Contemporary Warriors

Michelle Therianos

At the beginning of Plebe Summer, every Midshipmen is issued The Warrior Ethos by Steven Pressfield. This piece of literature fundamentally outlines the nature of the warrior code and its rules. The very first chapter, of course, begins in Ancient Greece with the Spartan warriors. Studying a society characterized by patriotism and toughness is where a Midshipman’s development begins, and rightfully so.

Perhaps the most striking aspect of Spartan civilization is their fascination with being warriors. In Sparta, there was only one occupation: soldier. Indoctrination into this lifestyle began as early as seven years old, when they left home to live in communal barracks and train extensively. They lived meagerly and in austere conditions, building mental and physical strength through sports competitions, team-building exercises, and tests of survival. By 20 years old, a Spartan boy was officially a solider, and would remain active duty until 60. These warriors were skilled in Ancient Greek fighting styles, primarily the phalanx formation, which required coordinated mass maneuvers. It is in this that a naval officers can learn the greatest of lessons: no one sailor is more superior to another. In the phalanx formation, each solider is vital to success; this applies to the modern Navy because, in order to win wars, the entire team must work in unison, free of prejudice. With this fighting spirit came a strong sense of nationalism. This patriotism is yet another aspect essential to the makings of a naval officer.

Another point to note of Spartan society is that they treated women better than the rest of the world did. Spartan women were independent-minded and had more freedoms, powers, and education than other women across Ancient Greece. While they were not part of the military, they were encouraged to be athletic and have knowledge of war due to their spouses’ involvement. One Spartan mother once said to her son, who was leaving for war with his shield, to return “either with this, or on it” (Plutarch, Moralia, 241). When the men were out fighting, women even managed politics and property. In this society, women had a role that transcended child-rearing and cleaning, which relates to the modern military. With the Navy being almost 25% female, it is vital that a naval officer treat women equal to men. In fact, women are allowed to have any job, including those with combat. During a time where women were considered vastly inferior, a naval officer can learn from the liberties that Spartan society fairly gave females.

Word Count: 415

Of the Crescent and the Cross

Michelle Therianos

In today’s society, Islam and Christianity appear to be as different as night and day. Upon further examination, however, it is evident that the two faiths share some resemblances. To begin, both religions are monotheistic, Abrahamic, and text-based, even sharing prophets and certain customs, such as fasting and praying. One of the more surprising similarities is the fact that Jesus Christ is acknowledged and respected by both religions. While he is not necessarily considered divine by the Muslims, he is still a prophet and of virgin birth. In fact, his mother, Mary, is the only woman ever referred to by name in the Quran, and is even mentioned more often in the Quran than in the Bible itself. It is interesting, however, that Muslims hold Christianity’s namesake in high regard, but Christians vehemently regard Muhammad, Islam’s founder, as a false prophet.

Another surprising commonality is that both Muslims and Christians believe in Judgement Day. Although the specific events of this day differ between the two religions, the end result is the same: all humans on Earth will die and be sent to Heaven or Hell based on their loyalty and obedience. The members of both religions acknowledge that Hell is the destination for sinners while Heaven, or Paradise, is the haven, in the form of a garden, for God’s good followers. In addition, Satan is a constant figure in both faiths, and exists as the evil parallel to the righteous God. The fact that both Muslims and Christians have the same afterlife is fascinating; they are judged by the same god and placed in the same Heaven or Hell, where they may coexist.

Through a canonical lens, Islam and Christianity are indeed mutually exclusive. The truth is that a Muslim cannot be a Christian, and vice versa, due to the basic tenants of both religions. The most fundamental belief of Christianity lies in its namesake: to be a Christian, one must accept that Jesus Christ is the son of God and is consubstantial with the father. To add to this, they must also believe that Jesus died on the cross and rose again on the third day on his own accord because he was fully God and fully man. Both of these principles, as well as the idea of the Holy Trinity, are utterly rejected by Islam. Practicing both religions purely would be essentially impossible because the issue of Jesus is too different.

Word Count: 403

Top 10 Battles of Succession: Concubine 1 vs. Concubine 3

Michelle Therianos

The Wanli Emperor, Zhu Yijun, did not like his wife. It was not necessarily that he hated her, but rather that the arranged betrothal was simply loveless. Married at the tender age of 13, he and Empress Wang Xijie were only lovers in fine print. The distance between them only grew when she was unable to provide a male heir, their only legitimate child being a female, Princess Zhu Xuanying. The emperor did have his concubines, though, and several of them. It was from these consorts’ children that the emperor was to name an heir, given that his legitimate wife remained sonless. The courts preached primogeniture, but the emperor had other ideas.

The first of his consorts to give birth was Consort Gong, who bore Zhu Changluo. In theory, this child would inherit the throne, as he was the first-born son. The emperor, however, vehemently refused to listen to his advisors on the matter of inheritance. His intention was to name the son of Consort Zheng, his third concubine, the heir because he loved her and hated Consort Gong. Straying away from primogeniture, the emperor denied tradition for 15 long years, a fact that alienated him from his court. He eventually folded and named Zhu Changluo the heir apparent, but he died unhappy with the decision.

This specific battle of inheritance was such a big issue because Emperor Wanli was, for the last portion of his 48-year rule, inadequate. Prior to the question of an heir apparent, he had already instigated a fight with his ministers, going as far as arranging a formal strike against them for over 20 years. He stopped holding court with his officials, ceased replacing ministers that died or retired, and refused to read petitions and memorandums, thus allowing the eunuchs to take control. His refusal to work with them about his sons was something of a “last straw,” the final, condemning blow to his image. This behavior goes against Confucius’ writings, which state “when he commits a fault, he is not afraid to amend his ways” (The Analects 1.8); the emperor was stubborn and feuded for decades instead of fixing his issues. In my opinion, the emperor should have just agreed to name his first son the heir, as it would have alleviated years of tension between him and his officials. Concurring would have also improved his dwindling public opinion. It was after this specific feud on inheritance that the emperor was truly gone, deaf to the Chinese people and their needs. If the ruler and his court had agreed on the matter, China could have perhaps been saved from almost a score of insufficiency and rot. By focalizing his own displeasure and failing to care for China, the emperor violated more of Confucius’ ways by going against “the gentleman considers the whole rather than the parts. The small man considers the part rather than the whole” (The Analects 2.14).

Word Count: 485

Killing Christians: An Unnecessary Evil

Name: Michelle Therianos

The very concept of Christianity shook the Roman Empire. In a society where its rulers were considered gods, it was threatening to the state to have monotheistic constituents. The idea of having a single, almighty entity above the emperor was worrying, as it portrayed the Roman hierarchy as having less power and control. Christians were outwardly committing national apostasy, deviating from the standard Roman religion and thereby showcasing political disloyalty. It was only natural for Roman citizens to be unaccepting of a foreign cult that challenged their government and beliefs. By not offering sacrifices or respect to patron gods, the Christians were promoting disorder and breaking laws, something that made other groups distance themselves.

Aside from political conduct, Christians were also shunned because of their dogmas. The namesake of Christianity, Jesus Christ, was, after all, portrayed as a criminal, nailed to a cross alongside two thieves. The Christians worshipped what appeared to be a villain who encouraged cannibalism and incest; the notion of calling those within the same religion “brother” and “sister” implied incest, and, as far as they were concerned, partaking in “the body and blood of Christ” meant literally eating him. These instances, all written into their bible, frightened the Roman populous.

For two centuries, Christians were deemed enemies of the state and persecuted. While this panic was understandable, it was truly not justifiable. The Christians unfortunately played the scapegoat for the Roman Empire’s downfalls; they were blamed for the Great Fire of Rome by Emperor Nero, sentenced to death by wild beast in the Colosseum, and essentially forced to choose between their religion and their lives under Decius’ religious edicts. Emperor Valerian even attempted to rid the Christian church of its leaders, executing the Bishop St. Cyprian. Christians were maltreated simply because they were different, and that is the fact of the matter. Even though they did rebel in small ways, like not paying tribute to pagan gods or refusing to serve in the imperial military, there was never a formal, violent insurgency on their part. Their quiet worship was met with the sword, something I do not think was appropriate, regardless of the times. Even after they were recognized and protected as a religion, there was still internal turmoil due to the schism that arose from those who yielded to imperial pressure. The Christians never really posed a threat, and their persecution wrongfully crippled their religion for years to follow.

Word Count: 404

More Like the Swiss?

The United States is a representative democracy, and has been for centuries. With such a strong worldly presence and a large population, it is hard to envision the nation with any other type of government. This sentiment is echoed through the fact that many nations are either a representative democracy or a hybrid of it. When examining the reasons behind the current system, it dates back to the Founding Fathers, who feared the consequences of a radically direct democracy, and rightfully so.

A representative democracy is, in general, better suited for dealing with a large electorate. The fact of the matter is that, while a direct democracy works well with a smaller population, it gets exponentially harder to maintain as the number of people increases. When each voice must be heard individually, it becomes much more work for the government. Time and money can be lost at the expense of entertaining a direct democracy, especially when only 55.5% of the United States’ population even votes (“2016 November General Election Turnout Rates.”). This low percentage may be variety of reasons, ranging from a busy schedule to sincere apathy. The beauty of a representative democracy, though, is that, even with a low voter turnout, the nonparticipants are still represented through elected officials.

The representative system additionally prioritizes the needs of the group more so than the needs of the individual. It is only natural for citizens to vote for proposals that benefit themselves, neglecting to think of others and the nation itself. This is evident with Switzerland, one of the only countries still with a direct democracy. In 2009, the populous voted to ban the construction of minarets adjacent to mosques, preventing them from getting any ventilation (“Swiss Ban Building of Minarets on Mosques.”). This vote excluded the Swiss Muslim population, and handicapped their ability to worship comfortably. Additionally, even if not for self-interest, a direct democracy would allow for people who do not completely understand issues to still vote on them. The average American may not have the time or tools to make a well-informed vote, which is why a representative democracy works better. An elected official, whose only focus is making large-scale decisions, is better suited for this civic responsibility.

The direct democracy of Ancient Athens was, in itself, flawed. Although advertised as being open to all, it was in fact barred from slaves, women and foreigners born on Greek soil. It was also off-limits to the exiled, which was a growing list since there was an annual vote on who to banish. Votes were taken by submitting stones or through a show of hands, methods that were easy to manipulate, hard to document, and not necessarily anonymous. While these elements are considered undemocratic by today’s standards, it is undeniable that they paved the way for modern politics. While the representative democracy still prevails, it would not be what it is today without the Greeks and their rudimentary direct democracy.