Today human cultures suffer nuclear power station meltdowns, rivers of plastics destroying natural environments and petrol fumes clogging cities’ airways and human arteries, but ancient history is full of catastrophes which had natural origins. Those who lived in ancient days were void of early warning systems and international aid was non-existent. When super volcanoes blew, earthquakes cracked and tsunamis rolled in, it often meant the destruction of entire villages, towns, cities and sometimes civilizations. Mega ecological events leave a residue of archaeological evidence on islands and at abandoned farming settlements archaeologists find fragments of human remains which offer insights into how volcanoes, earthquakes and tsunamis destroyed past worlds.
Nyiragongo is an active stratovolcano with an elevation of 3,470 meter (11,380 feet) in the Virunga Mountains associated with the Albertine Rift inside Virunga National Park in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Nyiragongo and nearby Nyamuragira are together responsible for 40 percent of Africa's historical volcanic eruptions. (Cai Tjeenk Willink/ CC BY-SA 3.0)
History has seen some truly monstrous volcanic eruptions such as June 15, 1991’s Mount Pinatubo event, the second-largest terrestrial eruption of the 20th century, after the 1912 eruption of Novarupta in Alaska. The power of volcanic eruptions is measured using the Volcanic Explosivity Index (VEI), a classification system developed in the 1980’s ranging from one to eight, and each succeeding VEI is 10 times greater than the last. The following graphic explains the mechanics of these beastly earth levelers:
At Yellowstone, some scientists theorize that the earth's crust fractures and cracks in a concentric or ring-fracture pattern. At some point these cracks reach the magma reservoir and release the pressure causing the volcano to explode. The huge amount of material released causes the volcano to collapse into a huge crater called a caldera.
The entire Yellowstone National Park in North America is an active volcano and it has erupted with magnificent strengths including three magnitude-8 eruptions as far back as 2.1 million years ago, again 1.2 million years ago, and the last event occurring about 640,000 years ago. According to the U.S. Geological Survey: “ Together, the three catastrophic eruptions expelled enough ash and lava to fill the Grand Canyon ”. The enormous lake of magma beneath Yellowstone, if released, would today fill the Grand Canyon 11 times over
Wrath of the Gods: Historic Eco-Armageddons - History
It has been a while since we talked! Not your fault, but mine. I am hoping to set this right. Over the past 20 years, I have had countless individuals call, email, and/or text me requesting information about a PreWrath-favoring church in their area.
Unfortunately, 99% of the time, I was unable to answer the question in the affirmative. There are not many churches that are conservative in their theology that are not hostile to all other positions on the timing of the Lord’s return, but a pretribulation rapture.
It is sad, but a reality for many PreWrathers. I am so excited that technology has progressed to the point that we can fellowship, pray, and study together very inexpensively. Zoom is a wonderful new way to conference with privacy.
Started Sunday, April 26, at 7 PM Orlando time (7 Eastern, 6 Central, 5 Mountain, and 4 Pacific) we are going to try it out! If you would like to be a part of this historic first-try, then email me and request the link.
The Zoom conference is free and you can do it on your smartphone, laptop, desktop, or TV if it has internet and email attached.
My email is
I look forward to seeing, praying, and studying together Sunday.
Charles Cooper, PreWrathRapture.Com
Santorini and Atlantis: Are They The Same?
Atlantis was an island that the Ancient Greek philosopher Plato wrote about in his Critias and his Timaeus. Plato told of a people, inhabiting the island, who were extremely advanced technologically and intellectually, but had declined morally to such an extent that they angered the gods. As punishment for their moral decline, the gods destroyed them and their island in a single day and a single night.
Plato claimed that this story was passed on to him by the Egyptians and that it was true. However, the location of Atlantis, and whether or not it ever existed, remains a mystery. Just like any other mystery, many people wish to solve it. Therefore, many researchers, scientists, and mystery enthusiasts have sought Atlantis for centuries. Some have concluded that the island of Santorini is a very likely location for the lost island of Atlantis. Truth be told, there are many similarities between Santorini and Plato’s description of Atlantis. However, there are many differences as well.
Atlantis was described as a circular island, possibly larger than Libya and Asia. It also had a concentric circle pattern with a canal leading from the inland to the sea. The island of Santorini is a crescent-shaped island in the Aegean Sea. It has been the site of a lot of volcanic activity over thousands of years. Therefore, its shape has changed dramatically since the estimated time of the supposed destruction of Atlantis. It was devastated by a large eruption during the Bronze Age. It is thought that the shape of Santorini would have been very similar to that of Atlantis before this massive Minoan eruption.
The description of the destruction of Atlantis does sound an awful lot like a natural disaster and, of course, the ancient people that may have witnessed it would have believed it to be the wrath of the gods, as in the Atlantis legend. Therefore, some people believe that the Minoan eruption of Santorini and the destruction of Atlantis are the same event. Are Santorini and Atlantis one and the same?
Plato described the people of Atlantis as an advanced civilization. The island presumably had many community buildings and homes on it. Obviously, any location that could possibly be considered as the potential location of Atlantis would have had to have been home to a civilized community. There is evidence of a Minoan civilization that existed on the island of Santorini prior to the Minoan eruption.
Regardless of all of these similarities between the island of Santorini and the lost island of Atlantis, many people are skeptical. While it may seem likely that the two are the same, there are still many differences between the two and there are educated assumptions that have been made in the comparison. For example, the dates of the eruption of Santorini and the date, given by Plato, of the destruction of Atlantis do not match up. Now, this could be explained by a mistranslation or a mistake on Plato’s part. This is coupled with the fact that the date that Plato gives is highly unlikely. Therefore, many people dismiss his date as incorrect. One must also remember that Plato’s telling of the story is, in fact, a retelling and therefore may not be completely accurate.
There is also the location of Santorini to consider. Plato puts the location of Atlantis “beyond the Pillars of Hercules.” The Pillars of Hercules are thought to mean the Straits of Gibraltar. If that is the case, then Santorini is nowhere near where Atlantis would have been. There are some theories that Plato may have had an agenda when he told the story, so he may have wanted to place Atlantis as far away from Greece as possible. Of course, that is purely conjecture and can never be known for certain.
Another thing to consider is the sheer size of the Atlantis described by Plato. Santorini is certainly not the size of Libya and Asia combined. Anything of that size would likely have been located in the Atlantic Ocean, which would also be “beyond the Pillars of Hercules,” if they are, indeed, the Straits of Gibraltar.
One last thing to consider is the difference between Santorini’s Minoan civilization and the civilization that supposedly existed on Atlantis. The Atlantians were supposedly destroyed, along with their home. Interestingly, not one body has been discovered at the Minoan site. This would suggest that the residents of the island had enough warning of the impending to disaster to vacate the island before it struck. This most definitely does not match up with the fate of the Atlantians.
There is, of course, the possibility that Plato or the Egyptians simply concocted the story of Atlantis to teach a lesson in morality. In that case, Atlantis will never be discovered, on Santorini or anywhere else. Nonetheless, the fact that the existence of Atlantis cannot be disproved will keep men searching for it. Whether for the purposes of filling the pages of history or for the purposes of finding the riches that presumably sunk with the island, the search for Atlantis is a thrilling one that will not likely be given up any time soon.
Analysis of Aeschylus’s Oresteia
[The Oresteia is a] trilogy whose special greatness lies in the fact that it transcends the limitations of dramatic enactment on a scale never achieved before or since.
—Richard Lattimore, “Introduction to the Oresteia” in The Complete Greek Tragedies
Called by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe “the masterpiece of masterpieces” and by Algernon Charles Swinburne “the greatest achievement of the human mind,” Aeschylus’s Oresteia is the monumental accomplishment of drama’s greatest early visionary and progenitor. Considered by the Greeks the “father of tragedy,” Aeschylus, “more than anyone,” according to classical scholar C. M. Bowra, “laid the true foundations of tragedy and established the forms and spirit which marked it out from other kinds of poetry.” The Oresteia, the only surviving Attic tragic trilogy, dramatizes the working out of the curse on the house of Atreus from Agamemnon’s homecoming from Troy and his murder by his wife, Clytemnestra, through her subsequent death at the hands of her son, Orestes, and the consequences for human justice and cosmic order. Aeschylus presents the archetypal family tragedy, the influences of which can be felt in subsequent theatrical depictions of the houses of Oedipus, Tyrone, Loman, Corleone, and Soprano and other uses of the family as the locus for dramatic conflict. Aeschylus points the way by which a domestic tragedy can serve in the hand of a great poet and stage craftsman as a profound enactment of the human condition and human destiny on a truly colossal dramatic scale.
To understand Aeschylus’s originality and achievement in the Oresteia, it is necessary to place the trilogy in the context of the origins and development of drama in ancient Greece. Western drama’s beginnings are obscure, but most authorities have detected a connection with religious rituals that enact the central myths of a society’s understanding of the powers that govern its well-being and its own interrelationships. Greek drama derived from the religious festivals that paid tribute to Dionysus, the Greek god of fertility, wine, revelry, and regeneration, who was celebrated and worshipped in choral song and dance. Aristotle, in the Poetics (c. 335–323 b.c.), the earliest extant account of how Greek drama originated, asserted that tragedy began with the speeches of “those who led the dithyramb,” the choral lyric honoring Dionysus, and that comedy came from the “leaders of the phallic songs” performed by a group of singers and dancers representing satyrs—half men, half goats—who were the attendants of Dionysus. At some point during the sixth century b.c., the choral leader began to impersonate imaginary characters and to imitate, rather than narrate, the story of a deity or a mythical hero. Tradition credits Thespis (none of whose plays survive) with first combining the choral songs and dances with the speeches of a masked actor in an enacted story. As the first known actor, Thespis is memorialized in the term thespian, a synonym for actor. It is believed that Thespis first performed his plays at festivals throughout Greece before inaugurating, in 534 b.c., Athens’s reorganized annual spring festival, the Great, or City, Dionysia, as a theatrical contest in which choruses competed for prizes in a festival that lasted for several days. During the City Dionysia, performed in an open-air theater that held audiences of 15,000 or more, businesses were suspended and prisoners were released on bail for the duration of the festival. The first day was devoted to traditional choral hymns, followed by the competition in which three dramatists each presented a tetralogy of three tragedies, as well as a comic satyr play.
If Thespis is responsible for the initial shift from lyric to dramatic performance by introducing an actor, it is Aeschylus who, according to Aristotle, added the second actor to performances and thereby supplied the key ingredient for dialogue and dramatic conflict between characters on stage that defines drama. Aeschylus was born near Athens around 525 b.c. The known facts of his life are few. He fought during the wars against the Persians in the battle of Marathon in 490, and his eyewitness account of the battle of Salamis in his play The Persians, the only surviving Greek drama based on a contemporary historical event, suggests that he was also a participant in that battle. Although his role in Athenian politics and his political sympathies are subject to differing scholarly conjecture, it is incontestable that in his plays Aeschylus was one of the principal spokesmen for the central values of the Greeks during a remark-able period of political and cultural achievement that followed the defeat of the Persians and the emergence of Athens to supremacy in the Mediterranean world. Aeschylus wrote, acted in, and directed or produced between 80 and 90 plays, of which only seven—among the earliest documents in the history of the Western theater—survive. No other playwright can be credited with as many innovations as Aeschylus. Besides adding the second actor, Aeschylus also, according to Aristotle, reduced the number of the chorus from 50 to 12 and “gave the leading role to the spoken word.” Aeschylus thereby centered the interest of his plays on the actors and their speeches and dialogue. He is also credited with perfecting the conventions of tragedy’s grand poetic diction and introducing rich costuming and spectacular stage effects. Underlying his grandiloquence, Aeschylus produced some of the greatest poetry every created for the theater and used masterful representational stagecraft as a fundamental element in his plays, which helped turn the theater into an arena for exploring essential human questions. “In all probability,” literary historian Philip Whaley Harsh has concluded, “Aeschylus is chiefly responsible for the essentially realistic nature of European drama—qualities which can be fully appreciated only by making a comparison between Greek tragedy and Sanskrit or Chinese drama. European drama, then, is perhaps more heavily indebted to Aeschylus than to any other individual.”
Aeschylus won his first victory at the City Dionysia in 484 b.c. and followed it with 12 subsequent prizes, a clear indication of his great acclaim and preeminence as a dramatist. It is Aeschylus whom Dionysus recalls from the underworld as the greatest of all tragic poets in Aristophanes’ Frogs. Aeschylus’s plays include The Persians, Seven against Thebes, The Suppliants, and Prometheus Bound. Each is a third of a trilogy whose companion plays have been lost. With the Oresteia, however, we have the only intact tragic trilogy. If his fellow Greek tragedians, Sophocles and Euripides, concentrated on the individual play as their basic unit of composition, Aeschylus was the master of the linked dramas that explored the wider implications and consequences of a single mythic story, thus extending the range of tragedy to a truly epic scale. The three plays making up the Oresteia—Agamemnon, The Libation Bearers, and The Eumenides—can be seen as three acts of a massive epic drama that invites comparison in its range, grandeur, and spiritual and cultural significance to the heroic epics of Homer, Virgil’s Aeneid, Dante’s Divine Comedy, and John Milton’s Paradise Lost.
Aeschylus reportedly stated that his plays were merely “slices of fish from Homer’s great feasts.” However, the Oresteia, combining themes from both the Iliad and the Odyssey, is in every sense a dramatic main course in which the playwright attempts nothing less than to explore with a truly Homeric amplitude the key conflicts in the human condition: between humans and the gods, male and female, parent and child, passion and reason, the individual and community, vengeance and justice. The background for his drama is the curse laid upon the ruling house of Argos when Atreus revenged himself on his brother Thyestes for having seduced his wife by serving Thyestes’ children to him at a banquet. Cursing Atreus, Thyestes leaves Argos with his one remaining son, Aegisthus, vowing retribution. Thyestes’ curse is visited on the next generation, on Atreus’s sons, Menelaus and Agamemnon, through the seduction of Menelaus’s wife, Helen, by the Trojan Paris, which provokes the Trojan War. The Greek force, led by Agamemnon, sets out to regain Helen and take revenge on the Trojans, but their fleet is initially beset by unfavorable winds. Agamemnon, choosing his duty as a commander over his responsibilities as a father, sacrifices his daughter Iphigenia as the price for reaching Troy and ultimate victory. The Oresteia considers the consequences of Agamemnon’s act and the Greek’s defeat of the Trojans at the decisive moment of his homecoming to Argos.
Agamemnon, the first play of the trilogy, which has been called by some the greatest of all Greek tragedies, works out the revenge of Agamemnon’s wife, Clytemnestra, for their daughter’s death. Having taken Thyestes’ son, Aegisthus, as her lover, Clytemnestra both betrays her husband and plots to usurp his throne with his bitterest enemy. Agamemnon returns to a disordered homeland in which all is not as it appears. Clytemnestra’s welcoming of her returned husband is shockingly revealed as a sinister pretense for his murder in what critic Shirley J. Stewart has called “a play of distortion.” Agamemnon is shown arriving in his chariot, proud, self-willed, and oblivious to the insincerity of his wife or his own hypocrisy, riding alongside his prize from Troy, Cassandra, the embodiment of his excessive destruction of the Trojans and an insult to his wife. He is invited to walk on an outspread crimson carpet into his palace. The red carpet, one of drama’s first great visual stage effects, becomes a striking symbol of Agamemnon’s hubris, for such an honor is reserved for the gods, and Agamemnon fi guratively trods a trail of blood to his own demise. “Let the red stream flow and bear him home,” Clytemnestra states, “to the home he never hoped to see.” After Cassandra’s prediction of both Agamemnon’s and her own death comes true, Clytemnestra returns to the stage, blood-spattered, revealing for the first time her savage hatred of Agamemnon and her bitter jealousy of Cassandra. Clytemnestra justifies her act as the avenger of the house of Atreus who has freed it from the chain of murder set in motion by Atreus’s crime. Clytemnestra’s murder of Agamemnon, however, only continues the series of retributive murders afflicting the house of Atreus, while demonstrating the seemingly unbreakable cycle that “Blood will have blood.” The play ends with Clytemnestra and Aegisthus ruling Argos by force and intimidation with the renewal of the demands of blood vengeance suggested by the Chorus’s reference to Agamemnon’s son, Orestes, who must someday return to avenge his father’s death.
In The Libation Bearers Orestes does arrive, echoing the homecoming of his father in the first play. Meeting his sister Electra before their father’s grave, Orestes, Hamlet-like in his indecision, reveals his dilemma and the crux of the trilogy’s moral, religious, and political conflict. Ordered by Apollo to avenge his father, by doing so, Orestes must kill his mother, thereby incurring the wrath of the Furies, primal avengers charged with protecting the sanctity of blood-kinship. By doing what is right—avenging his father—Orestes must do what is wrong—murdering his mother. His conflict is dramatized as a kind of cosmic schism between two divine imperatives and world orders, as a fundamental conflict between the forces of vengeance and justice. Orestes’ seemingly insolvable quandary sets the tragic conflict of the entire trilogy that dramatizes the means by which the seemingly unbreakable cycle of violence begetting violence can come under the rule of law and the primal can give way to the civilized. If, as it has been argued, the essence of tragedy is the moment of concentrated awareness of irreversibility, then Orestes’ decision to act, accepting the certain punishment of the Furies, is the decisive tragic moment of the trilogy. Entering the palace by a stratagem, Orestes kills Aegisthus but hesitates before killing Clytemnestra, who bears her breast before him to remind Orestes that she has given him life. Orestes, sustained by the command of Apollo, finally strikes, but he is shortly beset by a vision of the Furies, women, “shrouded in black, their heads wreathed, / swarming serpents!”
In The Eumenides Orestes is pursued by the Furies first to Delphi, where Apollo is unable to protect him for long, and then to Athens, where Athena, the patroness of the city, arranges Orestes’ trial. In a trilogy that alternates its drama from the domestic conflict of Agamemnon and Clytemnestra to the internal conflict of Orestes, the third play widens its subject to the truly cosmic scale as Apollo, Hermes, the Furies, and Athena all take the stage, and the full moral, political, and spiritual implication of Orestes’ crime is enacted. Aeschylus searches for nothing less than the meaning of human suffering itself and the ways by which evil in the world can be overruled by justice and chaos can be replaced by order.
Ancient critics indicated that Aeschylus’s dramatic method was to aim at “astonishment,” and all of the playwright’s verbal and stage magic are fully deployed in The Eumenides. It is said that the first appearance of the Furies in The Eumenides caused members of the audience to faint and women to miscarry. In the trilogy’s great reversal the competing gods’ dilemma over what to do about Orestes’ crime—matricide according to the Furies, justifiable manslaughter according to Apollo—is finally resolved by representatives of the play’s first audience, Athenian citizens gathered by Athena into a jury. The Athenian legal system, not the gods, Aeschylus suggests, becomes the means for mercy and equity to enter the treatment of crime, breaking the seemingly hopeless cycle of blood requiring blood and ultimately lifting the curse on the house of Atreus. Orestes is acquitted, and the Furies are placated by being persuaded to become Athens’s protectors. Old and new gods are reconciled, and a new cosmic order is asserted in which out of the chaos of sexual aggression and self-consuming rage, justice and civilization can flourish. The final triumphal exodus led by Athena of the jurors out of the theater into the city where the principles of justice and civilization are embodied must have been overwhelming in its civic, moral, and spiritual implications for its first spectators. For later audiences it is the force and intensity of Aeschylus’s dramatic conception and his incomparable poetry that captivates. The Oresteia remains one of the most ambitious plays ever attempted, in which Aeschylus succeeds in uniting the widest possible exploration of universal human themes with an emotionally intense and riveting drama.
Little of Oenomaus' past has been revealed. He believes his life was meaningless before he became a gladiator, and thus does not value or speak of it.
Young Oenomaus fighting in The Pit.
As a young man Oenomaus was condemned to fight in the Pits after being sold to the pit boss by Maalok, his face painted white. After showing an unusual level of ferocity and fighting prowess, despite his small size, he was purchased in the Pits by Titus Lentulus Batiatus for eight denarii, during a period of Quintus Lentulus Batiatus' youth. The former took care forging him into a gladiator, encouraging him to find an honorable reason to fight, instead of simply doing so to survive. Oenomaus eventually chose to fight for the purpose of honoring the House of Batiatus.
Trained to be highly skilled gladiator by Titus' Doctore Ulpius, Oenomaus would eventually rise to the title of Champion, and a reward was given: Lucretia's body slave, Melitta, who became his wife. However, unlike many ordered unions between slaves, Oenomaus and Melitta genuinely fell in love and were happy together, even though they were only allowed to be together once a week.
Oenomaus became highly respected amongst the brotherhood. His greatest friend was Gannicus, a Celt, while also developing strong friendships with others such as Barca and Auctus. Also, unusual for a gladiator, he maintained a strong friendship with his Dominus, Titus Batiatus.
At the peak of his prowess, he was chosen to fight the most fearsome gladiator of the age, Theokoles the Shadow of Death in the city of Pompeii. However, this opponent proved too much for even Oenomaus' considerable skill, and he received near mortal wounds at the giant's hands. However, he survived longer than any other opponent to face Theokoles, which the spectators counted as a victory and allowed him to live.
Marcus Garvey (1887-1940)
Marcus Mosiah Garvey, one of the most influential 20th Century black nationalist and Pan-Africanist leaders, was born on August 17, 1887 in St. Ann’s Bay, Jamaica. Greatly influenced by Booker T. Washington’s autobiography Up From Slavery, Garvey began to support industrial education, economic separatism, and social segregation as strategies that would enable the assent of the “black race.” In 1914, Garvey established the Universal Negro Improvement Association (UNIA) in Kingston, Jamaica, adopting Washington’s inspirational phrase “Up, you mighty race you can conquer what you will.” By May of 1917, Garvey relocated the UNIA in Harlem and began to use speeches and his newspaper, The Negro World, to spread his message across the United States to an increasingly receptive African American community. His major audience included the thousands of Southern blacks who were then migrating from the “shadow of slavery and the plantation” to the urban North. Black veterans of World War I were another Garvey audience. Most of them had experienced both French equality and US military bigotry and returned home as militant “race men.” They were attracted to Garvey’s calls. The UNIA grew larger still following the race riots in the Red Summer of 1919.
Garveyism resonated with the rapidly urbanizing black community and spread beyond the United States to the Caribbean, Latin America and Africa. Regardless of the locale, Garvey’s UNIA promised black economic uplift via self-reliance, political equality via self-determination, and the “liberation of Africa from European colonialism via a Black army marching under the Red, Black, and Green flag of Black manhood.” Africa’s redemption, according to UNIA supporters was foretold in the messianic Biblical Psalms 68:31 “Princes shall come out of Egypt Ethiopia shall soon stretch out her hands unto God.” However, it was Garvey’s ability to convey, in his vivid and powerful speeches, the distinct possibility of achieving these goals that led the UNIA to become an organization of millions. When Garvey bellowed, “I am the equal of any white man [and] I want you to feel the same way,” he inspired the faithful and attracted the curious. Addressing the gender question Garvey wrote, “Black queen of beauty, thou hast given color to the world…Black men worship at thy virginal shrine of purest love…!” Garvey even created a new black faith by ordaining Reverend George Alexander McGuire as Chaplain General of the African Orthodox Church. McGuire’s sermons urged Garveyites to “Erase the white gods from your hearts.”
At the 1920 UNIA International Convention at Madison Square Garden, with twenty five thousand delegates and observers in attendance, Garvey issued the Declaration of Rights of the Negro Peoples of the World. The convention also produced the Universal Ethiopian Anthem. The Negro World, the official newspaper of the UNIA, also spread the organization’s philosophy globally. With a circulation of over 200,000 and published in three languages, Spanish and French as well as English, the Negro World was read on four continents.
Garvey’s most ambitious effort was the establishment of the Black Star Steamship Line. Garvey hoped that this joint stock corporation would develop lucrative commercial networks between the United States, the Caribbean, and the continent of Africa. He also hoped that his three ships would help in the return of millions of blacks in the “Diaspora” to Mother Africa. However, because of heavy debt and mismanagement, the steamship line went bankrupt and Garvey in January 1922 was arrested and charged with using the US Mail to defraud stock investors.
Ultimately, Garvey garnered the wrath of African American leaders when he met with the Ku Klux Klan leader, Edward Young Clark in Richmond, Virginia in June 1922. Garvey naively believed the two organizations could work together since they both supported the goal of racial purity. Clark in fact did promise some financial assistance for the UNIA. After hearing of this meeting, however, the NAACP leader, W.E.B. DuBois, called Garvey the greatest enemy of the Negro race. The Urban League called Garvey a “swindler” and black union leader A. Philip Randolph said that Garvey and Garveyism should be purged from American soil.
Various civil rights organizations now mounted a coordinated “Garvey Must Go” campaign. The Justice Department, seeking to discredit Garvey because it felt he represented a threat to colonial interest and menaced racial peace in the US, hired its first black agent, James Wormley Jones, to infiltrate the UNIA. Garvey was convicted of mail fraud in 1923 and sentenced to five years in federal prison. In part, because of a letter writing campaign orchestrated by Garvey’s second wife, Amy Jacques Garvey, President Calvin Coolidge commuted his sentence in 1927 in exchange for the UNIA President accepting deportation. Garvey spent his last years in Jamaica trying to revive his political fortunes and eventually died in London, England in 1940, never having set foot on African soil.
Second book in the series picks up three weeks after the first book ended. The thing is, this series has potential, it does. However, the couple in it is actually, strangely, the thing that ruins the books for me. In book one, it started out pretty good with the male character trying to killed the female character. Enemies to lovers, or hate to love is themes I enjoy so I thought that was what we were gonna get. But Maisy started thinking about falling for Cronus like. less than a week in. In this book book, they are away from each other three weeks without any contact, and bam they get together again and the L word is out there. There was no build up, no frustration, no depth. hell the little chemistry they had in book one was gone here. I felt nothing for it. I even started to lose interest in Cronus. The whole story and its romance just fell flat to me. I see that this is getting to become a pattern when Jaymin Eve has a co-writer. It seems like I can't truly dive in and fall for her males. They need to be more like Braxton. I like a possessive, all-powerful, commanding and demanding. I love a dominant male in my books. It's just a must. But I don't know if it's Maisy or if it's Cronos, or if it's them together that just doesn't work for me. I think I'll just skim the last book of the series, because I'm frankly no longer interested.
The list is long so I've put it in a spoilers tag.
(view spoiler) [→ Maisy ‘#HashtagQueen’ ‘Mais’ Hope Parker (21), main character. A demi-god - half human, half god. A descendant of Selene, the moon goddess. Maisy is the box to contain the deadly sins, and in order to finally destroy the sins, Maisy has to die after containing all nine sins.
→ Cronus ‘Cronie’, a Titan of the Greek pantheon, the strongest of the Titans - their leader. Cronus is the father of time.
→ Rhea, Cronus's Titan ex-wife. She’s tied to the first sin (out of the nine deadly sins). Rhea is the Titan of fertility and motherhood. Her powers are strong, but nothing like Cronus. (view spoiler) [Towards the end of the book Death killed Rhea. (hide spoiler)]
→ Zeus, the leader of the Greek pantheon. The gods are lesser beings that were borne of Titans. Zeus is perhpahs Cronus's son, or Hyperion's (is Hype's).
→ Matt, friend of Maisy.
→ Shauna, friend of Maisy.
→ Narida, a crone (witch) who sister Cronus slept with and… accidentally killed Narida's father. She's the strongest magic user Selene know.
→ Athena, the goddess of warfare, wisdom, and the arts.
→ Apollo, Athena's half-brother and god.
→ Thanatos, the god of death.
→ Heracles, god and enjoys crushing his victims alive.
→ Ares, the god of war, he can completely ruin your life, tear you limb from limb, and he’ll do that just for fun.
→ Selene, the moon goddess. Died a thousand years ago, the same time as the Titans. She used all of her magic in helping the Titans create the box. Later, Zeus killed her for her treason.
→ Crius and Koios, Titans brothers of Cronus. The pair were never far apart. Their strength used to hold up the sky.
→ Hyperion ‘Hype’, titan brother of Cronus who he favored. Hyperion is second to Cronus in regard to power. He birthed three gods. The god of the sun, the goddess of dawn, and the goddess of the moon. He can harness the elements. He can also boost other gods’ powers. Technically he's Maisy's grandfather.
→ Moirai, Clotho and ?, the Fates. The three who weave the fates of the world, sisters, born of Zeus.
→ Asclepius, a healer god who sided with the Titans, Zeus killed him right after Cronus were imprisoned. Panacea, his daughter.
→ Jessell ‘Jess’, a powerful seer, blessed with longevity and future sight. At one time she was Cronus's greatest asset, but she defected to Zeus’s side and was part of Cronus's downfall. Seers thrive on emotion.
→ Oceanus, Titan brother of Cronus who Cronus is not on speaking terms with.
→ Iapetos ‘Iappie’, Titan brother of Cronus who converses with the dead, sees into the immortal plane that exists side by side to Earth. He will hear things the other Titans can’t. He’s a Titan of mortality, lifespan, death.
→ Hound, Cronus's hellhound.
→ Medusa, goddess with snakes for hair who could turn a being to stone.
→ Aphrodite, the goddess of love who's married to Hephaestus, son of Zeus, the best blacksmith this world has. He alone can possibly build a container for the sins after Cronus captures them.
→ Theia, Hyperion's wife and Titan. Their son, Helios.
→ Tethys, Themis, Mnemosyne and Phoebe ‘Pheebs’ (a prophet), Titans. (hide spoiler)]
The Nine Sins:
Were once upon a time gods: the nine gods were lesser deities who discovered that evil was more powerful to them than whatever they were before.
▶ The first sin - Sickness. The world will manifest a virus, or something of that nature, and it will spread like wildfire.
▶ The second and third sin - Turmoil and Strife. One will create disturbances and confusion, and the second will take that confusion and turn it into conflict. This is the beginning of a world war.
▶ The forth and fifth sin - Jealousy and Famine. Those two have always been Hyperion's favorites to destroy. Jealousy doesn't want glory or recognition. He doesn’t brag or show himself much. His power is subtle, but deadly in its intent. A lot of murder-suicides happen when Jealousy is near.
▶ The six sin - War.
▶ The seventh sin - Frost. Frost is more as an ice age, and then that will be followed by a fire that will cleanse the world of all, and then death.
▶ The eight and nine - Fire and Death. At full power, they have no equal. At full power, the world will burn, and every living thing will die.
Quick basic facts:
Genre: - (Upper YA/NA) Fantasy Mythology.
Series: - Series, Book Two.
Love triangle? - (view spoiler) [No. (hide spoiler)]
Cheating? - (view spoiler) [No. (hide spoiler)]
HEA? - (view spoiler) [No. (hide spoiler)]
Favorite character? - Cronus.
Would I read more by this author/or of series? - Yes.
Would I recommend this book/series? - Not really.
Will I read this again in the future? - No.
Rating - 2.5/2 stars. . more
Wars of the Gods - Ancient Wars mod for Total War: Rome II
Welcome to the Official ModDB site for "Wars of the Gods - Ancient Wars" Mod by ToonTotalWar and Bran Mac Born. Here you will find latest news, updates and download area for the mod.
For all of you who are new here, this modification gives you one of the largest overhauls for Total War: Rome 2 game. We have also been inspired by the original Rome Total War game which we pride ourselves on the inspiration, mechanics and game play from great mods such as Roma Surrectum and SPQR. The mod is about Wars and expanding and conquering, but it still gives you an option to plan and build your empire!
Wars Of The Gods is not a College Thesis, or micro managing and nor is it an extension of Vanilla game, It is totally unique experience and we are proud what we have delivered in this mod to our players.
Unlocked all factions for Grand Campaign, Imperial Augustus, Wrath of Sparta, Caesar In Gaul, Hannibal At The Gates, Empire Divided and Rise of the Republic with Traits and Victory Conditions added for all factions. Thats over 345 Major and Minor factions to choose from.
Unlocked Factions for Grand Campaign, Imperial Augustus, Wrath of Sparta, Ceaser In Gaul , Hannibal At The Gates and Rise of the Republic
Over 1500 units added across all factions
Unique AOR (Area Of Recruitment) for many units
Roman Army Major Overhaul
Various BAI and CAI updates to give much smoother, historically realistic and better gameplay experience.
Unique UI, Loading Screens, Unit Cards
Many other features include Graphical and Campaign Gameplay improvements.
Also in September 2018 the mods BAI & CAI have received a total overhaul and the in game mechanics totally changed so that the AI is stretched to its capacity to perform on its decisions on Diplomacy and Strategy.
Here is a flavour of what to expect. AI armies are well balanced mix of units and are powerful and Faction growth with expansion and formation of empires. Also your allies will assist and aid in wars with you, less squalor and more food production, cities are harder to take down as the ai will defend them. Ai will be aggressive and attack you and will grow stronger still as the campaign continues faction growth with improved factions will research more and build up their cities.
Battles in game are also now more creative by the AI when facing your opponents as they will plan there attacks carefully. AI armies keep their formations better and are clever -units will disengage reform and attack your weak points, better flanking, units will counter player moves better, battles last longer. but not too long, units have better endurance and morale, better AP for javelin units. battle will be tough and bloody affairs-do not take AI faction for granted they are not push overs.
The Mods preferred level to be played on is Hard/Very Hard difficulties. Please visit our website which is located in right column next to "Homepage" to view more details and the additional mods we recommend you to use that are compatible.
Experienced Players:If you want the most challenging campaign it is recommended you play on Very Hard Campaign difficulty and use some of the following submods: Harder Economy, Double Research and Building Costs, Total Slaughter or the Super Slaughter submod. Also if you play as the Romans the preferred level is Very Hard as they have buffs in game so that the AI when using them stay in game and do not get wiped out early on!
So that's it for now and stay tuned for further developments.
IMPORTANT NOTE: This mod is only compatible with the sub mods that are listed on our download section or steam sites and any other mods are not supported and will give either erratic game play or crashes in game. We will only consider and offer help on bug reports with the provision that you are using no other unsupported mods, however if you wish to contact the mod authors direct to confirm if compatible, thanks.
On Major updates to mod we advise a new start as some save games will not be compatible, however we will always try and let you know if they are save game compatible. Also on major updates it is always best to start a new campaign game so that you can play with all the new stuff that has been added.
Also please visit our official website for news, updates and Sub Mod downloads: Website
How the AIDS Crisis Became a Moral DebateEven gay journalists and activists abetted ill-informed efforts to link AIDS to promiscuity, Anthony Petro writes in his new book. Photo courtesy of Petro
In 1993, the Reverend Billy Graham asked an audience rhetorically, “Is AIDS a judgment of God?” He then answered his own question: “I could not say for sure, but I think so.”
Graham later apologized for suggesting that the Almighty had unleashed the epidemic to punish homosexuals. Yet the fact that an influential and popular pastor echoed views, however hesitantly, of harder-line clerics reflected the perception of many Christians, Anthony Petro writes at the outset of his new book, After the Wrath of God: AIDS, Sexuality, and American Religion (Oxford University Press, 2015). The book revisits the history of the disease in the United States and religious reactions to it.
Petro, a College of Arts & Sciences assistant professor of religion, says After the Wrath goes beyond most such accounts, which focus on the religious right’s reaction, to include mainstream and progressive denominations’ handling of the crisis. What began as a public health issue, he writes, became a pan-denominational discussion of morality and sexuality. Condemnations of promiscuity, support for abstinence and monogamy, even discussion of gay marriage: all were directly or indirectly touched by the moral debates launched by AIDS, he argues.
Petro faults even gay writers and activists—such as Randy Shilts, who condemned the Reagan administration’s indifference to the epidemic in his 1987 best seller And the Band Played On—for fostering notions that promiscuity was to blame for the disease. “Shilts wrote for a broad audience, and in doing so, offered a gripping narrative,” he says, “one that featured a Canadian flight attendant as the infamous ‘patient zero,’ or antihero, of the account. Shilts characterizes the epidemiological spread of the epidemic as very much a moral failing on the part of this flight attendant, who stands in for what he saw as the problem of promiscuous gay men more generally.”
Actually, After the Wrath argues that it is the type rather than frequency of sexual encounter that puts people at risk. BU Today interviewed Petro about his book.
BU Today:What did you find new to say about this topic?
Petro: I suggest two main points about how leaders of the Christian right approached the AIDS crisis as God’s punishment for sexual immorality. First, this rhetoric wasn’t new. It comes out of much older theological and religious statements that connected sexual immorality to threats to a community or even a nation. In the medieval period, Christian writers reinterpreted biblical passages about the destruction of the city of Sodom as descriptions of sexual sin, namely, the sin of “sodomy” (which would become the sin of homosexual acts in the 20th century). Conservative Christians, in the decades preceding AIDS, worried about an epidemic of immorality tied to the sexual revolution of the 1960s.
The second point is that conservative rhetoric that characterized AIDS as God’s wrath was overrepresented in the media and in national consciousness. Most American Christians, even most evangelicals, downplayed or even rejected the idea that AIDS was God’s punishment. Or they layered this interpretation with calls for compassion.
What was the response of mainstream and liberal Christian churches and of non-Christian traditions to the epidemic?
Mainstream and liberal Christians were slow to confront the epidemic. It wasn’t until the mid-1980s that we saw mainstream Christian writers calling for attention to the crisis in national magazines like Christian Century and Christianity Today. By the end of the decade, though, a number of denominations had issued statements calling for care and compassion for people with HIV or AIDS, for governmental funding to fight the epidemic, and for an end to discrimination against people based on their HIV status and sexuality.
Some of the major non-Christian traditions, especially Judaism and Buddhism, had an easier time confronting the crisis and its connection to homosexuality. These traditions do not have the powerful readings of sodomy as sexual sin that have characterized Christian traditions for so many centuries. In fact, one of the very first public meetings to educate people about what at the time was called “gay cancer” was sponsored by a gay Jewish group in New York City in 1982.
What lessons should we draw going forward?
We should understand how arguments about public health are never just that. They are also arguments about human rights—about how we understand individual freedom versus community responsibility. Public health and politics can work together in productive ways, but such entanglements can also blind us to what can become moralistic arguments about who is or is not part of a valued community and about what kinds of risks we value and which we label not merely risks, but moral failings.
For instance, in the past few years, some dominant approaches to HIV prevention have focused on gay marriage as the antidote to promiscuity, and by extension, to increased rates of infection. In other words, in the fight for gay marriage equality, and even now that same-sex marriage is legal, some public health leaders and AIDS workers have championed gay marriage as a tool to fight HIV. I’m less interested in whether this logic is epidemiologically valid or not than I am in how it brings together a public health argument with a moral argument for marriage (and by extension, monogamy, which it often equates with marriage).
The history of the AIDS crisis and religion teaches us to look at such moments more critically, to pause and ask why it is that this particular reasoning appears more reasonable than emphasizing a variety of other tactics for fighting HIV.