Ever since the Mongol invasion of Russia in 1237 and Batu’s burning of Moscow that same year, the often feuding Russian princes harbored the notion of driving the “infidel” from their lands and ending the yearly tribute paid to the khans. From the first decisive Mongol victory against the fractured Russian principalities at the Kalka River in 1222, the invader was seen as invincible. This “invincibility,” however, was enhanced more by the disparate loyalties of individual princes to a common cause than by the might of the Tatars.

 

In the late fourteenth century, Dmitri Ivanovich, Grand Prince of Moscow, would destroy the myth of Mongol invincibility at the Battle of Kulikovo Pole, adding the dimension of a Christian crusade to the growing restlessness against Mongol control. He would be called Dmitri “Donskoi” (of the Don) for his exploits and Moscow would rise to assume the position of political and religious leadership which would pave the road toward hegemony of Great Russia in the subsequent century.

 

The Russian victory at Kulikovo in 1380 was a pointed reminder that the Mongols themselves were disunified. The Mogol leader at Kulicovo, Kan Mamai, was involved in a power struggle with Khan Tokhtamysh, a protégé of Tamerlane, and the eventual victor in the struggle with Mamai. Two years after Kulicovo, Mamai would be dead. Tokhtamysh would continue to receive the tribute of Russian princes, including Dmitri of Moscow, yet the seed had been planted. Kulikovoi was not a battle for independence, but it was highly symbolic of nationalist feelings that spurred boyars and princes to further action. Chronicles of the battle compare it to the Marathon Plain. Kulikovo also had divine implications.

 

The Russian army marched to Kolomna, south of Moscow, to be joined by 70,000 from “brave Lithuania.” The Nikon Chronicle states that Dimitri’s army numbered 400,000. Another chronicle, the Zadinscina, captures the patriotic feeling: “ horses neigh in Moscow, horns sound in Kolomna, drums are beaten…glory resounds through the whole Russian land.”

 

Dmitri led his army across the Oka River and southward to the Upper Don. According to the Nikon Chronicle, the Russian army encamped at the mouth of the Lopasna River while Mamai’s forces were south of Kulikovo Pole. The Russians chose the battlefield deliberately, an area of hilly terrain which would force the Mongols to dispense with the use of their effective cavalry and thus prohibit them from enveloping the Russian positions. After the battle in such tight quarters, a Russian chronicle relates that, “…Christian bodies lie like haycocks, and the river Don flowed in blood for three days.”

  Moscow at War with the Mongols for the Soul of Russia at the Battle of Kulikovo in 1380

Michael Streich

 

On September 8^th, 1380, the birthday of the Holy Virgin, the Russian army met the Mongols. The battle was fought “from morning to noon,” the Mongol advance blinded by the sunlight reflected off Russian armor. Dmitri was severely wounded as the battle turned against the Russians. As Mongol triumph appeared certain. Prince Vladimir of Serpukov appeared, held in reserve by Dmitri. The weary Mongols retreated.

 

The Russian struggle against the “pagan Mamai” was seen as a crusade for Orthodoxy. James H. Billington, in The Icon and the Axe, asserts that the chronicles of Kulikovo are more decisive in their attempt to portray Dmitri’s struggle in terms of a crusade against infidels rather than military gain. Kulikovo was also an important step in the ascendancy of Moscow as the chief repository of power once Mongol influence was eradicated.

 

Final independence from the Mongols would not occur until the reigns of Ivan the Great and Ivan IV (the Terrible). Kulikovo, however, proved that the Mongols could be beaten and that invincibility was a myth.

Copyright owned by Michael Streich; republication only with written permission of author.

 

 Teaching ALL of American History

Michael Streich (Written & Published in 2012)

For teachers of American History, the task of covering all the material from the period of “discovery of the new world” to contemporary events is daunting and nearly impossible. In most cases, the curriculum is dictated by mandated state standards and courses of study that attempt to touch on key events and concepts detailed in 30 to 35 chapters of text.

 

The inclination and temptation to spend more time on favorite eras is checked by performance evaluations that gauge how well state requirements are addressed and how standardized test scores validate those requirements. Innovative strategies, however, might satisfy overall state standards as well as allow a greater degree of classroom freedom in terms of teaching key material.

 

Teaching American History using a Thematic Approach

 

Thematic treatments can still be chronological in order to be effective. For example, a semester theme focusing on expansion can analyze and correlate the following chronological events:

 

Colonial expansion up to the Mississippi

Beginning of the Westward Movement

Manifest Destiny

Expansionism in Foreign Affairs – 19^th Century

Imperialism

Global expansion through the World Wars

Cold War military and economic expansion

 

Other thematic approaches might cover the following areas:

 

The Move toward Democratic Ideals and Civil Rights

Using Court Cases to Teach U.S. History

American Innovations, Industrialism, and the Urban Nation

 

Mini Sections that Focus on Mico Historical Events

 

Another creative and chronological focus develops key or watershed movements in American History as a core focus from which ancillary topics are extrapolated. In this approach, the core focus becomes the center of study as well as the primary learning outcome.

 

If the core focus is “British tax policies after 1763 directly caused the American Independence Movement,” ancillary proofs can be taken from several actual events, determined by their ultimate impact on the core focus:

 

The Stamp Act

The Quartering Act

The Declaratory Act

The Boston Tea Party and subsequent Coercive Acts

Lexington and Concord

 

Rather than spending an inordinate amount of time on the 1763 Proclamation Line, the Townshend Acts, the Boston Massacre, and the Sons of Liberty, more pivotal events tell the story quickly without sacrificing content.

 

Begin American History at 1800

 

In North Carolina, the Revolutionary War and the birth of the nation is part of the sophomore-level civics course, enabling teachers of juniors to begin studies in the 19^th century and thereby have a better opportunity to meet state standards that require covering up to and including the 21^st Century.

 

Inevitably, however, significant problems exist:

 

Juniors have difficulty recalling curricula details from one semester to the next if interrupted by long summer breaks

Transfer students from out-of-state districts may have never been taught the earlier material

Even the best attempts of honest coverage results in “snap-shot” lesson plans that conform to a detailed history text.

 

Teaching American History from Selected Documents

 

This approach has many advantages. Using selected documents still maintains a chronological approach and it introduces students to primary source documents. Original source documents take studying and analysis to a higher level of critical thinking.

 

The singular negative in this approach rests with a teacher or instructor not fluent enough in the discipline to provide background information when needed or to make necessary connections between those documents that highlight similar themes. These points to a teacher enslaved by a publisher’s wrap-around-teacher edition of the text and the endless power point presentations that offer slightly more than a generic treatment of the material.

 

Worst Case Scenario

 

The worst case is usually walking into an American History class in March and finding that the American Civil War has just ended. Students in such classes never hear about World War I and never reach Vietnam under President Johnson. Such situations are found more in non-public schools where state standards are either not applied or vastly tweaked to satisfy the interests of individual teachers.

 

The Call for History Accountability

 

Since 2000, American elections have become more volatile and divisive within society. During the 2008 presidential election, young voters were enticed by Barack Obama’s message of change and voted in great numbers. Voting, however, correlates to knowledge of American History that is at the very least passable.

 

Unless educators develop innovative ways to teach the full gamut of American History in a meaningful way, employing strategies to ensure realistic student outcomes, standardization and “bubble-sheet” exams will continue to demonstrate that many American high school graduates know very little about their own history.

2021

The above reflections are even more important in the current pandemic crisis, which has all but eliminated in-person instruction and subjected most students to the deadening daily impact of "remote" learning. At the same time, those clamoring to remove statues and other public memorabilia resulting in an erasure of American History will damn an entire generation who may never know the truths of the past, good or bad.

 Economics of the Boston Tea Party and the Tea Tax

Michael Streich

Following the partial repeal of the Townshend Revenue Acts in April 1770, Parliament, following the recommendation of King George III, maintained the tax on tea, which would be paid by the American colonists without complaint until the Boston Tea Party turned tea into the “beverage of traitors.” The tax on tea, however, began in 1660 with the passage of the first Navigation Acts and was amended numerous times over the next 100 years. Parliamentary actions involving the East India Company, nonimportation agreements, and duty-free tea only hurt tea smugglers whose illegal tea imports after November 1773 were threatened.

 

Fluctuations in the Tea Tax Prior to 1767

 

Tea was a commodity that could only be imported into the American colonies on British ships coming from England. English tea originated in India where the East India Company facilitated tea cultivation and exportation. Tea entered the American colonies through New York, Boston, and Philadelphia. At the time of the Tea Party, Boston received the largest amounts of English tea, over-taking New York.

 

Prior to 1767, the taxes on tea were prohibitive, encouraging widespread smuggling. Some scholars suggest that much of the smuggled tea was tied to the Netherlands. Other historians, however, dispute this, suggesting that no solid evidence exists linking Dutch East Indies ports to illegal foreign tea imports into the colonies.

 

The importation of foreign tea was always subject to higher taxation. In 1711, for example, legal tea importation required a duty of four shillings per pound versus seven shillings per pound of foreign tea. Additionally, because the tea tax rose several times between 1660 and 1767 and was prohibitive, widespread smuggling of foreign tea occurred. Smuggling has been tied to many of the leading Northeast merchants of the period, including John Hancock.

 

The Ill-Fated Path toward the Boston Tea Party

 

Although the Townshend Revenue Acts were repealed, the threepence duty on tea was retained. For over two years, American colonists paid the tax without complaint. In 1773, however, Parliament exempted the East India Company from any duties on tea imported into the American colonies and allowed the company to ship tea directly to the colonies rather than through England.

 

The preferential treatment of the East India Company was tied to its precarious financial situation; the company was teetering on bankruptcy. Several board members held high positions in the British government. The East India Company already held a monopoly east of the Cape of Good Hope. Exempting the company from import duties, however, would severely undercut smuggling. English tea imports had already been decreased by Parliament to ten shillings per pound. Between 1763 and 1767, tea imports to the colonies averaged 328,125 pounds.

 

Colonial Reaction

 

The response of colonial agitators like Samuel Adams was predictable, given his letters or correspondence and public speeches. The imminent arrival of the English ship Dartmouth into Boston harbor, laden with hundreds of chests of tea, provided the object lesson Adams and the Sons of Liberty needed. On board the ship were 90,000 pounds of tea (some historians dispute this figure, accepting lesser amounts beginning at 35,000 pounds) valued at 10,000 English pounds sterling.

 

In mid-December 1773 at least fifty members of the Sons of Liberty – including Paul Revere, boarded the Dartmouth and destroyed the tea, tossing the chests into Boston harbor. They dressed as Indians, supposedly representative of the freedom embodied in the Native American, according to writer Robert Harvey. Similar actions took place in New York where the cargo of tea aboard the Nancy was destroyed.

 

Propaganda Effect of the Boston Tea Party

 

Like the Boston Massacre, the tea party was used to further the cause of Revolution. It did not help that Parliament overreacted. Robert Harvey states that, “…the goal of this huge destruction of property was plainly to goad the British government, so inept for so long, into action. This time the Sons of Liberty succeeded.” Americans stopped drinking tea and the tea party became an iconic event demonstrating the desire to stop immoral and illegal taxation.

 

References:

 

Oliver M. Dickerson, The Navigation Acts and the American Revolution (University of Pennsylvania Press, 1951)

Robert Harvey, “A Few Bloody Noses” (Overlook Press, 2002)

Copyright owned by Michael Streich

 Ghosts in Ancient Greece and Rome

Phantoms and Demons Interact With the Living

© Michael Streich

 Feb 15, 2009

Although ancient civilizations believed in magic and ghosts, the emerging Christian tradition differentiated ghosts as demons that disguised themselves as the dead.

Ghosts in the ancient world were an accepted part of the cosmos. Ancient literature, including the Bible, gives varying accounts of ghosts and their interactions with the living. Ghosts were associated with magic and often intertwined with demonology, such as the celebrated case in Mark’s Gospel. The strong identification of ghosts with the demonic is tied to the formation of early Christian theology that, unlike the cosmologies of ancient societies, made no provision for spectral existence.

Ghosts in Ancient Greece and Rome

The ancients strongly believed that those who died without proper burial could not cross the River Styx for at least one hundred years. According to Virgil, they were doomed to wander the banks until the years had elapsed. In Homer’s Odyssey, Odysseus, in the course of practicing a rite to safely enter Hades, spoke briefly with a ghostly warrior to whom he promised a fitting burial on his way home.

Ghosts were tied to murders and violent deaths. Suetonius, in The Twelve Caesars (34) describes how Nero arranged to have his mother killed, yet “often admitted that he was hounded by his mother’s ghost…” Suetonius also records that Nero “set Persian magicians at work to conjure up the ghost and entreat its forgiveness.”

Persians and Egyptians had long reputations for magic, divination, and the ability to deal with the supernatural.

Magic and even the assistance of gods and goddess as in the case of Odysseus were often vital. As Daniel Ogden writes, “contact with ghosts…could often be fatal to the living.” In Jean-Claude Schmitt’s detailed Ghosts in the Middle Ages, a group of ghosts carousing around a church altar suddenly attack and kill a priest who had come late at night to witness the phenomena.

Ghosts and Demons Differentiated by the Early Church

In the Gospel of Mark (5.1-20) Jesus arrived at Gerasenes and was confronted by a “man from the tombs with an unclean spirit.” In the ancient world, it was a common belief that ghosts inhabited tombs. Many of these ancient tombs lay outside the communities of the living, necropoleis containing the sarcophagi of the deceased. The man confronting Jesus was said to have “had his dwelling among the tombs” and was infected with many demons. For many reasons, ghosts could be viewed as “unclean” spirits. The differentiation with the notion of “demon” as a separate evil spirit associated with the legions of Satan is a Christian one.

The transition occurred when early Christian thinkers advanced the idea that ghosts were really demons disguised as the dead. Tertullian advances this view by pointing to the Old Testament story of the famous witch of Endor who conjures the spirit of the dead prophet Samuel on orders from Saul. Christian views held that the dead must await the final judgment in another realm. The thief on the cross had asked Jesus to remember him when he came into his “world” and was told by Jesus that he would be in paradise.

The problem with Tertullian’s interpretation is that a close reading of that text indicates sincere surprise on the part of the witch when Samuel appeared. The ghost she described was a “divine being coming up out of the earth.” That the dead lived below the earth was a universal ancient belief. Both Homer and Virgil placed the abode of the dead below the earth.

In the New Testament, death is described as “to give up the ghost” which literally means “to breathe out.” It is also translated in several passages as “giving up the spirit.” St. Paul’s “great cloud of witnesses,” i.e., those that passed on in this manner, cannot possibly be ghosts in the sense the ancient civilizations interpreted the concept of “ghost.”

Other Ghostly Haunts

Ghosts were associated with battlefields, temples, and houses where people had been murdered or committed suicide. Some have said that even today, standing in the old Roman Forum in the blanket of night, one can hear the ghosts of the past lamenting their condition and the fall of their civilization.

Sources:

Daniel Ogden, Magic, Witchcraft, and Ghosts in the Greek and Roman Worlds (Oxford University Press, 2002).

Suetonius, The Twelve Caesars (Penguin Books, 1984).

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia

The copyright of the article Ghosts in Ancient Greece and Rome in Ancient History is owned by Michael Streich. Permission to republish Ghosts in Ancient Greece and Rome in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.

Necropolis at Pammukale

City of the Dead

 Ancient Tombs and Burial Practices

Early Civilizations Develop Rituals Dealing with Death and Afterlife

© Michael Streich

 Mar 8, 2009

Ancient practices involving the dead varied between civilizations, yet the notion that death required ritual and planning was a universal aspect of evolving religion.

How the ancients viewed death and how they defined the Afterlife varied considerably through Middle Eastern and Mediterranean cultures. In some civilizations, practices and beliefs changed as their own societies declined. Treatment of the dead was a vital part of New Stone Age religious development: Mark Kishlansky refers to the discovery of human skulls at Jericho as evidence of possible early ancestor worship. [1] As views about death evolved, ancient civilizations developed their own, often elaborate, ways of bridging life with the world beyond.

Comparisons and Contrasts in Entombment

For the Etruscans, thriving in western Italy before the Roman Republic, death was a celebration and the Afterlife a continuation of the often lavish lifestyles of the wealthy. Their cities of the dead – necropoleis, were hewn out of the rocky hills. Each tomb duplicated Etruscan homes and it is from these tombs as well as the sarcophagi found therein that archaeologists have been able to present a portrait of Etruscan everyday life. Etruscan funerals featured gladiatorial “duels” to the death as part of the celebrations, a practice later inherited by the Romans that evolved into the popular public spectacles.

Like the Etruscans, Ancient Egyptians buried their wealthy dead in elaborate tombs filled with artifacts and wall paintings depicting families during everyday life. As with Etruscans, Egyptians had a positive view of the Afterlife. Both the Egyptians and the Etruscans, however, would see these positives change as their societies began to wan. The Afterlife became a place of fear, filled with evil spirits. Egyptians began to bury their deceased with the Book of the Dead, containing spells to help the departed.

Romans also buried their dead outside of city limits and every significant road or provincial city has these necropoleis. Yet Romans, in contrast, had no similar view of an Afterlife. According to Philippe Aries and Georges Duby, “No generally accepted doctrine taught that there is anything after death other than a cadaver.” [2] Romans, however, prolifically carved elaborate sarcophagi illustrating scenes from everyday life. Referring to Roman mausoleums and grave plaques, Lionel Casson comments that these markers “form one of the most fruitful sources of information we have about the Roman world.” [3]

Preparing and Remembering the Dead

It is well known that Ancient Egyptians took seventy days to prepare a pharaoh for the burial ceremony, although such elaborate preparations were not provided for the average Egyptian. Every ancient civilization, however, had methods of preparation, often designed to stop the rapid decomposition of the body. The very term “sarcophagus” comes from a Greek term referring to “flesh eating.” Heather Pringle writes that in Babylon, the important dead were often immersed in honey. [4] In most of the Ancient Near East, preparation and burial was swift.

Taken from the home within hours after death (often to avoid ill fortunes tied to the supernatural), the dead were placed in cities beyond the living, frequently with buried gifts although the purpose was not often tied to an Afterlife. Romans celebrated a “Feast of the Dead” once a year between February 13-21st. Offerings were left at graves and the dead were remembered. In Mycenaean Greece as well as Minoan Crete, early dug graves and later “chamber tombs” (tholoi) revealed elaborate burial gifts including swords.

The celebratory nature in Roman and Greek funerals may be evidenced by images of Bacchus on sarcophagi. The carefree god of wine and pleasure may have reinforced the notion that, for Romans, death was eternal sleep, and that “everything continues after everything has ceased.” A modern proverb illustrating this holds that “life is short and the grave is long.”

It is easy to see how ancient practices, later coupled with Christian ideals, shaped the modern tradition of death and the Afterlife. The combined traditions of thousands of years left an imprint that continues to define contemporary notions of life and death.

Sources:

[1] Mark Kishlansky and others, Civilization in the West 5th Ed. Vol. 1, (Longman, 2003) p 9.

[2] Philippe Aries and Georges Duby, General Editors, A History of Private Life From Pagan Rome to Byzantium (Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1987) p 219ff.

[3] Lionel Casson, Everyday Life in Ancient Rome (The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1998) p 32.

[4] Heather Pringle, The Mummy Congress: Science, Obsession, and the Everlasting Dead (Hyperion, 2001) p 40.

The copyright of the article Ancient Tombs and Burial Practices in Ancient History is owned by Michael Streich. Permission to republish Ancient Tombs and Burial Practices in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.

Etruscan Sarcophogus,Vatican

 

Reformation Sunday Commemorates Luther's 95 Theses

Oct 13, 2010 Michael Streich

Reformation Sunday Recalls Luther's 95 Theses - Oswald Walser Photo Image

Traditional historical accounts teach that Martin Luther nailed the 95 Theses to the Wittenberg Church door on October 31, 1517, but questions remain.

Reformation Sunday is the 31st of October. It is the anniversary of Martin Luther’s Ninety-Five Theses nailed to the church door at Wittenberg. When October 31st falls on another weekday, Reformation Sunday is celebrated on the Sunday immediately preceding the 31st.

The history behind Reformation Sunday and the events that precipitated it are, however, a matter of controversy. Did Luther actually nail the theses to the church door? Why did he take the action on October 31st, the eve before All Saints Day?

Nailing the Ninety-Five Theses to the Wittenberg Church Door

Traditionally, historians accepted the story that Martin Luther, an Augustinian monk and professor at the University in Wittenberg, nailed ninety-five theses or points for discussion to the church door at Wittenberg.

Some scholars point out that the church contained many relics and by placing his theses on the door, people coming the following day to celebrate the All Saints Day Mass would take notice, especially since the theses focused on indulgences.

There are, however, several problems with this history. Although Wittenberg was a university town, literacy rates in Europe in 1517 were less than three percent of the total population. The assumption is that most people coming for a Mass would not have been able to read the document.

Secondly, those townsmen who could read would not have had the theological training to understand Luther’s points unless they were members of the clergy. Historian Mark Edwards comments that, “We are likely never to be able to determine whether the 95 Theses were actually posted.”

The Ninety-Five Theses Set Up a Debate on Indulgences and Purgatory

Luther’s intent was to provoke a debate within the church intelligentsia on indulgences and purgatory. As contemporary Luther scholars point out, rather than nailing the theses to the church door, Luther would have sent them to the church hierarchy, most probably Archbishop Albrecht of Maintz.

Luther’s mental inquiries regarding purgatory and indulgences, as expressed in the theses, may have also been timed to coincide with both All Saints Day and All Souls Day. These days not only honored all Christian saints, but reinforced the practice of praying for the dead.

Indeed, the indulgence sales by Johaan Tetzel that could be purchased for souls already in Purgatory led to Luther’s disgust over Tetzel’s message: “when the coin in the coffer rings, the soul from purgatory springs.”

Celebrating the Meaning of Reformation Sunday

Ultimately, Reformation Sunday is a reminder that faith requires frequent rejuvenation if it is to bear a vibrant witness to truth. Luther had been to Rome and witnessed the decadence and corruption that was so common during the pontificate of Julius II. Harvard historian Richard Marius writes that at the time Luther was writing the theses, he was reading Erasmus’ Julius Exclusus.

Reformation Sunday is also a challenge. The process of reformation is on-going and adaptable to a changing world. Even among Catholics, for example, few people hold to a literal Purgatory either as an extension of life or a separate sphere. Luther’s theses represented one of the first transitional events that brought the cosmology of Medieval thinking to an end and helped to define man in a more human manner.

Reformation Sunday Commemorates the Birth of Protestantism

Although scholars point out that Reformation ideology can be traced to earlier churchmen like John Huss and John Wycliffe, it was Luther who instigated the movement that split Christendom. The many branches and denominations of contemporary Protestantism exist today because one Augustinian monk in Saxony published his Ninety-Five Theses on October 31, 1517.

Sources:

Paul Althaus, The Theology of Martin Luther (Fortress Press, 1966).

Mark U. Edwards, Jr., “Martin Luther,” Reformation Europe: A Guide to Research, edited by Steven Ozment (Center for Reformation Research, 1982).

Richard Marius, Martin Luther: The Christian Between God and Death (The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1999).

Steven Ozment, The Age of Reform 1250-1550 (Yale University Press, 1980).

Copyright Michael Streich. Contact the author to obtain permission for republication.