Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Basicall[y] the 1st Amendment also provides for freedom from religion as well as freedom of....
The Dark ages were dark because the great majority were bond in spiritual darkness.This religion of superstition and fear halted advance in science and technology.
Interesting point in light of the fact that the Church is about the only institution that actually grows and prospers durning the Middle Ages... in power, influence, and wealth. Do agree however agree about the slowing of scientific and Tech. advances that resulted... makes the Ren/Ref and later Enlightenment so much more improtant.Weclome to the forum,Wally
Without rules people wont be civil.
Too true, however, the more civil we are the fewer rules we will rquire, eh?Something J.S. Mill said about my right to swing my arm ending at the other fellow's nose.
Then there were the Moravians led by Count Zizendorf which was a possible offshoot of the Anabaptists....not sure, I'll have to verify that (and I should know this darn it!)
Hi Don,I think your right but Zizendorf comes in later (around 1720); they start with Hus (sort of a pre-Luther) in the late 14th according to my source.Wally
Sorry guys, I think it's less about rules than about civility; several people commented that we shouldn't post anything we wouldn't say to the person face to face… true, that! I know most of us try to do this… some folks just can't resist that chance to slip in the zingger that they can't be slapped for (over the 'net)… sort of an electronic King's X if you will. When the kids make a really snide remark and then say “Just kidding.” we all know they aren't and it is, sadly, the same thing when someone guts another person on a forum and then apologizes like it was just a tease that was misunderstood.Since we can't see faces or body language we need to consider how or posts look in the hard, cold light of a monitor. Glad that the posts here [are] at a high level of civility; kudos on and all. Wally
.... America is a peculiar nation where revivalism is more cyclical than in other nations such as those of Europe. I'm not exactly sure as to why, but perhaps someone could compile a list of societal impulses that lead to revivals.
Check out Generations by Strauss and Howe... that should be just the ticket you are looking for. Terrific insight into the various generations of Americans... Boomers, Silents, Greatest (GI), etc. on back... what make 'em tick, motivations and all. Worth everyone's time, IMHO.Wally
I have never heard of such a group existing prior to the Reformation.
Nor had I Phid; quick check on Wiki (sorry, not very academic sometimes... but a good start, often) indicates late MA had several groups that could be called Anabaptists. Among theose mentioned the Brethern of Common Life, the Waldesians and the Hussites. Too close to supper to dig anymore on this one but a starting point for anyone interested.wally
studying history encourages people to be grateful, espacially American History. All through the long history of the world one cannot deny the amazing hand of God that governs everything that happen in history and just work things out!
Only if they will open their eyes and minds.Welcome to the forum.Cheers,Wally
I admit I never saw the Disney Pocohontas, but....wasn't John Smith banished from Jamestown at some point, only to go away and establish some other town? And did Pocohontas end up marrying the other guy in the end (can't recall his name at the moment)?
Spot on, she married John Rolfe, he of tobacco fame. She was far too young for Smith (she about 11[,] he about 27) and likely only saved him from a mock execution (initiation as a brave friend of the tribe). souce: Unsolved Mysteries of American History by Paul Aron.
Given the regional and religious diversity of the US today, I have my doubts.The first and second GA's were responding to moral issues and social (political) at the same time. Hard to say, just have to wait ans see if anything will ignite the fervor again.
Let me understand something - did North American tribes already possess bow/arrow technology before the first colonists arrived in the various locations of the New World (e.g. early 17th Century)? If so would this be one of the few technologies developed independently of one another on both sides of the Atlantic?
Yes to the first part... here is just one source as I wasn't able to find anything on my bookshelf (too big a mess :o)http://www.texasbeyondhistory.net/graham/arrow.html. As to the second might be or might be an import from the old world by the backdoor... from Asia with the paleo-indians during theri migrations. Either way I'd say pre-Columbian.People in North America also invented the bow and arrow. While the bow and arrow were first invented in Asia in the Early Stone Age, long before people first came to North America, apparently the people who came to North America did not know how to use bows and arrows. They invented the bow and arrow for themselves, independently, about 500 AD. Soon people were using bows and arrows all over North America, and they became very important for hunting and for war. This is from http://www.historyforkids.org/learn/northamerica/before1500/science/index.htm (edit to add this... W)
Interesting is a word that doesn't narrow it down much; I'm interested in several groups for a variety of reasons… the Yahi of California (Ishi was the last of their group)… the tribes of the northwest coast for their potlatch system of wealth redistribution/social networking… the Modoc for their stubborn effort to hold onto their rugged and difficult corner of the world.Generally the Indians in California lived in a pretty good situation and were more likely to retreat from the encroaching settlers than fight... the Modoc (Modoc War 1872-73) and the Yuki, in the Mendocino War of (1859).I like that Canada recognizes the primacy of their native population referring to them as The First Nations, too bad we don't. Too late for that I guess.
... in England the king essentially "owned" all the land ... king then granted land to whomever he wished ... they in turn could grant land to whomever they wished, and so on. I imagine there was some similar charter system in the colonies as well.
Seems logical and was the case at the outset. In time people (in the best American tradition) realized that there were lots of lots, so to speak, and that no one could keep them from just moving beyond the area of control and staking a claim (nothing official, just squat) to all the land they wanted. If the got any flak from the practice they just moved on or more likely fought for the land.
