text:
- Just Released
- Sale Bestsellers
- Gifts for Him
- Gifts for Her
- New & Bestselling Fiction
- Back To School
- Bargains
- Christian Book Award Winners
- Bible Study Resources
- Wedding & Marriage
- VeggieTales
- Dove Awards Winners
- Keep Kids Safe Online
- Bulk Discounts on Books & Bibles
Read A Sample
Seven Men and Seven Women: And the Secret of Their Greatness
by Eric Metaxas
Learn More | Meet Eric Metaxas
Seven Men and the Secret of Their Greatness
As most people would concur, the idea of manhood has fallen into some confusion in the last decades. This book hopes to help correct some of that by asking and answering two vitally important questions: First, what is a man? And second, what makes a man great?
And you'll forgive me if I begin with John Wayne. "The Duke" is obviously not one of the seven men in this book, but many men of my generation have thought of him as something of an icon of manhood and manliness. We still do. But why? What is it about him? Is it the toughness and the swagger? Is it just that he comes across as big and strong and that most men aspire to those qualities? Well, that all has something to do with it, but I actually think his iconic status is because he usually played roles in which his size and strength were used to protect the weak. He was the good guy. He was always strong and tough but never a bully. Somehow watching him on the silver screen said more to generations of men (and women) about what made a man great than endless discussions on the subject. Sometimes a living picture really is worth a thousand words. And what we think of John Wayne is a clue to the secret of the greatness of the men in this book.
So this is a book that doesn't talk about manhood—at least not after this introduction, which you may skip if you like, although you've already come this far, so why stop?—but that shows it in the actual lives of great men. You can talk about right and wrong and good and bad all day long, but ultimately people need to see it. Seeing and studying the actual lives of people is simply the best way to communicate ideas about how to behave and how not to behave. We need heroes and role models.
Now, my own personal greatest role model is Jesus. And you may have noticed that he didn't just talk. Of course he said a lot of extraordinary things, but he also lived with his disciples for three years. They saw him eat and sleep and perform miracles. They saw him live life and suffer and die. They saw him interact with all kinds of people, including themselves. He lived among them. That's the main way that he communicated himself to the men who would communicate him to the world. That's how he made disciples—who would make disciples, who would make disciples. So from the gospel stories of Jesus' life, you get the idea that seeing a person's life is at least as important as getting a list of lessons from that person. Yes, sermons are important, but seeing the actual life of the guy who gives the sermon might be even more powerful. And you get the idea that how you live affects others. It teaches them how to live.
Historically speaking, role models have always been important. Until recently. The ancient Greeks had Plutarch's Lives, and in the sixteenth century we got Foxe's Book of Martyrs. The message in these and similar books was that these lives were great and worthy of emulation. Having role models and heroes was historically a vital way of helping a new generation know what it should be aiming at. This is one of the main reasons I wrote biographies of William Wilberforce (Amazing Grace: William Wilberforce and the Heroic Campaign to End Slavery) and Dietrich Bonhoeffer (Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy). By the way, one of the last books that Bonhoeffer himself was reading just before he died was Plutarch's Lives.
So the idea of having heroes and role models has historically been very important; but as I say, somehow this has changed in recent years. What happened?
Part of what happened is that—since roughly the late 1960s—we've adopted the idea that no one is really in a position to say what's right or wrong. So we're loath to point to anyone as a good role model. "Who am I to judge anyone?" has almost become the mantra of our age.
But how did that happen? Well, it's complicated. But it probably has something to do with the Vietnam War and with Watergate. Without a doubt these events helped accelerate a trend toward suspicion of the "official" version of things and of our leaders. Until Vietnam, all previous wars were generally seen as worthy of fighting, and the overwhelming cultural message was that patriotic Americans must do their duty and pitch in and help defend our country and our freedoms. With Vietnam, all that changed. Ditto with Watergate: for the first time in history—thanks mainly to the taped conversations in the White House—we saw and heard a US president not acting "presidential" at all but acting ignobly and venally and shamefully. We heard him use words we wouldn't want our children to use.
So the authority of that president, Richard Nixon, rightfully came under intense scrutiny. But since then, all our leaders have been held in deep suspicion. And we've tended to focus on the negative things about famous people. Every negative sound bite of a TV preacher that can be aired will be heard a thousand times more than the good things he's said. It's hard to have heroes in a climate like that.
We've even extended this idea backward through history, so that much of what we hear about our past presidential heroes is negative. George Washington is no longer thought of mainly as the heroic "Father of Our Country," but as a wealthy landowner who hypocritically owned slaves. Many of us have forgotten the outrageous and spectacular sacrifices that he made and for which every American ought to be endlessly grateful. This is not only disgraceful; it's profoundly harmful to us as a nation. Columbus isn't held up as a brave and intrepid visionary who risked everything to discover a New World. He's considered a murderer of indigenous peoples. It's true that thoughtless idol worship is never a good thing, but being overly critical of men who are otherwise good can also be tremendously harmful. And it has been.
So the very idea of legitimate authority has been damaged. Since I was a kid in the seventies, we have had bumper stickers that said "Question Authority." But this didn't just mean we should question whether authority is legitimate, which would be a good idea. No, it seemed to me to go beyond that. It seemed to say that we should question the very idea of authority itself. So you could say that we've gone all the way from foolishly accepting all authority to foolishly rejecting all authority. We've gone from the extreme of being naive to the other extreme of being cynical. The golden mean, where we would question authority in order to determine whether it was legitimate, was passed by entirely. We have fled from one icy pole to the other, missing the equator altogether. We are like the person who was so wounded by a betrayal from a member of the opposite sex that he no longer trusts anyone of that sex. Instead of looking for someone who is trustworthy, we've entirely dispensed with the idea of trustworthiness. No one is trustworthy.
This is a very bad place to end up, and in our culture we are paying a harsh price for it. As I've said, people need heroes and role models. Those of us who take the Bible seriously believe that mankind is fallen and that no one is perfect except Jesus. But we also believe that there are some lives that are good examples and some that are bad examples. Can we really believe that certain lives aren't worthy of emulation? And that others are cautionary tales? Are we really unwilling to say that we shouldn't try to get our children (and ourselves) to see that Abraham Lincoln is worthy of our emulation and Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin are not?
Recently I watched an old rerun of The Rifleman, starring Chuck Connors. The series ran from 1958 to 1963 and its audience was largely boys. I was absolutely stunned by how the story was clearly trying to communicate what it means to be a real man, a good man, a heroic and brave man. And it was showing the difference between that and being a coward or a bully. This is vital in raising up young men who aspire to do the right thing. But one look at TV today will tell you that this is entirely gone. This book is for everyone, but in writing a book about these seven men, I've thought that young men especially need role models. If we can't point to anyone in history or in our culture whom they should emulate, then they will emulate whomever.
Young men who spend their time watching violent movies and playing video games aren't very easily going to become the men they were meant to become. They will drift. They will lose out on the very reason they were brought into this world: to be great, to be heroes themselves. What could be more tragic than that? They won't understand who they are, and they will have no idea how to relate to women, and they will hurt themselves (and probably some women) along the way. So it is vital that we teach them who they are in God's view, and it's vital that we bring back a sense of the heroic. The men in this book are some of my heroes and I am thrilled to be able to share them with others. I hope they will inspire young men to emulate them.
At the beginning of this introduction I said that there was a general confusion about manhood. This confusion relates to the larger idea of authority itself coming under attack, which we've just mentioned. Since the father has traditionally been seen as the leader of the family, it only follows that if we've taken the very idea of authority down, we've taken fatherhood down with it.
Can anyone doubt that the idea of fatherhood has declined dramatically in the last forty or so years? One of the most popular TV shows of the 1950s was called Father Knows Best. It was a sweet portrayal of a wonderful and in many ways typical American family. The father, played by Robert Young, was the unquestioned authority, but his authority was never harsh or domineering. His strength was a quiet strength. In fact, he was gentle and wise and kind and giving—so much so that just about everyone watching the show wished their dad could be more like that! But of course today we tend to see fathers depicted in the mainstream media either as dunces or as overbearing fools.
There is something vital in the idea of fatherhood and it gives us a clue to the secret of a great man. But we have to point out that a man needn't be an actual father to bear the traits of every good father. Two of the men in this book, Dietrich Bonhoeffer and John Paul II, never married or had children. Even George Washington, who married, never had children of his own. And yet we Americans call him the father of our country. And in the case of Pope John Paul II, the root word from which we get "pope" is papa—father. Being a father is not a biological thing. If we think of the fatherhood of God, we get a picture of someone who is strong and loving and who sacrifices himself for those he loves. That's a picture of real fatherhood and real manhood.
In a world where all authority is questioned and in which our appreciation of real leadership—and especially fatherhood—has been badly damaged, we end up with very little in the way of the heroic in general. As we've said, the idea of manhood itself has become profoundly confused. And as a result of this, instead of God's idea of authentic manhood, we've ended up with two very distorted ideas about manhood.
The first false idea about manhood is the idea of being macho—of being a big shot and using strength to be domineering and to bully those who are weaker. Obviously this is not God's idea of what a real man is. It's someone who has not grown up emotionally, who might be a man on the outside, but who on the inside is simply an insecure and selfish boy.
The second false choice is to be emasculated—to essentially turn away from your masculinity and to pretend that there is no real difference between men and women. Your strength as a man has no purpose, so being strong isn't even a good thing.
God's idea of manhood is something else entirely. It has nothing to do with the two false ideas of either being macho or being emasculated. The Bible says that God made us in his image, male and female, and it celebrates masculinity and femininity. And it celebrates the differences between them. Those differences were God's idea. For one thing, the Bible says that men are generally stronger than women, and of course Saint Peter famously—or infamously—describes women as "the weaker sex." But God's idea of making men strong was so that they would use that strength to protect women and children and anyone else. There's something heroic in that. Male strength is a gift from God, and like all gifts from God, it's always and everywhere meant to be used to bless others. In Genesis 12:1–3, God tells Abraham that he will bless him so that Abraham can bless others. All blessings and every gift—and strength is a gift—are God's gifts, to be used for his purposes, which means to bless others. So men are meant to use their strength to protect and bless those who are weaker. That can mean other men who need help or it can mean women and children. True strength is always strength given over to God's purposes.
But because men have sometimes used their strength selfishly, there has been a backlash against the whole idea of masculine strength. It has been seen—and portrayed—as something negative. If you buy into that idea, then you realize the only way to deal with it is to work against it, to try to weaken men, because whatever strength they have will be used to harm others. This leads to the emasculated idea of men. Strength is denigrated because it can be used for ill. So we live in a culture where strength is feared and where there is a sense that—to protect the weak—strength itself must be weakened. When this happens, the heroic and true nature of strength is much forgotten. It leads to a world of men who aren't really men. Instead they are just two kinds of boys: boasting, loudmouthed bullies or soft, emasculated pseudo-men. Women feel that they must be "empowered" and must never rely on men for strength. It's a lot like a socialistic idea, where "power" and "strength" are redistributed—taken away from men and given to women, to even things out. Of course it doesn't work that way. Everyone loses.
The knight in shining armor who does all he can to protect others, the gentleman who lays down his cloak or opens a door for a lady—these are Christian ideals of manliness. Jesus said that he who would lead must be the servant of all. It's the biblical idea of servant leadership. The true leader gives himself to the people he leads. The good shepherd lays down his life for his sheep. Jesus washed the feet of the disciples. Jesus died for those he loves. That is God's idea of strength and leadership and blessing. It's something to be used in the service of others. So God's idea of masculine strength gives us the idea of a chivalrous gentleman toward women, not a bully or someone who sees no difference between himself and them.
Last summer, there was a terrible shooting at a movie theater. Twelve people who had gone to a midnight showing of the most recent Batman movie were senselessly murdered by what can only be described as a madman. But of all the things that have been said about this tragic event, what struck me more than anything was that three young men died protecting their girlfriends from the madman's bullets. Something caused them to risk losing their lives for a young woman.Why did they do that? What does that say about manhood?
In the killer, you have a perfect picture of evil, which is the opposite of love. It is a picture of someone using power (in this case his firearm) to destroy, to harm. But in the three young men, you have a picture of strength expressed as love, which is the opposite of evil. You see men using their power and their strength to protect. In the case of the first you see someone doing something that is unfathomably selfish, someone who seems to see no value in others, and whose actions reflect that judgment. In the second you see three men doing something that is unfathomably selfless. Why did they use their strength and power to help someone else? What was that instinct, and why did they follow it?
The stories in this book are the stories of men who followed that latter path, who seemed to know that at the heart of what it is to be a man is that idea of being selfless, of putting your greatest strength at God's disposal, and of sometimes surrendering something that is yours for a larger purpose—of giving what is yours in the service of others.
I was an English major in college, and now I'm a writer—so I hope you won't mind a brief etymological digression. It doesn't matter if you don't know exactly what that is, but the point I want to make is very important.
We say that the selfless acts of those men in the movie theater—and the selfless acts of most people everywhere—are courageous. Strength in the service of others is courageous. But did you know that the word courage comes from the Latin cor, which means "heart"? So to have courage simply means to have "heart." Of course the Bible often exhorts people to "take heart" or to "be of good courage." The meaning is effectively the same. So to have heart means to have courage. This is God's idea of strength, to have a heart like a lion. A man who has heart can be described as lionhearted.
You may notice that the false macho idea of manliness sees having "heart" as a weak, soft thing. It misses the true idea of what it is to have heart. Instead, the false macho concept of manhood substitutes having something else. Hint: it starts with a "b." Second hint: the Spanish word is cojones. But notice that this concept of manhood reduces God's idea of a noble and heroic man to a sexual level. It puts us in mind of apes and goats, but not of lions. Did you ever read theC. S. Lewis essay titled "Men Without Chests"? Lewis understood that large-hearted men, men "with chests," were real men. It's about having a chest and a heart. Until we realize that God is concerned with the size of our hearts and not that of our genital apparati, we can never understand God's idea of true masculinity.
So what is "heart"? It's courage, but courage to do what? The courage to do the right thing when all else tells you not to do it. The courage to rise above your surroundings and circumstances. The courage to be God's idea of a real man and to give of yourself for others when it costs you to do so and when everything tells you to look out for yourself first.
Anyone reading this book must wonder why I chose these seven men. Of course this is not a definitive list. There is great subjectivity in these choices. There are many, many more whom I would have liked to include and whom I hope to include in future volumes. But in this first volume I was looking for seven men who had all evinced one particular quality: that of surrendering themselves to a higher purpose, of giving something away that they might have kept. All of them did this in one way or another. Doing this is noble and admirable, and it takes courage and it usually takes faith. Each of the seven men in this book have that quality.
Let me explain briefly what I mean for each of them.
As you'll soon see when you read about him, George Washington (1732–1799) once voluntarily gave up extraordinary power. He actually could have become a king, when being a king really meant something; but he selflessly refused the honor. Such a sacrifice is almost unfathomable to us today. But Washington knew there was something even greater than power. To do the noble thing, the heroic thing, the right thing—for him, that was greater than becoming powerful. He surrendered all that power for the sake of something nobler: he did it for the sake of his new country and for millions yet to be born. If he hadn't done it, that country might not have lasted very long. So anyone who is an American is a direct beneficiary of what this great man did. This is not hyperbole. What he did affected you, personally. He gave up a sure thing to do the right thing, and today he is deservedly regarded to be one of the greatest heroes in the history of the world.
Similarly, William Wilberforce (1759–1833) gave up the chance to be prime minister of England. Many have said that he "put principle above party" and gave up becoming prime minister. But for what did he surrender the prize of that office? He gave it up for a cause that to him was far greater than becoming the leader of the greatest empire in the world at that time. He gave up his life for the sake of African slaves, people who could give him nothing in return. But Wilberforce knew that what God had given up for him was far greater, so he did what he did for the Africans he would never meet, and for God.
This man's conversion to the Christian faith changed everything for him. Suddenly he saw everything differently. Suddenly he realized that everything he had been given—wealth and power and influence and connections and intelligence and a gift of oratory—was a gift from God. And he realized that it was a gift to be used for others. The choice was his, of course, but when you really know that God has given you something for others, it's hard not to use it for others. Wilberforce knew that taking everything he had been given and using it to improve the lives of others was the very reason he had been born. And by devoting himself to this for five decades of his life, he became one of the most important human beings who ever lived. He changed the world in a way that would have been unthinkable at the time.
The 1982 movie Chariots of Fire tells the story of Eric Liddell (1902–1945) who gave up the acclaim of millions to honor God. It is one of the most extraordinary stories in the history of sports. But it doesn't involve any athletic action. In fact, it involves deliberate athletic non-action. It was the historic decision by a devoutly Christian young man to forgo the one thing that everyone said he should want—and deserved—namely, the opportunity to win an Olympic gold medal in the one event in which he was most likely to win it. But God came first, and Liddell surrendered his best chance for Olympic gold. And, as you'll discover, that's only half of his story.
Then there is the brilliant and heroic German pastor and theologianDietrich Bonhoeffer (1906–1945), who courageously defied the Nazis and surrendered his freedom and safety time and time again. He did that most notably in 1939 when he made the fateful decision to leave the safety of America to return to Germany, simply because he felt that was what God wanted him to do. Ultimately, he gave up his life. His willingness to do that has inspired countless people to do the right thing in thousands of situations, and Bonhoeffer's story is inspiring them still.
Jackie Robinson (1919–1972) was given the opportunity to do something historic when he was chosen to be the man who broke the so-called color barrier in professional baseball. But in order to do this, he had to surrender something very few men would have the strength to surrender: he would have to give up the right to fight back against some of the most vicious insults against his race that anyone has ever heard. It must have taken superhuman effort, but with faith in God, and with a desire to bless unknown millions who would have the opportunity to follow in his footsteps, he did just that. He made a great sacrifice for people he would never meet. He thought of his wife and his children, whom he knew, but he also thought of all the others who would benefit from his doing the right thing, and he suffered greatly to do what he did. Because of his courage and heroism, he is in this book of great men.
Karol Wojtyla—whom we know as Pope John Paul II (1920–2005)—surrendered his whole life to God in what many would think of as the most typical way: he became a priest and decided to serve God. He became a bishop, an archbishop, a cardinal, and finally, in 1978, the pope. But he was not an ambitious man. He wasn't in it for the power. He gave up his right to himself. He even gave up his right to dignity. When he grew old, he went before the whole world as a picture of a man weakened by Parkinson's disease, but who nonetheless courageously continued to appear before the world, even in that weakened state. As a result, he showed in his own life what he professed with his words, that a human being is sacred in God's eyes. Even in our weakened state, and especially in our weakened state, we are children of God. He was a picture of courage and of heroic consistency, a man who practiced what he preached.
The one man in this book I had the privilege to know personally was Chuck Colson (1931–2012). In the beginning of his life, Chuck was a man who was not exactly headed for inclusion in a book like this one. He was tremendously ambitious, but he seemed to seek power for its own sake, or for his own sake. Eventually he amassed a tremendous amount of it, as special counsel to the president of the United States, Richard Nixon. This was a heady thing for a man not yet forty, and what he did with that power was his great undoing. But when, in the scandal of Watergate, that power was finally stripped from him, Chuck Colson found the real reason for his life and for life in general. And when his role in Watergate threatened to send him to prison, he didn't blink. His faith was so strong that he knew the only thing to do was to trust God so completely that it would look crazy to the rest of the world. And it did look crazy. But he didn't care about what anyone thought—except God. He was playing to the proverbial audience of One and he refused a plea bargain that would have made his life much easier during that time. Then he voluntarily pled guilty when he didn't have to—and went to prison as a result. But he knew that when you give everything to God, only then are you truly free. His is a true picture of greatness for all of us.
In my humble estimation, the men in this book are some of the greatest men who have ever lived. So if you get to know their stories, your life will be immeasurably richer. It is my fondest hope that these short biographies would lead you to read longer biographies of these great men. I hope you would want to study these lives—and not just study them but emulate them. It is my prayer that those who read this book would be inspired to become real heroes, to become great men in their own generation.
You may read the seven stories of these seven men in the chronological order in which they appear here, or you might skip around. It doesn't matter. These chapters can stand alone as well as they can stand together.
Seven Women and the Secret of Their Greatness
Joan of Arc
Even to those who know it well, the story of the woman called Joan of Arc is an enigma. I knew little about her until I saw the landmark silent film The Passion of Joan of Arc some years ago. But after seeing the film and reading more about her, I quickly understood that her character and her exploits were so extraordinary as to be almost beyond belief. They are certainly without equal. But what are we to make of this woman? Those who would make her out to be an early feminist, or a religious fanatic, or a lunatic subject to strange delusions may be forgiven their confusion, because — although she was none of those things — her life stands well apart from all others. She was so pure and so brave and so singular in her faith and obedience to God that, perhaps like Francis of Assisi or even like Jesus himself, she challenges many of our deepest assumptions about what a life can be.
To get a sense of who Joan of Arc was, imagine a teenage farm girl entering the halls of the Pentagon in Washington, DC, and forcefully demanding to see the secretary of defense, saying that God had given her a plan to end all terrorism aimed at the United States and her allies, and all she required was an army of soldiers with weapons. Most people would sensibly assume such a young woman was mentally ill or perhaps simply extremely naive. The last thing we would imagine is that she was actually sent by God, and that everything she said was true and would come to pass precisely as she said it would. But this was approximately the scenario that faced French military and political figures in 1429, when a humble, uneducated seventeen-year-old girl from a small village appeared before them.
In order to appreciate what this girl was proposing, we have to understand the situation in France at that time. The war that came to be known as the Hundred Years War had been raging on and off since 1337. The English, having taken over vast tracts of France by 1429, were winning, and they now hoped to literally crown their efforts by putting an English king on the French throne. At the time, this practically seemed a fait accompli. But Joan innocently and forcefully explained to French officials that she had been sent by God to drive the English out of the great city of Orléans. What's more, she claimed that she would ensure that the proper Frenchman — Charles VII — was crowned king of France! Taking her seriously was out of the question; and yet somehow, in the end, the befuddled and desperate leaders of France did just that. They had run out of sensible options and knew they had nothing to lose. But far less bizarre than their taking her seriously is the fact that she would actually succeed in everything she said she would do. It is preposterous to consider, and yet history records that it happened.* * *
Jeanne d'Arc — or Joan of Arc, as she is called in English — was called Jeanette by her parents. She was born in 1412 into a peasant family in Domrémy, a village in northeastern France. With her parents and four siblings, she lived in a simple stone house next to the village church.
Like most peasant girls of that time, when she was old enough Joan helped her father, Jacques, in the fields. She also took care of the family's animals, weeded the vegetable garden, and helped her mother in the house. She is said to have especially enjoyed weaving and spinning. Joan was never taught to read or write, but she had a passionate interest in the church and in God. At an early age, she prayed frequently and fervently. Long after her death her childhood companions remembered how they had teased their friend for her piety.
Life was precarious for the citizens of France. The Hundred Years War had been the agonizing backdrop of their lives for as long as anyone could remember. The English firmly believed that France should be part of England, and because of much intermarrying between the royal families of England and France, the line of succession was unclear.
The confusion started around 1392, when the French began hearing rumors that the man they considered the rightful king of France, Charles VI, was suffering bouts of madness. His uncle, Philip the Good (so-called), seized the reins of the kingdom. He and Charles's unpleasant wife, Queen Isabeau, were attempting to end the war in a way that was handsomely profitable to themselves and to England, but decidedly detrimental to France.
Philip was also the powerful Duke of Burgundy, whose lands — constituting a considerable portion of France — were under English control. He wanted France to give in to English demands in order to stop the endless fighting. Queen Isabeau went along with this plan and wheedled her mentally compromised husband into signing the Treaty of Troyes. This treaty gave Charles VI the right to rule France during his lifetime, but upon his death, Henry V of England would rule both countries. To make the provisions of the treaty more palatable, Henry V married Princess Catherine, the daughter of Charles VI and Queen Isabeau, so any children they had would be half-French.
It all might have worked, but for one person: Princess Catherine's younger brother, the crown prince Charles — or the Dauphin, as the French called him — who was intent on remaining in the line of succession. In 1422, to complicate things further, King Charles VI died. But the Duke of Burgundy and Queen Isabeau's plans to have England's Henry V succeed him were no longer possible because Henry himself had died two months earlier. Who then would become the next king of France? That was the question that burned in the hearts of every Frenchman — and that burned in the heart of the inhabitants of Joan's village, Domrémy.
There were two principal contenders: the Dauphin (Charles VII) and Henry VI, the infant son of Henry V and Catherine. The English and their allies, the Burgundians, who controlled northern France, predictably supported Henry VI, while those in southern France supported the Dauphin. So the war raged on, and now the French were fighting not only the English but each other as well.
Most of the Hundred Years War had been fought on French soil, and the French had not won any significant victories in decades. By 1429, when Joan was seventeen, the English had managed to conquer a good deal of France's northern territory, and sections of southwestern France were under the control of the Anglo-allied Burgundians. The French populace had suffered greatly during the bubonic plague pandemic (the Black Death) that first spread from China to Europe in the 1340s. French merchants were cut off from foreign markets, and the French economy was in shambles.
Joan and her fellow Domrémy villagers strongly supported the Dauphin and considered the English a foul enemy, in part because it was not unusual for English soldiers to march into French villages, killing civilians, burning homes, and stealing crops and cattle. But what could they do to ensure that the Dauphin would become king? It was not something that anyone would have thought probable. But around the time Joan was twelve, something began happening that would catapult her into the center of these events and make her the principal player in leading France to victory and making the Dauphin her rightful king: she began hearing voices and seeing visions. Joan said that messengers from heaven were visiting her in her father's garden. She believed them to be the archangel Michael, Saint Catherine, and Saint Margaret. At first they didn't say anything about France or her role in saving France from the English; they just encouraged Joan in her already deep faith.
Joan looked forward to and loved her interactions with these heavenly visitors, but over time their words to her became quite specific and serious. They informed her that she had a great mission to perform. She was to rescue France from the English and take the Dauphin to the city of Reims to be crowned. Like Mary, the mother of Jesus, Joan was amazed at what these heavenly visitors told her. Who was she to lead an army? She hardly knew how to mount a horse, much less how to lead soldiers into battle. But as she was a girl of deep faith, she did not doubt that these messengers were indeed from heaven and must be taken seriously.
Joan was not the only person in the family to be troubled by things difficult to understand. One night her father dreamed that his pretty, adolescent daughter would run away with soldiers. Misunderstanding its meaning, he dramatically instructed his sons to drown their sister if she ever did such a thing. He also preemptively began to plan for Joan's marriage to a local swain. Unbeknownst to her father, however, Joan had made a private vow to God never to marry. So when the time came, she refused to go through with the ceremony, despite the fact that her so-called fiancé went to court over the broken arrangement.
When Joan was about sixteen, her "voices," as she called them, told her that her time had come at last. They gave her specific instructions to travel to the town of Vaucouleurs. Once there, she was to ask Governor Robert de Baudricourt to provide her with an armed escort to the castle of Chinon, where the Dauphin and his court lived. Knowing how her parents would react, Joan told them she wished to visit her married cousin, Jeanne Laxart, who lived a short distance from Vaucouleurs. They allowed their daughter to go.
She did visit her cousin but then talked her cousin's husband, Durand, into taking her to see Baudricourt. The governor patiently listened to Joan describe how God had instructed her to lead an army in driving the English out of France and then to oversee the crowning of the Dauphin as king of France. But what was the esteemed and dignified governor to make of this simple girl's outrageous story? He did what anyone else likely would have done: he told Durand to send her home immediately but not before boxing her ears for all the trouble she was causing.
The frustrated Joan returned home, but no sooner had she arrived than the horrors of the war finally came to her own doorstep. Burgundian soldiers swept into Domrémy and cruelly laid waste to the entire village by fire. She and her fellow villagers fled to a nearby fortified town. Then, a few months later came worse news: the English had surrounded the great French city of Orléans and were laying siege to it. Joan's voices gave her an urgent new message: God intended for her to rescue Orléans.
Joan, now seventeen, returned to Vaucouleurs and spent the next six weeks attempting to see the governor again. While waiting, she spoke openly to all who would listen about her God-given mission. The Vaucouleurs townspeople remembered a famous prophecy that France would one day be lost by a woman and then restored by a maiden — a virgin. They came to assume that the woman who would lose France was the despicable Queen Isabeau and that the maiden who would restore their country might well be Joan. As for the governor, he was less encouraging and again dismissed her and her preposterous ideas.
But Joan did not take his rebuffs to heart. "I must be at the King's side," she insisted. "There will be no help if not from me. Although I would rather have remained spinning at my mother's side ... yet must I go and must I do this thing, for my Lord wills that I do so."
There's little doubt that Joan really did wish to remain at home with her family, doing the things she had grown up doing. But she knew that God himself was calling her to the task at hand. She would not disobey, and she would not relent until she had done what God called her to do.
Baudricourt agreed to see the persistent farm girl again, but this time, Joan told him something remarkable, something she had no way of knowing. In Mark Twain's fictional account of Joan's life, which he researched and wrote for twenty years, the outspoken religious skeptic presented this account of Joan's meeting with Baudricourt:
"In God's name, Robert de Baudricourt, you are too slow about sending me, and have caused damage thereby, for this day the Dauphin's cause has lost a battle near Orléans, and will suffer yet greater injury if you do not send me to him soon."
The governor was perplexed by this speech, and said:
"To-day, child, to-day? How can you know what has happened in that region to-day? It would take eight or ten days for the word to come."
"My voices have brought the word to me, and it is true. A battle was lost to-day, and you are in fault to delay me so."
The governor walked the floor a while, talking within himself, but letting a great oath fall outside now and then; and finally he said:
"Harkye! go in peace, and wait. If it shall turn out as you say, I will give you the letter and send you to the King, and not otherwise."
Joan said with fervor: "Now God be thanked, these waiting days are almost done."
Word arrived that the French had indeed lost the battle. The governor was flabbergasted and finally convinced.
Orléans, located along the Loire River, was the final obstacle to an assault on the rest of France and therefore of tremendous strategic importance. Given the unlikelihood that Orléans could long endure a lengthy siege, rescue of the city was essential if France were ever to rule itself again. But to see the Dauphin, Joan would have to travel to Chinon, where the royal court had relocated from Bourges.
Joan began working out practical details of her 350-mile journey. It was for her own safety when traveling across enemy territory that she decided to cut her hair short and dress as a man. The citizens of Vaucouleurs clearly saw the sense in this and provided her with masculine clothing — a tunic, hose, boots, and spurs. They also provided her with a horse, and Baudricourt himself gave Joan her first sword.
On a cold February night, Joan — who now simply called herself "La Pucelle," which translates to "the Maid," or "the Maiden," meaning a young woman or a virgin — swung herself atop her horse and began the long journey to Chinon, accompanied by six male escorts. They had agreed to travel by night and sleep by day in order to avoid enemy soldiers, whom they might otherwise encounter, as they rode through hostile Burgundian lands.
Eleven days later Joan and her escorts stopped in Fierbois, a three-hour ride from Chinon. There Joan dictated a letter to the Dauphin, asking to meet with him. The Dauphin agreed, and soon the little band clattered onto the cobblestoned streets of Chinon. Joan was met by many curious stares, for stories of the virgin who claimed she would save France had preceded her.
Like Robert de Baudricourt, the Dauphin had prepared a test for Joan. She had hinted in a letter that, although she had never met him, she would be able to identify the Dauphin. So Louis de Bourbon, Count of Vendôme, led Joan through a stone passage opening into the castle's grand hall, where she found herself in the company of hundreds of gorgeously dressed and bejeweled guests. After looking around for a moment, Joan walked straight toward the Dauphin and knelt before him. "God give you life, gentle king," she said.
"I am not the king," the Dauphin replied. "There is the king!" he said, pointing to another man.
Joan responded, "In God's name, Sir, you are the King, and no other! Give me the troops wherewith to succour Orléans and to guard you to Rheims to be anointed and crowned. For it is the will of God."
Still not quite convinced, the Dauphin took Joan aside to speak privately. In an effort to prove she had been sent by God, she told him about something he had done in private: he had prayed that God would reveal to him whether or not he was actually the son of Charles VI. His mother, hardly a virtuous woman, had claimed he was not. If he were not the son of the late king, the Dauphin prayed that God would take away his desire to rule.
Search Chapters:Browse More Chapters


text:
'I killed my mother and disobeyed the Chinese code on human relations within the family'
The story of one of the many families destroyed by the Cultural Revolution
Fang Zhongmou with her family in 1963, seven years before her son Zhang reported her to the authorities over her criticism of Chairman Mao, after which she was executed by firing squad
In April 1970, as a 15-year-old Red Guard in the Chinese town of Guzhen, Zhang Hongbing did something he has regretted ever since. After his mother, Fang Zhongmou, angrily criticised chairman Mao, he reported her to the authorities and she was executed by firing squad on April 11th.
Now a successful lawyer, Zhang has lived with the repercussions of his decision all his life. He has made his peace with his family and cleared his mother's name of the charges against her. Now he wants her grave declared a landmark.
"I killed my mother and disobeyed the Chinese code on human relations within the family. I am tormented by this," he said in an interview.
The Cultural Revolution was a catastrophic period of upheaval that is still off the official agenda, which destroyed millions of lives.
Waving their little red books containing the thoughts of chairman Mao, Red Guards, leftist students and schoolchildren, roamed the streets attacking intellectuals, forcing them to wear dunces' hats, beating them up and sending them to the countryside.
The Cultural Revolution declared war on bourgeois culture, capitalist roaders and class enemies, but many believe it was primarily a bloody purge aimed at entrenching Mao's hold on power and maintaining the cult of personality built up around him. He had been sidelined politically and it was a brutal reminder of just who was boss.
The education Zhang received at the time was the orthodox education that children received during the period, which was based on total dedication to the party and rejection of the family.
Zhang was so taken with revolutionary fervour that he changed his name from Tiefu to Hongbing, which means "red soldier" aged 14.
He starts to sing a song from the period: "Mother is close and father is close. But they won't be as close as chairman Mao."
'Cult of personality'
"Mao's ideology was that revolution was a treasure, and it was completely built on a cult of personality. When my mother said she doubted chairman Mao, she was no longer my mother. She became a class enemy, like a monster with fangs," he said.
By some estimates, millions died in the ideological frenzy of those 10 years and China still bears the scars of the Cultural Revolution.
The Communist Party describes the Cultural Revolution as a disaster for China and its people, and it is often referred to as "the 10-year catastrophe". However, the party denies responsibility for what happened and chairman Mao still looks out over Tiananmen Square and gazes up from every bank note. The Great Helmsman is described as 70 per cent good, 30 per cent bad.
The events of the Cultural Revolution are blamed on a conspiracy around Mao, led by marshal Lin Biao and the Gang of Four, which included Mao's wife Jiang Qing and three other leftist hardliners.
Zhang's father Zhang Yuesheng had suffered at the hands of the Red Guard during "struggle sessions". His older sister died of meningitis in 1966 aged 14 during a visit to Beijing to hear Mao speak.
From 1955 to 1965, Zhang's mother worked for the Huaiyuan People's Hospital. She worked tirelessly.
She was angry at the way the Cultural Revolution was destroying her family. She asked her husband and son: "Why is Mao creating a cult of personality?"
She said she would rip down the propaganda portraits in the house. Her husband and son were scandalised, and Zhang's father went to report his mother.
"But I was even doubtful whether he really did it. I quickly wrote down what my mother said and signed it. And then went to the home of the leader with my badge and a letter to report my mother by myself." He put the letter under the door and his mother's fate was sealed.
Taken away
The authorities came to their home. Enraged, his mother locked herself in a room and set fire to a portrait of Mao and some of his key works, as well as some commemorative stamps. She was brought out of the room and Zhang was ordered to beat her, which he did. A soldier took her away, and after a brief trial she was found guilty of "attacking chairman Mao Zedong " and executed.
While Zhang attended a mass trial in the town, he did not go to the execution ground to watch her be shot by firing squad. His father had divorced her days before the execution.
This kind of zealotry was common during the Cultural Revolution, and many people still live with the shame of denouncing their parents, criticising their relatives and shaming their teachers.
Destroy 'old thinking'
Part of the Cultural Revolution education, which first appeared in an editorial by arch ideologue Chen Boda in the People's Daily in June 1966, was to destroy the "four olds" – old thinking, old culture, old customs and old habits – and cultivate the "four news" – new customs, new culture, new habits and new ideas.
"I was 13 years old in 1966. All family affection, friendship and kindness were considered as four olds and destroyed. Between 1966 and 1970, all kind things were replaced by class thought," said Zhang.
"The 10 years of cultural revolution included a lot of problems. Some people on the internet are calling for a new cultural revolution, but I think if we are going to have social progress, we need to reassess the Cultural Revolution and learn a lesson from it," he said.
"I don't know what the government should do. As a normal person, I experienced the Cultural Revolution. I think I should use my mother's unjust case to remind people that we shouldn't forget history and we should learn our lesson to avoid a reprise of the Cultural Revolution. The Cultural Revolution is rarely mentioned in the books. I should tell the truth that under Cultural Revolution, I hope this living example can make people understand the Cultural Revolution," he said.
He was driven to call for a reassessment of the Cultural Revolution by the actions of the purged Chinese leader Bo Xilai, who, during his time as Communist Party secretary in Chongqing, called on people to sing red songs and other throwbacks to the Cultural Revolution.
"When I heard about Bo Xilai's campaign to sing 'red songs' and crack down on gangsters, I decided to use my experience to fight against what looked to me like a rehearsal for a Cultural Revolution on a smaller scale," said Zhang.
In detention
Bo is currently in detention awaiting trial, and his wife Gu Kailai and former lieutenant Wang Lijun have already been sentenced to jail terms for various crimes, including the murder of a British businessman, Neil Heywood.
"I don't have a positive opinion about Bo. I think if Bo really got into the standing committee of the politburo that he would one day do the same thing all over China."
He speaks of his love for his country, using a poem by the poet Ai Qing (father of artist/dissident Ai Weiwei) to express his feelings: "Why are my eyes filled with tears? Because I love this land deeply."
"For this land and people's happiness, I would love to tell the truth of Cultural Revolution in order to avoid a repeat. My hope is that our descendants can grow up happily in a normal society, with law like other countries. We should not use class struggle to separate people and provoke hatred. It should light up every corner with human nature and humanity."

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Network visibility is difficult design problem. After years of research and customer engagements, Ive been able to prove that network visibility can be reduced to two states. I present the results in this chart.
Other Posts in This Series
- Poster: How To Make a Single Pane of Glass (22nd January 2015)
- My Review of 2014. Who Cares ? (31st December 2014)
- Poster: Life Dashboard (10th October 2014)
- Poster: Network Visibility Dual State Diagram (14th May 2014)
- Poster: Only Two Problems With IP Routing (5th May 2014)
- Poster: Network Safety Starts With You (21st April 2014)
- Poster: Manager, Engineer, Architect, ITIL Consultant (12th March 2013)
- Poster: Keep Calm, Do Networks Everywhere (21st November 2012)
- Poster: Cloud Price Negotiations (6th April 2012)
- Poster: Cloud Kittens (21st February 2012)
- Poster: The Eight Levels of Vendor Acceptance (30th September 2011)
- Poster - Cisco VPN Client Licensing (13th August 2011)
- Poster: Servers, Tablets. Just Desktops and Printers to Go. (21st January 2011)
- Cisco and their Security Strategy (3rd July 2010)
- Poster - Reassuringly Expensive (3rd July 2010)
- Cisco Borderless Networks Motivational Marketing Poster (24th March 2010)


text:
msth3ge.dll download
We use a special protection system to prevent unauthorized copying of content from our site. Enter the code shown in the picture on the next page. If the code is entered correctly, the download will start automatically.
To use a DLL file, you will first need to extract it from an archive. You don't have to use the paid versions of archivers to do that – there are lots of free alternatives.
Our file database is checked with several anti-virus tools every day. When you download a file from our site, you may rest assured about the security of your computer.
|Copyright © 2005-2017 www.DriversKit.com All rights reserved.
|Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy


text:
Wepay.com is the hassle-free way to collect payments online: no merchant account, website, or programming required. With no contracts, set up fees, or monthly fees. Just 1% + 30¢ for bank payments and 2.9% + 30¢ for credit cards. Invoice your customers, and accept payments online. Simple websites for stores, event registration, or online donations. Accept payments on your website without writing code.
Venture Slogan: The easiest way to accept payments
Venture Link: Wepay.com
Source: Venturebin.com


text:
The first lines of the famous poem by John Donne seemed to haunt me as I read the final testaments—one of them even recorded on voice mail—of men about to die at the World Trade Center or in the skies above New York and Pennsylvania.
The professions of love for spouse and family felt not so much like the commonplace that some warm people are often given to say or the panicked are rushed to include at hurried moments. These words seemed more like a final strike at fate, a trumping of the death card dealt, a summing up of lives that would live beyond allotted time.
What is the relationship between this life and the next? How is our behavior, how are our choices, how does the life one lives affect one's destiny?
By one account, our ethical or moral choices have nothing to do with eternity, for there is no eternity. There is only the now, heaven and hell being invented by people who need the crutch to lean on or the cane to fear as punishment. This has led some to be "naturalistic humanists," boldly committed to the betterment of the earth but often disillusioned, as Bertrand Russell was, in the face of extinction. Others, I think more honestly, have come to the ethically nihilistic conviction that since nothing really lasts, nothing really matters.
For those who do believe in an afterlife, there seems to be, as well, two ways to approach it. The first portrays the "next world" as being so unlike "this" world that a rejection of this world is the best way to insure happiness in the next. One wise old wag called this the "it's hell all the way to heaven and heaven all the way to hell" theory. Be miserable and unfulfilled now, and get your reward later. Have a good time now and pay painfully in eternity.
The second approach takes the opposite tack. It goes like this. If we really knew what was important, if we truly understood what happiness is, we would, no matter what our place or station, slowly learn to embrace what matters in this life so that when we die our arms would be open to all the truth there is to know and all the good there is to love. By this account, if we get things right, it's a little bit of heaven all the way to heaven. I think this is the correct take on things. Experientially at least, the happiest people (although not those having the most fun, to be sure) I have ever met are the holiest.
Aside from considerations of unmerited grace, which might rescue us from our direst acts, our choices are the prime indicators of our destiny. Behavior matters—not because we are punished by a God eager for retribution, but because we actually become, eternally, what we have given ourselves to.
And that is why those last messages seemed such a triumph—not in terms of this life, which was disastrously ending, but as a triumph over death. What greater way to disarm death than to utter the word of love in its face? Love is the exercise of our most godly and greatest gift, our ability to say yes, to affirm the other, which no one else can do for us but which each of us, from our earliest stirring, is empowered to do. As those men died, so they are indelibly are.
Love, ultimately, is the foundation of every choice, even our bad ones. As Dante told it (echoing Aquinas), misdirected or fearful or excessive loves can bode a terrible fate. But love purified and authentic is joy, here and hereafter. The purification is not easy. It may require the terrible focusing moment of impending disaster to shake us into the realization of what really counts, what truly is important. It may demand the harsh and dreadful path that Dostoevsky's Father Zossima predicts in The Brothers Karamazov. It may be the daily refining of the virtues that St. Paul celebrates in his First Letter to the Corinthians. But it is love, grounded in the truth, that we are made for and love which is eternally of God.
John Donne's "Death Be Not Proud" is central to the recent brilliant HBO film "Wit," directed by Mike Nichols. In the Margaret Edson script, Emma Thompson plays a university professor specializing in the metaphysical poets, especially Donne. Facing her own death from ovarian cancer and devastating rounds of chemotherapy, Thompson is led not only to recognize the absence of love in her past life and the lives of the physicians and researchers around her, but to discover love's presence in her nurse and her former, now-aging teacher. The sum of her life is not her scholarly achievements or even the circumstances of mindless therapies and heartless attempts at resuscitation, but in the love she could finally give and, more important, evoke from others.
In the end, our choices, our behaviors and the actions of others toward us make all the difference, whether we are a money marketer, a teacher, a nurse or a pitiful patient. Emma Thompson's character in "Wit" and the last minute messengers of love have come to the same liberating truth.
At last, only three things last. And the greatest is Love.


text:
Birkhead to testify about Smith's drug use?
Birkhead is helping lawyers for the State of California in their case against the former Playboy beauty's doctors, who are accused of illegally supplying her with prescription pills before her death from an accidental overdose in February 2007.
According to legal documents filed by prosecutors, Birkhead has "personal knowledge of Anna Nicole Smith's drug activities, gleaned from years of personal observation".
They add that Birkhead is convinced Smith was an "addict" because he "personally observed her using controlled substances in an uncontrolled way over a long period of time".
But prosecutors are facing a challenge from attorneys defending the doctors, who claim Birkhead isn't "qualified" to determine whether Smith met the legal criteria of a drug addict, reports TMZ.com.
Birkhead is the father of Smith's three-year-old daughter, Dannielynn.


text:
Great People
Fund: GrowthWorks Capital
Posted by Nella on 2009-11-14
I'm brand new to the world of funding and am always trying to look for some guidance. I met with Tim Lee, one of the execs at Growthworks, at an event, and he offered to tell me all about the ins and outs of funding. He spent an hour of his busy time talking to me. Although I am not at the stage yet where I need VC money, I would definitely refer Growthworks and Tim Lee.PRIVATE: Members Only


text:
Cooperation between Electromach and American HVAC specialist, Specific Systems
Electromach has started a cooperation with the American company Specific Systems.
Specific Systems also engineers and manufactures HVAC units for light industrial, commercial, and military applications with industrial single unit capacities up to 50 tons (600,000 BTUH).
Together with Electromach, Specific Systems designed an ATEX certified Air conditioning system. These Air conditioning systems will be available on short notice.
Ex-news: Overview standards of the 60079 series
In this newsletter you will find the first overview of standards relating to explosion safety. The first overview contains the standards of the 60079 series, an actual overview of the standards and the actual status of every standard.
The data for these overviews comes from several sources. We cannot accept any claims relating to these documents. If errors are detected, please notify us.
We will update these documents every upcoming newsletter.
Explosion protected Exe junction boxes, at stock!
As of now, Electromach can supply, direct from their extensive inventory, explosion protected Exe junction boxes.
The junction boxes are foreseen with the maximum amount of terminals and punched entries.
Place your order and specify how many cable glands / stopping plugs you will need, and they will be package separately. The cable glands/stopping plugs can be mounted easily at site.
Obstruction lights
Compact zone 1 pneumatic module for R. STAHL's remote I/O system
Bus module instead of a valve island: 8 solenoid valve block on the IS1 rail
Designed as a plug-in module and thus requiring little installation space, R.STAHL's new DOMV pneumatic module for the IS1 remote I/O system is a considerably more compact solution than conventional additional valve islands.
The module, which is snapped onto the BusRail, is supplied via the IS1 system. Furthermore, it is directly connected to the remote I/O system's internal data and address bus.
Thanks to this complete integration, no additional efforts are required for wiring, configuration and monitoring of the DOMV via IS1.
Sunlight readable displays for explosion-protected HMI systems
No more glare….
The PC-based, explosion-protected operating systems from the Open HMI series can now be fitted with the new innovative 15" displays to reduce glare and reflections to a minimum.
The new displays can be read easily, even in bright sunlight, since a filter pack effectively diverts even strong incoming ambient light. The new solution is based on a very effective combination of polarisation filters placed on top of and behind one another in front of the display.
New website for E2S
E2S, European Safety Systems, launched a new website.
For more information about acoustic- and visual signalling equipment, please visit www.e2s.com.
All E2S products are available at Electromach.
Sales Team Electromach
Would you like to contact our Sales Team directly?
Please visit our website for all contact information from our internal- and external Sales Team.
More info...


text:
Physical Science: Session 1
Children's Ideas About Matter
Below are common ideas children in grades K-6 have about this topic, compiled from research on children's ideas about science. Consider what evidence might refute this idea, and why a child would be likely to believe this? Once you've entered all your answers you can click "printable page" at the bottom of this form to print your answers. You can also click "see possible response" for any question to see one possible response from the series content advisors.
1. "Matter" is something that is important.
|prev: mystery substance


text:
When life hands you lemons — make Lemon Lemon Cake! I made this cake twice last week, and I LOVE it. I am so IN love with it, I will have to MARRY it. Seriously.
|Moist lemon cake, covered in rich, lemon cream cheese frosting, and filled with homemade lemon curd.
|What is it with me and lemons lately?
Lemon Lemon Cake
Cake: Based on a recipe by Cooking Light
Lemon Curd: Based on a recipe by Joy of Baking.com
3 tablespoons thawed lemonade concentrate
2 teaspoons vanilla extract
2 large eggs
2 large egg whites
1 1/4 cups buttermilk
Cooking spray
Lemon Curd
3 large eggs
3/4 cup granulated sugar
1/3 cup fresh-squeezed lemon juice (about 2-3 lemons)
4 tablespoons unsalted butter, at room temperature
1 tablespoon lemon zest
2 cups icing sugar
|Lemon Cake: I can't quit you!
- Pre-heat oven to 350° F. Prepare two 9" cake pans with cooking spray and lightly dust with flour. Set aside.
- Combine flour, baking powder, baking soda and salt in a mixing bowl. Set aside.
- In the bowl of a stand mixer, cream butter until fluffy. Add sugar, lemon zest, lemonade concentrate and vanilla and mix until thoroughly combined.
- Add eggs, one at a time, mixing well after each addition. Add egg whites one at a time, mixing well after each addition.
- Add half the buttermilk, mixing well afterwards. Add half the flour, mixing well afterwards. Repeat, ending with the flour. Mix until just combined.
- Divide batter equally between the two prepared cake pans. Bake for 18-20 minutes. Test with a toothpick inserted in the centre of the cake, until it comes out clean.
- Cool cake completely before assembling.
Method: Lemon Curd
- Place a large mixing bowl over a saucepan of barely simmering water. To the mixing bowl, add eggs, sugar and lemon juice. Whisk until combined.
- Continue whisking until mixture reaches 160° F on an instant-read thermometer, or reaches the consistency of a thick sauce.
- Remove from heat and add butter and lemon zest, stirring until butter is melted.
- Cool curd in the refrigerator, with plastic wrap resting on the surface of the curd to prevent a skin from forming.
- In the bowl of a stand mixer, cream the butter and cream cheese together until fluffy.
- Add lemonade concentrate, lemon zest and vanilla. Stir until combined.
- Add icing sugar. Mix on low speed until combined. Refrigerate for about 30 minutes to firm up.
- Place one cake layer on a plate. Spread about 1/4 cup of frosting on top of first layer.
- Spread about 1/4 cup of lemon curd on top of frosting, spreading almost to the edges of the layer but not quite.
- On top of this, add the second cake layer. Press down on top layer gently — not too hard or the lemon curd will squirt out! Spread the rest of the frosting over top and sides of cake, using whatever stylin' makes you smile.


text:
QX3 Time-Lapse Movie Gallery
Oxalic Acid
Oxalic acid is present in the sap of many plants and is common in vegetables as the potassium or calcium salt. Commercially, oxalic acid is manufactured by passing carbon monoxide into concentrated sodium hydroxide. Oxalic acid has a number of uses including calico printing and dyeing, paint removal, metal polishes, in ceramics, and as a cleaner in metallurgy. When recrystallized from the melt, oxalic acid will slowly crystallize, forming beautiful dendritic needle-like crystals that comprise spherulite structures. The time-lapse movie was made using a modified version of the Intel Play QX3 microscope equipped for polarized light illumination with a full-wave (first order) retardation plate.
Questions or comments? Send us an email.
© 1995-2019 by Michael W. Davidson and The Florida State University. All Rights Reserved. No images, graphics, software, scripts, or applets may be reproduced or used in any manner without permission from the copyright holders. Use of this website means you agree to all of the Legal Terms and Conditions set forth by the owners.
This website is maintained by our


text:
Union Square, Aberdeen
Situated in the North Atrium with footfall from the main entrance, train and bus station. Surrounded by New Look, Costa and Michael Kors.
Situated in the North Atrium with footfall from the main entrance, train and bus station. Surrounded by New Look, Costa and Michael Kors.
Car displays and larger promotions. This site can accomodate up to 3 vehicles.
2 x 13amp power socket available.
Each set up must not exceed 10m2 with out prior fire risk assessment.
Mon-Fri 9am - 8pm, Sat 9am - 7pm, Sun 11am - 6pm
All rates are exclusive of VAT. Weekend rate is for Sat to Sun. Rates subject to increase in Nov/Dec.
From concept to planning and execution our dedicated Union Square team is on hand to help you bring your idea to life...
What Fire Risk Assessment documentation is required?
You must provide a completed Fire Risk Assessment form before making any bookings.
Useful Link
HSE Controlling Risks
As part of Health and Safety, you must control the risks on your site. Find out more information here.
What are Hammerson Engage's Health and Safety Risk Assessment policies?
Risk Assessments must be written by the company responsible for the activity. The risk assessment needs to cover set up, customer interface and de-rig. A risk assessment provided for installation is fine, but often the greater risk is what takes place when visitors walk through the doors. Risk assessments should be specific to the activity and to your centre; generic risk assessments or blanket health and safety policies can never be comprehensive.
Useful Link
HSE Safety Assessment
Assess the work from height risks and ensure your project is safe.
What documentation do I need to complete my application?
Each tenant must demonstrate they have considered the risk of health, safety, fire and electrical hazards and provide control measures / method statements to confirm how they will remove or reduce risks to the lowest level as far as is reasonably practicable.
What electrical information to I need to provide?
Portable appliances - please specify the method and frequency of testing for electrical items within their risk assessment. Testing must be appropriate to the electrical supply, British Standard (e.g. BS7671:2008) and supporting PAT certificates must be provided.
Fixed wiring - permanent wiring must be tested by our electrician at point of installation and any resulting action recorded on the Activity Checklist. Thereafter, the wiring should be tested annually and the records collected.
What is the planning process?
Prior to being given site access, you will need to provide a brief outlining the nature and key features of your planned activity. This should include a visual, and you will need to provide the following information on the Hammerson Space Booking System:


text: Prices, Nutrient Carryover to Drive 2013 Fertilizer Applications November 7, 2012 10:07 PM Tweet TAGS: Marketing, Overseas December 18, 2014 By Rhonda Brooks Editor, Farm Journal MagazineEditorial Director, Farm Journal Media Email While carryover nutrients may be available to crops next spring, one expert predicts that high crop prices for corn and soybeans will also play a major role in farmers' nutrient use. Nutrient carryover in a year following drought is an important consideration for farmers. That's certainly true as farmers evaluate their crop fertility needs for 2013. For Larry Mussack's part, he plans to apply only the nutrients he knows his corn crop needs. "Soil test, don't guess," recommends the Decatur, Neb., farmer. Research by Harry Vroomen, vice president of economic services for The Fertilizer Institute, shows that while drought does impact the ability of crops to absorb nutrients in a given year, thus contributing to carryover, that fact doesn't automatically mean farmers will decrease fertility applications the following year. His research over a 30-plus year period bears out that fact. Vroomen notes that between 1970 and 2011, a significant drought occurred seven different years in the United States. He defines a drought as a year in which corn yields dropped by more than 15% in a given season, due to inadequate moisture. In each case, he looked to determine the impact on fertilizer applications the year following drought. What Vroomen learned is that in the years following those seven drought years, average nitrogen application rates fell only twice while they increased five times. Application rates for phosphorus and potash fell three times and increased four times in years following drought. In 1988, the year most comparable to 2012, Vroomen says corn yields dropped by nearly 30% due to drought. He reports that average fertility application rates the following year, 1989, fell 4% for nitrogen, 9% for phosphorus and 8% for potash. He doubts a drop in fertility applications will occur in 2013 like it did in 1989. He explains that's likely because 2012-13 corn prices are forecast at $7.10 to $8.50 per bushel (based on a mid-October 2012 USDA forecast) with a 5.6% stocks-to-use ratio. Whereas, in 1989, corn prices were closer to $2.50 per bushel and the stocks-to-use ratio was about 20%. Stocks-to-use ratio is a measurement of supply and demand interrelationships for commodities. High crop prices encourage growers to apply higher application rates as greater yields bring about higher additional revenue at higher crop prices; on the other hand, carryover nutrients will bring those higher application rates back down so the net effect is difficult to predict, notes Vroomen. On top of that, he adds that 2013 planted acreage of corn, soybeans and wheat, the top three fertilizer using crops, is expected to increase by several million acres. Despite the uncertainty, Vroomen is expecting little change in total U.S. nitrogen use next year; however, phosphate and potash use may decline somewhat, depending on the eventual level of nutrient carryover. "If a farmer is expecting $7.50 or $8 for corn next year, he won't take the chance of missing out on that potential income," Vroomen says. His prediction for 2013, regarding fertilizer application rates, goes back to Larry Mussack's recommendation. Notes Vroomen: "I think we're going to see soil testing like crazy." Related Video John Lory, University of Missouri nutrient management specialist, explains how this year's drought might affect next year's fertilizer needs. Back to news


text:
I am a 2 year new resident of Virginia. I spend a lot of time on the VDGIF site on fishing regulations, and find some parts of it very confusing. Being new to the idea that all the reservoirs local to me (Ni Lake, Hunting Run, and Motts Run) are closed to fishing in the late Fall till late Spring as well as after 8:00 pm generally, I have been looking into wading, bank fishing, and canoe fishing the Rapidan and Rappahannock rivers during the times the other places are closed. I am excited in the trout, small mouth and large mouth bass opportunities in these rivers as well as the stripped bass, however when I try to find the season and creel limits on stripped bass I get very confused. From what I read, I find stripped bass in the Rapidan and Rappahannock to be 1 per day 20" to 28" May 16 thru June 15 and then again October 4 thru December 31. Can anyone verify this or state it correctly for me? I am retired and purchased the lifetime Virginia trout, salt water, and fresh water license, and fished since I was old enough to pee around Lake Erie, but have never read a set of regulations that are so confusing as Virginia's, then when you throw in things like "Fall Line" and "Tidal Waters", and whether or not you are north or south of a bridge or route number, it makes you just want to stay home. I live in Spotsylvania County, don't know hardly anyone around here but my kids who live fairly close. I expect to wade, or canoe from the Eli's Ford, Hunting Run boat launch, Motts Run Boat Launch, Little Falls Boat Launch, and Hopyard Landing Boat Launch. Can anyone tell me whether or not the current is typically weak enough to get back to these points in a canoe once downstream in the last two (Little Falls and Hopyard Landing.) I appreciate any information that anyone will share.
No announcement yet.
Striper Confused
new posts
Striper ConfusedTags: None
Boudreaux ketch dem feesh
- Mar 2009
- 3203
not really confusing when you spend just a lil time getting oriented. to get you started, here are a couple of definitions:
- fall line = the poi t at which the tidal influence ends. in other words, the river acts like a normal (non-tidal) river with flow going one way
- tidal waters will experience ebb and flow on a regular, very predictable schedule. knowing this schedule is key to being successful on tidal waters.
you understand the creel limits perfectly. always a good idea to refer back to the VDGIF site before going out. I've lived in VA for a total of 14 years and I still check, even on waters I know well. fishing from a canoe or kayak will allow you access to places most glas and tin boats can't get to. that said, you'll test your endurance and strength working tides (with and against). timing your outings is key. you'll want to put in while the flow is minimal, allowing you to cover water more efficiently. same-same for the return trip. rowing with a tide is not always a sure fire safe ride. the tides on the Rapp, for example, can absolutely scream. managing those tides in a glas boat is a challenge. where you put in is also key. ideally, you'll want to minimize the distance you have to row. a quick look at maps (I like the GMCO maps for VA waters) will tell you where you can access. a quick look at the tides will help you time it right.sigpic
PsuHntr ,,,,Thanks, that's exactly what I needed to hear. I have a small trolling motor which I run off the port side in the reservoirs which works out great but certainly would not be enough for tidal water. Can I assume that when the tide is going out it adds to the speed of the current, which is much slower when the tide is coming in? Which tide direction is better fishing?Last edited by keeganzpapa; 08-30-2016, 10:52 AM.
31Airborne I appreciate your advice. You mention things about the tide that I had not considered. Last thing I need is to watch my point of exit pass by because I cannot get to it , or rolled out on some rapids I did not plan for. Maybe a 68 year old man with a bad back should just be satisfied with bank fishing in the tidal portions of the rivers.
What confuses me, and please give that right, is a post by Brian (Lip Ripper) on 5-22-14 Chartering a catch of over 100 fish for the day with his clients taking home 20 fish. It appears there were not 20 people on that boat, so either charter fishermen have a higher creel limit, or there were 20 fishermen that took home 1 fish each?
I almost have as many posts as Striper
- Dec 2009
- 301
That report was from a guide on Lake Anna. On Lake Anna, each person can keep 4 striped bass which measure at least 20 inches, per day. Because the report states they kept 20 fish, that means there were 5 fishermen/women, children under 16 years old, and includes the guide (4 clients + guide = 5 fishermen x 4 fish limit per person = 20 fish limit for that boat that day). That leaves over 80 fish that they caught and released. Released fish were either less than 20", or they kept fishing after having their limit and released all fish...even if those fish caught were over 20". Catch and release is allowed even after a fisherman has their daily limit. Hopefully that clears up some confusion.sigpic
Yep, that's much clearer, and is exactly what I must have failed to dig deep enough to capture. Missed the part that Lake Anna's limit is different. Also did not understand that once you have your limit you can continue to fish, also that the Guide was considered a fisherman, but then again, why not? Wish they would just word it that clear in the Chapter(s). Thanks again for your assistance.


text:
Imagine being able to magically produce 8 wooden, handcrafted birdcages from an empty frame!
All cages have been crafted to exacting dimensions, which allow this multiple production to become a magical reality. Each cage contains a realistic artificial dove -- thus everything you need is provided -- no livestock is required!
Unit breaks down for easy and secure transport and storage.
Do you own this product? Write a review.


text:
Andrea "Andi" Williams has been with Health First since July of 2009.
Andi has been drawn to Women's Health for many years. She believes Women's Health is comprised of much more than physical health. Andi values the time she is able to spend with her patients, which enables her to connect on a personal level and build relationships. She is an advocate for her patients, and makes considerable effort to promote health and wellness. Andi consistently does community volunteering at the local high schools educating students about available healthcare careers.
Andi has worked in health care in some capacity since 1988 when she became a Licensed Practical Nurse. Over the years she continued her education, receiving her Master's Degree in Nursing from UCF in 2003. She holds certification with the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners. She is a member of the Nursing Honor Society Sigma Theta Tau, Nurse Practitioners in Women's Health, and the Florida Nursing Association. Andi received the Crystal Apple Award from the Chamber of Commerce for providing community education.
Andi has been a Brevard County resident for 20 years. She enjoys recreational activities outdoors, spending time with her family and friends, traveling and reading.


text:
Prince Charles has opened up about his duty as a member of the Royal Family and how the arrival of Prince George has made him more determined to continue his work.
In a revealing piece in TIME magazine, titled The Forgotten Prince, Charles explains how he has always wanted to help improve people's quality of life.
"I've had this extraordinary feeling, for years and years, ever since I can remember really, of wanting to heal and make things better," he explained. "I feel more than anything else it's my duty to worry about everybody and their lives in this country, to try to find a way of improving things if I possibly can."
The Prince also spoke of his "wonderful wife" and described becoming a grandfather for the first time to Prince George as "what this is all about".
The article, which interviewed 50 of his closest friends and aides, also suggests Prince Charles has more concerns about his duty to help people through his charities rather than becoming King straight away.
"Charles is not itching to ascend the throne," Catherine Mayer, TIME's editor-at-large explains, "but is impatient to get as much done as possible before [becoming King]."
Since a young age, The Prince of Wales has been focused on supporting people through his charity work and, in 1976, he formed The Prince's Trust which helps people build a life for themselves that they choose.
Earlier this week, on Wednesday, Prince Charles attended the christening of his first grandchild, Prince George.
Charles, with the Duchess of Cornwall, joined senior royals including The Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh at the Chapel Royal at St James's Palace, which his son Prince William and the Duchess of Cambridge had chosen for the three-month-old's christening.
photo credit: Downing Street via photopin cc