Proposition 21 is a offer to the Californian people concerning state parks. It is called, "The State Park and Wildlife Conservation Act." Funding for these state parks will come from the pockets of the citizens of California and will be charged to the registration of their vehicles. Proposition 21 will be voted upon this coming Tuesday and we shall see whether our opinions are correct.
After going over Prop 21 several times, I have concluded that I would not vote for it. There are numerous reasons why, however a few resound loudly in the minds of the people of California. In our current economic crisis, eighteen dollars per car, per year is adding up and the people of California simply do not have it. Extra fees and taxes are not going to bring about happiness from the citizens, nor is it truly necessary.
Yet another reason not to vote for Prop 21 is the lack of usage of State Parks. Not many people who do not live within ten minutes of a State Park will never use it. Personally, I have never visited a State Park and never really plan to. The people who spend eighteen dollars per car per year, and never visit the parks, are wasting their money. Last time I checked, most people do not like the sound of their money burning away.
An issue that is ever existent in most propositions these days, is the location of where the money is truly going. Its tough to know exactly what our funds are being used for, as well as how much were paying in the end. The Prop says that the fund will only be used for funding State Parks. However, later it says that some of the extra money may be used elsewhere if needed. Why should there even be extra money? These questions must be answered before the people of California will simply throw their money at something they do not see the end of.
Lastly, my opinion is that Proposition 21 will cause Californians only more grief and economic hardship. Without knowledge of the location of the fees that we're paying, as well as not being able to visit and enjoy the State Parks are a few reasons why Prop 21 should not be supported.
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Saturday, October 2, 2010
College Funding
As a graduating senior, college is swiftly approaching. With all the excitement and new opportunities it brings, college is expensive. There is no way around that fact. As a Christian looking to head into the ministry, private colleges are in the forefront of my search which makes my scholarship searching that much more necessary and crucial. No student should have to pay for college out of their own pocket, as well as any parent. Scholarships are out there for all who are willing to put in the work and research and time into finding them.
California Baptist University is at the top of my list for colleges that I wish to attend. They offer multiple scholarships that are applicable to me. The first scholarship that I will apply for is called the Federal Pell Grant. This is a federal program that awards scholarships based on the financial need of the student. Although, the financial need is there for ever student, this may not allow me to gain tons of money. Secondly, I am applying for is the Cal Grant. This grant is based on GPA and academics of the student's high school career. My academics are solid enough to allow me to receive a decent amount of money from the state of California in this grant. I will soon be filling out a FAFSA form to receive this grant.
CBU offers academic and athletic scholarships, as do most colleges. Thus, I will be searching and asking for those opportunities to be given. The Presidential scholarship is awarded to students with a 3.75 cumulative GPA and a 1,100 SAT score. I will be taking the SAT for the second time on November 6 to improve my score in hopes of receiving the Presidential scholarship. Athletic scholarships are also available, which is why I am practicing hard on the golf course to hopefully earn money for golf. I have spoken several times with the golf coach and have had conversations about scholarship money, which may be awarded at a later time.
Also at CBU, there is money available for BAT majors. The BAT program is the Bachelors of Applied Theology program that trains and prepares young men to become pastors. this is my desired field and I will hopefully receive scholarship money in that program. A friend of mine just received 15,000 dollars from the BAT program this year.
With some time still left on my plate, scholarship searching is getting more and more intense. I am still searching for more because of the obvious need for college funding. Nobody needs to wholly pay for college, but the student must work for the money that he may earn scholarships to be able to pay for college.
California Baptist University is at the top of my list for colleges that I wish to attend. They offer multiple scholarships that are applicable to me. The first scholarship that I will apply for is called the Federal Pell Grant. This is a federal program that awards scholarships based on the financial need of the student. Although, the financial need is there for ever student, this may not allow me to gain tons of money. Secondly, I am applying for is the Cal Grant. This grant is based on GPA and academics of the student's high school career. My academics are solid enough to allow me to receive a decent amount of money from the state of California in this grant. I will soon be filling out a FAFSA form to receive this grant.
CBU offers academic and athletic scholarships, as do most colleges. Thus, I will be searching and asking for those opportunities to be given. The Presidential scholarship is awarded to students with a 3.75 cumulative GPA and a 1,100 SAT score. I will be taking the SAT for the second time on November 6 to improve my score in hopes of receiving the Presidential scholarship. Athletic scholarships are also available, which is why I am practicing hard on the golf course to hopefully earn money for golf. I have spoken several times with the golf coach and have had conversations about scholarship money, which may be awarded at a later time.
Also at CBU, there is money available for BAT majors. The BAT program is the Bachelors of Applied Theology program that trains and prepares young men to become pastors. this is my desired field and I will hopefully receive scholarship money in that program. A friend of mine just received 15,000 dollars from the BAT program this year.
With some time still left on my plate, scholarship searching is getting more and more intense. I am still searching for more because of the obvious need for college funding. Nobody needs to wholly pay for college, but the student must work for the money that he may earn scholarships to be able to pay for college.
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Dwight D. Eisenhower
Dwight D. Eisenhower was one of the greatest men in American history. A true American man who was a real leader at heart, led our great nation to many victories as well as two terms as President. Eisenhower knew that the only way to truly lead, was to first serve. As General commander of the American forces, he showed that his service was widely apparent and this led to his pure leadership. Dwight D. Eisenhower was one of America's greatest leaders.
David Dwight Eisenhower was born on October 14, 1890, in Texas. "He was the third of seven sons born to David Jacob Eisenhower and Ida Elizabeth Stover, of German, English and Swiss ancestry." Dwight was raised under Presbyterian church leadership by his parents. They are described as strict but fair. He attended Abilene High School in Abilene, Kansas, and attended the Naval Academy. Before entering, however, Dwight worked for two years as a night foreman at the Belle Springs Creamery. This he did to support his brother Edgar's education wishes. After these two years, Eisenhower wanted to join the Naval Academy. He passed the entrance exam with flying colors, but was beyond the age eligibility to enter the academy. With great disappointment, Dwight then decided that he would try his luck at the military academy at West Point. He was accepted and graduated at the upper echelon of his class. He graduated in 1915, in, "the class the stars fell on." It was given this name because 59 of the classmates became general officers later in life. As an addition to all of this, Dwight also had an astounding athletic career. As a baseball player, golfer, boxer, and a football player, he was an obvious star. He played football as a running back and linebacker at West Point. He also plyed golf at the prestigioous Augusta National golf club in his later years.
Eisenhower's military career is also quite impressive. his early career he never saw combat. But soon he began to talk with General George S. Patton and became interested in tank warfare. This is what finally led him to the battlefield. His normal rank was the Captain position but he eventually rose to a major. He then served as betallion commander from 1924 until 1927. in 1936, he was promoted to permanent lieutenant colonel after 16 years as a major. He also learned to fly, but was never used as a pilot. Later, Eisenhower joined the forces to assist in World War II. In 1944, he was appointed General of the army. "In this and the previous high commands he held, Eisenhower showed his great talents for leadership and diplomacy. Although he had never seen action himself, he won the respect of front-line commanders. He dealt skillfully with difficult subordinates such as Patton, and allies such as Winston Churchill, Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery and General Charles de Gaulle. He had fundamental disagreements with Churchill and Montgomery over questions of strategy, but these rarely upset his relationships with them. He negotiated with Soviet Marshal Zhukov, and such was the confidence that President Franklin D. Roosevelt had in him, he sometimes worked directly with Stalin, much to the chagrin of the British High Command who disliked being bypassed." This man showed his great ability to be led and thus take the lead over and over again in this war, and he was rewared accordingly. His story is a model that serves to support the concept that hard work and discipline truly does pay off.
In November of 1945, Dwight returned to take over as Chief of Staff. His main job was to demobilize millions of soldiers an find them jobs, which would turn out to be a very slow process. Later, he introduced the "Eisenhower Doctrine." "In relation to the Middle East, the U.S. would be "prepared to use armed force...[to counter] aggression from any country controlled by international communism." The Eisenhower Doctrine of 1957 declared that the United States would distribute economic and military aid and, if necessary, use military force to stop the spread of communism in the Middle East." This doctrine played out in the United States sending aid to the Kingdom of Jordan to supress a upheaval that had risen up. These kinds of things were at the heart of the Eisenhower Doctrine.
Finally, Eisenhower's most important trait that led to him being the incredible leader that he was. His desire and discipline to serve and compete with his fellow soldiers are what allowed them to trust him in times of despair. His leaderhsip led them out of trouble and this only occured because they were comfortanle to trust him because of his leadership. "Our landings in the Cherbourg-Havre area have failed to gain a satisfactory foothold and I have withdrawn the troops. My decision to attack at this time and place was based on the best information available. The troops, the air and the Navy did all that bravery and devotion to duty could do. If any blame or fault attaches to the attempt, it is mine alone." Those last words are the heart of this great man. Responsibility, discipline, and hard work.
David Dwight Eisenhower was born on October 14, 1890, in Texas. "He was the third of seven sons born to David Jacob Eisenhower and Ida Elizabeth Stover, of German, English and Swiss ancestry." Dwight was raised under Presbyterian church leadership by his parents. They are described as strict but fair. He attended Abilene High School in Abilene, Kansas, and attended the Naval Academy. Before entering, however, Dwight worked for two years as a night foreman at the Belle Springs Creamery. This he did to support his brother Edgar's education wishes. After these two years, Eisenhower wanted to join the Naval Academy. He passed the entrance exam with flying colors, but was beyond the age eligibility to enter the academy. With great disappointment, Dwight then decided that he would try his luck at the military academy at West Point. He was accepted and graduated at the upper echelon of his class. He graduated in 1915, in, "the class the stars fell on." It was given this name because 59 of the classmates became general officers later in life. As an addition to all of this, Dwight also had an astounding athletic career. As a baseball player, golfer, boxer, and a football player, he was an obvious star. He played football as a running back and linebacker at West Point. He also plyed golf at the prestigioous Augusta National golf club in his later years.
Eisenhower's military career is also quite impressive. his early career he never saw combat. But soon he began to talk with General George S. Patton and became interested in tank warfare. This is what finally led him to the battlefield. His normal rank was the Captain position but he eventually rose to a major. He then served as betallion commander from 1924 until 1927. in 1936, he was promoted to permanent lieutenant colonel after 16 years as a major. He also learned to fly, but was never used as a pilot. Later, Eisenhower joined the forces to assist in World War II. In 1944, he was appointed General of the army. "In this and the previous high commands he held, Eisenhower showed his great talents for leadership and diplomacy. Although he had never seen action himself, he won the respect of front-line commanders. He dealt skillfully with difficult subordinates such as Patton, and allies such as Winston Churchill, Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery and General Charles de Gaulle. He had fundamental disagreements with Churchill and Montgomery over questions of strategy, but these rarely upset his relationships with them. He negotiated with Soviet Marshal Zhukov, and such was the confidence that President Franklin D. Roosevelt had in him, he sometimes worked directly with Stalin, much to the chagrin of the British High Command who disliked being bypassed." This man showed his great ability to be led and thus take the lead over and over again in this war, and he was rewared accordingly. His story is a model that serves to support the concept that hard work and discipline truly does pay off.
In November of 1945, Dwight returned to take over as Chief of Staff. His main job was to demobilize millions of soldiers an find them jobs, which would turn out to be a very slow process. Later, he introduced the "Eisenhower Doctrine." "In relation to the Middle East, the U.S. would be "prepared to use armed force...[to counter] aggression from any country controlled by international communism." The Eisenhower Doctrine of 1957 declared that the United States would distribute economic and military aid and, if necessary, use military force to stop the spread of communism in the Middle East." This doctrine played out in the United States sending aid to the Kingdom of Jordan to supress a upheaval that had risen up. These kinds of things were at the heart of the Eisenhower Doctrine.
Finally, Eisenhower's most important trait that led to him being the incredible leader that he was. His desire and discipline to serve and compete with his fellow soldiers are what allowed them to trust him in times of despair. His leaderhsip led them out of trouble and this only occured because they were comfortanle to trust him because of his leadership. "Our landings in the Cherbourg-Havre area have failed to gain a satisfactory foothold and I have withdrawn the troops. My decision to attack at this time and place was based on the best information available. The troops, the air and the Navy did all that bravery and devotion to duty could do. If any blame or fault attaches to the attempt, it is mine alone." Those last words are the heart of this great man. Responsibility, discipline, and hard work.
Monday, February 15, 2010
Abraham Kuyper and Calvinism
Abraham Kuyper
Abraham Kuyper was born on October 29, 1837 and died on November 8, 1920. His life was full of proclamation and defense of his views and faith. This man truly fulfilled the defense of the Christian faith as Christ desired it. With all this in mind, I will now go into the study of this great man, Abraham Kuyper.
Kuyper was born to Jan Frederik Kuyper and Johanna Kuyper. He was home schooled from a very early age and excelled greatly in all academics. His teacher was his father, who was the minister for the Dutch Reformed Church in Hoogmade. He had no true formal education but had a secondary education later in his life. This is what is so amazing about Kuyper. “In 1862 he was promoted to doctor in Theology on basis of a dissertation called "Disquisitio historico-theologica, exhibens Johannis Calvini et Johannis à Lasco de Ecclesia Sententiarum inter se compositionem" (Theological-historical dissertation showing the differences in the rules of the church, between John Calvin and John Łaski).” (Wikipedia) Abraham quickly became a doctor in theology which was his greatest love of study. His deepest desire was to delve into the Scriptures and the books of his hero John Calvin and compare and contrast them with gentleness and respect.
Kuyper was a Dutch Calvinist who was extremely passionate about that title. He studied the ideas and methods of the great John Calvin with intelligible intensity. However, he also studied the theology of John Laski. His favor leaned toward Laski in the early days of his study. This was because the ideas of Laski were not as controversial as those of John Calvin. With these studies in full form, Kuyper began to realize God changing him day by day. He always had showed favor to the theology of John Laski and now he was beginning to realize that God had different plans for his beliefs and evangelism. He began to see the deep truth of Calvin’s Five Points and the totality of his theology and views toward evangelism.
Kuyper’s study of Calvinism set him on fire for evangelism. He began to lecture as the minister of the Dutch Reformed Church. Many of his lectures were on the topic of Calvinism which stirred up many debates and arguments in his native Holland. He, however, was greatly versed in the issues and was often able to solve debates and arguments with his own knowledge and study. Abraham Kuyper is most famous for, “The Stone Lectures,” which were 6 lectures preached by Kuyper on the topic of Calvinism. These lectures were sparked by Kuyper’s study of Calvinism and his fondness of it. He began to see the truth of this issue and thought that it had such great importance that he needed to preach on the topic so that his congregation would know the truth. The first lecture was, “Calvinism As A Life System.” Kuyper preached this sermon first because he thought this was the basis of Calvinism, that it should be lived out as a life system. This quote by Kuyper is a part of his first great sermon. “From the first, therefore, I have always said to myself,–If the battle is to be fought with honor and with a hope of victory, then principle must be arrayed against principle; then it must be felt that in Modernism the vast energy of an all-embracing life-system assails us, then also it must be understood that we have to take our stand in a life-system of equally comprehensive and far-reaching power. And this powerful life-system is not to be invented nor formulated by ourselves, but is to be taken and applied as it presents itself in history. When thus taken, I found and confessed, and I still hold, that this manifestation of the Christian principle is given us in Calvinism. In Calvinism my heart has found rest. From Calvinism have I drawn the inspiration firmly and resolutely to take my stand in the thick of this great conflict of principles. And therefore, when I was invited most honorably by your Faculty to give the Stone-Lectures here this year, I could not hesitate a moment as to my choice of subject. Calvinism, as the only decisive, lawful, and consistent defence for Protestant nations against encroaching. and overwhelming Modernism,–this of itself was bound to be my theme.” (Kuyper) This is the heart of Abraham Kuyper. Calvinism is the life system that the Bible details. Principles have great power, and Calvinism has the greatest power of all principles. The greatest protection against Modernism is the life system of Calvinism.
Kuyper speaks of Calvinism as the life system of the Christian principle, and as the place his heart found rest. This place is also known as Scripture. Calvinism is well spoke out in Scripture and is the reason why many great theologians have found it to be the only life system that Scripture truly implies and supports. John Calvin’s only goal and desire, was to study the sacred Scripture, interpret it correctly, and speak this interpretation to all other people. With this goal accomplished came Calvinism. And with Calvinism. Abraham Kuyper found rest and began to preach and influence the lives of many great theologians.
Abraham Kuyper was born on October 29, 1837 and died on November 8, 1920. His life was full of proclamation and defense of his views and faith. This man truly fulfilled the defense of the Christian faith as Christ desired it. With all this in mind, I will now go into the study of this great man, Abraham Kuyper.
Kuyper was born to Jan Frederik Kuyper and Johanna Kuyper. He was home schooled from a very early age and excelled greatly in all academics. His teacher was his father, who was the minister for the Dutch Reformed Church in Hoogmade. He had no true formal education but had a secondary education later in his life. This is what is so amazing about Kuyper. “In 1862 he was promoted to doctor in Theology on basis of a dissertation called "Disquisitio historico-theologica, exhibens Johannis Calvini et Johannis à Lasco de Ecclesia Sententiarum inter se compositionem" (Theological-historical dissertation showing the differences in the rules of the church, between John Calvin and John Łaski).” (Wikipedia) Abraham quickly became a doctor in theology which was his greatest love of study. His deepest desire was to delve into the Scriptures and the books of his hero John Calvin and compare and contrast them with gentleness and respect.
Kuyper was a Dutch Calvinist who was extremely passionate about that title. He studied the ideas and methods of the great John Calvin with intelligible intensity. However, he also studied the theology of John Laski. His favor leaned toward Laski in the early days of his study. This was because the ideas of Laski were not as controversial as those of John Calvin. With these studies in full form, Kuyper began to realize God changing him day by day. He always had showed favor to the theology of John Laski and now he was beginning to realize that God had different plans for his beliefs and evangelism. He began to see the deep truth of Calvin’s Five Points and the totality of his theology and views toward evangelism.
Kuyper’s study of Calvinism set him on fire for evangelism. He began to lecture as the minister of the Dutch Reformed Church. Many of his lectures were on the topic of Calvinism which stirred up many debates and arguments in his native Holland. He, however, was greatly versed in the issues and was often able to solve debates and arguments with his own knowledge and study. Abraham Kuyper is most famous for, “The Stone Lectures,” which were 6 lectures preached by Kuyper on the topic of Calvinism. These lectures were sparked by Kuyper’s study of Calvinism and his fondness of it. He began to see the truth of this issue and thought that it had such great importance that he needed to preach on the topic so that his congregation would know the truth. The first lecture was, “Calvinism As A Life System.” Kuyper preached this sermon first because he thought this was the basis of Calvinism, that it should be lived out as a life system. This quote by Kuyper is a part of his first great sermon. “From the first, therefore, I have always said to myself,–If the battle is to be fought with honor and with a hope of victory, then principle must be arrayed against principle; then it must be felt that in Modernism the vast energy of an all-embracing life-system assails us, then also it must be understood that we have to take our stand in a life-system of equally comprehensive and far-reaching power. And this powerful life-system is not to be invented nor formulated by ourselves, but is to be taken and applied as it presents itself in history. When thus taken, I found and confessed, and I still hold, that this manifestation of the Christian principle is given us in Calvinism. In Calvinism my heart has found rest. From Calvinism have I drawn the inspiration firmly and resolutely to take my stand in the thick of this great conflict of principles. And therefore, when I was invited most honorably by your Faculty to give the Stone-Lectures here this year, I could not hesitate a moment as to my choice of subject. Calvinism, as the only decisive, lawful, and consistent defence for Protestant nations against encroaching. and overwhelming Modernism,–this of itself was bound to be my theme.” (Kuyper) This is the heart of Abraham Kuyper. Calvinism is the life system that the Bible details. Principles have great power, and Calvinism has the greatest power of all principles. The greatest protection against Modernism is the life system of Calvinism.
Kuyper speaks of Calvinism as the life system of the Christian principle, and as the place his heart found rest. This place is also known as Scripture. Calvinism is well spoke out in Scripture and is the reason why many great theologians have found it to be the only life system that Scripture truly implies and supports. John Calvin’s only goal and desire, was to study the sacred Scripture, interpret it correctly, and speak this interpretation to all other people. With this goal accomplished came Calvinism. And with Calvinism. Abraham Kuyper found rest and began to preach and influence the lives of many great theologians.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Panama Canal
The building of the Panama Canal was one of the most controversial works that has ever occurred in history. Its constructing was a work of enormous proportions and hard work. This made it the work that it was, being that many did not want it and its construction was immensely difficult. however, it was built, with perseverance and endurance.
The Panama Canal is a ship canal that allowed ships to travel between the Caribbean Sea and the Pacific Ocean. This route, previously, had taken several days to make this type of trip. This canal allowed ships to travel in a faster route and a less dangerous route to travel between the Caribbean Sea and the Pacific Ocean. This canal also allowed for the route from South America across the ocean to be much shorter. Because of this trading became simpler, and travel became swifter.
The building of the Panama Canal was not only controversial, but the work that it required was extremely strenuous. This canal was incredibly long and deep, therefore, it took tough workers and true leadership. The most well known builder of the Panama Canal was President Theodore Roosevelt . Roosevelt helped lead the building of the Panama Canal by taking a swift role of leadership by pulling the pieces together and making things work out in this architectural work.
Along with the building of the Panama Canal , there were also health and death issues that came along with the construction. At this point in history, hygiene is still a large issue. Disease can spread quite quickly when men and women are packed in tight together, such as in a building of the Canal. Among the entire time while building the Panama Canal, there were 27,500 deaths that occurred in construction. Diseases, such as malaria, spread quickly through the men who were building this masterpiece. Many also died from this malaria, which added to the death toll. However, there must always be sacrifice when we desire reward.
Finally, this canal was built to simplify and make more useful, the traveling of ships and the safety and speed of trade. This goal was accomplished and at a high level as Theodore Roosevelt took complete charge and made it so that this building would not fail.. This is the type of leadership that needs to be taken in our own world today. The leadership that was demonstrated in the building of the panama Canal was absolutely extraordinary.
Haskin, Frederic Jennings. The Panama Canal. Doubleday. 1914. Harvard University.
Bennett, Ira Elbert. History of the Panama Canal: its building and construction. Historical Publishing Company. 1915. Michigan.
The Panama Canal is a ship canal that allowed ships to travel between the Caribbean Sea and the Pacific Ocean. This route, previously, had taken several days to make this type of trip. This canal allowed ships to travel in a faster route and a less dangerous route to travel between the Caribbean Sea and the Pacific Ocean. This canal also allowed for the route from South America across the ocean to be much shorter. Because of this trading became simpler, and travel became swifter.
The building of the Panama Canal was not only controversial, but the work that it required was extremely strenuous. This canal was incredibly long and deep, therefore, it took tough workers and true leadership. The most well known builder of the Panama Canal was President Theodore Roosevelt . Roosevelt helped lead the building of the Panama Canal by taking a swift role of leadership by pulling the pieces together and making things work out in this architectural work.
Along with the building of the Panama Canal , there were also health and death issues that came along with the construction. At this point in history, hygiene is still a large issue. Disease can spread quite quickly when men and women are packed in tight together, such as in a building of the Canal. Among the entire time while building the Panama Canal, there were 27,500 deaths that occurred in construction. Diseases, such as malaria, spread quickly through the men who were building this masterpiece. Many also died from this malaria, which added to the death toll. However, there must always be sacrifice when we desire reward.
Finally, this canal was built to simplify and make more useful, the traveling of ships and the safety and speed of trade. This goal was accomplished and at a high level as Theodore Roosevelt took complete charge and made it so that this building would not fail.. This is the type of leadership that needs to be taken in our own world today. The leadership that was demonstrated in the building of the panama Canal was absolutely extraordinary.
Haskin, Frederic Jennings. The Panama Canal. Doubleday. 1914. Harvard University.
Bennett, Ira Elbert. History of the Panama Canal: its building and construction. Historical Publishing Company. 1915. Michigan.
Saturday, September 26, 2009
Trans-Continental Railroad
The Trans-Continental Railroad was one of the most famous and spectacular creations of our country's past history. Congress came together and tried to to discover a strategy for building some sort of transportation that could be used in a transcontinental fashion for the country. They eventually passed an efficient trans-continental plan known as the Pacific Railroad Act of 1862, shortly following the beiginning of the Civil War, and happily signed by President Abraham Lincoln. I will attempt to explain the monumental importance of this major construction of the Transcontinental Railroad.
There were truly only four men, known as the "Big Four" who really brought this incredible idea together. These men were Leland Stanford, Collis Huntington, Charles Crocker and Mark Hopkins. These men were also all merchants. It was soon recognized by those who saw the great dedication of these men to the construction of this railroad. They used most of their own money to fund this creation, and themselves worked on it. Without these four brave men, this railroad would have never been built.
California, before the building of the railroad, sat apart of the rest of the country. There was no real way for anyone to be transported there without the railroad. This shows that this building was absolutely monumental to the linking of California to the rest of the country.
The linking of these numerous states did not just help transportation but also economy. With people not having to pay as high for the various needs of transportation, the value of the dollar went up again. This railroad was a enormous aid to the economy as well as the transportation. "By linking with the existing railway network of the Eastern United States, the road thus connected the Atlantic and Pacific coasts by rail for the first time. Opened for through traffic on May 10, 1869, with the driving of the "Last Spike" at Promontory Summit, Utah, the road established a mechanized transcontinental transportation network that revolutionized the population and economy of the American West."
Finally, the construction of the Transcontinental Railroad was a great achievement. These men and the many that supported them demonstrated bravery and dedication to this work which is what made it successful. Without this railroad, not only would there be no link for the states, but the way we see the rest of the country would be utterly different.
Blashfield, Jean F. Transcontinental Railroad, The. Compass Point Books. 2001. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Houghton, Gillian. Transcontinental Railroad: A Primary Source History of America's First Coast-To-Coast Railroad, The. The Rosen Publishing Group. 2003. New York.
There were truly only four men, known as the "Big Four" who really brought this incredible idea together. These men were Leland Stanford, Collis Huntington, Charles Crocker and Mark Hopkins. These men were also all merchants. It was soon recognized by those who saw the great dedication of these men to the construction of this railroad. They used most of their own money to fund this creation, and themselves worked on it. Without these four brave men, this railroad would have never been built.
California, before the building of the railroad, sat apart of the rest of the country. There was no real way for anyone to be transported there without the railroad. This shows that this building was absolutely monumental to the linking of California to the rest of the country.
The linking of these numerous states did not just help transportation but also economy. With people not having to pay as high for the various needs of transportation, the value of the dollar went up again. This railroad was a enormous aid to the economy as well as the transportation. "By linking with the existing railway network of the Eastern United States, the road thus connected the Atlantic and Pacific coasts by rail for the first time. Opened for through traffic on May 10, 1869, with the driving of the "Last Spike" at Promontory Summit, Utah, the road established a mechanized transcontinental transportation network that revolutionized the population and economy of the American West."
Finally, the construction of the Transcontinental Railroad was a great achievement. These men and the many that supported them demonstrated bravery and dedication to this work which is what made it successful. Without this railroad, not only would there be no link for the states, but the way we see the rest of the country would be utterly different.
Blashfield, Jean F. Transcontinental Railroad, The. Compass Point Books. 2001. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Houghton, Gillian. Transcontinental Railroad: A Primary Source History of America's First Coast-To-Coast Railroad, The. The Rosen Publishing Group. 2003. New York.
Friday, September 25, 2009
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Paris and London
Paris and London are two of the greatest cities in the world, and have been for centuries. Paris, the permanent capital of France, has a long history of movement and defeat but survived and is now one of the premier cities in Europe. London, the capital of England, also has a history of movement and is one of the most beautiful, inhabitated cities in Europe. These two magnificent cities hold great splendor and great history.
Paris was first given the name in 360. one of its first attacks was by Attila the Hun who tried to enter in 451 but was stopped by the Prayer of Genevieve. The first main conqueror of Paris was King Clovis 1 who succeeded in capturing the great city in 508, making it his capital. Clovis also built two glorious sculptures of the Apostles Peter, and Paul after his conversion to Christianity. He was the first great ruler of Paris.
The second astonishing ruler was Charlemagne, ruler of the Carolignian Empire. His conquest of Paris began in 768. He built many churches and monestaries making Paris a great religious city within his empire. Paris reached its high point of growth in the 8th century under Charlemagne. This short reign of Paris was still magnificent considering the growth in such a short time frame.
London also had two great eventful rulers in its history. The first, was Queen Boudicca of the Iceni Tribe. She sacked the city in an attempt to revolt against the Roman Empire. The Emperor Paulinus, tried desperately to save his beloved city but the size of Boudicca's army was simply too large to fight against. He retreated and the city was taken over by the Iceni Tribe.
The next powerful ling of Paris was the great Christian Emperor Diocletian. he again reorganized Britain to become a universal Christian capital of his Empire. London still was known as the financial center of Britain, but it was now a Christian city. He is also known for keeping a watchful eye on his troops and spreading his empire to create a massive rule.
These two astounding cities will be known for many years to come. They are both incredibly beautiful and attract thousands of tourists a year. Being one of the tourist capitals of Europe, these cities are often used but still retain their luster as they hopefully will forever.
Wilson, A.N. London. Modern Library. 2004. New York.
Druon, Maurice. The History of Paris From Caesar to St. Louis. Hart-Davis. 1969. Michigan
Paris was first given the name in 360. one of its first attacks was by Attila the Hun who tried to enter in 451 but was stopped by the Prayer of Genevieve. The first main conqueror of Paris was King Clovis 1 who succeeded in capturing the great city in 508, making it his capital. Clovis also built two glorious sculptures of the Apostles Peter, and Paul after his conversion to Christianity. He was the first great ruler of Paris.
The second astonishing ruler was Charlemagne, ruler of the Carolignian Empire. His conquest of Paris began in 768. He built many churches and monestaries making Paris a great religious city within his empire. Paris reached its high point of growth in the 8th century under Charlemagne. This short reign of Paris was still magnificent considering the growth in such a short time frame.
London also had two great eventful rulers in its history. The first, was Queen Boudicca of the Iceni Tribe. She sacked the city in an attempt to revolt against the Roman Empire. The Emperor Paulinus, tried desperately to save his beloved city but the size of Boudicca's army was simply too large to fight against. He retreated and the city was taken over by the Iceni Tribe.
The next powerful ling of Paris was the great Christian Emperor Diocletian. he again reorganized Britain to become a universal Christian capital of his Empire. London still was known as the financial center of Britain, but it was now a Christian city. He is also known for keeping a watchful eye on his troops and spreading his empire to create a massive rule.
These two astounding cities will be known for many years to come. They are both incredibly beautiful and attract thousands of tourists a year. Being one of the tourist capitals of Europe, these cities are often used but still retain their luster as they hopefully will forever.
Wilson, A.N. London. Modern Library. 2004. New York.
Druon, Maurice. The History of Paris From Caesar to St. Louis. Hart-Davis. 1969. Michigan
Saturday, October 4, 2008
Salah Al Din
Salah Al Din was an influential leader and led an inspirational life as the sultan of Egypt and Syria. His life impacted many and has even led some to live their lives to accomplish the things that he did, such as Saddam Hussein. Saladin, as he is better known today, is recognized for his chivalrous actions toward those he captured and to those who lived around him.
Saladin was born a Kurdish Muslim and practiced as such. He was led by his uncle, Sherrga, into war and came out the leader of his country after the death of his uncle. After the death of Sherrga, Saladin was appointed vizier of Egypt in 1169. This event caused his glorious reign to begin, and not stop until 1193 . This reign is known as one of the most chivalrous times in history because of the acts of Saladin. "Saladin is one of very few personages of the time of the Crusades that has managed to be positively described in both Western and Eastern sources. With his high position among his Western opponents, he has become a figure that have fascinated Western writers."
The first interaction Saladin is faced with is when his uncle, the present vizier of Egypt, asks him to ride along with him into Egypt. Though Saladin does not want to go, he does so willingly. While on this trip, his uncle dies after a party from eating too much. This propels Saladin into power since he is the only heir left to the throne. He is still young, but he takes his responsibility as a man, and takes the crown and thus begins his reign over Egypt .
Saladin is most well known for his defense against the 3rd Crusade. As the Crusaders were invading attempting to defeat the Muslims, there was a truce made between the Crusaders and Saladin. Raynald, the leader of the 3rd Crusade, broke the truce by attacking the caravans of Saladin. After being asked to stop, he once again attacked a caravan. This caravan, however, carried with it Saladin's sister, whom Raynald captured and perhaps raped. This action launched Saladin over the edge in rage. His defense is to attack Raynald, crushing him, and eventually killing Raynald with his bear hands. He does so and therefore ends the 3rd Crusade.
This event is the one of the few points in history that we see the cruelty of Saladin. He is well known for being a kind, chivalrous leader while still conquering and spreading his kingdom. This man ruled well over Egypt, while still maintaining his kingdom and respect from his people.
Stanley, Diane. Saladin:Noble Prince of Islam. Harper Collins. 2002. New York.
Ali, Tariq. The Book of Saladin:A Novel. Verso. 1999. New York.
Saladin was born a Kurdish Muslim and practiced as such. He was led by his uncle, Sherrga, into war and came out the leader of his country after the death of his uncle. After the death of Sherrga, Saladin was appointed vizier of Egypt in 1169. This event caused his glorious reign to begin, and not stop until 1193 . This reign is known as one of the most chivalrous times in history because of the acts of Saladin. "Saladin is one of very few personages of the time of the Crusades that has managed to be positively described in both Western and Eastern sources. With his high position among his Western opponents, he has become a figure that have fascinated Western writers."
The first interaction Saladin is faced with is when his uncle, the present vizier of Egypt, asks him to ride along with him into Egypt. Though Saladin does not want to go, he does so willingly. While on this trip, his uncle dies after a party from eating too much. This propels Saladin into power since he is the only heir left to the throne. He is still young, but he takes his responsibility as a man, and takes the crown and thus begins his reign over Egypt .
Saladin is most well known for his defense against the 3rd Crusade. As the Crusaders were invading attempting to defeat the Muslims, there was a truce made between the Crusaders and Saladin. Raynald, the leader of the 3rd Crusade, broke the truce by attacking the caravans of Saladin. After being asked to stop, he once again attacked a caravan. This caravan, however, carried with it Saladin's sister, whom Raynald captured and perhaps raped. This action launched Saladin over the edge in rage. His defense is to attack Raynald, crushing him, and eventually killing Raynald with his bear hands. He does so and therefore ends the 3rd Crusade.
This event is the one of the few points in history that we see the cruelty of Saladin. He is well known for being a kind, chivalrous leader while still conquering and spreading his kingdom. This man ruled well over Egypt, while still maintaining his kingdom and respect from his people.
Stanley, Diane. Saladin:Noble Prince of Islam. Harper Collins. 2002. New York.
Ali, Tariq. The Book of Saladin:A Novel. Verso. 1999. New York.
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Orthodox Religion In Comparison With Christianity
The Eastern Orthodox Church is an attraction to those who love history as well as an exciting religion. Orthodoxy bases much of its value on historic lineages and relation. This concept is odd because there is not much depth or intrinsic value in lineages compared to events or miraculous occurences that happen in other faiths. As with Christianity, many events occur which together, are powerful to give us hope and righteousness and to save us. As we look at these two faiths, keep in mind that this is not a presentation but simply, rather a description of the two.
First of all, the core of the Orthodox Church is the same as the Christian Church, which is that Jesus is the head of the church and the church being his body. This idea is spelled out in Ephesians 5, saying that Jesus is the husband and His bride is the church. This gives us a framework of marriage as well, being that Christ gave Himself to the church and she submitting to Him. This should be the example that mirrors the Christian marriage. This concept is at the heart of Orthodoxy.
The Orthodox Church traces themselves back to great names and titles from Biblical history. Each person of the faith traces himself back to one of the apostles in a direct lineage. As well as these people, each city is governed by a bishop. These bishops are directly are believed are to be traced to Jesus Christ Himself. This historical lineage is the basic reason that they believe makes thier beliefs valid. This is a concept with not much proof because lineage has value, but not truth. There is no truth and no proof and no glory in lineages for obtaining power! There must be events and actions that differentiate this religion from others
This faith also claims that they are the true recievers and obtainers of the gospel of Jesus Christ. They believe that it was passed from the Apostles to them without flaw or demeanor and that they are the true chosen nation and people of God and that he chose them from the beginning. This is clearly not truthful for God personally claimed Israel, the Jews as His chosen people, and that is why salvation comes from the Jews as Jesus states in Matthew 15. This idea gives light on the concept that The Orthodox Church has not been truly chosen by God as a people.
The Greek or Eastern Orthodox Church has been established since Jesus and His Apostles established Christianity. They believe they are the true recievers of this faith and that they are truly traced back to them. This idea is widely debated and discussed around the world, and will be done so for years to come.
First of all, the core of the Orthodox Church is the same as the Christian Church, which is that Jesus is the head of the church and the church being his body. This idea is spelled out in Ephesians 5, saying that Jesus is the husband and His bride is the church. This gives us a framework of marriage as well, being that Christ gave Himself to the church and she submitting to Him. This should be the example that mirrors the Christian marriage. This concept is at the heart of Orthodoxy.
The Orthodox Church traces themselves back to great names and titles from Biblical history. Each person of the faith traces himself back to one of the apostles in a direct lineage. As well as these people, each city is governed by a bishop. These bishops are directly are believed are to be traced to Jesus Christ Himself. This historical lineage is the basic reason that they believe makes thier beliefs valid. This is a concept with not much proof because lineage has value, but not truth. There is no truth and no proof and no glory in lineages for obtaining power! There must be events and actions that differentiate this religion from others
This faith also claims that they are the true recievers and obtainers of the gospel of Jesus Christ. They believe that it was passed from the Apostles to them without flaw or demeanor and that they are the true chosen nation and people of God and that he chose them from the beginning. This is clearly not truthful for God personally claimed Israel, the Jews as His chosen people, and that is why salvation comes from the Jews as Jesus states in Matthew 15. This idea gives light on the concept that The Orthodox Church has not been truly chosen by God as a people.
The Greek or Eastern Orthodox Church has been established since Jesus and His Apostles established Christianity. They believe they are the true recievers of this faith and that they are truly traced back to them. This idea is widely debated and discussed around the world, and will be done so for years to come.
Monday, August 18, 2008
The Middle Ages
The Middle Ages was a time of grand building and exsquisite artistry. But, very few writing took place during the years of the Middle Ages. Through these years, an event took place called the Reformation. This is by far my favorite time period of the Middle Ages. The Reformation was headlined by Martin Luther, a German monk and theologian, who challenged the church by posting a theses of 95 acts that he felt the church was committing that were sinful. This action by Luther led to the split of the church forming the Reformed Catholic church.
Martin Luther was born on November 10, 1483. He was born to Hans and Margaretha Luther and was baptized the day after his birth. Hans Luther was a peasant man who wished only to see his son to go beyond the life of a peasant into civil service and becoming a educated man. Martin Luther obeyed his father's wishes and graduated with his master's degree in only 4 years of college. After recieving his degree, Luther began attending law school. One day, Luther was on his way home when a lightning bolt struck quite near to Him. In deep fright, he shouted, "St. Anne! Spare me and I will become a monk!" Later regretting his words, Luther kept his promise and went into the monestary.
The Catholic Church in the 16th century was much like some churches today. The priests and bishops lived in luxury and comfort while the lower church employees struggled financially. The aristocracy and poverty clashed within the church walls and arose tension in the early 1500's. Seeing this anger build, Martin Luther began to compile a list of sinful traditions the church leaders were now executing with the congregation. These rituals included indulgences. This is the practice of using monetary value to earn salvation during and after your life. Many other occurences of sinful deeds soon angered Luther causing him to post his list on the door of the Wittenburg church in Germany.
After the posting by Luther, many things changed in the Catholic Church. Several artworks and sculptures were destroyed by the Protestants along with parts of churches that signified the glory of man himself. Some of the gorgeous windows and crosses that represented were torn down as the Protestant Radicals did as they believed was right. Though we can no longer see this great history because of the acts of the Radicals, the point of Luther was firmly made clear to all that God is the ultimate power in thes world, not man.
MacCullough, Diarmaid. Reformation, The. Viking Publishing. 2004. New York
Bainton, Roland Herbert. The Reformation of the Sixteenth Century. Hodder and Stoughton. 1953. New York.
Martin Luther was born on November 10, 1483. He was born to Hans and Margaretha Luther and was baptized the day after his birth. Hans Luther was a peasant man who wished only to see his son to go beyond the life of a peasant into civil service and becoming a educated man. Martin Luther obeyed his father's wishes and graduated with his master's degree in only 4 years of college. After recieving his degree, Luther began attending law school. One day, Luther was on his way home when a lightning bolt struck quite near to Him. In deep fright, he shouted, "St. Anne! Spare me and I will become a monk!" Later regretting his words, Luther kept his promise and went into the monestary.
The Catholic Church in the 16th century was much like some churches today. The priests and bishops lived in luxury and comfort while the lower church employees struggled financially. The aristocracy and poverty clashed within the church walls and arose tension in the early 1500's. Seeing this anger build, Martin Luther began to compile a list of sinful traditions the church leaders were now executing with the congregation. These rituals included indulgences. This is the practice of using monetary value to earn salvation during and after your life. Many other occurences of sinful deeds soon angered Luther causing him to post his list on the door of the Wittenburg church in Germany.
After the posting by Luther, many things changed in the Catholic Church. Several artworks and sculptures were destroyed by the Protestants along with parts of churches that signified the glory of man himself. Some of the gorgeous windows and crosses that represented were torn down as the Protestant Radicals did as they believed was right. Though we can no longer see this great history because of the acts of the Radicals, the point of Luther was firmly made clear to all that God is the ultimate power in thes world, not man.
MacCullough, Diarmaid. Reformation, The. Viking Publishing. 2004. New York
Bainton, Roland Herbert. The Reformation of the Sixteenth Century. Hodder and Stoughton. 1953. New York.
Saturday, April 26, 2008
God. Yes or No?
On the night of April 25th, I had the oppurtunity to see and hear the debate between the ahiest Peter Singer, and the Christian Dinesh D'Souza. Both men have a long sheet of credentials and have studided their way into being some of the great minds of our generation. The debate was on the issue of the existence of God and a sub-topic of human and animal suffering. As these two brilliant minds duked it out, I went on a learning journey of my own. This was by far one of the most interesting conversations i have heard.
Peter Singer was born in Australia and has studied at the University of Oxford and the University of Melbourne in Australia. He has also published many books on his beliefs and spoken to many different types of audiences. Dinesh D'Souza was born in India and did the majority of his studying at the University of Dartmouth. He has also written many books and many national bestsellers. His ideas have caused some of the most controversial battles over thoughts of any one man.
The debate had a different vibe to it then i thought of when I decided to attend. Peter Singer mostly brought up the idea of suffering and how a all-loving, all-knowing God could allow such suffering to occur in our universe. Dinesh D'Souza responded in a hidden matter by saying that in a Darwinian universe nobody would care about suffeing, after all we're simpy machines. This thought was rebuddled by Singer as one of the hardest topics of the night. Neither man really gave an objective answer to the problem of suffering nor the problem of evil. This non answering technique muddled me that even the topics I struggle with, as do these men.
Many people had the oppurtunity to ask questions to either Singer or D'Souza. The main questions were still on the problem of suffering and the problem of evil. My viewpoint on these two issues is this: Suffering was caused by man's choice to reject the Father's leadership and thus caused a perversion of the human creative order and a distortion of man's relationship with God. The same is to be said about the problem of evil. Man's choice to reject led to the evil in this world. Now a common argument to this idea is that, in that case God must have created evil. My response is no, because God gave us a free will to choose Him, instead of forcing love upon Himself from us. God did not create evil. Though He may have created the potential for evil, in giving us free will and choices. This issue I myself do not have the knowledge o explain. Only God knows the exactness and the details of His creation. Scientists may come closer and closer to knowing the world we live in, but only the Father knows exactly.
As the debate came to a close, each man had a concluding statement. Singer cleaned up his argument by saying that neither man had answered the problem of suffering and evil. Dinesh refuted by syaing that Peter had not answered the idea of compassion coming as a Christian moral. These two men I believe, got so caught up in beating the other, that the Gospel had an oppurtuinty to be shared, and it was not. D'Souza had some amazing ideas and arguments, but in the end, they were all technical aspects of the spectrum that he based his debate upon. Singer was the same way, his arguments were all based on the physical aspects of this world instead of the deeper idea, of does God exist?
Peter Singer was born in Australia and has studied at the University of Oxford and the University of Melbourne in Australia. He has also published many books on his beliefs and spoken to many different types of audiences. Dinesh D'Souza was born in India and did the majority of his studying at the University of Dartmouth. He has also written many books and many national bestsellers. His ideas have caused some of the most controversial battles over thoughts of any one man.
The debate had a different vibe to it then i thought of when I decided to attend. Peter Singer mostly brought up the idea of suffering and how a all-loving, all-knowing God could allow such suffering to occur in our universe. Dinesh D'Souza responded in a hidden matter by saying that in a Darwinian universe nobody would care about suffeing, after all we're simpy machines. This thought was rebuddled by Singer as one of the hardest topics of the night. Neither man really gave an objective answer to the problem of suffering nor the problem of evil. This non answering technique muddled me that even the topics I struggle with, as do these men.
Many people had the oppurtunity to ask questions to either Singer or D'Souza. The main questions were still on the problem of suffering and the problem of evil. My viewpoint on these two issues is this: Suffering was caused by man's choice to reject the Father's leadership and thus caused a perversion of the human creative order and a distortion of man's relationship with God. The same is to be said about the problem of evil. Man's choice to reject led to the evil in this world. Now a common argument to this idea is that, in that case God must have created evil. My response is no, because God gave us a free will to choose Him, instead of forcing love upon Himself from us. God did not create evil. Though He may have created the potential for evil, in giving us free will and choices. This issue I myself do not have the knowledge o explain. Only God knows the exactness and the details of His creation. Scientists may come closer and closer to knowing the world we live in, but only the Father knows exactly.
As the debate came to a close, each man had a concluding statement. Singer cleaned up his argument by saying that neither man had answered the problem of suffering and evil. Dinesh refuted by syaing that Peter had not answered the idea of compassion coming as a Christian moral. These two men I believe, got so caught up in beating the other, that the Gospel had an oppurtuinty to be shared, and it was not. D'Souza had some amazing ideas and arguments, but in the end, they were all technical aspects of the spectrum that he based his debate upon. Singer was the same way, his arguments were all based on the physical aspects of this world instead of the deeper idea, of does God exist?
Saturday, March 1, 2008
Roman Roads
Rome was one of the most powerful empires this world has ever seen. At the base of this great empire, were the infamous Roman roads. "The road system of the Ancient Romans was one of the greatest engineering accomplishments of its time, with over 50,000 miles of paved road radiating from their center at the miliarius aurem in the Forum in the city of Rome. Although the Roman road system was originally built to facilitate the movement of troops throughout the empire, it was inevitably used for other purposes by civilians then and now." (source) These roads were the main source of transportation, and without these roads, Rome never sees the glory that it once held at the peak of its empire.
The Romans were the first to build paved roads that did not prohibit them from travelling after a storm or any other type of bad weather. The roads were mainly used for trading. "The Romans had exceptional nautical technology for their time; however their network of roads, even with the perils of land travel, was unparalleled in convenience and was often the only choice for travel or shipping goods." (source) These roads let them go anywhere within the empire with ease. Paved roads were often the only means for transportation and shipping as well.
The most impressive part of the Roman roads was the quality of the building. The key to having quality roads is the ability to get rid of waste on the roads. These roads were higher in the middle as to let the water flow off the sides of the road. This created a clean environment for travelling and shipping. This ease of travel and shipping and trading made the Roman roads famous because they were easy to travel upon.
The Romans were the first to build paved roads that did not prohibit them from travelling after a storm or any other type of bad weather. The roads were mainly used for trading. "The Romans had exceptional nautical technology for their time; however their network of roads, even with the perils of land travel, was unparalleled in convenience and was often the only choice for travel or shipping goods." (source) These roads let them go anywhere within the empire with ease. Paved roads were often the only means for transportation and shipping as well.
The most impressive part of the Roman roads was the quality of the building. The key to having quality roads is the ability to get rid of waste on the roads. These roads were higher in the middle as to let the water flow off the sides of the road. This created a clean environment for travelling and shipping. This ease of travel and shipping and trading made the Roman roads famous because they were easy to travel upon.
Saturday, February 23, 2008
The Roman Life
Life in Rome was good. Rules and regulations kept the city under control and many rulers kept one man from gaining too much power. Roman life also was very much grounded by the city. All things started with the city, and its success. Without Rome itself, most of the things that we know of the Romans, are never found or maybe never happen. Most of life in Rome, was ran through the landholders and the city. These people and the city of rome, started one of the greatest empires ever known to man.
The work done in Rome was mostly done by the men. All the bills, the fields, all was done by the men. The woman's job was to care for the house and to give birth to Roman boys. An average Roman man awoke early and worked a six hour day in the fields. For the most part, sons also followed in their father's footsteps inheriting their profession and their business. The rich men and women of Rome, were restricted too a career in law, politics, or the army. Other occupations were deemed to low for their kind. (source)
Roman Education sat in the hands of the parents. They decided if their children went to school or worked with the father. This made education very different than we see it today. The parents sent their children to sachool based on whether or not the family was having success. If the family was struggling in the work field, the son would skip school to help the father. School started in March, holidays were observed and days off every ninth day. Summer has never been proven, but historians say some period like summer would have existed.
The use of slavery in Rome was as big as anywhere else in the early world. Romans kept slaves and used them in all areas of needed assistance. The Romans saw slavery as simply carrying on the tradition started by the Egyptians, Babylonians, Indians, Chinese.
The work done in Rome was mostly done by the men. All the bills, the fields, all was done by the men. The woman's job was to care for the house and to give birth to Roman boys. An average Roman man awoke early and worked a six hour day in the fields. For the most part, sons also followed in their father's footsteps inheriting their profession and their business. The rich men and women of Rome, were restricted too a career in law, politics, or the army. Other occupations were deemed to low for their kind. (source)
Roman Education sat in the hands of the parents. They decided if their children went to school or worked with the father. This made education very different than we see it today. The parents sent their children to sachool based on whether or not the family was having success. If the family was struggling in the work field, the son would skip school to help the father. School started in March, holidays were observed and days off every ninth day. Summer has never been proven, but historians say some period like summer would have existed.
The use of slavery in Rome was as big as anywhere else in the early world. Romans kept slaves and used them in all areas of needed assistance. The Romans saw slavery as simply carrying on the tradition started by the Egyptians, Babylonians, Indians, Chinese.
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Roman Developement
The Romans made a monumental impact in the area of art, and architectural building. Often in our world today one hears of a Roman style house or a Roman style painting or sculpture. These two areas are the biggest when it comes to the impact of Rome on our society. Both are still extremely evident in our world today.
The Romans treated architecture in a different way than the rest of the world. They were the first to use their buildings as a way to serve the nation's needs. Before them, buildings purposes were to either serve the gods, the dead, or the royal families. "As far as Roman Architecture goes, it is difficult to compare it with that of other nations, because the Romans applied architecture to so many and such varied purposes, and so constructed monuments involving both architectural and engineering skill." (source) The Romans were the first to take architecture toa different level. Most try to simply be better, but to be different, that is where true greatness is found.
The Romans also took a different step in art. Roman art was practiced for 1,000 years and it was the first to really trademark a style of buildings and sculpture. They developed the arch and the pillar a great signatures of roman art. These adeas were vitally important to the success of Roman art and architecture.
The Romans treated architecture in a different way than the rest of the world. They were the first to use their buildings as a way to serve the nation's needs. Before them, buildings purposes were to either serve the gods, the dead, or the royal families. "As far as Roman Architecture goes, it is difficult to compare it with that of other nations, because the Romans applied architecture to so many and such varied purposes, and so constructed monuments involving both architectural and engineering skill." (source) The Romans were the first to take architecture toa different level. Most try to simply be better, but to be different, that is where true greatness is found.
The Romans also took a different step in art. Roman art was practiced for 1,000 years and it was the first to really trademark a style of buildings and sculpture. They developed the arch and the pillar a great signatures of roman art. These adeas were vitally important to the success of Roman art and architecture.
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Homer vs. Virgil
Homer's Odyssey and Virgil's Aeneaid are two stories much discussed between historians today. these stories are also all over the classrooms of America and most likely will stay there. These two stories are of the adventures of one man in each story who simply dreams of getting home alive.
Virgil's Aeneaid is a story of Aeneas trying to be the first to find the great city of Rome. He was told that the city was to be founded when his men began to eat their plates. One day his men used leaves as their plates and simply ate the entire meal and he then knew that this was the spot where rome was to be founded.
The Odyssey written by Homer is the great story of Odysseus trying to find his way home. His incredible adventures cover everything from a cyclops to a witch to the Greek gods temselves. Odysseus is known for his clever mind and his basic street skills. Odysseus and his men will be remembered for their bravery and their courage to get home at all costs.
There are many differencesand many similarities in these two stories. The first similarity is that both stories are fiction. Another similar fact is that they are both about a great man trying to do good for his people and his country. Some differences are that these two men are from two different parts of the world. Aeneas is Roman while Odysseus is Greek. These two men fought n two diffeent sides of the Trojan War as well.
These two stories are some of the most loved stories of historians simply because of their historical background. Homer and Virgil are argueably the two best poets of Ancient Greece. These two stories are of the finding of Rome and great adventures whichmakes them a must for ancient historians of today.
Virgil's Aeneaid is a story of Aeneas trying to be the first to find the great city of Rome. He was told that the city was to be founded when his men began to eat their plates. One day his men used leaves as their plates and simply ate the entire meal and he then knew that this was the spot where rome was to be founded.
The Odyssey written by Homer is the great story of Odysseus trying to find his way home. His incredible adventures cover everything from a cyclops to a witch to the Greek gods temselves. Odysseus is known for his clever mind and his basic street skills. Odysseus and his men will be remembered for their bravery and their courage to get home at all costs.
There are many differencesand many similarities in these two stories. The first similarity is that both stories are fiction. Another similar fact is that they are both about a great man trying to do good for his people and his country. Some differences are that these two men are from two different parts of the world. Aeneas is Roman while Odysseus is Greek. These two men fought n two diffeent sides of the Trojan War as well.
These two stories are some of the most loved stories of historians simply because of their historical background. Homer and Virgil are argueably the two best poets of Ancient Greece. These two stories are of the finding of Rome and great adventures whichmakes them a must for ancient historians of today.
Saturday, November 24, 2007
Plato
Plato was, as well as Socrates and all the other great names, was an essential part of Greek history and philosophy. He was the writer of basically all of Socrates' pieces including Meno, and The Apology. With these pieces, came the fame of Plato, in the years after his death.
Plato was born in 428 B.C. and eventually died in 348 B.C. He was a poet, mathematician, philisophical writer, as well as being the founder of the Academy of Athens. (Source) Plato was a student of Socrates, and was greatly influenced by him, and learned much about the society of Athens by studying the death of his teacher. Plato had undeniable ability to think and to write, as can be seen in his works. (Williams 41) Much of this ability is because of the influence he had under the teaching of the greatest philosopher the world has ever seen, Socrates. Plato's works are still used to teach a wide range of subjects in today's schools.
One of Plato's works, The Apology, is studied by many people today. It is the oldest work of Plato to date. Only two copies of this work survive, the one f Plato, and another by Xenophon. The Apology explains the speech of Socrates at his trial. He basically says that Athens are still wrong, and that he is deliberately trying to be found guilty and be condemned to death. "Now, although the word "apology" is the direct descendant into English of the Greek word apología, the meaning has changed. Socrates was not apologizing or making excuses. He wasn't sorry. The Greek word apología simply and precisely meant a defense, or a defense speech. This meaning has been preserved in English in some related words: An "apologist" is still someone who argues a defense of someone or something, and "apologetics" is still a discipline or system of argued defense of something, usually a doctrine, cause, or institution. Socrates' speech thus might be translated The Defense of Socrates without the possible confusion over the modern meaning; but after long usage, it is hard to imagine calling the Apology anything else." (Ross) This quote explains that Plato was at the trial, and he understod that Socrates was not trying to say that he was sorry. The Apolgy was a defense for the freedom of Socrates.
Because Plato was a student of Socrates, his thoughts and ideas were instilled in the minds of all the great philosophers to come out of Greece. Plato was the teacher of Aristotle, who was the teacher of Alexander the Great who was the best ruler and conqueror the world has ever seen. Because Alexander conquered so much territory, his ideas were also spread. This spread of ideas all started with Socrates, to Plato, to Aristotle, to Alexander the Great, and into the rest of the world. (Nails 213)
Plato was one of the greatest philosophers we have ever seen. He was influenced by the best, and he also taught the best. The key to greatness in this life, is to learn from the best, and play with the best, then to teach the best. This way you can collect all information from those who have found it successful and use it to beat the best and learn from them.
Williams, Bernard Arthur Owen. Plato. Routledge. 1999.
Nails, Debra. The People of Plato: A Prosopography of Plato and other Socratics. Hackett Publishing. 2002. New York.
Plato was born in 428 B.C. and eventually died in 348 B.C. He was a poet, mathematician, philisophical writer, as well as being the founder of the Academy of Athens. (Source) Plato was a student of Socrates, and was greatly influenced by him, and learned much about the society of Athens by studying the death of his teacher. Plato had undeniable ability to think and to write, as can be seen in his works. (Williams 41) Much of this ability is because of the influence he had under the teaching of the greatest philosopher the world has ever seen, Socrates. Plato's works are still used to teach a wide range of subjects in today's schools.
One of Plato's works, The Apology, is studied by many people today. It is the oldest work of Plato to date. Only two copies of this work survive, the one f Plato, and another by Xenophon. The Apology explains the speech of Socrates at his trial. He basically says that Athens are still wrong, and that he is deliberately trying to be found guilty and be condemned to death. "Now, although the word "apology" is the direct descendant into English of the Greek word apología, the meaning has changed. Socrates was not apologizing or making excuses. He wasn't sorry. The Greek word apología simply and precisely meant a defense, or a defense speech. This meaning has been preserved in English in some related words: An "apologist" is still someone who argues a defense of someone or something, and "apologetics" is still a discipline or system of argued defense of something, usually a doctrine, cause, or institution. Socrates' speech thus might be translated The Defense of Socrates without the possible confusion over the modern meaning; but after long usage, it is hard to imagine calling the Apology anything else." (Ross) This quote explains that Plato was at the trial, and he understod that Socrates was not trying to say that he was sorry. The Apolgy was a defense for the freedom of Socrates.
Because Plato was a student of Socrates, his thoughts and ideas were instilled in the minds of all the great philosophers to come out of Greece. Plato was the teacher of Aristotle, who was the teacher of Alexander the Great who was the best ruler and conqueror the world has ever seen. Because Alexander conquered so much territory, his ideas were also spread. This spread of ideas all started with Socrates, to Plato, to Aristotle, to Alexander the Great, and into the rest of the world. (Nails 213)
Plato was one of the greatest philosophers we have ever seen. He was influenced by the best, and he also taught the best. The key to greatness in this life, is to learn from the best, and play with the best, then to teach the best. This way you can collect all information from those who have found it successful and use it to beat the best and learn from them.
Williams, Bernard Arthur Owen. Plato. Routledge. 1999.
Nails, Debra. The People of Plato: A Prosopography of Plato and other Socratics. Hackett Publishing. 2002. New York.
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Socrates
Greek philosophy has been and always will be the greatest base for modern thought. The Greeks were people of thinking and reasoning. They helped establish what we base our entire trial of thinking that we usae today. The biggest and brightest of these Greek philosophers was a man named Socrates.
Socrates was born in 470 B.C. in such a way that allowed nobody to think that he would set the base for the modern world of thinking. He is most famous for his developement of the Socratic method, which used the form of questioning to find knowledge and wisdom. The Socratic method has been used for every philosophy book and idea since the time of Socrates where it was developed. This method is still used today with great respect for the man who trademarked it.
Socrates was a man of great thought and intellectual want in a sense that he would aggrivate one so much that one would just stop thinking about the subject and leave himself unanswered. This type of person is called a gadfly, one who says things that make you thimk. Socrates always had someone writing down his ideas, but Socrates himself never wrote any books. His one main idea and quote was "The unexamined life is not worth living." This quote is saying that Socrates believed that life was to be devoted to the study of the human mind and soul. (Stone 211) These ideas made Socrates one of the mosat respected men in the world, but one of the most hated men in the Athenian society.
Because of his challenging ideas and his new thoughts, Socrates became the one most hated man in Athens. He was smelly and disgusting and the people of Athens saw nothing but the outside of this man. (Guthrie 42) They charged him with heresy and sentenced him to death by the drinking of hemlock. He thought long and hard about his sentence and came up with a speech to use in front the royal assembly. His speech was breathtaking but still the assembly chose death for Socrates. He drank the hemlock and he died.
Socrates was a great man. He gave us the Socratic method and many great ideas, that we still use today. He was a thinker who accepted nothing at face value. He was smart enough to admit that he didn't know everything, but only that of his own ignorance. This in itself is one of the single most important things we can learn from Socrates.
Stone, I.F. The Trial of Socrates. Pan Books. 1989. New York
Guthrie, William Keith Chambers. Socrates. Cambridge University Press. 1971. New York.
Socrates was born in 470 B.C. in such a way that allowed nobody to think that he would set the base for the modern world of thinking. He is most famous for his developement of the Socratic method, which used the form of questioning to find knowledge and wisdom. The Socratic method has been used for every philosophy book and idea since the time of Socrates where it was developed. This method is still used today with great respect for the man who trademarked it.
Socrates was a man of great thought and intellectual want in a sense that he would aggrivate one so much that one would just stop thinking about the subject and leave himself unanswered. This type of person is called a gadfly, one who says things that make you thimk. Socrates always had someone writing down his ideas, but Socrates himself never wrote any books. His one main idea and quote was "The unexamined life is not worth living." This quote is saying that Socrates believed that life was to be devoted to the study of the human mind and soul. (Stone 211) These ideas made Socrates one of the mosat respected men in the world, but one of the most hated men in the Athenian society.
Because of his challenging ideas and his new thoughts, Socrates became the one most hated man in Athens. He was smelly and disgusting and the people of Athens saw nothing but the outside of this man. (Guthrie 42) They charged him with heresy and sentenced him to death by the drinking of hemlock. He thought long and hard about his sentence and came up with a speech to use in front the royal assembly. His speech was breathtaking but still the assembly chose death for Socrates. He drank the hemlock and he died.
Socrates was a great man. He gave us the Socratic method and many great ideas, that we still use today. He was a thinker who accepted nothing at face value. He was smart enough to admit that he didn't know everything, but only that of his own ignorance. This in itself is one of the single most important things we can learn from Socrates.
Stone, I.F. The Trial of Socrates. Pan Books. 1989. New York
Guthrie, William Keith Chambers. Socrates. Cambridge University Press. 1971. New York.
Thursday, November 1, 2007
Greek Architecture
Greek architecture started in the early Stone Age. it began from small, narrow huts and tents, and went all the way into stone walls and great churches and houses, paved roads, and even villages. Eventually, the Greeks began to build temples for the gods. These temples were first built in Doric style. These temples were burned in the Greek Dark Ages.
In the 6th century, most buildings were made with mud-brick and clay. Because of this, many buildings were destroyed or burnt, so many buildings were lost during the Greek Ages. The only ruins left of these buildings, were a couple unfinished plans and some mud and clay. In the early sixth century, most Greek buildings were built in a Doric style. These buildings were temples and churches. The most expensive, and nicest buildings were built with marble. Marble was extremely expensive and was used for the houses of the aristocrats. There were also buildings of limestone, which Greece was filled with.
There were two main building styles in Ancient Greece. There was the Doric style and the Ionic style and the Corinthian style. These names reflected the belief in the Dorian and Ionian Greeks during the Dark Ages. The Doric style was very formal and fancy. The Ionic style was more relaxed and free. The Corinthian style was made famous in the use of columns. The Doric style originated in mainland Greece where it spread throughout the Greek regions of Italy.
The Doric style was the simplest form of Greek architecture in Greece. The columns consisted of a crown on the top, made of a circle on top of a square. The shaft has 20 sides, and is very plain. The Doric style is simple, but it is still super powerful. It also has no base in the buildings. There was also a metope on the middle of the buildings, often consisting of gods and goddesses. The Doric was used mainly by middle class artisans and craftsman.
Lawrence, Arnold Walter. Greek Architecture. Yale University Press. 1996. New York.
Taylor, William. An Architecture Notebook. Barker Press. 1971. New York
In the 6th century, most buildings were made with mud-brick and clay. Because of this, many buildings were destroyed or burnt, so many buildings were lost during the Greek Ages. The only ruins left of these buildings, were a couple unfinished plans and some mud and clay. In the early sixth century, most Greek buildings were built in a Doric style. These buildings were temples and churches. The most expensive, and nicest buildings were built with marble. Marble was extremely expensive and was used for the houses of the aristocrats. There were also buildings of limestone, which Greece was filled with.
There were two main building styles in Ancient Greece. There was the Doric style and the Ionic style and the Corinthian style. These names reflected the belief in the Dorian and Ionian Greeks during the Dark Ages. The Doric style was very formal and fancy. The Ionic style was more relaxed and free. The Corinthian style was made famous in the use of columns. The Doric style originated in mainland Greece where it spread throughout the Greek regions of Italy.
The Doric style was the simplest form of Greek architecture in Greece. The columns consisted of a crown on the top, made of a circle on top of a square. The shaft has 20 sides, and is very plain. The Doric style is simple, but it is still super powerful. It also has no base in the buildings. There was also a metope on the middle of the buildings, often consisting of gods and goddesses. The Doric was used mainly by middle class artisans and craftsman.
Lawrence, Arnold Walter. Greek Architecture. Yale University Press. 1996. New York.
Taylor, William. An Architecture Notebook. Barker Press. 1971. New York
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)