The ambitions of Henry VIII in the years to 1526 Essay Example for Free

The ambitions of Henry VIII in the years to 1526 Essay How successful was Wolsey’s foreign policy in satisfying the ambitions of Henry VIII in the years to 1526? (24 marks) The foreign policy of the 12 years following 1514 was Wolsey’s accounts have been written almost as if, during these years, Henry VIII only existed as a stamp and the decisions were made by Wolsey. It is apparent that Wolsey made most decisions on a day-to-day basis and occasionally took major initiatives without the King’s acknowledgement. Henry intervened decisively at times to redirect events at his pleasure. Wolsey has to look like he was implementing the King’s policies even if he was pursuing his own ideas. Henry played a more significant role in the formation and conduct of Wolsey’s foreign policy than has traditionally been suggested. It was argued that the aim was perused in order to preserve some influence for England in foreign affairs, by ensuring that no one attained such dominance that he could arrange matters without taking into account the interests of other states, such as England. The claim was that Wolsey followed this policy by threatening to give his support to whichever side seemed likely to be worsted by the other. It was maintained that this policy was generally successful in ensuring that England’s international status remained high. This is the orthodox interpretation, where the main idea is that Wolsey wanted to maintain the balance of power. However, J.J. Scarisbrick had serious doubt on the geniuses of Wolsey’s ambition to become Pope. He argued that Wolsey’s support of papal diplomatic initiatives was largely coincidental and happened because England and the Papacy shared common interests from time to time. Scarisbrick established a new ’revisionist’ interpretation based on the existence of a main aim and a preferred method. The aim was the established and maintenance of peace. The method was a variant of the old ’balance of power’ interpretation. He established this by claiming that Wolsey sought to achieve an ’unbalance of power’ that he tried always to join the stronger side, so that it would create a sufficient imbalance for the other side to realise that fighting was pointless. He claimed that this policy has not been more apparent to observers because Wolsey was not very good at implementing it and frequently made mistakes, which he attempted to justify by p retending that his aims and methods were other than they had been. Henry had a very aggressive policy on France, until he eventually decided on trying to become the peacemaker of Europe. Henry wanted to regain the lost territory in northern France so he could be seen as a Great War lord with visions of honour and glory, but also to challenge Henry V’s title of the last great English warrior. The first sign of this aim being put into place is the first French war from 1512-1514. However the first expedition on June 1512 was a disastrous failure as Ferdinand of Aragon and Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian didn’t hold up to their end of the deal for an allied invasion. This shows Henrys naivety in foreign policy and the other European powers were using him to benefit themselves whilst sending him to his downfall. Wolsey gained his first experience of the duties and pitfalls involved in organising financing, transporting and feeding an army. Wolsey was blamed by many for the shambles that developed after the army landed in France despite the fact that he was a junior member of the Royal Council. However, Henry did not blame Wolsey and the manner in which Wolsey had conducted himself in correspondence with Ferdinand of Aragon impressed Henry. Despite this Henry personally lead an army of 25,000 across the channel and took Thà ©rouanne and Tournai in northern France and winning memorable battles such as the battle of the spurs. Wolsey was the Quarter-Master generally rather than the war minister. When a French force was defeated near Thà ©rouanne, Wolsey’s reputation as a master organiser was enhanced. The King’s growing trust in Wolsey enabled English diplomacy to shape, the guiding principle of which was to ensure that England, the least important of the three great western monarchies, was not left isolated against a Valois-Hapsburg alliance. Wolsey was the one who very effectively organised the second attempt on besieging France and made the peace agreements between the two nations in 1514, so it could be argued that the foreign policy towards the French at the time was policy’s that of Wolsey not Henry. Also in later years in the second French war 1522-25 Henry was yet again let down by his allies Charles V and Duke of Bourbon, which shows he didn’t learnt from previous experiences and is not very knowledgeable in foreign policy. Henry’s policy in France benefited him slightly by collecting a pension from the French, but is failure as it shows he can be manipulated by other powers and lost huge amounts of money on war. On a financial level the wars with France did have some bonuses one being the pensions they would receive due to the peace treaties. During Henry’s reign he managed to accumulate  £730,379 in funds from the French; however this was in no comparison to the amount spent on the wars which was  £3,545,765, so the pension was more of a consolation. D. MacCulloch quotes â€Å"Henrys demand for his pension was much more constant† which means he made sure he collected his money which shows he’s a strong king. Wolsey was unable to prevent the Emperor’s friends from persuading Henry VIII that England must take some military action against France. Francis chose to ignore the warnings he’d been given. An English army was sent to France at short notice in August 1523. In the sixteenth century, military action proved to be much less decisive than its authors had expected. Wolsey’s and Henry’s passing enthusiasm for armed intervention evaporated, and Wolsey was allowed to implement his original strategy of stalling Charles’ demands for action while he was attempted to negotiate a general peace with the French. But on February 1525, Charles secured the decisive victory that Wolsey had estimated to be so unlikely. In a battle that took place outside the walls of Pavia, in northern Italy, the unthinkable happened. Not only was the French army totally destroyed as an effective fighting force, but Francis I and most of his leading supporters were captured. This placed Charles in an overwhelmingly dominant position and Henry VIII was not slow to seek advantage of the situation. He realised that here was a rare opportunity to fulfil his intermittently held dream of securing the French crown for himself; Francis was prepared to launch fresh attacks on Charles within a year of his release. Henry had hopes of launching an attack on France while she was leaderless, but he was forced to abandon these when he was unable to raise the necessary finance. It shows that Wolsey was less enthusiastic about this, as shown by the lack of determination in making success of the ‘Amicable Grant’ which was supposed to fund for this. However Wolsey was certainly not diligent in encouraging the formation of an anti-imperial alliance (the League of Cognac) in northern Italy in 1526, with which France could associate in her efforts to reserve the verdict of Pavia. A further aim of Henry’s was to achieve everlasting honour and glory. He wanted to be remembered throughout the ages and to have a huge reputation in Europe and be among the great superpowers in Europe. He achieved historical remembrance quite easily from the many famous acts he passed; however he did bathe in a huge amount of glory and honour when the field of cloth of gold was held. This was a spectacular array of games held in Calais 1520 between Henry and Francis, it was meant to be a diplomatic meeting however no agreements were made, yet it did make Henry look good. However he failed on a lot of attempted invasions to France, but he overall succeeded in acquiring a degree of honour and glory in Europe. It seems that Henry and Francis viewed the occasion as no more than an opportunity to impress others of their wealth and international standing. The field of Cloth of Gold did nothing to advance the cause of general peace. If anything it created problems for Wolsey in convincing the rest of Europe that England was not taking sides in the already developing struggle for supremacy between Francis I and Charles V. Henry was most grateful to Wolsey for making it appear to the World that he was the equal of the two ‘super power’ rulers of Europe. Henry also managed to achieve success by maintaining links with the Netherlands. England depended on the Antwerp cloth market heavily as cloth was England biggest trading material at the time. Henry tried to maintain this link throughout, by allying with Charles V whenever he went to war, as Charles was in control of the Netherlands at the time. As years passed, Henry began to portray the image of being the peacemaker of Europe. Under the guidance of Wolsey Henry began to use the treaty of London in his own favour to try and achieve a peaceful Europe. It could be argued that Henry only resorted to this as he couldn’t achieve honour through war. However he undertook this role to try and make the country look good, cement his place at the top of the leader board in Europe and make England look bigger and more powerful than what it really was. He also used the treaty of London so he had alliance requests from Charles V and Francis I before the Hapsburg-Valois war, so he could choose which side would benefit him the most. In October 1518 the treaty was signed, with Wolsey being the organiser. England and France were the first signatories and within a few months, Spain and the Papacy also signed. It was a grandiose scheme’ intended to bind the 20 leading states of Europe to perpetual peace with one another. The plan was for all those states with an active foreign policy not only to commit themselves to non-aggression, but to promise to make war on any ruler who went against the treaty, thus making it impossible for any state to benefit from attacking another. Wolsey delivered an oration in praise of peace that was much acclaimed. This wasn’t actual topic that the Pope had organised it for, buy Wolsey changed it. This could be seen as Wolsey trying to get his own way and for his own gain, but it benefited himself, Henry and all of England. Historians have generally viewed this initiative as yet another example of Wolsey’s cynical self-interest. The public perception was that Wolsey was working to implement the Pope’s wishes because he was using the fact that he was acting as the Pope’s representative because he was Legatus a Latere. Others have maintained that he was merely seeking to satisfy his sense of his own importance by being seen to be the peacemaker (arbiter) of Europe, and to be treated as such during the extensive public celebrations that accompanied the unveiling of the treaty. Many believe that he was guilty of sacrificing national interests for personal gain. A Hapsburg-Valois conflict began when Charles was elected Holy Roman Emperor in 1519. This situation presented Henry VIII and Wolsey with both continuous opportunities and frequent challenges. Given the strategic position that England enjoyed, being able either to disrupt Charles’s communications between Spain and Netherlands or to open a new front in any attack on France, her favours were certain to be in great demand from the two major powers. Wolsey was called on to pay some of the price for his triumph of the Treaty of London. Francis I had been happy enough to receive his reward for agreeing to join the Cardinal’s ‘grand design’ but he had no intention of being constrained by its terms on conditions. Francis was determined to strengthen his position in Northern Italy by military action against Charles and his supporters. Charles called upon England another to come to his assistance to halt the aggressor. In August 1521, Wolsey travelled to Bruges in Netherlands in order to meet with Charles on the action to be taken. The agreement made with Charles was that an English army would invade France unless Francis agreed to make peace. The mere threat of English action would be sufficient to persuade France to make terms. Wolsey had experience of Francis’ stubbornness that he must have realised that a threat was likely to be insufficient. He was more than satisfied with the honour that his meeting with Charles had brought him. Henry however failed in securing his dynasty. He married his daughter Mary off to Charles V. However it failed because Mary and Charles did not have children. But, in 1514 Louis XII of France became a widower. Wolsey seized the opportunity to propose a Valois-Tudor alliance to be sealed by the offer in marriage of Mary, sister of Henry VII. With Henry’s willing consent, the marriage went ahead and the ensuring treaty gave Henry an annuity of 100,000 crowns and confirmed English possession of Tournai. The success of the negotiations had enabled Wolsey to cement his place as the King’s chief diplomat. Scarisbrick’s interpretation has not been replaced by an alternative straightforward explanation. This is because it has become more and more apparent that no coherent pattern ever existed in Wolsey’s approach to diplomacy. It is now widely accepted that there was no single guiding principle that directed his actions throughout his 15 years in power. At differing times he was motivated by selfish considerations, especially a desire to obtain more extensive or longer-lasting delegated powers from the Pope. The need to satisfy the expectations of Henry VIII to further what he considered to be national or papal interests and by an altruistic inclination to benefit mankind by creating an era of peace. It is impossible to detect if many or all of these motives were behind each decision he made. There is not enough evidence to judge the importance of these motives. So in conclusion, Wolsey’s foreign policy to a great extent, satisfied Henry’s ambitions because Wolsey did exactly what Henry wanted; even though he thought about himself a lot.

An Essay Concerning Alias Grace As A Major Piece Of Literature

  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The book Alias Grace by Margaret Atwood is a beautifully articulated work of literature. The book presents a Victorian mode spiced up with spooky plot twists. Although the book presents a Victorian mode it is not entirely comprised of Romantic ideals. Atwood is a modern writer who was influenced by the major paradigms of both American and Canadian history. Since she was a child, she was fascinated by the true story of Grace Marks. Grace Marks was a teenage, Canadian domestic worker of the nineteenth century who was convicted upon the murder of her employer (Thomas Kinnear) and his mistress (Nancy Montgomery). In this novel, Atwood reimagines Grace’s enigmatic story. And in doing so, she embodies a signature theme, the injustices of women’s lives which also conveys the literary importance of the book. Also, she portrays the hypocrisy and ignorance of Victorian culture. Atwood also cleverly uses the characters’ conversations to convey topics su ch as prostitution, spiritualism, and treatment for the insane. This is one factor that makes Atwood’s style unique. Alias Grace has a style that is thoroughly logical yet complicated. This is not the case with the author’s tone which remains indifferent throughout the book. And so, this intriguing novel is one of unique style, indifferent tone, a signature theme that conveys the injustices of women’s lives that was influenced by all of the important eras pertaining to both American and Canadian Literature.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Atwood presents a style unlike any other in her book, Alias Grace. Throughout the novel, Atwood inserts excerpts from other literary works to help illustrate the very complex Grace Marks. This is not common amongst modern writers. Another aspect that makes Atwood’s style unique, at least in this book, is her change of perspective. The book constantly changes from one perspective to another. Most of the book is either a narrative or a conversation (mainly between Dr. Simon Jordan and Grace Marks). Sometimes the book is in first person omniscient as seen through the eyes of Grace, and at other at other times, the book is in third person in a series of letters (and this is what may seem complicated to the reader). This shows Atwood’s grand creativity. Another aspect regarding Atwood’s style is her creative and descriptive diction. A good example of this can be... ...with one of which is blame. This can be seen in the quote, â€Å". . . once you are found with a man in your room you are the guilty one, no matter how they get in.† This is an example of how the book not only shows the superiority of men but also how women are always the one who get the blame. This was definitely true of Victorian times, and is usually the case today. This quote is very significant in that it foreshadows who will be seen as guiltier between McDermott and Grace when it is time for the trials. And after Grace is found to be guilty, she becomes known as a â€Å"celebrated murderess.† As can be concluded, Atwood’s signature theme in this book deals with the injustices of women’s lives.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The novel Alias Grace by Margaret Atwood is a compelling story of a young woman convicted for murder. The novel is especially unique in its style, and although its tone remains indifferent, it conveys a unifying theme concerning injustices which women must face. And the novel gave Atwood the chance to embrace her fascination with the strong, clever, diligent, talented, thought-provoking, intelligent Grace Marks. And so, Alias Grace is a great book unlike any other.

Research for a Database For a Travel Agents Essay

Introduction I have been given a task to make things easier for a travel agent called Type a Flight. Type a Flight is a travel agent which is situated in Warrington and it was established in 2005 and it also has about 500 customers. The company does all its work manually. They keep their documents in filing cabinets. So when customers call in to book flights then they have to look in the cabinets for a document. This is very time consuming and due to this problem they could loose a fantastic amount of customers because they will get tired on the phone. Filing cabinets also take up a lot of space. This is getting very difficult and time consuming as the number of customers is rising on a daily basis. One of the problems is that it takes time writing letters by hand .For this problem I have come to conclusion that I will create template letters for the company and these can be sent out to customers to tell the customers that their ticket is ready or for any reasons. The conclusion I have come to is that I am going to help the agency in every single way. My main aim is to make the agency more professional and more modern and make things easier for them. For me to do my task, I will need a computer and a few important application softwares with which I shall make a database, logo and other things. Research I had a look at a database which I was shown by my class teacher. It was called ‘Type of Flight’. In the database it had things like name, ID, gender, telephone number. Database: Type a Flight Comment: The logo is located on the centre of the switchboard. The logo is got to do with holidays and other things which the agency offers. Around the logo there are the buttons which will be needed. The database has things like name, town, address, telephone numbers, date of birth, gender postcode and other few things. The database makes things easier and quicker now. This was done by putting queries, forms and a switchboard. Tasks To do my task I have broke the task into the following five parts: 1. Getting information about the travel agency. 2. Design a logo and a slogan for the travel agency. 3. Create a database, Queries, Forms and switchboard. 4. Create a letterhead and design letter templates. 5. Writing reports at the end (User Guides). 1. Getting information about the travel agency a. I can do this task by going on the internet but I will not do it this way because on the internet it will not tell you how the agency works. b. I can also do this task by going around and asking a few people but will not use it because people might not have the correct and up to date information. c. I will do this task this by ‘Interviewing the agency manager’ because he will know the latest information and what problems there are in the agency. 1. What problems do you have in the agency? 2. How many customers does the agency have? Less than 100 100-250 250-500 More than 500 3. How are the documents of the customers stored? Filing Cabinet Other 4. What do you think of a computerized way to remove your problems? 5. Do your employees know how to use Microsoft Access? Yes No Do not know 6. Are your employees capable of using a switchboard? Yes No Do not know 7. Does the agency have letter templates? Yes No 8. Does the agency have a good logo? Yes No 9. Do the employees need a user guide? Yes No 10. What changes will the agency have if the computerized way was used? 2. Design a logo and a slogan for the travel agency a. I can do this task by using Microsoft Word but will not do it this way because it does not have many of the tools needed to make a logo but I can make the slogan on it. b. I can also do this task by using Adobe Photoshop but will not use it because the application is quite complicated for me. c. I will do this task this by using ‘Paint’ because It offers a good amount of tools which can be used to make a good logo and a slogan. 3. Create a database, Queries, Forms and switchboard a. I can do this task by using pen and paper but will not do it this way because it will be time consuming and many mistakes can be made. b. I can also do this task by using Open Office Base but will not use it because it is harder to use than Microsoft Access. c. I will do this task this by using ‘Microsoft Access’ because I can make databases, Queries, Forms and switchboards more quicker because I have used it many times before. 4. Create a letterhead and design letter templates a. I can do this task by using Microsoft Publisher but will not do it this way because it is a little hard to create a letter template but a letterhead can be produced easily. b. I can also do this task by using Paint but will not use it because it is not suitable for large amount writing. c. I will do this task this by using ‘Microsoft Word’ because this application is good for making letterheads and letter templates as it gives a step by step way of making it. 5. Writing reports at the end (User Guides) a. I can do this task by using WordPad but will not do it this way because it is not possible to put in arrows to make things clearer to people. b. I can also do this task by doing it on paper and there after scan it but will not use it because it may not be neat and professional enough. c. I will do this task this by using ‘Microsoft Word’ because I can take screen shots and then I can paste them onto the page. There after I will put in arrows and any other things if needed to label it clearly with information so that people fully understand. Input, Output, Process and Storage After my research and looking at the various tasks, I can establish what the input, output and storage of the system is. Ease of use The final product that I will make would consist of database, queries, forms and letterheads. It would be easy for the agency to use because I think the employees are more or less familiar with computers and using the applications needed. I will also supply them with a user guide. The user guide will be simple and very easy to use. It will have screenshots and clear labeling with arrows so if the employees get stuck any where then they could refer to the user guide which has clear instructions and easy step by step of using any application. After using the user guide the employees should have no doubt in using an application. Description of problem = 1 Plan of solution = 1 Methods = 1 Solution meets requirement = 1 Ease of use = 1

The Sobibor Revoltâ€Jewish Retaliation During Holocaust

Jews have often been accused of going to their deaths during the Holocaust like sheep to the slaughter, but this just wasnt true. Many resisted. However, the individual attacks and the individual escapes lacked the zest of defiance and craving for life that others, looking back in time, expect and want to see. Many now ask, why didnt the Jews just pick up guns and shoot? How could they let their families starve and die without fighting back? However, one must realize that resisting and revolting were just not this simple. If one prisoner were to pick up a gun and shoot, the SS would not just kill the shooter, but also randomly choose and kill twenty, thirty, even a hundred others in retaliation. Even if escaping from a camp were possible, where were the escapees to go? The roads were traveled by Nazis and the forests were filled with armed, anti-Semitic Poles. And during the winter, during the snow, where were they to live? And if they had been transported from the West to the East, they spoke Dutch or French - not Polish. How were they to survive in the countryside without knowing the language? Although the difficulties seemed insurmountable and success improbable, the Jews of the Sobibor Death Camp attempted a revolt. They made a plan and attacked their captors, but axes and knives were little match for the SSs machine guns. With all this against them, how and why did the prisoners of Sobibor come to the decision to revolt? Rumors During the summer and fall of 1943, the transports into Sobibor came less and less frequently. The Sobibor prisoners had always realized that they had been allowed to live only in order for them to work, to keep the death process running. However, with the slowing of the transports, many began to wonder whether the Nazis had actually succeeded in their goal to wipe out Jewry from Europe, to make it Judenrein. Rumors began to circulate—the camp was to be liquidated. Leon Feldhendler decided it was time to plan an escape. Though only in his thirties, Feldhendler was respected by his fellow inmates. Before coming to Sobibor, Feldhendler had been the head of the Judenrat in the Zolkiewka Ghetto. Having been at Sobibor for nearly a year, Feldhendler had witnessed several individual escapes. Unfortunately, all were followed by severe retaliation against the remaining prisoners. It was for this reason, that Feldhendler believed that an escape plan should include the escape of the entire camp population. In many ways, a mass escape was more easily said than done. How could you get six hundred prisoners out of a well-guarded, land mine-surrounded camp without having the SS discover your plan before it was enacted or without having the SS mow you down with their machine guns? A plan this complex was going to need someone with military and leadership experience. Someone who could not only plan such a feat but also inspire the prisoners to carry it out. Unfortunately, at the time, there was no one in Sobibor who fit both these descriptions. Sasha On September 23, 1943, a transport from Minsk rolled into Sobibor. Unlike most incoming transports, 80 men were selected for work. The SS were planning on building storage facilities in the now empty Lager IV, thus chose strong men from the transport rather than skilled workers. Among those chosen on that day was First Lieutenant Alexander Sasha Pechersky as well as a few of his men. Sasha was a Soviet prisoner of war. He had been sent to the front in October 1941 but had been captured near Viazma. After having been transferred to several camps, the Nazis, during a strip search, had discovered that Sasha was circumcised. Because he was Jewish, the Nazis sent him to Sobibor. Sasha made a big impression on the other prisoners of Sobibor. Three days after arriving at Sobibor, Sasha was out chopping wood with other prisoners. The prisoners, exhausted and hungry, were raising the heavy axes and then letting them fall on the tree stumps. SS Oberscharfà ¼hrer Karl Frenzel was guarding the group and regularly punishing already exhausted prisoners with twenty-five lashes each. When Frenzel noticed that Sasha had stopped working during one of these whipping frenzies, he said to Sasha, Russian soldier, you dont like the way I punish this fool? I give you exactly five minutes to split this stump. If you make it, you get a pack of cigarettes. If you miss by as much as one second, you get twenty-five lashes.1 It seemed an impossible task. Yet Sasha attacked the stump [w]ith all my strength and genuine hatred.2 Sasha finished in four and a half minutes. Since Sasha had completed the task in the allotted time, Frenzel made good on his promise of a pack of cigarettes - a highly prized commodity in the camp. Sasha refused the pack, saying Thanks, I dont smoke.3 Sasha then went back to work. Frenzel was furious. Frenzel left for a few minutes and then returned with bread and margarine - a very tempting morsel for all who are really hungry. Frenzel handed the food to Sasha. Again, Sasha refused Frenzels offer, saying, Thank you, the rations we are getting satisfy me fully.4 Obviously a lie, Frenzel was even more furious. However, instead of whipping Sasha, Frenzel turned and abruptly left. This was a first in Sobibor - someone had had the courage to defy the SS and succeeded. News of this incident spread quickly throughout the camp. Sasha and Feldhendler Meet Two days after the wood cutting incident, Leon Feldhendler asked that Sasha and his friend Shlomo Leitman come that evening to the womens barracks to talk. Though both Sasha and Leitman went that night, Feldhendler never arrived. In the womens barracks, Sasha and Leitman were swamped with questions - about life outside the camp...about why the partisans had not attacked the camp and freed them. Sasha explained that the partisans have their tasks, and no one can do our work for us.  5 These words motivated the prisoners of Sobibor. Instead of waiting for others to liberate them, they were coming to the conclusion that they would have to liberate themselves. Feldhendler had now found someone who not only had the military background to plan a mass escape, but also someone who could inspire confidence in the prisoners. Now Feldhendler needed to convince Sasha that a plan of mass escape was needed. The two men met the following day, on September 29. Some of Sashas men were already thinking of escape—but for just a few people, not a mass escape. Feldhendler had to convince them that he and others in the camp could help the Soviet prisoners because they knew the camp. He also told the men of the retaliation that would occur against the whole camp if even just a few were to escape. Soon, they decided to work together and information between the two men passed via a middle man, Shlomo Leitman, so as not to draw attention to the two men. With the information about the routine of the camp, layout of the camp, and specific characteristics of the guards and SS, Sasha began to plan. The Plan Sasha knew that any plan would be far-fetched. Even though the prisoners outnumbered the guards, the guards had machine guns and could call for back-up. The first plan was to dig a tunnel. They started digging the tunnel in the beginning of October. Originating in the carpentry shop, the tunnel had to be dug under the perimeter fence and then under the minefields. On October 7, Sasha voiced his fears about this plan - the hours at night were not sufficient to allow the entire camp population to crawl through the tunnel and fights were likely to flare-up between prisoners waiting to crawl through. These problems were never encountered because the tunnel was ruined from heavy rains on October 8 and 9. Sasha began working on another plan. This time it was not just a mass escape, it was a revolt. Sasha asked that members of the Underground start preparing weapons in the prisoner workshops—they began to make both knives and hatchets. Although the Underground had already learned that the camp commandant, SS Haupsturmfà ¼hrer Franz Reichleitner and SS Oberscharfà ¼hrer Hubert Gomerski had gone on vacation, on October 12 they saw SS Oberscharfà ¼hrer Gustav Wagner leaving the camp with his suitcases. With Wagner gone, many felt the opportunity ripe for the revolt. As Toivi Blatt describes Wagner: Wagners departure gave us a tremendous morale boost. While cruel, he was also very intelligent. Always on the go, he could suddenly show up in the most unexpected places. Always suspicious and snooping, he was difficult to fool. Besides, his colossal stature and strength would make it very difficult for us to overcome him with our primitive weapons.6 On the nights of October 11 and 12, Sasha told the Underground the complete plans for the revolt. The Soviet prisoners of war were to be dispersed to different workshops around the camp. The SS would be individually lured to the various workshops either by appointments to pick up finished products they had ordered like boots or by individual items that attracted their greed like a newly arrived leather coat. The planning took into consideration the Germans brashness and power-hungry mistreatment of the seemingly subdued Jews, their consistent and systematic daily routine, their unfaltering punctuality, and their greed.7 Each SS man would be killed in the workshops. It was important that the SS did not cry out when being killed nor any of the guards alerted that something unusual was happening in the camps. Then, all the prisoners would report as usual to the roll call square and then walk out together through the front gate. It was hoped that once the SS had been eliminated, the Ukrainian guards, who had a small supply of ammunition, would acquiesce to the revolting prisoners. The phone lines were to be cut early in the revolt so that the escapees would have several hours of fleeing time under the cover of darkness before back-up could be notified. Significant to the plan was that only a very small group of the prisoners even knew of the revolt. It was to be a surprise to the general camp population at roll call. It was decided that the following day, October 13, would be the day of revolt. We knew our fate. We knew that we were in an extermination camp and death was our destiny. We knew that even a sudden end to the war might spare the inmates of the normal  concentration camps, but never us. Only desperate actions could shorten our suffering and maybe afford us a chance of escape. And the will to resist had grown and ripened. We had no dreams of liberation; we hoped merely to destroy the camp and to die from bullets rather than from gas. We would not make it easy for the Germans.8 October 13 The day had finally arrived. Tension was high. In the morning, a group of SS arrived from the nearby Ossowa labor camp. The arrival of these additional SS not only increased the man power of the SS in the camp but could preclude the regular SS men from making their appointments in the workshops. Since the additional SS were still in the camp during lunchtime, the revolt was postponed. It was rescheduled for the following day - October 14. As the prisoners went to bed, many were afraid of what was to come. Esther Grinbaum, a very sentimental and intelligent young woman, wiped away her tears and said: Its not yet the time for an uprising. Tomorrow none of us will be alive. Everything will remain as it was - the barracks, the sun will rise and set, the flowers will bloom and wilt, but we will be no more. Her closest friend, Helka Lubartowska, a beautiful dark-eyed brunette, tried to encourage her: There is no other way. Nobody knows what the results will be, but one thing is sure, we will not be led to slaughter.9 October 14 The day had come. Excitement among the prisoners was so high that no matter what happened, the revolt could not be postponed, for the SS were sure to notice the change in mood in the prisoners. The few weapons that had been made were already handed out to those doing the killing. In the morning, they all had to try to look and act normal while waiting for the afternoon to come. NoonAll battle team commanders (the prisoners who were to actively participate in the revolt were broken up into battle teams of two to three persons each) had each individually met with Sasha for final instructions.Frenzel entered the carpentry shop and noticed one prisoner was wearing especially nice clothing. The inmate was wearing nice clothes in preparation for the revolt. Many other prisoners were wearing extra clothes as well as carrying extra food and valuables. Frenzel asked the prisoner if he was going to a wedding. 102:00 p.m.Something unusual happened. SS Unterscharfà ¼hrer Walter Ryba, armed with a submachine gun, came into Lager I and took four prisoners away with him. SS didnt usually carry such heavy weapons. Could he know about the planned revolt?3:00 to 4:00 p.m.Sasha found out that SS Ryba was only carrying the submachine gun because a Ukrainian guard had not also accompanied the prisoners.Many of the battle teams take their positions.My assignment was to liquidat e Scharfà ¼hrer Greischutz, who was in charge of the Ukrainian guard. I was happy for the opportunity given to me to kill a German. We had prepared axes, which we had sharpened in the smithy. We took up our position an hour earlier. At four oclock we were sitting in the rooms and waited.114:00 to 5:00 p.m.The killings began. (Though there are discrepancies in the accounts as to which SS officer was killed at what location, the following is a summary of the SS deaths.)Vorlager: Leon Feldhendler was stationed here to help orchestrate the revolt in this section of the camp.Unterscharfà ¼hrer Josef Wulf: Wulf was the first SS man killed during the revolt. Once he entered the storeroom, one prisoner offered him a coat and another helped him into it. While he was putting on the coat, two other prisoners hit him on the head with axes. Wulfs dead body was then hidden among piles of clothes and the blood was cleaned up.Steubel: Steubel was also lured into the storeroom and killed.Scharfà ¼hrer Vallaster: Killed during revolt; circumstances of death not known.Scharfà ¼hrer Kurt Beckman: While the attempt to lure Beckman to the storeroom for a new leather coat started successfully, on his way he abruptly turned around and went to his office. A little later, three prisoners went to Beckmans office where they surprised him and stabbed him with daggers. Since they did not have time to hide his body or clean up the blood, they left the body behind the desk.Unterscharfà ¼hrer Walter Ryba: Not part of the planned killings, Ryba entered the SS garage and was killed by a prisoner working there. Sasha worried that Rybas body, which was very close to the SS and Ukrainian living quarters, would be discovered.Lager I: Sasha Pechersky was stationed here to orchestrate the revolt in this section of the camp.Untersturmfà ¼hrer Josef Niemann: The acting commander of the camp rode up to the tailor shop on his chestnut horse, dismounted, and went inside. As he was being fitted for a new uniform, prisoners hit him on the back of the head with an  axe. His body was then dragged to the back room and his horse taken back to the stables.Oberscharfà ¼hrer  Goettinger: Head of Lager III, Goettinger was asked to try on a new pair of boots in the shoemakers shop. While talking to the shoemaker, Goettingers head was smashed with an  axe.Scharfà ¼hrer Siegfried Greischutz: Head of the Ukrainian guard, Greischutz was killed once inside the Ukrainian tailor shop.Klat: Klat, a Ukrainian guard, entered the tailors shop looking for his boss, Greischutz (who had just been killed there). The tailors maneuvered Klat so that his back was to the back room. He was then attacked and killed.Scharfà ¼hrer Friedrich Gaulstich: Gaulstich was killed in the carpentry workshop.After 5:00 p.m.The prisoners had gathered as usual in the roll call area. At 5:10 p.m. - twenty minutes early for roll call - the roll call whistle was blown according to Sashas signal. Though Sasha was surp rised at how well the plan had gone thus far, he realized that there could not be an orderly march through the front gate. Sasha stood up and addressed the assembled prisoners, saying something similar to Our day has come. Most of the Germans are dead. Lets die with honor. Remember, if anyone survives, he must tell the world what has happened here.12A Ukrainian guard discovered the body of Scharfà ¼hrer Beckman behind his desk and ran outside where SS men hear him yell, A German is dead! This alerted the rest of the camp to the revolt.The prisoners at the roll call square yell, Hurrah! Then it was every man and woman for themselves.Prisoners were running to the fences. Some were trying to cut them, others just climbed over. Yet, in most places, the minefield was still fully in place.Suddenly we heard shots. In the beginning only a few shots, and then it turned into heavy shooting, including machine-gun fire. We heard shouting, and I could see a group of prisoners running with axes, knives, scissors, cutting the fences and crossing them. Mines started to explode. Riot and confusion prevailed, everything was thundering around. The doors of the workshop were opened, and everyone rushed through. . . . We ran out of the workshop. All around were the bodies of the killed and wounded. Near the armory were some of our boys with weapons. Some of them were exchanging fire with the Ukrainians, others were running toward the gate or through the fences. My coat caught on the fence. I took off the coat, freed myself and ran further behind the fences into the minefield. A mine exploded nearby, and I could see a body being lifted into the air and then falling down. I did not recognize who it was.13As the remaining SS were alerted to the revolt, they grabbed machine guns and began shooting into the mass of people. The guards in the towers were also firing into the crowd.The prisoners were running through the minefield, over an open area, and then into the forest. It is estima ted that about half the prisoners (approximately 300) made it to the forests. The Forest Once in the forests, the escapees tried to quickly find relatives and friends. Though they started off in large groups of prisoners, they eventually broke into smaller and smaller groups in order to be able to find food and to hide. Sasha had been leading one large group of about 50 prisoners. On October 17, the group stopped. Sasha chose several men, which included all the rifles of the group except one, and passed around a hat to collect money from the group to buy food. He told the group that he and the others he had chosen were going to do some reconnaissance. The others protested, but Sasha promised hed come back. He never did. After waiting for a long time, the group realized that Sasha was not going to come back, thus they split into smaller groups and headed off in different directions. After the war, Sasha explained his leaving by saying that it would have been impossible to hide and feed such a large group. But no matter how  truthful  this statement, the remaining members of the group felt bitter and betrayed by Sasha. Within four days of the escape, 100 of the 300 escapees were caught. The remaining 200 continued to flee and hide. Most were shot by local Poles or by partisans. Only 50 to 70 survived the war. Though this number is small, it is still much larger than if the prisoners had not revolted, for surely, the entire camp population would have been liquidated by the Nazis. Notes 1. Alexander Pechersky as quoted in Yitzhak Arad,  Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka: The Operation Reinhard Death Camps  (Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1987) 307.2. Alexander Pechersky as quoted in Ibid 307.3. Alexander Pechersky as quoted in Ibid 307.4. Alexander Pechersky as quoted in Ibid 307.5. Ibid 308.6. Thomas Toivi Blatt,  From the Ashes of Sobibor: A Story of Survival  (Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 1997) 144.7. Ibid 141.8. Ibid 139.9. Arad,  Belzec  321.10. Ibid 324.11. Yehuda Lerner as quoted in Ibid 327.12. Richard Rashke,  Escape From Sobibor  (Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1995) 229.13. Ada Lichtman as quoted in Arad,  Belzec  331. 14. Ibid 364. Bibliography Arad, Yitzhak.  Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka: The Operation Reinhard Death Camps.  Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1987. Blatt, Thomas Toivi.  From the Ashes of Sobibor: A Story of Survival. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 1997. Novitch, Miriam.  Sobibor: Martyrdom and Revolt. New York: Holocaust Library, 1980. Rashke, Richard.  Escape From Sobibor. Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1995.