Je li nasljednik ikada uvjerio državu da povjeruje da je sadašnji vladar umro kako bi preuzeo prijestolje?

Je li nasljednik ikada uvjerio državu da povjeruje da je sadašnji vladar umro kako bi preuzeo prijestolje?


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Prije izuma semafora i telegrafa poruka nije mogla putovati brže od brzine konja (ili možda goluba glasnika ili nešto slično - još uvijek prilično sporo).

Je li ikada u povijesti postojala situacija da je vladar zemlje otišao u rat/prisustvovao stranim poslovima daleko od svoje zemlje, a nasljednik je naveo građane da vjeruju da je vladar mrtav kako bi preuzeo prijestolje? Možda je platio glasniku da se pretvara da nosi poruku smrti?

To bi bili slučajevi preuzimanja zemlje korištenjem dezinformacija, a ne atentata.


Da. Engleski kralj John pokušao je preuzeti prijestolje od Richarda I. dok je bio u križarskom ratu. Richardov odgođeni povratak bio je posljedica činjenice da ga je Leopold V, vojvoda od Austrije zarobio, a zatim predao caru Svetog Rima Henriku VI. Ivan je u međuvremenu iskoristio bratov zatvor, okupivši oko sebe pristaše i spletkareći s Filipom II. On također

počeo tvrditi da mu je brat mrtav ili na drugi način trajno izgubljen.

Iako je Richard svog nećaka, Arthura vojvodu od Bretanje, nazvao svojim nasljednikom prije odlaska u križarski rat, Arthur je bio tek dijete i Ivan se uspio okupiti oko sebe vodeći plemiće koji su ga prepoznali kao nasljednika. Kako bi umirili Ivana i dobili njegovu pomoć u prikupljanju otkupnine,

Nadbiskup Walter pozvao je akvitansku kraljicu Eleanor i regentsko vijeće da usvoje pomirljivu politiku prema Ivanu ... Eleanor i magnati poslušali su Hubertov savjet i s Ivanom pregovarali o primirju. Pristao je predati svoje dvorce svojoj majci i ako ne budu mogli vratiti Richarda, on će postati kralj.

Naravno, Richard se na kraju ipak vratio nakon što je platio veliku otkupninu. John je brzo pobjegao u Francusku, no kasnije mu je Richard oprostio. Godine 1196., Richard je ponovno imenovao Arthura za svog nasljednika, ali se predomislio na samrtnoj postelji 1199. godine i umjesto njega imenovao Ivana, vjerojatno zato što je smatrao da je Arthur premlad da bi bio kralj i da bi zapovijedao potrebnom potporom da zadrži Angevinsko carstvo. Arthur je kasnije 'nestao' (1203.), a John je bio glavni osumnjičenik za ubojstvo svog nećaka.


Iako nije bio nasljednik francuskog prijestolja, general Claude François de Malet pokušao je državni udar u Francuskoj 1812. Nakon bijega iz zarobljeništva obavijestio je Nacionalnu gardu da je Napoleon umro u Rusiji. Uspio je osloboditi dva generala, uhitio nekoliko drugih i pokušao preuzeti vlast u Parizu. Istog dana predao je pisma pukovniku Pierreu Doucetu u kojima se navodi da je Napoleon umro 7. listopada. Međutim, Doucet je znao za pisma koja je Napoleon napisao nakon tog datuma i postao je sumnjičav.

Ubrzo nakon toga Malet je uhićen, a zatim pogubljen.

Članak s wikipedije: Puč Malet iz 1812


Nisam siguran računa li se to ili ne, budući da to nije bila monarhija, nasljednik je zapravo mislio da je vladar u početku mrtav (kao posljedica detonacije bombe koju je postavio), a također nije bilo u srednjem vijeku, ali na um dolazi pukovnik Claus von Stauffenberg.

U onome što je vjerojatno bilo najbliže uspjehu atentata na Hitlera, Stauffenberg je podmetnuo bombu na sastanku kojem je prisustvovao s Hitlerom 1944. godine, a zatim je napustio sastanak zbog primljenog planiranog telefonskog poziva. Uređaj je detonirao, kada je Stauffenberg pretpostavio da je Hitler mrtav i aktivirao plan poznat kao Operacija Valkira, koji je Stauffenbergu i njegovim suučesnicima omogućio da nakratko preuzmu kontrolu nad većinom njemačke vlade.

Nažalost, konferencija se održala u nadzemnoj konferencijskoj sali umjesto u normalnom podzemnom bunkeru zbog vremenskih uvjeta, pa pritisak eksplozije nije bio ograničen u prostoriji pa, prema tome, nije bio toliko smrtonosan. Hitler je bio ozlijeđen, ali je preživio. Budući da je zavjeta već bila u tijeku kad je saznao da je Hitler preživio, Stauffenberg je tražio da se nastavi i pokušao je zavarati druge da vjeruju da je Hitler, zapravo, mrtav.

Međutim, budući da Hitler zapravo nije bio mrtav, radnja se počela raspadati u roku od nekoliko sati jer su se vijesti polako širile o Hitlerovom preživljavanju. Konačno, zavjera je propala i Stauffenberg je pogubljen oko 12 sati nakon detonacije bombe. No, nekoliko sati on i njegovi suučesnici su zaista kontrolirali veći dio nacističke Njemačke zbog toga što su ljudi mislili da je Hitler mrtav.

Ovaj pokušaj državnog udara bio je radnja filma Valkyrie iz 2008. godine s Tomom Cruiseom u glavnoj ulozi.


Drugi primjer bio je (bizantski) rimski car Ivan Komnenos. To je učinjeno prema nekim izvorima (mislim da je Runciman, ali čini se da se Wikipedia ne slaže) uz izričit pristanak njegovog umirućeg prethodnika i oca Alexiosa Komnena. Uplašeni da će Alexiosova kći i zet pokušati izvršiti puč kad Alexios umre, John je uzeo očev pečat dok mu je otac još umirao, ali prije nego što je umro, i odjahao je u palaču gdje su ga ljudi proglasili carem. (Otac mu je zapravo umro tek sljedećeg dana.)

Ovo je vjerojatno malo jeftino jer je već bio su-car, ali iako je to zasigurno bilo više od puke tehničke strane, to zapravo nije bilo jamstvo nasljedstva (a njegov šogor je pokušao državni udar nekoliko mjeseci kasnije).


Albert II, princ Monaka

Albert II [1] [2] (Albert Alexandre Louis Pierre Grimaldi rođen 14. ožujka 1958.) suvereni je princ Monaka i poglavar Kneževske kuće Grimaldi. Sin je princa Rainiera III i Grace Kelly.

Rođen je u Kneževoj palači u Monaku, a prije studija političkih znanosti na koledžu Amherst pohađao je Lycée Albert Premier. U mladosti se natjecao u bobu tijekom zimskih olimpijskih finala prije nego što je otišao u mirovinu 2002. Albert je imenovan regentom u ožujku 2005. nakon što mu se otac razbolio, a postao je suvereni princ nakon što je preminuo tjedan dana kasnije. Od svog uzašašća bio je otvoren na području zaštite okoliša i zagovornik očuvanja oceana, [3] i usvajanja obnovljivih izvora energije za rješavanje globalnih klimatskih promjena [4] [5] i osnovao Zakladu Princ Albert II od Monaka 2006. izravno prikupiti sredstva i pokrenuti mjere za takve uzroke i veće očuvanje okoliša.

Albert je jedan od najbogatijih kraljevskih društava na svijetu, s imovinom procijenjenom na više od milijardu dolara [6], uključujući zemljište u Monaku i Francuskoj. Posjeduje udjele u Société des Bains de Mer, koji upravlja monaškim kockarnicama i drugim zabavnim objektima u kneževini. [7] [8]

U srpnju 2011. princ Albert oženio se južnoafričkom olimpijskom plivačicom Charlene Wittstock. [9] Imaju dvoje djece, blizanke princezu Gabriellu i nasljednog princa Jacquesa. Princ Albert također je otac dvoje djece rođene prije braka, Jazmin Grace Grimaldi rođene u Americi i Alexandre Grimaldi-Coste, rođenog u Francuskoj.


Prijestolonasljednik Saudijske Arabije govori za 60 minuta

Sa 32 godine, prijestolonasljednik Saudijske Arabije Mohammed bin Salman već je najdominantniji arapski vođa u generaciji. Ovaj tjedan kreće na cross-country američku turneju na kojoj će svoje kraljevstvo predstaviti skeptičnoj američkoj javnosti. Prije devet mjeseci proglasio ga je prijestolonasljednikom njegov 82-godišnji otac, kralj Salman, koji je sinu podario ogromne nove moći.

Poznat po svojim inicijalima-"M-B-S"-njegove reforme unutar Saudijske Arabije bile su revolucionarne. On emancipira žene, uvodi glazbu i kino te suzbija korupciju u zemlji sa 15.000 prinčeva. No, prodaja Saudijske Arabije neće biti laka. U svom prvom intervjuu za jednu američku televizijsku mrežu želio je izravno razgovarati o obećanju svoje zemlje i njezinoj problematičnoj reputaciji.

Norah O'Donnell: Kad mnogi Amerikanci razmišljaju o Saudijskoj Arabiji, razmišljaju o Osami bin Ladenu i 11. septembru. Razmišljaju o terorizmu koji je donio na američko tlo.

Mohammed bin Salman: Pravo. Osama bin Laden regrutirao je 15 Saudijaca u napadima 11. rujna s jasnim ciljem. Prema dokumentima CIA -e i istragama Kongresa, Osama bin Laden želio je stvoriti raskol između Bliskog istoka i Zapada, između Saudijske Arabije i Sjedinjenih Američkih Država.

Prestolonasljednik Saudijske Arabije Mohammed bin Salman CBS News

Norah O'Donnell: Zašto je Osama bin Laden htio stvoriti mržnju između Zapada i Saudijske Arabije?

Mohammed bin Salman: Kako bi stvorio okruženje pogodno za novačenje i širenje svoje radikalne poruke da zapad planira uništiti vas. Doista je uspio stvoriti taj raskol na zapadu.

Norah O'Donnell: I kako to promijeniti? Jer izgleda da pokušavate promijeniti stvari ovdje kod kuće.

Mohammed bin Salman: Doista. Vjerujem da smo u posljednje tri godine uspjeli u mnogim aspektima.

Princa Mohammeda prvi smo put upoznali na Kraljevskom dvoru u Rijadu. Stigao je po jakoj kiši, znak sreće u pustinjskom kraljevstvu. Nazvan je odvažnim i vizionarskim za svoje reforme kod kuće, kao i bezobzirnim i impulzivnim u svom dolasku na vlast. Razbio je gnijezdo stršljena na Bliskom istoku i stekao mnoštvo novih neprijatelja, dijelom i zbog toga što je jedan od najstrože čuvanih ljudi na svijetu. Ovo je ured u kojemu započinje dane.

Norah O'Donnell: Teško raditi?

Mohammed bin Salman na engleskom: Stalno.

Kao klinac naučio je engleski gledajući filmove. I vrlo je svjestan da je 70 posto stanovništva poput njega, mlađe od 35 godina i postalo je nemirno.

Norah O'Donnell: Što je bio najveći izazov?

Mohammed bin Salman na engleskom: Puno je izazova. Mislim da je prvi veliki izazov koji imamo je vjeruju li ljudi u ono što radimo.

Norah O'Donnell: Rasprostranjena je percepcija da je islam u Arabiji oštar, strog i netolerantan. Ima li u tome istine?

Mohammed bin Salman: Nakon 1979. to je istina. Bili smo žrtve, posebno moja generacija koja je jako patila od ovoga.

Prijestolonasljednik većinu problema Saudijske Arabije prati do 1979. godine, kada je ajatolah Khomeini uspostavio islamsku teokraciju u susjedstvu u Iranu. Iste godine vjerski ekstremisti u Saudijskoj Arabiji zauzeli su najsvetije islamsko mjesto, Veliku džamiju u Meki. Kako bi umirili vlastite vjerske radikale, Saudijci su počeli suzbijati i odvajati žene od svakodnevnog života.

Norah O'Donnell: Kakva je to Saudijska Arabija posljednjih 40 godina? Je li to prava Saudijska Arabija?

Mohammed bin Salman: Apsolutno ne. Ovo nije prava Saudijska Arabija. Zamolio bih vaše gledatelje da koriste svoje pametne telefone kako bi saznali. Saudijsku Arabiju mogu proguglati 70 -ih i 60 -ih godina, a na slikama će lako vidjeti pravu Saudijsku Arabiju.

Norah O'Donnell: Kakva je bila Saudijska Arabija prije 1979.?

Mohammed bin Salman: Živjeli smo sasvim normalnim životom kao i ostale zaljevske zemlje. Žene su vozile automobile. U Saudijskoj Arabiji postojala su kina. Žene su radile posvuda. Bili smo samo normalni ljudi koji su se razvijali kao i svaka druga država na svijetu do događaja 1979. godine.

Saudijske žene - koje su bile praktički nevidljive u javnosti - dobile su nova prava koja im olakšavaju pokretanje posla, pridruživanje vojsci i prisustvovanje koncertima i sportskim događajima. U lipnju će moći sjesti za volan i voziti.

Norah O'Donnell: Jesu li žene jednake muškarcima?

Mohammed bin Salman: Apsolutno. Svi smo mi ljudska bića i nema razlike.

Norah O'Donnell: Rekli ste da jeste: "Vraćajući Saudijsku Arabiju na ono što smo mi bili, umjereni islam." Što to znači?

Mohammed bin Salman: Imamo ekstremiste koji zabranjuju miješanje dvaju spolova i nisu u stanju napraviti razliku između muškarca i žene sami zajedno i njihovog zajedničkog boravka na radnom mjestu. Mnoge od tih ideja proturječe načinu života za vrijeme proroka i halifa. Ovo je pravi primjer i pravi model.

On je ograničio ovlasti takozvane "vjerske policije" u zemlji, koja je donedavno mogla hapsiti žene jer nisu zataškavale. I pažljivo slušajte ono što kaže da nije dio islamskog zakona.

Mohammed bin Salman: Zakoni su vrlo jasni i propisani šerijatskim zakonima: da žene nose pristojnu odjeću s poštovanjem, poput muškaraca. Ovo, međutim, ne navodi posebno crnu abayu ili crni pokrivač za glavu. Odluka je u potpunosti prepuštena ženama da odluče koju će vrstu pristojne i poštovane odjeće odabrati odjenuti.

Njegove su riječi značajne, a do sada su se vjerski vođe kraljevstva držali za jezik i zakleli se na vjernost mladom princu.

Prestolonasljednik Saudijske Arabije Mohammed bin Salman CBS News

Od svih sastanaka kojima vodi svaki tjedan, ovo je najvažniji: njegovo ekonomsko vijeće. To su muškarci i nekoliko žena kojima se vjeruje da će sa svojim narodom ponovno sklopiti "socijalni pakt" Saudijske Arabije. Jedan od najbližih savjetnika prijestolonasljednika je Mohammed al-Sheikh, odvjetnik rođen u Saudijskoj Arabiji, obrazovan na Harvardu.

Mohammed al-Sheikh: Imali smo mladu populaciju. Mi smo osiguravali stanovništvo, znate subvencioniranu energiju, vodu, medicinu, obrazovanje, mi smo subvencionirali svačiji život.

Norah O'Donnell: I bez poreza.

Mohammed al-Sheikh: I bez poreza.

Norah O'Donnell: Koliko je Saudijska Arabija bila blizu financijske krize?

Mohammed al-Sheikh: Mislim da nije bilo previše blizu, ali je išlo u tom smjeru.

Reforma socijalne države jedan je izazov. Drugo je ono što prijestolonasljednik naziva "ovisnošću" Saudijske Arabije o nafti. Državna naftna kompanija Aramco procijenjena je na 2 bilijuna dolara. Prema planu prijestolonasljednika, dio će se prodati za ulaganje u nove pothvate. Postoji zabrinutost da bi tajne financije kraljevstva i loš dosje o ljudskim pravima mogli uplašiti ulagače.

Norah O'Donnell: Obećali ste transparentnost i otvorenost. No, postoje izvještaji da je u posljednjih godinu dana uhićeno više desetaka ljudi koji su kritizirali vašu vladu. Uključuju ekonomiste, klerike, intelektualce. Je li ovo doista otvoreno i slobodno društvo?

Mohammed bin Salman: Pokušat ćemo objaviti koliko god možemo i što brže možemo informacije o tim pojedincima kako bismo svijet osvijestili što vlada Saudijske Arabije čini u borbi protiv radikalizma.

Norah O'Donnell: No, da odgovorim na pitanje o kršenju ljudskih prava u ovoj zemlji.

Mohammed bin Salman: Saudijska Arabija vjeruje u mnoga načela ljudskih prava. Zapravo, vjerujemo u pojam ljudskih prava, ali na kraju saudijski standardi nisu isto što i američki. Ne želim reći da nemamo nedostataka. Svakako. No, naravno, radimo na ispravljanju ovih nedostataka.

No, prijestolonasljednik je optužen za tešku taktiku. Najizvanredniji primjer dogodio se u studenom prošle godine u hotelu Ritz-Carlton u Rijadu. Pozvao je stotine sadašnjih i bivših ministara vlade, medijskih moćnika, istaknutih gospodarstvenika i najmanje 11 prinčeva na sastanak ovdje, na kojem su optuženi za krađu od države i držani su dok im to nisu vratili ili dokazali svoju nevinost.

Norah O'Donnell: Mislim, što se dogodilo u Ritz-Carltonu? Kako je to funkcioniralo? Vi ste, u biti, Ritz-Carlton postao zatvor.

Mohammed bin Salman: Ono što smo radili u Saudijskoj Arabiji bilo je iznimno potrebno. Sve poduzete radnje bile su u skladu s postojećim i objavljenim zakonima.

Među privedenima bio je i princ Alwaleed bin Talal - jedan od najbogatijih ljudi na svijetu. Nakon što je princ Alwaleed bio zatočen više od dva mjeseca, Saudijci su pustili snimateljsku ekipu u svoju sobu u Ritzu na kratki intervju.

Princ Alwaleed: I želio bih ostati ovdje dok se ova stvar potpuno ne završi i izađem van i život nastavi.

Mohammed al-Sheikh je rekao da je suzbijanje potrebno.

Mohammed al-Sheikh: Nije bilo lako. Samo s obzirom na imena i s obzirom na ljude koji su bili uključeni, doista nije bilo lako. Ali mi ... samo smo osjećali da to moramo učiniti. I morali smo to učiniti na taj način.

Norah O'Donnell: O kakvoj korupciji govorimo? Mislim, koliko je novca nestalo?

Mohammed al-Sheikh: Vjerojatno 5 do 10 posto godišnje potrošnje vlade, što je otprilike, rekao bih, bilo između 10-20 milijardi dolara, možda čak i više, na godišnjoj razini.

Norah O'Donnell: Dakle, 20 milijardi dolara godišnje samo nestaje?

Mohammed al-Sheikh: Nestajući.

Bilo je izvješća da su neki zatočenici fizički zlostavljani, a jedan je preminuo u pritvoru. Saudijci su nam rekli da je odabir hotela "održati poštovanje, dostojanstvo i pomoć helpa onima koji se istražuju".

Norah O'Donnell: Je li to bilo hvatanje snage?

Mohammed bin Salman: Ako ja imam moć, a kralj ima moć poduzeti mjere protiv utjecajnih ljudi, onda ste već u osnovi jaki. Ovo su na & iumlve optužbe.

Norah O'Donnell: Koliko ste novca dobili natrag?

Mohammed bin Salman: Iznos prelazi 100 milijardi dolara, ali stvarni cilj nije bio ovaj iznos ili bilo koji drugi iznos. Zamisao nije doći do novca, već kazniti korumpirane i poslati jasan signal da će se onaj tko se bavi koruptivnim poslovima suočiti sa zakonom.

Norah O'Donnell: Radi li se i o slanju poruke da, kako kažemo u Americi, u gradu postoji novi šerif?

Mohammed bin Salman: Apsolutno. Apsolutno.

"Saudijska Arabija ne želi nabaviti nikakvu nuklearnu bombu, ali bez sumnje, ako Iran razvije nuklearnu bombu, mi ćemo to slijediti što je prije moguće."

No, dok "novi šerif" suzbija korupciju, postavljaju se pitanja o njegovom bogatstvu. New York Times izvještava da je nedavno kupio jahtu za pola milijarde dolara, zajedno s francuskim dvorcem.

Mohammed bin Salman: Moj osobni život je nešto što bih volio zadržati za sebe i ne pokušavam skrenuti pozornost na to. Ako neke novine žele istaknuti nešto o tome, to je na njima. Što se tiče mojih privatnih troškova, ja sam bogata osoba, a ne siromah. Nisam Gandhi ili Mandela. Član sam vladajuće obitelji koja je postojala stotinama godina prije osnivanja Saudijske Arabije. Posjedujemo jako veliko zemljište, a moj osobni život isti je kao prije 10 ili 20 godina. Ali ono što ja radim kao osoba je da dio svog osobnog prihoda potrošim na dobrotvorne svrhe. Potrošim najmanje 51% na ljude, a 49 na sebe.

Među prinčevim službenim titulama je i "ministar obrane". I tu ga je njegova očita privrženost Iranu dovela u blato u susjednom Jemenu.

Mohammed bin Salman: Iranska ideologija prodrla je u neke dijelove Jemena. Za to vrijeme ova je milicija izvodila vojne manevre tik uz naše granice i postavljala projektile na našim granicama.

Njegov je odgovor bio pokretanje kampanje bombardiranja koja je dovela do humanitarne katastrofe, kako smo izvijestili o 60 minuta prošle jeseni. Kaže da su pobunjenici koje podržava Iran koristili zemlju za ispaljivanje projektila na Rijad.

Mohammed bin Salman: Ne mogu zamisliti da će Sjedinjene Države jednog dana prihvatiti da milicija u Meksiku lansira rakete na Washington D.C., New York i LA dok Amerikanci gledaju te projektile i ne rade ništa.

Ujedinjeni narodi kažu da su tisuće smrtnih slučajeva civila u Jemenu izravna posljedica saudijskih zračnih napada i blokade, otkako je ukinuta, jemenske luke koja je privremeno spriječila dotok hrane i lijekova do stotina tisuća ljudi.

Norah O'Donnell: Priznajete li da je to bila humanitarna katastrofa, 5.000 ubijenih civila i djeca koja su tamo gladovala?

Mohammed bin Salman: To je uistinu vrlo bolno i nadam se da će ova milicija prestati koristiti humanitarnu situaciju u svoju korist kako bi izazvala suosjećanje međunarodne zajednice. Blokiraju humanitarnu pomoć kako bi stvorili glad i humanitarnu krizu.

Norah O'Donnell: Je li ono što se događa u Jemenu u biti posrednički rat s Iranom?

Mohammed bin Salman: Nažalost, Iran igra štetnu ulogu. Iranski režim temelji se na čistoj ideologiji. Mnogi operativci Al-Qaede zaštićeni su u Iranu i odbija ih predati pravdi te nastavlja odbijati njihovo izručenje Sjedinjenim Državama. To uključuje sina Osame bin Ladena, novog vođu Al-Qaide. Živi u Iranu i radi izvan Irana. Podržava ga Iran.

Prestolonasljednik Saudijske Arabije Mohammed bin Salman sa suradnicom Norah O'Donnell CBS News

Vrijedi napomenuti da i sunitska Saudijska Arabija i šiitski Iran tvrde da predstavljaju jedinu istinsku granu islama.

Norah O'Donnell: U čemu je srž ovog rascjepa? Je li to bitka za islam?

Mohammed bin Salman: Iran nije rival Saudijskoj Arabiji. Njegova vojska nije među prvih pet armija u muslimanskom svijetu. Saudijsko gospodarstvo veće je od iranskog. Iran daleko od toga da je jednak Saudijskoj Arabiji.

Norah O'Donnell: Ali vidio sam da ste ajatolaha, Hamneija, nazvali "novim Hitlerom" na Bliskom istoku.

Mohammed bin Salman: Apsolutno.

Norah O'Donnell: Zašto?

Mohammed bin Salman: Zato što se želi proširiti. Želi stvoriti vlastiti projekt na Bliskom istoku vrlo slično Hitleru koji se u to vrijeme želio proširiti. Mnoge zemlje diljem svijeta i Europe nisu shvaćale koliko je Hitler opasan sve dok se nije dogodilo ono što se dogodilo. Ne želim vidjeti da se isti događaji događaju na Bliskom istoku.

Norah O'Donnell: Treba li Saudijskoj Arabiji nuklearno oružje za suprotstavljanje Iranu?

Mohammed bin Salman: Saudijska Arabija ne želi nabaviti nikakvu nuklearnu bombu, ali bez sumnje, ako Iran razvije nuklearnu bombu, mi ćemo to slijediti što je prije moguće.

Producent 60 minuta Harry Radliffe II CBS News

Bilješka iz 60 minuta: Naša priča "Nasljednik prijestolja" ima mnogo autora. Tim od deset osoba koji je otprilike tjedan dana putovao u Saudijsku Arabiju uključivala je dopisnicu Norah O'Donnell koja je sa sobom nosila dugogodišnju fascinaciju tom regijom. Također u našem timu: producenti Graham Messick i Vanessa Fica, koji su počeli raditi na zadatku prije više od dvije godine na zahtjev izvornog producenta priče, Harryja A. Radliffea II, prije nego što je preminuo od raka u 66.

Radliffe je bio stalni stručnjak za politiku, religiju i povijest na Bliskom istoku u 60 minuta. Dobro putovan i strastveno znatiželjan, Harry bi o segmentu od 60 minuta o Saudijskoj Arabiji rekao: "Ako to nije priča, ne znam što je." Radliffe je bio poznat po tome što je odvajao vrijeme s ovakvim pričama. Znao je da će jednog dana saudijska kraljevska obitelj konačno napokon dati svoj uspjeh. Nažalost, taj je dan došao nakon Harryjeve smrti, ali drago nam je što smo nastavili s njegovom vizijom.

Također u timu koji je omogućio ovu priču: pridruženi producent Jack Weingart, bliskoistočni producent Amjad Tadros, fotografi Jonathan Partridge i Mark La Ganga, audio inženjeri Anton Van der Merwe i Matt Magratten, te urednici Dan Glucksman i Craig Crawford. Jeff Fager, Radliffeov blizak prijatelj i izvršni producent 60 minuta, imao je posljednju riječ nad pričom i osobno je uvjerio dva saudijska princa da ćemo biti pošteni i točni i dopustiti prijestolonasljedniku da ispriča svoju priču ako nam to dopusti. Drago nam je da je to učinio.

32-godišnji prijestolonasljednik Saudijske Arabije Mohammed bin Salman nadmudrio je ujake, rođake i polubraću kako bi postali moć koja stoji iza prijestolja njegovog ostarjelog oca, kralja Salmana. Od tada je ovaj kraljevski iskorak prepravljao saudijsko društvo & mdash iz društvene i ekonomske potrebe. Velika većina građana kraljevstva mlađih od 30 godina povezani su sa svijetom putem svojih mobitela. Jednako važno, nafta više nije predvidljiv izvor prihoda, što znači da su zdravstvena, obrazovna i druge usluge od kolijevke do groba ugrožene. To je zapaljiva mješavina za hrabrog vođu u opasnom dijelu svijeta. No, čini se da prijestolonasljednik želi izazov.

Norah O'Donnell: Oh, ovdje provodiš cijelu noć?

Mohammed bin Salman na engleskom: Uglavnom. Tako su svi radoholičari ministri znali provoditi većinu svojih noći u ovome, u ovim uredima. Tako da mi je žao ako je malo loš.

Norah O'Donnell: Ovo nije loš ured.

Većinu večeri provodi u Rijadskoj palači Irgah, gdje odbacuje tradicionalnu saudijsku maramu.

Norah O'Donnell: U koje ste jutro ujutro do posla?

Mohammed bin Salman na engleskom: Oh, dolazim ovdje, u, poput popodneva do kasno u noć.

Rečeno nam je da je njegov 82-godišnji otac, kralj Salman, negdje gore, a većinu svakodnevnog posla prepustio je sinu. Otpratio nas je u 21 sat. na sastanak o fondu javnih ulaganja.

Prema detaljnom planu princa Mohammeda za preinaku Saudijske Arabije & ndash pod nazivom "Vizija 2030" & ndash, fond za javna ulaganja će na kraju narasti na 2 bilijuna dolara. Muškarci u ovoj prostoriji govore o tome kako to uložiti. Nedavno su potonuli tri i pol milijarde dolara u Uber. Ako se takve oklade isplate, u saudijsku će se riznicu slivati ​​dividende, a ne prihodi od nafte.

Princeza Reema: Ovaj čovjek provodi 24 sata dnevno radeći na ostvarivanju ove vizije.

Princeza Reema bint Bandar rođakinja je prijestolonasljednika i on ju je izabrao da vodi jednu od vladinih sportskih vlasti.

Norah O'Donnell: Iznenadio vas je tempo kojim radi stvari.

Princeza Reema: Nisam iznenađen tempom. Iznenađen sam koliko je tempo detaljan. Mi nismo zajednica koja je navikla da netko kaže: "U utorak, 5. studenog, želim vidjeti X." Ta vrsta znači da, možda, inšallah.

Norah O'Donnell: Božja volja.

Prestolonasljednik Saudijske Arabije Mohammed bin Salman vodi sastanak CBS News

Princeza Reema: Zapravo postoji sustav praćenja koji svi mi ažuriramo mjesečno. Kakav je naš napredak? Kako smo dosegli svoje brojeve? Radimo i poslujemo kao privatni sektor. I to je novo.

Posjetitelju se ne čini da se mnogo toga promijenilo. Samci u jasnim bijelim haljinama i žene potpuno odjevene u crno drže se međusobno udaljene. Posjetiteljice se i dalje osjećaju obveznima nositi tradicionalnu Abayu u javnosti i hellip, ali ne više maramu. U ovom Starbucksu muškarci sjede u jednom odjelu i žene i obitelji odmah iza drvene pregrade.

Bilo je teško natjerati ljude & ndash, posebno žene & ndash, da pred kamerom govore o reformama prijestolonasljednika. Ovaj je čovjek pozvao na oprez.

Abdul Rahman: Sviđa mi se promjena koja je postupna. Ne želimo se kretati prebrzo i platiti visoku cijenu.

Norah O'Donnell: Drugim riječima, mislite da prijestolonasljednik mora jako paziti na tempo?

Abdul Rahman: Točno.

Saudijska Arabija se i dalje pridržava drevnog dogovora o podjeli moći između Kuće Saud i vehabijskog islama, stroge, prevladavajuće vjere u Saudijskoj Arabiji. No, prijestolonasljednik nam je rekao da nije njegova religija, već ekstremisti unutar islamskih skupina poput Muslimanske braće, koji su se infiltrirali u saudijsko društvo, uključujući i njegove škole.

Norah O'Donnell: Gledate li školovanje i obrazovanje u Saudijskoj Arabiji?

Mohammed bin Salman: Saudijske škole napali su mnogi elementi organizacije Muslimansko bratstvo, zasigurno u velikoj mjeri. Čak su i sada ostali neki elementi. Proći će još kratko vrijeme dok se svi potpuno ne iskorijene.

Norah O'Donnell: Kažete da ćete iskorijeniti ovaj ekstremizam u obrazovnom sustavu ovdje?

Mohammed bin Salman: Naravno, niti jedna država na svijetu ne bi prihvatila da bilo koja radikalna skupina napadne njezin obrazovni sustav.

Prijestolonasljednik predstavlja ogromnu većinu saudijskog naroda koji su pretežno mladi, nemirni i povezani sa gotovo svim putem mobitela. Srodnu dušu vide u svom novom vođi ovisnom o iPadu.

Norah O'Donnell: Većina mladih žena koje sam upoznao su sve na Snapchatu. Tražili su da im se pridružim na Snapchatu. Ovo mijenja cijelu ovu kulturu.

Mohammed bin Salman: Ne mogu tvrditi da sam u tome igrao ulogu. Saudijski građani uvijek su bili otvoreni za društvene medije i tehnologiju.

Mladi Saudijci s kojima smo razgovarali na ovom trendovskom pop-up burger zajedničkom sastanku kažu da su još uvijek oprezni u pogledu onoga što objavljuju na Twitteru i Instagramu, zbog čega se pripadnici suprotnog spola povezuju putem privatnih aplikacija za razmjenu poruka poput Snapchata i Whatsappa.

Norah O'Donnell: Društveni mediji.

MUŠKARAC #1: U Saudijskoj Arabiji je ogroman.

MUŠKARAC #2: Ovo je naš bijeg, da.

Norah O'Donnell: Telefon je vaš bijeg?

MUŠKI GLAS: Da. Društvene mreže jesu.

Prijestolonasljednik ima goruće brige, samo 22 posto saudijskih žena radi, a on želi potaknuti još više ljudi da se pridruže radnoj snazi.

Mohammed bin Salman: Radimo na inicijativi, koju ćemo pokrenuti u bliskoj budućnosti, za uvođenje propisa koji osiguravaju jednake plaće za muškarce i žene.

Norah O'Donnell: Ali govorite o jednakim plaćama. Žene ne mogu ni voziti u ovoj zemlji. Ovo je posljednje, posljednje mjesto na svijetu na kojem žene nemaju prava na vožnju.

Mohammed bin Salman: To više nije problem. Danas su osnovane autoškole koje će se uskoro otvoriti. Za nekoliko mjeseci žene će voziti u Saudijskoj Arabiji. Napokon smo prošli kroz to bolno razdoblje koje ne možemo opravdati.

Norah O'Donnell: Svakako, većina ljudi čuje za pravilo koje će ženama omogućiti vožnju u lipnju. No, postojali su i ti zakoni o skrbništvu da žena, da bi putovala, mora dobiti dopuštenje muškarca u svom kućanstvu. Čini se tako povratnim.

Mohammed bin Salman: Danas Saudijke još uvijek nisu dobile svoja prava. U islamu postoje prava koja još uvijek nemaju. Došli smo jako dug put i pred nama je još kratak put.

Želio je da vidimo ovu autoškolu na Sveučilištu Princess Nourah, najvećem ženskom sveučilištu na svijetu. Škola se priprema naučiti 70.000 žena voziti.

Ovi treneri će provesti žene kroz tečajeve i simulatore prije nego što ih pokrenu.

Norah O'Donnell: Kako sada doći do posla ili škole?

ŽENA #1: Za mene, imam vozača. Ili moj tata ili brat.

ŽENA #2: Vožnja je samo brza pobjeda. Nije sve. Samo je reprezentativno da idemo u pravom smjeru. To je napredak. Putanja sada ide samo naprijed, a ne unatrag.

Norah O'Donnell: Svjedočite li povijesti?

ŽENE: (OVERTALK) Da. Točno. Drago nam je što smo dio ove povijesti.

Princeza Reema također pomaže u stvaranju povijesti, a nedavno je otvorila vrata Saudijkama za odlazak na nogometne utakmice.

Norah O'Donnell: Mislim, upravo je 2015. uhićena Saudijka koja je pokušala otići na utakmicu.

Princeza Reema: Da. Da. I znate što? S ponosom mogu reći da sam bio na prvoj utakmici u kojoj to više nije stvarnost. Koliko je to senzacionalno reći za dvije godine? U dvije godine luk se promijenio.

Norah O'Donnell: Ljudi su me pitali za moje dojmove, a toliko je modernog u smislu infrastrukture i američkih restorana. No, ipak je zanimljivo vidjeti da samci jedu u jednom dijelu restorana. I obitelji i žene u drugom.

Princeza Reema: Ispravno.

Norah O'Donnell: Odvojeno je.

Princeza Reema: It is viewed here as the preservation of the privacy of the personal space of the woman. If it comes out to being viewed internationally as disrespectful, that's not the intention. Does it end up sometimes causing obstacles? Da. But the intent is not disrespect.

Norah O'Donnell: Do you think Mohammed bin Salman is prepared to take the throne?

Princess Reema: I don't think anyone is ever prepared. I think since he was 18 years old he has been groomed for leadership.

His ascension would mark a generational power shift. It was his grandfather, King Abdulaziz, who founded modern Saudi Arabia, and was succeeded by six sons, including the current king, King Salman. The crown prince grew up by his father's side, learning and biding his time.

Norah O'Donnell: What did you learn from your father?

Mohammed bin Salman: Many, many things. He loves history very much. He is an avid reader of history. Each week, he would assign each one of us a book. And at the end of the week, he would ask us about the content of that book. The king always says, "If you read the history of a thousand years, you have the experience of a thousand years."

Mohammed bin Salman is trying to keep pace with a population that's become as familiar with American celebrity culture as they are with the tales of the Prophet Muhammad in the birthplace of Islam. Just as American society transformed during the 1960's, the Saudis are in the midst of their own cultural revolution. The kingdom, the Middle East, and the Islamic world may never be the same.

Norah O'Donnell: You're 32 years old. You could rule this country for the next 50 years.

Mohammed bin Salman: Only God knows how long one will live, if one would live 50 years or not, but if things go their normal ways, then that's to be expected.

Norah O'Donnell: Can anything stop you?

Mohammed bin Salman: Only death.

Produced by Graham Messick and Vanessa Fica. Associate producer, Jack Weingart.

Norah O'Donnell is the anchor and managing editor of the "CBS Evening News." She also contributes to "60 Minutes."


Event chain: Fear and Loathing [ edit ]

Fear and Loathing in $PROVINCENAME$

Twilight is always the worst. The clouds racing circles across moonless skies, cruel stars suspended like grains of broken glass, and chandeliers throwing strange shadows across the Royal Chambers. Lately, a strange sense has come upon you that there is something wrong with the place. The geometry of it seems. unsound. Thinking back. it all started with the birth of $HEIR$.

The event chain: Fear and Loathing starts.

The current heir of the province owner dies. ⎗ ]

The Discovery

My $MONARCHTITLE$. ' you sense instantly that there is something wrong. There is something in his voice, right below the surface. Hidden contempt, and fear. '. the new brick wall in the eastern cellar. It wasn't built for insulation, was it?' You remember it clearly now. How small the body felt. Carrying it down into the damp cellar, laying the bricks. It made you sick. Sick to the core. Killing your progeny wasn't the catharsis you had expected it to be. For an instant, the flashing glimpse of an insight blows across your mind.

  • imao event ‘Fear and Loathing in $PROVINCENAME$’ and chosen the option: ‘All work and no play, makes $MONARCH$ a dull, dull boy.’ i imao ne this event before. ⎙ ]
  • čini ne have a regency council.
  • je ne the lesser part in a personal union.

The current ruler dies.
The event chain: Fear and Loathing is over. ⎚ ]

Dance Macabre

The Royal Chamber is a swirling mist of scents and shapes, coming and going into and out of existence like colorful snowflakes. You are hungry. So very hungry. As if you hadn't eaten in months. The stars looking down on you, still suspended in a moonless sky, laugh and dance. They seem free, and wild. There is something about those stars. They seem so. right. You have gone quite insane.

  • had the />event ‘Fear and Loathing in $PROVINCENAME$’ and
    • either chose the option “Lord God our Father, thou who art in heaven!”
    • or chose the option “All work and no play, makes $MONARCH$ a dull, dull boy.” and then had the />event The Discovery and chose the option “Heeere's $MONARCH$!” ⎛ ]

    The event chain: Fear and Loathing is over. ⎜ ]

    The current ruler dies.
    The country gets the modifier: “Delivered from evil” for 10 years giving the following effects:

    The event chain: Fear and Loathing is over. ⎜ ]

    Our Monarch Dies

    Our monarch has died, and considering the strange things he was saying toward the end of his life, perhaps it is for the better.

    The country is in the event chain: ‘Fear and Loathing’. ⎝ ]

    The country gets the modifier: “Delivered from Evil” for 10 years giving the following effects:

    The event chain: Fear and Loathing is over. ⎞ ]


    Strong Leader

    Over the next four decades, Haile Selassie presided over a country and government that was an expression of his personal authority. His reforms greatly strengthened schools and the police, and he instituted a new constitution and centralized his own power.

    In 1936 he was forced into exile after Italy invaded Ethiopia. Haile Selassie became the face of the resistance as he went before the League of Nations in Geneva for assistance, and eventually secured the help of the British in reclaiming his country and reinstituting his powers as emperor in 1941.

    Haile Selassie again moved to try to modernize his country. In the face of a wave of anti-colonialism sweeping across Africa, he granted a new constitution in 1955, one that outlined equal rights for his citizens under the law, but conversely did nothing to diminish Haile Selassie&aposs own powers.


    Djeca

    Elizabeth and Philip wasted no time in producing an heir: Son Charles was born in 1948, the year after their wedding, and daughter Anne arrived in 1950. Elizabeth had two more children — sons Andrew and Edward — in 1960 and 1964, respectively.

    In 1969, she officially made Charles her successor by granting him the title of Prince of Wales. Hundreds of millions of people tuned in to see the ceremony on television.

    In 1981 32-year-old Charles wed 19-year-old Diana Spencer (best known as Princess Diana), with later rumors surfacing that he was pressured into the marriage from his family. The wedding drew enormous crowds in the streets of London and millions watched the proceedings on television. Public opinion of the monarchy was especially strong at that time.


    Augustus (63 BC - AD 14)

    A bronze head of Augustus © Augustus was the first emperor of Rome. He replaced the Roman republic with an effective monarchy and during his long reign brought peace and stability.

    Augustus was born Gaius Octavius on 23 September 63 BC in Rome. In 43 BC his great-uncle, Julius Caesar, was assassinated and in his will, Octavius, known as Octavian, was named as his heir. He fought to avenge Caesar and in 31 BC defeated Antony and Cleopatra at the Battle of Actium. He was now undisputed ruler of Rome.

    Instead of following Caesar's example and making himself dictator, Octavian in 27 BC founded the principate, a system of monarchy headed by an emperor holding power for life. His powers were hidden behind constitutional forms, and he took the name Augustus meaning 'lofty' or 'serene'. Nevertheless, he retained ultimate control of all aspects of the Roman state, with the army under his direct command.

    At home, he embarked on a large programme of reconstruction and social reform. Rome was transformed with impressive new buildings and Augustus was a patron to Virgil, Horace and Propertius, the leading poets of the day. Augustus also ensured that his image was promoted throughout his empire by means of statues and coins.

    Abroad, he created a standing army for the first time, and embarked upon a vigorous campaign of expansion designed to make Rome safe from the 'barbarians' beyond the frontiers, and to secure the Augustan peace. His stepsons Tiberius and Drusus undertook the task (Augustus had married their mother Livia in 38 BC). Between 16 BC and 6 AD the frontier was advanced from the Rhine to the Elbe in Germany, and up to the Danube along its entire length. But Drusus died in the process and in 9 AD the annihilation of three Roman legions in Germany (out of 28 overall), in the Varian disaster, led to the abandonment of Germany east of the Rhine.

    Augustus was determined to be succeeded by someone of his own blood, but he had no sons, only a daughter, Julia, the child of his first wife. His nephew Marcellus and his beloved grandsons Gaius and Lucius pre-deceased him, so he reluctantly made Tiberius his heir.

    Military disaster, the loss of his grandsons and a troubled economy clouded his last years. He became more dictatorial, exiling the poet Ovid (8 AD), who had mocked his moral reforms. He died on 19 August 14 AD.


    The Queen Who Would Be King

    Editor’s Note: This article was adapted from its original form and updated to include new information for Smithsonian’s Mysteries of the Ancient World bookazine published in Fall 2009.

    It was a hot, dusty day in early 1927, and Herbert Winlock was staring at a scene of brutal destruction that had all the hallmarks of a vicious personal attack. Signs of desecration were everywhere eyes had been gouged out, heads lopped off, the cobra-like symbol of royalty hacked from foreheads. Winlock, head of the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s archaeological team in Egypt, had unearthed a pit in the great temple complex at Deir el-Bahri, across the Nile from the ancient sites of Thebes and Karnak. In the pit were smashed statues of a pharaoh—pieces “from the size of a fingertip,” Winlock noted, “to others weighing a ton or more.” The images had suffered “almost every conceivable indignity,” he wrote, as the violators vented “their spite on the [pharaoh’s] brilliantly chiseled, smiling features.” To the ancient Egyptians, pharaohs were gods. What could this one have done to warrant such blasphemy? In the opinion of Winlock, and other Egyptologists of his generation, plenty.

    The statues were those of Hatshepsut, the sixth pharaoh of the 18th dynasty, one of the few—and by far the most successful—women to rule Egypt as pharaoh. Evidence of her remarkable reign (c. 1479-1458 b.c.) did not begin to emerge until the 19th century. But by Winlock’s day, historians had crafted the few known facts of her life into a soap opera of deceit, lust and revenge.

    Although her long rule had been a time of peace and prosperity, filled with magnificent art and a number of ambitious building projects (the greatest of which was her mortuary, or memorial, temple at Deir el-Bahri), Hatshepsut’s methods of acquiring and holding onto power suggested a darker side to her reign and character. The widowed queen of the pharaoh Thutmose II, she had, according to custom, been made regent after his death in c. 1479 b.c. to rule for her young stepson, Thutmose III, until he came of age. Within a few years, however, she proclaimed herself pharaoh, thereby becoming, in the words of Winlock’s colleague at the Metropolitan, William C. Hayes, the “vilest type of usurper.” Disconcerting to some scholars, too, was her insistence on being portrayed as male, with bulging muscles and the traditional pharaonic false beard—variously interpreted by those historians as an act of outrageous deception, deviant behavior or both. Many early Egyptologists also concluded that Hatshepsut’s chief minister, Senenmut, must have been her lover as well, a co-conspirator in her climb to power, the so-called evil genius behind what they viewed as her devious politics.

    Upon Hatshepsut’s death in c. 1458 b.c., her stepson, then likely still in his early 20s, finally ascended to the throne. By that time, according to Hayes, Thutmose III had developed “a loathing for Hatshepsut. her name and her very memory which practically beggars description.” The destruction of her monuments, carried out with such apparent fury, was almost universally interpreted as an act of long-awaited and bitter revenge on the part of Thutmose III, who, Winlock wrote, “could scarcely wait to take the vengeance on her dead that he had not dared in life.”

    “Of course, it made a wonderful story,” says Renée Dreyfus, curator of ancient art and interpretation at the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco. “And this is what we all read when we were growing up. But so much of what was written about Hatshepsut, I think, had to do with who the archaeologists were. gentlemen scholars of a certain generation.”

    Hatshepsut was born at the dawn of a glorious age of Egyptian imperial power and prosperity, rightly called the New Kingdom. Her father, King Thutmose I, was a charismatic leader of legendary military exploits. Hatshepsut, scholars surmise, may have come into the world about the time of his coronation, c. 1504 b.c., and so would still have been a toddler when he famously sailed home to Thebes with the naked body of a Nubian chieftain dangling from the prow of his ship—a warning to all who would threaten his empire.

    Hatshepsut seems to have idolized her father (she would eventually have him reburied in the tomb she was having built for herself) and would claim that soon after her birth he had named her successor to his throne, an act that scholars feel would have been highly unlikely. There had been only two—possibly three—female pharaohs in the previous 1,500 years, and each had ascended to the throne only when there was no suitable male successor available. (Cleopatra would rule some 14 centuries later.)

    Normally, the pharaonic line passed from father to son—preferably the son of the queen, but if there were no such offspring, to the son of one of the pharaoh’s “secondary,” or “harem,” wives. In addition to Hatshepsut—and another younger daughter who apparently died in childhood—it’s believed that Thutmose I fathered two sons with Queen Ahmes, both of whom predeceased him. Thus the son of a secondary wife, Mutnofret, was crowned Thutmose II. In short order (and probably to bolster the royal bloodlines of this “harem child”), young Thutmose II was married to his half sister Hatshepsut, making her Queen of Egypt at about age 12.

    Historians have generally described Thutmose II as frail and ineffectual—just the sort of person a supposedly shrewish Hatshepsut could push around. Public monuments, however, depict a dutiful Hatshepsut standing appropriately behind her husband. But while she bore her husband a daughter, Neferure (her only known child), Hatshepsut failed in the more important duty of producing a son. So when Thutmose II died young (c. 1479 B.C.), possibly still in his 20s—the throne went, yet again, to a “harem child.” Duly named Thutmose III, this child was destined to become one of the great warrior kings of Egypt. But at the time of his father’s death, he was likely an infant, a “hawk. still in the nest”—and deemed too young to rule.

    In such cases, it was accepted New Kingdom practice for widowed queens to act as regents, handling the affairs of government until their sons—in this case, stepson/nephew—came of age, and Hatshepsut (more or less automatically, it seems) got the assignment. “I think it would have been pretty much the norm for Hatshepsut to step in,” says Peter Dorman, an Egyptologist who is president of the American University of Beirut. “But it’s also quite clear that Thutmose III was recognized as king from the very start.”

    Monuments of the time show Thutmose III—still a child, but portrayed in the conventional manner as an adult king—performing his pharaonic duties, while Hatshepsut, dressed as queen, stands demurely off to one side. By the seventh year of her regency, however (and it may have been much earlier), the formerly slim, graceful queen appears as a full-blown, flail-and-crook-wielding king, with the broad, bare chest of a man and the pharaonic false beard.

    Ali zašto? To Egyptologists of an earlier generation, Hatshepsut’s elevation to godlike status was an act of naked ambition. (“It was not long,” Hayes wrote, “before this vain, ambitious, and unscrupulous woman showed. her true colors.”) But more recent scholarship suggests that a political crisis, such as a threat from a competing branch of the royal family, obliged Hatshepsut to become pharaoh. Far from stealing the throne, says Catharine Roehrig, curator of Egyptian art at the Metropolitan Museum in New York City, “Hatshepsut may have had to declare herself king to protect the kingship for her stepson.”

    It’s an interpretation that seems to be supported by Hatshepsut’s treatment of Thutmose III during her reign. “He wasn’t under house arrest for those 20-odd years,” says Roehrig. “He was learning how to be a very good soldier.” And it’s not as if Hatshepsut could have stepped down when her stepson came of age. “Once you took on the attributes of kingship,” explains Dreyfus, “that was it. You were a god. It’s not queen for a day, it’s king for all time.”

    Hatshepsut probably knew her position was tenuous—both by virtue of her sex and the unconventional way she had gained the throne—and therefore appears to have done what canny leaders have often done in times of crisis: she reinvented herself. The most obvious form this took was having herself portrayed as a male pharaoh. As to why, “No one really knows,” says Dorman. But he believes it may have been motivated by the presence of a male co-ruler—a circumstance with which no previous female ruler had ever contended.

    “She was not pretending to be a man! She was not cross-dressing!” Cathleen Keller, a professor of Near Eastern studies at the University of California at Berkeley, told me before her death last year. Inscriptions on Hatshepsut’s statues, she said, almost always contain some indication of her true gender—a title, such as “Daughter of Re,” or feminine word endings, resulting in such grammatical conundrums as “His Majesty, Herself.”

    Hatshepsut also took a new name, Maatkare, sometimes translated as Truth (maat) is the Soul (ka) of the Sun God (Re). The key word here is maat—the ancient Egyptian expression for order and justice as established by the gods. Maintaining and perpetuating maat to ensure the prosperity and stability of the country required a legitimate pharaoh who could speak—as only pharaohs could—directly with the gods. By calling herself Maatkare, Hatshepsut was likely reassuring her people that they had a legitimate ruler on the throne.

    One important way pharaohs affirmed maat was by creating monuments, and Hatshepsut’s building projects were among the most ambitious of any pharaoh’s. She began with the erection of two 100-foot-tall obelisks at the great temple complex at Karnak. Reliefs commemorating the event show the obelisks, each weighing about 450 tons, being towed along the Nile by 27 ships manned by 850 oarsmen.

    Hatshepsut carried out her public works program across the empire, but it was concentrated in the area around Thebes, the dynastic and theological center of the Thutmoside dynasty, where she built a network of imposing processional roadways and sanctuaries. At Deir el-Bahri, just across the Nile from Thebes, she erected her magnum opus—an immense memorial temple, used for special religious rites connected to the cult that would guarantee Hatshepsut perpetual life after death.

    Dramatically sited at the base of towering limestone cliffs, the temple, which is regarded as one of the architectural wonders of the ancient world, is approached through a series of terraced colonnades and courtyards that appear to ascend up the very side of the mountain. Despite the enormous scale of the complex—roughly the length of two and a half football fields—its overall impression is one of lightness and grace, unlike the fortresslike temples of her predecessors.

    The temple’s lower levels featured pools and gardens planted with fragrant trees. Supersized images of Hatshepsut were everywhere. Some 100 colossal statues of the female pharaoh as a sphinx guarded the processional way. Lining the terraces were more images of the ruler (some more than ten feet tall) in various devotional attitudes—kneeling with offerings to the gods, striding into eternity or in the guise of Osiris, god of death and resurrection. Miraculously, a number of these statues—some reassembled, others still in a fragmentary state—survive. Most are massive, masculine and meant to be seen from a distance.

    Hatshepsut’s temple also featured a series of reliefs marking the achievements of her reign, including a storied trading expedition to the mysterious and distant land called Punt, believed to be somewhere on the coast of the Red Sea, perhaps in current-day Eritrea. The reliefs show the Egyptians loading their boats in Punt with an array of highly prized luxury goods—ebony, ivory, gold, exotic animals and incense trees. “Never,” reads an inscription, “were such things brought to any king since the world was.”

    As a work of art, of architecture and of self-glorification, Hatshepsut’s memorial was an enormous enterprise that must have involved an army of workers. It’s almost certain, scholars agree, that Senenmut, the official overseer of works at Deir el-Bahri, was the mastermind behind—if not the actual architect of—the temple. He had most likely begun his climb to power during the reign of Thutmose II, when he was appointed tutor to Hatshepsut’s daughter, Neferure. But his influence soared with Hatshepsut’s accession to the throne. In time he acquired some 93 titles, the most prestigious of which was Great Steward of Amun (the god of Thebes), which put him in charge of all of Karnak’s building and business activities.

    Many of Senenmut’s monuments to himself (some 25—a staggering number for a nonroyal) mention his exceptional access to the throne he was a “true confidant” of the pharaoh and the “one upon whose utterances his Lordrelied.” But earlier scholars’ belief that Senenmut was the real force behind Hatshepsut’s rule—not “even a woman of the most virile character could have attained such a pinnacle of success without masculine support,” wrote historian Alan Gardiner in 1961—has now been largely discounted by experts as a woeful underestimation of Hatshepsut.

    Did she and Senenmut share more than power? Probably not, most scholars, including Peter Dorman, have concluded. Dorman does believe, however, that the pharaoh and her favorite minister may well have been victims ofspeculation and gossip.

    Senenmut’s fate is a mystery. His privileged position allowed him to build a splendid tomb for himself near Hatshepsut’s—which is in the Valley of the Kings, just west of Deir el-Bahri—but he apparently never occupied it. The tomb suffered major damage, including the smashing of his impressive, if unused, stone sarcophagus. It was long thought that either Hatshepsut or Thutmose III were the culprits, but recent scholarship suggests some combination of religious upheaval, tomb robbers and natural collapse.

    Hatshepsut’s own tomb was cut into the base of the cliffs on the east side of the Valley of the Kings and was large enough to accommodate both her sarcophagus and that of her father—reburying him in her tomb was yetanother attempt to legitimize her rule. It’s believed that Hatshepsut died (possibly in her late 40s) around 1458 b.c., the year that Thutmose III first used the title “Ruler of Maat.”

    Thutmose III’s destruction of Hatshepsut’s monuments has long been recognized as a conscientious—and very nearly successful—attempt to obliterate her name and memory from history. But was it, as many early Egyptologists had assumed, an act of revenge and hatred? In recent decades, scholars have re-examined the archaeological evidence and come to the startling conclusion that the destruction, presumed to have been initiated soon after Hatshepsut’s death, was actually not begun until some 20 years later, toward the end of Thutmose III’s own long reign (c. 1458-1425 b.c.). “I think that people recognize now, because it happenedso late in Thutmose III’s reign, that it wasn’t personal animosity,” says Dorman of the rampage. “For some reason, Thutmose III must have decided it was necessary to essentially rewrite the official record of Hatshepsut’s kingship”—which meant eradicating all traces of it to suggest that the throne had gone directly from his father to him.

    While numerous theories abound, most contemporary Egyptologists agree that the effort to delete Hatshepsut’s rule had something to do with Thutmose III’s concerns about the succession of power after his death. Wasthere some threat to the legitimacy of his own son, Amenhotep II, who in fact did succeed him? Možda. But Dorman believes that Hatshepsut’s unconventional reign may have been too successful, a dangerous precedent “best erased,” he suggests, “to prevent the possibility of another powerful female ever inserting herself into the long line of Egyptian male kings.”

    The story of Hatshepsut will probably never be complete. “She’s like an iceberg,” says Joyce Tyldesley, scholar and author of the 1996 biography Hatchepsut: The Female Pharaoh. “On the surface we know quite a lot about her. But there’s so much we don’t know.”

    Even so, new light continues to shine on the queen who would be king. In 2007, Egyptian archaeologist Zahi Hawass identified a previously excavated royal mummy as Hatshepsut. Catharine Roehrig is among those scholars awaiting more evidence to bolster the claim. “The fact that the mummy is female, was found in the Valley of the Kings and is about the right age makes this identification quite possible,” she says. But, Roehrig adds, “The evidence is not conclusive further studies are in progress.”

    Tyldesley believes that Hatshepsut may have been keenly conscious of her exceptional place in history. “This is just speculation,” she says, “but I think she was almost aware that she might be forgotten or that her actions would be misunderstood.” Toward the end of her reign, Hatshepsut erected a second pair of obelisks at Karnak. On one the inscription reads: “Now my heart turns this way and that, as I think what the people will say—those who shall see my monuments in years to come, and who shall speak of what I have done.”


    The Constitution has an answer for seditious members of Congress

    Let's review two pieces of news from the last week. First, the American coronavirus pandemic is entering its worst stage yet, with cases and deaths skyrocketing across the country. Last Thursday saw over 3,000 deaths — more than 9/11 or Pearl Harbor — and with ICU beds at or near capacity in most of the country, absent serious change it is possible there will be double or even triple that number per day in a matter of weeks. We may yet top the deadliest day in American history, the Galveston hurricane of 1900 that killed an estimated 8,000 people, very soon. President Trump is doing precisely nothing about this.

    Second, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who is under investigation for bribery and abuse of office, filed a baldly seditious lawsuit calling for the Supreme Court to overturn the election results in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan, and hand their electoral votes to Trump. It was flatly an attempt to overturn the 2020 election, end constitutional government, and install Trump in power. Before the Supreme Court threw the suit out Friday night, 17 other Republican state attorneys general had joined him, along with 126 members of the Republican caucus in the House, while Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) has agreed to represent Trump. And this is just one of dozens of attempts that Republicans at all levels of government have concocted to overturn Trump's loss.

    In short, material conditions in this country have not been this bad since 1932 at least, and the political situation has not been this bad since 1860. The logical endgame of the rapidly-accelerating Republican attempt to destroy democracy while the country burns would be civil war — if it weren't for the high probability that Democratic leaders would be too cowardly to fight.

    But it's worth thinking about what a party seriously committed to preserving democracy would do when faced with a seditious opposition party — namely, cut them out of power and sila them to behave. Democrats could declare all traitors ineligible to serve in national office, convene a Patriot Congress composed solely of people who have not committed insurrection against the American government, and use that power to re-entrench democracy.

    The reasoning here is very simple. All members of Congress swear an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, which establishes a republican form of government. The whole point of a republic is that contests for power are conducted through a framework of rules and democratic elections, where all parties agree to respect the result whether they lose or win. Moreover, the premise of this lawsuit was completely preposterous — arguing in effect that states should not be allowed to set their own election rules if that means more Democrats can vote — and provides no evidence whatsoever for false allegations of tens of thousands of instances of voter fraud. Indeed, several of the representatives who support the lawsuit were themselves just elected by the very votes they now say are fraudulent. The proposed remedy — having Republican-dominated legislatures in samo the four states that gave Biden his margin of victory select Trump electors — would be straight-up election theft.

    In other words, this lawsuit, even though it didn't succeed, is a flagrant attempt to overturn the constitutional system and impose through authoritarian means the rule of a corrupt criminal whose doltish incompetence has gotten hundreds of thousands of Americans killed. It is a "seditious abuse of the judicial process," as the states of Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin jointly wrote in their response to Texas trying to steal their elections.

    The Constitution, as goofy and jerry-rigged as it is, stipulates that insurrectionists who violate their oath are not allowed to serve in Congress. Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, written to exclude Confederate Civil War traitors, says that "No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress … who … having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress … to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same[.]" How the Supreme Court ruled, or whether Republicans actually believe their lunatic claims, is irrelevant. It's still insurrection even if it doesn't work out.

    Democrats would have every right, both under the Constitution and under the principle of popular sovereignty outlined in the Declaration of Independence, to convene a traitor-free Congress (also including similar acts committed by Republican senators like Lindsey Graham, David Perdue, Kelly Loeffler, and others), and pass such laws as would be necessary to preserve the American republic. That might include a national popular vote to decide the presidency, ironclad voting rights protections, a ban on gerrymandering either national or state district boundaries, full representation for the citizens of D.C. and Puerto Rico, regulations on internet platforms that are inflaming violent political extremism, a clear legal framework for the transfer of power that ends the lame duck period, and so on. States would be forced to agree to these measures before they can replace their traitorous representatives and senators. If the Supreme Court objects, more pro-democracy justices can be added.

    This wouldn't be the first time such a thing has happened, either. Immediately after the Civil War, the Radical Republican Congress refused to seat delegations from the former rebellious states until they were satisfied with the progress of Reconstruction. Southern states were forced to ratify the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments — which guaranteed due process and universal male suffrage — before their congressional delegations would be seated. (As a consequence, those delegations included numerous Black representatives, until Reconstruction was overthrown.)

    It is virtually impossible to imagine the ancient, timid fossils that run the Democratic Party even considering this kind of thing (though remarkably, Rep. Bill Pascrell of New Jersey has) because it would require courage, vision, and honestly reckoning with the parlous state of the nation. It would not be illegal, but it would be a step beyond narrow legal proceduralism and into the uncharted waters of aggressive political innovation and raw will-to-power. It could conceivably touch off armed unrest in several states.

    But it's not hard to see where the current conservative trajectory is headed. While elected Republicans have tried to overturn the election using increasingly blatant methods, top conservative pundits are mulling the idea of secession, as their treasonous fire-eater forebears did 160 years ago. The lie that Biden stole the election is now official GOP dogma. By the same token, it is not a coincidence that the Republican Party is ignoring the deadly pandemic (if not actively spreading the virus) while they try to overturn the Constitution. They feel they can safely ignore the welfare of the American people, because they are not accountable to them.

    Unless this escalating conservative extremism halts from the inside somehow — which is not remotely in sight anywhere — this can only end eventually in a violent confrontation, or (much more likely) Democrats will simply give up and let themselves be defeated. Still, this country was founded by people who thought it was worth putting their lives at hazard to throw off tyrannical rule. Perhaps some of that spirit can once again be found.


    This Is Why Queen Elizabeth I Died a Virgin at Age 69

    During a time when female monarchs were assumed to marry and birth an heir, Queen Elizabeth I famously defined standards and never had a husband or children, earning her the nickname of the Virgin Queen.

    Seeing her mother Anne Boleyn essentially be sentenced to death for being unable to produce a male heir (she was executed on false charges of incest, adultery, witchcraft and conspiracy against the king, her husband Henry VIII) made Elizabeth immediately cautious about having kids herself. And then, as shown in the upcoming movie Marija Kraljica Škota, Elizabeth witnessed what happened when her cousin, Mary Stuart (Saoirse Ronan), married Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley (Jack Lowden).

    “I think all those sort of things seeded this paranoia in Elizabeth,” Margot Robbie, who plays Elizabeth in the historical drama, tells PEOPLE in this week’s issue.

    After Mary wed Henry and welcomed son James, an heir to both Scotland and England’s throne, Henry conspired with his father and Mary’s male council to take the power for himself.

    𠇎lizabeth saw what happened to Mary, which is that Mary becomes pregnant, bears a male heir, and she says, ‘Here’s the heir to these two crowns,’ and then really, really soon after that, men crowd in, conspire to bring her down,” director Josie Rourke says. “They take that male heir, and they say he is now the king and we’re going to rule on his behalf until he’s old enough.”

    As Mary lost her crown and fled Scotland, Elizabeth decided she considered herself a man and declared she was married to her country.

    “It was actually quite clever of her to announce that she was married to the country and therefore could not be married to someone else,” Robbie, 28, says. “It was really the only way of protecting herself and protecting her position in that way. It really came from life and death stakes. In her mind, it was a survival technique.”

    And eventually, her inner circle stopped pushing her to marry and conceive and realized that it wouldn’t even be possible at a certain point in her 44-year rule.

    𠇋y then, Elizabeth has reached past the age of 50 and they did understand that once a woman had passed the age of 50, she was past menopause and therefore could not have children of her own,” says historian John Guy, whose book Mary Queen of Scots: The True Life of Mary Stuart, serves as a historical basis for the movie. “The men stopped pestering her all the time to marry and settle the succession in her own kingdom.”

    He continues, “In a sort of ironic sort of way, it actually strengthens her hand and she can feel that she can exercise fully both the masculine and feminine dimensions of the monarchy in a way that she couldn’t really before, because that expectation that somehow her chief function as a woman ruler is to reproduce in order to produce a male heir. That’s out of the equation.”


    Gledaj video: Dokumentarni film Otto i HrvatiOtto und die Kroaten