History Magazine Issue 1 by winstanleycollege

Meet the Editorial Team ‘

Chief Editor: Alice Rushton

Hello and welcome to the 2021 Winter Edition of Winstanley’s History Magazine! This was the first magazine I have put together and I had the pleasure of working alongside the amazing Editorial team who have worked tirelessly to make sure the magazine was perfect! I would like to give them a huge thanks along with the writers who have shared their historical wisdom with us this past term. And I can’t take credit for our fantastic front cover; that is the artistic skills of Daniel Syddall. I would also like to thank Silvia Marques for her support in making this magazine possible and for chaperoning all of the otherwise chaotic meetings! We made this magazine as a part of the Winstanley History Society which helps to supplement the learning of history Students in Winstanley College. However, even if you aren’t interested in writing articles, there is much more on offer within the society! We have historical debates, archaeological digs, historical bake sales and we even have a historical film Friday— that’s right! We watch films in college! So please come and join us if you are passionate about history because there really is something for everyone! I hope you enjoy the magazine! Merry Christmas

- Lorenzo d

Our Editors Our Editorial Team: Railey Morgan Adam Phoebe May Woodard Daniel Syddall

The History Society Previous Events: 

Historical Bake Sale



Rome/ Russia Trip



Memorial Day Services

Current events: 

Archaeological Dig



Historical Film Friday



Historical Debates



Podcast Appearances

Contents page Page 1: Cover Page 2-3: Our Editorial Team and the History Society Page 4: Contents Page Page 5-7: Día de Muertos: connecting the past to the present - by Molly Grey Page 8-10: Diogenes: The Mad Philosopher - by Harry Morgan Marsh

Page 11: History Crossword Page 12-13: London History Trip 2021—by Evie Tobias Page 14-16: Josephine Baker— by Callum Andrè Forster Page 17-19: Pazzi Conspiracy—by Emily Gorman Page 20-22 The Peterloo Massacre: How Much Have we Learnt? - by Oliver Eastham Page 23-24: The Life and Times of the Lioness of Brittany: Jeanne de Clisson— by Leon Apollo Asher Jones

Page 25: Holocaust is Still relevant Today — by Megan Radcliffe Page 26-27: World War 2 America—by Holly Nash. Page 28-30:“How did Fascist Dictators gain a foothold in government, in what seemed to be modernised western societies?” – by Esther Brojerdi Page 31-32: The Holocaust; Names Behind the Numbers - by Alice Rushton. Page 33-34: 'Man is born free, and he is everywhere in chains': An investigation of the influence of Rousseuist thought on the French Revolution - by Charlotte Steven

Page 35-39: a review of Dunkirk (2017) by Christopher Nolan – by Phoebe Woodard Page 40: An Exploration of the Power of Human Testimony - by Antonia Wilks Page 41-44: Deepened Misogyny Behind the Image of a Witch—by Tahlia Jones Page 45: Crossword Answers Page 46-47: History Magazine Trivia Page 48: History Magazine Answers

Día de Muertos: connecting the past to the present By Molly Grey “Si nada nos salva de la muerte, que al menos el amor nos salve de la vida.” – This is the quote Carolina T chooses to best describe the meaning of this great Mexican festival which compares to no other. The Day of the Dead (or Día de Muertos in Spanish) blends indigenous practices and symbols with Catholic tradition to welcome back the souls of the deceased for two lively nights of food, music and celebration on annually November 1 and 2

Going back over 3,000 years, the rituals carried out today to honour the dead are rooted in preColumbian Mesoamerica. The Aztecs (a famous Native American civilisation who dominated Mexico until they were conquered by the Spanish in the 16th century) believed that upon dying a person would go to Chicunamictlán, the Land of the Dead. Only after several years of facing its nine levels, consisting of dangerous challenges would the soul reach Mictlán, the final resting place. To aid the deceased on their journey, living family members would provide food, water and the necessary tools. This forms the foundation of today’s Day of the Dead practice in which people build altars in their homes with ofrendas – offerings to their loved ones’ souls. When I speak to Carolina, a 16-year-old student from Oaxaca, Mexico, she explains passionately about the altar her school makes every year to honour the mother and the priest who founded the institute – how many of us can say we know who founded Winstanley College? The grand, breathtaking altars found in homes, public buildings and cemeteries, are emblematic of this celebration and are adorned with hundreds of cempasúchils – a vibrant Mexican marigold with indigenous origins. Its sweet, fresh smell is so strong that it is believed the flower awakens the dead and guides them on their trip from Mictlán back to the living world. Another major part of the ofrenda is food: as tradition states that the souls will be hungry after undertaking their journey. When Carolina shows me the magnificent altar in her school, the first thing I notice are the hundreds of apples and other types of fruit laid before the structure. Next, I see the most prominent symbol of death in Mexico and an icon of this festival – La Catrina. The tall female skeleton wearing a fancy feathered hat was brought to life in 1912 by Mexican illustrator José Guadalupe Posada. At a time where some Mexicans aspired to be like the wealthy European aristocrats, the drawing was intended to remind people to live their true selves, as no matter how rich or poor we are; no matter the colour of our skin; and no matter our social class, we will all end up becoming skeletons.

However, Carolina assures me that the Day of the Dead is not a day of sadness, but rather a celebration of the lives of the deceased. This is seen through the uniqueness of each person’s altar as they consist of the things their loved one liked the most. For example, according to tradition November 1 is when the spirits of children can rejoin their families for 24 hours. Their altars will include lots of sweets and chocolates. Whilst on November 2 the spirits of adults return, and their altars are more likely to include cigarettes and beer! I am told, however, that not everyone necessarily believes that the border between the spirit world and the real world will dissolve, and the souls of the dead will return. Instead for some people, altars are a way to show devotion and respect to their loved one – and to ensure that their history is never forgotten. It must be pointed out that many altars will also include Christian symbols such as a crucifix and images of saints – because the Day of the Dead is a festival of blended cultures. The Spanish invaders of Mexico, who were Catholics, tried to eradicate native beliefs by demolishing religious temples and destroying Aztec books. Nevertheless, indigenous people resisted these attempts to stamp out their beliefs and, although the festival was moved from late July to early November to correspond with the Christian All Saints’ Day and All Souls’ Day, the indigenous style of celebrating remains firmly in place. Throughout our conversation, Carolina emphasised that there are many different ways in which this festival is celebrated. Her family go to the cemetery in the day to clean the graves of their deceased and lay flowers. Meanwhile, thousands of other families stay awake the whole night next to the tomb of their loved one whilst the souls enjoy their ofrenda. But what shocked me the most was the unique tradition in Pomuch, a town in the Mexican state of Campeche. When a person dies and has been buried for three years, they are dug back up on November 1 and their bones are placed in a wooden box, which are then cleaned by their relatives annually! This is rooted in Mayan culture (the Mayans were a Mesoamerican civilisation) who believe that death is not the end, but merely a transformation and a cycle within the universe. In the town of Pomuch, the belief is that if the family does not clean the bones during the Day of the Dead, the soul will become furious, and you will be able to see it roaming the streets.

It became clear to me during my chat with Carolina that the Day of the Dead is certainly not a sombre, miserable event – it’s a party! In San Agustín Etla, a town in Oaxaca, la muerteada is a lively parade filled with colour and music, which takes place all throughout the night and into the morning of November 2. Everyone in the family dresses up in elaborate costumes and disguises themselves as different characters: devils, skeletons, La Catrina and animals. It is a way for them to remember the dead whilst enjoying themselves through music and dance. The great Mexican tradition of the Day of the Dead connects the past to the present and, through the creation of altars, ensures that the history of our ancestors is never forgotten. The Mexican way to remember the dead is one of pure happiness and enjoyment and reminds us that death is a part of life. This line from the poet Pablo Neruda which Carolina told me best sums up this celebration: “If nothing saves us from death, let at least love save us from life.”

Diogenes: The Mad Philosopher By Harry Morgan Marsh Ancient Greece was the stage for some of the most influential characters and schools of thought in the Western world and internationally; most famously philosophers such as Aristotle or Plato (and their works such as Plato’s Republic). However, Diogenes was quite dissimilar to his more notorious contemporaries.

Diogenes’ genesis As with much of ancient history, records and credible sources are scarce and apocryphal sources plentiful but what we believe to be true goes as follows. Diogenes was born at around 412BC in Sinope, Paphlygonia (now Turkey). In his early life he minted coins with his father, Hicesias, before being exiled from the city for his involvement in a scandal involving defacing or debasing currency. This was possibly motivated by political motives rather than financial ones as at the time Sinope was disputed between factions of pro-Greek and pro-Persian ideology. Either way, the exile from Sinope meant that Diogenes and his father lost their citizenship and all their material possessions. One story tells that a young Diogenes consulted the Oracle at Delphi who told him to ‘deface the currency’ which he took as the political currency rather than monetary. He elected to travel to Athens and partake in an unorthodox crusade to challenge the values and customs of Athenian society.

Athens Upon Diogenes’ arrival to Athens, he was immediately hit with a stroke of misfortune. Manes, his slave and one of his final possessions ran away from Diogenes almost immediately after entering the city. Diogenes, always with a sense of humour, lessened his loss by commenting ‘If Manes can live without Diogenes, why not Diogenes without Manes’. His study and conflict with many Athenian philosophers began when he became infatuated with Antisthenes, a student of Socrates. This is likely where Diogenes began to develop his own philosophical doctrine based upon the teaching of Antisthenes, who is regarded by Diogenes Laertius (an ancient historian who documented many of Diogenes’ actions) as the first cynic philosopher. He is said to have hounded Antisthenes and become like a faithful dog to the philosopher, becoming obsessed with him and arguably somewhat of a nuisance. This relationship is often regarded as where Diogenes began his ascetic

Philosophical Feud Diogenes soon took to attempting to answer the much-discussed philosophical questions of the time. One of these was the simplest way to define a human. Plato attempted to answer this question and found his answer to be ‘featherless biped’. Upon hearing this, Diogenes plucked a chicken of all it’s feathers before rushing to Plato’s academy with the animal in hand, calling out ‘Behold, here is Plato’s man’. The incident caused Plato to revise his definition, eventually adding ‘with broad flat nails’ to his definition. It’s probably a good job that Diogenes did not take any further steps to remove the body parts of animals in an effort to outwit Plato. Another story tells of Plato encountering Diogenes washing vegetables in a stream. Plato remarked ‘My good Diogenes, if you knew how to pay court to Dionysius (the tyrant who ruled Athens at the time and a man who Plato was a fan of), you wouldn’t have to wash vegetables.’ ‘And.’ Diogenes began to reply, ‘If you knew how to wash vegetables, you wouldn’t have to pay court to Dionysius.’ This not only tells of the rivalry between the two but of their ideological differences. Plato believed in an ordered society where people had a specific place and role as he tells in ‘The Republic’ whereas Diogenes believed in an individualistic and atomistic society, where one should be dependant only to oneself. Unfortunately, Diogenes himself rarely recorded his ideas and preferred to reveal his ideas through his actions as an embodiment to one of his heroes, Heracles. Diogenes was a student of Antisthenes who himself was a student of Socrates whereas Plato was a direct student of Socrates. It is therefore possible that their ideological battle was chiefly about the legend and memory of Socrates.

Diogenes and Alexander Alexander the Great was a fan of philosophy when he wasn’t busy conquering a large part of the known world. One of the philosophers it seems that he was particularly interested in was Diogenes. During one sunny day in Corinth, Alexander met Diogenes whilst Diogenes was sunbathing. Alexander, possibly the most powerful man in the world, asked the cynic if there was anything at all he could do for the man. Diogenes simply replied ‘Yes, stand out of my sunlight’. Alexander’s respect for Diogenes only grew from this disrespect, prompting him to say, ‘If I was not Alexander, then I would wish to be Diogenes’. Yet just when it seemed that Diogenes’ wit may have been exhausted, he said back ‘Were I not Diogenes, I would wish to be him as well’. Another, perhaps darker and less entertaining, version of this tale goes that Alexander met Diogenes whilst Diogenes was rummaging through a pile of human bones. When Alexander inquired into what he was doing, Diogenes responded ‘I was searching for the bones of your father but cannot distinguish them from those of a slave’. These stories are not only entertaining anecdotes of Diogenes’ witty humour and disrespect for social status but contain a deeper message of his belief in foundational equality and lack of care for societal expectations, originally coming from the fateful telling of the Oracle at Delphi.

Captured by Pirates The final story I will tell of Diogenes’ many eccentric adventures is that of his capture and eventual sale by pirates. He was captured by pirates whilst sailing to the island of Aegina and later put up for auction. At the auction, he was asked where he was from, to which he replied that he was a citizen of the world (perhaps suggesting that he would resent his title of Diogenes of Sinope, though Diogenes of Earth doesn’t really have the same ring to it). Then he began to lay down and pretend to be a fish to make fun of his auctioneer before lecturing and berating the audience on the proper method of buying a slave. Eventually, Diogenes pointed to a wealthy man in the crowd named Xeniades saying ‘Sell me to that man, he could do with a master!’ Xeniades did indeed purchase Diogenes, putting him in charge of his household and his children, to whom he taught the tenets of his ideas and trained them to endure hardship.

Conclusion It’s not entirely known how Diogenes died. Some say he ate a raw octopus; others claim that he was bitten by a rabid dog but by far the best story of his death is that he simply grew tired of living and held his breath until he died. True to his character, Diogenes claimed that he had little care what happened to his body after death but that he would like to be thrown into the wilderness to give back to the planet what little he took from it. It’s unlikely that anyone objected to this request being that his eccentric actions seemed to annoy many.

His effect on the modern day has been quite substantial. He is well known and often respected in philosophical circles for his willingness to put his theories into action. Due to this, a statue of Diogenes was erected in his home city of Sinope (now Sinop). Diogenes syndrome was named after Diogenes of Sinope and is an officially recognised medical condition characterised by self-neglect and a lack of shame, much like the philosopher himself. Whatever your opinion of his actions and ideas, he must be acknowledged for his willingness to put his own wellbeing at risk to (in his opinion) enlighten others.

London History Trip 2021 By Evie Tobias On the 25th November 2021, a group of 23 members of the history department met at Wigan North Western Station at 6:45am for their departure to London Euston. After a 2 hour train journey, we arrived in London, ready for a guided tour to our first destination – The Temple church. As we ventured through the streets of London, Phil enlightened us with some of the city’s historic relics – Charing Cross being the site of the final rebellion of Wyatt’s rebellion in 1554 as well as the site of the gruesome execution of King Charles I and World War memorials scattered around the city. Arriving at the 12th Century Temple church, we begin to explore. Packed with 800 years of history, the church was built by the Knights Templar, the order of crusading monks. It was founded to protect pilgrims on their way to Jerusalem in the 12th Century. The church is in two parts, the Round and the Chancel. The Round Church was consecrated in 1185 by the Patriarch of Jerusalem. The design’s purpose was to recall the holiest place in the Crusader’s world – the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. We spent around 20 minutes admiring the fantastical architecture of the church – from awing glass windows to the impressive sculpture work of the Crusader tombs.

We then continued our London adventure onto the next location - The Imperial War Museum. Taking the underground tube, we then arrived at our second destination. In a slightly daunting foyer, (an immense collection of jets and missiles which hung over our heads precariously) we were released to explore the museum. We began at the World War II exhibition, immersed in preserved military uniform, fragment of warfare and a recreation of a 1940s house – completed with a bunker. Next, we went on to a very thought-provoking exhibition; the Holocaust memorial. Artifacts of a haunting past, from toys once possessed by an innocent child, to dirtied ‘striped pyjamas’ worn by unjustified prisoners. Truly, it was tear-jerking, but was insightful to a troubled past, too unbelievable to understand. We concluded the tour with the 9/11 gallery and World War I exhibition, ready to depart for the final destination. Once again, taking the underground tube, we found ourselves at the grand face of the British Museum – it’s architecture reflecting something royal. Beginning at the ancient history sector, we strolled through the centuries of Ancient Egypt - mesmerised by spectacular Pharaoh busts and mummies – then, progressing onto Ancient Rome, where we came face to face with the ruthless Nero. Exploring the museum for just shy of 2 and a half hours, we united again having seen thousands of years of history – some other artifacts including one of the Easter Island heads, ‘The Great Wave’ artwork and a display of traditional, intricate china.

To conclude our conquest of the impressive London, we refuelled ourselves with a takeaway feast, before finally departing the city from Euston and arriving back at Wigan North Western Station at 9:30pm, in readiness for a well deserved night’s sleep.

AD: Winstanley Podcasts As part of Winstanley Enrichment, Daniel Syddall (yes—also the guy in charge of the Graphis for this magazine) records, edits and produces podcasts for Winstanley TV. Accessible through YouTube, these podcasts cover a wide range of topics from political discussions to would you rather games. If you are interested in media, film or just want to enjoy the experience of working with professional sound equipment, contact Daniel to make an appearance on his podcast. Or, if you are looking at joining the Winstanley community in September, why not take a look at his podcasts online and get to meet the students studying at Winstanley this year.

Josephine Baker By Callum Andrè Forster

Growing up America Josephine Baker was born 3rd of June 1906 in St Louis Missouri in the US. Growing up in East S.T.Louis with her mother Carrie McDonald she first experienced the racially divided America of the 20th century as, after an accusation of a robbery of a white man by a black man triggered, 3 days of riots in which more than 30 (confirmed) black Americans died along with 9 white. During these riots Josephine childhood home was also burnt down, causing her to live the rest of her childhood in poverty. At the age of 8 her mother married the jazz drummer and dancer Eddie Carson and, as the family was very poor and she had 3 siblings, she got a job cleaning for a local woman. The employer was abusive towards her as and Josephine left as quickly as she feasibly could.

There’s no business like show business She panhandles by dancing on the streets, a skill she picked up whilst performing little show with her siblings for the family. At the age of 13 she gets married, she leaves her other job as a waitress and joins the vaudeville act, the Dixie steppers, leaves her husband and marries Willy Baker then moves all over the country with the Dixie Steppers at the age of 15. She adds further to her performing by joining the courses, including the iconic shoe Shuffle Along. During this stint with the Dixie Steppers she makes her name for being one of the main solo acts in a slightly comedic roll but also one of the most skilful dancers in the show. She becomes so famous and well known that in 1925 she leaves her 2nd husband and she moves to France to do a show which would feather a dance which would be an image that would iconize her for being the pinnacle of the Jazz dance age of the 1920s. She is a fashion and dance icon and is one of the most highly paid performers in the 1920s.

Money makes the world go around

Viva la revolution During the Second World War she adds another string to her bow, but not another performance, she joins the French Resistance following the Nazi invasion of France. She spy’s on high officials and uses inviable ink on her sheet music, uses her personal plane to transfer surprises all under the confidence that no one would dare to such her because of her fame.

With her newfound wealth she goes onto live the life that would only be familiar to a pre-revolutionary French aristocrat. She creates the modern image of glamor buying extremely frivolous things such as a Mary Antoinette’s bed, a chateau and her personal menagerie (including a cheetah, goat, pig, aps, horse, snakes and a parakeet, all of which had diamond colliers) some of her animals would even come out, like a pet dog, with her when she went out and even when she was performing (and yes even the cheetah would come with her to shows). She adds 2 more skills to her performing career as she takes up singing and acting making herself a true reasons woman of the jazz age. 1937 she marries for the 3rd time, to Jean Lion, whom she lives a longer marriage too.

The American Dream? After the end of the war in 1945 she returns to America to try and get a second chance at succeeding the still racially divided country. She decided to challenge the racist l aws and culture of the US and was refused from 39 venues, due to her refusal to play any segregated venues. She organises boycotts of racist establishments and draws in attention, using her fame. However after being accused of being a communist and an investigation by the FBI, she is put on their watch list and losses her US citizenship. She then torus South America and meats with political icons such as Fidel Castro (it is also rumoured her children swam in his personal pool). This didn’t help her defence against the accusation of communism and only is able to return to America in 1963. During this time she makes her strongest political gestures at the most significant event in US 20th century history, she gives a speech at the Washington million man marches, right before Martin Luther King, wearing her French Resistance uniform, provoking imagery of revolution but also brotherhood. She settles in her French Chateau and creates her Graceland style mansion, complete with her menagerie, wax museum, motel, bakaryjazz club, café, golf course and a quaint village. She adopts 12 children from all over world. Opening her home to the public and lives a very public life. 1969 she is bankrupted and evicted from her chateau (as you can see above).

The final Curtin Grace Kelly, whom she meant in America whilst on tour, was a good friend with Baker and Princes Grace gives her a home and a big revue to balance Josephine’s finances –which was now 68 years old. Baker herself in staring in this show and is said to be the liveliest performer on the stage, despite probably being the eldest.

She dies four days later, April 12 1975 in Paris in her bed of a stroke. However, she left the world with a last sine of her diverseness; surrounding her death bed she left her outstanding revues of her previous show.

Josephine Baker didn’t just make social change in gender equality, racial equality and sexuality in the two countries’ that she lived in, but also globally. She is often pushed to one side when talking about protest against the repressed societies of the 19th century to create the freer society we live in today, being over shadowed by other activist such as Martin Luther King and Malcolm X. However she the finest example of revolution in the jazz age and it is hard to find many celebrates that cant trace there influences back to her work. Who need the Kardashians? When Josephine Baker has already been there done that, and got the cheetah.

Pazzi Conspiracy By Emily Louise Gorman ‘What I have dreamed in an hour is worth more than what you have done in four.’ - Lorenzo de’ Medici

The Medici were a powerful, wealthy family in Florence. Around the 13th Century, they began their steady rise to prominence by creating a bank and dynasty that would survive for centuries. With famous members ranging from Queens to Popes, the family not only participated in finance but in politics and leadership. The Medici also had a reputation for helping the poor and for being supporters of the arts. Artists that the family supported include Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and Sandro Botticelli but that is not to say they were loved by everyone. The Medici certainly had their enemies; one particular event may show the deadliest pinnacle of this hostility. On the 26th April 1478, Lorenzo de’ Medici was attacked and Giuliano de’ Medici was murdered in a plot which later became known as the Pazzi Conspiracy. The plotters consisted of some of the Pazzi Family (Bernardo Baroncelli, Pope Sixtus IV, his nephew Girolamo Riario, the archbishop of Pisa, Francesco Salviati, and some others). The Pazzis were jealous of the popularity, wealth, influence and power that the Medici Family possessed and wanted their bank to be the one that controlled Florence instead. The Pope wanted to demolish the dominion of the Medici and gain control of territories in Florence that had been withheld from him. The other conspirators each held their own motives/grudges against the Medici which had led them to this point. A plan was borne to kill Lorenzo and his brother Giuliano, the two heads of the family, so there would be no Medici who could stand in their way. The brothers had to be killed simultaneously, to avoid the other gaining support from the city and crushing the plot. Several plots were then outlined to kill the brothers either on the road or in their home however, one of them ended up being absent at each of these events, foiling the plan. For example, one of the original plans was to poison the brothers during a banquet (which was in order to celebrate Cardinal Raffael Riario on the 25th April), but Giuliano was unwell and therefore did not attend; the plot had to be temporarily abandoned. Desperate, the conspirators latched onto the one time the brothers would certainly be together. At church, during Mass, on the Sabbath (Easter Sunday). According to the account of Machiavelli (ref. Florentine Histories, Book VIII), Francesco de’ Pazzi and Bernardo Baroncelli walked Guiliano to the Duomo after it looked as though he might not show in order to ensure his presence, one of them hugging him in supposed jest, but in reality, it was to check whether or not he was wearing armour. He was not.

In church, the conspirators came behind the brothers. Some accounts say the signal was the ‘elevation of the host’, others say it was the ending words of Mass, “ite missa est.” Either way, after the signal, the attackers struck. Giuliano was killed, suffering a head wound and being stabbed an estimated 19 times by the merchant Bernardo Baroncelli and Francesco de’ Pazzi. He was only 24 years old. Lorenzo suffered severe, albeit non-fatal wounds. Francesco Nori, a true friend of the Medici Family, died from wounds while trying to save them. Lorenzo was then hidden in the sacristy by his trusted friend Angelo Poliziano. Meanwhile, Salviati reached the Palazzo Vecchio with a group of men whilst Jacopo de’ Pazzi spoke to the people and tried to paint the Medici as tyrants, waiting for reinforcements that would never arrive. Before the conspirators could completely seize control of the city, Lorenzo returned from hiding in the sacristy, proving that he was in fact alive. The people then had to choose between supporting Lorenzo and the Medici or the Pazzi. Killing Guiliano in church was a sin, seen not just as a crime against the Medici family but one against God. Furthermore, as the Medici were patrons of art and poetry, gave money to the poor and helped trade, they were loved by the people. From a historical viewpoint, the family later gained the title ‘Godfathers of the Renaissance,’ which proves the magnitude of their contributions towards the Arts. The people of Florence chose to stand with Lorenzo de Medici and overthrew the conspirators. In his anger, Lorenzo then ordered the death of the Pazzi family and everyone involved in the plot, killing many of the key conspirators. Five of them, including Francesco de’ Pazzi, Bernardo Baroncelli and Francesco Salviati, were hung from the windows of the Palazzo Vecchio. Several members of the Pazzi Family were captured, executed or exiled whether they were known to be part of the plot or not. Lorenzo’s sister, Bianca de’ Medici, was married to Guglielmo de’ Pazzi (a marriage that was supposed to have united the families but had failed) and both of them went into exile. Jacopo de’ Pazzi, who attempted to flee the city, was dragged back to Florence, hung and buried in the Pazzi tomb but then re-buried outside the city walls and later unearthed by children who dragged his corpse around the city.

Some of the Pazzi’s money was then regifted to the people. Pope Sixtus IV became ill on 8th August 1484 and died soon after. Girolamo Riario (the Pope’s nephew) became one of the last living main Pazzi Conspirators but was assassinated by the Orsi family 10 years later (supposedly over a financial dispute). Lorenzo also commissioned a fresco of the conspirators on the wall of the Palazzo Vecchio, which was painted by Botticelli. It depicted the hanging bodies of each of the main plotters. This artwork was destroyed after the Medici temporarily lost control in 1494.

The bloody plot and its horrific aftermath led to a 2-year long conflict between Florence and the Papacy which came close to war. This conflict almost ended disastrously for Florence however it also strengthened Lorenzo and the support the Medici family had from the people. Nevertheless, after Lorenzo died in 1492, the Medici family fell, with Lorenzo’s successor Piero being exiled from Florence in 1494. The family eventually returned to Florence and took back power in 1512. The Medici had many famous descendants including Catherine de’ Medici, Queen Consort of France, Lorenzo’s son Giovanni who became Pope Leo X and Lorenzo’s nephew (Guiliano’s son) Guilio who became Pope Clement VII. Overall, the event of the Pazzi Conspiracy was a tragedy, from the loss of Guiliano de’ Medici to the brutal fall-out and Lorenzo’s vendetta.

References: https://www.britannica.com/event/Pazzi-conspiracy (Encyclopaedia Britannica) http://www.aboutflorence.com/pazziconspiracy.html (About Florence) https://ultimatehistoryproject.com/the-pazziconspiracy.html (Ultimate History Project) https://lovefromtuscany.com/pazzi-conspiracy/ (Love from Tuscany) https://www.history.com/topics/renaissance/medicifamily (History - The Medici Family) TV Show ‘Medici’ + Book ‘Florentine Histories Book VIII’ by Niccolò Machiavelli Book ‘April Blood; Florence and the Plot Against the Medici.’ by Lauro Martines. Related Wikipedia Pages; such as Lorenzo de’ Medici, Pazzi Conspiracy, Girolamo Riario, Guglielmo de’ Pazzi and Bianca de’ Medici

The Peterloo Massacre: How Much Have we Learnt? By Oliver Eastham

On the morning of the 16th August 1819, 60,000 working class protestors emerged from the vast slums of the impoverished North-West. They intended a peaceful protest, yet they were met with brutal, oppressive violence. 200 years later, have we learnt our lesson? Or has history repeated itself in silencing the voice of the masses?  England in 1819 was dominated by poverty, crisis, and famine. Nearing the end of the industrial revolution, rich factory owners filled their pockets with continuous technological advancement, replacing dependent workers with profit-maximising machinery. The Napoleonic wars, which ended in 1815 after the Battle of Waterloo, drained the British economy and demanded jobs and food for the returning 350, 000 ex-servicemen, increasing the financial pressure. Additionally, newly imposed corn laws were disastrous, making essentials like bread unaffordable for the vast proletariat. This cumulatively created the Post-Napoleonic Depression, where those still employed suffered immensely, particularly in disenfranchised areas like Manchester, where salaries were reduced to a third of their original number.  As expected, working-class Britain plunged into financial hardship, political tension, and mass protests, yet fewer than 2% of the population had the right to vote, those few being the ruling classes. With ideas of the French Revolution in mind, a crowd quickly gathered from across Greater Manchester at St. Peter’s Field demanding universal suffrage. Yet unlike the French Revolution, the crowds poised themselves peacefully with dignity and discipline with banners simply proposing "EQUAL REPRESENTATION", "UNIVERSAL SUFFRAGE" and, most poignantly, "LOVE".

Fearing the enormous size of the crowd, the local magistrates ordered them to disperse without consideration of their desperate pleas or peaceful composition. When they didn’t, a great force of at least 1000 cavalrymen, 400 from the 15th Hussar, and several hundred infantrymen were tasked with arresting the starving protesters. These men, known as the Yeomanry, proceeded forward without any intention of arrest, being consumed by hatred towards the notorious leading protesters from the radical Manchester Observer and alcohol, according to some sources. Armed with sabres and clubs, the cavalry charged with fury into the heart of the crowd. They mercilessly cut down and trampled anybody in their vicinity, regardless of their intentions. Protesters desperately tried to escape, but in their attempts, the cavalry charges crushed them together. The harrowing cries of children were masked by the enraged shouts of the soldiers as more joined the assault, believing the commotion to be a product of violent protesters. By 2 pm, all that remained on the field were abandoned banners and dead bodies. At least 15 protestors were killed, while upwards of 700 were injured. A peaceful protest turned into a brutal bloodbath in minutes.

Greater England was disgusted by the harsh brutality enforced by the Yeomanry. Sanctions were swiftly imposed, and political reform loomed on the horizon. The name ‘Peterloo’ was assigned, echoing the British victory at Waterloo, and highlighting the pure horror of the massacre, as an injured veteran described the event as ' downright murder’ in comparison to his experience of war. The Manchester Guardian was established two years after the crisis, largely in response to this massacre of the working class, and thus the voices of the misfortunate were cemented in print. For a while, this event signified a turning point in the treatment of the working class and was undoubtedly influential in winning working-class suffrage in 1832, 13 years later.

However, 200 years on, have we forgotten the importance of Peterloo in listening to the lower class? Have you even heard of the event? Modern school curriculums would suggest not. The event that was decisive in changing public opinion on issues such as equality, poverty, and social class scarcely appears on a syllabus, and much of the public have little or no knowledge of the topic. Instead, the predominant historical period taught in schools is the World Wars, with political protest being referenced rarely through brief mentions of movements like the suffragettes. While these wars are of paramount importance to our society, having completely changed the human experience we encounter today, it is undeniable that a discussion of the protests that established our basic human rights should be equally as important. Working class people across the nation cannot be deprived of the knowledge that there is power in their words and in their actions, and that, through protest, the government can be held accountable.  There has never been a more momentous time to understand the power of protest. This is most notably captured in Percy Bysshe Shelley’s Masque of the A narchy. In this long poem, based on the tragic events of Peterloo, Shelley personifies the immoralities of a corrupt government, such as fraud, hypocrisy, and murder, and calls upon the deflated public to "Rise, like lions after slumber/ In unvanquishable number!" and constantly reminds them, "Ye are many—they are few." Even to the naivest of readers, the battle cry of one of the most famous pieces of protest verse does not sound too dissimilar to the political criticism of modern day. In Ben Okra’s poem Grenfell Tower, based on the eponymous events of 2017, Shelley’s tone is still mirrored roughly 200 years later, noting that "the poor die for others’ prosperity." Clearly then, even in an age as supposedly progressive as our own, "the poor die" as a result of the richest people's desire to get richer, something we can all agree is abhorrent. Yet, we still have learnt nothing. Most recently, the Police, Crime, Sentencing, and Courts Bill of 2021, proposed by Boris Johnson’s government, aims to make protests that cause "public nuisance" illegal, unquestionably restricting any protest that makes too much noise, no matter how peaceful. This is an impediment to our liberty, and it is occurring right before our eyes. The Yeomanry of the Peterloo massacre transfigured a peaceful protest into a bloodbath, and now our government suggests that protestors crying audibly for their cause should be forcibly arrested. The parallels should alarm you. In conclusion, the suppression of the poor is an issue that should never be overlooked. The right to protest is an essential way to externalise the injustice facing the modern working class, and our right to use our voices should never be threatened. Had the Peterloo massacre been taught in schools, this would be unrelentingly clear.

The Life and Times of the Lioness of Brittany: Jeanne de Clisson By Leon Apollo Asher Jones

Before Joan of Arc, there was Jeanne de Clisson. When we think of history, we think of kings and knights, lords and baro especially true when we think of the many wars between the English and French. However, no one person has changed t history for these two countries more than the Lioness of Brittany.

Born in 1300 in Belleville-Sur-Vie to a noble family, Jeanne de Clisson married her first husband at only twelve years old. Seven years her senior, Geoffrey de Châteaubriant VIII had only been married to her for fourteen years, producing two children before he died. This is about as much as we know about her early life, and very quickly afterward, Jeanne marries Guy of Penthièvre, likely to protect herself and her young children. However, this marriage is annulled due to the Pope’s interference and complaints from Guy’s family. In 1330, for the third time, Jeanne married once more. This time to a man known as Olivier de Clisson IV. Their combined assets made them one of the most powerful couples in France at the time, and surprisingly, their union was less about power and more about love. Jeanne and Olivier had five children together. Their first, Isabeau, was born out of wedlock in 1325, whilst they were still both married to their first partners. In 1329, Charles IV of France died, leaving only the English King Edward III as a possible heir, sparking the Hundred Years’ War. Alongside this, in 1341, the War of Breton Succession began due to the death of John III, Duke of Brittany. The de Clissons’ had sided with the French choice of heir, Charles de Blois, to fill the now empty Bretan Ducal crown, as opposed to the English choice. However, despite this, Charles de Blois did not trust Olivier in what would prove to be a fatal opinion. During the Capture of the city of Vannes, Olivier would be captured whilst acting as military commander alongside Hervé VII de Léon. Olivier was released for an unusually low ransom as well as the First Earl of Strafford was freed from French captivity, leading to much suspicion. These strange facts built up and Charles de Blois now believed him to be a traitor. During a tournament in August of 1343, Olivier and fifteen other Bretan Lords were arrested and taken to Paris, where they were unjustly tried and executed by beheading at Les Halles. His head was displayed for all to see, something never done for nobles. Shocked and angered by this, Jeanne took her youngest sons, Olivier (who would later be known as the Butcher for his cruelty on the battlefield) and Guillaime, to witness the head of their father on Sauvetout Gate, hoping to spark in them the same anger she felt. She vowed revenge on the King of France, Philip VI, for the cowardly murder of her husband as well as Charles de Blois, whom she swore to kill. Selling all her estates, Jeanne raised an army. This army was successful and brilliant, attacking many French forces and even besieging a castle and massacring the entire garrison except for one, who was sent back in order to report what she had accomplished. In the same year as her husband’s death, Jeanne was found guilty of treason and all her lands confiscated. Her story does not end there, however, as she appeared to escape justice without much damage to herself other than the land she lost. Impressed by her bravery, Edward III granted Jeanne income from English owned lands in Brittany to fund her fight against her own people.

It is here where Jeanne turns to piracy. She purchases three warships, paints them black and dyes their sails red. This was known as the Black Fleet and her flagship was called My Revenge. With these ships, Jeanne patrolled the English Channel on the lookout for any French ships. If a French ship was unlucky enough to be confronted by the Black Fleet, then it was sure that they would be massacred all except one-who would deliver the news of her exploits to the King of France, just like her first massacre. It is here that she earns the moniker "Lioness of Brittany" and for another thirteen years, she fights. Her own private war is successful. Along with hundreds of ships, she is said to have 'put to sword and fire' many coastal towns. Also, Jeanne was incredibly vital for the English during the Hundred Years’ War, using her ships to supply the English forces, most notably during the battle of Crecey. With the sinking of her flagship in 1356, Jeanne and her two sons-Olivier V and Guillaume-are set adrift for five days. During this time, Jeanne rows non-stop, taking no rest to save her dear children. However, her son Guillaume succumbs to exposure and dies. She is eventually saved with her other son, Olivier and so ends her career of piracy. For the fourth time, Jeanne marries, perhaps thinking her late husband has been avenged or maybe growing tired of the war that had just killed her youngest son. Now married to Walter Bentley, a military deputy under Edward III, Jeanne retires to the Castle of Hennebont, a port town in Brittany. She lived the rest of her life quietly, peacefully, dying three years later in 1359. Jeanne de Clisson is often ignored in the annals of history as just being another woman. However, Jeanne was not just another woman and frankly, the English wouldn’t have lasted throughout the Hundred Years’ War without her. She never managed to kill King Philip or Charles du Blois, but the devastating blows she dealt to them were probably worth all the struggles she went through. Jeanne’s victories were never about showing that a woman could lead as well as a man (even though she went on to prove that point very well), but rather about how the dedication of one person could change everything; for both themselves and history as a whole.

Why the Holocaust is Still relevant Today? By Megan Radcliffe The Holocaust is the name given to the genocide of European Jews during World War II. Between the years 1933 and 1945, the German Nazi regime rose to power with little opposition and, with this rise, came a horrible ideological and systematic, state approved persecution and mass murder of approximately 6 million European Jewish men, women and children in concentration camps. It is important to note that many historians believe that other deaths should go under the label of ‘Holocaust’. These deaths include Romani (then called gypsies), the mentally and physically disabled, foreign dignitaries, homosexuals, Catholics and political prisoners.

The first camp set up outside of German borders (Stutthof) was the last to be liberated by the Allies on the 9th of May 1945. The day before this liberation (8th of May 1945), is known as Victory in Europe day, or VE day, which celebrates the formal acceptance by the Allies of Germany’s unconditional surrender of its armed forces.

Sixty years after the war, the memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe was opened in Berlin. Here, Holocaust survivor Sabina Wolanski noted that, although the Holocaust took everything of value to her away, it also taught her that hatred and discrimination are doomed to fail. When I visited this memorial with my parents, I felt that it was a place of remembrance and mourning of mistakes made in the past but also a warning. A warning to the future generations across the globe of what happens when people stand by and let injustice fester and grow to the point where it has a foothold in the world. It is hard to believe that almost a century later, we are still making the same mistakes. WW2 was a terrible lesson of what happens when we let our differences get the best of us and when we allow one person to decide what is best for us all. After all, as Simon Wiesenthal famously said, “the only thing necessary for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing”.

So, why is the Holocaust still relevant today? Well, it not only demonstrates what may happen when differences get the better of us but also how valuable life is and how it must be protected from those who do not believe that one life can look differently from another. In modern times, it is easy to think that this could never happen again, that nobody could ever murder millions of innocent people simply because they didn’t share the same beliefs. However, institutionalised issues of discrimination still exist. We cannot stop resisting until it no longer does. Part of what makes humanity so special is that we aren’t all the same. You are unique! I believe that the holocaust teaches the vital lesson that we can’t stand by and watch oppressors enforce the suffering of others and, instead, we should embrace our own differences.

World War 2 America By Holly Nash

In September 1940, the United States began to provide significant military supplies and other forms of assistance to the Allies; they did not officially enter the war until the December of 1941. Much of the aid the U.S. provided flowed to the United Kingdom and other nations at war with Germany and Japan through the innovative program Lend-Lease. When the war broke out, President Roosevelt declared that America would remain in neutral law; he made significant efforts to extend a helping hand to countries that lacked the supplies necessary to fight against the Germans.  Concern over the threat of war had spurred President Roosevelt and Congress to approve the nation's first peacetime military draft in September 1940. By December 1941, the U.S. Military had grown to nearly 2.2 million soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines. The armed forces consisted mainly of 'citizen soldiers, men, and women drawn from civilian life, coming from every state and economic and social stratum. Many were volunteers, but the majority, roughly 10 million, entered the On December 7th, 1941, Japan staged a surprise attack army through the draft. Most draftees were assigned to the army. The other seron American military installations in the Pacific. The vices attracted enough volunteers at first, most devastating strike was on Pearl Harbor, the Habut eventually, their ranks also included waiian Naval base, where most of the US Pacific fleet was moored. In just two hours, the Japanese warplanes draftees. Upon arriving at the training camps, they were stripped of their freesand or damaged 18 warships and destroyed 164 airdom and individuality. They were adapting craft. Over 2,400 servicemen and civilians lost their lives. On December 8th, President Roosevelt asked Con- to an entirely new way of living, involving gress to declare war against Japan; this was passed with routine inspection and strict military conjust one dissenting vote. Three days later, Germany and duct. Given Identical haircuts, uniforms, and equipment, they were assigned to Italy allied with Japan, declaring war on the U.S., they Spartan barrack that afforded no privacy were now drawn into a global war. The U.S. was illand little room for personal possessions.  equipped and wounded, now at war with three formidable adversaries; they had to prepare to fight on two distant and very different fronts, Europe and the Pacific. Meeting the challenges of quickly raising, training, and outfitting a vast military force and providing material aid to the hard-pressed allies would require massive government spending, converting existing industries to wartime production, construction of massive new factories, changes in consumption, and restrictions of many aspects of American life.

By late 1942, men aged 18-64 were required to register for the draft; in practice, the system concentrated on men under age 38. 36 million men were registered, and individuals were selected from this workforce pool for examination by over 6,000 local draft boards. These boards, compromised of citizens from individual communities, determine if a man was fit to enter the military. They considered factors like the importance of a man's occupation to the war effort, his health, and his family situation. Many men volunteered rather than wait to be drafted; they could choose their branch of service. Potential servicemen reported to military induction centres to undergo physical and psychiatric examinations. If they passed the exams, they were fingerprinted and asked which type of service they preferred; the assignment would be based on the military's needs. Once the induction papers were signed, he was issued a serial number, and the last step was the administration of the oath. After a short furlough, he reported to a reception centre before being shipped to training camp; recruits faced more medical examinations, inoculation, and aptitude tests. The training camp was the forge in which civilians began to become military men and women. They underwent rigorous physical conditioning, were drilled in military life's essential elements, and were trained to work as a team. They learned to operate and maintain weapons, test to determine their talents, and more specialized skills. Paratroopers, antiaircraft teams, desert troops, and other unique units received additional instructions at special training centres.

Sergeant James J. Barnes (1919-1943) served as a technical Sergeant on B-24D "Liberty Lass" #4123732, 409th Bomber Squadron, 93rd Bomber Group, U.S. Army Air force in World War 2. He resided in Erie County, New York, before the war. He enlisted in the Army Air Corps on September 16th, 1941; he was noted as being employed in a machine shop and as a single without dependents. He was 'Killed in Action when his B-24 was shot down and crashed near Plouarzel, North West of Brittany, France, at age 24. He was awarded the Air Medal and the Purple Heart.

The forces had to be supplied with the uniform, guns, tanks, ships, warplanes, and other weapons and equipment needed to fight. With its vast human and material resources, the U.S. had the potential to supply both itself and its allies. The American economy had to be converted to war production. War production effort brought immense changes to American Life. Millions of men and women entered the service, and production boomed, unemployment virtually disappeared. The need for labour opened up new opportunities for women and African Americans, and other minorities. Millions of Americans left home to take jobs in war plants that sprang up around the nation, and economic output skyrocketed. War effort on the 'Home front' required sacrifices and cooperation. 'Don't you know there is a war on?' was a common expression. Rationing became a part of everyday life. Americans learned to conserve vital resources, lived with price controls, dealt with shortages of everything from nylons to housing, and volunteered for jobs ranging from air raid wardens to Red Cross workers.

How did Fascist Dictators gain a foothold in government, in what seemed to be modernised western societies? By Esther Brojerdi Italy and Germany were countries both deeply affected by world war one, Germany in a much more direct way, and although many predicted there would be great impacts as a consequence of the treaty of Versailles, as Woodrow Wilson stated, “it must be a peace without victory...only a peace between equals can last”, no one would have thought it would be as significant.

The staggering thing was how rapidly fascist leaders - Hitler and Mussolini- gained popularity. The Partito Nazionale Fascista (PNF) and the Nazi party both had no seats in their respective countries 1919 elections, but by 1921 the PNF had 35 and by 1933 the Nazis had 288, but how significant was this rise in electoral support when historians such as AJP Taylor, for example, have referred to Mussolini as a “vain blundering boaster without ideas or aims”. Whether their success was due to failures of the previous governments, terror, appeal of their ideology, or their use of indoctrination and propaganda there is no doubt their rise was convoluted and the main cause is still widely disputed.

In the case of Mussolini, the main effect ww1 was highlighting the serious issues of the current government. The Italian government depended on consensus between multiple liberal parties [transformismo], and as a result, there were extremely rapid successions of ministers- 38 between 1860-1914. This resulted in a weak, unstable, and corrupt government, in which consensus was maintained by the distribution of favours and positions in office. Giolitti who held the position of prime minister multiple times attempted to increase the representativeness of the government by seeking cooperation between the two major parties – Catholic Church and socialists – however, ultimately did not efficiently adjust to mass participation. Mussolini and the PNF and their authoritarian backlash seemed to offer something more secure than liberal corruption. War only deepened the government’s weak image and subsequently served to make the PNF become an even more promising alternative. The war riddled the government with division. the main divide came from the decision to fight or not, whilst Giolitti constantly opposed fighting, many other wartime ministers were in favour such as Boselli. This eventually resulted in a paralysis of government worsened by defeat to the Austrians at Caporetto (1917). The war also weakened the government’s economic base. the total cost of the war was 148,000 million Lire, there was an unbalance of trade and production and as post-war production could no longer be geared towards the war effort unemployment soared to 2 million by 1919, simultaneously inflation had risen dramatically and the cost of living in 1919 was four times the cost only 6 years earlier. This now led to huge demands of the government, the working class wanted to prevent the decline in the living conditions, workers wanted wage rises and even lower middle classes became radicalised. By now Giolitti found all hope of consensus severed, with parties becoming militant in their demands. The chaos in Italy could not be overcome by the current government and as a result, they relied heavily on the strengths of the fascists- a decision they would come to regret.

The new Weimar republic was hit much more directly by WW1 and many of the politicians who were part of the government were blamed for agreeing to the humiliating terms of the Treaty Of Versailles which had been signed by the chancellor at the time. The government had come about as a consequence of the dissolution of the Kaiser's Second Reich and this time is referred to by many as the German revolution. The main aim of the Treaty in the eyes of French Prime Minister Clemenceau, “The Tiger”, was to be harsh on Germany and match the level of destruction and pain they had caused Europe during the war. However, with hindsight, it can now be seen that the treaty was disproportionally harsh and the real intention of crushing Germany was what ultimately left the country vulnerable to Fascist ideology. The treaty included such terms as the war guilt clause which forced Germany to admit to starting war and reparation payments of 33 billion dollars which were set far too high and led to the borrowing of loans from America which left Germany too reliant on the US, crippling their economy during the great depression. By the end of 1919 the republic had set up its governmental framework and many feared whether it would manage to survive. The earliest emergence of Hitler was during an initial period of struggle, between 1919-1923 there were serious issues of inflation; due to the treaties harsh reparations, the mark was devalued and in 1923 there was mass overprinting of money due to French occupation of the Ruhr – an industrialised areawhich saw the complete collapse of the Mark to 16,000 million to the pound. People’s lifelong savings became worthless unless used to burn fires. Through no coincidence during this time, Hitler made his first attempt to seize power in Germany in the form of the Munich Putsch (1923)- his putsch was overall a failure and saw him being arrested and spending time in prison, but it did give him time to reaffirm his ideology and realise the benefit to taking a more political advance into government. Although the government did stabilise both economically and politically briefly under Stresemann. After he died in 1929 and the beginning of the great depression Germany was once again plunged into economic catastrophe and Hitler was waiting for his chance to gain power and this time would be more successful. As the depression worsened foreign loans were withdrawn and the banking system collapsed. As a direct result, unemployment rose to over 6 million in 1932. This crisis also extended to the government as parties refused to collaborate. Hitler took advantage of this crisis, arranging mass rallies, and during the election of 1930 gained 107 seats. Hitler offered stability to the people who had increasing uncertainty around the future of Germany, and as people became hungry and desperate they turned to the parties who offered an immediate solution, or the party who offered what they desired most “work and bread”. Nevertheless, the failure of the government isn’t the only reason for Mussolini’s rise to dictatorship, indoctrination, and appeal of his ideology can also be credited. The use of indoctrination increased after 1935, with the invasion of Ethiopia; in which emphasis was placed on the personality cult. This refers to the way he justified his rule and enabled social and political integration. For example, his appearance was altered to give him a more Roman look. He was portrayed as an expert in riding and fencing, the public was bombarded with slogans such as “Believe! Obey! Fight!”. Furthermore, after 1929 there was also an attempt to ‘Fascistize’ schools, and eventually, racism was openly taught in the classroom. The creation of youth organisations also became an important tool of indoctrination, in which boys were taught doctored versions of Italian history. However, these groups weren’t as far-reaching as Mussolini hoped and were mainly popular amongst the middle classes.

Nevertheless, the failure of the government isn’t the only reason for Mussolini’s rise to dictatorship, indoctrination, and appeal of his ideology can also be credited. The use of indoctrination increased after 1935, with the invasion of Ethiopia; in which emphasis was placed on the personality cult. This refers to the way he justified his rule and enabled social and political integration. For example, his appearance was altered to give him a more Roman look. He was portrayed as an expert in riding and fencing, the public was bombarded with slogans such as “Believe! Obey! Fight!”. Furthermore, after 1929 there was also an attempt to ‘Fascistize’ schools, and eventually, racism was openly taught in the classroom. The creation of youth organisations also became an important tool of indoctrination, in which boys were taught doctored versions of Italian history. However, these groups weren’t as far-reaching as Mussolini hoped and were mainly popular amongst the middle classes.

Similarly, Hitler’s support not only stemmed from failures of the Weimar republic but was also aided through the use of propaganda, indoctrination, and terror. Hitler once said ‘when an opponent declares “I will not be on your side”, I calmly say your child belongs to us already”. His statement seems to sum up the main aim of indoctrination, through studying race theory, eugenics, and primarily Nazi and military history, Hitler hoped to create youth commitment to the regime. In an attempt to spread these messages to the rest of the population the Nazis used propaganda in the form of radios, cinema, and the press. Radio was the main method as it was believed to create a personal link between the people and their leader, Goebbels stated that the main use of propaganda was “to simplify complicated ways of thinking so that even the smallest man in the street may understand”, and simultaneously, so Hitler’s policies could be spread at an even larger scale, radio ownership was increased from 25% of households to 70%. It must also be said that even if this level of indoctrination and propaganda didn’t work and people dared to speak out Hitler would use one of his three strands of institutions that covered all areas of policing and security. The creation of the Gestapo meant that any opposition was quickly struck down and ensured complete loyalty to the Fuhrer through spying, intimidation, and imprisonment.

It can also be said that many people in both Italy and Germany supported the basic ideals of Fascism, being; anti-communist, anti-socialist, and authoritarian in structure along with its promotion of territorial expansion.

Overall, Whilst Mussolini’s and Hitler’s use of indoctrination and fascist ideology played a main role in their rise to power, these tools of gaining mass support would be rendered insignificant were it not for the weakness of the previous governments and parties in bringing stability to their countries. This along with people's general hatred of communism following the events in Russia were undoubtedly the main reason leaders with such backward views were able to gain positions of power. Sources: European Dictatorships 1918-1945 by Stephen J. Lee

The Holocaust; Names Behind the Numbers By Alice Rushton

6 million Jews were killed. Antisemitism. Racism. Nazis. Hitler. All these words sound familiar when we remember being taught about the Holocaust however, what we don’t remember are the names. The names that were uttered by members of the Gestapo. The names that were cried over and mourned upon. The names that were lost and replaced by a tattooed number. The names that survived the storm and still live today. A couple of months ago I was part of a Holocaust education programme with the Holocaust Educational Trust. We learned about Auschwitz and Birkenau and the different concentration camps but, most importantly, we uncovered the emotion behind the Holocaust. The facts and figures were stripped away to give us raw, gripping anecdotes of those who suffered during the Holocaust, including a live testimony from a Holocaust Survivor; Eva Clarke. We learned that there was more to the story than statistics and dates.

Eva was born in the Mauthausen concentration camp in Austria on the 29 th of April 1945 but her and her mother (Anka) were unfortunately the only two out of her family to have survived the holocaust. Less than a week before liberation, Eva’s father was killed, and he never knew he had a daughter. When Eva’s mother arrived in Auschwitz-Birkenau, she was already pregnant, but it wasn’t obvious which is the only reason they survived. She was therefore put to work outside Auschwitz in the armaments factory in Freiberg. She was getting weaker whilst also becoming more visibly pregnant but, in 1945, the Germans began to retreat and started to evacuate concentration camps. They ushered prisoners onto filthy, open-sky coal trucks where they would begin a 3-week journey with scarce amounts of food and water. When they eventually arrived at the notorious Mauthausen concentration camp, Anka was so horrified that it sent her into labour. Eva was born without any real medical assistance and in highly unsanitary conditions. Anka only weighed around 5 stone at the time with Eva weighing about 3 pounds. Despite the conditions of Eva’s birth being brutal, unsanitary and nightmarish, the timing of it was perfect because the camp’s gas chambers had been blown up the previous day which meant the Americans liberated the Mauthausen camp just days after they arrived; this ensured their survival. After they were liberated, the pair returned to Prague where Anka married Eva’s stepfather in February of 1948. Later that year, they moved to the UK and found a home in Cardiff. Eva married a lawyer in 1968, has two sons and now lives in Cambridge.

This story, thankfully, had a happy ending but that wasn’t the case for millions of other victims. The physical and mental toll that the Holocaust took on Eva and her mother will haunt them for the rest of their lives. I really appreciated the opportunity to learn about the personal and intimate stories of those who lived through the Holocaust because it is something so hard-hitting that I had never been taught whilst learning about it before. Hearing the life testimony from Eva herself only made it even more gripping and I was even able to ask her a question at the end about her faith. I was interested to know if Eva and her family had kept their faith after the Holocaust, but she said she never identified much with being Jewish and neither did her mother. It was amazing to be able to talk to Eva first-hand and it was interesting to hear her thoughts Judaism. In addition to the live testimony, we also had a Holocaust remembrance service lead by a Rabbi who sung a prayer in Hebrew. He said, “you can almost know what I am saying even if you don’t speak, Hebrew” and he was completely correct! I don’t know one word of Hebrew, but the tone of his voice mixed with the sombre beat of the prayer brought goosebumps to my arms! It was a beautiful moment of mutual understanding – a feeling I never thought I would be able to have via zoom! Of course, we also learned about the Auschwitz-Birkenau camps which were originally used as army barracks. The camp opened in 1940 and was one of the Nazi’s most deadly concentration camps with over 1 million people having lost their lives in Auschwitz. It was located in southern Poland and was initially used as a detention centre for political prisoners but eventually evolved to exterminate and exploit the labour of Jews and other perceived enemies of the “Aryan race”. When the camp was evacuated in 1945, the Nazis attempted to move around 60,000 prisoners alongside Eva’s mother. The camps were made as part of Hitler’s “Final Solution” and Auschwitz murdered more people than any other concentration camp however, individuals marked unfit for work were never recorded as Auschwitz inmates before they were killed in the gas chambers which makes it difficult to determine how many people were actually killed there. But it’s easy to remember the brutality and the horror of the Holocaust when we often forget to acknowledge to those who were brave enough to stand up to the regime; many people opened their homes to complete strangers, just in attempt to save them from the death camps. Families put their loved ones in danger so they could to stand up to Hitler’s regime. This bravery we see is inspirational; people guarded their hearts from being infected by Hitler’s attempts at indoctrination. Sometimes we feel too tired or lazy or scared to help a friend when they need us most when people during the Holocaust put their lives on the line so they could provide a refuge for total strangers. That proves it is so important that we remember those people brave enough to help because it is a message we can use in everyday life; we should have the courage to go out and help others even when we might not feel like it. There are always a million reasons not to do something but we must remember to be generous, like those who stood up to Hitler.

When remembering the Holocaust, it is obviously important to remember those who died, to remember that we can’t repeat the mistakes of Hitler and the Nazis but it is also fundamental that we remind ourselves not to be a bystander in times of injustice and, even if it is just holding a door out for someone, you are going out of your way to help others which, in turn, can help us remember the Holocaust.

'Man is born free, and he is everywhere in chains': An investigation of the influence of Rousseuist thought on the French Revolution By Charlotte Steven The enlightenment is widely regarded as one of the root causes of the French Revolution of 1789, as royal authority and religion came under intense scrutiny by the philosophes, coupled with a general refusal to accept unproven dogma. One such proponent of rational thinking was Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Rousseau galvanised those who were attracted to the concept of revolution through his stirring assertion that ‘man is born free but everywhere he is in chains’1 in The Social Contract. He maintained that in order for man to unshackle himself from these chains, he must turn to the notion of general will. That is, the will of the sovereign and the collective good of all. He championed the sovereignty of the people as opposed to the sovereignty of the king.

This allusion to the ideal principle of democracy was juxtaposed with Rousseau’s portrayal of the reality as it were at the time, a reality in which private interests prevailed over the common interests of the people. Rousseau then proceeded to deliver a disparaging and vociferous critique of the vices to which kings are prone, asserting that even if the king was not already ill motivated and iniquitous then ‘the throne would make him so’.2 He stressed that society had a right to overthrow such despotic monarchs, and the idea of a social contract emerged whereby subjects obeyed the king only in return for various services that the king was contractually obliged to perform, such as providing law and order, protection from want or outside invasion. Rousseau’s notion of the general will exerted an influence on one of the most influential political pamphlets of the revolution: “What is the Third Estate?” by Emmanuel Sieyes. There is a clear vein of Rousseauist thought in the pamphlet, seen most conspicuously in the line ‘The national will, on the contrary, never needs anything but its own existence to be legal. It is the source of all legality.’ This assertion was clearly inspired by Rousseau’s concept of the general will and popular sovereignty. The influence of Sieyes’ pamphlet was profound, since it tapped into the grievances of the common people and exhorted them to demand a constitution and greater political representation.

This exemplifies the way in which Rousseau’s theorising exerted a direct influence on the revolution, through his influence on Sieyes who in turn provided a ‘a script for the revolution’, and arguably the most influential document of the revolutionary period.4 Rousseau’s influence was not confined to Sieyes, since Rousseau’s propositions inspired revolutionaries such as Louis Antoine de Saint-Just to proclaim in his ‘Discours sur le jugement de Louis XVI’ delivered at the National Convention on November 13, 1792 that ‘royalty is an eternal crime against which every man has the right to rise up and take arms...one cannot reign in innocence’5 which inspired revolutionary action and also reflecting Rousseau’s penchant for the collective will of man, and, more precisely, the collective will of man taking action against despotic monarchs.

Rousseau’s notion of the general will was an integral element of the revolutionary fervour that gripped France in the summer of 1789. This was noted by Eric Thompson, who observes that "From 1789 onwards it [the 'general will'] became a constant phrase on the lips of the Palais Royal orators; it was repeated endlessly in the popular journals and in the speeches of deputies in the Assembly itself. It was constantly heard in the Jacobin Club and in the branches later established by it throughout the country."6 Jason Neidleman even goes as far to state that "The Jacobins' claim to embody the general will become a justification for almost anything they did."7 This further reinforces the pre-eminence of Rousseauist ideas in revolutionary France. A final vindication of the far-reaching influence of rousseauist ideas can be found in the Declaration of the Rights of Man, as Article 6 expressly asserted, "The law is the expression of the general will. Every citizen has a right to participate personally, or through his representative’’ suggesting the all-encompassing and pervasive impact on the ideas postulated by Rousseau; toppling royal authority in favour of the concept of the general will. The writings of Rousseau arguably dealt the ‘ideological deathblows’ to the Ancien Regime, given the distinctly Rousseauist character that infused the revolutionary fervour that was so palpable in the summer of 1789. The other philosophes, such as Montisquieu and Voltaire, also exerted a profound influence on revolutionary sentiment by undermining the bulwarks of tradition and providing an alternative model of power, but none exerted quite the influence that Rousseau did.

References: 1. Rousseau J-J, “The Social Contract” <https://www.earlymoderntexts.com/assets/pdfs/rousseau1762.pdf>

Meyer PH, “The French Revolution and the Legacy of the Philosophes” (1957) 30 The French Review 429 <https://www.jstor.org stable/383864?seq=1>

3. 3.

O’Hara K, The Enlightenment: A Beginner’s Guide (Oneworld 2010) <https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/268580/>

A review of Dunkirk (2017) By Phoebe Woodard

// synopsis and overview written, directed and produced by Christopher Nolan cast Aneurin Barnard as Gibson Kenneth Branagh as Commander Bolton Tom Glynn-Carney as Peter Dawson

Tom Hardy as Farrier [Fortis One] Barry Keoghan as George Miller Jack Lowden as Collins [Fortis Two] Cillian Murphy as ‘the Shivering Soldier’ Mark Rylance as Mr. Dawson Fionn Whitehead as Tommy music by Hans Zimmer cinematography by Hoyte van Hoytema running time 106 minutes release date 13 july 2017 budget $100 million box office $526.9 million

THE ARMY HAS DRIVEN THE BRITISH AND FRENCH ARMIES TO THE SEA. TRAPPED AT DUNKIRK, THEY AWAIT THEIR FATE. HOPING FOR DELIVERANCE. FOR A MIRACLE.

The film follows three timelines - the Mole, spanning one week; the Sea, spanning one day; and the Air, spanning one hour. The Mole follows Tommy, a British private, and Gibson, a French soldier, as they both try desperately to escape the dive bombers and enemy attacks on Dunkirk beach. The Sea follows civilian sailor Mr Dawson and his son Peter as they prepare their requisitioned yacht ‘the Moonstone’ to aid Operation Dynamo and the Air follows Spitfire pilots Farrier, Collins and Fortis Leader as they fly across the channel to Dunkirk.

// historical context More than 338,000 British and French soldiers were evacuated from Dunkirk during Operation Dynamo, between 26th May and 4th June 1940. The evacuation followed the phoney war and the brief six-week Battle of France, in which the British Expeditionary Force (BEF) was pushed back by the German army to the port of Dunkirk, on the north coast of France. On the first day of the evacuation, only 7,669 soldiers were evacuated, but by the eighth day that number had risen to 338,226 - well exceeding Churchill's objective of 45,000.

// execution and historical accuracy One inaccuracy is that the film greatly underplays the role of the Royal Air Force - through the course of the film (which takes place over a week) we only ever see the three spitfires - the three flown by Farrier, Collins and Fortis Leader. In reality, RAF pilots flew over 3,500 sorties during the evacuation, and suffered 145 losses. The belief that the RAF was absent during the invasion, is perpetrated by the fact that much of the RAF’s power was held back in preparation for the Battle of Britain, and that many pilots were occupied in dogfights over the channel rather than engaging with the dive-bombers at Dunkirk beach. The animosity displayed by the soldiers on the beach, however, is fairly accurate and well recorded - AVM Harold Bird-Wilson recalls a hostile encounter between a pilot he knew and an army officer, where the pilot had to fight his way onto a boat after his plane was shot down over Dunkirk. Of course there are other small inaccuracies, such as the markings of the Messerschmitt Bf 109: yellow noses weren’t widely introduced until after Dunkirk. Or that the naval ships used were French ships dressed as British ships - however these were necessary to satisfy the audience’s understanding and Nolan’s instance on practical effects. Stemming from this insistence on practical effects is the most obvious criticism of the film - the emptiness of the beach. The film shows at most a few thousand men when in reality there were close to 400,000; and little to none of the heavy equipment, most of which had to be abandoned. Although Dunkirk was filmed on location, it would have been easy to add the almost 85,000 vehicles, 445 tanks and 653,000 tons of ammunition and fuel that were left behind in post-production, to be more like the scenes in Atonement or World on Fire. Nevertheless, the use of wide shots and empty frames is a stylistic choice that emphasises the abandonment of the soldiers and their bleak situation; Nolan is able to hone in on specific characters’ physical isolation, and utilise their loneliness as a microcosm for the wider population of Dunkirk.

Nolan’s minimalistic approach to a war epic is, however, justified. He says ‘I don’t see [Dunkirk] as a war film. I see it as a survival story.’ – it is an intimate account of the desperation of the British Expeditionary Force. The nine characters present a small but fairly diverse view of all those involved in the evacuation - the audience is able to see their emotions and experiences in detail, and then amplify that stress 400,000 times, to get a sense of the scale of the evacuation. He paints the soldiers as distressed and discouraged rather than heroic - reflecting the interviews he had with veterans who recalled the bleak morale of May 1940. In the book “Dunkirk: the History Behind the Major Motion Picture”, Nolan recalls these interviews - ‘When I look at the scene where they watch the guy walk into the water, I don’t know what that guy’s doing, whether he's killing himself or whether he thinks he can actually swim out. But the reason I don't know is because I think I even asked [the veteran] ‘Was he killing himself?’ and he didn't have an answer’. Even in this simple scene the urgency of the situation is conveyed, and the fate of the soldier is left for the viewer to decide – is he so desperate that he tries to swim to England, or has he resigned himself to death? So here, we can understand why the film exaggerates the little ships’ contribution to the rescue; the soldiers have been let repeatedly down by their superiors, and have ended up surrounded in France; their fate is almost certainly annihilation from Stukas in the air or Panzers on the ground - while it is true that the little ships only rescued about 5% of the soldiers, their arrival is, to the BEF, truly a miracle.

// how the film and score aid the accurate portrayal of ww2

The casting of the film furthers Nolan’s perspective of war being bleak and traumatic: by casting young actors in the main roles, the audience knows instinctively that the beach, (with its constant bombardment from tanks, psychological warfare utilised by the third reich in the sirens on Stuka dive bombers, and lack of food and basic facilities) and consequently war as a whole, is a brutal and inhumane setting for men who are barely adults. Additionally, by calling the protagonist Tommy and leaving the rest of the cast without proper names or backstories, (i.e. Shivering Soldier or Gibson, merely a name on the tag of a stolen uniform) Nolan reinforces the anonymity of war, and how most of its victims won’t be remembered as people, but statistics. By focusing the film on these few characters, he seeks to humanise their experience and immerse the viewer in it, but still remind them that many of the people who died did not die heroically, and will remain nameless. The film’s immersive environment is assisted greatly by the score and soundscape - Zimmer’s composition uses a technique known as a Shepard Tone, in which the pitch of a steady note seems to be rising continually (most notably on the track ‘Supermarine’). This technique heightens tension throughout the film, and is complimented by the soundscape, where ‘the battle appears to be ten miles away, then seven miles away, the four miles away’ as the gunfire gets louder and louder: the audience can experience to some extent the terror and stress this inflicted.

// what can we learn from this film Dunkirk is not a war film - it is a thriller, reflecting the distress and suffering of the soldiers: highlighting their perseverance, yes, but also highlighting the horrors of war. The military aren't the only victims; despite his good intentions George still dies, and the glory that often goes hand in hand with death in war films is absent. Here, the dead like Gibson and Fortis Leader are forgotten, resigned to anonymous, unloving graves. Overall, Dunkirk shows that war is diverse in its experience, but overarchingly awful; and yet a united effort can bring safety and liberation to all.

An Exploration of the Power of Human Testimony By Antonia Wilks The Holocaust is widely defined as the “the murder of approximately 6 million Jewish men, women and children by Nazi Germany and its collaborators during WW2” and whilst this definition is coherent and precise, the statistic of “six million” is rather impersonal and incomprehensible; detaching the suffers from our understanding. However, through hearing the testimonies of holocaust survivors, I have been able to actively connect with these statistics and re-humanise the sufferers. Whilst of course we cannot know all 6 million testimonies, I think it is important to listen to and share the testimonies of those we can, to ensure their history is recognised and never forgotten as Elie Wiesel said, “when you listen to a witness, you become a witness.” Thus, I would like to share the story of Manfred Goldberg and what his experience of the holocaust entailed in this article. Manfred was a Jew, subsequently making him a victim of the Nazis; despite attempts to emigrate alongside his father, on the 20th August 1939, Manfred and the rest of his family were stuck in Germany. Before too long, the Nazis found him and his family, and they were sent to a ghetto in Riga, Latvia. Life in the ghetto was characterised by malnourishment, exhausting work and constant fear: with the Nazis and their Latvian collaborators regularly “purging” the ghettos of the old or unworkable by subjecting them to mass shootings in forests on the edge of the city. Luckily Manfred and his mother and brother survived all of these ‘purges’. With that being said, Manfred revealed that his mother once came close to being selected for death during these processes - he was sent to the ‘live side’ whilst his mother to the ‘death side’ - but before the death group were sent off to be killed, hundreds from this group ran over to the ‘live side’ and intermingled with the rest of the live group. Of course, some of the people were found and brought back to the correct group but luckily Manfred’s mother was not, and until their liberation, Manfred and his mother stayed together. Unfortunately, they did lose Manfred’s brother, and Manfred can still recall his mother’s desperate screams for her child - they still do not know what happened to him. After a series of transportations from camp to camp, he and his mother ended up at Stutthof (this is a camp that is widely understood as very brutal, with a minimal survival rate). However, after a few months, 5,000 people were selected, Manfred and his mother being two of them, and they were sent on a death march and ultimately taken onto barges and toed into the sea. Whilst in the sea, around 25 people were selected daily to be thrown overboard and left to be drowned. After around a week, Manfred and the other people ended up on land and whilst on the land, a British tank coven coincidently passed them, causing the SS guards, who were watching over the prisoners, to run away. It is here that Manfred and his mother were liberated and after around a year, reunited with their father. Manfred’s story resonated with me for multiple reasons. Firstly, I found his experience, of course deeply sad, but also interesting as he did not once come into contact with Auschwitz. I believe it is a common mistake to largely associate the holocaust with Auschwitz and whilst the two are of course closely intertwined, Auschwitz does not solely comprise the Holocaust. As I learnt from Manfred’s story, most Jewish people did not experience Auschwitz. To me this highlighted the complexity and multifaceted nature of the Holocaust with not one testimony or experience being the same. This variety of experiences is something which I believe is important to acknowledge and understand, but which is often not recognised, doing the survivors an injustice and disservice. Therefore, I think it is important to learn about different testimonies and share them with others, to give the people of the past a voice in the present, ensuring that their history and experiences are never forgotten. Moreover, through learning about the Holocaust we realise the impact of human behaviour, utilising a group, like the Jews, as a scapegoat for the world’s problems - something which is still commonly done. Therefore, through teaching and using personal testimonies from the Holocaust, the problems of humanity are illustrated, and we too can learn from our own mistakes… hopefully.

The Deepened Misogyny Behind the Image of a Witch The immediate reaction to the word "witch" would be that of a malevolent, wart-nosed woman, cackling over her cauldron. But this ill-faced perception resulted in the dark history of misunderstood housewives in the late 16th and 17th centuries. For this, we need to understand where this perception in England stemmed from.

James I

On Elizabeth I's death in 1603, she was succeeded by her nephew James I, who was believed to have developed an obsession with hunting witches after his trip to Denmark. By 1590, James had already had his first major persecution of witches in Scotland under the Witchcraft Act of 1563. Several women were convicted of using witchcraft to sabotage and murder him and his new queen, one of whom was known as Agnes Sampson. James’ first victim underwent torture before she was finally found guilty and executed on January 28, 1591 in Edinburgh. Thereupon, the king became increasingly concerned with the threat posed by witches and went on to write the "Daemonologie" in 1597. In his book, he expressed to his followers that they should denounce any practitioners or supporters of witchcraft, stressing the importance of hunting and prosecuting them. One year after acceding to the English throne, he set out on a much stiffer Witchcraft Act of 1604 that would divert suspicion away from male homosexuality among the elite, focusing instead on the fear of female communities and gatherings of women. This law also imposed the death penalty in cases where it was proven that harm had been caused using magic or corpses had been exhumed for magical purposes. Women and their ‘threat’ During this time, England was a vastly patriarchal society, with the lives of women heavily influenced by contemporary beliefs on what they could and could not do. Whether they were married, unmarried, or widowed, it did not matter, nor did the place they lived or their social class. When it came to their independence, choice was more limited in terms of access to employment or trade. However, although many did not approve, women healers became a huge profession as they were hired by hospitals and parishes to deliver central care for those in need, using their own remedies passed down through generations. Nevertheless, this didn’t hold for long until the belief in magic became associated with the healing of these miraculous concoctions. Their solitary, vulnerable status and unusual knowledge made them perfect targets for people's rage and fear, blaming the cause of many natural and man-made disasters, troubles with livestock, weather, unknown diseases, and plots against the church on them.

These wise women were more liberal in their ideas, being closely associated with love, sex, healing, and not following the expectations set by the church and elite. This perceived threat towards established norms inherited the idea that women were moving beyond their expected societal roles, encouraging males to join in. As one example, descriptions of the witches’ sabbath state that if there were not enough women during orgies, men would engage sexually with other men. Fundamentally, the church viewed this subversion as an expression of rebellion against gender identities and the use of demonic magic against educated males. Neither men nor women were allowed to engage with demons, but while men had access to education, they stood a chance of resisting demonic control; women did not. It was believed that this perceived lack of intelligence with their "passions" meant that demons were more likely to seek influence in women and convince them to take part in the unholy practise of magic. Pendle hill

As many of you know, Pendle Hill is one of the most notorious witch trials of the 17th century, and likely the most notorious in England. The legend takes place over the summer of 1612, when the imprisonment of 11 witches and the execution of 10 occurred as the cold, dark dungeons proved too much for 80-year-old Elizabeth Southern (Old Demdike). The tale centred around two families, headed by elderly wise women (Old Demdike and Old Chattox), who claimed to have the power to remove curses and heal. However, it was ultimately sparked on March 18th, when Demdikes' granddaughter Alizon was out begging. Alizon asked the travelling peddler, John, for some metal pins—he refused and walked away. It was then claimed she had put a curse on him, as he soon collapsed, paralysed and unable to speak. From what we know now, John was likely to have suffered from a stroke, but this fear of demons grew stronger than any other option the community had, and so the young lady was arrested. From this conspiracy, panic escalated and a fair trial for all was out of the picture; most of the evidence given against them was based on rumours and false confessions, with the prohibition of calling a witness to speak on their behalf.  Intimidation of women's success Women with both vulnerable and political status seem to draw accusations of witchcraft throughout history, as female success seems to have intimidated the male gender. One example would be that of Joan of Arc, who led the French to victory against the English. She was renowned in France for her purity, cleverness, and faith, but when the English couldn’t beat her, they undermined her ability, crediting her success to demonic means since a young girl could never perform such wonders on her own. Likewise, Anne Boleyn was accused of witchcraft with rumours that she possessed physical marks of the devil, such as a third nipple, moles, and six fingers. These accusations were a savvy way for political enemies to stigmatise her, as it was impossible to give explicit proof that one was not a witch. Correspondingly, women today in politics still take this heat and are depicted as being the classic stereotype of old, ragged women. Hillary Clinton was met with taunts like "ditch the witch" from protesters, the flooding of images on social media and opponents naming her "the wicked witch of the left," testifying that she smelled like sulphur. Controversially, Margaret Thatcher is a fitting example. Like myself, many didn’t agree with her ideology, but whether you liked her or not, she was apathetic, using her ambitions and establishment to state her beliefs, uncaring for those who opposed them; in return, this intimidated many. Overall, we can see how much influence the church and societal expectations have on the way in which people treat women, even to this day. The legacy of the church's worries against the devil resulted in anywhere between 500 and 1000 deaths (90% of whom were women) and left behind the hurtful image we now know as a silly Halloween costume, unknowing of the dark history behind it.

Witches kneeling for James I in ‘Daemonologie’ 1597

Pendle witches: Anne whittle (Chattox) and her daughter Anne Redferne

Witch feeding her familiars

Sources The Pendle Witches: https://www.historic-uk.com/CultureUK/The-Pendle-Witches/ https://www.lancs.live/news/lancashire-news/tale-pendle-witches-how-nine-19195748 https://www.thehistorypress.co.uk/articles/the-pendle-witches/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pendle_witches Witchcraft and trials: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witchcraft_in_early_modern_Britain https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/learn/histories/journey-into-witchcraft-beliefs/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch_trials_in_England https://www.history.com/topics/folklore/history-of-witches

History of women: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_women_in_the_United_Kingdom#cite_note-27 https://www.historic-uk.com/CultureUK/Witches-in-Britain/ https://theconversation.com/the-evolution-of-the-medieval-witch-and-why-shes-usually-a-woman-104861

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/apr/07/cursed-from-circe-to-clinton-why-women-are-cast-as-witch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_VI_and_I#Witch_hunts

History Magazine Trivia 1)

When Was Diogenes Born?

500BC

412BC

204BC

2) How Old was Jenne de Clisson when she Married her First Husband? A)

16 years old

9 years old

12 years old

3) How many Jews were killed in the Holocaust? A)

6 Million

4 Million

12 Million

4) What Holiday does Dia de Muertos Celebrate? A)

Day of the Dead

Halloween

Valentine’s day

5) At the age of 15, which Dance Group did Josephine Baker tour the US with ? A)

Miller Bothers

The Dixie Steppers

The Dukes

6) What Effect did WW1 have on Mussolini’s Government? A)

It was strengthened by the modernisation of factories that were destroyed in the war which created support for the government.

WW1 highlighted the serious issues of the government such as the rapid succession of ministers which resulted in a weak, unstable, corrupt government.

The war had to effect on the government.

7) When Did America Officially Enter WW2? A)

December 1941

April 1943

June 1939

8) How many Protesters gathered at Peterloo in 1819? A)

20,000

30,000

60,000

9) Which Operation Evacuated over 338,000 British and French Soldiers from Dunkirk Between May 26th and June 4th of 1940? A)

Operation Sealion

Operation Dynamo

Operation Techno

10) When was the French Revolution?

1739

1789

1790

11) What were the Pazzis Jealous of the Medici for in the Pazzi Conspiracy? A)

Their wealth, influence and popularity

Their close-knit bond

Their pets

Trivia Answers 1)

10)

11)