In three minutes, I’d like to answer, what is President’s Day and why is it celebrated?
President’s Day is an American holiday rich in history because it started as a remembrance day on George Washington’s birthday. When is Washington’s birthday? Well, that’s complicated because in 1752, colonists moved from the Julian calendar (named for Julius Caesar) to the Gregorian calendar (named for Pope Gregory the 13th).
That update shifted 11 days on the calendar. So, when George was a kid, his birthday was Feb 11; but at age 20, his birthday moved forward to February 22. The year changed too. Can you imagine changing your birthday? That would be weird, but there’s more to the story.
In 1968, congress moved the occasion to the third Monday of February, so Americans could get a three day weekend out of Washington’s birthday. That’s nice. Since then, tradition has re-labeled the event “Presidents’ Day.” By calling it that, we also remember President Abraham Lincoln, the victor of the civil war, who was born on February 12. Some Americans remember all the presidents on this special federal holiday.
Let’s go now to why we celebrate President Day because it’s not just for appliance sales (though you’ll find some good deals on the three day weekend!)
One of the main reasons Americans celebrate Presidents’ Day goes back to George Washington who was most extraordinary for how he left office as the first president of the United States. You see, after serving two terms, George Washington walked away from the presidency! With unrivaled power, and the chance to serve a lifetime, if he wanted, Washington said goodbye to prestige, and goodbye to politics in 1796. He just wanted to retire at Mt. Vernon.
Yes, President Washington wanted the new nation to experience a peaceful transition of power to the next president—without the trappings of a royal blood line, briberies, or civil war (something all too common in history past.)
Well, none of America’s founders were perfectly great men or women; they had flaws. But they did have great ideas, like the time Washington resigned to move centuries of power from a king on a throne—to the voter on the street! Remember that amazing milestone in history when you think of Presidents’ Day.
For inspiration, read Washington’s Famous Farewell Address. It’s long, but the senate still reads it out loud around President’s Day.
Thanks for watching, and for more history through my books, classes, and lectures, visit: TheMysteryofHistory.com
]]>Archimedes was born about 287 B. C. in Syracuse, Sicily, which at the time was a Greek colony. Not much is known about his family life or lineage, but historians think his father may have been an astronomer. Archimedes may also have had some royal blood. He went all the way to Alexandria, Egypt, to go to school. Archimedes must have received a very good education there because he went back to Syracuse and invented many amazing tools and concepts.
Archimedes was fascinated with the power of the lever and pulley. He created devices that could raise great ships out of the water. Another idea he used in the sea was of using large mirrors on a ship to reflect the sun’s rays and burn down other ships! I guess it would take a pretty big mirror to do that. Archimedes also figured out a clever way to move water for irrigation. He invented what is known as Archimedes’ screw. Imagine placing a giant screw (the size of a man) in a lake or stream. As you turned the screw, water would catch in the grooves and travel up and out.
One more fascinating invention (also used in the water) was called The Claw of Archimedes. It was a giant metal claw or hand (similar to the claw-games you find at arcades) used to upset enemy war ships. It was apparently so effective that in the siege of Syracuse (214 BC), the attacking Romans wondered if the gods of mythology were ambushing them.
Apparently, Archimedes dabbled in astronomy like his father. Historians think that he may have written a few unpublished works on astronomy; however, these have been lost to history. One still survives having the very fantastical name of “The Sand-Reckoner.” In it Archimedes tries to determine the size of the universe using grains of sand as a measuring tool, alongside mathematics. Speaking of mathematics, Archimedes also calculated the value of pi, which is used to help determine the dimensions of circles.
Now, this next idea has a story with I think you’ll find quite entertaining. The king where Archimedes lived was suspicious that the gold crown he had ordered was not made of pure gold. He asked Archimedes to figure out if some of the gold had been replaced with a less-expensive metal. Archimedes pondered this question for a long time. One day as he was lowering himself into a bathtub, he noticed the amount of water that splashed out. He realized that the displacement of water for the weight of gold would be different from the displacement for the weight of a cheaper metal. Archimedes had stumbled onto the great idea of displacement, but in doing so forgot himself. He was so excited about his observation that he jumped out of the tub, forgot his clothes and ran through the town! The story goes that he yelled unclothed, “Eureka, eureka!”—which in Greek means “I have found it!” If this legend is true, it surely shocked a few onlookers!
Unfortunately, this same kind of absentmindedness might have contributed to the death of Archimedes in 212 B.C. Here’s the setting: the Romans were besieging Syracuse. The Roman general in charge had forbidden his soldiers to harm Archimedes because he was a valuable asset. The stories differ, but some say that Archimedes remained working in his study with some special instruments—completely unaware of what was going on. A Roman soldier killed him in hopes that his tools were made of gold. Other versions of the story say a soldier killed Archimedes while he was strolling, carrying an expensive invention. Either way, Archimedes wasn’t paying much attention to the battle raging around him. According to legend, his last words were “Nōlī turbāre circulōs meōs!”, which translates to “Do not disturb my circles!.” This supposedly was in reference to the geometry project he was working on. Again, there is no solid proof he said this, but it is a funny quote that reveals his character.
Either way, the brilliant life of Archimedes ended abruptly. The Roman general who had hoped to spare the life of Archimedes built a special tomb in his honor. His tomb has been lost to history and is still waiting to be discovered today. The death of Archimedes was a great loss, and I can’t help but wonder what more he may have invented had his life not been cut short.
Younger Students—Fun with Displacement
Materials: Masking tape, permanent marker, bathtub or large tub
Get a one-foot length of masking tape and a permanent marker. Adhere the tape vertically in your bathtub or container. Fill it about half way with water. When the water is done filling up, mark the water line on the tape with the marker. Now, climb in or put in your arm and be very still. When the water has finished sloshing around, mark the new water line. It should be higher than the last line. Mark different lines for other people. The biggest people should have the highest watermark. This means they would displace more water than the smaller people would. Don’t forget to yell “Eureka, eureka!” when you get out!
Middle Students—Mirror!
ADULT SUPERVISION NEEDED. Materials: Small mirror, 1 piece of paper
Using a mirror and the sunlight, experiment with angling and directing the mirror. (CAUTION: Be careful not to reflect the light into anyone’s eyes. Never stare or look directly at the sun, which is very harmful to your eyes!) Aim for your piece of paper, noting the amount of heat it creates. Archimedes was able to start a fire with this method. You probably won’t have the same success but work over concrete just in case!
Older Students—Make a Claw of Archimedes! (Idea and photos contributed by Selah Elder.)
Materials: Scissors, Cardboard, String, Straws, Hot Glue Gun or Masking tape, Pencil.
Now, we don’t know for sure what Archimedes’ claw looked like, but we can make this cool hand mechanism that might come close. First, trace your hand over the cardboard and then cut it out. Bend the fingers where the knuckles on the hand. Cut small, inch-long pieces of straws and glue or tape them on the fingers, between the bends (knuckles) on the hand. Once they are secure, thread a piece of string through the straws, one piece of string for each finger. Glue one section of straw (Optional; maybe a larger straw, like a soft drink straw) to the wrist of the hand. Thread all the strings (there should be 5) through this wrist-straw and tie a knot so they don’t come apart. When you pull the thread at the knot, the fingers should move like a real hand! Try picking up small objects, or performing tasks that a real hand would do (like drawing). You can experiment with making longer fingers, adding a long stick to the wrist area, or whatever comes to mind!
When the snow lay round about, deep and crisp and even.
Brightly shone the moon that night, though the frost was cruel,
When a poor man came in sight, gath’ring winter fuel.”1
Have you heard this Christmas tune? Written in the 1800s, this carol is a beautiful tribute to a kindly young man named Wenceslas (sometimes pronounced WHEN-slis) from medieval times. Let’s look at his legacy and the true story behind “Good King Wenceslas.”
For context of this true and tender tale, we must first backtrack to two missionary brothers—Cyril and Methodius. They were missionaries responsible for creating a written language for the Slavic people to evangelize Czechoslovakia (presently the Czech Republic). While there, the zealous missionaries were able to share the Gospel with the prince and his wife, Ludmilla (lud MILL uh or lewd MEE luh), who became strong believers.
Now, what do the prince of Czechoslovakia and his wife have to do with Wenceslas? Well, they were his paternal grandparents, meaning his father’s parents. It seems their strong Christian faith helped shape the heart of young Wenceslas. You see, when Wenceslas was just 13, his father—the duke of Bohemia—died in battle. (Bohemia was a province in former Czechoslovakia.) Wenceslas then moved in with his paternal grandparents. It was Ludmilla’s idea. She wanted her dear grandson to grow up under their Christian influence.
As one example of how dedicated Ludmilla was to Wenceslas, she planted a tree in his name. Ludmilla planted the seedling when Wenceslas was just a baby. The tree was watered with his own bathwater. It supposedly still stands today even though it’s over one thousand years old!
Unfortunately, this tender arrangement between grandmother and grandson didn’t last. You see, there is another character in this story that needs to be introduced—that is the mother of Wenceslas. Her name was Drahomira (dray uh MY ruh or druh haw MEE ruh.) She didn’t like the special treatment or the Christian upbringing that Wenceslas was receiving from his paternal grandparents. Drahomira was from a strong pagan background. This difference of faith caused a lot of tension between the royal families. To add to the tension, Drahomira was ruling Bohemia until Wenceslas was old enough to take his father’s place. The nobles who surrounded her had pagan beliefs too. They may have influenced Drahomira to do something dreadfully wicked. To get Wenceslas out from under his grandmother’s influence, Drahomira arranged for Ludmilla to be strangled to death!
Upon losing his grandmother, Wenceslas was now back under his mother’s care, along with her pagan traditions. But Wenceslas could not be swayed in his beliefs. Because of his grandparents’ guidance, he had grown to have a strong, genuine faith in Jesus Christ. He remained faithful in secret!
But Wenceslas was soon spared from this trying situation, and justice was done. In 922, Drahomira was banished by the authorities for Ludmilla’s murder! With Drahomira gone, Wenceslas became the rightful duke of Bohemia when he was 18 years old. As a demonstration of his character, do you know what one of Wenceslas’s first acts was as the new duke? Remembering the biblical command to “Honor your father and your mother” (Exodus 20:12), Wenceslas brought his mother out of banishment. He forgave her for killing his grandmother! That was just the beginning of Wenceslas’s kindness.
Wenceslas’s kindness and generosity extended to the rich and poor alike. He was greatly dedicated to giving shelter to the homeless as well as to buying the freedom of slaves—especially the freedom of slave children. In an effort to spread Christianity further, Wenceslas invited missionaries to Bohemia.
hen, of course, there is the story of “Good King Wenceslas” from the traditional Christmas carol. (The song refers to Wenceslas as a king, although he was really a duke.) It describes a scene from the life of Wenceslas that gives a touching glimpse into his heart. The carol tells of a cold, bitter night when Wenceslas and a page, or helper, notice a poor man gathering firewood. The kindhearted king asks where the man lives. When learning that the poor man lives against a faraway fence, the king instructs the page that they will go that very night and provide the man with a meal.
Unfortunately, not all appreciated the generous heart of Wenceslas. In fact, some considered it a weakness. His younger brother Boleslav (BO leh slav) thought it was not fitting for a king to mingle with the poor. He was also jealous that Wenceslas had a son who might rule as the next duke instead of him. As the sad story goes, Boleslav invited Wenceslas to a feast at church. If only he knew! On September 28th, 929, Wenceslas turned up the steps of the church to find Boleslav and other members of the nobility surrounding him. They stabbed and beat him ruthlessly. His brother delivered the final blow. He was only 25 years old. “Good King Wenceslas” was buried at the church of St. Vitus in Prague, Czechoslovakia. A statue in his memory still stands in the Prague city square. And September 28th is dedicated as St. Wenceslas Day. Isn’t it fitting to have such a generous character remembered in a carol?
Younger and Middle Students—Christmas Carol
With parental guidance, find the Christmas carol “Good King Wenceslas” on the internet. Sing the carol together and discuss the meaning of the words.
Middle and Older Students—Pay it Forward
The expression “pay it forward” refers to the act of repaying a good deed to a third party rather than to the original benefactor. For example, when Wenceslas helped the poor man, the poor man could pay it forward by offering something to another in need. And that other person could pay it forward and so on.
1. In remembrance of Wenceslas, start a “pay it forward” chain in your class or family. Surprise another person with a good deed or an act of service!
2. Have that person surprise another with a good deed and so on until all have participated as both a giver and a recipient. (Do this by having the last person do something for the original benefactor.)
3. What Bible passages talk about acts of service? (See Matthew 25:31–46.)
4. Write down your “pay it forward” good deeds (or take pictures) to document.
References
1. John Mason Neale, “Good King Wenceslas,” Hymnary.org, https://hymnary.org/text/good_king_wenceslas_looked_out.
]]>“Are we there yet?” I wonder how many times the children on board the Mayflower asked this question. Their voyage across the Atlantic was as expected – smooth at times and tumultuous at others. When bad storms hit, the ship was tossed to and fro. In one such storm, lightning struck the cross beam of the mast. There were lots of days and nights when the children were forced below deck along with the other passengers. The stench was awful, but it was far too dangerous to be outside on those bad days. One crewman had already fallen off the deck and been rescued. He was lucky to have survived.
As far as the Separatists were concerned, it wasn’t luck that was keeping them alive. It was prayer. The Separatists, as you may know, were those people who wanted to “separate” from the Church of England. They held deep convictions regarding the Word of God. For this, they were seeking religious freedom in the New World.
The story of the Pilgrims really begins in the early 1600s, when a group of Separatists (and some former Puritans) started their own congregation in Scrooby, England. Members included William Brewster – a postmaster and a tavern keeper, William Bradford – a 12-year old orphan, and John Robinson – who later became a pastor. At this time, James I was the king of England. Under his reign, there was a great deal of hostility toward anyone opposed to the Church of England. It led to persecution.
The Separatists were forced to meet secretly at the Scrooby manor. Authorities were suspicious. William Brewster was fired as postmaster (or perhaps resigned) and church members were being spied on day and night. A few were tortured and imprisoned. So, the congregation of Scrooby decided to pack their belongings, sell their homes, and move to Holland in the Netherlands.
The Separatists first attempt to flee in 1607 ended in disaster. Their plot was discovered and most of the congregation was thrown in jail for a month! The second attempt was equally difficult when authorities once again found out their plans. As the men escaped by ship, the women and children were held back from joining them. There were many tears and crying! But the women and children were released, and in 1608 the families reunited in Amsterdam, Holland. Eventually, about 100 of the Scrooby churchmen moved to Leiden (LYE den), Holland. Though Leiden wasn’t “home” it was a place to freely worship God.
The Separatists would have stayed in Leiden, Holland a long time I suppose except that things weren’t going as smoothly as they hoped. The Separatists had been farmers back in England. But in Holland, they were forced to work in factories. It was so difficult to make a living that even the children were working in the factories and falling behind in their school work. Furthermore, after 11 years in Holland, the young people were forgetting their English customs, they were forgetting English and speaking Dutch, and they were picking up poor habits around them. William Bradford wrote this of the youth, “. . . of all sorrows most heavy to be born, was that many of their children. . . were drawn away by evil examples intro extravagant and dangerous courses, getting the reins off their necks and departing from their parents.” (Of Plymouth Plantation, p. 25)
Besides that, William Brewster was a “wanted” man in Holland for printing and shipping religious materials to England. And on top it all, Spain remained a constant threat to the Dutch, due to the Dutch Revolt!
Through all these difficult circumstances, many Christians believe it was the Lord who led the Separatists to relocate. But where? Well, as difficult as things had been for the settlers of Jamestown, who landed in Virginia in 1607, the New World was still inviting. The land was ripe, abundant, and wide open. Yes, there would be trials, storms, and challenges. But, the Separatists were eager to settle and to spread out in a new land. After all the bloodshed and the persecution of the Reformation, the Separatists were willing to move again for the sake of freedom.
William Brewster was one of the leaders who arranged the voyage across the Atlantic Ocean. London merchants agreed to finance the trip using an old boat named the Speedwell. Brewster and members of his church boarded the Speedwell and sailed first to England. Pastor John Robinson stayed behind with the rest of the church, hoping to join them later. I wonder what it was like when these brothers and sisters in Christ said goodbye. Did they exchange gifts and goods for the trip? Did they exchange hugs and prayers? William Bradford wrote in his account, “. . . truly doleful was the sight of that sad and mournful parting, to see what sighs and sobs and prayers did sound amongst them, what tears did gush from every eye, and pithy speeches pierced each heart. . . . (Of Plymouth Plantation, p. 50)
There were many uncertainties ahead for the travelers, not to mention great danger. John Robinson led church members in a day of prayer and fasting before they divided the church in two. For inspiration, he read Ezra 8:21 asking the Lord for the “right way for us and for our children.”
Once they made it to England, the Separatists were joined by “Strangers.” That’s what the Separatists called them. The Strangers were a mix of Englishmen seeking adventure and new business. According to William Bradford, “They left that goodly and pleasant city which had been their resting place near twelve years; but they knew they were pilgrims” (Of Plymouth Plantation, p. 50. Italics mine.) when they first left Holland. He was referring to the Separatists who were on a pilgrimage to the New World. But over time, the entire group of Separatists and Strangers were called “the Pilgrims.”
In England, the Pilgrims filled the old Speedwell and a larger ship named the Mayflower. Unfortunately, the Speedwell was unstable on the sea. It had to return to port twice. It was finally abandoned. With it, several passengers abandoned their dreams and returned home.
When at last the Mayflower was boarded, it carried about 30 sailors, and 102 Pilgrims. Only 35 of the Pilgrims were Separatists from Leiden. Most of the Pilgrims were traveling as families, so there were 32 children on board (if you can imagine!). But that number changed when two babies were born on the Mayflower! One named Oceanus Hopkins was born at sea and cleverly named after the event. Another baby named Peregrine White was born while anchored in the harbor of the New World. With everyone’s belongings and supplies, a few favorite pets, and crying newborns, the ship was far more cramped than planned.
Fortunately, the Strangers and the Separatists got along well. Though they ventured across the ocean for different reasons, they had much in common. All were courageous folks. All had hopes for starting new lives in North America. They would cling together through difficult times yet ahead. I imagine that those new babies were rocked and held by most of the women on board.
After 65 days at sea, land was finally in sight. (I’m sure the children shrieked with delight!) The first obstacle the Pilgrims faced was where to set ashore. You see, they had been granted passage to the territory of Virginia, but they didn’t exactly land there. The storms in the Atlantic drove them further north than Jamestown. They were at Cape Cod in present-day Massachusetts. The Pilgrims tried to turn the Mayflower south, but the rocky shoreline and strong currents wouldn’t allow for it. An historic decision was then made.
The Pilgrim men gathered on board the Mayflower to sign the Mayflower Compact. It was an agreement between them all that they were to be “self-governed.” Since they weren’t in Virginia, they weren’t under its laws and needed to make their own. The Mayflower Compact stated that each man would do their best according to God’s will and would protect the rights of others. It would help prevent any one man from ruling over all the rest and restricting freedom – the very thing they were striving for. At this time, John Carver was elected the first governor.
Now, the signing of the Mayflower Compact may not seem like a big deal. But it really was. You have to remember the state of things back in Europe. The Thirty Years War was raging between Protestants and Catholics under the weight of heavy handed kings and emperors. The Pilgrims didn’t want the same problems in the New World. The Separatists therefore did not impose their faith and religion on the Strangers among them. Nor did the Strangers restrict the worship of the Separatists. All of the men sought to be represented and protected under this newly formed charter. It was baby steps toward democracy in the New World.
Before I tell you about making landfall, let me introduce you to one of the heroes of the Pilgrims. His name was Miles Standish. His wife was named Rose. Miles was a short stout redhead with a fiery temper. Miles Standish met the Separatists back in Leiden. He never joined the church of the Separatists, but he had great respect for these God-fearing people. The Separatists voted him in as the first captain of the colony. They knew that to tame to the land, they needed his bravery and expertise. Unfortunately, Miles had hostile encounters with the Native Americans that ended in bloodshed. The Native Americans quickly learned to leave the short red head alone.
After scouting the area for five weeks, Miles Standish and others found a place with a clearing, good water, and a high hill for scouting. The area had been home to a Native American tribe that had since died out. The Pilgrims named their settlement New Plymouth, after a city in England. The official date of their landing was December 21, 1620. There sits a large rock at Plymouth today that marks the spot where the Pilgrims supposedly stepped from their ship to the shore. All I can picture are the children hitting the beach and running – after their long and dreary confinement!
William Bradford describes the scene for us this way, “Being thus arrived in a good harbour, and brought safe to land, they fell upon their knees and blessed the God of Heaven who had brought them from all the perils and miseries thereof, again to se their feet on the firm and stable earth, their proper element.” (Of Plymouth Plantation, p. 69)
Unlike the British gentlemen of Jamestown, who opposed strenuous work at first, the Pilgrims were industrious. They immediately went about their chores of building, hunting, and gathering wood. The women had loads of foul laundry to wash. Even with all their hard work, the first winter in Plymouth was miserable. It was so cold that their clothes froze on their bodies. Food was scarce and disease raged. The Pilgrims called it “the Great Sickness.” Everyone lived under the same roof of a fort that soon turned into a hospital.
At one time, only seven Pilgrims were healthy enough to tend to all the others. One of the healthy Pilgrims was Miles Standish. He cooked, nursed the sick, and did laundry. Despite the efforts of everyone, by springtime, 42 Pilgrims were dead, including Rose Standish. That means that half of the Pilgrims perished that first winter in Plymouth! I do wonder what the Pilgrims thought of the desperate situation. Had they heard the Lord clearly? Would they survive?
In mid-March of 1621, the Pilgrims were startled to hear the words, “Welcome! Welcome Englishmen!” These words were spoken by a Native American named Samoset. According to the Pilgrims, Samoset was a gift from God. He spoke broken English and introduced them to two very important people. First, he brought them Squanto, a Native American who spoke almost perfect English! (More on him later.) Second, Samoset brought them Chief Massosoit (mass eh SOIT). Massosoit was a kind Native American chief who was visiting in the region. He was the leader of the Pokanoke Indians who lived in southeastern Massachusetts. They were also called the Wampanoag (wom peh NO ag) which means “people of the early light.” On the east coast of North America, they were the first people to see the sun rise each morning. Chief Massosoit, after getting to know the Pilgrims, agreed to sign a peace treaty with them that lasted for 50 years. The peace treaty greatly helped the Pilgrims survive their hardships. (Tragically, peace would not last in the region beyond those 50 years! But that’s a topic for The Mystery of History Volume IV, “The French and Indian War.” Our focus here is the first Thanksgiving at New Plymouth.)
In April of 1621, Governor Carver died. It was decided than that William Bradford would be the new governor. Bradford carried a great amount of responsibility on his shoulders, but he relied on the Lord for strength and held his position for 30 years. William Bradford was a godly man and provided the spiritual leadership that the Pilgrims desperately needed. He wrote, “the whole country, full of woods and thickets, represented a wild and savage hue. If they looked behind them, there was the mighty ocean. . . What could now sustain them but the Spirit of God and His grace?” (Keesee, Timothy and Mark Sidwell. United States History for Christian Schools, p.23) I suspect that with every new grave that was made, many prayers were prayed. I believe the Lord was listening.
Getting back to Samoset, it only made sense that he would introduce the Pilgrims to Squanto, who spoke the white man’s language. (He learned the language after numerous captures and escapes back and forth to the Old World!) It must have been a delightful encounter on both sides because once Squanto met the Pilgrims, he never left.
Do you remember that first terrible winter for the Pilgrims in 1621? That’s when nearly half of them died from the Great Sickness. Well, it was the following spring when Squanto came to join them. Squanto taught them many things like how to find eel and clams and how to sneak up on deer, turkey, and bear. He taught the Pilgrim children where to find wild berries and nuts. It was probably something he grew up doing as a young Native American boy.
But probably the most famous gesture by Squanto was teaching the Pilgrims how to improve their crops of corn, beans, and pumpkins. (I love this part of the story.) In particular, Squanto taught the settlers to fertilize the ground with fish. Yes, fish. Squanto showed them that every seed or kernel planted should be surrounded by three small alewives, or tiny fish. (Alewives are fish in the herring family.) The decomposing fish nourished the ground and helped the crops grow stronger.
Squanto’s tips and tricks would pay off. That fall, in 1621, the Pilgrims had an extremely bountiful harvest. Governor Bradford declared it a time of “thanksgiving.” The feast lasted three days and included worship, Bible readings, and games. I think you already know who was invited. The Pilgrims invited Chief Massasoit who brought about 90 Native Americans with him to the first Thanksgiving. They in turn brought more deer to eat. It was only fitting.
Fortunately, we have written accounts of that first Thanksgiving, so we don’t have to use our imagination. Edward Winslow wrote a letter to a friend in England describing the great feast. He wrote, “Our harvest being gotten in, our Governor sent four men on fowling, that so we might . . . rejoice together, after we had gathered in the fruits of our labors. They four in one day killed as many fowl as . . . served the Company for almost a week, at which time, amongst our recreations, we exercised our arms, many of the Indians coming amongst us, and amongst the rest their great king the Massasoit, with some ninety men, whom for three days we entertained and feasted.” (Bradford, William. Of Plymouth Plantation. p. 100)
Beyond the full bellies, I hope there were full hearts on that first Thanksgiving. I hope the Pilgrims and the Native Americans were warmed by the presence of one another. I hope they saw beyond their differences in color and creed. I imagine the children had an abundance of fun competing in games and trading homemade dolls and bracelets. I would love to have been there.
I wish I could end the story here and say that all lived happily ever after. But that is not the case. The next winter and spring were terribly difficult. Again the Pilgrims were short of food and a severe drought nearly killed their crops. Ships from the New World arrived with more hungry settlers and few supplies. There just wasn’t enough to go around. At one time, each Pilgrim was allotted no more than 5 kernels of corn to eat per day. Regardless, the Pilgrims continued to pray and place their faith in God. They would survive to celebrate more and more Thanksgivings, but it wasn’t without hardship.
As for Squanto, he had only a few adventures left which give us a little insight into his character. He heard that his friend Captain Thomas Dermer was captured by other Native Americans. As a good gesture, Squanto rescued Dermer and helped to set him free. As another good gesture, Squanto joined a search party for a lost Pilgrim boy. Fortunately, the young boy was found! But on another note, Squanto was accused of spreading rumors of an Indian attack on Plymouth! It is unclear of his intentions on the matter. Governor Bradford dropped any charges against him and allowed him to stay on with the Pilgrims.
In the end, Squanto suffered quite unexpectedly. In the fall of 1623, Squanto fell ill with a high fever and nose bleed. He knew he was dying. Squanto asked William Bradford to pray for him. He then gave his few belongings to the Pilgrims. Squanto died at about age 38. William Bradford wrote a lot about how much Squanto had meant to them. He said, “. . .But Squanto continued with them (the Pilgrims) and was their interpreter and was a special instrument sent of God for their good beyond their expectation. He directed them how to set their corn, where to take fish, . . . and was also their pilot to bring them to unknown places for their profit, and never left them till he died.” (Of Plymouth Plantation. p. 89. Words in parentheses mine.)
As for Thanksgiving, it has become a well-loved American holiday for most. It is above all, a time to give thanks despite hardships, not in the absence of them. In that spirit, let us give thanks in the midst of our modern problems and remember to be grateful in all things. May the Lord bless you and keep you!
If you’d like age-appropriate activities for students, please keep reading! These are contained in the Companion Guide that accompanies The Mystery of History, Volume III.
Five Kernels of Corn. Materials: unpopped popcorn, glue, leaves (real or made from construction paper).
If you were to join my family for Thanksgiving one year, you would learn that one of our traditions is to place a large fall-colored maple leaf on each plate before dinner is served. Five kernels of corn are glued to each leaf (for convenience and storage, we use popcorn kernels.) Before we pray and eat, we are reminded that at one time the Pilgrims were allotted only five kernels of fresh corn to eat per day! That realization adds to the appreciation of the feast waiting for us. Make these to store away for your next Thanksgiving. You will need large maple leaves, popcorn kernels, and glue. You can use real fall-colored maple leaves if maples grow in your area and the time of the year is right for them. Or you can make your own out of orange, yellow, and red construction paper.
Beans and Sardines. Materials: can of sardines, dry beans, paper cups, planting soil
Squanto has been well remembered for teaching the Pilgrims to add fish to the soil of their gardens. Do the same in a windowsill garden. Fill a paper cup 2/3 full with planting soil. Poke a hole with your finger. Drop a sardine into the hole. Add a bean. Cover with soil. Water gently and watch it grow. To make an experiment of the project, plant a bean without a sardine in the cup and see how the two compare. I can not guarantee that a canned sardine will improve your results!
Trivia Time. Why in 1941 did Franklin Roosevelt move Thanksgiving to the third Thursday of each November? To answer this question, you will need to do a quick study on the history of the celebration of Thanksgiving. See what trivia you can find.
]]>
Ludwig van Beethoven was born in Bonn, Germany, in 1770. Generally quiet, he was not born with the inclination to perform. As a 4-year-old, young Ludwig was forced to sit at the keyboard for long hours at a time—squirming as most children would. Ludwig’s teacher, who was also his father, drank heavily and leaned on his son to help pay the family bills. By age 7, young Beethoven was performing in public for wages. As a youth, Beethoven struggled with having little to no social graces (his appearance was usually disheveled, and his demeanor was awkward). As a young man, and throughout his life, Beethoven suffered rejection from women he loved. Through letters of uncertainty, he bared his tender heart. The most famous of these letters was to a woman he called his “immortal beloved.” Her identity is unknown, and the letter was never mailed. By his own admission, Beethoven remained an “unhappy” bachelor all his life.1
But more sorrowful than unrequited love would be Beethoven’s loss of hearing. His deafness came on slowly—starting in his late twenties with humming in his ears. Beethoven was afraid that others would dismiss him as not being a serious composer, so he hid his problem. Unfortunately, Beethoven’s growing loss of sound made him increasingly grumpy. He defended his shortcomings, writing: “Oh you who think or say that I am malevolent, stubborn or misanthropic, how greatly do you wrong me. You do not know the secret cause which makes me seem that way to you. . . . Ah, how could I possibly admit an infirmity in the one sense which ought to be more perfect in me than in others, a sense which I once enjoyed in the highest perfection.”2
As Beethoven’s irritation and deafness worsened, he gave in to inventive hearing devices like ear horns, and tools that would vibrate from sound. At age 48 that Beethoven resorted to communicating with others through “conversation books.” These are little notebooks in which a conversation partner writes what they want to say, and you would then respond with speech. The pages are like a window, allowing us to peer into Beethoven’s quiet world. (They recently have been translated from German into English and are available online and in some libraries.)
One of the amazing things about Beethoven is that he composed nine symphonies with only a faint ability to hear or no ability at all! Eight symphonies were composed with partial deafness; the ninth and last, he would never hear—but it has remained his most famous. It is called “Ode to Joy.” The Third Symphony was originally written in honor of Napoleon Bonaparte, but when Napoleon began to show himself a tyrant, Beethoven erased his name from the work! For the piano, Beethoven composed “Für Elise,” which translates as “For Elise.” It may have been written for a woman Beethoven loved.
Otherwise, Beethoven composed six concertos and 32 sonatas for the piano. (The piano was still somewhat new—Beethoven helped make it famous.) Beethoven’s most admired sonatas would include Pathétique (PATH THEY teek), Appassionata (AH PASS syaw nah ta), Farewell, and Moonlight. Each of these sonatas and its movements is completely different—thus representing the wide range of talent and emotion that Beethoven possessed.
Fortunately, Beethoven would reap the benefits of fame in his lifetime. His peers found him hard to get along with, but they and his audiences greatly appreciated his classical style. Beethoven was well paid for his hard work and when he died at 56, an estimated 20,000 mourners gathered for his funeral. His final resting place was the Central Cemetery in Vienna, near other leading composers. Is there more I can add to this story? Certainly, there is much more I could say about this masterful composer, but I would rather you listen to Beethoven’s works than listen to me. His music continues to speak for itself.
Younger Students—Orchestra!
Pretend to conduct an orchestra in a performance of Beethoven’s Fifth Symphony with a conductor’s baton. Your makeshift baton can be a chopstick, pencil, or other household item.
Middle Students—Conversation Book
Beethoven’s final eight years were silent. From age 48 to 56, he resorted to keeping conversation books to communicate with others. See what it’s like, carefully insert cotton in your ears and limit your conversation only to what you can write down. Use a notebook and pen.
Older Students—Like Music?
Choose other famous composers from the seventeenth to nineteenth centuries, and write a one-page mini-biography on each. Other favorites of the Classical Era (c. 1750–1830) would include Christoph Willibald Gluck and Franz Joseph Haydn. The Romantic Age (c. 1850–1920), an era less strict than classical and more expressive, would include Franz Schubert, Vincenzo Bellini, Frédéric Chopin, Robert Schumann, Johannes Brahms, and Claude Debussy.
References
1. Beethoven wrote to his “immortal beloved”: “Your love has made me one of the happiest and, at the same time, one of the unhappiest of men — at my age.” From Michael Steen, The Lives and Times of the Great Composers. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2003), 187.
2. Harold C. Schonberg, The Lives of the Great Composers. (New York: W.W. Norton, 1997), 115.
]]>My stories are from The Mystery of History Volume IV (spanning 1708 to 2014). They are:
These history lessons are longer than a typical blog, so I’ll divide them into three posts. (This is the third of post of three.) And, for expediency, I’ll leave out the photos. (If you’re interested, there are color photos in all of our volumes.) Please keep in mind these lessons were written years ago for middle school and high school students. They won’t address everything going on today, nor are they supposed to. But I do hope this pertinent background information will help families as they pray for the Middle East!
Since the formation of Israel in 1948, the Middle East has been in a state of turmoil. Whether this conflict is viewed as political, the fulfillment of prophecy, or a combination of both, tension in the Middle East runs deep and wide. As a tragic example, we will look today at the assassination of Anwar Sadat (AHN wahr Suh DAHT), the president of Egypt, who was shot more than 30 times on October 6, 1981, for making peace with Israel!
Anwar Sadat was born in 1918 in a poor village along the Nile River. His family’s busy household of 13 children was located 40 miles north of Cairo, the largest city in Egypt and the capital. His father was a clerk at a military hospital. His mother was part Sudanese. (Her ethnicity gave Anwar his distinctive skin color, which was darker than the skin of most Egyptians.) At the time of Anwar’s birth, Egypt was a British colony. In his youth, Anwar heard stories of how Mohandas Gandhi peacefully led India out from under British control. He wondered if his Egyptian homeland, rich in the history of pharaohs and pyramids, would ever see the same kind of independence.
Through his childhood, Anwar Sadat was taught by a kindly Islamic cleric. At age 18, Anwar enrolled in a military academy. Upon graduation, he was transferred to a distant outpost in Sudan where he met Gamal Abdel Nasser (Guh MAHL AB dool NAH ser). To understand Anwar Sadat, we need to spend a little time on Gamal Nasser. (It will all tie in very soon!)
Gamal Nasser and Anwar Sadat were the same age. Having grown up in the same political climate, they had similar revolutionary ideas for setting Egypt free from British control. Nasser started the Association of Free Officers, a small secret society designed to overthrow the British. Sadat joined the group and was arrested and imprisoned twice for treason against Great Britain! (He also led a hunger strike against the British, as his hero, Gandhi, did. That landed Sadat in a military hospital, from which he subsequently escaped!)
Finally, after all the failures, the Association of Free Officers succeeded in 1952 in leading the Egyptian Revolution. As a result of that revolution, the British were driven out; the king of Egypt was ousted; and a new president was put in office. Gamal Nasser would, in time, serve as the second president of the new Egyptian Republic. As the president of Egypt, Gamal Nasser kept Anwar Sadat close by as a friend, an ally, an aide, and a vice president. (The two had come a long way from their young revolutionary days.)
Now you still may be wondering what any of this has to do with Israel and turmoil in the Middle East. I’m getting to that. President Nasser was one of several Middle Eastern Muslim leaders who deeply despised and deeply resented the formation of Israel. For example, Nasser said in 1967, “We will not accept any . . . coexistence with Israel. . . . Today the issue is not the establishment of peace between the Arab states and Israel. . . . The war with Israel is in effect since 1948.” (Endnote 1)
With that threat, and many more, President Nasser proceeded to close the Strait of Tiran (Tih RON) to Israeli shipping on May 22, 1967. (The Strait of Tiran, at the tip of the Sinai Peninsula, connects the Gulf of Aqaba [AH kuh buh] to the Red Sea and is vital to Israel’s trade and prosperity.) For crippling Israel’s trade, some considered the blockade of the Strait of Tiran an act of war! In addition to this, Nasser and the leader of Syria mobilized thousands of troops along the borders of Israel.
Israel saw inevitable bloodshed coming its way. To protect itself and survive, Israel attacked Egypt and Syria in what has been called the Six-Day War (fought June 5 to June 10, 1967). Much to the surprise and embarrassment of President Nasser, the Egyptian air force was caught off guard at the time of the attack and essentially wiped out. In victory against Egypt, Israel gained the Sinai Peninsula and secured the Strait of Tiran. In a successful assault against Syria, Israel took East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and the Golan Heights — three heavily disputed territories. To Israel, the Six-Day War was a necessary victory to secure its right to exist as a state. To the Arab world, it was a humiliating setback.
This brings us now to Anwar Sadat. In 1970, he was the vice president of Egypt and next in line to rule the nation should anything happen to the president. Well, quite unexpectedly, President Nasser died of a heart attack. That thrust Anwar Sadat into a significant place on the stage of world history. Previously behind the scenes and in Nasser’s shadow, Anwar Sadat was barely known to the rest of world. As the new president of Egypt, that changed very quickly!
Anwar Sadat started his presidency by following the policies of Gamal Nasser. Like Nasser, he begrudged the existence of Israel. Sadat started a campaign against Israel with a request. He asked Israel to return to the borders that existed before the Six-Day War of 1967. Israel would not agree to relinquish that much territory. It was willing to give up the Sinai Peninsula, but before negotiations could take place, Sadat attacked! Yes, in 1973, Anwar Sadat led several Arab states, including Syria, in a surprise attack against Israel.
The day chosen for the attack was very intentional. It was October 6, which in that year coincided with Yom Kippur (or the Day of Atonement), the holiest day in the Jewish calendar. That date also fell in the month of Ramadan, a holy month of fasting and prayer for Muslims. So the Fourth Arab-Israeli War, as this attack was named, is also called the Yom Kippur War, the Ramadan War, and the October War. Whatever it is called today, the conflict was both a political war and a “holy war” between Muslims and Jews.
As an important side note, one of Egypt’s allies was the Soviet Union. Israel found support from the United States. You know what that means? In the event the war went global, old opponents of the Cold War were pitted against each other — again! The Soviets didn’t feel up to the challenge and so quickly bowed out from helping the Arabs. Disappointed and insulted, Sadat expelled 20,000 Soviet advisers from Egypt. Sadat’s countrymen admired his audacity in sending the Russians packing.
The Fourth Arab-Israeli War (which again was several Arab states against Israel) was short in length, but full-blown in hostility. It lasted only 19 days, but both sides pulled out their best weapons of warfare and sacrificed thousands of troops on the battlefield. Once the fighting began, the Soviets changed their minds about bowing out and got involved by resupplying Arab forces. To counterbalance that, the United States provided Israel with air support and intelligence. United Nations forces showed up late on the scene but intervened on behalf of both sides by calling for an immediate ceasefire. With thousands having already died, both sides agreed to stop fighting.
In tactics and morale, Israel probably had the upper hand in the Yom Kippur War (as they would call it). As in the Six-Day War, Israelis proved to their Middle Eastern neighbors that they were a power to be reckoned with. To the Arab world, the Ramadan War (as they would call it) was both good and bad. On the positive side, it gave Sadat a boost in popularity for leading the effort against Israel and trying to take back Sinai. On the negative side, Egypt was not entirely victorious and Israel was not exactly defeated. After the dust settled, it would appear that the Arab states had been too divided to be effective, with Syria focusing on the Golan Heights and Egypt focusing on Sinai. The survival of Israel would prove to foster more hostilities from the Arab world. It also led Anwar Sadat to a change of heart toward Israel that would eventually cost him his life. Here’s why.
Shortly after the Yom Kippur invasion, Sadat gave an interview stating that he would go to Israel in person if need be to help settle the differences between Egypt and Israel. Shocked and encouraged by this gesture, the Israelis took him up on it and arranged for a meeting in Jerusalem between Anwar Sadat and Israel’s Prime Minister, Menachem Begin (Meh KNOCK’HM BAY geen). (He was one of the first leaders of the Zionist movement.) The November 20, 1977, meeting between Sadat and Begin was historic: Anwar Sadat was the first Arab leader to visit Israel on friendly terms.
When Anwar Sadat addressed the parliament of Israel, he did so with extraordinary grace and eloquence. He said:
“I come to you today on solid ground to shape a new life and to establish peace. We all love this land, the land of God, we all, Moslems, Christians and Jews, all worship God. . . . Any life that is lost in war is a human life, be it that of an Arab or an Israeli. A wife who becomes a widow is a human being entitled to a happy family life, whether she be an Arab or an Israeli. Innocent children who are deprived of the care and compassion of their parents are ours. They are ours, be they living on Arab or Israeli land. They command our full responsibility to afford them a comfortable life today and tomorrow. For the sake of them all, for the sake of the lives of all our sons and brothers, for the sake of affording our communities the opportunity to work for the progress and happiness of man, feeling secure and with the right to a dignified life, for the generations to come, for a smile on the face of every child born in our land, for all that I have taken my decision to come to you, despite all the hazards, to deliver my address.” (Endnote 2)
Sadat’s address proceeded to outline a means to peace in the Middle East based on justice and mutual respect. He added, “No one can build his happiness at the expense of the misery of others.” (Endnote 3) Sadat’s visit to Israel led to more visits, but these would take place at Camp David, a military/presidential retreat located 60 miles from Washington, D.C. Hosting the event was U.S. President Jimmy Carter. (This was about a year before the American hostage crisis with Iran.) After 13 days of intense meetings, Anwar Sadat and Menachem Begin signed a rough draft peace treaty, called the Camp David Accords, on September 17, 1978. (The full treaty was signed in 1979.)
One of many significant elements to the treaty was Israel’s act of returning the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt. Egypt agreed to keep the region a “demilitarized” zone. For their mutual agreement to the Camp David Accords, both Sadat and Begin received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1978. Needless to say, the entire event was unprecedented!
The signing of the Camp David Accords was, in fact, so big that it rocked the Arab world. While many Egyptians claimed to support the peace treaty, and many were glad to gain back the Sinai Peninsula, others felt betrayed by Anwar Sadat. You see, Sadat had changed and softened in many ways since becoming the president of Egypt. For one, he visited the United States to earn favor with the West. Second, he invited Billy Graham to Egypt for a Christian evangelistic rally. (That was surprising!) Third, he visited the Vatican and invited the pope to Cairo. And fourth, he offered refuge to the shah of Iran, a Shiite, when the shah was on his deathbed. All of this was pretty unusual behavior for a Sunni Muslim leader in the heart of the Middle East, which leads us to the tragedy of the story.
On October 6, 1981, Egypt was remembering and celebrating the previous invasion of Israel on Yom Kippur with parades and fanfare. Sitting in the front row of the parade’s grandstand was Anwar Sadat. While jets flew in formation overhead, a vehicle stopped in front of the president. Armed gunmen jumped out of the vehicle and opened fire on the unsuspecting crowd in the grandstand. President Sadat was shot 37 times. The scene was one of complete chaos. Eleven died and 28 were wounded. In the mad shuffle, Vice President Hosni Mubarak was escorted to safety.
A group named the Muslim Brotherhood took responsibility for the assassination of Anwar Sadat. Some of the gunmen were killed that day while others were arrested. Unlike the assassination of John F. Kennedy, there was no mystery behind this murder! Members of the Muslim Brotherhood were publicly avenging what they believed to be betrayal by their own president. Anwar Sadat had dared to make friends with Israel — and paid for it with his life. (The Muslim Brotherhood, founded in 1928, claims to be a peaceful political group seeking only to unify Muslims under Sharia law. As with the assassination of Sadat, their actions are not peaceful!)
After the death of Sadat, Vice President Mubarak declared Egypt to be in a state of emergency. Unfortunately, he kept it that way for 30 years! On paper, Mubarak served as the president of Egypt, but in action, he was a dictator. He established a one-party government that served him and him alone. Egyptians compared his authoritarian regime to those of the ancient pharaohs.
After years of oppression, the Egyptians turned against Mubarak. Starting in January of 2011, thousands of Egyptians gathered in Cairo in a peaceful protest demanding the resignation of their president. Never before in the history of Egypt had such a thing occurred! Within weeks, the voice of the people was heard and Mubarak stepped down from power. At present, a new government is under construction with many groups jockeying for power, including the Muslim Brotherhood. Should they take control of Egypt, Israel will be threatened again, as the Israelis are still not welcome in the Middle East. The world waits, on a nervous edge, for the future of the Middle East to unfold.
I will end this lesson with the words of Anwar Sadat. At one of his last interviews, a reporter asked him, “If you had only three wishes, what would they be?” He answered with sincerity, “One, peace in the Middle East. Two, peace in the Middle East. Three, peace in the Middle East.” (Endnote 4)
For more understanding of the Middle East, don’t miss my first and second posts related to this topic:
Endnotes:
My stories are from The Mystery of History Volume IV (spanning 1708 to 2014). They are:
These history lessons are longer than a typical blog, so I’ll divide them into three posts. (This is the second post of three.) And, for expediency, I’ll leave out the photos. (If you’re interested, there are color photos in all of our volumes.) Please keep in mind these lessons were written years ago for middle school and high school students. They won’t address everything going on today, nor are they supposed to. But I do hope this pertinent background information will help families as they pray for the Middle East!
The history of Iran stretches back to ancient times when it went by the name of Persia. Over the centuries, the Persian Empire was conquered and reclaimed many times by many rulers. As I taught in Volume III of this series, it was Ismail I in 1502 who established the Safavid (Suh FAH weed) Empire of Persia and branded it a Shiite Muslim nation. Surrounded by Sunni Muslim nations, and blanketed in fields of purple saffron, Persia would stand unique in the Middle East. Its history would be unique, too. We will see this more clearly today in the story of Ayatollah Khomeini (Eye yuh TOE lah Koe MAY nee), the Shiite spiritual leader who turned to politics and formed the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Ayatollah Khomeini (see the featured image of this post) was born into a prosperous Muslim family in 1902. His birth name was Ruhollah Musavi Khomeini. Ruhollah is a common Muslim name meaning “the spirit of god.” Khomeini comes from Khomein, the name of the town in which Ruhollah was born. Khomein is an orchard-filled village about 200 miles south of Tehran, the capital city of Iran.
Ruhollah’s father came from a religious Shiite family and was himself a Shiite cleric. Tragically, when Ruhollah was only five months old, his father was assassinated. The motive behind his death is not entirely clear, but Ruhollah’s father may have been the victim of a land dispute. Ruhollah’s mother and aunt raised him and his siblings, but unfortunately, both women died when he was 15.
Ruhollah’s education started at the age of 6. He attended a Muslim school where he was expected to memorize the Koran, which Muslims consider to be the holy book of Islam. In addition to his education at school, Ruhollah was tutored in Arabic and grammar by relatives. His brother sent him at 18 to the city of Arak (or Sultanabad, as it was known then) for further religious study. After that, Ruhollah followed his favorite teacher and mentor to the city of Qom, the spiritual capital of Iran, for additional study at a madrasah (muh DRASS uh; spellings vary). A madrasah is a highly regimented school of Islamic theology usually attached to a mosque. As you would expect from this kind of religious education, Ruhollah Khomeini was immersed in Islamic thought, Islamic literature, and Islamic philosophy. Strict Shiism would guide Ruhollah all his life.
As a married man and the father of five, Ruhollah Khomeini spent most of his adult life teaching in the Shiite schools of Iran. He enjoyed literature and poetry and taught Islamic law and history. Ruhollah had a special interest in philosophy and Gnosticism, which is a mystical approach to religion. (Some would label it radical.)
Ruhollah was in his 60s before he entered the world of politics. He had strong opinions about the role of clerics like himself and believed they should be political leaders as well as spiritual leaders. These beliefs trace back to Shiism. To help you understand Ruhollah’s political aspirations, it’s critical that I pause here to elaborate on some unique aspects of the Shiite faith.
Sunni Muslims and Shiite Muslims divided after the death of Mohammed over the issue of leadership. Sunni Muslims chose to follow Abu Bekr, the closest friend of Mohammed. Shiite Muslims chose to follow Ali, the closest relative to Mohammed through his daughter. Because Shiite Muslims look to the descendants of Mohammed for divine leadership, they don’t believe in electing their highest leader. In fact, they would look down on Western societies that vote for their highest official. (Shiites will vote for the president of their nation, but he is not considered the highest official of the land. A spiritual leader occupies that position.)
There is more. After splitting from the Sunnis, the Shiites relied, in their earliest centuries, on 12 special men for spiritual guidance and political leadership. These men were supposedly infallible and through divine revelation were able to draw upon the wisdom of Allah, the god of Islam, for all matters civil and spiritual. Shiites call these special men imams (ih MOMZ). (Sunnis have imams, too, but they are not of the same status.) Mainline Shiites believe that the 12th Imam of the Shiite faith, Muhammad al-Mahdi (born in A.D. 869), did not die but is in spiritual hiding. The Shiites are “waiting” for the 12th Imam to return as a messiah figure who will deliver the world from injustice and establish a pure form of Islam. This sect of Shiism is called “Twelver Shiism.”
Until the return of the 12th Imam, Shiites view their highest spiritual leaders as “intermediate” imams. The greater the credentials and the reputation of these imams, the greater the authority they have over Shiite Muslims. Now, let me tie this in to Ruhollah Khomeini. Ruhollah Khomeini was so well educated in the ways of Shiite Islam, and so respected in his community, that he rose to the status of an imam with an exceptional level of authority. In fact, some would say Khomeini had the same authority as one of the special, infallible 12 imams of earlier centuries!
Knowing this, you can only imagine the amount of influence that Ruhollah Khomeini would have over Twelver Shiites around the world, and especially those in Iran. Like the 12 imams, he would be considered an authority figure in politics, as well as in spiritual matters. In fact, in the 1950s he was recognized as a “Grand Ayatollah,” a title given to the most highly ranked Shiite clerics. Among Twelver Shiite Muslims, Ayatollah Khomeini is, out of reverence, most often called Imam Khomeini. (Sunni Muslims would hold no reverence for the man.) Let’s get back to our story.
As Ayatollah Khomeini grew in popularity, power, and influence over Twelver Shiites, so grew the fact that he was a threat to the existing government of Iran. You see, in the 1960s, the government over Iran was a rather liberal one. Iran’s ruler, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the shah of Iran (shah means “king”), was open to the modernization and secularization of Iran. For example, the shah opened up elections to non-Shiites and dropped a requirement that officials swear an oath on the Koran. To devout Shiites, like Khomeini, the shah was diminishing the role of Islam in government affairs and ruining Iran with his open ideas. Among other things, the shah was highly criticized for negotiating oil deals with the United States and growing richer for it.
It is true that the shah of Iran was extremely wealthy. Many Shiites perceived him as a corrupt and extravagant ruler who was as oppressive as he was rich. Ironically, the United States “liked” the shah of Iran in his early reign, or at least worked with him, to keep close tabs on the bountiful supply of oil coming out of Iran. In fact, the United States was instrumental in helping the shah secure the throne of Iran in 1953 through a non-democratic coup.
Now, when Ayatollah Khomeini organized a boycott against the programs of the shah, and denounced him publicly as “that little man,” Khomeini was arrested. With talk of revolution, Khomeini was exiled. Starting in 1964, he was banished first to a prison in Turkey where contemptuous Sunni Muslims refused to let him wear his turban head covering and cloak. (These were symbols of his clerical authority.) After a year in a Turkish prison, Khomeini was moved to Iraq, where he spent 13 years in a much more relaxed state of exile. The shah assumed that Khomeini’s protests would be muffled in Iraq. They were not. Ayatollah Khomeini wrote extensively in Iraq and taught in the schools there. (Though Sunni Muslims governed over Iraq at that time, the majority of the population was Shiite.)
As criticism of the shah escalated from Khomeini’s mouth, the shah of Iran, with the help of Iraqi leaders, banished Khomeini from Iraq in 1977 — thinking that the farther Khomeini was moved, the less he would be heard. The shah was wrong again! Khomeini found refuge in Paris and worked from France to overthrow the shah. In Paris, Khomeini gained a worldwide audience because, quite simply, Westerners came to know him. Through television, the West grew to recognize images of Ayatollah Khomeini. Some would have sympathy for his cause; some would not.
As we’ve seen many times in history, the exile backfired. It did the opposite of what the shah hoped for. Though physically absent from Iran, Ayatollah Khomeini reached out spiritually to the Iranian people and encouraged a revolution. His appeal was so strong that some would describe it as mystical. Revering Ayatollah Khomeini as a special imam of the highest authority, the Shiite masses embraced every word he wrote or spoke.
When rioting broke out to overthrow the shah in 1977, thousands of Iranians waved copies of Ayatollah Khomeini’s words and raised photos of his face, distinguished by his dark, penetrating eyes and long white beard. Pressure grew against the shah, and strikes abounded across Iran. In 1979, the shah of Iran finally fled his own country. Two weeks later, Ayatollah Khomeini boarded a plane in France and flew to Iran, with revolutionary papers in hand. He would wind up not needing the papers to convince the masses of his authority. Five or six million Iranians welcomed Khomeini with cheers and tears of joy! By stepping off the plane in Iran, he essentially stepped into power — without a battle, without class warfare, and without a financial payoff. For these reasons, the Iranian Revolution (as it has been labeled) would be one of the most unique revolutions in history. On April 1, 1979, the Islamic Republic of Iran was made official, and Ayatollah Khomeini reigned supreme.
As Ayatollah Khomeini settled into his new role, a dramatic story unfolded in history that involved the United States. Here’s why. When the shah of Iran fled his homeland, he was a “wanted man.” The new government of Iran wanted the shah to stand trial for crimes against the people of Iran and against Islam. Viewing him as a criminal on the run, very few nations were interested in offering refuge to the shah. In fact, Jimmy Carter, the president of the United States, thought it was a bad idea to continue a friendship with the shah or to extend him shelter. (Carter knew there would be ramifications from the Shiite community.) However, unknown to most of the world, the shah of Iran was fighting cancer. He was in critical need of medical treatment and asked the United States for special permission to enter the nation for care. President Carter, in a controversial gesture, said “yes” to the shah and his wife and allowed them entrance to the United States. (The shah checked into a hospital under a fictitious name.)
As predicted, there were ramifications to accepting the shah in America! Shiite students in the city of Tehran schemed a plan to force the release of the shah. On November 4, 1979, they stormed the American embassy in Tehran and took 66 Americans as hostages in exchange for two things: (1) the shah of Iran, and (2) an apology from the United States.
At the time of the embassy takeover, Ayatollah Khomeini was reportedly taking a nap. According to most sources, it was not Khomeini’s idea to place these demands on the United States. However, once the hostages were secure, he did agree to hold them. In no time at all, nearly every news station in the world was broadcasting the crisis. Americans were sickened to see their fellow citizens blindfolded and bound as hostages and paraded before TV cameras. Though Americans had grown to recognize Khomeini, few understood his zealous leadership and the demands of the Iranian students to see the shah brought to justice. What these angry students wanted most was the execution of the shah.
President Carter was in an impossible situation. He would not go back on his decision to extend refuge to the shah, but he did not want to sacrifice the lives of the hostages. To create leverage with the Iranians, Carter authorized the “freezing” of billions of dollars of Iranian assets held in U.S. banks. This proved only to aggravate the hostage takers! As a result, they added to their list of demands the release of the frozen assets.
Iranian officials informed the United States that the hostages (reduced in number to 52 because 14 had been released for various reasons) were “guests” and were being well taken care of. While the hostages were eventually moved from the embassy to a prison, and then to a secure mansion, they were not well taken care of. According to the hostages, they were shackled, threatened, beaten, interrogated, and placed in solitary confinement. A few tried to escape, but failed. A few attempted suicide, but failed in that as well.
In mid-December 1979, barely six weeks after the hostages were taken, the shah of Iran left the United States. He went first to Panama, and then to Egypt. Americans thought this would end the hostage crisis. But it didn’t! Still doling out punishment for U.S. assistance to the shah and still demanding an apology and billions of dollars in assets, the students in Iran continued to hold the American hostages with the approval of Ayatollah Khomeini.
The harrowing weeks of the hostage crisis turned into months. News broadcasts on TV were notorious for chronicling a daily count of the event, saying, for example,“Day 105 of the hostage crisis!”“Day 106 of the hostage crisis!” And so on and so on went the daily count. No one knew how high the numbers would go. Your parents and grandparents may remember this well. They may also remember the “Tie a Yellow Ribbon” campaign that swept the nation after loved ones of the hostages tied yellow ribbons on trees (or wore small yellow ribbons on their clothes) in hopes of the hostages’ return. (Yellow ribbons have since been used to commemorate soldiers and other causes.) I was a freshman in college about this time, and like a lot of Americans, I saw and understood the yellow ribbons, but I struggled to really understand the politics behind the scenes of the Iranian situation.
On April 24, 1980, about five months into the crisis, a daring rescue mission authorized by President Carter was launched. However, with sandstorms raging in the desert, the mission failed. Five helicopters were abandoned or captured; one crashed and burned; and nine people died (eight Americans and one Iranian). The nation was stunned as Carter apologized in front of the press and took full responsibility for the blunder. Americans waited and prayed some more.
On July 27, 1980, the shah of Iran died in Egypt. It was hoped then that the American hostages would be released. News reporters were up to about “Day 270” in the headlines. But the death of the shah did not appease the hostage-takers or Ayatollah Khomeini! They continued to demand an apology and Iranian money held in U.S. banks. In addition, they asked that the United States make a promise to stay out of Iranian affairs. To retaliate, the United States placed sanctions against Iran, meaning the United States deprived Iran of trade items — especially those needed for war.
To complicate matters a great deal, the country of Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, invaded Iran on September 22, 1980. Why did Iraq dare to invade at that time? There were several reasons, but one reason was that the hostage crisis was a drain on Iran. With sanctions placed against it, Iran was vulnerable. To Saddam Hussein, it was the perfect time to settle an old score over a waterway and boundary line between Iraq and Iran. (In case you didn’t know, Iraq is considered an Arab nation; Iran is not. Iranians are a non-Arab group that speaks Farsi instead of Arabic. This ethnic difference fuels the animosity between the nations.)
As events played out, Iran suspected that the United States was in cahoots with Iraq. Officially, the United States was not involved. Unofficially, it was — because the United States did little to stop Iraq and secretly provided Iraq with chemical weapons and satellite intelligence! (Endnote 1) Needless to say, distrust grew deeper between Iran and the United States. At the same time, Iran desperately needed sanctions lifted to defend itself against Iraq! So serious negotia- tions with the United States finally began to take place.
Back in the United States, President Carter lost the next presidential election to Ronald Reagan, a conservative Republican. As Reagan’s inauguration ceremony approached, Carter’s final hours in the White House would be extremely tense! Pleading and bargaining for the release of the hostages, Carter and his staff would not sleep during their last 36 hours in the White House. On and off the phone with ambassadors and bankers, the White House worked on release efforts as the moments ticked down to Reagan’s presidential ceremony on January 20, 1981.
On that day in Iran, two hours before Reagan’s inauguration, the hostages were being shuffled about without knowledge of their fate or their destiny. After 444 days in captivity, they did not know if they were headed for freedom or a firing squad. The White House didn’t know either. There was no clarity coming from Iran. Without word of the release of the hostages, Carter changed his clothes to attend Reagan’s ceremony.
In Iran, Ayatollah Khomeini intentionally held on to the American hostages — until 20 seconds after Ronald Reagan was sworn into office! Under the watch of the new president, Khomeini let them go for the exchange of the frozen assets. It was a slap in the face to President Carter and an insult to his staff and the United States. Nevertheless, when the hostages landed in Germany, en route to the United States, Jimmy Carter was there on the ground to greet them. No longer president, Carter welcomed them home like a father. Americans continued the welcome-home celebration for the former hostages with a ticker-tape parade in New York City.
As for Iran, that nation’s attention was needed elsewhere. First, there was a government to put in place. With a new constitution, Khomeini secured Iran as a theocracy based on Twelver Shiite beliefs. He appointed himself the supreme leader of Iran for life, with a president serving under him. To flush out his “enemies” (those loyal to the shah, or those in favor of democracy), Khomeini privately and publicly saw to the torture and execution of hundreds! Second, there was a war to fight against Iraq, called simply the “Iran-Iraq War.” At the cost of a million lives, that war went on for eight years without either side winning.
Ayatollah Khomeini served Iran for 10 years, while overseeing the terms of three Iranian presidents. In this time period, he reinstated a strict dress code for women, which had existed for centuries but grown lax under the shah. (By Islamic custom, women dress in extreme modesty with head coverings and full-body cloak. The degree of the coverage varies from country to country.) As might be expected, shorts and sunbathing were forbidden in Iran for reasons of modesty, but Khomeini also forbade anything and everything of a Western flavor, like American music and American movies.
During his 10 years of leadership, Ayatollah Khomeini also gave significant support to Hezbollah. Hezbollah is a Shiite Muslim organization based in Lebanon that is dedicated to the destruction of Israel. Khomeini not only gave aid to terrorists, he saw to the building of special schools in Iran designed to teach and train radical Muslims in the acts of terrorism.
As for the fate of Ayatollah Khomeini, he died in office on January 3, 1989. Months before his death, Khomeini was concerned about who would fill his shoes. He was not satisfied with the candidates who met the qualifications outlined in the constitution. So Ayatollah Khomeini made an amendment to the constitution that would open the door for Ali Khamenei (Ah LEE Khah muh NAY), who was not an ayatollah at that time, to serve as the next supreme leader of Iran.
Ali Khamenei assumed office on June 4, 1989, and holds the position as of this writing. However, he would not have the clout of the former ayatollah. Ali Khamenei was overshadowed by the strong personality of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the president of Iran from 2005 to 2013. According to an article in the New York Times (posted on October 26, 2011), Ali Khamenei would like to dissolve the position of the president to reestablish his authority as the supreme leader of Iran. (Endnote 2) We wait to see who gains the upper hand in Iran. Be it a cleric or a politician, Iran is gaining frightening attention in world affairs for its openly negative attitude toward Israel and its interest in nuclear technology!
For more understanding of the Middle East, don’t miss my first and third posts related to this topic:
Endnotes:
These history lessons are longer than a typical blog, so I’ll divide them into three posts. And, for expediency, I’ll leave out the photos. (If you’re interested, there are color photos in all of our volumes.) Please keep in mind these lessons were written years ago for middle school and high school students. They won’t address everything going on today, nor are they supposed to. But I do hope this pertinent background information will help families as they pray for the Middle East!
On May 14, 1948, members of the Jewish People’s Council met in the city of Tel Aviv to declare Israel a “state.” Serious problems have existed in the Middle East ever since! Before delving into the formation of Israel in 1948, or the conflicts surrounding it, I need to define three terms and review some important Bible and political history.
First, I need to define “Palestine.” Palestine is one of many names given to the original land of Canaan, also called the Holy Land. According to some traditions, Palestine is derived from the ancient Roman province, Syria Palaestina. But according to Herodotus, an ancient historian, the name Palestine is a derivative of Philistine. You probably know the Philistines — they were one of several groups that occupied and fought for the land of Canaan in Bible times. To the Hebrew descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, Canaan was the “Promised Land.” As you may know, the Promised Land was conquered by the ancient Israelites after the Exodus, settled by the 12 tribes of Israel (the sons of Jacob), and so named “Israel.” After the reigns of Saul, David, and Solomon, Israel was divided into two kingdoms. The Northern Kingdom kept the name Israel. The Southern Kingdom went by Judah (Endnote 1) named for the tribes of Judah and Benjamin.
According to the Bible, the Lord allowed the Israelites of the Northern Kingdom to be conquered and deported to Assyria because of their numerous sins. (See 2 Kings 18:11–12.) That deportation occurred in 721 B.C. As a result of it, Israel went “off the map,” so to speak. “Jews” continued to live in Judah, the Southern Kingdom, until taken captive to Babylon in 605 B.C. by Nebuchadnezzar, one of the most famous kings of Babylonia. We call the fall of Judah to Nebuchadnezzar the Babylonian Captivity. That may sound familiar. The Babylonian Captivity lasted 70 years, as was prophesied in Scripture by Jeremiah. (See Jer. 25:8–11 and 2 Chron. 36:21.)
What I want you to know is that Palestine was the name most commonly used for the Holy Land after the Babylonian Captivity. (Though under much debate, you will see that most atlases use the term “Palestine” for the Holy Land after the Babylonian Captivity.) Following the Babylonian Captivity, the Persians conquered the Babylonians and then they ruled over Palestine. As an example of Persian rule, you may remember from Bible stories that Nehemiah had to get permission from the king of Persia to rebuild the walls in Jerusalem. In summary, when the Jewish exiles returned “home” from Babylon, they returned to Judah as a “district of Palestine” under Persian rule. Where was Israel? It was off the map. Where was Judah? It was a district of Palestine.
Now, the powers ruling over Palestine changed hands several times after the return of the Jewish exiles, meaning that in and of itself, Palestine was not an established nation. (By this, I mean that Palestine did not have its own government, its own ruler, its own currency, its own language, and so on.) To fully grasp the disarray of Palestine, let’s examine closely who possessed it after the Persians.
Alexander the Great of Macedonia conquered the Persians and took Palestine in 332 B.C. He kept “friendly” relations with the Jews and was not oppressive toward them. His successors were not so kind! For example, Antiochus Epiphanes, of the later Seleucid dynasty, defiled the Jewish Temple by sacrificing a pig on the altar.
In the Maccabean Revolt, the Jewish Hasmoneans gained control over the Seleucids, and Jews ruled Palestine from 140 B.C. to 37 B.C., more than 100 years. (The miracle of Hanukkah took place during the Maccabean Revolt.)
The Romans, who were great in size and power, gained control of Palestine prior to the birth of Christ and held on to it through Christ’s death and resurrection. The Romans allowed the Jews to practice Judaism but were otherwise oppressive. Jews rebelled against the Romans in the First Jewish Revolt. They lost that revolt, and the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in A.D. 70. At this pivotal time in history, most Jews fled Palestine to all parts of the world in what has been called the Diaspora.
Among the Jews who stayed behind in Palestine, a man named Bar-Kokhba arose as the leader of the Second Jewish Revolt. Bar-Kokhba and his loyal army of Jewish soldiers conquered the Romans in the second century and for a brief time established a Jewish state in Palestine. (See Volume II of this series.) However, the Romans killed Bar-Kokhba in battle and Palestine fell back under Roman rule.
In A.D. 313, Roman Emperor Constantine I declared the Roman Empire “Christian.” Palestine was part of the Roman Empire and considered Christian, too. After the fall of the Western Roman Empire, the Byzantine Empire (the Eastern Roman Empire) oversaw Palestine. The Byzantine Empire was “Eastern Orthodox,” and so Palestine was considered Eastern Orthodox, too.
Palestine remained a Christian empire until 638 when Muslim Arabs invaded. They held Palestine off and on for 1,300 years — battling “Christian” crusaders throughout the Middle Ages to maintain their presence in the Holy Land.
The Ottoman Turks, another Muslim group, conquered the Holy Land in 1517. The Ottoman Turks governed Palestine for about 400 years, until the end of World War I. Though thousands of Jews still lived in Palestine during this era, only Muslims were permitted to hold land.
After the Ottoman Empire collapsed at the close of World War I, Great Britain acquired Palestine in 1922 under the League of Nations. We call this acquisition of Palestine the British Mandate of Palestine. I realize that all of this is a lot of information! But it brings us up to the date of our lesson (1948), at which time we find “Palestine” under British rule.
With that in mind, my second term to define is “Palestinian.” Now, you might naturally assume that Palestinians are the people of Palestine, but since Palestine was not an “established nation” through all the history I just listed, the naming of its people is tricky. For centuries, a clear identity for the Palestinians was lost due to the changing hands of leadership over Palestine and the diverse blend of cultures living there.
Let’s pick up the definition of a Palestinian with the period of time during which Palestine was under the British Mandate. At that time, the term “Palestinian” was commonly used as an adjective. Thus, Jews in Palestine were called “Palestinian Jews,” Arabs in Palestine were called“Palestinian Arabs,” and Christians in Palestine were called“Palestinian Christians.”
This terminology would change, however, in 1948 when Israel declared its statehood, which is what our lesson is all about! Palestinian Jews, upon making their own state, would begin to call themselves “Israelis.” Palestinian Arabs would by and large identify themselves as “Palestinians”; they continue to use that name today. (Endnote 2) Palestinian Christians would keep the name“Palestinian Christians,” but we don’t hear that term very often since they make up only 4 percent of Israel’s population. Let’s move on.
Our third and final term to define is “Zionism.” Zionism comes from the word “Zion,” which is a hill in southeast Jerusalem and a biblical nickname for the holy city. By a broad definition, Zionism was a political movement (also called the Zionist movement) aimed at returning Jews to their ancient homeland. It originated in Russia, where Jews were oppressed for decades under Vladimir Lenin and Jospeh Stalin. But it was Theodor Herzl of Austria-Hungary who made Zionism a popular term in the nineteenth century. He wrote a book in 1896 proposing that the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine would ease the tension of anti-Semitism found all over the world. [Endnote 3] (Anti-Semitism is hostility toward Jews.) Herzl was writing about the need for a Jewish homeland before the Holocaust of World War II. He had no idea how anti-Semitism was going to worsen under Adolf Hitler! Ironically, one of the larger headquarters of the Zionist movement was located in Berlin, Germany. Obviously, it was there before Hitler!
With those terms and some Bible history behind us, let’s look more closely at the Zionist movement, which promoted the formation of Israel as a state. The Zionist movement, which had a large base in London, started slowly after World War I. In 1917, Arthur Balfour (the foreign secretary of Great Britain) wrote in a short letter called the Balfour Declaration that the British supported the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine. (The featured image of this post is Arthur Balfour and his declaration.) There was one condition, though. The British would support Israel only if nothing would hurt the people already living there (referring primarily to the Palestinian Arabs).
In exact words, the Balfour Declaration said that a Jewish state should not “prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine.” (Endnote 4) This meant that the rights of 400,000 to 500,000 Palestinian Arabs living in Palestine at that time were clearly acknowledged. As a matter of fact, in support of Palestinian Arabs, the British appointed a “Grand Mufti of Jerusalem.” This position, originally created by the Ottoman Turks, allowed a Sunni Muslim cleric to oversee Islamic holy places in Jerusalem.
With protection for Palestinian Arabs specified, and a Grand Mufti in place over Jerusalem, Winston Churchill lifted a ban in 1922 (before World War II) that had previously stopped Jews from immigrating to Palestine. With the ban lifted, at least 100,000 Jews made their way to Palestine. There appeared to be room for Jews and Arabs alike across the land (which then included much of Jordan). In fact, within a decade after the ban was lifted, the Nazis encouraged Jews to immigrate to Palestine. Yes, years before the ghettos and the death camps of the Holocaust, the Nazis supported a migration of German Jews to Palestine.
As you likely know, though, the persecution of Jews in Nazi-occupied Europe grew exponentially during the Holocaust. As more Jews fled for their lives, literally, their numbers dramatically increased in Palestine. In fact, by 1939, there were 500,000 Jews living in Palestine. (Endnote 5) Because of this rapid growth, Great Britain reconsidered its position on immigration and shut it down. Turning against the Jews, the British changed their open-immigration policy and made it nearly impossible for Jews to enter Palestine. So strict were the new immigration laws that ships en route to Palestine, with hundreds of Jewish immigrants aboard, were left stranded in harbors with nowhere to go. (Endnote 6)
The situation in Palestine was problematic, and tension naturally flared up between Palestinian Arabs (under the guidance of the Grand Mufti), Palestinian Jews (who had no single leader of their own), the British (who led from afar under the British Mandate), and Zionists (growing in numbers all over the world). Hurting the Zionist cause was the fact that Zionists were divided into“secular” Jews and“religious” Jews, with each group holding different values. Let me elaborate on that.
Secular Jews were interested in establishing a national home for Israel that was not necessarily religious. They were not looking to resurrect the ancient theocracy of Israel. They were looking to create a secular political state in the form of a democracy that would protect the Jewish people from persecution. They certainly had seen enough persecution from the Holocaust of World War II! In fact, one of their leaders, Menachem Begin (Meh KNOCK’HM BAYgeen), had spent time in a prison camp in the Arctic Circle after seeing his family shot by the Nazis and his hometown in Russia destroyed. (Endnote 7) Because of his painful experiences, and those of other Holocaust victims, he wanted the Zionist movement to be militant in nature with a strong army.
On the other end of the spectrum, religious Jews did not want Zionists to be militant at all. They wanted to see the hand of God alone in restoring Israel through the coming of the long-awaited Messiah. Blurring the matter, religious Jews debated among themselves over the boundaries of the Promised Land. Would a modern state of Israel be based on King David’s kingdom, King Solomon’s territories, or the lands of the divided kingdoms? These were serious questions with life-or-death answers for those who would battle over the frontier.
Now, even though the Zionist movement was divided by values, it was persistent in putting pressure on Great Britain for political freedom. As a result of all the tension, Great Britain offered to create two states in Palestine — giving about 80 percent to the Arabs and 20 percent to the Jews. The Arabs refused the offer. Seeing no solution in sight, Great Britain abandoned its interest in keeping Palestine under the British Mandate. In 1947, the British voted to turn Palestine and all its problems over to the United Nations. Now, something very important to know is this: In 1947, after studying the situation in Palestine, a special committee of the United Nations also proposed that Palestine be divided into two states — one Arab and one Jewish — with the city of Jerusalem remaining neutral.
To many people, the two-state plan proposed by the United Nations was a feasible way to meet the needs of everyone in Palestine. Others warned against it, saying, “. . . a Jewish state in Palestine will mean a permanent danger to a lasting peace in the Near East.” (Endnote 8) For the second time, Palestinian Arabs (growing in their own sense of nationalism) violently rejected the idea of two states in Palestine! For economic, political, and spiritual reasons, they did not (and do not) want the state of Israel to exist. Though Israel was founded as a secular democracy, Arabs claim the Zionist state is completely religious in nature and has no place in the Islamic Middle East.
Compounding the struggle is a dispute over possession of the Temple site, also called the Temple Mount. As you may know, religious Jews consider Jerusalem a sacred city because it is home to the former Jewish Temple and is the place where they await the Messiah. (See 2 Chron. 7:16–18.) Though not mentioned once in the Koran, Jerusalem is also considered a holy city by Muslims. They claim that Mohammed ascended to heaven from the site of the Temple. Memorializing that claim, an Islamic shrine called the Dome of the Rock stands at the Temple Mount today.
Getting back to our story line: On the same day that Great Britain officially dissolved the British Mandate over Palestine, Zionist leader David Ben-Gurion declared Israel a secular state in Palestine. That day was May 14, 1948, as mentioned at the very beginning of this lesson. The declaration stated:
“By virtue of our national and intrinsic right, and on the strength of the resolution of the United Nations General Assembly, we hereby declare the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine, which shall be known as the State of Israel.” (Endnote 9)
In this declaration, the borders of Israel were left vague and Jews freely migrated back to their ancient homeland.
In reaction, Arab armies from Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq attacked the newly formed state of Israel one day after Ben-Gurion’s declaration of statehood! Called the First Arab- Israeli War, it saw Arab nations join ranks under the leadership of King Abdullah I of Jordan. In this war, which spanned May 15, 1948, to March 10, 1949, Arabs seized control of the Gaza Strip (a small strip of land on the coast of the Mediterranean Sea) and the Old City of Jerusalem, which was home to the Temple Mount. Needless to say, religious Jews were especially brokenhearted to lose access to the site of the former Temple. (As of this writing, Palestinian Arabs still have control over the Temple Mount and restrict Jews from this site except to allow prayers and pilgrimages to the Western Wall, the last remaining wall of Herod’s Temple built in 19 B.C.) Despite some losses in the First Arab-Israeli War, Israel maintained its statehood. A parliamentary democracy was put in place to unite Israelis, with Chaim Weizmann serving as the first president of Israel. To further unite Jewish immigrants, who came from all corners of the globe, the ancient language of Hebrew was resurrected to become the national language of Israel.
With Israel holding fast to its statehood, two problems continued to develop in the Middle East — borders and refugees. As mentioned previously, the borders of Israel were vague when Israel first declared its statehood, and the situation has not greatly improved. And as Israel grew quickly in population, industry, and agriculture, approximately 400,000 to 500,000 Palestinian Arabs were displaced. (According to the United Nations General Assembly, in 2013 that number grew to five million, who lived in 59 designated refugee camps in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip.) [Endnote 10] Israel made efforts to compensate the refugees and offered citizenship in Israel. These offers were rejected. The Arab states surrounding Israel chose then and now not to absorb the majority of these refugees into their own borders.
Some would say these refugees have been “used” by the Arab world to draw world sympathy and bolster the Arab agenda to eliminate the state of Israel. In the words of Joseph Farah, an Arab American and founder of the news website WorldNetDaily, “The suffering of millions of Arabs [Palestinians] is perpetuated only for political purposes by the Arab states. They are merely pawns in the war to destroy Israel.” [Endnote 11] (Word is in brackets in the source.) By and large, Palestinian Arabs disagree and continue to fight against the “occupation” of their land.
As a matter of fact, three major places on the map are in dispute today. The West Bank (lands west of the Jordan River) and the Gaza Strip (mentioned earlier) are presently under Palestinian authority and called by some “Palestinian territories.” Israel prefers to call them “disputed territories.” The news media often describe these regions as “occupied territories” of Israel. Golan Heights (a rocky plateau overlooking southern Syria) is occupied and governed by Israel, but “claimed” by Syria.
Whatever you call these territories, they make the headlines today with car bombings, shootings, and other acts of violence between Israelis and Palestinians. The Gaza Strip sees some of the worst violence because it is governed by Hamas, a Palestinian Islamic political party affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood. Now, just so you know, Hamas is defined by the United States and many other nations as a terrorist group because of its violent tactics. The United Nations, as well as Russia, Turkey, and other Arab nations, does not define Hamas as a terrorist group. As a result, world powers disagree on what’s going on inside Israel and how to respond to it.
Furthermore, there are problems at the northern border of Palestine. Violence flares up on a regular basis along Israel’s border with Lebanon. Guarding this border is a Shiite Muslim organization called Hezbollah (HEZZ bow lah), which seeks the destruction of Israel. I do mean that literally. Hezbollah joins Hamas and several nations in the Middle East in wanting to eliminate Israel altogether. In the words of the late Yasser Arafat (a former Palestinian leader with mixed views toward Israel) in 1996:
“Peace for us means the destruction of Israel. We are preparing for an all-out war which will last for generations. . . . We shall not rest until the day when we return to our home, and until we destroy Israel.” (Endnote 12)
More than 60 years have passed since Israel declared its statehood. Many a politician has tried to solve the issues that were created and many a politician has failed. Though peace is desirable, many believe the problems of the Middle East are as spiritual in nature as they are political, and therefore they cannot be solved apart from the hand of the Lord. Some Christians (most of those holding to “Dispensationalism”) believe that Israel will be restored both spiritually and physically in the end times; other Christians (those holding to “Replacement Theology”) disagree and believe the church has replaced Israel regarding the plan, purpose, and promises of God. It’s a thought-provoking subject that you may want to study further under the guidance of the spiritual authorities in your life.
When studying and considering the Middle East situation, I have personally found great comfort in a conversation recorded in Acts 1:6–7. Consider this: After Christ rose from the dead and spent 40 days among his followers, the disciples asked Jesus, “Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” The Lord heard their concerns and His reply was,“It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has put in His own authority.”
After this, Jesus then gave the disciples a mission that they could know and that applies to all His followers. He said, “But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.” (Acts 1:8) My Christian friends, according to these verses, God’s plan for Israel, past, present, or future, is ultimately under His authority. What He wants of us now is to be witnesses for Him and to wait for His return!
For more understanding of the Middle East, don’t miss my next two posts:
Endnotes:
In 1493, when he was just a boy, Bartolomé de Las Casas really did attend a parade in Spain. And he really did see Indians who were put on display like spoils from a victory. Bartolome would grow up and eventually become known as the “Protector of the Indies” for fighting for the indigenous people of the Americas. The word indigenous means “natural.” It refers to the native people of the New World. We might also use the words natives or Indians when speaking of the indigenous people of America. And Bartolomé de Las Casas cared a great deal for them.
Bartolomé grew up in Spain, and was only 18 when he made his first trip to America. He traveled to Hispaniola in the West Indies. For his services, Bartolomé was granted an encomienda (en co mee IN duh). You may not know what that is, but it’s important that you understand. So let me explain.
As the Spanish settled in the Americas, they patterned things after the ways of life in Spain. Spain in the fifteenth century was still under the influence of the old feudal system, similar to that from the Middle Ages. It’s a system in which wealthy landowners lend portions of their land to the poor in exchange for their services. This system provided places for the poor to live and farm. It was a decent system when practiced fairly. Well, in the West Indies, the Spanish took the same idea and applied it to the Indians. They renamed it the encomienda system. As wealthy Spaniards came to the West Indies and took large portions of land, they “hired” the Indians who lived on the land to work for them. The landowners, or Encomenderos (en co men DARE ohs) provided protection and Christian training for work. Unfortunately, the Indians didn’t get much choice and were usually overworked and poorly taught. It was practically slavery. Now, let’s go back to Bartolomé de Las Casas.
As I mentioned before, Bartolomé was given an encomienda. But he wasn’t like most wealthy Spanish landowners. He saw the Indians as people, and he didn’t want to own them as slaves! He would spend the rest of his life trying to change this system. In 1511, he listened to the preaching of a Dominican priest who based his message on the Bible verse that reads, “I am ‘The voice of one crying in the wilderness: “Make straight the way of the Lord.” ’ ” (See John 1:23.). The Dominican priest thought this voice was like that of the Indians who were crying out for help. Bartolomé was moved in his heart and returned his encomienda to the governor!
A year later, in 1512, Bartolomé de Las Casas was ordained a priest in the Roman Church. He was the first to be ordained in the Americas. So, in 1515, Bartolomé decided to fight for the Indians. He got the king to allow him to set up an experimental colony with more rights for the natives. Sadly, the other Encomenderos were hostile to this “Better Way”, and it collapsed. Bartolomé was discouraged at this failure, but he didn’t give up his fight. (Tragically, critics will point out that Las Casas wasn’t a perfect defender of freedom throughout his life. Though he later regretted it, Las Casas at one time suggested the enslavement of Africans to reduce the labor of the Indians!)
When he was 36, Bartolomé de Las Casas joined the Dominicans and turned to the power of the pen. He directed his energy into writing books to expose the terrible treatment of the Indians to all who could read. He wrote of natives being butchered and burned alive. He wrote of seeing thousands die from laboring in the gold mines. Bartolomé saw these crimes firsthand. By 1537, Bartolomé would gain the attention of the pope in the matter. The pope agreed with Bartolomé and declared that the Indians were “rational beings” who should be protected. As normal as that might sound to us now, it was a new view back then.
Responding to a request by Bartolomé, King Charles I of Spain agreed to host a debate at the Council of Valladolid in 1550. Though no official verdict was given, many would say Bartolomé won. Finally, Bartolomé experienced some victory! He convinced Charles I to sign what were called the “New Laws.” They prohibited slavery of natives and limited the encomienda system. In particular, the New Laws limited the employment of slaves to one generation. It was progress.
Two years later, Bartolomé de Las Casas was made a bishop in Guatemala. He was joined by 45 Dominican friars in a large-scale mission to evangelize the Indians. He was there also to oversee that the New Laws were followed. Unfortunately, they weren’t! Native Americans were still being treated cruelly. So many colonists broke the New Laws that they were impossible to enforce. Sadly, the encomienda system stayed in place. But Bartolomé kept writing. (He was amazingly persistent!)
Bartolomé de Las Casas continued to speak at councils and give his voice to the American Indians until he died in 1566. He was 82 years old. Do you think the long fight of Bartolomé de Las Casas matters today? I’d say so. I’m glad that Bartolomé de Las Casas had the courage to address the difficult issues of the fifteenth century, which continue to linger in parts of the world today. His story is inspiring!
Younger Students—The Good Samaritan
Read the story of the Good Samaritan found in Luke 10:25–37. Act it out with multiple cast members if possible. How was Bartolomé like the Good Samaritan? How can you be like the Good Samaritan?
Middle Students—Feudal System
Research the feudal system. Write a research paper on the various ways it was implemented throughout history. Mention when it worked and when it didn’t. At the end of the paper, give your thoughts on this system.
Older Students—Original Works
Read Las Casas’ work titled Brevísima Relación de la Destrucción de Las Indias, or A Brief Account of the Destruction of the Indies. Discuss what lessons you’ve learned about the value of all people.
]]>About 600 years before Christ, there was a people group called the Celts. The Celts were artistic and brave, but never had their own written language, so not much is known of their early history. We do know that some settled in what is now modern-day England. About 550 years later, the Romans invaded England under the famous Julius Caesar.
The Romans ruled over England for about 30 years, living mostly in peace among the Celts. They built roads, bathhouses, and homes with central heating and glass windows. In some ways, the Romans guarded the Celts and helped them flourish. However, the Roman Empire began to collapse in the late 400s. As Romans fled the country, the Celts had no protection from hostile tribes wishing to invade. The primary tribes included the Angles, the Saxons, and the Jutes. (Many English speakers are descendants of the invading Angels and Saxons, and thus called “Anglo-Saxons.”)
This finally brings us to King Arthur. Most historians believe he was a Celtic king or war chief who lived in England just about the time that the Romans left. He soon became a legend for his heroism against numerous invaders like the Angles, the Saxons, and the Jutes. So, what exactly are the great tales surrounding King Arthur? I will share a few.
First, according to legend, Arthur’s destiny was revealed in a most unusual way. In one version of the story, news circulated that no one could remove a certain sword entrapped in stone except the future king of England. Many men failed to remove the sword, until 15-year-old Arthur passed it by. He was fetching a sword for his older brother, who was a knight participating in a tournament. But rather than run all the way home, Arthur decided to save a trip and grab the one he saw. To everyone’s surprise, the sword gave way in his hands! Arthur was quickly surrounded by townspeople and declared king. “Long live the king!” the crowd chanted. So, by reputation, Arthur became the greatest, most noble king that England ever had!
Another tale involves the mysterious Lady of the Lake, whose jeweled arm allegedly rose out of a crystal lake to give Arthur a sword of great craftsmanship. This was the famous sword Excalibur, which means “cut steel.” In The Story of King Arthur and His Knights by Howard Pyle, Arthur said to himself: “Now, as God hath seen fit for to intrust that sword into my keeping in so marvelous a manner as fell about, so must He mean that I am to be His servant for to do unusual things.”1
In becoming a king and the bearer of Excalibur, Arthur had much to learn. Most of his wisdom he attributed to Merlin, his childhood teacher. Merlin is traditionally portrayed as a magician. Merlin supposedly guided Arthur through his years as king. One tale involving Merlin included over 100 knights—and a large Round Table. What was the wisdom behind a round table? Well, it kept the knights from arguing over who would be seated in the best places!
So, what do kings and knights do to keep a kingdom? Mainly, they fight to protect it. According to folklore, knights also fought dragons! These dragon tales of old may be true if small species of dinosaurs still roamed nearby. (Some dinosaurs may not yet have become extinct.) Others suggest that dragons were symbolic of the Celts number one enemy—the Saxons.
Arthur supposedly fought 12 battles against the Saxons, the last one being the Battle of Mount Badon in 503. It is from these victories that we find some evidence to suggest that there was a true hero named Arthur—the Dux Bellorum, which means “Lord of the Battle.” Many believe that this Arthur, though never a king, was inspiration for today’s main character. (I wish we knew more because one writer claims that Arthur single-handedly fought 900 enemies at once!)
Legend or otherwise, Arthur is a truly impactful character. As time goes by, it’s as if Arthur is recreated and stories of him retold to fit the timeless need we have for a hero. Who knows for sure the reality of the tales of Merlin, dragons, or the Round Table? But when you put them all together, they help answer the question, “Was there really a King Arthur?”
Younger Students—Knights!
Most think that Arthur and his knights wore full plate armor, but that did not become popular until the early 1400s. Instead, Arthur and his knights had chain mail, swords, shields, helmets, tunics, leather, furs, and whatever else they could find.
Middle Students—Arthurian Legend
The vast collection of ancient Literature of King Arthur is commonly referred to as Arthurian legend. Read modern translations of Arthurian legend and poetry! Here are a few favorites:
Older Students—Artognou Stone
Fans of King Arthur are hopeful that archaeologists will find more concrete evidence to verify the ancient legends of Arthur. In 1998, a sixth-century stone named the Artognou Stone was discovered that may help!
References
1. Howard Pyle, The Story of King Arthur and His Knights (1903; New York: Barnes & Noble, 2016), 105.
]]>