The Real Catiline

Paper I did for 12th Grade Advanced Composition. Please keep in mind this is only a high school paper, and try and forgive the over reliance on a single source, as well as the oversimplification of some aspects of Roman politics.

In its last days, the republic of Rome was beginning to collapse under its own weight. Military conquests had brought in a new kind of luxury. The rich amassed all the wealth, the poor soon found themselves unemployed, since slaves did all the work. It was clear that things could not go on much longer, and many thought that change had come in Catiline. Catiline plotted to overthrow the Roman government, and to redistribute the wealth. Catiline’s plot was exposed, and he was killed in battle. Yet even today, we have a view of Catiline that is probably different from what he was really like. Catiline’s historical reputation is inaccurate, as can be seen from examining the style of ancient historians, looking at his probable innocence in the murder of Gratiadianus, and critically evaluating his first conspiracy.

Catiline was born in 108 B.C. He gained power from his support of Sullla, and was elected praetor, as well as the governor of Africa. His radical ideas about redistribution of property and abolition of debts gained him popularity with the lower classes, but fierce enemies among the rich. Failing to achieve his ends by legal means, Catiline plotted to seize control by force. Cicero was informed of the plot by his spies, and exposed Catiline to the Senate. Catiline and his fellow conspirators were killed (Kaplan).. Although it faired, the conspiracy was not without historical significance. Cicero’s place in history was largely secured by this event (Church 92).

The saying that the winners write the history book is glaringly true in the Catiline conspiracy. None of Catiline’s own speeches or writings have survived. The two main sources we have about the conspiracy come from Marcus Tullius Cicero, and Gaius Sallustus Crispus, both of whom had good reasons to place Catiline in an unfavorable light. From their writings Catiline emerges as a figure of satanic proportions. He was accused of almost every crime imaginable including murdering his brother in law, sister, step son, and wife, raping a vestal virgin, and practicing homosexuality. Virgil, in The Aenied, didn’t think twice about placing Catiline in hell. “There (Tartarus) Catiline hung from a threatening rock, and trembled to see the Furies’s faces;...” (221). There is much to suggest that neither the portrait of Catiline painted by Cicero, nor Sallust, can be taken at face value.

Cicero, to start with, was one of the most egotistical figures in classical history. As Michael Grant writes in his introduction to Cicero’s speeches, “Readers will be appalled at the boastfulness of Cicero. He blows his trumpet with an unremitting loudness which can scarcely be paralleled” (11). Ordinarily, if an orator wished to publish his speeches he would do so immediately after they were delivered, yet Cicero waited three years to publish his speeches against Catiline. He had much time to rewrite them during this period, and evidence suggests he probably did. His speeches appear to be too long for the Senate to have sat through, considering the emotion present. More likely, they were what the Romans called “altercation”, or give and take. Catiline’s supporters would shout one thing, and Cicero would respond to it (Grant 11).

In his own eyes, Cicero had saved Rome from the greatest danger possible. He wanted to make sure the rest of Rome knew that, and his reworked speeches do everything to maximize the danger Rome was in, and the depravity of Catiline. Michael Grant writes, “Cicero’s picture of his (Catiline’s) personal character...is too classically frightful and diabolical to be true” (72).

Sallust, on the other hand, had high expectations when he began his political career. In his writings, he claimed that any man who did not make himself great was no better than the animals, who lived only to satisfy their appetites. Sallust entered the political scene as a populare. His support of Gaius Julius Caesar caused him some humiliating setbacks at the beginning, but by 49 B.C. Caesar had acquired a position of power, and Caesar rewarded his friends well. Sallust was on the verge of attaining his consulship, the ultimate goal for all politicians, when Caesar was murdered by the optimates. The political scene changed rapidly, and it soon became clear that Sallust was to have no part in the changing order (Linderski).

Sallust’s hopes were dashed. He had spent all of his adult life (he was 45 at the time) trying to achieve greatness through politics, only to leave the scene a nobody. In writing his histories, Sallust had two purposes: to achieve greatness in his writings that he never achieved in politics, and to get revenge on the political system and people he felt had kept him from greatness.

Sallust admits putting his own words of criticism into Catiline’s mouth. Through Catiline, Sallust harshly criticizes the optimates, who had opposed him at every turn. Nor do the populares escape denunciations, since Sallust felt they had been unappreciative of his actions. In other words, all the anger and cynicism we normally associate with Catiline really belong to Sallust (Hutchinson 24-28).

Secondly, these histories were Sallust’s last chance of greatness, and he was taking no chances. He wanted his readers to be on the edge of their seat as they read about the Catiline conspiracy, wondering how Rome could possibly escape the danger, only to see it narrowly survive, the reader would breath a sigh of relief. Naturally, th reader had to passionately hate Catiline, and Sallust painted Catiline as a villain of the vilest nature (Hutchinson 24-28).

Sallust was not unique to his time in doing this. The ancients drew the line between history and story incredibly thin. Fact was often sacrificed for dramatization. Later historians writing about Catiline painted him much like Cicero and Sallust and, of course, made up events of their own to impress the reader. Most notably is Plutarch, who accused Catiline of killing his own brother, deflowering his own daughter, and eating flesh, while encouraging other young men to do the same (1046). No doubt these juicy crimes widened the eyes of his reader, but there is no apparent evidence behind them. Not only was Catiline never prosecuted for these crimes, but if there was any thread of rumor to these effects, you can bet Cicero and Sallust would have brought it up.

If all the crimes Catiline was charged with were believed to be true, he would not have been elected praetor or been allowed to stand for consul twice, much less have his array of powerful friends. In fact, few believed the crimes because it was common in ancient Rome to accuse an opponent of imaginary crimes. In schools of rhetoric, advocates were taught to make use of colours, a way of presenting insignificant facts, mixed with a few useful lies, to produce what appeared to be evidence of shocking guilt. “It had become a habit,” said Cicero (as quoted in Hutchinson 31) referring to this practice, even though he did it often himself. Also, in the law courts of the time, there were no rules of evidence. It was the duty of the prosecutor to create a maximum of prejudice. It is unfortunate that many of these fake crimes have leaked into history (Hutchinson 29-35).

Of all the crimes Catiline was accused of, the murder of Gratidianus was the most popular. To make sense of this, it should be understood that in the late republic, Rome had two main political parties: the optimates and the populares. To say that the optimates were primarily for looking out for the interests of the aristocrats, and the populares primarily concerned about helping the poor, would be an oversimplification bordering on falsehood, but perhaps a useful working definition for our purposes (Asimov 47).

Tensions between these two groups were always high, but it exploded under the influence of Marius and Sulla. Marius, the populare, was forced to flee when Sulla gained control of Rome. Narrowly escaping Sulla’s many death traps, Marius fled to Africa. Sulla, thinking Marius was dead, decided all was safe at home and left for Asia to conduct war against Pontus. Marius returned with an army to seize control of Rome. For many days the city stunk of rotting flesh as Marius conducted one of the most brutal massacres in Roman history. Everyone associated with the optimate party was murdered (Plutarch 478).

But Marius’s reign was short lived. He died of a stroke while his massacre was still in full swing. Sulla returned to regain control. Foremost on his mind was revenge. He wanted to conduct a slaughter of the populares that would exceed that of the optimates. He succeeded (Plutarch 556).

Among the victims was a man named Gratidianus, a native of Arpinum and related to Marius and Cicero. From what we know of Gratidianus, he was one of the few honest politicians Rome had. He attained popularity as a praetor by withdrawing bad money from circulation. Several statues had been raised in his honor, but he was a populare, and condemned as such (Hutchinson 39).

Catiline, although his political views would later change rapidly, was at this time one of Sulla’s right hand men. According to Plutarch, Catiline dragged Gratidianus to the tomb of Catulus, a former consul who had committed suicide to avoid being killed by Marius. In front of an applauding mob, Catiline broke Gratidianus’s legs, cut off his hands, and plucked out his eyes before finally decapitating him. After placing Gratidianus’s head at Sulla’s feet, Catiline added sacrilege to his crimes by washing his hands off in the sacred fountain of Apollo (Plutarch 946).

Yet there is sufficient evidence to doubt this story. Catiline remained on friendly terms with the populare senators, and was a successful candidate for high office. Of more importance, Sulla had insisted that the names of those who had received money for killing or betraying the proscribed (those killed by Sulla) were entered into the public records. In 67 B.C., when the quastor Cato made them refund this money, Catiline was never called into question (Hutchinson 40). The following year, Julius Caesar brought to court and condemned all those who had taken part in Sulla’s massacre. No mention was made of Catiline (Grant 19).

Catiline was first accused of murdering Gratidianus in De Petitione Consulatus, a book written to Marcus Cicero by his younger brother Quintus, on how to become successful in politics. Catiline was then later strongly attacked for this murder in “In Toga Candida”, a speech made by Cicero. It seems strange that Cicero would so strongly attack Catiline, when earlier the same year he had written the following to his friend Atticus, while Catiline was facing charges of extortion in Africa: “I design at present to defend my competitor Catiline....I hope if he be acquitted that he will be the more ready to join me in our common candidature....Catiline is a good citizen, a lover of honest men, a firm and faithful friend,” (as quoted in Hutchinson 43). It turned out that Cicero was not needed; all the senators of consular rank, and then consuls themselves gave testimony in Catiline’s favor, also indicating that he was innocent of the brutal murder. Based on the accusations made in “In Toga Candida”, Catiline was brought to court for the murder of Gratidianus, and prosecuted by Lucius Lucceius, an optimate and friend of Cicero. He was acquitted. (Hutchinson 39-41).

In 66 B.C., Publius Cornelius Sulla and Publius Autronius were elected consuls for the coming year. Unfortunately for them, they were never to see the day they would take office. They were found guilty of bribery, and disqualified, fined, and sentenced to permanent exclusion form the Senate and magistracies. Aurelius Cotta and Manlius Torquatus were elected in their place. According to traditional history, Sulla and Autronius believed they had spent too much money on the consulship to be defeated now. They soon came together with Gnaeus Calpurnius Piso, a hot-headed social revolutionary. Together the three plotted to overthrow the senate and place themselves in power.

Thinking Catiline would be sympathetic to their ideas, they approached him. Catiline eagerly accepted, and soon was dominating the whole plot. On the appointed day, Catiline was supposed to give the signal, and armed gladiators would storm into the Senate, killing all inside. Catiline, in his thirst for blood, gave the signal too soon before the gladiators had fully assembled, and the plan collapsed (Plutarch 1054).

This was known as Catiline’s first conspiracy, but it appears to be more rumor than anything else. Sallust presents it as fact, but even he has to admit that the whole thing was uncertain (Hutchinson 44). Torquatus, the consul who supposedly was marked for death, said “he had heard something of it, but believed none of it” (as quoted in Hutchinson 45). Neither a prosecution nor an enquiry was conducted, which suggests no one seriously believed the rumors. All of the so called conspirators remained on good terms with the rest of the senate, which is unlikely had the senators truly believed the conspirators planned to kill them (Hutchinson 45). Even if the conspiracy did exist, Catiline’s involvement in it was most likely minimal, if at all. R.E. Smith writes, “The truth was rather that this so called first conspiracy of Catiline was a conspiracy of two disgruntled men” (86).

To add to the confusion, two men told a different story of the conspiracy. Aedile Marcus Bibulus, and a former consul, the elder Curio, told a version picked up by some other historians, most notably Suetonius. In this version, Catiline is in the background; the two masterminds were Crassus and Caesar. On the appointed day, Caesar was to give the signal for the massacre by letting his toga fall. All the senators would be murdered, and Crassus would be set up as dictator, with Caesar as his master of the horse. When the time came, Crassus chickened out, didn’t show, and the plan was aborted (Grant 20-30).

This view also has some inconsistences in it. For one thing, it contradicts the historical view we have of Crassus and Caesar. Crassus was always cautious never to put himself in front of things, preferring to achieve his means as inconspicuously as possible (Smith 86). Caesar, at this point in his career, was known for following the Roman constitution to the letter (Smith 87). Both men were too shrewd as politicians to ever do something as daring as this. Plutarch tells us that Caesar refused the crown from Mark Antony three times, instead of just seizing power when he had the chance (Plutarch 1233). Furthermore, even if the plan had been successful, it would only have succeeded in bringing Pompey and his legions, currently stationed in Spain, back to Rome, where Pompey would have assumed the dictatorship (Smith 90).

Two-thousand years after he died, it’s hard to get an accurate picture of what Catiline really was like. Since the only information we have on him is from his enemies, it is more than likely he is different than we usually think of him. Whatever his character was, his vision was correct. The republic didn’t last much past him. The first Triumvirate was formed three years later.

Bibliography
Asimov, Isaac The Roman Republic Cambridge, Houghton Mifflin Company 1966

Cicero, Marcus Tullius Contra Catiline I-IV Rome, 66 B.C.

Church, Alfred Roman Life in the Days of Cicero New York, Bilso and Tannen, 1959

Grant, Michael Cicero: Selected Political Speeches London, Penguin Books 1969

Grant, Michael The Founders of the Western World: A History of Greece and Rome New York, Macmillan Publishing Company, 1989

Grant, Michael Julius Caesar. New York. M. Evans & Company. 1969

Hutchinson, Lester The Conspiracy of Catiline New York, Barnes and Noble 1967

Kaplan, Arthur “Catiline” (Electronic Encyclopedia) Grolier Electronic Publishing, Inc. Copyright 1995

Linderski, James “Sallust” (Electronic Encyclopedia) Grolier Electronig Publishing, Inc. Copyright 1995.

Maier, Paul Josephus: The Essential Writings Kregal Publications, Grand Rapids, 1988.

Plutarch Vitae Rome 105

Smith, R.E. Cicero the Statesman Cambridge, University Press 1966

Virgilius, Publius Maro The Aeneid Rome, 19 BC

Teacher’s Comments: I appreciate your work on transitions! You have a talent Joel! I can envision you as a history scholar. You should go for it. You’re talented. Be sure to be aware of info your reader needs to know. You improved this! Nice. Watch documentary style.
Grade 98% A

Video Version

The Black Panthers

This was a paper I wrote for high school back in 1995. The assignment was to do something related to the civil rights movement. I wanted to do a paper on the Black Panthers, and the teacher reluctantly agreed. Although I was interested, I knew nothing about the Black Panthers at the time, and the Christian High library was not a lot of help. (This was in the days before the internet really took off).
There were no books on the Black Panthers in the library, so I looked over every book I could find on the 60s or the Civil rights movement and pulled out everything that was tangentially related to the Panthers, and then threw it all together in this paper. Which is why it reads so jumbled. Like my paper on The Japanese Student Movement, I've learned a lot more about this subject in the following years, and would undoubtedly write a different paper today if I had the opportunity.

The Black Panther Party for Self Defense was organized in 1966 by Huey P. Newton and Bobby G. Seale in a ghetto in Oakland California, although the “self defense” part was eventually dropped. Its initial goal was to protect blacks from police brutality, but eventually it evolved into a communist group that combined both Marxist and Maoist ideals. The Black Panthers worked closely with white revolutionary and radical groups that shared their goals. In fact the Black Panthers worked more with white groups than any other black civil rights group at the time, which brought them into disagreements with some black groups. In particular, an alliance was formed with Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), the spearhead of counter-culture’s political movement. SDS hoped to benefit from the Panther’s publicity. The Panther’s claimed the biggest problem was “the economic exploitation of both blacks and whites by profit seeking capitalists.” The Panthers would also demand complete black control of ghettos, including business and the police, freedom for all blacks in prison, and draft exemption for Blacks from Vietnam, which they considered to be a racist war. The Panthers rejected white culture and instead chose Afro hair styles, dashiki robes, and black power handshakes. They also coined the slogan “Black is Beautiful.” Seale and Newton themselves took inspiration from Malcolm X.

The Panthers’s first challenge occured during the Chicago riots. During the hot days of July, police refused to turn on fire hydrants so black children could cool off in them. The riots ensued, and the national guard was called in. The guardsman were inexperienced and trigger happy. Several innocent blacks were killed just walking down the street. One boy was killed in his own yard bringing the garbage out. The Panthers said, “We want an immediate end to police brutality and the murder of innocent black people.”

In 1966, James H. Meredith, the first black student to attend the University of Mississippi, was killed by a sniper on a civil rights march. [Ed. Note: Actually I got this wrong. He was only wounded.] This incident caused outrage among blacks, and caused many to question if they would ever achieve their goals. John Lewis, the chairman of the Student Non-violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) struggled to keep the group peaceful, but was unsuccessful. He was replaced by Stokley Carmichael, who supported Panther ideals. By the end of the decade, the words “Non-violent” would be dropped from SNCC’s name. Carmichael was born in Trinidad, but grew up in Harlem. He was one of SNCC’s founding members in 1960, and led several student protest activities throughout his college years.

Also in 1966, the Panthers were joined by Eldridge Cleaver, who was on parole after being sentenced to twelve to fourteen years in 1958 for assault with intent to kill. Cleaver’s gift for speaking captivated many people, and he proved a valuable asset to the Panthers.

In 1967, Huey Newton was found guilty of murdering an Oakland Police officer, but the decision was reversed on appeal.

Bobby Seale was one of the “Chicago Eight”, a group that was accused of crossing state lines to start an anti-war riot at the Democratic National Convention. Interestingly, he was the only black man among the group. Nixon was out to make an example of this group, and many of them were sentenced to five years in prison. [Ed. Note: overturned on appeal]. Seale was not sentenced to prison.


In Los Angeles, three Black Panthers were killed in a shoot out with police. This incident fueled hatred between the two groups, and further shoot outs between police and panthers throughout the nation caused deaths on both sides. Cleaver himself fled to Algeria after a shooting incident in 1968. He would not return until 1975, when he claimed he had undergone a religious conversion and renounced many of his earlier beliefs. He was arrested for parole violations, and not released until 1979.

The Police claimed the Panthers were arming themselves for an all-out attack. The Panthers claimed the police were trying to exterminate them, so the Panthers sandbagged their headquarters against police attack, and armed Panther followers. While the California Senate was deliberating a gun control law that would have forced the Panthers to disarm, the Senate was rushed by 26 heavily-armed Panthers. The Panthers were disarmed by the security at the door.

That same year, Carmichael left SNCC to become the Prime Minister of the Panthers. The following are two quotes by Carmichael that reveal his views:

“When you talk of black power, you talk of bringing the country to its knees, of building a movement that will smash everything Western Civilization has created.”
And
“We have to wage a psychological battle for the right of black people to define their own terms, define themselves as they see fit and organize themselves as they see fit. We are concerned with getting the things we want, the things that we have to have to be able to function. Will white people overcome their racism and allow for that to happen in this country?”

Carmichael was replaced at SNCC by H. Rap Brown, who, after Martin Luther King’s assassination, would shout, “We must move from resistance to aggression, from revolt to revolution!” Brown would eventually aggravate Congress to pass what would be known as “The Rap Brown Act.” This act allowed peaceful protesters to be legally arrested. While arguing about this act, a Louisiana congressmen told his colleagues to “forget about the first amendment.” The Rap Brown Act was used heavily against the Panther in the following years.

Seale and other Panther leaders were accused of torturing and murdering a former Panther whom they suspected of being a police informer. The jury failed to reach a verdict.

Despite all their problems, the Panthers won support in the ghettos by feeding free breakfast to poor black children. The children were also given a free coloring book from the Panthers, which glorified killing white policemen.

In 1969, 14 police officers made an early morning raid on the apartment of Black Panther leader Fred Hampton, whom they suspected of having illegal weapons. Hampton and several other Panthers were sleeping in the apartment, when the police opened fire. Four Panthers were wounded, Hampton was killed in his bed. The police claimed they fired in self-defense, but an analysis of the area showed they had fired some 100 bullets in exchange for one from the Panthers. Panther Brenda Harris, who was in the apartment, testified in court: “They came in shooting. They shot me, they shot Mark Clark, and this other pig, he came in with a machine gun and he started shooting toward the back and they were yelling to each other, ‘There is some over there in the back. Get them’, and he would shoot over toward that direction, and he was just shooting with the machine gun, just going crazy.” Attorney General John Mitchell justified the police action, calling the Panthers a threat to National Security.

In 1969, Newton was charged with murder in a street brawl, and Carmichael resigned from the Panthers. The movement was hurting as its leaders were vanishing, and the remaining leaders quarreled constantly. Added to the decline of black radicalism, it spelled death for the Panthers.

So what happened to the leaders? Two former Panthers were implicated in the Brink Robbery incident in 1981. Newton spent three years in prison for shooting a police man, and afterwards was in and out of jail. He was last released in 1989, after serving time for a parole violation. Seale now studies and teaches at Temple University in Philadelphia. He has also published a book on barbecuing.

Teacher’s Comments: The Police used PIG, Pride Integrity Guts, to their advantage.

Caligula

10th Grade English Speech—Caligula
March 25th, 1994

I. Introduction
The Roman Empire—A forum through which ran some of the best and worst history has to offer. Commonly ranked as second only to Nero in the worst is Caligula. He came extremely close to destroying the whole Empire, and only a handful of brave men were able to stop him. They were faced with the impossible task of killing an Emperor.

II. Background
A. Childhood
1.Born in Gaul-12 AD-with the army—father Germanicus famous general
2. Named
a. Gaius Julius Caesar in honor of ancestor
b. Dressed up like soldier at three—earned the nickname “little boots”—Caligula in Latin
B. Reign
1. Became the third Emperor after Tiberious—AD 37
2. Ruled wisely for the first few months, but overtook by an unknown mental illness
3. Treasury
a. Used up by faulty spending
b. Executed rich people on false charges for their money
c. Over 38 known victims
4. Germanic tribes
a. giving him trouble—marched troops down to restore order
b. boasted he would conquer Britain also
(1). Disloyal troops made this impossible
(2). As a way out, he told troops they must first conquer the sea, and had them collect sea shells in helmet—great humiliation
III. Trouble in Judea
A. Declared himself God—ordered the whole empire to worship him as such
B. Alexandria
1. When the Jews refused to do so, Greeks burned their houses
2. Tensions rose so high that the case brought before Caligula
a. Greek spokesman—Apion—claimed Jews failed to honor the emperor
b. Jewish spokesman—Philio—cut off by Caligula
C. Statue
1. Sent Petronius to replace Legate of Syria
2. Told Petronius to march to Jerusalem and place the statue in the Holy of Holies
3. At Ptolemais—met by thousands of Jews
a. Pleaded for peace
b. Threatened revolution
c. Threatened destruction of crops—famine
4. At Tiberius
a. Same result
b. Gathered meeting—explained situation
c. Wrote a letter to Caligula saying plan wouldn’t work
5. King Aggrippa
a. Grandson of Herod the Great
b. Pleaded for Jews
c. Caligula reluctantly agreed
d. Letter from Petronius
(1). Only agitated him
(2) Ordered Petronius to commit suicide, but news of assassination reached Petronius first
IV. Asssassination
A. Three Groups
1. Originally worked without knowing about each other
2. Later joined into one group
B. Key conspirators
1. Chaerea
a. High pitched voice—Caligula mocked with hand and password
b. Liberty
c. Republic
2. Sabinus
3. Vinicianus
C. Omens
1. Sacrifices squirted blood
2. Actors at play vomited blood
D. Plan
1. Get him when he left play to bathe and lunch
2. Caligula showed signs of staying through play
3. Vinicianus—urged Chaerea to do act—stopped by Caligula
4. Chaerea almost committed assassination in theater, but Caligula convinced to leave
E. Assassination
1. Took a shorter route—unguarded alley
2. met by conspirators—Chaerea asked for password
3. Usual obscene reply
4. Chaerea struck neck
5. Caligula ran but Sabinus pushed him down
6. Stabbed thirty times—fatal blow from Aquila—41
7. Litter barrens took poles from litter to try and fight off—little good
V. Aftermath
A. German body guards
1. Arrived and cut down anyone in sight
2. Many conspirators escaped thanks to Alcyon, Physician who smuggled many out while pretending to look for supplies
B. Wife Caesonia and daughter Drusilla killed at home by Lupus
1. Wife—ran through with sword
2. Daughter—head smashed against wall
C. Claudius made emperor
1. Stuttered so Caligula had made him clown
2. Found hiding by the soldiers, and then hailed as Emperor—Caligula’s Uncle
D. Executions
1. Claudius glad of Caligula’s death, but wanted to make example
2. Chaerea and others killed
3. Public opinion against—so executions stopped
4. Sabinus felt guilty—committed suicide
VI. Conclusion
Through the valor of brave men, who risked their lives to stop a madman, the empire was saved. The republic never returned. It’s time had passed for a while. But history will always remember those who died to save the world from the corruption of power—from Caligula.

Bibliography

Barrett, Anthony. Caligula: The Corruption of Power. New Haven. Yale University Press. 1989.

Josephus. The Jewish War. Grand Rapids. Kregal Publications. 1988 (Translated by Paul Maier)

Grade: 96% A-

Teacher’s comments:
Nicely informative poster. Excellent information. Excellent conclusion. I really enjoyed everything you said.
Delivery—look at the sides as well. Don’t play with your pen.
The test of a good speech is whether you are able to retain audience attention throughout. You do this well. Keep working on delivery skills. I’d like to see your positioning reflect confidence.
Time: 7:09—long!
A-( I really wanted to give you an “A”, but for a couple of reasons I had to take off points).

Update: For my Roman History ESL Listening project, I've attempted to re-write this based off of my  old notes.  I'm hoping I got all the details right.

Google: docs, pub

Watch the Video: https://youtu.be/3PMN9OrN2Zs

Caligula 12-41A.D.
The Roman Empire—A forum through which ran some of the best and worst history has to offer. Commonly ranked as second only to Nero in the worst is Caligula. He came extremely close to destroying the whole Empire, and only a handful of brave men were able to stop him. They were faced with the impossible task of killing an Emperor.
Caligula was born in 12 AD in an army camp in Gaul.  His father was one of Rome’s most famous generals--Germanicus.
Caligula was named after Gaius Julius Caesar, who was one of his ancestors (by adoption--his great grandfather was Augustus Caesar, who had been adopted by Julius Caesar in his will.)  But Caligula enjoyed dressing up like a soldier at three years old, and so earned the nickname “little boots”, or Caligula in Latin
Caligula became the third Roman Emperor after Tiberius died in AD 37.  He ruled wisely for the first few months, but then he fell sick and suffered from an unknown illness.  This illness seemed to have an effect on his mental health, and he was never quite the same after he recovered.
Caligula used up all the money in the treasury through reckless spending.  Then, when he needed more money, Caligula had rich people executed on false charges in order to confiscate their fortunes.  There were over 38 known victims who were killed in this way.
When the Germanic tribes began to make trouble on the border, Caligula marched his troops over to restore order.  He then boasted that he would conquer Britain also.  However disloyal troops made this impossible.  As a way to save face, Caligula told the troops that they must first conquer the sea, and had them collect sea shells in their helmets.  The troops viewed this as a great humiliation.
In 40 A.D., Caligula declared himself a god, and ordered the whole empire to worship him as such.  In the Egyptian city of Alexandria, the Jews refused to do so.  There had been a long standing rivalry between the Jews and the Greeks in Alexandria, so when the Jews refused to worship Caligula, the Greeks burned down their houses. The tension in Alexandria rose so high that the case was brought before Caligula.  The Greek spokesman, Apion, spoke first.  He claimed that the Jews were failing to honor the emperor by refusing to worship him.  The Jewish spokesman, Philio, attempted to reply, but he never got the chance.  Caligula angrily cult him off. 
As a result of this conference, Caligula sent Petronius to replace the Legate of Syria.  Caligula told Petronius to march to Jerusalem and place a statue of himself in the Holy of Holies in the Jerusalem temple.
While he was still on his way, Petronius was met by thousand of Jews at the city of Ptolemais.  The Jews pleaded for peace, but also threatened revolution if the statue of Caligula was placed inside their temple  They threatened to destroy all of their crops, which would cause famine throughout the region.  At the city of Tiberias, the same thing happened.  Petronius was met by a group of Jews who also pleaded for peace, but promised they would stop at nothing to resist Caligula’s statue being placed in their temple.
At last, Petronius decided to sit down and write a letter to Caligula, explaining the situation, and telling Caligula why the plan to put his statue in the Jewish temple wouldn’t work.
While all of this was going on, Herod Agrippa, the King of Judea, met with Caligula and pleaded with him to stop his plans.   Herod Agrippa was the grandson of the famous Herod the Great, and had actually been an intimate friend of Caligula before Caligula became emperor.  Caligula reluctantly agreed to stop his plan.
It was at this moment that the letter from Petronius arrived.  Coming as it did when Caligula was still feeling disappointed about his plan, the letter only agitated Caligula further.  He wrote back and ordered Petronius to commit suicide.  Petronius, however, must have laughed when he read the letter.  News of Caligula’s assassination had reached him first.

Caligula’s Assassination
At first there were three groups working on Caligula’s assassination.  Originally they each worked without knowing about the others.  But later they joined into one group.
The key conspirators were Chaerea, Sabinus, and Vinicianus.  Chaerea was a member of Caligula’s Praetorian guard, but he had a high-pitched voice, and Caligula mocked him for it.  Whenever Chaerea had to kiss Caligula’s ring, Caligula would hold out his hand with only the middle finger extended--a gesture which meant the same thing in Roman times as it does today.   Whenever Charea was in charge of giving out the nightly passwords, Caligula would always make the password obscene.
In addition to his humiliation by Caligula, Chaerea was also motivated by his love for liberty.  He dreamed of restoring the Republic.
The other key conspirators were Cornelius Sabinus, a military tribune of the Praetorian Guard, and a Roman Senator Vinicianus.
On the appointed day for the assassination, the omens were bad for Caligula.  As he was sacrificing, the blood from the sacrifice squirted on him. When Caligula went to see a play, one of the actors got nervous, and started vomiting blood.  The other actors who were on stage were eager to show that they also had the same talent, and pretty soon the play turned in to a contest to see who could vomit the most blood.
The conspirators had planned to get Caligula when he left the play to bathe and have lunch.  However, when Caligula showed signs of intending to stay through the whole play, the conspirators began to panic.  Vinicianus urged Chaerea to do the act, and Chaerea almost committed assassination in the theater, but in the end Caligula was convinced to leave.
Caligula took a shorter route out of the theater than normal through an unguarded alley, where he was surrounded by conspirators.  Chaerea asked Caligula for the password of the day.  Caligula, suspecting nothing, gave his usual obscene reply.  Chaerea stabbed Caligula in the neck.  Caligula ran, but Sabinus pushed him down.  Caligula was stabbed thirty times.  The fatal blow is credited to a man named Aquila.  During this time, Caligula’s litter barrens took poles from the litter and tried to fight off the assassins, but it did little good.
After the assassination, Caligula’s German bodyguards arrived on the scene.  Fiercely loyal, they began taking their revenge by cutting down anyone in sight.  Many people were killed, both conspirators and innocent bystanders alike.  However, many of the conspirators also escaped thanks to Alcyon, a physician who smuggled many out while pretending to look for supplies.
After escaping from the German bodyguards, Chaerea began to get nervous that Caligula’s wife and daughter were still left alive, and so he sent a soldier named Lupus to go to Caligula’s house and take care of them.  Lupus killed Caligula’s wife, Caesonia, by running her through with a sword.  He killed Caligula’s daughter, Drusilla, by smashing her head against the wall.
Meanwhile, while the German bodyguards were looking for the assassins, they found Caligula’s uncle, Claudius, hiding behind a curtain.  Claudius had a speech impediment that made him stutter, so Caligula had mocked Claudius and used to force Claudius to dress up as a clown.  But when the German bodyguards found Claudius hiding behind the curtain, they hailed him as the new emperor.
The new emperor, Claudius, was glad of Caligula’s death.  But, nevertheless, since he was emperor now, he did not want to reward people who assassinated emperors.  He needed to make an example of them.  Claudius had Chaerea, and several other of the conspirators killed.  Public opinion turned against these executions, so Claudius had the executions stopped before all the conspirators were killed.  But Sabinus felt guilty about being left alive after the others were killed, and Sabinus committed suicide.
Through the valor of brave men, who risked their lives to stop a madman, the empire was saved. The republic never returned. Its time had passed. But history will always remember those who died to save the world from the corruption of power—from Caligula.

Video Version

A Tale of Two Cities

Video Version HERE 

A Tale of Two Cities: High School Book Review

1. Book: A Tale of Two Cities

2. Author: Charles Dickens

3. Genre: Historical Fiction

4. Setting: The Book takes place in France and England during the late seventeen hundreds. Dickens probably described the mood of the book best himself when he wrote, “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times...” The book shows both hope and joy contrasted with violence and hate.

5. Characters
Lucie Manette: A young English lady, with long golden curls. She has a forehead that moves when she thinks too hard, and most men find this attractive. Perfect in almost anything, she is extremely devoted to her father, and to a lesser extent her husband. She cries easily and doesn't take shocking news well.

Charles Darnay: A perfect gentleman. He is a French nobleman by nature, but lives in England. He is unique among his kind in that he cares for the poor. A very caring person, as evidenced by his attitudes towards Lucie.

Sydney Carton: He looks exactly like Darnay. He feels like his life has been wasted. He has an excellent memory, and is a valuable asset to his friend Stryver. Dickens frequently compares Carton to a Jackal

6. Theme: The theme is that all life is important. In the beginning, the aristocrats treat the peasants’ life as nothing. After the revolution, the peasants see the aristocrats life as nothing, but Sydney Carton, whose own life is wasted, makes the ultimate sacrifice to protect the life of his friend.

7. Rating: On a scale of one to ten, I would give this book an eight. Most of it was very interesting, such as the French Revolution bits and all the spies. I did, however, find some parts to be dry (described more fully in #8).

8.
“A Tale of Two Cities” by Charles Dickens, was overall a good book. As Dickens himself states when the book first opens, these were turbulent and interesting times, and his story of lovers caught in them is fascinating. If this review ends up giving a negative impression of the book, that is only because it is easier to be negative than positive. I did like the book.

The book takes place in both London and Paris (hence the title) in the late seventeen hundreds. The French Revolution is the background against which the story unfolds, so the book is historical fiction. I suspect Dickens has taken a lot of liberties with the history involved. I haven’t done any research, so I can’t say for certain, but I’m pretty sure most of his characters are fictitious, and so the important role they played in the French Revolution in Dicken's book never actually occurred in real life.

Throughout the book, Dickens had an eye for detail that sometimes irritated me. I would be anxious to get on with the story, and Dickens would be describing something in more detail than I cared to know about. His lengthy descriptions about how old fashioned Tellson's Bank is, for instance, something I could have done without. It also seemed terribly inconsistent to me. Here Dickens would describe a few minutes in great detail, here he would cover six years in a few paragraphs (such as when he is telling about how Lucie and Charles had one daughter, and a son who died only a few years after he was born). But, better too much description than too little, I suppose. And compared with some other books I have read, Dickens wasn't really all that bad.

As too the plot, the ending was painfully obvious even from the beginning of the book. The fact that Sydney Carton felt his life was a waste was emphasized so much it became obvious he would perform some great act of self-sacrifice before the end of the book to redeem himself. Also, the fact that he told Lucie he would gladly sacrifice his life for someone he loves adds to the feeling of inevitability. And, of course, the incredibly coincidence that Carton and Darnay look exactly alike (which I felt was a bit of an unbelievable coincidence) was too big of a coincidence not to be used in some way that would affect the plot.

While I may have seen that part coming, Dickens did have plenty of other surprises that I did not expect. For example, I did not expect that Misses Pross's brother Solomon would turn out to be John Barsad. Nor did I expect that Roger Cly was still alive. Or the whole story about why Dr. Manette had been locked up in the Bastille in the first place. And finally, the biggest surprise to me was that Madame Dafarge was the last surviving member of the peasant family victimized by the Evremondes.

Without a doubt, my favorite sections of the book were those dealing with Defarge, Jacques, and the rest of the French Revolution. The secret signals the Jacques had, such as Madame Defarge putting a rose in her hair to indicate when a spy was present, and the way they had hidden contacts all over to obtain information, reminded me of cold-war era spy movies. The noble cause for which they worked made me feel sympathetic to them, and even near the end of the book when they become the antagonists of Charles Darnay I never quite grew to hate them. I think I would have enjoyed the book immeasurably more if it had featured the Jacques as its main subject, instead of Lucie Mannette and Charles Darnay.

As to those to characters, they were, in my opinion, the most boring of the whole book. Jerry Cruncher was humorous, Carton was a likeable scoundrel, even Mr. Lorry was amusing as a man who dedicated his whole life to business. Every character in the whole book has some sort of quirk to make them interesting except for the main characters Charles and Lucie. When they spoke, it was much too formal and polite, and not at all like real people talk. Also, they were much too perfect. They could always be counted on to do the right thing, and didn’t have any signs of human fallibles in their moral character. Take for instance Lucie’s extreme devotion to her father, or Darnay’s sense of responsibility. I guess the only time you could fault either of them was on Darnay’s unwise decision to return to France.

This decision reminded me of many of the horror movies I have seen. In a horror movie, the audience knows that great danger awaits a character if they go to a certain place or do a certain thing. And all logic seems to scream at the character not to go to this place or do this thing. However ultimately the audience knows that the character must make this choice, and suffer the consequences, if for no other reason than to keep the plot moving in its intended decision.

So it was with Darnay’s decision to return to France. From the moment the Defarges were talking about what great danger would await Darnay if he ever returned to France, I knew he would somehow end up back there. Darnay’s decision does not seem particularly logical either. The narrator states Darnay felt shamed by the remarks made by the aristocrats and Stryver, but Darnay never seemed worried about their opinions before. He had rejected his life with the aristocrats and his life with them, and he had turned down Styrver’s children as pupils. Sure, Gabelle was in danger, but as a member of the aristocracy Darnay must have realized there was precious little he could do to save him. Finally, Darnay was taken by surprise by the extreme political situation and the new laws in France. Why didn't he bother to find out more before he left England?

Having expressed the book’s faults, I think it wise to close the same way I started, restating that the book was very good, and I enjoyed reading it. The above negatives are but a slight complaint for an overall good thing.

Grade: A

Teacher’s Comments: Your review was delightful Joel! I appreciate your honesty and forcefulness. Well done!

Foundation by Isaac Asimov Book Report

[This was originally submitted in the fall of 1994 for a high school Modern Fiction class. We were assigned to pick a book from a list of approved authors.  (Isaac Asimov was not originally on that list, but when I requested to read an Asimov book, the teacher allowed it).  We were supposed to write 6 journal entries, written while reading the book, and then finally submit one final formal report at the end on December 21, 1994.  The formal report was supposed to be a re-working of some of the themes we had previously explored in the journal entries, and reads accordingly.]

Video Version HERE

Journal Entry 1
Isaac Asimov, the author of Foundation, was influenced by many things that helped him to come up with the book.

To start with, the book is science fiction and so a large part of it is based on science.  Isaac Asimov has several degrees in chemistry, including a P.h.D.  He is also a professor of chemistry at Boston University.

Asimov has loved science fiction since he was nine and has been writing science fiction stories since he was eleven, submitting one to be published at eighteen.  Four years later, he got his first story published.

Asimov developed the idea for Foundation in a hurry, since he had an appointment to discuss the plot of a story he had not even thought of.  He opened a book at random to do free association and saw a picture of soldiers.  That gave him the idea to write about a galactic empire and its fall since he had read Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire twice.

All of these things influenced Asimov's writing in Foundations.

Journal Entry 2
One of the many themes in Foundation is that of how a culture can become stagnated.  Like the Roman Empire, and many nations before and after it, Asimov shows the cultural deterioration of the Galactic Empire.

When Lord Dorwin comes to visit from Trantus, he talks about his interest in archaeology.  When trying to solve the question of human origin, he read all the books by master archeologists and weighed their points against each other.  When Hardrin suggested he go to the sites himself, he only laughed.

Nuclear power was also in danger.  It had been lost in the Periphery.  A power plant under went meltdown in Gamma Andromeda because of poor repairs.  There is a complaint about the scarcity of nuclear technicians, but instead of training more, nuclear power is restricted.

The men at Foundation are caught in a trap.  When faced with attack by Anacreon, they rely on the long dead Hari Seldon for an answer instead of finding one themselves.  They didn't seem to realize they could find a solution just as well.

Asimov showed how this lack of responsibility led to the downfall of the Galactic Empire.  His message serves as a warning for the United States today.

Journal Entry 3
Besides showing how the Galactic Empire became stagnated, another theme in Foundation is that problems can always be solved without violence.

When in a disagreement with the Foundation leaders, Yate Fulham said that Salvor Hardin suggested that violence was the only solution to the Anacreon threat.  Hardin retorted that violence "is the last refuge of the incompetent" (p. 48).  Thirty years later, when Sef Sermak demanded violence against Anacreon, Hardin had him read a framed statement on his wall: "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent" (p. 103).  Sermak accuses it of being an old man's philosophy, but Hardin reminded him he had first applied it as a young man.

Hardin sticks to his doctrine as well.  When accused of using violence in his coup, he points out that not one life was lost.  The transfer of power went very smoothly.  When Anacreon tries to set up a base on Foundation , Hardin responds by convincing Anacreon's neighbors not to allow it.  When Anacreon tries to attack Foundation, Hardin appeals to the morals of the Anacreon soldiers.

The fate of those who follow violence is also shown.  Wienis, who killed his brother so he could rule Anacreon, who tried to attack Foundation and tried to kill Hardin through trickery, ends up destroyed.  His son, who supported him, was beaten senseless by angry soldiers.  He was to be imprisoned before he committed suicide.

Through these examples, Asimov shows how there is always an alternative to violence.

Journal Entry 4
In Foundation Asimov shows the simplicity, and therefore the danger, of mob control.  The ability of political leaders to convince the populace of many things leads to their success.  Even Hari Seldon's psycho history is based on mob reactions.

Salvor Hardin used the actions of the common people to control the four kingdoms.  By turning science into a religion, he made Foundation the center of this religion.  When Wienis tried to conquer Foundation, he is defeated when Hardin is able to convince the people it is sacrilegious.

Another example is that of Askone.  It didn't want to trade with Foundation, fearing it would cause them to be under the control of the religion.  Yet despite their efforts, once trade began with Foundation, they were quickly overtaken.

In a conversation with Jorane Sutt, Mallow points out how dangerous this policy is.  He calls it, "An insecure overlordship, based on the hated supremacy of a foreign spiritual power, which once it weakens ever so slightly, can only fall entirely, and leave nothing substantial behind except an immortal fear and hate," (p. 257).  Sutt intends to sue this religion against the Foundation.  To illustrate the situation, Mallow quotes Hardin, "A nuclear blaster is a good weapon, but it can point both ways."

When Sutt hopes to ruin Mallow, taking him to court not with the intent of convicting him, but with the intent of turning the people against him, Mallow responds by turning the tables.  With the wrath of the people on him, Sutt is ruined.

Throughout the book, mob control plays a big part in the plot.  It is used for good and for evil by various characters.

Journal Entry 5
The setting plays a very important part in Foundation.  It is from this setting that allows most of the action in the book to take place.  The setting in Foundation is somewhat unusual.

The location of Foundation is out in space.  It begins on the capital planet of the Galactic Empire, Trantor.  It then moves to a planet on the edge of the galaxy, Terminus.  After some of the provinces revolt, Terminus finds itself surrounded by powerful kingdoms and is cut off from the Empire, providing much of the story lines.  Also Terminus has almost no metals, making it hard for the planet to defend itself.

The time period of Foundation is very far into the future.  A specific date is not given, but the Galactic Empire has already been in existence for twelve thousand years, and humans have been in space so long they've forgotten which planet they originated from.  This time allows for space travel, new technology, and allows the author to create a world of his own.

The occupation of many of the characters are scientists.  Their knowledge allows them leverage over the neighboring barbaric kingdoms.  Many of the other characters are politicians.  This allows a political drama to take place.

All of these factors give Foundation some interesting twists that other books might not have.  It allows the characters opportunities otherwise not available, and makes an interesting book.

Journal Entry 6
In addition to the setting of the planet of Foundation, the setting of its neighboring planets is also important.  This setting contributes to the plot of the book as well.

Trantor, the capital of the Galactic Empire, is so greatly covered with metal that its inhabitants can't even see the sky.  This will be later contrasted against Terminus, which has a shortage of metals.  Because it is encased in metal, Trantor can produce little of its own necessities, and has almost everything imported.  Also, being the capital makes everyone who lives on Trantor more aware of current events then the colonies, whose news is censored.

Anacreon is a monarchy.  This leads to some struggles for the throne.  It is also the home of the Nyakbird, a favorite hunting sport.  "Accidents" involved in its hunting allow for a king to be assassinated, and his son threatened.

Although called a republic, Korell is actually a dictatorship.  The commander, Asper, has absolute power and uses it.  More importantly,  the Foundation has no contact with what is left of the Galactic Empire, but Korell does.  Asper has married the daughter of a powerful man in the Galactic Empire, and receives several ships from him with which he tries to conquer Foundation.  The Galactic Empire philosophy of bigger and better, however, gives Foundation the advantage when it comes to portability.

All of these planets and countries the Foundation interacts with, is the basis for most of the plot.  The setting of these planets allows for the interaction.

Teacher's Grade: A+
Teacher's Comments: From his tone or his plot, what does Asimov seem to feel/think about the various forms of government?

Final Paper, Modern Fiction, December 21, 1994

A Long Time from Now, On a Planet Far, Far Away

To say the setting of a book is important would be pointless, as it is a statement everyone knows is true.  The setting is essential to all plots.  However, in some stories it can truly be said that the setting plays a greater role than in others.  Some stories could not exist in a different setting, and Foundation is one of those stories.  Through the time period, the jobs of the characters, and the location, the setting of Foundation plays a significant role.

Time is the most obvious of these three.  The date of the story is not given in our years, but on page 3 we learn that the Galactic Empire has been in existence for twelve thousand and sixty nine years.  Lord Dorwin reveals humans have been in space so long that they forgot which planet they originated on, or are not even sure they originated from a single planet.  He says (in his peculiar affected noble way of talking): "Suahly you must know that it is thought that owiginally the human wace occupied only one planetawy system. ... Of cohse, no one knows exactly which system it is-- lost in the mists of antiquity." (p. 73)

The future allows Asimov to create his own universe, so to speak.  He is able to make up all the nations, all the political systems, all the cultures, and all the technology of the future.  He utilizes this fully, creating various kingdoms which must deal with each other.  Asimov also writes a scene in which Hari Seldon is attacked (in court) by the Commission of Public Safety.  Salvor Hardin expresses his frustration with the government by saying, "the board of Trustees of the Encyclopedia Committee has been given full administrative powers.  I, as Mayor of Terminus City, have just enough power to blow my own nose and perhaps to sneeze if you counter sign an order giving me permission," (p.49).  This leads to him changing the government in a coup.  Throughout the book, the technology also plays an important part, giving Foundation an edge over its more powerful neighbors, and making the Galactic Empire the most dangerous threat to Foundation.

Another important element of setting is the job of the characters.  At the beginning of the book, most of the main characters are scientists.  This turns out to be very important later in the novel, because when the Galactic Empire falls, much of its knowledge is forgotten, except for that preserved by the Foundation.  Foundation's scientific advancement over its neighbors proves to be its only defense.  Later in the book, many of the main characters are politicians.  This is also essential to the plot, as the reader must follow their struggles to get re-elected, and the delicate negotiations they must make with other nations.  Near the end of the book, the main characters are mostly traders.  A whole new perspective is given, since the first priority of a trader is profit, and helping Foundation is done only if it is convenient.  The traders often bend the laws of Foundation, or tradition, to be able to sell their goods.  Since travel is a major part of the traders' lives, through them we get to see other planets and nations besides the Foundation, such as Askone or the Korellian Republic.

A third part of the setting is, of course, the location.  Most of the book takes place on the planet of Terminus.  Terminus has very few metals.  This is very important, because without metals, weapons can not be made.  Foundation is left to rely on its wits when faced with enemy attack rather than fight back.  Also, Terminus is located on the edge of the Galactic Empire.  When the provinces revolted, Foundation was cut off from the rest of the Empire, and so was on their own against the new kingdoms.  It is not till the end of the book, almost two hundred years later, that Foundation discovers the Galactic Empire still exists in the center of galaxy.

There are many other ways the setting of Foundation makes the story possible.  If I had the room, I would talk about the space travel, or perhaps the setting of the various nations Foundation interacts with.  I do not feel this is necessary, as I believe the above paragraphs sufficiently show my point.  Without the setting it has, Foundation simply could not exist.  The setting is certainly very important in this book.

Teacher's comments: Keep focus on your topic, not yourself.  Define topic in thesis and develop it, without explaining/apologizing for not dealing with ideas not covered by thesis.  

Eagle Eye Articles: Language Department Not Diverse Enough

As I poured over the many posters commemorating Foreign Language week, I noticed nearly all of them had several people of different racial and ethnic backgrounds. This was also the case for last year's theme "Beauty in Diversity."

Although both last year's and this year's theme "Many Cultures, One Lord" are unquestionably admirable, I fail to see how they reflect the languages taught at our school. The five language courses available at Grand Rapids Christian: English, Latin, French, Spanish, and German are far from diverse. They are all Western European Languages. No Asian, African, or Native American languages are taught, contrary to what one might conclude when looking at the posters.

There are many equally important languages that the school could offer, such as Japanese or Russian, one of the three most used languages in the world. Unless our school's policy in terms of language education is altered, a suitable theme for 1995's foreign language week would be "The Dominance of Europe."

Commentary: This was the first, and only, article I wrote for the high school Newspaper "The Eagle Eye.

I was 16 in those days, and it was before I had my political conversion to liberalism, and still considered myself a conservative. I wasn't upset at the lack of diversity in the schools foreign language department so much as the hypocrisy of the foreign language department preaching diversity to the rest of us during foreign language week. To make my point I postured a bit more to the left/ multi-cultural position than I really felt at the time. But certainly in retrospect I agree with myself a lot more, especially after having spent 5 years in Asia.

I'm kind of proud of this piece in the forgiving way that we all look at stuff we wrote in high school. I especially like that jab at the end. But I should mention that even for an article this short it underwent considerable revision by the "Eagle Eye" staff just to clean it up. I had a whole middle section about the inter-related origins of the five European languages that was so muddled they just cut the whole thing. If my best friend wasn't editor of "The Eagle Eye", it probably would never have been published in the first place.

This issue (Dec, 1994) also featured the first article by my Freshman sister, in her case the first of many.

Etruscan War: 12th Grade Forensics Speech

Video version HERE.



In the year 507 B.C., Tarquinius Superbus, the last king of Rome, was expelled, and the Republic of Rome began. This new entity, however, did not have long to wait before it endured its first real test. The idea of people ruling themselves was greatly disturbing to the surrounding monarchs, among the Porsena, king of the Estrucans, who vowed to nip this republic in the bud and replace Tarquinius as king of Rome. Some of the greatest examples of heroism ever seen can be found in this war, as the Romans were determined not to give up their freedom.

As the Estrucan army approached, the Romans set up several garrisons. At many places they relied on the city wall, or the Tiber River as a sufficient barrier. The only place this river was crossable was at one point where a wooden bridge was built across it. It was at this point that the Etruscans attacked, taking the garrison station there completely by surprise. The Roman soldiers quickly lost order, throwing down their weapons and fleeing. One man alone stood his ground. His name was Horatius Cocles. With all the power he had, he urged his comrades to destroy the bridge by any means necessary. He offered to hold up the Etruscan army by himself while the task was being completed. Two other soldiers, Spurius Lartius and Titus Herminius offered to help him, but he forced them to save themselves instead.

As the Etruscan army approached, Horatius faced them with sword and shield held ready for battle: one man against an army. He called out to them, mocking them, and challenging one after another to single combat. For a while the Etruscans just stood there, each waiting for his neighbor to make the first move. Then, finally they gave a fierce cry and the first line all hurled their spears at Horatius. Horatius blocked the missiles with his shield, and held his ground. The army then advanced, intending to thrust him away with their numbers, but they were stopped by the sudden sound of the collapsing bridge. Before the Etruscans could react, Horatius plunged fully armed into the river, and swam to the other side, narrowly avoiding all the missiles the Etruscans threw at him.

The attempt to take the city by assault had failed, so Porsena lay siege to it. As the siege dragged on, food became scarce. It looked like Porsena might actually starve the city into submission. One Roman, Gaius Mucius, devised a plan. He presented himself to the Roman Senate, and asked permission to cross the river and enter the enemy’s camp, where he would assassinate Porsena. The Senate granted their permission.

Concealing a dagger in his clothing, Mucius arrived at the Etruscans camp and stood among the soldiers. There was a large crowd, since it was pay day. Porsena and his secretary sat side by side, dispensing the money to the soldiers. Since they were dressed identically, it was impossible to tell which one was which. Mucius had a fifty-fifty chance, and he took it, pushing his way through the crowd and stabbing one of the men. He then tried to make his escape, but was quickly apprehended. King Porsena now had one less secretary.

Mucius was brought before Porsena. Mucius defiantly told Porsena that he had come into the camp to kill him, and even added that there was a long list of other young men who demanded to know more about this plot, but Mucius would tell him nothing. In rage, Porsena ordered Mucius to be burned alive. Mucius responded, “See how cheap men hold their bodies when they care only for honor.” With that he thrust his hand into a nearby fire, kindled for sacrifice, and let it burn there as if he felt no pain. He didn’t even change his expression.

Porsena was so astonished that he leapt to his feet and ordered a guard to drag Mucius away from the fire. “Go free,” he said. “You have dared to be a worse enemy to yourself than to me. I should bless your courage, if it lay with my country to dispose of it. But as that cannot be, I, as an honorable enemy, grant you pardon, life, and liberty.”

As if he were thanking Porsena for his generosity, Mucius finished off the lie about the plot, saying that there were 300 men determined to kill Porsena, and one would come to the camp each night until they had fulfilled their mission.

Porsena was hardly pleased with this news. He hastened to make peace with the Romans. His demand that Tarquinius be returned to the throne was denied, bu t he did get the Romans to agree to give hostages over to him. Gaius Mucius was welcomed home a hero, and given the new name Gaius Mucius Scaevola, or “Gaius Mucius, the left handed man”.

One of the hostages given over to Porsena was a young maiden named Cloelia. One day, when the army was camped by the Tiber, she and some other girls who agreed to follow her eluded the guards, dove into the Tiber, swam through a rain of missles to safety, and then journeyed back to Rome. Porsena was furious, and demanded their return. Later, as his anger subsided, he admitted he had been impressed by their bravery, and agreed to let the girls stay free. In addition, he also released several other hostages. To honor Cloelia’s courage, the Romans erected a statue of her on horseback, the first time in history a woman was honored in this way.

Through the work of these brave individuals, the republic was saved. Had they not stepped forward, the world we know today would be entirely different. But because of their courage, the idea of a republic was preserved for future generations.

Mutiny in Pannonia: 11th Grade Forensics Speech

Video HERE



We live in a world today that is constantly manipulated by people who only want you to see one side of things. It is easy to get discouraged in this type of environment, but we must remember that the problem is not unique to our culture of even our time period. It is a problem that even the ancient Romans had to deal with.

This story of propaganda, violence, and compromise began in what is now known as Western Hungary and Northern Yugoslavia, then known as Pannonia. In that region were stationed, under the command of Quintus Junius Blaesus, the 8th, 9th, and 10th brigades. When the emperor Augustus Caesar died in the year 14 A.D., and was succeeded by his adopted son, Tiberius, Blaesus suspended the normal duties of the soldiers for a time of public morning. The soldiers soon grew accustomed to the relaxed life, and were not too thrilled about the idea of returning to their grueling schedules.

In addition, the men were also worried about their future. Now that there was a new emperor his plans for the army remained to be seen. It was on this base that a man named Percennius was able to take advantage of the situation. Percennius had been a professional applause leader before he became a soldier. He was experienced in manipulating crowds, and began to put his skills to use. He talked to the soldiers in the twilight or dark, after the more obedient ones had gone to bed, leaving only the other element behind.

One night Percennius gave his big finale. He pointed out the harsh discipline of the army, its low pay, the old men still stuck in the ranks, and the disappointing retirement plan. His speech struck home. The soldiers shouted that the three brigades should merge into one for a mutiny. However this idea was not to be, as each brigade wanted to keep their former name. They did, however, begin piling dirt to build a focal point for the mutiny.

At this point, Blaesus came on the scene and was horrified by what he saw. He began to run from one man to another, urging them to end this project. The platform kept increasing despite his efforts. But Blaesus never stopped his shouting and eventually convinced them to stop. Then Blaesus pleaded with them to send delegates to Rome instead of mutiny. The men insisted that Blaesus’s own son, a colonel, represent them. He was instructed to request a sixteen year maximum service, and he would receive further instructions once that was done. The colonel left for Rome, and the men became quite peaceful.

Unfortunately the story does not end here. Before the mutiny had even begun, detachments had been sent to the nearby town of Nauportus. When the soldiers there heard about the troubles in Pannonia, they tore down their colors and looted Nauportus and the surrounding villages. The company commanders who tried to stop them were mocked, abused, and beaten. The corps chief of staff, Aufidienus Rufus, who was known for reviving the strict army rules of the past, was the main victim of the anger. He was pulled out of his carriage, had baggage piled on his back, and forced to march at the head of the column, enduring frequent inquiries about his enjoyment of the experience.

Once the men from Nauportus reached camp, the mutiny was revived. The whole district was ransacked by the soldiers. In a desperate act to retain some sort of order, Blaesus ordered those who looted more than the rest to be flogged and confined to cells, for he was still obeyed by company commanders and loyal soldiers. The plan backfired. As they were being dragged off to be flogged, the guilty soldiers did everything they could to arouse sympathy. Everyone rushed to their rescue, freeing all those in the cells. This let condemned murderers out as well.

In the excitement of the moment, a private soldier named Vibulenus was hoisted on the shoulders of his comrades. As he broke into tears, he told the tragic story of his brother, sent by the soldiers in Germany to talk with the soldiers in Pannonia about their common interests. When his brother had arrived at the camp, he had been butchered by Blaesus’s guards and his body hidden. The effect of this tale was stunning. Three bands where formed, one which arrested and tortured Blaesus’s slaves, one which arrested the rest of his household, and one that went in search of the body. Blaesus himself was almost killed. Things settled down when it was discovered Vibulenus never had a brother.

The passion aroused by this speech was not by any means gone. It just lashed out at a different victim: the senior officers, who were forced to flee. Only one senior officer was killed, company commander Lucius, better known to the soldiers as “another please”. When he was disciplining a soldier, it was not uncommon for him to break a stick over the soldier’s back. He would simply ask for another stick, and if need be another, and another, and so on.
The rest of his comrades were able to find safety, except for poor Julius Clemens. He was spared death because the mutineers thought he would make an excellent spokesman for them.

The emperor Tiberius sent his son, Drusus, and two battalions of the guard to deal with this problem. Drusus received no definite instructions. He was only told ot act as events warrant.

When Drusus arrived at camp, he mounted the dais. The soldiers roared at him, but Drusus fought for silence and eventually won it. He then read a letter from Tiberius which expressed how much the emperor cared for the soldiers, so he had sent his son to deal with them. Drusus had been authorized to make any decisions Tiberius could have made, and the rest would be left up to the Senate.

After this, Julius Clemens spoke the demands of the mutineers, on which he had been briefed. He asked for a sixteen-year term of service, gratuities at completion, the pay of four sesterces a day, and no recalls after release. Drusus replied that Tiberius and the Senate must decide this, which caused an uproar among the soldiers.

The army made many menacing gestures to all of Drusus’s staff, but they were particularly bitter against Gnaeus Cornelius Lentulus II, who somehow struck them as a snob. Drusus realized the danger, and decided to evacuate Lentulus to the winter camp. Ironically, as the army saw him being escorted out of the camp by Drusus, they became convinced he was leaving for Rome so he could oppose them there. They surrounded him and hurled large stones. One stone hit Lentulus and he started to seriously bleed. Fortunately, the arrival of Drusus’s main force arrived and saved him from further injury.

That night, passions were high among soldiers, and Drusus was certain that it would bring disaster. Fortunately, the moon waned that night, and the soldiers were convinced it was a sign that the moon goddess was unhappy with them. They gathered every instrument they could get their hands on, and played in hopes that their music would appease the goddess, but it had no effect. Many thought the moon goddess was disgusted by their mutiny. Drusus saw his chance and seized it. He called together Julius Clemens, and any other officers who were popular with the soldiers. They were sent to go around the camp, reasoning with the soldiers to drop the mutiny.

By morning, the attitude of the soldiers had changed. Drusus called a meeting and gave a speech, in which he promised he would do all he could to make sure they were treated with mercy if the soldiers returned to work. They agreed. The younger Blaesus was sent back to Tiberius.

While the delegation was away, a debate sprang up over how to treat the soldiers. Drusus favored severity. Vibulenus and Percennius were summoned and executed. Other chief instigators were either hunted down and killed, or given up by their units as proof of loyalty.

That winter, the rain came down unceasingly, confining soldiers to tents. The brigades were convinced it was divine punishment. The only way to be forgiven, they thought, was to leave the defiled camp and go to their winter quarters. The 8th left first, followed by the 15th. The 9th was quite vocal in its decision to wait for a reply from Tiberius, but the withdraw of its comrades left it no choice. Drusus left for Rome, without waiting for the delegation to return.

The soldiers were easily manipulated, first by Percennius, then by Vibulenus, and finally by Drusus. From this example we can learn the value of examining critically what others say. We can also learn from Drusus the value of compromise.

The Trojan War: High School Essay

More than half of all surviving Greek literature is written about it. It has been the subject of a Shakespeare play and many Hollywood movies. From it we get such phrases as “Achille's heel”, “Cassandra complex”, “Beware of Greeks bearing gifts”, and words like “Pander”. It is, of course, the Trojan War.

The Greeks never tired of hearing the stories of courageous heroes and their mighty deeds in battle. Yet the modern reader often has trouble getting involved in the story. A ten year war over one unfaithful wife? And you thought the Vietnam War was pointless! Could the ancients really be so barbaric as to glorify such a war?

Until recently, the Trojan War was thought to be nothing more than a myth. How could a war in which gods fought alongside mortals, horses could speak, and heroes perform impossible acts even have a remote element of truth. Thanks to the work of amateur archaeologists Heinrich Schliemann, we now know that, like most other myths, the Trojan War has its basis in truth.

According to ancient legend, the city of Troy was built by two of the gods. Today, archaeologists refer to this city as Troy VII, the seventh city built on that location. The ancient Greeks had many reasons to attack the Trojans. The Trojans dominated the Greeks in trade. They also stood as a barrier to further eastward expansion, and controlled valuable land and water routes.

Fear of the Trojans kept the Greeks in check, but events were soon to change. An earthquake devastated Troy, and the Hittite empire, Troy’s strongest ally, disintegrated. The Greeks seized their chance. For whatever reason they finally went to war against Troy, they needed little provocation. Perhaps the story of Helen has a little truth in it after all.

After the war ended, the Greeks returned home to only a brief moment of piece. They were themselves attacked and besieged by Dorians. The Greeks, still in the bronze age, were no match for the Dorians. One by one, the Greek cities fell until only Athens was left.

Eventually the Dorian invaders became absorbed by the Greeks, but the entire Greek world, exhausted, isolated, and fragmented, collapsed into economic depression and political instability. The Greeks longed for the good old days, and poets nostalgically sang about the heroes of old. And so this almost insignificant war, which otherwise might have been totally forgotten by history, became the most famous conflict of all time.

Time marches on. As the legend of Troy passed on to other cultures, who didn't have the same historical connections to it, the war was viewed differently. The whole thing was looked upon as a big tragedy, a waste of life. Sympathy was given to the Trojans. The Romans went so far as to claim descent from the Trojans.

Video Version

Letter to the School Board: 10th Grade English

This letter was never sent.  It was simply an English assignment to practice writing a formal letter of complaint.  We were instructed to choose a school policy we disliked, and write to the school board about getting it changed.

October 8, 1993

The School board

2300 Plymouth Road

Grand Rapids, MI 49546

Dear school board members,

Greetings.  I appreciate the time you have committed to this school and the positive results there-of.  I am a student at the school and am always amazed by your refusal to get discouraged.

However, there are several rules which I think are bureaucratic and do more harm to the education received than good.  Foremost among them is the tardy policy.  I realize you can not put up with late students, but some revising would defiantly be in order.  The first problem of the policy is that it is too legalistic.  If your fingers are sticking through the door your safe, but if you are one foot away you are tardy.  What the message you are sending to the kids is that flexibility is bad, and brittleness is good.  Secondly, the rule leaves no room for human error.  If someone forgets to bring a book, notebook, paper, or any other materials to class, they must take a tardy to get them.  These kinds of mistakes are neither intentional nor avoidable.  How could you stop yourself from forgetting something?  Thirdly, the policy often makes people later then they all ready are.  For instance, several times last year my bus arrived at school two minutes before classes started.  To get to my locker, put my stuff away, and then get to my class in two minutes was impossible.  I instead had to go to the attendance office, wait in line, get an excuse, and then put my stuff away and  then get to class.  Instead of being one minute late, I ended up being about five.  Fourthly the policy underestimates the time it takes to get from one end of the school where your last class was, to your locker, and then back to the same end where your next class is.  The five minutes allotted may be adequate, except for the crowded halls.  It is in many cases impossible.  The halls are full of many people standing around talking, or walking slowly.  They do not have as far to walk as others.  And what if a student needed to make a stop along the way.  The policy also encourages, sometimes forces, running in the hall.  Now I realize that you need some sort of tardy policy to keep students from arriving ten minutes late everyday, but the existing one could use some changes.  First of all, be flexible, if a student is thirty seconds late, so what?  Second, increase the allotted time between classes to 7 minutes.  Third, allow a student one trip back to his locker per week, without a tardy.

Thank you for taking the time to hear me out. Together, we can make Christian High a better educational facility. The tardy policy is good, but I think my corrections could go a long ways.

Sincerely Yours

Joel Swagman

10th Grade High School English Assignment: Letter to a Friend

[This letter was never actually sent.  It was a 10th grade English Assignment to write a letter.  (Supposedly to a friend, but in reality it was handed in to the teacher, and never sent to the addressee).  As part of the assignment, we had to talk about a school policy that we wanted changed.]

Dear Brian,

How are things at your house?  Things are going pretty good over here.  I hope you and Jeff are getting along fairly well; I trust you haven't killed him yet.  I look forward to seeing you at Christmas.

How are you doing in school?  I guess things are going  as well as can be expected for me.  Of course there are  several things which I think can be improved.  I guess the main thing that I dislike is the tardy policy.  Our school use the policy to keep people from showing up late to class.  Unfortunately for the students, they've gone to far.  The system is really a pain.  I have to push and shove through crowded hallways in order to get to class on time.  There is no time for making side trips to go to the office(if I need to), drop a book off at the library, or pick something up from another class.  I would be nice if the school board would think of the students for once and change it; however I know that will never happen.  I've written a letter to the school board about it, but I don't think it will do any good.  I guess I'll just have to live with it.  It would be nice, though, if they would be a little less rigid about these things.  It's really frustrating when you know that a teacher is marking you tardy, when you were only five seconds late.  A second thing I would like to see would be the teachers, who allow no room for mistake, to allow me a few trips back to my locker each month.  Does your school have anything like that?

How about writing back to me?  I would really enjoy hearing from you.  See you at Christmas.

Robert E. Lee: Anything but the South's Savior: Incomplete

[This is a history paper I wrote for 10th grade History class back in 1993. 
Unfortunately, all I have left of it now are the first 3 paragraphs.  (That was all I get get out of my old computer discs. The file (on google drive here) must have gotten corrupted)  The original paper of course was much longer.
It's a pity because I remember this being a paper I was proud of at the time.]


 Joel Swagman
                                           6th. Hour History
  November 8, 1993

Many books about Lee portray him as an American hero, on equal footing with Ulysses S. Grant, Douglas MacArthur, or Benjamin Franklin.  This credit is obviously falsely given to someone who not only fought against the United States, but almost destroyed it.  In the South, he is even more such a hero, even though General Lee harmed the South more then he helped it then he helped it.  Robert E. Lee does not deserve the respect he is given today.

History, although some may claim otherwise, seems to be obsessed with putting people into the two fundamental categories, good or bad.  One desiring proof of this statement needs only to think of a famous historical person, and observe how quickly their mind places him or her into one of the two categories.  If someone, like Christopher Columbus, fails to slip neatly into this classification system, that person becomes the subject of spirited debates.  Julius Caesar or Lenin are other examples.  As any school child can tell you, Lee is a prominent figure in American history, and important people get categorized all the more.  So why was Lee categorized as a "good" person?
To start with, it's hard to put someone with family rich in patriotism, like Lee's, into the "bad" category.  Two of Lee's relatives had signed the declaration of independence.  Lee's father, Henry Lee, was known as Light Horse Harry.  Light Horse Harry was a friend of Marquis de Lafeyette and a student of George Washington.  He was governor of Virginia three times, and even came close to being the second President of the United States.  In 1830, Lee married Mary Curtis Washington, the granddaughter of none other then George Washington.