http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/300_%28film%29

In this movie “300”, a heroic squad of 300 Spartan soldiers takes on the Persian Army at Thermoplyae. It says that the Spartans alone were able to hold their ground against the Persians and take down numerous lines of Persian soldiers for three days before falling. The Spartans are able to stop the Persian army long enough for the rest of the Spartan army to prepare and that in the end the Spartans won against the Persians.

What this doesn’t show/tell is that although there were 300 Spartan soldiers at Thermoplyae, there was also 4000 other Greek soldiers there supporting them the first two days. Another fact it doesn’t show is that the “Immortals” of the Persian army were not slaughtered, but actually sacrificed so that the Persian army could go around the Spartans and head straight to Sparta, while the Spartans were distracted with the “Immortals”. In the actual Battle of Thermoplyae, in the aftermath of the battle, Xerxes actually desecrates Leonidas’ dead body after he has achieved victory, which they have no mention of in this movie.

Although this may seem like a heroic story, filled with extraordinary men. It was actually just regular men but many more of them then mentioned.

Soy Health Benefits

For those who are vegetarian and vegan, soy has been a god-send. In the health food industry, soy has been found in almost everything: soy milk, tofu, and fake-meat products. There are great qualities of the bean. They help in matters of the cardiac system, menopausal symptoms, and osteoporosis. There is also other evidence in it helping with pancreatic and breast cancers. After the hippie age, companies and big-business has found the product was an interest for their consumers that they began exporting the product heavily.

However, there is research to counter these claims of health. There are an array of “anti-nutrients” in soy that actually cause distress within the body. Also, there is a property in soy that causes red-blood cells to clump together (haemagglutinin). Animals have been observed to avoid soy entirely when encountered with it. The critters that were exposed to soy had cases of calcium and other minerals being sucked out of the body, as well as different kinds of cancers. So be careful in choosing your “health-foods.”

Many of the points for and against soy are based on only speculation and assumptions of future consequences. I do think that there are positive results of intaking soy, but to replace your entire diet with soy products is a dangerous thing to attempt. After all, a balanced diet is key to true health.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FieBKhHhDwQ

http://lyrics.wikia.com/Rush:Countdown

In the song “Countdown” by the progressive rock band Rush, the launch of the Space Shuttle Columbia on April 12, 1981 is reported both musically and poetically. The song relates the awesome and incredible experience of observing the first manned space shuttle, since the Apollo missions, begin its launch in a blaze of fire and sound. As the shuttle musically ascends towards space, one is left with the feeling of enormity and grandiosity that might have been felt by all observers.

Though the first launch of the Space Shuttle Columbia truly must have been an amazing and memorable event, the band neglects to mention the catastrophic end to the program. On January 16, 2003 (the shuttle’s 28^th flight) Columbia was destroyed upon re-entry into the atmosphere due to a dislodged piece of foam that damaged the shuttle’s wing; all of the astronauts died in the crash. It is important to note this later unfortunate event when discussing the original launch, because of its impact on the entire NASA program itself.

http://poetry.eserver.org/paul-revere.html

Many children learn about the heroic ride of Paul Revere in elementary school.  They are usually expected to learn this poem, or even memorize it.  However, there are many flaws that arise in this poem about how the midnight ride actually occurred. The phrase, “the British are coming!” is one that none of the riders yelled.  There was still a large percentage of the population that was loyal to the crown, so this operation had to be in secret.  Not only that, but Revere was only one out of nearly forty people who sent out the alert.  The main leaders were Revere, Prescott, and Dawes; in the middle of the operation Revere was arrested so the others had to complete the task without him.  Many people see Henry Wadsworth Longfellow as the person to blame for this misunderstanding in his poem.  But, the poem was never intended for historic purposes, rather, it was used for nationalistic purposes during the time of the Civil War.

http://memory.loc.gov/mss/mfd/47/47006/0001d.jpg

I think this poem shows an appreciation of farming despite the fact that he was a former slave. I think that this shows that he struggled with his freedom rather than the tasks given to him by his masters. I can only imagine the way I would view a farming scene after having been enslaved for my whole life and knowing that my brothers and sisters were still captive. We can really see how he exhibits a passionate hatred for slavery, but then maintains the ability to see the beauty of a farm scene. I think this is a characteristic that made him a prime example for other freed slaves, as well as a capable tool in disproving many common ideas about slaves.

http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=mfd&fileName=16/16013/16013page.db&recNum=2&itemLink=/ammem/doughtml/dougFolder4.html&linkText=7

When browsing through the artifact titled scrapbook I noticed that it wasn’t exactly what one would expect when browsing through a scrap book. Most of the articles actually in the scrap book are news paper clippings announcing the death of Frederick Douglass as opposed to reflecting upon his life accomplishments. In fact almost everything in the scrapbook reflect information regarding his death in dozens of different newspapers, with the occasional photo of Douglass. The obituaries that are written next to his death announcement inform the reader about the family he had up to that point in time and the kind of life that he had lived. At the time of his death it is safe to say that he was a well respected man for there to be this much media over his passing. The obituaries also reference him with high regards, at the time of his passing he had accomplished a lot that many may never get to in their life time. It is safe to say that this was written in 1895, because this was the year he had passed away.

It tells us that Frederick Douglass had made a name for himself by the time that he had passed and was now known across the nation for his accomplishments in being an abolitionist. This artifact however does not inform us about what kind of news papers were announcing his death. There could be a difference in how people viewed his death based upon how biased the newspaper was especially in terms of race.

web address:

memory.loc.gov

From looking at the artifact itself, I can see that it is written entirely in French. It is a very official looking document sent to Douglass by the President of Haiti, General Hyppolite in the year 1890 (45 years afterNarrative of the Life was published). The artifact is an invitation, from as much as I can tell, welcoming Douglass to visit the President in the National Palace.

This artifact reveals the extent of Douglass’ fame and influence. Haiti was the first black republic to declare independence, so it is understandable why they would want to invite him, being the foremost black figure in that period of time. What is incredible is that 45 years after his book was published, he was still sought after. This is very telling about Douglass’ character. He never stopped working for his cause and was still seen as an icon 45 years after he first broke through. Many figures in history just pop in and out, but Douglass lit up the world stage for decades, so much so that he was still touring foreign governments nearly half a century later.

After reading over this artifact, I wonder how many foreign governments Douglass toured in his lifetime. Did he travel the world championing the abolitionists’ cause? Did he do work in other countries to improve the lives of their people, or did he mainly focus on the United States?

Attachment link: http://memory.loc.gov/mss/mfd/47/47001/0001d.jpg

From looking at the map, one can infer the intentions of Frederick Douglass. Because he owned a map of Talbot County, a location he has spent much of his life as a slave, a place where he experienced many of the events in his story, shows his interest in escaping. The map is in near perfect condition, which indicates how Douglass cherished it for his goals.  It shows that he needs it and that it is a valuable resource to his plans. From this, one can see the dedication and resilience Douglass possessed to achieve his objective: to free himself and others from the entrapment of slavery.

The item that I noted was an undated document, which I found in General Correspondence, Undated: A. I can’t make out what the document says in its entirety, but I think the purpose of the letter was to send a poem for the Lincoln Monument inauguration. The letter is undated, but because Douglass wrote it as an “offering for the Lincoln Monument inauguration,” I’m guessing that it could have been written around that time.

I think the document shows the ‘poetic’ side of Frederick Douglass. Of course, we already know that he’s an eloquent man. His Narrative—in fact his whole career as an orator and writer—is testament to that, but I think it’s interesting to see another facet of his writing; in some places, it’s straightforward like his prose (“In vain blood was made to flow”), and in some places, it’s a bit more lofty (“Adorn thy golden hair“). The poem shows he thought of Lincoln positively.

One of the first questions I had after reading this was: Did he deliver the poem at the inauguration, or was it a silent offering that was meant to be read by others? Also, I’d like to know more about his relationship with Abraham Lincoln, but I’m mostly curious about if he wrote any other poems. If so, did they deal with slavery and freedom, or did he ever write about more ‘fanciful’ matters such as nature or romance? Whenever I think of Douglass’s writing, I think of very sharp, crisp language; he’s poetic, but I don’t necessarily see him as a poet, so I’d be interested in seeing how his writing style differed, if at all, between prose and poetry.

Artifact web addres:

http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/doughtml/dougFolder8.html

By examining the invitation to the unveiling of the Thomas Statue, a lot can be said about the time period and Frederick Douglas himself. Looking at this artifact, it is obvious that it is antiquated from the usage of the style of text as well as the content within the invitation. However, more can be said about Frederick Douglas and the prestigious, well respected man he was. During the late 1800’s it was very uncommon for a black man to be invited to such events, therefore this artifact reiterates how influential Douglas was. Examining this artifact also poses some questions. It causes one to wonder what sort of relationship the Society of the Army of the Cumberland and Douglas had so that he and his family were personally invited to this event. Also, one could question what sort of affect the possible attendance of Frederick Douglas to this event had on the members of the nearby community and the supporters of the Army of the Cumberland. Did the outright support of a black man lessen or increase the following of the Army of the Cumberland? All these questions and many more can be posed by looking at this simple artifact, which can be researched and further examined, then can help to better explain Douglas and his impact.

This particular appointment book of Frederick Douglass reveals much about his daily schedule for the year of 1867 (marked in the upper left corner of the first entry), and also suggests several considerations about his character and behavior in general.

By simply looking at the photograph images of the book’s pages, a lot can be observed about how Douglass scheduled himself and how he managed his time. The planner seems to be organized into two-page increments- the first in series containing dates, places, and sometimes short jottings, and the second containing additional space for lengthier notes.

Perhaps most revealing of his personality is that while the pages containing dates are consistently filled almost entirely with places and events, the supplementary notes pages are completely lacking in information. In fact, many of these pages are left blank.

What this implies about Douglass is that he was able to keep track of the details of his daily schedule and arrangements in his head- which would have been no simple task, given that he travelled for weeks on end with no break.

New questions that could arise from further study of this planner might investigate the nature of this frequent traveling of Douglass and what specifically was accomplished on each trip, as the planner does not specify.

artifact web address:

#mce_temp_url#http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=mfd&fileName=49/49001/49001page.db&recNum=0&itemLink=/ammem/doughtml/dougFolder9.html&linkText=7

The artifact is a speech Douglass gave in Broadway Tabernacle, New York on May 11^th, 1853. His main purpose was there to discuss the current condition of the colored people of the United States as well as their future. In the speech he was able to show the audience the oppression the colored people had faced due to slavery and to evangelize for the abolition of it.

From the speech, I was able to see that Douglass was a black man in a white man’s world, meaning that, to Southern American principles, he was worth less than a white man, even an immigrant white man like an Irish. I also noticed that the words he used and the way he put them together was highly sophisticated and just astonishing to think that he taught himself to write in such an elegant manner. The way he used his words captivated me as I read his speech. It made me believe him whole-heartedly and want to support him in his fight for freedom. His words really depicted the image of suffering and inequality towards blacks and how though some men are free from slavery the fight is not over until all men are free.

This artifact brought up the questions of how did this speech affect the audience? What type of reaction did they have to it? Did they feel as captivated as I did? Did something, some movement, come from this speech? Did he give this same speech everywhere or was it a different speech every time?

http://memory.loc.gov/mss/mfd/47/47003/0015.jpg

Frederick Douglass kept a large number of newspaper articles that help us gain a better understanding of the times he lived in.  One clipping that was particularly interesting wasn’t an article at all, but rather a page full of advertisements.  One of the most prominent stated in bold letters, “THE BLACK PHALANX.”  Below, in slightly smaller print, it said, “A book for the Race.”  Surrounding this were other advertisements.  One asked, “ARE YOU A SUBSCRIBER OF THE CLEVELAND GAZETTE?” promising it was “Devoted to the Interests of the Race.”  A third read, “A NEW RACE IN A NEW ERA.  MAKING NEW LITERATURE AND HAVING A UNIQUE HISTORY.”  Others on the page were advertising a “good education” with teaching on “Grammar, Normal and College Courses.”

The newspaper was published in September of 1892, a time in our country when many black men and women couldn’t read.  It is clear that more and more literature was being written “for the Race” and The Cleveland Gazette was encouraging them to pursue an education in reading.

That Douglass saved these advertisements shows the way he too valued education.  As one who taught himself to read, it was important to him to see others learn as well.  The fact that he had this newspaper and could read it was a great feat in itself.  It leaves us wondering what emotions must have filled his heart as he read those words, knowing others were also discovering the freedom he found in the written word.

      The first thing I noticed about this letter is that it was written to Henry Clay, of course. Henry Clay was a Senator and was known as the Great Compromiser. I also noticed that the letter was written in 1847, three years before the Compromise of 1850 which was authored in the Senate by Clay and had a big impact on the issue of slavery in this country. So it was relevant that Douglass be writing him at this point in history on the issue of his views on slavery. Clay was a known opponent of slavery, however Douglass did not hesitate to point out to Clay his faults and hypocrisies in the letter. The purpose of this letter was for Douglass to use a political outlet to shape slavery policy and make get a voice in the issue. It was also to entreat Clay that compromise is not the way to solve the problem of slavery.

      What I can glean from the time period in whic Douglass lived and wrote this letter is that a lot of things were happenning at the time. Douglass was trying to get his point across any way he could before policy was made in a way that didn’t favor his side. Also, I think it makes a good point that even and maybe especially back then politicians were huge hypocrites who couldn’t be trusted to make unbiased and unsullied decisions.

      Some new questions this article yields are, obviously, did Clay read the letter? Did he take it into consideration? Did it influence his actions on the floor of the Senate in the future? What was Douglass’s relationship with politicians like? Did he meet with them regularly as a valued advisor? What was his role in the eventual abolition of slavery?

http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=mfd&fileName=43/43003/43003page.db&recNum=3&itemLink=/ammem/doughtml/dougFolder6.html&linkText=7

The artifact is a contract between Mrs. Frederick Douglass and a Stone Mason for a stone tablet bearing the name Frederick Douglass. The first thing I noticed about the artifact upon reading it, was that the tablet was commissioned two years after Douglass’ death. The price of the tablet, $240, was a large sum of money in 1897, the ability of Douglass’ widow to pay such a sum means that Douglass and she were not poor when he died, and that he left behind a substantial amount of money for his widow—thus Douglass, when alive, was probably very careful in managing his finances. It would make sense, given his childhood of starvation and poverty, for Douglass to be frugal as he understood the value of what money could get one (esp. as his freedom had to be bought). The contract states that the “tablet” is to be placed in Mt. Hope Cemetery in New York. So, it is probable that the tablet is to be Douglass’ headstone. The headstone is very plain bearing bronze leaves around the top and then Douglass’ own name in plain “round” letters. Given how humble a man Frederick Douglass was, it is unsurprising for him to have an equally humble and unadorned stone on his grave. The contract also states that the tablet is to be placed in the cemetery by November 15, 1897. I wondered if there was any significance to this date for Douglass beyond it just being the date by which the craftsman could complete this project.

The name of the article is In the Memory of Frederick Douglass, which is about the death of Fredrick Douglas. Most of the article is about what Mrs. Sewalls said during a convention that talked about his death. It says how great of a man, Mr. Douglass was and his significance during the period of change. The period of change that is being referred is the Women’s Suffrage Movement and anti-slavery movement. It also mentions that before his death, he was attending a meeting. He was given an ovation at the platform, but he declined.

The document is a draft because there are editing marks over the pages. Although the exact date of the article is unknown, we can assume that it is just after the death of Frederick Douglass, which is in the year 1895. The purpose of this article is to reflect on the death of Mr. Douglass and his efforts to change society. Since Mrs. Sewall’s is quoted for most of the article with her speech, which shows that Mr. Douglass knew Mrs. Sewall very well. She is an abolitionist and a suffragist, which shows that Douglass had ties with many well-known figures at the time. It also shows that he is a large advocated of helping women gaining their right to vote. Some the things I wondered while reading this passage is what is Mr. Sewall’s relationship was with Mr. Douglass and who the originial author is of this document.

– http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=mfd&fileName=14/14021/14021page.db&recNum=0&itemLink=/ammem/doughtml/dougFolder4.html&linkText=7

Frederick Douglass not only believed in being well spoken, well written and well educated, he also strove to be well traveled.  He gave this lecture describing his time spent traveling in Europe.  Although the date it was given was not clear, one thing that is clear about it is that it has been edited, likely by Douglass himself.  This indicates that Douglass was meticulous, not content with simply arguing or speaking emotionally, but having a planned and powerful speech.  The true interest in the piece however, is the detail in which Douglass speaks of the foreign countries.  He sounds almost reverent, and his writing is extremely poetic, which is a sharp contrast to the way he describes the United States in The Narrative Life of Frederick Douglass.  However, it also important to note that Douglass does not condemn the United States.  He recognizes that some people believe that the United States will someday be the pinnacle of Western civilization, and he hopes for this, rather than scorning this positive view.  This just shows his optimism, as many would likely have little forgiveness for a country in which they were a slave.  The questions that this lecture raises are Douglass’s reasons for going abroad.  Were they purely personal, an attempt to further his self-education?  Or did he wish to educate those in foreign countries and raise international awareness of slavery?  Perhaps he simply wanted to bring his knowledge back to the United States.  Further reading of his speeches may hold the answer for these questions.

Letter to Henry Clay

As the title may reveal, “Letter to Henry Clay” is a letter printed in The North Star on December 3, 1847. It addresses, and criticizes, many of the points made in a speech given by Henry Clay at the Mass Meeting in Lexington, Kentucky, November thirteenth of the same year. All of the data about its printing is clearly labelled at the top of the letter.

The purpose of this letter is quite clear: to debunk Mr. Clay’s arguments about slavery. Douglass takes nearly every argument made by Clay and states clearly, and not without some heat, why each point is immoral, unethical, and contradictory.

With the arguments made by Douglass, it is obvious how he feels about slavery from a personal and worldly view. Slavery affects him still, even as a free man of the north, so the assumptions made my Clay are argued with a sharp tongue. It is a matter close to his heart and he will go the limit of blatantly insulting the other’s validity to prove his points.

I am filled with questions about how Fredrick Douglass can tolerate having so much bitterness and anguish towards the man he writes to. Were there other men that he successfully debunked with such detail and skill? Was this what he did from day to day, or was the speech made by Henry Clay so revolting that he no choice but write to him? The amount of material he has written on the matter shows that not only Henry Clay evoked this reaction, but how one man can tolerate being spiteful towards so many people leads one to wonder how Fredrick Douglass coped.

http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=mfd&fileName=21/21014/21014page.db&recNum=0&itemLink=/ammem/doughtml/dougFolder5.html&linkText=7

In the article “Abolitionists of Western New York, Awake!” in The North Star newspaper, you can tell just how passionate Frederick Douglass is. It is typed, but of an obvious old fashion nature. It was written for a newspaper but could have easily been a speech Douglass gave. The article was written and released to the public in January 1848, and was used as a way to express Douglass’ feelings and passion about slavery to a wider public audience.  From reading the article it seems that people are afraid to stand up for what they believe in and that if it continues this way nothing will change. He urges people with great rhetoric to help fight back! The article makes me wonder just how many people believed in the abolitionist movement, but were too afraid to do anything? Also, I feel like writing in a newspaper in 1848 would not have been the most successful way to get your word and opinions out. Thus, it makes me wonder, why a newspaper? Was it a more conspicuous way of not getting caught, or am I just naïve in thinking that few people had access to a newspaper?  Overall, this artifact was very interesting. Not only because it seems like it was in a very good condition when it was scanned, considering how long ago it was written, but also because it provides a deeper look into the life of Frederick Douglass.

From Frederick Douglass’s letter to Henry Clay in 1847, we learn that he was actively involved in determining whether or not the newly acquired territories from the Mexican-American war would be slave holding or not. Frederick Douglass was extremely angered by Henry Clay’s inconsistencies regarding the issue. Douglass uses quotes from Clay’s speeches to point out his hypocracy. I think this shows us that the decade before the civil war was a time when the abolitionist movement was taking off, and more into the minds of mainstream voters. Abolitionism became a value of the Republican Party of the time, and so Republican politicians supported it in their speeches. However, as Frederick Douglass points out, they were less willing to do so in practice. This must have been insulting to people such as Frederick Douglass, who probably felt that Clay was just using his cause as a way to get votes. Furthermore, Douglass shows discomfort with the fact that Clay thinks that states and the new territories shoud choose wether or not they have slaves, showing that Clay will not commit to being a true abolitionist.

This letter raises questions about the suitability of slaves in an expanding America, and the hypocrisy of some Republican politicians. Given the desert climate of much the Mexican cessasion, not suitable for plantation agriculture, would slavery even have been feasable there? Also, how would politicians who thought that blacks were just as capable of whites, such as Jefferson and Clay, refute claims of hypocrisy such as this one from Douglass?