Showing posts with label 1490s. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1490s. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 24, 2024

Saturday, January 24, 1874. The Pratulin Massacre.

On this day in 1874 the Pratulin Massacre occurred in which the Imperial Russian Army shot down thirteen Greek Catholic (Ruthenian) congregants who had gathered to protest the forced assignment of a Russian Orthodox Priest to their parish.


The city today is in Poland, on the border with Belarus.

Ruthenians are members of an Eastern Rite Church which was first separated from the West at the time of the Great Schism, but which came back into communion with Rome in 1646.  Contrary to what might be supposed, particularly today, after time and distance passed from the 1054 schism and its renewed 1492 schism various Eastern Rite bodies that were in the Orthodox communion did start to come back in, with it indeed being the case that several Russian Orthodox Bishops came back in.  In Imperial Russia, however, this was violently opposed, including in the case of at least one of the bishops.  In the instance of Pratulin, this was one of several such instances as Russian Orthodox clerics were assigned to Ruthenian parishes against their will.

Monday, December 4, 2023

Messed Up Animal Ecology. Why you can't separate out your favorite animal, and demonize your least favorite, and make a lick of sense.

The other night on the local news, some guy from some environmental outfit was yapping about "wild horses", equating them "with other wild animals like deer and elk", and suggesting that cattle need to be removed from the range.

One of the things he brought up about cattle were their numbers, in comparison to "wild" horses.

His argument was intellectually bereft, but then arguments in this area often are.

Winslow Homer painting of a (fairly thin looking) plow horse.  Lots of "chunks" were let go in the 30s when their owners droughted out, their descendants still roaming the range today.


There are no wild horses in North America at all.

None, nada, zippo, "0".

There are a little over 64,000 feral horses, all in the West, in the Western United States.  If we include burros, which at least nobody pretends are a wild animal, there are 82,000 feral equines.  

All wild equines stem, at the very oldest, from animals that were brought on to the continent in 1519.  Quite a few probably don't really have any Spanish blood in their veins at all, and hail from horses much more recently brought in. There's fairly good evidence that in the upper West horses came down out of Canada, not up from Mexico.  

Some poor coureur des bois awakened one morning, in other words, and thought "Chu dans marde! Mon cheval est parti!"


"Bourgeois" W---r, and His Squaw" by Alfred Jacob Miller, depicting a coureur des bois and his Native American spouse.  This is a famous painting, but we're not supposed to like it now.  One art museum notes about it:  "These words, which shaped how Miller's contemporaries viewed the watercolors, reveal the racism and sexism embedded in 19th-century exploration and colonization of the western part of what is today the United States."  Oh, horse crap.  Most trappers were culturally French, and the French had intermixed with the native population from day one.  This could just as easily be "guy and his wife."  The comment itself imposed an Anglo-American view on a Franco-American and Native American landscape.

Moreover, the introduction date to the Native Americans, at least on the Northern Plains, is much more recent than supposed, and even then, they didn't take them right up.  Indeed, among the Shoshone it produced a big argument, with the arguers, mostly young men, taking off and acquiring the name "The Arguers", i.e., Comanche.

In the 1930s, a lot of farmers in the West droughted out and simply let their horses go, including stocky draft horses, i.e., "chunks". Then again, in the 1970s the numbers of wild horses expanded as recent imports abandoned pasture pets out on the range and went back to their homes in Port Arthur, or wherever, and even now some of that happens.  The majestic broom tail of the range today may have been Little Becky's 4H project before she left for UW, died her hair purple, and started protesting for Hamas.

Okay, so what about cows?

Long horn in a herd of Angus or Black Baldies.  I'm not really sure how this bovine ended up in this herd.

They came in at just about the same time, or earlier.  Cattle were brought to the Caribbean as early as 1493 by Columbus, which is really early.  "In 1492 Columbus sailed the Ocean Blue", but in 1493 the livestock truck, basically, pulled up to the dock.  Cows can and do go wild, but nobody gets very romantic about it, and there isn't a Wild and Free Ranging Cow Act.  Nobody goes by the moniker "Wild Cow Annie".  A wild cow we had went rogue and recruited other cows to her rogue wild cow band, which shows how wild they can get.  A neighboring rancher, caught her and shipped her as a menace. We got the check, and were happy for that end.

There are about 90,000,000 head of cattle in the United States as of this past summer, down from 100,000,000 in 1998.  

Okay, that's a lot of cows.

Which bring back our ignorant protagonist's point.  Before Columbus came and said "let's stock this range and lose some horses doing it", he seems to argue, the rangeland was empty of large ungulates.

Um, nope.

There were something like 50,000,0000 to 75,000,000 buffalo.



But, gee, Yeoman, that would mean that the entire ungulate supporting range of North America has always had a lot of large ungulates on it. . . 

Yep, that's what it means.

Currently, there are about 20,500 Plains bison in wild herds and an additional 420,000 in commercial herds, which we are supposed to pretend are wild herds.

Given our inability to accurately state how many head of anything were on the Pre Columbian landmass, what this basically tells you is the ungulate population hasn't changed very much.  Overall populations of large wild animals, i.e., "big game" are way up, however, due to water projects and farmed fields.

So the entire Cow Bad/Horse Good argument is pretty flawed.

Now, the line of last defense on this is that cows cause global warming. That's because cows fart.

Buffalo don't.

Umm. . . 

Well, buffalo do, but only Febreeze.



Well, no, they fart methane too.

In reality, all mammals fart, but some fart more than they otherwise would due to diet.  You already know this due to your coworker who has, every day, the Lumberjack Special at Hefty Portions for breakfast, followed by the Ejército del Norte special at El Grande Conquistador for lunch, a quart of scotch around 2:00 p.m., and goes home and has his spouse's Roast Wildebeest Surprise for dinner (all Keto approved, of course).  The only real argument here, therefore, is that maybe cattle ought not to be finished off on corn, which they probably wouldn't normally do unless somebody left a gate down. That likely makes them gassy.

Lascaux painting of aurochs, approximately 36,000 years ago.  Note also the deer/roebucks and horse depicted.

Taking this out worldwide, I'd note, cattle are native to the entire rest of the planet in some form, save for Australia.  Wild cattle ranged Europe, Asia and Africa.  They aren't new here, and they've been wondering around chewing their cuts and farting for longer than we've been a species.

So back to environmental destruction.

The first real notable example of it was Cottonwood bottoms in the American West.  During the winter, buffalo hang out in them.  Feral horses took it up.  And mounted Native Americans, who previously had a pretty limited impact on the environment, did too.

But you can't really say anything about that.

Monday, October 9, 2023

A thought about not thinking things through on Indigenous Person's Day.

Wyoming politician Bob Ide is saying he's going to sponsor a bill to take the Federal domain into state hands, requiring, as if Wyoming can require the Federal Government to do anything, the fulfillment of a promise that the Federal Government never made at the time Wyoming became a state.

In fact, the opposite was true.  Wyoming promised not to seek any more Federal land than it was getting.

But a promise was made regarding those lands. . . to the Cheyenne, Arapahoe and Sioux tribes. . . that being that they could keep them for hunting grounds.

And a larger reservation than they currently have was originally given to the Shoshone.

In her campaign to displace Liz Cheney, Harriet Hageman emphasized the hardworking nature of her family and forebearors, and has been a standard-bearer of conservative and populist values in her brief time in Congress. She's from, she related, a fourth generation ranching family.

But most families that have been in agriculture in Wyoming that long, outside the descendants of British remission men, are remote beneficiaries of a gigantic government system which used Federal agents, in the form of the U.S. Army and Federal Indian Agents, to dispossess the occupants of that land, sometimes by force, and remove them to where they did not want to go, so that the land could be transferred free or cheaply to European Americans.  Those original European American occupants, we might note, in the case of homesteaders, were not the wealthy and were perfectly willing to take advantage of a government program.

My point?

Well I don't mean to be one of those who are going to engage in hagiography of any one group of American people, Natives nor European Americans, but on this day it might be worth remembering something.

The "pull up by the bootstraps" argument that the middle class, or lower upper class, so frequently states, or imagines about themselves, fails pretty readily upon close examination.  Almost every class of American with longstanding roots in the country that have been here for quite some time benefitted from a government program, whether that be homesteading, Indian removal by the Army, the mining law of 1872, the Taylor grazing act (which saved ranching in the West), the GI Bill, and so on.

That is, in fact, the American System.  Not the Darwinian laissez-faire economics that libertarians so often proclaim.

I'm not demanding reparations, or that injustices committed to people of the past be retroactively lamented.  Indeed, that's pointless.  What I’m suggesting instead is that justice be done for those now living, and that as part of that we admit when we are vicariously beneficiaries of some Federal program in the past, as I am.

And as part of that, I'm also suggesting that we don't engage in myths or hagiographies about our own predecessors.  Nobody carved a civilization out of an empty wilderness, unless we go back in North America 15,000 years.  Nobody promised that Wyoming could have the public domain.  None of us are as independent or virtuous as we pretend, if we pretend that we are, and nobody's ancestors were hearty bands of go it alone giants.

Shoot, even Columbus, if you prefer to ponder him on this day, was on a state funded mission.

Thursday, July 6, 2023

Western angst and spinning history.

I don't know if it was the anniversary of the raid, or what, but my Twitter feed for some reason picked up a link to a story about a large raid by the Barbary Pirates on the coast of Ireland.  In 1631 the pirates raided Baltimore, Ireland, in the County of Cork.  The town was not large, but between 100 and 300 of its inhabitants were abducted.  Only two made it back to Ireland, in part because the English government had just enacted a law which forbid paying ransom, which was often the goal of such raids.

The article that was linked in was scholarly, and noted that what would have occured is that, for the most part, children would have been separated from their parents and everyone sold into slavery when it became obvious that they would not be ransomed.  The male slavery would have been of the grueling work variety.  Women would have largely been sold as sex slaves, which the articles like to call "concubines".  

The reason that I note this here is that the author, again it was a scholarly article, felt compelled to blame the raids on the Spanish expulsion of the Moors from the Iberian Peninsula.  That process has commenced in 1492, and it was completed, effectively, in 1614.  The entire period wasn't a peaceful one, and in the Mediterranean various nations raided each other.

The final stages of the story are more complicated, in Spain, than might at first be imagined, as by the 1600s the "Moriscos" weren't actually Muslim, but rather Spanish descendants of Berbers and Arabs who were Catholic, but who retained Berber/Arab ancestry. Some claim they were "crypto Islamic", but more likely they were Catholics who retained some folk connection to their ancestor's prior religion.  Indeed, it'd be worth noting that Islam itself has a murky origin connection with Christianity, and this may have been confusing at the street level.  Anyhow, the last stages of this seem to be an ethnic spat, but it did have the effect of expelling Moriscos to North Africa, where they were absorbed ultimately into the local population, or to distribute them across Spain where the same thing occured.

Anyhow, blaming the Baltimore, and other Barbary Pirate, raids on this event is stretching it.  I suppose you could argue that the general belligerency of the Mediterranean contributed to the raiding atmosphere, and both sides did that, but that traces back to the rise of Islam in the first place, which was spread by the sword.  That this process went on, in one fashion or another, for a thousand years, and in some cases to this very day, does not mean that much except that the long arch of history and the fact that events play out over decades or centuries is the rule, and only seems to be odd to us, as we're used to everything occurring rapidly.

Anyhow, the author claimed that the children were treated with "utmost kindness".  Really?  Separating them from their parents, sending their fathers off to early grueling slave induced deaths and selling their mothers as sex slaves?  And then they'd end up slaves themselves, with boys often ending up enslaved soldiers and girls. . . sex slaves.

What BS.

The same author claimed that the women were sold into "concubinage", which is sex slavery in this context, and lived lives of "relative luxury", as if this weird image of the Playboy ethos had the women looking forward to this life of chattel status while they still retained their desirability.  The reality of it is that they had value as they were exotic, and bought for their physical attributes alone.

Why this story has to be spun in this fashion is really remarkable. We're supposed to feel some guilt for the story of the kidnappers and slavers, and even look kindly upon some of the grossest examples of slavery that are around.

None of this is to excuse Western conduct, whatever might be sought to be excused. Slavery was common amongst all Mediterranean societies, Christian and Islamic, but what played out with the Barbary pirates was not.  They engaged in slave raids, and forced sex slave status of captured women was endorsed by the Koran, although frankly probably not really in the form that was practiced here (it likely applied to women captured as a result of warfare, not that this makes it a lot better).  Putting a gloss on any kind of slavery, moreover, is bizarre.  When people attempt to do that, as many once did and a few still try to do, in regard to American slavery, we're rightly appalled.  This isn't any better.

The West has had a hard time reconciling an imperial past with its democratic values, and one way it tries to cope with it is by making Westerners always be the baddies.  The story of empire is a complicated one, but the 100 to 300 inhabitants of Baltimore didn't have much to do with it, and neither, really, did the Barbary pirates. Slavery was always bad and this sort of slavery gross.  Kidnapping people is always bad.  There are always bad people.  The Barbary Pirates don't need to be portrayed as if they're Captain Morocco, or something, in a Marvel movie.

Wednesday, December 23, 2020

Oddities of Cultural and Historical Correctness.

King Ferdinand II of Aragon and Queen Isabella I of Castile, two Spanish monarchs whose regal motto was Tanto monta, Isabel como Fernando, or They amount to the same, Isabella and Ferdinand, symbolizing their equality as monarchs, something further cemented by a prenuptial agreement to that effect. Among the successes of their unification of the Spanish crown and the accompanying unification of most of the Iberian peninsula under a single, Spanish, crown, was the launching of the Spanish Empire through the sponsorship of Christopher Columbus' endeavor.  Did we note that they were Spanish?

Denver has renamed Columbus Park "La Raza Park".

Because, as we know, Christopher Columbus was a racist colonizer.

La Raza, we're informed, is a name that has all positive connotations for Hispanics of all ethnicities.

It translates as "the race".

Now, in using that term, we need to be careful.  Many people if they called themselves "the race" would be using a term that would be, after all, racist.  Particularly if you were using a term associated with a racist colonial endeavor.

Christopher Columbus, as we know, was a racist colonizer.

He was working for the King and Queen of Spain. . . who were Hispanics. . . and whose Spanish conquest created . . . well. . . "the race".

So, Denver, in an effort to be culturally pure has taken away from a park the name of an Italian contractor with the Hispanic crown and renamed the park for the results of his work, in actual terms.

Things get complicated when you seek to be woke.

Tuesday, May 12, 2020

The Reassessors: St. Ignatius of Loyola


He was ordained a cleric at an early age, but received a release from his vows and became a soldier.  He was noted to be vainglorious in this period.  A battlefield wound lead to a long period of painful books during which his request for books about chivalry was met instead with religious works as the castle he was recuperating in had those and not the former.

This lead to a profound conversion, lead an austere life, dedicated himself to study, and ultimately returned to the clergy.  He founded the Society of Jesus, the Jesuits.

Sunday, May 10, 2020

May 10, 1920. Carranza ousted, Flappers appear, Home Rule denied, Sims criticized.

On this day in 1920 it became clear that Carranza had been ousted from control in Mexico, the price he paid for trying to dictate who his successor would be.  Mexican rebels were now in control of 25 of 28 Mexican states.


We'll play out the story of Carranza, a major figure in Mexican history, over the next few days. Suffice it to say, however, it's hard to feel sorry for him.  He was a haughty arrogant person who was responsible, if indirectly, for the demise of one of the most admirable figures of the Mexican Revolution, Emiliano Zapata, and now his story was playing out like that of those whom he'd replaced.


The pattern was also set by these events, although it had been by prior ones as well.  The Mexican Revolution was consuming itself.

Another place where a revolution was going on, Ireland, saw an attempt at reviving home rule as a solution when a bill to restore an Irish parliament was considered in London. That bill was defeated.

Ireland had its own parliament from 1297 until 1800, so in considering the bill, the British parliament was considering reviving an institution, on a wider grounds, that had ceased to exist 120 years prior with the Act of Union.

Irish history is really complicated, but the creation of the first Irish parliament really reflected the Anglo Norman ascendency in the country.  Ireland had no unity prior to the Norman invasion of the island and the Normans looked to the English crown for protection.  Over time the native Irish came to increasingly ignore the Anglo Normans and their parliament and as a result in 1494 the Irish parliament subordinated itself to the English one, effectively acknowledging English rule.  Following that, in 1541 English King Henry VIII, apparently not content with making a mess of things in England, declared a separate Irish Kingdom with himself at the head and began the long English attempt to dominate England and protestantise it.  That ultimately resulted in laws that banned Catholics, which the overwhelming majority of Irish were (and are), from occupying various professions, including that of parliamentarian, although the story is complicated as it did not occur all at once and things went back and forth over a long period of time in that context.

Oddly, Ireland was granted legislative independence in 1782, only to be joined to the British state in 1800 with the Act of Union. That eliminated the Irish parliament.  It didn't in any fashion end the complaints of the common Irish and even more of the more prominent Irish, who suffered under discriminatory legislation and second class citizen status.  Revolutionary movements sought to remove the English throughout the 19th Century and movements in Ireland and England were seriously considering "home rule" by the turn of that century.  That direction was firmly dominant just prior to World War One when the war put an end to the discussions, leaving Irish republicans ascendant.  Following the war the Anglo Irish War broke out and by this date in 1920 discussions on home rule were really too late.

In the US a drama was really playing out between Josephus Daniels and Admiral William Sims which dated back to Sims accusations that the US had not been prepared for the war.  While this controversy resulted in a lot of dramatic headlines at the time, Sims would emerge with an unscathed reputation and go on to a second tour as head of the Naval War College.

On this day the 1920s image of young women acquired a name.

Washington Post Photo, Miss Elizabeth Burrnett  wearing sash with a barrel labeled "Fill the Barrel" for Salvation Army fundraising campaign.  May 10, 1920.

Women's styles, and the presentation of young women in image, had been changing rapidly following World War One and probably at least partially due to it.  We've noted before that World War One saw a large percentage of women go to work to support the war and following the war there was a society wide restlessness that expressed itself in all things.  One thing that really was new was the concept of a young woman on her own.

It's really odd how this entire image has been morphed into "it was because of World War Two" when, at the same time, the events of the Roaring Twenties are really well known. We'll look at it elsewhere, but on this day the new on their own women acquired the nickname "flapper".

Oddly, flappers had probably been better presented already by the just released F. Scott Fitzgerald short story Bernice Bobs Her Hair.  But today the film The Flapper introduced the name.


The movie has a fairly typical melodramatic plot for the time involving a flirtatious 16 year old girl at a private school who passes herself off as being 20.  Probably not worth bothering with.

Monday, October 14, 2019

Today In Wyoming's History: October 14. Columbus and Duke William make the scene.

Today In Wyoming's History: October 14:

October 14

Today is Columbus Day for 2013.



1066. Duke William of Normandy defeats King Harold Godwinson as the Battle of Hastings.  The result of this battle would bring feudalism into England and result in the birth of English Common Law.



The Bayeux Tapestry depicting the vents of October, 1066.

And its Columbus Day for this year, 2019, as well.

At least in my part of the country Columbus Day doesn't mean much, other than Federal offices are closed.  In some parts of the country there are protests regarding what ultimately occurred with the arrival of European Americans in the New World, again, and this time to stay.  Indeed, in some localities it is Indigenous Peoples Day.

Columbus was working for the Spanish monarchs Ferdinand and Isabella, of course.  They were having a big year, to say the least.  On January 2, Granada, the last Moorish kingdom in Spain, had surrendered to them, having failed to receive aid from any other Muslim power.  In an odd sort of way, Granada's experience was therefore similar to that of Constantinople, the seat of the shrunken Byzantine Empire, in 1453, some forty years earlier, which had failed to secure the support of other Christian powers against the Ottomans.

Columbus' expedition is typically claimed to have sighted land on October 12, 1492, but that date was on the "Old Calendar".  Using the "New Calendar", that date is actually October 21, 1492.

It's also the anniversary of the Battle of Hastings, one of the single most important dates in English history and the history of the English speaking peoples.  Perhaps the single most important date.  Saxon England entered the feudal world and English met French.