by Frank Bergman, Slay News: A group of leading Polish researchers has confirmed that carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere has zero impact on so-called “global warming.” The study, led by Professor Stan Kubicki of the Military University of Technology in Poland, debunks the globalist narratives regarding “climate change.” The study, published in Science Direct, confirms […]

  The ancient Israelites played an important role in the development of the three major Abrahamic religions: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. This makes their history important, but it is also obscure. Their stories in the Old Testament may be fact or legend, and archaeologically they are hard to separate from the other inhabitants of the Middle East. Putting together the evidence that we do have for the ancient Israelites, what can we say about their history?   Origins and Identification Hebrew seal from Arad, Israel, c. 7th century BCE. Source: Israel Museum, Jerusalem.   The precise identification of the early Israelites is difficult because it involves religious concepts that can evoke emotion. With that in mind, it is important to begin with a linguistic-cultural-anthropological identification of the people who would later become the Israelites.   It is also important to define some terms, such as Hebrews, Israelites, and Jews, which are often used interchangeably in the modern world. The term Israelites refers to the people from the kingdoms of Israel and Judah in the early first millennium BCE. Jew refers to followers of the ancient religion of the Israelites and those who practice the modern religion of Judaism. The earliest use of the term Jew in the Old Testament historical books is in 2 Kings (16:6). Israelite was generally used more widely and before that Hebrew was the preferred term.   The Hebrew people spoke a Semitic language that was closely related to the language spoken by various Canaanite peoples in the Levant during the Bronze Age. Philologists have further classified Hebrew as a member of the Northwest Semitic branch of the Semitic family. Other languages in this group include Moabite, Edomite, Ammonite, and perhaps most importantly, Phoenician.   Early Hebrew History Sandstone statue of Mentuhotep II from Deir el Bahri, Thebes, Egypt, c. 2051-2000 BCE. Source: Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.   Little is known about the early history of the Hebrews due to the nature of the sources. The Hebrews were not a literate people in their early history and both archaeologically and anthropologically they resembled their Canaanite neighbors in many ways.   For the history of the Hebrews before the establishment of the Kingdom of Israel, the first five books of the Old Testament, known as the Pentateuch, are often used in concert with archaeological and Egyptian sources. Biblical scholars who view the historical events of the Old Testament as more or less accurate are often referred to as “maximalists,” while those who view the books more allegorically are “minimalists.”   Many biblical scholars begin the history of the Israelites in Egypt, which is partially recounted in the Old Testament book of Exodus. According to Genesis 12:10-19, Abraham traveled to Egypt. Some modern Egyptologists and biblical scholars believe this took place around 2116 BCE, or during Egypt’s 10th dynasty. Abraham then left Egypt but a remnant of the Hebrews who originally followed him may have remained. It was then Joseph the son of Jacob’s journey into Egypt that changed the Hebrews’ relationship with the Egyptians.   Colossal statue of Ramesses II from Memphis, Egypt, c. 1279-1213 BCE. Source: Copyright Jared Krebsbach.   According to Genesis 41:29-36, Joseph was imprisoned for two years until he interpreted the pharaoh’s dream. Following this revelation, Joseph was appointed as the pharaoh’s vizier (Genesis 41:45-46), and a great number of Hebrews migrated into Egypt, called the “land of Rameses” (Genesis 47:11). Later the Hebrews were said to dwell in a part of Egypt known as “Goshen” (Genesis 47:27). None of these accounts are corroborated directly by Egyptian evidence, but there are several pieces of supporting circumstantial evidence.   Egyptian Evidence for Hebrews in Egypt Temple of Ramesses II at Abu Simbel, Egypt, c. 1279-1213 BCE. Source: Copyright Jared Krebsbach.   The Egyptian sources never mention the Hebrews or the Israelites by name during the period of the Hebrews’ sojourn in Egypt from about 2116 BCE to the middle 13th century BCE. The Egyptians referred to Canaanites and people from the Levant as Asiatics—A’am in ancient Egyptian—or by the specific location where they originated in the Levant.   The number of Asiatics in Egypt was considerable during the Middle Kingdom (c. 2055-1650 BCE), when the Egyptians expanded their influence into the Levant. Asiatics/Canaanites came flowing into Egypt, especially the Delta, as prisoners of war, slaves, and merchants. There were certainly Hebrews among them. As the population of Asiatics grew, they also gained influence.   The idea that the Hebrew Joseph could have become so influential in the Egyptian court is not without precedent. During the early New Kingdom (c. 1550-1279 BCE), a number of Canaanites are documented in Egyptian sources as having risen in the Egyptian political hierarchy. A man of Canaanite descent named Ben-ozen was the chief royal herald and chief of the department of alimentation and beverages under Ramesses II (ruled c. 1279-1213 BCE). Perhaps the most important Asiatic/Canaanite in ancient Egypt was a man named Bay, who in the late 19th dynasty (13th/12th centuries BCE) rose to the position of chancellor.   Historicity of the Biblical Exodus Canaanite scarab with a roaring lion from Canaan, Levant, c. 1600-1500 BCE. Source: Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.   Egyptian sources indicate that many of the events involving the Hebrews related in the early sections of the Old Testament were possible, if not likely. A further examination of the book of Exodus can help pinpoint when many of those events might have taken place. Exodus 1:11 states that the Hebrews “built for Pharaoh treasure cities, Pithom and Raamses.” Once again, the Egyptian sources can at least partially corroborate this passage and identify these two locations.   The pharaohs of the Ramesside era—the 19th and 20th dynasties (c. 1295-1069 BCE)—routinely settled large foreign populations in the Delta. For example, Ramesses II settled large numbers of the Sea Peoples known as the Shardana/Sherden, who were then used as mercenaries in the Egyptian army. Some modern scholars argue that the biblical Raamses was the city of Per-Ramesses Aa-nekhet, while Pithom was Per-Atum. Both cities were located in the Delta and built during the reign of Ramesses II. Unfortunately, most of the archaeology in the Delta has been lost due to a combination of the high water table and the modern reuse of temple bricks.   Conquest of Canaan  A sphinx statue from the Middle Kingdom and later repurposed by Ramesses II and Merenptah, c. 1275-1203 BCE. Source: Louvre Museum, Paris.   The manner in which the Israelites left Egypt is open to speculation, though some scholars believe it could have more or less followed the book of Exodus. According to Numbers 32:13, the Israelites wandered in the southern Levant for forty years before settling in their home. Some scholars argue that the Israelites’ conquest of Canaan began around 1456 BCE. This would have taken place during the reign of Thutmose III (ruled c. 1479-1425 BCE) or Amenhotep II (reigned c. 1427-1400 BCE) during the 18th dynasty of the New Kingdom.   On the other hand, others argue that the mention of Ramesses in Exodus, and the extensive building activity, fits more closely with Ramesses II. Either way, the first mention of Israel in a non-biblical source is a historical stela from the reign of the Egyptian king Merenptah (ruled c. 1213-1203 BCE). The text recounts a number of lands and people in the Levant that Merenptah defeated, including this important reference: “Israel is desolated, his seed is not.”   Kingdoms of Israel and Judah Victory Stela with Aramaic inscription “House of David” from Dan, Israel, c. 9th century BCE. Source: Israel Museum, Jerusalem.   Merenptah may have temporarily defeated the Israelites, but about 200 years after that event the Israelites had transitioned from a tribal society to a kingdom. For the early history of Israel as a state, modern scholars primarily refer to the historical books of Samuel. According to these books, Saul (ruled c. 1042-1010 BCE) was the first king of Israel (1 Samuel 8:10).   The book also relates how the Israelites were under the rule of the coastal dwelling people known as the Philistines, who took the Israelites’ iron weapons (I Samuel 13:17-19). The low point for the Israelites during this period was their defeat by the Philistines at the Battle of Aphek, which modern scholars date to 1060/1050 BCE.   The role of the Philistines in the early history of the Kingdom of Israel is another important historical point. Most modern historians and archaeologists now believe that the Philistines arrived in the Levant during the Bronze Age collapse of c. 1200 BCE. It appears that the Peleset who attacked Egypt in the early 12th century BCE went to the southern Levant afterwards and became the biblical Philistines. The Peleset originated in the Aegean Sea and after landing in the Levant they adopted Canaanite archaeological attributes, developing a hybrid culture in the process.   Wine jug from the Philistine/Peleset City of Azor, Israel, c. 11th-12th centuries BCE. Source: Israel Museum, Jerusalem.   After Saul’s rule, Israel’s two greatest kings came to the throne – King David (c. 1010-970 BCE), and his son Solomon (970-931 BCE). According to 2 Samuel 21:15-22, David decisively defeated the Philistines, paving the way for an era of peace, wealth, and stability.   Solomon inherited his father’s alliance with King Hiram I (c. 980-947 BCE) of the Phoenician city-state of Tyre, using the kingdom’s wealth to build the Great Temple (1 Kings 1-11; 2 Chronicles 1-9). The rule of Solomon would prove to be Israel’s apex because, after that, internal divisions and stronger neighbors proved the undoing of the kingdom.   Silver plate depicting the battle of David and Goliath, Byzantine, 629-630 CE. Source: Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.   Division of the Kingdom Moabite Stone/Mesha Stele from Bhiban, Levant, c. 9th century BCE. Source: British Museum, London.   After Solomon died, Israel devolved into petty squabbling and quickly divided into two dynasties. Feeling burdened by heavy taxes, the tribes of Judah and Benjamin formed the Kingdom of Judah in the south. Judah’s first king was Rehoboam (ruled c. 931-915 BCE), while the rule of Israel passed to Jeroboam I (reigned c. 931-911 BCE). Jerusalem became the capital city of Judah, and in the north King Omri (ruled c. 882-871 BCE) built the city of Samaria as Israel’s capital.   The division of Israel came at a bad time. A revived Egypt under the Libyan-descended Pharaoh Shoshenq I (ruled c. 945-924 BCE) was attempting to retake territories in the Levant that Egypt had lost after the collapse of the New Kingdom. Shoshenq took advantage of the division by supporting Jeroboam, which eventually led to an Egyptian military campaign in Judah and Israel. This happened in the 5th year of Jeroboam I’s rule.   The campaign is recounted in 1 Kings 14:25-26 and 2 Chronicles 12:2-5, where Shoshenq I is called Shishak. The campaign is corroborated by a collection of texts and pictorial relief from the Egyptian temple of Karnak that are today known as the Bubastite Portal. The text lists the more than sixty towns Shoshenq plundered, with those of Israel listed first, followed by Judah.   Granite capital featuring the head of the Egyptian goddess Hathor from Bubastis, Egypt, c. 874-712 BCE. Source: Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.   It is believed that the main thrust of the Egyptian invasion went into Judah, with a smaller strike force hitting different locations in Israel. In addition to the list of the cities the Egyptians raided, the Bubastite Portal notes how the Israelites suffered serious casualties during the campaign.   “I made the southerners come in obeisance to thee, and the Northerners to the greatness of thy fame. Thou hast made a great slaughter among them without number, falling in their valleys, being multitudes, annihilated and perishing afterward, like those who have never been before.”   Shoshenq I’s campaign proved to be more of a raid, as the Egyptians did not occupy either kingdom. However, the damage they did to the kingdoms was likely quite significant and made the Israelites unable to oppose later, stronger enemies. The Moabite Stone/Mesha Stele is a Canaanite inscription that relates how King Mesha of Moab defeated the House of Omri around 840 BCE. It would be just another defeat in a long line the Israelites would suffer.   The Assyrian and Babylonian Captivities Cylinder inscription of Sargon II from Khorsabad, Iraq, c. 721-705 BCE. Source: British Museum, London.   Within a few decades of Shoshenq’s campaign against Israel, the northern kingdom was still weak and became a vassal of the Assyrian Empire by the mid-19th century BCE. Judah would hold out until the late eighth century, but during that time the kings of Israel attempted to reassert their independence. According to 2 Kings 18:9-10, the Assyrian King Shalmaneser V (726-722 BCE) besieged Samaria while Hoshea (732-722 BCE) was the king of Israel. The Assyrian sources corroborate this, although Sargon II (721-705 BCE) was the king. The discrepancy is probably the result of Sargon seizing the throne from his brother Shalmaneser in a palace coup during the siege. He then ended the siege during his rule in 722 BCE.   “From the year of my accession to the fifteenth year of my reign, I brought about the defeat of Humbanigash, the Elamite, in the plain of Der. I besieged and captured Samaria, carrying off 27,290 of the people who dwelt therein.”   The Assyrian and Babylonian practice of forcibly resettling rebellious populations became standard policy during the rule of the Assyrian King Ashurbanipal (884-859 BCE). Therefore, the end of the Kingdom of Israel and the dispersal of its people is corroborated by historical texts as well as circumstantial evidence.   Relief from the palace of Nimrud depicting the Assyrians using a siege engine and ladders to take a city, Iraq, c. 730-727 BCE. Source: British Museum, London.   The kings of Judah avoided the wrath of the Assyrians by following a more diplomatic path, and after the Assyrian Empire collapsed they probably thought they were safe. But the Assyrian Empire was replaced by the Neo-Babylonian Empire as the rulers of the Near East. The last three kings of Judah decided to test their Babylonian overlords, which is related in 2 Kings 24. According to 2 Kings, Jehoiakim (609-598 BCE), Jehoiachin (598-597 BCE), and Zedekiah (597-586 BCE) all rebelled against Babylon.   The Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar II (604-562 BCE) ordered a siege of Jerusalem in 597 BCE and for all of its valuables, including the royal family, to be brought to Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar then placed Jehoiachin’s uncle, Zedekiah, on the throne but he too rebelled (2 Kings 24:20). Finally, in 587 BCE, the Babylonians took Zedekiah away in chains to Babylon and tore down the walls of Jerusalem (2 Kings 25:10). A good portion of Judah’s population was taken into captivity and its royal dynasty ended. A cuneiform tablet from Babylon corroborates Nebuchadnezzar’s siege and destruction of Judah.   “Year seven, month Kisumu: The king of Akkad moved his army into Hatti land, laid siege to the city of Judah and the king took the city on the second day of the month Addaru. He appointed in it a (new) king of his liking, took heavy booty from it and brought it into Babylon.”   This marked the end of Israel’s era as an independent kingdom and its political influence in the Near East. With that said, Israel continued to influence ancient religion, giving birth to the three major Abrahamic religions of today.

  George Washington spent most of his life in a military uniform. As a young adult, Washington served as an officer in the Virginia militia loyal to the British Crown. But two decades later, he commanded an army determined to defeat Britain and secure American independence. Throughout his military service, Washington exposed himself to the same dangers on the battlefield as the soldiers he led. His bold choices in combat inspired his troops but worried supporters. Losing Washington was not an option for the revolutionaries if they were to win independence.   George Washington Goes to War George Washington in Virginia Militia Uniform, 1772 by Charles Wilson Peale. Source: Wikimedia Commons.   George Washington’s first experience in battle came in the conflict known to British colonists as the French and Indian War and in Europe as the Seven Years’ War. In fact, a young Washington played a central role in the outbreak of the war,  which also marked the first instance where he nearly lost his life in battle. In May 1754, as a 22-year-old Major, George Washington led a party of Virginia militia and Iroquois warriors against the French in the Ohio Valley. Although he achieved a quick victory, historian Fred Anderson notes that Washington was unprepared to be involved in the growing three-way struggle between Britain, France, and Native American communities for North America.   In July 1754, a French force joined by Canadian and Native American allies attacked Washington’s Virginia militia at Fort Necessity. The French wanted revenge for the May 1754 skirmish. Washington did not know it, but his name and actions would circulate in Europe as one of the causes of a new conflict between Britain and France for control of North America. A year later, Washington distinguished himself in the otherwise disastrous defeat of British forces led by General Edward Braddock at the Battle of the Monongahela in July 1755. Despite having multiple horses shot and musket ball holes in his clothing, Washington survived and led the retreat. Washington’s quick thinking saved most troops, but unfortunately, not Braddock.   The next time Washington fought in a major battle, it was against the British.   The Plot Against George Washington   Portrait of John Jay by Gilbert Stuart, 1794. Source: The National Gallery of Art   Washington arrived outside Boston in early July 1775 to take command of a motley army resisting British troops. The American rebels Washington commanded would be called the Continental Army. This undisciplined and poorly equipped force drove the British out of Boston in March 1776—but that was beginner’s luck. The British returned in the summer of 1776 with a massive force of roughly 30,000 troops to seize the important city of New York.   As Washington prepared his troops to defend New York, he also had to contend with a plot against his life. The week before Congress signed the Declaration of Independence, a crowd of 20,000 witnessed an American soldier’s execution for his role in a plot to assassinate Washington, foiled by future Chief Justice John Jay. Jay uncovered the designs on Washington’s life after the arrest of several prominent Loyalists in New York City. The central figure executed that day had been a member of Washington’s personal guard. Washington also faced conspiracies from fellow officers to remove him from command. While they may not have wanted to assassinate Washington, some ambitious officers had eyes on his job and were willing to challenge their commander’s authority.   Battle for New York  Battle of Long Island by Domenick D’Andrea, 2004. Source: Wikimedia Commons   The failed plot soon proved the least of Washington’s worries. American troops were little match for British forces in several battles around New York City later that summer. During the September 1776 British invasion of Manhattan at Kips Bay, Washington’s frustration with his army’s performance reached a boiling point. Retreating American soldiers scampered past Washington and other senior officers. Washington refused to withdraw, even as British troops marched closer. Instead, he attempted to rally his troops. Other commanders worried for Washington’s safety.   American General Nathanael Greene, who was on the battlefield that day, recalled his experience: “[Washington] was so vexed at the infamous conduct of the troops that he sought death rather than life.” Fortunately, one witness says an aide led Washington away before the British could attack.   Later in the campaign, British troops barely missed capturing Washington at his New York City headquarters. Clearly, Washington had been fortunate to escape New York with his life and the remnants of his army.   Ten Crucial Days The painting The Capture of the Hessians at Trenton, December 26, 1776, by John Trumbull, 1786-1828. Source: Yale University Art Gallery   Barely five months after the July 1776 Declaration of Independence, the American cause was on the verge of collapse. Indeed, as the year 1776 ended, Washington had barely any troops left to continue the fight against the British. Worse, much of Washington’s remaining force had expiring enlistment contracts, and there were few new recruits in the aftermath of so many defeats.   Washington wanted one last chance to defeat the British rather than surrender. On December 25, 1776, Washington led his army of 6,000 across the icy Delaware River to attack an unsuspecting Hessian garrison at Trenton, New Jersey. Washington’s troops routed the Hessians, who were still groggy from their Christmas celebration. Historian Alan Taylor explains it was Washington’s first major victory, and it saved the American cause.   American momentum continued to grow following the victory at Trenton. On January 2-3, 1777, Washington’s troops resisted British forces at Trenton and Princeton, with Washington once again leading his troops from the front at Princeton. Washington’s bold actions inspired his troops and created a new spike in volunteers joining the army. Historians refer to this period in late December and early January 1776-1777 as the “Ten Crucial Days.” In other words, it is difficult to imagine the American Revolution succeeding without Washington’s actions.   Ferguson’s Chance at Brandywine  Miniature of Captain Patrick Ferguson, 1774–77. Source: Wikimedia Commons   British forces in New York City spent the early months of 1777 recovering from the shock of Washington’s victories at Trenton and Princeton. British commander Sir William Howe decided to seize the American capital city of Philadelphia. In response, Washington took his army to defend Philadelphia from Howe’s invasion. The two armies clashed at the Battle of Brandywine on September 11, 1777.   Captain Patrick Ferguson was among the British officers involved in the opening phase of the Battle of Brandywine. Ferguson’s troops carried an experimental breech-loading rifle he invented. The rifle could fire at least two to three more shots per minute than the ordinary firearm of the time. Ferguson and his experimental weapon had an opportunity to change history.   At one point, Ferguson had an enemy officer “of remarkable distinction” in his sights. But as he prepared to fire, Ferguson changed his mind. He wrote, “It was not pleasant to fire at the back of an unoffending individual who was acquitting himself coolly of his duty, and so I let him alone.” While never confirmed, historian Thomas McGuire points out that many sources believe the officer was George Washington. Moments later, Ferguson was wounded. He recovered to command Loyalists in South Carolina, where he was killed at the Battle of King’s Mountain in 1780.   While the Americans lost the battle and Philadelphia, the coming months saw positive changes in the army’s quality. Brandywine showed this was not the same army that ran from the British in New York City.   Road to Independence  Panoramic View of the Siege of Yorktown by Jean-Antoine-Siméon Fort, October 6 to 19, 1781. Source: Wikimedia Commons   The American Continental Army had transformed from an inexperienced and untrained force into a professional military. While the soldiers may have changed, Washington remained fearless under fire. For instance, Washington rallied retreating troops at Monmouth Courthouse, New Jersey, in June 1778. After Monmouth, major fighting between different armies took place in the southern colonies, but despite various difficulties, Washington deployed his character and skillset to keep his army together.   For instance, Washington navigated multiple mutinies within the army. Soldiers and officers alike grew frustrated with Congress over many issues, including a lack of consistent pay. Their dissatisfaction continued even after the decisive victory over the British at Yorktown, Virginia, in October 1781. Despite these pressures, Washington diplomatically kept the peace within the army until the war’s end in 1783.   Tempting Fate or Making History? George Washington (The Constable-Hamilton Portrait), by Gilbert Stuart, 1797. Source: Crystal Bridges Museum of American Art, Bentonville, Arkansas   Washington’s behavior on the battlefield made subordinates and supporters fearful for his safety. Washington generally attributed his escapes to “providence”—he believed there was more than luck involved in explaining these near misses. On the other hand, Washington had no luck pursuing his dual passions of land surveying and farming at Mount Vernon. Instead, he was elected the nation’s first president.   From the attempt on his life in June 1776 to his aggressive actions on many battlefields, George Washington endured many risks during the American Revolution. The course of the war and the country’s history could have been changed had one of those dangerous situations proved fatal.   Were his near misses on his mind as he was sworn in as president on April 30, 1789?  Perhaps, as evidence shows, he was certainly considering them as he fought during the Revolution. In July 1776, as his armies prepared to fight the British and Congress formally declared independence, Washington wrote to a friend and fellow veteran of the French and Indian War, “I did not let the Anniversary of the 3rd or 9th…pas[s] of[f] without a grateful remembrance of the escape we had at the Meadows and on the Banks of the Monongahela.” Had they known, a great many Americans would have shared Washington’s gratitude.

  Places of exceptional historical significance never go unnoticed in the United States. For example, these are designated as National or State Historic Landmarks by the National Park Service or the Office of Historic Preservation in each state. Today, there are thousands of such sites across the country, and California is home to some of America’s most remarkable historic landmarks. We’ve handpicked 10 of the Golden State’s most iconic historic landmarks that we believe should make it onto your bucket list at least once in your lifetime due to their significant role in military defense, architectural innovations, civil rights movements, arts, and other events that shaped both the state and the nation.   1. Alcatraz Island, San Francisco Alcatraz Island, San Francisco, California. Source: Flickr   During its prime, this was considered America’s most secure prison. After all, “The Rock,” as it’s known, was a notorious facility that served as a military prison before transforming in 1934 into a maximum-security penitentiary when there was a national crackdown on crime. Alcatraz Island is perched on an isolated island in San Francisco Bay, and back in time, it housed some of the United States’ most dangerous criminals. Thanks to its remote location and very strong security measures, Alcatraz became synonymous with escape-proof incarceration.   Some of the infamous criminals that it housed include Al Capone and George “Machine Gun” Kelly. After the island was closed in 1963, it turned into a symbol of civil rights. This was when Native American activists occupied it for 19 months, starting in 1969. At present, Alcatraz Island is part of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area. It’s also a popular tourist destination that you can reach by ferry from Pier 33 near Fisherman’s Wharf in San Francisco.   2. Hearst Castle, San Simeon Neptune Pool at Hearst Castle in San Simeon, California. Source: Wikimedia Commons   Construction of this San Simeon castle, known as “La Cuesta Encantada” or “The Enchanted Hill,” began in 1919. It was actually the vision of newspaper tycoon William Randolph Hearst and was designed by the pioneering architect Julia Morgan. The Hearst Castle, which blends Mediterranean, Gothic, and Renaissance styles, took over 20 years to construct. It ended up with 165 rooms, of which 38 bedrooms, 41 bathrooms, one theater, and both indoor and outdoor pools.   Throughout its heyday, Hearst Castle became a glamorous retreat for the rich and famous, where Hollywood stars, artists, and political figures gathered for lavish parties. Guests like Charlie Chaplin and Winston Churchill were entertained with luxurious surroundings adorned with Hearst’s extensive art collection, which included pieces from Ancient Greece, Gothic Europe, and the Renaissance.   Nowadays, the castle, perched high above the Pacific Ocean, operates as a museum and state historical monument. It draws around 750,000 visitors every single year.   3. Golden Gate Bridge, San Francisco Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco, California. Source: Wikimedia Commons   Completed in 1937, this bridge is not only considered one of the most impressive landmarks in California or even the United States, but also the world. It’s the centerpiece of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area which is famous for a history that spans from Native American heritage to the eras of Spanish colonization, the Mexican Republic, and the California Gold Rush. All of these significant historical periods contributed to the growth of San Francisco as a major urban center.   The Golden Gate Bridge spans an impressive 1.7 miles across the Golden Gate Strait, and it connects San Francisco to Marin County. The suspension bridge’s distinctive “International Orange” color was chosen for visibility in the Bay Area’s frequent fog. Construction of this engineering marvel took over four years despite a handful of environmental and financial challenges. It’s also worth noting that the Art Deco towers of the Golden Gate Bridge soar 746 feet into the air.   You will enjoy walking or biking across the bridge while taking in panoramic views of the San Francisco skyline and the Pacific Ocean. Another interesting thing would be to see the historical exhibits offered by the Golden Gate Bridge Welcome Center.   4. Mission San Diego de Alcalá, San Diego Mission San Diego de Alcalá in San Diego, California. Source: Wikimedia Commons   Mission San Diego de Alcalá was chosen as the “mother” of all California missions before the Sacred Expedition reached the California coast in 1769. The strategic location, close to both the harbor and Mexico, made it an ideal base for the Franciscan missionaries. The first site of the mission, near the Presidio, was dedicated by Father Junípero Serra on July 16, 1769. This marked the beginning of the storied history of Mission San Diego de Alcalá.   The native Kumeyaay people learned about Christianity through the mission, which also served as a center for agricultural and cultural development. The many challenges, such as local uprisings and natural disasters, didn’t stop the mission, which was restored to its historical grandeur. Today, Mission San Diego de Alcalá remains an active parish, and it’s a designated minor basilica.   You can visit just for the beautiful adobe architecture, marvel at the charming gardens, and hit the iconic museum where you can find artifacts from the early days of the mission. The bell tower is also worth seeing. It contains several historic bells, with one dating back to the year 1802.   5. Cabrillo National Monument, San Diego Cabrillo National Monument in San Diego, California. Source: Wikimedia Commons   Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo was the first European to set foot on the West Coast of what is now the United States, and the Cabrillo National Monument in San Diego commemorates the 1542 landing of this man.   The historic site was established in 1913, and it offers stunning views of San Diego Bay, the Pacific Ocean, and seasonal whale migrations. The journey of Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo marked the start of European exploration in California. His legacy is honored with a statue and visitor exhibits.   When visiting this historic landmark in San Diego, you’ll have the chance to explore the historical exhibits of the monument, hike scenic trails, or discover the rich marine life in the tidepools. These are best viewed during the winter’s low tides. The Old Point Loma Lighthouse is another highlight of the area, and it provides you with a glimpse into 19th-century coastal life. You can easily access Cabrillo National Monument by car or public transport from downtown San Diego.   6. Manzanar National Historic Site, Independence The Manzanar Cemetery at Manzanar National Historic Site in Independence, California. Source: Wikimedia Commons   This stark wooden guard tower is a reminder of one of America’s darkest moments in history. It marks the entrance to the Manzanar War Relocation Center, found about five miles south of Independence. Not much remains of the original site where over 10,000 Japanese Americans were forcibly held during World War II. However, it remains a strong symbol of civil liberties lost. The last remaining structure of this historic site is the former high school auditorium. The latter serves today as an interpretive center that offers a poignant look into the lives of those incarcerated there.   The Manzanar National Historic Site was established in 1992, and it preserves what remains one of ten war relocation centers used to house Japanese American citizens and residents during the war. Nowadays, you can explore the reconstructed barracks, mess halls, and other facilities. This will allow you to gain insight into the harsh living conditions the internees endured from 1942 to 1945.   We also encourage you to begin the tour at the Visitor Center, where you can view exhibits and a 22-minute documentary, Remembering Manzanar. You can also try the self-guided driving tour, where you can explore additional areas of the 540-acre site, such as the camp cemetery and Japanese gardens.   7. The Presidio of San Francisco, San Francisco San Francisco National Cemetery in the Presidio of San Francisco, California. Source: Wikimedia Commons   Spanning 1,491 acres, this vibrant national park is nestled within San Francisco. It was founded in 1776 as a military outpost and has seen Spanish, Mexican, and American control over the years. In 1846, the Presidio became a US Army base and played a key role in various conflicts, such as the Spanish-American War and World War II. It wasn’t until 1994 that the site was transitioned to a public park after 148 years of military use. It has since become a part of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area.   When visiting the Presidio, make sure to explore the historic military structures housed there, including the Officers’ Club and the San Francisco National Cemetery. You can also enjoy the various scenic trails, picnic spots, and panoramic views of the Golden Gate Bridge. The park is open year-round, and entrance is free of charge.   8. Old Mission Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara Mission Santa Barbara chapel, Santa Barbara, California. Source: Wikimedia Commons   If you want to learn about California’s colonial past, then the “Queen of the Missions,” as Old Mission Santa Barbara is known, should be your next destination. Founded in 1786, this was Spain’s tenth mission, aimed at converting the indigenous people to Christianity.   Over the years, the Old Mission Santa Barbara saw several important historical events, such as the Chumash revolt of 1824. However, the mission continued to flourish despite all of these challenges. It remains, up to this day, a symbol of resilience and faith.   The 15-acre grounds that are all worth exploring include the Sacred Garden, Mission Church, Historic Cemetery, and La Huerta Garden. You’ll enjoy the neoclassical architecture, including the twin bell towers. These were added in the early 1800s. There’s also a museum on-site where you can see artifacts detailing the Old Mission Santa Barbara’s history and cultural impact.   You can easily reach the mission by car or foot as it’s located just four blocks from State Street. You can also use public transportation for that end.   9. The Huntington Library, Art Museum, and Botanical Gardens, San Marino L’Amour Captif de la Jeunesse statue at the Rose Garden in the Huntington Botanical Gardens, San Marino, California: Source: Wikimedia Commons   Spread across 120 acres, this charming site in San Marino, California, features more than 15,000 plant species, which makes an otherworldly escape just minutes from city life. This iconic cultural, educational, and research institution was established in 1919 by Henry E. Huntington, a railroad magnate. When visiting this landmark place, you’ll find rare books, artworks, and beautifully curated gardens. At the art museum, there’s European and American art, with iconic pieces such as Gainsborough’s The Blue Boy.   As for the library, it contains rare manuscripts. One of the 49 surviving Gutenberg Bibles is an example. You’ll have the opportunity to explore the 207-acre estate, including themed gardens like the Japanese and Chinese gardens, the Desert Garden, and the Rose Garden. If you’re a nature lover, then these botanical gardens, featuring over 16 distinct areas, will be your favorite.   10. Fort Point, San Francisco Fort Point, San Francisco, California. Source: Wikimedia Commons   This fascinating Civil War-era fort is located just beneath the south side of the Golden Gate Bridge. It was built between 1853 and 1861 and was designed to protect the San Francisco Bay from potential naval attacks. However, it’s interesting to know that the fort never saw active combat. Still, it stands today as an example of military architecture, praised for its fine masonry and strategic position.   On top of protecting the bay during wartime, Fort Point served several other purposes. One of these is being used for barracks and training during World War II. Today, you can visit the fort from Friday to Sunday between 10 AM and 5 PM. And it’s absolutely free to visit! You’ll have some quality time exploring the exhibits of the fort and walking through its historic corridors. Don’t forget to check out the rooftop; it offers some of the most mesmerizing views of the Golden Gate Bridge.

  Historian Roderick Beaton points out that many historians describe the first few decades on either side of the year 1800 as the “Age of Revolution.” One of the Age of Revolution’s more unexpected chapters occurred in 1830-1831 with the Belgian Revolution. In 1830, France’s Foreign Minister Charles Maurice de Talleyrand claimed, “There are no Belgians, there never have been, and there never will be: there are Frenchmen, Flemings or Dutchmen (which is the same thing) and Germans.” Yet, to Talleyrand’s surprise, thousands of people mobilized that very year to fight for the recognition of an independent Belgium distinct from the Netherlands and France.   Background: Belgium in the Age of the French Revolution Portrait of Holy Roman Emperor Joseph II by Carl von Sales, 1823. Source: Wikimedia Commons   Belgium was known as the Southern or Austrian Netherlands at the end of the eighteenth century. It thus formed part of the Holy Roman Empire, ruled by the Habsburgs in Vienna. Many communities in the Austrian Netherlands prospered during the reigns of Empress Maria Theresa and her son, Joseph II, in the second half of the eighteenth century.   Moreover, some areas of present-day Belgium, like the city of Liège, were separate entities within the Holy Roman Empire. In other words, there was hardly a Belgian state as we might recognize today at the end of the eighteenth century. However, this began to change once the French Revolution gripped neighboring France in 1789.   Inspired by the French Revolution, Belgian activists began to push for a republican government in a united Belgium. In Liège, rebels drove the ruling prince-bishop from power and proclaimed a republic.   Neighboring Brabant in the Austrian Netherlands rebelled against Emperor Joseph II’s centralizing policies. A rebel army defeated the Austrians at Turnhout in October 1789. As the Austrians retreated, rebels proclaimed a new state called the United Belgian States (January-December 1790).   However, academic Samuel Humes explains that the United Belgian States fractured between conservative and liberal factions. Moreover, the Austrians returned in force and soon reconquered the region. Nevertheless, Austrian rule proved short-lived.   For instance, between 1792 and 1794, present-day Belgium seesawed between Austrian and French control. However, revolutionary France gained control of Belgium after defeating the Austrians at Fleurus in June 1794.   French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Belgium Portrait of Napoleon Bonaparte as First Consul of France by Jean Auguste Dominique Ingres, 1803-1804. Source: Wikimedia Commons   Belgium experienced sweeping social, political, and economic changes like many places conquered by revolutionary or Napoleonic France. Historian Michael Rapport notes that France annexed Belgium in October 1795.   Napoleon presided over sweeping changes in Belgian society. For instance, historian Alexander Grab explains that the legal codes implemented under Napoleon became the basis for subsequent Belgian legal systems. The French also supported the region’s industrialization.   However, French rule was far from entirely welcomed by the population. For example, many resented the harsh demands of forced military service in Napoleon’s seemingly endless wars.   From Vienna to Waterloo  Wellington at Waterloo, 18 June 1815 by Robert Alexander Hillingford, c. 1901. Source: Wikimedia Commons   Members of the victorious Sixth Coalition against Napoleon (including Austria, Britain, Prussia, and Russia) convened in Vienna in 1814 to plan Europe’s future without Napoleonic France. They even permitted a French delegation representing the recently restored Bourbon monarchy to join negotiations at the Congress of Vienna.   The diplomats and rulers gathered at Vienna shared a primary goal: ensuring no country would dominate Europe as Napoleon’s France had in previous years. In other words, they hoped to restore the balance of power.   One way to do this was to create substantial buffer states between France and its former rivals like Austria and Prussia. The Netherlands proved to be one of the beneficiaries of the desire to establish stronger buffer states on France’s borders.   Indeed, the Netherlands received present-day Belgium and became the United Kingdom of the Netherlands in 1815.   However, Napoleon’s dramatic escape from exile on the Mediterranean island of Elba and return to power in France in March 1815 (the Hundred Days) rattled the diplomats and rulers present at the Congress of Vienna. Soon, a seventh coalition headed by Britain formed to defeat Napoleon.   A British and Allied army, including significant numbers of Dutch and Belgian troops, joined by a Prussian army, defeated Napoleon near Brussels at Waterloo in June 1815.   The United Kingdom of the Netherlands  Portrait of William I, King of the United Kingdom of the Netherlands by Joseph Paelinck, 1819. Source: Wikimedia Commons   King William or Willem I of the United Kingdom of the Netherlands had reason to be optimistic in the kingdom’s early years. For example, the region had begun to industrialize, and several cities like Verviers and Antwerp prospered during the Napoleonic Wars.   However, developments from the Napoleonic era also challenged the kingdom’s survival. William’s linguistic policies, for instance, angered many in the Flemish provinces in the south. The Dutch king wanted to make Dutch the official language of the traditionally Dutch-speaking Flemish provinces of the former Austrian Netherlands.   While this might appear like a non-issue, local elites took offense at King William’s proposed linguistic policy. The reason is that under Napoleonic French rule, many Flemish elites spoke French as their first language and now resisted the possibility of official linguistic changes imposed from the royal palace.   Moreover, King William was a Protestant Calvinist as were many of his subjects in the northern half of the kingdom. However, the population of the southern half, whether Dutch or French-speaking, was united by a shared Catholic faith.   King William and his court did little to earn the sympathy of those living in the southern provinces. Indeed, the Dutch went as far as to renege on the promise to appoint an equal number of senior administrative officials from the north and south of the kingdom.   By 1828, secular and religious groups from the South advocating for reform presented a united front against King William I’s government. Economic problems would soon combine with these calls for reform to spark a full-scale rebellion.   Revolution  Episode of the September Days 1830 (on the Grand Place of Brussels) by Égide Charles Gustave Wappers, 1835. Source: Wikimedia Commons   Reformers did not have to wait long for dramatic change. Indeed, a poor harvest in 1830 and the outbreak of revolution in Paris that July fanned the flames of revolt in Belgium.   Belgium’s revolution began in earnest following a performance of Daniel Auber’s opera, La Muette de Portici, on August 25, 1830. Riots occurred in Brussels as theatergoers rushed out to join growing mobs of protesters angered by tight restrictions on food supplies and other issues. While the opera had been performed in honor of King William’s birthday, the people of Brussels were not in the mood to celebrate their monarch.   Dutch Crown Prince William attempted to restore order in Brussels by mediating between the rebels and his father. However, the arrival of volunteers from across Belgium and King William’s refusal to negotiate put the young crown prince in a difficult position. By late September 1830, Belgian rebels forced Dutch troops led by King William’s second son, Prince Frederik, to evacuate Brussels.   A provisional government led by Charles Rogier declared Belgian independence from the United Kingdom of the Netherlands on October 4, 1830. In November 1830, elections were held for the first Belgian assembly called the National Congress.   Rulers and diplomats across Europe did not expect a challenge to the post-Napoleonic map of Europe to come from the United Kingdom of the Netherlands. When it did, many, like Austrian Chancellor Clemens von Metternich, expected Europe’s leaders to unite and support King William I’s efforts to reclaim Belgium.   However, to Metternich’s disappointment, this did not happen. European leaders convened in London to discuss matters related to Belgium, and soon, British and French leaders expressed sympathy for an independent Belgian state.   Leopold I, King of the Belgians Portrait of Leopold I by Nicaise de Keyser, 1856. Source: Wikimedia Commons   In February 1831, Belgium’s National Congress ratified a constitution that made the country a constitutional monarchy. Belgian leaders hoped that embracing a constitutional monarchy would satisfy Europe’s conservative anti-revolutionary leaders like Metternich and earn their recognition of an independent Belgium.   Prince Leopold of the German state of Saxe-Coburg became the first King of the Belgians (1831–1865). Leopold proved a suitable candidate as he was closely related to the British royal family and won recognition as an officer in the Imperial Russian army during the Napoleonic Wars.   While many of Europe’s rulers soon recognized an independent Belgium, King William I refused. Instead, the Dutch ruler prepared a military campaign to retake his former southern provinces.   However, the campaign proved as short-lived as its name, the Ten Days’ Campaign, suggests. It did not result in a restored United Kingdom of the Netherlands. Despite a quick victory on the battlefield over Belgian troops, Dutch forces agreed to depart in the face of a French army determined to support Leopold’s new kingdom.   Dutch troops evacuated Antwerp, their last base in Belgium, in 1832. But, King William did not recognize Belgian independence until signing the Treaty of London in April 1839.   Legacy   Liberty Leading the People by Eugène Delacroix, 1830. Source: Wikimedia Commons   Belgium’s 1830 revolt was closely linked to the July 1830 Revolution in France. Both revolutions symbolize the growth of Romanticism in European society in the first decades of the nineteenth century. Put simply, Romantics emphasized emotion and feelings to understand the world.   Art, literature, and music, including performances of operas like La Muette de Portici in Brussels, show us how emotion embodied by Romanticism shaped political movements like the 1830 Belgian Revolution.   Although France’s 1830 revolution is more well-known, Belgium’s role in the revolutionary climate of the 1830s and 1840s in Europe should not be forgotten. Indeed, Belgium’s 1830 rebellion stands out as an example of a successful revolt against the post-Napoleonic conservative order engineered by Metternich.

The left claims the "MAGA" movement is rooted in misogyny, racism and other forms of bigotry, but the truth is almost the exact opposite. At its core, the MAGA movement is about love: love of former President Donald Trump, what he represents, and America. That couldn't have been made any...

Thank heavens for the Biden-Harris administration and its steadfast determination to root out institutional racism wherever it may hide. And it hides in the strangest places, too. For instance, do you know it's institutionally racist to expect a firefighter to know enough to fight fires? I know, I'd been too...

If Dr. Benjamin Spock hadn't been cremated, he'd be rolling over in his grave right now. As many who were reared on the lefty pediatrician's methods, or who perhaps have tried his best-selling book "Baby and Child Care," will know, Spock was one of those who decried the spanking of...

In a case straight out of "1984," a grieving father has been convicted after saying a silent prayer for his dead son in a so-called "safe zone" near an abortion facility. Adam Smith-Connor, 51, went afoul of the United Kingdom's government in November 2022 when he bowed his head in...

October 21, 2024