History Podcasts

Did Man and Mammoth Ever Live in Harmony? Not Quite…

Did Man and Mammoth Ever Live in Harmony? Not Quite…

We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Humans and mammoths coexisted in Europe for about 30,000 years. As a result, it makes sense that humans would have used mammoths and their remains for food and possibly for making clothing and even weapons. It appears, however, that they also used the bones and skin of mammoths to make domiciles. Recent discoveries in Russia demonstrate that Early Modern Humans in the late Paleolithic (and possibly Neanderthals) made these tents.

Hunting Mammoth

In the high arctic and in climates characterized by tundra and glaciers, wood tends to be scarce. As result, bone is often used in place of wood by cultures that live in areas such as the far north of Canada, Greenland, and Siberia. For example, bone harpoons have been found at sites in Ice Age Europe dating to the Magdalenian epoch (20,000-11,000 B.P.) when Europe was mostly tundra and glaciers.

  • Initial Stage Reached on Dream of Cloning Woolly Mammoth
  • The smoking gun 'proving ancient man killed woolly mammoth 45,000 years ago'
  • A Mammoth-Sized Find: Humans Living in the Arctic 10,000 Years Earlier May Push Back Other Important Migration Dates Too

Mammuthus primigenius "Hebior Mammoth specimen" bearing tool/butcher marks. ( CC BY-SA 3.0 )

During this period, Mammoths were present in much of Europe, including Eastern Europe in the Ukraine. Early Modern Humans appear to have been better at hunting mammoths than their Neanderthal forebears - who appear to have hunted mammoths much less often. Mammoths are found at kill sites associated with Homo Sapiens much more often than those associated with Neanderthals. One reason for this might be that Neanderthals did not use range weapons and probably wrestled their prey to the ground with knives and spears whereas humans used more long-ranged weapons. This would have made it easier and less dangerous to hunt a mammoth for Early Modern Humans than for Neanderthals. Semi-domesticated wolf-dogs may have also helped in hunting down and distracting the mammoth while the human hunters went in for the kill.

Mammal display in the Royal BC Museum in Victoria (Canada). ( CC BY-SA 2.0 )

Mammoth Use

Unlike Neanderthals, early modern Homo Sapiens appear to have hunted mammoths so often that they made dwellings out of their bones and skin. In the Ukraine, in the village of Mezhyric in 1965, some farmers came across a prehistoric site dating to 15,000 B.P. which turned out to contain numerous mammoth bones including skulls and tusks. From the arrangements of the bones and tusks, scientists determined that they were probably used as part of the dwelling.

"Mammoth House" as shown at the "Frozon Woolly Mammoth Yuka Exhibit" in Yokoyama, Japan in Summer 2013. ( CC BY-SA 3.0 )

Another site dating to 44,000 B.P. has also recently been found, which also contains mammoth tusks and skulls. It was found in Molodova in the eastern Ukraine and it consisted of 25 hearths surrounded by mammoth bones. The age of the site suggests that it was made by the Neanderthals, though this is not certain. An abundance of mammoth bones is after all something more associated with Homo Sapiens and 44,000 B.P. is within the margin of error for when humans first arrived in Europe. The older site could thus be the earliest evidence of Homo Sapiens in Europe, though we do only have one other instance of humans making mammoth bone tents 30,000 years later.

  • Neanderthals cleared of herding mammoth over cliff edge
  • Could Discovery of Mammoth Blood Lead to Revival of Species?
  • The Peculiar Narrative of the Red Lady of Paviland, A Man from Paleolithic Wales

Why Undertake the Mammoth Task of Tent Building?

One thing that makes mammoth bone tents seem odd is that mammoths were difficult to kill and they probably were not the most common animals, though they were likely not uncommon during the Pleistocene. These two factors make it unlikely that mammoth bone tents were commonly used to make simple temporary shelters, even if they were portable. It is true that the population was much smaller in Europe during the Paleolithic, being not much more than a million across the entire continent, and most likely less. This, however, does not take away from the fact that mammoths were difficult to kill and probably less in number than humans.

Dwelling made from Mammoth Bones (reconstruction). ( CC BY-SA 3.0 )

It is possible, as a result of these factors, that the mammoth bone tents had some sort of special function, for example, they may have been used for ceremonial or religious purposes. They may also have been used to indicate the status of the owners. Hunter-gatherer societies do not usually have inherited status but they do have ascribed status. A man may not be born with high status, but through a life time of impressive feats in battle, hunting, or perhaps as a shaman, he could gain status. There is also evidence from Paleolithic sites of graves being made with special goods such as tools, flowers, or carvings. These special grave goods imply a difference in status for the people buried in such graves.

It is thus likely that there were status differences in Paleolithic societies, though based on ethnographic comparison with modern hunter-gatherers, this status probably had to be earned over the lifetime of an individual rather than being something that a person was born with.

Man buried with ivory bead grave goods in an Upper Paleolithic burial in Sunghir (Sungir), Russia. The site is approximately 28 000 to 30 000 years old.

Based on these findings and possibilities for Paleolithic societies, it is possible that the mammoth bone tents may have belonged either to people of high status such as elite warriors, chieftains, or shamans, or the mammoth bone tents may have been places of great ritual significance such as a site for performing magical or religious rites.

Whatever the nature of the mammoth bone tents, it shows that pre-historic humans were quite intelligent and not the brutish cavemen of popular culture.

Christianity and Racism – Was Jesus a Racist?

Rusty Wright takes a hard look at this question: does Christianity promote racism? He looks at the lives and teachings of Jesus and Paul to see if they taught equality of all races or promoted racism. He finds that it is not the teachings of Christianity that promote racism. A biblical worldview will create a love for all men and a desire to win them to Christ.

Does Christianity Promote Racism?

Thirty years after the heyday of the Civil Rights movement, racial issues in the US remain sensitive. Racial quotas in the workplace and academia continue to be controversial. Prominent corporations are accused of racist practices. Certain supremacy groups promote the Bible, God and the white race. Race and politics interact in ways that carry both national and international significance.

A few years back, the Southern Baptist Convention made headlines for renouncing racism, condemning slavery and apologizing for the church’s intolerant past. That laudable contrition raised a deeper question: Why would Christianity ever be associated with racial oppression in the first place? How did the faith whose founder told people to “love one another” ever become linked with human bondage and social apartheid?

African-American theologian James Cone notes that “In the old slavery days, the Church preached that slavery was a divine decree, and it used the Bible as the basis of its authority.”

“Not only did Christianity fail to offer the … [Black] hope of freedom in the world, but the manner in which Christianity was communicated to him tended to degrade him. The … [Black] was taught that his enslavement was due to the fact that he had been cursed by God. … Parts of the Bible were carefully selected to prove that God had intended that the…[Black] should be the servant of the white man….”

As a white baby boomer growing up in the South, I experienced segregated schools, restrooms, drinking fountains and beaches. My parents taught and modeled equality, so the injustice I saw saddened me deeply. I was appalled that the Ku Klux Klan used the Bible and the cross in its rituals.

During college, a friend brought an African-American student to a church I attended in North Carolina. The next Sunday, the pastor announced that because of “last week’s racial incident” (the attendance of a Black), church leaders had voted to maintain their longstanding policy of racial segregation. Thereafter, any Blacks attending would be handed a note explaining the policy and asking that they not return. I was outraged and left the church. (Postscript: A few years ago I learned that that white church had folded and that an African-American church came to use the same facility. Maybe God has a sense of humor.)

Does Christianity promote racism? Is it mainly a faith for whites? This article will examine these two burning questions.

Was Jesus Racist?

Does the Christian faith promote racism? Is it mainly for whites? Certain extremists think so. Some slavery-era ministers wrote books justifying slavery. George D. Armstrong wrote in The Christian Doctrine of Slavery, “It may be… that Christian slavery is God’s solution of the problem [relation of labor and capital] about which the wisest statesmen of Europe confess themselves at fault.”

Consider another book, Slavery Ordained of God. In it, Fred A. Ross wrote, “Slavery is ordained of God, … to continue for the good of the slave, the good of the master, the good of the whole American family, until another and better destiny may be unfolded.”

Those words seem quite different from the biblical injunction to “love your neighbor as yourself,” a statement with equally poignant historical roots.

In first-century Palestine, the Jews and Samaritans were locked in a blood feud. Divided by geography, religion and race, the two groups spewed venom. Each had its own turf. Jews considered the Samaritans to be racial “half-breeds.” The two groups disputed which followed the Bible better and on whose land proper worship should occur.

The founder of the Christian faith was no racist. He told people to get along. What about a chief expositor of the Christian faith? And why is eleven o-clock Sunday morning often the most segregated hour of the week? Let’s turn now to these important questions.

Was A Chief Expositor of the Faith A Racist?

Does Christianity promote racism? As we have seen, Jesus of Nazareth was no racist. Living in a culturally and racially diverse society that was in many ways analogous to ours, He promoted harmony by His example and His words. What about Paul, one of the chief expositors of faith in Christ?

Paul often had to counsel members of the communities he advised about diversity issues. Some in the groups with which he consulted were Jews, some were non-Jews or “Gentiles.” Some were slaves and some were free. Some were men and some were women. The mix was potentially explosive.

From prison, Paul wrote to a friend whose slave had run away, had met Paul, and had come to faith. Paul appealed to his friend on the basis of their relationship to welcome the slave back not as a slave but as a brother. He offered to repay any loss from his own pocket. The letter survives in the New Testament as the book of “Philemon” and is a touching example of a dedicated believer seeking to internally motivate a slaveholder to change his attitudes and behavior.

Paul felt that the faith he had once persecuted could unify people. He wrote to one group of believers that because of their common spiritual commitment, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one….” Paul, a Jew by birth, wrote to some non-Jewish believers that “Christ himself has made peace between us Jews and you Gentiles by making us all one people. He has broken down the wall of hostility that used to separate us.”

Paul exhorted another group of believers to live in harmony. He wrote, “Since God chose you to be the holy people whom he loves, you must clothe yourselves with tenderhearted mercy, kindness, humility, gentleness, and patience. You must make allowance for each other’s faults and forgive the person who offends you. Remember, the Lord forgave you, so you must forgive others. And the most important piece of clothing you must wear is love. Love is what binds us all together in perfect harmony.”

Paul promoted harmony, not discord. If the founder of the faith and its chief expositor were not racists, why is eleven o’clock Sunday morning often the most segregated hour of the week?

True Followers?

Why is Christianity often associated with racism? The short answer is that some that claim to be followers of Jesus are not really following Him. They may have the label “Christian,” but perhaps they never have established a personal friendship with Christ. They may be like I was for many years: a church member, seemingly devoted, but who had never accepted Christ’s pardon based on His death and resurrection for me. Or they may have genuine faith, but haven’t allowed God into the driver’s seat of their life. I’ve been there, too.

I shall always remember Norton and Bo. Norton was a leader of the Georgia Black Student Movement in the 1970s. Bo was a racially prejudiced white Christian. Once during an Atlanta civil rights demonstration, Bo and some of his cronies beat Norton up. The animosity ran deep.

Norton later discovered that Christianity was not a religion of oppressive rules, but a relationship with God. As his faith sprouted and grew, his anger mellowed while his desire for social justice deepened. Meanwhile, Bo rejected his hypocrisy and began to follow his faith with God in control. Three years after the beating, the two unexpectedly met again at a Christian conference. Initial tension melted into friendship as they forgave each other, reconciled and treated each other like brothers.

Of course not all disobedient Christians are racists. Nor is everyone not aligned with Jesus a racist. But faith in Christ can give enemies motivation to reconcile, to replace hatred with love.

Historical examples abound of true faith opposing racism. John Newton, an 18th-century British slave trader, came to faith, renounced his old ways, became a pastor, and wrote the famous hymn, “Amazing Grace.” Newton encouraged his Christian friend, William Wilberforce, who faced scorn and ridicule in leading a long but successful battle in Parliament to abolish the slave trade.

Does Christianity promote racism? No, true Christianity seeks to eliminate racism by changing people’s hearts.

After I had spoken on this theme in a sociology class at North Carolina State University, a young African-American woman told me, “All my life I’ve been taught that white Christians were responsible for the oppression of my people. Now I realize those oppressors were not really following Christ.”

Is Christianity just for whites? Norton, the Black activist, certainly did not think so. Let’s look further at the faith that crosses racial divides.

The Heart of the Matter

Is Christianity just for whites? Jesus and Paul said anyone who believed would be plugged into God forever. Africa has millions who follow Jesus. Koreans send missionaries to the US. And don’t we need them!

In Cape Town, South Africa, Saint James Church has been a beacon of diversity and social concern with its white, Black, Asian and biracial members. One Sunday evening, radical Black terrorists sprayed the multiracial congregation with automatic gunfire and grenades. Eleven died and 53 were wounded, some horribly maimed. The world press was astounded by the members’ reaction.

Lorenzo Smith, who is biracial, saw his wife, Myrtle, die from shrapnel that pierced her heart as he tried to shield her. Yet he forgave the killers. “I prayed for those that committed the crime,” he told me, “so they, too, can come to meet [the Lord].”

The president of the West African nation of Benin came to the US a few years back with a message for African American leaders: His compatriots were sorry for their ancestors’ complicity in the slave trade. An often-overlooked component of slavery’s historical stain is that Black Africans sold other Black Africans into slavery. When rival tribes made war, the victors took prisoners and made them indentured servants, often selling them to white slave merchants.

Benin’s President Kerekou, who in recent years had made his own commitment to Christ, invited political and church leaders to his nation so his tribal leaders could seek reconciliation with African Americans.

Brian Johnson, an African-American organizer, said the realization that Blacks sold other Blacks into slavery has been difficult for many African Americans to handle. “This made it difficult to hold the White man responsible,” he explained as we spoke. “This creates some problems in our own psyche. We have to deal with another angle to this…. It’s not merely a Black-White thing.”

The problem is in human hearts, Johnson believes. “All have sinned,” he claims, quoting the New Testament. “All of us need to confess our wrong and appeal to [God] for forgiveness.”

1. James Cone, Black Theology and Black Power (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1997), p. 74.

2. E. Franklin Frazier, Black Bourgeoisie (New York: Collier Books, 1965), p.115. Quoted in ibid. Bracketed words are mine.

3. Quoted in Frazier, loc. cit. quoted in Cone loc. cit. Neither emphasis nor bracketed words are mine. Emphasis is likely Frazier’s or Armstrong’s. Bracketed words could be either Frazier’s or Cone’s.

4. Quoted in Frazier, loc. cit. quoted in Cone loc. cit.

6. Merrill F. Unger, Unger’s Bible Dictionary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1957, 1961, 1966), pp. 958-960. See also John 4:1-45.

13. World Christian magazine (February 1989), p. U8.

Related Posts

I was born of Jewish parents, but never confirmed in the Jewish faith. I was baptized at a Billy Graham rally in 1952. I have questioned why writings about Jesus&hellip

Where in the bible can I find that Jesus is 100% man and 100% God? Thanks for your question. If you're looking for an exact quote, then I'm afraid that&hellip

Until now I've been told that Jesus died at the age of 33 years of age. However your Christmas Quiz says 37 to 38 years old. . .? Please help.&hellip

What would you say to a Catholic person who said "the church created the Bible"? In a very real sense, the person who says this is basically correct. But some&hellip

I’m not a Christian but I have a great appreciation for a lot of the messages attributed to Jesus in the writings about him. The idea that Jesus was, in&hellip

Is the United Pentacostal Church a cult, theologically speaking? And if so, why? What do they believe? The doctrine of the UPC is definitely heretical they deny the Trinity in&hellip

Rusty Wright

Rusty Wright, former associate speaker and writer with Probe Ministries, is an international lecturer, award-winning author, and journalist who has spoken on six continents. He holds Bachelor of Science (psychology) and Master of Theology degrees from Duke and Oxford universities, respectively. www.RustyWright.com

What is Probe?

Probe Ministries is a non-profit ministry whose mission is to assist the church in renewing the minds of believers with a Christian worldview and to equip the church to engage the world for Christ. Probe fulfills this mission through our Mind Games conferences for youth and adults, our 3-minute daily radio program, and our extensive Web site at www.probe.org.

Further information about Probe's materials and ministry may be obtained by contacting us at:


Harmony was one of the most successful guitar makers in the USA, manufacturing most all of their guitars in Chicago during the peak years in the mid 1960s. They made many types of stringed instruments, including ukuleles, acoustic and electric guitars, and violins. Founded in 1892 by Wilhelm Schultz a German immigrant from Hamburg. In their day, they made more guitars than all the other guitar makers combined. They made different models, for each style of guitar popular during their history.

Wilhelm Schultz, founder of Harmony on left with factory worker and manager

Wilhelm J.F. Schultz, a mechanic, came to Chicago and got work at the Knapp Drum Company. Knapp was bought out by a large instrument manufacturing giant, Lyon & Healy, and Schultz became foreman of the drum operation. In 1892, Schultz left Lyon & Healy and, with four employees, started Harmony in a loft of the Edison Building located at Washington and Market Streets in Chicago, later the site of the Civic Opera House.

Very little information is known about the earliest Harmony-made guitars. Probably not too many survived, but likely they were small acoustics that used with gut strings, and glued-on bridges. Very likely they would also have had three dots at the fifth, seventh, and 10th frets. Basically, markers at the 10th fret, versus the ninth (found on a few guitars and banjos before the 1880s), was a strategy employed by guitar makers who intended to sell their instruments into the immensely popular mandolin orchestras at the time. Mandolins had position markers at the 10th fret. The guitar of the 1890s was either used primarily for vocal accompaniment or as a continuo instrument in mandolin and banjo orchestras of the time. Harmony and its early main competitor, Oscar Schmidt, of New Jersey, continued to favor use of the 10th fret long after most other major manufacturers settled on the ninth fret (some, like the Larson Brothers, also continued to use 10th-fret markers).

By 1894 there were some 40 employees working at Harmony as Chicago was a hotbed of industrial manufacturing offering opportunity to European immigrants pouring into the country. Chicago was at the transportation crossroads of the nation as transcontinental railroad lines and sitting on the Great Lakes, and just over 100 or so miles from the mighty Mississippi River. Due to location, Chicago became the supplier of goods for the Heartland of America. Chicago was the home of the mail-order merchandise business, which played a major role in the dissemination of the guitars across America and the rise of the guitar makers there.

Montgomery Ward pledged to sell only American-made guitars in their 1894 catalog, which they claimed were of superior manufacture, made “scientifically,” and guaranteed not to warp or split…as long as you didn’t use steel strings! They abandoned the sale of imported guitars because they could not withstand the climatic changes they were subject to in the New World. Likely, these guitars were from German makers.

Ward’s was selling Lyon & Healy-made Washburn guitars and probably some low-end Bohmann guitars that featured birch wood with fake wood grains.

When Sears, Roebuck and Company entered into the picture, they were selling the exact same guitars in their catalog. Since Sears was formally a watch and jewelry company these were the first guitars they marketed for sale. By 1897, Sears was doing business with the fledgling Harmony company offering new guitar models. These were mostly small bodied parlor guitars which were popular at the time.

Seen in the ’97 Sears catalog was early Harmony made guitars like the No. 7102 “Euterpe,” a standard-sized guitar with an orange top (wood unspecified) and a body of quartersawn oak. The top was bound with a light/dark block marquetry purfling, as was the soundhole. The neck material was also unspecified, but often these had cedro or “Spanish cedar” necks, a wood like mahogany. The Euterpe had an 18-fret ebonized fingerboard, and our telltale three dots at five, seven and 10. The pin bridge had little elevated squares on the wings, typical of some Harmony bridges. This cost? $5.75, with money-back guarantee!

The No. 7106 “Troubadour,” at $8.65, was another standard with an orange top, this time made of solid mahogany. Unlike the Euterpe, this had a “convex” or ovaled ebonized fingerboard (5/7/10 dots), and a colored ring rosette. The top was unbound. The bridge was the same as on the Euterpe. For $.30 more you could get the No. 7107 Troubadour, which added white celluloid binding to the top. The Euterpe and Troubadours were offered until 1899.

In 1899, Sears expanded the line of guitars, from Harmony and by Oscar Schmidt of Jersey City, New Jersey. Harmony guitars on the lower end, Schmidt guitars had the upper end. This arrangement was offered for decades.

Chicago’s Montgomery Ward & Co. had begun its catalog sales to Grange farmers in 1872, and by 1890, just two years before Harmony’s advent, had become the world’s largest retailer. Sears, Roebuck & Co., which had begun as a watch business in Minnesota in 1885, became a full merchandise mail-order catalog business in late 1893, offering its first catalog in 1894 and moving to Chicago in 1895. By 1900, Sears had surpassed Ward’s to become the world’s largest store.

In 1914, Sears adapted the name Supertone for its musical instruments (also using this name for record players and records they sold). The instrument offerings and suppliers remained the same, this was Sears’ first big brand name. Almost simultaneous, Sears’ crosstown rival Montgomery Ward introduced its Concertone brand. And this was used on an almost identical series of guitars!

By 1915 Harmony was the first large scale ukulele builder. Sears, Roebuck and Co. purchased Harmony in 1916 to corner the ukulele market. At the time Harmony was led by Joe Kraus, who was chairman until 1940. In 1928, Harmony introduced the first of many Roy Smeck models, and went on to become the largest producer in the U.S. They sold 250,000 pieces in 1923 and 500,000 in 1930, including various models of guitars, banjos, and mandolins.

In the late 1930s, Harmony began making violins again after a 19 year hiatus. They also bought brand names from the bankrupt Oscar Schmidt Co.—La Scala, Stella, and Sovereign.

These instruments were still mostly sold through big mail order catalogs like Sears Roebuck (Silvertone) or Montgomery Ward (Airline) making them easily accessible to everyone. These were the days way before the Internet, eBay and Reverb. Plus before Asian imports were available. Many towns in America did not have a music store nearby. Harmony supplied many of the big mail order catalogs through the years which were the same Harmony-made instruments except for the label in most all cases.

Stella ad made by Harmony

It is not unusual to see the same vintage Harmony guitar model with different branding. Some Harmony instruments, although were considered by many players the “poor man’s” Gretsch or Gibson. However they have their own unique tone and vintage vibe.

Harmony Stratotone guitars

Harmony H49 Jupiter Stratotone

Several models have become sought after and popular in the vintage market like the mid to late 󈨀s Harmony H22 Bass, Harmony Rocket, Harmony H78 (Dan Auerbach of the Black Keys), 1967/68 Sovereign acoustic, Silvetone 1446 (Chris Isaak), Harmony H72 Meteor and Harmony Strattone H44 for examples. Interestedly, H1260 Sovereign was Jimmy Page’s main acoustic during the early years of Zeppelin. Any top-of-the-line Harmony made guitar are desirable in today’s vintage market, but generally priced way lower than Gibson, Fender or Martin making them a bargain, depending on condition and playability.

Harmony Sovereign Acoustic

Harmony was, especially in the early days, capable of turning out guitars with pretty good workmanship. But these guitars were never positioned to compete with D’Angelicos, much less Gibson, Gretsch or Fender. Harmony built guitars were many times a players first instrument. Harmony made guitars were played by Howlin Wolf, Big Joe Williams, Elmore James, Elvis, Ritchie Valens, The Stones, Small Faces and others. However, there are more than nostalgic reasons to be interested in Harmony guitars.

Instruments were sold under a variety of trade names—Vogue, Valencia, Johnny Marvin, Monterey, Stella, and others. In 1940, after Kraus had a conflict with management, he left, but then bought enough stock to restart the company independently.

Early 1960s Harmony Rocket with bolt on neck

1966 Harmony Rocket H54 with adjustable truss rod

1966 Harmony H78 with Bigsby and three pickups from my collection

Harmony peaked in 1964-1965, selling 350,000 instruments, but low-end foreign competition led to the company’s demise 10 years later. Between 1945 and 1975, the Chicago firm mass-produced about ten million guitars. The company reduced their output over the years, later focusing on student models sold through JCPenney.

1962 Harmony Montgomery Ward 7208 Roy Smeck Electric guitar

Note that some of the guitars sold in the Sears and Wards catalog where also manufactured by Valco and Kay companies.

In the 1930s, Valco was formed by three business partners and former owners of the National Dobro Company Victor Smith, Al Frost, and Louis Dopyera. The company name was a combination of the three partner’s first initials (V.A.L.) plus the common abbreviation for company (Co.)

Valco manufactured Spanish acoustic guitars, metal-bodied resonator guitars, electric lap steel guitars, and vacuum tube amplifiers under a variety of brand names including Supro, Airline, Oahu, and National. They also made amplifiers under contract for several other companies such as Gretsch, Harmony, and Kay. In the 1960s they began producing solid body electric guitars.

Kay Musical Instrument Company, USA musical instrument manufacturer also started its operations in the 1930s in Chicago, Illinois by Henry Kay Kuhrmeyer, from the assets of the former Stromberg-Voisinet, which was founded as Groeschel Mandolin Company in 1890. Kay offered their first electric guitar in 1936—five years after the Rickenbacker Frying pan, and the same year as the Gibson ES-150.

Valco merged with Kay Musical Instrument Company in 1967, however the merged company quickly went out of business in 1968 because of financial difficulties.

Harmony guitars, although they were mainly marketed to beginners, also built some guitars to attract professional players. The H78 was one of Harmony’s better quality guitars. Note that all Harmony guitars these were mass produced. Inexpensive rock and roll machines. Harmony produced so many different models under various brand names.

Harmony Broadway and Harmony Sovereign Patrician

Harmony’s higher-end archtops can be quite resonant, as most all of the early guitars – at least those made in America, as opposed to subsequent imports – were made of solid woods like solid spruce or mahogany and not plywood. The lower end models were usually made of birch and have the binding painted on. Instead of inlaid fret markers, the markers were merely painted in the appropriate places. The tailpieces on some of the lower end models were made of pressed metal. Some have the tailpieces or pick guards screwed into the wood.

Vintage Harmony Guitars Catalog

The necks on many of the Harmony guitars did not have adjustable truss rods. Instead the graphics on the head stock announce, “Steel Reinforced Neck.” Many Harmony guitars have retained a straight neck.

Old DeArmond single-coil pickups gracing the solids and Rocket thin lines which can sound great into a cranked up amp.

The pickups on almost all Harmony electric guitars and basses were manufactured by Rowe Industries Inc./H. N. Rowe & Company/Rowe DeArmond Inc./DeArmond In. in Toledo, Ohio. Many of the instrument amplifiers badged with the Harmony name were manufactured by Sound Projects Company of Cicero, Illinois.

The Harmony solid body electrics in the late 1950s and early 1960s were mainly aimed at the beginner market with names such as Stratotone and BobKat models. The better instruments were the thin line hollow body electric guitars such as the Harmony Rocket or H78.

1966 Harmony H78 from my collection

Some models even had up to three DeArmond pickups each with individual volume and tone controls. Harmony guitars generally did not have the quality of Gretsch and Gibson. For the money these were quite nice instrument and have their own unique sound due to the way they were build and the pickups they used. Have to love the tone of a gold-foil pickup.

Interesting fact is that when Fender was trying to break into the acoustic guitar market, the first guitar line they offered in their catalog was actually made by Harmony with the Fender brand on the head stock. Baldwin after purchasing Burns and Gretsch brands, did not have a classical model, so they had Harmony manufacture “Baldwin” classical guitars.

The late 1960s and early 1970s were not good times for U.S. guitar makers with Vietnam War and cheap Asian imports rushing in to the marketplace. None of the American guitar makers were doing well in this period and it soon spelled the end for USA Harmony guitars.

In 1975, the Harmony Guitar Co. in Chicago ceased operations and had a three day auction. The auction was huge since it was two city blocks under one roof. Must have been some event! Later in the 70’s the Harmony name was sold to be used on Asian guitars. Keeping with their tradition of selling through catalogs and department stores, the 1990’s saw Harmony sell most of their guitars to J. C. Penny stores. The Harmony trademark and all intellectual property was acquired in 2009 by Westheimer corpoaration in Northbrook, IL. In 2011 they debuted the New Harmony Vintage Reissue series.

Some Harmony Guitar Demos

Dan Auerbach Harmony H78 on Bridge Pickup

Dan Auerbach Harmony H78 Playing Clean

Rig Rundown – The Black Keys’ Dan Auerbach

Whitehorse Passenger 24 Live

ChasingGuitars - Text and Images Used by Permission Only - All Rights Reserved 2013 - 2019

Bible Verses About Judgement

As we dive into the Word, there is quite a bit of Scripture about judgement and judging others.

“Do not judge so that you will not be judged. For in the way you judge, you will be judged and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you.” Matthew 7:1-2 NASB

“Do not judge, and you will not be judged and do not condemn, and you will not be condemned pardon, and you will be pardoned. Give, and it will be given to you. They will pour into a lap of good measure – pressed down, shaken together, and running over. For by your standard of measure it will be measured to you in return.” Luke 6:37-38 NASB

“Therefore you have no excuse, every one of you who passes judgment, for that which you judge another, you condemn yourself for you who judge practice the same things. And we know that the judgment of God rightly falls upon those who practice such things. But do you suppose this, O man, when you pass judgment on those who practice such things and do the same yourself, that you will escape the judgment of God?” Romans 2:1-3 NLT

“But why do you judge your brother? Or why do you show contempt for your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.” Romans 14:10 NKJV

No matter how hard we strive to be sinless in our actions, we have a sinner’s heart. Only God can see our true motives. And only He can pass judgment on us.

“For I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not thereby acquitted. It is the Lord who judges me. Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart. Then each one will receive his commendation from God.” 1 Corinthians 4:4-5 ESV

“For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each may be repaid for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil.” 2 Corinthians 5:10 CSB

Did Man and Mammoth Ever Live in Harmony? Not Quite… - History

The Ahnishinahbæó t jibway Midé is the religion, the philosophy, the government, the legal system . etc. . of the Ahnishinahbæó t jibway. The birchbark scrolls of the Midé trace our history back through four ice ages [i] --about a million years. Fundamentalist Christians express the beginning of their Judeo-Christian tradition as the "creation of the world" slightly less than 6,000 years ago. [ii] Although they give an account of their African "evolutionary roots," Western European scientists describe the first "man" as having lived (in Asia) three ice ages ago, and trace their own roots into the last ice age. [iii] The Aboriginal Indigenous peoples of this Continent are not included in their charts of "Evolution of Man."

The Midé, our Aboriginal Indigenous religion, teaches us to live in harmony, in reality, with responsibility that we are all part of the Circle of Life.

Midé cannot be translated from the Ahnishinahbæó t jibway language into English, nor Chippewa. The Chippewa Indians and the Christians tried to translate Midé as "Grand Medicine Lodge," and said that we were "Devil-worshippers," who practiced "bad medicine." What the Indians call the "Great Spirit," and what the Christians call "God," do not exist in our religion, and neither does the Devil. These concepts come from the good-and-evil dichotomy of their believers' European, Catholic roots. The fragmentation of peoples' world-view into pairs of opposites with emotionally-laden connotations is a part of Lislakh hierarchical society.

How can Aboriginal Indigenous people be "Devil worshippers" when the land, the water, everything about the ecosystem was kept in such a beautiful condition? Now, under the Euro-American and Indian religion and economic system, everything is destroyed. All the lakes and streams are polluted, and the water is undrinkable.

The Euro-Americans always say "Church and State are separate." After the 1863 Indian Treaty was signed with the Chippewa, the U.S. Government gave Ahnishinahbæó t jibway land to the Christian Churches. The Indians sold the land, and the Euro-Americans divided up our religion and our church, so that the immigrants could build their churches and practice their own religion. It is claimed that the United States of America was founded on "freedom of religion."

The Ahnishinahbæó t jibway religious and philosophical tradition, the Midé, is holistic--there is no compartmentalization between religion, economics, science, philosophy, and politics. From an Aboriginal Indigenous perspective, the traditions of the Lislakhs also comprise a holistic totality, although for those studying that system from within, it is usually broken into disconnected categories. If one looks at the history of the various schools of thought through which these people of Western Civilization understand their own system, it may be easier to see the whole pattern. The abstract within which social and religious reality is defined comes to the Western Europeans through the Ancient Greeks: into modern science through Aristotle and into modern religion through Judeo-Christianity, which also has roots in Ancient Greek ways of thinking. Greek philosophers, including Diogenes and Plato, realized that truth was unattainable within their idealized structure, and demonstrated this in various and sometimes humorous ways. One contemporary scholar who has made connections between religion, economics and politics is MIT economist Paul Samuelson. [iv]

The Ahnishinahbæó t jibway cannot sell our Midé religion, which is a part of our land. In English we were being asked to sell "land," but Grandmother Earth and our relationship to her is part of our religion. The Indians have never understood this, since they have approximately the same values as their Lislakh fathers. Selling Aboriginal Indigenous land does not pose existential prohibitions of identity, sacrilege, and fundamental morality for these immigrant Judeo-Christian peoples. Political scientist Murray Edelman wrote, [v] "Religion, as Langer points out . work[s] together with economic organizations . "

The Indians whom the Euro-Americans created on this Continent are just as important as Christianity in maintaining the economic system and other parts of the inter-related imported European infrastructure. The social structure of Western European Civilization depends on establishing metaphysical justification for its economic system, which functions so that the people at the top of the hierarchy retain most of the wealth created, and the workers are kept in their place. The economic system, in turn, is a means of controlling access to resources, and distributing both the bare necessities and the incentive goods in a way which will maintain the hierarchy. The symbolic value attributed by Western European civilization to gold, silver, and paper or other promissory money is a smokescreen. What their money is really about is power, and control over the resources with which that power is maintained. The Indians are as necessary as institutionalized Christianity for the functioning of the imported Euro-American economic system. Indians are critical in maintaining the fiction that the Euro-Americans have a legal and honorable right to the Aboriginal Indigenous peoples' land of this Continent, through the Indian treaties. The institutions and dogma of Judeo-Christianity provide the foundation upon which Western European civilization occupies this Continent--and provided the rationalization for the genocide, dispossession and enslavement of the so-called "pagan" Aboriginal Indigenous peoples.

Part of the purpose of the Euro-Americans' Indian boarding schools was to destroy Aboriginal Indigenous religions. All I knew when I went into the Boarding School was the Ahnishinahbæó t jibway Midé. I did not know about the Christian God, the Indians' "Great Spirit"--or the Devil, which is also part of Christianity. During the first few years that I was at the Boarding School, there was a German prefect named Leo Schwartz, who was obsessed with the Devil. During the night, we could hear him praying in his room, and then he would start chasing the Devil. "Out, out," he would say, in German. He had a toilet in his room, and he would flush the Devil down the toilet, and then he would chase his Devil from his room into the sickroom, down the stairs into the playroom, and out the front door. I don't know why he never chased him out the back door. Sometimes we would meet Schwartz on the stairwell, chasing the Devil. He would be hollering "Out, Out, Out!" When he saw us he would stop chasing the Devil, and look at us sheepishly as he snapped out of his abstract hallucinations. Then, he would go back upstairs to his room. We wondered where the Devil went when Schwartz stopped chasing him--we figured the Devil went back into Schwartz' room.

Leo Schwartz looked like a crazy man: he had strange blue eyes with red rims. Once when I was sick, alone in the sickroom during the day, Schwartz chased the Devil out of there twice. I was so sick I didn't pay any attention the first time. When he came through again my curiosity got the best of me. I wanted to see what the Devil looked like. I sat up in bed and looked, because I'd heard so much about him in school. I didn't see anything. I recuperated right then, put on my clothes, and as sick as I was, I got out of the sickroom.

Both the Chippewas and the Catholic priests have superstitions arising from their Lislakh roots illusory ideas generated by the artificial cultural mechanisms which sustain their social hierarchy. The centralized power and artificial ranking of their society is reflected in Judeo-Christian metaphysics. The Ahnishinah­bæó t jibway children did not find the Christians' description of Heaven very attractive. We figured that if we went to Heaven, we would be at the very bottom of the Heavenly hierarchy, spending eternity among strangers, polishing all that gold.

By intentionally blurring the distinctions between the Ahnishinah­bæó t jibway and the Chippewas, the United States Government purposefully confused the Ahnishinahbæó t jibway Midé with the very different Chippewa Indian religion, and used the Indian religion which they had created to try to obliterate the Ahnishinahbæó t jibway Midé.

The Chippewa Indians have a Lislakh patriline. [vi] The replacement of Aboriginal Indigenous people with people of this patriline is prescribed in the Judeo-Christian Bible: [vii]

. Lift up now thine eyes, and look from the place where thou art northward, and southward, and eastward, and westward:
For all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever.
And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth: so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed also be numbered.
Arise, walk through the land in the length of it, and in the breadth of it for I will give it unto thee .

The land that the Lord was giving away to his chosen people, already belonged to somebody else. The seed (patrilineal heirs) to which the Bible refers repeatedly, is a directive for world conquest through genetic engineering. [viii]

Two world-views

The Ahnishinahbæó t jibway do not want to take over the world cherishing diversity is an inherent part of our traditional values. We have lived harmoniously and non-violently on our own land for more than one hundred millennia. We, the Ahnishinahbæó t jibway have a right to exist on our own land as a Sovereign people.

There are two very different religious philosophies on this Continent. One is the aggregate of the centralized, hierarchical world religions and other rigid schools of thought, including Indian religion. The other is the philosophy and world-view of the Ahnishi­nahbæó t jibway and other Aboriginal Indigenous people. The Ahnishinah­bæó t jibway Midé is a way of living in harmony and community a facilitation of each person's Sovereign relationship with Grandmother Earth, with Grandfather Midé, with the circle of life which encompasses us, and with the Great Mysteries of the Universe. The Midé is experienced, it is directly connected to Grandmother Earth they are married. This is where we come from.

The Midé is an egalitarian religion/philosophy, and relates not only to what happens after death, but also relates directly to life. We have said in English, "all life is sacred," although a more accurate translation would be "all life transcends Western Civilization's dichotomy between sacred and profane." The Ahnishinahbæó t jibway Midé is a philosophy, but it is also and simultaneously a non-abstract experience in physical reality. Proselytizing is not a part of our religion. Ahnishinahbæó t jibway are born into the patrilineal Dodems of the Midé.

The hierarchical world-view of Western Civilization has survived, been refined, sophisti­cated and expanded over the past six thousand years. The imaginary and symbolic worlds of its purported reality are remarkably consistent in internal structure. Nearly every possible loophole through which a person might catch a glimpse of what the Ahnishinahbæó t jibway and other non-hierarchical peoples understand as reality has been blocked by diversionary tactics, re-interpretation, automatic mind-blocking processes of denial, and emotionally-laden stereotypes. Because of this culturally-imposed blocking of informa­tion which is threatening to the hierarchy, I would be greatly surprised if even one percent of the people who read this understand what I am writing. I am not questioning that the people who are reading this are intelligent people. I am simply observing that the boxes of compartmentalized thinking into which the heirs of Western Civilization are forced by their culture, are extremely difficult to escape. Regimenta­tion is an important part of any hierarchical culture, and even brilliant trained observers have a mental block, buttressed by several millennia of hierarchical cultural and linguistic evolution. Standing outside the system, this structure is obvious. The reality of the Lislakh cultural, linguistic, and religious tradition is almost invisible from inside that system, but it's there.

Margaret Mead, who re-wrote and popularized the discipline of anthropology, tried to meticulously avoid value judgments about other peoples' cultures. But, she was trapped by the arrogance of the system into which she was born. Even though she was trying to be fair, her own culture's values led her to subtly discredit the perceptions of the people she was studying. Her self-definition and training as an anthropologist constrained her, and she could not discard the Western European analytical categories she brought with her. If she had remained with one group of egalitarian people, had learned their language fluently, and if she had been able to see herself as human in their context, then she might have been able to go beyond what other anthropologists have called the "glass wall," into an Aboriginal Indigenous understanding of the world, and see something truly beautiful. Lislakh reality is structured in such a way that venturing outside of its constructs can seem terrible and frighten­ing, [ix] but there have been a few Euro-Americans who have seen at least part way into an Aboriginal Indigenous reality.

Aboriginal Indigenous people are, because of our egalitarian, non-violent and holistic understanding of reality--and because of our inalienable connection to the land and resources upon which expan­sionistic societies depend--seen by the Euro-Americans and their cohorts as intrinsically threatening. Christianization was seen by U.S. policy-makers as a means of transforming us into a sub-group within their hierarchy, an ethnic group or a minority, and thereby no longer dangerous to their social order. This agenda was expressed at the Lake Mohonk Conference as a mandate for missionaries to "act as one body representing one great constituency, and combining their various energies to one great end, the Americanizing, civilizing and Christian­izing of the aborigines of the soil." [x]

At St. Mary's Catholic Mission at Red Lake, the staff wanted to bring us into their imaginary world, and simultaneously protect themselves from experiencing our world. Some of the defense mechanisms of the Lislakh hierarchy became obvious. When I asked questions which the Nuns felt were threatening, they slapped me, and said "Have blind faith!" They were not educating me in the sense that Ahnishinah­bæó t jibway would expect a person to be taught--they were programming me. The beautiful, loving reality of my Grandfather was too much a part of my reality for the programming to stick, although the brutality of the Mission School experience was enough to cause me and every other Ahnishinahbæó t jibway child who experienced it, years and years of anguish. Midé religious elders said, "don't believe them, they're lying," but I had to understand what it was that would make people act like the missionaries and other European people here had acted. There is more to know than simply rejecting the Euro-Americans as "liars." I had to find out why they did what they did, and how they think.


The nature of Lislakh reality directly relates to the Aboriginal Indigenous peoples' problems with Indians. It doesn't matter if Europeans or Métis dress up in feathers, say they're Indians, and act foolish. That's not our problem. The problems arise when immigrant peoples try to appropriate and re-define Aboriginal Indigenous peoples' identity, claiming that they are "American Indians," and thereby facilitate the alienation and theft of our land, and the destruction of our environ­ment, our culture, and our people.

The invention and maintenance of Indians is done in European languages. There is no word for Indian in the Ahnishinahbæó t jibway language--the Métis use the word Shi-nabbe but that's a word they stole and broke into a shorter word. [xi] Indians are a crucial theme of the Euro-American mythology about their relationship to this land and their identity as "Americans." Many get very nervous when they perceive themselves in danger of "losing their Indians." Metaphysical Indians are indispensable to the American Dream. With surgical precision, the molders of public opinion script their Indians to portray whichever extreme of the good-evil dichotomy meets the exigencies of the moment. Indians were polarized as the Noble Savage, they were also concocted from the Euro-Americans' worst fears and bogey-men, and there are a disproportionate number of Indians in prison because of the dichotomies of this projected stereotype. From the Wicked Witch who went after Hansel and Gretel, to the Big Bad Wolf who ate Little Red Riding Hood, the Indians are the polar opposite of what civilized and Christian Euro-Americans are presumed to be or fear they might be. As such, they balance the social equations of artificial dichotomy. Without Indians as a buffer between themselves and the reality of their history, the Euro-Americans are in the position of having to confront some very painful truths.

Dichotomy and paradox

Professor-philosopher Harvey Sarles (whom we thank for returning long-distance phone calls to discuss some of these issues), and linguist-philosopher Noam Chomsky, whom we thank for answering our letters with thought, have both helped me come to a clearer understand­ing of the way that the Lislakh people think. With regard to religion, I thank Dr. Sarles for his advice, "read Genesis, John, and Revelations of the Bible, to help understand how they think. If you want to know, read it without getting angry."

Lislakh reality is a mind-game fraught with artificial paradoxes. Good and bad, Jekyll and Hyde, God and Satan are all part of the abstract entity, forced into extremes and then kept apart by artificial categories of compartmentalized thinking. Responsibility is an inherent part of Ahnishinahbæó t jibway reality, but is avoidable in the compartments of linear European reality. As long as certain rules are followed, a Lislakh can evade accepting the responsi­bility for the consequences of his actions, at least within the figments of his mind.

I can go from the Ahnishinahbæó t jibway culture into the Euro-American culture, and I am still the same person. I am comfortable with my identity and I know who I am. My peoples' ancient roots grow deep here in this land. I am not a stranger here. I am not European, and in Germany I felt the disconnection from one's aboriginal indigenous place that Euro-Americans must have to live with on this Continent.

Most Europeans, including the Chippewa Indians, cannot go into the Ahnishinahbæó t jibway culture. They can look right at something, and not see it, because they don't know how to get outside of their prescribed definitions of reality, and look at the real world. The extent of their detachment from reality is readily apparent in reading European philosophy and religious texts. Any philosophical school where the practitioners seriously wonder whether or not they exist, is caught up in masochistic mind games. From the Ahnishinahbæó t jibway perspective, there are mysteries but no paradoxes. Our continual contact with Grandfather the Midé, with our inherent nature as living beings, and with Grandmother Earth where we come from and where we will go, does not make us primitive or ignorant.


I do not have anything against the Judeo-Christian or Islamic traditions (or any of the others they call World Religions), as the personal spirituality of those who sincerely live these philosophies. However, the Holy Roman Empire and other Judeo-Christian Churches are also political institutions--and the individuals of whom the institu­tions are composed bear a responsibility for the actions of those institu­tions. Judeo-Christians, in particular the Catholics and Protestant Episcopals, are on my land. For a century and a half, they have used unimaginable violence against my people. They have been telling my people that they "know how to live," and have discredited the culture, traditions and religion of the Ahnishinahbæó t jibway. [xii] It is with this background that I write what I do about Judeo-Christians. All peoples of the world have a right to live on their own land, harmoniously in accordance with their own traditions.

The abundant, harmonious, and lush paradise which encompassed both of these Continents was an expression of Aboriginal Indigenous peoples' religion and philosophy. The Europeans could not believe that such a place ever existed, and the miracle of it was such, that they readily believed myths of Golden Cities and Fountains of Youth. These are the same people who believed that the world was flat, and whose languages retain vestiges of flat-world thinking to this day. [xiii]

The Europeans who came to these Continents came from a plundered wasteland. The wars which raged back and forth across Europe had destroyed the European ecosystem and polluted the water. The social disharmony and ecological destruction that are a consequence of the Lislakh practice of war were a breeding-ground for countless plagues. War creates masses of starving people, and fosters the rape of both the women and the land. Ahnishinahbæó t jibway see this kind of behavior as unacceptable and insane.

The Lislakh paradigm of world conquest comes directly from their religions. They absolve themselves from responsibility by retreating into the abstract, and recently by saying "church and state are separate," but the very first chapter in the Judeo-Christian Bible includes the political admonition: [xiv]

. and God said unto them, Be [sic] fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

We do not see the Ahnishinahbæó t jibway Midé as extending beyond our Aboriginal Indigenous lands--although there are other Aboriginal Indigenous Traditions which belong in each place of Grandmother Earth. The Ahnishinahbæó t jibway believe in valuing what we have, and taking care of it respectfully, rather than strip-mining our own ecological infrastructure, and then looking for somebody else to rob. For nearly a million years, we have lived in harmony. We never took all of anything, and we made sure there was enough left for future genera­tions. If a young person heedlessly takes more than they need, or kills any living being without good reason, they are certain to get a kind but effective lecture from one of the Clan Mothers.

I had a well-meaning White friend question how we could have survived without being expansionistic. He did not understand that we lived in harmony, not only with our environment, but also with our neighbors, and that being ourselves on our own land was enough for the Ahnishinah­bæó t jibway to survive harmoniously as a Nation, throughout the sixty centuries of brutal peace and strife encompassing the rise and fall of every Lislakh empire.

The Lislakhs' expansionistic world-view precludes their dealing with those peoples who are their neighbors under conditions which are harmonious. Peace and harmony are two different things.

Social hierarchy means parasitic social relationships. Judeo-Christianity uses the concept of sin to bring people into their web of centralized control. The metaphor which the Judeo-Christian Bible uses to describe this intrinsic parasitism is a cannibalistic one: "eat of my flesh, drink of my blood," with the explanation that the human sacrifice of Jesus Christ will "take away sin."

People will spend all day in the Church, doing penance for their sins, seeking ritual purity. [xv] Indian religion is the same as Christianity in this way. Guilt is one of the hooks used to catch people's psyche. It's a necessary part of the economic system and often motivates people to donate all their worldly goods to the church (or to other charities which buttress the overall structure), because they are sinners. There have been, and can be again, harmonious, balanced communities without such psychological distortion.

I remember my first experience of Christian cannibalism at St. Mary's Catholic Boarding School at Red Lake. It was traumatic and profound, and to someone from the Ahnishinahbæó t jibway tradition, gruesome beyond belief. The Nuns gave us little children what they said was our "first communion," with instructions about how to "receive the Host." They told us that the Communion wafers were the "body of Jesus Christ," and told us not to chew on them, because we would be biting into Jesus Christ. They told us to let the wafer "melt in your mouth."

During the first years I was at the Mission School, there was a Catholic community event in which St. Nick brought candy and apples to children assembled right outside the Boys' building at the School, around Halloween. St. Nick was dressed up as a Pope, with a crooked staff, and big high pointed hat which now reminds me of the hats worn by the Ku Klux Klan. The White Indians sang a song about "Ho, Ho, Ho, the Good St. Nick." The Ahnishinahbæó t jibway were in the back of the assembled group. The older children whispered to us younger ones, "that's Johnny Windigo." The Métis have changed Windigo to mean a giant spirit who can bring diseases, and consume people and everything else. The harmonious Ahnishinahbæó t jibway understanding of Windigo has been transformed by the Chippewa Métis to conform to the Lislakh linguistic dualism of good and evil.

The Black-Robes

The French were the first Europeans to maintain an organized presence in the Ahnishinahbæó t jibway Nation. The economic pretext was the fur trade, but what the Europeans really wanted was everything we had. Father Louis Hennepin was among the early French explorers, and his description is one of inconceiv­able, unimaginable wealth. Father Hennepin, who was supposed to be the embodiment of Christian values, writes of his 1679 expedition: [xvi]

We found very good ripe grapes as large as damson plums to get them we had to cut down the trees on which the vines climbed. We made wine which lasted us nearly three months and a half.

Hennepin also writes about stealing Aboriginal Indigenous peoples' seed corn, killing animals and taking only a small portion of the meat, and cutting down trees for what he termed "security."

The Europeans had been impoverished for so long, that they had no way of coping with the immense wealth which, because of Ahnishinah­bæó t jibway non-violent and egalitarian way of keeping everything in balance, was simply there. In the Ahnishinahbæó t jibway way of thinking, there was no need to lock anything up. If somebody needed something, they took what they needed. Our ecosystem was intact and abundant, and there was enough for everyone.

The "black robes" were part of the first wave of European migrants. One of the words for Frenchman in the Ahnishinahbæó t jibway language is We-me-tig-o-ji, which describes the "wooden sticks" (crucifixes) which the French Catholic Priests waved around when they met my ancestors.

When the "Black Robe" Christian missionaries got here, they told the Ahnishinahbæó t jibway, "you have original sin, we have to baptize you to wash away your sin." The concept of original sin is not in our culture. Baptism is used to bring people into the Christian hierarchi­cal structure, take away their self-esteem, and control them like sheep in the fold.

The Christian pioneers used both sides of their dichotomy to bring people into their system, also using the label of "AntiChrist." When an Aboriginal Indigenous person says, "I don't believe in what you are saying, I have my own Tradition," the Christian Missionaries have responded with the accusation "you are the works of the Devil." They called our Midé longhouses "Grand Medicine Lodges," with very strong negative connotations. The early Missionaries tried to re-define the Ahnishinahbæó t jibway, translating such names as Ma-ji-que-wis, which means "life energy," [xvii] as "Evil Spirit." [xviii]

The United States Government's efforts to discredit and destroy the Midé were a deliberate part of their broader agenda of destroying the Ahnishinahbæó t jibway and other Aboriginal Indigenous Nations. As Bishop Whipple said during the 1890 Lake Mohonk Confer­ence: [xix]

Now, remember, no nation has ever survived the loss of its religion. It might have been a very poor religion, and full of superstition, but the moment that it lost that sense of accountability to an unseen power, and had no standard of right outside of itself, it perished like the fabric of a dream.

The United States Government specifically subsidized Christian churches at Red Lake. [xx]

Senator Albert Beveridge explained the relationship between Judeo-Christianity and the United States in terms of Manifest Destiny in a speech before the U.S. Senate in the year 1900:

We will not renounce our part in the mission of our race, trustee, under God, of the civilization of the world. And we will move forward to our work . with gratitude for a task worthy of our strength, and thanks­giving to Almighty God that He has marked us His chosen people, henceforth to lead in the regeneration of the world. Mr. President, this question is deeper than any question of party politics deeper than any question of isolated policy of our country even deeper even than any question of constitutional power. It is elemental. It is racial. God has not been preparing the English-speaking and Teutonic peoples for a thousand years for nothing but vain and idle self-contemplation and self-admiration. No! He has made us the master organizers of the world to establish system where chaos reigns. He has given us the spirit of progress to overwhelm the forces of reaction throughout the earth. He has made us adept in government that we may administer government among savage and senile peoples. Were it not for such a force as this the world would relapse into barbarism and night. And of all our race He has marked the American people to finally lead in the regeneration of the world. This is the divine mission of America, and it holds for us all the profit, all the glory, all the happiness possible for man.

I have also heard the policy of Manifest Destiny expressed in terms of "my brother's keeper."

Despite the evidence in their own history, most Euro-Americans seem to have almost insurmountable difficulty in seeing the extent to which they have lost their personal Sovereignty to Judeo-Christian religious institutions. God is acknowledged as their ultimate sovereign on every piece of their money, in their Pledge of Allegiance, and throughout their governmental and judicial ceremonies. However, the majority of Euro-Americans go into denial when the nature of their relationship to Judeo-Christian institutions is discussed. Having no point of reference outside of the Christian world-view, they are cut off from awareness of their life, their relationship to the Earth, their bodies, and much of their minds.

The people of Western Civilization say, "you are free." Free is an abused word. From what I have experienced in Euro-American society, and in studying their languages, I haven't found anything that was free, yet. There was always a price, and it was usually a very high one. Ahnishinah­bæó t jibway do not need to say, "you are free." There is no word-for-word translation of the English word free in our language. Freedom was just a natural part of life, without anything un-free as a comparison.

Indian religion

The Indian religion which has come into popular view is not Aboriginal Indigenous religion, and it is not indigenous to this land. The Chippewa Indian religion is a Creole religion, combining elements of French feudal folk Catholicism and Islam. [xxi] This Indian religion also has plagiarized some Ahnishinahbæó t jibway material, reinterpreted into a hierarchical Judeo-Christian structure, and includes some superstitions arising out of the Métis experience on this Continent. Under the ministrations of Bishop Baraga and other missionaries in the 18th and 19th Centuries, Chippewa Indian religion was further modified to conform to Catholic duality.

There is also an even newer Indian religion, which is a group of cults created in response to Euro-American demand for "Indian Spirituality." This Indian religion has incorporated some of the Métis Chippewa religion. The Euro-American people who are drawn to Indian religion are frequently people who feel that something is missing in mainstream religious traditions. They are looking to Indian religion to fill the void in their lives, hoping to find themselves and their spirituality. They are not going to find Aboriginal Indigenous spirituality in Indian religion--patrilineally, Indians are Lislakh immigrants just like the Whites. Indian culture has been re-invented to fit the mold of Judeo-Christian­ity since explicitly colonial times: [xxii]

At a conference held by Conbury in 1702 with five of the Indian Sachems, at Albany, the Indians expressed the hope that the Queen would be a good mother and send them someone to teach them religion. Translations were made to assist the Mohawks in their reading of the scriptures in their language.

Although there are a few sincere Métis playing the role of Indian Medicine Men, Indian religion has all of the problems of popular cults, including certain Christian personality cults of the electronic media. The people who become Indian Medicine Man get caught up in an impossible role. Indian religion is, like Judeo-Christianity, centralized, and the Medicine Man's followers have unattainable expectations of him. Some of these Indian Medicine Men are caught by their own egos, and get trapped by the structure of Indian religion into situations which are destructive both to themselves and their followers.

Prior to the Civil Rights Movement, the Aboriginal Indigenous religion had gone underground. When the American Indian Movement and other Civil Rights Movements brought Aboriginal Indigenous religion out, the real spiritual men, the ones who are indigenous to this land, came out for a brief moment. Particularly among the Lakota, there were some who welcomed anybody who came seeking with a sincere heart. The U.S. Government saw this, and understood the threat that egalitarian Aboriginal Indigenous spirituality posed to the centralized hierarchi­cal institutions of Judeo-Christianity. So the U.S. Government passed the Indian Freedom of Religion Act in 1978. After that, the Aboriginal Indigenous religions went back underground, and there has been a bumper crop of wanna-be Instant Indian Medicine Men.

One of the problems is that the Indians have lost their identity, even though they might have had an Aboriginal Indigenous mother or grandmother. Through their White fathers and grandfathers, they have become a part of the European culture. Their connections with Aboriginal Indigenous religion--if they ever had any on this Continent--are history. Some became Instant Indian Medicine Men from self-interest, rather than from a commitment to serve their community, and a lot of them have been trapped in their own mystique. Nobody knew what was going on, and they still don't, because they are not connected and they are not in harmony. They are stuck in hierarchical thought. One Indian Medicine Man would say something, and another would contradict him. There were, and still are, a lot of inflated and hocus-pocus claims: being healed of cancer, and everything else. There is no such thing as an Indian Medicine Man in Ahnishinahbæó t jibway culture, and never was. There are no words in English to describe the religion, philosophy and medicine of Ahnishinahbæó t jibway men and women.

I had a long talk with a Lakota man who had adhered to his traditional religion. He told me, "You are born into the Midé through your Dodems. For us, it is different." I cannot speak for the Lakota.

There are many false prophets in Christendom. The Indian religion which was legislated by Congress also has false prophets. The Indians who have been created by the Euro-Americans talk about "my Indian traditions," but they are plagiarizing the Aboriginal Indigenous peoples' traditions and redefining them in hierarchical terms. They have stolen everything except our values. If they had stolen our values, they wouldn't be lying about their identity, promoting stereotypes and vicious labels, claiming our property and masking the genocide.

The Ahnishinahbæó t jibway have lost our pow-wows, which used to be Aboriginal Indigenous events open to everybody. I haven't gone to a pow-wow since the early 1980's, because they don't have anything to do with the Ahnishinahbæó t jibway any longer. The pow-wows run by the Chippewa Indians are commercialized, with admission fees and big-money dance contests. The music at the Chippewa pow-wows is not the music I remember from the Ahnishinahbæó t jibway pow-wows of my childhood. The vibes of the Chippewa pow-wows are no longer Aboriginal Indigenous ones. The Métis mock the culture of the very people they're trying to imitate some of the men dance in women's jingle dresses. I have also seen pow-wows put on by Boy Scouts and other White Indian Dance Groups. In the 1970's, there was one such group which traveled around Europe, and what they presented was not Aboriginal Indigenous culture.

The sweat lodge is one of the Aboriginal Indigenous medicines which has been mutated into a principal ceremony of Indian religion. It has been taken out of context, and reinterpreted with hierarchical mystique. The sweat lodge is good for you. Like a sauna, it cleans a person out, which is necessary. But, the way it's done in the Indian religion, there is a lot of hocus-pocus which is nothing more than exploitive showmanship. It has become a symbol, both for the Indians and for the Catholics (who are incorporating it into their religion), changed from the real into the abstract. Over the past few years, the Catholics have made a concerted effort to incorporate Indian symbolism into their Mass (beaded buckskin altar cloths, star quilts over sweat lodges, etc.), in order to hang onto their Indians. This is not the first time Christian Missionaries have tried to assimilate Aboriginal Indigenous intellectual property into their hierarchical structure. Christian Missionaries took many Ahnishinah­bæó t jibway words and transformed them into their own value structure. For example the word ja-wén-da-go-si-win, the meaning of which Baraga defined as including happiness, good fortune, and prosperity, was transmuted into "Holy Communion." [xxiii] Judeo-Christians have a long tradition of appropriating and assimilating the religious symbols of other people. Christmas trees are another example. [xxiv] I see no need for a religious celebra­tion marked by ritual deforestation.

The Indians say "we are a Sovereign Nation," but what they are using is Euro-American Sovereignty, which is used against their own people, and also used to oppress the Ahnishinahbæó t jibway, over whom they have no jurisdiction. The United States Government is retrenching their control over Indians through legislation such as the Indian Freedom of Religion Act and its amendments, including the 1994 Senate Bill S. 1021. This unilateral bill violates the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights, and regulates Indian religion. For example, a Federally Recognized Indian must get a U.S. Government license to possess an eagle feather.

The United States is also using the Indian religion, and their unilateral Indian Freedom of Religion legislation, to try to claim unjustifiable jurisdiction over the Ahnishinahbæó t jibway and the Midé. There is no way in which these immigrant peoples can presume jurisdic­tion over the Aboriginal Indigenous peoples of this Continent, nor over ancient religions and philosophies which are far older than all of their so-called world religions put together. We are concerned about the way in which the Indian Freedom of Religion Act is being used to plunder and desecrate the graves of our Ahnishinahbæó t jibway ancestors. These graves are not "Indian mounds."

I am not a medicine man, and I am not a prophet. I am a human being. I was born Ahnishinahbæó t jibway, and I have a different way of looking at the world than the Euro-Americans. What I am writing about our religion is commonly known by Ahnishinahbæó t jibway. When people come asking me for the truth, I tell them that Sovereignty is within each person. If a person goes into the forest, and becomes a part of it, rather than looking at it from outside, one can start to understand what the Midé and other Aboriginal Indigenous religions are about.

There isn't any shortcut, and neither officially sanctioned nor self-proclaimed intermediaries can give answers to that which human beings must experience for themselves. The Midé happens to be the religious philosophy of the Ahnishinahbæó t jibway, and this is who I am. I have nothing to do with the Indian religion. Appropriating another people's religious philosophy is unneces­sary. Every human being can come into non-violent harmony with Grandmother Earth, with Grandfather, with life and death, with the Great Mystery. The institutions of mainstream Lislakh society are saturated with violence, and living the totality of one's life non-violently within their context is not always easy.

[i] . One Midé scroll which may independently document this is in a museum, the Glenbrow-Alberta Institute, Alberta, Canada cited as GAI-2 in The Sacred Scrolls of the Southern Ojibway [sic], Selwyn Dewdney, University of Toronto Press, 1975, page 24. With this citation, however, a caveat is in order: the published interpreta­tions of Midé scrolls are almost invariably done by Whites, using Christianized Métis informants who do not understand the Ahnishinahbæó t jibway language or the Midé. For example, some of what ethnologists have called "migration scrolls" may be Ahnishinahbæó t jibway scrolls, but these scrolls were re-interpreted by people who are documentably Métis, to fit their own reality. It is true of the Métis that, as quoted in Dewdney, page 57, "Our forefathers, many string of lives ago, lived on the shores of the Great Salt Water in the east. Here it is, while congregated in a great town [Montreal]. " Neither this, nor most of the other things alleged to be a part of our Midé tradition in published accounts, is accurate of the Ahnishinahbæó t jibway.

[ii] . According to humanist scholar and sage Robert L. Satterlee, the year of Creation for Fundamentalist Christians is 4004 B.C. He said this was originally "calculated by a British Bishop using the genealogies in the Bible--and once something is in print, it takes on a life of its own." Mr. Satterlee said that the month and day in which God is presumed to have finished his week-long Creation is "indeterminate, because of the calendar changes since the Roman Empire." Creation was supposed to have been completed at ten o'clock in the morning, "but this is also imprecise, because the rotation of the Earth is slowing down 1.5 seconds per year."

[iii] . The Rise and Development of Western European Civilization , Table II, page 3, Op. cit.

[iv] . For example, in the Family Tree of Economics, from Economics, an Introductory Analysis, by Paul A. Samuelson, Professor, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1967 Edition (end piece).

[v] . The Symbolic Uses of Politics , University of Illinois Press, 1967, pages 178-9.

[vi] . The Bureau of Indian Affairs was quite aware of their Indians' Lislakh patriline, and in the 1890 Report of the Commissioner, wrote that, "the question depends . not on the quantum of Indian blood, but upon the condition of his father, under the rule of civil law 'partus sequiter patrem,' which governs in this class of cases. . Vattel, in his Law of Nations, page 102, [wrote] as follows: 'By the law of nature alone children follow the condition of their fathers and enter into all their rights' and adds that this law of nature, so far as it has become a part of the common law . must be the rule in the case before it. . "

Despite such laws that the people they were making into Indians were actually Whites, the B.I.A. Commissioner stated U.S. Indian policy in 1890 as, "the admixture of blood, however, must be considered in connection with all the circumstances of each case consequently a fixed rule applicable to all cases can not well be adopted." Ten years earlier, the B.I.A. Commissioner had advocated turning White men into Indians "on the books" for the issuance of halfbreed scrip. The Bureau has not historically operated on the basis of meticulous attention to legal or ethical niceties, because their philosophy has been, as the B.I.A. Commissioner explained in 1890, "Since, under existing conditions, tribal organizations are now rapidly passing away, almost every question of importance depending on the tribal system will be solved."

[vii] . The Holy Bible (of the Judeo-Christians), licensed "in terms of the Letters of Patent granted by Her late Majesty Queen Victoria . dedicated to the most high and mighty Prince, James, by the Grace of God, King of Great Britain, France and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, Etc. . " Genesis 13:14-17.

[viii] . Specifically, the Judeo-Christian-Islamic tradition telegraphs their intention by re-defining their prescriptive reality (which exists only as images in their minds, rather than as a physically experienced, living reality) to include only Adam of Eden as the male progenitor of humankind. World conquest in their terms includes that all men should have the same Y chromosome, which came from Adam--that all should be of Judeo-Christian "seed." In their metaphorical and metaphysical world they have defined their objectives as already being real. This political agenda for world conquest is reflected in the pseudo-history of their European Indians whom the Europeans created and whom the Europeans falsely claim came over the Bering Strait (although their patrilineal ancestry is Indo-European and very few of these Indians are even matrilineally indigenous to this Continent). It is also reflected in the experimental design and focus which yielded scientific evidence of mitochondrial DNA alleged to prove that all women are descended from a purported Eve in Africa. There were other problems with the design and execution of this particular research, but the point is--why didn't they look at the DNA of the Y chromosome instead?

[ix] . If you put a "wild" animal in a cage, it will struggle to get out. Even a domesticated one will want out--that's why the cities of Western Civilization are filled with fences and jails and prisons. But, if you raise an animal inside of a cage, even if you torment it inside of the cage, when you open the door of the cage, it won't leave. If you take it out of the cage, it will run back in. This is part of what the recidivism rates in prisons are about--the inmates have been caged too long, and have been conditioned to live in prison.

The same thing is true of the prisons of the mind created by the Lislakh hierarchy--from Fundamentalist Judeo-Christianity to Communism, from Capitalism to Islam, from Hinduism to North American Democracy, the underlying structure is the same. People including Timothy Leary, Jean-Paul Sartre, and Frederick Nietzsche have tried to escape, but their language and culture did not give them the understanding with which to live outside of the Lislakh's box. They retreated back inside the prisons of their mind, and contented themselves making fun of it.

The Lislakhs use dichotomies to keep people inside of their culturally and linguistically constructed box. Within the structure of illusions which comprise the "shadows on the walls of the cave" of Plato's truth, harmonious reality has been distorted and stretched, spun out into insubstantial polar opposites. In Lislakh philosophy, not only is the totality of a living human being fragmented into hypothetical shards of "mind" and "body" and "soul," but even the reality of life itself is denied, focusing instead on their fraudulent mythology of "death." Lislakh reality-of-the-mind is characterized by denial, loss of awareness into the black hole of artificial subconsciousness, and an overriding, transcendent fear. Among the imaginary walls which imprison those of Western Civilization, including the Euro-Americans, are the flames and brimstone of Hell, the fear of losing oneself completely in the black abyss of insanity, and the screaming pain of losing the love of relatives, community, and their construct of God. The symbolic cannibalism within the Christian church is a metaphor for their manufactured reality of psychic cannibalism and real social parasitism. Once a person knows the reality of his or her self, and one's relationship to Grandmother Earth, the illusory Lislakh conceptual boxes are no longer a prison, and one can find the serenity and harmony outside of them.

[x] . Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Lake Mohonk Conference , 1887, Final Report of the Business Committee.

[xi] . A lot of Ahnishinahbæó t jibway words were broken when we were forced to work in the logging camps in the early 1900's. The logging companies said that our names were "too long to write on a check," and they could neither spell nor pronounce them, anyway. So, they shortened the names up into meaningless syllables--they could have just as well used acronyms. The name I use in public, Wub-e-ke-niew, is a shortened version of my real name, and they further shortened it to "Wub."

[xii] . E.g. Father Allouez, S.J. (1665) called the Midé "a false and abominable religion . these people are dull . "

[xiii] . Vestigial and outdated thinking was a part of their lexicon as European explorers went over the horizon to discover new worlds, and as their empires despoiled the far corners of the earth. It is still a part of American English as astronauts blast away from the face of the earth to new horizons in space.

[xiv] . The Holy Bible , Genesis 1:28., Op. cit.

[xv] . "Ritual purity" is an old Lislakh strategy for justification and maintenance of their social hierarchies. The "ritual purification" of the Hindus and other non-Judeo-Christian Lislakhs is reasonably apparent to Anglo social scientists, although their own culture's dependence on this same artificial construct is apparently invisible to them. "Go and Sin No More" is no different from Hindu Caste rituals, and neither is real. What amazes me is that although Greed is written as one of their "seven deadly sins," it's not only acceptable social behavior, but also a necessary cornerstone of their social engineering. Although there are a few people waking up, most of the Euro-Americans seem lulled into uncritical acceptance of the paradoxes of their values. Whether or not they admit to reality, it's there--and because of the ecological destruction, reality is going to come up and kick them. Denial is a part of their culture, but the resources are gone, and no amount of re-definition of reality will bring them back. Denial only works when there is a frontier beyond which other people have abundant resources. The public relations about the moon or outer space as the next frontier are hocus-pocus. Reality is when you have your two feet on Grandmother Earth, and know who you are, and where you are from. The Euro-Americans' culture has been so disconnect­ed, so caught up in denial of where they came from and who they are, that many of their people might as well be in outer space, looking for gold.

[xvi] . Father Louis Hennepin, Description of Louisiana, Newly Discovered to the Southwest of New France by Order of the King, translated by Marion E. Cross, University of Minnesota Press, 1938, page 46.

[xvii] . A more precise translation would be "the spiritual energy which gives the motive force to life" this word also has been used to describe a car battery.

[xviii] . Minnesota Chippewa Commission Census , National Archives, Op. cit.

[xix] . Transcripts of the Proceedings of the Lake Mohonk Conference , 1890, Op. cit.

[xx] . This included at least 320 acres of fee patent grants of Ahnishinahbæó t jibway land to the Red Lake "diminished Reservation," Catholic and Protestant Episcopal Churches, enumerated on page CLXXIV of the Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1890, Op. cit.

[xxi] . For example, some kinds of beadwork have religious overtones in the Chippewa religion. Many of their ritual objects are beaded, and the word for bead in Chippewa roughly translates to "little spirit seed." The Chippewa claim a tradition, in doing beadwork, of using one bead which is not part of the design, with the explanation that to aspire to complete perfection is an affront to the perfection of the "Great Creator." This is an Islamic tradition.

[xxii] . William Stevens Perry, D.D., L.L.D., The History of the American Episcopal Church, 1587-1883, Boston, James Osgood & Co., 1885.

[xxiii] . Baraga, A Dictionary of the Otchipwe Language, Minnesota Historical Society Reprint, 1992, page 167.

[xxiv] . "Have Yourself a Pagan Little Christmas," in American Airlines Flight Magazine, November, 1993.


McLaws to Emily McLaws, June 28, 1863, A Soldier’s General: The Civil War Letters of Major General Lafayette McLaws , ed. John C. Oeffinger (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2002), 194 Whitney, Herndon’s Informants: Letters, Interviews and Statements About Abraham Lincoln , ed. Douglas L. Wilson and Rodney O. Davis (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1998), 648 Washburne, William C. Harris, Lincoln’s Rise to the Presidency (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2007), 318 Abner R. Small, The Road to Richmond: Civil War Memoirs of Major Abner R. Small of the Sixteenth Maine Volunteers , ed. H. A. Small (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1939), 51 Rev. M. Colver, “Reminiscences of the Battle of Gettysburg,” 1902 Spectrum [Gettysburg College Yearbook, Special Collections], 179–80 Louis A. Warren, Lincoln’s Gettysburg Declaration: “A New Birth of Freedom” (Fort Wayne: Lincoln National Life Foundation, 1964), 48 Mark DeWolfe Howe, The Life and Letters of George Bancroft (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1908), 2:132.

Stuart, Herndon’s Informants , 519, and The Lincoln Papers , ed. David C. Mearns (New York: Doubleday, 1948), 1:159.

Hay, diary entry for July 25, 1863, Inside Lincoln’s White House: The Complete Civil War Diary of John Hay , ed. Michael Burlingame & J. R. T. Ettlinger (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1997), 67–68 Borrett, Letters from Canada and the United States (London: J. E. Adlard, 1865), 252.

“What Abraham Lincoln Read: An Annotated and Evaluative Bibliography,” Journal of the Abraham Lincoln Association 28 (Summer 2007): 28–81.

Lincoln, “Address to the New Jersey Senate at Trenton, New Jersey, February 26, 1861, Roy P. Basler et al., eds. Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln , 9 vols. (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1953–1955), 4:236.

Brooks, “Personal Recollections of Abraham Lincoln,” Lincoln Observed: Civil War Dispatches of Noah Brooks , ed. Michael Burlingame (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1998), 219.

Arnold, The Life of Abraham Lincoln (Chicago: Jansen, McClurg, 1885), 444 Hay, “Recollection of Lincoln: Three Letters of Intimate Friends,” Bulletin of the Abraham Lincoln Association 25 (December 1931): 7.

Epstein, Lincoln and Whitman: Parallel Lives in Civil War Washington (New York: Ballantine, 2005), 15.

Bruce A. McConachie, Melodramatic Formations: American Theatre and Society, 1820–1870 (Ames: University of Iowa Press, 1992), 34 “Speech of Daniel Webster, of Massachusetts, January 26 and 27, 1830,” Webster-Hayne Debate on the Nature of the Union: Selected Documents , ed. Herman Belz (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2000), 85–86 Irving H. Bartlett, Daniel Webster (New York: Norton, 1978), 282–83. See also R. Gerald McMurtry, “Lincoln Knew Shakespeare,” Indiana Magazine of History 31 (December 1935): 265–87 Robert Berkelman, “Lincoln’s Interest in Shakespeare,” Shakespeare Quarterly 2 (October 1951): 303–12, David C. Mearns, “‘Act Well Your Part’: Being the Story of Mr. Lincoln and the Theater,” Largely Lincoln (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1961), 114–49, and James A. Stevenson, “A Providential Theology: Shakespeare’s Influence on Lincoln’s Second Inaugural,” Midwest Quarterly 43 (Autumn 2001): 11–28.

Lamon, The Life of Abraham Lincoln: From His Birth to His Inauguration as President (Boston: James R. Osgood, 1872), 494.

Herndon to Jesse Weik, January 1, 1886, The Hidden Lincoln, From the Letters and Papers of William H. Herndon , ed. Emmanuel Hertz (New York: Viking, 1938), 117 Cullom, Walter B. Stevens, A Reporter’s Lincoln , ed. Michael Burlingame (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1998), 154.

Oddly, Bray fuddles the name—it was Clarence Edward Macartney (not Charles ) who wrote Lincoln and the Bible . Nor was he a Methodist. Macartney was the pastor of the Arch Street Presbyterian Church in Philadelphia and also quite a gifted amateur historian who wrote a biography of George B. McClellan in 1940, as well as Lincoln and His Generals (1926), Lincoln and His Cabinet (1931), and Grant and His Generals (1953).

Brooks, Lincoln Observed , 209–10 Gillespie to Herndon, December 8, 1866, Herndon’s Informants , 508.

The Einstein-Bohr legacy: can we ever figure out what quantum theory means?

Quantum theory has weird implications. Trying to explain them just makes things weirder.

  • The weirdness of quantum theory flies in the face of what we experience in our everyday lives.
  • Quantum weirdness quickly created a split in the physics community, each side championed by a giant: Albert Einstein and Niels Bohr.
  • As two recent books espousing opposing views show, the debate still rages on nearly a century afterward. Each "resolution" comes with a high price tag.

Albert Einstein and Niels Bohr, two giants of 20 th century science, espoused very different worldviews.

To Einstein, the world was ultimately rational. Things had to make sense. They should be quantifiable and expressible through a logical chain of cause-and-effect interactions, from what we experience in our everyday lives all the way to the depths of reality. To Bohr, we had no right to expect any such order or rationality. Nature, at its deepest level, need not follow any of our expectations of well-behaved determinism. Things could be weird and non-deterministic, so long as they became more like what we expect when we traveled from the world of atoms to our world of trees, frogs, and cars. Bohr divided the world into two realms, the familiar classical world, and the unfamiliar quantum world. They should be complementary to one another but with very different properties.

The two scientists spent decades arguing about the impact of quantum physics on the nature of reality. Each had groups of physicists as followers, all of them giants of their own. Einstein's group of quantum weirdness deniers included quantum physics pioneers Max Planck, Louis de Broglie, and Erwin Schrödinger, while Bohr's group had Werner Heisenberg (of uncertainty principle fame), Max Born, Wolfgang Pauli, and Paul Dirac.

Almost a century afterward, the debate rages on.

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2006 July 31

Did the U.S. purchase land from canada that would for the northern portion of the state of Maine? If so does the purchase have a name does it have a Wikipedia article and is their any maps of the purchase and maps of the U.S. before the purchase?

Webster-Ashburton Treaty Rmhermen 05:43, 31 July 2006 (UTC) To answer your question more directly, at the time of the Webster-Ashburton Treaty, Canada was a British possession. The United States claimed a northern border for Maine that runs through what are now the provinces of Quebec and New Brunswick. The United Kingdom claimed a southern border for Canada that runs through what is now Maine. The territory between the two borders (northern Maine, a southern slice of present-day Quebec, and northwestern New Brunswick) was disputed between the two nations. The Webster-Ashburton Treaty was a compromise that set the border between U.S. and British territory that is now the northern border of Maine. There was no purchase. Any map of the United States before 1842 will show the disputed area. A U.S. map from before that date would show the area claimed by the United States, while a British map would show the British claim.Marco polo 22:59, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Is it possible for a firefly or lightning bug to give off a blue light instead of a green-yellow light? Thank You

There are many subspecies of firefly some glow yellow, others green and some blue.Anton 15:14, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

what can neither gain or lose weight?does anyone know the answer to this riddle?

Wasn't this comprehensively answered the last time it was asked? Notinasnaid 08:03, 31 July 2006 (UTC) This is not really a riddle, is it? A riddle is "1. A question or statement intentionally worded in a dark or puzzling manner, and propounded in order that it may be guessed or answered, esp. as a form of pastime an enigma a dark saying. 2. transf. Something which puzzles or perplexes a difficult or insoluble problem a mystery." (OED). --Shantavira 10:07, 31 July 2006 (UTC) Weight is a measure of how two masses attract each other at a given distance. Given constant masses, the weight will change with a change in distance. Therefore, anything with mass can have a change in weight. Thus, something which "can neither gain or [sic] lose weight" would have to be something with no mass. Such as: a thought, an idea, a word, love, hate, time, etc. –RHolton – 22:44, 31 July 2006 (UTC) A cylinder made of an alloy of platinum and iridium of 39 mm height and diameter, which is kept at the Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (International Bureau of Weights and Measures). If it looses or gains weight it still weights a kilogram - but the weight of every other item in the universe changes. AllanHainey 13:55, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi, i bumped into a term "bubble era" couple of times lately. What does it mean exactly? Does it describe some period of Internet development only? I would appreciate anybody's answer greatly, thank you! T

u guyz aint that smart..the answer actually is an active monkey..it can hardly gain or lose weight.

Is putting your comment against the wrong question an example of how smart you are? :--) JackofOz 12:27, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

what is brute force. is it a means of code breaking. and how does it work.what are other means of breaking codes?

Brute force can mean a few things. What you seem to be interested in is a Brute force attack. There are a variety of other means of cryptanalysis, such as rubber-hose cryptanalysis.--Philosophus T 09:01, 31 July 2006 (UTC) Philosophus explains the basics of it fine, so I'll just add that brute force attacks are the "baseline" for how secure a digital cipher is. If there's a method that breaks it faster that means the cipher is insecure. --ColourBurst 19:43, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I think of "brute force code breaking" as trying every possible combo. For example, a 4-digit numeric PIN for a credit card only has ten thousand possibilities, which can all be tried out in a few minutes or hours using a computer, provided the software isn't sophisticated enough to lock out the PIN after a small number of mistakes. StuRat 23:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

just wanting to know if the male,female and baby south american sloth are known by any other names? e.g moose males,females and babies are also known as bulls,cows and calves. thankyou for your help jinine-- 09:14, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Neither sloth nor list of animal names mention any other names. In fact the sloth article refers to "infant sloths" at one point. Rmhermen 17:21, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

There is a featured article concerning the above. However i have noticed the following in varios places and pictures: Why in the picture of the lunar rover, are there no stars? The moon has no atmosphere, and should therefore show millions of stars, however the sky apears black. please explain if possible. Thanx193.115.175.247 13:17, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Since this is a Wiki, you can fix it yourself, but you have to register to upload images — M in un Spiderman • Review Me 13:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC) Stars are not visible because they are very dim compared to the moonscape. If the film was exposed long enough for stars to show up on it, the foreground dust would be hopelessly over-exposed. If you own a camera you can experimentally verify this yourself tonight. Earth's atmosphere has little effect on things clear non-polluted air blocks very little visible light (sorry, can't find an exact figure right now, I think it is a fraction of a percent). Weregerbil 14:28, 31 July 2006 (UTC) Because they were filmed in a soundstage on Earth! Adam Bishop 15:31, 31 July 2006 (UTC) There is a more detailed discussion of this at Apollo Moon landing hoax accusations#Photographs and films. --Shantavira 15:32, 31 July 2006 (UTC) I assume that you can see both the stars and the surface of whatever celestial body you're on with your eyes because human vision adapts, whereas in a camera the same sensitivity and exposure are used for the whole CCD or film. But where is this done? In the eyes or in the brain (or both)? And wouldn't it be possible to do something similar with cameras? I often have this problem that different parts of the photo differ so much in brightness that I can never give them both the right exposure. An intelligent camera could notice that different sections of the image differ greatly in brightness and adapt the sensitivity of the different parts of the CCD to that (wouldn't work with film). However, thinking of it, it seems rather complicated. How does the camera (or editing software) know which of the two an average-lit part belongs to? This again gives me great respect for the way human perception works (or any other animal for that matter). DirkvdM 07:58, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I would like to ask you how to pronounce the Minotaur and Centaur are they ( Tar ) or ( Tor) if you can help me out thank you, and if not thanks anyway. (e-mail adress removed to prevent spam) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk • contribs) 13:58, 31 July 2006.

Go to [1] and [2]. Click on the a loudspeaker to hear a word. Jacek Kendysz 14:12, 31 July 2006 (UTC) According to wiktionary:centaur, 'centaur' is pronounced closer to an 'o' (specifically, IPA: [ˈsɛntɔː(r)] ). I presume 'minotaur' is much the same. --Sam Pointon 14:23, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I have recently been reading about Monadic Cyles, I wish to know does the earth's sun have a binary dual? or to simplify, does our sun and galaxy revolve in with another? It is said in the book i am reading that it does, and with Andomeda, but that is a galaxy, acn any one shed any light on this subject in any way thanxAnton 15:11, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Just tell me if theres anything about the book you don't believe, and then we can decided if you should believe it or not, cheeers — M in un Spiderman • Review Me 19:52, 31 July 2006 (UTC) Sounds like you're mixing up stars and galaxies. Our galaxy (the Milky Way) may revolve around another, but our star (the Sun) doesn't. DirkvdM 08:04, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

What i believe to be true is irrelavant, What i want to know is Does our Sun have a binary dual and if so which/what/where is it.

Let's go back. I've never heard of a binary dual, and there aren't any hits in Google that seem to be relevant (except one earlier question here). So, since this is a specialised term, can you let us know where you have found this term used (a URL, if possible), and how it is defined if it isn't on a site we can visit. Thanks. Notinasnaid 14:32, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Right, Wiki has an article on Binary star. (dont know how to make link) Does our sun have such a Binary dual.? I really apreciate your help. Thanx193.115.175.247 14:54, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I think you would have got a quicker response if you had said "binary partner" or "companion star". No, the Sun does not have a binary partner it is not part of a binary star, as scientists would mean the term. However, if you are dealing with esoteric cosmology, this is more like religion than science. Notinasnaid 15:16, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I am dealing with esoteric cosmology actually. Well done Dude. But how would we know whether or not we are part of a binary. To observe a binary one needs to use the dopler shift, but this cannot be done as our binary partner would always be either moving away or toward us. So my actual problem is i am trying to write a book on the correlation between esoteric religion, christianity, hiduism, budism and science and how they all come together as part of a greater monadic cycle. any help in any way would be appreciated. thanks.

If the sun was part of a binary system with a nearby star, we would see it. Or, if it was black, it would still have a significant effect on the orbits of all the planets. However, scientists are able to calculate planetary orbits very accurately, which means there cannot be a nearby large gravitational source unaccounted for. If you posit that the entire solar system was in a dual relationship with a further away star, we would see the effects of the orbit in that the galaxy would appear to be rotating against our system. Or so it seems to me. But how about this for cosmic philosophy: it is never correct to say that one thing just orbits around another. While the earth orbits around the sun, so the sun orbits around the earth. Both influence each other. However, because the earth is so much smaller than the sun, the effect is that the sun has a tiny wobble, while the earth goes round very nearly the centre of the sun. So the Sun has a partner in each of its planets, and asteroids. Notinasnaid 15:57, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Very true, however, we might not notice the other scource rotating around us as it would do so so slowly. we might notice it comeing or going depending on what part of its cycle it was on but the sideways shift at its furthest point is impossable to observe, true or false. And again thanks.

Cofee beans are edable. Are Coffee berries, the fruit from which the beans come, edable, and if so what do the taste like? Are they available comercially? Why is coffee only made from the seeds of these plants? why not others such as orange seeds for different types of coffee?

For starters, check out the article on the coffee plant. It mentions that the berries are in fact edible (note the spelling). You might also be interested in the article on drupes, which are the classification of fruit in which the coffee berry belongs. --Bmk 16:11, 31 July 2006 (UTC) I asked this same question a while ago and never got a really good answer. Maybe you'll have more luck. —Keenan Pepper 22:03, 31 July 2006 (UTC) We don't take that "I didn't get a good answer from the reference desk" kind of thing lying down, you know. Oh no. I'm actually propped up on my sofa as I intimate that a) Two nuggets I've picked up are "I tried the berries David, they're quite pleasant in a sweet sort of way. Apparently it was originally the berries that were used as a beverage, the beans were discarded."[3] and "The coffee berries are difficult to chew so early coffee experimentation involved roasting the coffee beans to make them edible. Gradually, people began pouring hot water over the roasted coffee beans to make the well-known cup of coffee."[4]. Perhaps the best overview is here - enough on the history of coffee berry munching. Been going on for thousands of years, they reckon. b) Why not other seeds. Why not indeed. Google, being your friend, would like you to look up Ersatz coffee from the war years, made of some bean or other. In short, I imagine that there are a bunch of things which make more or less palatable beverages, and many that don't, and/or that'll make you proper ill. By the same token, why not tea from chesnut leaves or grass? And yea, we see a plethora of herbal infusions including Ersatz tea made from raspberry leaf. Conclusion: get out there and start roasting & boiling things & see what the result is. --Tagishsimon (talk) When at a coffee plantation I once ate peeled coffee berries, straight from the plant, and they weren't difficult to chew at all. However, they didn't taste like coffee at all. Nor did I notice any effect of the cafeine, but I'm an avid coffee drinker and I only ate a few. But that will have been the original reason for coffee consumption. Once people find something like this out they start experimenting and thus someone must have come up with the idea of roasting them for taste and then someone else came up with the drink. Or the other way around (although that sounds less likely). Oddly, when people use other plants for brewing a hot drink, it's usually called 'tea'. Shouldn't there be a separate name? DirkvdM 08:12, 1 August 2006 (UTC) By the way, coffee brewing has developed in something way too complicated. The best coffee is the simplest, cowboy style. Just add hot water to the ground coffee. To avoid the sludge at the bottom you could also filter it (afterwards!), whic makes it more complicated again, but that doesn't affect the taste. I suppose the reason this tates so much better is that all of the ground coffee comes into instant contact with almost-boiling water. The Coffee preparation article says "The recommended brewing temperature of coffee is 93 °C". If the water filers through a heap of coffee, only the top will get the water at the right temperature. DirkvdM 08:29, 1 August 2006 (UTC) I've tasted a new beverage that claims to be coffee berry juice(O.N.E. Coffee Berry Juice available at Whole Foods Markets). It has a sweet, and very mild flavour. A bit like redcurrant juice, but milder. It's amazing that this comes from the same plant as coffee. J I P | Talk 10:32, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I'll be a junior at UCLA this fall, after transferring from a community college. I would like to attend law school as soon as I graduate, which I estimate will happen by the summer of 2008. Supposing that most law schools would begin their academic calendars during the fall of that year, this means I would have to submit my applications the year prior, doesn't it? (That is, the fall of 2007, when I would be beginning my senior year.) If this is the case, would anyone like to share their thoughts on whether this would be a good decision? I feel that I would not have much under my belt at the university so soon after arriving. -- 17:42, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I have searched here and many places to no avail to find information about what the International/European "e-mark" is and what the criteria is for a product to receive this mark.

It appears on a product as a lower-case e. I am aware of certain products that have this, but I don't know what it means and what it takes for a skin care line, as an example, to receive this mark. I have been told it is some mark of excellence that has to do with the approval of some commitee of the European Union. Your help would be appreciated.

I think its just some kind of logo — M in un Spiderman • Review Me 19:03, 31 July 2006 (UTC) Do you mean CE mark or more probably Estimated sign? MeltBanana 19:32, 31 July 2006 (UTC) It explains in the article about that, check it out if thats what you mean — M in un Spiderman • Review Me 19:46, 31 July 2006 (UTC) Maybe the "Estimated" sign, a lower case e, which certifies that the actual contents of the package comply with specified criteria for estimation. See also[5]. The EU does not award marks of excellence, but of standardisation. In some cases it will be illegal to sell products that do not conform to EU standards, which may include carrying marks. Notinasnaid 20:06, 31 July 2006 (UTC) There are also European Quality Charters for all sorts of products and services (above the legal minimum standards). Is that what you mean? For example the 1998 European Quality Charter for CFL (Compact Fluorescent Lamps) link.

For specific info for businesses re EU Directives, Regulations, etc, contact any of the Information centres (EIC's). Here is a list of the ones in Britain [link]. Jameswilson 23:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Cool, I did some more digging and found the info that you were saying about the standardization mark. It has to do with quantity regulation of pre-packeged goods, of consistancy, and honesty in labeling. Thanks for your help. -Jeremiah

In short, if you don't give it the mark, every package has to contain at least the quantity the package says it does. With the mark, it only needs to be that amount on average (and within certain limits). DirkvdM 08:34, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Do rechargeable batteries(AA) specifically made for digital cameras work effectively for other divices? Thank you.

Ask Jeeves claims that they don't — M in un Spiderman • Review Me 19:01, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Strange, I was fairly confident that they would but wanted verification. Any ideas as to why not? Thanks again.

I'd like to see a link for the claim that they don't. If they are AA batteries, why wouldn't they work for other devices? For the record, I did go to Ask.com (it hasn't been called "Ask Jeeves" for some time now), typed in the question and found no links supporting the above responder's claim. --LarryMac 19:28, 31 July 2006 (UTC) Sorry, my mistake I found I was reading about a different kind of battery [6] sorry — M in un Spiderman • Review Me 19:48, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Now that I think of it they would perform better if anything being as digital cameras go through batteries like nothing-sounds like a good 8th grade science fair project.

A similar project would be to see it the batteries packaged as "for digital cameras" behave any differently from standard alkaline batteries. I have a feeling it's all a marketing game. --LarryMac 20:40, 31 July 2006 (UTC) I suspect otherwise. The charge-voltage curve for standard alkaline batteries is decidedly unfavorable towards use in cameras and other digital devices: the voltage drops too low for the device to use it long before the battery is fully discharged. If these "digital camera" alkalines have a different curve, they'll appear to last longer even though they don't actually store more power. --Serie 00:08, 1 August 2006 (UTC) NiMH batteries (which is what I assume you are asking about) can be used almost anywhere. In practice a problem is that they suddenly go from good to totally flat, whereas ordinary alkalines gradually lose power, giving you some warning that they are running low. This means that for NiMHs you start off with a good beam from your torch and 2 minutes later you can have nothing at all! And then a set of NiMh batteries running with one flat destroys the flat one permanently (even if it were its first use). See the WP article link above. The Star batteries Faq (although quite obviously biased in order to sell the stuff) gives valid, scientific, understandable information. For medium drain applications such as cameras and cd-players they are the most economical. But they discharge spontaneously on storage, so for inclusion in a "disaster emergency kit" a box of waterproof matches would be a better choice :) --Seejyb 00:16, 1 August 2006 (UTC) Serie gave an important part of the answer. Of course standardised batteries could easily be made, but that would mean a drop in sales - good for the manufacturer, but not for the producer. Consumers may demand what they wish, but if manufacturer don't deliver, that's the end of the story. The free market system isn't as perfect as it is often made out to be. It's sort of like with democracy: it sucks, but it's the best alternative we seem to have at the moment. DirkvdM 08:40, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi. I really need to know the exact time of day (to the second even IF possible) that it was when Zidane headbutted the Italian in the worldcup final on July 9 2006.

The game began at 8pm I believe (Germany time) and the headbutt was int he 110th minute, but I need to find out the exact time of day that it was when that happened (i.e. 10:00 PM).

This is a real challenge I think so thanks for any help

Well Zidane headbutted the guy on the 117:41 minute and the game started at 8pm German time, then it would have happened at approximatly 9:57:41pm in German time, give or take a few seconds due to the fact that the match wouldn't have started precisely on the 8pm mark. --user:02pollaj

Don't you have to add in half-time to that? And stoppage time? Adam Bishop 06:00, 1 August 2006 (UTC) Yes you would need plenty of extra time for half time + stoppage time + the time in between full time and extra time. I didn't record the match, but if someone did on one of those HDD recorders, they will usually tell you the exact time you started recording and the exact time something happens. – AlbinoMonkey (Talk) 08:49, 1 August 2006 (UTC) You'll never get the exact time by trying to add duration of match time, half time, injury time, etc. The best way to get the actual time it occurred would be to either get a full recorded video of the match or to check FIFA records as presumably the Referee recorded his red card somewhere & this woud have the time on it. I've just thought, some TV companies show the time as well as the score, who's playing, etc superimposed on the screen so just a picture of the headbutt from TV might do it. AllanHainey 14:11, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Could anyone direct me to the site(s) that explain these illusions. Maybe supply some vauluable keywords or simply the links. I have put considerable time into finding them for myself as well as previously trying to determine the explanations for myself all to no avail. Thanks.

Do you mean images (by illustrations)? — M in un Spiderman • Review Me 19:48, 31 July 2006 (UTC) Try Google Image search to find examples of images, and CrissAngel.com for most other info, cheers — M in un Spiderman • Review Me 19:59, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I never mentioned illustrations, perhaps you misread illusions?

Walking on water is explained at walking on water. How else?--Shantavira 07:24, 1 August 2006 (UTC) "Levitation" is explained at invisible thread and David Copperfield's flying and the "patent" link from there. All rather obvious when you know, isn't it?--Shantavira 09:50, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

i watch a lot of kung-fu movies, and some of the actors have a white square with a red circle on the square pasted to their head. i was wondering, what is the significance of the square.

genesis 2:16-17 Gensis 3:22-24 Did God did not want man to live forever.

Or does he not want man to live forever now that man has eaten of the fruit and knows right &wrong, good&evil .

It was alright to eat from the tree of life &live forever, until man ate from the tree of conscience?

Man was never told "not to eat from the tree of life. This Question is haunting my son (JoeyHipp)who has done extensive study of the Bible. "Please if at all possible" could somone answer this so i can send it to him.

There isn't going to be any "right answer". It's all the opinion of the reader. Of course, if you give us a particular denomination, we might be able to find their official stance on this issue. StuRat 23:31, 31 July 2006 (UTC) I am not quite sure what your question is. are you asking if eating from the tree was a sin. do you want to know what God plan was if man did not eat from the tree? Jon513 23:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC) I find the story a bit silly myself what was God's plan, just for them to avoid temptation and sit there in Eden doing nothing but "being happy" ? No human civilization, no nothing, just a whole universe created for two people ? Not much of a plan, if you ask me. StuRat 23:47, 31 July 2006 (UTC) You are very astute to recognize that. God's purpose was origianlly, and remains, that humans live forever in peace and harmony not only with each other, but with nature, forever. The first man was told that he could eat from every tree in the garden except for the one that the Creator reserved as his special posession. The only time death was even mentioned was as a penalty for disobedience and rebellion against God. In essense, what the first man and woman did when they ate that special fruit, was tell the Sovereign Lord of the Universe that they had the right to determine for themselves, "good and bad". 6,000+ years later, we see the result of man's self rule. Utter failure. That is why the prophet Jeremiah was inspired to say at Jer 10:23 that "It does not belong to man who is walking even to direct his step." But the Bible also outlays that this time will pass and that the earth will be restored along with obedient humanity to it's originally intended state. You see, God does not change his mind. The Bible clearly teaches that the Earth is here forever. It also teaches that is was made to be inhabited. It also clearly states that the righteous and the meek would inherit the Earth and that the wicked would be cut off and be no more. Death will be brought to nothing, sickness will be no more, nor will outcry, or pain be anymore. This is the purpose of God's Kingdom that was the theme of Jesus' ministry. This is the promise we hope for. that we look forward to seeing fulfilled. BibleTeacher89 But if you believe the story god created man in the first place. So he put the disobedient streak in him and then punished mankind for behaving in a way that he created us to behave. The story makes no sense. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 03:15, 1 August 2006 (UTC) It was not a disobedient streak that was put into man, man deliberately chose to disobey. It was the godlike quality of free will that was given man. But, just because you are free to make choices, you are not free to choose the result of those choices. They were made aware of what the law was. They chose to ignore that law. Just as someone who decides to "break the law" of gravity. you don't break any law of God, you break yourself against it. If they would have ignored the misleading advice of the rebellious spirit son of God who became the one called "Devil" and "Satan", they would have continued to prosper, and to fill the earth with perfect human offspring. Even if Adam would have chosen to not follow his wife, he could have been provided another wife and we would not have inherited sin as we all did. But this was not the case. Adam, the responsible and more experienced one, chose to disobey. Hence, death spread to all his offspring. That is why the ransom sacrifice was provided to buy mankind out of that condition. Jesus, having come to Earth as a perfect human, was qualified to "give his life as a ransom in exchange for many" and act as a propitiation for the perfect human life that Adam forfeited. That is why the Scriptures refer to him as "the last Adam". That act of love by Almighty God and his only begotten son paved the way for those in the memorial tombs to come out in the resurrection of the dead and for those and the ones who are preserved through and survive the "Great day of God the Almighty" to live everlastingly and have the priveledge of restoring the Earth to it's potential and filling it with perfect human society who live in peace under the rule, not of imperfect man. but of God's messianic Kingdom. BibleTeacher89 03:47, 1 August 2006 (UTC) I don't believe that either Adam or Jesus were perfect. The evidence on Adam is his choice of actions (eating the apple). The evidence on Jesus was his questioning God: "My God, why have thou forsaken me ?" (Matt 27:46). And while we're at it, why did God allow the evil serpent and the tempting tree to exist in his "perfect" world ? I must conclude that God, which produces all these creations with a slight evil streak in them, must be both good and evil, as in Eastern Philosophy, where Good exists in the heart of Evil, and Evil in the heart of Good (see the Ying Yang symbol). StuRat 06:25, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

God, being omnipotent, knew before hand that they would sin, therefore he placed the plant in the garden for them to sin with so everything is part of his plan. He planned for them to sin ect. 09:20, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

To be honest, rereading the thing, it looks like the story got a bit garbled. It makes sense (to me) if you consider that the knowledge of good and evil (right and wrong) can only be learnt through experience, and therefore they had to choose to do something wrong (when they had no sense of right or wrong) and be punished in order to know what right and wrong were. All other explanations I've seen fall down for me because they had no sense of right and wrong, so how can they be expected to know it is wrong to eat the fruit? Plus, if you have an omnipotent, omniscient god, he must have set it up so that they would disobey. Seems to me the tree was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil only in the sense that Death was waiting under the tree in the Parson's Tale. It possibly got garbled once people started taking it literally. Skittle 10:17, 1 August 2006 (UTC) Maimonides theorizes that before they ate from the tree they saw right and wrong in the same way we view true and false. That is to say that before the sin of the tree they were able to derive a moral system by pure logic. Only after the sin did right and wrong now exsist as separate consepts from true and false. Jon513 11:44, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I also think your question is a bit vague, but if you take away all the question marks what you are saying is generally correct - in my opinion. Perhaps you could explain what exactly is bothering your son specifically?BenC7 11:51, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

God, being omnipotent could have chosen to know beforehand that they would sin, or he could have configured events so that they would have, but that is not a complete picture of what omnipotence is about. Just as the dial on a radio allows we as people to tune in on a particular frequency, The Creator has the ability to choose to or to not see events that have not taken place yet. Placing the tree deliberately there to stumble them and to caste future mankind into the state of sin and death is not fitting with God's character. God is love, and also outlined in the Scritpures is the fact that it is impossible for God to lie. Therefore, this act of deceit is impossible for Him and against all that he stands for since it would have been, in effect, a lie. As said before, man was given the ability to choose his actions. He was told that statute and the consequences of that statute, therefore, he knew what God's requirements were and what good and bad was in the eyes of God. Whether he chose to obey this, however, is another matter. However, the rebellious angel under the guise of a talking serpent, told Eve that making her own choice in the matter of deciding what was good and bad would make her like God. He, in essence, called into question God's sovereignty, His right to rule and determine for mankind what would benefit them and what would not. By following this deceitful advice, Adam and Eve therefore rejected God's sovereignty and decided to choose for themselves the knowledge of what was good and bad. That is why they lost their lives. He decided to choose an act that he knew had dire consequences. Cause and effect. It is like when you pick up one end of a stick, you are free to do that, but you cannot then choose to not pick up the other end. That is the consequence of that action. Adam deliberately went against God's clear command (action/cause). That is why human perfection, albeit temporarily, was taken from them and their offspring. (consequence/effect) It is a matter of God's right to rule His right to tell us what it beneficial (good) and what is detrimental (bad). Once this matter is settled to the universal law's satisfaction, this little experiement of man's self rule will come to an end, and with it, as the Bible clearly points out, death, the last enemy, will be brought to nothing. --BibleTeacher89 14:54, 1 August 2006 (UTC) Even if God gave them free choice he would have known exactly what would happen. If God is omnipotent then he is complicit in their sin. Your particular interpretation is a bit disengienious. It requires that an omniscient omnipotent being be able to act without understanding the consequence of his actions, which is clearly impossible as it presents a logical paradox. It violates the definition of omniscience. If you believe in a truly unbound God, a God with complete omniscience and omnipotence then you must believe that God preordained the fall of man. No amount of circular logic can get around this. By the bible's own ethical rules not-acting creates the same responsibility as acting. --Darkfred Talk to me 15:52, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

This is some of the funniest stuff i have read in a long time! Well Done people! I just wanted to point out that this is all metophoric. Thanks, Oh, and basically it doesnt matter to the original question as the prisoner has no concept of right and wrong or he would not be a prisoner. i am still laughing at the previous two responses, bloody brilliant hahaha

Well, first of all, where in the Holy Scriptures do you see Almighty God apply any human definition of omniscient/omnipotent to himself? You are relying on human understaning to define the divine and spiritual. Forget, for a moment, your definition of omniscient/omnipotent. God himself, by means of his personal name, defines himself as "He Who Causes to Become" and "I Shall Prove to be What I Shall Prove to Be". He is not limited by your definition of what you think his state of being is. He can be what he wants to fit any situation. The only thing He cannot be, is a liar and deceitful. That is something that He hates and is against his very nature. Also, being complicit in their sin is against his very being. God is love. He is the personification of love and his very essense is love. He fully intended to allow them free will and for them to obey him due to love and respect To make the choice to obey him, not out of robotic compulsion. There is nothing circular about it. It is a logical and straightforward concept. Forget predestination, it is not a Biblical teaching. It is a philosophy of man. The bottom line and the answer to the question is that Almighty God created humans with everlasting life in mind. He created us with the intent to have us live, prosper, progress, and fill the earth with perfect offspring who live in peace and care for the planet. This intent has not changed. It will be filfilled in its due time. And, if you look at present events and circumstances, that time is drawing ever closer. Our deliverance is at hand!

Bible teacher, I invite you to take a look at Predestination, specifically the section on the Christian doctrine of predestination, predestination is a basic biblical concept, as you should well know. Anyway, it was a fun debate, although in an inappropriate forum. Because you seem new to this sort of debate I also invite you to have a look at circular logic, logical paradox and Argumentum ad populum. Argumentum ad populum, or the appeal to belief is a tricky argument to use in debate, it can force a false choice in the viewers mind between literal inerancy and atheism. This debate is a very old one see Fall of Man. The position taken by most christian religions is that the story is in at least the small details allegorical. And cannot be considered a literal paradox in that sense. If you had argued this way, then you would have avoided my entire argument. My argument relied on a literal interpretation. This way if your argument fails then most you have lost is your listeners trust in biblical literalism, not loss of faith. --Darkfred Talk to me 19:11, 1 August 2006 (UTC) Dark Fred, I don't seek debate. I don't care for debate. I care to teach and there is no learning in a debate, only the desire to win the argument. As for this literal paradox, I simply don't see the paradox. I hold that the account does relate an actual event and that there is nothing allegorical nor paradoxical about it, when you use discernment. When talking about the Bible, I believe in letting the Bible answer the Bible, not leaning on pagan-influenced church doctrine of men like Protestant Reformer John Calvin who defined his concept of predestination in the book Institutes of the Christian Religion. Christendom is littered with these types of empty philosophical attempts to try and understand and extrapolate the Scriptures. In my experience, the Bible answers itself. That is why my points are not circular nor are they based on the fear of loss of certain listeners' belief in the Bible or faith. Even Jesus himself, the Great Teacher, lost some listeners on occassion. He was not concerned with pleasing everyone nor am I, because he was confident that his sheep would hear his voice and respond. He was well aware that not everyone was ready to hear. Getting back to this non-Biblical doctrine, the Scriptures reveal that there are situations in which God chooses not to foreknow the outcome. Just before the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, he declared: “I am quite determined to go down that I may see whether they act altogether according to the outcry over it that has come to me, and, if not, I can get to know it.” This text clearly shows us that God did not foreknow the extent of the depravity in those cities before he investigated matters. True, God can foresee certain events, but in many cases, he has chosen not to use his foreknowledge. Because God is almighty, he is free to exercise his abilities as he wishes, not according to the wishes of imperfect humans. Rather than attach a concept of obligitory omniscience to God's perfection, it is more in harmony with the Scriptures to say that his power is more in line with selective foreknowledge. This would mean that, rather than all history from creation onward being a mere rerun of what had already been foreseen and foreordained, God could with all sincerity set before the first human pair the prospect of everlasting life in an earth free from wickedness. You and others who agree with Calvin say that God predetermined man’s fall before his creation and that he had predestinated the ‘chosen ones’ before that fall. But if this were true, would it not have been hypocritical for God to offer the prospect of everlasting life to Adam and Eve, fully aware that they would be unable to realize it? Moreover, the Scriptures nowhere deny that the first human couple were given a choice: either to follow divine directions and live forever or to reject them and die. The fact that God did not choose to know which course mankind would take did not prevent him from prophesying the consequences of man’s good or bad actions. A mechanic who warns a driver of the poor condition of his vehicle cannot be held responsible if an accident occurs or be accused of predestining it. Likewise, God cannot be accused of predestining the sad consequences of individuals’ actions. The same was true with the descendants of the first human couple. Before Cain killed his brother, God put a choice before Cain. Would he master sin, or would sin get mastery over him? Nothing in the account indicates that God predetermined that Cain would make the bad choice and murder his brother. Later, the Mosaic Law warned the Israelites about what would happen if they turned away from God, for instance, by taking wives from among the pagan nations. What was foretold did happen. This can be seen from the example of King Solomon, who in his later years was influenced by his foreign wives to practice idolatry. God warned his people, but he did not predestine what their individual actions would be. Man was given free will, being created “in God’s image.” Free will was indispensable if humans were to honor and serve God out of love, not as robots with every movement determined beforehand. Love displayed by intelligent, free creatures would enable God to refute unjust accusations. He says: “Be wise, my son, and make my heart rejoice, that I may make a reply to him that is taunting me.” If God’s servants were predestined—or programmed, so to speak—could not the genuineness of their love for their Creator be called into question? Also, would it not be contrary to God’s impartiality for him to make a predetermined choice of persons destined to glory and happiness without taking their individual merits into account? Moreover, if some receive such preferential treatment, while others are destined to eternal punishment, this would hardly arouse sincere feelings of gratitude in the “elect,” or “chosen ones.” Finally, Christ told his disciples to preach the good news to all mankind. If God has already chosen the ones to be saved, would this not dampen the zeal Christians show in evangelizing? Would it not make the preaching work essentially pointless? Impartial love from God is the strongest force that can move men to love him in return. The greatest expression of God’s love was to sacrifice his Son in behalf of imperfect, sinful mankind. God’s foreknowledge respecting his Son is a special case, but it assures us that the restoration promises resting on Jesus will indeed be fulfilled. So may we put faith in that Son and draw close to God. Let us show our appreciation by accepting God’s invitation to come into a fine relationship with our Creator. Today, God addresses this invitation to all who want to exercise their free will and show their love for him. --BibleTeacher89 07:23, 2 August 2006 (UTC) The Bible only said God didn't know the conditions in Sodom, it didn't say that the reason was that he chose not to know, that's purely your interpretation. Another example is that God apparently had to "walk" in Eden and "see" that Adam and Eve had clothed themselves, before he "knew" what they had done (all very anthropomorphic compared to our modern concept of God). Not only does this show a lack of knowledge of the future, but even the present, on God's part. My interpretation is that the Bible was written by many different people, each of which had different concepts of God. Most, but not all, conceived of an omnipresent God. The few who didn't added the portions where God doesn't seem to know what's going on. StuRat 08:45, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I would like to point out that User:BibleTeacher89 is clearly a Jehovah's Witness and thus does not represent Christian theology in his answers. BenC7 04:32, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I would like to point out that it never says the question wasn't for a jehovahs witness. Xcomradex 01:11, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I am looking for average - preferably median average - earnings of people in various parts of London such as Westminster, Chelsea, the City, Richmond, and so on.

I am seeking the earnings for both where people work and where they live.

I'd prefer the median average as the arithmetic average is distorted by a small number of high earners, meaning that most people earn less than the arithmetic average.

in the Winter 2005/06 the Average gross weekly earnings of full-time employees in London was 595 pounds. Information provided by Office for National Statistics of the UK, specifically here and here. Jon513 11:40, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I have a collection of files I need to store permanently. I've been warned by people that DVD-Rs only last 5 years if I'm lucky -- is there any truth to this? I'm not pinching pennies, I'm using Ritek, Ridata and Verbatim discs. About 150 are stored in standard plastic DVD cases on a shelf, and another 100 are stored inside a hard plastic DVD binder. How long will they last? Should I re-burn these discs every 3 or 4 years?

The answer is yes. --ColourBurst 07:15, 1 August 2006 (UTC) Actually according to that very article, the answer is no. 100-200 years for DVD-/+R and 25 years for DVD-/+RW. Nowimnthing 14:08, 1 August 2006 (UTC) Sorry, my bad. That 5-10 years is what the manufacturers claim. The tests are different. --ColourBurst 16:35, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Man, Godard and Nature (and Bardot, Too)

JEAN-LUC GODARD’S radiant, ambiguous, serenely perverse “Contempt,” 45 this year, is being revived again, in startling color and elegant, ribbony CinemaScope, for the second time in just over a decade, and it’s beginning to look like one of those movies we can’t do without for very long: a classic. Film Forum, which in 1997 gave New Yorkers their first opportunity in many years to see the film on the large screen it practically requires, starts another run (two weeks, minimum) on Friday. That 1997 revival opened a lot of eyes — of older filmgoers who’d been baffled by “Contempt” on its initial release, and of younger ones who knew it only by its reputation as Mr. Godard’s failed attempt at big-budget commercial moviemaking, or who had perhaps endured a college film society screening of a choppy, faded print. It’s time to open our eyes to its troubling beauty again.

When the picture, Mr. Godard’s sixth feature, opened in France in 1963, admirers of his challenging, radically innovative previous work, like “Breathless” (1960) and “My Life to Live” (1962), didn’t quite know what to make of it. Based on an Alberto Moravia novel that the director dismissed (unfairly) as a “nice, vulgar one for a train journey,” produced by Carlo Ponti and by Joseph E. Levine — two of the most powerful men in movies at that time, neither known as a patron of the arts — and starring, of all people, Brigitte Bardot, “Contempt” seemed at first a more conventional film than generally associated with Mr. Godard. Further confusing matters (as was, and remains, his custom), he told an interviewer that his movie was “a simple film, without mystery.”

It is nothing of the kind. Moravia’s story, which the film tells surprisingly faithfully, is a fairly simple one, about a screenwriter (played by Michel Piccoli) who can’t figure out why his wife (Ms. Bardot) has suddenly begun to despise him. The collapse of their marriage occurs while the writer is mulling an offer to punch up the script of “The Odyssey,” produced by a wily and crude American mogul (Jack Palance) and directed by Fritz Lang, who plays himself. (In the novel the director is an invented character, a generic veteran of the German silent cinema, who is, we’re told, “certainly not in the same class as the Pabsts and Langs.”) That’s about it for narrative: the writer frets, the wife glowers, the producer rants and manipulates, and Lang, calm in this storm of domestic malaise and showbiz madness, tries to make a movie that will reflect, at least a little, his vision of “The Odyssey.” “Homer’s world is a real world,” he says. “The poet belonged to a world that grew in harmony, not opposition, to nature.”

But Mr. Godard’s fidelity to the novel’s straightforward, rather uneventful plot has, like the heroine’s sullen fidelity to her husband, an undertone of refusal, even of subversion. The novel is interested primarily in the psychology of its characters, while the film is concerned with something so different that it seems, at times, almost to mock the very idea of psychology. When the screenwriter begins to interpret “The Odyssey” in terms of his own marital difficulties, he is purely ridiculous, and Mr. Godard emphasizes the absurdity by having the character deliver his loony exegesis while walking with Lang in a lovely grove on the island of Capri. The camera keeps its distance, as it does throughout the film you can measure this picture’s indifference to psychology by the near-total absence of close-ups.

No, what “Contempt” is most profoundly interested in is what Lang is interested in: the relation of man to nature, here represented by Capri and the tranquil Mediterranean and, of course, by the less restful beauty of Ms. Bardot. Mr. Godard was prevailed upon by Mr. Levine to shoot extra footage of his lead actress in the altogether, and so tacked on an opening sequence of Ms. Bardot and Mr. Piccoli in bed. He may have done this grudgingly, but it’s good for the movie, because between that short scene and the characters’ arrival on the “Odyssey” set in Capri about an hour later, the action takes place in an eerily depopulated Rome, in settings from which nature has, it seems, been forcibly excluded. A full half-hour of “Contempt” is set in the couple’s sleekly modern high-rise apartment, where they roam and bicker among angular, primary-colored chairs and sofas, which stand out more strongly against the stark white walls than the tones of the hero’s, and even the heroine’s, flesh.

Ms. Bardot’s body, in that first scene, and Capri, in the concluding scenes, are the natural world that nobody in this movie seems quite capable of harmonizing with, or of seeing, as entirely, irreducibly real, the way Homer did. And it isn’t, of course. As “Contempt” does not allow us to forget, Lang is shooting a movie, and we in the audience are watching one, and here, as in every other movie ever made, we gaze, like Odysseus in this film’s gorgeous final shot, at a reality that’s a projection of our own desires, an Ithaca turned hazy by artifice and distance.

The greatness of “Contempt” is that Mr. Godard is not, finally, nostalgic for the Homeric harmony Lang speaks of. He knows that ship has sailed. In this picture everything, ancient or modern, “real” or “unreal,” has its own stunned dignity, and the movie wants us to see it all as beautiful — as its people, tragically, cannot. Even early ’60s furniture. “Contempt” is about men and women rendered graceless by their times, but the movie, substituting rigorous aesthetics for the novel’s psychology, shows us where they (and we) went wrong and achieves an extraordinary grace. (The crisp natural-light cinematography, by Raoul Coutard, and Georges Delerue’s mournful score have something to do with this too.)

Maybe we need “Contempt” because it’s one of the few movies of the anxious past half-century that seems equally at home with history and modernity. It might once have looked conventional, but its audacity, we now see, is breathtaking. The world of “Contempt” is epic in a new way: a world growing in harmony, not opposition, with artifice.

Field Hollers and Slave Songs`

I don't know how many people here have listened to some of the field hollers that became the roots of blues. I can remember when I was about 5 or 6 years old, hearing the African-American field workers in the fields singing these. It seems they all inherently knew the song to sing for the occasion. one for cotton hoeing, one for cotton picking, one for working in the cornfield, one for washing clothes, and some the older women would sing to their babies.

From Beacon.org:, Here's a cornfield holler by Thomas J. Marshall - Arwhoolie: (In my opinion, the scale he sings is related closely to the blues scale and shows how the blues did, in fact, originate long before the end of slavery and probably came over from West Africa.

And here's a cottonfield holler by Roosevelt "Giant" Hudson:

If you look at the slave songs of the United States, you will find a regionality to them. The songs from the Carolinas are more sacred in context. The songs from the banks of the Mississippi River (Arkansas, Mississippi, Tennessee and Louisiana) tend to be secular.

Credits from William Francvis Allen, et al. "Slave Songs of the United States - 1889.

Here's a couple from South Carolina sea islands where the Gullah people still sing these slave songs from the 1800's. Roll Jordan, Roll has been modified since the slave days, but is still one of the most popular sacred African American spirituals.

And here's one slave song from the states along the Mississippi River that shows somewhat the secular nature of this region:

Of course, there were sacred elements to even the secular songs, such as the "Hipocrite and the Concubine".

And to further my thesis that the french creole influenced jazz and blues, here's two creole based slave songs from Louisiana in the early 1800's.

Aug 18, 2012 #2 2012-08-18T16:32

OK. I think I've got the links working now.

Any comments, disagreements, discussion.

Aug 19, 2012 #3 2012-08-19T15:47

I haven't been everywhere but it's on my list.

Aug 19, 2012 #4 2012-08-19T22:24

The Lomax vol 1&2 have lots of field hollers in the parchman prison recordings. Including "Rosie" If you haven't listened to either of these cds I highly recommend them

Aug 19, 2012 #5 2012-08-19T22:36

Tenn Jim, I think it's a great privilege, that you grew up hearing this music straight from the source!

I've tried to look into this kind of stuff every once and in a while, but there are a few problems that almost always occur.

The only early documentation we have is by western trained musicians, whose ability to note down the rhythms and melodies are unreliable, to say the least. They simply weren't trained to deal with polyrythms and microintervals at that time, since western music didn't deal with them.

The other problem is that we're terribly late (as we were recording the blues in the first place), and at the time we got to them, the field hollers and work songs weren't that much as an isolated "museum" of afro-american music origins, as we'd like to think. They might have picked up elements of commercial radio and records, and in fact recorded blues songs, before someone gathering them got around (the same problem appears with today's african music vs. the blues).

Anyway, on a more positive side, here's ar link to add to the discussion.

Aug 19, 2012 #6 2012-08-19T22:57

Paris, France.

Aug 20, 2012 #7 2012-08-20T03:24

QUOTE (Pan @ August 19, 2012 05:36 pm)
Tenn Jim, I think it's a great privilege, that you grew up hearing this music straight from the source!

First of all, thanks everyone who has commented. It's through these types of discussions that we all learn.

Pan, you bring up some great points. It's true, the music we attribute to slave songs are probably influenced by the western musicology. I'm sure the chants and "hollers" I heard back in the late 30's and eary 40''s were different from those that preceded the blues. However, some of those we find on Beacon.org have a sound very close to some of the Ethopian airs of the 20th century.

But, I defer to the more knowledgeable.

For those that are interested, here is the Beacon site.

These recordings include work by Lomax as well as others and were said to have been recorded by people who had lived in slavery. Of course, I'm sure these could have been influenced by the western civilization.

Again, thanks for commenting.

Aug 24, 2012 #8 2012-08-24T04:32

tenn_jim:These recordings include work by Lomax as well as others and were said to have been recorded by people who had lived in slavery. Of course, I'm sure these could have been influenced by the western civilization.
Here's an interesting and relevant, IMHO, old BBF thread that touches on the influence of 'western civalization' on 'the music' . you can go to the link below and view the entire thread . or check out the version I've attempted to edit below:

I just recently was in the Miss. Delta to give in-school/Blues In The Schools presentations and give an all day blues history/teaching seminar at the BB King Museum and Delta Interpretive Center in Indianola, MS.

While I was at the BB King Museum there was a program being presented in the lobby/coffee/gift shop area by Mr. Golden, an older Black gentleman, in his late 70s I'd guess, a former field hand in the cotton fields, on subject of cotton picking/labor in the 'old days' . and he brought along lots of items to 'show and tell' about . cotton sacks, tools, photos, etc.

In the course of his presentation he asked if anyone had questions . since I was doing a presentation on blues history and teaching blues history at the museum on the following day . I asked Mr. Golden about what was sung in the fields in this area of Mississippi . there were also some older, over 70, Black ladies present who work as docents at the museum . they all responded to my question with the same/similar answers .

"When our parents were in the fields working with us we generally sang Dr. Watts hymns. Somebody would suggest we 'Hey, sing an old Dr. Watts hymn!' And we would proceed to sing a song like "Father I stretch my hand to thee." "When our parents were not in the fields with us we would frequently sing blues songs."
This was fascinating to me . and I proceeded to ask about who Dr. Watts was . but Mr. Golden and the docents/ladies could not tell me anything about Dr. Watts. All they knew was that the hymns they most frequently sang were taught to them from Dr. Watts' book.

I then proceeded to go in to tour the BB King museum . and the first thing I saw when I walked into the museum was the photo/lyrics on the wall, facing the entrance as you walk into the museum . see below. Now I had a 'lead' . I went into the lobby and got one of the docent/ladies who had taken much time in telling me about 'singing in the fields' . I showed her the mural with the lyrics and she said . "Oh, now we both know a little bit about Dr. Isaac Watts. He's the one who wrote the hymn books we learned from."

So what I learned from this is that the hymns of Dr. Isaac Watts were frequently taught in Black churches in this region and frequently sung in the fields while working . and as I was still very curious to know more about Watts, I followed up by looking for information on Dr. Watts online . and judging by what I read about Watts at various web sites, he was/is a famous guy and very prolific in his contributions to Christian hymnal history/annals . a 'testament' to my ignorance on the subject. I guess, some might say, "What? You've never heard of the great Dr. Isaac Watts?" . well, no, I hadn't . but, hey, I learned something .

Dr. Isaac Watts bio.:
Isaac Watts (1674-1748) was an English pastor, preacher, poet, and hymn writer. Wrote about 600 hymns including When I Survey the Wondrous Cross, Am I a Soldier of the Cross, and Joy to the World. Considered the founder of English hymnody and children's hymnody. Published books of poetry, hymns, and three volumes of theological discourses.
http://www.hawkeyeherman.com/pdf/africa . _music.pdf

The music of blacks during slavery integrated their African heritage and the Judeo-Christian ethic. African American musical traditions began to emerge as an identifiable entity in the latter half of the 18th century, with the development of the sacred form of music known as the spiritual.

Spirituals were sung in both religious and nonsacred settings. The use of the spiritual reflects the African ideal that while sacred song allows one to communicate with the other world, it may also address matters of the present world.

One combination of song and movement that developed during slavery was known as ring shouts, or shout spirituals. These were a form of musical and religious expression performed primarily "after service" in praise houses or after a formal religious event. The music was call-and-response oriented accompaniment included singing, hand clapping, foot stamping, and thigh slapping. Shout music came from a body of spirituals and/or hymns used primarily for religious expression. The music was drawn from remnants of African melodies, single lines from hymns or folk spirituals, and songs reflecting significant events in the lives of participants.
Spirituals developed in northern independent black churches during the 18th and 19th centuries. Freedmen utilized the singing style and the practice of mixing movement with the music found in the South, but modified them to suit their specific needs. Spirituals were adapted from other hymnals, taken from folk and popular songs, or were new tunes composed to accompany text. Richard Allen's hymnal, published in 1801, used all of these techniques. Allen modified some hymns by adding supplementary lines, refrain lines, and choruses to ensure full participation of the congregation.

Philadelphia minister Charles Albert Tindley continued the tradition of Richard Allen. By the early 1900s, Tindley wrote more than 45 hymns, including "Stand By Me," "We'll Understand it Better By and By," and "I'll Overcome Someday." In the late 19th century, arranged spirituals appeared. George L. White, a young white teacher at Fisk University, developed a repertoire of classical music and musical forms that originated during slavery but were changed to reflect the different circumstances under which these former slaves lived. He gave his students musical training and formed the Fisk Jubilee Singers, who began touring in 1871. This started a musical tradition in historically black colleges and universities.

IMHO, spirituals and hymns do NOT necessarily emanate from the same source, and generally do not. Please read my previous post in this thread . many of the hymns sung in African American churches, and in the fields to pass long hours of labor in the Mississippi Delta were composed by Dr. Isaac Watts, a (white) Englishman, as well as other hymnal composers. That takes the 'hymn' out of the realm of what you have called 'came from folks doing traditional music of folklore' and into the realm of professional musicians/composers. Hymns and spirituals should not be placed in the same category, nor do they come from the same source.
Isaac Watts (1674-1748) was an English pastor, preacher, poet, and hymn writer. Wrote about 600 hymns including When I Survey the Wondrous Cross, Am I a Soldier of the Cross, and Joy to the World. Considered the founder of English hymnody and children's hymnody. Published books of poetry, hymns, and three volumes of theological discourses.

According to a book by William T. Dargan, Dr. Watts hymn singing had a direct influence on the field hollers or "field blues". In other words, it was one of the core foundations for what blues was built upon. What your saying helps to give even more credibility to this connection.

In order to understand the African American "Dr. Watts" hymn, there's a couple of things that should be clarified:

1. Isaac Watts (like a lot of other hymn writers) only wrote the text. His hymn poetry has been set to very different melodies and musical styles, ranging from folk songs and ballads, tunes inspired by European classical composers to music that resembles that of Africa. So the music of an Isaac Watts hymn can be sung in either the folk or professional manner. (His poetry was written in what is known as "ballad meter", which easily matches ballad tunes).

2. While the term "Dr Watts" is obviously a reference to Isaac Watts, it is also the name for a black American hymn style and any hymn in it's repertoire (regardless of whether the hymn is by Isaac Watts or not). One example of a very popular "Dr. Watts" hymn is Charles Wesley's "A Charge To Keep I Have".

This Dr. Watts hymn singing has been documented from the 1750's. It was the first (major) distinctive hymn style of African Americans and predates most of what is lumped in the black spiritual category. In it's normal church context it is most often sung slowly by the congregation (in response to a line first sung by the leader), with overlapping vocal parts, a lot of melisma and very bluesy---using blue notes. This dominant type of Dr. Watts is known by other names like "moaning hymns" and "long meter". (The field hollers were also known by the name of long meter). But it has some stylistic variations in different regions of the United States (the Mississippi delta region favoring a unison heterophonic "moaning" style), and it is sometimes adapted to solo singing. Unison, solo, or otherwise, the melodies are passed down through oral tradition. This qualifies it as folk music.

It is usually overlooked or unknown to the general public, but it is absolutely foundational to many styles of music. Not only did it influence the "field blues", but it impacted many of the black spirituals (especially it's bluesier side). It's influence also appears to have slipped into group work songs and it has intertwined with the more upbeat Ring Shout. (Some Dr Watts hymns have adapted to the rhythms of shouts or Ring Shouts, like the hymns sung in the Sea Islands of South Carolina and Georgia). There are other examples of Dr. Watts that use part harmonies, which remind me a bit of black quartet singing, so that might be another connection.

The Dr. Watts style is part of a larger hymn tradition known as the "lined out hymn" or "the old way of singing". It came to America from English and Scottish settlers. Characterized by slow tempos, a prevalence of melisma, irregular rhythms and a congregation repeating a line in a longer drawn out way, it shares similarities to the slow dirge singing in West & Central Africa. There is strong evidence that the slow "moaning" type of Dr. Watts (as found in Mississippi) is derived from blending these two similar styles. It certainly owes a lot to both African music and the white lined out hymn. Interestingly the white lined out hymns that survive in Kentucky, also share a bluesy quality (though maybe less obvious). Some other groups that have their own style of lined out hymn is Native Indians, black West Indians (showing little African influence from the bit I've heard) and the Amish/Mennonites (based on a German tradition as opposed to British). Additionally there is a survival of lined out Gaelic Psalm singing in the Hebrides of Scotland, but this probably had little to no influence on Dr. Watts.

Here are 7 examples of Dr. Watts singing (mostly from You Tube) and 1 example of white lined out hymn for comparison:

7. An Article On Dr. Watts Singing With A Full Song Sample:
http://www.arts.state.ms.us/folklife/ar . tts_doctor

Two more examples of a black lined out hymn, but this time from Jamaica and Trinidad (sounding very different from American Dr. Watts). Short samples can be heard on this following link (the first two sound clips):

Another black religious genre that is commonly overlooked is known as a "moan" or "moans". It is primarily a type of sung prayer, though also found in preaching. This style is very closely related to the Dr. Watts hymn (especially the slow bluesy "moaning hymns"). In fact it is often sung at the same time as a hymn performance. A common part of a moaning Dr. Watts is a wordless humming chorus after the last hymn stanza is sung. It is during the hummed melody of the hymn that a prayer moan is often introduced.

Moans have essentially the same singing style and melodic flow as the moaning hymn (even it's name is similar). Both are focused on slides, melismas, varied tone colors and blue notes, which are the musical characteristics that describe "moaning". (The term "moaning" can also refer to the humming chorus of a hymn or as another name for the prayer/sermon moans. This is potentially confusing). But the structure of moans is a bit different. Instead of constantly repeating a hymn stanza twice (alternating between a shorter sung line and a longer drawn out version of the same stanza), it is a more improvised spontaneous chant based on a two to three stanza form. The three stanza moans may have contributed to the typical three stanza form of blues (though they are AAA stanzas instead of AAB). One thing for sure is they sound a lot like the blues, having been around since the 1830's (if not earlier). The first time I remember hearing a prayer moan (from a radio church broadcast) I described it as a "blues chant", reminding me of an African tribe singing a unison a cappella chant. The link between the blues and the black church was very apparent to my ears.

Some sources suggest that Moans are an antecedent to black spirituals. They are very consistent in style to the slow bluesy spirituals of Dock Reed and Vara Hall (and a lesser extant to their quicker paced spirituals). The connection between this type of spiritual to the prayer moans (and related moaning hymns) is strongly suggested. It's close enough to moans in style, that I would call it a moaning spiritual. Most of the traditional spiritual singing I've heard shows a certain amount of that earlier moaning sound. But not all traditional spiritual singing sounds similar and can seem to have no connection. I personally believe that the category "black spirituals" encompasses some different song types and styles, not all springing from the exact same roots. Perhaps another time I will explain further.
Enough said for tonight. Yikes. the time on the clock!
Harmonica Mitch:
What are the origins of (black) American gospel music? (As performed by people like Rev Gary Davis, The Staple Singers, Mahailia Jackson. etc)
And how is black, American gospel music tied into/related to the blues, and its history? Which came first? I'm interested in the relationship between the two.
Why is it that certain chords and chord progressions 'sound like gospel music'?
Blind Will:

What came to be known as black gospel is largely an offshoot of the white gospel hymn or the quartet harmony tradition, intermingled with other musical influences. However, some of the black gospel of the Pentecostal realm is more related to the old ring shouts (heavily African based).

The first African American gospel style is sometimes known as the "black gospel hymn". Its origin is commonly attributed to Charles Tindley, who combined the white gospel hymn (a musical descendant of camp meeting songs, parlor ballads, classical, and Italian opera) with traditional black spiritual. His first published songs in this style were in 1901. But I do wonder if he was the first person to blacken the white gospel hymn, considering the gospel hymn had been around since at least the 1860's. Either way, he was the first to popularize this style and it's most important figure.

The black gospel hymn style that began with Charles Tindley (and others?) became infused with "secular" sounds of the day, along with the rhythmic drive of the shouts or ring shouts in Pentecostal churches. Thomas Dorsey was one of the pioneers in this second wave of gospel, who fused the black hymn style of Charles Tindley with his blues/jazz background (Dorsey has always credited Tindley as an influence on his music). There were others independent of Dorsey who were creating a similar type of gospel song. For instance, the gospel songs of Arizona Dranes in the 1920's have echoes of both gospel hymn, ragtime and blues, sometimes with sanctified shout singing. Her 1926 recording of "He's The Lily Of The Valley" adds jubilee quartet type harmony and operatic vocal tinges, ending in what sounds a lot like boogie woogie piano. She is lesser known but was very influential on the gospel scene. Mahalia Jackson was also intermingling jazz-blues with the black gospel hymn style, and I think she initially did this independent of Dorsey's influence (though she would later tour with him and include his songs in her repertoire). She is said to have been influenced by the likes of Bessie Smith by her teens ---most of her teen years in the 1920's. Most of Dorsey's blues infected gospel tunes didn't become written until the 1930's or later. So despite a very popular view, the black gospel genre didn't all begin with Thomas Dorsey (as important as he was). In fact both Dorsey and Mahalia Jackson have called Charles Tindley the father of gospel:

The black gospel quartet sound is linked to the earlier tradition of jubilee quartets and the close harmony sounds of barbershop (both of which go back to the late 1800's). If you dig deeper, it is ultimately linked to a form of close harmony that was found in Germany, Austria, and the Alpine region. It came to America in two ways: through German or German speaking immigrants in that region, and concert tours (the last being the most effective).

In the 1830's singing groups from the Austrian and Swiss border region of the Alps toured the United States. They introduced tight close harmony and it began a craze for this type of music in America. The most influential of the Alpine groups was a family quartet by the name of The Rainers or the Tyrolese Minstrels (touring from 1839 to 1943). Like wild fire, their 4 part harmony songs were translated from German into the English language, and new English American quartets sprang up in their likeness. Very quickly they began to combine this "German-Alpine" derived harmony with other music of the day---especially parlor ballads, minstrel tunes and African American forms like black spirituals and later ragtime. This varied mixing of genres led to minstrel quartets in the 1840's (the minstrel show taking it's name from the Tyrolese Minstrels), and eventually gave birth to barbershop (a major form of music for both whites and blacks in the 19th century) and to the black a cappella jubilee quartets that sang spirituals almost exclusively. The early jubilee quartets tended to be more restrained than black barbershop, but they were very similar in style (if not exactly the same on occasion) and borrowed techniques from each other.

By the 1920's and 1930's the jubilee quartet tradition (even more heavily impacted by barbershop) was absorbing the gospel music of Tindley, Dorsey and others or the same type of "secular" sounds that were found in gospel of that era---jazz, blues and ragtime. This new brand of jubilee harmony would become identified as black gospel quartets. Things continued to change, evolve and adapt to the trends of the time, including the addition of musical instruments like electric guitar, bass and drums (totally taking it out of the jubilee category). This gave us the likes of the Spirits Of Memphis, Hard gospel like the early Soul Stirrers (very harsh leads that sound like a Pentecostal preacher mixed with smooth harmonies) and the unique distinctive sound of the Staple Singers. The early gospel of The Staple Singers (drawing some of their inspiration from country & western and blues), utilized both gospel harmonies, soulful soloing from Mavis and some classy electric guitar work.

For an example of what I call "shout gospel" hear is a video by Louis Overstreet (from the early 60's). It's kind of a missing link between the old slave ring shouts and rock & roll:

To answer your second question:

The first accounts of the blues (excluding field hollers) go back to the early 1890's. The very first account is a recollection of W.C. Handy, which was a black vocal quartet doing a blues song around 1890. So this is before any known examples of black gospel (by the narrower use of the term), which begins around the turn of the 20th Century. But as I pointed out in my earlier post, the black church was already making very blues like music way before the blues emerged.
Some of the music that had the most impact on the early blues was the field hollers (an outgrowth of both West African work song and Dr. Watts hymn), black ballad songs (especially those with a three stanza and rhyming couplet), traditional African American stringed music (some of which is very close to that of Africa, even today) and possibly the three stanza prayer/sermon moans.

Black spirituals seem to have influenced black gospel more than the blues (the Dr. Watts hymn and moans are in a different category). However, it's possible that the ring shout (often classified as a black spiritual) had some influence on the boogie woogie piano blues. In jook joints (generally small houses where blacks met to eat, gamble and party) they had secularized variations of the old ring shout dances (which were found in praise houses). Jook joints also had blues. I can't say for sure, but perhaps the driving rhythms in boogie woogie are related to these dances that were performed in the jook joints.

PS. Hopefully nobody is offended by my Thomas Dorsey comments. It isn't my intention to step on anyones toes.
I'm not sure about pre-war recordings of Dr. Watts, but I do know of some more recent albums that have it. There's two selections of this kind on the new "Fire In My Bones" compilation.

Indeed - the Clear Creek Baptist Church Congregation track is one I particularly enjoy on that CD.

I expect any commercial recordings of this style was limited to those short snippets on the preacher records - ('Dark Was the Night Cold Was the Ground' sounds something like an instrumental translation of this style?)

Of those clips you linked to, I loved the Old Regular Baptists - "I am a Poor Pilgrim of Sorrow" - thanks for posting it.
Blind Will:

Your right about that Blind Willie Johnson track. In fact "Dark Was The Night Cold Was The Ground" is the title of a Dr. Watts hymn, and Blind Willie is adapting this hymn to an instrumental blues. Wordless humming is often used at the end of a Dr. Watts hymn (as I noted earlier), so this could easily be what he is imitating. The full title of the hymn is "Dark Was The Night And Cold Was The Ground On which Our Lord Was Laid". It's a hymn about the crucifixion of Christ.

The melody of Blind Willie's rendition is similar to a Dr. Watts version by John and Lovie Griffins (with words). Here's two links to compare the two melodies.

I also enjoy that song by the Clear Creek Baptist Church. It's one of the stand out songs on that album. The sincerity in the opening prayer is one thing I notice about that track, very genuine and heartfelt.

Earlier tonight I read someones comment on Johnson, saying he wasn't a blues artist but a gospel artist that never did a secular song. Some people just can't understand that blues music can be a religious or sacred music. Music in a blues style doesn't become non-blues just because it doesn't fit the secular "devils music" stereotype. He has some songs that deviate somewhat from blues (including some renditions of white gospel hymns), but a lot of more secular blues artists include some non-blues in their repertoire---like ragtime guitar pieces. Overall I think Johnson's style is very much blues and shouldn't be denied as blues or ignored by blues historians (kind of a pet peeve of mine). Not that your saying otherwise. Just giving my 2 cents on what I read tonight.

QUOTE (Blind Will @ February 07, 2010 07:38 am)
This Dr. Watts hymn singing has been documented from the 1750's. It was the first (major) distinctive hymn style of African Americans and predates most of what is lumped in the black spiritual category. In it's normal church context it is most often sung slowly by the congregation (in response to a line first sung by the leader), with overlapping vocal parts, a lot of melisma and very bluesy---using blue notes. This dominant type of Dr. Watts is known by other names like "moaning hymns" and "long meter". (The field hollers were also known by the name of long meter). But it has some stylistic variations in different regions of the United States (the Mississippi delta region favoring a unison heterophonic "moaning" style), and it is sometimes adapted to solo singing. Unison, solo, or otherwise, the melodies are passed down through oral tradition. This qualifies it as folk music.

That is fascinating. What sources document this kind of African American singing as early as 1750?

I ended up using the more general term "the 1750's", though I initially referred to "1750" until I edited my post (as you can see in the above quote the change has been made).

The first documented accounts of Dr. Watts hymn singing come from letters that Samuel Davies wrote to John Wesley. Samuel Davies was a Presbyterian preacher who taught hymns in the "lined out" fashion (he wrote 10 of his own hymns). In a letter he wrote in 1750, 1751 or 1755 (depending on what source you are to believe) he told Wesley that the slaves were exceedingly delighted with Watts songs. He said that the Negroes, above all the human species he knew had the nicest ear for music and an ecstatic delight in Psalmody, that they took pleasure in these books (of hymns) more than any other book. In a later letter to Wesley (which William Dargan says to be from March 2, 1756) he talks about the slaves accepting all the books that were sent to them, but especially 'Psalms and Hymns' (a hymn book by Isaac Watts) and said that it enabled them to gratify their peculiar taste for Psalmody. He talked about how some of them lodged all night in his kitchen, sometimes hearing them at two or three in the morning with a torrent of sacred harmony that carried his mind to heaven. Both of these letters (even though they don't give any specific details on how they sang) suggest their strong love for singing Isaac Watts hymns and imply that they had their own distinctive way of singing them.

In 1758 (assuming my source got the right year) another preacher, the Rev. Mr. Todd of Virginia spoke of multitudes of Negroes and whites flocking to his house to get books and talked about the slaves singing praises to God and the Lamb. The same year, the first organized black Baptist congregation was formed in Virginia (the Baptists playing a major role in the Dr. Watts hymn tradition).

According to professor/author William Dargan, there are repeated references showing blacks were developing a distinctive style of hymn singing by the mid 1700's. It's unfortunate that he didn't include more of these references in his book (which is where I base a lot of my information on this topic).

It should be kept in mind that when I refer to the moaning blue note style being the dominant type of Dr. Watts, I'm speaking this in the context of what has survived today. I have no way of proving this is the exact style of Dr. Watts in the 1750's. But if you consider the fact that this hymn music is passed down by oral tradition and is resistant to change (though changes do occur) this most common type likely goes back to the 1700's if not the 1750's or before it was even documented. Another thing to consider is that the slow unison heterophonic moaning style (common to not only Mississippi, but also Texas, west Tennessee, parts of Louisiana and northern cities like Detroit) is a style of Dr. watts that closely parallels the earlier white lined out hymns and Psalms of the British/Anglo-American tradition ( also a slow unison heterophonic tradition that can be traced back to at least the 1600's). All other common survivals of Dr. Watts (and some lesser common ones) are further apart in structure from the earlier white tradition. This suggests that this heterophonic blue note style closely represents an early way of singing Dr. Watts. However, the first Dr. Watts hymn I ever heard was very slow in unison heterophonic form (and thus closely parallel to earlier lined out hymns and Psalms), yet I heard very little bluesy tones to it. It sounded to me like a bunch of people at a funeral attempting to make up a melody as they go and not quite finding the melody. Quite clearly, you can't judge a whole genre on the first piece of music you hear from it (especially when it's a short sample).

Some other stylistic survivals of Dr. Watts that William Dargan mentions in his book (this should not be taken as a complete list):

1. Moaning Organum --- A moaning blue note style that has two part harmonies, moving in parallel fourths, fifths and thirds, intermingled with occassional heterophony. This style is strong in inland regions of South Carolina, Georgia and Florida. An example of this style is the recorded hymn "Father, I Stretch My Hands To Thee" by the Bethlehem Primitive Baptist Church of Eutaw, Alabama. Dargan suggests that this specific style of moaning hymn may have been influenced by shape-note singing. African Americans do have their own style of shape-note singing and Sacred Harp hymns (a ragged part harmony music that is more normally associated with white people).

2. Moaning Traidic Harmony --- Moaning Hymns that use traidic harmony (not exactly sure what that is or the geographic center of this style).

3. Cross-Shout --- A shouting style of Dr. Watts that borrows the cross rhythmic stomping and clapping of ring shouts. Found in the Sea Islands of Carolina and Georgia. It's not a very common style today and is said to be the least widely dispersed.

4. Off-Beat Shout --- An off beat syncopated clapping hymn style strong in the Carolinas, Louisiana, Piedmont and south east regions.

Dargan also refers to "tune-based moaning" hymns. These totally ignore the structures of "lining out" which is part of the official definition of Dr. Watts hymn singing (so it could be argued that they aren't truly Dr. Watts). Instead they use straight forward melodies, including melodies that are clearly from the white "folk hymn" tradition (a hymn genre that matches hymn text to British or Anglo-American folk/ballad tunes). But they are sung in a very bluesy moaning way, which may alter the original tune to make it fit the pentatonic scale. An example of this is Amanda Smith and Ella Pearl White's rendition of a ballad based hymn " What Wondrous Love Is This" (singers from Alabama). Again, I'm not sure of the geographic center for this style.

Watch the video: Bringing Back the Woolly Mammoth (May 2022).