The Role of Jewish Financiers Within Venice, Italy During the Renaissance and the Reason Christians Became Capable of Charging Interest Upon Loans

During the Renaissance, Jews were tolerated in Venice, Italy because they could provide an invaluable service which Christian financiers and merchants were forbidden to do which was to charge interest upon a loan, a concept referred to as “usury”, derived from the Latin term “usura” which means “use” or “interest”. Christians considered charging interest to be a sin and therefore could not partake in this economic exchange. Unfortunately, the Catholic Church’s Medieval laws against usury acted as a major obstacle for the development of finance within Europe during this period. Jews were not technically permitted to lend capital with interest, but those who did relied upon a convenient clause found within the 23rd chapter of Deuteronomy of the Christian Bible which states that lending to a brother at interest was forbidden but that a stranger was a different matter all together. These Jewish lenders interpreted this scripture as a means to provide the ability to lend to Christians, as Christian’s were not considered brothers of the Jews in a religious context during this period, but they would still not be capable of lending finance to other fellow Jews, as these members of society were viewed as brothers regardless of familial ties. Eventually Christian’s were able to circumvent the prohibition of charging interest, primarily because of Giovanni di Bicci de’ Medici, one of the wealthiest entrepreneurs within Italy during the Renaissance. Medici was able to evade Christian usury legislation as Jewish bankers did because of a clever device of trade which made profit upon exchanging multiple currencies rather than interest rates alone. No “interest” paid to Medici meant no sin had been committed. Medici’s business model took a small commission for each currency conversion rendered, with the size of the loan directly impacting the commission of the person who lent it

The Color of Ancient Egyptian Pharaoh Cleopatra’s Skin

Cleopatra VII, the last ruler of Ptolemaic Egypt, was of Macedonian descent, which makes her Greek, as her family was established by Ptolemy I, a soldier who later became a General within Alexander III’s military force, a person more commonly referred to as “Alexander the Great”. The Ptolemies practiced interfamily marriage, meaning siblings, or more uncommonly cousins etc., as Cleopatra herself married her brother, therefore her ancestry was predominantly Greek. The caveat to this is that the identity of Cleopatra’s mother is unclear, leaving a lot of room for speculation of potential Egyptian as well as other African or regional influences. As for her skin color specifically, historical depictions and recorded texts do not provide clear evidence, but based upon her Greek heritage, she likely had a light olive complexion, common in persons of Mediterranean lineage during the modern day. Cleopatra’s exact skin tone however remains uncertain without genetic evidence as her remains have never been identified and/or located

The Royal Marriages Act of 1772 and its Impact Upon Modern Royals

King George III married for dynastic reasons but his 2 brothers each married commoners would had been married before. George found this unacceptable as it brought the royal family disrepute. In 1772, George passed the Royal Marriages Act which stated that a monarch is permitted to decide who members of their family marry. This new law disrupted royal marriages for over 200 years, perhaps most famously in the case of King Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson. Princess Margaret also experienced problems because of this law as she was forced to ask her sister Queen Elizabeth for permission to marry a commoner as well. The royal family considered anyone not royal to be a commoner despite their wealth, fame, or aristocratic title

The National Security System of Dubai

Dubai has one of the most sophisticated surveillance states in the world. It is incredibly difficult to bypass Dubai intelligence, which Dubai promotes as a positive aspect of its government. The Arab Spring of 2011 gave way to multiple riots and protests across the Middle East which is why monitoring and security have become especially tight within the past decade. Social media and smartphones played a pivotal role in the uprising of the public across the Islamic world which is why Dubai has stepped up its surveillance measures. Dubai’s surveillance system is an ecosystem entitled “Falcon Eye”, a nod to the importance of falconry within Arab culture, a sophisticated network with software which tracks the movement of a person from the moment they leave their home until the moment they return. Camera surveillance is not the only method used however as the Dubai government has openly admitted to the tracking and monitoring of smartphones as well as to sending state agents to follow individuals like journalists via motorized vehicle and upon foot when a person is deemed to possibly cause a threat to the states national security. The reason this activity is not hidden from the public is because the Dubai government wants citizens and foreigners to know that they actively engage in the monitoring of what people do when within its borders. Dubai started spending millions of dollars in 2011 on state of the art Israeli spyware which had the ability to infect smartphones and turn them into portable surveillance devices as they are almost always with the person who is being spied upon. In the past decade, as of 2019, the United Arab Emirates has made strides in opening up communication and relationships with law enforcement and governments located near the Indian Ocean. This allows the reach of the Dubai government to effectively be international, much the same way that the U.S. has international diplomatic links with many other democracies around the world

King Edward II’s Homosexual Relationship with Piers Gaveston

Piers Gaveston, a minor noble who engaged in a homosexual relationship with Edward II, may have been overlooked during the 13th century if it were not for the lavish gifts Edward II showered upon Gaveston. Gaveston was exiled from the realm by Edward I for referring to Edward II as his brother. When Edward I died, his son Edward II brought Gaveston back into his kingdom and provided him with money, gold, title, and land. This caused the whole of England to murmur behind closed doors, against the king. It was not so much the act of homosexuality which infuriated the barons, it was the man of whom Edward II fell in love with. The nobles drafted a list of grievances against Edward II referred to as “The Ordinances”. Gaveston eventually fled and was captured by the Scots. Gaveston was sentenced as an enemy of the state and was executed despite Edward II’s attempted intervention