General William Westmoreland

During the late nineteenth century the French concouquered Vietnam and made it a protectorate and in 1941 the league for the independence of Vietnam (Viet Minh) was formed to fight for independence from the French and on Sept. 2nd . 1945. Ho chi Minh proclaimed it independent from France. The French opposed this and wanted to re-establish their rule but where defeated on the battlefield by the Viet Min and where forced to surrender this ended a war and French rule.

After the war there was a conference in Geneva where Vietnam was divided into two parts along the seventeenth arallel there where now a north and a south Vietnam similar to Korea the north being lead by Ho Chi Minh was mainly communist. North Vietnam at the time was a very poor area being cut off from the agricultural benefits of south Vietnam Ho Chi Minh was forced to ask for help from communist allies like the soviet union and china whom gave needed supported both before and during the war.

The south lead by an anti-Communist ruler named ngo Dinh Diem was headed towards a democracy. The south being supported by the French and the united states of America clearly shows how closely this conflict was tide to the cold war going on between the eastern and western superpowers who supported the war efforts on either side. North Vietnams goal was to unify both north and south Vietnam leaving one communist state even if it meant using military force, at this time the cold war was still going on an since the u. s. a. Feared the spread of communist in Asia, John F. Kennedy gave economic and military aid to south Vietnam in order to prevent the takeover of the outh by the north although all though the conflict was still a civil war and the united states where not officially involved they where the force behind the south.

The North Vietnamese resented the United States getting involved and on august 2nd 1964 three Vietnamese torpedo boats opened fire on an u. s. destroyer stationed 30 miles off the coast of Vietnam in International waters. The next day Johnson gave the order to “attack with the objective of destroying any hostile forces. Retaliation air attacks began that very same day with the goal of destroying Vietnams gunboat capability. As two more United States boats where supposedly sunk more American air and sea forces where sent into the region but held back from direct combat. This is when the United States officially entered the Vietnam War. They did this for a few different reasons the first was that they wanted to keep the independence of south Vietnam, the second had a lot to do with the cold war against communism.

America believed that if north Vietnam would be able to turn the south communist as well then Vietnam could become very powerful, after all the U. S. ad just witnessed the French be defeated by Vietnam. If Vietnam was to become a more powerful country then they would be able to persuade other Asian countries to become communist as well. I think that the U. S. A. felt it had to prove to it’s allied nations that it was willing to fulfil its vow of stopping the spread of communist. As the u. s. decided whether or not to move the combat to North Vietnam or not. The North Vietnamese made a surprise attack and moved the combat to the south when it attacked one of the U. S. A. ‘s major airbases in Bein Hoa.

Johnson immediately ordered a retaliation bombing on the north called rolling thunder which was supposed to scare them and convince them that they had no chance of winning. Bombing of this sort continued for some time. While u. s. troops where being brought in from other places in the world in order to launch a ground attack. By the end of 1965 over 180,000 American soldiers where stationed in South Vietnam under General William S. Westmoreland. The United States with superior firepower helicopters, planes, and many other advantages over the

North Vietnamese where very confident about the outcome of the war. They where to be surprised by the Viet cong’s surprise attacks and concealment as well as knowledge of the land and unity in the people. As the war pressed on it came more and more obvious that the Americans where not going to win this one simply because they where the richer larger more influential superpower. Soldiers where having a hard time in the field fighting the surprise attacks of the guerilla warfare which the Vietnamese used. United States soldiers where growing war weary.

The war effort no longer received the support from the American public that it had at the beginning of the conflict. All of America was posed with the question of “what are we fighting for? ” protests against the u. s. governments involvement in Vietnam broke out in all parts of the u. s. demonstrating the American publics mistrust and disappointment in the united states government. After reports of horrific massacres such as may lia were hundreds of innocent Vietnamese civilians Women and children lost their lives for no apparent reason murdered by American soldiers.

Hundreds of American casualties were being reported each day. The dragging on of a seemingly pointless war, and the amazing amounts of money being spent to cause this suffering, things add up. Soon almost the whole of America was against the war. By the end of 1968 the number of u. s. soldiers in Vietnam reached its peak with over 542,000. These stationed U. S. soldiers began to realize that the way things where going the war would last for many more years to come and they were skeptical to whether or not the u. s. war effort could succeed.

This was when the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese made the most important decision of the war and planned to strike with everything they had. The two forces simultaneously launched a massive siege against several different United States military bases. They called it the Tet offensive, which lasted from January 30th to February 25th, 1968. One of the largest ground battles of the war was fought when the Vietnamese led a surprise attack against the khe Sanh U. S. firebase. The effects of the Tet offensive where devastating to the U. S. forces and moral not only in the soldiers on the battlefield but to all of America.

The Tet offensive ultimately encouraged the decisions, which followed and brought and end of the war for America. Although it was not only the bad results in combat which decided whether the U. S. A. would continue It’s war efforts. Without the impact, which the American public made on the government the war, effort may have easily gone on even longer. At this point in time most people didn’t even know what the war was about in the first place In my opinion just as much respect is due to those people which stood up for what they elieved in and protested against what they did not.. The war. ”

The people that stood up for what they believed no matter the circumstances and made their voice’s be heard, while knowing what was wrong as well as what needed to make something right. There is no doubt about the large roll in the peace process which all the students, activist groups, hippies, and all those others that like peace played. By 1969 combat on the field had decreased very quickly as American troops where evacuated and returned home to a country which would never be the same to them again.

The New Dynasty

As we move into the new millennium, more so than decades, quarter or half centuries, we reflect back on the past. A vast number of books and other publications have come out which review certain areas of the past, a Y2K in review. Of course, the term Y2K immediately evokes the image of a world of computer technology going haywire. The world has had its share of tragedies and hardships, as well as great technological achievements and human advancement in this last century. As we enter Y2K, perhaps one of the major events we will speculate on is the rise and fall of communism.

For the US, it has had a great influence on foreign policy. After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the subsequent shift in power of former Soviet satellites, as well as the change in the centralized communist government in China to a market economy, many wrongly suspected that other smaller communist nations must follow suit. Such was the case for North Korea. Many times, especially in the last decade, it was assumed that North Korea was on the verge of collapse, only to rebound and somehow stay afloat.

How is this possible for an impoverished country where the military take precedence over the citizens, and even the military lacks the means to upgrade its equipment and conduct training due to lack of fuel? With allies running short, and old comrades, China and Russia, not only stopping support, but trying to persuade North Korea to abandon its missile project and not to go through with hereditary rulership, North Korean officials must certainly feel the strain.

Unable to get loans due to multiple defaults, having numerous foreign diplomats expelled from Third World countries for indecent behavior and setting everyone on edge with an alleged satellite missile launch, North Korea has had to resort to threats and concessions of nuclear production and inspections to obtain food and other aid, such as the promise for the development of two light-water reactors.

But even a North Korean defector, Kim Shin Jo, states, I cant understand how people can be so naive that they let themselves be used by North KoreaIt is wrong just to give food to North Korea, because those people who are really starving will not get the food (Hidden, p37). And furthermore, why help a country that spends tens of millions of dollars celebrating the birthday of Kim Il Sung with ever bigger statues and staging massive military parades(Hidden, p38)?

Nonetheless, the North Korean legacy continues, and the war continues. More than a thousand South Koreans have been killed [on the DMZ] since 1953, as have fifty Americans (In the Land, p58), and the DPRK has gone as far as to beef up their missile capability recently along the DMZ with the alleged ability to hit any part of Japan. As Bruce Cummings states, we need to look at Koreas history to find a better approach to dealing with North Korea. The New Dynasty

The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines dynasty as 1: a succession of rulers of the same line of descent 2: a powerful group or family that maintains its position for a considerable time. Following the formation of the Democratic Peoples Republic in late 1945, Kim Il Sung quickly gained full control over the government and the central party. Orville Schell describes it as [b]y occupying all the highest positions in the state, the party, and the military, he managed to turn North Korea into a private fiefdom. (In the Land, p59).

Though nominally a communist nation, it also has the strong makings of a fascist state. Following the 20th Party Congress, the Soviet leaders pressed Kim to adopt the principle of collective leadership, which was tantamount to the abandonment of his near dictatorial position (The NK Communism, p105). And with the passing of power from father to son, Korea was apparently advised by Deng Jiao Ping not to go through with the family legacy (A World W/O, p27). However, there seems to be little suppression of the citizens for cooperation.

Orville Schell was told by his guide while in the DPRK You must never ever allow yourself to think that our loyalty is forced (p58). This is due to North Koreas unique system of Juche, or Chuche, which shows Kims unique diversion from communist creed: As early as December 1995 Kim Il-song, in the midst of pressure from Moscow, expressed his determination, though cautiously, to strike out on an independent road for North Korea by calling for the establishment of Chuche among Koreans (The NK Comm. , p126).

Juche mixes aspects of Marxism, Leninism, Christianity, Confucianism and xenophobia (In the land, p 59). Hwang Jang Yop, a North Korean official who defected in February of 1997, described the system as an abnormal system, a mix of socialism, modern feudalism and militarism (Hidden, p38). The article Kim the Father, Kim the Son states that lumping the North in with other communist regimes is a mistake. Its claim to legitimacy is based not on Marx, but on something more likely to last: religious sense of nationalism. 56) The Kims are viewed by the people as something more like gods or divine rulers, a view strongly supported by the government run papers, publishers and radio. Korea is Tanguns country and Kim Il Sungs country. (Kim the Father, p58) Despite this almost fanatical devotion, one rumor is that attempts were made on the life of President Kim Il Sung] in 1986 and 1987 and also two explosions on trains are believed to be the result of sabotage, and there are said to have been several industrial strikes (Signs, p38).

Despite rumors of political unrest and possible military revolt, it can not be doubted that the Kim Il Sung’s, and now Kim Jong Ils, power is firmly entrenched. Various statues dot the landscape dedicated to both rulers. Photos of one or both are required to be hung in meeting halls, public areas and most houses. Kim Il Sungs various titles range from the Eternal Sun of the Nation and the Greatest Genius of Mankind(Hidden, 37), the Lodestar of Human Emancipation(In the Land, p59) and the Great Leader.

His legacy, now passed on to his son, Kim Jong Il, has also passed on titles like the savior of present-day human music (Hidden, 37), the genius of 10,000 talents (NK Under, p3) and the Dear Leader. Both are known together as Our Sun and Star (inside [US News], p53). There is nothing the Korean establishment craves more from foreigners than the appearance of respect for its leaders and revolution (In the Land, p6). Various grand structures, with no practical use or economic justification, are expected to impress the thousands of foreign visitors.

Signs, pg38) While Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il have fought endlessly to demonstrate North Korean superiority in various fields, they never fail to receive bad reviews by foreign visitors who may marvel at the stunning parades, but are stuck by the apparent falseness of it all, the empty streets, the often strange presentations, strict guided tours and ominous structures. The North Korean government, who believes the Western World is trying to slander them for their own gain, naturally, poorly receives these reviews. However, it is important to analyze the government to find some means of understanding it.

North Korea has once again put itself into a unique position. With the inauguration of Kim Jong Il, the Dear Leaders lasting achievement is to have established the first dynasty in communist history. (Looking, p12) Having presented North Korea in this manner, it seems appropriate to look at North Korea from the perspective of dynastic rule. Whereas communist regimes look unfavorably upon the centralized, Confucian-based Dynasties of old, which the communist parties in Korea and China had struggled against, the centuries of dynastic rule have left lasting impressions on the Asian societies.

The individual dynasties of both Korea and China have lasted centuries, with one ending and another taking its place. Such is the legacy that many assume was left behind with the fall of Koreas Yi and Chinas Ching Dynasties. However, as the barbarian forces of the Mongols and the Manchurians learned, centuries of tradition hold a lot of weight, and they carried on the dynastic tradition with the founding of the Yuan and Ching Dynasties.

In understanding this legacy and showing how it may be seen in the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea, it may become easier to understand why the country continues to survive, despite evidence supporting its collapse. To do this, it is necessary to view history and present not in the negative, but in a manner becoming the great tradition of dynasties. As China once saw itself as the center of the world, North Korea now sees itself as the last bastion of strength against imperialist aggressors, the last great nation on earth where many citizens believe there to be maybe only four other countries (presumably Russia, Japan, U. S. A. , and China, South Korea being part of Korea), and furthermore consider any reliance on the outside world as a source of weakness. (Looking, p13) Therefore, this paper will look at the general dynastic cycle of China, specifically the Ming dynasty, in comparison with the new North Korean Dynasty as well as compare one of the great Ming rulers, Wan-Li, with Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il.

In choosing a comparative dynasty, consideration was given to the Ming governments nationalistic and ethnocentric sentiment, indoctrination through education, hierarchical methods, the dynastic decline and centralized style government. In choosing Emperor Wan Li, his position as a divine ruler, great accomplishments in the early part of his rule, an eccentric patronage of the arts, later anti-social behavior and his ability to maintain power were the main factors.

None of the European power wanted World War I

None of the European power wanted World War I, but they feared Germany. Germany was newly unified, and was beating the European powers in population and Industry. France wanted to recover the Alsace-Lorraine. Britain was a country used to being on the ocean, so they felt threatened by Germany’s colonial expansion and William II’s insisting on a large navy. Russia and Austria feared pressure on their unstable empires. In 1887 William II refused to renew the Reinsurance treaty with Russia, but continued the Triple Alliance of Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy.

In 1894 Russia made an alliance with France, and Great Britain settled it’s differences with France in the Entente Cordiale in 1904 forming the Triple Entente. The assassination, with Serbian Knowledge, of the liberal Austrian archduke Francis Ferdinan in Sarajevo in June 1914 was the spark that set off the war. Germany assured Austria full support, which resulted in an Austrian ultimatum that Serbia could not accept. Austria declared war on Serbia. Russia mobilized to defend Serbia, then Germany declared war on Russia.

Germany also declared war on France. Germany wanted a quick defeat of France. To avoid the French frontier, German forces moved through neutral Belgium thinking they would take Paris by surprise. The Germans encountered more resistance than expected in Belgium, giving France time to prepare. [Caidin 207] This violation of international law destroyed all sympathy for the Central Powers. Although German forces nearly reached Paris, the British and French Miraculously turned back the Germans at the Battle of Marne.

The two sides dug trenches for a war that would last four years. The Russians then attacked sending Germany into a two front war. The Germans defeated the Russians Many times on the east, but the Allies blockaded the Germans on the east by cutting off food and raw materials, The Germans became desperate to break the blockade, so they declared unrestricted submarine warfare. [Villiers 176] After several American ships were sunk, the United States entered the war in 1917. The Russians were in the middle of several revolutions so they were not a threat to Germans.

In 1918 when the Germans did not have to worry about the east, they launched an all out offensive attack in the west, but the United Allies slowly turned the tide. Realizing the situation was hopeless the German High Command urged William to let a new civil government sue for peace. Woodrow Wilson, U. S. President from 1913 to 1921, insisted on dealing with citizens. William grudgingly appointed Prince Max of Baden as chancellor. Even Though Wilson was negotiating with the chancellor there were still many problems.

Fighting continued, sailors mutinied, socialist staged strikes, workers and military formed Communist councils, and revolution broke out in Bavaria. [Grolier] Prince Max announced the abdication of William II and resigned. When Germany surrendered and changed its government, it expected a negotiated peace rather than the harsh terms of the Versailles treaty of 1919. The allies were determined to receive reparations for their losses and to see that Germany was never in a position to harm them again. Germany lost the Alsace-Lorraine to France and lost West Prussia to Poland.

It also lost all its colonies and had to give up most of its coal, trains, and merchant ships, as well as its navy. Germany had to limit its army and submit to Allied occupation of Rhineland for 15 years. Worst of all, the Germans had to ccept full responsibility for causing the war and, consequently pay its total cost. The Germans did not consider themselves anymore guilty than anyone else and could not possibly pay all of the costs demanded. The Versailles treaty seemed fair to the Allies point of view, but it did not ensure a lasting peace.

By accepting the treaty the German Government gained a bad name among its people. [Encarta96] The war reparations put a enormous strain on a country already bankrupted by four years of war. In Weimar in 1919 a nationalist assembly, led by the Social democratic party, wrote a democratic constitution for the ew German Reich. But the prospects of the Weimar Republic, as it was familiarly known, were dim. For most Germans the government was defeated and was controlled by the Versailles treaty, which they regarded as only temporary. Encarta96] The Parliamentary government was opposed by conservative militarists and revolutionary scientists. Both sides frequently tried to overthrow the government with small armies. For instance the military Kapp Putsch in 1920 and, the Uprising of the Communist Sparticists in 1919 under Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg. The economic situation made matters worse because he German government could not pay off reparation requirements, so France invaded Ruhr in1923 to take over coal mines.

The government encouraged the workers to resist passively, printing large amounts of currency to pay them. The result was an inflation that wiped out savings, pensions, insurance, and other forms of fixed income, creating a revolution that destroyed the most stable elements of Germany. Aided by the Dawes plan of 1924, which set reasonable amounts of reparations and provided for foreign loans, the brilliant German Minister Gustav Stresemann reorganized the monetary system and ncouraged industry. Stresemann introduced a new currency, and paved the way for more reasonable reparation schedules.

For five years Germany enjoyed relative peace and prosperity. In 1926 Germany joined the League of Nations. In 1929 when the worldwide depression hit it plunged the city into disaster. Million of unemployed, disillusioned by capitalist democracy, turned to communism or to the party of National Socialism (Nazism) led by Adolf Hitler. In notable efforts called the Munich Putsch of 1923 Hitler and the Nazis made a farcical attempt to seize power in Bavaria. From 1930 on the government functioned by emergency decree.

The Communist profited briefly from radicalization, but the main beneficiary was the Nazi party. The Nazi party had twin attractions of appearing to offer radical solutions to economic problems while upholding patriotic values. [Encarta96] By 1932 it was the largest party in the Reighstag. The next year President Paul von Hindenburg appointed Hitler Chancellor after allowing himself to be convinced by generals and right-wing politicians that only the Nazi leader could restore order in Germany and that he could be controlled.

The Black Death

The Black Death had profound effects on Medieval Europe. Although most people did not realize it at the time, the Black Death had not only marked the end of one age but it also denoted the beginning of a new one, namely the Renaissance (“Effects” 1). Between 1339 and 1351a. d, a pandemic of plague called the Black Death, traveled from China to Europe affecting the importance of cities, creating economic and demographic crises, as well as political dislocation and realignment, and bringing about powerful new currents in culture and religion.

In the beginning, the Italian town of Genoa was one of the busiest ports in Europe. Ships sailed from there to trade all over the Mediterranean Sea. In October of 1347, 12 merchant ships sailed from Caffa to Italy (“Arrival” 1). A strange disease had infected the crew of these ships. Dying bodies lay aboard the ships. City officials, afraid that the disease might spread, issued an order that no person or piece of merchandise was to leave the ships. They even forbade medical treatment for the sick sailors and passengers. The disease still spread.

The officials had not considered that the rats from the ships were able to leave the ships by crawling along the ropes that were tied to the ships. From Italy, the disease spread all over Europe, traveling along the major trade routes. The rats were responsible for carrying the disease, which was transmitted by fleas from infected rats. The fleas drank the rats’ blood that carried the bacteria. The bacteria multiplied in the flea’s gut. While the fleas gut was clogged with bacteria, the flea bit the human and regurgitated blood into the wound (Transmitted” 2).

The Black Death came in 3 forms: the bubonic, pneumonic, and septicemic. Each different from of the plague killed people in a vicious way. All forms were caused by a bacterium called Yersinia pestis (“Forms” 1). The bubonic plague was the most commonly seen form of the Black Death. Which had a mortality rate of 30-70%. The symptoms were enlarged and inflamed lymph nodes (around armpits, neck and groin). The term “bubonic” refers to the characteristic bubo or enlarged lymphatic gland. Victims were subject to headaches, nausea, aching joints, fever of 101-105 degrees, vomiting, and a general feeling of illness.

Symptoms took from 1-7 days to appear (“Forms” 2). The pneumonic plague was the second most commonly seen form of the Black Death. The pneumonic and the septicemic plague were probably seen less than the bubonic plague because the victims often died before they could reach other places (this was caused by the inefficiency of transportation). The mortality rate for the pneumonic plague was 90-95%; (if treated today the mortality rate would be 5-10%). The pneumonic plague infected the lungs. Symptoms include slimy sputum; saliva mixed with mucus exerted from the respiratory system, tinted with blood.

As the disease progressed, the sputum became free flowing and bright red. Symptoms took 1-7 days to appear. This disease could only be transmitted through the air, by someone’s cough (“Forms” 2). Finally the septicemic plague was the most rare form of all. The mortality was close to 100 %. Symptoms, which took 1-7 days to appear, were high fever and skin turning deep shades of purple (“Forms 2”). The Black Death struck the European people without warning. Physicians and philosophers harmed rather than helped. They did not understand the causes of infectious diseases nor how they spread.

It is no wonder that they looked to priests and storytellers, rather than doctors, for answers. They did not have the ability to understand where this sudden cruel death had come from. And they did not know whether it would never go away (“Causes” 1). The most common belief was that God, being a punishment for the sin people had committed sent the plague. Even innocent people, such as infants, had to suffer for the horrible crimes of others. The church was quick to condemn gambling, excessive drinking, the immodesty of women, and the laziness of pheasants.

Guilt lay upon every man’s heart. Therefore, it was only natural that the first measures taken against the plague were the confession of all sins and prayer for forgiveness (“Punishment”2). Praying seemed to have very little effect. Therefore, many believed there was a necessary for extreme measures. A group of men decided to punish themselves in order to persuade God to forgive them. Each of theses “Flagellants” would carry a wooden stick with a couple of leather tongs attached to one end. At the end of each tong would be a sharp spike, about an inch in length.

The flagellants would walk from town to town. Once they would arrive in a village or city, they would go to a public place where there were a lot of people, such as a market or store. After they found that public place, they would start beating themselves with their wooden sticks, hitting their backs until blood flowed freely. The townspeople would always welcome them and the flagellants would sometimes encourage the townspeople to join their beatings. It was common for people to die in these beatings.

The flagellants would then leave the town after a few days, usually taking a few locals to join their group. The group’s numbers grew rapidly from 200-300 to 1000. They did more harm rather than help. The only thing they were doing was carrying the disease with them only spreading up the process (“Flagellation” 1). Many people believed in a legendary witch called the Plague Maiden. She was very beautiful and carried around her neck a red scarf. It was said that she traveled from town to town passing by each house.

When she waved her red scarf in front of a house window, the house would become infected. The legend also told that a man waited all night from the witch to arrive and when she did, he cut off her hand with a sword. It was said that this man was the last to die of the plague in his town (“Plague maiden 2”). In Europe the Jews were easy targets to blame. It was a common belief that the Jews were poisoning the water supply. In some towns, Jews were rounded up and burned to death. They also were accused of practicing witchcraft consequently also suffering the anger of mob violence.

There were massacres, especially in cities along the Rhine River, and many more cases of the Jews being expelled from the town. A few towns actually protected their Jews, but the Jews were being expelled generally from Western Europe during the 14th century, and they were tolerated in Poland and Lithuania. So when the persecutions associated with the Black Death a rose, some Jews simply migrated eastward and did not return (“Jews 1”). The effects that the Black Death had on Europe were very profound. The population of Europe lost about one- third of its people.

These general numbers disguise the uneven nature of the epidemic. Some areas suffered very little, some suffered far more. Some examples are as follows 45% and 75% of Florence died in a single year. One- third died in the first 6 months. Its entire economic system collapsed for a time. In Venice, 60% died over the course of 18 months, 500-600 a day at the height. Certain professions suffered higher mortality, especially whose duties brought them into contact with the sick, doctors and clergy. In Montpellier, only seven of 140 Dominican friars survived.

In Perpignan, only one of 9 physicians survived, and 2 of 18 barber surgeon (“Population loss” 1). The death rate of Auignon was 50% and was even higher among the clergy. One- third of the cardinals died. Clement VI had to concentrate the Rhone River so corpses could be sunken it, for there was not time or room to bury them. Long term population loss is also instructive. Urban populations recovered quickly, in some cases within a couple of years, though immigration from the countryside because of increased opportunities in the cities.

Hardest hit was special groups, such as friars, who took a couple of generations to recover. In many areas, pre-plague population levels were not reached until the 1500’s, in a few not until the 1600. This is one reason why the Black Death marks a dividing line between the central Middle Ages, with medieval culture in full bloom and at its greatest strength, and the later Middle Ages. The later period was one of chronically reduced population (“Population loss” 2). Prior to its arrival, life was difficult for the ordinary man, who was practically enslaved by his landlord.

Additionally, living conditions were very unsanitary. When the plague was brought to Europe, this state of existence promoted the spreading of this new disease and changed the way people, both rich and poor, dealt with their lives. After many years, when this epidemic finally ended, living standards had changes dramatically, Immense effects could be seen in culture, spirituality, and especially economics. Society was never to be the same again; life had changed forever. (“Effects” 3) Eventually, the plague did disappear, but it left Europe with great cultural changes.

Art, in other cases, was most effected by the plague. During the pre-plague times, Nobel lords were shown in full health, in their best clothes, and armor, holding their swards. Afterwards, half-decomposed bodies with parts of skeleton clearly visible were shown. The clothes draping the body were old dirty rags and some sculptures showed worms and snails borrowing in rotten flesh (“Art” 1). After the plague the art was obsessive with cruel aspects of pain and suffering. Painting focused on skeletons mixed in with men in every day life. It was a very cruel sort of art.

Literature was also effected by the plague. It became more dark and somber. Now that most of the stony writers and tellers died from the plague all that was talked about were dead bodies and poems of death and stories were told about the plague. In architecture, many of those with the skill to build died from the plague. Many buildings that were started before the plague were never finished. Universities were abandoned. In Europe Education Standards were incredibly low.

The whole community of scholars suffered as universities and schools were closed or even abandoned. of 40 Professors at Cambridge died. French was commonly spoken among the education in England, The death of numerous French teachers, however, helped the English language to gain over French in Britain. (“Art”1) Cities were hit had hard by the plague, Financial businesses were disrupted as debtors died and their creditors found themselves without recourse. Not only had the creditor died, his who family had died with him and many of his friends. There was simply no one to collect from (“Disruption” 1).

Construction projects were stopped or even abandoned, guilds lost their craftsmen, without the ability to replace them, important machinery broke, and those with the ability to repair them had died (“Effects”). The labor shortage was very severe, and consequently, wages rose. Because of the mortality, there was an over supply of goods, and prices dropped. Whole families died, with not heirs, their houses standing empty. The countryside faced a short-term shortage of labor. They tried to get more forced labor from them, as there were fewer peasants to be had. Peasant in many areas began to demand fairer treatment.

Lastly, the change in spirituality was one of the major effects of the plague. The Black Death left survivors mourning, depressed, and fearful of its return (“Economy” 1) One of the groups that suffered the most was the Christian Church. It lasts prestige, spiritual authority, and leadership over the people. The church promised cures, treatment, and an explanation for the plague. They said it was God’s will, but the reason for this awful punishment was unknown. People wanted answers, but the priests and bishops didn’t have anything to say. The people abandoned their Christian duties and fled.

People prayed to God and begged for forgiveness. After the plague ended, angry and frustrated villagers started to revolt against the church, this caused the churches to be abandoned (“Effects” 2). The Black Death changed European history in many ways. Its fatal symptoms took many human lives, and its influenced carried over into many areas of society. People suffered religiously because the disease brought out the darker side of life and made them question God. Europe would not be the same today without these changes brought on through the devastation of the Black Death.

Modern World

The study of world history is very important to us as Americans because it is helps us understand who we are and what helped us to get where we are. Also it helps us understand who we are as a culture and where we come from. Many people are different and share their different point of views. People have different religions and different ways of living. With the different ways of living and different religions there is a lot of racism and ethnic violence in America today. I feel this a very important issue in the world today because we as Americans need to tie together and become as a team.

While I take this course I hope to learn more about the different cultures and where they were originated from. If I learn where different cultures originated from and how they live their everyday life this can help me learn on how their life is lived and give me a vision of what their lives are really like. For example the people in Somalia are starving for food and will work all day for a simple meal, while most Americans eat food as if it was an everyday thing. As you can see all people have something a little different in them.

I think it’s very important for people to know their own roots. It is also important for us to learn about our government as well as other countries. This is another important thing that I would like to learn and understand by taking this class. We must learn about the leaders of different countries because many leaders from the past have taken a significant influence on our world’s history. The biggest leader who sticks out in my head is Hitler who lead Germany to believe in the Aryan race. This lead to many deaths of Jewish people at concentration camps.

If we would have learned more abut Hitler and his views we might have been able to sway him from his ways, or maybe even taken him out before the large death tolls of Jewish people at the concentration camps. We must learn these government believes and know its powers. Government is a main way of communicating with other countries. In order to keep it this way we must keep accepting some of the things they do. Your religion is one of the most important thing in one’s life that can separate one person from another.

The differences can cause major conflicts and can lead to a Holy War. This is why today in America they call it the “melting pot” of cultures and religions. Many people from all over the globe migrate to America to express their religion and cultural backgrounds. This is one of the biggest reasons of how racism comes into factor. As you can see I feel it is very important for Americans to learn about other cultures and other backgrounds so we can know how different people are and we can adjust to other peoples beliefs.

This can help cut down on racism in the world but it will take more than this to get rid of the people who are ethnocentric. Another important factor in our nation is our economy which depends upon the world’s demand for goods and resources. In understanding world history we can get to know our consumers better, and in doing that it creates a much bigger market for our goods. In return it benefits us by creating more jobs and capital in the United States. Every day Americans consume millions of dollars in imports. Whether it is the oil in your car or the leather coat you are wearing.

We depend on other nations just as they depend on us. One of the most important things in world history is the Bill of Rights. This has changed everybody’s life since it has been applied. Without the Bill of Rights, Americans will not be governed by laws and we would not have the rights we have today. The Amendments help protect the people and give them the rights they need to feel like they are American citizen. Amendments also help people from incriminating themselves. It makes it possible to protect yourself by keeping a gun in your house.

It gives us freedom of speech which is a very important thing to have because you are allowed to say whatever you want; without freedom of speech you would not be able to stick up for yourself and say what you think is right. If Americans didn’t have the amendments the world would be a very curupt place to live in. I am very happy to be an American citizen, and feel it is one of the most important things to me. I learned how lucky I am from taking looks at other countries and comparing what I have for rights and living style in America.

Many Americans take their country for granted, after learning more about the Modern World I am positive that I won’t. The scientific revolution did not happen all at once, nor did it begin at any set date. You can push the date back to the work of Nicolaus Copernicus at the beginning of the sixteenth century, or Leonardo da Vinci in the middle of the fifteenth. Even then, you haven’t gone back far enough and you haven’t included all the factors that contributed to scientific revolution. It’s hard to pinpoint the shift in these attitudes.

The introduction of humanism in the fourteenth century was in a large part based on the idea that human intellect and creativity were trustworthy, and human experience was, to some extent, a reliable base on which to hang knowledge. But the humanist revolution didn’t happen all at once. The difference between experience and authority was the question throughout the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. What should you believe? What your experience shows you? Or what authorities, including the church and the bible, tell you to believe?

While it’s hard to pinpoint the shift in European attitudes, the first, unambiguous statement of this shift in values come in Leonardo da Vinci’s treatise on painting. The Scientific Revolution has been given several dates from the mid to late 1600’s. I feel it occurred in the mid 1500’s to the mid 1700’s. Floris Cohen labels the late 1400’s and 1500’s as the Renaissance for science and the late 1500’s through the 1600’s. Any attempt to assign exact dates is impossible in my opinion. There are historical events that can be identified as useful reference points.

There was a scientific revolution of sorts in the high Middle Ages that in many ways rivaled the later scientific revolution in its sweeping changes, but all the cultural components were not in place. So the scientific revolution of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries did not produce a way of thinking about the world that closely resembles our own. You see, even in the high Middle Ages, Europeans believed that the center of all truth and experience was in God. The medieval’s deeply distrusted human perception. Not only has human perception variable and untrustworthy, the material world itself was deceptive.

Rather than a vehicle for truth, the material world was put in place to actively distract humans from the real task. Moreover, a revolution takes place over time while conditions are put in place which freeze in time the major identifiable events. Following this event, more changes are put into motion, continuing until somehow the activity of change becomes activity of stability. The Scientific Revolution is identified as the beginning of modern science in the early 17th century. The beginning and end points are still the subject of debate, but the events of the first few decades of the 17th century are identifiable and remarkable.

The impact of the Scientific Revolution has been profound. Its most direct influence was on European intellectuals who created a movement that they called the Enlightenment. These intellectuals saw that most human beings lived in ignorance and superstition. They believed that people could emerge from this darkness if they used their minds properly. Their inspiration was Issac Newton. But would the pioneers of the Scientific Revolution celebrate the way that it has triumphed? Today, most people accept scientific explanations as articles of faith rather than theories to be tested.

Comparative of Samurai and Medevil Knights

The Knights of Medieval Europe and the Samurai of Feudal Japan were similar in some ways and very different in others. Two broad topics I will discuss in this paper are the comparatives in the weapons, armor and tactics; and perhaps most importantly, each warrior-class code of conduct and ethics. To successfully compare the two, you must first look at the time period both were both part of respectively. Some historians will argue that the seeds of the Samurai were started in 660 BC when Emperor Jimmu Tenno set up the Yamato State and the production of armor and weapons developed.

Most accept the fact that Buddhisms arrival to Japan in the 500s formed the concrete platform to what the Samurai are based upon.. By the time the crusades occurred in the 12th century, Knights were an integral part of life in Europe. This paper will focus mainly on the Japanese and Samurai side of the two warrior classes due to the nature of this course. One major problem in researching these subjects is the reference material; a lot of it originates from the period.

Because the Samurai and Knights, and the time periods they occur within, are romanticized so widely in the literature of the time and following centuries, getting true accounts of events is difficult. The Japanese felt it necessary to make a very fine line between deities and humans when writing about their greatest Samurai. Also, European knights, due to literature and most recently television and motion pictures, have been placed on a pedestal themselves. Japanese Weapons, Armor and Tactics The Yamato clans conducted many military campaigns on the Asian mainland. Their targets included Korea and China.

These campaigns led to the importation of Korean and Chinese culture, technology and martial arts. Legend states that Emperor Keiko was the first person with the title of “Shogun. ” The word meant “Barbarian-subduing General. ” Legend continues that Keiko had a son named “Prince Yamato. ” He was cunning, fearless, strong and a great martial artist. Many believe that Yamato was a role model for future Samurai. Ancient warriors developed weapons, armor and a code during the ensuing centuries that became the centerpiece for the Japanese Samurai. Early weapons included bows, arrows and swords.

The Samurai rose out of the continuing battles for land among three main clans: the Minamoto, the Fujiwara and the Taira. The Samurai eventually became a class unto themselves between the 9th and 12th centuries. They were known by two names: Samurai (knights-retainers) and Bushi (warriors). Some of them were related to the ruling class, while others were hired men. They gave complete loyalty to their Daimyo (feudal landowners) and received land and position in return. Each Daimyo used his Samurai to protect his land and to expand his power and rights to more land.

The Samurai became expert in fighting from and on horseback and from and on the ground. They practiced armed and un-armed combat. The early Samurai emphasized fighting with the bow and arrow. Armor and Defenses changed with times as well as the Samurais enemies. More specifically, the battles began and continued within Japan between the larger rivaling clans. With the implementation of larger weapons and firearms, Defensive tactics became more important than defending the individual with armor. Also protecting the warrior be mounting him on a horse became a preferred choice of defensive and offensive attacks.

They used swords for close-in fighting and beheading their enemies. The Samurai wore two swords (daisho). One was long; the other short. The long sword (daito – katana) was more than 24 inches. The short sword (shoto – wakizashi) was between 12 and 24 inches. The Samurai’s desire for tougher, sharper swords for battle gave rise to the curved blade that is still existent today not only for weapons, but for decoration as well. After forging the blade, the sword polisher did his work to prepare the blade for the “furniture” that surrounded it.

Next, the sword tester took the new blade and cut through the bodies of corpses or condemned criminals. They started by cutting through the small bones of the body and moved up to the large bones. Test results were often recorded on the nakago (the metal piece attaching the sword blade to the handle). Battles with the Mongols in the late 13th century led to a change in the Samurai’s fighting style. They began to use their sword more and also made more use of spears and horseback fighting. One of the most important factor in the development of tactics was the introduction of firearms from Europe in 1542.

Stephen Turnbull said in his book Samurai Warfare, “The usual conclusion is to see the introduction of firearms as the cause, and the change in warfare as the result. ” The Daimyo could no longer use the cavalry charge, which was the most successful tactic until firearms. Because of the destructive nature of firearms, if a Daimyo didn’t get his hands on as many as possible, he would lose. However, most Daimyo didn’t like guns because they lessened the importance of honorable hand-to-hand fighting that had gone on for centuries.

Firearms also brought about changes in the Samurai’s armor, and even the recruitment of non Samurai to fight in battle. Armor now had to be thicker and heavier for the upper class Samurai; yet, even this was not enough. This extra cost, in money and life, was offset by the Daimyo recruiting commoners to fight their battles. These commoners were called “ashigaru”, or light feet. Ashigaru, too, were against the Samurai idea of honor. Their widespread and sometimes uncontrolled use contradicted much of the Samurai ideal of elite combat, but large numbers had to be used by any successful leader. European Weapons, Armor and Tactics

Armor during most of the middle ages was built for protection against small arms. For instance, during the 1300s and 1400s, chain mail served as a major form of protection. Suits of chain mail covered the knights from head to toe – protecting them from swords and other sharp weapons. The knights also wore helmets which protected them. Most of the helmets were decorated with beautiful art and designs, which caught the eyes of all who viewed them. In the following centuries, the weaponry used in battle became larger and more dangerous, thus causing chain mail to become less and less effective in times of war.

The next step in armor was plates of steel that only covered soldiers’ chests, knees, and thighs. Gradually, into the late 1400s and early 1500s, many more soldiers turned to full body plate armor. Even though the head-to-toe steel plating was relatively heavy, it provided excellent protection in battle along with a major factor of intimidation. During the Elizabethan Period, spanning from the late 1500’s to the early 1600’s, the main objective of armor makers was to make the suits more and more elaborate with decoration. One of the factors which made a difference in how elaborate one’s armor would be was how much money he had.

Full body armor of this period cost great sums of money. For one suit of armor, many men paid an armorer as much as a small farm. Weapons ranged from daggers to catapults, but the most famous was the warriors sword. Medieval swords were neither unwieldably heavy nor all alike. There was infinite variety in their shape and considerable differences in their purpose. Men were trained to use the sword from the age of seven. The weight of a 3 lb. sword alone could go through bone or a sapling tree. The stories we read of head-removing and limb-lopping blows are probably true. Samurai Code of Conduct and Ethics

The code was developed from the Chinese concept of the virtues of warriors doing battle to the Samurai code of chivalry known as Kyuba no michi (“The Way of Horse and Bow”) to the Bushido code. Bushido means “Way of the Warrior. ” It was at the heart of the beliefs and conduct of the Samurai. The philosophy of Bushido is “freedom from fear. ” It meant that the Samurai transcended his fear of death. That gave him the peace and power to serve his master faithfully and loyally and die well if necessary. “Duty” is a primary philosophy of the Samurai, even if that duty meant death.

Seppuku, a type of suicide, was the embodiment of Bushido. Seppuku was a means for a dishonored Samurai to regain honor. If a Daimyo lost a battle, and was about to be captured or killed by some nameless foot soldier, he would commit Seppuku. It was also called hara-kiri, translated means belly cut, which is a fitting name. The dishonored Samurai would sit on his knees, take out his short sword, and cut himself deeply across the abdomen. It took a while for the man to die. This painful process was sometimes shortened by a second man cutting off the head of the dishonored man at the moment of utmost agony.

Seppuku was not only suicide, it was a ceremonial saving of honor. There were some Samurai who had no regard for the rules of Bushido and honor. Lack of honor in Samurai was the second worst thing to a Daimyo, the worst being the use of Ninja. Ninja were stealthy assassins used by Daimyo to get rid of rivals. They were the most shameful weapon a Daimyo had. Medieval Knights Code of Conduct and Ethics The System of ethical ideals that grew out of Feudalism and had its zenith in the 12th and 13th centuries were known as Chivalry. Chivalric ethics originated chiefly in France and Spain and spread rapidly.

They were a fusion of Christian and military concepts of morality. The chief chivalric virtues were piety, honor, valor, courtesy, chastity, and loyalty. The knight’s loyalty was due to God, to his ruler, and to his sworn love. Love in the chivalrous sense was largely platonic. In practice, chivalric conduct was never free from corruption, and the outward trappings of chivalry declined in the 15th cent. Medieval secular literature, such as the Arthurian Legend and the Chansons De Geste, was concerned primarily with knighthood and chivalry. In the 19th century Romanticism revived chivalrous ideals.

During the research for this paper, while picking apart the truth and fiction of both warrior classes, I found that both classes were based on the same rudimentary elements. Religion played a large part in both their codes of conduct. Both were guided not only in their service to God but also to their service to the throne. One point that makes Samurai and Knights different is the sense of duty to self. To the Samurai culture it was much more important to be true to ones self than anything else. To the medieval knights service to God and the king came above any personal well-being.

Even though the Japanese and European Feudal cultures have been romanticized by literature I believe that there is no shame in that. They were both outstanding warriors for the people, rulers and Gods respectively. People should have a better understanding about the true meaning an seeds of the two. These two warrior classes were born in violence and necessity. They achieved victory through bloodshed and their strong belief systems. Both were effective for the time they evolved. Both proved valuable towards the development of the cultures that ensued and both make wonderful tales of heroism and honor to reflect on.

Latin History

On October 13th of 1492, Christopher Columbus made a “discovery” that changed all of mankind. He under the backing of the Spanish government made the pivotal first steps in colonizing a new land. The journey that had long been anticipated by Columbus was not important because it was the first of such expeditions, for it indeed was not. The fact that sets him apart is that his discovery was the last of such magnitude and lasting effects in history. His discovery was made at a time when Europe was in the process of great change.

These changes greatly influenced the voyage of Columbus and contributed to curiosity of the monarch and the citizens of Europe. The famous series of Wars called The Crusades caused great changes in the ways that Europeans thought and acted. The crusades, begun four centuries earlier, had increased the appetites of affluent Europeans for exotic things, and the most important of these things was gold and silver. The main reason for curiosity into new worlds and lands was the need for more trade, and quicker routes for existing trade routes.

Europe was in position to become the dominating force throughout the world and it was pertinent that they expand, and seek new riches and lands to add to its kingdom. The changes in Europe not only prompted Columbus’s voyages and those of others, but it paved the way for European domination for the next five hundred years. Often overlooked in the explanation of the events surrounding the discovery and settlement of the new worlds, are the little contributing factors. Those things that motivated and aided in the discovery and the settlement of this land.

The Europeans did not set sail on a wild goose chase for new territory. They had an idea of what they were looking for, who they were looking for, and what to do with whatever they encountered. The Europeans were organized in their efforts to conquer. Many different motivating factors contributed to Spanish expedition into the America’s; all are important and without each the affect of the expeditions in to the lands would not be possible. Foremost among these factors is the improvement of the European weaponry used, and the advances in technology that Europe had amassed.

The new technologies of warfare developed farther and faster in Western Europe than anywhere else in the world because of the union of existing technologies. By the 15th century, Europeans were the world’s masters in firearm manufacturers . This initiated an arms race that ushered in the refinement of archery, drill, and siege warfare. The arms race that was started then, has continued into the 21st century. This supreme dominance in the art of military technology gave the confidence needed by the Europeans to embark on their various expeditions into territory uncharted by Europeans.

When Columbus and his fellow mates landed in the Caribbean, they greeted the Indians with weapons that the natives had no notion about. The guns, and gunpowder were foreign to a society using bows and arrows, and spears. The ships in which they traveled far exceeded even the largest Indian vessel. The native Indians had never fathomed the advanced technology that the Spanish presented. This fact aided in the ease with which the Indians were controlled and enslaved. “To the Indians, the size of the ships with their billowing white sails suggested floating islands with close-hanging clouds” .

It was as if they were presented with an omnipotent force in the Spanish. Even the most traditional of weapons were beyond belief to the Indians. It is through the frightening of the Indians that Columbus found that the Indians became more manageable. They were afraid of the Spanish, intimidated by their strong omnipotent presence. The Spaniards upon embarking on the new land marched through the island to put down any signs of non-compliance with their demands or resistance to their enslavement . They were accompanied by horses, dogs, crossbows, these were all alien to the natives .

Columbus even notes that they didn’t know what their weapons were and so they reached out to touch the sword and cut themselves, because they didn’t know it was sharp . Another important factor in the process of colonization was ideological or even theological: amassing wealth and dominating other people came to be positively valued as the key means of winning esteem on earth and salvation in the hereafter. The Europeans hungered for gold and silver. The supply of the precious metal, by way of the Middle East and Africa, had always been uncertain.

Now, however the wars in Eastern Europe had nearly emptied the Continents reserves. A new supply, a more regular supply and preferably a cheaper supply was needed. Part of Europe’s desire to search for new land, was the rumored wealth of Asia, and Columbus indeed thought he had arrived in the famed land. Upon Columbus’s arrival in the New World his desire for riches was immediately satisfied. The natives were bejeweled with many gold pieces that pleased the eyes of Columbus. “Of course Columbus was looking for gold.

He saw little bits of gold in their noses and ears, and he was very anxious to please” . The profit motive operated heavily within Columbus as well as the Spanish crowns psyche. Columbus sought gold from the natives, so he sent them out to look for gold so he could have something to bring back for his sponsors in Spain. Columbus even placed a quota on the amount of gold the natives would have to amass, or face a penalty. When he reached Hispaniola, one of the largest discovered islands in the Greater Antilles, he found the gold he was searching for.

Columbus obtained enough gold through barter on Hispaniola to ensure a warm reception when he met Isabella in Barcelona in 1493. The gold craze spread and was the trigger to the exploration of the entire continent for its riches and the many different peoples that inhabit it. The wealth that was generated by the Spanish conquests was enormous. This wealth and the trade it generated within Europe was the backbone around which Capitalism was built. The Spanish quest for gold and wealth took on a religious connotation.

Columbus put it, “Gold is most excellent; gold constitutes treasure and he who has it does all he wants in the world, can even lifts souls up to paradise” . His quest for gold and exploration took on religious aspects. It was a major contributor in the motivation of Spanish conquest. Another very important factor is Europe’s readiness to embrace a new continent, was the nature of their religious beliefs. They believed that their religion rationalized conquest. After Spanish discovery of New Lands they would read aloud a passage, which has come to be called “The Requirement”.

Here is a short excerpt from one such writing. “I implore you to recognize the church as a lady and in the name if the Pope take the King as Lord of this land and obey his mandates. If you do not do it, I tell you that with the help of God I will enter powerfully against you all. ” This served as a means by which to satisfy their consciences by offering the Indians a chance to convert to Christianity, after that the Spaniards felt justified in any action against the natives. To say it was totally their religion that motivated them would be a fallacy.

European imaginations played an important role in the developments leading up to the discovery by Columbus (Discovering Columbus p. 17). The importance of areas that could be used for the expansion of the church was futile. The new area was prime for mission work. The conversion of the natives, the theoretical justification for the Iberian presence in the Indies, was the churches first priority was one of the first priorities. The fact that the technology and sheer size of European advances made it very easy to cause the natives to question their gods.

Once Columbus arrived he almost immediately initiate the process of bringing missionaries to assimilate the peoples. At the same time it was pertinent that these natives did not confuse the abuses they received with the nature of the religion. That was the job of the missionaries and priests, to shield the natives from the corruption and immorality of the European settlers and the labor demands of such a mass acculturation. Though the church of Spain moved quickly to convert the Indians, Columbus and the government saw these Indians as workers that could benefit the effort to colonize such a vast and profitable area.

This would lead to conflict among the church and the state, mostly over the use of the natives as slaves in cultivating and as aids in working to build a colony. Though great conflict arose, and the understanding of the value of Indians and Whites was still very evident. The fact to them stood, God ordained them as the chosen peoples to conquer the world in his honor. Neither Europe, nor Columbus would have even set sail without one of the most influential assets to exploration. The presence of slaves provided the needed manpower for Europe to complete its expedition.

In the early 15th century slavery in Europe had declined. Not until the Portuguese exploration into the western regions in Africa, did they encounter the slave trade of the indigenous peoples . This was a major feat, for by 1450, African slaves were pouring into Europe each year, almost five hundred slaves a year by 1480, and a constant flow continued for years after that. Thus, by the time Columbus sailed, African slave were much part of the social order within Europe. These slaves were very important to the manpower of the conquests, and were very helpful to the organization of the conquests initial efforts.

Though they were slaves, the Africans were much educated to the social norms of the Europeans. Many were baptized as Christians , and some even received education. Although the blacks were visibly, and culturally different from their white counterparts; they joined the Spanish conquistadors in imposing Europe’s domination and power over these native Indians. During the conquest of the new world the Africans held a higher rank among the Indians. The Hispanics viewed the Indians as weak and even used Africans to supervise the Indians at times.

The Indians observed the blacks as “black white men” . No matter the way both the Indians and the blacks saw each other, they were both under the control of the Europeans. Neither held the view of a full human being in society. With the eventual importance of sugar and the mining of gold, the Indian and African populations within colonial Latin America were utilized and their labor was a major contributor and major source in the colonial economy. Slavery and the disease of the Europeans destroyed the Indian populations.

The diseases they were exposed to and the work conditions aided in their extermination by the Europeans. To replace the dying Indians, the Spanish imported tens of thousands more Indians from the Bahamas. The results of all the Indian slave deaths lead to a slave trade of blacks and Indians across the Atlantic. These masses of slaves were responsible for cultivating the land, and mining for gold. All these tasks were for the betterment of the Spanish crown. Without this type of manpower and cooperation the conquest would be virtually unfeasible.

The medieval civilization

The greater part of medieval civilization was a time of simplicity and little cultural development. Feudalism was the structure that governed medieval society and came to represent this time period. The church became the universal symbol of medieval unity. Toward the end of the medieval period, however, town life and large-scale trade and commerce were revived. Great changes took place in the church fostering a new era and change. Feudalism was a system of government that provided the structure for the political, social, and economic aspects of medieval civilization.

It consisted of contracts between members of the nobility and less powerful nobles who served as their vassals. Economically it was a contract between the serfs who farmed that land and the nobles who owned it. Feudalism was very complex and confusing in some ways, but it could also be looked at as very simple. It was constructed in a pyramid or chess board-like form. Kings were at the top although they did not have much power, lords and vassals followed the king and had control of the lesser nobles. The serfs were at the base of the pyramid.

A manor, otherwise known as the lords estate, was where everyone lived and worked. In exchange for a place to live, food, and mainly protection, the serfs farmed the land. Agriculture was the foundation of feudalism, where land and food was used to barter for other items. There were different taxes and positions of distinct people on the manor. This illustrates the complexity of feudal life during the medieval ages. If you look at it as what the duties were of each specific class you see the simplicity of feudalism. Each member of medieval society had its own particular tasks to perform.

The serfs preformed the most labor-intensive tasks and often did the same thing everyday. The knights protected the manor and the lords were responsible for taking care of everyone on their manor. The feudal system could be compared to a modern corporation. The serfs could be looked at as the workers, the lords as management, the knights to the security, and the king would be the CEO of the company. Feudalism was complex in its organization and simple it its implementation. During most of the medieval time period the church was the center of society and was the law of the land.

The church regulated business practices, had the power to tax, controlled all people through the power of excommunication and had influence on the aesthetic aspects of life. The church exemplified both the simplicity and complexity of medieval life. Monks led a very simple life. Their days were spent working hard, studying, and praying. The church wanted to make life simpler by standardizing the rite, calendar, and monastic rule. It was more complex then simple however. The church held a great deal of power that was often in conflict with the monarch.

The head of the church, the pope, spent much of his time in Rome while attempting to govern the rest of Europe. It was difficult to govern such a large geographical area while residing in a city that was not centrally located. In A. D. 1377, Pope Gregory XI left Avignon and returned to Rome. This was known as the great schism and it developed great entanglement in the popes standing in medieval society. The crusades, while increasing the status of the pope, also increased the power of the monarchs over the nobles. Feudalism was broken down and the power the church was illustrated in the crusades.

Certain aspects of the church tried to simplify life while other things only made it more complex. Population growth contributed to the migration of people from the manor to the town, which was the base of complexity in the later stage of the Middle Ages. A self-sufficient manor sometimes was the beginning of a town where people came to form a complex web of commerce and trade. Products were bought with money rather then used to barter for other necessities such as in the earlier stage of the Middle Ages. As the towns grew the people became dissatisfied with being ruled by the nobles and church.

They wanted to govern and tax themselves, and eventually they began to do these things without the consent of the church or nobles. To better protect themselves the townspeople often joined together with people from other towns to form leagues. These leagues would band together to protect one another and promote trade. The people organized themselves even further with forming merchant and craft guilds. The guilds controlled the making and sale of particular products. Feudal lords as well as the church was concerned with the formation of towns.

Townspeople were able to increase their wealth through the sale and manufacturing of goods, while the lords only produced what was needed for their manor. The serfs began to move away from the manor because they realized that they could have a better life if they lived in the towns. By forming autonomous towns, people created complex relationships between themselves and the monarchs and churches. This was the development of a more complex form of economic subsistence known as capitalism. Medieval civilization was a time of change in many different ways, both simple and complex.

Feudalism was organized in a quite clear way yet the structure in which it was carried out and the roles played in it were confusing. The churchs power was very perplexing in that it had the power to run the government and economy. The way that the church wanted to standardize certain things was easy to understand. Towns were complex in their organization and in the way they divided the power among the common people and the nobles and church. Medieval society that was once based on faith became rooted in scholasticism. Many new ideas brought up through the medieval civilization forced the society to be both simple and complex in many aspects.

What Factors Influenced the Conduct of Foreign Affairs Between 1509-1529

Henry VIII succeeded his father to the throne at a very early age, with a correspondingly nave fairy tale view of a war like king; seeking power and glory. He implemented these aims through an aggressive foreign policy in the first five years of his reign until Wolsey came and directed Henrys glory attitude to a more moderate form of diplomacy. So it could be said that Wolsey was the main factor that influenced the conduct of foreign affairs in the later part of this period. Henry thought that war would reunite his people and establish himself as king in a strong definite way.

Henry gained an ally, Ferdinand of Aragon through marrying Catherine of Aragon, his brothers widow. Although France was posing no threat to England; English troops still invaded in 1513 capturing the towns of Therouanne and Tournai. French troops fled quickly hence the battle being named the Battle of the Spurs. Also in 1513 the Scottish King James IV was killed at the Flodden Field. This left the regency for James V in the hands of his mother, who was conveniently Henrys sister, Margaret.

These victories strengthened the English nobility, which was later to become increasingly important in Henrys time; through the French invasion an administrative genius emerged and his name was Thomas Wolsey. Wolsey had a passion for foreign affairs. He wanted to be a peacemaker, statesman and honest broker. Wolseys main aim behind his pomp arrogant attitude was to stop England going to war in Europe. Wolsey wanted England to have an active foreign policy but stop before it got to the point of war.

Ultimately, the hostility between France and Spain meant that England had no fears of invasion and every chance of being treated with respect. Because both France and Spain were searching for an ally, England might even gain their assistance in an event of an attack. France were worried because after his election as Emperor of Germany in 1519, Charles Vs territory seemed to encircle France. Meanwhile the Emperor was very worried about French expansion in Italy. In 1514 England made peace with France, this was probably quite a lot to do with Wolseys influence.

Henry seemed completely set on a peaceful coexistence with the old enemy. To seal the new friendship, Henrys younger sister, Mary, was married to King Louis XII of France. However, in 1515 the ageing bridegroom dies. A young man Francis I became King of France. This was bad for England because Francis wanted to avenge England for their attack in 1513. Francis tried stirring up trouble between England and Scotland. Wolsey persuaded Henry not to go to war, as they did not have an ally and not a large pile of finance. In 1518 Wolsey hijacked a papal call for a crusade against the Turks and turned it to Englands advantage.

He brought together the great powers of Europe, including England, Spain, France and The Holy Roman Empire, to sign the Treaty of London. This was a universal peace deal complete with protective security. Tournai was returned to France at the price of 600, 000 crowns, proposed marriage between Francis son and Henrys daughter Mary, helped secure British French peace. England was at the centre of affairs and it was Wolseys triumph and a step in the direction of a great \European diplomat. Two years after the Treaty of London, Wolsey triumphed again. Once again it was peace with glory for England.

June 1520 Henry led an expedition to France (not in a war like manner). He met Francis in a field near Calais that belonged to England. There were feasts and games and the meeting was a festive, happy, peaceful occasion; peace broke out again. However it wasnt long before England was back at war with France in 1523. France was weak at the time due to the Italian wars; Henry saw this as an opportunity to gain power and glory again. The French army was taken up in Italy. English troops took Boulogne and after an embarrassingly failed advance on Paris, due to poor supply connections.

Iran-Contra Scandal

The Cold War peaked the interest of the entire globe. Each threat, policy and action that took place had ramifications far more reaching then ever imaginable. The world sat on edge because it feared its own destruction, after the introduction of nuclear warfare at the close of World War II, another World War could result in the Earth’s demise. This fear ran through the hearts and minds of citizens of both the United States and the Soviet Union, but it is the citizens elsewhere that had to pay the consequences for these fears.

The “race” to become the premier superpower of the world between the U. S. and U. S. S. R. did not always remain as subsided as many like to believe. Many regions of the world were held accountable for fighting the ideological warfare that was to separate the two world powers. One region that has always been very active with warfare since the beginning of time is the Middle East. Fighting has remained one standard of living that many countries in the Middle East have come to live, and die with. When the ideological war came to the Middle East, the primary target became Iran.

Iran held the largest wealth in the region at the time because of its proceeds from the sale of oil and the United States feared that the neighboring communist would attempt to take over Iran and then have additional funding and support. One of the most pivotal moments at the end of the Cold War was the Iran-contra Affair. “The Iran-contra policies centered on two regions of the World which cast shadows of doubt on the public mind, and were difficult for the government to portray in positive terms; Central America and the Middle East.

Central America conjured up images of another Vietnam, of the United State being slowly sucked into an anti-communist third-world guerilla conflict for few tangible gains. Iranian ventures revived memories of other foreign policy nightmares, most obviously the Iranian hostage crises of 1979-1980, which had highlighted the potential impotence of American power in the Middle East. “[1] Now the United States was attempting to get hostages back from Iran by selling them arms and then turned around and gave the profits to the contra rebels in Nicaragua for the rebellion against the Sandinistas government.

This illegal, and therefore, secret operation was not only a failure, but it also brought relations between the Americans and Iranians to a crumbling halt. This paper will examine all aspects of the Iran-contra Affair by defining the history between the Iranians and the United States, then the Nicaraguans and the United States, and finally discussing the cover-up scandal, and impact the affair had on the United States and globally. To understand the Iran-contra Affair it is necessary to understand American-Iranian relations leading up to the scandal.

Since the origin of both major powers, Iran had managed to “to maintain its independence as a nation-state by playing the two superpowers against one another. ” And it was when the two rivals came to an understanding that, “Iranian leaders saw their country’s independence and identity in serious jeopardy. “[2] The turning point in the relationship between the Iran and the United States began “after [the United States] part in the overthrow of Muhammad Musadiq in 1953, the United States found itself the object of growing Iranian criticism. 3]

Moderate, nationalistic opposition forces and radical leftist began to refer to the United States as an “imperialistic, oppressive external force,” all as Shi’i religious leaders begun condemning America and their policies. “Iranians of all political persuasions increasingly formed a negative image of the United States. “[4] America exposed itself as no longer an external liberating force that was held responsible for protecting Iran from Great Britain and the Soviet Union, and instead, became the exploiter. “Throughout the 1970’s the United States increased its influence in

Iranand entwined itself more and more with the governing regime in Iran. By the time of the Iranian revolution in 1978, America’s reservoir of historical goodwill had been drained dry. The violent, antimonarchical revolution had a sharp anti-American edge that became sharper in reaction to policies developed in Washington in response to the revolution. “[5] In Iranian perspective, the United States decided to support and save the Shah, and this was their ultimate downfall in the relationship. As a result of the shah’s support the first hostage crisis took place.

When over fifty hostages were taken from the American embassy and held for almost fifteen months causing “the two countries engaged in practically every form of conflict short of all-out war. “[6] Iran’s newly formed Islamic Republic by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini was dropped from all diplomatic relations and had all trade embargoed by the United States because of its embassy staff being held hostage. After the hostages were released, the U. S. kept all arms shipment from being sent. “In the meantime, Iraq had opened war on Iran. The United States remained neutral and refused to ship arms to either side. 7]

The United States went a step further in 1984, designating Iran a “sponsor of international terrorism” and urged all allies to not ship arms there. “Beginning in March 1984, members of Hezbollah, a fundamentalist Shiite group sympathetic to the government of the Ayatollah Khomeini, kidnapped seven Americans in Beirut, Lebanon. “[8] Manucher Ghorbanifar, previously denounced by the CIA, was now relied on by NSC aides because of the capturing of William Buckley, CIA station chief, and the subsequent disappearing or hiding of many other CIA agents.

Ghorbanifar believed by selling arms to Iran their influence on the Lebanese Shiite group would result in the hostage release. [9] There were several other reasons why the Americans did take this course of action. “First, there was the urgent need to rescue CIA agent Buckley. (captured March 14, 1984) Secondly, American influence in Iran would help to counter possible Soviet intervention in the region, and thirdly, there was the appeal of solving a long-term geo-political problem via novel and cavalier means. “[10] The sale of missiles to Iran figured to be the best means to achieve the exchange for hostages.

The selling of missiles did result in the release of one hostage, Reverend Benjamin Weir (captured on May 08, 1984). “Oliver North, an industrious NSC aide, came to play an increasingly pivotal role in the logistical management of operations and, at a later date, set up a number of accounts to hold the money from the arms sales that were to support covert operations. “[11] And missiles continued to get sold to Iran throughout the end of 1985 and into the beginning of 1986, without anymore hostages being released. 2]

“In an attempt to promote relations and achieve a mutual understanding and ultimately have hostages released NSC agent North went to Tehran with several senior colleagues, however, this was unsuccessful because of the secrecy of the mission and lack of leverage the Americans held. After another hostage is released, three more are taken into hostage and it is at this time that the media becomes privy because of a leak in a Lebanese newspaper and the negotiations and selling of arms to Iran are shut down by Congress.

The Nicaraguan situation was actually separate from the Iran issue, but brought together because of the transfer of funds to Nicaragua from the sale of arms to Iran. The Reagan administration’s first attempt at covert operations was the contra affair that took place after the upheaval of Nicaragua government. After being overthrown by a revolutionary coalition called the Sandinista National Liberation Front, “On July 17, 1979, toward the end of the Carter administration, the forty-two-year-old Somoza dictatorship collapsed. 13] The rebels were named after the original revolutionary leader, Augusto Cesar Sandino, who had been killed many years before in a rebellion against patriarchal dynasty. [14] Carter’s offering of goodwill donations to Nicaragua in an attempt to promote democratic elements in their new government failed and “extremist leader, Daniel Ortega, emerged as the Nicaraguan Castro’. “[15]

The new order of government, the “Sandinistas,” then proceeded to support “leftist guerilla movements. In addition to breaking their promise of a democratic government, the Sandinistas permitted weapons from Cuba to be transported through Nicaragua to rebels in neighboring El Salvador. “[16] Soon after, “in March 1980, a Sandinista delegation went to Moscow and signed economic, technical, scientific, and cultural agreements with the Soviet Union. “[17] This triggered American fear and cautiousness to the Nicaraguan situation as Cuban “advisors” even began to move to Nicaragua.

Reagan, now a candidate, affirmed his standing on the issue by, “calling for the overthrow of the Sandinista regime: We will support the efforts of Nicaraguan people to establish a free and independent government. “[18] Reagan’s inauguration came at the same time of an obvious need for American drastic change in policies against the new Sandinista government. There was severe concern because of the Nicaraguan involvement with communist countries of Cuba and the Soviet Union, and this resulted in President Reagan’s authorization of a “CIA covert program for Central America. 19]

The United States effort to support the overthrow was difficult task because of the split of revolutionary factions. However, a decision was made to support a group primary made up of former national guardsmen for Somoza. The group was led by Enrique Bermudez, and was concentrated in Honduras. [20] CIA director Casey’s supplying, training, and support of this revolutionary faction was leaked to magazines and newspapers resulting in a series of laws produced by Congress called the Boland Amendments, named after the Massachusetts Representative Edward P. Boland. 1]

Effectively, declaring that, “The CIA was ostensibly forbidden to engage in such paramilitary operations. “[22] In order to still actively monitor and assist revolutionary attempts the NSC was arranged to now take over where the CIA left off in the operation. They realized that the NSC was excluded from the Boland Amendment, “on a distinction between a collecting intelligence agency and a coordinating on. “[23] The implication was that the CIA was an operational agency, the NSC staff was not; the latter was merely an extension of the President’s person and a recipient, not a collector of intelligence information.

It was necessary for the NSC to remain attentive to the situation in Nicaragua because of their contacts with communist countries and their closeness to the United States. “The Nicaraguan element of the Iran-Contra scandal involved the upkeep of a small guerilla force in Nicaragua, disposed towards the forcible removal of the leftist government, the Sandinistas. ” [24] “As was the case in the Iranian operation, when open action would not suffice, the policy was then taken underground and shielded from the eyes of Congress. 25] “The November 1985 shipment of arms to Iran exposed a number of weaknesses in the expansion of policy which would later form the core of the scandal which hit at the heart of the Reagan Presidency. Action had been taken which had been hidden from the Congress, the system of checks and balances were purposefully circumvented and Congress, alongside several administration officials, misled in order to sustain a covert and possibly illegal transfer of weapons. 26]

“Congressional opinion rested upon the belief that the United States had been held ransom by terrorist cells, and had violated its own publicly declared stance of no deals with terrorists. “[27] Many convictions resulted because of the Iran-contra Affair, but surprising, due to immunity agreements and later pardons, no one still serves any penalty for involvement. However, and probably more importantly, the Iran-contra affair did raise many concerns about the limit of the executive branch as well as government programs capabilities beyond the knowledge and scope of Congressional understanding.

Causes of the Russian Revolution

The Russian revolution was caused by the continual breakdown of the governments in Russia and the incompetency and authoritarian views of it’s czars. Their failures as leaders included policies that neither pleased nor benefitted the people. By the end of the nineteenth century, Russia’s economy, government, military, and social organization was at an extreme decline. Russia had become the least advanced of the major European nations in terms of political and social development. There was no parliament, and no middle class. The Church, officers, and other important people and institutions were irmly against social progress.

The disastrous defeat of Russia in the Crimean War in 1855 and 1856 exposed weaknesses of Russia’s various For the first few decades of the 1800’s, Russia’s outlook was brighter under Alexander I, who was relatively liberal. He became more reactionary however, and following his death, a group of young army officers tried to overturn the Czardom. This was called the Decembrist Revolt. The next czar, Nicholas, was a die hard authoritarian. The Administrative system continued to decay regardless of his iron fisted rule. The gap between the rich and the poorer continued to widen.

Over five hundred peasant revolts took place during his reign. Alexander II, who took the throne in 1855 tried to avert revolt by attempting reform. In 1861 he freed the serfs and gave them expectations of free land allotments. But to their surprise, and anger, they were only given the opportunity to share it as members of a village commune(mir). In addition, the mir had to pay back the government for the land over a period of 49 years with interest. Alexander also formed a series of elected local councils that gave districts restricted jurisdiction of certain aspects of life.

He too became more of a reactionary towards the end of his reign. The result was his assassination by a group of conspirators called the People’s Will movement. The next Czar, Alexander III, was yet another reactionary. He was active in silencing criticism of the government, exiling agitators, and stamping out revolutionary groups. Industrialization began to appear and with it an increase of dissatisfied workers. They were underpaid and forced to work in unfavourable conditions. The peasants farmers were doing fine on their farms but a famine in 1891 caused extensive suffering. Revolts again became fairly frequent.

Intellectual groups organized and continued the fight against serfdom and autocracy. At the beginning of the 20th century, Russian people were in the mood for revolution. The loss of the Russo Japanese war to Japan, and the resulting hardships, made concrete the opposition to the autocracy. In December of 1904, unrest surfaced in Baku. Strikes occurred in factories in the capital. Priest Father Gapon lead a peaceful march to petition the czar for a redress of grievances but it ended violently with the Czar’s troops firing on the crowd. In October of 1905 a general strike was declared that crippled the country.

On October 30th, Nicholas dispatched the historical October Manifesto which provided for a constitution under which civil liberties were granted and an elected state institution called the duma was formed. This broke the czar’s absolute power. However, the czar chose reactionary ministers to lead the duma and the secret police force was improved and strengthened. The first two were filled with radicals but quickly dissolved. The members of the third were conservative in outlook. Social conditions improved too slowly to reverse public opposition to the absolute monarchy.

Poor political and military leadership in the First World War led to widespread desertion of Russian soldiers. Their army suffered great casualties and a It was the accumulation of discontent for governments, czar’s, and living conditions along with Russian defeats in various wars, including WWI, of the working class citizens in Russia that eventually boiled over and resulted in revolution. The public dissatisfaction continued to fill for over a decade like a powderkeg and eventually as set off and caused an explosion of great impact to the future of Russia.

They displayed their anger in various ways, but the authoritarian Czar’s which attained power did not react to the incoming tide. In fact, they resisted change at every avenue possible and proved to outrage certain people to such a point that Czar’s were assassinated. By 1917, the Russian people had had enough, and a public disturbance in Petrograd soon spread throughout the city and had become a widespread revolt. The resulting revolution proved to restructure the politics in Russia for years to come.

The 1920’s

The 1920’s were a decade of enjoyment, employment, and for some disappointment. It was a decade classified as the “roaring twenties. ” Men returning from World War I had to deal with unemployment, wheat farmers and oil companies were striking it rich, new modern conveniences were being thought up, and fashion was a major issue among the rich. During the twenties the economy had a definite impact on the society. It benefited some, but hurt others. The people that benefited were the prairie farmers and the oil companies. The people who didn’t benefit were American soldiers returning from WW1.

Around the middle of the twenties, a wheat farmer was the person to be. Business was booming for all the wheat farmers, places like Europe, which were in war, were hungry for American’s wheat and contributed tremendous business to the American wheat industries. Farmers began making more money than ever before, and they started buying farm machinery to take place of their cattle and horses. Prices of wheat were at an all time high, which gave America’s wheat industry an even bigger advantage and a bigger form of money making in our economy.

American soldiers on the other hand who had returned from war were expecting to be employed when they returned, but not even after fighting for their country could they get a job. It was very hard to get a job because women and immigrants had taken them all during the war. American soldiers were surprised at how difficult it was to get a job. While they were out fighting in WW1, people who had business relating to military were striking it rich because of all the military equipment that was needed for the American army, to supply the soldiers who were fighting in the war.

Unemployment was something that white men had very seldomly dealt with before. During the twenties another discovery led to a rising economy for America. The oil industry struck it rich in Turner Valley Alberta, where a huge oil discovery took place. Eventually this industry would create new jobs and more money for the economy. America did have its good and bad times in the twenties, but most people benefited from the good times because of more job increases, and because of new industries such as wheat and oil.

Entertainment in the Twenties consisted of many famous people, it was n the twenties when a man by the name of Charlie Chaplain who was known for his “tramp” look, dominated the silent movie business. He was considered one of the most talented actors of the 20’s. Also during the 20’s radio was the popular for of listening to music and listening to the news. In the later 1920’s the television was created which now aloud people to see a picture in their home for entertainment, but the television did not surpass the radio entertainment wise, because most people were unable to afford it.

The 1920’s were filled with signs of raging new fashions. The loosening of fit and gradual downward movement of the waistline. In the twenties women could say and do what they please so in no time women were wearing make-up, changed there hairstyles to short and skirts gradually became shorter. While women were getting more daring in what they would wear, men tended to be more conservative, wearing double-breasted tuxedoes to dances and on a casual day wearing a nice suit. Also during the 1920’s a man by the name of Henry Ford created the assembly line.

He was also the founder of ford Motor co. creating the first automobile used by the average person. Fords assembly line was the key to his success in the automotive industry, because he was able to produce a mass amount of cars to lower the price so more people could afford them. Not only did the plant produce a lot of cars it also supplied thousands of jobs for unemployed workers. The automotive industry was a huge help on decreasing the unemployment rate. So as you can see the 1920’s or rather “The Roaring 20’s” was a very prosperous time to live in.

Some had to endure hard ships, but by the mid-1920’s the economy was booming and people were having a good time. Veterans had returned home and the unemployment rate was greatly decreased by the automotive industry. Many modern inventions were made, fashion changed, and women received more rights. Without the occurrence of the 1920’s in the way that it happened the United States wouldn’t be the same today. The 20’s inspired people to rebel, layback and have some fun. The 1920’s were a very influential time period in United States history.

Afganistan’s Apartheid

Beginning on September 27, 1996, an extremist militia group known as the Taliban seized control of Kabul, the capital of Afghanistan. Upon seizing control, the Taliban has instituted a system of gender apartheid, which has placed women into a state of virtual house arrest. Since that time the women and girls of Afghanistan have been stripped of all human rights including their voice, visibility and their mobility. The Campaign to stop Gender Apartheid, led by the Feminist Majority Foundation, has brought together numerous human right and womens organizations around the world to demand an end to the abuses of the omen in Afghanistan.

In the 1980s when the Soviet Union occupied Afghanistan, the United States gave billions of dollars, through a secret CIA operation, to revolutionary militia forces called the mujahideen (soldiers of God). Unfortunately, in 1989 when the Soviet Union pulled out, groups of the mujahideen entered into a civil war and in 1996 the Taliban emerged as the controlling force. The Taliban is actually made up of young men and boys who were raised in refugee camps and trained in ultraconservative religious schools in Pakistan.

The primary support system of the Taliban is from Pakistan, they rovide military aid and personnel, Saudi Arabia provides the financial support. In addition, Afghanistan is one of the worlds two largest producers of opium, which in turn makes it a huge drug-processing center. Finally, the biggest potential for financial support comes from the wealth of the petroleum industry. The Taliban claim to follow a pure, fundamental Islamic ideology, except the oppression they place upon women has no foundation in Islam.

Within Islam, women can earn, control and spend their own money; they can also participate in public life. Both the Organizations of the Islamic Conference and the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt have refused to recognize the Taliban as an official government in Afghanistan. Prior to the Taliban seizing control, women led very different lives. Many were educated and employed, 60% of the teachers at Kabul University were women as were 50% of the students. 70% of schoolteachers, 50% of civilian government workers and 40% of doctors were all women.

Just recently, a United Nations Reporter, Radhika Coomaraswami, voiced her shock of the violations she found in Afghanistan. She reported, ” widespread, systematic violation of Taliban areas of Afghanistan. ” She said she had never seen as uch suffering as she witnessed in Afghanistan. Since the Taliban militia took control, women have been forced to beg on the streets to simply feed their children because only a tiny percentage of women are allowed to work. Girls have been banned from attending school after the age of eight and women can not leave their homes unless accompanied by a close male relative.

If and when a woman does leave, she must be covered from head to toe with only a small opening to see and breath through. Medical access is extremely limited because male doctors cannot treat women and there are very few female physicians. Finally, the Taliban has required women to paint their windows opaque so that the women inside cannot be seen from the street. These rules are forcing women to lead a life worse than the depths of hell. There are many severe and even deadly consequences for disobeying the Talibans rules.

An elderly woman was critically beaten with a metal cable until her leg was broken because her ankle was accidentally showing. A woman caught trying to flee Afghanistan was stoned to death because the man she was with was not a relative. Many women have died of treatable illnesses because there was no doctor who would treat them. A high number of women, have attempted suicide by swallowing household cleaner rather than continuing to live under these appalling and ghastly circumstances. Ninety-seven percent of women who were surveyed by Physicians for Human Rights showed signs of major depression.

Since the Taliban has taken control of the government very few refugees have been able to flee the country to the United States. One woman, Nazira Karimi, fled the country one year ago after a long drawn out process to be exiled. Karimi was a journalist who spoke out against the Talibans actions and a death warrant was placed on her and every friend nd family member. After and initial denial from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, she sought help from the Feminist Majority.

Finally, after several more death threats and the kidnapping and torture of family members, emergency action was put into place and she was exiled to the United States. Just recently, 16 of her family members arrived safely at National Airport with help from the Department of State and the Immigration and Naturalization Service. In 1996 and 1997 no refugees were allow to enter, in 1998, 88 refugees entered. This year with the help of the Feminist Majority Foundation, the Department of State will allow approximately 1500 women and children to enter the United States to be saved from the deadly actions of the Taliban.

Currently, many national and international rights organizations are asking the United States and the United Nations to not recognize the Taliban as a legitimate government. Recently, the United States and the United Nations have threatened to impose sanctions against the Taliban if they do not turn over Osama bin Laden, a multimillionaire terrorist extremist. The Feminist Majority Foundation has appealed to the United States and United Nations to also include he brutal gender apartheid policies and human rights violations as part of the sanction conditions.

President Clinton acknowledged the Talibans horrible treatment of women and pledged not to recognize the militia group until all human rights are restored. I, personally, am not a big fan of allowing immigrants and refugees into our already overcrowded and problematic country, but after researching this paper my views have changed. I still believe we should restrict how many refugees are allowed into the United States, but in times of such dreadful and deadly actions of the Taliban we need to do something o protect these women and children.

After looking at pictures and reading about the disgusting cruelty, I emailed government and UN officials from the Feminist Majority web-site. As I sit and type this paper, women are being beaten and killed for no reason what so ever, except for the fact that they are female. I believe for once our nation needs to work quickly to help stop these brutal acts of human rights violations. People are urged to email the Secretary of State and the President to urge him to impose sanctions of the Taliban and not recognize their appalling form of government.

Darius I The Great Reign

Arrogant, powerful, wise, heroic, conqueror, and a superior leader are a few words that describe Dariuss I reign and the life that he lived. Darius I is one of the greatest leaders of any nation to ever live. Darius was always well dressed; he was clearly distinguishable from others by his gold scepter, long square beard, fancy jewelry, and a high flat-topped tiara. He wore robes of purple embroidered in gold, fine crimson trousers, and boots. He sat underneath a purple canopy all people were to fall or bow to the great king. His great authority was reflected in his title: Great King, King of Kings, or King of Persia.

His conquests are magical his reign is superior. His ability to consolidate power over his great empire is amazing in its self. He ruled for a thirty-six year period providing his empire with a new form of state organization. From the military down to small provinces and courts Darius had left his mark on Persia. His vast accomplishments helped Persia for many years to come. If it werent for Alexander the Great, Darius I would be a man everyone knows. His great undertakings should not go unnoticed for he propelled Persia into an even greater empire.

Darius I great reign was inscribed on a gigantic rock face facing the main caravan route Ecbatana to Babylon. Known as the Bisitun Inscription, the inscription claims that he is the rightful successor as the King of Persia. The throne was to be given to Gautmata pretending to be Cambyses brother. In 522 B. C. Darius defeated Gautmata and took over as the Great King of Persia. Darius took over as King at the young age of twenty-eight. The first two years of his reign were spent suppressing rebellions, the most famous in Babylon in 520.

After he successfully crushed the rebellion Darius committed himself to reorganizing Persia and securing its outer borders. He reorganized the immense empire into twenty satrapies (like small provinces). He built highways, created a postal system, reformed the currency, encouraged commerce, and was deeply liked by the large portion of his ethnically diverse empire. By reorganizing his empire into twenty satrapies Darius was able to collect taxes from each individual satrapy. The taxes were a fixed annual tax rate or tribute. The provincial system allowed different ethnicities to practice their own religious preference.

The people were pleased with Darius and his decision not to press one religion on his empire. Even though Darius himself was a great worshipper of Ahuramazda. Ahuramazda was said to be the god who invented the earth, man, the sky, and the creator of happiness. Darius allowing his people to retain their customs and religion was the greatest achievement of the Achaemenid Dynasty. Darius allowed the Jews to complete the rebuilding of the Temple at Jerusalem in 516. This propelled the Achaemenid Dynasty to rule the empire for over two centuries. Satraps ran the satrapies for the King.

Satrap is known in the English language as a petty tyrant. The satraps were ordered to command the provincial armed forces, to collect imperial taxes, and of course to enforce the Kings will. Satraps had immense power and money. Unlike provincial German princes in the medieval era Darius was able to put a check and balance system on his satraps. Darius established a traveling bureaucracy to drop in on his satraps to make sure they were being faithful to the people and to his income. All of his checks were unannounced; if appointments were made satraps could easily cover-up any wrong doing.

Darius was able to control his satrapies by his impeccable highways he had built. These great highways were also a great transportation system for trade routes. Darius built the longest road in the world which extended from Elamite to Epheus on the Aegean coast, cumulating a total over seventeen hundred miles! His postal system was made possible by these great highways. With vast trade and the ever-growing amount of people on these highways made it safe for travel. Important posts were setup at cities such as Babylon, Memphis, Ecbatana, Pasargrade, and Perseopolis.

These posts made rapid communication through the empire possible. The postal system was made up of horses for transportation. Darius found out how far a rider and a horse could travel everyday before needing a rest. Fourteen miles turned out to be the answer, so every fourteen miles a fresh rider and a fresh horse was waiting to continue the delivery. It took only a week for the Kings command to reach the farthest parts of his empire. With this speedy delivery system if revolts were to break out they could be dealt with quickly. The King would be able to be in contact with his satraps on a weekly basis.

The famous phrase of the U. S. Postal Office comes from this time period, Neither snow, nor rain, nor heat, nor gloom of night will stop the royal messages. Darius also had a great canal built between the Nile and he Red Sea. Now ships could have direct access to the Mediterranean to the Red Sea without having to use a land route or going all the way around Africa. More importantly the unbroken waterways now connected the eastern and western ends of the empire. Dariuss canal is now the modern day Suez Canal. The arrogant side of Darius is inscribed on the walls of his canal, found in 1866 by laborers on the Suez Canal.

The inscriptions read This canal was dug out as I commanded, and ships went from Egypt through this canal into Persia as was my desire(Achaemenide Map). Now with the connection of the eastern and western empires Darius ruled an area of almost two million square miles including ten million people. Persia enjoyed a great economic prosperity early in Dariuss reign. Darius stimulated the economy by promoting agriculture and trade. Agriculture would increase trade would increase revenue in the satrapies and the increased revenue would mean in creased taxes.

He also provided a common system of weights and measures while at the same time issuing a gold coinage. The empire used these funds to build better irrigation systems and encourage different manufacturing enterprises. People also used ingots, which was melted down gold or silver used for trade. Ingots were weighed for trade, the heavier the ingot the more it was worth. Dariuss gold coins were known as Darics, surely named after himself. The satraps were able to make coins of silver and bronze but the King could issue gold coins. Creating a single coinage made trade easier as well as unifying Persias commercial empire.

Darius the first was able to secure his borders by having a gigantic standing army. His army was known as the Ten Thousand Immortals, composed mainly of infantrymen. Every time a soldier was killed or could no longer serve in battle a new recruit quickly replaced him. Thus the standing army never shrank. His soldiers were armed with bows, spears, and swords. In battle they had light wicker shields, they wore a cloth headdress and a colorful tunic usually over a metal scale shirt. The soldiers were well protected in battle but very mobile. A thousand soldiers served as Dariuss personal bodyguards.

Soldiers were allowed to bring concubines and servants with them into battle. This must have made the enemy believe that their army was even larger than it actually was. Archers overwhelmed enemies by a barrage of arrows. The Persians were great horsemen and did not use their cavalry for just close combat but soldiers would actually fire arrows from horseback. Persians also brought elephants and camels into battles when in need. They often attached slashing blades to the wheels of their chariots and mowed down their enemy. Early in Dariuss reign he used his great standing army to secure his empires borders.

He conquered new territories along the Indus River in the east and to the Caucasus Mountains in the northwest. By conquering the northwest Darius was able to control a narrow straight that connected the Black Sea and the Mediterranean Sea. By having control over this narrow strip he successfully split Asia and Europe at modern day Istanbul. During Dariuss reign the Persian Empire achieved its highest peak. Persias borders were strong and their economy was sound. Like all good things Dariuss empire would not last forever. Toward the end of Dariuss reign a rebellion from Ionian Greeks broke out.

Ionian Greeks were Greek that actually lived in Asia Minor. The Ionian Greeks had grown tired of the mounting taxes, mandatory military service, and the local government. The rebellion was encouraged by some mainland Greek cities, however their home of Sparta wanted no part with Persia. Athens sent limited help to the Ionians, amassing twenty-five ships. Athens was deeply worried about Persias control over the Black Sea trade. After five years, starting in 499 B. C. the Ionian rebellion was struck down with severity. Four years later in 490 B. C. Persia launched his army to the mainland of Greece to punish them for encouraging a rebellion.

These were the first of the Persian Wars. The first war is the famous war of the Battle at Marathon. Though the Greeks were out numbered they retained the highland on the Marathon Plain giving them the advantage. The charging Greeks fought the Persians in hand-to-hand combat. Persia was a successful close range army. They were known for staying a good distance from their enemy and unleashing an onslaught of arrows upon them. The Persians suffering heavy casualties (6,400 soldiers to Greeces 192) were forced to retreat bank to Persia (Marathon, 1995).

Greeces war hero General Militades sent his best runner Pheidippides back to Sparta to tell them of the majestic news. Pheidippides ran roughly forty kilometers (almost twenty-five miles) (Marathon, Gr 2000). At his arrival he shouted, Victory! and died (Marathon, 1995). Modern day marathons are taken from this incident over two thousand four hundred years ago. Now if you see an individual of Persian decent remember that they are then celebrating their own defeat. It seems weird that almost every month theres a marathon somewhere in the world to celebrate the downfall of a society.

The Battle of Marathon was unquestionably the turning point in the Achaemind Dynasty. Darius began to build another exploration against Greece. It took longer than he planned for he had to suppress rebels on the other side of his empire. In 486 B. C. his planning came to a halt when he was killed in a revolt in Egypt. Xerxes his son took over as King of Kings but was never able to recapture what his father had built. The Persians once again were defeated this time at Platae. Persia had now lost all control over their European territories.

Persia managed to hang on to all its lands for a lingering half century to the end of the Achaemind Dynasty. With the rapid decline of the Persian Empire after the death of Darius, it is safe to say Darius was King of Kings among the Achaemind as well as the Persians. Darius I is one of the greatest political emperors to ever live. His ability to manage such a large area with little travel by himself and little technology. There were no phones, computers, television, or radio to broadcast the news, only men on horseback. His vast system of roads enabled his empire to increase trade, send messages quickly from one satrapy to another.

He built the longest road in the world and made the first postal system possible. Without the immense number of roads he had built the postal system would not have been possible. He constructed what is now the Suez Canal, which connects the Mediterranean to the Red Sea. His ability to restructure his government into smaller provinces and to check the power of the people that ran the provinces is remarkable. The economy flourished during his thirty-six year reign. He minted his own gold coins to be put into circulation and promoted agriculture and trade.

Darius understood that strong borders, strong economy, and strong communication would make his empire a powerhouse of the world. The most impressive accomplishment by Darius was his religious tolerance. He let people in the provinces worship who or what they wanted. The people loved him for that and gave him support. When thinking of great leaders Darius I should be one of the first ho comes to your mind. Remember when someone tells you that Bill Clintons a good leader you can ask him what he has done. Without Dariuss leadership Persia would never have amassed its great wealth and power at the height of its existence.

Persia set a precedent for all other empires to do one better or fall back into another recession. This well dressed powerful man propelled himself to be one of the greatest leaders to ever live. His accomplishment of the Bisitun Inscription puts the icing on the cake of his reign. In three different languages overseeing a heavily traveled trade route Darius wanted to make sure that everyone could see and read his accomplishments. The Bisitun Inscription describes his arrival to the throne and the power that he possessed over foreign countries and domestic people.

The great battles he won, his inventions, and his family. Darius should never be forgotten. Even though he has religious tolerance of others Darius was devoted to the God Ahuramazda. One of the inscription sums himself up and his empire perfectly. A great god Ahuramazda, who created this earth, who created happiness for man, who made Darius King, one king of many, one lord of many. I am Darius the great king, king of kings, king of countries containing all kinds of men, king in this great earth far and wide, son of Hystaspes, an Achaemenian, a Persian, son of a Persian, an Aryan, having Aryan lineage.

Examine the Causes of European Imperialism

European control and power over other nations was not a new ideal prior to 1870; in fact the process was in place as early as the 14th century. Disease and geography are only two of the factors that prevented European colonisation until the 19th century. Many factors led to the massive rise in imperialism after 1870, both internal and external. European imperialism stems from the capitalistic greed for cheap raw materials, advantageous markets, and good investments. These ideas motivated the search for new markets because Imperialists would rather invest in new markets rather than raise wages of domestic workers.

Not only was the cheap production of goods a motivating factor, but the quest for markets to sell manufactured goods contributed as well. Going along with this greed was the drive to expand authority by land acquisition or economic and political control over other nations. The quest for economic domination and advantage Europeans often denied the capitalistic greed as a factor in the cause of imperialism and had other ways of defining the motivation. Many stated that Imperialism was the natural effect of the idea of survival of the fittest.

This is best represented by Rudyard Kipling in the book White Mans Burden, which describes the notion that European Imperialism was simply the natural way that stronger nations gained power and those unable to keep up would be taken over. The Industrial Revolution also played a huge role in European imperialism. European nations had ease dominating non-Europeans due, in part, to the power retained from industrialisation. The Industrial Revolution provided tools such as guns, railway systems, steamships, and others, making it easier to overcome nations with less technology.

The new technology caused overseas transportation to be greatly improved, and masses of Europeans began to immigrate to other parts of the world. The combination of the increase in European population with improved overseas transportation led to the greatest migration up to that time. This transportation led to the need for strategic passages, such as the Strait of Gibraltar and the Suez Canal. Imperialism seemed the obvious strategy to obtain these passages.

Who was Heinrich Himmler

Heinrich Himmler was Reichsfhrer-SS (Reich SS Leader) and Chief of the German police. In this capacity, he was responsible for the implementation of the Final Solution – the extermination of the Jews – as ordered by the Fhrer, Adolf Hitler. He was born in Munich on October 7, 1900. His father was the son of a police president, a former tutor to the princes of the Bavarian court, and a headmaster by profession. Himmler originally intended to be a farmer and in fact acquired a degree in agronomy.

He fought in World War I at the every end, and afterwards drifted into one of the many right wing soldier’s organizations that were so prevalent at the time. It is here that he came into contact with Hitler. He took part in the Hitler Putsch (the attempt to overthrow the government) of 1923 as a standard-bearer. He married Margret Boden in 1926. In 1929, Hitler appointed him head of the SS, which at that time numbered about 300 men and served mainly as a bodyguard for Hitler.

A superb organizer, he had already expanded the SS to 50,000 men by 19 By 1936, he had consolidated police power in Germany and was named Chief of the German police on June 17 of that year. With all organs of the police, especially the Gestapo (secret state police), now under his control, his power was virtually without limit. In addition to his other responsibilities, he was also responsible for the security services (Sicherheitsdienst) and the concentration camps, which up to that time housed prisoners of the state.

Himmler’s men staged the phony border incident that Hitler used to justify the invasion of Poland at the outbreak of World War II. As the war went on, the armored portions of the SS – the Waffen SS – began to rival the Armed Forces for power in the military field, culminating in Himmler’s being named Minister of the Interior in 1943 and chief of the Replacement Army in 1944. Right up to the end, he was one of Hitler’s most loyal men. Hitler called him “der treue Heinrich” (loyal Heinrich).

When it came time for Hitler to order the annihilation of the Jews, who better to select to carry it out than the man who was at once his most loyal follower and also in control of the apparatus necessary for its execution? And that is what Hitler did. The precise dat is not known, but what is known is that Himmler obeyed the order he received with his customary thoroughness and efficiency. Interestingly enough, for a man who has been demonized as the incarnation of evil, Himmler makes it clear in several speeches that he was not particularly antisemitic.

He simply blindly obeyed, displaying almost more amorality than immorality. Whatever misgivings Himmler may have had, he carried out his orders with an efficiency and a zeal that at once astonish and repel. The first murders were carried out by Einsatzgruppen by shooting. As deadly as these shootings were, a more “efficient” method had to be found, one that would accelerate the killing and would at the same time spare the SS men the necessity to murder women and children in cold blood. The decision was made to use poison gases (hydrocyanic acid and carbon monoxide) in both stationary and mobile gas chambers in Poland.

It is estimated that around 6 million Jews were killed during the Final Solution, along with as many as another 6 million non-Jews. At the end of the war, Himmler made attempts to negotiate peace through the World Jewish Congress. Attempting to flee in disguise in May 1945, he was captured by British forces and admitted his identity. When a doctor was ordered to search him to ensure he did not have poison secreted on his person, he bit down on a cyanide capsule hidden in his mouth and was dead in a few minutes.

Like Hitler, he chose suicide as his way to exit the world. At a speech in Posen on October 4, 1943, Himmler uttered the words that Joachim Fest has described as “one of the most horrifying testaments in the German language”: I am talking about the evacuation of the Jews, the extermination of the Jewish people. It is one of those things that is easily said. “The Jewish people is being exterminated,” every Party member will tell you, “perfectly clear, it’s part of our plans, we’re eliminating the Jews, exterminating them, a small matter. “

Barter in the Cybernetic Age

Welcome to Entrepreneur-Land; home of tough decisions and (calculated) risk takers. This living heritage evokes images of Vikings on trade routes from Russia through the Black Sea and Istanbul, trading furs and northern products for exotic silks, spices, and metal craft of the Middle East. Thanks to technology’s World Wide Web, networked and encryption secured computers, faxes, cell phones, and satellite/land-line transmissions, the United States sports dozens of barter systems with thousands of members; from the largest corporate giants down to the “Mom & Pop” businesses of Hometown, USA.

We’re talking $8 billion worth of cashless trades for goods and services, and that’s old (1993) news; it’s growing strong. These systems have solidified their political clout in NATE (National Association of Trade Exchanges) and IRTA (International Reciprocal Trade Association). And the success of their lobbyists in Washington, D. C. was demonstrated as early as 1984, when a special understanding was reached with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).

Monthly statements, and more importantly (to the government) 1099Bs (Barter) are promulgated to these member businesses, who then put together (often using tax preparation software, I. E. TaxCut or TurboTax and submit (frequently via email) their yearly Federal Tax Returns, to an accepting IRS, which then (if authorized) electronically transfers the overpayment of taxes back into the businesses checking accounts.

Reputable barter brokers actively earn their commissions every day. These professionals provide the advertising, marketing, and accounting necessary to expand their clients businesses to areas and individuals that are not normally reached through “cash only” avenues. Developing the right strategy with a sharp barter broker can be the catalyst that enables you to start, and more importantly, stay in business, no matter how volatile the global economy gets.

Boadicea was she a powerful ruler, or a merciless general

Boadicea was she a powerful ruler, or a merciless general? Many questions arise when you begin to explore her accomplishments or many would even say failures. Most of the information on Boadicea has been derived from myths and most of what is written about her is from the words of her Roman enemies. During the creation and rule of the Roman Empire, Rome would constantly be aiming to take over the entire known world. Consequently Boadicea and her people of Britannia clashed.

Julius Caesar was the first to take over Britain; he forced 6 powerful barbarian tribes to become a part of the Roman Empire. Iceni was amongst them, which happened to be the tribe of the famous Boadicea and her husband Prasutagus. However, Caesar and his army left that same year because they found the conditions too cold. Later in 43 AD Claudius Nero came into power. A man who was both cruel and pitiless, in his lifetime he managed to not only kill both his wives, his brother, and his mother but was known to go around the streets at night killing random men.

Nero who wanted so badly to earn the respect of his Roman citizens decided to retake Britain. Boadicea was born into aristocracy in the year 30 AD she then married the ruler of the Iceni tribe. She had two daughters during their marriage. When the Roman army invaded her city her husband Prasutagus agreed to leave all his accumulated wealth to the Roman Emperor. Prasutagus did this in the hope that his country would be taken in piece but Nero did not see it in the same light. He took the offering as surrender.

The Roman army began to take action, they treated all the Iceni people as slaves, and they raped both of her daughters. Then when her husband past away, she became regent to the thrown and she was brutally beaten by the Roman army. If this was not enough Boadicea also had to witness the suffering of her people; raised taxes, forced military service. Claudius even had a temple built for him in Iceni, Boadicea had had enough. She recruited her army and the army of other bitter barbarian tribes and begun a very bloody war.

Boadicea and her supporters all felt that the army would only last for a short matter of days but lasted from 60 to 61 AD. Her opportunity came when the Roman general Seutonius Paulinus and his army were resting in what is modern day Wales. She took the Romans by surprise; she attacked the Romans strongly fortified temple, which gave out in only two days. The war cost hundreds of lives of not only the Celtic people but the Romans as well. Boadicea was successful in pushing the Romans all the way south to London.

On her way to the final battle in London Boadicea sacked and burned each major city she passed. She managed to burn the capital at Colchester, London and Verulamium. This however was not such an easy task, but the famous warrior queen was so determined in her revenge against the Roman people. Each house was built of hardened clay and timber making them hard to burn to the ground but she didn’t stop until every house was down to the ground. Was she determined and a powerful leader for doing this? Or was she merciless and evil?

In today’s society this is referred to as ethnic cleansing and would not be tolerated. Not only did she burn every object touched by the Roman people she crucified them, she took woman caught of their breasts and placed them in their mouths, which was thought to may have been a pay back for the rape her two daughters experienced. Fortunate or not Boadicea lost her final battle with the Romans. Boadicea refused to suffer the humility of being captured so she took a poison administered by her most faithful druids.

It is a common myth that her body still lies under platform 9 of Lords King Cross Station. Even though many will say Boadicea was an inhumane person by the punishments she enforced onto the Roman people she did manage to accomplish quite a few things. One, she was one of the earliest women in history that lead a successful battle. She was also the one who shocked the Roman emperor into adopting new, better and kinder policies towards the treatment of the lands they conquered because the Roman government was scared for another revolt of the same magnitude.

Although, the Iceni tribe was not free from Rome, they did manage to encourage Seutonius successor Pretonious Turpilanius to let the Britons guide themselves. This gave Britannia more power and freedom than ever before. Every battle Boadicea fought she fought it with all her might it was Boadicea who said, “Think of how many of us are fighting and why. Then you will win this battle or die. That is what I, a woman plan to do. Let the men live as slaves, if they want. I won’t. “

Napoleon Bonaparte Life

Napoleon I (1769-1821), emperor of the France, who made reforms after the French Revolution. One of the greatest military commanders of all time, he conquered the larger part of Europe and did much to modernize the nations he conquered. Napoleon was born on August 15, 1769, in Ajaccio, Corsica, and was given the name Napoleon. He was the second of eight children of Carlo Bonaparte and Letizia Ramolino Buonaparte, both of the Corsican-Italian ancestry.

Napoleans father was a lawyer who had fought for Corsican independence, but after the French occupied the island in 1768, he served as a prosecutor and a judge and entered the French nobility as a count. Through his fathers influence, Napoleon was educated at the expense of King Louis XVI, in Paris. Napoleon graduated in 1785, at the age of 16, and joined the artillery as a second lieutenant. After the Revolution began, he became a lieutenant colonel. In 1793, however, Corsica declared independence, and Bonaparte, a French patriot and a Republican, fled to France with his family.

He was assigned, as a captain, to an army besieging Toulon, a naval base that, aided by a British fleet, was in revolt against the republic. Replacing wounded artillery general, he seized ground where his guns could drive the British fleet from the harbor, and the port fell. As a result Napoleon was promoted to brigadier general at the age of 24. In 1795 he saved the revolutionary government by dispersing an insurgent mob in Paris. In 1796 he married Josephine de Beauharnais, the widow of an aristocrat murdered in the Revolution. Also in 1796, Napoleon was made commander of the French army in Italy.

He defeated four Austrian generals, each with superior numbers, and forced Austria and its allies to make peace. In northern Italy he founded the Cisalpine Republic (later known as Italy) and strengthened his position in France by sending millions of francs worth of treasure to the government. In 1798, to strike at British trade with the East, he led an expedition to Turkish-ruled Egypt, which he conquered. The British admiral Horatio Nelson, leaving him stranded, however, destroyed his fleet. Undaunted, he reformed the Egyptian government and law, abolishing serfdom and feudalism and guaranteeing basic rights.

The French scholars he had brought with him began the scientific study of ancient Egyptian history. In 1799 he failed to capture Syria, but he won a smashing victory over the Turks. France, meanwhile, faced a new army; Austria, Russia, and lesser powers had allied with Britain. Napoleon, was no meek soul, he decided to leave his army and return to save France. In Paris, he joined a conspiracy against the government. November 9-10, 1799, he and his friends seized power and established a new regime. Under its constitution, Napolean, as first consul, had almost completely dictatorial powers.

The constitution was revised in 1802 to make Bonaparte consul for life and in 1804 to create him emperor. Each change received the overwhelming assent of the French electorate. In 1800, he assured his power by crossing the Alps and defeating the Austrians. He then negotiated a general European peace that established the Rhine River as the eastern border of France. He also concluded an agreement with the pope, which contributed to French domestic tranquillity by ending the quarrel with the Roman Catholic Church that had arisen during the Revolution.

In France the administration was reorganized, the court system was simplified, and all schools were put under centralized control. French law was standardized in the Code of Napoleon. They guaranteed the rights and liberties won in the Revolution, including equality before the law and freedom of religion. In April 1803 Britain, provoked by Napoleons aggressive behavior, resumed war with France on the seas; two years later Russia and Austria joined the British in a new coalition. Napoleon then abandoned plans to invade England and turned his armies against the Russian forces.

In 1806 he seized the kingdom of Naples and made his elder brother Joseph king, converted the Dutch Republic into the kingdom of Holland for his brother Louis, and established the Confederation of the Rhine of which he was the protector. Napoleon had meanwhile established the Continental System; a French-imposed blockade of Europe against British goods, designed to bankrupt what he called the “nation of shopkeepers. ” In 1807 Napoleon seized Portugal. In 1808, he made his brother Joseph king of Spain, awarding Naples to his brother-in-law, Joachim Murat.

Josephs arrival in Spain touched off a rebellion there, which became known as the Peninsular War. Napoleon appeared briefly and scored victories, but after his departure the fighting continued for five years, with the British backing Spanish armies and guerrillas. The Peninsular War cost France 300,000 casualties and lots of money and contributed to the eventual destruction of the Napoleons Empire. In all the new kingdoms created by Napolean, the Code Napoleon was established as law. Feudalism and serfdom were abolished, and freedom of religion.

Each state was given a constitution, providing for the right for a male vote and a parliament and a bill of rights. French-style administrative and judicial systems were required. Schools were put under centralized government, and free public schools were thought of. Higher education was opened to all that qualified, regardless of class or religion. Every state had an academy or institute for the promotion of the arts and sciences. Incomes were provided for scholars, especially scientists.

Constitutional government remained only a promise, but progress and increased efficiency were widely realized. Not until after Napoleons fall did the common people of Europe, alienated from his governments by war taxes fully appreciate the benefits he had given them. In 1812 Napoleon, whose alliance with Alexander I had disintegrated, launched an invasion into Russia that ended in a disastrous retreat from Moscow. After that all Europe united against him, and although he fought on, and brilliantly, the odds were impossible to beat.

After the allies had rejected his stepping down in favor of his son, Napoleon unconditionally surrendered and was exiled to a Mediterranean island. Marie Louise and his son were put in the custody of her father, the emperor of Austria. Napoleon never saw either of them again. Napoleon himself, however, soon made a dramatic comeback. In March 1815, he escaped from Elba, reached France, and marched on Paris, winning over the troops sent to capture him. In Paris, he promulgated a new and more democratic constitution, and veterans of his old campaigns flocked to his support.

Napoleon asked peace of the allies, but they outlawed him, and he decided to strike first. The result was a campaign into Belgium, which ended in defeat at the Battle of Waterloo on June 18, 1815. In Paris, crowds begged him to fight on, but the politicians withdrew their support. Napoleon fled to Rochefort, where he surrendered to the captain of the British battleship. He was then exiled to a remote island in the South Atlantic Ocean, where he remained until his death from stomach cancer on May 5, 1821.

The Pamphleteers Protestant Champion: Viewing Oliver Cromwell Through the Media of his Day

The years between 1640 and 1660 witnessed in England a greater outpouring of printed material than the country had seen since the first printing press had begun operating in the 1470s. 1 The breakdown of government and Church censorship in the early 1640s was almost total until the mid-1650s when Oliver Cromwell as Lord Protector reimposed some controls. Not until the return of the Stuarts and their royal censors did the flow of pamphlets cease.

This tumultuous period of English history therefore became a crowded arena for free expression of radical religious, social, and political ideas. This fact, coupled with the euphoria surrounding the victories of the New Model Army, the uninhibited exchange of ideas, and the general millennial atmosphere, especially following Charles Is execution, led many Englishman to see their nation as the emerging leader of the Protestant world. A recurring theme among these pamphlets, sermons, and broadsides was the idea that Oliver Cromwell was the man to lead England into this new age.

Like the second coming of the Swedish soldier-king Gustavus Adolphus, Cromwell would champion the Protestant cause wherever it was in need. As a Civil War hero, conqueror of the Irish and Scots, and later as Lord Protector, the devoutly religious Cromwell certainly had the background to fit the role. Yet in practical terms, England of the 1640s and 1650s was not the military juggernaut that many writers pictured it to be. The nation was not capable of wiping out the Turkish menace, unseating the Pope, and defending persecuted Protestants on the Continent all in one fell swoop.

Thefinancial difficulties of the Stuarts did not disappear with the execution of Charles, and though the navy was strong, it was not logistically feasible for the army to get involved in a large Continental war. Despite this, even Cromwell himself had some occasional delusions of religious and military grandeur. A well known quote has him saying that, were he ten years younger, “there was not a king in Europe I would not make to tremble. “2 In moments of religious fervor Cromwell might have seen himself and England in a millenial light, yet he was first and foremost a pragmatic politician.

His genuine belief in the need to aid and protect his co-religionists took a secondary position to the day-to-day realities of English society and politics. His alliance with the Catholic French against the Spanish and his acquiescence to the war agaist the Protestant Dutch provide ample evidence of his heeding realpolitik considerations over any Pan-Protestant ideology. Why then was Cromwell cast by the pamphleteers as a Protestant champion? The answer lies in the fact that the world view of the average Englishman was limited to either what he read or what was read to him, either at informal gatherings or in church.

Thus, the power of the printed word is hard to exaggerate in this time of upheaval and millennial anticipation. How and why Oliver Cromwell was cast in the role of English savior is directly related to the outlook of his contemporaries as shaped by the literature of the era. After distinguished service in the early years of the Civil War, Cromwell was firmly thrust into the limelight following his participation in the Battle of Naseby on 14 June 1645, the conflicts decisive engagement.

Having only recently rejoined the army following his exemption from the Self Denying Ordinance, he was to play a major role in this Parliamentary victory. Despite an overwhelming numerical advantage (14,000 vs. 7,500), the Parliamentary forces were on the verge of collapse following a Royalist charge against one end of their line. Cromwell, however, led the better disciplined Parliamentary horse on a charge against the opposite flank and succeeded in getting behind the Royalist infantry and thus swinging the victory toward Parliament.

Though the King held out for another year, Naseby effectively crushed the Royalist cause. 3 Cromwells letter to the Speaker of the House William Lenthall following the battle set the tone for future Cromwellian victory announcements. In its two paragraphs, the letter, which was read to Parliament as well as in the Churches in and around London,4 credited the victory to God no less than six times. He wrote, “This [victory] is none other but the hand of God; and to him alone belongs the glory, wherein none are to share with him.

Cromwells giving credit for his triumphs to divine providence is a recurring theme throughout his life. Two months later, from the town of Bristol, Cromwell sent more good tidings to Parliament. Having just concluded a storming of the town, Cromwell wrote, “This is none other than the work of God. He must be a very atheist that doth not acknowledge it. ” After thanking God several more times, Cromwell described his soldiers joy as being in the knowledge “that they are instruments of Gods glory and their countrys good. “6 Following Naseby, the New Model Army ran off a string of victories.

An atmosphere of invincibility and a sense of divine backing began to permeate the army and its supporters. Hugh Peter, an army chaplain and Independent minister, preached a sermon before Parliament in April 1645 (which was revised and printed in 1646) in which he spoke of seeing “Gods hand” in Parliaments victory. Peter made special mention of Cromwell as a decisive player in the victory at Naseby. He also saw an expanded role for England, saying that “the Lord hath made us warlike, awaked us thoroughly out of our effeminacy and we are becom[ing] formidable to our neighbors.

Going even further, Peter saw the Palatinate, Germany, France, Ireland, and the Netherlands all looking to England fr leadership. 7 Along with the growing pubic praise for the New Model Army as it continued its dominance over the Royalist forces was the increased stature enjoyed by Cromwell following Naseby. A Parliamentary newspaper in 1646 was full of praise for the “active and gallant commander Lieutenant General Cromewell” when he visited London. It described his great willingness “to advance the Great Cause in hand for the Reformation of Religion, and the resettling of the peace and government of the kingdom.

The article goes on to describe the awe in which the other MPs viewed him as well as to state, “[Cromwell] had never brought his colors from the field but he did wind up victory within them. “8 It should be recalled that Europe was still embroiled in the Thirty Years War, which the Stuarts had avoided despite the fact that James Is daughter (Charles Is sister) was married to the Elector of the Palatinate. England remained neutral due to the financial crisis at home, as well as to allow James to play the role of mediator in the conflict. For many Englishmen, the refusal to aid the Protestant cause on the Continent was an embarrassment.

Hugh Peters reference to England getting over her “effeminacy” and becoming warlike is an example of Puritan disappointment with Stuart foreign policy. As Christopher Hill writes, “It was with burning shame that such patriots saw the supine or hostile attitude of their government whilst these great issues were at stake. “9 In May 1646, the King fled to the Scottish army and with the surrender of the Royalist capital of Oxford in July, the Civil War seemed over. Cromwell returned to his home following the signing of the terms of capitulation.

In the succeeding months the army became increasingly radicalized by Parliaments refusal to address the soldiers material grievances and its rejection of the armys right to petition. 10 Negotiations with the King had become fruitless and the chances for a settlement with him looked bleak. When a group of soldiers seized Charles in June 1647, Cromwell threw in his lot with the army radicals. 11 With the outbreak of the second Civil War in March 1648, Cromwell again was in the field at the head of an army. After easily suppressing a Royalist uprising in Wales, Cromwell hurried to help repel the invading Scottish army from the North.

In a series of battles from 17-19 August Cromwell shattered the dispirited and divided Scots at Preston. In his dispatch to Parliament, General Cromwell again credited the victory to the Lords providence. “Surely, Sir,” he wrote, “this is nothing but the hand of God. ” The victory did on the surface seem miraculous considering the Scots superiority in numbers. As Cromwell wrote, “Only give me leave to add one word, showing the disparity of forces (21,000 Scots vs. 8,600 English) . . . that you may see and all the world acknowledge the hand of God in this business.

In truth, the English victory was much more dependent on Scottish ineptitude than divine intervention, but the effect on public opinion of a success against such a numerically superior force was undoubtedly tremendous. The defeat of the Royalist threat in the Second Civil war was followed by the well known events of the Army entering London on 2 December 1648 and Colonel Prides purge of the Parliament on 5 December. The Army was now in control of the government and ready to push through its own agenda. No solution involving the king now seemed possible and talk of his being put on trial and removed was circulating the capital.

Early in December one London news sheet openly questioned what sort of government should replace the monarchy. It read, “For (say the Saints) shall not we be happy when we ourselves make choice of a good and upright man to be king over us? ” The article described an elected king as one who “esteemeth of Religion and Virtue, [more] than of all other worldly things. ” Two men who were deemed to possess the necessary traits were “honorable and victorious Fairfax or Cromwell, in whom God hath miraculously manifesed his presence. 3

This article was important not only because its author considered Cromwell suitable material for kingship, but also because it demonstrated the view of Cromwell as a “godly man” and one whose actions God had blessed. A sermon preached before the House of Commons on 22 December 1648 by Hugh Peter is another example of the extreme views which had emerged. Comparing the Army leaders (of whom Cromwell was one) to Moses, Peter urged that the army “must root up monarchy, not only here, but in France and other kingdoms round about.

By doing so, he asserted that the army would lead the English people out of their “Egyptian” religious and ideological enslavement. Monarchy was seen as a demonstrated evil and the eradication of it elsewhere would be a “godly” cause. Drawing from the Book of Daniel, Peter also saw the army as “that corner stone cut out of the mountain which must dash the earth to pieces. “14 The actions of the radicals, who on 30 January 1649 executed Charles I, horrified the rest of Europe (and much of England).

As Cromwellian biographer Charles Firth wrote, “There was indeed no prospect of the general league of European potentates to punish regicide, for which Royalists hoped, but both governments and people were hostile. “15 While the real threat of foreign invasion may not have been great, the ominous possibility of it created a siege mentality among the English people. A declaration in the name of Louis XIV published in Paris on 2 January and republished in England in translation, warned the Rump Parliament against any action towards the person of the King.

Louis considered it his “Christian duty” to either “redeem from bondage the injured person of our neighbor King” or “to revenge all outrages already done or hereafter which may happen to be done” against Charles. Louis vowed vengeance not only against the perpetrators of the crimes but also their wives and children. The French Kings diatribe concluded by urging all other “Kings, Princes, and States” to make similar proclamations and to join together for the safety of their brother sovereign. 16

In the event that official proclamations against England were not effective enough in creating an air of paranoia, Royalist propagandists were also willing to contribute. In April 1649 Ralph Clare published a fabricated declaration by several monarchs, real and imaginary, condemning Englands regicidal actions. The pamphlets stated purpose was “[a] detestation of the present proceedings of the Parliament and Army, and of their [the monarchs] intentions of coming over into England in behalf of King Charles II. 7 Up to this point one can see the background developing for identifying Cromwell as Englands religious and martial defender. His popularity with the general population, and especially with the army, coupled with the nations growing sense of isolation, pushed him further into the role of bulwark against the enemies of England. Yet it was his acceptance of his next military assignment which would propel him into the image of English and Protestant champion–the suppression of Ireland.

The Irish rebellion which broke out in October 1641 initially was directed against Protestant English settlers and landholders, large numbers of whom were murdered and abused. The reporting in England of the massacres brought the normal disdain for the “uncivilized” Irish to a fever pitch of hatred. Streams of pamphlets, some highly fictionalized, concerning the revolt poured forth and it is obvious that many people accepted them wholly as truth. In London the pamphlets were absorbed with fascinated horror.

“All the news and speech is here of the rebellion,” wrote one city resident. In the Commons, Speaker of the House Pym inflamed fears of an Irish invasion and Catholic uprising in England. Pyms fears were real and he took every revelation of a plot, no matter how far fetched, with equal seriousness. e honestly believed that there had been “common counsel at Rome and in Spain to reduce us to popery. “19 With a leader of the nation so paranoid and frightened, it is no wonder that the people at large were able to believe so easily any story they heard.

A typical example is one piece published in December of 1641 entitled The Rebels Turkish Tyranny: . taken out of a letter sent from Mr. Witcame, a merchant in Kingsdale to a brother of his here: showing how cruelly they [the Irish] put them to the sword, ravished religious women, and put their children upon red hot spits before their parents eyes: threw them in the fire and burned them to ashes: cut off their ears and nose, put out their eyes, cut off their arms and legs, broiled them at the fire, cut out their tongues, and thrust hot irons down their throats, drown them, dash out their brains and such like other cruelty not heard of among Christians.

And this is only the introduction to the pamphlet. Another illustrated broadside of the same month by Anthony Rouse told of drunken Irish soldiers killing each other to celebrate the birthday of a rebel leader. “Each man slew his friend to the number of three thousand,” wrote the author. 21 To the English mind the Irishman seemed capable of any atrocity. While the gross exaggerations of Irish ruthlessness seem almost comical today, this sort of propaganda was common and its effects on naive readers should not be discounted.

It was especially easy to swallow when the perpetrators were Catholics and the victims Protestant. News accounts from the Continent during the Thirty Years War were full of detailed accounts of the torture and barbarities practiced by the Catholic soldiers of Tilly and Wallenstein against Protestants in Germany. Protestants having their eyes “twisted out” or their faces “planed with chisels” were typical examples. 22 Because of the Civil War in England and the subsequent unrest in the army, no troops could be sent to put down the insurrection in Ireland until 1649.

The delay in sending forces did not diminish the flow of pamphlets concerning the plight of the Protestants in Ireland. A Royalist newspaper in 1644 printed a story entitled “The Clergys Lamentation” which was a martyrology of dozens of “godly” Protestants killed through the “unparalleled cruelties and murders exercised by the inhumane Popish rebels. “23 In June of the same year Morely Gent published A Remonstrance of the Barbarous Cruelties and Bloody Murders in which he decried the feeding of newborns to dogs and the burning of a fat Scotsman, whose grease was used to make candles.

Other titles of these inflammatory pamphlets include The Impudence of the Romish Whore and A New Remonstrance from Ireland,25 both of which are replete with shocking stories of Irish depravity. Quite obviously these stories stirred up passions in England and brought about calls for a rapid suppression of the “barbarous rebels. ” There were also practical reasons in 1649 for desiring a quick re-establishment of English authority over the Irish. Charles II had made known his intentions of soon traveling to Ireland and using it as the staging area for an eventual invasion of England.

There was a Royalist Army in the field there and several of the rebel armies were negotiating with Charles to assist in restoring him to the throne in exchange for various concessions. 26 This is the situation Cromwell faced as he accepted the command of the 12,000 man expedition to Ireland. It was not only the political and military importance of his mission which motivated Cromwell. He had a fierce prejudice against the Catholic Irish and seems to have accepted every tale of atrocity.

He once wrote, “I had rather be overrun by a Cavalierish interest than a Scotch interest, I had rather be overrun by a Scotch interest than an Irish interest, and I think that of all, this the most dangerous . . . for all the world knows their barbarism. “27 Cromwell meticulously planned the strategy and provisioning of the campaign, arriving in Dublin on August 15, 1649. The brutality of Cromwells first two victories all but decided the outcome of the war. The Duke of Ormonde, commander of the royalist army in Ireland, wrote, “It is not to be imagined how great the terror is that those successes . have struck into this people.

They are so stupefied, that it is with great difficulty that I can persuade them to act anything like men towards their own preservation. “28 On 11 September 1649 Cromwells forces stormed the town of Drogheda and slaughtered the nearly 3,500 soldiers and civilians inside. Cromwell himself personally ordered his men to “put all to the sword. ” In his victory announcement to Parliament he spoke proudly of the massacre. “I am persuaded that this is a righteous judgement of God upon these barbarous wretches, who have imbrued their hands in so much innocent blood.

Cromwell went on to add that he believed all but two of the Friars in the town were killed by blows to the skull, or as he wrote, “knocked on the head promiscuously. “29 A month later Cromwell took the stronghold of Wexford by assault as well, killing more than 2,000 Irish soldiers. Though Cromwell did not order that the whole garrison be put to the sword, his soldiers got out of hand and did so on their own initiative. Cromwell expressed no regret over the episode, but rather said that “God in his righteous justice, brought a just judgement upon them.

His message of triumph to England asserted that the Irish had gotten their just desserts. “[Gods will] causing them to become a prey to the soldier who in their piracies had made preys of so many families, and with their bloods to answer the cruelties which they had exercised upon the lives of poor Protestants. “30 These two victories broke the back of the Irish rebellion. By the time Cromwell returned to England in May of 1650 to deal with another Scottish threat, the success of the English conquest was assured. It is hard to understate the impact of Cromwells victories on the Irish people.

W. C. Abbot writes that the “conditions of the Cromwellian conquest and settlement left a heritage of hate among the defeated people ‘scarcely equalled and seldom, if ever, surpassed in history. “31 Several times in the months following Wexford Cromwell was rumored to have been killed. Against these false hopes a contemporary Irish poet wrote: Cromwell is dead, and risen; and dead again and risen the third time after he was slain: No wonder! For hes a messenger of hell: And now he buffets us, now posts to tell Whats past: and for more game new counsel takes Of his good friend the devil, who keeps the stakes.

If for the Irish Cromwell was a “messenger of hell,” for the English he wasa savior. The Poet Andrew Marvell published a tribute to Cromwell in June 1650 entitled An Horatian Ode Upon Cromwells Return from Ireland. The poem, though it subtly chasted Cromwell for his inability to be satisfied by the “inglorious arts of war,” was full of praise for Cromwells exploits. And despite a doubting attitude by Marvell towards Charles Is execution, he declared that much to Cromwell “is due. ” He stepped out of obscurity to “cast the kingdoms of old into another mold.

In what battle of the Civil War were “[Cromwells] not the deepest scars? ” asked the poet, who also admonished the Irish who “see themselves in one year tamed” by Cromwell. Marvell honored Cromwell for selflessly giving his victories to England: [He] forbears his fame to make it theirs: And has his sword and spoils ungirt, Finally, the author denigrated the rebellious Scots valor, as he unabashedly compared Cromwell to Caesar and predicted that the Scots will “Shrink underneath the plaid [their kilts]” in reaction to Cromwells coming invasion.

The victories in Ireland were only the beginning of what some thought Cromwell might accomplish. The Fifth Monarchist movement had viewed the execution of Charles I as making way for the earthly reign of Jesus Christ Himself. One member of the sect, New Model Army veteran John Spittlehouse, published a pamphlet in 1650 which attacked the aristocracy and endorsed the Kings execution.

Spittlehouse warned the Papacy to “beware of Nol Cromwells army, lest Hugh Peter come to preach in St. Peters chair. 4 To him and other Fifth Monarchists, England (and the Revolution) represented a precedent of what God intended to do elsewhere. 35 Cromwell had originally been recalled from Ireland in order to assist General Fairfax in defeating the Scottish revolt. Fairfax, however, refused to involve himself in a war against the Presbyterian Scots, so the command was given to Cromwell alone. The Scots had been appalled by the execution of Charles, a Scottish King, and they conditionally proclaimed Charles II king six days after the execution.

The young king arrived in Scotland in the Spring of 1650 and raised an army. In the last week of July Cromwell led an English force into Scotland. The Lord Generals approach to the quelling of the Scottish revolt was thoroughly different from the course taken in Ireland. Cromwell published in Scotland A Declaration of the Army of England upon his march into that country. He appealed to the Scots as fellow Covenanters to realize the error of their ways.

He justified the invasion as a self defense “of English religion and liberty. 6 This policy of moderation by Cromwell stands in stark contrast to his behavior in Ireland where he was bent on the destruction of “popish interests. ” At Dunbar on September 4, 1650 Cromwells 11,000 man army routed a Scottish army twice its size. In his report to Parliament he described the battle in detail and related the English armys dramatic battle cry, “the Lord of Hosts! ” The Lord General saw the army as comparable to the “chariots and horsemen of Israel. ”

The victory would not only be a benefit to England but also an example which “shall shine forth to other nations who shall emulate such a pattern. 7 The 12 September issue of the government newspaper Mercurius Politicus described the Stuarts as being asdespotic as the Roman Tarquin, and it praised Cromwell not only for his triumph but for his mercy towards Scottish wounded, whom the Lord General had ordered to be treated kindly. 38 The Scottish forces never fully recovered from the rout at Dunbar; however, they were still strong enough to create problems for the English. On 3 September 1651, the one year anniversary of Dunbar, Cromwell won a decisive victory at Worcester, deep in English territory.

Charles II himself led the Scots into the battle and only barely escaped capture. The Scottish-Royalist movement was thus exterminated for the near future. In bulletins sent to England in the days following the battle, which were read “from all London pulpits,” Cromwell thanked the Lord for what “He hath wrought for this Commonwealth and for his people. ” He viewed the victory as divine approval for the “[English] Nation and the change of government” brought about by the revolution. 39 A published account by an English eyewitness to the battle saw things in the same light as the Lord General.

He said that the the “Lord hath clothed us in white garments, our enemies in bloody garments. ” To him, the victory was the “beginning of their fall [Englands] before appearance of the Lord Jesus [i. e. the millennium]. “40 His Scottish victories earned Cromwell still more glory from pamphleteers. In 1652, Payne Fisher published a tiresomely long poem dedicated to Cromwell entitled appropriately enough Veni, Vidi, Vici. It declared the Lord General to be an “Instrument of God used to destroy the Scots. ” In endless comparisons Fisher set Cromwell alongside virtually every noted military figure in Greek and Roman antiquity.

He was the equal of Ulysses and Aeneas, as well as Priam and Agamemnon in the poets eyes. Because he fought for “liberty and religion,” God was on his side. The idea that the Lord Generals conquests had brought Gods blessings upon the English people was the main thrust of the work. 41 In 1653, the self-proclaimed prophet Arise Evans printed a compilation of his visions. In one of them he claimed to have seen himself carried from France to Rome and heard “a voice come to me saying, ‘So far as thou art come, so far shall Cromwell come. 2

Considered insane by the authorities, Evans had been a court prophet to Charles I and was to be one later for Cromwell, despite the fact that he continually predicted the restoration of the Stuarts. 43 The respect accorded to Evans is attested to by the tolerance given him, and his predictions, by both the Kings and Protectors courts. The forcible dissolution of the Long Parliament (the Rump) in April 1653 by Cromwell and the army, and the establishment of a nominated (Barebones) parliament was seen by many religious extremists as a step towards a “new age.

This was especially true for the Fifth Monarchists with whom Cromwell was associated closely at this time. This association was the result of Cromwells friendship with General Harrison, a known Fifth Monarchist, as well as the Lord Generals appointing of several members of the sect to the Barebones. His speech on 4 July 1653 to the first assembly of the Barebones Parliament gave encouragement to beliefs of the coming of a new age of “godly rule. ” Cromwell had “surrendered himself to millenarian enthusiasm” according to Barry Coward, as he told the Barebones,

Truly you are called by God to rule with Him and for Him, I confess I never looked to see such a day as this when Jesus Christ should be so owned as He is, at this day… this may be the door to usher in the things that God has promised; which have been prophesied of . . . we have some of us thouht, that it is our duty to endeavor this way; not vainly to look at that prophesy in Daniel. 44 Cromwells euphoria soon dissipated as the Barebones Parliament became a thorn in his side just as the previous parliaments had been to the Stuarts.

A conservative backlash, joined by Cromwell himself, also swelled up against some of the more radical ideas espoused by the Parliament, especially those concerning property. As Cromwell later told his officers, “Ministry and property were like to be destroyed . . . Who could have said anything was their own if they [the barebones] had gone on? “45 On 12 December 1653 the moderate majority of the Barebones resigned and four days later Cromwell accepted the Instrument of Government and was installed as Lord Protector.

To most radicals, Cromwell was seen as a traitor to the Revolution. Some however held on to the hope that he would use his new power to enact reforms and pursue the crusading pro-Protestant policies which the Barebones had been unable to do. Among these men was John Rogers, an Independent minister and Fifth Monarchist who still believed Cromwell to be a champion of reform. 46 In 1654 he published Doomsday Drawing Nigh, a book he dedicated to Cromwell, “the Peoples Victorious Champion. He wrote, “His Excellency the Lord Jesus hath sent out his summons to other nations also, and the blade of the sword (whose handle is held in England) will reach to the very gates of Rome. Rogers called upon England to help her Protestant neighbors in Bordeaux and Germany. In his mind, all Protestants were bound together and should join together their armies and navies.

“The peoples eyes and cries are directed to the Lord General,” according to Rogers, “as the interest by whom they are [to be] recovered out of the Norman tyranny. The characterization of the “Norman Tyranny” as a “yoke” was a reference to the equal rights and privileges believed to have been lost by the average Englishman through the Norman conquest. 7 Oliver Cromwell was the peoples champion in Rogers eyes because he conquered “not for himself but for the people,” in contrast to the selfish William the Conqueror. The author finished out his work by quoting and interpreting numerous prophesies of his own and others. One prophecy, which he credited to the French astrologer Nostradamus, had England beginning a Reformation by destroying Rome with her armies.

The Turk too would be vanquished by the English, in league with the Venetians according to the predictions. 8 Like others, Rogers picked up upon the theme of England emerging as a power to be reckoned with, led by Cromwell. Andrew Marvell wrote a poem in 1655 to the Protector to commemorate the first anniversary of Cromwellian rule. Marvell, a protege of Milton, was not only unperturbed by Cromwells assumption of one man rule, he rather seemed to grow in his fondness for the Protector.

The poem opened with almost fifty lines praising the vigor of the Lord Protector as a ruler. The next sixty lines were a testament to his construction of such a harmonious state. Marvell then bemoaned the fact that mans sins had delayed the millennium. He decried those who still worshiped “the whore” (Rome) and those who subjugated the Indian and burned the Jew (Spain), when instead they should have been trying to convert them in anticipation of the millennium. The poet pictures Cromwell rooting out Catholicism by using the image of the scarlet beast of the Apocalypse.

Till then my muse shall hollo far behind Angelic Cromwell who outwings the wind, And in dark nights, and in cold days alone Pursues the monster thorough every throne: Which shrinking to her Roman den impure, Gnashes her gory teeth; nor there secure. Marvell demonstrated his desire for Cromwell to become king by comparing him favorably to Gideon and Noah. He was critical of the Fifth Monarchists, whose prophesies were “fit to be [put in the] Koran. ” Marvells final plea to Cromwell, “the angel of our Commonwealth,” was to continue healing yearly the “troubling water” around England as he had done thus far. 9

Some of the literature of this period which applauded Cromwell or cast him in the role of religious crusader was either outright government-sponsored propaganda or, at the least, encouraged by the government. An example of this is in the 1656 translation of Bartolomeo De La Casas book The Tears of the Indians. The translator, John Phillips, wrote the books dedication to “Oliver, Lord Protector of the Commonwealth,” asking the Protector to avenge the Spanish slaughter of the twenty million Indians of whom De La Casas wrote.

Phillips suggested that the Indians cries would cease “at the noise of Your [Cromwell] great transactions, while you arm for their revenge. The translator saw divine virtues in Cromwell which would rightfully allow him to punish “the bloody and popish nation of the Spaniards,” whose crimes were “far surpassing the popish cruelties in Ireland. ” Phillips timely translation and dedication were used to help rouse up support for the coming war with Spain. As Phillips was the nephew of John Milton (Cromwells first official censor and propaganda minister), Phillips work was surely encouraged, if not authorized, by

The Nuremberg trials

During World War II the Allies were determined that both Hitler and the men around him should be punished for starting World War II and the crimes they had committed while they were waging it. These crimes included the extermination of the Jewish people of Europe known as the Holocaust or the Shoah. After some debate it was decided that the fairest way to proceed was the public trial of the men and organizations who committed At the most famous of these, the Nuremberg Trial, , and that had been organized to carry out the Nazi programs, were placed on trial for their crimes.

Martin Bormann was tried in bsentia. Additionally Robert Ley was charged as a defendant but committed suicide before the trial, and Gustav Krupp, who was named in the indictments, was found to be medically unfit to stand trial. Many of the leading Nazis, such as Hitler, Himmler, and Goebbels, were not present at the Nuremberg Trial because they has committed suicide at The first step was to agree upon the rules for the trial. They adopted a of the four Allies (the United States, Great Britain, France and the Soviet Union).

The defendants were given the right to be represented by counsel, call witnesses, and present evidence in their wn behalf. They were not given the right to a jury trial which was part of the law only in Great Britain and the United States. Finally, after all the evidence was presented, the defendants were permitted to make statements to the court without being sworn or The next step was the , a statement of the charges against each defendant.

The Allies charged the defendants with four types of crimes: conspiracy against peace, crimes against peace, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. The Allies stated that the Nazis, when they started the war, had deliberately broken the treaties that Germany had signed. The Holocaust was included as part of the crimes against humanity. Not all of the defendants were charged under all counts of the indictment. Doenitz, Raeder, and Schacht were not accused of participating in the Holocaust.

The trial was held before a panel of judges selected by the Allies called the and presided over by a British judge named Lord Lawrence. The Allies presented their evidence which consisted almost entirely of the words and documents of the Nazis themselves. During the investigation that led up to the trial, the U. S. and British investigators had discovered iterally tons of documents which proved the charges against the defendants. The decision was made, therefore, to rely on the words of the defendants themselves in the trial. Certain witnesses were presented to flesh out the evidence.

This is especially true in the case against the concentration camps where witnesses ranging from a member of the French parliament — who had been imprisoned as a slave laborer at Auschwitz — to an American army officer who had been imprisoned at Buchenwald testified. Several Nazi officers also testified about how the Holocaust occurred. Although the French and the Soviets were originally supposed to present the case on the crimes against humanity, the Americans and British had presented a lot of evidence about the Holocaust when they presented evidence.

In fact, by the time the Soviets started to present their case one of the judges, Lord Birkett of Great Britain, was restless because he thought the testimony was unnecessary — the case had been proven over and over again. The final phase of the trial was the defendants’ cases. The defendants actually took more time in the court than the prosecutors. Although the defenses varied most either stated hat they not involved in the Holocaust or did not know it was happening. All of the defendants testified at length and presented witnesses.

One of the most important witnesses about the Holocaust, Rudolf H (or “Hoess”), the commandant of Auschwitz, was actually called as a witness for the defense. The judges had a hard time deliberating about whether the defendants were guilty and what punishments should be meted out to those who were guilty. The French judge, DeVabres, was not convinced that any of the defendants should be found guilty on the charge of conspiracy because that concept was not found in French or German law. In the final , three defendants, Von Papen, Schacht, and Fritzche, were acquitted entirely.

Eleven others were acquitted of some of the charges against them and Hess was acquitted of the charges of participating in the Holocaust and other war crimes. Twelve of the defendants were sentenced to death. Bormann was never found and Goering committed suicide. The others were hung on October 16, 1946. The Nuremberg Trial was the only trial of Nazi war criminals that was conducted by an international tribunal. Later, other Nazi war criminals were placed on trial, many in the ame court-room where the Nuremberg Trial had occurred. Each of these trials, however, was conducted by a single country.

The Americans, for example, tried the defendants who had performed cruel medical experiments on prisoners; the British tried the men who had run Bergen-Belsen concentration camp. The trials continued for several years until the American, British, and French turned the work over to German courts. As late as 1965, defendants were still being tried in Germany for the crimes they committed during the Holocaust. The Nuremberg trials were more controversial when they happened then they are today. It was a new idea and new procedures had to be established.

Some were uncomfortable with the idea of trying men for starting the war when there had never been a trial like this before. Others have been bothered by the death sentence given to Julius Streicher and the light sentence given to Albert Speer. Today there are very few legal scholars who accept the technical arguments about whether the trial should have been held. Even those reputable scholars who disagree base their objections on their legal philosophy. All agree that the Tribunal took its job seriously and gave the defendants a fair trial.

How does the arrival of the early Europeans has changed or affected

In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the movements to explore the new world increased rapidly. Among them was the arrival of the early Europeans on Americas. Only in a few decades this arrival has changed the land and the people of the Americas both on the physical the non-physical outcomes. On the physical outcomes, within a few decades after the arrival of European Ships on October 12, 1492, successive waves of explorers and colonists slaughtered, raped, and exploited indigenous populations who were poorly equipped to resist the bearded, white strangers invading their bays, inlets, and high plateaus.

As mentioning in The Second Voyage: The Cannibals of Columbus: Having her in my room and she being naked as is their custom, I began to want to amuse myself with her. Since I wanted to have my way with her and she was not willing, she worked me over so badly with herTo get to the end of the story, seeing how things were going, I got a rope and tied her up so tightly that she made unhearding how things were going, I got a rope and tied her up so tightly that she made unheard of cried which you wouldnt have believed.

Spears, arrow, wood, and human agility proved no match against guns, cannon, steel, and horses. Many native communities were wiped out. As a result, a large number of people were killed, European as well as Native American. As mentioned In the King Philips war, one in ten soldiers on both sides was injured or killed and it took many years for Plymouth and the other colonies to recover from damage to property. (Ms. Hamidahs lecture notes) In addition, the Spanish would soon rely on slave labor to send profitable supplies of gold, sugar, coffee, and tobacco (new human necessities) to European markets.

Hundreds of Natives who fought with Philip were sold into slavery abroad; others, especially women and children were forced to become servants locally. Columbus had this idea as soon as he came to the New Land: They ought to be good servants and of good skill, for I see that they repeat very quickly whatever was said to them. In many ways, the arrival of whites was tragic disaster for Native Americans. In the 1700s, about two thirds of the native population in Michigan died from diseases whites brought such as smallpox, cholera, yellow fever, malaria, typhus, tuberculosis, measles, influenza, and even the common cold.

The combination of slavery, disease, captivity, and brutality exacted a heavy toll throughout the Americas. Considering land as gold, the encounter between European and the Native American has given many conflicts. From the conflict in non-physical it leads to the conflict in physical aspect. To the Native Americans, land is something that they have to respect. On the contrast, the European considered land as a tool to enrich them. As a result, tribes lost massive amounts of land to the U. S. Government, for which they were often neither paid nor compensated.

By 1820, they had lost claim to over half of Michigan’s Lower Peninsula. Most Native Americans and some whites thought that the government’s relations with Native Americans were marked by dishonesty, corruption, and deception. By 1838, almost all native villages in Michigan had been abandoned. As the result of the invader of European on the physical aspect, the relationship between the natives and the invaders was clear: conquest, enslavement, the expropriation of all the wealth and resources of the land. However the Native Americans were also affected on the non-physical aspect.

As the traditional base of existence changed due to the Colonists victory, the local Native communities had to adapt certain aspects of their culture in order to survive. Rich source of misunderstanding between Indian and White Anglo-Saxon cultural analysis is the different attitude of most Native Americans to such concepts as Nature, the environment, and social values. Wolves held a special place in almost all Native American tribes. They were admired for their strength and powers of endurance, and taught the tribes many skills. And after killing the prey, a good hunter always left a piece of meat behind.

This was reflected through the dialogue between the two wolves and the man: Now we will tell you why we have helped you. Whenever you went hunting you always gave the best part of the meat to us and kept only the smallest part for yourself. For that we are thankful and help you. Contrasting with European folklore, wolves are usually depicted as evil. The Indians watched the Europeans come and kill the wolves. The Blackfoot and Lakota believe that a gun used to shoot a wolf will never shoot straight again. In addition, the two different cultures and concepts of land use had caused tension for many years.

To the Native Americans, Esdzanadkhi (probably Mother Earth) created humanity so they always respect her as well as their land. This causes the conflict with whiteman’s violent aggression towards the land. A continuing problem was the trampling of Native cornfields by colonists livestock. Increased competition for resources (particularly land for planting, hunting and fishing) caused friction between the two groups. One of the short stories that reflects the conflict is A Narrative of the Captivity and Restoration of Mrs. Mary Rowlandson.

Because of the land conflict and the necessary to take the land back, the Native American captured Mrs. Mary Rowlandson. Moreover, the history of the interaction between American Indians and the American Government has been characterized by a number of conflicting policies. On the American Government side there have been policies of separation by which the American Indians were to be removed from the lands that the expansionist whites coveted. At the same time there was recognition of the Indians’ sovereign rights to their new territories.

This policy was historically followed by one of coercive assimilation in which Indian ways were to be replaced by the culture of white Anglo-Saxon Protestantism. Native Americans also grew increasingly distant from native culture under the influence of white schools, missions, and churches. Within a European view of the natives as barbarous, uncivilised, the European thought to a need of conversion to Christianity to save Native Americans souls as Columbuss thought when he departed to a new land: I believe that they would easily be made Christians, because it seemed to me that they belonged to no religion.

On the other hand, despite the unremitting efforts of many Christian missionaries and schools to replace the native religions with Roman Catholicism or one of the varieties of Protestantism, a diverse range of native religions survive or have been attached to Christian forms. Another result of European conquest and settlement is the language. Maybe, depending on their strength, the European imposed their language on the new land and made some languages of Native Americans disappear.

By the middle of the 20th cent. , perhaps two thirds of the many indigenous American languages had already died out or were dying out. Still other aboriginal languages are only now being discovered and investigated by researchers. Especially, The Indian contribution to America is greater than is often believed. The European languages those are official today in countries of the New World, such as English, Spanish, and Portuguese, have also borrowed a number of words from aboriginal languages.

English, for example, has been enriched by such words as moccasin, moose, mukluk, raccoon, skunk, terrapin, tomahawk, totem, and wampum from indigenous North American languages; by chocolate, coyote, and tomato from indigenous Mexican tongues , etc Last but not least, the way of life is also the effect of the encounter of the two cultures (The Europeans and Native Americans). The Navaho were a nomadic tribe. In winter they lived in earth-covered lodges and in summer in brush shelters called hogans. They farmed (corn and beans), hunted (deer, elk, and antelope), and gathered wild vegetable products.

After sheep were introduced (early 17th cent. ) by the Spanish, sheep raising superseded hunting and farming. Thus the Navaho became a pastoral people. In summary, there are many differences in culture and ideology between the Europeans and the Native Americans. The conflicts on both the physical and the non-physical outcomes are the result that we can not get rid of. And the result for those conflicts is that a completely new and different labor, religious, economic, and social regimes were imposed.

Labor And Unions In America

The Industrial Revolution was dawning in the United States. At Lowell, Massachusetts, the construction of a big cotton mill began in 1821. It was the first of several that would be built there in the next 10 years. The machinery to spin and weave cotton into cloth would be driven by water power. All that the factory owners needed was a dependable supply of labor to tend the machines.

As most jobs in cotton factories required neither great strength nor special skills, the owners thought women could do the work as well as or better than men. In addition, they were more compliant. The New England region was home to many young, single farm girls who might be recruited. But would stern New England farmers allow their daughters to work in factories? The great majority of them would not. They believed that sooner or later factory workers would be exploited and would sink into hopeless poverty. Economic “laws” would force them to work harder and harder for less and less pay.

How, then, were the factory owners able to recruit farm girls as laborers? They did it by building decent houses in which the girls could live. These houses were supervised by older women who made sure that the girls lived by strict moral standards. The girls were encouraged to go to church, to read, to write and to attend lectures. They saved part of their earnings to help their families at home or to use when they got married.

The young factory workers did not earn high wages; the average pay was about $3.50 a week. But in those times, a half-dozen eggs cost five cents and a whole chicken cost 15 cents. The hours worked in the factories were long. Generally, the girls worked 11 to 13 hours a day, six days a week. But most people in the 1830s worked from dawn until dusk, and farm girls were used to getting up early and working until bedtime at nine o’clock.

The factory owners at Lowell believed that machines would bring progress as well as profit.

Workers and capitalists would both benefit from the wealth created by mass production. For a while, the factory system at Lowell worked very well. The population of the town grew from 200 in 1820 to 30,000 in 1845. But conditions in Lowell’s factories had already started to change. Faced with growing competition, factory owners began to decrease wages in order to lower the cost-and the price-of finished products.

They increased the number of machines that each girl had to operate. In addition, they began to overcrowd the houses in which the girls lived. Sometimes eight girls had to share one room.

In 1836, 1,500 factory girls went on strike to protest wage cuts. (The girls called their action a “turn out.”) But it was useless. Desperately poor immigrants were beginning to arrive in the United States from Europe. To earn a living, they were willing to accept low wages and poor working conditions. Before long, immigrant women replaced the “Yankee” (American) farm girls.

To many people, it was apparent that justice for wage earners would not come easily. Labor in America faced a long, uphill struggle to win fair treatment. In that struggle, more and more workers would turn to labor unions to help their cause. They would endure violence, cruelty and bitter defeats. But eventually they would achieve a standard of living unknown to workers at any other time in history.

In colonial America, most manufacturing was done by hand in the home. Some was done in workshops attached to the home. As towns grew into cities, the demand for manufactured goods increased. Some workshop owners began hiring helpers to increase production. Relations between the employer and helper were generally harmonious. They worked side by side, had the same interests and held similar political views.

The factory system that began around 1800 brought great changes. The employer no longer worked beside his employees. He became an executive and a merchant who rarely saw his workers. He was concerned less with their welfare than with the cost of their labor. Many workers were angry about the changes brought by the factory system. In the past, they had taken great pride in their handicraft skills; now machines did practically all the work, and they were reduced to the status of common laborers. In bad times they could lose their jobs. Then they might be replaced by workers who would accept lower wages. To skilled craft workers, the Industrial Revolution meant degradation rather than progress.

As the factory system grew, many workers began to form labor unions to protect their interests. The first union to hold regular meetings and collect dues was organized by Philadelphia shoemakers in 1792. Soon after, carpenters and leather workers in Boston and printers in New York also organized unions. Labor’s tactics in those early times were simple. Members of a union would agree on the wages they thought were fair. They pledged to stop working for employers who would not pay that amount. They also sought to compel employers to hire only union members.

Employers found the courts to be an effective weapon to protect their interests. In 1806, eight Philadelphia shoemakers were brought to trial after leading an unsuccessful strike. The court ruled that any organizing of workers to raise wages was an illegal act. Unions were “conspiracies” against employers and the community. In later cases, courts ruled that almost any action taken by unions to increase wages might be criminal. These decisions destroyed the effectiveness of the nation’s early labor unions.

Not until 1842 was the way opened again for workers to organize. That year several union shoemakers in Boston were brought to trial. They were charged with refusing to work with non-union shoemakers. A municipal court judge found the men guilty of conspiracy. But an appeal to a higher court resulted in a victory for labor unions generally. Chief Justice Lemuel Shaw ruled that it was not unlawful for workers to engage peacefully in union activity. It was their right to organize, he said. Shaw’s decision was widely accepted. For many years following this decision, unions did not have to fear conspiracy charges.

In the next two decades, unions campaigned for a 10-hour working day and against child labor. A number of state legislatures responded favorably. In 1851, for example, New Jersey passed a law calling for a 10-hour working day in all factories. It also forbade the employment of children under 10 years old.

Meanwhile trade unions were joining together in cities to form federations. A number of skilled trades organized national unions to try to improve their wages and working conditions. The effort to increase wages brought about hundreds of strikes during the 1850s. None was as extensive, however, as a strike of New England shoemakers in 1860. The strike started in Lynn, Massachusetts, when factory workers were refused a three-dollar increase in their weekly pay. It soon spread to Maine and New Hampshire. Altogether, about 20,000 workers took part in the strike. It ended in a victory for the shoemakers. Similar victories were soon won by other trade unions. These successes led to big increases in union membership. Yet most American workers were generally better off than workers in Europe and had more hope of improving their lives. For this reason, the majority did not join labor unions.

Emperor Kang-hsi

Emperor Kang-hsi ruled China from 1661 to 1722 and his reign is captured by Jonathan D. Spences book Emperor of China. The different chapters of the book deal with certain aspects of the Emperors life. Aspects that the history books to normally deal with. The information in Spences book is based on Emperor Kang-hsis correspondence, his own writings. This writing maybe biased towards himself, but no other piece of information could provide insight into his mind. The book is divided into six parts; In motion, Ruling, Thinking, Growing Old, Sons, Valedictory.

The book ollows Emperor Kang-hsis life as Emperor in chronological order. In the first part, In Motion,” the main emphasis was on Emperor Kang-hsi travels though his kingdom. He wrote a letter to Ku Wen-hsing stating that he had traveled 1000s of miles in each direction. He had traveled to the provinces of Shansi and Shensi in the west, to the provinces of Manchuria and Ula in the east, north across the Gobi to the Kerulean River and south to the Yangtze River. On his travels, Emperor Kang-hsi, liked to collect and compare different plats, animals, birds that he came across.

He loved to hunt with bows and guns during his travels. Emperor Kang-hsi hunting practices were not just meant for joy and exercise, it was also an exercise in military preparedness. He took thousands of his troops on many of his trips to train them in shooting, camp life, and formation riding. The second part of the book emphasis on the historiographically part of the emperors rule. The authors’ facts were based on the thousands of imperial documents that came from the emperor. The author was able to piece together the kind to government that existed.

The central bureaucracy of emperor Kang-hsis China was composed of a metropolitan division and a provincial division. The metropolitan division was supervised by four to six Grand Secretaries and were directed by the presidents and vice-presidents of the Six Boards. The provinces were divided into six province blocks, controlled by s governor-general. Each province was divided into prefectures and each prefecture was subdivided into counties controlled by a magistrate. Ruling to Emperor Kang-hsi meant he had compete control for his economical and educational structure.

He also felt that he was responsible for the life and death of subjects. The third part of the book is Thinking, that deals with Emperor Kang-hsi perspective on his life and of his subjects. Emperor Kang-hsi believed in Neo- Confucianism and often refereed to it as the Confucian Classic. In different parts of the Emperors life he was interested in geometry, astronomy, cartography, medicine, and math. He took advantage in the free time a ruler has to expand his mind. The section Growing Old showed that Emperor Kang-hsi recognized that the human body was fallible.

He tried to prolong his life with an awareness into his diet, medicine and memory. He tried to obtain public sympathy with his openness towards his health, thus gaining the there trust and support in hard times. Kang-hsi recognized that admission to his physical weakness was the ultimate honestly but preventing physical weakness was the ultimate common sense. Practicing medicine under Emperor Kang-hsi was a highly specialized practice. He had large groups of men for diagnosis and treatment. In the end, Kang-hsi knew that death was enviable, but he tried to live forever hough his children.

Kang-hsi had fifty-six children in his life time, but only one was born to his first wife. This son was to be raised as the heir to the throne, he received the most care and love that the Emperor could give. From an early age, Kang-hsi eldest son knew he would inherit the throne. Many officials also knew that the son would inherit the throne and thus tried to gain favors with the son. Different officials also tried to jockey for position with the government. Emperor did not look kindly towards this. This political theme is the basis for the chapter named Sons.

Thirty years after Emperor Kang-hsi was helped into power by his uncle Songgotu, he had Sonnggotu executed. Shortly after Sonnggotu was killed, Emperor Kang-hsi had his sons killed also. In 1712 the garrison commander of Peking was put to death in fear of the commander gaining to much power. Emperor Kang-hsi was very protective of his sons. When he suspected that his son Yin-jeng has indulging in homosexual activities, Kang-hsi had three cooks and the serving boys put to death. He suspected that the cooks and servers were engaging in homosexual activities with his son.

In conclusion, the book achieves in its purpose, to give new insights into the Emperors life. Spences book goes into greater detail about Emperor Kang-hsi life then any history book could have. Spence is able to do this by emphasizing on Kang-hsis writings, and not on other sources. The book was divided into six sections that described different aspects of the Kang-hsi life and times. The most interesting chapter in my option was the chapter Sons. In this chapter Spence describes the Emperors protective nature towards his sons.

He went to great lengths to protect his sons and their heir to the kingdom. Spences summary of the data he collected was a little too short. Spence did not go into great detail over many facts. In addition, Spence did not address issues outside China that effected it. By this time in history, China had foreign intervention and influence. Yet Spence did not address the issue of foreign policies that Kang-hsi made during his reign. In the end Spence did achieve his goal of gaining new insights into Emperor Kang-hsi and wrote a good history of the Emperors life.

The French Revolution

During the late 1700s, France followed in Americas footsteps towards their own revolution. A major shift in power would be seen within the short time period of 1789-1799, and with it a large advancement away from the absolutist government of France. During the late 1700s France was the most powerful estate in the world. The effects of the countrys revolution would soon spread from France to the rest of Europe and finally result in a continental war. The French Revolution was based mostly on the Third Estates desire to obtain liberty and equality.

Frances social system was set up in such a way that it was only a matter of time before a revolution took place. The economic classes of France were set in three estates. The first estate was the church, or clergy, the second estate was the nobles, and the third estate consisted of peasants and the uneducated. Frances economic system allowed for the highest taxation of the third estate while the clergy members were exempt from taxes, and the nobles paid little or no taxes at all. People who are starving and can barely afford to survive can only pay so much before they refuse to pay anymore.

It is not suprising that the third estate was driven to immediate action with Louis XVIs demand for higher taxes. Ideas of liberty and equality sprang up with the onset of the American Revolution and paved a way for the third estate to change Frances system of government. Philosophes such as Voltaire spread ideas of reform that excited the peasants to believe there was a chance for a better life. Along with the social causes of the revolution, economic and political events brought about the desire for change as well.

Economic conditions such as poor harvests made the price of food rise to such high prices that half a workers wages were spent on trying to feed the family alone. The taxation system took money from the peasants, yet they did not reap any of the benefits that were supposed to come from their money. For Example, King Louis XVI lived such and extravagant life that three percent of the nations GNP was spent on royal family lifestyle. Wars also played a major role in depleting the nations funds. The cost of maintaining a standing army exceeded half of Frances expenditures.

The taxes were not used however to improve infrastructure, health facilities, schooling, or general life of the third estate from which all the money was being generated. These economic hardships set the stage for some major changes in France. Louis XVI did try, but was unsuccessful in reforming the political system of France. When King Louis XVI came into power, he realized that these problems existed. Louis appointed a man by the name of Robert Turgot ease the financial crisis of France, but he had difficulties when he tried to introduce a major reform.

Turgot could not establish a change in the taxation policies of France. He was unable to introduce a higher tax to the second estate because the king could not tax the nobles unless the Parliament approved of the new tax laws. The people in the courts that voted on these laws were the nobles, called nobles of the robe, and therefore rejected Turgot’s reform. After Turgot was rejected, the king fired him from his office. With the economic problems of France ever increasing, Louis XVI summoned the Estates General in 1789.

The Estates General was a council where each social class could be represented. Louis convened the Estates General with the intent on raising taxes even higher within the third estate. However, the third estate thought that they would finally be able to express their ideas about a national change that would promote liberty and equality. When the Estates General met in 1789, the representatives from the third estate outnumbered the representatives of the first and third estates (reflecting the social class pyramid of the time).

When the king realized this, he closed the doors to the third estate members. Outraged by the unwillingness to hear their views, the third estate convened in an indoor tennis court, declared themselves the National Assembly and made an oath not to leave until they had established a reformed government. This became the famous tennis court oath. So in 1791, the National Assembly brought forward a new constitution. It made France a limited monarchy and established a system of separation of powers. Under the constitution, the old distinctions between the clergy, nobles, and commoners disappeared.

Few people were satisfied with the old constitutional monarchy, and Louis XVI, frightened by the actions of the National Assembly fled the country with his wife, but he was later arrested and brought back to accept the constitution. Louis XVI and his wife Marie Antoinette were imprisoned and held powerless while a revolution destroyed the old system of government. The third estate had gained power, and leaders among them now took roles of government officials. With the overturning of power, Maximilien Robespierre came to power.

In an attempt to stabilize the country under his control, Robespierre began what is now referred to as the Reign of Terror. Robespierres time in control was backed by the power of the guillotine. Any person that posed a threat to the new standing government was executed immediately. Much like the Holocaust in the 1900s, Robespierres Reign of Terror allowed for only those loyal to him to hold any kind of power. Robespierre was successful continued his reign of terror until 1794. By this time the French Revolution engulfed all of Europe. France was successful on all fronts, and slowly gaining world power.

However, in July of 1794 Robespierres power was losthe was executed by his own device of terror, the guillotine. With the end of Robespierres reign, a new form of government came to power. A five man executive committee known as the Directory began to rule France. The Directory supported Robespierres objectives, yet their power was short lived as a brilliant young general, Napolean Bonaparte, seized power in 1799. The Napoleonic Era brought a sense of unity to France. This bold young leader quickly established a form of government of which he was in complete control.

Napoleans goals were completely personal and held little respect for what was best for France. He dreamed of global conquest, and continued Frances expansionist views by putting even more efforts in foreign fronts. While in power Napolean also established several beneficial systems that are still used in French society today. For this reason, it is argued as to whether Napolean was a hero or tyrant. There are arguments to support both sides, however, with his disregard for Frances goals to fulfill his own, Napolean is more easily shown as a tyrant. Napolean did view his goals as benefiting France though.

His foreign policy consisted of conquering as much of Europe as possible and building Frances empire. Napolean gained a reputation throughout Europe that he was not to be trusted. Attacking every territory he could, Napolean soon over extended Frances empire and made too many enemies. His downfall was inevitable. After defeat from his allies, Napolean was abducted from his throne and banished to the island of Elba. But in one more glorious attempt to regain power Napolean escaped to France and once again tried to raise an army. His attempt failed and as he was jailed the Napoleonic Era ended, and with it the era of the French Revolution.

The French Revolution was a drawn out era that has no definitive beginning. Though the first actions may have occurred in 1789, the causes of the revolution began long before that. Though the time that the revolution took place is not important, the affects have changed the course of European history. Frances revolution sparked a continental war while it also took its place with the United States to lead the way for future revolutions throughout the world. The far reaching implications of what the French Revolution became could never have been conceived by the poor peasants that took that Tennis Court Oath and vowed to change the government.

Dinosaur history

When dinosaur bones were first found they thought that they belonged to giant lizards. The word “dinosaur” came from the Greek words deinos, meaning marvelous or terrible, and sauros, meaning lizard. The larger dinosaurs must have seemed to be terrible to the smaller animals. Some of the first dinosaurs were only about as big as a small dog. That is how big the horses of that time were. Over the years, as the dinosaurs aged, they grew to be much more large in size. The sizes of dinosaurs ranged greatly, all the way from two feet long to one hundred and fifty feet long.

They weighed as much as fifty tons, which is seven African Bull Elephants. We first discovered the fossils and bones shortly under the surface of the Earth. After scientists got more into the study they started to dig deeper down. The fossils get so deep because of the years of rocks and dirt that were piled up on it. Some also get buried if a dinosaur were to die next to a river, and over the years the river probably changed courses a little, so therefore the bones would be covered up. They would actually be in the bank of the river. The Evolutionary theory states that everything evolved over millions of years.

Evolutionists say that dinosaurs came from six million years back. They also say that the Earth is four to six billion years old. They say that fifty million years ago there was horses no bigger than dogs, and birds as tall as man, three hundred million years ago giant dragon flies buzzed around in the large forests, six million years ago small animals, called trilobites, lived in the sea and were rulers of the world. Evolutionists think that the world started off with just plants on it, then came legged animals from the sea that took over.

They feel that a certain kind of fish evolved into the first four-footed animals. After millions of years those animals eventually turned into dinosaurs. That is how dinosaurs came to be. Then finally the dinosaurs died off and little, furry, four-legged creatures appeared. These animals were called mammals, which then took over the world. Then those mammals evolved into man. The Evolutionists believe that dinosaurs were extinct millions of years before there were even any people to walk the Earth. The Evolutionists had a hard time trying to explain why dinosaurs became extinct. They have many different theories.

One theory says that the impact of an asteroid or comet caused the destruction of the environment, leading to the extinction of the dinosaurs. Evidence to support this theory includes the discovery of a buried impact crater (thought to be the result of a large comet striking the earth) that is 124 miles in diameter in the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico. Using similar techniques to date the dramatic changes in the record of microscopic fossils, they have found that the impact and the dinosaur extinction occurred nearly simultaneously. They believe dust blocked sunlight from the earth’s surface for many months.

Scorched sulfur from the impact site, water vapor and chlorine from the oceans, and nitrogen from the air combined to produce a worldwide fallout of intensely acidic rain. Scientists theorize that darkness and acid rain caused plant growth to cease. As a result, both the herbivorous dinosaurs, which were dependent on plants for food, and carnivorous dinosaurs, which fed on the herbivores, became extinct. Animals such as frogs, lizards, and small insect-eating turtles and mammals, which were dependent on organisms that fed on decaying plant material, were more likely to survive.

Their survival indicates that, in most areas, the surface of the earth did not freeze. Whatever happened, Evolutionists agree that it must have been a world-wide scale disaster. “For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth and the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy. ” – Exodus 20:11, John 1:3. Those are the words from the Bible. What that says there is that God created everything on Earth and that includes Earth itself, therefore dinosaurs had to have been created by God, which proves evolution wrong.

Dinosaurs are even mentioned in the Bible, of course not by the term “dinosaur”. It uses the ancient name “behemoth”. One of the Bible’s description of a dinosaur is in Job 41:15-24. Job is a very old book, probably written around 2000 B. C. Here God describes one of the larger dinosaurs. It is said to be describing a Brachiosaurus. It is a giant plant eating animal with strong bones. There are tracks in Texas that are embedded in hard rock that show that dinosaurs and man walked at the same time.

There is one human track and one dinosaur track seventeen inches apart. It is evidence that shows the thought that dinosaur and man never saw each other may be wrong. From the facts here I believe that the Christian theory is correct. The Evolutionists couldn’t agree on a reason for the disappearance of the dinosaurs, and I think that the flood wiped all but the one that were on the Ark. After the flood the dinosaurs could not handle the conditions, so they all died off. The theory of the canopy collapsing, I believe is why dinosaurs are gone.

The atmosphere after the flood was too harsh and hot. Also there was a big air pressure release after the flood. In evolution’s theory, the beginning of time was started by an accidental “Big Bang”. The planets were pulled into place. That opposes the Christian theory. Christians feel that God place all of the planets in a specific place. Creation was a matter of time. It took six days for the universe to be created. According to Evolution it just happened instantly. You can read anything in Genesis 1 and it will contradict the Evolutionary theory.

The Decision of the Century

On August 2, 1945, Harry S. Truman made the toughest decision of his life. He knew that if he made the right decision, he would save hundreds of thousands of American lives. In making this decision, he would also be responsible for the deaths of hundreds and thousands of Japanese lives. If he made the wrong decision, the war would drudge on as the death count rose higher and higher as each new battle was fought. Japan would not surrender unconditionally, as the United States wanted. With Germany already beaten, the United States was not about to back down.

No one knows whether or not he made the right choice, but he did, in fact, bring an end to World War II. World War II’s basic statistics qualify it as by far the greatest war in history in terms of human and material resources expended. In all, 61 countries with 1. 7 billion people, three-fourths of the world’s population took part. A total of 110 million persons were mobilized for military service, more than half of those by three countries: USSR (22-30 million), Germany (17 million), and the United States (16 million).

For the major participants the largest numbers on duty at any time were as follows: USSR (12,500,000); U. S. (12, 245,000); Germany (10,938,000); British Empire and Commonwealth (8,720,000); Japan (7,193,000); and China (5,000,000). Harry S. Truman was born May 8, 1884 in Lamar, Missouri. He was named Harry after his uncle, Harrison Young. His parents, John Anderson Truman and Martha Ellen Young Truman, wanted to honor both of Harry’s Grandfathers when they were deciding on a middle name for him. The only problem was deciding which one, Anderson Shippe Truman or Solomon Young.

His parents finally decided to name him Harry S. and let the S stand for both of Harry’s grandfathers’ names. Before Harry S. Truman became the thirty-third President of the United States, he had many jobs which included: railroad work, business man, sales rep. , Captain in the United States Army, a United States Senator, and Vice President. Harry S. Truman became President of The United States on April 12, 1945 after Franklin Delano Roosevelt had passed away from a heart attack. He never knew what he was really getting himself into. Harry S.

Truman had only been the President of The United States for thirteen days when Henry L. Stimson, The Secretary of War, delivered a complete report on the United States of America’s new secret weapon that would supposedly end World War II. Before Harry S. Truman received this report, he had no idea that such a weapon existed or that the American scientists had been trying to develop the atomic bomb over the last four years. On July 21, 1945 while at Potsdam, Truman received the results from General Leslie Groves testing of the atomic bomb at Alamogordo.

The results were as follows: A force of 15-20,000 tons of TNT, a fireball lasting several seconds, a mushroom cloud rising skyward approximately 41,000 feet above sea level. There were many secondary explosions within the mushroom cloud causing a 1,200-foot crater in the ground. The 100 feet tower, which the bomb had been detonated in and a seventy-foot steel tower a half-mile away was disintegrated. It became obvious that Truman had two choices: invade mainland Japan or drop the atomic bomb.

If Truman chose to invade Japan, he calculated he would need a ground force of 766,700 soldiers with roughly 31,000 American casualties within the first 30 days (Hamby 19). In addition to the estimated casualties of the invading ground force the estimated 100,000 prisoners of war would be slaughtered (Ferrell 24). The order was issued by Japan’s vice minister of war as follows: “Whether they are destroyed individually or in groups, or however it is done, with mass bombing, poisonous smoke, poisons, drowning, decapitation or what, dispose of them as the situation dictates.

In any case it is the aim not to allow the escape of a single one, to annihilate them all, and not to leave any traces. ” Another factor in the equation of the bomb vs. an invasion was the weather. At close to the time of the planned invasion a typhoon struck mainland Japan almost leveling everything in its path (Ferrell 24). Japan had anticipated a U. S. attack so they readied themselves by assembling 215 Kairya available with another 207 being built; 115 Koryu–five man suicide submarines complete with another 500 more being built, Kaiten–human torpedoes carrying bombs which were capable of sinking the largest U.S. ships.

Also in their arsenal was the Fukuryu which was capable of staying under water for up to 10 hours with huge mines attached which could destroy a 950-ton ship. Other precautions they took were to send 4,000 Navy Shinyo to Kyushu with anti-landing obstacles, coastal batteries to set up pillboxes, bunkers, strong points underground fortresses and barbed wire entanglements to force the invaders into the enemy line of fire (Reese 41). Truman made his final decision on August 2, 1945 to drop the bomb on Japan August 6, 1945.

Colonel Paul Tibbets flew the Enola Gay, the B-29 that dropped the bomb on Hiroshima from an altitude of 31,600 feet. The explosion occurred at 2,000 feet, killing approximately 80,000 Japanese instantly. No single device in the history of warfare had killed so many people so indiscriminately (Hamby 24). On August 9, 1945 at 11 am the second atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki killing approximately 40,000 Japanese instantly. Everyone knows that millions of lives were lost in this war. Even though we had solders fighting the war civilians lost their lives too. Some of the death tolls are more substantial then others.

The U. S. lost only 407,318 military personal, while Japan lost about 1,700,000 military personal and 380,00 civilian. Almost one half of the Japanese civilian casualties came from the dropping of the two atomic bombs. Truman later said to the media on August 15, 1945: “I did not hesitate to order the use of the atomic bomb on military targets, I wanted to save half a million boys on our side and as many on the other. I never lost any sleep over my decision. I was there. I did it. I would do it again. ” Truman later found out that Japan had perfected their atomic bomb one day after the U. S. bombed Nagasaki.

This discovery further confirmed in his mind that his decision was the correct one. There have been many people who have criticized Truman over the years for his decision. So many human lives were destroyed by his decision, but when you look at the facts and weigh the possibility of what would have happened if Japan had dropped their bomb first, then this was the only possible decision to make in order for the U. S. to come out victorious. With all that I have researched I have found that Trumans’ decision to drop the Atomic bomb on Japan was the right decision because it saved American lives.

The Beginning

To understandhow the Earth started; we need to start off with origins of mankind and the earth’s existence. The Earth came into existence about 6 billion years ago and the emergence of homo-sapiens-sapiens 200,000 years ago. Technology has always been closely linked to the way in which people have lived. Before the development of civilizations, humans lived for many millennia with tools and techniques that allowed them to live successfully in wide variety environments. Following this development, civilization started to arise.

Through discoveries of the ancient world, we can understand the lifestyle and how these humans have grown together. Prehistoric humans developed technologies and ways of life that allowed them to increase their control over the natural world. To interpret the entire breadth of human existence, vast lengths of time are required. Once we enter prehistoric time, we are dealing with hundred and thousands of years. To make sense of this time scale, we start off with the first, and most ancient, the Paleolithic Age. The term Paleolithic means “old stone” and gives an indication of how things were related to human existence.

This era in history begins somewhere between 2 million years ago and ends 10,000 years before our time. It marks the beginning of the existence of the ancestors of man, the homo-sapiens sapiens. The Paleolithic people were brought up on hunting, gathering, and fishing. In search of the new food sources and to be able to hunt animals, they moved from place to place, and gathered in small groups. The dwellings of these people were normally in rocky areas. Starting around 40,000 BCE, the Paleolithic people started making simple stone tools for hunting and protection purposes.

Not being able to move much due to the glacial age climate, the primitive man utilized the skin of the animals. During this time of survival, the Paleolithic people were able to discover and control fire, in turn passing an important step in their development, which helped them be separate from the animals. The intellectual life of the man was beginning. The next era brings the Neolithic Age, or “new stone” age. The early emergence of this period dates around 8000 B. C. E. The Neolithic Age saw the most important technological breakthrough of the prehistoric period; development of agriculture.

This formed a radical new way of extracting food from the environment. In fact, where hunter-gatherers had only acquired their food by collecting what the environment offered, agriculturists – farmers – managed to control the environment in such ways that they actually made it produce the food they needed. As a result, the outcomes were tremendous and prosperous. First, and most significant, farmers stopped being nomadic. Now, humans that farmed became sedentary. Another major result was that farmers began to produce an incredible amount of food. For the first time, people actually had a significant surplus of food.

It was upon this agricultural surplus that civilization first developed. Between 9000 B. C. E. , western civilizations came into being in Egypt and in what historians call Ancient Western Asia. The earliest permanent settlements occurred between 9000-6000 B. C. E and were accompanied by the domestication of plants and animals. Between 4000-3000 B. C. E. , the first cities appeared in response to the pressure of the population growth, the organizational requirements of irrigation and the demands of more complex trade patterns. The societies of Egypt and Ancient Western Asia correspond to what we would call civilizations.

The history and culture of the Mesopotamian (“land between two rivers”) civilization is inextricably connected to the ebb and flow of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers. The earliest communities developed to the north, but by 5000 B. C. E communities had spread south to the rich alluvial plains. Agriculture was the primary economy. Due to the fertile soil, Mesopotamia was given a chance to thrive. With the surplus of food, people were able to settle and establish a village life; creating towns and cities. Along with this surplus came a population increase, a well-defined division of labor, organization, cooperation and kingship.

The emergence of cities involved interaction between people. The Mesopotamian’s built massive temples or ziggurats, which housed the priestly class, the human representatives of gods. The priests controlled the religious life of the community, the economy, land ownership, and the employment of workers. Mesopotamian villages and towns eventually evolved into independent and self-sufficient city-states. The first inhabitants of Mesopotamia were made by the Sumerians. The origin of the Sumerians is really unclear, expect that they dominated Mesopotamian law, religion, art, literature, and science for nearly seven centuries.

The greatest contribution was their cuneiform (“wedge-shaped”) system of writing. Mespotamian’s viewed themselves as subservient to the gods and believed humans were at the mercy of the god’s arbitrary decisions. To counter the insecurity, they established codes that regulated their relationships with one another. These law codes (Code of Hammurabi) became an integral part of the Mesopotamian society. Through the Code of Hammurabi we see an important glimpse into the values of Mesopotamian Civilization. Ancient Egypt is a land of mysteries.

Mystery surrounds its origins, its religion and its monumental architecture: colossal temples, pyramids and the enormous Sphinx. Just as life arose from the waters, the seeds of civilization were first sown along the banks of the Nile River. This mighty river nourished the growth of the pharaonic kingdom. The long, narrow flood plain was a magnet for life, attracting people, animals and plants to its banks. Seen as a gift from the gods, the annual flooding of the river deposited nutrient rich silt over the land, creating ideal conditions for growing wheat, flax and other crops.

The first communal project of this fledgling society was the building of irrigation canals for agricultural purposes. Government and religion were inseparable in ancient Egypt. The pharaoh was the head of state and the divine representative of the gods on earth. Religion and government brought order to society through the construction of temples, the creation of laws, taxation, the organization of labor, trade with neighbors and the defense of the country’s interests. The pharaoh was assisted by a hierarchy of advisors, priests, officials and administrators, who were responsible for the affairs of the state and the welfare of the people.

Tomb paintings and sacred hieroglyphic texts provide a glimpse into the world of the elite, but information on the lives of ordinary people remains scant. The majority of the population of ancient Egypt was peasants who played a vital role within the country’s strict hierarchical society. Artifacts related to daily activities remain as a testament to the labors of the workers who transformed ancient Egypt into an earthly paradise. Many diverse ethnic, linguistic, and religious groups have resided in the Indus River valley region. The Indus Valley civilization appeared around 2500 B. C. E. ong the Indus River valley in Punjab and Sindh.

The two most important discovered sites were the Mohenjo-daro, in Sindh, and Harappa, in Punjab. This civilization had a writing system, urban centers, and a diversified social and economic system. How closely these places were connected to Mohenjo-daro and Harappa is not clearly known, but evidence indicates that there was some link and that the people inhabiting these places were probably related. Indus Valley civilization was essentially a city culture sustained by surplus agricultural produce and extensive commerce, which included trade with Sumer in southern Mesopotamia (Iraq).

Copper and bronze were in use, but not iron. Mohenjo-daro and Harappa were cities built on similar plans of well-laid-out streets, elaborate drainage systems, public baths, differentiated residential areas, flat-roofed brick houses and fortified administrative and religious centers enclosing meeting halls and granaries. Weights and measures were standardized. Distinctive engraved stamp seals were used, perhaps to identify property. Wheat, rice, and other food crops were cultivated, and a variety of animals were domesticated. Wheel-made pottery has been found in profusion at all the major Indus sites.

A centralized administration has been inferred from the cultural uniformity revealed, but it remains uncertain whether authority lay with a priestly or a commercial oligarchy. A social and political system evolved in which the Aryans dominated, but various indigenous peoples and ideas were accommodated and absorbed. The caste system that remained characteristic of Hinduism also evolved. One theory is that the three highest castes–Brahmins, Kshatriyas, and Vaishyas–were composed of Aryans, while a lower caste–the Sudras–came from the indigenous peoples. During the sixth century B. C. E.

Northern India was populated by a number of small princely states that rose and fell. In this milieu, a phenomenon arose that affected the history of the region for several centuries-Buddhism. Siddhartha Gautama, the “Enlightened One” spread his teachings in all directions by monks, missionaries, and merchants. His teachings proved enormously popular when considered against the more obscure and highly complicated rituals and philosophy of Vedic Hinduism. The original doctrines of the Buddha also constituted a protest against the inequities of the caste system, attracting large numbers of followers.

The Ghost Dance

In January 1889, Wavoka, a Paiute Indian, had a revelation during a total eclipse of the sun. It was the genesis of a religious movement that would become known as the Ghost Dance. It was this dance that the Indians believed would reunite them with friends and relatives in the ghost world. The legend states that after prayer and ceremony, the earth would shatter and let forth a great flood that would drown all the whites and enemy Indians, leaving the earth untouched and as it was before the settlers came to America.

The religion prophesied the peaceful end of the westward expansion of whites and a return of the land to the Native Americans. The first dance was held by Wovoka in 1889. The ritual lasted five successive days, being danced each night and on the last night continuing until morning. Hypnotic trances and shaking accompanied this ceremony, which was supposed to be repeated every six weeks. The ceremony also had rhythmic drumming and introduced many new musical instruments into Indian religious ceremonies.

In addition, both men and women participated in the dance, unlike other Indian religions in which men were the primary dancers, singers, and musicians. Word spread quickly and the Utes, Bannocks, and Shoshone tribes accepted the Ghost Dance. Eventually, the plains tribes also accepted the Ghost Dance movement. The peaceful message of hope was uplifting to many Indians. It gave them a sense of hope that the progress of the white man would be stopped by the will of Nature. While adopting the movement, many tribes added specific customs and rituals that reflected the tribes individuality.

The Sioux, for instance, added two specific elements including the use of hypnosis to bring about trances as well as aid in communication with the dead, and Ghost Clothing. There are two specific types most commonly used, the ghost shirt and the ghost dress. Both were believed to protect the wearer from bullets. Sitting Bull, a famous Sioux warrior, adopted the ghost dance into his way of life. He was a respected leader, medicine man, and warrior. His following of the movement alarmed both the military and Indian Agencies. In 1890, just a few months after attending his first ghost dance, Sitting Bull was killed while resisting arrest.

His followers fled and joined Kicking Bull, one of the first to Practice with Wovoka. Donning their ghost shirts and with their beliefs firm in their hearts, the followers of the ghost dance were rounded up at Wounded Knee creek and killed while resisting arrest. Hundreds of Sioux were killed, including women and children, all wearing their ghost shirts, that unfortunately, did not make them immune to the bullets of the military and Indian Agencies. The ghost dance continued to be practiced in more southern tribes, but at the end of the movement came with the deaths at Wounded Knee.

The hopes of the Indians also ended at that massacre. Many of Wovokas ideas and concepts were adopted by Peyote cults and can be found in practice today. Indian tribes did not survive the push of the white man. Broken up and with broken dreams, the tribes were shuffled onto reservations and lost many of their customs and rituals. The Ghost Dance was one of those customs lost, but never forgotten. Resurrected from the past, the Ghost Dance and other tribal beliefs are brought together in the education of our nation.

Akhenaten – the greatest mystical revolutionaries of all time

Akhenaten is know as one of the greatest mystical revolutionaries of all time, but was his new religion a product of his creative genius, or merely a reaction to threats within his own empire. As Pharaoh, Akhenaten and his wife Nefertiti, changed the traditional polytheistic religion to a monotheistic one centered on the Aten (the sun disk). He moved the Egyptian capitol from Thebes to a site now know as el-Amarna. After Akhenatens death, his successors re established the old order of things and set about systematically destroying any trace of him and his reforms.

In this essay, through the analysis of evidence, I will come to a conclusion as to what really inspired Akhenaten, need or enlightenment. Very little is known about Akhenatens early years. As had an older brother, Thutmose, it is not likely that he was expected to rule. Amenhotep, as he was then called, was probably trained as a priest of Re at Heliopolis, as where all young princes. The manner Akhenatens accession to the throne is still a much debated event in his life. Scholars are still unsure as to weather he came to power directly after his fathers death or if he ruled with his father in a co regency.

Scholars are still debating the length of the co regency, some say a short period of around 2 years while others argue it was probably around 12 years. At the start of his reign, Akhenaten did not do anything unorthodox. He completed his fathers building projects, and had himself depicted worshiping the traditional gods of Egypt, although special attention was paid to the falcon-headed Re-Horakhty, who wears the Aten sun-disk on his head. By year 3 of his reign, Akhenaten was beginning do make changes.

He celebrated his first Sed festival, which was a celebration that showed that the Aten was in partnership with Akhenaten. At the same time, Akhenaten ordered the building of four new temples at East Karnak which where to be dedicated to the Aten. This would have been quite a surprise to many people of the time because East Karnak was the traditional precinct of the god Amun. The cult of Amun was the strongest of all the cults and its power had grown almost so as to rival the pharaoh himself. Many modern day historians believe that this was the firs blow in a plan to take all power away from the cult.

Others argue he was only showing his devotion to the Aten, with no ill intent. Nefertiti lived a good life as Akhenatens queen in Thebes. She held a prominent place in society, higher than any other queen before. At the temples in East Karnak she is depicted in a traditional head smiting pose, like the king, and is shown worshiping the Aten with her daughter, Meritaten. A topic which has been greatly discussed by historians is the unusual appearance of Akhenaten in the paintings he had made of himself.

Many believe it was a product of his creative nature; he wanted to look different to uphold the theory of his religion which says that he is the son of the Aten. The most likely theory is that Akhenaten suffered from Frhlich syndrome, which caused physical abnormalities such as a woman shaped body, incredibly long neck and facial distortions. Akhenaten might have preferred to be depicted in his actual image than shame himself by having the painting made to look perfect. There are many theories but as of yet, historians are still unsure, some even claim Akhenaten was a woman posing as a man.

In year 5 of his reign, Akhenaten made drastic changes to the Egyptian empire. It was at this time that he changed his name from Amenhotep to Akhenaten. Shortly after this he began the establishment of a new city, which was to be built in a barren plane which is now called El-Amana. The city was to be named Akhetaten He ordered the construction of 14 border stelae on the hills surrounding the site. The main reason for Akhenatens selection of this sit was the fact that it had never been dedicated to any god.

This action took even more power away from the priests as it moved the court and capital away from Karnak The city was built quickly, partly due to Akhenatens new building techniques, which included the use of talitat blocks (smaller building blocks that could be carried by one man), and through the use of sunken relief, which was quicker and more effective and stood out stronger in the Atens rays. Another contributing factor was the sheer scale of the building project. Thousands and thousands of workers built the palaces, temples, promenades and dwellings of the new city.

Once the city was complete, the court and royal family moved in. Nefertiti Enjoyed a great lifestyle. She was seen as almost an equal with the king. She appeared with the king in the window of appearances to reward their good subjects and was much loved. Nefertiti was a central part of Akhenatens atenist religion. In relives Nefertiti is often depicted wearing crown traditionally only worn by the king and smiting enemies in battle. At the peak of her power she shared a co-regency with Akhenaten.

The ordinary people of Akhetaten lived in quickly constructed plastered, mud brick houses. The city was essentially a living parade ground for Akhenaten, Nefertiti and his new religion, atenism. The central belief of atenism was that Akhenaten was the son of the Aten, who he claimed was the only and true god, who believed in Maat. Akhenatens religion was merely a monotheistic version of the traditional religion, with several gods being given names and new forms, but unlike before it made the King divine and so forth the highest individual in Egyptian religion on earth.

In effect he took all power from the Amun cult, and all other cults, which received no further funding. The changes in the methods of worship created incredible focus on the king and the royal family, because the only way to worship the Aten was through worshiping his son on earth, Akhenaten and through him was the only way ones prayers could reach the dead traveling into the afterlife. Many people didnt like the changes because they preferred the personal relationships they had enjoyed with the gods of their old faith.

It is known that in some houses of Akhetaten, shrines to the old gods could be found. It is at this time clear that Akhenaten has completely turned his back on the old order. The changes in temple architecture where in key with Akhenatens revolutionary approach; traditional roofed temples where the statue of the god was kept in the darkest place where replaced with light open temples with no roofs. No cult statues occupied these new temples of sunlight, as traditional representations of gods where avoided. The alters where open to the air and the sun shone brightly on them.

Akhenaten also reintroduced the benben, a ritual stone that dates back to the first old kingdom worship of the sun. A priest of Aten had little to do, as now all worship was directed to the pharaoh. The priest came to hold a position similar to a modern day alter boy, greatly reducing their status. By this time the Amun priesthood was all but destroyed, leaving no rivals to Akhenatens power. Akhenaten created an original artistic style, which later became known as Amarna art, named after the amarna period.

Apart from his controversial depiction of himself, he created a new style of art. It was a beautiful natural looking style, almost classical. This was a very different approach to former artworks, in which people and objects were depicted in unnatural poses, and almost always in perfect health. Prior to the amarna period, the personal life of the royal family was not for the publics attention, but Akhenaten beloved every part of their life was sacred as he was the son of the Aten. Paintings began to portray the royal family in intimate moments, formerly never carved.

The changes to a more realistic style of art are probably as a result of his belief in maat, which is both a word with the meaning truth and also a concept of truth. It came from the old god of truth, Ma at. Akhenaten continued his fathers foreign policy, and was a peaceful king apart from some small campaign early in his reign, although, while his father had been a genius at such diplomacy Akhenaten was to preoccupied to worry about foreign affairs, and relations with other countries grew distant although trade continued to flourish. Akhenaten needed a great deal of funds for his colossal building projects.

In the later years of his reign, Akhenaten became an oppressor of anyone who showed any belief in the old gods. He became obsessive about destroying all trace of the cult of Amun and had its name carved out of every monument in Egypt. Some say this obsession came from his original motive to take power away from the cult of Amun. Others believe he was filled with such religious zeal that he did it for his faith. At the end of his reign, the capital was moves swiftly back to Thebes and all trace of Akhenaten and his religion was destroyed.

For this reason, the armana period is a highly researched period in Egyptian history. Before deciding weather Akhenaten was a revolutionary or a reactionary character, one last point must be mentioned. Akhenaten was not the first pharaoh to show interest in the Aten. Akhenatens forefathers also showed interest in the Aten, devoting several sights to different versions of the sun disk. Was Akhenaten a reactionary, creating the new religion to consolidate his power, raise his status and make him more famous than any pharaoh before.

Or was he a Revolutionary, bravely developing and impementing his beliefs, which would have been influenced buy his fathers obvious soft spot for the Aten. It is true that Akhenaten probably used the new religion as a way to draw more power and prestige to himself, but the new ideology, art forms, architecture, way of life and capitol where all truly the result if a great revolutionary vision. If he began his quest only with the intention to increase his power, then by the time he was at its end, he truly believed in it. What might of began as a reaction no doubt became a great revolution.

Martin Luther – Protestant Reformation in Germany

Martin Luther lived from 1483-1546. Luther was born on November 10, 1483 in Eisleben in the province of Saxony. His protestant view of Christianity started what was called the Protestant Reformation in Germany. Luther’s intentions were to reform the medieval Roman Catholic Church. But firm resistance from the church towards Luther’s challenge made way to a permanent division in the structure of Western Christianity. Luther lived in Mansfield and was the son of a miner. He later went on to study at Eisenbach and Magdeburg. After studying at these institutions he moved on to study at the University of Erfurt.

Luther started out studying law, but then went on to enter the religious life. He went into the religious life due to the fact that he felt that he would never earn his eternal salvation. He didn’t feel that all of the prayer, studying and sacraments were enough. Therefore, Luther felt that he would never be able to satisfy such a judging God. Not being able to satisfy this God meant eternal damnation. After entering the religious life he later became an Augustinian monk and entered the Augustinian monastery at Erfurt in July of 1505.

While in this monastery Luther became a well known theologian and Biblical scholar. In 1512 Luther earned his doctorate in theology and became a professor of Biblical literature at Wittenberg University. Luther took his religious vocation very serious. This led him into a severe crisis in dealing with his religion. He wondered, “is it possible to reconcile the demands of God’s law with human inability to live up to the law. ” Luther then turned to the New Testament book of Romans for answers.

He had found, “God had, in the obedience of Jesus Christ, reconciled humanity to himself. What was required of mankind, therefore, was not strict adherence to law or the fulfillment of religious obligations, but a response of faith that accepted what God had done. ” In other words he realized that religion is based on love and not fear. Basically, he realized that everyone is burdened by sin because it happens as a result of our weaknesses. He concluded that man could never earn his salvation by leading a blameless life or by performing holy acts. Instead, man’s salvation was a divine gift from God resulting from faith in Jesus, especially the saving power of his death and resurrection.

This was known as the protestant doctrine of “justification by faith alone. ” The fact that Luther believed this, lead him into his first confrontation with the Catholic Church in 1517. All of this influenced Luther to write his Ninety-Five Theses in 1517. The leader of the Catholic Church, Pope Leo X, was trying to raise money in order to build St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome. To raise money the Pope offered the sale of indulgences. Basically, these were donations of money that would give partial forgiveness for people’s sins.

So, on October 31, 1517, Luther posted these Ninety-Five Theses or propositions on the door of the Wittenberg Catholic Church. These Ninety-Five Theses denied the right of the Pope to sell indulgences for the forgiveness of sins, among other challenges. His authorship of the Ninety-Five Theses would make Luther the leader of the religious movement or reformation towards Protestantism. Pope Leo X forced Luther to appear before Cardinal Cajetan in Augsburg. Here the Cardinal demanded Luther to take back everything that he said in his Ninety-Five Theses. Luther said that he would if his Theses could be proved wrong by use of the Bible.

Later in 1521, Pope Leo X issued a “Bull of Excommunication” towards Luther. Emperor Charles V was expected to enforce the Excommunication. Charles V formed a “diet” in the town of Worms and asked Luther to attend this meeting so that he could be examined. Once again Luther was asked to take back everything that he had said in his Ninety-Five Theses. Luther refused again and was outlawed. Anyone could kill Luther and they would not have been held accountable to the law for punishment. Luther decided that it would be best to relocate under these circumstances. He had a friend that was an elector of Saxony that helped him escape.

So, Luther disguised himself and went off to hide in the castle of Wartburg. While he was in Wartburg he began translating the New Testament into German. At that time the emperor was occupied with a war waging in France. This distraction helped Luther return to his work with aid of his followers in Wittenberg. Some of his followers went too far carrying out the reform. Luther tried to correct his follower’s mistakes and was unsuccessful. In 1524, this caused the German peasants to use his teachings as a reason to revolt. Luther married Katharina Von Bora, a former nun, in 1525.

This displayed his rejection towards living in a monastery as a monk and for clerical celibacy. After this marriage he spent the rest of his life writing, teaching and preaching. How did Luther view the power of God and what can a person do without God’s grace? He believed that God’s power was completely beyond man’s comprehension and could only be accepted on faith alone. He didn’t believe that humans could understand how God with all his greatness become man through Jesus and be susceptible to weakness, sin and death. His thoughts were that man could accomplish nothing without God’s grace.

Man could not gain his own salvation and therefore God had to send his own son to earth. While on earth his son would live as a human and eventually die on the cross for our sins. How did Luther view idolatry and why he chose this word? He felt that all participation in church activities like, following religious rules, ceremonies and doing good works were idolatrous. These practices would not help us to gain eternal salvation, but only faith alone in God could do that. He felt that all these religious practices were external from God and were, therefore, idolatrous in nature. What were Luther’s views on the Bible?

Luther felt that the Bible, the word of God, was of primary importance in a Christian’s life. He felt that over time man had through speculative reasoning distorted the accuracy and true meaning of the Word. He felt that the Roman Catholic Church preferred the Papal authority of the Church above God’s Word. How did Luther define faith? Luther defines faith as the absence of all good works. What were Luther’s objections to the Pope and other church officials? He felt that the Pope and other officials of the Catholic Church had no knowledge or comprehension of the Bible or had ever even read it.

They were wicked people who were preoccupied with wealth and power, but who never considered accomplishing God’s will. What political and social implications came as a result of Luther’s teachings? His teachings caused a revolt among the German peasants. They also caused separation within the Catholic Church. How did Protestantism encourage people to view religion on an individual basis? Protestantism encouraged people individually to decide what they needed to do to be saved. This caused people to stray away from traditional beliefs.

German pharmacologist, Louis Lewin

It was in 1886 that the German pharmacologist, Louis Lewin, published the first systematic study of the cactus, to which his own name was subsequently given. Anhalonium lewinii was new to science. To primitive religion and the Indians of Mexico and the American Southwest it was a friend of immemorially long standing. Indeed, it was much more than a friend. In the words of one of the early Spanish visitors to the New World, “they eat a root which they call peyote, and which they venerate as though it were a deity. ”

Why they should have venerated it as a deity became apparent when such eminent psychologists as Jaensch, Havelock Ellis and Weir Mitchell began their experiments with mescalin, the active principle of peyote. True, they stopped short at a point well this side of idolatry; but all concurred in assigning to mescalin a position among drugs of unique distinction. Administered in suitable doses, it changes the quality of consciousness more profoundly and yet is less toxic than any other substance in the pharmacologist’s repertory. Mescalin research has been going on sporadically ever since the days of Lewin and Havelock Ellis.

Chemists have not merely isolated the alkaloid; they have learned how to synthesize it, so that the supply no longer depends on the sparse and intermittent crop of a desert cactus. Alienists have dosed themselves with mescalin in the hope thereby of coming to a better, a first-hand, understanding of their patients’ mental processes. Working unfortunately upon too few subjects within too narrow a range of circumstances, psychologists have observed and catalogued some of the drug’s more striking effects. Neurologists and physiologists have found out something about the mechanism of its action upon the central nervous system.

And at least one Professional philosopher has taken mescalin for the light it may throw on such ancient, unsolved riddles as the place of mind in nature and the relationship between brain and consciousness. There matters rested until, two or three years ago, a new and perhaps highly significant fact was observed. * Actually the fact had been staring everyone in the face for several decades; but nobody, as it happened, had noticed it until a Young English psychiatrist, at present working in Canada, was struck by the close similarity, in chemical composition, between mescalin and adrenalin.

Further research revealed that lysergic acid, an extremely potent hallucinogen derived from ergot, has a structural biochemical relationship to the others. Then came the discovery that adrenochrome, which is a product of the decomposition of adrenalin, can produce many of the symptoms observed in mescalin intoxication. But adrenochrome probably occurs spontaneously in the human body. In other words, each one of us may be capable of manufacturing a chemical, minute doses of which are known to cause Profound changes in consciousness.

Certain of these changes are similar to those which occur in that most characteristic plague of the twentieth century, schizophrenia. Is the mental disorder due to a chemical disorder? And is the chemical disorder due, in its turn, to psychological distresses affecting the adrenals? It would be rash and premature to affirm it. The most we can say is that some kind of a prima facie case has been made out. Meanwhile the clue is being systematically followed, the sleuths–biochemists , psychiatrists, psychologists–are on the trail.

By a series of, for me, extremely fortunate circumstances I found myself, in the spring of 1953, squarely athwart that trail. One of the sleuths had come on business to California. In spite of seventy years of mescalin research, the psychological material at his disposal was still absurdly inadequate, and he was anxious to add to it. I was on the spot and willing, indeed eager, to be a guinea pig. Thus it came about that, one bright May morning, I swallowed four-tenths of a gram of mescalin dissolved in half a glass of water and sat down to wait for the results.

We live together, we act on, and react to, one another; but always and in all circumstances we are by ourselves. The martyrs go hand in hand into the arena; they are crucified alone. Embraced, the lovers desperately try to fuse their insulated ecstasies into a single self-transcendence; in vain. By its very nature every embodied spirit is doomed to suffer and enjoy in solitude. Sensations, feelings, insights, fancies–all these are private and, ex- cept through symbols and at second hand, incommunicable.

We can pool information about experiences, but never the experiences themselves. From family to nation, every human group is a society of island universes. Most island universes are sufficiently like one another to Permit of inferential understanding or even of mutual empathy or “feeling into. ” Thus, remembering our own bereavements and humiliations, we can condole with others in analogous circumstances, can put ourselves (always, of course, in a slightly Pickwickian sense) in their places. But in certain cases communication between universes is incomplete or even nonexistent.

The mind is its own place, and the Places inhabited by the insane and the exceptionally gifted are so different from the places where ordinary men and women live, that there is little or no common ground of memory to serve as a basis for understanding or fellow feeling. Words are uttered, but fail to enlighten. The things and events to which the symbols refer belong to mutually exclusive realms of experience. To see ourselves as others see us is a most salutary gift. Hardly less important is the capacity to see others as they see themselves.

But what if these others belong to a different species and inhabit a radically alien universe? For example, how can the sane get to know what it actually feels like to be mad? Or, short of being born again as a visionary, a medium, or a musical genius, how can we ever visit the worlds which, to Blake, to Swedenborg, to Johann Sebastian Bach, were home? And how can a man at the extreme limits of ectomorphy and cerebrotonia ever put himself in the place of one at the limits of endomorphy and viscerotonia, or, except within certain circumscribed areas, share the feelings of one who stands at the limits of mesomorphy and somatotonia?

To the unmitigated behaviorist such questions, I suppose, are meaningless. But for those who theoretically believe what in practice they know to be true–namely, that there is an inside to experience as well as an out- side–the problems posed are real problems, all the more grave for being, some completely insoluble, some soluble only in exceptional circumstances and by methods not available to everyone. Thus, it seems virtually certain that I shall never know what it feels like to be Sir John Falstaff or Joe Louis.

On the other hand, it had always seemed to me possible that, through hypnosis, for ex- ample, or autohypnosis, by means of systematic meditation, or else by taking the appropriate drug, I might so change my ordinary mode of consciousness as to be able to know, from the inside, what the visionary, the medium, even the mystic were talking about. From what I had read of the mescalin experience I was convinced in advance that the drug would admit me, at least for a few hours, into the kind of inner world described by Blake and AE.

But what I had expected did not happen. I had expected to lie with my eyes shut, looking at visions of many-colored geometries, of animated architectures, rich with gems and fabulously lovely, of landscapes with heroic figures, of symbolic dramas trembling perpetually on the verge of the ultimate revelation. But I had not reckoned, it was evident, with the idiosyncrasies of my mental make-up, the facts of my temperament, training and habits. I am and, for as long as I can remember, I have always been a poor visualizer.

Words, even the pregnant words of poets, do not evoke pictures in my mind. No hypnagogic visions greet me on the verge of sleep. When I recall something, the memory does not present itself to me as a vividly seen event or object. By an effort of the will, I can evoke a not very vivid image of what happened yesterday afternoon, of how the Lungarno used to look before the bridges were destroyed, of the Bayswater Road when the only buses were green and tiny and drawn by aged horses at three and a half miles an hour.

But such images have little substance and absolutely no autonomous life of their own. They stand to real, perceived objects in the same relation as Homer’s ghosts stood to the men of flesh and blood, who came to visit them in the shades. Only when I have a high temperature do my mental images come to independent life. To those in whom the faculty of visualization is strong my inner world must seem curiously drab, limited and uninteresting.

This was the world–a poor thing but my own–which I expected to see transformed into something completely unlike itself. The change which actually took place in that world was in no sense revolutionary. Half an hour after swallowing the drug I became aware of a slow dance of golden lights. A little later there were sumptuous red surfaces swelling and expanding from bright nodes of energy that vibrated with a continuously changing, patterned life.

At another time the closing of my eyes revealed a complex of gray structures, within which pale bluish spheres kept emerging into intense solidity and, having emerged, would slide noiselessly upwards, out of sight. But at no time were there faces or forms of men or animals. I saw no landscapes, no enormous spaces, no magical growth and metamorphosis of buildings, nothing remotely like a drama or a parable. The other world to which mescalin admitted me was not the world of visions; it existed out there, in what I could see with my eyes open.

The great change was in the realm of objective fact. What had happened to my subjective universe was relatively unimportant. I took my pill at eleven. An hour and a half later, I was sitting in my study, looking intently at a small glass vase. The vase contained only three flowers-a full-blown Belie of Portugal rose, shell pink with a hint at every petal’s base of a hotter, flamier hue; a large magenta and cream-colored carnation; and, pale purple at the end of its broken stalk, the bold heraldic blossom of an iris.

Fortuitous and provisional, the little nosegay broke all the rules of traditional good taste. At breakfast that morning I had been struck by the lively dissonance of its colors. But that was no longer the point. I was not looking now at an unusual flower arrangement. I was seeing what Adam had seen on the morning of his creation-the miracle, moment by moment, of naked existence. “Is it agreeable? ” somebody asked.

During this Part of the experiment, all conversations were recorded on a dictating machine, and it has been possible for me to refresh my memory of what was said. ) “Neither agreeable nor disagreeable,” I answered. “it just is. ” Istigkeit–wasn’t that the word Meister Eckhart liked to use? “Is-ness. ” The Being of Platonic philosophy– except that Plate seems to have made the enormous, the grotesque mistake of separating Being from becoming and identifying it with the mathematical abstraction of the Idea.

He could never, poor fellow, have seen a bunch of flowers shining with their own inner light and all but quivering under the pressure of the significance with which they were charged; could never have perceived that what rose and iris and carnation so intensely signified was nothing more, and nothing less, than what they were–a transience that was yet eternal life, a perpetual perishing that was at the same time pure Being, a bundle of minute, unique particulars in which, by some unspeakable and yet self-evident paradox, was to be seen the divine source of all existence.

I continued to look at the flowers, and in their living light I seemed to detect the qualitative equivalent of breathing–but of a breathing without returns to a starting point, with no recurrent ebbs but only a repeated flow from beauty to heightened beauty, from deeper to ever deeper meaning. Words like “grace” and “transfigu- ration” came to my mind, and this, of course, was what, among other things, they stood for. My eyes traveled from the rose to the carnation, and from that feathery incandescence to the smooth scrolls of sentient amethyst which were the iris.

The Beatific Vision, Sat Chit Ananda, Being-Awareness-Bliss-for the first time I understood, not on the verbal level, not by inchoate hints or at a distance, but precisely and completely what those prodigious syllables referred to. And then I remembered a passage I had read in one of Suzuki’s essays. “What is the Dharma-Body of the Buddha? ” (‘”the Dharma-Body of the Buddha” is another way of saying Mind, Suchness, the Void, the Godhead. )

The question is asked in a Zen monastery by an earnest and bewildered novice. And with the prompt irrelevance of one of the Marx Brothers, the Master answers, “The hedge at the bottom of the garden. And the man who realizes this truth,” the novice dubiously inquires, ‘”what, may I ask, is he? ” Groucho gives him a whack over the shoulders with his staff and answers, “A golden-haired lion. ” It had been, when I read it, only a vaguely pregnant piece of nonsense. Now it was all as clear as day, as evi- dent as Euclid. Of course the Dharma-Body of the Buddha was the hedge at the bottom of the garden. At the same time, and no less obviously, it was these flowers, it was anything that I–or rather the blessed Not-I, released for a moment from my throttling embrace–cared to look at.

The books, for example, with which my study walls were lined. Like the flowers, they glowed, when I looked at them, with brighter colors, a profounder significance. Red books, like rubies; emerald books; books bound in white jade; books of agate; of aquamarine, of yellow topaz; lapis lazuli books whose color was so intense, so intrinsically meaningful, that they seemed to be on the point of leaving the shelves to thrust themselves more insistently on my attention.

The Boer War

The Boer War was a conflict that lasted from 1899 to 1902 in southern Africa between Great Britain and their allies, Transvaal (South African Republic) and Orange Free State, in what is now South Africa. Throughout the 19th century, after Great Britain conquered the Cape of Good Hope in 1814 and expanded its territory in Southern Africa, there was tension between the British settlers and the Dutch-descended population which were called Afrikaners or Boers.

This resulted in the Afrikaner migration called the Great Trek, which was from 1835 to 1843, and the establishment of the Afrikaner republics. These republics were called Natal, Orange Free State, and the South African Republic. Natal became a British colony in 1843, but the Transvaal territories were granted independence from Great Britain in 1852. In 1854, Orange Free State also got their independence. In the late 1850s, the Transvaal territories formed the South African Republic.

In 1884, gold was discovered in the Witwatersrand, which lured thousands of British miners and prospectors to settle in the area. The Afrikaners, who were mainly farmers, didnt like the newcomers (Uitlanders), so they taxed them and denied them voting rights. The dislike of one another grew, which lead to a revolt by the Uitlanders in Johannesburg against the Afrikaner government. This revolt was instigated by the British colonial statesman and financier Cecil Rhodes, the premier of the Cape Colony, who wanted to bring all of Southern Africa into the British Empire.

In December of 1895, Leander Starr Jameson, who was a friend of Rhodes, led a group of 600 armed British men in an attempt to support the Uitlanders in the South African Republic. This was called the Jameson Raid. It resulted in Jamesons capture and imprisonment, and in Rhodess resignation. Jameson later became the premier of the Cape Colony from 1904 to 1908. Direct negotiations to solve the South African problem were unsuccessful, and hostility between the Afrikaners and the Uitlanders continued. The president of the South African Republic, Paul Kruger, would not back down from the Uitlanders.

In 1899 the British governor of Cape Colony, Alfred Milner, who strongly disliked the Afrikaners treatment of British subjects, issued orders to build up the 12,000 man British army in Southern Africa. The British army eventually grew to 500,000 men. On October 9, 1899, Kruger demanded the removal of all British troops from the Transvaal frontiers within 48 hours. Their alternative was war. The South African Republic and the Orange Free Stated made an alliance. They then declared war on the British on October 12, 1899 because they were uncooperative with Kurgers demands.

The Afrikaner forces were successful in invading Natal and Cape Colony. In December the British commander in chief Sir Redvers H. Buller sent fresh troops to relieve the British forces in three war zones. These zones were Colenso, Natal, the hills of Magersfontein on the Orange Free State and Cape Colony borders, and the mountain range of Stormberge in the Cape Colony. Within a week, which is referred to as the Black Week by the British, each of the new units had been defeated by Afrikaner forces.

On January 10, 1900, the British general Frederick S. Roberts was sent to replace Buller as commander in chief. However, Buller remained to fight throughout the war. Early in February, Roberts ordered the British commander John D. P. French north to relieve the city of Kimberley. Roberts marched northeastward from Cape Colony into the Orange Free State. Attacked by the Afrikaner general Piet Cronje on February 27, Roberts fought back successfully and forced the surrender of Cronje and his troops. On March 13, Roberts entered Bloemfontein, which was the capital of the Orange Free State.

Roberts captured Johannesburg on May 31 and Pretoria on June 5. After they won, President Kruger went to Europe and Roberts returned to England in January 1901 because he thought the war was over. British satisfaction was short lived. Boer leaders attacked the British troops using guerrilla warfare. The fighting continued for the next year and was finally ended through the severe tactics of the new British commander in chief, Lord Horatio Herbert Kitchener. He stopped the enemy by destroying the Afrikaner farms that sheltered the guerrillas.

They placed black African and Afrikaner women and children in concentration camps and built a chain of iron blockhouses for his troops. Negotiations for peace began on March 23, 1902, and on May 31 Afrikaner leaders signed the Treaty of Vereeniging. The treaty ended the problems and led to the self-government of Transvaal and the Orange Free State as colonies of the British Empire. Britain agreed to pay an indemnity of 3 million dollars for rehabilitation to the Afrikaner soldiers who promised their loyalty to the British monarch.

The Treaty of Vereeniging brought peace and political unification to South Africa but did not erase the causes that had triggered the conflict. Even after the establishment of the Union of South Africa in 1910, the Afrikaners kept themselves culturally and socially separate. This event involves imperialism, nationalism, militarism, economics, mercantilism, and geography. Imperialism is shown when the British and the Afrikaners were trying to conquer each other. Nationalism played a part in the Boer War because the people of both sides were willing to fight and stand up for their land.

Militarism and mercantilism were involved because both Britain and the Afrikaners had to trade with other countries in order to build up their military and gain technology. Geography played a role in the war because Britain was fighting for land in order to expand their territories, while the Afrikaners were fighting to keep their land. Economics were involved because as a result of the Boer War Britain had to pay the Afrikaner soldiers a 3 million dollar indemnity, which was worth a lot more at that time then it is now.

Edward VII

Peaceful yet popular and very well respected, Edward VII plays an influential part in bringing Great Britain, France, and Russia together in 1907 into the Triple Entente. One of the most wittiest and inventive satirist’s writers in England is a journalist most noted for his fiction pieces, known as Hector Hugh Munro. Saki is his pen name ( Comptons Online Encyclopedia). His typical stories are marked by amoral reversal revenge on the pretentious cruel practical jokes, and uncary supernatural incidents (Encyclopedia of Knowledge).

Evidence from research has proven to show that Edward VII’s political practices and beliefs have almost no influence on Saki’s writings. Edward VII is born in London in 1841, at Buckingham Palace. He is the first of three sons born to Queen Victoria and Prince Albert. Edward belongs to the royal family of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha and is the first member of the royal family to tour the USA ( Ross, 15). When his father died in 1861, Queen Victoria, Edward’s mother, blamed him for the death. Edward then has his seat in the House of Lords as the Duke of Cornwall (www. artacus. com).

In 1863, Edward married Princess Alexandra of Denmark. The Prince and Princess have six children (Encyclopedia Americana). In 1901, Edward is the king of the United Kingdom of Great Britian and Ireland and empire of India (Encyclopedia Americana, 544). Edward takes place in many public duties, has a close interest in politics, and has an intrest in the military. He opposed attemps to reduce public spending on the armed forces (Langguth,129). In 1904, Edward contributed to the Entente Cordiale, and the Anglo Russian Agreement of 1907 (www. db. web. aol. com).

While at throne, Edward helps support the Territorial and Reserve Forces Acts, helped find Royal College of Music,witnessed the conservative party split,opposed woman’s suffrage, and Edward is a patron of Arts and Sciences. Edward is also a familiar figure in the worlds of racing, yachting, and grouse shooting ( Somerset,29). After a short reign of only nine years, Edward VII, the King, collapsed on the afternoon of May 6, 1910, after a series of heart attacks. He left the throne to his son, King George V ( www. spartcus. com).

The very first decade of the 20th century is the decade in which Edward VII reigned. This era is known as the Edwardian Era (World Book Encyclopedia, 59). It is King Edward’s era, being named after him. ” The Edwardian Era was the beginning of the 20th century, and led to all sorts of predictions by all sorts of people about how that century would signal the start of a truly golden age,” said Richard Washington. This era is known as the sanest era in the history of our world (www. geocites. com). Edward VII along with other Edwardians helped to make it that way.

Saki is a novelist and short story writer born in Akyab, Mynamar on December 18,1870 ( www. spartcus. com). Munro is the youngest of an Inspector – General’s three children. At age two, he is sent to England and is brought up by his two strict aunts, Aunt Tom and Aunt Augusta. Hw later takes literary revenge on them by using them as characters in the “Lumber” and the “Sex That Never Shops” (Langguth, 219). In June of 1893, Saki returns to Burma, joins the police force, and begins to study Burgmese animals. He writes about one of the tigers in his short story, ” Mrs.

Packletide’s Tiger. ” Saki says, ” It was Mrs. Packletides pleasure and intention that she should shoot a tiger. ” Three years later, Munro returns to London and writes political satires for the West Minister Gazette and publishes ” The Rise of the Empire”, in 1900 (Encyclopedia of Knowledge, 224 ). A collection called Not So Stories is published soon after in 1902. For a few years he works as a foreign correspondent for the Morning Post, in the Balkans, in Russia, and France, before settling in London in 1908 to write full time (www. l. com).

In 1910, “Reginald” in Russia is published, followed by ” The Chronicles of Clovis” in 1912 ( www. bnl. com). By the spring of 1914, Saki is writing a column called ” Potted Parliament for Outlook” and ” Beasts and Superbeasts” is published the same year ( langguth,187). Hector Hugh Munro is also responsible for two novels. These novels show his gifts as a satirist of his upper-class Edwardian Era ( Comptons Online Encyclopedia). These two novels were , The Unbearable Bassington , and When William Came.

The Unbearable Bassington features a likeable but maljusted hero ( AOL: Biography Find). Saki shows his sense of humor, high spirits, wit and urbanity in the two stories ( www. bnl. com). In June of 1916, Saki goes back to London to spend time with his sister and brother. Three months later, he becomes a lance – sergeant ( langguth, 22). November of the same year, Saki enters World War I. Hector Hugh Munro, Saki, is killed by a sniper in the early hours of a winter day, on November 13, 1916 ( Langguth, 98).

Saki is remembered for his fiction pieces distinguishing by dialogue and narrative ( Encyclopedia Americana, 26). He delightes readers with his political sketches, intensive writings. He is often compared with ” O-Henry” ( www. spartcus. com). Edward VII and Saki’s lives overlap. Munro’s writings are not influenced by Edward’s practices or beliefs, except for the content of The Unbearable Bassington and When William Came. These novels deal with the Edwardian Period which is named after Edward himself.

Both of Munro’s Novels are published after Edward VII’s death. Saki is not living under King Edward VII’s rule for all nine years of his reign. Saki’s only there to witness the last two years of the Kings Reign. (1908-1910) Edward VII and Saki both live through many of the same events,witness and feel similiar feelings, and share the concept of trouble childhoods, but Edward’s political influences do not effect the works of Saki. Hector Hugh Munro and Edward VII both live seperate lives and have different beliefs.

Jeanne La Pucelle (Joan The Maid)

1412, it is in the last half-century of the Hundred Years’ War in which the French attempted to attain freedom from English rule by fighting to eradicate English strongholds. An unusually strong, healthy, and possibly clairvoyant girl is born to Isabelle Romee and Jacques d’Arc in the small village of Domremy, France. Her mother is from the town of Vouthon, which is west of Domremy. Her surname concurs that either she or a family member has visited Rome. Her father was born in a village called Ceffonds in the province of Champagne.

His last name indicates a onnection with Arc-en-Barrois, a small town fifty kilometers north of Ceffonds. She had a somewhat wealthy family as you can tell from their home with a stone construction. You can still visit her home today. It has since been used as a wine cellar, a wine press, and a stable. She was one of five children: Jacques, Catherine, Jean, Joan, and Pierre. Their wealth came from their farming of wheat, flax, beet hemp, and colza. They also bred livestock, spun wool and tow, and kneaded their own bread.

She was baptized by Jean Minet in the Church of St. Remy. She is admired by patriots, women’s rights activists, paranormal investigators, and playwrights. The woman I am talking about is commonly known as Joan of Arc. When Joan was 13 she began to see visions and hear voices who she later determined to be Saints Catherine, Margaret, and Michael. They convinced her that she was chosen by God to help the dauphin, Charles VII free France and take his seat in the throne. At age 17 in 1429 she gained access to the King through the military commander in Vaucoulaurs.

Charles was desperate because the English had captured almost half of France including Paris. When Joan told him of her visions of the Saints he was doubtful so he set up two tests for her. In the first he disguised himself as a courtier, but she pointed him out immediately. For the second test he asked her what he prayed to God for the night before she arrived; she told him exactly. Some of the clergy believed her to be Satanic, but Joan was approved. Charles fitted her with armor and gave her command of the military. Soon after she set out to free Orleans from a brutal siege.

The other French commanders hesitantly ollowed orders, but soon they obeyed her whole-heartedly. Under Joan’s command the siege was broken after only ten days and the English fled. She was given the everlasting title “The Maid of Orleans”. Joan convinced Charles to undergo a formal coronation in the Cathedral at Reims. While escorting Charles, Joan and her army won several battles with the British along the way. She was at his side when Charles took the throne on July, 17 1429. During a minor battle in September, 1429 where Joan tried to free Paris, she was injured.

Eight months later she was captured by a troop f Burgundians who wished to sell her for ransom. Instead she was sold to the English for a lot of money. The English believed her rumored visions Satanic so they tried her on accusations of witchcraft and heresy. Despite constant badgering she never swayed from her belief that her visions her from God. A French clergy sympathetic to the English convicted and sentenced Joan to death. On May, 30 1431 in the town square at Rouen she was burned at the stake. Due to her bravery in death people thought they had witnessed martyrdom of a Saint.

Much to her family’s regret she was not allowed a Christian burial as her ashes were thrown into the Seine River. In 1455 Joan’s family requested a retrial for her and a hearing was granted by Pope Callistus III. One year later she was found innocent. Joan was beatified by Pope Pius X in 1909, and in 1920 she was canonized as a Saint. You can celebrate her feast day on May 30. “Joan of Arc, the maid of Orleans, was neither a witch nor a saint, but by curious circumstances her life and death fulfilled the requirements of both. “

America And The Normandy Invasion

The year was 1944, and the United States had now been an active participant in the war against Nazi Germany for almost three and a half years. During this time, numerous battles had occurred which were fought with determination and intensity on both sides. Amongst the many invasions of World War II, there is one day which stands out more in the minds of many American soldiers than the others. That day was June 6, 1944, more commonly known as D Day, part of the invasion of Normandy, known as “Operation Overlord. ” This operation was the largest amphibious assault in history.

It was a day in which thousands of young Americans, who poured onto the beaches of France, matured faster than they would have ever imagined. They were not prepared for the chaos and torment that awaited them on their beach arrivals. The attacks on the Utah and Omaha beaches were strategically made, and carried out in careful preciseness. The Allied invasion of Nazi-occupied France began on June 6, 1944, and the American assault on the Utah and Omaha on this day played a critical role in the overall success of the Normandy operation.

An extensive plan was established for the American attack on Utah and Omaha Beaches, in addition to all of the other Normandy beaches. (See Appendix A) The plan was so in-depth and complex, its descriptions detailed the exact arrivals of troops, armour, and other equipment needed for the invasion, and where exactly on the beach they were to land. 1 Before the landings were to begin, the coastal German defences had to be broken down by a combination of a massive battering by United States Naval ships, and by bombing from the United States Air Force.

Between the hours of 3 a. m. and 5 a. m. on the morning of June 6, over 1,000 aircraft dropped more than 5,000 tons of bombs on the German coastal defences. As soon as the preliminary bombing was over, the American and British naval guns opened fire on the Normandy coastline. 2 A British naval officer described the incredible spectacle he witnessed that day: “Never has any coast suffered what a tortured strip of French coast suffered that morning. Along the fifty-mile front the land was shaken by successive explosions as the shells from the ships’ guns tore holes in fortifications and tons of bombs poured down on them from the skies. Through smoke and falling debris German defenders crouching in their trenches would soon faintly see the hundreds of ships and assault craft closing in on the shore. There were initial problems with the invasion. Numerous American bombers missed their targets up to as much as five miles inland due to the thick cloud cover.

Rockets which were fired from offshore destroyers landed short killing thousands of fish, but not any Germans. Artillery from American battleships crashed against the tops of the bluffs of Omaha, and sailed into the adjacent towns, but not did not successfully accomplish their goals of destroying targets on the beachhead such as enemy artillery and machine gun positions. 4 Contrary to Omaha, Utah Beach was less strengthened against an attack. Erwin Rommel was the commander of the German forces in northern France and he predicted an Allied invasion in another part of the region.

Subsequently, the Utah beach was not as well equipped as that of Omaha. The Germans had not been able to fully construct defensive barriers by the time of the invasion and also had not completely laid the number of land mines Rommel had in mind. Aiding to the Allied success at Utah were the underwater demolition teams who were able to knock off many of the coastal defences awaiting the Americans. As American soldiers moved toward Utah Beach in their conveyances, the pounding the beachhead fortifications had taken from US naval artillery and rockets was clearly evident.

Large gun stations, machine gun posts, and infantry positions were among many of the targets weakened or destroyed. The artillery not only aided the soon to be arriving troops in that many coastal threats had been eliminated, but in that the hundreds of shell holes created provided excellent cover for the troops coming ashore. 5 The American assault on Utah was very carefully planned and designed in the idea that the Allies would send wave after wave of troops onto the shores to defeat the opposition. Troops, armour, and equipment arrivals were timed to the minute.

Naval barrage landed first on the beach at 6:30 a. m. , immediately followed by thirty-two light assault tanks known as DD tanks to further subdue fortified positions and provide cover for the oncoming troops (These were held on large freight boats known as LCTs). In the wake of this attack came the American 2nd Battalion, 8th Infantry in twenty Higgens boats, another type of transport designed to hold a thirty-man team. They were followed by the 1st Battalion, 8th Infantry, bringing engineers and naval demolition teams in thirty-two more Higgens boats.

Wave after wave of troops and equipment, containing bulldozers, and the light and mobile Sherman Tank (see appendix B) continued to arrive. Before the assaults began, the planners, including Allied Commander Dwight D. Eisenhower, hoped everything would stick to the precise schedule. This hope was not a reality, as some craft landed too late, others too early, and some off course as far as a kilometre south of the target. There were many factors which resulted in the wronging of the time table.

Tides, wind, waves, and a thick cover of smoke were all partially responsible for the trouble, while the largest factor were the mines placed just off of the coast. These obstacles resulted in the tanks landing a kilometre south. The American forces were in for a strike of luck however, as the German defensive fortifications at their new and accidental landing site, had been badly damaged from the naval artillery and air battering. The fortifications where the landing was supposed to take place were still strong, unscathed from the preceding bombardment.

Engineers and naval demolition teams came ashore after the first wave. They consisted of five Navy “Seabees,” also known as combat demolition units, and two or three American engineers. The engineers, who were highly trained in explosives, made quick work of the outermost set of obstacles before the tide had a chance to cover them up. The engineers worked at a very fast pace clearing the way for more landing craft to arrive. Engineering teams continued to work hard as more and more forces began piling up on the now secured beach awaiting the chance to drive through the land mine filled interior defences.

The assault on Utah Beach proved to be fairly simple as compared to what was going on at Omaha. An anonymous Infantryman from the 4th division was quoted as saying, “You know, it sounds kind of dumb but it was just like a [training] exercise. Easier. We waded ashore like kids…. and up the beach. (See Appendix C) A couple of shells came over but nowhere near us. I think I even felt somehow disappointed, a little let down. “8 Altogether, 200 American soldiers died, but the Allies were victorious. Omaha Beach in itself was a formidable challenge for the Allies.

If the Germans were going to try and stop an Allied Invasion, Omaha Beach was the place to do it. Omaha Beach stretched for approximately 10 kilometres, its sand was golden brown in colour, it was firm and fine, and during low tide there was a stretch of 300 to 400 meters of firm beach sand. 9 The physical makeup of Omaha Beach made it easy for the Germans to defend. The beach was adjacent to hills perpendicular to the beach spanning the entire 10 kilometres. On this basis, the German stations had an extreme advantage holding the safety of the hills, sometimes a 200 foot height advantage at some points.

Omaha was the perfect place to hold a defensive stance against an invasion. Its hilly landscape provided the perfect place for fortifications and machine guns, the sloping ground leading up to the bluffs allowed for a useful trench system, and the overall height advantage provided for a clear view of the entire field below. 10 It was like having an army of snipers on towers looking down on the incoming troops. Eisenhower did not like the idea of having to attack Omaha, but he knew it had to be done. Rommel took full advantage of what he learned from defending frontal infantry assaults during the First World War.

He heavily mined the coastline, and the shore. He placed extensive amounts of barbed wire leading up to the hills. He placed machine guns at angles to have better shots at all points of the beach. He also added all types of weapons to cover all possible weaknesses in the German posts. He added mortars and artillery pieces on top of the hills to bring more firepower from above. Rommel’s setup allowed for enemy fire coming from three different directions. 11 (See Appendix D) There were four main factors which led the Americans to believe that an attack on such a difficult position would succeed.

Intelligence reports gave the Americans the impression that the command posts and trenches were being manned by the 716th Infantry Division, a supposed low quality force composed of Poles and Russians. This was, however, untrue, as the positions were being held by the German 352nd Division, a section of well-trained troops. Second, intelligence reports gave the Americans the impression that only 800 troops were manning the defences, when in actuality, a number three to four times that was more realistic. Third, B-17 bombers were to thoroughly prep the site by dropping thousands of tonnes of bombs.

However, due to the intense cloud cover, bombers missed their targets by as much as 5 kilometres. Finally, the invasion was to consist of 40,000 men and 3,500 motorized vehicles. This idea later failed as troops and vehicles became backed up on the beach. Allied Captain Walker on a landing craft headed toward the beach commented on the sight, “I took a look toward the shore and my heart took a dive. I couldn’t believe how peaceful it was, how untouched, and how tranquil the scene was. The terrain was green. All the buildings were intact. The church and steeple were still standing in place.

Where are the damn Air Corps! “12 The plan for Omaha was to have assault teams cover every inch of beach. Weapons used to cover the successive landing crafts were to include . 30 caliber machine guns, bazookas, 60mm mortars, and flame throwers. Just like the assault on Utah, DD tanks were to lead the invasion ashore while Naval demolition teams worked to clear the area. Following the initial craft were to be reinforcements to bring up stronger firepower ranging from greater numbers of M-1’s to 105mm howitzers, in addition to more tanks, jeeps, medical units, head quarters and communication units.

Two hours after this first wave, it was planned that vehicles would have already scaled the hills and begin to push farther inland. Unfortunately for the Allies, nothing for the assault on Omaha went according to plans. Only one group (or company) had landed at their target, Company A. Company E was as much as two kilometres off course due to winds, waves, and strong tides. This resulted in large gaps between the forces coming ashore and allowed the Germans to concentrate their firepower on the smaller group of American forces.

The Germans streamed a steady line of artillery, mortar, and machine gun fire down onto Company A. Needless to say, it was an slaughter. Only a few dozen people of the original 200 survived, and practically all of them were wounded. By 6:40 a. m. , just ten minutes after the first wave, only one officer from the Company was alive, and he had been shot in the heel and the stomach. On one particular Allied boat, when the ramp was dropped, every single man of the thirty-man assault team was killed before they could get out. A short way down the beach, Companies F and G were having troubles of their own.

Sgt. Harry Bare describes the experience as they disembarked, “I tried to get my men off the boat and make it somehow to the seawall. We waded to the sand and threw ourselves down and the men were frozen, we could not move. My radioman had his head blown off three yards from me. The beach was covered with bodies, men with no legs, no arms – God it was awful. “13 It was clearly evident as wave upon wave of troops came ashore that everything was in complete and udder chaos. People were being butchered left and right by machine guns, and literally blown to pieces by artillery and mortar fire.

Bare continued to say, “Sgt. Clarence Robertson had a gaping wound in the upper right corner of his forehead. He was walking crazily in the water. Then I saw him get down on his knees and start playing the rosary beads. At that moment the Germans cut him in half with the deadly crossfire. “14 “When we were 200 yards from our landing point I could see heavy machine-gun-bullets cutting up the sand and making a noise like a huge swarm of bees. “My God, we are going to be slaughtered. ” – Sgt. H. M. Kellar 15 Omaha Beach on that day was in a state of pandemonium.

There was no organization which was proven as the troops found themselves pinned with no leadership and no where to go, with additional equipment and troops coming ashore to only back things up worse. The Americans were pinned on the beach. German Commander Rommel had constructed the ultimate killing field, and for a few hours, it seemed like it was going to take a miracle to save the Americans. It was becoming ever more evident to American commanders that if they remained on the beach, it would be suicide. After several hours of fighting, the Americans had only a few yards of beach, and it was under intense enemy fire.

Under these hellish conditions, heroes were produced. Brigadier General Norman D. Cota deliberately exposed himself to enemy fire while walking up and down the beach, rallying his troops to get them moving. Colonel George A. Taylor performed a similar feat in leading an attack against a German machine-gun post while declaring, “Two kinds of people are staying on this beach, the dead and those about to die. Now lets get the hell out of here! “16 As the hours wore on, a greater foothold on Omaha was established. The American Forces knew that it was imperative that they get off the beach.

As more and more soldiers began to make their way forward, reinforcements continued to arrive bringing tanks, engineers, and more troops. Soldiers, lacking order and organizations began working together to establish routes up the hills. One by one, barbed wire was blown clear, German gun stations were destroyed, and artillery was eliminated. By the end of the day more than 2,500 Americans lay dead on the bloody yet still victorious beaches of Omaha. D Day, June 6, 1944 was the beginning of the end of the Nazi empire.

It was one of the most important days in military history as General Eisenhower’s cross channel attack, the largest in history, proved to be an overall success. The actions of the American soldiers on the Utah and Omaha beaches that day greatly aided in the triumph of the operation as a whole. They had no idea of the death and destruction which awaited their stepping foot onto the beaches. For a few hours on the morning of June 6, 1944, it appeared that Rommel had created the ultimate coastal command post. His strategic placements of machine guns, mortars, and artillery pieces took a tremendous toll on the American invaders.

For a time, it appeared that the Americans were not going to make it off the beach. If not for the courage of a few individuals leading the way, all could have been lost. Their actions played a critical role in the success of D Day, and of the ultimate demise of the Nazi Empire. Even through all of the factors which went wrong that day, and even without the aid of today’s military technology, they made the invasion possible. The status of the free world today can be directly related to the actions of every American soldier who set foot on the beached of Omaha and Utah that day. They will forever be heroes.

The suicide of Meriwether Lewis

In the early hours of October 11, 1806, while en-rout to Wasington to defend himself against accusations made on him in accordance to the fiancial decisions made by him as govoner of the Louisian teritory,Meriwether Lewis shot himself in the head with his own pistol at Natchez Trace. 1 However, the ball only grazed his skull. Of course, after doing so he fell to the floor in pain. After this, Lewis drew his second pistol, and shot himself in the chest, this passing through his body and exiting at his lower back bone.

However, once again, he survived this blow. By now he had aroused Mrs. Grinder, the innkeeper at Natchez Trace, who sent for the servants in the barn. After entering Meriwethers room she saw Lewis cutting himself with a razor. At this point he exclaimed, I am no coward; but I am so strong, [it is] so hard to die. At this point Lewis pleaded with the servants to take his rifle and kill him; he even offered them money and the assurance that no ill fate would come to them. After dawn, Meriwether Lewis hart stopped beating.

To understand why such a well respected man, and explorer took his own life we must examine what composed his life, this being his upbringing and major events and influences in his life. 4 Meriwether Lewis was born August 18, 1774, the same year of the Boston Tea Party, in Rockfish Gap, Virginia, in the Blue Ridge Mountains. Here the East met the West. 5 Lewis had the advantages of living in the wilderness to sharpen his hunting and wilderness skills, but when the availability of schooling from the East. 6 Meriwether Lewis was born on the eve of the revolution.

He was brought up with a very anti- British attitude. Meriwether also was brought up knowing of what his ancestors had accomplished. For instance Robert Lewis, a Welshman, was one who moved from Britain to the wilderness of Virginia, on a grant from the King of England of thirty-three thousand thirty three and a third arcs of land. However, the most substantial Lewis, other than Meriwether, was Thomas Lewis. Thomas Lewis accompanied Peter substantial Lewis, other than Meriwether, was Jefferson, Thomas Jeffersons father exploring the Northern Neck between the Potomac and the Rappahannnock.

He was also the first to keep a very accurate log of all that they saw and did while on their expedition. Thus, this led on to his predisposition to ramble in the woods for hours. 8 Progressing into Meriwether Lewis life we find that he is acutely a rather average person. In the field of education he had not learned a substantial amount of Latin to use well, nor orthography ever to be completely capable of spelling. However, Meriwether did excel in biology along with a solid base in mathematics, natural history, geometry, philosophy and the classics.

After his upbringing and schooling Lewis fit the perfect Virginian stereotype. He was hospitable and generous, courteous in relation to his peers, chivalrous, and kind to his inferiors, though he did separated them as his inferiors. Along with this he had the less admirable part of the stereotype, he was an alcoholic. However, to compensate for this Meriwetehr was extraordinarily honest. In this he prided himself in, his word was his bond whether written or spoken. 10 As a plantation owner, Lewis found himself rater good at managing his farm, though he never worked a single day doing physical work,

Lewis did a very good job of managing his plantation. 11 The next step in Meriwether Lewis life becoming a soldier. Meriwether was inspired to become a soldier in response to the presidents call for troops to put down the Whisky Rebellion. As Private Lewis entered the army, he was subjected to many hardships of this carrier choice, however, he was not the only one. Most of the privates on the march to the West endured the lack of rations and clothing. After, the rebellion was put down Lewis received a commission to the Virginia militia. However, Lewis alcoholism got him into trouble.

Lewis was brought before general courts-martial at Waynes headquarters. Charges against Meriwether were that of braking the first and second Articles of the seventh section of the Rules and Articles of War. 12 These were as to the effect of No officer or soldier shall use any reproachful or provoking speeches or gestures to another. Article two was that of disallowing a challenge to a duel. 13 In reply to these charges Lewis replied with the plea of Not Guilty. General Wayne decided to transfer twenty-one year old Lewis to Chosen Rifle Company of elite riflemen-sharpshooters.

Here Meriwether Lewis met William Clark. Over the next four years, Meriwethers army life gave him enough travel to satisfy his rambling nature. As time continued, Lewis eventually achieved the rank of captain. Around the time of Lewis being promoted Lewis friend Thomas Jefferson is elected to the presidency. Thomas Jefferson, who wishes to expand the United States to the west charges Lewis and Clark with the great expedition to the Pacific Ocean and back. 14 On this expedition Lewis took the commanding role.

In fact, Lewis so demanded authority that when one of is troops left he sent a regiment of four men to find him, once found he was made to run by his fellow Compatriots while they switched him. Though when a man was told to scout up stream, and never returned, Lewis did nothing. 15 After Lewis returned from the great expedition, he, among other things, eventually became governor of Louisiana. Here Meriwether was somewhat a decent governor, however, thing did not fall his way. In between a few bad deals and a jealous Mr. Bates, who was after his job, Lewis did not help Louisiana at all.

In fact this rather blemished his name. 16 Meriwether Lewis physiological profile was very interesting. His mind was made of very many, very intriguing traits. One of the most noticable and destructive traits was that of his alcohol and possible sustenance abuse. Though he met the stereotypical Virginian in that he drank, Lewis Abused alcohol regularly. Along with this Lewis was somewhat a loner. He never married; he enjoyed time with himself in the woods and had an engrossed ego. Some of Meriwethers more positive attributes was he did have a very good sense of honor, his word his bond13.

He also wished to live up to everyones expectations. This, however, he did not do. He failed his adored friend, Thomas Jefferson, in that he did not immediately publish his journals, thus slowing the United States appeal to advance to the West. He also did not come through with his financial dealings in Louisiana, when he was governor. In light of these conditions, Lewis suffered great depression. In fact, he may have been self-medicating with his medicines to become change how he felt. 17 However, most likely these pills he took were most likly opiate derivative, thus brought him down even further.

A combination between all hese thing; the fact of his failure as governor, the falling of his good friend, a Mr. Bates after his job, and the sense of he had accomplished everything he was to do in his life. Thus he decided to end it. 18 The death of Meriwether Lewis has been widely accepted as a suicide. However, Starrs believes it to have been that of an assassination. His reasoning is that of Lewis being an accurate mark man. This was heavily debated and the solution was that of escavating Meriwether Lewis grave. The team, which included a doctor, said, “it seems more probable that he died by the hands of an assassin. “

The United States And The Normandy Invasion

The year was 1944, and the United States had now been an active participant in the war against Nazi Germany for almost three and a half years. During this time, numerous battles had occurred which were fought with determination and intensity on both sides. Amongst the many invasions of World War II, there is one day which stands out more in the minds of many American soldiers than the others. That day was June 6, 1944, more commonly known as D Day, part of the invasion of Normandy, known as “Operation Overlord. ” This operation was the largest amphibious assault in history.

It was a day in which thousands of young Americans, who poured onto the beaches of France, matured faster than they would have ever imagined. Little did they know of the chaos and torment that awaited them on their arrival. The attacks on Utah and Omaha were strategically made, and carried out in careful preciseness. The Allied invasion of Nazi-occupied France began on June 6, 1944, and the American assault on the Utah and Omaha beaches on this day played a critical role in the overall success of the Normandy operation. An extensive plan was established for the American attack on Utah and Omaha Beaches.

The plan was so in-depth and complex, its descriptions detailed the exact arrivals of troops, armour, and other equipment needed for the invasion, and where exactly on the beach they were to land. Before the landings were to begin, the coastal German defences had to be broken down by a combination of a massive battering by United States Naval ships, and by bombing from the United States Air Force. Between the hours of 3 a. m. and 5 a. m. on the morning of June 6, over 1,000 aircraft dropped more than 5,000 tons of bombs on the German coastal defences.

As soon as the preliminary bombing was over, the American and British naval guns opened fire on the Normandy coastline. A British naval officer described the incredible spectacle he witnessed that day: “Never has any coast suffered what a tortured strip of French coast suffered that morning. ” Along the fifty-mile front the land was shaken by successive explosions as the shells from the ships’ guns tore holes in fortifications and tons of bombs poured down on them from the skies. Through smoke and falling debris German defenders crouching in their trenches would soon faintly see the hundreds of ships and assault craft closing in on the shore.

There were initial problems with the invasion. Numerous American bombers missed their targets up to as much as five miles inland due to the thick cloud cover. Rockets which were fired from offshore destroyers landed short killing thousands of fish, but not any Germans. Artillery from American battleships crashed against the tops of the bluffs of Omaha, and sailed into the adjacent towns, but not did not successfully accomplish their goals of destroying targets on the beachhead such as enemy artillery and machine gun positions. Contrary to Omaha, Utah Beach was less strengthened against an attack.

Erwin Rommel was the commander of the German forces in northern France and he predicted an Allied invasion in another part of the region. Subsequently, the Utah beach was not as well equipped as that of Omaha. The Germans had not been able to fully construct defensive barriers by the time of the invasion and also had not completely laid the number of land mines Rommel had in mind. Aiding to the Allied success at Utah were the underwater demolition teams who were able to knock off many of the coastal defences awaiting the Americans.

As American soldiers moved toward Utah Beach in their conveyances, the pounding the beachhead fortifications had taken from US naval artillery and rockets was clearly evident. Large gun stations, machine gun posts, and infantry positions were among many of the targets weakened or destroyed. The American assault on Utah was very carefully planned and designed in the idea that the Allies would send wave after wave of troops onto the shores to defeat the opposition.

Troops, armour, and equipment arrivals were timed to the minute. Naval barrage landed first on the beach at 6:30 a. m. mmediately followed by thirty-two light assault tanks known as DD tanks to further subdue fortified positions and provide cover for the oncoming troops (These were held on large freight boats known as LCTs). In the wake of this attack came the American 2nd Battalion, 8th Infantry in twenty Higgens boats, another type of transport designed to hold a thirty-man team. They were followed by the 1st Battalion, 8th Infantry, bringing engineers and naval demolition teams in thirty-two more Higgens boats. Wave after wave of troops and equipment, containing bulldozers, and the light and mobile Sherman Tank continued to arrive.

Before the assaults began, the planners, including Allied Commander Dwight D. Eisenhower, hoped everything would stick to the precise schedule. This hope was not a reality, as some craft landed too late, others too early, and some off course as far as a kilometre south of the target. There were many factors which resulted in the wronging of the time table. Tides, wind, waves, and a thick cover of smoke were all partially responsible for the trouble, while the largest factor were the mines placed just off of the coast.

These obstacles resulted in the tanks landing a kilometre south. The American forces were in for a strike of luck however, as the German defensive fortifications at their new and accidental landing site, had been badly damaged from the naval artillery and air battering. The fortifications where the landing was supposed to take place were still strong, unscathed from the preceding bombardment. Engineers and naval demolition teams came ashore after the first wave. They consisted of five Navy “Seabees,” also known as combat demolition units, and two or three American engineers.

The engineers, who were highly trained in explosives, made quick work of the outermost set of obstacles before the tide had a chance to cover them up. The engineers worked at a very fast pace clearing the way for more landing craft to arrive. Engineering teams continued to work hard as more and more forces began piling up on the now secured beach awaiting the chance to punch through the land mine filled interior defences. The assault on Utah Beach proved to be fairly simple as compared to what was going on at Omaha.

An anonymous Infantryman from the 4th division was quoted as saying, “You know, it sounds kind of dumb but it was just like a [training] exercise. Easier. We waded ashore like kids…. and up the beach. A couple of shells came over but nowhere near us. I think I even felt somehow disappointed, a little let down. ” Altogether, 200 American soldiers died, but the Allies were victorious. Omaha Beach in itself was a formidable challenge for the Allies. If the Germans were going to try and stop an Allied Invasion, Omaha Beach was the place to do it.

Omaha Beach stretched for approximately 10 kilometres, its sand was golden brown in colour, it was firm and fine, and during low tide there was a stretch of 300 to 400 meters of firm beach sand. The physical makeup of Omaha Beach made it easy for the Germans to defend. The beach was adjacent to hills perpendicular to the beach spanning the entire 10 kilometres. On this basis, the German stations had an extreme advantage holding the safety of the hills, sometimes a 200 foot height advantage at some points. Omaha was the perfect place to hold a defensive stance against an invasion.

Its hilly landscape provided the perfect place for fortifications and machine guns, the sloping ground leading up to the bluffs allowed for a useful trench system, and the overall height advantage provided for a clear view of the entire killing field. It was like having an army of snipers on towers looking down on the incoming troops. Eisenhower did not like the idea of having to attack Omaha, but he knew it had to be done. Rommel took full advantage of what he learned from defending frontal infantry assaults during the First World War.

He heavily mined the coastline, and the shore. He placed extensive amounts of barbed wire leading up to the hills. He placed machine guns at angles to have better shots at all points of the beach. He also added all types of weapons to cover all possible weaknesses in the German posts. He added mortars and artillery pieces on top of the hills to bring more firepower from above. Rommel’s setup allowed for enemy fire coming from three different directions. There were four main factors which led the Americans to believe that an attack on such a difficult position would succeed.

Intelligence reports gave the Americans the impression that the command posts and trenches were being manned by the 716th Infantry Division, a supposed low quality force composed of Poles and Russians. This was, however, untrue, as the positions were being held by the German 352nd Division, a section of well-trained troops. Second, intelligence reports gave the Americans the impression that only 800 troops were manning the defences, when in actuality, a number three to four times that was more realistic. Third, B-17 bombers were to thoroughly prep the site by dropping thousands of tonnes of bombs.

However, due to the intense cloud cover, bombers missed their targets by as much as 5 kilometres. Finally, the invasion was to consist of 40,000 men and 3,500 motorized vehicles. This idea later failed as troops and vehicles became backed up on the beach. Allied Captain Walker on a landing craft headed toward the beach commented on the sight, “I took a look toward the shore and my heart took a dive. I couldn’t believe how peaceful it was, how untouched, and how tranquil the scene was. The terrain was green. All the buildings were intact. The church and steeple were still standing in place.

Where are the damn Air Corps! ” The plan for Omaha was to have assault teams cover every inch of beach. Weapons used to cover the successive landing crafts were to include . 30 caliber machine guns, bazookas, 60mm mortars, and flame throwers. Just like the assault on Utah, DD tanks were to lead the invasion ashore while Naval demolition teams worked to clear the area. Following the initial craft were to be reinforcements to bring up stronger firepower ranging from greater numbers of M-1’s to 105mm howitzers, in addition to more tanks, jeeps, medical units, head quarters and communication units.

Two hours after this first wave, it was planned that vehicles would have already scaled the hills and begin to push farther inland. Unfortunately for the Allies, nothing for the assault on Omaha went according to plans. Only one group (or company) had landed at their target, Company A. Company E was as much as two kilometres off course due to winds, waves, and strong tides. This resulted in large gaps between the forces coming ashore and allowed the Germans to concentrate their firepower on the smaller group of American forces.

The Germans streamed a steady line of artillery, mortar, and machine gun fire down onto Company A. Needless to say, it was an slaughter. Only a few dozen people of the original 200 survived, and practically all of them were wounded. By 6:40 a. m. , just ten minutes after the first wave, only one officer from the Company was alive, and he had been shot in the heel and the stomach. On one particular Allied boat, when the ramp was dropped, every single man of the thirty-man assault team was killed before they could get out. A short way down the beach, Companies F and G were having troubles of their own.

Sgt. Harry Bare describes the experience as they disembarked, “I tried to get my men off the boat and make it somehow to the seawall. We waded to the sand and threw ourselves down and the men were frozen, we could not move. My radioman had his head blown off three yards from me. The beach was covered with bodies, men with no legs, no arms – God it was awful. ” It was clearly evident as wave upon wave of troops came ashore that everything was in complete and udder chaos. People were being butchered left and right by machine guns, and literally blown to pieces by artillery and mortar fire.

Bare continued to say, “Sgt. Clarence Robertson had a gaping wound in the upper right corner of his forehead. He was walking crazily in the water. Then I saw him get down on his knees and start playing the rosary beads. At that moment the Germans cut him in half with the deadly crossfire. ” (D-Day, Ambrose 337) “When we were 200 yards from our landing point I could see heavy machine-gun-bullets cutting up the sand and making a noise like a huge swarm of bees. “My God, we are going to be slaughtered. ” – Sgt. H. M. Kellar (Lewis 120) Omaha Beach on that day was in a state of pandemonium.

There was no organization which was proven as the troops found themselves pinned with no leadership and no where to go, with additional equipment and troops coming ashore to only back things up worse. The Americans were pinned on the beach. German Commander Rommel had constructed the ultimate killing field, and for a few hours, it seemed like it was going to take a miracle to save the Americans. It was becoming ever more evident to American commanders that if they remained on the beach, it would be suicide. After several hours of fighting, the Americans had only a few yards of beach, and it was under intense enemy fire.

Under these hellish conditions, heroes were produced. Brigadier General Norman D. Cota deliberately exposed himself to enemy fire while walking up and down the beach, rallying his troops to get them moving. Colonel George A. Taylor performed a similar feat in leading an attack against a German machine-gun post while declaring, “Two kinds of people are staying on this beach, the dead and those about to die. Now lets get the hell out of here! ” (D’ Este 114) As the hours wore on, a greater foothold on Omaha was established.

The American Forces knew that it was imperative that they get off the beach. As more and more soldiers began to make their way forward, reinforcements continued to arrive bringing tanks, engineers, and more troops. Soldiers, lacking order and organizations began working together to establish routes up the hills. One by one, barbed wire was blown clear, German gun stations were destroyed, and artillery was eliminated. By the end of the day more than 2,500 Americans lay dead on the bloody yet still victorious beaches of Omaha. D Day, June 6, 1944 was the beginning of the end of the Nazi empire.

It was one of the most important days in military history as General Eisenhower’s cross channel attack, the largest in history, proved to be an overall success. The actions of the American soldiers on the Utah and Omaha beaches that day greatly aided in the triumph of the operation as a whole. They had no idea of the death and destruction which awaited their stepping foot onto the beaches. For a few hours on the morning of June 6, 1944, it appeared that Rommel had created the ultimate coastal command post. His strategic placements of machine guns, mortars, and artillery pieces took a tremendous toll on the American invaders.

For a time, it appeared that the Americans were not going to make it off the beach. If not for the courage of a few individuals leading the way, all could have been lost. Their actions played a critical role in the success of D Day, and of the ultimate demise of the Nazi Empire. Even through all of the factors which went wrong that day, and even without the aid of today’s military technology, they made the invasion possible. The status of the free world today can be directly related to the actions of every American soldier who set foot on the beached of Omaha and Utah that day. They will forever be heroes.

Cleopatra Life

In the springtime of 51 BC, Ptolemy Auletes died and left his kingdom in his will to his eighteen year old daughter, Cleopatra, and her younger brother Ptolemy XIII who was twelve at the time. Cleopatra was born in 69 BC in Alexandria, Egypt. She had two older sisters, Cleopatra VI and Berenice IV as well as a younger sister, Arsinoe IV. There were two younger brothers as well, Ptolemy XIII and Ptolemy XIV. It is thought that Cleopatra VI may have died as a child and Auletes had Berenice beheaded. At Ptolemy Auletes’ death, Pompey, a Roman leader, was left in charge of the children.

During the two centuries that receded Ptolemy Auletes death, the Ptolemies were allied with the Romans. The Ptolemies’ strength was failing and the Roman Empire was rising. City after city was falling to the Roman power and the Ptolemies could do nothing but create a pact with them. During the later rule of the Ptolemies, the Romans gained more and more control over Egypt. Tributes had to be paid to the Romans to keep them away from Egypt. When Ptolemy Auletes died, the fall of the Dynasty appeared to be even closer.

According to Egyptian law, Cleopatra was forced to have a consort, who was either a brother or a son, no matter what age, throughout her reign. She was married to her younger brother Ptolemy XIII when he was twelve, however she soon dropped his name from any official documents regardless of the Ptolemaic insistence that the male presence be first among co-rulers. She also had her own portrait and name on coins of that time, ignoring her brother’s. When Cleopatra became co-regent, her world was crumbling down around her. Cyprus, Coele-Syria and Cyrenaica were gone. There was anarchy abroad and famine at home.

Cleopatra was a strong-willed Macedonian queen who was brilliant and dreamed of a greater world empire. She almost achieved it. Whether her way of getting it done was for her own desires or for the pursuit of power will never be known for certain. However, like many Hellenistic queens, she was passionate but not promiscuous. As far as we know, she had no other lovers other than Caesar and Antony. Many believe that she did what she felt was necessary to try to save Alexandria, whatever the price. By 48 BC, Cleopatra had alarmed the more powerful court officials of Alexandria by some of her actions.

For instance, her mercenaries killed the Roman governor of Syria’s sons when they came to ask for her assistance for their father against the Parthians. A group of men led by Theodotus, the eunuch Pothinus and a half-Greek general, Achillas, overthrew her in favor of her younger brother. They believed him to be much easier to influence and they became his council of regency. Cleopatra is thought to have fled to Thebaid. Between 51 and 49 BC, Egypt was suffering from bad harvests and famine because of a drought which stopped the much needed Nile flooding.

Ptolemy XIII signed a decree on October 27, 50 BC which banned any shipments of grain to anywhere but Alexandria. It is thought that this was to deprive Cleopatra and her supporters who were not in Alexandria. Regardless, she started an army from the Arab tribes which were east of Pelusium. During this time, she and her sister Arsinoe moved to Syria. They returned by way of Ascalon which may have been Cleopatra’s temporary base. In the meantime, Pompey had been defeated at Pharsalus in August of 48 BC. He headed for Alexandria hoping to find refuge with Ptolemy XIII, of whom Pompey was a senate-appointed guardian.

Pompey did not realize how much his reputation had been destroyed by Pharsalus until it was too late. He was murdered as he stepped ashore on September 28, 48 BC. The young Ptolemy XIII stood on the dock nd watched the whole scene. Four days later, Caesar arrived in Alexandria. He brought with him thirty-two hundred legionaries and eight hundred cavalry. He also brought twelve other soldiers who bore the insignia of the Roman government who carried a bundle of rods with an ax with a blade that projected out. This was considered a badge of authority that gave a clear hint of his intentions. There were riots that followed in Alexandria.

Ptolemy XIII was gone to Pelusium and Caesar placed himself in the royal palace and started giving out orders. The eunuch, Pothinus, brought Ptolemy back to Alexandria. Cleopatra had no ntentions of being left out of any deals that were going to be made. She had herself smuggled in through enemy lines rolled in a carpet. She was delivered to Caesar. Both Cleopatra and Ptolemy were invited to appear before Caesar the next morning. By this time, she and Caesar were already lovers and Ptolemy realized this right away. He stormed out screaming that he had been betrayed, trying to arouse the Alexandrian mob.

He was soon captured by Caesar’s guards and brought back to the palace. It is thought that Caesar had planned to make Cleopatra the sole ruler of Alexandria. He thought she would be a puppet for Rome. The Alexandrian War was started when Pothinus called for Ptolemy XIII’s soldiers in November and surrounded Caesar in Alexandria with twenty thousand men. During the war, parts of the Alexandrian Library and some of the warehouses were burned. However, Caesar did manage to capture the Pharos lighthouse, which kept his control of the harbor. Cleopatra’s sister, Arsinoe, escaped from the palace and ran to Achillas.

She was proclaimed the queen by the Macedonian mob and the army. Cleopatra never forgave her sister for this. During the fighting, Caesar executed Pothinus and Achillas was murdered by Ganymede. Ptolemy XIII rowned in the Nile while he was trying to flee. During July of the year 46 BC, Caesar returned to Rome. He was given many honors and a ten-year dictatorship. These celebrations lasted from September to October and he brought Cleopatra over, along with her entourage. The conservative Republicans were very offended when he established Cleopatra in his home. Her social manners did not make the situation any better.

She upset many. Cleopatra had started calling herself the New Isis and was the subject of much gossip. She lived in luxury and had a statue made of gold placed by Caesar, in the temple of Venus Genetrix . Caesar also openly claimed Caesarion as his son. Many were upset that he was planning to marry Cleopatra regardless of the laws against bigamy and marriages to foreigners. However, on the Ides of March of 44 BC, all of that came to an end. Caesar was assassinated outside the Senate Building in Rome. He was killed in a conspiracy by his Senators. Many of the Senators thought he was a threat to the republic’s well-being.

It was thought that Caesar was making plans to have himself declared king. After Caesar’s murder, Cleopatra fled Rome and returned home to Alexandria. Caesar had not mentioned Cleopatra or Caesarion in his will. She felt her life, as well as that of her child, was in great danger. Upon returning to Alexandria, she had her consort, Ptolemy XIV, assassinated and established Caesarion as her co-regent at the age of four. She found Egypt suffering from plagues and famine. The Nile canals had been neglected during her absence which caused the harvests to be bad and the inundations low.

The bad harvests continued from 43 until 41 BC. Trying to help secure recognition for Caesarion with Caesar’s former lieutenant Dolabella, Cleopatra sent Dolabella the four legions that Caesar had left in Egypt. Cassius captured the legions hich caused Dolabella to commit suicide at Laodicea during the summer of 43 BC. She was planning to join Mark Antony and Octavian (who became Augustus) with a large fleet of ships after Dolabella’s death, but was stopped by a violent storm. Cleopatra watched in the time that followed, who would be the next power in Rome.

After Brutus and Cassius had been killed and Antony, Octavian and Lepidus were triumphant, Cleopatra knew which one she would have to deal with. Octavian went back to Italy very ill, so Antony was the one to watch. Her son gained his right to become king when Caesar was officially divinized in Rome on January 1, 2 BC. The main object was the promotion of Octavian, but the triumvirs knew of Cleopatra’s aid to Dolabella. Cleopatra and Antony spent the winter of 41 to 40 in Alexandria. According to some sources, Cleopatra could get out of him whatever she wanted, including the assassination of her sister, Arsinoe.

Cleopatra may not have had so much influence over him later on. He took control of Cyprus from her. Actually it may have been Cleopatra who was the exploited one. Antony needed money and Cleopatra could be generous when it benefited her as well. In the spring of 40 BC, Mark Antony left Cleopatra and returned home. He did not see her for four years. Antony’s wife, Fulvia had gotten into a serious movement against Octavian over veterans’ allotments of land. She fled to Greece and had a bitter confrontation with Antony. She became ill and died there.

Antony patched things up with Octavian that same autumn by marrying Octavian’s sister, Octavia. She was a beautiful and intelligent woman who had been recently widowed. She had three children from her first marriage. In the meantime, Cleopatra had given birth to twins, one boy and one girl, in Alexandria. Antony’s first child by Octavia was a girl. Had Octavia given him a son, things ight have turned out different. Antony kept the idea of the treasures of the Ptolemies and how much he wanted it. When he finally did get the treasures, the standard interest rate in Rome fell from 12 percent to 4.

Mark Antony left Italy and went to deal with the Parthians. Octavia had just had another daughter and went with him just as far as Corcyra. He gave her the excuse that he did not want to expose her to the dangers of the battles and sent her home. He told her that she would be more use to him at home in Rome keeping peace with her brother, Octavian. However, the first thing that he did when he eached Antioch, was to send for Cleopatra. Their twin children were officially recognized by Antony and were given the names of Alexander Helios and Cleopatra Selene.

Mark Antony gave her much land which was very essential to Egypt. He gave her Cyprus, the Cilician coast, Phoenicia, Coele-Syria, Judea and Arabia. This allowed Egypt to be able to build ships from the lumber from Cilician coast. Egypt then built a large fleet. Antony had planned a campaign against the Parthians. He obviously needed Cleopatra’s support for this and in 36 BC, he was defeated. He became more indebted to her than ever. They had just had a third hild. On their return to Syria, she met him and what was left of his army, with food, clothing and money.

Early in 35 BC, he returned to Egypt with her. Antony’s wife, Octavia was in Athens with supplies and reinforcements waiting for her husband. He sent her a letter telling her to not come any further. Her brother, Octavian, tried to provoke Antony into a fight. Octavian would release troops as well as ships to try to force Antony into a war, which, by this time was almost inevitable. Antony might have been able to patch things up with Octavia and her brother had he returned to Rome in 35 BC. Cleopatra probably did er best to keep him in Alexandria.

Octavia remained completely loyal to Antony through all of this. After Antony’s death, Cleopatra was taken to Octavian where her role in Octavian’s triumph was carefully explained to her. He had no interest in any relationship, negotiation or reconciliation with the Queen of Egypt. She would be displayed as a slave in the cities she had ruled over. She must have had memories of her sister, Arsinoe, being humiliated in this way. She would not live this way, so she had an asp, which was an Egyptian cobra, brought to her hidden in a basket of figs. She died on August 12, 30 BC at the age of 39.

The Egyptian religion declared that death by snakebite would secure immortality. With this, she achieved her dying wish, to not be forgotten. The only other ruler to cast a shadow on the fascination with Cleopatra was Alexander who was another Macedonian. After Cleopatra’s death, Caesarion was strangled and the other children of Cleopatra were raised by Antony’s wife, Octavia. Her death was the mark of the end of the Egyptian Monarchs. The Roman Emperors came into to rule in Egypt. The Ptolemies were Macedonian in decent, but ruled as Egyptians, as Pharaohs. Cleopatra was the last Pharaoh of Egypt.

What is often not associated with Cleopatra was her brilliance and her devotion to her country. She was a quick-witted woman who was fluent in nine languages, however, Latin was not one of them. She was a mathematician and a very good businesswoman. She had a genuine respect for Caesar, whose intelligence and wit matched her own. Antony on the other hand almost drove her insane with his lack of intelligence and his excesses. She dealt with him and made the most of what she had to do. She fought for her country. She had a charismatic personality, was a born leader and an ambitious monarch who deserved better than suicide.

The Philly Election Of 1794

The Swanwick-Fitzsimmons election in Philadelphia of the most infamous elections in American history due to the fact that, it brought with it the first distinction ever between two political parties, the Federalists and the Democrats. Subsequently the election of 1794 brought America it’s first democratic congressional leader, John Swanwick. The factors surrounding Swanwick’s congressional debut were national issues, local issues, yellow fever epidemic, the Whiskey Rebellion, and the excise tax. The democratic party was led by James Madison and Thomas Jefferson.

This society was composed of mostly middle class citizens being composed of artisans and laborers. Their beliefs consisted of a central government power but with limitations, they also had a strict interpretation of the Constitution. The also supported pro-French foreign policy and opposed the Bank of the United States. This party also passed a resolution resisting the excise tax. George Washington believed that the democratic party and similar societies were the one is responsible for the Whiskey Rebellion .

On the contrary, the Federalist party, which was led by Alexander Hamilton, believed in a strong sturdy central government, and had a broad interpretation of the constitution. They believed in full payment of national and state debts, and were the ones that established the Bank of the United States. They also supported pro-British policy and the excise tax was established by their leader Alexander Hamilton. Until 1794, America was predominantly led by our first president George Washington, being a federalist.

Therefore, Fitzsimmons had seemed to be the perfect candidate, due to the fact that this country had been run by federalist leaders. Suprisingly, the election in Philadelphia did not go as expected because the federalists had a new competitor. The Democrats were now forming a strong political party and were ready to challenge the Federalists. Thomas Fitzsimmons, member of the Federalist society, entered commerce as a clerk and worked his way up the ladder, to secure his position he married into the principle merchant’s family.

During the Revolution he was the captain of the Pennsylvania militia. In 1782 and 1783 he was member of the Continental Congress, in 1786 and 1787, was elected in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives. He was a signer of the United States Constitution. In 1788 he was elected in the Federal House of Representatives. Fitzsimmons was a tremendous supporter of Alexander Hamilton’s policies and in his excise tax. He helped draft legislation chartering the Bank of the United States, and was the primary founder of the Bank of North America. He was also a Roman Catholic.

John Swanwick, member of the Democratic Society, in 1777 was hired as a clerk in a merchant firm for Robert Morris. He worked his way up by gaining full partnership by 1783. By 1794, bought out Morris’s share of the company. Swanwick was one of the leading export merchants in Philadelphia, was a stockholder at the Bank of North America. He also held minor offices (under Morris) in the confederation government. In 1792 he was elected to the state legislature and by 1793 he drifted from Federalism to become a Democratic Republican, in which he joined in 1794, soon after he became an officer.

Swanwick was also an officer for a society that aided immigrants. Furthermore, he opposed the excise tax, but thought the Whiskey Rebellion in western Pennsylvania used the wrong method to protest against what they believed in. He also a member of the Protestant Episcopal Church. Along with the complications of the election came local controversial issues. For example, friends of the two candidates filled the public with “vicious charges and countercharges in hopes of attracting voters to their respective candidates”(p 90).

Other factors that contributed to the problems of the election were the Whiskey Rebellion and the excise tax. The reason for the excise tax, a system that lay a tax on selected products manufactured in the United States(tobacco products, snuff and pipe tobacco, sugar products and whiskey) was to resolve the massive public debt to pay off the national debt and to establish government operating capital. This excise tax, raised extreme protest in western Philadelphia where whiskey was a very important commodity.

Farmers tried to prevent the collection of the tax, a protest that eventually grew into the Whiskey Rebellion of 1794. ” (P 92) Washington in return sent out 15,000 troops to stop the rebellion, but the protesting already collapsed by the time they arrived. Jefferson wrote to James Madison, December 28, 1794 of the situation: “The excise law is an infernal oneThe information of our militia, returned from the Westward, is uniform, that the people there let them pass quietly; they were objects of their laughter, not their fear. p100)

A final possible complication of the congressional election was “a disorder to have occasioned great devastation in the year 1793” (p 104), known as the Yellow Fever Epidemic. However, a person by the name of Dr. Benjamin Rush, one of the few doctors that actually stayed to help battle this epidemic. During this dark time, the city lost 10 of its most valued doctors and many other were sick. By the time of the election, the death toll reached its height at 4041 people.

Whether this situation had a direct correlation on the outcome of the election or not, will not be known, however it seriously upset the social agendas of the Democratic-Republican parties and well as the Federalist parties. Taking into consideration that Dr. Rush, in 1794 crossed over political parties to become a Democrat-Republican. “Most physicians in Philadelphia in 1794 were Federalists. “(p 105) In conclusion, the election of 1794 proved to be one of the most important aspects of our nation’s history because it clearly distinguished two political parties, Democratic-Republicans and Federalists.

The democratic-Republic win of John Swanwick demonstrated that his campaign was more aggressive, less elitist, and his appeal to the general public. For example, Swanwick opposed the excise tax, which, in turn, allowed him to receive a majority of the votes of the public. “Democratic-Republicans gained strength, so much so that by 1800 their titular leader, Thomas Jefferson, was able to win the presidential election and put an end to Federalist control of the national government. “

Designers/Artists of the Past

Art and design do coveys various types of communication, for informative purposes and for entertainment value. In order for a creator to produce something creative they must draw from their inner impulses, and the environmental and historical influences around them in order to communicate a language. Throughout the centuries art and design has seen numerous art movement arise depicting their views on how are and design should be communicated in the hope for social reformation.

They sought about enforcing changes in art and design by creating new ideals, adopting and adapting to old ideal and regurgitating new ones in order to form new art movements throughout each era. However they never succeeded to conform to one art style, instead they carved theories, styles and techniques into history. With the emergence of the following eras we have arguably gained three of the greatest painters/designers the world has ever known. They have not only brought some of world famous paintings and advertisements, they have also developed theories and techniques in which all new designers/artists follow when creating work.

Techniques like the way we construct our pieces with strong visual depth of field, and illusions can be obtained from the eighteenth century, decoration style, Rococo. Art Nouveau with its sensuous curves, flowing lines and its ease with abstract motifs, ensured that all things resembles handwork and handicrafts and not purely bland conformity. The Bauhaus however followed on after the Art Nouveau and striped ornamentation leaving behind clean lines and function, ensuring that students reform to an artistic process (Malyon, 1997-2001).

Rococo was an art style during the eighteenth century. It emerged from French migrs, who used the word to designate the whimsical fashion of the old shellwork style (style rocaille). It was seen to be the climax or degeneration of Baroque, however both styles had little effect on architectural construction, and were regarded as merely a new kind of decoration which culminated in the resolution of architectural forms of the interiors (pilasters and architraves), rather than being an actual style (The Age, 2004).

Rococos decoration portrayed the carefree life of the aristocracy rather than on grand heroes or pious martyrs (Delahunt, 1996). Love and romance was portrayed considerably as they were seen to be better subjects for art rather than historical or religious subjects. The eighteenth centuries notion of painting was as a staged fiction in order to involve the viewer on a purely imaginative level. The style produced many artists who were masters of light, colour and fantasy.

Arguably one of the greatest painters was Giambattista Tiepolo (1696- 1770). His works combined Illusionism and Veronses extravagance from High Baroque. However he also paints with imagination by transposing the world of ancient history, myth, the scriptures and the sacred legends into a grandiose, even theatrical languages. His work The banquet of Cleopatra (figure 1) represents this era of luxury and extravagance, through its shear size and its dramatic style it captures a famous incident from the life of the Egyptian queen, Cleopatra.

Tiepolo has portrayed Plinys story of a wager between Cleopatra, Queen of Egypt, and Mark Anthony, Roman consul in Egypt. This story shows them challenging each other to spend the most on a single banquet, Cleopatra finally winning by dissolving one of the rarest pearls of the ancient world in vinegar and swallowing it. This theatrical piece portrays the setting in the The banquet of Cleopatra with no relevance to Egypt apart from two Egyptian figures and a Sphinx fountain. Instead of creating a painting of historical information, Tiepolo has portrayed a kind of exotic, grand fantasy.

The clothing that he has painted them in too shows no historical continuity as Cleopatra is wearing a 16th Century Venetian dress, and Mark Anthony is in a Roman costume. Rather than the justaucorps, waistcoats and breeches that the men typically wore, or a polonaise a robe, which was lifted up and poufed in back, supported by a bustle pad that gave the illusion that the lady had an overly large backside, known as Cul de Paris, which the women typically wore (Jaeggi, 2003).

Tieopolo paved a style which can be can be characterised by a free, graceful movement; through a playful use of line, and delicate colours by artist and designers today. His techniques radiate strength, movement and colour, through carefully painted tiles, the placement of each columns and the way he has aligned each characters gaze allows the viewers eyes to be lead to the banquet setting. This rule of placement can be applied to all visual artists and communicators today ensuring the viewer obtain the message being conveyed by the artist/designer.

In a broad term the artist/designer is an inventor of images, who draws on his own inner impulses and tries to communicate them through a language of information and gesture (Jacques Garamound). Another Art Movement focusing on the international style of decoration and architecture, was Art Nouveau (New Art in French) It was developed in the 1880s and 1890s however arose largely as a reaction against the increasing drabness of industrialized society. One major result of the nineteenth century was mass production, and although it did provide a greater number of commodities at a lower cost, it did cause masses of bland uniformity to goods.

The movement put emphasis on decoration and artistic unity, links the movement to contemporary Symbolist ideas in art, as seen in the work of the Vienna Secessionists, but the movement was also akin to William Morris Arts and Crafts movement in England, which attempted to eradicate the divide line between art and audience. Morris states that everything could and should be art (www. bpib. com). Art Nouveau arose to combat the negative results of industrialisation and the struggle with historicism.

The new ornamentation was carried out through all design disciplines transcending what they though was the boundary between fine arts and applied arts. A room was not just a room in which one placed art, but was considered a total work of art, to which ornamentation served as a linking member, not just arbitrarily employed, but organically arising from the construction and function of an object (A Concise History P:44). One of the foremost exponents of Art Nouveau was Alphonse Mucha a Czech artist who was born in Bohemia in 1860 and moved to Paris in 1890 where he became the star of the poster-art movement.

The exciting rigid Victorian attitudes were giving way in Paris, allowing various modes of expression to adapt. Being that his ideals expressed the Victorian idealisation of womankind using strong compositions, sensuous curves, flowing lines and the ease with which abstracted and stylised motifs from the natural world coincided with new trends in both art and society (Mourey, 2002). The Art Nouveau precepts were used too, but never at the expense of his vision. Muchas style is virtually synonymous with French Art Nouveau and he is one of the most imitated artists and designers of all time.

Although he did not create Art Nouveau, his work especially as a poster artist, came to symbolise the full flowering of the style and the era. One of the pieces that gained him extreme recognition was Au Quartier Latin (Figure 2) a lithographic poster, created in 1982. This new style was advertised extensively through the medium of the poster. Like the poster Au Quartier Latin it draws the passers by into a direct, sometimes short-lived, correspondence. However what attracted the viewers was the artwork itself rather than the advertisement. The wording can be seen couched and cleverly integrated into the design.

Because of its aesthetic enhancement, the message was more likely to make a favourable and memorable impression on the viewer (The world and I, 1987). In order to have the viewer linger longer over the advertisement Mucha presented insouciant, flirtatious females in occasional dishabille (The world and I, 1987). It seems though that Mucha had a fascination with the femme fatale. Quite like the artists from the Rococo period Mucha seemed inspired by a variety of contemporary literary sources or by celebrated historical archetypes such as Delilah, Helen of Troy or Cleopatra.

While artist though this Art Nouveau style was rejecting industrial mass production and thought that they reformed handwork and the handicrafts, by replacing patterns with their vegetation, they were merely replacing one kind of ornamentation with another (A Concise History P:95). The compression of space can be seen as a characteristic that todays artists/designers have opted to illuminate from their rules of thumb, as the message seems to get lost amongst the excessive elaboration.

Todays artists/designers have selected sections of their work to reveal Art Nouveaus elegance. They have integrated formats of sweeping lines, exotic shapes and resplendent juxtapostitioning of tone through aspects of their work rather than engrossing the whole artwork with imagery, this is what we call minimalism. Bauhaus occurred during the period 1919-1933, and was focused on forming the ideas that made students realise that the future is primarily about industry and mass production rather than individual craftsmanship.

It was a firmly established industrial design movement that stripped away decoration and left behind clean lines and function. Some say it was the removal of human craft, but to the teachers and followers of Bauhaus, function was their major concern, removing the past from the damage that World War One caused, so rather than adding decoration to the objects like Rococo, they returned to the basics design fundamentals. Bauhaus was thought to be the design of purest forms, simple structures and the exclusion of ornamentation and excess (Carvan, 2003).

Although Baroque and Rococo tried to establish a style with exquisite decoration and ornamentation, they were unsuccessful as ornamentation as a rule makes the product, more expensive (A Concise History P:13). It was a beautiful art form that can co-exist with industrial products but not merely by itself as they cause the products to be costly and extremely time consuming. Ludwig Mies van der Rohe (1886-1969) was perhaps the most influential architect of the mid-20th-Century. Miess phrase less in more became the essence of architecture paving his way through the style, and also influencing todays designers.

He achieved international recognition as one of the leading figures of modern architecture, due to the German Pavilion for the 1929 Barcelona Exhibition. The Pavilion was built from glass, travertine and different kinds of marble. It was contrived to accommodate the official reception presided over the King Alphonso XIII of Spain with the German authorities. Some say that he stripped architecture of all humanity, creating cold, sterile and unlivable environments, others praise his work, saying he created architecture in its most pure form.

However as individuals having natural prejudices and preconceptions to design it can mean all sorts of things to others and absolutely nothing got the rest of the population (Powell, 2000). Due to an obvious abundance of followers Van der Rohe s Barcelona lounge chair (Figure 3) is a notable piece of modern design and part of the permanent design in todays history, being replicated around the world. Each chair is meticulously constructed of hand polished stainless steel and individually sewn squares of fine leather. The straps and buttons are made of cowhide while cushions are made of urethane foam with dacron polyester fibrefill.

Although his chairs were constructed using machinery he always believed that adding the perfection and uniqueness could only he created by hand, hence the sewing and polishing of each chair. He had a highly developed sense of classical proportion, appreciation of modern structure and materials, and keen sense of craftsmanship, which has had a profound effect on todays artists/designers. They seek influence from the art period and also replicate his work. ­­­­­ Bauhaus probing means to reconcile the artist and the machine became an inspiration to todays artists/designers around the world.

Without its particular attention to pursuing new forms and new solutions, todays artists/designers would not have returned to the fundamentals, the basic materials or even the basic rule of design. Today, Bauhaus is still an influential movement, still effecting todays industrial design culture. (Whitford; Masters and students, 1992, P 10) proclaimed, everyone is sitting on a chair with tubular steel frame, using an adjustable reading lamp, or living in a house partly or entirely constructed form prefabricated elements.

Communication will continue to occur throughout the following eras as individuals need to be informed and continually entertained. There is a constant demand for new ideas designers today have opted to borrow elements from the past design styles, like imaginative metaphorical paintings from the Rococo era, or streamlined dynamic lines, organically formed handles, chair legs, that are reminiscent of Art Nouveau, or even the basic material and fundamental design of Bauhaus.

As design should ooze individuality depict their art and design within trends rather than making rules in which everyone has to conform to. Socialism cannot be changed by conforming a culture to sets of rules in art and design. Designs rules are not like that of the law, rather they are an act of individualism.

Hispanismo, 1898-1936: Spanish Conservatives and Liberals and their Relations

This book review of Hispanismo, 1898-1936: Spanish Conservatives and Liberals and their Relations with Spanish America, by Frederick B. Pike, is mainly about as the title suggests, Hispanismo. Hispanismo or often called Hispanoamericanism and/or Pan Hispanismo is a trend of Latin American cultures that is quite simply in the most basic terms the “shared . . . unassailable faith in the existence of a transatlantic Hispanic family, community, or raza (race)” Many Central and Latin American countries for years feared the influence of Spain in heir lives with the United States posing little threat and being often helpful.

This all changed with the downfall of the Spanish Empire, in the 1800s, weakening the menace to its former colonies and the final crushing loss of the Spanish-American War in 1898. But after this turning mark year, the United Sates posed more of an imperialistic threat to its southern neighbors than weakened Spain. With a new threat to the North, the new world countries regained their ties to the “mother country”. Activists in a new movement saw Spain and Latin countries of the Southern Hemisphere as sharing common values, beliefs, and characteristics.

This book, describing the subsequent ties to Spain, is important to my study of Latin America’s involvement in the Spanish Civil War and in this review I will analyze this work to determine its value as a source. Hispanismo, 1898-1936: Spanish Conservatives and Liberals and their Relations with Spanish America, part of the International Studies of the Committee on International Relation Series of Notre Dame, deals with the rise of the Hispanismo movements in Latin America from 1898 up to 1936, the turning point n Latin America’s/Spain’s relations.

Pike deals with the perspectives of the Hispanismo movement and the people’s attitude toward Spain on the eve of the Spanish Civil War. Analyzing the reasoning behind their attitude and their subsequent return to Spanish values, the author’s central theme seems to be that people of Latin America have always had some need or underlying desire to have an element of Spanish culture and direction in their lives on many levels.

The author argues this theme well in a clear concise way thereby providing enough logical evidence to support the thesis that “(there has always been) . a conscious effort of Spaniards and Spanish Americans to establish close spiritual, and sometimes also economic and political ties, often with the specific purpose of bulwarking the prevailing social system throughout the Hispanic world. ” The thirteen chapters of this book provide more than adequate evidence to support this trend and Pike takes his argument one step further by addressing in the last chapter both the strength and weaknesses of his thesis, thereby leaving no issue untouched which in the end does more to bolster his thesis into a solid logical one

Frederick B. Pike, professor of history at Notre Dame (now retired) has published numerous books in a long career in Latin American history. Certainly not an antiquestrian the author is a serious Latin Americanist and this is clearly shown by his knowledgeable writing in this book. Tackling a complex and broad subject such as Hispanismo seems not to be an easy task with many different parties and factors going into each side’s issues, and there are both many sides and many issues, but the author seems to pull this off extremely well without confusing the eader unduly.

Pike accomplishes this by giving the reader an adequate background of both Spanish America and Spain before simply jumping headfirst and blind into his argument. The author seems to have no unneeded biases of arguing unduly the merits of only one side even though he focuses mainly on Central and Latin American conservatives, taking no liberties or straying from the issues by getting on his soapbox. Even though this work is confined to a time span of forty years, this book and the issues it addresses seems, as mentioned before, a complicated subject. As sources, Pike used primarily published material of books, periodicals, and newspapers.

I found Frederick B. Pike to be humble in his argument throughout his entire work. Certainly one of the best in his field, and even with receiving the Guggenheim Foundation Fellowship and a “generous grant” from Notre Dame University, to write this book, Pikes writing does not reflect an air of condensation or superiority whatsoever. As throughout the entire text, the author states in the preface that he considered that not enough primary sources, mainly newspapers were not used. However, I found this not to take anything away from his writing with an adequate number of primary source to both support his argument and addresses its weaknesses.

The main focus of this work was to address the complex relationship of Hispanismo between Spanish America and Spain with looking at how Central and Latin American countries saw their relationship and/or their “madre piaz” or mother country. I feel that this book is major contribution toward the field of Latin American studies. Pike clearly accomplishes his objectives and provides a logical ell-researched argument of a Spanish American/Spanish interdependence which sheds light on my subject of Latin America’s involvement with Spain during its turbulent civil war.

This book addresses important social issues that both Spain and Latin America faced at the same time. In my focus of study, this work provides the foundation for the understanding of the subject as a whole. This book is definitely a good source with its strongest points being that it is well written and addressed its own weaknesses thereby making it invaluable to the field of Latin American history and my subject of study.

The harrowing stories of the Jews persecution

The following asocial elements are to be transferred from the prison to the Reichsfuehrer S. S. to be worked to death: persons under protective arrest, Jews, Gypsies, Russians, Ukrainians, Poles . . . Czechs, and Germans with sentences of more than eight years . . . quoted by Reichsfuehrer S. S. Himmler, on September 18, 1942.

When author Ina R. Friedman wrote this book, by accumulating stories from people in various parts of Germany and the U. S. he unveiled hidden truths that not many people had ever had the opportunity to know, whether due to ignorance, sadness and sorrow, humiliation, secretes to be hidden, or just a desperate need to forget. There was a need for people to know the truth. In reading this book, we find out that sixty years after the Holocaust many people believe that only Jews were the victims of the Nazis. Today, more and more, the truth is being revealed in books like Friedmans and movies from producers like Speilburg.

It is important for others to know not only the harrowing stories of the Jews persecution, but of the others that many never knew were being persecuted. In the book, THE OTHER VICTIMS, Friedman reveals true accounts of who these other victims were and why they were persecuted. Her reasoning behind her writings, Like the young people whose stories are told in this book, each of us has a responsibility to safeguard the rights of others. If we do not, our own rights could vanish. It is interesting to learn that Heil Hitler was more than just a salute, it meant complete surrender to mind control.

Hitler wanted complete control over Germany first and then his control would eventually extend out to other countries, other people until he had complete control of this world. As he began in Germany, he not only wanted to exterminate the Jewish people, but he identified those that were unworthy of life. This group included Romani or Gypsies and homosexuals. Friedman states, Rewards were offered for Gypsies, dead or alive. If a Gypsy woman was discovered, her left ear was cut off. One of the stories told states that in the nineteenth-century Denmark, on hunt bagged 260 men, women, and children.

Hitler also went to war against the church, Christians, Jehovahs Witnesses, and any other religion that did not believe the way he did. He not only wanted to conquer the world, but create a new religion. This new religion was based on Love thy neighbor, but only loyalty to the German Nazi ideals: the purity of German blood and a willingness to die for Hitler. With this belief of purity, came the assignment of Breeding a Master Race. Hitler had a program to identify and eliminate inferior non-Germans (Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, Blacks, Czechs ) and German defectives which were the mentally and physically handicapped.

Hitler wanted to control the minds and the lives of all people and create slaves for the Nazi empire. In fact, Hitler makes this statement, We shall have no other God but Germany. There are many stories throughout this book that reveal inhumane acts against almost every kind of person, even of German decent. It is hard to understand what makes one person think like this or have so much hatred for anyone. It must have been that he was full of the devil himself! Every story was mesmerizing and made the book hard to put down.

How could one person have ruined the lives of so many people? The contents of the stories caused many emotions to flame. Things that had never been thought of before actually happened in the twentieth century. It was amazing! For instance, black entertainers were popular in Germany before Hitler ever came into power; they were boycotted when the Nazis took over. The book even revealed the famous story of Jesse Owens, the American track star who had won three gold metals at the 1936 Olympics in Berlin, Hitler refused to be present when the medals were presented.

It seemed to be so childish, possible jealousy, but most probably, hatred. How can anyone hate so strongly? This book moved emotions not normally felt this day and age. The acts in these stories were appalling. One incident most disturbing was the Nuremberg Laws that forbade marriages between Christians and Jews to prevent race defilement. Why was Hitler so concerned about race defilement between two groups of people he thought already to be defiled? It was horrible the agony Hitler and his ungodly rules put people through.

People were stolen from, lied to, sterilized, controlled, ravaged, beaten, put into slave camps, worked to death, euphemized, children taken from their parents, families torn apart, children left to themselves, people executed, gassed, starved, and fear gripped the hearts and lives of people due to the unknown. Although the stories were hard to imagine, there were incidents that proved perseverance brought promise. As with Zbigniew Zawadzki who was one of the few among nineteen hundred students of the University of Warsaw Medical School who lived to recount the story of his education that was under fire in 1940.

He came through hell and back and in January 1947, he was awarded the degree of Doctor of Medicine. His dream had finally come true. As an educator, this book revealed the hardships of people just like you and me. The lessons in this book and the stories are so profound. There are encouraging outcomes at the end of most every story. It revealed the pervasiveness of Hitlers attack and parallels with the possible hatred in todays society, though not as gory, yet still as harmful. Hitler did not accomplish this horrible task alone.

It took many people. Just as Hitler caused a world of hurts, it is important to believe that each person can make a difference in the world in which we live. It will come through educating people that everyone is different and by accepting that difference as long as our differences are not deadly to others. For educators, this book will encourage ones desire to strengthen cultural differences and educate teachers of ways to implement successful multicultural classrooms for the twenty-first century.

The Nazi government

In December 1929, the German government faced a total financial crisis, facing a short fall of 1. 5 billion marks in anticipated revenues. It occurred then that the world would lie in darkness, where deaths would override births dramatically, and where the lives of those of a different race, those opposed to the Nazi rule would lie. In the 1920s, Germany encountered a great mired in an economic depression. Millions of citizens suffered hunger and many remained out of work. The national spirit of the once-proud people became low.

The Germans became enraged by their loss of World War I and stood humiliated by the terms they had to accept in 1919 the treaty of Versailles. The War had a destruction of millions of deaths. Germany had to give up territory, slash its military, and pay billions of dollars in reparations for the damaged it caused during the war. Hitler used his nations despair and humiliation as fuel for a new political monument, which took shape as the Nazi party (Schoenbaum 8). In 1933, Hitler achieved his goal of gaining political power.

In January 30, President Von Hindenburg swore Hitler as Germanys new chancellor. Hitler then took charge of the armed forced the police, and other institutes. By 1934, upon the death of Von Hindenburg, Hitler became president as well as chancellor. Eventually he would become called leader (Dallin 64). Nazis became brainwashed. They became manipulated in to believing that the Germans exsisted as the best the best and that their blood was the purist and that no one would be greater than they would. Nazi were formed as well to believe that all Jews were the enemies of all Germans.

Some though were forced to become Nazis because their families had no money and they had no other way of making a living during the depression. Once at the training sessions they would, without knowing become brainwashed. Nazis were formed to form a totalitarian government, a government where all of human affairs were controlled by the government (Dallin 68-9). Th National Socialist Party came to power in Germany in 1933, and they brought with them sweeping social changes. They sought to control all aspects of life within the German Reich.

By January 1939, the Nazis had a large, well-armed military. The Nazis created a powerful system of propaganda to mold and manipulate peoples beliefs and attitudes. The Nazi government controlled radio stations, theatres, and movie houses, and all the print media. Officials banned books, magazines, and newspapers that promoted ideas they disliked, along with their approval. In response thousands of artists, scientists, writers, musicians, and professors, both Jewish and non -Jewish, fled from the country. Many however, got arrested or killed. Even worse violence followed.

Nazi officials had long planned a massive program, a group or mob attack, against Jews and their property. The Nazi found an excuse to launch this program when in October 1938; a teenager named Herschel Grynszpan shot a Nazi official in Paris. Because of this his parents and other polish Jews were sent to camps. On the night of November 9, Nazi stormtroopers groups throughout Germany and Austria were ordered to destroy as many Jewish homes, stores, and businesses (Hermans 21). The Nazis based their intentions and policies throughout on an articulated, shared understanding of Jews, namely their eliminations, racial antisemitism.

When it recognized that the eliminationist ideology-which provided a diagnosis of the perceived problem and which implied a variety of possible practical solutions to it underlay the nazis thinking and actions, then the contours of their policies towards Jews appear far less enigmatic, far more deliberate, far easier to undersstand for what they had a concerted yet flexible and necessarily experimental attempt, born of conscious intent, to iliminate putative fewish power and influence and finally made possible germany during the nazy period had a political system that was both dicatorial and consensual, dicatorial in that no formal mechanism such as elections existed to check Hitlers power or to remove him from office, consensual in that the people who staffed the institusions of the political system and hitlers authority as desirable and Hitlers authority as desirable and legitimate (Schoenbaum 14).

Finally, regarding Nazi jewish policy as if these three feactures of the political system did not already promise to produce inconsistence, the eliminationist ideology seemed compatible with a variety of solutions and virtuallity all of them were unprece dented and difficult to implement. These feactures of the Nazi system complicate the attempt to understand what the Nazis intentions had for disposing of German and European Jews and, whatever their intentions they hold, what considerations moved them to adopt the actual policies and measures that they chose (Hermans 12-3). The Nazis moved quickly to exploit the land and its people. As Hitler envisioned it, Poland had to provide the Third Reich with more Leben sraum, or living space.

The poles (mostly Gentiles), whom Hitler had long despiced and whom the Nazis viewed as Subhuman would be used as a suorce of cheap or slave labor. Jews and their communities had simply to disapear (Dallin 46). Violence flared as the invaders burned down synagogues and businesses. In one town, Nazis started burning a Jewish home for the poor. Angri (Zechs worked to put out the fire and took turns guarding the home before they were overpowered by armed Nazis. Non-Jewish (Gentile) czechs also showed their support by continuing to shop in Jewis owned stores after the Nazis required these places to display an important Jewish symbol, the six-pointed Star of David.

Aproximately 3. illion Jews lived in Poland before the German invasion of western Poland and the subsequent soviet invasion of eastern Poland. Centuries of harsh antisemitism had forced these people to rely a great deal on their own resources. At times during the Middle Ages, when Jews were not allowed to own land or enter most professions, landowners hired Jews to serve as their merchants, moneylenders, and tax collectors. As they carried out these orders, Jews aroused the anger of the lower classes. There existed a widespread mistrust of ethnic minorities in general, but feelings toward the Jews always seemed to jave the most negetive. The catholic church fortified its powerful position by exploiting these prejudices and critizing Jews and their faith (Fischer 262).

The process of Nazification began at once. Polish cities turned into German cities with new names, new street signs, and adorned with German Flags, slogans, and posters. All around them, Poles heard German being spoken. When people shopped for fuel or food, they had to make their requests in German or they might get denied service or sent to the back of the line. Groups of armed Nazis took charge of local governments. As they had elsew here, they created an atmosphere of fear and violence. Stuffhof concentration camp, for example, was set up in Poland on September 2, one day after the invasion began (Fest 28-30). The Nazis did not hesitate to try new killing methods on children.

In 1940, a group of 250 Romani children from Brno, Czechoslovakia, jad thaken from their familiers and sent to an extermination center in Germany. They had murdered with a gas called Ziclon B. Nazi scientists wanted to fest the efficiency of this new popson. A long with Jews, the Romani wjad targeted for destruction by the Nazis. These people, from two tribal groups called Roma and Sinti, had come to Europe from India in the 1300s, spreading both east and west. Like Jews, they had persecuted for centuries and banned from joining craftsmens guilds that would enable them to get jobs. To some people from the Nazis, Jews in Palestine organized sea voyages, conducted in secrecy. In Novenber 1939, a group of 1,500 German and Austrian refugees boarded one of these secret ships.

They had come by riverboat down the Danube River to the Blak Sea, where they boarded an oil tanker in Kladovo on the coast of Yugoslavia. Vichy leaders debated what type of Jewsh policy to enforce. Some wanted to pass laws against Jews and to deport those foreign-born. French Nazis wanted all Jews out of the country. At first the government allowed foreign Jews to leave. In 1941, on its own, the vichy governement passed anti-Jewish laws. It would later helped the Nazis round up Jews to and then deport them (Dallin 81-108). Jews in the ghettos suffered new hard ships early in 1941. During this time, the Nazis announced that ghetto residents must now give up all their coats and warm woolen garments to benefit German troops and civilians.

People in the ghettos had already suffered from the icy weather. Lacking coal and other fuel most had to chop furniture and destroy buildings for their fires. They stuffed their clothing with paper and rags. People of all ages freezed to death. Disease and starvation in the ghettos continued to claim lives, as did unsanitary conditions. With, no soap or hot water, people could not bathe, wash their hair, or clean their meager clothing. Toilets had been used beyond their limits and no longer worked; other plumbing equipment also broke down. Foul-smelling garbage piled up on the streets. The filth only increased the suffering of the Jews of the ghetto (Merkl 152-6).

The Nazis no longer bot hered to single out individuals or small groups for extermination; they massacred entire communities. After reaching a place where Jews lived, the Nazis told them they had to rounder up for resett lement. One firing-squad commander later described how Nazi treated Jews during these round-ups: They requested Jews to hand over their valuables to the leaders of the unit and shortly before the execution to surrender their outer clothing. The men, women, and children were led to a place of execution which in most cases found lacated next to a more deeply excavated… ditch. There they got shot, kneeling or standing, and the corpses thrown into a ditch.

During these massacres, the victims became usually machinegunned to death (Merkl 203-6). They got Killed either incide the huge pits or along the edges. Some though got buried alive. Some executions lasted for hours, other Einsatzgruppen Killen victims inside special vans that funcioned as moving gas chambers. People were locked inside and gas fumes piped in, causing death by a faithful process of suffocation. As spread about these vans, Jews began to hide when they spotted on the road. The cruelty and sadism of the execution tactics now reached oven more severe levels. An eyewitness later described the barbarism he witnessed in a region of the Soviet Union.

There, Jews got shot in trenches and sprayed with powdered lime, a caustic substance that burns flesh and causes bodies to decay. Row upon row of human beings got forced tolie on to of the dead so that they, too, could be shot. Childrens heads got beaten against stones. Many were still got burried alive (Michel 98-100). Crimes against persons can got grouped into five broad categories: (1) slave labor, (2) abise of prisoners of war, (3) torture and execution of hostages, (4) cruel and unusual medical experiments, and (5) organized atrocities. Once the possibility of a potracted confict had become reality, the Nazi leadership decided to wage an economic war as brutal as the military one they had been fighting (Neumann 93).

The use of forture in the Interrogations had almost a general rule the tortures usually applied beating, whipping, chaining Nazi for several days without a moment of rest for nourishment or hygienic care, immersion in ice wather, drowing in a bath tub, charging the bath weather with electricity, electrification of the most sensitive parts of the body, burns at certain places on the body and the pulling out of fingernails (Schoenberner 142). It took at least thirty minutes to extract the mass of bodies, which got glued together like pillars of basalt, still erect, not having any space to fall; legs were covered with faces and menstrual bloud. An other special crew, the tooth commandoes, sprang into action and extracted the fillings from the victims.

Such valuables got collected by Odilo Globocnik, one of the chief agents of Action Reinhard, as the gassimgs of the Jews now got called after the assassination of Reinhard Heydrich; Globocnik was responsible for roundingup the loot (money, gold, diamons, watches, and so on ) and sending it to the Deutsche Reichsbank (German Reichsbank). For purposes of identifucation, prisoners at all vamps had to display makings of diffrent colors on their uniforms, consisting of a serial number and a colored triangle. Prisoners were awakened at dawn and had to report to roll call, which mught last for hours. They were then ariven owt of work by Nazis with constant screams, insults, and harassment. Most was petty manual labor in quarries or btickyards, but at some of the larger camps like Auschwitz prisoners worked in a cement plan, a cole mine, a steel factory, a shoe factory, and in the I. G. Farben plant that produced synthetic rubber (Fest 231-3).

At all the camps, were inadequate and the food was bad; in the death camps, where the object was to work people to death, the aaily food allowance, usually given to prisoners after they returned from work, included a watered-down soup and a little bread, augmented by a little extra allowance of margarine, a slice of bad sausage, a piece of cheese, or a bit of honey of watery jam the Survival depended on the black Market and on sheer ingenuity (Michel 190-2). A Nazi agent was sent to spy on the peoples thoughts and behavior. Everyone in Germany-child youth, or adult-was touched somehow by the vast party network. Nazi propaganda, which had unrelentingly anti-Semitic, prepared theway for dividing the Jews from the rest of the population.

With his party in power, Minister of propaganda Goebbels had the means to barrage the public daily with complaints and threats against the Jews. The next step was open terror. For a whole week in March 1933, Jude verrecke!. Rang through the streets while storm troopers beat, robbed, and murdered Jews at will. The police, on orders, stuod by and watched. At railway station, SA bollies met each train, shouting in cadence, To hell with the Jews! Nazi thugs stormed into hospitals and courts, ousting Jewist doctors, lawyers, and judges. Then, on April 1, the Nazis sprang the first offocial governmental act against the Jews-a boycott. SS and SA men picketed Jewish stores, factories, and shops-keeping people from entering.

Across shop windows was smeared the word Jude. The Nazis intent was to cut off Jewish enterproses from their customers and suppliers, and thys face the owners to transfer their businesses-cheaply to non-Jews (Allen 163-184). The Nazi leaders took aduantage of the events to get rid of their rivals, the military leaders, once and for all. The Nazis first of all had the delight of seeing the military tear oach other into pieces (Neuman 341). Nazi leaders took over command ofthe armies. Himmler was pat in charge of the Home Army; at last the Nazis were going to be able to transform the aristocratic wehramacht into a peoples army, inspired the pure spirit of Nazism.

The first measure concerned potential deserters:theis families wowd beshot; an y soldier absent withowt leave wowd be executed. But even here it might be argued that these were the consequences of war and difficult to avoid. But in addition, the war allowed the Nazis to apply a system of coercicn with complete impanity, a system built up on ther dreams of power and the logical consequences of their racialist doctrines of vidence and inhumanity. Concentration camps were the old people, children, pregnant women, and mentaly ill people. Before being sent to gas chambers, the Jews had been covered with scorn, stripped off ther possessions and outlawed from Hitlers Germany because they represented the counter myth to the triumphs of Nazism (Fischer 173-179).

The Germans estimated that about 11 million Jews now remained under their control. Millons of these Jews lived in big cities, where the Killing squads could not operate in secreted. Top Nazi afficials now pondered more efficient, impersonal, and less costly methods of killing. The use of poison gas was discussed more and more frequently. Auschwitz commandant Rudolf Hss later say that, in the summer of 1941, Heinrich Himmler, the head of the SS, told him that Hitler had decided to use the labor camp at Auschwitz as the site for the mass destruction of European Jews. Hitler, he said, had given an order for a final solution of the Jewish question; Hss was assigned to work out the details.

To test new methods of killing gas, the Nazis constructed a special building at the camp in cheimno. Several hunderd Jews from small towns in that region were secretly killed there. That same summer, at Auschwistz-Birkenau the Nazis tested pellets of cynicle gas called Zyklon B, used to kill rats. The victims of this experiment were approximatery 250 hospital patients and 600 soviet prisoners of war. The Nazis now began turning several concentration camps into outright death camps (Dallin 89-94). There are forces at work in the wald which eat off human responce. They make it possible for people to commit terrible crimes withowt knowing or feeling they are doing wrong. The machine destraying inhuman object, the Jews.

They were doing their daty, it was said. They were the product of a totalitarian state. The shame and horror of our century have to do with the conduct of the European powers, the Gentile world. Even if not one Jew had resisted, there would be no justification either to condemn the victims or to devert attention from the crimes of the murderers. The central issue must not be forgotted. It is a moral issue, the issue of what the world has done and permitted to be done. To insist upon making the world uncomfortable with the memory of its guilt is a necessity for that moral reconstrucction which may alone prevent a repetition of the cruel horrors of the Nazis.

Another Salem Witch Trials

The Salem witchcraft trials of 1692, which resulted in 19 executions, and 150 accusations of witchcraft, are one of the historical events almost everyone has heard of. They began when three young girls, Betty Parris, Abigail Williams and Ann Putnam began to have hysterical fits, after being discovered engaging in forbidden fortune-telling (not dancing naked in the woods) to learn what sorts of men they would marry. Betty’s father, the Reverend Samuel Parris, called in more senior authorities to determine if the girls’ affliction was caused by witchcraft.

Although Betty was sent away airly soon, and did not participate in the trials, the other girls were joined by other young and mature women in staging public demonstrations of their affliction when in the presence of accused “witches. ” The events in Salem have been used as a theme in many literary works, including the play by Arthur Miller which we are going to read during this unit. They are interesting to anthropologists because they display some of the characteristics of “village” witchcraft and some of the features of the European witch craze.

Many commentators have seen the Salem witch craze as the last outbreak of he European witch craze, transported to North America. As in African and New Guinea villages, the original accusations in Salem were made against people who, in one way or another, the accusers had reason to fear or resent. Moreover, the first few of the accused fit the definition of “marginal” persons, likely to arouse suspicion. However, as in Europe, the accusations spread, and came to encompass people not involved in any of Salem’s local grudges.

As in Europe there was a belief that the accused were in league with the Devil and “experts” employed “scientific” ways of diagnosing itchcraft. Interestingly, during the colonial period in Africa, shortly after World War II, there were a number of witch finding movements in Africa, which resembled the Salem episode in some ways, and had a similar status “in between” the sort of witch hunt found in Europe and the typical African pattern. Typically, in these movements, “witch finders” would come in from outside a village and claim to be able to rid the village of witchcraft.

At this period there was great dislocation, with people moving around because of government employment, appropriation of farmland, and other causes. Some people were improving their economic status as a result of these changes, and some were doing much worse than before. Whereas in the past everyone in a locality had followed the same religion, people were now exposed to Christianity and the local religions of people who had moved to their region, or whose regions they had moved to. In the cities of central and southern Africa, many local religions and Christian sects could be found, as well as Islam.

Belief in witchcraft tended to unite people across religious differences. Typically, the names brought to witch finders were those of the ame sort of local enemies we have become familiar with in reading about the Azande. As the frenzy increased, people began to be accused who had not aroused any particular jealousies, possibly because they possessed a peculiar bag or horn, which might be said to contain “medicine” – in one reported case, such a container did indeed contain “medicine” but ordinary physical medicine, not magical substances.

These crazes tended to die down, often after considerable conflict and property damage, and the witch finders would then move on to the next town. As witchcraft accusations still ccur in the area, we can conclude that the movements did not get rid of witches forever, nor, unlike the situation Salem or Europe, did belief in witchcraft itself actually end with the witch crazes. The actual execution of witches was not usually a feature in African witchcraft, so there was probably less to repent in the end, though there was certainly social disruption and property damage.

Despite these differences, these African witch movements are evidence that events like the Salem witch trials, where village witchcraft accusations blossom into something larger, while still remaining relatively ocalized, have happened elsewhere under particular social conditions. These social conditions include fairly rapid social change, a distrusted outside political authority (the British government in Africa, Salem town council in Salem village), and new opportunities for betterment which are not evenly distributed throughout the population, causing increased social inequality.

There have been three basic approaches taken to the analysis of the Salem witch trials. Scholars have sought psychological and biological explanations for the symptoms displayed by the bewitched girls. Sexual repression in Puritan New England, the low status of women, especially young women, in the community, and lack of opportunity for any sort of entertainment are among the psychological explanations which have been offered. “Group psychology,” or the tendency for out of control behaviours to spread in crowds, has also been mentioned. Various dietary deficiencies at the end of a New England winter have also been blamed for the symptoms.

My colleague, Anne Zeller, has written an excellent article suggesting that the diet of Salem villagers at that time might well have led to alcium deficiency, which is known to cause spasms and “hysterical” states. It has also been suggested that some of the “spectral evidence” (claims to have been visited or actually sat upon, choked, etc. by the “spectres” of accused witches) might have been the result of a condition known as sleep paralysis. (Click here to visit a site maintained by a University of Waterloo psychology professor, in which sleep paralysis is compared to both beliefs in demons and beliefs in alien invasion.

While some of these psychological and biochemical factors were undoubtedly present, we eed to look further to explain why the symptoms were interpreted in the precise way they were, why so many people were accused and convicted, and why certain people were accused and not others. The reasons why “witchcraft” was blamed for the symptoms, rather than psychological disturbance, physical illness, or even religious conversion (the experience of receiving Christ and being saved) have often been sought in the theology of the Puritan inhabitants of Salem.

Another generation of New England Puritans, a little over fifty years later, did interpret a similar outbreak of spasms and ysterias in young girls as “salvation,” an event which led to The Great Awakening, a series of mass conversion experiences throughout New England. A core belief held by New England Puritans, which may have led to both interpersonal suspicion and conceptions of a secret world, hidden from living humans, was the notion of predestination, the belief that God had already determined who was to be saved and who was to be damned.

As He had not made his choices known, however, believers had to rely on clues as to who was among the elect, the souls destined for salvation. Only these people could become full church members and receive communion. Adherence to strict codes of conduct was necessary, but not sufficient, evidence of salvation. A “feeling” of being saved, and, above all, the ability to convince others of one’s status, were important. To some degree, wealth and status in the community counted as evidence of salvation, but there were relatively poor church members and relatively rich non-members.

Whether a member or not, everyone was expected to attend Sunday meeting, and failure to do so, as we shall see in The Crucible, could count against one if one were accused of witchcraft. Both church members and non-members were accused and convicted of witchcraft. Indeed, a sincere church member would be most likely to have difficulty issuing a false confession to save his or her life, since to lie was evidence (at least to oneself) that one might not, after all, be saved.

For a true believer, a decision to make a false confession might really appear to be sacrificing a hope of eternal life for a few extra years of life on earth. During the century after the Salem witch trials, the New England Congregationalist church struggled to reconcile the notion of predestination with a culture which placed strong emphasis on individual mbition and responsibility. (I notice, by the way, that many Distance Education students have indicated on the Web Board that you blame yourselves for your own misfortunes — that is a very modern notion, which was just in the process of being born in 1692.

The experience of being converted, or born again, began to be actively sought and to become the main requirement for church membership, though one was expected to verify the conversion experience by living a virtuous life. The Great Awakening, referred to above, was one of the evidences of this new opportunity for ndividuals to actively seek evidence of salvation, but even then there was dispute as to how open church membership should be.

Jonathan Edwards, the minister who diagnosed the Northampton, Massachusetts girls as being visited by divine spirit, rather than bewitched, eventually was dismissed from his pulpit for insisting that only those who had experienced conversion, and not those who simply awaited it with sincerity, might take communion. Early in the eighteenth century, Cotton Mather, a rather complex Massachusetts theologian, who, during his life, both wrote a manual for the rosecution of witches, which was used in the Salem trials, and encouraged smallpox vaccination in Massachusetts, prepared advice for those who wished to be saved.

You may read that advice at this website. Mather placed great emphasis on fear of God and an acute sense of one’s own sinfulness – only by feeling truly bad could one have hope of avoiding damnation. In a world where God was seen as giving clues, at best, to His intentions, it was also credible that another secret force was at work: God’s enemy, the Devil. Witchcraft confessions were incomplete ithout reference to attendance at secret meetings to worship Satan, and acknowledgments that oneself and others had signed documents enrolling in Satan’s service.

Belief in a secret world, where the forces of good warred with the forces of evil, both acting out of human sight, prompted a search for visible “clues” that some people were involved in a Satanic plot. This search might be seen as a kind of negative mirror of the search for clues that one was saved. Cotton Mather’s guide to the prosecution of witches described some of these clues, including ones familiar to us from the film The Burning Times. They included strange marks on the body (e. g. birthmarks, and extra nipples, which many women have, and which were considered “witches’ teats” used to suckle demons).

More controversial was “spectral evidence. ” The afflicted girls and some male witnesses said that they saw “spectres” (normally invisible spirits) of the accused, either in the courtroom or at other times, and that these “spectres” choked them, frightened them, and otherwise tormented them. No doubt some of those who confessed, and were spared, were able to justify confessing on the ground that their pectres might have done things of which they were not aware, rather like confessing Azande witches who say that mangu may have acted without their knowledge.

Although some authorities, including Increase Mather, Cotton Mather’s father, were dubious about the use of spectral evidence, the fact that it was used is evidence of how deep was the belief among Salem residents in an unseen world, peopled by malign forces. A belief in an ongoing battle between the forces of good and the forces of evil can quickly become an excuse for scapegoating in times of real or perceived crisis. And demons need not always be spirits.

As we shall see, Arthur Miller’s play, The Crucible, uses the Salem witch trials as a metaphor for the obsession, in the U. S. during the 1950s, with a vast, hidden communist conspiracy, threatening all that was good in America. This excursion into theology, I hope, helps to explain why the girls’ symptoms were interpreted as they were, and why certain kinds of evidence were used at the trial. To understand why certain people were accused and certain others accused them, we require an analysis in terms of social relationships, just as we did in the case of the Azande.

The selection in your text, from a well-known book on Salem, Salem Possessed, attempts to explain the witch craze primarily in sociological, political and economic terms, though it does not neglect psychology or theology. Boyer and Nissenbaum suggest that Salem was in a state of some flux at the time of the witch trials. Several ministers had left Salem as a result of factionalism in the village. The minister in 1692, Samuel Parris, was involved in several disputes over his salary, his supply of firewood, and the ownership of his house, among other things.

Boyer and Nissenbaum believe that the core of the trouble was ension between Salem town, the larger entity of which Salem village was a part, and the village of Salem. Salem town, which was a prosperous seaport, received taxes from the residents of Salem village and until 1689, the year Parris was appointed, controlled the “Church” in the sense of those covenanted members who had been saved. Until then, although some Church members lived in Salem village, one could only become a covenanted member and receive communion through the Salem town church.

Salem village had been given permission to build a meeting house because of the nconvenience of travelling several miles to meeting, but the local committee which hired Salem village ministers did not really have legitimacy. It was simply a committee of townsmen, with shifting membership, rather than the group of covenanted elders who would normally have the authority to elect a minister. Salem village had repeatedly asked for permission to form its own “Church” in the proper sense, but been denied.

This meant the status of Salem village’s minister was never secure. This, along with town factionalism, may have accounted for the fact that several ministers before Parris had either been dismissed or left voluntarily when they saw the hopelessness of their situation. One of them, George Burroughs, was called back to be executed as a witch. Although Salem Village finally obtained a covenanted Church in 1689, which hired Parris as its first minister, the tensions and factionalism of the preceding period did not disappear overnight.

Authority was further compromised by the fact that there had recently been a bloodless revolution in England, and the king had been deposed, leaving weakened authority in that quarter. Moreover, the Governor was away fighting Indians during much of the furor, giving the judges more power than they otherwise would have had. The trials, in fact, were stopped shortly after the Governor’s return. In general, Boyer and Nissenbaum argue, Salem town was richer than Salem village. Salem village was particularly pressed for land, being hemmed in on all sides.

Salem town also was more open to the outside influences one would expect in a wealthy seaport, while Salem village was more strictly agrarian. The Puritan religion forbade most forms of entertainment, but Boyer and Nissenbaum uggest that Salem town offered more possibilities than Salem village. One of the earliest people to be accused (and ultimately hanged) was Bridget Bishop, who ran an unlicenced cider-shop in her home in Salem village. Boyer and Nissenbaum argue that there were personal enmities, based on land ownership and inheritance, in Salem village and neighbouring towns.

There was also general potential for schism between those parts of the village near to Salem town and those further away from it. The authors note that most of the accused witches lived in the Salem town side of the village, and most of the ccusers lived in the side of the village further from the town. The meeting house was in the part of the village where most of the accusers lived. Those who accused their neighbours tended to be supporters of Rev. Parris. The accused and their relatives and supporters tended to belong to the faction that opposed Parris.

In general, the opposition to Parris represented the better-off residents. The anti-Parris faction clustered around Israel Porter, a member of Salem town church, and the pro-Parris faction centered around Thomas Putnam, Jr. , whose daughter was one of the afflicted girls nd whose wife was one of the other accusers. Thomas Putnam believed that he had been cheated out of his inheritance by Joseph Putnam, his half brother, who had connections to the Porters, and who was the child of Thomas Putnam Sr. ‘s second marriage to a woman in Salem town.

Elisabeth and Thomas Very were related to Thomas Putnam Jr. ‘s stepmother, Mary Very, whom he probably blamed for his father’s will. On the chart on p. 268 you can see some of the links between the accused. Boyer and Nissnbaum suggest that it would have been unremarkable, at the time, for the first three ho were denounced, including a rather bad-tempered beggar, Sarah Good, and the Parris’s West Indian slave, Tituba, to be the target of accusations (Tituba confessed and survived. ) Such marginal individuals frequently become scapegoats for social tensions.

What they believe needs explanation was the way in which the witchcraft accusations spread, so that many respectable people were accused and hanged, including a former minister of the village, George Burroughs. This is what takes the Salem witchcraft episode beyond the range of the Azande-type pattern, though it never achieved he scope of the European witchcraft trials. Boyer and Nissenbaum suggest that Parris used the theological assumption of a hidden battle between good and evil to force villagers to take sides between himself (whom he identified as on the side of God) and those who opposed him (whom he identified with the Devil).

The witchcraft craze in Salem began when Parris’s daughter Betty, his relative and ward Abigail Williams, and his slave Tituba, were found to be using magical practices to predict the fortunes, particularly the marriages, of Betty, Abigail, Ann Putnam Jr. and a number of other girls in the community. Because they were practicing magic, these people could all have been accused of witchcraft themselves, or they could have been seen as wayward women and children and punished accordingly, or simply ignored.

That only Tituba was accused, while the others became accusers of many of Parris’s enemies, proved to be very opportunistic for him. As the town minister it was Parris, of course, who first had to make the decision to treat the strange symptoms of Betty and Abigail as bewitchment and call in the relevant experts. Boyer and Nissenbaum make the relevant point that although many respectable people were tried nd convicted, the leaders of the anti-Parris faction, who were among the politically and economically strongest men in the village, were not accused, though their friends, wives and kin were.

Moreover, what finally stopped the witchcraft craze was its spread beyond Salem, so that important people in Boston, the capital of Massachusetts Bay Colony began to be accused. Even Cotton Mather himself was named at one point, though he was never formally charged. It should remembered that Increase Mather, along with Judge Sewall, one of the trial judges, began to question spectral evidence. At any rate, when the Governor’s wife was accused, the Governor called an end to the trial. Eventually, everyone who was still in jail was released, and some compensation was paid to the survivors.

Parris was removed from his pulpit some years later, and replaced with a man whom Boyer and Nissenbaum (elsewhere in their book) characterize as more interested in hunting and fishing than in seeking out evidences of the Devil’s work. He also established a school and a charitable organization in the town, to take charge of two elements of the population who had been heavily involved in the tart of the trials, as accusers and the earliest accused: young people and beggars. The Salem witch trials represent an instance of theology being wed to politics, with tragic results.

In the play, The Crucible, Arthur Miller uses the trials to draw attention to a secular theology of fear (substitute “Communism” for “Satan”) which he believed was involved in a similar marriage in 1950s America. Before reading my comments on the play, you ought (if you have not done so already) to visit this website, where the liberties which Miller has taken with the play are spelled out.

Apart from the hanges which obviously are made for theatrical convenience (giving Ann Putnam, Jr. different name from her mother, reducing the number of locales, and therefore the number of required stage settings), Miller’s alterations tell us something about the nature of recent “witch hunts,” as compared with those of the 17th Century. Senator Joseph McCarthy, who gave his name to an era, led the U. S. House Un-American Activities Committee in seeking out real and imagined Communists, who were widely believed to be infiltrating the U. S. government, spying and spreading propaganda on behalf of the Soviet Union. Because of this fear of propaganda, the media and entertainment industries were also subject to scrutiny.

Indeed, many people who worked in these industries, including Miller himself, did have left-wing sympathies, but it is unlikely in the extreme that many (or any) of them were actively working for the Soviet Union. People suspected of Communist sympathies were summoned to testify in front of the House of Representatives Committee, and asked to name any “accomplices” who had ever been members of the Communist party or “Communist front” organizations. The penalty for not confessing and aming one’s associates could be anything from arrest to “blacklisting. ”

Pressure was put on publishers, film studios, etc. ot to allow suspected “Communists” to work. If you visit this website, you will find a list of writers who had to work under false names in order to write for the movies during this period, along with the movies for which they have only recently been given credit. It might be added that similar, though less extreme, pressure was brought to bear on people with left-wing sympathies elsewhere in the “free world,” including Canada. To be fair, much more deadly and xtensive purges of people suspected of anti-Communist sympathies were being conducted in the Soviet Union, and these too can be profitably compared to witch hunts.

Arthur Miller himself, already a famous playwright, was at least partly blacklisted until he proved that he was a “normal” American male by marrying Marilyn Monroe! This fact is symptomatic of another aspect of McCarthy era America, one which undoubtedly influenced some of the changes Miller made to the historical record. The 1950s were the era of Leave it To Beaver (a television show whose passing our own Mike Harris recently mourned! ). It was a time when women were being encouraged to return to the kitchen, after being encouraged to leave it during the war years.

Recently returned soldiers scrambled to acquire an education under the G. I. Bill, which paid their tuition, and to buy houses in the new suburbs growing up all over North America, and to get jobs in a rapidly expanding economy to support large families, and buy unprecedented quantities of cars and household appliances. Deviation from such “family values” made one suspect. For a time, “homosexual” was a word that was almost synonymous with “Communist” in the United States. Moreover, Jewish intellectuals like Miller were automatically suspect, and Miller’s history of divorces would also have stood against him.

I believe it was this emphasis on sexual conformity during the McCarthy era that led Miller to exaggerate the sexual aspects of the Salem story, changing the ages of some of the characters to make sexual interpretations more credible. Sexual innuendoes were certainly not absent in Salem, but sexual politics were certainly bubbling closer to the surface during the McCarthy era, to boil over a decade later, in the so-called “sexual revolution. ” Recent politics in he U. S. teach us that sexuality is still a lodestar for political suspicion in the U. S.. To each age its own demons! The other theme which is very important to Miller, and concerning which he alters the record somewhat, is the pressure on accused witches to confess.

Certainly, the accused could save their lives by confessing, just as writers, actors and civil servants in the 50s could try to save their careers by confessing and naming others. Of course, in both cases, they paid a price, other than that exacted by their consciences – many of their friends no longer trusted them. This was likely to be a more acute problem in the U. S. since the people who were named by those who cooperated with the Committee weren’t hanged and put out of the way, just fired and left to try to lead the resistance to McCarthyism. Namers of names sometimes found themselves with no friends at all, since anti-Communists often still failed to trust them. The issue of resisting collaboration with the witch hunters was important enough to Miller that he altered history, and portrayed the trials as stopping when more people refused to confess when, in fact, a significant increase in confessions probably erved to cast some doubt on the validity of individual confessions.

Taking liberties with the text is one of the characteristics of the interaction between humans and their myths. And a charter myth is certainly what the witch hunts in Europe and Salem have become, though they have more basis in fact than most myths. The stories of the witch hunts are charter myths for our time, to be told by feminists, left-wing intellectuals, and lawyers for President Clinton, each taking what he or she needs from the story, adding or subtracting as seems fit.

Aaron Burr Treason Trial

The early 1800’s were an unusual time in the history of the United States. A country in its infancy, growing, turbulent, and filled with intrigue where political and economic fortunes were made and lost overnight. While the country was founded on noble ideas—and no doubt these powerful ideas were taken seriously—how such ideas were to be put into practice created fertile ground for personal ambition and interest to be a stronger motivator than the “common good”.

In fact, at times it appears that the ideas were little more than vehicles for the personal ambitions—and in the case of this story—the personal vendettas of powerful personalities. Aaron Burr, brilliant, ambitious, and a great orator, was certainly larger than life. And his battles with Thomas Jefferson—no less a dramatic figure—lead finally to his trial for treason against the United States.

This trial was the culmination of a personal political battle between two great figures where Jefferson would stop at nothing to destroy Burr…even if it meant abusing the principles that he himself help enshrine as the basis for the United States. This trial, and the preceding events, are the subject of this paper. Reviewing the facts illustrates that the trial was really more about a vendetta between Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr than the law. Aaron Burr was born in 1756 and was one of the rising stars of the new republic.

A rising star many felt was sure to be the President of the young country and to be a distinguished one at that. Burr’s conflict with Jefferson began when they tied for the presidential election of 1800. The election then went to the House of Representatives where Burr rejected Federalist overtures for a coalition, but did not publicly support giving the Presidency to Jefferson. Burr felt that an election should not be won through coalitions and he was especially bitter about the idea of working with the Federalists.

Burr, arrogant, confident and trusting in the ‘rightness’ of his position, made no effort to persuade congress to his side. On the other hand, Jefferson quickly established deals with many of the Federalist congressmen to insure their votes and consequently won the presidency. During several depositions following the election it became very clear to the public that Jefferson had worked with the Federalists in order to secure the election. A founder and the leader of the Republicans had, in the end, sided with the opposition in order to insure his own presidential victory.

This political maneuvering to ensure his election made Jefferson look opportunistic and self-serving, and left an enduring black spot on his reputation that was never removed. Jefferson directly blamed Burr, and he would distrust and despise Burr for the rest of his life. A close friend of Jefferson even declared, “that this fixed the destiny of Colonel Burr… Mr. Jefferson’s malignity toward Colonel Burr never ceased but with his last breathe. ” In the end, the election concluded with Jefferson as President and Burr as Vice President.

Their personal enmity only grew worse while they were forced to work together in the White House. Jefferson finally ousted Burr from the Republican ticket during his reelection. After this Burr would attempt to run for the governorship of New York, but through clever planning by Alexander Hamilton he would lose this election. This would result in the infamous dual of honor between Burr and Hamilton, in which Hamilton was fatally shot by Burr. Wanted for murder in two states, Burr would then be forced to flee to the west. Thus began the final chapter of his ambitious career.

Burr was almost fifty when he arrived in the West for the first time. He was amazed by the amount of untamed land and openness of the western plains, but was most impressed by the incredible isolation . His natural charm and great oratorical skill would serve him well in this untamed land. His uncanny ability to sway small and large groups alike–in an land where outsized ideas and ambitions seemed the order of the day–would aid him on the road ahead. Burr came west with no clear idea what to do. He thought he might simply rebuild his legal career, speculate in land, and seek public office.

Or possibly construct a canal around the Falls of the Ohio. But such ideas didn’t quite fit with a man who had been so close to the Presidency of the Republic. It is not known exactly where the idea for a conspiracy came from, but on April 29, 1805 Burr unveiled his plan to lead a revolution in Mexico (still a colony of Spain) over dinner with Herman Blennerhassett. Blennerhassett was a rich landowner who lived on a 300-acre island on the Ohio River and Burr realized that for this plan to succeed it would require a great deal of money, men and other resources .

But Blennerhassett wasn’t much for grand foreign adventures and Burr eventually settled on a strategy of swindling Britain and Spain into giving him the money and the troops he needed to revolutionize Mexico. This was difficult from the start, especially since the Spaniards controlled Mexico at the time. Burr’s plan was to lie to both Britain and Spain, telling them he was trying to tear the United States in half, east from west. But instead of breaking up the country he intended instead to use the money and troops from Spain and Britain to invade Mexico.

He outlined the first part of his strategy in a letter to Anthony Merry, the British minister to the US, and Don Carlos Yrujo, the Spanish minister to the US on January 1st, 1806. This letter eventually ended up in the hands of president Jefferson, and would become an important part of the prosecution’s case against Burr in his trial for treason. Burr maintained that he never had any intention of committing treason—it was simply a ruse against two countries that were not particularly popular in the US at that time.

Since it was well known at that time that to commit treason you had to actually commit an overt act of treason, not only plan one, Burr claimed (later) that his strategy was a reasonable one. Burr’s grand plan began to fail when he realized he could not obtain the funds he required without the help of both Yrujo and Merry. Both ministers had, unknown to Burr, discovered his true intentions. This left Burr desperate for funds and with nowhere else to turn except the east coast of the United States (where he was still wanted for murder…though nobody seemed particularly interested in prosecuting him).

Shortly after his arrival rumors began to spread that Burr was trying to split the East from the West. Jefferson, having received a letter about Burr’s offer to Yrujo and Merry, quickly made a public announcement declaring that he had learned of a conspiracy to split the country and that everyone associated with it should distance themselves as soon as possible (though he never mentioned Burr’s name). Within several days the conspiracy was shattered. Three months later, on January 22nd, 1806, President Jefferson issued a special message to congress saying, “Aaron Burr was the ‘arch conspirator’ in a treasonous enterprise to divide the nation.

Although Jefferson gave no evidence at this time, Burr’s reputation was ruined and public sentiment would be against him for the rest of his life. There were several important conspirators who helped Burr with his plan. The most important, and a key witness later in the trial against Burr, was General James Wilkinson. General Wilkinson was a corrupt and selfish politician who was always willing to sell himself to the highest bidder. In 1787 Wilkinson swore allegiance to the Spanish crown in order to get the exclusive privilege to sell Kentucky produce in the metropolis of Louisiana.

He would later try to separate Kentucky from Virginia, with the idea that upon achieving statehood Kentucky would not join the United States, but would be left free to make plans with its Spanish neighbors. This incident is known as the Spanish Conspiracy and it only becomes more incriminating when it was discovered that Wilkinson was receiving $2,000 a year from the Spanish government. After this Wilkinson would join the army and after only eight years, become the ranking general. At this point the Spanish government was paying him $16,000 for his “services”.

It may be that the corrupt Wilkinson was the only real traitor in this story…but he hadn’t made Thomas Jefferson his personal enemy. Wilkinson’s role in Burr’s plan was to lead Burr’s army of mercenaries against Mexico. In exchange, Burr would help Wilkinson become governor of the Louisiana territory (which he did) and compensate him with lands gained from Mexico. When Burr’s plan was uncovered, and Wilkinson learned that President Jefferson had heard of the plot, he quickly wrote Jefferson a letter admitting everything hoping to gain indemnity in exchange for testifying against Burr.

Jefferson first heard about Burr’s plan on December 1st, 1805. But for a full year he did nothing. This has led many historians to believe that Jefferson may have been involved in a plot to actually frame Burr. It wasn’t until Jefferson received a letter from the postmaster general on October 16th, 1806, (stating that Burr’s plan was to split the country) that Jefferson made the announcement warning people to distance themselves from the conspiracy. Jefferson hoped that in making a moderate proclamation, and that by not mentioning Burr directly, that he could trap Burr in a more overt act of treason that could be better prosecuted.

However by January 22nd, 1807, Jefferson felt that he had gathered suitable evidence to convict Burr and he delivered his message to congress accusing Burr of being the ‘arch-conspirator’ in a Western plot. John Randolph, a congressman, was outraged after hearing Jefferson’s proclamation against Burr and ordered Jefferson to provide evidence for his serious accusations. Jefferson provided several letters that he claimed were all written by General Wilkinson (although, in fact, some weren’t). The letters mentioned both a plot to split the West from the East and Burr’s intentions to invade Mexico. Congress was convinced.

Three months later on March 30th, 1807, Burr was arrested in Richmond, Virginia, on several charges. The first charge was the misdemeanor of having set forth on an expedition against the dominions of the King of Spain. The second charge was treason for having assembled an armed force for the purpose of seizing the city of New Orleans, revolutionizing Orleans Territory, and separating the Western from the Atlantic states. The warrant for his arrest was written and delivered by Chief Justice John Marshall, who was also a leading citizen of Richmond. Burr went peacefully into custody and awaited the beginning of his trial.

Since he was arrested in the jurisdiction of the Chief Justice it was decided that Marshall would preside over the case. This would have a profound effect on the case. Prosecuting Burr was U. S. Attorney George Hay, a decent lawyer but nothing compared to the brilliant legal minds of the defense. Luckily for Hay however, he received daily letters from Jefferson ( a brilliant lawyer) offering legal advice. Eventually, Jefferson began to dictate the legal strategies of the defense (certainly a questionable action from the Chief Executive). The prosecution planned to convict Burr by using a precedent established in a previous trial.

That precedent established that if a treasonous act is in fact committed all persons involved, no matter how small their involvement, are guilty of treason. They planned to show that a group of fifty or so men assembled on Blennerhassett island for a treasonable purpose, and that although Burr wasn’t present at the time, his involvement in the scheme made him guilty of treason. The prosecution was aided by the patently illegal actions of President Jefferson, who at this point was sending blank pardons to Hay and authorizing him to pardon anyone involved in the conspiracy if they would testify against Burr.

The defense was made up of Burr himself, Edmund Randolph, John Wickham, and Luther Martin. These men were four of the best lawyers in the country and were all united in one thing, their hatred of President Jefferson. Their legal strategy was to depict Burr as the victim of a Presidential administration that had pursued him relentlessly and that had repeatedly violated his civil rights. Burr also made a request for a subpoena to require Jefferson to deliver several documents, including Jefferson’s correspondence with Wilkinson.

The court supported Burr’s request and this created a power clash between the judicial and executive branches. How should the independence of the president be balanced against the rights of an accused to obtain evidence? In the end, however, Jefferson submitted the documents, although he made it very clear that he was only doing so because he deemed the documents did not compromise national security. The trial finally began after a Grand jury indicted Burr on both charges. It took ninety-six prospective jurors before twelve suitable ones could be found.

This was because most admitted to a bias against the defendant. The prosecution had indicated they intended to call a large number of witnesses. However, few were actually allowed to testify in court because of objections by the defense or rulings by judge Marshall. For instance, testimony from William Eaton was never allowed because the defense forced him to admit that the government had recently settled a long standing claim for $10,000 which the government only agreed to pay when Eaton agreed to testify. Others were disallowed because of the pardons given to them by Jefferson.

Certainly the zeal of the prosecution, driven directly by the President, didn’t help their case. Burr and his colleagues argued two major points. First, no act of treason had ever occurred. Since the definition of treason in the constitution requires an overt act of war against the country and since no act of war was committed then no act of treason existed. Second, arguing against the earlier precedent, since Burr was not even present when the supposed act of treason took place, he clearly could not be guilty. Several days later on Monday, August 31, 1807, Marshall carefully and meticulously delivered a three-hour decision.

He ruled that contrary to a previous opinion, actual presence at the island was essential for proof of an overt act; “To advise or procure treason… is not treason in itself. ” The next day the case went to the jury, which ruled “ We of the jury say that Aaron Burr is not proved to be guilty under this indictment by any evidence submitted to us. We therefore find him not guilty. ” Jefferson was so outraged by the ruling that he threatened to impeach Marshall, and even took it to congress, but congress never brought the impeachment to a vote. History has made its assessment.

Jefferson’s personal hatred of Burr defiantly drove him to inappropriately pursue, and even illegally conspire to convict, a political opponent. Normally a brilliant and capable lawyer, based on the same facts he never would have brought a case of treason against an unknown man. Moreover, had he not known Burr he would never have let himself get as involved, preferring to let justice take its course. Under the influence of his patriotism, Jefferson may have believed that writing a letter planning treason was treason but more likely he simply wanted to destroy Burr.

Clearly, Jefferson let his own bias and vindictiveness drive his behavior and in so doing violated the very thing he tried so hard to protect, the Constitution. While he didn’t succeed in getting Burr convicted he did accomplish the driving objective. After the trial Burr was so hated by the public that he was almost lynched in the streets and was forced to flee America in a disguise to Europe where he stayed for four years in complete poverty. When he finally returned to United States his daughter and young grandson died at sea.

On his deathbed in 1836 a friend asked Burr if he had ever intended to separate the West from the Union. Burr responded, “NO! I would as soon have thought of taking possession of the moon and informing my friends that I intended to divide it among them. ” Still, as an example of how politicians use speech filled with noble sentiments to pursue the basest of political aims, the trial of Aaron Burr remains relevant. Those shocked by the self serving behavior during our last presidential election—lamenting the passing of more dignified times—may, by studying history, find that things really haven’t changed that much at all.

Five Important Events of the 1960s

During the 1960s the world was hit with four different assassinations of some of the leaders in the world who were out to change the way things were. Although some disagreed to the changes that they were trying to do and even threatened them, they still continued to pursue their idea of change. Ngo Dinh Diem became the first president of South Vietnam in 1956 he was a catholic who opposed Communism and sought for an independent Vietnam while it was under French power.

Although he was viewed as brutal, corrupt, and prejudice against non-Catholics and Buddhists, he did however help make Vietnam an independent country from France and help prevent Communist rule over all of Vietnam. In 1933 Ngo Dinh Diem was appointed Minister of the Interior by Emperor Bao Dai, at the same time during the 1930s Ngo Dinh Diem began to disapprove of the French rule over Vietnam. He decided to leave the government and follow the many Vietnamese nationalists who were also against French rule.

In 1950 he left Vietnam and headed for the U. S. fter Vietnam had fallen under rule of Viet Minh in August of 1945, seeing Communism as a threat to his values as a Catholic and to an independent Vietnam. President Dwight D. Eisenhowers administration fearing Communist takeovers in Southeast Asia saw Ngo Dinh Diem as a Vietnamese nationalist capable of overturning Communist Viet Minh. In 1954 Viet Minh defeated the French and he won control of Northern Vietnam, thus splitting the country in half. Southern Vietnam remained under the control of Emperor Bao Dai, who was supported by the U. S. greatly.

The U. S. appointed Ngo Dinh Diem as Prime Minister under Bao Dai. In 1956 elections were held in South Vietnam and Ngo Dinh Diem was elected the first president of the newly established Republic of Vietnam (South Vietnam). The U. S. military was sent into South Vietnam to form and train an army for the republic, thus becoming the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN). While Ngo Dinh Diem was president he forcibly moved peasants and rural villagers from their homes and put them into controlled settlements in order to suppress Communist activities.

He also drafted all males from the villages into the ARVN. As a result of his acts a group called the National Liberation Front (NLF) was formed in order to overthrow his power as president. Ngo Dinh Diem was also prejudice against non-Catholics and extremely prejudice against the Buddhists, and often denied them of positions in the government. He would also give government positions to his family, such as his brother Ngo Dinh Nhu who headed up the National Police.

Ngo Dinh Nhu was a gangster, and often trafficked drugs and promoted prostitution. In May 1963, Buddhists formed large demonstrations against Ngo Dinh Diem. During one of these demonstrations the National Police killed 9 people, in protest against the killings Buddhist monks set themselves on fire, and burned themselves to death. After the killings and after the protests of the Buddhist burnings, Ngo Dinh Diem lost his U. S. support and viewed him as an embarrassment to the U. S. also that his government was brutal and corrupt.

On November 2, 1963 a group of ARVN generals took over Ngo Dinh Diem government and with the USs support, assassinated Ngo Dinh Diem and his brother Ngo Dinh Nhu. The major effect of Ngo Dinh Diems assassination was that it led North Vietnam to its victory over South Vietnam because of political confusion caused by the assassination during the Vietnam War. It also led to the expansion of the NLF, which aided the North Vietnamese in over throwing the South Vietnamese government during the Vietnam War.

John Fitzgerald Kennedy was elected president in 1961 he became the youngest person ever to be elected president. Although his presidency was cut short and he only got to serve 3 years, he was one of Americas greatest presidents. During his presidency he influenced the world, young people looked up to him, brought back old traditions of the United States government, fought for the equal rights of all humans despite their racial background and the color of their skin. He also prevented a Nuclear War and possibly World War III from developing during the Cuban missile crisis.

In a speak he said Let the word go forth from this time and place to friend and foe alike, that the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americansborn in this century, tempered by war, disciplined by a hard and bitter peace, proud of our ancient heritageand unwilling to witness or permit the slow undoing of those human rights to which this nation has always been committed and to which we are committed today at home and around the world. He was committed to changing this country and influencing the world to change for the better that no human rights shall be denied to anyone.

Were he called for a new world of law, where the strong are just and the weak secure and the peace preserved. He realized that this was going to be a hard thing to do, and that he wouldnt be president to carryout but he still new he had to start it and he announced that too. He said All this will not be finished in the first 100 days, nor will it be finished in the first 1000 days, nor in the life of this administration, nor even perhaps in our lifetime on this planet. But let us begin. Then on November 22, 1963 tragedy struck the U. S. and the world.

President Kennedy and Mrs. Kennedy were in Dallas, Texas riding in a open convertible on the way to have lunch with Texas Governor John Connally and Connallys wife who were riding with them in the convertible. Out of nowhere two shots were fired rapidly at the president, he was hit in the neck, where the bullet then hit Governor Connally in the back, the second bullet hit the president directly in the head. John Kennedy was rushed to the hospital but never gained consciousness, at 1:00PM he was declared dead.

On the 24th of November, John F. Kennedys body was carried through the streets of Washington D. C. as more then 1 million people watched as it passed by. At Kennedys funeral in Arlington National Cemetery hundreds of thousands of people including representatives of 92 different nations. On President Kennedys grave marker was an eternal flame, which will burn forever in memorial of him. The assassin was Lee Harvey Oswald, who worked in the warehouse where the shots had been fired from a window on the sixth floor. While he was being transferred to a different jail, Jack Ruby a nightclub owner in Dallas shot and killed Oswald.

The major effect of John F. Kennedys assassination came two hours after President Kennedy was pronounced dead, Vice President Lyndon Baines Johnson was sworn in as president. Lyndon B. Johnson was said to be a masterful politician. He fought a way against poverty though out the United States. On his State of the Union address, on January 8, 1964, He said his office today, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in America, and I urge this Congress and all Americans to join with me in that effort. To do so he created programs to help the poor like Neighborhood Health Care Facilities.

Also during his presidency Medi-care and Medi-aid were created to help the elderly and the poor. The most profound effect of John F. Kennedys assassination will never be known, for we will never know what changes might have occurred, or effects that he might have had on the world if he had never been assassinated. One effect is for sure, that no President of the United States will ever ride in a open convertible again without the fear of being attacked. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a American clergyman, Nobel Prize winner, the main leader in the civil rights movement, and a advocate of nonviolent protests.

He challenged segregation and racial discrimination during the 1950s and 1960s. He also successful in convincing whites to support the civil rights cause throughout the U. S. and the world. He had excellent public-speaking abilities, were he was praised for having powerful impression on the people he was speaking too, by doing so he was able to influence the people of color to protest nonviolently against discrimination towards them. In 1954, he became pastor at a Baptist Church in Montgomery, Alabama, where he used his speaking skills and his intellectual influence to promote and encourage nonviolent protest against discrimination.

In 1955, he was chosen as president of the Montgomery Improvement Association (MIA), which directed the Montgomery bus boycott between 1955 to 1956. He was able to make a positive impression on whites outside the south, by not fighting back when attacked while protesting. In February of 1956, he was able to get the federal court to rule that city buses must be desegregated. In 1957 he founded the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), an organization of black churches and ministers that sought to stop racial segregation.

The SCLC encouraged the use of nonviolent protests directly against discrimination, such as marches, demonstrations, and boycotts. By doing so he provoked some whites to act out violently against the protesters, which lead to the federal government to confront the discrimination and racism. King was able to make connections with radical activists such as the American Communist Party, who gave him advice and supplied him with money to fund protests. He also met with white Protestant leaders and other white public figures to help him in stopping discrimination. On August 28, 1963, He delivered a speech in Washington D. C. ring a massive protest of more than 200,000 supporters.

The speech he gave will be remembered forever, the I Have a Dream speech. During the speech he was noted for these statements, I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal. I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. As a result of his speech a political momentum was created, and soon following was the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The act prohibited segregation in public accommodations, and discrimination in education and employment. Kings speeches against discrimination and teachings of nonviolence protests, won him a Nobel Prize for peace in 1964. Later in 1965, king and the SCLC marched from Selma, Alabama to the capital of Alabama, Montgomery more then 50 miles away to join a voting-rights protest. 300 people made the whole trip taking 5 days to complete and when they arrived in Montgomery they were joined by 20,000 people in front of the capital building were King led the protest.

Later President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which banned the use of voter qualification tests that were used often to prevent blacks from registering to vote. King later focused on discrimination in housing and employment in the cities, and moved his headquarters to Chicago. Then in 1967 he started to protest for a redistribution of the nations wealth to help solve the problem of black poverty. On April 4, 1968 in Memphis, Tennessee, while he was supporting garbage workers on strike, he was shot and killed by a sniper, James Earl Ray.

The effects of the assassination were felt almost immediately shock and anger swept the U. S. and the world, riots broke out in hundreds of U. S. cities in the days after his death. King has become to represent black courage and achievement, speaking skills, leadership skills, and the ability to influence others to change. Several memorials have be built for him including Martin Luther King, Jr. , Center for Social Justice, a research institute located in Atlanta another memorial in Atlanta is Martin Luther King, Jr. National Historic Site, where his birthplace, the Ebenezer Church, and the King Center, where his tomb is located.

Then in 1983 Congress dedicated a National Holiday in his honor on the third Monday of January. Robert Francis Kennedy was a great U. S. political leader and Senator, were he was extremely concerned with the problems of urban ghettos and of the poor and disadvantaged. He attended Harvard and received his Bachelor of Arts degree in 1948, and was later awarded a LL. B. degree from the University of Virginia in 1951. Later in 1951 he was made an attorney in the U. S. Department of Justice.

In 1952 he helped manage his brother John F. Kennedys senatorial campaign. After John F. Kennedy was elected president, Robert was appointed U. S. attorney general, while in office he fought on the enforcement of civil rights laws. He later resigned in 1964, and later that year he was elected U. S. senator from New York. As senator he continued to fight for civil rights, and work on the problems in the ghettos and with the poor. During the spring of 1968 he was campaigning for the Democratic Party nomination. In June of 1968, he had won major primaries in Indiana, Nebraska, and California.

While leaving a celebration in Los Angeles on June 5, 1968 after the California primary was assured that he would win, he was shot. The next day on June 6, 1968 he died after being shot by Jerusalem-born Jordanian Sirhan Bishara Sirhan. His gravesite is in Arlington National Cemetery near John F. Kennedys gravesite. If Robert F. Kennedy was never shot, he may have become president, and bought new changes to the U. S. , for he is known for saying in one of his speeches Some men see things as they are and say why? I dream things that never were and say why not?

Advancement in Science and Technology One of the biggest achievements in science and technology was the invention of the laser. The idea of the laser and how it would work was first invented by Albert Einstein in 1917. The first laser was outlined by the American physicists Arthur Leonard Schawlow and Charles Hard Townes that were patented in 1958. But a working laser was never seen until 1960 when the American physicist Theodore Maiman observed the first laser in action. Then in 1961 a helium-neon gas laser was built by the American physicist Ali Javan.

Later in 1966 a liquid laser was constructed by the American physicist Peter Sorokin. In industry lasers are being used on all types of different things ranging from cutting to monitoring earth movements. Powerful laser beams can be focused on a very small spot, where the laser can be used to heat, melt, cut, or vaporize material with very precise accuracy. For example lasers are used to drill holes in diamonds, shape machine tools, cut microelectronics, and create semiconductor chips. Lasers are also being used in an attempt to create controlled nuclear fusion.

The short laser pulses allow for high-speed photography, and laser beams are also being used for accurate alignment on construction sites. Lasers are being used to study the movement of the earth to study earthquakes and are also very effective detectors of air pollution. Also lasers have been used to determine the distance between the earth and the moon and other planets too. Lasers are also used for scientific research in the study of molecules and chemical analysis. Scientists can use lasers to measure changes in molecular structures of matter to better study and analyze molecules.

Also by using lasers the speed of light has been determined accurately. Chemical reactions can be selectively caused in controlled environments to study chemical analysis. Lasers can be used for communication too, lasers can carry more information and move it faster then any other form of communication. Lasers can be sent on long distances without losing information and little reduction in strength. Lasers can carry 1000x more information then the older forms of communication such as microwaves, so they are ideal for space communication.

Fiber optics were develop to send lasers throughout the earth sending telephone calls and computer information across the planet at incredible speeds. Lasers are also used to record information on CDs and read information off them too. In medicine intense laser beams are being used to do medical procedures. Doctors are using lasers to cut, repair and destroy certain tissues without damaging the surrounding healthy tissues. Also in the military lasers are being used as guidance systems. The guidance systems are used for missiles, aircraft, and satellites for accurate location of targets.

Laser beams have been proposed for use against hostile ballistic missiles as a defense system. Lasers are also being used to trigger an atom or molecule to separate isotopes to build nuclear weapons. Although lasers were still being studied in the 1960s and didnt have any major effect during the 1960s, they have had a major effect in all fields of work starting in the 1980s, and the possibilities for use of lasers is endless. Arab-Israeli Conflict; The Six Day War On May 14, 1948, Israel became independent, thus triggering conflicts to become a full-scale war between Israel and the Arab States.

The Arab States claimed that Israel was on their territory and that they wanted it back. The Arab States included Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, and Iraq. The first war between the Arab States and Israel was between May 14, 1948 and January 7, 1949 where a cease-fire was announced. In 1956, Israel became convinced that the Arab States with the Soviet Union on their side were preparing for war and Israeli with the United States, Great Britain, and France on their side they prepared for an attack. On October 29, 1956, Israel attacked Egypts Sinai Peninsula.

Israel captured the Gaza strip and Sharm el Sheikh, after capturing these they withdrew and turned them over to the UN in 1957. Between 1957 and 1960 conflicts between the Arab States and Israel were calm. Then during the 1960s Arab nationalists, Egypt and Jordan wanting to destroy Israel supported Palestinian guerrillas who attacked troops and civilians in Israeli territory. In April of 1967 Syria after bombing Israeli villages began to fight Israel in aerial battles. Israel shot down six MiG Syrian planes, which were given to Syrian from the USSR.

Israel warned Syria about attacking again, Syria then turned to Egypt for help. Egypt in May moved 100,000 troops and 1000 tanks to Israels southern border the Sinai Peninsula. UN forces were stationed around the area but on May 17th Egypt asked that the UN troops be removed, the UN did so. Then on the 22nd Egypt closed the Strait of Tiran, which was a major shipping route for Israel and cut off major sources of petroleum. Back in 1956, Israel had declared that if the canal was ever closed again they would consider it an act of war. Soon following Egypt and Jordan put their armies under one command.

Because Israel didnt want to fight a three front war between Egypt, Jordan, and Syria and wanting to fight over Arab territory, Israel decided to attack first. On June 5, 1967 at 8:45AM the Israeli air force attacked Egyptian military and air bases. Israeli forces destroyed 309 of Egypts 340 aircraft. On the ground Israeli troops invaded the Sinai Peninsula and Gaza Strip. Egypt suffered heavy casualties but Israeli suffered a few causalities. Egypt told the Egyptians and Jordanians told Egypt had won the battles, even though that was not so.

At 11:00AM Jordan believing that Egypt had won, Jordan launched an attack against Israels side of Jerusalem, which had been split in half years ago. Israelis air force then moved in on Jordans military and air bases, and nearly destroyed it completely. At 12:00am of June 6th Israeli troops began to take back Jordans Jerusalem and by morning had taken back the city. By now Israelis air force had destroyed 2/3 of the Arab States air forces. At 10:00AM on the 6th Israeli troops had taken back the Wailing Wall in the Old City, which is a holy place in Judaism for the first time in 2000 years.

On June 7th Jordan troops had retreated across the Jordan River. That night the UN declared cease-fire between Jordan and Israel. On June 8th Israeli troops made it to the Suez Canal and gained control of the canal. The Egyptians were retreating back to Egypt, but along the way back to Egypt, Israelis air force continued to bomb them. On the 9th Israel began their attack on Syria and began to surround the Syrias troops. Then on June 10th at 6:30, Israel and Syria made a cease-fire agreement. The fighting between Israel and Egypt didnt end until 1979, even though Israeli controlled the Sinai Peninsula.

Israels attack on the Arab States (Egypt, Jordan and Syria) was devastating to the Arabs. The Arabs lost almost all of their air forces and military weaponry. In Sinai and Gaza more then 10,000 Egyptians were killed but only 300 Israeli were killed. Overall Egypt lost 11,000, Syria lost 1000, Jordan lost 6000 and Israel only lost 700. As a result the Soviets who had supplied the Arab States with weapons, realized that their weapons were inferior to the Western weapons used by the Israeli forces. This embarrassed the Soviets and pushed them to improve their weapons thus continuing the Cold War.

On November 22nd the UN passed Resolution 242, which told Israeli forces to move out of the territories occupied during the war, and said that the Arab States had to recognize Israels independence and guarantee that Israels borders remain secure. Neither side followed Resolution 242, and the Arab States said that they would continue to fight against Israel. Israel began to build up defenses along the occupied territories borders and around Jerusalem and also announced that they intended to make Jerusalem their capital. This caused conflicts between the two and in 1973 led to war, the Yom Kippur War.

Resolution 242 even though it was not obeyed it helped the peace process and showed results in the late 1970s. But then in 1978 Palestinian guerrillas launched an air raid on Israel from Lebanon, Israel then sent in troops to Southern Lebanon to protect Israels border. Later in 1982 Israel sent troops into So. Lebanon to destroy all military bases belonging to Palestinian guerrillas (Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO)). The war lasted for 10 weeks and ended in West Beirut, when the Palestinians were forced to accept a U. S. plan where the PLO had to leave Beirut.

Israel left Lebanon in 1985 but still has border protection between Lebanon and Israel at the northern part of the border. As a result of the Six Day War, two more wars have been caused, more then 18,700 people were killed, and conflicts still exist between the Arab States and Israel. Also after the Six Day War was over the Soviets now had an idea of the U. S. military technology, and now knew what they had to do to improve their own weapons. The Soviets also knew somewhat on what the U. S. technology was capable of doing during wartime.

The U. S. however realized that their military technology was superior to that of the Soviets. Space Race The space race was a battle between the Soviet Union and the U. S. on whom would conquer space first, by getting a man to the moon and to put spy satellites in the earths orbit to keep an eye on each other. The U. S. space program began on October 1, 1958 when the National Aeronautics and Space Administration or NASA was inaugurated. Their task was to oversee a civilian space program, and beat the Soviets in what was to become the space race.

The Soviets were the first to send an object into space by sending the first artificial satellite, Sputnik 1 in October 4, 1957. The world viewed this as a great achievement in the advancement of science. The U. S. government didnt view this as a great achievement but as a threat to the U. S. defense. This showed the U. S. that the Soviets had advances in the design and construction of rocket-propelled ballistic missiles. By being able to send a satellite (Sputnik 1) weighing 184 pounds into space it surely showed that the Soviets had the means to construct missiles capable of equal distances of the satellite if not more.

Soon following the Soviets launched yet another satellite, Sputnik 2 into space, this time weighing 1120 pounds and carrying a living dog inside it. Finally in January of 1958 the U. S. launched a satellite of its own into space, Explorer 1. On September 12, 1959 the Soviets launched Luna 2 landed on the moons surface and crashed after 36 hours of flight. Until April 12, 1961 no man had ever been in outer space but under the Soviets project Vostok, Lt. Yuri A. Gagarin became the very first man in outer space, were he orbited the earth once in 1 hour and 48 minutes.

The U. S. later on May 5, 1961, Comdr. Alan B. Shepard, Jr. flew Freedom 7 into outer space but didnt orbit the earth, he did however stay up for 15 minutes and 28 seconds. The U. S. launched 1 more mission before sending a man into orbit around the earth, Lt. Col. John H. Glenn Jr. was the first American to orbit the earth, he orbited 3 times and was up in orbit for 4 hours and 55 minutes. But before the U. S. had a man orbit the earth just once the Soviets had sent a man to orbit the earth 17 times in 1 day, 1 hour and 18 minutes.

It seemed to the Americans that the United States was losing the space race, then on May 25, 1961 President John F. Kennedy promised that the United States would land a man on the moon by the end of the decade. To the American people they were enthusiastic but NASA was not so optimistic and felt the extreme pressure of the presidents speech. On October 12, 1964 the Soviets launched Voskhod 1, a successful but reckless attempt to beat the U. S. in the space race again, to be the first to put three men into space aboard the same spacecraft. Soviet premier Nikita Khrushchev ordered that the Soviet Space program beat the U. S. in the space race, to do so they put the pilots at extreme risk.

To get three men into the same spacecraft they had to remove safety equipment, the ejection seat, and didnt have the cosmonauts wear spacesuits. Although the mission was successful, the publicity stunt was one of many reasons that lead to Khrushchevs downfall. Later with Voskhod 2, which was launched on March 18, 1965 the Soviets sent two men into space with adequate space and with a airlock which could be opened in outer space. On the 18th the Soviets beat the U. S. once again and sent the first man to successfully walk in space.

Then on March 23, 1965 the U. S. under project Gemini began to advance ahead of the Soviets in spacecraft maneuvers. Between March 23, 1965 and November 11, 1966 the U. S. advanced over the Soviets and over the course of 12 different missions the U. S. successfully completed 4 docking, 3 pass by, and 2 space walk missions along with maneuvering missions. The success of these mission objectives led to the start to a new project, Project Apollo, at the same time the Soviets started a new project themselves, Project Soyuz both beginning in 1967.

On January 27, 1967 while testing Apollo 1, there was a fire inside the cabin of the spacecraft and all three of the crew were killed before workers could open the door of the spacecraft, it was said that the inside of the craft reached 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit. After the fire the Apollo program was postponed until investigation was completed. Investigators concluded that the fire could have been prevented if the inside of the craft wasnt made of such flammable materials, and put the blame on poor design.

The program remained postponed for about a year and a half while the whole craft was redesigned. The same fate occurred for the Soviet spacecraft Soyuz 1, on April 23, 1967 the spacecraft took off and completed 13 orbits when the spacecraft failed and began to spin out of control. The pilot was able to reenter earths atmosphere but was killed because of excessive heat during reentry, and crashed into earth. The Soviet space program was also postponed after the accident for about a year and a half. The next six Apollo missions were unmanned while testing was conducted.

Then on October 11, 1968 Apollo 7 was launched and conducted a prolonged earth orbit that lasted for 10 days and 20 hours. The U. S. was winning the space race, for the Soviets didnt conduct a pass by until Soyuz 3 launched on October 26, 1968 and less then 2 months later the U. S. completed the first manned moon orbit, Apollo 8 launched on December 21, 1968.

On January 14 and January 16, 1969 on two different missions 2 different dockings and space walks were conducted in an attempt to catch up too the U. S. the space race. Then on March 3, 1969, Apollo 9 took off and tested the lunar module (the spacecraft used to land on the moon) for the first time in space in a successful mission they were able to dock to the lunar module, separate, and then re-dock. On May 18, 1969, Apollo 10 was launched and went into orbit around the moon, following along with the command module was the lunar module, the lunar module then came within 9 miles of the moons surface then took back off and then reattached to the command module.

The success of this mission showed that a moon landing was possible to come back from, the only thing left to do was to land on the moon. Finally on July 16, 1969, Apollo 11 took off on board were astronauts Lt. Col. Michael Collins, Col. Edwin Aldrin, and Neil A. Armstrong. They named the lunar module the Eagle and the command module the Columbia. While orbiting the moon, the command module and the lunar module separated, aboard the Columbia was Lt. Col. Michael Collins, aboard the Eagle was Col. Edwin Aldrin, and Neil A. Armstrong.

On July 20, 1969 at 9:18PM, the Eagle landed on the moon, and the U. S. had won the space race. Neil A. Armstrong was the fist man to walk on the moon and as he took his first step on to the moons surface nearly 1/3 of the world listened to him say Thats one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind. After several science experiments and collections had been completed the Eagle took off from the moon and docked with the Columbia and returned to earth. They spent the next three weeks after returning to earth in quarantine in fear of viruses that they could have contracted while on the moon.

The Soviets had lost the space race but still launched three more Soyuz missions between October 11 to October 13, 1969, no one knows for sure why they had launched them, no docking was conducted, although they did pass by each other. There are some thoughts to why they launched these missions such as to build a space station, or simply use up hardware, or maybe they were still in the space race and were simply failed to successfully dock. There is thought that the Soviets dropped out of the space race back on April 24, 1967 when Soyuz 1 failed and crashed into earth.

Once again the U. S. nds on the moon, using Apollo 12 launched on November 14, 1969. While on the moon the astronauts found Surveyor 3, a unmanned spacecraft launched on April 17, 1967 by the U. S. to photograph and test the composition of the moons surface. The space race wasnt just about manned space flights and rockets sent into space to collect information, it was also about a race to gain power over communication worldwide, military reconnaissance, and advanced weather. On August 12, 1960 Echo 1 was designed and launched by Bell Laboratories and NASA, it was a 100 foot wide balloon, made of plastic and covered with aluminum.

It was used only when it was in the right position over earth that it could be used to send radio messages to another location. In 1962 Telstar 1 was launched by Bell Telephone and AT&T as a communications satellite. Telstar was a 3 foot-diameter ball, that had solar cells which provided power to the satellite. It was capable of picking up radio signals like television broadcasts and telephone calls. On earth receivers would pick up the radio signals, and would then amplify them to be heard or seen.

In 1963 the first commercial based satellite communications company was formed the Communications Satellite Corporation (COMSAT) in 1963. When the International Telecommunications Satellite Organization (INTELSAT) was formed in 1964, COMSAT became the U. S. member. Based in Washington, D. C. , INTELSAT is owned by more than 120 nations. Intelsat 1 was launched in 1965 provides either 2400 voice circuits or one two-way television channel between the U. S. and Europe. Also for military usage, the military has satellites, which they use for private communication and early weather detection.

Alexander The Great

Alexander III, more commonly known as Alexander the Great, was one of the greatest military leaders in world history. He was born in Pella, Macedonia, then a Greek nation. The exact date of his birth is uncertain, but was probably either July 20 or 26, 356 B. C. Alexander was considered a child from his birth until 341 B. C. His princehood lasted from 340 to 336 B. C. In 336 B. C. Philip II, his father, was assassinated, thus making Alexander king. Alexander became a military leader in 335, and remained one until his death in 323 B. C.

He reigned from 336 B. C. until 323 B. C. hen he died. His military campaign in Persia lasted from 334 to 329, and in 328 he began his campaign in India and Bactria, which lasted until 326. Alexander was only 20 years old when his father died in early 336 B. C. and he took over, ruling for 12 years and eight months. Alexander was fair skinned and fair haired. He was not very tall, but had outstanding speed and stamina. He was a dedicated soldier, but didnt care for sports. The only sport he really liked was hunting. Alexander was the eldest son of Philip II and Olympias. Like Alexander, Philip II was a great general.

Olympias and Philip, when Philip was not away on a campaign, constantly fought. His father was away often, and so much of his childhood influences came from his mother, although his father taught him many useful things about war. Because of his mothers heritage, Alexander could truthfully claim relation to two Trojan War heroes, Achilles and, indirectly, Hector. Philip II taught him he was descended from Hercules, which was not true. The historian Callisthenes started an untrue rumor that Alexander was the son of Zeus. Alexander had seven wives and a male lover.

In 327 B. C. married Roxanne, his main wife, so to speak. Roxanne was a Persian, and by the time he married her, Alexander had total control of Persia and was doing his campaigns in India and Bactria. Roxanne later became pregnant with a child, but when Alexander died it had not yet been born. *center*Alexanders Childhood When Alexander was either 13 or 14(different sources gave different ages), Alexander became the pupil of the great philosopher Aristotle. Aristotle taught Alexander grammar, literature, especially Homer, politics, the natural sciences, and rhetoric(the art of using words well and effectively).

Aristotle inspired Alexander with a love for literature. He came to know and like the Greek styles of living. Greeces ideals of civilization impressed him, and took part in sports and daily exercises to develop a strong body. Alexander had another teacher, Leonidas, whom was hired by Philip II to train and discipline Alexanders body. Leonidas sent Alexander on frequent all night marches and rationed his food. Alexanders schooling with his two teachers continued until he was 16 years old. When Alexander was 16, his father went away to a military campaign. He left Alexander temporarily in charge of his kingdom.

While Philip II was away, the people of Thrace started a rebellion. Alexander found out about this rebellion, and crushed it. This rather impressed Philip II, and he let Alexander settle his first town, Alexandropolis. This city, as is probably quite self-evident, was named for Alexander. In Greek, polis means city, so this means Alexander city. At this age, Alexander also had an interest in medicine. He even prescribed medicine to some of his friends. The Story of Bucephales When Alexander was either 11 or 12 or 14(there are differing accounts), he went with his father and his fathers company while they went to buy a horse.

After a while, Philip saw a horse that he wanted. He soon saw that it was very mean and wild, so he decided against buying it. When Alexander learned of this decision, he said to his father,What a horse they are losing, and all because they do not know how to handle it, or dare not try. To this Philip II responded,Are you finding fault with your elders because you think you know more than they do, or can manage a horse better? At least I can manage this one better,Alexander replied. Alexander then decided to show the company he could calm this horse. He approached the horse and calmed it.

Once the horse seemed to be calm enough, Alexander mounted it and galloped around the field. The company applauds, and Philip II weeps for joy. When Alexander dismounted, Philip II kissed him. He told his son,My boy, you must find a kingdom big enough for your ambitions. Macedonia is too small for you. Alexander named this horse Bucephales, meaningox head in Greek. He rode Bucephales throughout his youth and later in his campaigns in Persia. Finally, in the Battle of Jhelum, Bucephales suffered a wound. He later died from it. Alexander’s Rise to Power In early 336 B. C.

Philip II was assassinated at his daughter’s wedding feast. The assassin was an aggrieved Macedonian nobleman, who was slain as he tried to escape. The official verdict on Philip’s assassination claimed the assassin had been bribed by Darius, the king of the Persian empire. However, Alexander and his mother were suspected by many because they had recently fallen from royal favor. This was not mentioned in the verdict, and it is still unknown which suspicion is correct. When Philip II died, Alexander found his new empire in disorder. He had enemies all over, in home and abroad.

Many people were dissatisfied and so they threatened rebellion. To solve this problem, Alexander killed everyone posing a threat. This included his younger half-brother, but not his older one. Much was fixed, although perhaps not in a satisfactory way. In late summer that year, Alexander was confirmed as the Captain-General of the campaign in Persia as well as becoming the Captain-General of the League of Corinth. These two positions were good for Alexander because they provided him with many more soldiers for his campaign in Persia. General Information on Alexander’s Army and Conquests

Athens versus Philip II in Elatea Late one September evening, before the Battle of Chaeronea, an Athenian assembly heard that Philip II had occupied Elatea. They were rather nervous, and not without reason. Elatea was a key point on the road to Thebes and Attica, two of Athen’s allies. Because of this information, the Athenian army marched into Boeotia, which neighbored Elatea. Athen’s and Boeotia, two new allies, fortified the north-west passage into central Greece. 10,000 mercenaries were dispatched to cover the road to Amphissia. Despite its efforts, Athens was still defeated.

Basic Information on Alexander’s Army Alexander had army men from every province under his control or allied with him. One of his generals was Ptolemy, who was one of the best generals in Alexander’s campaigns in Asia and India. He was believed to have been related to the royal family. Alexander was an expert at organizing his units for complex battle maneuvers, hiding his true numbers and true make-up of his army, and managing his army. Alexander’s position as a military leader changed throughout his conquests. He started out as a crusader, trying to have revenge for the destruction of Greece’s precious buildings.

He ended up with the goal of expanding his empire and the knowledge and practice of Hellenic culture throughout it. Alexander’s army started out with army men from Macedonians, Thessalians, Thracians, Athenians, and those from just about every other Greek city-states. He already had these provinces in his realm, and this was what he brought into Persia. Unlike most rulers, Alexander joined his men in battle and led in attacks. Since he was the Captain-General of the League of Corinth he had many more soldiers than he would have had otherwise.

Some of Alexander’s Conquests in Short In Autumn 337 B. C. ere was a meeting of the League of Corinth. There Alexander’s crusade against Persia was ratified. This made Alexander’s campaign in Persia much easier than if the League had chosen otherwise. When Alexander was 21 he marched into Thebes. He made the journey of about 240 miles in 13 days. There he defeated the Thracians in his first major battle. During this battle, 6,000 Thracians defending Thebes died. The remaining 30,000 were sold into slavery. In early spring 335 B. C. Alexander went north to deal with political problems in Thrace and Illyria. That year he also crushed the revolt of Thebes.

The next year, 334 B. C. , he put under siege and later captured Miletus. He then put Halicarnassus under siege, which is put in more detail later. Next, Alexander got through Lycia and Pamphylia. That year he also attacked and conquered the Greek occupied In 333 B. C. , first he and his army, marching in columns, went north to Celaenae and then marched to Ancyra. He then moved south to the Cilician Gates. While he was doing this, Darius went westward from Babylon. Then Alexander reaches Taurus, where there is a halt because he then fell ill. Once his ailment was cured, Alexander advanced with his army southward through Phoenicia.

In this year, Memnon died, the Persian forces in Babylon were mustered, and Alexander reached Gordium where he sliced the Gordian Knot. This is put in more detail later. In January 332 B. C. , Byblos and Sidon submitted themselves to Alexander’s rule. In September or October that same year, he reached Thapsacus on the Euphrates. During this, Darius moved his main forces from Babylon. On September 18, 331 B. C. , he crossed the Tigris. In early June 330 B. C. Alexander set out for Ecbatana. Darius then renewed his march toward Bactria that had been halted temporarily.

Soon after Darius did this, Alexander reached Ecbatana and dismissed the Greek allies and left Parmenio behind. He made Harpalus Treasurer of Ecbatana. Then he began his march to Hyrcania, and marched through Arachosia to Parpamisidae. In 330 B. C. , Alexander also renewed his pursuit of Darius via the Caspian Gates. In July, he found Darius murdered near Hecatomplyus, where he was apparently murdered by his own men. When he found out about this, Bessus declared himself king of the Persian Empire, or Great King. In 329 B. C. , Alexander crossed the Hindu Kush via the Khawak Pass. During April and May that year, he advanced to Bactria.

That year, Bessus retreated across the Oxus. He then reached and crossed it in June, and from there he advanced to Maracande. This was also the year in which Alexander finished conquering Persia. When he had accomplished this, Alexander has been reported to have said,So this is what it is like to be an emperor. In 328 B. C. , Alexander had his campaign against Spitamenes. Then Cletus the Black was murdered. Later that year, he defeated and killed Spitamenes. The following year, he reached Nysa and captured the Soghdian rock. This year Alexander’s conquests of India ended.

The year after that, 326 B. C. Alexander was badly wounded during his campaign against the Brahman cities(high-caste Indian cities). That year he also conquered most of the remaining part of Pakistan, India, and Iran. The end of his conquests were coming near. In 325 B. C. Alexander’s army suffered the loss of 3,000 mercenaries. In Bactria, the people revolted against him and it was necessary for Alexander to intervene unless he wanted to loose Bactria. After that, Alexander returned to Persepolis and then moved to Susa, where there was a long halt. He renewed his march in September, going through the Gedrostan Desert.

In January 324 B. C. Nearchus and his fleet went to Susa. They then moved to Ecbatana. Alexander conquered many countries. Some of the cities he had to conquer (they did not submit themselves to Alexander’s rule peacefully and/or were not acquired by Alexander because another city was) in the Asia Minor were(in order):Halicarnassus, Syria, Tyre, Gaza, Egypt, Guagamela, Babylon, Susa, Persepolis, Media, Arachosia, Bactria, and Sogdiana. Alexander had a huge empire. In the Mediterranean, Alexander had parts if not all of Bulgaria, Greece, and Macedonia. In the Middle East, he had parts or all of Iraq, Iran, Egypt, Israel, and Lebanon.

In Asia Minor, Alexander held parts or all of Turkey, Afghanistan, and Armenia. In Asia, he ruled parts or all of India and Pakistan. He also ruled small parts of Albania, Libya, and Russia. Darius made three peace deals with Alexander throughout Alexander’s campaign in Persia. The first was in 333 B. C. , the second in June 332 B. C. , and the third in 331 B. C. The third was offered shortly after Alexander had conquered Tyre. In this offer, Darius offered Alexander a daughter in marriage, 10,000 talents worth of gold, and all of his territory west of the Euphrates.

Today, 10,000 talents of gold is worth about three-hundred million dollars. The amount of territory Alexander was offered was about one-third of Darius’ empire. It required, however, that Alexander leave Persia at peace and ally with Darius. Alexander’s general Paremonian advised Alexander to agree to this. Alexander, however, was in no mood to cancel his campaign in Persia. To Paremonian’s suggestion he replied,I would accept them, but only if I were Paremonian. The Battle of Chaeronea Background on the Battle The battle of Chaeronea was the first major battle Alexander fought in.

It took place on August 4, 338 B. C. , during Philip II’s rule. Philip and his army was fighting against the allied Thebes, Athens, Megara, Corinth, and Achaia, in the city of Piraeus. The most important of the five Allies were Athens and Thebes. The Allies made sure that their mercenaries and part of the regular army blocked both possible lines of attack. The allied right flank was comprised of mainly Thebans. They were 12,000 strong. They were led by the Sacred Band, the Theban king’s best soldiers, at 300 strong. The left side was made up of mostly Athenians, who were, at that time, 10,000 strong. Everyone else was in the center.

Philip II commanded the Macedonian right flank. The right flank slightly outflanked the Allies’ right. Their left flank, which had heavy cavalry, was commanded by Alexander, at this time only 18 years old. This was an extraordinary responsibility for someone his age because he was the one that had to deliver the knock-out blow that would determine whether the Macedonians won this battle or lost it. Philip’s center and left were back at an angle from the Allied line. What Happened in the Battle At the beginning of the battle, Philip and his guards brigade engaged the Athenians, while the rest of the Macedonian army advanced.

At this time, the Athenians launched a wildly enthusiastic charge. Their general lost his head, not literally yet, and said,Come on, let’s drive them back to Macedonia! Such amount of enthusiasm usually makes the warriors reckless, and it is difficult to win the battle with it. The Greek center soon began to spread out perilously, and there became many gaps between the army men. Upon seeing this, the Macedonians backed up onto the bank of a small stream, which made a gap between the center and right open. Then Alexander, at the head of Macedonia’s best cavalry, drove a wedge into the heart of the Theban ranks.

While he did this, a second brigade attacked the Sacred Band. The attack did its job, and soon the Thebans were surrounded. During this, Philip remained on the right. He halted his retreat up the river bank and launched a down-hill counter-charge. His phalanx finished what Alexander’s cavalry had started by pouring through the broken lines, and engaged the allied Greek center at the front and flank simultaneously. The two sides had a severe struggle, after which the entire army of the Allies broke and fled except for the Sacred Band, who planned to and did fight until the end. But Philip II came out of the battle victorious.

After the Battle After Philip’s victory, 46 members of the 300 strong Sacred Band were taken alive. The other 254 died. The dead were buried around where they had died, in seven soldierly rows, near where Zion of Chaeronea was soon to be put. When he had won the battle, Philip called off the cavalry pursuit of the Allies. He then raised a victory trophy and made sacrifices to the gods. A number of men were decorated for conspicuous gallantry. Even after Philip II’s victory, the Athenian armed slaves and residents were ready to defend their city to their death. Philip remained victorious, though.

The Athenian naval fleet remained intact, but offered little resistance after learning of Philip’s victory. Philip gained things other than territory from his victory in Piraeus. He controlled the Athenian naval fleet if the need for it ever arose. He also got the harbor and arsenals of Piraeus. To some in his newly acquired territory, Philip II was reasonably kind to. He let Piraeus’ inhabitants maintain supplies and communication by sea indefinitely if they decided to. He also let the Thebans raise a great monument near where the Sacred Band’s soldiers were buried in memory of them called the Zion of Chaeronea.

Philip let them do this because, being a soldier himself, he appreciated truly valorous opponents. He refrained from imposing garrisons on most of the leading Greek cities. Philip would give up the Athenian dead. He had 2,000 Athenian prisoners, who would all be released without ransom. He guaranteed not to send troops into Attica or warships to Piraeus. Athens would remain the governmental nucleus of the Aegan islands, included Delos and Samos. However, Philip could be harsh at times, too. He gave told the Athenians that they had to do two things for Macedonia.

One of these was to help Macedonia with all other territorial claims. The other was it must dissolve the Athenian Maritime League. Athens’ government accepted these conditions en bloc(meaning altogether). They were not in a position to object to these;any privilege Philip II gave him then were just an arbitrary favor, which was reversible if Philip wanted to. Philip was cruel to others, too. He abolished the Boeotian League. This was the embryo of the Theban empire. Philip was kind to these cities, however, when he gave all the cities belonging to the Boeotian League their independance back, which was shrewd diplomacy for him.

He also forced the Thebans to recall all political exiles, and then set up a puppet government, with Macedonians watching over it from the Cadnea. Unlike their Athenian counterparts, the Theban prisoners had to be ransomed at a good price. If they were not, they would be sold as slaves. The Battle of Granicus Background Information on the Battle Granicus was the first major battle during Alexander’s rule. It was also the first battle in Persia. It took place in May 334 B. C. Alexander lead his troops while the Persians were lead by Arsites, one of Darius’ generals. Darius was the king of the Persian empire.

Alexander only slightly outnumbered the Persians at the time of this battle. His ground forces overwhelmingly outnumbered the Persians’;the Persians had 30,000 overall ground force while Alexander had 43,000 infantry alone. However, the Persians had 15,000-16,000 cavalry, where as Alexander only had 6,000-7,000. It also must be taken into account that Darius’ navy, which was Phoenician, was nearly three times larger than Alexander’s and much more efficient. Before the Battle During a site-seeing trip on the way to Granicus, Alexander was asked if he would like to inspect Paris’ lyre.

Alexander refused curtly. He said that all Paris played on the instrument were,adulterous ditties to captivate and bewitch the hearts of women. He then added,But I would gladly see that of Achilles, to which he used to sing the glorious deeds of brave men. In this battle, Alexander’s position had similarities to that of two other military men. He was in a way like Achilles, sailing again for battle. But he also was like the Captain-General of the Hellenes, trying to get vegenance on Xerxe’s invasion of Greece(he was mad at the Persians for burning many of Greece’s great cities a long time ago).

An important thing on the way to the site of this battle was to cross the Narrows. He crossed them at the same point as the Athenians had in the Trojan War. The Persians offered no opposition when he did this. He then made the 300 mile march to Sestos in 20 days, a remarkably short time for an entire army. Next, with 6,000 men, he went over land to Elaeum, which is at the southern tip of the Galipoli Peninsula. There he sacrificed before the tomb of Protesilaus. Protesilaus was the first Greek in Agememnon’s army to step ashore at Troy. In the tomb he prayed that his landing on Asiatic soil would be better than Protesilaus’.

This prayer was not without reason;Protesilaus had been killed almost immediately, and like Protesilaus, Alexander planned to be the first on shore. After making this prayer, he built an altar at the tomb and invoked the gods for victory. Once this was done, Alexander crossed the Darndelles in the 60 vessels Parmenio had sent down from Sestos. Alexander steered the Admiral’s flagship. When the ships were halfway across the river the squadrons sacrificed a bull to Poseidon and made libation with a golden vessel, just as Xerxes had done when he crossed it.

He landed on the Achen Harbor. This is possibly present-day Rhoeteum. There he set up an alter to Athena, Hercules, and Zeus, in thanks for a safe landing. Here he prayed thatthese territories might accept me as king of their own free will, without constraint. Once he had done this, Alexander set off for Ilium. Once at Ilium, he was welcomed by a committee of local Greeks who presented him with a ceremonial gold wreath. He then offered a sacrifice at the tomb of Ajax and Achilles. Next he made an offering at the sacred hearth of Zeus of Enclosures.

Legend has it that it was here that Alexander’s ancestor Neoptolemus had slain Priam. From Ilium Alexander moved north again and rejoined his army at Arisbe, a little out of the city of Abyos. From there he and his army marched north-east, following the road to Dascylium, where the Phyrgian satrap(sort of a Persian governor)had his seat of government. The first city Alexander and his army reached was Pericte, a city in Macedonia’s control. But they soon reached Lampsacus. This was controlled by Memnon like a lot of other cities in Asia Minor.

There the philosopher Anaxenes, who was acting as Lampsacus’ official envoy, persuaded Alexander to bypass Lampsacus. Alexander had an extreme shortage of money, with only enough pay to last a fortnight and food to last a month. Considering these conditions, it is most likely that Anaxenes bribed Alexander with a large sum of money. Because of these conditions, Alexander’s only hope was to tempt the Persians into a set battle and inflict a crushing defeat. Arsites, the governor of Hellespontine Phyrga, sent out an appeal for help from his fellow governors.

He wanted to meet with Arsamenes of Cilician and Spithridates of Lydia and Ionia. The three governors set up their base camp at Zeleia, east of the River Granicus. Here they summoned their commanders to a council of war to decide what strategy to use against Alexander. Memnon of Rhodes, a mercenary, put forth the best suggestion. He proposed a scorched-earth policy–destroy all crops, strip the countryside, if they had to, burn down towns and villages. When he proposed this plan, Memnon made it clear that it would force the Macedonians to withdraw for lack of provisions.

While this was happening, the Persians would assemble a large fleet and carry the war into Macedonia while the Macedonian army was still divided over what to do. This was great advise, but since it came from a mercenary, whose brilliance and plain speaking was not respected by his Persian colleagues, it was not paid due attention. However, a little more tact still might have gotten Memnon all he wanted. But he went on to say that they should avoid fighting a pitched battle because the Macedonian infantry was very superior to Persia’s.

This hurt the Persians’ dignity, and so they rejected Memnon’s plan. Since Memnon’s plan was rejected, the Persians had to choose a new strategy. They decided to take a defensive strategy. This was probably second only to Memnon’s plan because if the Macedonians could be lured into attacking a strongly held position over dangerous ground where the cavalry would have trouble charging and the phalanx couldn’t hold formation, the invasion would end quickly. The Persians’ rejection of Memnon’s plan was good for Alexander, but the Persians still had an advantage over Alexander.

This was that the Persians had a choice of terrain. Once the Persians realized how badly needed battle they realized they could bring him to battle wherever and whenever they pleased. The Persians collected all available reinforcements to prepare for the coming battle. Then they advanced to the River Granicus on the eastern bank, which had the best conditions for the Persian strategy. This spot on the river was good for the Persians because the Macedonian army would have to cross it to get to Dascylium(a spot on the river Alexander would need to get to to continue his conquests).

It would be hard for him to cross the River because of its speed and depth. The Macedonians would have to cross in columns, and while the Macedonians were struggling on the bank in general disorder, they’d be highly vulnerable, and the Persians could force an engagement. Once they were at the River Granicus, the Persians drew up forces and waited. You might remember that the Persians had far less ground forces than Alexander. Because of this, Arsites had to avoid exposing his interior infantry to open ground. For Arsites to win, he had to have a skillful use of cavalry and mercenaries.

When he they reached the River Granicus, Alexander wanted to fight. But Parmenio knew the Persians had set up a death trap. Parmenio did his best to reason with Alexander, and Alexander had to agree. So, under the cover of darkness, he and his army marched downstream until they found a suitable place to ford. Here they bivouacked, and began crossing at dawn. What Happened in the Battle When they found out that the Macedonians were fording, Arsites’ scouts sounded the alarm. Several regiments of cavalry galloped down, trying to catch the Macedonians at a disadvantage.

But by the time they got to the place Alexander had chosen to ford, there were not many Macedonians left on the western bank. When they saw Arsites’ scouts, the Macedonian phalanx formed to cover their comrades still in the river. Meanwhile, Alexander led his cavalry in a swift, outflanking charge. The Persians wisely retreated. Once they had, Alexander got the rest of his columns across, and then deployed them in battle formation. The terrain was rich, rolling land, which was perfect for cavalry. This was good for the Persians because they had so much more cavalry than Alexander.

Arsites put all of his cavalry regiments into front line, on as wide a front as possible. His entire infantry was held in reserve. He then advanced to Alexander’s position. Alexander was clad in magnificent armor he had taken from the Temple of Athena at Ilium. His shield was blazoned splendidly, and wore an extraordinary helmet with two great wings or plumes. A crowd of pages and staff officers thronged around him. Alexander took the battle on the right flank. When they saw this, the Persians transferred some of their best troops to the center. This was just what Alexander wanted.

With trumpets blowing and echoes of the Alalalalaibattle cry, Alexander charged, leading his cavalry in wedge formation. He feinted at the enemy’s left, where Memnon and Arsames were waiting. Then he suddenly swung his wedge inwards, diving at the new weakened Persian center. On the first onslaught, Alexander’s spear broke, so the old Demaratus of Corinth gave him his. While this was happening, Parmenio always was on the Persian left. He was fighting a holding action against the Medes and Bactrians on Alexander’s right. Alexander made a classic pivotattack, using his left flank as his axis.

So what he did was, keeping his left flank stationary, he swung his right and center around it, so that now the center remained the center, but the left was the right and the right was the left. Mathrilas, Darius’ son-in-law, counter-charged at the head of his own Iranian cavalry division with 40 high ranking Persian nobles. He began to drive a similar wedge into the Macedonian center. After this, the Persian general Mithridates hurled a javelin at Alexander. He threw it with such force that it didn’t just blow through Alexander’s shield but hit the cuiraso behind it.

Alexander then plucked it out and sent spurs to his horse. He then drove his own spear far into Mithridates’ breastplate. But Mithridates’ breastplate did not break, and Alexander’s spear broke of short. Mithridates then drew out his sword for hand-to-hand fighting. Alexander, however, was not about to do that. Alexander retrieved his broken spear and jabbed it into Mithridates’ face, hurling him to the ground. As this happened, Rhosaces(a Persian) came at him from behind. He rode at Alexander from a flank with his saber with such force that it went through Alexander’s helmet to the bone of his scalp.

Alexander, swaying and dizzy, managed to kill Rhosaces. Meanwhile, Spithridates, the governor of Lydia and Ionia, moved in behind Alexander. He was about to kill him when Cletus, Alexander’s nurse’s brother, severed Spithridates’ arm at his shoulder. After this, Alexander, probably from his scalp injury, half-fainted. While Alexander was in the half-faint, his phalanx poured through a gap in the Persian center, and had started to get rid of Arsites’ native infantry. Alexander managed to struggle back onto his horse, and his companions rallied around him.

During this, the enemy center began to cave in, leaving their flanks exposed. Then Parmenio’s Thessalian cavalry charged on the left. In a moment, the entire Persian line broke and fled. Their infantry, except the mercenaries, offered little resistance. The only part of the Persian army that was left was Memnon and his men. The Macedonians focused on destroying them. While the Macedonian phalanx delivered a frontal assault, his cavalry hemmed them from all sides to prevent a massive breakout. Somehow, however, Memnon managed to escape. This ended the battle.

The Persians suffered far greater casualties than the Macedonians. The Persians lost 2,500 men total, some 1,000 of them Iranians. There were different amounts of casualties reported for Alexander. The maximum for the infantry was 30, and the minimum nine. For the cavalry, the maximum was 120 and the minimum 60. After the Battle 25 Macedonians fellin the first charge. Alexander had a statue made of each of them. He then erected each statue somewhere near Granicus. He also erected a statue of himself, although he did not even die, let alone in first charge.

This was a strange gesture that would never be repeated again. 2,000 of Memnon’s mercenaries survived. After the battle they were chained like lions and sent back to forced labor, probably in the mines. This was not a very placatory gesture by Alexander. The reason he gave for it was that they had violated Greek public opinion by fighting with the Orientals against the Greeks. After his victory, Alexander went across the rocky, volcanic islands of Cappadocia. His victory was the start of a long campaign in Persia. It opened Asia-Minor to Alexander. The Battle of Issus

Background Information The Battle of Issus was, like Granicus, a battle against Persia. It took place in September or October 333 B. C. Alexander, as in about all of his major battles, led his troops. I am not sure who led the Persians, although Darius was there. This battle was important because it was the only way for Alexander to get to the coastal plain of Asia. The numbers for both sides at this time are uncertain. Before the Battle Alexander was separated from the coastal plain of Asia by the Tarsus Mountains, and the only pass through these mountains was a deep twisting canyon.

There were gates to this canyon, and Alexander anticipated trouble there, but there was no other feasible route. Arsames, who was the Persian governor of Cilicia, unintentionally saved Alexander a lot of trouble. Arsames was bent on immitating Memnon’s scorched earth policy-strategy and avoiding a head-on collision. Because of this, he only left a small force at the Gates and spent much time and energy destroying the Cilician plain. Because of this, the entire Macedonian army co

Viking Raids On England

From 793 to 1066, England was terrorised by Viking warriors. These were people from Scandinavia, especially Danmark and Norway. Scandinavia at the time had a growing population and with inland areas inhospitable, the vikngs looked overseas for new territories and wealth. “In the year 793, the pagans from the north came to Britain like stinging hornets… ” wrote an early Saxon chronicler about the first Viking raid on England. The Vikings had struck a small costal monastery, killed and pillaged.

This was the frist blow in a mighty struggle between the Vikings and England whch ended with The Battle Of Hastings in 1066. For the next 40 years however, there was peace. The Vikings had been preparing for a full-scale invasion and from 835 onwards, hardly a year went by without a raid being reported to the Saxon chronicles. In 851, the Vikngs first wintered in England and in 856 forced England to pay its first Danegald or tribute. In 867, 3 famous sons of ragnar hairy-Breeches : Ivar the the boneless, Ubbi and Halfdan landed in East Anglia, marched across country, seized York and settled in Northumbria. By 871 the Vikings had overrun the north of England and were preparing to invade the Saxon tronghold, Wessex.

This was the first time they had come face-to-face with the Saxon Prince Alfred. Although only second in command, Alfred led the Saxons to victory. Later that year, Alfred became King Alfred and within months was on the battle fields once again. This time however, he was defeated at Wilton and forced to pay a tribute. After this the Vikngs split in two. One group under the leadership of halfdan went and settled in northumbria. the remaing under Guthrum settled in South Cambridge and waited for another chance to invade Wessex.

In 875, Alfred went to sea with a small aval force and on the south coast of Wessex met 7 Viking longships and defeated them. This was the first time that the Vikings had been challenged at sea so Alfred decided to build a fleet. While busy seeing over the shipbuilding, Alfred failed to notice that Guthrum had struck south. Guthrum had taken Chippenham thus surrounding Wessex and giving himself a much greater chance of success. The Vikings had taken control of most of West Wessex and the Saxons submitted to them. But not Alfred. He and a small group of troops made a small stronghold at Athelney.

Alfred, wishing to know the Vikings plans nd tactics, dressed as a wandering minstrel and walked boldly into the viking camp and snuck his way into the council of war. After staying a few days, and content that he knew all he needed to, Alfred hurried back and told his men how easily the Vikngs could be beaten. With the people of Somerset, Wiltshire and Hampshire united, Alfred drove the Vikings back to Chippenham and stayed to negotiate a treaty with Guthrum. This treaty stated that Alfred and the Saxon people aknowledged their new neighbours and territories.

Guthrum returned to Danelaw which was comprised of the five boroughs of Derby, Stamford, Leicester, Lincoln and Nottingham but not before being baptised in the presence of Alfred. After Guthrum moved back to Danelaw, there was seven years of peace. this was until a new army from the continent came across the English Channel and seized the city of Rochester. Alfred’s army came once again to the rescue athough and defeated the new invaders and pushed them back to sea. Alfred steadily pushed the Vikings back with many small invasion attempts and by 886 had regained control of London. y now all the English looked upon alfred as their leader.

Alfred felt n easing of pressure and now concentrated on his defences. He built fortified towns or Burhs. There were seven more years of peace, until The Great Army from Germany crossed the Channel with 250 ships, sailed un the Lympne estuary and stormed one of Alfred’s Burhs . These Vikings were defeated at Farnam and at the same time the Vikings in danelaw chose to send 100 ships to the north coast of Devon, so that the Saxons had to march west. The Saxons overtook the vikng army on the banks of the Buttington and on the Banks of the Severn and besieged it on every side.

The Vikings his time were defeated be famine and when they finally faced the Saxons they lost a very bloody battle. After 2 further years of fighting, The Great Army broke up. In October 899, King Alfred died. He went down in history as the man who saved England from being completely overrun but the Vikings still held Danelaw. Alfred’s successor edward the Elder (899-925) was a powerful king. He conquered much of Danelaw in his reign as king. The next king, King Athelstan (925-940) was a powerful king also. Despite this, the Northumbria Vikings were restless and joined forces with the Scots and the Norwegian vikings rom Ireland.

Athelstan inflicted a devestaing defeat upon them. The Northumbria Vikings continued however until their last king, Erik Bloodaxe was driven out in 954, when Northumbria became an English earldom. The Norwegian Vikings settled down and started to settle in the Northeast and Midlands. Edgar the Peaceable (959-975) became friends with the Vikngs as he respected their beliefs and customs. But his son Ethelred the unready (978-1016) was a different kind of man. The Viking attacks were soon renewed. The Vikings had a string of victories and made Ethelred pay higher and higher amounts of Danegald.

The most annoying of Ethelred’s foes was the king of Denmark, Svein Forkbeard. He attacked mercilessly until Ethelred ordered that “all the Vikings that have sprung up on this island shall be destroyed”. This led to the massacre of St. Brice’s day on 13th November 1002. Among those killed was Svein’s sister, Gunnhild. Her death enraged Svein and from 1003 onward there were continuous attacks. When Svein died, his second son Canute took his place. He wooed the church and went on a pilgrimage to Rome. In all he ruled England, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, and the Orkney and Shetland islands.

While he reigned the Vikings and Saxon people lived in harmony, but when he died everything changed. His son died unexpectedly and as the fight for succession carried on, the English elected a new king, Edward the confessor (1042-1066). The Vikings made one last attempt to conquer England under a new leader Harald Hardradi. However three days after losing the battle of Stamford bridge, the Normans landed led by Duke William. They fought hard with King Hardradi and all his remaining troops but were defeated and it was there that King Harald was killed. The Viking raids were over and the English had new tormentors.

Race Relations in the New World

The British colonies in North America were not societies that valued or expected equality. They conquered Native American land without any payment for it and they used African Americans as slaves. By the end of the 17th century and the beginning of the 18th century, the standard norm for the British included vicious warfare with the Native Americans and enslavement of the African Americans. These practices became the standard norm as a result of carelessness and perhaps fear of change on the part of the British.

Early British settlements in North America established first contact between the British and the Native Americans. Almost twenty years after the mysterious disappearance of the colonists who settled at Roanoke, the British settled In the Chesapeake Bay area in the early 17th century. They called it Jamestown in honor of their king, James I. Shortly after settling in Jamestown, a group of about two hundred Native Americans attacked the British because the British were trying to exploit Native American labor and wealth.

The British saw nothing wrong with holding a peaceful social state but at the same time using Native Americans as a cheap form of labor. Although the Native Americans had supplied the British with food and other vital necessities, tensions still persisted. The British and the Native Americans interacted very often in trade surroundings, but the failure of each group to understand and accept the other group’s culture prevented any lasting cooperation between the two groups. Simple misunderstandings during a trade agreement could turn into violent confrontations as a result of the large difference in culture and beliefs.

In March 1622, one Native American by the name of Opechancanough planned a surprise attack on Jamestown. Intending to wipe out the whole colony, his plan was only partially successful as a result of British retaliation which killed more Native Americans than they did British. After retaliation by the British, the Native Americans mounted their last major act of armed resistance. This failed due to British awareness, preparedness, and superiority over the Native Americans. After peace was restored, the Native American population in the Chesapeake Bay area was down from eight thousand to two thousand.

Later conflict between the Native Americans and the British occurred in 1676 when an English planter named Nathaniel Bacon organized an unauthorized force in Virginia to drive the Native Americans farther west. Bacon and his followers were frustrated that all the best tobacco land had already been taken by the wealthy and decided to drive the Indians west and settle on that land. Bacon’s army consisted of other angry Virginian planters who wanted more land so they could grow more tobacco. When the British sent an army to stop Bacon, he reversed his aim and instead went after Jamestown.

The sudden death of Bacon while trying to escape an attack from the British army put an end to one of America’s first violent protest movements. One result of this rebellion was that it strengthened the elite group of the wealthy planters and government officials. They also realized that indentured servants would not be a reliable source of labor and that they needed enslaved people to work for them. They needed human beings who would never have a chance at freedom, own land, or protest the government. Bacon’s rebellion also severed British relations with the Native Americans.

The conflict between the British and the Native Americans broke into open hostility and as a result, King Philip’s War. King Philip’s War began around 1675 in the New England area. The two groups had hoped trade would ease the tensions but in the 1670’s the peace came to an end. The English continued to destroy forests, put up fences, and create pastures for their cattle. This threatened the livelihood of the Native Americans, who lived by hunting game, gathering plants for food, and growing crops. This meant that Native Americans needed almost twenty times the amount of land per person as the English needed.

Minor disagreements over land disputes between a Native American leader, Metacom (known as King Philip to the settlers) and the people of Plymouth began the war. These minor disputes lead to larger ones and war inevitably broke out. The war started out as a disaster for both sides. Each side was losing just as many people as they were killing and the war was turning into a war of attrition. The English soon gained the upper hand and the large number of English settlers began to pay off. The end of the war came with the death of Metacom.

Once he was dead, the English cut his head off and sent it to Plymouth Colony where it was displayed for decades. Aftereffects of this war were both economic as well as political. The region of New England did not surpass its prewar income per person for more than 140 years. Politically, the aftereffects in part lead to the American Revolution due to stresses and strains obtained by the amount of interaction between the colonies and Britain. The relations between the Europeans and the Africans, on the other hand, were extremely one-sided.

Slavery came about because the colonists needed a more controllable source of labor. Indentured servants wouldn’t work because the owners needed a race that would have no chance of being allowed freedom, and understood that. Africans were used to being slaves so when they were first brought over by slave traders, they did not expect to ever be free. Slavery eventually developed into a much more widespread practice. No longer were certain slave traders bringing slaves across the Atlantic Ocean but slaves were now being shipped across in large numbers.

The Europeans traded with the West Indies and the Americas which formed a sort of triangle. The Middle Passage was the part of the triangular trade between Africa and the Americas where slaves were transported to the West Indies and on to North America in exchange for American goods such as tobacco. Although conditions varied from colony to colony for African Americans, conditions were consistently brutal. The African Americans who lived in South Carolina and Georgia labored under particularly brutal conditions.

These slaves primarily cultivated rice and indigo because conditions in the low country were especially good for that. Slaves in North Carolina faced similar conditions as the slaves in Virginia and Maryland because it was more suited for tobacco farming. Slaves in these colonies not only worked in the fields but were also assigned other household tasks. Slaves in New England and the Middle Colonies had more freedom in choosing their occupations than did the slaves of the Southern Colonies.

The lives and work of African Americans, although a minority by a large amount, reflected the region’s mixed economy and its varied ways of life. The slaves in these colonies north of Maryland had a considerable amount more of freedom in choosing their occupation than the slaves of the southern colonies did. This lead to the slaves pushing the slave owners more and more until the slave owners became so threatened that they began to pass strict laws regulating the amount of freedom that these slaves had.

In the late 1600’s, several laws were passed by the colonies controlling the activities of the African Americans. The African Americans were becoming too aggressive and this worried the colonists. The government passed strict laws that would help keep slaves under control and keep the colonists feeling a little safer. Harsh punishments were performed on African Americans who did not follow these rules and regulations as a way to enforce the laws. Many of these laws were soon applied to free African Americans as well as Native Americans. The combination of such laws and the harsh conditions led to violent revolts.

Slave revolts emerged all throughout the colonies but New York had the worst of these revolts. As a result of harsh conditions, slaves began to resist forcefully. Rebellions occurred there in 1708, 1712 and 1741. After the rebellion of 1741, thirteen slaves were burned alive as punishment for revolting. This also served as a warning to other slaves not to revolt. Slavery became a part of the new kind of society that emerged in North America which was built on relationships between ordinary people as well as inequality and the superiority of the British.

These race relations also led in part to larger wars such as the French and Indian War and the American Revolution. The British not only treated the Native Americans unfairly by taking over their land and waging war on them but they also treated African Americans with inequality by treating them as a piece of property rather than as human beings. The enslavement of African Americans, and constant war with the Native Americans became such a routine practice that it just evolved into the standard norm of that time period.