The year was 1980. The Empire Strikes Back hit movie theaters. Solidarity was established in Poland. And Ronald Reagan defeated Jimmy Carter to become the 40th president. Civil Rights and Woodstock were but fleeting memories in the minds of the aging hippies and nascent yuppies. It was a turning point, a time when the free flowing, sometimes drug induced ideas of the 60s and 70s gave way to a more pragmatic and realistic conservatism. An era of romanticism had come to an end.
The year 1980 also marked my first memory, one of those snippets from youth that I recall vividly. I was a little more than three years old. I was at my grandparents' house, though for what reason I couldn't say. Someone was on the phone. I don't remember who, though I'd guess it was my grandfather. It was a rotary phone in those days. And the only one in the house. One of those phones that was attached to the wall, a little too high for a three year old to reach. My grandmother called me from the hallway; she was moving a kitchen chair beneath the phone, obviously intending that I was to speak with whomever was on the other end. I stepped onto the chair and prepared the line that my grandparents had relayed. I heard an unusually melancholy voice say hello on the other end. And then, I said my piece, 'I'm sorry about John Lemmon.'
It has been 30 years since the world changed. Since another era of romanticism waned into nothingness. And today marks 30 years since the actualization of that romantic era's symbolic death. Though it might not have been the day the music died, it was the day that peace lost its chance.
Showing posts with label History. Show all posts
Showing posts with label History. Show all posts
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
History Revisited: Pony Up
Was the Pony Express integral to the continued existence of the United States or was it merely one of the most elaborate - and costly - stopgaps in history?
In 1861, the American Civil War began, the Kingdom of Italy came into being with Victor Emmanuel II as its king, and the Pony Express ceased operation.
In fact, the Pony Express ceased operation on October 26, 1861, just 18 months after it commenced in April of 1860. That's just about two present-day baseball seasons. A mere blip on the radar in American history.
Not to mention the Pony Express was a huge undertaking. It was a more involved process than anything short of war, in those days. So, why did it last only two years? And why would someone set it up in the first place?
Let's journey back from 1861 to the Feast of the Epiphany, 1838. (That's January 6th for all y'all who don't know the Epiphany.) On that day, a Mr. Samuel Morse sent the sentence 'A patient waiter is no loser' across two miles of wire in New Jersey. Six years later, the same man sent the rather famous quotation, 'What hath God wrought' from Washington D.C. to Baltimore. It was the birth of a new and faster way to communicate, i.e. the electrical telegraph. It was that era's internet.
Fast forward again to 1860. By that time, there were telegraph lines all over the east coast. And there were telegraph lines up and down the California coast. But no telegraph line connected east and west. In essence, California - although a state - was all by its lonesome on the Pacific. In 1860, the Pacific Telegraph Company in Nebraska - created by the then president of Western Union (like at the end of Back to the Future 2) - and the Overland Telegraph Company of California agreed to build telegraph lines from Omaha and Carson City respectively to Salt Lake City, Utah where they all proceeded to jump in the lake.
Yeah, I know, this story's about the Pony Express; I'm getting there. But just after I get to the date when the two companies met in Salt Lake City. That was October 24, 1861. Two days before the Pony Express went the way of the dodo. In present day IT terms, those two days were part of the post production implementation of the transcontinental telegraph. Good luck saying that any times fast.
So, you want to know about the Pony Express? There were 157 stations over a 2000 mile route. There were about 80 riders employed at any one time. And there were about 400 other people working the stations along the way. In addition, there were about 400 horses used.
Then there was the process. Riders would ride each horse a maximum of 20 miles - the approximate maximum distance between two stations along the route - and would then switch the horse out with another at each station. Most riders traveled up to 75 miles a day. At approximately 9 miles per hour. That's first gear on an auto, folks. For 2000 miles.
Why? To get messages from east to west in 10 days. That's it. It was all about information. It wasn't like the riders could lug anything larger than a small box of books in that time. Any message that I can now send in under a second via internet / phone would have required 10 days of at least one rider riding more than 100 horses from Missouri to California.
What in the name of all that's holy possessed anyone to create such a costly stopgap just to deliver information, especially when the transcontinental telegraph was being built?
I turn your attention to the first part of the first sentence I wrote in this post. In 1861, the Civil War began. The Civil War and the time immediately preceding it, that great big zit on the nose of American history, dominated all decisions in all parts of the United States in the late 1850s leading into 1861.
I won't go into all the details because I'd bore the majority of you to death, but the time between the Mexican American War and the start of the Civil War was like a young brother and sister nagging each other in the back of a car on a 12 hour trip, except there were no parents in the front seat to pull over and threaten them with bodily harm. The South wanted more slave states. The North wanted fewer. They straddled the middle for about 15 years so that they didn't have to fight. But they reached an impasse. Then, Abraham Lincoln was elected. And all hell broke loose.
Always off on these tangents. So, what the hell does this have to do with the Pony Express? Well, each side wanted to extend their respective influence. And the way to extend influence is to control both information and communication. Just ask China.
In that critical time between April 1860 and October 1861, it just so happened that the Union controlled the Pony Express, which subsequently kept the lines of communication open with California and all points in between, an effective stopgap until the telegraph lines met in Salt Lake City. And when that happened, the South lost all hope of exerting influence out west, which meant they had nowhere to expand with their states rights and pro-slavery dogma, not to mention they had few places to seek reprieve when they started losing the war.
A look back shows that the Pony Express was a rather big and costly finger in the dike, but that finer just may have kept the dike from tumbling down entirely.
In 1861, the American Civil War began, the Kingdom of Italy came into being with Victor Emmanuel II as its king, and the Pony Express ceased operation.
In fact, the Pony Express ceased operation on October 26, 1861, just 18 months after it commenced in April of 1860. That's just about two present-day baseball seasons. A mere blip on the radar in American history.
Not to mention the Pony Express was a huge undertaking. It was a more involved process than anything short of war, in those days. So, why did it last only two years? And why would someone set it up in the first place?
Let's journey back from 1861 to the Feast of the Epiphany, 1838. (That's January 6th for all y'all who don't know the Epiphany.) On that day, a Mr. Samuel Morse sent the sentence 'A patient waiter is no loser' across two miles of wire in New Jersey. Six years later, the same man sent the rather famous quotation, 'What hath God wrought' from Washington D.C. to Baltimore. It was the birth of a new and faster way to communicate, i.e. the electrical telegraph. It was that era's internet.
Fast forward again to 1860. By that time, there were telegraph lines all over the east coast. And there were telegraph lines up and down the California coast. But no telegraph line connected east and west. In essence, California - although a state - was all by its lonesome on the Pacific. In 1860, the Pacific Telegraph Company in Nebraska - created by the then president of Western Union (like at the end of Back to the Future 2) - and the Overland Telegraph Company of California agreed to build telegraph lines from Omaha and Carson City respectively to Salt Lake City, Utah where they all proceeded to jump in the lake.
Yeah, I know, this story's about the Pony Express; I'm getting there. But just after I get to the date when the two companies met in Salt Lake City. That was October 24, 1861. Two days before the Pony Express went the way of the dodo. In present day IT terms, those two days were part of the post production implementation of the transcontinental telegraph. Good luck saying that any times fast.
So, you want to know about the Pony Express? There were 157 stations over a 2000 mile route. There were about 80 riders employed at any one time. And there were about 400 other people working the stations along the way. In addition, there were about 400 horses used.
Then there was the process. Riders would ride each horse a maximum of 20 miles - the approximate maximum distance between two stations along the route - and would then switch the horse out with another at each station. Most riders traveled up to 75 miles a day. At approximately 9 miles per hour. That's first gear on an auto, folks. For 2000 miles.
Why? To get messages from east to west in 10 days. That's it. It was all about information. It wasn't like the riders could lug anything larger than a small box of books in that time. Any message that I can now send in under a second via internet / phone would have required 10 days of at least one rider riding more than 100 horses from Missouri to California.
What in the name of all that's holy possessed anyone to create such a costly stopgap just to deliver information, especially when the transcontinental telegraph was being built?
I turn your attention to the first part of the first sentence I wrote in this post. In 1861, the Civil War began. The Civil War and the time immediately preceding it, that great big zit on the nose of American history, dominated all decisions in all parts of the United States in the late 1850s leading into 1861.
I won't go into all the details because I'd bore the majority of you to death, but the time between the Mexican American War and the start of the Civil War was like a young brother and sister nagging each other in the back of a car on a 12 hour trip, except there were no parents in the front seat to pull over and threaten them with bodily harm. The South wanted more slave states. The North wanted fewer. They straddled the middle for about 15 years so that they didn't have to fight. But they reached an impasse. Then, Abraham Lincoln was elected. And all hell broke loose.
Always off on these tangents. So, what the hell does this have to do with the Pony Express? Well, each side wanted to extend their respective influence. And the way to extend influence is to control both information and communication. Just ask China.
In that critical time between April 1860 and October 1861, it just so happened that the Union controlled the Pony Express, which subsequently kept the lines of communication open with California and all points in between, an effective stopgap until the telegraph lines met in Salt Lake City. And when that happened, the South lost all hope of exerting influence out west, which meant they had nowhere to expand with their states rights and pro-slavery dogma, not to mention they had few places to seek reprieve when they started losing the war.
A look back shows that the Pony Express was a rather big and costly finger in the dike, but that finer just may have kept the dike from tumbling down entirely.
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Sunday Scribblings: In Which Era Would I Live?
Over at Sunday Scribblings, I came across a great question, especially for me who loves history. In which era/time/civilization would I live? When? Why? Where?
When I saw this topic, I said to myself, self, you've studied a lot of history given you're a history teacher by trade, so of all those eras you've taught, in which era would you choose to live? Being a history teacher, I've heard the question before. From students, other teachers, parents, friends, family, those questionnaires everyone sends via e-mail asking what your favorite color is and the like.
I have the quick answer, the answer about which I can speak at length. The Enlightenment. France. Paris, to be exact. I'd have to be at university or involved in the intellectual life to some degree. And I'd have to be a white male. What an exciting time, I'd say. Yes, I know that I wouldn't have the technology. Yes, I know the cities stunk. Yes, I know that it most likely would have been a difficult life. But, the uncovering of points of view, the leap forward towards revolution would have been enthralling.
Those are the reasons I could give for choosing the Enlightenment. Those and so many more. But I choose that period also because I know the most about it. It is, in some ways, very familiar to me. A time with which I can relate, being a European mutt by ancestry.
When I saw the question posed on Sunday Scribblings, I got to thinking about it more. Would it really be the Enlightenment? Or would it be some other time? I needed to try to think outside the box.
I could say that I was born in exactly the right time and place. That would be true. I enjoy my life, and if given the chance, I wouldn't live at any other time. But, for me that steals the fun out of the response. I kept thinking.
The 20th century? Nah. Not really into world or cold wars. Outside the box... I could have lived in another country that wasn't too much affected. Like which, I responded to myself, Mongolia?
Back in time. 19th century? Certainly not the U.S. China, maybe, before the significant interactions with the West. Or even Japan. To be a part of Japanese culture before 1868 would have been truly interesting. But too strict. Too totalitarian.
Ha! you may say to me. Try to find a situation in which a society was NOT too totalitarian in history. Some African tribes. Some Native American tribes. The Vikings, though too decentralized for me. There were plenty.
So, when and where?
After some research, I settled on the Navajo in the southwestern U.S. BEFORE the arrival of the Europeans. In reading about their nomadic culture and their love of the land and everything the land gave them, I would have to say that - although I would have no conveniences - I would be a part of a tight-knit matriarchal community that understood the truths of history and the future.
Why the Navajo? Too much further north, and I would have been freezing. Too much further east and I'd have been annoyed by the humidity. Dry warmth is my idea of a good climate. Why not the Mayan civilization or some other in Mexico or South America? The government was too centralized. Some of the dictators in Tenochtitlan and the other Native American centers were just as bad as any Asian, African, or European dictator.
Why not the Hopi, then? Okay, fine, I'd consider being Hopi too.
Just as long as - I reemphasize - I would have been long dead before the Europeans came.
When I saw this topic, I said to myself, self, you've studied a lot of history given you're a history teacher by trade, so of all those eras you've taught, in which era would you choose to live? Being a history teacher, I've heard the question before. From students, other teachers, parents, friends, family, those questionnaires everyone sends via e-mail asking what your favorite color is and the like.
I have the quick answer, the answer about which I can speak at length. The Enlightenment. France. Paris, to be exact. I'd have to be at university or involved in the intellectual life to some degree. And I'd have to be a white male. What an exciting time, I'd say. Yes, I know that I wouldn't have the technology. Yes, I know the cities stunk. Yes, I know that it most likely would have been a difficult life. But, the uncovering of points of view, the leap forward towards revolution would have been enthralling.
Those are the reasons I could give for choosing the Enlightenment. Those and so many more. But I choose that period also because I know the most about it. It is, in some ways, very familiar to me. A time with which I can relate, being a European mutt by ancestry.
When I saw the question posed on Sunday Scribblings, I got to thinking about it more. Would it really be the Enlightenment? Or would it be some other time? I needed to try to think outside the box.
I could say that I was born in exactly the right time and place. That would be true. I enjoy my life, and if given the chance, I wouldn't live at any other time. But, for me that steals the fun out of the response. I kept thinking.
The 20th century? Nah. Not really into world or cold wars. Outside the box... I could have lived in another country that wasn't too much affected. Like which, I responded to myself, Mongolia?
Back in time. 19th century? Certainly not the U.S. China, maybe, before the significant interactions with the West. Or even Japan. To be a part of Japanese culture before 1868 would have been truly interesting. But too strict. Too totalitarian.
Ha! you may say to me. Try to find a situation in which a society was NOT too totalitarian in history. Some African tribes. Some Native American tribes. The Vikings, though too decentralized for me. There were plenty.
So, when and where?
After some research, I settled on the Navajo in the southwestern U.S. BEFORE the arrival of the Europeans. In reading about their nomadic culture and their love of the land and everything the land gave them, I would have to say that - although I would have no conveniences - I would be a part of a tight-knit matriarchal community that understood the truths of history and the future.
Why the Navajo? Too much further north, and I would have been freezing. Too much further east and I'd have been annoyed by the humidity. Dry warmth is my idea of a good climate. Why not the Mayan civilization or some other in Mexico or South America? The government was too centralized. Some of the dictators in Tenochtitlan and the other Native American centers were just as bad as any Asian, African, or European dictator.
Why not the Hopi, then? Okay, fine, I'd consider being Hopi too.
Just as long as - I reemphasize - I would have been long dead before the Europeans came.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)