We are searching data for your request:
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.
Voor die uitvinding van die semafoor en die telegraaf, kon 'n boodskap nie vinniger beweeg as die spoed van 'n perd (of miskien 'n boodskapperduif of iets in die rigting nie - nog steeds redelik stadig).
Was daar ooit 'n situasie in die geskiedenis dat 'n heerser van 'n land na oorlog gegaan het of buitelandse sake ver van hul land bygewoon het, en 'n erfgenaam die burgers laat glo het dat die heerser dood is om die troon oor te neem? Miskien het hy 'n boodskapper betaal om voor te gee dat hy die boodskap van die dood dra?
Dit is gevalle van die oorname van die land deur verkeerde inligting te gebruik, nie moord nie.
Ja. Koning John van Engeland het probeer om die troon van Richard I te neem terwyl hy op kruistog was. Richard se vertraagde terugkeer was te wyte aan die feit dat hy deur Leopold V, hertog van Oostenryk, gevange geneem is en daarna aan die Heilige Romeinse keiser Hendrik VI oorgegee is. Intussen het John voordeel getrek uit die gevangenisstraf van sy broer, ondersteuners om hom versamel en met Philip II van Frankryk gesels. Hy ook
het begin beweer dat sy broer dood of andersins permanent verlore was.
Alhoewel Richard sy neef, Arthur Duke van Bretagne, as sy erfgenaam genoem het voordat hy na die kruistog vertrek het, was Arthur slegs 'n kind en het John daarin geslaag om vooraanstaande edeles om hom te vergader wat hom as erfgenaam herken het. Om John te kalmeer en sy hulp te kry om die losprysgeld in te samel,
Aartsbiskop Walter spoor koningin Eleanor van Aquitanië en die regentsraad aan om 'n versoenende beleid teenoor John aan te neem ... Eleanor en die magnate neem die advies van Hubert op en onderhandel 'n wapenstilstand met John. Hy het ingestem om sy kastele aan sy moeder oor te gee, en as hulle Richard nie kon terugkry nie, sou hy koning word.
Richard het natuurlik uiteindelik teruggekeer na betaling van 'n groot losprys. John vlug dadelik na Frankryk, maar is later deur Richard vergewe. In 1196 het Richard Arthur weer as sy erfgenaam genoem, maar hy het van plan verander op sy sterfbed in 1199 en John in plaas daarvan genoem, waarskynlik omdat hy gevoel het Arthur was te jonk om koning te wees en om die nodige steun te beveel om die Angevin -ryk aan te hou. Arthur 'verdwyn' daarna (1203), met John as die hoofverdagte in die moord op sy neef.
Alhoewel hy nie 'n erfgenaam van die Franse troon was nie, het generaal Claude François de Malet 'n staatsgreep in Frankryk probeer, in 1812. Nadat hy uit gevangenskap ontsnap het, het hy die nasionale garde meegedeel dat Napoleon in Rusland gesterf het. Hy het daarin geslaag om twee generaals vry te laat, 'n paar ander gearresteer en probeer om die mag in Parys te gryp. Dieselfde dag het hy briewe aan kolonel Pierre Doucet gelewer waarin verklaar word dat Napoleon op 7 Oktober oorlede is. Doucet het egter kennis gehad van briewe wat Napoleon na daardie datum geskryf het, en het agterdogtig geraak.
Kort daarna is Malet gearresteer en toe tereggestel.
Artikel uit Wikipedia: Malet -staatsgreep van 1812
Ek is nie seker of dit tel of nie, aangesien dit nie 'n monargie was nie, het die opvolger eintlik gedink dat die heerser aanvanklik dood was (as gevolg van die ontploffing van die bom wat hy geplant het), en dit was ook nie in die Middeleeue, maar kolonel Claus von Stauffenberg kom by my op.
Stauffenberg het 'n bom geplant in 'n ontmoeting wat hy in 1944 met Hitler bygewoon het en daarna die vergadering verlaat weens 'n beplande telefoonoproep. Die toestel het wel ontplof, op daardie stadium het Stauffenberg aangeneem dat Hitler dood is en 'n plan bekend as Operasie Valkyrie geaktiveer, waarmee Stauffenberg en sy makkers die beheer van die grootste deel van die Duitse regering kortliks kon oorneem.
Ongelukkig het die konferensie plaasgevind in 'n bogrondse konferensiekamer in plaas van die normale ondergrondse bunker weens die weer, sodat die druk van die ontploffing nie in die kamer was nie en dus nie so dodelik was nie. Hitler is beseer, maar het oorleef. Aangesien die plot reeds aan die gang was toe hy uitvind dat Hitler dit oorleef het, het Stauffenberg daarop aangedring om voort te gaan en het hy probeer om ander te mislei om te glo dat Hitler in werklikheid dood was.
Aangesien Hitler egter nie eintlik dood was nie, het die plot binne 'n paar uur begin uitmekaar val, aangesien nuus stadig oor Hitler se voortbestaan versprei het. Uiteindelik het die plot misluk en Stauffenberg is ongeveer 12 uur na die ontploffing van die bom tereggestel. Maar hy en sy makkers het 'n paar uur lank 'n groot deel van Nazi -Duitsland beheer, omdat hulle mense laat dink het dat Hitler dood is.
Hierdie poging tot staatsgreep was die plot van die 2008 -film Valkyrie met Tom Cruise in die hoofrol.
'N Ander voorbeeld was die (Bisantynse) Romeinse keiser John Komnenos. Dit is volgens sommige bronne gedoen (Runciman, dink ek, maar dit lyk nie asof Wikipedia daarmee saamstem nie) met die uitdruklike toestemming van sy sterwende voorganger en vader Alexios Komnenos. Bang dat Alexios se dogter en skoonseun 'n staatsgreep sou probeer bewerkstellig toe Alexios sterf, het John die seël van sy vader geneem terwyl sy pa nog sterf, maar voordat hy dood was, en na die paleis gery waar die mense hom as keiser geroep het. (Sy pa het in werklikheid eers die volgende dag gesterf.)
Dit is waarskynlik 'n bietjie goedkoop omdat hy reeds mede-keiser was, maar hoewel dit beslis meer as net 'n tegniese aspek was, sou dit nie regtig 'n waarborg vir opvolging wees nie (en sy swaer het wel 'n staatsgreep probeer doen) 'n paar maande later).
Albert II, Prins van Monaco
Albert II [1] [2] (Albert Alexandre Louis Pierre Grimaldi gebore 14 Maart 1958) is die Soewereine Prins van Monaco en hoof van die Princely House of Grimaldi. Hy is die seun van prins Rainier III en Grace Kelly.
Hy is gebore in die Prince's Palace van Monaco en het die Lycée Albert Premier bygewoon voordat hy politieke wetenskap aan die Amherst College gestudeer het. In sy jeug het hy deelgeneem aan bobslee tydens die Olimpiese Winter -eindronde voordat hy in 2002 uittree. Albert word in Maart 2005 aangestel nadat sy pa siek geword het, en word 'n soewereine prins by sy heengaan 'n week later. Sedert sy hemelvaart is hy uitgesproke op die gebied van omgewingsbewustes en 'n voorstander van die bewaring van die see, [3] en die aanneming van hernubare energiebronne om die globale klimaatsverandering aan te pak, [4] [5] en stig hy The Prince Albert II van Monaco Foundation in 2006, om direk geld in te samel en aksie te begin vir sulke oorsake en groter ekologiese bewaring.
Albert is een van die rykste koninklikes ter wêreld, met bates ter waarde van meer as $ 1 miljard, [6] wat grond in Monaco en Frankryk insluit. Hy besit aandele in die Société des Bains de Mer, wat Monaco se casino en ander vermaaklikheidseiendomme in die prinsdom bedryf. [7] [8]
In Julie 2011 trou prins Albert met die Suid -Afrikaanse Olimpiese swemmer Charlene Wittstock. [9] Hulle het twee kinders, die tweeling prinses Gabriella en oorerflike prins Jacques. Prins Albert is ook vader van twee kinders wat voor sy huwelik gebore is, die in Amerika gebore Jazmin Grace Grimaldi en die Frans gebore Alexandre Grimaldi-Coste.
Saoedi -Arabië se troonopvolger praat met 60 minute
Op 32 -jarige ouderdom is Saoedi -Arabië se kroonprins Mohammed bin Salman reeds die mees dominante Arabiese leier in 'n generasie. Hierdie week begin hy met 'n Amerikaanse landtoer, waar hy sy koninkryk aan 'n skeptiese Amerikaanse publiek sal toespits. Hy is nege maande gelede as erfgenaam van die troon aangewys deur sy 82-jarige pa, koning Salman, wat sy seun groot nuwe magte verleen het.
Sy hervormings in Saoedi-Arabië was revolusionêr, bekend onder sy voorletters-"MB". Hy emansipeer vroue, stel musiek en bioskoop voor en bekamp korrupsie in 'n land met 15 000 prinse. Maar dit is nie maklik om Saoedi -Arabië te verkoop nie. In sy eerste onderhoud met 'n Amerikaanse televisienetwerk was hy gretig om die belofte van sy land en sy ontstelde reputasie van voor af te bespreek.
Norah O'Donnell: As baie Amerikaners aan Saoedi -Arabië dink, dink hulle aan Osama bin Laden en 9/11. Hulle dink aan die terrorisme wat hy op Amerikaanse bodem gebring het.
Mohammed bin Salman: Reg. Osama bin Laden het in die 9/11 aanvalle 15 Saoedi's gewerf met 'n duidelike doelwit. Volgens die CIA -dokumente en kongresondersoeke wou Osama bin Laden 'n skeuring tussen die Midde -Ooste en die Weste skep, tussen Saoedi -Arabië en die Verenigde State van Amerika.
Saoedi -Arabië se kroonprins Mohammed bin Salman CBS News
Norah O'Donnell: Waarom wou Osama bin Laden daardie haat tussen die Weste en Saoedi -Arabië skep?
Mohammed bin Salman: Om 'n omgewing te skep wat bevorderlik is vir werwing en die verspreiding van sy radikale boodskap dat die weste beplan om jou te vernietig. Hy het inderdaad daarin geslaag om hierdie skeuring in die weste te skep.
Norah O'Donnell: En hoe verander jy dit? Omdat dit lyk asof u probeer om dinge hier tuis te verander.
Mohammed bin Salman: Inderdaad. Ek glo dat ons die afgelope drie jaar in baie opsigte geslaag het.
Ons het prins Mohammed die eerste keer ontmoet by die Royal Court in Riyadh. Hy het aangekom in 'n reën, 'n teken van geluk in die woestynryk. Hy is moedig en visioenêr genoem vir sy hervormings by die huis, sowel as roekeloos en impulsief in sy aanloop tot mag. Hy het 'n horingnest in die Midde-Ooste geskop en 'n magdom nuwe vyande verdien, deels waarom hy een van die swaarste bewaakte mans ter wêreld is. Dit is die kantoor waar hy sy dae begin.
Norah O'Donnell: Werk hard?
Mohammed bin Salman in Engels: Altyd.
Hy het as kind Engels geleer om films te kyk. En hy is terdeë bewus daarvan dat 70 persent van die bevolking soos hy is, jonger as 35 jaar en rusteloos word.
Norah O'Donnell: Wat was die grootste uitdaging?
Mohammed bin Salman in Engels: Daar is baie uitdagings. Ek dink die eerste groot uitdaging wat ons het, is om die mense te glo in wat ons doen.
Norah O'Donnell: Daar is 'n wydverspreide opvatting dat die soort Islam wat in Arabië beoefen word, streng, streng, onverdraagsaam is. Is daar enige waarheid daaraan?
Mohammed bin Salman: Na 1979 is dit waar. Ons was slagoffers, veral my generasie wat baie hieraan gely het.
Die kroonprins spoor die meeste van Saoedi -Arabië se probleme na die jaar 1979, toe die Ayatollah Khomeini 'n Islamitiese teokrasie in Iran gestig het. In dieselfde jaar het godsdienstige ekstremiste in Saoedi -Arabië die heiligste plek van Islam, die Groot Moskee in Mekka, oorgeneem. Om hul eie godsdienstige radikale te versoen, het die Saoedi's begin om vroue van die alledaagse lewe af te skei en te skei.
Norah O'Donnell: Wat was hierdie Saoedi -Arabië die afgelope 40 jaar? Is dit die ware Saoedi -Arabië?
Mohammed bin Salman: Absoluut nie. Dit is nie die ware Saoedi -Arabië nie. Ek sou u kykers vra om hul slimfone te gebruik om dit uit te vind. En hulle kan Saoedi -Arabië in die 70's en 60's google, en hulle sal die regte Saoedi -Arabië maklik op die foto's sien.
Norah O'Donnell: Hoe was Saoedi -Arabië voor 1979?
Mohammed bin Salman: Ons het 'n baie normale lewe geleef, soos die res van die Golflande. Vroue het motors bestuur. Daar was rolprentteaters in Saoedi -Arabië. Vroue het oral gewerk. Ons was net normale mense wat ontwikkel het soos enige ander land ter wêreld tot die gebeure van 1979.
Saoedi -vroue - wat feitlik onsigbaar was in die openbaar - het nuwe regte gekry, wat dit makliker gemaak het om 'n onderneming te begin, by die weermag aan te sluit en konserte en sportbyeenkomste by te woon. In Junie sal hulle agter die stuur kan klim en ry.
Norah O'Donnell: Is vroue gelyk aan mans?
Mohammed bin Salman: Absoluut. Ons is almal mense en daar is geen verskil nie.
Norah O'Donnell: U het gesê dat u 'Saoedi -Arabië terugneem na wat ons was, 'n gematigde Islam.' Wat beteken dit?
Mohammed bin Salman: Ons het ekstremiste wat vermenging tussen die twee geslagte verbied en is nie in staat om 'n onderskeid te maak tussen 'n man en 'n vrou alleen en hul samesyn op 'n werkplek nie. Baie van hierdie idees weerspreek die lewenswyse gedurende die tyd van die profeet en die kalief. Dit is die werklike voorbeeld en die ware model.
Hy het die bevoegdhede van die land se sogenaamde 'godsdienstige polisie' ingeperk, wat tot onlangs vroue in hegtenis kon neem omdat hulle nie toegesmeer het nie. En luister aandagtig na wat hy sê nie deel uitmaak van Islamitiese wet nie.
Mohammed bin Salman: Die wette is baie duidelik en bepaal in die wette van Sharia: dat vroue ordentlike, respekvolle klere dra, soos mans. Dit dui egter nie spesifiek op 'n swart abaya of 'n swart kopbedekking nie. Die besluit word heeltemal oorgelaat aan vroue om te besluit watter soort ordentlike en respekvolle kleredrag sy wil dra.
Sy woorde is belangrik, en tot dusver hou die koninkryks godsdienstige leiers hul tong vas en het hulle die trou aan die jong prins gesweer.
Saoedi -Arabië se kroonprins Mohammed bin Salman CBS News
Van al die vergaderings wat hy elke week voorsit, is dit die belangrikste: sy ekonomiese raad. Dit is die mans en 'n paar vroue wat vertrou word om Saoedi-Arabië se 'sosiale pakt' met sy mense te heroorweeg. Een van die kroonprins se naaste raadgewers is Mohammed al-Sheikh, 'n Saoedi-gebore, Harvard-opgeleide advokaat.
Mohammed al-Sheikh: Ons het 'n jong bevolking gehad. En ons het voorsiening gemaak vir die bevolking, u weet gesubsidieerde energie, gesubsidieerde water, gesubsidieerde medisyne, gesubsidieerde onderwys, ons het almal se lewe gesubsidieer.
Norah O'Donnell: En geen belasting nie.
Mohammed al-Sheikh: En geen belasting nie.
Norah O'Donnell: Hoe naby was Saoedi -Arabië aan 'n finansiële krisis?
Mohammed al-Sheikh: Ek dink nie dit was baie naby nie, maar dit was in die rigting.
Die hervorming van die welsynstaat is een uitdaging. 'N Ander is wat die kroonprins Saoedi -Arabië se "verslawing" aan olie noem. Die oliemaatskappy van die staat, Aramco, het 'n waarde van $ 2 triljoen. Onder die plan van die kroonprins sal sommige daarvan verkoop word om in nuwe ondernemings te belê. Daar is kommer dat die koninkryks geheimsinnige finansies en die slegte rekord oor menseregte beleggers kan ontstel.
Norah O'Donnell: U het deursigtigheid en openheid belowe. Maar daar is berigte dat tientalle mense wat u regering gekritiseer het, die afgelope jaar in hegtenis geneem is. Dit sluit ekonome, geestelikes, intellektuele in. Is dit werklik 'n oop en vrye samelewing?
Mohammed bin Salman: Ons sal probeer om soveel as moontlik en so vinnig as moontlik inligting oor hierdie individue bekend te maak om die wêreld bewus te maak van wat die regering van Saoedi -Arabië doen om radikalisme te bekamp.
Norah O'Donnell: Maar om die vraag oor menseregteskendings in hierdie land te beantwoord.
Mohammed bin Salman: Saoedi -Arabië glo in baie van die beginsels van menseregte. Ons glo eintlik in die idee van menseregte, maar uiteindelik is Saoedi -standaarde nie dieselfde as Amerikaanse standaarde nie. Ek wil nie sê dat ons nie tekortkominge het nie. Ons doen beslis. Maar natuurlik werk ons daaraan om hierdie tekortkominge reg te stel.
Maar die kroonprins word beskuldig van hardhandige taktiek. Die mees buitengewone voorbeeld was verlede November in die Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Riyadh. Hy het honderde huidige en voormalige ministers van die regering, mediamagsmanne, prominente sakemanne en ten minste 11 prinse na 'n vergadering hier genooi, waar hulle beskuldig word dat hulle van die staat gesteel het en aangehou is totdat hulle dit terugbetaal het of hul onskuld bewys het.
Norah O'Donnell: Ek bedoel, wat het by die Ritz-Carlton gebeur? Hoe het dit gewerk? U was eintlik die Ritz-Carlton 'n gevangenis.
Mohammed bin Salman: Wat ons in Saoedi -Arabië gedoen het, was uiters noodsaaklik. Alle aksies wat geneem is, was in ooreenstemming met bestaande en gepubliseerde wette.
Onder die aangehoudenes was prins Alwaleed bin Talal - een van die rykste mans ter wêreld. Nadat prins Alwaleed langer as twee maande aangehou is, het die Saoedi's 'n kameraspan in sy kamer by die Ritz toegelaat vir 'n kort onderhoud.
Prins Alwaleed: En ek wil graag hier bly totdat hierdie ding heeltemal verby is en uitkom en die lewe aangaan.
Mohammed al-Sheikh het gesê die inperking is nodig.
Mohammed al-Sheikh: Dit was nie maklik nie. Gegewe die name en die mense wat betrokke was, was dit regtig nie maklik nie. Maar ons — ons het net gevoel dat ons dit moet doen. En ons moes dit so doen.
Norah O'Donnell: Van watter korrupsie praat ons? Ek bedoel, hoeveel geld het verdwyn?
Mohammed al-Sheikh: Waarskynlik 5 tot 10 persent van die jaarlikse uitgawes deur die regering, wat ongeveer was, tussen $ 10-20 miljard, miskien selfs meer, op 'n jaarlikse basis.
Norah O'Donnell: Dus verdwyn $ 20 miljard per jaar net?
Mohammed al-Sheikh: Verdwyn.
Daar is berigte dat sommige gevangenes fisies mishandel is en dat een in aanhouding dood is. Die Saoedi's het vir ons gesê dat die keuse van die hotel "was om die respek, waardigheid en troos vir diegene wat ondersoek word, te behou."
Norah O'Donnell: Was dit 'n kraggryp?
Mohammed bin Salman: As ek die mag het en die koning mag optree teen invloedryke mense, dan is u reeds fundamenteel sterk. Dit is uiters beskuldigings.
Norah O'Donnell: Hoeveel geld het jy teruggekry?
Mohammed bin Salman: Die bedrag is meer as $ 100 miljard, maar die eintlike doel was nie hierdie bedrag of 'n ander bedrag nie. Die idee is nie om geld te kry nie, maar om die korrupte te straf en 'n duidelike sein te gee dat elkeen wat korrupte transaksies onderneem, die wet in die gesig staar.
Norah O'Donnell: Gaan dit ook oor die stuur van 'n boodskap dat daar, soos ons in Amerika sê, 'n nuwe balju in die stad is?
Mohammed bin Salman: Absoluut. Absoluut.
"Saoedi -Arabië wil geen atoombom aanskaf nie, maar sonder twyfel sal ons so gou as moontlik volg as Iran 'n atoombom ontwikkel het."
Maar terwyl die 'nuwe balju' korrupsie onderdruk, is daar vrae oor sy eie fortuin. The New York Times berig dat hy onlangs 'n seiljag vir 'n half miljard dollar gekoop het, saam met 'n Franse kasteel.
Mohammed bin Salman: My persoonlike lewe is iets wat ek vir myself wil hou, en ek probeer nie die aandag daarop vestig nie. As sommige koerante iets daaroor wil uitwys, is dit aan hulle. Wat my privaat uitgawes betref, is ek 'n ryk mens en nie 'n arm persoon nie. Ek is nie Gandhi of Mandela nie. Ek is 'n lid van die regerende familie wat honderde jare bestaan het voor die stigting van Saoedi -Arabië. Ons besit baie groot grond, en my persoonlike lewe is dieselfde as 10 of 20 jaar gelede. Maar wat ek as persoon doen, is om 'n deel van my persoonlike inkomste aan liefdadigheid te bestee. Ek bestee ten minste 51% aan mense en 49 aan myself.
Onder die prins se amptelike titels is 'minister van verdediging'. En dit is waar sy skynbare fiksasie op Iran hom in 'n moeras in die naburige Jemen gelei het.
Mohammed bin Salman: Die Iraanse ideologie dring deur na sekere dele van Jemen. Gedurende daardie tyd het hierdie milisie militêre maneuvers reg langs ons grense uitgevoer en missiele op ons grense geplaas.
Sy reaksie was om 'n bomaanval te begin wat tot 'n humanitêre ramp gelei het, soos ons verlede herfs oor 60 minute berig het. Hy sê rebelle wat deur Iran ondersteun word, het die land gebruik om missiele op Riyad af te vuur.
Mohammed bin Salman: Ek kan my nie voorstel dat die Verenigde State eendag sal aanvaar dat 'n burgermag in Mexiko missiele na Washington DC, New York en LA sal aflaai terwyl Amerikaners hierdie missiele dophou en niks doen nie.
Die Verenigde Nasies sê duisende burgerlike sterftes in Jemen is die direkte gevolg van Saoedi -lugaanvalle en 'n blokkade wat sedertdien opgehef is, van die hawe in Jemen wat voedsel en medisyne tydelik verhinder het om by honderde duisende mense uit te kom.
Norah O'Donnell: Erken u dat dit 'n humanitêre katastrofe was, 5 000 burgerlikes vermoor en kinders daar honger gely het?
Mohammed bin Salman: Dit is werklik baie pynlik, en ek hoop dat hierdie milisie nie meer die humanitêre situasie tot hul voordeel kan gebruik om simpatie uit die internasionale gemeenskap te put nie. Hulle blokkeer humanitêre hulp om hongersnood en 'n humanitêre krisis te veroorsaak.
Norah O'Donnell: Is dit wat in Jemen gebeur, in wese 'n volmagoorlog met Iran?
Mohammed bin Salman: Ongelukkig speel Iran 'n skadelike rol. Die Iraanse regime is gebaseer op suiwer ideologie. Baie van die Al-Qaeda-agente word beskerm in Iran en dit weier om hulle aan die gereg oor te gee, en weier steeds om dit aan die Verenigde State uit te lewer. Dit sluit die seun van Osama bin Laden, die nuwe leier van Al-Qaeda, in. Hy woon in Iran en werk uit Iran. Hy word ondersteun deur Iran.
Saoedi -Arabië se kroonprins Mohammed bin Salman saam met bydraer Norah O'Donnell CBS News
Dit is opmerklik dat die Soennitiese Saoedi -Arabië en die Sjiitiese Iran beide beweer dat hulle die enigste ware tak van Islam verteenwoordig.
Norah O'Donnell: Waaroor gaan hierdie breuk in sy hart? Is dit 'n stryd om Islam?
Mohammed bin Salman: Iran is nie 'n mededinger teen Saoedi -Arabië nie. Sy leër is nie een van die top vyf leërs in die Moslemwêreld nie. Die Saoedi -ekonomie is groter as die Iraanse ekonomie. Iran is nog lank nie gelyk aan Saoedi -Arabië nie.
Norah O'Donnell: Maar ek het gesien dat u die Ayatollah, Khamenei, 'die nuwe Hitler' van die Midde -Ooste noem.
Mohammed bin Salman: Absoluut.
Norah O'Donnell: Hoekom?
Mohammed bin Salman: Omdat hy wil uitbrei. Hy wil sy eie projek in die Midde -Ooste skep, net soos Hitler wat destyds wou uitbrei. Baie lande regoor die wêreld en in Europa het nie besef hoe gevaarlik Hitler was voordat dit gebeur het nie. Ek wil nie dieselfde gebeure in die Midde -Ooste sien gebeur nie.
Norah O'Donnell: Het Saoedi -Arabië kernwapens nodig om Iran teë te werk?
Mohammed bin Salman: Saoedi -Arabië wil geen atoombom aanskaf nie, maar sonder twyfel sal ons so gou as moontlik volg as Iran 'n atoombom ontwikkel het.
60 minute vervaardiger Harry Radliffe II CBS News
'N Nota uit 60 minute: ons verhaal "erfgenaam van die troon" het baie skrywers. Die span van tien persone wat ongeveer 'n week na Saoedi-Arabië gereis het, het die korrespondent Norah O'Donnell ingesluit, wat 'n langdurige fassinasie vir die streek by haar gehad het. Ook in ons span: die vervaardigers Graham Messick en Vanessa Fica, wat op versoek van die oorspronklike vervaardiger van die verhaal, Harry A. Radliffe II, meer as twee jaar gelede begin werk het voordat hy op 66 -jarige ouderdom aan kanker oorlede is.
Radliffe was 60 minute 'n inwonende kenner van politiek, godsdiens en geskiedenis in die Midde -Ooste. Goed gereis en hartstogtelik nuuskierig, sou Harry oor 'n segment van 60 minute oor Saoedi-Arabië sê: "As dit nie 'n verhaal is nie, weet ek nie wat dit is nie." Radliffe was bekend daarvoor dat hy sy tyd geneem het met stories soos hierdie, wat hy geweet het dat die Saoedi-koninklike familie eendag uiteindelik 'n voorsprong sou gee. Ongelukkig het die dag gekom na Harry se afsterwe, maar ons is so bly dat ons sy visie kon voortsit.
Ook in die span wat hierdie verhaal moontlik gemaak het: medeprodusent Jack Weingart, produsent in die Midde -Ooste, fotograwe Jonathan Partridge en Mark La Ganga, klankingenieurs Anton Van der Merwe en Matt Magratten, en redakteurs Dan Glucksman en Craig Crawford. Jeff Fager, die goeie vriend van Radliffe en die uitvoerende vervaardiger van 60 minute, het die laaste sê oor die verhaal gehad en het twee Saoedi -prinses persoonlik verseker dat ons regverdig en akkuraat sou wees en die kroonprins kon toelaat om sy verhaal te vertel as hy ons toelaat. Ons is bly dat hy dit gedoen het.
Die 32-jarige kroonprins van Saoedi-Arabië, Mohammed bin Salman, het ooms, neefs en halfbroers uitoorlê om die mag agter die troon van sy ouer vader, koning Salman, te word. Sedertdien het hierdie koninklike opstart die Saoedi -samelewing herbou uit sosiale en ekonomiese noodsaaklikheid. Die oorgrote meerderheid van die burgers van die koninkryk is jonger as 30 jaar oud en het via hul selfone met die hele wêreld verbind. Net so belangrik is dat olie nie meer 'n voorspelbare bron van inkomste is nie, wat beteken dat gesondheidsorg, opvoeding en ander dienste wat elke Saoedi-burger se geboortereg was, in gevaar is. Dit is 'n brandbare mengsel vir 'n brutale leier in 'n gevaarlike deel van die wêreld. Maar die troonopvolger lyk gretig vir die uitdaging.
Norah O'Donnell: O, is dit waar u die hele nag deurbring?
Mohammed bin Salman in Engels: Meestal. Dus het al die werkslaafse predikante die meeste van hul nagte hier in hierdie kantore deurgebring. So, ek is jammer as dit 'n bietjie sleg is.
Norah O'Donnell: Dit is nie 'n slegte kantoor nie.
Hy bring die meeste aande deur in die Irgah -paleis in Riyad, waar hy die tradisionele Saoedi -hoofdoek afgee.
Norah O'Donnell: En hoe laat in die oggend is u hier totdat u werk?
Mohammed bin Salman in Engels: O, ek kom hier, by, soos middag tot laataand.
Ons word vertel dat sy 82-jarige pa, koning Salman, iewers bo is en die grootste deel van die daaglikse werk aan sy seun oorlaat. Hy het ons om 21:00 begelei. na 'n vergadering oor die openbare beleggingsfonds.
Ingevolge die gedetailleerde plan van prins Mohammed om Saoedi -Arabië en 'Visie 2030' te herskep, sal die openbare beleggingsfonds uiteindelik tot $ 2 triljoen groei. Die mans in hierdie kamer praat oor hoe om dit te belê. Hulle het onlangs drie en 'n half miljard dollar in Uber gesink. As sulke weddenskappe vrugte afwerp, sal dit dividende wees, nie olie -inkomste nie, wat in die Saoedi -tesourie kom.
Prinses Reema: Hierdie man spandeer 24 uur per dag aan hierdie visie.
Prinses Reema bint Bandar is die kroonprins se neef en hy het haar gekies om een van die sportowerhede van die regering te lei.
Norah O'Donnell: U was verbaas oor die tempo waarmee hy dinge doen.
Prinses Reema: Ek is nie verbaas oor die pas nie. Ek is verbaas oor hoe gedetailleerd die pas is. Ons is nie 'n gemeenskap wat gewoond is daaraan dat iemand sê: "Dinsdag, 5 November, ek wil X sien nie." Die soort beteken ja, miskien, inshallah.
Norah O'Donnell: God wil.
Saoedi -Arabië se kroonprins Mohammed bin Salman lei 'n vergadering CBS News
Prinses Reema: Daar is eintlik 'n opsporingstelsel wat ons maandeliks opdateer. Wat is ons vordering? Hoe het ons ons getalle bereik? Ons werk en werk soos 'n private sektor. En dit is nuut.
Vir 'n besoeker lyk dit nie asof daar baie verander het nie. Ongetroude mans in helder wit klere en vroue wat heeltemal swart geklee is, hou afstand van mekaar. Vroulike besoekers voel steeds verplig om die tradisionele Abaya in die openbaar te dra, maar nie meer die doek nie. By hierdie Starbucks sit mans in 'n afdeling en sit vroue en gesinne net anderkant die houtafskorting.
Dit was moeilik om mense te kry, veral vroue en vroue, om op kamera te praat oor die hervormings van die kroonprins. Hierdie man het versigtigheid aangemoedig.
Abdul Rahman: Ek hou van die geleidelike verandering. Ons wil nie te vinnig beweeg nie en 'n duur prys betaal.
Norah O'Donnell: Met ander woorde, dink u dat die kroonprins baie versigtig moet wees met die pas?
Abdul Rahman: Presies.
Saoedi-Arabië hou nog steeds by 'n antieke magsdelingreëling tussen die House of Saud en Wahhabi Islam, die streng, oorheersende geloof in Saoedi-Arabië. Maar die kroonprins het ons vertel dat dit nie sy godsdiens is nie, maar ekstremiste binne Islamitiese groepe soos die Moslem -broederskap, wat die Saoedi -samelewing, insluitend sy skole, binnegedring het.
Norah O'Donnell: Kyk u na die opleiding en opvoeding in Saoedi -Arabië?
Mohammed bin Salman: Saoedi -skole is deur baie elemente van die Muslim Brotherhood -organisasie binnegedring, sekerlik in 'n groot mate. Selfs nou nog is daar enkele elemente oor. Dit sal 'n kort rukkie duur totdat hulle heeltemal uitgewis is.
Norah O'Donnell: U sê dat u hierdie ekstremisme in die onderwysstelsel gaan uitroei?
Mohammed bin Salman: Natuurlik sou geen land ter wêreld aanvaar dat sy onderwysstelsel deur enige radikale groep binnegeval word nie.
Die kroonprins verteenwoordig die oorgrote meerderheid van die Saoedi -mense en -dashers wat oorweldigend jonk, rusteloos en via alles met hul selfone verbind is. Hulle sien 'n verwante gees in hul nuwe iPad-verslaafde leier.
Norah O'Donnell: Die meeste jong vroue wat ek ontmoet het, is almal op Snapchat. Hulle het my gevra om by hulle aan te sluit op Snapchat. Dit is dat dit die hele kultuur verander.
Mohammed bin Salman: Ek kan nie beweer dat ek 'n rol hierin gespeel het nie. Saoedi -burgers was nog altyd oop vir sosiale media en tegnologie.
Jong Saoedi's met wie ons gesels het by hierdie nuwerwets pop-up-burger, sê dat hulle steeds versigtig is oor wat hulle op Twitter en Instagram plaas, en daarom verbind lede van die teenoorgestelde geslag via privaat boodskapprogramme soos Snapchat en Whatsapp.
Norah O'Donnell: Sosiale media.
MANNEL #1: Dit is groot in Saoedi -Arabië.
MANNEL #2: Dit is ons ontsnapping, ja.
Norah O'Donnell: Is die telefoon jou ontsnapping?
MANSTEM: Ja. Sosiale media is.
Die kroonprins het meer kommer, net 22 persent van die Saoedi -vroue werk, en hy wil meer aanmoedig om by die arbeidsmag aan te sluit.
Mohammed bin Salman: Ons werk aan 'n inisiatief wat ons in die nabye toekoms sal begin om regulasies in te stel wat gelyke loon vir mans en vroue verseker.
Norah O'Donnell: Maar jy praat van gelyke loon. Vroue kan nie eers in hierdie land ry nie. Dit is die laaste, laaste plek in die wêreld wat vroue nie die regte het om te bestuur nie.
Mohammed bin Salman: Dit is nie meer 'n probleem nie. Vandag is bestuurskole gestig en sal binnekort oopmaak. Oor 'n paar maande sal vroue in Saoedi -Arabië ry. Ons is uiteindelik verby die pynlike tydperk wat ons nie kan regverdig nie.
Norah O'Donnell: Die meeste mense hoor beslis van die reël wat vroue in Junie sal laat bestuur. Maar daar was ook hierdie voogdyskapswette dat 'n vrou toestemming moet kry van 'n man in haar huishouding om te reis. Dit lyk so 'n terugslag.
Mohammed bin Salman: Vandag het Saoedi -vroue steeds nie hul volle regte ontvang nie. Daar is regte in Islam wat hulle nog steeds nie het nie. Ons het 'n baie lang pad gekom en het 'n kort pad.
Hy wou hê dat ons hierdie bestuurskool by die Princess Nourah -universiteit, die grootste vroue -universiteit ter wêreld, moes sien. Die skool berei hom voor om 70 000 vroue te leer bestuur.
Hierdie afrigters sal vroue deur klasse en simulators sit voordat hulle die pad aandurf.
Norah O'Donnell: Hoe kom jy nou by die werk of skool?
VROU #1: Vir my het ek 'n bestuurder. Of soos my pa of my broer.
VROU #2: Ry is net 'n vinnige oorwinning. Dit is nie alles nie. Dit is net verteenwoordigend dat ons in die regte rigting gaan. Dit is vooruitgang. Die trajek gaan nou net vorentoe en nie agteruit nie.
Norah O'Donnell: Getuig u van die geskiedenis?
VROUE: (OVERTALK) Ja. Presies. Ons is bly om deel te wees van hierdie geskiedenis.
Prinses Reema help ook om geskiedenis te maak, en sy het onlangs die poorte oopgemaak vir Saoedi -vroue om sokkerwedstryde by te woon.
Norah O'Donnell: Ek bedoel, dit was net in 2015 dat 'n Saoedi -vrou in hegtenis geneem is wat probeer het om na 'n speletjie te gaan.
Prinses Reema: Ja. Ja. En weet jy wat? Ek is trots om te sê dat ek by die eerste wedstryd was waar dit nie meer 'n werklikheid is nie. Hoe opspraakwekkend is dit om oor twee jaar te sê? In twee jaar het die boog verander.
Norah O'Donnell: Mense het my gevra vir my indrukke, en daar is soveel modern wat infrastruktuur en Amerikaanse restaurante betref. Maar dit is nog steeds interessant om te sien dat enkellopende mans in een deel van die restaurant eet. En gesinne en vroue in 'n ander.
Prinses Reema: Reg.
Norah O'Donnell: Dit is geskei.
Prinses Reema: Dit word hier beskou as die behoud van die privaatheid van die persoonlike ruimte van die vrou. If it comes out to being viewed internationally as disrespectful, that's not the intention. Does it end up sometimes causing obstacles? Ja. But the intent is not disrespect.
Norah O'Donnell: Do you think Mohammed bin Salman is prepared to take the throne?
Princess Reema: I don't think anyone is ever prepared. I think since he was 18 years old he has been groomed for leadership.
His ascension would mark a generational power shift. It was his grandfather, King Abdulaziz, who founded modern Saudi Arabia, and was succeeded by six sons, including the current king, King Salman. The crown prince grew up by his father's side, learning and biding his time.
Norah O'Donnell: What did you learn from your father?
Mohammed bin Salman: Many, many things. He loves history very much. He is an avid reader of history. Each week, he would assign each one of us a book. And at the end of the week, he would ask us about the content of that book. The king always says, "If you read the history of a thousand years, you have the experience of a thousand years."
Mohammed bin Salman is trying to keep pace with a population that's become as familiar with American celebrity culture as they are with the tales of the Prophet Muhammad in the birthplace of Islam. Just as American society transformed during the 1960's, the Saudis are in the midst of their own cultural revolution. The kingdom, the Middle East, and the Islamic world may never be the same.
Norah O'Donnell: You're 32 years old. You could rule this country for the next 50 years.
Mohammed bin Salman: Only God knows how long one will live, if one would live 50 years or not, but if things go their normal ways, then that's to be expected.
Norah O'Donnell: Can anything stop you?
Mohammed bin Salman: Only death.
Produced by Graham Messick and Vanessa Fica. Associate producer, Jack Weingart.
Norah O'Donnell is the anchor and managing editor of the "CBS Evening News." She also contributes to "60 Minutes."
Event chain: Fear and Loathing [ edit ]
Fear and Loathing in $PROVINCENAME$
Twilight is always the worst. The clouds racing circles across moonless skies, cruel stars suspended like grains of broken glass, and chandeliers throwing strange shadows across the Royal Chambers. Lately, a strange sense has come upon you that there is something wrong with the place. The geometry of it seems. unsound. Thinking back. it all started with the birth of $HEIR$.
The event chain: Fear and Loathing starts.
The current heir of the province owner dies. ⎗ ]
The Discovery
My $MONARCHTITLE$. ' you sense instantly that there is something wrong. There is something in his voice, right below the surface. Hidden contempt, and fear. '. the new brick wall in the eastern cellar. It wasn't built for insulation, was it?' You remember it clearly now. How small the body felt. Carrying it down into the damp cellar, laying the bricks. It made you sick. Sick to the core. Killing your progeny wasn't the catharsis you had expected it to be. For an instant, the flashing glimpse of an insight blows across your mind.
- had the
event ‘Fear and Loathing in $PROVINCENAME$’ and chosen the option: ‘All work and no play, makes $MONARCH$ a dull, dull boy.’ en gehad het nie this event before. ⎙ ]
- doen nie have a regency council.
- is nie the lesser part in a personal union.
The current ruler dies.
The event chain: Fear and Loathing is over. ⎚ ]
Dance Macabre
The Royal Chamber is a swirling mist of scents and shapes, coming and going into and out of existence like colorful snowflakes. You are hungry. So very hungry. As if you hadn't eaten in months. The stars looking down on you, still suspended in a moonless sky, laugh and dance. They seem free, and wild. There is something about those stars. They seem so. reg. You have gone quite insane.
- had the />event ‘Fear and Loathing in $PROVINCENAME$’ and
- either chose the option “Lord God our Father, thou who art in heaven!”
- or chose the option “All work and no play, makes $MONARCH$ a dull, dull boy.” and then had the />event The Discovery and chose the option “Heeere's $MONARCH$!” ⎛ ]
The event chain: Fear and Loathing is over. ⎜ ]
The current ruler dies.
The country gets the modifier: “Delivered from evil” for 10 years giving the following effects:The event chain: Fear and Loathing is over. ⎜ ]
Our Monarch Dies
Our monarch has died, and considering the strange things he was saying toward the end of his life, perhaps it is for the better.
The country is in the event chain: ‘Fear and Loathing’. ⎝ ]
The country gets the modifier: “Delivered from Evil” for 10 years giving the following effects:
The event chain: Fear and Loathing is over. ⎞ ]
Strong Leader
Over the next four decades, Haile Selassie presided over a country and government that was an expression of his personal authority. His reforms greatly strengthened schools and the police, and he instituted a new constitution and centralized his own power.
In 1936 he was forced into exile after Italy invaded Ethiopia. Haile Selassie became the face of the resistance as he went before the League of Nations in Geneva for assistance, and eventually secured the help of the British in reclaiming his country and reinstituting his powers as emperor in 1941.
Haile Selassie again moved to try to modernize his country. In the face of a wave of anti-colonialism sweeping across Africa, he granted a new constitution in 1955, one that outlined equal rights for his citizens under the law, but conversely did nothing to diminish Haile Selassie&aposs own powers.
Kinders
Elizabeth and Philip wasted no time in producing an heir: Son Charles was born in 1948, the year after their wedding, and daughter Anne arrived in 1950. Elizabeth had two more children — sons Andrew and Edward — in 1960 and 1964, respectively.
In 1969, she officially made Charles her successor by granting him the title of Prince of Wales. Hundreds of millions of people tuned in to see the ceremony on television.
In 1981 32-year-old Charles wed 19-year-old Diana Spencer (best known as Princess Diana), with later rumors surfacing that he was pressured into the marriage from his family. The wedding drew enormous crowds in the streets of London and millions watched the proceedings on television. Public opinion of the monarchy was especially strong at that time.
Augustus (63 BC - AD 14)
A bronze head of Augustus © Augustus was the first emperor of Rome. He replaced the Roman republic with an effective monarchy and during his long reign brought peace and stability.Augustus was born Gaius Octavius on 23 September 63 BC in Rome. In 43 BC his great-uncle, Julius Caesar, was assassinated and in his will, Octavius, known as Octavian, was named as his heir. He fought to avenge Caesar and in 31 BC defeated Antony and Cleopatra at the Battle of Actium. He was now undisputed ruler of Rome.
Instead of following Caesar's example and making himself dictator, Octavian in 27 BC founded the principate, a system of monarchy headed by an emperor holding power for life. His powers were hidden behind constitutional forms, and he took the name Augustus meaning 'lofty' or 'serene'. Nevertheless, he retained ultimate control of all aspects of the Roman state, with the army under his direct command.
At home, he embarked on a large programme of reconstruction and social reform. Rome was transformed with impressive new buildings and Augustus was a patron to Virgil, Horace and Propertius, the leading poets of the day. Augustus also ensured that his image was promoted throughout his empire by means of statues and coins.
Abroad, he created a standing army for the first time, and embarked upon a vigorous campaign of expansion designed to make Rome safe from the 'barbarians' beyond the frontiers, and to secure the Augustan peace. His stepsons Tiberius and Drusus undertook the task (Augustus had married their mother Livia in 38 BC). Between 16 BC and 6 AD the frontier was advanced from the Rhine to the Elbe in Germany, and up to the Danube along its entire length. But Drusus died in the process and in 9 AD the annihilation of three Roman legions in Germany (out of 28 overall), in the Varian disaster, led to the abandonment of Germany east of the Rhine.
Augustus was determined to be succeeded by someone of his own blood, but he had no sons, only a daughter, Julia, the child of his first wife. His nephew Marcellus and his beloved grandsons Gaius and Lucius pre-deceased him, so he reluctantly made Tiberius his heir.
Military disaster, the loss of his grandsons and a troubled economy clouded his last years. He became more dictatorial, exiling the poet Ovid (8 AD), who had mocked his moral reforms. He died on 19 August 14 AD.
The Queen Who Would Be King
Editor’s Note: This article was adapted from its original form and updated to include new information for Smithsonian’s Mysteries of the Ancient World bookazine published in Fall 2009.
It was a hot, dusty day in early 1927, and Herbert Winlock was staring at a scene of brutal destruction that had all the hallmarks of a vicious personal attack. Signs of desecration were everywhere eyes had been gouged out, heads lopped off, the cobra-like symbol of royalty hacked from foreheads. Winlock, head of the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s archaeological team in Egypt, had unearthed a pit in the great temple complex at Deir el-Bahri, across the Nile from the ancient sites of Thebes and Karnak. In the pit were smashed statues of a pharaoh—pieces “from the size of a fingertip,” Winlock noted, “to others weighing a ton or more.” The images had suffered “almost every conceivable indignity,” he wrote, as the violators vented “their spite on the [pharaoh’s] brilliantly chiseled, smiling features.” To the ancient Egyptians, pharaohs were gods. What could this one have done to warrant such blasphemy? In the opinion of Winlock, and other Egyptologists of his generation, plenty.
The statues were those of Hatshepsut, the sixth pharaoh of the 18th dynasty, one of the few—and by far the most successful—women to rule Egypt as pharaoh. Evidence of her remarkable reign (c. 1479-1458 b.c.) did not begin to emerge until the 19th century. But by Winlock’s day, historians had crafted the few known facts of her life into a soap opera of deceit, lust and revenge.
Although her long rule had been a time of peace and prosperity, filled with magnificent art and a number of ambitious building projects (the greatest of which was her mortuary, or memorial, temple at Deir el-Bahri), Hatshepsut’s methods of acquiring and holding onto power suggested a darker side to her reign and character. The widowed queen of the pharaoh Thutmose II, she had, according to custom, been made regent after his death in c. 1479 b.c. to rule for her young stepson, Thutmose III, until he came of age. Within a few years, however, she proclaimed herself pharaoh, thereby becoming, in the words of Winlock’s colleague at the Metropolitan, William C. Hayes, the “vilest type of usurper.” Disconcerting to some scholars, too, was her insistence on being portrayed as male, with bulging muscles and the traditional pharaonic false beard—variously interpreted by those historians as an act of outrageous deception, deviant behavior or both. Many early Egyptologists also concluded that Hatshepsut’s chief minister, Senenmut, must have been her lover as well, a co-conspirator in her climb to power, the so-called evil genius behind what they viewed as her devious politics.
Upon Hatshepsut’s death in c. 1458 b.c., her stepson, then likely still in his early 20s, finally ascended to the throne. By that time, according to Hayes, Thutmose III had developed “a loathing for Hatshepsut. her name and her very memory which practically beggars description.” The destruction of her monuments, carried out with such apparent fury, was almost universally interpreted as an act of long-awaited and bitter revenge on the part of Thutmose III, who, Winlock wrote, “could scarcely wait to take the vengeance on her dead that he had not dared in life.”
“Of course, it made a wonderful story,” says Renée Dreyfus, curator of ancient art and interpretation at the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco. “And this is what we all read when we were growing up. But so much of what was written about Hatshepsut, I think, had to do with who the archaeologists were. gentlemen scholars of a certain generation.”
Hatshepsut was born at the dawn of a glorious age of Egyptian imperial power and prosperity, rightly called the New Kingdom. Her father, King Thutmose I, was a charismatic leader of legendary military exploits. Hatshepsut, scholars surmise, may have come into the world about the time of his coronation, c. 1504 b.c., and so would still have been a toddler when he famously sailed home to Thebes with the naked body of a Nubian chieftain dangling from the prow of his ship—a warning to all who would threaten his empire.
Hatshepsut seems to have idolized her father (she would eventually have him reburied in the tomb she was having built for herself) and would claim that soon after her birth he had named her successor to his throne, an act that scholars feel would have been highly unlikely. There had been only two—possibly three—female pharaohs in the previous 1,500 years, and each had ascended to the throne only when there was no suitable male successor available. (Cleopatra would rule some 14 centuries later.)
Normally, the pharaonic line passed from father to son—preferably the son of the queen, but if there were no such offspring, to the son of one of the pharaoh’s “secondary,” or “harem,” wives. In addition to Hatshepsut—and another younger daughter who apparently died in childhood—it’s believed that Thutmose I fathered two sons with Queen Ahmes, both of whom predeceased him. Thus the son of a secondary wife, Mutnofret, was crowned Thutmose II. In short order (and probably to bolster the royal bloodlines of this “harem child”), young Thutmose II was married to his half sister Hatshepsut, making her Queen of Egypt at about age 12.
Historians have generally described Thutmose II as frail and ineffectual—just the sort of person a supposedly shrewish Hatshepsut could push around. Public monuments, however, depict a dutiful Hatshepsut standing appropriately behind her husband. But while she bore her husband a daughter, Neferure (her only known child), Hatshepsut failed in the more important duty of producing a son. So when Thutmose II died young (c. 1479 B.C.), possibly still in his 20s—the throne went, yet again, to a “harem child.” Duly named Thutmose III, this child was destined to become one of the great warrior kings of Egypt. But at the time of his father’s death, he was likely an infant, a “hawk. still in the nest”—and deemed too young to rule.
In such cases, it was accepted New Kingdom practice for widowed queens to act as regents, handling the affairs of government until their sons—in this case, stepson/nephew—came of age, and Hatshepsut (more or less automatically, it seems) got the assignment. “I think it would have been pretty much the norm for Hatshepsut to step in,” says Peter Dorman, an Egyptologist who is president of the American University of Beirut. “But it’s also quite clear that Thutmose III was recognized as king from the very start.”
Monuments of the time show Thutmose III—still a child, but portrayed in the conventional manner as an adult king—performing his pharaonic duties, while Hatshepsut, dressed as queen, stands demurely off to one side. By the seventh year of her regency, however (and it may have been much earlier), the formerly slim, graceful queen appears as a full-blown, flail-and-crook-wielding king, with the broad, bare chest of a man and the pharaonic false beard.
Maar hoekom? To Egyptologists of an earlier generation, Hatshepsut’s elevation to godlike status was an act of naked ambition. (“It was not long,” Hayes wrote, “before this vain, ambitious, and unscrupulous woman showed. her true colors.”) But more recent scholarship suggests that a political crisis, such as a threat from a competing branch of the royal family, obliged Hatshepsut to become pharaoh. Far from stealing the throne, says Catharine Roehrig, curator of Egyptian art at the Metropolitan Museum in New York City, “Hatshepsut may have had to declare herself king to protect the kingship for her stepson.”
It’s an interpretation that seems to be supported by Hatshepsut’s treatment of Thutmose III during her reign. “He wasn’t under house arrest for those 20-odd years,” says Roehrig. “He was learning how to be a very good soldier.” And it’s not as if Hatshepsut could have stepped down when her stepson came of age. “Once you took on the attributes of kingship,” explains Dreyfus, “that was it. You were a god. It’s not queen for a day, it’s king for all time.”
Hatshepsut probably knew her position was tenuous—both by virtue of her sex and the unconventional way she had gained the throne—and therefore appears to have done what canny leaders have often done in times of crisis: she reinvented herself. The most obvious form this took was having herself portrayed as a male pharaoh. As to why, “No one really knows,” says Dorman. But he believes it may have been motivated by the presence of a male co-ruler—a circumstance with which no previous female ruler had ever contended.
“She was not pretending to be a man! She was not cross-dressing!” Cathleen Keller, a professor of Near Eastern studies at the University of California at Berkeley, told me before her death last year. Inscriptions on Hatshepsut’s statues, she said, almost always contain some indication of her true gender—a title, such as “Daughter of Re,” or feminine word endings, resulting in such grammatical conundrums as “His Majesty, Herself.”
Hatshepsut also took a new name, Maatkare, sometimes translated as Truth (maat) is the Soul (ka) of the Sun God (Re). The key word here is maat—the ancient Egyptian expression for order and justice as established by the gods. Maintaining and perpetuating maat to ensure the prosperity and stability of the country required a legitimate pharaoh who could speak—as only pharaohs could—directly with the gods. By calling herself Maatkare, Hatshepsut was likely reassuring her people that they had a legitimate ruler on the throne.
One important way pharaohs affirmed maat was by creating monuments, and Hatshepsut’s building projects were among the most ambitious of any pharaoh’s. She began with the erection of two 100-foot-tall obelisks at the great temple complex at Karnak. Reliefs commemorating the event show the obelisks, each weighing about 450 tons, being towed along the Nile by 27 ships manned by 850 oarsmen.
Hatshepsut carried out her public works program across the empire, but it was concentrated in the area around Thebes, the dynastic and theological center of the Thutmoside dynasty, where she built a network of imposing processional roadways and sanctuaries. At Deir el-Bahri, just across the Nile from Thebes, she erected her magnum opus—an immense memorial temple, used for special religious rites connected to the cult that would guarantee Hatshepsut perpetual life after death.
Dramatically sited at the base of towering limestone cliffs, the temple, which is regarded as one of the architectural wonders of the ancient world, is approached through a series of terraced colonnades and courtyards that appear to ascend up the very side of the mountain. Despite the enormous scale of the complex—roughly the length of two and a half football fields—its overall impression is one of lightness and grace, unlike the fortresslike temples of her predecessors.
The temple’s lower levels featured pools and gardens planted with fragrant trees. Supersized images of Hatshepsut were everywhere. Some 100 colossal statues of the female pharaoh as a sphinx guarded the processional way. Lining the terraces were more images of the ruler (some more than ten feet tall) in various devotional attitudes—kneeling with offerings to the gods, striding into eternity or in the guise of Osiris, god of death and resurrection. Miraculously, a number of these statues—some reassembled, others still in a fragmentary state—survive. Most are massive, masculine and meant to be seen from a distance.
Hatshepsut’s temple also featured a series of reliefs marking the achievements of her reign, including a storied trading expedition to the mysterious and distant land called Punt, believed to be somewhere on the coast of the Red Sea, perhaps in current-day Eritrea. The reliefs show the Egyptians loading their boats in Punt with an array of highly prized luxury goods—ebony, ivory, gold, exotic animals and incense trees. “Never,” reads an inscription, “were such things brought to any king since the world was.”
As a work of art, of architecture and of self-glorification, Hatshepsut’s memorial was an enormous enterprise that must have involved an army of workers. It’s almost certain, scholars agree, that Senenmut, the official overseer of works at Deir el-Bahri, was the mastermind behind—if not the actual architect of—the temple. He had most likely begun his climb to power during the reign of Thutmose II, when he was appointed tutor to Hatshepsut’s daughter, Neferure. But his influence soared with Hatshepsut’s accession to the throne. In time he acquired some 93 titles, the most prestigious of which was Great Steward of Amun (the god of Thebes), which put him in charge of all of Karnak’s building and business activities.
Many of Senenmut’s monuments to himself (some 25—a staggering number for a nonroyal) mention his exceptional access to the throne he was a “true confidant” of the pharaoh and the “one upon whose utterances his Lordrelied.” But earlier scholars’ belief that Senenmut was the real force behind Hatshepsut’s rule—not “even a woman of the most virile character could have attained such a pinnacle of success without masculine support,” wrote historian Alan Gardiner in 1961—has now been largely discounted by experts as a woeful underestimation of Hatshepsut.
Did she and Senenmut share more than power? Probably not, most scholars, including Peter Dorman, have concluded. Dorman does believe, however, that the pharaoh and her favorite minister may well have been victims ofspeculation and gossip.
Senenmut’s fate is a mystery. His privileged position allowed him to build a splendid tomb for himself near Hatshepsut’s—which is in the Valley of the Kings, just west of Deir el-Bahri—but he apparently never occupied it. The tomb suffered major damage, including the smashing of his impressive, if unused, stone sarcophagus. It was long thought that either Hatshepsut or Thutmose III were the culprits, but recent scholarship suggests some combination of religious upheaval, tomb robbers and natural collapse.
Hatshepsut’s own tomb was cut into the base of the cliffs on the east side of the Valley of the Kings and was large enough to accommodate both her sarcophagus and that of her father—reburying him in her tomb was yetanother attempt to legitimize her rule. It’s believed that Hatshepsut died (possibly in her late 40s) around 1458 b.c., the year that Thutmose III first used the title “Ruler of Maat.”
Thutmose III’s destruction of Hatshepsut’s monuments has long been recognized as a conscientious—and very nearly successful—attempt to obliterate her name and memory from history. But was it, as many early Egyptologists had assumed, an act of revenge and hatred? In recent decades, scholars have re-examined the archaeological evidence and come to the startling conclusion that the destruction, presumed to have been initiated soon after Hatshepsut’s death, was actually not begun until some 20 years later, toward the end of Thutmose III’s own long reign (c. 1458-1425 b.c.). “I think that people recognize now, because it happenedso late in Thutmose III’s reign, that it wasn’t personal animosity,” says Dorman of the rampage. “For some reason, Thutmose III must have decided it was necessary to essentially rewrite the official record of Hatshepsut’s kingship”—which meant eradicating all traces of it to suggest that the throne had gone directly from his father to him.
While numerous theories abound, most contemporary Egyptologists agree that the effort to delete Hatshepsut’s rule had something to do with Thutmose III’s concerns about the succession of power after his death. Wasthere some threat to the legitimacy of his own son, Amenhotep II, who in fact did succeed him? Moontlik. But Dorman believes that Hatshepsut’s unconventional reign may have been too successful, a dangerous precedent “best erased,” he suggests, “to prevent the possibility of another powerful female ever inserting herself into the long line of Egyptian male kings.”
The story of Hatshepsut will probably never be complete. “She’s like an iceberg,” says Joyce Tyldesley, scholar and author of the 1996 biography Hatchepsut: The Female Pharaoh. “On the surface we know quite a lot about her. But there’s so much we don’t know.”
Even so, new light continues to shine on the queen who would be king. In 2007, Egyptian archaeologist Zahi Hawass identified a previously excavated royal mummy as Hatshepsut. Catharine Roehrig is among those scholars awaiting more evidence to bolster the claim. “The fact that the mummy is female, was found in the Valley of the Kings and is about the right age makes this identification quite possible,” she says. But, Roehrig adds, “The evidence is not conclusive further studies are in progress.”
Tyldesley believes that Hatshepsut may have been keenly conscious of her exceptional place in history. “This is just speculation,” she says, “but I think she was almost aware that she might be forgotten or that her actions would be misunderstood.” Toward the end of her reign, Hatshepsut erected a second pair of obelisks at Karnak. On one the inscription reads: “Now my heart turns this way and that, as I think what the people will say—those who shall see my monuments in years to come, and who shall speak of what I have done.”
The Constitution has an answer for seditious members of Congress
Let's review two pieces of news from the last week. First, the American coronavirus pandemic is entering its worst stage yet, with cases and deaths skyrocketing across the country. Last Thursday saw over 3,000 deaths — more than 9/11 or Pearl Harbor — and with ICU beds at or near capacity in most of the country, absent serious change it is possible there will be double or even triple that number per day in a matter of weeks. We may yet top the deadliest day in American history, the Galveston hurricane of 1900 that killed an estimated 8,000 people, very soon. President Trump is doing precisely nothing about this.
Second, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who is under investigation for bribery and abuse of office, filed a baldly seditious lawsuit calling for the Supreme Court to overturn the election results in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan, and hand their electoral votes to Trump. It was flatly an attempt to overturn the 2020 election, end constitutional government, and install Trump in power. Before the Supreme Court threw the suit out Friday night, 17 other Republican state attorneys general had joined him, along with 126 members of the Republican caucus in the House, while Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) has agreed to represent Trump. And this is just one of dozens of attempts that Republicans at all levels of government have concocted to overturn Trump's loss.
In short, material conditions in this country have not been this bad since 1932 at least, and the political situation has not been this bad since 1860. The logical endgame of the rapidly-accelerating Republican attempt to destroy democracy while the country burns would be civil war — if it weren't for the high probability that Democratic leaders would be too cowardly to fight.
But it's worth thinking about what a party seriously committed to preserving democracy would do when faced with a seditious opposition party — namely, cut them out of power and krag them to behave. Democrats could declare all traitors ineligible to serve in national office, convene a Patriot Congress composed solely of people who have not committed insurrection against the American government, and use that power to re-entrench democracy.
The reasoning here is very simple. All members of Congress swear an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, which establishes a republican form of government. The whole point of a republic is that contests for power are conducted through a framework of rules and democratic elections, where all parties agree to respect the result whether they lose or win. Moreover, the premise of this lawsuit was completely preposterous — arguing in effect that states should not be allowed to set their own election rules if that means more Democrats can vote — and provides no evidence whatsoever for false allegations of tens of thousands of instances of voter fraud. Indeed, several of the representatives who support the lawsuit were themselves just elected by the very votes they now say are fraudulent. The proposed remedy — having Republican-dominated legislatures in enigste the four states that gave Biden his margin of victory select Trump electors — would be straight-up election theft.
In other words, this lawsuit, even though it didn't succeed, is a flagrant attempt to overturn the constitutional system and impose through authoritarian means the rule of a corrupt criminal whose doltish incompetence has gotten hundreds of thousands of Americans killed. It is a "seditious abuse of the judicial process," as the states of Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin jointly wrote in their response to Texas trying to steal their elections.
The Constitution, as goofy and jerry-rigged as it is, stipulates that insurrectionists who violate their oath are not allowed to serve in Congress. Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, written to exclude Confederate Civil War traitors, says that "No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress … who … having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress … to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same[.]" How the Supreme Court ruled, or whether Republicans actually believe their lunatic claims, is irrelevant. It's still insurrection even if it doesn't work out.
Democrats would have every right, both under the Constitution and under the principle of popular sovereignty outlined in the Declaration of Independence, to convene a traitor-free Congress (also including similar acts committed by Republican senators like Lindsey Graham, David Perdue, Kelly Loeffler, and others), and pass such laws as would be necessary to preserve the American republic. That might include a national popular vote to decide the presidency, ironclad voting rights protections, a ban on gerrymandering either national or state district boundaries, full representation for the citizens of D.C. and Puerto Rico, regulations on internet platforms that are inflaming violent political extremism, a clear legal framework for the transfer of power that ends the lame duck period, and so on. States would be forced to agree to these measures before they can replace their traitorous representatives and senators. If the Supreme Court objects, more pro-democracy justices can be added.
This wouldn't be the first time such a thing has happened, either. Immediately after the Civil War, the Radical Republican Congress refused to seat delegations from the former rebellious states until they were satisfied with the progress of Reconstruction. Southern states were forced to ratify the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments — which guaranteed due process and universal male suffrage — before their congressional delegations would be seated. (As a consequence, those delegations included numerous Black representatives, until Reconstruction was overthrown.)
It is virtually impossible to imagine the ancient, timid fossils that run the Democratic Party even considering this kind of thing (though remarkably, Rep. Bill Pascrell of New Jersey has) because it would require courage, vision, and honestly reckoning with the parlous state of the nation. It would not be illegal, but it would be a step beyond narrow legal proceduralism and into the uncharted waters of aggressive political innovation and raw will-to-power. It could conceivably touch off armed unrest in several states.
But it's not hard to see where the current conservative trajectory is headed. While elected Republicans have tried to overturn the election using increasingly blatant methods, top conservative pundits are mulling the idea of secession, as their treasonous fire-eater forebears did 160 years ago. The lie that Biden stole the election is now official GOP dogma. By the same token, it is not a coincidence that the Republican Party is ignoring the deadly pandemic (if not actively spreading the virus) while they try to overturn the Constitution. They feel they can safely ignore the welfare of the American people, because they are not accountable to them.
Unless this escalating conservative extremism halts from the inside somehow — which is not remotely in sight anywhere — this can only end eventually in a violent confrontation, or (much more likely) Democrats will simply give up and let themselves be defeated. Still, this country was founded by people who thought it was worth putting their lives at hazard to throw off tyrannical rule. Perhaps some of that spirit can once again be found.
This Is Why Queen Elizabeth I Died a Virgin at Age 69
During a time when female monarchs were assumed to marry and birth an heir, Queen Elizabeth I famously defined standards and never had a husband or children, earning her the nickname of the Virgin Queen.
Seeing her mother Anne Boleyn essentially be sentenced to death for being unable to produce a male heir (she was executed on false charges of incest, adultery, witchcraft and conspiracy against the king, her husband Henry VIII) made Elizabeth immediately cautious about having kids herself. And then, as shown in the upcoming movie Mary Queen of Scots, Elizabeth witnessed what happened when her cousin, Mary Stuart (Saoirse Ronan), married Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley (Jack Lowden).
“I think all those sort of things seeded this paranoia in Elizabeth,” Margot Robbie, who plays Elizabeth in the historical drama, tells PEOPLE in this week’s issue.
After Mary wed Henry and welcomed son James, an heir to both Scotland and England’s throne, Henry conspired with his father and Mary’s male council to take the power for himself.
𠇎lizabeth saw what happened to Mary, which is that Mary becomes pregnant, bears a male heir, and she says, ‘Here’s the heir to these two crowns,’ and then really, really soon after that, men crowd in, conspire to bring her down,” director Josie Rourke says. “They take that male heir, and they say he is now the king and we’re going to rule on his behalf until he’s old enough.”
As Mary lost her crown and fled Scotland, Elizabeth decided she considered herself a man and declared she was married to her country.
“It was actually quite clever of her to announce that she was married to the country and therefore could not be married to someone else,” Robbie, 28, says. “It was really the only way of protecting herself and protecting her position in that way. It really came from life and death stakes. In her mind, it was a survival technique.”
And eventually, her inner circle stopped pushing her to marry and conceive and realized that it wouldn’t even be possible at a certain point in her 44-year rule.
𠇋y then, Elizabeth has reached past the age of 50 and they did understand that once a woman had passed the age of 50, she was past menopause and therefore could not have children of her own,” says historian John Guy, whose book Mary Queen of Scots: The True Life of Mary Stuart, serves as a historical basis for the movie. “The men stopped pestering her all the time to marry and settle the succession in her own kingdom.”
He continues, “In a sort of ironic sort of way, it actually strengthens her hand and she can feel that she can exercise fully both the masculine and feminine dimensions of the monarchy in a way that she couldn’t really before, because that expectation that somehow her chief function as a woman ruler is to reproduce in order to produce a male heir. That’s out of the equation.”
Kyk die video: Die Realiteit van die Ewige Lewe
A bronze head of Augustus © Augustus was the first emperor of Rome. He replaced the Roman republic with an effective monarchy and during his long reign brought peace and stability.
