1 line
27 KiB
JavaScript
1 line
27 KiB
JavaScript
var tipuesearch = {"pages":[{"title":" Search Attention Span History\n","text":"\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Search Attention Span History\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAttention Span History \n\n\nHome\n\n\nRSS\n\n\nTags\n\n\nTwitter\n\n\nGithub\n\n\nSearch\n\n\nSource\n\n\nDoc Blog\n\n\nFavorite Podcasts\n\n\nTrentReads\n\n\nArt\n\n\nEtymology\n\n\nOpera\n\n\nWar\n\n\nWar, Culture, Personality, Politics\n\n\nArchives\n\n\n\nSearch\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Proudly powered by Pelican,\n which takes great advantage of Python.\n \n\n\n","tags":"","url":"https://blog.trentpalmer.org/search.html"},{"title":"Contrasting English Queens","text":"Victoria and Elizabeth II are Queens of England, and are related by blood, but that is where the similarity ends. For instance, Queen Victoria was emotional, petty, politically relevant, culturally relevant, and a dynamic personality. But Elizabeth II was not. Victoria's Contribution to the Historical Record Written Documentation Queen Victory wrote 60 million words in her lifetime. This includes her journal , which fill 122 volumes in the Royal Archive, even after heavy redaction. Her book Our Life in the Highlands , was a best-seller. Queen Victoria also constantly wrote letters. Victoria's Political Relevance Grandmother of Europe Queen Victoria was known as the Grandmother of Europe . Having spread her seed amongst Nobility and Royalty all over Europe, and engaged in constant coorespondence, she had a profound effect upon International Politics. In theory this was a key reason why there were no World Wars between Napoleon and World War One. British Empire It should be noted however, that the British Empire was at war every single year of her 64-year reign, and it was during her reign that the British Empire reached its zenith. Victoria's Cultural Relevance Arts and Culture Queen Victoria was a huge patron of the arts, and her legacy included Royal Albert Hall , and statues of Prince Albert were erected all over the British Empire. Customs and Morality The court of Victoria and Albert was outwardly morally uptight, and this percolated through society. The manner in which Christmas was (and still is) celebrated throughout the Western World, was derived from traditions begun during the Victorian Era. Perhaps reflecting their sheltered upbringing, they were quite naive and would laugh at any stupid little joke. How annoying! Victoria's Dynamic Personality Melodrama In the Bedchamber Crisis , of 1839, Government dissolved because Victoria refused to replace her ladies-in-waiting with the wives of the new ministers. In her photos she never smiled. But contemporary reports suggest that Victoria did frequently smile, and could really light up the room. Mental Depression Queen Victoria suffered from postpartum depression which poisoned her relationship with her children and husband. Upon Prince Albert's untimely death , The Queen entered several years of seclusion and wore black for the rest of her life. Temper Tantrums Unfortunately, Albert and Victoria frequently squabbled, events which usually featured a \"scene\". Daddy Issues As a result of a troubled upbringing with a controlling stepfather , Victoria suffered from \"Daddy Issues\", and developed obsessive attachments to Prime Minister Melbourne , her husband , as well as house servants John Brown , and Abdul Karim . Brattiness Victoria's innappropriate favouritism towards Brown and Karim, both foreigners, caused resentment amongst her staff. Pettiness Queen Victoria made impolite remarks about other people. Queen Elizabeth II In her youth Elizabeth once outrageously exclaimed, \"My Goodness!\" Conclusion Queen Victoria and Queen Elizabeth II were very different from each other. Thanks for reading! Recommended I recommend Rex Factor Podcast .","tags":"War, Culture, Personality, Politics","url":"https://blog.trentpalmer.org/contrasting-english-queens.html","loc":"https://blog.trentpalmer.org/contrasting-english-queens.html"},{"title":"Ideology Of World War One","text":"How did ideology contribute to World War One? It did not. None of the extant ideological movements of the time were a factor in causing World War One. Even ethnicity , which is the opposite of ideology, played only a very small role. This blog post is a response to the Podcast When Diplomacy Fails , which asserts that ideology was a contributing factor, but I disagree. Communism None of the belligerents were pro-communist. Even if one were to speculate that any of the belligerents, might have been capable of being motivated by the desire to prevent the spread of communism, there was nothing to prevent. While it is true that the outbreak of communism in Russia was tangent, that only lead to Russia withdrawing from the war. Democracy Democracy is interesting because it had been a huge motivation in the past. Because the French Revolution gifted France the capability to raise huge armies, The First Coalition rose up against it. And Democracy certainly has been a huge factor in other wars. For instance Democracy gave Athens the spirit to win at Marathon . And Democracy enabled the allies to execute more effectively and win World War Two. But despite being the most democratic belligerent in WWI, France did not even have the most powerful army at the time, Germany did. And there is no indication that France wanted to spread Democracy to Germany. In a vacuum the only motivation France would have had to go to war with Germany would have been to recapture Alace-Loraine , which it lost in the Franco-Prussion War , or to possibly exchange colonial assets. Imperialism The only exception here is that Serbia's stance was in opposition to the Austro-Hungarian Empire . But in the final analysis, Serbia was merely a pawn. Russia, France, Italy, Austria, Britain, Ottomans, and Germany were all empires, and thus unopposed to Imperialism as an idea. Even the King of Belgium possessed colonies. Monarchy While it is true that Austria wanted to protect the Monarchy as in institution, the fact that Archduke Franz Ferdinand was heir to the Austrian Throne was only relevant in the local context of the assassination in Sarajevo. Indeed, Serbia also had a King. Ethnicity The problem here is that identity is not an ideology. Identity is the opposite of ideology. Western Elitists may very well hold the ideology that identity is an ideology, but the ideology of identity being an ideology, is not that same thing as identity being an ideology. This merely shows how out-of-touch Elitists are. But even if we stipulate that identity is an ideology, this only applies to Russia coming to Serbia's defense because the Serbs are Slavs. And while it is true that the war would not have happened if Russia had not stood up for Serbia, in the final analysis Serbia was only a pawn. And furthermore, Russia was equally motivated by sphere-of-influence considerations in the Balkans. And while it is true that Austria was motivated to contain Serb influence in its empire, Serbianism is not an ethnicity. A Serb is no more or less a Slav than is a Czech, Bosnian, or Croat, all of whom were already established within the empire. Were the Ottoman Turks Racist? Either way that is immaterial as they were only able to fight effectively in defense. Nor did Germany invade France for ethnic reasons. Germany attacked France because the strategy of the Schlieffen plan was to defeat France quickly on the assumption that Russia would be slow to mobilize, thus avoiding having to fight both at the same time. The fact that Germany entered the war because of Russian mobilization, and because Russia was deceptive and duplicitous about that, is a separate issue from the strategy of the Schlieffen plan. Nor did America enter the war for 'anti-German' reasons. America entered the war because she had lent vast amounts of money to the belligerents and needed to protect her investment. It would be as disingenuous to cast, as racist, alarm about the Zimmerman Telegram , as it is to cast Trump's Border Wall as racist. War as an Ideology The Statesmen who pushed over the dominoes, may well have embraced the Glory of War, but that was an evolution; an effect but not a cause. As of June 28, no one thought that the destruction of Europe would be therapeutic. Conclusion World War One was caused not by ideology, but by Nationalism and Fear. Nationalism and Fear are not ideas, they are feelings. The Donkeys were not thinking men anymore than Democrats are . Ironically, World War Two was caused by Idealism. From Wilson's 14 Points , to the Versaille Treaty , to the League of Nations , to the Weimar Republic : the Elites tried to remake Society and the World according to their high-minded ideals, but then in typical fashion shielded themselves from the negative consequences of their idealism while being unwilling and incapable of enforcing them. Until Patton came along.","tags":"War","url":"https://blog.trentpalmer.org/ideology-of-world-war-one.html","loc":"https://blog.trentpalmer.org/ideology-of-world-war-one.html"},{"title":"Xmas","text":"Where does the word Xmas come from? Early Christians used many symbols such as the Chi Rho, the Ichthys, the Anchored Cross, and the Sator Square. Chi Rho The Chi Rho , ☧ as explained in this YouTube Video , is a symbol composed by overlaying Chi and Rho, the first two Greek Letters in the word Christ . And well, it kind of looks like an X doesn't it? This is where the word Xmas comes from. Anchored Cross Early Christians also drew the Anchored Cross , ⚓ as explained in this YouTube Video , because it contains a cross. Ichthys The Ichthys ∝ , otherwise known as The Christian Fish Symbol , as explained in this YouTube Video , which early Christians used as a secret sign with which to identify each other, because Christ told several of his Disciples that he would make them Fishers of Men . Sator Square The Sator Square , as explained in this YouTube Video , is a mysterious square of 5 Latin words which mirror each other forwards and backward, both vertically and horizontally. A translation, derived from the nominal translations of the individual words in the context of the rotatability of their arrangement, would presumable be something like AS YE SOW, SO SHALL YE IN TURN REAP . R O T A S O P E R A T E N E T A R E P O S A T O R You can rearrange the letters into a cross contructed from the word PATERNOSTER , which translates to Our Father , decorated with the symbolic first and last letters of the Greek alphabet, Alpha and Omega , a title ascribed to God in Revelations, meaning The Beginning And The End . P A T A E O R P A T E R N O S T E R O O S A T E R Recommended I recommend watching the entire video because it is fantastic. In fact I recommend watching the entire playlist for the same reason. (You'll have to sign into to watch the video about Paul Rubens).","tags":"Art","url":"https://blog.trentpalmer.org/xmas.html","loc":"https://blog.trentpalmer.org/xmas.html"},{"title":"Trebia Trasimene Cannae and Zama","text":"What are the four major Battles of the Second Punic War ? If you said, \"Trebia, Trasimene, Cannae, and Zama\", you are correct! Prologue In 218 BC, Carthaginian General Hannibal, with an army of 40,000 and more than 30 war elephants, crossed the Pyrenees Mountains , then crossed the Rhone River , and then crossed The Alps in winter, and invaded Northern Italy, otherwise known as Cisalpine Gaul . Trebia River In December, on a floodplain of the Trebia River , Hannibal decisively defeated a Roman Army led by Roman Consul Tiberius Sempronius Longus . Hannibal's Numidian Cavalry were instrumental in victory, and the Carthaginian Light Infantry out-flanked the Roman Infantry. But the battle was decided when a hidden Carthaginian unit ambushed the Roman Army from behind while they were engaged. Lake Trasimene In the Spring of 217 BC, Hannibal crossed the Apennine Mountains , marched for four days through the swamps near the mouth of the Arno River (which flows through modern Florence and Pisa), and ambushed a Roman Army which was led by Roman Consul Gaius Flaminius , as it marched along the shore of Lake Trasimene . This was (and still is), the greatest ambush in human military history. And once again the Roman Army was wiped out. Cannae Rome scrambled to rebuild it's army, and once again on August 2 216 BC, met Hannibal at the Battle of Cannae . This time the Roman Army was led by both Consuls : Gaius Terentius Varro , and Lucius Aemilius Paullus . Once again, Hannibal had more and better Cavalry. However the Carthaginian Army was outnumbered by the Roman Army nearly two to one. But through clever and deceptive battle-field deployment and maneuver, Hannibal's more-experienced infantry managed to completely surround the Roman Infantry, which consequently fell-in on itself, and unable to fight or maneuver, was almost completely wiped out. The Battle of Cannae was (and still is), one of the bloodiest days in human history with perhaps 50,000 - 70,000 casualties in the span of just a few hours. Zama By waging war against Carthage , Roman General Publius Cornelius Scipio compelled Hannibal to return with his Army to Africa, where the two met in 202 BC at the Battle of Zama . This time Rome had the superior Cavalry as Numidia was now allied with Rome. Hannibal's 80 war elephants spooked and were inneffective. At first, the Carthaginian Cavalry attempted to lure the Roman Cavalry away from the Battle Field by fleeing. However, Hannibal's tactic of placing his veterans in the rear back-fired, because about the time that the first two lines of Carthaginian Infantry were wiped out and the third line was engaged, the Roman Cavalry returned to the Battle Field and rolled-up the Carthaginians from behind. Carthage was routed from the Battle Field and the fleeing troops were easily pursued and killed by the Roman Cavalry in the flat terrain. On the Ancient Battle Field, you were a winner ... until you were not. Hannibal would regret not having attacked the City of Rome following the Battle of Cannae. The Second Punic War earned for Rome the reputation of refusing to give up and refusing to accept defeat.","tags":"War","url":"https://blog.trentpalmer.org/trebia-trasimene-cannae-and-zama.html","loc":"https://blog.trentpalmer.org/trebia-trasimene-cannae-and-zama.html"},{"title":"Hillbillies","text":"Hillbillies are so called because their Ulster-Scots Ancestors supported King William III during the Williamite War. Ulster You may be familiar with current events in Northern Ireland. This history goes back to a time when Scots from Southern Scotland and Northern England colonized Ulster which is Northern Ireland. Scottish Marches But why did the Ulster-Scots migrate from the Scottish Marches to Northern Ireland? There is an oft-repeated scenario in Medievel Europe involving something called a March . Please click through to the Wikipedia Article to see the long list of Marches all over Europe! To summarize, a March is a border region or frontier region where the Presiding Lord, often titled a Marquise was allowed additional fortifications and military capability above and beyond that allowed ordinary Nobility. And so this oft-repeated scenario was that in a border region or March, the local Nobility would have the means to enrich themselves with repeated cross-border raids. But this unfortunately always came at the expense of the local population, thus the motivation to flee to Ulster. King William III So let's circle back. Hillbillies were so called because their Ulster-Scots Ancestors supported King Billy during the Williamite War . Also known as William of Orange , he was installed as King of England during a coup known as the Glorious Revolution in 1688, in which King James II was deposed. King James II (and VII) So what was King James' problem? King James II was thown out of office because he was Catholic, because his second wife Mary of Modena was also Catholic, and because together they parented James Francis Edward and raised him as a Catholic. Williamite War Ok, let's circle back to the Williamite War in 1689. It turns out that while King James II was deposed as King of England, Ireland, and Scotland, he still had an armed force in Ireland with which he fought a war against, and was defeated by, King William III in Northern Ireland. This is when the Ulster-Scots became known as supporters of King Billy. Anglo-Dutch Wars But why was William of Orange installed as King? I am not going to answer this question. But it should be noted that William of Orange was also the ruler of Holland, Zeeland, Utrecht, Guelders, and the Dutch Republic. And the context for this is that throughout the 17th Century, England and the Netherlands had been fighting a series of disastrous and expensive wars against each other known collectively as the Anglo-Dutch Wars . Indeed it was just prior to the Second Anglo-Dutch War that New Amsterdam became New York. The purpose of the Anglo-Dutch Wars was to establish control of International Colonial Trade, but it was believed that having a single King and Ruler of both England and several countries in the Lowlands would create peace. Principality of Orange As an interesting aside, let's just point out that the Principality of Orange came into existence in 1163 per Holy Roman Emperor Frederick Barbarossa in order to serve as a March in the context of his conflict with the Papacy. Recommended Born Fighting is a Book written by Senator James Webb . While I have not read the book, the Television Series Born Fighting from the Smithsonian Channel is also narrated by Senator James Webb and is very fun and interesting to watch.","tags":"Etymology","url":"https://blog.trentpalmer.org/hillbillies.html","loc":"https://blog.trentpalmer.org/hillbillies.html"},{"title":"Veneti","text":"Who were the Veneti? This is not an easy question to answer. Baltic Veneti The Vistula Veneti were called Wends , by German-speaking people. But another theory is that Veneti is a diminutization of venus , as per Latin origins. And for further confusion, Slavs living near Germanic settlements were also called Wends . The Vistula Veneti hailed from Eastern Poland. Adriatic Veneti The Adriatic Veneti lived in a region that we now identify as \"the area around Venice\". Indeed, this area is known by the name Veneto , or Venetia . Strabo, the Greek historian, conjectures that the Adriatic Veneti are related to the Veneti of Brittany. Breton Veneti The Veneti of the Breton Peninsula , were a tribe of Gauls which were defeated by Julius Brunus Albinus , in a naval battle in 56 BC , as part of Julius Caesar's campaign to pacify Gaul. Part of the drama here was that the Veneti were experienced in operating on the ocean, whereas the Romans would have only ever known the waters of the Mediterranean Sea. In particular, ships sailed by the Veneti were faster than the Roman ships. Recommended Wends, Sorbs, and Other Slavs - History of Germany Podcast 40 The Celtic Holocaust - Hardcore History 60 \"De Bello Gallico\" and Other Commentaries by Julius Caesar","tags":"Etymology","url":"https://blog.trentpalmer.org/veneti.html","loc":"https://blog.trentpalmer.org/veneti.html"},{"title":"Guideschi You Guys","text":"\"You Guys!\" was an insult. But this expression was transformed into a term of endearment, in America, by the working class. Because that is what the working class do. Gunpowder Plot You are probably familiar with the Gunpowder Plot , in which Guy Fawkes , attempted to blow up Parliament on 5 November 1605. And thus, because Guy Fawkes was reviled for his crime, the expression \"You Guys\" emerged as an insult. Norman Conquest But how did an Englishman come by the names \"Guy\", and \"Fawkes\"? According to Wikipedia, Fawkes is a name of Norman-French origin . Well now. It just so happens that the Normans invaded and conquered England in 1066 , an event from which the history of English Nobility ever since can be traced. Guy of Nantes And yet more than a half century before the Normans even settled in Normandy , which they would not do until the middle of the 9th Century, (from where they would later sail across the English Channel and conquer England), Guy of Nantes was Count of Nantes, as of 778, which was of course the late 8th Century, the County of Nantes being located next door to what was not yet Normandy nor inhabited by Normans, and Guy (of the Guideschi Family), not being Norman but Frankish of descent. Well, that was awkward. Breton Peninsula Geography So who was Guy, who were the Guideschi, and why were they occupying a small principality in between what are today Normandy and Brittany in the NorthWest corner of France? If you will recall that Charlemagne became King of the Franks in 768, but he was never able to conquer the Breton Peninsula , because the terrain was too rough. Thus he appointed Guy's father Roland as Count of Nantes, intending for the County of Nantes to be a buffer zone of containment protecting the Carolingian Empire from the inhabitants of the Breton Peninsula, (who could not be conquered on account of the rough terrain). Excile to Italy Anyway, one thing led to another. Guy's son Lambert had a falling-out with Charlemagne's son Louis the Pious , which resulted in the Guideschi Family being exciled to Italy. And then in 834 Lambert was given the Duchy of Spoleto , even though he was exciled, and the Guideschis firmly ensconsed themselves in the chaos and intrigue of what at that time passed for statecraft in Italy. Conclusion In conclusion I really have no idea where I was going with all this, but thanks for reading all the way to the end, you guys! Here's a podcast about the Guideshi .","tags":"Etymology","url":"https://blog.trentpalmer.org/guideschi-you-guys.html","loc":"https://blog.trentpalmer.org/guideschi-you-guys.html"},{"title":"Lohengrin","text":"Have you heard of Lohengrin ? It is a German Opera written and composed by Richard Wagner in 1850. I happen to think that German Opera is more entertaining than Italian Opera, but enough about me. King Ludwig II Which brings me to King Ludwig II of Bavaria . If I understand correctly, King Ludwig was very fond of Lohengrin, and built Neuschwanstein Castle as a private world for himself where he could live alone in a fantasy inspired by the Knight of the Swan Legend , on which Lohengrin is based. But don't judge King Ludwig II too harshly: he was after all a cigar connoisseur, drove a smoking-hot golden carriage, and Neuschwanstein Castle is an excellent place to take selfies. You really should visit the Marstallmuseum at Nymphenburg Palace in Munich and see the golden carriage . Needless to say, Lohengrin is quite different from the Strauss Operas that your great-great-great Grandmother used to listen to on her smartphone in the bathtub. Lohengrin So what happens in Lohengrin? King Henry the Fowler fights the Magyars . This means we have to talk about the Magyars, King Henry's Son King Otto I , the Battle of Augsburg which is sometimes called the Battle of Lechfeld, and the Mongols ! Magyars Ok, the Magyars are descended from a nomadic-steppe-people who settled on the Hungarian Plain , which is sometimes called the Carpathian Plain. Unfortunately for them, the Hungarian Plain was not quite vast enough to support a prosperous nomadic lifestyle. And so for some hundreds of years, the Magyars raided and pillaged all over Europe. It should be noted that Hungary considers 1896 to be the 1000th anniversary of the Magyars entering the Carpathian Plain, and in that year many memorials, monuments, and museums were built in Budapest . As stated above, the Magyars came into conflict with King Henry the Fowler who was the King of East Frankia . East Frankia evolved from the Eastern Parts of the Carolingian Empire that was originally put together by Charlemagne . Indeed, there is today a region of Bavaria called Franconia , which has excellent regional passenger trains connecting innumerable picturesque little cities and towns which are perfect for taking selfies and drinking the local bier . But I digress. Battle of Lechfeld The Magyars were finally defeated by King Henry the Fowler's son King Otto I near Augsburg in 955, Augsburg being an ancient city in Bavaria that goes all the way back to the Roman Empire. King Otto I of East Frankia was the greatest King since Charlemagne, and the Battle of Lechfeld was equal in importance to the Battle of Hastings in 1066 , in the context of European History, but deeper analysis of that is above my pay grade. (This is a free blog post) Recommended Anyway, the Magyars gave up their raiding, became Christianized, and adopted a more agrarian lifestyle on the Hungarian Plain where they founded the Nation of Hungary around the year 1000. In the 13th Century, the Mongols invaded Hungary, but were never able to advance beyond Hungary into Western Europe . For more riveting entertainment about the Mongols, I recommend Dan Carlin's Hardcore History Podcast, in particular the subseries Wrath of The Khans . Thanks for reading, I'm fresh out of cigars.","tags":"Opera","url":"https://blog.trentpalmer.org/lohengrin.html","loc":"https://blog.trentpalmer.org/lohengrin.html"},{"title":"Battle In The Middle Ages","text":"There were three type of battles in Europe in the Middle Ages: Raids Sieges Field-Battles There were two types of soldiers in Europe in the Middle Ages: cavalry and infantry. Raids Infantry tended to not be used in raids, because horses had the advantage in speed and mobility. Sieges Cavalry were not much use in sieges, but when infantry were not available, the cavalry could obviously dismount. Later in the Middle Ages, infantry began using CrossBows, which were easy to use, and effective in sieges. And so, when infantry were available for sieges, they would often use CrossBows, and would often be Mercenaries. Field-Battles In set-piece battles, cavalry and infantry could work together. For instance cavalry could not charge infantry that were in tight formation with spears. But cavalry were useful for attacking the enemy's flanks, and for pursuit in the case of a rout. However, for economic reasons, most field battles were fought between cavalry because it was too expensive to muster both cavalry and infantry most of the time. Crusades The Crusades demonstrate that although most field battles in Europe during the Middle Ages were fought between Cavalry, the warriors of that age were capable of more sophisticated tactics. Here it should be noted, that because lands to the East tended to be more arid, the opponents fighting against the European Crusaders were more skilled on horseback and with the bow and arrow. Eastern-style fighting was much more cavalry-oriented. What tipped the scale in favour of the Crusaders in certain battles that they won, was the fact that the CrossBow could outrange the bow-and-arrow. So, the Crusaders would line up infantry with edged-weapons in front, behind them would be CrossBow Infantry, with Cavalry protecting the flanks. The edged-weapon infantry would protect the CrossBowMen, who would shoot over the top and protect the edged-weapon infantry from enemy harrassment. Recommended This blog post is inspired by Wittenberg To Westphalia Podcast , specifically Episode 38 , Episode 39 , and Episode 40 .","tags":"War","url":"https://blog.trentpalmer.org/battle-in-the-middle-ages.html","loc":"https://blog.trentpalmer.org/battle-in-the-middle-ages.html"}]}; |