Beginnings of Democracy

Democracy, the cornerstone of American pride, is an institution that depends solely on the participation and pride of it's constituents. Without participation democracy is meaningless and without pride in one's chosen government little can be accomplished. For when the general populace puts their will, their collective wisdom together the impossible becomes possible and the greatness of democracy surpasses all others. Athens is the picture perfect example of such a democracy, indeed the very first to ever be founded in this world and thus there is no better example of a citizen lead government to be had.

The first question that must be asked is why a democracy how a democracy was put into place. What actions and events must have transpired to form a government that was run by the people? The answer lies with the Greek rulers, starting with Solon. After creating the hierarchy that allows for the distinguishing between the classes, Solon's system allowed for easy determination of who was allowed to participate in the political process, simply the ability to afford armor. Thus Solon created a system that forced the citizenry to seek military status in order to gain a political voice.

After Solon's system was in place it would still take adjustments to create a democracy representative of those that we know today. After a time, Cleisthenes would come to power and then the true brilliance of a democratic reformation would begin. Cleisthenes would divide the traditional four tribes of Athens into ten new tribes, intermixing the old family alliances and tribal loyalties as to eliminate the old ruling classes. He increased the Council membership from 400 to 500, and he divided each new tribe up into an area that consisted of one urban/suburban, one coastal, and one inland region. This division of tribes and equal geographic disbursal was meant to ensure that each area would be equal in thought and representation in the Assembly.

After all former ties to family and clan were dissolved, there would be no confusion as to who each citizen was loyal to. Pride developed naturally in each district in their own ways of life and their national democracy. Citizens strove to rise higher in the hierarchy to achieve the right to vote and in doing so made the Athens all the greater. Democracy was born.

Crossing the Alps

In his article, "Over the Alps to Rome's Gates," Daniel A. Fournie wrote about Hannibal's famous march over the Alps, in which he attempted to attack Rome from the north with war elephants in tow. The article pretty well summarizes the hardships of Hannibal and his men, and Fournie details some of the Roman reaction to his endeavor. The article also describes the trouble of transporting the elephants such a great distance over unfamiliar terrain.

GETTING THEIR ELEPHANTS ACROSS the Rhône posed special problems for the Carthaginians. The animals refused to board boats or small rafts for the crossing. Hannibal directed his pioneers to construct a number of large rafts, 25 feet square. These were lashed together in pairs, and eight pairs were attached to the bank, forming a pier 50 feet wide and extending 200 feet into the river. Two additional rafts were attached to this pier and connected with towlines to boats. The rest of the elephants had refused to venture onto boats in the river, so the pier was disguised as dry land, covered with dirt. The elephants were led by two compliant females across the pier and onto the raft. Then the rafts were cut free and towed across the river. The elephants panicked at first but eventually crowded toward the center of the raft and made the crossing safely. The process was repeated a number of times, and though a few of the frightened elephants fell into the water, even they managed to swim across.

Fournie also discussed the issue of where Hannibal and his army crossed the Alps, a debate fought over five possible passes. I find it interesting that given so much study of this event, there is still uncertainty over something as seemingly simple as a path.

Along with the scholars, generals and emperors have advanced their own pet theories. Five Alpine passes have been considered most often. From north to south these are the Little Saint Bernard (elevation 2,188 meters), the Mount Cenis (2,083), the Col du Clapier (2,482), the Mom Genevre (1,850) and the Col de la Traversette (2,914). A recent survey of 24 modern historians yielded the following results: Four chose the Little Saint Bernard, six selected the Mont Cenis, five designated the Col du Clapier and three named the Traversette. Napoleon Bonaparte declared the Mont Cenis as Hannibal's mute. Perhaps only the discovery of archeological remains may someday settle the issue. Until then, each succeeding generation of historians will be free to champion its claim regarding the one true pass.

While knowledge of an exact path may be inconsequential, validation of the actual route may lead to a greater knowledge of this great historical feat.

Great Battles in History: The Battle of Issos

The Battle of Issos was the second major battle between Alexander the Great, King of Macedonia, and The Persian Empire. However, it was the first between Alexander and the Persian King Darius III. The battle took place in November 333 B.C.E., on the narrow coastal plain in modern day southern Turkey.

Alexander crossed into Anatolia in Spring 334 B.C.E., and after defeating local Persian forces at the Granicus River, he conquered Anatolia with relative ease. In 333 B.C.E. Darius III was eager to defeat this upstart and take back Anatolia. Darius III set out with his army numbering anywhere between 100,000 and 600,000 men. This large difference is because many ancient historians exaggerated their number. Anyway it is certain that Alexander was greatly out numbered.

Alexander moved his army into the narrow coastal plain. This was ideal landscape for Alexander because it took away the Persian advantage of numbers. Also, this terrain allowed him to be resupplied therefore, he could wait for Darius. Darius was not stupid, he did not want to fight Alexander there. His plan was to fight Alexander in the open Amik plains in modern day Syria. However, Alexander did not leave the coastal plains. Darius with a large army could not be supplied there indefinitely therefore, he had to go to Alexander.

Darius crossed Amanus Mountains to the north of Issos, which surprised Alexander, and cut off his supply lines. Battle was immanent. The armies met at the Pinarus River, Alexander set up his forces south of the river with Darius to the north. Alexander placed his infantry phalanx in the center, with Thessalian cavalry on his left, and himself with the rest of the cavalry on his right. Darius focused his infantry in the center with a good number on his flanks with the cavalry. Darius himself was in the center of the formation, protected by his bodyguard. Alexander started the battle by charging his right flank into the Persian left, causing the line to brake. In the center the infantry were in a stalemate, and on the Persian right the cavalry attacked the Thessalian cavalry, pushing them back. However, when the Persian left broke, Alexander turned the cavalry and flanked the Persian infantry in the center, causing them to flee. At this time the Persian cavalry retreated on the right flank. With the whole Persian line in flee and panic, Alexander charged Darius, cutting through his bodyguard. Darius, with the battle lost fled before Alexander got to him.

The Macedonians won a decisive victory. The casualty rates for the Persians were in the tens of thousands, while the Macedonians were in the hundreds. Two factors attribute to this. One, history is written by the victor, leading to exaggeration. Second, since the Persians were being routed, more of them were cut down. This battle left Alexander free to conquer the rest of the coastal plain and down into Egypt. Darius survived to fight another day, which came on October 1, 331 B.C.E. at the Battle of Gaugamela. There Darius was defeated again leaving Persepolis, the Persian capital, open to Alexander.

Alexander The Ambiguity of Greatness, Guy MacLean Rogers. Random House Trade Paperbacks. 2004.

The Terracotta Army, a Chinese National Treasure

So I guess I'm in for round two already. Might as well get another post out of the way for this week. This post will be one of the site link ones, so you can read up on more information about these interesting sculptures.

The Terracotta Army was unearthed in 1974 by archaeologists in Xian, Shaanxi Province. The archaeologists were summoned by several peasants who discovered ancient pottery when digging a well. During the years, three different pits have been excavated, containing thousands of the clay warriors, each one around actual size.

The earthen figures came in all sorts of different styles. They all have a variety of facial features, giving each sculpture a unique look when compared to his neighbors. It is believed that the ancient sculptors worked in an assembly line style to maximize output and achieve the individual features. Each part of the sculptures were sculpted separately and assembled at the end of the process. Scientists have discovered eight basic face shapes that utilize a plethora of different molds for facial features such as noses and lips. This mixing and matching allowed them to achieve all of the different faces of the soldiers. Along with facial differences, the soldiers were also arranged in combat formations and by rank. Their heights were used to show ranks in the army, with generals being the tallest sculptures. Also mixed in amongst the soldiers were musicians, government officials, horses, and chariots, allowing scientists to see a cross section of what made up a Chinese army at that time.

What kind of army would be complete without weapons and armor? The Qin era figures are wielding authentic weaponry from swords to crossbows and wearing armor modeled after the actual armor worn by their living counterparts. The armor of each soldier also comes in different styles based on his rank and job in the army. The foot soldiers all shared the same basic armor type, but officers and generals all had unique garb that signified their higher positions. Cavalrymen and archers also had their own types of armor that set them apart from the pack. Every soldier also came with Bronze age weapons fit for the battlefield. Many of the excavated weapons are still sharp and shiny, which shows that if the Chinese were willing to arm sculptures with such excellent weapons, then the weapons they gave to their living soldiers must be formidable indeed.

So what would be the point of this Terracotta Army? Why would anyone spend so much time and money into making the world's most useless army? The answer is that the first emperor of China, Shihuangdi, created them as part of his elaborate tomb. Around 221 BCE, Emperor Shihuangdi began construction of his tomb, which would not be finished until 210 BCE, right around the time that the Terracotta Army was being created. It is believed that Shihuangdi created the soldiers to either guard him in the afterlife, or help him establish a new kingdom in the next world.

Sadly enough, unfortunate events have led to the current state of decay of the Terracotta Army. Several years after Shihuangdi was buried, a Chinese general burned and looted the funeral complex, severely damaging almost all of the figures. Today, the clay soldiers are under assault from mold, pollution, and earthquakes. Scientists have begun to rebury some of the soldiers in order to preserve them for future generations.

For more information, visit
http://www.travelchinaguide.com/attraction/shaanxi/xian/terra_cotta_army/

As a side note, did anyone notice that one of the professors they interviewed in that video today never blinked? The one with the beard and the blue eyes in front of the statue of Athena. it made my eyes water just watching him talk. Feel free to comment or whatever.

Profiles in History: Pericles

Hey Guys.
This is going to be my first post, so take it easy. So, I figure I will focus on more of the Profile type blogs that are focused on whoever gets mentioned in class.

Pericles was the Greek leader of Athens during the high point of the city's culture. His name means "surrounded in glory", which is appropriate due to the things that were achieved during his term. New fields of science were advanced and the Arts flourished during the fifteen years he was in office. Many of the magnificent monuments and sculptures around Athens were also created during that time. Until the end of his political time, he always focused on making Athens an even greater center of religion, intellectualism, athleticism, and artistry.

Pericles was born in 495 BCE to Xanthippus, a politician and a commander in the Greek navy, and Agariste, a descendant of a powerful Greek family. His youth was spent on schooling, which involved music and philosophy. Pericles entered politics in 472 BCE and soon managed to join up with the Democratic Party. During this time, he tried to act like a model citizen, even going so far as to avoiding banquets to save money. Around the 460’s BCE, Pericles’s political party began to take over Athens from the old aristocrats. Pericles in particular, declared that one his rivals only held on to power because of his wealth, not the fact that the people were supporting him. This is a foreshadowing of Pericles’s attitude towards politics, as he believed the public as a whole should be the ones controlling government.

At about the same time, the leader of the Democratic Party was murdered, opening the way for Pericles to take control of Athens. In the initial stages of his reign, Athens was involved in several wars, but starting at 445 BCE, there was a Thirty Year Peace between Athens and her rival, Sparta. During this time, Pericles funded many ambitious building projects, including the Acropolis and the restoration of several major temples. He also focused on putting power into the lower class citizens of Athens by including them in the Democratic process, allowing them to vote and to run for office. Pericles believed that there was power in the masses of lower citizens and gave them many opportunities to advance themselves, including free access to the theater, payment for government service, and hired them to work on his numerous construction projects.

Athens flourished at this time, with many of the most brilliant minds of the ancient world calling her home. Philosophers such as Socrates, playwrights that still influence theater today, architects whose styles can be seen around the world, and scientists that developed fields like biology all lived in Athens at that time. It became an educational center of the world and its people were enjoying a Golden Age under Pericles. At this time, even though Pericles had done so much good for Athens, he was not immune to the ravages of politics. He himself was charged with gross misuse of public funds and his friends were not spared. His wife was slandered and his friends were accused of embezzlement.

Nearing the end of his life and his reign, Pericles launched a series of failed raids around Sicily, resulting in a drastic reduction of Athen’s military power. Simultaneously, a plague appeared in Athens, killing almost a third of the population. Due to these circumstances, Pericles was not re-elected to public office and watched as his wife and sons fell to the disease. In 429 BCE Pericles also contracted the plague and died, taking with him the glory of Athens. Soon after his death, Athens collapsed into anarchy and infighting.