California, one of the self-proclaimed most progressive states around, where I imagine it will soon be law that everyone has to drive hybrids, is home to six of the top ten worst places to breathe in the US, according to the American Lung Association. The ALA considered several factors in their survey, including ozone pollution and particle pollution.
The California cities that made the list were Bakersfield, Los Angeles, Fresno, Visalia-Porterville, Hanford-Corcoran, and Sacramento. Also on the list were Birmingham, AL; St. Louis, MO; New York, NY; and Pittsburgh, PA.
More here.
Saturday, March 27, 2010
Friday, March 26, 2010
Let Them Be Kids
"During a fire drill at a middle school in Worcester, England, students aged 10 to 13 looked on in horror as "as a man appeared brandishing a gun and appeared to shoot dead Mr. Kent, their science teacher, as he ran across a field." It was only ten minutes after the shooting that teachers revealed the whole thing to be fake. The exercise was apparently "intended to teach Year 8 pupils how to investigate, collect facts and analyse evidence." They couldn't have just pretended to lose the class rabbit, or something?"
Found the article here.
...Incredible. If this were just a prank, I might think it was funny. Actually, I still think it's funny, but that's beside the point. This is demonstrative of a tendency amongst adults that is becoming more and more common. We want our children to be grown up without them leaving home.
The parents of these children may not have been involved, but it's a tendency nonetheless. Why on earth would they make these children aware of such an adult situation at such a young age? They aren't even capable of reacting properly at this point of their lives, so what's the point of scaring them? It's the same idea with sex and drug ed. Kids younger and younger are being taught about it by a biased source likely before they've even been exposed to it. What's the point?
And what kind of evidence did they expect the kids to analyze? Fingerprints and blood samples???
Let kids be kids. There's no need to scare them yet. The world will do that eventually anyway, so let them have this time to themselves.
Found the article here.
...Incredible. If this were just a prank, I might think it was funny. Actually, I still think it's funny, but that's beside the point. This is demonstrative of a tendency amongst adults that is becoming more and more common. We want our children to be grown up without them leaving home.
The parents of these children may not have been involved, but it's a tendency nonetheless. Why on earth would they make these children aware of such an adult situation at such a young age? They aren't even capable of reacting properly at this point of their lives, so what's the point of scaring them? It's the same idea with sex and drug ed. Kids younger and younger are being taught about it by a biased source likely before they've even been exposed to it. What's the point?
And what kind of evidence did they expect the kids to analyze? Fingerprints and blood samples???
Let kids be kids. There's no need to scare them yet. The world will do that eventually anyway, so let them have this time to themselves.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Patrik DeCicco and Zoey
I recently did my first real portrait assignment. I loved it.
The subject-- that sounds too formal, too stiff. Portraits are nothing if not personal. You get to work closely with someone, get to know them, and incorporate that into the photos. I could be cheesy and say something along the lines of, the photos are a glimpse into someone's soul. Which is partly true, but it's nothing so grand. It's merely an attempt to capture and clearly show this person, in this case Patrik DeCicco, owner of Boulder Map Gallery Inc, avid sky diver and base jumper, and his beautiful dog, Zoey. They made this experience truly wonderful. It was a pleasure to work with them.
Here are some of the results from the shoot. They're nothing special, but I'm proud of them.
It was great work, and reminded me of all the beauty of photography :)
Friday, March 12, 2010
Important Facts
1) No-one in the entire world can touch all their own teeth with their tongue.
2) Mad people everywhere are now trying this.
4) You've just tried, and discovered this to be untrue.
5) Now you're sitting there with a crazed smile on your face.
5) Bet you didn't notice that I'd skipped number 3!
6) And now you've gone back to check.
7) Bet you didn't notice that I'd skipped number 6 either.
8) Fooled again...
9) Bet you didn't notice that number 5 appears twice!
10) Now that hopefully you've got a smile on your face, remember that that's what it's all about.
2) Mad people everywhere are now trying this.
4) You've just tried, and discovered this to be untrue.
5) Now you're sitting there with a crazed smile on your face.
5) Bet you didn't notice that I'd skipped number 3!
6) And now you've gone back to check.
7) Bet you didn't notice that I'd skipped number 6 either.
8) Fooled again...
9) Bet you didn't notice that number 5 appears twice!
10) Now that hopefully you've got a smile on your face, remember that that's what it's all about.
Friday, March 5, 2010
Jedi Bears
I have a list, of creatures in the world that not only scare me, but inspire a sense of terror for whatever reason. Ironically, this is the same list as the list of creatures I want to spend time with. Maybe someday I'll get around to posting the list, but right now, I'd just like to address one: polar bears.
Polar bears are huge, the largest land predator of today. They weigh in between1,000 and 1,500 pounds, on average. They blend in so well with their environment that they might as well be giant ninjas, and they don't fear humans. This last is startling. Most mammals are skittish of human settlements, but in many areas polar bears acquire a taste for garbage, and sometimes for humans themselves. They're one of the rare predators that have been known to actively hunt humans. And we're just beginning to learn about their origins.
In Norway 2004, a rare fossil of a polar bear jaw was discovered, and it may hold secrets as to not only the age and origins of the species, but also the ability of polar bears to adapt to climate change.
“Our results confirm that the polar bear is an evolutionarily young species that split off from brown bears some 150,000 years ago and evolved extremely rapidly during the late Pleistocene, perhaps adapting to the opening of new habitats and food sources in response to climate changes just before the last interglacial period,” says Charlotte Lindqvist, research assistant professor in the University at Buffalo Department of Biological Sciences.
The age of the fossil implies that polar bears are a relatively new species, off-shooting from their closest relatives, the brown bear. Ironically, this fossil that tells us the polar bear is young is also "the oldest mammal mitochondrial genome to be sequenced." It's nearly twice as old as the oldest mammoth genome yet sequenced.
The term "mitochondrial genome" refers to all the DNA in the mitochondrion, the energy-producing component of most complex beings. Think of them as midichlorians, giving energy to living beings. The polar bear is a Jedi Knight. Polar bears with lightsabers...frightening.
The fossil also shows that polar bears have survived other climate changes, including interglacial warming periods. This may seem to be a point against global warming arguments, but the rapidity of this current climate change may be too much for the polar bears. We don't know if they can keep up.
Yes, they terrify me. But if they disappear, I'll never get the chance to face one in its home environment. And that makes me terribly sad.
Full Article
Trippy
Against Nebraska, you are a baby apple
upon shoe worn floor
reaching out as elephants pass by
and nod farewell to asses
upon shoe worn floor
reaching out as elephants pass by
and nod farewell to asses
The Tipping Point
Malcolm Gladwell's number one national bestselling novel The Tipping Point dissects revolutionary social trends and their causes, drawing on real historical events to demonstrate his points with clarity and purpose. The novel is compelling and original, using experiences that everyone can relate to, drawing the reader in and making him or her feel like they are discovering the facts for themselves. Gladwell found modern examples of everything he addressed in the form of real life persons, and shows the readers how these ideas and concepts are present in our everyday lives.
The Tipping Point addresses the phenomena of certain social trends, ones that for a while are low key and unknown and then explode into a cultural obsession, or ones that at the height of their popularity suddenly plummet to obscurity. That point where a trend rises or falls is called the "tipping point," the event or person that triggers a set of reactions that leads to one of the two outcomes stated above. Malcolm Gladwell says of his book:
It is the biography of an idea, and that idea is very simple. It is the best way to understand the emergence of fashion trends, the ebb and flow of crime waves, or, for that matter, the transformation of unknown books into bestsellers, or the rise of teenage smoking, or the phenomena of word of mouth, or any number of other mysterious changes that mark everyday life is to think of them as epidemics.
This idea of social trends as epidemics is central to the book, as Gladwell points out that such trends have much in common with epidemics. First of all, social trends are clear examples of contagious behavior. They often start out with only a few people, and those few people are the main means of conveying a trend to the rest of a population. Fashion trends begin with a few different minded people starting their own fashion, and they spread those fashions until they become popular to the point where their styles are being featured in fashion shows. Secondly, in most cases of explosive trends, small changes created big effects. The actions of a few, or the circumstances in a small situation affect the larger picture to an almost disproportional degree. A third characteristic is that all the changes occur quickly. There's no slow build-up, no steady decline, but sharp rises or falls. It all occurs in one dramatic moment, the tipping point. This is the same way one could describe an outbreak of a virus in a small town.
The majority of Gladwell's book is dedicated to the three rules of epidemics: the Law of the Few, the Stickiness Factor, and the Power of Context. The Law of the Few states that any social epidemic is based on the efforts of a few people with a particular set of social skills. This law is heavily studied by economists, and is referred to as the 80/20 Principle, in which 80% of the work is done by 20% of the population. For example, 80% of beer is drunk by 20% of beer drinkers. Those who affect the social change are coined by Gladwell as Connectors, Mavens, and Salesmen. Connectors are those people who form large social networks for the sake of meeting people, and have an uncanny ability to form relationships with mere acquaintances. Mavens are information specialists, people who garner information about a particular market, and then distribute it to people around them, making their knowledge public. Salesmen are, like their name implies, people with the charismatic ability to sell you on an idea, so convince those who are doubtful to take a certain course of action. For all of these Gladwell sites Paul Revere as one of the best examples. Paul Revere and William Dawes both set out on a fateful night to warn the militias of the coming of the British, but Paul Revere's ride is famous while William Dawes' is practically unheard of. That is because Paul Revere was a Connector, a Maven, and a Salesman all at once. He knew many people through his work as a messenger, he ran information gathering groups to find out about the British, and he had the charisma to convince militia leaders and common folk about the urgency and veracity of his message. Paul Revere was one of those rare people who could reach everyone and bring them to his cause with ease, helping to set in motion one of the most important events in our nation's history: the Revolutionary War.
The second of the three rules of epidemics is known as the Stickiness Factor. The Stickiness factor is the specific content of a message that renders it more memorable to the listener or audience. This idea is crucial, because if no one remembers what the message was or the effect is not lasting, then there is no hope for any significant change in trend. This is especially crucial in advertising, where the entire point is to get a customer to remember a product or service. For example, Winston filter-tip cigarettes came up with a new and catchy slogan to promote their cigarettes, "Winston tastes good like a cigarette should." The grammatical and syntax problems made the slogan more memorable, and within months soared past competition to become the second largest cigarette seller at the time, and soon after became the largest.
The third and final rule of epidemics is the Power of Context, which states that people will react differently in certain situations depending on the surroundings and the specific context. For example, during the spring and summer months, the spread of STDs in East and West Baltimore increase at a rapid rate, but during the colder seasons drop down dramatically. The cold deters people from frequenting several bars and thus increasing the risk of getting an STD. Take another example, the 1964 stabbing of Kitty Genovese. Kitty was attacked three times over the course of a half hour and eventually killed, all while thirty-eight of her neighbors watched from their windows. None of them called the police. When later asked, none of them could even say why they didn't call the police. After several experiments, psychologists have determined that this was because with so many people watch, all the neighbors thought that if there were really a problem, someone else would call the police. If only one person had been witness, Kitty's life probably would've been saved.
This book aptly expresses a form of journalism that is deeply researched and thought through, with not a single extraneous thought or sentence. Malcolm Gladwell clarifies every point with a precise and relevant example, showing just how prevalent the concept of tipping points exist in our lives. He reveals the causes of social trends in a way that they can be applied through our everyday lives, whether it's to spread an idea, sell a product, or try to change the world.
The Tipping Point addresses the phenomena of certain social trends, ones that for a while are low key and unknown and then explode into a cultural obsession, or ones that at the height of their popularity suddenly plummet to obscurity. That point where a trend rises or falls is called the "tipping point," the event or person that triggers a set of reactions that leads to one of the two outcomes stated above. Malcolm Gladwell says of his book:
It is the biography of an idea, and that idea is very simple. It is the best way to understand the emergence of fashion trends, the ebb and flow of crime waves, or, for that matter, the transformation of unknown books into bestsellers, or the rise of teenage smoking, or the phenomena of word of mouth, or any number of other mysterious changes that mark everyday life is to think of them as epidemics.
This idea of social trends as epidemics is central to the book, as Gladwell points out that such trends have much in common with epidemics. First of all, social trends are clear examples of contagious behavior. They often start out with only a few people, and those few people are the main means of conveying a trend to the rest of a population. Fashion trends begin with a few different minded people starting their own fashion, and they spread those fashions until they become popular to the point where their styles are being featured in fashion shows. Secondly, in most cases of explosive trends, small changes created big effects. The actions of a few, or the circumstances in a small situation affect the larger picture to an almost disproportional degree. A third characteristic is that all the changes occur quickly. There's no slow build-up, no steady decline, but sharp rises or falls. It all occurs in one dramatic moment, the tipping point. This is the same way one could describe an outbreak of a virus in a small town.
The majority of Gladwell's book is dedicated to the three rules of epidemics: the Law of the Few, the Stickiness Factor, and the Power of Context. The Law of the Few states that any social epidemic is based on the efforts of a few people with a particular set of social skills. This law is heavily studied by economists, and is referred to as the 80/20 Principle, in which 80% of the work is done by 20% of the population. For example, 80% of beer is drunk by 20% of beer drinkers. Those who affect the social change are coined by Gladwell as Connectors, Mavens, and Salesmen. Connectors are those people who form large social networks for the sake of meeting people, and have an uncanny ability to form relationships with mere acquaintances. Mavens are information specialists, people who garner information about a particular market, and then distribute it to people around them, making their knowledge public. Salesmen are, like their name implies, people with the charismatic ability to sell you on an idea, so convince those who are doubtful to take a certain course of action. For all of these Gladwell sites Paul Revere as one of the best examples. Paul Revere and William Dawes both set out on a fateful night to warn the militias of the coming of the British, but Paul Revere's ride is famous while William Dawes' is practically unheard of. That is because Paul Revere was a Connector, a Maven, and a Salesman all at once. He knew many people through his work as a messenger, he ran information gathering groups to find out about the British, and he had the charisma to convince militia leaders and common folk about the urgency and veracity of his message. Paul Revere was one of those rare people who could reach everyone and bring them to his cause with ease, helping to set in motion one of the most important events in our nation's history: the Revolutionary War.
The second of the three rules of epidemics is known as the Stickiness Factor. The Stickiness factor is the specific content of a message that renders it more memorable to the listener or audience. This idea is crucial, because if no one remembers what the message was or the effect is not lasting, then there is no hope for any significant change in trend. This is especially crucial in advertising, where the entire point is to get a customer to remember a product or service. For example, Winston filter-tip cigarettes came up with a new and catchy slogan to promote their cigarettes, "Winston tastes good like a cigarette should." The grammatical and syntax problems made the slogan more memorable, and within months soared past competition to become the second largest cigarette seller at the time, and soon after became the largest.
The third and final rule of epidemics is the Power of Context, which states that people will react differently in certain situations depending on the surroundings and the specific context. For example, during the spring and summer months, the spread of STDs in East and West Baltimore increase at a rapid rate, but during the colder seasons drop down dramatically. The cold deters people from frequenting several bars and thus increasing the risk of getting an STD. Take another example, the 1964 stabbing of Kitty Genovese. Kitty was attacked three times over the course of a half hour and eventually killed, all while thirty-eight of her neighbors watched from their windows. None of them called the police. When later asked, none of them could even say why they didn't call the police. After several experiments, psychologists have determined that this was because with so many people watch, all the neighbors thought that if there were really a problem, someone else would call the police. If only one person had been witness, Kitty's life probably would've been saved.
This book aptly expresses a form of journalism that is deeply researched and thought through, with not a single extraneous thought or sentence. Malcolm Gladwell clarifies every point with a precise and relevant example, showing just how prevalent the concept of tipping points exist in our lives. He reveals the causes of social trends in a way that they can be applied through our everyday lives, whether it's to spread an idea, sell a product, or try to change the world.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
From Roman to Anglo-Saxon England
*Another long history essay. Sorry to anyone who actually reads this, but I just felt like putting some research papers online.
The Dark Ages, so called because so little is known about them, because so few primary sources are to be found. The term has meant many things in the past, whether it be used when referring to the period after the glory of the Roman age, and before the time in which the term was coined, or because it was commonly thought that the period was plagued with illiteracy and ignorance, requiring enlightenment. But historians only drew these conclusions because they didn't know what else to say, particularly about the British Isles. However we need not be ignorant about this time. It is a critical time in British history, the transformation from Roman Britain to the precursor to modern Britain, Anglo-Saxon England. How did this come to be? What about the fall of the Western Roman Empire allowed for this drastic change? Towards the end of the fourth century and the beginning of the fifth century, when the decline of Rome was in full, the loss of military control of Britain represented a loss of Roman influence in Britain. The Roman army was a representation of Rome itself, a physical manifestation of the building power of the great empire, and with its absence the physical reminder of that power disappeared. In addition, when the army left, so did much of the governing structure that had been built around it, to maintain the wages and supplies of the soldiers. This not only left the British open to invasion from foreign barbarians, but also, more importantly, left a vacuum to be filled. In filling that vacuum, the Anglo-Saxons gained access to the entire island, and were from there able to create a sphere of influence that shaped the development of a nation.
In truth, the Western Roman empire had begun to lose its hold upon Britain even before the "fall of Rome," most particularly in the form of its military occupation, if not in the form of cultural influence. Throughout the third century and the beginning of the fourth, leading right up to the sack of Rome, Roman Britain was subject to numerous rebellions and usurpations, as well as military threats that severely taxed the Roman military presence in Britain, and over time, the Roman garrison was reduced to a fraction of its original numbers. One of the most famous of these crises was the rebellion of Magnus Maximus in 383. Maximus was a Dux Britanniarum, or a Duke of the Britains, and a military leader within Britain. With the support of the military behind him, Maximus was proclaimed emperor, and "placed himself at the head of the British military. . . .and landed at the mouth of the Rhine. The troops. . . .quickly revolted to his standard. . . ." In order to compile a formidable military force, Maximus drained the forts of Wales and West Britain, leaving them completely vulnerable to raids from the Picts and the Scots. Even after his defeat in 388, there's no sign of any strengthening of the British garrisons. The empty forts of Wales and Western Britain were never reoccupied, leaving a critical weakness in British defenses that continued until the full departure of Roman forces. Rather, upon his defeat in Gaul, Maximus's forces were absorbed by the Western Roman army and put to use in defense of Italy against the barbarian threat. When faced with a similar barbarian threat in the form of the Picts, Rome sent its most powerful general to deal with the situation: Stilicho. This was the last occasion in which aid was sent from Rome to Britain to aid against the islands barbarian foes. By 401, the situation was largely in hand, and Stilicho withdrew with British forces in tow to deal with the invading Goths in Italy. In much the same manner, the rebellion and then recognition of Constantine III drew even more of the reduced British manpower, as Constantine crossed into Gaul with his army and established control over much of the Western Roman empire. At this point there are British regiments serving all over Europe, even in the East, but aside from a few minimal garrisons left in the walled towns on the frontier in Britain, the island was left largely undefended.
These series of upheavals are marking points for the end of Roman rule in Britain, Culminating in the elevation of Constantine III as emperor. Upon Constantine's departure to the continent with most of what was left of the Roman British military, the Britons, having been left to defend themselves against the barbarian invaders, chiefly the Saxons, took matters into their own hands. According to the Greek historian Zosimos of 500, the Britons "rebelled against Rome and removed themselves from Roman jurisdiction." However, Zosimos's work does not account for the motive behind the supposed revolt. For long, the event has been viewed as an uprising of peasants against their masters, and this was merely an episode of class struggle. If that were the case however, then why was the Britons' first action to rescue their towns and expel the barbarians from their territory, rather than to tear down the Roman hierarchy in place? A much more likely explanation is the rebellion was led by landowners and members of the local oligarchy who had the most at stake in the urban centers. Rome's ability to defend its citizens in Britain had failed, and as such their only choice was to defend themselves. A year later, the emperor Honorius a letter to the cities of Britain, telling the Britons to look to their own defense. Honorius covered the fact that Britain had already acted on its own behalf, and made it appear as if he still had some measure of control. But after 409, there was no attempt to restore the island to Roman rule.
The emperor's letter to the British citizens that they should look after themselves implies a shift in the relationship between Rome and its subjects. In Britain and other areas, such as Gaul, the Roman government had been an important aspect of everyday life, particularly for the maintenance of the military. But without a military presence, the governing bodies had lost much of their purpose, particularly in the collection of taxes. So with the crippling of the local governments and the absence of a military, the citizens were left two major choices for their own defense: to rise up and defend themselves, or to hire defenders from amongst the barbarians. For the most part the Britons chose the former, but it was the latter that had the deepest long-term effect of the creation of a new Britain. Those who chose the latter continued to resist Saxon dominance in Britain until 634. The old separation between citizen and soldier to which the people had become so used to was gone; Britain was becoming militarized.
After the departure of the Roman military, otherwise referred to as the abandonment of Britain, there were rapid changes to the governing system that lasted until the dominance of the Angle-Saxons, lasting in some areas until the eleventh century. The relation between the Romano-British aristocracy and the imperial government which had administered the cities of Britain were no longer in existence. As Malcolm Todd states in his essay "After the Romans," "The evils of Roman taxation had gone, but so had the protective umbrella of Roman power." In its absence, the contemporary land-owning families attempted to hold onto their own power. And though some succeeded for a period of time, the lack of a central authority in Britain eventually worked against the local magnates who tried to hold on to their authority. Without a central government to administer and organize the economic base of the British society, it began to fall apart. The great agricultural estates began to slowly and gradually fall into decline with less demand coming from towns and garrisons. They were unsure of the market for their crops, and as they became more and more isolated, they became unable to plant or harvest crops. In the case of the centralized market industries, the industries, unlike the agricultural estates, collapsed early-on in the fifth century, some even ending before 400. With the fall of urban and military demand, the markets the industries such as metalworking and pottery centers depended were no longer there. What needs there were for such goods were taken care of locally. And without an organized system, successful distribution of goods became an exercise in futility. Another apparent sign of deep economic change can be found in the cessation of Roman coins reaching the island in the beginning of the fifth century. The copper coins which were such a great part of daily life began to fall into disuse. Coins are now only found in settlements and cities which had a previous Roman phase. Even in the important economic centers of the later years, such as Cornwall of the sixth and seventh centuries, had no coins to be found. Britain at this time was going through some very incredible changes, trying to adapt to a new situation. This instability only aided the Anglo-Saxons in their coming dominance of Britain.
The choice to ally with one barbarian war-leader against the rest became increasingly more common as time went by. After creating an agreement, a war-leader, often a Saxon in the beginning, would defend the former Roman civilians against other barbarians--Picts and other Saxons--in exchange for supplies--including food, material, and shelter--and small tributes, or taxes. Increasingly, this allowed the Saxons to fill the vacuum left by the Roman army. One of the most often cited cases of this, expected by Gildas to date 446, comes from Gildas's work On the Ruin of Britain, writing, "Then all the councillors, together with that proud tyrant Gurthrigern, the British king. . . .invit[ed] in among them (like wolves into the sheep-fold), the fierce and impious Saxons. . . .to repel the invasions of the northern nations." Gildas goes on to lament the foolish embracement of the Saxons, godless heathens, by the British kings, and cites this as one of the primary reasons for the fall of ruin of Britain. Although his commentary was largely influenced by religious perspectives, Gildas was on the right track. By taking the Saxons in with them, the British kings ensured the barbarians a foothold in their land. The agreement between the two peoples lasted a long time, but eventually the treaty was broken. Now, the Saxon army that had been called in to defend the Britons had become "a far greater threat than any posed by the Picts and the Irish." And this Saxon army set itself to conquer all of Britain.
In order to understand the transition of the island from Roman Britain to Anglo-Saxon England, it is important to look at the reasons for the Anglo-Saxon migration. First, however, there is a critical assumption that greatly changes the general understanding of the circumstances of the Saxon invasion. Gildas uses a letter from the Britons to Aetius requesting aid against the barbarian invaders as a starting point for the presence of Saxons in Britain: "'To Aetius, now consul for the third time:. . . . The barbarians drive us to the sea; the sea throws us back on the barbarians: thus two modes of death await us, we are either slain or drowned.'" The address of "consul for the third time" means that the letter was sent no earlier than 446, the earliest year the appeal could have been made, when Aetius was deemed consul for the third time, and no later than 453, when he was deemed consul a fourth time. It was Aetius's refusal of this appeal that inspired the treaty between the "proud king" and the Saxons, and the basis for Gildas's reasoning that the Saxons arrived no earlier than 446. With their arrival at that date, it was long presumed that the Saxons only began their takeover of Britain after the breaking of the treaty, when they began their campaign to conquer the island. However, there is evidence that makes that presumption faulty. First, the Saxons were originally part of a great assault on Britain in 367, including Saxons, Picts, and Scotti, found in evidence from Ammianus Marcellinus, a late Roman historian and former military officer. The massive raids were repulsed, but the Saxons managed to form a beachhead of sorts, from which small settlements and raids could be made. Second, from the Life of St Germanus of Auxerre, a bishop and former provincial governor, we see that in 429 the bishop "gave encouragement to a British army fighting Saxons who were already located in Britain." Third, and finally, from the work, The Gallic Chronical, of 452, cited a disaster c.441 by the Britons at the hands of the Saxons, that ultimately led to military domination by the Saxons. If this is the case, then Gildas, writing nearly a century later, was incorrect in his assumption that the settlement and invasion took place c.450, by which time the Saxons had already achieved much of their power.
This new revelation lends itself to the understanding that the Saxon invasion and migration was not something that happened quickly, but rather took place gradually over decades at a time, before near contemporaries ever suspected. The reasons for that migration are in large part tied with the declining Roman state. In the Saxon society, same with the Angles and Jutes, the two other Germanic tribes that made up the migrating population to Britain, authority rested in part with the chief or king, and in part with the principal lineages of the tribe, which acted as a check to the leader's power. To go to war, for example, the kind needed the help of the noble lineages to raise a militia from the tribe, since there was no standing army. But the king could generate more authority within the tribe by having control of the economy. In this case, distant trade with Rome, an exotic foreign power, provided prestige goods that greatly impressed the community and reinforced the king's position. Some of the goods included glassware, fine pottery, and a multitude of jewels, which the king would often give away in a show of generosity, a sign of power in the Germanic tribes. So when Rome began to experience recession and inflation at its decline, the Saxons, Angles, and Jutes suffered as well. Some Anglo-Saxon tribes had structured their daily life to accommodate the Roman traders and merchants, Roman luxury goods replacing the traditional economy of the tribes. The Anglo-Saxons were forced to turn to raiding to supplement their economic needs, and as such began to target vulnerable coastal towns for their raids. At the same time, a climate shift lowered the temperatures by two or three degrees, a small amount, but enough to severely destabilize the agriculture for the Anglo-Saxon tribes. Those two to three degrees caused shorter summers and longer winters, northern crops to fail more often, river valleys to flood frequently, and livestock to be suddenly more costly to take care of during the longer winters. In short, the Anglo-Saxon tribes were subjugated to a period of unrest that greatly threatened both the accumulated power of the kings and the ability of the tribe to thrive. It became clear that they needed to seek better opportunities elsewhere.
In groups of thirty to fifty, the Anglo-Saxons began crossing over to Britain, settling down in Kent, the Thames Valley, East Anglia, and the Trent Valley over several decades. The migration accounted for several tens of thousands of immigrants, and though some met violent resistance, in areas where the Britons employed Saxons as defenders against further incursions, for the most part the Anglo-Saxon migrants were received without rancor. Compared to the million population of Britain at the beginning of the fifth century, the Anglo-Saxons weren't much of a numerical threat. The farmers of the Anglo-Saxons settled in the towns fallen to disrepair after the departure of Rome, and soon reconstructed villages controlled by Anglo-Saxons was becoming the norm. It is only later, when the Saxon army began its conquest of the island, that the Saxons were seen as a true threat. Archeological evidence supports the presence of Anglo-Saxons before the invasion, with Saxon cemeteries being found at Winchester with objects dated at least a century before the conflict, presenting the conclusion the much of the success of the Anglo-Saxons is owed to a peaceful integration underlying the conquest of war.
The Anglo-Saxons found rich ground in which to replant themselves, ecologically and politically. Because of the Briton's dependence on Rome and her military presence so much, when it left them behind, they found themselves exposed to the military force and cultural influence of the Anglo-Saxons. The collapse of the structured governing system of the Romans left a gap to be filled, and the Anglo-Saxons found themselves to be a perfect fit. As time passed, the Anglo-Saxons and the Britons found themselves coexisting without much conflict, and the Anglo-Saxon nobility didn't assert itself as rulers until a few generations had passed by. Later on, the Anglo-Saxons gained continued hold with their conversion to Christianity, culminating in the eventual conquest of the entire island in the eleventh century. There are still many gaps in the knowledge of this time in British history, the Dark Ages. But slowly historians are piecing together the narrative of Britain, and the story of what happened, and how Anglo-Saxon England came to be.
Works Cited
Pat Southern, "The Army in Late Roman Britain," A Companion to Roman Britain, Malcolm Todd ed. (The Blackwell Companions to British History: Oxford, 2004)
Thomas Wright, Esq, The Celt, the Roman, and the Saxon, (Arthur Hall, Virtue, and CO: London, 1852)
Malcolm Todd, "After the Romans," The Making of Great Britain: The Dark Ages, Lesley M. Smith ed. (Shocken Books: New York, 1984)
Mathew Innes, Introduction to Early Medieval Western Europe, 300-900 (Routledge: London, 2007)
Ian Wood, "The Final Phase," A Companion to Roman Britain, Malcolm Todd ed. (The Blackwell Companions to British History: Oxford, 2004)
Thomas Charles-Edwards, "Introduction," After Rome, Thomas Charles-Edwards ed. (Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2003)
Bryan Ward-Perkins, The Fall of Rome and the End of Civilization (Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2005)
John Hines, "Nations and Kingdoms," After Rome, Thomas Charles-Edwards ed. (Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2003)
Gildas, "The Works of Gildas," Six Old English Chronicals, J.A. Giles ed. (George Bell & Sons: London, 1885)
Richard Hodges, "The Anglo-Saxon Migrations," The Making of Great Britain: The Dark Ages, Lesley M. Smith ed. (Shocken Books: New York, 1984)
Lloyd and Jenifer Lang, Celtic Britain and Ireland, (St. Martin's Press: New York, 1990)
The Dark Ages, so called because so little is known about them, because so few primary sources are to be found. The term has meant many things in the past, whether it be used when referring to the period after the glory of the Roman age, and before the time in which the term was coined, or because it was commonly thought that the period was plagued with illiteracy and ignorance, requiring enlightenment. But historians only drew these conclusions because they didn't know what else to say, particularly about the British Isles. However we need not be ignorant about this time. It is a critical time in British history, the transformation from Roman Britain to the precursor to modern Britain, Anglo-Saxon England. How did this come to be? What about the fall of the Western Roman Empire allowed for this drastic change? Towards the end of the fourth century and the beginning of the fifth century, when the decline of Rome was in full, the loss of military control of Britain represented a loss of Roman influence in Britain. The Roman army was a representation of Rome itself, a physical manifestation of the building power of the great empire, and with its absence the physical reminder of that power disappeared. In addition, when the army left, so did much of the governing structure that had been built around it, to maintain the wages and supplies of the soldiers. This not only left the British open to invasion from foreign barbarians, but also, more importantly, left a vacuum to be filled. In filling that vacuum, the Anglo-Saxons gained access to the entire island, and were from there able to create a sphere of influence that shaped the development of a nation.
In truth, the Western Roman empire had begun to lose its hold upon Britain even before the "fall of Rome," most particularly in the form of its military occupation, if not in the form of cultural influence. Throughout the third century and the beginning of the fourth, leading right up to the sack of Rome, Roman Britain was subject to numerous rebellions and usurpations, as well as military threats that severely taxed the Roman military presence in Britain, and over time, the Roman garrison was reduced to a fraction of its original numbers. One of the most famous of these crises was the rebellion of Magnus Maximus in 383. Maximus was a Dux Britanniarum, or a Duke of the Britains, and a military leader within Britain. With the support of the military behind him, Maximus was proclaimed emperor, and "placed himself at the head of the British military. . . .and landed at the mouth of the Rhine. The troops. . . .quickly revolted to his standard. . . ." In order to compile a formidable military force, Maximus drained the forts of Wales and West Britain, leaving them completely vulnerable to raids from the Picts and the Scots. Even after his defeat in 388, there's no sign of any strengthening of the British garrisons. The empty forts of Wales and Western Britain were never reoccupied, leaving a critical weakness in British defenses that continued until the full departure of Roman forces. Rather, upon his defeat in Gaul, Maximus's forces were absorbed by the Western Roman army and put to use in defense of Italy against the barbarian threat. When faced with a similar barbarian threat in the form of the Picts, Rome sent its most powerful general to deal with the situation: Stilicho. This was the last occasion in which aid was sent from Rome to Britain to aid against the islands barbarian foes. By 401, the situation was largely in hand, and Stilicho withdrew with British forces in tow to deal with the invading Goths in Italy. In much the same manner, the rebellion and then recognition of Constantine III drew even more of the reduced British manpower, as Constantine crossed into Gaul with his army and established control over much of the Western Roman empire. At this point there are British regiments serving all over Europe, even in the East, but aside from a few minimal garrisons left in the walled towns on the frontier in Britain, the island was left largely undefended.
These series of upheavals are marking points for the end of Roman rule in Britain, Culminating in the elevation of Constantine III as emperor. Upon Constantine's departure to the continent with most of what was left of the Roman British military, the Britons, having been left to defend themselves against the barbarian invaders, chiefly the Saxons, took matters into their own hands. According to the Greek historian Zosimos of 500, the Britons "rebelled against Rome and removed themselves from Roman jurisdiction." However, Zosimos's work does not account for the motive behind the supposed revolt. For long, the event has been viewed as an uprising of peasants against their masters, and this was merely an episode of class struggle. If that were the case however, then why was the Britons' first action to rescue their towns and expel the barbarians from their territory, rather than to tear down the Roman hierarchy in place? A much more likely explanation is the rebellion was led by landowners and members of the local oligarchy who had the most at stake in the urban centers. Rome's ability to defend its citizens in Britain had failed, and as such their only choice was to defend themselves. A year later, the emperor Honorius a letter to the cities of Britain, telling the Britons to look to their own defense. Honorius covered the fact that Britain had already acted on its own behalf, and made it appear as if he still had some measure of control. But after 409, there was no attempt to restore the island to Roman rule.
The emperor's letter to the British citizens that they should look after themselves implies a shift in the relationship between Rome and its subjects. In Britain and other areas, such as Gaul, the Roman government had been an important aspect of everyday life, particularly for the maintenance of the military. But without a military presence, the governing bodies had lost much of their purpose, particularly in the collection of taxes. So with the crippling of the local governments and the absence of a military, the citizens were left two major choices for their own defense: to rise up and defend themselves, or to hire defenders from amongst the barbarians. For the most part the Britons chose the former, but it was the latter that had the deepest long-term effect of the creation of a new Britain. Those who chose the latter continued to resist Saxon dominance in Britain until 634. The old separation between citizen and soldier to which the people had become so used to was gone; Britain was becoming militarized.
After the departure of the Roman military, otherwise referred to as the abandonment of Britain, there were rapid changes to the governing system that lasted until the dominance of the Angle-Saxons, lasting in some areas until the eleventh century. The relation between the Romano-British aristocracy and the imperial government which had administered the cities of Britain were no longer in existence. As Malcolm Todd states in his essay "After the Romans," "The evils of Roman taxation had gone, but so had the protective umbrella of Roman power." In its absence, the contemporary land-owning families attempted to hold onto their own power. And though some succeeded for a period of time, the lack of a central authority in Britain eventually worked against the local magnates who tried to hold on to their authority. Without a central government to administer and organize the economic base of the British society, it began to fall apart. The great agricultural estates began to slowly and gradually fall into decline with less demand coming from towns and garrisons. They were unsure of the market for their crops, and as they became more and more isolated, they became unable to plant or harvest crops. In the case of the centralized market industries, the industries, unlike the agricultural estates, collapsed early-on in the fifth century, some even ending before 400. With the fall of urban and military demand, the markets the industries such as metalworking and pottery centers depended were no longer there. What needs there were for such goods were taken care of locally. And without an organized system, successful distribution of goods became an exercise in futility. Another apparent sign of deep economic change can be found in the cessation of Roman coins reaching the island in the beginning of the fifth century. The copper coins which were such a great part of daily life began to fall into disuse. Coins are now only found in settlements and cities which had a previous Roman phase. Even in the important economic centers of the later years, such as Cornwall of the sixth and seventh centuries, had no coins to be found. Britain at this time was going through some very incredible changes, trying to adapt to a new situation. This instability only aided the Anglo-Saxons in their coming dominance of Britain.
The choice to ally with one barbarian war-leader against the rest became increasingly more common as time went by. After creating an agreement, a war-leader, often a Saxon in the beginning, would defend the former Roman civilians against other barbarians--Picts and other Saxons--in exchange for supplies--including food, material, and shelter--and small tributes, or taxes. Increasingly, this allowed the Saxons to fill the vacuum left by the Roman army. One of the most often cited cases of this, expected by Gildas to date 446, comes from Gildas's work On the Ruin of Britain, writing, "Then all the councillors, together with that proud tyrant Gurthrigern, the British king. . . .invit[ed] in among them (like wolves into the sheep-fold), the fierce and impious Saxons. . . .to repel the invasions of the northern nations." Gildas goes on to lament the foolish embracement of the Saxons, godless heathens, by the British kings, and cites this as one of the primary reasons for the fall of ruin of Britain. Although his commentary was largely influenced by religious perspectives, Gildas was on the right track. By taking the Saxons in with them, the British kings ensured the barbarians a foothold in their land. The agreement between the two peoples lasted a long time, but eventually the treaty was broken. Now, the Saxon army that had been called in to defend the Britons had become "a far greater threat than any posed by the Picts and the Irish." And this Saxon army set itself to conquer all of Britain.
In order to understand the transition of the island from Roman Britain to Anglo-Saxon England, it is important to look at the reasons for the Anglo-Saxon migration. First, however, there is a critical assumption that greatly changes the general understanding of the circumstances of the Saxon invasion. Gildas uses a letter from the Britons to Aetius requesting aid against the barbarian invaders as a starting point for the presence of Saxons in Britain: "'To Aetius, now consul for the third time:. . . . The barbarians drive us to the sea; the sea throws us back on the barbarians: thus two modes of death await us, we are either slain or drowned.'" The address of "consul for the third time" means that the letter was sent no earlier than 446, the earliest year the appeal could have been made, when Aetius was deemed consul for the third time, and no later than 453, when he was deemed consul a fourth time. It was Aetius's refusal of this appeal that inspired the treaty between the "proud king" and the Saxons, and the basis for Gildas's reasoning that the Saxons arrived no earlier than 446. With their arrival at that date, it was long presumed that the Saxons only began their takeover of Britain after the breaking of the treaty, when they began their campaign to conquer the island. However, there is evidence that makes that presumption faulty. First, the Saxons were originally part of a great assault on Britain in 367, including Saxons, Picts, and Scotti, found in evidence from Ammianus Marcellinus, a late Roman historian and former military officer. The massive raids were repulsed, but the Saxons managed to form a beachhead of sorts, from which small settlements and raids could be made. Second, from the Life of St Germanus of Auxerre, a bishop and former provincial governor, we see that in 429 the bishop "gave encouragement to a British army fighting Saxons who were already located in Britain." Third, and finally, from the work, The Gallic Chronical, of 452, cited a disaster c.441 by the Britons at the hands of the Saxons, that ultimately led to military domination by the Saxons. If this is the case, then Gildas, writing nearly a century later, was incorrect in his assumption that the settlement and invasion took place c.450, by which time the Saxons had already achieved much of their power.
This new revelation lends itself to the understanding that the Saxon invasion and migration was not something that happened quickly, but rather took place gradually over decades at a time, before near contemporaries ever suspected. The reasons for that migration are in large part tied with the declining Roman state. In the Saxon society, same with the Angles and Jutes, the two other Germanic tribes that made up the migrating population to Britain, authority rested in part with the chief or king, and in part with the principal lineages of the tribe, which acted as a check to the leader's power. To go to war, for example, the kind needed the help of the noble lineages to raise a militia from the tribe, since there was no standing army. But the king could generate more authority within the tribe by having control of the economy. In this case, distant trade with Rome, an exotic foreign power, provided prestige goods that greatly impressed the community and reinforced the king's position. Some of the goods included glassware, fine pottery, and a multitude of jewels, which the king would often give away in a show of generosity, a sign of power in the Germanic tribes. So when Rome began to experience recession and inflation at its decline, the Saxons, Angles, and Jutes suffered as well. Some Anglo-Saxon tribes had structured their daily life to accommodate the Roman traders and merchants, Roman luxury goods replacing the traditional economy of the tribes. The Anglo-Saxons were forced to turn to raiding to supplement their economic needs, and as such began to target vulnerable coastal towns for their raids. At the same time, a climate shift lowered the temperatures by two or three degrees, a small amount, but enough to severely destabilize the agriculture for the Anglo-Saxon tribes. Those two to three degrees caused shorter summers and longer winters, northern crops to fail more often, river valleys to flood frequently, and livestock to be suddenly more costly to take care of during the longer winters. In short, the Anglo-Saxon tribes were subjugated to a period of unrest that greatly threatened both the accumulated power of the kings and the ability of the tribe to thrive. It became clear that they needed to seek better opportunities elsewhere.
In groups of thirty to fifty, the Anglo-Saxons began crossing over to Britain, settling down in Kent, the Thames Valley, East Anglia, and the Trent Valley over several decades. The migration accounted for several tens of thousands of immigrants, and though some met violent resistance, in areas where the Britons employed Saxons as defenders against further incursions, for the most part the Anglo-Saxon migrants were received without rancor. Compared to the million population of Britain at the beginning of the fifth century, the Anglo-Saxons weren't much of a numerical threat. The farmers of the Anglo-Saxons settled in the towns fallen to disrepair after the departure of Rome, and soon reconstructed villages controlled by Anglo-Saxons was becoming the norm. It is only later, when the Saxon army began its conquest of the island, that the Saxons were seen as a true threat. Archeological evidence supports the presence of Anglo-Saxons before the invasion, with Saxon cemeteries being found at Winchester with objects dated at least a century before the conflict, presenting the conclusion the much of the success of the Anglo-Saxons is owed to a peaceful integration underlying the conquest of war.
The Anglo-Saxons found rich ground in which to replant themselves, ecologically and politically. Because of the Briton's dependence on Rome and her military presence so much, when it left them behind, they found themselves exposed to the military force and cultural influence of the Anglo-Saxons. The collapse of the structured governing system of the Romans left a gap to be filled, and the Anglo-Saxons found themselves to be a perfect fit. As time passed, the Anglo-Saxons and the Britons found themselves coexisting without much conflict, and the Anglo-Saxon nobility didn't assert itself as rulers until a few generations had passed by. Later on, the Anglo-Saxons gained continued hold with their conversion to Christianity, culminating in the eventual conquest of the entire island in the eleventh century. There are still many gaps in the knowledge of this time in British history, the Dark Ages. But slowly historians are piecing together the narrative of Britain, and the story of what happened, and how Anglo-Saxon England came to be.
Works Cited
Pat Southern, "The Army in Late Roman Britain," A Companion to Roman Britain, Malcolm Todd ed. (The Blackwell Companions to British History: Oxford, 2004)
Thomas Wright, Esq, The Celt, the Roman, and the Saxon, (Arthur Hall, Virtue, and CO: London, 1852)
Malcolm Todd, "After the Romans," The Making of Great Britain: The Dark Ages, Lesley M. Smith ed. (Shocken Books: New York, 1984)
Mathew Innes, Introduction to Early Medieval Western Europe, 300-900 (Routledge: London, 2007)
Ian Wood, "The Final Phase," A Companion to Roman Britain, Malcolm Todd ed. (The Blackwell Companions to British History: Oxford, 2004)
Thomas Charles-Edwards, "Introduction," After Rome, Thomas Charles-Edwards ed. (Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2003)
Bryan Ward-Perkins, The Fall of Rome and the End of Civilization (Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2005)
John Hines, "Nations and Kingdoms," After Rome, Thomas Charles-Edwards ed. (Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2003)
Gildas, "The Works of Gildas," Six Old English Chronicals, J.A. Giles ed. (George Bell & Sons: London, 1885)
Richard Hodges, "The Anglo-Saxon Migrations," The Making of Great Britain: The Dark Ages, Lesley M. Smith ed. (Shocken Books: New York, 1984)
Lloyd and Jenifer Lang, Celtic Britain and Ireland, (St. Martin's Press: New York, 1990)
Fall of Rome
*This is a paper I wrote a couple months back comparing two distinguished authors' takes on the fall of Rome. Kind of dry I imagine, but something I find interesting.
Over the years, countless historians, and college students, have studied the fall of the Roman Empire. And as can be expected, many different interpretations of the fall have been spread and discussed. Some, such as author Peter Brown, believe a more contemporary view, developed within the past few decades. This viewpoint treats the fall of the Roman empire not so much as a collapse or demise of a society, but rather a transformation of a culture because of outside influences. This belief focuses on the spread of religion and the accommodation of barbarian culture as some of the main driving forces behind that cultural change. Others, such as Bryan Ward-Perkins, believe that the fall of the Roman empire was indeed a collapse of a society, and resulted in the dramatic decline of standard of living and economic prosperity for most of the former empire. For these people, the invasion of barbarians was indeed an invasion, with violence and force at the front of the actions. Bryan Ward-Perkins' The Fall of Rome and the End of Civilization and Peter Brown's The World of Late Antiquity exemplify the two opposite viewpoints that are among the most often discussed.
One of the key areas on which Peter Brown and Bryan Ward-Perkins differ is the interpretation of the coming of the Germanic peoples, or simply "the barbarians," to the Roman Empire, and the result. Ward-Perkins said in his book that Brown "was able in his book to narrate the history of these centuries [200 AD - 700 AD] 'without paying lip service to the widespread notion of decay'" (Ward-Perkins 4). This aptly sums up the view of Brown's book on the barbarians. In fact, Brown has only one chapter discussing the role of the Germanic peoples within the Western and Eastern Roman Empires, and within that section uses the very word invasion when paired or associated with "so-called." Brown says of the invasions:
These invasions were not perpetual, destructive raids; still less were they organized campaigns of conquest.Rather, they were a 'gold rush' of immigrants from the underdeveloped countries of the north into the rich lands of the Mediterranean(Brown 122).
A rather different outlook on the situation, and almost completely doing away with the notion of violent invasion once so-often associated with the barbarians. The barbarians arrived in the West facing a society fragmented by its own heightened sense of identity and increased boundaries, leading to an intolerance of those different to them, even, or especially, within its own empire. The conflicting forces of the pagan Latin culture and the new-come Christian cultured created an empire that lacked the strength to resist the oncoming barbarian tribes, and one that was so inflexible that it couldn't influence the barbarian incursion enough to preserve their own Roman life (Brown 122). But because of the stagnant nature of the Roman senate and military, the barbarians found themselves in a position of high power. Barbarian warrior-aristocracy was integrated into the system by being offered posts of in the High Command. But with the Roman aristocracy resenting having to include barbarians within the power structure, and the Catholic Church unwilling to accept such men of war as the barbarians, the powerful barbarians were surrounded on all sides by hostility if not out-right opposition (Brown 124-125). And because of this, the barbarian tribes were forced to maintain their own identity, and as such were in a better position to change the nature of Roman society than the Romans to change barbarian society.
War-Perkins, however, has a rather different point of view. Unlike Brown, he maintains that the incursion of the barbarians was indeed a violent invasion, one that was decidedly unpleasant for the Roman people, especially those of the Western empire. For him, the barbarians "seized or extorted through threat of force the vast majority of the territories in which they settled, without any formal agreement on how to share resources with their new Roman subjects" (Ward-Perkins 12). Many historians typically cite a treaty between Rome and the Visigoths in 419, in which the Visigoths were granted some land in Aquitaine, but by the end of the century, the area of land controlled by the Visigoths had expanded in all directions, claiming an area of land many times larger than the original grant, and this land was taken either by force or threat of force from the Roman government or Roman provincials (Ward-Perkins 14). Even within Italy itself, the Emperor was forced to grant an extensive tax relief to the people up and down the peninsula, for the damage caused by Goths marching throughout the peninsula between 401 and 412, and a separate force of Goths that invaded the north-central region of Italy between 405 and 406. The damage was so great that even with the vastly reduced taxes, some provinces were still unable to pay them up to ten years after the invaders had left (Ward-Perkins 16).
Peter Brown's and Bryan Ward-Perkins' books all differ based what each does not talk about. In his book, Ward-Perkins chooses not to address the factor of religion with regard to the fall of Rome, other than to mention theories of historians such as Gibbon and A.H.M. Jones, in which the latter said, "the Christian church imposed a new class of idle mouths on the resources of the empire . . . a large number lived on the alms of the peasantry, and as time went on more and more monasteries acquired landed endowments which enabled their inmates to devote themselves entirely to their spiritual duties" (Ward-Perkins 41). Or, as Gibbon put it more succinctly, these are the "specious demands of charity and devotion" (Ward-Perkins 41). Ward-Perkins acknowledges these theories as having some effect on the fall of the empire, but he moderates them by paying so little attention to their subject. In contrast, a very large portion of Brown's book is dedicated largely to the effect of Christianity and religion on the transformation of the empire. The new barbarian rulers helped to spread Catholicism, because within the territories that once comprised the Western Roman empire, it was now an actual worry that Roman culture would be submerged, so the Church began asserting itself, trying harder and harder to create a united culture that could resist change. However, with more and more people converting to the Catholic faith, it was becoming more and more common for common people to focus more on their own smaller communities and their local ties, further strengthening the divisions created by the various gothic tribes (Brown 126-127). In their struggle to resist change, the people in turn changed further from the more united front needed to preserve the Roman culture as it once was.
As Ward-Perkins disregards religion within his book, so Brown chooses to ignore the more economic side of the fall of Rome, which Ward-Perkins chooses to dedicate several chapters to. Ward-Perkins uses several different sources to prove that in the post-Roman West, the economic decline was such that the standard of living for most areas declined to levels before the foundation of the Roman Empire. Chief among the evidence used is of pottery and coins. With regard to pottery, after the decline of the empire, material sophistication vanished. Markets that once distributed basic but still well made items to middle and lower class citizens were no longer in existence. In looking at the locally distributed pottery found in areas such as Britain, when compared with the quality of Roman times, the pottery found was extremely less friable and impractical (Wards-Perkins 104). In addition, the quantity of post-Roman pottery decreased dramatically, meaning that circulation of household goods had likely ground to a halt. And with regard to coins, the daily use of coinage had virtually disappeared in many areas of the post-Roman West (Ward-Perkins 111). These coins were once used daily, and were a fair indicator of the economic sophistication of the empire, and their absence indicates a decrease in levels of sophistication for much of the West. For most areas, without copper coins to facilitate small trade, and with no new coins being minted, much of the exchange in small markets would be done in barter or raw bullion for larger purposes (Ward-Perkins 118). With some exceptions, economic levels had dropped significantly for much of the empire.
The debate concerning the fall of the Roman empire will never truly end. There are so many theories and facts to be found, that any attempt for one overriding theory would never completely cover everything. However, the constant debate and comparison of the various arguments help to bring to light the general trends that expose as much of the truth as possible. As to which theory is more correct? As with most historical arguments, there is no black and white answer. History is painted in shades of gray, and it's up to us to try and complete the picture.
Over the years, countless historians, and college students, have studied the fall of the Roman Empire. And as can be expected, many different interpretations of the fall have been spread and discussed. Some, such as author Peter Brown, believe a more contemporary view, developed within the past few decades. This viewpoint treats the fall of the Roman empire not so much as a collapse or demise of a society, but rather a transformation of a culture because of outside influences. This belief focuses on the spread of religion and the accommodation of barbarian culture as some of the main driving forces behind that cultural change. Others, such as Bryan Ward-Perkins, believe that the fall of the Roman empire was indeed a collapse of a society, and resulted in the dramatic decline of standard of living and economic prosperity for most of the former empire. For these people, the invasion of barbarians was indeed an invasion, with violence and force at the front of the actions. Bryan Ward-Perkins' The Fall of Rome and the End of Civilization and Peter Brown's The World of Late Antiquity exemplify the two opposite viewpoints that are among the most often discussed.
One of the key areas on which Peter Brown and Bryan Ward-Perkins differ is the interpretation of the coming of the Germanic peoples, or simply "the barbarians," to the Roman Empire, and the result. Ward-Perkins said in his book that Brown "was able in his book to narrate the history of these centuries [200 AD - 700 AD] 'without paying lip service to the widespread notion of decay'" (Ward-Perkins 4). This aptly sums up the view of Brown's book on the barbarians. In fact, Brown has only one chapter discussing the role of the Germanic peoples within the Western and Eastern Roman Empires, and within that section uses the very word invasion when paired or associated with "so-called." Brown says of the invasions:
These invasions were not perpetual, destructive raids; still less were they organized campaigns of conquest.Rather, they were a 'gold rush' of immigrants from the underdeveloped countries of the north into the rich lands of the Mediterranean(Brown 122).
A rather different outlook on the situation, and almost completely doing away with the notion of violent invasion once so-often associated with the barbarians. The barbarians arrived in the West facing a society fragmented by its own heightened sense of identity and increased boundaries, leading to an intolerance of those different to them, even, or especially, within its own empire. The conflicting forces of the pagan Latin culture and the new-come Christian cultured created an empire that lacked the strength to resist the oncoming barbarian tribes, and one that was so inflexible that it couldn't influence the barbarian incursion enough to preserve their own Roman life (Brown 122). But because of the stagnant nature of the Roman senate and military, the barbarians found themselves in a position of high power. Barbarian warrior-aristocracy was integrated into the system by being offered posts of in the High Command. But with the Roman aristocracy resenting having to include barbarians within the power structure, and the Catholic Church unwilling to accept such men of war as the barbarians, the powerful barbarians were surrounded on all sides by hostility if not out-right opposition (Brown 124-125). And because of this, the barbarian tribes were forced to maintain their own identity, and as such were in a better position to change the nature of Roman society than the Romans to change barbarian society.
War-Perkins, however, has a rather different point of view. Unlike Brown, he maintains that the incursion of the barbarians was indeed a violent invasion, one that was decidedly unpleasant for the Roman people, especially those of the Western empire. For him, the barbarians "seized or extorted through threat of force the vast majority of the territories in which they settled, without any formal agreement on how to share resources with their new Roman subjects" (Ward-Perkins 12). Many historians typically cite a treaty between Rome and the Visigoths in 419, in which the Visigoths were granted some land in Aquitaine, but by the end of the century, the area of land controlled by the Visigoths had expanded in all directions, claiming an area of land many times larger than the original grant, and this land was taken either by force or threat of force from the Roman government or Roman provincials (Ward-Perkins 14). Even within Italy itself, the Emperor was forced to grant an extensive tax relief to the people up and down the peninsula, for the damage caused by Goths marching throughout the peninsula between 401 and 412, and a separate force of Goths that invaded the north-central region of Italy between 405 and 406. The damage was so great that even with the vastly reduced taxes, some provinces were still unable to pay them up to ten years after the invaders had left (Ward-Perkins 16).
Peter Brown's and Bryan Ward-Perkins' books all differ based what each does not talk about. In his book, Ward-Perkins chooses not to address the factor of religion with regard to the fall of Rome, other than to mention theories of historians such as Gibbon and A.H.M. Jones, in which the latter said, "the Christian church imposed a new class of idle mouths on the resources of the empire . . . a large number lived on the alms of the peasantry, and as time went on more and more monasteries acquired landed endowments which enabled their inmates to devote themselves entirely to their spiritual duties" (Ward-Perkins 41). Or, as Gibbon put it more succinctly, these are the "specious demands of charity and devotion" (Ward-Perkins 41). Ward-Perkins acknowledges these theories as having some effect on the fall of the empire, but he moderates them by paying so little attention to their subject. In contrast, a very large portion of Brown's book is dedicated largely to the effect of Christianity and religion on the transformation of the empire. The new barbarian rulers helped to spread Catholicism, because within the territories that once comprised the Western Roman empire, it was now an actual worry that Roman culture would be submerged, so the Church began asserting itself, trying harder and harder to create a united culture that could resist change. However, with more and more people converting to the Catholic faith, it was becoming more and more common for common people to focus more on their own smaller communities and their local ties, further strengthening the divisions created by the various gothic tribes (Brown 126-127). In their struggle to resist change, the people in turn changed further from the more united front needed to preserve the Roman culture as it once was.
As Ward-Perkins disregards religion within his book, so Brown chooses to ignore the more economic side of the fall of Rome, which Ward-Perkins chooses to dedicate several chapters to. Ward-Perkins uses several different sources to prove that in the post-Roman West, the economic decline was such that the standard of living for most areas declined to levels before the foundation of the Roman Empire. Chief among the evidence used is of pottery and coins. With regard to pottery, after the decline of the empire, material sophistication vanished. Markets that once distributed basic but still well made items to middle and lower class citizens were no longer in existence. In looking at the locally distributed pottery found in areas such as Britain, when compared with the quality of Roman times, the pottery found was extremely less friable and impractical (Wards-Perkins 104). In addition, the quantity of post-Roman pottery decreased dramatically, meaning that circulation of household goods had likely ground to a halt. And with regard to coins, the daily use of coinage had virtually disappeared in many areas of the post-Roman West (Ward-Perkins 111). These coins were once used daily, and were a fair indicator of the economic sophistication of the empire, and their absence indicates a decrease in levels of sophistication for much of the West. For most areas, without copper coins to facilitate small trade, and with no new coins being minted, much of the exchange in small markets would be done in barter or raw bullion for larger purposes (Ward-Perkins 118). With some exceptions, economic levels had dropped significantly for much of the empire.
The debate concerning the fall of the Roman empire will never truly end. There are so many theories and facts to be found, that any attempt for one overriding theory would never completely cover everything. However, the constant debate and comparison of the various arguments help to bring to light the general trends that expose as much of the truth as possible. As to which theory is more correct? As with most historical arguments, there is no black and white answer. History is painted in shades of gray, and it's up to us to try and complete the picture.
Poem: Unconcious
Submerged under water, a body
Breath bubble, trickle
I see through opaque windows
Kissing with lips
Hallways, bruises
A touch
Breath bubble, trickle
I see through opaque windows
Kissing with lips
Hallways, bruises
A touch
Piracy
In the past few years, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) has begun to address, with extreme prejudice, what they believe to be a serious and debilitating issue: file sharing, or piracy as it is usually called. They quickly blamed the phenomenon for the recent decline in sales of the music and recording industry, and began to bring both file sharing media, such as Napster, and individual perpetrators to court, imposing fines which some believe to be ridiculous amounts as penalties. However, while music piracy may have been responsible for some of the industry's declining revenues, it is nearly impossible to point out an exact number or to determine the severity of the decline, because the decline has been affected by a bad economy, and a lack of any quantity of big releases. Big record companies see the losses and the trend of file sharing, and assume that file sharing is the cause of declining sales. But little does the public know the ways record companies can exploit the music artists for profit. The theoretical effect of file sharing on record sales is ambiguous, but there lies the possibility that file sharing, so-called piracy, could ultimately be beneficial to the music industry and culture as a whole.
A problem with pinpointing causation between record sales and file sharing is that most of the information about the phenomenon is gathered through surveys. These surveys commonly compare the purchases of retail CD's by people who do download music from P2P servers to those who don't. The problem is that the former category of P2P users would most likely not buy CD's in any case, since file sharing typically appeals to those who are time-rich but cash-poor. So a person who has plenty of time, but no money with which to buy CDs, will download perhaps a few songs from the album. To this end, file sharing might actually improve the music industry, by acting as a promotional medium. If someone downloads a few songs only, it would appear unlikely that he or she would purchase the entire album. In this way, P2P acts much like the radio, but unlike the radio, music labels don't need to pay sums of money to get their songs promoted, making the business of promoting music more competitive and thus less expensive for the music industry. In the case of the time-rich but cash-poor persona, what P2P file sharing does is exposes the individual to the music, acting as a sampler to find music one would otherwise not be exposed to, making one more likely to attend other money-making enterprises for the music industry, such as concerts, the major means by which artists make their money, or might even buy the album in the future.
In an effort to find some relationship between file sharing and music industry sales, Oberholzer and Strumpf (2007) conducted research over a period of several years, in which they observed directly P2P servers and file sharing sites, and applied information they gleaned to several experiments, surveys, and comparisons with regard to music sales. In one such observation, Oberholzer and Strumpf discovered that file sharing decreased sharply over the summer, from about May to September. They concluded that this was because college students, possibly the largest source of file sharing and piracy, were away from their high speed internet connections. The author's hypothesis that if downloads crowd out actual album purchases, then there should be an increase in album sales over the summer vacation. When the sales over summer of 2007 were compared to those of 1995-1998, the fours year before the introduction of Napster, they discovered that the average share of summer sales had remained virtually the same, 37.0 percent in the earlier years compared to 35.9 percent in the later years. In a second experiment to determine if there were any spatial variables, Oberholzer and Strumpf compared sales and P2P activity across the United States. Since a third of US downloads come from western European countries such as Germany and Italy, P2P downloading must be affected by time zones, because peak file sharing period runs between 7:00 pm and 3:00 am. These times overlap between Western Europe and the East Coast, but not with the West Coast, implying that P2P interaction and file sharing activity would be more common on the East Coast, and indeed this is the case. Now, if file sharing was negatively affecting the music industry, then there should be a larger decrease in sales on the East Coast than on the West Coast. This is not, however, the case. The difference in sales in 1998, the last year before Napster came out, and 2002, there was also virtually no difference, 43.9 percent compared to 43.5 percent, respectively, for sales shares on the East Coast. These statistics imply a negligible effect of file sharing on total album sales. Taking the most negative findings in Oberholzer and Koleman's research, file sharing "reduces an album's weekly sales by a mere 368 copies, an effect that is too small to be statistically distinguishable from zero." The natural conclusion drawn from these numbers is that the effect of music pirating on the overall music industry is minimal.
Assuming the claim file sharing negatively affects music sales, the truth of the matter is that the only ones affected would be the recording companies and labels, who exploit the creativity of the artists through unfavorable contracts. Retail price of CD's generally range between 15 and 17 dollars, yet the artist is lucky to see $1.50 of that, and for most young bands it's more like 8 percent, and an established band is very lucky to get 15 percent revenue. The revenue is based on the standard retail price, sold in retail stores like Barnes & Noble or Tower Records (now out of business). For every album sold outside of a retail store, artists receive a fraction of the total revenue. For example, records sold outside of the US will bring in maybe 60-75 percent of the standard revenue, 60 percent for albums sold at a discount, and 50 percent for sales through record clubs. In addition, any music sold on the internet also brings in a fraction of the contract revenue. Music labels also often have the artists pay for the packaging of the CD, and pay the producer out of their revenue, deducting another 3 percent from the total revenue, in effect turning a standard 11 percent revenue into a 6-7 percent revenue. In addition, the artist or band must pay back any advancement given to them by the record company, and until that time it is standard for an artist not to see a single revenue check until the advancement is paid. Advancements typically range anywhere between $100,000-$500,000, which means that even if a band makes a gold record-that is 500,000 copies sold-they might not see a penny of their revenue. And for most bands, with standard contracts, after any touring or merchandising is finished-the areas where bands make most of their money-they'll still be in debt to the record companies. With all the money spent on videos, recording, busses, t-shirt manufacturing, new instruments, and paying for the managing fees, a band can be in debt for more than $14,000, and that's if the band's record did well. And if file sharing really does harm sale, then the only ones effected are the recording companies, and the effect on the music artists themselves is practically nil. The only feasible way for artists to make money is concert tickets and merchandise, both of which are only helped by file sharing. File sharing in this case acts as a promotional tool, letting people who typically would not buy a CD in any case sample music for free, and are in fact encouraged to become fans of more and more artists. This naturally increases concert attendance, which in turns increases the revenue of artists. The only ones who conceivably lose out are the big record companies, who use unfair record contracts to make their money off of artists.
There are many factors that contribute to the decline in music sales over the past few years. For example, music sales have shifted dramatically to discount retailers such as Wal-Mart, reducing inventories, and thus making album shipments fall to less than actual sales. There are several other variables that the music industry fails to consider, variables that are inherent in the system of distribution, but the industry refuses to look beyond what they have pegged as the cause of their decline. They sue hundreds of college students and families a week, charging up to $150,000 per song. They sued Brianna, a 12 year old girl, one of 261 people arrested in a week. She could face penalties as high as $150,000, and even have a permanent mark on her record. As her mother said, "This is a 12-year-old girl, for crying out loud."
Copyright laws are meant to protect the artist. The laws are meant to ensure that artists can earn money for the work they create, and don't have to worry about being taken advantage of. If this is the case, then why are the only ones being protected by anti-file sharing laws the record companies? The record companies take advantage of the artists' work and make money off of it, the same as if absolutely no copyright laws existed. Artists create what their name implies: art. Whereas before art would fall to the public domain after 14 years, now 70 years must pass before that happens. This literal wait of a lifetime detracts from public conversation of expression, with tributes, remixes, and recreations no longer available to people within a free democracy. Overall, the only people being helped by the restrictive copyright laws are the record companies, rather than the artist or the intended audience. Take away the some of the restrictions, allow a more free exchange of music and art, and you might find that everyone-the music artists, the public, and even the people who sell the albums-will benefit.
Works Cited
Albini, Steve. "The Problem with Music," http://www.negativland.com/albini.html, 1990.
Campbell, Richard. Media and Culture: An Introduction to Mass Communication (New York: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2009).
Hosler, Mark. "Digital Freedom." http://www.digitalfreedom.org/utilities/2008/10/mark-hosler- from-negativland-visits.html. 30 October 2008.
Oberholzer, Felix and Strumpf, Koleman. "The Effect of File Sharing on Record Sales: An Empirical Analysis." (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago, 2007). http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1086/511995, 15 March 2009
Silverthorne, Sean. "Music Downloads: Pirates, or Customers?" http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/4206.html
"12-Year-Old Sued for Music Downloading," New York Post, http://foxnews.com/story/0,2933,96797,00.html. 19 March 2009.
"Music Industry Contracts," http://www.musiclaw.me/musiccontracts.html, 19 March 2009.
A problem with pinpointing causation between record sales and file sharing is that most of the information about the phenomenon is gathered through surveys. These surveys commonly compare the purchases of retail CD's by people who do download music from P2P servers to those who don't. The problem is that the former category of P2P users would most likely not buy CD's in any case, since file sharing typically appeals to those who are time-rich but cash-poor. So a person who has plenty of time, but no money with which to buy CDs, will download perhaps a few songs from the album. To this end, file sharing might actually improve the music industry, by acting as a promotional medium. If someone downloads a few songs only, it would appear unlikely that he or she would purchase the entire album. In this way, P2P acts much like the radio, but unlike the radio, music labels don't need to pay sums of money to get their songs promoted, making the business of promoting music more competitive and thus less expensive for the music industry. In the case of the time-rich but cash-poor persona, what P2P file sharing does is exposes the individual to the music, acting as a sampler to find music one would otherwise not be exposed to, making one more likely to attend other money-making enterprises for the music industry, such as concerts, the major means by which artists make their money, or might even buy the album in the future.
In an effort to find some relationship between file sharing and music industry sales, Oberholzer and Strumpf (2007) conducted research over a period of several years, in which they observed directly P2P servers and file sharing sites, and applied information they gleaned to several experiments, surveys, and comparisons with regard to music sales. In one such observation, Oberholzer and Strumpf discovered that file sharing decreased sharply over the summer, from about May to September. They concluded that this was because college students, possibly the largest source of file sharing and piracy, were away from their high speed internet connections. The author's hypothesis that if downloads crowd out actual album purchases, then there should be an increase in album sales over the summer vacation. When the sales over summer of 2007 were compared to those of 1995-1998, the fours year before the introduction of Napster, they discovered that the average share of summer sales had remained virtually the same, 37.0 percent in the earlier years compared to 35.9 percent in the later years. In a second experiment to determine if there were any spatial variables, Oberholzer and Strumpf compared sales and P2P activity across the United States. Since a third of US downloads come from western European countries such as Germany and Italy, P2P downloading must be affected by time zones, because peak file sharing period runs between 7:00 pm and 3:00 am. These times overlap between Western Europe and the East Coast, but not with the West Coast, implying that P2P interaction and file sharing activity would be more common on the East Coast, and indeed this is the case. Now, if file sharing was negatively affecting the music industry, then there should be a larger decrease in sales on the East Coast than on the West Coast. This is not, however, the case. The difference in sales in 1998, the last year before Napster came out, and 2002, there was also virtually no difference, 43.9 percent compared to 43.5 percent, respectively, for sales shares on the East Coast. These statistics imply a negligible effect of file sharing on total album sales. Taking the most negative findings in Oberholzer and Koleman's research, file sharing "reduces an album's weekly sales by a mere 368 copies, an effect that is too small to be statistically distinguishable from zero." The natural conclusion drawn from these numbers is that the effect of music pirating on the overall music industry is minimal.
Assuming the claim file sharing negatively affects music sales, the truth of the matter is that the only ones affected would be the recording companies and labels, who exploit the creativity of the artists through unfavorable contracts. Retail price of CD's generally range between 15 and 17 dollars, yet the artist is lucky to see $1.50 of that, and for most young bands it's more like 8 percent, and an established band is very lucky to get 15 percent revenue. The revenue is based on the standard retail price, sold in retail stores like Barnes & Noble or Tower Records (now out of business). For every album sold outside of a retail store, artists receive a fraction of the total revenue. For example, records sold outside of the US will bring in maybe 60-75 percent of the standard revenue, 60 percent for albums sold at a discount, and 50 percent for sales through record clubs. In addition, any music sold on the internet also brings in a fraction of the contract revenue. Music labels also often have the artists pay for the packaging of the CD, and pay the producer out of their revenue, deducting another 3 percent from the total revenue, in effect turning a standard 11 percent revenue into a 6-7 percent revenue. In addition, the artist or band must pay back any advancement given to them by the record company, and until that time it is standard for an artist not to see a single revenue check until the advancement is paid. Advancements typically range anywhere between $100,000-$500,000, which means that even if a band makes a gold record-that is 500,000 copies sold-they might not see a penny of their revenue. And for most bands, with standard contracts, after any touring or merchandising is finished-the areas where bands make most of their money-they'll still be in debt to the record companies. With all the money spent on videos, recording, busses, t-shirt manufacturing, new instruments, and paying for the managing fees, a band can be in debt for more than $14,000, and that's if the band's record did well. And if file sharing really does harm sale, then the only ones effected are the recording companies, and the effect on the music artists themselves is practically nil. The only feasible way for artists to make money is concert tickets and merchandise, both of which are only helped by file sharing. File sharing in this case acts as a promotional tool, letting people who typically would not buy a CD in any case sample music for free, and are in fact encouraged to become fans of more and more artists. This naturally increases concert attendance, which in turns increases the revenue of artists. The only ones who conceivably lose out are the big record companies, who use unfair record contracts to make their money off of artists.
There are many factors that contribute to the decline in music sales over the past few years. For example, music sales have shifted dramatically to discount retailers such as Wal-Mart, reducing inventories, and thus making album shipments fall to less than actual sales. There are several other variables that the music industry fails to consider, variables that are inherent in the system of distribution, but the industry refuses to look beyond what they have pegged as the cause of their decline. They sue hundreds of college students and families a week, charging up to $150,000 per song. They sued Brianna, a 12 year old girl, one of 261 people arrested in a week. She could face penalties as high as $150,000, and even have a permanent mark on her record. As her mother said, "This is a 12-year-old girl, for crying out loud."
Copyright laws are meant to protect the artist. The laws are meant to ensure that artists can earn money for the work they create, and don't have to worry about being taken advantage of. If this is the case, then why are the only ones being protected by anti-file sharing laws the record companies? The record companies take advantage of the artists' work and make money off of it, the same as if absolutely no copyright laws existed. Artists create what their name implies: art. Whereas before art would fall to the public domain after 14 years, now 70 years must pass before that happens. This literal wait of a lifetime detracts from public conversation of expression, with tributes, remixes, and recreations no longer available to people within a free democracy. Overall, the only people being helped by the restrictive copyright laws are the record companies, rather than the artist or the intended audience. Take away the some of the restrictions, allow a more free exchange of music and art, and you might find that everyone-the music artists, the public, and even the people who sell the albums-will benefit.
Works Cited
Albini, Steve. "The Problem with Music," http://www.negativland.com/albini.html, 1990.
Campbell, Richard. Media and Culture: An Introduction to Mass Communication (New York: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2009).
Hosler, Mark. "Digital Freedom." http://www.digitalfreedom.org/utilities/2008/10/mark-hosler- from-negativland-visits.html. 30 October 2008.
Oberholzer, Felix and Strumpf, Koleman. "The Effect of File Sharing on Record Sales: An Empirical Analysis." (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago, 2007). http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1086/511995, 15 March 2009
Silverthorne, Sean. "Music Downloads: Pirates, or Customers?" http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/4206.html
"12-Year-Old Sued for Music Downloading," New York Post, http://foxnews.com/story/0,2933,96797,00.html. 19 March 2009.
"Music Industry Contracts," http://www.musiclaw.me/musiccontracts.html, 19 March 2009.
Thinking About Descartes
*Note: This is a response to a philosophy class discussion on Descartes.
Descartes says, "the decay of the body does not imply the destruction of the mind," implying that the mind and body are two distinct entities, and claims they are separate, and even opposite of one another. This is further supported by the idea that as long as one possesses thought, one exists, regardless of whether the physical body that we know exists or not. But what about alzheimer's? The decay of the brain, which is a physical aspect of the perceived body, leads to a decay of the mind, a discrepancy of thought. An old man who once was capable of great things now is limited by the decay of his body; his thoughts are hedged in. He is no longer able to function as he was once able.
Take the case of Charles Whitman, the Texas Tower Sniper of August 1, 1966, as another example of mind decay. He was responsible for the death of 14 individuals, and for 31 wounded. He was diagnosed with a tumor in his brain, which caused irrational and violent thoughts, leading to the heinous actions. It was because of a physical problem that his mind was warped.
So what does this imply for the thought of an afterlife, if the mind is so strongly affected by the physical body? Descartes talks of wax, and how easily the senses are fooled by it. But what if the body is much like a wax figure? Ever changing, ever being reshaped. Experiences of a lifetime change the way we think, the way thoughts are perceived or processed in the mind, so thus mind is changed as well. Which seems to make sense, for the mind is surely different from when we are children to when we are adults. And even if all the experiences that happened are false, that does not change the fact that physical experiences changed the mind in some way. So the body and mind and both malleable, both wax figures, changing from one state to another. Is the death of the body merely another change of state? Does that mean that the mind changes state as well? Or does it die with the brain, tied so tightly to the physical changes the brain goes through. However, no matter the change of state in the wax, it is still wax, it still remains. No one can deny that the body still exists after death, so then would the mind not also remain?
Descartes says, "the decay of the body does not imply the destruction of the mind," implying that the mind and body are two distinct entities, and claims they are separate, and even opposite of one another. This is further supported by the idea that as long as one possesses thought, one exists, regardless of whether the physical body that we know exists or not. But what about alzheimer's? The decay of the brain, which is a physical aspect of the perceived body, leads to a decay of the mind, a discrepancy of thought. An old man who once was capable of great things now is limited by the decay of his body; his thoughts are hedged in. He is no longer able to function as he was once able.
Take the case of Charles Whitman, the Texas Tower Sniper of August 1, 1966, as another example of mind decay. He was responsible for the death of 14 individuals, and for 31 wounded. He was diagnosed with a tumor in his brain, which caused irrational and violent thoughts, leading to the heinous actions. It was because of a physical problem that his mind was warped.
So what does this imply for the thought of an afterlife, if the mind is so strongly affected by the physical body? Descartes talks of wax, and how easily the senses are fooled by it. But what if the body is much like a wax figure? Ever changing, ever being reshaped. Experiences of a lifetime change the way we think, the way thoughts are perceived or processed in the mind, so thus mind is changed as well. Which seems to make sense, for the mind is surely different from when we are children to when we are adults. And even if all the experiences that happened are false, that does not change the fact that physical experiences changed the mind in some way. So the body and mind and both malleable, both wax figures, changing from one state to another. Is the death of the body merely another change of state? Does that mean that the mind changes state as well? Or does it die with the brain, tied so tightly to the physical changes the brain goes through. However, no matter the change of state in the wax, it is still wax, it still remains. No one can deny that the body still exists after death, so then would the mind not also remain?
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Hard News Editing
Original Information
1. Child Abuse Prevention Center in Baltimore released a survey yesterday showing that three to four children die every day in the United States from child abuse or neglect, along with evidence showing the cases of child abuse have increased to 2.7 million, from 2.5 million the previous year.
2. MILWAUKEE – Yesterday nearly 150 anti-abortion protestors were arrested for disorderly conduct during a three-day demonstration, intended to last six weeks, of over 2,5000 people.
3. Yesterday a delivery driver for a Chinese food restaurant was robbed of his delivery at gunpoint at 718 S.W. Western Avenue.
4. A casual cigarette cause over $45,000 in damages to Kathy Maloney's home in the 2300 block of Main Street last night.
5. Colorado murders are up 53 percent according to a report release yesterday by the Colorado Bureau of Investigation, but the number of rapes and robberies have decreased significantly.
6. A ten percent increase in skin cancer cases over the next decade could be a real scenario, as United Nations scientific panel released a report yesterday showing that damage to the earth’s ozone layer is increasing.
7. A Santa Ana woman was charged with attempted murder yesterday after June Carter, 71, doused her husband, who was confined to a wheelchair and had cancer, with rubbing alcohol and set him on fire.
8. Broadband users have finally surpassed dial-up users due to lower broadband prices; 53 percent of residential users now use broadband, according to Nielsen/NetRatings.
9. In an effort to stem grade inflation, Princeton University put a cap on the number of A's that can be awarded this school year.
10: Approximately 70 million people in the United States are affected by a sleep problem, according to the National Sleep Foundation, which cause an estimated $100 billion to the American people annually.
1. Child Abuse Prevention Center in Baltimore released a survey yesterday showing that three to four children die every day in the United States from child abuse or neglect, along with evidence showing the cases of child abuse have increased to 2.7 million, from 2.5 million the previous year.
2. MILWAUKEE – Yesterday nearly 150 anti-abortion protestors were arrested for disorderly conduct during a three-day demonstration, intended to last six weeks, of over 2,5000 people.
3. Yesterday a delivery driver for a Chinese food restaurant was robbed of his delivery at gunpoint at 718 S.W. Western Avenue.
4. A casual cigarette cause over $45,000 in damages to Kathy Maloney's home in the 2300 block of Main Street last night.
5. Colorado murders are up 53 percent according to a report release yesterday by the Colorado Bureau of Investigation, but the number of rapes and robberies have decreased significantly.
6. A ten percent increase in skin cancer cases over the next decade could be a real scenario, as United Nations scientific panel released a report yesterday showing that damage to the earth’s ozone layer is increasing.
7. A Santa Ana woman was charged with attempted murder yesterday after June Carter, 71, doused her husband, who was confined to a wheelchair and had cancer, with rubbing alcohol and set him on fire.
8. Broadband users have finally surpassed dial-up users due to lower broadband prices; 53 percent of residential users now use broadband, according to Nielsen/NetRatings.
9. In an effort to stem grade inflation, Princeton University put a cap on the number of A's that can be awarded this school year.
10: Approximately 70 million people in the United States are affected by a sleep problem, according to the National Sleep Foundation, which cause an estimated $100 billion to the American people annually.
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
In-Class Editing
a. PANORA, Ia. – This small town welcomed home one of its soldiers Friday, but instead of jubilant well-wishers, there were 525 mourners who packed every corner of the United Methodist Church, and instead of a parade down Main Street, there was a stream of cars that stretched from the church to the West Cemetery outside of town.
b. There were flags at half-staff, there were red, white and blue ribbons tied to flower sprays that surrounded the altar and there were tears – of grief, not joy.
c. To the rest of the country, Army Spec. Michael Mills was one of 191 Americans killed in the war, he was one of 28 people killed Feb. 25 when an Iraqi suicide bomb exploded, but to the 1,100 people here, Mike Mills was the 23-year-old hometown boy who carried on a family tradition by joining the Army, and his funeral Friday provided a somber contrast to the joyous reunions held for returning troops throughout the country.
PANORA, Ia. – Mourners flooded the streets and churches when 23-year-old Army. Spec Michel Mills' body was returned to his home town. Mills was one of 28 people killed in a suicide bombing Feb 25.
The United Methodist Church was filled with 525 grievers, and the streets played host to streams of cars between the church and the West Cemetery outside of town. There were flags at half-staff, there were red, white and blue ribbons tied to flower sprays that surrounded the altar and there were tears in many eyes.
Mills had followed family tradition by joining the Army, and his heartbreaking death rings strongly throughout the 1,100 close people of Panora. The scene played a stark contrast to joyous reunions and celebrations taking place around the country.
The rest of the country may feel for the loss of Mills, but to them he is one of the 191 Americans killed in the war. But to the small Iowa town, he was a known member of a community, and one whose loss will ache for years to come.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
