<span>You're talking about the Napoleon of the West or at least that's what he liked to call himself. General Antonio Lopez de Santa Ana. Of course he had a few lapses of control over that 35 yr period. And then there was the time he was marched back to Mexico with his tail between his legs by the victorious Texan army led by Sam Houston. Adios, Amigo</span>
original source A direct source of information or research
Primary source. In the study of history as an academic discipline, a Primary Source (also called an original source or evidence) is an artifact, document, diary, manuscript, autobiography, recording, or any other source of information that was created at the time under study. It serves as an original source of information about the topic.
The skepticism about the empire of Ghana and the accounts for it is nothing weird because the majority of what is written about it is from two people from the same place, that had totally different views and interpretations on the things, and came from different culture.
Very often in the historical text, the people that wrote something have been very subjective, not objective. Thus the writings of these two Arab geographers can be very misleading, as they described what they saw with their own eyes, but also with using their own perception. That has proven numerous times to give very inaccurate depictions of a society and culture, like the depictions of the Romans for the Celts, or of the Greeks for the Scythian female warriors that they named Amazons.
There's only one point of view unfortunately, and it is always much more reliable when multiple writings are available from people from multiple different backgrounds, or the best scenario if it is writings from the people in question.
In April 11 1865 he talks about life after the war and how every thing will from now on go
James Madison was the person behind the federalist papers. He later became the president of the U.S.
