Fury Gene Tenace (; born Fiore Gino Tenacci; October 10, 1946), better known as Gene Tenace, is an American former professional baseball player and coach. He played as a catcher and first baseman in Major League Baseball from  through , most notably as a member of the Oakland Athletics dynasty that won three consecutive World Series championships between 1972 and 1974.

Tenace was drafted by the Kansas City Athletics from Valley High School in Lucasville, Ohio, and played for the Oakland Athletics, San Diego Padres, St. Louis Cardinals and the Pittsburgh Pirates. He batted and threw right-handed. Despite his low career batting average of .241, his career on-base percentage of .388 is the fourth-highest all-time among qualifying catchers, and his .429 slugging percentage was considerably above the average in the era he played. His 46.8 Baseball Reference Wins Above Replacement (WAR) ranks 13th all-time among catchers, and his 7-year peak WAR is tied with Roy Campanella for 12th all-time among catchers. Also of note is that his career rWAR is fifth highest among all sub .250 hitters. Tenace's career 140 Weighted Runs Created Plus (wRC+) are tied with Mike Piazza for the highest all-time among catchers. Tenace won the 1972 World Series Most Valuable Player Award.

After his playing days ended, Tenace coached for several organizations, most notably for the Toronto Blue Jays.

Playing career

Oakland Athletics (1969–76)
Tenace was selected in baseball's first entry draft, being taken in the 20th round of the 1965 Major League Baseball draft by the then Kansas City Athletics. Tenace made his major league debut for Oakland on May 29, 1969 against the Detroit Tigers at Oakland–Alameda County Coliseum where he went 0-for-4 with two strikeouts in an 8–4 Oakland loss. He hit the first home run of his career on June 6, 1969 at Tiger Stadium against Earl Wilson of the Detroit Tigers. He finished the  season with a .158 batting average, a home run and two runs batted in, appearing in just 38 games as a third-string catcher.

He continued to play the next two years as the third-string catcher before serving as Dave Duncan's backup in 1971. Tenace entered the 1972 season backing up Duncan, but was given a chance to show his abilities by being made the team's regular catcher in the post-season. Tenace took full advantage of this opportunity, excelling in the 1972 playoffs and World Series. In the 1972 American League Championship Series against the Detroit Tigers, he drove in the clinching run in Oakland's 2–1 victory in Game 5; it was his only hit of the series.  Tenace's heroics made up for an error in Game 4 of the series when he had to play second base (for the first time since high school) in the late innings due to regular second baseman Dick Green getting hurt and backup second baseman Ted Kubiak having to play shortstop due to Bert Campaneris being suspended.  Tenace dropped a throw from Sal Bando on a potential game-ending double play attempt in the bottom of the 10th which kept the inning alive as the Tigers eventually won.

He put himself in the spotlight once again in Game 1 of the 1972 World Series when the Athletics faced the Cincinnati Reds. He became the first player to hit home runs in his first two World Series at bats and drove in all three runs in the A's 3–2 victory.  Prior to Tenace's feat, only eight other players had homered in their first World Series at bat. In Game 4, the A's were losing 2–1, with their only run to that point coming on Tenace's solo home run. A ninth-inning one-out rally consisting of four singles, with Tenace's the second and the rest coming from pinch hitters, won the game against Cincinnati's ace relief pitcher, Clay Carroll. He hit a three-run home run in the A's Game 5 loss. Before Game 6 of the 1972 Series, he was the target of a death threat. In Game 7, he was once again the hero, driving in two runs in a 3–2 victory for Oakland. In total, he went 8-for-23 in the Series, with four home runs and 9 RBI to earn the World Series Most Valuable Player Award.

Tenace's heroics helped him earn a full-time job in Oakland's lineup. He served as the team's starting first baseman for two seasons, while still serving as the backup catcher to Ray Fosse. He had his roles reversed in , starting at catcher while backing up first base. As a regular starter for the A's, Tenace had a low batting average but a fair amount of power, hitting 20 home runs in four consecutive years in Oakland, finishing among the top 10 home run hitters in the American League each year. He further made up for his lack of a high batting average by sporting a tremendous batting eye. He drew over 100 walks in a season three times for Oakland, and led the American League in walks in 1974, making up for a career-low .211 average that year. Statistically, his best year with Oakland was in 1975, when he hit a career-best 29 home runs and drove in 87 runs, drew 106 walks, finished 18th in the American League Most Valuable Player Award balloting and was selected to be the starting first baseman for the American League in the 1975 All-Star Game.

As a member of the A's, Tenace hit what turned out to be the final home run in the history of Kansas City's Municipal Stadium on September 30, 1972, in a 10–5 Oakland victory over the Kansas City Royals.

San Diego Padres (1977–80)

Tenace was one of several Athletics who became free agents after the 1976 season and participated in a newly created re-entry draft, in which teams acquired the rights to negotiate with veteran free agents. Tenace and teammate Rollie Fingers were the first players from that draft to sign, with both joining the San Diego Padres in December of that year. In four years as a starter with the Padres, his power numbers dropped in part due to the cavernous dimensions of San Diego Jack Murphy Stadium, only reaching 20 home runs once; but his batting eye remained, recording three more seasons of 100 walks, with a career best of 125 in 1977. In 1979, Tenace led National League catchers with a .998 fielding percentage, committing only one error in 94 games. He recorded an on-base percentage of over .390 in each of his years in San Diego, and finished third in the National League in that department in three consecutive years.

On August 1, 1979, Tenace was part of a bench-clearing brawl against the Atlanta Braves. After hitting a home run off of pitcher Eddie Solomon, he charged the mound when Solomon apparently said something to him, and the benches cleared. No punches were thrown, and the Braves won 5–4.

St. Louis Cardinals (1981–82)
After the 1980 season, Tenace, Fingers, Bob Shirley, and Bob Geren joined the St. Louis Cardinals in a trade for Terry Kennedy and six minor league players. In his two years in St. Louis, Tenace primarily played against left-handed pitchers, platooning with Darrell Porter. As a member of the Cardinals team he won the 1982 World Series, giving him four World Series rings.

Pittsburgh Pirates (1983)
Tenace played his final season as a utility player and pinch-hitter, appearing in 53 games and batting just .177 with 6 RBI for the Pittsburgh Pirates in 1983. He retired after being released the following year in spring training.

Coaching career
Tenace became a coach after retiring as a player. He was touted as a possible managerial candidate during his later years. The Pittsburgh Pirates became strongly interested in the possibility of hiring Tenace as their manager to replace Chuck Tanner. When the year ended, however, Tanner was still the manager, so Tenace became a coach at the Major League level with the Houston Astros in 1986 and 1987, and later coached with the Toronto Blue Jays from 1990 to 1997. When manager Cito Gaston was sidelined with a herniated disc in 1991, Tenace served as the team's interim manager, going 19–14 and keeping Toronto competitive en route to an eventual American League Eastern Division title. He was part of Toronto's World Series-winning teams in 1992 and 1993, giving him six rings in six World Series appearances as a player and a coach. After he left the Jays, he joined the Boston Red Sox organization, serving as hitting coach for their Triple-A affiliate Pawtucket Red Sox in 1999, and Double-A affiliate Trenton Thunder in 2001. He then served as a hitting instructor for the St. Louis Cardinals organization. He was re-hired as the Blue Jays' hitting coach on June 20, 2008, when Cito Gaston replaced John Gibbons as the team's manager. Tenace replaced hitting coach Gary Denbo. He was one of two members of Gaston's old coaching staff from his last World Series championship team who were brought back to the team (third base coach Nick Leyva being the other). He announced his retirement following the 2009 season.

Managerial record

Hitting approach
Tenace advocates a more aggressive approach to hitting. Under his guidance, hitters spend less time working the count and more time preparing to hit. He stresses the mental part of hitting, such as the mental preparation for what a pitcher will do, rather than just the physical aspect. Under Tenace, the philosophy of hitting can be described as "Grip It And Rip It" and more of an old school approach to hitting.

During the 2008 season, prior to the hiring of Gaston, the Blue Jays had a record of 35–39. Once Gaston and his coaches took over the Blue Jays went 51–37 to finish with an 86–76 record. The offensive improvements under Gaston were one of the reasons for the resurgence and as the hitting coach, Tenace was credited with rejuvenating a stagnant offense. Adam Lind commented: "The thing is, a lot of people can teach you how to hit, but not a lot of people can teach you how to hit in the big leagues", referring to the major league experience of Gaston and Tenace. Blue Jays' former center fielder Vernon Wells has said he likes the approach to hitting that Tenace teaches: "One thing Gene talks about is having that approach mentally when you go up there, in your mind you already guarantee yourself that one run on third, but you want to do more than that. Gene always says that first runner is a gimme, you should be able to come through in pretty much every situation like that. And then you try to do more damage than just that one run".

Career statistics
In a 15-year major league career, Tenace played in 1,555 games, accumulating 1,060 hits in 4,390 at bats for a .241 career batting average along with 201 home runs, 674 runs batted in and an on-base percentage of .388. He not only caught nearly 900 games, but also played first base over 600 times. Tenace ended his career with a .986 fielding percentage as a catcher and a .993 fielding percentage as a first baseman. He reached 20 home runs in five of his seven seasons as a regular, with a high of 29 in . After becoming an everyday player in 1973, he did not have an on-base average below .370 until his final year; his OBP was above .400 five times and over .390 (about 60 points above the league average) an additional three times, ending his career with an impressive .388 on-base percentage. Six times he drew more than 100 bases on balls, and he led his league twice. He set the American League record for having the lowest batting average while leading the league in walks in  when he posted a .211 batting average with a league-leading 110 walks. In , he had a .415 on-base percentage while posting a .233 batting average, the second lowest batting average with a .400 on-base percentage in major league history. Less than half of his career trips to first base came via base hits, reaching 1,075 times through walks (984) and being hit by pitches (91) as opposed to only 1,060 hits.

In his book, The Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract, baseball historian Bill James ranked Tenace 23rd all-time among major league catchers. Chuck Rosciam, a baseball historian and a member of the Society for American Baseball Research, believes that Tenace deserves to be enshrined in the Baseball Hall of Fame. Using six offensive measures–batting average, on-base percentage, slugging percentage, runs batted in, runs created and win shares, all league-era adjusted—Rosciam ranks Tenace sixth offensively behind Mickey Cochrane, Mike Piazza, Bill Dickey, Gabby Hartnett and Joe Torre among catchers. Among major league catchers, he is fourth overall in career on-base percentage (OBP) behind Mickey Cochrane, Wally Schang and Joe Mauer. He is tied with Johnny Bench and Joe Torre for third in career on-base plus slugging percentage (OPS) behind only Roy Campanella and Yogi Berra.

Notable achievements

 AL All-Star (1975)
 1972 World Series MVP
 2-time League Bases on Balls Leader (1974/AL & 1977/NL)
 20-Home Run Seasons: 5 (1973–1976 & 1979)
 Caught Vida Blue's no-hitter on September 21, 1970
 Won four World Series as a player with the Oakland Athletics (1972, 1973 & 1974) and the St. Louis Cardinals (1982)
 Won two World Series as a coach with the Toronto Blue Jays (1992 & 1993)

Appearances in other media
 Tenace did a voice cameo in an episode of The Simpsons entitled "Regarding Margie" in 2006.
 Tenace appeared in a television commercial for the Toronto Blue Jays in 2008.
 Tenace was mentioned by sportscaster Champ Kind in the party scene in Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy while describing his signature catchphrase. "Gene Tenace at the plate, and Whammmy!"
 Tenace is portrayed on one of the Floodwall Murals in Portsmouth, Ohio honoring local Major League Baseball players.

References

External links

Baseball Reference (Minors)
Baseball Evolution Hall of Fame
Baseball Gauge
Gene Tenace - Baseballbiography.com
Encyclopedia of Baseball Catchers
Retrosheet
Venezuelan Professional Baseball League

1946 births
Living people
American expatriate baseball people in Canada
American League All-Stars
American people of Italian descent
Arizona Instructional League Athletics players
Baseball players from Pennsylvania
Birmingham A's players
Houston Astros coaches
Iowa Oaks players
Leesburg A's players
Leones del Caracas players
American expatriate baseball players in Venezuela
Major League Baseball catchers
Major League Baseball first basemen
Major League Baseball hitting coaches
World Series Most Valuable Player Award winners
Minor league baseball managers
Oakland Athletics players
Peninsula Grays players
People from West Deer Township, Pennsylvania
Pittsburgh Pirates players
St. Louis Cardinals players
San Diego Padres players
Shelby Rebels players
Toronto Blue Jays coaches
Toronto Blue Jays managers

Gene Tenace


Jean-Jacques Madeleine Willmar (; 6 March 1792 – 20 November 1866) was a Luxembourgian politician and jurist. An Orangist, he was the second Prime Minister of Luxembourg, serving for five years, from 6 December 1848 until 23 September 1853.

Born in 1792 in the city of Luxembourg, he was the son of Jean-Georges Willmar, who was governor of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg from 1817 to 1830.

In 1814 he received his Licence in Law in Paris, and became a lawyer at the bar of Luxembourg city. He was appointed a judge in 1824.

From 1830 to 1839, after the Belgian Revolution, he supported the Dutch King William I, during a period when a large part of Luxembourg wanted to join the new Belgian state.

In 1840 he was appointed Procureur général. From 1841 to 1848 he was a member of the Assembly of Estates, and in 1848 was the Luxembourgish representative at the Frankfurt Parliament.

From 2 December 1848 to 23 September 1853 he was prime minister and Administrator-General (Minister) for Foreign Affairs, Justice, Religion and education. Norbert Metz, who had become Finance Minister, and who was pro-Belgian and against membership of the German Confederation and the Zollverein, had a great influence on foreign policy, which led to tensions with Germany. Relations with the Netherlands also became chilled after the death of William II in 1849. His son, William III, who had himself represented by his brother Prince Henry, led a strictly conservative and reactionary policy, and deposed the government in 1853. Willmar's time in office saw the decision to introduce the Franc instead of the Guilder as the accounting unit of the government. In 1854, the first Luxembourgish copper coins were made.

From 28 November 1857 onwards, Willmar was a member of the newly founded Council of State, and remained as such until his death on 26 November 1866 in Luxembourg city.

References

|-

|-

Prime Ministers of Luxembourg
Ministers for Foreign Affairs of Luxembourg
Ministers for Justice of Luxembourg
Members of the Council of State of Luxembourg
Luxembourgian Orangists
19th-century Luxembourgian judges
1792 births
1866 deaths
People from Luxembourg City
Members of the Frankfurt Parliament

Jean-Jacques Willmar


USS William Seiverling (DE-441) was a  acquired by the United States Navy during World War II. The primary purpose of the destroyer escort was to escort and protect ships in convoy, in addition to other tasks as assigned, such as patrol or radar picket. Post-war she returned home bearing four battle stars; when she was reactivated for the Korean War, she returned home after that war with three more.

William Seiverling was named in honor of William Frank Seiverling, Jr., who was awarded the Navy Cross posthumously for his actions on Guadalcanal.

William Seiverling was laid down on 2 December 1943 at Newark, New Jersey, by the Federal Shipbuilding and Drydock Company, launched on 7 March 1944; sponsored by Mrs. Grace Seiverling; and commissioned at the New York Navy Yard on 1 June 1944, Lt. Cmdr. Charles Francis Adams IV in command.

Namesake
William Frank Seiverling Jr. was born on 22 September 1920 in Elizabethtown, Pennsylvania. He enlisted in the United States Marine Corps at Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on 2 February 1942. Attached to the Marine Barracks, Parris Island, South Carolina, for basic training from 3 February to 12 March, he moved to New River, North Carolina, on the latter date and served there until 17 May, 1942. He began service as a private on 19 June 1942 and was deployed to the Guadalcanal Campaign helping to wrest control of that island from the Japanese.

On 1 November 1942 during the Japanese attack across the Matanikau River Seiverling ran down the hill in the face of enemy fire, killing at least one sniper and perhaps several others. Later, he covered the evacuation of wounded Marines from his own platoon; and, after hearing that the 2nd Platoon was also in trouble, he ran between that unit and the enemy to cover his comrades' withdrawal. Once again, he killed several Japanese before he himself was hit by enemy machinegun fire. Though wounded, Seiverling continued to deliver fire into an enemy position with his automatic rifle. As he started back over the ridge to make his own retirement, he was fatally wounded. For his actions he was awarded the Navy Cross, posthumously.

World War II Pacific Theatre operations
Following commissioning, William Seiverling conducted shakedown training in the vicinity of Bermuda. She returned to New York on 26 July and began post-shakedown availability at the New York Navy Yard. She completed repairs on 8 August and put to sea on the 9th, bound ultimately for the western Pacific. After several stops along the way, she transited the Panama Canal on 25 August. The warship remained at Balboa until the 30th, at which time she continued her voyage.

She stopped at San Diego, California, from 2 to 11 September before getting underway for Pearl Harbor on the latter date. The destroyer escort reached Oahu on 17 September and began a series of missions out of the Pearl Harbor base. For the remainder of September and during the first week in October, those operations consisted of torpedo, surface gunnery, and shore bombardment exercises. After 8 October, William Seiverling began antisubmarine warfare duty, first on a training basis and, after 1 November, as a unit of a hunter-killer force built around . That employment continued until 24 November, when she sortied from Pearl Harbor in company with Task Group (TG) 12.4, a hunter-killer group built around . That unit steamed via Eniwetok to Ulithi, where it arrived on 2 December.

Antisubmarine operations

For the next three months, William Seiverling operated with the hunter-killer group from the base at Ulithi. She helped to patrol the sea lanes between various islands in the Central Pacific to keep them clear of Japanese submarines. On 28 December, the destroyer escort departed Ulithi in company with the Tulagi group to provide ASW support for the Lingayen landings scheduled for the beginning of the second week in January 1945. She and her unit stopped at Kossol Roads in the Palau Islands from 29 December 1944 until 1 January 1945.

On the latter day, she sortied with the task group and set a course—via the Surigao Strait, the Sulu Sea, and the South China Sea—for Luzon. During the transit, enemy air attacks were frequent, but William Seiverling never got into the action until she arrived off Lingayen Gulf on 7 January. On that day, her guns warded off a single attacker whose approach was quite desultory in nature. She patrolled the waters off Lingayen Gulf until 17 January at which time she joined the screen of task group TG 77.4 and TG 77.3 and headed south. She conducted patrols with elements of the two task groups until 1 February when she began retirement through the Sulu Sea with TG 77.4.

On 5 February, the warship reentered the lagoon at Ulithi. Upkeep occupied the next two weeks. On 19 February, the destroyer escort reported for duty with the U.S. 5th Fleet as an element of Task Unit (TU) 50.7.3. That same day, she departed Ulithi with that task unit and headed—via Guam—to the vicinity of Iwo Jima to support the battle then in progress for that island. For about a month, she and the other ships of the task unit conducted antisubmarine patrols of the sea lanes between the Marianas and Iwo Jima. On 11 March, she cleared the Iwo Jima area to return to her base at Ulithi where she arrived on 14 March.

Okinawa operations

William Seiverling remained at Ulithi completing logistics until 21 March at which time she got underway with TG 52.1 to support the assault on and occupation of Okinawa. Her first mission in support of the Ryukyu campaign consisted of antisubmarine protection for escort carriers, the planes of which provided close air support for the troops assaulting Okinawa. That phase of her Okinawa service lasted until 15 April at which time she began another series of antisubmarine patrols along the route between Okinawa and Ulithi with TU 50.7.3, the reconstituted Tulagi hunter-killer group. Those patrols occupied her time until 30 April at which time she parted company with the unit to return to Ulithi for repairs to her main propulsion plant.

Under air attack
The warship arrived back in the lagoon at Ulithi on the afternoon of 3 May and commenced repairs. She completed repairs on 15 May and stood out of the anchorage on the 16th to escort  back to Okinawa. Upon arrival in the Ryūkyūs on 20 May, she began duty patrolling on various antisubmarine and antiaircraft defense stations around Okinawa. During that phase of her Okinawa duty, William Seiverling came under air attack on numerous occasions—including the 25 May attack when a suicider succeeded in crashing and sinking   and she claimed three kills and a number of hits but suffered no damage herself. On 28 May, the destroyer escort received orders to join the screen of TG 30.7 with which she conducted antisubmarine patrols about 400 miles north of Guam. On 5 June, her unit shaped a course via Guam to Ulithi where it arrived on 8 June.

Philippine Islands operations

William Seiverling remained at Ulithi for about two weeks conducting repairs and provisioning. On 24 June, she departed the atoll and shaped a course for San Pedro Bay, Leyte, where she and her division mates joined TG 30.8 on 26 June. On the 28th, TG 30.8—with William Seiverling in company—departed Leyte to return to Ulithi. The task group reentered Ulithi on 30 June and commenced logistics operations in preparation for its logistics support missions to the U.S. 3rd Fleet carriers during the summer air strikes on the Japanese home islands. William Seiverling served in the screen of the U.S. 3rd Fleet replenishment group through most of July.

On 23 July, she returned to Ulithi for repairs to her sound gear and to take on stores and provisions. She returned to sea on 25 July and rendezvoused with   on the 28th. She conducted antisubmarine patrols with that escort carrier until 1 August at which time the task unit set a course for Leyte and temporary duty with the U.S. 7th Fleet. She and her unit mates arrived in San Pedro Bay on 5 August and remained there until 8 August when they resumed antisubmarine patrols to the northeast of Luzon. That duty occupied her time until the end of hostilities on 15 August and thereafter.

End-of-war assignments

She continued patrols of that nature, operating from the base on Leyte near San Pedro Bay until 27 August at which time she set a course for Japan and duty in conjunction with the occupation. The warship arrived in Tokyo Bay on 2 September, the day Japan formally surrendered to the Allies. She supported the occupation forces in Japan until 17 October when she departed Yokosuka to escort a convoy of tank landing ships to Manila. She reached her destination on 25 October and remained there for repairs and provisions until 3 December.

On the latter day, the warship stood out of Manila Bay to return to the United States. After stops at Guam, Eniwetok, and Pearl Harbor, William Seiverling arrived in San Pedro, Los Angeles, on 26 November. The destroyer escort began preparations for inactivation almost immediately upon arrival. William Seiverling was placed in commission, in reserve, sometime in December. Though inactive, the warship remained in commission, in reserve, until formally decommissioned on 21 March 1947.

Reactivation for Korean War

The outbreak of the Korean War during the summer of 1950 brought many warships in the reserve fleet back to active duty. Accordingly, on 27 December 1950, William Seiverling was recommissioned at San Diego, California, Lt. Comdr. Walter C. Cole in command. She spent the first three months of 1951 conducting shakedown training along the California coast. On 16 April, she departed San Diego in company with Escort Squadron (CortRon) 9, bound for the Far East. After stops at Pearl Harbor and Midway Island, she arrived in Sasebo, Japan, on 14 May. From there, she moved south to Keelung, Taiwan, where she joined the Taiwan Strait patrol.

Korean War operations
In July, the warship arrived in the Korean War zone. From the 6th to the 12th, she conducted shore bombardment missions near Songjin. When not engaged in shore bombardment, William Seiverling patrolled the North Korean coast as a unit of the United Nations Blockading Force. Early in September she joined the naval forces blockading Wonsan harbor.

Under fire from Korean shore batteries
On 8 September, while operating with minesweepers in the inner harbor at Wonsan, the destroyer escort drew fire from an enemy shore battery. She began maneuvering radically and opened counter battery fire. The enemy, however, proved far more accurate than did the American warship. Throughout the brief action, he consistently straddled William Seiverling and succeeded in scoring three hits, one of which struck the ship below the waterline at the number 2 fireroom. That hit caused William Seiverling to break off the action and retire to Sasebo for repairs. The warship remained at Sasebo for the remainder of that deployment. She returned to the United States on 22 November.

William Seiverling completed repairs and conducted normal operations along the California coast during the first 10 months of 1952. On 17 October 1952, she departed San Diego to return to the Far East. After stops at Pearl Harbor and at Midway Island, she arrived in the western Pacific at Yokosuka on 11 November. By 16 November, the destroyer escort was back on station with the Wonsan blockade. That duty—including shore bombardment missions—lasted until 26 December. After upkeep, she returned to the Korean coast on 5 January 1953. Her western Pacific deployment lasted until late May and included three more tours of duty in the coastal waters around Korea.

Assigned to training duty
She departed the Far East on 22 May and reentered San Diego on 9 June. She resumed local operations until January 1954 at which time the warship entered the Long Beach Naval Shipyard for overhaul. She completed repairs on 26 March and resumed training duty out of San Diego for the next two months. On 20 May, William Seiverling stood out of San Diego on her way back to the Orient. The warship arrived in Japan on 8 June but was soon back in Korean waters participating in a landing exercise at Sokcho Ri. Between 29 June and 26 July, the ship made a series of goodwill visits to the Japanese ports of Kobe, Nagoya, Muroran, and Niigata. During the remainder of that deployment, she resumed duty with TF 95. Late in November, she completed her western Pacific assignment and set a course for San Diego. William Seiverling arrived back in her home port on 10 December 1954.

The final years

The warship's active career lasted just a little over two more years. During that time, she made two more deployments to the western Pacific. During the first 7th Fleet assignment, she operated in the old familiar northwestern Pacific near Japan and Korea. Also during that deployment, she visited Maizuru, Japan, where, in June and July 1955, she took custody of lend-lease ships being returned to the United States. Her second and final deployment of that period took her to the southwestern Pacific for visits to New Zealand and Australian ports before she headed north for duty on the Taiwan Strait patrol. She returned to San Diego from the last tour of duty in the Far East on 18 February 1957. She resumed normal operations until 15 June at which time she began preparations for decommissioning.

Final decommissioning

William Seiverling was placed out of commission at San Diego on 27 September 1957. She remained in the Pacific Reserve Fleet until 1 December 1972 when her name was struck from the Navy List. On 20 September 1973, she was sold to Levin Metals Corp., of San Jose, California, for scrapping.

Awards

William Seiverling earned the following awards:

Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal with four battle stars
World War II Victory Medal
Navy Occupation Medal
National Defense Service Medal
Korean Service Medal with three battle stars
Philippine Liberation Medal
United Nations Service Medal

References

External links
 NavSource Online: Destroyer Escort Photo Archive – USS William Seiverling (DE 441)

John C. Butler-class destroyer escorts
Ships built in Kearny, New Jersey
1944 ships
World War II frigates and destroyer escorts of the United States
Korean War frigates and destroyer escorts of the United States

USS William Seiverling


Rượu đế is a distilled liquor from Vietnam, made of either glutinous or non-glutinous rice. It was formerly made illegally and is thus similar to moonshine. It is most typical of the Mekong Delta region of southwestern Vietnam (its equivalent in northern Vietnam is called rượu quốc lủi). Its strength varies, but is typically 40 percent alcohol by volume. It is usually clear, and a bit cloudy in appearance.

Etymology

The term rượu đế literally means "đế (Kans grass) liquor." This name is explained by the fact that in Cochinchina (southern Vietnam) during the early period of French colonization, the imperialist government had a monopoly on alcohol production, and the only distilled alcoholic beverage the general population could legally purchase was rượu Công Ty (literally "Company alcohol"; also known as rượu Ty). Those who paid a special fee were given a sign emblazoned with the letters "RA" (an abbreviation for "Régie d'Alcool") to hang in front of their store, which gave them the privilege to be able to sell alcohol from the Société Française des Distilleries de l'Indochine, which was a diluted distilled alcoholic beverage made from rice and corn. In order to obtain liquor with a higher proof, many people resorted to distilling their own liquor in secret by hiding it in tall grass called cỏ tranh (Imperata cylindrica), or in another kind of grass called đế (Kans grass, which grows up to three meters tall), far away from their homes. Whenever such individuals saw the tax collector, they would bring their alcohol and hide it in a field overgrown with đế plants.

Rượu đế is sometimes referred to as rượu lậu, literally "contraband liquor", although this term may also refer to other varieties of illegally produced Vietnamese liquor or rice wine.

While the term rượu đế is used most often in southern Vietnam, such liquor is typically called rượu quốc lủi in northern Vietnam. Although the exact etymology of the latter term is unclear, its component words translate literally as follows: rượu=liquor; quốc=nation, state; and lủi=to slip away. There are several theories of the origin of this term. The first proposes that it is a corruption of rượu cuốc lủi (literally "swamphen slips away liquor"), as cuốc (Porphyrio, a type of swamphen) and quốc are homophones; this term may have come about because those who produce and sell this form of liquor have to do it in fear of prosecution, selling and then slipping away, like the behavior of the cuốc bird. The second theory is that the term is a parody of the foreign term "national spirit" (literally translated as quốc hồn quốc túy, but can be understood to refer to a type of liquor), because the "national spirit" has to be produced surreptitiously, it is thus called rượu quốc lủi. The third theory states that the term was created to distinguish this liquor from rượu quốc doanh (literally "state enterprise alcohol"); the government in northern Vietnam under communist rule prior to đổi mới in the 1980s had a monopoly on liquor production, so this illegally produced alcohol is similar to American moonshine—again highlighting the theme of secrecy.

See also

Cơm rượu
Rice baijiu
Rice wine
Rượu nếp
Rượu thuốc
Rượu cần
Shōchū
Vietnamese wine
Vietnamese Wikipedia Category: Vietnamese alcoholic beverages

References

Bibliography
Lê Tân (2003). Văn hóa ẩm thực ở Trà Vinh. NXB: Văn hóa Thông tin, H.2003, p. 78.

External links

Short Television Documentary about Rượu Đế Ông Già
Article about Rượu đế in USA
The making of Vietnamese Rice Liquor
Article mentioning rượu đế
Article about rượu đế in Can Tho
https://www.wfaa.com/video/features/originals/two-vietnamese-americans-create-traditional-rice-liquor-only-found-in-kennedale-texas/287-78671e90-9660-4508-88ec-97adb3e61131?jwsource=cl

Rice wine
Vietnamese alcoholic drinks

Rượu đế


William Pitt Kellogg (December 8, 1830 – August 10, 1918) was an American lawyer and Republican Party politician who served as the governor of Louisiana from and twice served as a United States senator during the Reconstruction era.

He was one of the most important politicians in Louisiana during and immediately after Reconstruction and was notable for being elected after most other Republican officials had been defeated when Democrats regained control of state politics, though he was also one of the Northern-born politicians who were derided by Southerners as "carpetbaggers" during this period. Kellogg is also notable as one of the few incumbent senators ever to be elected to the U.S. House of Representatives, where he served one term. He was the last Republican U.S. senator from Louisiana until David Vitter in 2005.

Early life and education
Kellogg was born in Orwell, Vermont, near the New York border, where he spent his childhood. After completing his education in the common schools, he moved to Peoria, Illinois, at the age of eighteen and was a school teacher for several years. His fifth cousin William Kellogg lived in the area and served as a member of the United States House of Representatives from 1857 to 1863.

Career
Kellogg became a lawyer, likely "reading law" and studying with practicing lawyers, as was typical for many then. He moved to Canton, Illinois, and started a law practice. There he joined the U.S. Republican Party and eventually came to know Abraham Lincoln, a fellow lawyer. When Lincoln became president in 1861, he appointed Kellogg as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the Nebraska Territory. Kellogg moved to Nebraska.

With the outbreak of the American Civil War, Kellogg was granted a leave of absence and he returned to Illinois and joined the 7th Regiment Illinois Volunteer Cavalry. By 1862, he had risen to the rank of colonel and played an important role at a small battle near Sikeston, Missouri. Kellogg resigned because of ill health on June 1, 1862. He then returned to Nebraska and resumed his work as Chief Justice. After the Civil War, Kellogg was elected as a companion of the Military Order of the Loyal Legion of the United States.

On April 14, 1865, hours before his assassination, Lincoln appointed Kellogg as the federal collector of customs of the port of New Orleans. This launched Kellogg's 20-year political career in Louisiana, notable as he was one of the first carpetbaggers. He remained Collector of New Orleans, despite complaints, until 1868, and was then elected to the United States Senate. That year, "reconstructed" Louisiana was readmitted to the federal Union.

In 1872, Kellogg ran on the Republican ticket and was elected governor. He resigned from the Senate to take office. In the election, John McEnery, a Democrat, ran against Kellogg. The sitting Governor Henry Clay Warmoth, although a Republican, opposed the Republican Party faction that was loyal to President Ulysses S. Grant, who was supporting Kellogg. Warmoth supported McEnery.

Former Confederate Assistant Secretary of War John Archibald Campbell was involved in the controversy surrounding Kellogg. He was a member of the "Committee of One Hundred" that went to Washington to persuade President Grant to end his support of what they called the "Kellogg usurpation". Grant initially refused to meet them but later relented. Campbell stated the case before Grant but was refused.

The results of the election were disputed by the Democrats. The politics of the state was in turmoil for months, as both candidates held inauguration celebrations, certified their local candidate slates and tried to gather political power. Political tensions broke out in violence, including the Colfax Massacre in April 1873. As Governor, Warmoth controlled the State Returning Board, the institution which administered elections. With the election challenged, Warmoth's board named McEnery the winner. A rival board claimed Kellogg to be the victor, although the board had no ballots or returns to count.

It was not only disputed by Democrats. Even the Republican-controlled U. S. Congress doubted the legitimacy of Kellogg's Carpetbag state government.

The House of Representatives declared that the Kellogg regime was "not much better than a successful conspiracy." The Senate threw out both returns of Louisiana's 1872 presidential electoral results. A Senate committee reported that the entire Louisiana 1872 election had been unfair and that both state governments were illegal. It recommended that a new election be held under federal supervision.

President Grant ignored the Senate committee recommendation and chose to put the force of the U. S. Army behind Kellogg's machine, perhaps because Grant's own brother-in-law, James Casey, was part of the machine. Casey also held the lucrative post of New Orleans Customs Collector, to which Grant reappointed him in March 1873.

In January 1875 even President Grant admitted that Louisiana's 1872 election "was a gigantic fraud, and there are no reliable returns of its result."

In February 1876, Kellog was impeached by the Louisiana House of Representatives. The Senate did not convict him, however, and he remained in office.

According to historian William Gillette, "By having invoked federal authority in civil law and having employed federal force in state politics, he [Grant] had mounted a successful coups d'état."

Warmoth was impeached for allegedly stealing the election. A black Republican, P. B. S. Pinchback, became governor for 35 days until Grant seated Kellogg as Governor with Federal protection. McEnery's faction established a "rump legislature" in New Orleans to oppose Kellogg's actions. McEnery urged his supporters to take up arms against Kellogg's fraudulent government. In 1874 the anti-Republican White League sent 5,000 paramilitary men into New Orleans, wherein the Battle of Liberty Place, they defeated the 3500-man Metropolitan Police and state militia. They took over the state government offices for a few days but retreated before the arrival of federal troops sent as reinforcements. President Grant had finally sent U.S. troops in response to Kellogg's request for help.

Kellogg's lieutenant governor was Caesar Antoine, an African-American native of New Orleans. He had been a State Senator from Shreveport before running as lieutenant governor. Despite the intense backlash against the Republican Party among white Democrats in the South, Kellogg was elected to the United States Senate in 1876. He served in the Senate until 1883. He did not seek re-election, for his party was too weak in the South to be competitive. He was the chairman of the Senate Committee on Railroads from 1881 to 1883.

Kellogg was elected to the United States House of Representatives in 1882, defeating the incumbent Democrat Chester Bidwell Darrall and served one term from 1883 to 1885. He was defeated for re-election in 1884 by Edward James Gay. He continued to live in Washington, D.C., but retired from political life. He died in Washington and is buried at Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia.

Kellogg was one of the most important politicians in Louisiana during and immediately after Reconstruction. He was able to maintain power for much longer than most Republican elected officials who had come to the area from the North. He is also notable as one of few senators to be elected to the House of Representatives immediately after leaving the Senate. (Claude Pepper, a 20th-century Florida Democrat, was similarly elected to the House after having served in the Senate but did not begin his long House tenure until 12 years after the end of his Senate service.)

References

External links

Google Books full online browsing copy
State of Louisiana - Biography
Cemetery Memorial by La-Cemeteries

1830 births
1918 deaths
People from Orwell, Vermont
Governors of Louisiana
People of Vermont in the American Civil War
Union Army colonels
Politicians from Peoria, Illinois
People from Canton, Illinois
American lawyers
Republican Party governors of Louisiana
Republican Party United States senators from Louisiana
Burials at Arlington National Cemetery
Washington, D.C., Republicans
Illinois Republicans
Nebraska Republicans
Republican Party members of the United States House of Representatives from Louisiana
19th-century American politicians
American lawyers admitted to the practice of law by reading law
Impeached state and territorial governors of the United States

William Pitt Kellogg


Pre-sectarian Buddhism, also called early Buddhism, the earliest Buddhism, original Buddhism, and primitive Buddhism, is Buddhism as theorized to have existed before the various Early Buddhist schools developed, around 250 BCE (followed by later subsects of Buddhism).

The contents and teachings of this pre-sectarian Buddhism must be deduced or re-constructed from the earliest Buddhist texts, which by themselves are already sectarian.  The whole subject remains intensely debated by scholars, not all of whom believe a meaningful reconstruction is possible.

"Early Buddhism" may also be used for considerably later periods.

Name
Various terms are being used to refer to the earliest period of Buddhism:
 "Pre-sectarian Buddhism"
 "Early Buddhism",
 "The earliest Buddhism",
 "Original Buddhism",
 "The Buddhism of the Buddha himself."
 Precanonical Buddhism
 Primitive Buddhism

Some Japanese scholars refer to the subsequent period of the early Buddhist schools as sectarian Buddhism.

Timespan

Pre-sectarian Buddhism may refer to the earliest Buddhism, the ideas and practices of Gautama Buddha himself. It may also refer to early Buddhism as existing until the first documented split in the sangha. According to Lambert Schmithausen, it is "the canonical period prior to the development of different schools with their different positions."

Contrary to the claim of doctrinal stability, early Buddhism was a dynamic movement. Pre-sectarian Buddhism may have included or incorporated other Śramaṇic schools of thought, as well as Vedic and Jain ideas and practices.

The period of "Early Buddhism" in the sense of pre-sectarian Buddhism is considered by scholars such as Paul J. Griffiths and Steven Collins to be from the time of the historical Buddha to the reign of Ashoka (c. 268 to 232 BCE). The first documented split occurred, according to most scholars, between the second Buddhist council and the third Buddhist council. Lamotte and Hirakawa both maintain that the first schism in the Buddhist sangha occurred during the reign of Ashoka. According to scholar Collett Cox "most scholars would agree that even though the roots of the earliest recognized groups predate Aśoka, their actual separation did not occur until after his death."

The first post-schismatic groups are often stated to be the Sthavira nikāya and the Mahāsāṃghika. Eventually, eighteen different schools came into existence. The later Mahayana schools may have preserved ideas which were abandoned by the "orthodox" Theravada, such as the Three Bodies doctrine, the idea of consciousness (vijñāna) as a continuum, and devotional elements such as the worship of saints.

Earliest Buddhism and the Śramaṇa movement

Pre-sectarian Buddhism was originally one of the śramaṇic movements. The time of the Buddha was a time of urbanisation in India, and saw the growth of the śramaṇas, wandering philosophers that had rejected the authority of Vedas and Brahmanic priesthood, intent on escaping saṃsāra through various means, which involved the study of ascetic practices, and ethical behavior.

The śramaṇas gave rise to different religious and philosophical schools, among which pre-sectarian Buddhism itself, Yoga and similar schools of Hinduism, Jainism, Ājīvika, Ajñana and Cārvāka were the most important, and also to popular concepts in all major Indian religions such as saṃsāra (endless cycle of birth and death) and moksha (liberation from that cycle). Nevertheless, despite the success that these wandering philosophers and ascetics had obtained by spreading ideas and concepts that would soon be accepted by all religions of India, the orthodox schools of Hindu philosophy (āstika) opposed to śramaṇic schools of thought and refuted their doctrines as "heterodox" (nāstika), because they refused to accept the epistemic authority of Vedas.

The ideas of saṃsāra, karma and rebirth show a development of thought in Indian religions: from the idea of single existence, at the end of which one was judged and punished and rewarded for one's deeds, or karma; to multiple existences with reward or punishment in an endless series of existences; and then attempts to gain release from this endless series. This release was the central aim of the Śramaṇa movement. Vedic rituals, which aimed at entrance into heaven, may have played a role in this development: the realisation that those rituals did not lead to an everlasting liberation led to the search for other means.

Scholarship and methodology
Earliest Buddhism can only be deduced from the various Buddhist canons now extant, which are all already sectarian collections. As such any reconstruction is tentative. One method to obtain information on the oldest core of Buddhism is to compare the oldest extant versions of the Theravadin Pāli Canon, the surviving portions of the scriptures of Sarvastivada, Mulasarvastivada, Mahīśāsaka, Dharmaguptaka and other schools, and the Chinese āgamas and other surviving portions of other early canons (such as the Gandharan texts). Early proto-Mahayana texts which contain nearly identical material to that of the Pali Canon such as the Salistamba Sutra are also further evidence.

The beginning of this comparative study began in the 19th century, Samuel Beal published comparative translations of the Pali patimokkha and the Chinese Dharmaguptaka pratimoksa (1859), showing they were virtually identical. He followed this up with comparisons between the Chinese sutras and the Pali suttas in 1882, accurately predicting that "when the Vinaya and Āgama collections are thoroughly examined, I can have little doubt we shall find most if not all the Pali Suttas in Chinese form." In the following decades various scholars continued to produce a series of comparative studies, such as Anesaki, Akanuma (who composed a complete catalogue of parallels), Yin Shun and Thich Minh Chau. These studies, as well as recent work by Analayo, Marcus Bingenheimer and Mun-keat Choong, have shown that the essential doctrinal content of the Pali Majjhima and Samyutta Nikayas and the Chinese Madhyama and Samyukta Agamas is mostly the same, (with, as Analayo notes, "occasional divergence in details").

According to scholars such as Rupert Gethin and Peter Harvey, the oldest recorded teachings are contained in the first four Nikayas of the Sutta Pitaka and their various parallels in other languages, together with the main body of monastic rules, which survive in the various versions of the patimokkha. Scholars have also claimed that there is a core within this core, referring to some poems and phrases which seem to be the oldest parts of the Sutta Pitaka.

The reliability of these sources, and the possibility to draw out a core of oldest teachings, is a matter of dispute. According to Tillman Vetter, the comparison of the oldest extant texts "does not just simply lead to the oldest nucleus of the doctrine." At best, it leads to

According to Vetter, inconsistencies remain, and other methods must be applied to resolve those inconsistencies. Because of this, scholars such as Edward Conze and A.K. Warder have argued that only the material which is common to both the Sthavira and the Mahasamghika canons can be seen as the most authentic, since they were the first communities after the first schism. The problem is that there is little material surviving from the Mahasamghika school. However, what we do have, such as the Mahasamghika pratimoksha and vinaya, is mostly consistent in doctrine with the Sthavira texts. Other Mahasamghika sources are the Mahavastu and (possibly) the Śālistamba Sūtra, both of which also contains phrases and doctrines that are found in the Sthavira canons.

Further exemplary studies are the study on descriptions of "liberating insight" by Lambert Schmithausen, the overview of early Buddhism by Tilmann Vetter, the philological work on the four truths by K.R. Norman, the textual studies by Richard Gombrich, and the research on early meditation methods by Johannes Bronkhorst.

Scholarly positions
According to Schmithausen, three positions held by scholars of Buddhism can be distinguished regarding the possibility to extract the earliest Buddhism from the Early Buddhist Texts:

 "Stress on the fundamental homogeneity and substantial authenticity of at least a considerable part of the Nikayic materials;"
 "Skepticism with regard to the possibility of retrieving the doctrine of earliest Buddhism;"
 "Cautious optimism in this respect."

Optimism regarding the early Buddhist texts
In his history of Indian Buddhism (1988), Etienne Lamotte argues that while it "is impossible to say with certainty" what the doctrine of the historical Buddha was, "it is nonetheless a fact that, in order to appreciate early Buddhism, the only valid evidence - or indication - which we possess is the basic agreement between the Nikayas on the one hand and the Agamas on the other".

Likewise, Hajime Nakamura writes in his Indian Buddhism, that "there is no word that can be traced with unquestionable authority to Gotama Sakyamuni as a historical personage, although there must be some sayings or phrases derived from him". Nakamura adds that scholars must critically search the early scriptures for the oldest layer of material to find the "original Buddhism". Nakamura held that some of the earliest material were the gathas (verses) found in the Suttanipata, as well as the Sagatha-vagga of the Samyutta-Nikaya, the Itivuttakas and the Udanas. These texts use less of the doctrinal material that is developed in other texts, are more likely to promote wilderness solitude over communal living and use terminology which is similar to Jain ideas.

British indologist Rupert Gethin writes that "it is extremely likely" that at least some of the suttas in the four main Nikāyas "are among the oldest surviving Buddhist texts and contain material that goes back directly to the Buddha." Gethin agrees with Lamotte that the doctrinal basis of the Pali Nikayas and Chinese Agamas is "remarkably uniform" and "constitute the common ancient heritage of Buddhism."

Richard Gombrich agrees that the four Nikāyas and the main body of monastic rules present "such originality, intelligence, grandeur and—most relevantly—coherence, that it is hard to see it as a composite work" and thus concludes that it is the work of one genius, even if he agrees that when it comes to the Buddha's biography "we know next to nothing".

Peter Harvey affirms that the four older Nikāyas preserve an "early common stock" which "must derive from his [the Buddha's] teachings" because the overall harmony of the texts suggest a single authorship, even while other parts of the Pali canon clearly originated later.

The British indologist A. K. Warder writes that "we are on safe ground only with those texts the authenticity of which is admitted by all schools of buddhism (including the Mahayana, who admit the authenticity of the early canons as well as their own texts) not with texts only accepted by certain schools." Warder adds that when the extant material of the Tipitakas of the early Buddhist schools is examined "we find an agreement which is substantial, though not complete" and that there is a central body of sutras "which is so similar in all known versions that we must accept these as so many recensions of the same original texts."

Alexander Wynne has also argued for the historical authenticity of the early buddhist texts (contra skeptics like Gregory Schopen) based on the internal textual evidence found inside them as well as archaeological and inscriptional evidence. As noted by T.W. Rhys Davids, Wynne points out the pali texts depict a pre-Asokan north India and he also cites KR Norman who argues that they show no Sinhalese prakrit additions. Reviewing the literature by figures such as Frauwallner, Wynne argues that the pali suttas reached Sri Lanka by 250 BCE and that they preserved certain details about fifth century north India (such as that Uddaka Rāmaputta lived near Rajagrha). Wynne concludes:
The corresponding pieces of textual material found in the canons of the different sects – especially the literature of the Pāli school, which was more isolated than the others – probably go back to pre-sectarian times. It is unlikely that these correspondences could have been produced by the joint endeavour of different Buddhist sects, for such an undertaking would have required organisation on a scale which was simply inconceivable in the ancient world. We must conclude that a careful examination of early Buddhist literature can reveal aspects of the pre-Aśokan history of Indian Buddhism.

Pessimism
One of the early Western skeptics was French indologist Émile Senart, who argued in his Essai sur la legende du Buddha (1875) that the legends of Buddha's life were derived from pre-Buddhist myths of solar deities.

The late Edward Conze held that there was an "absence of hard facts" regarding the first period of Buddhism and regarding the teachings of the Buddha, "none of His sayings is preserved in its original form." Since we only possess a small fraction of the Buddhist literature that must have circulated during the early period, Conze held that all the scholarly attempts to reconstruct the 'original' teachings were "all mere guesswork" because "that which we have may have been composed at any time during the first 500 years" and "there is no objective criterion which would allow us to single out those elements in the record which go back to the Buddha Himself." Conze argues that comparative study using the sources of different schools could give us some knowledge of the pre-sectarian period doctrine, but he adds that such knowledge might not take us to the earliest period after the Buddha's nirvana, which is a period that is "shrouded in mystery and to which we cannot penetrate."

Japanese Buddhologist Kogen Mizuno argues in his "Buddhist Sutras" (1982) that the material we possess may not contain the actual words of the Buddha because "they were not recorded as he spoke", but compiled after his death and also because they do not survive in the original language (some form of Magadhi Prakrit) but "transmitted in other Indic languages of later periods, and without doubt conscious and unconscious changes in the Buddha's words were made during several centuries of oral transmission." Mizuno does note that Pali is the oldest of these, but it is still different from old Magadhi and it is from a different region (Western India).

Ronald M. Davidson, a scholar of tantric Buddhism, while acknowledging that most scholars agree that the early community maintained and transmitted a rough body of sacred literature, writes that "we have little confidence that much, if any, of surviving Buddhist scripture is actually the word of the historical Buddha." His view is that:
More persuasively, the Buddhist order in India might be considered the greatest scriptural composition community in human history. Given the extraordinary extent of the material passing at any one time under rubric of the "word of the Buddha," we might simply pause and acknowledge that Indian Buddhists were extraordinarily facile litterateurs.
The American scholar Gregory Schopen holds that "we cannot know anything definite about the actual doctrinal content of the nikäya/ägama literature much before the fourth century C.E." Schopen is very critical of modern Buddhist studies because of its preference for literary evidence that "in most cases cannot actually be dated and that survives only in very recent manuscript traditions" that have been "heavily edited" and were intended as normative not historical accounts. Schopen believes that the preference for texts over archeology and epigraphy is a mistake and that it is Buddhist epigraphy which are the earliest written sources. Regarding the textual sources, Schopen holds that even the oldest sources such as the Pali canon, "cannot be taken back further than the last quarter of the first century B.C.E, the date of the Alu-vihāra redaction," but that actually it is not until the 5th or 6th centuries CE "that we can know anything definite about the actual contents of this canon." He notes that references to Tipitaka and Nikaya date from much later periods than the Asokan era (such as Kaniska's reign). Only a few texts have been identified in Asoka's edicts (such as his Bhabra Edict), but these are all short verse texts and are nothing like the suttas of the first and second Nikayas. Schopen concludes that it is only "from the end of the fourth century, that some of the doctrinal content of Hinayana canonical literature can finally be definitely dated and actually verified."

Regarding the view of comparative critical scholars that agreement between the different sectarian texts points to a common early source, Schopen counters that since this kind of higher criticism is already being done on texts which belong to "uniformly late stages of the literary tradition." Schopen believes instead that the agreement was produced by the sharing of literature and ideas between the different sects at a later date. Schopen defines this position as:
If all known versions of a text or passage agree, that text or passage is probably late; that is, it probably represents the results of the conflation and gradual leveling and harmonization of earlier existing traditions.
Citing Bareau and Wassilieff, he holds that it is just as likely that textual agreement among the different canons was produced by parallel development and contact between the different Indian traditions.

Moderate skepticism and reconstructionism
According to Constantin Regamey, the view followed by the "Franco-Belgian" school of buddhology (which applies to figures like Jean Przyluski, Louis de la Vallee Poussin, A. Weller, and A.B. Keith) did not consider the Pali Canon a straightforward "faithful reflection of the teachings of the Buddha".  This group of scholars sought to use all available sources to reconstruct the original teachings of the Buddha in a way which diverged from the Pali focused perspective of Anglo-German indologists such as Oldenberg and Frauwallner.

A common position of the Franco-Belgian school was that primitive Buddhism did not have such negative view of nirvana, but that it was a positive reality, a kind of immortal state (amrta) similar to the godly abode of svarga found in the Edicts of Ashoka.

These mainly continental European scholars attempted to reconstruct early Buddhism drawing on many sources, including Mahayana sources, instead of only relying on the Pali Canon. However, in the post-war years, Franco-Belgian scholars like Jean Filliozat mostly stuck to a moderate skepticism which did not hypothesize about what the original Buddhism may have been and merely focused on looking at the sectarian sources which currently exist (and which do not go back to the earliest period). Filliozat argues that any reconstruction "would remain purely ideal" and might be lacking in key doctrines that might have been lost over time. Since all the canons were edited at different times throughout history, any reconstruction would never arrive at original Buddhism.

Polish scholar Stanislaw Schayer (1899 - 1941) was one figure who followed this reconstructionist method to put forth a hypothesis of an alternative early Buddhist worldview. Schayer argued that the Nikayas preserve elements of an archaic form of Buddhism which is close to Brahmanical beliefs, and survived in the Mahayana tradition. As noted by Alexander Wynne, Schayer drew on passages "in which "consciousness" (viññana) seems to be the ultimate reality or substratum (e.g. A I.10), as well as the Saddhatu Sutra, which is not found in any canonical source but is cited in other Buddhist texts." According to Schayer, contrary to popular opinion, the Theravada and Mahayana traditions may be "divergent, but equally reliable records of a pre-canonical Buddhism which is now lost forever." The Mahayana tradition may have preserved a very old, "pre-Canonical" tradition, which was largely, but not completely, left out of the Theravada-canon.

Schayer searched through various early sources for ideas that contradict the dominant doctrinal positions of the early canon. According to Schayer, these ideas have were "transmitted by a tradition old enough and considered to be authoritative by the compilers of the Canon." He thus considers these ideas which were "doctrines contradictory to the generally admitted canonical viewpoint" as "survivals of older, precanonical Buddhism."

Constantin Regamey has identified four points which are central to Schayer's reconstruction of precanonical Buddhism:

 The Buddha was considered as an extraordinary supernatural being, in whom ultimate reality was embodied, and who was an incarnation of the mythical figure of the tathagata;
 The Buddha's disciples were attracted to his spiritual charisma and supernatural authority;
 Nirvana was conceived as the attainment of a "persisting immortality", and the gaining of a deathless sphere from which there would be no falling back (acyuta pada), which is the pinnacle of reality, the supreme point of the dharmadhatu. This nirvana, as a transmundane reality or state, an "eternal vijñana" and is incarnated in the person of the Buddha. The more radical anatman doctrine does not apply to this.
 Nirvana can be reached because it already dwells as the inmost "consciousness" of the human being. It is a consciousness which is not subject to birth and death.

According to Ray, Schayer has shown a second doctrinal position alongside that of the more dominant tradition, one likely to be of at least equivalent, if not of greater, antiquity. However, according to Edward Conze, Schayer's views are "merely a tentative hypothesis" and that it is also possible that these ideas later entered Buddhism, as a concession to "popular demand, just as the lower goal of birth in heaven (svarga) was admitted side by side with Nirvana." Conze thought that both were equally possible.

The French scholar Constantin Regamey argues that Schayer's general position is cogent. Regamey argues that the various Buddhist canons, like the Pali canon, have many chronological layers and include "many divergences and contradictions." As such, one cannot rely on any single one of them to construct the original view of the Buddha, especially since the teachings found in them are mostly composed of "terms, formulas, or bare patterns" that can and have been interpreted in many different ways. Regamey argues that a broader historicist method is needed, which draws on numerous sources, historical evidence and the very internal contradictions found in the canon. He argues that a broader historical method can show that early Buddhism might have supported ideas that are similar to Brahamanical theories of consciousness or some Mahayana views on consciousness and Buddhahood.

A similar view is defended by Christian Lindtner. Lindtner argues that some early Buddhist sources point to stainless formless consciousness which is similar to Brahmanical ideas and later Mahayana views. He also argues that ancient Buddhist view of nirvana was likely cosmological (and had similarities with ancient Vedic cosmology) and that it was an eternal realm at the peak of existence (bhutakoti) one could reach by wisdom.

Teachings of earliest Buddhism
The Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta is regarded by the Buddhist tradition as the first discourse of the Buddha. Scholars have noted some persistent problems with this view. Originally the text may only have pointed at "the middle way" as being the core of the Buddha's teaching, which pointed to the practice of dhyana. This basic term may have been extended with descriptions of the eightfold path, itself a condensation of a longer sequence. Some scholars believe that under pressure from developments in Indian religiosity, which began to see "liberating insight" as the essence of moksha, the four noble truths were then added as a description of the Buddha's "liberating insight".

Death, rebirth and karma

According to Tilmann Vetter, the Buddha at first sought "the deathless" (amata/amrta), which is concerned with the here and now. According to Edward Conze, Death was an error which could be overcome by those who entered the "doors to the Deathless", "the gates of the Undying." According to Conze, the Buddha saw death as a sign that "something has gone wrong with us." The Buddha saw death as brought on by an evil force, Mára, "the Killer," "who tempts us away from our true immortal selves and diverts us from the path which could lead us back to freedom." Our cravings keep us tied to Mára's realm. By releasing our attachments we move beyond his realm, and gain freedom from saṃsāra, the beginningless movement of death and rebirth.

Karma is the intentional (cetanā) actions which keep us tied to saṃsāra. Two views on the liberation from saṃsāra can be discerned in the śramaṇic movements. Originally karma meant "physical and mental activity". One solution was to refrain from any physical or mental activity. The other solution was to see the real self as not participating in these actions, and to disidentify with those actions. According to Bronkhorst, the Buddha rejected both approaches. Nevertheless, these approaches can also be found in the Buddhist tradition, such as the four formless jhanas, and disidentification from the constituents of the self.

Bruce Matthews notes that there is no cohesive presentation of karma in the Sutta Pitaka, which may mean that the doctrine was incidental to the main perspective of early Buddhist soteriology. Schmithausen is a notable scholar who has questioned whether karma already played a role in the theory of rebirth of earliest Buddhism. According to Schmithausen, "the karma doctrine may have been incidental to early Buddhist soteriology." According to Vetter, "the deathless" (amata/amrta) is concerned with the here and now. Only after this realization did he become acquainted with the doctrine of rebirth. Bronkhorst disagrees, and concludes that the Buddha "introduced a concept of karma that differed considerably from the commonly held views of his time." According to Bronkhorst, not physical and mental activities as such were seen as responsible for rebirth, but intentions and desire.

Soul
According to Bronkhorst, referring to Frauwallner, Schmithausen and Bhattacharya,

The Four Noble Truths
According to Eviatar Shulman, the doctrine of the Four Noble Truths is rooted in "a meditative perception regarding the arising and passing away of mental events" which also includes a "detached attitude" to phenomena. Out of this practice of "meditative observation" developed a theoretical or discursive philosophical understanding.

K.R. Norman concluded that the earliest version of the Dhamma-cakka-ppavattana sutta did not contain the word "noble", but was added later. Lambert Schmithausen concluded that the four truths were a later development in early Buddhism.

Carol Anderson, following Lambert Schmithausen and K.R. Norman, notes that the four truths are missing in critical passages in the canon, and states:

The four truths probably entered the Sutta Pitaka from the Vinaya, the rules for monastic order. They were first added to enlightenment-stories which contain the Four Jhanas, replacing terms for "liberating insight". From there they were added to the biographical stories of the Buddha:

According to both Bronkhorst and Anderson, the four truths became a substitution for prajna, or "liberating insight", in the suttas in those texts where "liberating insight" was preceded by the four jhanas. According to Bronkhorst, the four truths may not have been formulated in earliest Buddhism, and did not serve in earliest Buddhism as a description of "liberating insight". Gotama's teachings may have been personal, "adjusted to the need of each person."

This replacement was probably caused by the influence and pressures of the wider Indian religious landscape, "which claimed that one can be released only by some truth or higher knowledge."

The Noble Eightfold Path
According to Tilmann Vetter, the description of the Buddhist path may initially have been as simple as the term "the middle way". In time, this short description was elaborated, resulting in the description of the eightfold path. Vetter and Bucknell both note that longer descriptions of "the path" can be found, which can be condensed into the Noble Eightfold Path. One of those longer sequences, from the CulaHatthipadopama-sutta, the "Lesser Discourse on the Simile of the Elephant's Footprints", is as follows:
 Dhammalsaddhalpabbajja: A layman hears a Buddha teach the Dhamma, comes to have faith in him, and decides to take ordination as a monk;
 sila: He adopts the moral precepts;
 indriyasamvara: He practises "guarding the six sense-doors";
 sati-sampajanna: He practises mindfulness and self-possession (actually described as mindfulness of the body, kāyānupassanā, that is, reflection on the impurities of the body);
 jhana 1: He finds an isolated spot, sits down cross-legged, purifies his mind of the hindrances (nivarana), and attains the first rupa-jhana;
 jhana 2: He attains the second jhana';
 jhana 3: He attains the third jhana;
 jhana 4: He attains the fourth jhana;
 pubbenivasanussati-nana: he recollects his many former existences in samsara;
 sattanam cutupapata-nana: he observes the death and rebirth of beings according to their karmas;
 asavakkhaya-nana: He brings about the destruction of the asavas (inflow, mental bias), and attains a profound realization of (as opposed to mere knowledge about) the four noble truths;
 vimutti: He perceives that he is now liberated, that he has done what was to be done.

Satipatthana

According to Grzegorz Polak, the four upassanā have been misunderstood by the developing Buddhist tradition, including Theravada, to refer to four different foundations. According to Polak, the four upassanā do not refer to four different foundations, but to the awareness of four different aspects of raising mindfulness:
 the six sense-bases which one needs to be aware of (kāyānupassanā);
 contemplation on vedanās, which arise with the contact between the senses and their objects (vedanānupassanā);
 the altered states of mind to which this practice leads (cittānupassanā);
 the development from the five hindrances  to the seven factors of enlightenment (dhammānupassanā).

Dhyāna

According to Bronkhorst, dhyana was a Buddhist invention, whereas Alexander Wynne argues that dhyana was incorporated from Brahmanical practices, in the Nikayas ascribed to Āḷāra Kālāma and Uddaka Rāmaputta. These practices were paired to mindfulness and insight, and given a new interpretation. Kalupahana argues that the Buddha "reverted to the meditational practices" he had learned from Āḷāra Kālāma and Uddaka Rāmaputta. Norman notes that "the Buddha's way to release [...] was by means of meditative practices." Gombrich also notes that a development took place in early Buddhism resulting in a change in doctrine, which considered prajna to be an alternative means to "enlightenment".

Dhyāna and insight
A core problem in the study of early Buddhism is the relation between dhyana and insight. The Buddhist tradition has incorporated two traditions regarding the use of dhyana (jhana). There is a tradition that stresses attaining insight (bodhi, prajñā, kensho) as the means to awakening and liberation. But it has also incorporated the yogic tradition, as reflected in the use of jhana, which is rejected in other sutras as not achieving the final result of liberation. The problem was famously voiced in 1936 by Louis de La Vallee Poussin, in his text Musila et Narada: Le Chemin de Nirvana.

Schmithausen notes that the mention of the four noble truths as constituting the core of "liberating insight", which is attained after mastering the Rupa Jhanas, is a later addition to texts such as Majjhima Nikaya 36. Schmithausen discerns three possible roads to liberation as described in the suttas, to which Vetter adds the sole practice of dhyana itself, which he sees as the original "liberating practice":
 The four Rupa Jhanas themselves constituted the core liberating practice of early buddhism, c.q. the Buddha;
 Mastering the four Rupa Jhanas, whereafter "liberating insight" is attained;
 Mastering the four Rupa Jhanas and the four Arupa Jhanas, where-after "liberating insight" is attained;
 Liberating insight itself suffices.

This problem has been elaborated by several well-known scholars, including Tilman Vetter, Johannes Bronkhorst, and Richard Gombrich.

The meaning of samadhi
Traditionally, meditation is often described as samadhi, one-pointed concentration, and dhyana and samadhi are often referred to interchangeably. Yet, Schmithausen, Vetter and Bronkhorst note that the attainment of insight and mindfulness, which is a cognitive activity, cannot be possible in a state wherein all cognitive activity has ceased. Vetter notes that "penetrating abstract truths and penetrating them successively does not seem possible in a state of mind which is without contemplation and reflection."

According to Richard Gombrich, the sequence of the four rupa-jhanas describes two different cognitive states, namely concentration followed by a sharpened attention. Alexander Wynne further explains that the dhyana-scheme is poorly understood. According to Wynne, words expressing the inculcation of awareness, such as sati, sampajāno, and upekkhā, are mistranslated or understood as particular factors of meditative states, whereas they refer to a particular way of perceiving the sense objects. According to Gombrich, "the later tradition has falsified the jhana by classifying them as the quintessence of the concentrated, calming kind of meditation, ignoring the other - and indeed higher - element.

According to Vetter and Bronkhorst, dhyāna itself constituted the original "liberating practice". Vetter further argues that the eightfold path constitutes a body of practices which prepare one, and lead up to, the practice of dhyana.

Liberating insight
Discriminating insight into transiency as a separate path to liberation was a later development. According to Johannes Bronkhorst, Tillman Vetter, and K.R. Norman, bodhi was at first not specified. K. R. Norman:

According to Norman, bodhi may basically have meant the knowledge that nibbana was attained, due to the practice of dhyana.

Bronkhorst notes that the conception of what exactly this "liberating insight" was developed throughout time. Whereas originally it may not have been specified, later on the four truths served as such, to be superseded by pratityasamutpada, and still later, in the Hinayana schools, by the doctrine of the non-existence of a substantial self or person. And Schmithausen notices that still other descriptions of this "liberating insight" exist in the Buddhist canon:

The developing importance of liberating insight may have been due to an over-literal interpretation by later scholastics of the terminology used by the Buddha, or to the problems involved with the practice of dhyana, and the need to develop an easier method. According to Vetter it may not have been as effective as dhyana, and methods were developed to deepen the effects of discriminating insight. Insight was also paired to dhyana, resulting in the well-known sila-samadhi-prajna scheme. According to Vetter this kind of preparatory "dhyana" must have been different from the practice introduced by the Buddha, using kasina-exercises to produce a "more artificially produced dhyana", resulting in the cessation of apperceptions and feelings. It also led to a different understanding of the eightfold path, since this path does not end with insight, but rather starts with insight. The path was no longer seen as a sequential development resulting in dhyana, but as a set of practices which had to be developed simultaneously to gain insight.

According to Alexander Wynne, the ultimate aim of dhyana was the attainment of insight, and the application of the meditative state to the practice of mindfulness. According to Frauwallner, mindfulness was a means to prevent the arising of craving, which resulted simply from contact between the senses and their objects. According to Frauwallner this may have been the Buddha's original idea. According to Wynne, this stress on mindfulness may have led to the intellectualism which favoured insight over the practice of dhyana.

Insight and dhyana as complementary
Rupert Gethin rejects the notion of two opposing paths, arguing that a close study of the bodhipakkhiyādhammās, particularly the bojjhangas, shows how there is no conflict between samadhi and insight practices in early Buddhism, but that "in fact it turns out that the characteristically early Buddhist conception of the path leading to the cessation of suffering is that it consists precisely in the combining of calm and insight."

Bhikkhu Analayo, scholar of the early texts, has also critiqued the view that there are two contrasting views of liberation in the early sources (i.e. dhyana vs insight). According to Analayo, samadhi and insight are actually two complementary aspects of the path to liberation. Analayo refers to Damien Keown who writes that, for the Buddha, "there exist two techniques of meditation precisely because the obstacles to enlightenment are themselves twofold, both moral and intellectual." Analayo also refers to Collett Cox, who noted that it is possible that the Buddhist goal of the elimination of the asravas "subsumes knowledge and concentration as equally cooperative means rather than mutually exclusive ends," and that this view is also reflected in Abhidharma.

Keren Arbel describes the fourth jhana as "non-reactive and lucid awareness," not as a state of deep concentration. She sees samadhi and insight as closely connected, and argues that in the Pali suttas, "the entrance into the first jhāna is the actualization and embodiment of insight practice."

Dependent origination

While Pratītyasamutpāda, "dependent origination," and the twelve nidānas, the links of dependent origination, are traditionally interpreted as describing the conditional arising of rebirth in saṃsāra, and the resultant duḥkha (suffering, pain, unsatisfactoriness), an alternate Theravada questions the authenticity of this interpretation, and regards the list as describing the arising of mental formations and the resultant notion of "I" and "mine," which are the source of suffering.<ref name="Payutto">Payutto, Dependent Origination: the Buddhist Law of Causality</ref>

Scholars have noted inconsistencies in the list, and regard it to be a later synthesis of several older lists. The first four links may be a mockery of the Vedic-Brahmanic cosmogeny, as described in the Hymn of Creation of Veda X, 129 and the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad. These were integrated with a branched list which describe the conditioning of mental processes, akin to the five skandhas. Eventually, this branched list developed into the standard twelvefold chain as a linear list. While this list may be interpreted as describing the processes which give rise to rebirth, in essence it describes the arising of dukkha as a psychological process, without the involvement of an atman.

 37 factors of enlightenment
According to A.K. Warder the Bodhipakkhiyādhammā, the 37 factors of enlightenment, are a summary of the core Buddhist teachings which are common to all schools. These factors are summarized in the Maha-parinibbana Sutta, which recounts the Buddha's last days, in the Buddha's last address to his bikkhus:

Alex Wayman has criticized A.K. Warder, for failing to present an integrated picture of early Buddhism. But according to Gethin, the bodhipakkhiyādhammā provide a key to understanding the relationship between calm and insight in early Buddhist meditation theory, bringing together the practice of jhana with the development of wisdom.

 Nirvana

 As cessation and ending of rebirth
Most modern scholars such as Rupert Gethin, Richard Gombrich and Paul Williams hold that the goal of early Buddhism, nirvāṇa (nibbana in Pali, also called nibbanadhatu, the property of nibbana), means the 'blowing out' or 'extinguishing' of greed, aversion, and delusion (the simile used in texts is that of a flame going out), and that this signifies the permanent cessation of samsara and rebirth.Keown, Damien (2000), Buddhism: A Very Short Introduction (Kindle ed.), Oxford University Press As Gethin notes, "this is not a 'thing' but an event or experience" that frees one from rebirth in samsara. Gombrich argues that the metaphor of blowing out refers to fires which were kept by priests of Brahmanism, and symbolize life in the world.

According to Donald Swearer, the journey to nirvana is not a journey to a "separate reality", but a move towards calm, equanimity, nonattachment and nonself. Thomas Kasulis notes that in the early texts, nirvana is often described in negative terms, including "cessation" (nirodha), "the absence of craving" (trsnaksaya), "detachment," "the absence of delusion," and "the unconditioned" (asamskrta). He also notes that there is little discussion in the early buddhist texts about the metaphysical nature of nirvana, since they seem to hold that metaphysical speculation is an obstacle to the goal. Kasulis mentions the Malunkyaputta sutta which denies any view about the existence of the Buddha after his final bodily death, all positions (the Buddha exists after death, does not exist, both or neither) are rejected. Likewise, another sutta (AN II 161) has Sāriputta saying that asking the question "is there anything else?" after the physical death of someone who has attained nibbana is conceptualizing or proliferating (papañca) about that which is without proliferation (appapañcaṃ) and thus a kind of distorted thinking bound up with the self.

 As a kind of consciousness or a place
Edward Conze argued that nirvana was a kind of Absolute. He mentions ideas like the "person" (pudgala''), the assumption of an eternal "consciousness" in the Saddhatu sutra, the identification of the Absolute, of Nirvana, with an "invisible infinite consciousness, which shines everywhere" in Digha Nikaya XI 85, and "traces of a belief in consciousness as the nonimpermanent centre of the personality which constitutes an absolute element in this contingent world" as pointing to this.

Influenced by Schayer, M. Falk argues that the early Buddhist view of nirvana is that it is an "abode" or "place" of prajña, which is gained by the enlightened. This nirvanic element, as an "essence" or pure consciousness, is immanent within samsara. The three bodies are concentric realities, which are stripped away or abandoned, leaving only the nirodhakaya of the liberated person. A similar view is also defended by C. Lindtner, who argues that in precanonical Buddhism Nirvana is:

According to Lindtner, Canonical Buddhism was a reaction to this view, but also against the absolutist tendencies in Jainism and the Upanisads. Nirvana came to be seen as a state of mind, instead of a concrete place. Elements of this precanonical Buddhism may have survived the canonisation, and its subsequent filtering out of ideas, and re-appeared in Mahayana Buddhism. According to Lindtner, the existence of multiple, and contradicting ideas, is also reflected in the works of Nagarjuna, who tried to harmonize these different ideas. According to Lindtner, this lead him to taking a "paradoxical" stance, for instance regarding nirvana, rejecting any positive description.

Referring to this view, Alexander Wynne holds that there is no evidence in the Sutta Pitaka that the Buddha held this view, at best it only shows that "some of the early Buddhists were influenced by their Brahminic peers". Wynne concludes that the Buddha rejected the views of the vedas and that his teachings present a radical departure from these brahminical beliefs.

See also
 Atthakavagga and Parayanavagga
 Buddhist Paths to liberation
 Basic Points Unifying the Theravāda and the Mahāyāna
 Buddhist councils
 History of Buddhism
 Index of Buddhism-related articles
 Outline of Buddhism

Notes

Quotations

References

Sources

Printed sources

Further reading
History of Buddhism (general)

Early Buddhism

Modern understanding

External links
 A handful of Leaves Essential publications on Buddhist history
 Louis de La Vallée Poussin, Musial and Narad. Translated from the French by Gelongma Migme Chödrön and Gelong Lodrö Sangpo.

Early Buddhism

Pre-sectarian Buddhism


{{Infobox person|
| name               = Cacique Guaicaipuro(Guacaipuro)
| image              = File:Cacique Guaicaipuro..jpg
| caption            = A statue of Guaicaipuro
| birth_date         =  1530
| birth_place        = Northern Venezuela Province (present day Los Teques, Venezuela)
| death_date         = 1568 (aged 37-38)
| death_place        = Paracotos, Venezuela Province, Spanish Empire
}}
Cacique Guaicaipuro was a legendary native (indigenous) Venezuelan chief of both the Teques and Caracas tribes. Though known today as Guaicaipuro, in documents of the time his name was written Guacaipuro.

Life

Guaicaipuro formed a powerful coalition of different tribes which he led during part of the 16th century against the Spanish conquest of Venezuelan territory in the central region of the country, especially in the Caracas valley. He commanded, among others, Caciques (Spanish: Indian chief) , , Chacao, Aramaipuro, Paramaconi and his own son . Guaicaipuro is one of the most famous and celebrated Venezuelan caciques. The area occupied by the Teques was populated by several native groups each with its own cacique. Guaicaipuro's tribe, which was located in what is now San Antonio de los Altos, was the largest one. His son Baruta was himself a cacique. The names of two of his sisters are also known: Tiora and Caycape.

The Spaniards discovered gold in the area of the land of the Teques, and as they started to exploit the mines, Guaicaipuro attacked, forcing the Spanish to leave. Following the attack, the governor of the province of Venezuela sent  to pacify the area, which apparently he did after defeating Guaicaipuro in several engagements. Believing he had achieved his task, the Spanish commander and his soldiers left the area leaving behind miners and three of his sons. Once the Spanish soldiers had left, Guiacaipuro assaulted the mines killing all the workers as well as the sons of Rodríguez Suárez. Immediately thereafter, Rodríguez Suárez who was on his way to the city of Valencia, with a small contingent of only six soldiers, with the purpose of meeting Lope de Aguirre, another Spanish conquistador, was ambushed by Guaicaipuro and killed.

After these successes Guaicaipuro became the main and central figure in the uprising of all the native tribes in the vicinity of the Caracas valley, and managed to unite all the tribes under his command. In 1562 they defeated an expeditionary force led by Luis Narváez. Due to the fierce attacks, the Spanish retreated away from the area for several years.

In 1567 the city of Santiago de Leon de Caracas was founded in the Caracas valley. The Spanish worried about the nearby presence of Guaicaipuro and his men, and given his previous attacks, they decided not to wait for him to attack, and as a pre-emptive move Diego de Losada, (founder of Caracas) ordered the mayor of the city,  to undertake Guacaipuro's capture. In 1568 Infante and his men were led by native guides to the hut where Guaicaipuro lived and they set it on fire to force the native cacique out. Guaicaipuro was then killed by the Spanish soldiers.

 Spiritism
Guacaipuro is one of the main figures in Venezuelan spiritism, alongside María Lionza and Negro Felipe.

Legacy
The county of Guaicaipuro in the state of Miranda, Venezuela was named in his honor. Later the county became the Guaicaipuro Municipality.

Amidst the new policy started by former president Hugo Chávez of re-assessing and valuing the role of Venezuela's caciques and indigenous peoples in a historical narrative which has traditionally given greater prominence to the Spanish conquistadores, Guaicaipuro's remains were symbolically moved (his actual remains have never been found) under ceremonial pomp to the national pantheon on December 8, 2001.

Under the same policy, Chávez often mentioned Guaicaipuro and other native chiefs in his speeches with the purpose of inspiring Venezuelans to resist what he called the policies of American imperialists and interventionists directed towards Venezuela. Most notably, he did this every year during the October 12 holiday, which after being renamed several years ago Dia de la Raza (previously Americas Discovery Day), was recently renamed as Día de la Resistencia Indígena (Day of Indigenous Resistance).

The Venezuelan government named as Mission Guaicaipuro'' one of its ongoing Bolivarian Missions; this specific program seeks to restore communal land titles and human rights to Venezuela's still remaining 33 indigenous tribes.

See also
 Cacique
 European colonization of the Americas

References

1568 deaths
History of Venezuela
Venezuelan people of indigenous peoples descent
Indigenous leaders of the Americas
Year of birth uncertain

Guaicaipuro


The Panamerican Esperanto Congress (, TAKE) begun as an irregular meeting of Esperanto speakers in the Americas, and, starting with the third Congress, has been held approximately every third year under the aegis of the Committee for the Americas of the Universal Esperanto Association.

The Congress aims to strengthen solidarity among Esperantists of North, Central and South America, advance the general goals of the movement, and study its problems. The Congress organizers try to have a program with a variety of topics, so to be of interest to both specialists and non-specialists interested in gaining familiarity with individual, group and official activities of the Esperanto movement in the various countries of the Americas and around the world. In addition to the official part of the program, the Congress offers many opportunities for education and entertainment aiming to familiarize the Congress participants with the host country.

List of the Congresses

 1978: Marília, Brazil
 1980: San Luis, Argentina
 1996: San José, Costa Rica; Congress theme: "Pan-American Activity"
 1999 Jan - Feb: Bogotá, Colombia; 63 participants from 12 countries
 2001 15-21 April: Mexico City, Mexico; 169 registrants from 29 countries; Congress theme: "America: One Continent, Many Histories"
 2004: Havana, Cuba; 178 participants from 19 countries; Congress theme: "What kind of Esperanto movement for the Americas?"
 2008: Montreal, Canada; 222 registrants from 24 countries (193 participated), July 12-18; Congress theme: "Ecosystems, languages, cultures: diversity for a sustainable development in the Americas"
 2011: São Paulo, Brazil; Congress theme: "The process of regional integration in the American continent, the role of Esperanto"

External links
 5-a TAKE : Official home page (in Esperanto)
 5th TAKE : Congress resolutions (in English)
 7th TAKE : Official home page

Esperanto culture
Esperanto meetings
Recurring events established in 1978
Pan-Americanism

Panamerican Esperanto Congress