England’s Real “Game of Thrones” – The War of the Roses

Dear Readers: As always, check Legal Insurrection for my political punditry:

• Two HOT graphics

• Whistle-blowing Scientist Sues UCLA for His Job

• Obama’s “Where’s Waldo” Foreign Policy World

On Canto Talk, we will be taking with military history expert extraordinaire Barry Jacobsen about England’s real “Game of Thrones”, the War of the Roses.  The show will be Thursday, March. 21st at 7 pm PST/9pm CT/10 pm EST – click HERE FOR PODCAST LINK.

There is a fun video that discusses the “War of the Roses”

The basis for this interest is the recent identification of King Richard III’s remains, which were located under a parking lot.

Rigorous scientific investigations confirmed the strong circumstantial evidence that the skeleton found at the site of the Grey Friars church in Leicester was indeed that of King Richard III.

University of Leicester researchers have revealed a wealth of evidence — including DNA analysis, radiocarbon dating and skeletal examination — proving the identity of the skeleton.

University of Leicester archaeologists co-director Richard Buckley, the lead archaeologist on the Search for Richard III, said: “It is the academic conclusion of the University of Leicester that the individual exhumed at Grey Friars in August 2012 is indeed King Richard III, the last Plantagenet King of England.

“It has been an honour and privilege for all of us to be at the centre of an academic project that has had such phenomenal global interest and mass public appeal. Rarely have the conclusions of academic research been so eagerly awaited.”

University of Leicester geneticist Dr Turi King confirmed that DNA from the skeleton matches that of two of Richard III’s family descendants — Canadian-born furniture maker Michael Ibsen and a second person who wishes to remain anonymous.

Dr King, of the University’s Department of Genetics, said: “The DNA sequence obtained from the Grey Friars skeletal remains was compared with the two maternal line relatives of Richard III. We were very excited to find that there is a DNA match between the maternal DNA from the family of Richard the Third and the skeletal remains we found at the Grey Friars dig.”

Skeletal analysis carried out by University of Leicester osteoarchaeologist Dr Jo Appleby showed that the individual was male and in his late 20s to late 30s. Richard III was 32 when he was killed at the Battle of Bosworth in 1485.

The individual had a slender physique and severe scoliosis — a curvature of the spine — possibly with one shoulder visibly higher than the other. This is consistent with descriptions of Richard III’s appearance from the time.

Trauma to the skeleton indicates the individual died after one of two significant wounds to the back of the skull — possibly caused by a sword and a halberd.

This is consistent with contemporary accounts of Richard being killed after receiving a blow to the back of his head.

The skeleton also showed a number of non-fatal injuries to the head, rib and pelvis — believed to have been caused by a wound through the right buttock — which may have been caused by ‘humiliation injuries’ after death.

Dr Appleby’s analysis is backed up by radiological evidence carried out by University of Leicester forensic pathologists and forensic engineering experts.

Dr Appleby, of the University’s School of Archaeology and Ancient History, said: “The skeleton has a number of unusual features: its slender build, the scoliosis and the battle-related trauma. All of these are highly consistent with the information that we have about Richard III in life and about the circumstances of his death. Taken as a whole, the skeletal evidence provides a highly convincing case for identification as Richard III.”

The War of the Roses was fairly brutal:

The Wars of the Roses refers to a long, repetitive, and destructive civil war, based on a struggle for the English crown by the members of two distinct factions in the English royal family (called the Plantaganets, who had ruled for over two hundred years). Strictly speaking, the Wars of the Roses applies only to the latter half of this conflict, but it is commonly used to describe the entire internecine fight.

The war had its origins in a quarrel between Richard II and his cousin, Henry Bolingbroke, as a result of which Richard II was murdered and Henry became Henry IV. Richard’s murder brought about civil war, which continued until Henry IV’s son ascended the throne as Henry V and restored a short interval of glorious military victory in France and peace at home.

Upon Henry V’s early death, the wars of succession resumed. Henry’s son, Henry VI, who led the branch of the family called the Lancastrians (the party of the Red Rose) was challenged by the Yorkist branch of the family (the party of the White Rose). Success in the war alternated for a number of years, until the Yorkists prevailed, and Edward IV came to the throne. Upon the death of Edward, his brother Richard became King Richard III.

The Lancastrian cause meanwhile was taken up by a distant relative of the royal family, Henry Tudor (whose claim was based upon the marriage of his grandfather, Owen Tudor, to Henry V’s widow). He invaded England and defeated the Yorkist forces at the Battle of Bosworth Field (in 1485), thus ending the dynasty of the Plantaganets and initiating the Tudor royal family (as Henry VII). Henry VII was the father of Henry VIII and therefore the grandfather of Queen Elizabeth.

Although the procedure may be seriously misleading, the Battle of Bosworth Field is often used as a convenient date to mark the start of the Renaissance in England, inasmuch as it initiates the first distinctly Renaissance royal family in England, the Tudors, who take over from the famous medieval royal family, the Plantaganets.

The dynamics will be familiar to those who love the TV series, though it lacks the ghouls and the dragons.

Read Full Post »

Roman Leaders, Old and New: Julius Caesar and Pope Francis

Dear Readers: Canto Talk will be filled with lots of interesting news and view, so be sure to tune in today (Thursday, March 14 at 7 pm PST/9 pm CT/10 pm EST) for a two guest show!!!

To start with, noted Catholic author and a good friend of the Shrine, John Zmirak will join us to discuss the new pope, the “Bishop of Rome”. More on this big event is detailed at Legal Insurrection: Argentina’s Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio becomes Pope Francis – Updated

And there is even more Roman goodness: Fellow SLOB and military historian extraordinaire Barry Jacobsen will be on the second half of the show to discuss the assassination of Julius Caesar on the “Ides of March”, which is tomorrow.

In January of 49 BC, Julius Caesar led his army across the Rubicon River in Northern Italy (see Caesar Crosses the Rubicon, 49 BC) and plunged the Roman Republic into civil war. Caesar’s rival, Pompey, fled to Greece. Within three months Caesar controlled the entire Italian peninsula and in Spain had defeated the legions loyal to Pompey.

Caesar now pursued Pompey to Greece. Although outnumbered, Caesar crushed the forces of his enemy but not before Pompey escaped to Egypt. Following Pompey to Egypt, Caesar was presented with his rival’s severed head as a token of friendship. Before leaving the

The Assassination of Caesar

region, Caesar established Cleopatra as his surrogate ruler of Egypt. Caesar defeated his remaining rivals in North Africa in 47 BC and returned to Rome with his authority firmly established.

Caesar continued to consolidate his power and in February 44 BC, he declared himself dictator for life. This act, along with his continual effort to adorn himself with the trappings of power, turned many in the Senate against him. Sixty members of the Senate concluded that the only resolution to the problem was to assassinate Caesar.

Death of a Dictator

Nicolaus of Damascus wrote his account of the murder of Caesar a few years after the event. He was not actually present when the assassination occurred but had the opportunity to speak with those who were. He was a friend of Herod the Great and gathered his information during a visit to Rome. His account is thought to be reliable.

The Plan:

“The conspirators never met openly, but they assembled a few at a time in each others’ homes. There were many discussions and proposals, as might be expected, while they investigated how and where to execute their design. Some suggested that they should make the attempt as he was going along the Sacred Way, which was one of his favorite walks. Another idea was for it to be done at the elections during which he bad to cross a bridge to appoint the magistrates in the Campus Martius; they should draw lots for some to push him from the bridge and for others to run up and kill him. A third plan was to wait for a coming gladiatorial show. The advantage of that would be that, because of the show, no suspicion would be aroused if arms were seen prepared for the attempt. But the majority opinion favored killing him while he sat in the Senate, where he would be by himself since non-Senators would not be admitted, and where the many conspirators could hide their daggers beneath their togas. This plan won the day.”

Brutus Persuades Caesar to Ignore his Apprehensions:

“…his friends were alarmed at certain rumors and tried to stop him going to the Senate-house, as did his doctors, for he was suffering from one of his occasional dizzy spells. His wife, Calpurnia, especially, who was frightened by some visions in her dreams, clung to him and said that she would not let him go out that day. But Brutus, one of the conspirators who was then thought of as a firm friend, came up and said, ‘What is this, Caesar? Are you a man to pay attention to a woman’s dreams and the idle gossip of stupid men, and to insult the Senate by not going out, although it has honored you and has been specially summoned by you? But listen to me, cast aside the forebodings of all these people, and come. The Senate has been in session waiting for you since early this morning.’ This swayed Caesar and he left.”

Bad Omens:

“Before he entered the chamber, the priests brought up the victims for him to make what was to be his last sacrifice. The omens were clearly unfavorable. After this unsuccessful sacrifice, the priests made repeated other ones, to see if anything more propitious might appear than what had already been revealed to them. In the end they said that they could not clearly see the divine intent, for there was some transparent, malignant spirit hidden in the victims. Caesar was annoyed and abandoned divination till sunset, though the priests continued all the more with their efforts.

Those of the murderers present were delighted at all this, though Caesar’s friends asked him to put off the meeting of the Senate for that day because of what the priests had said, and he agreed to do this. But some attendants came up, calling him and saying that the Senate was full. He glanced at his friends, but Brutus approached him again and said, ‘Come, good sir, pay no attention to the babblings of these men, and do not postpone what Caesar and his mighty power has seen fit to arrange. Make your own courage your favorable omen.’ He convinced Caesar with these words, took him by the right hand, and led him to the Senate which was quite near. Caesar followed in silence.”

The Attack:

“The Senate rose in respect for his position when they saw him entering. Those who were to have part in the plot stood near him. Right next to him went Tillius Cimber, whose brother had been exiled by Caesar. Under pretext of a humble request on behalf of this brother, Cimber approached and grasped the mantle of his toga, seeming to want to make a more positive move with his hands upon Caesar. Caesar wanted to get up and use his hands, but was prevented by Cimber and became exceedingly annoyed.

That was the moment for the men to set to work. All quickly unsheathed their daggers and rushed at him. First Servilius Casca struck him with the point of the blade on the left shoulder a little above the collar-bone. He had been aiming for that, but in the excitement he missed. Caesar rose to defend himself, and in the uproar Casca shouted out in Greek to his brother. The latter heard him and drove his sword into the ribs. After a moment, Cassius made a slash at his face, and Decimus Brutus pierced him in the side. While Cassius Longinus was trying to give him another blow he missed and struck Marcus Brutus on the hand. Minucius also hit out at Caesar and hit Rubrius in the thigh. They were just like men doing battle against him.

Under the mass of wounds, he fell at the foot of Pompey’s statue. Everyone wanted to seem to have had some part in the murder, and there was not one of them who failed to strike his body as it lay there, until, wounded thirty-five times, he breathed his last. “

Read Full Post »

A Look at Moms in Cuba and America

Dear Readers: I wanted to share with you some observations about the book my friend, Silvio Canto Jr., recently published: Cubanos in Wisconsin (Available form Amazon.com in BOOK and KINDLE) form).

Cuba has always been held captive by the Castro regime from the time I was born, and I was only vaguely aware of the sequence of events that put Fidel Castro in power. I recall some scenes from “The Godfather II” showing the turmoil and the attacks. But there is so much more to the story.

It seems that Castro came to power on a wave of popular support, as the US had stopped helping the corrupt leader Batista it became obvious to all that he was doomed. Castro had not declared himself a communist but acted as one as he brutally enforced a distributionist economic system that enriched only a very few. However, to get to power, he promised liberty and prosperity — which sounded great to a population chaffing under the rule of a corruptocrat.

It was the old bait-and-switch routine.

One of the concepts that came across in Silvio’s experiences was during the implementation of Castro’s vision, was the complete absence of private property. Silvio saw that the high-tech radio his father worked hard for and prized was being eyed by officials, who stated that the family didn’t own it. Sadly, the concept of the state owning everything, no matter the effort it took to obtain an item, is one we may have to get used to in this country.

Richard Baehr of American Thinker offers further details on what happened to the Canto family once Silvio’s banker father, who was forced by the new government to be a baker, when they decided to head to the United States:

The journey makes up a good part of the book. Today, many of us have vague recollections of Cubans flying out of Havana to Miami in the first years after the Castro regime came to power. But it was not that simple. Once a family became “Gusanos” (worms) in the eyes of the community for choosing to emigrate from Cuba, there was nothing automatic about applying for and getting permission to leave. Some families sent their children out first. It took several years before Canto’s family received their departure papers, a process that involved their having to give up pretty much all of their possessions beforehand. The journey to Madison was not a one-shot affair either. From Havana, their plane flew to Mexico City, after stopping in Meridia. The plane’s landing gear failed approaching Mexico City, and emergency vehicles were at the ready to deal with a possible belly flop landing. After a one week stay in Mexico City, the family boarded a plane for Kingston, Jamaica, a county of extreme poverty, from which the family could first apply for entry visas to the U.S.

Perhaps the person I identified with most was Silvio’s mom Angela, who valiantly protected her children from the chaos of the new world order. For example, one particularly irksome official named Bello tried to whisk young Silvio away to the surgacane fields. Silvio’s mom sharply rebuked the official, bravely saying that she would be going along with her son. Silvio didn’t have to cut sugarcane, but the family was subjected to a retribution in many ways after that incident.

Another incident touched my heart. At one point, the Cantos were considering participating in Operation Pedro Pan, which would get the children out of Cuba while the parents stayed. Angela would not hear of it, as she would not be parted from her children and insisted the family go together — which led to many adventures Silvio entertainingly chronicles in his book.

As a Californian, I read the Canto family experience with their first earthquake in Mexico City with some amusement.

Silvio’s book is a very engaging read, and should be picked up by anyone who wants to see how a relatively free society transforms itself into a thugocracy. There is a wide array of behaviors displayed, from going along with the brutality of the regime to fighting back via stealth and strategy. As Americans see the IRS used to enforce Obamacare, and other examples of statist power-grabbing, Silvio’s book could be valuable insight as to how we respond unless we change the direction of the country.

Silvio’s mom is a driving force in making a better life for her children in the United States. That ties into a post I did for Legal Insurrection yesterday:  American Women, not Koch Brothers, birthed the Tea Party Movement

Most of the original “Tea Party” organizers joined the developing national-scale protest in 2009 because we were deeply concerned about our children’s futures. Between the enormous expenditures of the Toxic Asset Relief Program and the “Stimulus Package”, many of us were reeling over the fact our taxpayer concerns were being ignored, and the result would be making our children indentured servants of the state to pay off the enormous debt.

This ties into a the Thursday Canto Talk show, I am doing with fellow San Diego Tea Party – SoCal Tax Revolt Coalition co-founders: Dawn Wildman and Sarah Bond. We three activist moms will be discussing the 4th anniversary of the organized Tea Party movement with Silvio. It should be a blast. (CLICK HERE FOR PODCAST LINK).

Read Full Post »

MUT Takes on The Crusades

Dear Readers:  As I noted earlier, my political punditry will be appearing on Legal Insurrection for the next couple of days.  So, I will focus on history at the Shrine.

Normally, my gig is ancient Egyptian history.  However, I am going to jump ahead a few centuries and discuss the Crusades.  The reason is that this topic will be featured this Thursday (Jan. 10th) on Canto Talk (7 pm PST, 9 pm CT).  The guest that evening will be noted military history expert Barry Jacobsen (whose featured appearances include THERMOPYLAE and THE REAL KING ARTHUR).

The era of the Crusades is a fascinating period that clearly demonstrates that the Middle East has always been a hot bed of political intrigue, religious disagreements, and general unrest.  The four key players are:

• The Byzantine Empire, which was the heir to Imperial Rome moved to Constantinople.  It was coming off a high point reached under Basil II, and basically kick started the Crusades by requesting Western European help after a substantial defeat at the hands of the Seljuk Turks at Manizkert in 1071.

• Dualing Islamic Powers:  The Fatimids (who thought Ali, son-in-law to Mohammad via marriage to the prophet’s daughter Fatima — aka “Shia Muslims“) centered in Cairo, Egypt and the Abbasid Caliphate out of Baghdad (“Sunni” Musims who accepted accept Mohammad friend Abu Bakr as the successor to the prophet).

• Western Europe: Western Europe was then emerging as a significant power in its own right, though it still lagged far other the above two Mediterranean entities.  At that time a combination of advances in agriculture, religious unification under Christianity, and developing nation-states permitted England, France, and Germany to organize and send troops to the Levant.  However, they rarely got along with Eachother.

• The Jews:  This religious minority population, spread throughout Europe and the Levant, seemed to suffer no matter who was in charge.

Proving, the more things change, the more they stay the same.

There following is “The 8 Crusades Explained“, which focus on the organized campaigns that had the regaining the city of Jerusalem under Christian rule as its main objective.

1. The First Crusade (1095-1101) [Wikipedia]

In March 1095 at the Council of Piacenza, ambassadors sent by Byzantine emperor Alexius I called for help with defending his empire against the Seljuk Turks. Later that year, at the Council of Clermont, Pope Urban II called upon all Christians to join a war against the Turks, promising an indulgence for those who died in the service of the army.

Crusader armies managed to defeat two substantial Turkish forces at Dorylaeum and at Antioch, finally marching to Jerusalem with only a fraction of their original forces. In 1099, they took Jerusalem by assault and created small crusader states which were the Kingdom of Jerusalem.

2. The Second Crusade (1145-47) [Wikipedia]

After a period of relative peace in which Christians and Muslims co-existed in the Holy Land, Muslims conquered the town of Edessa. A new crusade was called for by various preachers, most notably by Bernard of Clairvaux. French and German armies, under the Kings Louis VII and Conrad III respectively, marched to Jerusalem in 1147 but failed to accomplish any major successes. By 1150, both leaders had returned to their countries without any result.

3. The Third Crusade (1188-92) [Wikipedia]

in 1187, Saladin, the Sultan of Egypt captured Jerusalem. Pope Gregory VIII called for a crusade which was undertaken by King Richard I of England (Richard the Lionheart), Holy Roman Emporer Frederick I, and King Philip II of France. They defeated the Muslims near Arsuf and were in sight of Jerusalem. However, due to an inadequate food and water supply, the crusade ended without the taking of Jerusalem. Richard left the following year after establishing a truce with Saladin. This crusade is sometimes referred to as the King’s Crusade. Pope Gregory VIII did not live to see the end of this crusade.

4. The Fourth Crusade (1204) [Wikipedia]

The Fourth Crusade was initiated in 1202 by Pope Innocent III, with the intention of invading the Holy Land through Egypt. Because the Crusaders lacked the funds to pay for the fleet and provisions that they had contracted from the Venetians, Doge Enrico Dandolo, enlisted them to restore to obedience the Christian city of Zara (Zadar). Because they subsequently lacked provisions and time on their vessel lease the leaders decided to go to Constantinople, where they attempted to place a Byzantine exile on the throne. After misunderstandings and outbreaks of violence, the Crusaders sacked Constantinople.

5. The Fifth Crusade (1217) [Wikipedia]

By processions, prayers, and preaching, the Church attempted to set another crusade on foot, and the Fourth Council of the Lateran (1215) formulated a plan for the recovery of the Holy Land. In the first phase, a crusading force from Hungary, Austria joined the forces of the king of Jerusalem and the prince of Antioch to take back Jerusalem. In the second phase, crusader forces achieved a remarkable feat in the capture of Damietta in Egypt in 1219, but under the urgent insistence of the papal legate, Pelagius, they proceeded to a foolhardy attack on Cairo, and an inundation of the Nile compelled them to choose between surrender and destruction.

6. The Sixth Crusade (1228-29, 1239) [Wikipedia]

Emperor Frederick II had repeatedly vowed a crusade but failed to live up to his words, for which he was excommunicated by Pope Gregory IX in 1228. He nonetheless set sail from Brindisi, landed in Palestine, and through diplomacy he achieved unexpected success: Jerusalem, Nazareth, and Bethlehem were delivered to the crusaders for a period of ten years. This was the first Crusade that had no Papal involvement. The Pope eventually lifted the excommunication.

7. The Seventh Crusade (1249-52) [Wikipedia]

The papal interests represented by the Templars brought on a conflict with Egypt in 1243, and in the following year a Khwarezmian force summoned by the latter stormed Jerusalem. The crusaders were drawn into battle at La Forbie in Gaza. The crusader army and its Bedouin mercenaries were outnumbered by Baibars’ force of Khwarezmian tribesmen and were completely defeated within forty-eight hours. This battle is considered by many historians to have been the death knell to the Christian States. As part of this Crusade, Louis IX organised a crusade against Egypt which lasted until 1254.

8. The Eighth Crusade (1270) [Wikipedia]

The eighth Crusade was organized by Louis IX in 1270, again sailing from Aigues-Mortes, initially to come to the aid of the remnants of the crusader states in Syria. However, the crusade was diverted to Tunis, where Louis spent only two months before dying. For his efforts, Louis was later sainted (the city of St. Louis, Missouri, USA is named for him). This Crusade is sometimes broken into an eighth and ninth crusade. The result of this crusade was the loss of Christian rule in Syria though it achieved a partial success in that Christian religious were allowed to live peacefully in the region.

Read Full Post »

Genghis Khan: World Conqueror, Capitalist Hero

Dear Readers:  A bit of history today, so that I can share with you some of the interesting items I learned this holiday while reading Jack Weatherford’s book:  GENGHIS KHAN AND THE MAKING OF THE MODERN WORLD (note – please order it through one of my Capitalist heroes, Legal Insurrection or Captain Capitalism.)

Genghis Khan

In fact, I would like to give my friend, Captian Capitalism, a hat-tip for the inspiration of this post. He noted that Genghis perhaps had the best harem set-up, as the Mongol Emperor kept his women separate. Since one in 200 men in Central Asia are his descendants, the success of this approach cannot be argued.

According to Weatherford, Genghis Khan’s military success stems from transforming steppe warband fighting to large scale conflicts with a smartly organized military structure. Through a series of small scale/inter-tribal civil wars, Temujin (Khan’s original name) refined various elements of shock warfare,. Temujin was given the title Genghis Khan – Unshakeable Leader – upon his designation as the Mongol’s top man in 1206 AD. Some of the examples of Khan’s war innovation included incorporating in an equitable and ordered fashion; killing off the aristocracies of the tribes while protecting and supporting the wealth producers (e.g., craftsman, scholars, merchants).

Perhaps the most profound lesson from the book was Khan’s motivation: He was driven to obtain goods and luxury items for his people, and he desired to have an effective trade system that supported artisans, craftsmen, business enterprises, miners, and other suppliers of material beauty and comfort. A good example of how to make yourself a target of the Khan’s wrath:

He had far more goods now than he could possibly use or distribute to his people, and he wanted to use this vast amount of new resources to stimulate trade. In addition to the thriving supply of traditional Asian goods, other commodities sometimes trickled in from the more distant and exotic lands of the Middle East. The Muslims in that part of the world produced the finest of all metals, the magnificent gleaming steel. They had cotton and other fine textiles, and knew the mysterious process of making glass. The vast area from the mountains of modern Afghanistan to the Black Sea fell under the power of the Turkic sultan Muhammad II, whose empire was called Khwarizm.

Khan initially sought a trading partnership with Khwarzim; however, the Governor of one of its cities and the brother of the Sultan’s powerful mother killed the caravan members of the first salvo of traders from the Mongolian Empire. Khan demanded the guilty parties be punished, and the Sultan (at the behest of his mother) rebuked Genghis in a dramatic and offensive manner. End result: Khwarzim joins the Mongols, the Sultan dies in cowardly exile, and the Sultan’s mom becomes a servant in the Khan’s wife’s court.

Genghis Khan

A lot of the bad press associated with the “Mongol Hordes” was effective use of the “new media in the 1200′s”. Using the scholars and storytellers he collected in his wins, Khan had dispatches prepared highlighting terror tactics the Mongols used and ginning up the numbers slaughtered so that future enemies would be less likely to engage in war more likely to negotiate trade or willingly join Team Khan. In fact, the Mongols were fairly civilized by the standards that time: They almost never engaged in torture, mutilation, or maiming. And while the Mongol army was quick to kill and utterly destroyed those who resisted their rule or betrayed them outright, conquest and loot were their goals. They did not relish in beheadings, impalings, quartering, or catapulting living children into walls — hallmarks of the way other cultures of that time handled war.

Interestingly, the Mongols often managed to turn enemy advantages into their own time and time again. One example comes after the death of Khan, when a leader named Subodei wanted to target Europe and recounted his experiences leading a Mongol army against Christian ones on the Russian plains for the first time:

The Mongols began the confrontation with a small skirmish, after which they immediately began to fall back toward the east, from whence they had come, as though they might have been afraid to fight a large and powerful foe. The Russian troops and some of their Kipchak allies gleefully followed them, but day after day the Mongols remained a little beyond the reach of the pursing Russians. While some of the regiments had not yet arrived to join the pursuit, the slower regiments fell behind, and the faster ones races on nipping at the heels of the Mongols. The Russians feared that the Mongols might escape and thereby deprive the Russians of a large number of horses and other booty they carried from earlier raids across Persia, Georgia, and Azerbaijan.

Needless to say:

The Mongols had lured in a now separated and nearly exhausted Russian army. Despite having nearly twice the men on the field (as high as 80,000), the Russians were butchered. For example, the Mongol tactics of using quiet, coordinated feints utterly confused the peasant infantry. Another aspect that befuddled the Russians: The Mongols had designed their arrows so they could only be used in Mongol bows. So, once the Mongol archers attacked, their arrows couldn’t be used by the Russians — whereas the Mongols could readily send back the Russian arrows to kill the original senders. Once the Mongols decimated the infantry, they readily picked off the heavily armored noblemen on warhorses, as the horses were big, bulky, and so weighted down with metal and could hardly outrun the swift Mongol horsemen.

In the words of the Novogorod Chronicle of 1224: Of the large army sent out to fight the Mongols, “only every tenth returned to his home”.

One last note: The Mongol expansion throughout Central Asiafrom around 1207 to 1360 helped bring political stability,re-established the Silk Road, and promoted East-West trade and dialog. It also brought an end to the Islamic Caliphate’s monopoly over world trade.

One downside: It also provided a fantastically effective route for the the Bubonic Plague/Black Death to infect the civilized world a few years later. We will touch upon that topic in a future post.

Read Full Post »

CANTO TALK: Krampus – The Dark Side of X-Mas (outside of the malls, that is).

Dear Readers: Profit-center activities have left me busy, and a bit tired. However, I wanted to share a few items related to the appearance of Charles Caesar/Doo Doo Economic’s friend JH Northrop, who will be sharing the history behind Krampus – The Yule Lord, as part of this weeks Thursday – Canto Talk (7 pm PST, 9 pm CT, 10 pm EST, click here for show).

As a person who loves Halloween best as a holiday, I have to say I find the concept of Krampus intriguing:

JH explains it this way: As an amateur historian and a nominal Christian I enjoy finding where the pre-ChristMass traditions have still held through. I’m curious what the further background is, but my neo-pagan friends are mostly clueless about it & I can’t afford a trip to europe at this time to trackdown a shaman to teach me… If they even still know.

A little background on Krampus:

Krampus is a beast-like creature from the folklore of Alpine countries thought to punish bad children during the Christmas season, in contrast with Saint Nicholas, who rewards nice ones with gifts. Krampus is said to capture particularly naughty children in his sack and carry them away to his lair.

Krampus is represented as a beast-like creature, generally demonic in appearance. The creature has roots in Germanic folklore. Traditionally young men dress up as the Krampus in Austria, southern Bavaria, South Tyrol, Hungary, Slovenia and Croatia during the first week of December, particularly on the evening of 5 December, and roam the streets frightening children with rusty chains and bells. Krampus is featured on holiday greeting cards called Krampuskarten. There are many names for Krampus, as well as many regional variations in portrayal and celebration.

The history of the Krampus figure stretches back to pre-Christian Germanic traditions.[1] He also shares characteristics with the satyrs of Greek mythology. The early Catholic Church discouraged celebrations based around the wild goat-like creatures, and during the Inquisition efforts were made to stamp them out. However, Krampus figures persisted, and by the 17th century Krampus had been incorporated into Christian winter celebrations by pairing them with St. Nicholas.

It is believed that the tradition of donning the costume of Krampus came about as part of a coming of age ritual for young men. They would be sent off into the forest/mountains with not much more than a small sack of provisions – similar to many coming-to-manhood traditions still found in various iterations all over the world. He comes back down to the village after his time in the wild dressed as Krampus, embodying the wild spirit he took with him from this time living as a wild animal in the woods. Attempting to frighten young children was a test of the mettle of the children of the village, and also part of their coming-of-age process to demonstrate their bravery in front of the horned man from the mountains.

There is a piece on 10 FUN FACTS ABOUT KRAMPUS that includes this tidbit:

Krampus is St. Nick’s right hand man: a good cop/bad cop team of pure emotional torture. If it’s decided you’re good (AND you pass a grueling pop-quiz on religious catechism, in some traditions), the gifts are yours. If not, you are swiftly whipped raw and right to the edge of death by Krampus’ unrelenting birch rods. St. Nick — the Don Michael Corleone in this fucked-up relationship – -looks on but keeps his hands clean. He’s a saint, after all.

There is a whole website devoted to Krampus: KRAMPUS.COM From that site, you can even send your special loved one a free e-card (click HERE for e-card).

The Etsy blog has an entire post devoted to the subject, with an array of old-fashioned postcards that feature the Yule Lord.– Krampus: The Darker Side of Christmas

If you’ve ever been on the naughty side of Santa’s list, be warned: there’s worse in store for you than broken twigs and the disappointment of an unidentified black rock. If you live in the remote Alpine villages of Austria and Hungary, you’ll have to face up to Santa Claus’s muscle, the hooved, horned and goat-draped Krampus.

Krampus roaming the streets, terrorizing the youth.

Be afraid. Be very, very afraid.

These demonic Christmas cryptids, along with a wide variety of other nefarious aides and companions, have accompanied Saint Nicholas on his gift-giving journeys in the Central and Eastern European Alps for hundreds of years. Cloven feet aside, these monstrous figures (really local youths with a love for tradition, with some casual sadism thrown in) are quite frightening to see, brandishing chains, whips, and switches at the townsfolk. According to Der Spiegel, “On December 5, the day before St. Nicholas arrives with his sack of gifts, local men dress up in goat and sheep skins, wearing elaborate hand-carved masks. They make the rounds of village houses with children. When the kids open the door, they’re frightened by Krampus-clad men waving switches at them and ringing loud cowbells. In some towns, kids are made to run a Krampus-gauntlet, dodging swats from tree branches.”

This should be a fascinating show!

Read Full Post »

CANTO TALK: “Worthless” Education and the real Camelot

Dear Readers: Thrilling news! It’s going to be a dynamic week on Canto Talk, as we will be featuring two of my favorite Capitalist Heroes! Tonight, Captain Capitalism Aaron Clarey will be chatting about his book, “Worthless” — and I will be featuring some tales from College Insurrection that make his point that sensible young people will study Science-Technology-Engineering-Math, learn a skilled trade, or join the military (CLICK HERE FOR LINK TO CANTO TALK).

In his video today, Aaron show us why he is the Grand Master of Capitalism:

Today’s College Insurrection pieces that make the case for “Worthless – The Young Person’s Indispensable Guide to Choosing the Right Major” (purchase at Aaron’s site, click HERE and hit icon at left)

• The rampant political discrimination: Affirmative action for conservative professors?
• Students forced into slave labor to engage progressive professors ‘s activism: College stages “Wikistorm” that rains down liberalism upon online entries
• Professor rants against taxpayers who don’t want higher taxes: Columbia Prof’s crazed YouTube rant against tax-fighter Grover Norquist
• Colleges kick out Christian groups but promote those that feature sexual fetishes: ACLJ Starts Petition for Students’ Religious Rights ; Harvard approves BDSM club

Occasionally, something happens on American campuses that makes the Goddess smile: Jersey college student starts 24/7 condom delivery service

As if all this capitalism goodness were not enough, Thursday we feature fellow SLOB and good friend Barry Jacobsen of Deadliest Blogger.  He will be discussing his excellent “The Age of Arthur” series.

In it, we will be comparing the Myth and Legend of Camelot to what is actually known about 5th and 6th century Britain via written and archeological records. Some of the topics to be covered.

• Was there a King Arthur who ruled Britain?
• Who exactly were the “Knights of the Round Table”?
• Was there a Queen Guinevere, and if she existed, would she have been involved with Sir Lancelot?
• Was Merlin real or fantasy?
• How did Arthur die?

Both shows should be fun and informative!

Read Full Post »

A Soviet Kitchen Take on Thanksgiving!

Dear Readers: In light of the Nov. 6th election results, Silvio and I thought it would be a good time to step back and enjoy the Soviet! SovietKitchen.com, that is! We will be talking to one of the site’s editors, Michael Bogdanov. (Please Click Here for the Canto Talk show link – 10 pm EST/9 pm CT/7 pm PST).

I first spotted a reference to this fascinating website on Instapundit:

A CLASSIC 1939 SOVIET COOKBOOK, NOW ON KINDLE: Book of Tasty and Healthy Food.

Via reader Michael Bogdanov, who writes:

Hi Glenn,

We are a bunch of ex-Soviets living in the USA and we read your site daily.

Recently we’ve launched our blog, SovietKitchen.com, which introduces American and other English-speaking readers to best recipes from all former republics of the USSR.

We’ve also compiled our first recipe book – “Book of Tasty and Healthy Food”, based on the Soviet best-seller, with original illustrations, available on Kindle now.

It should be an interesting read for all foodies as well as history buffs interested in the Soviet period.

Michael came over to the country with his family in 1990 at the age of 14 from the Soviet Union. “Our family came for the opportunities”, he said. Subsequently, Michael received an engineering degree from a university in New York and has quite a career, including a stint on Wall Street. Now he is taking on several new projects, including the cookbook with partner and translator Boris Ushumirskiy.

“While we do not support Communism as an ideology in any way, we are still fond of some things from that bygone era,” Michael explained. “Our childhood and teenage memories are almost exclusively positive, and food has certainly got a lot to do with that. Despite occasional shortages of different ingredients, our parents and grandparents were still able to prepare nutritious meals that tasted great. The vast territory of the Soviet Union, spanning from Europe to the Far East, was home to a great number of nations and cultures, each boasting their own cuisine. There are many thousands of delicious dishes available, some virtually unknown to the Western food enthusiasts. We believe that anyone’s culinary and tasting experience can be enriched by becoming familiar with a few of them, and this is our goal.”

I took the liberty of highlighting 3 recipes from the website that make offer a new take on classic Thanksgiving fare:

Pumpkin Braised with Rice and Raisins

Satsivi with Turkey Roasted on a Spit

Cranberry Mousse with Farina

Read Full Post »

On Egyptian Princesses and Military Love Affairs (e.g., Petraeus, Washington, and Nelson)

Dear Readers: One consequence of the election is that I will be featuring more history-oriented posts (as most of my current event content will go to Legal Insurrection and College Insurrection.

Let me start with an homage to Egyptology: Tomb of Ancient Egyptian Princess Discovered in Unusual Spot

The tomb of an ancient Egyptian princess has been discovered south of Cairo hidden in bedrock and surrounded by a court of tombs belonging to four high officials.

Dating to 2500 B.C., the structure was built in the second half of the Fifth Dynasty, though archaeologists are puzzled as to why this princess was buried in Abusir South among tombs of non-royal officials. Most members of the Fifth Dynasty’s royal family were buried 1.2 miles (2 kilometers) to the north, in the central part of Abusir or farther south in Saqqara.

(Saqqara holds a vast burial ground for the ancient capital Memphis and is home to the famous Step Pyramid of Djoser.)

The researchers aren’t sure whether the remains of the princess are inside tomb, as the investigation is still in progress, Miroslav Bárta, director of the mission, told LiveScience. Even so, they also found several fragments of a false-door bearing the titles and the name of Sheretnebty, the king’s daughter. [Image Gallery: Egypt's Great Terrace of God]

“By this unique discovery we open a completely new chapter in the history of Abusir and Saqqara necropolis,” said Bárta, who heads the Czech mission to Egypt from the Czech Institute of Egyptology of the Charles University in Prague.

Bárta and colleagues think the ancient builders used a naturally existing step in the bedrock to create the princess’ court, which extends down 13 feet (4 meters) and is surrounded by mastaba tombs above it. A mastaba is a type of ancient Egyptian tomb that forms a flat-roofed rectangular structure.

A limestone staircase descends from north to south along the burial court; four limestone pillars that once supported roofing blocks hold carved hieroglyphic inscriptions reading: “King’s daughter of his body, his beloved, revered in front of the Great God, Sheretnebty.”

The four surrounding tombs were cut into the rock of the south wall of the court and of a corridor that runs east from the southeast corner of the court. The two tombs in the south wall, dating to the time of Djedkare Isesi, the seventh ruler of the Fifth Dynasty, belong to Shepespuptah, the chief of justice of the Great House, and Duaptah, an inspector of the palace attendants. The other pair is situated along the corridor, with one belonging to an official named Ity.

“We are very fortunate to have this new window through which we can go back in time and to follow and document step by step life and death of several historically important individuals of the great pyramid age era,” Bárta said in a statement.

Now, turning to a little history, I would like to highlight a few of the high-level military men who had fairly meaningful romantic affairs — and, yet, still managed to open a can of whoopass on the enemy:

Eight Famous Military Affairs, From Petraeus to Washington

Here is a fact I did not know until digging in to military leaders and their mistresses: George Washington had a major crush on a beauty named Sally Fairfax: We cannot tell a lie—George Washington almost certainly did not have an affair with Sally Fairfax, wife of his mentor, William Fairfax, one of the most prominent men in Virginia. But the young soldier was clearly smitten with her. “Tis true, I profess myself a Votary to Love,” Washington famously wrote to her in 1758. “I feel the force of her amiable beauties in the recollection of a thousand tender passages that I wish to obliterate, till I am bid to revive them—but experience alas! Sadly reminds me how Impossible this is.” The following year, Washington married the wealthy widow Martha Dandrige Custis—and the rest is American history.

Another analysis indicates the relationship between George and Sally may have been more substantial:

The evidence rests on two mysterious letters sent in September 1758, when George was a social-climbing, 26-year-old farmer-turned-army colonel writing from the front lines of the French and Indian War, and Sally was the belle of Virginia, a pretty, sophisticated and flirtatious minx two years his senior. George had met Sally several years earlier, when she married his Anglophile neighbor, G. W. Fairfax, in Mount Vernon, Virginia. The Washingtons and Fairfaxes were old family friends, so young George spent many nights playing cards, dancing, and enjoying amateur theatricals at the luxurious Fairfax mansion. Then, in 1757, while he was still recovering from “bloody flux” or dysentery he had, a little unconventionally, invited Sally to visit while her husband was away in London. The pair evidently got on like a house on fire: The poorly educated Washington, from a socially modest family, was dazzled by the lovely, refined, and aristocratic Sally. She was also attracted to the studly young George, who had a modicum of fame for his war exploits and was tall (over 6’ 2”, a giant for the period) and handsome, with gray-blue eyes and auburn hair tied in a short pigtail — a dashing effect, despite poor teeth and mild facial scars from a childhood bout with smallpox.

Sally Fairfax

And so the next September, when Sally wrote to congratulate him on his engagement to the rich, plump, and good-natured widow Martha Dandridge Custis, George wrote back with a convoluted letter implying that his real passion lay with her, Sally. (“Tis true, I profess myself a Votary to Love — I acknowledge that a Lady is in the Case — and further confess, that this Lady is known to you… I feel the force of her amiable beauties in the recollection of a thousand tender passages that I wish to obliterate, till I am bid to revive them — but experience alas! Sadly reminds me how Impossible this is.” His love, he goes on, is “an honest confession of a Simple Fact — misconstrue not my meaning — ‘tis obvious — doubt it not, nor expose it, — the World has no business to know the object of my Love, declared in this manner to — you when I want conceal it…”) In the second letter, he explicitly compares himself and Sally to the fictional characters Cato and Juba — a pair of secret lovers in a famous literary work of the time. (“Do we still misunderstand the true meaning of each others Letters?” he writes. “I cannot speak plainer without — but I’ll say not more, and leave you to guess the rest.”)

Alas, it appears that, while George and Sally were quite possibly in love, the idea of an actual affair is the product of frustrated historians’ vivid imaginations. But as with so many bedroom sagas, we will never know the truth. Naysayers point out that there is no hard documentary evidence of consummation, and that George would hardly have risked his honor and career by indulging in a furtive liaison with Sally because of his friendship with her husband and father-in-law. Moreover, he was wildly ambitious, and already showing a stern self-discipline; their relationship, says the historian Joseph J. Ellis, fell under the category of “forbidden love,” and was the first sign of the self-denial that would characterize Washington’s life. His marriage to Martha, while perhaps inspired at first by her huge wealth, blossomed into a very happy and durable union; and before the Revolutionary War tore Virginia apart — Sally’s husband declared himself a Loyalist and took her away to Britain — the foursome were close friends and visited often.

Romantics, however, will never quite be convinced that a 26-year-old George would have been entirely ruled by pragmatism and social convention; after all, there is no evidence proving that they didn’t consummate their love. The pair’s later correspondence was tinged with regret. A year before his death in 1799, by then one of the world’s most famous individuals and in his late 60s, Washington wrote frankly to Sally in Britain that he had “never been able to eradicate from my mind those happy moments, the happiest in my life, which I have enjoyed in your company.” Then again, he included a note from Martha in the same letter, so the ambiguity of the message will forever remain.

Interestingly, a descendent of the beautiful Sally indicates great looks and the ability to flirt intensely is quite genetic! Perhaps there is some relationship to General Petraeus’ biographer. But, I digress.

I also recall the fairly successful Lord Admiral Nelson (e.g., Battle of the Nile) had a fairly intense affair with a beauty named Emma Hamilton. That gives me an excuse to share one of my favorite Vivian Leigh films, That Hamilton Woman.

Finally, fellow historian Word Warrior had a great post on the Petraeus resignation, which is the must-read of the day.

The loss of a man of such brilliance from public service should not be taken lightly. Such losses can have deep consequences, unforseen at the time. Future historians, perhaps commenting on the decline of the American Empire, will take not of Petraeus’ fall from grace; and note this milestone, a sign of that America is no longer a serious society capable of greatness, or worthy of Great Power status.

My take: Benghazi claims another victim.

Read Full Post »

“Age of Arthur” Much More than “Knights in Shining Armor”

Welcome “Manosphere” members, and a big thanks to Captain Capitalism for the link.

Dear Readers:  I wanted to take some time away from the realm of ancient Egypt and review a wonderful series written by a good friend, Barry C. Jacobsen of “Deadliest Blogger – Military History Page“.  He is close to wrapping up this wonderful work, which has been a real labor of love, and I wanted to share a few items and recommend the “Age of Arthur” series to history fans everywhere. (To start, go to “The Age of Arthur, Part One”).

I am an amateur Egyptologist, who has written articles and given lectures on mummification and other aspects of ancient Egyptian history. So, I am no scholar of Arthurian history, Germanic battle tactics, or Celtic legends. Yet, the now 17-part series provided a lot of background information so as each part tied into the next, to make a very cohesive and engaging overview of the 5th though the mid-6th Century A.D., when the Classical Age of Greece and Rome transformed into Germanic “Dark Ages”. I am still no expert, but a lot more informed!

“The Age of Arthur” shows how Britain became the only territory of the Western Roman Empire to hold back and even reverse the tide of Germanic expansion and conquest for nearly two centuries. One aspect I really enjoyed about “The Age of Arthur” was learning about a very transitional phase in World History, between the collapse of the Roman Empire and the Medieval period. Before reading “The Age of Arthur”, I never considered that fully suited knights and court life did not arise in a vacuum — there is an true evolution in weapons and culture from Rome through to the Middle Ages. This series detail that fascinating transfiguration.

“The Age of Arthur” compares and contrasts the story of Camelot and the history of the “real Arthur”. For example, the legendary Arthur pulls a sword from a stone, gets named King, and then spends is reign sending his “knights of the round table” on quests before he his killed in battle by his son Mordred. However, the reality is more fascinating, if not quite as fantastical. In his essays, Jacobsen provides the evidence shows that the real Arthur was actually a warlord (who likely never used term “king”) of the Roman-Britons. Interestingly, this warlord actually fought the English, who were Germanic barbarian invaders! And Arthur’s “Knights of the Round Table” were probably a band of armored cavalry, of the late Roman type called cataphracts. Arthur’s men, in reality, went around on their steeds intercepting and defeating bands of Anglo-Saxon raiders

The study of ancient Egypt is often focused on specific rulers, whose projected personalities impact the view of a period. “The Age of Arthur” also offers an intriguing cast of characters, and Jacobsen goes into detail on family histories and theories about personalities and motivation that puts life into the legend. For example, there is a recounting of a chronicler of the period’s history, Gildas the Monk, the closest contemporary historian to the events in question. Gildas calls a British warlord Vortigern a superbo tyranno (“the proud usurper”) while heaping praise on another regional powerhouse, Ambrosius Aurelianus.

Below is a sampling of the work that discusses who Arthur actually is, which comes at Part 9. This demonstrates exactly how detailed Jacbosen’s analysis is):

Sometime in the last decade(s) of the 5th century, a new leader emerges among the Britons. He is Arthur/Artorius/Artos; and his name might either have been a nickname (“the Bear”) or his given name. In either case, his exploits as a war leader soon catapulted him into a position of primacy among the Celtic warlords.

Arthur is perhaps a kinsman (nephew?) of Ambrosius Aurelianus, the Riothamus (“Supreme King”) of Britain. If he’s a nephew, it is likely to have been by marriage: Gildas states that Ambrosius “alone” of his family survived slaughter by either Vortigern or the Saxons. Though Ambrosius was almost certainly a southern Briton, from the Belgae territory around Salisbury; it is not contradictory to suggest that Arthur could have been raised by a northern branch of the family (Ambrosius’ wife’s family). Perhaps (and this is a stretch) Arthur was even related to descendents of Lucius Artorius Castor; Ambrosius marrying a daughter of that house, Arthur’s aunt. Alternatively, Ambrosius’ exile in Armorica (Brittany) as a young man could have resulted in marriage to a daughter of the Alans; and Arthur could then have been of Armorican-Alan blood. Either origin would gives Arthur proximity in his childhood to the Sarmatian-Alans; and perhaps even kinship.

Jacobsen ties the series together effectively with his use of the “Twelve Battles of Arthur”:

“Then Arthur fought against them in those days, together with the kings of the British; but he was their war leader (or ‘dux bellorum’).

The first battle was at the mouth of the river called Glein.

The second, the third, the fourth and the fifth were on another river, called the Douglas, which is in the country of Lindsey.

The sixth battle was on the river called Bassas.

The seventh battle was in Celyddon Forest, that is, the Battle of Celyddon Coed.

The eighth battle was in Guinnion fort, and in it Arthur carried the image of the holy Mary, the everlasting Virgin, on his [shield,] and the heathen were put to flight on that day, and there was a great slaughter upon them, through the power of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

The ninth battle was in the City of the Legion.

The tenth battle was on the bank of the river called Tribruit.

The eleventh battle was on the hill called Agned.

The final battle was on Badon Hill, in which 960 men fell in one day from a single charge of Arthur’s, and no one laid them low save he alone; and he was victorious in all his campaigns”.

The following segments of “The Age of Arthur” details the landscape, tactics, weapons, and outcomes of each of these engagements. The most recent installment recounts the Battle of Badon Hill. At this point, I would like mention that Jacobsen makes very good use of maps, which provide a thorough understanding of the areas discussed and also allows readers to visualize the battles described. In fact, his use of graphics is extremely effective and is a big part of what makes this series successful.

For one brief shining moment, Camelot may have existed. However, Rome is eternal — and “The Age of Arthur” highlights its influences (especially in terms of weapons, cavalry and battle strategy). Jacobsen has managed to reconstruct a legend to create a history that is no less intriguing.

***************************************************************************
A Goddess Point of View

I would be remiss, in terms of my own website, if I did not add a few comments that provide a slightly feminine point of view.

1) I was very sorry to learn that my favorite Arthurian character, Morgan le Fay, only belongs to the realm of legend.

2) My personal favorite bit in the series came during Part 2, which involved a Saxon chieftain, his daughter, and a love-struck warlord!

“Sixteen more “keels” arrived, bearing another 400-700 Saxon warriors. More fatefully, among these was Hengist’s daughter, Rowena (or Rhonwen), a girl of surpassing beauty. At a welcome banquet for the newcomers, tradition has it that Hengist encouraged his daughter to serve Vortigern with her own hand. The effect of a young (perhaps teenage) girl on a middle-aged man can be profound. Vortigern became obsessed with the Saxon girl, and putting aside the mother of his sons, married the daughter of his Saxon lieutenant. As bride-price, Hengist persuaded Vortigern to give the Saxons all of Kent.”

Also, in terms of “Knights in Shining Armor”, here is a video of a melee I took at last Sunday’s “Order of the Phoenix” jousting tournament!

Read Full Post »