HS Comments on the Fly

So, we’re still reading Virginia’s General by Marrin. It’s about General Lee. No, not Bo and Luke Duke’s car, but its namesake. This book was out of print for a while, and the price went a little high — that was when I bought my copy. But now this book is priced reasonably because a homeschool publisher re-published it and a few of Marrin’s other books.

The other day we read about the Union and Confederate soldiers making contact with each other during the war. In this case, it was when they were camped on opposite sides of the Rappahannock River. At these times, pickets (lookouts) would holler at each other for trades. The South could trade their tobacco since they had plenty of it. The North might send over some sugar or coffee, which the South had a difficult time getting its hand on. Little sailboats were used to complete the trades.

Here’s a quote from the book:

[Lee’s] only objection was to a trade in Southern newspapers, which foolishly printed articles about his positions and troop movements. He, like his Northern foes, believed freedom of the press must be limited in time of war. (p.106)

This book is full of interesting little tidbits. Without them, I can find non-fiction history books a little too facty. A little more personal slant on things spices things up — that’s what I like about Marrin’s books. He manages to research and find personal accounts or other source documents that often give us a more realistic view of history, full of little-known tidbits. I wrote a long review of Marrin’s Sea King (Sir Francis Drake) a whopping eight years ago; it describes how Marrin’s writes (but embarrassingly shows my ignorance of a few things).

It was such a hassle. I searched for it for a long time.

My problem usually with searching for book is all an issue of color. I thought the book was blue with the words “Robert Dudley” on the spine. Come to find out, the book is red with the words “Elizabeth and Leicester” on the spine. Leicester = Dudley. Those ancient and royal Brits had too many names to keep track of, didn’t they? Confusing folks like me who don’t really understand the whole royalty and peerage business. To top it off, Leicester is pronounced just like Lester. I wonder if Leicester Square is named after him or if it was some other Leicester who was being honored.

Philippa Gregory, novelist, claims to have used Elizabeth and Leicester when she wrote The Virgin’s Lover. That’s a bonus for me. Reading Gregory’s book actually is what made me want to find my book on Dudley. Remember … Dudley = Leicester. Sometimes I wondered which parts of The Virgin’s Lover were real and which were supposition. It is a novel, after all.

I wish I could find a good and interesting book about Elizabeth for a 10 year old, not that I have a 10 year old, but understanding the importance of Elizabeth’s reign is good for a 10 year old, imo, esp. if the 10 year old is interested. Gergory’s novel is not appropriate for a 10 year old. I can, however, recommend the Landmark (review of all Landmark Books), Queen Elizabeth and the Spanish Armada. I definitely don’t recommend the Royal Diaries version of the story of Elizabeth by Lansky. It only covers about three years of her childhood which isn’t too helpful.

Anyway, I’ve read a couple of pages of Elizabeth and Leicester and found out that Elizabeth I decided when she was only eight that she would never marry. Based on her examples of great marriages up to that point, I can see why.

We watched the Anne-Marie Duff version of Elizabeth I the other day thanks to Netflix. My daughter’s not so interested in Elizabeth’s reign and its consequences, but the movie doesn’t bother her too much. I’m not sure it’s as good as Mirren’s version, but the younger actors are a little more realistic, imo. And the costumes are great.

Che was homeschooled.

I’m not kidding. Ernesto Guevara de la Serna was homeschooled. Beginning in 1934, he attended homeschool. His homeschooling continued until he started attending primary school in 1937. It was probably during the ages 6-9 since he was born on June 14, 1928.

I’m guessing his parents decided to homeschool him (possibly) because of his asthma. But what do I know?

So, someone should design a Cafe Press shirt with an image of Che Guevara on it and the label “Homeschooled” above it. I bet it would sell.

Source: Wikipedia

I know you’re wondering why I was reading Che’s Wikipedia article. It was because we were discussing the Bay of Pigs today.

According to the article, Che shot himself in the face during that invasion and lived to tell the tale.

The trivia just never ends, does it?

Today, a convoluted path (through Farm School) eventually got me to an older entry at Jennifer Armstrong’s journal where she tells us why she writes for homeschoolers. Basically, in 10 words or less, it’s because it seems to her that homeschoolers are more connected to the world of learning, but you’d be better off reading it for yourself.

I thought I recognized Jennifer’s name … and I actually did. She’s the author of Shipwreck at the Bottom of the World. I bought it through Scholastic, in ‘98 or ‘99. It sat on our shelves until one day in 2000 or ‘01 when my husband asked me if I’d ever heard of Ernest Shackleton. I quickly ran downstairs, grabbed the book, and surprised him with a complete book on the topic. (I love doing that. The joys of a home library.)

I think most folks know who Ernest Shackleton is, but if not, I’ll just mention quickly that he was a fellow who was trying to be the first to travel straight across Antarctica (or something like that, he did a couple of trips with different goals). On this trip, which occurred near the beginning of WWI, his ship, the Endurance, got stuck in the ice, then cracked up, and sank. (It took a while for all of this to happen, many months.) Eventually Shackleton and his crew made the long trip back to where they started — well, a few of them did and they sent back help.

So, the book ended up sitting on our coffee table (a place for promising books to sit while I hope one of my students will be tempted by it) where it was picked up by my son. He read the book. My husband even read the book. Multiple oohs and aahs proceeded. We were doing a bit of sailing then and learning a little about navigation, so Shackleton and his abbreviated crew finding South Georgia Island was deemed a marvel (by us).

While reading the book, my son startled me with his decision to try snow camping. It was a lucky thing that we had a good 3/4 of a foot of snow outside or it might have been a tricky proposition. Out came the tent and sleeping bags — right into the backyard. He drug some firewood back there, too — way back there — far away from the house and other outbuildings. He talked his sister into staying out there for the night, too. I’ve got some old pictures of them the next day standing near the fire remains. I wish I had gotten a photo of the tent, but it was too cold out there when they were setting up their “Antarctic” camp. I can’t believe they even wanted to sleep out there.

Later we got Branagh’s movie of Shackleton and watched it. And fairly recently we were at a museum and chanced upon a special exhibit of Shackleton’s trip, complete with the little boat that Kenneth Branagh had sailed in as he pretended to be Shackleton trying to return to South Georgia Island.

Anyway, my point, Jennifer Armstrong … she writes for homeschoolers. I’m grateful (and more than a little surprised). She inspired our students and introduced our family to one of the great explorers of history. Yea for her!

Catchy title, no? I stole it from the Daily Mail, but titles (of books, at least) aren’t copyrightable as I understand it. So I’m probably safe.

I think it’s a great way to more clearly examine the consequences of events if we ask, “What if Event X had never happened?”

Example: What if Henry VIII had never divorced Catherine, his first wife? First off, there would have been no Elizabeth I, daughter of Queen Anne (Boleyn). Without Elizabeth I, England may not have gained supremacy of the seas and Spain may have colonized the Americas, specifically the U.S. east coast, more thoroughly. Or possibly the French may have, but then that is more likely a discussion for the question, What if the Pope had given the Portuguese the land west of the Line of Demarcation?

So, that said, I liked the question posed by the Daily Mail, What If Britain HADN’T Joined the EU?

The question is posed because it’s been 50 years since the Treaty of Rome, when the EEC was first formed, and the article’s author, Christopher Booker, is taking stock. I remember learning about the EEC (European Economic Community) over and over again in 4th and 5th grade. I got so sick of it. I guess the textbooks my school was using those years were really into the EEC. It was supposedly the best thing in the world, that and collective farms in the USSR. Anyway, the EEC lives on, and we here in the States also live with the EU.

The article, remember I’m no expert in international relations, just a homeschooling mom — but the article indicates that not everyone in the UK is particularly happy with membership in the European Union (which is the new name for the EEC - it’s gone beyond just economics). The article discusses the reasons why Britain joined, why it seemed necessary at the time.

It then gives about ten ways that Britain would have been better off if they’d never joined. If it’s all true, it’s a sad commentary.

Here’s one of the reasons given as to why Britain would be better off if they’d never joined:

If we had never joined, we would still have retained the right to choose our own weights and measures. It would not have become a criminal offence to sell a pound of bananas.

What!? It’s illegal to sell a pound of something? Wow. That seems stringent. And yet they’re still allowed to print miles (as opposed to meters) on their traffic signs. There’s so much I don’t understand.

The article even draws Margaret Thatcher’s views into the discussion:

DRAWING on the experience of those 11 years when, as Prime Minister, she saw the real nature of the ‘European project’ at first hand, Mrs Thatcher wrote in her last book that the attempt to create a European superstate would be seen in the future as having been ‘the greatest folly of the modern era’.

She went on to say that for Britain, ‘with her traditional strengths and global destiny’, to have become part of it, would come to be seen as having been ‘a political error of the first magnitude’.

So, what I wonder is whether or not Britian can get out of the EU? What happens if they just quit? The article indicates that non-member Norway still trades with the EU, so if the UK were a non-member, you’d think they’d still be able to trade with the EU. So, can the UK just withdraw from the European Union? Maybe quickly, before they have to trade their pound notes in for euros? Or has the UK irrevocably given their country to Brussels?

Links that are also good:

- History of the European Union (includes reasons why Britain was hesitant about joining)

- European Union Timeline (at the BBC site, nice, interactive)

You remember having to learn about Henry VIII’s wives in school, right?

Here’s a visual site to help your homeschool students remember how each of Henry’s marriages ended. Just drag the cursor over the illustrations of each of his wives.

WARNING: Please preview before showing your students. Some would say this link (to a UK site) is in bad taste.

I don’t mind so much that our library is working hard to tempt us to take more books home with us by placing books right near the check-out line. It makes me feel like I’m at the grocery store. No problem.

At the library the other day, I grabbed The Other Boleyn Girl by Philippa Gregory. I didn’t look at it until I got home.

Guess what? Philippa Gregory is not Kristiana Gregory, author of those Royal Diaries and Dear America books. Yeah, there’s a big difference. Both authors write historical romances, but Philippa is not writing for a young audience.

However, I am enjoying finding out about Anne Boleyn’s sister, albeit in a fictional manner, which is why I snatched the book. I always wondered what happened to her and her child (she actually had two) fathered by HRH Henry VIII. She had a small part in that movie Anne of a Thousand Days with Genevieve Bujold.

My student is busy reading The Scarlet Pimpernel, her choice, so she has shown no interest in my Boleyn book. We also watched that History Channel International show on the French Revolution last night. It was pretty in depth.

Anyway, I have more to say on libraries, but it’ll wait.

So, are you feeling two-faced today? Today’s the best day for it. Janus would say so.

Who is Janus, you ask? (Okay, you probably already know, but play along, okay?) He was the Roman god who had a face that looked back toward the previous year and an additional face that looked forward toward the new year. Handy, no? Sort of like mothers everywhere who are purported to have eyes in the back of their head. Beyond watching after children, pets, and the possible recalcitrant partner, it would make bad hair days a thing of the past. And no longer would talking to yourself be considered a bit daft.

But who cares what I think about Janus? This is what William Stearns Davis writes in A Day in Old Rome (p. 413) which is recommended in The Well-Trained Mind:

Highly important … is the strictly native Italian Janus, the two-faced lord of beginnings and endings, probably an ancient Sun-God; whom one should invoke at the opening of every fresh day, and in whose honor (quite appropriately) the month of January is named with New Year’s Day especially designated to his festival.

This is what Isaac Asimov writes in The Roman Republic (pp. 14-15):

There were some Roman religious beliefs that remained strictly Roman, because there was no Greek counterpart. One of these involved the god Janus (jay’nus), whose worship was supposedly established by Numa Pompilius.

Janus was the god of doors, which is more important than it sounds, for doors symbolize entrances and exits; therefore beginnings and endings. (The month January, which begins the year, is named in his honor, and the guardian of the doors of a building - and of its other portions as well - is a ‘janitor.’)

Janus was usually pictured with two faces, one looking forward toward the end of things and one backward toward the beginning. His sanctuaries consisted of arches through which one could enter or leave. A particularly important sanctuary consisted of two parallel arches, connected by walls and possessing gates. These gates were supposed to remain open whenever Rome was at war, and closed when Rome was at peace.

Genevieve Foster’s book, the one pictured above and a homeschooling favorite, Augustus Caesar’s World, begins this way:

Old Janus, who could see two ways at once, both in time and space, was one of the earliest gods of ancient Rome. Guardian spirit of the house door, he also protected the city gate, and was even believed to hold the key to the gates of heaven. A temple to Janus in the market place of Rome always stood open in time of war, but was closed with great ceremony in those rare times when there was peace.

It was for Janus that the first month of our calendar was named. And since he watched over all openings and beginnings, it seemed right that he should also be here at the opening of this book.

For this is a story of the world, centered in old Rome, during the lifetime of Augustus Caesar, Rome’s first emperor, who closed the gates of Janus for the first time in over two hundred years, and established peace and order in the Roman Empire.

A Day in Old Rome is nice because it splits up life in Rome into topic-based chapters: Children and Schooling, Economic Life of Rome, Costume, Food and Drink, Roman Women, Homes, etc. I wrote a review of Genevieve Foster’s books a few years ago. Asimov’s book is superlative; his whole series is. I was quite happy when I found our copy at a library sale. My son read it a few years back. It’s quite readable, surprisingly. Most non-fiction books are a tad more dry than this one. I think because Asimov was already a successful author in his own right with sci-fi books (I, Robot, for example), he already knew how to write in a way that captures the reader’s attention. Maybe.

So that’s it. Remember to feel free to be two-faced today.

I don’t have many memories of President Ford.

I don’t think it’s good that one of my strongest memories of Pres. Ford is actually Chevy Chase playing President Ford and making him look clumsy and bumbling. jt.org states: “The running gag in which President Ford encounters one malady after another stems from a June 1st, 1975 incident in Salzburg, Austria, when he slipped on a wet ramp while exiting Air Force One.” I know that’s not terribly useful info, but I’ve always wondered why a fellow who had played football so well was depicted as someone without any coordination on Saturday Night Live.

I guess I can be forgiven for having few memories of President Ford because I was fairly young at the time and hated watching Walter Cronkite each evening at dinnertime. I remember him running for President against Jimmy Carter. But I think that’s only because a classroom teacher made us come up with campaign slogans for the candidates. One girl used, “Ford will keep things above board.” Hear the rhyme? Well, I had no idea what “above board” meant at the time. I also had to write a short bio of him in school, and that’s where I learned he was a football star in college in Michigan.

Well, we’ll have the news on today for a few hours and hopefully my daughter will learn a little bit of history (me, too). My son will be working - and he’s finished with school, anyway. I think about all I ever taught them about Ford was that he was the fellow who stepped in when Nixon stepped down and that Ford pardoned Nixon, which was controversial.

Good sites:

Ford Biography

Ford’s Recent Activities

President Gerald Ford Memorial

There’s a pic over at History Is Elementary of the Battle of Bunker Hill by John Trumbull.

That blogger wants a visitor to identify the battle and then tell something unusual about it. I’m doing it here because I don’t want to get a blogger account just to enter a “Wordless Wednesday” contest. If an actual prize was in the offing, then I might be willing to get a blogger account. After all, I’m as mercenary as the next guy.

So, I’ve identified the battle - Bunker Hill. And the unusual part is that the Battle of Bunker Hill occurred on Breed’s Hill. I learned that from one of my favorite authors, Albert Marrin. I read his Revolutionary War book to my children back in 2000 or 2001.

If you hurry you might be able to be the first to identify it since there isn’t a right answer listed yet - zero comments so far.

Won’t it be extremely embarrassing if I’m wrong and it’s a painting of something else? Stay tuned.

UPDATE: I answered at 6:30 AM EST. It’s now 4:48 PM EST, about 10 hours later, and someone (out of 7 comments) did offer what I believe is the correct battle name, they haven’t mentioned the unusual feature requested by History is Elementary. Battle of Bunker Hill should be called the Battle of Breed’s Hill. So, I’m still waiting to see if I’m correct.

When we were studying Rome many eons ago (8? years), I ordered a coin for next to nothing off of eBay. I think I paid about $7 total, including shipping.

I’ve still got it. We never did clean it even though the seller sent instructions. It’s from Macedonia and has “Constantine” written on it. I believe it to be authentic. I imagine lots of folks are selling similar coins right now on eBay.

It’s not like the kids learned a whole lot from it, but it was a unique way, I thought, to enhance the time we spent learning about Rome. I think, though, if I had to do it all over again, I would buy two coins and give each child a coin of their own to keep instead of treating it like something precious and tucking it away in my desk. I think the kids would have enjoyed having their own Roman coin and carrying it around. Ah, regrets. (I think I need to make another category for entries and file this entry under “Regrets.”)

UPDATE: I went and searched eBay and posted links to auctions of Roman coins over at the bottom of the righthand column.