HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: murray@husc10.harvard.edu (Brendan Murray)
Newsgroups: soc.history,talk.politics.misc,alt.war,alt.war.civil.usa,talk.bizarre
Subject: In need of help identifying quotation
Date: 15 Sep 92 00:16:24 GMT
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

Posted from a friend's account:

For a school assignment I desperately need to know who spoke (or wrote?)
the following famous quotation:

"Those who do not learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them".

(I know this is not the exact quote, but we've all heard it before! But
who said it originally, and what was the context?)

If someone could e-mail me the answer before midnight Monday the 14th it
would be greatly appreciated. The due date for this in class is Tuesday
morning, however, so if anyone knowing the answer could mail me before
then it would also be appreciated.

Thank you!

Tom
murray@husc.harvard.edu
From: brinkema@fjc.GOV (John R. Brinkema)
Newsgroups: soc.history
Subject: Re: slavery
Date: 6 Sep 92 02:39:53 GMT
Distribution: soc.history
Organization: Federal Judicial Center, Washington, D.C.

jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy) writes:

>What is the first statement anyone can find that slavery is wrong - and
>not just a natural consequence of being conquered?  I believe that in
> ...

Indeed, *WHY* did the world discover that slavery is wrong.  Considering that
all the major religions at the time considered life as a relatively
unimportant interval in the road the soul travels, and that all other
parts of the path were 'better' (acknowledged hyperbole), death was a favor
and slavery a mere delay from the rest of the better path. 

Can someone point to a (the) standard history of slavery?  tnx.   jb.
Newsgroups: soc.history,bit.listserv.history
From: jdnicoll@watyew.uwaterloo.ca (James Davis Nicoll)
Subject: Re: Oldest City in North America?
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 13:52:43 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.184158.16049@compu.com> fr@compu.com (Fred Rump from home) writes:
>yeonwook@hardy.u.washington.edu (Mark Choi) writes:
>
>>In article <1992Sep7.184927.27052@cs.mun.ca> carlos@garfield.cs.mun.ca (Carlos Borges) writes:
>>>Which is the oldest city in North America that is still around?
>>>I've been told it's St. John's, Newfoundland, but I thought
>>>Mexico City was settled by Europeans first.  Any others?
>
>>The most probable guess would be an Aztec city of some sort. Mexico
>>city was not settled by Europeans first. If you remember correctly, the
>>city was called Tenochitlan (spell?) before the Spanish.
>
>Mexico City is not exactly considered North American now, is it? 

	Why not? It isn't like Central America is a continent, or that
national borders define continental borders. Before North and South
America's land connection, Mexico was clearly on the N. American side
of the gap.

>I believe St Augustine in FL claims the distinction of being the oldest city 
>in NA.

	They can claim it, but it doesn't make it true.

							James Nicoll
Newsgroups: soc.history
From: patter@dasher.uucp (24224-guthrie)
Subject: Re: 50 Years Ago: October
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 15:14:02 GMT

 1 Oct - America's first jet propelled aircraft flies for the first time.
         Bell Aircraft's XP-59 "Aircomet" is rated at 400 mph with a ceiling
         in excess of 40,000 feet. It's two kerosene fueled turbojets
         are a British design.

 2 Oct - One hundred American bombers stage a daylight raid on industrial
         targets at Lille on the Eastern front. British bombers follow up
         with a night raid on the same targets.

11 Oct - The battle of Cape Esperance takes place off Guadalcanal. This
         is a confused night action between squadrons of cruisers and 
         destroyers. The American force is led by Admiral Scott and the
         Japanese by Admiral Goto. Heavy casualties are incurred, including
         admiral Goto, but Japanese troops and supplies are successfully
         landed.

14 Oct - Japanese battleships shell Henderson field. Out of 90 aircraft
         on the field, 48 are destroyed.

14 Oct - The "Tokyo Express" lands more troops and supplies at Tassfaronga.

25 Oct - The battle of Santa Cruz occurs east of the Solomon islands.
         Four task forces under Admiral Halsey are outnumbered by forces
         under Admiral Yamamoto. The battle is fought entirely by aircraft.
         Halsey loses the carrier "Hornet". The carrier "Enterprise" is 
         damaged and forced to withdraw. The battle is a victory for the
         Japanese, but momentarily stops their movements at sea.

Source - "Ghosts" calendar, 1992

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
                    |
George Patterson -  | If train stations are where trains stop, 
                    | what are work stations?
                    |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky soc.history:8229 soc.culture.turkish:9912 soc.culture.greek:8808
From: michael.polymenakos@factory.com (Michael Polymenakos) 
Newsgroups: soc.history,soc.culture.turkish,soc.culture.greek
Subject: RE: CONSCRIPTS WHO CAN'T
Date: 10 Sep 92 17:26:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York City, NY - 212-274-1243v.32bis
Reply-To: michael.polymenakos@factory.com (Michael Polymenakos) 


The Advanced Racist Garbage Insult Creator (ARGIC) said:
> Sea novices: Although famed as a maritime nation and despite being
> surrounded by seas, a report has disclosed that only one in ten
> conscripts called up to join the Greek navy can swim.
>
> Poor "paliks".

 Right on: This coming from a country whose airplanes sank it's own
ships in 1974.

 Right on: Greece had to fish over 200 Turks from the sae when two
turkish landing boats collided in the Aegean, a few years ago.

 Right on: Remember the "Averof" (I betcha many turks learned how to
swim that night). Glup, Glup, Glup...

 Right On: Remember "Malta yok"?


Get a life Hasan. Oh, and a new name too. Your 'Argic' name sounds like
medication for hemmoroids.

m.
From: traynor@fnalb.fnal.gov
Newsgroups: soc.history
Subject: Re: Oldest City in North America?
Date: 10 Sep 92 04:55:14 GMT
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Lab
X-Posted-From: fnalb.fnal.gov
X-Posted-Through: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <1992Sep8.184158.16049@compu.com>, fr@compu.com (Fred Rump from home) writes:
> yeonwook@hardy.u.washington.edu (Mark Choi) writes:
> 
>>In article <1992Sep7.184927.27052@cs.mun.ca> carlos@garfield.cs.mun.ca (Carlos Borges) writes:
>>>Which is the oldest city in North America that is still around?
>>>I've been told it's St. John's, Newfoundland, but I thought
>>>Mexico City was settled by Europeans first.  Any others?
> 
>>The most probable guess would be an Aztec city of some sort. Mexico
>>city was not settled by Europeans first. If you remember correctly, the
>>city was called Tenochitlan (spell?) before the Spanish.
> 
> Mexico City is not exactly considered North American now, is it? 
> 
> I believe St Augustine in FL claims the distinction of being the oldest city 
> in NA.
> 
> Fred
> -- 
> W. Fred Rump 	office:	   fred@COMPU.COM     'mans feet have grown/so big 
> 26 Warren St.   home: fred@icdi10.compu.com  that he/forgets his littleness'
> Beverly, NJ. 08010                          		Don Marquis 
> 609-386-6846    bang:uunet!cdin-1!icdi10!fr   

Why isn't Mexico City considered North American?

					-Mike Traynor

NNN  NN DDDD    Mike Traynor (ND '86)(Rice '93?) |||     Amiga 500 owner   ///
 N N N   D  D   Fermilab PO Box 500 MS 221 E683  |||     Only Amiga makes ///
 N  NN   D  D   Batavia IL, 60510               //|\\    it possible  \\\/// 
NN   NN DDDD    (708) 879-6095 [ans. mach.]    /// \\\                 \XX/
Newsgroups: soc.history,bit.listserv.history
From: viking@bnr.ca (Harold Henrikson)
Subject: Re: Oldest City in North America?
Reply-To: viking@bmerh66.bnr.ca
Organization: BNR Ottawa, Fibre Systems Development
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 15:58:35 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.184158.16049@compu.com>, fr@compu.com (Fred Rump from home) writes:
|> yeonwook@hardy.u.washington.edu (Mark Choi) writes:
|> 
|> >In article <1992Sep7.184927.27052@cs.mun.ca> carlos@garfield.cs.mun.ca (Carlos Borges) writes:
|> >>Which is the oldest city in North America that is still around?
|> >>I've been told it's St. John's, Newfoundland, but I thought
|> >>Mexico City was settled by Europeans first.  Any others?
|> 
|> >The most probable guess would be an Aztec city of some sort. Mexico
|> >city was not settled by Europeans first. If you remember correctly, the
|> >city was called Tenochitlan (spell?) before the Spanish.
|> 
|> Mexico City is not exactly considered North American now, is it? 

Last I heard Mexico is considered part of North America.

|> 
|> I believe St Augustine in FL claims the distinction of being the oldest city 
|> in NA.
|> 

Mexico city is certainly older but is the question the oldest city founded by
Europeans or oldest city period?  If the latter, there are/were several cities
claiming older status.

|> Fred
|> -- 
|> W. Fred Rump 	office:	   fred@COMPU.COM     'mans feet have grown/so big 
|> 26 Warren St.   home: fred@icdi10.compu.com  that he/forgets his littleness'
|> Beverly, NJ. 08010                          		Don Marquis 
|> 609-386-6846    bang:uunet!cdin-1!icdi10!fr   

--
Harold Henriksen                    Bell-Northern Research
email: viking@bmerh694.bnr.ca       Ottawa,Ontario,Canada 

Pillaging and plundering were more fun than programming!
(Opinions are not my employer's and sometimes not mine)
Newsgroups: soc.history
From: dickwin@sequent.com (Dick Winningstad)
Subject: I quit this group
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems Inc.
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 23:55:37 GMT

To Sedar Argic and/or Mutlu:

FUCK YOU I QUIT THIS GROUP.

To everyone else:

My ignorance has made me unable to set up a kill file that kills their
bullshit and no one is interested in limiting posts (not content, but
number) so I am unsubscribing.

If any one is interested in starting a moderated news group discussing
history that LIMITS THE NUMBER OF SUBMISSIONS PER DAY NOT CONTENT then
I will be interested in joining.

Thanks for the fun I've had, but the Turkish/Armenian crap is boring
and I'm tired of sifting it out.

dick
Xref: sparky soc.history:8221 bit.listserv.history:4876
Organization: Washington University, St. Louis
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 92 15:40:58 CST
From:         C05705DA@WUVMD
To:           NETNEWS@WUVMD
Subject:      Re: Oldest City in North America?
Newsgroups:   soc.history,bit.listserv.history

To extend the string, I've always heard that El Paso is oldest European
settlement in the U.S.  But then, I've also heard that Roake (sp?)
in Carolina was the first settlement.  St. Augustine was built to guard
off the French, English, and Dutch from landing in Florida and cutting
across the penninsula to the settlements and Carribean in general.
Xref: sparky soc.history:8233 soc.culture.japan:7977
From: miklg@acuson.com (Michael Goldman )
Newsgroups: soc.history,soc.culture.japan
Subject: Re: The Russo-Japanese War (part 2)
Date: 11 Sep 92 20:45:52 GMT
Organization: Acuson; Mountain View, California

jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy) writes:

>In article <Bty1tu.78r@world.std.com> cmr@world.std.com (Charles M Richmond) writes:

>   250 years of isolationism is both indicative of and a cause of the 
>   strongest kind of racism. The fear/hate of outsiders is reinforced
>   by the lack of contact.

>   Charlie

>The actual rationale for the Japanese isolationism is hard to
>determine.  No Japanese has ever been able to point me at any
>contemporary documents advocating it.  Everyone I asked says
>it had to do with Confucian fears of being corrupted by foreign
>ideology, especially by Christianity which had two million
>converts in Japan.  I don't recall anything about foreigners
>being declared inferior.  It follows by 50 years or so,
>a corresponding isolationist policy of the Chinese empire.

	The books I've read ascribe the isolationism to a very
	specific fear that with the western religions would come
	western allegiences.  A Portugese sailor is said to
	have told the Shogun that it was typical of western
	countries to first send missionaries to convert the
	people and then to send warships with the converts
	as allies.  The sailor may have been apochryphal,
	but the persecutions of Christians was based on that fear.

	- Michael Goldman

-- 
"History teaches us that men and nations behave wisely once they have
exhausted all other alternatives." - Abba Eban
	Disclaimer:  All views are solely my own & not the views of Acuson.
	<sun!sono!miklg>  or  [miklg@acuson.com]
Xref: sparky soc.history:8137 bit.listserv.history:4826
From: fr@compu.com (Fred Rump from home)
Newsgroups: soc.history,bit.listserv.history
Subject: Re: Oldest City in North America?
Date: 8 Sep 92 18:41:58 GMT
Organization: CompuData Inc.

yeonwook@hardy.u.washington.edu (Mark Choi) writes:

>In article <1992Sep7.184927.27052@cs.mun.ca> carlos@garfield.cs.mun.ca (Carlos Borges) writes:
>>Which is the oldest city in North America that is still around?
>>I've been told it's St. John's, Newfoundland, but I thought
>>Mexico City was settled by Europeans first.  Any others?

>The most probable guess would be an Aztec city of some sort. Mexico
>city was not settled by Europeans first. If you remember correctly, the
>city was called Tenochitlan (spell?) before the Spanish.

Mexico City is not exactly considered North American now, is it? 

I believe St Augustine in FL claims the distinction of being the oldest city 
in NA.

Fred
-- 
W. Fred Rump 	office:	   fred@COMPU.COM     'mans feet have grown/so big 
26 Warren St.   home: fred@icdi10.compu.com  that he/forgets his littleness'
Beverly, NJ. 08010                          		Don Marquis 
609-386-6846    bang:uunet!cdin-1!icdi10!fr   
Newsgroups: soc.history
From: miklg@acuson.com (Michael Goldman )
Newsgroups: soc.history
Subject: Re: there's more to history than war
Date: 8 Sep 92 22:33:00 GMT
Organization: Acuson; Mountain View, California

nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson) writes:


>   But I'm somewhat troubled by the way history forums, and especially 
>   this one, are dominated by military matters.  I would say less than 10%
[...] Does
>   it reflect the way people have internalized the definition of "history"
>   we learned in school (kings, conquests, dates)?  

	My schooling was largely on the order of economic and social
	progress.  I think it is the anomalous nature of war that makes it
	more interesting.  Professional historians have long concentrated
	on long term evolutionary factors, wherein wars are more the 
	punctuations marks than the serious stuff.

	If I look at my local city library, for every 1 book by a
	professional historian, I'll find 10 by retired Admirals and
	journalists on wars.  The wars are interesting in so far as
	they affected history, and the number of people involved.
	I.e., there's hardly anything on the Wars of the Spanish 
	Succession, while there are tons of books on WWII.

>   Most people do not fight in wars at any point in their lifetime.
>   Even those who do typically spend only a few years of their lives so
>   engaged.   Before the modern period of "total war", where the idea 
>   is to make war on your enemy's economic and industrial base, wars
>   typically had very little effect on people's lives unless battles
>   happened to be fought on their land.  

	It's more interesting to watch fireworks than to watch
	wheat grow, though the latter is more useful.  It is the total
	wars of WWII and the US Civil War that draw the most attention.

>   The educational system has propagandized that history is about wars,
>   dates, kings, and conquest.  "Big Things".   But most of history 

	You went to a different set of schools than I did.  Most
	historians seem to take your view about the lesser importance
	of wars.

	- Michael Goldman

-- 
"History teaches us that men and nations behave wisely once they have
exhausted all other alternatives." - Abba Eban
	Disclaimer:  All views are solely my own & not the views of Acuson.
	<sun!sono!miklg>  or  [miklg@acuson.com]
Newsgroups: soc.history
From: mss2@quads.uchicago.edu (Michael S. Schiffer)
Subject: Battle of New Orleans
Reply-To: mss2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 03:58:56 GMT

	My education in US history had always suggested that the
Battle of New Orleans was, as a battle, historically irrelevant.
Because it took place several weeks after the conclusion of the Treaty
of Ghent and the formal end of the War of 1812 (though neither side
knew of this at the time due to communication delays) it was portrayed
as a militarily impressive but ultimately meaningless victory, its
only importance lying in the fact that it catapulted Andrew Jackson to
national prominence.

	However, recently I've been reading Paul Johnson's _The Birth
of the Modern_, a history of the early 19th century, which takes a
somewhat different view of it:

	"[T]hough Jackson's victory at New Orleans had no effect on
the treaty [of Ghent] itself, it determined the way it was interpreted
and applied.  The treaty was as important in what it did not say as in
what it did.  The Treaty of San Ildefonso (1800), by which Bonaparte
secured the Louisiana Territory from Spain, said France could not
dispose of it without first offering it back to its original owner.
This Bonaparte omitted to do, so when he sold it to the United States
in 1803, most nations, including Britain, did not recognize the
purchase.  In international law, as Britain saw it, America had no
right to be anywhere on the gulf of Mexico, including New Orleans and
Mobile.  Since the Treaty of Ghent said nothing about these
territories, Britain would have been at liberty to hand them back to
Spain had she been in possession of all or any of them at the time the
treaty came into effect.  As Monroe put it to Madison, if Jackson had
lost the battle, that is exactly what Britain would have been tempted
to do.  The effect of Jackson's victory was to legitimize the entire
Louisiana purchase in the eyes of the international community;
henceforth we hear no more about its illegality.  Equally, if Fort
Bower had been taken before the war ended, instead of after, Britain
could have occupied Mobile with the 6,000 men she had on the spot and
might have been tempted to fortify and keep it as another Gibraltar,
to checkmate any U.S. forward moves in the Carribean.  The
instructions given to Cochrane and Pakenham reserved the right to
retain any conquests after the war, and the actual wording of the
treaty would have made this provision lawful.  As it was, Britain, in
effect, renounced any such ambitions provided America left Canada
alone."

	It seems to me that Johnson makes a good case.  But I'm
curious, is there anything to the "conventional wisdom"?  Anyone care
to argue that Johnson overstates the importance of New Orleans?

Mike

-- 
Michael S. Schiffer, LHN, FCS	"Indeed I tremble for my country
mss2@midway.uchicago.edu	 when I reflect that God is just."
mike.schiffer@um.cc.umich.edu	 -- Thomas Jefferson, Notes on
mss2@usite-next.uchicago.edu     Virginia (1784)
Newsgroups: soc.history,bit.listserv.history
From: yeonwook@hardy.u.washington.edu (Mark Choi)
Subject: Re: Oldest City in North America?
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 02:31:24 GMT

In article <1992Sep7.184927.27052@cs.mun.ca> carlos@garfield.cs.mun.ca (Carlos Borges) writes:
>Which is the oldest city in North America that is still around?
>I've been told it's St. John's, Newfoundland, but I thought
>Mexico City was settled by Europeans first.  Any others?

The most probable guess would be an Aztec city of some sort. Mexico
city was not settled by Europeans first. If you remember correctly, the
city was called Tenochitlan (spell?) before the Spanish.

>-- 
>   ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
>  // C. Miguel Borges               A.K.A.                Carlos M. Borges //
> // an630@cleveland.freenet.edu                 carlos@garfield.cs.mun.ca //
>///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////


-- 
    .  .      +---------------------------------+
  --|--|      | Mark Yeon Wook Choi             |
   /.\ |      | yeonwook@hardy.u.washington.edu |
  --|--|      +---------------------------------+  
Newsgroups: soc.history
From: sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan)
Subject: Re: Oldest City in North America?
Reply-To: sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan)
Organization: Plymouth State College - Plymouth, N.H.
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 13:55:12 GMT

Rob Harrington writes:
>sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan) writes:
>> I always thought it was Old Oraibi in Arizona.
>
>What ever happened to St. Augestine(sp) Florida?  I was always told that
>was the first permanent European settlement in N. America...

That's what I was always taught, too.  But I believe the orinal
question just asked what was the oldest extant city in N.A., not
restricting himself (herself?) to European settlements.   I have read
that the Hopi settlement of Oraibi is older than the Aztec, Mayan or
Incan cities, and is still occupied.

-- 
  - Steffan O'Sullivan		         sos@oz.plymouth.edu
From: ecrjbruce@economics.adelaide.edu.au
Newsgroups: soc.history
Subject: Re: Battle of Hastings?
Date: 16 Sep 92 02:10:47 GMT
Organization: Economics, University of Adelaide
NNTP-Posting-Host: eco.economics.adelaide.edu.au

In article <82733@bcsaic.boeing.com>, rwojcik@atc.boeing.com (Richard Wojcik,snake) writes:
> In article 1@economics.adelaide.edu.au, ecrjbruce@economics.adelaide.edu.au () writes:
 
> "It is thought..." doesn't tell us by whom.  By William, of course.  What objective
> evidence is there that Edward ever thought to designate William?  We know that 


there wa enough evidence for the pope to support William above Harold.  Source
Encyclopaedia Brittanca, just checked it in the library.

>  It is said that 


didn't you just object when I used a similar line.....

>  The fact remains that
> he rushed to have himself crowned as soon as Edward died. 

Sure, but Edward only nominated him as his successor on his deathbed.  Given
the period in history I would have wanted my coronation ASAP to quell as many
rival claims as possible.

 
> When I visited the museum and viewed the Tapestry in July, all of the materials
> there claimed that the figure in the Tapestry was Harold.  These included the
> exhibits and the documentary film that is shown before you go to view the
> tapestry.  What is your claim based on, and why do they spread false information
> at the Tapestry Museum?

Perhaps not deliberately - for instance who was the first man to fly.  History
records it as Orville (or was it Wilbur ?) Wright, yet there has been much
speculation that the Smithsonian Institute is keeping evidence (photographic)
that shows a German (name I have forgotten) flying hidden, simply because they
have the Kittyhawk which would lose value as an exhibit if it suddenly became
the SECOND powered flight machine.  The Harold copped it in the eye story makes
good copy, and passed into legendary status.  Nowhere near as interesting is
Harold died but one of his bodyguard copped an arrow in the eye.  How long did
the Shroud Of Turin last as a holy relic? Or the blood that never clots in some
Italian cathedral etc.?  Only as long as we don't challenge the misinformation
provided.  The bayeaux tapestry is no different, modern examination has
indicated that it was not Harold but one of his guard that received the eye
wound.  I will post my source as soon as I cna find it.


regs

Rob