Tag Archives: Lex Talionis

The Battle of Jumonville Glen

24 Saturday Jul 2021

Posted by in Amerindians, The French and Indian War, United Kingdom, United States

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

Charles Willson Peale, Portrait de George Washington, 1772.

—ooo—

The Battle of Jumonville Glen

  • George Washington goes to the Ohio Country
  • George Washington travels with Tanacharison, the Half King

It is difficult to tell what happened at the Battle of Jumonville Glen. First, it was not a battle; it was an ambush. Yet, it started the French and Indian War (1754-1763), which in turn, started the Seven Years’ War (1756-1763), a global conflict and a defeat for France. Tanacharison (1718-1754), an angry Mingo (Iroquoian Amerindian), also called the Half King pressed George Washington (1732-1799) into joining him and attacking a French encampment Amerindians had spotted. When they reached the encampment, it seems that Tanacharison brutally murdered an innocent French captain, Coulon de Jumonville. He stood next to George Washington, thus starting the French and Indian War (1754-1763) which led to the arbitrarily considered last and lost Battle of the Plains of Abraham, and which also led to the Seven Year’s War (1756-1763), or the defeat of France.

Aubert de Gaspé keeps repeating that the defeated are forever defeated and then says, in full, that at the Treaty of Paris 1763 (“trois ans après”), Louis XV abandoned France’s colony in North America. The Battle of Sainte-Foy was a French victory, but the Battle of the Plains of Abraham, a short confrontation, was deemed the last and lost battle of the French and Indian War (1754-1763) when in fact the last battle, the Battle of Saint-Foy, fought on 28 April 1760, was a French victory. “Nonchalant” Louis XV tossed the Battle of Sainte-Foy aside, turning a victory into a defeat. Not necessarily. Coulon de Villiers could avenge his half-brother’s assassination, however, by 1759, could France reinforce its troops in New France. France was losing the Seven Years’ War.

La Nouvelle-France, abandonnée de la mère patrie, fut cédée à l’Angleterre par le nonchalant Louis XV, trois ans après cette glorieuse bataille qui aurait pu sauver la colonie.
Les Anciens Canadiens (XIV: page 321)

[New France, abandoned by the mother country, was ceded to England by the careless Louis three years after the battle.]
Cameron of Lochiel (XIII: 202-203)

Tanacharison tries to return his wampum & the ambush

December 1753

In 1753, the French started to build forts in the Ohio country and were driving out British traders. Therefore, Virginia lieutenant governor Robert Dinwiddie sent George Washington (1732-1799) to these forts to demand that the French vacate. On his journey, Washington stopped at Logstown to ask Tanacharison, the Half-King, to travel with him. Tanacharison agreed to return the symbolic wampum given to him by French captain Philippe-Thomas Chabert de Joncaire. Tanacharison also travelled with George Washington to meet with Jacques Legardeur de Saint-Pierre, the French commander of Fort Le Bœuf. Neither Chabert de Joncaire nor Jacques Legardeur de Saint-Pierre took the wampum back, and the French did not leave the Ohio country, at least, not then. 

So, we know why Washington was in Ohio Country. He had been asked to drive the French away.

27 – 28 May 1754

On 27 May 1754, Tanacharison learned of a French encampment. He urged Washington to ambush the French and Washington agreed.

On 28 May 1754, “[a] company of colonial militia from Virginia under the command of Lieutenant Colonel George Washington, and a small number of Mingo warriors led by Tanacharison ambushed a force of 35 Canadiens under the command of Joseph Coulon de Villiers de Jumonville.” (See Battle of Jumonville Glen, Wikipedia).

I have not been able to determine whether Virginia lieutenant governor Robert Dinwiddie authorized the “ambush” that took place on 28 Mary 1754. But in 1753, George Washington was asked to tell the French to leave the Ohio Country.

Questions: the Jumonville Affair

  • Who started the Jumonville affair?
  • Who killed Jumonville?
  • a battle, a skirmish or an ambush …

In the Wikipedia entry on Tanacharison, one can read that Tanacharison, the Half King, started the French and Indian War (1754-1763) which would develop into the Seven Years’ War, an international conflict. (See Tanacharison, Wikipedia.)

Questions do arise? For instance, who initiated the offensive, an ambush, that took place on 28 May 1754? Was it George Washington or Tanacharison, or was it a joint decision by George Washington and Tanacharison? More importantly, as noted above, had Virginia lieutenant governor Robert Dinwiddie authorized the ambush of an encampment of 35 Frenchmen? In Wikipedia’s entry on Robert Dinwiddie, it is stated that Virginia lieutenant governor Robert Dinwiddie started Washington’s military career. In one of the videos embedded in my last post, George Washington opened fire. This could be the case. In fact, if Jumonville did not have a gun, or, if a gun was not at hand, should Washington have shot at Jumonville? Robert Dinwiddie is credited with having started George Washington’s military career. Not quite.

“Washington was heavily criticized in Britain for the incident. British statesman Horace Walpole referred to the controversy surrounding Jumonville’s death as the “Jumonville Affair” and described it as ‘a volley fired by a young Virginian in the backwoods of America that set the world on fire.'” (See Joseph Coulon de Jumonville, Wikipedia.)

Jumonville Glen has been called a battle and the Jumonville Skirmish, but it was an ambush, and Joseph Coulon de Villiers de Jumonville was murdered. George Washington took Tanacharison to the Ohio Country. However, it seems, that Tanacharison took George Washington to ambush Joseph Coulon de Villiers de Jumonville. Whether Virginia Royal Governor Robert Dinwiddie authorized this second event cannot be ascertained. It also seems that Jumonville and a few Frenchmen were killed or wounded and that all of them, but one, were captured. Moreover, Jumonville may have been killed at Fort Duquesne. When Washington surrendered, if he surrendered, he admitted that Jumonville was assassinated. But, as mentioned above, this may not be true.

In fact, “[t]he exact circumstances of Jumonville’s death are a subject of historical controversy and debate.” (See Battle of Jumonville Glen, Wikipedia.)

It seems that Canadiens seigneurs were the military in New France. Joseph Coulon de Villiers de Jumonville was a seigneur. Seigneuries had been given to members of the Régiment de Carignan-Salières who wanted to remain in Canada. They arrived in 1665. Nouvelle-France was often attacked by Iroquois, who were allies of the British in North America. Canada had its French and Indian War 1754-1763), its French and Indian Wars (1688-1763), inter-colonial wars, and it also had its Beaver Wars or Guerres franco-iroquoises. In the early 1750s, the French were building forts in the Ohio country. Forts were trading posts and fortresses.

François Gaston de Lévis (Wikimedia Commons)

Conclusion

So Aubert de Gaspé comments on the inanity of wars. But in North America, a war was waged that was a tinier war than the Seven Years’ War, but it was absurdism at its peak. Nouvelle-France fell. Jumonville was not a battle, whether it took place at an encampment or in Fort Duquesne, and the French won the Battle of Saint-Foy. I feel as though I were reading an early draft of Malraux‘s Condition Humaine (Man’s Fate, 1933), or Camus, all of Camus.

Militarily, Jumonville’s brother, Captain Coulon de Villiers, “marched on Fort Necessity on the 3rd of July [1754] and forced Washington to surrender.” (See Joseph Coulon de Jumonville, Wikipedia.) The lex talionis was at work: an eye for an eye. Humanity has been avenging itself for millennia at a huge cost. Historically, the people of New France change masters overnight. I suspect that Sir Guy Carleton, 1st Baron Dorchester, who passed the Quebec Act of 1774, could tell that the French, the people, did not have to be punished. It is also very refreshing to read Aubert de Gaspé who writes:

Des deux côtés la bravoure était égale, et quinze mille hommes des meilleures troupes du monde n’attendaient que l’ordre de leurs chefs pour ensanglanter de nouveau les mêmes plaines qui avaient déjà bu le sang de tant de valeureux soldats.
Les Anciens Canadiens (XIV: p. 318)

[The courage of both was beyond question, and fifteen thousand of the best troops in the world only awaited the word of their commanders to spring at each other’s throats.]
Cameron of Lochiel (XIII: 201-202).

RELATED ARTICLES

Sources and Resources

Wikipedia, The Canadian Encyclopedia, & Britannica
Escarmouche de Jumonville Glen
George Washington in the French & Indian War on Vimeo
Jumonville Glen Skirmish · George Washington’s Mount Vernon
Les Anciens Canadiens (ebooksgratuits.com). FR
Cameron of Lochiel (Archive.org ), Sir Charles G. D. Roberts, translator. EN
Cameron of Lochiel is Gutenberg [EBook#53154], Sir Charles G. D. Roberts, translator. EN
Une Colonie féodale en Amérique: l’Acadie 1604 – 17 (Rameau, Google Books)

French and Indian War

© Micheline Walker
24 July 2021
WordPress

The Paris Attacks: a Few Thoughts

26 Thursday Nov 2015

Posted by in Middle East, Paris, Terrorism

≈ 12 Comments

Tags

, , ,

 

DT1971

Prayer in the Mosque by Jean-Léon Gérôme (Photo credit: Metropolitan Museum)

The massacre in Paris has led me to wonder whether there is a solution to terrorist attacks other than strikes. I keep reaching the same conclusion. I doubt that there can be an effective resolution unless it comes to a significant extent from within Islam. If a person is attacked, self-defense is instinctive. One puts up a fight. However, nearly two weeks after the attacks on Paris and earlier attacks, it would seem that, if at all possible, leaders should continue to seek a diplomatic resolution to the crisis as retaliation could intensify and perpetuate the current atrocities.

My reasoning is based on the cultural prevalence in the Middle East, including Israel, of the lex talionis, “an eye for an eye.” I am using the word “prevalence” because humans tend to retaliate when they are harmed.

However, I am glad to see that there is unanimity at the United Nations. I note, moreover, that Ban Ki-moon did not mention a country which was judicious on his part. The wording is “terrorists and ideology extremists[.]”  There are a large number of “ideology extremists[.]”

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has called on Russia and the US to join their efforts to combat terrorism. He told the annual East Asia Summit in Kuala Lumpur that terrorists and ideology extremists must be “defeated in the name of humanity.”

https://www.rt.com/news/323033-russia-us-terrorism-summit/

For the time being, the United States and Russia will not join forces in combating terrorism. This matter was mentioned during French President François Hollande’s visit to Washington, on 24 November.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/obama-hollande-vow-to-continue-fight-against-isis-1.3334325

Retaliation

It is within the nature of retaliation to perpetuate conflicts. An act of terrorism leads to strikes that lead to other acts of terrorism and to further strikes. There is no end to this process. For retaliation to be effective, all terrorists would have to be rounded up and exterminated, which will not and should not happen.

It appears that two of the assailants in the Paris tragedy entered Europe looking like refugees, which has created greater fear of the refugees. Some of the assailants, however, already lived in Europe. There are Isis terrorists in various countries. We will not have a precise account of the facts regarding the Paris attacks until the investigation is over. There has to be an investigation.

In the meantime, a Russian fighter jet was shot down in Turkey. This matter must also be investigated, but it could be an act of retaliation on the part of Isis, now called Daesh.

Radicalization

Given that the West has mingled in the Middle East, we must also take into consideration the consequences of ill-considered actions. When George W Bush entered Iraq, he violated the sovereignty of a country. In fact, mere intervention is often viewed as interference. It may also be viewed as a rejection of a country’s ability to govern itself. Under such circumstances, countries may lapse into an interpretation of laws that has long fallen into obsolescence. It’s a form of résistance.

In most countries of the Middle East, there is no separation of faith and state, which complicates matters. Sharia law is state and faith combined.

“Sharia and sharia law is the basic Islamic legal system derived from the religious precepts of Islam.” (See Sharia, Wikipedia.)

Therefore, heads fall, limbs are chopped off, and women taken in adultery are stoned to death.

“In the Name of Humanity”

Since 2011, nearly five million Syrians have taken refuge in neighbouring countries and are now seeking asylum in European countries. Canada was to give a home to 25,000 refugees in January, but this process has now been delayed. Yet, the refugees are leaving a country that has been ruined.

Moreover, on 21 August 2013, sarin was used against an enemy sect. Among the 400 to 1,200 people killed were several children. (See Use of chemical weapons in the Syrian civil war and the Ghouta Attack, Wikipedia.)

Conclusion

After the Paris attacks, presidential hopeful Jeb Bush, a relative of George W Bush, was ready to enter into a war against Isis. It was his first reaction, one that could change. But…

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/jeb-bush-isis-war_5654d4a5e4b0879a5b0cd82b

Let me return to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon’s statement:

…ideology extremists must be ‘defeated in the name of humanity.’

President Obama is still at the helm and he continues to believe that a diplomatic resolution of the crisis in the Middle East is possible. But, as I wrote at the opening of this post, no resolution will be effective unless it comes to a greater than lesser extent from within Islam. Yet Isis “must be defeated in the name of humanity.”

It must be excruciating for Muslims all over the world to watch Isis kill innocent people in the name of Allah. A fire damaged a mosque in Toronto, which is regrettable. Isis is not Islam. It’s a group of terrorists.

I apologize for not posting for several days. It has not been possible. I’m facing a number of difficulties. The Paris attacks have had a nefarious effect on me, as they have on a large number of people. In fact, I’m feeling quite ill.

My kindest regards  ♥

DT1971

© Micheline Walker
26 November 2015
WordPress

 

 

 

The Golden Rule

24 Friday Oct 2014

Posted by in Canada, Terrorism, The Middle East

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

Le Prophète Mahomet Al-Bîrûnî, al-âthâr al-bâqiya (Vestiges des siècles passés). BnF, Manuscrits (Arabe 1489 fol. 5v) (Photo credit: Bibliothèque nationale de France)[1]

640px-Biruni-russian

Al-Biruni, Russian Stamp (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Today is Friday, 24 October 2014. It has not been a good week for Canadians. Nor has it been a good week for the entire world. Isis militants do not necessarily live in the Middle East and those who do not are not easy to identify. However, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) has identified 130 Isis sympathizers in Canada and 93 are to be denied a passport.

He was awaiting a Passport

When he shot Nathan Frank Cirillo, 24, Zehaf-Bibeau, 32, the Ottawa gunman, was waiting for his passport to be issued. It seems he no longer had a passport but that he was about to be provided with one. He was anxious to leave and waiting frustrated him, which is why he was in Ottawa. His name was not on a list of 93 persons to be denied a passport.

Denying passports is a preventive measure aimed at keeping would-be terrorists within Canada.

However, individuals denied passports may kill fellow Canadians. This question is central to the shooting death of two Canadian soldiers on 21 and 23 October 2014 respectively. Martin Rouleau-Couture’s passport had been confiscated. On 21 October, Rouleau-Couture killed a soldier at St. Jean-sur-Richelieu in what is believed to have been an isolated incident.

The shooting death of Nathan Frank Cirillo, on Parliament Hill, in Ottawa, is also believed to have been an isolated incident related to a delay in obtaining a passport.

The question is whether or not refusing passports to would-be terrorists solves problems.

The Canadian government does not want to let out of the country persons who may join Isis and be implicated in acts of terrorism abroad. However, these would-be militants, may commit acts of terrorism inside their country, which is what happened this week in Canada. Two soldiers are dead and the suspected killers wanted to go to Syria.

Mohammed receiving his first revelation from the angel Gabriel. Miniature illustration on vellum from the book Jami' al-Tawarikh (literally "Compendium of Chronicles" but often referred to as The Universal History or History of the World), by Rashid al-Din, published in Tabriz, Persia, 1307 A.D. Now in the collection of the Edinburgh University Library, Scotland.

Mohammed receiving his first revelation from the angel Gabriel. Miniature illustration on vellum from the book Jami’ al-Tawarikh (literally “Compendium of Chronicles” but often referred to as The Universal History or History of the World), by Rashid al-Din, published in Tabriz, Persia, 1307 CE. Now in the collection of the Edinburgh University Library, Scotland. (Caption and photo credit: www.zombietime.com)

A Lone Killer

It appears the Mr. Zehaf-Bibeau acted alone. However, he had to borrow a gun. Canadians cannot carry lethal weapons, except the police, the military, and similarly authorized individuals. Strict gun-control legislation is viewed as a security measure.

Therefore, who provided Zehaf-Bibeau with a deadly weapon?

Zehaf-Bibeau, who spoke four languages, nearly reached a room filled with members of the Conservative Party. He was prevented from entering the room by Sergeant-at-Arms Kevin Vickers, who killed him putting himself at risk.

Conclusion

Investigators must find the provenance of the gun. Did Isis supply the gun?

The more important issue may be that we are dealing with cultures where the lex talionis still prevails. One goes from retaliation to retaliation for centuries and, occasionally, as seems to be the case at the moment, matters spiral out of control. I believe Jesus of Nazareth’s was the first person, a Jew who lived in occupied Palestine, to  advocate turning the other cheek, probably a metaphor. Jesus spoke in parables.

Many early societies applied this “eye-for-an-eye” principle literally.[2]

I should note, in closing, that the quotation posted on Facebook, by Zakria Habibi of Sherbrooke, missing since 17 July, is from a book written by Ahmad Ibn Taymiyyay, in the 13th century CE.

We definitely need to teach young children always to behave moderately, to respect the law, to respect human life, and to love another. We cannot do unto others that which we do not want others to do unto us.

That is the Golden Rule and the Golden Rule is the same every where. It is universal, and I believe it negates the lex talionis.

Sources

Gun control http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/who-may-carry-handguns-in-canada-1.1135084
 
The Middle East http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/should-the-west-stop-intervening-in-the-middle-east-1.2811177
 

With my kindest regards to all of you. 

____________________

[1] The Remains of Past Centuries

[2] “talion”. Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online.
Encyclopædia Britannica Inc., 2014. Web. 24 Oct.. 2014
<http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/581485/talion>.

world3

Photo credit: Muslim Inventions

The Medieval Golden Age, Al-Biruni and the Earth’s Radius لبيروني و حجم الارض

(Photo credit: Renaissance Astrology)785311596270360493
 
 
© Micheline Walker
24 October 2014
WordPress

The Fox & the Crane, or Stork

30 Monday Sep 2013

Posted by in Art, Beast Literature, Fables, Illustrations

≈ 10 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

4900407892_060b2145d1_b
 
The Fox and the Crane, by Walter Crane (1845–1915)
Photo credit: Gutenberg [eBook #25433]), p. 19
Perry Index 426
Aarne-Thompson Classification Systems 60 (now ATU [Uther])
 
 
You have heard how Sir Fox treated Crane:
With soup in a plate. When again
They dined, a long bottle
Just suited Crane’s throttle:
And Sir Fox licked the outside in vain.
 
THERE ARE GAMES THAT TWO CAN PLAY AT
 
5Cover Page: Baby’s Own Æsop
Photo credit: Gutenberg [eBook #25433] 
(Please click on the image to enlarge it.) 
 

Walter Crane: a Limerick

We are still in the “‘Golden Age’ of British illustration”[i] (see Arthur Rackham, Wikipedia).  Walter Crane (1845–1915) created illustrations for Baby’s Own Æsop (1887), Æsop‘s Fables adapted for children. The above illustrations are examples of Art Nouveau  (curves…). Famed engraver W. J. Linton (7 December 1812 – 29 December 1897) provided Walter Crane with the limericks, which does not mean he is their author. To the best of my knowledge, the limericks are anonymous. In Æsop and Jean de La Fontaine, the crane is a stork. Consequently, these are functions.

As for the text, it is a limerick version of the Æsopic fable “The Fox and the Stork” and Jean de La Fontaine’s retelling. Limericks are five-line poems and, typically, nonsensical, which is not the case with “The Fox and Crane.” The fable has simply been adapted for children.  Limericks can be learned easily and then recited. Their rhyme scheme is AABBA and their meter, the tri-syllabic anapest: two short and a long. Interestingly, the shortened text is inserted in the illustration, suggesting the growing importance of illustrations. Therefore, the limericks have a dual purpose. They suit children and allow for large illustrations.

“The Fox and the Stork,” by Æsop

In Æsop’s fable, the crane (la grue) is a stork (la cigogne) and the limerick, a genuine fable.  It is number 426 in the Perry Index and type 60 and AT type 60.  The following is V. S. Vernon Jones’ translation of Æsop’s “The Fox and Stork.” [eBook #11339]

A Fox invited a Stork to dinner, at which the only fare provided was a large flat dish of soup. The Fox lapped it up with great relish, but the Stork with her long bill tried in vain to partake of the savoury broth. Her evident distress caused the sly Fox much amusement. But not long after the Stork invited him in turn, and set before him a pitcher with a long and narrow neck, into which she could get her bill with ease. Thus, while she enjoyed her dinner, the Fox sat by hungry and helpless, for it was impossible for him to reach the tempting contents of the vessel.
 

preface

Preface, by illustrator Walter Crane
Photo credit: Gutenberg [eBook #25433]
 

deco05

La Fontaine’s “Le Renard et la Cigogne”

« Le Renard et la Cigogne » (I.18)
“The Fox and the Stork” (I.18) 
 
Old Mister Fox was at expense, one day,
To dine old Mistress Stork.
The fare was light, was nothing, sooth to say,
Requiring knife and fork.
That sly old gentleman, the dinner-giver,
Was, you must understand, a frugal liver.
This once, at least, the total matter
Was thinnish soup served on a platter,
For madam’s slender beak a fruitless puzzle,
Till all had passed the fox’s lapping muzzle.
But, little relishing his laughter,
Old gossip Stork, some few days after,
Returned his Foxship’s invitation.
Without a moment’s hesitation,
He said he’d go, for he must own he
Never stood with friends for ceremony.
And so, precisely at the hour,
He hied him to the lady’s bower;
Where, praising her politeness,
He finds her dinner right nice.
Its punctuality and plenty,
Its viands, cut in mouthfuls dainty,
Its fragrant smell, were powerful to excite,
Had there been need, his foxish appetite.
But now the dame, to torture him,
Such wit was in her,
Served up her dinner
In vases made so tall and slim,
They let their owner’s beak pass in and out,
But not, by any means, the fox’s snout!
All arts without avail,
With drooping head and tail,
As ought a fox a fowl had cheated,
The hungry guest at last retreated.
You knaves, for you is this recital,
You’ll often meet Dame Stork’s requital.
 
Jean de La Fontaine
(Photo credit: La Fontaine, ancien site officiel) 
 
RENARD-ET-CIGOGNE(Photo credit: La Fontaine, ancien site officiel)
 

The Deceiver Deceived or “le trompeur trompé ”

The structure of this fable is that of the “deceiver deceived” or “trompeur trompé.” The fox, as host, serves the crane (la grue) her meal on a flat plate. So the crane, as hostess, serves the fox (le renard) his meal in an urn. Molière used this structure in shorter plays (one to three acts) known as farces, as opposed to grandes comédies (five acts). These shorter plays resemble French medieval farces and facéties as well as comedies belonging to the Italian commedia dell’arte, an improvised comic form where the characters were stock-characters or archetypes, i.e. they always played the same role in plays following the same formula, or plot, as in “Harlequin” Romances.

In short, “The Fox and the Crane” is a farce; a trick played on one character is played on the trickster.  It is as though “The Fox and the Stork” were reversed into “The Stork and the Fox,” a mirror image æsthetics.

The Moral of “The Fox and the Stork”

At its simplest level, the moral of this fable is that what harm we do unto others can be done to us. The trickster may expect retaliation (lex talionis),[i] but not of a military nature. So this fable is a cautionary tale. The stork having been fooled by the fox, the fox can expect anything, and it is fooled the stork.  

Yet, what this fable has to teach is an all-encompassing rule.  It is the “do not do unto others what you do not wish others to do unto you.” According to Wikipedia,

“[t]he moral drawn is that the trickster must expect trickery in return and that the golden rule of conduct is for one to do to others what one would wish for oneself.”

Wikipedia emphasizes the universality of this rule (see Golden Rule). Let’s scroll down to the Sanskrit tradition.

“In Mahābhārata, the ancient epic of India, comes a discourse where the wise minister Vidura advises the King Yuddhiśhṭhira thus, ‘Listening to wise scriptures, austerity, sacrifice, respectful faith, social welfare, forgiveness, purity of intent, compassion, truth and self-control – are the ten wealth of character (self). O King aim for these, may you be steadfast in these qualities. These are the basis of prosperity and rightful living. These are highest attainable things. All worlds are balanced on dharma, dharma encompasses ways to prosperity as well. O King, dharma is the best quality to have, wealth the medium and desire (kāma) the lowest. Hence, (keeping these in mind), by self-control and by making dharma (right conduct) your main focus, treat others as you treat yourself.’”
 

—ooo—

 

“In the best of all possible worlds” (Candide [Leibniz], Voltaire), would the stork or crane have tricked the trickster?

_________________________  
[i] Randolph Caldecott, Kate Greenaway, Arthur Rackham, Sir John Tenniel, etc.
[ii] “talion”. Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online.
Encyclopædia Britannica Inc., 2013. Web. 30 Sep. 2013
<http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/581485/talion>.
 

Sources

1. V. S. Vernon Jones, (tr) G. K. Chesterton, Arthur Rackham (ill)
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/11339/11339-h/11339-h.htm
[EBook #11339]
 
2. George Fyler Townsend, translator
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/21/21-h/21-h.htm#link2H_4_0210
[EBook #21]
 
3. Harrison Weir, John Tenniel and Ernest Griset, illustrators
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/18732/18732-h/18732-h.htm
[EBook #18732]
 
4. Milo Winter, illustrator
The Æsop for Children
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/19994/19994-h/19994-h.htm
[EBook #19994]
 
5. Walter Crane, illustrator
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/25433/25433-h/25433-h.htm
[EBook #25433]
 
Crane_toybook  
Walter Crane’s Alphabet of Old Friends
(Featured in the video.)
(Please click on the image to enlarge it.)
 
Walter Crane
Jacques Offenbach (20 June 1819 – 5 October 1880)
Barcarolle, “Belle nuit, ô nuit d’amour”
 
 

deco04© Micheline Walker
30 September 2013
WordPress

The Syrian Crisis & the United Nations

19 Thursday Sep 2013

Posted by in The Middle East

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

1379449220988.cached 

Vladimir Putin

(Photo credit: Valeriy Melnikov/Host Photo Agency via Getty)
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/09/17/mckeon-responds-to-putin-in-the-moscow-times.html
 

Retaliation or the Lex Talionis 

Life teaches us not to let ourselves be provoked.  Indignation has its place, but if someone gets angry, it is best to leave the room and let that person simmer down.  Whether or not he or she is right or wrong, the first response to anger may well be to get out of harm’s way.

Retaliation, the lex talionis, an eye for an eye, is at times applicable.  For instance, Assad may have to compensate the Syrian citizens who have left the country and the families of those who have been killed.  However, in all likelihood, retaliation, i.e. a strike on the part of the US, would, at the moment, make matters worse.

When George W Bush entered Iraq, he entered a sovereign nation.  This was a transgression.  We may therefore be witnessing an instance of retaliation (lex talionis).

Using Chemical Weapons: “war Crime”

However, forces under Bashar al-Assad’s command now stand accused of a “war crime.”  The use of chemical weapons, weapons of mass destruction, is a criminal violation of international law.  Given that Assad’s forces killed indiscriminately 1,429 Syrian citizens using a chemical weapon, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad may have to face the International Court of Justice, at The Hague, as may Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Matters have changed

In other words, on 16 September 2013, when the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Ban Ki-moon, reported that sarin gas had been used, matters changed.  It is now for a united world to act.  A strike on the part of the United States may no longer be the appropriate course of action.

http://webtv.un.org/watch/ban-ki-moon-syria-security-council-media-stakeout-16-september-2013/2676128008001/

US Secretary of State John Kerry

US Secretary of State John Kerry pared the problem down to the use of a chemical weapon, the “war crime.”  In an “off-the-cuff” remark, John Kerry stated that if Syria put its chemical weapons under international control and destroyed them, there would not be a strike on the part of the United States.  The world welcomed this idea, including Ban Ki-moon, the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

The Deal of a lifetime

In the meantime, as mentioned above, it has been determined by the United Nations that Bashar al-Assad’s forces used sarin, a chemical weapon, to kill 1,429 Syrian citizens.  On 16 September 2013, Ban Ki-moon, reported that a “war crime” had been committed.  If it is acceptable to the international community, Mr Kerry’s deal may be the deal of a lifetime for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.  At any rate, President Assad has accepted to put his chemical weapons under international control.  They will be destroyed.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/19/syria-chemical-weapons-bashar-al-assad-tv-interview

The US viewed as “exceptional”

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Fundamentally-Freund-Yes-Mr-Putin-America-is-exceptional-326415

According to Michael Freund of the Jerusalem Post, “America is truly different, both because of its principles and its performance on the world stage.”  The United States has been and remains a superpower, but should the world entertain the notion that certain states are exceptional?  This concept warrants serious analysis.

For one thing, the US’ status as “superpower” has been a burden on US President Barack Obama and his nation.

::

RELATED ARTICLES

Felix Mendelssohn (3 February 1809 –  4 November 1847)
Song without Words, opus 109
Jacqueline du Pré (cello)
 

449px-Mendelssohn_BartholdyPortrait of Felix Mendelssohn by the English miniaturist James Warren Childe (1778–1862), 1839
Photo credit: Wikipedia
(Please click on the image to enlarge it.)
 
© Micheline Walker
September 18, 2013
WordPress

Middle East musings

23 Friday Sep 2011

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 14 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

On Wednesday, September 21, 2011, I expressed a level of optimism with respect to peace in the Middle East.  I had seen President Obama and President Hamid Karzai speak together with civility and the final handshake seemed genuine.

However, a conflict is looming in the traditional Middle East.  On the one hand,  Palestine is asking for nationhood and, on the other hand, Israel wants protection from Arab attacks.

In a recent address to the United Nations, Obama stated that Palestinians deserve “their own state,” which they do, but he added that this can “only be achieved through talks with Israel” (BBC, UK, September 21, 2011).

It may be worth reviewing the manner in which Israel came to be a nation.  Six million Jews had been killed by the Nazis, which could have been a catalyst for the creation of Israel.  Moreover, if they were to be a Jewish State, the Jews wanted to live in their “promised land” and, because of their circumstances at that time, this wish seemed legitimate.  However, this “promised land” was Palestine in general and Jerusalem in particular.

The Jewish tribes had been dispersed about two thousand years before the creation of the State of Isreal, on May 14, 1948.  Yet, in 1948, there were Jews already or still living in Palestine, then under British control.  So Palestine made room for the remainder of Europe’s Jewish population.  Arab Palestinians were therefore displaced for the arrival of European Jews who had survived the Holocaust.

But, let us return to more current events.  Palestinian authorities are now before the United Nations asking for the same type of nationhood that was granted to Israel. Palestinians deserve nationhood.  However, had Yasser Arafat accepted Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barack’s offer (Camp David Summit, 2000), Palestinian nationhood would have been achieved by now, and it would have been achieved “through talks with Israel.”  Prime Minister Ehud Barack’s offer was generally perceived to be generous and just.

Given, however, the rejection of Ehud Barack’s offer, can Palestinians now expect Israel to withdraw from the territories it has occupied since the 1967 Seven Day War? In the mind of a large number of Israelis, this land is perceived to belong to Israel, which is not the case.

Given also, the murderous attacks perpetrated by some Arab Palestinian radicals against Israelis and the subsequent Israeli retaliation against Palestinians, confidence in a peaceful coexistence between Israelis and Palestinians has been eroded.  Not that the creation of a Palestine is a pipe dream, but that Israel needs and deserves guarantees that it will not be attacked.

As for the Palestinians, in the current climate of distrust amongst the parties involved, they need a level playing field in order to deal with the legitimate security concerns of the Israelis.

Providing this level playing field could be the role of the United Nations.  Israel cannot live in constant fear of attacks from Arab countries.  Although both Israel and Palestine deserve nationhood, further bloodshed is unacceptable.  So I wonder whether nationhood for Palestinians can “only be achieved through talks.”

Perhaps.  But to the words of President Obama, I would add that considerable good faith on the part of both Israeli and Palestinian negotiators is imperative and that Palestinian authorities need to deal with its Iranian terrorist group, Hamas, which teaches hatred against Jews, the sort of hatred that can convince human beings to transform themselves into live bombs.

In other words, I would suggest that it would be in the best interest of Middle East countries, including Israel, to promote peace, which would mean rethinking the ancient wisdom of the lex talionis: “An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.”

Rethinking such wisdom would be a concession to Christian teaching, except that Christ was himself a Jew and a Palestinian.

*   *   *

September 23, 2011

Troy Davis: The Lex Talionis

22 Thursday Sep 2011

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on Troy Davis: The Lex Talionis

Tags

, , , , , , ,

The Supreme Court could have saved Troy Davis’s life.  There was reasonable   doubt.  So now two mothers are grieving or, in the case of Mrs MacPhail, attempting to grieve, the death of a son.  The lex talionis (loi du talion) prevailed.  An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth…  except that, in the current case, it was a son for a son, whether or not the son who was executed was guilty of the crime he allegedly committed:  killing Mrs MacPhail’s son.

I watched Anderson Cooper’s interview with Marc MacPhail’s mother.  Mr Cooper wanted to know whether Mrs MacPhail would feel “peace,” after the execution of Troy Davis.

Mrs MacPhail answered that she hoped to feel peace, but will she?  Officer MacPhail, her son, is still dead.  Nothing can bring him back to his family.  And now, compounding  matters, doubt concerning Mr Davis’s guilt lingers and will continue to linger, thus hindering peace.  Therefore, executing Troy Davis is still a tragedy, but a larger one.

Troy Davis’s mother will mourn her son, but it seems unlikely Mrs MacPhail will feel peace.  I hope, for her sake, that she does, but may I repeat that there was reasonable doubt as to Mr Davis’s guilt.

The lex talionis seems little more than sanctioned revenge.  Moreover, what the world may have witnessed is a classic case of scapegoating.  It appears that Troy Davis was the archetypal sacrificial lamb.

What is now on the stand is justice itself.

*   *   *

September 22, 2011