ZORRO:Timon of Athens. But most often they wrote in code or refused to write at all. They actually taught through techniques and disciplines which made people truly know what can be and how to become adept as individuated parts of the collective or ‘nous’.

Michael Rivero has a few words to ponder - "Many people prefer to believe their leaders are just and fair even in the face of evidence to the contrary, because once a citizen acknowledges that the government is lying and corrupt, the citizen has to choose what he or she will do about it. To take action in the face of a corrupt government entails risks of harm to life and loved ones. To choose to do nothing is to surrender one’s self-image of standing for principles. Most people do not have the courage to face that choice. Hence, most propaganda is not designed to fool the critical thinker but only to give moral cowards an excuse not to think at all."

Poetry and music have an integrative force that appeals to the people who are tired of all the perambulations that intellectual hegemonies employ. They let their music function to inspire the masses more than write large tomes and argue linear-logical epistemological or other fine points that seldom lead to real change. There are many different learning styles and neurological constructs that are not enabled in the present social programming that takes place in school. I dare say the creative and spatial thinking populace will be well represented in the counter-cultural groups like Goths and Hippies.

Author of Diverse Druids, Columnist for The ES Press Magazine, Guest writer at World-Mysteries.com

The Art of War is an ancient Chinese text on strategy and warfare written by a Sun Wu, a brilliant military general more than two thousand years ago. It is considered one of the oldest attempts at analyzing and documenting the specific components of strategic warfare, with wisdom that is as applicable today as it was thousands of years ago.

Many Chinese and international scholars debated the exact dates that Sun Tzu waged war against his enemies and many question the legitimacy of such a historical figure actually existing. Rather than a sole general or military expert being the sole author, they interpreted the manuscripts as a collection of works pieced together by Chinese Philosophers.

In 1972 a set of engraved, bamboo texts were discovered in a grave near a city called Linyi Shandong. This discovery supported the existence of Sun Tzu’s. The texts were dated between 134-118 B.C and not only confirmed Sun Tzu’s historical existence, but also added new sections of strategic text. To support a timeline, clues can be found within his 13 Chapters of strategy, and especially in chapter two. Some scholars feel that the descriptions of war chariots that were used by the ancient Chinese were only used for a brief period ending in the 4th Century BC.

The actual text is 13 chapters covering all aspects of strategy from the use of psychological warfare, to his use of strategic deception, and the value he placed on the armies of secret agents and double agents.

As an example of text in which he uses an exercise in deception, he advised that if your enemy was near, to make him think you are far, if your enemy is far, make him think you are near. In an area that you are weak, make him think you are strong, in an area that you are strong, make him think that you are weak.

While he could be a ruthless military tactician, he also recognized that it requires more skill to take a city intact, than it was to destroy it. He also said that many successful battles is not the result of skill, but to rather to subduing the enemy without fighting is the test of true skill.

There are many free online version of Sun Tzu with links posted at the bottom. As you begin your study in the ancient, but applicable art of war, you will find varying translations due to “disagreements” of exact translations of the Chinese text. Even with the small variations, the message will resonate with accuracy, and relevancy.

The below excerpt is from an ancient biography on Sun Tzu and provides some insight into Sun Tzu’s rise to power. It outlines the story of Sun Tzu and the concubines. It is made possible with permission from Project Guttenberg with the complete text found at:

www.clas.ufl.edu/users/gthursby/taoism/sunntro.htm

Ssu-ma Ch`ien gives the following biography of Sun Tzu

Sun Tzu Wu was a native of the Chi State. His ART OF WAR brought him to the notice of Ho Lu, King of Wu.

Ho Lu said to him: "I have carefully perused your 13 chapters. May I submit your theory of managing soldiers to a slight test?" Sun Tzu replied: "You may." Ho Lu asked: "May the test be applied to women?"

The answer was again in the affirmative, so arrangements were made to bring 180 ladies out of the Palace. Sun Tzu divided them into two companies, and placed one of the King’s favorite concubines at the head of each. He then bade them all take spears in their hands, and addressed them thus: "I presume you know the difference between front and back, right hand and left hand?" The girls replied: Yes.

Sun Tzu went on: "When I say "Eyes front," you must look straight ahead. When I say "Left turn," you must face towards your left hand. When I say "Right turn," you must face towards your right hand. When I say "About turn," you must face right round towards your back."

Again the girls assented. The words of command having been thus explained, he set up the halberds and battle-axes in order to begin the drill. Then, to the sound of drums, he gave the order "Right turn." But the girls only burst out laughing. Sun Tzu said: "If words of command are not clear and distinct, if orders are not thoroughly understood, then the general is to blame."

So he started drilling them again, and this time gave the order "Left turn," whereupon the girls once more burst into fits of laughter. Sun Tzu: "If words of command are not clear and distinct, if orders are not thoroughly understood, the general is to blame. But if his orders ARE clear, and the soldiers nevertheless disobey, then it is the fault of their officers."

So saying, he ordered the leaders of the two companies to be beheaded. Now the king of Wu was watching the scene from the top of a raised pavilion; and when he saw that his favorite concubines were about to be executed, he was greatly alarmed and hurriedly sent down the following message: "We are now quite satisfied as to our general’s ability to handle troops. If we are bereft of these two concubines, our meat and drink will lose their savor. It is our wish that they shall not be beheaded."

Sun Tzu replied: "Having once received His Majesty’s commission to be the general of his forces, there are certain commands of His Majesty which, acting in that capacity, I am unable to accept."

Accordingly, he had the two leaders beheaded, and straightway installed the pair next in order as leaders in their place. When this had been done, the drum was sounded for the drill once more; and the girls went through all the evolutions, turning to the right or to the left, marching ahead or wheeling back, kneeling or standing, with perfect accuracy and precision, not venturing to utter a sound. Then Sun Tzu sent a messenger to the King saying: "Your soldiers, Sire, are now properly drilled and disciplined, and ready for your majesty’s inspection. They can be put to any use that their sovereign may desire; bid them go through fire and water, and they will not disobey."

But the King replied: "Let our general cease drilling and return to camp. As for us, we have no wish to come down and inspect the troops." Thereupon Sun Tzu said: "The King is only fond of words, and cannot translate them into deeds." After that, Ho Lu saw that Sun Tzu was one who knew how to handle an army, and finally appointed him general. In the west, he defeated the Ch`u State and forced his way into Ying, the capital; to the north he put fear into the States of Ch`i and Chin, and spread his fame abroad amongst the feudal princes. And Sun Tzu shared in the might of the King.

Leadership Development and Leadership Training are the focus of Aubie Pouncey’s career. He works as a contributing writer for http://www.righttolead.com and has put together many leadership training modules that can be found at: http://www.trainercorner.com

Queen Mary I of England was born in 1516 to Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon and was the first British monarch to rule in her own right. Mary was pronounced queen in 1553 and ruled for five years after the death of Edward VI. Mary was well educated and learned to speak Latin, Spanish, French and Italian. She was also taught Greek, science and music.

1547 saw the death of her father and her half brother Edward VI crowned king. Edward was England’s first Protestant monarch; his Parliament’s Act of Uniformity prescribed Protestant rites for church services. Mary, wanting to keep her Roman Catholic faith, asked to be allowed to worship in private in her own chapel. Upon being ordered to discontinue this practice, Mary appealed to her cousin, the Emperor Charles V. Charles subsequently threatened to declare war against England if Mary’s religious rights were infringed. Mary was never bothered again and was left to worship in private.

Edward died in 1553 whilst Mary was staying at Framlingham Castle in Suffolk. He had no wish for the Crown to go to either Mary or her half sister Elizabeth, so had them both excluded from the line of succession in his will.

One of Mary’s first acts after came to power, was to bring the Catholic faith back to England by initially scrapping the religious proclamations of her half brother, Edward VI. Mary replaced the proclamations with the old English laws. Heresy against the church was now punishable by death. The reintroduction of this act earned Mary the nickname, “Bloody Mary”. During her short, five-year reign, Queen Mary I had more than 300 subjects burnt at the stake for the act of heresy. The most notable of these was the Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Cranmer.

In 1555, in an effort to produce a male heir, Mary married prince Philip II of Spain. This did not go down well with the people, as many viewed Spain as an enemy of England. Twice during her rule, Mary thought she was pregnant with child, displaying all the symptoms. Alas, this was not so as her symptoms were a sign of a false pregnancy. Mary had convinced herself that she was pregnant and the body reacted accordingly.

Following the advice of her husband, Mary allied herself with Spain during the war against France. The subsequent consequences of her actions were that England lost her only and last remaining foothold in the country – Calais. Sadly, in 1558, Philip II left her and went back to Spain to claim the Spanish throne.

Queen Mary I, childless and without a husband was forced to recognize her sister, Elizabeth, an Anglican Protestant, as the next ruler of England. Although Mary tried to persuade her sister to convert and accept the Roman Catholic faith, Elizabeth refused and went on to become Queen Elizabeth I.

England suffered under the leadership of Mary: the economy was in ruin, religious dissent reached its pinnacle and England lost her last foothold in Europe. Jane Austen wrote about Mary: "This woman had the good luck of being advanced to the throne of England, in spite of the superior pretensions, Merit and Beauty of her Cousins Mary Queen of Scotland and Jane Grey. Nor can I pity the Kingdom for the misfortunes they experienced during her reign, since they fully deserved them…"

Mary died at the age of forty-two of influenza, uterine cancer or ovarian cancer at St. James’s Palace on 17 November 1558 and is buried in Westminster Abbey beside Elizabeth. The Latin inscription on their tomb translates to "Partners both in Throne and grave, here rest we two sisters, Elizabeth and Mary, in the hope of one resurrection".

I hope you have enjoyed reading about Queen Mary I.

In my next article will learn about the life of Charles II of England.

Until then,

Best wishes and have a great day

Stuart Bazga

www.guide-to-castles-of-europe.com

A Guide to Castles of Europe was born from childhood dreams and aspirations. It is my hope to educate and stimulate you into exploring these castles for yourselves.

The red dragon was introduced to Britain during Roman times. It is possible that the Romans learned of the dragon from the Persians. Initially the ‘draco’ was used as a standard by the Roman army but over time it was adopted by the Welsh people as their national flag. It is possibly the oldest national flag in use today.

The earliest recorded use of the red dragon symbolising Wales is in the ‘Historia Brittonum’ otherwise known as the ‘History of Britain’. This was written early in the ninth century. It describes a battle between red and white dragons. Initially the white dragon dominated but finally the red dragon won. The fight was said to symbolise the struggle between the Welsh and English and prophesised that after years of oppression the Welsh would drive the English from their lands.

The great Welsh king, Cadwaladr, carried the dragon standard as a symbol of bravery and fierceness. Welsh princes and warriors continued the tradition. At the Battle of Crecy in 1346 Welsh longbow men serving in the English army carried the standard. Henry Tudor, who claimed descent from Cadwaladr, carried the dragon banner into battle at the Battle of Bosworth Field in 1485. When he became Henry VII he decreed that the red dragon should appear on the Welsh flag. In 1959 Queen Elizabeth II declared that the red dragon on a green and white field should become the official symbol of Wales.

Today, despite the continued strength of the white dragon, the Welsh people maintain their language, culture and sense of Welsh identity. Welsh regiments serving overseas proudly fly their flag.

Ashley Shameli, the author of this article, is a director of http://www.purdicejewellery.co.uk. He also helps run the Purdice Home & Jewellery eBay shop at http://stores.ebay.co.uk/Purdice-Home-and-Jewellery

My first kid’s father named my son Marcus after legendary Marcus Garvey. Which made me curious to know more about who Marcus Garvey actually was…

"Up You Mighty Race, Accomplish What You Will…" (Marcus Garvey)

The following text is dedicated to my eldest son Marcus.

Marcus Mosiah Garvey was born on August the 17, 1887, in St Ann’s Bay, Jamaica as the youngest of 11 children.

Marcus Garvey was known as a journalist, entrepreneur, publisher and a crusader for black nationalism. During his whole life, he has fought for racial equality.

Childhood years

In St Ann’s Bay, young Marcus attended grammar school. Alfred Burrowes, his godfather, also gave him some private instruction. Alfred Burrowes hired Marcus at the age of 14 as an apprentice in order to learn the printing trade.

Garvey’s father, who was the owner of a private library, encouraged young Marcus’ love for books.

During his apprentice period, Marcus used to discuss politics and social affairs at his uncle’s place.

In 1906, Garvey moved from St Ann to Kingston.

In 1908, Marcus Garvey participated in Jamaica’s first Printers’ Union strike. The strike was unsuccessful and as a consequence, Marcus Garvey lost his job.

Luckily, he was employed by the Government Printing Office.

Visiting the world

Around 1910, Marcus Garvey left Jamaica for Costa Rica. There, he worked as a time keeper at a panana plantation. Then he went to Central America, visited the Panama Central Zone. He observed Blacks and Indians hard working conditions. He also traveled to Equador, Nicaragua, Honduras, Columbia and Venezuela.

Very sensitive about discrimination and racial prejudice, Marcus Garvey always had the will to make things change. That’s why he appealed to his government in order to improve West Indians working conditions. But the government just wouldn’t listen to his complaint.

Garvey, the publisher

Marcus Garvey’s first publications started during his Central American travels.

In 1910, Garvey started his first newspaper, The Watcher, that was followed by several other short lived newspapers

He was also associated with several publications:

- The African Times and Orient Review, The Daily Negro Times, Harlem, 1922-1924

-The Blackman, Kingston, Jamaica, 1929-1931

-The New Jamaican, Kingston, 1932-33

Marcus Garvey started The Black Man Magazine in 1933 in Kingston. His magazine was continued in England until 1939.

Black militantism: the creation of the UNIA-ACL

Marcus Garvey was very conscious that improving black folks conditions was a long term work. It had better chances to work if Africans united. That’s why he created the the Universal Negro Improvement and Conservation Association and African Communities League (UNIA). As the President of the UNIA, he defined its goal to unite « all the people of African ancestry of the world into one great body to establish a country and Government absolutely their own. » very precisely. The UNIA’s flag is red, black and green.

In 1916, Marcus Garvey went to the USA and gave a lecture tour.

In 1920, Garvey set up branches of the UNIA in more than 40 countries.

Garvey’s ideas

Marcus Garvey fought for social, political and economic freedom for Black people.

He founded several companies like Black Star Line and Black Cross Navigation and Trading Company.

He also created the Negro Factories Corporation, which helped to created more marketable black businesses. Garvey was commercially very active: he started chains of groceries and restaurants and many other kind of businesses.

"Africa for the Africans…At Home and Abroad!"

Marcus Garvey wanted Blacks to consider Africa as their permanent homeland:

« I have no desire to take all black people back to Africa, there are blacks who are no good here and will likewise be no good there. Our success educationally, industrially and politically is based upon the protection of a nation founded by ourselves. And the nation can be nowhere else but in Africa ».

In 1920, he worked on the ambitious project to develop African state Liberia by building colleges and industries , but he had to stop it, because of many European countries’ political and economic interest in Liberia.

Mail fraud charges

Marcus Garvey was confronted by mail fraud charges in 1925 and sentenced to jail in 1925. He was jailed at Atlanta Federal prison. After his release in 1927, he was deported from New Orleans to Kingston, Jamaica, where a huge crowd welcomed him.

Defending Blacks till his death

Marcus Garvey has never stopped fighting for the cause he found right.

In 1928, he went to Geneva. He presented the "Petition of the Negro Race" to the League of Nations, which was strongly against black people’s abuse around the world.

In 1929, he founded the PPP (People’s Political Party), which became Jamaica’s first political party. This political party was all about helping poor people, education and workers’ rights.

In 1929, Garvey was elected Councillor for the Allman Town division of the Kingston and St. Andrew Corporation (KSAC).

He was reelected in 1930.

In 1931, Marcus Garvey created Edelweiss Amusement Company, a company that was supposed to help artists to make a living out of their work and to give them an opportunity to get known better- at least locally.

In 1935, Marcus Garvey moved to London. He kept being involved in his activism till his death. Garvey died in London in 1940. He is considered as Jamaica’s first national hero.

It is a known fact that Marcus Garvey was nicknamed « Black Moses »…

Don’t search so many saints in the Holy Bible when you have a pretty good example in real life.

Copyright©2005 by Isabelle Esling
All Rights Reserved

I am an Eminem biographer and a freelance music journalist. I teach English and German at public schools.

I cannot emphasize enough the dearth of information, or the outright disinformation, I find in various web world accounts relating to Josephine and Jean Lafitte. I chuckle to think they often get her given name wrong as I have noted from the beginning of this book. Her name was not Josephine and if a current author is right about Napoleon being a bi-sexual we can imagine his brother Joseph’s name was on his lips during sexual acts with Marie-Rose and this lead to her nickname which he gave her. These are important people from not so long ago. In the case of Josephine and her heritage, there is no good reason to not make it clear she was a Merovingian with great bloodlines.

“Josephine’s family story is intricately woven into the tapestry of Martinique history. Pierre Bélain d’Esnambuc, the founder of French power in the Antilles, who had taken possession of the island on behalf of Louis XIII in 1635, was one of her ancestors. She was also a descendant of Guillaume d’Orange, a courageous and audacious leader, who was responsible for protecting the colonists from Carib aggression {? – HMMM?}in 1640 and who played a crucial role in defending Martinique during the Dutch Navy’s attempt to take the island in 1674.” (1)

The name Guillaume d’Orange is not without major precedence in history and legend. I think this Columbia Professor says something important about him and history in general. “History tells us little of the medieval William of Orange, but legend tells us a great deal. From the legends grew the most extensive epic cycle of the Middle Ages.” (2) There is another William of Orange who was more of a contemporary with her ancestor and I suspect she is related to them all. That William of Orange is most important to Irish history and the destruction of the Brotherhood remnants which I have addressed in most of my books on our true worldwide cultural development. They are an important family of what Dutch people call their heroes (3) and yet here we see one of them fighting the Dutch Navy in the usual Hegelian ‘play both ends against the middle’ gambit of the Merovingians.

There is a good chance that these are Merovingians called Cathars and then Huguenots. My namesakes in the 19th Century are authors of many books on these people. After what happened to the Cathar attempt to make a modern culture of egalitarian ethics we can understand if some of them went undercover or still had issues with the other elites who did not stay the course and fight to build what might be the last attempt to re-energize true Brotherhood. I will continue to try to understand why her distant cousin named Beauharnais went to Martinique after witnessing her sexual behavior and then sought an unsuccessful dissolution to their arranged marriage. Could the people who arranged for Napoleon to marry this woman have seen to it that her first husband was killed in the Terror?

Author of Diverse Druids, Columnist for The ES Press Magazine, Guest writer at World-Mysteries.com

The history of the royal barges dates back to the Sukhothai era in the 13th century when the first royal barges were reportedly seen. The barges were originally troop carriers at a time when it was more expedient to transport troops into battle along rivers.

As life in Thailand then was so intimately linked to the river, these barges were also used for religious and ceremonial purposes.

During the Ayutthaya era between the 14th - 18th centuries, the Royal Barge Ceremonies flourished, particularly during the reigns of King Naresuan and King Narai.

King Naresuan (1590 – 1605 AD) named his personal barge Suphannahongsa and so started the first generation of this famous royal barge. Since then this has been the name of the King’s personal barge. Two more versions have been built since.

In the reign of King Narai, the Royal Barge Processions became more elaborate and one such procession had more than 100 vessels.

Unfortunately all this came to an abrupt end in 1767 when the Burmese sacked Ayutthaya and destroyed all the barges. It was a sad period in the history of the royal barges.

The Thonburi era (1767 – 1782) under King Taksin saw a reemergence of royal barge activity. During his reign the Emerald Buddha was brought from Vientiane to Ayutthaya. A hundred and fifteen barges went to Ayutthaya to receive this holy statue and bring it back to Bangkok. Another 131 vessels went up river to welcome the Emerald Buddha.

The Bangkok era, which commenced in 1782, saw a new dawn in the history of the royal barges. King Rama I revived the tradition of the royal barges. Sixty were built and modeled on designs in the early Bangkok era. A new Suphannahongsa was built to serve as the King’s personal barge.

Royal barge construction continued under the reign of the Chari kings. King Rama IV ordered the construction of the Anantanakkharat with the seven-headed serpent Naga on the bow.

During the reign of King Rama V, a new Suphannahongsa was built. It was completed during the reign of King Rama VI in 1911. This version of Suphannahongsa is being used to this day as the King’s personal barge.

The coup in 1932, when Thailand changed from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy, brought about another abrupt halt to royal barge activity. Subsequent governments ceased the Royal Barge Ceremonies for the next 25 years.

The royal barges suffered a further setback when they were damaged by Japanese bombs during World War II. Damaged sections of these barges are still preserved at the Royal Barge Museum.

In 1957 the history of the royal barges took a turn for the better when King Rama IX had the barges restored to their former glory.

On 19 May 1957, the first Royal Barge Procession in 25 years sailed down the Chao Phraya River to commemorate the 25th century of the Buddhist Era. Since then, the tradition and grandeur of the royal barges have continued to this day.

The history of the royal barges reflects an enduring tradition that flows on timelessly like the Chao Phraya River.

For details on the royal barges, please see Types of Royal Barges.

This article by Eric Lim first appeared in Tour Bangkok Legacies, a historical travel site on people, places and events that shaped the landscape of Bangkok. Lim, a free-lance writer, lives in Bangkok, Thailand.

Family Values in Ancient Times:

Many people of the present make some very grave and disturbing assumptions about prior unethical behaviour by humans. My theories may be biased and overly appreciative of a time before Empire and there is less data due to the destructive power of Empire and the hegemony to go on. However, that data is more pure and less likely to have been promoted or propagandized for the interests of power-mongers. Top scholars and those who are regarded as great academics still debate whether women ever had equal rights and some state there never were matriarchal societies of great note. It would be a surprise for me if there were not many different approaches used in various cultures and millennia before the Ice Age we just experienced and thereafter, leading up to what we call history. Much of history today has all the markings of hegemony akin to the Middle Ages according to John Ralston Saul who says it “has come to resemble the obscure and controlling scholasticism of the Middle Ages.” (1)

Could it be that ethics and moral behaviour had higher importance in the communal houses of the Kelts and North American Indians, as well as other societies throughout this awesome world? We now know it has been traversed by ancient humans who loved and played all over the place for a far longer period than we have been lead to believe even though many may not be aware of these facts. Is it possible that basic principles were easily communicated and respect was the goal of people long ago? Why even debate the point about power and money – they had little need of it. Western society still has much of the ingrained misogyny of millennia of macho Mediterranean mores and the rest of the world is far worse. What greater issue is there than incest and family violence? It rots the fabric of families and society as a whole. This quote from respected anthropologist Carlton Coon about the ‘hunting societies’ of prehistory sets a stage we need to appreciate and evaluate.

“While under certain circumstances, in some societies, a young man may marry a woman past menopause, he may manage to have sexual relations with other women, and may eventually get a nubile second wife.” (2)

This seems a workable arrangement that includes education and the planning of families to avoid unnecessary abortion or mouths who aren’t truly cared for, doesn’t it? The older woman presumably would be able to satisfy the early sexual energy of the young man, without leading their social or tribal culture into all the problems associated with children having children such as often happens today. The young man might even develop some sexual techniques and understand his urges better than pure lustful infatuation or the need to run off to fight in order to get rape and pillage payment for some Lord or Caesar. Then when financially and emotionally prepared for parenting he might actually do a decent job. Coon was able to observe this still exists in some Neolithic societies of the present day. When the second wife arrived it might present some problems but in most cases the first wife would probably enjoy helping the new wife to understand her opportunities better. Yes, I do overstate the case, I suppose, but in the Keltic clandoms it was even better than I am suggesting.

Kids were a resource and source of pride for the whole clan. In the dynamic of raising a child this allowed for many things to occur in a more mature environment with less emotional blackmail. That does not lessen the aspirations parents have for their children but it makes for a lot less vicarious pressure, as parents have to spend all their waking hours attending to the needs of kids; who see a way to get what they want by playing to the unrealistic parents who have yet to learn what they need to know. There are aspects of North American Indians tribes that show a similar approach to child-raising. The Stadacona Indians sent some of their children with Cartier, much as the Kelts shared educational opportunities with trading partners. Aunts and uncles do the disciplining of children among the Cree. The extended family and communal living is very clannish and even Gibbon noted there were heraldic Indian regalia that mirrored those of British heraldry.

The Hurons and Iroquois are most like the Irish or Norse Kelts in their social structure. Crimes committed by a member of a family or clan (tribe) are paid for by the whole family. With this kind of policing or morals bureaucracy would starve for want of something to do. The compassion and behaviour modification of a family is better than that of the police or prisons, I think. The women of the Iroquois were the decision makers in most cases except the daily running of a war once it was approved. These women owned the assets or leaseholds. No one owned land just as was true in the land use laws of the Kelts which the English had to expunge along with all other just and fair culture when they finally forced Ireland under their rule. The Indians still practice Potlatch or the giving of respect and assets despite the 1920s law against it in Canada. We can all imagine the Tax collectors don’t like this kind of custom. It was much more than mere taxes the government sought and the Supreme Court has ruled the government and Catholic Church were intent on the total destruction of Indian beliefs, in recent rulings.

“In any event, the incest tabus recognized in any given hunting society bear some relationship to his choice (or to his and/or her parents’ choice) of a marital partner. Of these prohibitions there are three basic and quite different incest tabus, prohibiting intercourse between father and daughter, mother and son, and brother and sister. These prohibitions are not based on instinct or the inductive experience of the genetic consequences that sometimes result {Like the idiots and haemophiliacs or sexual deviates who lead us as a result of ‘noble’ heritage – to war and other great heroic endeavours.}. Some individuals violate them, but if so the violations do not result in marriage.

To a considerable extent these primary incest tabus are based on two kinds of antisocial results. Parent-child intercourse would disrupt the lines of authority between generations, lines that hold the family together. Brother-sister intercourse during adolescence would inhibit intermarriage between families, reducing their interdependence. Were a married woman to have intercourse with her brother, it would create a state of serious conflict between her husband and his brother-in-law, two kinsmen by marriage who, in certain cultures, might need each other’s confidence and help.” (3)

The ‘controlling scholasticism of the Middle Ages’ referred to by Ralston Saul was part of the continuing effort to destroy these real family values. The marriage laws of the Kelts had to be eliminated because these laws were equitable and fair to women and children. Bastards were not ever possible in Keltic society and the idea of a single mother was totally different than it is today. Of course, the payment of mercenaries including the rape and pillage which enabled men to gradually lose all decent tabus or constructs based on the ancient means of care for each other that were part of all the systems Brotherhood developed, through common sense. The elevation of Gods from the state of hero (mere human) to Divine Rights and separate from Nature, is at the root of a lot of it. Heyerdahl thinks Odin was a Keltic king in southern Russia around the time of Christ and I find that entirely likely. When man began to say other men were unable to comprehend nature and needed an interpreter for the collective soul of humanity and all life, things began the downward drift to the hegemony that often even denies man has a soul.

The extent of character assassination by academics that do not delve into the reasons for Caesar’s propaganda or quote others who did not employ due diligence is as evident today as it ever was. The people who focus on Keltic sacrifices and trophy head customs are telling a fact but not the whole truth. What is abortion and capital punishment if not sacrificing the life of people, perhaps for a common good? Victorian prudishness developed the ‘sins and demons’ fear-mongering of Jehovian greed even further. In fact the Western Tradition has succeeded in the destruction of all Ancient Knowledge if you were to believe what is allowed to be disseminated through ‘official’ or educational channels. The Temples of Saphos and Mesopotamia joined all Mediterranean cultures in some form of forced prostitution for women, while the Biblical ‘Devoted Ones’ were sacrificed when the priest or his cronies were through with other obvious and disgusting uses of them. Often the orphans and waifs caused by the changing laws and racial unrest and prejudice fomented in these times, led souls to a place worse than the Hell ruled by the Catholic created Satan. The excellent book called The Golden Bough by Sir James Frazer gives ample evidence from credible sources about burning Red Heads and women of all classes being forced to sell their bodies and give the money to the Temple. It may have started with Abraham (and other Ur-Story proponents with their harems) and his baby-factories but it was certainly not the way of ancient Kelts even after his time. The Indians of North America and the natives of Hawaii are ample testimony of the diversity of Keltic egalitarian approaches.

Author of Diverse Druids, Columnist for The ES Press Magazine, Guest writer at World-Mysteries.com

As far back as one can remember famous celebrities have been wearing the jewelry made by famous jewelry designers. Through out many eras and many styles the celebrities and jewelry designers have held a close bond. Who better to display your beautiful pieces than a beautiful celebrity that has already captured the audiences attention.

Elizabeth Taylor will always be remembered for her glamorous and beautiful look. I cannot remember any time that I have seen Elizabeth without her jewels to adorn her.

This was a lady with a fashion style like no other. From gorgeous pearls adorning her face to beautiful diamonds adorning her neck. She knew how to make a fashion statement!

Ava Gardner was a woman with a glamorous fashion style that did not go unnoticed. Whether she choose to wear her best diamond earrings or her favorite Trifari necklace she always looked spectacular. There are many of us who could pick up a few tips from Ava’s flare!

Joan Crawfard and Joan Collins are another two that simply can’t be outdone. One must wonder how a women so easily learns to be that refined and beautiful at all times. Like Cleopatra it seems to be bred deep within the soul.

Let us not forget about royalty. Although not perhaps celebrities as we think of them still important figure heads that are within the public eye.

How about the gorgeous jewels of the Duchess of Windsor or Umbero II of Italy. Then there was Princess Mary of Great Britain who was seldom seen without her jewelry adornments.

To more modern times, what about that beautiful engagement ring that Camela Parker Bowls was seen wearing. An outstanding piece of jewelry on a women that quite commonly presents herself in a very traditional refined style. No glamour here except for that drop dead gorgeous ring!

Whether we are talking about Jennifer Aniston, Courteney Cox, Kate Winslet, Kate Hudson, or Katie Holmes celebrities give us the opportunity to see jewelry designs in play. They instantly help develop a desire for a certain jewelry piece or look.

We’ve got plenty we can learn from the styles of celebrities. And once these designer jewelry pieces grab hold it isn’t long before someone is making a similar piece that our pocket books can afford.

So keep watching the stars for great jewelry to make your fashion statement!

Sher from Estate Jewelry International has been serving customers for over 20 years, providing fashion, jewelry, and wedding help. So stop by and visit us at http://www.estatejewelryinternational.com/ We’ll help you make your fashion statement! Remember looking good doesn’t have to cost a fortune!

Born in 1630, Charles II was the second eldest son of Charles I, who spent most of his teenage years fighting parliaments Roundheads until the execution of his father in 1649, and after he agreed to make Presbyterianism the religion of England and Scotland.

In 1650, Charles returned to his native Scotland and a year later led an unsuccessful campaign against Cromwell’s forces at Worcester. During this defeat, Charles managed to avoided capture, finding safe passage to France where he spent the next eight years roaming the wilderness of Europe.

Upon the collapse of Cromwell’s commonwealth, Charles was invited back to England and shortly after married Catherine of Braganza. His marriage to Catherine was a fruitless one as it bore him no legitimate heir to the throne.

In 1660, at the age of 30, Charles ascended the English throne and immediately set about seeking retribution for his father’s execution. Nine of his father’s conspirators were brought to trial and executed. As well as being very tolerant towards those who had condemned his father to death, he was also a very tolerant person in regards to all religious matters.

The country was in a jubilant mood at having a true monarch again, but his powers had been severely curtailed by Parliament. This curtailment meant that the Royal coppers were not what they should be and Charles had to fund his administrators from customs taxes and a pension that was paid to him by King Louis XIV of France.

Out of the ashes of the civil war, England’s first political parties were formed. The Cavaliers went on to form the first Tory party, whose ideology was in preserving the kings power over Parliament, while Cromwell’s Roundheads went on to form the Whig Party. Oddly enough, the Whig Party was all for expansion of trade abroad and maintaining parliament’s supremacy in the political field. In essence they were forbearers of today’s modern political parties.

Charles first ten years in power was not very memorable or fruitful. He was defeated by the Dutch in a war over foreign trade. In the latter half of the 1660’s Charles had to cope with the Great Plague of 1665 as well as the Fire of London in 1667, which left much of the capital a whole burnt out shell which only added to his trouble.

On top of all this, during the same year as the Great Fire of London, the Dutch brazenly sailed up the Medway River and sank five of his battleships. And to rub salt into already opened wounds, they towed the Royal Charles back to Holland.

The start of a new decade saw a new alliance with France. The French promised to help Charles in his fight against the Dutch with the assurance that Charles would bring back Catholicism to the country. This was in turn used against him by the Whig party. The consequence of this was another bout of religious hatred towards the Catholic Church. This anti-Catholicism paranoia led to the Queen and her favourites being accused of attempting to murder Charles II. In Parliament the Whig party, who held the majority of seats at the time, tried to push through an Exclusion Bill barring Catholics from holding public office and thus keep James Stuart from the throne. Charles II was felled by fever and this illness caused the balance of opinion to tip in his favour.

The king had a self-indulgent character - he had numerous mistresses and illegitimate children, and loved racing and gambling - and this led to him having a considerable influence on Restoration art and literature.

Charles II’s remaining years were occupied with securing his brother’s right to the throne and gathering political support from the Tory party. Charles died in February 1685 from complications following a stroke.

Charles II’s life can be best summed up from a quote of the time: "Charles II was always very merry and was therefore not so much a king as a Monarch. During the civil war, he had rendered valuable assistance to his father’s side by hiding in all the oak-trees he could find. He was thus very romantic and popular and was able after the death of Cromwell to descend to the throne."

I hope you have enjoyed reading about Charles II.

In my next article we will learn about the life of Philip II of France.

Until then,

Best wishes and have a great day

Stuart Bazga

www.guide-to-castles-of-europe.com

A Guide to Castles of Europe was born from childhood dreams and aspirations. It is my hope to educate and stimulate you into exploring these castles for yourselves.