The Roman war history
From early days, the Romans considered war as an essential element in their lifetime. They prepared for war on a daily basis. In addition, annually traditions marked the closing and opening of the campaigning year. All Roman people were responsible for army support and, apart from the lowest and freedmen, most Roman people under the beginning and center Republic served in various decades’ strategies during their youngsters. The censors’ category of the individuals into property sessions and hundreds of years provided both governmental and military reasons. In addition, it showed the close links between military responsibilities and governmental privileges. It was not by accident that, when the individuals met to choose their primary magistrates, who instructed the military, they constructed outside the town on the University Martius, which was generally known as the field of Mars or the war god. Valour in hands won the biggest famous, and members of the top level were under heavy pressure to improve their loved one’s wonder by identifying themselves in battle. There were crowns and different army awards that any solder won, while a winning leader gained the superior respect of leading his coming back members of the military into the town in a victory.
In the starting hundreds of years, Roman combat was not remarkably effective. The capital was merely one of the areas of the simply of Latium, and her people battled their conflicts against Latina who live nearby and against the individuals of the nearby mountains. However, there started an interval of fast development, in which the Romans won a long sequence of army achievements. After sometimes, they managed all France southern of the Po. International conflicts followed, especially against Carthage and different Hellenistic leaders, and all prospective competitors were beaten. Competitors, like the Ancient historian Polybius, now identified the capital as the leader of the Mediterranean Sea globe. In many areas, they worked out only casual kingdom, but varieties of overseas areas were directly ruled, as provinces.
Technologically, they had proven themselves formidably convenient. Their weapons were enhanced, not by their own enhancements so much as by credit from competitors. The loose strategic framework of the area provided it the advantage over the phalanx. Simple generalship was not normally embraced, but when the Carthaginians created a leader of professional in Hannibal, the people of Roman gradually discovered his coordinate in Scipio Africanus. However, the most essential purpose for their achievements lay in the wide sources of human sources that they could get rid of due to the way in which they had structured their conquests in France. Many of the beaten areas were integrated into the Roman resident whole body, so that by the later third millennium about a third of the populations of France southern of the Po were citizens of Rome. Others were created companions, and were consistently called for services in Rome’s military. Consequently, the capital had the ability to field military in different cinemas at the same time in the beginning decades of the Second Punic.
At first, great outcomes in war seems to have assisted all stages of Roman community. The beginning Republic had been wracked by governmental issue, which financial discontents such as area starvation and debts, assisted to fuel. Numerous butts and the submission of seized area seem to have treated these demands and probably provided to the governmental balance of the third and beginning second millennium. However, by the second millennium, the advantages of war and kingdom reduced to be equitably diffused. The élite increased continuously better and the competitors between its associates regularly increased. While inadequate men who were fortunate enough to provide in profitable conflicts such as those in the Eastern could do well, majority of their people were not fortunate.
The wealthy were desperate to get some of their new prosperity in area, which they proved helpful with slaves, created at low costs available by war. Consequently, majority of peasant family members were uprooted. Land submission could have assisted to take care of this, but the France conquest competition intended that area was no more being seized in the peninsula. As an outcome, after the 170s the Roman government stopped to create area withdrawals. The French companions too became restive and the opposition of their requirement for the citizenship led many allied areas to develop rebel. This problem was settled by the expansion of the citizenship to the whole of France southern of the Po, but the war led on to a dangerous sequence of municipal conflicts, which essentially destabilized the nation. Civil war split out again in and went on occasionally until the ultimate success.
In the beginning and center Republic, prolonged support in Rome’s conflicts was aspect of the encounter of most people. The delayed Republic can already identify a pattern away from this. The old concept that no one could take a position for workplace unless he had provided for ten strategies was no more required by that time Cicero began his profession. Difference in war was still the most extremely valued way of famous, but oratory and jurisprudence now provided different methods by which an ambitious politician could create popularity. A little support in the Public War was all that Cicero saw of military, until, delayed in his profession and very much against his will, he was sent to regulate Cilicia and was amazed to discover himself subduing a hill group and making the right to a victory. The old perspective that Marius provided the capitals an experienced military can no more be managed. His enrolment of men without the residence certification in 107 was in all possibility a separated episode. The anger, which it turned on, creates it unlikely that his successors followed fit. The conventional techniques of the imposer, such as the residence certification, probably stopped to function in the disorderly circumstances of the 80’s.
In the delayed Republic military persisted to be brought up for the most aspect by conscription. However, the technique used now seems to have been the delivery of press-gangs to take part in areas. Overall, circumstances seem to have been no more than in the past millennium, and for the most aspect the men recruited came from the same social category, namely the non-urban inadequate. However, the new technique of enlistment may have intended that the pressure of support be less equally distributed. It will have been an issue of opportunity who drawn the hiring officer’s interest.
It was the military changes of Augustus, which lastly changed the old resident militia by an experienced long-service military. The exercise of increasing extra soldiers to battle a particular war and discharging them when the war was over was finished. By the end of Augustus’ rule, the efficient interval of support for legionaries had been set at 25 decades. In the problems, which introduced down the Republic military had come to anticipate grants of area on release. Nevertheless, this was troublesome and from13 BC Augustus changed money expenses, financed originally from his own sources but from AD 6 by new taxation. Probably Augustus forbade military to get married to during their phrase of support. Certain unique corps provided in the capital and France, but the large of the military was positioned in the frontier regions and from the first millennium AD, it came to be enrolled mainly from provincials.
Augustus preferred senators to be aware of the camping. However, under perticipation, younger men who aspired to the senate usually provided just for a season as an army tribune, and many furnished with that. The content to which senators were hired by the emperor involved army commands. However, following the proctorship, senators could possibly be put in control of a region, and following the consulship, he could possibly regulate one or more army regions. Majority of senators gained themselves army popularity, like Agricola and Corbulo. However, several senators organized no army sessions at all. Crumbled special conquests had assisted to set up the place of highly effective dynasts in the republic. Pompey had set the pattern with his strategies in the Eastern. Caesar copied his examples in Gaul. Crassus desired to adhere to against Parthia, but missed his lifestyle in the procedure. Caesar as a master, organized a Parthian battle, but was killed before setting out. Antony started on one, and was fortunate to extricate himself with large failures.
When Augustus founded himself in authority, men predicted him to perform excellent conflicts of conquests and he properly obliged, but it was not against the predicted opponents, Parthia, and England. He attained a diplomatic housing with Parthia and disregarded England. Nevertheless, in some places, he extended the Roman Kingdom, subjugating the Alps and north Italy, forcing ahead Roman management to the Danube, and overcoming Malaysia up to the Elbe. However, the catastrophe experienced by Varus in AD 9 made Germany to loss, and Augustus recommended his successors not to improve the kingdom beyond its current limitations. His successors in the primary followed this principle, with a few exclusions, of which the most significant were Claudius’ cure of England and Trajan’s cure of Dacia and his competitive battle against Parthia.
Army service had stopped to be a responsibility to which entire people were responsible and which majority of them experienced. Instead, army established an individual area of community, considered with an assortment of respect, incomprehension and hated by the non-army population. The army was positioned in the frontier regions, and only sometimes had major conflicts to fight. Assured by the army, the rest of the kingdom’s subjects experienced the pax Romana-the Roman serenity. The Roman kingdom lastly compensated the cost for Augustus dissolution of the web link between military support and citizenship. That web link had affirmed the Republic of a wide source of employees, which allowed it to surmount its inner downturn. The military of the new Roman kingdom showed imbalanced to the barbarian task. Since the entire kingdom’s subjects had owned and operated the Roman citizenship. Yet the Roman nation did not convert to them to create up the military lack, but instead applied barbarians to battle on its part. The citizens of Rome had always used allied soldiers, but with unusual exclusions, they had confidence that the variety of companions did not become so excellent as to endanger their protection.
Second Macedonian Conflicts started out the Roman development eastward. In the brief of one creation, the capital had obtained the control over the Hellenistic globe, a factor exclusive in record. Even at the other end of the traditional program of abilities, in the distant Crimea, and even in 179 B.C., the credibility of a partnership was programmed upon its contract with Rome’s international plan. Because of this, the causes of the eventful war against John of Macedon were strongly discussed among both Romans and the Greek. About 197 B.C. there already were oracles introducing that the increasing Kingdom of the capital would get through the old ones of Portugal and Macedon. Records of this enthusiastic debate endure nowadays on relevant web pages of ancient researchers. This continues to be entitled to a near evaluation. They may tell something about Roman imperialism and perhaps even more about Traditional and Roman historiography.
The war was announced upon Master John and the Macedonians, over whom he decided, due to the accidents he had induced and the strikes he had created on the companions of the Roman individuals. This approved edition of the activities was diffused by official propaganda, arriving even from the Roman level, and usually accredited by the Roman community. Cicero said to his viewers “without themselves having been harmed, their forefathers would have not created war upon the Aetolians, John p, Antiochus, and the Carthaginians for the security of the allies.” Nevertheless, the annalists were not pleased with such an uncomplicated consideration and seemed for some more innovative factors for Rome’s involvement.
Outlining the annalistic custom on the topic, Livy says that the Romans were irritated with John because he did not notice the serenity with the Aetolia’s and the other companions in that region. Due to his support to Hannibal an African-American at the end of the Punic War. During summer time, the Athenians turned them on. In addition, about the same time there came envoys from Pergamum and Rhodes, stressing about Philip’s aggressions. Nevertheless, this design has no more aspect in the story. Then, in the starting of 200, dispatches from Roman emissaries in Portugal introducing Philip’s armaments and a new embassy from Athens impelled the American senate to recommend to the individuals an announcement of war against John of Macedon. This consideration demands some findings. To start with, let us consider the lawful process intended by the annalist.
According to the fetial guidelines, a particular requirement of reparations and then an ultimatum introducing the objective to create war were needed before the elect in the capital and the following announcement of hostilities to the opponent. However, when the capital became engaged in wars internationally, the exclusive process was actually changed at many factors. Therefore, the rerum repetitio progressed in to return of embassies with suggestions and reverse suggestions. Accordingly, the American senate could distribute with any denuntiatio belli. I n 191 B.C. a choice of the fetial higher education identified the new concept that the amicitia might be damaged by the point that no pay attention to it had been given to Roman demonstrations. As Polybius notices some 40 decades later, from the standard program of official war making there stayed only the serious announcement of hostilities. Accordingly, the annalistic story of the origins of the war against John properly notices the indictio bellt at its date place but does not discuss any serious denuntiatio belli.
The annalist knows as diplomatic demarches before the crack with John only a demonstration registered with him in 203 and then a caution given to his envoys by the American senate in 201. This demonstration of record is, of course, a distortion of information. We know from Polybius that during summer time season of 200, the American senate resolved notices twice to the Macedonian master. However, the annalistic consideration may help to comprehend the lawful characteristics of these diplomatic emails. The typical perspective is that the first notice was the denunciation belli, while the second one, provided to John himself in Abydus. In Aug 200, was the indictio belli, following to the voting of the war in the capital. Another demonstration views Lepidus’ meeting as a denunciation belli. Nevertheless, this description increases date complications, while the present demonstration satisfies with powerful historical arguments. As a point actually, the indictio bellt was communicated to a Macedonian public in Illyria when a Roman military had surpassed the Adriatic, about mid-September 200.
An ultimatum was believed needless because John did not response the notice passed over in Athens but persisted with his aggressions; by his perform splitting serenity and relationship with the capital. Lepidus’ demonstration was an increased restoration of the notice passed on in Athens, and the war was elected in the capital about plenty of duration of the colloquy in Abydus and individuals of its result. The views between the annalist and the Polybian custom are different. According to the Traditional historian, John was perturbed in the fall of 201 on studying of the embassies’ were being sent to the American senate to grumble against him. The envoys of the Rhodians and of Attalus of Pergamum revealed that, in the capital, Philip’s pact with Antiochus III instructed against the red sea.
Another objective asking for security came to the capital from Alexandria. In the springtime of 200, the American senate sent out a delegation to Portugal and the Eastern to negotiate the southern issue. It was this objective, of which Lepidus was a participant, which introduced about the conflict between the capital and Macedon. On all these issues, Livy continues to be quiet even in his variation of relevant web pages of Polybius. He rather follows his annalistic referrals, which keeps to the official inspiration of the Roman objective as sent to thank Ptolemy for his commitment and to ask him to sustain it in the occasion of a Roman war against John p. Thus, the annalist detaches the Macedonian War from the southern problems.
Therefore, the actual factors for the Roman choice to go to war are the risk of Philip’s control in Portugal and a wish for avenging Philip’s involvement in the Punic War. The war is a precautionary one and, simultaneously, a vindication of previous errors. The capital is far away from the fetial formalism and even from the conventional of a bellum iustum, which cannot be announced nisi de repetitis rebus.
John, and Graham Shipley. 1993. War and society in the Roman world.
 Rich, John, and Graham Shipley. 1993. War and society in the Roman world. London: Routledge.
 Rich, John, and Graham Shipley. 1993. War and society in the Roman world. London: Routledge.
 Rich, John, and Graham Shipley. 1993. War and society in the Roman world. London: Routledge.
 Rich, John, and Graham Shipley. 1993. War and society in the Roman world. London: Routledge.
 Rich, John, and Graham Shipley. 1993. War and society in the Roman world. London: Routledge.
 Rich, John, and Graham Shipley. 1993. War and society in the Roman world. London: Routledge.
 Rich, John, and Graham Shipley. 1993. War and society in the Roman world. London: Routledge.
 Rich, John, and Graham Shipley. 1993. War and society in the Roman world. London: Routledge.
 Rich, John, and Graham Shipley. 1993. War and society in the Roman world. London: Routledge.
 Rich, John, and Graham Shipley. 1993. War and society in the Roman world. London: Routledge.
 Rich, John, and Graham Shipley. 1993. War and society in the Roman world. London: Routledge.
The Entry of United States Into World War I
World War I is a worldwide historical event of great significance. It took place in Europe between 1914 and 1918 as a result of excessive conflict and hostility between the European great powers. Colonial issues aggravated this conflict, disagreement over territories and boundaries, and diplomatic clashes between the great powers (Vander 21). The European great powers grouped themselves in two camps during this conflict. The Allies camp had Russia, France and Britain and the central powers camp had Germany and Austria-Hungary. America joined the war in 1917 supporting the Allies camp. This occurred after the Germans sunk several American ships without warning thus killing several Americans and this prompted the nation to declare war on Germany (Vander 43).
When the war broke out, the Americans preferred to maintain neutrality. However, after the several ships sunk in Germany, the American government had to retaliate. President Woodrow Wilson took the position that America had the mandate of maintaining global safety for democracy and they termed their act of joining the war as a means of ending it (Vander 62). United States majorly contributed material assistance to their British allies. Moreover, after America fully joined the war, they sent troops into the battlefield and contributed ammunition and arms for the Allies camp resulting in victory. Moreover, America crushed Germany’s economy. The signing of the treaty of Versailles and the league for nations marked the end of the war (Vander 79). This had numerous effects on American politics. The Americans rejected this treaty because of their isolationism ideology citing the following reasons: adhering to the treaty was costly, many soldiers were dying in the peacekeeping process, many Americans had Europe ties, and the Americans did not support British Empire. In addition, the women were liberated to vote in 1920 and Americans became more interested in African American culture.
Vander, Hook S. The United States Enters World War I. Edina, Minn: ABDO Pub, 2010. Print.
How did Michail Bulgakov contribute to the Russian history of medicine?
The history of medicine in Russia has seen practical developments over the years. It shares conceptual traits, narratives and methodological conventions with the other eastern European countries (Bernstein et al 9). The significant contributions of Michail Bulgakov on the Russian history of medicine bridge the major revolutions over the centuries and the general impact on the medical history and profession. Prior to the aspect of the revolution, Russia was backward in terms of medical provision, especially for the majority of the people during World War I (Bernstein et al 13). Over the years, vast advance has been established with public health and sanitation becoming perfect through the contribution of professional medical personnel to the present day. With the establishment of new economic policy and the suppression of the Russian war communism, medicine improved significantly with hospitals and medical schools improving slowly (Bernstein et al 13). For many years now, the quality of medical care has advanced tremendously and medical information and awareness has heightened and is provided to the Russians in masses.
During the time when Bulgakov practiced medicine as a profession, Soviet Russia had one of the socialist health care models with an integrated, centralized and hierarchically organized system with the government health care to the citizens. Health personnel were mostly state employees, especially during the world war (Bernstein et al 26). The control of the communicable diseases was given priority over the non-communicable ones. The Soviet system had highly emphasized hospital and specialists care. Through the integrated model, significant success was achieved, particularly in dealing with contagious illnesses, such as, tuberculosis, typhus and typhoid fever. However, the model effectiveness deteriorated following the increased underinvestment. Health outcomes and medical care in the Soviet Union was, on balance with the western standards (Bernstein et al 29).
Despite the doubling number of doctors per capita, especially during the 1900s, lack of money going into health was one of the obvious cases. Russia experienced significant changes in medicine after the World War I (Bernstein et al 30). This includes the adoption of a blended model of health care inclusive of private provision and financing relating to the financing and provision of the state. The government had introduced policies confirming that the citizens had the right to health care and medical assistance. The continued efforts of the likes of Bulgakov contributed to the promotion of such Medicare assistance efficiency and patient choice. Government efforts provided for the systematic and professional extension of medical practitioners and treatment facilities to most of the provinces (Bernstein et al 32).
Russian history of medicine
Health policy subjected matters of health of the non-serf population to the hands of the province health commissions (Bernstein et al 7). Further slight changes over the years introduced manifested itself through numerical augmentation of the people charged with the responsibility in public health such as the appointment of Bulgakov as a provincial physician in Smolensk province and his later return to Kiev to open a private practice at Andreyevsky Descent. During the time, public health was also in the hands of bureaucratic institutions such as medical boards, committees of public health, departments of state properties and appendages, and medical counsel (Bernstein et al 17). Most of the officials heading such departments produced lots of documents without the prior knowledge about the needs of medicine.
Although the growing vital amount of medical faculties of the Soviet Union’s institutions, as well as the continued improvement of medical science, contributed significantly to both the quantity and quality of Russian physicians. Bulgakov is a primary example, as one of the professional personnel admitted in Kiev University at the Medical Faculty and later finished with a special commendation that secured him a significant position as one of the key physicians based at a Kiev Military Hospital. This hardly had an influence on the general situation of health care within the Russian Empire. The existing medical system in the Soviet Union before and after the First World War brought significant changes to the medical institution’s education and provision of health care (Bernstein et al 57).
During the early 1900s, the extant situation in the medical profession was that there were a significant number of physicians who were unable to secure job opportunities or faced difficulties while serving. Similar cases led to Bulgakov volunteering as a medical doctor with the Red Cross during the First World War. A very small number of the Soviet Union medical institutions, cases of non-existent conditions majorly for the private practice in larger cities and provinces led to an artificial surplus of physicians. Such situations facilitated the establishment of poor financial compensations which was a sensitive factor for most of the then young practitioners such as Bulgakov. Following an outbreak of World War I, there were an increased number of vacancies in medicine practice. This was even for most of the graduates who had enjoyed the support of the Soviet Union while still studying at the universities (Bernstein et al 69).
Although most of the Soviet Union state authorities, tried to facilitate changes to the situation through ordering the early retirement of physicians and giving some of them opportunities to practice private medicine after reaching the age of 60 years. This had relations with the positions most of them held. The successive Soviet Union governments managed to draft Bulgakov as a young and professional doctor into their service. It should be considered that the case of “surplus” of the physicians, which appeared prior to the world war period, saw one physician serving approximately 30,000 inhabitants (Bernstein et al 117). In the Voronezh province, the ratio had a significant variation with 1:38,000 while in the Samara province as 1:53,000. In the Orenburg province, the ratio was higher as much as 1:70,000.
History statistics indicate the number of medical facilities in the Soviet Union and western region generally which were at the disposal of the State before cases of reorganization. This is especially when its medical functions were passed to the Zemstvos system. It was especially during the time when the state Ministry constituted the main body charged with the responsibility for the provision of medical assistance to the non-serf population of the Russian Empire (Bernstein et al 119). According to state based statistics, one hospital was meant to serve 721,499 inhabitants, especially after the first world war. One medical practitioner such as a physician or feldsher was assigned to serve approximately 101,516 inhabitants while one smallpox vaccinator charged with the responsibility of serving 5,790 of the people (Bernstein et al 119).
Altogether, in the Soviet Union during the time of Michail Bulgakov as one of the key physicians at a Kiev Military Hospital, there were approximately 269 out-patient clinics, 170 physicians who were employed at the district and province levels and 1200 rural kits, 1278 feldshers, 51 veterinarians and 3,276 smallpox vaccinators hired through the Ministry (Bernstein et al 126). Therefore, it is conclusive through such statistics that a qualified medical assistance might have been ensured is available for the significant part of the Soviet Union population. It is also worth mentioning that, during that time, even the regular medical procedures rooted in Russia were relatively dangerous for the health of the people due to cases of rather bad performance (Bernstein et al 172). As a result of careful organization of smallpox vaccinations in the west, the morbidity of smallpox underwent a sharp decrease. However, in Russia, the cases of smallpox vaccinations inoculated syphilis situations and other diseases.
Naturally, most of the people had to run away from cases of ignorant vaccinations since they failed to keep elementary hygienic rules throughout such simple task. Therefore, on the one hand, the Russian Empire population, except for minor parts living in the metropolitan cities with the ability to secure the use of private practitioners, significantly suffered the lack of medical services. In addition, most of the physicians themselves and the newly graduated ones faced cases of serious difficulties, especially in securing places of employment due to the faulty organizations of the Soviet Union public health system (Bernstein et al 172). Such problems, including the rest, no less significant, had to be subjected to permanent solutions, at least through legislative means by the successive governments who managed to draft medical practitioners as young and professional doctors such as Michail Bulgakov into their service.
Mikhail Bulgakov was one of the Soviet most post-revolutionary Russia satirists and successful playwright and writer during the 20th century first half. Bulgakov was widely recognized for one of his best masterpieces, “The Master and Margarita” and has been considered a significant contribution of the 2oth century (Milne 134). Most of his fiction sketches and stories, including his other works present significant adjustments of the intellectual class based on Russian class to life in reflection to the communist rule. Through the influence of Nikolai Gogol, Michail Bulgakov combined realism, fantasy and satire in ridiculing the modern progressive society especially the Soviet medical system.
Bulgakov was born in Kiev in the Russian Empire on 15 May 1891 among seven children. He was the oldest among three brothers born to Afanasi Bulgakov, who was an assistant professor at Kiev Theological Academy and a former teacher, Varvara Mikhailovna. Both of Bulgakov grandfathers were member of the Russian Orthodox Church and also clergymen (Milne 134). Afanasi Bulgakov was born to a priest father in Bryansk Oblust in Russia and later moved to study at the Kiev academy while Varvara Mikhailovna in Karachev. Mutual love, friendship and respect are some of the significant elements that reigned in the large family of Bulgakov and happy home. Since childhood, Bulgakov had an interest in theater and managed to write comedies, of which his sisters and brother acted out (Milne 134).
During 1901, Bulgakov decided to become part of the Kiev Gymnasium from which he developed a passion for the European and Russian literature by favorite authors, including Dickens, Dostoyevsky, and Pushkin, Gogol and Saltykov-Shchedrin opera and theatre. The gymnasium teachers exerted pressure and significant influence, especially on the relative formation of Bulgakov literary taste. Following his father’s death in 1907, his mother who was extraordinarily diligent and well-educated person assumed the sole responsibility in ensuring that Bulgakov received his education. Upon graduation in 1909 from the gymnasium, Bulgakov was admitted in Kiev University at the Medical Faculty (Milne 134). He later finished with a special commendation and then took a significant position as one of the key physicians at a Kiev based Military Hospital.
Bulgakov was married in 1903 to Tatiana Lappa and following an outbreak of World War I; he volunteered as a medical doctor with the Red Cross (Milne 134). Bulgakov was later assigned to the front as a medical practitioner where he had a bad injury on two occasions. His suffering from the wounds he endured had deleterious effects which lasted for a very long time. In order to suppress the chronic pain he was experiencing in the abdomen, Bulgakov had a self injection with morphine and over the following years, he grew addicted to the medication. During 1918, Bulgakov abandoned the use of morphine and dreaded never to use it again. He later released a book, “Morphine” in 1926 giving an account of his prying moments (Milne 135).
Bulgakov graduated in 1916 from the Kiev University, Medical Department and served as a one of the surgeons at the Chemovtsy hospital (Milne 135). This later led to his appointment as a provincial physician in Smolensk province. “A Country Doctor’s Notebook” reflects Bulgakov’s life during such times (Milne 135). He was later in 1917 moved to a hospital in Vyanza and in February 1918, Bulgakov returned to Kiev to open a private practice at Andreyevsky Descent. Here, Bulgakov lived through the civil war and witness major coups (Milne 135). The successive governments managed to draft Bulgakov as a young and professional doctor into their service. Two of his brothers also served in the army, especially against the Bolsheviks.
In 1919 February, Bulgakov was mobilized by the Ukranian People’s Party as an army physician and was later referred to the Northern Caucasus. Bulgakov becomes ill while serving in the Northern Caucasus when he suffered Typhus but barely survived. While still at the Caucasus, he changed his mind about medicine as a profession and started working as a part time writer and journalist. He was later invited by the German and French governments to work as a doctor, but was denied the opportunity to leave Russia and honor the call as a result of the typhus (Milne 135). It was the last time Bulgakov saw his family since the Soviets up rise and the Civil war; the majority of his relatives had to migrate to Paris.
Following the illness that Bulgakov suffered, he was forced to leave his career as a professional doctor and major in writing. In his autobiography, Bulgakov recalled about his writing and where he started. He explained that, during 1919 when travelling by train one night, he managed to write a short story and later took it to a newspaper publisher upon alighting in the next town. The short story was published, though Bulgakov made his first fiction efforts while in Kiev. This is when he decided to pursue the love for literature in 1919. He produced his first book; “Future Perspectives” which was written and published in 1919 was a success. Bulgakov later moved to Vladikavkaz in December 1919. During this time, he was already a play writer and wrote his first two successful plays, “The Turbin Brothers” and “Self Defense” which were produced with great success in the city theatre (Milne 137).
After his travels through the Caucasus, he later headed for Moscow with the intentions of remaining there for a long time to practice his career as a writer. Bulgakov found it difficult to secure employment in the capital, but managed to secure an appointment as a secretary in Glavpolitprosyet literary section. This was a republic central committee for political education. Later on 1921 September, Bulgakov in the company of his wife settled in Partriach’s pond, Bolshaya Sadovaya Street close to Mayakovskaya. In order to survive, Bulgakov started as a feuilletons writer and correspondence for Krasnaia Panorama and Gudok newspapers which were based in Berlin (Milne 137). In 1924, he wrote “The Fatal Eggs” for Almanac Nedra and later in 1925, “Heart of a Dog.” his works combined bitter elements and satire of science fiction, which reflected on the misuse of most of his discoveries and fate of the rest of the scientists.
During the time, the primary features that Bulgakov involved in his satire including grotesque situations, the skillful blending of realistic and relevant elements and concerns reflecting on significant ethical issues were already in shape. Such features later underwent developments through the works of Bulgakov especially through his most successful novels. He successfully created various plays from 1922 to 1926. This includes “Zoyka’s Apartment.” none of the plays were produced. One of his masterpieces, “The Run” which treated horrors of the fratricidal was banned personally by Joseph Stalin. This follows the department of repertoire decision that the work glorified white generals and the aspect of emigration. Bulgakov divorced his wife in 1925 and later married Belozerskaya Lyubov (Milne 138).
Stalin personally came to the rescue of Bulgakov defending him when some of the directors of the Moscow theatre severely criticized his work. This was with the idea that most of the work he produced were of quality. Despite being highly favored under Joseph Stalin soviet regime, Bulgakov faced restrictions from visiting or immigrating to the west. He was never in support of the regime and at times mocked it through a significant number of ways, such as his works which were consigned to a desk drawer for many years (Milne 142). This is since such writings contained politically sensitive matters to publish. Bulgakov later wrote a letter requesting for permission from Stalin to migrate that saw him receiving a personal phone call to deny him the request.
Some of the works of Bulgakov, which were banned through the influence of Stalin include “Don Quixote,” “Last Days” and “Ivan Vasilievich.” another significant setback that he faced was during the premiere of “The Cabal of Hypocrites” which received disappointing reviews as a play in Pravda and was withdrawn immediately from the theatre. 1928 saw the staging of “The Purple Island” and “Zoyka’s Apartment” in Moscow as comedies. Both plays were accepted with enthusiasm by the public, but received bad reviews from critics (Bulgakov 34). The career of Bulgakov as a writer faced a standstill as the government censorship created barriers for the publication of most of his work including the staging of some of his plays.
The letter that Bulgakov wrote on July 1929 was through the effort to reach out to Joseph Stalin for the government to grant him the permission to move since he felt the Soviet Unions had no more need for him as one of the literature and play writers. He claimed in his autobiography that writing a letter to Stalin was out of mental anguish and desperation, but he never had the intentions of posting it (Bulgakov 34). Since he replied the direct phone call from Stalin that he never wished to live away from his homeland, Bulgakov was given the opportunity to continue with his work at the Art Theatre. He later rejoined the theatre on May 1930 as one of the stage director assistants. Bulgakov later adapted “Dead Souls” by Golgol for the stage.
Bulgakov’s third marriage was to Yelena Shilovskaya in 1932 . She was the inspiration for the Margarita characters in his most successful and famous novel. He continued with his work on the novel, “The Master and Margarita” during the last years of his life (Milne 142). He also wrote critical works, plays and stories and continued to produce several dramatizations and translations of novels. The majority of his works was never published by others given bad reviews by his critics. His work which involved ridiculing of the Soviet Union was never published for several decades. The authorities’ refusal to let him continue with his work in the theatre in order to fulfill his desire in seeing his family who lived abroad pushed him to use drastic measures. Despite his continued impressive work, most of the projects he started while at the theatre faced restrictions making him unhappy and strained (Milne 142).
Bulgakov was known during his life following a significant contribution in medicine as a government and private practitioner and in writing plays that he later contributed to the Moscow Art Theatre. One of his dramatizations, “The Cabal of Hypocrites” that entailed a Moliere’s life is still active in the Moscow art Theatre (Milne 182). Even following the banning of most of his plays from the theatres, he still managed to write grotesquely entertaining comedy in the 1930s. Bulgakov also produced several plays related to the life and young years of Stalin, which contributed significantly to saving of his life during the years of terror when most of the writers who were not supporting his leadership were purged.
Bulgakov managed to write prose during the early 1920s upon publishing an autobiographical works, including “The White Guard” and a collection of short stories named “Notes of a Country Doctor” based on his experience during the post-revolutionary Ukraine (Milne 182). During the mid-1920s, Bulgakov developed an admiration for H.G Wells work and managed to write several stories involving science fiction elements such as “The Fatal Eggs in 1924 and “The Heart of a Dog” in 1925.
“Heart of a Dog” and “Fatal Eggs”
These are some of the successful masterpiece of Bulgakov as a writer. “Fatal Eggs” is a short story that was inspired by the contributions of H.G Wells in writing, which focuses on the events of Professor Persikov, who carried out an experiment with eggs only to discover that there is a red ray that is able to increase the growth in living organisms (Milne 185). During the time, cases of illness passed through chicken in Moscow, causing the death of the majority. In remedying the situation, the government decided to recommend and utilize the ray in farms. However, the mix up in egg shipment results to the professor acquiring the chicken eggs.
The government runs the farm, on the other hand, receives the shipment containing the eggs of snakes, ostriches and crocodiles meant for the professor. In the case, the mistake is never discovered until the eggs hatch into giant monsters that wreak havoc, killing the majority of the workers in the farm in Moscow suburbs (Milne 185). The propaganda aspect turn onto the professor then distorts his nature in a similar way his tampering enabled the creation of the monsters. Bulgakov’s parody of an unprofessional bureaucracy earned him a significant reputation as one of the counter-revolutionary aspects.
“Heart of a Dog” is a story based on the features of Frankenstein, a professor, capable of implanting human pituitary glands and testicles into a dog. The dog proceeds to turn into human with time, but the brutish idea turns into a manner of chaos. The story is relatively critical satire reflecting on the new Soviet man, which was later turned into one of the comic operas referred to as “The Murder of Comrade Sharik” done in 1973 by William Bergsma (Milne 186).
The Master and Margarita
Bulgakov began writing this novel in 1928, and it emerged to be one of his best works . He destroyed the first version of the novel in March 1930 upon receiving news that “Cabal of Sanctimonious Hypocrites” was banned. The masterpiece was later published twenty-six years later in 1966 by his widow, which contributed to the international recognition and appreciation of Bulgakov’s work. He was forced to rewrite the book from memory upon burning the draft manuscript. The novel is majorly a significant critique of the Soviet society following its literary establishment (Milne 187). It is highly appreciated upon its philosophical undertones and a higher artistic level in reflection of the picturesque descriptions, style and lyrical fragments. The novel is also a frame narrative that involves two plot lines and time periods with significant characteristics, including the description of a contemporary Moscow and the retelling of the gospels.
The novel changed and omitted parts during its publication with an indication of the relatively modified places were later made for self-publication. During 1967, Frankfurt publisher printed a version of the novel produced through the aid of such modifications. The first ever complete version in Russia was prepared through the guide of Anna Saakyants and was published through Khudozhestvennaya Literatura later in 1973 (Milne 187). The publication was based on a later version of 1940 which was proofread by the publisher. Since then, the version remained one of the canonical editions until the year 1989 when the preparation of the last version by a literature expert Lydia Yanovskaya took place based on the available manuscripts (Milne 188).
Parts of the masterpiece have become the major target of Satanist groups based in Moscow since the early 1980s. This also includes the fans of Bulgakov, which also involves cases of graffiti in different types (Milne 188). With attempts to deter such groups, the residents residing in the building that housed his apartment where the first version of the novel manuscript have been trying to convert the flat into a museum of his work and life.
Mikhail Bulgakov semi-autobiographical heroes are one of the factors that affirm that he was a monarchist through conviction. Through his life as a medical practitioner and writer, much is reflected that relates to the health care system in Russia, which has changed significantly and has been following an administrative structure of the region, which is divided into regions, federal and municipal levels (Milne 207). The system has been improvised to exercise efficiency through implementations and reforms.
Michail Bulgakov museums
There are two museums in Moscow established to honor his memory and his masterpiece, “The Master and Margarita.” Such museums are based in his old apartment building which is located in Bolshaya Sadovaya street in which “The Master and Margarita” parts are set. The building has been a gathering spot since 1980s, especially for his fans and Moscow-based groups with various types of graffiti scrawling the walls (Milne 207). Numerous quips, paintings and drawings, faced a complete whitewash in 2003 with the best drawings kept upon repainting the walls. This is to enable several layers of colored paints seen around some of the best drawings. Currently, there has been a rivalry amid the two museums, which is maintained through the later establishment of an official Museum M.A Michail Bulgakov (Milne 207). It invariable presentably as the only Michail Bulgakov Memorial Museum based in Moscow.
“The Master and Margarita” has inspired most of the musicians and authors who credited it as a masterpiece. Bulgakov house is also an influential factor which was converted into a private initiative in 2004. The house has photos, personal belongings and several significant exhibitions which relate to the life and different works of Bulgakov (Milne 207). There have been literary events and various poetic events held in honoring his works, including the organization of excursions that involve animations of the novel, “The Master and Margarita” with living characters. In the same building housing his apartment, there is also another government initiative found on March 2007 on the fourth floor as a second museum to keep alive his memory (Milne 207).
During the late 1930s, Bulgakov became part of Bolshoi Theatre as one of the consultants and librettist. He later had to leave following a perception that most of his work would undergo production. The favor of Stalin protected his work and him especially from cases of arrests and sometimes execution. However, he could not manage to get most of the masterpiece he produced published. The novels and dramas he wrote were indefinitely banned. In addition, for the second time, his career as one of the most reliable playwright faced long-term ruins. When he wrote his last play, “Batum” in 1939, Bulgakov faced humiliation since the work was a complimentary portrayal of the early revolutionary days of Stalin. Bulgakov was banned before performing any rehearsals, but requested for permission to go to the west of which he was denied (Milne 157).
With his health deteriorating, Bulgakov devoted most of his time during the last moments to what he referred to as his “sunset” novel. He faced a stressful moment between 1937 and 1939 as he veered from an optimistic glimpse with the belief that there is the possibility for the successful publication of most of his masterpiece, sessions of depression, especially when he felt no hope. During June 1938, while on the verge of finishing the manuscript, Bulgakov managed to draft a letter to inform his wife about his last piece of work (Milne 157). In the letter, he indicated that he already had a manuscript of about 327 pages which equals approximately 22 chapters. He explained that the most significant remains of the work were editing, which was going to be challenging and would necessitate him to pay a close attention to the details. This could even lead to a case of rewriting some parts, but continued to question about the future, indicating that maybe, possibly the manuscript will end up in the drawers just like the rest of the rejected and criticized plays (Milne 157).
In the letter, he finalized with an expression that may be his wife also did not know the future and from that draws own judgment about the book. Bulgakov indicated that the manuscript deserved to be hidden away like the rest of his criticized and banned plays. He later in 1939 arranged for a private session for his work, “The Master and Margarita” mostly in a circle of close friends. Bulgakov succumbed on March 10, 1940 to nephrosclerosis, which is an inherited kidney disorder (Milne 157). His father had also died from a similar disease that led to Bulgakov’s guess of a potential future mortal diagnosis. His burial was in Moscow, Novodevichy Cemetery.
Bernstein, Frances L, Christopher Burton, and Dan Healey. Soviet Medicine: Culture, Practice, and Science. DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 2010. Print.
Bulgakov, Mikhail. A Young Doctor’s Notebook. Richmond: Alma Classics, 2012. Print.
Milne, Lesley. Mikhail Bulgakov: A Critical Biography. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1990. Print.
Бернстайн, Фрэнсис Л, Кристофер Burton, и дан Хили. Советской медицины: культуры, практики и науки . -Декалб: Northern Illinois University Press, 2010 г. Печать.
Булгаков, Михаил. Молодой доктор для ноутбуков . Ричмонд: Альма-классики, 2012 год. Печать.
Милн, Лесли. Михаил Булгаков: критическая – Творческая биография – Изобразительное искусство России . Кембридж: Кембриджский университет, 1990 год. Печать.
Bush and Obama Administrations
George W. Bush and Barack Obama are the 43rd and 44th persons to occupy the U.S presidency respectively. Both individuals served for two terms, although Obama’s second term administration is still in session. There are several key events and policies marking their terms, which have been categorized as either successes or failures. This paper reviews the milestones of Presidents Bush and Obama’s administrations.
George W. Bush
Election into Office
- Both the election and re-election of George Bush into office were marked by controversy unlike his successor who had massive victories.
- In an election that will be historically regarded as the most disputed, he was declared the winner in 2000 for his first term, despite losing the popular vote to his rival.
- He was re-elected into office in 2004 with only a slight 2.5% point edge.
- After the September 11th attacks on the U.S, Bush unified the country in the immediate outcome of the al Qaeda attacks. He ensured that there were no more terrorist attacks on the U.S soil after September 11, 2001.
- His policy on cutting income tax is viewed as the biggest tax cut in the history of the U.S. This returned money to all citizens, although it largely benefited the rich (Hay 3).
- His policy on economy contributed to the weakening of the U.S economic performance, he was the heir to the largest surplus and left with the greatest debt.
Prevention of Economic Meltdown
- The imminent failure of the U.S. financial system in the waning days of the Bush administration was largely due to his poor domestic policies.
- However, his rapid response in convincing the congress to act helped prevent a recurrence of the great depression.
War on Iraq
- Although he succeeded in rooting out Saddam Hussein, his decisions to invade the country are said to be based on false intelligence reports.
- Furthermore, the invasion of Iraq acted as a diversion from the ongoing military efforts to secure Afghanistan (Hirsh).
Failure to capture Osama and Secure Afghanistan
- Bush failed to live to his promise of bringing in Osama “dead or alive” and the departure of the U.S troops from Afghanistan left anxiety in the country’s future.
- Despite these setbacks, his administration greatly contributed to reducing terrorism activities worldwide.
- Barrack Obama earned a landslide election victory in 2008 to become the first black president in the history of the United States.
- He was re-elected four years later with convincing victories in both the popular and the congress votes.
Foreign Policy and war on Terrorism
- Obama does not favor a military action based foreign policy. This has portrayed him as an understanding and diplomatic president.
- These actions, however, have been unsuccessful as Iran is likely to have nuclear weapons capability, a consequence that poses grave future problems.
- He has successfully fought terrorism as is evident from the killing of Osama, although the mass murders in Syria still stain his record.
Tax Policy and Economic Stability
- In 2010, he extended the Bush tax cuts, thus, reducing tax burdens on the citizens. This aided in stabilizing the economy by preventing greater damage.
- These tax cuts are however argued to majorly favor the wealthy citizens as middle family incomes have continued to spiral downwards.
- Referred to as the ObamaCare and regarded as his best achievement, the Obama health care plan greatly benefits the average American by ensuring that the majority of uninsured citizens have access to quality and affordable insurance.
- On the contrary, there are new taxes, especially for high-income earners and large companies who may experience negative effects.
America’s Image in the World
- Obama’s quest to change the world’s perception of America has been through the closure of the Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba, retrieval of the U.S troops from Iraq and Afghanistan as well as diplomatic foreign policies (Goldenberg).
- This has however been criticized on grounds that it breeds future consequences that will be hard to deal with, such as the Iran nuclear weapon developments.
Goldenberg, Suzanne. “Barack Obama’s successes and failures.” The Guardian 24 January 2011: n. pag. Web. 16 March 2014
Hay, Chelsey E. “A Taxing Presidency: A Critique of the George W. Bush Tax Policy.” Student Pulse: The International Student Journal, Vol. 2 No. 05 (2010): 2/3. Web. 16 March 2014
Hirsh, Michael. “Gates: Bush Screwed Up the War on Terror.” The National Journal (2014): n. pag. Web. 16 March 2014
The Great society has been using programs that have enhanced the implementation of domestic policies in countries across the world. One leader who has used the programs is President Johnson. He used his first state of union message to call for people to forge on and fight against poverty, and to form a great nation that would put an end to racial barriers and divisions. He was determined to use the great society policy to enact domestic programs that would improve education, provide affordable medical care access to everyone, and eliminate poverty. He passed two major civil-rights acts (1964-1965), the economic and education acts respectively. However, the economic and political expenses of the intensification of the Vietnam War, as well as, the costs of these programs soon became a handful and surpassed Johnson’s domestic initiative. As much as the Great Society initiatives made a major contribution to the safeguarding of civil rights and the development of social programs, the anti-poverty program continued to be progressively unsuccessful and wasteful. Critics and the masses complained that a lot of money was being poured out to these programs and very little value and progress was seen as a result. Instead, the country faced several challenges, such as recording big losses. This is evident in some texts for the course such as ‘pruit-igoe’ and ‘can’t stop won’t stop’. Some of the contributions brought about by these failures in the texts of the course are discussed below.
President Johnson came up with enhancements and developments, which include better Medicare and environmental protection laws that guarded the people with low income. All these programs and major improvements needed money and the funding was not available. The government was spending trillions of dollars with very few results to show from these programs, which had failed to work effectively for the people and the nation. According to Pruitt-Igoe’s film, the residents of these public buildings put up by the government were victims of gentrification. During the 70s, the government’s efforts to pursue economic developments in the suburbs drove away the white middle class people. The population declined by half since the middle class white families moved with their businesses to the suburbs where federal policies were favorable for them and their businesses’ economic development. This led to decrease in tax money from the city dwellers and many of the remaining residents became desperate and resorted to crimes. Economic development projects were done even at the expense of poorer families. The rate of inflation began to edge up after 1965, and most of these programs were ineffective, spending taxpayer’s money with little or nothing at all to show for their display of good intentions. Besides, according to ‘Can’t Stop Won’t Stop’ article, the 1960s was a period when the great society underwent changes. For instance, in America, politics was lurching to catch up with the changes that were already felt in the culture. This article also articulates that as the 60s drew into the 70s, the well of faith and idealism that had sustained the movements against the forces of rationalization and violence drained, and many dreams of the Blacks who were integrationists and nationalists were burned. This was a change in the great society that occurred in the 60s and 70s.
The ‘Can’t Stop Won’t Stop’ article adds that, just before the 60S, the great society also faced major hurdles, such as mass movements. The movements took place in several countries worldwide. For instance, in the year 1953, the Bronx had an artificial trench that cut through it. From this trench, the future of Bronx was observable. It was from the South Bronx that catastrophes, such as massive proportions and violence began. This later led to the global mass movements that were witnessed across the world during the 60s. These mass movements stimulated the poor economic growth of countries.
Most of the people left behind to accommodate these buildings could not maintain them and a high percentage belonged to the African-American group. According to Pruitt-Igoe, after the end of the world war two in 1970, there was segregation of the poor families from the rich. The black community that made up the large population of poor people was discriminated even more based on poverty and their skin color. The black communities were therefore forced to beg from the middle class white families, who were cruel towards them and this was a hostile environment. This led to aggressive behaviors by the black people who involved themselves in drugs and crime due to the frustrations from the failed housing project and the kind of discrimination and segregation they faced. The end of the war was also facilitated by the various cultures of people, such as the Jamaicans. They were known as Rasftafarians and they believed in God and praised him in a number of ways. Their culture spread across the world in the 70s, making it a strong factor behind the abolition of mass movements and aggressive behaviors among humankind.
The failure of some of these programs influenced the lives of many Americans who were affected by them in a traumatic way. They got into drug abuse and criminal activities just to console themselves. This replaced the war against poverty by the great society programs and instead the government started to focus on how to fight drug abuse. The government believed in the policy of warehousing and confinement as the best way to prevent these crimes instead of rehabilitation. The prisons on the other hand were in a very bad state and the correctional officers mistreated the inmates. They were beaten up and others shot while inside the correctional facilities. In 1960, they formed a movement that fought for the rights of these prisoners and advocated for them to join and form labor unions that would assist them in supporting their families while in prison.
In the Malcolm X text, we are told that the members of the society underwent a number of challenges that were setbacks to peaceful coexistence of the great society. For instance, the society had prisoners until 1964 when a group of Black Muslim prisoners went to court arguing that prison officials denied them their rights to worship. The denial of such rights clearly indicates how the society faced hurdles.
In conclusion, there were many struggles, especially among leaders, such as President Johnson who tried his best to bring change to the nation through these programs but could not succeed in every aspect in eliminating all the problems faced by the people during his term in office. From the 70s all through to the 90s up to current times, the effect of the failures are still being felt and although the government has learnt from past experiences, major adjustments have to be made among the various people in the society. Poverty on the other hand is still a major hindrance to the growth of the economy as the people living below poverty level keep rising day in day out. However, these programs brought a new dimension in which current and future leaders should deal with problems facing our nation in a more critical and wise way that will offer long lasting solutions to the nation and the people.
Technology Innovation and Entrepreneurship
Technological innovations have played an integral part in promoting and developing entrepreneurial skills among various agencies, firms, and individuals. As such, technological advancements have led to positive impacts on various city economies. In Oklahoma, technological innovations have had various positive impacts from partners, such as i2E, OCAST, and the Oklahoma Manufacturing Alliance among others. Firstly, OCAST is considered as an engine of technological developments, commercialization, and transfer, since its establishment in 1987. OCAST has achieved key performances. Being an advanced technological and scientific center, OCAST has been able to create 12,494 jobs in the last five years. OCAST has an average pay of $ 55,000 with a 5.4 billion dollar impact. As such, it has been able to expand Oklahoma’s technological state and employment opportunities.
OMA has been able to work with manufacturers strategically in order to broaden the state of the economy in Oklahoma and create wealth. OMA does this by offering business advice and technical assistance to companies. These services aid the success and innovation of firms, corporations, and agencies in Oklahoma. In addition, the network of engineers and agents help in Oklahoma’s wealth creation. Similarly, i2E has supported entrepreneurial spirit in Oklahoma. The i2E mission is to enhance the growth of companies through entrepreneurial investment. i2E has venture advisors who coach and provide advanced business guidance for entrepreneurs. Furthermore, i2E gives upcoming businesses in Oklahoma startup capitals. It also works with other business associations, chambers, and local governments among others. This is aimed at tapping any entrepreneurial potential among Oklahoma residents. Therefore, all these strategic partners aim at promoting technological innovation, wealth creation, and improvement of the Oklahoma economy.
Constantinian the Great
Between 306-337AD the Roman Empire was under the rule of Constantine the Great who was he first Roman Emperor to profess Christianity. This led to the development of a Christian Empire and by extension the growth of both the Byzantine Empire and the Western culture in the medieval period (Baker 5). Other than engaging in numerous battles and ruling Rome alone, Constantine the great is also celebrated for the introduction of new architectural design, the martyrium and the basilical Church (Krautheimer 123). This paper will focus on these architectural techniques, their functions and their origins.
Functions of the basilicas and martyrium
Constantinian basilicas were halls designed for large gatherings. These gatherings included among others gathering for the township, they acted as market places, gatherings for judicial sessions, military drills, theatres, reception halls for the wealthy and consequently as throne rooms for royal fortresses. The basilicas would later serve as Christian churches and places where the remains of the apostles were buried (Krautheimer 122).
One of the best-preserved Constantinian basilicas is the one at Trier. When Constantine ruled Trier as Caesar in the years between 305- 312 AD, the basilica was built. It served as the greatest audience hall in which the Constantine sat to receive reverence and bestow justice. This was because the basilica’s audience hall was attached to the palace. Other than the basilica at Trier, Constantine built another basilica in Rome that was attached to Lateran Roman palace. This basilica was to serve as a cathedral for the Christian bishop and his flock (Krautheimer 117-118).
It is important to note that Constantinian basilicas that served as cathedrals for Christian congregations fall in the same category in terms of design as the basilicas that Constantine laid down for other secular functions. All basilicas had an architectural role of public monumental buildings. They were built with Constantine’s monetary and political support as part of a political initiative. They were just as other basilicas meeting and audience halls. These basilicas shared similarities in size, modest construction and extravagant adornments (Krautheimer 130).
Constantinian basilicas were also built in commemoration of Apostles. This introduced a new form of architecture called the martyrium. A martyrium was a structure erected to bear witness of Christian faith. These were forms of commemoration of Christian martyrs often built on their tombs. They were sunken to bring pilgrims closer to the martyrs. Constantinian basilica at Holy Sepulchre was an example of a martyrium (Armstrong 13). This basilica took the plan of a cruciform, which was in contrast to the longitudinal plan of the other basilicas. The Holy Sepulchre and other martyriums of that time served as churches where the relics of the saints could be brought in addition to establishing the churches on top of the saints’ graves (Armstrong 13).
St. Peters basilica is also one of the great basilicas constricted under the commission of Emperor Constantine. It served as a cathedral for the Christin congregations and as a martyrium constructed in commemoration of St. Peter. In addition, the basilica served as a centre of numerous festivals including the festival of the cathedral of St. Peter on the 22nd February including the combined centenary of St. Peter and St. Paul on 29th June. During these events, Christians who wished to witness these celebrations thronged the basilica as it was designed to accommodate a throng of people (Bannister 31).
Origins of Constantinian basilicas
Architectures in the Roman antique thought in line with the grading of architectural categories and their sub categories. Ideally, the naming was determined by the purpose of the building. Each of these buildings were bestowed with suitable plans, vocabulary and stylist perception. This was concerning temples, funerary buildings, domestic architecture and public architecture. Basilicas, irrespective of their purpose, were property of the public realm. Their positions including their vocabulary had great amount of flexibility compared to other forms of buildings. The designs and eventual construction of basilicas advanced from a purely utilitarian perspective (Krautheimer 123). Those considered as public basilicas of reputation in Rome and other cities had to reflect the magnificence of the Empire and the authority of the divine ruler. This main aim was to use basilicas as tools of spreading political propaganda. Religious buildings in Rome were majorly conservative and the basilicas of this time retained their tractability until the year 300 AD when the architectural field went through a process of break-up and renaissance (Krautheimer 123).
This change in design had its preparation prior to its occurrence. These changes were to appear in both the function and the plan of the basilicas. Any public basilica for example, had both religious meanings and other ordinary functions. Within these new basilicas, the law was to be bestowed as business transactions were legitimately concluded before the image of the Emperor’s heavenly genius. In addition, the thermae basilicas also had this image or an alternative of some other divinity. The effigy whose usual place was the on the apses of the basilica was later relocated to religious edifices. This included the Synagogue at Alexandria, an enormous basilica, bestowed with double lanes but was destroyed in 116 A.D (Krautheimer 123-124).
By the beginning of the fourth century, the revitalization of the statue was complete. This meant that the presence of the Emperor in person or in effigy had become a predominant phenomenon in all basilicas. Under this structure, the borderline between religion, the law and governance in basilicas had been eliminated. This meant that any basilica was to have the sanctuary of the god of earth. The traditional design of basilicas had become obsolete. During the early reign of Constantine the main type of basilica was strictly a longitudinal structure housing throne rooms and accustomed bastions of the Emperor with lavish houses and cottages (Krautheimer 124-125). This included basilicas such as the one at Piazza Armerina built in early 300. As years progressed, basilica designs spread beyond the private and palace basilica. All monumental public basilicas became the responsibility and property of the Emperor (Krautheimer 125). The longitudinal basilica became the best of all basilicas. After 300, Constantinian church basilicas could be understood from the background of raising the church for anonymity and persecution. This made the building of church basilica a public affair (Krautheimer 126).
The construction of Constantinian basilicas and martyrium were an attempt to express power and authority in his the empire. Constantine being the first Emperor to profess Christianity used the opportunity to establish his dominance in the church (Baker 5). Initially basilicas served as market places, judicial offices and the Emperors lavish palaces (Krautheimer 122). With the acceptance of Christianity, basilicas were built to commemorate Christ’s apostles, have a place of worship for Christians and build a sanctuary for the emperor as the early God. The origin of basilicas is traceable to the traditional Roman architectural designs that through renaissance developed the technique of designing enormous buildings especially the longitudinal design that stood out as the best of all the basilicas ((Krautheimer 123, 126).
Armstrong, T, G. Constantine’s Churches: Symbols and Structure. Journal of the Society of
Architectural Historians, Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 31, 1974
Baker, G P. Constantine the Great and the Christian Revolution. New York: Cooper Square
Press, pp. 5, 2001. Print.
Bannister, T. The Constantinian Basilica of Saint Peter at Rome. Journal of the Society of
Architectural Historians, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 31, 1968
Krautheimer, R. The Constantinian Basilica. Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 21, pp. 1967.
Hamilton and Jefferson
What are Hamilton and Jefferson’s main differences?
Hamilton is a supporter of the institution of a national bank to help ease the trouble of debt incurred in the revolution war. He is insistent that the congress uses the ‘necessary and proper’ cause in the constitution to come up with laws on how the bank will be formed and run. He is the leader of the Federalists who believe that America should have a strong central government that can gather and lend funs to industrialists. Jefferson on the other hand is a republican who feels that the strong central government might lead to tyranny. In this context, Jefferson is against the formation of the national bank by the congress on the premise that they are not allowed to do so unless this mandate falls under the ‘enumerable powers.’ He is assertive that this is not necessary and proper as required by the constitution.
Do you see any Places for Compromise?
There are few chances for compromise between these two persons. This is because their views are formed from their very divergent backgrounds. Hamilton is in favor of trade and industrialization while Jefferson supports farming and rural living. Hamilton is against anarchy while Jefferson is opposed to tyranny. There is little hope in the fact that the values they stand for are likely to benefit the nation only that their approaches conflict much.
How might these two viewpoints reflect or inform the creation of political parties?
The ideologies held by these two men can verily form a basis for the creation of political parties. The Republican stand is that states should wield more power than the central government, and are insistent on freedom. The Federalists on the other hard are more concerned about having order in the society made possible by a strong central government.
The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo
The history of the world has been shaped to some extent by the signing of treaties to end wars. One such treaty is that of Guadalupe hidalgo that effectively ended the US-Mexican war. This paper discusses this treaty and highlights how it came about. It also intends to investigate what happened to the Mexicans who found themselves in a new country following the signing of the treaty.
The treaty of Guadalupe hidalgo remains one of the oldest in the history of the United States. It came about as an aftermath of the hostilities that was taking place between the United States and Mexico. The war began in April 1946 and went on up to late 1947. Numerous battles characterized this war and approximately forty thousand soldiers lost their lives. Most of these were Mexican soldiers and only a handful of the US soldiers lost their lives in direct battle. A large number of the American soldiers only succumbed to diseases they contracted in the military camps.
Twelve battles were fought during the US-Mexican war. The Mexico City happened in September 1848. The United States soldiers capitalized on victory in the previous battle to pursue Mexican soldiers who were now retreating to the western parts of the city. General Antonio Lopez and General Winfiled Scott led the Mexican troupes and American troupes respectively. During this final battle, over three thousand Mexican soldiers were killed. After consultations, a delegation of Mexican politicians gave up the war and surrendered the city to the Americans.
The media performed an essential responsibility during this war. Using the telegraph and other print media, information spread at fast rates. Publishers provided information to the fighting troupes as well as the public. In Mexico, the media was used to praise and criticize the war depending on which side of the political movements one supported.
In the aftermath of the military engagement between the US and Mexico, the Mexican government agreed to meet with Nicholas Trist, the United States peace commissioner, to formulate the terms and conditions of the peace deal. Negotiations began, and the key issues discussed were geographical boundary, property rights, and the citizenship of Mexican citizens in the new territories. When an agreement had been reached, General Trist drew up a draft in English, which was translated into Spanish. The treaty was officially signed on February 2, 1848. Ratification followed the signing by both the American and Mexican congress. This was despite opposition from some quarters in both the US and Mexico.
The Mexicans who found themselves in the American territory after the treaty had to deal with issues of civil and property rights apart from social and political inequality. There have been numerous unsuccessful attempts through the courts by the Mexicans to reclaim their land from the United States. The Mexicans in the ceded territory were also unable to acquire full citizenship. This was contrary to the promise of full US citizenship that was preserved in the treaty. They were later offered citizenship but were still considered as foreigners by the Native Americans. The Mexicans in the ceded regions were treated as a minority.
In summary, the treaty was only good because it stopped the bloodshed that was going on in the war. In terms of tangible benefits, the Mexicans were shortchanged because the promises enshrined in the treaty were not upheld. The consequences of the treaty continue to be experienced to date between the United States and Mexico.
The American Civil War
The American civil war was a time of national strife in America that lasted between April eighteen sixty one and May eighteen sixty five. The war nearly resulted in the splitting of the nation as several states in the South declared secession from the nation mainly due to their differences in opinion regarding slavery and its expansion into the North. By the time the civil war came into conclusion, several revolutionary legislations had been made including the abolishment of slavery, it also consequently led to the assassination of Abraham Lincoln, the incumbent president. As shown below, there were several events that built up animosity before the war started.
Historically, slavery was not practiced in all of the states in the nation. The fifteen states that practiced it – slave states- were; Delaware, Georgia, Maryland, South Carolina, Virginia, North Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Missouri , Arkansas, Florida and Texas. The previous regimes and the leaders of Northern states had been opposed to the expansion of slavery into other regions and through their majority in the Senate and Congress had always defeated pro-slavery motions in parliament through majority vote. The USA however was expanding and had conquered California and Northern Mexico and therefore wanted to make them part of the union which caused division since they were slave states and their admission would have led to the practice spreading due to their increase in numbers. Cuba also wanted to be recognized as US territory and was a slave state and its admission was therefore another source of disagreement in congress. As of eighteen sixty four, the states that did not support slavery, free states, were; New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Maine, Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin.
In the compromise of 1850, the south slave owners lost the right to practice slave trade in the capital city however, this did not bar them from having slaves or practicing slavery in Washington, simply from exchanging them for goods, services, cash or other slaves. The compromise of 1850 however allowed for slave owners to pursue slaves even in northern territories that were against the practice. The new laws also made it compulsory for all citizens to return slaves who they knew had escaped from their masters irrespective of the territory that they were in which was a gain for the slave owners. The state of California was however lost as a slave state as it was admitted into the union as a free state where slavery was not allowed (McWilliams 43).
The Kansas- Nebraska Act was created in order to have the railroad expanded and make several areas available for farming specifically in Kansas and Nebraska. The status of slavery in various states was a cause of several political stalemates and in order for the railway project to progress, it was decided that through popular vote the respective states would decide if they wanted to allow or bar slavery. The act therefore undid some of the clauses of the 1850 compromise (Fehrenbacher 96). The Dred-Scott decision was a Supreme Court ruling that set the precedents that Africans did not have any citizen rights and could therefore not represent themselves in court; it also stated that slavery was not to be regulated by the federal government as it was a state’s choice (Fehrenbacher 138).
The Kansas-Nebraska Act was one of the direct causes of the civil war as there was strong opposition of it from the Northerners who felt that as Kansas was initially a free state it should not have slavery as an electoral issue. The act led to many pro-slavery members going to Kansas to vote so as to try and make it into a slave state which is what led to the Bleeding Kansas period where pro-slavery immigrants would engage the anti-slavery supporters in skirmishes in attempts to get the political views of Kansas to change. The bleeding Kansas incident showed how popular sovereignty can on occasions lead to a violent confrontation due to an extremely polarizing issue which has two or more parties feeling that their existence rests on the vote going their way. The incidents also show that just because an idea is right it does not mean that it will receive the political backing of everybody and it can even lead to conflict.
The American Civil War was a conflict that lasted for four years in the nineteenth century that resulted in the abolition of slavery and the assassination of Abraham Lincoln four days after the secessionists surrendered. The origin of the conflict was in the legal status of slavery with the Northern states strongly opposing it while Southern states strongly supported it. Middle ground was reached at the compromise of 1850 however, the treaty of Nebraska-Arkansas undid many of the agreements made in it, making it the starting point of the civil war. As more is studied on it, we can learn more on conflict resolution and how violent outcomes can be avoided.
Fehrenbacher, Edward. Slavery, Law, and Politics: The Dred Scott Case in Historical Perspective. Oxford: Oxford Press. 1981.
McWilliams, Carey. California, the great exception. California: First California. 1974.
- How do you explain A. Carnegie’s rapid rise to wealth? What factors in America permitted this to happen?
Andrew Carnegie established and practiced business activities that resembled monopoly through “vertical integration”, and therefore accumulated wealth for himself. During this time, that is 1860-1900, the economy of America grew by a percentage greater than 400% (from a total national wealth of $16 billion to $88 billion). The factors that fuelled this economic growth included the advancement of technology, enhanced transportation networks, new and innovative business ideas and practices, financial innovation, and the growing American population, which created a high demand for goods and services. With all these changes and opportunities, Andrew Carnegie established monopoly and revolutionized business practices, more so in the steel industry. Since the ideology of Laissez faire that existed at this time encouraged minimum or no involvement of the government in regulating economic activities and affairs, Carnegie maximized his benefits as his fellow unskilled or untrained urban employees could not share his economic milages or gains. As such, Carnegie managed to amass a lot of wealth as little supervision and monopoly of business practices gave him an advantage over other citizens.
- What was the Homestead Strike about? What was the Carnegie’s role?
The “Homestead Strike of 1892” was about a conflict between labour and management. At this time, the management of Carnegie Steel Company (belonging to Andrew Carnegie) through the plant manager, Henry Clay Frick, had a serious disagreement with the strongest union in America, Amalgamated Association of Iron and Steel Workers. A strike that took place in 1889 won the steelworkers a positive 3-year contract, which did not last long. By 1892, Carnegie was determined to break the union and as such directed Mr. Henry Frick (the plant manager) to step up the production or manufacturing demands, which the union members disagreed with. Consequently, Henry Frick began to lock out the labourers of the plant and by the 2nd of July 1892, he managed to discharge all remaining with only expert tradesmen.
This number represented less than 1/5thof the total 3,800 workers employed in the steel plant. As such, the majority voted tremendously to join the strike, thus the Homestead Strike of 1892. Andrew Carnegie is solely responsible to blame for this strike because he directed Henry Frick to shut down the plant, if the union disagreed with his terms (dissolving the union), until the employees buckled. By so doing, he gave Henry the mandate to manage negotiations in a fraught environment, which was a big mistake because he was the same man responsible for the Johnstown flood. This action is illustrated by his words to Frick stating, “We… approve of anything you do,” which he wrote in a letter from England. “We are with you to the end.” Frick responded by slashing down his worker’s wages, locking them out of the work premise, refusing to negotiate further with the union members, and building a perimeter wall governed by the sheriffs to keep them out, an action which led to the strike. Meanwhile, Carnegie thought his company’s employees would relinquish the union membership with an intention of saving their jobs.
- Carnegie once said, “The man who dies rich dies disgraced.” He believed the accumulation of wealth had the potential for enormous evil—unless he gave away his riches. Was he capable of this (giving away his money)? Was he convincing in escaping disgrace? (Keep in mind: Carnegie had one child-a daughter and he did not leave her ANYTHING!) He was a Social Darwinist and profited from the workers.
It is in deed true that Carnegie was capable of giving his money because he sold his steel company and prior to his death in 1919; he had invested some good amount of his fortunes to the society. He gave $350 million, which was almost everything that he had. He gave this to enhance education, culture, science, recognize heroes and heroines, and similarly encourage intercontinental peaceful relations. By doing this, it is true that Carnegie remained faithful to his devotions and gave back what he accumulated from the society. In spite of the fact that he left his daughter nothing, it is imperative to note that Carnegie gave back his wealth for the greater good of the society, and whatever benefits the majority is justified. He is therefore convincing enough to have escaped disgrace because whatever is done in the general will meet the requirements of a social contract. His daughter was part of the society and may have benefited from the education that he invested in.
- Why is A. Carnegie important to American history? He represents less than 1% of American society—yet an entire biography is devoted to him. Does he deserve so much attention? Why/why not?
Andrew Carnegie is important to the American history because he left a legacy of giving and goodwill. Since there are few generous donors in the society, he deserves the attention that he is given because the legacy that he left is still partially evident in the generation of generous donors (philanthropists) that followed him centuries after his death. For instance, the recipients of the Carnegie Medal of 2011 still followed his course, which is encouraging.
- What was W.E.B Du Bois’ vision for African-Americans? What did he hope to accomplish?
Du Bois was in agreement that the idea of personality, self, or individual improvement was a good one, however, he emphasized that it was not supposed to be implemented and accepted in exchange for surrendering their citizenship or nationality rights straight away. He thought about establishing a group of elite and educated black or African leaders who were supposed to lead the African Americans in protecting their equivalent rights and obtaining higher financial standards. In light of this argument, Du Bois had a vision that all African Americans be accorded equal political and civil rights, and similarly attain equal social status. He hoped that one day all the African Americans would be allowed to vote and take part in other civic activities and live lives that were almost similar to, if not equal to the white Americans. Seemingly, Du Bois wanted an immediate end to the racial segregation that the African Americans were facing at this time.
- Why did Du Bois conflict with other African-American leaders and reformers such as Booker T. Washington and Marcus Garvey?
Du Bois conflicted with Booker T. Washington because his approach of handling the situation was difficult. While Du Bois demanded for an immediate end to the era of discriminating against the Africans in line with political rights, such as voting, Booker T. Washington argued that the African Americans would better first develop themselves by means of education, business possession, and industrial education (training). Booker thought that his visualization for black Americans would finally lead to them accessing their equal civil and political rights. In light of this argument, it is evidenced that Booker was advising the African Americans to first postpone their instantaneous demands that aimed at ending the racial discrimination and the denunciation of their right to vote. He therefore refutes or disagrees with the Du Bois approach to solving their miseries (Booker T. was using an accommodationist technique to achieve the same goals) Conversely, Marcus Garvey is of the opinion that African Americans would never be considered equal to the white Americans, and more so in the United States. He was of the opinion that African Americans establish their individual detached communities and companies or even travel or migrate back to their motherland, ‘Africa’.
- Why did Du Bois eventually become a socialist and move to Ghana, Africa?
After failing to meet his vision, Du Bois became a big supporter of communist, thus qualified to be called a socialist or social activist, and he never again trusted politicians and capitalists, which means he had already given up on the war to establish racial unity. Later on, Du Bois became a chairman of the NAACP, where he kept challenging African leaders against imperialism. As the head of the Peace Information Centre (PIA), Du Bois demanded for the interdiction of atomic weaponry, which led the United States to retaliate by giving an order to him to register as a foreign agent through their Department of Justice. Du bois refused to respect this order, which made the United States Department of Justice to order him being instantaneously indicted in line with the requirements of the Foreign Agents Registration Act. Despite being acquitted, it was too late to salvage the damage that was already created, and this increased his hatred towards the governing system in the United States of America. Since this was an era of the cold war and it was a difficult task to remain a communist, Du Bois migrated to Ghana after being declared the first independent black African nation. Since Du Bois had worked all through his life to achieve this status, he was invited by the then president, Kwame Nkrumah.
- Eugene Debs embraced socialism —why? What was occurring in American society that made this ideology attractive?
Eugene was first elected in the Indiana House of Representative being as a Democrat. After a decade, he took part in the Pullman strike which led to his incarceration. Actually, he was against the principles of communists, and refuted the idea of America participating in World War 1. In essence, he was jailed for ten years because he opposed the idea publicly. Additionally, it is imperative to note that at this time there was a lot of corruption and corporate despotism, which made him, together with other skilled and unskilled personnel, to establish various labour unions, such as the American Railway Union (ARU), amongst others. Since the plight of labourers became his concern, Deb began to see corporations and trusts as rivals to the humanity of labourers. This became the only reason why he decided to use the language of republicans in order to support the resistance of employees. Because he supported such movements and refused to obey a court order stopping him and his colleagues from joining a strike, Debs was incarcerated for six months. While in prison, one socialist member by name Victor Berger brought him a text authored by Karl Marx on the subject Das Kapital to study. At this point in time, he started making considerations in regard to using socialism techniques as opposed to capitalism. He came out from prison as a totally changed man, thus the beginning of his socialism. Perhaps the mistreatment that he was given for violating a court injunction against a strike changed his style of approaching issues. His ideology became attractive because it was relevant to the plights of labourers, who were similarly against capitalist techniques of leading. Employees in different organizations then found him relevant in solving their plights.
- Explain Deb’s role in the famous Pullman Strike.
When a manager by name George Pullman made a decision to slash the wages of his employees by 25% because of a financial decline or reduction in business, he failed to do the same for rents and utilities ion the factory owned by the town of Pullman. Four thousand employees decided to join the American Railway Union, which was at that point in time led by Eugene Debs. It then followed that they struck the Pullman town plant. The members of the ARU, who were working on different railway lines gave their support the idea of the strike by boycotting cars in Pullman town. Actually, they declined to connect cars in Pullman town to their respective trains. As such, one of the federal judges in Pullman town gave an injunction against the course or boycott that was taken by these employees, and Mr.Cleveland, the President, ordered the military troops to counter and end the strike. Debs, who was part of this striking team at this time refused to obey the order that was given by the federal judge, and this led to his arrest. The end result was that the union collapsed after his incarceration. His main role therefore was that he gave his support, as the head of ARU, to the striking employees of Pullman, and this led to the Pullman Strike.
- What did Debs and Du Bois accomplish for working class Americans? Specifically, what did these men do to heighten awareness of inequality during the Age of Industry?
Du bois gave his contributions, particularly as an activist in fighting for civil rights. He was one of the most prominent political activist and intellectual African American leader in the 1st half of the 20th century. As a present-day image of Booker T., he facilitated dialogues with the government in regard to subjects of racism, denied political rights, and methodologies through which the life of African Americans could be improved. As such, he was nicknamed, “The Farther of Pan-Africanism”. Together with Washington, W.E.B Du Bois aided in organizing the exhibition of Negros, which took place in Paris in1900, dubbed “Exposition Universelle.” This exhibition encompassed the photos of Benjamin Johnstone of black students from Hampton Institute. Additionally, the exhibition of African Americans focused on the constructive contributions that African Americans gave to the society in America. Later on, in 1905, the attorney of Minnesota, by name McGhee Fredrick, together with Du Bois and other philanthropists assisted in establishing the Niagara Movement with William Monroe Trotter. This movement fought for the authentication of the freedom of criticism and speech, the acknowledgement of the utmost, and the best training for humans as the domination of no race or caste, total masculine suffrage, credence in the decorum of labour, and an amalgamated attempt to recognize such morals under the influence of sound management.
Conversely, the contributions that Debs made could be categorized as being an active and effective member of a labour union, who made a decision to ignore his radical inclinations. He fought for African Americans to enjoy their fundamental freedom of speech and safeguard their welfare in working environments. In the organized segments of labour, Debs was given respect as one of the major forces to reckon with amongst the initiators of the labour movements in America. Through his public speeches against capitalism helped create awareness in regard to the inequalities, corruption, and employee welfare abuses that occurred in the government and railway industry.
- Why did President Wilson intervene in Mexico’s affairs? Why did he send troops?
The decision made by the United States to intervene in the revolution of Mexicans was brought forth by the sentiments of the United States against the Hispanic leadership, and the large amount of the U.S business ventures in the economy of Mexico. Even though President Wilson did not announce war against Mexico, the affair of the Ypiranga strained their diplomatic relations. During this affair, the government of Germany sent arms, which were illegal to the President of Mexico. Imperative to note, however, is that President Wilson was not in support of the President of Mexico. As a form of retaliation for the raid that Pancho Villa executed in New Mexico, President Wilson decided to send military troops to the boarder of Mexico in 1916, with an intention of capturing Pancho Villa. The forces were that time under the direct governance of General Pershing John. Even though the raid that was done by General Pershing were not successful, the diplomatic relations that existed between Mexico and the United States almost came to a halt, and the Zimmermann telegraph publication further infuriated the American citizens. Essentially, therefore, this argument illustrates that in 1916, President Wilson Woodrow sent military forces into Mexico with the aim of arresting Pancho Villa. Villa vowed to take revenge against the U.S for refusing to support his efforts to be a Mexican President. As such, he and his supporters carried out an attack against the American citizens who were living along the United States-Mexican border. The action of President Wilson to secure the American borders is what he called the Mexican Intervention.
- Although this biography is fairly even-toned and positive toward Wilson, he had very set ideas about race. He is the first president to segregate the White House and he’s best known for private viewing of the infamous pro-Klan film Birth of a Nation. He strongly believed and practiced segregation. Realize that perhaps many presidents before and after Wilson held these same views, however Wilson is often viewed as “one of America’s most progressive presidents.” What do you think? Please find other information on him to support this claim. PBS has a wonderful web site that addresses this information. Why is this view of Wilson generally not presented (at least in grade school)?
- If Wilson was so popular at the conclusion of World War One, then why did the United States not ratify the Treaty of Versailles or join the League of Nations?
The Treaty of Versailles was to later form the League of Nations. The United States thought that this treaty would be a threat to their own sovereignty. The Covenant of the League of Nations was included inthe Versailles Treaty. Article X of this treaty outlined details of joint security. As such, The League of Nations wanted to make use of joint armed resources belonging to its member states to defend against any attack. This implied that an action taken by the United States to become part of the League would create the necessity of this state engaging in war, without the Congress’ support of an armed combat. Secondly, joining the League failed because the concept of isolationism was fast growing with the support of Republicans. Since the President that took power after President Wilson, namely Warren Harding, was a Republican, he took advantage of the isolationist feelings that were prevalent during this period and won elections. Finally, the U.S failed to join the League of Nations because it opposed the postulations in the Monroe Doctrine. This doctrine stated that “all future attempts of the European nations to colonize would be considered acts of hostility and would invite the U.S military interventions,” which would have been contradicted, suppose the Treaty of Versailles would have been ratified. This alone negated the possibilities of the U.S joining the League of Nations.
In a general sense, despite the efforts made by President Woodrow Wilson to establish the League of Nations, objections that arose from the Senate (more so from the Republicans) made it impossible for the country to join the league. For instance, Borah E. Wiliam and majorly Cabot Hendry Lodge, and the refusal of Wilson to negotiate made sure that the United States does not ratify the Treaty of Versailles and The League of Nations. A decision to join the league could only be compared to signing a cheque that is blank. The United States of America refuted the idea of having to transport their military personnel through half of the worlds continents for clashes that were not any of their concerns. Additionally, the state did not want to put the lives of American citizens and their economy at risk after the massive losses that it incurred in World War 1. Finally, the Republicans supported the idea of isolationism and thus acted in independence and not collaboratively with other states, in addition to American citizens feeling that the Treaty of Versailles was very harsh, more so for German-Americans.
- How did Thomas Edison earn the title the “Wizard of Menlo Park”? What personal price did he pay for success?
He is called so because he established and located his 1st laboratory in New Jersey, Menlo Park. This is where he did his supposed inventions. Edison lived a pretentious life of seriousness, without doing anything serious. Any time he heard that reporters were going to his lab to have a glimpse of what he was doing, he could pretend to be serious and tell his colleagues to do the same. After a while of silence, he would burst out and announce an invention he had made theoretically, which never came to pass. However, because he spoke and promised the world some of the greatest inventions for the future, he got employed in telegraph companies, amongst others, thus his success.
- Is science progress? How did Edison modernize American society? How did science and technology become a big business as a result of Edison’s inventions? Provide examples.
It is true that science is progress because it gave the world the current technologies that it uses to make work easy. Edison modernized the American society through his early inventions in telegraphy, and similarly pioneering the work of developing an electric bulb, which exists today. All the credit pertaining to electricity are given to Edison. Edison was the first to improve inventions that he stumbled on, and similarly invented some of his own. Since Edison established the first invention factory of the world by inventing things, building them, and finally shipping them, within the same building or complex, he introduced a new technique of doing business. Since many businesses that exist today operate in this way, his factory design has become a success story. Edison improved the telephone, but invented the light bulb and projector used in movies today. He similarly stumbled upon the phonograph, which he was very proud of amongst all his inventions. He invented, built, and sold or shipped all these things in one complex, which has led to the existence of today’s hypermarkets.
- Access the History matters web site. The site is located under web links on the course content on Learn. Type in “Pullman Strike” under search. Listed are 6-7 primary sources describing the Pullman strike which involved laborers who lived and worked in Pullman’s company town. Read over the accounts by both workers and George Pullman. What did workers want? How did Pullman justify his actions? What were his motives?
The workers of the Pullman Palace Car Company wanted their employers in Pullman to stop deducting their wages, stop controlling all aspects of their life, and similarly improve their working conditions. Characteristically, Pullman held his employees responsible for the problems they were facing, with an argument that if they had not gone on strike they would not be undergoing such kind of anguish and pain. In fact, Pullman further reiterated that the strike was a violation of the United States constitution, thus illegal. He was interested in breaking the American Railway Union (ARU) by making his employees surrender their membership in the union in order to save their jobs.
17. What perspectives are presented with these primary sources? How do these primary sources reflect the tensions and concerns over labor and industry? Please provide examples from the website.
These primary sources suggest that the authorities at this time sympathized with the workers that Pullman had laid off. For instance, Governor John P. Atgeld sympathized with these workers and pleaded with Pullman to do something about their plights. Similarly, these sources portray other citizens as sympathizers of their fellow employees who are displaced because of dictatorial regimes and this is evidenced by the food donations that the public gave the workers who were on strike until they got employed in other companies. The Tensions and concerns that are raised over labour and industry are portrayed in these sources as being constitutional and national affairs, which can only be solved with the support of a judiciary, and not unions. However, it is noted that unions play a significant role in fighting for the rights of employees in regard to improving their wages and protection against totalitarian regimes.
“Are Sleeping Cars Protected by the Constitution? Mr. Dooley on the Pullman Strike.” Retrieved from http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5305.
“Broken Spirits: Letters on the Pullman Strike.” Retrieved from http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5363.
“Chicago under the mob.” Retrieved from http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/6769.
“Father Knows Best?: Strikers Denounce Pullman.” Retrieved from http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5307.
“For the Further Benefit of Our People”: George Pullman Answers His Strikers. Retrieved from http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5306.
Altgeld, John Live Questions, Chicago: George S. Bowen and Son, 1899.
Bailey, Thomas Andrew. Woodrow Wilson and the great betrayal. Macmillan, 1945.
Barbara C., Schaaf, ed., Mr. Dooley’s Chicago, New York: Anchor Press/Doubleday, 1977, 341–343.
Carnegie, Andrew. “Wealth.” North American Review 148.391 (1889): 653-665.
Carnegie, Andrew. Autobiography of Andrew Carnegie. Vol. 3. Houghton Mifflin, 1920.
ChicagoEvening Post, 7 July 1894.
December, I. N. “Woodrow Wilson and the Mexican lnterventionist Movement of 1919.” The Journal of American History 58.1 (1971): 46-72.
Du Bois, William Edward Burghardt. Of Mr. Booker T. Washington and Others. ProQuest Information and Learning, 2005.
Egerton, George W. “Britain and the’Great Betrayal’: Anglo-American Relations and the Struggle for United States Ratification of the Treaty of Versailles, 1919-1920.” Historical Journal (1978): 885-911.
Frederic, Remington, Harper’s Weekly, July 21, 1894—American Social History Project.
Lee, Ronald, and James R. Andrews. “A story of rhetorical‐ideological transformation: Eugene V. Debs as liberal hero.” (1991): 20-37.
Reply of the Pullman Company, U.S. Strike Commission, Report and Testimony on the Chicago Strike of 1894 (Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1895), 578–80.
Salvatore, Nick. Eugene V. Debs: Citizen and Socialist. University of Illinois Press, 1982.
Statement of the Pullman Strikers, U.S. Strike Commission, Report and Testimony on the Chicago Strike of 1894, Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1895, 87–88.
Stross, Randall E. The Wizard of Menlo Park: How Thomas Alva Edison Invented the Modern World. Random House LLC, 2007.
Thomas G. Manning, The Chicago Strike of 1894, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1960, 4–7.
Thomas G., Manning , The Chicago Strike of 1894, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1960, 2–4.
Washington, Booker T. Up from slavery. Penguin, 1986.
Winkler, John Kennedy. Incredible Carnegie: The Life of Andrew Carnegie (1835-1919. The Vanguard Press, 1931
Japanese history reflected in the book
“Musui’s Story: The Autobiography of a Tokugawa Samurai”
Each individual has a defining moment that tends to transform one’s character. It does not matter whether that moment is affirmative or unconstructive, but how an individual reacts to that moment is essential. The Samurai were considered as great warriors in Japanese culture. The book Musui’s Story: The Autobiography of a Tokugawa Samurai expounds on Katsu Kokichi’s life as a samurai, and his transformation in the Tokugawa era. Kokichi underwent numerous challenges in life, which was one of the characteristics of samurai in the Tokugawa age. After retiring from being a samurai, as well as the family leader, Kokichi passed the mantle to his son, thus, getting the time to write his autobiography. Kokichi expected that his story would help people to avoid making mistakes, just as he did in early life. Kokichi’s transformation offers a great lesson that people should mind about others, rather than themselves all the time.
The Prologue of Katsu Kokichi endeavored to give a story of his life in brief. It offered words of advice to the coming generations to be proactive while they are still young. Kokichi began by explaining how reading as many books as possible could help in gaining wisdom. He mentioned the brilliant generals and “warriors who disregarded the law of Heaven” (Katsu 1). The prologue emphasized on respecting the teachings from the sages and Heaven, disregarding the position in society. Helping other people was part of samurai culture , but Kokichi gained blessings from Heaven by helping those were in dire needs. Kokichi asserted that his family has enjoyed the comforts of life due to its association with people who possess good morals. Life experiences are better than the formal education that people go through. The essence of life is to understand how the human heart works and pursue the way of righteousness. Individuals should shun from showing favoritism or greed. Kokichi’s reflection was about how he lived his young life, and how life changed for better even at old age.
Kokichi’s relationship with his family members was problematic. He was raised by his step-mother, as her mother was her father’s concubine. When he was young, he made life hell for his step-mother. However, he could not let his brother know of his mischief, as he feared punishment. Although his father could tolerate him, his step-mother could not. When he stole her mother’s irises, his father claimed, “Children are supposed to be full of spirit…Just buy plenty of irises and keep hanging them up” (Katsu 11). Everyone in the family regarded him as a nuisance, although the Otani family supported him financially until he got married. He even scorned his grandmother for being so strict with him.
Education was a fundamental thing in the life of a samurai, and children were usually molded to fit their lords by memorizing some texts from their instructors. Initially, Kokichi did not like classes because everyone hated him. When other children ganged up to beat him, he would overpower them, and when overpowered, he would contemplate “to commit hara-kiri” (Katsu 13). Samurai warriors were expected to be brave, regardless of the situation that they were in.
During the Tokugawa epoch, samurai were transformed into bureaucrats, administrators and merchants, rather than remaining as warriors. There were no warfare in this era, thus, samurai progressively lost their martial responsibility. However, Kokichi lack of interest in education made him unwise. He spent his money faster than he was earning them. He became a rebel, a brawler and a skilled sword-seller, while his fellow samurai in this period became statesmen and poets, among other high responsibilities in society. It was a shame for a samurai not to hold a political office in Japan. For Kokichi, his name was always forwarded for candidacy, but not once was he given a position (Katsu 72).
Kokichi’s finances and collective status kept on changing throughout his life. With all the trickery and misdeeds in his life, Kokichi turned to religion for assistance and guidance when life became difficult. He attended different shrines, in addition to climbing on top of a mountain to pray and dedicate himself to a higher being. The Japanese society, starting from the family, to ordinary people, to samurai, valued religion. It seemed that people turn to religion whenever they fall into problems, or when preconditioned to poverty. Religion was also used for retaining power and respect among the followers. When Kokichi retired from being a samurai, he became a “lay Buddhist priest” and also changed his name to Musui, a religious name than meant “dream-besotted” (Katsu 128). Despite poverty, reverence and age, samurai utilized religion and worshipping in the same manner. They used religion to nourish their lives in the most convenient manner. Generals and warriors who failed to adhere to “the laws of Heaven” were punished by losing their dominion (1-2). Religion influenced beliefs and events of Japanese society. Kokichi believed that when one volunteered to help others, he/she received blessings from Heaven. He asserted that it was essential for an individual to gain favor and honor, rather than shame.
As a samurai, Kokichi had a sword as the only weapon. When he left home for the first time, he engaged himself in buying and selling swords (Katsu ix). As a samurai, one was supposed to be educated in order to lead others. However, poverty made samurai warriors to engage in farming and businesses. Samurai warriors had lost no morals in the Tokugawa era. Most of Kokichi’s friends were drunkards and gamblers. They also enjoyed visiting brothels and wasting money on women. This lifestyle made Kokichi run into debts. Thus, immorality seemed to have spoiled most of the samurai warriors as Tokugawa period came to an end. The Tokugawa period disclosed the sad truth of how samurai lost their responsibilities to the commoners. Musui’s story illustrated that it was possible to buy samurai status, rather than inheriting it (Katsu 11).
Kokichi also touched on instances that he was compelled to help people who ran into debts. His landlord was one of them, as Kokichi claimed that “He had later taken to drink …spending his nights in drunken revelry” (Katsu 119). He could not understand why a person could accumulate such a huge debt. However, Kokichi tricked the peasants into contributing more money by attempting to commit suicide, although it had never been his intention to do so. This idea did not please the commoners, as they were unwilling to help their irresponsible leaders.
Samurai warriors in the
Tokugawa age failed to live up to their expectations. Kokichi wanted to correct
the next generation by writing an autobiography, which was meant to advise
young people of how to utilize their youth for societal benefits. His story
demonstrated how samurai of the Tokugawa age shamed the commoners and lost
respect among the high classes. It does not pay to be rude and immoral, as bad behaviors
ruin leaders. After realizing that he had messed with the life of commoners,
Kokichi handed his leadership to his son who was quite responsible. He got time
to discover that an individual ought to do what is ethical, and to help others
whenever possible. His main advice was that people should focus more on the
service of others than themselves.
Katsu, Kokichi, and Teruko Craig. Musui’s Story: The Autobiography of a Tokugawa Samurai. Tucson: The Univ. of Arizona Press, 1995. Print.
Pocahontas and the Powhatan dilemma
Camilla Townsend’s book titled Pocahontas and the Powhatan dilemma concerns how Native Americans who were at Pocahontas reacted to the invasion of the British to their homeland. Faced with highly effective opponents like the British, Townsend’s book portrays how Pocahontas, her biological father Powhatan, and her individuals deftly accepted, involved, opposed, or controlled the British to try to secure their way of life. Particularly, this book describes Pocahontas’s activities through other person’s sight. In fact, this book is all about a story of her individuals and their battle for freedom in a fast modifying world.
In this book, john smith was portrayed as a famous British captain. However, Townsend claims that Opechancanough, Chief Powhatan’s brother captured him. In addition, she indicate that after captain smith was captured, he shown at various Powhatan Native Indian cities before being taken to Werowocomoco, the Powhatan Chiefdom capital. At the chief camp, smith was to be executed but the chief’s daughter, Pocahontas, saved him. This made the chief to adopt smith through an elaborated adoption ceremony. Thus, smith’s life was safe because from that moment onwards, he was regarded as a member of the chief’s tribe. Hence, he was free from captivity and allowed to get out of Werowocomoco. Once smith went back to Jamestown, Powhatan sent presents of meals to the hungry British. Pocahontas usually accompanied these envoys, as she was an indication of peace to the British.
Rolfe was a widower who became well known because of introducing tobacco cash
crops to the Virginia settlers. By all British records, Rolfe and Pocahontas
loved each other and desired to get married. Powhatan agreed to the suggested
marriage and sent Pocahontas’ uncle to represent the people of Pocahontas and
the chief at the marriage ceremony. Rolfe and Pocahontas’s marriage promoted
“Pocahontas peace,” a lull in the unavoidable disputes between the British and
Powhatan Indians. The two soon had a baby boy known as Thomas. The London
Virginia Company, who had financed the Jamestown settling, made the decision to
use the preferred little girl of the excellent Powhatan to their benefits. They
believed, as a Religious turn wedded to a British man, Pocahontas could enhance
attention in the organization and Virginia.
Pocahontas was well known in United States tale as the Indian local lady who rescued and then wedded captain smith of Jamestown. Pocahontas has been an icon of the Native Americans capitulation to English colonialism. Townsend, operating from a fragmentary history, gives Pocahontas an increasingly separate lifestyle, within her own country and outside. In this book, Townsend records Pocahontas’s lifestyle from her child years and youngsters to her ultimate wedding to Rolfe and her shift to Britain. Townsend portrays her as intelligent in operating for her individual’s best interests. Moreover, assured of her capabilities to create her own identification in a globe covered with highly effective and imperialistic others.
In addition, Pocahontas was a spy used by her father in a sensitive sequence of governmental chess. For example, some were with the British while others with other local areas. She understood standard British and carried herself with the pride she thought the British were anticipating of her; they considered her as the little girl of a Master and she approved the part as princess. Townsend illustrates an essential point by clearly showing the readers that no one can fully understand Pocahontas. Rather, we indicate, infer, and think depending on so little about her. She warns the readers throughout the book regarding this tendency.
The writer’s point is that by association Pocahontas and her individuals were not acquiescent lovers of British lifestyle or hopeless sufferers of British imperialism. The writer claims that Pocahontas was a fearless and brilliant lady who dared and sacrificed to secure her individuals. The writer reveals how the other Local United states individuals and Powhatan were not innocent savages. Nevertheless, they were innovative and sensible individuals using their own simple clever to battle against the English’s wide technical advantage. She reveals how through involvement, adjustment, and level of resistance the Local American’s were able to avoid British control and sustain their freedom. Townsend conflicts the common misconception that Pocahontas loved supplicant. In addition, that Pocahontas turned to Western ways but instead made a choice for her individuals to provide and secure them. Overall, the writer intended to reword the knowing of beginning northeastern interaction with Local People in America and provide Pocahontas with the regard she should get.
This book seeks to regain the humankind that the belief of Pocahontas took from Ammonite. Along with the way, we understand not only regarding the Local United states lady behind the belief but also regarding the truth behind Americas’ legendary beginning. Townsend’s main dissertation is not a specifically new one. Particularly, she claims that the Algonquian lady Ammonite was subverted into the legendary Pocahontas to provide the needs of the residents and Jamestown backers adventure as well as fascinated experts within common population and the government of Britain. Since that period, loving romantics, and supporters of United States exceptionalism have persisted to twist the reality to the factor that the actual Pocahontas no more prevails. According to the author of this book, Pocahontas “was as fearless as all her individual. Not an easy delighted worshipper of British power or men, but an actual and complex lady with her own programs, objectives and ideas”
This book’s conclusion is incredibly probably and her discussion is very effective. It is impractical to believe the Local Individuals in America were only supplicant lovers of British lifestyle and technological innovation. Far more likely is the perspective that they were trying to sustain their freedom from the British and opposed servitude. The writer’s interpretation of Pocahontas is the only place that raises concerns. It is incredibly likely that the writer is appropriate about Pocahontas purposes and objectives about defending her people. Nevertheless, the writer does not provide enough evidence for this. The light Townsend reduces on Pocahontas as well as her lifestyle creates her more an actual individual and less like the story version that has typically been informed.
Pocahontas and the Powhatan dilemma book pieces away part after part of belief, inadequate or imperfect analysis and quick or prejudiced results. Townsend’s work is regularly referred to the original resources. If the real tale of Pocahontas is so much bigger, complex and sadder, it is a tale that is important at the beginning of white-colored community in the United States. It is also important to the end of local individuals across the same scenery. A remarkable scholarly accomplishment, not to be skipped.
Labor and the Civil War
The notion of free labor was one of the concepts, which were live and formed a heated debate during the civil war with proponents of ‘free labor’ notion supporting it since they regarded it as opportunity ideology. In support of the ideology, it advocates for hard work where people were in a position for free and unhindered social mobility. The notion and concept of free labor was the basis for the introduction of American capitalism, especially in 1850s. During these periods, free labor was mostly regarded as those working in factories as well as lower level functionaries with regard to the new wave of industrialization which was very much present in the North. Industrialization, which was advanced through factories, the concentration of activities in urban centers as well as a ready market and the need for labor, were regarded as prerequisites driving free labor concept (Eric 2).
During this era, it was considered honorable working in factories as contrasted with the archetype of southern slavery. Those who considered and subscribed to free labor suggested that working in the Northern region, which was industrious was prestigious and favorable even when on small capacities. This was more specifically compared to the slavery conditions in existence in the south. However, the North and South regions were distinct in various ways as described below. First, there was a chance that the workers in the southern region had hope of moving upwards, which presented a reality that could never be witnessed in the southern slavery. To ascertain this assertion, Eric Foner suggests that “republicans believed that a man who ‘remained all his life dependent on wages for his livelihood appeared almost as unfree as the southern slave.” It was the believe and suggestion of many that a worker who worked in southern region could emerge once as an owner of the means of production while employing other workers to work for him. However, this assertion is a reality, which was never expected in the slavery conditions. Secondly, free labor was regarded honorable than slavery carried out in the Southern region because it was a representation of the achievements of the American dream and its articulation (Eric 2).
The American dream was associated with individual hard work, biding one’s time and eventually being in a position to enjoy the fruits of one’s efforts. These characteristics were mostly associated with majority of immigrants and all those in search of a new life. The proponents of free labor advocated its essentials and importance in the notion of expanding the American dream to many individuals and to numerous places as much as possible. However, the vision of life in the south was contrary to such notion of free labor. The conditions of the south were challenged by the proponents of the free labor crusaders from the North who inhibited the “American dream” and preached it across the country. As Twain noted, “In doing so, this highlights the intensity and brutality of the conflict because both ways of life were pitted against one another and only one could survive. In addition, The Civil War uprooted institutions that were centuries old, changed the politics of people, transformed the social life of half the country, and wrought so profoundly upon the national character that the influence cannot be measured short of two or three generations (Eric 2).”
Those who greatly supported and advocated for free labor were convicted that by so doing, every individual’s role in its promotion and advocacy of capitalism in American was carrying out an honorable venture. This effort and feeling was necessitated by the commitment towards feeding the American dream and advancing the economic development of the people. As Eric Foner noted, “Free labor advocates were so passionate about their vision and the “honorable” individuals who were to partake in it because it provided an alternative narrative to slavery in defining American consciousness. It is for this reason that many believed free labor’s capitalist vision so intensely. It shaped both individual lives and the American narrative leading into and following the Civil War (Eric 2).”
The Economics of Slavery
This was the notion majorly held by the Southerners in their quest for prosperity and economic development. The economics of slavery-involved slave trading highly practiced in the south despite being outlawed by the Congress in 1808. This was the same year the US Congress passed a resolution barring the country from participating in international trade in slavery despite high demand in the southern region. Before the Congress resolution, slavery were traded through auction and direct sales in case the slave owner died or required urgent cash. In addition, trading in slaves was prevalent whenever the owner wanted to get rid of troublesome and lazy slaves. The slave trade never considered family ties or bonds and trade was carried out indiscriminative with members of the same family together or to separate owners. Male slaves were traded for $920 each while female fetched $640. Children were not left behind in slave trade for they fetched below $100 until they attain the adult age or old enough to be introduced to field work.
In order to ensure the continuity of slavery, especially after the Congress ban, various means and ways for reproduction were hatched. Natural reproduction was the preference with many southerners; in addition, the slaves were forced to reproduce. Reproduction was also carried out through rapes and life cycle of female slaves. The retention of slaves was cruel and inhuman with psychological torture being used to scare and enslave them not to run away. Some of the responsibilities which were daily activities for the slaves included wheelwright, caulker, midwife/nurse, blacksmith, field-hand and cooking chores (Jose 4).
These activities were minimized when the American colonization society was established in 1817. This was a milestone, especially to African Americans who considered the establishment a greater step towards freedom. Discrimination was also carried through the types of jobs offered, skin color, relationship to the owner and finally time allowed in the plantation. Some were treated differently from others where material incentives like better food and clothing were given (Eric 2).
How changes affected the lives of people from 1850-1877
The entrance of women in the labor force, especially in the southern and northern regions brought out a new frontier in how work was considered. The entrance of women in the wage work force exemplified and complicated the respectability of free labor in equal measures. Since women could not be involved in equal types of jobs like men, although the labor laws and notion of free labor allowed, the compensation scheme became a complex issue. Although they demanded equal payment, it was not equivalent to the amount and type of work they performed compared to male counterparts. Margaret Garner’s life and the publicity towards free labor and entry in the wage labor force demonstrated the completion which existed between wage labor and plantation slavery. She demonstrated that women were also able in equal measures to transform from plantation slavery and be absorbed to wage labor force and deliver accordingly. As observed by Roediger, those involved in the northern wage labor force underlined the dignity of wage laborers compared to the plantation slavery in the south (Eric 2).
slave trade was brought to an end with the reconstruction and civil war,
especially from 1850-1877. The workers also participated through disobedience
of their masters, go slows and strikes in plantations. They were also a
combination of open and quieter resistance, which eventually resulted in
blending of the African and American influences from the south and north
respectively. The reconstruction agenda was advanced by Andrew Johnson, who
advocated for the rights of southerners and the end of the slave trade. The
State responded with the 13th amendment while issuing a pardon to
all the southerners. By 1865, various States in the south had passed clack
codes protecting former slaves’ rights and treating them equally. The 13th
amendment abolished slave trade while the 14th amendment provided
citizenship to African Americans. By the time the 15th amendment was
passed, it was illegal to deny any voting rights to any citizen based on
previous enslaved status, religion or race. These processes resulted in
emancipation where four million slaves were set free. Emancipation resulted in
reconciliation between separated families, construction of schools by former
slaves, and petitioning of government for compensation. These efforts even led
to the establishment of the Freedman’s bureau responsible for gaining
education, obtaining land, negotiating labor contracts, settling legal disputes,
and provision of basic necessities. These efforts were fruitful and witnessed
various Acts, especially the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871, which empowered
southerners and suspended the writ of habeas corpus (Jose 4).
Eric, Foner. Politics and Ideology in the Age of the Civil War (Magill’s Literary Annual 1981). Frank Northen Magill. Salem Press, Inc. 1981. Print.
Jose, Galdo. The Long-Run Labor-Market Consequences of Civil War, New York: NY. Routledge, 2010. Print.