Podcasts about labourers

The last time Yamato was heavily involved on the continent, they were defeated militarily, and they returned to fortify their islands.  So how are things looking, now? This episode we will talk about some of what has been going on with Tang and Silla, but also touch on the Mishihase, the Hayato, the people of Tamna and Tanegashima, and more! For more information and references, check out:  https://sengokudaimyo.com/podcast/episode-140   Rough Transcript   Welcome to Sengoku Daimyo's Chronicles of Japan.  My name is Joshua and this is episode 140: Improving Diplomatic Ties Garyang Jyeongsan and Gim Hongsye looked out from the deck of their ship, tossing and turning in the sea.  The waves were high, and the winds lashed at the ship, which rocked uncomfortably beneath their feet.  Ocean spray struck them from below while rain pelted from above. Through the torrential and unstable conditions, they looked out for their sister ship.  It was their job to escort them, but in these rough seas, bobbing up and down, they were at the mercy of the elements.  One minute they could see them, and then next it was nothing but a wall of water.  Each time they caught a glimpse the other ship seemed further and further away.  They tried calling out, but it was no use—even if they could normally have raised them, the fierce winds simply carried their voices out into the watery void.  Eventually, they lost sight of them altogether. When the winds died down and the seas settled, they looked for their companions, but they saw nothing, not even hints of wreckage on the ocean.  They could only hope that their fellow pilots knew where they were going.  As long as they could still sail, they should be able to make it to land—either to the islands  to which they were headed, or back to the safety of the peninsula. And so the escort ship continued on, even without a formal envoy to escort.  They would hope for the best, or else they would explain what would happen,  and hope that the Yamato court would understand. The seas were anything but predictable, and diplomacy was certainly not for the faint of heart.   We are going through the period of the reign of Ohoama, aka Temmu Tennou.  It started in 672, with the death of his brother, Naka no Oe, remembered as the sovereign Tenji Tenno, when Temmu took the throne from his nephew, Ohotomo, aka Kobun Tenno, in what would become known as the Jinshin no Ran.  From that point, Ohoama continued the work of his brother in creating a government based on a continental model of laws and punishments—the Ritsuryo system.  He accomplished this with assistance from his wife, Uno, and other members of the royal family—his own sons, but also nephews and other princes of the time.  And so far most of our focus has been on the local goings on within the archipelago. However, there was still plenty going on in the rest of the world, and though Yamato's focus may have been on more local affairs, it was still engaged with the rest of the world—or at least with the polities of the Korean Peninsula and the Tang Dynasty.  This episode we are going to look at Yamato's foreign relations, and how they were changing, especially as things changed on the continent. Up to this point, much of what had been happening in Yamato had been heavily influenced by the mainland in one way or another.  And to begin our discussion, we really should backtrack a bit—all the way to the Battle of Baekgang in 663, which we discussed in Episode 124.  That defeat would lead to the fall of Baekje, at the hands of the Silla-Tang alliance.  The loss of their ally on the peninsula sent Yamato into a flurry of defensive activity.  They erected fortresses on Tsushima, Kyushu, and along the Seto Inland Sea.  They also moved the capital up to Ohotsu, a more easily defended point on the shores of Lake Biwa, and likewise reinforced various strategic points in the Home Provinces as well.  These fortresses were built in the style and under the direction of many of the Baekje refugees now resettled in Yamato. For years, the archipelago braced for an invasion by the Silla-Tang alliance.  After all, with all that Yamato had done to support Baekje, it only made sense, from their perspective, for Silla and Tang to next come after them.  Sure, there was still Goguryeo, but with the death of Yeon Gaesomun, Goguryeo would not last that long.  With a unified peninsula, then why wouldn't they next look to the archipelago? And yet, the attack never came.  While Yamato was building up its defenses, it seems that the alliance between Silla and Tang was not quite as strong as their victories on the battlefield may have made it seem.  This is hardly surprising—the Tang and Silla were hardly operating on the same scale.  That said, the Tang's immense size, while bringing it great resources, also meant that it had an extremely large border to defend.  They often utilized alliances with other states to achieve their ends.  In fact, it seems fairly common for the Tang to seek alliances with states just beyond their borders against those states that were directly on their borders.  In other words, they would effectively create a pincer maneuver by befriending the enemy of their enemy.  Of course.  Once they had defeated said enemy well, wouldn't you know it, their former ally was now their newest bordering state. In the case of the Silla-Tang alliance, it appears that at the start of the alliance, back in the days of Tang Taizong, the agreement, at least from Silla's perspective, was that they would help each other against Goguryeo and Baekje, and then the Tang dynasty would leave the Korean peninsula to Silla.  However, things didn't go quite that smoothly.  The fighting against Goguryeo and Baekje can be traced back to the 640s, but Tang Taizong passed away in 649, leaving the throne to his heir, Tang Gaozong.  The Tang forces eventually helped Silla to take Baekje after the battle of Baekgang River in 663, and then Goguryeo fell in 668, but the Tang forces didn't leave the peninsula.  They remained in the former territories of Baekje and in Goguryeo, despite any former agreements.  Ostensibly they were no doubt pointing to the continuing revolts and rebellions in both regions.  While neither kingdom would fully reassert itself, it didn't mean that there weren't those who were trying.  In fact, the first revolt in Goguryeo was in 669.  There was also a revolt each year until 673.  The last one had some staying power, as the Goguryeo rebels continued to hold out for about four years. It is probably worth reminding ourselves that the Tang dynasty, during this time, had reached out on several occasions to Yamato, sending diplomatic missions, as had Silla.  While the Yamato court may have been preparing for a Tang invasion, the Tang perspective seems different.  They were preoccupied with the various revolts going on, and they had other problems.  On their western border, they were having to contend with the kingdom of Tibet, for example.  The Tibetan kingdom had a powerful influence on the southern route around the Taklamakan desert, which abuts the Tibetan plateau.   The Tang court would have had to divert resources to defend their holdings in the western regions, and it is unlikely that they had any immediate designs on the archipelago, which I suspect was considered something of a backwater to them, at the time.  In fact, Yamato would have been much more useful to the Tang as an ally to help maintain some pressure against Silla, with whom their relationship, no longer directed at a common enemy, was becoming somewhat tense. In fact, just before Ohoama came to the throne, several events had occurred that would affect the Silla-Tang alliance. The first event is more indirect—in 670, the Tibetan kingdom attacked the Tang empire.  The fighting was intense, and required serious resources from both sides.  Eventually the Tibetan forces were victorious, but not without a heavy toll on the Tibetan kingdom, which some attribute to the latter's eventual demise.  Their pyrrhic victory, however, was a defeat for the Tang, who also lost troops and resources in the fighting.  Then, in 671, the Tang empire would suffer another loss as Silla would drive the Tang forces out of the territory of the former kingdom of Baekje. With the Baekje territory under their control, it appears that Silla was also working to encourage some of rebellions in Goguryeo.  This more than irked the Tang court, currently under the formal control of Tang Gaozong and the informal—but quite considerable—control of his wife, Wu Zetian, who some claim was the one actually calling most of the shots in the court at this point in time.  Silla encouragement of restoration efforts in Goguryeo reached the Tang court in 674, in and in 675 we see that the Tang forces were sent to take back their foothold in the former Baekje territory.  Tang defeated Silla at Gyeonggi, and Silla's king, Munmu, sent a tribute mission to the Tang court, apologizing for their past behavior. However, the Tang control could not be maintained, as they had to once again withdraw most of their troops from the peninsula to send them against the Tibetan kingdom once more.  As soon as they did so, Silla once again renewed their attacks on Tang forces on the peninsula.  And so, a year later, in 676, the Tang forces were back.  They crossed the Yellow Sea to try and take back the Tang territories on the lower peninsula, but they were unsuccessful.  Tang forces were defeated by Silla at Maeso Fortress in modern day Yeoncheon.  After a bit more fighting, Silla ended up in control of all territory south of the Taedong River, which runs through Pyongyang, one of the ancient capitals of Goguryeo and the capital of modern North Korea.  This meant that the Tang dynasty still held much of the territory of Goguryeo under their control. With everything that was going on, perhaps that explains some of the apparently defensive measures that Yamato continued to take.  For example, the second lunar month of 675, we know that Ohoama proceeded to Takayasu castle, likely as a kind of formal inspection.  Then, in the 10th lunar month of 675 Ohoama commanded that everyone from the Princes down to the lowest rank were to provide the government with weapons.  A year later, in the 9th month of 676, the Princes and Ministers sent agents to the capital and the Home Provinces and gave out weapons to each man.  Similar edicts would be issued throughout the reign.  So in 679 the court announced that in two years time, which is to say the year 681, there would be a review of the weapons and horses belonging to the Princes of the Blood, Ministers, and any public functionaries.  And in that same year, barrier were erected for the first time on Mt. Tatsta and Mt. Afusaka, along with an outer line of fortifications at Naniwa. While some of that no doubt also helped to control internal movements, it also would have been useful to prepare for the possibility of future invasions.  And the work continued.  In 683  we see a royal command to all of the various provinces to engage in military training.  And in 684 it was decreed at that there would be an inspection in the 9th month of the following year—685—and they laid out the ceremonial rules, such as who would stand where, what the official clothing was to look like, etc.  Furthermore, there was also an edict that all civil and military officials should practice the use of arms and riding horses.  They were expected to supply their own horses, weapons, and anything they would wear into battle. If they owned horses, they would be considered cavalry soldiers, while those who did not have their own horse would be trained as infantry.  Either way, they would each receive training, and the court was determined to remove any obstacles and excuses that might arise.   Anyone who didn't comply would be punished.  Non compliance could mean refusing to train, but it could also just mean that they did not provide the proper horses or equipment, or they let their equipment fall into a state of disrepair.  Punishments could range from fines to outright flogging, should they be found guilty.  On the other hand, those who practiced well would have any punishments against them for other crimes reduced by two degrees, even if it was for a capital crime.  This only applied to previous crimes, however—if it seemed like you were trying to take advantage of this as a loophole to be able to get away with doing your own thing than the pardon itself would be considered null and void. A year later, the aforementioned inspection was carried out by Princes Miyatokoro, Hirose, Naniwa, Takeda, and Mino.  Two months later, the court issued another edict demanding that military equipment—specifically objects such as large or small horns, drums, flutes, flags, large bows, or catapults—should be stored at the government district house and not kept in private arsenals.  The "large bow" in this case may be something like a ballista, though Aston translates it to crossbow—unfortunately, it isn't exactly clear, and we don't necessarily have a plethora of extant examples to point to regarding what they meant.  Still, these seem to be focused on things that would be used by armies—especially the banners, large bows, and catapults.  The musical instruments may seem odd, though music was often an important part of Tang dynasty military maneuvers.  It was used to coordinate troops, raise morale, provide a marching rhythm, and more.  Granted, much of this feels like something more continental, and it is unclear if music was regularly used in the archipelago.  This could be more of Yamato trying to emulate the Tang dynasty rather than something that was commonplace on the archipelago.  That might also explain the reference to the Ohoyumi and the catapults, or rock throwers. All of this language having to do with military preparations could just be more of the same as far as the Sinicization of the Yamato government is concerned; attempts to further emulate what they understood of the civilized governments on the mainland—or at least their conception of those governments based on the various written works that they had imported.  Still, I think it is relevant that there was a lot of uncertainty regarding the position of various polities and the potential for conflict.  Each year could bring new changes to the political dynamic that could see military intervention make its way across the straits.  And of course, there was always the possibility that Yamato itself might decide to raise a force of its own. Throughout all of this, there was continued contact with the peninsula and other lands.  Of course, Silla and Goguryeo were both represented when Ohoama came to the throne—though only the Silla ambassador made it to the ceremony, apparently.  In the 7th lunar month of 675, Ohotomo no Muraji no Kunimaro was sent to Silla as the Chief envoy, along with Miyake no Kishi no Irishi.  They likely got a chance to witness first-hand the tensions between Silla and the Tang court.  The mission would return in the second lunar month of the following year, 676.  Eight months later, Mononobe no Muarji no Maro and Yamashiro no Atahe no Momotari were both sent.  That embassy also returned in the 2nd lunar month of the following year. Meanwhile, it wasn't just Yamato traveling to Silla—there were also envoys coming the other way.  For example, in the 2nd lunar month of 675 we are told that Silla sent Prince Chyungweon as an ambassador.  His retinue was apparently detained on Tsukushi while the actual envoy team went on to the Yamato capital.  It took them about two months to get there, and then they stayed until the 8th lunar month, so about four months in total. At the same time, in the third month, Goguryeo and Silla both sent "tribute" to Yamato.  And in the 8th month, Prince Kumaki, from Tamna, arrived at Tsukushi as well.  Tamna, as you may recall, refers to nation on the island known today as Jeju.  The late Alexander Vovin suggested that the name originated from a proto-Japonic cognate with "Tanimura", and many of the names seem to also bear out a possible Japonic influence on the island nation. Although they only somewhat recently show up in the Chronicles from our perspective, archaeological evidence suggests that they had trade with Yayoi Japan and Baekje since at least the first century.  With the fall of Baekje, and the expansion of Yamato authority to more of the archipelago, we've seen a notable uptick in the communication between Tamna and Yamato noted in the record.  A month after the arrival of Prince Kumaki in Tsukushi, aka Kyushu, it is noted that a Prince Koyo of Tamna arrived at Naniwa.  The Tamna guests would stick around for almost a year, during which time they were presented with a ship and eventually returned in the 7th lunar month of the following year, 676.   Tamna envoys, who had also shown up in 673, continued to be an annual presence at the Yamato court through the year 679, after which there is an apparent break in contact, picking back up in 684 and 685. 676 also saw a continuation of Silla representatives coming to the Yamato court, arriving in the 11th lunar month.  That means they probably passed by the Yamato envoys heading the other way.  Silla, under King Mumnu, now had complete control of the Korean peninsula south of the Taedong river.  In the same month we also see another mission from Goguryeo, but the Chronicle also points out that the Goguryeo envoys had a Silla escort, indicating the alliance between Silla and those attempting to restore Goguryeo—or at least the area of Goguryeo under Tang control.  The Tang, for their part, had pulled back their commandary to Liaodong, just west of the modern border between China and North Korea, today.  Goguryeo would not go quietly, and the people of that ancient kingdom—one of the oldest on the peninsula—would continue to rise up and assert their independence for years to come. The chronicles also record envoys from the somewhat mysterious northern Mishihase, or Sushen, thought to be people of the Okhotsk Sea culture from the Sakhalin islands.  There were 11 of them, and they came with the Silla envoys, possibly indicating their influence on the continent and through the Amur river region.  Previously, most of the contact had been through the regions of Koshi and the Emishi in modern Tohoku and Hokkaido.  This seems to be their only major envoy to the Yamato court recorded in this reign. Speaking of outside groups, in the 2nd lunar month of 677 we are told that there was an entertainment given to men of Tanegashima under the famous Tsuki tree west of Asukadera.  Many people may know Tanegashima from the role it played in the Sengoku Period, when Europeans made contact and Tanegashima became a major hub of Sengoku era firearm manufacturing.  At this point, however, it seems that it was still a largely independent island in the archipelago off the southern coast of Kyushu.  Even southern Kyushu appears to have retained some significant cultural differences at this time, with the "Hayato" people being referenced in regards to southern Kyushu—we'll talk about them in a bit as they showed up at the capital in 682.  Tanegashima is actually closer to Yakushima, another island considered to be separate, culturally, from Yamato, and could be considered the start of the chain of islands leading south to Amami Ohoshima and the other Ryukyuan islands.  That said, Tanegashima and Yakushima are much closer to the main islands of the archipelago and show considerable influence, including Yayoi and Kofun cultural artifacts, connecting them more closely to those cultures, even if Yamato initially saw them as distinct in some way. A formal Yamato envoy would head down to Tanegashima two years later, in the 11th lunar month of 679.  It was headed up by Yamato no Umakahibe no Miyatsuko no Tsura and Kami no Sukuri no Koukan.  The next reference to the mission comes in 681, when the envoys returned and presented a map of the island.  They claimed that it was in the middle of the ocean, and that rice was always abundant. With a single sowing of rice it was said that they could get two harvests.  Other products specifically mentioned were cape jasmine and bulrushes, though they then note that there were also many other products that they didn't bother to list.  This must have been considered quite the success, as the Yamato envoys were each awarded a grade of rank for their efforts.   They also appear to have returned with some of the locals, as they were entertained again in Asuka—this time on the riverbank west of Asukadera, where various kinds of music were performed for them. Tanegashima and Yakushima would be brought formally under Yamato hegemony in 702 with the creation of Tane province, but for now it was still considered separate.  This was probably just the first part of the efforts to bring them into Yamato, proper. Getting back to the Silla envoys who had arrived in 676, they appear to have remained for several months.  In the third lunar month of 677 we are told that they, along with guests of lower rank—thirteen persons all told—were invited to the capital.  Meanwhile, the escort envoys and others who had not been invited to the capital were entertained in Tsukushi and returned from there. While this was going on, weather out in the straits drove a Silla boat to the island of Chikashima.  Aboard was a Silla man accompanined by three attendants and three Buddhist priests.  We aren't told where they were going, but they were given shelter and when the Silla envoy, Kim Chyeonpyeong, returned home he left with those who had been driven ashore, as well. The following year, 678, was not a great one for the Silla envoys.  Garyang Jyeongsan and Gim Hongsye arrived at Tsukushi, but they were just the escorts.  The actual envoys had been separated by a storm at sea and never arrived.  In their place, the escort envoys were sent to the capital, probably to at least carry through with the rituals of diplomacy.  This was in the first month of the following year, 679, and given when envoys had previously arrived, it suggests to me that they waited a few months, probably to see if the envoys' ship eventually appeared and to give the court time to figure out what to do.  A month later, the Goguryeo envoys arrived, still being accompanied by Silla escorts, also arrived. Fortunately the Yamato envoys to Silla and elsewhere fared better.  That year, 679, the envoys returned successfully from Silla, Goguryeo, and Tamna.  Overall, though, I think it demonstrates that this wasn't just a pleasure cruise.  There was a very real possibility that one could get lost at sea.  At the same time, one needed people of sufficient status to be able to carry diplomatic messages and appropriately represent the court in foreign lands.  We often seen envoys later taking on greater positions of responsibility in the court, and so you didn't have to go far to find those willing to take the risk for later rewards. That same year, another tribute mission from Silla did manage to make the crossing successfully.  And in this mission we are given more details, for they brought gold, silver, iron, sacrificial cauldrons with three feet, brocade, cloth, hides, horses, dogs, mules, and camels.  And those were just the official gifts to the court.  Silla also sent distinct presents for the sovereign, the queen, and the crown prince, namely gold, silver, swords, flags, and things of that nature. This appears to demonstrate increasingly close ties between Silla and Yamato. All of that arrived in the 10th lunar month of 679, and they stayed through the 6th lunar month of 680—about 7 to 9 months all told, depending on if there were any intercalary months that year.  In addition to entertaining the Silla envoys in Tsukushi—it is not mentioned if they made it to the capital—we are also told that in the 2nd lunar month, halfway through the envoys' visit, eight labourers from Silla were sent back to their own country with gifts appropriate to their station. Here I have to pause and wonder what exactly is meant by this.  "Labourer" seems somewhat innocuous.  I suspect that their presence in Yamato may have been less than voluntary, and I wonder if these were captured prisoners of war who could have been in Yamato now for over a decade.  If so, this could have been a gesture indicating that the two sides were putting all of that nastiness with Baekje behind them, and Yamato was accepting Silla's new role on the peninsula.  Or maybe I'm reading too much into it, but it does seem to imply that Silla and Yamato were growing closer, something that Yamato would need if it wanted to have easy access, again, to the wider world. Speaking of returning people, that seems to have been something of a common thread for this year, 680, as another mission from Goguryeo saw 19 Goguryeo men also returned to their country.  These were condolence envoys who had come to mourn the death of Takara Hime—aka Saimei Tennou.  They must have arrived in the midst of all that was happening peninsula, and as such they were detained.  Their detention is somewhat interesting, when you think about it, since technically Baekje and Goguryeo—and thus Yamato—would have been on the same side against the Silla-Tang alliance.  But perhaps it was just considered too dangerous to send them home, initially, and then the Tang had taken control of their home.  It is unclear to me how much they were being held by Yamato and how much they were just men without a country for a time.  This may reflect how things on the mainland were stabilizing again, at least from Yamato's perspective.  However, as we'll discuss a bit later, it may have also been another attempt at restoring the Goguryeo kingdom by bringing back refugees, especially if they had connections with the old court.  The Goguryeo envoys—both the recent mission and those who had been detained—would remain until the 5th lunar month of 681, when they finally took their leave.  That year, there were numerous mission both from and to Silla and Goguryeo, and in the latter part of the year, Gim Chyungpyeong came once again, once more bearing gives of gold, silver, copper, iron, brocade, thin silk, deerskins, and fine cloth.  They also brought gold, silver, flags of a rosy-colored brocade and skins for the sovereign, his queen, and the crown prince. That said, the 681 envoys also brought grave news:  King Munmu of Silla was dead.  Munmu had reigned since 661, so he had overseen the conquest of Silla and Goguryeo.  His regnal name in Japanese might be read as Monmu, or even "Bunbu", referencing the blending of literary and cultural achievements seen as the pinnacle of noble attainment.  He is known as Munmu the Great for unifying the peninsula under a single ruler—though much of the Goguryeo territory was still out of reach.  Indeed he saw warfare and the betterment of his people, and it is no doubt significant that his death is recorded in the official records of the archipelago.   He was succeeded by his son, who would reign as King Sinmun, though the succession wasn't exactly smooth. We are told that Munmu, knowing his time was short, requested that his son, the Crown Prince, be named king before they attended to Munmu's own funerary arrangements, claiming that the throne should not sit vacant.  This may have been prescient, as the same year Munmu died and Sinmun ascended to the throne there was a revolt, led by none other than Sinmun's own father-in-law, Kim Heumdol.  Heumdol may, himselve, have been more of a figurehead for other political factions in the court and military.  Nonetheless, the attempted coup of 681 was quickly put down—the envoys in Yamato would likely only learn about everything after the dust had settled upon their return. The following year, 682, we see another interesting note about kings, this time in regards to the Goguryeo envoys, whom we are told were sent by the King of Goguryeo.  Ever since moving the commandery to Liaodong, the Tang empire had claimed dominion over the lands of Goguryeo north of the Taedong river.  Originally they had administered it militarily, but in 677 they crowned a local, Bojang as the "King of Joseon", using the old name for the region, and put him in charge of the Liaodong commandery.  However, he was removed in 681, and sent into exile in Sichuan, because rather than suppressing revolt, he had actually encouraged restoration attempts, inviting back Goguryeo refugees, like those who had been detained in Yamato.  Although Bojang himself was sent into exile, his descendants continued to claim sovereignty, so it may have been one of them that was making the claim to the "King of Goguryeo", possibly with Silla's blessing. Later that year, 682, we see Hayato from Ohosumi and Ata—possibly meaning Satsuma—the southernmost point of Kyushu coming to the court in 682.  They brought tribute and representatives of Ohosumi and Ata wrestled, with the Ohosumi wrestler emerging victorious.  They were entertained west of Asukadera, and various kinds of music was performed and gifts were given. They were apparently quite the sight, as Buddhist priests and laiety all came out to watch. Little is known for certain about the Hayato.  We have shields that are attributed to them, but their association may have more to do with the fact that they were employed as ceremonial guards for a time at the palace.  We do know that Southern Kyushu had various groups that were seen as culturally distinct from Yamato, although there is a lot of overlap in material culture.  We also see early reports of the Kumaso, possibly two different groups, the Kuma and So, in earlier records, and the relationship between the Kumaso and the Hayato is not clearly defined. What we do know is that southern Kyushu, for all that it shared with Yamato certain aspects of culture through the kofun period, for example, they also had their own traditions. For example, there is a particular burial tradition of underground kofun that is distinct to southern Kyushu.  A great example of this can be found at the Saitobaru Kofun cluster in Miyazaki, which contains these unique southern Kyushu style burials along with more Yamato style keyhole shaped and circular type kofun.  Miyazaki sits just north of the Ohosumi peninsula, in what was formerly the land of Hyuga, aka  Himuka.  This is also where a lot of the founding stories of the Heavenly grandchild were placed, and even today there is a shrine there to the Heavenly Rock Cave.  In other words there are a lot of connections with Southern Kyushu, and given that the Chronicles were being written in the later 7th and early 8th centuries, it is an area of intense interest when trying to understand the origins of Yamato and Japanese history. Unfortunately, nothing clearly tells us exactly how the Hayato were separate, but in the coming century they would both come under Yamato hegemony and rebel against it, time and again.  This isn't the first time they are mentioned, but it may be the first time that we see them as an actual people, in a factual entry as earlier references in the Chronicles are suspect. Continuing on with our look at diplomacy during this period, the year 683 we see a continuation of the same patterns, with nothing too out of the ordinary.  Same with most of 684 until the 12th lunar month.  It is then that we see a Silla ship arrive with Hashi no Sukune no Wohi and Shirawi no Fubito no Hozen.  They had both, previously been to the Tang empire to study, though we don't have a record of them leaving for that or any other purpose.  They are accompanied by Witsukahi no Muraji no Kobito and Tsukushi no Miyake no Muraji no Tokuko, both of whom had apparently been captured and taken by the Tang dynasty during the Baekje campaign.  Apparently they had all traveled back from the Tang empire together to Silla, who then provided them passage to Yamato. The timing of this suggests it may have had something to do with the changes going on in the Tang empire—changes that I desperately want to get into, but given that we are already a good ways into this current episode, I think I will leave it for later.  But I will note this:  Emperor Gaozong had passed away and his wife, Empress Wu Zetian, was now ruling as regent for her sons.  Wu Zetian is probably the most famous empress in all of Chinese history, and while she held de facto power as a co-regent during her husband's reign and as a regent during her sons' reigns, she would actually ascend the throne herself in 690.  Her reign as a woman during a time of heightened patriarchal tradition is particularly of note, and it leads us to wonder about the vilification that she received by the men who followed her rule.  And I really want to get into all of that but, thematically, I think it better to wait.  Those of you reading ahead in the syllabus—which is to say the Chronicles—probably know why.  So let us just leave it there and say that the Tang was going through a few things, and that may explain why students were returning back in the company of former war captives. A few months later, the Silla escort, Gim Mulyu, was sent home along with 7 people from Silla who had been washed ashore—presumably during a storm or other such event, again illustrating the dangers of taking to the ocean at this time.  Perhaps related to that theme is the entry only a month later, which merely stated that Gim Jusan of Silla returned home.  Gim Jusan was an envoy sent to Yamato in the 11th lunar month of 683.  He was entertained in Tsukushi, and we are told that he returned to his own country on the 3rd month of 684.  Now we are seeing an entry in the 4th month of 685 that this same person apparently returned home. It is possible that something got mixed up, and that the Chroniclers were dealing with a typo in the records that made it seem like this took place a year later than it did.  This was certainly an issue at this time, given all the math one had to do just to figure out what day it was.  There is also the possibility that he returned on another embassy, but just wasn't mentioned for some reason.  The last possible explanation is that he somehow got lost and it took him a year to find his way back.  Not entirely impossible back then, though I am a bit skeptical.  Among other things, why would that note have found its way into the Chronicles in Yamato?  While they were certainly using some continental sources, this seems like something they were talking about as far as him leaving the archipelago, rather than discussion of something happening elsewhere. Speaking of happening elsewhere, I'm wondering about another event that happened around this time as well.  In fact, it was while Gim Mulyu was still in the archipelago.  For some reason the Yamato court granted rank to 147 individuals from Tang, Baekje, and Goguryeo.  Interestingly, they don't mention Silla.  Furthermore, there is no real mention of any Tang envoys during this reign.  In fact, there is hardly mention of the Tang dynasty at all.  There is a mention of some 30 Tang men—captives, presumably—being sent to the Yamato court from Tsukushi.  Those men were settled in Toutoumi, so there were men of Tang in the archipelago.  But beyond that, there are only three other mentions of the Tang dynasty.  One was when the students and war captives came back.  Another was this note about giving rank to 147 individuals.  Finally there is a similar record in 686, at the very end of the reign, where it is 34 persons who were given rank.  This time it was to carpenters, diviners, physicians, students from Tang—possibly those who had just come back a year or so earlier.  So if there weren't envoys from Tang, Goguryeo, and Baekje, who were these people and why were they being granted Yamato court rank?  My assumption is that it was foreigners living in the archipelago, and being incorporated into the Yamato court system.  Still, it is interesting that after the overtures by the Tang in the previous reign we have heard virtually nothing since then.  Again, that is likely largely due to the conflicts between Tang and Silla, though now, things seem to be changing.  The conflicts have settled down, and new rulers are in place, so we'll see how things go. Speaking of which, let's finish up with the diplomatic exchanges in this reign.  I'm only hitting some of the highlights here.  First is the return from Silla, in the 5th month of 685, of Takamuku no Asomi no Maro and Tsuno no Asomi no Ushikahi.  They had traveled to Silla in 684, and they did not come back emptyhanded.  The new King of Silla presented them with gifts, including 2 horses, 3 dogs, 2 parrots, and 2 magpies.  They also brought back the novice monks Kanjou and Ryoukan.  Not bad, overall. Then, 6 months later, another tribute mission came, but this one has an interesting—if somewhat questionable—note attached to it.  It is said that the envoys Gim Jisyang and Gim Geonhun were sent to request "governance" and to bring tribute.  This certainly go the court's attention.  They didn't bring the envoys all the way to the capital, but they did send to them, in Tsukushi, Prince Kawachi, Ohotomo no Sukune no Yasumaro, Fujiwara no Asomi no Ohoshima, and Hodzumi no Asomi no Mushimaro. About three months later they send the musical performers from Kawaradera to provide entertainment during a banquet for the Silla envoy, and in payment some 5,000 bundles of rice rom the private lands attached to the queen's palace were granted to the temple in gratitude. The Silla tribute was then brought to the capital from Tsukushi.  This time it was more than 100 items, including one fine horse, one mule, two dogs, a gold container inlaid with some kind of design, gold, silver, faint brocade, silk gauze, tiger and leopard skins, and a variety of medicines.  In addition, as was now common, the envoys, Gim Jisyang and Gim Geonhun, apparently had personal gifts to give in the form of gold, silver, faint brocade, silk gauze, gold containers, screens, saddle hides, silk cloth, and more medicine.  There were also gifts specifically for the sovereign, the queen, the Crown Prince, and for the various princes of the blood. The court returned this favor with gifts to the envoys, presented at a banquet just for them, before sending them on their way. A couple of notes.  First off, it is interesting that they are entertained at Tsukushi rather than being invited to the capital, and I wonder if this was because the sovereign, Ohoama, wasn't doing so well.  This was all happening in 685 and 686, and the sovereign would pass away shortly afterwards.  So it is possible that Ohoama just was not up to entertaining visitors at this time.  Of course, the Chronicles often don't tell us exactly why a given decision was made, only that it was.  And sometimes not even that. The other thing that seems curious is the mention of a request for governance.  That almost sounds like Silla was asking to come under Yamato hegemony, which I seriously doubt.  It may be that they were asking something along the lines of an alliance, but it is also possible that the scribes recording things for Yamato heard what they wanted to hear and so wrote it down in the light most favorable to Yamato laying claim to the peninsula. Or perhaps I'm misunderstanding exactly what they were asking for.  Maybe "governance" here means something else—perhaps just some kind of better relationship. And with that, we'll leave it for now.  There is more developing in the next reign, but I think we want to wait until we get there.  There are still a lot more things to cover in this reign before we move on—we haven't even touched on the establishment of the new capital, on the various court events, not to mention some of the laws and punishments that this period is named for.  And there is the minor issue of a rebellion.  All of that will be dealt with.  And then, after that, we get to the final reign of the Chronicles: the reign of Jitou Tennou.  From there?  Who knows. It is the winter holiday season, so I hope everyone is enjoying themselves.  Next episode will be the New Year's recap, and then we should finish with this reign probably in January or early February. Until then, if you like what we are doing, please tell your friends and feel free to rate us wherever you listen to podcasts.  If you feel the need to do more, and want to help us keep this going, we have information about how you can donate on Patreon or through our KoFi site, ko-fi.com/sengokudaimyo, or find the links over at our main website,  SengokuDaimyo.com/Podcast, where we will have some more discussion on topics from this episode. Also, feel free to reach out to our Sengoku Daimyo Facebook page.  You can also email us at the.sengoku.daimyo@gmail.com.  Thank you, also, to Ellen for their work editing the podcast. And that's all for now.  Thank you again, and I'll see you next episode on Sengoku Daimyo's Chronicles of Japan.

Notre agriculture va droit dans le mur.C'est ce que rappelle, sans détour, le biologiste et mycologue Marc-André Selosse dans ce #REWIND coup de poing.Il nous livre un éclairage saisissant sur le coût réel de l'agriculture conventionnelle : dégradation de la santé des sols, explosion des coûts de dépollution de l'eau, perte de matière organique, émissions de CO₂, et dépendance aux engrais chimiques.Mais il montre aussi qu'un autre chemin est possible — moins coûteux, plus fertile, et plus vivant.En défendant les pratiques de non-labour, de couvre-sol, ou encore la culture des blés pérennes, il bouscule nos croyances et rappelle que les alternatives existent — et fonctionnent.

My husband has left me for our labourer and gifted her our newly built home; he insists he's over our many years of childlessness. - Wife weeps

Sermon Title: We Are Labourers Together With GodSpeaker: Rev. Provy R. CadelinaDate: February 4, 2024Service: Sunday Morning Worship ServiceIlocano Preaching

Sermon Title: We Are Labourers Together with God (Part 2)Speaker: Rev. Provy R. CadelinaDate: February 5, 2024Service: Long Distance PreachingIlocano Preaching

Before he was Tywin Lannister in Game of Thrones or the commanding presence of The Jewel in the Crown, Charles Dance was a boy from Worcestershire whose father died when he was three and whose mother built a new life for the family, remarried to their lodger. A childhood marked by loss, a stammer and humble beginnings gave little hint of the commanding actor he would become.In this episode of Full Disclosure, James O'Brien sits down with the Emmy-nominated actor to trace an extraordinary journey from working-class Devon to the stages of the Royal Shakespeare Company and Hollywood sets alongside Meryl Streep, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Maggie Smith. Dance reveals how two eccentric mentors in rural Devon taught him to speak, act and think like an actor, and why, even now at 79, he still considers himself a “working actor” rather than a star.It's an intimate, reflective conversation about identity, perseverance, class, craft and the enduring magic of the stage- told with the wit and humility of a man who's seen it all and still can't quite believe his luck.

Hello Interactors,Fall is in full swing here in the northern hemisphere, which means it's time to turn our attention to economics and economic geography. Triggered by a recent podcast on the origins of capitalism, I thought I'd kick off by exploring this from a geography perspective.I trace how violence, dispossession, and racial hierarchy aren't simple externalities or accidents. They emerge out of a system that organized itself and then spread. Capitalism grew out of dispossession of land and human autonomy and became a dominant social and economic structure. It's rooted in violence that became virtuous and centuries later is locked-in. Or is it?EMERGING ENGLISH ENCLOSURESThe dominant and particular brand of capitalism in force today originates in England. Before English landlords and the state violently seized common lands back in the 1300s, economic life was embedded in what historian E.P. Thompson called “moral economies”.(1) These were systems of survival where collective responsibility was managed through custom, obligation, and shared access to resources. Similar systems existed elsewhere. Long before Europeans arrived at the shores of what is now called North America, Haudenosaunee longhouse economies were sophisticatedly organized around economies of reciprocity. Further south, Andean ayllu communities negotiated labor obligations and access to land was shared. West African systems featured land that belonged to communities and ancestors, not individuals.Back in medieval English villages, commons weren't charity, they were infrastructure. Anyone could graze animals or gather firewood. When harvests failed, there were fallbacks like hunting and gathering rights, seasonal labor sharing, and kin networks. As anthropologist Stephen Gudeman shows, these practices reflected cultures of mutual insurance aimed at collective resilience, not individual accumulation.(2)Then landlords, backed by state violence, destroyed this system to enrich themselves.From 1348-1349, the bubonic plague killed perhaps half of England's population. This created a labor shortage that gave surviving so-called peasants leverage. For the first time they could demand higher wages, refuse exploitative landlords, or move to find better conditions.The elite mobilized state violence to reverse this. In 1351 the state passed The Statute of Labourers — an attempt to freeze wages and restrict worker movement. This serves as an early signal that reverberates today. When property and people come in conflict, the state sides with property. Over the next two centuries, landlords steadily enclosed common lands, claiming shared space as private property. Peasants who resisted were evicted, sometimes killed.Initial conditions mattered enormously. England had a relatively weak monarchy that couldn't check landlord aggression like stronger European states did. It also had growing urban markets creating demand for food and wool and post-plague labor dynamics that made controlling land more profitable than extracting rents from secure peasants.As historian J.M. Neeson details, enclosure — fencing in private land — destroyed social infrastructure.(3) When access to common resources disappeared, so did the safety nets that enabled survival outside of market and labor competition. People simply lost the ability to graze a cow, gather fuel, glean grain, or even rely on neighbors' obligation to help.This created a feedback loop:Each turn made the pattern stronger. Understanding how this happens requires grasping how these complex systems shaped the very people who reproduced them.The landlords driving enclosure weren't simply greedy villains. Their sense of self, their understanding of what was right and proper, was constituted through relationships to other people like them, to their own opportunities, and to authorities who validated their actions. A landlord enclosing commons likely experienced this as “improvement”. They believed they were making the land productive while exercising newly issued property rights. Other landlords were doing it, parliament legalized it, and the economics of the time justified it. The very capacity to see alternatives was constrained by relational personal and social positions within an emerging capitalistic society.This doesn't excuse the violence or diminish responsibility. But it does reveal how systems reproduce themselves. This happens not primarily through individual evil but through relationships and feedback loops that constitute people's identities and sense of what's possible. The moral judgment remains stark. These were choices that enriched someone by destroying someone else's means of survival. But the choices were made by people whose very selfhood was being constructed by the system they were creating.Similarly, displaced peasants resisted in ways their social positions made possible. They rioted, appealed to historical customary rights, attempted to maintain the commons they relied on for centuries. Each turn of the spiral didn't just move resources, it remade people. Peasants' children, born into a world without commons, developed identities shaped by market dependence — renting their labor in exchange for money. What had been theft became, over generations, simply “how things are.”By the mid-16th century, England had something new. They'd created a system where most people owned no land, had no customary rights to subsistence, and had to compete in labor markets to survive. This was the essence of capitalism's emergence. It wasn't born out of markets (they existed everywhere for millennia) but as market dependence enforced through dispossession. Out of this emerged accumulated actions of actors whose awareness and available alternatives were themselves being shaped by the very system they were simultaneously shaping and sustaining.REPLICATING PATTERNS OF PLANTATIONSOnce capitalism emerged in England through violent enclosure, its spread wasn't automatic. Understanding how it became global requires distinguishing between wealth extraction (which existed under many systems) and capitalist social relations (which require specific conditions).Spain conquered vast American territories, devastating indigenous populations through disease, warfare, and forced labor. Spanish extraction from mines in the 16th century — like Potosí in today's Bolivia — were worked by enslaved indigenous and African peoples under conditions that killed them in staggering numbers. Meanwhile, Portugal developed Atlantic island sugar plantations using enslaved African labor. This expansion of Portuguese agriculture on Atlantic islands like Madeira and São Tomé became a blueprint for plantation economies in the Americas, particularly Brazil. The brutally efficient system perfected there for sugar production — relying on the forced labor of enslaved Africans — was directly transplanted across the ocean, leading to a massive increase in the scale and violence of the transatlantic slave trade.Both empires generated massive wealth from these practices. If colonial plunder caused capitalism, Spain and Portugal should have industrialized first. Instead, they stagnated. The wealth flowed to feudal monarchies who spent it on palaces, armies, and wars, not productive reinvestment. Both societies remained fundamentally feudal.England, with virtually no empire during its initial capitalist transformation, developed differently because it had undergone a different structural violence — enclosure of common land that created landless workers, wage dependence, and market competition spiraling into self-reinforcing patterns.But once those capitalist social relations existed, they became patterns that spread through violent imposition. These patterns destroyed existing economic systems and murdered millions.English expansion first began close to home. Ireland and Scotland experienced forced enclosures as English landlords exported the template — seize land, displace people, create private regimes, and force the suffering to work for you. This internal colonialism served as testing ground for techniques later deployed around the world.When English capitalism encountered the Caribbean — lands where indigenous peoples had developed complex agricultural systems and trade networks — the Spanish conquest had already devastated these populations. English merchants and settlers completed the destruction, seizing lands indigenous peoples had managed for millennia while expanding the brutal, enslaved-based labor models pioneered by the Spanish and Portuguese for mining and sugar production.The plantations English capitalists built operated differently than earlier Portuguese and Spanish systems. English plantation owners were capitalists, not feudal lords. But this was also not simply individual choice or moral character. They were operating within and being shaped by an emerging system of capitalist social relations. Here too they faced competitive pressures to increase output, reduce costs, and compete with other plantation owners. The system's logic — accumulate to accumulate more — emerged from relational dynamics between competing capitalists. The individual identities as successful plantation owners was constituted through their position within the competitive networks in which they coexisted.New location, same story. Even here this systemic shaping doesn't absolve individual responsibility for the horrors they perpetrated. Enslaved people were still kidnapped, brutalized, and worked to death. Indigenous peoples were still murdered and their lands still stolen. But understanding how the system shaped what seemed necessary or moral to those positioned to benefit helps explain how such horror could be so widespread and normalized.This normalization created new spirals:This pattern then replicated across even more geographies — Jamaica, Barbados, eventually the American South — each iteration destroying existing ways of life. As anthropologist Sidney Mintz showed, this created the first truly global capitalist commodity chain.(4) Sugar produced by enslaved Africans and indigenous peoples — on their stolen land — sweetened the tea for those English emerging factory workers — themselves recently dispossessed through enclosure.At the same time, it's worth calling attention, as Historians Walter Rodney, Guyanese, and Paul Tiyambe Zeleza, Malawian, have point out, that African societies weren't passive.(5,6) Some kingdoms initially engaged strategically by trading captives from rival groups and acquiring weapons. These choices are often judged harshly, but they were made by people facing threats to their very existence. They were working with frameworks developed over centuries that suddenly confronted an unprecedented system of extractive violence. Historians Linda Heywood and John Thornton show that African economic strength and political organization meant Africans often “forced Europeans to deal with them on their own terms” for centuries, even as the terms of engagement became increasingly constrained.(7) This moral complexity matters. These were real choices with devastating consequences, made by people whose capacity to perceive alternatives was constrained by their eventual oppressors amidst escalating violence by Europeans.Native American scholars have documented similar patterns of constrained agency in indigenous contexts. Historian Ned Blackhawk, Western Shoshone, shows how Native nations across North America made strategic choices — like forming alliances, adapting governance structures, and engaging in trade — all while navigating impossible pressures from colonial expansion.(8) Historian Jean O'Brien, White Earth Ojibwe, demonstrates how New England indigenous communities persisted and adapted even as settler narratives and violence worked to wipe them out of existence.(9) They were forced to make choices about land, identity, and survival within systems designed to eliminate them. These weren't failures of resistance but strategic adaptations made by people whose frameworks for understanding and practicing sovereignty, kinship, and territorial rights were being violently overwritten and overtaken by colonial capitalism.Europeans increasingly controlled these systems through superior military technology making resistance futile. Only when late 19th century industrial weapons were widely wielded — machine guns, munitions, and mechanisms manufactured through capitalism's own machinations — could Europeans decisively overwhelm resistance and complete the colonial carving of Africa, the Americas, and beyond.LOCKING-IN LASTING LOOPSOnce patterns spread and stabilize, they become increasingly difficult to change. Not because they're natural, but because they're actively maintained by those who benefit.Capitalism's expansion created geographic hierarchies that persist today: core regions that accumulate wealth and peripheral regions that get extracted from. England industrialized first through wealth stolen from colonies and labor dispossessed through enclosure. This gave English manufacturers advantages. Namely, they could sell finished goods globally while importing cheap raw materials. Colonies were forced at gunpoint to specialize in export commodities, making them dependent on manufactured imports. That dependence made it harder to develop their own industries. Once the loop closed it became enforced — to this day through institutions like the IMF and World Bank.Sociologists Marion Fourcade and Kieran Healy show how these hierarchies get naturalized through moral categories that shape how people — including those benefiting from and those harmed by the system — come to understand themselves and others.(10) Core regions are portrayed as “developed,” “modern,” “efficient.” Peripheral regions are called “backward,” “corrupt,” “informal.” These aren't just ideological justifications imposed from above but categories that constitute people's identities. They shape how investors see opportunities, how policy makers perceive problems, and how individuals understand their own worth.Meanwhile, property rights established through colonial theft get treated as legitimate. They are backed by international law and written by representatives of colonial powers as Indigenous land claims continue to get dismissed as economically backward. This doesn't happen through conscious conspiracies. It's because the frameworks through which “economic rationality” itself is understood and practiced were constructed through and for capitalist social relations. People socialized into these frameworks genuinely perceive capitalist property relations as more efficient, more rational. Their (our?) very capacity to see alternatives is constrained by identities formed within the system in which they (we?) exist.These patterns persist because they're profitable for those with power and because people with power were shaped by the very system that gives them power. Each advantage reinforces others. It then gets defended, often by people who genuinely believe they're defending rationality and efficiency. They (we?) fail to fathom how their (our?) frameworks for understanding economy were forged through forceful and violent subjugation.INTERRUPTING INTENSIFICATIONViewing capitalism's complex geographies shows its evolution is not natural or even inevitable. It emerged, and continues to evolve, as a result of shifting relationships and feedbacks at multiple scales. Recognizing this eventuality creates space for imagining and building more ethical derivatives or alternatives.If capitalism emerged from particular violent interactions between people in specific places, then different interactions could produce different systems. If patterns locked in through feedback loops that benefit some at others' expense, then interrupting those loops becomes possible.Even within capitalist nations, alternative arrangements have persisted or been fought for. Nordic countries and Scotland maintain “Everyman's Right” or “Freedom to Roam” laws. These are legal traditions allowing public access to private land for recreation, foraging, and camping. These represent partial commons that survived enclosure or were restored through political struggle, showing that private property needn't mean total exclusion. Even in countries that participate in capitalist economies. In late 19th century America, Henry George became one of the nation's most widely read public intellectuals. More people attended his funeral than Abraham Lincoln's. He argued that land value increases resulting from community development should be captured through land value taxes rather than enriching individual owners. His ideas inspired single-tax colonies, urban reform movements, and influenced progressive era policies. Farmers organized cooperatives and mutual aid societies, pooling resources and labor outside pure market competition. Urban communities established settlement houses, cooperative housing, and neighborhood commons. These weren't marginal experiments, they were popular movements showing that even within capitalism's heartland, people continuously organized alternatives based on shared access, collective benefit, and relationships of reciprocity rather than pure commodity exchange.Or, consider these current examples operating at different scales and locations:Community land trusts in cities like Burlington, Vermont remove properties from speculative markets. These trusts separate ownership of the land from the buildings on it, allowing the nonprofit land trust to retain ownership of the land while selling homes at affordable prices with resale restrictions. While they're trying to break the feedback loop where rising prices displace residents, gentrification and displacement continue in surrounding market-rate housing. This shows how alternatives require scale and time to fully interrupt established feedback loops.Zapatista autonomous municipalities in Chiapas, Mexico governed 300,000 people through indigenous forms of collective decision-making, refusing both state control and capitalist markets — surviving decades of Mexican government counterinsurgency backed by US military support. In 2023, after three decades of autonomy, the Zapatistas restructured into thousands of hyperlocal governments, characterizing the shift as deepening rather than retreating from their fundamental rejection of capitalist control.Brazil's Landless Workers Movement has won land titles for 350,000 families through occupations of unused land. These are legally expropriated under Brazil's constitutional requirement that land fulfill a social function. Organizing 2,000 cooperative settlements across 7.5 million hectares, this movement has become Latin America's largest social movement and Brazil's leading producer of organic food. They're building schools, health clinics, and cooperative enterprises based on agroecology and direct democracy.(11) Still, titled arable farmland in Brazil is highly concentrated into a minuscule percent of the overall population. Meanwhile, capitalist state structures continue favoring agribusiness and large landowners despite the movement's successes with organic food production.Indigenous land back movements across North America demand return of stolen territories as restoration of indigenous governance systems organized around relationships to land and other beings rather than ownership. Through the InterTribal Buffalo Council, 82 tribes are restoring buffalo herds. The Blackfeet Nation is establishing a 30,000-acre buffalo reserve that reconnects fragmented prairie ecosystems and restores buffalo migrations crossing the US-Canada border, reclaiming transnational governance systems that predate colonial boundaries.These aren't isolated utopian fantasies, and they're not perfect, but they're functioning alternatives, each attempting to interrupt capitalism's spirals at different points and places. Still, they face enormous opposition because for some reason, existing powerful systems that claim to embrace competition don't seem to like it much.Let's face it, other complex and functional economic systems existed before capitalism destroyed them. Commons-based systems, gift economies, reciprocal obligations organized around kinship and place were sophisticated solutions to survival. And extractive and exploitive capitalism violently replaced them. Most of all them. There are still pockets around the world where other economic geographies persist — including informal economies, mutual aid networks, cooperative enterprises, and indigenous governance systems.I recognize I've clearly over simplified what is a much more layered and complex evolution, and existing alternatives aren't always favorable nor foolproof. But neither is capitalism. There is no denying the dominant forms of capitalism of today emerged in English fields through violent enclosure of shared space. It then spread through transformation of existing extraction systems into engines of competitive accumulation. And it locked in through feedback loops that benefit core regions while extracting from peripheral ones.But it also took hold in hearts and habits. It's shaping how we understand ourselves, what seems possible, and what feels “normal.” We've learned to see accumulation as virtue, competition as natural, individual success as earned and poverty as personal failure. The very category of the autonomous ‘individual' — separate, self-made, solely responsible for their own outcomes — is itself a capitalist construction that obscures how all achievement and hardship emerge from relational webs of collective conditions. This belief doesn't just justify inequality, it reproduces it by generating the anxiety and shame that compel people to rent even more of their time and labor to capitalism. Pausing, resting, healing, caring for others, or resisting continue exploitation marks them as haven chosen their own ruin — regardless of their circumstance or relative position within our collective webs. These aren't just ideologies imposed from above but the makings of identity itself for all of us socialized within capitalism. A financial analyst optimizing returns, a policy maker promoting market efficiency, an entrepreneur celebrating “self-made” innovation — these aren't necessarily cynical actors. They're often people whose very sense of self has been shaped by a system they feel compelled to reproduce. After all, the system rewards individualism — even when it's toxins poison the collective web — including the web of life.Besides, if capitalism persists only through the conscious choices of so-called evil people, then exposing their villainy should be sufficient. Right? The law is there to protect innocent people from evil-doers. Right? Not if it persists through feedback loops that shape the identities, perceptions, and moral frameworks of everyone within it — including or especially those who benefit most or have the most to lose. It seems change requires not just moral condemnation but transformation of the relationships and systems that constitute our very selves. After all, anyone participating is complicit at some level. And what choice is there? For a socio-economic political system that celebrates freedom of choice, it offers little.To challenge a form of capitalism that can create wealth and prosperity but also unhealthy precarity isn't just to oppose policies or demand redistribution, and it isn't simply to condemn those who benefit from it as moral failures. It's to recognize that the interactions between people and places that created this system through violence could create other systems through different choices. Making those different choices requires recognizing and reconstructing the very identities, relationships, and frameworks through which we understand ourselves and what's possible. Perhaps even revealing a different form of capitalism that cares.But it seems we'd need new patterns to be discussed and debated by the very people who keep these patterns going. We're talking about rebuilding economic geographies based on mutual respect, shared responsibility, and a deep connection to our communities. To each other. This rebuilding needs to go beyond just changing institutions, it has to change the very people those institutions have shaped.As fall deepens and we watch leaves and seeds spiral down, notice how each follows a path predetermined by its inherited form. Maple seeds spin like helicopters — their propeller wings evolved over millennia to slow descent and scatter offspring far from competition. Their form has been fashioned by evolutionary forces beyond any individual seed's control, shaped by gusts and gravity in environments filled with a mix of competition and cooperation — coopetition. Then reflect on this fundamental difference: Unlike seeds locked into their descent, we humans can collectively craft new conditions, consciously charting courses that climb, curl, cascade, or crash.ReferencesChibber, V., & Nashek, M. (Hosts). (2025, September 24). The origins of capitalism. [Audio podcast episode]. In Confronting Capitalism. Jacobin Radio.1. Thompson, E. P. (1971). The moral economy of the English crowd in the eighteenth century. Past & Present, 50(1), 76–136.2. Gudeman, S. (2016). Anthropology and economy. Cambridge University Press.3. Neeson, J. M. (1996). Commoners: Common right, enclosure and social change in England, 1700–1820. Cambridge University Press.4. Mintz, S. W. (1985). Sweetness and power: The place of sugar in modern history. Viking Penguin.5. Rodney, W. (1972). How Europe underdeveloped Africa. Bogle-L'Ouverture.6. Zeleza, P. T. (1997). A modern economic history of Africa: The nineteenth century (Vol. 1). East African Publishers.7. Heywood, L. M., & Thornton, J. K. (2007). Central Africans, Atlantic creoles, and the foundation of the Americas, 1585-1660. Cambridge University Press.8. Blackhawk, N. (2023). The rediscovery of America: Native peoples and the unmaking of US history. Yale University Press.9. OBrien, J. M. (2010). Firsting and lasting: Writing Indians out of existence in New England. U of Minnesota Press.10. Fourcade, M., & Healy, K. (2017). Seeing like a market. Socio-Economic Review, 15(1), 9–29.11. Carter, M. (Ed.). (2015). Challenging social inequality: The landless rural workers movement and agrarian reform in Brazil. Duke University Press. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit interplace.io

He saw. He was moved. He sent. It's time for us to see what Jesus saw and do what He commanded.

First, The Indian Express' Ravi Dutta Misra talks about the new tariffs that the US administration under President Donald Trump announced last week, and what they could mean for India.Next, we talk to The Indian Express' Shubham Tigga about Jharkhand, where the promise of work led 13 young men into captivity. (09:37)Lastly, we take a look at Tamil Nadu where one of the deadliest political tragedies in years claimed 39 lives. (20:47)Hosted by Ichha SharmaProduced and written by Shashank Bhargava and Ichha SharmaEdited and mixed by Suresh Pawar

La foi est comme un jardin,Si tu l'entretiens, elle fleurit et parfume ton cœur.Si tu l'oublies, les mauvaises herbes de l'ego, de l'orgueil et de la paresse l'envahissent…Labourer le jardin de la foi, c'est arroser son âme de dhikr et de Coran, observer ses racines de nos vices cachés et rechercher en permanence la lumière d'Allah. ☀️Car le jardin que l'on entretient ici-bas n'est qu'une parcelle de celui que l'on espère dans l'au-delà.Qu'Allah fasse fleurir nos jardins intérieurs de paix et de miséricorde.

Timothy “A True Son in the Faith, The Apostle Paul's Labourer – By Laurence Torr  We can learn a lot about what a Labourer looks through the life of Timothy. Timothy was a wonderful believer and Labourer of the Apostle Paul and faithful and loyal to God and the encouragement that was given to him through the ministering of the Apostle Paul. In summary: Timothy was a young labourer / disciple from Lystra, raised in faith by his mother and grandmother Lois, mentored by Paul, and became a key early church leader/Labourer. He is remembered as a faithful, gentle, yet courageous servant of God who carried Paul's teachings and heart for the churches.   Give/ Honour God  https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/laurencetorr Visit Our Website http://www.graceloveandtruth.com/ Visit Our YouTube Channel Here http://www.youtube.com/laurencetorr  

A new MP3 sermon from Coleraine Free Presbyterian Church is now available on SermonAudio with the following details: Title: Send Forth Labourers Speaker: Rev. John Greer Broadcaster: Coleraine Free Presbyterian Church Event: Sunday - AM Date: 9/21/2025 Bible: Matthew 9:38 Length: 49 min.

Filipino migrant Manu Ofiaza shares his journey from Perth to Dalwallinu, Western Australia, where hard work and community support helped him secure permanent residency and reunite with his family. - Sa episode ng Trabaho, Visa atbp., ibinahagi ni Manu Ofiaza ang kanyang karanasan mula Perth hanggang Dalwallinu, Western Australia, kung saan ang pinasok ang iba't ibang trabaho at lumipat sa regional Australia para makamit ang permanent residency at muling makasama ang pamilya.

Sunday August 31, 2025 Elmsdale Church of the Nazarene - PE -CA Speaker: Pastor Betty Zita Scripture: Matthew 20:1-16

Lance Hohenstreet 08.24.25

The Parable of the Hired Labourers 7-27-2025 pm by Kevin O'Connor

03-08-2025 Sunday AM1 - Pastor N. Davies

In this passage we see Jesus tell a parable about labourers working in a vineyard. What do we learn about God's kingdom from this story?

Peace be in your house my dear friend. This is DAY 331 ☕️ LAST BOOK — The labourer is worthy of his hire. Thank you for listening to this talk, I hear wisdom in it.—JC. ★ Support this podcast ★

Jesus called God Father. What did he mean by using that very human metaphor and what did he learn about that from Joseph, the father who raised him? Based on Matthew 13:55-57, Mark 6:3, Matthew 6:7-9, Matthew 7:7 and Luke 13:4-5 among many other sayings of Jesus about God as Father. Show notes have been posted at retellingthebible.wordpress.com. Media in this Episode The following music was used for this media project: "AhDah" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com) Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Music: Lonely Fish by Sascha Ende Link: https://ende.app/en/song/4655-lonely-fish http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Support Retelling the Bible If you would like to support the work that I do creating these stories, go to patreon.com/retellingthebible and choose a level of support! Contact me on Social Media! Bluesky Facebook Reddit

Class 1 from this series was used in GCT Episode 355.

On Sunday 29th June we returned to our Matthew series, and dug into the parable Jesus told about the labourers in the vineyard. David also gave us a lot think about regarding the first and the last.Listen to Martin Scott's message from last weekFor more information about who we are, what we believe and how you can get involved, please visit our website

This week on the Chasin' the Racin' podcast, Dom Herbertson and Joe Akroyd welcome none other than the legendary John McGuinness — national treasure and the world's fastest labourer — into the trailer for a full debrief on the 2025 Isle of Man TT. From Dean Harrison's emotional victory to Peter Hickman's TT 2025 ending crash and everything in between, McPint shares his unfiltered take on all the highs, lows, and talking points of TT '25. We also dive into the North West controversy and hear who impressed the 23-time TT winner the most this year. Enjoy - CTR x   Powered by OMG Racing       Supported by JCT Truck and Trailer Rental and Lucky Day Competitions     Lucky Day are one of the biggest competition companies in the UK and have an amazing range of prizes up for grab every week! Check them out: https://www.luckydaycompetitions.com/     Episode sponsor: Oakmere Motorgroup. They are a motorcycle dealership specialising in Norton and CCM. Visit their site www.oakmeremotorgroup.co.uk or go inshore at Brook Garage, Prestbury, Macclesfield, SK10 4AL   If you're interested in sponsoring an episode of the podcast, please don't hesitate to get in touch via email to chasintheracin@outlook.com         ------------         We have a full range of merchandise as well as Alan Carter's and Ian Simpson's Autobiography's over on our website: https://chasintheracin.myshopify.com           CTR Patreon Page: https://patreon.com/MotorbikePod?utm_...           -------------           SOCIALS:         Instagram: @chasintheracinpod         Facebook: Chasin' The Racin' Podcast         X: @motorbikepod

https://anchorbaptist1611.com/

In this incredible conversation, Intel technologist and grassroots leader Ananthan Ayyasamy shares his astonishing rise—from farm labor and caste barriers in rural Tamil Nadu to becoming a top 1% realtor in the U.S. and writing patents at Intel. But the story doesn't stop there. Ananthan gave it all up to return to India—fighting for clean politics, rural upliftment, and systemic change through his foundation and public service. This episode is a masterclass in perseverance, service, and impact. A must-watch for anyone who believes in the Indian dream—and wants to build it.

Sometimes I feel like the “Labourer” in our household. “Darling, can you please dig me a large hole for a Nikau Palm” followed by “pruning the fruit trees” and “covering the soil against blackbirds” or “create a nice pathway”. Of course I have my own stuff to do/plant/remove/mow, but once I start the Hansa Chipper I am in my element. Branches up to 2 inches in diameter are turned into excellent, fresh and sizeable mulch – stuff that will —in time— be the best organic matter to feed the soil and the plants that grow in situ. But it needs to be managed well. Couple of things you can do with this chipping monster and the chips: Create a thick layer of wood chips that cover the garden path. It keeps it covered in winter, and it stops a lot of weeds germinating on that path – saves a heap of weeding and keeps the surface relatively dry after winter rain. But if you want to create a good mulch for your plants, you'll need to add some Nitrogen (N). Your chipped wood is mainly Carbon. The Nitrogen (in the form of Urea) is needed to turn the Carbon into balanced compost – a handful of Urea per square meter might do the trick. Many people that have a compost bin stuff that bin full of lawn clippings, fruit remains, and vegetable matter and stalks, left over from a dinner This compost bin is very full of Nitrogen and lacking a decent amount of Carbon —the opposite to the thick layer of wood chips— to be used as “Mulch”. You guessed it: this compost bin needs a good amount of Carbon from the chipper to balance the C-N ratio required for a decent plant food fertiliser in the garden Generally speaking, the C-N ratio required to make fertile soil should be in the order of 20-1 (up to 30-1). LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

While Spurgeon usually preaches on single texts he does not invariably preach isolated sermons. On Sunday 5th June, 1881, he preached from 1 Corinthians 3:6–9 about God's co-labourers. On Sunday 12th June he took up the same theme of labourers on God's farm, this time from Mark 4:26–29, explicitly linking the two sermons together. If the first sermon showed how far human agency is required in the work of the gospel, and how dependent all results are upon the Lord, the second sermon emphasises how far a holy labourer can go, and how far he cannot go: “the measure and limit of human instrumentality in the kingdom of grace.” As so often, Spurgeon's structure is fairly simple and repetitive: what we can and cannot do, what we can and cannot know, what we may and may not expect if we work for God, and what sleep workers may and may not take. It is an intensely practical sermon of particular encouragement and instruction to Christian workers—and which Christian ought not also to be a worker on God's farm? Read the sermon here: https://www.mediagratiae.org/resources/what-the-farm-labourers-can-do-and-what-they-cannot-do Check out the new From the Heart of Spurgeon Book! British: https://amzn.to/48rV1OR American: https://amzn.to/48oHjft Connect with the Reading Spurgeon Community on Twitter! https://twitter.com/ReadingSpurgeon Sign up to get the weekly readings emailed to you: https://www.mediagratiae.org/podcasts-1/from-the-heart-of-spurgeon. Check out other Media Gratiae podcasts at www.mediagratiae.org Download the Media Gratiae App: https://subsplash.com/mediagratiae/app

While Spurgeon usually preaches on single texts he does not invariably preach isolated sermons. On Sunday 5th June, 1881, he preached from 1 Corinthians 3:6–9 about God's co-labourers. On Sunday 12th June he took up the same theme of labourers on God's farm, this time from Mark 4:26–29, explicitly linking the two sermons together. If the first sermon showed how far human agency is required in the work of the gospel, and how dependent all results are upon the Lord, the second sermon emphasises how far a holy labourer can go, and how far he cannot go: "the measure and limit of human instrumentality in the kingdom of grace." As so often, Spurgeon's structure is fairly simple and repetitive: what we can and cannot do, what we can and cannot know, what we may and may not expect if we work for God, and what sleep workers may and may not take. It is an intensely practical sermon of particular encouragement and instruction to Christian workers—and which Christian ought not also to be a worker on God's farm?

Matthew 20:1-16 — If Christians tend to grumble, commiserate, and feel sorry for themselves, is it because they've forgotten grace? Murmuring stems from a belief that one deserves something more. As a result, they're never happy and become a complaining people. In this sermon on the parable of the workers in the vineyard from Matthew 20:1–16, Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones explains that the murmuring person has forgotten that everything is grace. To illustrate this point, Jesus gives us the parable of the laborers in the vineyard. This sermon highlights the grumbling of those who have been in the faith for a long time. They are complainers; they feel they deserve more than the others. They started out well, but got into trouble later on. Listen as Dr. Lloyd-Jones applies this parable to the human condition today. Christians have the gospel of Jesus Christ, but if they do not continue in it, they get into the same trouble. They become entitled and believe they deserve more. What they forget is this: it's all grace. It's always been grace. In the Christian life, all is grace, from the beginning to the end. Christians are called to do all things without murmuring. What a tragedy when Christian people become miserable. What a tragedy when they murmur. The same grace that saved them keeps them. Listen and rejoice––it is all of grace.

Matthew 20:1-16 — If Christians tend to grumble, commiserate, and feel sorry for themselves, is it because they've forgotten grace? Murmuring stems from a belief that one deserves something more. As a result, they're never happy and become a complaining people. In this sermon on the parable of the workers in the vineyard from Matthew 20:1–16, Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones explains that the murmuring person has forgotten that everything is grace. To illustrate this point, Jesus gives us the parable of the laborers in the vineyard. This sermon highlights the grumbling of those who have been in the faith for a long time. They are complainers; they feel they deserve more than the others. They started out well, but got into trouble later on. Listen as Dr. Lloyd-Jones applies this parable to the human condition today. Christians have the gospel of Jesus Christ, but if they do not continue in it, they get into the same trouble. They become entitled and believe they deserve more. What they forget is this: it's all grace. It's always been grace. In the Christian life, all is grace, from the beginning to the end. Christians are called to do all things without murmuring. What a tragedy when Christian people become miserable. What a tragedy when they murmur. The same grace that saved them keeps them. Listen and rejoice––it is all of grace.

Matthew 20:1-16 — If Christians tend to grumble, commiserate, and feel sorry for themselves, is it because they've forgotten grace? Murmuring stems from a belief that one deserves something more. As a result, they're never happy and become a complaining people. In this sermon on the parable of the workers in the vineyard from Matthew 20:1–16, Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones explains that the murmuring person has forgotten that everything is grace. To illustrate this point, Jesus gives us the parable of the laborers in the vineyard. This sermon highlights the grumbling of those who have been in the faith for a long time. They are complainers; they feel they deserve more than the others. They started out well, but got into trouble later on. Listen as Dr. Lloyd-Jones applies this parable to the human condition today. Christians have the gospel of Jesus Christ, but if they do not continue in it, they get into the same trouble. They become entitled and believe they deserve more. What they forget is this: it's all grace. It's always been grace. In the Christian life, all is grace, from the beginning to the end. Christians are called to do all things without murmuring. What a tragedy when Christian people become miserable. What a tragedy when they murmur. The same grace that saved them keeps them. Listen and rejoice––it is all of grace.

Matthew 20:1-16 — If Christians tend to grumble, commiserate, and feel sorry for themselves, is it because they've forgotten grace? Murmuring stems from a belief that one deserves something more. As a result, they're never happy and become a complaining people. In this sermon on the parable of the workers in the vineyard from Matthew 20:1–16, Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones explains that the murmuring person has forgotten that everything is grace. To illustrate this point, Jesus gives us the parable of the laborers in the vineyard. This sermon highlights the grumbling of those who have been in the faith for a long time. They are complainers; they feel they deserve more than the others. They started out well, but got into trouble later on. Listen as Dr. Lloyd-Jones applies this parable to the human condition today. Christians have the gospel of Jesus Christ, but if they do not continue in it, they get into the same trouble. They become entitled and believe they deserve more. What they forget is this: it's all grace. It's always been grace. In the Christian life, all is grace, from the beginning to the end. Christians are called to do all things without murmuring. What a tragedy when Christian people become miserable. What a tragedy when they murmur. The same grace that saved them keeps them. Listen and rejoice––it is all of grace. To support this ministry financially, visit: https://www.oneplace.com/donate/603/29

Group Brand Manager for Trigon Hotels, Sandra Murphy explains why the Metropole Hotel in Cork is looking to find four men who left a note which was discovered in the bricks of the lobby.

What is a Labourer? – By Laurence Torr Jesus said to his disciples, The harvest truly is plenteous, but the labourers are few;  Pray you therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he will send forth labourers into his harvest.    (Matthew 9:35-38KLV) Jesus encouraged his disciples to pray to the Lord of the harvest which is God, to send forth (throw out) the labourers into the harvest. the harvest is those that need to be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth and the labourers are those that preach the gospel and do the work that God gives them to do.  What are some of traits of a labourer how do we know if God has sent us a labourer?  are we a labourer?

Every year, tens of thousands of labourers in the wealth countries of the Gulf, most of them migrants from South Asia, die in unsafe working conditions on construction sites. As the GCC states pour enormous resources into developing their infrastructure, little attention is paid to the plight of the people doing the actual building work. I spoke to James Lynch of FairSquare, a UK-based non-profit that researches and advocates for the rights of labourers in the Gulf.https://fairsq.org/Assistant Producer: Japji Oberoi Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The life of Jesus is the exact opposite of casual! We are called to a new level of commitment and urgency to see the lost be saved. We can no longer kick back or remain on the sidelines – we need to step out!

An industrial worker is in critical condition and two others are injured after being struck by several sheets of marble in south Auckland today. The hired labourers were unloading a shipping container in Manurewa when disaster struck. Felix Walton spoke to witnesses at the scene. A warning, some of the details in his report are distressing.

https://ontargetpodcast.caThe needle drops, the sparks fly, and the momentum keeps rolling! After last week's milestone celebration, On Target is back with a fresh stack of sizzling 45s. Mod Marty serves up the signature mix of rare and irresistible 60s soul, driving R&B, beat, and garage—all spinning on original vinyl.-----------------------------------------------The playlist is:"Don't Mess With Cupid"Otis Redding - Volt"Money (That's What I Want)"Jr. Walker & The All Stars- Soul"The Bounce"The Olympics- Mirwood"The Who Who Song"Jackie Wilson- Brunswick"The Whip"Gene Austin - TEC 3005"Wanted $10,000 Reward"Ernie K-Doe- London"That's Right"Bobby Lewis- ABC-Paramount"Harlem Shuffle"The Traits- Scepter"Looking Glass"The Will-O-Bees- Date "Labourer"49th Parallel- RCA-Victor"Somebody"Ray Charles- London Cross-Over"Yo-Yo"Billy Joe Royal- Columbia"Running Out"Bongi & Judy - Buddah"Stay"The Virginia Wolves- Amy"A Sign Of The Times"Petula Clark- Warner Brothers"That's Where I Lost My Baby"Marv Johnson- United Artisits"Shame"Dave Dee, Dozy, Beaky,Mick & Tich- Fontana"Fine With Me"The Beau Brummels- Warner Brothers"Why Did You Hurt Me"The Standells- Tower"Our Day Will Come"James Brown At The Organ- Smash

Canada Immigration CEC Express Entry selection since 2015 for NOC 75110 Construction trades helpers and labourers for New Brunswick Good day ladies and gentlemen, this is IRC news, and I am Joy Stephen, an authorized Canadian Immigration practitioner bringing out this data analysis on the number of applicants approved for Canadian Permanent Residence for multiple years Under the Express Entry CEC selection based on your NOC code. I am coming to you from the Polinsys studios in Cambridge, Ontario The number of individuals selected under the old 4 digit NOC code 7371 (GROUP) or the new Specific 5 digit NOC code 75110 Construction trades helpers and labourers through the Federal Express Entry CEC for Canadian Residents in the express entry program is listed on your screen as a chart. These Permanent Residents were destined for the province of New Brunswick. The figures for each year from 2015 to 2023 are shown as a chart on your screen. Years without any selection for this category destinated for New Brunswick are shown as a blank. | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | - | - | - | - | - | - | 10 | - | - If you have an interest in gaining assistance with Work Permits based on your country of Citizenship, or should you require guidance post-selection, we extend a warm invitation to connect with us via https://myar.me/c. We strongly recommend attending our complimentary Zoom resource meetings conducted every Thursday. We kindly request you to carefully review the available resources. Subsequently, should any queries arise, our team of Canadian Authorized Representatives is readily available to address your concerns during the weekly AR's Q&A session held on Fridays. You can find the details for both these meetings at https://myar.me/zoom.  Our dedicated team is committed to providing you with professional assistance in navigating the immigration process. Additionally, IRCNews offers valuable insights on selecting a qualified representative to advocate on your behalf with the Canadian Federal or Provincial governments, accessible at 

In this episode of ACTRA Toronto Reel Talk, Asante Tracey sits down with ACTRA Toronto Councillor Gugun Deep Singh to discuss his journey as an actor and advocate, as well as key issues facing the industry as we head into IPA bargaining. Gugun explains the "AIR" acronym, referring to Accessibility, Inclusion, and Respect, and highlights the critical issues of artificial intelligence, fair wages, and residuals for performers. Gugun and Asante also discuss the importance of creating supportive and safe environments on set, inclusive practices, and setting standards for performers in a rapidly evolving landscape.

The parable of The Labourers in the Vineyard before us this week from Matthew 20 is in fact a continuation from last week as Jesus explains the statement at the end of Chapter 19, -Many who are first will be last, and the last first.- Most of us expect a certain 'order of things' in life to be kept and maintained by the vast majority. And it is interesting, and somewhat revealing, to observe how we respond when such expectations are not met. Jesus teaches us that we should not presume we are entitled to anything in the Kingdom of Heaven. Instead, whether we are first in line, or last, we receive far more than any of us deserve. It is all gift- Such is the generosity and grace of our Lord and God.

The parable of The Labourers in the Vineyard before us this week from Matthew 20 is in fact a continuation from last week as Jesus explains the statement at the end of Chapter 19, "Many who are first will be last, and the last first." Most of us expect a certain 'order of things' in life to be kept and maintained by the vast majority. And it is interesting, and somewhat revealing, to observe how we respond when such expectations are not met. Jesus teaches us that we should not presume we are entitled to anything in the Kingdom of Heaven. Instead, whether we are first in line, or last, we receive far more than any of us deserve. It is all gift! Such is the generosity and grace of our Lord and God.

I SOUGHT FOR A MAN (CO-LABOURERS WITH GOD) - WORD SESSION WITH APOSTLE JOSHUA SELMAN - 14||07||2024

I SOUGHT FOR A MAN (CO-LABOURERS WITH GOD) WITH APOSTLE JOSHUA SELMAN - 14||07||2024

I SOUGHT FOR A MAN (CO-LABOURERS WITH GOD) WITH APOSTLE JOSHUA SELMAN - 14||07||2024

William Taylor - There is much written today about Christian leadership – and rightly so. But what is the gold-standard? In detailing the ministry he exercised in founding the church in Thessalonica, the Apostle Paul provides us with a benchmark for all Christian work.

William Taylor - There is much written today about Christian leadership – and rightly so. But what is the gold-standard? In detailing the ministry he exercised in founding the church in Thessalonica, the Apostle Paul provides us with a benchmark for all Christian work.