Latest news with #Gauls
Evening Standard
4 days ago
- Lifestyle
- Evening Standard
A guide to gym etiquette in a heatwave — how not to behave when working out this summer
When it comes to swimwear, too many gymgoers treat the pool like the Côte d'Azur. By all means, ladies, feel free to wear a stylish one-piece. But save your thong bikini for the beach. And men? We may be in the middle of Thigh Guy Summer, but that does not give you permission to go full Speedo. Please remember we're uptight Brits, not laidback Gauls. As Simmons says, 'Unless you're on a specific kind of beach at a specific kind of hour, keep your trunks at least a third of the way down your thighs.'
RTÉ News
5 days ago
- Politics
- RTÉ News
How hunger and starvation are used as political weapons in Gaza
Analysis: Hunger has been used as a weapon of war for millennia, but is now recognised both morally and legally as a crime against humanity "We must never accept hunger as a weapon of war". So says UN Secretary-General António Guterres reflecting on the catastrophic reality in Gaza today, where the population of two million are being deliberately and systematically destroyed by famine and malnutrition. He is right of course, except that hunger has been a weapon of war for millennia. In 52 BC, Julius Caesar secured his most important victory against the Gauls, and hunger was his chosen weapon. The Roman army starved its enemy into submission. The fortified town of Alesia, in modern day eastern France, was subjected to Caesar's most audacious siege. In his Commentarii de Bello Gallico (Gallic Wars), Caesar boasts of killing 250,000 people, one of the earliest recorded genocides in history. Modern historians will tell you that that's a gross exaggeration, but they also agree that many thousands, mostly women and children, died of hunger and malnutrition in that siege. I wouldn't be surprised if Israel's prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has a copy of Caesar's Gallic Wars on his desk. From RTÉ Radio 1's Sunday Miscellany, Mary Byrne's Looking for Gauls in Gallia Narbonensis on the trail of the Gauls from Caesar's Gallic Wars to Asterix The siege of Alesia was not the first time hunger was used as a weapon of war, and certainly not the last. There have been many sieges since then, and the 20th century was not an exception. Some of the most recent devastating sieges of the last 100 years include Stalingrad (1942-3), Beirut (1982) and Srebrenica (1992-5). Hunger is, and always has been, a weapon of war. In fact, hunger has always been a political weapon, even outside of wars. In his book The Politics of Hunger, which focuses on politics in England between 1750 and 1840, Carl Griffin examines how hunger was deliberately used by the British Empire as a disciplining device. The Irish people were often at the receiving end of this crushing policy. The future is unpredictable, however history has a tendency to repeat itself. Where wars erupt, hunger, malnutrition and starvation tend to follow. What is happening in Gaza today should not surprise anyone, least of all António Guterres. Nor should it surprise US president Donald Trump, who seemed flabbergasted when asked whether Israel was fuelling hunger in Gaza during his recent visit to Scotland: "I don't know... those children look very hungry... that's real starvation stuff". From RTÉ News, aid agencies say humanitarian suffering in Gaza at 'unimaginable' levels It's important to remind ourselves that at least one thing has changed since Julius Caesar's roamed with impunity across France, Germany and Britain, and more recently since the violent supremacy of the British Empire. The advent of the culture of human rights, and the international law framework for punishing or rebuking those who violate human rights, has been a game changer since the end of World War II. Hunger as a weapon of war is now recognised both morally and legally as a crime against humanity. The concept of crime against humanity has legal recognition in international law, thanks to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The crimes that can be charged as crimes against humanity include enslavement, deportation or forcible transfer of population, torture and sexual violence (rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization). It also includes the crime of extermination. While open to different interpretations, according to William Schabas, Professor Emeritus at the Irish Centre for Human Rights at the University of Galway, the deprivation of access to food and medicine can constitute an act of extermination. From RTÉ News, Taoiseach says Israel's Gaza blockade 'clearly a war crime' The International Criminal Court has jurisdiction in accordance with the Rome Statute with respect to four legally recognized crimes: the crime of genocide; crimes against humanity; war crimes and the crime of aggression. These are not just abstract concepts, or mere words. The recognition of these crimes is an acknowledgement of our common humanity. Impunity or indifference in the face of these unimaginable atrocities that shock the conscience of humanity risk breaking not just the common bonds that unite all peoples, but also shattering the very meaning of what is to be human. Depriving access to food and medicine is considered by many human rights scholars a violation of a basic right, to be precise the right to subsistence. This right can be traced back to the work of 17th century German jurist and political philosopher Samuel von Pufendorf, but more recently it has been vindicated by some of the most influential scholars in human rights and political philosophy, including Henry Shue, who advocates the right to those material provisions needed for one's self-preservation. As Shue writes in his 1996 book Basic Rights: Subsistence, Affluence, and U.S. Foreign Policy, "no one can fully, if at all, enjoy any right that is supposedly protected by society if he or she lacks the essentials for a reasonably healthy and active life". These essentials, which make up the right to subsistence, include the right to water, food, shelter, and access to basic medical provisions. From RTÉ Radio 1's Morning Ireland, "I'm a genocide scholar. I know it when I see it". Holocaust historian and former Israeli soldier, Prof Omer Bartow, says the IDF campaign in Gaza amounts to genocide Israel signed the Rome Statue on December 31st 2000, but withdrew on August 28th 2002, and they have since formally indicated that they no longer plan to ratify the treaty. Sudan, the United States and Russia also withdrew their signature from the Rome Statute. Nevertheless, if international law is to retain any legitimacy and standing, it is imperative that the international community keeps using these terms, and that politicians and concerned global citizens keep referring to these crimes in relation to current affairs, whether the accused state is a signatory or not to the Rome Statute. The malnourished and starving children of Gaza are not the only victims of this conflict. The biggest casualty of the war in Gaza risks being politics itself. International politics and international human rights law are facing an existential crisis. It takes a gargantuan effort of optimism to keep believing in the power of politics during times of war, but the alternative is too dire to even consider. António Guterres says that we must never accept hunger as a weapon of war because he knows that the UN is being starved of its legitimacy, and international law is being starved of its efficiency. As Israel defends its latest plan to take control of Gaza City, the future of human rights - not only for Palestinians but for all of us - is in the balance.
Spectator
06-08-2025
- Politics
- Spectator
The problem with experts
Danny Kruger's brave defence of Christianity in the history of this country, which he recently delivered to an empty House of Commons, has won much praise. His words reminded me of when the same thing happened the other way round. As fourth-century Rome was Christianised by imperial decree, the distinguished senator Symmachus spoke up for the old pagan religion which had been degraded by the removal of the Altar of Victory from the Senate. He expressed his thoughts in the voice of the city herself, thus (Gibbon's translation): 'Pity and respect my age, which has hitherto flowed in an uninterrupted course of piety. Since I do not repent, permit me to continue in the practice of my ancient rites. Since I am born free, allow me to enjoy my domestic institutions. This religion has reduced the world under my laws. These rites have repelled Hannibal from the city, and the Gauls from the Capitol. Were my grey hairs reserved for such intolerable disgrace?' Symmachus did not prevail, and the Senate dethroned Jupiter by a big majority. Given the political pressures, Gibbon writes, 'it is rather surprising that any members should be found bold enough to declare… that they were still attached to the interest of an abdicated deity'. Kruger was showing similarly lonely boldness. There is a difference, however. The old Roman religion was defenceless except on grounds of custom. It did not contain the seeds of its own renewal. Kruger's defence of his country's past Christianity, by contrast, looked to the future. 'A new restoration is needed now, with a revival of the faith, a recovery of a Christian politics and a re-founding of this nation on the teachings that Alfred made the basis of the common law of England…' He ended: 'This is a mission for the Church under its next leader… it is a mission for this place – the old chapel [on the site of whose altar the Speaker's chair now sits] that became the wellspring of western democracy – and for us, its members; and it is a mission for our whole country. It is the route to a prosperous modernity founded on respect for human dignity, responsibility for the created world and the worship of God.' That resonates. Many say that domestic political motives underlie the cabinet's promise to recognise the statehood of Palestine. Less has been said about its intellectual model. I suggest it is the Good Friday Agreement, coming from Jonathan Powell who, now as then, advises Labour prime ministers on how to deal with terrorists. Such suspicions were confirmed by a letter in Monday's Times from Tom Kelly, the Blair spin doctor who was also involved in the Ulster peace process. He said terrorists rely on a simple argument: 'That violence is the only way to get the world to take their cause seriously.' Disprove that argument and the terror weapon fails: 'That is how we ended the IRA's campaign of violence and that is how Hamas could be stopped too.' 'But politics needs to be seen to work,' Kelly continues, 'and the recognition of Palestinians' right to determine their own future is a first step.' There are numerous fallacies in this reasoning (e.g. Hamas seem to have gained kudos in the West by mass murder), but there is also a key difference between the Northern Ireland situation and that in Gaza. In the first, the British prime minister was the most important player. In the second, he is of almost no account. It is dangerously hubristic to propose what you have so little part in delivering. We generalists skate on thin ice and often rely on experts to start forming our views. For me, a current case in point is Javier Milei. I have never been to Argentina, and know little about it, so I have no idea whether its President is saviour or charlatan. I naturally turn for guidance to two economic writers whom I admire, Niall Ferguson and Ambrose Evans-Pritchard. Both have written about Milei recently. Ferguson hails Milei's 'glorious call to the authentic capitalists in the audience to rise up against their ancient enemy – the state' and says that 'The result of [his] shock therapy has been a stunning recovery'. Evans-Pritchard complains that 'The Austro-libertarian free marketeer is not so free when it comes to the currency. He has allowed the peso to move within wider bands but it is still 30 per cent overvalued'. He has made his country yet more in hoc to the IMF ('479 per cent of the country's quota'). Kemi Badenoch should not praise him: 'His circus-act adventurism has nothing in common with the great tradition of British conservatism.' Oh dear. What am I supposed to think? I was recently talking to a friend who recalled her childhood drives from home in East Anglia to the Sussex coast. In the early 1960s, there were no relevant motorways and so the journey passed through central London. To while away the time – on similar journeys I remember counting legs in the names of pubs (44 for The Cricketers) – her family would compete for how many black people (a complete novelty to them) they could see out of the car window. A typical total for the journey was eight. This little memory conveys the change more readily than all statistics. In Poland, they want to build a new deep-water container port at Swinoujscie in the Baltic. This challenges existing German ports. Such disputes used to be settled by force of arms, but now we are all much nicer, and so German economic interests are being surreptitiously advanced through a court case brought by a body claiming environmental motives. Its name, in English, is the harmless-sounding Living Space Pomerania. The original German, however, is Lebensraum Vorpommern, which may help explain why feelings are running high. 'It is 80 years since nuclear weapons were first used,' says the BBC. True, but it is also 80 years since they were last used. So the theory of deterrence has worked, so far.
Yahoo
02-06-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Celtic quiz: Test your knowledge about these fierce tribes once described by Julius Caesar
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. The ancient Celts were a collection of tribes that roamed Europe for centuries, reaching as far east as what is now Turkey. Best known from the writings of Julius Caesar, who recorded information on his war with the Gauls — a tribe that lived around modern-day France — the Celts are often depicted as violent, fierce and scruffy. But this picture has been filtered through ancient Roman and Greek authors who knew little about these groups, which spoke different languages and had complex cultures. There's also no universal definition of who counted as an ancient Celt. Some historians count only continental tribes as Celtic, while others view the Brittonic-speaking tribes in the British Isles, such as the Durotriges and Iceni, as Celts as well. The association of the Celts with only the British Isles — and with Ireland in particular — that often persists today is a Renaissance invention. Are you up to date on your knowledge of the Celts? Take our quiz to find out. Remember to log in to put your name on the leaderboard; hints are available if you click the yellow button! —Viking quiz: How much do you know about these seaborne raiders, traders and explorers? —Stonehenge quiz: What do you know about the ancient monument? —Ancient Maya quiz: What do you know about the civilization that built pyramids across Mesoamerica?
Edinburgh Live
26-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Edinburgh Live
Who Wants To Be A Millionaire contestant loses biggest amount in show's history after blunder
Our community members are treated to special offers, promotions and adverts from us and our partners. You can check out at any time. More info In a dramatic turn on Who Wants To Be A Millionaire, contestant Nicholas Bennett lost the largest sum ever on the show due to a costly blunder. The quiz show, now in its 30th series, witnessed Nicholas reach the £500k question without using any lifelines, much to the amazement of host Jeremy Clarkson. But disaster struck and Nicholas walked away with a staggering £375k less than he could have won. After successfully answering the £125,000 question, Clarkson remarked: "He's just roaring along." READ MORE - DVLA issues urgent driving licence warning to anyone who passed test before 2016 READ MORE - BBC 'error' leaves fans seething just minutes before Gary Lineker's farewell The £250,000 question then challenged Nicholas with: "Which of these groups never successfully invaded the city of Rome?" The choices were: "a) Visigoths, b) Huns, c) Vandals, d) Gauls". Nicholas, exuding confidence, declared: "I do like history, I know the Gauls invaded pretty early on. I'm pretty sure the Vandals destroyed the city - that's why we have vandalism. I don't think the Huns did, I don't think they made it that far into Europe, whereas I knew the Visigoths were around. As it's a free shot, I'm 70-80% sure..", reports the Mirror. Despite Clarkson reminding him of his unused lifelines and advising against guessing, Nicholas confidently replied: "I don't think this is a guess though. Maybe on the next question I'll need them, so I'm gonna say Huns - final answer." His gamble paid off, and the correct answer propelled him to the £500k question. Clarkson noted Nicholas's apparent calmness, prompting him to admit: "It's not relaxed inside my head." The £500k question posed was: "Which of these long-running US sitcoms had the most episodes? a) The Big Bang Theory b) Friends c) The Office or d) Seinfeld". Unsure of the answer, he turned to the audience who believed it was Friends - but only 37% agreed, while 30% thought it was Seinfeld. Still uncertain and not wanting to risk it, he opted for the 50/50 lifeline, which left The Big Bang Theory and The Office (proving the audience wrong). Nicolas admitted that he struggled to articulate his thoughts before finally settling on The Big Bang Theory as his final answer. His gamble paid off and he moved on to the ultimate question, the £1million query. Clarkson then asked: "Which of these words, each coined by a famous writer, was derived from the title of a fairytale about three princes? a)Pandemonium b) Serendipity c) Utopia d) Yahoo." Nicholas responded: "The one that's standing out to me is yahoo, but I don't know." He sought advice from host Jeremy, who confessed he couldn't recall a fairytale involving three princes and noted that all four words were indeed coined by authors. Nicholas then recalled a puppet show he attended recently in Spain, which he believes was about three princes. He confessed his Spanish wasn't fluent enough to understand the storyline. "But I think someone was yelling yahoo", he added. He rationalised that he'd still have £125k even if his answer was incorrect, to which Clarkson highlighted the potential £375k loss and reminded him of an available lifeline. Nicholas opted to use the lifeline, but his friend Meg was clueless about the question. "Normally, I'm really averse to any kind of gambling, but I do think I'm going to go for it," he declared, confidently stating "Yahoo, final answer." The correct answer turned out to be serendipity, a term created by Horace Walpole inspired by The Three Princes of Serendip. With a nonchalant attitude, Nicholas remarked: "I've still got £125k" while Jeremy confessed he'd be "sobbing on the floor" after such a hefty loss. Clarkson, clearly astonished, exclaimed post-event, "Oh my giddy aunt," questioning whether this was the most significant loss in 'Millionaire' history. He praised Nicholas, saying, "I don't think I've had a contestant I've enjoyed more than you. Well done, enjoy your winnings." Upon returning from the commercial break, Clarkson greeted the audience with, "We've just seen someone lose what we think is the biggest amount in Who Wants to be a Millionaire history".
