Showing posts with label History. Show all posts
Showing posts with label History. Show all posts

Monday, March 6, 2023

Remember the Alamo!, maybe


The Battle for the Alamo ended 187 years ago today.  Following a thirteen day siege, the Mexican army under President General Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna reclaimed the Alamo mission.  Most of the occupants and fighters within the mission were killed.

"Remember the Alamo!" 

The battle cry of the Texians in the Battle of San Jacinto would become an unofficial motto of the state, propelling the site into the public consciousness and to perhaps a loftier position that it deserves.  Within weeks of the battle, it was even compared to the Battle of Thermopylae in the Greco-Persian Wars.  Like many things, the myth is more understood than the reality.  And that myth has a tangled history.

The myth often ignores and downplays the contributions of the native Tejano population in the defense of the Alamo and their contributions to the broader Texas Independence movement.  It downplays the problematic underpinnings of Texas Independence, started in part as opposition to Mexican policies regarding the abolition of slavery and the curtailing of immigration from the United States to Texas.  It overplays the certain death the defenders of the Alamo felt, as there was initial hope for support coming to aid them.  It creates dramatic lines in the sand that never existed.

As such, your perception of the Alamo depends on your background.  Especially because the myth is popular.

"There can be little doubt that most Americans have probably formed many of their opinions on what occurred at the Alamo not from books, but from the various movies made about the battle."  

Films certainly have done much to continue to perpetuate the myth of the Alamo.  Films of the Alamo date as far back as 1911 with The Immoral Alamo by George Melies.  And this spirit continued in the Davy Crockett television show (all myth) and the 1960 John Wayne The Alamo, which have continued to present the battle as the ultimate heroic sacrifice.  "There is not a single scene in The Alamo [1960] which corresponds to a historically verifiable event."  Meanwhile, the more character driven and historically accurate 2004 film, The Alamo, while praised by critics for its accuracy, bombed at the box office.

So, here's my plea for you today. Please, do remember the Alamo.  We don't need to go as far as the call of "Forget the Alamo" that was written in opinion columns a few years ago.

Instead, let's just remember it completely.  Let's understand all of the complexities of the battle.  All of the actors, all of the contributors.  

Let's enrich our understanding of history, not just continue to perpetuate myth and legend.

Because the truth is so much more interesting.



Wednesday, January 27, 2021

Holocaust Remembrance Day

Today is International Holocaust Remembrance Day.  It commemorates the tragedy of the Holocaust, remembering the genocide that resulted in the death of an estimated 6 million Jews, 8.7 million Slavs, 1.8 million ethnic Poles, 220,000 Romani people, 250,000 mentally and physically disabled people, 312,000 Serb civilians, 1,900 Jehovah's Witnesses, and 9,000 homosexual men by the Nazi regime.  Honoring the anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz concentration camp on January 27, 1945 and the end of the Holocaust.

We remember and commemorate these events so that we never forget them.  So that we learn from them, for that is the purpose of history.  For us to be able to look back and see the events that led to such events and to be able to recognize them as they occur around us.

"The International Day in memory of the victims of the Holocaust is thus a day on which we must reassert our commitment to human rights [...]

We must also go beyond remembrance, and make sure that new generations know this history.  We must apply the lessons of the Holocaust to today's world.  And we must do our utmost so that all peoples may enjoy the protection and rights for which the United Nations stands."

Former United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon, January 19, 2008

The learning of history, the application, is sadly where we are falling down.  It's part of a bigger discussion of how we learn history, how we teach history.  Another big question for a future blog.  But on this topic, we can see the evidence around us of our failure as a society to completely grasp the lessons of the Holocaust.

Anti-semitism, though not at its highest levels, remains relatively high.  In the European Union, 89% of respondents that had identified as Jewish indicated that anti-Semitism had increased over the last five years in their country.  Further, 40% of respondents feared a physical anti-Semitic attack.

In the United States, the Anti Defamation League found that there had been 1,879 anti-Semitic incidents in 2018, slightly down from 2017, but still at a historically high level.  The New York Police Department has said that there have been more anti-Jewish incidents in the city in 2019 than all other crimes added together.

There are bright spots, reflecting a willingness, an eagerness to learn and to not forget.  The University of Southern California's Shoah Foundation features more than 52,000 Holocaust testimonies that are frequently accessed.  The U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum had more than 1.6 million visitors in 2018, 93% of which were non-Jewish.

We still have a long way to go, though.  Only 11 states require that Holocaust history be taught in school.  This is reflected in the gaps in education of the current generation.  Among millennials, 66% of them could not identify Auschwitz, 22% of them could not confirm hearing of the Holocaust.  If you want an excellent film on why this is important, watch Denial, a historical film based on Deborah Lipstadt's work and case against noted Holocaust denier David Irving.

It seems history is more important to us than ever before.  If only we would listen.  May we never forget and may we ever be vigilant.

Tuesday, July 14, 2020

Bastille Day


Today, the people of France celebrate Bastille Day, in remembrance of the storming of the Bastille on July 11, 1789.  King Louis XVI dismissed the Finance Minister Jacques Necker, who was sympathetic to the Third Estate, the working class.  The working class became afraid that their representatives would be attacked and sought ammunition for the general population.  The Bastille, the fortress-prison of Paris, held a large cache of ammunition and gunpowder, and acted as a symbol of the French monarchy, holding political prisoners.  Previously in the day, Les Invalides had also been stormed, for similar reasons. 

The storming of the Bastille marked a turning point in the French revolution.  Within a little over a month, feudalism in France would be abolished on August 4, and the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen would be proclaimed on August 26.  

Celebrations for the day started as early as a year later.  On July 14, 1790, the Fête de la Fédération was held to celebrate the unity of the French people.  Nearly one hundred years later, the celebration would be made official, the Fête Nationale, or National Celebration.

Typically, the day would hold one of the oldest and largest military parades in Europe.  This year, because of the global pandemic, the military parade was suspended.  Instead, the celebration was recalibrated to honor medics, postal workers, and other essential workers that have been heroes of the pandemic.  President Emannuel Macron used the celebration to admit past mistakes in handling of the pandemic and to focus on French recovery, instituting a mask mandate for all enclosed public spaces starting August 1 and outlining a €100 billion recovery plan.

We remember these events, we remember the French revolution, the American revolution because of what they created.  The French revolution decriminalized heresy, blasphemy, and witchcraft; ended one of the oldest European monarchies with a republic based on universal male suffrage; introduced no-fault divorce and easy adoption; embraced the ideal of formal equality before the law; and for at least a short time, championed universal employment, education, and subsistence as basic human rights.


Prior to the revolution, fear swept across the country.  Businesses started collapsing.  A select few made huge fortunes.  Panicked customers start hoarding - paper, food, weapons, whatever they can get their hands on.  The government's reaction was inconsistent and ineffectual.  Ordinary commerce ground to a halt.  Political factionalism grew more and more intense.  

Then everything fell apart.

That sounds eerily prescient, doesn't it.  

Are we on the precipice of a similar revolution?  There is so much division in this country, so much rancor, to the point we've even politicized public health and safety.  We're attacking each other over whether someone wears a mask to protect the general population.  We're at each others throats with so much change necessary.  We still have to address deep racial issues in this country.  We have to address an ever increasing wealth gap and the destruction of the middle class.  We still have many situations in which we still allow legal discrimination on what should be protected classes of people.

A change is certainly coming.  The question becomes do we learn from history.  Do we go through a Reign of Terror and a military dictatorship like France to come through stronger, or do we forge a different path?

In that spirit, I hope we learn the lessons of Bastille Day well.  

bonne Fête Nationale

Sunday, June 2, 2019

Following Judas: The Judas of History


6. The Judas of History

Judas as a historical figure even brings controversy.  There are scholars who believe that Judas Iscariot is largely a fiction or device created for the narrative.  In his book Antisemitism and Modernity (2006), Jewish scholar Hyam Macoby suggests that, in the New Testament, the name "Judas" was constructed as an attack on the Judaeans or on the Judaean religious establishment held responsible for executing Jesus.  A form of the argument against Passion plays, which were historically used to drum up feelings of Anti-Semitism.  John Shelby Spong, concurred in his book The Sins of Scripture (2009), insisting, "The whole story of Judas has the feeling of being contrived...The act of betrayal by a member of the twelve disciples is not found in the earliest Christian writings.  Judas is first placed into the Christian story by the Gospel of Mark (3:19), who wrote in the early years of the eighth decade of the Common Era."  Or 80 AD.

In fact, early Christian writers had little interest in Judas.  The betrayal had remained a dark spot for the young church, and as such, the apologetic literature of the second century carefully avoided the subject.  Judas did grow in legend, developing more and more the evil character and terrible end of the betrayer.  We only know of this because of Ireaneaus and the Papias fragment.  We do not find any mention in expected sources like Justin, Hermas, Josephus, or Clement.  The Gnostics would then be the first to meditate on Judas, as we've seen in the Apocrypha section. Origen of Alexandria, 185-254 A.D. would then be the first to write about the historical and theological implications of the betrayal in his Commentaries on the New Testament.

These concerns may be a bit overstated.  The name Judas is actually used in the New Testament to refer to several individuals in a positive light including the prophet Judas Barsabbas, Jesus's brother Jude, and the apostle Judas the son of James.  It was an extremely common name for Jewish men during the first century.  Further, while First Corinthians does not mention Judas explicitly by name, it does refer to "the night when he was betrayed" regarding the Lord's Supper.  While the translation for paradidomi should perhaps be "was handed over" instead of "was betrayed," either could refer to Judas and his betrayal.  First Corinthians has been dated back to 53-54 AD.

Generally, the acceptance of Judas Iscariot as a historical figure is widely accepted.  Most other details are up for debate.

A. Iscariot

While Judas is relatively easy to trace, the epithet Iscariot or Ὶσκάριωθ or Ὶσκαριώτης, is not.  Generally, Iscariot is thought to be a Greek rendering translating to "the man from Kerioth," a town in the south of Judea.  This particular translation is supported by the reference to his father as "Simon Iscariot" in John 6:71.  This would place both men as from that particular location.  Such a translation would make Judas the only disciple who was not from Galilee.  As Robert Cargill, assistant professor of classics and religious studies at the University of Iowa and editor of Biblical Archaeology Review, "Jesus is from the northern part of Israel, or Roman Palestine.  But [Judas's] surname might evidence that he's from the southern part of the country, meaning he may be a little bit of an outsider."

A popular alternative explains that Iscariot is a corruption of the Latin word sicarius, meaning "dagger man," which referred to a member of the Sicarii, a group of Jewish rebels and the earliest known organized assassination units of cloak and daggers.  The Sicarii were known for committing acts of terrorism in the 40s and 50s AD.  In particular, they assassinated people in crowds using long knives hidden under their cloaks.  Much of what is known about the Sicarii comes from the writings of the early historian Josephus.  This interpretation is problematic, as there is nothing else to tie Judas to the Sicarii, especially given they were only known to be active after his death.

Many other explanations have been offered from it meaning the "false one" or "liar," to meaning "red color," to it being associated with "chokiness" or "constriction" to indicate he was the hanged.  There is disagreement as to whether it is a posthumously applied epithet to it being a descriptive name given by Jesus, like Cephas to Peter.  It is simply unclear and not explained in any text that we have.  Cargill summarizes, "We're not sure Judas was from the South, and we're not sure Judas was Sicarii.  These are attempts to see if there may have been something up front that set Judas apart from the rest.  Because people are always trying to explain - why would he have done this?  Why would Judas have betrayed Jesus?"

B. The Betrayal

Judas's betrayal is generally accepted in history.  As quoted in the introduction to this series, it is one of the two basic facts we know about Judas.  According to New Testament Scholar Bart D. Ehrman, the betrayal "is about as historically certain as anything else in the tradition."  The betrayal is independently attested to in the Gospel of Mark, the Gospel of John, and the Book of Acts. It is unlikely early Christians would have made up the betrayal, as it would have reflected poorly on Jesus's judgment in choosing him as a disciple.  With the act of betrayal as a certainty, motivation becomes the part still fought over.

Origen of Alexandria would make it part of his philosophical writings through his Commentary on Matthew's and John's Gospel, with his writings dating back to sometime after 200 AD.  Origen moved beyond the Judas legend to as "How could Christ take a thief and betrayer among his closest followers?"  Origen still regards Judas as a covetous keeper of the moneybag, but he looks far beyond that information to the deeper questions.  Origen insists Judas possessed a full apostleship; i.e. that he was a "good apostle" on whom Jesus had put "a good hope."  But he also recognizes that as surely as Judas had once lived as a good apostle, he likewise found himself a slave to sin where he was no longer a servant of God.  To Origen, Judas's greed likely served as the foothold Satan needed to lead Judas to betray Jesus.  That Judas through free will made a choice to turn away from God and to pursue the path of betrayal.  This examination provides a theologically sound exploration of Judas's life and act of betrayal.

Greed has been continually pointed to as a primary source for the motivation, based on its mention in scripture.  "There have always been those who have wanted to tie Judas's betrayal to the fact that he had a love of money."   It does raise several questions though.  If Judas's only motive was greed, why didn't he ask for more money?  The thirty pieces of silver would have only bought a field.  Victorian art critic John Ruskin adds a little color to this question.  "Stupidity is always the basis of the Judas bargain.  We do great injustice to Iscariot, in thinking him wicked above all common wickedness.  He was only a common money-lover, and, like all money-lovers, did not understand Christ;-could not make out the worth of Him, or meaning of Him. He never thought He would be killed.  He was horror-struck when he found that Christ would be killed; threw his money away instantly, and hanged himself.  ...Judas was a common, selfish, muddle-headed, pilfering fellow; his hand always in the bag of the poor, not caring for them.  Helpless to understand Christ, he yet believed in Him, much more than most of us do; had seen Him do miracles, thought He was quite strong enough to shift for Himself, and he, Judas, might as well make his own little bye-perquisites out of the affair.  Christ would come out of it well enough, and he have his thirty pieces."

Other suggestions have cropped up throughout history.  One suggestion has been that Judas was a zealot and was following Jesus because he believed Jesus would be the new King of Israel.  He expected Jesus to overthrow Roman rule of Judea.  This is used to explain Judas's betrayal, as he would seemingly be forcing Jesus's hand to act, and to explain his remorse, in that he never intended for Jesus to die, he just wanted him to fight.

Others have taken a completely opposite view.  That perhaps Judas believed Jesus was causing unrest likely to increase tensions with Rome.   This Judas would have betrayed Jesus because he thought they should be restrained until after Passover, when things had died down.  Judas would have here been attempting to prevent a riot or large scale confrontation.

Each of these has a combination of personal gain and unintended consequences, used to tie together the betrayal and the remorse.  I think this is important in our understanding of how we act like Judas.

C. Death

Historians have attempted to reconcile the two accounts of Judas's death presented in Matthew and in the book of Acts.  Augustine of Hippo suggested a literal interpretation in which the two accounts are viewed as describing different aspects of the same event. Judas hanged himself in a field and the rope or branch snapped, sending him falling down such that his body burst open.

The early Church Father Papias of Hierapolis offered a much different version of the death of Judas in his Expositions of the Sayings of the Lord, likely written in the early 100s AD.  According to Papias, Judas was so afflicted by God's wrath that his body became so enormously bloated that he could not pass through a street with buildings on either side.  His face became so swollen that a doctor could not even identify the location of his eyes using an optical instrument.  His genitals became enormously swollen and oozed with pus and worms.  It is this state that leads Judas to commit suicide by pouring his guts onto the ground of his own land.  According to Papias that it stank so horribly that even a century later, people still could not pass the site without holding their noses.  This story has remained popular, even competing with the Gospel accounts of Judas's death.

--------------------

Though historical writings and theories on Judas are scarce, they do provide interesting possibilities for motive.  They also provided inspiration for much of the art and literature surrounding the Passion and Judas's role in it.

Sunday, March 17, 2019

The Feast Of Saint Patrick

Today we have a reminder of the influence of the Irish on our American heritage. Thirty- three million people or 10.5% of our population tracing their heritage to Ireland. There are over five times more people with Irish heritage in America than there are Irish in Ireland. 

Today, we recognize them as a pillar of the American melting pot. Celebrated communities in the Northeast. Pioneers in the westward expansion. 

And yet, for the majority of their immigration pathway here, they were discriminated against. Viewed as less than. Inferior. 

Hated and feared for their religious differences (Catholics v Protestants). For their ethnic differences (Celts v Anglo-Saxon). For a language barrier. For their work class. No Irish Need Apply. 

On this day when we celebrate the patron saint of Ireland. His capture into slavery and conversion.  His ministry and dedication to Ireland. His driving out Druids, or “snakes,” out of Ireland.  And the Irish history and heritage of our country. 

Why don’t we celebrate by honoring that history. By owning up to complicated history that it is. And by looking at how we treat any immigrant to our country. By committing to not making the same mistakes. 

We can keep up the old traditions. Wear green. Drink green beer. Raise a glass high. 

But I think that the list above might be a far better way to celebrate today.

Happy St. Patrick’s Day!