Author Archives: residentjudge

History of Rome Podcast. Episode 129 Abdication. Well, Diocletian had done all that he wanted to do and now all he had to do was work out a transition plan, so that there would be a stable tetrarchy in place to cover the whole of the Roman Empire. Really, although it was called a tetrarchy, it was really two Caesars (junior emperors) and two Augusti, one of whom took the lead- in this case, Diocletian. In Diocletian’s plan, each Augustus would rule for twenty years, then abdicate, the two junior emperors would move up to be Augusti and two new junior emperors would take their place. Simple, eh? Problem was, if he was going to keep the 2X2 structure, he would have to persuade Maximian to retire at the same time, which he managed to do. Galerius and Constantius stepped up, but who was to take their place as junior emperors? Episode 130 Lost in Transition Everyone expected that Constantine and Maxentius, as sons of reigning emperors would be placed in the vacancies, but Diocletian wanted to break the idea of hereditary emperors. So he looked elsewhere. Instead of the hereditary sons, Severus and Maximinus Daza were declared junior emperors. Then Maxentius (the son of Maximian) revolted; Maximian arranged for Severus to be killed; Galerius had to slink out of Italy, and Constantine was lurking up in the north. This is all very confusing- all these Maxes – the names are too similar. Anyway, it’s a stuff-up. Episode 131 The New Game in Town. When Severus was killed, Galerius arranged for his friend Licinius to be appointed and catapulted him up to be Augustus without serving the requisite time as Caesar. Old Man Maximian argued with his son Maxentius, and ended up seeking refuge with his son-in-law Constantine. It was such a mess that they even asked Diocletian to come back, but he said that he was happy tending his cabbages. But then Maximian mounted a come-back against Constantine, who defeated him and was very angry, exhorting him to ‘do the right thing’ and kill himself- which he did. Even though Maxentius and his father weren’t talking, Maxentius vowed to avenge his father’s honour. Then Galerius got sick and smelly and died. This is just getting silly now.

Rear Vision (ABC) The Greens- politics and the environment. I was really impressed by Adam Bandt’s address to the Press Club, and I’m uneasy about the talking-out-of-both-sides-of-your-mouth about the fossil-fuel industry from the ALP. This is the history of the Greens, starting from its roots in the Nuclear Disarmament Party. It put up two candidates for the Senate: Peter Garrett (who was expected to win) and Jo Valentine (who wasn’t). But it didn’t turn out that way, and when Valentine won she distanced herself from the NDP who wanted to tell her how to vote. In the 1970s, Greens parties arose across the world, especially in Europe, and there was an international network of Greens parties. Up until now, the Greens were state-based parties but in 1992 the Federal Green party was formed, after it had sorted out some thorny constitutional problems. It adopted consensus decision making (which was found to be very unwieldy) , the right of a conscience vote for MPs and proscription (i.e. members couldn’t belong to another party). The state parties continued, each with a different flavour. In NSW there were links with the BLF and the socialist parties and an emphasis on environmentalism and conservation; in Tasmania it was about wilderness, damming the Franklin and opposing the Wesley Vale pulp mill, and WA kept its anti-nuclear movement links. Milne rejected Rudd’s climate policy because it locked-in failure: a big judgment call that has embittered many ever since. When the Greens supported Gillard’s minority government, they provided stable support in Senate which contributed to the heavy slate of legislation that the government actually passed.

Australia If You’re Listening (ABC) Episode 4: the decade when climate change became a culture war. This episode picks up on Judith Brett’s contention in The Coal Curse that the mining industry and its lobbyists cut their teeth on the indigenous land rights issue. Hugh Morgan, former CEO of Western Mining Corporation seeded right-wing think tanks like the IPA which, after de-fanging land rights legislation then turned their attention to casting doubt on climate change. When Al Gore came out so strongly for climate change in An Inconvenient Truth, the link was made between Democratic/Labor/Progressive politics and calls for action- and the converse Liberal/Republican/Conservative calls for skepticism.

Things Fell Apart. A Miracle. Tammy Faye Bakker was a wildly successful tele-evangelist, who along with her husband Jim ran the Praise the Lord Ministry. In 1985 she conducted an interview on her ‘Tammy’s House Party’ program with Steve Peters, a man gravely ill with AIDS. Although Tammy Faye’s questions were clumsy and bordering on offensive, for many evangelical Christians it was the first time that they had been exposed to the human face of AIDS. In a twist of fate, after the fall of the PTL empire, Tammy Faye became a gay icon.

War on Truth (BBC). My Son is the Snake Island Hero has an interview with Tetyana, the mother of the Russian soldier who told the Russian warship Moskva to go fuck itself (an interesting visual image). At first she was told that all the Ukrainian soldiers had died, but the Russians accused Ukraine of misinformation as they were, indeed, alive and part of a prisoner swap. Then the Moskva itself sank – Russian say because of fire; Ukrainians say because of attack. The Snake Island soldiers are now depicted on a stamp.

The Explanation (BBC) Understanding the rise of Boko Haram. The journalist Mayeni Jones explains that Nigeria is geographically and politically divided into two parts. The South is wealthy, Christian and humid: the North is poor, arid and Muslim. From 1960s with the granting of independence through to 1999 Nigeria was led by a military dictatorship, but the corruption continued under democratic government. In July 2009 Boko Haram burst onto the scene. Led by Muhummed Yusuf, ‘Boko Haram’, literally means ‘Western Education is forbidden. He was arrested and killed by the police, which just made him a martyr. He was replaced by Abubakr Shekau in 2010, and Boko Haram executed a car bombing inside the UN compound. The first school kidnapping was almost by chance. They were actually looking for a brick making machine, and the girls were there and they took them. In 2021 Abubakr Shekau blew himself up when surrounded by West African Islamic State fighters. Whether it is Al-Qaeda IS or any other terrorist group, there is a huge disaffected young population in Nigeria to draw upon, and the structural problems remain.

Revolutions Podcast Having listened to Mike Duncan talking about the History of Rome (see above), it felt strange to tune back into his Revolutions Podcast, where he’s up to episode 95 of the Russian Revolution. I have no intention of listening to the rest of them (although I did start, years ago), but Episode 95: Russian Empire, Soviet Empire is interesting in light of the Ukraine situation today. He looks at the year 1921, when Russia saw its western regions peeling off into independent (although still heavily influenced) countries like Lithuania, Finland, Ukraine etc. The trade treaty that Russia signed with Great Britain in 1921 conferred de-facto recognition, although US held out until 1933 before recognizing the Soviet Union. Meanwhile Trotsky suggested that because it was clear that the revolution wasn’t going to spread throughout Europe, the Soviet Union turn to Eur-Asia and foment revolution as an attack on colonialism. He goes through the -stans, and Russian involvement, and interestingly spends quite some time on Georgia, where the Mensheviks had been very strong. (I watched a Foreign Correspondent program last night about how, since the Ukrainian invasion, many Russian dissidents have gone to Georgia where the people have no great love for Russia, although their government in ambivalent). As Duncan says, 1921 is almost a potted summary of the whole revolution (and it saves you listening to the 94 preceding episodes)

Start the Week (BBC) An interesting episode in The Age of the Strongman Leader, featuring Gideon Rachman, author of The Age of the Strongman: How the Cult of the Leader Threatens Democracy Around the World, Judy Dempsey who has written a lot on Angela Merkel, and Christopher de Bellaigue, author of The Lion House: The Coming of a King about Suleiman the Magnificent. This last title might seem a bit out of place, but this discussion talks about the phenomenon of the ‘strongman’ across history. One of them (Rachman?- the two male voices were similar) identified four qualities of the strongman 1. Cult of personality 2. Nostalgic nationalism, looking backwards 3. Contempt for the rule of law (although at first, they might have championed the rule of law to obtain power, but then subverted it) 4. Gender- mainly men. Merkel doesn’t fit this pattern, but other powerful women in politics are often the wives or daughters of strongmen. The modern strongmen they discuss use the democratic system, but then subvert it by encouraging polarization. The use of history by these strongmen is selective- for example, in December 2021 Putin’s courts put an end to the Memorial Project which documented the atrocities of the Stalin era. They also spoke about the strongmens’ need for large rallies – and no doubt May 9 will be such an occasion for Putin this year.

History of Rome Podcast Episode 126 All the Kings Men deals with Diocletian’s reorganization of the government, something which had not occurred for a long time because of the increasing militarization of society. With the Tetrarchy, it meant that there could be four times more oversight of government activity. The empire now comprised over 100 provinces, and Diocletian was insistent that the governors do more in their own patch, especially in relation to the administration of justice. He introduced the idea of twelve dioceses, each headed by a vicar, in order to implement empire-wide change. He made Italy and Egypt equal to the other provinces in terms of taxation and expenditure, although he did carve out a special place for the city of Rome. Administrators were drawn exclusively from the equestrian class. The Praetorian Prefect was top of the bureaucratic structure, and acted as a type of vice-governor. There was a corresponding change in the status of emperor. He was no longer the First Citizen: there was now The Ruler and The Ruled.

Episode 127 Commanding the Empire. Rome’s economy was in disarray when Diocletian came to power and he initiated major overhauls to get the system running again. He had four main reforms. First, he attempted to stabilize the economy by issuing new standardized coins of copper, silver and gold, but he didn’t recall enough of the old, debased coinage so this didn’t work. Second, he re-organized the tax structure based on the old army method of requisition. He drew up Tables of Equivalency for a ‘unit of tax’, so tax payments could be made in kind, based on what the tax payer had access to. Third, he calcified the professions by insisting on compulsory, hereditary guilds, so that from generation to generation, people had to stay in the same trade. He also stopped migration- and yes, we’re getting into pre-feudal ideas here. Finally, he issued an Edict on Prices where he catalogued everything that could possibly be sold, and set a maximum price for it. Punishment by death awaited those who overcharged, but it ended up being unenforcable. So old Diocletian really is moving the empire onto a more rational, pre-feudal basis and he was one of the most transformative of the emperors. But- there’s always a ‘but….

And here it comes in Episode 128 The Great Persecution.For the first 15 years of Diocletian’s rule, he had instituted great changes across the empire- some resisted, others accepted. But when he wanted an oracle to read his future, he was told that the gods couldn’t get through. Some said that it was because Christians had made the sign of the cross in the imperial palace. So he decided to deal with the increasing Christian movement by insisting that everyone make a sacrifice to Jupiter, and did the same in the army. This was just the start. At this point, Mike Duncan stops and backtracks to give a potted history of Christianity- and he does a pretty good job of doing so, given the eagle eyes of his Christian commenters on his webpage. The early church in the 1st Century CE had to sort out what to do about the Gentiles who wanted to join- whether to go ‘big tent’ or ‘little tent’. ‘Big tent’ won. In 2C CE the original disciples and apostles had all passed away, and the church had become decentralized with bishops who often disagreed with each other. After the fall of Jerusalem in 70 CE, the Christians did not join in the Jewish Wars of 130 CE and although the Romans had deferred to the antiquity of Judaism, this did not extend to the newly-formed Christians. The Christian Church endured the same chaos as everyone else in the tumultuous 3rd Century CE. Emperor Trajan had persecuted Christians in the 2nd Century and Decius did so in too in the 3rd Century. Within the Christian church itself, there was a split between those who acquiesced to Roman pressure and those who resisted. Between the years 260 and 300, the stigma of being Christian became muted, and Christianity began to spread across social groups to about 10% of the population (usually in urban centres, which made it seem even more prominent). By this time it was the largest monotheistic religion in the Empire, and it was accumulating wealth and building dedicated churches. It was becoming a threat to the status quo. In 302-3 the persecution began again. Galerius may have been the driving force (or that might just be anti-Galerius propaganda). In 303 Diocletian let the hardliners off the leash and they razed churches, burned scriptures and tortured and killed Christians who refused to recant. In the summer of 303, bishops and deacons were arrested, and the jails were emptied of regular prisoners to make room for them. However, Roman soldiers themselves often turned a blind eye, and Constantinus wanted nothing to do with it. Citizens were resisting too, because they saw Christians as harmless, taxpaying citizens. The persecution was dropped by 311 when Galerius realized the advantages in doing so, especially with the rise of Constantine the Great. All in all, a bad and bloody policy.

The Documentary (BBC) Understanding the long history between Russia and Ukraine is actually part of the BBC’s ‘The Explanation’ series. Here Claire Graham talks to former BBC foreign correspondent Kevin Connolly about what has historically bound Russia and Ukraine together, and what has pulled them apart. He points out that the Russ empire stretched from the Baltic to the Black Sea, and this is more or less the sphere of interest that Putin is exerting pressure over. He goes back to the Orange Revolution in 2004 with the rather confusing election between Viktor Yushchenko and Viktor Yanukovych (it’s sounding like a Fast Forward ‘In Moscow Tonight’ episode) – and, I’d forgotten about this- the opposition leader Yushchenko suffering dioxin poisoning. He reminds us of the mistaken shooting down of the Malaysian Airlines flight over Ukraine, and the conflict in the Donbass region where the Ukrainian forces took the offensive, both of which highlighted Putin’s impunit,. Putin denied military involvement in Ukraine until Feb 2022… and then we all know what happened next.

The Real Story (BBC) France’s Place in the World was recorded on 12 February, before Putin invaded Ukraine. It features Jacques Rupnik –( Research Professor at CERI, Science Po, in Paris); Dominique Moïsi – (French political scientist and a special advisor at l’Institut Montaigne, a think tank in Paris) and Catherine Nicholson – (European Affairs Editor for France 24). At this stage, Macron was in Russia, engaged in shuttle diplomacy between Russia and Ukraine. The commentators discussed this diplomatic move (which they all agreed was ‘bold’) by Macron , the youngest French president, who memorably declared that ‘Europe is brain dead’. They pointed out that Macron is operating in a vacuum after the resignation of Merkel and Brexit. They suggest that perhaps Macron is thinking of the Finlandization of Ukraine (although even Finland is rethinking its position at the moment). They discuss France’s anger over AUKUS- disappointment with U.S. but real anger at UK and Australia (we get a mention!)

Then, just before the French elections this weekend, I listed to The Appeal of the French far-right, featuring Nonna Mayer – (A CNRS Research Director Emerita at the Centre for European Studies and Comparative Politics, Sciences Po), Jean-Yves Camus – (Senior Fellow at the Centre for Analysis of the Radical Right (CARR) and Christine Ockrent – (Journalist and broadcaster). When asked when they first became aware of the French far-right, two answered that became interested in 2002 when Marine Le Pen’s father Jean-Marie Le Pen reached the second round of voting; the other identified 1984 when Jean-Marie Le Pen became one of the first MPs to the European Parliament. Marine Le Pen started off as a moderate, and expelled many of the old fascists attached to her father’s National Front. They suggest that the core of her program hasn’t changed, but she has turned arguments about laicite (i.e. secularity), women’s rights, gay rights, Jewish rights, against the left by arguing that by restricting Muslim immigration will defend these rights. She wants to change the constitution by referendum (which is illegal). The yellow vests, they suggest, emerged from a real anger about purchase power and the need to be heard. Le Pen is not necessarily pro-Russian, but does believe that ‘traditional values’ apply there, although her beliefs are more closely aligned with Hungary and Poland. (Not a reassuring thought). One of the commentators commented on the gender aspect of this presidential run-off-something I hadn’t thought much about.

Archive on 4 (BBC) I’ve been very much aware of the strong visuals coming from the war in Ukraine. Not only is President Zelensky very much aware of packaging himself and his message individually for each country that he is addressing, but we have so much video footage as well. But wariness over disinformation is now so deep-seated that I find myself wondering whether I am looking at fakes or not, and the steady stream of Russian denials of things that are patently obvious makes things even more unsettling. War on Truth looks at the disinformation being purveyed through Russian television, and speaks to bloggers and influencers, mainly from the Ukrainian side, and the pile-on that has followed videos and postings showing life in Ukraine today. It unpacks the story of the pregnant woman filmed after the bombing of the maternity hospital, and the way that both sides are packaging ‘content’ to be picked up and broadcast further.

Nothing on TV Truth be told, there hasn’t been much action on the ‘Nothing on TV’ podcast either, with the episode Tin-kettling recorded in June 2019 (although at least history podcasts don’t date). Once she started looking into it, Robyn Annear found many, many references to tin-kettling. Tin-kettling in Europe sprang from the tradition of charivari, which was a way of expressing moral disapproval of things like wife-beating or marrying too soon after the death of a spouse. In Australia, it seems to have been a more raucous, alcohol-fuelled event, often linked with weddings although the protagonists often ended up in court. It seemed to have been particularly prevalent in areas where Cornish miners had settled, and the ‘tin kettle’ and saucepan were soon replaced with kerosene tins filled with rocks. By the twentieth century, it seems to have been tamed somewhat into some good natured fun.

Australia If You’re Listening. (ABC) In Episode 3 How Long Will the World Want our Coal? Matt Bevan turns to look at India, and its demand for coal and the involvement of the big mining companies here in meeting that demand. In particular it looks at the Galilee Basin, and Adani and the arguments that the fossil-fuel lobby mounts in trying to protect its product and extort more assistance from state and commonwealth governments.

History of Rome Podcast Episode 123 The Tetrarachy We had two emperors before (Diocletian and Maximian) and now it was about to become four with the addition of Constantius and Galerius in 293AD. Mike Duncan makes the rather large claim that the years of the Tetrarachy were amongst the most important in Rome’s history, laying down the ground rules for late antiquity. It does, however, cause a narrative problem for Duncan as a podcaster, because now there are 4 centres of power. The self-elected ’emperor’ Carausius was still sitting over in Britain, but before Diocletian and Maximian could confront him, they needed to make sure that the Germanic tribes had been pacified first. However, Maximian failed to retake Britain in 289 AD. So who were these other new emperors: Constantius and Galerius? Constantius had married Maximian’s daughter, and we really don’t know much about Galerius. However, in 293 AD they were named as part of the Tetrarachy (although they didn’t call it that then) as junior partners. Constantius was given oversight of Gaul and Britain; Maximian had Spain, Africa and Italy; Galerius had responsibility for the Danube, and Diocletian concentrated on the Far East. However, these were not demarcated political units: Diocletian always emphasized unity.

Episode 124 The Tetrarachs at War sees Constantius embarking on the job of retaking Britain. It was a hard task, because Carausius was a very able ruler, and well supported. But not supported well enough, because he was assassinated by Allectus. During Maximian’s earlier attempt to take Britain, they landed in one place but this time Constantius landed his fleets in two places. Allectus didn’t have the popular support that Carausius had enjoyed, and the people were more frightened of the Franks than the Romans, so they were willingly reabsorbed back into the empire. Meanwhile, over on the Danube, Galerius was battling with the Sassanids, who were restive again and invaded Armenia and threatened Syria. The Romans were defeated at first. Diocletian had to leave the east to go to Egypt to quash a rebellion there, and Galerius had another go at the Sassanids in Armenia, and this time he had the last word.

Diocletian wrought many changes, but always with the aim of saving the old order, not introducing a new one. Episode 125 The Best Defence is a Good Defence starts off with a summary of the changes in the Roman military over time. From the citizen army, they had gone to the Maniple structure of fighting. Professional standing armies were introduced, but they mainly ended up fighting other Romans. Augustus introduced garrisons to protected what they had captured and Hadrian and Antoninus Pius built walls. From the 3rd century AD onwards, the numerical strength of invading forces outnumbered that of the Roman legions. So Diocletian introduced 4 changes: 1. He devised a ring of small militarized provinces around the empire 2. He separated the civilian and military career paths. No longer could you have a soldier emperor. Instead, there was a general and there was a governor- two men. 3. He divided the army into legions and static frontier militia. 4. instituted webs of defence across the empire (i.e. ‘defence in depth’) which would slow an opponent’s army down, causing it to lose memomentum although this argument, exemplified by Edward Luttwak’s work, is somewhat disputed and not well supported by archaeological evidence.

Rules Based Audio. This podcast is put out from the Lowy Institute. In Ukraine and the Future of the Rules Based Order, the presenter Ben Scott discusses the war in Ukraine and international law with Professor Fleur Johns and Dr Eve Massingham. They talk about the laws of war, economic sanctions, cyber operations, neutrality, international humanitarian law, and war crimes. Certainly it’s all more complex than it might appear at first. International law is just one tool that can be deployed in this situation, and even though it may not be particularly useful at the moment, it will bring accountability once hostilities have stopped, and will (hopefully) be useful in controlling behaviour in the future (e.g. Ukraine asking for guarantees of security). Cyber war is a new complication (i.e. it is not legal to give information to direct an attack), and sanctions using electronic banking is another new horizon. It was surprising to learn what is legal under international war, and what is not.

God Forbid (ABC) The March 20 episode Ukraine and Russia: religion and the politics of war is well worth listening to (and I did- three times, because I was listening to it in bed and I kept falling asleep!) With its own panel of speakers and drawing on interviews on other ABC radio programs, it looks at the Orthodox Church, Putin’s war against Ukraine, Patriarch Kirill of Moscow’s support of Putin and the resultant dissent amongst Orthodox clerics. Christianity came to the East in 988 and after the 2014 ‘Revolution of Dignity’ which expelled the pro-Russian president, in 2018 the Archbishop of Constantinople (the Orthodox church still calls it that), Bartholemew I, recognized a distinct, self-governing Orthodox Church in Ukraine. A study of people who identify as Orthodox in Ukraine in 2020 found that 34% identified with the Orthodox Church in Ukraine; 14% with the Moscow Patriarch and 28% as neither. Recently 300 Orthodox Clerics in Belurus, Spain and inside Russia signed a letter condemning Kirill’s tacit support for the invasion, and refusing to mention his name or commemorate the Moscow Patriarchy in their services. The speakers point out that both Russia and Ukraine are multi-cultural countries- Russia, for example has 35 official languages- with sizeable Muslim populations. Ukraine also has a large Jewish minority (and indeed Kyev and Odessa were important Jewish centres historically) and the Ukraine Greek Catholic Church is also prominent. While there are anti-Semitic groups in Ukraine, they also operate throughout Europe and perhaps to a lesser extent in Ukraine than elsewhere. Well worth listening to- even three times!

Things Fell Apart (BBC) Episode 2: Dirty Books goes back to 1974 when a church minister’s wife in West Virginia challenged the board of education when they sent textbooks to support a new curriculum to her school. She read through all the books, and was offended by many things in them and encouraged other parents to join her in refusing them. But she may well have misinterpreted some of the things that offended her so much. Fast forward thirty years, and textbooks are still being challenged- this time for Critical Race Theory (in maths books, no less).

Emperors of Rome It’s Good Friday, so I thought that I would listen to the episode on Crucifixion. Episode CLXXXI Crucifixion, as you might expect, came with a content warning. Crucifixion was a much wider term than we might imagine, because people could be nailed to a stake, tree, plank etc and the ultimate cause of death was asphyxiation when it became too difficult to heave yourself up to breathe. It was a form of death only for slaves and enemies of Rome, not Roman citizens. Owners could crucify their slaves privately, or it could be a state punishment. As well as the gospels, which give a lot of detail, there are other sources as well: Seneca, Cicero, Josephus in written form, archaelogical evidence (e.g. an ankle bone in a Judea that had a nail through it), and graffiti. Crucifixion was formally abolished in 337 CE by Constantine, who felt that no ordinary mortal should die the same way as Jesus had done (not because it was a painful, cruel and slow death).

Australia If You’re Listening (ABC). Episode 2: How we became addicted to coal. I don’t know why I have been so slow to listen to each episode of this podcasts – perhaps because I thought I already knew all about it- but it really is excellent. The historian in me really liked this episode, which focusses on Newcastle, which was Australia’s first coal region. It deals with the coming and going of ‘the’ BHP (how quaint) (1915-1997) and Newcastle’s development into a coal port, even though the local coal was eventually exhausted. The program gives a really good description of the stagnation of the Australian economy as Australia, ‘the lucky country’, drifted into a heavily protected domestic economy that was only saved by the export of raw products like coal, especially to China. Historians featured include John Maynard from the University of Newcastle, and Judith Brett, author of the Quarterly Essay The Coal Curse (which I’m sure I have unopened on my bookshelf somewhere- might be time to open it.)

Travels Through Time In this episode The Last Emperor of Mexico, historian William Shawcross discusses Maximilian I of Mexico, who was appointed as Emperor of Mexico by Napoleon III as part of a French invasion of Mexico. After the Mexican War of Independence between 1810 and 1821 and Spain’s final relinquishment in 1836, there were still a lot of royalists in Mexico. After being wupped by the United States in the Mexican-American war in 1848, these royalists approached Archduke Maximilian of Austria, a stereotypical second son to become emperor of Mexico. In 1863, he consented to do so at the request of Napoleon III. William Shawcross chooses 1867 as his year of interest, starting on 13 February 1867 as Maximilian rides out with his Mexican troops (and not his far more experienced, European troops) to confront the guerrilla fighters led by General Benito Juarez. On May 15 1867, Querétaro. Maximilian is cornered in a shell-shattered former convent, beseiged by the Mexican guerillas, getting ready to break out. By 19 June 1867, it was all over, with Maximilian under arrest in another convent in Querétaro another convent, and -spoiler alert- executed by firing squad.