Welcome to History Podcast number 80. This is a very special episode. Just a quick warning, it does not cover history, instead it is three history podcasters Matt Datillo from Matt’s today in history, Bob Wright from Baseball History podcast and myself. If you have a color ipod you should see a picture of us recording this episode. This is a long one so there will be no Frapper Mapper segment at the end of the discussion. I hope you all enjoy. For more information please stop by historyonair.com, and while you are there please take our survey. Thank you for listening!
Archive for October, 2006
What you hear now in the background the Kent State Fight Song. And if I figured it out and you have a color ipod capable of displaying an image for this podcast you should see that famous picture of the shootings aftermath, more on the later in the show.
Located in the in northeastern Ohio
a city of some 30,000
rests on the banks of the Cuyahoga River
11 miles east of Akron, 33 miles southeast of Cleveland
May 4, 1970
Ohio National Guard fired into a crowd of Kent State University demonstrators, killing four and wounding nine Kent State students
triggered a nationwide student strike that forced hundreds of colleges and universities to close
The shootings have come to symbolize the deep political and social divisions that sharply divided the nation during the Vietnam War
WHY WAS THE OHIO NATIONAL GUARD CALLED TO KENT?
Nixon was elected president of the United States in 1968 based in part on his promise to bring an end to the war in Vietnam.
During the first year of Nixon’s presidency, America’s involvement in the war appeared to be winding down.
In late April of 1970, however, the United States invaded Cambodia and widened the Vietnam War.
This decision was announced on national television and radio on April 30, l970 by President Nixon, who stated that the invasion of Cambodia was designed to attack the headquarters of the Viet Cong, which had been using Cambodian territory as a sanctuary.
Protests occurred the next day, Friday, May 1, across United States college campuses where anti-war sentiment ran high.
At Kent State University, an anti-war rally was held at noon on the Commons, a large, grassy area in the middle of campus which had traditionally been the site for various types of rallies and demonstrations.
Fiery speeches against the war and the Nixon administration were given, a copy of the Constitution was buried to symbolize the murder of the Constitution because Congress had never declared war, and another rally was called for noon on Monday, May 4.
Friday evening in downtown Kent began peacefully with the usual socializing in the bars, but events quickly escalated into a violent confrontation between protesters and local police.
The exact causes of the disturbance are still the subject of debate,
but bonfires were built in the streets of downtown Kent, cars were stopped, police cars were hit with bottles, and some store windows were broken.
Kent Mayor Leroy Satrom declared a state of emergency
Bars were closed – increased size of angry crowd
Police used tear gas to disperse the crowd from downtown,
Crowd moved back to the campus.
Fearing further disturbances Mayor Satrom asked Governor Rhodes to send the Ohio National Guard, which he did at 5pm.
There had been threats made to downtown businesses and city officials as well as rumors that radical revolutionaries were in Kent to destroy the city and the university.
WHAT HAPPENED SATURDAY MAY 2 AND SUNDAY MAY 3 AFTER THE GUARDS ARRIVED ON CAMPUS?
Members of the Ohio National Guard were already on duty in Northeast Ohio, so they quickly to move to Kent.
They arrived at 10 p.m., and encountered a riotous scene.
The wooden ROTC building adjacent to the Commons was on fire and would eventually burn to the ground
There is still controversy regarding who set fire to the ROTC building
Assumed protestors responsible
Interfered with firemen extinguishing the fire
Cheered the burning
Confrontations between Guardsmen and demonstrators continued well into the night
tear gas filled the campus
numerous arrests were made
Sunday, May 3rd
Nearly 1000 Ohio National Guardsmen occupied the campus
The day was warm and sunny, however, and students frequently talked amicably with Guardsmen.
Ohio Governor James Rhodes flew to Kent on Sunday morning
At a press conference, he said, campus protesters the worst type of people in America and every force of law will be used to deal with them.
Rhodes also indicated that he would seek a court order declaring a state of emergency
National Guard and University officials assumed it was being declared
All rallies were banned when the Guard acted on its assumption and took control from the University officials
Further confrontations between protesters and guardsmen occurred Sunday evening
Rocks and tear gas thrown and arrests took place on campus
On Friday, May 1, student protest leaders called for another rally to be held on the Commons at noon on Monday, May 4.
Although University officials warned against it a crowd began to gathering beginning as early as 11 a.m.
By noon, the Commons area contained 3,000 people
Although estimates are inexact,
about 500 core demonstrators , Victory Bell at one end of the Commons
another 1,000 people were supporting the active demonstrators
and an additional 1,500 people were spectators standing around the perimeter of the Commons
Across the Commons at the burned-out ROTC building stood about 100 Ohio National Guardsmen carrying lethal M-1 military rifles.
Little evidence exists as to who were the leaders of the rally and what activities were planned, but initially the rally was peaceful.
WHO MADE THE DECISION TO BAN THE RALLY OF MAY 4?
1975 federal civil trial, General Robert Canterbury, the highest official of the Guard, testified that widespread consensus existed that the rally should be prohibited because of the tensions that existed and the possibility that violence would again occur.
Kent State President Robert White had explicitly told Canterbury that any demonstration would be highly dangerous.
In contrast, White testified that he could recall no conversation with Canterbury regarding banning the rally.
The decision to ban the rally can most accurately be traced to Governor Rhodes’ statements on Sunday,
May 3 when he stated that he would be seeking a state of emergency declaration from the courts.
Although he never did this, all officials — Guard, University, Kent — assumed that the Guard was now in charge of the campus and that all rallies were illegal.
Thus, University leaders printed and distributed on Monday morning 12,000 leaflets indicating that all rallies, including the May 4th rally scheduled for noon, were prohibited as long as the Guard was in control of the campus.
WHAT EVENTS LED DIRECTLY TO THE SHOOTINGS?
Shortly before noon, General Canterbury made the decision to order the demonstrators to disperse.
A Kent State police officer made an announcement using a bullhorn.
When this had no effect, the officer and several Guardsmen drove across the Commons to tell the protesters that the rally was banned and that they must disperse.
This was met with angry shouting and rocks, and the jeep retreated.
Canterbury ordered his men to lock and load their weapons
tear gas canisters were fired into the crowd around the Victory Bell
the Guard began to march across the Commons to disperse the rally
The protesters moved up a steep hill, known as Blanket Hill, and then down the other side of the hill onto the Prentice Hall parking lot as well as an adjoining practice football field.
Most of the Guardsmen followed the students directly and soon found themselves somewhat trapped on the practice football field because it was surrounded by a fence.
Yelling and rock throwing reached a peak as the Guard remained on the field for about ten minutes.
The Guardsmen huddling together knelt and pointed their guns, but no weapons were shot at this time
The Guard then began to return up Blanket Hill.
At the top of the hill, 28 of the more than 70 Guardsmen turned and fired their rifles and pistols. Many fired into the air or the ground. However, a small portion fired directly into the crowd. There were between 61 and 67 shots fired in a 13 second period.
HOW MANY DEATHS AND INJURIES OCCURRED?
Four Kent State students died as a result of the firing by the Guard.
The closest student at 270 feet from the Guard
standing in an access road leading into the Prentice Hall parking lot
shot in the mouth
Prentice Hall parking lot
330 feet from the Guardsmen
shot in the left side of her body
Prentice Hall parking lot
390 feet from the Guard
left side of his back
Prentice Hall parking lot
390 feet from the Guard
bullet pierced the left front side of her neck
9 Kent State students were wounded in the 13 seconds of fire. Most of the students were in the Prentice Hall parking lot. A few were on the Blanket Hill area
closest about 60 feet
middle finger extended
bullets struck him in the right abdomen and left lower leg
was wounded in the left ankle
upper left chest
most seriously wounded of the nine students
small of his back
300 feet and was permanently paralyzed from the waist down.
right thigh and right forehead
farthest, 750 feet
WHY DID THE GUARDSMEN FIRE?
(1)the Guardsmen fired in self-defense, and the shootings were therefore justified
(2)the Guardsmen were not in immediate danger, and therefore the shootings were unjustified.
fear of their lives.
numerous investigating commissions, federal court
had to fire in self-defense.
federal criminal and civil trials have accepted the position of the Guardsmen
1974 federal criminal trial
District Judge Frank Battisti dismissed the case
against eight Guardsmen indicted by a federal grand jury
ruling at mid-trial that the government’s case against the Guardsmen was so weak
that the defense did not have to present its case
1975 (much longer and more complex) federal civil trial
a jury voted 9-3 that none of the Guardsmen were legally responsible for the shootings
This decision was appealed,
Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a new trial had to be held because of the improper handling of a threat to a jury member.
January of 1979 with an out-of-court settlement
a statement signed by 28 defendants
$675,000 to the wounded students and the parents of the students who had been killed.
money was paid by the State of Ohio rather than by any Guardsmen
the amount equaled what the State estimated it would cost to go to trial again.
the statement signed by members of the Ohio National Guard was viewed by them to be a declaration of regret, not an apology or an admission of wrongdoing:
In retrospect, the tragedy of May 4, 1970 should not have occurred. The students may have believed that they were right in continuing their mass protest in response to the Cambodian invasion, even though this protest followed the posting and reading by the university of an order to ban rallies and an order to disperse. These orders have since been determined by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals to have been lawful.
Some of the Guardsmen on Blanket Hill, fearful and anxious from prior events, may have believed in their own minds that their lives were in danger. Hindsight suggests that another method would have resolved the confrontation. Better ways must be found to deal with such a confrontation.
We devoutly wish that a means had been found to avoid the May 4th events culminating in the Guard shootings and the irreversible deaths and injuries. We deeply regret those events and are profoundly saddened by the deaths of four students and the wounding of nine others which resulted. We hope that the agreement to end the litigation will help to assuage the tragic memories regarding that sad day.
numerous other studies of the shootings
primary responsibility for the shootings lies with the Guardsmen
Experts who find the Guard primarily responsible find themselves in agreement with the conclusion of the
Scranton Commission Report
1970, p. 87
“The indiscriminate firing of rifles into a crowd of students and the deaths that followed were unnecessary, unwarranted, and inexcusable.”
WHAT HAPPENED IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE SHOOTINGS?
Faculty marshals convinced the students (willing to risk their lives trying to kill the Guardsmen) to leave the Commons.
Ambulances arrived and took those not already dead to hospitals for treatment.
The University was ordered closed immediately
first by President Robert White
and then indefinitely by Portage County Prosecutor Ronald Kane under an injunction from Common Pleas Judge Albert Caris.
Classes did not resume until the Summer of 1970
faculty members engaged in a wide variety of activities through the mail and off-campus meetings that enabled Kent State students to finish the semester.
WHAT IS THE STORY BEHIND THE PULITZER PRIZE WINNING PHOTO OF THE YOUNG WOMAN CRYING OUT IN HORROR OVER THE DYING BODY OF ONE OF THE STUDENTS?
A photograph of Mary Vecchio, a fourteen year old runaway
screaming over the body of Jeffery Miller appeared on the front pages of newspapers and magazines throughout the country
the photographer, John Filo, was to win a Pulitzer Prize for the picture.
The Mary Vecchio picture shows her on one knee screaming over Jeffrey Miller’s body.
Miller is lying on the tarmac of the Prentice Hall parking lot.
One student is standing near the Miller body closer than Vecchio.
Four students are seen in the immediate background.
John Filo, a Kent State photography major in 1970
continues to works as a professional newspaper photographer and editor.
He was near the Prentice Hall parking lot when the Guard fired.
He saw bullets hitting the ground, but he did not take cover because he thought the bullets were blanks. Of course, blanks cannot hit the ground.
Well that is all for the history portion of todays show. I hope you all enjoyed learning about the 1970 Kent State Shooting. I would like to thank David from Irvine for suggesting this episode. You can suggest an episode as well by calling the history hotline at (206) 339-7278 or visiting historyonair.com.
Please stay tuned at the end of the show to hear a promo from one of my favorite podcast The Unreal OC. Also, I have received many emails from listeners these past few weeks and I would like to thank all of you especially, Becky and Christian who submitted intros for the podcast and won a book each. I promise to mail your books soon.
Todays intro was from Andy Walker of Lab Rats TV. I meet Andy and Sean at the Podcast Expo in Ontario California and they interviewed me for their video podcast. I highly recommend their show to all of you. Make sure you watch Episode 45: LabRats at Podcast Expo 2006 (Part 1) and you can see me in person, kinda.
Coming up on the podcast you will be hearing a great program on Nauropathy medicine by Listener Brett. Also, coming up I was lucky enough to run into Matt Ditillo from Matt’s today in history and Bob Wright from Baseball History Podcast. We all got together on the show room floor and recorded for an hour. That special episode will be coming out soon as well.
Make sure you stop by historyonair.com to see some great podcast that I recently added to the “Friends” page.
Our Frapper mappers for this episode are:
- Sarah Shelton from Austin, TX
- Chris from Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
- Angel from Stillwater, Oklahoma Angel Says, “Great podcast! It makes my boring down time way easier to deal with!”
- Iain Cheyne from London, Arkansas
- Holly Casey from Cedar Hill, Texas
If you would like to hear your name read as part of the Frapper Mapper segment, go to historyonair.com and click on the frapper link.
Please remember to use the links on historyonair.com for all your amazon.com holiday shopping. The podcast will get a small percentage of your purchase at no additional cost to you.
Thank you all for listening! Have a great week and I will speak with you soon.
Welcome to history podcast episode 81. Lots of news about the podcast to be covered after the history. Todays subject is The Great Fire of Rome in 64AD. As I am not familiar with this topic please excuse me if I make an mispronunciations and feel free to call me out on them in the forums.
This is a request from Chris Otto from Minneapolis Minnesota.
There is not a lot of information about the Great Fire of 64. I checked out four books from my local library, two of them on Nero who was the emperor at the time and the last two were by Roman historians Suetonius and Tacitus.
These two Roman historians only devote a couple pages each to the fire. There was another Roman historian who also wrote about the fire. Cassious Dio, but I could not find any of his works at my local library.
The two books about Nero do a very good job of summarizing what Suetonius and Tacitus report. The first book is Nero by Edward Champlin the second Nero: The end of a Dynasty by Miriam T. Griffin.
Champlin starts by opening the first question, when was the fire. Reports differ as to if it was the night of the 18th or 19th. However, all agree that the fire started in the southeastern section of the Circus Maximus near the Palatine and Caelaian hills. The items in the stores fuled the flames of the fire. The wind drove the fire down the 650 meters of the circus. Then it consumed its way north along the east side of the Palatine through the Colosseum’s Valley to the lower reaches of the Esquiline.
They tore down a number of small buildings so that there was nothing to feed the fire. The plan worked. After six days the fire stopped.
However, soon the fire returned. No mention is given to how much time passed between this fire and the last one. Only that the second fire started before the people had time to recover from the first. The second fire did not cause as much damage and death as the first.
To better understand the timing of the fires Camplin summarizes, “Tactius reports that the fire started on July 18 and burned itself out on the sixth day Suetonius says the disaster raged for six days and seven nights, scholars therefore assume that it started on the night of the 18/19 and burned of the six days of 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 and 24 of July and burned itself out during the night of the 24th. Tactius says it broke out again, but doesn’t mention how long the second fire lasted and Suetonius is apparently unaware that it had broke out again. The second fire started North of the Capitoline Hill, but did not spread to the Campus Martius, where the buildings were open to the newly homeless.
As for the extent of the damage Dio says that two-thirds of the city burned and countless people died. Fourteen of the cities regions were undamaged, three burned to the ground, and their were smoking ruins in the other seven. This is as detailed a description as I could find on exactly what burned and where.
Nero had been in Antium, but quickly returned to take control of the situation. He opened the Campus Martius and the buildings of Agrippa for the homeless. And even his own gardens were opened to those who had lost their homes. In addition he made arrangements for temporary housing to be constructed and provided supplies from neighboring municipalities. Suetonius says that the people were driven to take shelter in monuments and tombs. He also lowered the price of grain. As Camplin puts it “Nero’s response to the disaster was magnificent. Prompt relief of misery through temporary housing, emergency supplies, and cheap grain, he launched a careful and comprehensive long-term reconstruction of the city.”
This next quote from Suetonius does not speak well of Nero:
“Nero’s men destroyed not only a vast number of apartment blocks, but mansions which had belonged to famous generals….Nero watched the conflagration from the Tower of Maecenas, enraptured by what he called ‘the beauty of the flames’; then put on his tragedian’s costume and sang The Sack of Ilium from beginning to end. He offered to remove the corpses and rubble free of charge, but allowed nobody to search among the ruins even of his own mansion; he wanted to collect as much loot and spoils as possible himself. Then he opened the fire relief fund and insisted on contributions, which bled the provincials white and practically beggared all private citizens.”
Camplin backs up Suestonious claim that the rich paid for the disaster saying “The cost of the fire fell on the rich, communities outside of Rome.” So was Nero’s magnificent response to the fire worth it?
Yes, that is right it seems that many thought Nero was to blame for the fires. However, Suetonius was unsure. Dio and Tactius were sure of his guilt. Nero blamed a Jewish sect, infamous for its hatred of the human race. Not sure what sect that was. He sacrificed them to the gods. Camplin says, “initially ancient opinion was divided.” as to Nero’s guilt. Some writers (now lost) attributed the Great Fire to accident, some a plot by Nero.
So if Nero did do it why would he? According to Camplin, he is said to have been offended by the ugliness of the ancient buildings and the narrow, winding streets, and a play written shortly after his death made mention that he wanted to take revenge on his people of their support in 62 of his discarded wife, Octavia. Camplin continues, Nero therefore dispatched his agents to destroy the city, though accounts fo the actual arson differ. Dio presents his story as fact, he says, Nero’s men, pretending to be drunk or up to no good, set fire to different buildings in different parts of the city, causing general panic and chaos; later, some of those who should have been extinguishing the flames, soldiers and vigiles (the night watchmen), were seen actually to be kindling them, Suetonious’ account is similar: several ex-consuls discovered Nero’s own personal servants, his cubicularii, on their properties with tow and torches. Cubicularri were slaves who had the care of sleeping and dwelling rooms. Faithful slaves were always selected for this office as they had to a certain extent the care of the master’s person. Tacitus’ story is also similar, but he presents every thing as no more than rumor: rescue efforts were hampered be a number of unnamed people who either prevented the flames from being extinguished or openly hurled torches, shouting that someone had given them orders.
One final comment from Camplin, “Not only did the emperor cause the destruction of this capital, he gloried in it, or –as a seventeenth-century accretion to the legend so memorably phrased it—Nero fiddled while Rome burned. The accounts of what he actually did vary remarkably, as we have seen.”
In Nero’s defense there are three arguments of his innocence. 1. Accidents were far too likely, Rome was overcrowded, poorly constructed, and inadequately protected by fire-fighting forces. It constantly suffered major fires. 2. The moon was full on July 17, so on the 18/19 it was still almost full, making it a bad night for arson, because the arsonist were more likely to have been seen with so much light. 3. Why would Nero put so much effort into recovering from the fire if he had caused it? Wouldn’t have made more sense to demolish whatever he wanted and then rebuild?
What do you think? Visit the new Forums and let me know if you think Nero was innocent or not?
As for the people of Rome, they did not blame Nero, instead they blamed person’s unknown. If they did believe that Nero was to blame they would have made their beliefs known.
If Nero was innocent then what of his henchmen? Did they start the fire and it got out of hand? Or did they find the fire already blazing and contribute to it for their own reasons? Again, a question open for discussion on the new History Podcast forums. Check out the website for more information.
That does it for our history this week. Please stop by the website and let me know about yourself by taking the survey. You get to hear from me every week, but I don’t know many of you. The survey gives me a chance to learn about you. Please take a moment and fill out this short survey. Thank you.
The website is growing be leaps and bounds. There is a new forums available for discussion on anything you wish. Please help me grow this new section of the website. Also, I will be launching some more great features to the website. So keep an eye open for some very cool stuff there.
- Danielle from Washington DC she says “Hi!”
- Michelle Adcock from Thorndale, Pennsylvania
- Scott Longworth from Belfast, Ireland says, “Love the Podcast!” Thanks Scott.
- John from Aichi, Japan says “Konichiwa yo” I don’t know much Japanese but I do know that means greetings, so konichiwa right back to ya yo.
- Brett Horgan from Hamilton, New Zealand
Thank you all for taking the time to add yourself to the frapper map! I’m very glad you are listening. If I haven’t read your name yet please visit historyonair.com and click on the frapper map link to add yourself. And soon you will hear your name as well!
Remember to start your amazon.com shopping from our website. The podcast will get a small percentage of your purchase at no additional cost to you. Thank you!
One more reminder please fill out the survey at historyonair.com. And keep an eye open for the new features this week. Thank you all for listening! After the show I will be playing a promo for Lifespring! Podcast and some audio comments I have received via the history hotline.