Page 1: Magazine cover
Page 2: Contents page
Page 3: Note from the chief editor and assistants
Page 4: The magazine/editorial team
Page 5-6: The Gaia society and high school competition
Page 7-8: High school competition winner: How Did Religion Impact the Political Systems of Ancient Civilisations?
Page 9-22: High school competition runners up
Page 23-25: Ancient history essay question example
Page 26: The most powerful women in History
Page 27-28: Archaeopteryx – where dinosaurs became birds
Page 29-30: Byzantine art
Page 31-32: Geology quiz
Page 33-34: Has Disney warped our perspective on Hercules?
Page 35-36: The History of Worsley New Hall
Page 37: Artemis
Page 38: Wonders of Macedon
Page 39: Olympias
Page 40-41: History quiz
Page 42: Basalt fact file
Page 43-45: The 99 years of peace in Europe: 1815-1914
Page 46-48: The assassination of Philip of Macedon
Page 49: The Westside Cowboys on Death Avenue
Page 50-51: The Seven Ancient Wonders of the World
Page 52-53: The problems with Ancient sources
Page 54-55: Geography quiz
Page 56-57: Quiz answers
Page 58: Goodbye notes
Hello and welcome to the final edition of this year’s magazine.
Over the past year, it has been an honour to watch not only the magazine, but also how our society flourished after geography and geology were proudly added – their impact being nothing short of amazing. It has also been personally inspiring to see everyone’s individual impact on the society, from magazine members, article writers, Gaia leaders and societal members, everyone has played an important role this past year and has helped our society become recognised for its excellence. On that note, on behalf of myself and the magazine team, we wish the Upper Sixth good luck for results day and a congratulations to Lower Sixth who have worked extremely hard on their mocks and who are currently working tirelessly to prepare for their own exams near year. And so, after taking inspiration from last year’s editions, we decided adding model answers will hopefully be beneficial for lowers in preparation for said exams – we hope we will be able to help! Along with this, I would like to give some special mentions to people who the magazine would be nothing without; Silvia for always being there to support and keep the society alive alongside giving me the opportunity to run the magazine, my remarkable assistant editor Seren and the magazine team for all their hard work and dedication and to everyone who submitted anything for the last three editions. I thank everyone sincerely. It was our goal to inspire and educate with the magazine and we hope we have been able to do so. Without further ado, we hope you enjoy.
Happy reading everyone and I hope you all have a wonderful summer!
Love Brooke Bibby, Chief Editor.Hello everyone.
I am very proud to welcome you to this year’s last Gaia magazine! We have had some amazing articles this year and so I would just like to thank everyone who has shared theirs with us, as well as the wonderful editorial team, who together have created a very memorable first year of Gaia magazines with the united society. Thank you to Silvia for everything she has done for us this past year, the Gaia presidents, the advertising team, and all other Gaia members for contributing to this special Gaia family. I hope that Gaia and the magazine live on for many years to come!
Most importantly though, a massive thank you to Brooke who makes this magazine what it is with her continuous and dedicated hard work. You have been such a fantastic editor and I feel I speak for us all when I say that we could not have done this without you. So thank you!
I hope that you all enjoy reading this edition and have a great summer!
Thank you all, Seren Sackville-Jones, Assistant Editor.
Meet the magazine/editorial team
I would like to proudly introduce the amazing magazine/ editorial team who work constantly to make sure the magazine is perfect for you all to enjoy.
• Isla Thandi-Akter
• Zoe Stradins
• Charlotte Fern
• James MoorhouseKeegan
• Abigail Chapman
• Thomas Harry Oakes
• Scarlett Marie Wright
The magazine is an endless world of education, community and possibilities all compiled into one place, surrounding all elements and History, Geography and Geology. When you write for the magazine, you are not just submitting a piece of writing but are also helping to educate and inspire others. Within the works of the magazine, we all work together to help to inspire each other to achieve greatness. If you would like to become part of our magazine or editorial team, please email G001081@Winstanley.ac.uk or post a message on our Gaia magazine teams channel. To gain access to the channel, please speak to Silvia Marques. (Photography credits go to the very talented Grace Gavin)
The Gaia Society
Our society
This is our Gaia society. A community similar to that of a family where people with a passion for Geography, Geology and History join together to inspire each other and better ourselves and the knowledge of the world around us –both past and present.
What do we get up to?
Since the beginning of this academic year, our society has been remarkably busy involving ourselves in many different events and activities. (Photography credits go Grace Gavin and students)
Teachers such as Melanie and Phil helped prepare Upper Sixth for their exams by hosting teams revision support sessions. Silvia also hosted a session in college with one-to-one support.
Throughout the year, Gaia has hosted many interesting talks about a multitude of different topics. Katie Frost recently hosted one about the most powerful women in historythe powerpoint is posted on teams and is included within this magazine for those who are interested.
Our very own assistant editor, Seren, has been busy on teams questioning Gaia members on what they believe are the coolest costal landforms. Keep a look out on teams for the next poll!
Debates, visits and parties have kept everyone busy throughout this past term. For further information, take a look on teams :)
What have we got planned?
Everyone within the society is always working hard to plan and organise events and we will have lots planned for the foreseeable future. Below is an example of our Gaia calendar, which is used to track all upcoming events and it is always full of many things for everyone to partake in. We will be sure to continue with the events for the next academic year – I am sure there will be something for you to enjoy! Keep a look out on our teams and on the calendar to find events that will soon be happening.
If you would like to be part of our society, feel free to join us on Thursdays in A6 for our weekly Gaia meetings. You would be more than welcome, and we would be happy to see you there. For any other information regarding the society, please email our presidents (G001188@Winstanley.ac.uk and G002409@Winstanley.ac.uk) or Silvia Marques at Silvia.Marques@Winstanley.ac.uk
For this edition of the magazine, we send out an article competition to local high schools, where pupils from years 9 and 10 could send in a History, Geography or Geology article on a topic of their choice. We got some amazing entries that really show people’s passion for these subjects, so thank you to everyone who participated – you should be very proud of your entries! Here we have published the winning article as well as the runners up (in no particular order) and have included all the lovely comments the team made about each article. We hope that you all enjoy reading them as much as we did!
It was a tough decision, but the winner is Sophie for her Ancient History article!
Lots of amazing praise was given to this winning article, including it being called “an extremely sophisticated piece of writing which I would highly recommend reading – loved reading this! Thank you!” It was also described as having a “clear and well-articulated manner” and “offering a fascinating account of the symbiotic nature of religion and politics”, as well as “having really engaging and interesting content, while also creating a very well balanced and crafted article.” Well done on your fantastic winning article Sophie!
Gaia magazine high school competition winner!How Did Religion Impact the Political Systems of Ancient Civilisations?
By Sophie RustageDespite Ancient Greek politics typically being associated with democracy, monarchy, tyranny and oligarchy, it can be argued that one of the most predominant political influences was the religion and polytheism of Ancient Greece.
To begin, it is critical to understand how religion and politics worked, separately, in Ancient Greece. Polytheism was the key concept of Ancient Greek religion, with many different Gods and Goddesses who differed in characteristics of what they were the god/goddess of. Religion impacted the everyday lives of Ancient Greeks, and was one of the key cultural influences in the city-states.
On the other hand, politics was slightly less straightforward: while Ancient Athens had democracy, Ancient Sparta had an oligarchy, and most of the city-states had a monarchy, which obviously made room for tyranny. Although there were a large quantity of differences between political power all over Ancient Greece, there were also some similarities between them, based on religion.
In many of the city-states of Ancient Greece, there was little to no separation of religion and the state. As a result, religious beliefs could easily influence political decisions made at the time. In fact, the state often served as the means by which deities could articulate themselves to the people, and we’re responsible for upholding a system of rituals that organised world order.
In addition to this, political diplomacy between states was also expressed through religion. One key example of this is the first Ancient Greek diplomats, known as ‘Heralds’, who were protected by the Gods with immunity, unlike their counterparts ‘Proxenos’, who were not.
Furthermore, many Ancient Greeks firmly believed that the success of the state was heavily dependent on the favour of state patron deities. If the state were to fail, it would be considered as the abandonment of these deities to the city-state. Consequently, one of the primary functions of the state was to maintain the favour of the Gods and patron deities through the usage of rituals in order to appease them and ensure good fortune upon their states.
However, there is one religious political figure who had almost complete control over all of the Greek city-states: the Oracle of Delphi. Due to her ability to tell prophecies, the Oracle of Delphi was consulted prior to declarations of war and formations of new colonies, making her powerful politically, while still influencing leaders through a religious perspective.
In Ancient Athens in particular, religion impacted the hierarchal structure and politics of its democracy. This was because, despite their lack of rights, women in Ancient Athens could become priestesses. Frequently, priests and priestesses were chosen as state officials, and served terms of singular years. As a result, women and men, on the grounds of their religious beliefs, were able to hold some form of power over a short period of time, inside of the democracy.
Additionally, it was also common for the members of the democracy to congregate at the agora, a sacred religious space to the Ancient Athenians, to discuss state affairs. This means that not only were the state affairs of Ancient Athens decided partially by religious civic officials and religious opinions, but they were also being determined on religious ground, meaning that the politics of Ancient Athens were surrounded by religion.
On the other hand, Ancient Roman religion held even more power over politics. In fact, religion was an integral part of the Ancient Roman political system. Both the people and leaders understood the importance of the Gods to their livelihoods, and Emperors even used this to their own advantage.
Similar to Ancient Greece, priests were connected to politics, as they were officials who were elected by the governments. However, what differs this to Ancient Greece, is that while religion held power over many Ancient Greek city-states, it was politics that held power over religion in Ancient Rome. This was because religious figures were chosen by politics, meaning that governments dictated important aspects of Ancient Roman religion.
Additionally, one other similarity is that in Ancient Rome, cities had divinities who watched over the city, a patron deity of sorts, much like the Ancient Greek city-state deities. The Ancient Romans believed that they needed to gain the favour of the gods so that they would bring good fortune upon them, so they frequently praised them, and performed rituals in order to appease them. In particular, Ancient Roman priests (as elected by the government) were responsible for organisation of events such as religious festivals, showing that the government could control religion.
As the government could at least somewhat control religion, this provided Ancient Rome with a significant power that Ancient Greece did not have. Religion influenced the everyday lives of many people at the time, so the government having the ability to control and influence these people with religion makes them significantly powerful.
Conclusively, religion was a key influencer in Ancient Greece for the politics of many city-states, even despite the difference between political systems. Possibly, the links between these two forms of influence could stem from the fact that both religion and politics were (mostly) directed at the prosperity of the community: every political action had a religious aspect, and every religious action had a political aspect, clearly showing how the two went hand-inhand in Ancient Greece.
Moreover, Ancient Roman politics was also influenced, in part, by religion. However, it was also equally as common for the government of Ancient Rome to control and influence religion, showing a key difference between the two Mediterranean cultures, although they are often associated alongside each other.
One team member described this as a “beautiful, descriptive piece of writing which helps raise awareness to a very modern issue of how women are treated and perceived”, while another said the timeline through history was “done exceptionally well” It was also said that “your passion and enjoyment for this topic really shines and it has some well-rounded and clear answers to your title question. You did a great job.” Well done Philippa!
RUNNER UP: How has the perception of women in Literature changed throughout history?
By Philippa HorrobinFor thousands of centuries, authors have used their work to reflect the common beliefs of society at that time. The perception of women as weak, inferior properties of men can be seen from Ancient Greek literature all the way through to authors of the 20th century.
In most early literature, a woman is only present as one thing; an object. These could be objects to be won, to be desired or to be owned, but nothing more. One of the most famous quotes about the perception of women was one from the Ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle who said, “so it is naturally with the male and female, one is superior, the other inferior, one governs, and one is to be governed.” These words explore gender roles in a way only thought about centuries later. In most texts around this time, men were in the main roles and women just took domestic roles – or were seen and not heard. However, sometimes, authors would experiment with what would happen if women were given power or rebelled against gender stereotypes and fought for it themselves. We can see this in the Ancient Greek text, The Story of Clytemnestra. When Clytemnestra (a woman) has power, the story ends in disaster. Often, throughout literature, if the natural patriarchal order is disrupted, disaster would follow. This mirrors the cultural perception of women and justifies their exclusion from decision making and positions of power.
Moving through to the 16th century, we can see how the treatment had barely changed. Throughout this time, we can see the concept of Androboulon feature in many of Shakespeare’s works. Androboulon translates to “with manly purpose” or “thinking like a man” and was the solution to women’s struggle against society – at least in literature. If a woman thought like a man, then they could have power. Despite this sounding like a positive opportunity for female empowerment, this too came with its problems. Throughout the Jacobean period, women were seen as ruled by emotion. In arguably Shakespeare’s most famous text ‘Macbeth’ he explores the role of women. At the beginning of the play, Lady Macbeth is presented as courageous, evil and more ‘manly’ than many of the male characters. She calls upon the spirits to “Unsex” her as she needs to lose any feminine traits in order to fully give in to her ambition. She is the mastermind behind and goes through with the plan to kill King Duncan, convincing the audience that she is not truly a woman. The audience at that time would have been shocked and almost outraged as it was practically unheard of for a woman not to obey her husband. However, as the play progresses, we see Lady Macbeth become overcome with guilt to the point where she cannot function due to her powerful emotions. This agreed with the general belief at the time – that women could not handle responsibility because they were governed by their emotions. Some people during this time thought that Androboulon was a positive concept because women could have power if they prove themselves worthy enough. However, why should a woman have to prove herself just to have the same opportunities as a man? This only limits women further as without changing, they can do nothing and still, only men have the right to power.
Moving forward into a classic still read today, we can see different views on women presented in the 1912 novel Herland. This was one of the first novels written that openly criticised the treatment of women in everyday life. It is considered the first feminist utopian novel. Even at this time, women were seen as dependent on men, and it was the men’s job to look after the woman and ensure they have everything they need. However, in the novel Herland, Charlotte Gilman sets her utopia in a lost country populated entirely by women. Three men – stuck in societies views that women were weak and timid – stumble across this civilisation and cannot believe that women can function without the constant support of men. This novel marked a turning point in literature as more and more authors experimented using female protagonists and the novel became very well-known.
The main advancement for women came during WW1 when they had to step up and fulfil men’s roles. Both WW1 and WW2 gave women a chance to be praised for their qualities rather than be deemed as inferior. Women, much like the men, were divided in their view over the war – some championing it and others feeling threatened. This led men to see that women thought like them and could understand consequences and the balance of power. The novel ‘Birdsong’ was set during WW1 and Faulks explored and dismantled traditional stereotypes regarding gender. It also
challenges what it means to be a man or a woman. By starting the novel with a description of a family adhering to the normal gender stereotypes, the dismantling of these later in the text is much more powerful. The patriarchal system is evident with Isabelle’s father forcing her to marry a man of the same social class and – in the process –breaking her heart. Faulks wrote the novel to demand an answer to a topic rarely spoken about – Is the patriarchal system we live in affecting our women? And more importantly, Is it right? As well as challenging female gender stereotypes Faulks also shone a light on the truth of how some men are – not all bloodthirsty, but gentle and loving.
In today’s literature both male and female protagonists are used and both gender’s qualities are written about. Despite the huge advancement for women throughout literature, is there still work to be done? How many books do you read where men are feminine, cry or stay at home to look after the children? The answer not many. We need to become more accepting of how men can reveal their weaknesses just as we have done with the idea of women becoming showing their strength.
One of our team praised this next article with the comment “as a criminology student myself, I am familiar with the Columbine shootings and would like to say this article illustrates the events extremely well with lots of information on parts of the story people often miss – you should be very proud of yourself!” As well as someone else saying “it was a very detailed and interesting article that gave an emotive insight onto a tragic event.” Well done Imogen!
RUNNER UP: Columbine: The Trench Coat Mafia
By Imogen YorkeColumbine is probably the most remembered school shooting in America. Most people even 15 years later know the basic outline of what happened. But, why? Why this specific massacre and not the 300 documented school shootings in America before it? It could be due to the pure savagery and brutality of the attack. Not once before had two boys shown up to school, armed to the teeth with guns and explosives, and tried to shoot up practically the whole school. It was a planned attack, and calculated to the nth degree. Diaries of the shooters show that plans for ‘Judgement day’ (what they referred to the day of the massacre as) nearly a year earlier. Another reason could be that before 1999 , it hadn’t been covered very largely in media or news, and thus wasn’t too well known or a major threat. “What sticks out in my memory was how shocked everyone was; reporters, teachers, parents. [...] It wasn’t really in the popular consciousness to worry about kids bringing guns to school.” Cory Rosan states when speaking about Columbine, being only a kid herself when it occurred.
Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold:
The two shooters, Eric and Dylan, were mostly average teenagers, or as normal as alternative dressers back then could be. They had some friends, who referred to themselves as the trench coat mafia due to the trench coats they typically wore. They were both brains, however Dylan was less attractive and more smart. Although they were similar in many ways, how they handled authority illuminated the differences in their personalities. Where Eric was calm and level-headed, Dylan would erupt. Where Eric could usually talk his way out of trouble, Dylan would hyperventilate.
Eric seemingly had no plans to graduate or plans for his future. This was strange considering his potential, but could be due to the fact he had attempted to join the marines but was rejected as he was on antidepressants. This crushed him, as his dad was a marine corp himself. His dad is rumoured to have been abusive, or perhaps neglectful. Because of his job, the Harris family moved a lot during Eric’s youth. He never seemed to have many friends, writing in his diary, ‘Don’t invite that weird kid Eric! Oh no!’
Dylan on the other hand, had a fantastic home life. However, he was a depressive, self-medicating with alcohol. He spoke of love, in his diary, how he ‘has so much to give, but no one to take it.’ It's speculated they were also bullied, for dressing differently and acting weird. A lot of people use this as an excuse to justify their actions, ‘Oh but they were bullied! Poor things,’ Some people fail to realise the amount of malice and hatred they both harboured, However in Dave Cullen's extensive 10 year research of Columbine, he finds no evidence of them being motivated by bullying. However, in Dave Cullen’s book Columbine, he attempts to change the narrative of who the boys were. He paints Dylan out to be more innocent than Eric, and makes it seem like Dylan was enthralled by Eric’s charisma, a lamb led astray, a boy who ‘fell into a bad crowd’, the lesser of two evils. This is not the case, while Dave Cullen mentions how Dylan ‘barely fired’ He leaves out the fact Dylan was cheering and laughing while Eric shot their classmates.
The Basement tapes + Diaries:
The boys were aware that what they were going to do would confuse the public, so they left plenty behind to convey their motives. Both their diaries were published, and the ‘basement tapes’ were published as a transcript. They were dubbed the basement tapes as most the recordings happened in a basement, filmed on a 8mm sony camcorder. 2 of the 5 tapes had been released to public eye, In 2003, a fifteen-minute recording of the killers shooting at the Rampart Range was released, and in 2004, a short film the two had created for school five months prior to the massacre titled Hitmen for Hire, both of which many people suspected to have been two of the five "Basement Tapes". These tapes had been released to reporter Tim Roche, and family members of the victims. The rest were then destroyed, and the two released have been purged from the internet. In these tapes, the two murderers recall
a kill list of sorts, and clarify their motives. A noteworthy detail about these tapes is how Dylan acts differently, louder and more performative, before glancing to Eric, who preferred to be behind the camera, for approval.
Dylan's diary starts a year earlier than Eric’s and fills 5x the amount of pages. He speaks about love, anger, suicide. He fantasies about killing himself nearly 2 years before the failed bombing. But most prominent was his beliefs. He was an undoubting, unbending Christian, believing that killing himself and going to heaven would finally make him feel not at war with himself. What’s strange about these beliefs, as someone who literally believed in heaven and hell, surely he’d realise partaking in a mass murder would get him sent to hell? Another strange aspect of his beliefs is that the two boys seemed to mostly target Christians, as well as jocks, killing a Christian after they asked her if she ‘still believed in God’ and she replied ‘yes.’
Dylan speaks of love quite a bit in his diary, his longing for it, and a girl he was obsessively in love with. He wrote in his diary, “I’m either going to kill myself of go NKB with [redacted]” Though, we have no concrete proof, most speculate he had a girl in mind. This partly considering how he speaks of love in his diary entries, it's also partly because of his love of the film Natural Born Killers and fantasy about going on a killing spree with his ‘one true love.’ Eventually he found his ‘nkb’ partner in Eric. While Dylan’s diary is more honest and raw, providing more insight to him as a person and his motivations, Eric’s starts with him knowing he’s going to become a killer. Each page points in the same direction, and the diary reads like he wrote it with the intention of people reading it. He has more bravo and was constructed better than Dylans, whose diary consisted of loose notes and homework sheets put together to make a more cohesive diary and to fit a timeline. In this diary, he refers to Dylan as Vodka, often spelt VoDkA, and he writes about his disdain for fat people, women, goths, jocks, and Jewish people, having a black knife with a swastika carved into it. He also states he wants to bomb Denmark, but it was too far away. They were both full of hate and Vermin, and these ‘mementos’ they left behind prove it. They enjoyed killing people, revelled in the idea of it, and on ‘Judgement Day’ itself, a teacher reports he spoke to both the boys, Dylan in particular. “Dylan was up on my left, [...] So I asked what’re you doing.. It still gives me chills the way he just said ‘Killing some people.’ Cullen describes the killer's motives as a ‘cocktail of malice, self-loathing and a craving for fame.’
The last tape left by Eric was the Nixon tape, left in his parents' home. It's estimated to have been recorded at 2.30am, as Eric references the fact that ‘Judgement Day’ would start in 9 hours. He says, ‘People will die because of me’ and ‘It will be a day that will be remembered forever.’ In his diary, Eric brags about ‘topping McVeigh’. Timothy McVeigh was responsible for the Oklahoma City bombings, harbouring a hatred for the government after a 51-day stand-off with the Branch Davidian cult in Waco, Texas. They ended it by infiltrating the compound, also known as the Waco Siege, where a mass fire broke out and killed a majority of 80 inhabitants. Where McVeigh merely walked away from his bomb, Eric had much bigger plans.
Judgement Day:
A fact rarely mentioned is that Columbine was not a successful shooting, it was a failed bombing. The first bomb, which Eric made following the ‘Anarchist Cookbook’ off the web, was planted 3 miles away from school in a park. The motive behind this was to distract police and neighbours, effectively working as a decoy, to increase their body count with the extra minutes.
Then, they’d drop bombs in the cafeteria, wait for them to go off at 11:17, before standing at the exits with their semi-automatics trained at the doors and waiting for survivors. This was the part of the plan they both seemingly savoured, and were the most excited for. They also carried pipe bombs and ‘crickets’ which were small co2 cartridges with fuses duct-taped onto them.
On the day of the attack, they dropped off the bomb at the park and arrived at school at 11:10. They warned their friend ‘Brooks’ to go home after they spotted him smoking outside. Brooks' parents had earlier reported the two boys' strange behaviours, particularly picking up their obsessions with death and military, however these reports went ignored by police. They then dropped the bombs off into the canteen, going unnoticed in their trench coats and large duffle bags which they left behind. As far as either as the boys knew, the police were racing towards the park, they had no clue the bombs had fizzed out. At 11:18, they realised after the cafeteria hadn’t blown up and people were getting in their cars and leaving the bombs had not erupted. It turns out the propane bombs were pitifully and unsuccessfully made, which luckily allowed more people to leave and survive. John Kiekbusch, chief of investigators, confirmed the bombs were wired incorrectly and the timers were not attached correctly.
As they realised this, they decided to move onto the next part of their plan. Both boys had semi automatics, sawed off shotguns and a bag of pipe bombs and crickets. They brandished their shotguns and entered the school, one removing his coat and creating a misconception of a third shooter in a white T-shirt. They were first observed at 11:19, in the external stairs to the west exit.
At the top of the stairs, as people started flooding in, they opened fire. Dylan rarely fired, but did however cheer Eric on as he shot fellow classmates. They fired at people in the grass, those walking amongst the trees and those coming up the stairs. Rachel Scott was the first fatality, murdered for her Christian faith. Her mother has since forgiven her killers, and formed a bond with one their mothers. Her brother survived by feigning death. They tossed pipe bombs onto the grass, roof and down the stairwell. Danny Rohrbough, Lance Kirklin and Sean Graves rushed towards the gunfire, assuming they were paintball guns or a prank. Danny got shot in the leg, and Lance attempted to catch his friend before he too was shot, and fell unconscious but thankfully breathing. After being shot but not realising, Sean was advised to play dead by a janitor who held his hand as Dylan rounded nearer to them. Dylan apathetically stepped over Sean’s body.
By this point, the lunch crowd had panicked, rushing under tables or fleeing the school. Around 100 students were caught on the stairs as Dylan aimed his shotgun at them. He swept his gun over the crowd, not firing before rejoining Eric in the external staircase. Dylan entered the cafeteria briefly, though for reasons unknown. Some sources say he shot at the bombs to see if they would explode while others state he went no one where near. Though most believe that Eric sent him in to increase their body count.
By this time, Sheriff's deputy Neil Gardener was the first to arrive outside the school. Alerted by the sirens. Eric and Dylan went outside, where Eric opened fire and Dylan did nothing. Eric shot 10 rounds, each missing, before his rifle jammed. Whilst fixing it, Dylan fled inside, shortly followed by Eric.
Eventually, they headed towards the library, where the majority of their killings took place. They killed another girl, Cassie Bernall, after asking if she still believed in God. After she said yes, they shot her. Her parents wrote a book ‘She said yes’ to honour their daughter, however it was later determined they asked the girl next to her, hiding under the table. They already had a gunshot wound, and when she replied yes, they allegedly walked away. Despite still having pipe bombs and crickets, they didn’t use them in the library. It was sited that Dylan told ‘Everyone in white hats to stand up.’ This was because it was a trend in Columbine for guys to wear white hats, further pushing the theory that they shot minorities, jocks and Christians. However, other proof leads us to believe they fired sporadically at everyone.
For another 90 minutes, they seemed to roam the school, still sporadically firing. A little after 12pm, they shot themselves, the cowards way out. Officer John Kiekbusch refers to them as cowards, too scared to be taken in by the police alive, and face their horrendous crimes. They repeatedly made it clear in the basement dairies that they would die ‘in battle’, Eric saying he was going to wage a war ‘on the human race’
The incentive:
Despite the extensive evidence they left behind, The Basement Tapes, diaries, along with maps and drawings, the reasons why they did this are relatively unclear.
Dylan’s reasons were chalked up to not being well liked upon his peers, and being a so-called outcast. Most people believe his reasoning was average teenage angst, combined with depression and a fondness of vodka and violence. However, Eric’s reasons stretched beyond love and hurt, although he also had depression, lots of psychiatrists on the case thought Eric to be a psychopath. In the basement tapes, he outdid Dylan in the apology department, and mentioned how he was distancing himself from his family, to not allow for ‘bonding’ and to make it ‘easier’. In one tape, while alone he breaks down crying, apologising to his family and friends. In another, he begs for his family, friends and co-workers to not be arresting, siting that they ‘Didn’t have a f*cking clue’. While these seem sincere, psychiatrists saw a psychopath, feeling on the outside but numb on the inside. He craved to leave a mark on the world, wanted his 5 minutes of fame, a moment in the spotlife. The tapes, his diaries, and the massacre were all a performance for the public eye. Homicidal and suicidal make for a deadly mix.
The Columbine effect:
The after effects of Columbine were vast, from affecting views on gothic fashion and inspiring other outcasts to take inspiration from the boys.
A thing not too often mentioned was due to the fact the killers were so young, lots of documents about the case were withheld for a certain amount of time. This bred lots of rumours about the case and boys, mainly being ‘they were outcast, they were goths, liked Marilyn Manson, were bullied, part of the trench coat mafia’ Which, another member of the so-called trench coat mafia confirmed Eric and Dylan were never part of their clique, but hung out with the group from time to time. However, reporters heard the term ‘trench coat mafia’ and snatched it up. They made the hasty connection of ‘trench coats’ to two other groups who typically wore trench coats; Marilyn Manson fans and Goths. Which then led onto if you were a bullied goth kid in the 90’s, people would start to fear you, even in the UK where obtaining guns is relatively impossible. Some goth kids even started to consider the murderers as idols or gods, people to be worshipped and admired. Dorian Bridges expressed that they could understand, while he doesn’t disagree with their so-called ‘worshippers’. “I know a lot of people who said, if we had guns lying around the house, we would of. You can see why this sh*t happens. If you’re already bullied like that every day, and you don’t care whether you live or die, and there's people you hate, and you’ve got a gun to spare? You can see the temptation, can’t you?” However, this after effect of the Columbine Massacre is almost ironic, considering their collective hatred for goths. They were of been referred to as ‘Dirtheads’ over goths.
The thing that changed almost immediately after the shooting, was restrictions on guns in schools and the proper documentation of school shootings. Reports show 81% of the time, at least one person knew about the planned shootings, but most times no one says anything. Nowadays, threats are assessed and taken more seriously, precautions are taken in the unfortunate case of a school shooting, with drills in place, and school building security is higher and more trained/prepared for such an event.
The worst aftermath of this tragedy is those who derive inspiration from the boys. On Youtube, you can find two boys who copied the basement tapes and casually discuss shooting up the entire school. Another pair of students in a different school dressed up and posed in the same poses as Eric and Dylan when they had shot themselves. Pictures were leaked on the crime scene and uncensored photos of the boys bodies after they turned the guns on themselves still float about on the internet today. ABC news had recognised 17 attacks and 37 serious threats connected to Columbine up to 15 years after the attack. The most chilling attack, however, must be the student who idolised Eric Harris so much, he convinced a family member to drive him down to Columbine High School. He bought the same gun as Eric and dressed the same as them, threatening to shoot up the school. This threat was not empty, as he shot his father and injured 3 students in Columbine during his shooting spree. This Columbine effect is a strange phenomenon and still mostly unexplainable. Suicidal and homicidal thoughts? A way to vent certain grievances? A want for attention? This columbine craze only seemed to grow with the time passed between the present and the event.
Columbine happened on the 20th of April 1999, and shook Littleton forever. 15 died and 21 were injured. Victims of the Columbine shooting include Cassie Bernall, 17; Steven Curnow, 14; Corey DePooter, 17; Kelly Fleming, 16; Matthew Kechter, 16; Daniel Mauser, 15; Daniel Rohrbough, 15; William "Dave" Sanders, 47; Rachel Scott, 17; Isaiah Shoels, 18; John Tomlin, 16; Lauren Townsend, 18, and Kyle Velasquez, 16. May they rest in peace.
This article is “an absolute must read which gives an interesting insight on how history can be viewed differently.” and it was commented that “as a history student, I am very impressed!” It was also commented that “it’s a thoughtprovoking article that shows a different perspective on how to view history and shows an open-minded, thoughtful approach to studying history.” Well done Ayisha!
RUNNER UP: Has History Been Manipulated By The Truth, Or Lies?
By Ayisha ChaudharyThe constituents of the past have merged to form timelines of events which tell the story of our world from the very beginning. However, as time is continuous and uncontrollable, even before us, it has been ticking and, in the future, it will be ticking. Each tick forward is unique as it sets a mark for the future. These series of marks are events that without, the future will not exist. Any slight changes to these marks would cause alters in the future, making them unpredictable than ever. But it is the present that records the past. If the present is in an error, then the remembrance of the past becomes ambiguous. Therefore, the future would be brought up by the errors of the present and lies would become the foundation of the timelines. Has that already happened though? Has justice been exploited by the diversity of moralities through time, resulting to it having undecided meanings? Unfortunately, yes. Because what we call ‘History’ is not just the true past but a replica of the numerous interpretations and perspectives, recorded by the minds that differ in thought. Since the born of humanity, everyone had lived a life from a distinct perspective which was based around their morality – what they thought is right or wrong. The personalities they developed, differed from the others, giving them opposing insights of the world. So, when it came to recording the past, everyone had their own story to tell. Which story was true? Which perspective was the right perspective? This can be debated, but the answer may still be unknown.
The way the mind interprets things may be extraordinarily dissimilar, but what could be the alternative from referring the interpretations as the truth? If we stated that the brains were a blunder, then would it be for the insights of the world? What we see is true to our own morality. However, the pure truth could still exist – what really happen. Though, the variations become dominant over the purity.
As a result, history is indefinite – there is no exact records of the past. In the past, witnesses of an event, would have had their own stories related to what they saw. This would have also applied for the primary sources that could have been produced. Varieties of primary sources could have been forged for the same event. However, there have been possibilities that the majority of the sources have been quite similar, if the producers were stating the obvious. Such link is what makes the recorded history believable. Otherwise, the alternative variations would only be accepted by an individual’s opinion. Over time, sources have become manipulated by biased views as it moves towards secondary and tertiary sources. That’s when those who weren’t first-hand witnesses start giving their own thoughts based on the primary sources. These ideas may have been either relatable or biased. How can we know what to trust?
As well as perspective being a factor of how history is determined, the intentions of the first-hand witnesses must also matter. Did they write to prove their own point or to give the truth? For example: During the Cold War, the USA’s and the Soviet Union’s relations intensified in the Space Race. Considering the peak of tension at that point, how do we know if the first man on the moon was Neil Armstrong? The USA could have used false footage to prove to the Soviet Union of a ‘false’ victory. This implies how the USA’s glory may have led to the recording of a fake event. Another example could be the two world wars. It is still debated on what was the main triggers of both wars, due to the idea of us being unaware of the pure significance of each event that led to it. However, when listing the events down coherently, each country would have their own history related to their pride. This would indicate how vast the topics may become. Though, when considering the idea of perspective, all the stories could be true if the intentions were truthful. If Britain had their own story to indicate their glory, Germany have had a completely different story relative to their pride. In the end, none of the stories would be purely true, they would only be evaluations that would emphasise the events according to how they want. That would alter their intentions never to forget how believable they would be. Situations like this could have happened throughout history unnoticed but we will never know. The timeline is growing longer as the years go by and there is only a limited amount of evidence left for events that happened centuries ago. Therefore, we have no choice but to believe what we already know.
What about the lies that have influenced many to set forward fake history? There have been many occasions in the past where common sense did not prevail, leading to many believing in information that were obviously wrong. Not everything was written down. Majority of the primary sources have been lost verbally as they eventually got converted into rumours. If no one would have believed in it, it wouldn’t have been part of history. Therefore, history cannot be recorded without it being supported by either belief or evidence. If people believed in lies, then the lies would be part of history.
With all these unexplained answers and doubts, how can we guarantee whether the answers to the historical questions are true? We can’t, because the answers could be visualized differently, based on one’s opinion. But when looking deeply, many aspects of history are still being discovered today so there is still more to learn. Contemporarily, many versions of history exist and whilst there are possibilities of them being biased, we could say none of them a purely true. It would be inaccurate to consider history as true; they are only assumptions. It would be inevitable that those assumptions consist of lies.
One team member said “another piece from a talented writer which also comments on another modern issue –climate change. An interesting read which explains facts about climate change I never knew before. Well done!” While another said “as a Geography student, it's great to see you exploring the different influences and complexities of climate change. Well done and thank you for your article!” Well done Ayisha!
RUNNER UP: Why Are Humans to Blame for Climate Change?
By Ayisha ChaudharyClimate change is the gradual fluctuations of temperature over the decades. The differentiations between the temperatures recorded, referring to that specific time period, would eventually result to an official change which would prove the existence of climate change. The current theory that supports climate change is the theory of Global Warming. Over the years, global temperatures have risen to an extreme level, indicating that the causes of such condition have also increased. The main reason for Global Warming revolves around the idea of the greenhouse effect. Greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere like carbon dioxide, methane and water vapour are able to absorb and emit radiation from the sun. Once the energised photons are absorbed by these molecules, they either emit it out of the atmosphere or keep it in. This builds up heat which warms the planet.
As the role of the atmosphere (specifically the ozone layer) proceeds to avail by keeping the Earth warm, an increase in the greenhouse effect would intensify the heat even more, increasing the surface temperature. This is the potential cause of global warming. There are many factors that increase greenhouse gases in the earth’s atmosphere, where the majority is at the fault of human activities. For example:
Carbon dioxide is released by:
• High usage of fuel-based products – E.g. The more transport we use, the more fuel is burned, which releases carbon dioxide. Even if humans try the alternative of a fuel-based transport, an electric car, more resources would still be required to coincide with the high-demands. All resources are limited, so we need utilise them wisely in order for them to last for our future generations. As well as that, the electricity required to produce electric transports would release a further amount of carbon during the non-renewable processes of electricity generations. The common process of producing electricity is burning fossil fuels (remains of organisms that have decomposed over millions of years).
• Since the industrial revolution, greenhouse gas emissions have increased due to a higher rate of productions which involves the combustion of fossil fuels. All the technologies and machineries we now use either burn fossil fuels or require electricity. Both requirements contribute to climate change, indicating that the entire human lifestyle revolves around eco-destructive activity.
• Deforestation – The more we demand for wood-based products or land, the more the biodiversity of this planet is at risk. Plants and vegetation are one of the three carbon sinks which absorb carbon from the atmosphere. They are the reasons why carbon dioxide in the atmosphere have been maintained. However, decreasing trees would allow carbon rates to increase as there would be less plants photosynthesising.
Methane is released by:
• Increased rubbish in landfills – The more non-biodegradable products we produce, the more we damage the environment. Firstly, the high demand for unnecessary products (which are unfortunately based on what we want not need) results to more energy being wasted in the process of production, as well as an increase in carbon dioxide. The high content of CO2 doesn’t just increase climate change but also increases pollution in the atmosphere which could cause acid rain, ocean acidification etc. Secondly, many materials like plastic can’t be recycled nor decomposed which would complicate the process of disposal. Every moment, plastics is being created and every moment, it is being dumped into landfills. They have nowhere to. The further additions of non-biodegradable rubbish release methane which damages the environment. Subsequently, in deprived areas across the world, where there are no standard landfills, many people burn rubbish which further releases CO2, or the rubbish ends up in the oceans where marine organisms are endangered. Consuming such hazardous junk would result to many malnourished marine life. The microplastics consumed would bioaccumulate through the food web until it reaches the Apex predators, which includes human. If marine organisms in the ocean die out, then there would be less carbon dioxide for the plants in the ocean,
therefore they will also die out. This would decrease the majority of oxygen on earth as it is the sea that produces the most oxygen.
However, it could be argued that nature also pays a part in the increase of greenhouse gases like volcanoes and wildfires.
Another piece of evidence that might be valid could be the records of the significant changes in climate over the lifetime of the Earth. Many scientists still disapprove over the idea that humans are the cause of climate change. This is because great changes had already occurred even before humanity, like the ice age. There was also an era where the Earth was experiencing through a change called the Palaeocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM). This was an extreme version of global warming that increased the temperatures of the earth to about 5-8 degrees. Including the concept of the earth’s size, even 1 degree increase can cause a massive difference. It is thought that the PETM was caused by natural causes like volcanoes that built up the greenhouse gases for over 50,000 years. Though this may seem quite influencing, it emphasises more on how humans are responsible. It took over 50,000 years to reach PETM however, after the industrial revolution, we have reached the peak of omission only in 200 years which is terribly worrying. As a result, we can conclude that humans have speeded up the process of climate change, therefore they are more responsible. Volcanoes are not blame as they only emit 1% as much carbon dioxide as we do. Neither is the sun to blame as it would have heated up the upper atmosphere rather than just the lower atmosphere. Albeit this is not the case. The weather is also not to blame either as there is evidence that after the ice age, the Earth’s surface warmed up at a rate of 0.06 degrees every 100 years. Unfortunately, contemporarily recordings have shown that per year, the earth’ s surface warms ten time more – to 0.6 degrees. With humans having the most factors, they are to blame.
This article was praised as being “clearly a well-researched piece, articulated in a really approachable and understandable way that can appeal to a range of audiences. Amazing work!” With someone else commenting: “Wow! A really interesting piece which opened my mind about the history of Nuclear Warfare,” and said that they “could read it again so many times!” Well done Holly!
RUNNER UP: A History of Nuclear Warfare; 1940s to Modern Day.
By Holly GouldingWhen most people think of nuclear warfare, they think of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. However, they have missed out on a major chunk of nuclear history; the tests, the projects and their scientists. To quote Colonel John Hughes-Wilson, in his book ‘Eve of Destruction,’ “The world has changed forever. The age of the atom had arrived.”
In modern ages, radioactive materials such as uranium, americium and plutonium are used for everyday things, such as nuclear fission for power, smoke detectors and pacemakers. It wasn’t always like that. In 1942, just under a month after the Japanese attacks on Pearl Harbour, US president Franklin D Roosevelt authorized the funding for a full-scale study into the possibility of an atomic warhead. This was a ground-breaking moment! For the first time in chemistry and physics a project was allowed involving research into a relatively new area of research. Later in the year in September 1942 this life saving (and threatening) research was laid into the hands of the United States Army Corps of Engineers’ Manhattan District Office. This was the infamous “Manhattan Project.”
Los Alamos was a crucial site in nuclear warhead testing. One of the lead scientists, Oppenheimer, owned a ranch there which led him to suggest the site. On the 25th of November, 1942, $440000 was approved for the purchase of 54,000 acres of land, 8900 of which were already owned by the Federal government. In the end, $414,971 was spent on 45,737 acres of land. Los Alamos was referred to as “Site Y” due to the discreet nature of the project.
Just three years later, the trinity test happened. On July 16, 1945, at 0529 hours, the detonation of the world’s first nuclear bomb happened in the Jornada del Muerto desert, New Mexico. The mechanism inside the bomb was an implosion design and the radioactive material used was Plutonium, this mechanism was used just 24 days later in the Fat Man bomb detonated over Nagasaki. This test had the estimated power 25 kilotons of TNT.
During the early planning of the Hiroshima attack, engineers made the discovery the 17 ft long thin man could only fit in the RAF’s Avro Lancaster, this was a major issue. While the British did help the US in the research, the Americans wanted an American plane to drop the merciless bomb on the Japanese as a means of revenge. Luckily, the Thin Man bomb was scrapped and replaced with the Little Boy bomb and so the USAAF could use an altered American Boeing B-29; codename- Enola Gay. This was chosen in respect to the brave pilot’s (Paul Warfield Tibbets) mother.
On the 6th of August, 1945, Enola Gay jettisoned the Little Boy bomb, and, at an altitude of 1750 ft, it exploded. It is estimated that 4.7 square miles of Japanese land was destroyed. 69% of Hiroshima’s buildings were demolished and 6.5% damaged. A total of 80,000 people were killed (20,000 Japanese combatants and 20,000 Korean slave laborers) and 70,000 were severely injured, whether from radiation poisoning or due to the sheer force of the implosion. Overall, the project’s cost was a whopping $1.845 billion (which, in today’s amount, is $79,729,425,805). Interestingly, Los Alamos only took up 3.9% of all the money.
Initially, the British and USA didn’t collaborate on any projects whatsoever and they only exchanged information on the use of nuclear energy. This could have been due to reluctancy as America had only just come out of an economic recession. While the British had spent substantial portions of time in the earlier years of the war, they had run out of funds or hope in the project and could not help the powerful US. In an unexpected change of events, President Roosevelt and prime minister Churchill agreed on a combined effort on the project in July 1942. By 1943, the US informed the British that they would “no longer receive atomic information except in certain areas” with the head of the Canadian research council writing “I can’t help feeling that the United Kingdom group over emphasizes the importance of their contribution as compared with the Americans”. Not long after this statement was put out, the American scientists decided that the Us no longer needed support from other countries. In the early months of that year the British stopped sending research to America. In return America refused to send any new findings to Britain.
This led to the Brits considering cutting off America’s supply of heavy-water and Uranium in Canada. In August 1943, the Quebec agreement was signed meaning the resumption of cooperation.
In the 21st century the threat of nuclear warfare is more imminent than ever, especially with the growing conflict in Korea, China, Taiwan, Russia and Ukraine; the US has 5428, Russia has 5977 and UK has 225. No matter the war we can never truly live safely when 9 major countries have nuclear warheads. And those are just the countries that are confirmed to have them, for all we know other countries may have illegal and unregistered atomic weapons. Since the bombings in August 1945 there have been 2000 bombs set off for testing and demonstration. Germany, Italy, Turkey, Belgium and the Netherlands all share nuclear weapons.
The UK has four vanguard-class submarines equipped with nuclear armed trident missiles and one is always at sea, one undergoing maintenance and the other two undergoing training or just in port. One submarine can hold up to 192 warheads. Each warhead is armed with either 0.3 kt, 5-10kt and 100kt allowing for boosted or unboosted jettisoning. In 2008, the British voted to renew the lives of the nuclear warheads and to replace and upgrade the stockpile we currently hold at a cost of around £3 billion.
If you really think about it, most people alive today are younger than the first nuclear weaponry and yet everyone knows what they are and everyone can tell the potential threat that they hold to humanity, its legacy and the beautiful planet that we inhabit.
This article is “an infatuating piece of writing for people who love learning about world and war history. Thank you for submitting!” As well as being “a clear, well-structured article that is a great read for both those who are already interested and familiar with WW2, and those who wish to know more.” Well done Aiden!
RUNNER UP: The 6 most gruesome years of the 20th century: World War II.
By Aiden PThe Nazis came to power in Germany in 1933, led by Adolf Hitler. Hitler was appointed Chancellor of Germany by President Hindenburg, and he quickly consolidated his power by suppressing opposition parties and establishing a totalitarian regime.
Hitler's rise to power was facilitated by the economic and political instability of Germany in the aftermath of World War I. The Treaty of Versailles had imposed harsh reparations on Germany, which led to economic hardship and social unrest. Hitler and the Nazi party capitalised on this discontent by promising to restore order and prosperity to the country.
Once in power, Hitler embarked on a program of aggressive expansionism, which eventually led to the outbreak of World War II. The Nazis invaded and occupied much of Europe, including France, Poland, and the Soviet Union.
The Nazi regime was characterised by its extreme brutality and repression. Millions of people were killed in concentration camps, and the regime was responsible for some of the worst atrocities in human history.
The Battle of Britain:
The Battle of Britain was a significant air battle fought between the British Royal Air Force (RAF) and the German Luftwaffe during World War II. The battle lasted from July to October 1940 and was fought over the skies of Britain.
The battle began with a German air campaign, which aimed to destroy the RAF and gain air Superiority over Britain. The Germans launched a series of air raids on Britain's airfields, RADAR stations, and cities. However, the RAF was able to defend itself and inflict heavy losses on the German forces.
The victory in the Battle of Britain was due to the bravery and skill of the RAF pilots, who were able to defend Britain against overwhelming odds. The pilots were supported by a sophisticated RADAR system, which allowed them to track and intercept German planes.
The Battle of Stalingrad:
The Battle of Stalingrad was a major battle fought between the German army and the Soviet Union during World War II. The battle lasted from August 1942 to February 1943 and was fought near Stalingrad (named after Joseph Stalin), which is located in present-day Volgograd, Russia.
The battle was one of the most significant of the war and marked a turning point in the conflict. The German army had been advancing rapidly into the Soviet Union, but in the Battle of Stalingrad halted their progress and forced them to retreat.
The battle was characterised by brutal urban warfare and hand-to-hand combat. The fighting was intense and often took place in close quarters, with soldiers fighting in buildings and on the streets.
The Soviet Union was eventually able to gain the upper hand in the battle, thanks in part to the harsh winter conditions, which made it difficult for the German army to continue fighting. The German army suffered heavy losses, including many of their best soldiers. Although the Germans did lose many, the Soviets endured a much greater loss.
D-Day:
D-Day was a pivotal event in the history of World War II. It was a military operation that took place on June 6th 1944, during which the Allied powers landed on the beaches of Normandy, France, to liberate Western Europe from Nazi control. The operation was meticulously planned and involved over 156,000 troops, 5,000 ships, and 11,000 planes.
The planning for D-Day began in 1943, and the operation was codenamed "Operation Overlord." The goal of the operation was to establish a foothold in Normandy and push inland to liberate France and eventually Germany. The operation was led by General Dwight D. Eisenhower, who would later become the President of the United States of America.
The success of D-Day was due to the thorough planning and preparation of the Allied forces. The operation involved a complex system of deception, which aimed to convince the Germans that the Allies would land at a different location. The Allies also conducted extensive training and rehearsals to ensure that the troops were well-prepared for the invasion.
On the morning of June 6th, 1944, the allied forces landed on the beaches of Normandy. The operation was divided into 5 sectors: Utah, Gold, Omaha, Juno, and Sword. The troops faced significant resistance from German forces, who had heavily fortified the beaches. However the allies were able to establish a foothold in Normandy and eventually pushing land.
The success of D-Day was a turning point in the war. It allowed the allies to establish a base in Western Europe and begin the liberation of France. The operation also diverted German resources away from the Eastern Front, where they were fighting the Soviet Union. The success of D-Day paved the way for the eventual Allied victory in World War II.
The operation was not without its costs. The Allied forces suffered over 10,000 casualties, Including 2,500 killed. The operation also resulted in significant damage to the towns and villages of Normandy.
The Holocaust:
The Holocaust was a genocide that took place during World War II, in which millions of Jews, as well as other marginalised groups, were systematically murdered by the Nazi regime. The Nazis believed in the idea of racial purity and sought to eliminate those they deemed undesirable. The Holocaust was one of the most horrific events in human history and has had a lasting impact on the world.
The downfall of the Nazis was result of a combination of factors, Including military defeats, economic collapse, and internal dissent. Allied forces were able to push back the German army on multiple fronts, weakening their position and reducing their ability to continue fighting. The Nazi regime also faced economic collapse as the war effort drained resources from the German economy. Finally, internal dissent within the Nazi party, including attempts to overthrow Hitler, weakened the regime and contributed to its downfall.
In the end, the Nazis were defeated and brought to justice for their crimes. The Holocaust remains a tragic reminder of the dangers of hatred and intolerance, and serves as a warning to the future generations about the consequences of allowing such atrocities to occur.
Conclusion of the war:
World War Two was a devastating conflict that lasted from 1939 to 1945 and involved many of the world's major powers. It was fought on multiple continents and resulted in the deaths of millions of people. The war had had a profound impact on the world, leading to the formation of the United Nations on the establishment of new international norms and institutions. It also contributed to the rise of the United States as a global superpower and the beginning of the Cold War. At the same time, the wall left behind a legacy of destruction, trauma, and loss that would take years to overcome. Despite the many challenges on difficulties faced during the war, it ultimately resulted in the defeat of the Axis powers and the preservation of the democracy and freedom around the world.
Ancient history essay question example
By Brooke Bibby“After the Peace of Nicias (421BC) Alcibiades could have won the war for Athens, but in the end caused her to lose it.” To what extent do you agree with this view? (30 marks)
After Athens and Sparta decided it was best to sign their peace in 421BC (with the Peace of Nicias), due to multiple reasons such as Cleon and Brasidas dying and Athens already suffering major defeats, it can then be said that Alcibiades could have won the war but instead caused Athens to lose it. There are multiple different factors that feed into what potentially led Alcibiades to lose the war, but there are also ones arguing that he could have won or even that the reason Athens lost was because of things out of his control in the first place.
Alcibiades caused Athens to lose the war, despite his notable actions which could have led to Athens winning. One significant factor which could highlight this statement to be accurate is Alcibiades’ escape and arrival in Spartamore specifically the advice and support he gave his (supposed) enemies at Declea. Whilst the Sicilian expedition was taking place, Sparta made a decisive decision that peace with Athens was almost impossible and so attacked at the end of 414BC. Alcibiades had already been growing a questionable reputation through, for example, things like his rumoured involvement in the sacrilege of the Herms and so him advising the Spartans to fortify a permanent position in Attica using the Athenian tactic of the epiteichismos, only further added to his already not so great repubility. He was the one to suggest using Declea and the Spartans sure enough followed his advice, which led to a significant victory for the Spartans, meaning the impact both Alcibiades and this battle had on Athens chances of winning the war were considerable. Not only did Sparta win the battle, which would have already caused damage to Athenian morale and damaged their ego, but also it had other irreversible effects on Athens in the long run which arguably prevented them from their desperately needed victory. For example, the Athenian supply route from Euboea (which carried significant supplies to keep war and troops running) was interrupted meaning that ships had to travel further and leave Athens without the supplies for longer or in some instances, not potentially managing to make it at all. Alongside this, 20,000 Athenian slaves managed to escape. Slaves held the Athenian population together as they worked to help Athens with agriculture and architecture, and so without them the Athenian economy would be hit harshly – Athens would now struggle to pay to continue fighting. These impacts alone together added with Alcibiades giving Sparta the paramount advice they needed to win shows how close Alcibiades was to helping Athens to win, but only continued to act in ways which destroyed their every chance. Thucydides is keen to give his opinion on how detrimental Alcibiades and his actions at Declea were to Athens and his reports even show that he believes it is one of the main reasons Athens lost the war. We can view his accounts on Alcibiades to be credible because he was contemporary to the time and would have had a chance to speak with people who were either at Declea, knew Alcibiades or could comment on his actions because of what they had first handily witnessed. However, his comments on him could also be less useful because it can be said he was less fond of Alcibiades because he went against Pericles defensive strategy - Thucydides was fond of Pericles and an advocate of his strategies.
Despite the previous factors, there are arguments with substantial enough evidence that show that Alcibiades could have won the war. One significant factor which could highlight this statement to be accurate is how Alcibiades helped to put together the alliance between Athens, Argos, Mantinea and Elis. By the time Alcibiades began to become more prevalent in Greece, not only were Sparta and Athens at heightened tensions with each other but Sparta's allies were also. Peloponnesian allies were unhappy about the peace of Nicias because they felt they were not consulted when the terms were created. This therefore gave Alcibiades a perfect opportunity to try and bring some of them against Sparta and instead ally with each other and Athens to fight against Sparta. Alcibiades helped to convince Argos, Mantinea and Elis to alliance with Athens. It is widely known he was an effective orator and was able to persuade people easily, it may have helped too that he was already a respected politician due to his relation to Pericles and his other family background, so it can be said he used these skills to his advantage to bring the alliance together. Once all allied, Sparta tried to get Boetia to ally with Argos so that Boetia could bring them into Sparta league, and once they agreed to this, the Athenians (specifically Alcibiades) were incensed and sought out to make a new alliance with the Argives. Once Alcibiades was successful in being able to bring these 4 states together, it could be said that Sparta became increasingly aware of how powerful the alliance
could become and so sent envoys to renew relations with Athens. Not only did Sparta notice this, but Alcibiades recognized that the triple alliance had, in the short time it had been created, threatened the stability of the Peloponnese; therefore, showing how effective what Alcibiades had created was. With that, Athens was able to enter into a hundred-year alliance with Argos, Elis, and Mantinea, and, with it, the Athenians had successfully divided the Peloponnese – all courtesy of Alcibiades and his efforts.
Another factor which could further evidence the belief that Alcibiades could have won the war is his rumoured involvement in the mutilation/sacrilege of the Herms. In 415BC, Athens was busy preparing for their expedition to Sicily which they hoped would be able to give them more of an opportunity to hopefully be able to surround Sparta from both sides and win the war. It was looking promising until around the middle of 415BC, when a horrifying scene took place in Athens which distracted Athens from further preparing themselves efficiently enough for Sicily. Athenian citizens found one day many stone herm statues to be destroyed with their faces and other parts of them being smashed and subject to a violent attack. Herms were an extremely important and treasured part of Greek culture and so the attack seem targeted. A throughout investigation into who committed this act of sacrilege was held, and a lot of the blame was based onto Alcibiades; however, not much evidence was found and it was mostly based around rumours. Due to his reputation of being a young agitator and populist, he was an easy person to blame and although he managed to escape trail before setting off to Sicily, Athens would not forget what they believed he had done and called him to trail at a later, more significant date where his innocence was again proven but he was removed from having the chance to ever actually go to Sicily. Although, his political enemies saw an opportunity to discredit him by saying they believed the "mockery of sacred rites was part of a 'conspiracy against the democracy'". Thucydides also comments on the view of democracy around this time; “as for democracy, those with any sense knew what it meant”. It can be inferred that Thucydides was potentially criticising as it is well known he was not that fond of him. This comment could be credited as Alcibiades may have had an opinion on democracy because he comes from a place of privilege and has been given advantages others will not have the access too without democracy. In the end, Alcibiades was eventually tried and condemned to death. The most important thing to note from the hermai incident is Alcibiades not having the chance to go Sicily and instead Nicias being sent to lead. Alcibiades was the original advocate to travel to Sicily and was extremely passionate about what he believed it could bring for Athens; success, power and their hegemony back. On the other hand, Nicias believed Athens had too many difficulties at home and believed that Alcibiades only wanted to go to Sicily for his own gain. When it came to Sicily, Nicias was far from troubled about how he was acting and the adverse effects his unbothered attitude would later have. Unfortunately, Athens was far from successful in their expedition and Nicias was even executed. It can be inferred that if Alcibiades was sent instead to lead, Athens would have had a better chance at winning because their leader actually wanted to be there and understood how much the expedition could have improved Athens. The Sicilian expedition had a detrimental effect on how Athens fought in the battles afterwards, perhaps if they won there (due to Alcibiades help) they could have won overall.
On the other hand, it could also be argued that Alcibiades in fact had no influence on Athens's victory during the war and there were other factors that had more of a pressing long-lasting effect on whether they won or lost. One factor that could be seen as having a detrimental effect on Athens’s potential victory is the plague that spread in Athens during 430-429BC and the winter of 427/226BC. It spread before Alcibiades was even becoming relatively prevalent in Athens and tensions began to rise further between Athens and Sparta. When it struck, Sparta had been continuing their annual invasions in Attica but soon stopped after they saw the striking affect the plague was having on the citizens of Athens. It had wiped out around 1/3 (approx. 100,000) of the population and so Sparta did not even need to get involved in war with Athens, the plague destroyed Athens for them. Thucydides comments on the effects the plague had on not only the citizens but economy, politics; “The bodies of dying men lay upon another, and half-dead creatures reeled about the streets and gathered round all the fountains in their longing for water.” His accounts can be seen as credible because he was a first-hand account witness to the effects the plague would have had, he suffered from it himself and so could record symptoms etc but also see what Athens was like afterwards also. However, Thucydides was biased towards Athens and so he could blame the plague as one of the main reasons why they lost the war to make it seem like it was out of their control, and they did have the power to win – the plague just prevented them. Not only was 1/3 of the population dead, which included their hoplites so they their military power was diminished significantly, but also Pericles died due to the plague. At the time when the plague came
around, Pericles was the main political figure in Athens at the time and knew how to run the military and city to gain success. I believe Pericles dying was the most disastrous effect on Athens because they now had lost a key form of leadership and now there was opportunity to for the Athenian strategy to change. As we see with Alcibiades, he changed the Athenian strategy and influenced people to do other things then what Pericles had been preaching for years, and in the end, Athens lost the war. It could therefore be said that if Pericles had not died, Athens would have had the key leadership figure they desperately needed alongside his proven successful strategies and could have won. Alongside this, the plague had a destructive impact on Athens economic system. With citizens, slaves and hoplites alike all perishing due to the plague, no one was able to work and feed money into Athens economic system. This meant that after the plague, Athens struggled so much to build back up their army and economic status and so had to turn to allies. This put more pressure on the Delian league to support Athens, which may not have been a choice for some of them meaning enemies and quarrels could easily be created. Overall, from Pericles dying to the effects the plague had on Athens economic system and allies alone, the plague was a significant factor which cannot be ignored as a reason why Athens lost the war. They hardly stood a chance arguably before they had even started.
Another factor could be seen as having a detrimental effect on Athens’s potential victory is Persia's involvement with the war and how they support Sparta. The final years if the Peloponnesian war are known as the Ionian war and included significant amounts of Persian support. Nearing the end of the war, Athenian allies who wanted to revolt against Athens (e.g Euboea and Lesbos) went to Visit the King of Sparta at the time, King Agis II, in search of guidance and support. Not only were Athenian allies going, but also representatives of a Persian satrap in Asia Minor. King Agis’ father knew that if they were going to win the war overall, they needed Persian money and navy and so they accepted the representatives with open arms. An Athenian speechwriter, Andocides, gives a speech about the feeling in Athens around the time that Persia and Sparta were looking to start working together again to support Athens's downfall. In the speech, he states things like Athens tend to “abandon powerful friends” and that they should begin by “making a truce with the Great King”. It is clear to see that at this point in time, people of Athens believed it would best to make a truce with Persia, but as stated previously, Sparta had beat them to it. In 413, Sparta and Persia officially made a formal alliance together which inevitability sealed Athens impending doom. Within the alliance, it stated they must both carry on the war together and all territories previously belonging to the Persian king and his ancestors shall be his; Sparta had now signed of the whole of Greece to Persia
Throughout the remainder of the war until Athens lost in 404, Sparta and Persia were inseparable. Persia offered money, ships, troops, support and a navy to Sparta willingly and helped them recover each time they fell (e.g., Cyzicus and Arginusae).
This allowed them to continue fighting no matter what. Not only this, but Persian involvement could be said to have bruised Athens’ ego and lowered morale – Athens knew how strong Persia was, it could be argued they understood they did not stand a chance after the alliance was created. Athens was already struggling to be able to offer the war, troops, keep hold of support from allies etc. so it could be said that the support from Persia was the final straw in causing them to lose their victory. Without Persian support, Sparta would have been struggling just as much as Athens and would not have been able to uphold everything war comes along with, without them I believe both sides would have lost.
Although Alcibiades played a significant role in both the failure and potential success of Athens throughout the war, I believe the reason they lost was out of his control altogether. I believe Persia and their involvement with offering both financial and moral support to Sparta to keep them going throughout the war was the reason Athens lost. Without their involvement, it is clear that Sparta would have struggled with the upkeep of war. Alongside this, Persia had always been in the background since the Greco-Persian wars and since they lost that, it can be said they were waiting for an easy opportunity to work their way back into Greece and offering Sparta the help they so desperately needed was an obvious pathway. Persia had always favoured Sparta and their involvement could have bruised Athenian morale and ego before they could put up their best fight.
The most powerful women in History
By Katie FrostZenobia (240-275)
Zenobia, the rebel queen who took on Rome. This ancient queen of palmyra conquered Egypt, captured roman provinces and nearly transformed her realm into an empire equal to Rome. She faced a power vacuum following the death of her husband and the disintegration of the roman power in the Near East. To ensure stability in the region she created a palmyrene empire that incorporated most of the Romans near the east from Anatolia to Egypt. Zenobia was a cultured monarch who encouraged intellectual movement at the court and the ruled here multilingual and multi-ethnic subjects which fairness and tolerance. Yet after ruling for only a short time, this dynamic female monarch fell before resurgent Roman Empire.
Cleopatra (69-30 BC)
Cleopatra VII ruled Egypt for 21 years a generation before the birth of Christ. She lost her kingdom once; regained it; nearly lost it again; amassed an empire; lost it all. A goddess as a child, a queen at 18, at the height of her power she controlled virtually the entire eastern Mediterranean coast, the last great kingdom of any Egyptian ruler. For a fleeting moment she held the fate of the Western world in her hands. She had a child with a married man, three more with another. She died at 39. Catastrophe reliably cements a reputation, and Cleopatra's end was sudden and sensational.
Florence nightingale (1820-1910)
Even tough Florence nightingale didn’t believe in germ theory when she saw the working conditions of a hospital she started to clean around the solders as she was disgusted about the conditions they were in such as cleaning up the surroundings in the hospital and also getting the wounded soldiers’ fresh clothes and beds for the ones that were on the floor. By doing this she increased the survival rates of the soldiers and created a book for nurses to read and learn from and opened nursing school and by doing this she changed nursing and has saved an uncountable about of lives.
Queen Victoria (1819-1901)
The Famine Queen. The Widow of Windsor. Grandmother of Europe. Queen Vic. In the 19th century, Queen Victoria earned all those nicknames and more testaments to the enduring influence of her 64-year (1837-1901) reign over the United Kingdom. During the period now known as the Victorian Era, she oversaw her nation’s industrial, social, and territorial expansion and became known as a trendsetter who made over European attitudes toward the monarchy. An estimated one in four people on Earth were subjects of the British Empire by the end of her rule. But when Victoria took the throne, the British monarchy was deeply unpopular There were lots more women that were discussed in Katies lesson, but these are just some key women to give you a taste on what the lesson was like.
Archaeopteryx – where dinosaurs became birds
By Daniel JB JonesThere are two types of people in the world, people who believe that dinosaurs went extinct in the Chicxulub Impact of the Cretaceous–Palaeogene (K-Pg) extinction event and palaeontologists.
Prior to the impact event, there were many types of dinosaurs, constituting the mostly herbivorous ornithischians (think Triceratops and Stegosaurus) and the mostly carnivorous saurischians (think Velociraptors and Tyrannosaurus-Rex). However, some species were omnivores. Within the saurischian clade was the theropods. Ancestrally carnivorous, they can be identified by hollow bones and 3 digits (with claws) on each limb. The theropods were also unique due to their clade being home to avian dinosaurs. These avian dinosaurs were the first birds, capable of gliding with the presence of feathers.
Unfortunately for the dinosaurs, the impact event resulted in the extinction of 75% of all animal and plant life on the planet. An asteroid approximately 10 kilometres in diameter struck what is now the Yucatán Peninsula in modern day Mexico. Immediately the impact caused earthquakes, tsunamis and global firestorms. Over the long-term, acid rain and ocean acidification caused by sulphate aerosol released at the impact site occurred. Soot aerosols reflecting thermal radiation caused a global impact winter and thus the slowing or outright cessation of photosynthesis. Less photosynthesis means less plants, less plants means less food and bad news for the ornithischian dinosaurs. The collapse of food webs depending upon plants as a source resulted in the extinction of most saurischian dinosaurs too, save for those that ate grains - the avian dinosaurs.
Following their survival, the avian theropods radiated and continued their evolutionary path. It’s possible that the extinction of pterosaurs (pterodactyls were not dinosaurs) resulted in a niche to be filled in the sky, ideal for birds. This is merely one of many possible explanations.
This is all great news for dinosaur fans, now you can look practically anywhere and eventually you will see a real living dinosaur. Though, Jurassic Park would probably be less interesting. However, the question that remains is how we know this. After all, it’s hard to believe the theropods (with its infamous Velociraptors, Tyrannosaurus-Rex and the aptly named Giganotosaurus) containing small, feathered dinosaurs whose descendants are still extant today. There’s clearly a link missing to prove firstly the relation between avian dinosaurs and the theropods then to modern birds.
What’s missing is Archaeopteryx.
Archaeopteryx (literally translated to “old-wing”) was a genus of bird-like dinosaurs. Only twelve specimens have been found and all in quarried limestone deposits near Solnhofen, Germany. Analysis of these fossils revealed many interesting qualities. An interesting point to note is listed bird-like features, such as hollow bones, are found in some non- avian theropods. However, the uniqueness of all these attributes together in one creature is what makes Archaeopteryx so captivating and so important. The first Archaeopteryx feather was discovered in 1961, two years after the publishing of Darwin’s “On the Origin of Species”. Its discovery helped support his theories and earned Archaeopteryx the privilege of being a key piece of evidence for evolution.
Extinct Therapod-like features of Archaeopteryx Modern-day bird-like features of Archaeopteryx
Teeth Wishbone
Long bony tail
Gastralia bones (belly ribs)
Flat sternum (the long bone at the centre of your ribs)
3 claws
Hollow bones (to reduce overall weight to allow gliding / flight)
Reversed hallux (big toe)
Reduced fingers
Feathers
Reduced fingers
These features make Archaeopteryx an obvious example of a transitional fossil, a fossil exhibiting features to both an ancestral group (regular therapods) to a derived descendant group (birds). Thus, we have found the relational link between regular theropods, avian theropods (Archaeopteryx itself) and modern birds. From here we can be almost certain that dinosaurs prevailed through the K-Pg extinction event and continued evolving into modern birds. Archaeopteryx was only the start, since its discovery many other candidates for dino-birds have been discovered, that may even be older, such as Anchiornis, Aurornis and Xiaotingia. The discovery of Archaeopteryx highlights the importance of fossils and how even in death the study of their remains allows greater insight into evolutionary history
Byzantine Art
By Amy Moss
The byzantine style of art and architecture (including art from the 4th century until the fall of Constantinople in 1453) originated from the Byzantine Empire. The Byzantine Empire (also referred to as Byzantium) was the continuation of the Roman empire. At its peak it spanned from southern Europe to the middle East, with Constantinople (modern day Istanbul) as its capital. During most of its existence, the empire remained the most powerful economic, cultural, and military force in Europe.
Byzantine art is largely characterised by religious symbolism and sophisticated techniques which were rarely paralleled in contemporary western art. This is crucial due to the religious tension between Byzantium and the West following the Great Schism in 1054. In 1054, the Eastern Christian church (also referred to as the orthodox church) split from the Western Christian church (also referred to as the Latin church or the Catholic church) over theological disagreements.
Style of Art
Byzantine art is distinguished by a move away from the naturalism of the Classical tradition towards the more abstract and universal – there is a definite preference for two-dimensional representations. Many artists, notably those who created illustrated manuscripts, were priests or monks. Artists were supported by patrons who commissioned their work, notably the emperors and monasteries, but also many private individuals, including women (especially widows). Religious icons often stare directly at the viewer as they are designed to facilitate communication with the divine. Figures also often have a nimbus or halo around them, emphasizing their holiness. Mosaics were common and sought to evoke the heavenly realm. For example, in the Church of San Vitale in Ravenna, ethereal figures seem to float against a gold background which is representative of no identifiable earthly space. By placing these figures in the spiritual world, the mosaics gave worshippers some access to the spiritual world. Moreover, mosaics were also used to affirm the power of byzantine rulers. In this sense, the art of the Byzantine empire continued some of the traditions of Roman art. However, byzantine art also differs from the art of Romans in that it often interprets the intangible such as heaven and hell, whereas Roman religious art largely focused on naturalism. The image to the side is of the Basilica of San Vitale in Ravenna, Italy
The importance of Domes
An iconic feature of byzantine architecture is the extensive use of large domes/vaults to replicate the Eastern church’s view that the universe was hierarchical. The interiors of the domes, walls and vaults of the churches were often covered in intricate mosaics. The virgin Mary was often pictured high in a half dome. Additionally, the figure of Christ Pantocrator (ruler of the universe) was also often installed at the top of the central dome above figures of angels and archangels. Figures of the saints illustrated the walls. Therefore, the congregation would physically be the lowest in the church, thus effectively forming a microcosm of the universe in the view of the Eastern church. The image to the side is of the Monreale Cathedral, Sicily
The Iconoclastic Controversy (8th and 9th century)
The Iconoclastic Controversy was when the use of religious images was hotly contested. This is due to how the Iconoclasts (those who worried that the use of religious images was idolatrous), destroyed images. Thus, leaving few surviving images from the Early Byzantine period (c. 330–750). However, those in favour of images won the controversy and the middle byzantine period began (c. 843–1204) which continued the previously discussed stylistic and thematic interests of the Early byzantine period.
Sculpture
Little sculpture was produced in the Byzantine Empire. The most frequent use of sculpture was in small ivory carvings used for book covers, boxes, and similar small objects. However, other forms of miniature art such as embroidery and goldwork flourished in the sophisticated and wealthy society of Constantinople. The image to the side is of the Melisende Psalter.
The late Byzantine period (c. 1261-1453)
Between 1204 and 1261, the Byzantine Empire was under Latin occupation. Crusaders from Western Europe invaded and captured Constantinople in 1204, temporarily toppling the empire in an attempt to bring the Eastern Empire back into the fold of western Christendom. By 1261, the Byzantine empire was free of its western occupiers, although significantly weakened. In spite of this period of diminished wealth and stability, the arts continued to flourish in the late byzantine period.
Impact on Western Art
The importance of Byzantine art to the religious art of Europe cannot be overstated. Byzantine techniques were spread by trade and conquest to Italy (specifically Sicily). Although they only persisted in a modified form throughout the 12th century, it became a formative influence on Italian Renaissance art. Crucially, through Eastern Orthodox expansion, byzantine techniques also became prominent in Eastern Europe during the 17th century, many of which remain today despite local modification. The image to the side is the Feodorovskaya icon - Russian art inspired by byzantine art.
Geology quiz
Q1: How old was the fossil of the earliest known animal predator identified in 2022?
A. 560 million-years-old
B. 200 million-years-old
C. 120 million-years-old
D. 10 million-years-old
Q2: How thick is Earth’s outer core (approximately)?
A. 200 km
B. 2,200 km
C. 500 km
D. 1,350 km
Q3: What is the approximate temperature of Earth’s inner core?
A. 1,000,000 degrees Celsius
B. 5,200 degrees Celsius
C. 435,000 degrees Celsius
D. 400 degrees Celsius
Q4: Which of these Hawaiian volcanoes erupted in 2022 for the first time since 1984?
A. Mauna Loa
B. Hualālai
C. Kīlauea
D. Lōihi
Q5: Which mineral was discovered in Cornwall by mineralogists in 2020?
A. Tungsten
B. Barium
C. Cobalt
D. Kernowite
Q6: Which volcanic rock is the most common on Earth?
A. Basalt
B. Andesite
C. Pumice
D. Rhyolite
Q7: Why is Mars red?
A. It is closer to the sun than Earth is
B. Its surface material (regolith) contains a large amount of iron oxide
C. It has very little water across its surface
D. There are numerous lycopene deposits across Mars
Q8: Which of these was the first geologic eon?
A. The Hadean
B. The Archean
C. The Proterozoic
D. The Phanerozoic
Q9: Which major tectonic plate is the largest on Earth?
A. The North American Plate
B. The Eurasian Plate
C. The Antarctic Plate
D. The Pacific Plate
Q10: What percentage of Earth’s volcanoes are located along the Ring of Fire?
A. 99%
B. 15%
C. 50%
D. 75%
Q11: Which is the smallest type of volcano?
A. Shield volcanoes
B. Cinder cone volcanoes
C. Composite volcanoes
D. Calderas
Q12: Which is currently the oldest dinosaur species known to us?
A. Tyrannosaurus rex
B. Triceratops horridus
C. Allosaurus atrox
D. Nyasasaurus parringtoni
Q13: What are the three main types of rock?
A. Igneous, sedimentary and metamorphic
B. Igneous, sedimentary and plutonic
C. Granitic, plutonic and metamorphic
D. Metamorphic, sedimentary and plutonic
Q14: What rocks comprise the majority of Earth’s continental crust?
A. Granitic rocks
B. Sedimentary rocks
C. Basaltic rocks
D. Metamorphic rocks
Q15: Which geologic era are we currently in?
A. Jurassic
B. Paleogene
C. Cenozoic
D. Mesozoic
Has Disney warped our perspective on Hercules?
By Natasha LancasterWhen people think of Hercules, they think of the Greek hunk of a Demigod and picture the blonde-haired sweetheart from the Disney film. But what if I told you that he wasn’t as lovely as he seems. What if I told you about how he murdered Megara AND that his name wasn’t even Hercules? You feel betrayed, right? Disney has warped our perspective of Herakles’ Zero to Hero story and I aim to address and clear up some common misconceptions whilst also giving Disney credit where credit is due.
As mentioned prior, Hercules, one of our most well-known Greek heroes, isn’t even called Hercules! When the Roman’s adapted the Greek myth, they changed his name from Herakles or Heracles to Hercules. So, from the title, Disney is already misleading their audience.
Disney also portrays both Zeus and Hera as Herakles’ parents, however this is not the case as Herakles was the product of one of Zeus’ many affairs. Herakles’ mother was Alcmene, the immortal princess, granddaughter of the great Perseus, and wife of Amphitryon-who Zeus disguised himself as in order to sleep with her. In reality, Hera detested Herakles and did everything in her power to make his life horrible. She even tried to prevent his and his brother’s birth by forcing Eileithyia, the goddess of childbirth, to sit cross legged to prevent them from being born (and yes, Herakles was a twin! But Iphicles- his sibling-was completely mortal due to them being a case of heteropaternal superfecundation, which is a complicated way of saying twins with different fathers). Luckily, the nurse convinced Eileithyia that the twins had already been delivered, forcing Hera to release her and allowed our favourite Greek hero to be born. Despite this hatred, Hera is the reason why Herakles gained his powers. This is because Alcmene left Herakles exposed (abandoned him on a mountain, ‘exposed’ to the elements) where Athena found him and brought him to Hera who obliviously nursed him, giving him his magic powers, allowing him to go the distance.
However, Disney did get at least one thing right and this was the snake scene. Remember in the movie when baby Herakles strangles Pain and Panic, in snake form, after Hades sends them to kill Herakles and his mortal parents are shocked? Well, believe it or not this is one of the only true to myth aspects of the movie, except they aren’t magical shape shifters, they’re just normal snakes. And Hades didn’t send them, Hera did!
Like this, another thing Disney didn’t get entirely wrong was the slaying of the Hydra. Herakles’ second labour was to kill the Lernaean Hydra, but this was raised by Hera not Hades to destroy Herakles. He took his nephew Lolaus, who isn’t once mentioned in the Disney film, to help him slay the monster. As well as this, Herakles doesn’t suffocate the beast in falling debris, he finds and cuts off its one mortal head (out of eight immortal, regenerative ones) and this kills the Hydra. The hero then dips some arrows in the poisonous blood of the beast to use later, which Disney neglects to mention.
On this note of Disney slander, another aspect they got wrong was Megara and Herakles’ eternal love. In the myth, Megara is given as a REWARD to Herakles, by her father, after leading the Theban defence against the Minyans at Orchomenus. After this, Herakles and Megara had three sons (according to Apollodorus) and started to live a relatively normal life. Until one day when Hera decided to mess with Herakles’ mind, forcing him to kill his own wife and kids. A bit far from the original source material, Disney!
Speaking of people that Herakles killed, in the movie he has a personal trainer called Philoctetes or Phil, the half man half goat, voiced by the iconic Danny DeVito.
In the myth, Chiron (the closest thing to Phil) was a centaur who was famous for his wisdom and knowledge of medicine. Chiron was killed by Herakles when he accidentally pricked him with the Hydra blood-soaked arrow. But that isn’t even the worst part, the Hydra blood made it impossible for Chiron to heal himself, dooming him to an eternity of agony. Not cool Herakles!
Finally, the biggest misconception, in my opinion, is Pegasus. Pegasus does not belong to Herakles! Pegasus and Herakles never met! So why did Disney plonk him in the movie?! He wasn’t even made of a cloud by Zeus either. Pegasus was born when Perseus beheaded Medusa, after this he and Chryasor sprung out of her severed neck. Pegasus does not show up in Herakles’ myth, Bellerophon is the person who rode Pegasus, trying to reach Mount Olympus, but angered Zeus with his Hubris and he sent a gadfly to sting Pegasus, hurtling them to the ground. Zeus, knowing it wasn’t Pegasus’ fault, turned him into a constellation, the seventh largest in the sky. Whilst I’m ranting about Pegasus, the final thing I’d like to say is that Pegasus is NOT an animal, Pegasus was the name of the winged horse. There is only ONE Pegasus!
The History of Worsley New Hall
By Abigail Chapman
If you travel down Leigh Road in Worsley, there is an abandoned gate surrounded by metal fencing and CCTV warning signs. Most passers-by are unaware that this overgrown gate was once the entrance to the estate where Worsley New Hall once stood. Even though the Hall was standing for less than 100 years it played a vital role in royal visits, war efforts and the local community.
The building of New Hall
Long before Worsley New Hall was built, the original stately home was Worsley Old Hall which is located on the opposite side of Leigh Road to where the New Hall was later constructed. Old Hall was built at some point between the late 16th century and early 17th century and was a timber framed building. Since the 19th century, it has had an extension and experienced many renovations, including a billiard room built between the wings in 1905. Worsley Old Hall is now a brick Grade II listed building that is a public house and restaurant.
When Francis Egerton, 1st Earl of Ellesmere, inherited the Worsley estate including Worsley Old Hall and the Brick Hall, he commissioned Edward Blore to design the Elizabethan Gothic-style mansion Worsley New Hall, which was to replace the more classic-styled Brick Hall. Edward Blore was a famous architect who is known for designing the stalls in Westminster Abbey and he completed the east wing of Buckingham Palace. The first stone of Worsley New Hall was laid in April 1840 and the Hall was completed 6 years later by the end of 1846. This entire building process cost just under £100,000 which now would be close to £6.7 million. The Hall was three stories high and had a symmetrical main block with a wing for the family on one side and a servants wing with a tower on the other side. Following the construction of the hall and gardens, the entrance gate on Leigh Road was built in 1850.
Royal visits
After Worsley New Hall’s construction, there was multiple visits from the British monarchy specifically a series of visits from Queen Victoria. Her first visit was with Arther Wellesley the 1st Duke of Wellington, in October 1851 while the Queen was on tours of Lancaster: it was the first royal visit to the area in 150 years. The Queen then visited for a second time in 1857 when she was attending the Art Treasures Exhibition in Manchester, while visiting she planted a North American giant redwood tree in memory of Duke Wellington. Edward VII, Queen Victoria’s son, also visited when he was the Prince of Wales with his wife Alexandra in 1909 to inspect the Territorial Army’s East Lancashire division located on the grounds at the time.
Involvement in the Wars and the decline of Worsley New Hall
During the First World War John Egerton , 4th Earl of Ellesmere, lent the hall to the British Red Cross to be used as a convalescent home. The hall was utilised in many ways as the grand rooms were used as wards, parkland for recreation and food was provided by the kitchen and terrace gardens. However, after the end of the war, the hospital was closed in 1919 and the hall never returned to its glamorous pre war state. In the 1920s, the 4th Earl was forced to auction off furniture because of death duties and relocate the remaining furniture and paintings to the Earl’s other residence such as Mertoun House and Bridgewater House. This wasn’t enough to keep up with the maintenance of New Hall and in 1923 the Worsley Estate was sold to the Bridgewater Estates Limited for £3.3 million. During World War 2, the War Office requisitioned parts of New Hall to
Worsley Old Hall
Worsley New Hall
Injured soldier outside New Hall
create a training site for the Lancashire Fusiliers who also used the basement as an air raid shelter. In the later war years it supposedly housed Dunkirk evacuees and American soldiers while they prepared for D-Day.
During military occupation of the hall, damaged windows, Leigh Road entrance gate and much of the remaining furnishings were used as firewood. When there was a fire in 1943, it badly damaged the top floors and roof of Worsley New Hall, leading it to fall into disrepair as it suffered from dry rot so the only option was to sell the hall to a scrap merchant, Sydney Litter for £2,500 in 1944.
The demolition
Once the hall was sold, its fate was set and the demolition followed quickly beginning in 1946 by 1949 New Hall and the bridge over Leigh Road were completely lost. All that remained of the new hall was parts of the ground floor and the basement below it. There are parts of Worsley New Hall that still survive today as many bricks were used to build groups of houses in West Yorkshire.
Later use of the site
The War Department requisitioned the land in 1951 and built a reinforced concrete bunker where the servants’ wing once was. This bunker was then used as food storage for the Royal Navy in the 1950s and then leased to a local gun club in the 1980s to be used as a shooting range. However, the land is currently owned by Peel Land and Property and there have been some plans to rebuild hotels on the property but all have fallen through.
In 2011 an archaeological excavation of Worsley New Hall began, it was funded by Peel Land and Property and carried out by the University of Salford, the intention of the project was to research the heritage of Worsley New Hall. The excavation revealed some of the basement and its foundations were still in existence and not full demolished.
The future of Worsley New Hall
It was announced in 2015 that the Royal Horticultural Society would be renovating the 156 acre gardens of the estate to open their fifth garden. After a few delays, the Gardens were opened on the 18th of May 2021 (a year late) and the grounds include a series of gardens, a learning centre, a terrace café and the reconstructed walled garden. These gardens provide the next chapter for the Worsley New Hall estate and provide an incite into what is now lost. Currently the little remaining of Worsley New Hall includes small portions of the brick foundations covered in shrubbery, the outlines of the large fountain and the original steel gate on Leigh Road.
RHS Bridgewater
Entrance gate on Leigh Road
Artemis
By Natasha Lancaster
Artemis is the goddess of the hunt, wilderness, childbirth, chastity, and in my opinion the bravest, most badass god/goddess there ever was. I aim to get you to share my viewpoint in this article.
First, I need to talk about her birthing story. Artemis is the twin sister of Apollo and the daughter of Zeus and Leto, the titan, this is another one of Zeus’ infamous affairs (as touched on prior in my Herakles article). In order to exact her revenge on Leto for sleeping with Zeus, Hera forbade her from giving birth. However, Leto sought refuge on the island of Delos and gave birth to the twins. Artemis was born first so helped her mother give birth to Apollo, her own twin brother, at only a few minutes old. If that doesn’t scream badass then I don’t know what does!
In the Iliad, it was said that she halted the wind blowing the Greek ships during the Trojan war. All because the Greek leader, King Agamemnon, shot and killed her sacred deer. She then demanded that he sacrifice his young daughter to her just to show his remorse. She was also a maiden goddess, one of the three virgin goddesses that swore off marriage, so Aphrodite had no control over them.
She was that serious about chastity, that she killed a guy for just seeing her naked! According to Ovid’s Metamorphosis, Actaeon (the Theban hero) accidentally saw Artemis without clothes whilst she was bathing in Mount Cithaeron, when he got separated from his hunting gang. For his mistake, she turned him into a stag and as he tried to find his way back, he was torn to shreds by his own hunting dogs.
Another example of Artemis’ sadism is in her interaction with Queen Niobe of Thebes. The Queen boasted about how she was a far better mother than Leto as she had 12 more children than her. So, to avenge her mother, her and Apollo murdered Niobe’s children.
First, Apollo crept up on all 7 of her sons, killing them all with his silver bow, but then Niobe, not getting the hint, boasted again stating that she was better still, as she had 7 daughters. Then, Artemis came in and despite Niobe’s pleading, shot her daughters one by one with arrow shower.
Like this, Princess Chione of Phocis was admired by both Hermes and Apollo, she boasted to Artemis, stating that she was better than her as she had attracted two gods. Artemis was enraged, so, casually, shot her tongue off with an arrow, so she could no longer brag again. A bit harsh, but arguably deserved.
Even though she can be quite protective of her image, she can also be compassionate. When Orion, Artemis’ hunting partner, said that he could ‘kill every beast on earth’, this upset Gaia (the titan, not our society), so she sent a giant scorpion to sting him. Artemis in her grief, sent him up in the sky to form the constellation, Orion.
Artemis also saved abandoned baby Atlanta after she was exposed. However, this act is undermined by the fact that she later sent a bear to injure her as she said she was a better hunter than Artemis. Moral of the story, don’t mess with Artemis!
Wonders of Macedon
By Korrigan Parr
As opposed to before the reign of Philip II of Macedon, Macedonia has become a very powerful kingdom that controlled many parts of the ancient world, including the whole of Greece and Persia! Macedon was a complex and fascinating civilization that was most well-known for its military power and their unique traditions, which blended many cultures together, including from the Romans, Greeks, Byzantines and Ottomans.
One of the most notable aspects of Macedonian society was its military. Macedonian Kings, such as Philip II of Macedon, and Alexander the Great were considered to be divine and were welleducated by mentors such as Aristotle! Both leaders were considered to have very dominant military leadership in battle as well as the army itself being very flexible in any given situation. The army was also fiercely loyal towards their leader and were a huge part of the conquests of various different locations.
Other than their military prominence, Macedon was also very wellknown for their art and architecture. Many buildings built by the Macedonians were influenced by a Greek style, but they also incorporated their own unique designs and motifs. One of the most famous examples of Macedonian architecture was the palace of King Philip II of Macedon himself, which was built in the 4th century BC.
Designs weren’t the only thing Macedonians took inspiration from the Greeks for. Lots of religious gods and goddesses were borrowed from Greek mythology, such as Zeus, Artemis, Heracles, Dionysus, and more. Although, Macedon did have lots of unique religious practices, which honoured legendary figures from their history.
Despite their military and cultural achievements, the Macedonians were not without their flaws. They were known for their heavy drinking, as well as their disruptive behaviour, which helped the Greek’s case of calling them “barbarians,” since they believed that the Macedonians had a lack of sophistication and refinement.
Overall, ancient Macedonian society was truly notable in history that left a lasting impact on the world and is still visited today by millions all around the world! From their military conquests to their art and architecture, Macedon was a truly unique civilization which is still studied to this day.
Olympias
By Olivia Gargan
Olympias was a Greek princess and queen, most commonly known as the mother of Alexander the Great and wife of Philip of Macedon. As is the case with many women in history, her own existence is often overlooked and only viewed in relation to that of the men in her life. However, Olympias was strong and powerful in her own right, with a fascinating history of her own.
Olympias was born in Epirus in 375BC and was supposedly originally named Myrtale. This only changed in recognition of Philip’s victory in the Olympic Games of 356BC when she was renamed Olympias. Her father, Neoptolemus I, was King of the Molossians, an ancient tribe in Epirus while her family claimed to be descended from Achilles, a hero of the Trojan War and the greatest Greek warrior of all time, whose mother was a sea nymph or goddess.
Olympias was devoted to the cult of Dionysus who, in Greek religion, was the god of winemaking and vegetation. The Macedonian people deeply disapproved of this as they considered this a cult of mainly wild, insane women promoting violence and intoxication. It is rumoured that Olympias introduced the practice of handling snakes to the cult, and even kept them in her bedchamber.
Olympias married Philip King of Macedon in 357BC, a diplomatic move to unite the Molossians and the Macedonians in an alliance. According to ancient historian Plutarch, the pair met on Samothrace, an island in the Aegean Sea, and Philip ‘fell passionately in love with her’ immediately due to her intoxicating beauty and fiery temper. Together they had a son, who would later come to be known as Alexander the Great, and a daughter named Cleopatra of Macedonia.
Philip had numerous wives to build alliances, but his polygamy began to threaten Olympias’ position in 337BC when he married high-born Macedonian Cleopatra. Together, Cleopatra and Philip had a son named Caranus who rivalled Alexander the Great’s claim as heir to the Macedonian throne. In 336BC Philip of Macedon was assassinated by one of his bodyguards, however ancient historian Justin believes that the act was instigated by Olympias due to her resentment and jealously of Cleopatra. It is said that she placed a gold crown on the head of Philip’s killer, made him an extravagant tomb next to that of Philip, and performed yearly sacrifices at his grave out of respect.
It is also rumoured that she forced Cleopatra to hang herself after murdering her daughter Europa in front of her eyes. Apparently, Olympias enjoyed watching Cleopatra suffer after finally being able to achieve her vengeance and secure the throne for her son.
Following Alexander’s death, Olympias aimed to make his son, the young Alexander, king. Alongside her cousin, the King of Epirus, she launched an invasion into Macedonia where Cassander, the son of a trusted general of Alexander the Great, had become regent. After ordering the execution of many Macedonians loyal to Cassander in 317BC, Olympias’ invasion failed, and she was put to death in 316BC.
Arguably, it is only down to Olympias that Alexander achieved great success as she removed his competition while also filling him with confidence by assuring him that his father was in fact not Philip, but Zeus, ruler of all Gods. Olympias’ passionate and powerful nature ensured the greatness of her son, and her bold decisions deserve to be recognised and acknowledged.
By Phoebe Reast-Jones
By Thomas Dunleavy
The 1848 German Revolution
Europe, 1815
The Congress of Vienna, 1815
Italy in 1861
The colonisation of Africa by 1914
The last photo taken of Franz Ferdinand before his assassination.
By Isabella Gordon
