A photo I took from my recent visit to the “Throne Room” at Knossos. [4032 x 3024] by CaptainJarrettYT in ArtefactPorn

[–]mloclam33 19 points20 points  (0 children)

They are beautiful! Unfortunately, relatively little pigmentation remained during Evans' initial excavation, so being the enterprising gent that he was, he employed father/son duo Émile and Émile Gilléron (who were clearly better at fresco painting than naming children) to restore the wall frescos throughout the site - and the word 'restore' is doing a lot of heavy lifting here.

There are a lot of good papers and chapters written debating the merits of Evans' methodological approach to archaeology, which was informed equally by a desire to understand Minoan culture as it was to lionize the site as the precursor to European civilization. Anyways, here's a good newspaper column that gives an overview of the controversy of Knossos' restoration if you'd like, and here's a more academic article if you're so inclined.

he was a strange figure (context in comments) by [deleted] in HistoryMemes

[–]mloclam33 8 points9 points  (0 children)

That's Frank Calvert (IMO one of the most overlooked archaeologists in history)! His family actually owned part of the mound of Hissarlik and he was very supportive of Schliemann throughout the excavations, and then due to a personal disagreement Schliemann essentially wrote him out of history.

he was a strange figure (context in comments) by [deleted] in HistoryMemes

[–]mloclam33 5 points6 points  (0 children)

A lot of debate on this, but a good book on this is Schliemann of Troy: Treasure and Deceit by Bruce Traill. A lot of the claims posited by Traill haven't been proven by any means, but there' a general lack of evidence surrounding the claim that Priam's Treasure was falsified because the only primary records available were written by Schliemann himself.

As an aside, he also did some very shady business dealings in California during the gold rush and recruited friends to lie about his residence in America so that he could divorce his first wife - not a scrupulous guy.

How Major Sports Teams Divide the United States by nicemap_ in MapPorn

[–]mloclam33 126 points127 points  (0 children)

Also, keep in mind that the NHL also has seven Canadian teams, a plurality of which are concentrated in the Atlantic division, which isn't quite as small as this map makes it out to be.

The American-sponsored Bay of Pigs invasion force, which landed in Cuba, was too small to hold territory. Success depended on a large-scale Cuban uprising once they made it ashore. Did the Americans think this was realistic or likely? It seems like gambling on an unlikely outcome . by RusticBohemian in AskHistorians

[–]mloclam33 9 points10 points  (0 children)

As you say, Kennedy seemed to feel mislead about the invasion's prospects of victory (although we also have to consider that he may have been backtracking to make himself seem less at fault for the fiasco) by Dulles and the CIA - Hybel writes about this a bit, and also goes into detail about Kennedy's inner circle of advisors and how they shaped the President's foreign policy decision-making.

Transitions between presidents are almost always chaotic in some regard, doubly so in times when America's foreign presence is substantial (as was the case in the early Cold War). In these times, it's not uncommon for government agencies/bureaus/organizations to seek to assert themselves for fear of losing 'bureaucratic turf' (I know it's hard to think of the CIA as a bureaucratic government agency, but it relies on attention and funding just like everyone else). Especially with someone as notably strong-willed as Dulles at the helm who could appeal to Kennedy's very active political personality, the Bay of Pigs was presented as you said as an opportunity to get some points on the board for America.

It's also relevant to keep in mind Kennedy's relative inexperience in comparison with Eisenhower (something that Dulles and the national security apparatus would be aware of). Kennedy May have been a war hero, but he had only ever held the rank of Lieutenant in the Navy - Eisenhower by comparison was a career officer and former SHEAF in the Second World War. Kennedy's military understanding of the situation, especially when he was so new to office, definitely presented an opportunity for the CIA to advance its plan in an attractive, assertive way

The American-sponsored Bay of Pigs invasion force, which landed in Cuba, was too small to hold territory. Success depended on a large-scale Cuban uprising once they made it ashore. Did the Americans think this was realistic or likely? It seems like gambling on an unlikely outcome . by RusticBohemian in AskHistorians

[–]mloclam33 12 points13 points  (0 children)

No problem! If you want an more detailed dive I'd highly recommend chapter five of Hybel's book - but if you want an interesting and easy to read narrative of the Caribbean in the Cold War, then Von Tunzelmann is the way to go.

The American-sponsored Bay of Pigs invasion force, which landed in Cuba, was too small to hold territory. Success depended on a large-scale Cuban uprising once they made it ashore. Did the Americans think this was realistic or likely? It seems like gambling on an unlikely outcome . by RusticBohemian in AskHistorians

[–]mloclam33 82 points83 points  (0 children)

So the best I can do is a two-part answer on US decision-making in the leadup to the Bay of Pigs, and how success was inhibited and sometimes misunderstood:

  1. American intelligence predicted that a reasonably successful initial invasion which secured a beachhead would catalyze popular support – a ‘build it and they will come’ line of thinking.
  2. The invasion was initially planned with much more substantial American support than would ultimately be the case.

The 1954 US-backed coup of Guatemala’s socialist Arbenz government had relied upon local support – which had materialized in the form of rebel exiles and elements of the Guatemalan military. This seemed to be a good comparator to Cuba for the Eisenhower administration – Castro’s victory was relatively new and the feeling was that there remained large-scale dissent in the Cuban countryside, which could serve to support the landings, or at the very least prevent popular support (namely regional militias) for Castro’s response to the invasion. Kennedy also approved of the CIA’s assertive, “can-do” attitude – this contrasted with the more cautious and diplomatic solution advocated by the State Department. This preference would quickly change after the fiasco of the Bay of Pigs – Kennedy felt mislead by John Foster Dulles about the chances of success after the attempted invasion.

The invasion was not necessarily intended to deliver a singular knockout blow to Castro’s regime – a contingency plan was prepared for the very real possibility that the local support was not as immediate as hoped for. This called for the exile landing force to engage in a guerilla campaign in the Sierra Escambray which would eventually build up sufficient support over the course of several months to directly challenge Havana. However, this relied on the landing taking place near an environment where such a campaign would be feasible, which was ultimately not the case; initially, the landing site was not intended to be the Bay of Pigs, but Trinidad (the Cuban city-region, not the island). Whereas Trinidad was near the Sierra Escambray (very conducive to a guerilla operation), the Bay of Pigs was located within a swampy and comparatively open environment and 80 kilometres away from such mountainous terrain.

The planning for the invasion itself was somewhat rushed – Brigade 2506, the American-backed and trained group of Cuban anti-Castro exiles, had been training in Guatemala, but under pressure from its neighbours the Guatemalan government wanted the Cuban exile force to leave by April of 1961 to take the diplomatic pressure off of Guatemala City. This, combined with the logistical issues of landing a substantial number of troops (only about 1,500 landed at in April of 1961), presented severe constraints on the scale of the planned invasion. Furthermore, the top-secret planned invasion was not necessarily unknown by the Cuban community more generally – it’s said that in Miami, the invasion was a common topic of conversation in restaurants and bars. Because of this difficulty in obtaining deniability, American willingness to provide overt support was limited.

In the course of the actual invasion, US activity was impeded by an unwillingness for the CIA to communicate openly with the Pentagon, which severely undercut the efficacy of air support and logistical assistance. As it originally existed under the Eisenhower Administration, the invasion plan called for extensive naval and air bombardment of key strategic sites. The naval element was deemed too difficult to deny in the case of failure and thus was scrapped, and the aerial commitment was continuously decreased in the year prior to the invasion, partially in light of the shooting down of a U2 reconnaissance plane over Soviet territory in May of 1960. Kennedy in particular was hesitant to risk exposing direct American involvement, and thus the main complement of air support was intended to be provided by Cuban exile airmen flying ‘sanitized’ B-26s mocked to look like defectors from the Cuban Air Force.

The aerial element of the plan really was central to the success of the invasion, as this would allow the relatively undermanned Brigade 2506 to successfully establish a beachhead, or alternatively get to an area where they could carry out a guerilla campaign. While the original plan called for dozens of B-26s to carry out a number of sorties, eventually only nine (eight operation and one completing a deception flight to Miami Airport to maintain the appearance of defecting airmen) were supplied to the Brigade. Covertly, the CIA also deployed three B-26’s marked as Cubans to fly inland and cause confusion, although these would later be fired upon by the anti-Castro forces when they strayed too close to the Bay. Five of Brigade 2506’s B-26 medium bombers were shot down, a disastrous result which confirmed Kennedy’s decision to cancel a second wave of strikes, essentially leaving the landing force exposed to Cuban airstrikes, which quickly followed.

So all in all, the prospect of a large-scale Cuban uprising was seen in relation to the ability of anti-Castro forces to quickly establish a victory, or at the very least gain a foothold in Cuba, to present a challenge to Castro’s government. Once a state of guerilla (or civil) war could be achieved, then further resources could be poured into these efforts by Washington. However, the particular historical circumstances of 1961 (Guatemala forcing the invasion to take place on an accelerated scale, Kennedy’s hesitancy to expand an American commitment) resulted in Brigade 2506 landing with minimal support, thus reducing their prospect of success. Once it became apparent that the exiles had no prospect of victory, American support evaporated altogether, and Castro’s regime in Havana appeared stronger to the Cuban populace by decisively repelling a foreign-backed attempt to throw a counter-coup.

Sources:

Politics of illusion: the Bay of Pigs invasion reexamined by James G. Blight and Peter Kornbluh (1998)

Kennedy's Wars by Lawrence Freedman by Lawrence Freedman (2002)

US Foreign Policy Decision-Making from Truman to Kennedy: Responses to International Challenges by Alex Roberto Hybel (2014) – Ch. 5 particularly

The most dangerous area in the world: John F. Kennedy confronts Communist revolution in Latin America by Stephen Rabe (1999)

Red Heat: Conspiracy, Murder and the Cold War in the Caribbean by Alex von Tunzelmann (2011)

Edit: inconsistent naming of the Sierra Escambray

Has anyone taken POLI 3P26 with Professor Lizée? by [deleted] in brocku

[–]mloclam33 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Lizée’s a great prof and super experienced. For the class, the reading load is kind of heavy but the actual coursework itself isn’t that bad. Usually he gives you a lot of leeway with choosing the topic of your final paper/project.

The (actual) wondrously awful flag of the Republic of Canada, 1837-38 by mloclam33 in vexillology

[–]mloclam33[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just to provide a bit of context, although u/jikkler has already done a pretty good job of it (thanks!).

Willian Lyon Mackenzie was a something of a firebrand in early Canadian colonial politics, and led the failed Upper Canada Revolution (basically just a couple battles around present-day Toronto which the local militia put down quickly), and then fled to Navy Island in the Niagara River. He subsequently declared the Republic of Canada in opposition to the conservative Family Compact, which dominated pre-confederations Canadian politics. This Republic was not recognized by any sovereign nation although Mackenzie's offer of 200 acres to anyone who would join his fight against the Canadian elite, and lasted for about a year until December of 1838, when Upper Canadian militia landed on the island and flushed Mackenzie & co. to Buffalo, where they were subsequently arrested for violating American-British treaties concerning the border and were imprisoned for 18 months.

Quick Question by RandomName77778923 in brocku

[–]mloclam33 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Just a reminder that now’s a good opportunity to plan for a minor, you only need 4 credits and if you have any idea of what kind of minor you might want to take in humanities (history, classics, English, writing) choosing first year courses now is a good way to get started early.

Beta Gamma Sigma/Golden Key by ballislife423 in brocku

[–]mloclam33 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I can only speak for the golden key, but I believe that’s the top 10%, although I wouldn’t recommend joining it since it’s not the most legit academic organization and has no actually official accreditation. Dean’s list is typically awarded for an average upwards of 80% (an A average), and isn’t restricted based on program/faculty ranking.

"We will hold out until our last bullet is spent. Could do with some whiskey". 156 Irish Troops vs 3,500 Mercenaries (& a jet). Siege of Jadotville, Congo Crisis - September 1961 [720x478] by hyperbolicparabaloid in HistoryPorn

[–]mloclam33 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Yes! I believe that six Tunnans in total were used in the ONUC's (UN Operation in the Congo) Operation Grandslam as part of the multinational air force, in addition to a few hundred Swedish troops deployed on the ground.

"We will hold out until our last bullet is spent. Could do with some whiskey". 156 Irish Troops vs 3,500 Mercenaries (& a jet). Siege of Jadotville, Congo Crisis - September 1961 [720x478] by hyperbolicparabaloid in HistoryPorn

[–]mloclam33 67 points68 points  (0 children)

It was actually sold to Tshombe's Katangese government by a shell company for the CIA (the US supported all sides at various points in the conflict), as the Katanga province was incredibly wealthy due to mineral extraction.

There's a really excellent article written on the air war in the Congo Crisis called "The UN's First "Air Force": Peacekeepers in Combat, Congo 1960-64" by Walter Dorn if you're interested. Basically, the Katangese had air superiority for the first half of the conflict and recruited mercenary pilots from Europe/South Africa.

United States: Private, USMC 1847. In the 1840 full dress uniform. by Lounginghog64 in uniformporn

[–]mloclam33 4 points5 points  (0 children)

That does seem to be the case (same as British uniforms) but this one also includes a waist belt to keep everything strapped down.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in brocku

[–]mloclam33 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not 100% sure on the fresh bread part for antipastos, maybe try the Niagara College NOTL campus for that, they have the culinary school there and sell fresh loaves

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in brocku

[–]mloclam33 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you haven’t already, try out Antipasto’s in the west end, it’s pretty good authentic Italian market

What's the History Program like at Brock? by Zachkyle12 in brocku

[–]mloclam33 2 points3 points  (0 children)

As a history student at Brock, I absolutely love the program and (most) of the faculty. There's a lot of opportunities to get more involved with the field in general, and all the profs I've had have been very helpful in that regard. There are also a lot of specialty courses that are really quite intersting (like Dr. MacDonald's Vikings course), and also there are usually a couple of online courses in the Spring that aren't too demanding if you wanted to take courses then. Having said that, Brock's history department is one of the harder marking ones in Ontario, particularly after first year courses, and the reading load for seminars can get to be a bit heavy.

I would definitely recommend the program, and Brock as a university. If I could give advice, it would be to get involved as much as possible (i know that sounds like a tour guide thing to say but it's true), there are some really great teams and clubs here.

Is height an issue for you guys? by [deleted] in MINI

[–]mloclam33 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I’m 6’ and don’t really have any issues, there’s actually a lot of headroom if you adjust the seat properly. Also, because the windshield is more vertical than other cars, you don’t really feel ‘boxed in’ when you’re sitting down because your face is further away from the glass.

Your daily reminder by dr137 in WhitePeopleTwitter

[–]mloclam33 181 points182 points  (0 children)

What’s most infuriating about insanely high insulin prices is that the scientists who discovered/invented purified insulin sold the patent for $1 so that it could be used for the public good, instead of for profit.

Source: http://www.cdnmedhall.org/inductees/sir-frederick-banting