Things to consider if you’re wanting to learn Biblical languages

“If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.”

– The New Testament, “The First Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians,” Chapter 14, Verse 27 (as translated by the King James Version of the Bible)

This might seem a strange way to begin a blog post about Biblical languages … but most versions of contemporary Islam require their adherents to learn Classical Arabic. This is because they are expected to read the Quran in the original. To Muslims, translations of the Quran are not even the “Quran” at all. Reading the “Quran” in English would thus be unsatisfactory to them. Some versions of Judaism have a similar reverence for the Hebrew language, with even the characters of the Hebrew alphabet being considered sacred. By contrast, most Christian religions would be totally fine with their members reading the Bible in translation. More to the point, reading the Bible in translation does indeed count as “reading the Bible” in most Christian denominations.

The caves at Qumran, where the famous Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered

Is college right for me? (It depends)

Which things are best learned in a classroom? Which are best learned somewhere else?

It’s an all-too-common refrain today: “college is good for everyone.” Some tell us that “everyone” should go, and that people are “failing” in life … if they choose not to go. But, if “everyone” is going, it seems to mean a little less if someone does have a degree. Even when the degree is a real one, rather than the fake kind sold by diploma mills, college degrees have nowhere near the value that they once held. More to the point, college is not inherently better for everyone. It is indeed good for some people, but it is not good for others. There are other ways to realize your potential besides going to college. And, although college might be best reserved for people who are unusually smart (as well as academically inclined), many smart people have never set foot in a college classroom. There are other ways to do smart things, and do some great deeds to boot. Some of the greatest minds of history were self-taught, and moved forward on their own willpower without the aid of a formal classroom. Thus, there is certainly a role for self-education. That being said, there may be some other things that can only be learned in a classroom. Laboratory science might be one of these things. You can read about biology and physics, and see videos of chemists using beakers and test tubes. But, unless you perform some laboratory science for yourself, you won’t really learn much about how it actually works. Self-education, although very valuable, can only go so far.

A Crookes tube in chemistry (two views): light and dark

Why I would like to learn Biblical Aramaic

“The king [Nebuchadnezzar] answered and said to the Chaldeans, The thing is gone from me: if ye will not make known unto me the dream, with the interpretation thereof, ye shall be cut in pieces, and your houses shall be made a dunghill. But if ye shew the dream, and the interpretation thereof, ye shall receive of me gifts and rewards and great honour: therefore shew me the dream, and the interpretation thereof.”

– The Hebrew Bible, “The Book of Daniel,” Chapter 2, Verses 5 and 6 (as translated by the King James Version of the Bible) – one of the few parts of the Hebrew Bible to be written in Aramaic, rather than Hebrew

Religious schools are among the most prominent schools (usually at the college level) to offer entire programs in Bible Studies. For example, BYU has a major in “Ancient Near Eastern Studies” (more about that here), which is basically the same thing. Usually, such programs require you to take either Greek, or Hebrew, or both. Hebrew is the primary language of the Old Testament, while Greek seems to be the original language of the New Testament. Many of them will offer a class or two in Aramaic. However, very few of these programs will require their Bible Studies students to take such classes. I should acknowledge that this is perfectly understandable – and maybe even reasonable. This is because Aramaic makes up only 1% of the Old Testament – and far less than 1% of the entire Christian Bible. This, it is often offered as an elective, but is seldom required.

Aramaic inscription from Tayma, containing a dedicatory inscription to the god Salm

What should I study to become a writer?

“Learning to write by trial and error not only calls for patience on the writer’s part, it also taxes the patience of wives, landlords, and creditors. Whenever someone, especially a young person, tells me of an ambition to become a writer, my heart goes out to him or her immediately—and my spirits sink. There is seldom a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, even for those who become established writers eventually—and a lot can happen between now and eventually, like broken marriages, eviction for non-payment of rent, and the like.”

– The economist Thomas Sowell, in “Some Thoughts on Writing” (2001)

Being a writer may have been my most-stubbornly-held childhood ambition. I had this dream from a very early age. I wanted to be a professional writer, and sell popular novels that I hoped would make me a fortune. At that time, I tended to imagine myself writing a science fiction novel of some kind. It’s not unusual for kids to have dreams like this, but it is unusual for people to ever realize such ambitions. Certainly I have never made any significant money from my writings, and I’ve been blogging for more than a decade now.

My interests have largely shifted since I was a kid, since I now tend to write more about history and politics. Readers of this blog are likely to notice this quickly after visiting my blog. It’s possible that my efforts (successful or otherwise) to write good fiction stories as a kid may have helped me in my later efforts to write non-fiction, even though these two genres (obviously) have very different writing styles. The sorts of things that you want to write … may influence your decisions about college. That is, your decisions about what to study in depth, what to study in passing, and even whether to be attending college in the first place. Many different kinds of programs can help you in this endeavor – or, at least, they’re fairly likely to do so if you study them in the right kinds of schools.

So, without further ado, I will now give my thoughts on what college majors (or minors) are most appropriate for aspiring writers. To be clear, there is no guarantee here that you’ll make any money with any of these majors – let alone that you’ll do so as a successful professional writer. But, if you’re interested in writing for a living, here are a few college majors to consider:

Ernest Hemingway, winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature

What languages did our Founding Fathers know?

“I was educated at William and Mary college in Williamsburg. I read Greek, Latin, French, Italian, Spanish, and English of course, with something of it’s radix the Anglo-Saxon.”

– Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to Joseph Delaplaine (12 April 1817) – which seems to show that Jefferson thus studied what is now known as “Old English” (or, as he calls it here, “Anglo-Saxon”)

Our Founding Fathers were quite a knowledgeable group, who knew many foreign languages

The Founding Fathers of the United States are among the most brilliant collection of individuals in all of world history. Seldom, if ever, has there been such a remarkable collection of talent anywhere else. Our Founding Fathers were particularly well-versed in things like history – particularly that of Ancient Greece (including Athens), the Roman Republic, the Roman Empire, the British Isles, and our own Colonial America. They also studied the greatest Greek and Roman philosophers, as well as relatively modern philosophers from Britain and France, with great skill. They studied prior laws from the British Isles (such as the Magna Carta), and the great British jurists who expounded on those laws. And, if I may offer an opinion, they helped to create the most successful Constitution that the world has ever known. Nonetheless, many of them were also accomplished polyglots, who attained fluency in a notable variety of foreign languages. Here, too, their genius shines through – with both ancient and modern languages.

Thomas Jefferson

To save time here, I’ll be focusing on some of the most prominent of our Founding Fathers

I have covered their accomplishments in these other spheres elsewhere. Thus, I will instead be focusing here on their attainments in the realm of foreign languages. Here as elsewhere, the Founding Fathers’ record can speak for itself, since I will be trying to use their own words here as much as possible. To shorten this discussion, I will focus entirely on some of the most prominent of our Founding Fathers. This will help to keep our discussion to a more manageable length. It will also help to showcase the knowledge of our Founding Fathers, which stands up well to any reasonable standard.

Thomas Jefferson

The Case of Proclamations created a political uproar

“I was sent to attend the Lord Chancellor, Lord Treasurer, Lord Privy Seal, and the Chancellor of the Duchy; there being present the attorney, the solicitor, and recorder: and two questions were moved to me by the Lord Treasurer; the one if the King by his proclamation may prohibit new buildings in and about London, etc; the other, if the King hath answered, that he will confer with his Privy Council, and his Judges, and then he will do right to them … I did humbly desire them that I might have conference with my brethren the Judges about the answer of the King, and then to make an advised answer according to law and reason.”

– The decision written by Sir Edward Coke, in the Court of King’s Bench, in the Michaelmas Term of the year 1610 – better known today as Sir Edward Coke’s “Case of Proclamations” (1610)

The Case of Proclamations was the brainchild of Sir Edward Coke, and angered King James

In 1610, Sir Edward Coke was a judge in the Court of King’s Bench. He had been appointed there by King James the First of England. The king’s Lord Chancellor approached Sir Edward Coke about a court case that Coke was then hearing. This court case is now known as the “Case of Proclamations.” When Sir Edward Coke made his decision, Coke noted the Lord Chancellor’s prior requests to him in the decision itself. The relevant part is as follows: “the Lord Chancellor said, that every precedent had first a commencement, and that he would advise the Judges to maintain the power and prerogative of the King; and in cases in which there is no authority and precedent, to leave it to the King to order in it, according to his wisdom, and for the good of his subjects, or otherwise the King would be no more than the Duke of Venice: and that the King was so much restrained in his prerogative, that it was to be feared the bonds would be broken: but to apply his medicine according to the quality of the disease: and all concluded that it should be necessary at that time to confirm the King's prerogative with our opinions, although that there were not any former precedent or authority in law: for every precedent ought to have a commencement.” (see source) Sir Edward Coke then offered his response, which would not exactly please this same King James.

Sir Edward Coke

How little-known European conflicts sucked in Britain’s American colonies

Note: This post covers a number of conflicts in various parts of the world. But all of them are arguably part of a larger pattern of European wars during this period. Thus, many of my other mentions of these conflicts are directed to this post, which tries to discuss these various conflicts (and sub-conflicts) in this broader colonial context.

Dutch colony of New Netherland (America), and the First and Second Anglo-Dutch Wars

It was only seven years after the 1607 founding of the Jamestown Settlement … that Holland created its own colony in North America. It was called “New Netherland,” and it was founded in 1614. Only six years later was the Pilgrim colony created at Plymouth Rock in 1620. French Canada had begun to fight the Beaver Wars back in 1609. These Beaver Wars would then be fought for the next 90 years or so. In 1635, the Acadian Civil War also began in French Canada. But, elsewhere in North America, the Netherlands would soon be fighting a war against the native peoples, known as “Kieft’s War.” It was fought from 1643 to 1645, in what are today the American states of New York and New Jersey. But Holland would soon be at war with a much greater threat: the mighty “English” Empire (not to be confused with its eventual successor, the “British” Empire). Thus, in 1652, the First Anglo-Dutch War began, over disputes about trade. This particular war was fought almost entirely at sea, in various bodies of water – from the English Channel to the Persian Gulf. In 1654, the war ended with the Treaty of Westminster, where the Dutch made some minor concessions to the English. The aforementioned Acadian Civil War also ended in 1654, although the aforementioned Beaver Wars continued. But, in 1665, the Second Anglo-Dutch War began. Like its predecessor, this war was fought mainly at sea. However, there was also some land fighting in West Africa, the East Indies, the Guianas, and the Caribbean. In North America, the war also involved the city of New Amsterdam surrendering to the English. Thus, in 1664, New Amsterdam was then renamed “New York City,” the name by which it is still known today. In 1667, the Second Anglo-Dutch War ended with the Treaty of Breda. Thus, the Dutch colony of New Netherland temporarily ended in 1667. However, England also ceded English Guiana, Fort Amsterdam in Ghana, and Run to the Netherlands. The stage was thus set for a rematch.

The Battle of Scheveningen – part of the First Anglo-Dutch War, 1653

The Four Days’ Battle – part of the Second Anglo-Dutch War, 1666

A review of “Confucianism and Taoism” (audiobook)

“Citizens of the People’s Republic of China shall enjoy freedom of religious belief. No state organ, social organization or individual shall coerce citizens to believe in or not to believe in any religion, nor shall they discriminate against citizens who believe in or do not believe in any religion. The state shall protect normal [but, apparently, only “normal”] religious activities.” 

– Chapter II, Article 36 of the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China (ratified 1954)

In communist China, Chairman Mao persecuted both the Confucian and Taoist religions. The Constitution of the People’s Republic of China pays lip service to “freedom of religious belief.” But, in practice, freedom of religion is actually quite limited there. This may be why it’s hard to come up with reliable statistics for the relative size of the country’s religions. In fairness, persecution of both the Confucian and Taoist faiths in China predates the communist revolution there. But this persecution went into high gear, when Mao took over the mainland of China in 1949. The government of the older “Republic of China” then retreated to the nearby island of Taiwan. Taiwan is a much freer country today. Thus, it’s easier to see the influence of the “Chinese folk religions” there, as they are now called, in the country’s demographics.

A review of “Confucius, Lao Tzu, and Chinese Philosophy” (audiobook)

In the West, Confucius may be the most admired of all of the Eastern philosophers. When Westerners are asked to give the name of a non-Western philosopher, Confucius is probably the one that would most often be cited. There has long been some debate in the West, surrounding whether Confucianism is a “philosophy” or a “religion.” Similar debates apply with Taoism – or “Daoism,” as they pronounce it here. Regardless, I might mention that this company (Knowledge Products) actually did another audiobook on this same subject. Specifically, it was called “Confucianism and Taoism.” But, to me, “Confucianism and Taoism” seemed to focus more on the two belief systems as religions. By contrast, this audiobook (“Confucius, Lao Tzu, and Chinese Philosophy”) seemed to be approaching both belief systems from a philosophical perspective. And, in many noticeable ways, they were trying to capture the richness of Chinese philosophy.

Why I’m glad to be a native speaker of English

“… all Pleas which shall be pleaded in [any] Courts whatsoever, before any of his Justices whatsoever, or in his other Places, or before any of His other Ministers whatsoever, or in the Courts and Places of any other Lords whatsoever within the Realm, shall be pleaded, shewed, defended, answered, debated, and judged in the English language [formerly French], and that they be entered and inrolled in Latin … ”

– “Pleading in English Act” (1362), as passed by the relatively-new Parliament of England in the Middle Ages

When including second-language speakers, English is the world’s most spoken language

I love learning non-native languages as much as the next person (and maybe more so). I’ve learned some Spanish and French, as well as some Biblical Hebrew and Greek. Perhaps partially because of this, I would love to have multiple native languages. More specifically, given that I live in the American Southwest, I would love to be a native speaker of both English and Spanish. To be clear, it’s hard for people with one native language to raise their kids bilingually, when that language is not dominant in the culture where they live. Thus, I should clarify that this is not intended as a “criticism” of my parents, for somehow “failing” to teach me any significant Spanish as a kid. Given that they were not native speakers of Spanish, such expectations would seem entirely unwarranted, not to mention inapplicable. And, as mentioned above, I was still able to learn Spanish as a second language later on, making up somewhat for this minor disadvantage in my situation. Nonetheless, if I’ve got to have only one native language, I’m glad in many ways that it was English. Speakers of nearly every language tend to consider their own language to be the most “beautiful.” I get this. I’m actually less that way myself, since I find all of my languages to be comparable in their charm and beauty – maybe even more beautiful. But English likewise has its own charm. Obviously, it’s the most useful language here in the United States, which remains one of the largest economies in the world. But, with apologies to Spanish and Mandarin Chinese, it’s also the most practical language in the entire world. Spanish and Mandarin Chinese may have more native speakers than English, but English has a significant number of second-language speakers. Thus, when you include these second-language speakers in the total, English is currently the most spoken language in the world. In part, this is because English remains one of the major languages of India today. India has more than a billion people, as you may know. Owing in part to the prior British colonization there, a significant portion of modern India speaks English. Small wonder, then, that the business value of English is so strong today.

An official of the British East India Company, circa 1760

Trading floor of the New York Stock Exchange, 1963

Why I’m glad that I learned Spanish

“Se habla español.” (“We speak Spanish.”)

– A phrase used by businesses in parts of the United States (including here in the Southwest)

Anecdote about immersing myself in Hispanic culture (which I can’t do with ancient cultures)

This might seem a strange way to begin a blog post about Spanish – but I’ve been learning Biblical Hebrew and Greek for some years now. Because of this, I’ve actually been able to read some parts of the Bible in the original Hebrew. I’ve sometimes wished that I could get off the plane, and step into the cultures of both Biblical Hebrew and Greek. For example, I’ve sometimes wished that I could have a conversation in one (or even both) of these two dead languages. Of course, I’ve never actually been able to do so, because I live in the twenty-first century. There are such languages as modern Hebrew and Greek, but the ancient forms of these languages died out many centuries ago. However, I do have some modern languages alongside of the ancient ones. And one of these modern languages, as it turns out, is Spanish. I live in the Southwestern United States, so Hispanic culture is all around me here. It can be found in things from the local Spanish place names, to the remarkable Mexican food that so many of us eat here. Indeed, this is one of the few cultures that I can actually step into while staying here in my Arizona hometown. This is one of the reasons that I’ve long been glad that I learned some Spanish. I wouldn’t even need to purchase a plane ticket, to be able to put this language into practice. I can do so right here at home, without even having to leave town. With Spanish, I got my wish, and was actually able to get some firsthand experience of the culture for myself.

Great image of a carne asada burrito from Wikipedia

How the Seven Years’ War spilled over into Latin America

The Seven Years’ War was fought on five different continents. Thus, it was a massive worldwide conflict (as I argue elsewhere). It started out in the frontier of North America, but soon drew in many of the mother countries from back in Europe. From there, the conflict would then spread to West Africa, to the Indian subcontinent, and to the Philippine Islands. But it would also be fought in a couple of the Spanish and Portuguese colonies of South America. Specifically, it would be expressed there, as part of a forgotten conflict called the “Fantastic War.” This part is sometimes called the “First Cevallos expedition.” This is basically the Latin American theater of the Seven Years’ War. You could even regard it as the Seven Years’ War spilling over into Latin America. The “Fantastic War” (and this portion thereof) are mostly forgotten to history, but the conflict may have set the stage for the later Latin American wars of independence. Thus, it may behoove us to look for a moment at this forgotten (and important) conflict in this post. This will tell us much about the great European colonies in Latin America.

The captured Spanish fleet at Havana (Cuba, 1762) – during the Anglo-Spanish War

Some medieval pros and cons: Striking a “middle” course with the Middle Ages

Two possible extremes of the Middle Ages: romanticizing them, and demonizing them

The Middle Ages remain a source of enduring interest today, but they are also the center of a great international debate. One side seems to romanticize the Middle Ages, based on things like the chivalry and the various kinds of art. The other side seeks to demonize and dismiss the Middle Ages, based on things like the superstition and the great brutality. Few periods in European history are as hard for people in the modern West to understand as the thousand-year Middle Ages. In some ways, the Middle Ages may (in fact) be the most alien period of such length in all of Western history. But it would be a mistake to throw out the baby with the bathwater. The Middle Ages also produced some fantastic art, architecture, music, and literature – inspired by the fervent faith of the era. It also produced some great religious philosophers – such as St. Augustine, Duns Scotus, and St. Thomas Aquinas in the Christian world. Elsewhere, it also produced Maimonides in Judaism, and Avicenna and Averroes in the Islamic world. And the Middle Ages even produced some great science (more about that here) – more science than most people today might realize. Much of this was centered around the Islamic world, but some of it also came from Catholic Europe. Thus, we continue to try to come to terms with the complex history of the Middle Ages, and the relative degree of good and evil therein. Thus, this post will try to examine some of the pros and cons of the Middle Ages, and how some of them continue to affect how people today see this period.

Byzantine Church mosaics, Monreale, Sicily, late 12th century

Why does the Declaration of Independence list so many grievances?

“Whereas many of our subjects in divers parts of our colonies and plantations in North America … have at length proceeded to open and avowed rebellion, by arraying themselves in a hostile manner, to withstand the execution of the law, and traitorously preparing, ordering and levying war against us: And whereas, there is reason to apprehend that such rebellion hath been much promoted and encouraged by the traitorous correspondence, counsels and comfort of divers wicked and desperate persons within this realm: To the end therefore, that none of our subjects may neglect or violate their duty through ignorance thereof, or through any doubt of the protection which the law will afford to their loyalty and zeal, we have thought fit, by and with the advice of our Privy Council, to issue our Royal Proclamation …”

– The “Proclamation of Rebellion” by King George the Third (23 August 1775)

In the eighteenth century, Americans had strong disagreements about colonial grievances

We today remember the Declaration of Independence for its ideas, and it is right that we do so. But, surprisingly, it was most famous in its own time … for the list of colonial grievances. To the people of that time, the list of grievances was the most important part, and certainly the most interesting. The grievances addressed the fiery controversies of the day, about whether the king had broken his end of a social contract with the people. Some American Loyalists actually agreed with the idea that the king had done some terrible things to the American colonies. Many of them even agreed that, if these provocations were indeed bad enough, rebellion would indeed be justified. But they needed to be convinced that the provocations were indeed bad enough to justify this radical course of action.

Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence

Jainism and Sikhism: Two of the minority religions of India

“The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.”

– Part III, Article 15 of the current Constitution of India – which came into force in the year 1950

India has one billion people. Thus, even the country’s minority religions can be big ones …

India has more than one billion people. Some even believe that it may have overtaken China as the most populous nation in the world. If not, it is easily still the second most populous. Thus, even the country’s minority religions can be big ones today. Hinduism, as you may know, is the largest religion in India today. Nearly 80% of the country are Hindus, according to an Indian census in 2011. The second largest religion in India today, as it turns out, is Islam. Nearly 15% of the country are Muslims. It would probably be even more, if you were to include nearby Pakistan and Bangladesh – both of which were once parts of British India, along with what is today “India.” If you do the math, these two religions alone would thus account for more than 90% of the current population of India. But what about the rest of the country? The third largest religion there is Christianity, with roughly 2% of the country. The influence of prior British colonization may help to explain this Christian segment somewhat. But here, I will be focusing on two lesser-known religions, whose very names are often unknown to many of my fellow Americans. Thus, in the interest of education, I would like to focus on Jainism and Sikhism, two of the important minority religions of India. I will start here by talking about Jainism.

Guru Nanak explaining Sikh teachings to Sadhus

How the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars changed Europe

“His majesty the king of Prussia cedes … all the territories and domains, and all territorial property of whatever kind, or by whatever title possessed, by his majesty the king of Prussia, between the Rhine and the Elbe, at the commencement of the present war … The kingdom of Westphalia shall consist of the provinces ceded by his majesty the king of Prussia, and of other states which are at present in possession of his majesty the emperor Napoleon … His majesty the king of Prussia cedes the circle of Kotbus, in Lower Lusatia, to his majesty the king of Saxony, with full right of proprietorship and sovereignty.”

– “Treaty of Tilsit, 9 July 1807” (specifically, Articles VII, VIII, and XII), between Napoleon Bonaparte of France and King Frederick William the Third of Prussia

During the French Revolution, at least 40,000 of the French people were executed by the guillotine. These eventually included King Louis the Sixteenth, and his wife Marie Antoinette. They even include a few of the Revolution’s leaders, such as Maximilien Robespierre. Eventually, the French Revolution was sucking much of the rest of Europe into the French Revolutionary Wars. At least half a million people died in this earlier conflict, which lasted for a decade. It was soon followed by the Napoleonic Wars, whose death toll proved even higher. (More about that later.) Like its predecessor, this conflict also lasted for a decade. These conflicts would be fought in Egypt, the Middle East, India, the East Indies, North America, South America, the Caribbean islands, and many of the world’s oceans and seas. But it would also involve countless battles on the European continent. The legacy of the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars … has always been somewhat complicated. But it’s also extremely interesting, with many dramatic moments. Many of them shaped the course of history. Thus, this might be a good time to examine the general legacy of this period. I will try to show how these wars helped to shape Europe. But, through Europe, this conflict also affected many of Europe’s former colonies, in many different parts of the world.

Entry of Napoleon into Berlin – Prussia, 1806

The rise and fall of the “British Raj” in India

Note: This post is primarily focused on the post-1858 “British Raj” – that is, on things after the 1850s “Indian Rebellion.” Things before that will be discussed in a later post. (Warning: This post contains some disturbing pictures.)

One of the most controversial topics in the entire history of the British Empire …

The war that turned India into a longtime British colony … arguably began in distant North America. It was called the “French and Indian War,” and it began in colonial Pennsylvania in 1754 – with an incident that involved George Washington. In 1756, the war soon spread to Europe, as the “Seven Years’ War” officially began. And, in 1757, the war then fatefully spread to the massive Indian subcontinent in South Asia. The war’s fighting in India is now known to history as the “Third Carnatic War.” In the First and Second Carnatic Wars (in some prior decades), the European powers had been fighting among themselves to control the Indian subcontinent. These powers had even included the French, who had some local colonization plans of their own. But the British were now determined to kick the French out of India for good. And, in 1757, the British began to do so at the fateful Battle of Plassey.

Lord Clive meeting with Mir Jafar after the Battle of Plassey, 1757

How our Founding Fathers fought the Barbary Pirates

“[The Congress shall have the power] To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offences against the law of nations …”

– Article 1, Section 8, Paragraph 10 of the United States Constitution – ratified in 1787, during the American-Algerian War

Militarily speaking, the Founding Fathers are most famous today for fighting the British. During the American Revolution, they fought to become independent from Great Britain. But, when four of our Founding Fathers became presidents, they had to deal with the Barbary Pirates. These were a group of (mostly Muslim) pirates from distant North Africa. Many of them would capture Christians, and sell them into slavery. Thus, it’s a small wonder that the Barbary Pirates would become somewhat unpopular in America (not to mention elsewhere) as a result. This post will thus tell the forgotten story of the Barbary Wars. But, in order to understand them, we must understand the Barbary Pirates themselves. And it turns out that their story goes back for many centuries.

An Algerine pirate ship, during the prior actions of the Barbary Pirates

Why is French spoken on five different continents? (Answer: History)

Spanish and Portuguese are found mainly in the Americas today, but French is spread out

You might already know that Spanish and Portuguese both have far more native speakers than French. With 250 million native speakers, Portuguese is the fifth-most-spoken language in the world by this measure. And, with 480 million native speakers, Spanish is the second-most-spoken language in the world by this measure. (Only Mandarin Chinese has more.) Both of them attained this status by aggressive colonization in past centuries. Obviously, both of them originated in Europe, on the Iberian Peninsula – which includes both Spain and Portugal. But, outside of Europe, Spanish and Portuguese are each spoken mainly in the Americas. Portuguese has a strong presence in South America through Brazil. Spanish has a strong presence in North America through Mexico. And Spanish is, of course, spoken in Central America and South America as well – not to mention the Caribbean. With the exception of some Portuguese colonies in Africa, both are fairly rare on other non-European continents.

One group of King’s Daughters arrives at Quebec – French Canada, 1667

The “Quasi-War”: The only war between France and the United States

“There shall be a firm inviolable and universal peace, and a true and sincere friendship between His Britannick Majesty, his heirs and successors, and the United States of America; and between their respective countries, territories, cities, towns and people of every degree, without exception of persons or places.”

“It is agreed between His [Britannick] Majesty and the United States of America, that there shall be a reciprocal and entirely perfect liberty of navigation and commerce, between their respective people, in the manner, under the limitations, and on the conditions specified in the following articles.”

– Articles 1 and 11 of the Jay Treaty (signed in 1794, and proclaimed in 1796), as negotiated by ambassador John Jay under President George Washington – which angered the French enough for France to fight the “Quasi-War” with the United States

That time that the United States went to war with France (sort of)

You might already know that the American colonies rebelled against Britain, in our “Revolutionary War.” You might further know that we fought against Britain again during our “War of 1812.” In both of these wars, we were thus allied with distant France. Thus, many Americans would feel some degree of “gratitude” to France for helping us with these wars. But the situation may actually be a little more complicated. In the late eighteenth century, we fought a small (but still important) war with France on the high seas. This is a lesser-known conflict, which was between the American Revolution and the War of 1812. During this conflict, we had to make some difficult choices about whom we would choose as allies. And we had to make some equally difficult choices … about whom we would choose as our enemies. Had the war gone a little differently, our “War of 1812” might have instead been against France – and who knows what the war’s consequences would have been in that case? This had the potential to change American history, if it had been navigated a little less delicately.

Fire at Port-Royal following Samuel Argall’s attack – French Acadia, 1613

A review of Ken Burns’ “The American Revolution” (PBS)

“But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government.”

– The United States Declaration of Independence (July 4th, 1776)

My prior concerns about this series, and how my hopes for this series were restored

When I first saw Ken Burns’ prior series “The Civil War,” I was mesmerized by it. I still consider it to be among the greatest series ever made, of any kind. And, in many ways, I was looking forward to seeing Ken Burns’ coverage of the American Revolution as well. But I confess that I also had some concerns about how he would cover this massive (and important) topic. These concerns were partially stoked by his biographical film about Thomas Jefferson, which could almost be described as a hatchet job. The film had so much coverage of his slaveholding, and his relationship with Sally Hemings (both legitimate topics), that it drowned out his considerable role in drafting the Declaration of Independence. But, thankfully, my confidence in Ken Burns’ coverage was restored somewhat, when I saw his biographical film about Benjamin Franklin. This proved far more sympathetic, and gave me hope that he would cover the American Revolution in a (somewhat) more sympathetic light. Ken Burns definitely covers the slavery issues, and he also covers the comparable issues surrounding Native American involvement. Both of these receive a lot of time in this series. But he also shows that the British were willing to sacrifice Black and Native American interests to their own war aims, even if they still tended to offer a better deal to these two ethnic groups than the Patriot side did. And he shows that there were many Blacks and Native Americans who fought for the Patriot side, even if there were still far more of them who fought for the British and Loyalist side.