Copernicus

I was very interesting reading about the findings of Copernicus.  Specifically, reading about how certain heavenly fixtures can be observed in Egypt but not Italy, conversely certain fixtures in the sky were visible in Italy and not in Egypt.  I often wondered about how the conclusion and supporting evidence was used to show that the earth was indeed a sphere and not flat.  It makes it even more remarkable that this view was certainly a minority view at this time.  To think these scientists did not have any expensive gadgets or any technology and they just relied on basic fundamentals to support their claims.  I often wonder if there are scientists today that are completely ostracized from the scientific community but possibly hundreds of years from now they will be looked upon as genius. 

Trial of Galileo

I'm not a biblical scholar of any sort, but its interesting that Galileo was put on trial for heresy.  One of the reasons claimed is because his assertion that the Sun is in the middle of the universe conflicted with the Catholic Church's view of scripture. However, I don't know if I've ever heard a place in the Bible that explains the alignment of the planets and specifically the sun. I wonder of there were basing these accusations on the actual Bible or just because it conflicted with the previous writing of Pope's or other influential members of the Vatican. 

I would think that during this time, if the Pope said something and someone had conflicting information it probably behooved the Catholic Church to silence any opinion that differed from the church. Just my guess, again I'm not a Biblical scholar. Overall, pretty impressive though that Galileo was spot on with his observations.  Unfortunately, he was largely condemned for his views during his time.  I guess though he gets to brag in heaven that he was right and they were wrong.

Week 13 Blog

Sorry about the confusion but my week 13 blog (Charles I) was finished a week earlier, need to scroll down to find it. Thank you.

Wikipedia Article Analysis III

     This article discusses the life and time of Charles I of England. It mentions that Charles I was an advocate of the Divine Right of Kings, which is a belief that asserted that God grants the King absolute power and parliament should hold little power if at all. Consequently, parliament looked at Charles I as a threat and these two completely clashed during his reign. This article does a great job describing his early life and the things that led up to his rise and of course details his rule and the inevitable collapse of Charles I. In addition, it illustrates the economic problems and religious conflicts he had to contend with during his life.

1.  The word length of the article is 7249 words.

2.  The search term is Charles I (England)

3.  The disambiguation link displayed other readings with similar titles and concepts.

4.  The page discussion section explained that the article has numerous discussion postings.  There are approximately 38 various postings on Charles I.

5.  The entire article had a total of 500 changes and the earliest change was October 4 2005, and the most recent change was November 23, 2008.

6.  There are also 29 external links provided that detailed additional information.

7.  There is 47 references and it was listed with a variety of available sources.

8.  There are 19 various books and readings under further reading.

Overall, I would highly recommend looking at this article. Specifically, I felt it did an excellent job detailing important information that help explain why Charles I had made some of his decisions. There is certainly plenty to write about his life.  In essence, it was a man who was at the top at one time and ultimately his life ended in a horrible fashion. I don't believe there area lot of historical figures that experienced life on both spectrums a King and later a prisoner. In addition, this article highlighted multiple links to learn more about his life. Honestly, after the reading it did encourage me to look for further reading on the eventful life of Charles I.

Martin Luther

I know some people will probably disagree but I believe that multiple forms of Christianity and differing ways of worship is a good thing . Luther during his time noticed that many people were being neglected by the Church, and he did something about that and I think it's a good thing. Even today, some people choose to attend Catholic Mass in Latin as opposed to attending a Baptist Church. My point is that people are diverse and because of that Christianity should be diverse as well, and I don't believe one way is the absolute right way but I think its intended by God. Again, we would all walk, talk, and look the same if that's the way it was intended. I certainly think Luther played an integral role to revitalize the Christian faith during his time.

Assignment Correction

On November 16th, I also posted blog for week 13 as well. Sorry about the confusion.

Charles I

I enjoyed the readings on the happenings in England in the 1600's. Admit tingly because a lot of what was going on in England during this time especially with the Puritans eventually affected America. As I read the stories about how religion interfered with Parliament and how religious figures controlled the government, I wondered out loud about our own country. Especially, the idea of separation of the powers between the three branches of government. Were the founding fathers taking a page of England's past during the 1600's? Specifically, the conflicts between Charles I and Parliament. The idea that Charles I would ignore Parliament for over eleven years. Obviously, this system during this time was a contributing factor in England's civil war. Charles sure did lead a adventurous life, after reading his stories definitely made my life feel a little boring. To go from the King of England to being executed, talk about a reversal of fortunes. 

The Bible

One of the parts of the reading that I enjoyed was the background history related to the translation of the Bible. Also, how the Catholic Church did not want people to read and translate the Bible under their own.  The Church felt that that people needed specialists (priests, etc) to correctly translate the verses. Admit tingly, on one hand I found that was an insult to people, however, upon further reading I could see why they were very protective of the Bible. It seems there were many groups out there trying to take advantage and alter the Bible to their own translations. Also, I think its easy to sit back today and judge about the actions of others in previous times. But one thing I thought about is the Catholic Church at this time could not see into the future and possibly fretted about what would happen if the Bible was translated differently to what they were teaching. However, on the other hand were they fretting about souls or lost power in Europe? Definitely, an interesting subject to me.

The Papacy

I definitely learned a lot in this weeks readings about the Pope's during the middle age. Specifically, the tension between different countries in Europe, such as, France, Italy, Germany, England, Portugal etc., and how these tensions framed 

the structure of the catholic church. As I read through the history of the Pope's and the different territories, it reminded me a lot of the Godfather Trilogy. It seemed there were various entities and councils and a lot of different hands involved in choosing the Pope. I was floored when the reading mentioned that at one time there were three Pope's. It also was interesting that how different Kings had a hand and involved themselves to have a Pope that will help serve their own purposes. When I think of our Constitution the founding fathers made sure there was a separation of church and state, this of course was provided to keep the government out of the affairs of the church's as well. Overall, enjoyed the reading and really illustrated governments intervention in religion. 

The Plague - Global Cooling!

Up to this point the readings on the plague have been the most interesting. After the reading though I felt some of my own questions went unanswered.  For instance, I wondered what the main factor was that eventually contained the plague. I understand it is still around today, but I'm curious to know what factors were at play that prevented the plague from eventually wiping out all of Europe. Additionally, I found it interesting because it was mentioned multiple times that the plague flourished because the planet was experiencing a cooling period with very wet conditions that negatively contributed to the spread of the disease. You would think then that maybe global warming has some positive effects after all. I guess I'll take my chances with global warming over global cooling that killed 1/3 of the people. I wonder if people in the middle ages had people running around telling them we are all doomed because of global cooling? And then everyone must be 'black' and everyone must work to warm the planet by burning fires all night. Maybe tax incentives to mine coal? Was their an Italian Al Gore saying, "I told you so!"? Are we going to go too far cooling the planet and then we will be working for the next 100 years trying to warm it again?I apologize for getting a on a soapbox. Its just that the reading made me realize that our generation is spoiled in comparison to other people in history. Overall, this is why I love history it really puts things in perspective. Also, I wonder if the disease traveled and affected the Western Hemisphere as well. If anyone knows any good books on the plague please let me know. 

Wikipedia Article Analysis II

Viking Ships

This article describes the various vessels utilized by the Vikings between (793 - 1066) in Northern Europe.  This article provided some fundamental analysis of the three main ships utilized by the Vikings during this time period, such as, the longship, knar, and the smaller vessels utilized.  In addition, this article at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/viking_ship also discussed about the further evidences of these ships through the preservation of these ships. The article also briefly discussed the infamous "Dragon Ships" that were the mainstay of the Vikings. 

1. The length of the article is 655 words (4 KB)

2. The search term utilized was Viking Ships.

3. The disambiguation link displayed other readings with similar titles and concepts.

4. The page discussion section explained that the article is within the scope of WikiProject Norse history and culture. This article had not yet obtained a rating.

5. The article had a total of 8 changes and the earliest change was Feb 7 2006, and the most recent change was Nov 3 2007.

6. There are also 12 external links provided that detailed additional information.

7. There is just one reference and it was listed as BBC News.

8. Nothing is listed under further reading.

Overall, I would recommend the article to understand and introduce the basic information of Viking Ships. This site does provide a basic overview and provides additional external links to learn even more detailed information on the ships designs and features.  This includes information about preserved ships from the Viking era, including, the Gokstad ship excavation.  

Vikings

It was interesting to learn that how vast the influences of the Vikings were. From Russia as far away as Iceland. Notably, reading about how the Vikings would plunder along the rivers in Europe for thirteen years.  It's pretty unimaginable that anything like that could happen for such a prolonged time. A chronicle from the Scheldt River Valley mentioned how the roads are covered with the dead of priests, women, and babies. Honestly, before reading about the Vikings I had a pretty naive opinion of what I thought I knew. Admit tingly, most my opinions originated from media sources.  After reading about the descriptions of the conquests of the Vikings I was amazed at the scope of the attacks and the effects throughout Europe, and of course the sheer brutality the Vikings imposed. In addition, I found it interesting that Normandy was given the name because of a Viking who converted to Christianity and promised France that they would help defend from other Vikings.

The Papacy

I found it very interesting seeing how different people ran the church during medieval times.  Specifically, it seems that Pope Gregory I was the one that put the papacy in motion and became a true church leader. I think it was interesting how he saw slaves from England in the Roman marketplace and then converted them. In addition, then sent a delegation to England and then converted the King.  Consequently, England became a christian nation. It makes me wonder, how the act of man could have a substantial impact not only on his own time but for the future. 

Also, informative on how the kings and leaders of the church rivaled each other in the world. They were competing for power with the same group of people. It makes me wonder if any of these situations later compelled our own founding fathers to emphasize the separation of church and state. If anything was learned from previous medieval time periods. 

ISLAM

I found the article on the origins of Islam very interesting. Especially interested in the pillars of faith and the additional duties of Islam. I'm curious to know more about the part that one of the duties is to wage war (jihad) against those who persecute the faithful. I don't know if that just means self-defense of Islamic lands or it means that force is justified to convert people to Islam. I believe that most muslims are not for using force in the name of their religion, however, other extremists probably use the Jihad clause to advance their causes. Understandably, I recognize their are extremists in every religion.  However, in explaining the life of Muhammad it seems his movement had advocated violence in Mecca to advance their cause originally. Also, after reading about the reasons why Islam spread so rapidly, I can understand why they controlled such vast expanses. I think taking away the burden of taxation, using a common language (Arabic), and making it very simple for people to convert and understand the religion obviously went a long ways. 

Roman Slavery

After reading about the details of slavery in the Roman Empire it is amazing how the people viewed it as a right.  It's hard to believe that perception still exists today. I think the aspect that was most shocking is how the reading mentioned that if a Roman was murdered then his slaves would be executed as well for not doing enough to stop it. Their welfare was directly tied to their owner - the reading also mentioned suicide would also end the lives of the slaves. I wonder how this perception could even persist. Perhaps through the generations having slaves was normal, I wonder how many if any people questioned the consequences of slavery. Overall, I felt it was a little ironic that the dependence of slavery and the economy that was centered around it was ultimately a contributing aspect to the downfall of Rome. Ultimately, you would think other countries would have learned a lesson from the Romans, however it's evident that many didn't.

Punic War Consequences

One of the things that caught my attention in the readings was how The Punic Wars started almost in a casual way, however, complete destruction eventually occurs at the end. For instance, the First Punic war lasted 20 years and admit tingly both sides 

did not seek a major conflict with each other. This made me wonder that if two sides did not seek conflict they both probably did not imagine there would be a total of three Punic Wars. Also, because the first Punic War did last twenty years, you would certainly think there should have been some meeting of the minds. The readings also mentioned that each side did not know how to withdraw. This amazes me that all this energy was put forth to fight for twenty years, and in that time the two sides could not negotiate a peace, that would have saved many lives. I think other issues surfaced from the length of the first war, including, the effect on the next generation of Carthage.  Specifically, Hannibal who learned from his father hatred of Rome and eventually invades Italy in the Second Punic War, and of course this conflict lasts a significant time. In all, three wars are waged over a long period that ended countless lives. I don't know if all wars can be avoided, but it does beg the question if the Punic wars could have been avoided.

Wikipedia Article Analysis

"Roman Military Engineering"

The Wikipedia article illustrated the importance of engineering and its effect on the successes of the Roman military throughout ancient Rome.  The article broke the subject into fortified camps, bridge building, siege machines, road making, civilian engineering by Roman troops and mining operations. It summarized each subject and then described the situation when these engineering marvels benefited the troops. 

Criteria:

1. The length of the article is 1271 words.

2. The search term was Roman road building project. The Wikipedia title is Roman Military Engineering.

3. The disambiguation link displayed other readings with similar titles and concepts.

4. In the page discussion there was dialogue between two authors. They were discussing why certain topics were not discussed in article.

5. On the history page there were 500 hundred changes to the article.  The first change was November 5, 2006 and the last change was August 31, 2008.

6. There was one external links.

7. There were not any primary or secondary references listed.

8. There were five items listed for further reading.

Overall, I would recommend the article because it gives a constructive overview of the engineering marvels that helped propel the Roman military during ancient times. It was fascinating to see how engineering inventions were able to change the course of a battle or a war. 

Conquering 101 - Roman Style

I thoroughly enjoyed the article that describes the various conflicts the Romans were engaged in and how Rome became a power. The most interesting aspect was how the Romans were unique in their strategies with conquered cities and peoples.  For example, they did not destroy the cities they conquered, instead incorporated the province and sometimes gave them the same rights afforded to Roman citizens.  In some cases, they even granted complete autonomy. I wonder who is credited in Roman history with the strategy of successfully holding onto to conquered land.  It seems until this time, this strategy was not effectively implemented.

Another important element that Rome employed to keep peace in the conquered lands was an efficient road building project. It's very interesting how they built roads in a straight line, so that Roman soldiers can react swiftly if there were any uprisings.  Undoubtedly, this helped maintain peace in the Italian peninsula. I never would have put together that straight roads could help maintain peace. 

Lead by Example - Alexander The Great

I find it very interesting that the success of Philip of Macedonia would eventually be overshadowed by the success of Alexander. Again, Philip would probably be in various mythologies and stories throughout the world on a grand scale. However, Alexander transformed his life to almost a make believe character. 

Alexander had many factors in his favor early on, including, an excellent education with Aristotle and witnessing a father lead by example.

The most prolific aspect of Alexander's life that caught my attention was how in the heat of the moment in battle he would often lead the charge. This is completely different from many famous generals who would lead from the back. No wonder Alexanders men adored and respected the man. We are all mortal and it's amazing that Alexander had the most to lose than anyone on the battle field.  He was wealthy and controlled a vast empire, I think most in his position would be in a palace enjoying life on a grand scale. This was certainly not the case for Alexander. It strikes me that Alexander was definitely an adventurer, he felt he can handle anything along the way and in the meantime wanted to build the empire as big as possible. Obviously the odds of warfare did not concern him, most of his battles he was vastly outnumbered on foreign soil.  However, by his men watching by example, I feel the majority of the army probably felt invincible. 

Duties of Greek Democracy

It seems to me that Greek society revolved around the city-state, and I found it interesting that all the citizens were involved in politics.  They did not have a conventional Bill of Rights as we established in America, because Greek citizens did not have rights, but only duties to the given city-state. Overall, the Greek world was dominated by hundreds of independent city-states.

It is important to note however, that women, slaves, peasants, were not considered citizens in Greek Society.  Therefore, the city-states decisions were made by the males and they were bound together by blood ties.  It is interesting to me that this Greek society would not qualify as a democracy in today's world. It would be very interesting to learn what Greek society expected of women in their society and to learn the major contributions they made to the city-state.