#since it's much more different than the ones caesar had with other prominent romans that we know from that period

[navree]

if fictional interpretations of the historical time period surrounding the ides of march and philippi and all that insist on going with the shakespearean framing of brutus and caesar having an almost father-son sort of relationship, they need to put their money where their mouths are and make the core emotion of the narrative be about octavian-caesar-brutus, sons who aren't really sons of the father who are on diametrically opposed sides of the conflict with two different versions of not only what they think is the right call but also of who caesar should have been. that's the only way.

[0mega-x]

The idea of one personification for Gaul is tricky because, like I said in this post , the different Gaulish tribes were conscious of belonging to a same sort of "nation" (not the same way we define it now), like they knew they were similar and belonging to an approximate geographical area, but they felt different from each other in a way.

My idea for a (Celtic) Gaul OC is a woman (I can't picture her as anything but that) who likes to travel between her different tribes and territory. She feels free this way, and it's a sentiment that she enjoys very much. I saw over the years that a lot of people saw Gaul as "feral," and while the idea seems interesting, I don't really know. I feel like in Rome's eyes, she'd definitely be feral, but would she be like almost ""savage""? What would that mean ? Eh. However, she knows how to fight. Her people did have a society that loved their warriors after all. But she also liked the calmness of nature. She could be quite the solitary woman in some ways. She was also very close with the average people, not only with the aristocracy. She often crashed at their houses, ate with them, and took part in working on farms sometimes as well.

She has a lot of children, they each represent a tribe. Because of how much they are, she can't have a close relationship with a lot of them, and while they are her biological children, she'd only really know those who are from the most prominent tribes (The Aeduii, the Remii,...). The other kids are usually closer to their siblings from tribes theirs interact with the most or are clients of. She believed it was better for her children to be raised independently from her so that 1. they wouldn't be too attached to her if something happened to her and 2. so they could enjoy the same sense of freedom she liked. She thought that since her people took care of her children, they'd be fine without seeing her for months, even years. It's not that she didn't love or care for them. She absolutely did in her own way, and so did her children.

Talking of children, I see France as one of her many biological children. Which tribe was he from? It doesn't matter (I haven't thought about it). For now, because I can't see how to reconcile both France being Gaul's kid and Gaul having a child for each tribe in any other way, I see this as what happened in regards to why he seems to be the only one left. Let's just say that he got "lucky". Gaul died shortly after 52BCE and her children slowly followed suit until they were only a few one. France managed to get close enough to Rome that he could survive easily with his favour, and so that's how he outlived all his children. This might have made him feel guilty a little bit, he felt as if he was betraying his family. But still being a kid and not wanting to leave no trace of his family, that's what he did. Then Germania killed Rome eventually, he brought France over to the Franks and so on and so on...

Back to Gaul, she had 2 or 3 other siblings. Belgae is definitely her closest sibling. He is slightly crazier than his sister, but she doesn't mind. She has/had Transalpina as another sibling, I don't know it if either died following being made a Roman Province or not, I haven't thought about it that much. As for Aquitania, I also don't really know if they are really related to the Gauls. From what I read, they seemed way more different than the rest of Gaul, so yeah.

Her relationship with Rome was... interesting. She had an interest in him. Not necessarily romantic, but she was intrigued by his people, his culture, and his goods. They were rivals, ever since the sack of Rome, actually. Her favourite thing to do when see him is tease him. But she was mostly suspicious of him. When Transalpina became a Roman province, she started being wary of him expanding onto her territory. However, at the beginning of the Gallic Wars, she only realised what Rome (or Caesar, but anyway) was trying to do and to what extent he went too late to stop it immediately. She was fully for Vercingetorix's counterforce, but they lost. She tried to escape but was caught. Rome emprisoned her for having taken part in Alesia, but he didn't have her killed. As she realised she might never get her full freedom again, she decided to kill herself and be free instead of living under bars for who knows how long (very shakespearian, I know 💃). As for her children, they were each caught, and as the Gauls became Gallo-Romans, at some point, only one was left.

While France didn't have many occasions to be close to his mom, he only had good memories of her. And one that stuck with him was how close she liked to be with her people. He doesn't miss her as often as one would think as he had been used to her absence even in her life. But when, in recent centuries, his people started putting the spotlight on the Gauls, he started to become a little nostalgic. It felt gratifying to hear that his people from today (French) regarded his people from his early childhood (Gauls) as their ancestors, it was sort of validating, even if he knew very well why this interestet grew. I like to picture him talking to historians about daily life in gaul or to linguist about the gaulish language and then suddenly sidetracking to make a whole speech on his mom and how free and inspiring and happy she was.

What would her name be though? I don't know yet...

[dykedteach]

Sell Rome to me. I saw you posting about it and now I’m really interested in watching but like...who are the best characters? Seasons? Ships?

Hi anon!

So it’s two seasons long, and it covers the period of Roman history between the start of the civil war between Julius Caesar and Pompey Magnus, to the end of the war between Gaius Octavius (Augustus) and Antony and Cleopatra, so between 49BC and 30BC. The first season is brilliant and well paced, but there are some issues with the second season feeling a bit rushed (they had outlined the stretch of history to cover five seasons, but because they filmed in Italy it was so ridiculously expensive that they couldn’t continue and had to squeeze four series worth of outlined plots into just season two. There’s a lot of time jumps, some more jarring than others, but it’s still good.)

It’s pretty typical HBO fare in terms of sex and violence, and in terms of some of the more problematic subject matter it’s fairly similar to Game of Thrones - I wouldn’t say it’s as bad though? I think if you managed to watch Thrones (or tbh even Black Sails) despite the scenes focusing on rape, incest, and torture, then I think you’d be able to handle how Rome deals with those things.

Back to the plot! One of the things I most love about it is how it balances the two worlds of Ancient Rome. Half the plot is focused on the real historical events and the nobles that took part in them, yes, but then the rest looks at the lives of ordinary soldiers and families, and it’s really interesting to see how these two very separate worlds have an effect on each other. There’s also a lot of stunning comparison scenes, things like funeral scenes blended together so you see the difference between how a self proclaimed god might be mourned by crowds, and how a common roman might be mourned by their family. Visually, it’s a stunning series as well. The locations they shoot on are gorgeous, and the cinematography is amazing too (a lot of the crew I’ve looked up seem to have been posted on the first few seasons of GoT after - for example, the man who directed Baelor where Ned Stark gets beheaded also did an episode here featuring a Triumph celebration, and it feels very very similar although entirely different moods).

Depending on how much you know about that period of Roman history, you’ll likely know a lot of the main characters. If you’re a fan of The Terror, Ciaran Hinds and Tobias Menzies play Caesar and Brutus, and they have some absolutely incredible scenes together (and apart). You have other prominent historical figures like Cleopatra, Mark Antony, and Augustus (as a teenager, Octavian), but they do also expand a lot upon the role that the female relatives of these figures had. Two main characters who don’t feature so much in the history but are given prominent time here are Atia, Octavian’s mother (and the lover of Antony, so I think she’s supposed to also be Fulvia) and the niece of Caesar, and Servilia, the mother of Brutus and lover of Caesar. They really are shown as the heads of their houses, and you get to see how they tweak things behind the scenes, whisper ideas into the ears of the men who change the world. I’ve seen people compare Atia in particular to Cersei Lannister, and I can definitely see the parallels.

In terms of the relationships, there’s a lot of intense romances throughout the show generally between men and women, if that’s your thing. Even though it has its issues, I ended up loving how they showed the passionate affair between Cleopatra and Antony, for example. There isn’t much canonical gay representation - one fleeting f/f relationship, and a handful of jokes about Antony. The two main soldiers that the show focuses on, Vorenus and Pullo, definitely have an intense relationship, very much ride or die, and very familial, but I think if you wanted to read it in a certain way there’s definitely a reading there. In the past few months, I’ve somehow gone in for Brutus/Antony, after seeing some incredible content for it which has made me think about their parallels and so on. There’s also a very non-deep element about it where I’ve chosen the two men in the series I’m most attracted to, but anyway.

I don’t know how well I’ve sold this to you, but it’s definitely worth a try! If you enjoy historical dramas, or HBO shows, it’s worth it. It’s not perfect by any means, but it’s entertaining for sure. There’s a lot of very funny scenes, the dialogue feels very...real? but then also you get these huge iconic lines and speeches and it’s just perfect. I really didn’t expect it to be as funny as it was.

If you’re not too opposed to spoilers, I have a fair bit tagged on my blog under Rome (I will warn you, there’s a lot of repeat reblogs - it’s still a small fandom with a small output of content, but I’ve only been here since the start of the year and even I’ve seen it grow!). If you’re in the UK, it unfortunately doesn’t seem to be on any streaming services, but it’s on HBO if you’re in the US. (or, you know, search Rome HBO free stream online or whatever).

EDIT: look I fully intended to be impartial but I would also hate for someone to start watching Rome with no concept of how much of a gem of a character Cicero is, he very much snuck up on me as a favourite during my first watch, and only now during my second do I feel I fully appreciate this sly dramatic king

[recentanimenews]

What Anime Represent Each of Japan's Eras?

On April 30, 2019, Japan’s Emperor Akihito officially abdicated the throne and his son, Naruhito, became the new emperor. This means that the country has both a new ruler and has started a new era, ending the Heisei era that started in 1989 and beginning the Reiwa era.

  This brings up an interesting question though. What are the major Japanese eras? Many anime fans will know terms like “Warring States period” and maybe “Showa era,” and may even know some of the important names or characteristics, but when does each era occur in relation to the others, what was happening in the world in general at the time and most importantly: what anime can I watch that depicts each era?

    Keep in mind that many of these periods of history last for centuries and so no characterization is going to be perfectly accurate. Society changes a little with each generation, so the early Edo period of the 1600’s is almost certainly significantly different than the late Edo of the 1850’s.

      Also, technically each emperor is given their own era, hence why Akihito’s Heisei is ending and Naruhito’s Reiwa is beginning, however for the sake of not turning this article into a history book, we will be talking about the major historical periods, and only focusing on each emperor’s era for the most recent few.

  Chronologically, the earliest parts of Japanese history, collectively known as ancient Japan, are the Jomon, Yayoi and Kofun eras. Jomon is the oldest, going from 10,000 to 800 B.C. In terms of the rest of the world, by 800 B.C. Chinese alchemists had made gunpowder and Rome was about to be founded.

    No anime have been explicitly set in the Jomon era, however the era’s dogu figurines, one of its most well known styles of art, have been depicted in shows like Digimon via Shakkoumon and Pokémon, with Claydol.

  The Yayoi era takes up the next 600 years, from 300 B.C. to 300 A.D. This is when various practices made their way to Japan, like metallurgy and hierarchical class structure. In other parts of the world: Christianity started, Julius Caesar’s reign happened and China entered its Three Kingdoms era.

    In terms of anime, while not set in Japan, Kingdom is set in the Chinese warring states era, which ended in the 4th century B.C., which is still in the early Yayoi period. Meanwhile, Osamu Tezuka’s Phoenix is set in a few different eras, with the one of the arcs, specifically the Dawn arc, being in the Yayoi era. In 2004, the manga received an anime adaptation, and earlier this year Media Blasters announced that they were re-licensing the title to make Blu-rays available for the first time.

    The final era of ancient Japan is the Kofun era, from 300 A.D. to 538 A.D., when the country became more politically centralized with the start of the first Imperial government. The name of the era comes from the Kofun mounds where important figures were buried. Elsewhere, the huns were attacking India and Rome, Zen Buddhism entered Korea and Chichen Itza was founded in modern day Mexico.

  Unfortunately, there do not appear to be any anime that have adapted the Kofun era. Even Phoenix, despite covering eras both before and after Kofun, seems to skip over this time period.

    Next is Classical Japan, with the Asuka, Nara and Heian eras. The Asuka era lasted from 538 to 710, during which the arts were greatly affected by the influx of Buddhism, and the country’s name changed from Wa to Nihon. In the rest of the world, Italy reunified under the Byzantine Empire, the Islamic prophet Muhammad is born and wet field rice cultivation flourished.

  For anime, Phoenix comes back to life as quite possible the only show that has adapted the era, specially the Sun arc for the Asuka era.

    Nara, which lasted from 710 to 794, is known for the Imperial Court creating the first Japanese literature and Buddhism finally gaining more followers due to the emperor being Buddhist. Meanwhile, the Ghana empire began and the Iberian Peninsula begins to be ruled by Berber Muslims.

  Outside of potentially some children’s manga though, like the Kofun era, there seriously don’t seem to be any anime set in the Nara era.

  Japan’s classical era ended with the Heian era from 794 to 1185, during which Buddhism and the Imperial Court were at their peak, Charlemagne was crowned Roman emperor, the Norse became Normans, the University of Oxford began teaching and anime finally had something to adapt. This is the era Shounen Onmyoji and Otogi Zoshi are set, among others.

    After the Heian era are the Kamakura, Muromachi and Azuchi-Momoyama eras, collectively known as Medieval Japan. In general, these eras are known as when the shogunate and samurai became prominent.

  The Kamakura era, from 1185 to 1333, saw the rise of the Kamakura shogunate, emergence of samurai and establishment of the feudal system. In the rest of the world, Richard I was crowned king of England, Genghis Khan was declared Great Khan of the Mongols and the Ottoman Empire was established.

  Like with many of the ancient eras, not many anime are explicitly set in the Kamakura era. One exception is Kurozuka, a show about a man in the 12th century who finds out he is unable to die and so watches Japan develop for the next 1,000 years.

    The Kenmu Restoration, which lasted the next three years, was an attempt to put the Imperial Court back in power, and ultimately led to the next Shogunate.

  The Muromachi era and shogunate lasted until 1573 with a succession of 15 shoguns. The last shogun was driven out of the capitol by Oda Nobunaga, starting the Azuchi-Momoyama era, which most people probably recognize more as when Nobunaga and company ended the Warring States era (which had lasted 150 years through half of the Muromachi era) and reunited Japan. When Tokugawa Ieyasu took over and started the Tokugawa shogunate, the Edo period and Japan’s isolationism policy officially began, lasting from 1603 to 1868.

  The reason why these three eras are combined instead of each getting their own sections is because they are collectively known as Japan’s feudal era, one of the most popular time periods for anime.

    If a show looks like it’s set in the past and the characters are wandering the countryside from village to village, there’s a good chance it’s set during the Warring States period, even if it has more magical or fantastic elements. If the show ever mentions the Shinsengumi, it’s probably set sometime during the Edo period or shortly after.

  Most anime set in feudal Japan tend to keep the exact era obscured, instead just showing that the setting is somewhere in that almost 400 year timeframe or heavily inspired by the politics and history of feudal Japan in general, like how Gintama is technically set shortly after the Edo era, so still has a Shogunate and the Shinsengumi, but is also set in a world where aliens conquered Earth. Of the shows that make the timing clearer, the likes of Inuyasha and Dororo are set in the Warring States era while Samurai Champloo and Mononoke are in the Edo period.

    The Edo period ended when people loyal to the emperor overthrew the shogunate to reinstate the Imperial Court, leading to the Meiji Restoration and subsequent era. During the Meiji era, which lasted from 1868 to 1912, Japan emerged from its isolation and ended its feudal system, influenced by more Western ideas.

  In terms of anime, this is the set piece for the likes of Rurouni Kenshin and Golden Kamuy.

    After the Meiji era come the Taisho, Showa and Heisei eras of the 1900’s and 2000’s, with Taisho going from 1912 to 1926, Showa lasting until 1989, and Heisei ending this year on April 30th, 2019.

  The Taisho era established the Imperial Diet of Japan and democratic political parties. The Showa era lasted through World War II, and as a result saw a drastic shift in Japanese society eventually resulting in a parliamentary democracy replacing the Imperial government and a massive economic boom in the latter half of the era.

    This season’s Demon Slayer: Kimetsu no Yaiba is set in the Taisho era. For Showa era shows, Showa Genroku Rakugo Shinju and Baccano! are two of the bigger names. Moving into the Heisei era, pretty much anything set in the modern day qualifies.

  The Heisei era is still a part of modern memory, so it is difficult to know how it will be remembered in history, however the transition between Heisei and the new Reiwa era is the first time an emperor has abdicated the throne rather than the new emperor ascending soon after the previous one died.

  And that leads into the current Reiwa era. Since even anime set in modern times typically lags behind current events by a few months or years, nothing is explicitely set in the new era yet, but any slice of life show set in a highschool where the school year just started will be a good contendor for the first ones to cross that line, as one month into the current Japanese school year (specifically at the end of Golden Week) everyone in the country should get a bit of extra time off as the new emporer takes the throne, prompting a national holiday and extension of the students' study time in preparation for their upcoming exams.

    That takes us all the way through Japanese history, from the ancient artifacts of the Jomon era to the smartphones of the modern Reiwa era. There are still the science fiction shows set in the future, but since those eras are yet to come, they do not fall in the scope of this article. Now, all that's left is to watch how the modern era turns out and see how anime in the coming seasons and years deal with new history being made.

  Do you know of any anime set in ancient Japan that I missed? Any standouts from classical or medieval Japan? Let me know in the comments below!

  ----

Kevin Matyi is a freelance features writer for Crunchyroll. He's been watching anime for as long as he can remember, and his favorite shows tend to be shonen and other action series.

  Do you love writing? Do you love anime? If you have an idea for a features story, pitch it to Crunchyroll Features! 

By: news+feed@crunchyroll.com

[my-darron-world-blog]

What became of the Twelve Apostles?

                                        by Leonardo Da Vinci, 1498

Have you ever wondered what became of the Apostles after the first century. All the Bible tells us of them is written in the New Testament. But no New Testament writings, that were considered canonical, were written after the first century. But Christian writers of the first, second and third centuries wrote numerous books about the apostles ministry and fate. Since these works are not inspired, like the New Testament is, there is some times no way of discerning fact from myth. But below is a brief summary of what most Christian historians believe was the continuing work of the apostles until their deaths, gleaned from the aforementioned texts. Please remember that what is written is not necessarily true, but it may well be. Most of the material presented here comes from the book by William Steuwart McBirnie, "The Search for the Twelve Apostles”, Tyndale House Publishers, 1986.

 Peter, also known as Simon or Cephas was the brother of Andrew, the  son of John. He began his work in Syria, where he founded the church of  Antioch and was the Bishop there for seven years from 33 to 40 AD. During  this time, he ministered throughout Asia Minor in the provinces of Pontus,  Galatia, Bithynia, and Cappadocia. After leaving Syria, Peter went to Rome in  about 44 AD and possibly stayed there until 49 AD, until being expelled along  with all other Jews by Claudius Caesar. From there he went to Britain where  he evangelized for some time until returning to Rome. After witnessing his  own wife being put to death under the reign of Nero in 67 AD, Peter was  crucified head downwards, upon his request. His apostolic symbol is a cross  upside down with crossed keys, which represent his role as the Holder of the  Keys to the Kingdom of Heaven. He is remembered by the Church on June 29.

Andrew, was the brother of Simon Peter. Originally he was a disciple  of John the Baptist (Mark 1:16-18). Andrew brought his brother, Peter, to  Jesus (John 1:40). He evangelized mainly in Scythia, but also preached in  Macedonia, Greece, and Achia. While in Patros of Achia, the Governor's wife  Aepeas' was healed and converted to the Christian faith, and shortly after  that the Governor's brother became a Christian. Aepeas was enraged. He  arrested Andrew and condemned him to die on the cross. Andrew, feeling  unworthy to be crucified on the same-shaped cross as his Master, begged that  his be different. So, he was crucified on an X-shaped cross in 69 AD, which  is now known as a St. Andrew's cross. His apostolic symbol is a an X shaped  cross on which he was crucified. He is remembered by the Church on November  30.

James, (the elder, or James the Great), was the brother of John and  the son of Zebedee and Salome (probably the sister of Mary the mother of  Jesus). The New Testament tells us very little about James. His name never  appears apart from that of his brother, John. They were an inseparable pair  (Mark 1:19-20; Matthew 4:21; Luke 5:1-11). He was a man of courage and  forgiveness, a man without jealousy, living in the shadow of John, a man of  extraordinary faith. He was the first of the twelve to become a martyr. James  is traditionally associated with evangelizing the country of Spain. He then  returned to Judea where he ministered until his death. James' death is  recorded in the book of Acts as his being beheaded under the persecution of  Herod Agrippa I in 44 AD. His apostolic symbol is a scalloped shell, the sign  of his pilgrimage by the sea. He is remembered by the Church on July 25.

John, the brother of James, was another son of Zebedee. John was one  of the prominent Apostles. He is mentioned in many places in the New  Testament. He was a man of action; he was very ambitious; and a man with an  explosive temper and an intolerant heart. His second name was Boanerges, which  means son of Thunder. He and his brother, James, came from a more well-to-do  family than the rest of the Apostles. Since his father had hired servants in  his fishing business (Mark 1:20). He labored among the churches in Asia  Minor, especially at Ephesus. John mellowed with time. At the latter part of  his life, he had forgotten everything, including his ambition and explosive  temper, except his Lord's command of love. He was exiled under the reign of  Domitian to the isle of Patmos where he wrote the book of Revelation. After  Domitian's death, John was released by Nerva, the next Roman Emperor and  returned to Ephesus where he died of old age in about 98 AD. It is said that  an attempt was made on his life by giving him a chalice of poison from which  God spared him. He is the only Apostle who died of natural causes. A chalice  with a snake in it is his symbol. He is remembered by the Church on December  27.

Philip, preached primarily in Phrygia and then in Scythia. He is also  associated with evangelizing the country of France. Philip was a man with a  warm heart and a pessimistic head. He was one who would very much like to do  something for others, but who did not see how it could be done. Yet, this  simple Galilean gave all he had. In return God used him. It is said that he  died by hanging. While he was dying, he requested that his body be wrapped  not in linen but in papyrus for he was not worthy that even his dead body  should be treated as the body of Jesus had been treated. The symbol of Philip  is a basket, because of his part in feeding of the five thousand. It is he  that stressed the cross as a sign of Christianity and victory. He later  returned to Phrygia where he was martyred in the city of Hierapolis by being  stoned and then crucified at the age of 87. His apostolic symbol is a basket  and a Tau Cross, which reminds us of the miracle of the loaves and the  fishes. He is remembered by the Church on May 1.

Bartholomew, also know as Nathanael, was the son of Tolmai. A number of scholars believe that he was the only disciple who came from royal blood, or noble birth. The New Testament gives us very little information about him. Tradition indicates he was a great searcher of the Scripture, a scholar in  the law and the prophets and one of the Church's most adventurous  missionaries. He preached the gospel in Phyrgia along with Philip and then  went into Armenia after Philip's death. He also is said to have preached in Persia, Parthia, Arabia and as far as India. After preaching in India he returned to Armenia, where in the  city of Albanopolis, he was flayed alive and then crucified head downward in  68 AD. His apostolic symbol is the symbol of a knife resting on the Bible recalling his life's work and his death at knife point. He is remembered by  the Church on September 21.

Thomas, is also called Didymus meaning "twin". Thomas was  his Hebrew name and Didymus was his Greek name. Matthew, Mark and Luke tell  us nothing about Thomas except his name. However, John defines him more  clearly in his Gospel. Thomas appeared in the raising of Lazarus (John  11:2-16), in the Upper Room (John 14:1-6) where he wanted to know how to know  the way where Jesus was going. In John 20:25, we see him saying unless he  sees the nail prints in Jesus' hand and the gash of the spear in His side he  will not believe. That's why Thomas became known as Doubting Thomas. He is  chiefly associated with founding the church in Babylon. He also preached in  Parthia, Persia, and India. He suffered martyrdom near Madras, India by being  pierced through with a lance in about 60 AD. His apostolic symbol is a lance  and a carpenter's square. He is remembered by the Church on December 21.

Matthew, is also known as Levi, the son of Alphaeus (or Cleophas) and  Mary, and he is also the brother of James (the less). Mary was possibly the  cousin of Mary the mother of Jesus. Matthew worked in and around Judea for  about 15 years and then went out to minister among the Gentiles. He  evangelized in the areas of Persia, Parthia, and in Ethiopia where he was  beheaded in about 90 AD. There are numerous traditions of Matthew ministering  to kings and other high government officials, more so than any other apostle.  This was undoubtedly due to he himself being a bureaucrat, enabling him to  understand how to reach such individuals. His apostolic symbol is a moneybag  since he was a tax collector. He is remembered by the Church on September 21.

James (the less), was the brother of Matthew. Very little is known of  him, in part because of the confusion between the many different James' in  the New Testament. Strong tradition associates him with evangelizing Syria  and Egypt where he was crucified. One interesting tradition says that James,  being the cousin of Jesus, bore a remarkable resemblance to Him and this may  explain the necessity of the betrayal kiss by Judas in the garden. Tradition  tells us that he also died as a martyr and his body was sawed in pieces. His  apostolic symbol is a saw. He is remembered by the Church on

Jude, or Judas, also called Thaddaeus and Lebbaeus, was the son of  James. Jerome called Jude "Trinomious" which means "a man with  three names." In Mark 3:18 he is called Thaddaeus. In Matthew 10;3 he is  called Lebbaeus. His surname was Thaddeus. In Luke 6:16 and Acts 1:13 he is  called Judas the brother of James. Judas Thaddeus also was called Judas the  Zealot. Strong tradition identifies Jude's father with James (the Elder),  which would make Jude the grandson of Zebedee. Jude preached in Syria,  Armenia and Persia where he was martyred by a javelin or with arrows in 50  AD. His apostolic symbol is a ship because he was a missionary thought to be  a fisherman. He is known as the patron saint of hopeless cases, because his  Epistle stresses that the faithful should persevere in the face of harsh  difficult circumstances. He is remembered by the Church on October 28.

Simon, was known as the Canaanite, or the Zealot. Being a Zealot made Simon one of the fanatical Nationalists, a man devoted to the Law, a man with  bitter hatred for anyone who dared to compromise with Rome. Yet, Simon  clearly emerged as a man of faith. He abandoned all his hatred for the faith  that he showed toward his Master and the love that he was willing to share  with the rest of the disciples and especially Matthew, the Roman tax  collector. Simon preached the gospel in Egypt, N.W. Africa, Mauretinia, and  Britain. Joseph of Arimathea accompanied him to Britain. From Britain he  returned to Palestine and ministered together with Jude in Syria, Mesopotamia  and Persia, where he was martyred along with Jude, by being sawed into. His  apostolic symbol is a fish, which reminds us once being a fisherman he became  a fisher of men. He is remembered by the Church on October 28.

Judas Iscariot,  the traitor, was the son of Simon who lived in Kerioth of Judah. He betrayed  Jesus for thirty pieces of silver and afterwards hanged himself (Matthew  26:14,16). Judas, the man who became the traitor, is the supreme enigma of  the New Testament because it is so hard to see how anyone who was so close to  Jesus, who saw so many miracles and heard so much of the Master's teaching  could ever betray him into the hands of his enemies. His name appears in  three lists of the 12 Apostles (Matthew 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:19). It is  said that Judas came from Judah near Jericho. He was a Judean and the rest of  the disciples were Galileans. He was the treasurer of the band and among the  outspoken leaders. It is said that Judas was a violent Jewish Nationalist who  had followed Jesus in hope that through Him his nationalistic flame and dreams  might be realized. No one can deny that Judas was a covetous man and at times  he used his position as treasurer of the band to pilfer from the common  purse. There is no certain reason as to why Judas betrayed his master; but it  is not his betrayal that put Jesus on the cross-it was our sins. His  apostolic symbol is pieces of silver, due to his betrayal of Jesus for 30  pieces of silver.

Matthias, this disciple remains a figure of mystery. Not one of the  Twelve, he was later chosen to take the place of Judas. He is never mentioned  again in the New Testament after he was chosen. The following is a summation  of all the traditions about Matthias. As one of the earliest followers of  Jesus, Matthias was prominent among the Seventy. He had apparently accompanied  the Twelve Apostles on numerous occasions and very possibly may have been at  first a disciple of John the Baptist. Strong tradition suggests that he  ministered among the regions of Armenia. His symbol is the lance. It  is an old tradition that Saint Matthias was martyred in southern Asia with  such a weapon.

[neospacenerds]

Notes on AU!Roman

Reversed Background

Almost everything about Roman’s home planet is explained in this post, though I've come up with a few amendments since them. Mainly regarding the name which is now KXT-49. But here are some additional notes.

- His family has weird hair and eye colors because at some point they volunteered as test subjects for cosmetic gene modification to make some extra money. It’s one of the many things that people can do on these corporation  owned planets to earn extra cash.

- Was discovered to be an abnormally fast learner from a really early age, but that didn’t amount to anything seeing as hello, their lives are still pretty much corporate collateral.

- Access to reading materials is very sparse on his planet and internet access was limited, so anything he could read he would tear through repeatedly. He never attended an official school. Like most of the kids on the planet, the only education they got was from teachers from a voluntary organization coming over to give them lessons, which is how his sister-in-law Clairesse got involved in his life.

- Clairesse played a big role in cultivating his interest in learning, especially in science and math. Her being able to come and go from the planet as she wished allowed her to bring back lots of reading materials and learning aids that helped him immensely.

- His big break came when he got intergalactic attention for discovering a huge flaw in a prominent scientific theory that basically changed the foundations of modern science (I often joke that it’s Einsteins theory of relativity but I might actually have to research on this one)

- That’s basically how he earned a full scholarship to NEMI under the  Technological & Systems and Support majors from one of the biggest names in R&D in the galaxy (possibly Nabaal, we’ll have to see when i start developing my concepts for the AU!Hyperion Collective).

- He’s got a very simple goal; make cutting edge breakthroughs in tech development that’ll earn him enough money to buy his family out of indentured labor.

- Naturally he’s practically guaranteed to end up in for Alpha in this universe, primarily because he doesn't have the glaring personality flaws his canon self possesses.

Personality

- My basis for his personality was basically what Roman would be like if he didn’t turn out to be so very jaded and cynical about everything. AU! Roman is intelligent, but more importantly he’s obviously constantly curious and isn’t reserved about it. He know’s he’s smarter than most but he doesn't rub that in everyone else faces. He’s not at all reserved when it comes to asking questions, and when he really hooks on to a topic those questions can get rapid fire and intense as all hell.

- He has an almost scary desire to improve himself and is always working on something. Doesn't matter if he’s reading, doing homework, learning some new skill or going ham in the workshop, it’s as if he constantly needs to be working somehow. A lot of that compulsion probably comes from the fact that he thinks he missed out on so much time to do so much while he was just a farm boy on his home planet. Now he feels that he needs to make up for that, not to mention the fact that his family’s basically relying on him to get them out of hell. No pressure.

- You know that one Hamilton song? Why do you write like you’re running out of time? That’s him. Part of him feels like this whole experience is a dream from which he might wake up from at any time, which is why he’s got to make the best use of it while he can.

- One thing he retains about his canon personality is how organized he is. In addition he’s very frugal and doesn't waste anything. Does everything to maximum effectiveness, which might come off as OCD a lot of the time.

- He’s definitely a lot more genuine. Oh yes he’s got no qualms about being open about his feelings. One might say he really took after his mother on this one. It might take awhile for him to ease into it though, since back home he’s very used to repressing his emotions just to make things easier on those around him. But once he gets used to the idea that he’s in an environment where he doesn't have to do that, oh boy are we going to have a fun time.

- I feel like he would also retain some of his manipulative edge. Not a lot of it, just enough to show that he’s self-aware about his motivations. He knows he’s there for a purpose and that’s to get rich. Anything that brings him a step closer to that goal, he’ll do in a heartbeat. Contrary to his canon self, he’d probably be very contentious about making friendly relationships, especially with others who could prove useful in the future. He especially would target individuals that’re well off, which I think at some point will lead to him befriending the wrong people (ie. AU!Aoife, if my ideas for her pan out, nudge nudge wink wink). Realizing where his morals stand in comparison to his ambitions is probably going to become a definitive struggle for him.

- He is very shrewd when it comes to making money and takes up any opportunity he can find. He will do a lot of things for money, even if they border on morally gray or take advantage of legal loopholes. Though he probably wouldn’t commit a crime. I’ve actually envisioned him plotting some sort of scam type scheme with Day to steal from the rich and give to the poor (himself) which might be a whole episode i’ll write about later.

- He tries not to lie, though he can and will twist/omit the truth. He definitely feels guilt about his ulterior motives but tells himself it's all for a good cause.

- He’s probably going to start as someone who avoids conflict and takes insults rather than fighting back since I imagine that’s the kind of treatment he’s endured back on his home planet. He’s also diplomatic rather than confrontational in nature. However he’s probably going to develop with time from being calculatingly passive to actually being able to stand up for himself. There’ll come a breaking point where someone pushes him a little too far and he snaps, giving rise to him easing into the iconic sassmaster9000 that he was meant to be.

- He might fight some people, though he’d probably since he's a scrawny farm boy with minimal combat training.

- I feel like he keeps trying to do ridiculous experimental stuff going out of his way to try to break the law of physics. Everyone else is just like Roman stop why can’t you give us regular exosuit upgrades like everyone else and he’s just like NORMAL ISN’T GOING TO MAKE ME RICH. He especially wants to build a portable temporal flux device ie. mini time travel machine. Imagine someone being able to zip about through time like tracer.

- He really likes animals. REALLY likes them. I swear he will befriend any animal in existence.

Family

- His family structure is essentially the same as canon, two half brothers, father, mother. Only difference being that his mom’s actually still alive in this one.

- His brother’s mother, Elizabeth was the sister of his mother, Victoria. She fell ill and died, leaving Victoria to take care of her young nephews. Somewhere along the line Frederick and Victoria fell in love and they got married and tada, Roman was born.

- Roman has a lot of respect for his parents, both of whom are ridiculously hardworking. They tried their best to keep the children away from hard work for as long as they could so it wouldn’t stunt their growth or affect their health, but it took a heavy toll on them. Frederick’s health has been poor over the past few years, and while Victoria’s determination to raise her children has prevented her from falling into the same pit of despair she did in canon, she can get really emotionally unstable, hysterical and is always stressed about making ends meet.

- Roman got a lot of his diplomatic personality from dealing with his mother who overreacts to things a lot. It’s an unspoken rule in their household that he’s pretty much the only one who really knows how to handle her when she’s like that.

- His oldest brother Alexander follows closely in their father’s footsteps. He is happily married to Clairesse and they're about to have their first child. Roman is really to Clairesse, She’s practically the sister she never had and they act like they’ve been siblings forever.

- His brother Caesar is the troublemaker in the family. To everyone’s dismay he’s constantly getting into trouble gambling, drinking and being an unscrupulous womanizer. He's been chased out of the house with a broom more times than anyone can count. He constantly tries to mooch money off his younger brother, and though Roman never gives him any he sneaks food out so Caesar doesn't go hungry. It feels a lot like he’s the older brother whenever he as to give Caesar a lecture about not being a fucking dumbass.

[instituteofgeorgianhistory]

Georgia as a Part of Integrated Europe – Analysis

Tedo Dundua

Emil Avdaliani

https://www.eurasiareview.com/11052020-georgia-as-a-part-of-europe-analysis/

 Below is a short overview of how the concept of Europe emerged over the past millennia and why Georgia has always been part of integrated Europe.

Climate determines eco­no­mics. Hot and less humid environment defined an early advantage of the South over the North – indeed, the Egyptian state and the crafts confront entirely the primitive clan-system which existed in fact everywhere. Then the whole pattern changed.

Times after, some technical improvements towards the North created very comfortable vegetation process, while the Egyptians still needed time to put a seed beyond the reach of the sun. In the 9th-8th cc. B.C. the Greeks are already at the vanguard by means of the technics and the structures. The countries being superb before, like Egypt and Babylon, or India, now face a new hegemonic power – Hellas, already overpopulated and needing grain and the raw materials to be imported. Then the perception of Europe has appeared. Europe is a special term for the part of the earth, which stipulates or will stipulate the same vanguard level of development. Even Scythia with its rough spring was thought to be reorganized in the Greek manner, than those countries which needed the additional finances for irrigation. So, the making of Europe started.

The Greek pattern was as follows: 1. occupying or even frequently being invited to the key points of other economic structures like Caria, Thrace, Bosphorus or Colchis; 2. establishing the autonomous Greek social structures granted heavily with the technics from the metropolis; 3. the natives being equipped with the best tools for agriculture; 4. Greek industrial structures maintained on this background; 5. exporting supplies to Hellas and receiving back some industrial goods. The Aegean and the Pontic (the Black Sea) areas were supposed to form unique economic space. Economic integration considered several stages to be realized: first it was Asia Minor, in fact mistakenly called so, to be Hellenized due to climatic similarity with Greece, then – West, North and East Black Sea countries.

Two major waves of the colonists passed from Hellas – first one in the 8th-6th cc. B.C., and the next – in the 4th c. B.C. led by Alexander the Great. Asia Minor was a complete victory of Hellenism, even being integrated politically under Mithridates Eupator, king of Pontus, as far back as in the 1st c. B.C. The Roman rule gave a new sense to the economic prosperity of the Greek World. And at last, the Byzantine metropolis was created with all those languages like Lydian, Cappadocian etc. vanished forever. But there were serious failures too. Colchis (Western Georgia) offered a dangerous humidity to the Greek way of life. The Greeks living there had no chance to keep their industrial spirit as agriculture was very slow in development. Soon the Greek community became a bilingual one, and after – totally assimilated within the Colchian society. As to Bosphorus (at the Northern Black Sea coast), a corn-supply from Asia Minor to Greece broke the traditional scheme and the region soon lost its Greek style.

The Romans did the same job for Gaul and Spain, putting the Latin population there and Romanizing these sites. They also cared much about their Greek colleagues in making Europe – starting from the 1st c. B.C. the Romans were running the whole administration within the Hellenistic World, while the Greeks used to build their integrated industry. Then the whole system collapsed.

Indeed, Italy never cared much for maximum of technical improvement and power revolution. The result was catastrophic – excessive growth of population in Italy, insufficient economic progress, high prices on the Italian industrial export, cheap supply from European provinces, indecisive military advantage of the metropolis over the provinces; the Roman imperial system vanished Italy being forced to receive large numbers of Goths as settlers. New Europe will pay special attention to the technical progress employing more and more hands in heavy industry. But what was supposed to be done with the starving Italy?

East Rome (Byzantium) possessed prominent food stocks from Asia Minor and Egypt. Emperor Justinian put Italy within the Byzantine hegemony. But Byzantium itself was also a very old economic pattern. And Europe struck with the Slavs and the Bulgars penetrating beyond the Danube, establishing their national states in Thrace, Moesia and Dalmatia. The Asian provinces were lost too. From this very point on Byzantium was steadily degrading still being a predominant for East Europe and the Black Sea countries. Besides, the Byzantines kept some of the Italian provinces thus irritating the rest of Europe and provoking the emergence of Catholicism and Holy Roman Empire.

Till the 11th c. Byzantium was the dominant power, the champion of Christendom against onslaught of Asia and Islam. But it was already very old European pattern of the Mediterranean trying to control North. Soon Empire found itself caught between two fires – the Crusaders and the Turks. Byzantium had to be calmed finally. The Crusaders (after 1204) and the Turks (after the battle of Manzikert, 1071) did this job properly overpopulating the country. Towards the end of the 13th c. Byzantium is nothing but a lot of principalities with different confessional visages (Orthodox, Catholic and Muslim). The Orthodox World starts disputing about a new leader, Serbian, Bulgarian and Georgian kings assuming formally the title of Caesar and Autocrat (and before the Georgian kings formally had been hailed as king and Kuropalates, king and Sebastos, even sometimes, king and Caesaros).

The Italians were more pragmatic. Seizing the whole islands and the key points over the Aegean and the Black Sea, they will control the complete economic output there until the 15th c. This was a disaster for building of Europe. Within the Holy Roman Empire Italy was granted only moderate supplies of food and the raw materials from the Northward. And now Venice and Genoa made a commercial onslaught upon what still can be called the Byzantine World destroying the local crafts. e.g. In 1261 the Byzantine Emperor Michael Palaeologos had to sign a treaty with Genoa promising the republic the concessions, own quarters in Constantinople and other ports, and free access to those of the Black Sea.

A comparative analysis of the Hellenic and the Italian periods is as follows: the Greeks took up their permanent residence within the East Aegean and the Pontic areas stimulating economics, while the Italians placed the soldiers and the merchants there to empty the local markets. That is why the Ottoman reintegration was welcomed by the overwhelming majority in Asia Minor. And Greece since has formed a separate economic structure. Thus the Italian overlordship came to an end together with the handsome transit trade.

The Italians did their best to save the maritime empires but they failed. Galata or Pera was lost immediately. And the Ottoman control over the Straits endangered the existence of the Black Sea colonies like Caffa (Theodosia), which passed over to the Ottomans in 1475. Quite soon the whole empire of Genoa had vanished. Venice triumphed at the battle of Lepanto (1571), but little good resulted. Hence the Italian supplies had been tied up neatly with the countries Northwards, while Italy itself being reduced to a modest land.

After these Southern European empires gone forever, new Europe emerged with its rationalism and a traditional division into the West and the East still vital, with a clear perspective of collaboration, even creating the universal whole European architectural style – a certain mixture of the Gothic (Western) and the Byzantine (Eastern) styles – that was Baroque, elaborated still in Italy in the 16th c. The West was lucky in evolution, more severe East had to arrange an economic tension losing the comforts and the services to catch the West. Both of them headed towards Asia for a supply. The colonial system was established. And if the imperial experiment happened to be used still within Europe, like the Austrians and the Russians did, no economic synthesis was planned. Great Britain and Russia never thought even of America and Siberia as of some agrarian sections while sending the colonists there. World War I created the state-socialist system in the Russian Empire and the USSR appeared. World War II widened the state-socialist system and the Warsaw Pact appeared. The brutal rationalism like state-socialism still did its job neatly. Towards the midst of the 19th c. East Europe with its serfdom seems to be a grotesque European province. Now the differences are hastily diminishing, and the making of Europe is nearing the end. Soon the entire North will face the South within the network of a collaboration affiliating some extremely Southern industrial countries like Australia and the Republic of South Africa, Chile and Argentina.

So, Europe is part of the earth which stipulates or will stipulate the same vanguard level of development. That has been well acknowledged since ancient times. An idea of European integration is as old as comprehension of geographical determinism for technological evolution.

Academic summary for Georgia being a permanent subject of the European integration is as follows: as far back as in the 6th c. B.C. Themistagoras from Miletus made Phasis in Colchis home for himself and his Greek colonists. Thus West Georgia was involved in the European matter. Greek commercial superiority was substituted by the Roman hegemony over the small coastal strip of Colchis, already called Lazica in the 1st c. A.D. And that hegemony was based upon well-manned castellum-system from Pitius up to Aphsaros. Lazi client-kings, dwelling in the hinterland, largely enjoyed Roman pax and prosperity, gaining a handsome profit by trading with the gallant Pontic cities, like Sinope, Amisus and Trapezus.

The whole Black Sea area might be looked upon as a multicultural region of which the general principles were still based on Hellenism, but that was facilitated mostly by the Roman money and defended by the Roman soldiers. Further towards the East, Iberian kings, sometimes even possessing Roman citizenship, welcomed Graeco-Roman transit from Central Asia and India. Spices, precious wood and stones were brought to Europe via “Transcaucasian” trade-route.

http://georgiatoday.ge/news/20876/Silk%2C-Spices-and-Oil–%27Transcaucasian%27-Trade-Route-and-Georgia

Byzantium was not a betrayal of all that was the best in Hellas and Rome. Great oriental bastion of Christendom, she seems to be a formulator of the Orthodox Christian Commonwealth. The Georgian kings being within were hailed as king and Kuropalates, king and Sebastos, king and Caesaros. Again dual citizenship was applied. For the Christian monarchs, there were the Byzantine titles to make them feel as the citizens of the Orthodox Empire, being at the same time ascribed to their own country. After the adoption of Christianity, Eastern Slavonia, with Kyiv as capital, joined the Byzantine Commonwealth. That clearly meant enlargement of the Eastern European unity towards the Eastern section of humid continental Europe, into the direction of the river Volga. Russians were the loyal subjects of the Commonwealth, looking calmly at the decline of Constantinople’s hegemony, and the Bulgar and Georgian kings seizing the titles of “Tsar” and “Autocrat”.

Becoming stronger, Russia vividly protested Ottoman reintegration of what was formerly known as Byzantium, and Muslim overlordship over the Orthodox World by taking the title of “Tsar” for Grand Prince Ivan in 1547. New center of East Europe was shaped, and then long-term war started for hegemony, Russia being victorious.

Seeing itself as East European super-power, thus Russia claimed Byzantine political heritage. For Russians Georgia had to be within the East European Union, and at the beginning of the 19th c. Kartalino-Kakhetian Kingdom (Eastern Georgia) became a part of the Russian Empire. The USSR was a substitute for the Russian Empire. And now Georgia is searching for her room within unified Europe (T. Dundua. The Making of Europe (Towards History of Globalization). The Caucasus and Globalization. Journal of Social, Political and Economic Studies. Volume 2. Issue 2. Sweden. 2008, pp. 38-45).

   Towards the Modern Period

 Georgia and EU established close bilateral relations since the 1990s. Significant progress was made in 2004-2011 paving the way for further cooperation. In June 2012 the EU opened a visa dialogue with Georgia. By early 2013 a visa liberalization action plan was laid out. In March 2016 the European Commission proposed to allow visa-free travel to the Schengen area for Georgian citizens.

https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/eastern-partnership/georgia/  

Major developments took place in the economic sphere. In June 2014 the EU and Georgia signed an Association Agreement (AA). This, along with the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA) Agreement, builds a foundation for far-reaching Georgian political and economic integration with the EU.

https://eeas.europa.eu/headquarters/headquarters-homepage_en/49070/Georgia%20and%20the%20EU

Modern Georgia aspires to become an economic part of Europe, and enjoy its monetary system, unified currency – euro. Major steps have been made to this end since the break-up of the Soviet Union. The current EU-Georgia close relationship is based on the EU-Georgia Association Agreement. More importantly, the latter involves a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA), which came into force in mid-2016 and along with closer political ties aims to achieve deeper economic integration between Tbilisi and the EU.

http://georgiatoday.ge/news/20981/%27Attic-Standard-Zone%27%2C-Eurozone-and-Georgia%3A-Historical-Comparative-Analysis

Since the signing of the DCFTA EU-Georgia trade ties have seen a radical change. True that only a modest growth of exports to the EU has been seen so far. However, there was a considerable decline in Georgia’s trade with the former Soviet states due to the unfavorable economic situation of CIS trade partners. By 2020 Georgia trades more with the EU than it was before the DCFTA. Over the long term the positive effects of the DCFTA are likely to build up considerably (Deepening EU-Georgian Relations. What, why and how? Ed. M. Emerson, T. Kovziridze. London. 2018, p. 5).

On 27 June 2014 the European Union and Georgia signed the Association Agreement (AA), including the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA). The DCFTA has an ambitious objective of integration with the EU’s internal market, therefore is considered as the unique free trade agreement. As the main pillar of the AA, it contributes to modernization and diversification of economy in Georgia.

https://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/georgia/49070/node/49070_uz

Recently the EU has published an Eastern Partnership (EaP) policy which outlines the Union approach for 2020 and beyond towards the six former Soviet states bordering Russia. This comes amid fears that the EU has not been able to fully implement its previous Eastern Partnership policy as Georgia and Ukraine, the states which most successfully implemented the reforms, have not become EU members.

https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2020/03/01/despite-troubles-eastern-partnership-will-remain-operational-in-one-form-or-another/ The new policy document is therefore an important step, serving as a continuation of the EU’s resolve to further integrate the 6 former Soviet states into the Union’s institutions.

The new policy document is a result of consultations launched in 2019 by the European Commission. The previous document made an emphasis on engaging with civil society to ensure effective reforms. There also was a focus on increased public accountability, advanced human rights and local development.

The new policy document outlines changes in 3 out of 4 priority areas. The EU again will work on building stronger economy, connectivity and stronger society as a guarantee.

In the new policy, EU-Georgia cooperation will remain the main way to ensure the implementation of policy recommendations. According to the document, “the EU will continue to provide support in bilateral, regional and multi-country fora, including targeted sectoral assistance in line with the principles of inclusiveness and differentiation. In addition, the EaP will continue to be flexible and inclusive, allowing countries to tackle common and global challenges jointly in a wide range of areas, fostering regional integration”.

https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/sites/near/files/joint_communication_on_the_eap_policy_beyond_2020.pdf  

Overall, there are the following long-term Eastern Partnership policy objectives the EU plans to implement with Georgia beyond 2020: building resilient, sustainable and integrated economies, accountable institutions; increasing the rule of law and general security; making progress in building environmental and climate resilience; implementing a resilient digital transformation; building a fair and inclusive societies.

The new EaP strategy also underlines the importance of increasing bilateral trade which builds upon the previous progress. For example, in the 2010s, EU-EaP trade has nearly doubled, turning the partner countries into the EU’s 10th largest trading partner.

This has the geopolitical ramification of Russia gradually losing the economic battle as the EaP states diversify their economies. The EU is the first trading partner for four partner countries (Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine), while for Armenia and Belarus the EU is the second biggest trading partner.

The diversification in exports of goods of EaP states helps to better integrate those states into the global value chains. Another sign of closer interaction between the EU and EaP states is the number of companies trading with the Union. In Georgia, the number increased by 46%, from Moldova by 48% and from Ukraine by 24%.

Building upon this achievement, the new document calls for deepening of “the economic integration with and among the partner countries, particularly that of the three associated countries through continued support for the full implementation of the current DCFTAs”.

Another geopolitical realm covered by the new document is transport. The EU will be focusing on upgrading key physical infrastructure in road, rail, port, inland waterway and airport facilities, and logistics centers, in order to further strengthen connectivity between the EU and the partner countries and among the partner countries themselves. This is in connection with the energy connectivity in the “South Caucasus”, as the Southern Gas Corridor was completed in 2020 with first gas from Azerbaijan likely reaching the EU.

https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2020/03/21/the-eu-introduces-new-vision-for-eastern-partnership-states/ Yet another important sphere of cooperation will be strengthening the EU’s cooperation with the partner countries to create a strong financial system for sustainable economic growth. Within the measures to minimize organized crime, the EU will continue its support for the EaP states to cooperate with EU justice and home affairs agencies to fight human trafficking and trafficking of illicit goods (notably drugs and firearms), etc. Among other policies, the EU’s support for the cyber resilience of the partner countries stands out. This is particularly important for Georgia as the country was recently subject to massive external cyber-attacks.

Thus there is a clear progress in EU-Georgia relations with likely advancement to follow in the coming years.

[spirit-science-blog]

Is 2020 the New 2012?

“Judgment day and the end of the world is in our minds..and our minds are a dangerous place to be” -Kelly Cutrone.

Hey, hey, Remember when everyone said the world would end in 2012 and they made a movie about it and everything? And everyone was saying that there would be cataclysmic events like Massive fires, World War 3, plagues of locusts, floods, and mass civil unrest...leading to complete shutdown of all society?? Yeah, so uh funny story while we all know that didn’t happen in 2012, cause we’re all still here almost every prediction people made about how the world would end back then has pretty much come true for 2020. Wildfires exploded across Australia at the tail end of 2019 and were most influential in January. WW3? In January, after the assassination of Iranian general Qasem Soleimani, tensions between the US and Iran were at an all-time high, with attacks on the US Embassy in Baghdad sparking fears the next war could happen pretty soon. Swarms of locusts eating 1000s of crops and causing famine? February in Kenya. Flooding March in the UK. Civil unrest and anarchy in the streets? Mark another one-off for Apocalypse Bingo! Still wondering if we’ll get our hoaxed alien attack this year.

You really would be forgiven for thinking the Maya just got the math wrong on their calendar. Maybe the stonemason just had too much Peyote that day, who knows, But believe it or not, there is a conspiracy about this going around. Our current year 2020 is 2012, and it all has to do with the time that we adopted the Gregorian Calendar as opposed to older Julian one. Now Before we start, let’s just say, there are a few significant issues with this theory, the least of which is that different parts of the world adopted the Gregorian calendar at different times, so it wasn’t a universal thing that you can just calculate the math on and BANG - you’ve got yourself a day to lock yourself in your doomsday bunker with your mask and your Kool-ade... but we’ll get there soon.

So what is this whole thing about? Last month, a man named Paolo Tagaloguin, who claims to be a researcher/Fulbright scholar took to twitter (in a now-deleted post that he claimed was a joke) and did some somewhat questionable math and came up with a theory that said:

“We were technically in 2012. The number of days lost in a year due to the Gregorian Calendar shift is 11 days. For 268 years using the Gregorian Calendar (1752-2020) times 11 days = 2,948 days. 2,948 days / 365 days (per year) = 8 years”....

Which according to him, put Apocalypse II: Nibiru Boogaloo on the 21st of June 2020.  Now it’s July, so that didn’t happen. As we said earlier, there are quite a few issues with his calculations that prove him wrong.  To start with, Let’s get some background info.  The Gregorian Calendar is essentially the most widely used calendar and dating system used in the world today. It splits a canonical year into 12 months, and spaces leap years to make the average year 365.2 days long, focusing predominantly on Earth’s revolution around the sun as a means of keeping time. If you live in the world today, chances are you at least know this dating system.

It was invented by Pope Gregory XIII and gradually replaced the much older Julian Calendar that was in use at the time, which some people say gave us April Fools day!  See, aside from Christian influences - like changing how the lunar cycles were calculated by the church to get a more accurate date for Easter, and the time of the New Year, the Gregorian Calendar also shortened the average year by 0.0075 days to stop the drift of the calendar concerning the equinoxes. The Julian Calendar, though, was proposed by Julius Caesar around 46BC and was invented with the help of Greek Mathematics and astronomy and had been used up until 1582.  

This is where we see the first issue with Tagaloguin’s theory. Not only does it not take into account leap years, but the date he used for its adoption (1752), is only the date that the New Calendar was adopted in Britain and its colonies (otherwise known as the area of the United States east of the Appalachian Mountains).  Much of Europe (including a lot of Catholic countries), such as France, Spain, Lithuania, and much of the not-so-Holy Roman Empire had adopted it right from the start, though, in 1582.  Some of the first records showed a funny glitch in the dates where Thursday 4th October 1582 was followed by Friday, 15 October 1582, the next day - seriously! Go on a calendar app and check it out. It’s amusing.

Arguments between Protestant Christians and Catholics, though, led to a delay in the Calendar taking off in the rest of the world, with some countries not even changing until the 18th Century! Which meant that they had to observe an additional leap year, which is where we get the 11 days to change from. The French and Spanish colonies in the US adopted the change when their home countries did in the 1500s, so, in short, the math is entirely wrong…

The other thing to consider is that the whole 2012 phenomenon was a huge misunderstanding.  We’ve covered this on the channel before, but in a nutshell, the world was never going to “end,” at least, not in the sense of the movie cataclysms or anything. See, the calendar would reset at the end of the 13th Bak'tun - rather than end life on Earth entirely. If anything thinks of the Maya calendar like a car’s mileage counter, once it reaches 99,999,99, it just resets to 0...or 1 since we can’t have a year 0. The thing about the Maya is.. they LOVED their cycles. They thought everything was a cycle, which - if you’ve seen our episode called Cycles n Sine Waves, or ever read any of the Hermetic Writings - it makes sense that as things naturally move in waves, cycles appear to be built into the fabric of the cosmos. In Mesoamerican mythology, even the world itself went through 4 creations and re-creations before the gods got it right. Something about raining jaguars or giant floods kept messing everything up. Enlil, what have you got to say for yourself?

Anyway, my point is, did the Mayan calendar end on December 21st, 2012? Yeah technically. But they didn’t see it as an “ending,” once the Bak’tun reached its end, it would merely transition into a new phase, and trigger a kind of Rebirth for all of our cultures, the beginning of a new massive cycle of time. A lot of New Age beliefs saw this rebirth as a dawning of a new age of consciousness, where people would go through a period of great transition, leading to an overall higher knowledge for all of humanity, and we would eventually move into a new heart-centered age, and this was the beginning of that shift. Would this have been a period ending the Maya thought was wicked cool? You bet! The most significant period endings they experienced were Bak'tun endings. So it was a huge deal, just not a world-ending huge deal. Well, maybe it depends on how we describe it. Is it the end of our old way of life as we know it? Yeah, we could probably say that!

Given our current climate in 2020, it’s easy to look for energetic or spiritual excuses for everything that’s happening, and maybe there is something to be said about how we account for time. The energy is coming back around to clear out old ways and paradigms before moving into a new one. It’s interesting to see that almost everything that we thought would happen in 2012 is happening now. Almost like we didn’t learn the first time around, so we’re repeating the energy until we finally break through and change for the better.

You might be wondering why a crazy theory like this took off so quickly, despite its questionable math, well part of it also lies in Astrology.  We covered the Astrology of Coronavirus earlier in another video, so definitely go check that out for some relevant Planetary Gossip..but the thing is Astrologers have been hyping up 2020 as a year of radical change for many many years now, thanks to the rare alignment of Saturn and Pluto on the 12th January, which was made more prominent by Jupiter coming in shortly after that, which is the angle we looked at in our COVID Astrology episode. While no one could have predicted how epic a catastrophe Corona would be, we did get at least one apocalyptic cataclysm! Many Astrology charts predicted that this year would mark history by challenging us in some pretty extreme ways.

This is one of those things that I’d love to see some scientists take more seriously. At the same time, Astrology is often ridiculed as a superstition. How is it that so many astrologers have been telling us about the significant change of 2020 for decades in advance, hitting the nail on the head perfectly?

According to Chani Nicholas, right from the beginning, January’s conjunction was a scary start, as it’s episode coincided last time with both World Wars and the economic recession of the 80s, so we were in for it from the starting line along with 2 Mercury retrogrades this year, and the latter being during the next election some more stuff is bound to go down before we’re through the 2020 woods. It’s not all doom and gloom, though, given Neptune's position, which suggests we’re entering a period where we will feel more interconnected and understanding of each other than ever before. And with Venus’ recent retrograde in Gemini, we have an energy of renewal and reassessment with relationships, both with others and ourselves. This is a time of apocalyptic matters - and if you recall from one of our flagship original spirit science episodes - apocalypse translates to a “lifting of the veil.” So 2020 is a time where the truth is coming out, we see all of the chaos of human consciousness with crystal clear vision, as the truth comes to the surface, for it to be healed.

Even better though�� 2021 is supposed to be GREAT. With the conjunction of Saturn and Pluto in Aquarius on the winter solstice, we’ll be entering a period of a fresh start, especially about science and innovation. Chani seems to think that the new energy will probably guide many industries to change in ways that will make them practically unrecognizable. Some new and surprising concepts and innovations will be coming out in how we live in harmony with the Earth and her resources. Maybe we’ll even see the electric human blackfly drone machine come to the market and Hey, we might even start laying the groundwork for our Spirit Center next year, we’ve got some huge plans for that, but we’ll have to save that discussion for another time.

So, If the 21st of June 2020 wasn’t the end of the world. Did anything interesting happen on that day at all? There wasn’t anything as dramatic as tidal waves or volcanos going off and destroying everything around it, But it was world Yoga day! And world selfie day, and world optimism day, and indigenous peoples day (yay) and well you get the picture, we made it into a lot of different things. Astronomically it was pretty cool too; there was a solstice new moon solar eclipse in cancer! Only parts of Central and Eastern Africa and some parts of southwest Asia could see the eclipse, But still, someone somewhere probably thought the world was ending.

So long story short Is 2020 the new 2012? If we see 2012 as a time where the energy shifted and brought us into a new age, then Kinda! A lot of what’s going on at the moment in the world is dramatically changing our cultural climate and collective consciousness. The riots especially are uprooting long-held old systems of oppression and making way for new, more progressive energies and mindsets, which is fantastic. Is the world going to end at some point this year? No more than it did 2012.

When a cycle ends, the calendar is meant to be reset to the beginning and start. It's intended to be a time of change and renewal, which 2020 certainly is.  Spiritually speaking, perhaps the new energies introduced to us in 2012 have finally integrated into our society and are shaking things up, and we’re only just feeling it now. Like in 2012, we are presented with a great opportunity, if 2020 is the actual 2012, let's rebirth some stuff for real this time.

And if you need some help getting your cosmic rebirth on, allow me to share the 7-Day Transformation with you. It only takes a week to shift your entire reality completely! Here’s what someone else said when they went through it!

Thanks for watching, and we’ll see you next time!

[araitsume]

The Desire of Ages, pp. 601-609: Chapter (66) Controversy

This chapter is based on Matthew 22:15-46; Mark 12:13-40; Luke 20:20-47

The priests and rulers had listened in silence to Christ's pointed rebukes. They could not refute His charges. But they were only the more determined to entrap Him, and with this object they sent to Him spies, “which should feign themselves just men, that they might take hold of His words, that so they might deliver Him unto the power and authority of the governor.” They did not send the old Pharisees whom Jesus had often met, but young men, who were ardent and zealous, and whom, they thought, Christ did not know. These were accompanied by certain of the Herodians, who were to hear Christ's words, that they might testify against Him at His trial. The Pharisees and Herodians had been bitter enemies, but they were now one in enmity to Christ.

The Pharisees had ever chafed under the exaction of tribute by the Romans. The payment of tribute they held to be contrary to the law of God. Now they saw opportunity to lay a snare for Jesus. The spies came to Him, and with apparent sincerity, as though desiring to know their duty, said, “Master, we know that Thou sayest and teachest rightly, neither acceptest Thou the person of any, but teachest the way of God truly: is it lawful for us to give tribute unto Caesar, or no?”

The words, “We know that Thou sayest and teachest rightly,” had they been sincere, would have been a wonderful admission. But they were spoken to deceive; nevertheless their testimony was true. The Pharisees did know that Christ said and taught rightly, and by their own testimony will they be judged.

Those who put the question to Jesus thought that they had sufficiently disguised their purpose; but Jesus read their hearts as an open book, and sounded their hypocrisy. “Why tempt ye Me?” He said; thus giving them a sign they had not asked, by showing that He read their hidden purpose. They were still more confused when He added, “Show Me a penny.” They brought it, and He asked them, “Whose image and superscription hath it? They answered and said, Caesar's.” Pointing to the inscription on the coin, Jesus said, “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.”

The spies had expected Jesus to answer their question directly, in one way or the other. If He should say, It is unlawful to give tribute to Caesar, He would be reported to the Roman authorities and arrested for inciting rebellion. But in case He should pronounce it lawful to pay the tribute, they designed to accuse Him to the people as opposing the law of God. Now they felt themselves baffled and defeated. Their plans were disarranged. The summary manner in which their question had been settled left them nothing further to say.

Christ's reply was no evasion, but a candid answer to the question. Holding in His hand the Roman coin, upon which were stamped the name and image of Caesar, He declared that since they were living under the protection of the Roman power, they should render to that power the support it claimed, so long as this did not conflict with a higher duty. But while peaceably subject to the laws of the land, they should at all times give their first allegiance to God.

The Saviour's words, “Render ... unto God the things that are God's,” were a severe rebuke to the intriguing Jews. Had they faithfully fulfilled their obligations to God, they would not have become a broken nation, subject to a foreign power. No Roman ensign would have waved over Jerusalem, no Roman sentinel would have stood at her gates, no Roman governor would have ruled within her walls. The Jewish nation was then paying the penalty of its apostasy from God.

When the Pharisees heard Christ's answer, “they marveled, and left Him, and went their way.” He had rebuked their hypocrisy and presumption, and in doing this He had stated a great principle, a principle that clearly defines the limits of man's duty to the civil government and his duty to God. In many minds a vexed question had been settled. Ever after they held to the right principle. And although many went away dissatisfied, they saw that the principle underlying the question had been clearly set forth, and they marveled at Christ's far-seeing discernment.

No sooner were the Pharisees silenced than the Sadducees came forward with their artful questions. The two parties stood in bitter opposition to each other. The Pharisees were rigid adherents to tradition. They were exact in outward ceremonies, diligent in washings, fastings, and long prayers, and ostentatious in almsgiving. But Christ declared that they made void the law of God by teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. As a class they were bigoted and hypocritical; yet among them were persons of genuine piety, who accepted Christ's teachings and became His disciples. The Sadducees rejected the traditions of the Pharisees. They professed to believe the greater portion of the Scriptures, and to regard them as the rule of action; but practically they were skeptics and materialists.

The Sadducees denied the existence of angels, the resurrection of the dead, and the doctrine of a future life, with its rewards and punishments. On all these points they differed with the Pharisees. Between the two parties the resurrection was especially a subject of controversy. The Pharisees had been firm believers in the resurrection, but in these discussions their views in regard to the future state became confused. Death became to them an inexplicable mystery. Their inability to meet the arguments of the Sadducees gave rise to continual irritation. The discussions between the two parties usually resulted in angry disputes, leaving them farther apart than before.

In numbers the Sadducees fell far below their opponents, and they had not so strong a hold upon the common people; but many of them were wealthy, and they had the influence which wealth imparts. In their ranks were included most of the priests, and from among them the high priest was usually chosen. This was, however, with the express stipulation that their skeptical opinions should not be made prominent. On account of the numbers and popularity of the Pharisees, it was necessary for the Sadducees to concede outwardly to their doctrines when holding any priestly office; but the very fact that they were eligible to such office gave influence to their errors.

The Sadducees rejected the teaching of Jesus; He was animated by a spirit which they would not acknowledge as manifesting itself thus; and His teaching in regard to God and the future life contradicted their theories. They believed in God as the only being superior to man; but they argued that an overruling providence and a divine foresight would deprive man of free moral agency, and degrade him to the position of a slave. It was their belief, that, having created man, God had left him to himself, independent of a higher influence. They held that man was free to control his own life and to shape the events of the world; that his destiny was in his own hands. They denied that the Spirit of God works through human efforts or natural means. Yet they still held that, through the proper employment of his natural powers, man could become elevated and enlightened; that by rigorous and austere exactions his life could be purified.

Their ideas of God molded their own character. As in their view He had no interest in man, so they had little regard for one another; there was little union among them. Refusing to acknowledge the influence of the Holy Spirit upon human action, they lacked His power in their lives. Like the rest of the Jews, they boasted much of their birthright as children of Abraham, and of their strict adherence to the requirements of the law; but of the true spirit of the law and the faith and benevolence of Abraham, they were destitute. Their natural sympathies were brought within a narrow compass. They believed it possible for all men to secure the comforts and blessings of life; and their hearts were not touched by the wants and sufferings of others. They lived for themselves.

By His words and His works, Christ testified to a divine power that produces supernatural results, to a future life beyond the present, to God as a Father of the children of men, ever watchful of their true interests. He revealed the working of divine power in benevolence and compassion that rebuked the selfish exclusiveness of the Sadducees. He taught that both for man's temporal and for his eternal good, God moves upon the heart by the Holy Spirit. He showed the error of trusting to human power for that transformation of character which can be wrought only by the Spirit of God.

This teaching the Sadducees were determined to discredit. In seeking a controversy with Jesus, they felt confident of bringing Him into disrepute, even if they could not secure His condemnation. The resurrection was the subject on which they chose to question Him. Should He agree with them, He would give still further offense to the Pharisees. Should He differ with them, they designed to hold His teaching up to ridicule.

The Sadducees reasoned that if the body is to be composed of the same particles of matter in its immortal as in its mortal state, then when raised from the dead it must have flesh and blood, and must resume in the eternal world the life interrupted on earth. In that case they concluded that earthly relationships would be resumed, husband and wife would be reunited, marriages consummated, and all things go on the same as before death, the frailties and passions of this life being perpetuated in the life beyond.

In answer to their questions, Jesus lifted the veil from the future life. “In the resurrection,” He said, “they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.” He showed that the Sadducees were wrong in their belief. Their premises were false. “Ye do err,” He added, “not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God.” He did not charge them, as He had charged the Pharisees, with hypocrisy, but with error of belief.

The Sadducees had flattered themselves that they of all men adhered most strictly to the Scriptures. But Jesus showed that they had not known their true meaning. That knowledge must be brought home to the heart by the enlightenment of the Holy Spirit. Their ignorance of the Scriptures and the power of God He declared to be the cause of their confusion of faith and darkness of mind. They were seeking to bring the mysteries of God within the compass of their finite reasoning. Christ called upon them to open their minds to those sacred truths that would broaden and strengthen the understanding. Thousands become infidels because their finite minds cannot comprehend the mysteries of God. They cannot explain the wonderful exhibition of divine power in His providences, therefore they reject the evidences of such power, attributing them to natural agencies which they can comprehend still less. The only key to the mysteries that surround us is to acknowledge in them all the presence and power of God. Men need to recognize God as the Creator of the universe, One who commands and executes all things. They need a broader view of His character, and of the mystery of His agencies.

Christ declared to His hearers that if there were no resurrection of the dead, the Scriptures which they professed to believe would be of no avail. He said, “But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.” God counts the things that are not as though they were. He sees the end from the beginning, and beholds the result of His work as though it were now accomplished. The precious dead, from Adam down to the last saint who dies, will hear the voice of the Son of God, and will come forth from the grave to immortal life. God will be their God, and they shall be His people. There will be a close and tender relationship between God and the risen saints. This condition, which is anticipated in His purpose, He beholds as if it were already existing. The dead live unto Him. 

By the words of Christ the Sadducees were put to silence. They could not answer Him. Not a word had been spoken of which the least advantage could be taken for His condemnation. His adversaries had gained nothing but the contempt of the people. 

The Pharisees, however, did not yet despair of driving Him to speak that which they could use against Him. They prevailed upon a certain learned scribe to question Jesus as to which of the ten precepts of the law was of the greatest importance.

The Pharisees had exalted the first four commandments, which point out the duty of man to his Maker, as of far greater consequence than the other six, which define man's duty to his fellow man. As the result, they greatly failed of practical godliness. Jesus had shown the people their great deficiency, and had taught the necessity of good works, declaring that the tree is known by its fruits. For this reason He had been charged with exalting the last six commandments above the first four.

The lawyer approached Jesus with a direct question, “Which is the first commandment of all?” The answer of Christ is direct and forcible: “The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: and thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.” The second is like the first, said Christ; for it flows out of it, “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.” “On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”

The first four of the Ten Commandments are summed up in the one great precept, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart.” The last six are included in the other, “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” Both these commandments are an expression of the principle of love. The first cannot be kept and the second broken, nor can the second be kept while the first is broken. When God has His rightful place on the throne of the heart, the right place will be given to our neighbor. We shall love him as ourselves. And only as we love God supremely is it possible to love our neighbor impartially.

And since all the commandments are summed up in love to God and man, it follows that not one precept can be broken without violating this principle. Thus Christ taught His hearers that the law of God is not so many separate precepts, some of which are of great importance, while others are of small importance and may with impunity be ignored. Our Lord presents the first four and the last six commandments as a divine whole, and teaches that love to God will be shown by obedience to all His commandments.

The scribe who had questioned Jesus was well read in the law, and he was astonished at His words. He did not expect Him to manifest so deep and thorough a knowledge of the Scriptures. He had gained a broader view of the principles underlying the sacred precepts. Before the assembled priests and rulers he honestly acknowledged that Christ had given the right interpretation to the law, saying:

“Well, Master, Thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but He: and to love Him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love his neighbor as himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices.”

The wisdom of Christ's answer had convicted the scribe. He knew that the Jewish religion consisted in outward ceremonies rather than inward piety. He had some sense of the worthlessness of mere ceremonial offerings, and the faithless shedding of blood for expiation of sin. Love and obedience to God, and unselfish regard for man, appeared to him of more value than all these rites. The readiness of this man to acknowledge the correctness of Christ's reasoning, and his decided and prompt response before the people, manifested a spirit entirely different from that of the priests and rulers. The heart of Jesus went out in pity to the honest scribe who had dared to face the frowns of the priests and the threats of the rulers to speak the convictions of his heart. “And when Jesus saw that he answered discreetly, He said unto him, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God.”

The scribe was near to the kingdom of God, in that he recognized deeds of righteousness as more acceptable to God than burnt offerings and sacrifices. But he needed to recognize the divine character of Christ, and through faith in Him receive power to do the works of righteousness. The ritual service was of no value, unless connected with Christ by living faith. Even the moral law fails of its purpose, unless it is understood in its relation to the Saviour. Christ had repeatedly shown that His Father's law contained something deeper than mere authoritative commands. In the law is embodied the same principle that is revealed in the gospel. The law points out man's duty and shows him his guilt. To Christ he must look for pardon and for power to do what the law enjoins.

The Pharisees had gathered close about Jesus as He answered the question of the scribe. Now turning He put a question to them: “What think ye of Christ? whose son is He?” This question was designed to test their belief concerning the Messiah,—to show whether they regarded Him simply as a man or as the Son of God. A chorus of voices answered, “The Son of David.” This was the title which prophecy had given to the Messiah. When Jesus revealed His divinity by His mighty miracles, when He healed the sick and raised the dead, the people had inquired among themselves, “Is not this the Son of David?” The Syrophoenician woman, blind Bartimaeus, and many others had cried to Him for help, “Have mercy on me, O Lord, Thou Son of David.” Matthew 15:22. While riding into Jerusalem He had been hailed with the joyful shout, “Hosanna to the Son of David: Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord.” Matthew 21:9. And the little children in the temple had that day echoed the glad ascription. But many who called Jesus the Son of David did not recognize His divinity. They did not understand that the Son of David was also the Son of God.

In reply to the statement that Christ was the Son of David, Jesus said, “How then doth David in Spirit [the Spirit of Inspiration from God] call Him Lord, saying, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou on My right hand, till I make Thine enemies Thy footstool? If David then call Him Lord, how is He his son? And no man was able to answer Him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask Him any more questions.”

[thisdaynews]

The Myth of George Washington’s Post-Presidency

New Post has been published on https://thebiafrastar.com/the-myth-of-george-washingtons-post-presidency/

The Myth of George Washington’s Post-Presidency

In Obama’s telling, that tradition goes back to George Washington. “After he led the colonies to victory as General Washington, there were no constraints on him … no democratic norms that guided what he should or could do,” Obama explained in a 2018 speech. Washington “could have made himself, potentially, president for life. Instead, he resigned as commander in chief and moved back to his country estate. Six years later, he was elected president, but after two terms, he resigned again and rode off into the sunset.”

That is where Obama ended his history lesson, but that is not how Washington’s life actually ended. The story of America’s first president riding off into the sunset and vacating public life has become so much the stuff of legend that even his successors do not realize that it is only legend.

The reality is quite different: When Washington left the presidency, he didn’t really leave politics. In fact, few former presidents in American history have meddled as much as Washington did.

The lesson for Obama as he considers how much to involve himself in the 2020 race lies not in the path that Washington followed but in the disillusionment that he found.

***

If Washington could have had his wayas he left the presidency in 1797, his final years would have gone much as Obama supposed. To say that Washington at the time had no precedent would not be accurate. He did have one; it was just a few thousand years old: Cincinnatus, the Roman general who saved the republic and then retired to his farm.

Washington said he wished to do the same as he returned to his Mount Vernon estate. “The remainder of my life,” he wrote in a letter during his final days in office, “will be occupied in rural amusements … at Mount Vernon, more than 20 miles from which, after I arrive there, it is not likely I ever shall be.”

Yet even as Washington rode around his farms, his mind traveled back to politics. The newspapers he pored over could not satisfy his need to be in the know. He badgered members of his final Cabinet, all of whom had retained their posts in the new administration, to send updates that pushed the boundaries of confidentiality.

The topics that dominated the news in the late 1790s echo today. There was a deepening division between political parties. There was a foreign power (France) that had meddled (unsuccessfully) in the most recent presidential election on behalf of the Democratic-Republican Party, which had formed in opposition to the administrations of Washington and his successor John Adams. There were new forms of partisan media and, with them, cries of fake news and calls for regulation.

No threat concerned former President Washington more than the foreign policy crisis that brought the country to arms in 1798. For those following the Ukraine scandal that led to Trump’s impeachment, the broad outlines of the so-called XYZ Affair are familiar: the executive of the world’s mightiest military power (then France) sought personal benefit in exchange for granting a formal reception to the representatives of a fledgling republic (then the United States). The Americans called France’s preconditions bribery and refused to pay.

With French privateers preying on American ships, the United States prepared for war. Alexander Hamilton, who had served as an aide to Washington during the Revolutionary War, believed that President John Adams was not up to the challenge of overseeing the creation of a new army and began floating Washington’s name for command.

Barely a year had passed since Washington had left office with “a determination not to intermeddle in any public matter.” In letters, he worried what people would say if he violated that pledge. Would they “denounce” his return as “a restless act, evincive of discontent in retirement”?If so, they would not have been completely wrong. With a speed that surprised no one more than himself, Washington decided that he could not “remain an idle spectator” when what lay in peril was “everything sacred and dear to freemen.”

Far from fearing Washington’s return, Adams encouraged it—at least initially. So enthusiastic was Adams that he appointed his predecessor commander in chief of the armies of the United States without pausing to ponder why the Constitution specifically assigns that title to the president—and without knowing what Washington’s terms of acceptance might be.

As it turned out, Washington had some conditions. He would not take active command of the new army except in the event of an invasion and wanted to select the other general officers— including his second-in-command, who would serve as the head in his absence. For this position, Washington chose the one officer he had specifically heard Adams did not want: Hamilton.

Adams distrusted Hamilton and privately feared he more resembled a Caesar than a Cincinnatus. But publicly, Adams could not afford a falling out with Washington, who made it known he would resign if he did not get his way. Adams had no choice but to give way. Had he not, Adams later explained to a friend, Hamilton would have received command of the army directly from Washington, who “would have been chosen president at the next election.”

The evidence suggests that Adams was right to worry: As Adams embraced an opportunity for new negotiations that ensured a full-scale war with France never happened, influential people in communication with his own Cabinet secretaries plotted ways to replace him by persuading Washington to stand for office in the coming election of 1800. Much as Washington tried to stop all talk of the idea, his friends still found reason to fantasize.

While leaving office often creates the public perception of lifting modern presidents above politics, the private letters Washington sent reveal that he had descended deeper than ever. He began openly describing himself as a member of a political party (the Federalists), involved himself in congressional electioneering in a way he never would have as president, and supported the infamous Alien and Sedition Acts, which the government used to imprison the sort of journalists who had attacked his character while in office.

Matters reached such a point that Washington had ceased all communication with three of the most prominent Democratic-Republican leaders: Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and James Monroe, who went on to become America’s third, fourth and fifth presidents, respectively. Just hearing a report of a speech that Madison had given in favor of Monroe’s election to the Virginia governorship sent Washington into a rage on the evening of December 13, 1799.

Whether a retiree so easily roused could have sat on the sidelines as Republicans ran away with the next presidential election defies definitive answer because Washington died the next night.

***

None of this history shouldreduce the world’s respect for Washington. Surrendering power is not easy and in the story of Washington’s last years lies a reminder of the temptations former presidents face: However far they agree to venture back on to the public stage, there will always be calls for them to go further and resume the leading role—to be the “indispensable man.”

One person who no longer deemed himself indispensable during the final months of his life was Washington himself. The friends begging him to seek the presidency in 1800 believed he could straddle a partisan divide that no other candidate could. He disagreed. “The line between parties,” he wrote, had become “so clearly drawn” that even he could not rise above it.

Those despairing words point to the paradox of the post-presidency today: The stature that comes from rising above politics collapses as soon as one descends back into it. What gives former presidents the perception of power is also what leaves them, in effect, powerless.

Why, then, do Americans cling to the fantasy of former presidents rescuing the republic? Perhaps the answer lies in the circular nature of the Cincinnatus story so central to the country’s founding: Only by riding out of retirement can the hero be celebrated for riding back into it.

Read More

[journeydb]

September 12 2016 Montpelier and Arles, France

The Pullman hotel is quite nice, especially the cafe and pool on the terrace.  I worked out early in the gym and swam in the pool before breakfast, packing, and heading out past the lovely front entrance with all its glass  and greenery to the train station for Arles.  This time we knew where to catch the tram to go to the train station so it was a lot easier than our arrival in Montpelier.

In Arles we checked into the Jules Cesar hotel, named after, you guessed it, Julius Caesar!  There is a theater attached to the hotel and, between the buildings, a frieze with Caesar’s face on it.

The Jules Cesar has recently been remodeled and the interior and fashion designer who was chosen is very famous in France, and internationally, for his whimsical style.  This is what Wikipedia has to say about Christian Lacroix, who is a great designer but, ultimately, a not so successful businessman:

“Christian Lacroix was born in Arles, Bouches-du-Rhône in southern France. At a young age he began sketching historical costumes and fashions. Lacroix graduated from high school in 1969 and moved to Montpellier, to study Art History at the University of Montpellier. In 1971, he enrolled at the Sorbonne in Paris. While working on a dissertation on dress in French 18th-century painting, Lacroix also pursued a program in museum studies at the École du Louvre. His aspiration during this time was to become a museum curator. It was during this time he met his future wife Françoise Rosenthiel, whom he married in 1974.

In 1987, he opened his ownhaute couture house.  He began putting out ready-to-wear fashions in 1988, drawing inspiration from diverse cultures. Critics commented that he did not seem to understand the type of clothing the working woman needed. In 1989, Lacroix launched jewelry, handbags, shoes, glasses, scarves, and ties (along with ready-to-wear). In this same year, he opened boutiques within Paris, Arles, Aix-en-Provence, Toulouse, London, Geneva, and Japa.

With his background in historical costume and clothing, Lacroix soon made headlines with his opulent, fantasy creations, including the short puffball skirt ("le pouf"), rose prints, and low décolleté necklines. He referenced widely from other styles—from fashion history (the corset and the crinoline), from folklore, and from many parts of the world—and he mixed his references in a topsy-turvy manner. He favored the hot colors of the Mediterranean region, a hodgepodge of patterns, and experimental fabrics, sometimes handwoven in local workshops.

From 1987 to its purchase from LVMH by Falic Fashion Group in 2005, the fashion house had cumulative losses of more than €200 million.[2]

In 2009, the fashion house, owned by duty-free retailer Falic Fashion Group, put the business into bankruptcy and laid off all but 12 workers. Lacroix's A/W 2009 Haute Couture was privately financed by Lacroix and each model was paid €50. "I didn't want to cry," said Lacroix "I want to continue, maybe in a different way, with a small atelier. What I really care about is the women who do this work" Lacroix said about his last Haute Couture collection. Throughout its history, it never turned a profit[2] and reported a €10 million loss in 2008. In 2011 he began collaborating with the Barcelona-based design company Desigual.

Christian Lacroix has also completed interior design work at several landmark hotels, including the Hotel Le Petit Moulin in Spring, 2005; the Hotel Bellechasse, right in the heart of Saint-Germain-des-Prés (Paris), in 2007 (a member of Small Luxury Hotels of the World); and in 2010 Le Notre Dame hotel just a step from the cathedral Notre-Dame-de-Paris.”

It is no surprise that our suite, like the rest of the hotel, is rich in texture, imagery, and complicated, sometimes competing messages, because Christian Lacroix is obviously a complex, inspired genius.  Not everyone appreciates his style, and, while I’m fascinated by it, Bruce feels it is somewhat overwhelming, especially in a living space like this where he is looking for relaxation and distraction, not a cacophony of visual stimulation.

When people think of Arles they may associate it with Vincent Van Gogh, which is what I have always done, since he stayed here during a very difficult period of his life when he had a mental breakdown and was hospitalized here and in St. Rhemy.  It was also during this period that he painted some of his most famous and, arguably, best works.  The light in this part of France is famous for its subtle hues and intensities and many painters have frequented Provence, and in particular, Arles, for that reason.  Tomorrow we hope to tour the village to see some of the sights that inspired his paintings.

Some people may not realize, however, that Arles has a much more ancient history that goes back to Roman times.  This was all new to us and we were fascinated, so we walked around town looking for Roman ruins and found many, including the amphitheater, which some call a coliseum.  According to Wikipedia:

“The Arles Amphitheater  is a Roman amphitheater in the southern French town of Arles. This two-tiered Roman amphitheatre is probably the most prominent tourist attraction in the city of Arles, which thrived in Roman times. The pronounced towers jutting out from the top are medieval add-ons.

Built in 90 AD, the amphitheater was capable of seating over 20,000 spectators, and was built to provide entertainment in the form of chariot races and bloody hand-to-hand battles. Today, it draws large crowds for bullfighting during the Feria d'Arles, as well as plays and concerts in the summer.”

There are many shops near the amphitheater and we spend some time shopping before heading back to the hotel.  I found a shirt with one of my favorite Van Gogh paintings on it and also a book about Van Gogh which I plan to give to Bruce for his birthday.

This Van Gogh painting of a local cafe is on the shirt I bought.  Hopefully tomorrow we’ll see the actual cafe!

We had dinner at a restaurant in the Place de Forum, where there was a statue of Frederic Mistral, a famous writer from Provence.

“Frédéric Mistral (8 September 1830 – 25 March 1914) was a French writer and lexicographer of the Occitan language who was born in Maillane in the Bouches-du-Rhône and lived in Provence. Mistral received the 1904 Nobel  Prize in Literature "in recognition of the fresh originality and true inspiration of his poetic production, which faithfully reflects the natural scenery and native spirit of his people, and, in addition, his significant work as a Provençal philologist. He was a founding member of Félibrige and a member of l'Académie de Marseille.”

How fitting that when we returned to our hotel this evening I found his name on the wall near our room. One of his most famous quotes is:

“Quand le Bon Dieu en vient à douter du monde, il se rappelle qu'il a créé la Provence.“ In English that translates to “When the Good Lord begins to doubt the world, he remembers that he created Provence.”

[itsiotrecords-blog]

http://ift.tt/2tCUgEf

A city becomes “lost” when it is abandoned by its inhabitants and left to decay. This can be the result of war, migration, or natural disaster, but in each case these cities can act as a sort of time capsule, leaving a civilization frozen in history and waiting to be discovered. While many of these cities have indeed been rediscovered, others have never been found and have taken on the status of legend. Whether real or mythical, the following are the ten lost cities that have most captured the imaginations of historians, archeologists, and adventurers.

#1 The City Of The Caesars Also known as the Wandering City and the City of Patagonia, The City of the Caesars is a mythical city that is believed to have been located on the southernmost tip of South America in the region known as Patagonia. The city has never been found, and at this point it is considered more legend than anything, but in its time it was quite sought after by colonial explorers. It was said to have been founded by survivors of a Spanish shipwreck, and was believed to possess huge amounts of gold and jewels. Over time, a number of legends have formed around the City of the Caesars, with some saying that it was populated by 10-foot tall giants, and others claiming that it was a city of ghosts that could appear and disappear at will.

#2 Troy Made famous in the epic poems of Homer, Troy was a once-legendary city located in modern day Turkey. Best known for being the site of the Trojan War, ancient Troy was a strongly fortified city that stood on a hill near the river Scamander. Its coastal location allowed it to be a naval power, and nearby plains provided excellent land for farming. Troy was long considered by many to be the stuff of myth until it was first excavated in the 1870s by Heinrich Schliemann, who discovered that there were actually numerous cities on the site, which over the years had been built on top of one another. Although it was once a towering seat of power, the modern-day Troy excavation site is said to be relatively unimpressive, the result of years of digging and frequent looting by tourists.

#3 The Lost City Of Z Supposedly located deep in the jungles of Brazil, the lost city of Z was said to be an advanced civilization with a sophisticated network of bridges, roads, and temples. Speculation about Z began after a document was found in which a Portuguese explorer insisted he had visited the city in 1753, but otherwise no evidence of its existence has ever been uncovered. The city of Z is most famous for attracting the interest of explorer Percy Fawcett, who in 1925 vanished without a trace while in search of it, and over the years a number of other adventurers have died or disappeared while on its trail. In recent years, a city known as Kuhikugu was discovered in the Amazon Rainforest that showed evidence of sophisticated fortifications and engineering, leading many to speculate that it may be the source of the Z legend.

#4 Petra Arguably the most beautiful of all the cities on this list, Petra is located in Jordan near the Dead Sea and is believed to have once been the center of the Nabataean caravan trade. Its most striking feature is its exquisite stone architecture, which is carved out of the rocks of the surrounding mountains. This helped make Petra a naturally fortified city when it was established as a capital in 100 B.C., and evidence suggests that it featured many other technological advancements like dams and cisterns, which helped the inhabitants channel the region’s flash floods and store water for use in times of drought. After hundreds of years of prosperity, the city went into decline after the Romans conquered the region, and in A.D. 363 an earthquake destroyed several of its buildings and crippled its infrastructure. Petra was eventually abandoned, and it stood for years in the desert as something of a curiosity before being revealed to the world at large in 1812 by a Swiss explorer.

#5 El Dorado The Zipa used to cover his body in gold dust and, from his raft, he offered treasures to the Guatavita goddess in the middle of the sacred lake. This old Muisca tradition became the origin of El Dorado legend. One of the most famous of all the legendary cities, El Dorado was a mythical empire supposedly found in the jungles of South America. Literally meaning “The Golden One” in Spanish, the city was said to be led by a powerful king and hold untold riches of gold and jewels. In the time of the conquistadors, the city was a subject of constant fascination, and several disastrous expeditions were launched in search of it. The most famous of these was headed by Gonzalo Pizarro, who in 1541 led a group of 300 soldiers and several thousand Indians into the jungle in search of El Dorado. They uncovered no evidence of the city or its treasures, and after the group was decimated by disease, famine, and attacks by natives, the expedition was abandoned. This model is on display in the Gold Museum, Bogotá, Colombia

#6 Memphis Founded in 3,100 B.C., Memphis was the capital of ancient Egypt, and served as the civilization’s administrative center for hundreds of years before being abandoned with the rise of Thebes and Alexandria. At its height, Memphis is estimated to have had a population of more than 30,000, which would have made it the biggest city of antiquity. Over the years, the location of Memphis became lost, and it was a subject of much debate among archeologists before it was rediscovered by a Napoleonic expedition in the late 1700s, and it was then that the city’s sphinx, statues and temples were first seriously studied. Unfortunately, stones from the ruins had been appropriated to build nearby settlements, and many important parts of the site remain lost to historians.

#7 Angkor The Angkor region of Cambodia served as the center of power for the Khmer Empire from 800 AD well into the 1400s. The region was abandoned after a slow decline that ended with an invasion by a Thai army in 1431, leaving the massive city and its thousands of Buddhist temples to be reclaimed by the jungle. The city lay relatively untouched until the 1800s, when a group of French archeologists began to study and restore it. Angkor and its surroundings– which rival Los Angeles in size– have since been recognized as the biggest pre-industrial city in the world, and its famed temple of Angkor Wat is commonly considered to be the largest religious monument in existence.

#8 Pompeii The Roman city of Pompeii was destroyed in AD 79 after the nearby volcano Vesuvius erupted and buried the entire community under 60 feet of ash and rock. The city was estimated to have had around 20,000 inhabitants at the time, and it was considered one of the premier vacation spots for the upper class of Roman society. After the eruption, the ruins stood for 1,700 years before being accidentally rediscovered in 1748 by workmen building a palace for the King of Naples, and since then Pompeii has been the source of constant excavations by archeologists. Ironically, the devastation caused by Vesuvius also helped preserve the city’s architecture, which along with countless frescoes and sculptures, have helped make Pompeii a key part of modern historians’ understanding of life in ancient Rome.

#9 Atlantis At this point it is fairly easy to write Atlantis off as nothing more than a myth, but this legendary city has been a source of speculation ever since the philosopher Plato first wrote about it in 360 B.C. Described by Plato as an advanced civilization and formidable naval power, Atlantis is said to have conquered much of Europe before sinking into the sea as the result of some kind of environmental disaster. While Plato’s story is seen by most as a work of fiction, his description of a massive civilization years ahead of its time technologically has captured the imaginations of countless writers and would-be adventurers, and there have been numerous expeditions launched in search of the city. Perhaps the most infamous occurred at the beginning of WWII, when the Nazis supposedly organized a journey to Tibet with the hope of finding remnants of Atlantaen culture.

#10 Machu Picchu Of all the lost cities that have been found and studied, perhaps none is more mysterious than Machu Picchu. Isolated near the Urubamba Valley in Peru, the city was never found and plundered by conquistadors, and it was not until historian Hiram Bingham visited it in 1911 that it became known outside of the region. The city is divided into districts, and features over 140 different structures bordered by polished stone walls. It is said to have been built in the 1400s by the Incas and abandoned less than 100 years later, most likely when its population was wiped out by smallpox brought over from Europe. There has been much speculation as to what Machu Picchu was used for, as well as why the Incas chose such to build it in such a strange location. Some have said it was a holy temple of sorts, while others have maintained that it was used as a prison, but recent research suggests that it was probably a personal estate of the Inca emperor Pachacuti, and its location was chosen because nearby mountains figured prominently in Inca astrological mythology.

Source: TopTenz