Fall 2014 Volume XI
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Fall 2014 Volume XI The Michigan Journal of History 1 About the Cover Annie Smith Peck (1850-1935) was a notorious mountaineer and lecturer of the early 20th century, known best for climbing Mount Huascarán—the highest peak in Peru. Peck graduated from the University of Michigan in 1878 with a degree in Greek, only a few years after the University first allowed female students to enroll. After making a living by teaching and giving public lectures, Peck discovered a love for mountaineering at the age of 45. Her first major accomplishment in this field was the climbing of the Matterhorn, which she achieved in 1895. The picture on the cover was from a publicity shoot just before she began this journey. In the picture, she wears a woolen tunic, knickerbockers and leather boots. This choice set her apart from previous female mountaineers, most of whom wore dresses or skirts when climbing in order to adhere to the decorum of the time. As part of a promotion, Singer, the sewing machine company, gave away postcards of this image with every purchase. The cards declared that Peck was “The Queen of the Climbers.” Later, Peck enjoyed a successful career climbing mountains in South America, where she made her largest contributions to the field. For more, see Elizabeth Faggs Olds’ Women of the Four Winds. Cover photo title: Annie Smith Peck in climbing costume; Date: 1878; Collection title: University of Michigan student portraits ; Photographer: Gray; BL# 003663; Located in Bentley Historical Library Online Image Bank: http://quod.lib.umich.edu/b/bhl/x-bl003663/bl003663 2 A Letter from the Editor-in-Chief Dear Readers, I know I speak for myself and the rest of the editing team at the Michigan Journal of History when I say that we are excited to release this new issue to you. We were once again fortunate to have received many submissions from talented students all over the country, and it was no easy task deciding which essays would be included in this journal. In the end, the pieces we chose reflect a wide array of time periods, events, and cultures. They look at history through unique lenses-- lending fresh perspectives to bygone times. We are also happy to announce the addition of a new feature to our journal. While we are more than grateful to welcome submissions and readers nationally, we have started a tradition of including an essay which particularly focuses on the greater Ann Arbor-Detroit area that the University of Michigan calls home. In this way, we hope to acknowledge our strong Michigan roots in a way which we can share with our friends across the nation. In closing, I'd like to thank everyone who was a part of the Fall 2014 issue. This publication would not have been possible without the dedication of the Michigan Journal of History's editorial team. Thank you to all of you who helped put this together, it has been a pleasure working with you all this past semester.I'd also like to extend our thanks to all of the writers who submitted their work for review. We are constantly impressed by not only the volume of submissions, but the talent behind them, and we encourage you all to continue submitting. Sincerely, Melissa Durante Editor-in-Chief, Michigan Journal of History 3 MICHIGAN JOURNAL OF HISTORY EDITORIAL BOARD, Fall 2014 Melissa Durante Editor-in-Chief James Nadel Managing Editor Jordan Grauer Sonali Gupta Senior Editors Indira Bhattacharjee Senior Editor/Webmaster Sarah Bedoyan Mollie Berkowitz Iris Chen Andrew Grafton Hannah Graham Alec Ramsay-Smith Jason Rozbruch Associate Editors 4 Table of Contents 5 Compromised Defense – The Conquests of Basil II Michael Goodyear, University of Chicago 17 Buffalo Extermination: 1865-1883 Heather Kirkpatrick, University of Michigan 33 Bourgeois Espionage: The Bureau of Secret Intelligence During World War I and the State Department’s Battle with Modernity Sam Kleinman, Georgetown University 56 “I Do What I Can for Organization:” Lincoln the Campaigner in 1860 William Redmond, Georgetown University 74 The Roaring Nineties: Privatization and the Mongolian Stock Exchange Nicolas Sambor, Columbia University 88 A Shift in Philosophy: The American Jewish Congress and the Fight to End Discrimination in Stuyvesant Town, New York Gregory Segal, University of Pennsylvania 114 Misreading Shadows: Elusive Victory, Enigmatic Defeat: The USSR, The US, Egypt, and Israel During the “War of Attrition,” 1969-1970 Matthew Schweitzer, University of Chicago 138 The Demise of Chene Street: Urban Crisis in Detroit’s Lower East Side Christopher White, University of Michigan 159 “Stand Down Margaret, Please Stand Down:” Musical and Political Opposition to the Conservative Government (1979-1990) Cecily Zander, University of Virginia 197 Insights into the Early 20th Century Debate Vivisection Via The Case of Udo J. Wile Jacob Ziff, University of Michigan 5 Compromised Defense - The Conquests of Basil II Michael Goodyear University of Chicago The reign of Basil II has been considered a time of strength and expansion for the Byzantine Empire. During Basil’s nearly fifty-year reign the frontiers of Byzantium grew on various fronts, and the Empire was at a peak of military strength and foreign influence. Just fifty years after Basil’s death, however, the Byzantine Empire diminished greatly in size, and its army was in a decrepit state. Basil’s successors were certainly not as competent in military or political affairs as Basil himself. That being said, Basil left them a heavy legacy. At the beginning of Basil’s reign there was a bulwark of defense comprised of the buffer states - a series of smaller, independent nations that surrounded the borders of the Byzantine Empire in the Balkans and in the Middle East. The location of these states prevented a direct territorial connection between Byzantium and the greater military powers to the North, South, and East of the Byzantine state.1 During Basil’s campaigns, the Byzantine state directly absorbed the buffer states in Bulgaria and the Caucasus. The political and military repercussions of these conquests have often been overlooked by past scholarship on Basil II. Although Basil is considered one of the greatest of Byzantine emperors, considering the financial and territorial ramifications that stemmed from the integration of these buffer states brings into question the effectiveness and benefit of the very conquests for which he is remembered and exalted. Many historians hold Basil in esteem for both his internal and external policies. His military victories in Bulgaria are given a semi-mythical quality, especially the Battle of Kleidion 1 The term “buffer state” is used in this paper to describe any independent nation that bordered the Byzantine Empire and was a hindrance to invaders rather than their ally, thus providing Byzantium with a valuable first defense against invaders. 6 and its aftermath. Complete histories of the Byzantine Empire in general do not go into much detail on any effects of Basil’s conquests.2 Even works on issues and enemies that Byzantium faced after Basil II’s death do not go into detail about the buffer states.3 John Haldon’s specialized work on Byzantine warfare does mention this issue of the buffer states, but only in passing.4 The ramifications of Basil’s conquests have often been overlooked and have thus far not received a thorough examination.5 Basil was a soldier emperor who undertook many wars along Byzantium’s borders. According to a near contemporary, Basil “spent the greater part of his reign serving as a soldier on guard at our frontiers,” continuously campaigning and expanding the borders of Byzantium.6 He campaigned across the Empire and “did not follow the customary procedure of other emperors…for him the time to return was when the task at hand was accomplished.”7 This single-mindedness resulted in significant gains for Byzantium. Under Basil, the Byzantine Empire achieved a territorial height it had not seen since the advent of Islam. This territorial expansion was achieved through the conquest of the buffer states. These states were the Bulgarian Empire in the Balkans and various Armenian principalities in the Caucasus and they 2 Romilly Jenkins, Byzantium: The Imperial Centuries AD 610-1071 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1987), 301-332; George Ostrogorsky, History of the Byzantine State (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University, 1969), 298- 315; A.A. Vasiliev, History of the Byzantine Empire (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1952), 300-374. 3J. Laurent, Byzance et les Turcs Seldjoucides dans l’Asie occidentale jusqu’en 1081, Annales de l’Est publiées par la Faculté des Lettres de l’Université de Nancy (Paris, 1913-1914), 16-18; G. Schlumberger, L’Épopée byzantine à la fin du dixième siècle, II (Paris: 1896-1905), 498-536. Laurent focuses on the Seljuks while Schlumberger provides details on Basil’s relations with the various Caucasian states. Neither directly discusses, however, how Basil’s conquests affected or did not affect Seljuk incursions. 4 John Haldon, Warfare, State and Society in the Byzantine World, 565-1204 (London: University College, 1999), 85-90. 5 My examination of the ramifications here is strictly limited to the strategic military ramifications. There were certainly others such as seditious conquered populations and tax problems. Due to Basil’s great reputation among Byzantine historians that followed him, it is difficult to find explicit source details on consequences of Basil’s conquests. Tactical observations and interpreting the observations of historians that followed Basil and witnessed the crumbling of the empire, however, can be achieved to better understand the military consequences of Basil’s conquests. 6 Michael Psellus, Fourteen Byzantine Rulers, trans. E. R. A. Sewter (Harmondsworth, England: Penguin Classics, 1966), 46. 7 Psellus, Fourteen Byzantine Rulers, 46.