The post Backwards Biden appeared first on WND.

The post Nikki unmasked appeared first on WND.

It’s a fraction of the price! READ MORE...

  Geoffrey of Monmouth remains an elusive and mysterious figure from the Medieval era. Rarely has so little been known about a man who contributed so much to the recorded history of Britain.   Let us take a moment to explore the life and works of Geoffrey of Monmouth‚ and attempt to discover what it was that influenced him to bring to life some of the most significant characters from British folklore. By collecting what information we can from our most reliable sources‚ we may build a firmer picture of Arthur‚ Merlin‚ and the man who made them.    Geoffrey Of Monmouth: Get To Know The Man Himself  Sketch from Ballads of Bravery‚ Source: Ballards of Bravery‚ by George Melville‚ Baker‚ 1877‚ online at the Internet Archive   Everyone has heard of the legendry King Arthur. Everyone has heard of his magical accomplice‚ Merlin the Sorcerer. Everyone has also heard of the beautiful but scandalous Queen Guinevere and of the charming Sir Lancelot who captured her heart.   Everyone has heard of the sword in the stone; of the Knights of the Round Table; of Uther Pendragon; of Morgan le Fay; of the Lady of the Lake. But who has heard of Geoffrey of Monmouth‚ the man who helped these enduring figures and enchanting tales to become as famous as they are today? It is largely thanks to Geoffrey of Monmouth that King Arthur is still one of the most popular literary characters of all time.   Without such a prolific chronicler as Geoffrey of Monmouth‚ there would be no Arthur‚ no Guinevere‚ no Merlin‚ and no Camelot. Stories of the imaginary world we have grown to know and love might never have been passed down to us. In fact‚ some scholars even go as far as to say that Geoffrey of Monmouth invented these characters and tales himself‚ with nothing more than his own imagination to inspire him.   Michael Cronin as Geoffrey of Monmouth in Merlin‚ 2008‚ Source: IMDb   Thanks to his ancient publications‚ Geoffrey of Monmouth is often mentioned in the same breath as many other historians‚ chroniclers‚ and churchmen of the Medieval era. Adam of Usk‚ William of Malmesbury‚ Gerald of Wales‚ and Walter of Oxford are just a few of the names that immediately spring to mind.   But what made Geoffrey of Monmouth so special that he should be esteemed more highly than his contemporaries‚ despite the fact that practically nothing is known about his life? Who exactly was this talented man‚ that he possessed both the creativity required to concoct such stories and the dedication required to sit down at his desk and put pen to paper?   The modern historian may question further; was Geoffrey of Monmouth really from Monmouth‚ or did he merely live there for a short time? Was he even Welsh‚ at all? Did he have personal relationships and connections with the characters he claimed to be genuine historical figures‚ or were they purely fragments of his vivid imaginings? Were his writings intended as historical records of real events‚ or as fanciful legends to entertain and inspire?   Who Was Geoffrey Of Monmouth And What Made Him Special? Statue of Geoffrey of Monmouth‚ Source: Visitmonmouthshire.com   There are many facts to be discovered regarding the life of Geoffrey of Monmouth‚ although there is much confusion over the validity of each individual detail. Although there has been a lot of dispute between historians over which claims have substance and which have no historical evidence‚ Geoffrey of Monmouth is still popularly remembered in many different ways.   He was very likely a Welshman; he was a man of the late eleventh and early twelfth centuries. He was a cleric. He was a great scholar. He was likely to have been fluent in English‚ Welsh‚ and Latin; he was almost certain to have spent much time on his skills in conversation and translation. He was a historian. He was a chronicler. He was‚ quite possibly‚ a Monk of the Benedictine Order. He was also a Canon of Saint George’s College in Oxford‚ and a little later he was Bishop of Saint Asaph.   Arms of the Diocese of Asaph‚ Source: Wikimedia Commons   Geoffrey of Monmouth was‚ and still is‚ one of the most important figures in the development of British historiography. We can tell by his proven abilities that he was a man who meant to make a success of his life. He was someone who had a variety of wonderful stories to tell‚ and who worked unceasingly to tell them.   To this day‚ Geoffrey of Monmouth is best remembered for his three major works. They were: The Historia Regum Britannie (The History of the Kings of Britain)‚ Prophetiae Merlin (The Prophecies of Merlin)‚ and finally Vita Merlini (The Life of Merlin).   Monmouth: Picture of a Town  Monnow Bridge‚ Monmouth‚ by John Arthur Evans‚ later 18th-early 19th centuries‚ Source: ArtUK.org   Monmouth. Anyone living in Wales will be familiar with the name of this idyllic place. Presently‚ at the beginning of the twenty-first century‚ it is the very picture of a thriving and historic countryside town. Monmouth is pleasantly situated‚ for beside the town center the River Monnow joins the River Wye on the English-Welsh border. Monmouth lies thirty miles northeast of the Welsh Capital of Cardiff‚ and just under one-hundred-and-fifty miles from London.   The word Monmouth is an English contraction of the phrase Monnow-Mouth‚ and references the River Monnow which flows through the town. The Welsh name for the river Monnow is Mynwy‚ which translates loosely as fast-flowing. In accordance‚ Monmouth was originally known to the Welsh as Abermynwy (Mouth of the Monnow).   By the year of 1536‚ however‚ the town was officially recognized as the abbreviated name of Monmouth. It was also during this year that Monmouth became a county-town in its own right. Monmouth is still well-known and well-loved for its connections to many figures from British history; not only Geoffrey of Monmouth‚ but also King Henry V (who was born at Monmouth Castle and went on to win the Battle of Agincourt in 1415)‚ Charles Rolls (whose ancestral home was in Monmouth and who co-founded Rolls-Royce)‚ and King Charles I (who gave an unofficial tour of Monmouthshire during the English Civil War).   Monmouth is also home to some of the most significant sites in Wales‚ including the Monnow Bridge (the only remaining Medieval bridge in Britain with its original gate-tower still standing)‚ Monmouth Benedictine Priory (originally built in 1075 and home to Geoffrey of Monmouth)‚ and Saint Thomas the Martyr Church (originally built in 1180 and including a twelfth-century Norman Chancel).   Monmouth Flag‚ Source: The Flag Institue   The occasional visit to the town of Monmouth is essential for all local history lovers‚ not only for its associations with the figures and buildings listed above but also because it was named one of the top ten towns in Britain by the Council for British Archaeology. Even back during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries‚ Monmouth was renowned for its profound history and stunning scenery. So famous did Monmouth become that it attracted wealthy clientele from all over Britain.   Monmouth quickly became a popular center for visitors who wished to undertake something called The Wye Tour; an excursion by boat throughout the scenic Wye Valley. The tour passed through not only Monmouth but also Ross-on-Wye‚ Tintern‚ and Chepstow.   Poets such as William Wordsworth‚ Samuel Coleridge‚ and Robert Southby‚ as well as the painter J.M.W Turner‚ are among those known to have visited the area in this way. These days‚ an extremely popular heritage trail can be taken around the town. The walk takes tourists to twenty four sites‚ all of which hold great historical significance‚ and many of which relate to Geoffrey of Monmouth himself.   A Picture of Geoffrey’s Monmouth  Map of Monmouthshire‚ by John Speed‚ 1610‚ Source: Livinglevels.org   It is shortly before the Norman Conquest that Geoffrey of Monmouth makes his first appearance in our history books. He was likely to have been born sometime between the years of 1090 and 1100‚ during the reign of either King William II or King Henry I.   A popular theory holds that Geoffrey of Monmouth’s father arrived in Britain after fighting for William the Conqueror at the Battle of Hastings. Whatever the exact year of his birth may have been‚ the fact remains that by the time Geoffrey had arrived on the scene in Monmouth in the late eleventh or early twelfth century‚ the town was already an ancient one‚ having been inhabited for many thousands of years.   So ancient was the town‚ in fact‚ that a neolithic dwelling was once present on the land that would become Monmouth. Therefore‚ it is thought that the first human life could have settled there up to twelve thousand years ago. Later‚ approximately five thousand years ago and forty centuries before Geoffrey of Monmouth was born‚ the same land was home to a Bronze-Age boat-building community. However‚ the first recorded settlment at Monmouth was the small‚ Roman Fort of Blestium. This fort was connected by Roman-built roads to two important towns; Glevum (Gloucester) and Isca Augusta (Caerleon).   Scene from the Bayeux Tapestry‚ Source: Wikimedia Commons   The proximity of Monmouth to Caerleon is significant‚ for it was Geoffrey of Monmouth who named it the Court of King Arthur. Of course‚ the question of whether or not Geoffrey of Monmouth was truly from Monmouth still remains‚ and the authenticity of his Welsh heritage is frequently questioned. When considering his true nationality‚ we must remember that there is absolutely no evidence to confirm that he was Welsh‚ or that he was Norman.   However‚ we do know that he referred to himself in his work as Galfridus Monemuntenis‚ which indicates a desire to associate himself with the town of Monmouth. It is therefore rumored that he was born there or‚ at the very least‚ lived there for a large portion of his life‚ probably at the Benedictine Priory of Monmouth.   Descriptions of Monmouth town‚ as it appeared during the year of 1086‚ have survived in the Domesday Book of King William I. In this particular year‚ shortly after the time when Geoffrey of Monmouth would have been present in the town‚ Monmouth possessed an extremely small population.   The lands and resources present in Monmouth at the time when the Domesday Book was written included twelve plough-teams to work on the ploughland‚ three mills and fifteen notable households‚ all of which gave employment to servants. Monmouth has grown significantly since then‚ for it now has a population of ten thousand.   The Death of King Arthur‚ by James Archer‚ 1860‚ Source: Wikimedia Commons   Whether or not he was born in Monmouth‚ and whether or not he ever visited the nearby town of Caerleon‚ Geoffrey of Monmouth certainly wished to express his love for the area to his readers. He even gave a beautiful description of Caerleon for us to enjoy.   He claimed Caerleon to be “a delightful spot in Glamorgan on the River Usk. For the noble river I have named flows along it on one side‚ upon which the Kings and Princes who would be coming from overseas could be carried by ship. But on the other side‚” Geoffrey of Monmouth continued‚ “protected by meadows and woods‚ it was remarkable for Royal Palaces‚ so that it imitated Rome in the golden roofs.”   Many other chroniclers and authors have echoed the idea of King Arthur’s Court being held at Caerleon. For example‚ during the year 1188‚ Gerald of Wales confirmed that “the Roman ambassadors here received their audience at the Court of the great King Arthur.”    It was not until a few decades later‚ thanks to the French poet Chretien de Troyes‚ that the Court of King Arthur was held in a fictional land called Camelot.  Several centuries later‚ it was revealed that Alfred Tennyson had lodged at The Hanbury Arms in Caerleon as he wrote his famous work‚ Morte d’Arthur‚ more commonly known as The Death of Arthur.    The Work of Geoffrey of Monmouth: Factual or Fanciful? Manuscript of the Historia Brittonum‚ Source: The British Library   Geoffrey of Monmouth wrote three major works during his lifetime. The earliest of these works was The Prophecies of Merlin. It was originally written sometime during the year 1130 and contains a number of writings that Geoffrey attributed to the wizard Merlin.   However‚ it is Geoffrey’s Historia Regum Britanniae‚ that undoubtedly provokes the greatest amount of twenty-first-century dispute.  Geoffrey of Monmouth began this particular chronicle with what he would have considered to be an essential revelation. He clearly stated; “I have not been able to discover anything at all on the Kings who lived here before the Incarnation of Christ‚ or indeed about Arthur and all the others who followed on. Yet the deeds of these men were such that they deserve to be praised for all time.”   Also in his dedication‚ Geoffrey of Monmouth made it clear that he believed all the information within his book was both true and accurate. He claimed that his writings were nothing more than a direct translation of another book; no embellishments or enhancements included.   According to him‚ Historia Regum Britanniae was an updated version of “an ancient book in the British language that told in orderly fashion the deeds of all the Kings of Britain.” The original book was given to him by his friend and colleague; Walter‚ Archdeacon of Oxford.   For the most part‚ modern-day historians are unanimous in dismissing these claims of accuracy. Although Historia Regum Britanniae was considered by some as a factual retelling of events‚ and although in some areas it was given credence well into the sixteenth century‚ it is now thought by most to hold almost no historical value at all.   Vortigern and Ambrose watch two Dragons fight‚ from the Historia Regnum Britanniae‚ 15th century‚ Source: Wikimedia Commons   Even during the year 1190‚ many scholars were skeptical. William of Newburgh spoke against the declarations made by Geoffrey of Monmouth. He wrote that “it is quite something that everything this man wrote about Arthur and his successors‚ or indeed about his predecessors from Vortigern and onwards‚ was made up‚ partly by himself and partly by others.”   It must be noted that not all skeptics were critics. A.G Rigg (1937-2019)‚ praised Geoffrey of Monmouth for publicizing his own‚ personal take on British history. He commented that “historians such as Gildas or Henry of Huntingdon imposed moral patterns on their material‚ usually of guilt or retribution or at least of good and evil.” He continued‚ “but Geoffrey‚ in creating his own material‚ has brought the mysterious into harmony with nature‚ with no reference to Christian morality.”   Would Geoffrey of Monmouth have known that his works contained false information? Or did he genuinely believe that he had taken down an accurate record of past events? What we can be certain of is that he claimed his work was factual‚ whether he truly believed it to be factual or not.   The question of whether he truly believed in the contents of his work‚ or whether he thought there was something to be gained in claiming his stories to be true‚ is left for us to answer for ourselves. Geoffrey of Monmouth’s final work‚ The Life of Merlin‚ was written around 1150‚ just a few years before his death. The Life of Merlin is a poem that tells many stories of Arthurian legend and most importantly gives an account of King Arthur’s death and final journey to Avalon.   The Geoffrey Of Monmouth Tapestry Geoffrey of Monmouth Tapestry‚ photo by Blubellam‚ 2013‚ Source: Wikimedia Commons   During the year of 2000‚ nine centuries after his death‚ a wall-hanging was commissioned by the people of Monmouth to commemorate the life of Geoffrey of Monmouth‚ and to celebrate the 900th anniversary of Monmouth Benedictine Priory.   This enormous task was taken on by a small army of dedicated craftspeople; just fourteen talented volunteers. The research and design took six months to complete‚ and after a combined total of just over 2‚750 hours‚ the project was finally completed in May of 2003.   The tapestry now hangs on the first floor of the Priory in a room quite fittingly entitled The Geoffrey Room. This room was believed to have belonged to Geoffrey of Monmouth himself while he lived at the Priory. There‚ the story of Geoffrey of Monmouth is displayed beautifully‚ having been skilfully brought back to life with the use of wool and embroidered linen.   The wall-hanging consists of three panels. The first‚ on the left‚ shows the crowning of King Arthur and Queen Guinevere at Caerleon. The central panel depicts Geoffrey of Monmouth as he writes his chronicles. In this depiction‚ he is dressed in the black habit of the Benedictine Order. The panel on the right depicts another of Geoffrey’s figures‚ King Vortigern‚ as he listens to the stories of Merlin the Sorcerer. The River Monnow‚ one of Monmouth’s most famous features‚ can be seen running through each of the panels.   The Death and Legacy of Geoffrey of Monmouth Geoffrey of Monmouth at Desk‚ Source: Scribd.com   Geoffrey of Monmouth is popularly believed to have had the misfortune of dying at Christmastime. Many history enthusiasts like to imagine that he breathed his last either on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day‚ but in reality‚ Geoffrey of Monmouth’s death could just as easily have occurred on any day of the year.   According to records‚ Geoffrey of Monmouth was still Bishop of Saint Asaph on Christmas Day of 1154‚ but had been succeeded in the office by Christmas Eve of 1555. The chosen successor‚ who went only by the name Richard‚ had obviously accepted the Bishopric on the event of Geoffrey’s death. Therefore‚ Geoffrey’s demise and burial are almost certain to have taken place between these times.   Just like many notable figures of his era‚ Geoffrey is believed to have died of old age‚ (sixty years would have been considered more than adequate for a lifetime)‚ but the true cause of death has never been determined. Although he has been gone almost nine-hundred years‚ reminders of Geoffrey’s origins are still scattered throughout the town of Monmouth with remarkable density.   Just one example of the sites to be seen in Monmouth is the Geoffrey of Monmouth window‚ which leads to the aforementioned Geoffrey Room at the Benedictine Priory. This sumptuous oriel window has been described as the only recognisable surviving medieval feature of the Priory‚ and can be seen clearly from the outside by passersby.   On viewing this window on a cold morning in the Welsh countryside‚ one may easily bring to mind the picture of Geoffrey of Monmouth at work in his study. He would be warmly wrapped in furs‚ huddled before a small fire‚ bending over his desk‚ a concentrated expression on his face‚ a scratching quill in his hand and a pot of ink at his side.   Photo of Geoffrey of Monmouth’s window‚ by W.A. Call‚ Source: Wikimedia Commons   Physically he would be present in Monmouth Priory‚ but mentally‚ he would be present in Caerleon‚ or Camelot. Geoffrey of Monmouth’s general obscurity outside Wales does not lessen his vast contribution to our recorded history.   So important was his work that Arthurian stories are now categorized as either pre-Galfridian or post-Galfridian‚ depending on whether or not they were influenced by Geoffrey of Monmouth. The Vita Merlini‚ contained within it seven different manuscripts‚ and are all now cared for by the British Library in London‚ which is also home to other fascinating works such as the Magna Carta.   Of course‚ the tales of Arthur and Merlin have been retold countless times throughout the centuries since his death‚ but it should not be forgotten that Geoffrey of Monmouth’s accounts were the first. Therefore‚ when we consider the dazzling characters and delightful tales he penned‚ it is only fitting that Geoffrey of Monmouth should be remembered as the man who made them.

  Although the Nazca Lines of Peru are the best-known geoglyphs out there‚ there are thousands of other glyphs around the world. Huge geoglyphs in the shape of humans‚ animals‚ and geometric shapes exist on nearly every continent.   1. The Uffington White Horse Geoglyph Uffington White Horse‚ date unknown‚ via World History Encyclopedia   The only known pre-historic geoglyph in Europe‚ the Uffington White Horse‚ is a splendid sight to behold. Nestled on the upper slopes of Whitehorse Hill in Uffington‚ England‚ the horse stretches 360 feet (110 m) across the hill. The striking white chalk makes the horse stand out from the lush green grass.   Historians and archaeologists do not know what people created the glyph or why. Constructed between 1380 and 550 BCE‚ during the late Bronze Age or Early Iron Age‚ references to the White Horse have existed since medieval times. One legend stated that the glyph was carved to celebrate an Anglo-Saxon defeat of a Viking army in 875 CE. However‚ later excavations proved that the glyph is much older.   Other theories state that a pre-historic culture created the glyph to mark ownership of their land or that the horse corresponds to celestial or astronomical events. When viewed from a hill opposite the horse in midwinter‚ the sun rises behind the horse and‚ throughout the day‚ moves past it. Some archaeologists believe that this indicates that the horse represents a sun horse‚ an ancient Indo-European symbol representing the belief that a horse pulled the sun across the sky.   No matter the purpose‚ the White Horse remains a significant cultural and historical artifact. Locals have maintained the site for centuries‚ ensuring the foliage doesn’t cover the horse.   2. The Atacama Giant El Gigante de Atacama‚ photo by Sznegra‚ February 27‚ 2008‚ via Wikimedia Commons   The Nazca Lines aren’t the only geoglyphs in South America. In the Atacama Desert in Chile‚ carved into a hillside‚ stands the Atacama Giant‚ the world’s oldest anthropomorphic geoglyph. This large‚ humanoid glyph stands at 390 feet (119 m) and is surrounded by thousands of smaller glyphs. It was created from stones and dirt and can be viewed from great distances.   The Tiwanaku people created the giant geoglyph over 1‚000 years ago but the purpose of the glyph is unknown. Some believe that it served as an astrological tool because the lines on the head predict the moon’s movement and can help predict the changing of the seasons. Since the glyph is meant to be viewed from a distance‚ people could use it to predict the rainy season — a vital survival tool in the highly arid Atacama Desert.   Similar to the Nazca Lines‚ researchers believe that the glyph may have also served as a map or guide to finding important sites or resources. While the glyph resembles an alien‚ other researchers believe that the glyph represents one of the deities the region’s native cultures used to worship. The being’s right-hand holds a crosier‚ and by its knees are feathered decorations.   3. The Blythe Intaglios Blythe Intaglios‚ photo by Rsfinlayson‚ October 23‚ 2016‚ via Wikimedia Commons   The Blythe Intaglios‚ located in California along the Colorado River‚ are a series of six figures in three locations. Each location features a human figure with a four-legged creature or a spiral. The largest human figure is 171 feet long‚ with the other two being about 100 feet long. The animal glyphs are 50 feet long. The glyphs are dated between 450-2‚000 years old. Natives created the glyphs by removing rock to expose the soil below.   The glyphs are hidden in the desert that hugs the Colorado River and weren’t rediscovered until 1932. A pilot flying from Blythe‚ California‚ to Las Vegas‚ Nevada‚ noticed the glyphs below. Since 1974‚ the Bureau of Land Management has had fences around the glyphs to protect the site’s integrity.   According to natives in the region (the Mohave and Quechans) the human figures represent Mastamho‚ the Creator of all life. The animal figures represent Hatakulya‚ one of two mountain lions/persons who helped in the Creation. They also state that in ancient times‚ the natives held ceremonial dances to honor the Creation. The Blyth Intaglios are best viewed from the air. Although other glyphs exist in the American West‚ the Blyth Intaglios are the most famous.   4. The Great Serpent Mound Great Serpent Mound‚ via Wikimedia Commons   The Great Serpent Mount stretches over 1‚300 feet across a ridge in Adams County‚ Ohio. The serpent is 20 to 25 feet wide and averages heights between 4 and 5 feet. Since the mound does not contain artifacts‚ dating it has proven exceedingly difficult. Some researchers attribute its construction to the Early Woodland Adena culture‚ which occupied the area from 500 BCE to 200 CE‚ or to the Late Prehistoric Fort Ancient culture‚ which occupied the region from 1‚000 to 1‚650 CE. Most current research suggests that the Adena culture built the mound. Still‚ it is possible that multiple cultures maintained and used the site.   Graves and burial mounds nearby suggest the builders intended the structure to serve a burial function. The head faces east‚ and the tail faces west. The head aligns with the summer solstice sunset and the tail with the winter solstice sunrise. The shape of the snake closely resembles the constellation Draco‚ suggesting that the mound may serve an astrological purpose.   One of the most debated parts of the serpent mound is the egg-shaped object at the snake’s mouth. Some believe the shape merely shows the snake consuming an egg‚ while others believe the form represents the sun.   Research continues on the mound as archaeologists study the astrological and cultural significance of the mound. Despite‚ or because of‚ the mystery surrounding the Great Serpent Mound‚ the site remains an important historical‚ archaeological‚ and cultural artifact.   5. The Turgai Geoglyphs The Ushtogay Square‚ via the Astana Times   Some of the most recently discovered geoglyphs are the Turgai Geoglyphs. Located in and named for the Turgai Trough in northern Kazakhstan‚ Dmitriy Dey discovered the glyphs in 2007 while studying satellite images from Google Earth. Dey presented his findings to the European Archaeological Association in 2014.   The site has earned the nickname “The Nazca lines of Kazakhstan” due to the large number of glyphs found. So far‚ researchers have discovered 260 giant glyphs. Unlike the Nazca Lines‚ which the natives created by removing the topsoil‚ the Turgai Geoglyphs were created by using rocks and dirt to build up mounds on the ground.   No one knows who created these glyphs or why but one of the oldest glyphs dates to 8‚000 BCE. The glyphs are designed in geometric shapes‚ including squares‚ rings‚ crosses‚ and swastikas. They range in size from 90 to 400 meters (295 to 1300 feet) in diameter.   Archaeological excavations have found the remains of structures at the geoglyphs. These discoveries suggest that ancient tribes may have performed rituals at the sites. Other research indicates that ancient people may have used glyphs to mark their territory. Of course‚ other researchers hypothesize that ancient peoples used the glyphs as astrological observatories. The glyphs are challenging to see from the ground but are viewable from the sky. Researchers continue to investigate the sites to learn more about their origins and purpose.   6. The Effigy Mounds Effigy mounds‚ via the National Parks Service   While many Native American cultures in North America built effigy and burial mounds‚ only those in the Upper Midwest created mounds shaped like birds‚ turtles‚ lizards‚ and other animals.   Located mainly in Iowa‚ Effigy Mounds National Monument houses around 200 of these mounds. Other mounds lie in the surrounding states. In addition to animal-shaped mounds‚ the mound builders also built linear and conical-shaped mounds.   Some mounds exist on their own‚ while others are organized in groups and one of the most prominent animal mounds is the bear. Native American legends state that the bear is the guardian of the Earth. Because there are so many mounds in the shape of a bear‚ the Natives could have used the mounds to establish a connection between the land and the spirit world.   Effigy mounds with bears‚ by the National Parks Service‚ via Wikimedia Commons   Built during the Late Woodland Period (1‚400-750 BCE)‚ and stretching from the Upper Mississippi River to Lake Michigan‚ the mounds were used for ceremonial and burial purposes. Later cultures continued the tradition of mound building. About 4‚000 mounds exist in the Upper Midwest‚ but estimates indicate there may have been up to 15‚000. Many were destroyed by natural processes and human damage to the land.   Geoglyphs Around the World Blythe Intaglios‚ animal figure‚ via Wikimedia Commons   Although the Nazca Lines are the most well-known geoglyphs in existence‚ there are thousands of glyphs around the world. Many of these glyphs were created hundreds to thousands of years ago by cultures that left no information about the building or purpose of their glyphs. Modern studies  generally agree that most glyphs were created for various reasons‚ including religious ceremonies‚ territorial designation‚ and astrological calendars or guides. While we may never know the true purposes of the glyphs‚ we can enjoy their beauty‚ engineering‚ cultural significance‚ and long-lasting nature.

  The idea of a “gold rush” evokes images of miners with pickaxes striking it rich in the deserts of California. “Forty-niners” hoped to make the American dream a reality as the search for gold brought forth villages‚ then towns‚ and finally‚ cities. Some would survive and prosper; others turned to ghost towns. However‚ the hunt for gold wasn’t limited to the Wild West. Way up north in the barren wilds of Alaska and Canada‚ men and women braved the cold in an attempt to make millions and forge a successful life.   A Unique Region Map of Alaska and the Klondike Gold Fields‚ J.J. Millroy‚ 1897. Source: Library of Congress   The Klondike is not the name of a specific town but the name given to a region of what is now the Yukon Territory. It is in the northwestern corner of Canada‚ near the US border of Alaska. The region gets its name from a river bearing the same name.   The Klondike River is a tributary of the larger Yukon River‚ but it was the smaller tributaries of the Klondike that would be the starring locations of the events that took place beginning in 1896.   Bonanza! Photo of Bonanza Creek by JBrooks85. Source: Encyclopedia Britannica   Knowledge of the existence of gold in the Yukon was nothing new in the late nineteenth century. The Indigenous groups of the area had known of and spoken of this precious metal for years‚ but it had little value to them in their subsistence economy before the arrival of colonizers. However‚ word began to travel‚ and soon‚ prospectors began to travel to the area‚ hoping to make their fortune.   The returns would be meager‚ though‚ until 1896‚ when a man named “Skookum Jim” Mason discovered significant deposits of gold at a place that would become known as Bonanza Creek‚ formerly Rabbit Creek. Mason was accompanied by his sister Kate (born Shaaw Tlaa)‚ who was of Tagish descent‚ her husband George‚ and their nephew‚ later known as Dawson Charlie (birth name Kaa Goox). Quickly‚ the team acquired claims on the area‚ but news spread fast. By the end of the month‚ all of the claims in the area of Bonanza Creek had been occupied.   The Rush Miners working in the Yukon. Source: Adam Smith Institute   Although the initial claims sold out quickly‚ news of the discovery spread rather slowly globally due to the nature of the times. Information had to travel south by ship and telegraph. Still‚ it persisted and spread nevertheless over the next year. As 1897 continued‚ prospectors arrived from all over the world to try their hand at striking it rich in the Yukon. Most of these miners were from the United States‚ but some crossed oceans and continents‚ dreaming of riches and fame. It was not an easy trip‚ as the fortune seekers not only had to adapt to the harsh Arctic conditions but they had to shell out the cash for the arduous journey–the average cost was $1‚200.   Miners hiking to the claims at Chilkoot Pass‚ 1898. Source: Norman B. Leventhal Map &; Education Center   Unfortunately‚ when many arrived‚ they found that there were limited or no claims available or that they lacked the resources necessary to take one up. They were then forced to give up their hopes of striking it rich and instead go to work for the “Klondike Kings”: those who had been around for the initial rush or had capitalized on the new economy springing up around them.  Regardless‚ it is estimated that about one billion dollars of gold was found in the Klondike Rush (adjusted for inflation).   Capitalizing in Other Ways A miners’ tent city. Source: National Parks Conservation Association   Not everyone in the Yukon decided to make their living hunting for gold. Others saw an opportunity to provide goods and services for those searching for wealth. Villages and towns started springing up around the tent cities created by miners.   Joe Ladue and Arthur Harper were two local traders who saw the writing on the wall. They quickly bought up local swampland‚ stocked up on lumber to sell‚ and named their new acreage Dawson City. It would become the center of the Klondike Gold Rush and is still a center of tourism today.   Dawson started out roughly‚ but by the end of the century‚ it was a legitimate city with fire hydrants‚ electric lighting‚ and an excellent police presence. Dance halls‚ bars‚ and supply depots found their demand increasing daily‚ and new businesses began popping up as the rush continued. Some individuals and businesses made money from the Klondike Gold Rush without ever stepping foot in the Arctic. It is estimated the businesses in the Seattle area made about 1 million dollars (not adjusted) during the period selling supplies to prospectors who were setting out on their trip north.   Harsh Reality  Heading up White Pass. Source: National Park Service   Despite the record profits and success some saw in the Yukon‚ this positive outcome was unattainable for many. There were two ways to access the gold-rich area‚ and both had their challenges. Skagway‚ Alaska was the gateway to the White Pass Trail‚ and it was a town of lawlessness and trouble. The Chilkoot Trail was the other option‚ originating in Dyea. It had fewer outlaws but was steeper than White Pass. Regardless of which trail they took‚ few prospectors were truly prepared for the brutal Alaskan environment. Many were not adequately stocked‚ and malnutrition and illness were common.   Panning for gold in the Klondike. Source: History Extra   The supplies that were necessary for prospecting were heavy‚ requiring pack animals or many back-and-forth trips on foot. So many horses died on White Pass Trail that it was commonly known as “Dead Horse Trail.” It is estimated that about 3‚000 animals met their demise there‚ overloaded and overworked‚ with many of their bones still occupying Dead Horse Gulch.   A monument was dedicated to these hapless pack animals in 1929. Writer Martha Ferguson McKeown later said about the trails‚ “There ain’t no choice‚ one’s hell‚ the other damnation.”   Lawlessness Abounds Soapy Smith stands in his saloon in Skagway. Source: Library of Congress   Some saw others’ misery as a chance to profit and took advantage. One of the most prominent swindlers to show up in the Klondike in the midst of the gold rush was Soapy Smith. Born Jefferson Smith in Denver‚ Soapy got his nickname from a scam he ran involving selling bars of soap with cash prizes inside. He started this racket in Denver and ran it in numerous other cities‚ always leaving town when he was caught or was about to be.   He did spend some time in jail but was rarely caught before skipping town with his ill-gotten gains in tow. Soapy ran a gang of men that would often pose as customers that would “win” a big prize‚ thus encouraging others to wile their wealth away in his schemes. At one time‚ his gang numbered 300 men‚ operating out of the town of Skagway‚ where he’d opened a saloon.   One of Smith’s most notable scams involved a fake telegraph system in Skagway. Soapy would take messages from the prospectors eager to reach their friends and family back at home‚ along with a fee for sending the message. The only problem was he never sent them! He went so far as to set up telegraph poles and wires; they just weren’t connected to anything. Smith died in 1898 at age 38 in a shootout at a town meeting‚ bringing his racket to an end.   The Collapse Gold became harder to find as time went on. Source: Grayline Alaska   By late summer of 1898‚ the gold pockets in the Klondike seemed exhausted. Many miners had left for home‚ their savings exhausted‚ and their dreams of fortunes burst. News of a fresh gold strike near Nome‚ Alaska reached the Yukon‚ and hundreds left Dawson and other areas‚ eager to jump on the newest claim. As the miners began their exodus‚ it was evident that the Klondike Gold Rush was over as fast as it began. Towns like Dawson City began to see drastic drops in population. Other towns‚ Dyea‚ for instance‚ would disappear altogether in the subsequent years. Businesses that were once thriving were forced to shutter as the population fell by the thousands.   Modern Connections Jack London‚ one of the voices of his generation‚ was shaped by his experiences in the Yukon‚ 1916. Source: AP Photo via NPR   While it burned out quickly‚ the Klondike Gold Rush left lasting impacts. Dawson City remains today the cultural capital of the Yukon Territory. As of the most recent reported count in 2018‚ the city is home to over 2‚300 people and is seeing consistent growth. However‚ over 60‚000 visitors stop in Dawson each year‚ and its vibrant tourist industry remains steady. The legacy of the gold rush is still evident‚ with mining-themed attractions throughout the town and the Klondike Gold Rush era playing a prominent role in museums and historical attractions.   Jack London’s legacy persists today‚ such as in this recent adaptation of his classic Call of the Wild starring Harrison Ford. Source: 20th Century Studios via National Geographic   Jack London‚ one of literature’s most prominent names‚ spent much time in the Yukon as a twenty-one-year-old man‚ arriving in the first wave of prospectors hoping to strike it rich. His experiences and the things he saw would become the fodder for a great deal of his fiction and nonfiction pieces in the future. His time in the North had a significant impact on him‚ as evidenced through his work‚ and enabled him to create vivid details in his works of fiction.   Dawson City persisted beyond the Rush‚ 1899. Source: Dawson City.ca   Though it couldn’t last forever‚ the Klondike Gold Rush left its mark on American and Canadian history. Parts of Alaska‚ Vancouver‚ Victoria‚ and Edmonton owe their existence to the impact the desire for gold had on the hearts and minds of frenzied prospectors. Common men and women took it upon themselves to attempt to conquer the frozen north‚ and in some small way‚ many were able to.

  The termination of Ottoman rule in the Balkans was a long and bloody process. After Greece gained its independence‚ other Balkan states followed. However‚ the recently independent states were not ethnically homogeneous. In almost every state‚ an ideology emerged proposing that all ethnic communities belonging to the nation but residing outside national boundaries should be incorporated. The ambition to expand over neighboring states’ territories‚ amplified by the fact that national identities in the region had not yet fully crystallized‚ caused a strained situation. In Greece‚ this irredentist ideal‚ known as the “Megali Idea” (“Great Idea”)‚ was steadily pursued until 1922.   The Birth of Greek Irredentism &; Megali Idea The gradual implementation of the “Megali Idea”. Source: Wikimedia Commons   When the Greek Kingdom achieved independence from the Ottoman Empire in 1831‚ there were massive and homogeneous Greek communities still outside the states’ boundaries. An ideology aiming at the eventual incorporation of these communities and the respective territories was formulated and first heard in the Greek parliament by the middle of the 19th century. With few exceptions‚ the “Megali Idea” was loudly adopted by most political parties and whole-heartedly supported by the public opinion‚ both within the free state and abroad. The Greeks outside Greece were much fiercer supporters of the national ambition. They put it forward in their claims for independence and joining the homeland‚ with a notable example provided by the several Cretan rebellions against Ottoman rule. However‚ not all “Greek” communities had clearly formulated national identities. In Macedonia‚ for example‚ the people perceived themselves in more nuanced terms‚ such as “Greek-speaking” rather than just “Greek”.   Driven by the Megali Idea‚ the area of the Greek state began to expand after intensive diplomatic‚ political‚ and military efforts. After the defeat of the Ottomans in the Turkish-Russian War of 1877-1878‚ Greece was granted the region of Thessaly and the district of Arta in Epirus‚ still inhabited by large Muslim communities. The island of Crete continued to be hotly contested between Greece and the Ottoman Empire. Moreover‚ the situation in Macedonia also fueled tensions between Greece and Bulgaria‚ who started competing for control over the region as the official Ottoman rule weakened. The turbulent situation did not go unnoticed by European powers that started competing for influence over the newly independent states.   The War of 1897 The Battle of Farsala by Georgios Roilos‚ 1897-1903. Source: National Gallery‚ Athens   Tense relations between Greece and the Ottoman Empire‚ often sparked by the ongoing unrest in Crete‚ culminated in the short War of 1897‚ in which Greece experienced a humiliating defeat. It was the first time that the Megali Idea directly led to actual conflict. The Turkish Army‚ numerically and qualitatively superior‚ swiftly advanced as far south as Lamia‚ successively winning the battles of Farsala‚ Velestino‚ and Domokos. A similarly successful advance in Epirus eventually forced the Greek government to seek an armistice. The defeat was primarily the result of the Greek Army being outdated and archaic with regard to equipment‚ organization‚ and training‚ not aligning with its lofty‚ irredentist motivation. Interestingly‚ due to the Megali Idea‚ Greek public opinion was overall supportive of the war. But the bitter outcome made it absolutely clear that the need to modernize the state structure and institutions (notably the army) had become imperative.   Thanks to the intervention of the Great Powers‚ territorial losses were avoided‚ and Crete was granted a degree of autonomy. Reparations‚ however‚ had to be paid‚ and by 1898 the country defaulted and came under international economic control.   Moreover‚ the shame of the defeat‚ unbearable to younger army officers‚ uncovered a hitherto smoldering discontent against the high command and its choices. The commander-in-chief was Crown Prince Constantine‚ whose military studies‚ experience‚ and competence were bluntly doubted. The qualities of several army leaders‚ who owed their rank and posts mostly — if not exclusively — to royal favor‚ were also questioned. The Crown’s interference was projected as the primary reason behind the defeat. The need to assimilate European expertise in army organization also became evident. The Ottoman Army‚ after all‚ was already under the supervision of a German military mission.   The Macedonian Struggle The former Greek consulate in Ottoman-ruled Thessaloniki‚ now the Museum for the Macedonian Struggle. It was the main base for the organization and coordination of the Greek efforts during the Macedonian Struggle. Source: Wikimedia Commons   The defeat of 1897 proved to be a temporary stall. Still‚ it showed that the Greek Army was not ready for large-scale confrontations. Nor were the state politics or finances stable enough to support the irredentist expansion. The Ottomans also faced serious internal issues‚ with civil unrest spreading and control over some provinces growing thin. Moreover‚ a new problem had now arisen‚ namely the race for control over the multiethnic region of Macedonia. A gradual antagonism‚ primarily between Greece and Bulgaria‚ emerged in their effort to affiliate the populations‚ which had been divided based primarily on faith (Millet system). Hence‚ affiliation with a certain state was often experienced as arbitrarily imposed from above. With Greece reluctant to be openly involved in another war‚ the struggle with Bulgaria took the form of guerilla warfare. Greek bands (Makedonomachoi) clashed with the Bulgarian ones (Komitadjis) as well as Ottoman authorities.   The very nature of the struggle makes it hard to precisely define it in terms of places and dates. It is also difficult to assess the degree of official Greek interference. Support was granted secretly via institutions and societies‚ mostly based in Thessaloniki‚ the region’s administrative center. The force involved in the field comprised of irregulars and volunteers‚ usually led by Greek officers. The gradual and systematic implementation of the Megali Idea laid the ground for a better organized military endeavor in the future‚ in line with the formation of strong national identities by the locals.   However‚ there was an unforeseen consequence. The spread of nationalism was followed by inter-communal tensions‚ a situation made worse by the blurring of the line between civilians and irregular fighters. This was but a prelude to much more vicious attacks against civilians‚ something that drew European attention. The intensity of the clash started to fade when the Young Turks took over in 1908.   The “Goudi Movement” The 14th of September 1909‚ lithograph. Source: National Historical Museum   Understandably‚ the basic tool for implementing the Megali Idea was the army. Trained to believe in the ideal and alarmed by the defeat of 1897‚ many army officers sought reforms. Further disappointed over a period of political instability‚ they grouped together into the “Stratiotikos Syndesmos” (“Military League”) secret organization. The organization openly propagated its demands in August 1909. They demanded the modernization of the army by limiting royal interference (seen as a threat) and propagated a renewal in the political scene. As the list of demands widened in the quest for general social reform‚ the movement gathered public support. This “revolution” had to be addressed.   That year‚ 1909‚ was the first time in Greek history that the officer corps interfered in politics. But the group of — mostly young‚ lower‚ and middle rank — officers did not seek to seize power. They chose Venizelos‚ a hero of the Cretan revolutions but still largely unknown in Athens‚ to represent them and advocate their demands once negotiations with the government stalled. Most of the demands were met‚ and the revolution went almost bloodless. After the success of the movement‚ Venizelos and his newly formed Liberal Party won the majority in the late 1910 elections and proceeded with implementing the much-awaited reforms. In that sense‚ Goudi was a kind of revival or‚ better yet‚ the point that marked the modernization of the state. However‚ ruptures within society began to appear.   Origins of the Greek National Schism  The Greek Headquarters at Hadji Beylik‚ detail depicting Prince Constantine and Premier Venizelos‚ 1913. Source: War Museum‚ Athens   Until 1909‚ King George I and Constantine had ostensibly tried to push their agenda into the Greek Parliament and the army‚ even without public or political support. Since the Goudi Movement openly challenged that‚ the ensuing conflict was inevitable. In contrast‚ Venizelos’s success was based precisely on the fact that he promoted the majority’s interests. He also believed in the Megali Idea. Venizelos’ cabinet implemented numerous reforms‚ including a revision of the constitution and the speeding up of previous initiatives for the army’s modernization. Stratiotikos Syndesmos demanded the removal of Constantine from the post of commander-in-chief‚ reminding that he had established an exclusive mentality of clientelism. Venizelos carefully tried to restrict the crown’s influence on the army or at least counterbalance it by assigning officers sharing his political views to key posts. This way‚ he did not question the monarchy and avoided a direct confrontation with the court.   Still‚ not everyone saw Venizelos’ rapid modernization favorably. The “urban majority” supported him‚ but others felt threatened (although to what extent the reforms should be perceived in the context of a class struggle has been questioned). The Antivenizelists turned to the older parties and — in the case of opposing officers — to Prince Constantine‚ as their ranks and posts were often dependent on court favor. The dominant stature of Venizelos urged his political opponents to seek cooperation; since one of the few unifying factors in their loose alliance was the — often unconditional — loyalty to the throne‚ all anti-Liberal political formations (and their supporters) gradually came to be collectively known as “Royalists” (merging into a single party in 1915). Thus‚ a “dichotomy” in Greek politics had already begun to take shape. Many supporters of either side started becoming fanatical. The younger “rebellious” officers began to fratricide‚ too‚ motivated not only by patriotism but personal interest as well. They too lacked a single and clear unifying ideology and aspiration.   Preparations for War  Battleship Averof‚ now a naval museum. Source: Greek City Times   Thus‚ since 1909‚ two influential decision-makers started competing for control over the Greek political scene. Prime Minister Eleftherios Venizelos and Prince Constantine‚ who was soon reinstated as the commander-in-chief‚ had even greater authority than the Minister of the Military. With both leaders being quite charismatic‚ tensions were bound to arise. Contested topics‚ for example‚ were foreign policy‚ often centered on the Cretan issue and army organization. However‚ despite some initial such arguments‚ both leaders‚ as well as the political bodies they headed (Liberal and Royalist)‚ managed to push disagreements aside and cooperate (an important step being the reinstation of Constantine by Venizelos himself). Likewise‚ the Royal Army Staff was reformed‚ and certain Royalist staff officers‚ discharged due to political reasons in 1909‚ were restored. A French military mission was invited‚ and the equipment and organization of the force were modernized.  Battleship Averof‚ commissioned in 1908‚ was framed by newly commissioned smaller ships (including a submarine)‚ making the Greek navy dominant in the Aegean. The Greek forces also acquired their first aircrafts.   The reforms in the army had indeed swift and remarkable results. The achievement was hailed by both sides since both propagated the Megali Idea‚ even if different approaches to the ideal began to be heard (often linked to a supporter of a specific side). Most agreed however that‚ with a strengthened army‚ the time was right for territorial expansion. Venizelos now demonstrated his diplomatic skills too. Not only did he loosen restrictions on the court (in order to pacify internal dissent in the face of the upcoming war) but he also managed to join a coalition of Balkan states‚ driven by their own irredentist ideals‚ against the common enemy‚ the Ottoman Empire. Likewise‚ Venizelos had also tried to court Britain‚ contrary to the Royalist Germanophile stance. In 1911‚ Venizelos won again a landslide electoral victory and finally managed to pacify both the army and the political scene.   The First Balkan War (1912-1913) The Surrender of Thessaloniki at Topsin‚ Lithograph by K. Haupt. Source: Historical and Ethnological Society of Greece   The weakness of the Ottoman Empire became further evident when Austria annexed Bosnia (1908) and Italy Libya (1911). With Russian guidance‚ Bulgaria allied with Serbia in March 1912. Venizelos‚ sensing opportunity‚ joined the coalition with Montenegro following shortly after. The disorganized empire was caught off-guard‚ and the European powers did not take serious steps to prevent a war. The demands of the Balkan States on the empire were outrageous‚ and it responded by declaring war. The war effectively hid the disagreements and antagonism between neighboring states. Defeating the Ottomans was the common priority. Greece deployed a small yet dependable army‚ more important being the contribution of her navy. After victories in Sarantaporo and Grevena‚ the army was faced with a dilemma: either to move north to Manastrir and link with the allied forces or to liberate Thessaloniki.   This was the first serious argument between Constantine and Venizelos‚ with the Prince ordered to proceed to Thessaloniki against his own judgment. There was another victory at Yannitsa‚ and the city of Thessaloniki — much-contested between Bulgarians and Greeks — was captured by the latter. To the north‚ the borders with Serbia and Bulgaria were delineated. Unable to reinforce their last possessions in the Balkans‚ the Ottomans went into separate negotiations with each belligerent by late 1912. However‚ with Greece in particular‚ warfare would continue.   In January 1913‚ the Greek navy defeated the Ottomans in two battles and captured almost every island in the Aegean. In Epirus‚ Ioannina surrendered in February after a lengthy bloody siege. By March 1913‚ a conference in London marked the end of the war‚ although peace talks were far from easy. The Ottoman army tried to mount some final resistance‚ but it was clear that not much could be done against a Balkan coalition with a remarkable ability to cooperate on the battlefield and a boosted morale.   The Second Balkan War (1913)  Greek weapons and equipment from the Balkan Wars. Source: the Balkan War Museum‚ Thessaloniki   The gains of the war were remarkable for all Balkan allies. Greece nearly doubled its territory and population. Ottoman authority was wiped entirely off the Balkan peninsula‚ with the Bulgarian army having captured Edirne and reached Çatalca‚ the last defensive line before Istanbul. Albania was granted independence. But the war brought forward new issues. Greece and Serbia faced border disputes with Bulgaria; Greece and the Ottoman Empire quarreled over the status of certain islands. With tensions on the rise‚ in May 1913‚ Greece signed a secret defensive treaty with Serbia‚ one that would prove very important later‚ during the First World War. Despite intense diplomatic efforts‚ war broke out again.   Greece allied with Serbia against Bulgaria‚ while the Ottomans attacked and recaptured Edirne. The Bulgarians vehemently defended their positions on the Greek front but were eventually defeated in the bloody battles of Kilkis and Lachanas. The Greek army pushed through Bulgarian territory‚ but being on the verge of exhaustion‚ it was only spared from defeat due to the Romanian invasion of Bulgaria. Bulgaria‚ facing four enemies on four fronts‚ capitulated. The war might have lasted only one month (June 1913)‚ but it was as bloody and harsh as the previous clash. The violence became particularly evident when it came to the treatment of civilians. Communities with different ethnic identities were wiped out by the armies of a different nation. Especially in the case of Muslim communities‚ the displacement reached such proportions that resentment would be kept alive at least for the next decade. By July 1913‚ negotiations began at Bucharest. This was another chance for Venizelos to demonstrate his diplomatic skills. He managed to win the islands and the much-contested region of Kavala (Eastern Macedonia). In exchange‚ he forfeited any claims to northern Epirus‚ which became part of Albania.   Results: Uneasy Peace and Ensuing Problems  Muhacirler‚ refugee Muslim populations forced to abandon their residence in the Balkans fleeing en masse to the lands of the Ottoman Empire. Source reubensilverman.wordpress.com   With her armies united under a single banner‚ Greece emerged triumphant from the Balkan Wars. Yet‚ though the military effort overshadowed internal divisions‚ political antagonism was still active. With the Prince serving as the commander-in-chief‚ the victory not only absolved the court from any previous dismay but also raised Constantine’s reputation as the “invincible leader of a glorious army”. Moreover‚ with King George assassinated in 1913‚ Constantine ascended to the throne. Of course‚ Venizelos was still seen as the leader capable of helping the until then “insignificant” Greece cope with her shortcomings‚ pursue national interests‚ rekindle national sentiment‚ and grant the country diplomatic power once again. Indeed‚ the emergence of Venizelos coincided with an increased interest on behalf of European powers for the region. His skills in negotiating and attracting support allowed Greece to become an active and influential player in the diplomatic scene. Thus‚ Venizelos’ monopoly as the national hero was now threatened by Constantine. There was also now a somewhat balanced interaction: the King interfered in the political and diplomatic decision-making‚ but Venizelos also imposed certain directives on the army.   The political scene was not the only worrisome issue. Civilian violence in the Balkans had reached an unprecedented scale‚ and there were still minorities within the sovereignty of most states. The Aegean islands continued to cause tension between Greece and the Ottoman Empire‚ and the same was true for the region of Bulgarian-held Western Thrace‚ with the Greeks still having their eyes on it due to the Greek population there. The Bulgarians were likewise eager to reclaim Eastern Macedonia. More importantly‚ the Balkan states would soon find themselves engulfed in a much greater conflict. If it was Austria’s annexation of Bosnia that had spurred Balkan nationalism‚ the very same nationalism would now fire the fatal shot on the Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand. The First World War was about to begin.

  The term “Holodomor” means “death by starvation” or “killing by starvation” in Ukrainian. It describes the brutal Soviet policy of collectivization of agriculture that forced private farmers to join collective farms. The policy resulted in mass hunger and starvation and claimed the lives of millions of Ukrainians. For the Ukrainian people‚ the Holodomor is regarded as a national tragedy fabricated by the Soviet authorities to suppress Ukrainian nationalism.   Prerequisites &; Causes of the Holodomor Genocide of Culture to Genocide of Nation by Bily Oleh‚ via HREC Education   World War I transformed the international system as the fall of European empires sparked independence movements in several countries‚ including Ukraine. Following the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia in 1917‚ Ukraine seized an opportunity for national self-determination. In January 1918‚ the interim administration of Ukraine proclaimed the creation of the Ukrainian People’s Republic. Only one year later‚ on January 22‚ 1919‚ the Ukrainian Unification Act formed a single nation-state from the territories previously split between the Austro-Hungarian and Russian Empires. Ukrainian independence‚ however‚ was short-lived. The Ukrainian government was compelled to renounce its independence on December 30‚ 1922. Following the establishment of the Soviet Union‚ the Ukrainian People’s Republic became the Soviet Republic of Ukraine.   Ukraine’s long history of struggles for independence against the Russian Empire did not just vanish into oblivion with the creation of the Soviet Republic of Ukraine. The Soviet authorities‚ just like Tsarist Russia‚ did not deny Ukrainians as people. But they fiercely opposed Ukraine as an independent nation. The Soviet leaders‚ aware of Ukraine’s relentless strive for independence‚ tried to suppress the resistance. With this objective in mind‚ the founding head of the government of Soviet Russia‚ Vladimir Lenin‚ initiated the policy of korenizatsiia‚ or indigenization‚ in 1923.   The policy aimed to instill Ukrainian loyalty to the Soviet regime‚ eventually suppressing national liberation movements in Ukraine. The strategy of indigenization allowed some degree of cultural autonomy. The Ukrainian language was widely used in schools‚ universities‚ cinema‚ and publishing. Although the Soviet regime tried to portray Ukrainian cultural heritage as “rural and outdated‚” the policy helped Ukrainians to form state‚ cultural‚ and scientific institutions and contributed to the development of national art and literature.   Preparation of grain for shipment to the filling station in the collective farm named after H. Petrovskyi. The village of Petrovo-Solonykha‚ the Mykolaiv Region‚ 1933‚ via Ukrainer   These developments transformed into the waves of the national revival in Ukraine in the mid-1920s. Famous Ukrainian communist and writer Mykola Khvylovyi’s slogan “Get away from Moscow!” illustrated Ukraine’s choice to focus on Europe‚ not Russia.   Besides cultural liberation‚ Vladimir Lenin launched the New Economic Policy (NEP) in March 1921. The policy aimed to alleviate food shortages and stop the subsequent peasant uprisings. It liberated the economy and allowed the functioning of private enterprises for independent farms and small businesses within the Soviet Union by granting the right for private trade to sell surplus goods and products.   In 1924‚ Joseph Stalin became the new leader of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. He disregarded Vladimir Lenin’s policies of indigenization and economic liberalization in Ukraine. Stalin feared Ukraine’s strengthened cultural and economic autonomy within the Soviet Union‚ thinking it would eventually result in a “Ukrainian national counterrevolution.”   By 1929‚ the Soviet regime under Joseph Stalin had arrested‚ convicted‚ or exiled most Ukrainian intellectuals‚ civil activists‚ or political elite who were at the forefront of Ukrainianization. Besides large-scale political repressions‚ Joseph Stalin canceled the NEP and the “indigenization” policy and introduced a new policy‚ often called the forced collectivization of agriculture.   By giving the Soviet government direct control over the grain produced in Ukraine‚ collectivization sought to meet the needs of the Soviet Union during its aggressive industrialization efforts. Additionally‚ the strategy required independent farmers to work for government collective farms and give up their land‚ cattle‚ and farming equipment. Due to its abundant resources and favorable conditions‚ Ukraine was known as the “granary of Europe” and the “all-Union bread storehouse.”  The successful execution of the new collectivization policy in Soviet Ukraine proved essential for the Soviet Union.   A woodcut “What is exported from Ukraine to Russia” from the album of graphics by Nil Khasevych‚ via Ukrainer   Farmers resisted‚ resulting in a wave of armed demonstrations during February and March of 1930. Even though peasants’ uprisings occurred in different Soviet republics‚ the Ukrainian one was particularly large in scale and fierce‚ with more than 4‚000 mass protests and 1.2 million Ukrainian peasants participating. Stalin’s response was repression‚ but it appeared that repression alone was unable to crush Ukrainian resistance.   In 1930‚ as part of the forced collectivization strategy‚ wealthy peasants were labeled as kulaks (“fist” in Russian)‚ declared enemies of the state‚ and deported to remote areas of the Soviet Union‚ mainly to Siberia and Kazakhstan. In 1930 alone‚ 113‚000 kulaks were forced to leave their homes.   By 1931‚ most of the peasant farms were collectivized but failed to deliver the desired results as the production could not meet the established high harvest quotas. The Soviet authorities decided to take almost all the crops from farmers‚ marking the start of total terror‚ a terror of hunger widely known as the Holodomor.   The Holodomor The man-made famine’s victims lying dead in the streets of Kharkiv‚ by Ewald Ammende‚ 1933‚ via Euromaidan Press   The unbearable situation brought on by malnutrition and a shortage of products was already visible at the start of 1932. Red flags were raised by representatives of the communal farms and Ukrainian communists led by Vlas Chubar‚ who pled with the Soviet leadership to take action. One of the letters‚ dated June 1932‚ stated the following:   “Farmers go to the fields and disappear. In a few days‚ their bodies are discovered and put in graves‚ completely without emotion‚ as if it were normal. And the next day you may already find the body of a person who has just dug graves for the others.”   The way out of the crisis was apparent: to halt or revise unrealistic grain quotas and provide humanitarian assistance to the affected Ukrainian population. Instead‚ Joseph Stalin issued the “Law of Spikelets” on August 7‚ 1932‚ further aggravating the situation. The law was intended to protect state-owned commodities on collective farms‚ especially grain. In reality‚ it became a tool for subjugating the Ukrainian population. The “Law of Spikelets” stipulated “execution with confiscation of all property and replacement in mitigating circumstances with imprisonment for at least 10 years with confiscation of all property‚” even for a small amount of food or grain that desperate peasants were trying to obtain for survival.   Another brutal element of Stalin’s terror regime in Ukraine was the so-called blacklisting of collective farms‚ villages‚ or districts in Soviet Ukraine that failed to meet the requested grain quotas. In practice‚ the decree was applied to every member of Ukrainian society whom the Soviet regime saw as an enemy or threat to communism. Stalin introduced the policy in November 1932 as a form of penalty. Affected regions were completely isolated and paralyzed as Joseph Stalin supplemented the blacklisting policy with the introduction of the travel ban in 1933.   Providing daily food ration to children during the Holodomor in Ukraine in 1932-1933‚ via European Network for Remembrance and Solidarity   The “black boards” were erected in the areas previously identified by the Soviet authorities. Residents of the areas were generally accused of counter-revolutionary activities‚ trying to damage the collectivization processes by not working hard enough to meet the harvest quotas or stealing grain. The Soviet military units controlled the area‚ ensuring that no individual could leave the territory in search of food. The policy of “black boards” covered the majority of Ukrainian districts‚ 252 out of 405‚ according to the historian Heorhii Papakin.   The Road of Sorrow by Nina Marchenk‚ via HREC Education   Joseph Stalin’s strategy succeeded. Not only did the Soviet government manage to export more than one million tons of Ukrainian grain during those years‚ but also Ukrainian peasants became dependent on the Soviet regime by controlling their work and reimbursement. By limiting access to food‚ the Soviet leadership ultimately gained control over every aspect of Ukrainian peasants’ lives‚ where there was no longer the idea of an independent Ukraine but only the idea of survival.   Stalin’s policy of forced agriculture collectivization and subsequent oppressive measures resulted in “the Sovietization of Ukraine‚ the destruction of the Ukrainian national idea‚ and the neutering of any Ukrainian challenge to Soviet Unity‚” as outlined by Pulitzer Prize-winning historian Anne Applebaum in her book Red Famine.   According to the United States Commission on the Ukraine Famine‚ conducted in 1988‚ witness Nadia Harmash responded with the following words when asked why people didn’t rise in revolt against the Soviet Union: “How can you rise when you’re dying of hunger?”   The Soviet Union in Denial &; the Response of the International Community A worker guarding stores of grain collected from the villages during the Holodomor in Ukraine in 1932-1933‚ via HREC Education   The majority of the traditional farming communities in Ukraine had been destroyed by 1933. Concerned with the rising death toll‚ the Soviet government repopulated affected areas with the new settlers from Russia‚ reduced grain procurement quotas‚ and eased restrictions on food and movement. The Soviet regime sent limited aid to the most affected areas of the Ukrainian SSR. With the arrival of the new harvesting season in the spring of 1933 and the little food aid‚ the famine slowly alleviated. The death rate gradually declined.   The Holodomor received little international political or humanitarian attention because of Soviet denial‚ censorship‚ and suppression of information regarding the scope of the disaster. The League of Nations and several European nations’ meager efforts were constrained and faced difficult obstacles. The growing Nazi influence in Germany and Japan’s expansionist policies forced Western countries‚ especially the United States under President Franklin D. Roosevelt‚ to ignore any worrying developments originating from the Soviet Union.   The Soviet Union completely denied the tragic famine in Ukraine. The Executive Committee for Communist Parties‚ the Politburo‚ masked the Soviet-staged starvation in Ukraine as a consequence of the adverse climate and Kulak corruption.   The Holodomor was extensively employed as propaganda against Stalin’s policies when Nazi Germany invaded Soviet Ukraine in June 1941. Joseph Stalin managed to successfully use this opportunity to label any individual‚ including representatives of the mass media and historians interested in the true causes of the famine in Ukraine‚ as “fascists” and “Nazis” influenced by Adolf Hitler’s propaganda.   Tuesday 19th February 1935‚ NY Journal – Page 12‚ via Gareth Jones   Additionally‚ the Soviet leadership actively engaged in media propaganda internationally. Former Prime Minister of France Édouard Herriot and famous writers such as Bernard Shaw‚ Herbert Wells‚ and The New York Times correspondent Walter Duranty were influenced by Soviet authorities to spread disinformation regarding the Holodomor. For example‚ Bernard Shaw‚ who visited the Soviet Union in 1931‚ openly declared that he had not noticed hunger or malnutrition in children or adults‚ as did the New Yorker correspondent Walter Duranty.   The first person to openly address the terror of Holodomor was Ukrainian poet Ivan Drach‚ following the Chernobyl nuclear disaster in Ukraine in 1986. In this case‚ as well‚ the Soviet authorities denied the accident and censored the information. Ivan Drach outlined the tragic history of famine in Ukraine as an example of how damaging official silence can be.   Outcome &; Legacy of the Holodomor   Joseph Stalin’s forced collectivization of agriculture‚ unrealistically high quotas on grain‚ and accompanying repressions claimed the lives of around 3.9 million Ukrainians between 1932 and 1933. As estimated by the demographers from the Ukrainian Institute of Demographic and Social Studies and the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill in 2015‚ at its peak in June 1933‚ 28‚000 Ukrainians died every day‚ 1168 every hour‚ and 20 every minute. The results were catastrophic. Historians described Holodomor as “what must count as one of the greatest man-made horrors in a century particularly full of them.”   Holodomor memorial in Ukraine‚ via Holodomor Museum‚ Kyiv   Even though the Soviet officials were eagerly trying to erase the memory of Holodomor in Ukraine and generally in the Soviet Union‚ it was forever inscribed in the collective memory of the Ukrainian people. In the short term‚ the terror by hunger suppressed nationalism and denied Ukrainians the right to grieve personal and national traumas‚ slowing down the process of state-building.   In the long term‚ however‚ Stalin’s strategy failed; the resentment and hatred towards the Soviet Union further solidified Ukrainian nationalism‚ and when the independent Ukrainian state was finally formed after the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991‚ Holodomor became one of the most influential and integral parts of the Ukrainian national identity. Holodomor Remembrance Day is remembered on the fourth Saturday of November annually. The Ukrainian government invested in funding research‚ educational‚ and informative campaigns to raise awareness about the Holodomor and keep the memory of the tragic events and their victims.   The Holodomor became a focal point in the history of Ukraine and played a significant role in determining its foreign policy‚ particularly regarding the Russian Federation. In 2003‚ the United Nations recognized that the mass hunger in the Soviet Republic of Ukraine resulted from the totalitarian Soviet regime’s unjust policies and cruel attitudes. In March 2008‚ the parliament of Ukraine (Rada) and 19 other nations recognized the Soviet policies of 1932–1933 as genocide against the Ukrainian people. The Holodomor is also regarded as a crime against humanity by the resolution passed by the European Parliament on October 23‚ 2008.

  Despite its fierce-sounding name‚ Kido Butai only means “mobile force” in Japanese‚ better known as the 1st Air Fleet. Used as an organizational name‚ Kido Butai was Japan’s elite carrier strike force. This powerful group was established in 1941‚ just before Japan entered World War II. Centered on aircraft carriers‚ the group included battleships‚ cruisers‚ destroyers‚ and other support ships. Only the best personnel served in the Kido Butai. This powerful group gave Japan a formidable striking force early in World War II.   The Reasons Behind the Kido Butai IJN Akagi with Zero Fighter 1941 Source: Wikimedia Commons   International naval limitation treaties between 1922 and 1936 limited Japan’s navy to sixty percent of the U.S. and Britain’s navies. Many ships could not exceed fixed tonnage limits. Japan felt the signers should have equal footing. Japan abandoned the treaties and set out to overcome any naval disadvantages.   Revamp and Revolutionize The Japanese Nakajima Kate torpedo bomber. Source: MSN   Japan began to build carriers ambitiously in the 1930s; by 1939‚ it possessed six modern carriers. The Japanese Navy also built a small officer core that understood carrier operations and this group won the battleships versus airpower argument. This core gathered or trained others‚ many being China War veterans‚ to high standards. Japan understood what carrier planes could do – strike at long distances unexpectedly. Therefore‚ Japan developed outstanding planes like the Mitsubishi Zero fighter and the Nakajima Kate torpedo bombers. Most naval planes were a generation behind these in terms of performance and technology.   The Offensive Edge Admiral Yamamoto‚ Commander Source: Wikimedia Commons   The next dilemma was doctrine. The Japanese Navy realized that grouping their carriers forged a combined airborne strike force not seen prior. Carriers previously operated alone or in twos. Six modern carriers combined with their squadrons meant hundreds of planes could be brought to bear. Think of a naval Blitzkrieg; it became dogma‚ giving Japan a distinct advantage. In April 1941‚ this Fleet was organized as the First Air Fleet.    Early Successes Three United States Battleships being attacked by Japanese bombers in Pearl Harbor‚ Hawaii‚ on December 7‚ 1941‚ Source: NPR   Imperial Japan entered World War II with the December 8th attacks on Pearl Harbor and other Asian countries. The First Air Fleet hit Pearl Harbor‚ as the U.S. Navy was deemed the biggest Pacific threat. The pilots and crews explicitly trained for this attack‚ using mockups of the American base. Some three hundred sixty planes in two waves sank four battleships but did not find the crucial American carriers.   Starting in 1942‚ the Fleet sailed across the Pacific and beyond. These raids included strikes on British targets in the Indian Ocean‚ Australia‚ and New Guinea. Operations supporting the Army took place in New Guinea and the Solomon Islands. The Fleet suffered few losses due to their skill and weaker opponents.   The First Real Brawl USS Lexington sinking Source: WW2DB   The first real contest for Japan’s mighty carrier force came in May 1942 during the Battle of the Coral Sea‚ the first carrier-only battle. The Japanese sought to cut American communications with Australia and invade New Guinea. The Coral Sea was the keystone for these operations. The U.S. knew this couldn’t be allowed. Task Force 17‚ with carriers Lexington and Yorktown‚ sailed in. The First Air Fleet committed the two big carriers‚ Zuikaku and Shokaku.   In a first-of-its-kind battle‚ only the highly trained aircrews clashed – no ships‚ and the U.S. routed the Japanese. The Lexington was sunk‚ and Yorktown damaged. The U.S. Navy damaged the Shokaku and decimated Japanese aircrews. Neither Fleet carrier would be available for the next Yamato planned operation.   The Massive Gamble Midway Island 1942 Source: Wikimedia Commons   The Kido Butai’s biggest gamble came at the June 1942 Battle of Midway. Yamamoto hoped to occupy Midway Atoll for future attacks against Pearl Harbor‚ pressuring America to negotiate to end the war. Preparations were made in complete secrecy. However‚ the U.S. Navy long cracked Japan’s encrypted radio codes and prepared a response. Japan’s Combined Fleet‚ led by the First Air Fleet‚ sailed in late May. The U.S. Navy positioned itself northwest of Midway waiting. Japan struck first‚ bombing Midway‚ but intense aerial battles soon started. American dive bombers caught the First Air Fleet exposed‚ its Zero fighters decimating U.S. Navy torpedo bombers. Bombs sank all four carriers and‚ with them‚ hundreds of veteran aviators and naval crew.   A Brutal Aftermath A dauntless dive bomber during the battles of Midway. Source: Seradata   Midway was Kido Butai’s swansong. The loss of four fleet carriers‚ hundreds of irreplaceable specialist aircrews‚ and sailors crippled the First Air Fleet. As the war revved up‚ a downward spiral ensued. Crews received half the previous training. Japan struggled to replace the lost carriers in a futile attritional war. The Kido Butai proved to be unstoppable for six months. In the naval battlegrounds of the early war‚ these exceptional crews and airmen were unparalleled. This proved to be their Achilles’ heel; no conditions existed where their skills could be re-created.