I find it interesting to find out why places are named what they are. Wayne County in Michigan is the 15th most populous county in the US. It is where you’ll find Detroit and was named after General Anthony Wayne. In fact, there are 14 other states with a Wayne County all named after the general. “Mad” Anthony Wayne was known for his heroic charges into the hottest spots of the battlefield. As John Willyard of the Farmington Patch explains, Jacob Burnet wrote about his first-hand accounts of the historic events in Michigan during the early years of the United States, many of which are about “Mad” Anthony Wayne.
“Burnet’s Notes On The Northwestern Territory”, written by Jacob Burnet (1770 – 1853), provides very interesting insight into the surrender of Detroit and is quoted below. He was a circuit rider judge who was a personal witness to many significant early events in Michigan’s history. His book was published in 1847 based on a series of letters he wrote starting in 1837.
The Revolutionary War ended with the Treaty of Paris, signed in 1783, which granted the Northwest Territories to the United States. Since there was no pressure from the local inhabitants to hand over Detroit, and since most of the Indians in the Northwest Territories supported the British and vigorously resisted American movement into the territory, it remained in the hands of the British.
The so-called “Western Indian Confederacy,” under the leadership of Blue Jacket of the Shawnees and Little Turtle of the Miamis, engaged U.S. military forces in the area and won decisive victories against them in 1790 and 1791. In response, George Washington placed Revolutionary War hero Anthony Wayne in charge of a military force to overcome the Indian opposition and open the Territory to U.S. settlement.
Read the rest of the article at The 1796 Surrender of Detroit to the U.S. – Farmington-Farmington Hills, MI Patch.
As they say, history is not an exact science! As you read through the article by Harry Mount that appeared in the IOL News, you will find many historic truths once believed to be correct are in actually misrepresentations of facts. Governments and cultures dictate what they want people to believe. The truth is bent to help shape people’s perception.
The Vikings never had horns on their helmets
None of the helmets unearthed from Viking archaeological sites have horns.
These appeared as an illustration of Viking headgear only in the 19th century, thanks to Swedish artist Gustav Malmstrom, who used them in an edition of an ancient Scandinavian tale.
Some historians have even doubted the Vikings’ reputation for violence. A 1995 investigation by the BBC Timewatch series poured cold water on the image of the Viking as a deranged pillager.
Professor Janet Nelson, a medieval historian at King’s College, London, said it was difficult to find evidence of specific raids in contemporary accounts.
“In fact, there isn’t a single case of rape,” she told the programme. Instead, the average Viking was more likely to be “a decent, respectable migrant” who was “a little dull”. Anglo-Saxon England, it seems, was invaded by an orderly band of gentle accountants.
Find out more myths revealed at ‘History is bunk’ – Back Page | IOL News | IOL.co.za.
The rules of succession of the British throne has been in place since 1689. The British Bill of Rights of 1689 determined only Protestants could succeed to the Throne and those who married Catholics were excluded. The monarchies of Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden have repealed the male-preference primogeniture. Matt Falloon reports for Reuters about UK Prime Minister David Cameron’s proposal to end this.
A 300-year-old ban on heirs to the throne marrying Roman Catholics will be overturned and discrimination against royal daughters removed under reforms proposed on Wednesday by Prime Minister David Cameron.
Cameron has written to the leaders of the 15 other realms who share Queen Elizabeth as their monarch, including the Solomon Islands and the Grenadines, to request their approval, his office said.
Cameron wants to banish laws dating back to 1688 and 1700 designed to ensure a Protestant monarchy and barring anyone in line to the throne from marrying a Roman Catholic unless they relinquished their claim to the crown.
Read the rest of the article at Hear ye, hear ye: royal heirs may wed Catholics | Reuters.
Photo by Magnus D
Have wondered what Prince William’s last name is? Click here
The British Empire was the largest the world has ever known. By 1922, one quarter of the world’s population was under the sphere of influence of the British Empire. As Bernard Porter mentions in his review for Jeremy Paxman’s new book for the Guardian, books on the British Empire are not new and even though Paxman may gloss over some seemingly important events, he does a decent job in the end.
Jeremy Paxman thinks we’re neglecting the history of the British empire. “Perhaps in the dark recesses of a golf-club bar some harrumphing voice mutters about how much better the world seemed to turn when a great-uncle in baggy shorts ran a patch of Africa the size of Lancashire. But, by and large, no one has much to say about empire.” That will come as a surprise to the authors of the dozen fat books about it that have appeared over the last few years. If Paxman thinks his Empire is filling a gap, he’s mistaken.
British imperial history is highly contested territory. One reason is obvious: the number of peoples, societies and nations that still bear the marks of it, or think they do. Another is that it is so often discussed – or expected to be discussed – judgmentally. What readers generally look for first in a new history of the empire is whether it is for it or against it. More neutral books are often forced into one category or the other simply to give reviewers a handle on them; or, if they can’t be, they are ignored. For those of us who burrow away at the subject academically, this last is probably the best we can hope for. It’s not an option available to Paxman, however, who is too famous to be ignored. In fact it’s difficult to say where he stands in the great pro- or anti-imperial debate; but that’s to the credit of the book, especially if it can put over to readers that the question is not a simple one.
Read More of the Book Review at Empire: What Ruling the World Did to the British by Jeremy Paxman – review | Books | The Guardian.
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle is predominately known for his creation of Sherlock Holmes, while a lot of his other work has mostly disappeared from public consciousness. One was even lost to Conan Doyle himself. As reported in the International Business Times, Conan Doyle’s first novel has now surfaced after being lost in the mail 128 years since it was written.
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s first-ever novel, “The Narrative of John Smith”, has been released by the British Library, almost 128 years after it was written. Written between 1883 and 1884, the author did send it to a publisher but the manuscript was reportedly lost in the post.
The book was then reconstructed from memory but never re-submitted to publishers. Conan Doyle once claimed: “My shock at its disappearance would be as nothing to my horror if it were suddenly to appear again – in print.” The novel was written while Conan Doyle was in his early 20s, just after he moved to Southsea, near Portsmouth.
The book provides an insight into the author’s mindset at that period of time; just a few years before his creation of Sherlock Holmes – a character that would earn him a place in the history of English literature.