China's Mysterious Desert Construction

A strange tangle of white lines appeared in China's Gobi desert, this had been the content of the new mystery that's been circulating the web for the past week.

The said structure was discovered in Google Map images. Military pundits, armchair investigator, and conspiracy theorists have had a field day with the strange set of lines, which seems to not make any sense, although numerous theories could be drawn out, none of them have supporting evidence.

Among the theories/hypothesis that were made were:

It's a UFO landing strip!

It's a mockup of the streets of Washington, D.C., constructed for nefarious military purposes!

It's China's Area 51!

It's a top-secret military installation doing experiments in controlling the weather!

It's a nuclear testing range!

It's a military base!

It's a new weapon!

It's a hoax: the Google Map images themselves are fakes, and the lines are not actually there!

And the long list of guesses goes on...

A previous Discover News piece concluded that it probably had some military significance (such as target practice range, based in part on the fact that other similar sites in the area had airplanes sitting in them).

However, a space researcher has offered what he believes is the correct solution to the mystery that's been flying around cyberspace for quite a while already. The researcher was a NASA scientist, and his theory seems to be most plausible. "They are almost definitely used to calibrate China's spy satellites," says Jonathan Hill, a research technician and mission planner at the Mars Space Flight Facility at Arizona State University, which operates many of the camera used during NASA's Marsa missions.

China, like many countries including the United States, is known to have spy satellites in orbit. There's been no official explanation from the Chinese government - which is not surprising, since China doesn't need to explain some white lines in its desert to anyone.

Pocahontas Documentary

Pocahontas and her son, Thomas Rolfe

There are so many stories surrounding the Indian princess "Pocahontas," some have even romanticized it to fit the idea of a lovely fairytale, but little knows the real story behind. And as always, the real world isn't as nice as the imaginary one.

Pocahontas was the daughter of Powhatan, a paramount chief of an alliance of Virginia Indians in Tidewater Virginia, ancient America. An iconic figure in American history, Pocahontas is largely known for saving the life of the Jamestown colonist John Smith and then romancing him — although both events are unlikely to be true. She did meet Smith several times, sometimes serving as Powhatan's silent figurehead and a symbolic liaison between the chief and the English colonists; she wasn't, however, a "princess" or a diplomat in any modern sense. Sometime around 1610, she married an Indian named Kocoum, and in 1613, she was captured by the English and confined at Jamestown, where she converted to Christianity and married the colonist John Rolfe. The marriage was approved by Powhatan, and it brought an end to the First Anglo-Powhatan War (1609-1614) and set the stage for Pocahontas' visit to London in 1616. At the request of  the Virginia Company of London, she met both King James I and the bishop of London, after which she reunited briefly with Smith. Early in her return voyage to Virginia, she mysteriously became ill and died at Gravesend in March 1617. In the following centuries since, Pocahontas' life has slipped into myth, serving to represent Virginia's early claim to be the foundation-place of America. Meanwhile, many elite Virginians have tenuously claimed her as a relative, even leading to a "Pocahontas clause" in the Racial Integrity Act of 1924.

19th century oil portrait of Pocahontas by artist
Robert Matthew Sully, depicting the legendary
Virginian Indian before her conversion to
Christianity and her marriage to the English
colonist John Rolfe. Despite the artist's attempt
to portray Pocahontas more in accordance with
Indian character, Sully endows her with features
conforming to Anglo-Saxon standards of beauty.
In her mode of dress, the artist claimed to have
been inspired by descriptions of Indians in The
History and Present State of Virginia (1705), by
colonist Robert Beverley. Pocahontas is shown
here wearing flowers in her hair and a fur robe
that leaves her nude to a little below the
shoulders.

Early Life

Pocahontas was one of dozens of children born to Powhatan, the paramount chief of Tsenacomoco, a political alliance of Algonquian-speaking Indians in Tidewater Virginia. Her mother's name and tribal origin, as well as her birth date, were never recorded, although no English colonist ever suggested that she was not an Indian.

In her infancy, Pocahontas was given the secret personal name Matoaka. Later, she was known as Amonute. Neither name can be translated.

Pocahontas' birth year is unknown, but some historians estimate it to have been around 1595, based on the accounts of Captain John Smith. In Smith's A True Relation of Virginia (1608), Smith described the Pocahontas he met in the spring of 1608 as being "a child of ten-years-old. In a letter written in 1616, he again described her as she was in 1608, but this time, she had grown slightly to "a child of twelve or thirteen years of age."

Powhatan had many wives, and according to their Indian custom, he can keep a wife only until she had a child by him, after which he would sent her back to her people and be supported by him until she found another husband. As a result, Pocahontas had no full siblings and many half siblings. When each child was ready to leave home and become part of a working household — probably at the age of eight to ten years — he or she moved to Powhatan's capital, freeing the mother to remarry.

Late in her childhood, Pocahontas likely joined Powhatan's large, busy household, where everybody worked, even Powhatan himself. In addition to their daily tasks, members of the household labored to produce grand feasts on important occasions. Meanwhile, Pocahontas probably participated in what was traditionally women's work, which includes farming, collecting wild foods and firewood, making utensils, cooking, and cleaning, and as a result, she had little contact with her father or other males during the day. In the evenings, she probably had stiff competition for her father's attention. Still, by 1607, she was her father's favorite child. Her new name, "Pocahontas," may suggest why. William Strachey, who lived at Jamestown from 1610 until 1611, translated "Pocahontas" as "little wanton." In Strachey's time, "wanton" meant not only bawdy but also cruel and undisciplined. In other words, it's possible that Pocahontas may have teased Powhatan about his age (about 60-years-old), and his multitude of wives, and he may have been delighted by it.

John Smith

Chromolithograph credited to the New England
Chromo. Lith. Company, ca. 1870, shows Pocahontas
saving the life of John Smith. The scene is idealized and
relies on stereotypes of American Indians rather than
reliable information about the particulars of this
historical moment. For example, there are no mountains
in Tidewater Virginia, and Powhatan Indians lived not
in tipis but in thatched houses. And the scene that
Smith famously described in his Generall Historie
(1624) did not take place outdoors but in a longhouse.

Pocahontas' first opportunity to see an Englishman came late in December 1607, about eight months after the founding of Jamestown, when John Smith was brought to Powhatan's capital at Werowocomoco. Smith had initially been a captive, but after being vetted by the high priests, he arrived as an honored guest. In The Generall Historie of Virginia, New-England, and the Summer (1624), he famously wrote that he was threatened to death only to be rescued by Pocahontas, a story that subsequently became legend. However, in a more reliable account — a letter written a few months after his visit — Smith said only that he was feasted and then interviewed by Powhatan. This version of event makes sense, given how eager the Indian leadership was to find out why the English had come and stayed in Virginia. The interview took place inside Powhatan's house, a space large enough to accommodate only a few dozen people at most. In fact, Pocahontas probably wasn't even there; being then a young girl of perhaps eleven, she was needed to help with food preparation and washing up afterward.

English colonist Captain John Smith, arrived in Virginia with just more than a hundred other settlers in April 1607. After building a fort on a marshy peninsula poking out into the James River, the Englishmen had numerous encounters over the next several months with the American Indians of Tsenacommacah, some of them friendly, while some are hostile. Then, in December 1607, while exploring on the Chickahominy River, Smith was captured by a hunting party led by Powhatan's younger brother (or perhaps, a close relative) Opechancanough and this is how he was brought into Powhatan's capital.

The anthropologist Helen C. Rountree has argued that Smith's first version of events (the event in which he was interviewed by Powhatan was more reliable than the second. Smith may have exaggerated or invented the account to enhance Pocahontas' standing. On the other hand, he may have been telling the truth. Some scholars have argued that the absence of the episode in Smith's earlier works should not be definitive evidence that it did not happen. Historian J. A. Leo Lemay, for instance, noted in his 1992 book that, as Smith's earlier was primarily concerned with geographical and ethnographic matters, he had no reason then to recount the story of Pocahontas. Stan Birchfield has written that "Smith's writings are perfectly consistent with the truthfulness of the episode," but he does not take into account the strong implication, in Smith's True Relation, that he did not first meet Pocahontas until the spring of 1608.

John Smith

In True Travels (1630), Smith told a similar story of having been rescued by the intervention of a young girl after having been captured in 1602 by Turks in Hungary. The historian Karen Ordahl Kupperman has suggested that he "presented those remembered events from decades earlier" when telling the story of Pocahontas. In other words, his story may have grown taller over time. A different theory suggests that Smith may have misunderstood what had happened to him in Powhatan's longhouse. Rather than the near victim of an execution, he may have been subject to a tribal ritual intended to symbolize his death and rebirth as a member of the tribe. However, this theory is unlikely being as that little is known of Powhatan rituals, nor is there evidence of similar rituals among other North American Indian groups. The historian Margaret Williamson Huber has argued that Powhatan, in this case, was being politically pragmatic by attempting to bring Smith, and so the English, into his chiefdom. According to Huber, Powhatan attempted to offer Smith rule of the town of Capahosic, which was close to Powhatan's capital at Werowocomoco. In this way, the paramount chief hoped to keep Smith and his men "nearby and better under control."

Early historical accounts did establish that Pocahontas befriended Smith and the Jamestown colony. Pocahontas often went to the settlement and played games with the boys there. When the colonists were starving, "every once in four or five days, Pocahontas with her attendants brought him (Smith) so much provision that saved many of their lives that else for all this had starved with hunger." As the colonists expanded their settlement further, the Virginia Indians felt their lands were threatened, and conflicts arose again.

In another historical account, Pocahontas traveled to Jamestown in the spring of 1608 as part of a delegation charged with negotiating the release of several Indian captives. Sent as a silent reminder of Powhatan's trust in Smith, she was accompanied by several fully armed adult men, one of whom, Rawhunt, who did all the talking. The captives were released — although to Pocahontas rather than Rawhunt, presumably because she served as a symbol of Powhatan. In his 1624 account, Smith hints that Pocahontas, acting as a diplomat, led the party, but earlier eyewitness accounts say no such thing. Even the daughter of a powerful chief like Powhatan would have left military and diplomatic matters to her male relatives. This was especially true for Pocahontas, who had not only uncles but also two older half brothers, serving Powhatan as appointed district chiefs.

With his later accounts suggesting that Pocahontas saved him personally as well as (in some accounts) the entire Jamestown colony, Smith had a tendency to attribute to Powhatan's daughter power she was unlikely to have possessed. That tradition continues in the frequent modern day references to her as a "princess." Pocahontas lived in a society in which the paramount chief's position was matrilineal. In other words, Powhatan's brothers, sisters, and his sisters' children were his heirs, not his own children. As such, Pocahontas was not a princess in the European sense, and next to her favored half brothers, she was relatively powerless, either to gain entry to that first feast with John Smith or later to act on behalf of the English. On most occasions when she visited Jamestown, she probably tagged along with adults, as did other young people eager to gawk at the foreigners. Smith later described Pocahontas' "wild train," or mischievous retinue, while Strachey described her goading the English boys into turning cartwheels with her around the fort.

From the autumn of 1608 onward, relations between the Jamestown colony and Powhatan became more strained, culminating in the First Anglo-Powhatan War. Powhatan moved his capital west to Orapax, on the Chickahominy River, and out of the reach of English ships. Smith departed Virginia in October 1609 after getting injured from a gunpowder explosion. He return to England for medical care. The story of Pocahontas traveling to Jamestown to ask after him is unlikely to be true. Otherwise she would have been in danger of being taken as a hostage. Instead, she probably learned about Smith's departure through her father's intelligence channels.

It was also said that the English told the American Indians that Smith was dead. Pocahontas believed that account until she learned that he was living in England when she traveled there several years later, already the wife of John Rolfe.

Historical records do not suggest that Smith and Pocahontas were lovers. The romance is featured only in fictional versions of their relationship.

Marriage, Capture, and Remarriage

In this engraving, The abduction of Pocahontas (1619) by
Johann Theodor de Bry, depicts a full narrative. Starting in
the lower left, Pocahontas (center) is deceived by the
weroance Iopassus, who holds as bait a copper kettle, and
his wife, who pretends to cry. At center right, Pocahontas is
put on the boat and feasted. In the background, the action
moves from the Potomac to the York River, where negotiations
for a hostage trade fail and the English attack and burn an
American Indian village.

What little is known about Pocahontas' next few years comes from William Strachey, whose interpreter, Machumps, was one of Powhatan's brothers-in-law. Through Machumps, Strachey learned that Pocahontas began menstruating sometime in 1610, soon after which she married an Indian named Kocoum, who is described by Strachey as a "private captain," or a warrior who was a commoner. There is no record of any children or of where the couple lived after the wedding. Nothing more is known about this marriage. It likely ended, according to American Indian custom, when Pocahontas was captured by the English in 1613.

The English began to expand their settlements beyond the Jamestown fort, including at Henricus, established on the James River in September 1611. It was slowed but not stopped by Indian guerrilla attacks. The English by 1613 were sending ships to trade with the Potomac River tribes who were beginning to act beyond the control of Tsenacomoco. In April 1613, Captain Samuel Argall heard that Pocahontas was visiting Passapatanzy, a satellite town of the Patawomecks, one of his trading partners. Argall pressured the subchief, Iopassus (Japazaws), to assist him in taking her prisoner, promising an alliance against Powhatan. After conferring with his superior, Iopassus agreed, and with his wives' help, lured Pocahontas aboard Argall's ship. Argall promptly transported her to Jamestown and sent a ransom demand to her father.

Pocahontas' capture occurred in the context of the First Anglo-Powhatan War, a conflict between the Jamestown settlers and the American Indians that began late in the summer of 1609. The ransom includes the release of English prisoners held by her father, along with various stolen weapons and tools.

Powhatan returned the prisoners, but failed to satisfy the colonists with the number of weapons and tools he returned. A long standoff ensued, during which the English kept Pocahontas captive.

During the year-long wait, she was held at Henricus, in modern-day Chesterfield County, Virginia. Little is known about her life there, although colonist Ralph Hamor wrote that she received "extraordinary courteous usage." Linwood "Little Bear" Custalow, in a 2007 book, asserted that Pocahontas was raped during this time, citing oral tradition handed down over four centuries. Custalow cited the Mattaponi oral history which attributes to Mattachanna, whom the English sent for in order to comfort Pocahontas when she became depressed while being held captive. "When Mattachanna arrived at Jamestown, Pocahontas confided in Mattachanna that she had been raped," the authors write. "It is possible that it had been done to her by more than one person and repeatedly." Although Pocahontas soon would be married to planter John Rolfe, the oral history suggests that the colonist Sir Thomas Dale, and not Rolfe, may have been the father of Pocahontas' child, Thomas Rolfe, who, the book claims, was born prior to the wedding. According to Helen Rountree, "Other historians have disputed that such oral tradition survived and instead argue that any mistreatment of Pocahontas would have gone against the interests of the English in their negotiations with Powhatan." Moreover, a truce had been called, the Indians still far outnumbered the English, and the colonists feared retaliation.

The Baptism of Pocahontas (1840).
This twelve-by-eighteen-foot oil painting was painted by
Virginia born artist John Gadsby Chapman.

In any event, Deputy Governor Sir Thomas Dale, with the help of Alexander Whitaker, the minister at Jamestown and Henricus, saw to it that she was trained in the ways of the Anglican Church and was taught English. She was baptized and given the Christian name Rebecca, at which time, she also revealed her secret name, Matoaka. By the time the English forced the issue of ransom payment in March 1614, she and John Rolfe apparently had fallen in love. A 28-years-old widower from a family in the English gentry, Rolfe had come to Virginia, with Dale and Strachey. In 1610, and over a dozen years, he made his fortune in tobacco.

In March 1614, the standoff built up to a violent confrontation between hundreds of English and Powhatan men on the Pamunkey River. At Powhatan's capital of Matchcot, the English encountered a group of some senior American Indian leaders (excluding Powhatan himself, who was away). The English permitted Pocahontas to talk to her countrymen. Pocahontas reportedly rebuked her father for valuing her "less than old swords, pieces, or axes," and told the Powhatan she preferred to live with the English.

John Rolfe was a very pious man who agonized over the potential moral repercussions of marrying a heathen. In a long letter to the governor requesting permission to wed her, he expressed both his love for her and his belief he would be saving her soul claiming he was:

"...motivated not by the unbridled desire of carnal affection, but for the good of this plantation, for honor of our country, for the Glory of God, for my own salvation... namely Pocahontas, to whom my hearty and best thoughts are, and have been a long time so entangled, and enthralled in so intricate a labyrinth that I was even a-wearied to unwind myself thereout."

Pocahontas' feelings about Rolfe and the marriage are unknown. Although it can be assumed that there was love involve.

Dale assented to their marriage — as did Powhatan, who sent one of Pocahontas' uncles as a witness — and on or about April 5, 1614, Rolfe and Pocahontas were married, and the minister Richard Bucke performed it. For two years, they lived on Rolfe's plantation, Varina Farms, which was located across the James River from the new community of Henricus. They had a child, Thomas Rolfe, born on January 30, 1615.

Meanwhile, Powhatan called a halt to his ongoing war with the English. It is unlikely that Pocahontas negotiated the peace, as some writers have claimed, nor would she have been needed as an interpreter by then. Instead, she served as a figurehead — a symbol of peaceful relations and a Christianized "savage."

Ralph Hamor wrote:

"Since the wedding, we have had friendly commerce and trade not only with Powhatan but also with his subjects round about us."

In 1616, the Virginia Company of London paid her passage to England.

A 19th century depiction of
Pocahontas.

Life in England

The Virginia Company of London had long seen one of its primary goals as the conversion of American Indians to Christianity. With the conversion of Pocahontas and her marriage to an Englishman, all of which helped bring an end to the First Anglo-Powhatan War, the company saw an opportunity to promote investment. The company decided to bring Pocahontas to England as a symbol of the tamed New World "savage" and the success of the Jamestown settlement. In 1616, the Rolfes traveled to England, arriving at the port of Plymouth on June 12. They journeyed to London by coach, accompanied by a group of about eleven other Powhatans, including a holy man named Uttamatomakkin, also Tomocomo for short. Tomocomo is Powhatan's brother-in-law who was sent along with Pocahontas to act as an observer. In particular, Tomocomo was tasked with finding John Smith, meeting the English king, viewing the English god, and conducting a census of both the Englishmen and their trees (an earlier Indian visitor, who saw only London and the Thames River, had mistakenly reported that there were next to no trees in England, explaining why the English sought timber in Virginia). Tomocomo would accomplish the first two objectives but fail with the rest, and his encounters with evangelistic clergymen such as Reverend Samuel Purchas would turn his sympathies against the English forever.

John Smith was living in London at the time and while Pocahontas was in Plymouth, she learned he was still alive. Smith did not meet Pocahontas, but wrote to Queen Anne, the wife of King James, urging that Pocahontas be treated with respect as a royal visitor. He suggested that if she were treated badly, her "present love to us and Christianity might turn to ... scorn and fury," and England might lose the chance to "rightly have a Kingdom by her means."

Pocahontas was entertained at various society gatherings. On January 5, 1617, she and Tomocomo were brought before the king at the Banqueting House in Whitehall Palace at a performance of Ben Jonson's masque, The Vision of Delight. According to Smith, King James was so unprepossessing that neither Pocahontas nor Tomocomo realized whom they had met until it was explained to them afterward.

Although Pocahontas was not a princess in the context of Powhatan culture, the Virginia Company nevertheless presented her as a princess to the English public. The inscription on a 1616 engraving of Pocahontas, made for the company, reads: "MATOAKA ALS REBECCA FILIA POTENTISS : PRINC : POWHATANI IMP:VIRGINIÆ," which means: "Matoaka, alias Rebecca, daughter of the most powerful prince of the Powhatan Empire of Virginia." Many English at this time recognized Powhatan to be the ruler of an empire, and they presumably accorded to his daughter what they considered appropriate status. Smith's letter to Queen Anne refers to "Powhatan their chief King." Samuel Purchas recalled meeting Pocahontas in London, writing that she impressed those she met because she "carried her self as the daughter of a king." When he met her again in London, Smith referred to Pocahontas deferentially as a "King's daughter."

Pocahontas was apparently treated well in London. At the masque, her seats were described as "well placed," meaning seated among important people, and according to Purchas, John King, Bishop of London, "entertained her with festival state and pomp beyond what I have seen in his great hospitality afforded to other ladies."

Not all the English were so impressed though. According to Helen C. Rountree, "there is no contemporary evidence to suggest ... that Pocahontas was regarded in England as anything like royalty." Rather, she was considered to be something of a curiosity and according to one observer, she was merely "the Virginian woman," refusing to acknowledge her as a lady.

According to Robert Beverley Jr., King James was angry with John Rolfe for presuming to marry a "princess," there is no contemporary evidence to suggest that the king was angered by the marriage and that Pocahontas was regarded as anything like royalty.

Even John Smith took little trouble to pay his respects to his former friend. Living in London himself, he waited several months before calling on her. In his 1624 account, he claimed that he had been too busy, and when he finally made his appearance, Pocahontas was so angry with him that she retired to another room to regain her composure. Their conversation, once it began, soon degenerated into her flinging taunts at him about his shabby treatment of her father. Smith ended his account of the visit with her telling him that she and her fellow American Indians had thought him dead, but her father had told Tomocomo to seek him "because your countrymen will lie much (often)."

If Smith was an accurate reporter — he wrote about the conversation seven years after it happened — then Pocahontas may have been experiencing some disillusionment with her husband's people. By the time Smith came around, she and her family had moved to Brentford, which was then a small village outside London. Later writers have claimed that her health was failing in the capital's smoky environs, although this is unlikely, given the fact that Pocahontas had grown up in smoky Indian housed. It is more probable that her novelty among the upper classes had faded, and without rich sponsors, the Virginia Company was forced to transfer her to cheaper accommodations. Indirect evidence also suggests that she was in good health at that time.

Though they were already planning to return to Virginia, a week before they departed, the Rolfes were awarded a large grant by the Virginia Company to start a mission. As part of such an enterprise, Pocahontas would have been expected to serve the dual roles of interpreter and housemother, which would have been a strenuous assignment.

Death

After a two-month delay because of bad weather, the Rolfes and Tomocomo embarked for Virginia in March 1617. Pocahontas was rumored to have regrets about leaving London, but that may have been wishful thinking on the part of some Englishmen. In the end though, she became gravely ill.

The ship had only gone as far as Gravesend on the River Thames when Pocahontas became ill. She was taken ashore and died in John Rolfe's arms at the age of twenty-two (21 on another account). It is unknown what exactly caused her death, but theories range from smallpox, pneumonia, or tuberculosis, to her having been poisoned (Custalow's account). In Custalow's account based on Mattaponi oral history, Mattachanna, who was among the 16 Powhatan people who accompanied Pocahontas on her voyage to England, claims that a healthy Pocahontas became suddenly ill after a shipboard meal. She died within hours. Mattachanna believed that she was poisoned. Based on her testimony, it was believed that Pocahontas, having learned in England about the extent of the plans to colonize her homeland, became emboldened and thus dangerous. They feared that if they allowed Pocahontas to return, she would lead the Powhatan to revolt against them, however such account had been found questionable by some historians.

According to Rolfe, she died sating, "all must die, but it's enough that her child lives." Her funeral took place on March 21, 1617 in the parish of Saint George's Gravesend. The site of her grave is unknown, but her memory is honored in Gravesend with a life-size bronze statue at St. George's Church.

Her son, Thomas, was too sick himself to travel, and therefore remained in England. Although later on, he finally sailed for Virginia in 1635, but it was thirteen years after his father's death. Tomocomo, meanwhile, returned to Virginia with John Rolfe and Samuel Argall and reported to Powhatan's brother, Opechancanough, in such negative terms about his experience that the English attempted to discredit him. The ships that carried Argall, Rolfe, and Tomocomo back to Virginia also brought to the colony an epidemic of hemorrhagic dysentery, which colonists called bloody flux and which Argall referred to as "a great mortality;" this epidemic may have been the cause of Pocahontas' death.

Legacy

Statue of Pocahontas in
St. George's church, Gravesend,
Kent, England

Pocahontas is one of the iconic figures in American history. Since her death, her life story has been supplanted by myth. Except for her time in London, her contemporaries paid little attention to her, and they wrote next to nothing about her. In fact, she did not become a celebrity until the 1820s, when southerners sought a colonial heroine to compete with the story of the Pilgrims in Massachusetts and so establish Virginia (more accurately) as the earlier of the two English colonies. Toward that end, historians consulted Smith's Generall Historie, which two hundred years later was still one of the only available published accounts of early Jamestown. Written in the midst of the Second Anglo-Powhatan War (1622-1632), Smith's book emphasizes treacherous natives, a heroic Smith, and the one "good" Indian, "Princess Pocahontas." Some of what Smith writes include the famous episode in which Pocahontas saved his life, which contradicts his earlier accounts. Nevertheless, the mythical Pocahontas survives in the Walt Disney animated feature Pocahontas (1995), and the Terrence Malick film, The New World (2005), both of which emphasize an unlikely romance between the young girl and Smith.

Because of her celebrity, Virginians have long sought to connect themselves with Pocahontas. After St. George's Church burned in 1727, her bones and those of all the other people buried under the church floor were reinterred in a mass grave in the churchyard. Attempts made in the 1920s to identify her bones were unsuccessful. However, many Virginians have claimed descent from Pocahontas. The Racial Integrity Act, passed by the General Assembly in 1924, allowed the state to assign all newborns to racial categories and disallowed the mixing of those categories, especially in marriage. But one exception was made: "persons who have 1/16 or less of the blood of the American Indian and have no other non-Caucasic blood shall be deemed to be white persons."

Referred to as the "Pocahontas clause," this language was added in direct response to an outcry by elite Virginians who claimed Pocahontas and John Rolfe as distant relatives and who worried that, according to the proposed law, they were not considered to be white.

Such connections, though, have always been tenuous at best.

Pocahontas' son, Thomas Rolfe, never joined the Virginia colony's elite upon his return in 1635. He died in 1681 (although some accounts say it was 1875). Virginia kept no consistent records of births, marriages, and deaths before 1853, and no part of a Thomas Rolfe-descended genealogy was written down until the 1820s. In other words, exactly when the Pocahontas myth was beginning to be constructed. Who is and is not actually descended from Pocahontas thus remains both cloudy and controversial.

Mayweather Sr. says Pacquiao fights like amateur

Floyd Mayweather Sr.

Father of boxer Floyd Mayweather Jr., Floyd Mayweather Sr., said Philippine boxing icon Manny Pacquiao played like an amateur during his last fight and won't be able to beat his son.

Mayweather Sr., in fighthype.com website, said "Pacquiao didn't look too good... That dude is nothing but an amateur. He is not going to whoop Lil Floyd."

He said if the fight between his son and Pacquiao pushes through, "Lil Floyd's gonna whoop Pacquiao."

He also said "If they think this man (Pacquiao) can whoop Lil Floyd, why he got to fight Marquez over and over again? If you think a guy can whoop a guy, then you go on with that fight next."

Pacquiao won his trilogy fight against Marquez by a controversial majority decision, but Mayweather said Pacquiao was not hitting the Mexican fighter.

"If Marquez hit him with right hands, what do you think Lil Floyd can do? Marquez was making Pacquiao miss," he said.

Mayweather also said "Pacquiao shouldn't be able to fight again, for real, if they wanna get down to business and find out what's going on in this sport."

Pacquiao is still in the top spot of the Ring Magazine's ranking, but came second to undefeated American boxer Mayweather Jr. in the ratings of sports websites, including ESPN and Sports illustrated (SI).

Mayweather, who is the current World Boxing Council's welterweight champion, is ranked number one in both rankings.

"Even after 16 months out of the ring following his near shutout of Shane Mosley in 2010. Mayweather returned to action on September 17 and showed not the slightest bit of rust," ESPN's Dan Rafael said of the 34-year-old Mayweather, who has a record of 42-0, 26 KOs.

Rafael said Mayweather is "still fast and possessing great defense and underrated power."

He credited the American boxer for knocking out Victor Ortiz in the fourth round to reclaim one of the titles he had previously given up.

Ring Magazine was considering placing number two ranked Mayweather Jr. above Pacquiao after the latter's disappointing performance or to leave the number one spot blank and let Pacquiao and Mayweather duke out for the pound-for-pound title.

Supreme Court orders Hacienda Luisita to distribute land to farmers

A young protester stouts slogans as he joins his elders from
Hacienda Luisita during a rally in front of the Supreme Court
on Thursday.

The case of Hacienda Luisita had been pending on the court for a long time, but recently, the Supreme Court of the Philippines has ordered the distribution of 4,900 hectares of Hacienda Luisita lands to about 6,000 farmer tilling the agricultural estate owned by relatives of President Benigno Aquino III in Tarlac.

Chief Justice Renato Corona said Thursday that 14 justices voted in favor of giving the land to the farmers.

Associate Justice Antonio Carpio did not take part in the voting.

In its decision, the Court ordered the distribution of 4,915 hectares of the estate to the 6,296 farm worker-beneficiaries and for the Hacienda Luisita Inc. (HLI) to pay them P1.3 billion.

"In line with our finding that control over agricultural lands must always be in the hands of the farmers, we reconsider our ruling that the qualified farmer workers-beneficiaries should be given an option to remain as stockholders of HLI, inasmuch as these qualified farmer workers-beneficiaries will never gain control given the present proportion of shareholdings in HLI," the 56-page resolution penned by Associate Justice Presbitero Velasco Jr. stated.

The stock distribution plan implemented before by the management, as stated in the High Court ruling, will never provide farmers the control of the land they tilled for decades.

With this, a farmers' group urged Aquino to respect and immediately implement the SC decision.

"We hope that Aquino will not use his position as president to get away with the SC ruling. He must immediately abide by the High Court's decision to distribute the land, direct his family to let go of the Hacienda, and pay the farmworkers what is due them," Unyon ng mga Manggagawa (UMA) [eng: Union of Workers] officer Jay Calaguing told Sun Star, a media group.

On Thursday, Malacañang declined to comment on the latest SC ruling on the massive Hacienda Luisita.

"Let me just beg your indulgence and say that we have not received a copy. We will hold comment, we will defer comment until we've seen it," presidential spokesperson Edwin Lacierda said in a press briefing.

Hacienda Luisita in Tarlac is owned by the Cojuangco clan, the family of the President's late mother, former President Corazon "Cory" Aquino.

But Lacierda insisted that the President already divested his shares from the contested land and that Aquino is not aware of the next step of the Cojuangcos on the matter.

The Palace spokesman, meanwhile, believed that the Cojuangcos will respect the decision of the SC if it is already final and executory.

He said the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) is ready to implement whatever decision the SC will make.

According to the decision, the HLI should pay the farm workers P500 million it received from Luisita Realty Inc. for the sale of 200 hectares of land in 1996; P750 million for the sale of the Luisita Industrial Park; and P80,511,500 for the sale of the 80.51-hectare lot for the Subic-Clark-Tarlac Expressway road network.

Lawyer Jobert Pahilga, counsel for the Alyansa ng mga Manggagawang Bukid sa Asyenda Luisita (AMBALA) [eng: Alliance of Mountain Workers for Hacienda Luisita], said the SC decision on Hacienda Luisita cas was long overdue but a welcome development.

"For sure, the Cojuangco-Aquino family will do everything under its power to prevent the execution of the recent SC decision. Given their influence, politically and economically... we could never be sure on what will happen to this recent SC decision until it attained finality," he said.

The Kilusang Mayo Uno (KMU) [eng: May One Movement], for its part, said it is almost certain that the Cojuangco-Aquino clan would attempt to reverse the decision favoring the farmers.

And even if the expected move becomes successful, KMU secretary general Roger Saluta said the workers and farmers will forever hold-on to the said decision of the High Court.

He also called on the farmer-beneficiaries to remain united in anticipation of the counter-attacks by Aquino's family.

Saluta also assured that the workers' sector is fully behind them in continuing the fight for land and justice.

In the House of Representatives, a lawmaker called for vigilance until the High Court's decision on the contested Cojuangco estate is implemented.

"It is crucial that we remain vigilant until the lawful distribution of the bloodied Hacienda Luisita estate has been strictly implemented and completed," Kabataan party-list [eng: Youth party-list] Representative Raymond Palatino said.

Palatino added that with the SC ruling, the government should start going after other haciendas in the country for land distribution.

He said other vast tracts of agricultural land in the country that have been monopolized for decades to serve the interest of a very few total to 2,820,000 hectares combined.

Palatino noted that haciendas are concrete expressions of semi-feudalism, which thrive on cheap labor for the operation of vast agricultural estates whose raw materials and products are mainly exported to benefit capitalist countries like the United States.

Gabriela party-list Representative Emmi De Jesus, on the other hand, called on President Aquino to immediately direct the concerned government agencies to distribute the Luisita lands.

"Another day of delay in the distribution of land is another day of injustice for the farm workers. The President must also ensure that land distribution is coupled with production assistance so as to ensure that big corporate growers will not take advantage of cash-stripped farmers," De Jesus said.

Last July 5, the SC rendered a decision that ordered the farm workers to choose, through a secret voting, whether to remain as stockholders of HLI to opt for land distribution.

AMBALA filed a motion for reconsideration and argued, among others, that section 31 or the Stock Distribution Option (SDO) provision of Republic Act 6657 or the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law is unconstitutional.

It said section 31 does not give the farmers ownership of the land but the corporation and they will only be given shares of stocks equivalent to the value of the land.

AMBALA also argued that the decision, which orders the farm workers to choose whether to remain as stockholders of HLI or to opt for land distribution, would result in inequity and prejudice to the farm workers as they will remain the minority stockholders.

Mystery of Dead Sea Scroll Authors Solved?

Dead Sea Scrolls

The Dead Sea Scrolls are a collection of 972 texts from the Hebrew Bible and extra-biblical documents found between 1947 and 1956 on the northwest shore of the Dead Sea.

The texts are of great religious and historical significance, as they include the oldest known surviving copies of Biblical and extra-biblical documents and preserve evidence of great diversity in late Second Temple Judaism.

These are written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, mostly on parchment, but with some written on papyrus. These manuscripts are said to be generally dated between 150 BCE (Before Common Era) or BC (Before Christ) and 70 CE (Common Era) or AD (Anno Domini).

The Dead Sea Scrolls are traditionally divided into three groups: "Biblical" manuscripts (copies of texts from the Hebrew Bible), which comprise roughly 40% of the identified scrolls; "Apocryphal" or "Pseudepigraphical" manuscripts (falsely attributed works, texts whose claimed authorship is unfounded. Also known as documents from the Second Temple Period like Enoch, Jubilees, Tobit, Sirach, non-canonical psalms, etc., that were not ultimately canonized in the Hebrew Bible), which comprise roughly 30% of the identified scrolls; and "Sectarian" manuscripts (previously unknown documents that speak of the rules and beliefs of a particular group of groups within greater Judaism like the Community Rule, War Scroll, Pesher on Habakkuk, and the Rule of the Blessing), which comprise roughly 30% of the identified scrolls.

The Dead Sea Scrolls may have been written, at least in part, by a sectarian group called the Essenes (an ancient Jewish sect that flourished from the 2nd century BCE to the 1st century CE, which some scholars claim seceded from the Zadokite priests), according to nearly 200 textiles discovered in caves at Qumran, in the West Bank, where the religious texts had been stored.

Scholars are divided about who authored the Dead Sea Scrolls and how the texts got to Qumran, and so the new finding could help clear up this long-standing mystery.

The research reveals that all the textiles were made of linen, rather than wool, which was the preferred textile used in ancient Israel. They also lack decoration, with some actually being bleached white, even though fabrics from the period often have vivid colors. Altogether, researchers say these finds suggest that the Essenes penned some of the scrolls.

Not everyone agrees with this interpretation however. An archaeologist who has excavated at Qumran told LiveScience that the linen could have come from people fleeing the Roman army after the fall of Jerusalem in AD/CE 70, and that they are in fact responsible for putting the scrolls into caves.

The Iconic Scrolls

The Dead Sea Scrolls consist of 972 texts, the first batch of which were discovered by a Bedouin shepherd in 1947. They date from before CE 70, and some may go back to as early as the third century BCE. The scrolls contain a wide variety of writings including early copies of the Hebrew Bible, along with hymns, calendars, and psalms, among other works.

Nearly 200 textiles were found in the same caves, along with a few examples from Qumran, the archaeological site close to the caves where the scrolls were hidden.

Orit Shamir, curator of organic materials at the Israel Antiquities Authority, and Naama Sukenik, a graduate student at Bar-Ilan University, compared the white-linen textiles found in the 11 caves to examples found elsewhere in ancient Israel, publishing their results in the most recent issue of the journal Dead Sea Discoveries.

A breakthrough in studying these remains was made in 2007 when a team of archaeologists was able to ascertain that colorful wool textiles found at a site to the south of Qumran, known as the Christmas Cave, were not related to the inhabitants of the site. This meant that Shamir and Sukenik were able to focus on the 200 textiles found in the Dead Sea Scroll caves and at Qumran itself, knowing that these are the only surviving textiles related to the scrolls.

They discovered that every single one of these textiles was made of linen, even though wool was the most popular fabric at the time in Israel. They also found that most of the textiles would have originally been used as clothing, later being cut apart and re-used for other purposes such as bandages and for packing the scrolls into jars.

Some of the textiles were bleached white and most of them lacked decoration, even though decoration is commonly seen in textiles from other sites in ancient Israel.

According to the researchers, the finds suggest that the residents of Qumran dressed simply.

"They wanted to be different than the Roman world," Shamir told LiveScience in a telephone interview.

"They were very humble, they didn't want to wear colorful textiles, they wanted to use very simple textiles."

The owners of the clothing likely were not poor, as only one of the textiles had a patch on it. "This is very, very important," Shamir said. "Patching is connected with the economic situation of the site."

Shamir pointed out that textiles found at sites where people were under stress, such as at the Cave of Letters, which was used in a revolt against the Romans, were often patched. On the other hand "if the site is in a very good economic situation, if it is a very rich site, the textiles will not be patched," she said. With Qumran, "I think economically, they were in the middle, but I'm sure they were not poor."

Robert Cargill, a professor at the University of Iowa, has written extensively about Qumran and has developed a virtual model of it. He said that archaeological evidence from the site, including coins and glassware, also suggests the inhabitants were not poor.

"Far from being poor monastics, I think there was wealth at Qumran, at least some form of wealth," Cargill said, arguing that trade was important at the site. "I think they made their own pottery and sold some of it, I think they bred animals and sold them, I think they made honey and sold it."

Who authored the Dead Sea Scrolls?

Scholars are divided about who authored the Dead Sea Scrolls and how the texts got to Qumran. Some argue that the scrolls were written at the site itself while others say they were written in Jerusalem or elsewhere in Israel.

Qumran itself was first excavated by Roland de Vaux in the 1950s. He came to the conclusion that the site was inhabited by a religious sect called the Essenes, who wrote the scrolls and stored them in caves. Among the finds he made were water pools, which he believed were used for ritual bathing, and multiple inkwells found in a room that became known as the "scriptorium." Based on his excavations, scholars have estimated the population of the site at as high as 200.

More recent archaeological work, conducted by Yitzhak Magen and Yuval Peleg of the Israel Antiquities Authority, suggests that the site could not have supported more than a few dozen people and had nothing to do with the scrolls themselves. They believe that the scrolls were deposited in the caves by refugees fleeing the Roman army after Jerusalem was conquered in CE 70.

Magen and Peleg found that the site came into existence around 100 BCE as a military outpost used by the Hasmoneans, a Jewish kingdom that flourished in the area. After the Romans took over Judea in 63 BCE, the site was abandoned and eventually was taken over by civilians who used it for pottery production.

They found that the pools de Vaux discovered include a fine layer of potters' clay.

There are other ideas as well. Cargill argues that while Qumran started out as a fort, it was later occupied by a sectarian group whose members were deeply concerned with ritual purity. "Whether or not they are the Essenes, that's a different question," he said. This group, much smaller than earlier estimates of 200 people, would have written some of the scrolls, while collecting others, he argues.

Other groups, not part of the Qumran community, may also have been putting scrolls into the caves, Cargill said.

Solving the mystery with Clothing?

The new clothing research may help to identify the writers of the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Shamir told LiveScience that it is unlikely the scrolls were deposited in the caves by Roman refugees. If that were the case, the more-popular textile in ancient Israel, which is the wool, would have been found in the caves along with other garments.

"If people run away from Jerusalem, they would take all sorts of textiles with them, not only linen textiles," she said. "The people who ran away to the Cave of Letters, they took wool textiles with them."

Peleg, the archaeologist who co-led the recent archaeological work at Qumran told LiveScience that he disagrees with that assessment. He said he stands by the idea that there is no connection between Qumran and the scrolls stored in the caves.

"We must remember that almost all the textiles were found in the caves and not at the site. The main question is the connection between the site and the scrolls," Peleg wrote in an email. "I can find alternative explanations for the fact that scrolls were found with linen."

For instance, linen could have been chosen as scroll wrapping for religious reasons or perhaps priests were responsible for storing the scrolls and they wore linen clothing. "The clothes of the priests were made from linen," Peleg wrote.

In their paper, Shamir and Sukenik say that the clothing found in the Dead Sea Scroll caves is similar to historical descriptions of the clothing of the Essenes, suggesting that they in fact lived at Qumran. They point to an ancient Jewish writer, Flavius Josephus, who wrote that the Essenes "make a point of keeping a dry skin and always being dressed in white."

However, Josephus never said anything about the clothing being made of linen, Peleg points out.

Josephus also wrote that the Essenes were very frugal when it came to clothing and shared goods with each other.

"In their dress and deportment, they resemble children under rigorous discipline. They do not change their garments or shoes until they are torn to shreds or worn threadbare with age. There is no buying or selling among themselves, but each gives what he has to any in need and receives from him in exchange something useful to himself..."

~Translation from "Jewish Life and Thought Among Greeks and Romans: Primary Readings," Louis Feldman and Meyer Reinhold, 1996. 

In their paper, Shamir and Sukenik also point to another ancient writer, Philo of Alexandria, who wrote that the Essenes wore a common style of simple dress.

"And not only is their table in common but their clothes also. For in winter, they have a stock of stout coats ready and in summer cheap vests, so that he who wishes may easily take any garment he likes, since what one has is held to belong to all and conversely what all have one has."
~Translation from the "Selected Writing of Philo of Alexandria," edited by Hans Lewy, 1965.

Cargill said that the clothing is further evidence that there was a Jewish sectarian group living at Qumran.

"You do have evidence of a group that raised its own animals, pressed its own date honey, that appears to have worn distinctive clothes and made its own pottery, and followed its own calendar, at least a calendar different from the temple of priesthood," he said. "Those are all signs of a sectarian group."

He also noted the presence of mikveh (ritual baths) at the site and the fact that the residents could make pottery that was ritually pure.

This group appears to have wanted to separate itself from the priests based at the temple in Jerusalem. "There is a congruency within many of the sectarian documents that appears to be consistent with a sectarian group that has separated itself from the temple priesthood in Jerusalem," Cargill said.

According to Cargill's theory, the people of Qumran would have written some of the scrolls, while collecting others. "Obviously, they didn't write all of the scrolls," Cargill said. Dating indicates some of the scrolls were written before Qumran even existed. One unusual scroll, made of copper, may have been deposited after Qumran was abandoned in CE 70.

Cargill says it's possible that some of the scrolls may have been put in caves from people outside the community. If that's true, some of the textiles could also be from people outside of Qumran.

"If not all of the Dead Sea Scrolls are the responsibility of sectarians at Qumran, then it would follow that not all of the textiles that are discovered in the caves are the product of a sect at Qumran," Cargill said.

Were there women at Qumran?

The new research may also shed light on who created the textiles.

The textile are of high quality and based on the archaeological finds at Qumran itself, where there is little evidence of spindle whorls or loom weights, the team thinks it's unlikely they would have been made at the site.

"This is very, very important, because this is connected to gender," Shamir said, "spinning is connected with women."

She explained that the textiles were likely created at another site in Israel, with women playing a key role in their production. This suggests that there were few women living at Qumran itself. "Weaving is connected with men and women, but spinning was only a production of women, and we don't find this item at Qumran."

Hacktivist group Anonymous targets pepper-spraying UC Davis cop

The hacktivist collective Anonymous now targets the UC Davis police officer who was filmed casually pepper-spraying passive students protesters.

A new 10-minute video attributed to the shadowy "hacktivist" group threatens the officer directly and and publicize his personal contact information, including his cell phone number and an alleged home address.

The voicemail on the working cell number for Lt. John Pike was full Tuesday.

"Dear Officer John Pike, we are Anonymous. Your information is now public domain," a computer-generated voice narrating the Anonymous video states.

"Expect our full wrath," the voice continues as viral video of the Friday incident plays in the background. "Anonymous seeks to avenge all protesters... We are going to make you squeal like a pig."

The ominous message, which ends with a photo of Lt. Pike and the sounds of shrieking pigs, makes no excuse for exposing Pike to potential reprisals. Moreover, Anonymous urge people to harass the said officer.

"We have no problem targeting police and releasing their information even if it puts them at risk because we want them to experience just a taste of the brutality and misery they serve us on an everyday basis," it says.

UC Davis authorities were aware of the Anonymous threat Tuesday, a source in the campus police department said.

The source declined to comment further, referring questions to a spokeswoman who was not immediately available.

University officials and campus police are facing an angry backlash from students and protesters associated with the Occupy Wall Street movement who are demanding the firing of Pike and others involved in the confrontation.

Widely circulated videos show Pike calmly spraying a bright orange stream of police-grade pepper spray into the faces of protesters sitting on the ground with arms linked.

The image of his outstretched arm has become an internet meme, cut and pasted into iconic scenes of serenity including a photo of John Lennon and Yoko Ono lying in bed.

Since the incident, two unidentified UC Davis police officers and the police chief have been placed on administrative leave.

Psychopaths' brains show differences in structure and function

According to a recent study, images of prisoners' brains show important differences between those who are diagnosed as psychopaths and those who aren't. The study was led by University of Wisconsin-Madison researchers.

The result could help explain the callous and impulsive anti-social behavior exhibited by some psychopaths. The study showed that psychopaths have reduced connections between the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC), the part of the brain responsible for sentiments such as empathy and guilt, and the amygdala, which mediates fear and anxiety. Two types of brain images were collected. Diffusion tensor images (DTI) showed reduced structural integrity in the white matter fibers connecting the two areas, while a second type of image that maps brain activity, a functional magnetic resonance image (fMRI), showed less coordinated activity between the vmPFC and the amygdala.

"This is the first study to show both structural and functional differences in the brains of people diagnosed with psychopathy," says Michael Koenigs, assistant professor of psychiatry in the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health. "Those two structures in the brain, which are believed to regulate emotion and social behavior, seem to not be communicating as they should."

The study, which took place in a medium-security prison in Wisconsin, is a unique collaborative between three laboratories.

University of Wisconsin-Madison Psychology Professor Joseph Newman has had a long term interest in studying and diagnosing those with psychopathy and has worked extensively in the Wisconsin corrections system. Dr. Kent Kiehl, of the University of New Mexico and the MIND Research Network, has a mobile MRI scanner that he brought to the prison and used to scan the prisoners' brains. Koenigs and his graduate student, Julian Motzkin, led the analysis of the brain scans.

The study compared the brains of 20 prisoners with a diagnosis of psychopathy with the brains of 20 other prisoners who committed similar crimes but were not diagnosed with psychopathy.

"The combination of structural and functional abnormalities provides compelling evidence that the dysfunction observed in this crucial social-emotional circuitry is a stable characteristic of our psychopathic offenders," Prof. Newman says. "I am optimistic that our ongoing collaborative work will shed more light on the source of  this dysfunction and strategies for treating the problem."

Newman notes that none of this work would be possible without the extraordinary support provided by the Wisconsin Department of Corrections, which he called "the silent partner in this research." He says the DOC has demonstrated an unprecedented commitment to supporting research designed to facilitate the differential diagnosis and treatment of prisoners.

The study, published in the most recent Journal of Neuroscience, builds on earlier work by Newman and Koenigs that showed that psychopaths' decision-making mirrors that of patients with known damage to their ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC). This bolsters evidence that problems in that part of the brain are connected to the disorder.

"The decision-making study showed indirectly what this study shows directly - that there is a specific brain abnormality associated with criminal psychopathy," Koenigs adds.