tmoswole
tmoswole:

centuriespast:

Nelson and the Bear
by Richard Westall
In 1773 Horatio Nelson served as a midshipman in the ‘Carcass’, which sailed under Captain Constantine Phipps on a Polar expedition to try to find a north-east passage to the Pacific. These two strongly built bomb-vessels were both obliged to return when they found their way impenetrably barred by ice to the north of Spitsbergen. During the attempt, Nelson set off with a friend to stalk a polar bear. His musket misfired and he attacked the bear with the butt-end until saved from harm by a rift in the ice, which separated him from the animal. A gun was fired from the ship to scare the bear off and Nelson justified his action to a furious Captain Lutwidge by stating that he wished to kill the bear to take its skin home to his father.
Date painted: c.1806
Oil on oak panel, 36.8 x 55.8 cm
Collection: National Maritime Museum

Evidently Horatio Nelson was a total badass. Stories like this are why I love history. What would have been funny is if Nelson was killed by the polar bear while he was on a ship called “Carcass”. 

History is downright funny

tmoswole:

centuriespast:

Nelson and the Bear

by Richard Westall

In 1773 Horatio Nelson served as a midshipman in the ‘Carcass’, which sailed under Captain Constantine Phipps on a Polar expedition to try to find a north-east passage to the Pacific. These two strongly built bomb-vessels were both obliged to return when they found their way impenetrably barred by ice to the north of Spitsbergen. During the attempt, Nelson set off with a friend to stalk a polar bear. His musket misfired and he attacked the bear with the butt-end until saved from harm by a rift in the ice, which separated him from the animal. A gun was fired from the ship to scare the bear off and Nelson justified his action to a furious Captain Lutwidge by stating that he wished to kill the bear to take its skin home to his father.

Date painted: c.1806

Oil on oak panel, 36.8 x 55.8 cm

Collection: National Maritime Museum

Evidently Horatio Nelson was a total badass. Stories like this are why I love history. What would have been funny is if Nelson was killed by the polar bear while he was on a ship called “Carcass”. 

History is downright funny

In a continuation of my post from August 14, 2014 and almost 6 years to the day that World War I started (according to most sources if you don’t consider the Japanese invasion of Manchuria, China and Korea), on this day in history September 2, 1945: at 9:05am Japanese time, the Japanese representatives sign the Instrument of Surrender aboard the U.S.S. Missouri which is docked in Tokyo Bay. The signing of the Instrument of Surrender officially brought the war against Japan to an end.

The National Archives and Records Administration website for the Japan Surrenders portion of the Featured Documents exhibit describes the event as follows:

On September 2, 1945, the Japanese representatives signed the official Instrument of Surrender, prepared by the War Department and approved by President Truman. It set out in eight short paragraphs the complete capitulation of Japan. The opening words, “We, acting by command of and in behalf of the Emperor of Japan,” signified the importance attached to the Emperor’s role by the Americans who drafted the document. The short second paragraph went straight to the heart of the matter: “We hereby proclaim the unconditional surrender to the Allied Powers of the Japanese Imperial General Headquarters and of all Japanese armed forces and all armed forces under Japanese control wherever situated.”

That morning, on the deck of the U.S.S. Missouri in Tokyo Bay, the Japanese envoys Foreign Minister Mamoru Shigemitsu and Gen. Yoshijiro Umezu signed their names on the Instrument of Surrender. The time was recorded as 4 minutes past 9 o’clock. Afterward, Gen. Douglas MacArthur, Commander in the Southwest Pacific and Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers, also signed. He accepted the Japanese surrender “for the United States, Republic of China, United Kingdom, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and in the interests of the other United Nations at war with Japan.”

On September 6, Col. Bernard Thielen brought the surrender document and a second imperial rescript back to Washington, DC. The following day, Thielen presented the documents to President Truman in a formal White House ceremony. The documents were then exhibited at the National Archives after a dignified ceremony led by General Wainwright. Finally, on October 1, 1945, they were formally received (accessioned) into the holdings of the National Archives.

The Instrument of Surrender was signed by the following officials:

  • MAMORU SHIGMITSU By Command and in behalf of the Emperor of Japan and the Japanese Government
  • GENERAL YOSHIJIRO UMEZU By Command and in behalf of the Japanese Imperial General Headquarters
  • GENERAL DOUGLAS MAC ARTHUR, Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers
  • ADMIRAL CHESTER W. NIMITZ, United States Representative
  • GENERAL HSU YUNG-CH’ANG, Republic of China Representative
  • ADMIRAL SIR BRUCE FRASER, United Kingdom Representative
  • LIEUTENANT GENERAL KUZMA DEREVYANKO, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics Representative
  • GENERAL SIR THOMAS BLAMEY, Commonwealth of Australia Representative
  • COLONEL LAWRENCE MOORE COSGRAVE, Dominion of Canada Representative
  • GENERAL JACQUES LE CLERC, Provisional Government of the French Republic Representative
  • ADMIRAL C.E.L. HELFRICH, Kingdom of the Netherlands Representative
  • AIR VICE-MARSHAL LEONARD M. ISITT, Dominion of New Zealand Representative

For Further Reading:

Large Bather by Pierre-Auguste Renoir, French, 1841 - 1919. Located at the Philadelphia Museum of Art
Geography:
Made in France, Europe
Date:
1905
Medium:
Oil on canvas
Dimensions:
38 1/4 x 28 3/4 inches (97.1 x 73 cm)
Curatorial Department:
European Painting
Object Location:
* Gallery 162, European Art 1850-1900, first floor (Vogt Gallery)
Accession Number:
1978-9-1
Credit Line:
Gift of Mr. and Mrs. Rodolphe Meyer de Schauensee, 1978

Large Bather by Pierre-Auguste Renoir, French, 1841 - 1919. Located at the Philadelphia Museum of Art

Geography:

Made in France, Europe

Date:

1905

Medium:

Oil on canvas

Dimensions:

38 1/4 x 28 3/4 inches (97.1 x 73 cm)

Curatorial Department:

European Painting

Object Location:

* Gallery 162, European Art 1850-1900, first floor (Vogt Gallery)

Accession Number:

1978-9-1

Credit Line:

Gift of Mr. and Mrs. Rodolphe Meyer de Schauensee, 1978

The Large Bathers by Pierre-Auguste Renoir, French, 1841 - 1919. Located at the Philadelphia Museum of Art
Geography: Made in France, Europe
Date: 1884-87
Medium: Oil on canvas
Dimensions: 46 3/8 x 67 1/4 inches (117.8 x 170.8 cm)
Curatorial Department: European Painting
Object Location: * Gallery 162, European Art 1850-1900, first floor (Vogt Gallery)
Accession Number: 1963-116-13
Credit Line: The Mr. and Mrs. Carroll S. Tyson, Jr., Collection, 1963

The Large Bathers by Pierre-Auguste Renoir, French, 1841 - 1919. Located at the Philadelphia Museum of Art

Geography:
Made in France, Europe

Date:
1884-87

Medium:
Oil on canvas

Dimensions:
46 3/8 x 67 1/4 inches (117.8 x 170.8 cm)

Curatorial Department:
European Painting

Object Location:
* Gallery 162, European Art 1850-1900, first floor (Vogt Gallery)

Accession Number:
1963-116-13

Credit Line:
The Mr. and Mrs. Carroll S. Tyson, Jr., Collection, 1963

I recently came across the ad at the top from the New York Times September 2, 1962 while researching the following post Masanori Murakami becomes the first Japanese player in MLB September 1, 1964 for my baseballsisco page. So in conjunction with my siscovanillaatthemovies page, I present Wolfschmidt Vodka Ad from The New York Times September 2, 1964

Enjoy the four 1960’s ads where the bottle of Wolfschmidt sounds like Don Draper of Mad Men fame. What a cad.

tetw

tetw:

image

On Keeping a Notebook by Joan Didion - A great essay about making notes that gets to the very core of the writing process

Write Like a Motherfucker by Cheryl Strayed - Raw, emotional advice on the role of humility and surrender in the often tortured world of the writer

Thoughts on Writing by Elizabeth Gilbert  - On disicpline, hard work, rejection and why it’s never too late to start

Write Till You Drop by Annie Dillard - “Do you think I could be a writer?” “I don’t know… . Do you like sentences?”

Why I Write by George Orwell - On egoism, a love of beauty, the quest for truth and the desire to change the world — Orwell’s ‘four great motive for writing’.

Despite Tough Guys, Life Is Not the Only School for Real Novelists by Kurt Vonnegut - A beautifully argued defence of the role of teaching in developing writers.

That Crafty Feeling by Zadie Smith - A lecture by a great essayist and novelist on the craft of writing.

A Place You All Know Well by Michael Chabon - On the central role of exporation in writing.

The Nature of Fun by David Foster Wallace (excerpt) - DFW on what drives writers to write

Uncanny the Singing That Comes from Certain Husks by Joy Williams - “Who cares if the writer is not whole? Of course the writer is not whole, or even particularly well…”

Write, write, write until your fingers all off. Then dictate if you need to. Never stop writing.

From the website:

The Ludlow Massacre was one of deadliest attacks on striking workers in U.S. history. Profile by By Howard Zinn with film clip by Deb Ellis and Denis Mueller and song by Woody Guthrie.

Shortly after Woodrow Wilson took office there began in Colorado one of the most bitter and violent struggles between workers and corporate capital in the history of the country.

This was the Colorado coal strike that began in September 1913 and culminated in the “Ludlow Massacre” of April 1914. Eleven thousand miners in southern Colorado … worked for the Colorado Fuel & Iron Corporation, which was owned by the Rockefeller family. Aroused by the murder of one of their organizers, they went on strike against low pay, dangerous conditions, and feudal domination of their lives in towns completely controlled by the mining companies. …

When the strike began, the miners were immediately evicted from their shacks in the mining towns. Aided by the United Mine Workers Union, they set up tents in the nearby hills and carried on the strike, the picketing, from these tent colonies.

The gunmen hired by the Rockefeller interests—the Baldwin-Felts Detective Agency—using Gatling guns and rifles, raided the tent colonies. The death list of miners grew, but they hung on, drove back an armored train in a gun battle, fought to keep out strikebreakers. With the miners resisting, refusing to give in, the mines not able to operate, the Colorado governor (referred to by a Rockefeller mine manager as ‘our little cowboy governor’) called out the National Guard, with the Rockefellers supplying the Guard’s wages.

The miners at first thought the Guard was sent to protect them, and greeted its arrival with flags and cheers. They soon found out the Guard was there to destroy the strike. The Guard brought strikebreakers in under cover of night, not telling them there was a strike. Guardsmen beat miners, arrested them by the hundreds, rode down with their horses parades of women in the streets of Trinidad, the central town in the area. And still the miners refused to give in. When they lasted through the cold winter of 1913-1914, it became clear that extraordinary measures would be needed to break the strike.

In April 1914, two National Guard companies were stationed in the hills overlooking the largest tent colony of strikers, the one at Ludlow, housing a thousand men, women, children. On the morning of April 20, a machine gun attack began on the tents. The miners fired back. Their leader, …, was lured up into the hills to discuss a truce, then shot to death by a company of National Guardsmen. The women and children dug pits beneath the tents to escape the gunfire. At dusk, the Guard moved down from the hills with torches, set fire to the tents, and the families fled into the hills; thirteen people were killed by gunfire.

The following day, a telephone linesman going through the ruins of the Ludlow tent colony lifted an iron cot covering a pit in one of the tents and found the charred, twisted bodies of eleven children and two women. This became known as the Ludlow Massacre.

Click on the link for Ludlow Massacre: April 20, 1914 to read the rest.

On Sept. 1, 1939, World War II began as Nazi Germany invaded Poland. The term Blitzkrieg becomes a household word as Hitler’s “Lightning war” was hurled against the Poles. 

Hitler claimed that Germany was provoked and attacked thereby the Poles brought the invasion on themselves. According to the article German Army Attacks Poland; Cities Bombed, Port Blockaded; Danzig Is Accepted Into Reich from the New York Times dated September 1, 1939, Hitler sent the following proclamation to the German Army:

To the defense forces:

The Polish nation refused my efforts for a peaceful regulation of neighborly relations; instead it has appealed to weapons.

Germans in Poland are persecuted with a bloody terror and are driven from their homes. The series of border violations, which are unbearable to a great power, prove that the Poles no longer are willing to respect the German frontier. In order to put an end to this frantic activity no other means is left to me now than to meet force with force.

"Battle for Honor"

German defense forces will carry on the battle for the honor of the living rights of the re- awakened German people with firm determination.

I expect every German soldier, in view of the great tradition of eternal German soldiery, to do his duty until the end.

Remember always in all situations you are the representatives of National Socialist Greater Germany!

Long live our people and our Reich!

Berlin, Sept. 1, 1939. 

Adolf Hitler

France, Great Britain and Canada respond by declaring war on Nazi Germany on September 3, 1939 ushering the specter of war that the world thought they had exorcised with the end of World War I.

The Soviet Union would invade Poland on September 17, 1939

For Further Reading:

1939: Germany invades Poland from the BBC On This Day 1950-2005 website

I came across the article India, China ignore border dispute for now by Tim Sullivan from the Japan Times dated August 31, 2014. This article talks about how there is a tentative peace along the disputed area of the shared border between China and India. While I knew there were areas where India and Pakistan have fought over since both became independent in 1947, I didn’t quite know that both China and India have had their own border disputes. 

One of the areas where the border is disputed is what’s called the “McMahon Line”. On the top map it is along the Eastern border. The listing for the McMahon Line on the Encyclopaedia Britannica website describes it as follows:

McMahon Line, frontier between Tibet and Assam in British India, negotiated between Tibet and Great Britain at the end of the Shimla Conference (October 1913–July 1914) and named for the chief British negotiator, Sir Henry McMahon. It runs from the eastern border of Bhutan along the crest of the Himalayas until it reaches the great bend in the Brahmaputra River where that river emerges from its Tibetan course into the Assam Valley.

Delegates of the Chinese republican government also attended the Shimla Conference, but they refused to sign the principal agreement on the status and boundaries of Tibet on the ground that Tibet was subordinate to China and had not the power to make treaties. The Chinese have maintained this position to the present day and also have claimed that Chinese territory extends southward to the base of the Himalayan foothills. This frontier controversy with independent India led to the Sino-Indian hostilities of October–November 1962. In that conflict the Chinese forces occupied Indian territory south of the McMahon Line but subsequently withdrew after a cease-fire had been achieved.

Sullivan describes the conflict as such:

At first glance, the Himalayan border that India and China share seems ideal for similar clashes. China says the Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh, an immense territory of nearly 84,000 square kilometers (more than 32,000 square miles), is part of China. India, meanwhile, insists China is illegally occupying the region of Aksai Chin, a rocky and largely empty 37,000-square-kilometer (14,000-square-mile) region far to the east.

If you want to get even more specific about the disputed areas, the op-ed piece Why India and China went to war in 1962 by Zorawar Daulet Singh from the Tribune of India Special INDIA-CHINA WAR 50 YEARS LATER gives an even more in-depth description:

The bone of contention

The border with China runs 3488 km. It can be divided into three sectors:

Western Sector: This includes the border between Jammu and Kashmir and Xinjiang and Tibet. India claims that China is occupying 43,000 sq km in this sector, including 5180 sq km illegally ceded to it by Pakistan.

Central Sector: This includes borders shared by Himachal Pradesh and Uttrakhand with Tibet. Shipki La and Kaurik areas in HP and areas around Pulam, Thag La, Barahori, Kungri Bingri La, Lapthal and Sangha are disputed.

Eastern Sector: China disputes India’s sovereignty over 90,000 sq km, mostly in Arunachal Pradesh. Tawang, Bum La, Asaphi La and Lo La are among the sensitive points in this sector. Strategically vital Tawang holds the key to the defence of the entire sub-Himalayan space in this sector.

Both countries waged war against each other for a brief period in 1962. Now here is why I can say that I’ve never heard of the conflict. Apparently it occurred at the same exact time as the Cuban Missile Crisis was happening. In most of the classes that I have taken, whenever October 1962 comes up in the historical context, the Cuban Missile Crisis has dominated the discussion. 

China and India had armed conflict for one month from October 20-November 21, 1962. From what I am reading (and mind you this is a simplified reason for the conflict), one of the main reasons for conflict between China and India has to do with China’s invasion of Tibet and the Dalai Lama seeking and receiving refuge in India. Obviously there are many other factors that went into the differences between China and India that led to war.

Since I am not a scholar in Sino-Indian relations, Chinese History, Indian History and or Asian History I won’t copy and paste the reasons that I find online here to make myself seem knowledgeable in these areas. Until a few hours ago I didn’t even know the two countries fought. I need to do some more research for myself.

What I will do is post links to articles that I have found and have you click on them and read the information for yourselves. To make your own impressions. I apologize for having more links to Indian sources than Chinese sources but to be honest, I really couldn’t find much from the Chinese point of view. 

For Further Reading: