The King, Socrates, And I

Recently I had the opportunity to see my old high school preform The King and I on stage, complete with excellent acting and harmonic musical numbers. While the theatrics were top notch, the cast also did an excellent job conveying to the audience the various themes the play had to offer, one of which I have always been particularly passionate about: Knowledge. But what exactly is The King and I? Who originally composed it? What were it's origins? These questions are good ones but outside my scope of knowledge, so I went to Wikipedia for a quick reference, and here is what I found:

"The King and I is a musical, the fifth by the team of composer Richard Rodgers and dramatistOscar Hammerstein II. It is based on the 1944 novel Anna and the King of Siam by Margaret Landon, which is in turn derived from the memoirs of Anna Leonowens, governess to the children of King Mongkut of Siam in the early 1860s. The musical's plot relates the experiences of Anna, a British schoolteacher hired as part of the King's drive to modernize his country. The relationship between the King and Anna is marked by conflict through much of the piece, as well as by a love that neither can admit. The musical premiered on March 29, 1951, at Broadway's St. James Theatre. It ran nearly three years, then the fourth longest-running Broadway musical in history, and has had many tours and revivals."

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_King_and_I)

So Anna, a British woman, becomes the teacher to the children of the King of Siam. This position in the King's palace implies many things which are not said outright in the play. Because the whole state rests squarely on the King's shoulders, he is responsible for the lives of everyone in his kingdom, all of whom think the King is all-knowing. The King, painfully aware of this, hires Anna to instill in his children (and secretly in himself) the advanced science of the Western World. The King, trapped in a paradoxical situation, has to struggle with his people believing in his infinite wisdom, but also has to deal with the fact that he is painfully ignorant. While battling this internal conflict, the King is suddenly inspired with a balled of introspection, a verse of which runs thus:

"There are times I almost think

I am not sure of what I absolutely know

Very often find confusion

In conclusion, I concluded long ago"

Read more: The King And I - A Puzzlement Lyrics | MetroLyrics

If only the King knew just how wise he was being in knowing he did not know everything. Was it not Socrates who said: "Then the wise or temperate man, and only he, will know himself, and be able to examine what he knows or does not know, and see what others know and what they think they know and do really know, and what they do not know and fancy that they know when they do not.... And this is wisdom and temperance and self-knowledge -- for a man to know what he knows, and what he does not know. [The opposite of wisdom is, thus, to fancy that you know what you do not know (166c-d) because you are unable to distinguish between knowledge and ignorance.]" 

(http://www.roangelo.net/logwitt/charmides.html#Wisdom-is-knowledge-both-of-what-one-know-and-of-what-I-do-not-know)

The King, in questioning his knowledge, was on the road to wisdom. He came to the same conclusions Socrates did, and he arranged a plan for modernizing Siam by becoming wiser himself, teaching his children, and collecting wise advisors like Anna (although this advisory relationship was hidden). Because the King knows his ignorant condition, he is far better equipped to deal with the British ambassador when he came knocking. Without Anna's help, the King would have embarrassed himself in the eyes of the nations. In the end, the King becomes incapable of pretending omnipotence, and becomes fatally sick. Before his death, the King pronounces his young son, to be the new King. His son, was this whole time under the tutelage of Anna, and thus it was that his son, having learned much about British science, became the new King, and was able to govern Siam with what he learned from Anna. Again, the King acted wiser than he thought. 

Greece And Civilization: Who Needs Gun Control?

Swords and other weapons were worn by ancient Greeks in like manner as they would wear their normal clothes; in fact, weapons were necessary accessories to any fashion statement. Did the people tout around weapons because they were eccentric, or because they were prudent? Thucydides, an Athenian general and historian during the Peloponnesian War, said that the reason why arms were a part of daily life in Athens was because they were an indispensable tool to maintain life and protect property. Once Athens became more civilized however, weapons became an inconvenience and almost unnecessary altogether. Thus weapons fell out of use in Athenian fashion. The reason Athens stopped carrying weapons was due to the fact that they simply didn't need them any longer and their persons and their property were safe whether they carried a sword or not.

However, Melissa Lane writing for The Newyorker, shared a different interpretation of what Thucydides said on the use of weapons in Athens: "...Thucydides reported that the Athenians were the first to lay aside their weapons. Whereas men in all Greek societies used to carry arms at home, this had been a sign of an uncivilized era of piracy in which the most powerful men could dominate all the rest. Laying aside the everyday wearing of weapons was part of what Thucydides believed had allowed Athens to become fully civilized, developing the commerce and culture that made her the envy of the Greek world. The Romans, too, banned the carrying of weapons within the pomerium, the sacred boundary of the city."

http://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/how-the-greeks-viewed-weapons

Her definition reports that Athens laid down their weapons, and then became civilized. Whereas, what actually happened was that Athens became civilized and then had no need of weapons. The machine that is The Left, would have America believe that we need to give up our guns, and then become civilized, when the opposite is true. We need to become more civilized, and then give up our guns because we don't need them. When murder and crime goes up, so does the need for weapons. If people think we should do away with guns because they cause barbarism, they need to question their premiss because reality tells a different story. In all truth, barbarism creates a need for guns. The questions debated in the public forums then, should not be pro-gun control or antigun gun control, but what is the best way to eliminate barbarism. Once the need for arms no longer exists, the people will exercise their own gun control privately. 

Immortal Glory: The 25 Building Blocks That Will Exalt A Nation

In relation to the other ancient powers, Greece was less than a third world country. Where the Egyptians, Babylonians, and Persians lived in splendor and plenty, the Greek suffered amidst wretchedness and famine. Where the civilized ate cake and drank wine, the Greek was lucky to scrounge stunted grain and brackish water. Where other lands had Pyramids and Hanging Gardens, Greece had not even a hovel. If Greece were placed on a scale against any of these other powers, Greece would be catapulted up into the air. How did Greece against all odds rise to empire despite the whole wealthy world against them? Is it possible that other nations, states, and persons could  replicate the process? How? Perhaps we could venture to answer this question by using our understanding of Grecian history as a guide.

All the ancient sources agree that primeval greece was barbarous unto contempt; in fact Greece could have defined the meaning of barbarism itself. The 1828 Webster's Dictionary, however, defines "Barbarism" as "3. Rudeness of manners; savagism; incivility; ferociousness; a savage state of society."  (http://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/Bbarbarism) 

What did a barbarous Greece look like? Not pretty. There were no vineyards, houses, or fields; thus, there were few people, doomed to live in misery. There were however, lots of clubs and spears for these were the implements the people used to rob and murder each other. When anyone got anything of value, bandits were not far behind. When owning a week's worth of food will get you killed, it's better to just eat for today and pray for tomorrow. Attica (the future home of Athens) was especially poor and undesirable. While other lands abounded in natural resources, Attica was sparse and barren. Because none cared to rob and slaughter such poor men in a desolate land, Attica's population boomed. Eventually Attica could no longer support her population, and some were sent to populate Ionia. Then it was that civilization started and once brother stopped killing brother, families grew rich and happy together. Men were then able to keep the fruits of their labour without fear from their neighbor's greedy sword and became an industrious people: they built houses, formed pottery, plowed fallow lands, fished, and traded. At first their wealth remained local, but soon Phoenician traders became attracted to the growing markets in greece and it was from these traders that Greece learned her letters among many other arts. Once the Greek was able to read and write, they were able to compile their oral traditions into papyrus scrolls in order to preserve their thoughts, ideas, conquests, failures, arts, and religion. Because of this, the works of Homer were preserved and we know something of the earliest exploits of the Greeks: The Trojan War.

Prior to the Trojan war, the Greeks were not considered one people, but lived in very small communities. But with the passing of time, the political atmosphere was ripe for a unified effort, which took shape in the abduction of a Grecian woman by the name of Helen. The Greeks then banded together for the first recorded time and destroyed Troy. Years latter, Persia claimed a right to invade Greece, for they considered any attack on Asia and Troy to be an offense to them. Herodotus, the ancient historian, then gives account of the Persian War.

Prior to the Persian war, the Greeks had returned to their homeland and once more separated into their separate tribes and cities; but the Persian war was again to unite Greece to a public cause. Not all the Greeks joined the cause of Greece however, for the Persians were at that time the supper power of the world, having conquered Babylon, Assyria, Egypt, and a good part of western India. Greece was among the very few places in the civilized world left unconquered, causing many Grecian states to submit willingly to Persian rule. But some states were not to be conquered, for their Patriotism was fierce. Can you  guess which to cities resisted Persian invasion? Athens and Sparta. Athens supplied a navel defense against the Persians and Sparta Prepared a land force against the same. The battle of Marathon was Athen's war against the Persians and the battle of Thermopylae was the Spartan's. Both won great renown and their people, forged in adversity became powerful and Robust. Thus Sparta and Athens became the primary states in Greece and all lesser states became subject to them.

with the passing of the Persian invasions, Greece entered a new stage of turmoil, for Athens and Sparta were both entering imperial governments, and Greece they supposed, was not big enough for the two of them and the Peloponnesian War was ignited. Sparta won the conflict, but didn't stay on top for long. Wikipedia recounts the aftermath of this Grecian strife as: "Both Athens and Sparta were later overshadowed by Thebes and eventually Macedon, with the latter uniting the Greek world in the League of Corinth (also known as the Hellenic League or Greek League) under the guidance of Phillip II, who was elected leader of the first unified Greek state in history." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greece#History)

Thus Greece became a unified body and grew in power and prestige. Phillip II, unified the Greeks, but his son Alexander The Great would lead Greece to become the new supper power. He launched an invasion of the Persian Empire backed by the combined might of all the Greeks, spreading a Greek empire to the ends of the earth. Greeks filled the known world with their culture. As a result, the Western World found her identity. Empires won quickly and by conquest, do not last long. When Alexander died, his empire followed him to his grave. All the same though, Greece became a force to be reckoned with and changed the corse of history permanently.

Greece went from the epitome of poor to the masters of the universe, but how? Through philanthropy?Did any nation raise Greece like a mother raises a child? No, at best Greece had a few trading partners in the Phoenicians, but the Phoenicians didn't go to Greece because they were generous, but because Greece had something to offer them. Moreover, Greece was invaded multiple times! yet she somehow came out on top! How does a bunch of waring tribes become a super power? Here is a list of building blocks from the Greek's example on how to become a super power:

1. Individuals stopped plundering each other. 
2. Man did not fear relentless slaughter
3. Population boomed
4. Man did not fear being plundered
5. industry boomed 
6. Man became rich
7. Trade boomed
8. Technology boomed 
9. Education became available
10. Some men became more powerful than others
11. Power centralized
12. The waring and plundering cities stopped robing each other
13. Cities united for a common cause
14. The anatomy of power was refined 
15. Population, industry, trade, wealth, technology, and education were revolutionized
16. Prosperity invited inner tumult and external invasion (Persian Invasions)
17. The people are refined and higher morals established 
18. Population, industry, trade, wealth, technology, and education are revolutionized
19. Power struggles
20. The anatomy of power is further refined 
21. Justice prevails over injustice
22. The cities and states become unified under one government
23. Population, industry, trade, wealth, technology, and education are revolutionized
24. Influence exponentially expands 
25. A super power is formed

Each instruction is built on top of the first. A population is not built from plunder and murder! A population, on the contrary, is built upon safety and a surplus of food (wealth). If once the blocks of civilization start to tower high, and a block on the bottom is removed, then the tower will fall. If a super power becomes tyrannical, blocks are removed and the power reduced. This was how Greece went from chump to champ.

While Greece did win a place in history, she did stumble a few times. If a nation is built off of not killing each other,  destroying Troy is not a constructive (nor humane) path to victory. In a similar manner, conquering the world and subjecting other peoples dose not open the door to salvation. Furthermore, overly centralized governments typically spell ruin for any nation who supports them. As is clear, Greece had shortcomings, but she still able to construct, and out of those 25 building blocks was able to erect a monument that will stand as long as man can read.

I often imagine that I can use the past to become a powerful seer, and am able to divine the future based on my knowledge. In doing this I wonder what the fates of nations will be. Perhaps the current superpowers will topple because they removed a vital block. Perhaps there are nations currently small and weak, whom will someday be grand super powers because of their diligence in placing block upon block. I don't believe I imagine in vein, for the signs are clear: If America dares remove her foundation, she will fall. If the barbaric nations build block upon block, they will inherit the world.

Sources:
http://classics.mit.edu/Homer/iliad.html
http://classics.mit.edu/Homer/odyssey.html
http://classics.mit.edu/Herodotus/history.html
http://classics.mit.edu/Thucydides/pelopwar.html
http://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/Bbarbarism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greece#History

Wisdom form Herodotus

Furniture and Architecture Of The French Empire

Perhaps one of the most active and vigorous eras in France was when she suddenly sprung to Empire after the disaster that was the French Revolution. France, like the nations before it, bestowed the government on the shoulders of a single man whom they pronounced king. Afterwords, when the particular dynasty fails, the people decide that monarchy must have been the formulation of conspiracy, and promptly establish a new form of government that, with prayer and luck, might be more just than the former tyranny the backs of the people suffered under before. Unfortunately, instead of using a republic as the bastion of justice, men turn it into the thieves den and use the force that government so unavoidably implies to plunder their neighbors and to rob the widow's mite. 

Thus France overthrew the monarchy of King Louis XIV, and replaced him with the lunacy of bureaucrats and bankers and the motley masses, who corrupted the republic and the legislature, trampling the rights of man under foot and brought france to the point of either falling into the abyss or finding a brutal tyrant to regain control. Napoleon, realizing that the men of his country were incapable of handling their own freedom, became the enlightened despot that he though himself to be, which while terrible, is better than most alternatives. In any event, the time period led to many romantic adventures, breakthroughs in culture and several innovations, two of which was the architecture of the times and the furniture the architecture hid within. 

It was in the French Empire era that many of the styles of architecture we are familiar with originated and were influenced. Empire Style, or the architectural style established in france in the early nineteenth century, is a very beautiful design that incorporates many neoclassical elements along with the more modern Directoire style, and perhaps most importantly, Empire style took on the face of the minds of the people, who were highly influenced by antiquity. Wikipedia said: 

"The Empire style, French pronunciation: ​[ɑ̃.piːʁ],the second phase of Romanticism, is an early-19th-century designmovement in architecture, furniture, other decorative arts, and the visual arts that flourished between 1800 and 1815 during the Consulate and the First French Empire periods, although its life span lasted until the late 1820s (or more depending on each country). From France it spread into much of Europe and the United States.

The style originated in and takes its name from the rule of Napoleon I in the First French Empire, when it was intended to idealize Napoleon's leadership and the French state. The style corresponds in that intent to the Biedermeier style in the German-speaking lands, Federal style in the United States, and the Regency style in Britain. The previous style in France was called Louis XVI style."

The Known World of Herodotus

Just a few maps of historical interest: