluded, very few Southern soldiers expressed regret for fighting for the Confederacy. On the contrary, most were proud to have fought against northern aggression. The way they saw it, they were not fighting for the continuation of slavery, but for the preservation of state’s rights. General Robert E. Lee, who was commissioned with the U.S. Army when the war broke out, resigned because he decided it was better to side with his state than to fight for the U.S. government as a whole. Colonel John S. Mosby was quoted after the war as saying, “I am not ashamed of having fought on the side of slavery – a soldier fights for his country – right or wrong – he is not responsible for the political merits of the course he fights in.” This sentiment holds true throughout the course of time, and is still true today. So who are we to judge the sentiments of soldiers who served 150 years ago? Beliefs were very different then, but they shouldn’t be considered as right or wrong. That is merely the way it was. On this, the final day of Confederate Heritage Month, we should take a moment to consider all the suffering and sacrifice that Southern soldiers went through to protect and defend their homeland. One hundred and fifty years ago, the war they fought in to preserve their heritage came to a close. Hopefully, the tradition of Confederate History Month won’t come to a close as well.	360	ENGLISH	1
The first elections to the Assembly of Representatives were held amongst members of the Jewish community in Mandatory Palestine on 19 April 1920, except in Jerusalem where voting took place on 3 May. Ahdut HaAvoda led by David Ben-Gurion emerged as the largest party, winning 70 of the 314 seats. Following the British conquest of Ottoman Palestine in 1917, Jewish leaders met in Petah Tikva on 17 November to discuss the formation of a representative convention. After Jerusalem fell to the British, another convention was held, this time in Jaffa, to discuss the establishment of an organisation for the Jews of Palestine. A committee was formed with the mandate to hold elections to a Constituent Assembly. With northern Palestine still held by the Ottomans, a second convention was held in Jaffa in July 1918 and elections were scheduled to be held by the end of 1918. However, after the armistice was signed in November, delegates were required to represent Palestinian Jews at the peace conference. A third convention was held in Jaffa on 18 December, to which every settlement, community and political party were invited.Chaim Weizmann and Nahum Sokolow were chosen to represent the community at the peace conference. The elections were then postponed several times, before they were fixed for 26 October 1919. However, they were postponed again as Weizmann was worried that internal divisions would weaken the Jewish negotiating position. The date was finally set for 19 April 1920 after it was confirmed that the British would have the Mandate for Palestine. At the first meeting in Jaffa, it was decided that the election would be held using secret balloting, and would be direct. However, no agreement was made on women's suffrage. The second meeting confirmed that men and women over the age of 21 would be entitled to vote, although the issue of women candidates remained unresolved. The issue was raised at the third Jaffa convention, and despite opposition from Orthodox Jews, it was decided that women would be allowed to stand as candidates. However, ultimately the Orthodox held separate elections in Jerusalem on 3 May, from which women were banned from participating. Voters elected one member for every 80 voters, except for the Orthodox, who elected one for every 40 voters on the basis that women were banned from their vote. A total of 263 delegates were elected in the general voting, and another 51 by Orthodox voters. \|Youth of Israel Union\|\|4\| \|Mizrahi Youth Union\|\|2\| Around 22,000 of the 26,000 registered voters participated in the election.	<urn:uuid:3ba3847d-4952-4559-a556-45512b26d47b>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://popflock.com/learn?s=1920_Assembly_of_Representatives_election	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250597458.22/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120052454-20200120080454-00378.warc.gz	en	0.980468	527	3.921875	4	[ -0.09224031865596771, 0.18184727430343628, -0.08651165664196014, -0.09337085485458374, -0.41271069645881653, 0.4087233543395996, -0.47137510776519775, 0.24844205379486084, 0.13882608711719513, -0.006943712010979652, 0.010567654855549335, -0.2677752375602722, 0.24918389320373535, 0.15280354...	1	The first elections to the Assembly of Representatives were held amongst members of the Jewish community in Mandatory Palestine on 19 April 1920, except in Jerusalem where voting took place on 3 May. Ahdut HaAvoda led by David Ben-Gurion emerged as the largest party, winning 70 of the 314 seats. Following the British conquest of Ottoman Palestine in 1917, Jewish leaders met in Petah Tikva on 17 November to discuss the formation of a representative convention. After Jerusalem fell to the British, another convention was held, this time in Jaffa, to discuss the establishment of an organisation for the Jews of Palestine. A committee was formed with the mandate to hold elections to a Constituent Assembly. With northern Palestine still held by the Ottomans, a second convention was held in Jaffa in July 1918 and elections were scheduled to be held by the end of 1918. However, after the armistice was signed in November, delegates were required to represent Palestinian Jews at the peace conference. A third convention was held in Jaffa on 18 December, to which every settlement, community and political party were invited.Chaim Weizmann and Nahum Sokolow were chosen to represent the community at the peace conference. The elections were then postponed several times, before they were fixed for 26 October 1919. However, they were postponed again as Weizmann was worried that internal divisions would weaken the Jewish negotiating position. The date was finally set for 19 April 1920 after it was confirmed that the British would have the Mandate for Palestine. At the first meeting in Jaffa, it was decided that the election would be held using secret balloting, and would be direct. However, no agreement was made on women's suffrage. The second meeting confirmed that men and women over the age of 21 would be entitled to vote, although the issue of women candidates remained unresolved. The issue was raised at the third Jaffa convention, and despite opposition from Orthodox Jews, it was decided that women would be allowed to stand as candidates. However, ultimately the Orthodox held separate elections in Jerusalem on 3 May, from which women were banned from participating. Voters elected one member for every 80 voters, except for the Orthodox, who elected one for every 40 voters on the basis that women were banned from their vote. A total of 263 delegates were elected in the general voting, and another 51 by Orthodox voters. \|Youth of Israel Union\|\|4\| \|Mizrahi Youth Union\|\|2\| Around 22,000 of the 26,000 registered voters participated in the election.	576	ENGLISH	1
Just as the Renaissance saw a great evolution in European art the Scientific Revolution of approximately the same timeframe was a huge evolution in European science. The works of scientists such as Copernicus Galileo and Newton significantly changed Europeans mindsets. Their work was definitely affected by important components of the societies that they lived in. Religious controversy hindered the work of scientists by creating barriers to the spread of scientific ideas. Leaders supported science for their own political purposes helping in its advance. Although there was widespread support for science the norms of society crippled the strength and effectiveness of those who hoped to further and embrace scientific ideas. First, a major factor in the endeavors of these scientists was the staunch opposition of the Catholic Church. The Church had a great deal of control over science at this point in history as evidenced by Galileo's experience with the Inquisition where he was punished by the Church for his work in favor of heliocentricity. Scientists were driven to ingratiate themselves with the Church to make sure that their work would be able to reach enough people. This is certainly seen in the writing of Copernicus to Pope Paul III when he states. It is to your Holiness rather than to anyone else that I have chosen to dedicate these studies of mine.	<urn:uuid:7b611fac-28d0-457c-a8c2-96bfa211a35f>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://noplag.com/free-essays/europe/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592394.9/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118081234-20200118105234-00252.warc.gz	en	0.983224	248	3.453125	3	[ 0.031045204028487206, 0.31917282938957214, -0.12218675762414932, 0.05276612192392349, -0.006512857507914305, -0.09956502914428711, -0.25176069140434265, 0.709513247013092, -0.07969073206186295, 0.22836844623088837, -0.13699764013290405, -0.270048588514328, 0.1614358127117157, -0.1712832748...	18	Just as the Renaissance saw a great evolution in European art the Scientific Revolution of approximately the same timeframe was a huge evolution in European science. The works of scientists such as Copernicus Galileo and Newton significantly changed Europeans mindsets. Their work was definitely affected by important components of the societies that they lived in. Religious controversy hindered the work of scientists by creating barriers to the spread of scientific ideas. Leaders supported science for their own political purposes helping in its advance. Although there was widespread support for science the norms of society crippled the strength and effectiveness of those who hoped to further and embrace scientific ideas. First, a major factor in the endeavors of these scientists was the staunch opposition of the Catholic Church. The Church had a great deal of control over science at this point in history as evidenced by Galileo's experience with the Inquisition where he was punished by the Church for his work in favor of heliocentricity. Scientists were driven to ingratiate themselves with the Church to make sure that their work would be able to reach enough people. This is certainly seen in the writing of Copernicus to Pope Paul III when he states. It is to your Holiness rather than to anyone else that I have chosen to dedicate these studies of mine.	250	ENGLISH	1
The history of Ecuadorian art would not be the same without this great master. Camilo Egas was one of the country's most important artists, who is mainly known for his paintings. Born at the end of the 19th century, he made an invaluable contribution for many years to the development of Ecuadorian identity. Over a number of different rooms, this centre focuses on the various phases of his work. These phases included his involvement in national expressionism, where he played a key role in shaping national identity during the 20th century. His Indigenist creations are also of great significance, a retrospective phase in which he focused heavily on the perception of the pre-Colombian world and on indigenous studies, leading to his later period of formalistic romanticism. However, it is not just Egas' paintings that are so important, but the powerful message behind his art, linked to the need of a nation to define and safeguard its own unique identity.	<urn:uuid:ef41bd1c-63dd-4a91-b062-29a149182f57>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.iberia.com/us/destination-guide/quito/mueso-camilo-egas/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250593937.27/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118193018-20200118221018-00282.warc.gz	en	0.982789	194	3.40625	3	[ 0.25309455394744873, 0.21314407885074615, 0.867888331413269, -0.0070040603168308735, -0.11259898543357849, 0.3640698194503784, 0.23741799592971802, -0.031177418306469917, -0.1543532907962799, 0.02946239337325096, -0.47800809144973755, -0.02114589884877205, -0.2340855896472931, 0.3549535572...	3	The history of Ecuadorian art would not be the same without this great master. Camilo Egas was one of the country's most important artists, who is mainly known for his paintings. Born at the end of the 19th century, he made an invaluable contribution for many years to the development of Ecuadorian identity. Over a number of different rooms, this centre focuses on the various phases of his work. These phases included his involvement in national expressionism, where he played a key role in shaping national identity during the 20th century. His Indigenist creations are also of great significance, a retrospective phase in which he focused heavily on the perception of the pre-Colombian world and on indigenous studies, leading to his later period of formalistic romanticism. However, it is not just Egas' paintings that are so important, but the powerful message behind his art, linked to the need of a nation to define and safeguard its own unique identity.	196	ENGLISH	1
Clara Barton was one of the most prominent medical volunteers in the Civil War and helped revolutionize battlefield medicine well after it ended. Please consider these ten facts to expand your appreciation for this important and influential woman. Fact #1: Barton had little to no practical medical experience before the outbreak of the war. She mostly worked as a clerk for her older brother and at the Patent Office, and as a teacher. American Battlefield Trust Fact #2: She was very unpopular amongst her co-workers in the Patent Office. Her unpopularity was not only for working in a government job as a woman, but also for her outspoken abolitionism, which eventually got her fired in 1857. Fact #3: She offered her services to both Union soldiers and Confederate prisoners alike. In her diaries, she notes some of the appalling conditions wounded soldiers were forced to deal with as they were either dying or recovering. In one account around the time of the Battle of Fredericksburg, she recorded that she "went to the old National Hotel...some hundreds (perhaps 400) western men, sadly wounded, all on the floors – had nothing to eat." It was sights like these that further inspired her efforts to care for the wounded. Fact #4: Much of the money she raised to support her efforts came out of her own pocket. It was Barton who bought most of her supplies and paid for their transportation to and around battlefields. She was, however, later reimbursed by Congress and supplemented with money from donations across the country. Fact #5: She was given many affectionate nicknames for her service. These included “The American Nightingale,” in reference to Florence Nightingale of Crimean War fame, and “Angel of the Battlefield.” American Battlefield Trust Fact #6: Barton put herself at risk from infection many times due to her work. In South Carolina, she nearly died from illness and had to be relocated to one of her own hospitals on Hilton Head island until she recovered. Fact #7: Towards the end of the war, Barton established the Bureau of Records of Missing Men of the Armies of the United States. This board sought to locate soldiers who had gone Missing in Action, as well as identify those buried in anonymous graves. Through her work, she and her staff were able to identify around 22,000 missing soldiers, and the DC office where she worked is now a museum. Fact #8: After the war, Clara Barton shifted her efforts from promoting public health to women's rights. She was well acquainted with Women’s Rights leaders like Susan B. Anthony, and shared her goals of promoting women’s suffrage. Fact #9: She founded the American Red Cross in 1880. She modeled the organization after its international counterpart, and served as its first president from 1881 to 1904. She led the organization in aiding victims of natural disasters in America and abroad. Clara Barton (National Archives) Fact #10: She continued to lend aid to the American military well into old age. She volunteered her medical and philanthropic services for the final time in Cuba during the Spanish American war, aiding refugees and prisoners.	<urn:uuid:c8013e32-7c82-4497-a34e-bc9ac1790e03>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/10-facts-clara-barton	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251687958.71/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126074227-20200126104227-00116.warc.gz	en	0.984075	661	4	4	[ -0.3484283983707428, 0.22713150084018707, 0.2697771191596985, 0.22655422985553741, 0.10872842371463776, 0.3574105501174927, 0.5492610931396484, 0.3877367377281189, -0.14207723736763, 0.3729705810546875, 0.10980050265789032, -0.3108326196670532, -0.09818775951862335, 0.33998197317123413, ...	4	Clara Barton was one of the most prominent medical volunteers in the Civil War and helped revolutionize battlefield medicine well after it ended. Please consider these ten facts to expand your appreciation for this important and influential woman. Fact #1: Barton had little to no practical medical experience before the outbreak of the war. She mostly worked as a clerk for her older brother and at the Patent Office, and as a teacher. American Battlefield Trust Fact #2: She was very unpopular amongst her co-workers in the Patent Office. Her unpopularity was not only for working in a government job as a woman, but also for her outspoken abolitionism, which eventually got her fired in 1857. Fact #3: She offered her services to both Union soldiers and Confederate prisoners alike. In her diaries, she notes some of the appalling conditions wounded soldiers were forced to deal with as they were either dying or recovering. In one account around the time of the Battle of Fredericksburg, she recorded that she "went to the old National Hotel...some hundreds (perhaps 400) western men, sadly wounded, all on the floors – had nothing to eat." It was sights like these that further inspired her efforts to care for the wounded. Fact #4: Much of the money she raised to support her efforts came out of her own pocket. It was Barton who bought most of her supplies and paid for their transportation to and around battlefields. She was, however, later reimbursed by Congress and supplemented with money from donations across the country. Fact #5: She was given many affectionate nicknames for her service. These included “The American Nightingale,” in reference to Florence Nightingale of Crimean War fame, and “Angel of the Battlefield.” American Battlefield Trust Fact #6: Barton put herself at risk from infection many times due to her work. In South Carolina, she nearly died from illness and had to be relocated to one of her own hospitals on Hilton Head island until she recovered. Fact #7: Towards the end of the war, Barton established the Bureau of Records of Missing Men of the Armies of the United States. This board sought to locate soldiers who had gone Missing in Action, as well as identify those buried in anonymous graves. Through her work, she and her staff were able to identify around 22,000 missing soldiers, and the DC office where she worked is now a museum. Fact #8: After the war, Clara Barton shifted her efforts from promoting public health to women's rights. She was well acquainted with Women’s Rights leaders like Susan B. Anthony, and shared her goals of promoting women’s suffrage. Fact #9: She founded the American Red Cross in 1880. She modeled the organization after its international counterpart, and served as its first president from 1881 to 1904. She led the organization in aiding victims of natural disasters in America and abroad. Clara Barton (National Archives) Fact #10: She continued to lend aid to the American military well into old age. She volunteered her medical and philanthropic services for the final time in Cuba during the Spanish American war, aiding refugees and prisoners.	653	ENGLISH	1
\|Photo by John Eaton, ca. 1895\| Prior to the arrival of the European settlers, caves were important shelters for the American Indians. They used caves that had dry floors and large openings (where smoke from campfires could not collect) for shelter and for dwellings. Indians used several caves along the Meramec River, but they seldom went beyond the entrances. The natural entrance to Onondaga Cave is low and water filled; it was probably never used by Indians. Several caves exist along the Meramec River. Being proximal to water, some were likely used by Native Americans. It remains unknown if Onondaga Cave was ever used by any indigenous peoples. To date, no evidence of prehistoric use has been identified. Because the natural entrance to Onondaga Cave is water filled and situated in the flood plain its location may have been less appealing. However, caves had special significance for Native Americans. It is certainly possible that Onondaga, or any of the caves located in the park, could have been used in ways that did not leave tangible remains, perhaps as a spiritual or ceremonial location. For example, the Osage Nation, descendants of the prehistoric inhabitants of the Meramec River area, have recognized Onondaga Cave as one of many sacred sites in Missouri. The combination of water and cave has a very powerful meaning to the Osage and the ancestral people that would have considered Onondaga Cave a significant part of the landscape. The early European settlers used caves to protect and feed themselves. They mined the mineral saltpeter from the caves. Saltpeter was used in making gunpowder and comes from the nitrates in the cave clay reacting with the rock to make calcium nitrate. The nitrates in the clay came from either bat excrement or nitrogen fixing bacteria in the clay. The saltpeter was extracted from the clay and refined; then it was mixed with potash to make potassium nitrate and lime. Caves supplied the early settler with gunpowder for hunting and for protection from Indians and outlaws. Caves in Missouri were also an important source of saltpeter during the War of 1812 and the Civil War. The Union Army got its supply of gunpowder from elsewhere, but the caves were mined for saltpeter to supply the Confederate Army. Today, other ways of making gunpowder have replaced saltpeter mining. Onondaga Cave itself was never used for gunpowder, as it remained undiscovered until after the time when caves were so used. As settlement continued, some of the springs, which came out of caves, were dammed to power gristmills. A gristmill was the place where people took their corn and wheat to be ground into meal and flour. The Davis Mill foundation can still be seen outside of Onondaga Cave. Caves also played a role in the development of a major industry in St. Louis; the brewing of beer. Before the invention of refrigeration, the only place that a brewery could lager beer was in cool caves. Missouri's caves, at a constant temperature of about 56°F (13°C ), were a perfect place to lager beer. Beer was first introduced into the United States in 1840; by 1860 there were 40 breweries in St. Louis, each with its own cave.	<urn:uuid:527528c5-84f1-4717-aab7-0bfcae460ab6>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://mostateparks.com/page/55122/cave-history	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251779833.86/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128153713-20200128183713-00176.warc.gz	en	0.982587	674	3.625	4	[ -0.36789804697036743, 0.35553282499313354, 0.21615386009216309, -0.1394672989845276, -0.19886565208435059, -0.14888086915016174, 0.5357502102851868, -0.11817093938589096, -0.535638153553009, 0.21301090717315674, 0.2100139558315277, -0.5814958810806274, 0.053023211658000946, 0.0724613219499...	4	\|Photo by John Eaton, ca. 1895\| Prior to the arrival of the European settlers, caves were important shelters for the American Indians. They used caves that had dry floors and large openings (where smoke from campfires could not collect) for shelter and for dwellings. Indians used several caves along the Meramec River, but they seldom went beyond the entrances. The natural entrance to Onondaga Cave is low and water filled; it was probably never used by Indians. Several caves exist along the Meramec River. Being proximal to water, some were likely used by Native Americans. It remains unknown if Onondaga Cave was ever used by any indigenous peoples. To date, no evidence of prehistoric use has been identified. Because the natural entrance to Onondaga Cave is water filled and situated in the flood plain its location may have been less appealing. However, caves had special significance for Native Americans. It is certainly possible that Onondaga, or any of the caves located in the park, could have been used in ways that did not leave tangible remains, perhaps as a spiritual or ceremonial location. For example, the Osage Nation, descendants of the prehistoric inhabitants of the Meramec River area, have recognized Onondaga Cave as one of many sacred sites in Missouri. The combination of water and cave has a very powerful meaning to the Osage and the ancestral people that would have considered Onondaga Cave a significant part of the landscape. The early European settlers used caves to protect and feed themselves. They mined the mineral saltpeter from the caves. Saltpeter was used in making gunpowder and comes from the nitrates in the cave clay reacting with the rock to make calcium nitrate. The nitrates in the clay came from either bat excrement or nitrogen fixing bacteria in the clay. The saltpeter was extracted from the clay and refined; then it was mixed with potash to make potassium nitrate and lime. Caves supplied the early settler with gunpowder for hunting and for protection from Indians and outlaws. Caves in Missouri were also an important source of saltpeter during the War of 1812 and the Civil War. The Union Army got its supply of gunpowder from elsewhere, but the caves were mined for saltpeter to supply the Confederate Army. Today, other ways of making gunpowder have replaced saltpeter mining. Onondaga Cave itself was never used for gunpowder, as it remained undiscovered until after the time when caves were so used. As settlement continued, some of the springs, which came out of caves, were dammed to power gristmills. A gristmill was the place where people took their corn and wheat to be ground into meal and flour. The Davis Mill foundation can still be seen outside of Onondaga Cave. Caves also played a role in the development of a major industry in St. Louis; the brewing of beer. Before the invention of refrigeration, the only place that a brewery could lager beer was in cool caves. Missouri's caves, at a constant temperature of about 56°F (13°C ), were a perfect place to lager beer. Beer was first introduced into the United States in 1840; by 1860 there were 40 breweries in St. Louis, each with its own cave.	696	ENGLISH	1
A Wonderful WW2 Hook! Guten Tag! Yesterday we held our exciting ‘hook’ to immerse the children into our new history-led WW2 topic, Keep Calm and Carry on! We began with a ‘slow reveal’ of the first illustration in our focus book, Rose Blanche. Piece by piece, more of the interesting illustration was uncovered and the children made brilliant predictions about what this book might be about. Initially, many of the children thought the image showed British soldiers either about to go to war or returning, hence the happy faces. Once the Nazi flags were revealed, the children then realised that this was in fact set in Germany showing a celebration of war being announced. We gathered together as a year group to discuss the whole picture, before being rudely interrupted by the ‘fat mayor’ who can be seen in the illustration overlooking the town square below him! He gathered us all together in our very own German market square outside Year 6 where we had to put ourselves in the shoes of the German children at this time. We learnt that the idea of war and Hitler’s views would have been welcomed by many German people in order to build a stronger nation as the years between WW1 and WW2 were punitive. Although this was initially tricky for some of the Year 6 children to understand, they were able to try and empathise. Imagining they were German children, they took part in 3 activities: learning some German numbers and phrases, looking at propaganda posters and trying some German delicacies! We will be exploring ‘Rose Blanche’ further in our Book Club and English lessons, following Rose’s experience of WW2. As tempting as it may be, please avoid sharing this book with your children until after we have finished using it! Of course in history lessons, the children will learn how our amazing country was able to ‘Keep Calm and Carry on’ in order to eventually win the war and shape our nation as it is today. Our key question for this half term is “Were there any true winners from WW2?”, with a key concept of ‘peace’. On Friday, children will come home with their knowledge organisers for them to share with you. We would love for older generations in your family to share any experience of WW2 with the children to make it even more meaningful for them. If any family members are willing to come in and share experiences with our Year 6 children in a small assembly, we would greatly appreciate it. Please let your child’s class teacher know if this is something you could offer.	<urn:uuid:3efb7c2d-3e95-4c88-aec8-95ec150e996e>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.stmarksprimary.net/2019/11/14/a-wonderful-ww2-hook/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251690095.81/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126165718-20200126195718-00272.warc.gz	en	0.980455	539	3.28125	3	[ -0.18583199381828308, 0.09516730159521103, -0.05813845247030258, 0.11732859909534454, -0.03879415988922119, 0.34340783953666687, -0.37214896082878113, 0.007137010805308819, -0.3581851124763489, -0.40123364329338074, 0.00873671006411314, -0.4842173755168915, -0.07717511802911758, 0.26164296...	1	A Wonderful WW2 Hook! Guten Tag! Yesterday we held our exciting ‘hook’ to immerse the children into our new history-led WW2 topic, Keep Calm and Carry on! We began with a ‘slow reveal’ of the first illustration in our focus book, Rose Blanche. Piece by piece, more of the interesting illustration was uncovered and the children made brilliant predictions about what this book might be about. Initially, many of the children thought the image showed British soldiers either about to go to war or returning, hence the happy faces. Once the Nazi flags were revealed, the children then realised that this was in fact set in Germany showing a celebration of war being announced. We gathered together as a year group to discuss the whole picture, before being rudely interrupted by the ‘fat mayor’ who can be seen in the illustration overlooking the town square below him! He gathered us all together in our very own German market square outside Year 6 where we had to put ourselves in the shoes of the German children at this time. We learnt that the idea of war and Hitler’s views would have been welcomed by many German people in order to build a stronger nation as the years between WW1 and WW2 were punitive. Although this was initially tricky for some of the Year 6 children to understand, they were able to try and empathise. Imagining they were German children, they took part in 3 activities: learning some German numbers and phrases, looking at propaganda posters and trying some German delicacies! We will be exploring ‘Rose Blanche’ further in our Book Club and English lessons, following Rose’s experience of WW2. As tempting as it may be, please avoid sharing this book with your children until after we have finished using it! Of course in history lessons, the children will learn how our amazing country was able to ‘Keep Calm and Carry on’ in order to eventually win the war and shape our nation as it is today. Our key question for this half term is “Were there any true winners from WW2?”, with a key concept of ‘peace’. On Friday, children will come home with their knowledge organisers for them to share with you. We would love for older generations in your family to share any experience of WW2 with the children to make it even more meaningful for them. If any family members are willing to come in and share experiences with our Year 6 children in a small assembly, we would greatly appreciate it. Please let your child’s class teacher know if this is something you could offer.	515	ENGLISH	1
Herman Melville was an American novelist, essayist and poet. During his lifetime, his early novels were popular, but his popularity declined later in his life. By the time of his death he had nearly been forgotten, but his masterpiece, Moby-Dick—which was largely considered a failure during his lifetime, and responsible for Melville’s drop in popularity at the time—was “rediscovered” in the 20th century as a literary masterpiece. - Moby Dick (1851) - Also known as The Whale, this is the story of Ishmael, a sailor aboard the Pequod with Captain Ahab. Ishmael soon realizes that vengeful Ahab's only mission is to find the sperm whale, Moby Dick. FCIT. (2020, January 18). Herman Melville author page. Retrieved January 18, 2020, from FCIT. "Herman Melville author page." Lit2Go ETC. Web. 18 January 2020. <>. FCIT, "Herman Melville author page." Accessed January 18, 2020..	<urn:uuid:5d06bde0-4a9c-462b-9c01-7fd9da6fdd49>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://etc.usf.edu/lit2go/authors/51/herman-melville/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594101.10/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119010920-20200119034920-00274.warc.gz	en	0.986372	226	3.34375	3	[ -0.28539079427719116, 0.3120053708553314, -0.012902820482850075, 0.051758166402578354, -0.03104906529188156, -0.006594983395189047, -0.03746505826711655, 0.20308788120746613, -0.0019671826157718897, -0.0010536897461861372, 0.16727939248085022, -0.1513116955757141, 0.38965991139411926, 0.10...	1	Herman Melville was an American novelist, essayist and poet. During his lifetime, his early novels were popular, but his popularity declined later in his life. By the time of his death he had nearly been forgotten, but his masterpiece, Moby-Dick—which was largely considered a failure during his lifetime, and responsible for Melville’s drop in popularity at the time—was “rediscovered” in the 20th century as a literary masterpiece. - Moby Dick (1851) - Also known as The Whale, this is the story of Ishmael, a sailor aboard the Pequod with Captain Ahab. Ishmael soon realizes that vengeful Ahab's only mission is to find the sperm whale, Moby Dick. FCIT. (2020, January 18). Herman Melville author page. Retrieved January 18, 2020, from FCIT. "Herman Melville author page." Lit2Go ETC. Web. 18 January 2020. <>. FCIT, "Herman Melville author page." Accessed January 18, 2020..	244	ENGLISH	1
Thomas Jefferson: A Man of Two Faces THESIS: Thomas Jefferson was a wealthy plantation owner and politician that would speak out about slavery on a regular basis but would still employ slaves for his own use. "We are told by his biographers, and apologists, that he hated slavery with a passion. But since he participated fully in the plantation slavery system, buying and selling slaves on occasion, and because he could not bring himself to free his own slaves, who often numbered upward of 200-250 on his plantations, one has to either question the verity of this passion or speculate that it was merely the abstract idea of slavery that he hated." (Smedley 189) Thomas Jefferson was always aware of the fact that slavery would soon one day be abolished but he made no efforts during his lifetime to accelerate the process. Jefferson was a wealthy plantation owner and politician that would speak out about slavery on a regular basis but would still employ slaves for his own use. Thomas Jefferson was a plantation owner, politician, and verbal defender of slaves who would continuously contradict himself about his beliefs on slaves. A part of him would comment about protecting slaves, and another part would say slaves are simply property not human beings. Many people believed saw slaves as just property even though they talk, walk, breathe, and carry out all other essential human functions. Slaves are no different than Thomas Jefferson and the other plantation owners, their skin may be an altered color than theirs, but that does not allow a person to be treated in the matter slaves were. Jefferson owned 15,000 acres of prosperous plantations and hundreds of slaves to work his land every single day and night. Like all plantation workers Jefferson, housed both white and black workers. He seemed to have more exclusive relations with the slaves that tended to his personal needs such as those who cooked, waited on tables, washed, wove the cloth, and made the clothing for the house. Including these slaves was a young woman who shared the same bed...	<urn:uuid:bcc2b4df-2af9-4103-8cd3-aff6340e6d3a>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://brightkite.com/essay-on/thomas-jefferson-a-guy-of-two-faces	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250599789.45/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120195035-20200120224035-00556.warc.gz	en	0.9895	403	3.65625	4	[ -0.21043719351291656, 0.4591752886772156, 0.14442187547683716, -0.3849738538265228, -0.09907893091440201, 0.12254813313484192, 0.3411013185977936, -0.19386261701583862, 0.08497022092342377, 0.30449438095092773, 0.2743004858493805, -0.15209633111953735, -0.48738226294517517, 0.0021014800295...	1	Thomas Jefferson: A Man of Two Faces THESIS: Thomas Jefferson was a wealthy plantation owner and politician that would speak out about slavery on a regular basis but would still employ slaves for his own use. "We are told by his biographers, and apologists, that he hated slavery with a passion. But since he participated fully in the plantation slavery system, buying and selling slaves on occasion, and because he could not bring himself to free his own slaves, who often numbered upward of 200-250 on his plantations, one has to either question the verity of this passion or speculate that it was merely the abstract idea of slavery that he hated." (Smedley 189) Thomas Jefferson was always aware of the fact that slavery would soon one day be abolished but he made no efforts during his lifetime to accelerate the process. Jefferson was a wealthy plantation owner and politician that would speak out about slavery on a regular basis but would still employ slaves for his own use. Thomas Jefferson was a plantation owner, politician, and verbal defender of slaves who would continuously contradict himself about his beliefs on slaves. A part of him would comment about protecting slaves, and another part would say slaves are simply property not human beings. Many people believed saw slaves as just property even though they talk, walk, breathe, and carry out all other essential human functions. Slaves are no different than Thomas Jefferson and the other plantation owners, their skin may be an altered color than theirs, but that does not allow a person to be treated in the matter slaves were. Jefferson owned 15,000 acres of prosperous plantations and hundreds of slaves to work his land every single day and night. Like all plantation workers Jefferson, housed both white and black workers. He seemed to have more exclusive relations with the slaves that tended to his personal needs such as those who cooked, waited on tables, washed, wove the cloth, and made the clothing for the house. Including these slaves was a young woman who shared the same bed...	412	ENGLISH	1
Success is a very powerful word which society uses to describe a person that is intelligent or genius. However the book Outliers shows a different meaning for success that most society isn’t familiar with. Outliers show that you don’t have to be born with talent in order to achieve things and to become successful but it is more about taking the time to practice and make the best out of everything. Outliers shows that culture, Timing, and opportunity play a big role in a person’s success and this book supported that with evidence and well known historian that were successful. Essay due? We'll write it for you! In the Outliers written by Malcolm Gladwell which he argues that success isn’t born with anybody and it’s only earned by the different factors that is called Matthew effect. People study the personality, intelligence, and lifestyle of those successful people that everyone believes that they were born with those talents that got them to be successful. But Gladwell used his method to prove that success takes a lot of practice and it also depends on factors such as age, opportunity and the right time. The age plays a big role in most cases as Gladwell described; age plays a big role in different cases such as sports and education. In hockey most players that were born in the early year months such as January, February, and march would most likely have better chance to be picked that the players than the ones that are born at the end months of the year due to the more time of practice that they had by being born almost a year ahead as Gladwell stated. Also in the baseball and the European soccer the players that were born at the beginning of the year most likely will be picked unlike the players that were born at the end of the year, Gladwell shows how age plays a main factor in sports but he also shows how age also plays a big role in education as well. The older the kids are the more things they learn than the kids that are born in the late of months of the year. Elizabeth Dhuey gave example about kids in the fourth grade which she found that the older the kids the more advantages than the rest. The earlier months of the year that someone was born in the better chances they had in sports and education but age isn’t the only a role in being successful, Gladwell also said that practice, opportunity and good timing are main factors in being successful and play a bigger role in achieving things than being talented. Gladwell stated in order to master anything you have to practice at least 10,000 hours in anything you want to be successful in. Having a good opportunity plays a big role in being successful as well Gladwell gave us an example showing how bill gates became very successful because of the chance that he had which was having the opportunity to work with computers when he was in eighth grade during 1960s computers weren’t common and not a lot of people had a chance to used them, therefore bill gates had a better chance on everyone else by having a good chance of using computer which made him successful not his talent. Bill gates had a chance to get his ten thousand hours of practice on computers just like Gladwell had said which made him successful and this example support his theory. Another example that supports Gladwells theory are the two richest industrialist in the history which were John Rockefeller, and Andrew Carnegie which the age was the main factor that led to their success. Gladwell used all these examples to support his thoughts; He also said a Genius doesn’t have a better chance of success than that practice for long time. The theory of the outlier matters more than IQ test. In Gladwell opinion IQs set a view limit to the testers thinking, a British Psychologist Liam hudsin explains that a secintist with and IQ of 130 is likely to win a Noble Prize as one whose IQ us 180, Liam shows that a IQ test doesn’t measure how smart or how successful a person could be, just like Gladwell said IQ tests limit your way of thinking, Gladwell stated “ To Be a Noble Prize winner, apparently you have to be smart enough to get into a college at least as good as Natre Dame or the University of Illinois. That all” in this quote he shows how most people look at success in a way that to be successful you have to graduates from a certain school or be as good as someone otherwise you will not be consider as successful which is false in his opinion. Gladwell believes that every person should be prepared and ready for the right time to achieve their success through one on his logic opportunities. Some parents may work hard to achieve a goal but never actually be successful themselves but they show their kids the way to be successfully which will affect the life of their kids in the long run. By the parents try to be successful this can built a better future for their kids and teaching them how to be successful for their own lives. Gladwell believes that culture can play a big role in an individual’s success as well, attitude and behaviors that’s being taught in culture can shape the way a person’s reaction to a certain situation, and this can lead the individual to be successful or fail. Gladwell brings in an example about an experiment that was done and it was divided between people in the south and the north and finding out the way each group would react to threat. This experience proved that Gladwells logic was credible, and the results were the people in the south faced the threat with anger and on the other hand the people of the north were calmer and this shows how the culture makes a different in an individual’s opinion. Tradition and attitudes can lead to a person success or failure, because it culture can change the ways people would people with same situation but different ways of facing it. For example Asians are good with math which makes math easy for younger generation than the rest of the other countries, because math is easy for most kids in china shows how culture can also effect the education for better or worse depending on the case that a person is facing. Gladwell also ends the story of outliers with a personal experience about how he had become famous, which was the help of the people that he knew like his mother, great mother, and great great-mother. His personal shows that no one will make it out alone without an opportunity or a perfect time, and he also said that luck plays a big role in being successful as well. The Outliers shows helps us understand history by giving stories about the life of big legend that became in power and took over the oil filed which was Rockefeller and the reason that helped him become the person that he was. This book proves facts about successful people and the things that supported them to get to where they were and made them well known to everyone and mostly not because they had talent or were born genius, but more like they had better chances than everyone else during their times. Gladwell Believes that in order to be successful you need the help from others or have some kind of chance that will get you to be famous, and also believes that being talented isn’t a role in order to be successful. To be outliers you need luck. Everyone needs practice for at least 10 thousand hours in order to be successful at anything in Gladwells opionon. This book gives different stories that show the reader how to become successful without being smart or born with talent but to earn it and always try to find the right timing to be successful and always look out for an opportunity. Disclaimer: This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers. You can order our professional work here. Sorry, copying is not allowed on our website. If you’d like this or any other sample, we’ll happily email it to you. Your essay sample has been sent. Want us to write one just for you? We can custom edit this essay into an original, 100% plagiarism free essay.Order now	<urn:uuid:8fe4f079-8b24-4c34-b062-313c789cb975>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://eduzaurus.com/free-essay-samples/what-is-success-according-to-malcolm-gladwell/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250604397.40/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121132900-20200121161900-00273.warc.gz	en	0.987983	1,657	3.484375	3	[ 0.08712159097194672, 0.05319761484861374, -0.16276776790618896, -0.1556558907032013, -0.020920105278491974, 0.18571799993515015, 0.4009847342967987, 0.027757931500673294, 0.12080935388803482, 0.0782642662525177, 0.2063019573688507, 0.009019325487315655, 0.22288835048675537, -0.140693545341...	2	Success is a very powerful word which society uses to describe a person that is intelligent or genius. However the book Outliers shows a different meaning for success that most society isn’t familiar with. Outliers show that you don’t have to be born with talent in order to achieve things and to become successful but it is more about taking the time to practice and make the best out of everything. Outliers shows that culture, Timing, and opportunity play a big role in a person’s success and this book supported that with evidence and well known historian that were successful. Essay due? We'll write it for you! In the Outliers written by Malcolm Gladwell which he argues that success isn’t born with anybody and it’s only earned by the different factors that is called Matthew effect. People study the personality, intelligence, and lifestyle of those successful people that everyone believes that they were born with those talents that got them to be successful. But Gladwell used his method to prove that success takes a lot of practice and it also depends on factors such as age, opportunity and the right time. The age plays a big role in most cases as Gladwell described; age plays a big role in different cases such as sports and education. In hockey most players that were born in the early year months such as January, February, and march would most likely have better chance to be picked that the players than the ones that are born at the end months of the year due to the more time of practice that they had by being born almost a year ahead as Gladwell stated. Also in the baseball and the European soccer the players that were born at the beginning of the year most likely will be picked unlike the players that were born at the end of the year, Gladwell shows how age plays a main factor in sports but he also shows how age also plays a big role in education as well. The older the kids are the more things they learn than the kids that are born in the late of months of the year. Elizabeth Dhuey gave example about kids in the fourth grade which she found that the older the kids the more advantages than the rest. The earlier months of the year that someone was born in the better chances they had in sports and education but age isn’t the only a role in being successful, Gladwell also said that practice, opportunity and good timing are main factors in being successful and play a bigger role in achieving things than being talented. Gladwell stated in order to master anything you have to practice at least 10,000 hours in anything you want to be successful in. Having a good opportunity plays a big role in being successful as well Gladwell gave us an example showing how bill gates became very successful because of the chance that he had which was having the opportunity to work with computers when he was in eighth grade during 1960s computers weren’t common and not a lot of people had a chance to used them, therefore bill gates had a better chance on everyone else by having a good chance of using computer which made him successful not his talent. Bill gates had a chance to get his ten thousand hours of practice on computers just like Gladwell had said which made him successful and this example support his theory. Another example that supports Gladwells theory are the two richest industrialist in the history which were John Rockefeller, and Andrew Carnegie which the age was the main factor that led to their success. Gladwell used all these examples to support his thoughts; He also said a Genius doesn’t have a better chance of success than that practice for long time. The theory of the outlier matters more than IQ test. In Gladwell opinion IQs set a view limit to the testers thinking, a British Psychologist Liam hudsin explains that a secintist with and IQ of 130 is likely to win a Noble Prize as one whose IQ us 180, Liam shows that a IQ test doesn’t measure how smart or how successful a person could be, just like Gladwell said IQ tests limit your way of thinking, Gladwell stated “ To Be a Noble Prize winner, apparently you have to be smart enough to get into a college at least as good as Natre Dame or the University of Illinois. That all” in this quote he shows how most people look at success in a way that to be successful you have to graduates from a certain school or be as good as someone otherwise you will not be consider as successful which is false in his opinion. Gladwell believes that every person should be prepared and ready for the right time to achieve their success through one on his logic opportunities. Some parents may work hard to achieve a goal but never actually be successful themselves but they show their kids the way to be successfully which will affect the life of their kids in the long run. By the parents try to be successful this can built a better future for their kids and teaching them how to be successful for their own lives. Gladwell believes that culture can play a big role in an individual’s success as well, attitude and behaviors that’s being taught in culture can shape the way a person’s reaction to a certain situation, and this can lead the individual to be successful or fail. Gladwell brings in an example about an experiment that was done and it was divided between people in the south and the north and finding out the way each group would react to threat. This experience proved that Gladwells logic was credible, and the results were the people in the south faced the threat with anger and on the other hand the people of the north were calmer and this shows how the culture makes a different in an individual’s opinion. Tradition and attitudes can lead to a person success or failure, because it culture can change the ways people would people with same situation but different ways of facing it. For example Asians are good with math which makes math easy for younger generation than the rest of the other countries, because math is easy for most kids in china shows how culture can also effect the education for better or worse depending on the case that a person is facing. Gladwell also ends the story of outliers with a personal experience about how he had become famous, which was the help of the people that he knew like his mother, great mother, and great great-mother. His personal shows that no one will make it out alone without an opportunity or a perfect time, and he also said that luck plays a big role in being successful as well. The Outliers shows helps us understand history by giving stories about the life of big legend that became in power and took over the oil filed which was Rockefeller and the reason that helped him become the person that he was. This book proves facts about successful people and the things that supported them to get to where they were and made them well known to everyone and mostly not because they had talent or were born genius, but more like they had better chances than everyone else during their times. Gladwell Believes that in order to be successful you need the help from others or have some kind of chance that will get you to be famous, and also believes that being talented isn’t a role in order to be successful. To be outliers you need luck. Everyone needs practice for at least 10 thousand hours in order to be successful at anything in Gladwells opionon. This book gives different stories that show the reader how to become successful without being smart or born with talent but to earn it and always try to find the right timing to be successful and always look out for an opportunity. Disclaimer: This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers. You can order our professional work here. Sorry, copying is not allowed on our website. If you’d like this or any other sample, we’ll happily email it to you. Your essay sample has been sent. Want us to write one just for you? We can custom edit this essay into an original, 100% plagiarism free essay.Order now	1,616	ENGLISH	1
What Was the U.S. Bracero Program? The Bracero Program was a guest worker program begun in a partnership between the United States and Mexico on August 4, 1942. It was a vital part of the development of the agricultural industry in the United States during a time when workers were hard to find. Unfortunately, the workers were often exploited. Wages were low and some employers provided substandard housing and not enough to eat. Despite this, some braceros were grateful for the opportunity to work in America, as their situation in Mexico was grim. Both Countries Needed It In Mexico, agriculture was an important industry. The rich soil and good weather led to the growth of large farms where they grew squash, beans, tomatoes, cotton, vanilla, avocados, and cacao. But as big farms began to replace family farms in the early 1900s, political agitation in Mexico grew. By 1910 a full-scale political revolution was underway. The revolt began as a rebellion against long-time president Porfirio Diaz. Though he led the country toward industrialization, farmers and laborers were left behind. He was removed from office in 1911, but it took almost ten years for the unrest to end. The Mexican government used military power to quell citizen uprisings, and from 1910-20, some two million Mexicans died. Even as a new government settled in with the approval of the Mexican Constitution in 1917, the Mexican government still failed to put in place a method for helping low-wage laborers or agricultural workers make a living. Many citizens began to leave Mexico for the United States with the hope of finding work. In the United States As all this was happening, the United States faced a new unexpected crisis. By the 1940s, President Roosevelt committed the U.S. to serve as an “arsenal of democracy” for the Allies who were being attacked by Germany. Companies geared up to increase production of defense materials for Europe. Then the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 led to the United States’ declaration of war. The defense industry called for more workers, yet the pool of workers was becoming smaller as large numbers of young men enlisted. As a result, more and more workers were needed. Jobs opened up for ethnic groups and women. The ship-building industry in California brought thousands of African Americans from the South for skilled work that would never have previously been available to them. Women, too, were hired in the aviation and automobile industries doing jobs in factories and plants. Farm Workers Needed Feeding people throughout the U.S. and overseas was a necessity, but farm workers were taking other jobs and also enlisting. Women often stepped up to run farms and ranches for their families, and the government backed Victory Gardens in urban areas to try to reduce the production needs placed on the farms. But ultimately migrant workers were badly needed. Particularly in the less populous sections of the Southwest, including California and the San Joaquin Valley, workers were needed on the railroad as well. Creation of the Bracero Program In 1942, the governments of the United States and Mexico created the Bracero Program as a result of each country’s needs. On their side, Mexico regulated the number of workers leaving each section of the country, so that no area would be too low on farm workers. But corrupt practices began here. In some areas, Mexican government officials would only give those who paid bribes permission to enter the program. In the United States, the program operated through a coordinated effort of the State Department, the Labor Department, and Department of the Immigration and Naturalization Services. The U.S. Farm Bureau interfaced with the American farm associations for placing the workers. Offices were established along the border towns—Ciudad Juarez, Chihuahua, and El Paso, Texas, to recruit and place the workers who arrived. Guest Workers Arrive Brought in as “guest workers,” the braceros (meaning those who “labor with their arms”) were given contracts with expiration dates. The contracts tended to be from 1-6 months and were issued in English. Most men were not fully aware of what it stated about their conditions of employment. When they arrived in the United States, the men were inspected and interviewed. Most centers also fumigated the newcomers, generally using DDT, a pesticide that is now used very sparingly because of its dangers. Not all the men sent to the U.S. from Mexico were accepted, but neither government took responsibility for helping the men return home. Employers Held the Power While some employers ran decent operations, corrupt practices were also plentiful. Contracts were often ignored by U.S. employers. Workers were promised clean living conditions, food, and decent pay, but it often didn’t happen. Most contracts also specified that 10 percent of money due each man would be deposited in a savings account. The money would be available to them when they returned home. There are still lawsuits pending concerning the fact that money often wasn’t paid and may not actually have been set aside. Braceros were permitted to return home for family emergencies only with written permission of their American employer, and all contracts had an expiration date. When their date came, they were to turn in their permits and return home. Many of those who returned home then re-applied. The men found that what little they earned was more than what was available at home. They valued being able to set aside money for tools and equipment that would help their families in Mexico. Farm Workers Brought Value While much of the work they did involved weeding and picking everything from cucumbers and tomatoes to cotton, the farm workers of Mexico had experience and made helpful contributions to those who employed them. Farmers in Mexico found that that if they planted corn, beans, and squash together, all three crops did better. (The beans replace the nitrogen in the soil that is depleted by growing corn.) This was an important development in agriculture progress of the day, and family farms in Mexico practiced this planting system as well. What Happened to the Program? By the 1960s, Mexican immigrants were arriving in the U.S. with and without permits. They were also finding less work was available for them as American farmers turned to different forms of mechanization for some of the agricultural work. Cotton was a prime example. Cotton-picking had always been an extremely labor-intensive crop to harvest, and the by 1960s, more farms were using the mechanical cotton harvester. By 1964, the U.S. Department of Labor was ready to end the program. The braceros who were still in the United States were sent back to Mexico, but they faced difficulties in finding work there. However, border ranches and farms in the U.S. continued to employ them—it was cheap, available labor. Remembering the Braceros Recently, there has been an effort to recognize the 4.5 million Mexican nationals who participated in the Bracero Program. In several locations, monuments have been erected to recognize the hard work done by the migrant workers. In Los Angeles near where many of these workers were based, a statue was erected in a plaza downtown. Sculptor Dan Medina interviewed dozens of braceros as he planned out the monument. The farm tool held by the depicted bracero is an “el cortito.” This is a short-handled hoe that was the primary tool of these workers. The only way to use this small hoe is when bending over or working on one’s hands and knees—clearly back-breaking work. Artist Dan Medina was quoted in The Los Angeles Times after the unveiling of the monument: “The immigrant has been demonized. .. If you look at history through the scope of honesty, we wouldn’t be here without their contributions.” While many braceros eventually returned to the United States, brought families and gained citizenship, it was not without great hardship. After the Program Some in this country feel that the Bracero Program kept wage growth low and living conditions sub-standard because the farms could find the labor they needed without improving work conditions. But the civil rights unrest of the early 1960s and the official close of the Bracero Program changed the balance of power. Activists began to create grassroot organizations to stand up for the workers, and over time, it made a difference. In 1959 Dolores Heurta organized the Agricultural Workers Association (AWA). Three years later, Cesar Chavez started the National Farm Workers Association (NFWA). Both organizations sent representatives from farm-to-farm to meet with workers of many nationalities—Filipino, Chicanos, Anglos, and black workers. Most of the workers they met with could not afford to lose their employment. Huerta, Chavez, and other leaders including Larry Itliong, and Gilbert Padilla convinced them that change had to happen. By 1965, several small strikes were underway, and the movement grew. Chavez also pushed for a nationwide boycott of grapes, and the public responded. All these efforts convinced the owners that they had to address the issue. Employers started with an offer of a wage increase– to $1.25 an hour. But the organizations had seen small sums offered before, and they urged the workers to hold out for full unionization. By 1970, the combined organizations—now called the United Farm Workers–had 50,000 dues-paying members, the most ever represented by an agricultural union in California. The Need Continues While the United Farmworkers of America made great strides, backsliding is constant. It is an ongoing challenge to protect new generations of workers. Today the Farmworker Justice organization works on behalf of these laborers, In late 2019, the House of Representatives passed the Farm Workforce Modernization Act of 2019, HR 5038. This bill provides a path to lawful permanent residency for undocumented farm workers and their family members. Farmworker Justice representatives point out that with the fear of deportation, the workforce fluctuates constantly, and it is hard to assure farmers of the steady quality of work. If workers feel their work situation is stable, they can be trained to a higher level. This helps assure greater food safety and security to the benefit of employers, workers, and consumers. The bill awaits approval by the Senate. Luisa Moreno was another who activist who worked for labor rights. View sources » Ace Pilot Pete Fernandez: Korean War Ace pilot Pete Fernandez was one of the top fighter pilots in the Korean War, but he almost didn’t see combat. He was so valuable... » Isabel González and U.S. Citizenship for Puerto Ricans Isabel González was 20 years old and pregnant in 1902. She was traveling from her home in Puerto Rico to the United States, where the... » Luisa Moreno, (1907-1992), Labor Organizer Activist in the Mexican-American Civil Rights Movement (which preceded Chicano activism) Organized first National Congress of Spanish-Speaking People (1938) Luisa Moreno was born in Guatemala... » Woman's Land Army of America Rosie the Riveter is a well-known icon used to portray how women stepped in to men’s jobs during World War... »	<urn:uuid:5400ee2a-ebc1-48ff-a27b-a8a97cd22707>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://americacomesalive.com/2020/01/07/what-was-the-u-s-bracero-program/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250597230.18/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120023523-20200120051523-00438.warc.gz	en	0.980108	2,364	4.4375	4	[ -0.25504207611083984, 0.2701512277126312, 0.23243190348148346, -0.023932021111249924, 0.23262576758861542, 0.2259635329246521, -0.5746012926101685, 0.21078115701675415, -0.38852137327194214, -0.2528991103172302, 0.0007667932659387589, 0.4138794541358948, 0.01243496686220169, 0.008633538149...	4	What Was the U.S. Bracero Program? The Bracero Program was a guest worker program begun in a partnership between the United States and Mexico on August 4, 1942. It was a vital part of the development of the agricultural industry in the United States during a time when workers were hard to find. Unfortunately, the workers were often exploited. Wages were low and some employers provided substandard housing and not enough to eat. Despite this, some braceros were grateful for the opportunity to work in America, as their situation in Mexico was grim. Both Countries Needed It In Mexico, agriculture was an important industry. The rich soil and good weather led to the growth of large farms where they grew squash, beans, tomatoes, cotton, vanilla, avocados, and cacao. But as big farms began to replace family farms in the early 1900s, political agitation in Mexico grew. By 1910 a full-scale political revolution was underway. The revolt began as a rebellion against long-time president Porfirio Diaz. Though he led the country toward industrialization, farmers and laborers were left behind. He was removed from office in 1911, but it took almost ten years for the unrest to end. The Mexican government used military power to quell citizen uprisings, and from 1910-20, some two million Mexicans died. Even as a new government settled in with the approval of the Mexican Constitution in 1917, the Mexican government still failed to put in place a method for helping low-wage laborers or agricultural workers make a living. Many citizens began to leave Mexico for the United States with the hope of finding work. In the United States As all this was happening, the United States faced a new unexpected crisis. By the 1940s, President Roosevelt committed the U.S. to serve as an “arsenal of democracy” for the Allies who were being attacked by Germany. Companies geared up to increase production of defense materials for Europe. Then the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 led to the United States’ declaration of war. The defense industry called for more workers, yet the pool of workers was becoming smaller as large numbers of young men enlisted. As a result, more and more workers were needed. Jobs opened up for ethnic groups and women. The ship-building industry in California brought thousands of African Americans from the South for skilled work that would never have previously been available to them. Women, too, were hired in the aviation and automobile industries doing jobs in factories and plants. Farm Workers Needed Feeding people throughout the U.S. and overseas was a necessity, but farm workers were taking other jobs and also enlisting. Women often stepped up to run farms and ranches for their families, and the government backed Victory Gardens in urban areas to try to reduce the production needs placed on the farms. But ultimately migrant workers were badly needed. Particularly in the less populous sections of the Southwest, including California and the San Joaquin Valley, workers were needed on the railroad as well. Creation of the Bracero Program In 1942, the governments of the United States and Mexico created the Bracero Program as a result of each country’s needs. On their side, Mexico regulated the number of workers leaving each section of the country, so that no area would be too low on farm workers. But corrupt practices began here. In some areas, Mexican government officials would only give those who paid bribes permission to enter the program. In the United States, the program operated through a coordinated effort of the State Department, the Labor Department, and Department of the Immigration and Naturalization Services. The U.S. Farm Bureau interfaced with the American farm associations for placing the workers. Offices were established along the border towns—Ciudad Juarez, Chihuahua, and El Paso, Texas, to recruit and place the workers who arrived. Guest Workers Arrive Brought in as “guest workers,” the braceros (meaning those who “labor with their arms”) were given contracts with expiration dates. The contracts tended to be from 1-6 months and were issued in English. Most men were not fully aware of what it stated about their conditions of employment. When they arrived in the United States, the men were inspected and interviewed. Most centers also fumigated the newcomers, generally using DDT, a pesticide that is now used very sparingly because of its dangers. Not all the men sent to the U.S. from Mexico were accepted, but neither government took responsibility for helping the men return home. Employers Held the Power While some employers ran decent operations, corrupt practices were also plentiful. Contracts were often ignored by U.S. employers. Workers were promised clean living conditions, food, and decent pay, but it often didn’t happen. Most contracts also specified that 10 percent of money due each man would be deposited in a savings account. The money would be available to them when they returned home. There are still lawsuits pending concerning the fact that money often wasn’t paid and may not actually have been set aside. Braceros were permitted to return home for family emergencies only with written permission of their American employer, and all contracts had an expiration date. When their date came, they were to turn in their permits and return home. Many of those who returned home then re-applied. The men found that what little they earned was more than what was available at home. They valued being able to set aside money for tools and equipment that would help their families in Mexico. Farm Workers Brought Value While much of the work they did involved weeding and picking everything from cucumbers and tomatoes to cotton, the farm workers of Mexico had experience and made helpful contributions to those who employed them. Farmers in Mexico found that that if they planted corn, beans, and squash together, all three crops did better. (The beans replace the nitrogen in the soil that is depleted by growing corn.) This was an important development in agriculture progress of the day, and family farms in Mexico practiced this planting system as well. What Happened to the Program? By the 1960s, Mexican immigrants were arriving in the U.S. with and without permits. They were also finding less work was available for them as American farmers turned to different forms of mechanization for some of the agricultural work. Cotton was a prime example. Cotton-picking had always been an extremely labor-intensive crop to harvest, and the by 1960s, more farms were using the mechanical cotton harvester. By 1964, the U.S. Department of Labor was ready to end the program. The braceros who were still in the United States were sent back to Mexico, but they faced difficulties in finding work there. However, border ranches and farms in the U.S. continued to employ them—it was cheap, available labor. Remembering the Braceros Recently, there has been an effort to recognize the 4.5 million Mexican nationals who participated in the Bracero Program. In several locations, monuments have been erected to recognize the hard work done by the migrant workers. In Los Angeles near where many of these workers were based, a statue was erected in a plaza downtown. Sculptor Dan Medina interviewed dozens of braceros as he planned out the monument. The farm tool held by the depicted bracero is an “el cortito.” This is a short-handled hoe that was the primary tool of these workers. The only way to use this small hoe is when bending over or working on one’s hands and knees—clearly back-breaking work. Artist Dan Medina was quoted in The Los Angeles Times after the unveiling of the monument: “The immigrant has been demonized. .. If you look at history through the scope of honesty, we wouldn’t be here without their contributions.” While many braceros eventually returned to the United States, brought families and gained citizenship, it was not without great hardship. After the Program Some in this country feel that the Bracero Program kept wage growth low and living conditions sub-standard because the farms could find the labor they needed without improving work conditions. But the civil rights unrest of the early 1960s and the official close of the Bracero Program changed the balance of power. Activists began to create grassroot organizations to stand up for the workers, and over time, it made a difference. In 1959 Dolores Heurta organized the Agricultural Workers Association (AWA). Three years later, Cesar Chavez started the National Farm Workers Association (NFWA). Both organizations sent representatives from farm-to-farm to meet with workers of many nationalities—Filipino, Chicanos, Anglos, and black workers. Most of the workers they met with could not afford to lose their employment. Huerta, Chavez, and other leaders including Larry Itliong, and Gilbert Padilla convinced them that change had to happen. By 1965, several small strikes were underway, and the movement grew. Chavez also pushed for a nationwide boycott of grapes, and the public responded. All these efforts convinced the owners that they had to address the issue. Employers started with an offer of a wage increase– to $1.25 an hour. But the organizations had seen small sums offered before, and they urged the workers to hold out for full unionization. By 1970, the combined organizations—now called the United Farm Workers–had 50,000 dues-paying members, the most ever represented by an agricultural union in California. The Need Continues While the United Farmworkers of America made great strides, backsliding is constant. It is an ongoing challenge to protect new generations of workers. Today the Farmworker Justice organization works on behalf of these laborers, In late 2019, the House of Representatives passed the Farm Workforce Modernization Act of 2019, HR 5038. This bill provides a path to lawful permanent residency for undocumented farm workers and their family members. Farmworker Justice representatives point out that with the fear of deportation, the workforce fluctuates constantly, and it is hard to assure farmers of the steady quality of work. If workers feel their work situation is stable, they can be trained to a higher level. This helps assure greater food safety and security to the benefit of employers, workers, and consumers. The bill awaits approval by the Senate. Luisa Moreno was another who activist who worked for labor rights. View sources » Ace Pilot Pete Fernandez: Korean War Ace pilot Pete Fernandez was one of the top fighter pilots in the Korean War, but he almost didn’t see combat. He was so valuable... » Isabel González and U.S. Citizenship for Puerto Ricans Isabel González was 20 years old and pregnant in 1902. She was traveling from her home in Puerto Rico to the United States, where the... » Luisa Moreno, (1907-1992), Labor Organizer Activist in the Mexican-American Civil Rights Movement (which preceded Chicano activism) Organized first National Congress of Spanish-Speaking People (1938) Luisa Moreno was born in Guatemala... » Woman's Land Army of America Rosie the Riveter is a well-known icon used to portray how women stepped in to men’s jobs during World War... »	2,362	ENGLISH	1
The general belief of luck by Aristotle is the influence on the particular act of luck as it occurs in the moral sphere. This leads to the denial that the relevant causes of good fortune are luck. The order of the relevant features of the person’s life can be compelled to the rule in the scope of luck. Thus, luck is, according to Aristotle, an accidental cause that is indefinite, unbounded, and unaccountable by the reason. The qualification of his definition is by his addition that not just two events can be related to the accidental causes and effects. First-Class Online Research Paper Writing Service - Your research paper is written by a PhD professor - Your requirements and targets are always met - You are able to control the progress of your writing assignment - You get a chance to become an excellent student! In order to understand an object or an event, there are some aspects that need to be answered concerning nature. Understanding a thing in the whole, the causes of its existence must be well known as it may be; there are four causes of the explanatory factors, in which this thing can be explained. The four causes are: material, formal, efficient, and final, which aid to the claim that there is the complete understanding of the thing (Aristotle 9). The arguing over the fifth cause is being an explanatory factor that has been argued correctly by Aristotle; according to him, chance is not a fifth cause of the explanatory factors. The four causes have been accounted in-depth by Aristotle giving the meaning to each of them. The cause of material is the element from which a thing is made, as in the case of furniture the material it is made from is wood, and the furniture is made of wood. The formal cause focuses on the shape and the arrangement as the shape and the dimensions are unique to this thing; the efficient cause of the thing is, thus, the source by which a thing as it is. This defines how a thing came to the existence the way it is. The final cause is the purpose, in which it is intended or the end of its existence. In the case provided, the purpose of furniture is the provision of comfort to people, and these are the four causes of the thing. Aristotle argued that there were only four causes for defending his position that in order to understand something. There are the questions on the account of what a thing is. He argued that there were only four answers that fully satisfy the question, as there is nothing else left to explain the question. All objects and events according to Aristotle will only admit to the four explanatory factors. The objection of notion of having only four causes has been argued that ther were the things that happened by chance, or by the account of luck. If two people are romantically interested in one another but there is no one daring to initiate anything beyond friendship. They both plan separately to have a vacation and bump into each other in the same place and on the same day of their vacation. They fall in love during their vocational stay. The situation is seen as an event of chance or luck. This can be described to be the luck due to the fact that they welcome the outcome, though they had been earlier willing to initiate. The circumstances they had created triggered their romantic relationship, thus, the event happened by chance as both were on vacation at the same period in the same place without not knowing of each other (Coffrin 12). This event could be explained by chance or luck as there were no intentions from each agent during the outcome. The occurrences of these events happened by chance as Aristotle accepts, but the outer side of their meeting can only be explained by the cause of efficiency. The fact of their vacation was due to necessity as it had been the cause of their meeting. The sequence of events can be explained through the reference of efficient causes due to the action of agents these events occurred. Love was the final cause that had been developed as the description of the event occurring by luck or chance; it is not the explanation of causes of the events occurring (Coffrin 11). Thus, the outcome was by luck but the cause was not by luck. This is because the chance and luck cannot produce an event that happened concurrently with the other four causes of this event. The simultaneous occurrence of events and circumstances is concurrence, and, thus, the meeting of the two ones was a coincidence. If a man builds a house, he is a real cause of the house. If he is still a musician, the statement has no sense as that music was the cause of the house. The admission that music was a concurrence cause of the house being sensible, as this man is a musician, and this happened simultaneously with the house building (Aristotle). The cause of anything is not by chance, rather than knowing that music was indeed the cause of the house and this lacks the power of explanation. It does not help to the fact how the house came to be the explanation that it had been built by that person knowing music (Aristotle 16). Thus, there is no way that chance can help in explaining how an event came to be as it is only an explanatory factor. According to Aristotle chance is the concurrence cause of things, as it can be formulated; for the happening of any event by chance, there is no intention from the side of an agent to achieve the outcome at that time. The intentional acts are the ones that cause an event, and the occurrence of anything during the time of the cause is a concurrence with the event and not a cause of the event. The concurrence by chance with other causes, thus, puts the chance as a cause by the virtue of concurrence. Though this argument is not implicitly made by Aristotle, he agreed with each of the premises as he gave an example of a man meeting with someone owing him money; the man did not do anything there in the time for the reason. Thus, his intension was not to collect money, but it was by chance that he had fulfilled this till the end. It is agreeable with Aristotle that the occurrence of events by chance is the unintentional acts, and that the objects and events were caused by some intentional acts as the four causes identified as intentional acts. Aristotle gives the account of a sculptor who is creating a statue. It is he who intends to use the material; he intends for the statue to take the shape and the form it is taking; he intends to be a creator of the statue as a source of the statue existence and the intended purpose of the statue. The four causes are the intentional acts, and due to the fact they are the only causes, all the causes are intentional; hence, the events are triggered by intentional acts (Coffrin). The presentation of these arguments is believed to be by that chance, and the luck exists, though they are not the real causes of events (Johnson 22). This is due to the fact that the chance can be a cause of anything but it is more reasonable that the chance is simultaneous with the actual cause of objects and events. Thus, Aristotle claimed of the four causes to be binding. Aristotle is making points that there is nothing that comes to by by luck the way the things happen as a result of four causes; as this could mean that calling the causes of things to be the luck is that the true cause is unknown. His theory brings to light being a genuine cause wherever there is a cause of luck. His definition of luck is an accidental cause; the correct analysis of luck is if it is a true cause, , it can be conceded the luck to be an accidental cause due to which it is existing. Most popular orders	<urn:uuid:16f27ebe-8a95-422c-95b9-565500abe088>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://essaysexperts.com/essays/philosophy/the-four-causes-of-events-and-objects.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598726.39/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120110422-20200120134422-00127.warc.gz	en	0.982947	1,568	3.6875	4	[ 0.2876455783843994, 0.11439155042171478, 0.235307514667511, -0.42220550775527954, -0.25893786549568176, -0.12101833522319794, 0.6343039870262146, 0.10492798686027527, 0.1612202525138855, 0.02486037090420723, 0.20325015485286713, -0.21990258991718292, 0.11316177248954773, 0.3919587731361389...	1	The general belief of luck by Aristotle is the influence on the particular act of luck as it occurs in the moral sphere. This leads to the denial that the relevant causes of good fortune are luck. The order of the relevant features of the person’s life can be compelled to the rule in the scope of luck. Thus, luck is, according to Aristotle, an accidental cause that is indefinite, unbounded, and unaccountable by the reason. The qualification of his definition is by his addition that not just two events can be related to the accidental causes and effects. First-Class Online Research Paper Writing Service - Your research paper is written by a PhD professor - Your requirements and targets are always met - You are able to control the progress of your writing assignment - You get a chance to become an excellent student! In order to understand an object or an event, there are some aspects that need to be answered concerning nature. Understanding a thing in the whole, the causes of its existence must be well known as it may be; there are four causes of the explanatory factors, in which this thing can be explained. The four causes are: material, formal, efficient, and final, which aid to the claim that there is the complete understanding of the thing (Aristotle 9). The arguing over the fifth cause is being an explanatory factor that has been argued correctly by Aristotle; according to him, chance is not a fifth cause of the explanatory factors. The four causes have been accounted in-depth by Aristotle giving the meaning to each of them. The cause of material is the element from which a thing is made, as in the case of furniture the material it is made from is wood, and the furniture is made of wood. The formal cause focuses on the shape and the arrangement as the shape and the dimensions are unique to this thing; the efficient cause of the thing is, thus, the source by which a thing as it is. This defines how a thing came to the existence the way it is. The final cause is the purpose, in which it is intended or the end of its existence. In the case provided, the purpose of furniture is the provision of comfort to people, and these are the four causes of the thing. Aristotle argued that there were only four causes for defending his position that in order to understand something. There are the questions on the account of what a thing is. He argued that there were only four answers that fully satisfy the question, as there is nothing else left to explain the question. All objects and events according to Aristotle will only admit to the four explanatory factors. The objection of notion of having only four causes has been argued that ther were the things that happened by chance, or by the account of luck. If two people are romantically interested in one another but there is no one daring to initiate anything beyond friendship. They both plan separately to have a vacation and bump into each other in the same place and on the same day of their vacation. They fall in love during their vocational stay. The situation is seen as an event of chance or luck. This can be described to be the luck due to the fact that they welcome the outcome, though they had been earlier willing to initiate. The circumstances they had created triggered their romantic relationship, thus, the event happened by chance as both were on vacation at the same period in the same place without not knowing of each other (Coffrin 12). This event could be explained by chance or luck as there were no intentions from each agent during the outcome. The occurrences of these events happened by chance as Aristotle accepts, but the outer side of their meeting can only be explained by the cause of efficiency. The fact of their vacation was due to necessity as it had been the cause of their meeting. The sequence of events can be explained through the reference of efficient causes due to the action of agents these events occurred. Love was the final cause that had been developed as the description of the event occurring by luck or chance; it is not the explanation of causes of the events occurring (Coffrin 11). Thus, the outcome was by luck but the cause was not by luck. This is because the chance and luck cannot produce an event that happened concurrently with the other four causes of this event. The simultaneous occurrence of events and circumstances is concurrence, and, thus, the meeting of the two ones was a coincidence. If a man builds a house, he is a real cause of the house. If he is still a musician, the statement has no sense as that music was the cause of the house. The admission that music was a concurrence cause of the house being sensible, as this man is a musician, and this happened simultaneously with the house building (Aristotle). The cause of anything is not by chance, rather than knowing that music was indeed the cause of the house and this lacks the power of explanation. It does not help to the fact how the house came to be the explanation that it had been built by that person knowing music (Aristotle 16). Thus, there is no way that chance can help in explaining how an event came to be as it is only an explanatory factor. According to Aristotle chance is the concurrence cause of things, as it can be formulated; for the happening of any event by chance, there is no intention from the side of an agent to achieve the outcome at that time. The intentional acts are the ones that cause an event, and the occurrence of anything during the time of the cause is a concurrence with the event and not a cause of the event. The concurrence by chance with other causes, thus, puts the chance as a cause by the virtue of concurrence. Though this argument is not implicitly made by Aristotle, he agreed with each of the premises as he gave an example of a man meeting with someone owing him money; the man did not do anything there in the time for the reason. Thus, his intension was not to collect money, but it was by chance that he had fulfilled this till the end. It is agreeable with Aristotle that the occurrence of events by chance is the unintentional acts, and that the objects and events were caused by some intentional acts as the four causes identified as intentional acts. Aristotle gives the account of a sculptor who is creating a statue. It is he who intends to use the material; he intends for the statue to take the shape and the form it is taking; he intends to be a creator of the statue as a source of the statue existence and the intended purpose of the statue. The four causes are the intentional acts, and due to the fact they are the only causes, all the causes are intentional; hence, the events are triggered by intentional acts (Coffrin). The presentation of these arguments is believed to be by that chance, and the luck exists, though they are not the real causes of events (Johnson 22). This is due to the fact that the chance can be a cause of anything but it is more reasonable that the chance is simultaneous with the actual cause of objects and events. Thus, Aristotle claimed of the four causes to be binding. Aristotle is making points that there is nothing that comes to by by luck the way the things happen as a result of four causes; as this could mean that calling the causes of things to be the luck is that the true cause is unknown. His theory brings to light being a genuine cause wherever there is a cause of luck. His definition of luck is an accidental cause; the correct analysis of luck is if it is a true cause, , it can be conceded the luck to be an accidental cause due to which it is existing. Most popular orders	1,563	ENGLISH	1
by Hazrat Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmud Ahmad, Khalifatul Masih II(ra) Throughout history, women have been powerless and weak. Before the Holy Prophet Muhammad’s arrival, a woman was regarded as man’s slave and property, and no religion or nation could offer the woman rights and freedom. When their husbands died, they were forced to marry relatives or sold for money. There was no law that could protect them. Prophet Muhammad proclaimed in the name of God that men and women are equal. He declared that a man does not own his wife. He may not sell or force her into slavery. The teaching of the Holy Prophet raised the status of women as being not only equal to men, but also gave them freedom for social, physical and spiritual development. This book is about women’s rights and freedom in Islam and shows that Holy Prophet Muhammad was indeed the liberator of women.	<urn:uuid:3c0f6c22-4dd6-41ed-9c58-d597d4352007>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.alislam.org/book/muhammad-liberator-women/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251671078.88/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125071430-20200125100430-00342.warc.gz	en	0.980223	192	4.25	4	[ -0.2713207006454468, 0.792796790599823, -0.3025991916656494, 0.023042017593979836, -0.3379589021205902, 0.39715084433555603, 0.22896194458007812, 0.0999307930469513, 0.15524378418922424, 0.11221551150083542, -0.163930281996727, -0.044140204787254333, 0.2083890736103058, -0.2130934149026870...	9	by Hazrat Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmud Ahmad, Khalifatul Masih II(ra) Throughout history, women have been powerless and weak. Before the Holy Prophet Muhammad’s arrival, a woman was regarded as man’s slave and property, and no religion or nation could offer the woman rights and freedom. When their husbands died, they were forced to marry relatives or sold for money. There was no law that could protect them. Prophet Muhammad proclaimed in the name of God that men and women are equal. He declared that a man does not own his wife. He may not sell or force her into slavery. The teaching of the Holy Prophet raised the status of women as being not only equal to men, but also gave them freedom for social, physical and spiritual development. This book is about women’s rights and freedom in Islam and shows that Holy Prophet Muhammad was indeed the liberator of women.	183	ENGLISH	1
That time the Soviets tried to design a flying tank In 1942 Soviet Russia attempted to create a flying tank to aid efforts during WWII. The crazy thing is, it kind of worked. The Antonov A-40 Krylya Tanka was designed to glide to the ground after being towed into the air by a bomber. Early efforts to transport tanks by air Delivering tanks by air was no new concept. Other nations had already successfully loaded tanks on gliders. In the 1930s, nations toyed around with dropping tanks by parachute. Some even tried dumping them into shallow water from low altitudes and fishing them out. The Soviet airborne forces had already strapped small T-27 tanks to bombers and dropped them into the water. In the 1940 Occupation of Bessarabia, tanks were dropped by bombers from a few feet in the air. Dropping the tank with the crew The main problem with all these methods is that the tank couldn’t be dropped without the crew. It had to sit there for who knows how long before the crew arrived. Tanks were expensive, and Soviet leadership didn’t like them to be vulnerable. The A-40 Krylya Tanka potentially solved this issue. They needed a glider that could accommodate the crew and the essential operational components of the tank. Oleg to the rescue The Soviet Air Force had engineer Oleg Antonov bust out the drawing board and got to sketching. He said to heck with the glider and built a biplane with a detachable cradle to hold the tank. The tank could fly onto the battlefield and detach the wings in minutes. They only tested the design once. Despite the tank being stripped of its ammunition, fuel, armaments, and headlights, it was still too heavy for the bomber to drag high enough into the air. The pilot had to detach early, landed safely, and vow never to do that again.	<urn:uuid:180eac93-9783-4611-b449-0e38838466a3>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.history101.com/soviets-tried-design-flying-tank/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251684146.65/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126013015-20200126043015-00164.warc.gz	en	0.981452	394	3.484375	3	[ -0.9102720022201538, 0.0797123908996582, -0.008205625228583813, 0.19129720330238342, -0.11765576153993607, -0.043001674115657806, 0.05036444962024689, 0.4728573262691498, -0.47002407908439636, -0.10162664949893951, 0.1392604112625122, 0.1480579674243927, 0.42755553126335144, 0.480052173137...	3	That time the Soviets tried to design a flying tank In 1942 Soviet Russia attempted to create a flying tank to aid efforts during WWII. The crazy thing is, it kind of worked. The Antonov A-40 Krylya Tanka was designed to glide to the ground after being towed into the air by a bomber. Early efforts to transport tanks by air Delivering tanks by air was no new concept. Other nations had already successfully loaded tanks on gliders. In the 1930s, nations toyed around with dropping tanks by parachute. Some even tried dumping them into shallow water from low altitudes and fishing them out. The Soviet airborne forces had already strapped small T-27 tanks to bombers and dropped them into the water. In the 1940 Occupation of Bessarabia, tanks were dropped by bombers from a few feet in the air. Dropping the tank with the crew The main problem with all these methods is that the tank couldn’t be dropped without the crew. It had to sit there for who knows how long before the crew arrived. Tanks were expensive, and Soviet leadership didn’t like them to be vulnerable. The A-40 Krylya Tanka potentially solved this issue. They needed a glider that could accommodate the crew and the essential operational components of the tank. Oleg to the rescue The Soviet Air Force had engineer Oleg Antonov bust out the drawing board and got to sketching. He said to heck with the glider and built a biplane with a detachable cradle to hold the tank. The tank could fly onto the battlefield and detach the wings in minutes. They only tested the design once. Despite the tank being stripped of its ammunition, fuel, armaments, and headlights, it was still too heavy for the bomber to drag high enough into the air. The pilot had to detach early, landed safely, and vow never to do that again.	400	ENGLISH	1
Fort Leonard Wood had to be built quickly as troops were scheduled to arrive in only a few weeks. The construction was completed in June 1941, 1600 buildings were built in only a matter of six months. This cost was $37 million. In March of 1941, the first of many soldiers to train at Fort Leonard Wood arrived. During just World War II, 300,000 soldiers passed through the facility. General Leonard Wood was a recipient of the Medal of Honor, and served as a soldier and surgeon for forty years. He lead the Rough Riders in the Spanish American War, and worked with Theodore Roosevelt until his promotion. Leonard Wood served as Chief of Staff from 1910 to 1914, and then served as the Governor General of the Philippine Islands until his death in 1927. Memorial Grove's entrance is a statue of two giant pistols leaned against each other to create an arch known as the Gateway to the Regiment. There are thousands of stones dedicated to fallen Military Police soldiers, they create the walkway to the grove. Countless benches line the walkway, some engraved with soldiers names and some statues in order to honor MP soldiers that have sacrificed their lives.	<urn:uuid:44054a65-a68c-4155-949d-a83375392e9b>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.theclio.com/entry/65655	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251779833.86/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128153713-20200128183713-00359.warc.gz	en	0.990749	232	3.328125	3	[ -0.049928899854421616, 0.44752568006515503, 0.6245996952056885, -0.5193899869918823, -0.3416403830051422, -0.30134791135787964, -0.2229493111371994, -0.1569303572177887, -0.04706741124391556, 0.03239870071411133, 0.34387415647506714, -0.14090444147586823, -0.08302489668130875, 0.9177005290...	2	Fort Leonard Wood had to be built quickly as troops were scheduled to arrive in only a few weeks. The construction was completed in June 1941, 1600 buildings were built in only a matter of six months. This cost was $37 million. In March of 1941, the first of many soldiers to train at Fort Leonard Wood arrived. During just World War II, 300,000 soldiers passed through the facility. General Leonard Wood was a recipient of the Medal of Honor, and served as a soldier and surgeon for forty years. He lead the Rough Riders in the Spanish American War, and worked with Theodore Roosevelt until his promotion. Leonard Wood served as Chief of Staff from 1910 to 1914, and then served as the Governor General of the Philippine Islands until his death in 1927. Memorial Grove's entrance is a statue of two giant pistols leaned against each other to create an arch known as the Gateway to the Regiment. There are thousands of stones dedicated to fallen Military Police soldiers, they create the walkway to the grove. Countless benches line the walkway, some engraved with soldiers names and some statues in order to honor MP soldiers that have sacrificed their lives.	260	ENGLISH	1
Frankincense also known as “olibanum” is a dried resin produced from the frankincense tree. When the bark of the tree is stripped, the sap called as the tears are collected and utilized for many purposes. In the ancient world, it was well-liked and used for aromatherapy and perfumery. Frankincense was also used religiously as well as medicinally. It’s popularity dates back to 1500 B.C. and more for then 5,000 years it was traded on the Arabian peninsula. Pliny the Elder, the Roman botanist and historian wrote in the early century A.D that expensive frankincense resins had made the southern Arabians rich. At that time, the Arabians were known as some of the richest people on earth, due primarily to their mass production of frankincense. Interesting enough, there are quite some mentions of the use of frankincense in the Bible. It is evident from the Bible that one of the three wise men presented baby Jesus with a gift of frankincense. The value of it may have been tremendously high during that time. The Egyptians considered it as a all-cure. Historically, it was used to treat asthma, bronchitis, snake bites, diarrhea, swellings and other ailments. It was also quite popular in traditional Chinese medicine and Ayurveda. Many cultures believed the smoke of frankincense could calm one’s mood. It was a common practice to use the incense during rites of passages like funerals and weddings. The crystallized pieces were used as incense by burning the resin on top of lit coal, producing perfumed smoke. It is known that the ancient Greeks and Romans imported resins in massive quantity to be used as incense during cremations and for other purposes. The Christians and Hebrews made use of the incense in many of their religious ceremonies and burials. It was quite popular among the Assyrians and Babylonians as well. Even the Egyptians used frankincense as an important element in their daily lives. They knew how to use makeup, and the ash from burned frankincense was sometimes used as an eyeliner for both men and women. Paintings of frankincense can be seen on walls of the temple of Queen Hatshepsut, a queen of Egypt that ruled for nearly two decades. Another use of it was the bark of the tree as a dye. In ancient days, the bark was utilized as a dye and is still practiced today. Well, that’s the history of frankincense. Hope you enjoyed reading it.	<urn:uuid:03572cc4-a9c4-4955-8769-61f56706980e>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://reedshandmadeincense.com/blog/incense/history-of-frankincense-an-ancient-remedy/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250593994.14/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118221909-20200119005909-00094.warc.gz	en	0.982654	541	3.609375	4	[ -0.03520110249519348, 0.299225389957428, 0.25727713108062744, -0.15163521468639374, 0.28172945976257324, 0.08336067199707031, 0.48419150710105896, -0.10489747673273087, -0.2227620631456375, 0.10195715725421906, -0.16761109232902527, -0.583961009979248, -0.23918642103672028, 0.3945939242839...	3	Frankincense also known as “olibanum” is a dried resin produced from the frankincense tree. When the bark of the tree is stripped, the sap called as the tears are collected and utilized for many purposes. In the ancient world, it was well-liked and used for aromatherapy and perfumery. Frankincense was also used religiously as well as medicinally. It’s popularity dates back to 1500 B.C. and more for then 5,000 years it was traded on the Arabian peninsula. Pliny the Elder, the Roman botanist and historian wrote in the early century A.D that expensive frankincense resins had made the southern Arabians rich. At that time, the Arabians were known as some of the richest people on earth, due primarily to their mass production of frankincense. Interesting enough, there are quite some mentions of the use of frankincense in the Bible. It is evident from the Bible that one of the three wise men presented baby Jesus with a gift of frankincense. The value of it may have been tremendously high during that time. The Egyptians considered it as a all-cure. Historically, it was used to treat asthma, bronchitis, snake bites, diarrhea, swellings and other ailments. It was also quite popular in traditional Chinese medicine and Ayurveda. Many cultures believed the smoke of frankincense could calm one’s mood. It was a common practice to use the incense during rites of passages like funerals and weddings. The crystallized pieces were used as incense by burning the resin on top of lit coal, producing perfumed smoke. It is known that the ancient Greeks and Romans imported resins in massive quantity to be used as incense during cremations and for other purposes. The Christians and Hebrews made use of the incense in many of their religious ceremonies and burials. It was quite popular among the Assyrians and Babylonians as well. Even the Egyptians used frankincense as an important element in their daily lives. They knew how to use makeup, and the ash from burned frankincense was sometimes used as an eyeliner for both men and women. Paintings of frankincense can be seen on walls of the temple of Queen Hatshepsut, a queen of Egypt that ruled for nearly two decades. Another use of it was the bark of the tree as a dye. In ancient days, the bark was utilized as a dye and is still practiced today. Well, that’s the history of frankincense. Hope you enjoyed reading it.	529	ENGLISH	1
Hello boys and girls! How are you? It´s time for grammar and today we´re going to talk about Narrative tenses. When telling a story, what kind of verbal tenses must you use? For example, what verbal tense do you normally use to ‘set a scene’? And to describe a longer, continuous past action? If you have some doubts when writing a story, you must read this post. Go on! To start with, narrative tenses are those tenses that you use when you talk about a past event (a story, an experience…) There are four main tenses. They are: past simple (the most common), past continuous, past perfect and past perfect continuous. You use the past simple to talk about the main events in a story, and to talk about consecutive actions in the past. Example 1: Mike got up and left the room. (First he got up and then he left the room). Example 2: I didn´t like the sinopsis so I didn´t buy the book. Example 3: My mum picked up the phone and asked for a taxi. You use the past continuous to describe a longer, continuous past action. This is often an action which was in progress when another action happened. So, it´s often interrupted by another event (past simple). This tense is often used to set the scene at the beginning of a story. Example 1: When I woke up that morning it was snowing and my husband was already having breakfast. Example 2: While I was trying to do my homework, my little brothers started fighting. Example 3: Sarah was talking to his boyfriend when the waitress brought the bill. You use the past perfect to talk about an action which happened before the specific time in the past when the main events of the story happened. The actions are often mentioned out of time sequence and the past perfect makes the order clear. Had is often contracted to ‘d. Example 1: When Miranda arrived at the station, the bus had left. (First the bus left. Then, Miranda arrived at the station). Example 2: The bank cashier didn´t realize that she hadn´t locked the door. Example 3: I´d been waiting for an hour. My husband had promised to be be here at about eleven. PAST PERFECT CONTINUOUS You use the past perfect continuous to talk about a longer continuous action that was going on before the specific time in the past when the main events of the story happened. Example 1: I was exhausted because I´d been studying all day. Example 2: My wife went to the doctor because she hadn´t been feeling well. *Example 3: Robert had been studying all the afternoon when he found out that the exam was cancelled. EXAMPLE: A SHORT STORY It was ten o´clock in the morning and Natasha was sitting in the restaurant waiting for Jack to arrive. She was exhausted, because she had been travelling all night. She was feeling anxious too. She wasn´t sure if she would recognize him after all this time. It was difficult to believe but they hadn´t seen each other for nine years now. She wondered if Jack had changed much. Nine years ago he had been nice, but not very handsome. Natasha looked at her watch again. She´d been waiting for half an hour. He had promised to be there at about eight, but he had never been a very punctual person. She ordered a glass of red wine. Suddenly, she saw him. He was wearing a long coat and was looking round the other tables, obviously looking for her. She stood up and walked towards him. ‘You look fantasticc, Dad’, she said. And that is all for today. Do you have any doubts? If so, leave us a comment. Once more, thank you for visiting our blog!	<urn:uuid:63bf1473-6de6-438a-ac41-dc325de763f7>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.esichiclana.com/2019/11/21/grammar-12-narrative-tenses/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250593994.14/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118221909-20200119005909-00227.warc.gz	en	0.981266	836	3.578125	4	[ 0.017132243141531944, 0.07742880284786224, 0.2546778917312622, -0.031073110178112984, -0.4222375750541687, 0.19153857231140137, 0.32309722900390625, 0.10067858546972275, 0.3465559780597687, -0.06317107379436493, -0.1016014963388443, 0.271268367767334, 0.02978403866291046, 0.428049713373184...	4	Hello boys and girls! How are you? It´s time for grammar and today we´re going to talk about Narrative tenses. When telling a story, what kind of verbal tenses must you use? For example, what verbal tense do you normally use to ‘set a scene’? And to describe a longer, continuous past action? If you have some doubts when writing a story, you must read this post. Go on! To start with, narrative tenses are those tenses that you use when you talk about a past event (a story, an experience…) There are four main tenses. They are: past simple (the most common), past continuous, past perfect and past perfect continuous. You use the past simple to talk about the main events in a story, and to talk about consecutive actions in the past. Example 1: Mike got up and left the room. (First he got up and then he left the room). Example 2: I didn´t like the sinopsis so I didn´t buy the book. Example 3: My mum picked up the phone and asked for a taxi. You use the past continuous to describe a longer, continuous past action. This is often an action which was in progress when another action happened. So, it´s often interrupted by another event (past simple). This tense is often used to set the scene at the beginning of a story. Example 1: When I woke up that morning it was snowing and my husband was already having breakfast. Example 2: While I was trying to do my homework, my little brothers started fighting. Example 3: Sarah was talking to his boyfriend when the waitress brought the bill. You use the past perfect to talk about an action which happened before the specific time in the past when the main events of the story happened. The actions are often mentioned out of time sequence and the past perfect makes the order clear. Had is often contracted to ‘d. Example 1: When Miranda arrived at the station, the bus had left. (First the bus left. Then, Miranda arrived at the station). Example 2: The bank cashier didn´t realize that she hadn´t locked the door. Example 3: I´d been waiting for an hour. My husband had promised to be be here at about eleven. PAST PERFECT CONTINUOUS You use the past perfect continuous to talk about a longer continuous action that was going on before the specific time in the past when the main events of the story happened. Example 1: I was exhausted because I´d been studying all day. Example 2: My wife went to the doctor because she hadn´t been feeling well. *Example 3: Robert had been studying all the afternoon when he found out that the exam was cancelled. EXAMPLE: A SHORT STORY It was ten o´clock in the morning and Natasha was sitting in the restaurant waiting for Jack to arrive. She was exhausted, because she had been travelling all night. She was feeling anxious too. She wasn´t sure if she would recognize him after all this time. It was difficult to believe but they hadn´t seen each other for nine years now. She wondered if Jack had changed much. Nine years ago he had been nice, but not very handsome. Natasha looked at her watch again. She´d been waiting for half an hour. He had promised to be there at about eight, but he had never been a very punctual person. She ordered a glass of red wine. Suddenly, she saw him. He was wearing a long coat and was looking round the other tables, obviously looking for her. She stood up and walked towards him. ‘You look fantasticc, Dad’, she said. And that is all for today. Do you have any doubts? If so, leave us a comment. Once more, thank you for visiting our blog!	804	ENGLISH	1
Worksheet: Two-Step Problems with Bar Models: Numbers up to 100 In this worksheet, we will practice solving two-step addition and subtraction problems with numbers up to 100 by drawing part–whole and comparative bar models. James’s sticker book contained 62 stickers. He bought a new pack of 12 stickers and found that he already had 5 of those stickers in his book. He stuck the stickers he did not already have into his book. Pick one way to calculate the number of stickers in his book now. - AHe had new stickers. So, there are stickers in his book. - BHe had new stickers. So, there are stickers in his book. - CHe had new stickers. So, there are stickers in his book. - DHe had new stickers. So, there are stickers in his book. - EHe had new stickers. So, there are stickers in his book. There were 68 biscuits in a box. A boy ate 43 biscuits, and his sister ate 12. How many biscuits did they eat, and how many are left? - AThey ate 25 biscuits, and 43 are left. - BThey ate 55 biscuits, and 13 are left. - CThey ate 13 biscuits, and 55 are left. - DThey ate 56 biscuits, and 12 are left. Scarlett, Charlotte, and David were collecting leaves for an art project. Scarlett collected 48 leaves. Charlotte collected 13 more leaves than Scarlett. David collected 12 more leaves than Charlotte. How many leaves did David collect? There were 83 raisins in a box. A boy ate 20 raisins and his friend ate 31. How many raisins are left? Michael brought 52 blocks and Hannah brought 18 blocks to build a castle. They used 62 blocks to build the castle. How many blocks did they start with? How many blocks did they have left after building the castle? Daniel had 6,950 LE in the bank. Then he withdrew 1,166 LE and after that he deposited 1,304 LE. How much money is in his account now? There were 28 biscuits in a box. A boy ate 11 biscuits, and his sister ate 13. How many biscuits did they eat, and how many are left? - AThey ate 17 biscuits, and 11 are left. - BThey ate 24 biscuits, and 4 are left. - CThey ate 4 biscuits, and 24 are left. - DThey ate 15 biscuits, and 13 are left. In a quiz, Michael could correctly answer 23 of the 82 questions. Madison knew the answers to half of the other questions. Which model shows this situation? Write an expression for the number of questions that Madison answered. In the second grade at a school, 41 students have hot lunches. The number of students who have packed lunches is 8 more than the number who have hot lunches. How many students have packed lunches? How many students are there in the second grade? Liam, Noah, and Jennifer were playing a game. Liam scored 52 points. Noah scored 21 more points than Liam. Jennifer scored 9 points fewer than Noah. How many points did Jennifer score? In a garden, there are 53 roses. There are 19 fewer daffodils than roses. How many daffodils are there? How many flowers are in the garden? Isabella and Madison were taking photos for an art project. Isabella took 11 fewer photos than Madison. Madison took 50 photos. How many photos did Isabella take? How many photos did the girls take altogether? William usually runs 20 miles over 2 or 3 days. If he ran 5 miles on the first day, determine the number of miles he will run during the second and third days.	<urn:uuid:6605cac4-9bf6-4d9c-8585-6879c3494246>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.nagwa.com/en/worksheets/594106564937/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598217.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120081337-20200120105337-00485.warc.gz	en	0.98248	798	3.765625	4	[ -0.5908311605453491, 0.09751808643341064, 0.2748870849609375, -0.28801727294921875, -0.6375573873519897, -0.01931905373930931, -0.0996919721364975, -0.03391671180725098, 0.07119881361722946, 0.10808106511831284, 0.054525226354599, -0.5693596601486206, 0.05990654602646828, 0.019853256642818...	1	Worksheet: Two-Step Problems with Bar Models: Numbers up to 100 In this worksheet, we will practice solving two-step addition and subtraction problems with numbers up to 100 by drawing part–whole and comparative bar models. James’s sticker book contained 62 stickers. He bought a new pack of 12 stickers and found that he already had 5 of those stickers in his book. He stuck the stickers he did not already have into his book. Pick one way to calculate the number of stickers in his book now. - AHe had new stickers. So, there are stickers in his book. - BHe had new stickers. So, there are stickers in his book. - CHe had new stickers. So, there are stickers in his book. - DHe had new stickers. So, there are stickers in his book. - EHe had new stickers. So, there are stickers in his book. There were 68 biscuits in a box. A boy ate 43 biscuits, and his sister ate 12. How many biscuits did they eat, and how many are left? - AThey ate 25 biscuits, and 43 are left. - BThey ate 55 biscuits, and 13 are left. - CThey ate 13 biscuits, and 55 are left. - DThey ate 56 biscuits, and 12 are left. Scarlett, Charlotte, and David were collecting leaves for an art project. Scarlett collected 48 leaves. Charlotte collected 13 more leaves than Scarlett. David collected 12 more leaves than Charlotte. How many leaves did David collect? There were 83 raisins in a box. A boy ate 20 raisins and his friend ate 31. How many raisins are left? Michael brought 52 blocks and Hannah brought 18 blocks to build a castle. They used 62 blocks to build the castle. How many blocks did they start with? How many blocks did they have left after building the castle? Daniel had 6,950 LE in the bank. Then he withdrew 1,166 LE and after that he deposited 1,304 LE. How much money is in his account now? There were 28 biscuits in a box. A boy ate 11 biscuits, and his sister ate 13. How many biscuits did they eat, and how many are left? - AThey ate 17 biscuits, and 11 are left. - BThey ate 24 biscuits, and 4 are left. - CThey ate 4 biscuits, and 24 are left. - DThey ate 15 biscuits, and 13 are left. In a quiz, Michael could correctly answer 23 of the 82 questions. Madison knew the answers to half of the other questions. Which model shows this situation? Write an expression for the number of questions that Madison answered. In the second grade at a school, 41 students have hot lunches. The number of students who have packed lunches is 8 more than the number who have hot lunches. How many students have packed lunches? How many students are there in the second grade? Liam, Noah, and Jennifer were playing a game. Liam scored 52 points. Noah scored 21 more points than Liam. Jennifer scored 9 points fewer than Noah. How many points did Jennifer score? In a garden, there are 53 roses. There are 19 fewer daffodils than roses. How many daffodils are there? How many flowers are in the garden? Isabella and Madison were taking photos for an art project. Isabella took 11 fewer photos than Madison. Madison took 50 photos. How many photos did Isabella take? How many photos did the girls take altogether? William usually runs 20 miles over 2 or 3 days. If he ran 5 miles on the first day, determine the number of miles he will run during the second and third days.	849	ENGLISH	1
A Short History of Argentina The first navigator who arrived was Juan Díaz de Solís in 1516. He did in a fight with the natives shortly after his arrival. In 1520 Fernando de Magallanes stopped for a short while during one of his voyages around the world. He died during the trip Sebastián Cabot arrived in 1526, naming Rio de la Plata in hopes that it would make him wealthy. Cabo found neither treasures nor wealth, however he was fortunate to returne tho his homeland safely. Even though the Spanish navigators did not find wealth, they claimed the territory for their king. During 300 years Argentina, as well as most of South America, was a Spanish territory. Thousands of Spanish settlers arrived to build houses, forts, mines and ports. The founded the city of Buenos Aires, which today is the capital of Argentina. The Spanish integrated Argentina into their system by establishing the Vice Royalty of Rio de la Plata in and Buenos Aires became a flourishing port. In 1806 British forces arrived the land, but their invasion failed. That boosted the confidence of the colonists who sought independence from Spain. Buenos Aires formally declared independence from Spain on July 9, 1816.	<urn:uuid:79db34ef-5387-41eb-9a6b-039e07eb26cf>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.studycountry.com/guide/AR-history.htm	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250610919.33/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123131001-20200123160001-00214.warc.gz	en	0.980264	256	3.640625	4	[ -0.00868527963757515, 0.0002520723210182041, 0.7912411689758301, -0.0630624070763588, -0.3283115029335022, -0.4935572147369385, 0.1660691201686859, 0.22765511274337769, -0.05031861737370491, -0.22774377465248108, 0.10250111669301987, -0.08311466127634048, 0.0029769481625407934, 0.530261874...	4	A Short History of Argentina The first navigator who arrived was Juan Díaz de Solís in 1516. He did in a fight with the natives shortly after his arrival. In 1520 Fernando de Magallanes stopped for a short while during one of his voyages around the world. He died during the trip Sebastián Cabot arrived in 1526, naming Rio de la Plata in hopes that it would make him wealthy. Cabo found neither treasures nor wealth, however he was fortunate to returne tho his homeland safely. Even though the Spanish navigators did not find wealth, they claimed the territory for their king. During 300 years Argentina, as well as most of South America, was a Spanish territory. Thousands of Spanish settlers arrived to build houses, forts, mines and ports. The founded the city of Buenos Aires, which today is the capital of Argentina. The Spanish integrated Argentina into their system by establishing the Vice Royalty of Rio de la Plata in and Buenos Aires became a flourishing port. In 1806 British forces arrived the land, but their invasion failed. That boosted the confidence of the colonists who sought independence from Spain. Buenos Aires formally declared independence from Spain on July 9, 1816.	268	ENGLISH	1
In the story, Insects, Malaria, Reeds, Rapid, Lilies, and the route caused Rose and Allnutt great difficult and painful experience on their way to the Bore River. They had to pass the Lake in order to come to the Bore River because there was no other way for them to choose. Along the Lake s sides were masses of soil. They formed a huge delta as much as thirty miles along each of its three sides. Besides, the Lake was filled half of mud half of water, steaming in a tropical heat, overgrown with dense vegetation. It was the home of the very little, pestilent animals. When being into the Bore River, Rose and Alnutt found out that Reeds and Lilies circled them and became the obstacle for them to go a head. They had to jump into the water to pull the boat passing the obstacle. They were filthy with mud and Reeds and insects surrounded them. That was why they had Malaria: They were filthy with mud. Their sojourn in the semi-darkness had changed their deep sunburn into an unhealthy yellow color which was accentuated by their malaria. (pg.183) Not only the route made them a difficult time to pass by, but the weather also caused them a painful experience. It was so hot and stormy. On the way to the Bore River, Rose and Alnutt could not tolerate the hot weather. They looked like having steam bathes in middle of the day. Their skin color changed and became patches: the sun blazed down upon them with a crushing violence they had not known in the sunless gorges of the upper river. The heat was colossal (Pg138). Even though the heat of the weather, they still steered the boat down the River to fight with German. While they prepared a plan to attack the enemy, a storm came. Thunder and the strong wind scared them. They had to struggle with the wind to maintain their balance on the boat. The following rain wet them with cold and scared. Then the violence of nature sunk their boat down to the bottom of the Lake: Then came the rain, pouring down through the blackness in solid rivers Alnutt had selected the type to fuse he had employed any other night have been touched off by the pounding waves, but the water which could toss about the boat like a toy could not drive nails (Pg.218).	<urn:uuid:0b5c72a7-05ca-46ca-96ad-147fb509b8c1>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://essay.ua-referat.com/Ordeal	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250595282.35/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119205448-20200119233448-00183.warc.gz	en	0.990337	492	3.546875	4	[ -0.09163552522659302, 0.07898125052452087, 0.27554845809936523, 0.2719106674194336, 0.30850881338119507, -0.2265625, 0.2865506112575531, 0.028769660741090775, -0.33234095573425293, 0.00931620504707098, -0.07266503572463989, -0.16794715821743011, 0.21169036626815796, 0.17905081808567047, ...	5	In the story, Insects, Malaria, Reeds, Rapid, Lilies, and the route caused Rose and Allnutt great difficult and painful experience on their way to the Bore River. They had to pass the Lake in order to come to the Bore River because there was no other way for them to choose. Along the Lake s sides were masses of soil. They formed a huge delta as much as thirty miles along each of its three sides. Besides, the Lake was filled half of mud half of water, steaming in a tropical heat, overgrown with dense vegetation. It was the home of the very little, pestilent animals. When being into the Bore River, Rose and Alnutt found out that Reeds and Lilies circled them and became the obstacle for them to go a head. They had to jump into the water to pull the boat passing the obstacle. They were filthy with mud and Reeds and insects surrounded them. That was why they had Malaria: They were filthy with mud. Their sojourn in the semi-darkness had changed their deep sunburn into an unhealthy yellow color which was accentuated by their malaria. (pg.183) Not only the route made them a difficult time to pass by, but the weather also caused them a painful experience. It was so hot and stormy. On the way to the Bore River, Rose and Alnutt could not tolerate the hot weather. They looked like having steam bathes in middle of the day. Their skin color changed and became patches: the sun blazed down upon them with a crushing violence they had not known in the sunless gorges of the upper river. The heat was colossal (Pg138). Even though the heat of the weather, they still steered the boat down the River to fight with German. While they prepared a plan to attack the enemy, a storm came. Thunder and the strong wind scared them. They had to struggle with the wind to maintain their balance on the boat. The following rain wet them with cold and scared. Then the violence of nature sunk their boat down to the bottom of the Lake: Then came the rain, pouring down through the blackness in solid rivers Alnutt had selected the type to fuse he had employed any other night have been touched off by the pounding waves, but the water which could toss about the boat like a toy could not drive nails (Pg.218).	500	ENGLISH	1
\|\|measure the expected increase in mutations in the surviving peoples of Hiroshima and Nagasaki who were subjected to the largest radiation experiment in history. Investigation of radiation damage was of both scientific and political interest. The DOE had been using relatively crude measures to document the expected increase in mutations among offspring of victims of the bombs, but none was demonstrable. What was needed was a more sensitive test. Here was a government project desperate for rescue. The real problem was that the base line, i.e. normal, rate of spontaneous mutations in humans was not known and could not be measured with existing techniques, so it was hard to determine whether or not the bombs had caused an increase in deleterious mutation unless the increase was huge. New approaches were needed. So the question was asked whether DNA sequences could be looked at directly to measure changes. How much DNA would have to be sequenced and how many people would have to be compared to arrive at an estimate of the natural mutation rate? The conclusion was clear: much more DNA sequencing would be required than any technology available at the time could hope to support. However, someone made the facetious suggestion that if we could just sequence a couple of whole genomes, then by comparison we would know. That idea, once sown, caused excitement about how incredible it would be to look at a whole sequence - a whole blueprint. The meeting ended with the original question swept up in the larger, radical challenge that the DOE should consider harnessing the technological infrastructure of the National Labs to improve sequencing technology, and even more, to take on the goal of obtaining the complete sequences for the human and other genomes. The issue was debated in the scientific community with ardent supporters and equally ardent opponents. The NIH initially declined interest in the project on the grounds that such technology development was not within their sphere and was best left to the National Labs. But the political winds began to blow favorably over DOE's move and NIH quickly rethought its position and did its best to become the "lead" agency for this new project. Jim Watson of helical fame led the NIH attack. In his inimitable style he skillfully generated national interest in the project. A cooperative agreement between the two agencies in 1988 solved the territorial problem and lead to their joint funding of research towards mutually acceptable goals starting in 1990. It was not an easy alliance. The different styles of the agencies and their leaders promoted deep mistrust and suspicion, aided by Watson's vigorous and colorful derision of the DOE National Labs. That uneasy alliance has now mellowed.	<urn:uuid:0ad71d55-a443-4a56-aecd-7163eb55e783>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://collections.lib.utah.edu/details?id=320739	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250610919.33/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123131001-20200123160001-00002.warc.gz	en	0.980236	510	3.515625	4	[ -0.5324859619140625, 0.0901414155960083, 0.10847922414541245, -0.14971277117729187, 0.4947926998138428, -0.014694510027766228, -0.08714909851551056, 0.3214366137981415, -0.24814535677433014, 0.15088769793510437, 0.35734257102012634, -0.051994770765304565, 0.13820907473564148, 0.37868326902...	1	\|\|measure the expected increase in mutations in the surviving peoples of Hiroshima and Nagasaki who were subjected to the largest radiation experiment in history. Investigation of radiation damage was of both scientific and political interest. The DOE had been using relatively crude measures to document the expected increase in mutations among offspring of victims of the bombs, but none was demonstrable. What was needed was a more sensitive test. Here was a government project desperate for rescue. The real problem was that the base line, i.e. normal, rate of spontaneous mutations in humans was not known and could not be measured with existing techniques, so it was hard to determine whether or not the bombs had caused an increase in deleterious mutation unless the increase was huge. New approaches were needed. So the question was asked whether DNA sequences could be looked at directly to measure changes. How much DNA would have to be sequenced and how many people would have to be compared to arrive at an estimate of the natural mutation rate? The conclusion was clear: much more DNA sequencing would be required than any technology available at the time could hope to support. However, someone made the facetious suggestion that if we could just sequence a couple of whole genomes, then by comparison we would know. That idea, once sown, caused excitement about how incredible it would be to look at a whole sequence - a whole blueprint. The meeting ended with the original question swept up in the larger, radical challenge that the DOE should consider harnessing the technological infrastructure of the National Labs to improve sequencing technology, and even more, to take on the goal of obtaining the complete sequences for the human and other genomes. The issue was debated in the scientific community with ardent supporters and equally ardent opponents. The NIH initially declined interest in the project on the grounds that such technology development was not within their sphere and was best left to the National Labs. But the political winds began to blow favorably over DOE's move and NIH quickly rethought its position and did its best to become the "lead" agency for this new project. Jim Watson of helical fame led the NIH attack. In his inimitable style he skillfully generated national interest in the project. A cooperative agreement between the two agencies in 1988 solved the territorial problem and lead to their joint funding of research towards mutually acceptable goals starting in 1990. It was not an easy alliance. The different styles of the agencies and their leaders promoted deep mistrust and suspicion, aided by Watson's vigorous and colorful derision of the DOE National Labs. That uneasy alliance has now mellowed.	522	ENGLISH	1
Who was Charlotte Amalie? Charlotte Amalie is the name of the capital city of the U.S. Virgin Islands, named after Charlotte Amalie of Hesse-Kassel. It ranks as the biggest city in the Virgin Islands Archipelago, and it is notable for its Danish colonial architecture. The city, in addition to the Islands, was bought by the US from the Danish in 1917. Charlotte Amalie was born in Kassel on April 27, 1650. She belonged to the House of Hesse-Kassel with her father William VI, Landgrave of Hesse-Kassel and her mother Hedwig Sophia of Brandenburg. Charlotte Amalie received an excellent education in the disciplines of geography, philosophy, French, and Italian. She was raised in a Reformist family, and her mother was politically inclined towards Brandenburg. Queen Sophie Amalie of Denmark singled out Charlotte Amalie as the future wife of the crown prince Christian. The Queen wanted a daughter-in-law she could easily control. The crown prince met her in 1665 when he arrived in Hesse to get to know her. Negotiations soon began primarily due to religious issues. On June 25, 1667, Charlotte Amalie was married to the prince who ascended to the throne in 1670 becoming Christian V, and she became the Queen of Denmark. She had eight children, among them Fredrick IV who reigned as King of Denmark and Norway from 1699 to 1730. As Queen, Charlotte Amalie is notable for several things. Her refusal to convert to the Lutheran Church, for which her husband was the head, was met with some resistance. The Queen did not adhere to the stipulations of the Lutheran Church, but rather, she continued to observe the Reformed faith. She financed the construction of a Reformed Church in Copenhagen, and she acquired some rights for her fellow believers in Denmark. The Lutheran clergy objected to her coronation as Queen due to her faith. Charlotte Amalie did not have a cordial relationship with her mother-in-law, and their conflicts were mainly due to matters of etiquette. When King Charles XII of Sweden staged an invasion in Zealand in 1700, Queen Amalie was at the forefront of defending Copenhagen. She spoke to the citizens of the city, effectively strengthening their resolve and negotiating for their access to the canons. The Queen organized the city’s defense, and she was consequently praised as a heroine. Queen Charlotte Amalie was a skilled administrator of her estates, and she settled in the Charlottenborg Palace, which she had purchased, after her husband’s death. The mansion was converted to the Royal Danish Academy of Art from 1754. Before the Danish West Indies, the city now known as Charlotte Amalie was called Taphus, which is Danish for beer houses or beer hall since the city was home to many beer halls. The city was renamed Amalienborg in 1691 which translates to Charlotte Amalie in English in honor of the Queen of Denmark and Norway. The city was known as St. Thomas from 1921 to 1936 after which it was renamed as Charlotte Amalie. The city is home to an estimated 18,481 inhabitants, and it enjoys a thriving tourism industry. Who Was Charlotte Amalie? Charlotte Amalie was the Queen of Denmark in the 1600s. About the Author Benjamin Elisha Sawe holds a Bachelor of Arts in Economics and Statistics and an MBA in Strategic Management. He is a frequent World Atlas contributor. Your MLA Citation Your APA Citation Your Chicago Citation Your Harvard CitationRemember to italicize the title of this article in your Harvard citation.	<urn:uuid:0165f1be-fcef-482e-8563-ec90b41e66e9>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/who-was-charlotte-amalie.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251687725.76/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126043644-20200126073644-00428.warc.gz	en	0.980219	770	3.4375	3	[ 0.4317958950996399, 0.2799857258796692, 0.1838335245847702, 0.21270214021205902, 0.2713468670845032, 0.10731446743011475, 0.22625935077667236, 0.06396952271461487, 0.05696351081132889, 0.2373923361301422, -0.0660240575671196, -0.2701088786125183, 0.030408132821321487, 0.14599263668060303, ...	2	Who was Charlotte Amalie? Charlotte Amalie is the name of the capital city of the U.S. Virgin Islands, named after Charlotte Amalie of Hesse-Kassel. It ranks as the biggest city in the Virgin Islands Archipelago, and it is notable for its Danish colonial architecture. The city, in addition to the Islands, was bought by the US from the Danish in 1917. Charlotte Amalie was born in Kassel on April 27, 1650. She belonged to the House of Hesse-Kassel with her father William VI, Landgrave of Hesse-Kassel and her mother Hedwig Sophia of Brandenburg. Charlotte Amalie received an excellent education in the disciplines of geography, philosophy, French, and Italian. She was raised in a Reformist family, and her mother was politically inclined towards Brandenburg. Queen Sophie Amalie of Denmark singled out Charlotte Amalie as the future wife of the crown prince Christian. The Queen wanted a daughter-in-law she could easily control. The crown prince met her in 1665 when he arrived in Hesse to get to know her. Negotiations soon began primarily due to religious issues. On June 25, 1667, Charlotte Amalie was married to the prince who ascended to the throne in 1670 becoming Christian V, and she became the Queen of Denmark. She had eight children, among them Fredrick IV who reigned as King of Denmark and Norway from 1699 to 1730. As Queen, Charlotte Amalie is notable for several things. Her refusal to convert to the Lutheran Church, for which her husband was the head, was met with some resistance. The Queen did not adhere to the stipulations of the Lutheran Church, but rather, she continued to observe the Reformed faith. She financed the construction of a Reformed Church in Copenhagen, and she acquired some rights for her fellow believers in Denmark. The Lutheran clergy objected to her coronation as Queen due to her faith. Charlotte Amalie did not have a cordial relationship with her mother-in-law, and their conflicts were mainly due to matters of etiquette. When King Charles XII of Sweden staged an invasion in Zealand in 1700, Queen Amalie was at the forefront of defending Copenhagen. She spoke to the citizens of the city, effectively strengthening their resolve and negotiating for their access to the canons. The Queen organized the city’s defense, and she was consequently praised as a heroine. Queen Charlotte Amalie was a skilled administrator of her estates, and she settled in the Charlottenborg Palace, which she had purchased, after her husband’s death. The mansion was converted to the Royal Danish Academy of Art from 1754. Before the Danish West Indies, the city now known as Charlotte Amalie was called Taphus, which is Danish for beer houses or beer hall since the city was home to many beer halls. The city was renamed Amalienborg in 1691 which translates to Charlotte Amalie in English in honor of the Queen of Denmark and Norway. The city was known as St. Thomas from 1921 to 1936 after which it was renamed as Charlotte Amalie. The city is home to an estimated 18,481 inhabitants, and it enjoys a thriving tourism industry. Who Was Charlotte Amalie? Charlotte Amalie was the Queen of Denmark in the 1600s. About the Author Benjamin Elisha Sawe holds a Bachelor of Arts in Economics and Statistics and an MBA in Strategic Management. He is a frequent World Atlas contributor. Your MLA Citation Your APA Citation Your Chicago Citation Your Harvard CitationRemember to italicize the title of this article in your Harvard citation.	775	ENGLISH	1
Greece is rightly proud of the King of Macedonia, Alexander the Great (356-323 BC), as the Greek Empire was at its mightiest during his reign. By the time of his death his armies had conquered lands throughout the Middle and Near East, as far as the Punjab, and down into Egypt, where he founded the city of Alexandria and where he is somewhere thought to be buried – although he actually died in Babylon. Philip of Macedonia Alexander’s father, Philip II of Macedonia, was already extending his Empire and gave his son, who was born in Alexander the Great, the very best start in life. He had the finest teachers, including Aristotle, and he was commanding part of the Macedonian Army by the age of eighteen. Two years later his father Philip was assassinated as he prepared to invade Persia, and it cannot be certain that Alexander did not actually have a hand in this. Alexander immediately took command of the Macedonian troops, and in 334 BC took an army of some 35,000 of them across the Hellespont (now the Dardanelles) and although outnumbered they defeated the Persian Army allegedly with the loss of only 110 of their own men. He had already swiftly put down rebellions in some of the Greek city-states, notably Thebes, which he burned to the ground. From Persia he turned his attention to the Middle East, conquering Damascus, then Palestine, and finally marching into Egypt. Here he was welcomed for liberating the country from the Persians, and in 331 BC he founded Alexandria, having by this time complete control of the Eastern Mediterranean. Not satisfied with his, he headed for India, where he won more victories but at the cost of great numbers of men. Alexander the Great, as depicted in the Alexander Mosaic The Death of Alexander Alexander the Great was back in Babylon in 323 BC, turning his attentions to conquering more of Arabia and further west into North Africa, when he was taken ill with a fever after a banquet and died eleven days later. His body was taken in a gold casket to Alexandria, but his burial place has never been firmly established. Some recent archaeological digs claim to have found his tomb in the Egyptian desert, but without convincing proof. There is no doubt that Alexander was indeed one of the greatest leaders in history, noted for his tactical ability, his charisma in leading his men and inspiring bravery in his troops, and for his own bravery too. Like all such leaders, though, he had his ruthless side and didn’t hesitate to eliminate potential rivals just as swiftly and as brutally as he wiped out his enemies. It is also said that he had a vision not merely to conquer the world but to unite both East and West in one large harmonious Empire. Certainly the cities he founded were all civilised and cultured places, and he fervently spread Greek culture and language while taking an interest in the cultures of the lands he conquered. He might well even be regarded as the most important Greek who ever lived. Simple but bursting with flavor, these traditional dips and spreads are firm favorites in Greek tavernas and can be easily made at home. No matter where you're going in Greece, delicious surprises await. Here are the products you simply must make room for on your plate (and in your suitcase). With the right tools, the workman can’t go wrong, and the bounty of the natural world has supplied Greek cooks with a panoply of outstanding ingredients.	<urn:uuid:356bdec1-8928-4380-82c3-1a2ee40e5f68>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.greece-travel-secrets.com/Alexander-the-Great.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251694071.63/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126230255-20200127020255-00434.warc.gz	en	0.989507	711	3.40625	3	[ -0.054313503205776215, 0.4770110547542572, 0.47740495204925537, -0.22856375575065613, -0.28560757637023926, -0.7464166879653931, 0.2260136902332306, 0.7276499271392822, -0.13010062277317047, -0.08041271567344666, -0.21746420860290527, -0.27687063813209534, 0.13222642242908478, 0.2598730325...	1	Greece is rightly proud of the King of Macedonia, Alexander the Great (356-323 BC), as the Greek Empire was at its mightiest during his reign. By the time of his death his armies had conquered lands throughout the Middle and Near East, as far as the Punjab, and down into Egypt, where he founded the city of Alexandria and where he is somewhere thought to be buried – although he actually died in Babylon. Philip of Macedonia Alexander’s father, Philip II of Macedonia, was already extending his Empire and gave his son, who was born in Alexander the Great, the very best start in life. He had the finest teachers, including Aristotle, and he was commanding part of the Macedonian Army by the age of eighteen. Two years later his father Philip was assassinated as he prepared to invade Persia, and it cannot be certain that Alexander did not actually have a hand in this. Alexander immediately took command of the Macedonian troops, and in 334 BC took an army of some 35,000 of them across the Hellespont (now the Dardanelles) and although outnumbered they defeated the Persian Army allegedly with the loss of only 110 of their own men. He had already swiftly put down rebellions in some of the Greek city-states, notably Thebes, which he burned to the ground. From Persia he turned his attention to the Middle East, conquering Damascus, then Palestine, and finally marching into Egypt. Here he was welcomed for liberating the country from the Persians, and in 331 BC he founded Alexandria, having by this time complete control of the Eastern Mediterranean. Not satisfied with his, he headed for India, where he won more victories but at the cost of great numbers of men. Alexander the Great, as depicted in the Alexander Mosaic The Death of Alexander Alexander the Great was back in Babylon in 323 BC, turning his attentions to conquering more of Arabia and further west into North Africa, when he was taken ill with a fever after a banquet and died eleven days later. His body was taken in a gold casket to Alexandria, but his burial place has never been firmly established. Some recent archaeological digs claim to have found his tomb in the Egyptian desert, but without convincing proof. There is no doubt that Alexander was indeed one of the greatest leaders in history, noted for his tactical ability, his charisma in leading his men and inspiring bravery in his troops, and for his own bravery too. Like all such leaders, though, he had his ruthless side and didn’t hesitate to eliminate potential rivals just as swiftly and as brutally as he wiped out his enemies. It is also said that he had a vision not merely to conquer the world but to unite both East and West in one large harmonious Empire. Certainly the cities he founded were all civilised and cultured places, and he fervently spread Greek culture and language while taking an interest in the cultures of the lands he conquered. He might well even be regarded as the most important Greek who ever lived. Simple but bursting with flavor, these traditional dips and spreads are firm favorites in Greek tavernas and can be easily made at home. No matter where you're going in Greece, delicious surprises await. Here are the products you simply must make room for on your plate (and in your suitcase). With the right tools, the workman can’t go wrong, and the bounty of the natural world has supplied Greek cooks with a panoply of outstanding ingredients.	720	ENGLISH	1
The events before World War II Several events happened after World War 1. The League of Nations was established after the World War 1 to maintain peace. It however failed since it was not able to resolve the economic crisis of Depression. It was also unable to prevent the Second World War. The League of Nations also had few countries. Germany was not allowed to join because it caused World War 1. Britain and France refused Russia to join due to fear of Communism. The Treaty of Versailles blamed Germany for causing World War 1. It was made to pay high financial reparations crippling the German economy. The Great depression made it worse. The country was stripped of its colonial territories. The country’s military as it was not allowed to have an air force army. In Italy, the Fascist power with Benito Mussolini took power in 1922. They believed in a strong central government that controlled the people and the economy. They saw this economic style as better since they deemed the free market economy to have failed. In Northern Germany Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist German Workers Party embraced the fascist concepts. They further believed in the supremacy and racial purity of the German race. Hitler desired that Germans should rule the whole world. In 1933, he was appointed the Reich Chancellor by President Hindenburg. In 1935 he transformed Italy into a police state. He banned political parties that opposed the Nazi ideologies. He then began killing who he deemed to be the racial enemies of Germany. He stripped Jews of their citizenship and forbade interracial marriage between Jews and Germans. He killed many Jews while many were arrested and put in concentration camps where many died. In 1934 Hitler broke the Treaty of Versailles by resuscitating the Air force and expanding the military. He further pushed for the reoccupation of Rhineland by the German army. Britain and Germany were aware of Hitler’s military plans but were more concerned with preventing the spread of communism. They thought a stronger German country would reduce the spread of communism. There were also sympathetic politicians in Great Britain and France who felt the conditions by the Treaty of Versailles that had been enforced on Germany were unfair. Furthermore, the countries wanted to avoid war seeing how the World War 1 had devastated the infrastructure and economy of European countries. Hitler wanted to regain all the territories that had been taken from Germany after World War 1. He pushed for the takeover of Austria by working with the Austrian Nazi party in 1938. He then started paramilitary and extremist violence in Sudetenland, Czech in order to take over the land. In a conference in 1938 in Munich, Sudetenland, Czech was given to Germany by Britain and France in exchange for them to cease fighting for more territories. Germany however broke the agreement and seized the remainder of the Czech Republic. The World War II It began in 1939 when Germany invaded Poland. Poland was a colony of Britain and France and the two countries declared war on Germany. Britain and France gave an ultimatum to Germany to end fighting. With no reply war was declared. The Soviets also attacked Poland. Being a new country formed after World War 1 with a weak army it was defeated. Many polish activists, actors and cops were killed by the Germans and Soviets. The Soviet Union and Germany had signed a pact of non-aggression. They had also decided to take over the territory of Poland. The Soviet Union soon invaded Finland and defeated it2. The war lasted from 1939 to 1945.Hitler wanted to take over the land owned by what he deemed as the inferior races so as to provide land to the superior German race. In 1940, Hitler invaded Denmark, Norway, Netherlands and Belgium. He later advanced against France and strategically defeated it. He attacked Britain but the British Army caused heavy losses on the German army so they retreated. Italy also announced war on Britain and France that year with Mussolini as their leader. It decided to take over territories in Northern Africa. Britain and Italy engaged in battles in Africa as Italy took over Somaliland which had been Britain’s colony. It tried to invade Egypt but was defeated by the British. Italy invaded Greece while Germany took over Yugoslavia and Crete. Japan had invaded Manchuria in 1931which was a mineral rich part of China and quit the League of Nations on being questioned. The battles with China lasted for years. In 1937, it declared its intention to take over Eastern Europe. In the 1930’s Britain and USA to protect their economies had put high protective trade tariffs which affected Japan’s economy negatively as their exports were greatly reduced. It also refused to renew the US-Japan treaty of Commerce and Navigation thus Japan’s access to oil and scrap metal. Japan felt humiliated. To retaliate, Japan joined forces with Italy and Germany. Japan attacked the U.S Naval base at Pearl Harbor in 1941 using war planes. This caused America to participate fully in the war. Joining forces with Britain, it assisted greatly in defeating Germany and Japan. In addition Japan attacked the territories of Philippines and Guam which were territories of US. It also attacked Malaysia and Hong Kong which were under the control of Britain. In December 1940 Hitler decided to attack the USSR. In 1941 he advanced against USSR but the battle was too fierce. During the year 1944, the Soviet forces forced Germany out of its country and pursued them across Eastern Europe and even into Germany itself in 1945. In 1944 Britain and U.S troops invaded Germany. Although they were wary of Communism they did not want Germany to take over the USSR. The two countries provided the USSR with military help in terms of aircraft, tanks, medical supplies and food. Germany was now being attacked from the West and East. The soviets reached Berlin first forcing Germany to surrender in May 1945 shortly after the suicide of Hitler. In 1942 Japan and America engaged in battles that lead to Japan’s defeat3. For the next three years the conquests of Japan were liberated by the Allied forces of US and Britain. The USA dropped an atomic bomb in Japan in August 1945 that led to Japan’s surrender in the war. Effects of World War II The countries that engaged in the war were affected in various ways. The Nazi regime was defeated. German and Japanese cities were in ruins due to the bombs. Adolf Hitler committed suicide. The country was divided into four parts and controlled by the countries that won the war. German and Japanese leaders went to trial for crimes against humanity. Japan was placed under the U.S military rule. Since it was occupied by western forces the economy developed as a capitalistic nation. The economy did so well and this has continued till now. England was highly devastated by the war. It depended on America for economic aid. Their industrial infrastructure was ruined and their economy had collapsed. France and Furthermore the two countries were no longer Super Powers. The countries with Super Power status were now America and Soviet Union. Russia territory had been affected by the war but in fighting the Germans they had a large and powerful army. This army combined with the country’s great population and resources made it attain a Super Power status. Russia extended its boundaries to Poland, Japan, Czech and Romania. The economy of America picked up after the war. The Depression ended and industries were built all over the country. The country suffered no physical destruction therefore their economy led in the world market4. For the countries outside the European Union they fought and pushed for their national independence. This was due to the perceived weaknesses of France and Britain in the war. There were great technological innovations during the war in computers and electronics. This assisted in further development of the world. The radar developed by the British led to the invention of the television. There was also technology to fight disease that resulted in lower mortality rates even in Non-European countries leading to high population growth. The war caused the people to realize the utter devastating effects of the war. The United Nations was formed in 1945 by 51 countries gathered in San Francisco to help maintain world peace. This body had the support of the United States and the Soviet Union and all other significant countries. In 1944 the major world powers also formed the International Monetary Fund to set up an international tariff known as GATT. This was to prevent the interwar factors that had accelerated the Depression. The countries entered into a period of international cooperation. Other international organizations that were formed were World Bank and World Trade organization. The United Nations helped in the creation of the country of Israel due to the experience of the Holocaust. The defeated nations were expected to pay for the devastations of the war on the Soviet Union and other countries. This was paid through the transfer of capital goods. In 1951 the countries in Europe formed the European Community to help the economies of the countries to grow and foster unity to countries that had been enemies in the war. The World War 2 ushered in the era of nuclear weapons as nuclear bombs were unleashed on the Japanese grounds. Paxton, R. Robert (2006). Europe in the 20th Century, 4th edition. New York, Wadsworth Publishing 2006, 126. Weinberg, Gerhard L. A World at Arms: A Global History of World War II. Chicago, MacGraw Hill, 1994, 214. Kershaw, Ian. Hitler, 1936-1945: Nemesis. London, Oxford University Press, 2000, 112	<urn:uuid:d1b6f171-3c25-405a-8d2f-7385ee92a953>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.wowessays.com/free-samples/world-war-ii-essay/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250595282.35/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119205448-20200119233448-00374.warc.gz	en	0.983905	1,894	3.765625	4	[ -0.2449376881122589, 0.4942759871482849, 0.011850351467728615, -0.11057908833026886, -0.04746583476662636, 0.31254473328590393, -0.0612109936773777, 0.1550796627998352, 0.305378258228302, -0.3222564458847046, 0.21593964099884033, 0.11207236349582672, 0.3687882423400879, 0.6455239653587341,...	5	The events before World War II Several events happened after World War 1. The League of Nations was established after the World War 1 to maintain peace. It however failed since it was not able to resolve the economic crisis of Depression. It was also unable to prevent the Second World War. The League of Nations also had few countries. Germany was not allowed to join because it caused World War 1. Britain and France refused Russia to join due to fear of Communism. The Treaty of Versailles blamed Germany for causing World War 1. It was made to pay high financial reparations crippling the German economy. The Great depression made it worse. The country was stripped of its colonial territories. The country’s military as it was not allowed to have an air force army. In Italy, the Fascist power with Benito Mussolini took power in 1922. They believed in a strong central government that controlled the people and the economy. They saw this economic style as better since they deemed the free market economy to have failed. In Northern Germany Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist German Workers Party embraced the fascist concepts. They further believed in the supremacy and racial purity of the German race. Hitler desired that Germans should rule the whole world. In 1933, he was appointed the Reich Chancellor by President Hindenburg. In 1935 he transformed Italy into a police state. He banned political parties that opposed the Nazi ideologies. He then began killing who he deemed to be the racial enemies of Germany. He stripped Jews of their citizenship and forbade interracial marriage between Jews and Germans. He killed many Jews while many were arrested and put in concentration camps where many died. In 1934 Hitler broke the Treaty of Versailles by resuscitating the Air force and expanding the military. He further pushed for the reoccupation of Rhineland by the German army. Britain and Germany were aware of Hitler’s military plans but were more concerned with preventing the spread of communism. They thought a stronger German country would reduce the spread of communism. There were also sympathetic politicians in Great Britain and France who felt the conditions by the Treaty of Versailles that had been enforced on Germany were unfair. Furthermore, the countries wanted to avoid war seeing how the World War 1 had devastated the infrastructure and economy of European countries. Hitler wanted to regain all the territories that had been taken from Germany after World War 1. He pushed for the takeover of Austria by working with the Austrian Nazi party in 1938. He then started paramilitary and extremist violence in Sudetenland, Czech in order to take over the land. In a conference in 1938 in Munich, Sudetenland, Czech was given to Germany by Britain and France in exchange for them to cease fighting for more territories. Germany however broke the agreement and seized the remainder of the Czech Republic. The World War II It began in 1939 when Germany invaded Poland. Poland was a colony of Britain and France and the two countries declared war on Germany. Britain and France gave an ultimatum to Germany to end fighting. With no reply war was declared. The Soviets also attacked Poland. Being a new country formed after World War 1 with a weak army it was defeated. Many polish activists, actors and cops were killed by the Germans and Soviets. The Soviet Union and Germany had signed a pact of non-aggression. They had also decided to take over the territory of Poland. The Soviet Union soon invaded Finland and defeated it2. The war lasted from 1939 to 1945.Hitler wanted to take over the land owned by what he deemed as the inferior races so as to provide land to the superior German race. In 1940, Hitler invaded Denmark, Norway, Netherlands and Belgium. He later advanced against France and strategically defeated it. He attacked Britain but the British Army caused heavy losses on the German army so they retreated. Italy also announced war on Britain and France that year with Mussolini as their leader. It decided to take over territories in Northern Africa. Britain and Italy engaged in battles in Africa as Italy took over Somaliland which had been Britain’s colony. It tried to invade Egypt but was defeated by the British. Italy invaded Greece while Germany took over Yugoslavia and Crete. Japan had invaded Manchuria in 1931which was a mineral rich part of China and quit the League of Nations on being questioned. The battles with China lasted for years. In 1937, it declared its intention to take over Eastern Europe. In the 1930’s Britain and USA to protect their economies had put high protective trade tariffs which affected Japan’s economy negatively as their exports were greatly reduced. It also refused to renew the US-Japan treaty of Commerce and Navigation thus Japan’s access to oil and scrap metal. Japan felt humiliated. To retaliate, Japan joined forces with Italy and Germany. Japan attacked the U.S Naval base at Pearl Harbor in 1941 using war planes. This caused America to participate fully in the war. Joining forces with Britain, it assisted greatly in defeating Germany and Japan. In addition Japan attacked the territories of Philippines and Guam which were territories of US. It also attacked Malaysia and Hong Kong which were under the control of Britain. In December 1940 Hitler decided to attack the USSR. In 1941 he advanced against USSR but the battle was too fierce. During the year 1944, the Soviet forces forced Germany out of its country and pursued them across Eastern Europe and even into Germany itself in 1945. In 1944 Britain and U.S troops invaded Germany. Although they were wary of Communism they did not want Germany to take over the USSR. The two countries provided the USSR with military help in terms of aircraft, tanks, medical supplies and food. Germany was now being attacked from the West and East. The soviets reached Berlin first forcing Germany to surrender in May 1945 shortly after the suicide of Hitler. In 1942 Japan and America engaged in battles that lead to Japan’s defeat3. For the next three years the conquests of Japan were liberated by the Allied forces of US and Britain. The USA dropped an atomic bomb in Japan in August 1945 that led to Japan’s surrender in the war. Effects of World War II The countries that engaged in the war were affected in various ways. The Nazi regime was defeated. German and Japanese cities were in ruins due to the bombs. Adolf Hitler committed suicide. The country was divided into four parts and controlled by the countries that won the war. German and Japanese leaders went to trial for crimes against humanity. Japan was placed under the U.S military rule. Since it was occupied by western forces the economy developed as a capitalistic nation. The economy did so well and this has continued till now. England was highly devastated by the war. It depended on America for economic aid. Their industrial infrastructure was ruined and their economy had collapsed. France and Furthermore the two countries were no longer Super Powers. The countries with Super Power status were now America and Soviet Union. Russia territory had been affected by the war but in fighting the Germans they had a large and powerful army. This army combined with the country’s great population and resources made it attain a Super Power status. Russia extended its boundaries to Poland, Japan, Czech and Romania. The economy of America picked up after the war. The Depression ended and industries were built all over the country. The country suffered no physical destruction therefore their economy led in the world market4. For the countries outside the European Union they fought and pushed for their national independence. This was due to the perceived weaknesses of France and Britain in the war. There were great technological innovations during the war in computers and electronics. This assisted in further development of the world. The radar developed by the British led to the invention of the television. There was also technology to fight disease that resulted in lower mortality rates even in Non-European countries leading to high population growth. The war caused the people to realize the utter devastating effects of the war. The United Nations was formed in 1945 by 51 countries gathered in San Francisco to help maintain world peace. This body had the support of the United States and the Soviet Union and all other significant countries. In 1944 the major world powers also formed the International Monetary Fund to set up an international tariff known as GATT. This was to prevent the interwar factors that had accelerated the Depression. The countries entered into a period of international cooperation. Other international organizations that were formed were World Bank and World Trade organization. The United Nations helped in the creation of the country of Israel due to the experience of the Holocaust. The defeated nations were expected to pay for the devastations of the war on the Soviet Union and other countries. This was paid through the transfer of capital goods. In 1951 the countries in Europe formed the European Community to help the economies of the countries to grow and foster unity to countries that had been enemies in the war. The World War 2 ushered in the era of nuclear weapons as nuclear bombs were unleashed on the Japanese grounds. Paxton, R. Robert (2006). Europe in the 20th Century, 4th edition. New York, Wadsworth Publishing 2006, 126. Weinberg, Gerhard L. A World at Arms: A Global History of World War II. Chicago, MacGraw Hill, 1994, 214. Kershaw, Ian. Hitler, 1936-1945: Nemesis. London, Oxford University Press, 2000, 112	2,004	ENGLISH	1
2 We use the past continuous tense to describe a period of time in the past. 3 Compare the past continuous (I was doing) and past simple (I did): Past continuous (in the middle of an action)I was walking home when I met Dave. (in the middle of walking home)Ann was watching television when the phone rang.I was sitting in class when I fell asleep.We were talking when the teacher came into the room.They were having lunch in the park when it started to rain. 4 GRAMMARI wasYou wereHe / She / It was V_ingWe wereThey were 5 Tom burnt his hand when he was cooking the dinner. Past simple and past continuous are used together when something happened in the middle of something else.Tom burnt his hand when he was cooking the dinner.I saw you in the park yesterday. You were sitting on the grass and reading a book.While I was working in the garden, I hurt my back. 6 But we use the past simple to say that one thing happened after another: Compare:When Karen arrived, we were having dinner (we had already started dinner before Karen arrived).When Karen arrived, we had dinner. (first Karen arrived and then we had dinner) 7 There are some verbs (for example, know/want/believe) that are not normally used in the continuous: We were good friends. We knew each other well (NOT “we were knowing”).I was enjoying the party but Chris wanted to go home.	<urn:uuid:a0491051-c302-4d27-b017-fe90f815f51e>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://slideplayer.com/slide/4466460/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606696.26/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122042145-20200122071145-00106.warc.gz	en	0.992351	314	3.46875	3	[ -0.3896096646785736, 0.04766804352402687, 0.39782118797302246, 0.11757669597864151, -0.038730282336473465, 0.08432964980602264, 0.5137448906898499, -0.2692672312259674, 0.30252745747566223, -0.40084731578826904, 0.07899346202611923, 0.07911576330661774, -0.0705438107252121, 0.2396211177110...	4	2 We use the past continuous tense to describe a period of time in the past. 3 Compare the past continuous (I was doing) and past simple (I did): Past continuous (in the middle of an action)I was walking home when I met Dave. (in the middle of walking home)Ann was watching television when the phone rang.I was sitting in class when I fell asleep.We were talking when the teacher came into the room.They were having lunch in the park when it started to rain. 4 GRAMMARI wasYou wereHe / She / It was V_ingWe wereThey were 5 Tom burnt his hand when he was cooking the dinner. Past simple and past continuous are used together when something happened in the middle of something else.Tom burnt his hand when he was cooking the dinner.I saw you in the park yesterday. You were sitting on the grass and reading a book.While I was working in the garden, I hurt my back. 6 But we use the past simple to say that one thing happened after another: Compare:When Karen arrived, we were having dinner (we had already started dinner before Karen arrived).When Karen arrived, we had dinner. (first Karen arrived and then we had dinner) 7 There are some verbs (for example, know/want/believe) that are not normally used in the continuous: We were good friends. We knew each other well (NOT “we were knowing”).I was enjoying the party but Chris wanted to go home.	301	ENGLISH	1
Women’s mentality has revolutionized over the years. In the 1800s women belonged in the kitchen. Women were expected to be submissive and respectful to their husbands. Women were also expected to stay after infidelity. In those days infidelity did not lead to divorce. The 20th-century woman is an independent woman. A woman with dreams and ambitions. Women are now competing with men in the workplace and pushing for equal pay. The 20th-century woman is not a woman who stays at home all day and takes care of the house. She is a working woman with goals and plans for her future. Daily lives for women in the 1800s came with very few choices. Women were influenced by men in their lives. First their fathers, their brothers, male relatives and then their husbands. Their purpose in life was to get married, reproduce and serve their husband for the rest of their lives. Women who decided not to get married were pitied by the communities. In some places like Congo, single women were considered weak and therefore not included in important matters. When a woman was married all of her possessions now belonged to her husband including herself. Her husband is given right to do what he pleased with her and she is to obey him under the vow, “ obey her husband”. As I recall my younger years in Nyarugusu a small refugee camp where I grew up. Women were treated as nothing more than property. Women were also used and are still used today as a way for the family to have a better life. For example, a father would marry his daughter off to a rich man in town not considering the age difference or religion and certainly not considering his daughter’s feelings towards the man. The reason for this would be the hope that his daughter will always do whatever her husband demands and so in return, her husband will provide for her family here and there. Sometimes women were married for a good reputation. Once married she would take on the responsibility of the entire household. If her husband lived his parents she would take the responsibility of cleaning, washing, cooking and caring for them as well. She is not allowed to complain. Even if her husband committed adultery she is not allowed to leave him because she was taught at a very young age that it was normal for a man to do so. In those days I remember unhappy marriages, abused and mistreated women. Who were blind to see the opportunities in front of their eyes. In most homes, women were the sole providers. Women did a lot of farming while men tried to do small business which was not always successful. Today more women are walking out of broken marriages. They are freeing themselves from physical and mental abuse. Today women are happier when alone and more successful. Women are no longer depending on men to do everything for them. Now women chase their dreams and reach for the stars because the sky is not the limit. Photo credit: Internet. Miss Tilisa Mlondani: email@example.com	<urn:uuid:92840c07-cc5d-454f-8f17-9a3754c761cb>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://i-need-answers.com/2019/05/18/the-women-we-used-to-be/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251696046.73/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127081933-20200127111933-00451.warc.gz	en	0.993447	617	3.515625	4	[ 0.050012752413749695, 0.44316765666007996, 0.03467133641242981, -0.13979363441467285, -0.07314778864383698, 0.5152621865272522, 0.00957934744656086, 0.032752372324466705, 0.03254782781004906, -0.20968124270439148, 0.21768692135810852, 0.08760716021060944, -0.04208291321992874, 0.0855669677...	3	Women’s mentality has revolutionized over the years. In the 1800s women belonged in the kitchen. Women were expected to be submissive and respectful to their husbands. Women were also expected to stay after infidelity. In those days infidelity did not lead to divorce. The 20th-century woman is an independent woman. A woman with dreams and ambitions. Women are now competing with men in the workplace and pushing for equal pay. The 20th-century woman is not a woman who stays at home all day and takes care of the house. She is a working woman with goals and plans for her future. Daily lives for women in the 1800s came with very few choices. Women were influenced by men in their lives. First their fathers, their brothers, male relatives and then their husbands. Their purpose in life was to get married, reproduce and serve their husband for the rest of their lives. Women who decided not to get married were pitied by the communities. In some places like Congo, single women were considered weak and therefore not included in important matters. When a woman was married all of her possessions now belonged to her husband including herself. Her husband is given right to do what he pleased with her and she is to obey him under the vow, “ obey her husband”. As I recall my younger years in Nyarugusu a small refugee camp where I grew up. Women were treated as nothing more than property. Women were also used and are still used today as a way for the family to have a better life. For example, a father would marry his daughter off to a rich man in town not considering the age difference or religion and certainly not considering his daughter’s feelings towards the man. The reason for this would be the hope that his daughter will always do whatever her husband demands and so in return, her husband will provide for her family here and there. Sometimes women were married for a good reputation. Once married she would take on the responsibility of the entire household. If her husband lived his parents she would take the responsibility of cleaning, washing, cooking and caring for them as well. She is not allowed to complain. Even if her husband committed adultery she is not allowed to leave him because she was taught at a very young age that it was normal for a man to do so. In those days I remember unhappy marriages, abused and mistreated women. Who were blind to see the opportunities in front of their eyes. In most homes, women were the sole providers. Women did a lot of farming while men tried to do small business which was not always successful. Today more women are walking out of broken marriages. They are freeing themselves from physical and mental abuse. Today women are happier when alone and more successful. Women are no longer depending on men to do everything for them. Now women chase their dreams and reach for the stars because the sky is not the limit. Photo credit: Internet. Miss Tilisa Mlondani: email@example.com	606	ENGLISH	1
The Island's History A Historic Setting Cedar Island is located in what could arguably be America’s most historically significant lake, Lake Champlain. The lake was named after the French explorer Samuel Champlain, who became the first European known to have discovered the lake, in 1609, more than 150 years before the American Colonies declared their independence from Great Britain in 1776. When Champlain arrived at the lake, he marched into a war zone where he fired a single shot with his arquebus (rifle) which would reverberate for 175 years! The lake formed a natural boundary between two powerful American Indian nations, both of whom claimed the lake as belonging to the members of their own tribe: the Iroquois on the West bank, in what is now northern New York State, and the Algonquins on the East bank, in what is now the State of Vermont. As a result, the lake – both its islands and its shores – had been almost entirely abandoned by the time of Champlain’s arrival. Living within this disputed territory was a recipe for extermination by the enemy tribe as the struggle for control of the lake region raged, causing both Indian tribes to move further inland where they were safer from attack. However, on Champlain’s momentous visit to the lake, he found a party of Iroquois warriors. To further endear the French to the Algonquins, some of whom accompanied him on the journey, he fired his arquebus (loaded with four balls) into the war party. This instantly killed two of the three chiefs and wounded one of their companions (who later died from the wound), to the utter astonishment and consternation of the Iroquois because the chiefs were wearing arrow-proof armor woven from cotton thread and wood. From this day forward, the Iroquois became the eternal enemies of the French, later allying with the English, whom they helped to wrest the eventual control of Canada from the French, who abandoned the province to the English in 1763. Lake Champlain is located at the northern end of the Champlain Valley, formed by the Green Mountains (part of the Appalachian Mountain system) to the east and the Adirondack Mountains to the west. It is fed by Lake George to the south and drains into the Richelieu River to the north. In a time when there were no highways connecting our nation via land, waterways formed the fastest means of moving military troops from one area to another. As a result, the Lake Champlain region became the scene of important battles in all three of the wars that established the boundaries of the territory that is now the northeastern region of the United States: the French and Indian War of 1754-1763, the American Revolutionary War, which began in 1775, and the War of 1812. When the French and Indian War started in 1754, the Champlain Valley was part of New France, having been secured by the French through the installation of a number of military forts on and around Lake Champlain. One of these military forts was Fort Ticonderoga, where the Battle of Carillon (the original French name of the fort) was fought in 1758, in which the French successfully defended the fort against a British attack. In 1759, however, a combination of British and American Colonial troops forced the French to retreat from the area, burning their forts behind themselves as they left. When the first Treaty of Paris was signed, in 1763, the French gave to Great Britain much of its claims to New France, including the colony of Canada which had extended south into the Champlain Valley. On May 10, 1775, soon after the beginning of the American Revolution, Fort Ticonderoga, considered “the gateway to the continent” and then controlled by the British, was captured by the Green Mountain Boys, led by Ethan Allen. Fort Crown Point, Fort George (on Lake George, which connects to Lake Champlain to the south), and Fort Saint-Jean (just above Lake Champlain, on the Richelieu River) were also captured during the Revolutionary War, in effect severing the British forces in Canada from those south of the region and thus playing a major role in the war. Upon hearing the news of the fall of Ticonderoga, Lord Dartmouth, then back in England, after serving as the British Secretary of State for the Colonies from 1772-1775, wrote that it was “very unfortunate; very unfortunate indeed.” After the Thirteen Colonies won their independence from Great Britain through the second Treaty of Paris, in 1783, forming the United States of America, Lake Champlain served as an important entrance into the new nation from Canada. The lake had to remain fortified to prevent any British military attack from the north. Near the end of the War of 1812, the Battle of Plattsburgh (New York), fought on September 11, 1814 and also known as the Battle of Lake Champlain, played the key role in ending the British invasion from Canada and in preventing Great Britain from gaining any territory from the United States during that war. In that battle, an American naval force led by Master Commandant Thomas Macdonough soundly defeated the British naval squadron, causing the British to retreat into Canada. The Treaty of Ghent was signed on December 24th of that year, ending the war and leaving our northern border with Canada intact as it remains to this day. After the War of 1812, Lake Champlain and the waterways to which it is connected continued to play a very important role in the commerce of New England, and especially in the development of Burlington, Vermont, until the creation of automobile highway systems, which diminished the need for water transportation of people and goods. In the twenty-first century, Lake Champlain provides a delightful combination of scenic beauty, recreational opportunities, and historical sites, making it an important tourist destination – especially for American patriots with the cultural and educational background needed to fully appreciate the significance of the region in the formation of our nation, or those with a desire to acquire greater knowledge of our history while relaxing amidst stunning views of sparkling water and mountain grandeur. The early history of Cedar Island might well bring to mind a phrase usually attributed to New York Tribune founder Horace Greely: “Go West, Young Man”. That phrase was made popular by a 1936 comedy film starring Mae West, which used “Go West, Young Man” as the film’s title. The story of Cedar Island’s first owners is, to a large degree, a microcosm of the European settlement and westward expansion of the United States. This story begins in Argylleshire, Scotland, where Duncan Campbell married Mary McCoy (Campbell) before heading southwest, to Tyrone County, in the province of Ulster, (Northern) Ireland, where son Robert Campbell was born to them in 1669. While still in Ulster, Robert married Janet Stuart (Campbell), with whom he had six children, before heading southwest (as his father had done many years before) with Janet and the children. The family arrived in Boston, in the English Colony of Massachusetts, along with the Reverend Samuel Dorrance, a Presbyterian minister, in 1714. By then, their son James (born in Ulster about 1704) was 10 years old. Since the residents of Boston would not sell land to the new immigrants, the family headed southwest, again, eventually settling in Voluntown, New London County, Connecticut, in May of 1722, where Robert lived until his death. There, James married Hannah Taylor (Campbell), and together they had 13 children, all born in Voluntown. The oldest of the sons born to James & Hanna, William Campbell (born in 1726) married Sarah Barnes (Campbell), with whom he had six children, in Voluntown, before carrying on the family tradition of heading west, settling in South Hero Island, Vermont, around 1784, sometime after he finished his service as a soldier in the American Revolutionary War. After moving to Vermont, he lived another 14 years, dying in 1798, at age 71 or 72. He was buried in the Campbell-Plumb Cemetery, on South Hero Island, where his gravestone stands, to this day. At least one of William’s sons, Private Samuel Campbell, Sr. (born in 1762), also fought in the Revolutionary War. He was initially in Captain John Spoon’s Company, which was part of Colonel John Brown’s Regiment, but also served in other regiments, including one that was led by a Colonel James Campbell, who might have been his Uncle James. Samuel married Grace Plumb (Campbell), with whom he had seven children, including Samuel, Jr. He became the second private owner of Cedar Island (which was just east of his farm on South Hero Island), before moving even further west, to Durand, Winnebago County, Illinois, where he died, at age 82, in 1844. Grace had died in 1827 at the young age of 52, and was buried in the Greenwood Cemetery in Saint Albans, Franklin County, Vermont, as was their son Samuel Campbell, Jr., who was buried there at age 70, in 1871. He, along with his brother Zeno, were apparently the only children who stayed behind, in Vermont, when the rest of the family moved west. However, we are getting ahead of our story. James and Hanna also had another son (William’s brother), Samuel (born in 1831, or – by some accounts – in 1836), who had a daughter named Susannah (born in 1861) who married the man who became the first private owner of Cedar Island, Sergeant Reuben Rowley, who was born on April 16, 1750. Reuben served in the Revolutionary War under Colonel Seth Warner, who – along with Colonel Ethan Allen – led a regiment of soldiers (commissioned by the Continental Congress) which had been formed from the men who had served as members of the Green Mountain Boys (named after the mountain range that forms the eastern wall of the Champlain Valley in which Lake Champlain sits). The Green Mountain Boys had been formed in the late 1760s to protect the territory (in what is now the state of Vermont) along the eastern border of Lake Champlain, which was claimed by the Colony of New Hampshire as well as by the Colony of New York. As Peter S. Palmer states in his book, History of Lake Champlain, 1609-1814: Both colonies frequently issued grants for the same territory; causing much confusion in the land titles and creating great animosity between rival claimants. As Palmer explains, the Governor of New Hampshire had made land grants “prior to the close of the year 1763” – the year when the French, after years of war, ceded the territory to the British under the first Treaty of Paris. During that time of confusion and disputed land titles, which followed the French & Indian War, a number of settlers who had taken possession of their land in the territory east of Lake Champlain, called the “New Hampshire Grants,” were driven off their land by other settlers who had been granted the same land by the Colony of New York. In turn, the Green Mountain Boys drove the New York settlers off the land they had taken from the New Hampshire grantees. As a result, the New Hampshire grantees were able, then, to return and reclaim the land granted to them. The Green Mountain Boys eventually secured total control of the entire region for New Hampshire, when New York became distracted from giving attention to the land grant conflict, as the colony got embroiled in conflicts with the British, preceding the American Declaration of Independence in 1776. Those conflicts, of course, were a part of what led to the Revolutionary War, during which most of the settlers were fighting in the war, or merely trying to survive the war, with some of them having fled their lands around Lake Champlain to evade conflict with British troops who had invaded the region. It was not until after the war that most of the settlements near the eastern border of Lake Champlain became permanent. In 1779, while the war was still raging, Thomas Chittenden, governor of the independent state of Vermont (before Vermont became a member of the United States of America, in 1791), granted, to “Colonel Ethan Allen, and Samuel Herrick, and their Associates,” “about 23,000 acres” of land consisting of “a certain large island, lying and being situated in Lake Champlain, in This State, and known sometimes by the name of Grand Isle,” which was divided into the “South Island” and the “North Island,” and “incorporated into one distinct Township, or Incorporation, by the Name of the Two Heroes.” This grant almost certainly included Cedar Island, given its small size and proximity to South Hero Island, even though it is not specifically named in the grant. Among the associates listed in that land grant document was “Reuben Rowley.” Retention of the grant of land was conditional upon actually settling the land, as the grant document explained: That each Proprietor in the said Two Heroes, his heirs or assigns, shall plant & cultivate [crops on] the Land, or have one Family settled on each respective Right, within the Term of One Year next after the Conclusion of the Present War, on penalty of Forfeiture of each respective Right or Share of Land in said Island, not so improved & the same to revert to the Freemen of this State, to be, by their representatives regranted to such Persons as shall appear to [qualify]. The Revolutionary War came to an end in 1783, with the signing of the second Treaty of Paris. It was at that point that settlers began to arrive in the “Two Heroes”. Although Reuben Rowley was living in nearby Rutland County about that time, he appears to have met the qualifications, above, for retention of his grant, since he signed a warranty deed (contained in Volume 6, Pages 518 – 519, of the deed records of the Town of South Hero) dated May 11, 1784, in which he affirms that he is transferring “one right of land granted to Me by the Governor and Counsel of the State of Vermont on the Grand Isle or two Grate Heros” to “Samuel Campbell,” who, at that time, apparently was living in the vicinity of Boston, as mentioned in the deed. It appears that – in the absence of Samuel – the deed was signed in the presence of, and given to, William Campbell (named on the deed), Samuel’s father. By this means, it appears that Private Samuel Campbell, Sr., the first cousin of Reuben’s wife, Susannah (Campbell) Rowley, became the second person to own Cedar Island, even though there is no description, in that deed, of what that “Right or Share of Land” included. What is known, for certain, is that the South Hero town clerk’s office has on its walls maps of the original subdivisions of land, from the fall of 1783 and spring of 1784, which show a “Reuben Rowley” as the owner of one of the original lots at the northeast corner of South Hero island called Campbell Point (what is Kibbe Point, today), which is almost directly west of Cedar Island. From this, it appears highly likely that Reuben Rowley was, in fact, the original grantee of land on South Hero Island, which included (by proximity) Cedar Island (even though the island is not shown on that map), and that his conveyance of his land grant to Samuel Campbell, in 1784, was the first conveyance of the island between private parties. This seems especially likely based upon the land description contained in the Warranty Deed dated September 3, 1818 in which Samuel Campbell, in turn, transferred the island to Benajah Phelps, who then became the third private citizen to own Cedar Island, which was still, then, known by the name “Gull Island”. That deed refers to the “Division of lots of the [land grant] rights of … Reuben Rowley”, and gives a very specific description of the land, as follows: commonly known by the name of Campbell Point farm containing by intimation two hundred forty acres and also two islands, lying about one mile east of the above described transfer containing about eighteen acres said islands known by the name of Fish Bladder and Gull Islands … Benajah, whose family may have been the first family to settle on South Hero Island (and who still has descendents on that island), was born on March 4, 1770, and lived until April 12, 1862, dying at age 92. He is buried in the South Hero Cemetery. On September 18, 1852 (shortly before the Civil War), Benajah transferred ownership of Cedar Island to his two younger sons, George Phelps (1822–1911), and Samuel Phelps (1824–1906). It appears that, at some point, Samuel gave his interest in the island to his older brother George, since the next available deed record shows that George, alone, divided the island, selling the eastern side of the island to Eleazar Jewett, on April 18, 1870, for $200, and the “west half” of the island to Horace C. Martin, on February 20, 1875. In turn, Eleazar Jewett conveyed the eastern portion of the island to Ell Barnum, on August 13, 1877. Then, on July 4, 1879, the island was reunited under one owner – never to be divided, again – when Jed P. Clark purchased the western half of the island from Homer C. Martin for $150, and the eastern half of the island from Ell Barnum, also for $150. Jed was the son of Joseph Clark who was arguably the most influential citizen in the history of Milton, a town of about 10,000 people, which is almost due east from Cedar Island, in Chittenden County, Vermont. Milton was chartered by Governor Benning Wentworth of New Hampshire, on June 8, 1763, just months after the signing of the Treaty of Paris, on February 10, 1763, when the French ceded most of their North American territories – including the Lake Champlain region – to the British, as mentioned earlier in this history, but the town was not settled until 1782. The Lamoille River flows through Milton and enters Lake Champlain at the town’s southwest corner, depositing sediment into the lake that forms the sand bar just south of Cedar Island, as well as the beaches of Sand Bar State Park. On June 5, 2013, a local newspaper, Milton Independent, published an article entitled “Clark made Milton,” in which the staff writers explain that Joseph Clark came to Milton “at the young age of 20 in 1816,” a year “known as Eighteen Hundred and Froze to Death,” which was “not a good year for most of the northeast because of the frosts and snow every month,” which caused agricultural crops to fail that year, creating a great deal of hardship. The Champlain Canal opened in 1823, which increased trade with New York, and Clark began to supply spars (ship masts, booms, etc.) for the shipping trade, purchasing a sawmill in 1825, in which to finish the raw wood. Perhaps his most important accomplishment was his influence in bringing “the railroad” to Milton. Clark was also an active Republican, who “served three terms in the state senate.” He passed away in 1879, the same year his son Jed P. Clark bought Cedar Island. Most likely, the funds for the purchase came from Jed’s inheritance, and Jed continued to live in the stately home his father built on Main Street, in Milton, which later served as the town’s offices until 1994. Jed retained the ownership of Cedar Island until September 5, 1890, when he sold the island to Alexander Whiteside for $400 – making a $100 profit above his purchase price. Whiteside, who was a prominent resident of Champlain, Clinton County, New York, was born on November 14, 1825, and died on February 2, 1903 at age 77. He is buried in the Glenwood Cemetery in Champlain. He was married to Eleanor Anne Shattuck (Whiteside), who became the owner of Cedar Island upon his death, and who created a warranty deed, on February 19, 1903 (which was corrected on March 26, 1903), transferring the island to their children George S. Whiteside, Alexander Whiteside, Helen E. Whiteside (later Helen E. Soutter), and Anne H. Whiteside (later Anne. H. Williams). The Whiteside Family retained ownership of the island until August 2, 1942, when the “Heirs of Alexander & Eleanor A. Whiteside” conveyed the island to Eugene A. Richard, via a quit-Claim Deed that identifies the island as “Cedar Island”, further known as “Gull Island”. This is the first deed in the chain of title that refers to any buildings or other improvements on the island. Eugene Richard was from Winooski, Vermont, which (according to Wikipedia) “is the most densely populated municipality in northern New England”. It is also a very culturally diverse city, and it was in Winooski that Eugene “ran a furniture factory,” according to Kim Chase, as reported in the Burlington Free Press, in a June 10, 2016 article entitled “History Space: Winooski – a ‘p’tit Canada.” Eugene retained the property for 20 years before transferring it to his children Henry J. Richard, Priscilla R. Sleeper, and Bertha M. Condon on April 17, 1962. The Richard children owned the island for exactly five years before they sold it to Suburban Realty of Vermont Corporation on April 17, 1967. In turn, the corporation sold the island to Patricia M. Bellows on June 24, 1972 for $28,750. The island would remain in the Bellows Family for 30 years. After Kendrick F. “Rick” Bellows, Jr. passed away, on February 15, 2016, his obituary in the Burlington Free Press ended with the words: For thirty years, Cedar Island in South Hero was his joyful retreat. Rick, who grew up in Plainfield, New Jersey, graduated from Princeton University in 1957 and served in the U.S. Marine Corps before entering the banking business, at one point serving as President and CEO of the Bank of Vermont. In addition to being a private pilot, Rick was an avid tennis player, and he was probably the owner responsible for the building of the red clay tennis court on Cedar Island, which stood for many years, until it fell into disrepair (many years after Rick sold the property) and was removed. In addition to two daughters, Rick is survived by his wife, Barbara O’Reilly, and son Kendrick F. Bellows, III, both of whom were also listed as owners on some of the multiple Bellows Family deeds to Cedar Island. It was near the end of the Twentieth Century, while the Bellows Family still owned Cedar Island, that they became the victims of arsonists, during one winter, when the lake was frozen over, and some drunken fellows on a snowmobile apparently decided it would be ‘fun’ to watch a house burn down, so they set fire to the island’s main house, which was rebuilt in its current form (with some 2004 enhancements) in 1999. The original main house was also a two-story home of about the same size as the current home, but it was constructed before building permits were required in the Town of South Hero, so there are no public records showing the construction of that home. The South Hero “lister card” shows that one of the two cottages on Cedar Island was built in 1930. (In Vermont, listers are elected officials responsible for valuing properties for the purpose of assessing property taxes.) But there are no public records showing the date when the other cottage was built. However, well before Rick Bellow’s death, in 2016, Cedar Island had been sold (on November 1, 2002) to the Marshall and Kristine Cooper Family, through a family limited partnership, for $960,000 – a far cry from the $400 for which Jed Clark had sold the island in 1890, which says a great deal about the inflation of real estate prices in this nation over the past 100 plus years! In 2004, Marshall and Christine added a hot tub and expanded the patio with a stone fireplace, built by Collin Marcotte, the current caretaker of Cedar Island, as well as adding the current boathouse. At some point during the 14 years during which the Cooper Family owned the island, they had the honor of hosting U.S. Vice President Mike Pence on the Island. There, Pence used his skill as an artist to create a painting of an island scene, which was proudly displayed in the island’s main house, until the Coopers sold the island. Brint Ryan, the current owner of Cedar Island, grew up in Big Spring, Texas, and acquired the property from the Cooper Family on November 10, 2016. Brint is the Founder, Chairman and CEO of Ryan, LLC, a global tax services firm. He is a member of the University of North Texas System Board of Regents and served as its Chairman from 2013 through 2019. He received his Bachelor and Master of Science degrees in accounting, with an emphasis in taxation, from the University of North Texas. In 2018, the University named the School of Business the G. Brint Ryan School of Business, in his honor. Brint lives most of the year in Dallas, Texas with his wife, Amanda Ryan, and their five daughters. (The above history of Cedar Island was updated on December 3, 2019.)	<urn:uuid:9af4fc04-3c72-4c42-8e8d-d726c95a0e39>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.cedarislandvermont.com/the-islands-history/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251672440.80/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125101544-20200125130544-00279.warc.gz	en	0.981705	5,475	3.796875	4	[ -0.012994055636227131, 0.1468341201543808, -0.09544406831264496, 0.004022777546197176, -0.4459890127182007, 0.07514791190624237, 0.5752242803573608, -0.020505206659436226, -0.007287280634045601, -0.13943776488304138, -0.1549645960330963, -0.2544926404953003, -0.043181005865335464, 0.585609...	4	The Island's History A Historic Setting Cedar Island is located in what could arguably be America’s most historically significant lake, Lake Champlain. The lake was named after the French explorer Samuel Champlain, who became the first European known to have discovered the lake, in 1609, more than 150 years before the American Colonies declared their independence from Great Britain in 1776. When Champlain arrived at the lake, he marched into a war zone where he fired a single shot with his arquebus (rifle) which would reverberate for 175 years! The lake formed a natural boundary between two powerful American Indian nations, both of whom claimed the lake as belonging to the members of their own tribe: the Iroquois on the West bank, in what is now northern New York State, and the Algonquins on the East bank, in what is now the State of Vermont. As a result, the lake – both its islands and its shores – had been almost entirely abandoned by the time of Champlain’s arrival. Living within this disputed territory was a recipe for extermination by the enemy tribe as the struggle for control of the lake region raged, causing both Indian tribes to move further inland where they were safer from attack. However, on Champlain’s momentous visit to the lake, he found a party of Iroquois warriors. To further endear the French to the Algonquins, some of whom accompanied him on the journey, he fired his arquebus (loaded with four balls) into the war party. This instantly killed two of the three chiefs and wounded one of their companions (who later died from the wound), to the utter astonishment and consternation of the Iroquois because the chiefs were wearing arrow-proof armor woven from cotton thread and wood. From this day forward, the Iroquois became the eternal enemies of the French, later allying with the English, whom they helped to wrest the eventual control of Canada from the French, who abandoned the province to the English in 1763. Lake Champlain is located at the northern end of the Champlain Valley, formed by the Green Mountains (part of the Appalachian Mountain system) to the east and the Adirondack Mountains to the west. It is fed by Lake George to the south and drains into the Richelieu River to the north. In a time when there were no highways connecting our nation via land, waterways formed the fastest means of moving military troops from one area to another. As a result, the Lake Champlain region became the scene of important battles in all three of the wars that established the boundaries of the territory that is now the northeastern region of the United States: the French and Indian War of 1754-1763, the American Revolutionary War, which began in 1775, and the War of 1812. When the French and Indian War started in 1754, the Champlain Valley was part of New France, having been secured by the French through the installation of a number of military forts on and around Lake Champlain. One of these military forts was Fort Ticonderoga, where the Battle of Carillon (the original French name of the fort) was fought in 1758, in which the French successfully defended the fort against a British attack. In 1759, however, a combination of British and American Colonial troops forced the French to retreat from the area, burning their forts behind themselves as they left. When the first Treaty of Paris was signed, in 1763, the French gave to Great Britain much of its claims to New France, including the colony of Canada which had extended south into the Champlain Valley. On May 10, 1775, soon after the beginning of the American Revolution, Fort Ticonderoga, considered “the gateway to the continent” and then controlled by the British, was captured by the Green Mountain Boys, led by Ethan Allen. Fort Crown Point, Fort George (on Lake George, which connects to Lake Champlain to the south), and Fort Saint-Jean (just above Lake Champlain, on the Richelieu River) were also captured during the Revolutionary War, in effect severing the British forces in Canada from those south of the region and thus playing a major role in the war. Upon hearing the news of the fall of Ticonderoga, Lord Dartmouth, then back in England, after serving as the British Secretary of State for the Colonies from 1772-1775, wrote that it was “very unfortunate; very unfortunate indeed.” After the Thirteen Colonies won their independence from Great Britain through the second Treaty of Paris, in 1783, forming the United States of America, Lake Champlain served as an important entrance into the new nation from Canada. The lake had to remain fortified to prevent any British military attack from the north. Near the end of the War of 1812, the Battle of Plattsburgh (New York), fought on September 11, 1814 and also known as the Battle of Lake Champlain, played the key role in ending the British invasion from Canada and in preventing Great Britain from gaining any territory from the United States during that war. In that battle, an American naval force led by Master Commandant Thomas Macdonough soundly defeated the British naval squadron, causing the British to retreat into Canada. The Treaty of Ghent was signed on December 24th of that year, ending the war and leaving our northern border with Canada intact as it remains to this day. After the War of 1812, Lake Champlain and the waterways to which it is connected continued to play a very important role in the commerce of New England, and especially in the development of Burlington, Vermont, until the creation of automobile highway systems, which diminished the need for water transportation of people and goods. In the twenty-first century, Lake Champlain provides a delightful combination of scenic beauty, recreational opportunities, and historical sites, making it an important tourist destination – especially for American patriots with the cultural and educational background needed to fully appreciate the significance of the region in the formation of our nation, or those with a desire to acquire greater knowledge of our history while relaxing amidst stunning views of sparkling water and mountain grandeur. The early history of Cedar Island might well bring to mind a phrase usually attributed to New York Tribune founder Horace Greely: “Go West, Young Man”. That phrase was made popular by a 1936 comedy film starring Mae West, which used “Go West, Young Man” as the film’s title. The story of Cedar Island’s first owners is, to a large degree, a microcosm of the European settlement and westward expansion of the United States. This story begins in Argylleshire, Scotland, where Duncan Campbell married Mary McCoy (Campbell) before heading southwest, to Tyrone County, in the province of Ulster, (Northern) Ireland, where son Robert Campbell was born to them in 1669. While still in Ulster, Robert married Janet Stuart (Campbell), with whom he had six children, before heading southwest (as his father had done many years before) with Janet and the children. The family arrived in Boston, in the English Colony of Massachusetts, along with the Reverend Samuel Dorrance, a Presbyterian minister, in 1714. By then, their son James (born in Ulster about 1704) was 10 years old. Since the residents of Boston would not sell land to the new immigrants, the family headed southwest, again, eventually settling in Voluntown, New London County, Connecticut, in May of 1722, where Robert lived until his death. There, James married Hannah Taylor (Campbell), and together they had 13 children, all born in Voluntown. The oldest of the sons born to James & Hanna, William Campbell (born in 1726) married Sarah Barnes (Campbell), with whom he had six children, in Voluntown, before carrying on the family tradition of heading west, settling in South Hero Island, Vermont, around 1784, sometime after he finished his service as a soldier in the American Revolutionary War. After moving to Vermont, he lived another 14 years, dying in 1798, at age 71 or 72. He was buried in the Campbell-Plumb Cemetery, on South Hero Island, where his gravestone stands, to this day. At least one of William’s sons, Private Samuel Campbell, Sr. (born in 1762), also fought in the Revolutionary War. He was initially in Captain John Spoon’s Company, which was part of Colonel John Brown’s Regiment, but also served in other regiments, including one that was led by a Colonel James Campbell, who might have been his Uncle James. Samuel married Grace Plumb (Campbell), with whom he had seven children, including Samuel, Jr. He became the second private owner of Cedar Island (which was just east of his farm on South Hero Island), before moving even further west, to Durand, Winnebago County, Illinois, where he died, at age 82, in 1844. Grace had died in 1827 at the young age of 52, and was buried in the Greenwood Cemetery in Saint Albans, Franklin County, Vermont, as was their son Samuel Campbell, Jr., who was buried there at age 70, in 1871. He, along with his brother Zeno, were apparently the only children who stayed behind, in Vermont, when the rest of the family moved west. However, we are getting ahead of our story. James and Hanna also had another son (William’s brother), Samuel (born in 1831, or – by some accounts – in 1836), who had a daughter named Susannah (born in 1861) who married the man who became the first private owner of Cedar Island, Sergeant Reuben Rowley, who was born on April 16, 1750. Reuben served in the Revolutionary War under Colonel Seth Warner, who – along with Colonel Ethan Allen – led a regiment of soldiers (commissioned by the Continental Congress) which had been formed from the men who had served as members of the Green Mountain Boys (named after the mountain range that forms the eastern wall of the Champlain Valley in which Lake Champlain sits). The Green Mountain Boys had been formed in the late 1760s to protect the territory (in what is now the state of Vermont) along the eastern border of Lake Champlain, which was claimed by the Colony of New Hampshire as well as by the Colony of New York. As Peter S. Palmer states in his book, History of Lake Champlain, 1609-1814: Both colonies frequently issued grants for the same territory; causing much confusion in the land titles and creating great animosity between rival claimants. As Palmer explains, the Governor of New Hampshire had made land grants “prior to the close of the year 1763” – the year when the French, after years of war, ceded the territory to the British under the first Treaty of Paris. During that time of confusion and disputed land titles, which followed the French & Indian War, a number of settlers who had taken possession of their land in the territory east of Lake Champlain, called the “New Hampshire Grants,” were driven off their land by other settlers who had been granted the same land by the Colony of New York. In turn, the Green Mountain Boys drove the New York settlers off the land they had taken from the New Hampshire grantees. As a result, the New Hampshire grantees were able, then, to return and reclaim the land granted to them. The Green Mountain Boys eventually secured total control of the entire region for New Hampshire, when New York became distracted from giving attention to the land grant conflict, as the colony got embroiled in conflicts with the British, preceding the American Declaration of Independence in 1776. Those conflicts, of course, were a part of what led to the Revolutionary War, during which most of the settlers were fighting in the war, or merely trying to survive the war, with some of them having fled their lands around Lake Champlain to evade conflict with British troops who had invaded the region. It was not until after the war that most of the settlements near the eastern border of Lake Champlain became permanent. In 1779, while the war was still raging, Thomas Chittenden, governor of the independent state of Vermont (before Vermont became a member of the United States of America, in 1791), granted, to “Colonel Ethan Allen, and Samuel Herrick, and their Associates,” “about 23,000 acres” of land consisting of “a certain large island, lying and being situated in Lake Champlain, in This State, and known sometimes by the name of Grand Isle,” which was divided into the “South Island” and the “North Island,” and “incorporated into one distinct Township, or Incorporation, by the Name of the Two Heroes.” This grant almost certainly included Cedar Island, given its small size and proximity to South Hero Island, even though it is not specifically named in the grant. Among the associates listed in that land grant document was “Reuben Rowley.” Retention of the grant of land was conditional upon actually settling the land, as the grant document explained: That each Proprietor in the said Two Heroes, his heirs or assigns, shall plant & cultivate [crops on] the Land, or have one Family settled on each respective Right, within the Term of One Year next after the Conclusion of the Present War, on penalty of Forfeiture of each respective Right or Share of Land in said Island, not so improved & the same to revert to the Freemen of this State, to be, by their representatives regranted to such Persons as shall appear to [qualify]. The Revolutionary War came to an end in 1783, with the signing of the second Treaty of Paris. It was at that point that settlers began to arrive in the “Two Heroes”. Although Reuben Rowley was living in nearby Rutland County about that time, he appears to have met the qualifications, above, for retention of his grant, since he signed a warranty deed (contained in Volume 6, Pages 518 – 519, of the deed records of the Town of South Hero) dated May 11, 1784, in which he affirms that he is transferring “one right of land granted to Me by the Governor and Counsel of the State of Vermont on the Grand Isle or two Grate Heros” to “Samuel Campbell,” who, at that time, apparently was living in the vicinity of Boston, as mentioned in the deed. It appears that – in the absence of Samuel – the deed was signed in the presence of, and given to, William Campbell (named on the deed), Samuel’s father. By this means, it appears that Private Samuel Campbell, Sr., the first cousin of Reuben’s wife, Susannah (Campbell) Rowley, became the second person to own Cedar Island, even though there is no description, in that deed, of what that “Right or Share of Land” included. What is known, for certain, is that the South Hero town clerk’s office has on its walls maps of the original subdivisions of land, from the fall of 1783 and spring of 1784, which show a “Reuben Rowley” as the owner of one of the original lots at the northeast corner of South Hero island called Campbell Point (what is Kibbe Point, today), which is almost directly west of Cedar Island. From this, it appears highly likely that Reuben Rowley was, in fact, the original grantee of land on South Hero Island, which included (by proximity) Cedar Island (even though the island is not shown on that map), and that his conveyance of his land grant to Samuel Campbell, in 1784, was the first conveyance of the island between private parties. This seems especially likely based upon the land description contained in the Warranty Deed dated September 3, 1818 in which Samuel Campbell, in turn, transferred the island to Benajah Phelps, who then became the third private citizen to own Cedar Island, which was still, then, known by the name “Gull Island”. That deed refers to the “Division of lots of the [land grant] rights of … Reuben Rowley”, and gives a very specific description of the land, as follows: commonly known by the name of Campbell Point farm containing by intimation two hundred forty acres and also two islands, lying about one mile east of the above described transfer containing about eighteen acres said islands known by the name of Fish Bladder and Gull Islands … Benajah, whose family may have been the first family to settle on South Hero Island (and who still has descendents on that island), was born on March 4, 1770, and lived until April 12, 1862, dying at age 92. He is buried in the South Hero Cemetery. On September 18, 1852 (shortly before the Civil War), Benajah transferred ownership of Cedar Island to his two younger sons, George Phelps (1822–1911), and Samuel Phelps (1824–1906). It appears that, at some point, Samuel gave his interest in the island to his older brother George, since the next available deed record shows that George, alone, divided the island, selling the eastern side of the island to Eleazar Jewett, on April 18, 1870, for $200, and the “west half” of the island to Horace C. Martin, on February 20, 1875. In turn, Eleazar Jewett conveyed the eastern portion of the island to Ell Barnum, on August 13, 1877. Then, on July 4, 1879, the island was reunited under one owner – never to be divided, again – when Jed P. Clark purchased the western half of the island from Homer C. Martin for $150, and the eastern half of the island from Ell Barnum, also for $150. Jed was the son of Joseph Clark who was arguably the most influential citizen in the history of Milton, a town of about 10,000 people, which is almost due east from Cedar Island, in Chittenden County, Vermont. Milton was chartered by Governor Benning Wentworth of New Hampshire, on June 8, 1763, just months after the signing of the Treaty of Paris, on February 10, 1763, when the French ceded most of their North American territories – including the Lake Champlain region – to the British, as mentioned earlier in this history, but the town was not settled until 1782. The Lamoille River flows through Milton and enters Lake Champlain at the town’s southwest corner, depositing sediment into the lake that forms the sand bar just south of Cedar Island, as well as the beaches of Sand Bar State Park. On June 5, 2013, a local newspaper, Milton Independent, published an article entitled “Clark made Milton,” in which the staff writers explain that Joseph Clark came to Milton “at the young age of 20 in 1816,” a year “known as Eighteen Hundred and Froze to Death,” which was “not a good year for most of the northeast because of the frosts and snow every month,” which caused agricultural crops to fail that year, creating a great deal of hardship. The Champlain Canal opened in 1823, which increased trade with New York, and Clark began to supply spars (ship masts, booms, etc.) for the shipping trade, purchasing a sawmill in 1825, in which to finish the raw wood. Perhaps his most important accomplishment was his influence in bringing “the railroad” to Milton. Clark was also an active Republican, who “served three terms in the state senate.” He passed away in 1879, the same year his son Jed P. Clark bought Cedar Island. Most likely, the funds for the purchase came from Jed’s inheritance, and Jed continued to live in the stately home his father built on Main Street, in Milton, which later served as the town’s offices until 1994. Jed retained the ownership of Cedar Island until September 5, 1890, when he sold the island to Alexander Whiteside for $400 – making a $100 profit above his purchase price. Whiteside, who was a prominent resident of Champlain, Clinton County, New York, was born on November 14, 1825, and died on February 2, 1903 at age 77. He is buried in the Glenwood Cemetery in Champlain. He was married to Eleanor Anne Shattuck (Whiteside), who became the owner of Cedar Island upon his death, and who created a warranty deed, on February 19, 1903 (which was corrected on March 26, 1903), transferring the island to their children George S. Whiteside, Alexander Whiteside, Helen E. Whiteside (later Helen E. Soutter), and Anne H. Whiteside (later Anne. H. Williams). The Whiteside Family retained ownership of the island until August 2, 1942, when the “Heirs of Alexander & Eleanor A. Whiteside” conveyed the island to Eugene A. Richard, via a quit-Claim Deed that identifies the island as “Cedar Island”, further known as “Gull Island”. This is the first deed in the chain of title that refers to any buildings or other improvements on the island. Eugene Richard was from Winooski, Vermont, which (according to Wikipedia) “is the most densely populated municipality in northern New England”. It is also a very culturally diverse city, and it was in Winooski that Eugene “ran a furniture factory,” according to Kim Chase, as reported in the Burlington Free Press, in a June 10, 2016 article entitled “History Space: Winooski – a ‘p’tit Canada.” Eugene retained the property for 20 years before transferring it to his children Henry J. Richard, Priscilla R. Sleeper, and Bertha M. Condon on April 17, 1962. The Richard children owned the island for exactly five years before they sold it to Suburban Realty of Vermont Corporation on April 17, 1967. In turn, the corporation sold the island to Patricia M. Bellows on June 24, 1972 for $28,750. The island would remain in the Bellows Family for 30 years. After Kendrick F. “Rick” Bellows, Jr. passed away, on February 15, 2016, his obituary in the Burlington Free Press ended with the words: For thirty years, Cedar Island in South Hero was his joyful retreat. Rick, who grew up in Plainfield, New Jersey, graduated from Princeton University in 1957 and served in the U.S. Marine Corps before entering the banking business, at one point serving as President and CEO of the Bank of Vermont. In addition to being a private pilot, Rick was an avid tennis player, and he was probably the owner responsible for the building of the red clay tennis court on Cedar Island, which stood for many years, until it fell into disrepair (many years after Rick sold the property) and was removed. In addition to two daughters, Rick is survived by his wife, Barbara O’Reilly, and son Kendrick F. Bellows, III, both of whom were also listed as owners on some of the multiple Bellows Family deeds to Cedar Island. It was near the end of the Twentieth Century, while the Bellows Family still owned Cedar Island, that they became the victims of arsonists, during one winter, when the lake was frozen over, and some drunken fellows on a snowmobile apparently decided it would be ‘fun’ to watch a house burn down, so they set fire to the island’s main house, which was rebuilt in its current form (with some 2004 enhancements) in 1999. The original main house was also a two-story home of about the same size as the current home, but it was constructed before building permits were required in the Town of South Hero, so there are no public records showing the construction of that home. The South Hero “lister card” shows that one of the two cottages on Cedar Island was built in 1930. (In Vermont, listers are elected officials responsible for valuing properties for the purpose of assessing property taxes.) But there are no public records showing the date when the other cottage was built. However, well before Rick Bellow’s death, in 2016, Cedar Island had been sold (on November 1, 2002) to the Marshall and Kristine Cooper Family, through a family limited partnership, for $960,000 – a far cry from the $400 for which Jed Clark had sold the island in 1890, which says a great deal about the inflation of real estate prices in this nation over the past 100 plus years! In 2004, Marshall and Christine added a hot tub and expanded the patio with a stone fireplace, built by Collin Marcotte, the current caretaker of Cedar Island, as well as adding the current boathouse. At some point during the 14 years during which the Cooper Family owned the island, they had the honor of hosting U.S. Vice President Mike Pence on the Island. There, Pence used his skill as an artist to create a painting of an island scene, which was proudly displayed in the island’s main house, until the Coopers sold the island. Brint Ryan, the current owner of Cedar Island, grew up in Big Spring, Texas, and acquired the property from the Cooper Family on November 10, 2016. Brint is the Founder, Chairman and CEO of Ryan, LLC, a global tax services firm. He is a member of the University of North Texas System Board of Regents and served as its Chairman from 2013 through 2019. He received his Bachelor and Master of Science degrees in accounting, with an emphasis in taxation, from the University of North Texas. In 2018, the University named the School of Business the G. Brint Ryan School of Business, in his honor. Brint lives most of the year in Dallas, Texas with his wife, Amanda Ryan, and their five daughters. (The above history of Cedar Island was updated on December 3, 2019.)	5,722	ENGLISH	1
Maurya was a skilled leader and politician as well as military leader. He expanded the Kingdom of Magadha into the Mauryan Empire. Maurya developed infrastructure such as roads, bridges, and a post office, that would help his empire to flourish for almost 150 years. Chandragupta Maurya. Chandragupta Maurya founded the empire around 322 BC. He first conquered the Nanda dynasty who ruled Patliputra, which was located near Bihar. By 316 BC the Empire had fully occupied north-western India. Patliputra was the busiest place. It was under the direct control of the Emperor. Merchants, officials and craftsmen probably lived in these cities of the empire. Patliputra is now known as Patna and is the capital of Bihar. Ujjain lay on the key route from north to south India and later the prime meridian used by Indian astronomers ran through the city. It is located in modern Madhya Pradesh. Asoka was the grandson of Maurya, He was brutal warlord. His army reached up to the boarders of the empire which included two thirds of the Indian Subcontinent. The Kalinga War : Kalinga was the ancient name of coastal Orrisa. Ashoka fought a war to conquer Kalinga but after seeing the violence and bloodshed he decided never to fight any more wars and converted to Buddhism. By encouraging dhamma.Ashoka's dhamma did not involve worship of god or of anything else. It involved only his messages which he wanted to tell the people. It wasn't a religious belief Ashoka sent. He wanted to spread the message of honesty, truth, fullness, etc. In Later life Asoka grew tired of war and converted to Buddhism. In his rule Buddist teachers were able to spread there religion far and wide. After Asoka's death, the Mauryan Empire declined. He successors levied heavy taxes on the people. Their harsh treatment caused the people to turn against their Mauryan masters. The last Mauryan King was murdered in 184 B.C whoch ended the Mauryan Empire. Ashoka's son was Bindusara, who ruled after the death of Bindusara. A total of 33 inscriptions in stone pillars record Asoka's "Edicts" - many of them reflections rather than edicts in the usual sense - record key features of his thinking and events of his reign. These "Edicts", which are dispersed across a wide area of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and even extend as far west as Kandahar in Afghanistan are mainly in the Prakrits language. Chanakya's real name was Vishnu Gupta. He was a wise man in the court of Chandragupta Maurya. He wrote a book called "Arthashastra". There are 15 books of Arthashastra. He died in 283 BC. 185 BC. The Mauryan Empire fell due to weakness of the Emperor and because the army was inactive. The fall was also due to brahmins who sacrificed animals after Ashoka's death.Brihadratha. Brihadratha was the last ruler of the Mauryan Empire. He ruled from 187-185 BC. He was killed by Pusyamitra Sunga. Mahindra. Mahindra was the son of Ashoka. His name means "the conqueror of the world".	<urn:uuid:d4e113b2-c79b-4c50-aef8-20c2e8eace64>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.gatka.net/mauyan-empire	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251799918.97/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129133601-20200129163601-00213.warc.gz	en	0.984192	713	3.71875	4	[ -0.3517260253429413, 0.3635006248950958, 0.2552335560321808, -0.18681533634662628, -0.3928237557411194, -0.02971891686320305, 0.3088192641735077, 0.24479594826698303, -0.17430105805397034, -0.11477378010749817, 0.2850608825683594, -0.7476232051849365, -0.25757020711898804, 0.23999759554862...	10	Maurya was a skilled leader and politician as well as military leader. He expanded the Kingdom of Magadha into the Mauryan Empire. Maurya developed infrastructure such as roads, bridges, and a post office, that would help his empire to flourish for almost 150 years. Chandragupta Maurya. Chandragupta Maurya founded the empire around 322 BC. He first conquered the Nanda dynasty who ruled Patliputra, which was located near Bihar. By 316 BC the Empire had fully occupied north-western India. Patliputra was the busiest place. It was under the direct control of the Emperor. Merchants, officials and craftsmen probably lived in these cities of the empire. Patliputra is now known as Patna and is the capital of Bihar. Ujjain lay on the key route from north to south India and later the prime meridian used by Indian astronomers ran through the city. It is located in modern Madhya Pradesh. Asoka was the grandson of Maurya, He was brutal warlord. His army reached up to the boarders of the empire which included two thirds of the Indian Subcontinent. The Kalinga War : Kalinga was the ancient name of coastal Orrisa. Ashoka fought a war to conquer Kalinga but after seeing the violence and bloodshed he decided never to fight any more wars and converted to Buddhism. By encouraging dhamma.Ashoka's dhamma did not involve worship of god or of anything else. It involved only his messages which he wanted to tell the people. It wasn't a religious belief Ashoka sent. He wanted to spread the message of honesty, truth, fullness, etc. In Later life Asoka grew tired of war and converted to Buddhism. In his rule Buddist teachers were able to spread there religion far and wide. After Asoka's death, the Mauryan Empire declined. He successors levied heavy taxes on the people. Their harsh treatment caused the people to turn against their Mauryan masters. The last Mauryan King was murdered in 184 B.C whoch ended the Mauryan Empire. Ashoka's son was Bindusara, who ruled after the death of Bindusara. A total of 33 inscriptions in stone pillars record Asoka's "Edicts" - many of them reflections rather than edicts in the usual sense - record key features of his thinking and events of his reign. These "Edicts", which are dispersed across a wide area of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and even extend as far west as Kandahar in Afghanistan are mainly in the Prakrits language. Chanakya's real name was Vishnu Gupta. He was a wise man in the court of Chandragupta Maurya. He wrote a book called "Arthashastra". There are 15 books of Arthashastra. He died in 283 BC. 185 BC. The Mauryan Empire fell due to weakness of the Emperor and because the army was inactive. The fall was also due to brahmins who sacrificed animals after Ashoka's death.Brihadratha. Brihadratha was the last ruler of the Mauryan Empire. He ruled from 187-185 BC. He was killed by Pusyamitra Sunga. Mahindra. Mahindra was the son of Ashoka. His name means "the conqueror of the world".	727	ENGLISH	1
Reeling from the attack on Pearl Harbor, the United States needed to give an answer, and they needed to do it swiftly. Japan had to pay. But Japan was far away and impenetrable. Or was it? In the days following Pearl Harbor, this was the question on President Roosevelt’s mind. It was James “Jimmy” Doolittle who would step up to the plate with the answer: the Doolittle Raid on Saturday, April 18th, 1942. To bomb Japan and prove that it was indeed not impenetrable was no small task. The mission would take some considerable risks. The USS Hornet aircraft carrier would cross the Pacific in silence with sixteen B-25 bombers on deck. Bombers had never before taken off from a carrier; these would be the pioneers. And because they would have to fly a considerable distance to bomb Japan and land in China, they needed to be heavily modified for more fuel capacity and less weight. The secret, select crew of twenty-four would get just three weeks of training in simulated carrier deck takeoffs, low-level and night flying, low-altitude bombing, and over-water navigation. Four months after Pearl Harbor, the plan was ready to set in motion. But it did not quite go as planned. 750 miles from Japan, the Hornet and its escorts were spotted by a Japanese patrol ship and Doolittle was forced to launch the attack 10 hours and 200 miles too soon. The bombers arrived in Japan around noon, hitting ten military and industrial targets in Tokyo, two in Yokohama, and one each in Yokosuka, Nagoya, Kobe and Osaka. About fifty Japanese were killed, including civilians, and another 400 injured. Due to low fuel, the bombers were unable to make it to the designated landing sights in China, most crash landing along the coast. Three crew members were killed and eight captured. Every plane that participated in the raid was lost, causing Doolittle to fear that he might be courtmartialed. Despite the loss, the Doolittle Raid was considered a massive success. It gave the United States a much needed morale boost and fractured the confidence of Japan, causing them to expand their defense to a wider range which would ultimately cost them greatly. Doolittle could have only hoped that his endeavor would be so influential. And not only did he not get court-martialed, he was instead promoted two grades to brigadier general and awarded the Medal of Honor.	<urn:uuid:80d290a6-410b-4640-a18e-82815e46ece8>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://warbirdfanatics.com/2018/12/26/the-genius-of-jimmy-doolittle-and-his-raid/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251700988.64/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127143516-20200127173516-00259.warc.gz	en	0.983381	514	3.609375	4	[ -0.19495439529418945, -0.12108632177114487, -0.12173140048980713, -0.585395872592926, 0.30719974637031555, 0.320854514837265, 0.04058190807700157, 0.3686984181404114, -0.04718020558357239, 0.008344512432813644, 0.471177875995636, 0.06564708054065704, 0.18089702725410461, 0.6173957586288452...	8	Reeling from the attack on Pearl Harbor, the United States needed to give an answer, and they needed to do it swiftly. Japan had to pay. But Japan was far away and impenetrable. Or was it? In the days following Pearl Harbor, this was the question on President Roosevelt’s mind. It was James “Jimmy” Doolittle who would step up to the plate with the answer: the Doolittle Raid on Saturday, April 18th, 1942. To bomb Japan and prove that it was indeed not impenetrable was no small task. The mission would take some considerable risks. The USS Hornet aircraft carrier would cross the Pacific in silence with sixteen B-25 bombers on deck. Bombers had never before taken off from a carrier; these would be the pioneers. And because they would have to fly a considerable distance to bomb Japan and land in China, they needed to be heavily modified for more fuel capacity and less weight. The secret, select crew of twenty-four would get just three weeks of training in simulated carrier deck takeoffs, low-level and night flying, low-altitude bombing, and over-water navigation. Four months after Pearl Harbor, the plan was ready to set in motion. But it did not quite go as planned. 750 miles from Japan, the Hornet and its escorts were spotted by a Japanese patrol ship and Doolittle was forced to launch the attack 10 hours and 200 miles too soon. The bombers arrived in Japan around noon, hitting ten military and industrial targets in Tokyo, two in Yokohama, and one each in Yokosuka, Nagoya, Kobe and Osaka. About fifty Japanese were killed, including civilians, and another 400 injured. Due to low fuel, the bombers were unable to make it to the designated landing sights in China, most crash landing along the coast. Three crew members were killed and eight captured. Every plane that participated in the raid was lost, causing Doolittle to fear that he might be courtmartialed. Despite the loss, the Doolittle Raid was considered a massive success. It gave the United States a much needed morale boost and fractured the confidence of Japan, causing them to expand their defense to a wider range which would ultimately cost them greatly. Doolittle could have only hoped that his endeavor would be so influential. And not only did he not get court-martialed, he was instead promoted two grades to brigadier general and awarded the Medal of Honor.	517	ENGLISH	1
Around 1800 a migration took place along the coast of East Norfolk by people who had previously worked on the land. These people organised themselves into beach companies’ in order to benefit from the rapidly expanding Yarmouth Herring Industry by earning a living salvaging the many vessels that had come to grief on the maize of sandbanks that lurked just below the surface of the sea. The men became known as 'beachmen' . Around 1840 a group of beachmen from Winterton moved south and established the California settlement which was so named because of Gold coins being found in the cliffs at the time of the California Gold Rush. California had the advantage of a clear view of the sandbanks from Happisburgh to Corton including the sheltered anchorage in Yarmouth where up to 1000 sailing ships would await a favourable wind. A lookout tower was erected on the cliffs and vessels called ‘Gigs’ and ‘Yawls’ were purpose built for salvage work. In 1854 the beachmen also had a lifeboat built by the famous Yarmouth boat builders James Beeching, to enable them to carry out more hazardous work. Permission was granted from the Prince Consort to name the lifeboat ‘Prince Albert’ and under the leadership of Coxswain Solomon Brown, many notable rescues were carried out .(Solomon Brown is far right, back row in the right hand picture below) However from around 1880 erosion started to affect the work of beach companies with the loss of both beach and cliffs, this eventually resulted in the loss of the lookout, and subsequently the original California Tavern, to the sea. By 1890 the California beach companies ceased to exist and the beachmen migrated to Caister and joined the beach companies there. The future for California now lay in the booming tourist industry where people originally came to Norfolk via the railways to enjoy the golden beachs and stay in the fast developing Holiday Camps.	<urn:uuid:35451fff-32d1-4ce2-9472-380a06a4f9b9>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.californiatavern.co.uk/history	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606872.19/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122071919-20200122100919-00550.warc.gz	en	0.98039	396	3.328125	3	[ 0.22790604829788208, -0.02474428340792656, 0.17437732219696045, -0.17405089735984802, 0.30268481373786926, 0.011665355414152145, -0.09102045744657516, -0.2917401194572449, -0.5152704119682312, -0.12734663486480713, 0.4250339865684509, -0.5533047914505005, 0.12260109186172485, -0.1790844500...	15	Around 1800 a migration took place along the coast of East Norfolk by people who had previously worked on the land. These people organised themselves into beach companies’ in order to benefit from the rapidly expanding Yarmouth Herring Industry by earning a living salvaging the many vessels that had come to grief on the maize of sandbanks that lurked just below the surface of the sea. The men became known as 'beachmen' . Around 1840 a group of beachmen from Winterton moved south and established the California settlement which was so named because of Gold coins being found in the cliffs at the time of the California Gold Rush. California had the advantage of a clear view of the sandbanks from Happisburgh to Corton including the sheltered anchorage in Yarmouth where up to 1000 sailing ships would await a favourable wind. A lookout tower was erected on the cliffs and vessels called ‘Gigs’ and ‘Yawls’ were purpose built for salvage work. In 1854 the beachmen also had a lifeboat built by the famous Yarmouth boat builders James Beeching, to enable them to carry out more hazardous work. Permission was granted from the Prince Consort to name the lifeboat ‘Prince Albert’ and under the leadership of Coxswain Solomon Brown, many notable rescues were carried out .(Solomon Brown is far right, back row in the right hand picture below) However from around 1880 erosion started to affect the work of beach companies with the loss of both beach and cliffs, this eventually resulted in the loss of the lookout, and subsequently the original California Tavern, to the sea. By 1890 the California beach companies ceased to exist and the beachmen migrated to Caister and joined the beach companies there. The future for California now lay in the booming tourist industry where people originally came to Norfolk via the railways to enjoy the golden beachs and stay in the fast developing Holiday Camps.	406	ENGLISH	1
The upheaval of WWI changed the world. From 1914 to 1918, the international conflict caused many challenges throughout Europe; millions perished as a result. Many elements of conflict were unavoidable, and medical tents and hospitals were close to the perimeter to care for hurt soldiers quickly. WWI nurses witnessed the conflict firsthand. Many of them wrote about their involvement in diaries and letters that, similar to photographs from this time, offer insight into how they were personally impacted. These accounts also include details about fighting, disease, and the hope that nurses and soldiers alike found in their darkest moments. Germany introduced gas as a new form of aggression in 1915. This ushered in a different level of engagement. As gas devices became more commonplace, they were pervasive in the trenches and were among the most feared elements of WWI. Sister Edith Appleton, a British nurse who served France during WWI, wrote about soldiers stricken by gas and the adverse physical impacts they endured. Margaret Trevenen Arnold worked as a volunteer British Red Cross nurse in France in 1915. She kept a diary of her time at Le Tréport and described "groans, and moans, and shouts, and half-dazed mutterings, and men with trephined heads suddenly sitting bolt upright... It was awful, and I really know now what [conflict] means." An anonymous British nurse working at a field hospital in Belgium recalled caring for soldiers in a ramshackle cottage where quiet soldiers were too afflicted to make a sound. An anonymous nurse in Belgium recounted her experiences with a soldier named "Ragtime," a man she treated. Ragtime sustained a wound on his back and a broken arm. Initially, nurses changed his bandages every two hours and rolled him often to keep him comfortable before he received surgical intervention. An anonymous British nurse serving in Belgium endured a siege at the Fort of Walaem and described the difficulty nurses faced when it came to clean water and sterile surroundings.	<urn:uuid:197437de-be8b-4757-88df-554f0d81829d>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.ranker.com/list/nurse-stories/melissa-sartore?ref=collections&l=2164503&collectionId=1444	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591431.4/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117234621-20200118022621-00049.warc.gz	en	0.98497	403	3.53125	4	[ -0.3420203626155853, 0.2556093633174896, 0.6259790062904358, 0.03508958965539932, 0.2508896291255951, 0.11802066117525101, 0.16838869452476501, 0.19707797467708588, -0.04943985864520073, -0.1973126381635666, -0.19104328751564026, -0.40057605504989624, -0.07990740239620209, 0.50451284646987...	3	The upheaval of WWI changed the world. From 1914 to 1918, the international conflict caused many challenges throughout Europe; millions perished as a result. Many elements of conflict were unavoidable, and medical tents and hospitals were close to the perimeter to care for hurt soldiers quickly. WWI nurses witnessed the conflict firsthand. Many of them wrote about their involvement in diaries and letters that, similar to photographs from this time, offer insight into how they were personally impacted. These accounts also include details about fighting, disease, and the hope that nurses and soldiers alike found in their darkest moments. Germany introduced gas as a new form of aggression in 1915. This ushered in a different level of engagement. As gas devices became more commonplace, they were pervasive in the trenches and were among the most feared elements of WWI. Sister Edith Appleton, a British nurse who served France during WWI, wrote about soldiers stricken by gas and the adverse physical impacts they endured. Margaret Trevenen Arnold worked as a volunteer British Red Cross nurse in France in 1915. She kept a diary of her time at Le Tréport and described "groans, and moans, and shouts, and half-dazed mutterings, and men with trephined heads suddenly sitting bolt upright... It was awful, and I really know now what [conflict] means." An anonymous British nurse working at a field hospital in Belgium recalled caring for soldiers in a ramshackle cottage where quiet soldiers were too afflicted to make a sound. An anonymous nurse in Belgium recounted her experiences with a soldier named "Ragtime," a man she treated. Ragtime sustained a wound on his back and a broken arm. Initially, nurses changed his bandages every two hours and rolled him often to keep him comfortable before he received surgical intervention. An anonymous British nurse serving in Belgium endured a siege at the Fort of Walaem and described the difficulty nurses faced when it came to clean water and sterile surroundings.	415	ENGLISH	1
View This Storyboard as a Slide Show! Create your own! Copy this storyboard Like What You See? This storyboard was created with Kong Qiu, one day, maybe just one day, you'll make China a more peaceful place because of you. YES MASTER KONG! And remember, practical direction on life and self is more important than those around you. Got it? During 551-479 BC, in a province on the east coast of China, a famous philosopher was born. He was known as Kong Qiu, otherwise known as Confucious. Humanity, rectitude, tradition, knowledge, and scrupulousness. Years later, he made his own house into a school. Almost everyday, students would come into his home and learn about his teachings. His fame grew and grew, plus he even became chancellor. Do unto others as you would have done to yourself. Back in the day, Chinese states were often at war, and this became a problem for the prince of Lu. He then decided to take a 13-year hike, also known as a sabbatical in Confucianism. In some of Confucius's teachings, he taught other things such as the Five Constants: humanity, rectitude, tradition, knowledge, and scrupulousness. What are the Five Constants? He also invented the Golden Rule; "Do unto others as you would have done to yourself." He also made filial piety, which is a virtue of respect for one's parents, elders, and ancestors. Along with that was the Three Fundamental Bonds, which is the key relations between your relatives. It's not your fault, Mom, I was the one who dropped the glass. Over 12 Million Create My First Storyboard	<urn:uuid:69ca8fa1-e9a6-443b-9f0e-0aac26f3b005>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.storyboardthat.com/storyboards/bbf3879a/confucious	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606226.29/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121222429-20200122011429-00231.warc.gz	en	0.98385	374	3.515625	4	[ -0.30754169821739197, 0.2688427269458771, 0.7202712893486023, -0.24628949165344238, -0.3782908320426941, 0.22102732956409454, 0.39573997259140015, 0.04747311770915985, 0.08629380911588669, 0.1826169341802597, 0.34769827127456665, -0.42221730947494507, 0.5253886580467224, 0.1279946714639663...	1	View This Storyboard as a Slide Show! Create your own! Copy this storyboard Like What You See? This storyboard was created with Kong Qiu, one day, maybe just one day, you'll make China a more peaceful place because of you. YES MASTER KONG! And remember, practical direction on life and self is more important than those around you. Got it? During 551-479 BC, in a province on the east coast of China, a famous philosopher was born. He was known as Kong Qiu, otherwise known as Confucious. Humanity, rectitude, tradition, knowledge, and scrupulousness. Years later, he made his own house into a school. Almost everyday, students would come into his home and learn about his teachings. His fame grew and grew, plus he even became chancellor. Do unto others as you would have done to yourself. Back in the day, Chinese states were often at war, and this became a problem for the prince of Lu. He then decided to take a 13-year hike, also known as a sabbatical in Confucianism. In some of Confucius's teachings, he taught other things such as the Five Constants: humanity, rectitude, tradition, knowledge, and scrupulousness. What are the Five Constants? He also invented the Golden Rule; "Do unto others as you would have done to yourself." He also made filial piety, which is a virtue of respect for one's parents, elders, and ancestors. Along with that was the Three Fundamental Bonds, which is the key relations between your relatives. It's not your fault, Mom, I was the one who dropped the glass. Over 12 Million Create My First Storyboard	363	ENGLISH	1
By the late summer of 1862, the Civil War was still raging. But all was not quiet on the frontier, and a battle was brewing in Minnesota that would draw money and resources from the major conflict. One after another, treaties with the Dakota had been broken. The tribe was pushed onto smaller and smaller allotments of land. Hunting became less sustainable as more white settlers moved into the area. A poor harvest in 1861 was followed by a harsh winter. By the next summer, the Dakota were on the verge of starving. But government gold was in short supply because of the war, and annuities to the Dakota were late. Traders refused to sell on credit. When told that the Dakota were starving, one trader responded, “Let them eat grass.” The Indian agent refused to release food from the warehouse until the annuities arrived. The Dakota were desperate. It only took a small spark to set off the blaze. On August 17, 1862, four young Santee were returning from an unsuccessful hunting trip. When they came to a settler’s cabin, one of the young men took eggs from a hen’s nest. An argument ensued, and five settlers were killed. The young men returned to their village and told their families what they had done. Conflict had been simmering just under the surface. The Dakota knew that this incident would cause serious trouble. Sissetons and Wahpetons felt that a conflict could only have bad results for them, and stayed out of the fighting. Mdewakantons and Wahpakutes believed that they would be held responsible no matter what they did, and some factions chose war. They also knew that a majority of soldiers from Minnesota had been deployed to fight the Civil War, and felt this was the time to strike. The influential leader Little Crow (Taoyateduta) argued against the fight. He felt the United States would meet such a conflict with overwhelming force, and warned the warriors, “You will die like rabbits.” But there was no holding back the warriors, and in the end, Little Crow agreed to lead them. They attacked the Lower Sioux Agency the following day, killing 31 and capturing 10. Authorities and settlers alike were completely taken by surprise. The Dakota ambushed a small military force at Redwood Ferry, where they killed 23. Two attacks on Fort Ridgely were successfully fended off, and the town of New Ulm was able to defend itself. On September 1, 170 soldiers were sent out from Fort Ridgely to bury settlers who had been killed in the fighting. That evening, they camped near Birch Coulee Creek. The ground was poorly chosen. It was open, flat, and exposed, near woods that provided cover for attackers. The Dakota surrounded the encampment during the night and attacked the following morning. Furious fighting continued for 36 hours, and the Dakota were on the verge of victory when a detachment from Fort Ridgely arrived and drove them off. The original force suffered severe casualties: 13 men were killed, 47 were wounded, and all the horses and mules were killed. It demonstrated just how serious the Dakota were. The Dakota offensive slowed after the defeat at Birch Coulee, and Colonel Henry Hastings Sibley reached out to Little Crow. Little Crow explained the causes of the war and hinted he might be willing to negotiate. Sibley refused to negotiate and demanded that the Dakota surrender. Little Crow refused. Sibley arrived at Fort Ridgely with 1,400 men. His advance was delayed by lack of supplies. Settlers grew impatient with the delay, wanting the Dakota driven out of Minnesota. A St. Cloud newspaper editor wrote, “For God’s sake put some live man in command of the force against the Sioux…” Supplies finally reached Sibley, and he set out on September 19. Little Crow was aware of the advance, and planned to ambush the soldiers when they were marching. He knew the troops would be strung out along the road. But some of the wagons were not on the road and were being driven towards where Little Crow’s warriors were hidden in the brush. They fired at the wagons, and the Battle of Wood Lake was on. The Dakota found themselves facing seasoned troops who had been fighting the Confederates. The battle lasted about two hours, and at the end of it, the Dakota Uprising was over. The Dakota suffered high casualties, and the arguments of the peace faction won out. Most of the Dakota surrendered after Wood Lake at a place called Camp Release. It was called that because it was the site where the Dakota released the captives they had taken prisoner during the fighting. About 270 captives were turned over to Sibley. Little Crow did not surrender. He was killed on July 3, 1863, by a settler. The warriors who surrendered were given military trials in November 1862. 498 were tried and 303 were sentenced to hang. President Lincoln commuted the sentences of all but 38. On December 26, 1862, the 38 Dakota were hanged at Mankato, Minnesota, in what remains the largest mass execution in American history. For more information: - Check out these amazing digital resources about the 1862 Dakota Uprising: Minnesota History Center, The U.S.-Dakota War of 1862 and University Archives and Southern Minnesota Historical Center - For an audio podcast of Little War on the Prairie with This American Life, click here	<urn:uuid:998ec4d5-d6ad-4f0c-93c0-598163f55a99>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://ushistoryscene.com/article/1862-dakota-uprising/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598217.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120081337-20200120105337-00490.warc.gz	en	0.987794	1,116	3.625	4	[ -0.3823298215866089, 0.3556240499019623, 0.08532258868217468, 0.13982853293418884, 0.368140310049057, -0.11861478537321091, -0.23030462861061096, 0.18412090837955475, -0.42337435483932495, -0.1156984269618988, 0.4030802249908447, 0.07932518422603607, 0.39409035444259644, 0.3564056158065796...	9	By the late summer of 1862, the Civil War was still raging. But all was not quiet on the frontier, and a battle was brewing in Minnesota that would draw money and resources from the major conflict. One after another, treaties with the Dakota had been broken. The tribe was pushed onto smaller and smaller allotments of land. Hunting became less sustainable as more white settlers moved into the area. A poor harvest in 1861 was followed by a harsh winter. By the next summer, the Dakota were on the verge of starving. But government gold was in short supply because of the war, and annuities to the Dakota were late. Traders refused to sell on credit. When told that the Dakota were starving, one trader responded, “Let them eat grass.” The Indian agent refused to release food from the warehouse until the annuities arrived. The Dakota were desperate. It only took a small spark to set off the blaze. On August 17, 1862, four young Santee were returning from an unsuccessful hunting trip. When they came to a settler’s cabin, one of the young men took eggs from a hen’s nest. An argument ensued, and five settlers were killed. The young men returned to their village and told their families what they had done. Conflict had been simmering just under the surface. The Dakota knew that this incident would cause serious trouble. Sissetons and Wahpetons felt that a conflict could only have bad results for them, and stayed out of the fighting. Mdewakantons and Wahpakutes believed that they would be held responsible no matter what they did, and some factions chose war. They also knew that a majority of soldiers from Minnesota had been deployed to fight the Civil War, and felt this was the time to strike. The influential leader Little Crow (Taoyateduta) argued against the fight. He felt the United States would meet such a conflict with overwhelming force, and warned the warriors, “You will die like rabbits.” But there was no holding back the warriors, and in the end, Little Crow agreed to lead them. They attacked the Lower Sioux Agency the following day, killing 31 and capturing 10. Authorities and settlers alike were completely taken by surprise. The Dakota ambushed a small military force at Redwood Ferry, where they killed 23. Two attacks on Fort Ridgely were successfully fended off, and the town of New Ulm was able to defend itself. On September 1, 170 soldiers were sent out from Fort Ridgely to bury settlers who had been killed in the fighting. That evening, they camped near Birch Coulee Creek. The ground was poorly chosen. It was open, flat, and exposed, near woods that provided cover for attackers. The Dakota surrounded the encampment during the night and attacked the following morning. Furious fighting continued for 36 hours, and the Dakota were on the verge of victory when a detachment from Fort Ridgely arrived and drove them off. The original force suffered severe casualties: 13 men were killed, 47 were wounded, and all the horses and mules were killed. It demonstrated just how serious the Dakota were. The Dakota offensive slowed after the defeat at Birch Coulee, and Colonel Henry Hastings Sibley reached out to Little Crow. Little Crow explained the causes of the war and hinted he might be willing to negotiate. Sibley refused to negotiate and demanded that the Dakota surrender. Little Crow refused. Sibley arrived at Fort Ridgely with 1,400 men. His advance was delayed by lack of supplies. Settlers grew impatient with the delay, wanting the Dakota driven out of Minnesota. A St. Cloud newspaper editor wrote, “For God’s sake put some live man in command of the force against the Sioux…” Supplies finally reached Sibley, and he set out on September 19. Little Crow was aware of the advance, and planned to ambush the soldiers when they were marching. He knew the troops would be strung out along the road. But some of the wagons were not on the road and were being driven towards where Little Crow’s warriors were hidden in the brush. They fired at the wagons, and the Battle of Wood Lake was on. The Dakota found themselves facing seasoned troops who had been fighting the Confederates. The battle lasted about two hours, and at the end of it, the Dakota Uprising was over. The Dakota suffered high casualties, and the arguments of the peace faction won out. Most of the Dakota surrendered after Wood Lake at a place called Camp Release. It was called that because it was the site where the Dakota released the captives they had taken prisoner during the fighting. About 270 captives were turned over to Sibley. Little Crow did not surrender. He was killed on July 3, 1863, by a settler. The warriors who surrendered were given military trials in November 1862. 498 were tried and 303 were sentenced to hang. President Lincoln commuted the sentences of all but 38. On December 26, 1862, the 38 Dakota were hanged at Mankato, Minnesota, in what remains the largest mass execution in American history. For more information: - Check out these amazing digital resources about the 1862 Dakota Uprising: Minnesota History Center, The U.S.-Dakota War of 1862 and University Archives and Southern Minnesota Historical Center - For an audio podcast of Little War on the Prairie with This American Life, click here	1,163	ENGLISH	1
Thomas Hobbes was an English philosopher who was born April 5,1588 and died December 4,1679. He attended Oxford University where he studied classics. He was a tutor by profession and also traveled around Europe to meet scientists and to study different forms of government. Thomas Hobbes was the first great figure in modern moral philosophy. He became interested in why people allowed themselves to be ruled and what type of government would be best for England. Hobbes had a pessimistic view of people. His view was that humans were mean creatures who would do anything to better their positions. Also that people could not be trusted to make decisions on their own and a country needed an authority figure to provide direction and leadership. Therefore, he believed in monarchy- a government that gave all power to a king or queen. He said that democracy would never work because people were only interested in promoting their own self-interests. Despite this doubt of democracy, he believed that a contrasting group of representatives presenting the problems of the common person would prevent a king from being unfair and cruel. Hobbes originates the phrase 'Voice of the people' meaning one person could be chosen to represent a group with similar views. Legitimacy of government Hobbes was a dedicated materialist. The views that got him in trouble were related to this, as Hobbes claimed to believe in God, but believed that since only the material universe existed, God must be a material being, just one with great powers. Hobbes sought legitimacy for government not founded in religion, because his sort of religion wasn't what most Christians would regard as Christianity. He also saw that a new source of legitimacy for the state was needed, because kings and priests had been working very hard at destroying their own legitimacy. He wrote Leviathan during the English Civil War in 1648.The Thirty Years War ended, while the English Civil War started in... Please join StudyMode to read the full document	<urn:uuid:e8c1f1fd-6167-4b45-b421-85e278a7a5c2>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.studymode.com/essays/Thomas-Hobbes-And-Democracy-43796437.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251778168.77/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128091916-20200128121916-00039.warc.gz	en	0.988407	391	4.1875	4	[ -0.12953925132751465, 0.4583766460418701, 0.18446595966815948, -0.49534404277801514, -0.13396479189395905, 0.08687103539705276, 0.36957699060440063, 0.2654782235622406, -0.03033740632236004, 0.3871403932571411, -0.07677650451660156, -0.4100978374481201, 0.09092187881469727, 0.3031820952892...	1	Thomas Hobbes was an English philosopher who was born April 5,1588 and died December 4,1679. He attended Oxford University where he studied classics. He was a tutor by profession and also traveled around Europe to meet scientists and to study different forms of government. Thomas Hobbes was the first great figure in modern moral philosophy. He became interested in why people allowed themselves to be ruled and what type of government would be best for England. Hobbes had a pessimistic view of people. His view was that humans were mean creatures who would do anything to better their positions. Also that people could not be trusted to make decisions on their own and a country needed an authority figure to provide direction and leadership. Therefore, he believed in monarchy- a government that gave all power to a king or queen. He said that democracy would never work because people were only interested in promoting their own self-interests. Despite this doubt of democracy, he believed that a contrasting group of representatives presenting the problems of the common person would prevent a king from being unfair and cruel. Hobbes originates the phrase 'Voice of the people' meaning one person could be chosen to represent a group with similar views. Legitimacy of government Hobbes was a dedicated materialist. The views that got him in trouble were related to this, as Hobbes claimed to believe in God, but believed that since only the material universe existed, God must be a material being, just one with great powers. Hobbes sought legitimacy for government not founded in religion, because his sort of religion wasn't what most Christians would regard as Christianity. He also saw that a new source of legitimacy for the state was needed, because kings and priests had been working very hard at destroying their own legitimacy. He wrote Leviathan during the English Civil War in 1648.The Thirty Years War ended, while the English Civil War started in... Please join StudyMode to read the full document	396	ENGLISH	1
Revenge and Downfall In Shakespeare’s Hamlet, it is the desire for revenge that lies behind the motives of young Hamlet. His moral struggle towards revenge becomes an obsession leading to a change in character. His actions strongly imply that madness has overcome him. However, there are hints present in the text that implies his madness was feigned in order to achieve his revenge. Immediately following the appearance of old King Hamlet’s ghost, Hamlet warns Horatio that he may act mad, which foreshadows a change in Hamlet’s character. The reader is prepared that any abnormal acts may be a result from Hamlet’s acting. As the play continues, more questions are raised that involve his sanity. Ophelia, who was the first to witness his madness, offered an insight as she described Hamlet’s actions to her father. Hamlet, who was described as being mad, was speechless and only stared into Ophelia’s eyes. The bizarre actions of Hamlet are presumed to be an act, but the strong visualization of the scene can create doubt in a reader’s mind. If Hamlet was feigning his madness, then why would he want to frighten his girlfriend that he cared for so much? As more events led to the questioning of Hamlet’s sanity, the reader was given a glimpse into the mind of Hamlet in the famous “To be or not to be” soliloquy. Hamlet’s questions of life and contemplation of suicide revealed his emotions of depression, which derived mainly from his family conflicts. His build up of stress, depression, and inability to cope with these emotions could have easily affected him. His constant reminder of the evil in King Claudius and his vow to seek revenge also added to his burden. His struggles against these emotions weakened him, and ultimately led him to actual madness. As it become more evident that Hamlet’s acting could have become a reality, his desire for revenge becomes stronger. He becomes more focus on achieving his revenge, but does not rush for the opportunity. When Hamlet approached King Claudius praying in act 3 scene 3, he does not react immediately. He thinks about his actions and decides not to harm the King. This thought out decision would lead one to believe that Hamlet is not crazy due to his ability to rationalize, but Hamlet’s decision not to kill the King was because he did not want to kill him after he had confessed his sins to God. Thus, the fact that Hamlet thinks to the extent of whether or not the King’s soul will go to heaven or hell shows that his intentions were rooted from his madness. Before Hamlet’s madness became an issue, he would often try to rationalize his actions. When Hamlet first saw the ghost of his father, he questioned the intentions of the ghost and the validity of the ghost’s story of murder. However, later in the play, as Hamlet is looked upon by others as mad, he confronts his mother in a way the reader has not seen before. He is brutally honest with her, yelling at her for being with King Claudius and admits to her that Claudius has murdered old King Hamlet. In the same scene, Hamlet fatally stabs Polonius who was hiding. Hamlet, who was not sure of the identity of the person, acted without thought. After learning the identity of Polonius, Hamlet does not seem shocked that he murdered his girlfriend’s father, in fact he continued talking to his mother. His spontaneous reaction can be showed as evidence of his madness due to his lack of thinking, which was out of the norm for Hamlet. Following the death of Polonius, Hamlet continues to commit murder. He left Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to travel alone to England, where they would be met by an execution. He continues then with Laertes, and finally King Claudius. His ultimate revenge was the last achieved, only after his mother died. Although Hamlet was filled with madness, he never seemed to have enough courage to confront King Claudius until his mother died. Perhaps losing both parents was the final straw for Hamlet, or perhaps he cared too much for his mother that he did not want to murder his mother’s husband. Nevertheless, Hamlet’s revenge was attained through his madness, which unfortunately led to his own death.	<urn:uuid:ccb37f7e-7b9d-4033-bdb5-961ac8c0cab7>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://freebooksummary.com/revenge-and-downfall	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251684146.65/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126013015-20200126043015-00257.warc.gz	en	0.991357	931	3.796875	4	[ 0.01534459087997675, 0.17031368613243103, 0.32337450981140137, -0.07040857523679733, -0.2970864176750183, 0.022762183099985123, 0.4628487825393677, 0.23274996876716614, 0.07485318183898926, -0.33883073925971985, -0.11220335960388184, -0.3149282932281494, -0.17140120267868042, 0.23772609233...	2	Revenge and Downfall In Shakespeare’s Hamlet, it is the desire for revenge that lies behind the motives of young Hamlet. His moral struggle towards revenge becomes an obsession leading to a change in character. His actions strongly imply that madness has overcome him. However, there are hints present in the text that implies his madness was feigned in order to achieve his revenge. Immediately following the appearance of old King Hamlet’s ghost, Hamlet warns Horatio that he may act mad, which foreshadows a change in Hamlet’s character. The reader is prepared that any abnormal acts may be a result from Hamlet’s acting. As the play continues, more questions are raised that involve his sanity. Ophelia, who was the first to witness his madness, offered an insight as she described Hamlet’s actions to her father. Hamlet, who was described as being mad, was speechless and only stared into Ophelia’s eyes. The bizarre actions of Hamlet are presumed to be an act, but the strong visualization of the scene can create doubt in a reader’s mind. If Hamlet was feigning his madness, then why would he want to frighten his girlfriend that he cared for so much? As more events led to the questioning of Hamlet’s sanity, the reader was given a glimpse into the mind of Hamlet in the famous “To be or not to be” soliloquy. Hamlet’s questions of life and contemplation of suicide revealed his emotions of depression, which derived mainly from his family conflicts. His build up of stress, depression, and inability to cope with these emotions could have easily affected him. His constant reminder of the evil in King Claudius and his vow to seek revenge also added to his burden. His struggles against these emotions weakened him, and ultimately led him to actual madness. As it become more evident that Hamlet’s acting could have become a reality, his desire for revenge becomes stronger. He becomes more focus on achieving his revenge, but does not rush for the opportunity. When Hamlet approached King Claudius praying in act 3 scene 3, he does not react immediately. He thinks about his actions and decides not to harm the King. This thought out decision would lead one to believe that Hamlet is not crazy due to his ability to rationalize, but Hamlet’s decision not to kill the King was because he did not want to kill him after he had confessed his sins to God. Thus, the fact that Hamlet thinks to the extent of whether or not the King’s soul will go to heaven or hell shows that his intentions were rooted from his madness. Before Hamlet’s madness became an issue, he would often try to rationalize his actions. When Hamlet first saw the ghost of his father, he questioned the intentions of the ghost and the validity of the ghost’s story of murder. However, later in the play, as Hamlet is looked upon by others as mad, he confronts his mother in a way the reader has not seen before. He is brutally honest with her, yelling at her for being with King Claudius and admits to her that Claudius has murdered old King Hamlet. In the same scene, Hamlet fatally stabs Polonius who was hiding. Hamlet, who was not sure of the identity of the person, acted without thought. After learning the identity of Polonius, Hamlet does not seem shocked that he murdered his girlfriend’s father, in fact he continued talking to his mother. His spontaneous reaction can be showed as evidence of his madness due to his lack of thinking, which was out of the norm for Hamlet. Following the death of Polonius, Hamlet continues to commit murder. He left Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to travel alone to England, where they would be met by an execution. He continues then with Laertes, and finally King Claudius. His ultimate revenge was the last achieved, only after his mother died. Although Hamlet was filled with madness, he never seemed to have enough courage to confront King Claudius until his mother died. Perhaps losing both parents was the final straw for Hamlet, or perhaps he cared too much for his mother that he did not want to murder his mother’s husband. Nevertheless, Hamlet’s revenge was attained through his madness, which unfortunately led to his own death.	888	ENGLISH	1
Finding the Lost Colony of Roanoke When a relief party sent from England arrived at the Roanoke Colony on the East coast of the United States in 1590, they found the settlement neatly dismantled, and not a soul to be found. Some 115 men, women, and children had simply disappeared. The only clue was the name of a nearby island, Croatoan, carved into the trunk of a tree. And thus was launched one of history's great mysteries: The Lost Colony of Roanoke. Around 1580, the English mogul, explorer, and all-around famous guy Sir Walter Raleigh made a deal with Queen Elizabeth I to establish an English colony in America. He was given ten years to do it, and the deal was that they'd share in the riches they hoped would be found, and also create a base for English ships fighting Spain. Raleigh did not personally go, but his first expedition sailed in 1584 to find a good location. And find one they did: Roanoke Island, off of North Carolina. It's located inside the outer banks, a long string of narrow sand spit islands that shelter half the coast of North Carolina. Roanoke is fertile, defensible, well wooded, and offers substantial protected anchorage for ships. But Raleigh's expedition made some poor choices. Among the first things they did was to pick a fight with the local natives, charging them for some petty theft, burning their village, and beheading their chief. This was perhaps not the best way to establish friendly relations. Sir Francis Drake happened by during some of his pirating exploits, and finding the men in poor condition, he gave them a lift back to England. Strike 1 for the New World colony. What nobody knew was that Raleigh's second ship was already on its way. The two ships passed each other in the Atlantic, and the new group found an abandoned settlement. They returned to England, but left a small garrison of fifteen men on Roanoke to protect Raleigh's claim. The garrison was unaware of the bad diplomacy they'd inherited, and it should come as no surprise that they were never seen or heard from again. Strike 2 for the New World colony. Raleigh sent a third expedition to Roanoke in 1587, larger and better provisioned than the predecessors, commanded by Roanoke veteran John White, a prolific artist and cartographer who had originally been hired to document the colonization through his artwork. White re-established the Roanoke settlement, but failed to rebuild relations with the natives. They sometimes skirmished, and being vastly outnumbered and completely on their own, feared for their lives. As this was the first colony to include women and children, including White's daughter and her family, he was persuaded to return to England with a skeleton crew to ask Raleigh for help. With relocating the colony as an acknowledged possibility, White left instructions that if the colonists did choose to move in his absence, to carve their destination on a certain tree; and that if they were in trouble, to also carve a maltese cross. Arrived in England, White found that the war with Spain had complicated matters, and it was three long years before he was finally able to return with an armed party and the needed supplies. Unfortunately, there was nobody on Roanoke to receive them. The camp had been tidily dismantled; there had been no sudden massacre. White went to the tree and found a single carved word, Croatoan, and no carved cross. Wherever they'd gone, their departure appeared to have been orderly and planned, and they had not been in any immediate danger. Croatoan was a barrier island on the outer banks, now called Hatteras Island, about 35 nautical miles south of Roanoke. Today its flat dunes are covered with hurricane-hardened vacation homes. Sport fishing boats come and go, and kite boarders take advantage of its strong winds. But in the colonial days, it was one home of the Croatan natives, who were friendly to the English. It would seem to have been a logical destination, had food run out on Roanoke or if there had been some other cause to leave. Unfortunately, the weather had plans for John White that did not include allowing him to make the short hop to Croatoan to find his colony. A storm came in just as they arrived at Roanoke, and White's ship lost its main anchor. The combination of storm waves and wind, and a lost anchor, made it impossible to safely navigate the coastal islands and to land anywhere. The captain of the ship hired by White was anxious to get back to the more profitable business of privateering against Spain, and rather than his risk his vulnerable ship in a dangerous and fruitless coastal search, he opted to return to England. White arrived home empty handed. It was Strike 3, and nobody ever again heard of Sir Walter Raleigh's lost colony of Roanoke. It was the end of their story, and also the beginning of their legend. But colonies ultimately did take root in America, and it seems that those early colonists closest to Roanoke may have learned something of what became of them. The lost colony did eventually have neighbors, but they came some 25 years later and some 125 nautical miles of sailing to the north. It was 1607 when a more permanent colony was finally established in Virginia: Jamestown, named after King James, later famous for Captain John Smith, Pocahontas, and John Rolfe's tobacco. Jamestown struggled badly in its first years, and most of its colonists died from starvation or disease. They had few resources and never mounted an expedition to Croatoan to see what had become of their predecessors. Jamestown was in Powhatan native territory. Shortly before the Jamestown colonists had arrived, or at about the same time, the Powhatan had attacked and exterminated the Chesapeake (yes, the lovely Pocahontas was from a genocidal tribe). If any English or half-English had survived and been living with the Chesapeake, Powhatan killed them too. Relations between the English and the Powhatan were frosty, but the English were able to gain some small amount of information about what had become of the Roanoke colony. According to the Powhatan who were willing to talk, the original colonists had integrated into the mainland Carolina tribes to the west of Croatoan. There were a number of stories that supported this. John Smith was told there was a town where men dressed as he did, and another Englishman, William Strachey, wrote that he was told of: Copper working was indeed known to the native Americans at that time. Further evidence for these stories was found later by Spanish agents, whose job it was to eliminate evidence of the English occupying and possessing America. They recovered a chart drawn by a Jamestown man, now known as the Zuniga Map, and sent it to Europe in 1608. The chart was inscribed with the place names mentioned by Smith and Strachey, but also mentions "four clothed men from Roonok." There is only one account of the Jamestown colonists actually encountering a person who appeared to be of English descent. He was seen in Powhatan territory in 1607, and was described as: If this is a true account, and the witnesses were not mistaken in their observation and reporting, then this boy would have been born some seven years after John White found the deserted colony. It seems probable that the boy was a descendant of the Roanoke settlers who had either been spared by the Powhatan or was raised by them. Either way, it would be evidence that some of the Roanoke colonists did seek refuge to the north. Other accounts place the colonists south, either on Croatoan or on the Carolina coast. A century later, surveyor John Lawson wrote that the Hatteras natives on Croatoan: The late Irish historian David Beers Quinn was probably our most knowledgeable scholar on the Roanoke colony. He devoted his career to the study of the colonization of America. Quinn's theory, developed after decades of studying many such accounts, is that the colonists abandoned Croatoan and separated into two groups. One group peacefully assimilated into the Carolina tribes to the west, and the other group went north to live with the friendly Chesapeake, reasoning that Virginia was the most likely place to which any future English colonists might come. We know that any who went north ultimately died, either naturally or at the hands of the Powhatan, but the fate of those who went to the Carolina mainland is less clear. Quinn's theory is the best available based on historical study, and needs only archaeological and genealogical evidence to back it up. Fortunately, both are forthcoming — sort of. There is archeological evidence that the colonists may have lived for a time on Croatoan, though it's not conclusive. Alongside artifacts of the Croatan natives, a gold ring was found bearing the family crest of the Kendall family, and there was a Master Kimball in the original Roanoke colony. However two English copper farthings were also found on Croatoan, but they were not produced until the 1670's, nearly a century too late to have belonged to anyone who was in the colonies at the time of Roanoke. Update: As eventually happens with nearly all artifacts of the colony promising to shed light, the gold ring was also recently found to be an anticlimax. - BD The DNA evidence supporting Quinn's theory may prove to be more revealing. Several different groups throughout the United States are currently analyzing DNA test results looking for clues to whether the colonists' genes survive today. Native populations at the time were quite small, and so it's more than likely that intermarriage would leave a substantial genetic footprint. In an article published in 2005 in the Journal of Genetic Genealogy, researcher Roberta Estes gave a thorough rundown of what's known so far, and unfortunately, the strongest point made is that there is insufficient data. When I think of the lost colony, I think of John White; of his many beautiful illustrations of native life in the Americas, and of the anguish he felt at sea having left his daughter at Roanoke for more than three years. I think of how helpless he must have felt, being unable to find ships to return. I think of how it must have been to find the word Croatoan carved into the tree, of his doubtless desperation to continue, and the frustration of having to return to England when he was so close to finding them. Where were Eleanor White, her husband, and White's infant granddaughter? Were they living safely with the Croatans, or had they succumbed to disease or starvation? He never knew, and we'll never know either. We may find better evidence of what happened to the colony as a whole, but the small personal tragedies will always remain unaccountable. Cite this article: Copyright ©2020 Skeptoid Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved.	<urn:uuid:d9beb2e6-23a0-4789-8d5c-c966e2ae55da>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4245	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251796127.92/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129102701-20200129132701-00051.warc.gz	en	0.988105	2,272	3.78125	4	[ -0.20127178728580475, 0.29867422580718994, 0.2726985514163971, -0.11774389445781708, 0.030082890763878822, -0.15181386470794678, 0.16928473114967346, 0.0604565404355526, -0.229559987783432, 0.29268062114715576, 0.623352587223053, -0.45139652490615845, 0.04478142783045769, -0.17073243856430...	3	Finding the Lost Colony of Roanoke When a relief party sent from England arrived at the Roanoke Colony on the East coast of the United States in 1590, they found the settlement neatly dismantled, and not a soul to be found. Some 115 men, women, and children had simply disappeared. The only clue was the name of a nearby island, Croatoan, carved into the trunk of a tree. And thus was launched one of history's great mysteries: The Lost Colony of Roanoke. Around 1580, the English mogul, explorer, and all-around famous guy Sir Walter Raleigh made a deal with Queen Elizabeth I to establish an English colony in America. He was given ten years to do it, and the deal was that they'd share in the riches they hoped would be found, and also create a base for English ships fighting Spain. Raleigh did not personally go, but his first expedition sailed in 1584 to find a good location. And find one they did: Roanoke Island, off of North Carolina. It's located inside the outer banks, a long string of narrow sand spit islands that shelter half the coast of North Carolina. Roanoke is fertile, defensible, well wooded, and offers substantial protected anchorage for ships. But Raleigh's expedition made some poor choices. Among the first things they did was to pick a fight with the local natives, charging them for some petty theft, burning their village, and beheading their chief. This was perhaps not the best way to establish friendly relations. Sir Francis Drake happened by during some of his pirating exploits, and finding the men in poor condition, he gave them a lift back to England. Strike 1 for the New World colony. What nobody knew was that Raleigh's second ship was already on its way. The two ships passed each other in the Atlantic, and the new group found an abandoned settlement. They returned to England, but left a small garrison of fifteen men on Roanoke to protect Raleigh's claim. The garrison was unaware of the bad diplomacy they'd inherited, and it should come as no surprise that they were never seen or heard from again. Strike 2 for the New World colony. Raleigh sent a third expedition to Roanoke in 1587, larger and better provisioned than the predecessors, commanded by Roanoke veteran John White, a prolific artist and cartographer who had originally been hired to document the colonization through his artwork. White re-established the Roanoke settlement, but failed to rebuild relations with the natives. They sometimes skirmished, and being vastly outnumbered and completely on their own, feared for their lives. As this was the first colony to include women and children, including White's daughter and her family, he was persuaded to return to England with a skeleton crew to ask Raleigh for help. With relocating the colony as an acknowledged possibility, White left instructions that if the colonists did choose to move in his absence, to carve their destination on a certain tree; and that if they were in trouble, to also carve a maltese cross. Arrived in England, White found that the war with Spain had complicated matters, and it was three long years before he was finally able to return with an armed party and the needed supplies. Unfortunately, there was nobody on Roanoke to receive them. The camp had been tidily dismantled; there had been no sudden massacre. White went to the tree and found a single carved word, Croatoan, and no carved cross. Wherever they'd gone, their departure appeared to have been orderly and planned, and they had not been in any immediate danger. Croatoan was a barrier island on the outer banks, now called Hatteras Island, about 35 nautical miles south of Roanoke. Today its flat dunes are covered with hurricane-hardened vacation homes. Sport fishing boats come and go, and kite boarders take advantage of its strong winds. But in the colonial days, it was one home of the Croatan natives, who were friendly to the English. It would seem to have been a logical destination, had food run out on Roanoke or if there had been some other cause to leave. Unfortunately, the weather had plans for John White that did not include allowing him to make the short hop to Croatoan to find his colony. A storm came in just as they arrived at Roanoke, and White's ship lost its main anchor. The combination of storm waves and wind, and a lost anchor, made it impossible to safely navigate the coastal islands and to land anywhere. The captain of the ship hired by White was anxious to get back to the more profitable business of privateering against Spain, and rather than his risk his vulnerable ship in a dangerous and fruitless coastal search, he opted to return to England. White arrived home empty handed. It was Strike 3, and nobody ever again heard of Sir Walter Raleigh's lost colony of Roanoke. It was the end of their story, and also the beginning of their legend. But colonies ultimately did take root in America, and it seems that those early colonists closest to Roanoke may have learned something of what became of them. The lost colony did eventually have neighbors, but they came some 25 years later and some 125 nautical miles of sailing to the north. It was 1607 when a more permanent colony was finally established in Virginia: Jamestown, named after King James, later famous for Captain John Smith, Pocahontas, and John Rolfe's tobacco. Jamestown struggled badly in its first years, and most of its colonists died from starvation or disease. They had few resources and never mounted an expedition to Croatoan to see what had become of their predecessors. Jamestown was in Powhatan native territory. Shortly before the Jamestown colonists had arrived, or at about the same time, the Powhatan had attacked and exterminated the Chesapeake (yes, the lovely Pocahontas was from a genocidal tribe). If any English or half-English had survived and been living with the Chesapeake, Powhatan killed them too. Relations between the English and the Powhatan were frosty, but the English were able to gain some small amount of information about what had become of the Roanoke colony. According to the Powhatan who were willing to talk, the original colonists had integrated into the mainland Carolina tribes to the west of Croatoan. There were a number of stories that supported this. John Smith was told there was a town where men dressed as he did, and another Englishman, William Strachey, wrote that he was told of: Copper working was indeed known to the native Americans at that time. Further evidence for these stories was found later by Spanish agents, whose job it was to eliminate evidence of the English occupying and possessing America. They recovered a chart drawn by a Jamestown man, now known as the Zuniga Map, and sent it to Europe in 1608. The chart was inscribed with the place names mentioned by Smith and Strachey, but also mentions "four clothed men from Roonok." There is only one account of the Jamestown colonists actually encountering a person who appeared to be of English descent. He was seen in Powhatan territory in 1607, and was described as: If this is a true account, and the witnesses were not mistaken in their observation and reporting, then this boy would have been born some seven years after John White found the deserted colony. It seems probable that the boy was a descendant of the Roanoke settlers who had either been spared by the Powhatan or was raised by them. Either way, it would be evidence that some of the Roanoke colonists did seek refuge to the north. Other accounts place the colonists south, either on Croatoan or on the Carolina coast. A century later, surveyor John Lawson wrote that the Hatteras natives on Croatoan: The late Irish historian David Beers Quinn was probably our most knowledgeable scholar on the Roanoke colony. He devoted his career to the study of the colonization of America. Quinn's theory, developed after decades of studying many such accounts, is that the colonists abandoned Croatoan and separated into two groups. One group peacefully assimilated into the Carolina tribes to the west, and the other group went north to live with the friendly Chesapeake, reasoning that Virginia was the most likely place to which any future English colonists might come. We know that any who went north ultimately died, either naturally or at the hands of the Powhatan, but the fate of those who went to the Carolina mainland is less clear. Quinn's theory is the best available based on historical study, and needs only archaeological and genealogical evidence to back it up. Fortunately, both are forthcoming — sort of. There is archeological evidence that the colonists may have lived for a time on Croatoan, though it's not conclusive. Alongside artifacts of the Croatan natives, a gold ring was found bearing the family crest of the Kendall family, and there was a Master Kimball in the original Roanoke colony. However two English copper farthings were also found on Croatoan, but they were not produced until the 1670's, nearly a century too late to have belonged to anyone who was in the colonies at the time of Roanoke. Update: As eventually happens with nearly all artifacts of the colony promising to shed light, the gold ring was also recently found to be an anticlimax. - BD The DNA evidence supporting Quinn's theory may prove to be more revealing. Several different groups throughout the United States are currently analyzing DNA test results looking for clues to whether the colonists' genes survive today. Native populations at the time were quite small, and so it's more than likely that intermarriage would leave a substantial genetic footprint. In an article published in 2005 in the Journal of Genetic Genealogy, researcher Roberta Estes gave a thorough rundown of what's known so far, and unfortunately, the strongest point made is that there is insufficient data. When I think of the lost colony, I think of John White; of his many beautiful illustrations of native life in the Americas, and of the anguish he felt at sea having left his daughter at Roanoke for more than three years. I think of how helpless he must have felt, being unable to find ships to return. I think of how it must have been to find the word Croatoan carved into the tree, of his doubtless desperation to continue, and the frustration of having to return to England when he was so close to finding them. Where were Eleanor White, her husband, and White's infant granddaughter? Were they living safely with the Croatans, or had they succumbed to disease or starvation? He never knew, and we'll never know either. We may find better evidence of what happened to the colony as a whole, but the small personal tragedies will always remain unaccountable. Cite this article: Copyright ©2020 Skeptoid Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved.	2,312	ENGLISH	1
Charles I (1600-1649), King of England, Scotland, and Ireland (1625-1649), 1636 Charles I (19 November 1600 – 30 January 1649) was monarch of the three kingdoms of England, Scotland, and Ireland from 27 March 1625 until his execution in 1649. Charles was born into the House of Stuart as the second son of King James VI of Scotland, but after his father inherited the English throne in 1603, he moved to England, where he spent much of the rest of his life. He became heir apparent to the thrones of England, Scotland and Ireland on the death of his elder brother, Henry Frederick, Prince of Wales, in 1612. An unsuccessful and unpopular attempt to marry him to the Spanish Habsburg princess Maria Anna culminated in an eight-month visit to Spain in 1623 that demonstrated the futility of the marriage negotiations. Two years later, he married the Bourbon princess Henrietta Maria of France instead. After his succession, Charles quarrelled with the Parliament of England, which sought to curb his royal prerogative. Charles believed in the divine right of kings and thought he could govern according to his own conscience. Many of his subjects opposed his policies, in particular the levying of taxes without parliamentary consent, and perceived his actions as those of a tyrannical absolute monarch. His religious policies, coupled with his marriage to a Roman Catholic, generated the antipathy and mistrust of Reformed groups such as the English Puritans and Scottish Covenanters, who thought his views were too Catholic. He supported high church Anglican ecclesiastics, such as Richard Montagu and William Laud, and failed to aid Protestant forces successfully during the Thirty Years' War. His attempts to force the Church of Scotland to adopt high Anglican practices led to the Bishops' Wars, strengthened the position of the English and Scottish parliaments and helped precipitate his own downfall. From 1642, Charles fought the armies of the English and Scottish parliaments in the English Civil War. After his defeat in 1645, he surrendered to a Scottish force that eventually handed him over to the English Parliament. Charles refused to accept his captors' demands for a constitutional monarchy, and temporarily escaped captivity in November 1647. Re-imprisoned on the Isle of Wight, Charles forged an alliance with Scotland, but by the end of 1648 Oliver Cromwell's New Model Army had consolidated its control over England. Charles was tried, convicted, and executed for high treason in January 1649. The monarchy was abolished and a republic called the Commonwealth of England was declared. Read more: Wikipedia Find out about full size:	<urn:uuid:e45ad700-db47-40b9-9e20-747470b1d88b>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://portraitsofkings.com/gallery/england-scotland-kingdom-of-great-britain-united-kingdom/charles-i-1600-1649-/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250595787.7/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119234426-20200120022426-00257.warc.gz	en	0.981205	543	3.359375	3	[ -0.021729884669184685, 0.5224370956420898, 0.08678945153951645, -0.08828214555978775, -0.10816071182489395, -0.49132633209228516, 0.1388329416513443, -0.08376624435186386, 0.20322924852371216, 0.050027403980493546, -0.1341906189918518, -0.46140533685684204, 0.3211536109447479, -0.060683049...	2	Charles I (1600-1649), King of England, Scotland, and Ireland (1625-1649), 1636 Charles I (19 November 1600 – 30 January 1649) was monarch of the three kingdoms of England, Scotland, and Ireland from 27 March 1625 until his execution in 1649. Charles was born into the House of Stuart as the second son of King James VI of Scotland, but after his father inherited the English throne in 1603, he moved to England, where he spent much of the rest of his life. He became heir apparent to the thrones of England, Scotland and Ireland on the death of his elder brother, Henry Frederick, Prince of Wales, in 1612. An unsuccessful and unpopular attempt to marry him to the Spanish Habsburg princess Maria Anna culminated in an eight-month visit to Spain in 1623 that demonstrated the futility of the marriage negotiations. Two years later, he married the Bourbon princess Henrietta Maria of France instead. After his succession, Charles quarrelled with the Parliament of England, which sought to curb his royal prerogative. Charles believed in the divine right of kings and thought he could govern according to his own conscience. Many of his subjects opposed his policies, in particular the levying of taxes without parliamentary consent, and perceived his actions as those of a tyrannical absolute monarch. His religious policies, coupled with his marriage to a Roman Catholic, generated the antipathy and mistrust of Reformed groups such as the English Puritans and Scottish Covenanters, who thought his views were too Catholic. He supported high church Anglican ecclesiastics, such as Richard Montagu and William Laud, and failed to aid Protestant forces successfully during the Thirty Years' War. His attempts to force the Church of Scotland to adopt high Anglican practices led to the Bishops' Wars, strengthened the position of the English and Scottish parliaments and helped precipitate his own downfall. From 1642, Charles fought the armies of the English and Scottish parliaments in the English Civil War. After his defeat in 1645, he surrendered to a Scottish force that eventually handed him over to the English Parliament. Charles refused to accept his captors' demands for a constitutional monarchy, and temporarily escaped captivity in November 1647. Re-imprisoned on the Isle of Wight, Charles forged an alliance with Scotland, but by the end of 1648 Oliver Cromwell's New Model Army had consolidated its control over England. Charles was tried, convicted, and executed for high treason in January 1649. The monarchy was abolished and a republic called the Commonwealth of England was declared. Read more: Wikipedia Find out about full size:	597	ENGLISH	1
We know very little about Shakespeare’s early childhood or teenage years. In those days children were seen as miniature adults to be manipulated and trained to take their place in the adult world as soon as possible. In the modern world teenagers are a clear and distinct group, with a ‘teenage’ identity and a clear and distinct way of life, recognised by adults. Marriage was the natural step as soon as one was not a child anymore. You will know that Juliet was just fourteen when her parents were arranging her marriage, and Romeo wasn’t much older. In the meantime teenagers either went to work or endured a very hard slog at school. We first hear of the young William as a baby being baptised. The next time we hear of him is when he marries the twenty-six year-old ‘old maid’, Anne Hathaway, when he was eighteen. She was three months pregnant on her wedding day. Her parents were dead and she lived with her brother in the family home, where William visited her. We can see, then, that young Will does as any seventeen year-old boy, given the chance; he hurries to this older woman’s cottage to spend long rainy afternoons alone with her! It wasn’t unusual for women and girls to be pregnant when they married. When a boy made a girl pregnant he was honour-bound to marry her, and Shakespeare did that. If he hadn’t, her child would have been a ‘bastard’, looked down on throughout its childhood and adulthood, and without any legal rights. So the pressure to marry in those circumstances was compelling. We know, then, that Shakespeare was a teenage father, having to marry the woman he had made pregnant and supporting her and her child. He was penniless at the time and his father had fallen on hard times: we don’t know how William supported his wife and baby girl, but, a few years later, soon after they had their twins, another girl, and a boy, he went to London and started his career in the theatre. He did really well in that and was able to send money to his family and visit them frequently. Eleven years after the twins’ birth he had become so rich that he bought New Place, one of Stratford’s biggest houses, and moved his family into it. There is a sad note here: one of the twins, the boy, Hamnet, died in the same year, aged eleven. (Read our Shakespeare Timeline or Shakespeare biography to see how that all fits in.) Hygiene was not a strong point during Shakespeare’s childhood. Young Will had a bath once a year in May. It was a big occasion. The water had to be fetched; then the mother spent hours boiling it. She would fill a barrel, or the biggest tub they had. The father bathed first, then any other men who lived in the house, then the women, and finally the children, in order of their age. By the time it got to the baby’s turn the water was thick and black with all the dirt.	<urn:uuid:9ac6e904-46bf-4a72-b360-a29b373abb32>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.nosweatshakespeare.com/resources/life/shakespeare-childhood/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251778168.77/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128091916-20200128121916-00069.warc.gz	en	0.991485	650	3.3125	3	[ -0.19227643311023712, -0.08902257680892944, 0.37479227781295776, -0.3162034749984741, -0.43573468923568726, 0.1731244921684265, -0.05552951619029045, 0.2332429140806198, 0.022158561274409294, -0.16666370630264282, 0.3663516640663147, 0.09402524679899216, -0.12171065807342529, 0.32133173942...	2	We know very little about Shakespeare’s early childhood or teenage years. In those days children were seen as miniature adults to be manipulated and trained to take their place in the adult world as soon as possible. In the modern world teenagers are a clear and distinct group, with a ‘teenage’ identity and a clear and distinct way of life, recognised by adults. Marriage was the natural step as soon as one was not a child anymore. You will know that Juliet was just fourteen when her parents were arranging her marriage, and Romeo wasn’t much older. In the meantime teenagers either went to work or endured a very hard slog at school. We first hear of the young William as a baby being baptised. The next time we hear of him is when he marries the twenty-six year-old ‘old maid’, Anne Hathaway, when he was eighteen. She was three months pregnant on her wedding day. Her parents were dead and she lived with her brother in the family home, where William visited her. We can see, then, that young Will does as any seventeen year-old boy, given the chance; he hurries to this older woman’s cottage to spend long rainy afternoons alone with her! It wasn’t unusual for women and girls to be pregnant when they married. When a boy made a girl pregnant he was honour-bound to marry her, and Shakespeare did that. If he hadn’t, her child would have been a ‘bastard’, looked down on throughout its childhood and adulthood, and without any legal rights. So the pressure to marry in those circumstances was compelling. We know, then, that Shakespeare was a teenage father, having to marry the woman he had made pregnant and supporting her and her child. He was penniless at the time and his father had fallen on hard times: we don’t know how William supported his wife and baby girl, but, a few years later, soon after they had their twins, another girl, and a boy, he went to London and started his career in the theatre. He did really well in that and was able to send money to his family and visit them frequently. Eleven years after the twins’ birth he had become so rich that he bought New Place, one of Stratford’s biggest houses, and moved his family into it. There is a sad note here: one of the twins, the boy, Hamnet, died in the same year, aged eleven. (Read our Shakespeare Timeline or Shakespeare biography to see how that all fits in.) Hygiene was not a strong point during Shakespeare’s childhood. Young Will had a bath once a year in May. It was a big occasion. The water had to be fetched; then the mother spent hours boiling it. She would fill a barrel, or the biggest tub they had. The father bathed first, then any other men who lived in the house, then the women, and finally the children, in order of their age. By the time it got to the baby’s turn the water was thick and black with all the dirt.	613	ENGLISH	1
"A Christmas Carol" had already been in print for nine years when Dickens first began to read it in public: the first edition of 6,000 copies, printed in 1843 and paid for by Dickens himself, had sold out almost immediately, and within a year there had been eleven further editions. But the “readings” that Dickens embarked upon as a result of the novella’s success were very much dramatic, as opposed to literary, performances: rather than simply read the story aloud, Dickens created a theatrical script from the text and added stage directions where necessary, even creating the voices and facial expressions for each character. From the outset Dickens’ public performances of "A Christmas Carol" were immensely popular: his first appearance at Birmingham Town Hall in December 1853 met with great acclaim and on 15 December 1857, he appeared at the Corn Exchange in Hertford Street at the request of Joseph Paxton, who had designed the new city cemetery at London Road. Dickens’ work had always been informed by the social issues of the day, and he was known for his commitment to good causes, particularly when it came to the welfare and education of the poorer classes. “A Christmas Carol” had in part been inspired by a speech that Dickens had given at the Manchester Athenaeum, an educational and recreational institute founded for labouring men and women; Dickens had also toured the tin mines of Cornwall and seen at first-hand the appalling working conditions of the people employed there, particularly the children. He wrote later that these workers had “for many years… been out of sight in the dark earth,” and that as a consequence all “considerations of humanity, policy, social virtue and common decency have been left rotting at the pits mouth.” Dickens appeared at the Corn Exchange to raise funds for the Coventry Institute. This new enterprise had emerged from the Mechanics’ Institution and the Religious and Useful Knowledge Society, which, despite some differences, shared a broadly similar aim: to promote literary and scientific pursuits among the working poor by means of books, lectures and concerts. Its offices weren’t that far from the Corn Exchange itself, an impressive building designed by James Murray, and built by Thomas Pratt. A settlement deed drawn up in 1854 states that the purpose of the building was “to maintain a public exchange for corn and other crops, and a hall for meetings and balls” and although it was used primarily as a corn market, the Exchange was indeed of a sufficient size to accommodate concerts, entertainments and lectures. Dickens' appearance that December night was applauded in the local press for its “admirable dramatic power” and it raised £50 for the Institute. He was invited back to the city the following year for a dinner held in his honour, where he was presented with a gold watch manufactured by local firm, Rotherham and Sons. It was inscribed with the words: “Presented to Charles Dickens, esquire, by his friends at Coventry, in testimony of his kindness to them, and of his eminent services in the interest of humanity.” Dickens would continue to perform "A Christmas Carol" right up until his death in 1870. In later years The Corn Exchange was purchased by William Bennett, who also owned the Coventry Opera House. As the Empire Theatre it became one Coventry’s earliest cinemas, and although it was destroyed by fire in 1931, a new theatre was opened in the same location in September 1933. Present at the Empire’s grand re-opening was Colonel Wyley, owner of the Charterhouse, whose uncle had laid the foundation stone of the original Corn Exchange nearly eighty years before. The proceeds raised on the night went towards the Coventry Crippled Children’s Guild: Dickens and even Scrooge himself would surely have approved... “God bless us, every one!”	<urn:uuid:b787dcba-5890-4192-9672-71c4f252e2a9>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://forum.historiccoventry.co.uk/main/forum-posts.php?id=76429&show_cats=all	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594101.10/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119010920-20200119034920-00059.warc.gz	en	0.984647	806	3.625	4	[ -0.008295649662613869, -0.15954676270484924, 0.3932896852493286, 0.178632915019989, 0.034182868897914886, -0.29482197761535645, -0.1869899034500122, 0.07250282168388367, 0.044460222125053406, -0.0326228104531765, 0.20847001671791077, 0.20363187789916992, -0.13414627313613892, 0.10478724539...	4	"A Christmas Carol" had already been in print for nine years when Dickens first began to read it in public: the first edition of 6,000 copies, printed in 1843 and paid for by Dickens himself, had sold out almost immediately, and within a year there had been eleven further editions. But the “readings” that Dickens embarked upon as a result of the novella’s success were very much dramatic, as opposed to literary, performances: rather than simply read the story aloud, Dickens created a theatrical script from the text and added stage directions where necessary, even creating the voices and facial expressions for each character. From the outset Dickens’ public performances of "A Christmas Carol" were immensely popular: his first appearance at Birmingham Town Hall in December 1853 met with great acclaim and on 15 December 1857, he appeared at the Corn Exchange in Hertford Street at the request of Joseph Paxton, who had designed the new city cemetery at London Road. Dickens’ work had always been informed by the social issues of the day, and he was known for his commitment to good causes, particularly when it came to the welfare and education of the poorer classes. “A Christmas Carol” had in part been inspired by a speech that Dickens had given at the Manchester Athenaeum, an educational and recreational institute founded for labouring men and women; Dickens had also toured the tin mines of Cornwall and seen at first-hand the appalling working conditions of the people employed there, particularly the children. He wrote later that these workers had “for many years… been out of sight in the dark earth,” and that as a consequence all “considerations of humanity, policy, social virtue and common decency have been left rotting at the pits mouth.” Dickens appeared at the Corn Exchange to raise funds for the Coventry Institute. This new enterprise had emerged from the Mechanics’ Institution and the Religious and Useful Knowledge Society, which, despite some differences, shared a broadly similar aim: to promote literary and scientific pursuits among the working poor by means of books, lectures and concerts. Its offices weren’t that far from the Corn Exchange itself, an impressive building designed by James Murray, and built by Thomas Pratt. A settlement deed drawn up in 1854 states that the purpose of the building was “to maintain a public exchange for corn and other crops, and a hall for meetings and balls” and although it was used primarily as a corn market, the Exchange was indeed of a sufficient size to accommodate concerts, entertainments and lectures. Dickens' appearance that December night was applauded in the local press for its “admirable dramatic power” and it raised £50 for the Institute. He was invited back to the city the following year for a dinner held in his honour, where he was presented with a gold watch manufactured by local firm, Rotherham and Sons. It was inscribed with the words: “Presented to Charles Dickens, esquire, by his friends at Coventry, in testimony of his kindness to them, and of his eminent services in the interest of humanity.” Dickens would continue to perform "A Christmas Carol" right up until his death in 1870. In later years The Corn Exchange was purchased by William Bennett, who also owned the Coventry Opera House. As the Empire Theatre it became one Coventry’s earliest cinemas, and although it was destroyed by fire in 1931, a new theatre was opened in the same location in September 1933. Present at the Empire’s grand re-opening was Colonel Wyley, owner of the Charterhouse, whose uncle had laid the foundation stone of the original Corn Exchange nearly eighty years before. The proceeds raised on the night went towards the Coventry Crippled Children’s Guild: Dickens and even Scrooge himself would surely have approved... “God bless us, every one!”	796	ENGLISH	1
Bringing evergreen trees indoors has traditionally been used to celebrate winter festivals — both by Pagans and Christians — for thousands of years. Pagans would decorate their homes during the winter solstice with tree branches as a symbol to think of spring that was just around the corner. Fir trees were also used by the Romans to decorate their temples at the festival of Saturnalia, while Christians used it as a sign of everlasting life with God. Germany is also heavily credited with starting the Christmas tree tradition, as many Christians began decorating trees brought in from outside. Those who didn't have trees — or couldn't afford them — would make their own clever alternatives using wooden pyramids instead. Some of the first Christmas trees in Germany were decorated with delicious edible decorations, such as gingerbread men and gold-covered apples (glass makers would also hang special small ornaments they had crafted themselves). Who first brought a Christmas tree into the home? The 16th century preacher, Martin Luther, was recorded as one of the first people to bring a Christmas tree into his home – and one of the first to add lights on the tree, too. According to tradition, one night before Christmas, Martin was seen walking through the forest and looked up to see the brightly shining stars glistening through the tree branches. To recapture this scene for his family, he placed a tree in his living room and wired its branches with beautiful lights. When did the Christmas tree first come to England? While Queen Victoria and Prince Albert are said to be the ones that made Christmas trees popular in England during the 1800s, it dates back much further than this. The tradition came from Germany, where King George III's wife was born. It was thought that his German wife, Charlotte, used to decorate a Christmas tree with her family during the 1760s. Charlotte had a tree set up at the Queen’s Lodge in Windsor for a children's party for those who were rich and noble. Not long after, having a tree had become popular amongst some rich families too. In 1848, a drawing of 'The Queen's Christmas tree at Windsor Castle' was published in an addition of the Illustrated London News. After many people had read this, decorating trees started to rise in popularity. What does the Christmas tree symbolise? Long before the advent of Christianity, plants and trees had a special meaning with many people during the cold, winter months. Just as many of us decorate our homes today, ancient cultures would hang evergreen boughs across their doors — many even believed that this was something that could keep witches, evil sprits and illnesses at bay. Back in 2004, Pope John Paul called the Christmas tree a 'symbol of Christ.' He said that this ancient tradition exalts the value of life and reminds Christians of the 'tree of life', which is found in the Bible's first book, Genesis. How have Christmas trees changed now? Much like the very early Christmas trees, we still decorate ours with baubles and hang them with lights. Buying a real Christmas tree is still a tradition for many families, but over the years we have seen an increase in the number of artificial trees, especially pre-lit Christmas trees, as people opt for fuss-free, low maintenance trees that they can reuse every year. We've also seen decorations take a more extravagant turn, with trends such as rainbow trees, sunflower trees and multi-coloured 'party' trees shaping the way people decorate, as well as wooden Christmas trees and twig trees. These alternative trees gain more popularity each year, and some households are ditching trees altogether, instead choosing to decorate a houseplant as a Christmas tree. Like this article? Sign up to our newsletter to get more articles like this delivered straight to your inbox.	<urn:uuid:2e9669dc-4ca2-4199-b70f-d546923b9be0>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.housebeautiful.com/uk/decorate/a30322567/why-do-we-have-christmas-trees/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250628549.43/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125011232-20200125040232-00253.warc.gz	en	0.981909	792	3.421875	3	[ 0.41107314825057983, 0.4441556930541992, 0.34387779235839844, -0.2958253026008606, 0.3502333164215088, -0.01179697085171938, -0.15496638417243958, -0.11630390584468842, 0.1336868703365326, 0.266927570104599, -0.009173617698252201, 0.22472041845321655, -0.16216735541820526, 0.16003508865833...	7	Bringing evergreen trees indoors has traditionally been used to celebrate winter festivals — both by Pagans and Christians — for thousands of years. Pagans would decorate their homes during the winter solstice with tree branches as a symbol to think of spring that was just around the corner. Fir trees were also used by the Romans to decorate their temples at the festival of Saturnalia, while Christians used it as a sign of everlasting life with God. Germany is also heavily credited with starting the Christmas tree tradition, as many Christians began decorating trees brought in from outside. Those who didn't have trees — or couldn't afford them — would make their own clever alternatives using wooden pyramids instead. Some of the first Christmas trees in Germany were decorated with delicious edible decorations, such as gingerbread men and gold-covered apples (glass makers would also hang special small ornaments they had crafted themselves). Who first brought a Christmas tree into the home? The 16th century preacher, Martin Luther, was recorded as one of the first people to bring a Christmas tree into his home – and one of the first to add lights on the tree, too. According to tradition, one night before Christmas, Martin was seen walking through the forest and looked up to see the brightly shining stars glistening through the tree branches. To recapture this scene for his family, he placed a tree in his living room and wired its branches with beautiful lights. When did the Christmas tree first come to England? While Queen Victoria and Prince Albert are said to be the ones that made Christmas trees popular in England during the 1800s, it dates back much further than this. The tradition came from Germany, where King George III's wife was born. It was thought that his German wife, Charlotte, used to decorate a Christmas tree with her family during the 1760s. Charlotte had a tree set up at the Queen’s Lodge in Windsor for a children's party for those who were rich and noble. Not long after, having a tree had become popular amongst some rich families too. In 1848, a drawing of 'The Queen's Christmas tree at Windsor Castle' was published in an addition of the Illustrated London News. After many people had read this, decorating trees started to rise in popularity. What does the Christmas tree symbolise? Long before the advent of Christianity, plants and trees had a special meaning with many people during the cold, winter months. Just as many of us decorate our homes today, ancient cultures would hang evergreen boughs across their doors — many even believed that this was something that could keep witches, evil sprits and illnesses at bay. Back in 2004, Pope John Paul called the Christmas tree a 'symbol of Christ.' He said that this ancient tradition exalts the value of life and reminds Christians of the 'tree of life', which is found in the Bible's first book, Genesis. How have Christmas trees changed now? Much like the very early Christmas trees, we still decorate ours with baubles and hang them with lights. Buying a real Christmas tree is still a tradition for many families, but over the years we have seen an increase in the number of artificial trees, especially pre-lit Christmas trees, as people opt for fuss-free, low maintenance trees that they can reuse every year. We've also seen decorations take a more extravagant turn, with trends such as rainbow trees, sunflower trees and multi-coloured 'party' trees shaping the way people decorate, as well as wooden Christmas trees and twig trees. These alternative trees gain more popularity each year, and some households are ditching trees altogether, instead choosing to decorate a houseplant as a Christmas tree. Like this article? Sign up to our newsletter to get more articles like this delivered straight to your inbox.	769	ENGLISH	1
In 1965, at the Horn Antenna in New Jersey, scientists Robert Wilson and Arno Penzias were getting ready to map the radiation in our galaxy. The Horn Antenna, New Jersey But what they were about to discover was much bigger and would earn them a Nobel prize in the process. The Horn Antenna was designed to funnel in radiation in the form of radio waves, but before they could start they had to check that it was working accurately. Dr Arno Penzias - "Here we had purposely picked a portion of the spectrum, a wavelength of 7cm, where we expected nothing or almost, almost nothing, no radiation at all from the sky." Dr Robert Wilson - "Instead, what happened is that we found radiation coming into our antenna from all directions. It's just flooding in at us." It was an embarrassing start for the scientists. Their experiment was going wrong before it had even begun. They had to uncover the cause of this unexpected radiation before they could proceed. Dr Arno Penzias - "Naturally we focused first on the antenna. That was an attractive place for pigeons. We didn't mind that because they flew away when we, when we came, except that they had coated the surface with a white... white sticky material. When we were able to dismantle our antenna and clean these surfaces, we found to our surprise that most of the effect was still there. So now we were stuck with the sky beyond, which was not easy for us to accept, that this radiation was coming from somewhere in really deep cosmic space, beyond any radio sources that any of us knew about or even dreamed existed." But at Princeton University, only 30 miles from the antenna, Prof Bob Dicke and his team were looking for the exact radiation that Wilson and Penzias had found. They believed that if the Big Bang theory was correct - that the Universe had started from a single point in time and space - then there would be radiation left behind. Prof Jim Peebles, Princeton University - "Well, Bob received the call, we heard the discussion in the background, bits and pieces of it, couldn't imagine what was happening, Bob came back and said, well boys, I think we might have it." The radio waves that Wilson and Penzias had discovered confirmed Bob Dicke's predictions. They had found cosmic microwave background radiation. Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation Radiation that was emitted when the Universe first formed. Their accidental discovery led them to win a Nobel prize in physics in 1978. And to think, they originally thought it was the pigeons!	<urn:uuid:24c5c50c-4974-4c77-81fd-d547878f0e2a>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.twig-usa.com/film/nobel-prize-by-chance-3050/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594391.21/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119093733-20200119121733-00311.warc.gz	en	0.984246	543	3.34375	3	[ -0.46397650241851807, 0.2537717819213867, -0.19579482078552246, -0.21864137053489685, 0.10932257026433945, 0.04191575571894646, -0.23450443148612976, 0.3415509760379791, 0.006425885017961264, 0.12583598494529724, 0.3346254527568817, -0.276106059551239, -0.06102028861641884, 0.0352621302008...	1	In 1965, at the Horn Antenna in New Jersey, scientists Robert Wilson and Arno Penzias were getting ready to map the radiation in our galaxy. The Horn Antenna, New Jersey But what they were about to discover was much bigger and would earn them a Nobel prize in the process. The Horn Antenna was designed to funnel in radiation in the form of radio waves, but before they could start they had to check that it was working accurately. Dr Arno Penzias - "Here we had purposely picked a portion of the spectrum, a wavelength of 7cm, where we expected nothing or almost, almost nothing, no radiation at all from the sky." Dr Robert Wilson - "Instead, what happened is that we found radiation coming into our antenna from all directions. It's just flooding in at us." It was an embarrassing start for the scientists. Their experiment was going wrong before it had even begun. They had to uncover the cause of this unexpected radiation before they could proceed. Dr Arno Penzias - "Naturally we focused first on the antenna. That was an attractive place for pigeons. We didn't mind that because they flew away when we, when we came, except that they had coated the surface with a white... white sticky material. When we were able to dismantle our antenna and clean these surfaces, we found to our surprise that most of the effect was still there. So now we were stuck with the sky beyond, which was not easy for us to accept, that this radiation was coming from somewhere in really deep cosmic space, beyond any radio sources that any of us knew about or even dreamed existed." But at Princeton University, only 30 miles from the antenna, Prof Bob Dicke and his team were looking for the exact radiation that Wilson and Penzias had found. They believed that if the Big Bang theory was correct - that the Universe had started from a single point in time and space - then there would be radiation left behind. Prof Jim Peebles, Princeton University - "Well, Bob received the call, we heard the discussion in the background, bits and pieces of it, couldn't imagine what was happening, Bob came back and said, well boys, I think we might have it." The radio waves that Wilson and Penzias had discovered confirmed Bob Dicke's predictions. They had found cosmic microwave background radiation. Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation Radiation that was emitted when the Universe first formed. Their accidental discovery led them to win a Nobel prize in physics in 1978. And to think, they originally thought it was the pigeons!	537	ENGLISH	1
Antiochus took power after the death of Seleucus Philopator. He had been hostage in Rome following the peace of Apamea in 188 BC but had recently been exchanged for the son and rightful heir of Seleucus IV, the later Demetrius I Soter. Taking advantage of this situation, Antiochus was able to proclaim himself as co-regent with another of Seleucus' sons, the infant Antiochus, whose murder he orchestrated a few years later. Notable events during his reign include the near-conquest of Egypt, which was halted by the threat of Roman intervention, and the beginning of the Jewish revolt of the Maccabees. He was succeeded by his infant son, Antiochus V Eupator. Because the guardians of Ptolemy VI of Egypt were demanding the return of Coele-Syria, Antiochus, in 170 BC decided on a preemptive strike and invaded Egypt, conquering all but Alexandria. He then captured Ptolemy agreed to let him continue as King but as his puppet. (This had the advantage of not alarming Rome.) Alexandria thereupon chose Ptolemy's brother Ptolemy Euergetes as King. In Antiochus' absence, the two brothers came to an agreement to rule jointly. Hence in 168 BC Antiochus again invaded and overran all Egypt but Alexandria while his fleet captured Cyprus. Near Alexandria he was met by a Roman envoy who told him that he must at once withdraw from Egypt and Cyprus. Antiochus said he would discuss it with his council, whereupon the envoy drew a line in the sand round him. Were he to step out of the circle, the envoy said, without having first undertaken to withdraw , he would be at war with Rome. Antiochus agreed to withdraw. In a spirit of revenge he organized an expedition against Jerusalem, which he destroyed, as well as putting vast multitudes of its inhabitants to death in a most cruel manner. From this time the Jews began the war of independence under their Maccabean leaders with marked success, defeating the armies of Antiochus that were sent against them. Enraged at this, Antiochus is said to have marched against them in person, threatening utterly to exterminate the nation; but on the way he was suddenly arrested by the hand of death (164 BC). The exact causes of the Jewish revolt, and of Antiochus' response to it, are uncertain; The Jewish accounts are in The Books of The Maccabees, and the successful revolt commemorated in the Holiday of Hanuka. His last years were spent on a campaign against the rising Parthian empire, which seems to have been initially successful but which terminated upon his death. The reign of Antiochus was a last period of strength for the empire, but in some way it was fatal; because he was an usurper and left no successor except a little boy, his death was followed by devastating dynastic wars.	<urn:uuid:94a3355c-8e51-47ea-9f90-079a93b43a56>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://thesignsofthetimes.com.au/35/64797.htm	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598800.30/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120135447-20200120164447-00254.warc.gz	en	0.987669	604	3.59375	4	[ -0.34611180424690247, 0.5899294018745422, 0.1692585051059723, -0.2592690587043762, -0.5632935762405396, -0.4117884039878845, 0.288105309009552, 0.49003076553344727, 0.21221701800823212, 0.29466819763183594, 0.1269838511943817, -0.5705432891845703, -0.23741751909255981, -0.05671345442533493...	1	Antiochus took power after the death of Seleucus Philopator. He had been hostage in Rome following the peace of Apamea in 188 BC but had recently been exchanged for the son and rightful heir of Seleucus IV, the later Demetrius I Soter. Taking advantage of this situation, Antiochus was able to proclaim himself as co-regent with another of Seleucus' sons, the infant Antiochus, whose murder he orchestrated a few years later. Notable events during his reign include the near-conquest of Egypt, which was halted by the threat of Roman intervention, and the beginning of the Jewish revolt of the Maccabees. He was succeeded by his infant son, Antiochus V Eupator. Because the guardians of Ptolemy VI of Egypt were demanding the return of Coele-Syria, Antiochus, in 170 BC decided on a preemptive strike and invaded Egypt, conquering all but Alexandria. He then captured Ptolemy agreed to let him continue as King but as his puppet. (This had the advantage of not alarming Rome.) Alexandria thereupon chose Ptolemy's brother Ptolemy Euergetes as King. In Antiochus' absence, the two brothers came to an agreement to rule jointly. Hence in 168 BC Antiochus again invaded and overran all Egypt but Alexandria while his fleet captured Cyprus. Near Alexandria he was met by a Roman envoy who told him that he must at once withdraw from Egypt and Cyprus. Antiochus said he would discuss it with his council, whereupon the envoy drew a line in the sand round him. Were he to step out of the circle, the envoy said, without having first undertaken to withdraw , he would be at war with Rome. Antiochus agreed to withdraw. In a spirit of revenge he organized an expedition against Jerusalem, which he destroyed, as well as putting vast multitudes of its inhabitants to death in a most cruel manner. From this time the Jews began the war of independence under their Maccabean leaders with marked success, defeating the armies of Antiochus that were sent against them. Enraged at this, Antiochus is said to have marched against them in person, threatening utterly to exterminate the nation; but on the way he was suddenly arrested by the hand of death (164 BC). The exact causes of the Jewish revolt, and of Antiochus' response to it, are uncertain; The Jewish accounts are in The Books of The Maccabees, and the successful revolt commemorated in the Holiday of Hanuka. His last years were spent on a campaign against the rising Parthian empire, which seems to have been initially successful but which terminated upon his death. The reign of Antiochus was a last period of strength for the empire, but in some way it was fatal; because he was an usurper and left no successor except a little boy, his death was followed by devastating dynastic wars.	632	ENGLISH	1
World Religions - RELG110 23 July 2014 23 July 2014 The Lenape Indians originated from the majority of the eastern part of the United States. They covered an immense amount of land, so different areas referred to themselves by different names. They believed in many different spirits, good and evil, that affected how they lived their daily lives. The Lenape Indians participated in rituals and put forth physical offerings to the spirits as well. They not only offered gifts to just the good spirits, they gave them to the evil spirits too. Some other rituals involve burial rituals and ceremonies. Eventually the Europeans arrived and caused a shift in some Lenape beliefs and customs. The daily life of a Lenape Indian included hunting, farming, fishing, and making tools. Believe it or not, quite a few of Lenape Indians are still continuing their traditions today. The Lenape Indians are known by many different names but they all share the same beliefs, customs, rituals, traditions, and daily life activities. The Lenape Indians, also referred to the Delaware Indians or Lenni Lenape, originated from Lenapehokeing which translates to “Land of the Lenape” and that’s exactly what it was. They had an immense amount of land, which covered from all of New Jersey to Northern Delaware and even some small parts of Connecticut. Some other areas in between included East Pennsylvania and Southern New York State. From the headwaters of the Delaware River all the way down the boarder to the Delaware Bay, were the main clans, which were referred to as the Unami, Unalachtigo, and the Munsee. Unami means, “people down the river”, Unalachtigo means, “people who live near the ocean”, and Munsee means people of the stony country”. They are all different groups and usually stick together while traveling, etc. Another name, previously mentioned, are the Lenni-Lenape Indians who are said to be the eldest of the Indians or “the ancient ones”. There was also the Nanticoke Indian ancestors who were referred to as the “tidewater people”. They migrated from the Nanticoke River in Maryland and originated as early as the 1950’s! The Nanticoke Indians didn’t begin their migration to the Delaware River until the 1600’s and were settled there around the 1800’s. Eventually they became friendly with the Lenni-Lenape Indians who were mainly throughout New Jersey. The Lenape Indians believed in many different spirits. According to them, some of the spirits were helpful and some were actually harmful. The Lenape believed that all of the spirits needed to be treated with respect. The Lenape called the spirits that were all around them, Manetu. They believed in a great spirit and an evil spirit. The Great Spirit was called Kishelemukong, who according to their beliefs, created the world. The evil spirits on the other hand, were known as Mantuwak. The Mantuwak were the evil spirits that the Lenape’s believed brought sickness and death to their people. Even though the spirits were considered to be evil, the Lenape Indians insisted on giving them gifts, or offerings, thinking that the spirits would be nice to them in return. They would leave the offerings wherever they thought the spirits lived such as by a tree or even a rock. The offerings were small items like a flower, stick, or a few leaves for example. There was a spirit who went by the name of Mesingw who was responsible for taking care of all the animals that lived in the forest of their lands. The Lenape Indians would call upon him to scare the bad children in the area. They wanted to have peace in their villages and children always seemed to be the ones causing the ruckus. Mesingw never physically spoke but he did communicate to the Lenape Indians by using a stick and turtle shell rattle. The Lenape Indians would try to drive out the evil spirits though certain rituals…	<urn:uuid:3faf2930-60b2-4414-847b-082979558810>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.majortests.com/essay/Lenape-Indians-570862.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251778272.69/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128122813-20200128152813-00517.warc.gz	en	0.981985	836	3.703125	4	[ -0.09728867560625076, 0.06704073399305344, 0.09785978496074677, -0.21220313012599945, -0.21202337741851807, -0.0824771374464035, 0.3272591829299927, -0.42573294043540955, -0.026213141158223152, -0.060392554849386215, 0.22608280181884766, -0.06256335973739624, -0.1280028223991394, 0.1892296...	1	World Religions - RELG110 23 July 2014 23 July 2014 The Lenape Indians originated from the majority of the eastern part of the United States. They covered an immense amount of land, so different areas referred to themselves by different names. They believed in many different spirits, good and evil, that affected how they lived their daily lives. The Lenape Indians participated in rituals and put forth physical offerings to the spirits as well. They not only offered gifts to just the good spirits, they gave them to the evil spirits too. Some other rituals involve burial rituals and ceremonies. Eventually the Europeans arrived and caused a shift in some Lenape beliefs and customs. The daily life of a Lenape Indian included hunting, farming, fishing, and making tools. Believe it or not, quite a few of Lenape Indians are still continuing their traditions today. The Lenape Indians are known by many different names but they all share the same beliefs, customs, rituals, traditions, and daily life activities. The Lenape Indians, also referred to the Delaware Indians or Lenni Lenape, originated from Lenapehokeing which translates to “Land of the Lenape” and that’s exactly what it was. They had an immense amount of land, which covered from all of New Jersey to Northern Delaware and even some small parts of Connecticut. Some other areas in between included East Pennsylvania and Southern New York State. From the headwaters of the Delaware River all the way down the boarder to the Delaware Bay, were the main clans, which were referred to as the Unami, Unalachtigo, and the Munsee. Unami means, “people down the river”, Unalachtigo means, “people who live near the ocean”, and Munsee means people of the stony country”. They are all different groups and usually stick together while traveling, etc. Another name, previously mentioned, are the Lenni-Lenape Indians who are said to be the eldest of the Indians or “the ancient ones”. There was also the Nanticoke Indian ancestors who were referred to as the “tidewater people”. They migrated from the Nanticoke River in Maryland and originated as early as the 1950’s! The Nanticoke Indians didn’t begin their migration to the Delaware River until the 1600’s and were settled there around the 1800’s. Eventually they became friendly with the Lenni-Lenape Indians who were mainly throughout New Jersey. The Lenape Indians believed in many different spirits. According to them, some of the spirits were helpful and some were actually harmful. The Lenape believed that all of the spirits needed to be treated with respect. The Lenape called the spirits that were all around them, Manetu. They believed in a great spirit and an evil spirit. The Great Spirit was called Kishelemukong, who according to their beliefs, created the world. The evil spirits on the other hand, were known as Mantuwak. The Mantuwak were the evil spirits that the Lenape’s believed brought sickness and death to their people. Even though the spirits were considered to be evil, the Lenape Indians insisted on giving them gifts, or offerings, thinking that the spirits would be nice to them in return. They would leave the offerings wherever they thought the spirits lived such as by a tree or even a rock. The offerings were small items like a flower, stick, or a few leaves for example. There was a spirit who went by the name of Mesingw who was responsible for taking care of all the animals that lived in the forest of their lands. The Lenape Indians would call upon him to scare the bad children in the area. They wanted to have peace in their villages and children always seemed to be the ones causing the ruckus. Mesingw never physically spoke but he did communicate to the Lenape Indians by using a stick and turtle shell rattle. The Lenape Indians would try to drive out the evil spirits though certain rituals…	834	ENGLISH	1
This past week in class we reviewed and clarified the topic of Ethnography. Breaking down the word ethnography it describes writings about people. When an individual is utilizing ethnography there are do’s and don’t. You can not use ethnography on one person it is a tool to be used during sociological observation of an entire community. Two key components are investigating peoples lives and reporting lives to others. Ethnography is away to see from a different standpoint. Most times starting from a certain standpoint would imitate a sort of bias to sociological perspective however seeing from a standpoint is not bias because there is no way to not hold a Bias because it is in our nature whether we are aware of it as humans or not. Having multiple perspectives allows the sociologist to produce more of an understanding and comprehension of the world around the object being observed. Reflexive Ethnography has four skills sets to be utilized, listening and understanding, willing to be vulnerable, stand up to ones own personal presumptions, recognition of ones personal cultural baggage. Lastly, there are six stages of ethnography, Investigating primitive peoples, cultural relativism, modernization theory, interpretive ethnography, colonial complicity, focus on representation. Interpretation of ethnography and focusing on representing the results of the ethnography are two key components of the six stages Today the Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris was the victim of a fire and currently, no one knows the cause of the fire. Photos show that the spire and parts of the roof are severely damaged. The cathedral is a cornerstone of the Catholic church in Paris, not only bringing in around 12 million visitors a year but also being the seat of the Archbishop of Paris. It’s interesting to think about the community aspect of religion especially in times of tragedy, reports say that there were people outside the burning cathedral singing hymns. Being considered a national emergency the French President Emmanuel Macron came to the area and took post in a nearby police station. Following after arriving he made a post on Twitter saying “A part of us is on fire”, from his post and the reactions of nearby people, the community, including public safety officers, Catholics, and the people of Paris are all trying to do their part and help in what why they seem fit. From this tragedy, we are able to see the influence and many aspects of a community in work. We also see aspects of an outside community (The United States) and their reactions, President Trump has a tweet saying “So horrible to watch the massive fire at Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris. Perhaps flying water tankers could be used to put it out. Must act quickly!” There is something to be noted about the sincerity and tone of people who are speaking from within the community and from outside the community. This week we learned about ethnography, which is used to learn about different cultures and religions. Part of being a good ethnographer is being able to identify and put aside your own biases in order to conduct a study from the point of view of the study subjects. I definitely had to use this skill in order to conduct studies during my congregation visits. It is very easy to judge a culture that you are not a part of. When I went to the Jehovah’s Witnesses congregation, I found myself wanting to be judgmental of their worldview. When they showed signs of enforcing gender roles, I have to admit I was upset. I consider myself an avid feminist and liberal. However, I knew that I had to put my thoughts aside in order to conduct an accurate study. Therefore, I tried to think from their point of view. The gender roles may have made me uncomfortable, but it made them feel secure. I think it is a useful skill to use even if you are not conducting a sociology study. When we feel uncomfortable or upset about certain customs or traditions, we need to realize that humans are different all across the world. We do not all fit into the same mold. It is important that we try to see the world from a point of view different than our own. Just because something/someone is different, it does not mean it is better/worse. I will definitely use ethnography skills in the future. The Mission Inn Quaker congregational visit was different and interesting to know because I didn’t have any idea of that religion since it is not really heard of. I thought is very ironic how the building for the church was a small house-based congregation in downtown Riverside. I was unusual to hear that the décor of the church looking like a living room and the chairs were set up in a square shape that way everyone is facing each other. The point of this arrangement was to let the members know about their surroundings. The Quaker religion doesn’t have a set scripture or bible type of layout for a tradition service where the is a priest or speaker because their type of worship was to sit in silence until someone had the urge to stand and speak or say a message. Other wise during the service that our classmate attended didn’t experience anyone speaking thus it felt like a type of meditation but still being aware of the others in their square set up. Another congregation presentation that I found interesting was The Kingdom Hall of Jehovah Witness because I didn’t know that they offered a Spanish service. The service was interactive and majority Hispanic during the Hispanic mass. Also, to learn that active members at the church combine their religious and social life together. For example, they wont date anyone else who aren’t Jehovah witness because to them it is considered a sin. But for personal experience they are a welcoming group of people who are willing to help new comers join their congregation. During class last week we learned a little bit about Ethnography and how it differed from a sociologist. Ethno means people and graphy means writing, so in other words it means writing about people. Ethnographers tend to spend very long periods of time at the place they are looking at. During class we learned a little bit of background about how it started. One of the first ethnographers was W.F Whyte. He was hired to hang out with street gangs and find out how they worked, in order to try and get them to comply with society and behave with the middle class. At the time the street gangs were considered lower class and deviant, but still salvageable. What he ended up finding was that the street gangs were still people like anybody else, and he didn’t feel that they needed to be assimilated into the middle class anymore. He started to understand how they ran their lives and believed they still deserved to be treated with respect. Overall what came from this study was the complex picture of human beings that Whyte was able to portray. I think this is the most important job of ethnographers. It is imperative that they can show other people that do not understand them, that just because they have differing views, they still deserve to be treated just like everyone else, even if you don’t agree with them. This is why it is important for ethnographers to be able to realize the viewpoint they are at and express that in an article, so it does not come off as biased. This past week in class we heard students present about their visits to different congregations within the Redlands area. The diverse religious landscape found within such a small area will never cease to amaze me, and even the differences found within the vast array of congregations that fall under one major branch of religion. The majority of the students in our class visited congregations that identified themselves as “Christian” in some way or another, ranging from Evangelism, to the church of the Latter-day Saints, to Jehovah’s witnesses, and beyond. I appreciate doing these congregation visits, and hearing about other students’ experiences because it has helped me delve further into the world of sociological thinking, in which one listens and learns about other people’s experiences and beliefs without judging. Prior to taking this class I may have classified some of these religious traditions as “weird,” “fake,” or even “cultish,” but I have learned to become fascinated by the world of religious traditions that differ from my own upbringing, and to learn and understand rather than judge or fear. We have begun to form our own small ethnographies of the religious traditions we have immersed ourselves in, and through this I have personally began to understand the criticality of pluralism, and that we must engage this idea in our study of sociology, anthropology, and religion. In class we learned about the importance and role ethnography plays in the field of sociology. The Greek word “Ethno” means “people” and “Graphy” means “writing,” so together it means “writings” about “people.” Ethnography allows sociologists to both investigate the lives of people, but also to report in writing those lives to others. There are two institutional sources, the first being “Colonial Ethnography,” where sociologists wrote about rulership and observed the “cultural savage,” meaning they followed natives and observed their lifestyles to be able to write about them. The second is the Chicago School of Sociology, the first major body of research emerging during the 1920s and 1930s specializing in urban sociology. There are 6 stages of ethnography: Investigating “primitive peoples,” cultural relativism, modernization theory, interpretive ethnography, colonial complicity, and focus on representation. These 6 different categories focus on different sociological aspects, making sociology and its study of the development, structure, and functioning of human society broad so that all things can be observed, written about, and talked about. This past week I was able to interview my religious specialist. Although both of our schedules weren’t compatible with each other, we were still able to make it work via email. I interviewed Pastor Rich Cox from the Christian Door Fellowship. He was such a nice, genuine person who has an amazing story of how he was reborn again. Pastor Rich Cox is currently the senior pastor at his church. He is a very hard working man as he works 7 days a week with 12-14 hours per day. If you didn’t know, the average person works 5 days a week with 8.8 hours per day! I was quite shocked when he told me this. I can’t image how he manages his life outside of his work! Before he became a pastor, Pastor Rich was a full time police officer for 10 years. He believed that there was too much violence and cruelty that he witnessed everyday, so he decided to withdraw himself from all of it. Although it took him awhile, he surrendered his life to Christ in 1984 and believed that he was called to become a pastor. From then on, it made him love and enjoy what he does for people everyday. There are a lot of people like Pastor Rich who have surrendered their life to Christ. My pastor at my own church has a similar background story just like Pastor Rich. They both never grew up wanting to be involved in full time ministry. It was both during a certain moment in their life where they believed there is something out there for them that is better. Something that was missing in their life. It’s amazing to hear about all these different stories and to see how each person has grown just by accepting Christ in their life. Last Thursday, we spent our class time presenting our second congregation visits. While most information in the presentations had been covered during the first round of congregation visits, this time around I was able to focus less on the details of each organization and instead appreciate Redlands’ religious diversity as a whole. I realized that this diversity is what allows people to not only be picky and shop around for a goldilocks church (perpetuating the religious market narrative), but it also encourages more participation in organized religion as a whole. Because they have so many options, people are more likely to find a church that matches not only their belief system but the kind of community and level of commitment they are looking for. If there are fewer churches to choose from, families and individuals might feel too much like they are conforming to something they don’t fully believe in and end up not joining a church at all. Sticking with the vernacular of the religious market narrative, I think that to an extent it is the responsibility of the congregation responsibility to convince potential members that the “goods” they provide can meet their needs. Extra efforts to recruit could be the difference in whether they decide to return or not, but it is nearly impossible to know exactly what people are looking for. I think it would be very cool if there was an application that helped match people with religious organizations. After entering their basic preferences(religion/belief system, size of congregation, length of service, anonymity or community, etc), the app could find which nearby organization(s) best fit the individual’s needs. Users could see which of their friends go to which churches, and view detailed profiles of each organization. The app could also give organizations access to data that reflects what most people are looking for, so they can adjust based on demand. Perhaps this is oversimplifying, or it has been done before, but I think this app could make the process of joining a church easier, and has the potential to increase membership in religious organizations wherever it is implemented. On Thursday we heard the presentations of the second round of congregation visits. This time, what stood out to me were the different points focused on between class members who visited the same congregation as well as in general the different aspects of congregations that were focused on among all the presentations. This just goes to show how in sociology who is asking the questions and what questions they are asking shape their observations/ study. Members of our class all come from different backgrounds and experiences. In our congregation visits, we naturally focused on what stood out to us- which varied and in a way can reflect who we are. It is interesting to me that in sociology and anthropology who is doing the research is relevant and says something about their findings. As much as we can try to remove our biases, it goes beyond that. The questions we choose to ask, our position in the group we are observing, etc. all affect our study.	<urn:uuid:15a05705-815e-49f8-8a70-5ade6742057d>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://soan232.coolsociology.net/course-blog/page/2/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251690095.81/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126165718-20200126195718-00452.warc.gz	en	0.98141	2,959	3.265625	3	[ 0.314068466424942, 0.29652169346809387, 0.03970614820718765, -0.38821208477020264, 0.4188395142555237, 0.345389187335968, 0.1441960632801056, 0.05242373049259186, -0.1122906506061554, 0.06227404624223709, 0.10930043458938599, 0.03652287274599075, -0.197666734457016, 0.2910464406013489, 0...	3	This past week in class we reviewed and clarified the topic of Ethnography. Breaking down the word ethnography it describes writings about people. When an individual is utilizing ethnography there are do’s and don’t. You can not use ethnography on one person it is a tool to be used during sociological observation of an entire community. Two key components are investigating peoples lives and reporting lives to others. Ethnography is away to see from a different standpoint. Most times starting from a certain standpoint would imitate a sort of bias to sociological perspective however seeing from a standpoint is not bias because there is no way to not hold a Bias because it is in our nature whether we are aware of it as humans or not. Having multiple perspectives allows the sociologist to produce more of an understanding and comprehension of the world around the object being observed. Reflexive Ethnography has four skills sets to be utilized, listening and understanding, willing to be vulnerable, stand up to ones own personal presumptions, recognition of ones personal cultural baggage. Lastly, there are six stages of ethnography, Investigating primitive peoples, cultural relativism, modernization theory, interpretive ethnography, colonial complicity, focus on representation. Interpretation of ethnography and focusing on representing the results of the ethnography are two key components of the six stages Today the Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris was the victim of a fire and currently, no one knows the cause of the fire. Photos show that the spire and parts of the roof are severely damaged. The cathedral is a cornerstone of the Catholic church in Paris, not only bringing in around 12 million visitors a year but also being the seat of the Archbishop of Paris. It’s interesting to think about the community aspect of religion especially in times of tragedy, reports say that there were people outside the burning cathedral singing hymns. Being considered a national emergency the French President Emmanuel Macron came to the area and took post in a nearby police station. Following after arriving he made a post on Twitter saying “A part of us is on fire”, from his post and the reactions of nearby people, the community, including public safety officers, Catholics, and the people of Paris are all trying to do their part and help in what why they seem fit. From this tragedy, we are able to see the influence and many aspects of a community in work. We also see aspects of an outside community (The United States) and their reactions, President Trump has a tweet saying “So horrible to watch the massive fire at Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris. Perhaps flying water tankers could be used to put it out. Must act quickly!” There is something to be noted about the sincerity and tone of people who are speaking from within the community and from outside the community. This week we learned about ethnography, which is used to learn about different cultures and religions. Part of being a good ethnographer is being able to identify and put aside your own biases in order to conduct a study from the point of view of the study subjects. I definitely had to use this skill in order to conduct studies during my congregation visits. It is very easy to judge a culture that you are not a part of. When I went to the Jehovah’s Witnesses congregation, I found myself wanting to be judgmental of their worldview. When they showed signs of enforcing gender roles, I have to admit I was upset. I consider myself an avid feminist and liberal. However, I knew that I had to put my thoughts aside in order to conduct an accurate study. Therefore, I tried to think from their point of view. The gender roles may have made me uncomfortable, but it made them feel secure. I think it is a useful skill to use even if you are not conducting a sociology study. When we feel uncomfortable or upset about certain customs or traditions, we need to realize that humans are different all across the world. We do not all fit into the same mold. It is important that we try to see the world from a point of view different than our own. Just because something/someone is different, it does not mean it is better/worse. I will definitely use ethnography skills in the future. The Mission Inn Quaker congregational visit was different and interesting to know because I didn’t have any idea of that religion since it is not really heard of. I thought is very ironic how the building for the church was a small house-based congregation in downtown Riverside. I was unusual to hear that the décor of the church looking like a living room and the chairs were set up in a square shape that way everyone is facing each other. The point of this arrangement was to let the members know about their surroundings. The Quaker religion doesn’t have a set scripture or bible type of layout for a tradition service where the is a priest or speaker because their type of worship was to sit in silence until someone had the urge to stand and speak or say a message. Other wise during the service that our classmate attended didn’t experience anyone speaking thus it felt like a type of meditation but still being aware of the others in their square set up. Another congregation presentation that I found interesting was The Kingdom Hall of Jehovah Witness because I didn’t know that they offered a Spanish service. The service was interactive and majority Hispanic during the Hispanic mass. Also, to learn that active members at the church combine their religious and social life together. For example, they wont date anyone else who aren’t Jehovah witness because to them it is considered a sin. But for personal experience they are a welcoming group of people who are willing to help new comers join their congregation. During class last week we learned a little bit about Ethnography and how it differed from a sociologist. Ethno means people and graphy means writing, so in other words it means writing about people. Ethnographers tend to spend very long periods of time at the place they are looking at. During class we learned a little bit of background about how it started. One of the first ethnographers was W.F Whyte. He was hired to hang out with street gangs and find out how they worked, in order to try and get them to comply with society and behave with the middle class. At the time the street gangs were considered lower class and deviant, but still salvageable. What he ended up finding was that the street gangs were still people like anybody else, and he didn’t feel that they needed to be assimilated into the middle class anymore. He started to understand how they ran their lives and believed they still deserved to be treated with respect. Overall what came from this study was the complex picture of human beings that Whyte was able to portray. I think this is the most important job of ethnographers. It is imperative that they can show other people that do not understand them, that just because they have differing views, they still deserve to be treated just like everyone else, even if you don’t agree with them. This is why it is important for ethnographers to be able to realize the viewpoint they are at and express that in an article, so it does not come off as biased. This past week in class we heard students present about their visits to different congregations within the Redlands area. The diverse religious landscape found within such a small area will never cease to amaze me, and even the differences found within the vast array of congregations that fall under one major branch of religion. The majority of the students in our class visited congregations that identified themselves as “Christian” in some way or another, ranging from Evangelism, to the church of the Latter-day Saints, to Jehovah’s witnesses, and beyond. I appreciate doing these congregation visits, and hearing about other students’ experiences because it has helped me delve further into the world of sociological thinking, in which one listens and learns about other people’s experiences and beliefs without judging. Prior to taking this class I may have classified some of these religious traditions as “weird,” “fake,” or even “cultish,” but I have learned to become fascinated by the world of religious traditions that differ from my own upbringing, and to learn and understand rather than judge or fear. We have begun to form our own small ethnographies of the religious traditions we have immersed ourselves in, and through this I have personally began to understand the criticality of pluralism, and that we must engage this idea in our study of sociology, anthropology, and religion. In class we learned about the importance and role ethnography plays in the field of sociology. The Greek word “Ethno” means “people” and “Graphy” means “writing,” so together it means “writings” about “people.” Ethnography allows sociologists to both investigate the lives of people, but also to report in writing those lives to others. There are two institutional sources, the first being “Colonial Ethnography,” where sociologists wrote about rulership and observed the “cultural savage,” meaning they followed natives and observed their lifestyles to be able to write about them. The second is the Chicago School of Sociology, the first major body of research emerging during the 1920s and 1930s specializing in urban sociology. There are 6 stages of ethnography: Investigating “primitive peoples,” cultural relativism, modernization theory, interpretive ethnography, colonial complicity, and focus on representation. These 6 different categories focus on different sociological aspects, making sociology and its study of the development, structure, and functioning of human society broad so that all things can be observed, written about, and talked about. This past week I was able to interview my religious specialist. Although both of our schedules weren’t compatible with each other, we were still able to make it work via email. I interviewed Pastor Rich Cox from the Christian Door Fellowship. He was such a nice, genuine person who has an amazing story of how he was reborn again. Pastor Rich Cox is currently the senior pastor at his church. He is a very hard working man as he works 7 days a week with 12-14 hours per day. If you didn’t know, the average person works 5 days a week with 8.8 hours per day! I was quite shocked when he told me this. I can’t image how he manages his life outside of his work! Before he became a pastor, Pastor Rich was a full time police officer for 10 years. He believed that there was too much violence and cruelty that he witnessed everyday, so he decided to withdraw himself from all of it. Although it took him awhile, he surrendered his life to Christ in 1984 and believed that he was called to become a pastor. From then on, it made him love and enjoy what he does for people everyday. There are a lot of people like Pastor Rich who have surrendered their life to Christ. My pastor at my own church has a similar background story just like Pastor Rich. They both never grew up wanting to be involved in full time ministry. It was both during a certain moment in their life where they believed there is something out there for them that is better. Something that was missing in their life. It’s amazing to hear about all these different stories and to see how each person has grown just by accepting Christ in their life. Last Thursday, we spent our class time presenting our second congregation visits. While most information in the presentations had been covered during the first round of congregation visits, this time around I was able to focus less on the details of each organization and instead appreciate Redlands’ religious diversity as a whole. I realized that this diversity is what allows people to not only be picky and shop around for a goldilocks church (perpetuating the religious market narrative), but it also encourages more participation in organized religion as a whole. Because they have so many options, people are more likely to find a church that matches not only their belief system but the kind of community and level of commitment they are looking for. If there are fewer churches to choose from, families and individuals might feel too much like they are conforming to something they don’t fully believe in and end up not joining a church at all. Sticking with the vernacular of the religious market narrative, I think that to an extent it is the responsibility of the congregation responsibility to convince potential members that the “goods” they provide can meet their needs. Extra efforts to recruit could be the difference in whether they decide to return or not, but it is nearly impossible to know exactly what people are looking for. I think it would be very cool if there was an application that helped match people with religious organizations. After entering their basic preferences(religion/belief system, size of congregation, length of service, anonymity or community, etc), the app could find which nearby organization(s) best fit the individual’s needs. Users could see which of their friends go to which churches, and view detailed profiles of each organization. The app could also give organizations access to data that reflects what most people are looking for, so they can adjust based on demand. Perhaps this is oversimplifying, or it has been done before, but I think this app could make the process of joining a church easier, and has the potential to increase membership in religious organizations wherever it is implemented. On Thursday we heard the presentations of the second round of congregation visits. This time, what stood out to me were the different points focused on between class members who visited the same congregation as well as in general the different aspects of congregations that were focused on among all the presentations. This just goes to show how in sociology who is asking the questions and what questions they are asking shape their observations/ study. Members of our class all come from different backgrounds and experiences. In our congregation visits, we naturally focused on what stood out to us- which varied and in a way can reflect who we are. It is interesting to me that in sociology and anthropology who is doing the research is relevant and says something about their findings. As much as we can try to remove our biases, it goes beyond that. The questions we choose to ask, our position in the group we are observing, etc. all affect our study.	2,882	ENGLISH	1
Get help with any kind of project - from a high school essay to a PhD dissertation In almost every town in Vietnam is present a street called “Hai Ba Trung”, honoring both legendary sisters who led a revolt against the Chinese guideline around 39 C.E. The day of their deaths marks Vietnam’s Women’s Time, and their legend provides been informed in Vietnamese children’s books for generations. Today, Trung Trac and Trung Nhi are considered two of the most crucial heroines in Vietnamese history. The pair, who had already result from a militarily strong family, led an army against the Chinese officials who managed Vietnam at the time. They took back Vietnam eventually, and ruled for 3 years before an army was delivered to destroy them. The Trung sisters utilized their sociable status and the overall discontent the Vietnamese people experienced towards the ruling Chinese to begin a rebellion. Traditionally, Vietnamese women have generally had more freedom than their Chinese counterparts in the initial century A.D. Although still not add up to men, they did have significantly more rights and gained nearer to equal inheritance. A component could possibly be played by them in public areas life, and could end up being political leaders, judges, traders, and warriors. In the mean time, ladies in Han China didn't have these rights, because they were considered subservient with their husbands. The Trung Sisters were obviously not subservient to their husbands. Trung Trac, the elder sister, was married to Thi Sach, and he was probably alive through the rebellion. However, it really is probable that he didn't play a huge part in it, apart from helping his wife. When the Trung Sisters was founded, Mi-ling, the birthplace of sisters, was made capital rather than his own birthplace. If he were the primary leader of the rebellion, it could definitely be his own birthplace made capital. The Trung Sisters had a...	<urn:uuid:ab821db4-883e-4efa-893b-b05ce13dfdc3>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://studybay.com/example-works/essay/other/1001374/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250589560.16/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117123339-20200117151339-00507.warc.gz	en	0.986901	399	3.765625	4	[ -0.2600981593132019, 0.6153162121772766, 0.10127690434455872, -0.03289437294006348, 0.2879546880722046, 0.4749918282032013, 0.11010151356458664, 0.05490729212760925, -0.27556779980659485, -0.1538461297750473, -0.04602276533842087, -0.3401657044887543, 0.4703713655471802, 0.2244567126035690...	1	Get help with any kind of project - from a high school essay to a PhD dissertation In almost every town in Vietnam is present a street called “Hai Ba Trung”, honoring both legendary sisters who led a revolt against the Chinese guideline around 39 C.E. The day of their deaths marks Vietnam’s Women’s Time, and their legend provides been informed in Vietnamese children’s books for generations. Today, Trung Trac and Trung Nhi are considered two of the most crucial heroines in Vietnamese history. The pair, who had already result from a militarily strong family, led an army against the Chinese officials who managed Vietnam at the time. They took back Vietnam eventually, and ruled for 3 years before an army was delivered to destroy them. The Trung sisters utilized their sociable status and the overall discontent the Vietnamese people experienced towards the ruling Chinese to begin a rebellion. Traditionally, Vietnamese women have generally had more freedom than their Chinese counterparts in the initial century A.D. Although still not add up to men, they did have significantly more rights and gained nearer to equal inheritance. A component could possibly be played by them in public areas life, and could end up being political leaders, judges, traders, and warriors. In the mean time, ladies in Han China didn't have these rights, because they were considered subservient with their husbands. The Trung Sisters were obviously not subservient to their husbands. Trung Trac, the elder sister, was married to Thi Sach, and he was probably alive through the rebellion. However, it really is probable that he didn't play a huge part in it, apart from helping his wife. When the Trung Sisters was founded, Mi-ling, the birthplace of sisters, was made capital rather than his own birthplace. If he were the primary leader of the rebellion, it could definitely be his own birthplace made capital. The Trung Sisters had a...	392	ENGLISH	1
Notorious pirate Captain William Kidd started out as a Scotsman who became a leading citizen of New York City and was active in the building of Trinity Church. His pirate career started when he was assigned to rid the seas of pirates. At first, he was a reluctant pirate even though his crew voted him in as captain. After attacking an East India Company ship Captain Kidd suddenly discovered that he was being hunted for this deed. He buried some of his treasure on Gardiners Island, hoping the goods could be used for bargaining. However, when both he and his wife were captured in Boston, Massachusetts Captain Kidd was sent to England for trial. He was sentenced to death by hanging. Unfortunately, the noose used to hang him broke twice but once he was dead on the third hanging attempt his body was doused with tar and hung by chains along the Thames River. It is believed that his treasure is buried somewhere in the Caribbean.	<urn:uuid:cd6fef84-15e7-4b6c-af25-d39eb9406b17>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://virily.com/other/pirate-hung-by-chains/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251689924.62/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126135207-20200126165207-00110.warc.gz	en	0.99594	187	3.734375	4	[ -0.1225886195898056, 0.2966441810131073, 0.3872131407260895, -0.7724997997283936, 0.05030697584152222, -0.0076552582904696465, 0.445902019739151, -0.02405948005616665, -0.45654794573783875, 0.021642208099365234, 0.3364650309085846, -0.018718717619776726, -0.11934863030910492, 0.42428618669...	1	Notorious pirate Captain William Kidd started out as a Scotsman who became a leading citizen of New York City and was active in the building of Trinity Church. His pirate career started when he was assigned to rid the seas of pirates. At first, he was a reluctant pirate even though his crew voted him in as captain. After attacking an East India Company ship Captain Kidd suddenly discovered that he was being hunted for this deed. He buried some of his treasure on Gardiners Island, hoping the goods could be used for bargaining. However, when both he and his wife were captured in Boston, Massachusetts Captain Kidd was sent to England for trial. He was sentenced to death by hanging. Unfortunately, the noose used to hang him broke twice but once he was dead on the third hanging attempt his body was doused with tar and hung by chains along the Thames River. It is believed that his treasure is buried somewhere in the Caribbean.	185	ENGLISH	1
Edward I (17 June 1239 – 7 July 1307) Edward the First, also known as Edward Longshanks, was King of England from 1272 to 1307. He was the first son of Henry III. In 1259, the Barons rebelled against the King, due to the perceived abuses of King Henry II. Initially Edward supported the Provisions of Oxford which would give greater rights to the Barons. Along with the Magna Carta, the Provisions of Oxford was considered to be the first written English constitution. The provisions of Oxford forced Henry III to accept a new form of government in which power was placed in the hands of a council of twenty-four members, twelve selected by the crown, twelve by the barons. However, in 1261, Henry III overthrew these provisions and the barons rebelled again. By this time, Edward had reconciled with his father and he helped to defeat the baron rebellion. During the battle of Lewes, Edward was captured by the rebel barons, however, he was able to escape and rejoin the fight. In 1265, Edward was part of the forces that defeated Simon de Montfort at the battle of Evesham; this extinguished the rebellion and cemented the rule of Henry III. After the end of the baron rebellion, Edward went on a crusade to the Holy Land, however, the crusade was relatively insignificant and demoralised he returned home to England. By the time he returned to England in 1274, his father Henry III had died, leaving him to be crowned as King at Westminster. Edward proved an able administrator. He spent his early years as king reforming the law on regulating criminal and property law. He helped strengthen the government and parliament and removed some of the abuses of power and patronage. However, during this period there were frequent rebellions in Wales against English rule. After the second rebellion of 1282-83, Edward took his army to Wales in order to conquer and pacify Wales once and for all. He was successful militarily and built a series of forts and castles to help strengthen the English position in Wales. This action cemented Wales within the British government. Later Edward switched his attention to Scotland. He claimed the right to have ultimate power in Scotland. But, led by William Wallace and Robert Bruce, Edward was never able to wipe out Scottish resistance. The Scottish wars continued after his death. The continual fighting at home and abroad was very expensive leading to a shortage of funds. Edward responded by putting up taxes which proved very unpopular, and Edward had to meet with opposition from those paying taxes. Edward I was a tall imposing man who cemented the unity of Britain. He played an important role in restoring the power and importance of the King. However, he also helped establish Parliament as a permanent institution, this proved important for the future development of the British state. He also made important changes in law and order. Cementing the use of legal statutes to defend property and the law. However, he has been criticised for the expulsion of Jews from England in 1290. Also, even by medieval standards, his treatment of the Welsh and Scottish was brutal. Royalty – Famous Kings and Queens throughout history. Including Henry VIII, Tsar Nicholas II, Queen Victoria and Catherine the Great. Great Briton list – Top 100 famous Britons as voted by a BBC poll. Including Winston Churchill, William Shakespeare, Thomas Cromwell and Queen Elizabeth I.	<urn:uuid:f5384a45-7c71-4dc1-b3c4-b3d2902ee7b4>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.biographyonline.net/royalty/king-edward-i.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251796127.92/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129102701-20200129132701-00288.warc.gz	en	0.983138	710	3.90625	4	[ -0.29295894503593445, 0.0457119420170784, 0.11144891381263733, -0.14544373750686646, -0.2526133060455322, -0.36043572425842285, 0.2342909872531891, -0.42957526445388794, -0.015903495252132416, 0.08459538221359253, -0.06971365958452225, -0.4242866039276123, 0.09204085171222687, -0.122818186...	1	Edward I (17 June 1239 – 7 July 1307) Edward the First, also known as Edward Longshanks, was King of England from 1272 to 1307. He was the first son of Henry III. In 1259, the Barons rebelled against the King, due to the perceived abuses of King Henry II. Initially Edward supported the Provisions of Oxford which would give greater rights to the Barons. Along with the Magna Carta, the Provisions of Oxford was considered to be the first written English constitution. The provisions of Oxford forced Henry III to accept a new form of government in which power was placed in the hands of a council of twenty-four members, twelve selected by the crown, twelve by the barons. However, in 1261, Henry III overthrew these provisions and the barons rebelled again. By this time, Edward had reconciled with his father and he helped to defeat the baron rebellion. During the battle of Lewes, Edward was captured by the rebel barons, however, he was able to escape and rejoin the fight. In 1265, Edward was part of the forces that defeated Simon de Montfort at the battle of Evesham; this extinguished the rebellion and cemented the rule of Henry III. After the end of the baron rebellion, Edward went on a crusade to the Holy Land, however, the crusade was relatively insignificant and demoralised he returned home to England. By the time he returned to England in 1274, his father Henry III had died, leaving him to be crowned as King at Westminster. Edward proved an able administrator. He spent his early years as king reforming the law on regulating criminal and property law. He helped strengthen the government and parliament and removed some of the abuses of power and patronage. However, during this period there were frequent rebellions in Wales against English rule. After the second rebellion of 1282-83, Edward took his army to Wales in order to conquer and pacify Wales once and for all. He was successful militarily and built a series of forts and castles to help strengthen the English position in Wales. This action cemented Wales within the British government. Later Edward switched his attention to Scotland. He claimed the right to have ultimate power in Scotland. But, led by William Wallace and Robert Bruce, Edward was never able to wipe out Scottish resistance. The Scottish wars continued after his death. The continual fighting at home and abroad was very expensive leading to a shortage of funds. Edward responded by putting up taxes which proved very unpopular, and Edward had to meet with opposition from those paying taxes. Edward I was a tall imposing man who cemented the unity of Britain. He played an important role in restoring the power and importance of the King. However, he also helped establish Parliament as a permanent institution, this proved important for the future development of the British state. He also made important changes in law and order. Cementing the use of legal statutes to defend property and the law. However, he has been criticised for the expulsion of Jews from England in 1290. Also, even by medieval standards, his treatment of the Welsh and Scottish was brutal. Royalty – Famous Kings and Queens throughout history. Including Henry VIII, Tsar Nicholas II, Queen Victoria and Catherine the Great. Great Briton list – Top 100 famous Britons as voted by a BBC poll. Including Winston Churchill, William Shakespeare, Thomas Cromwell and Queen Elizabeth I.	740	ENGLISH	1
The winter war was a fight between the Soviet Union and Finland during WW2. It started the 30 of November 1939; only 3 month after WW2 started. It lasted three and a half months and ended 13 March 1940 with the Moscow Peace Treaty. The war started because the Soviets wanted Finnish territory in exchange for land elsewhere. However Finland refused and USSR invaded the country. There were many casualties during the war and at least 80,000 lost on both sides. After the Moscow Peace Treaty was signed, Finland relinquished 11% of its territory. After, Finland was able to retain its Sovereignty and enhanced international reputation. Unfortunately, the bad performance of the Red Army, made Nazi leader Adolf Hitler think attacking them would be successful; also known as Operation Barbarossa. This failed and the USSR ended up joining the Allies in WW2.	<urn:uuid:db57e232-cbb8-4be3-b314-8f4401de380f>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://nope.video.blog/2019/03/16/history-winter-war/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594705.17/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119180644-20200119204644-00161.warc.gz	en	0.984271	168	3.78125	4	[ -0.49146416783332825, 0.05425253510475159, 0.20824000239372253, 0.17972198128700256, -0.16237150132656097, 0.25474733114242554, 0.02998422645032406, 0.36140066385269165, -0.2756792902946472, -0.09331544488668442, 0.1248566061258316, -0.3547230362892151, 0.5331334471702576, 0.73351508378982...	1	The winter war was a fight between the Soviet Union and Finland during WW2. It started the 30 of November 1939; only 3 month after WW2 started. It lasted three and a half months and ended 13 March 1940 with the Moscow Peace Treaty. The war started because the Soviets wanted Finnish territory in exchange for land elsewhere. However Finland refused and USSR invaded the country. There were many casualties during the war and at least 80,000 lost on both sides. After the Moscow Peace Treaty was signed, Finland relinquished 11% of its territory. After, Finland was able to retain its Sovereignty and enhanced international reputation. Unfortunately, the bad performance of the Red Army, made Nazi leader Adolf Hitler think attacking them would be successful; also known as Operation Barbarossa. This failed and the USSR ended up joining the Allies in WW2.	186	ENGLISH	1
On January 9, 1924, Virginia Woolf and her husband buy a house at 52 Tavistock Square, in the Bloomsbury district of London near the British Museum. Woolf had been associated with the district since 1902, when she took a house in the area with her three siblings after their father’s death. She had remained in the neighborhood, becoming a central character of the “Bloomsbury Group,” a set of writers and thinkers including biographer Lytton Strachey and writer E.M. Forster. Woolf, born in 1882, grew up surrounded by intellectuals. The Bloomsbury set embraced progressive intellectual ideas and sexual liberty. Woolf became a regular contributor to the Times Literary Supplement and also took odd jobs to support herself until she inherited a comfortable income from an aunt. Virginia married writer and social reformer Leonard Woolf in 1912. The couple established the Hogarth Press in their dining room several years later. In addition to Virginia Woolf’s later novels, the press also published T.S. Eliot and translations of Chekhov and Dostoevsky. Woolf published her groundbreaking novel Mrs. Dalloway in 1925. Its stream-of-consciousness structure deeply influenced later writers. That same year, she fell in love with poet Vita Sackville-West, who was married to the bisexual diplomat and author Harold Nichols. The affair inspired Woolf’s most whimsical work, Orlando. Woolf wrote several more novels as well as social and literary criticism. However, she suffered from depression and mental illness all her life. In 1941, fearful for her own sanity and afraid of the coming world war, she filled her pockets with rocks and drowned herself.	<urn:uuid:4f92f3c4-1275-4650-a669-f2910ecc6f18>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/virginia-woolf-buys-a-house-in-bloomsbury	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251788528.85/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129041149-20200129071149-00155.warc.gz	en	0.981254	361	3.328125	3	[ 0.3329799771308899, 0.13088427484035492, 0.3476228415966034, -0.17230674624443054, -0.17790816724300385, -0.024136928841471672, -0.2171354740858078, 0.09997031092643738, -0.10303124040365219, 0.14670933783054352, -0.14229147136211395, 0.016624776646494865, 0.30695632100105286, 0.0934376642...	16	On January 9, 1924, Virginia Woolf and her husband buy a house at 52 Tavistock Square, in the Bloomsbury district of London near the British Museum. Woolf had been associated with the district since 1902, when she took a house in the area with her three siblings after their father’s death. She had remained in the neighborhood, becoming a central character of the “Bloomsbury Group,” a set of writers and thinkers including biographer Lytton Strachey and writer E.M. Forster. Woolf, born in 1882, grew up surrounded by intellectuals. The Bloomsbury set embraced progressive intellectual ideas and sexual liberty. Woolf became a regular contributor to the Times Literary Supplement and also took odd jobs to support herself until she inherited a comfortable income from an aunt. Virginia married writer and social reformer Leonard Woolf in 1912. The couple established the Hogarth Press in their dining room several years later. In addition to Virginia Woolf’s later novels, the press also published T.S. Eliot and translations of Chekhov and Dostoevsky. Woolf published her groundbreaking novel Mrs. Dalloway in 1925. Its stream-of-consciousness structure deeply influenced later writers. That same year, she fell in love with poet Vita Sackville-West, who was married to the bisexual diplomat and author Harold Nichols. The affair inspired Woolf’s most whimsical work, Orlando. Woolf wrote several more novels as well as social and literary criticism. However, she suffered from depression and mental illness all her life. In 1941, fearful for her own sanity and afraid of the coming world war, she filled her pockets with rocks and drowned herself.	370	ENGLISH	1
King Philip’s War was a disturbing war fought in America in 1675, almost certainly as a result of the early contact between the English Colonists and the Native Americans. The Natives were, and had always been fighting for their freedom and land, as well as their culture unharmed. Though the Natives had their own religious beliefs, the Colonists felt that they were the greater man, and that God would play a part by remaining on their side. The Natives did not trust the English with their multiple cheated promises and such, and it was only expected that the Natives would not believe in the English. There is no one established reason for this war, like many wars, but it is only probable that it be a result of the many differences between the Native way of life, and the English way. The Wampanoag Indians were a tribe that settled in the area of current day Rhode Island and Massachusetts. It is estimated that the number of tribe members was somewhere over ten thousand before the English arrived and brought along sickness and disease that the Natives were not accustomed to. By around 1675 it is imagined that the Wampanoag population plummeted to around only one thousand members. At first, the Wampanoag were accepting of the English because there appeared to be no immediate threat of endangerment of the Natives. The Natives actually became appreciative and dependent on the English in a sense, because they had been introduced to the various types of food, clothing, and most importantly, weapons. Massasoit, the Chief of the Wampanoag Indians at the time, signed a treaty of peace with the English that promised not to give up their land to anybody without the knowledge and consent of the Plymouth government first. It wasn’t until 1630 when the situation reversed with the increasing amount of settlers moving to The Massachusetts Bay Colony known as “The Great Migration”, that the Natives became angered. The new settlers, the Puritans, were in desperate need of land and would do anything to get it. They wiped the Pequoit Indians out in the Pequoit War of 1637, and other than those who chose to convert to the Puritan religion and way of life, the Pequoit had vanished. Many of the Indian tribes were in trouble with the threat of loss of land, as well as loss of lives. It was time to strike back and defend what was theirs. After Massasoit had passed on, Alexander would be the next Satchem (Chief) of the Wampanoag tribe. Alexander was Metacomet’s brother, as was Massasoit his father. Alexander died shortly after his reign from what is believed to have been an ill fever of some type. At this time, Metacomet, King Philip, would become the Grand Sachem of the Wampanoags. Philip was the predecessor of Tecumseh and was an excellent leader of the tribe. He knew that the English would try and rid them of their land and expand more until they wiped out his tribe totally. King Philip would need to get other tribes to understand what the English were doing, and to...	<urn:uuid:ff4f4ffe-35d0-4ac6-8278-8afc614d2921>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://brightkite.com/essay-on/king-philip	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783000.84/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128184745-20200128214745-00203.warc.gz	en	0.990408	648	4.28125	4	[ -0.17747282981872559, 0.529758870601654, 0.3929043412208557, -0.1757068634033203, -0.3420630693435669, -0.30059540271759033, 0.26753509044647217, 0.07551705092191696, -0.24957969784736633, 0.30482375621795654, 0.23991720378398895, -0.30294692516326904, -0.10291676223278046, 0.3489754199981...	1	King Philip’s War was a disturbing war fought in America in 1675, almost certainly as a result of the early contact between the English Colonists and the Native Americans. The Natives were, and had always been fighting for their freedom and land, as well as their culture unharmed. Though the Natives had their own religious beliefs, the Colonists felt that they were the greater man, and that God would play a part by remaining on their side. The Natives did not trust the English with their multiple cheated promises and such, and it was only expected that the Natives would not believe in the English. There is no one established reason for this war, like many wars, but it is only probable that it be a result of the many differences between the Native way of life, and the English way. The Wampanoag Indians were a tribe that settled in the area of current day Rhode Island and Massachusetts. It is estimated that the number of tribe members was somewhere over ten thousand before the English arrived and brought along sickness and disease that the Natives were not accustomed to. By around 1675 it is imagined that the Wampanoag population plummeted to around only one thousand members. At first, the Wampanoag were accepting of the English because there appeared to be no immediate threat of endangerment of the Natives. The Natives actually became appreciative and dependent on the English in a sense, because they had been introduced to the various types of food, clothing, and most importantly, weapons. Massasoit, the Chief of the Wampanoag Indians at the time, signed a treaty of peace with the English that promised not to give up their land to anybody without the knowledge and consent of the Plymouth government first. It wasn’t until 1630 when the situation reversed with the increasing amount of settlers moving to The Massachusetts Bay Colony known as “The Great Migration”, that the Natives became angered. The new settlers, the Puritans, were in desperate need of land and would do anything to get it. They wiped the Pequoit Indians out in the Pequoit War of 1637, and other than those who chose to convert to the Puritan religion and way of life, the Pequoit had vanished. Many of the Indian tribes were in trouble with the threat of loss of land, as well as loss of lives. It was time to strike back and defend what was theirs. After Massasoit had passed on, Alexander would be the next Satchem (Chief) of the Wampanoag tribe. Alexander was Metacomet’s brother, as was Massasoit his father. Alexander died shortly after his reign from what is believed to have been an ill fever of some type. At this time, Metacomet, King Philip, would become the Grand Sachem of the Wampanoags. Philip was the predecessor of Tecumseh and was an excellent leader of the tribe. He knew that the English would try and rid them of their land and expand more until they wiped out his tribe totally. King Philip would need to get other tribes to understand what the English were doing, and to...	657	ENGLISH	1
By Adam Ali Among the most dreadful and powerful images of violence from the Middle Ages are that of the scaffold, the dungeon, and of course the hooded executioner who meted out dreadful punishments upon outlaws, rebels, defeated enemies, heretics, and others who were unfortunate enough to end up in their hands. In the case of Egypt and Syria during the 13th-16th centuries, often referred to as the Mamluk era, the sources abound with graphic accounts of corporal punishment for a variety of crimes such as regicide, murder, rebellion, treason, and theft. As in Europe and elsewhere during the Middle Ages, these executions were turned into mass public spectacles that were witnessed by large crowds and involved the humiliation, torture, and finally the death of the condemned. However, on some occasions mercy was shown to the condemned. There were a variety of reasons for staying an execution including: intercession on behalf of the condemned, bribery, and physical beauty. The mamluks had come to power by overthrowing the previous regimes in Egypt and Syria, and their sultans had to defend their rule from rebels and potential usurpers. Power struggles were very common during the first fifty years of Mamluk rule (1250-1300) – ten out of thirteen sultans were deposed. Among those deposed seven rulers were violently murdered. New sultans, upon their accession, often attempted to purge their predecessors’ mamluks and their officers and to replace them with their own followers. These purges varied in severity. A sultan may demote his predecessor’s followers and confiscate their property and wealth, or imprison them, or exile them, or carry out wholesale massacres. Such violence was not only present in the palace and among the elites, but it also permeated all levels of society. The rank and file mamluk soldiers often mutinied and rioted when they did not get paid on time. It was the populace of Cairo that often bore the brunt of these mamluks’ wrath and depredations. There were also frequent factional conflicts that result in violent street battles in the major urban centers of the sultanate such as Alexandria, Aleppo, Damascus, and especially Cairo. During these fights large groups of mamluks often battled against one another in the city streets and squares and were often joined by gangs of thugs and criminals who took advantage of the chaos to loot, pillage, and commit other crimes. The sultans and the ruling elite had to enforce their rule by punishing those who transgressed their authority, committed crimes, or rebelled. These punishments were carried out in public for all to witness. The sources describe the various forms of punishment that were carried out in these spectacles, sometimes in graphic detail. For example, sultan al-Ashraf Khalil’s (r.1290-1293) assassins were quickly defeated by a loyalist faction that supported his young brother. When Baydara, the sultan’s vicegerent and the ringleader of the conspiracy, was captured he was disemboweled by al-Ashraf’s mamluks. They then took turns cutting the flesh from his body and consuming it due to their anger over their master’s death. Seven of the other emirs involved in the regicide had their hands cut off and strung around their necks. They were then crucified and paraded around Cairo on the backs of camels. In another example, Sultan Barquq (r. 1382-1389 and 1390-1399) uncovered two plots against him. In the first one in 1383 the caliph al-Mutawakkil and the emirs Quruṭ b. ‘Umar al-Turkmani and Ibrahim b. al-Amir Quṭlu al-‘Ala’i plotted to kill the sultan and to replace him with the caliph (by this point in history the caliphs were fulfilled a symbolic role and were the sultans’ puppets in Cairo). Their plan was to ambush the sultan, using Quruṭ’s private army of 800 Turkmen and Kurdish warriors, when he descended to the hippodrome to play polo. Barquq got wind of the plot and foiled it. The caliph barely escaped with his life and was imprisoned in the citadel. Quruṭ and Ibrahim were crucified and the former was then cut in half. The second plot Barquq uncovered in 1386 involved a group of Royal Mamluks under the leadership of the ḥajib (grand chamberlain), emir Timurbugha, who planned to assassinate him. The plotters were arrested and beaten with whips after which Timurbugha and ten of his co-conspirators were crucified and then cut in half. One can also add the threat of Arab tribal revolts against the Mamluk regime, which increased in frequency and intensity. The authorities responded tot these Bedouin uprisings with ever increasing harshness and cruelty. Captive rebels were impaled on stakes, flayed alive, roasted alive, and buried alive. Suffice to say, the Mamluk state was a violent place and its rulers responded by harsh punishments. Save yourself with bribes or friends Despite the extreme violence of these public spectacles, as they are described in the sources, there were instances when the condemned were shown mercy. Clemency was shown to some of the powerful individuals whose support the sultan could not afford to lose. Some of the condemned were able to avoid a gruesome death by paying the sultan and his emirs large sums of money. Lastly, mercy was sometimes granted when large numbers of people begged the ruler on behalf of the condemned. For instance, the Bedouins suffered severe retributions for rebelling, as mentioned above. However, it depended on which group of Arab tribes were involved in the uprising. The most draconian punishments were meted out to the Arab tribes of Upper Egypt. On the other hand, the Arabs of Syria and their chieftains were often treated with leniency. For example, Isa b. Muhanna, the amir al-‘arab (paramount chief of the Arab tribes of Syria), threatened to defect to the Mongols in 1271 when he had been deprived of some of his lands. Sultan Baybars I (r. 1260-1277) went to Syria and met with the rebellious chieftain and placated him. This same chieftain rebelled against sultan Qalawun (r. 1279-1290) in 1280 and threatened to join the Mongol army that was invading Syria that year. This sultan was once again able to appease his rebellious vassal and pardoned him. The reason that the chief of the Arabs of Syria was treated so leniently was due to his wealth, power, and his large following. He was also the first line of defense against the Mongols in Iraq and Iran on the eastern frontier along the Euphrates River and his defection would have caused the Mamluks a great deal of trouble in their struggle with the Ilkhanate. In another example in 1309 Salar, the sultan’s viceroy, was able to purchase his life and freedom by presenting horses, slaves, and money to his sovereign, who had been displeased with his powerful viceroy’s ambitions. In 1311 another two emirs were arrested and they also only escaped with their lives after paying a large sum of money. Appealing a death sentence to the ruler was another means through which the condemned could escape his/her fate. Upon his accession to the throne in 1290, al-Ashraf Khalil had a number of powerful emirs and potential rivals strangled in his presence in order to secure his position. The sultan’s retainers and emirs begged him to spare the life of Lajin, who had been the powerful viceroy of Damascus. The sultan showed this emir mercy. Ironically, Lajin was among al-Ashraf’s murderers and eventually ruled Egypt and Syria as the sultan for two years (1297-1299). In another instance, al-Nasir Muḥammad (r. 1293-1294, 1299-1309, and 1310-1341) sentenced a group of his predecessor’s mamluks to be crucified beneath the walls of the Cairo Citadel for plotting to overthrow him. On the appointed date they were led out in chains to their execution. The mamluks’ wives and children attended the event wailing and begging the sultan for mercy. The plight of the women and the children touched the sultan and he stopped the executions and pardoned the mamluks. Perhaps the most interesting examples of clemency shown to condemned traitors, rebels, and criminals are the instances where the sources mention that they were granted mercy due to their beauty, youth, and attractiveness. Shah Suwar was a vassal of the Mamluk sultanate. He was the prince of the Turkmen Dhu al-Qadrid dynasty that ruled southeastern Anatolia. He rebelled against his overlords in 1465 and was able to defeat two punitive expeditions sent against him, despite the inferiority of his forces before he was finally defeated in 1471. After being on the run for two years Shah Suwar, his brothers, and the emirs still loyal to him were captured in 1473 and dragged back to Cairo in chains. Shah Suwar was presented before sultan Qaitbay (r. 1468-1496) who rebuked him for his rebellion and the bloodshed and destruction it had caused. A procession was then formed to take the condemned rebels to Bab Zuwayla (one of medieval Cairo’s major gates facing south), where a grizzly death awaited them. They were suspended on hooks and chains and remained in this state until they died. The other rebel prisoners were taken to Birkat al-Kilab (the Lake of Dogs) and were all cut in half. While Shah Suwar and his brothers were being executed in Cairo, the crowd that had gathered to watch the spectacle took pity on the youngest brother, Salman, on account of his youth and handsome features. They pleaded with Yashbak, the dawadar (the bearer of the royal inkwell and the officer who had been charged with putting down the revolt), who also took pity on the young man and commuted his sentence to imprisonment. The story of Ghaziya the Strangler The next example is even more striking for two reasons: it involves a commoner and a woman. These are significant points because the chronicles of this era focus primarily on the events surrounding the rulers and the elite. However, in the case of the story below, the narrative in two of the chronicles suddenly stops and addresses the crimes committed by this commoner and her compatriots, the group’s punishment, and her salvation. In fact, the account in both chronicles reads like a crime story, not too different from some of the crime shows on TV. Both al-Maqrizi and Ibn al-Dawadari mention in their chronicles that a large number of people disappeared in Cairo during 1263. They state that these disappearances were linked to a woman called Ghaziya who, according to these reports, was a very beautiful young woman. She prowled the marketplaces of Cairo accompanied by an older woman. Her beauty and charm frequently attracted men’s attention and those who wished to pursue her for a romantic or sexual encounter were told by the older woman that Ghaziya only met her love interests at her home. When the unfortunate suiters arrived at her house they were set upon and killed by two or more men who attacked them as they entered. The group then robbed and stripped their victim and disposed of the body by burning it in a kiln owned by one of their associates. The group moved locations frequently to avoid suspicion, detection, and getting caught. One day the older woman approached one of Cairo’s famous coiffeuses and tailors and told her that a young woman from her family was getting married and that they intended to hire her to tailor her dress and to prepare her for the wedding. The old woman told her to bring her best material and cosmetics to Ghaziya’s home. The coiffeuse went to the house accompanied by her servant but dismissed the servant upon her arrival. Like the other victims, the coiffeuse was murdered and robbed. When her mistress did not return her servant reported it to the wali (a position similar to that of prefect or sheriff or chief of police) of Cairo. The wali and his men raided the home and arrested the two women who confessed to their crimes under duress. Their male accomplices were also arrested and several bodies were found in a mass grave beneath their home. The two women and their male accomplices were all sentenced to be crucified. After the sentence was carried out a large number of emirs, who were in attendance, took pity on Ghaziya on account of her beauty and fair looks and petitioned the sultan to have her taken down. The sultan consented and she was spared from the long and painful death her partners suffered. The theme of mercy and clemency being shown to those who were beautiful, wealthy, or powerful is not uncommon and not exclusive to the Mamluk period. During the struggle between Salah al-Din (Saladin) and Richard I during the Third Crusade, 3,000 Muslim prisoners from Acre were massacred by the crusaders in plain sight of the Muslim army. In response, Salah al-Din put a large number of Frankish soldiers and knights who had been captured to death. In his biography of Salah al-Din, Ibn Shaddad, writes about a Christian knight who had been taken prisoner. After questioning him, the sultan ordered his execution, however he was spared because “our admiration and his fair appearance interceded for him. Indeed I have never seen such a perfect frame with such elegance of body and refinement of manners the sultan ordered him be left for now and his case deferred.” Some questions arise when reading the accounts from these medieval sources. How accurate or exaggerated are they? It can be argued that these chronicles present both truth and exaggerations. Carl Petry states this most aptly in his introduction to The Criminal Underworld in a Medieval Islamic Society: Those who compiled these works seem to have made no attempt to gloss over unsettling criminal acts…From a superficial perspective, chronicle authors sought to “spice up” their logs with graphic descriptions of the deviant, discomfiting, or shocking in daily life. They perceived no need to hide its sordid side from their readers. The mamluks were a foreign elite in Egypt and Syria. Hailing primarily form Inner Eurasia and the Caucasus region, they entered Egypt and Syria as slaves and rose to become its rulers. However, many of the chroniclers, who formed the scholarly and religious class, were critical of their rule. These chroniclers accepted the hierarchy of their societies with these elite slaves occupying the top position; however they did not censor themselves when it came to being critical of them. These chroniclers included judges, scholars, bureaucrats, and even the sons of mamluks, who were members of the military class. As foreigners who were considered usurpers, looked upon with contempt, and feared by the freeborn elites and the scholarly and religious classes (many of whom write about the mamluks and their behavior in a disapproving tone), the mamluks had to use their strengths to maintain their rule. These strengths included patronizing the scholarly and religious class to legitimize their rule. But more importantly, they utilized brute force and violence, including the violent spectacles mentioned above, to enforce their monopoly on the use of violence (as is the case with most ruling bodies and governments) to bring their subjects in line and to ensure their continued rule. The mamluks’ utilization of force should come as no surprise since they formed a socio-military elite and the sultans were able to enforce their will through violently punishing transgressors through the centralized coercive power at their disposal. Does it still happen? Recent studies have shown that those people deemed “physically attractive” have advantages over others in our societies today. The studies show that “good-looking” people tend to have better chances of getting hired, frequently get paid higher salaries, often have an advantage in politics, are more likely to be trusted, receive better treatment in their societies generally, and they often get away with more lenient penalties for committing crimes and transgressions. Case in point, a study entitled “When Emotionality Trumps Reason” carried out in Cornell University “has found that unattractive defendants tend to get hit with longer, harsher sentences — on average 22 months longer in prison.” A modern day example of good looks serving those who had fallen afoul of the law include Jeremy Meeks who not only got famous for his mugshot after his crimes, but also landed a modelling career after he had served his sentence. His “sexy mugshot” garnered him hundreds of thousands of followers on social media and his mother’s crowdfunding page “Free Jeremy Meeks” raised thousands of dollars from fans infatuated with him. Additionally, in a Psychology Today article, researcher Sandie Taylor, Ph.D., has explained. “People who are physically attractive are assumed to be clever, successful and have more friends, it is tragic in a way.” “Taylor has cited Ted Bundy, the notorious serial killer who murdered more than 30 young women, as an example of a criminal who used his good looks to lure his victims—and, at least to a point, charm jurors. “[I]f that forensic evidence hadn’t been there, he might well have got off, because he was quite charming and knew how to work people,” she has said.” The historical accounts mentioned above, from an era seemingly very foreign to our 21st century societies, in which mercy and clemency are shown to people humanize the historical characters in these accounts and show that they could be moved by the prospect of economic gain, or valued the alliance of a powerful individual (or potentially losing his support and that of his followers), or were so moved by the physical beauty of the condemned that they spared them from horrible deaths. These stories demonstrate that these people were human beings who were in some ways not too different from people in the 21st century. Adam Ali is a lecturer at the University of Toronto. Click here to read more from Adam. Ali, Adam. “Mighty to the End: Utilizing Military Models to Study the Structure, Composition, and Effectiveness of the Mamlūk Army” PhD Diss. University of Toronto, 2017. Elbendary, Amina. Crowds and Sultans: Urban Protest in Late Medieval Egypt and Syria. Cairo: The American University of Cairo Press, 2015. Har-El, Shai. Struggle for Domination in the Middle East: the Ottoman-Mamluk War, 1485-91. Leiden: Brill, 1995. Hiyari, M. A. “The Origins and Development of the Amīrate of the Arabs during the Seventh/Thirteenth and Eighth/Fourteenth Centuries.” BSOAS 38, (1975): 509-524. Ibn Shaddād, Bahāʼ al-Dīn. The Rare and Excellent History of Saladin, or, al-Nawādir al-Ṣultāniyya wa al-Mahāsin al-Yūsufiyya. Translated by D. S. Richards. Aldershot, England: Ashgate, 2001. Irwin, Robert. The Middle East in the Middle Ages: The Early Mamluk Sultanate, 1250-1382. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1986. Levanoni, Amalia. “Mamluks’ Ascent to Power in Egypt.” Studia Islamica 72 (1990): 121-144. Northrup, Lind. From Slave to Sultan: The Career of al-Manṣūr Qalāwūn and the Consolidation of Mamlūk Rule in Egypt and Syria (678-689 AH/1279-1290 AD). Stuttgart: F. Steiner, 1998. Petry, Carl F. Twilight of Majesty: The Reigns of the Mamlūk Sultans al-Ashraf Qāytbāy and Qānṣūh al-Ghawrī in Egypt. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1993. Petry, Carl. The Criminal Underworld in a Medieval Islamic Society: Narratives from Cairo and Damascus under the Mamluks. Chicago: Middle East Documentation Center, 2012. Pipes, Daniel. Slave Soldiers and Islam: The Genesis of a Military System. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1981. Top Image: KBR Ms. 11201-02 fol. 01v	<urn:uuid:3272fd7e-9da4-46c2-bc7a-025b81c61198>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.medievalists.net/2019/12/saved-execution-middle-ages/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251694908.82/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127051112-20200127081112-00442.warc.gz	en	0.982248	4,466	3.703125	4	[ -0.2728670835494995, 0.5134456157684326, 0.2323566973209381, -0.026519885286688805, -0.09111544489860535, -0.17472445964813232, 0.1052149087190628, -0.04018355906009674, 0.1752636581659317, -0.09717296063899994, 0.22695913910865784, -0.15087656676769257, -0.06048620492219925, -0.0850645303...	8	By Adam Ali Among the most dreadful and powerful images of violence from the Middle Ages are that of the scaffold, the dungeon, and of course the hooded executioner who meted out dreadful punishments upon outlaws, rebels, defeated enemies, heretics, and others who were unfortunate enough to end up in their hands. In the case of Egypt and Syria during the 13th-16th centuries, often referred to as the Mamluk era, the sources abound with graphic accounts of corporal punishment for a variety of crimes such as regicide, murder, rebellion, treason, and theft. As in Europe and elsewhere during the Middle Ages, these executions were turned into mass public spectacles that were witnessed by large crowds and involved the humiliation, torture, and finally the death of the condemned. However, on some occasions mercy was shown to the condemned. There were a variety of reasons for staying an execution including: intercession on behalf of the condemned, bribery, and physical beauty. The mamluks had come to power by overthrowing the previous regimes in Egypt and Syria, and their sultans had to defend their rule from rebels and potential usurpers. Power struggles were very common during the first fifty years of Mamluk rule (1250-1300) – ten out of thirteen sultans were deposed. Among those deposed seven rulers were violently murdered. New sultans, upon their accession, often attempted to purge their predecessors’ mamluks and their officers and to replace them with their own followers. These purges varied in severity. A sultan may demote his predecessor’s followers and confiscate their property and wealth, or imprison them, or exile them, or carry out wholesale massacres. Such violence was not only present in the palace and among the elites, but it also permeated all levels of society. The rank and file mamluk soldiers often mutinied and rioted when they did not get paid on time. It was the populace of Cairo that often bore the brunt of these mamluks’ wrath and depredations. There were also frequent factional conflicts that result in violent street battles in the major urban centers of the sultanate such as Alexandria, Aleppo, Damascus, and especially Cairo. During these fights large groups of mamluks often battled against one another in the city streets and squares and were often joined by gangs of thugs and criminals who took advantage of the chaos to loot, pillage, and commit other crimes. The sultans and the ruling elite had to enforce their rule by punishing those who transgressed their authority, committed crimes, or rebelled. These punishments were carried out in public for all to witness. The sources describe the various forms of punishment that were carried out in these spectacles, sometimes in graphic detail. For example, sultan al-Ashraf Khalil’s (r.1290-1293) assassins were quickly defeated by a loyalist faction that supported his young brother. When Baydara, the sultan’s vicegerent and the ringleader of the conspiracy, was captured he was disemboweled by al-Ashraf’s mamluks. They then took turns cutting the flesh from his body and consuming it due to their anger over their master’s death. Seven of the other emirs involved in the regicide had their hands cut off and strung around their necks. They were then crucified and paraded around Cairo on the backs of camels. In another example, Sultan Barquq (r. 1382-1389 and 1390-1399) uncovered two plots against him. In the first one in 1383 the caliph al-Mutawakkil and the emirs Quruṭ b. ‘Umar al-Turkmani and Ibrahim b. al-Amir Quṭlu al-‘Ala’i plotted to kill the sultan and to replace him with the caliph (by this point in history the caliphs were fulfilled a symbolic role and were the sultans’ puppets in Cairo). Their plan was to ambush the sultan, using Quruṭ’s private army of 800 Turkmen and Kurdish warriors, when he descended to the hippodrome to play polo. Barquq got wind of the plot and foiled it. The caliph barely escaped with his life and was imprisoned in the citadel. Quruṭ and Ibrahim were crucified and the former was then cut in half. The second plot Barquq uncovered in 1386 involved a group of Royal Mamluks under the leadership of the ḥajib (grand chamberlain), emir Timurbugha, who planned to assassinate him. The plotters were arrested and beaten with whips after which Timurbugha and ten of his co-conspirators were crucified and then cut in half. One can also add the threat of Arab tribal revolts against the Mamluk regime, which increased in frequency and intensity. The authorities responded tot these Bedouin uprisings with ever increasing harshness and cruelty. Captive rebels were impaled on stakes, flayed alive, roasted alive, and buried alive. Suffice to say, the Mamluk state was a violent place and its rulers responded by harsh punishments. Save yourself with bribes or friends Despite the extreme violence of these public spectacles, as they are described in the sources, there were instances when the condemned were shown mercy. Clemency was shown to some of the powerful individuals whose support the sultan could not afford to lose. Some of the condemned were able to avoid a gruesome death by paying the sultan and his emirs large sums of money. Lastly, mercy was sometimes granted when large numbers of people begged the ruler on behalf of the condemned. For instance, the Bedouins suffered severe retributions for rebelling, as mentioned above. However, it depended on which group of Arab tribes were involved in the uprising. The most draconian punishments were meted out to the Arab tribes of Upper Egypt. On the other hand, the Arabs of Syria and their chieftains were often treated with leniency. For example, Isa b. Muhanna, the amir al-‘arab (paramount chief of the Arab tribes of Syria), threatened to defect to the Mongols in 1271 when he had been deprived of some of his lands. Sultan Baybars I (r. 1260-1277) went to Syria and met with the rebellious chieftain and placated him. This same chieftain rebelled against sultan Qalawun (r. 1279-1290) in 1280 and threatened to join the Mongol army that was invading Syria that year. This sultan was once again able to appease his rebellious vassal and pardoned him. The reason that the chief of the Arabs of Syria was treated so leniently was due to his wealth, power, and his large following. He was also the first line of defense against the Mongols in Iraq and Iran on the eastern frontier along the Euphrates River and his defection would have caused the Mamluks a great deal of trouble in their struggle with the Ilkhanate. In another example in 1309 Salar, the sultan’s viceroy, was able to purchase his life and freedom by presenting horses, slaves, and money to his sovereign, who had been displeased with his powerful viceroy’s ambitions. In 1311 another two emirs were arrested and they also only escaped with their lives after paying a large sum of money. Appealing a death sentence to the ruler was another means through which the condemned could escape his/her fate. Upon his accession to the throne in 1290, al-Ashraf Khalil had a number of powerful emirs and potential rivals strangled in his presence in order to secure his position. The sultan’s retainers and emirs begged him to spare the life of Lajin, who had been the powerful viceroy of Damascus. The sultan showed this emir mercy. Ironically, Lajin was among al-Ashraf’s murderers and eventually ruled Egypt and Syria as the sultan for two years (1297-1299). In another instance, al-Nasir Muḥammad (r. 1293-1294, 1299-1309, and 1310-1341) sentenced a group of his predecessor’s mamluks to be crucified beneath the walls of the Cairo Citadel for plotting to overthrow him. On the appointed date they were led out in chains to their execution. The mamluks’ wives and children attended the event wailing and begging the sultan for mercy. The plight of the women and the children touched the sultan and he stopped the executions and pardoned the mamluks. Perhaps the most interesting examples of clemency shown to condemned traitors, rebels, and criminals are the instances where the sources mention that they were granted mercy due to their beauty, youth, and attractiveness. Shah Suwar was a vassal of the Mamluk sultanate. He was the prince of the Turkmen Dhu al-Qadrid dynasty that ruled southeastern Anatolia. He rebelled against his overlords in 1465 and was able to defeat two punitive expeditions sent against him, despite the inferiority of his forces before he was finally defeated in 1471. After being on the run for two years Shah Suwar, his brothers, and the emirs still loyal to him were captured in 1473 and dragged back to Cairo in chains. Shah Suwar was presented before sultan Qaitbay (r. 1468-1496) who rebuked him for his rebellion and the bloodshed and destruction it had caused. A procession was then formed to take the condemned rebels to Bab Zuwayla (one of medieval Cairo’s major gates facing south), where a grizzly death awaited them. They were suspended on hooks and chains and remained in this state until they died. The other rebel prisoners were taken to Birkat al-Kilab (the Lake of Dogs) and were all cut in half. While Shah Suwar and his brothers were being executed in Cairo, the crowd that had gathered to watch the spectacle took pity on the youngest brother, Salman, on account of his youth and handsome features. They pleaded with Yashbak, the dawadar (the bearer of the royal inkwell and the officer who had been charged with putting down the revolt), who also took pity on the young man and commuted his sentence to imprisonment. The story of Ghaziya the Strangler The next example is even more striking for two reasons: it involves a commoner and a woman. These are significant points because the chronicles of this era focus primarily on the events surrounding the rulers and the elite. However, in the case of the story below, the narrative in two of the chronicles suddenly stops and addresses the crimes committed by this commoner and her compatriots, the group’s punishment, and her salvation. In fact, the account in both chronicles reads like a crime story, not too different from some of the crime shows on TV. Both al-Maqrizi and Ibn al-Dawadari mention in their chronicles that a large number of people disappeared in Cairo during 1263. They state that these disappearances were linked to a woman called Ghaziya who, according to these reports, was a very beautiful young woman. She prowled the marketplaces of Cairo accompanied by an older woman. Her beauty and charm frequently attracted men’s attention and those who wished to pursue her for a romantic or sexual encounter were told by the older woman that Ghaziya only met her love interests at her home. When the unfortunate suiters arrived at her house they were set upon and killed by two or more men who attacked them as they entered. The group then robbed and stripped their victim and disposed of the body by burning it in a kiln owned by one of their associates. The group moved locations frequently to avoid suspicion, detection, and getting caught. One day the older woman approached one of Cairo’s famous coiffeuses and tailors and told her that a young woman from her family was getting married and that they intended to hire her to tailor her dress and to prepare her for the wedding. The old woman told her to bring her best material and cosmetics to Ghaziya’s home. The coiffeuse went to the house accompanied by her servant but dismissed the servant upon her arrival. Like the other victims, the coiffeuse was murdered and robbed. When her mistress did not return her servant reported it to the wali (a position similar to that of prefect or sheriff or chief of police) of Cairo. The wali and his men raided the home and arrested the two women who confessed to their crimes under duress. Their male accomplices were also arrested and several bodies were found in a mass grave beneath their home. The two women and their male accomplices were all sentenced to be crucified. After the sentence was carried out a large number of emirs, who were in attendance, took pity on Ghaziya on account of her beauty and fair looks and petitioned the sultan to have her taken down. The sultan consented and she was spared from the long and painful death her partners suffered. The theme of mercy and clemency being shown to those who were beautiful, wealthy, or powerful is not uncommon and not exclusive to the Mamluk period. During the struggle between Salah al-Din (Saladin) and Richard I during the Third Crusade, 3,000 Muslim prisoners from Acre were massacred by the crusaders in plain sight of the Muslim army. In response, Salah al-Din put a large number of Frankish soldiers and knights who had been captured to death. In his biography of Salah al-Din, Ibn Shaddad, writes about a Christian knight who had been taken prisoner. After questioning him, the sultan ordered his execution, however he was spared because “our admiration and his fair appearance interceded for him. Indeed I have never seen such a perfect frame with such elegance of body and refinement of manners the sultan ordered him be left for now and his case deferred.” Some questions arise when reading the accounts from these medieval sources. How accurate or exaggerated are they? It can be argued that these chronicles present both truth and exaggerations. Carl Petry states this most aptly in his introduction to The Criminal Underworld in a Medieval Islamic Society: Those who compiled these works seem to have made no attempt to gloss over unsettling criminal acts…From a superficial perspective, chronicle authors sought to “spice up” their logs with graphic descriptions of the deviant, discomfiting, or shocking in daily life. They perceived no need to hide its sordid side from their readers. The mamluks were a foreign elite in Egypt and Syria. Hailing primarily form Inner Eurasia and the Caucasus region, they entered Egypt and Syria as slaves and rose to become its rulers. However, many of the chroniclers, who formed the scholarly and religious class, were critical of their rule. These chroniclers accepted the hierarchy of their societies with these elite slaves occupying the top position; however they did not censor themselves when it came to being critical of them. These chroniclers included judges, scholars, bureaucrats, and even the sons of mamluks, who were members of the military class. As foreigners who were considered usurpers, looked upon with contempt, and feared by the freeborn elites and the scholarly and religious classes (many of whom write about the mamluks and their behavior in a disapproving tone), the mamluks had to use their strengths to maintain their rule. These strengths included patronizing the scholarly and religious class to legitimize their rule. But more importantly, they utilized brute force and violence, including the violent spectacles mentioned above, to enforce their monopoly on the use of violence (as is the case with most ruling bodies and governments) to bring their subjects in line and to ensure their continued rule. The mamluks’ utilization of force should come as no surprise since they formed a socio-military elite and the sultans were able to enforce their will through violently punishing transgressors through the centralized coercive power at their disposal. Does it still happen? Recent studies have shown that those people deemed “physically attractive” have advantages over others in our societies today. The studies show that “good-looking” people tend to have better chances of getting hired, frequently get paid higher salaries, often have an advantage in politics, are more likely to be trusted, receive better treatment in their societies generally, and they often get away with more lenient penalties for committing crimes and transgressions. Case in point, a study entitled “When Emotionality Trumps Reason” carried out in Cornell University “has found that unattractive defendants tend to get hit with longer, harsher sentences — on average 22 months longer in prison.” A modern day example of good looks serving those who had fallen afoul of the law include Jeremy Meeks who not only got famous for his mugshot after his crimes, but also landed a modelling career after he had served his sentence. His “sexy mugshot” garnered him hundreds of thousands of followers on social media and his mother’s crowdfunding page “Free Jeremy Meeks” raised thousands of dollars from fans infatuated with him. Additionally, in a Psychology Today article, researcher Sandie Taylor, Ph.D., has explained. “People who are physically attractive are assumed to be clever, successful and have more friends, it is tragic in a way.” “Taylor has cited Ted Bundy, the notorious serial killer who murdered more than 30 young women, as an example of a criminal who used his good looks to lure his victims—and, at least to a point, charm jurors. “[I]f that forensic evidence hadn’t been there, he might well have got off, because he was quite charming and knew how to work people,” she has said.” The historical accounts mentioned above, from an era seemingly very foreign to our 21st century societies, in which mercy and clemency are shown to people humanize the historical characters in these accounts and show that they could be moved by the prospect of economic gain, or valued the alliance of a powerful individual (or potentially losing his support and that of his followers), or were so moved by the physical beauty of the condemned that they spared them from horrible deaths. These stories demonstrate that these people were human beings who were in some ways not too different from people in the 21st century. Adam Ali is a lecturer at the University of Toronto. Click here to read more from Adam. Ali, Adam. “Mighty to the End: Utilizing Military Models to Study the Structure, Composition, and Effectiveness of the Mamlūk Army” PhD Diss. University of Toronto, 2017. Elbendary, Amina. Crowds and Sultans: Urban Protest in Late Medieval Egypt and Syria. Cairo: The American University of Cairo Press, 2015. Har-El, Shai. Struggle for Domination in the Middle East: the Ottoman-Mamluk War, 1485-91. Leiden: Brill, 1995. Hiyari, M. A. “The Origins and Development of the Amīrate of the Arabs during the Seventh/Thirteenth and Eighth/Fourteenth Centuries.” BSOAS 38, (1975): 509-524. Ibn Shaddād, Bahāʼ al-Dīn. The Rare and Excellent History of Saladin, or, al-Nawādir al-Ṣultāniyya wa al-Mahāsin al-Yūsufiyya. Translated by D. S. Richards. Aldershot, England: Ashgate, 2001. Irwin, Robert. The Middle East in the Middle Ages: The Early Mamluk Sultanate, 1250-1382. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1986. Levanoni, Amalia. “Mamluks’ Ascent to Power in Egypt.” Studia Islamica 72 (1990): 121-144. Northrup, Lind. From Slave to Sultan: The Career of al-Manṣūr Qalāwūn and the Consolidation of Mamlūk Rule in Egypt and Syria (678-689 AH/1279-1290 AD). Stuttgart: F. Steiner, 1998. Petry, Carl F. Twilight of Majesty: The Reigns of the Mamlūk Sultans al-Ashraf Qāytbāy and Qānṣūh al-Ghawrī in Egypt. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1993. Petry, Carl. The Criminal Underworld in a Medieval Islamic Society: Narratives from Cairo and Damascus under the Mamluks. Chicago: Middle East Documentation Center, 2012. Pipes, Daniel. Slave Soldiers and Islam: The Genesis of a Military System. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1981. Top Image: KBR Ms. 11201-02 fol. 01v	4,523	ENGLISH	1
The 23rd amendment gives residents of Washington DC the right to vote for representatives in the Electoral College. Remember that the Electoral College chooses our next president, based on the voting within their state. Since DC is not a state, its residents were not allowed to vote for President as well as elected voting representative to Congress. Today, DC sends a delegate to Congress who may speak on behalf of those that live in DC, but that delegate may not vote. The 23rd amendment passed Congress in June of 1960 and reached the ¾ approval threshold less than a year later, on March 23, 1961. What is the text of the 23rd Amendment? The District constituting the seat of Government of the United States shall appoint in such manner as the Congress may direct: (Washington DC may appoint…) A number of electors of President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a State (DC may have as many electors in the Electoral College as if it were a state) …but in no event more than the least populous State (the smallest state has three electoral votes and the 23rd amendment limits DC from having more votes than any other state, regardless of the DC population) they shall be in addition to those appointed by the States, but they shall be considered, for the purposes of the election of President and Vice President, to be electors appointed by a State; (the status and position of these electors is equivalent to other electors) and they shall meet in the District and perform such duties as provided by the twelfth article of amendment. (the 12th amendment provides for the creation of the Electoral College and those electors selected for DC under the 23rd amendment will be expected to carry out that same responsibilities) The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. (congress has the responsibility to ensure that the provisions of the 23rd amendment are enforced and DC has its electoral votes applied to subsequence presidential elections) Will the 23rd amendment last into the future? In recent years people in Washington DC have pushed the government for more rights and representation in Congress. Remember that the “delegate” from DC may speak but may not vote. Proposed amendments to the constitution would end the 23rd amendment in favor of complete voting rights. This amendment was proposed in the 1970s but was never successful and expired seven years after it was proposed by Congress. The 23rd amendment may end in the event that DC residents get their voting rights, but that may be some time from now.	<urn:uuid:30eb1d3d-5f8f-4740-8d52-1341af55fb36>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://kids.laws.com/23rd-amendment	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250593937.27/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118193018-20200118221018-00541.warc.gz	en	0.981508	531	3.65625	4	[ -0.298077255487442, -0.3196543753147125, 0.2603299617767334, -0.28853026032447815, -0.3082246780395508, 0.329283744096756, 0.20099011063575745, 0.15299192070960999, 0.052511945366859436, 0.27130353450775146, 0.43860942125320435, -0.010031741112470627, 0.12008710205554962, 0.098665319383144...	4	The 23rd amendment gives residents of Washington DC the right to vote for representatives in the Electoral College. Remember that the Electoral College chooses our next president, based on the voting within their state. Since DC is not a state, its residents were not allowed to vote for President as well as elected voting representative to Congress. Today, DC sends a delegate to Congress who may speak on behalf of those that live in DC, but that delegate may not vote. The 23rd amendment passed Congress in June of 1960 and reached the ¾ approval threshold less than a year later, on March 23, 1961. What is the text of the 23rd Amendment? The District constituting the seat of Government of the United States shall appoint in such manner as the Congress may direct: (Washington DC may appoint…) A number of electors of President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a State (DC may have as many electors in the Electoral College as if it were a state) …but in no event more than the least populous State (the smallest state has three electoral votes and the 23rd amendment limits DC from having more votes than any other state, regardless of the DC population) they shall be in addition to those appointed by the States, but they shall be considered, for the purposes of the election of President and Vice President, to be electors appointed by a State; (the status and position of these electors is equivalent to other electors) and they shall meet in the District and perform such duties as provided by the twelfth article of amendment. (the 12th amendment provides for the creation of the Electoral College and those electors selected for DC under the 23rd amendment will be expected to carry out that same responsibilities) The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. (congress has the responsibility to ensure that the provisions of the 23rd amendment are enforced and DC has its electoral votes applied to subsequence presidential elections) Will the 23rd amendment last into the future? In recent years people in Washington DC have pushed the government for more rights and representation in Congress. Remember that the “delegate” from DC may speak but may not vote. Proposed amendments to the constitution would end the 23rd amendment in favor of complete voting rights. This amendment was proposed in the 1970s but was never successful and expired seven years after it was proposed by Congress. The 23rd amendment may end in the event that DC residents get their voting rights, but that may be some time from now.	549	ENGLISH	1
Power is important to human beings as it is used for many purposes. All the sources of energy have their own drawbacks even those considered to be safe. For instance, energy sources like hydropower have their limitations although many people consider them to be safe. However, developing nuclear alternative energy sources such as nuclear energy is more dangerous than using the fossil fuels as sources of energy. This essay will discuss the dangers of nuclear sources of energy by focusing on Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster and Chernobyl nuclear meltdown. The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster resulted from an earthquake that caused nuclear reactors to shut down. After the earthquake struck, action was taken immediately where control rods were fixed at the nuclear plant to stop the nuclear reactions. The external supply of power to the nuclear plant was disrupted by the earthquake. Disruption of power supply was a dangerous occurrence in the nuclear power plant. During the first hour of power disruption, diesel generators reserved for emergency cases were used to supply power. However, the arrival of the tsunami filled the generators with water causing them to stop functioning. Tsunamis had occurred in different areas but the one that hit Fukushima was unexpected. The engineers responded by using the containment structure to store everything. Failure of the diesel generators as a result of flooding forced the engineers to use reactors run by batteries. However, the batteries sustained the reactors for eight hours after which they went off causing the amount of residual heat to increase beyond the limits. At this moment, there were speculations that core meltdown was likely to take place due to increased temperatures. However, it was still not possible but the most urgent action was to look for a way of dealing with the core as heating continued (Turk & Bensel, 2011). The process of cooling core was one of the most important processes. As a result, several cooling systems had been inserted in the reactor. The engineers did not establish the system that failed in its operation while the absence of power caused the cooling systems to lose their cooling ability. The reactors finally started releasing radioactive gases into the atmosphere. The gases did not pose health risks to the operators and the surrounding people since they were controlled. Later on, generators were moved into the plant to restore power. However, there was still a lot of water boiling which reduced the efficiency of the cooling systems. The fuel rods were heated until reactions that produced hydrogen gas occurred. The combustible nature of hydrogen when exposed to the air caused the explosion. Chernobyl disaster was described as the worst nuclear accident in the 20th century. Many people were curious about the disaster but it was really a terrifying experience. The day the accident occurred had started well but finally it changed the lives of people who lived near the nuclear plant. It was reported that fire had broken out at the nuclear power plant. The lieutenant who went to the plant to check the situation discovered that there was debris all over the nuclear plant. This was an indication that danger was in the offing. The level of radiation in the nuclear plant had gone up, something that prompted fire fighters to start putting off the blaze by using water only. As they continued fighting the blaze, some of them were taken to hospital after showing symptoms of sickness. The burning of the fire continued with no evidence of harmful effects to the surroundings After the first day of the nuclear accident, people started exhibiting signs of sickness. It took eight days for the fire to be put off during which six firefighters died in the process. Investigations were conducted and it was discovered that the fire in the nuclear plant was caused by numerous errors. One of the errors that were discovered was an operator error caused by the management. In addition, organization of the nuclear plant was responsible for some problems that were experienced. For instance, the tests at the nuclear plant were conducted by an engineer who was not experienced in dealing with reactors (World-Nuclear, 2011). From the experiences of Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster and the 20th century Chernobyl nuclear meltdown, it is evident that the use of nuclear energy is risky. The risks associated with the energy are more than the rewards. This is because disasters that occur in nuclear energy plants result into deaths. For example, the Fukushima nuclear disaster and the Chernobyl nuclear meltdown led to loss of many lives. These disasters were also associated with long term health problems on human beings. It is therefore important to look for alternative power sources since the risks associated with nuclear energy are more than the rewards. Turk, J., & Bensel, T. (2011). Contemporary environmental issues. San Diego: CA Bridgepoint Education. World-Nuclear. (2011). Chernobyl Accident 1986. Retrieved from http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/chernobyl/inf07.html	<urn:uuid:2eb8d7e6-e366-4904-8ec9-0b8dd7d66725>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://lucasdipasquale.com/nuclear-power/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606872.19/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122071919-20200122100919-00408.warc.gz	en	0.984869	962	3.453125	3	[ -0.18055769801139832, 0.15627805888652802, 0.0037729451432824135, -0.2925674617290497, 0.48292598128318787, 0.21363097429275513, 0.048085905611515045, 0.12253092229366302, -0.10704417526721954, -0.0011074492940679193, 0.1644986867904663, -0.3069947361946106, 0.2121604084968567, -0.08622765...	2	Power is important to human beings as it is used for many purposes. All the sources of energy have their own drawbacks even those considered to be safe. For instance, energy sources like hydropower have their limitations although many people consider them to be safe. However, developing nuclear alternative energy sources such as nuclear energy is more dangerous than using the fossil fuels as sources of energy. This essay will discuss the dangers of nuclear sources of energy by focusing on Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster and Chernobyl nuclear meltdown. The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster resulted from an earthquake that caused nuclear reactors to shut down. After the earthquake struck, action was taken immediately where control rods were fixed at the nuclear plant to stop the nuclear reactions. The external supply of power to the nuclear plant was disrupted by the earthquake. Disruption of power supply was a dangerous occurrence in the nuclear power plant. During the first hour of power disruption, diesel generators reserved for emergency cases were used to supply power. However, the arrival of the tsunami filled the generators with water causing them to stop functioning. Tsunamis had occurred in different areas but the one that hit Fukushima was unexpected. The engineers responded by using the containment structure to store everything. Failure of the diesel generators as a result of flooding forced the engineers to use reactors run by batteries. However, the batteries sustained the reactors for eight hours after which they went off causing the amount of residual heat to increase beyond the limits. At this moment, there were speculations that core meltdown was likely to take place due to increased temperatures. However, it was still not possible but the most urgent action was to look for a way of dealing with the core as heating continued (Turk & Bensel, 2011). The process of cooling core was one of the most important processes. As a result, several cooling systems had been inserted in the reactor. The engineers did not establish the system that failed in its operation while the absence of power caused the cooling systems to lose their cooling ability. The reactors finally started releasing radioactive gases into the atmosphere. The gases did not pose health risks to the operators and the surrounding people since they were controlled. Later on, generators were moved into the plant to restore power. However, there was still a lot of water boiling which reduced the efficiency of the cooling systems. The fuel rods were heated until reactions that produced hydrogen gas occurred. The combustible nature of hydrogen when exposed to the air caused the explosion. Chernobyl disaster was described as the worst nuclear accident in the 20th century. Many people were curious about the disaster but it was really a terrifying experience. The day the accident occurred had started well but finally it changed the lives of people who lived near the nuclear plant. It was reported that fire had broken out at the nuclear power plant. The lieutenant who went to the plant to check the situation discovered that there was debris all over the nuclear plant. This was an indication that danger was in the offing. The level of radiation in the nuclear plant had gone up, something that prompted fire fighters to start putting off the blaze by using water only. As they continued fighting the blaze, some of them were taken to hospital after showing symptoms of sickness. The burning of the fire continued with no evidence of harmful effects to the surroundings After the first day of the nuclear accident, people started exhibiting signs of sickness. It took eight days for the fire to be put off during which six firefighters died in the process. Investigations were conducted and it was discovered that the fire in the nuclear plant was caused by numerous errors. One of the errors that were discovered was an operator error caused by the management. In addition, organization of the nuclear plant was responsible for some problems that were experienced. For instance, the tests at the nuclear plant were conducted by an engineer who was not experienced in dealing with reactors (World-Nuclear, 2011). From the experiences of Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster and the 20th century Chernobyl nuclear meltdown, it is evident that the use of nuclear energy is risky. The risks associated with the energy are more than the rewards. This is because disasters that occur in nuclear energy plants result into deaths. For example, the Fukushima nuclear disaster and the Chernobyl nuclear meltdown led to loss of many lives. These disasters were also associated with long term health problems on human beings. It is therefore important to look for alternative power sources since the risks associated with nuclear energy are more than the rewards. Turk, J., & Bensel, T. (2011). Contemporary environmental issues. San Diego: CA Bridgepoint Education. World-Nuclear. (2011). Chernobyl Accident 1986. Retrieved from http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/chernobyl/inf07.html	972	ENGLISH	1
To the general public slavery is known as a wicked and pitiless practice that has long since been abolished. However, to many other poor souls, slavery has had a much deeper impact on them. There are many accounts having to deal with slavery and its evils, yet The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass Essay, An American Slave, Written by Himself is by far the most powerful account in illustrating the evils of slavery through the eyes of the enslaved. Frederick Douglass is best known for his speeches and essays devoted to the abolitionist movement. The abolitionist movement in the United States began long before the Civil War started in 1861. As an escaped slave, Douglass traveled all over the northern part of the United States to speak out against the horrors of slavery. Although human slavery is an ancient institution, the system of slavery practiced in North and South America, called "chattel slavery" because slaves were considered personal, disposable property, took on a distinct character. The two most important distinguishing factors in chattel slavery are: 1) its cruelty, made possible by the relative alienation of plantations where the slaves were subject to brutality and force to keep them from rebelling, a practice allowed by the government, and 2) the complex economic relationship between the slave system and the industrial cities of the north. American slaves experienced many kinds of brutality, including rape, castration, and other kinds of mutilation, and families were often sold away from each other. Sometimes plantation masters sold away their illegitimate children by slave mothers. Any attempt on the slave’s part to assert his or her rights, and escape brutality, was met with more brutality.Order now A slave could not even defend himself, by law. There were very few successful slave uprisings because most slaves never left the plantations and had little idea what the surrounding country was like, and also because slave catchers would use dogs and wanted posters to bring you back to slavery. It was extremely difficult for a slave to escape to the North, and, even if you made it to the free states, the Fugitive Slave Bill meant you could be sent back to slavery if you were caught. The system of chattel slavery existed in America for well over 100 years. The slave system in the United States did not only benefit the southern states. The main export crop from the South was cotton, which was shipped to textile industries in the North who would use it to make cloth and other items for sale. Slavery was a deeply embedded part of economic life in the United States, and people north and south benefited from the blood, sweat, and tears of millions of slave mothers, fathers, and children. Abolitionists like Frederick Douglass, who had experienced the degradation of slavery firsthand, bravely fought to end the slave system, even though it was a cornerstone of American industry. It was against the law for a person to teach a slave how to read and write, but against all odds Douglass taught himself to read and write and became a very skilled speaker. (Andrews) Perhaps it seems strange to see Frederick Douglass, whose character and thought were formed in the furnace of slavery, associated with the Transcendentalists, yet indeed he was. Like the transcendentalists, Douglass believed in self-development and self-reliance, and few others could show as vividly the value of this philosophy. As a writer, he understood the value of the first-person voice, and he had such a remarkable and inspiring story to tell. Like them, he had great reason to believe in self-education and was certain that he had a message the world must hear. He was the most eloquent supporter of the cause of abolition. He believed that the moral individual was responsible to articulate his view of truth until others could hear it. (Deacon) The foremost African American abolitionist in antebellum America, Frederick Douglass was the first African American leader of national stature in United States history. He was born, as can best be determined, in February 1817 (he took the 14th as his birthday) on the eastern shore of Maryland. His mother, from whom .	<urn:uuid:46210f53-1523-465f-8ff5-fbff7ce123af>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://artscolumbia.org/essays/the-narrative-of-the-life-of-frederick-douglass-essay-111353/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251696046.73/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127081933-20200127111933-00550.warc.gz	en	0.985786	847	3.8125	4	[ -0.14974507689476013, 0.3910910487174988, 0.4212806820869446, 0.15274851024150848, 0.06809644401073456, 0.05439160019159317, 0.1400747001171112, -0.36577266454696655, 0.035903289914131165, 0.09345291554927826, 0.1653393656015396, 0.08874671161174774, -0.20621925592422485, 0.113361567258834...	7	To the general public slavery is known as a wicked and pitiless practice that has long since been abolished. However, to many other poor souls, slavery has had a much deeper impact on them. There are many accounts having to deal with slavery and its evils, yet The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass Essay, An American Slave, Written by Himself is by far the most powerful account in illustrating the evils of slavery through the eyes of the enslaved. Frederick Douglass is best known for his speeches and essays devoted to the abolitionist movement. The abolitionist movement in the United States began long before the Civil War started in 1861. As an escaped slave, Douglass traveled all over the northern part of the United States to speak out against the horrors of slavery. Although human slavery is an ancient institution, the system of slavery practiced in North and South America, called "chattel slavery" because slaves were considered personal, disposable property, took on a distinct character. The two most important distinguishing factors in chattel slavery are: 1) its cruelty, made possible by the relative alienation of plantations where the slaves were subject to brutality and force to keep them from rebelling, a practice allowed by the government, and 2) the complex economic relationship between the slave system and the industrial cities of the north. American slaves experienced many kinds of brutality, including rape, castration, and other kinds of mutilation, and families were often sold away from each other. Sometimes plantation masters sold away their illegitimate children by slave mothers. Any attempt on the slave’s part to assert his or her rights, and escape brutality, was met with more brutality.Order now A slave could not even defend himself, by law. There were very few successful slave uprisings because most slaves never left the plantations and had little idea what the surrounding country was like, and also because slave catchers would use dogs and wanted posters to bring you back to slavery. It was extremely difficult for a slave to escape to the North, and, even if you made it to the free states, the Fugitive Slave Bill meant you could be sent back to slavery if you were caught. The system of chattel slavery existed in America for well over 100 years. The slave system in the United States did not only benefit the southern states. The main export crop from the South was cotton, which was shipped to textile industries in the North who would use it to make cloth and other items for sale. Slavery was a deeply embedded part of economic life in the United States, and people north and south benefited from the blood, sweat, and tears of millions of slave mothers, fathers, and children. Abolitionists like Frederick Douglass, who had experienced the degradation of slavery firsthand, bravely fought to end the slave system, even though it was a cornerstone of American industry. It was against the law for a person to teach a slave how to read and write, but against all odds Douglass taught himself to read and write and became a very skilled speaker. (Andrews) Perhaps it seems strange to see Frederick Douglass, whose character and thought were formed in the furnace of slavery, associated with the Transcendentalists, yet indeed he was. Like the transcendentalists, Douglass believed in self-development and self-reliance, and few others could show as vividly the value of this philosophy. As a writer, he understood the value of the first-person voice, and he had such a remarkable and inspiring story to tell. Like them, he had great reason to believe in self-education and was certain that he had a message the world must hear. He was the most eloquent supporter of the cause of abolition. He believed that the moral individual was responsible to articulate his view of truth until others could hear it. (Deacon) The foremost African American abolitionist in antebellum America, Frederick Douglass was the first African American leader of national stature in United States history. He was born, as can best be determined, in February 1817 (he took the 14th as his birthday) on the eastern shore of Maryland. His mother, from whom .	855	ENGLISH	1
10 Facts About William Wilberforce William Wilberforce is one of those historical names you are likely to have come across, but may not necessarily know much about. It is a strong name (it has the word force in it) which represents a man of character who fought hard to make improvements according to his beliefs. These beliefs led him to be lauded for his work towards abolishing the slave trade across the British empire and stemmed from deep religious conviction. However, he was far from liberally minded when it came to all social issues and he was a complicated man whose legacy is as conflicting as it is notable. Through these 10 interesting facts about William Wilberforce, oneHOWTO hopes to shed some light on both the history and the character of this controversial figure. - His youth was a mixture of privilege and tragedy - He was pals with Pitt - Wilberforce was a youthful reveller - He was not only a great speaker - He pushed for the abolition of slave trade - It wasn't quite abolition of slavery - He was mannered, for better or worse - He was an opium user - He was a devoted father - He died just after slavery was abolished His youth was a mixture of privilege and tragedy There is little question William Wilberforce would have had the impact on the world he had were he not born into such a socially privileged position. His grandfather was a wealthy merchant who made large sums of money in the burgeoning business of world trade. He was sent to some of the best educational institutions of the time, including the prestigious Hull Grammar School which boasted such alumni as the poet Andrew Marvell and mathematician Dr. Isaac Milner. His family home to which he was born still stand, now used as a museum with a statue of Wilberforce in its grounds. However, while he was fortunate in social standing, personally he suffered a great deal. As a young child he was kept infirm by a range of ailments. He was small in stature and weak of frame, suffering from an eye problem which would dog him his entire life. He said of his youth, of which little is recorded, he considered himself fortunate to not be "born in less civilized times, when it would have been impossible to rear so delicate a child". At the age of 11 his father died, an event about which his mother found it difficult to cope. This meant the child was sent away and had a rather haphazard upbringing being sent around relatives. He was particularly sad to have been separated by his aunt and uncle with whom he found youthful solace. He was pals with Pitt William Pitt was (and so far still is) the youngest person to be elected Prime Minister of Britain. He was a leading statesman and administrator aligned to the Tory party, which eventually became the modern day Conservative Party. Wilberforce and Pitt were born in the same year and rose up through the parliamentary system at a similar time, meeting as students in Cambridge. Pitt, however, was a more ambitious man and rose more quickly and shone more brightly. However, like many who shine bright, he also burned out at the relatively young age of 46. Wilberforce and Pitt shared many policy ideas, but did not see eye to eye on everything. It is possible that Pitt didn't even see Wilberforce as the best Parliamentarian, as he did not push for his friend in terms of ministerial positions. This, however, is likely subject to debate. There was one particular strain in their relationship when Wilberforce pushed for a peaceful resolution to their problems with France, with which Pitt vehemently disagreed. However, their friendship seemed otherwise intact until Pitt's death. Wilberforce would eventually be interred beside his friend in an esteemed place in Westminster Abbey. Wilberforce was a youthful reveller During his time spent pinballing around different schools and relatives, Wilberforce became particularly fond of his Wimbledon relatives. These same relatives introduced him to an evangelical style of Christianity which piqued his interest, but would not come into full fervor until later on in life. His religious instruction was haphazard and bore different influences, but it would eventually bear some evangelical fruit. However, he had to undergo a conversion to really chase religious ideals. Before that, he was actually known as quite the bon vivant. He would drink in local parliamentary watering holes and was even known to frequent gambling dens. This was similar to his friend Pitt, although the latter was known to hit it heavy with over 2 pints (34 oz) of port wine a day. Unlike Pitt, Wilberforce was also known to be very sociable, whereas the former stuck to a small cadre of friends from his youth. He was not only a great speaker Wilberforce was not forceful in stature, but was quite the contrary in terms of rhetoric. His small frame perhaps lead some to underestimate his power, bolstering the impact once he spoke so eloquently. One such man was James Boswell, who at first thought a mere 'shrimp' had come to the podium until as he "listened, he grew and grew, until the shrimp became a whale". This power of speech was to help with his achievements later on, but it was some other oratorical function which gained him notoriety early on. According to Georgiana Cavendish (the Duchess of Devonshire), the Prince of Wales would go anywhere to hear Wilberforce sing. He pushed for the abolition of slave trade This fact about William Wilberforce is probably the most well known. His conversion to Christianity helped him to see that the treatment of African slaves was unjust. In 1791, Wilberforce joined the Society for Effecting the Abolition of the Slave Trade, although he had been involved unofficially sometime before that. The society was established in a printing shop in London by 12 men, hoping to educate the nation about the abuses being carried out in the name of the British Empire. Wilberforce was not one of these original men, but he was a parliamentarian. This meant he was one of the men best positioned to bring abolition into effect. He pushed for various motions, but there was much disagreement in government about the slave trade. While money was being made, widespread abuse was also happening. Through a series of parliamentary actions, Wilberforce would help to bring this abuse to an end. Perhaps due to his great public speaking ability, he was able to help muster support for the action. However, he was only one cog in a larger machine. While they may have disagreed with some policy, Pitt also supported abolition. Much of the public view of the slave trade was linked with their views on France. In fact, as the French Revolution occurred, Wilberforce hoped to use the revolutionary push for abolition to further the cause at home. Unfortunately, Francophobia (anti-French sentiment) was so rife, anything France wanted, many in England didn't want. This was once of the many setbacks Wilberforce would face in his attempts. It wasn't quite abolition of slavery While it is inarguable Wilberforce worked hard to abolish the slave trade, he did not actually work towards the abolition of slavery itself. This was not because he simply didn't want Britain involved in the schemes. It was a more pragmatic suggestion that if they were to abolish the trading of slaves across the empire, then slavery itself would be unsustainable. This pragmatism, however, wasn't always the best course of action. Wilberforce was well liked, but his desire to remain affable to his fellow MPs meant that he sometimes did not argue when he should have. He was fervent in his belief, but not always in his action. Some argue that his blind faith in the class system of Britain held back the cause as he trusted those of high rank when he shouldn't. Perhaps this was somewhat bound up in his evangelical idealism. He was mannered, for better or worse Well liked and trying his best to what he saw as the right thing, William Wilberforce certainly believed he lived for the cause of good. However, when looking back through the prism of the present, some of his ideas are simply anti-progressive at best. At worst, some were inhumane. His evangelical Christianity may have lead to his views on what he saw as a fault in 'manners' leading to the Reformation of Manners. This was a religious campaign to bring public morals up to code with a hardline scriptural interpretation. Wilberforce did not start this reformation drive, but he did reignite it after a fallow period in the mid 18th century. It was essentially a Puritan appeal to stop everything from gambling to working on a Sunday. Sex outside of wedlock, drinking, swearing; essentially he wanted to get rid of all the fun stuff. However, this is a drop in the ocean compared to some other of his drives which included. He worked to oppose workers rights and his supreme belief in the class system of England lead him to work towards dissent along the lower classes (something also somewhat ironic in the context of abolition). He opposed women's rights, even or especially anti-slavery organizations run by women, and suppressed trade unions. While he was generous, he was also what we might see as misguided. He wanted what he thought was good, but he did so by suppressing individual rights as well as collective rights such as free speech and gender equality. He was an opium user Although we already spoke of Wilberforce's youthful indulgences, his conversion to evangelical Christianity saw him be quite ruthless in his self-examination. While he remained a sociable fellow throughout his life, he became more rigid in his cultural views. This is why this fact about Wilberforce seems so shocking; the fact that he was a regular opium user. The shock, however, gets mitigated by the context. Sometimes prohibiting him from going to parliament, Wilberforce was a sufferer of gastrointestinal issues. Perhaps related to stress from his work, it caused him a lot of pain. Brought by the trade routes of the empire (perhaps ironically considering his abolitionist views), opium was seen simply as medicinal. It is not thought his opium use was problematic, but it did continue for the rest of his life. He was a devoted father William Wilberforce was not a womaniser, but he did eventually marry. He was devoted to his wife and children, often playing and spending time with them even in ill health. Perhaps the greatest testimony to his role of father is the fact that two of his children, Robert and Samuel, wrote a book about him after his death. While perhaps not the greatest critical work, it does show the devotion went both ways. He died just after slavery was abolished Wilberforce worked hard along with his fellow abolitionists and the trade of slaves was passed in the House of Commons and given royal assent in March 1807. The Slave Trade Act was the first step towards abolition of slavery in Britain in general. Wilberforce all but gave up public life in 1825, but he did not die until 29th July 1833. This was 3 days after major concessions were carried out in parliament to allow the total abolition of slavery. If you want to read similar articles to 10 Facts About William Wilberforce, we recommend you visit our Culture & Society category.	<urn:uuid:14a77248-4b11-4ccc-99b9-c9899346f307>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://education.onehowto.com/article/10-facts-about-william-wilberforce-12665.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251778168.77/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128091916-20200128121916-00256.warc.gz	en	0.992421	2,338	3.4375	3	[ -0.24985606968402863, 0.38820135593414307, 0.4433218240737915, -0.055389050394296646, 0.03051310032606125, 0.025806434452533722, 0.35965174436569214, 0.06700608134269714, -0.03747245669364929, 0.2995261251926422, 0.023408710956573486, -0.24332888424396515, -0.139084130525589, 0.46914747357...	12	10 Facts About William Wilberforce William Wilberforce is one of those historical names you are likely to have come across, but may not necessarily know much about. It is a strong name (it has the word force in it) which represents a man of character who fought hard to make improvements according to his beliefs. These beliefs led him to be lauded for his work towards abolishing the slave trade across the British empire and stemmed from deep religious conviction. However, he was far from liberally minded when it came to all social issues and he was a complicated man whose legacy is as conflicting as it is notable. Through these 10 interesting facts about William Wilberforce, oneHOWTO hopes to shed some light on both the history and the character of this controversial figure. - His youth was a mixture of privilege and tragedy - He was pals with Pitt - Wilberforce was a youthful reveller - He was not only a great speaker - He pushed for the abolition of slave trade - It wasn't quite abolition of slavery - He was mannered, for better or worse - He was an opium user - He was a devoted father - He died just after slavery was abolished His youth was a mixture of privilege and tragedy There is little question William Wilberforce would have had the impact on the world he had were he not born into such a socially privileged position. His grandfather was a wealthy merchant who made large sums of money in the burgeoning business of world trade. He was sent to some of the best educational institutions of the time, including the prestigious Hull Grammar School which boasted such alumni as the poet Andrew Marvell and mathematician Dr. Isaac Milner. His family home to which he was born still stand, now used as a museum with a statue of Wilberforce in its grounds. However, while he was fortunate in social standing, personally he suffered a great deal. As a young child he was kept infirm by a range of ailments. He was small in stature and weak of frame, suffering from an eye problem which would dog him his entire life. He said of his youth, of which little is recorded, he considered himself fortunate to not be "born in less civilized times, when it would have been impossible to rear so delicate a child". At the age of 11 his father died, an event about which his mother found it difficult to cope. This meant the child was sent away and had a rather haphazard upbringing being sent around relatives. He was particularly sad to have been separated by his aunt and uncle with whom he found youthful solace. He was pals with Pitt William Pitt was (and so far still is) the youngest person to be elected Prime Minister of Britain. He was a leading statesman and administrator aligned to the Tory party, which eventually became the modern day Conservative Party. Wilberforce and Pitt were born in the same year and rose up through the parliamentary system at a similar time, meeting as students in Cambridge. Pitt, however, was a more ambitious man and rose more quickly and shone more brightly. However, like many who shine bright, he also burned out at the relatively young age of 46. Wilberforce and Pitt shared many policy ideas, but did not see eye to eye on everything. It is possible that Pitt didn't even see Wilberforce as the best Parliamentarian, as he did not push for his friend in terms of ministerial positions. This, however, is likely subject to debate. There was one particular strain in their relationship when Wilberforce pushed for a peaceful resolution to their problems with France, with which Pitt vehemently disagreed. However, their friendship seemed otherwise intact until Pitt's death. Wilberforce would eventually be interred beside his friend in an esteemed place in Westminster Abbey. Wilberforce was a youthful reveller During his time spent pinballing around different schools and relatives, Wilberforce became particularly fond of his Wimbledon relatives. These same relatives introduced him to an evangelical style of Christianity which piqued his interest, but would not come into full fervor until later on in life. His religious instruction was haphazard and bore different influences, but it would eventually bear some evangelical fruit. However, he had to undergo a conversion to really chase religious ideals. Before that, he was actually known as quite the bon vivant. He would drink in local parliamentary watering holes and was even known to frequent gambling dens. This was similar to his friend Pitt, although the latter was known to hit it heavy with over 2 pints (34 oz) of port wine a day. Unlike Pitt, Wilberforce was also known to be very sociable, whereas the former stuck to a small cadre of friends from his youth. He was not only a great speaker Wilberforce was not forceful in stature, but was quite the contrary in terms of rhetoric. His small frame perhaps lead some to underestimate his power, bolstering the impact once he spoke so eloquently. One such man was James Boswell, who at first thought a mere 'shrimp' had come to the podium until as he "listened, he grew and grew, until the shrimp became a whale". This power of speech was to help with his achievements later on, but it was some other oratorical function which gained him notoriety early on. According to Georgiana Cavendish (the Duchess of Devonshire), the Prince of Wales would go anywhere to hear Wilberforce sing. He pushed for the abolition of slave trade This fact about William Wilberforce is probably the most well known. His conversion to Christianity helped him to see that the treatment of African slaves was unjust. In 1791, Wilberforce joined the Society for Effecting the Abolition of the Slave Trade, although he had been involved unofficially sometime before that. The society was established in a printing shop in London by 12 men, hoping to educate the nation about the abuses being carried out in the name of the British Empire. Wilberforce was not one of these original men, but he was a parliamentarian. This meant he was one of the men best positioned to bring abolition into effect. He pushed for various motions, but there was much disagreement in government about the slave trade. While money was being made, widespread abuse was also happening. Through a series of parliamentary actions, Wilberforce would help to bring this abuse to an end. Perhaps due to his great public speaking ability, he was able to help muster support for the action. However, he was only one cog in a larger machine. While they may have disagreed with some policy, Pitt also supported abolition. Much of the public view of the slave trade was linked with their views on France. In fact, as the French Revolution occurred, Wilberforce hoped to use the revolutionary push for abolition to further the cause at home. Unfortunately, Francophobia (anti-French sentiment) was so rife, anything France wanted, many in England didn't want. This was once of the many setbacks Wilberforce would face in his attempts. It wasn't quite abolition of slavery While it is inarguable Wilberforce worked hard to abolish the slave trade, he did not actually work towards the abolition of slavery itself. This was not because he simply didn't want Britain involved in the schemes. It was a more pragmatic suggestion that if they were to abolish the trading of slaves across the empire, then slavery itself would be unsustainable. This pragmatism, however, wasn't always the best course of action. Wilberforce was well liked, but his desire to remain affable to his fellow MPs meant that he sometimes did not argue when he should have. He was fervent in his belief, but not always in his action. Some argue that his blind faith in the class system of Britain held back the cause as he trusted those of high rank when he shouldn't. Perhaps this was somewhat bound up in his evangelical idealism. He was mannered, for better or worse Well liked and trying his best to what he saw as the right thing, William Wilberforce certainly believed he lived for the cause of good. However, when looking back through the prism of the present, some of his ideas are simply anti-progressive at best. At worst, some were inhumane. His evangelical Christianity may have lead to his views on what he saw as a fault in 'manners' leading to the Reformation of Manners. This was a religious campaign to bring public morals up to code with a hardline scriptural interpretation. Wilberforce did not start this reformation drive, but he did reignite it after a fallow period in the mid 18th century. It was essentially a Puritan appeal to stop everything from gambling to working on a Sunday. Sex outside of wedlock, drinking, swearing; essentially he wanted to get rid of all the fun stuff. However, this is a drop in the ocean compared to some other of his drives which included. He worked to oppose workers rights and his supreme belief in the class system of England lead him to work towards dissent along the lower classes (something also somewhat ironic in the context of abolition). He opposed women's rights, even or especially anti-slavery organizations run by women, and suppressed trade unions. While he was generous, he was also what we might see as misguided. He wanted what he thought was good, but he did so by suppressing individual rights as well as collective rights such as free speech and gender equality. He was an opium user Although we already spoke of Wilberforce's youthful indulgences, his conversion to evangelical Christianity saw him be quite ruthless in his self-examination. While he remained a sociable fellow throughout his life, he became more rigid in his cultural views. This is why this fact about Wilberforce seems so shocking; the fact that he was a regular opium user. The shock, however, gets mitigated by the context. Sometimes prohibiting him from going to parliament, Wilberforce was a sufferer of gastrointestinal issues. Perhaps related to stress from his work, it caused him a lot of pain. Brought by the trade routes of the empire (perhaps ironically considering his abolitionist views), opium was seen simply as medicinal. It is not thought his opium use was problematic, but it did continue for the rest of his life. He was a devoted father William Wilberforce was not a womaniser, but he did eventually marry. He was devoted to his wife and children, often playing and spending time with them even in ill health. Perhaps the greatest testimony to his role of father is the fact that two of his children, Robert and Samuel, wrote a book about him after his death. While perhaps not the greatest critical work, it does show the devotion went both ways. He died just after slavery was abolished Wilberforce worked hard along with his fellow abolitionists and the trade of slaves was passed in the House of Commons and given royal assent in March 1807. The Slave Trade Act was the first step towards abolition of slavery in Britain in general. Wilberforce all but gave up public life in 1825, but he did not die until 29th July 1833. This was 3 days after major concessions were carried out in parliament to allow the total abolition of slavery. If you want to read similar articles to 10 Facts About William Wilberforce, we recommend you visit our Culture & Society category.	2,355	ENGLISH	1
Written by: Unknown Posted on: 05/06/2003 Category: Bible Studies Nehemiah had a big job to do. He was chosen by God and sent by King Artaxerxes to rebuild the city of Jerusalem. God had allowed the city to be destroyed because of Israel's disobedience. Nehemiah had to be very careful. The king had given him some supplies for the job but it was hard for the people to live in a burned out city with scarce supplies. Nehemiah kept his heart close to the Lord and he was able to keep his enemies away and rebuild the city at the same time. He hadn't counted on having any enemies inside the city however and shortly after he had made a good start on the wall he found out that some of the men were lending money and charging interest. This was against the law that Moses had taught the Jews. The greedy men who were lending the money must have picked up this idea from their enemies and decided that this would be a good time to try it. Maybe they thought that since the nation of Israel was busy trying to rebuild the city, they could get away with this. Perhaps they thought that Nehemiah was a weak man and that he didn't have enough authority from the king to stop them. As soon as Nehemiah heard about it he gathered all the people who had been cheated in front of the greedy money lenders. The Jews had a word for lending money with interest, it meant "to bite like a snake"! Nehemiah reminded the money lenders that God was watching them and that their enemies would like nothing better than to see the Jews hurt each other. He made the money lenders ashamed. When he was done talking they could see how they had been like snakes biting their brothers. They looked at the crowd of people. Some of the people in the crowd were very hungry looking, others had no money, only the clothes on their backs. Charging interest on money means that one man will give another man money if he promises to pay him back with more money than he borrowed, sometimes until he has paid back twice as much as he God calls it usury. Thanks to Nehemiah's obedience the money lenders were out of business. The enemies of the Lord could not say that God's people didn't love each other! Do you know the verse in Proverbs where God warns Taken from Nehemiah 5 Doc viewed 5122 times. This articles keywords/phrases are: The articles in the list below have 1 or more of the same keywords or phrases as the article you are viewing. If you wish to hone in on a single keyword, click on that keyword and you will see a list of articles that match just that keyword.	<urn:uuid:051acff3-26f8-4372-b888-c6e3f4391b0f>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://believersweb.org/view.cfm?ID=785	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606226.29/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121222429-20200122011429-00262.warc.gz	en	0.986888	592	3.328125	3	[ -0.5203931331634521, 0.2210788130760193, 0.09188692271709442, -0.2855323851108551, 0.22708410024642944, -0.43225955963134766, 0.33439046144485474, 0.2305360734462738, -0.30493319034576416, 0.28898146748542786, -0.03299451246857643, -0.0963754802942276, -0.021537136286497116, -0.12765012681...	1	Written by: Unknown Posted on: 05/06/2003 Category: Bible Studies Nehemiah had a big job to do. He was chosen by God and sent by King Artaxerxes to rebuild the city of Jerusalem. God had allowed the city to be destroyed because of Israel's disobedience. Nehemiah had to be very careful. The king had given him some supplies for the job but it was hard for the people to live in a burned out city with scarce supplies. Nehemiah kept his heart close to the Lord and he was able to keep his enemies away and rebuild the city at the same time. He hadn't counted on having any enemies inside the city however and shortly after he had made a good start on the wall he found out that some of the men were lending money and charging interest. This was against the law that Moses had taught the Jews. The greedy men who were lending the money must have picked up this idea from their enemies and decided that this would be a good time to try it. Maybe they thought that since the nation of Israel was busy trying to rebuild the city, they could get away with this. Perhaps they thought that Nehemiah was a weak man and that he didn't have enough authority from the king to stop them. As soon as Nehemiah heard about it he gathered all the people who had been cheated in front of the greedy money lenders. The Jews had a word for lending money with interest, it meant "to bite like a snake"! Nehemiah reminded the money lenders that God was watching them and that their enemies would like nothing better than to see the Jews hurt each other. He made the money lenders ashamed. When he was done talking they could see how they had been like snakes biting their brothers. They looked at the crowd of people. Some of the people in the crowd were very hungry looking, others had no money, only the clothes on their backs. Charging interest on money means that one man will give another man money if he promises to pay him back with more money than he borrowed, sometimes until he has paid back twice as much as he God calls it usury. Thanks to Nehemiah's obedience the money lenders were out of business. The enemies of the Lord could not say that God's people didn't love each other! Do you know the verse in Proverbs where God warns Taken from Nehemiah 5 Doc viewed 5122 times. This articles keywords/phrases are: The articles in the list below have 1 or more of the same keywords or phrases as the article you are viewing. If you wish to hone in on a single keyword, click on that keyword and you will see a list of articles that match just that keyword.	586	ENGLISH	1
Martha Dandridge Custis Washington was born on June 2nd, 1731, and is best known as America’s First Lady after she married George Washington. During her life, she was referred to as “Lady Washington.” When she was 18 year old, Martha married Daniel Parke Custis, a wealthy planter who was two years older than her. Together the pair would have four children, only two of which survived (Jacky and Patsy). Daniel died in 1757, leaving his fortune to Martha. Marriage to George Washington On January 6, 1759, at the age of 27, Martha married George Washington. She brought both enormous wealth and social status to her marriage with Washington. The pair settled into George's estate at Mt. Vernon, which was a grand property with working farms, gardens, and even a distillery. The Washingtons also owned many slaves that worked as servants and farmhands throughout Mount Vernon. Although the Washingtons had no children of their own, George helped raise Martha’s surviving children. Martha Washington followed her husband to his winter encampments for each of eight years during the Revolutionary War. Women who followed their husbands from camp to camp during the Revolutionary War were known as “Camp Followers”. These women were believed to keep up the spirits of the Continental soldiers, as well as to assist in battle and tend to the wounded soldiers. Following the war, however, Martha was unhappy that her husband had agreed to become America's first president. She refused to attend his inauguration in 1789 because she wanted to live a private life at Mt. Vernon. Death and Legacy Martha Washington died at the age of 70 on May 22, 1802. She left behind four grandchildren from her first marriage. By the time of her death, most of the Washington’s slaves at Mount Vernon were set free and many more were set free after her death in 1802. Martha Washington was the only women to ever grace the front of U.S. paper currency. Her face appeared on the 1886 and 1891 Silver Certificates.	<urn:uuid:5d989a37-16ba-49d2-96ed-c0a662a5f144>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://mrnussbaum.com/martha-washington-biography	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591431.4/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117234621-20200118022621-00123.warc.gz	en	0.991134	435	3.53125	4	[ -0.33602583408355713, 0.43709486722946167, -0.040724027901887894, 0.12092150002717972, -0.5783814787864685, 0.6692919731140137, 0.07503599673509598, -0.022018829360604286, 0.08212648332118988, 0.012401205487549305, 0.40224701166152954, 0.18095555901527405, -0.029423324391245842, 0.46502715...	3	Martha Dandridge Custis Washington was born on June 2nd, 1731, and is best known as America’s First Lady after she married George Washington. During her life, she was referred to as “Lady Washington.” When she was 18 year old, Martha married Daniel Parke Custis, a wealthy planter who was two years older than her. Together the pair would have four children, only two of which survived (Jacky and Patsy). Daniel died in 1757, leaving his fortune to Martha. Marriage to George Washington On January 6, 1759, at the age of 27, Martha married George Washington. She brought both enormous wealth and social status to her marriage with Washington. The pair settled into George's estate at Mt. Vernon, which was a grand property with working farms, gardens, and even a distillery. The Washingtons also owned many slaves that worked as servants and farmhands throughout Mount Vernon. Although the Washingtons had no children of their own, George helped raise Martha’s surviving children. Martha Washington followed her husband to his winter encampments for each of eight years during the Revolutionary War. Women who followed their husbands from camp to camp during the Revolutionary War were known as “Camp Followers”. These women were believed to keep up the spirits of the Continental soldiers, as well as to assist in battle and tend to the wounded soldiers. Following the war, however, Martha was unhappy that her husband had agreed to become America's first president. She refused to attend his inauguration in 1789 because she wanted to live a private life at Mt. Vernon. Death and Legacy Martha Washington died at the age of 70 on May 22, 1802. She left behind four grandchildren from her first marriage. By the time of her death, most of the Washington’s slaves at Mount Vernon were set free and many more were set free after her death in 1802. Martha Washington was the only women to ever grace the front of U.S. paper currency. Her face appeared on the 1886 and 1891 Silver Certificates.	451	ENGLISH	1
Making mummies in ancient Egypt wasn't for the faint of heart. Mummification was developed thousands of years ago but didn't become standard practice in Egypt until the Old Kingdom (c. 2600-2150 BCE). Embalmers were sacred individuals tasked with making sure the bodies of loved ones were appropriately prepared to make the journey to the afterlife. Ancient Egyptians approached mummification according to a detailed process tied up in myth, preservation techniques, and religious offerings. The body and soul were inextricably linked: For an individual to continue to the afterlife, he or she had to be identifiable in the underworld for final judgment. How bodies were handled in ancient Egypt wasn't determined strictly by spiritual beliefs, however. Economics, social class, and politics were all critical factors, and the embalming trade depended as much on the client as anything else. Ancient Egyptian embalming involved specific materials, but embalmers didn't uniformly apply them, nor were all embalmers created equal. Here's what it was like to be an Egyptian embalmer. In Ancient Egypt, rulers and members of the upper classes were initially the only people who were embalmed. As it became common throughout Egyptian society, however, embalmers adjusted their practice, providing services based on the social status of the subject. A recent archaeological find in the Saqqara necropolis in Egypt attests to this. The discovery of an embalmer's workshop with equipment and five mummies revealed "clear socioeconomic differences between the mummies in the shaft," according to Ramadan Badry Hussein, director of the Saqqara Saite Tombs Project. The idea that not all embalming was the same, however, is nothing new. Herodotus wrote about the three kinds of embalming as far back as the 5th century BCE. When presented with a person, embalmers showed family members options for mummification: In this occupation, certain persons employ themselves regularly and inherit this as a craft. These, whenever a [body] is conveyed to them, show to those who brought it wooden models... made like reality by painting, and the best of the ways of embalming they say is that of him whose name I think it impiety to mention when speaking of a matter of such a kind; the second which they show is less good than this and also less expensive; and the third is the least expensive of all. Having told them about this, they inquire of them in which way they desire... their friend to be prepared. Then they after they have agreed for a certain price depart out of the way. Simply put, embalmers showed the family members three wooden examples, the first of which is believed to have resembled Osiris, and asked which model they wanted their relative to look like when they entered the afterlife. Egyptian sources refer to locations where embalming took place as "the Good House." The workshop itself was known as "the Pure Place." Historians and archaeologists have long believed embalmers erected tents or temporary structures near interment sites to do their work. This was most likely done far away from residential areas to prevent the smell from affecting the general population. The archaeological find at the Saqqara necropolis reframes this assumption, as the workshop they uncovered was a bit more permanent than previously believed. The workshop is connected to a communal interment site where the embalmer had set up shop. According to Herodotus, embalming took 70 days. He described the process after the worker had cleaned the body and removed its organs: They keep it for embalming covered up in natron for 70 days, but for a longer time than this it is not permitted to embalm it; and when the 70 days are past, they wash the [cadaver] and roll its whole body up in fine linen cut into bands, smearing these beneath with gum, which the Egyptians use generally instead of glue. This is somewhat misleading, however, because there were other steps required for preservation. Other sources also indicate the timeframe could be accelerated. The Mortuary Stela of Priest Psantik from the 6th century BCE describes a man who "spent 42 days under the hand of Anubis, lord of Tazoser." The process an embalmer undertook varied based on the option chosen by an individual's family. First, the brain was removed through the nose using a hook. Next, the organs in the torso were taken out using "a sharp stone of Ethiopia." They also removed the lungs, stomach, liver, and intestines, leaving the heart because they believed that was the center of a person's soul and identity. The organs were placed into canopic jars. The cavity was cleaned with palm wine and spices and was filled with myrrh and cassia before being sewn back together. Those who desire the middle way and wish to avoid great cost they prepare [it] as follows: having filled their syringes with the oil which is got from cedar-wood, with this they forthwith fill the belly... and this they do without having either cut it open or taken out the bowels, but they inject the oil by the breech, and having stopped the drench from returning back they keep it then the appointed number of days for embalming, and on the last of the days they let the cedar oil come out from the belly, which they before put in; and it has such power that it brings out with it the bowels and interior organs of the body dissolved; and the natron dissolves the flesh, so that there is left... only the skin and the bones. When they have done this, they give back the [cadaver] at once in that condition without working upon it any more. At the lower end of the embalming spectrum, "They cleanse out the belly with a purge and then keep the body for embalming during the 70 days, and at once after that, they give it back to the bringers to carry away." In either of the lower-tier options, the organs were given much less care, but they were still placed into canopic jars.	<urn:uuid:0ae6c2be-b6e8-4ef5-b6ef-0b37b89ae366>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.ranker.com/list/ancient-egyptian-embalming-practices/melissa-sartore	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251728207.68/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127205148-20200127235148-00399.warc.gz	en	0.980005	1,268	3.65625	4	[ -0.14606665074825287, 0.5758694410324097, 0.44316670298576355, -0.3317112624645233, -0.6919459104537964, -0.29712343215942383, 0.009713279083371162, -0.3379172682762146, -0.0783572793006897, 0.3202231824398041, -0.15094751119613647, -0.5451461672782898, -0.15105482935905457, 0.137936174869...	1	Making mummies in ancient Egypt wasn't for the faint of heart. Mummification was developed thousands of years ago but didn't become standard practice in Egypt until the Old Kingdom (c. 2600-2150 BCE). Embalmers were sacred individuals tasked with making sure the bodies of loved ones were appropriately prepared to make the journey to the afterlife. Ancient Egyptians approached mummification according to a detailed process tied up in myth, preservation techniques, and religious offerings. The body and soul were inextricably linked: For an individual to continue to the afterlife, he or she had to be identifiable in the underworld for final judgment. How bodies were handled in ancient Egypt wasn't determined strictly by spiritual beliefs, however. Economics, social class, and politics were all critical factors, and the embalming trade depended as much on the client as anything else. Ancient Egyptian embalming involved specific materials, but embalmers didn't uniformly apply them, nor were all embalmers created equal. Here's what it was like to be an Egyptian embalmer. In Ancient Egypt, rulers and members of the upper classes were initially the only people who were embalmed. As it became common throughout Egyptian society, however, embalmers adjusted their practice, providing services based on the social status of the subject. A recent archaeological find in the Saqqara necropolis in Egypt attests to this. The discovery of an embalmer's workshop with equipment and five mummies revealed "clear socioeconomic differences between the mummies in the shaft," according to Ramadan Badry Hussein, director of the Saqqara Saite Tombs Project. The idea that not all embalming was the same, however, is nothing new. Herodotus wrote about the three kinds of embalming as far back as the 5th century BCE. When presented with a person, embalmers showed family members options for mummification: In this occupation, certain persons employ themselves regularly and inherit this as a craft. These, whenever a [body] is conveyed to them, show to those who brought it wooden models... made like reality by painting, and the best of the ways of embalming they say is that of him whose name I think it impiety to mention when speaking of a matter of such a kind; the second which they show is less good than this and also less expensive; and the third is the least expensive of all. Having told them about this, they inquire of them in which way they desire... their friend to be prepared. Then they after they have agreed for a certain price depart out of the way. Simply put, embalmers showed the family members three wooden examples, the first of which is believed to have resembled Osiris, and asked which model they wanted their relative to look like when they entered the afterlife. Egyptian sources refer to locations where embalming took place as "the Good House." The workshop itself was known as "the Pure Place." Historians and archaeologists have long believed embalmers erected tents or temporary structures near interment sites to do their work. This was most likely done far away from residential areas to prevent the smell from affecting the general population. The archaeological find at the Saqqara necropolis reframes this assumption, as the workshop they uncovered was a bit more permanent than previously believed. The workshop is connected to a communal interment site where the embalmer had set up shop. According to Herodotus, embalming took 70 days. He described the process after the worker had cleaned the body and removed its organs: They keep it for embalming covered up in natron for 70 days, but for a longer time than this it is not permitted to embalm it; and when the 70 days are past, they wash the [cadaver] and roll its whole body up in fine linen cut into bands, smearing these beneath with gum, which the Egyptians use generally instead of glue. This is somewhat misleading, however, because there were other steps required for preservation. Other sources also indicate the timeframe could be accelerated. The Mortuary Stela of Priest Psantik from the 6th century BCE describes a man who "spent 42 days under the hand of Anubis, lord of Tazoser." The process an embalmer undertook varied based on the option chosen by an individual's family. First, the brain was removed through the nose using a hook. Next, the organs in the torso were taken out using "a sharp stone of Ethiopia." They also removed the lungs, stomach, liver, and intestines, leaving the heart because they believed that was the center of a person's soul and identity. The organs were placed into canopic jars. The cavity was cleaned with palm wine and spices and was filled with myrrh and cassia before being sewn back together. Those who desire the middle way and wish to avoid great cost they prepare [it] as follows: having filled their syringes with the oil which is got from cedar-wood, with this they forthwith fill the belly... and this they do without having either cut it open or taken out the bowels, but they inject the oil by the breech, and having stopped the drench from returning back they keep it then the appointed number of days for embalming, and on the last of the days they let the cedar oil come out from the belly, which they before put in; and it has such power that it brings out with it the bowels and interior organs of the body dissolved; and the natron dissolves the flesh, so that there is left... only the skin and the bones. When they have done this, they give back the [cadaver] at once in that condition without working upon it any more. At the lower end of the embalming spectrum, "They cleanse out the belly with a purge and then keep the body for embalming during the 70 days, and at once after that, they give it back to the bringers to carry away." In either of the lower-tier options, the organs were given much less care, but they were still placed into canopic jars.	1,273	ENGLISH	1
When the Manifesto of the Communist Party was published on the eve of the February Revolution of 1848 in Paris, it's main author, Karl Marx, was convinced that Western Europe was on the verge of witnessing a great class struggle between the bourgeois and the proletariat. In the middle nineteenth century, industrialization was coming of age, capitalist owners were free to hire labor on their own terms. Although trade unions were formed to fight for better working conditions and fair wages, they represented a very small portion of an ever growing working class. Socialism gave hope to the working class, and the theory that made it possible was due to the work of Karl Marx. Marx's vision of a classless society was defined in the pamphlet which began with the statement that "the history of all hithero existing society if the history of class struggles (Marx 5)." History had been divided into the opposing forces of the oppressed and the oppressor, the bourgeois being the upper middle class oppressor and the proletariat being the oppressed industrial working class. The ideals set forth in the Manifesto were destined to influence revolutionaries all over Europe. . Karl Heinrich Marx was born into a Jewish family in the Prussian town of Trier on May 5, 1818. Trier was the oldest city in the Rhineland, and as a result of it's annexation by France in the Napoleonic Wars had been exposed to notions such as freedom of the press, constitutional liberty and religious toleration. Karl's parents were steeped in free French ideas of politics , religion, life and art. When the city was reincorporated into imperial Prussia by the congress of Vienna in 1815, Prussian edict banned Jews from public office and practicing in the professions (Wheen 10). Marx was a bourgeois Jew in a predominantly Catholic city, by the time he was six years old his father, a lawyer with a keen interest in philosophy, converted the family to Christianity and all were baptized as Protestants.	<urn:uuid:6cf0290e-df16-46b0-9857-6db90e2a40cb>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.exampleessays.com/viewpaper/69562.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591763.20/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118023429-20200118051429-00470.warc.gz	en	0.98588	395	4.1875	4	[ -0.2329023778438568, 0.4991021752357483, -0.14588409662246704, -0.028665101155638695, -0.16403338313102722, 0.5277960300445557, -0.5416239500045776, 0.5662908554077148, -0.23628178238868713, -0.05784986540675163, 0.01932653971016407, 0.28049400448799133, 0.09737534075975418, 0.179602891206...	5	When the Manifesto of the Communist Party was published on the eve of the February Revolution of 1848 in Paris, it's main author, Karl Marx, was convinced that Western Europe was on the verge of witnessing a great class struggle between the bourgeois and the proletariat. In the middle nineteenth century, industrialization was coming of age, capitalist owners were free to hire labor on their own terms. Although trade unions were formed to fight for better working conditions and fair wages, they represented a very small portion of an ever growing working class. Socialism gave hope to the working class, and the theory that made it possible was due to the work of Karl Marx. Marx's vision of a classless society was defined in the pamphlet which began with the statement that "the history of all hithero existing society if the history of class struggles (Marx 5)." History had been divided into the opposing forces of the oppressed and the oppressor, the bourgeois being the upper middle class oppressor and the proletariat being the oppressed industrial working class. The ideals set forth in the Manifesto were destined to influence revolutionaries all over Europe. . Karl Heinrich Marx was born into a Jewish family in the Prussian town of Trier on May 5, 1818. Trier was the oldest city in the Rhineland, and as a result of it's annexation by France in the Napoleonic Wars had been exposed to notions such as freedom of the press, constitutional liberty and religious toleration. Karl's parents were steeped in free French ideas of politics , religion, life and art. When the city was reincorporated into imperial Prussia by the congress of Vienna in 1815, Prussian edict banned Jews from public office and practicing in the professions (Wheen 10). Marx was a bourgeois Jew in a predominantly Catholic city, by the time he was six years old his father, a lawyer with a keen interest in philosophy, converted the family to Christianity and all were baptized as Protestants.	416	ENGLISH	1
Dickens teaches what we all must learn, the fact that the older one grows, the more important memory becomes Christmas traditions as we know them were originally the creations of three people in England, in a happy conjunction of effort at about the same time. Prince Albert, Queen Victoria’s German husband, is usually credited with the introduction of Christmas trees into England in the 1840s, but the Queen herself was half-German, and presumably knew of this custom of a decorated tree: her growing family always had one. In 1611 James I had been sent Christmas cards, but the practice failed to catch on. The Royal Mail began only in 1840 with the introduction of the Penny Black stamp, which meant that the sender of the letter henceforth bore the cost of postage. Commercially minded public servant Sir Henry Cole, anxious to increase the nascent post office’s business, hit upon the idea of greetings cards, and had an artist friend design one. At a shilling each, they were expensive: note that Charles Dickens’s Scrooge, for example, paid clerk Bob Cratchit 15 shillings a week. But such is the value of novelty that they were a sell-out from the start. It was also in 1843 that Dickens published A Christmas Carol, his first and most famous Christmas story, which has never been out of print. He published four more similarly-themed novels during the next five years, but then turned his attention to weekly magazines such as Household Words. Even so, he still wrote stories centred on ‘the great birthday’, and included them in the weekly publications. I have just finished reading one such: What Christmas is as We Grow Older, which appeared in 1851. Dickens was a prolific writer, and one of patchy quality: the threat of sentimentality was never far away, so that this brief work is not one of his best. But in this consumer age it is salutary to have his definition of the Christmas spirit, which is one ‘of active usefulness, perseverance, cheerful discharge of duty, kindness and forbearance’. He places emphasis on the last two, and also dwells on the matter of the unaccomplished visions of our youth, and ponders whether we might not be better off because of the failure of these dreams. But dreams always have a place, a ‘shelter underneath the holly’, and so do those people lost and gone. Much of this essay is about memory, and Dickens teaches what we all must learn, the fact that the older one grows, the more important memory becomes. So I cling to the summer memories of my late sister and me on the Christmas Days of long ago. Three generations of family camped by a river in NE Victoria, and we always attended carols by candlelight in the heat: nobody thought it strange that we regularly sang about snow ‘deep and crisp and even’. We children woke early to the liquid notes of magpies in the trees and grey light visible through the tent flap. The day had a set pattern: our bulging pillowslips, the present-giving at the tree, the hot dinner (how was the chicken cooked?) and Granny’s pudding stuffed with threepenny bits that was always lovingly transported from home. An evening church service. I remember, too, my early December festivities in Greece. It was freezing, and we had to go to church at six in the morning. I had read that George Johnston and Charmian Clift, when first on Hydra, had been unable to provide their children with a tree, and the same became true of me: a decorated olive branch had to do, so I told myself it had its own symbolism. My sons were stunned to learn that presents, if any, were exchanged on New Year’s Day, the feast day of St Basil. Toys were in short supply: the shops had cars and guns for boys and dolls for girls. Nobody sent cards. It was, to put it mildly, a time of adjustment. Everything has changed now in a mixed blessing/curse of shopping and spending: Greece has caught up with the commercialism of Europe. Cards are sent, and my grandchildren have trees and a variety of presents. I usually make a traditional fruit cake and buy puddings in Athens, and hope that my four young descendants are building their memories and reserving a place underneath the holly. For me. Gillian Bouras is an expatriate Australian writer who has written several books, stories and articles, many of them dealing with her experiences as an Australian woman in Greece.	<urn:uuid:6b70694d-7041-4f54-83cf-def302dbb397>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.ipdastamps.com/dickens-and-christmas-as-we-grow-older/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783342.96/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128215526-20200129005526-00223.warc.gz	en	0.98203	972	3.328125	3	[ 0.01619342342019081, 0.17140531539916992, 0.4906425178050995, 0.02167125605046749, 0.32196611166000366, -0.19011273980140686, -0.30433422327041626, 0.060124222189188004, -0.13941629230976105, 0.2913475036621094, 0.1212889701128006, 0.12415175139904022, 0.23629745841026306, 0.27711641788482...	1	Dickens teaches what we all must learn, the fact that the older one grows, the more important memory becomes Christmas traditions as we know them were originally the creations of three people in England, in a happy conjunction of effort at about the same time. Prince Albert, Queen Victoria’s German husband, is usually credited with the introduction of Christmas trees into England in the 1840s, but the Queen herself was half-German, and presumably knew of this custom of a decorated tree: her growing family always had one. In 1611 James I had been sent Christmas cards, but the practice failed to catch on. The Royal Mail began only in 1840 with the introduction of the Penny Black stamp, which meant that the sender of the letter henceforth bore the cost of postage. Commercially minded public servant Sir Henry Cole, anxious to increase the nascent post office’s business, hit upon the idea of greetings cards, and had an artist friend design one. At a shilling each, they were expensive: note that Charles Dickens’s Scrooge, for example, paid clerk Bob Cratchit 15 shillings a week. But such is the value of novelty that they were a sell-out from the start. It was also in 1843 that Dickens published A Christmas Carol, his first and most famous Christmas story, which has never been out of print. He published four more similarly-themed novels during the next five years, but then turned his attention to weekly magazines such as Household Words. Even so, he still wrote stories centred on ‘the great birthday’, and included them in the weekly publications. I have just finished reading one such: What Christmas is as We Grow Older, which appeared in 1851. Dickens was a prolific writer, and one of patchy quality: the threat of sentimentality was never far away, so that this brief work is not one of his best. But in this consumer age it is salutary to have his definition of the Christmas spirit, which is one ‘of active usefulness, perseverance, cheerful discharge of duty, kindness and forbearance’. He places emphasis on the last two, and also dwells on the matter of the unaccomplished visions of our youth, and ponders whether we might not be better off because of the failure of these dreams. But dreams always have a place, a ‘shelter underneath the holly’, and so do those people lost and gone. Much of this essay is about memory, and Dickens teaches what we all must learn, the fact that the older one grows, the more important memory becomes. So I cling to the summer memories of my late sister and me on the Christmas Days of long ago. Three generations of family camped by a river in NE Victoria, and we always attended carols by candlelight in the heat: nobody thought it strange that we regularly sang about snow ‘deep and crisp and even’. We children woke early to the liquid notes of magpies in the trees and grey light visible through the tent flap. The day had a set pattern: our bulging pillowslips, the present-giving at the tree, the hot dinner (how was the chicken cooked?) and Granny’s pudding stuffed with threepenny bits that was always lovingly transported from home. An evening church service. I remember, too, my early December festivities in Greece. It was freezing, and we had to go to church at six in the morning. I had read that George Johnston and Charmian Clift, when first on Hydra, had been unable to provide their children with a tree, and the same became true of me: a decorated olive branch had to do, so I told myself it had its own symbolism. My sons were stunned to learn that presents, if any, were exchanged on New Year’s Day, the feast day of St Basil. Toys were in short supply: the shops had cars and guns for boys and dolls for girls. Nobody sent cards. It was, to put it mildly, a time of adjustment. Everything has changed now in a mixed blessing/curse of shopping and spending: Greece has caught up with the commercialism of Europe. Cards are sent, and my grandchildren have trees and a variety of presents. I usually make a traditional fruit cake and buy puddings in Athens, and hope that my four young descendants are building their memories and reserving a place underneath the holly. For me. Gillian Bouras is an expatriate Australian writer who has written several books, stories and articles, many of them dealing with her experiences as an Australian woman in Greece.	943	ENGLISH	1
1800 – Deaths. Governor Edward Rutledge died “with perfect resignation, and with perfect calmness.” He was buried in the family plot in St. Philip’s graveyard. He was replaced as governor by John Drayton. Born to an aristocratic family, Edward Rutledge spent most of his life in public service. He was educated in law at Oxford and was admitted to the English Bar. He and his older brother John both attended the Continental Congress and unabashedly supported each other. Edward attended Congress at the remarkable age of 26 and was the youngest man to sign the Declaration of Independence. During the Revolution he served as a member of the Charleston Battalion of Artillery, and attained the rank of Captain. The colonial legislature sent him back to Congress in 1779 to fill a vacancy. During the defense of Charleston, Rutledge was captured and held prisoner until July of 1781. In 1782 he served in the state legislature, intent on the prosecution of British Loyalists. In 1789 he was elected Governor. 1861 – Secession. Pierre Gustave Toutant Beauregard was appointed superintendent of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. It was the shortest term in the post ever. Six days later his commission as superintendent was revoked, the day after his native Louisiana seceded from the Union. The Federal powers-that-be did not trust Beauregard’s Southern sympathies. One month later, Beauregard resigned his captaincy in the U.S. Army Engineers and offered his services to the Confederate government being formed in Montgomery, Alabama. Beauregard was born into a prominent Creole family in St. Bernard Parish, Louisiana and raised on a sugarcane plantation outside of New Orleans. He was appointed to the United States Military Academy at West Point in 1834 at age sixteen and became a popular cadet, earning several nicknames including “Little Napoleon” and “Little Creole,” due to his slight statue – 5’7”, 150-pounds. His favorite teacher was his professor of artillery, Robert Anderson. He graduated second in his class in 1838 and remained at the school to serve as Anderson’s assistant artillery instructor. During the Mexican War he serving under Gen. Winfield Scott and during the 1850s served as a military engineer clearing the Mississippi River of obstructions. He also spent time as an instructor at West Point before becoming the school’s superintendent for less than a week. On February 27 in Montgomery, Alabama, Beauregard was appointed the first brigadier general of the Confederate Army and sent to Charleston. On April 12, he ordered the first shot of the Civil War fired at Fort Sumter, commanded by his former West Point instructor, Major Anderson.	<urn:uuid:408fff07-08b3-44f4-9d26-096b132e3e86>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://markjonesbooks.com/2015/01/23/today-in-charleston-history-january-23/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250619323.41/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124100832-20200124125832-00255.warc.gz	en	0.986765	583	3.3125	3	[ -0.35315072536468506, 0.24537450075149536, 0.7878318428993225, -0.25567442178726196, -0.03845873475074768, -0.27839231491088867, 0.09951386600732803, 0.014517407864332199, -0.24458476901054382, -0.3682207465171814, 0.24106663465499878, -0.0127494428306818, 0.08901552855968475, 0.1664205789...	7	1800 – Deaths. Governor Edward Rutledge died “with perfect resignation, and with perfect calmness.” He was buried in the family plot in St. Philip’s graveyard. He was replaced as governor by John Drayton. Born to an aristocratic family, Edward Rutledge spent most of his life in public service. He was educated in law at Oxford and was admitted to the English Bar. He and his older brother John both attended the Continental Congress and unabashedly supported each other. Edward attended Congress at the remarkable age of 26 and was the youngest man to sign the Declaration of Independence. During the Revolution he served as a member of the Charleston Battalion of Artillery, and attained the rank of Captain. The colonial legislature sent him back to Congress in 1779 to fill a vacancy. During the defense of Charleston, Rutledge was captured and held prisoner until July of 1781. In 1782 he served in the state legislature, intent on the prosecution of British Loyalists. In 1789 he was elected Governor. 1861 – Secession. Pierre Gustave Toutant Beauregard was appointed superintendent of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. It was the shortest term in the post ever. Six days later his commission as superintendent was revoked, the day after his native Louisiana seceded from the Union. The Federal powers-that-be did not trust Beauregard’s Southern sympathies. One month later, Beauregard resigned his captaincy in the U.S. Army Engineers and offered his services to the Confederate government being formed in Montgomery, Alabama. Beauregard was born into a prominent Creole family in St. Bernard Parish, Louisiana and raised on a sugarcane plantation outside of New Orleans. He was appointed to the United States Military Academy at West Point in 1834 at age sixteen and became a popular cadet, earning several nicknames including “Little Napoleon” and “Little Creole,” due to his slight statue – 5’7”, 150-pounds. His favorite teacher was his professor of artillery, Robert Anderson. He graduated second in his class in 1838 and remained at the school to serve as Anderson’s assistant artillery instructor. During the Mexican War he serving under Gen. Winfield Scott and during the 1850s served as a military engineer clearing the Mississippi River of obstructions. He also spent time as an instructor at West Point before becoming the school’s superintendent for less than a week. On February 27 in Montgomery, Alabama, Beauregard was appointed the first brigadier general of the Confederate Army and sent to Charleston. On April 12, he ordered the first shot of the Civil War fired at Fort Sumter, commanded by his former West Point instructor, Major Anderson.	584	ENGLISH	1
Anna Freud was an Austrian psychologist, a pioneer in the field of child psychoanalysis, who defined the function of “ego” in psychology. The youngest daughter of Sigmund Freud, the father of psychoanalysis, Anna was devoted to her father and enjoyed developing psychoanalytic theory and practice. As a young woman she taught at elementary school, and her daily observation of children drew her to child psychology. She is most noted for her work with children and the concept of children undergoing analysis. She discovered that children often required different psychological treatment as compared to adults and emphasized the role that early disruptions in attachment could play a role in the subsequent development of psychological problems. Her experience as a school teacher added to her knowledge of ego psychology and helped her maintain The Hampstead Child Therapy Clinic. Her publication ‘The Ego and Mechanisms of Defense’ is considered to be a groundbreaking work in the development of adolescent psychology. During the World War II, she also established war nursery with an aim to help the children form attachments by providing continuity of relationships with the helpers and by encouraging mothers to visit as often as possible. Until the final years of her life, she travelled regularly to the United States to lecture, teach and visit friends. Her life was spent in constant search for useful social applications of psychoanalysis, especially in treating children and in learning from them. - She was born on December 3, 1895 in Vienna, Austria-Hungary, to Sigmund Freud, a neurologist now known as the ‘father of psychoanalysis’, and his wife, Martha Bernays.She had five elder siblings: Mathilde, Jean Martin, Oliver, Ernst and Sophie.From an early age, she had a strained relationship with her mother and also remained distant from her five siblings. She had major difficulty in getting along with her sister Sophie, who was very attractive and with whom she rivaled for her father’s attention.She also suffered from depression which caused chronic eating disorders and was repeatedly sent to health farms for thorough rest. Despite her misfits, she developed a close relationship with her father who was very fond of her.She received most of her education from her father despite attending schools. In 1912, after completing her education from the Cottage Lyceum in Vienna, she traveled to Italy to stay with her grandmother. From there she went alone to England in 1914 but was soon forced to return to her homeland when the World War I broke out.Continue Reading BelowRecommended Lists: - In 1914, upon her return to Vienna, she began teaching at the Cottage Lyceum, her old school. From 1915 to 1917, she served there as a trainee, and then as a teacher from 1917 to 1920.In 1918, she became actively involved in her father’s psychoanalysis study in which she was the subject of his research. In 1922, she was able to present the results of this analysis to the Vienna Psychoanalytic Society in a paper titled ‘The Relation of Beating Fantasies to a Daydream’.Later she became a member of the Vienna Psychoanalytic Society and began working with children in private practice. Within two years, she was offered a teaching position at the Vienna Psychoanalytic Training Institute.From 1927 to 1934, she served as the General Secretary of the ‘International Psychoanalytical Association’. In 1935, she became the director of the ‘Vienna Psychoanalytical Training Institute’. Later, she published her book ‘The Ego and the Mechanisms of Defense’, a study that laid the groundwork for the field of ego psychology.During this time she also founded the Hietzing School, along with Dorothy Burlingham and Eva Rosenfeld. The school was an attempt to create a more holistic educational curriculum informed by psychoanalytic principles.In 1938, when the Nazi threat became unsustainable, she fled to London along with her father. In 1941, she formed the ‘Hampstead War Nursery’ which served as a psychoanalytic program and home for homeless children.She also published three books ‘Young Children in Wartime’ (1942), ‘Infants Without Families’ (1943), and ‘War and Children’ (1943) based on her experiences at the war nursery.She established the ‘Hampstead Child Therapy Course and Clinic’ and served as its director from 1952 until her death.In 1965, she published her work ‘Normality and Pathology in Childhood’. In it she explained her hypothesis that children go through normal developmental stages against which everyone can be assessed, and that this capacity to develop is the key component of the diagnostic process.Continue Reading BelowLater in life, she visited Yale Law School and conducted courses on crime and its effect on family relationships. In 1973, she published ‘Beyond the Best Interests of the Child’ with Albert Solnit and Joseph Goldstein.Major Works - She created the field of child psychoanalysis and her work contributed greatly to the understanding of child psychology. She noted that children’s symptoms differed from those of adults and were often related to developmental stages.One of her most significant published works is ‘The Ego and the Mechanisms of Defense’ in which she outlined and expanded upon her father's theory of psychological defense mechanisms.Awards & Achievements - In 1965, she received the Dolly Madison Award.In 1967, she was named a Commander of the British Empire by Queen Elizabeth II.In 1975, she was awarded an MD degree from the University of Vienna. The same year, she also received the Grand Decoration of Honor in Gold.Personal Life & Legacy - She died on October 9, 1982 in London, England, at the age of 86. How To CiteArticle Title- Anna Freud BiographyAuthor- Editors, TheFamousPeople.comWebsite- TheFamousPeople.comURL- https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/anna-freud-4637.phpLast Updated- November 17, 2017 People Also Viewed	<urn:uuid:f872b53a-2eab-4c35-9abb-a9e13585949e>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/anna-freud-4637.php	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251684146.65/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126013015-20200126043015-00085.warc.gz	en	0.981561	1,256	3.578125	4	[ 0.2913777530193329, 0.5325977802276611, 0.32176339626312256, -0.23022761940956116, -0.2319553792476654, 0.3724677264690399, 0.3794630169868469, -0.09073568880558014, -0.10591879487037659, -0.3025473654270172, 0.49803048372268677, -0.3545127809047699, -0.054585520178079605, 0.61978870630264...	1	Anna Freud was an Austrian psychologist, a pioneer in the field of child psychoanalysis, who defined the function of “ego” in psychology. The youngest daughter of Sigmund Freud, the father of psychoanalysis, Anna was devoted to her father and enjoyed developing psychoanalytic theory and practice. As a young woman she taught at elementary school, and her daily observation of children drew her to child psychology. She is most noted for her work with children and the concept of children undergoing analysis. She discovered that children often required different psychological treatment as compared to adults and emphasized the role that early disruptions in attachment could play a role in the subsequent development of psychological problems. Her experience as a school teacher added to her knowledge of ego psychology and helped her maintain The Hampstead Child Therapy Clinic. Her publication ‘The Ego and Mechanisms of Defense’ is considered to be a groundbreaking work in the development of adolescent psychology. During the World War II, she also established war nursery with an aim to help the children form attachments by providing continuity of relationships with the helpers and by encouraging mothers to visit as often as possible. Until the final years of her life, she travelled regularly to the United States to lecture, teach and visit friends. Her life was spent in constant search for useful social applications of psychoanalysis, especially in treating children and in learning from them. - She was born on December 3, 1895 in Vienna, Austria-Hungary, to Sigmund Freud, a neurologist now known as the ‘father of psychoanalysis’, and his wife, Martha Bernays.She had five elder siblings: Mathilde, Jean Martin, Oliver, Ernst and Sophie.From an early age, she had a strained relationship with her mother and also remained distant from her five siblings. She had major difficulty in getting along with her sister Sophie, who was very attractive and with whom she rivaled for her father’s attention.She also suffered from depression which caused chronic eating disorders and was repeatedly sent to health farms for thorough rest. Despite her misfits, she developed a close relationship with her father who was very fond of her.She received most of her education from her father despite attending schools. In 1912, after completing her education from the Cottage Lyceum in Vienna, she traveled to Italy to stay with her grandmother. From there she went alone to England in 1914 but was soon forced to return to her homeland when the World War I broke out.Continue Reading BelowRecommended Lists: - In 1914, upon her return to Vienna, she began teaching at the Cottage Lyceum, her old school. From 1915 to 1917, she served there as a trainee, and then as a teacher from 1917 to 1920.In 1918, she became actively involved in her father’s psychoanalysis study in which she was the subject of his research. In 1922, she was able to present the results of this analysis to the Vienna Psychoanalytic Society in a paper titled ‘The Relation of Beating Fantasies to a Daydream’.Later she became a member of the Vienna Psychoanalytic Society and began working with children in private practice. Within two years, she was offered a teaching position at the Vienna Psychoanalytic Training Institute.From 1927 to 1934, she served as the General Secretary of the ‘International Psychoanalytical Association’. In 1935, she became the director of the ‘Vienna Psychoanalytical Training Institute’. Later, she published her book ‘The Ego and the Mechanisms of Defense’, a study that laid the groundwork for the field of ego psychology.During this time she also founded the Hietzing School, along with Dorothy Burlingham and Eva Rosenfeld. The school was an attempt to create a more holistic educational curriculum informed by psychoanalytic principles.In 1938, when the Nazi threat became unsustainable, she fled to London along with her father. In 1941, she formed the ‘Hampstead War Nursery’ which served as a psychoanalytic program and home for homeless children.She also published three books ‘Young Children in Wartime’ (1942), ‘Infants Without Families’ (1943), and ‘War and Children’ (1943) based on her experiences at the war nursery.She established the ‘Hampstead Child Therapy Course and Clinic’ and served as its director from 1952 until her death.In 1965, she published her work ‘Normality and Pathology in Childhood’. In it she explained her hypothesis that children go through normal developmental stages against which everyone can be assessed, and that this capacity to develop is the key component of the diagnostic process.Continue Reading BelowLater in life, she visited Yale Law School and conducted courses on crime and its effect on family relationships. In 1973, she published ‘Beyond the Best Interests of the Child’ with Albert Solnit and Joseph Goldstein.Major Works - She created the field of child psychoanalysis and her work contributed greatly to the understanding of child psychology. She noted that children’s symptoms differed from those of adults and were often related to developmental stages.One of her most significant published works is ‘The Ego and the Mechanisms of Defense’ in which she outlined and expanded upon her father's theory of psychological defense mechanisms.Awards & Achievements - In 1965, she received the Dolly Madison Award.In 1967, she was named a Commander of the British Empire by Queen Elizabeth II.In 1975, she was awarded an MD degree from the University of Vienna. The same year, she also received the Grand Decoration of Honor in Gold.Personal Life & Legacy - She died on October 9, 1982 in London, England, at the age of 86. How To CiteArticle Title- Anna Freud BiographyAuthor- Editors, TheFamousPeople.comWebsite- TheFamousPeople.comURL- https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/anna-freud-4637.phpLast Updated- November 17, 2017 People Also Viewed	1,285	ENGLISH	1
For such a small nation, Greece has produced an astonishing number of exceptional poets, including two winners of the Nobel Prize for Literature: George Seferis and Odysseus Elytis. The names of other Greek poets like Sappho and Cavafy are known all over the world. Homer can justifiably be regarded as the father of all poetry, though he is far from being the only Greek figure of importance in the world of verse. Consider the female poet Sappho (650-c.590 BC), whose very name has entered the language in the term ‘sapphic’ to describe lesbian love. The word lesbian itself comes from the fact that Sappho was born on the island of Lesbos in the northern Aegean. In fact there is no concrete evidence to prove that Sappho was herself a lesbian, and much to indicate the opposite. Sappho is said to have been a lover of the male poet, Alcaeus (c.620-c.580 BC), to have married and had a child by another man, and to have committed suicide by throwing herself off a clifftop on the island of Lefkada due to unrequited love for a boatman. The belief in her lesbianism came from another poet, Anacreon (c.572-488 BC), who claimed that Sappho was sexually attracted to the women to whom, she taught poetry. Of the poetry itself only fragments survive from the nine books that she wrote, but she was so highly regarded that long after her death the philosopher Plato (c.428-347 BC) described her as being the tenth muse. Of later Greek poets, one of the greatest is Constantine Cavafy (1863-1933). Although he was born and spent most of his life in Alexandria in Egypt, C.P. Cavafy was a Greek and used many Greek myths and historical incidents in his work, which included such poems as ‘Ithaca’, ‘Returning from Greece’ and ‘In Sparta’. He was a troubled homosexual, who published comparatively little during his lifetime. A great admirer of Cavafy was the poet and diplomat George Seferis (1900-1971), who became the first Greek poet to win the Nobel Prize for Literature, in 1963. While no Greek writer can ignore the country’s immense history, Seferis wrote more about what it was to be a modern Greek, and about the question of alienation - he himself was born in Smyrna, when it was Greek, but which is now Turkish Izmyr. He studied in Athens and at the Sorbonne, and in addition to his own work undertook the challenging task of translating T.S.Eliot's 'The Waste Land' into Greek. In 1979 Odysseus Elytis (1911-1996) became the second Greek poet to be given the Nobel Prize. Elytis was born on Crete and, like Seferis before him, was educated in Athens and Paris. He fought against the Italians during their invasion of Greece during World War II, and wrote powerfully and poignantly about the experiences, continuing the great tradition of war poets which goes back to the several unknown Greek poets who wrote about the Trojan Wars. See also our Sikinos page. A Selection of Books By and About These Great Greek Poets Simple but bursting with flavor, these traditional dips and spreads are firm favorites in Greek tavernas and can be easily made at home. No matter where you're going in Greece, delicious surprises await. Here are the products you simply must make room for on your plate (and in your suitcase). With the right tools, the workman can’t go wrong, and the bounty of the natural world has supplied Greek cooks with a panoply of outstanding ingredients.	<urn:uuid:f377c807-2838-4bac-a9e1-1417a54b1489>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.greece-travel-secrets.com/Great-Greek-Poets.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251796127.92/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129102701-20200129132701-00308.warc.gz	en	0.98456	794	3.375	3	[ 0.5885851383209229, 0.26382771134376526, 0.4327915906906128, -0.20604076981544495, -0.4616617262363434, -0.24276447296142578, 0.19912844896316528, 0.5856502652168274, -0.05298209190368652, -0.023619405925273895, -0.38713979721069336, -0.10202571749687195, 0.0006163635989651084, 0.317459166...	1	For such a small nation, Greece has produced an astonishing number of exceptional poets, including two winners of the Nobel Prize for Literature: George Seferis and Odysseus Elytis. The names of other Greek poets like Sappho and Cavafy are known all over the world. Homer can justifiably be regarded as the father of all poetry, though he is far from being the only Greek figure of importance in the world of verse. Consider the female poet Sappho (650-c.590 BC), whose very name has entered the language in the term ‘sapphic’ to describe lesbian love. The word lesbian itself comes from the fact that Sappho was born on the island of Lesbos in the northern Aegean. In fact there is no concrete evidence to prove that Sappho was herself a lesbian, and much to indicate the opposite. Sappho is said to have been a lover of the male poet, Alcaeus (c.620-c.580 BC), to have married and had a child by another man, and to have committed suicide by throwing herself off a clifftop on the island of Lefkada due to unrequited love for a boatman. The belief in her lesbianism came from another poet, Anacreon (c.572-488 BC), who claimed that Sappho was sexually attracted to the women to whom, she taught poetry. Of the poetry itself only fragments survive from the nine books that she wrote, but she was so highly regarded that long after her death the philosopher Plato (c.428-347 BC) described her as being the tenth muse. Of later Greek poets, one of the greatest is Constantine Cavafy (1863-1933). Although he was born and spent most of his life in Alexandria in Egypt, C.P. Cavafy was a Greek and used many Greek myths and historical incidents in his work, which included such poems as ‘Ithaca’, ‘Returning from Greece’ and ‘In Sparta’. He was a troubled homosexual, who published comparatively little during his lifetime. A great admirer of Cavafy was the poet and diplomat George Seferis (1900-1971), who became the first Greek poet to win the Nobel Prize for Literature, in 1963. While no Greek writer can ignore the country’s immense history, Seferis wrote more about what it was to be a modern Greek, and about the question of alienation - he himself was born in Smyrna, when it was Greek, but which is now Turkish Izmyr. He studied in Athens and at the Sorbonne, and in addition to his own work undertook the challenging task of translating T.S.Eliot's 'The Waste Land' into Greek. In 1979 Odysseus Elytis (1911-1996) became the second Greek poet to be given the Nobel Prize. Elytis was born on Crete and, like Seferis before him, was educated in Athens and Paris. He fought against the Italians during their invasion of Greece during World War II, and wrote powerfully and poignantly about the experiences, continuing the great tradition of war poets which goes back to the several unknown Greek poets who wrote about the Trojan Wars. See also our Sikinos page. A Selection of Books By and About These Great Greek Poets Simple but bursting with flavor, these traditional dips and spreads are firm favorites in Greek tavernas and can be easily made at home. No matter where you're going in Greece, delicious surprises await. Here are the products you simply must make room for on your plate (and in your suitcase). With the right tools, the workman can’t go wrong, and the bounty of the natural world has supplied Greek cooks with a panoply of outstanding ingredients.	818	ENGLISH	1
life as a viking View This Storyboard as a Slide Show! Create your own! Copy this storyboard Like What You See? This storyboard was created with Most vikings were farmers and villagers, there farms and crops were very important to them. On a daily basis men and women tended their crops. Men and women both shared jobs however the women tended to make clothes and do the weaving while the men went out on fishing voyages. The Vikings were known for raiding parties. They often attacked the Anglo-Saxons to get gold and money. they destroy and took everything they could, everything they couldn't take they burnt. If you were a freeman you would be attending a community meeting where laws were read and vikings choose their kings. If you were a skald, a keeper of viking history, you would have the job of memorizing and reciting viking history and stories. If you were a thrawl (slave) you would be doing all the heavy work in the farm and in the fields of the family who enslaved you. Over 12 Million Create My First Storyboard	<urn:uuid:341dce70-b347-45f6-b141-18577e5cde7b>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.storyboardthat.com/storyboards/6e48f16c/life-as-a-viking	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250604849.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121162615-20200121191615-00202.warc.gz	en	0.98524	236	3.703125	4	[ 0.09165912866592407, 0.3988286852836609, 0.0860196053981781, 0.11380825936794281, 0.08873283118009567, 0.11907987296581268, -0.3179836571216583, 0.34091314673423767, -0.13906730711460114, 0.088997021317482, 0.32136136293411255, -0.2221851944923401, 0.20895442366600037, 0.05454876273870468,...	1	life as a viking View This Storyboard as a Slide Show! Create your own! Copy this storyboard Like What You See? This storyboard was created with Most vikings were farmers and villagers, there farms and crops were very important to them. On a daily basis men and women tended their crops. Men and women both shared jobs however the women tended to make clothes and do the weaving while the men went out on fishing voyages. The Vikings were known for raiding parties. They often attacked the Anglo-Saxons to get gold and money. they destroy and took everything they could, everything they couldn't take they burnt. If you were a freeman you would be attending a community meeting where laws were read and vikings choose their kings. If you were a skald, a keeper of viking history, you would have the job of memorizing and reciting viking history and stories. If you were a thrawl (slave) you would be doing all the heavy work in the farm and in the fields of the family who enslaved you. Over 12 Million Create My First Storyboard	228	ENGLISH	1
D. People became more skeptical about politics and less trusting of government. Although Richard Nixon had several achievements during his term, he is, perhaps, best remembered for being accused of being involved in the Watergate Scandal. Such event was the scandal resulting from the arrest of five burglars in the office of the Democratic National Committee in June 1972 that were connected to President Nixon’s reelection campaign. The burglars had been caught wiretapping phones and stealing documents. Afterward, the President came to be in trouble with justice for trying to cover the crime and the documents, so, in order to avoid impeachment, he soon decided to resign from office. These events, which were clear proof of the government's corruption, increased American's skepticism about politics and the government.	<urn:uuid:ecb3ae40-c7ba-494c-8d66-a3f40a136ab9>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://assignmentgrade.com/which-of-the-following-is-not-a-major-reason-for-voter-registration-a-prevent-people-using-false-names-from-voting-c-prevent-immoral-people-from-vo-192571/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591763.20/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118023429-20200118051429-00308.warc.gz	en	0.985155	155	3.359375	3	[ -0.12590599060058594, 0.33812251687049866, 0.3033333420753479, -0.40190792083740234, 0.1620599329471588, 0.1550871729850769, 0.4454006254673004, -0.015143340453505516, 0.05446269363164902, 0.06040084362030029, 0.11999920755624771, 0.6078457236289978, 0.16317686438560486, 0.1339581310749054...	1	D. People became more skeptical about politics and less trusting of government. Although Richard Nixon had several achievements during his term, he is, perhaps, best remembered for being accused of being involved in the Watergate Scandal. Such event was the scandal resulting from the arrest of five burglars in the office of the Democratic National Committee in June 1972 that were connected to President Nixon’s reelection campaign. The burglars had been caught wiretapping phones and stealing documents. Afterward, the President came to be in trouble with justice for trying to cover the crime and the documents, so, in order to avoid impeachment, he soon decided to resign from office. These events, which were clear proof of the government's corruption, increased American's skepticism about politics and the government.	157	ENGLISH	1
Answered You can hire a professional tutor to get the answer. Your assignment is to prepare and submit a paper on the roles of doctor in the 18th century. Your assignment is to prepare and submit a paper on the roles of doctor in the 18th century. The state had not been involved previously in the maintenance of health and health-related issues but many writings and works led to the initiation of the intervention of the government in these issues. This century could not be considered as an era of great medical development because it did not reach very close to the actual concept and meaning of medical practice. But the advances and progression in this regard were great enough as compared to the previous centuries. The concept of disease was previously considered to be the problems encountered by a patient. It was the presentation of the symptoms and signs by the patient which laid the basis for the explanation of the disease. This practice was very common until the start of the eighteenth century. This is clearly presented by an example that was put forward by Alexander Morgan who was a surgeon in Bristol. He put forward a case which he encountered with a patient in 1744 when the patient presented him with his problems. This was the period when the doctor was not the person solely governing the pathology with which the patient was suffering and the prescribed medications. It was rather the doctor and the patient who discussed the problems together and reached a conclusion regarding the treatment to be prescribed to the patient. It is said that during this time it was actually the patient who ruled the right to reach a conclusion regarding his problem and medicine and practice basically lay in the hands of the sufferer. During this time patients explained the reasons for their diseases. They could actually stand against the treatment given to them by the doctor. The reasons explained for illnesses ranged from sudden changes in temperature to the curse of God. Not only were there vague reasons for diseases but treatments were also of a similar range. By the middle of the eighteenth century, certain changes to these concepts were noticed. Hospitals were created by this time. And the other .influences on the running of hospitals also changed and it came to be under the responsibility of the doctors to manage them. .	<urn:uuid:35edd2cc-5261-4341-a73f-6d3ba924a46d>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://studydaddy.com/question/your-assignment-is-to-prepare-and-submit-a-paper-on-the-roles-of-doctor-in-the-1	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250608295.52/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123041345-20200123070345-00558.warc.gz	en	0.987402	443	3.328125	3	[ -0.24930739402770996, 0.32503005862236023, 0.5433564782142639, -0.2608230710029602, -0.30229651927948, -0.12306101620197296, 0.4155144691467285, 0.37044399976730347, -0.3912512958049774, -0.10288084298372269, -0.02246764488518238, 0.13494129478931427, -0.03475110977888107, 0.11735977232456...	2	Answered You can hire a professional tutor to get the answer. Your assignment is to prepare and submit a paper on the roles of doctor in the 18th century. Your assignment is to prepare and submit a paper on the roles of doctor in the 18th century. The state had not been involved previously in the maintenance of health and health-related issues but many writings and works led to the initiation of the intervention of the government in these issues. This century could not be considered as an era of great medical development because it did not reach very close to the actual concept and meaning of medical practice. But the advances and progression in this regard were great enough as compared to the previous centuries. The concept of disease was previously considered to be the problems encountered by a patient. It was the presentation of the symptoms and signs by the patient which laid the basis for the explanation of the disease. This practice was very common until the start of the eighteenth century. This is clearly presented by an example that was put forward by Alexander Morgan who was a surgeon in Bristol. He put forward a case which he encountered with a patient in 1744 when the patient presented him with his problems. This was the period when the doctor was not the person solely governing the pathology with which the patient was suffering and the prescribed medications. It was rather the doctor and the patient who discussed the problems together and reached a conclusion regarding the treatment to be prescribed to the patient. It is said that during this time it was actually the patient who ruled the right to reach a conclusion regarding his problem and medicine and practice basically lay in the hands of the sufferer. During this time patients explained the reasons for their diseases. They could actually stand against the treatment given to them by the doctor. The reasons explained for illnesses ranged from sudden changes in temperature to the curse of God. Not only were there vague reasons for diseases but treatments were also of a similar range. By the middle of the eighteenth century, certain changes to these concepts were noticed. Hospitals were created by this time. And the other .influences on the running of hospitals also changed and it came to be under the responsibility of the doctors to manage them. .	444	ENGLISH	1
Native Americans in U.S. History – worksheet questions and answers 1. List four factors that led to white encroachment on Indian lands in the time period 1840-1870. The California Gold Rush, having been under Spanish and Mexican rule, and the Indian Removal Act (1830) that led to the Trail of Tears.2. Read about the “Sand Creek Massacre.” Why did it have such an impact on American public opinion? Because the massacre of these Indians was against the peace agreement and most of the victims were women and children so many were upset with this action. 3. Read about “The Battle of Little Big Horn.” Why was Custer there? What was the result of the battle? Custer was there trying to re-organize the reservation and trying to get on without the Native Americans permission. He lost terribly to the Native American army and many of his soldiers died. 4. Read about “Chief Joseph and the Nez Percï¿½.” Why is Chief Joseph’s story a particularly troubling one? Read “Chief Joseph’s I Will Fight No More Forever speech. ” In what ways is this speech indicative of the Native American psyche in the late 1870s? He tried to become one of the Native American hero’s and marched his Nez Perce people through the Northwest region. They avoided many of the U.S armies and defeated most of the ones they fought, but ended up surrendering at the end since they were all tired. It represents how the Native Americans started to not be able to fight back because they felt that there was no point now because there were too many white settlers. They just wanted to make sure their families were safe. 5. What happened at Wounded Knee? Why is this battle significant? U.S Army tried to arrest Sitting Bull and other Sioux leaders. During this, Sitting Bull was shot and many others killed. It’s significant because it’s said that the Army didn’t need to have used so much violence. It marked the last of the wars between the Americans and Indians and the Native American population was at its all time low.6. Overall, how did the Indian Wars affect U. S. policy toward Native Americans in this period? It caused them to start improving the reservations to prevent the decrease of the Indian population. They wanted to stop the corruption of the officers in charge of the reservations and spread the American culture to the Indians. A group of teachers were sent to educate the Native Americans. All this helped shape the Native American policy and the reforms continued on to be made better and they helped Indians be educated and live decently.Native American Primary Documents1. What group is discussed in the Dawes Severalty Act? The group being discussed is the Native Americans that are living U.S limits. 2. What must a Native American do in order to be granted citizenship in the United States? They must have been born in the U.S. or be a member of a tribe that is within the limits of the U. S. that don’t affect other tribes not within the given limit.3. What can you infer to be the goals of the government? The goals of the government are to guarantee the Native Americans their legal rights and to make them be U. S citizens so they follow the U.S rules. I think they are trying to allow the Native Americans to live on the land given to them , but under U.S law since they are now citizens and have to abide by the American laws. 4. What was the importance to Ah-nen-la-de-ni of the school changing his name? He felt like he had lost himself and that he was someone with his original name. By giving him a new name he had to get familiar with a new person in a way when had to get rid of all the things he had been with his old name. He felt that his original name connected him to his ancestors and who he was yet now his new name made him different and disconnected form his heritage. The idea of being a part of his tribe was gone.5. What was the rule for speaking at the school? What happened if you broke it? The rule was the kids had to speak in English or not speak at all. If they broke that rule, they were either made stand in the hall for a long time or made to march around the yard while all the other kids played. 6. Looking at the pictures in Document 3, describe the differences between the individual on the right, and the one on the left: (They are photographs of the same individual). How does this reflect a change in government policy? The individual had to cut his hair, change the way he dressed and had to get rid of all the jewelry he wore. The government made the policy that the Native Americans had to change to dress and act like an American. They educated the Native Americans of the American culture and made them adopt the American lifestyle and its ways. Rather then allowing them to carry on with their life on the given reservations, Americans made them change to live the way the Americans did and follow the American culture.7. What role did James Monroe see the American government having with respect to Native America? He felt that the government had noticed them, as a separate nation yet didn’t provide them the rights of one. He saw the government in governing over them, helping educate their children’s and provide them with help till they could carry on without any help. He wanted the government to provide them land in which they could live on and give them the rights to own property in turn that they agree to having the government support them. He saw the American government allowing the Native Americans live the way they did with the government just helping them and looking over them in support of them.8. Compare and contrast the ideas (points of view) concerning Native Americans given in documents 1 and 4. The Native Americans were all given the rights to education and the rights to be a citizen of the U.S. They all had to adhere to the ways of American law and in turn would be given the freedom guaranteed as a citizen. Native Americans felt compelled to follow the American customs. In contrast though, in one of the documents, Native Americans were seen to be living their life the way they had been living but just under government rule. Yet in another document, they had to change they’re whole lifestyle to the ways of Americans. They had to speak English, which was hard for many Native American children. In comparison, the government felt the need to help Native Americans and support them.9. Why did Standing Bear and his people object to having their hair cut? It was their custom to have long hair and felt that it was breaking an old tradition in agreeing to cut it.10. What objections did Standing Bear have to the clothing his people were required to wear? He felt that the clothes restricted the amount of nature the body was exposed to. He felt that the Native American clothes were easier to breathe in compared to the American clothing style, which was heavy and absorbed all the sweat.11. Helen Hunt Jackson offers a scathing indictment of US policy toward Native Americans. To what extent are her concerns valid? It’s valid to a good extent because she feels this is unfair and rude towards the Native Americans that the government is making them all citizens so that they don’t have to deal with their ways. She compares in giving all of them citizenship as in giving them all medicine regardless what symptom they have or to disease they have. In this comparison she shows that by giving them all a citizenship, the government is just trying to solve the problem without actually looking into it and trying to help out each Native American.12. Had you been President during this time period, what (if anything) would you have done differently in regards to Native Americans? I would have given them citizenship the way it’s given presently in the U.S, and I would have allowed them to carry on with their own way of life without a problem. I would still educate them and see to it that they learn English so it would help them live better in U.S, but I would still allow them to speak their language. Cite this Native Americans in U.S. History – worksheet questions and answers Native Americans in U.S. History – worksheet questions and answers. (2017, Nov 19). Retrieved from https://graduateway.com/native-americans-u-s-history-worksheet-questions-answers-essay/	<urn:uuid:f19e5b5d-0df4-432f-9a8b-9a0d8a98d844>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://graduateway.com/native-americans-u-s-history-worksheet-questions-answers-essay/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251672537.90/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125131641-20200125160641-00332.warc.gz	en	0.987644	1,784	4.125	4	[ -0.04064319282770157, 0.18869644403457642, 0.4037471413612366, 0.10843295603990555, -0.1891196370124817, -0.06048504263162613, 0.28709226846694946, 0.1623906046152115, -0.2577328681945801, -0.04114929214119911, 0.2891905903816223, 0.13202126324176788, 0.08220349252223969, 0.294336795806884...	1	Native Americans in U.S. History – worksheet questions and answers 1. List four factors that led to white encroachment on Indian lands in the time period 1840-1870. The California Gold Rush, having been under Spanish and Mexican rule, and the Indian Removal Act (1830) that led to the Trail of Tears.2. Read about the “Sand Creek Massacre.” Why did it have such an impact on American public opinion? Because the massacre of these Indians was against the peace agreement and most of the victims were women and children so many were upset with this action. 3. Read about “The Battle of Little Big Horn.” Why was Custer there? What was the result of the battle? Custer was there trying to re-organize the reservation and trying to get on without the Native Americans permission. He lost terribly to the Native American army and many of his soldiers died. 4. Read about “Chief Joseph and the Nez Percï¿½.” Why is Chief Joseph’s story a particularly troubling one? Read “Chief Joseph’s I Will Fight No More Forever speech. ” In what ways is this speech indicative of the Native American psyche in the late 1870s? He tried to become one of the Native American hero’s and marched his Nez Perce people through the Northwest region. They avoided many of the U.S armies and defeated most of the ones they fought, but ended up surrendering at the end since they were all tired. It represents how the Native Americans started to not be able to fight back because they felt that there was no point now because there were too many white settlers. They just wanted to make sure their families were safe. 5. What happened at Wounded Knee? Why is this battle significant? U.S Army tried to arrest Sitting Bull and other Sioux leaders. During this, Sitting Bull was shot and many others killed. It’s significant because it’s said that the Army didn’t need to have used so much violence. It marked the last of the wars between the Americans and Indians and the Native American population was at its all time low.6. Overall, how did the Indian Wars affect U. S. policy toward Native Americans in this period? It caused them to start improving the reservations to prevent the decrease of the Indian population. They wanted to stop the corruption of the officers in charge of the reservations and spread the American culture to the Indians. A group of teachers were sent to educate the Native Americans. All this helped shape the Native American policy and the reforms continued on to be made better and they helped Indians be educated and live decently.Native American Primary Documents1. What group is discussed in the Dawes Severalty Act? The group being discussed is the Native Americans that are living U.S limits. 2. What must a Native American do in order to be granted citizenship in the United States? They must have been born in the U.S. or be a member of a tribe that is within the limits of the U. S. that don’t affect other tribes not within the given limit.3. What can you infer to be the goals of the government? The goals of the government are to guarantee the Native Americans their legal rights and to make them be U. S citizens so they follow the U.S rules. I think they are trying to allow the Native Americans to live on the land given to them , but under U.S law since they are now citizens and have to abide by the American laws. 4. What was the importance to Ah-nen-la-de-ni of the school changing his name? He felt like he had lost himself and that he was someone with his original name. By giving him a new name he had to get familiar with a new person in a way when had to get rid of all the things he had been with his old name. He felt that his original name connected him to his ancestors and who he was yet now his new name made him different and disconnected form his heritage. The idea of being a part of his tribe was gone.5. What was the rule for speaking at the school? What happened if you broke it? The rule was the kids had to speak in English or not speak at all. If they broke that rule, they were either made stand in the hall for a long time or made to march around the yard while all the other kids played. 6. Looking at the pictures in Document 3, describe the differences between the individual on the right, and the one on the left: (They are photographs of the same individual). How does this reflect a change in government policy? The individual had to cut his hair, change the way he dressed and had to get rid of all the jewelry he wore. The government made the policy that the Native Americans had to change to dress and act like an American. They educated the Native Americans of the American culture and made them adopt the American lifestyle and its ways. Rather then allowing them to carry on with their life on the given reservations, Americans made them change to live the way the Americans did and follow the American culture.7. What role did James Monroe see the American government having with respect to Native America? He felt that the government had noticed them, as a separate nation yet didn’t provide them the rights of one. He saw the government in governing over them, helping educate their children’s and provide them with help till they could carry on without any help. He wanted the government to provide them land in which they could live on and give them the rights to own property in turn that they agree to having the government support them. He saw the American government allowing the Native Americans live the way they did with the government just helping them and looking over them in support of them.8. Compare and contrast the ideas (points of view) concerning Native Americans given in documents 1 and 4. The Native Americans were all given the rights to education and the rights to be a citizen of the U.S. They all had to adhere to the ways of American law and in turn would be given the freedom guaranteed as a citizen. Native Americans felt compelled to follow the American customs. In contrast though, in one of the documents, Native Americans were seen to be living their life the way they had been living but just under government rule. Yet in another document, they had to change they’re whole lifestyle to the ways of Americans. They had to speak English, which was hard for many Native American children. In comparison, the government felt the need to help Native Americans and support them.9. Why did Standing Bear and his people object to having their hair cut? It was their custom to have long hair and felt that it was breaking an old tradition in agreeing to cut it.10. What objections did Standing Bear have to the clothing his people were required to wear? He felt that the clothes restricted the amount of nature the body was exposed to. He felt that the Native American clothes were easier to breathe in compared to the American clothing style, which was heavy and absorbed all the sweat.11. Helen Hunt Jackson offers a scathing indictment of US policy toward Native Americans. To what extent are her concerns valid? It’s valid to a good extent because she feels this is unfair and rude towards the Native Americans that the government is making them all citizens so that they don’t have to deal with their ways. She compares in giving all of them citizenship as in giving them all medicine regardless what symptom they have or to disease they have. In this comparison she shows that by giving them all a citizenship, the government is just trying to solve the problem without actually looking into it and trying to help out each Native American.12. Had you been President during this time period, what (if anything) would you have done differently in regards to Native Americans? I would have given them citizenship the way it’s given presently in the U.S, and I would have allowed them to carry on with their own way of life without a problem. I would still educate them and see to it that they learn English so it would help them live better in U.S, but I would still allow them to speak their language. Cite this Native Americans in U.S. History – worksheet questions and answers Native Americans in U.S. History – worksheet questions and answers. (2017, Nov 19). Retrieved from https://graduateway.com/native-americans-u-s-history-worksheet-questions-answers-essay/	1,718	ENGLISH	1
People are usually described on the basis of the place they belong to, the language they speak and the work they do. The Rig Veda too composed by Aryans describes people according to their occupation. Priests who performed rituals and taught Vedas were called ‘Brahmins’. Kings or Warriors who fought for protecting their people and capturing land and cattle, were collectively known as Kshatriyas. However, the individual kings were called Rajas; Rajas living in the Aryan times were hugely different from those living in the later periods. A Raja had no capital cities, armies or palaces in the Aryan time and was elected by the people. The people who worked as traders, farmers, artisans and crafts persons were known as ‘Vaishyas’. The Rig Veda mentions of ‘Shudras’, people who did tedious tasks and served the Brahmins, Kshatriyas and the Vaishyas. The Shudras included Dasas or Dasyus, the original inhabitants of the Indian Subcontinent before the arrival of the Aryans. The Dasas or Dasyus were called so, as they were considered as opponents and differed in culture and language. The Aryans later captured them in wars and considered their personal property. The Rig Veda uses the word ‘Kula’ to indicate individual families. The word ‘Vish’ is used to indicate a clan formed by various kulas while the word ‘Jana’ is used to describe tribes formed by bringing together many Vish.	<urn:uuid:657d98ea-4912-4102-b70f-66659a0b9239>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.nextgurukul.in/wiki/concept/cbse/class-6/history/what-books-and-burials-tell-us/describing-people/3960480	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250608295.52/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123041345-20200123070345-00559.warc.gz	en	0.990467	329	3.9375	4	[ -0.059486351907253265, 0.1758461594581604, -0.0031113000586628914, -0.07090920954942703, 0.006568885408341885, -0.09661500155925751, 0.7406803965568542, -0.16409094631671906, -0.039566729217767715, -0.08237623423337936, -0.061442822217941284, -0.43904557824134827, 0.05658378079533577, 0.08...	3	People are usually described on the basis of the place they belong to, the language they speak and the work they do. The Rig Veda too composed by Aryans describes people according to their occupation. Priests who performed rituals and taught Vedas were called ‘Brahmins’. Kings or Warriors who fought for protecting their people and capturing land and cattle, were collectively known as Kshatriyas. However, the individual kings were called Rajas; Rajas living in the Aryan times were hugely different from those living in the later periods. A Raja had no capital cities, armies or palaces in the Aryan time and was elected by the people. The people who worked as traders, farmers, artisans and crafts persons were known as ‘Vaishyas’. The Rig Veda mentions of ‘Shudras’, people who did tedious tasks and served the Brahmins, Kshatriyas and the Vaishyas. The Shudras included Dasas or Dasyus, the original inhabitants of the Indian Subcontinent before the arrival of the Aryans. The Dasas or Dasyus were called so, as they were considered as opponents and differed in culture and language. The Aryans later captured them in wars and considered their personal property. The Rig Veda uses the word ‘Kula’ to indicate individual families. The word ‘Vish’ is used to indicate a clan formed by various kulas while the word ‘Jana’ is used to describe tribes formed by bringing together many Vish.	304	ENGLISH	1
Johan Ludvig Runeberg Runeberg, Johan Ludvig Hailed as Finland's national poet although writing in Swedish, Johan Ludvig Runeberg (1804–1877) significantly contributed to the Finnish people's sense of national identity and patriotism. One of Runeberg's most famous works was Fänrik Stål Sägner, an epic saga based on the Swedish-Finnish war against Russia waged from 1808-1809. The first ballad in that lengthy epic was set to music following World War II and became the national anthem of Finland. The eldest of six children, Runeberg was born on February 5, 1804, to Lorenz Ulrik Runeberg and Anna Maria (Malm) Runeberg in Jakobstad, Finland. His grandparents had emigrated from Sweden to Finland, and his father was a ship captain who had once studied theology. Just four years after Runeberg's birth, war broke out with Russia. The resulting 1809 Treaty of Hamina broke the almost 700-year-old political ties between Sweden and Finland, attaching the latter to the Russian empire as a relatively autonomous grand duchy. The long-assimilated Finns, which had shared a written language and literature with Sweden, were thrown into a state of flux as they struggled to build a new identity and culture. After some early schooling in Jacobstad, Runeberg was sent at the age of eight to live with an uncle and obtain further education in Oulu. He spent three years on more primary studies before attending the Vasa Gymnasium to prepare for higher education. Seven years later, in the autumn of 1822, Runeberg entered the University of Turku. Coincidentally, his class also included such future luminaries as Johan Vilhelm Snellman, who was to have a great impact as a philosophical activist and writer, and Elias Lonnrot, who was destined to create Finland's national epic, the Kalevala. Indeed, the three, along with fellow student and future author Zachris Topelius, had integral roles in establishing both a Finnish literature and a national identity. While in college, Runeberg subsidized himself by working as a tutor for the children of wealthy families during the summers. His time spent in central Finland in that pursuit acquainted him with the peasantry, who spoke Finnish; the educated, such as Runeberg, spoke Swedish at the time. He also learned to appreciate the spectacular local scenery, and returned to Turku with stories about the war of 1808. All these influences affected him deeply and eventually surfaced in his poetry. By the time Runeberg received his Ph.D. from the University of Turku in 1827, he had already begun to contribute poetry to local newspapers. Shortly after graduation, he moved to Helsinki, where his alma mater had relocated after a great fire in Turku. There, he began to make his mark on his future and the future of Finland as well. Early Career and Marriage In 1830, Runeberg took a job as secretary to the council of the University of Turku, then located in Helsinki. That same year, he also published his first collection of poems, simply titled Dikter. The work drew on his experiences in central Finland, reflecting his admiration of the landscape and its simple denizens. One of those rural characters, Farmer Paavo, was depicted as the epitome of working-class fortitude as he uncomplainingly suffered setback after setback and was reduced to eating bread made from pine bark. While some came to criticize Runeberg's sympathetic ideal of the peasantry as paternalistic, Paavo nonetheless was seen as the very personification of the Finnish concept of sisu, or endurance, a perception that lingered until the outbreak of the country's civil war in 1917. In 1831 Runeberg married Fredrika Charlotta Tengström, daughter of the archbishop of Finland and a writer who would later become a pioneer in Finnish historical novels. The couple had eight children, one of whom, Anna, died in 1833, and another, Walter Runeberg, who went on to become a sculptor of note and in 1885 installed a statue commemorating his father in Helsinki. To support his growing family, Runeberg took a job teaching at a local secondary school, and the newlyweds also began to take in lodgers, including Topelius, to make ends meet. In 1832, he published the very well received Elgskyttarne (The Elk Hunters) and founded a literary newspaper, the Helsingfors Morgonblad. The paper went on to become quite influential in Finland and Sweden, and counted among its prolific contributors none other than Runeberg's old classmate, Lonnrot. Runeberg continued to publish and gain prominence as a poet. Additionally, he accepted a position as a professor of Latin and Greek literature at Borgå College in 1837, and moved to its small town, where he would make his home for the rest of his days. In 1839 he received a gold medal from the Swedish Academy for his poem "The Grave in Perrho." Gossip and Flattery Runeberg stirred up his sleepy new hometown of Borgå in a number of ways. First, he was founding editor of the Borgå Tidning, which published his liberal views and instigated one of the largest religious debates of the time after Runeberg criticized the conservatism of the church. Second, tongues wagged over a suspected illicit relationship between the poet and the much-younger daughter of the head pastor of Porvoo. Thirdly, Runeberg's disciplinary style as a teacher was judged harsh and rigid by some parents, straining relationship in a few more quarters. Despite all the small-town mutterings, however, Runeberg found his popularity and celebrity continue to blossom. 1841 saw the release of Runeberg's poem on Russian life, Nadeschda, as well as another idyll of Finnish life titled Christmas Eve. In 1843 a third volume of his poems appeared, and in 1844 a cycle of unrhymed verse called Kung Fjalar was published. Runeberg had become one of the most esteemed poets in Finland and his most popular effort had not yet been written. Wrote Fänrik St ål S ägner Runeberg was named rector of Borgå College in 1947. The following year, he published what was to become his best known work, Fänrik Stål Sägner (Tales of Ensign Stål). The classical epic poem was composed of 35 heroic ballads, and set during the 1808-1809 war with Russia, an era that had first captured Runeberg's imagination during his tutoring days. The poem's themes of humanity and patriotism even passed muster with the Russian censor before its release, and its mission to stir feelings of Finnish pride and nationalism was overwhelmingly successful. The book was hugely popular, and Runeberg was promptly dubbed the national poet of Finland. Finns were so smitten with the saga that many were moved to send the poet more tales of the war, which led to an expanded version of the work in 1860. Its more immediate impact, of instilling a sense of a Finnish national identity, was illustrated most aptly on May 13, 1948. On that day, a musical version of the first ballad by composer Fredrik Pacius of the University of Helsinki, titled Our Land, was debuted by a university choir in Helsinki. Pacius himself conducted, and the crowd was moved to tears as Finland's national anthem was born. The first two stanzas of Fänrik Stål Sägner, published on The Swedish Finn Historical Society Website, give an indication as to why its effect was so great: "Our land, our land, our fatherland, Let the dear words ring forth! No hills to heaven their heights expand, No valley dips, seas wash no strand, More cherished than our home far north, Than this our native land. Our land is poor, it has no hold On those who lust for gain, And strangers pass it proud and cold, But we, we treasure every grain, For us, with moor and fell and main, It is a land of gold." Fänrik Stål Sägner continued to be plumbed for cultural and political inspiration well into the twentieth century. Its verses were cited by restless proponents of Finnish independence from Russia and used in political debate. Such lines as "Let not one devil cross the bridge," were extracted and used as rallying slogans in both Finland's civil war and World War II. In sum, Runeberg's epic was a tremendous contribution to his country. In the wake of his artistic and historic triumph, Runeberg continued his duties at the college, taking time out in 1851 to make his only journey out of Finland, a trip to Sweden. In 1852 he moved his family into a new home, the house eventually becoming the first Finnish museum dedicated to an individual when it was opened to the public in 1882. He also kept busy throughout the 1850s with such projects as the writing of psalms and hymns, and an 1854 compilation of his prose titled Smärre Berättelser. Neither did Finland's national poet forget his literary roots, publishing such pieces as the comedic Kan ej in 1862 and the more successful Kungarna på Salamis in 1863. Always an avid fisherman and hunter, Runeberg maintained those pursuits as well. Then fate dealt the inspiring bard a blow even his enviable vigor could not withstand. In 1865 the 61-year-old Runeberg suffered a debilitating stroke that left him severely incapacitated for the remainder of his life. His devastated wife tended to him 12 hours a day, reading aloud and easing his suffering in any way she could. He died on May 6, 1877, 40 years to the day after his taking the position at Borgå College. Runeberg was buried on May 17, and the day was declared a national day of mourning. Indeed, so numerous were the floral tributes alone that Finnish flower shops ran out and more flowers had to be ordered from Russia. The grateful Finns did not let the passing of their national poet go unnoticed. Time has not diminished Runeburg's influence. His birth date of February 5 became celebrated as "Runeberg Day" and was marked by feasting on little cakes named in his honor. Myriad musical compositions, including many by distinguished Finnish composer Jean Sibelius, were based on his poems. Writings were collected and published posthumously. The resonance and influence of Fänrik Stål Sägner continued to echo long after Runeberg's passing, and as late as the twenty-first century, his work remained still widely read in Finland. Nordic Business Report, January 27, 2004. "Finnish National Anthem," Virtual Finland Website, http://virtual.finland.fi/netcomm/news/showarticle.asp?intNWSAID=27080 (January 8, 2005). "Home of J. L. Runeberg," Museums in East Uusimaa Website,http://www.ita-uudenmaanmuseot.com/runebergeng.htm (January 8, 2005). "Johan Ludvig Runeberg," Books and Writers Website,http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/runeberg.htm (January 8, 2005). "Johan Ludvig Runeberg," Swedish Finn Historical Society Website, http://sfhs.eget.net/P–articles/Pelo20.htm (January 8, 2005). "Mythical Runeberg," Scandga.org, http://www.scandga.org/Insights/2003-04%20Winter/mythical–runeberg.htm (January 8, 2005). Project Runeberg Website,http://www.lysator.liu.se/nordic/authors/snellman.html (January 8, 2005).	<urn:uuid:dca7f203-670e-40c9-a4ee-ce73d5725e42>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.encyclopedia.com/people/literature-and-arts/scandinavian-literature-biographies/johan-ludvig-runeberg	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250619323.41/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124100832-20200124125832-00095.warc.gz	en	0.981546	2,513	3.625	4	[ 0.029194829985499382, 0.382978618144989, -0.0070548770017921925, -0.21151313185691833, -0.16394203901290894, 0.16518962383270264, -0.1383138746023178, 0.12239079177379608, 0.019434355199337006, -0.20546436309814453, 0.03959979861974716, -0.04102048650383949, 0.45697617530822754, 0.03256714...	1	Johan Ludvig Runeberg Runeberg, Johan Ludvig Hailed as Finland's national poet although writing in Swedish, Johan Ludvig Runeberg (1804–1877) significantly contributed to the Finnish people's sense of national identity and patriotism. One of Runeberg's most famous works was Fänrik Stål Sägner, an epic saga based on the Swedish-Finnish war against Russia waged from 1808-1809. The first ballad in that lengthy epic was set to music following World War II and became the national anthem of Finland. The eldest of six children, Runeberg was born on February 5, 1804, to Lorenz Ulrik Runeberg and Anna Maria (Malm) Runeberg in Jakobstad, Finland. His grandparents had emigrated from Sweden to Finland, and his father was a ship captain who had once studied theology. Just four years after Runeberg's birth, war broke out with Russia. The resulting 1809 Treaty of Hamina broke the almost 700-year-old political ties between Sweden and Finland, attaching the latter to the Russian empire as a relatively autonomous grand duchy. The long-assimilated Finns, which had shared a written language and literature with Sweden, were thrown into a state of flux as they struggled to build a new identity and culture. After some early schooling in Jacobstad, Runeberg was sent at the age of eight to live with an uncle and obtain further education in Oulu. He spent three years on more primary studies before attending the Vasa Gymnasium to prepare for higher education. Seven years later, in the autumn of 1822, Runeberg entered the University of Turku. Coincidentally, his class also included such future luminaries as Johan Vilhelm Snellman, who was to have a great impact as a philosophical activist and writer, and Elias Lonnrot, who was destined to create Finland's national epic, the Kalevala. Indeed, the three, along with fellow student and future author Zachris Topelius, had integral roles in establishing both a Finnish literature and a national identity. While in college, Runeberg subsidized himself by working as a tutor for the children of wealthy families during the summers. His time spent in central Finland in that pursuit acquainted him with the peasantry, who spoke Finnish; the educated, such as Runeberg, spoke Swedish at the time. He also learned to appreciate the spectacular local scenery, and returned to Turku with stories about the war of 1808. All these influences affected him deeply and eventually surfaced in his poetry. By the time Runeberg received his Ph.D. from the University of Turku in 1827, he had already begun to contribute poetry to local newspapers. Shortly after graduation, he moved to Helsinki, where his alma mater had relocated after a great fire in Turku. There, he began to make his mark on his future and the future of Finland as well. Early Career and Marriage In 1830, Runeberg took a job as secretary to the council of the University of Turku, then located in Helsinki. That same year, he also published his first collection of poems, simply titled Dikter. The work drew on his experiences in central Finland, reflecting his admiration of the landscape and its simple denizens. One of those rural characters, Farmer Paavo, was depicted as the epitome of working-class fortitude as he uncomplainingly suffered setback after setback and was reduced to eating bread made from pine bark. While some came to criticize Runeberg's sympathetic ideal of the peasantry as paternalistic, Paavo nonetheless was seen as the very personification of the Finnish concept of sisu, or endurance, a perception that lingered until the outbreak of the country's civil war in 1917. In 1831 Runeberg married Fredrika Charlotta Tengström, daughter of the archbishop of Finland and a writer who would later become a pioneer in Finnish historical novels. The couple had eight children, one of whom, Anna, died in 1833, and another, Walter Runeberg, who went on to become a sculptor of note and in 1885 installed a statue commemorating his father in Helsinki. To support his growing family, Runeberg took a job teaching at a local secondary school, and the newlyweds also began to take in lodgers, including Topelius, to make ends meet. In 1832, he published the very well received Elgskyttarne (The Elk Hunters) and founded a literary newspaper, the Helsingfors Morgonblad. The paper went on to become quite influential in Finland and Sweden, and counted among its prolific contributors none other than Runeberg's old classmate, Lonnrot. Runeberg continued to publish and gain prominence as a poet. Additionally, he accepted a position as a professor of Latin and Greek literature at Borgå College in 1837, and moved to its small town, where he would make his home for the rest of his days. In 1839 he received a gold medal from the Swedish Academy for his poem "The Grave in Perrho." Gossip and Flattery Runeberg stirred up his sleepy new hometown of Borgå in a number of ways. First, he was founding editor of the Borgå Tidning, which published his liberal views and instigated one of the largest religious debates of the time after Runeberg criticized the conservatism of the church. Second, tongues wagged over a suspected illicit relationship between the poet and the much-younger daughter of the head pastor of Porvoo. Thirdly, Runeberg's disciplinary style as a teacher was judged harsh and rigid by some parents, straining relationship in a few more quarters. Despite all the small-town mutterings, however, Runeberg found his popularity and celebrity continue to blossom. 1841 saw the release of Runeberg's poem on Russian life, Nadeschda, as well as another idyll of Finnish life titled Christmas Eve. In 1843 a third volume of his poems appeared, and in 1844 a cycle of unrhymed verse called Kung Fjalar was published. Runeberg had become one of the most esteemed poets in Finland and his most popular effort had not yet been written. Wrote Fänrik St ål S ägner Runeberg was named rector of Borgå College in 1947. The following year, he published what was to become his best known work, Fänrik Stål Sägner (Tales of Ensign Stål). The classical epic poem was composed of 35 heroic ballads, and set during the 1808-1809 war with Russia, an era that had first captured Runeberg's imagination during his tutoring days. The poem's themes of humanity and patriotism even passed muster with the Russian censor before its release, and its mission to stir feelings of Finnish pride and nationalism was overwhelmingly successful. The book was hugely popular, and Runeberg was promptly dubbed the national poet of Finland. Finns were so smitten with the saga that many were moved to send the poet more tales of the war, which led to an expanded version of the work in 1860. Its more immediate impact, of instilling a sense of a Finnish national identity, was illustrated most aptly on May 13, 1948. On that day, a musical version of the first ballad by composer Fredrik Pacius of the University of Helsinki, titled Our Land, was debuted by a university choir in Helsinki. Pacius himself conducted, and the crowd was moved to tears as Finland's national anthem was born. The first two stanzas of Fänrik Stål Sägner, published on The Swedish Finn Historical Society Website, give an indication as to why its effect was so great: "Our land, our land, our fatherland, Let the dear words ring forth! No hills to heaven their heights expand, No valley dips, seas wash no strand, More cherished than our home far north, Than this our native land. Our land is poor, it has no hold On those who lust for gain, And strangers pass it proud and cold, But we, we treasure every grain, For us, with moor and fell and main, It is a land of gold." Fänrik Stål Sägner continued to be plumbed for cultural and political inspiration well into the twentieth century. Its verses were cited by restless proponents of Finnish independence from Russia and used in political debate. Such lines as "Let not one devil cross the bridge," were extracted and used as rallying slogans in both Finland's civil war and World War II. In sum, Runeberg's epic was a tremendous contribution to his country. In the wake of his artistic and historic triumph, Runeberg continued his duties at the college, taking time out in 1851 to make his only journey out of Finland, a trip to Sweden. In 1852 he moved his family into a new home, the house eventually becoming the first Finnish museum dedicated to an individual when it was opened to the public in 1882. He also kept busy throughout the 1850s with such projects as the writing of psalms and hymns, and an 1854 compilation of his prose titled Smärre Berättelser. Neither did Finland's national poet forget his literary roots, publishing such pieces as the comedic Kan ej in 1862 and the more successful Kungarna på Salamis in 1863. Always an avid fisherman and hunter, Runeberg maintained those pursuits as well. Then fate dealt the inspiring bard a blow even his enviable vigor could not withstand. In 1865 the 61-year-old Runeberg suffered a debilitating stroke that left him severely incapacitated for the remainder of his life. His devastated wife tended to him 12 hours a day, reading aloud and easing his suffering in any way she could. He died on May 6, 1877, 40 years to the day after his taking the position at Borgå College. Runeberg was buried on May 17, and the day was declared a national day of mourning. Indeed, so numerous were the floral tributes alone that Finnish flower shops ran out and more flowers had to be ordered from Russia. The grateful Finns did not let the passing of their national poet go unnoticed. Time has not diminished Runeburg's influence. His birth date of February 5 became celebrated as "Runeberg Day" and was marked by feasting on little cakes named in his honor. Myriad musical compositions, including many by distinguished Finnish composer Jean Sibelius, were based on his poems. Writings were collected and published posthumously. The resonance and influence of Fänrik Stål Sägner continued to echo long after Runeberg's passing, and as late as the twenty-first century, his work remained still widely read in Finland. Nordic Business Report, January 27, 2004. "Finnish National Anthem," Virtual Finland Website, http://virtual.finland.fi/netcomm/news/showarticle.asp?intNWSAID=27080 (January 8, 2005). "Home of J. L. Runeberg," Museums in East Uusimaa Website,http://www.ita-uudenmaanmuseot.com/runebergeng.htm (January 8, 2005). "Johan Ludvig Runeberg," Books and Writers Website,http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/runeberg.htm (January 8, 2005). "Johan Ludvig Runeberg," Swedish Finn Historical Society Website, http://sfhs.eget.net/P–articles/Pelo20.htm (January 8, 2005). "Mythical Runeberg," Scandga.org, http://www.scandga.org/Insights/2003-04%20Winter/mythical–runeberg.htm (January 8, 2005). Project Runeberg Website,http://www.lysator.liu.se/nordic/authors/snellman.html (January 8, 2005).	2,590	ENGLISH	1
At a Glance Victor Hugo learned an important lesson—don't criticize Napoleon!—when the writer declared Napoleon III a traitor of France. Hugo was exiled in 1851 and granted amnesty in 1859, but he declined and chose instead to continue living in exile until 1870 when Napoleon III was replaced by the Third Republic. Hugo was somewhat of a chameleon and often changed his political views and religion over the years. He was a prolific writer of plays, poetry, essays, and novels. He is most famous for his novels Les Miserables and Notre-Dame de Paris, or The Hunchback of Notre Dame. Hugo was also a strong political figure in France and was elected to the National Assembly and the Senate upon his return to his homeland. Facts and Trivia - Hugo was very close with his mother and even waited until her death to marry his longtime sweetheart, Adele Foucher. Hugo’s mother disapproved of the match. - Hugo’s play Hernani (1830) started a riot between conservative and liberal factions in the audience. - The shortest correspondence in history is credited to Hugo and his editor upon the release of Les Miserables. Hugo was on vacation during the time the book was published and was curious as to its success. He telegrammed his editor “?” and was rewarded with the reply “!” - Although he never directly attacked the Catholic church, he was critical of its dogma. - More than two million people marched in Victor Hugo’s funeral procession through Paris. Article abstract: Hugo was one of the great authors of the nineteenth century, and by the force of his personality he became one of its great public figures, using his enormous popularity in the service of many political and social causes. His literary career, spanning six of the most turbulent decades in modern European history, encompassed poetry, drama, the novel, and nonfiction writing. Victor-Marie Hugo was born on February 26, 1802, in Besançon, France, the third son of Joseph Léopold Sigisbert Hugo and Sophie Trébuchet Hugo. At the time of their marriage in 1797, Joseph Hugo was a rising young Bonapartist soldier imbued with the ideals of the French Revolution; Sophie, the orphaned daughter of a Breton ship’s captain, had been reared by an aunt of pronounced Royalist sympathies. Thus, in his earliest years, the two poles of contemporary French politics became factors in his life. An early estrangement of Hugo’s parents, the result of personal incompatibilities magnified by the dislocations of his father’s military career, became permanent, and Victor and his brother Eugène went with their mother to live in Paris. Though Victor’s childhood was touched by the color and the upheaval of the Napoleonic era, by the age of seven he was able to read and translate Latin, and by his tenth year his spotty education had been augmented by trips to Italy and Spain. After 1814, Hugo’s education proceeded along more orthodox lines, but it left him time to write verse and plays; at age twenty, financial and critical recognition of his talent enabled him to wed his childhood playmate, Adèle Foucher, a shy, pious young woman to whom he had pledged his love in the spring of 1819. An early novel, Han d’Islande (1823; Hans of Iceland, 1845), is the feverishly emotional product of Hugo’s courtship of Adèle, but more significant for Hugo’s development at this time were his contributions to the short-lived periodical Muse française, which shows a modification of his Royalist sympathies and a recognition that a poet should play a role in society. Hugo’s ideas of literary form were evolving from a conservative classicism, which had won for him early popularity, toward a forward-looking but less well-defined Romanticism. In 1826, a small book of poems, Odes et ballades , signaled the poet’s embrace of Romanticism by substituting the inspiration of “pictures, dreams, scenes, narratives, superstitious legends, popular traditions” for the... (The entire section is 4,063 words.)	<urn:uuid:40132fff-11b4-47ad-8c11-6198f0b3f4ab>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.enotes.com/topics/victor-hugo?en_action=hh_answer_body_click&en_label=%2Fhomework-help%2Fwhat-themes-les-misreables-107259%23answer-124795&en_category=internal_campaign	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250607407.48/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122191620-20200122220620-00388.warc.gz	en	0.982592	904	3.375	3	[ -0.08751721680164337, 0.2874869108200073, 0.4577196538448334, -0.34604135155677795, -0.07164938747882843, -0.07960808277130127, 0.10875433683395386, 0.21474820375442505, 0.23298490047454834, -0.15251895785331726, -0.021650182083249092, -0.11053866147994995, 0.2171938419342041, 0.1293026804...	1	At a Glance Victor Hugo learned an important lesson—don't criticize Napoleon!—when the writer declared Napoleon III a traitor of France. Hugo was exiled in 1851 and granted amnesty in 1859, but he declined and chose instead to continue living in exile until 1870 when Napoleon III was replaced by the Third Republic. Hugo was somewhat of a chameleon and often changed his political views and religion over the years. He was a prolific writer of plays, poetry, essays, and novels. He is most famous for his novels Les Miserables and Notre-Dame de Paris, or The Hunchback of Notre Dame. Hugo was also a strong political figure in France and was elected to the National Assembly and the Senate upon his return to his homeland. Facts and Trivia - Hugo was very close with his mother and even waited until her death to marry his longtime sweetheart, Adele Foucher. Hugo’s mother disapproved of the match. - Hugo’s play Hernani (1830) started a riot between conservative and liberal factions in the audience. - The shortest correspondence in history is credited to Hugo and his editor upon the release of Les Miserables. Hugo was on vacation during the time the book was published and was curious as to its success. He telegrammed his editor “?” and was rewarded with the reply “!” - Although he never directly attacked the Catholic church, he was critical of its dogma. - More than two million people marched in Victor Hugo’s funeral procession through Paris. Article abstract: Hugo was one of the great authors of the nineteenth century, and by the force of his personality he became one of its great public figures, using his enormous popularity in the service of many political and social causes. His literary career, spanning six of the most turbulent decades in modern European history, encompassed poetry, drama, the novel, and nonfiction writing. Victor-Marie Hugo was born on February 26, 1802, in Besançon, France, the third son of Joseph Léopold Sigisbert Hugo and Sophie Trébuchet Hugo. At the time of their marriage in 1797, Joseph Hugo was a rising young Bonapartist soldier imbued with the ideals of the French Revolution; Sophie, the orphaned daughter of a Breton ship’s captain, had been reared by an aunt of pronounced Royalist sympathies. Thus, in his earliest years, the two poles of contemporary French politics became factors in his life. An early estrangement of Hugo’s parents, the result of personal incompatibilities magnified by the dislocations of his father’s military career, became permanent, and Victor and his brother Eugène went with their mother to live in Paris. Though Victor’s childhood was touched by the color and the upheaval of the Napoleonic era, by the age of seven he was able to read and translate Latin, and by his tenth year his spotty education had been augmented by trips to Italy and Spain. After 1814, Hugo’s education proceeded along more orthodox lines, but it left him time to write verse and plays; at age twenty, financial and critical recognition of his talent enabled him to wed his childhood playmate, Adèle Foucher, a shy, pious young woman to whom he had pledged his love in the spring of 1819. An early novel, Han d’Islande (1823; Hans of Iceland, 1845), is the feverishly emotional product of Hugo’s courtship of Adèle, but more significant for Hugo’s development at this time were his contributions to the short-lived periodical Muse française, which shows a modification of his Royalist sympathies and a recognition that a poet should play a role in society. Hugo’s ideas of literary form were evolving from a conservative classicism, which had won for him early popularity, toward a forward-looking but less well-defined Romanticism. In 1826, a small book of poems, Odes et ballades , signaled the poet’s embrace of Romanticism by substituting the inspiration of “pictures, dreams, scenes, narratives, superstitious legends, popular traditions” for the... (The entire section is 4,063 words.)	884	ENGLISH	1
Maximilian was the third child of Emperor Frederick III and Eleonora of Portugal. As the couple’s only surviving son he was groomed from childhood for his future role as ruler. His boyhood was difficult. He witnessed the bitter rivalries within the dynasty, some of which erupted into military conflict at times. One early and probably also traumatic experience during his childhood was the siege of the Vienna Hofburg by his uncle, Albrecht VI, together with his aristocratic supporters and angry citizens in 1462. Aged just three, Maximilian was trapped with his parents in the palace, which was under heavy bombardment from cannon. The occupants of the palace began to starve, and little Maximilian, additionally weakened by an unidentified illness, fell into a critical condition. Maximilian also suffered from the differences between his parents, whose characters were at complete variance with one another. His father, Emperor Frederick III, was a severe and secretive individual with extremely pragmatic attitudes, while his mother Eleonora was a spirited woman who sometimes displayed her outright dislike of her phlegmatic spouse. His parents had contrary opinions on politics and upbringing. His father wanted him to have a practical education and to be hardened towards physical discomfort while Eleonora spoiled her son and laid the foundations for his marked sense of monarchical mission and love of the outward display that represented his rank and standing. As a child Maximilian was torn between his parents. This left its mark on the child’s development. Maximilian made only slow progress and developed an obstinate nature. He later gave an idealized account of his childhood in the autobiographical texts Weisskunig and Theuerdank, which represent important, albeit sanitized sources. Although in his later years as ruler Maximilian was marked by a great thirst for knowledge, in his childhood and youth he was a hard-to-motivate pupil. Maximilian also had a speech defect as a child caused by a deformation of his lower jaw that had resulted in an extremely prominent lower lip. His speech had initially made his father fear that his son might be seen as feeble-minded or even mute. The prince’s education was influenced by early humanist currents of the time, and his tutors were engaged from the circles of the university at Vienna. However, Frederick was also keen for him to acquire practical skills. In keeping with the medieval ideal of a well-versed housefather who was qualified to head a household, the young boy was taught the rudiments of horse-breeding, horticulture and manual skills. The latter became a much-loved leisure activity later on in Maximilian’s life. At Kreuzenstein Castle near Vienna, for example, there is a turning lathe on display which is traditionally held to have been used by Maximilian to satisfy his predilection for manual crafts. Another focus of his upbringing lay in sporting activities such as horsemanship, hunting, dancing and fencing. Maximilian was athletic, excelling at jousting, and proved himself a daring horseman and tireless huntsman in the high mountain regions.	<urn:uuid:ad2ff3cc-1bf3-4848-99ad-89afdddfd507>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.habsburger.net/en/chapter/maximilian-i-early-practice-maketh-master-emperor	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606269.37/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122012204-20200122041204-00536.warc.gz	en	0.990899	646	3.640625	4	[ 0.1078110784292221, 0.6314241290092468, 0.1956992745399475, -0.4082697033882141, -0.1381896585226059, 0.03668951988220215, -0.18423214554786682, 0.04824753850698471, -0.180207759141922, -0.020773116499185562, 0.1721450388431549, -0.43049564957618713, 0.08501988649368286, 0.3792485296726227...	1	Maximilian was the third child of Emperor Frederick III and Eleonora of Portugal. As the couple’s only surviving son he was groomed from childhood for his future role as ruler. His boyhood was difficult. He witnessed the bitter rivalries within the dynasty, some of which erupted into military conflict at times. One early and probably also traumatic experience during his childhood was the siege of the Vienna Hofburg by his uncle, Albrecht VI, together with his aristocratic supporters and angry citizens in 1462. Aged just three, Maximilian was trapped with his parents in the palace, which was under heavy bombardment from cannon. The occupants of the palace began to starve, and little Maximilian, additionally weakened by an unidentified illness, fell into a critical condition. Maximilian also suffered from the differences between his parents, whose characters were at complete variance with one another. His father, Emperor Frederick III, was a severe and secretive individual with extremely pragmatic attitudes, while his mother Eleonora was a spirited woman who sometimes displayed her outright dislike of her phlegmatic spouse. His parents had contrary opinions on politics and upbringing. His father wanted him to have a practical education and to be hardened towards physical discomfort while Eleonora spoiled her son and laid the foundations for his marked sense of monarchical mission and love of the outward display that represented his rank and standing. As a child Maximilian was torn between his parents. This left its mark on the child’s development. Maximilian made only slow progress and developed an obstinate nature. He later gave an idealized account of his childhood in the autobiographical texts Weisskunig and Theuerdank, which represent important, albeit sanitized sources. Although in his later years as ruler Maximilian was marked by a great thirst for knowledge, in his childhood and youth he was a hard-to-motivate pupil. Maximilian also had a speech defect as a child caused by a deformation of his lower jaw that had resulted in an extremely prominent lower lip. His speech had initially made his father fear that his son might be seen as feeble-minded or even mute. The prince’s education was influenced by early humanist currents of the time, and his tutors were engaged from the circles of the university at Vienna. However, Frederick was also keen for him to acquire practical skills. In keeping with the medieval ideal of a well-versed housefather who was qualified to head a household, the young boy was taught the rudiments of horse-breeding, horticulture and manual skills. The latter became a much-loved leisure activity later on in Maximilian’s life. At Kreuzenstein Castle near Vienna, for example, there is a turning lathe on display which is traditionally held to have been used by Maximilian to satisfy his predilection for manual crafts. Another focus of his upbringing lay in sporting activities such as horsemanship, hunting, dancing and fencing. Maximilian was athletic, excelling at jousting, and proved himself a daring horseman and tireless huntsman in the high mountain regions.	623	ENGLISH	1
Washington Square PressCopyright © 2004 William Shakespeare All right reserved.ISBN: 9780743482745 Surviving documents that give us glimpses into the life of William Shakespeare show us a playwright, poet, and actor who grew up in the market town of Stratford-upon-Avon, spent his professional life in London, and returned to Stratford a wealthy landowner. He was born in April 1564, died in April 1616, and is buried inside the chancel of Holy Trinity Church in Stratford. We wish we could know more about the life of the world's greatest dramatist. His plays and poems are testaments to his wide reading — especially to his knowledge of Virgil, Ovid, Plutarch, Holinshed's Chronicles, and the Bible — and to his mastery of the English language, but we can only speculate about his education. We know that the King's New School in Stratford-upon-Avon was considered excellent. The school was one of the English "grammar schools" established to educate young men, primarily in Latin grammar and literature. As in other schools of the time, students began their studies at the age of four or five in the attached "petty school," and there learned to read and write in English, studying primarily the catechism from the Book of Common Prayer. After two years in the petty school, students entered the lower form (grade) of the grammar school, where they began the serious study of Latin grammar and Latin texts that would occupy most of the remainder of their school days. (Several Latin texts that Shakespeare used repeatedly in writing his plays and poems were texts that schoolboys memorized and recited.) Latin comedies were introduced early in the lower form; in the upper form, which the boys entered at age ten or eleven, students wrote their own Latin orations and declamations, studied Latin historians and rhetoricians, and began the study of Greek using the Greek New Testament. Since the records of the Stratford "grammar school" do not survive, we cannot prove that William Shakespeare attended the school; however, every indication (his father's position as an alderman and bailiff of Stratford, the playwright's own knowledge of the Latin classics, scenes in the plays that recall grammar-school experiences — for example, The Merry Wives of Windsor, 4.1) suggests that he did. We also lack generally accepted documentation about Shakespeare's life after his schooling ended and his professional life in London began. His marriage in 1582 (at age eighteen) to Anne Hathaway and the subsequent births of his daughter Susanna (1583) and the twins Judith and Hamnet (1585) are recorded, but how he supported himself and where he lived are not known. Nor do we know when and why he left Stratford for the London theatrical world, nor how he rose to be the important figure in that world that he had become by the early 1590s. We do know that by 1592 he had achieved some prominence in London as both an actor and a playwright. In that year was published a book by the playwright Robert Greene attacking an actor who had the audacity to write blank-verse drama and who was "in his own conceit [i.e., opinion] the only Shake-scene in a country." Since Greene's attack includes a parody of a line from one of Shakespeare's early plays, there is little doubt that it is Shakespeare to whom he refers, a "Shake-scene" who had aroused Greene's fury by successfully competing with university-educated dramatists like Greene himself. It was in 1593 that Shakespeare became a published poet. In that year he published his long narrative poem Venus and Adonis; in 1594, he followed it with The Rape of Lucrece. Both poems were dedicated to the young earl of Southampton (Henry Wriothesley), who may have become Shakespeare's patron. It seems no coincidence that Shakespeare wrote these narrative poems at a time when the theaters were closed because of the plague, a contagious epidemic disease that devastated the population of London. When the theaters reopened in 1594, Shakespeare apparently resumed his double career of actor and playwright and began his long (and seemingly profitable) service as an acting-company shareholder. Records for December of 1594 show him to be a leading member of the Lord Chamberlain's Men. It was this company of actors, later named the King's Men, for whom he would be a principal actor, dramatist, and shareholder for the rest of his career. So far as we can tell, that career spanned about twenty years. In the 1590s, he wrote his plays on English history as well as several comedies and at least two tragedies (Titus Andronicus and Romeo and Juliet). These histories, comedies, and tragedies are the plays credited to him in 1598 in a work, Palladis Tamia, that in one chapter compares English writers with "Greek, Latin, and Italian Poets." There the author, Francis Meres, claims that Shakespeare is comparable to the Latin dramatists Seneca for tragedy and Plautus for comedy, and calls him "the most excellent in both kinds for the stage." He also names him "Mellifluous and honey-tongued Shakespeare": "I say," writes Meres, "that the Muses would speak with Shakespeare's fine filed phrase, if they would speak English." Since Meres also mentions Shakespeare's "sugared sonnets among his private friends," it is assumed that many of Shakespeare's sonnets (not published until 1609) were also written in the 1590s. In 1599, Shakespeare's company built a theater for themselves across the river from London, naming it the Globe. The plays that are considered by many to be Shakespeare's major tragedies (Hamlet, Othello, King Lear, and Macbeth) were written while the company was resident in this theater, as were such comedies as Twelfth Night and Measure for Measure. Many of Shakespeare's plays were performed at court (both for Queen Elizabeth I and, after her death in 1603, for King James I), some were presented at the Inns of Court (the residences of London's legal societies), and some were doubtless performed in other towns, at the universities, and at great houses when the King's Men went on tour; otherwise, his plays from 1599 to 1608 were, so far as we know, performed only at the Globe. Between 1608 and 1612, Shakespeare wrote several plays — among them The Winter's Tale and The Tempest — presumably for the company's new indoor Blackfriars theater, though the plays seem to have been performed also at the Globe and at court. Surviving documents describe a performance of The Winter's Tale in 1611 at the Globe, for example, and performances of The Tempest in 1611 and 1613 at the royal palace of Whitehall. Shakespeare wrote very little after 1612, the year in which he probably wrote King Henry VIII. (It was at a performance of Henry VIII in 1613 that the Globe caught fire and burned to the ground.) Sometime between 1610 and 1613 he seems to have returned to live in Stratford-upon-Avon, where he owned a large house and considerable property, and where his wife and his two daughters and their husbands lived. (His son Hamnet had died in 1596.) During his professional years in London, Shakespeare had presumably derived income from the acting company's profits as well as from his own career as an actor, from the sale of his play manuscripts to the acting company, and, after 1599, from his shares as an owner of the Globe. It was presumably that income, carefully invested in land and other property, which made him the wealthy man that surviving documents show him to have become. It is also assumed that William Shakespeare's growing wealth and reputation played some part in inclining the crown, in 1596, to grant John Shakespeare, William's father, the coat of arms that he had so long sought. William Shakespeare died in Stratford on April 23, 1616 (according to the epitaph carved under his bust in Holy Trinity Church) and was buried on April 25. Seven years after his death, his collected plays were published as Mr. William Shakespeares Comedies, Histories, & Tragedies (the work now known as the First Folio). The years in which Shakespeare wrote were among the most exciting in English history. Intellectually, the discovery, translation, and printing of Greek and Roman classics were making available a set of works and worldviews that interacted complexly with Christian texts and beliefs. The result was a questioning, a vital intellectual ferment, that provided energy for the period's amazing dramatic and literary output and that fed directly into Shakespeare's plays. The Ghost in Hamlet, for example, is wonderfully complicated in part because he is a figure from Roman tragedy — the spirit of the dead returning to seek revenge — who at the same time inhabits a Christian hell (or purgatory); Hamlet's description of humankind reflects at one moment the Neoplatonic wonderment at mankind ("What a piece of work is a man!") and, at the next, the Christian disparagement of human sinners ("And yet, to me, what is this quintessence of dust?"). As intellectual horizons expanded, so also did geographical and cosmological horizons. New worlds — both North and South America — were explored, and in them were found human beings who lived and worshiped in ways radically different from those of Renaissance Europeans and Englishmen. The universe during these years also seemed to shift and expand. Copernicus had earlier theorized that the earth was not the center of the cosmos but revolved as a planet around the sun. Galileo's telescope, created in 1609, allowed scientists to see that Copernicus had been correct; the universe was not organized with the earth at the center, nor was it so nicely circumscribed as people had, until that time, thought. In terms of expanding horizons, the impact of these discoveries on people's beliefs — religious, scientific, and philosophical — cannot be overstated. London, too, rapidly expanded and changed during the years (from the early 1590s to around 1610) that Shakespeare lived there. London — the center of England's government, its economy, its royal court, its overseas trade — was, during these years, becoming an exciting metropolis, drawing to it thousands of new citizens every year. Troubled by overcrowding, by poverty, by recurring epidemics of the plague, London was also a mecca for the wealthy and the aristocratic, and for those who sought advancement at court, or power in government or finance or trade. One hears in Shakespeare's plays the voices of London — the struggles for power, the fear of venereal disease, the language of buying and selling. One hears as well the voices of Stratford-upon-Avon — references to the nearby Forest of Arden, to sheepherding, to small-town gossip, to village fairs and markets. Part of the richness of Shakespeare's work is the influence felt there of the various worlds in which he lived: the world of metropolitan London, the world of small-town and rural England, the world of the theater, and the worlds of craftsmen and shepherds. That Shakespeare inhabited such worlds we know from surviving London and Stratford documents, as well as from the evidence of the plays and poems themselves. From such records we can sketch the dramatist's life. We know from his works that he was a voracious reader. We know from legal and business documents that he was a multifaceted theater man who became a wealthy landowner. We know a bit about his family life and a fair amount about his legal and financial dealings. Most scholars today depend upon such evidence as they draw their picture of the world's greatest playwright. Such, however, has not always been the case. Until the late eighteenth century, the William Shakespeare who lived in most biographies was the creation of legend and tradition. This was the Shakespeare who was supposedly caught poaching deer at Charlecote, the estate of Sir Thomas Lucy close by Stratford; this was the Shakespeare who fled from Sir Thomas's vengeance and made his way in London by taking care of horses outside a playhouse; this was the Shakespeare who reportedly could barely read but whose natural gifts were extraordinary, whose father was a butcher who allowed his gifted son sometimes to help in the butcher shop, where William supposedly killed calves "in a high style," making a speech for the occasion. It was this legendary William Shakespeare whose Falstaff (in 1 and 2 Henry IV) so pleased Queen Elizabeth that she demanded a play about Falstaff in love, and demanded that it be written in fourteen days (hence the existence of The Merry Wives of Windsor). It was this legendary Shakespeare who reached the top of his acting career in the roles of the Ghost in Hamlet and old Adam in As You Like It — and who died of a fever contracted by drinking too hard at "a merry meeting" with the poets Michael Drayton and Ben Jonson. This legendary Shakespeare is a rambunctious, undisciplined man, as attractively "wild" as his plays were seen by earlier generations to be. Unfortunately, there is no trace of evidence to support these wonderful stories. Perhaps in response to the disreputable Shakespeare of legend — or perhaps in response to the fragmentary and, for some, all-too-ordinary Shakespeare documented by surviving records — some people since the mid-nineteenth century have argued that William Shakespeare could not have written the plays that bear his name. These persons have put forward some dozen names as more likely authors, among them Queen Elizabeth, Sir Francis Bacon, Edward de Vere (earl of Oxford), and Christopher Marlowe. Such attempts to find what for these people is a more believable author of the plays is a tribute to the regard in which the plays are held. Unfortunately for their claims, the documents that exist that provide evidence for the facts of Shakespeare's life tie him inextricably to the body of plays and poems that bear his name. Unlikely as it seems to those who want the works to have been written by an aristocrat, a university graduate, or an "important" person, the plays and poems seem clearly to have been produced by a man from Stratford-upon-Avon with a very good "grammar-school" education and a life of experience in London and in the world of the London theater. How this particular man produced the works that dominate the cultures of much of the world almost four hundred years after his death is one of life's mysteries — and one that will continue to tease our imaginations as we continue to delight in his plays and poems. Copyright © 2003 by The Folger Shakespeare Library	<urn:uuid:2824019e-6515-4dff-a520-f1dfddee38d3>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.npr.org/books/titles/138016130/the-tragedy-of-julius-caesar	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251694071.63/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126230255-20200127020255-00256.warc.gz	en	0.984925	3,079	3.671875	4	[ 0.07521040737628937, -0.16469651460647583, 0.883874773979187, -0.006392546929419041, -0.36155200004577637, -0.12162287533283234, -0.07141055911779404, 0.2824949622154236, -0.07622262835502625, -0.30839794874191284, -0.1337500810623169, -0.15772715210914612, 0.13634541630744934, 0.255058467...	1	Washington Square PressCopyright © 2004 William Shakespeare All right reserved.ISBN: 9780743482745 Surviving documents that give us glimpses into the life of William Shakespeare show us a playwright, poet, and actor who grew up in the market town of Stratford-upon-Avon, spent his professional life in London, and returned to Stratford a wealthy landowner. He was born in April 1564, died in April 1616, and is buried inside the chancel of Holy Trinity Church in Stratford. We wish we could know more about the life of the world's greatest dramatist. His plays and poems are testaments to his wide reading — especially to his knowledge of Virgil, Ovid, Plutarch, Holinshed's Chronicles, and the Bible — and to his mastery of the English language, but we can only speculate about his education. We know that the King's New School in Stratford-upon-Avon was considered excellent. The school was one of the English "grammar schools" established to educate young men, primarily in Latin grammar and literature. As in other schools of the time, students began their studies at the age of four or five in the attached "petty school," and there learned to read and write in English, studying primarily the catechism from the Book of Common Prayer. After two years in the petty school, students entered the lower form (grade) of the grammar school, where they began the serious study of Latin grammar and Latin texts that would occupy most of the remainder of their school days. (Several Latin texts that Shakespeare used repeatedly in writing his plays and poems were texts that schoolboys memorized and recited.) Latin comedies were introduced early in the lower form; in the upper form, which the boys entered at age ten or eleven, students wrote their own Latin orations and declamations, studied Latin historians and rhetoricians, and began the study of Greek using the Greek New Testament. Since the records of the Stratford "grammar school" do not survive, we cannot prove that William Shakespeare attended the school; however, every indication (his father's position as an alderman and bailiff of Stratford, the playwright's own knowledge of the Latin classics, scenes in the plays that recall grammar-school experiences — for example, The Merry Wives of Windsor, 4.1) suggests that he did. We also lack generally accepted documentation about Shakespeare's life after his schooling ended and his professional life in London began. His marriage in 1582 (at age eighteen) to Anne Hathaway and the subsequent births of his daughter Susanna (1583) and the twins Judith and Hamnet (1585) are recorded, but how he supported himself and where he lived are not known. Nor do we know when and why he left Stratford for the London theatrical world, nor how he rose to be the important figure in that world that he had become by the early 1590s. We do know that by 1592 he had achieved some prominence in London as both an actor and a playwright. In that year was published a book by the playwright Robert Greene attacking an actor who had the audacity to write blank-verse drama and who was "in his own conceit [i.e., opinion] the only Shake-scene in a country." Since Greene's attack includes a parody of a line from one of Shakespeare's early plays, there is little doubt that it is Shakespeare to whom he refers, a "Shake-scene" who had aroused Greene's fury by successfully competing with university-educated dramatists like Greene himself. It was in 1593 that Shakespeare became a published poet. In that year he published his long narrative poem Venus and Adonis; in 1594, he followed it with The Rape of Lucrece. Both poems were dedicated to the young earl of Southampton (Henry Wriothesley), who may have become Shakespeare's patron. It seems no coincidence that Shakespeare wrote these narrative poems at a time when the theaters were closed because of the plague, a contagious epidemic disease that devastated the population of London. When the theaters reopened in 1594, Shakespeare apparently resumed his double career of actor and playwright and began his long (and seemingly profitable) service as an acting-company shareholder. Records for December of 1594 show him to be a leading member of the Lord Chamberlain's Men. It was this company of actors, later named the King's Men, for whom he would be a principal actor, dramatist, and shareholder for the rest of his career. So far as we can tell, that career spanned about twenty years. In the 1590s, he wrote his plays on English history as well as several comedies and at least two tragedies (Titus Andronicus and Romeo and Juliet). These histories, comedies, and tragedies are the plays credited to him in 1598 in a work, Palladis Tamia, that in one chapter compares English writers with "Greek, Latin, and Italian Poets." There the author, Francis Meres, claims that Shakespeare is comparable to the Latin dramatists Seneca for tragedy and Plautus for comedy, and calls him "the most excellent in both kinds for the stage." He also names him "Mellifluous and honey-tongued Shakespeare": "I say," writes Meres, "that the Muses would speak with Shakespeare's fine filed phrase, if they would speak English." Since Meres also mentions Shakespeare's "sugared sonnets among his private friends," it is assumed that many of Shakespeare's sonnets (not published until 1609) were also written in the 1590s. In 1599, Shakespeare's company built a theater for themselves across the river from London, naming it the Globe. The plays that are considered by many to be Shakespeare's major tragedies (Hamlet, Othello, King Lear, and Macbeth) were written while the company was resident in this theater, as were such comedies as Twelfth Night and Measure for Measure. Many of Shakespeare's plays were performed at court (both for Queen Elizabeth I and, after her death in 1603, for King James I), some were presented at the Inns of Court (the residences of London's legal societies), and some were doubtless performed in other towns, at the universities, and at great houses when the King's Men went on tour; otherwise, his plays from 1599 to 1608 were, so far as we know, performed only at the Globe. Between 1608 and 1612, Shakespeare wrote several plays — among them The Winter's Tale and The Tempest — presumably for the company's new indoor Blackfriars theater, though the plays seem to have been performed also at the Globe and at court. Surviving documents describe a performance of The Winter's Tale in 1611 at the Globe, for example, and performances of The Tempest in 1611 and 1613 at the royal palace of Whitehall. Shakespeare wrote very little after 1612, the year in which he probably wrote King Henry VIII. (It was at a performance of Henry VIII in 1613 that the Globe caught fire and burned to the ground.) Sometime between 1610 and 1613 he seems to have returned to live in Stratford-upon-Avon, where he owned a large house and considerable property, and where his wife and his two daughters and their husbands lived. (His son Hamnet had died in 1596.) During his professional years in London, Shakespeare had presumably derived income from the acting company's profits as well as from his own career as an actor, from the sale of his play manuscripts to the acting company, and, after 1599, from his shares as an owner of the Globe. It was presumably that income, carefully invested in land and other property, which made him the wealthy man that surviving documents show him to have become. It is also assumed that William Shakespeare's growing wealth and reputation played some part in inclining the crown, in 1596, to grant John Shakespeare, William's father, the coat of arms that he had so long sought. William Shakespeare died in Stratford on April 23, 1616 (according to the epitaph carved under his bust in Holy Trinity Church) and was buried on April 25. Seven years after his death, his collected plays were published as Mr. William Shakespeares Comedies, Histories, & Tragedies (the work now known as the First Folio). The years in which Shakespeare wrote were among the most exciting in English history. Intellectually, the discovery, translation, and printing of Greek and Roman classics were making available a set of works and worldviews that interacted complexly with Christian texts and beliefs. The result was a questioning, a vital intellectual ferment, that provided energy for the period's amazing dramatic and literary output and that fed directly into Shakespeare's plays. The Ghost in Hamlet, for example, is wonderfully complicated in part because he is a figure from Roman tragedy — the spirit of the dead returning to seek revenge — who at the same time inhabits a Christian hell (or purgatory); Hamlet's description of humankind reflects at one moment the Neoplatonic wonderment at mankind ("What a piece of work is a man!") and, at the next, the Christian disparagement of human sinners ("And yet, to me, what is this quintessence of dust?"). As intellectual horizons expanded, so also did geographical and cosmological horizons. New worlds — both North and South America — were explored, and in them were found human beings who lived and worshiped in ways radically different from those of Renaissance Europeans and Englishmen. The universe during these years also seemed to shift and expand. Copernicus had earlier theorized that the earth was not the center of the cosmos but revolved as a planet around the sun. Galileo's telescope, created in 1609, allowed scientists to see that Copernicus had been correct; the universe was not organized with the earth at the center, nor was it so nicely circumscribed as people had, until that time, thought. In terms of expanding horizons, the impact of these discoveries on people's beliefs — religious, scientific, and philosophical — cannot be overstated. London, too, rapidly expanded and changed during the years (from the early 1590s to around 1610) that Shakespeare lived there. London — the center of England's government, its economy, its royal court, its overseas trade — was, during these years, becoming an exciting metropolis, drawing to it thousands of new citizens every year. Troubled by overcrowding, by poverty, by recurring epidemics of the plague, London was also a mecca for the wealthy and the aristocratic, and for those who sought advancement at court, or power in government or finance or trade. One hears in Shakespeare's plays the voices of London — the struggles for power, the fear of venereal disease, the language of buying and selling. One hears as well the voices of Stratford-upon-Avon — references to the nearby Forest of Arden, to sheepherding, to small-town gossip, to village fairs and markets. Part of the richness of Shakespeare's work is the influence felt there of the various worlds in which he lived: the world of metropolitan London, the world of small-town and rural England, the world of the theater, and the worlds of craftsmen and shepherds. That Shakespeare inhabited such worlds we know from surviving London and Stratford documents, as well as from the evidence of the plays and poems themselves. From such records we can sketch the dramatist's life. We know from his works that he was a voracious reader. We know from legal and business documents that he was a multifaceted theater man who became a wealthy landowner. We know a bit about his family life and a fair amount about his legal and financial dealings. Most scholars today depend upon such evidence as they draw their picture of the world's greatest playwright. Such, however, has not always been the case. Until the late eighteenth century, the William Shakespeare who lived in most biographies was the creation of legend and tradition. This was the Shakespeare who was supposedly caught poaching deer at Charlecote, the estate of Sir Thomas Lucy close by Stratford; this was the Shakespeare who fled from Sir Thomas's vengeance and made his way in London by taking care of horses outside a playhouse; this was the Shakespeare who reportedly could barely read but whose natural gifts were extraordinary, whose father was a butcher who allowed his gifted son sometimes to help in the butcher shop, where William supposedly killed calves "in a high style," making a speech for the occasion. It was this legendary William Shakespeare whose Falstaff (in 1 and 2 Henry IV) so pleased Queen Elizabeth that she demanded a play about Falstaff in love, and demanded that it be written in fourteen days (hence the existence of The Merry Wives of Windsor). It was this legendary Shakespeare who reached the top of his acting career in the roles of the Ghost in Hamlet and old Adam in As You Like It — and who died of a fever contracted by drinking too hard at "a merry meeting" with the poets Michael Drayton and Ben Jonson. This legendary Shakespeare is a rambunctious, undisciplined man, as attractively "wild" as his plays were seen by earlier generations to be. Unfortunately, there is no trace of evidence to support these wonderful stories. Perhaps in response to the disreputable Shakespeare of legend — or perhaps in response to the fragmentary and, for some, all-too-ordinary Shakespeare documented by surviving records — some people since the mid-nineteenth century have argued that William Shakespeare could not have written the plays that bear his name. These persons have put forward some dozen names as more likely authors, among them Queen Elizabeth, Sir Francis Bacon, Edward de Vere (earl of Oxford), and Christopher Marlowe. Such attempts to find what for these people is a more believable author of the plays is a tribute to the regard in which the plays are held. Unfortunately for their claims, the documents that exist that provide evidence for the facts of Shakespeare's life tie him inextricably to the body of plays and poems that bear his name. Unlikely as it seems to those who want the works to have been written by an aristocrat, a university graduate, or an "important" person, the plays and poems seem clearly to have been produced by a man from Stratford-upon-Avon with a very good "grammar-school" education and a life of experience in London and in the world of the London theater. How this particular man produced the works that dominate the cultures of much of the world almost four hundred years after his death is one of life's mysteries — and one that will continue to tease our imaginations as we continue to delight in his plays and poems. Copyright © 2003 by The Folger Shakespeare Library	3,177	ENGLISH	1
In this assignment I am going to discuss the portrayal of the female characters in “Hobson’s Choice”. I will explore the role of women in society, both at the time the play was set (between 1870 and 1880) and the time it was written (1916). I will then go on to consider how far Harold Brighouse’s characters fit in with the social, historical and cultural context of the play. The play was set in 1870. At this time, in Britain, men and women were treated very differently. Women had no rights. They were considered by men just to be baby makers and home planners. There were three main types of woman in 1870’s Britain. These were: high-class women, middle class and lower/working class women. With the different classes of woman came different lifestyles. A woman of the upper class did not work. Instead, she was a homemaker. She would not do any of the manual work, but would plan who did which jobs on which days. A high-class lady would have had a lot of leisure time. This time would not be used to pursue sports, but to practice something cultural such as playing a musical instrument, painting, hosting parties etc. A high-class woman would have servants for almost, if not, all housework. This included raising the children, of which she would have one or two. They would be raised and taught by a servant called a governess. A high-class woman would have the chance at a good education. They would probably have been able to read, write and maybe do simple maths. The core of an upper class girl’s education would have been learning the etiquette of the upper classes. This would be done at a finishing school. A woman of the middle class would probably work in a shop or office. Her job would not entail much manual work. If her family owned a business then she may work for the family. A middle class woman might have had a little help with her housework but would have done the majority herself. She may have had a little education and would almost definitely have been taught to read and write. A middle class woman would probably have had a little leisure time. This time would be filled with socialising, reading, knitting etc. A middle class woman would probably have had one or two children. In most cases, the parents would look after the children in a middle class family. A woman of the lower/working class would have had no education as it had to be paid for and lower class families could not always afford it. Even when they could afford school, boys in the family would take priority over the girls. A working class woman would do mainly manual work, in factories and for the upper class citizens as servants. Lower class women living in rural areas may work on the farmland. A lower class woman would have done all their own housework, as they did not have the money to hire a servant. She would have very little leisure time, if any at all. A lower class woman would have several children. This was so that they could be sent to work and earn money to support the family. They would start work at about the age of eleven. Of course, there were always exceptions to each case. For instance, a high-class family may have seven or eight children, a middle class woman may have enough money to hire a governess for her children, or maybe a working class family had enough money to send all their children, including girls, to school. Also, in 1880, men were still completely dominant over women. The government was made up entirely of men. This meant that men made all the laws. The only female input into law making was Queen Victoria and all she was allowed to do was decide on whether or not to pass it. She could not make, change, or abolish any law. Due to women being looked on as inferior to men, they were not allowed the vote. There was also a law that said, when a woman was married, all her possessions became the property of her husband. Only in 1882 was this law changed to allow women to keep their possessions after marriage. Between 1880 and 1916, the year the play was written, many changes took place that affected the role of women in Britain. Two major new inventions were introduced that opened up new job positions for women. These inventions were the telephone and the typewriter. Advances in the education system meant that everybody was able to attend a school. Upper classes went to public schools, where fees were paid. Lower, and some middle class children went to State schools, which were free. The difference in the quality of education given at Public schools and State schools would have been quite significant. Public schools would far surpass State schools, but State schools gave the lower class children the chance to become literate, learn mathematics and other skills. This gave them a chance at a better job later in life. In 1916, Britain was in the middle of World War 1. This meant that, due to a lack of men, women took up traditionally male jobs, such as mechanics, building, plumbing and butchery. This resulted in a change in female fashion. Instead of it being used to show off the woman’s body, it became practical and more work-related. Rather than wearing items that restricted movement, like high-heeled boots or bustles, clothing was simple and unrestrictive. There was also an increase in female professionals (e.g. doctors, lawyers). This was due to a combination of two things: a lack of men to fill the job spaces, and pioneering women. Meanwhile, another group of pioneering women were wreaking havoc on Britain. They were the Women’s Social and Political Union, more commonly known as the Suffragettes. This group was headed by a woman called Emmeline Pankhurst. They were campaigning for women’s rights. To gain public recognition the Suffragettes would do all sorts of things, mostly acts of vandalism. These included smashing shop windows, burning down buildings, cutting telephone wires, tearing up golf greens, and slashing paintings. They were even known to knock on the windows and doors of Herbert Asquith (the prime minister at the time) and run away. Some women felt so strongly for the Suffragettes cause that they were willing to give their lives for it. An extremist named Emily Davison threw herself under the King’s horse at the Derby and was killed to gain publicity for the Suffragettes. When a Suffragette was arrested and imprisoned they would go on a hunger strike. This meant that they would refuse to eat until they were let out. This put the Law in an awkward position; keep them locked up and let them die (which would cause bad publicity for the police and make people sympathise with the Suffragettes), or let them go without prosecution. To combat this, the government created The Cat and Mouse Act. This allowed The Law to let the woman go when she became dangerously malnourished, then re-arrest her when she was healthy again. Eventually the actions of the Suffragettes paid off, but not until 1918, when women over 30 were given the vote. This was then changed in 1928 to allow any woman over 21 to vote. Maggie Hobson comes from a middle class family. Her father owns a successful shoe shop, where she works as a saleswoman. She is not paid for what she does. Maggie is a very well organized woman. She is able to look after her whole family (her father, two sisters and herself) and run the family business almost single-handedly. We know it is her that keeps Hobson’s Shoe Shop going because when she leaves to start up her own business with Willie, Hobson’s shoe shop goes under; Willie: It’s been a good business in its day, too, has Hobson’s. Alice: What on earth do you mean? It’s a good business still. Willie: You try to sell it, and you’d learn. Stock and goodwill ‘ud fetch about two hundred. This quote is from near the end of the play, after Maggie and Willie have been gone about a year. It is Willie talking to Vickey and Alice about Hobson’s Shoe Shop, saying how it has gone downhill in the past year and telling them what is thought of their father and his business in trading circles. Maggie is a very good businesswoman. She always gets a sale and is able to work the accounting, due to her education. We do not know if she was self-taught but I think that she is as her sisters, Alice and Vickey, are not able to do the simple arithmetic needed for the accounts, whereas Maggie can: Alice: I’m not snappy in myself. (Sitting at desk.) It’s these figures. I can’t get them right. What’s 17 and 25? Vickey (promptly): Fifty-two, of course. Maggie does not get on very well with her father. This is due to her standing up to him and him being so stubborn. She does know how to manipulate and control him though. She knows that if she is forceful enough he will back down against her. Maggie behaves, towards her father, as if she is the parent and he is the child. She doesn’t ask him to do things, she tells him. This behaviour is probably because, since her mother died, her father has let her take up the maternal role. This means she is used to being in charge, as she has to control her younger sisters, and so thinks it necessary to take charge of her father too. When Maggie resides at her family home, her role is very much the mother. She cooks, cleans and looks after the interests of Alice and Vickey. They are dependant, as children would be. Although she cares for her sisters, she puts Willie before them both. She demands that they show him respect. In order to do this, she says they must both kiss him: Alice: It’s under protest Maggie: Protest, but kiss. (Vickey kisses Will, who finds he rather likes it. She moves back and starts dusting furiously.) Maggie’s relationship with Willie starts off as a purely business relationship. Their marriage was not one of love but a business partnership. In the beginning, Maggie treats Willie a lot like a child. He is extremely dependant on her and she does not leave him to make his own decisions. She even writes his wedding speech for him. Furthermore, she engineers situations to make it seem, outwardly, like a traditional marriage, where the male is dominant: Maggie (rising and going towards the door): Then I’ll leave you with my husband to talk it over. As the play goes on, Maggie and Willie’s relationship grows stronger and more loving. By the end of the play, the relationship has developed into a loving one. Maggie is friendly with Mrs. Hepworth. When she comes into Hobson’s she isn’t pushy, as she is with Albert Prosser, but polite: Maggie: Can I take your order for another pair of boots, Mrs. Hepworth? Mrs. Hepworth: Not yet, young woman. But I shall send my daughters here. And, mind you, that man’s to make the boots. Maggie: certainly, Mrs. Hepworth. This is because Mrs. Hepworth has a higher social status than Maggie. When Maggie meets Ada Figgins, she is very rude to her. This is not just because she is Willie’s Fiancï¿½e, but also because she is of lower class than Maggie herself. If Ada had been middle class Maggie would not have been quite so rude and if Ada were high class and the same situation arose, Maggie would not come out on top, due to her inferior class. Maggie’s marriage to Willie is not at all extravagant. Everything is kept simple and cheap. She has a brass ring, normal clothes are worn, only her sisters and their husbands-to-be are invited and the “reception” consists of a few sandwiches, tea, and cake. This shows Maggie’s non-conformist attitude, as it is not at all a traditional style wedding. It also shows her practicality, as she knows that they do not have enough money to throw it away on a wedding. Maggie’s attitude is quite formal nearly all the time. Even with people she is close to, she is still formal. The only person she really shows complete informality to is Willie. This formal attitude means that she does not show her love the way that the average daughter/sister would. She is also extremely self-reliant. She does not need people to plan out her life for her. She is in complete control of it herself. She also has a great many people dependant on her, and she rarely lets them down. This shows that she is generous and trustworthy too. Generosity, kindness, and selflessness are shown by the fact that she gives up a lot of time to teach Willie to read and write, but she gains nothing from it. It is simply to make his life better. Alice and Vickey Hobson are also middle class. They are the sisters of Maggie Hobson and work in the family shop. They do not do very much work. Instead, Vickey spends her work time reading and Alice spends it knitting. They also arrange for their boyfriends, Albert Prosser and Freddie Beenstock, to come into the shop and meet with them. As with Maggie, they are not paid, they get their keep, and they also get clothing. Their father pays the draper ten pounds a year for each of them to be clothed. They have to have the latest fashions and so the ten pounds is put to good use. Maggie also gets this ten pounds, but does not seem to take advantage of it the way that Alice and Vickey do. Alice and Vickey are not very well educated. They can obviously read, as Vickey reads a book in the shop, but they have trouble with maths. This is shown when they Vickey is trying to do the accounts: Alice: I’m not snappy in myself. (Sitting down at desk.) It’s these figures. I can’t get them right. What’s 17 and 25? Vickey (promptly): Fifty-two, of course. This lack of education is probably due to their interest in men. They did not need to know how to work out sums when they could attract a man with the look of their bodies. It becomes apparent, when Maggie leaves with Willie, that Alice and Vickey do not have any domestic skills either. They cannot cook and do not know the first thing about how to clean around the house. Vickey and Alice are not that close to their father. When he becomes ill at the end of the play, they are not bothered enough to go back to the house and look after him. There is very little love between them and they show no respect towards him. This is shown throughout the play by the way they speak to him. They stand up to him verbally, but will not take action as Maggie does. Instead, Maggie has to push them into it. The only thing that Alice and Vickey care about, relating to their father, is his money. It is proved when the three girls, Alice, Vickey, and Maggie, are invited to the house at the end of the play to sort out who is to move back and look after him. They do not show much remorse at the fact that he is ill, but are very concerned that, if Maggie and Willie are left alone with their father, he may write them out of his will and give it all to Maggie. Alice and Vickey’s relationship with Maggie is, as with their father, quite loveless. They are extremely dependent on her, as children would be with a mother, but do not show affection towards her as a child would its mother. They need her to run the business because they cannot do it for themselves. When she leaves, they are completely lost without her. Vickey and Alice are very critical of Maggie’s marriage to Willie. They think that, because Willie is of a lower class than them, that it will bring the family name into disrepute and affect their chances of getting husbands because of this: Alice: I know, and if you’re afraid to speak your thoughts, I’m not. Look here, Maggie, what you do touches us, and you’re mistaken if you think I’ll own Willie mossop for my brother-in-law. Maggie: Is there supposed to be some disgrace in him? Alice: You ask father if there’s disgrace. And look at me. I’d hopes of Albert Prosser till this happened. Despite the way Alice and Vickey treat Maggie, Maggie still helps them by arranging the extraction of their wedding settlements from their fathers tight fist. In a way, Alice and Vickey use Maggie to get what they need. At the beginning of the play, Alice and Vickey are both seeing men. Alice is seeing Albert Prosser, a lawyer, and Vickey has her eyes on Freddie Beenstock, a corn trader. More love is shown between each couple, respectively, than between Alice and Vickey and anyone else in the play. This is true with respect also. Despite these facts, both marriages came about due to Alice and Vickey’s pursuit for wealth and social standing. The two marriages are not covered in the play but, I would imagine, both were lavish with no expense spared. They would be held in a church and the rings given would be gold. Once the marriages have taken place, Alice and Vickey do not work. They expect to be provided for by their husbands, as was traditional in the 1880’s. Vickey is to have a baby, so some of her time may be taken up by the child. Alice is just a lady of leisure. Alice and Vickey have very stuck-up attitudes. They think they are great and wouldn’t like it if anyone told them differently. They are classic snobs. Alice even looks down on her own sister near the end of the play: Alice: Ah, well, a fashionable solicitor’s wife doesn’t rise so early as the wife of a working cobbler. You’d be up when Tubby came. They know their social status and like to flaunt it. No respect is shown to anyone lower in class than them. They want nothing but the best, but are not prepared to work for it themselves. Hypocrisy, jealousy and greed are shown in one particular scene in the play, when Maggie comes to collect some dilapidated pieces of furniture from the house. They consist of two or three broken chairs and a sofa with the springs all gone. Alice and Vickey say how it’s no way to live, with cast-off furniture, but Maggie tells them that she doesn’t care and that when her and Willie are richer than them all “It’ll be a grand satisfaction to look back and think how we were when we began”. After hearing this, Vickey makes an indirect objection to Maggie taking the chairs by saying, “You know, mended up, those chairs would do very well for my kitchen when I’m wed”. This is seconded by Alice’s comment of, “Yes, or for mine”. The two girls show their greed at the end of the play, as well, when they talk in secret about their father writing them out of his will: Vickey: Can’t you see what I’m thinking, Alice? It is so difficult to say. Suppose father gets worse and they are here, Maggie and Will, and you and I – out of sight and out of mind. Can’t you see what I mean? Alice: He might leave them his money? Vickey: That would be most unfair to us. This also shows that they have misgivings about both Maggie and their father. They are full of distrust. Mrs. Hepworth is a high-class woman. She is the typical wealthy woman of the time. She does differ to the average high-class woman in the way that she feels the lower classes deserve a chance. She shows this, along with her generosity, by giving Maggie and Willie the money to start up there own business. She is a very up-front, what you see is what you get, woman. She is not afraid to voice her opinion. The divide between the classes does not bother Mrs Hepworth as much as it would most other high-class women. This suggests that she herself came from a lower class and married into the money that she has. Ada Figgins is the extreme opposite of Mrs. Hepworth. She was born into a lower class family, lives as a working class woman, and will probably die as a working class woman. She lives with her mum, who controls her life almost completely. Her mother even had a hand in setting her up with Willie. Ada: Wait while I get you to home, my lad. I’ll set my mother on to you. Maggie: Oh, so it’s her mother that made this match? Willie: She had above a bit to do with it. Ada has no prospects for the future. She has nothing to aim for and says that Willie should sort her life out when he marries her. Ada shows fear of the upper classes when she comes up against Maggie. Because Maggie is of a higher class that Ada herself, she backs down from her. This also shows that she is timid. In conclusion, Harold Brighouse wanted to show the difference in class between women in 1880 and how they have changed from then to 1916. He accomplishes this very well, by portraying a stereotype of each class through characters in “Hobson’s Choice”. He then has a non-conformist, who goes against the ideas of the time, and, through her, shows how the women have changed. Maggie is the 1880’s non-conformist. She is more like a woman from 1916. This is shown in the way she pioneers and also makes use of things other people look on as rubbish. Alice and Vickey are stereotypes of the 1880’s middle class woman. This is shown in their attitude towards life, such as their belief that the husband should be the sole provider in a family or their dislike to work. Mrs. Hepworth is the stereotypical 1880’s high-class woman. This is shown through her dress sense, her attitude towards Mr. Hobson, and her wealth. Ada Figgins represents the 1880’s lower/working class. This is shown by the facts that she does not have any money, lives in a small, one or two room house with her family, has rags for clothes, and fears the upper classes.	<urn:uuid:03467b31-edc1-4934-a019-42d1367df862>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://thenewstandardgallery.com/consider-portrayal-female-characters-hobsons-choice-relates-social-historical-cultural-context-play-essay/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250590107.3/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117180950-20200117204950-00298.warc.gz	en	0.987739	4,919	3.765625	4	[ -0.24643050134181976, -0.050502754747867584, 0.2076759934425354, -0.43284645676612854, -0.09373759478330612, 0.2048238217830658, 0.10818365216255188, 0.2416309267282486, -0.11545520275831223, -0.013198615051805973, -0.09689605236053467, -0.12176786363124847, -0.11247430741786957, 0.2618952...	3	In this assignment I am going to discuss the portrayal of the female characters in “Hobson’s Choice”. I will explore the role of women in society, both at the time the play was set (between 1870 and 1880) and the time it was written (1916). I will then go on to consider how far Harold Brighouse’s characters fit in with the social, historical and cultural context of the play. The play was set in 1870. At this time, in Britain, men and women were treated very differently. Women had no rights. They were considered by men just to be baby makers and home planners. There were three main types of woman in 1870’s Britain. These were: high-class women, middle class and lower/working class women. With the different classes of woman came different lifestyles. A woman of the upper class did not work. Instead, she was a homemaker. She would not do any of the manual work, but would plan who did which jobs on which days. A high-class lady would have had a lot of leisure time. This time would not be used to pursue sports, but to practice something cultural such as playing a musical instrument, painting, hosting parties etc. A high-class woman would have servants for almost, if not, all housework. This included raising the children, of which she would have one or two. They would be raised and taught by a servant called a governess. A high-class woman would have the chance at a good education. They would probably have been able to read, write and maybe do simple maths. The core of an upper class girl’s education would have been learning the etiquette of the upper classes. This would be done at a finishing school. A woman of the middle class would probably work in a shop or office. Her job would not entail much manual work. If her family owned a business then she may work for the family. A middle class woman might have had a little help with her housework but would have done the majority herself. She may have had a little education and would almost definitely have been taught to read and write. A middle class woman would probably have had a little leisure time. This time would be filled with socialising, reading, knitting etc. A middle class woman would probably have had one or two children. In most cases, the parents would look after the children in a middle class family. A woman of the lower/working class would have had no education as it had to be paid for and lower class families could not always afford it. Even when they could afford school, boys in the family would take priority over the girls. A working class woman would do mainly manual work, in factories and for the upper class citizens as servants. Lower class women living in rural areas may work on the farmland. A lower class woman would have done all their own housework, as they did not have the money to hire a servant. She would have very little leisure time, if any at all. A lower class woman would have several children. This was so that they could be sent to work and earn money to support the family. They would start work at about the age of eleven. Of course, there were always exceptions to each case. For instance, a high-class family may have seven or eight children, a middle class woman may have enough money to hire a governess for her children, or maybe a working class family had enough money to send all their children, including girls, to school. Also, in 1880, men were still completely dominant over women. The government was made up entirely of men. This meant that men made all the laws. The only female input into law making was Queen Victoria and all she was allowed to do was decide on whether or not to pass it. She could not make, change, or abolish any law. Due to women being looked on as inferior to men, they were not allowed the vote. There was also a law that said, when a woman was married, all her possessions became the property of her husband. Only in 1882 was this law changed to allow women to keep their possessions after marriage. Between 1880 and 1916, the year the play was written, many changes took place that affected the role of women in Britain. Two major new inventions were introduced that opened up new job positions for women. These inventions were the telephone and the typewriter. Advances in the education system meant that everybody was able to attend a school. Upper classes went to public schools, where fees were paid. Lower, and some middle class children went to State schools, which were free. The difference in the quality of education given at Public schools and State schools would have been quite significant. Public schools would far surpass State schools, but State schools gave the lower class children the chance to become literate, learn mathematics and other skills. This gave them a chance at a better job later in life. In 1916, Britain was in the middle of World War 1. This meant that, due to a lack of men, women took up traditionally male jobs, such as mechanics, building, plumbing and butchery. This resulted in a change in female fashion. Instead of it being used to show off the woman’s body, it became practical and more work-related. Rather than wearing items that restricted movement, like high-heeled boots or bustles, clothing was simple and unrestrictive. There was also an increase in female professionals (e.g. doctors, lawyers). This was due to a combination of two things: a lack of men to fill the job spaces, and pioneering women. Meanwhile, another group of pioneering women were wreaking havoc on Britain. They were the Women’s Social and Political Union, more commonly known as the Suffragettes. This group was headed by a woman called Emmeline Pankhurst. They were campaigning for women’s rights. To gain public recognition the Suffragettes would do all sorts of things, mostly acts of vandalism. These included smashing shop windows, burning down buildings, cutting telephone wires, tearing up golf greens, and slashing paintings. They were even known to knock on the windows and doors of Herbert Asquith (the prime minister at the time) and run away. Some women felt so strongly for the Suffragettes cause that they were willing to give their lives for it. An extremist named Emily Davison threw herself under the King’s horse at the Derby and was killed to gain publicity for the Suffragettes. When a Suffragette was arrested and imprisoned they would go on a hunger strike. This meant that they would refuse to eat until they were let out. This put the Law in an awkward position; keep them locked up and let them die (which would cause bad publicity for the police and make people sympathise with the Suffragettes), or let them go without prosecution. To combat this, the government created The Cat and Mouse Act. This allowed The Law to let the woman go when she became dangerously malnourished, then re-arrest her when she was healthy again. Eventually the actions of the Suffragettes paid off, but not until 1918, when women over 30 were given the vote. This was then changed in 1928 to allow any woman over 21 to vote. Maggie Hobson comes from a middle class family. Her father owns a successful shoe shop, where she works as a saleswoman. She is not paid for what she does. Maggie is a very well organized woman. She is able to look after her whole family (her father, two sisters and herself) and run the family business almost single-handedly. We know it is her that keeps Hobson’s Shoe Shop going because when she leaves to start up her own business with Willie, Hobson’s shoe shop goes under; Willie: It’s been a good business in its day, too, has Hobson’s. Alice: What on earth do you mean? It’s a good business still. Willie: You try to sell it, and you’d learn. Stock and goodwill ‘ud fetch about two hundred. This quote is from near the end of the play, after Maggie and Willie have been gone about a year. It is Willie talking to Vickey and Alice about Hobson’s Shoe Shop, saying how it has gone downhill in the past year and telling them what is thought of their father and his business in trading circles. Maggie is a very good businesswoman. She always gets a sale and is able to work the accounting, due to her education. We do not know if she was self-taught but I think that she is as her sisters, Alice and Vickey, are not able to do the simple arithmetic needed for the accounts, whereas Maggie can: Alice: I’m not snappy in myself. (Sitting at desk.) It’s these figures. I can’t get them right. What’s 17 and 25? Vickey (promptly): Fifty-two, of course. Maggie does not get on very well with her father. This is due to her standing up to him and him being so stubborn. She does know how to manipulate and control him though. She knows that if she is forceful enough he will back down against her. Maggie behaves, towards her father, as if she is the parent and he is the child. She doesn’t ask him to do things, she tells him. This behaviour is probably because, since her mother died, her father has let her take up the maternal role. This means she is used to being in charge, as she has to control her younger sisters, and so thinks it necessary to take charge of her father too. When Maggie resides at her family home, her role is very much the mother. She cooks, cleans and looks after the interests of Alice and Vickey. They are dependant, as children would be. Although she cares for her sisters, she puts Willie before them both. She demands that they show him respect. In order to do this, she says they must both kiss him: Alice: It’s under protest Maggie: Protest, but kiss. (Vickey kisses Will, who finds he rather likes it. She moves back and starts dusting furiously.) Maggie’s relationship with Willie starts off as a purely business relationship. Their marriage was not one of love but a business partnership. In the beginning, Maggie treats Willie a lot like a child. He is extremely dependant on her and she does not leave him to make his own decisions. She even writes his wedding speech for him. Furthermore, she engineers situations to make it seem, outwardly, like a traditional marriage, where the male is dominant: Maggie (rising and going towards the door): Then I’ll leave you with my husband to talk it over. As the play goes on, Maggie and Willie’s relationship grows stronger and more loving. By the end of the play, the relationship has developed into a loving one. Maggie is friendly with Mrs. Hepworth. When she comes into Hobson’s she isn’t pushy, as she is with Albert Prosser, but polite: Maggie: Can I take your order for another pair of boots, Mrs. Hepworth? Mrs. Hepworth: Not yet, young woman. But I shall send my daughters here. And, mind you, that man’s to make the boots. Maggie: certainly, Mrs. Hepworth. This is because Mrs. Hepworth has a higher social status than Maggie. When Maggie meets Ada Figgins, she is very rude to her. This is not just because she is Willie’s Fiancï¿½e, but also because she is of lower class than Maggie herself. If Ada had been middle class Maggie would not have been quite so rude and if Ada were high class and the same situation arose, Maggie would not come out on top, due to her inferior class. Maggie’s marriage to Willie is not at all extravagant. Everything is kept simple and cheap. She has a brass ring, normal clothes are worn, only her sisters and their husbands-to-be are invited and the “reception” consists of a few sandwiches, tea, and cake. This shows Maggie’s non-conformist attitude, as it is not at all a traditional style wedding. It also shows her practicality, as she knows that they do not have enough money to throw it away on a wedding. Maggie’s attitude is quite formal nearly all the time. Even with people she is close to, she is still formal. The only person she really shows complete informality to is Willie. This formal attitude means that she does not show her love the way that the average daughter/sister would. She is also extremely self-reliant. She does not need people to plan out her life for her. She is in complete control of it herself. She also has a great many people dependant on her, and she rarely lets them down. This shows that she is generous and trustworthy too. Generosity, kindness, and selflessness are shown by the fact that she gives up a lot of time to teach Willie to read and write, but she gains nothing from it. It is simply to make his life better. Alice and Vickey Hobson are also middle class. They are the sisters of Maggie Hobson and work in the family shop. They do not do very much work. Instead, Vickey spends her work time reading and Alice spends it knitting. They also arrange for their boyfriends, Albert Prosser and Freddie Beenstock, to come into the shop and meet with them. As with Maggie, they are not paid, they get their keep, and they also get clothing. Their father pays the draper ten pounds a year for each of them to be clothed. They have to have the latest fashions and so the ten pounds is put to good use. Maggie also gets this ten pounds, but does not seem to take advantage of it the way that Alice and Vickey do. Alice and Vickey are not very well educated. They can obviously read, as Vickey reads a book in the shop, but they have trouble with maths. This is shown when they Vickey is trying to do the accounts: Alice: I’m not snappy in myself. (Sitting down at desk.) It’s these figures. I can’t get them right. What’s 17 and 25? Vickey (promptly): Fifty-two, of course. This lack of education is probably due to their interest in men. They did not need to know how to work out sums when they could attract a man with the look of their bodies. It becomes apparent, when Maggie leaves with Willie, that Alice and Vickey do not have any domestic skills either. They cannot cook and do not know the first thing about how to clean around the house. Vickey and Alice are not that close to their father. When he becomes ill at the end of the play, they are not bothered enough to go back to the house and look after him. There is very little love between them and they show no respect towards him. This is shown throughout the play by the way they speak to him. They stand up to him verbally, but will not take action as Maggie does. Instead, Maggie has to push them into it. The only thing that Alice and Vickey care about, relating to their father, is his money. It is proved when the three girls, Alice, Vickey, and Maggie, are invited to the house at the end of the play to sort out who is to move back and look after him. They do not show much remorse at the fact that he is ill, but are very concerned that, if Maggie and Willie are left alone with their father, he may write them out of his will and give it all to Maggie. Alice and Vickey’s relationship with Maggie is, as with their father, quite loveless. They are extremely dependent on her, as children would be with a mother, but do not show affection towards her as a child would its mother. They need her to run the business because they cannot do it for themselves. When she leaves, they are completely lost without her. Vickey and Alice are very critical of Maggie’s marriage to Willie. They think that, because Willie is of a lower class than them, that it will bring the family name into disrepute and affect their chances of getting husbands because of this: Alice: I know, and if you’re afraid to speak your thoughts, I’m not. Look here, Maggie, what you do touches us, and you’re mistaken if you think I’ll own Willie mossop for my brother-in-law. Maggie: Is there supposed to be some disgrace in him? Alice: You ask father if there’s disgrace. And look at me. I’d hopes of Albert Prosser till this happened. Despite the way Alice and Vickey treat Maggie, Maggie still helps them by arranging the extraction of their wedding settlements from their fathers tight fist. In a way, Alice and Vickey use Maggie to get what they need. At the beginning of the play, Alice and Vickey are both seeing men. Alice is seeing Albert Prosser, a lawyer, and Vickey has her eyes on Freddie Beenstock, a corn trader. More love is shown between each couple, respectively, than between Alice and Vickey and anyone else in the play. This is true with respect also. Despite these facts, both marriages came about due to Alice and Vickey’s pursuit for wealth and social standing. The two marriages are not covered in the play but, I would imagine, both were lavish with no expense spared. They would be held in a church and the rings given would be gold. Once the marriages have taken place, Alice and Vickey do not work. They expect to be provided for by their husbands, as was traditional in the 1880’s. Vickey is to have a baby, so some of her time may be taken up by the child. Alice is just a lady of leisure. Alice and Vickey have very stuck-up attitudes. They think they are great and wouldn’t like it if anyone told them differently. They are classic snobs. Alice even looks down on her own sister near the end of the play: Alice: Ah, well, a fashionable solicitor’s wife doesn’t rise so early as the wife of a working cobbler. You’d be up when Tubby came. They know their social status and like to flaunt it. No respect is shown to anyone lower in class than them. They want nothing but the best, but are not prepared to work for it themselves. Hypocrisy, jealousy and greed are shown in one particular scene in the play, when Maggie comes to collect some dilapidated pieces of furniture from the house. They consist of two or three broken chairs and a sofa with the springs all gone. Alice and Vickey say how it’s no way to live, with cast-off furniture, but Maggie tells them that she doesn’t care and that when her and Willie are richer than them all “It’ll be a grand satisfaction to look back and think how we were when we began”. After hearing this, Vickey makes an indirect objection to Maggie taking the chairs by saying, “You know, mended up, those chairs would do very well for my kitchen when I’m wed”. This is seconded by Alice’s comment of, “Yes, or for mine”. The two girls show their greed at the end of the play, as well, when they talk in secret about their father writing them out of his will: Vickey: Can’t you see what I’m thinking, Alice? It is so difficult to say. Suppose father gets worse and they are here, Maggie and Will, and you and I – out of sight and out of mind. Can’t you see what I mean? Alice: He might leave them his money? Vickey: That would be most unfair to us. This also shows that they have misgivings about both Maggie and their father. They are full of distrust. Mrs. Hepworth is a high-class woman. She is the typical wealthy woman of the time. She does differ to the average high-class woman in the way that she feels the lower classes deserve a chance. She shows this, along with her generosity, by giving Maggie and Willie the money to start up there own business. She is a very up-front, what you see is what you get, woman. She is not afraid to voice her opinion. The divide between the classes does not bother Mrs Hepworth as much as it would most other high-class women. This suggests that she herself came from a lower class and married into the money that she has. Ada Figgins is the extreme opposite of Mrs. Hepworth. She was born into a lower class family, lives as a working class woman, and will probably die as a working class woman. She lives with her mum, who controls her life almost completely. Her mother even had a hand in setting her up with Willie. Ada: Wait while I get you to home, my lad. I’ll set my mother on to you. Maggie: Oh, so it’s her mother that made this match? Willie: She had above a bit to do with it. Ada has no prospects for the future. She has nothing to aim for and says that Willie should sort her life out when he marries her. Ada shows fear of the upper classes when she comes up against Maggie. Because Maggie is of a higher class that Ada herself, she backs down from her. This also shows that she is timid. In conclusion, Harold Brighouse wanted to show the difference in class between women in 1880 and how they have changed from then to 1916. He accomplishes this very well, by portraying a stereotype of each class through characters in “Hobson’s Choice”. He then has a non-conformist, who goes against the ideas of the time, and, through her, shows how the women have changed. Maggie is the 1880’s non-conformist. She is more like a woman from 1916. This is shown in the way she pioneers and also makes use of things other people look on as rubbish. Alice and Vickey are stereotypes of the 1880’s middle class woman. This is shown in their attitude towards life, such as their belief that the husband should be the sole provider in a family or their dislike to work. Mrs. Hepworth is the stereotypical 1880’s high-class woman. This is shown through her dress sense, her attitude towards Mr. Hobson, and her wealth. Ada Figgins represents the 1880’s lower/working class. This is shown by the facts that she does not have any money, lives in a small, one or two room house with her family, has rags for clothes, and fears the upper classes.	4,742	ENGLISH	1
Change for Noblewomen in the Eighteenth Century Dashkova’s accomplishments reflected developments in elite women’s lives that spread outward from St. Petersburg during the eighteenth century. By Catherine’s reign, the gender segregation of the Muscovite era lingered on only in provincial areas far from the major cities. Nearly everywhere, girls from noble families were being educated, mostly by tutors hired by their parents. Women in families attuned to the new arts and ideas read for pleasure, played musical instruments, attended plays, and drew sketches of the countryside.15 While these pleasant additions to daily life spread through the provinces, noblewomen were also expanding their property rights. Women’s property rights were defined in various government statutes and debated in Russian law courts throughout the eighteenth century. Revisions of inheritance law remained true to the provisions of the Ulozhenie of 1649: widows were entitled to one‑seventh of their husband’s real property and one‑fourth of moveables. A daughter whose parents died intestate could claim one‑fourteenth of her parents’ real property and one‑eighth of the moveables; parents could choose to make more generous bequests in wills. The law did not address the question of whether daughters’ dowries should be considered part of their inheritances. That issue was contentious, because counting dowries as inheritances meant that women would receive less when their parents died. The courts usually ruled that dowry property should not be subtracted from inheritance shares.16 Russian judges in the eighteenth century also repeatedly reaffirmed the long‑standing principle that women, regardless of their marital status, could control their property. In 1753 the imperial Senate, Russia’s highest court, ruled in a landmark case that a woman did not need her husband’s consent to sell an estate that belonged to her. In effect, the senators were stating that women had the same ownership rights as men. Although consistent with Russian tradition, this ruling was remarkable in the context of eighteenth‑century Europe. In most countries, particularly the larger ones, medieval customs that had granted women considerable control over their dowries and inheritances had given way in the early modern period to law codes that gave husbands control of, and often ownership of, their wives’ property. In Britain, for example, the legal principle of couverture decreed that in marriage, “the husband and wife are one person in law; that is, the very being or legal existence of the woman is suspended during the marriage, or at least is incorporated and consolidated into that of the husband.”17 Because of couverture, an English wife required her husband’s agreement to sign a contract, file a civil suit, or execute a will, and she had little recourse should a profligate spouse gamble away all her property. By comparison, a Russian wife was practically a free agent. The property rights of Russian noblewomen were also strengthened in the eighteenth century by a redefinition of the landholding rights of their class. In the aftermath of Peter I’s abolition of pomeste and votchina, nobles argued successfully in court cases and petitions to the government that an individual landowner possessed full title to an estate. The government could not confiscate land if an owner defaulted on his obligation to serve the state. Nor could the government require an owner to obtain the consent of his or her extended family before selling land. It was significant that Russian jurists and litigants made no gender distinctions in these new arguments, and they also appear to have been quite blind to the attractions of couverture, eschewing its importation into Russian law. Perhaps noblewomen themselves pressured the lawmakers to preserve their rights, for even as the jurists drafted the laws and the judges interpreted them, noblewomen were exercising those rights more energetically than ever before. Widows had long been involved in the real estate market; now married women became more engaged as well. Michelle Marrese has found that 20 percent of the female sellers of land in the 1710s were married women. By mid‑century, that figure had more than doubled, to 46 percent. One hundred years later, married women were 63 percent of the female buyers of land and serfs. Marrese has estimated that by 1860 women comprised a third or more of the buyers and sellers.18 In the eighteenth century, women also participated more directly and more often in other legal transactions. They attended sessions of the courts and signed their own names to sales contracts, rather than sending male representatives to perform such tasks, as they had done in the past. Some women sued estranged husbands or other family members over property disputes. Foreign observers were astonished by the autonomy of propertied women. Martha Wilmot, Dashkova’s friend, wrote in her journal in 1806, “The full and entire dominion which Russian women have over their own fortunes gives them a remarkable degree of liberty and a degree of independence of their Husbands unknown in England.”19 The persistence of women’s property and legal rights in Russia was one important instance in which the preservation, and indeed expansion, of traditional principles worked to women’s benefit. Notions about family life were more affected by ideas flowing in from Western Europe in the eighteenth century. We have already seen that Peter I endorsed the principle that spouses should share emotional intimacy as well as household management. This principle gained widespread acceptance in the eighteenth century. In 1767, Natalia Dolgorukaia (1714–71), who belonged to the top ranks of the nobility, summed up the new stress on conjugal love in her description of her marriage. “It seemed to me that he had been born for me and I for him,” she wrote of her husband Ivan, years after his death, “and it was impossible for us to live without one another.” Theirs was an alliance of soulmates; “I was a comrade to my husband,” she fondly recalled.20 Similar sentiments appear in the correspondence of other noblewomen. Olga Glagoleva has analyzed the way eighteenth‑century wives addressed their husbands in letters. Early in Peter’s reign, women writing to their spouses emphasized their subordination. “To my sovereign Ivan Ivanovich,” wrote Maria Kireevskaia in 1716, “be healthy my sovereign Ivan Ivanovich for many years, please my sovereign have a letter written to me about your perennial health.” Glagoleva and Mary Cavender have found that by the end of the century, the tender terms “friend” and “angel” had replaced “sovereign.”21 Older patriarchal ideas persisted. Dolgorukaia saw herself as her husband’s comrade, not his equal: she believed that it was her duty to devote herself completely to him, while his was to serve as her lover, protector, and moral instructor. “I had everything in him,” she wrote many years after his death, “a gracious husband, and father, and teacher and seeker after my salvation.”22 Dolgorukaia proved her devotion to Ivan by following him into Siberian exile after he ran afoul of Empress Anna’s favorites. If a wife did not have such a loving marriage, she owed it to God and her family to make the best of things. A widow named Iakovleva, who headed her household and managed a small estate, made this clear to her thirteen‑year‑old daughter Anna in 1769, shortly before she arranged Anna’s marriage to a much older man. “And when God blesses you with a husband,” the widow declared, “then respect your husband as your master, obey him, and love him with all your heart, even if he acts badly toward you. Know too that he was given to you by the Lord: the good for making you happy, and the bad to test your tolerance. If you bear all of this with humility, then you will have submitted to the will of God and not humanity.”23 Noblewomen were also expected to be lovingly submissive to older family members, both before and after they married. In their memoirs, Dolgorukaia and Anna Labzina, Iakovleva’s daughter, profess deep affection for their marital families, especially their mothers‑in‑law. Each portrays herself as an innocent young bride afraid to leave her mother and go to live with people whom, as Dolgorukaia put it, she was “not accustomed to.” Both women came to love some of their new kin. Labzina, whose marriage to her first husband was desperately unhappy, threw herself on the mercy of her in‑laws, and they responded with kindness. “I will never forget their love and affection, “ she wrote, “especially that of my brother‑in‑law, who, upon seeing my youth and simple nature, endeavored to treat me warmly.” Labzina also relied heavily upon her mother‑in‑law, whom she remembered as “my… consolation and solace.”24 This latter comment may be particularly instructive. Eighteenth‑century court cases suggest fairly regular friction among sisters‑in‑law and brothers‑in‑law but rather less between parents and children. Perhaps the long‑standing Russian belief in the importance of respect for elders limited the conflict between generations. Дата добавления: 2016-01-29; просмотров: 593;	<urn:uuid:841cad58-0a1c-4a78-8747-852d46eee748>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://helpiks.org/6-65489.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250614880.58/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124011048-20200124040048-00211.warc.gz	en	0.980584	2,005	3.734375	4	[ -0.2309548556804657, 0.03972891345620155, 0.35100293159484863, -0.14977096021175385, -0.03780917078256607, 0.13371583819389343, -0.01776856929063797, -0.043023720383644104, -0.011924543417990208, 0.23867963254451752, -0.2370723932981491, 0.010580861009657383, 0.24874547123908997, -0.055759...	1	Change for Noblewomen in the Eighteenth Century Dashkova’s accomplishments reflected developments in elite women’s lives that spread outward from St. Petersburg during the eighteenth century. By Catherine’s reign, the gender segregation of the Muscovite era lingered on only in provincial areas far from the major cities. Nearly everywhere, girls from noble families were being educated, mostly by tutors hired by their parents. Women in families attuned to the new arts and ideas read for pleasure, played musical instruments, attended plays, and drew sketches of the countryside.15 While these pleasant additions to daily life spread through the provinces, noblewomen were also expanding their property rights. Women’s property rights were defined in various government statutes and debated in Russian law courts throughout the eighteenth century. Revisions of inheritance law remained true to the provisions of the Ulozhenie of 1649: widows were entitled to one‑seventh of their husband’s real property and one‑fourth of moveables. A daughter whose parents died intestate could claim one‑fourteenth of her parents’ real property and one‑eighth of the moveables; parents could choose to make more generous bequests in wills. The law did not address the question of whether daughters’ dowries should be considered part of their inheritances. That issue was contentious, because counting dowries as inheritances meant that women would receive less when their parents died. The courts usually ruled that dowry property should not be subtracted from inheritance shares.16 Russian judges in the eighteenth century also repeatedly reaffirmed the long‑standing principle that women, regardless of their marital status, could control their property. In 1753 the imperial Senate, Russia’s highest court, ruled in a landmark case that a woman did not need her husband’s consent to sell an estate that belonged to her. In effect, the senators were stating that women had the same ownership rights as men. Although consistent with Russian tradition, this ruling was remarkable in the context of eighteenth‑century Europe. In most countries, particularly the larger ones, medieval customs that had granted women considerable control over their dowries and inheritances had given way in the early modern period to law codes that gave husbands control of, and often ownership of, their wives’ property. In Britain, for example, the legal principle of couverture decreed that in marriage, “the husband and wife are one person in law; that is, the very being or legal existence of the woman is suspended during the marriage, or at least is incorporated and consolidated into that of the husband.”17 Because of couverture, an English wife required her husband’s agreement to sign a contract, file a civil suit, or execute a will, and she had little recourse should a profligate spouse gamble away all her property. By comparison, a Russian wife was practically a free agent. The property rights of Russian noblewomen were also strengthened in the eighteenth century by a redefinition of the landholding rights of their class. In the aftermath of Peter I’s abolition of pomeste and votchina, nobles argued successfully in court cases and petitions to the government that an individual landowner possessed full title to an estate. The government could not confiscate land if an owner defaulted on his obligation to serve the state. Nor could the government require an owner to obtain the consent of his or her extended family before selling land. It was significant that Russian jurists and litigants made no gender distinctions in these new arguments, and they also appear to have been quite blind to the attractions of couverture, eschewing its importation into Russian law. Perhaps noblewomen themselves pressured the lawmakers to preserve their rights, for even as the jurists drafted the laws and the judges interpreted them, noblewomen were exercising those rights more energetically than ever before. Widows had long been involved in the real estate market; now married women became more engaged as well. Michelle Marrese has found that 20 percent of the female sellers of land in the 1710s were married women. By mid‑century, that figure had more than doubled, to 46 percent. One hundred years later, married women were 63 percent of the female buyers of land and serfs. Marrese has estimated that by 1860 women comprised a third or more of the buyers and sellers.18 In the eighteenth century, women also participated more directly and more often in other legal transactions. They attended sessions of the courts and signed their own names to sales contracts, rather than sending male representatives to perform such tasks, as they had done in the past. Some women sued estranged husbands or other family members over property disputes. Foreign observers were astonished by the autonomy of propertied women. Martha Wilmot, Dashkova’s friend, wrote in her journal in 1806, “The full and entire dominion which Russian women have over their own fortunes gives them a remarkable degree of liberty and a degree of independence of their Husbands unknown in England.”19 The persistence of women’s property and legal rights in Russia was one important instance in which the preservation, and indeed expansion, of traditional principles worked to women’s benefit. Notions about family life were more affected by ideas flowing in from Western Europe in the eighteenth century. We have already seen that Peter I endorsed the principle that spouses should share emotional intimacy as well as household management. This principle gained widespread acceptance in the eighteenth century. In 1767, Natalia Dolgorukaia (1714–71), who belonged to the top ranks of the nobility, summed up the new stress on conjugal love in her description of her marriage. “It seemed to me that he had been born for me and I for him,” she wrote of her husband Ivan, years after his death, “and it was impossible for us to live without one another.” Theirs was an alliance of soulmates; “I was a comrade to my husband,” she fondly recalled.20 Similar sentiments appear in the correspondence of other noblewomen. Olga Glagoleva has analyzed the way eighteenth‑century wives addressed their husbands in letters. Early in Peter’s reign, women writing to their spouses emphasized their subordination. “To my sovereign Ivan Ivanovich,” wrote Maria Kireevskaia in 1716, “be healthy my sovereign Ivan Ivanovich for many years, please my sovereign have a letter written to me about your perennial health.” Glagoleva and Mary Cavender have found that by the end of the century, the tender terms “friend” and “angel” had replaced “sovereign.”21 Older patriarchal ideas persisted. Dolgorukaia saw herself as her husband’s comrade, not his equal: she believed that it was her duty to devote herself completely to him, while his was to serve as her lover, protector, and moral instructor. “I had everything in him,” she wrote many years after his death, “a gracious husband, and father, and teacher and seeker after my salvation.”22 Dolgorukaia proved her devotion to Ivan by following him into Siberian exile after he ran afoul of Empress Anna’s favorites. If a wife did not have such a loving marriage, she owed it to God and her family to make the best of things. A widow named Iakovleva, who headed her household and managed a small estate, made this clear to her thirteen‑year‑old daughter Anna in 1769, shortly before she arranged Anna’s marriage to a much older man. “And when God blesses you with a husband,” the widow declared, “then respect your husband as your master, obey him, and love him with all your heart, even if he acts badly toward you. Know too that he was given to you by the Lord: the good for making you happy, and the bad to test your tolerance. If you bear all of this with humility, then you will have submitted to the will of God and not humanity.”23 Noblewomen were also expected to be lovingly submissive to older family members, both before and after they married. In their memoirs, Dolgorukaia and Anna Labzina, Iakovleva’s daughter, profess deep affection for their marital families, especially their mothers‑in‑law. Each portrays herself as an innocent young bride afraid to leave her mother and go to live with people whom, as Dolgorukaia put it, she was “not accustomed to.” Both women came to love some of their new kin. Labzina, whose marriage to her first husband was desperately unhappy, threw herself on the mercy of her in‑laws, and they responded with kindness. “I will never forget their love and affection, “ she wrote, “especially that of my brother‑in‑law, who, upon seeing my youth and simple nature, endeavored to treat me warmly.” Labzina also relied heavily upon her mother‑in‑law, whom she remembered as “my… consolation and solace.”24 This latter comment may be particularly instructive. Eighteenth‑century court cases suggest fairly regular friction among sisters‑in‑law and brothers‑in‑law but rather less between parents and children. Perhaps the long‑standing Russian belief in the importance of respect for elders limited the conflict between generations. Дата добавления: 2016-01-29; просмотров: 593;	1,957	ENGLISH	1
Discovery of Juana Maria, a drawing by James Gibbons The heart-breaking story of a native woman abandoned on the island of San Nicholas for almost twenty years Captain George Nidever had arrived in California in 1834. He was a renowned hunter known for his skill in tracking sea otters along the coast and on the Channel Islands. Nidever was also an accomplished sailor, at one time employed as a pilot by government surveyors when they developed maps of the coast and the islands. San Nicholas is the most remote of the Channel Islands, and lies about 53 miles off the coast, west of Los Angeles. Viscaino landed on San Nicholas on December 6, 1602. He reported it densely populated. The Southern Channel Islands (Santa Catalina, San Clemente and San Nicholas) appear to have been inhabited by people of the Takic branch of the Uto Aztecan language. They were skilled sailors. Not much is known about the San Nicholas Islanders from 1602 to 1800 except that by 1800 the population had declined markedly. In 1811, a group of 25-30 Kodiaks from the Russian camp at Sitka (Alaska) were landed on the island to hunt otter and seal. The Kodiaks apparently feuded with the island men over the women. By the time the Kodiaks were finally removed, there were less than one hundred Indians left. By the early 1830s, with the Indian population in decline and many villages abandoned, the padres organized the removal of all remaining Indians from the Channel Islands. The last island to be evacuated was San Nicholas. The Peores Nada, captained by Charles Hubbard, landed on the island in 1835 and began to load the Indians on board. A child was found missing and his mother pleaded to be left on the island to find him. She was described as a light-complexioned woman between 20-30 years of age. She disappeared into the mist and wasn't seen again for eighteen years. The Peores Nada intended to return when the weather cleared but the ship struck an object entering into the harbor at San Francisco, and sank. Several efforts were made in subsequent years to find the "last" Indian but none succeeded until Captain Nidever discovered her in 1853. Captain Nidiver reported on the encounter in his memoirs The Life and Adventures of George Nidever. The party consisted of himself, another hunter named Charley Brown, "an Irishman we called Colorado from his florid complexion" and four Mission Indians. They landed on the island in July, planning several months hunting. Shortly after their arrival, they found an "old woman" stripping blubber from a piece of sealskin. According to Nidiver's account, instead of running away "she smiled and bowed, chattering away to them in an unintelligible language." She was "of medium height... about 50 years old but ...still strong and active. Her face was pleasing as she was continually smiling... Her clothing consisted of but a single garment of skins." Nidever had been requested by the Fathers at (delete the) Mission Santa Barbara to "bring the lost woman off [the island] in case we found her" and that is what they did about a month later. Upon the group's arrival in Santa Barbara, the woman was astonished and delighted at the signs of civilization. She was particularly intrigued by an ox-cart and all the horses. Word spread of her arrival and soon "half the town came down to see her." The good Captain took the woman to stay at his home, where she was nursed by his wife Sinforosa Sanchez Nidever. The “Lone Woman of San Nicholas” became an object of considerable fascination. She often visited the town and seldom returned without some presents. The Fathers from the Mission visited her. Everyone was taken with her attitude. She was "always in good humor and sang and danced, to the great delight of the children..." Through sign language, it was determined that she was indeed the woman left in 1835 and, sadly, that she never did find her child. Juana Maria (the name given her by the padres) became ill of dysentery and died after just seven weeks on the mainland. She was buried in the cemetery at Mission Santa Barbara. All her personal possession were given to California Academy of Sciences but these were destroyed in the San Francisco earthquake and fire of 1906.	<urn:uuid:339b7ce4-1766-4933-94fd-bb2bd7967c21>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://missionscalifornia.com/stories/lone-woman-san-nicolas-island	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250607118.51/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122131612-20200122160612-00173.warc.gz	en	0.984982	909	3.390625	3	[ 0.21451924741268158, 0.1787029355764389, 0.23791661858558655, -0.09211523830890656, -0.04236068204045296, -0.17655211687088013, 0.21124592423439026, 0.32330143451690674, -0.20480027794837952, 0.3156231641769409, 0.4275406002998352, -0.23419852554798126, -0.1801888644695282, 0.4400238096714...	6	Discovery of Juana Maria, a drawing by James Gibbons The heart-breaking story of a native woman abandoned on the island of San Nicholas for almost twenty years Captain George Nidever had arrived in California in 1834. He was a renowned hunter known for his skill in tracking sea otters along the coast and on the Channel Islands. Nidever was also an accomplished sailor, at one time employed as a pilot by government surveyors when they developed maps of the coast and the islands. San Nicholas is the most remote of the Channel Islands, and lies about 53 miles off the coast, west of Los Angeles. Viscaino landed on San Nicholas on December 6, 1602. He reported it densely populated. The Southern Channel Islands (Santa Catalina, San Clemente and San Nicholas) appear to have been inhabited by people of the Takic branch of the Uto Aztecan language. They were skilled sailors. Not much is known about the San Nicholas Islanders from 1602 to 1800 except that by 1800 the population had declined markedly. In 1811, a group of 25-30 Kodiaks from the Russian camp at Sitka (Alaska) were landed on the island to hunt otter and seal. The Kodiaks apparently feuded with the island men over the women. By the time the Kodiaks were finally removed, there were less than one hundred Indians left. By the early 1830s, with the Indian population in decline and many villages abandoned, the padres organized the removal of all remaining Indians from the Channel Islands. The last island to be evacuated was San Nicholas. The Peores Nada, captained by Charles Hubbard, landed on the island in 1835 and began to load the Indians on board. A child was found missing and his mother pleaded to be left on the island to find him. She was described as a light-complexioned woman between 20-30 years of age. She disappeared into the mist and wasn't seen again for eighteen years. The Peores Nada intended to return when the weather cleared but the ship struck an object entering into the harbor at San Francisco, and sank. Several efforts were made in subsequent years to find the "last" Indian but none succeeded until Captain Nidever discovered her in 1853. Captain Nidiver reported on the encounter in his memoirs The Life and Adventures of George Nidever. The party consisted of himself, another hunter named Charley Brown, "an Irishman we called Colorado from his florid complexion" and four Mission Indians. They landed on the island in July, planning several months hunting. Shortly after their arrival, they found an "old woman" stripping blubber from a piece of sealskin. According to Nidiver's account, instead of running away "she smiled and bowed, chattering away to them in an unintelligible language." She was "of medium height... about 50 years old but ...still strong and active. Her face was pleasing as she was continually smiling... Her clothing consisted of but a single garment of skins." Nidever had been requested by the Fathers at (delete the) Mission Santa Barbara to "bring the lost woman off [the island] in case we found her" and that is what they did about a month later. Upon the group's arrival in Santa Barbara, the woman was astonished and delighted at the signs of civilization. She was particularly intrigued by an ox-cart and all the horses. Word spread of her arrival and soon "half the town came down to see her." The good Captain took the woman to stay at his home, where she was nursed by his wife Sinforosa Sanchez Nidever. The “Lone Woman of San Nicholas” became an object of considerable fascination. She often visited the town and seldom returned without some presents. The Fathers from the Mission visited her. Everyone was taken with her attitude. She was "always in good humor and sang and danced, to the great delight of the children..." Through sign language, it was determined that she was indeed the woman left in 1835 and, sadly, that she never did find her child. Juana Maria (the name given her by the padres) became ill of dysentery and died after just seven weeks on the mainland. She was buried in the cemetery at Mission Santa Barbara. All her personal possession were given to California Academy of Sciences but these were destroyed in the San Francisco earthquake and fire of 1906.	944	ENGLISH	1
Nesyamun is the only mummy remaining at Leeds Museums and Galleries. Three mummies were on display at the museum during the Second World war, but the other two were destroyed during a German air bombing raid on Leeds. This is a reminder of how fragile, important and precious Nesyamun is. Who was Nesyamun? Nesyamun was a priest who worked at the Temple of Amun at the Karnak complex. Karnak was in Thebes (modern day Luxor) and the complex employed over 80,000 people! What was the Temple of Amun? Nesyamun means ‘the one belonging to Amun’. Amun was a very important Egyptian god. The young king Tutankhamen also worshipped the god Amun and his own name means ‘living image of Amun’. What does Nesyamun tell us about Ancient Egyptians? We can learn lots of things about the Ancient Egyptians from Nesyamun. - Dental records: Nesyamun does not have many teeth. This is because he ate bread, and in Ancient Egyptian times the bread would have had a lot of grit and sand. This will have worn away at his teeth. He also brushed his teeth with twigs, which means that the teeth he has left are very worn. There are splinters in his gums, further evidence of his dental hygiene. - Life as a priest: Nesyamun has no hair, this is because priests had to shave their heads (and the rest of their body) every day. Nesyamun’s coffin is adorned with pictures of him as a priest (particularly on the upper lid) and images of gods that he worshipped (on the bottom lid). - Religious rituals It also has hieroglyphics (Egyptian writing) which tell us about his life as a priest, his name and age, where he worked; and it contains spells and blessings from ‘The Book of the Dead’. What can't we be sure of? We do not know how Nesyamun died. He is a very unique mummy because his mouth is open and his tongue sticking out. Usually embalmers would not leave the mouth of a mummy open. This might give us a clue about his death: he could have been strangled (although there is no damage to his neck), or he could have suffered an allergic reaction, maybe to an insect that had bitten him. On the upper lid of his coffin, you can see a hole in the chin. There would have been a beard there, but this has been damaged.	<urn:uuid:382bd8cd-63ab-4dbf-8e6b-02ec0bbc7db8>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.mylearning.org/stories/ancient-egypt-death-and-the-afterlife/326	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251799918.97/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129133601-20200129163601-00202.warc.gz	en	0.991213	550	3.5	4	[ -0.2878234088420868, 0.5838155746459961, -0.02895291894674301, -0.20292741060256958, -0.4371548295021057, -0.3591083288192749, 0.7830004692077637, -0.16913415491580963, 0.013072737492620945, -0.12285251915454865, -0.1738911271095276, -0.332893967628479, 0.29623425006866455, 0.3530312478542...	4	Nesyamun is the only mummy remaining at Leeds Museums and Galleries. Three mummies were on display at the museum during the Second World war, but the other two were destroyed during a German air bombing raid on Leeds. This is a reminder of how fragile, important and precious Nesyamun is. Who was Nesyamun? Nesyamun was a priest who worked at the Temple of Amun at the Karnak complex. Karnak was in Thebes (modern day Luxor) and the complex employed over 80,000 people! What was the Temple of Amun? Nesyamun means ‘the one belonging to Amun’. Amun was a very important Egyptian god. The young king Tutankhamen also worshipped the god Amun and his own name means ‘living image of Amun’. What does Nesyamun tell us about Ancient Egyptians? We can learn lots of things about the Ancient Egyptians from Nesyamun. - Dental records: Nesyamun does not have many teeth. This is because he ate bread, and in Ancient Egyptian times the bread would have had a lot of grit and sand. This will have worn away at his teeth. He also brushed his teeth with twigs, which means that the teeth he has left are very worn. There are splinters in his gums, further evidence of his dental hygiene. - Life as a priest: Nesyamun has no hair, this is because priests had to shave their heads (and the rest of their body) every day. Nesyamun’s coffin is adorned with pictures of him as a priest (particularly on the upper lid) and images of gods that he worshipped (on the bottom lid). - Religious rituals It also has hieroglyphics (Egyptian writing) which tell us about his life as a priest, his name and age, where he worked; and it contains spells and blessings from ‘The Book of the Dead’. What can't we be sure of? We do not know how Nesyamun died. He is a very unique mummy because his mouth is open and his tongue sticking out. Usually embalmers would not leave the mouth of a mummy open. This might give us a clue about his death: he could have been strangled (although there is no damage to his neck), or he could have suffered an allergic reaction, maybe to an insect that had bitten him. On the upper lid of his coffin, you can see a hole in the chin. There would have been a beard there, but this has been damaged.	534	ENGLISH	1
It had been just a few years early that William Carey had left the church of England and had joined the ranks of the dissenting baptist. Taking the advice of a good friend, he immediately joined himself to a church. Not long afterward, the church began to see the work God was doing in Carey’s life and few doubted that God was going to use his life. So when Carey stepped forward to go into the ministry, few were surprised. A short entry in the church records on August 10, 1786 reads: This evening our brother William Carey was called to the work of the ministry and sent out by the Church to preach the Gospel wherever God in His providence might call him. Little did that church realize what they truly met by that little statement. They were thinking “wherever God in His providence might call him in England.” But God was saying, “wherever I, in My providence, might call him in the World.” Carey went on to help form the modern missionary movement in England and would serve as a missionary in India for many years. On this day in 1796, the Duff, a missionary ship, set sail from London for the Pacific islands. Aboard this ship were thirty-seven missionaries and their families with the London Missionary Society, along with numerous supplies. After over 200 days at sea, the ship finally reached its first destination, where it distributed the needed missionaries and supplies. One of its first stops was the island of Tahiti, where Henry Nott, along with eighteen other missionaries, were settled. These missionaries were the first pioneers to start working on this island. After much hardship, they were able to establish a strong work here. After completing its tour, the Duff returned to England, where it was immediately outfitted for the needed supplies for the missionaries it had just scattered across the islands. These supplies where vital for the survival of the missionaries, since they only had room for necessities with them before. But on the way back to the islands, the Duff was taken captive by a French ship (France and England were at war at that time). This unplanned hindrance lead to much hardship for the new missionaries. Check out bcwe.org	<urn:uuid:57376de3-596c-47f7-a64d-7f17e1c67690>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.worldevangelism.net/august-10th-in-world-evangelism-history/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251789055.93/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129071944-20200129101944-00309.warc.gz	en	0.990982	456	3.375	3	[ -0.10626587271690369, -0.05643434822559357, -0.013876019045710564, -0.3310278356075287, 0.24268153309822083, -0.32140475511550903, -0.05788983777165413, 0.16634029150009155, -0.020169148221611977, 0.20375116169452667, 0.04871629178524017, -0.01170356571674347, 0.37112686038017273, 0.272258...	2	It had been just a few years early that William Carey had left the church of England and had joined the ranks of the dissenting baptist. Taking the advice of a good friend, he immediately joined himself to a church. Not long afterward, the church began to see the work God was doing in Carey’s life and few doubted that God was going to use his life. So when Carey stepped forward to go into the ministry, few were surprised. A short entry in the church records on August 10, 1786 reads: This evening our brother William Carey was called to the work of the ministry and sent out by the Church to preach the Gospel wherever God in His providence might call him. Little did that church realize what they truly met by that little statement. They were thinking “wherever God in His providence might call him in England.” But God was saying, “wherever I, in My providence, might call him in the World.” Carey went on to help form the modern missionary movement in England and would serve as a missionary in India for many years. On this day in 1796, the Duff, a missionary ship, set sail from London for the Pacific islands. Aboard this ship were thirty-seven missionaries and their families with the London Missionary Society, along with numerous supplies. After over 200 days at sea, the ship finally reached its first destination, where it distributed the needed missionaries and supplies. One of its first stops was the island of Tahiti, where Henry Nott, along with eighteen other missionaries, were settled. These missionaries were the first pioneers to start working on this island. After much hardship, they were able to establish a strong work here. After completing its tour, the Duff returned to England, where it was immediately outfitted for the needed supplies for the missionaries it had just scattered across the islands. These supplies where vital for the survival of the missionaries, since they only had room for necessities with them before. But on the way back to the islands, the Duff was taken captive by a French ship (France and England were at war at that time). This unplanned hindrance lead to much hardship for the new missionaries. Check out bcwe.org	455	ENGLISH	1

Subsets and Splits

No community queries yet

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