Casino definition and meaning Collins English Dictionary

1. Ching Shih

She was a Chinese prostitute who married a pirate and took over his fleet when he died. She ran her ships with an iron fist and took no shit and was super successful, to the point that the Chinese government sent out an armada to stop her. She kicked their asses and captured 63 of their ships. They fought for two years and even brought in Dutch and British ships before they gave up and offered amnesty to her and her 17,000 crewmen. She got to keep ALL of her loot, spent her later years running a brothel/casino and lived to be 69.

2. Jack Churchill

He was a WW2 Commando who served with distinction in a number of theaters, his exploits earned him the Military Cross. He was known as ‘Mad Jack’ by his men and his fellow officers for his ferociousness in combat. Unlike his more conventional peers his weapons of choice were not the traditional British fire arms of the period, instead he chose to rush in to combat with a fucking long bow, a fucking sword and his trusty bag pipes. In 1943 him and a corporal infiltrated a German held town in Sicily capturing 42 men and a mortar position. With only his bagpipes, sword and bow. When the war ended in 1945 after the dropping of the bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima, he was extremely disappointed and was quoted as saying “If it wasn’t for those damn Yanks, we could have kept the war going another 10 years.”

3. Khutulun

This Mongolian Princess insisted that any man who wished to marry her must defeat her in wrestling, forfeiting horses to her if they lost. She gained 10,000 horses defeating prospective suitors.

4. Genghis Khan

“I am the punishment of God. If you had not committed great sins, God would not have sent a punishment like me to you.” Only someone badass enough to know they are badass enough to say that can be considered the baddest ass in history.

6. “Tank Man”

Tank Man, of Tiananmen Square fame. We tend to think that you need an army at your back to be a badass, but when you’re a true badass you face the army in front of you even when there’s no one behind you.

7. Rasputin

Trusted advisor to the Romanov family and was nearly impossible to kill (poisoned, shot, drowned).

8. Christopher Lee

*worked in military intelligence during WW2, the character of James Bond is supposed to be part based on him (Ian Fleming was his cousin.) About his war service (from wikipedia): Lee spent time with the Gurkhas of the 8th Indian Infantry Division during the Battle of Monte Cassino. -While spending some time on leave in Naples, Lee climbed Mount Vesuvius, which erupted three days later. – During the final assault on Monte Cassino, the squadron was based in San Angelo and Lee was nearly killed when one of the planes crashed on takeoff and he tripped over one of its live bombs. *played Count Dracula in a string of popular Hammer Horror films; a James Bond villain in The Man with the Golden Gun; Lord Summerisle in The Wicker Man; Saruman in The Lord of the Rings films and The Hobbit films; and Count Dooku in the final two films of the Star Wars prequel trilogy. *released a Heavy metal album at the age of 88; has won awards for his metal music; the single he released in his 90th birthday made him the genre’s oldest performer; he had a song in the Billboard Hot 100 in December 2013 making him — at 91 — the living oldest performer to ever chart; released an EP earlier this year, at 92. If he’s not the world’s baddest ass, he might still be the worlds most interesting man.

9. Subutai

Subutai, Ghengis Khan’s primary military strategist. Tore through Eastern Europe like tearing toilet paper, with only a scouting force. Check out the wiki link, because he was unbelievable.

10. Roy P. Benavidez

“Sergeant Benavidez’ gallant choice to join voluntarily his comrades who were in critical straits, to expose himself constantly to withering enemy fire, and his refusal to be stopped despite numerous severe wounds, saved the lives of at least eight men. His fearless personal leadership, tenacious devotion to duty, and extremely valorous actions in the face of overwhelming odds were in keeping with the highest traditions of the military service, and reflect the utmost credit on him and the United States Army.” – Medal of Honor citation

11. Anne Boleyn

I’ll always stand by Anne Boleyn – she manipulated an infamous king into turning away from his beloved religion, kill his supporters who objected (Cardinal Wolsey), and broke with the church to marry her. She’s usually seen as conniving, a witch and evil, but in a male dominated world she cut out her own path and went from low born to the queen of England. She’s such an interesting person in my opinion

12. Frederick the Great

Frederick the Great is one of the most underrated badasses in history. The guy took on Austria, France, Russia, Poland, Sweden, and a bunch of smaller German and Italian states and won with his tiny kingdom-Prussia. He turned a small obscure German state into the nation that would end up uniting Germany and guide it on its path to evoking the most powerful country on Earth…until WW1. He was also a very wise monarch. He was friends with Voltaire and passed reforms that helped out the serfs and Jews.

13. Boudicca

The Queen of the Iceni tribe of ancient celts, she led a ragtag army of Celtic tribes against the invading and highly organized roman army. She burnt Londonium (modern day London) to the ground and wiped out a decent portion of Roman forces. And, oh yeah, this is after the Romans came and ignored her rule, beat her up, and raped her two daughters. Boudicca didn’t mess around.

14. Albert “Hard” Jacka

“On the morning of 7 August 1916, after a night of heavy shelling, the Germans began to overrun a portion of the line which included Jacka’s dug-out. Jacka had just completed a reconnaissance, and had gone to his dug-out when two Germans appeared at its entrance and rolled a bomb down the doorway, killing two of his men. Emerging from the dug-out, Jacka came upon a large number of Germans rounding up some forty Australians as prisoners. Only seven men from his platoon had recovered from the blast; rallying these few, he charged at the enemy. Heavy hand-to-hand fighting ensued, as the Australian prisoners turned on their captors. Every member of the platoon was wounded, including Jacka who was wounded seven times; including a bullet that passed through his body under his right shoulder, and two head wounds. Fifty Germans were captured and the line was retaken; Jacka was personally credited with killing between twelve and twenty Germans during the engagement.” And that was the second time he had done something like that. I suspect he was a terminator sent back to save some historically important grandfathers.

17. Daniel Inouye

Second longest serving Senators in US History (representing Hawaii since it gained statehood in 1959) and a WWII vet with this remarkable story to tell: “On April 21, 1945, Inouye was grievously wounded while leading an assault on a heavily-defended ridge near San Terenzo in Tuscany, Italy, called Colle Musatello. The ridge served as a strongpoint along the strip of German fortifications known as the Gothic Line, which represented the last and most unyielding line of German defensive works in Italy. As he led his platoon in a flanking maneuver, three German machine guns opened fire from covered positions just 40 yards away, pinning his men to the ground. Inouye stood up to attack and was shot in the stomach; ignoring his wound, he proceeded to attack and destroy the first machine gun nest with hand grenades and fire from his Thompson submachine gun. After being informed of the severity of his wound by his platoon sergeant, he refused treatment and rallied his men for an attack on the second machine gun position, which he also successfully destroyed before collapsing from blood loss. As his squad distracted the third machine gunner, Inouye crawled toward the final bunker, eventually drawing within 10 yards. As he raised himself up and cocked his arm to throw his last grenade into the fighting position, a German inside the bunker fired a rifle grenade that struck him on the right elbow, severing most of his arm and leaving his own primed grenade reflexively “clenched in a fist that suddenly didn’t belong to me anymore.” Inouye’s horrified soldiers moved to his aid, but he shouted for them to keep back out of fear his severed fist would involuntarily relax and drop the grenade. While the German inside the bunker reloaded his rifle, Inouye pried the live grenade from his useless right hand and transferred it to his left. As the German aimed his rifle to finish him off, Inouye tossed the grenade into the bunker and destroyed it. He stumbled to his feet and continued forward, silencing the last German resistance with a one-handed burst from his Thompson before being wounded in the leg and tumbling unconscious to the bottom of the ridge. When he awoke to see the concerned men of his platoon hovering over him, his only comment before being carried away was to gruffly order them to return to their positions, since, as he pointed out, “nobody called off the war!”

18. Stanley “Swede” Vejtasa

He was an American pilot during WWII. At the Battle of the Coral Sea, he shot down two Japanese Zeroes in an SBD Dauntless – a dive bomber – and rammed a third. Upon learning of this, the Navy transferred him to a fighter wing flying F4F Wildcats. Later, at the Battle of Santa Cruz, he became an “ace in a day”, shooting down seven Japanese planes in a single sortie. At least one of these kills was accomplished after running out of ammunition; he charged an enemy plane (which was also out of ammunition) head-on at low altitude and forced it to crash. He survived the war, as well.

19. Grainne Mhaol (known as Grace O’Malley by the English)

16th Irish noblewoman, when she was a child her father (the chieftain of the Uí Mháille clan) refused to take her to sea and she cut off all her hair to embarrass him into taking her (her nickname means Bald Grainne). She was born at a time when the Tudor conquest of Ireland was picking up the pace. Throughout her life she was a pirate, she was leader of fighters, under her leadership castles and forts were taken and withstood sieges, she was a revolutionary and war-leader and when Elizabeth I captured her sons and brother, she came to the royal court and negotiated their release in Latin, as she spoke no English and Elizabeth spoke no Irish. Her life would seriously fill about ten books.

20. Audie Murphy

Audie Murphy, aka real life Captain America. He was 16 in 1942, weighing 110 pounds and standing 5’5″. He applied to both the Marines and Air Force, but was turned down by both, and eventually managed to get into the Army, where he passed out halfway through training but insisted on going to fight. He contracted malaria in Italy, but was still sent into France in 1944, where he found a German machine gun crew who pretended to surrender, then shot his best friend. Murphy flipped shit, killed everyone in the gun nest, then used their weaponry to kill every Nazi in a 100-yard radius. 6 months later, his company (down to 19 men out of the original 128) was tasked with defending a critical region in France. The Nazis showed up with a ton of guys, so Murphy and his men sent out their M-10’s, which didn’t do much. They were about to be overrun when the skinny short kid with malaria ran to one of the burning M-10’s, grabbed the machine gun, and started mowing down every enemy he could see. He kept going for an hour, until he ran out of bullets, then walked back to his men as the tank exploded behind him.

21. Leo Major

For starters, he was part of the D-Day invasion. That very day, he killed a squad of German soldiers and captured a half-track that was loaded with intelligence information. Quite a while later, he ran into 4 SS soldiers and killed all of them. However, one hit him with a phosphorous grenade, blinding him in one eye. He refused discharge, saying that as long as he could see through the scope, he had enough eyes. During the Battle of the Scheldt, Major single-handedly captured 93 German soldiers and was offered a Distinguished Conduct Medal. He refused, saying that the man awarding it, General Bernard Montgomery, was an incompetent, so any award from him was worthless. In the beginning of 1945, he was in a vehicle that struck a landmine. He broke both ankles, 4 ribs, and fractured 3 vertebrae. He still continued, refusing evacuation. In April of that year, his unit came upon the Dutch city of Zwolle. His commander asked for two volunteers for a reconnaissance mission. Major and his friend Willie volunteered. They were expected to go see how many German soldiers were in the town. Shortly into their mission, Willie was killed, and the plan changed. Major was out for blood. He went down the street guns blazing and throwing grenades while yelling in French to convince the Germans that the Canadians had sent their whole force into the town. He captured nearly one hundred German troops who went fleeing from their cover. Later that night, he came upon the Gestapo HQ and burned it to the ground. He barged into the SS HQ later that same night, killed 4, and ran the other 4 out of town. At 4:30 a. m. He discovered that the city belonged to the Dutch again, and the Germans had been run out. He received a Distinguished Conduct Medal for single-handedly liberating the town of Zwolle. But he still wasn’t done. In the Korean War, he was asked to lead a strike team of elite snipers to support an American division. He and his twenty men took the hill single-handedly and held it while nearly 20,000 Chinese soldiers attacked their position. He was ordered to retreat. Instead, he held the hill for three days until reinforcements arrived. For this action, he received a bar to his DCM.

22. Hugh Glass

While the story is probably embellished some, it’s still amazing. While on a fur trapping expedition, he was mauled by a grizzly bear, which he killed with some help, then passed out. Later, he woke up to find his party abandoned him and he had no equipment. So he cleaned his multiple wounds, used the bear’s skin as a bandage, and spent the next six weeks making it back to civilization. Along the way he fought off wolves, made his own raft to travel down a river, and with the help of natives sewed the bear skin in place to replace his own.

23. Witold Pilecki

Witold Pilecki was a Polish soldier and resistance member who volunteered to get imprisoned in the Auschwitz concentration camp in order to gather intelligence and escape. While in the camp, Pilecki organized a resistance movement and as early as 1941, informed the Western Allies of Nazi Germany’s Auschwitz atrocities. He escaped from the camp in 1943 after nearly 3 years of imprisonment.

24. Louis Zamperini

To elaborate, he was a tiny guy that ran track for the US Olympic team in Germany. He got cleated up so bad by the other runners he was bleeding all over the place and he busted it down the final stretch, didn’t win but the crowd was going nuts for the guy so much so that hitler asked to shake his hand after the race. Plane gets shot down in ww2, survives longer a drift than anyone has ever survived while fighting off sharks. Washes ashore a Japanese prison camp, much badassery ensues here. Gets tortured for a couple years and after he’s released, this cat returns to japan to tell his torturer that he forgives him, the coward won’t meet him. This guy even died on the Fourth of July. Oh and some say he was actually the first to run a mile in under four minutes, in the sand.

25. General John J. Pershing

If Commanding General of the American Expeditionary Forces in WWI, John J. Pershing was alive today, he would probably say the following on how to deal with suicide bombers and deter Islamic terrorists: further action can be taken once they blow themselves up; there is an effective substance that can deter these bombers. Its pork, and it will deny any Muslim extremist what they seek after death. During the Philippine Wars 1899-1913, we fought another Islamic terrorist group called the Moro’s, which were decisively quelled by John J. Pershing. One tactic he employed is said to have happened in 1911, when Pershing was serving as commander of a garrison. Following numerous Islamic terrorist attacks, Pershing captured fifty of the Moro’s, and used their religion against them. Forced to dig their own graves, the terrorists were all tied to posts, for execution by firing squad. American soldiers then brought in pigs, slaughtered them, and then coated their bullets with the blood and fat from the pigs. Pershing turned the tables, and terrorized these terrorists; he ensured they saw that once struck by the firing squad’s bullets, they would be contaminated with the pig’s blood. Even worse, their bodies would be dumped in a grave with a pig carcass, meaning that they could not enter Heaven, even if they were engaged in a Jihad. Pershing followed through with the operation. Forty-nine Moro’s were shot, their bodies dumped into the graves, and the dead pig carcasses and entrails poured all over them. The Fiftieth Moro was spared, and allowed to return to his camp, to spread the word to his fellow Jihadists what happened to the others. He must have made it clear what fate awaits any Jihadists caught by the Americans from that point forward, as it brought an end to terrorism in the Philippines for the next 50 years.

26. Leroy Jenkins

The Three Makotos of persona 5, and why Atlus choose the wrong one.

A religion-less society actually exists right now!

Hello Jodan,

I'm sending this letter to you, Sam Harris and Douglas Murray, and hoping that it will reach at least one of you directly as I believe it could move all of your individual viewpoints as well as your future conversations forward. I'm sending it in the interest of possibly alerting you to at least one country, the one I grew up in, which seem to have completely evaded your research efforts and leaving you all, it would seem, agree on one, to me a very curious and strange point, that a successful and happy society without a (major) role of religion in it does not exist or have ever been tried. Sam is sure it would work, you say it did not work in Stalin's Russia case (you also add Hitler, who clearly was not an atheist and his most brutal forces had "God is with us" written right on their belt buckles which pretty much destroys the non-religious assertion), but none of you seem to be aware that it worked and is still currently working already very well.

I respect all of you greatly. I identify most with Sam's points of view at matters - perhaps unsurprisingly given the country I grew up in and the personality I am - and least with you Jordan, but that's only because of the religious part of views he seems to insist on deeply. I admire Jordan for your abilities to reason and, most of the time, reason so for clearly logical things. I admire the other two for the same reason without the need for that exception.

I've watched a great many videos featuring you 3 plus of course other very intelligent people like Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, and others in the past few years. The one thing that always keeps surprising me is the point where the discussion gets to the point of arguing about "how viable would a theoretical society" built basically purely on reason and no religion look like and what state it would end up in. Not even Christopher Hitchens seemed to ever have any other answers than a very good, but yet still purely theoretical arguments regarding such a society. From all of those occasions in those conversations, I am basically forced to believe that you all guys, however much-traveled and intelligent, have completely missed at least this one real-life, well-working example, which is my country - The Czech Republic. I think that if you haven't and if you then talked to a few people who grew up there at least at the time when I did - born 1973 - you would find not theoretical, but very real examples of a great many people who not only grew up completely without any religion or any stories coming from it and yet, still grew up very nice, intelligent and maybe surprisingly to you all VERY HAPPY people.

I'm not sure how many people exactly like me you would find because I really set up my life to be very happy, not even knowing how exactly stress would feel - I just maybe get hints of what it may feel like when I'm cold, which is why I have relocated to Queensland, Australia a long time ago - but you would definitely find heaps and heaps of people who are undergoing the same stresses in life as in any other western-type society with handling family, work and the other aspects of life, yet without any regard whatsoever to notions of any religion or any need to any type of any kind of comforting mythical stories.

That, of course, is not to say that many of us do not enjoy fiction books or entertaining stories in the form of books, tales, or other arts. We can enjoy it all the same with the full knowledge that those are fiction.

All the above is the result of the socialist/communist system we grew up in which not necessarily stifled but certainly did not promote any religion. It is the one thing I am grateful for to that system I grew up in, apart from a very happy childhood since nobody's parents had existential struggles. I do believe that there were efforts to eradicate the religion, many of which may probably be identified as forceful, but we've always kept our history including its buildings like castles and churches as opposed to destroying them, which would be an extreme way to get rid of something. Even clergy was tolerated and some very tiny minority of mostly the old-times people were attending services even at those times.

The actual real fact of life was, however, that we never were taught about religion apart from being a part of history, including ours. And we would still go on school trips some of which may include admiring a great cathedral purely for its architecture and art.

Strangely, even the name of the "person" who brings the presents at Chrismas (which in the Czech language is called "vanoce", which has nothing to do with Christianity - at least not obviously - I did not study its etymological roots) is "Jezisek", which, funnily and very interestingly enough I personally only realized when I was about 14 years old, means "a little Jezis = Jesus - "little" here meaning a kid, a baby). So the presents were being brought by a baby Jesus and yet, for almost all of us it was just a name, same as the west had Santa Claus or any other name you could use for a fictional character. It had NO religious meaning whatsoever to us, nor any story was attached to it at all. It was (and is for us) simply a holiday with the ritual of decorating a tree and having a very nice, extraordinary family dinner before (mostly the kids) would enjoy the present unwrapping under the tree. (Yes, our Christmas all happen on 24th Dec). We had no idea that it was originally a celebration of the winter solstice or that it was then stolen as a Christian holiday. We enjoyed it and frankly still enjoy it for the same family reasons, all the same. Actually now knowing that it has been for the past many hundreds of years appropriated by a religious cult if anything taints the experience. It probably would not if that cult was a thing simply belonging and part of the history of "less educated" times of us humans. The fact that this magical thinking still sways great sections of global citizens' everyday lives is what taints Christmas for some us Czechs. It surely does for me. I feel more at ease with it knowing that actually it is the winter solstice celebration. I would surely be more fine with it if it was just a date that someone decided to arbitrarily put on a calendar rather than thinking of it in terms of a cult that brutally killed and tortured so many innocent people in history and still thinks that magical thinking is just a fine idea.

Similar to Christmas, we in the Czech Republic also celebrate Easter (another holiday appropriated for itself by Christianity as I learned much later in my life). We also enjoy it purely for the tradition or maybe just for the fact that it is a day off work :). In Czech, a part of the tradition regarding Easter is that man create a nice looking weaved supple "sticks" from the branches of a willow tree, and in the morning we go around as many girls/women we know as possible to "hit" their behinds with it so that they stay young and supple too. I'm sure that in today's "politically correct" society many would find something very wrong with it, but the simple fact was that it ended up being a very nice and very social day for everyone. (By the way, I never knew that anybody would consider women as any lesser than men. I grew up in a society where had no reason to even suspect such a thing.) In the afternoon the girls and women had the right on the other hand to pour buckets of water over the men's' heads, even though that part was never really practiced. (At least in our parts of the Czech Republic. There are more traditional areas.) I suppose that is because it is not as convenient to run around with buckets of water around than it would be with sticks. Also, we - boys and men - would get a colorful ribbon bound to the ends of the sticks by each female we've visited and "paid off" - we don't really call it hitting or beating. It would leave the omitted girls and women feel neglected rather than happy not to get hit. I'm sure that the absolute majority of us were always as gentle as myself and my friends in performing that "stick-and-behind" ritual. I actually never wanted or was planning to do this whole thing, but I had a friend who always came on the morning of Easter Monday to my home with a couple of those "sticks" - one for himself, one for me, and basically had to talk me into joining him every single year. And it always ended up being one of the best days of the year, finishing in a mixed group having a great time (including a bit of drinking in our later teenage years). It was very nice and social and NOTHING to do with any religion or anything other than "this tradition actually turns out to be fun" and we did not need some deep explanation for it that I'm sure Jordan would try to dig out at this point. It was the same fun we can end up with when we come up with brand new social events, out of which, when they turn out fun, we often try to make a tradition of too. All that being completely atheist and secular. I really don't understand what seems to be so hard to comprehend even to Sam - not that he could not seem to be able to imagine it - clearly, he very much is - but that it actually has already been tried and is still going on successfully. Admittedly though, traditions like the Easter ones in Czech are fading as the capitalist style of life requiring most of us to work more and more puts a strain on that too, together with an overload of other modern culture distractions obviously.

In any case, my point is that what Sam is saying, what Christopher used to say and others too, is NOT a theoretically working "utopia", it IS a reality for millions in just my own country of origin and we suffer no ill effects from it!

On the contrary, despite being a tiny nation of 10 million people we have (even though thanks to globalization, corruption, and not in small part thanks to the totalitarianism of the European Union) we are loosing great industry and very clever people. We used to be (before EU) totally self-sufficient in basically everything, were exporting fighter jets, cars, atomic reactors, locomotives, food, and much more to the rest of the world, gave the world some amazing people and inventions like contact lenses, nanofibres, the lighting rod, or even small things like sugar cubes, pencils or Koh-i-Noor snaps for our jeans :) and we needed no religion or the related stories to do that. And that is the one thing I'm happy the "communist" regime gave us - true freedom from religion, freedom from bullshit stories if you pardon me. It lets us concentrate on interesting and important stuff in life instead of trying to solve mute problems like why are we here. We are, so enjoy it. I must say that without the religious ideas surrounding us that most of us don't even think about it as something to worry about. We worry about "we are here now, what can we do to live well" and some of us also "what can we do to leave my imprint on humanity". The more curious of us sure ask "how" did we get here and maybe do think about how in the great scheme of things we are totally insignificant, but I don't think it makes us unhappy. I know it does not make me unhappy for sure. I enjoy learning new things, discovering, making logical conclusions, and, apart from other things, being truthful to myself and others, which is probably why I'm also so happy in my life and have always been, which all of you I'm sure will very easily understand.

All of you guys seem to imply or straight away say that "sure, there is not a person who would not have major problems in life, who would not have "demons"" etc. Well, sure, I've encountered problems in my life. I'm solving software problems every day (I'm a software engineer) I've traveled around the world on a motorbike so I've encountered life-threatening situations, I've lost family members (fortunately for me just the ones who naturally died of old age, no tragedies so far, so yes, I've been lucky in that respect). But problems are here, to my eye, to be solved. They are a challenge, not a tragedy. They make life interesting. And demons? No, I do not have any. Things I regret? Maybe, a tiny little ones like not asking that beautiful girl on a bus for a coffee. But I've never done anything I would be ashamed of. That does not mean that I never failed of course. But I freely admit and not try to hide my failings so I have no demons. Am I really the only person in the world you think? I may be rare, but I'm sure I'm not alone.

Regardless, many, or basically I'd say almost all of my friends, much as they may have more normal everyday problems and stresses than I have (and it is not at all related to money - I'm not wealthy at all - we even still rent the place where we live), would tell you the same thing regarding the role of religion or religious stories in their lives and their decisions - NONE whatsoever.

The Czech Republic is very rich in culture too. Our country has one of the biggest concentrations of castles for example. I do not think that religion was necessary for those structures to be built for powerful people in our history. Yes, many, many churches too. Beautiful buildings. Some of them truly amazing, as some of the castles, too. And our secular society still builds and creates amazing things with no religion required for it. Just yesterday I was sent a link to a video about the biggest chandelier and at the same time, the biggest jewel ever built anywhere. (Link here if you are interested: https://www.youtube.com/embed/AQ2udSvqx28 .) It could very well hang in a cathedral of some type. But it was built by a Czech company for a Saipan casino. Only human talent, work, and lots of money was needed to build this wonder. No religion whatsoever. So I'm pretty sure, Jordan, that you can stop worrying about losing culture if there was no religion. Sure, cassino may not be considered culture by many, but it is simply a fact of today's world that casinos are one of the areas where the money is. If you want to start to argue that we need religion as a way of extracting money from the population to build such marvels, as was historically exactly one of its functions and is one of the reasons those grand structures like great cathedrals exist, then fine. I would, like Sam, argue that it is possible to do without the pretense of magic, but at least that would be a simple point to defend. Not the only way though!! An example - and I'm sure there are also many modern ones too.. The National Theatre in Prague... It is a grandiose building with high ceilings covered with similar gold ornamentry and paintings to any cathedral you may find. It also has a huge painted curtain - a great painting of its own right. This all was built from money collected from donations of the citizens expressly towards building a national theatre, which was opened in 1881. The first idea came in 1844 at a congregation of Czech patriots. As far as I can tell no religion was involved. Certainly, none needed. And that great building is also a part of our and the world's registered cultural heritage sites.

So to summarize, the reason for this letter was to let all of you three guys know that you can stop only theorizing about a society without religion. Look at the Czech Republic especially before the Velvet Revolution (after which slowly more and more religion starts very slowly creeping in again), but where still today three-quarters of the population are completely irreligious. We are one of the safest, most educated, and happiest countries in the world. And if you look over the state ideology at any one time, where communism was making some people unhappy with restrictions on travel for example, and capitalism in its demands on sacrificing more of one's private / family time for work time, we are generally really happy people, nice to each other (without having to be threatened by hell or whatever other stupid magic idea), helping each other. And it is probably partly thanks to the LACK of any religion that we are that way. There is one less thing to partition us into opposing groups which argue about something they actually cannot even know.

Actually, that makes me think about my friends and people I know. I know and have experienced that my friends or even friends of my parents, for example, would (and in the past have) helped me when I really needed help, despite it being a great inconvenience for them. Yet, I was in similar situations when I only had a religious person to help me and they would not. It would seem to me that religious people like to listen to the stories that Jordan insists are shaping majorly their principles and behavior, rather than actually behave according to them. And then some feel great to tell you how good they are thanks to Jesus.

Ok, I think that concrete examples would be good here:
I know, that every time I go back to the Czech Republic for the summer I have offers from my friends to take me to the airport - both in Czech and in Australia (still from Czech friends interestingly enough). In both cases, it is over 100km and I do not want to inconvenience them if it is not necessary so I thank them and decline. But I know that even if I called them at three in the morning that I needed an urgent lift to the airport they would just tell me how long it would take them to pick me up.
Contrast that with this:
I've known a great person for 7 years and actually shared a house with her for 5 of those years. I consider her a very nice person and considered her a very good friend. I still visit her once a year or so when I have a chance, but thinking back on the story I'm about to tell you certainly makes me feel less worm towards her than I always thought she otherwise deserved.

So the story: I found a new life partner while again staying for the whole European summer in the Czech Republic. For reasons irrelevant to this story she could not join me permanently in Australia for the first few years of being together, so we were overcoming that problem by her periodically visiting me in Australia for 3 months, then we would not see each other for another 3, then I would go to Czech for 3 and a bit, again 3 months apart and then the cycle would repeat.

At the end of one of her stays in Australia with me, while I was still sharing the house with my friend, Jean, my partner was flying home the next day and I, shortly before that, decided I would actually fly back with her. I could not get a seat on the same flight so my flight was at 8 AM and hers the same day at 1 PM. My partner is a bit lost when traveling and she did not speak English at that time yet either, so we decided to travel the 150km to Brisbane in the evening before and arranged to stay with a friend there overnight. We were supposed to catch the second one of the only two trains that goes from that place to Brisbane daily. It was leaving around 9 PM. The nearest train station is about 8km from the place I lived in with Jean, who agreed or maybe even offered to take us to that train station, I can't remember that bit for sure. What is for sure is that once we got there it become clear that the train was not coming as the train tracks were not there and the workers currently working there under the floodlights confirmed that the trains were not operating on that track for the past 14 days and will not be going for another 14 more. I was amazed and surprised, especially after we got back home and I confirmed on the computer that the online time schedule directly on the Queensland Rail website still insists that there are no exceptions or delays and that that train is scheduled as per normal.

There was no other public transport for us to use from that place. So after another couple of hours of trying to figure out any other possibility of getting us there on time, I finally asked Jean if she would be so kind and took us to the airport (we did not want to bother the friend in Brisbane to sleep over anymore because we would arrive too late for that we felt) so that we could make our flights. Jean told us that "she would but that she promised her sister to accompany her to a church service the next morning and that if she took us she would be too sleepy for that the next day"..................

I probably don't have to say that I was a bit disappointed that someone I considered a friend and a good person would refuse to help us in a situation in which I would have no other safe viable option. I never analyzed it further beyond the disappointment. However, a couple of years later I was telling this story to a friend and he, I think very spot on, pointed out that "So she would rather go to church to listen to the preacher to tell her that she should be helping people rather than take the opportunity to actually help someone in a real need.". How is that for "Christian" values? I know my non-religious friends would not hesitate to help me in that situation as I'll give you an example of in a couple of lines.

Just to finish the story, Jean was "nice enough" to suggest that we can try hitchhiking on the highway (at 1 AM no less!!) and "kindly" offered to take us there. We had no other choice so we accepted. To start with, there were literally 2 cars in 40 minutes we stood there. Fortunately, the second car actually stopped for us, and also fortunately we survived that. I say the second "fortunately" since it was a German traveler who told us that he stopped because he needed someone to keep him awake since he has been driving at that point non-stop for 16 hours from Cairns. Needless to say that traveling in a car 20km over the highway speed limit with someone who is grossly falling to sleep is quite scary... The story still developed into having quite a few very interesting twists, but those are not relevant to this anymore.

So now a concrete matching example:
When I was 15 I was to travel by bus 150 km to my brand new high school. I was obviously gonna have to be staying at a boarding school there so I wanted to take an earlier Sunday bus to have a chance to choose my new bed. But after waiting over an hour over the scheduled time for the bus I concluded that it was not coming and I was going to have to take the late afternoon one. After returning to the bus station and waiting for that one for almost an hour again I finally figured out that it was actually a brand new holiday celebrating the two (religious - interestingly enough :)) men who managed to enforce the recognition of our language as a language recognized by the religion, based and thanks to which our writing was established. (Religion would not allow our writing if it did not recognize the language as being worthy.) It was never celebrated before as it was shortly after the Velvet Revolution so I had no idea. Anyway, the result was that there was no other bus that day and that not only I would arrive dead last to the boarding school, but I would also miss probably the important first half of the first day at the actual new school as a freshman since my dad was away somewhere at that time with our only car.

That evening, at about 10 PM, a neighbor and my parent's friend came to pick something up from my mum. He was surprised to see me still at home and so he asked how come? When we told him he said that we should have told him earlier because he would have taken me there. He also told us that he was supposed to be at work the next day at 5 or 6 AM so it was too late to drive me there now. I remember thinking that it is easy to say now if he can't prove he would have done it anyway. Three minutes later I hear him saying: "You know what, let's go, I'll take you there." It was a 3-hour drive one way!!! The Czech Republic is quite dense with towns and villages and there were at that time many quite large detours on the way, too. So this man would get home about an hour or two before having to go to work!

How big of a difference this is to a church on Sunday where you go by your own volition, you are not required to go and being able to take the highway instead of in that case basically the whole way, so that trip would have cost Jean 3 hours max!

So the person who is NOT compulsed to help me for fear of any hell or any other even slightly unpleasant result helps me for purely the good feeling that one gets from helping others by his own choice despite majorly inconveniencing himself is the one that actually helps me and the one that thinks of themselves as the chosen and the most kind people chooses to go listening about how kind they are rather than actually be. Does not that give you a pause? :)

Another example. I was renting a room in a home of another of my friends and I happened to accidentally either drop the clear plastic fridge bucket for fruits and veggies or drop something on it (I cannot remember), resulting in its cracking. The, for me absolutely obvious thing to do, despite that it was "just a crack" and the bucket was still capable of fulfilling its function (and in fact until this day I still use it in my garage to store stuff in), I went ahead and spent almost a whole day trying to find where I could buy the correct replacement and spent something like 60 bucks on it at a time I did not have much money at all. Just because it was a normal logical thing for me to do for the pure "golden rule" reason. And Jordan would maybe say "ha, see, Christian values". And I, same as Sam or Christopher or probably Douglas too, would say that that rule is very logical, self-evident, and much older than the Christianity that appropriates that too for itself. It is just logical. I did not ever need any kind of story behind it and definitely not one where I would be punished other than that others may start doing the same to me seeing me do that to others. And since I want others to be nice to me, I, quite logically and without complicated explanations that some try to fit to some ancient stories they happen to believe in, will behave nicely to them.

And now again, contrast this to a very similar situation the other way around, this time, however, the other person is a church-going Christian.

I now live in a nice big house, which we rent as I mentioned. For the past 10 years, it has been our home and we can only afford it because we are sub-letting one of its rooms directly connected to the main bathroom. And we do this because we fell in love with the house and felt immediately at home as soon as we inspected it. And we originally inspected it purely just as a point of comparison with other houses we went to see afterward because it was available for inspection first that day. Later, comparing it to the other houses, I realized we could make it affordable (same price as the others) by renting out just those two of the 4 rooms that were on the top of what we actually needed. So we did and it has been 10 years since.

We look for people who want to stay longer-terms. Last year, a guy from the Christian part of Nigeria was finishing his stay of over 2 years with us. He would go to church every Sunday without fail and was obviously a devout Christian. He was studying nursing and was working as well, earning quite good money too. In the home, we usually all fit in our big fridge together with our boarder. This one, however, said he needed more space so we bought an additional fridge for him. It was one of the smaller ones which still needs to be periodically defrosted. When we noticed that he is leaving the freezer to become overgrown with ice we told him that he will need to do that so that the fridge does not break. We asked him to do that several times over several months until the plastic hinge of the plastic freezer door broke by the ice pushing it out. It was obviously not even an accident. He would ignore that. So eventually I told him that now he, unfortunately, had to find a replacement freezer door for it because otherwise, the fridge will be consuming much more energy (and we are paying all the energy bills, the boarders have it included in a single unchanging rent amount, which is by the way cheapest in this area) and that it will freeze over faster and that the person after him will surely need the door, too. Nothing at all happened until he left.

I meant to force him to do that before I'd return his bond when he would eventually be leaving, but it happened just at a time when we were holidaying aborad and I forgot about the freezer door. So I remotely returned his full bond. Sometime after that, when he came to pick up some of his post that he still did not change the address for, I gave him the broken door and asked him if he could please finally get a replacement. It's been almost a year now and he tells me he did not find it. So I asked him obviously if he actually tried. He said he did. A couple of simple questions later it is clear that he actually did not even try but is happy to lie about it. So what exactly has the church taught him?? I know it has neither taught him for sure to be responsible for his own actions nor to be honest. Clearly. Qualities that I and all of my close friends who I grew up with, who have never been touched by religion of any kind, have.

I am not necessarily saying that these almost exactly one-to-one comparable examples are totally indicative of the difference of morals between Christians and completely irreligious people, but since it does fit pretty well with many others we see in history and also currently around us, I think it is time to stop theorizing about the necessity or even utility of religious values for modern people. I'm not disputing that religion does have utility for people who follow it, but it certainly is not the necessary or even important tool for people in general.

It seems to me that religion has a utility of a rock that you use to beat in a nail. Take the rock from me and you leave me with a hammer that actually makes much more sense, similarly to taking away the stories and threat of hell and replacing it with something that has been there all along - the genuinely nice feeling of helping someone even if I am otherwise not compelled by anything else than the great feeling and the very logical realization that I have a much better chance to be treated nicely if I treat everybody else nicely. And that I am much more likely to be helped by others if I unconditionally help them. And I may help someone who never helps me, but helps somebody else. And somebody I never helped may actually help me because he was also at some point helped or at least sees it as all so logical how this works.

Jordan, your well-researched arguments on many societal topics are great and helpful and make sense. But I must say that even though I heard a couple of ways you very interestingly matched biblical stories on some current situations or general human behavior, I also think that you are totally overcomplicating stuff in these cases and you are getting many, myself included, lost as to what you are in fact trying to do other than somehow trying to reconcile your Christian belief with current reality and as you just discussed during the talks with Douglas and Sam, smuggling the Jesus into it where really, it is not necessary at all, objectively.

I understand that it is important to many, you including, but it really is not necessary. We can very nicely do completely without it. As an exercise in reasoning it is, or can be, for sure interesting, especially for scholars like you. For us, normal people (or normal engineers like myself :)) it seems pretty pointless otherwise. And the case of the Czech Republic, I think, even takes a base from your case completely, even though I'm sure you could find connections.

As an engineer I can tell you I can map anything to anything if I put enough abstractions in between. But the simple truth is, that almost everybody in a real country that has been historically doing well, grew up a perfectly decent person, arguably in a bigger percentage more decent than the majority in much more religious countries. And we do not suffer. Again, I'd say we suffer less because we are not burdened by any traumas like worrying about ending up in hell.

Sure, in our folklore we have another tradition where St. Nicholas (we never used the "St" part, for us it was just "Mikulas") comes on 5. December together with one or more devils to our home and gives our children presents or coal if "they were not good". And yes, for most children the devils are scary and some parents use that to elicit the promise of being good "from now on", but I think that at least most parents (certainly mine) were not trying to persuade us these were real beings.

It was a (scary) theatre happening in almost everybody's homes. And as soon as you figure out those under the masks are just normal people you feel clever as a kid. And you feel like you've grown and maybe also that you outsmarted the adults who would not tell you straight away those are just people. When you are like 6, 7, or 8, you are looking forward to running outside with the Mikulases and devils despite sometimes still being scared by them if they play the role well. It is thrilling. But it never needed to be shoved down our throats as a reality and not even a story was needed.

We have folklore fairytales that feature devils punishing bad people, yes. But we do not need them to tell us what is right and what is wrong. We can figure that out for ourselves and the stories are just a nice entertainment, if done well. And yes, we can see the useful allegory in it. We would still, however, know quite naturally the difference between clear right and wrong, between hurting others and not hurting others. But we recognize the difference between entertainment and reality. We still enjoy stories all the same.

You do not need organizations that actually believe those, are exempt from paying taxes and are praying on those who cannot reason themselves out well enough or prevent themselves being reasoned in by these fantastical stories and the ability of the storyteller to manipulate. I'd say that the about 25% of people in the Czech Republic who identify themselves as somehow religious are exactly those types of people. Ones who severely lack logical thinking. I have an uncle and a stepdaughter both like that. Neither of them has very good reasoning ability and so they are hanging there to be hooked on by the use of fantastical and magical stories, despite the fact that they were not indoctrinated into it as children, which then makes it more understandable when even pretty intelligent people still have this illogical partition in their brain reserved for god.

OK, that's it. Quite a bit longer than I intended it to be, but I hope it will eventually reach at least one of you in person and maybe give you some more arsenal for good arguments. It is obvious that you are very busy people so I do not expect any reply at all, but it would be great to get something like: "Hey Marek, it reached me, thanks." so that I know that I haven't completely wasted almost the whole day today instead of fixing my server and getting back to my coding in which I'm so much behind.

Wish you all all the best.

Sincerely,

Marek Vsechovsky

Aside:
As I'm reading what I wrote after myself I realize that although not absolutely necessary to explain this, you may wonder if I'm not "telling you stories" since at one point I mention that I am a software engineer and in another talk about affordability of rent. Well, I really don't revolve my life around money. And since I very much enjoy my job and have large amounts of ideas, I'm trying to implement them running it as my own business. However, I am kind of a Wozniak without a Jobs, meaning that rather than marketing a finished product I immediately start working on the next one since I just can't wait to work on it, so I end up with no income to my business and so from time to time I have to accept a paid outside contract. Since my expertise is large and well valued, and since I am a very frugal person (if I compare myself to most other people who say they are too :) ) I only need to work for about 3 months to be able to live from that for the next two years developing my own ideas. That's why I'm still renting rather than owning. I do what I love, I spend as much time on it as I want and I live at a very nice place where I can take a 30-minute holiday jumping in the surf basically all-year-round, so I'm really happy.

[MF] The Fisherman from Kastoria

Captain George Sullivan applied more power to the B-25’s twin radial engines and pulled back on the control column. The versatile bomber climbed to avoid the thick toxic dark ash columns spewing out of Mount Vesuvius. The five able American airmen were accustomed to the deafening noise onboard Lady Flamenco, as well as to the strong odor of cordite and spent oil.
It was late March 1944. The crew ate fresh eggs for breakfast before they took-off to bomb a concentration of Wehrmacht troops southeast of Rome. Their plane was hit by heavy enemy anti-aircraft flack during the shallow dive-bombing run near Monte Cassino, but no major damage was inflicted. Luck ran out for the crew aboard the bomber which followed. Their right wing was shattered by flack and the leaking fuel ignited. The aircraft exploded before it hit the ground. No parachutes were spotted.
As soon as they were safe overland under Allied control, the P-51 Mustang fighter planes broke away and left the empty bombers to fly back unescorted to their airbase south of Naples. Sullivan’s heart rate stabilized. He peered out the cockpit window at the circular Mount Vesuvius. The eruption was into its sixth day. He was captivated by the streams of bright red lava which flowed without resistance into the defenseless and abandoned villages situated on the fertile foothills of the volcano. He questioned the event of a lifetime he witnessed.
Who inflicts more devastation, God or Man?
Sullivan glanced back into the cockpit and reviewed the familiar wall of dials in front of him. There was enough fuel to complete the return leg. He settled back in his seat. His confidence was at an all-time high with one more mission to fly to conclude the tour of duty.
I’m a lucky sucker. I’m going home soon!
Before starting the mandatory checks and slow descent for landing, Sullivan extended his hand into one of his sheepskin flight jacket pockets. He took out the worn-out black and white photograph of his high school sweetheart. The snapshot of Betty was with him wherever he traveled since leaving Madison County to join the Air Force. To most, she was an ordinary miss. For Sullivan, she was the most beautiful girl he ever met. He felt blessed with Betty and was set on marrying her as soon as he got back home. Sullivan turned the photograph around and read the handwritten message on the backside.
Go do your duty and come back to me. Love, B.
As Lady Flamenco’s tricycle gear touched down, the climatic impact of the Vesuvius eruption was felt as far away as northern Greece, about one thousand kilometers eastward. Black snow made of a mixture of feathery ice crystals and volcanic ash covered everything. For the locals of Kastoria, this weather phenomenon was perceived as a bad omen.
Adonis was a dark-skinned athletic fisherman in his early twenties. He was not too tall but not too short either. The Italian occupation of Greece had little impact on his tranquil life. Almost every day, in the early hours, while the people of Kastoria slept, he and his fellow fishermen ventured out to the deeper waters of Lake Kastoria. Most times they came back with a good catch. By midday, they sold everything in the market and to the local tavernas. Afterward, they often gathered to eat a fresh village salad and drink ouzo.
Life worsened in Kastoria when the Germans took over from the Italians in late 1943, but the lake rich in aquatic life saved the population from starvation. One day, a friend of Adonis invited him to attend a discreet gathering of aspiring Communists in one of the tavernas. He welcomed the escape from the dullness of occupation. At the small restaurant, Adonis locked eyes with a young lady. She had olive-colored skin, green eyes, and long pitch-black hair. She gave him a half-smile in return. Her name was Thalassa and they got to talking. Afterward, while walking home with his friend, Adonis declared that he had found his future wife.
Thalassa fancied the courtship which followed. She welcomed the romantic excitement into her otherwise boring life. Thalassa came from an affluent family of mink furriers but only the males ran the business. She told Adonis she wanted to be equal amongst men. Communism was her means away from an adult life of home cooking, cleaning, and bringing up children.
Thalassa was not bothered by her parent’s dislike of the poor fisherman. Her mother kept saying she had to find a man of equal or better social standing. Adonis’s mother wished her youngest son would stay away from Thalassa. She feared the rebellious political activities would get Adonis into trouble with the occupying forces. For Adonis, Communism was an excuse to be with the woman of his dreams.
“For a few drachmas, a rotten collaborator will report you to the Germans. They will arrest you for being a Communist. They are not forgiving like the Italians. They punish…”
As a passionate devotee of the Greek Orthodox Church, she even tried to convince him to make a lifelong commitment to God in order to stay out of trouble.
“I am not going to become a priest or monk…the Church is not for me…”
“Tfou, tfou, tfou…make sure you pray every morning before you head out to the lake!”
The black snow continued to pile up that late March afternoon. Undeterred by the weather, Adonis and Thalassa strolled hand in hand down the boardwalk by the lakefront. Thalassa stopped in front of a wooden bench. They sat down. The sun was setting in front of them. She shifted toward Adonis, took hold of his rough-skinned hands, and focused his dark brown eyes.
“Things are getting worse by the day…I have decided to join the Resistance in the mountains,” Thalassa said.
She often expressed her wish to join the Resistance, but Adonis never attributed much to her desire. When it came to the occupation, they were not like-minded.
“Let’s keep our heads down and wait for the war to end. We don’t have to prove ourselves to anyone…”
“It is not about that. I heard the Jews will be rounded up tomorrow. I cannot be oblivious to the events unfolding around us.”
“What about the two of us…our love? If we do not take up arms, the Germans will leave us alone. Is that not worth staying back for?”
“What is our love without freedom and equality?”
“You mean without equality and freedom…”
Adonis realized it was pointless to argue with Thalassa. She wanted to be a liberated woman, to challenge tradition and breakaway from her close-knit family, and then fight for a free Greece. Marriage came last. As the sun disappeared below the horizon, they stood face to face.
“Long life to you,” said Thalassa.
“Be safe. I love you. Forever.”
They kissed one more time and said goodbye.
Many years later…
An aging Adonis sat on the wooden bench by the lake. His mature skin was damaged by years of exposure to the sun while out fishing on the lake. These days he was too fragile to sail out to the deep waters, but from time to time he used a cane rod to fish along the shorelines. He took out small dual blade pocketknife and worked the carved initials on the backrest, just as he did many afternoons to make certain the engraving did not fade away.
While Adonis chipped into the engraved initials, an old round lady sat down by his side. He stopped carving and shifted toward her with an expression of fatigue. She had wrinkles on her face, snow-white hair and blue eyes. Between them, they had countless stories to tell, but most were forgotten by now. Adonis, as polite as always, said hello.
“I’m sorry, I don’t speak Greek…”
“Ah…I speak a little English. My name is Adonis.”
“Nice to meet you. My name is Betty. I am a tourist from America.”
She wiped the sweat from her forehead and drank from her bottle of water.
“First time in Greece?”
“First time in Europe. I am amazed at the colorful beauty of your country. Just like in the movies. Have you ever been to America?”
“All my life I stay in Kastoria. I never go far away.”
Betty could not decipher the carved Greek letters.
“What are you doing with the knife?”
“T for Thalassa and A for Adonis.”
“Adonis is you…and so I suppose… Thalassa is a woman close to you?”
Adonis looked out toward the Pindus mountains which rose up beyond the lake.
“Thalassa was a brave woman with the Resistance. She was killed by Germans in the mountains many years ago.”
“You loved her?”
A single tear rolled down his cheek. His lips trembled and he placed his hand over his heart.
“Yes, very, very much.”
Driven by an impulsive desire for human contact, Betty reached out and placed her soft hand above his.
“I’m so sorry for your loss. I also lost my love during the war. George was a pilot. He was killed in Italy on his last mission…every day I think of him and what could have been…”
The two elders cried as if they had shared a lifetime. They both knew that tears do not extinguish the memories or make the pain of loss go away.
“I wish I had gone with Thalassa into the mountains…but I was not brave. I was just a fisherman.”
***

monte cassino has been created

By John Lord, LL. D. THOMAS AQUINAS. THE SCHOLASTIC PHILOSOPHY. (ii.) With the Crusades arose a new spirit, which gave an impulse to philosophy as well as to art and enterprise. "The primum mobile of the new system was Motion, in distinction from the Rest which marked the old monas- tic retreats." An immense enthusiasm for knowledge had been kindled by Abélard, which was further in- tensified by the Scholastic doctors of the thirteenth century, especially such of them as belonged to the Dominican and Franciscan friars. These celebrated Orders arose at a great crisis in the Papal history, when rival popes aspired to the throne of Saint Peter, when the Church was rent with divisions, when princes were contending for the right of investiture, and when heretical opinions were de- fended by men of genius. At this crisis a great Pope was called to the government of the Church,——Inno- cent III., under whose able rule the papal power culminated. He belonged to an illustrious Roman family, and received an unusual education, being versed in theology, philosophy, and canon law. His name was Lothario, of the family of the Conti; he was nephew of a pope, and counted three cardinals among his relatives. At the age of twenty-one, about the year 1181, he was one of the canons of Saint Peter's Church; at twenty-four he was sent by the Pope on important missions. In 1188 he was created cardinal by his uncle, Clement III.; and in 1198 he was elected Pope, at the age of thirty-eight, when the Crusades were at their height, when the south of France was agitated by the opinions of the Albigenses, and the provinces on the Rhine by those of the Waldenses. It was a turbulent age, full of tumults insurrections, wars, and theological dissensions. The old monastic orders had degenerated and lost influence through idleness and self-indulgence, while the secular clergy were scarcely any better. Innocent cast his eagle eye into all the abuses which disgraced the age and Church, and made fearless war upon those princes who usurped his pre- rogatives. He excommunicated princes, humbled the Emperor of Germany and the King of England, put kingdoms under their interdict, exempted abbots from the jurisdiction of bishops, punished heretics, formed cru- sades, laid down new canons, regulated taxes, and di- rected all ecclesiastical movements. His activity was ceaseless, and his ambition was boundless. He in- stituted important changes, and added new orders of monks to the Church. It was this Pope who made auricular confession obligatory, thus laying the founda- tion of an imperious spiritual sway in the form of inquisitions. A firm guardian of public morals, his private life was above reproach. His habits were simple and his tastes were cultivated. He was charitable and kind to the poor and unfortunate. He spent his enormous revenues in building churches, endowing hospitals, and rewarding learned men; and otherwise showed himself the friend of scholars, and the patron of benevolent movements. He was a reformer of abuses, publishing the most se- vere acts against venality, and deciding quarrels on prin- ciples of justice. He had no dramatic conflicts like Hildebrand, for his authority was established. As the supreme guardian of the interests of the Church he sel- dom made demands which he had not the power to en- force. John of England attempted resistance, but was compelled to submit. Innocent even gave the arch- bishopric of Canterbury to one of his cardinals, Stephen Langton, against the wishes of a Norman king. He made Philip II take back his lawful wife; he nominated an emperor to the throne of Constantine; he compelled France to make war on England, and incited the barons to rebellion against John. Ten years' civil war in Ger- many were the fruit of his astute policy, and the only great failure of his administration was that he could not exempt Italy from the dominion of the Emperors of Germany, thus giving rise to the two great political par- ties of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries,——the Guelphs and Ghibellines. To cement his vast spiritual power and to add to the usefulness and glory of the Church, he not only countenanced but encouraged the Mendicant Friars, established by Saint Francis of Assisi, and Saint Dominic of the great family of the Guzmans in Spain. These men made substantially the same offers to the Pope that Ignatius Loyola did in after times,——to go where they were sent as teachers, preachers, and missionaries without condition or reward. They renounced riches, professed absolute poverty, and wandered from village to city bare- footed, and subsisting entirely on alms as beggars. The Dominican friar in his black habit, and the Fran- ciscan in his gray, became the ablest and most effective preachers of the thirteenth century. The Dominicans confined their teachings to the upper classes, and be- came their favorite confessors. They were the most learned men of the thirteenth century, and also the most reproachless in morals. The Franciscans were itinerary preachers to the common people, and created among them the same religious revival that the Meth- odists did later in England under the guidance of Wes- ley. The founder of the Franciscans was a man who seemed to be "inebriated with love," so unquenchable was his charity, rapt his devotions, and supernal his sympathy. He found his way to Rome in the year 1215, and in twenty-two years after his death there were nine thousand religious houses of his Order. In a century from his death the friars numbered one hundred and fifty thousand. The increase of the Do- minicans was not so rapid, but more illustrious men belonged to this institution. It is affirmed that it produced seventy cardinals, four hundred and sixty bishops, and four popes. It was in the palmy days of these celebrated monks, before corruption had set in, that the Dominican Order was recruited with one of the most extraordinary men of the Middle Ages. This man was Saint Thomas, born 1225 or 1227, son of a Count of Aquino in the kingdom of Naples, known in history as Thomas Aqui- nas, "the most successful organizer of knowledge," says Archbishop Trench, "the world has known since Aris- totle." He was called "the angelical doctor," exciting the enthusiasm of his age for his learning and piety and genius alike. He was a prodigy and a marvel of dialectical skill, and Catholic writers have exhausted language to find expressions for their admiration. Their Lives of him are an unbounded panegyric for the sweetness of his temper, his wonderful self-control, his lofty devotion to study, his indifference to praises and rewards, his spiritual devotion, his loyalty to the Church, his marvellous acuteness of intellect, his in- dustry, and his unparalleled logical victories. When he was five years of age his father, a noble of very high rank sent him to Monte Cassino with the hope that he would become a Benedictine monk, and ulti- mately abbot of that famous monastery, with the control of its vast revenues and patronage. Here he remained seven years, until the convent was taken and sacked by the soldiers of the Emperor Frederic in his war with the Pope. The young Aquino returned to his father's castle, and was then sent to Naples to be edu- cated at the university, living in a Benedictine abbey, and not in lodgings like other students. The Domini- cans and Franciscans held chairs in the university, one of which was filled with a man of great ability, whose preaching and teaching had such great influence on the youthful Thomas that he resolved to join the Order, and at the age of seventeen became a Dominican friar, to the disappointment of his family. His mother Theodora went to Naples to extricate him from the hands of the Dominicans, who secretly hurried him off to Rome and guarded him in their convent, from which he was rescued by violence. But the youth persisted in his intentions against the most passionate entreaties of his mother, made his escape, and was carried back to Naples. The Pope, at the solicitation of his family, offered to make him Abbot of Monte Cassino, but he remained a poor Dominican. His superior, seeing his remarkable talents, sent him to Cologne to attend the lectures of Albertus Magnus, then the most able ex- pounder of the Scholastic Philosophy, and the oracle of the universities, who continued his lectures after he was made a bishop, and even until he was eighty-five. When Albertus was transferred from Cologne to Paris, where the Dominicans held two chairs of theology, Thomas followed him, and soon after was made bach- elor. Again was Albert sent back to Cologne, and Thomas was made his assistant professor. He at once attracted attention, was ordained priest, and became as famous for his sermons as for his lectures. After four years at Cologne Thomas was ordered back to Paris, travelling on foot, and begging his way, yet stopping to preach in the large cities. He was still magister and Albert professor, but had greatly distinguished himself by his lectures. His appearance at this time was marked. His body was tall and massive, but spare and lean from fasting and labor. His eyes were bright, but their expression was most modest. His face was oblong, his complex- ion sallow; his forehead depressed, his head large, his person erect. His first great work was a commentary of about twelve hundred pages on the "Book of Sentences," in the Parma edition, which was received with great ad- miration for its logical precision, and its opposition to the rationalistic tendencies of the times. In it are discussed all the great theological questions treated by Saint Augustine,——God, Christ, the Holy Spirit, grace, predestination, faith, free-will, Providence, and the like,——blended with metaphysical discussions on the soul, the existence of evil, the nature of angels, and other subjects which interested the Middle Ages. Such was his fame and dialectical skill that he was taken away from his teachings and sent to Rome to defend his Order and the cause of orthodoxy against the slander of William of Saint Amour, an aristo- cratic doctor, who hated the Mendicant Friars and their wandering and begging habits. William had written a book called "Perils," in which he exposed the dangers to be apprehended from the new order of monks, in which he proved himself a true prophet, for ultimately the Mendicant Friars became subjects of ridicule and reproach. But the Pope came to the rescue of his best supporters. On the return of Thomas to Paris he was made doc- tor of theology, at the same time with Bonaventura the Franciscan, called "the seraphic doctor," between whom and Thomas were intimate ties of friendship. He had now reached the highest honor that the uni- versity could bestow, which was conferred with such extraordinary ceremony that it would seem to have been a great event in Paris at that time. His fame chiefly rests on the ablest treatise written in the Middle Ages,——the "Summa Theologica,"——in which all the great questions in theology and philosophy are minutely discussed, in the most exhaustive manner. He took the side of the Realists, his object being to uphold Saint Augustine. He was more a Platonist in his spirit than an Aristotelian, although he was in- debted to Aristotle for his method. He appealed to both reason and authority. He presented the Christian religion in a scientific form. His book is an assimila- tion of all that is precious in the thinking of the Church. If he learned many things at Paris, Cologne, and Naples, he was also educated by Chrysostom, by Augustine, and Ambrose. "It is impossible," says Car- dinal Newman, and no authority is higher than his, "to read the Catena of Saint Thomas without being struck by the masterly skill with which he put it together. A learning of the highest kind,——not merely literary book knowledge which may have supplied the place of in- dexes and tables in ages destitute of these helps, and when they had to be read in unarranged and frag- mentary manuscripts, but a thorough acquaintance with the whole range of ecclesiastical antiquity, so as to be able to bring the substance of all that had been written on any point to bear upon the text which in- volved it,——a familiarity with the style of each writer so as to compress in a few words the pith of the whole page, and a power of clear and orderly arrangement in this mass of knowledge, are qualities which make this Catena nearly perfect as an interpretation of Patristic literature." Dr. Vaughan, in eulogistic language, says: "The 'Summa Theologica' may be likened to one of the great cathedrals of the Middle Ages, infinite in detail but massive in the groupings of pillars and arches, forming a complete unity that must have taxed the brain of the architect to its greatest extent. But greater as work of intellect is this digest of all theologi- cal richness for one thousand years, in which the thread of discourse is never lost sight of, but winds through a labyrinth of important discussions and digressions, all bearing on the fundamental truths which Paul declared and Augustine systematized." This treatise would seem to be a thesaurus of both Patristic and Mediæval learning; not a dictionary of knowledge, but a system of truth severely elaborated in every part,——a work to be studied by the Mediæval students as Calvin's "Institutes" were by the scholars of the Reformation, and not far different in its scope and end; for the Patristic, the Mediæval, and the Protestant divines did not materially differ in refer- ence to the fundamental truths pertaining to God, the Incarnation, and Redemption. The Catholic and Protestant divines differ chiefly on the ideas pertain- ing to government and ecclesiastical institutions, and the various inventions of the Middle Ages to uphold the authority of the Church, not on dogmas strictly theological. A student in theology could even in our times sit at the feet of Thomas Aquinas, as he could at the feet of Augustine or Calvin; except that in the theology which Thomas Aquinas commented upon there is a cumbrous method, borrowed from Aristotle, which introduced infinite distinctions and questions and defi- nitions and deductions and ramifications which have no charm to men who have other things to occupy their minds than Scholastic subtilties, acute and logical as they may be. Thomas Aquinas was raised to combat, with the weapons most esteemed in his day, the various forms of Rationalism, Pantheism, and Mysticism which then existed, and were included in the Nominalism of his antagonists. And as long as universities are cen- tres of inquiry the same errors, under other names, will have to be combated, but probably not with the same methods which marked the teachings of the "angelical doctor." In demolishing errors and systematizing truth he was the greatest benefactor to the cause of "ortho- oxy" that appeared in Europe for several centuries, admired for his genius as much as Spencer and other great lights of science are in our day, but standing pre- eminent and lofty over all, like a beacon light to give both guidance and warning to inquiring minds in every part of Christendom. Nor could popes and sovereigns render too great honor to such a prodigy of genius. They offered him the abbacy of Monte Cassino and the archbishopric of Naples, but he preferred the life of a quiet student, finding in knowledge and study, for their own sake, the highest reward, and pursuing his labors without the impedimenta of those high posi- tions which involve ceremonies and cares and pomps, yet which most ambitious men love better than freedom, placidity, and intellectual repose. He lived not in a palace, as he might have lived, surrounded with flatterers, luxuries, and dignities, but in a cell, wearing his simple black gown, and walking bare- footed wherever he went, begging his daily bread ac- cording to the rules of his Order. His black gown was not an academic badge, but the Dominican dress. His only badge of distinction was the doctors' cap. Dr. Vaughan, in his heavy and unartistic life of Thomas Aquinas, has drawn a striking resemblance be- tween Plato and the Mediæval doctor: "Both," he says, "were nobly born, both were grave from youth, both loved truth with an intensity of devotion. If Plato was instructed by Socrates, Aquinas was taught by Albertus Magnus; if Plato travelled into Italy, Greece, and Egypt, Aquinas went to Cologne, Naples, Bologna, and Rome; if Plato was famous for his erudition, Aqui- nas was no less noted for his universal knowledge. Both were naturally meek and gentle; both led lives of retirement and contemplation; both loved solitude; both were celebrated for self-control; both were brave; both held their pupils spell-bound by their brilliant mental gifts; both passed their time in lecturing to the schools (what the Pythagoreans were to Plato, the Benedictines were to the angelical); both shrank from the display of self; both were great dialecti- cians; both reposed on eternal ideas; both were ora- cles to their generation." But if Aquinas had the soul of Plato, he also had the scholastic gifts of Aris- totle, to whom the Church is indebted for method and nomenclature as it was to Plato for synthesis and that exalted Realism which went hand in hand with Chris- tianity. How far he was indebted to Plato it is diffi- cult to say. He certainly had not studied his dialec- tics through translations or in the original, but had probably imbibed the spirit of this great philosopher through Saint Augustine and other orthodox Fathers who were his admirers. Although both Plato and Aristotle accepted "uni- versals" as the foundation of scientific inquiry, the former arrived at them by consciousness, and the other by reasoning. The spirit of the two great masters of thought was as essentially different as their habits and lives. Plato believed that God governed the world; Aristotle believed that it was governed by chance. The former maintained that mind is divine and eter- nal; the latter that it is a form of the body, and con- sequently mortal. Plato thought that the source of happiness was in virtue and resemblance to God; while Aristotle placed it in riches and outward prosperity. Plato believed in prayer; but Aristotle thought that God would not hear or answer it, and therefore that it was useless. Plato believed in happiness after death; while Aristotle supposed that death ended all pleasure. Plato lived in the world of abstract ideas; Aristotle in the realm of sense and observation. The one was reli- gious; the other secular and worldly. With both the passion for knowledge was boundless, but they differed in their conceptions of knowledge; the one basing it on eternal ideas and the deductions to be drawn from them, and the other on physical science,——the phenomena of Nature,——those things which are cognizable by the senses. The spiritual life of Plato was "a longing after love and of eternal ideas, by the contemplation of which the soul sustains itself and becomes partici- pant in immortality." The life of Aristotle was not spiritual but intellectual. He was an incarnation of mere intellect, the architect of a great temple of knowl- edge, which received the name of Organum, or the philosophy of first principles. Thomas Aquinas, we may see from what has been said, was both Platonic and Aristotelian. He resembled Plato in his deep and pious meditations on the eternal realities of the spiritual world, while in the severity of his logic he resembled Aristotle, from whom he learned precision of language, lucidity of statement, and a syllogistic mode of argument well calculated to confirm what was already known, but not to make attainments in new fields of thought or knowledge. If he was gentle and loving and pious like Plato, he was also as calm and passionless as Aristotle. This great man died at the age of forty-eight, in the year 1274, a few years after Saint Louis, before his sum of theology was completed. He died prematurely, exhausted by his intense studies; leaving, however, treatises which filled seventeen printed folio volumes, ——one of the most voluminous writers of the world. His fame was prodigious, both as a dialectician and a saint, and he was in due time canonized as one of the great pillars of the Church, ranking after Chrysos- tom, Jerome, Augustine, and Gregory the Great,—— the standard authority for centuries of the Catholic theology. The Scholastic Philosophy, which culminated in Thomas Aquinas, maintained its position in the uni- versities of Europe until the Reformation, but declined in earnestness. It descended to the discussion of unim- portant and often frivolous questions. Even the "an- gelical doctor" is quoted as discussing the absurd question as to how many angels could dance together on the point of a needle. The play of words became interminable. Things were lost sight of in a barbarous jargon about questions which have no interest to hu- manity, and which are utterly unintelligible. At the best, logical processes can add nothing to the ideas from which they start. When these ideas are lofty, discussion upon them elevates the mind and doubtless strengthens its powers. But when the subjects them- selves are frivolous, the logical tournaments in their defence degrade the intellect and narrow it. Nothing destroys intellectual dignity more effectually than the waste of energies in the defence of what is of no practical utility, and which cannot be applied to the acquisition of solid knowledge. Hence the Scholastic Philosophy did not advance knowledge, since it did not seek the acquisition of new truths, but only the estab- lishment of the old. Its utility consisted in training the human mind to logical reasonings. It exercised the intellect and strengthening it, as gymnastics do the body, without enlarging it. It was nothing but barren dialectics,——"dry bones," a perpetual fencing. The soul cries out for bread; the Scholastics gave it a stone. We are amazed that intellectual giants, equal to the old Greeks in acuteness and logical powers, could waste their time on the frivolous questions and dialectical subtilties to which they devoted their mighty powers. However interesting to them, nothing is drier and duller to us, nothing more barren and unsatisfying, than their logical sports. Their treatises are like trees with endless branches, each leading to new ramifica- tions, with no central point in view, and hence never finished, and which might be carried on ad infini- tum. To attempt to read their disquisitions is like walking in labyrinths of ever-opening intricacies. By such a method no ultimate truth could be arrived at, beyond what was assumed. There is now and then a man who professes to have derived light and wisdom from those dialectical displays, since they were doubt- less marvels of logical precision and clearness of state- ment. But in a practical point of view those "master- pieces of logic" are utterly useless to most modern inquirers. These are interesting only as they exhibit the waste of gigantic energies; they do not even have the merit of illustrative rhetoric or eloquence. The earlier monks were devout and spiritual, and we can still read their lofty meditations with profit, since they ele- vate the soul and make it pant for the beatitudes of spiritual communion with God. But the writings of the Scholastic doctors are cold, calm, passionless, and purely intellectual,——logical without being edifying. We turn from them, however acute and able, with blended disappointment and despair. They are fig- trees, bearing nothing but leaves, such as out Lord did curse. The distinctions are simply metaphysical, and not moral. Why the whole force of an awakening age should have been so devoted to such subtilties and barren dis- cussion it is difficult to see, unless they were found use- ful in supporting a theology made up of metaphysical deductions rather than an interpretation of the meaning of Scripture texts. But there was then no knowledge of Greek or Hebrew; there was no exegetical research; there was no science and no real learning. There was nothing but theology, with the exception of Lives of the Saint. The horizon of human inquiries was ex- tremely narrow. But when the minds of very intel- lectual men were directed to one particular field, it would be natural to expect something remarkable and marvellously elaborate of its kind. Such was the Scholastic Philosophy. As a mere exhibition of dia- lectical acumen, minute distinctions, and logical pre- cision in the use of words, it was wonderful. The intricacy and detail and ramifications of this system were an intellectual feat which astonishes us, yet which does not instruct us, certainly outside of a metaphys- ical divinity which had more charm to the men of the Middle Ages than it can have to us, even in a theologi- cal school where dogmatic divinity is made the most important study. The day will soon come when the principal chair in the theological school will be for the explanation of the Scripture texts on which dogmas are based; and for this, great learning and scholar- ship will be indispensable. To me it is surprising that metaphysics have so long retained their hold on the minds of Protestant divines. Nothing is more unsatis- factory, and to many more repellent, than metaphysical divinity. It is a perversion of the spirit of Christian teachings. "What says our Lord?" should be the great inquiry in our schools of theology; not, What deduc- tions can be drawn from them by a process of ingenious reasoning which often, without reference to other im- portant truths, lands one in absurdities, or at least in one-sided systems? But the metaphysical divinity of the Schoolmen had great attractions to the students of the Middle Ages. And there must have been something in it which we do not appreciate, or it would not have maintained itself in the schools for three hundred years. Perhaps it was what those ages needed,——the discipline through which the mind must go before it could be prepared for the sci- entific investigations of our own times. In an important sense the Scholastic doctors were the teachers of Luther and Bacon. Certainly their unsatisfactory science was one of the marked developments of the civilization of Europe, through which the Gothic nations must need pass. It has been the fashion to ridicule it and depre- ciate it in our modern times, especially among Prot- estants, who have ridiculed and slandered the papal power and all the institutions of the Middle Ages. Yet scholars might as well ridicule the text-books they were required to study fifty years ago, because they are not up to our times. We should not disdain the early steps by which future progress is made easy. We can- not despise men who gave up their lives to the contem- plation of subjects which demand the highest tension of the intellectual faculties, even if these exercises were barren of utilitarian results. Some future age may be surprised at the comparative unimportance of questions which interest this generation. The Scholastic Philos- ophy cannot indeed be utilized by us in the pursuit of scientific knowledge; nor (to recur to Vaughan's simile for the great work of Aquinas) can a mediæval cathedral be utilized for purposes of oratory or business. But the cathedral is nevertheless a grand monument, suggesting lofty sentiments, which it would be senseless and ruth- less barbarism to destroy or allow to fall into decay, but which should rather be preserved as a precious memento of what is most poetic and attractive in the Middle Ages. When any modern philosopher shall rear so gigantic a symmetrical monument of logical disquisitions as the "Summa Theologica" is said to be by the most com- petent authorities, then the sneers of a Macaulay or a Lewes will be entitled to more consideration. It is said that a new edition of this great Mediæval work is about to be published under the direct auspices of the Pope, as the best and most comprehensive system of Christian theology ever written by man. AUTHORITIES. Dr. Vaughan's Life of Thomas Aquinas; Histoire de la Vie et des Écrits de St. Thomas d'Aquin, par l'Abbé Bareille; Lacordaire's Life of Saint Dom- inic; Dr. Hampden's Life of Thomas Aquinas; article on Thomas Aquinas, in London Quarterly, July, 1881; Summa Theologica; Neander, Milman, Fleury, Dupin, and Ecclesiastical Histories generally; Biographie Univer- selle; Werner's Leben des Heiligen Thomas von Aquino; Trench's Lectures on Mediæval History; Ueberweg & Rousselot's History of Philosophy. Dr. Hampden's article, in the Encyclopædia Metropolitana, on Thomas Aquinas and the Scholastic Philosophy, is regarded by Hallam as the ablest view of this subject which has appeared in English.

from Beacon Lights of History, by John Lord, LL. D., Volume III, Part I: The Middle Ages, pp. 227 - 247. Copyright, 1883, by John Lord. Copyright, 1921, By Wm. H. Wise & Co., New York
این فضای شماست با یکدیگر مهربان باشید https://old.reddit.com/thesee [♘] [♰] [☮] 雨

Help needed for translation from Italy

Critical Study on Chronology of The Ancient World - Unit 1 Prg 1: Tacitus and Bracciolini (part 1)

Unit 1
ANTIQUE LITHERATURE
Prg 1. Tacitus and Poggio Bracciolini
Compositions of the famous Tacitus who gave us his expanded picture of The Emperors' Rome from Tiberius till Vespasian (for example see I. M. Troysky's article "Cornelius Tacitus" in ref 48) in masterly dramatic exposition appear to be one of our main sources on The Ancient Rome history.
Tacitus' personality and his compositions
PUBLIUS CORNELIUS TACITUS considered to be born during Nero about 55AD (this date is calculated according to cloudy designations of other authors, Plinius Jr. for example) and died during Adriane about 120AD. Tacitus' feather possesses "Biography of Agricola", "On origins, residence and mores of German people" etc. But the main studies by Tacitus appear the following:

"Chronicles" ("Annals"), containing The Roman Empire history during Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, Nero;
"History", describing Galba, Ottone and Vitelius' "Time of Troubles" till Vespasian’s rise to power.

Loads of strange obscurities and anachronisms in "Chronicles" and "History" was directing historical criticism to a doubt in reliability of Tacitus' legends for long time already. Here we will limit ourselves with giving a short exposition of criticism in regard to Tacitus, mainly following A. Amfiteatrov (see ref 8). A. Amfiteatrov's book is providing an objective exposition of history of Tacitus' criticism, namely Ross and Hoshar's works and this exposition is even more valuable for us because Amfiteatrov himself still doesn't want to reject the idea of Tacitus' reliability. Citing ref 8 we will allow ourselves to replace transcription "PoggIo Bracciolini" that Amfiteatrov is using with modern "Poggio Bracciolini". In the rest of cases we leave all the features of Amfiteatrov's text unchanged.
Criticism on Tacitus
It looks like the beginning of critical wave was set by Walter in his "The Philosophy Vocabulary". Lengeau The Advocate's polemical study whom Marabou has called "The Nero Advocate" is less known. One of the first people in Russia who's got a doubt even if not in Tacitus' facts themselves but at least in his assessment of these facts was Pushkin but only since the late XIX century serious historical studies completely rejecting authenticity of Tacitus' books have began to appear. Walter's criticism was more of a political kind: heyday of Tacitus' negative treatment was still ahead and it has reached its apogee in Germany, France and England. In Germany Tacitus has undergone thorough criticism of Mommsen, Shtare, Leman and especially Sivers and German Schiller when the latter in his two capital studies ("History of The Roman Empire during Nero's reign" and "History of The Roman Emperors' epoch") treated Tacitus almost just like tendentious pamphleteer, very talented and abundant in material but unscrupulous with it. In France Amadeus Tierrie was calling to careful treatment of Tacitus' data, warning against his aristocratically-nationalistic viewpoints. In England Charles Merival had similar opinion and basing off his studies M. A. Dragomanov's book "Question of historical meaning of The Roman Empire and Tacitus" appeared in Russia in 60s of XIX century. In this criticism we are interested the most about an alarming fact how in his political views Tacitus appear as a supporter of Italian type aristocratic republic of XIII-XIV centuries' period.
"New skeptical onflow has begun in late 70s on XIX century and continued in 80s and 90s now denying not facts or visions of Tacitus but Tacitus himself: authenticity and ancientry of his compositions. It's interesting how a hypothesis about forgery of Tacitus' manuscripts appeared in England and France at the same time. Englishman Ross has started it with his book of "Tacitus and Bracciolini" published in 1878... In France P. Hoshar... also known as G. Dakber... took the same route in his main three studies: "Etudes on Seneca's life" (1882-1885), "Etudes on the matter of persecution of Christians during Nero" (1885) and "On authenticity of "Annals" and "History" by Tacitus" (1890)... in which he's (Hoshar - Auth) revealing absolutely new views of facts putting faithful confidence in Tacitus' authority into hopeless deadlocks.
Hoshar's system of forgery evidences for imaginary historical compositions of Tacitus (and their attribution to Poggio Bracciolini's feather - Auth) is combined out of several basic statements.

Doubtfulness both of manuscripts in whose form compositions of Tacitus has come to us and of circumstances in which these manuscripts were discovered through the involvement of Poggio Bracciolini.
Complete or relative impossibility of Tacitus to write many things included in "Annals" and "Stories" according to conditions of his era.
Signs of The Renaissance in the text of pseudo-Tacitus. (I didn't add anything-tr)
Exaggerated opinion about Tacitus' dignity as Latin classicist. (By the way typical for XV century love to secular pornography combined with other circumstances also immediately makes similar suspicions to arouse in regard to Petronius (also found by Poggio) and in regard to Juvenal, Marcial and many other classicists. - Auth)
Latest (according to commonly accepted chronology of literature) main historians-witnesses of Rome (Joseph Flavius, Plutarch, Suetonius, Dio Cassius, Tertullian, Pavel Orosius, Sulpicius Sever etc.) didn't borrow his data from Tacitus but on opposite imaginary Tacitus is just a distributor and amplificator of intelligence that he drawn from ones named above having them all at his disposal and assorting them the way he liked.
Litheraturical talent, classical education and fraudful personality of Poggio Bracciolini worked exactly on the benefit of taste and demands of his age demanding revival of dead ancient gods, artists and authors.
Poggio Bracciolini was interested and capable of committing this great forgery - and he committed it.

Let's begin with biography of suggested pseudo-Tacitus, Poggio Bracciolini." (ref 8, p 356-358)
Poggio Bracciolini
"Poggio Bracciolini was born 1380 in Terra Nuova, small town nearby Florence and in early age he has already became known as young man of outstanding education and sharp mind. He has began his serving career during cardinal Barrie but we can soon see him at pope Bonifatio IX's court in rank of copyist...
Little by little he rose to a rank of secretary... one of editor officials whose duty was correcting official documents (correspondence, charters, resolutions) sent from pope's name.
He still remained in this rank during popes Innokentius VII and Gregory XII. In Bologna where apostolic throne was moved temporarily he was with Alexander V when this pope died from poisoning - at least that's what everyone's voice of rumor was saying - by Balthazar Cossa, a former pirate, later archidiaconal at Diocese of Rolone and finally Alexander V's successor, pope of Rome with a name of Jonah XXIII. Poggio, a man of complaisant conscience and typical representative of his unscrupulous age remained secretary with a new pope too. He followed Jonah to 1414 congress in Constance. But when Jonah was dethroned by this congress (1415) Poggio lost his position and as one would say, was left in a void.
Sometime later he has entered the service of Henry Bothore who was brother of king Henrico IV, bishop and later cardinal of Winchester. He met this rich and powerful prelate in Constance. Bothore was playing vital role in The Church affairs back then as an Authorized Representative from English people. Poggio has arrived in England in September 1418 as a part of entourage of his new patron. But realizing he's made a mistake in his calculations of coming rich profits, in 1422 he's already in Florence again and then in Rome. Johan XXIII's successor pope Martin V has returned Poggio his old position of secretary at the holy throne.
Italy of XV century is rich with educated minds but Bracciolini is one of the brightest and remarkable among them.
He learnt Latin from Giovanni Malpagini of Ravenna, friend of Petrarch; he learnt Greek from Chrisolore... he also knew Jewish. He studied ancientry with ardent passion. He could almost never be seen other way than reading Latin or Greek book or writing notes about it. He was a real library swallower. When he was young he had at his disposal the richest collection of library of Colucho Salutati, The Florence Republic chancellor whose books "more belonged to any sciences' hunter than himself". In London he used Bothore's magnificent book storage, who's

wandering eternally like a Scythian while I'm digging myself into books in my free time.

Library of the pope's palace in Rome doesn't satisfy Poggio, he's writing to his friends every now and then: send me this and this composition. A list of antique writers he has researched, both Pagan and Christian is truly grandiose. He's an antiquary and numismatist parsing and interpreting inscriptions and medals; at his villa in Val-d'Arno he's collected beautiful museum of antiquities purchased by himself personally or on his instructions in Italy, Greece and in The East. He's a first-class Latinist. "Chiropody" by Xenophon and of first five books by Diodore The Sicilian translated from Greek to Latin by his feather. In his original studies he's a writer of the first-class talent shining not only with almost impossible erudition but also with talent's flexibility on the same scale. His philosophical and ethical tractates ("On miserliness", "On nobleness", "On misfortune of sovereigns", "On wretchedness of human existence") are worthy of Cicero and Seneca. He can discuss theological questions and Christianic virtues with a language that without Bracciolini's signature anyone would mistake for language of one of the Fathers of The Church. Trying to keep up with Plinius who's enraptured Bracciolini he has wrote "On mores of The Indians" book. He has made extremely interesting archeological guide for research of roman monuments (De varietate fortunae). He tells a story of Venice man Niccoli de Conti's journey in Persia. Translates Manilius’ "Astronomicon" to Italian. Does a good sir want a satire of Petronius style? Poggio offers his extremely acrimonious "Historia convivales" ("The Tableful History") scourging lawyer and medic charlatans who has become lords of their age and profiteer both huge power and huge capital with human stupidity. Does good sir want historical study like Tacitus' "Chronicles"? That's what "Historia Florentina" ("The Florence History") is like, a story of clear and accurate tone, solid picture, bright coloring and full of artistic images and personalities and also deeply insightful in its judgment and foresight. After all Poggio's great glory was continuously strengthened and supported with witty and sage letters he was exchanging with the great people of this world (with Nikolai, Laurentius and Cosmos Medici, with Herzogs Sforza, Visconti, Leonello D'Este, with king Alfonso The Aragonian), with a majority of modern cardinals and with almost all of the remarkable personalities of his age. Poggio Bracciolini's splendid letters were going through many hands to be reread, rewritten, replacing newspapers and magazines for Italian intelligentsia of XV century. In a word, this resplendent imitator was his century's ruler of the minds in a full sense of these words. Criticism was placing him on the same level with the greatest authors of The Renaissance. His honorariums prove how high he was valued: for dedication of "The Chiropody" to Alfonso The Aragonian, Poggio was given 600 gold - 7200 franks. With a value of money back then this was a huge capital. Literature has advanced him to a rank of statesmen and he has ended his life at a height of important and powerful rank as a chancellor of The Florence Republic. He was a center of his modern literature to such an extent that many people used to find it possible to define first half of Italian XV century as "The Poggio Age". Even in France his name has disappeared in a family abbreviation of historical common knowledge - "Le Pogge". During his lifetime Florence has erected for him a statue of his own that was cut with Donatello's chisel. At first it stood under portico of Santa Maria del Fiere cathedral, now it’s carried inside the church itself.
These were light sides of this remarkable person. Now let's observe shadow ones.
The great writer had a disgusting personality which made him to quarrel all the Litheraturical celebrities of his age (Aurispa, Guarino, Vissarionus, but Filelfo and Valla especially). In their polemics all of these big people are not a bit better of a person than their poisonous and ferocious opponent though. Ploicianus called Poggio "the most vile-speeched person in a world: he's always either jumping towards sovereigns or attacking human customs without any distinguishing or either he rankle writings of a scientist of some kind - nobody can rest of him!". Seems like he was quite voluptuary and closer to an old age he have raised this little passion if his to a size of a fair shamelessness. When he was an old man already he has married a young girl and in his tractate "Should old men marry?" dedicated to Cosmos Medici he cynically explained his marriage with an aphorism that it’s never too late for a person to find his way towards decent lifestyle...
In a city of Constance he lives a grand style of reveler and womanizer everywhere, he likes lewd artworks stories and poems much and in an old age he's also its diligent and unbridled composer himself which makes Valla to reproach him harshly. In one word, in this scientist we can see just as big talent of living on his own pleasure as big his creative talent is: typical Florence baron aesthete and bourgeois, XV century epicurean with a beautiful dream and lowland life, the volcano man having either living flame sprinkling or smelly dirt flowing out of him all the time" (ref 8 p 358-363).
Poggio's activity of search and publishing of antique compositions
"Grand style of his life was cost much for Poggio Bracciolini surpassing his income since his young age and making him to live in eternal need of money. His source of additional income appeared to be his search, preparation and editing of the antique authors' copies (literally lists or write-offs - tr) basing on authentic manuscripts. Back in XV century that have aspired to resurrecting ancientry greedily this was very profitable budget item. With a help of Florence city scientist, book publisher and bookseller Niccolo Niccoli (1363-1437) who was a king of literature market at the time, Poggio Bracciolini set up something like a permanent studio for processing of antique literature, attracting a whole series of employees and contractors into this business who had very good education and abilities but everyone of them had dark spots on their reputation: here we can see Cinco The Roman, Bartolommeo di Montepulchano, Piero Lamberteski. Niccolo Niccoli was lending Poggio his working capital and served him as his agent for manuscript selling which means he basically was his publisher - and a very jealous and commanding publisher. This was a very imperious and irascible person. Even such aces of literature like Leonardo Aretin, Manuil Chrisolor, Guarino and Arispa he could twist like a ram's horn and when he quarreled with them he has literally forced them to leave Florence.
During the age of gathering in a city of Constance, Poggio Bracciolini and Bartolommeo di Montepulcano have made their first discoveries and then deposition of Johan XXIII's have put them in quite a critical position as abolished secretaries of the pope. In a forgotten and damp tower of The Saint Gallen Monastery "a tower in which a prisoner wouldn't survive for three days" they were happy to find a bunch of ancient manuscripts: compositions of Quintilian, Valerius Flakkus, Asconius Pedianus, Nonius Marcellus, Probus etc. (we want to emphasize how here it was a first time for all of these authors to be found - Auth). This discovery has not only made a sensation but also an entire age of literature. There can't be any doubt how Niccoli who had a lion's share of this treasure, has amassed very good out of it and was dreaming of amassing even more. Poggio who was encouraged with a huge success was digging diligently (from his own words - Auth) through monastery libraries of England and Germany but he couldn't find anything or he could only find bits and pieces. From his words though he still could deliver "Bucolicas" by Calpurneus and several units of Petronius to Niccoli (most likely fragments of his previous compositions; nobody and never has explained circumstances of these and all the later findings - Auth).
But even if no new original manuscripts could be found yet trade of copies was still going strong. A manuscript that was coming out of Poggio's workshop was valued very high. Meanwhile in his letters he's every now and then demanding paper, parchment, bookbindery buttstock from Niccoli and if publisher is late with delivery Poggio begins crying how he has to feed his artisan for free because of untidy workflow. One has to think how these artisans were not people of a pleasant kind. For XV century society scribes had a poor reputation. One notarius from late XIV century in his letter to a friend exclaim with a kind of a triumph that could look surprising for us:

I have found an excellent scribe and - believe you or not! - he wasn't in prison for people in a hard labor.

Of course scribes were mostly working on saleable secondary product only valuable with Poggio's editing. Amateur specimen were made by master himself and from the following example we can figure out how cruel his pricing was: after selling Alfonso The Aragonian a copy of Titus Livius he has made himself Poggio has spent a money he was paid to buy a villa in Florence. He has accepted a hundred of ducats (1200 franks) from Herzog d'Este for letters of Saint Hieronymus - doing this with a great dissatisfaction which looked like he was forced into it either by being low on money or late to complete his work and we should also consider how in an age of The Renaissance Fathers of the Church could not be sold from hands to hands as easily as Pagan philosophers. Among his clients Poggio had Medici, Sforza, d'Este, aristocratic families of England, Herzog house of Burgundy, Orsini cardinals, Cologne, just rich people like Bartolommeo di Bardio, universities using that exact times and a generosity of enlightened rulers for either establishing a library or widening their old book storages intensively. Poggio was making very big money so he has left his children with an excellent capital that they have wasted with an extreme rapidity. But there can be no doubt how for a very long time - till he was 40 at least - he lived bigger than his constant income was so I he wanted to get himself out of debt he needed some kind of emergency big score that he had to mine using equally emergent ways. And when he had to choose these ways he can never choose wisely.
This was the person who has found Tacitus. Now let's see what exactly did he found and how he did this" (ref 8 p 363-386)
Manuscripts of Tacitus
"Main manuscripts of Tacitus' "Chronicles" and "History" known as The First and The Second Medicean Copies are stored in Florence in book storage of "Bibliotheca Laurentiana". This book storage was founded by Cosmos Medici who donated his own library here along with Niccoli's library that Herzog has purchased after death of this famous publisher (1437). Poggio Bracciolini and Buondelmonti who was his father-in-law were among organizing directors of book storage. The Second Medicean Copy is more ancient than The First one even if not by origin then by publishing undoubtedly for 80 years. It's first page says clearly:

Cornelius Tacitus et Opera Apuleii.
Conventus sancti Marci de Florentia, ord.
Praedic. De heriditate Nicolai Nicoli
Florentissimi, viri Doctissimi

(Cornelius Tacitus and compositions of Apulei from books of Saint Mark monastery in Florence, of Preacher rank (?-tr). As a heritage from Niccolo Niccoli, valiant Florence citizen and extremely educated man)
From Tacitus this list contains 6 last books of "Chronicles" and 5 first books of "History". At these parts it appears as a prototype for all the rest copies claiming their ancientry: Farnes copy in Vatican, Budapest copy, Wolfenbuttel copy etc. First printed publishing of Tacitus released in Venice by Giovanni Spira or his brother Vandelline about 1470 they printed from The Second Medicean Copy or - according to a legend - from its precise copy that was stored in Venice in a library of Saint Mark cathedral. But copy has disappeared from it or may be never even been there: legend have just mixed two libraries with similar names. A usual and commonly accepted opinion on this copy says how it’s a product of work performed by scribe monks from the famous benedictian desert of Monte-Cassino in Italy halfway between Rome and Neapol.
The First Medicean Copy was purchased by pope Lion X and then immediately published by him (1515) in Rome under control of Philippe Beroalde Jr.:
Comelii Tasiti historiarum libri quinque nuper in Germania inventi.
(5 books of "History" by Cornelius Tacitus recently found in Germany.)
These 5 books are initial "Chronicles" hugging the reign of Tiberius. This way it turned out how according to Beroalde's picturesque expression

Cornelius never did lost his head through the ages just hiding it instead.

People think (not any kind of proof in present - Auth) how this copy was found in Corvei monastery and after being carried to Rome from there by some monk it was purchased for a pope by a certain Archimboldi who later has become a bishop of Milano. Corvei are a small town in Westphalia 65 kilometers southeast from Minden. It's benedictian monastery was founded by Ludovic The Good Soul in IX century played vital role during The Middle Ages as very important religious and political center.
Two Medicean Copies combined give us complete set of everything that has come to us out of Tacitus' historical compositions. Language, manner of presentation, tone - all the Litheraturical advantages and disadvantages - demonstrate undoubted unity of both copies proving how in both copies we've got a study of the same author on our hands. Before Justus Lipsius (1547-1606) all Tacitus' material contained in both collections was considered one solid composition. Justus Lipsius was the first who could see how despite visionary succession of contents "Annals" and "History" are actually two different studies - even if they do belong to the same author - so he has established its division approved ever since.
Style of handwriting appears to be an essential difference between two Medicean Copies. The Second Copy is performed with so called Lombardian writing, but The First is done with Caroling one (see figure in ref 5 - Auth).
Broadly speaking these are the most important features of two main Tacitus' copies that science acknowledged to be authentic in a course of over 3 centuries before Ross and Hoshar have touched this virgin reputation with their daring hands (In particular reviving suspicions of Poggio's contemporaries themselves - Auth). How exactly do they carry their attack?" (ref 8 p 366-368).
Legends of Tacitus' manuscripts
"Hoshar undoubtedly acknowledge how The Second Medicean Copy originates from Niccolo Niccoli's library but at the same time this attachment is the exact thing in which Hoshar can see a key to expose Poggio Bracciolini's forgery.
...How he (Tacitus - Auth) was known and read we know from his contemporaries (Plinius Jr.), from Christianity apologist Tertullian who was his enemy in 3rd century AD, from Flavius Vopisqus and blissful Hieronymus of 4th century, from Pablo Orosius and Sidonius Appolinarius of 5th century and from Cassiodorus of 6th century. (Let's make a comment how manuscripts of all these authors were also "discovered" in the same era with Tacitus' books mentioned above so actually these authors can't be used as a proof of Tacitus' authenticity - Auth). And then name of Tacitus disappeared from the memory of civilized world for many centuries. But it was much earlier when it has actually begun disappearing. Even though F. Vopisqus tells us quite flattering stories of Tacitus - how Tacitus The Emperor was proud to be his descendant and how he has commanded to all the public libraries of the empire to have copies of works of his great predecessor - but literature haven't kept even smallest signs of Tacitus' authority for us and how Servius, Priscionus, Nonius, Marcell who were The Latin Grammars at the end of The Roman Empire, diligent citers and numeraires of names of their literature don't recall Tacitus and obviously know nothing about him" (ref 8 p 368-369). So there's no way we can believe statement by apologists of Tacitus how "Tacitus wasn't there but a memory of him lived on".
I. M. Troysky (ref 48) is beginning his article about Tacitus saying

unlike his predecessors who were writing about the republic Tacitus when he was describing his activity of historian of The Roman Empire made a notion how his study is limited by narrow confines and will not bring him any glory ("Annals", IV, 32). To a certain extent these words have turned out to be prophetic.

Not a single historian of The Emperors’ Rome including Tacitus has become a "classic" of roman literature. Tacitus was not taught in roman schools: philologists (so-called grammars) who were keepers of scholar tradition were not interested in his works. For latest roman scientists an effect of this lack of attention appeared in complete absence of information about a life of this historian" (ref 48 v2 p203) By the way it means how the rest of roman historians of emperors' period didn't get any better treatment than Tacitus himself.
"In IX century (five hundred years later!) a name of Tacitus strangely surfaces in a chronicle by Freculf who was a bishop of Lisiex and in XI century it also surfaces in Johan The Salisburian's "Polycraticon" pamphlet directed against royalty. But Hoshar makes a notion how in both of these cases Tacitus is mentioned in such a general way not saying anything notable or anything its own about him that there's no any need to think how Freculf and Johan The Salusburean's libraries could possibly have Tacitus' compositions... (Actually we have to remember for the future how mention of Tacitus' name alone in any kind of source that doesn't have any details doesn't necessarily mean that very Tacitus that was found by Poggio - Auth).
There are monk legends of Tacitus' manuscripts allegedly preserved in monastery libraries in the famous benedictian desert at Monte-Cassino and in similar monastery of Fuld (in Germany nearby Cassel). First legend have grown out of mention in "Chronicle" by Desiderius who later (1086) has become pope Victor III how back in the day when he was a Hegumen of Monte-Cassini desert his monks under his control have made copies of 61 volumes of creations written by church and Pagan writers including "Cornelius' history with Homer" (Historiam Comelii cum Omero). According to monastery's chronicle majority of these books was stolen by thieves and soldiers of fortune robbing the desert. Hoshar is puzzled: what was the reason for these respected industrialists to rob monastery library at all and even if they still had to do this why would they carry away not something else but Tacitus exactly? Tacitus is not even mentioned in Desiderius' chronicle - this "History by Cornelius" could be for example Cornelius Nepot or any other of numerous roman writers all named Cornelius. Hoshar generally is quite skeptical in treating legends of treasures of The Middle Ages monastery libraries and he consider unnatural the very legend of Desiderius, a friend of Peter Damian - both are worst enemies of secular education - to make any kind of effort for preserving Pagan scriptures when both charter and personal antipathy were commanding him to destroy it. This is a late artifice and a concession for humanistic age. Abbot Rappe (abbe de la Trappe, 1626-1700, reformer of trappist order and author of "Life of St. Benedict") consider legends of written works of benedictians to be a guess not worthy to stop at. But the majority of historians still consider (without any documental reasons - Auth) The Second Medicean Copy to originate from Monte-Cassino and to be copied in the middle of IX or in XI century from some manuscript of IV or V century taken from Germany or France.
Fuld's legend is held on a citing in local monastery chronicle:

So in a city of Mimida on a river that Cornelius Tacitus the historian of feats committed by Romans among these people has called Visurgis (Veser) and historians of today call Visaraka.

Basing on this people has made a conclusion how the chronicler had an authentic text of Tacitus' "Annals" in front of him...
Another legendary copy of Tacitus was allegedly made by hand of Giovanni Boccaccio for his own library. This library is intact but Tacitus - looks like this is just a fate of this writer - has disappeared from it and nobody knows where it went and when did this happened. Hoshar is puzzled: if this exemplar (did they miss "not"?-tr) existed then where would Boccaccio take original to rewrite from? People assume that he did from Monte-Cassino during his stay in Neapol. But since Hoshar rejects a legend of Tacitus' manuscript in Monte-Cassino library then naturally he can't approve a reference to it in Boccaccio legend. And Boccaccio himself says how his stay at Monte-Cassino was extremely short and how he was met in a very poor manner: so how and when could he possibly copy a manuscript if he needed not less than a solid month of work sitting at the table and using the fastest writing style to do that? And the main thing is - if Boccaccio would know Tacitus this historian would leave at least some kind of mark in his works - but none can be noticed. This effect is even more vivid in his historically-anecdotic work of "De casibus virorum et ferminarum illustrum" ("On adventures of the famous men and women") among other things Boccaccio speak about Tiberius, Nero, Galba, Otone, Vitellius - using Suetonius' data exclusively with a certain borrowings from Juvenalus and - about Christians from church legend. (?-tr) If Boccaccio would know Tacitus then being a great artist he was how would he speak of Agrippina’s death without mentioning a great marine drama written by Tacitus or speak of the death of apostles Peter and Pavel without saying a single word about persecution of The Christians connected to the great fire of Rome? In a word, the most striking pages of Tacitus were left colorless and mute for Boccaccio; clearly he just didn't read them" (ref 8 p 369-373).
These are all the mentions of Tacitus before he was found by Poggio Bracciolini. So the entire length of The Middle Ages haven't had any kind of information stored anywhere that would speak of Tacitus' manuscripts existence so

we have to agree with Ross and Hoshar when they state how in late XIV and early XV centuries nobody of educated people had the smallest idea of Tacitus. This was an ancientry's great and cloudy myth stored in hints of the antique books. The greats believed in its obscurity and of course they were dreaming: if only I could find it! Idealistic-minded scientists were dreaming about it, practically minded scientists were dreaming about it too. At that time palace pantries, monastery basements and trash of rag pickers have revealed many Litheraturical treasures of The Ancient World and brought many antique dead back to life of The Renaissance. There was a need to conclude a series of findings of The Roman Literature with Tacitus and every bookseller was understanding how finding Tacitus meant amassing a capital. So in the end the demand has created the supply: Tacitus was found.

(ref 8 p 373-374)
this post tuned up to be more than twice larger than a reddit's limit so I had to split it
to be continued...

cassino english meaning video

Google's free service instantly translates words, phrases, and web pages between English and over 100 other languages. cassino in British English. or casino (kəˈsiːnəʊ ) noun. a card game for two to four players in which players pair cards from their hands with others exposed on the table. Collins English Dictionary. Copyright © HarperCollins Publishers. Word Frequency. casino definition: 1. a building where games, especially roulette and card games are played for money 2. a building…. Learn more. Rembrandt Casino is available in English, German, Finnish, Norwegian and English (Canadian) thus ensuring that everyone gets a chance to play. With a very easy interface Rembrandt Casino is the perfect online casino to begin your gaming adventure in. Everything is very organised and simple so you will never get lost. Define cassino. cassino synonyms, cassino pronunciation, cassino translation, English dictionary definition of cassino. A town of central Italy in the Apennines northwest of Naples. In World War II the town and nearby Benedictine monastery of Monte Cassino were reduced to... casino translation in Italian - English Reverso dictionary, see also 'casinò',Caino',casalingo',caso', examples, definition, conjugation 1. a building or large room used for meetings, dancing, or esp. for professional gambling. 2. (in Italy) a small country house or lodge. 3. Also, cassino. a card game in which cards that are face up on the table are taken with eligible cards in the hand. casino meaning: 1. a building where games, especially roulette and card games are played for money 2. a building…. Learn more. Casino Meaning In English, bet 365 full site, poker cu septari si fructe, poker legal california. 0. Best Casino Bonus Offers. Wager * T&C. Percentage. Everyday we update Casino Meaning In English our campaign offers with new no deposit casino bonus offers. Casino definition: A casino is a building or room where people play gambling games such as roulette. Meaning, pronunciation, translations and examples

cassino english meaning top

Vedas-With English Meanings - YouTube

JOIN THE ACADEMYhttps://speakenglishwithtiffaniacademy.comFollow me on instagram @speakenglishwithtiffani(I teach you 3 new vocabulary words every day)WHAT Y... Great deep house remix! Learning English is not easy, but if you know the right way to learn, it will be very effective. In this lesson, there are methods and tricks for learning En... Are you doing these 4 things every day to improve your English? Check out the Lingoda Language Sprint! 👉 http://bit.ly/EmmaTheLanguageSprint & use my code J... Kate Ritchie explores the connection between language and meaning. This video introduces two ways in which philosophers have answered the question 'what make... Learn English vocabulary in this lesson that contains 21 videos teaching common English words and their meanings.0:00 English Vocabulary Introduction Engli... All four Vedas with complete English meaning, really peaceful and also chantings that will make your hair stand on your body. Such is the power in these Veda... Let’s talk about the legendary phrase “sawarasenai kimi wa shojo na no” and it’s meaning in English!This phrase is from anime Yarichin B Club and it already ... Common English vocabulary words that start with A What is it the important to learn English vocabulary words?Vocabulary is the key to communicationWhen you l...