The Russian streltsy (shooters) of 17th century are usually depicted in winter uniform wearing fur hats and dress. What was their summer uniform?
That's not the winter uniform, it's simply the uniform, and was worn in all weathers.
In Russia in the early 17th century, strel'tsy (semiprofessional musketeers) wore red caftans (coats) with a white sash. In the second half of the 17th century, they wore fur-trimmed caftans of various colors, cloth caps, and colored high boots.
Working and summer uniforms were introduced in 1718.
-- The Great Soviet Encyclopedia (1979)
It's unclear if the summer uniforms were just for the navy, or for everyone, but this is the earliest date I can find for any mention of a winter or summer uniform, of any kind in any country. The Swedish 17th century Caroleans did not have separate winter and summer uniforms, for example.
What was the summer uniform of the streltsy? - History
Our symbols represent not only our illustrious history, but our unbreakable bond, with the Marines we fight alongside today and every Marine who has ever fought in our uniform. These symbols and uniforms add even more pride to a warrior class that is itself a symbol of our Nation’s resolve.
UNYIELDING COMMITMENT IN EVERY STITCH
To put on the Marine uniform is to don more than two and a half centuries of fight and feat. It is the cloth that threads all that Marines have faced before with all that Marines prevail over today. The uniforms Marines wear connect them to the timeless battles won long ago and the historic victories that continue to advance our Nation forward.
The Marine Corps Combat Utility Uniform, or “Cammies,” is the standard uniform Marines wear in garrison, during training, and while deployed overseas. Marines primarily wear cammies in the green print known as “Woodlands,” but when deployed in desert surroundings, Marines wear a tan and brown “Desert” variation, and in cold-weather environments, the white and gray-patterned design is available. Each of these patterns utilizes the MARPAT (Marine Pattern) design, formed by small rectangular pixels that provide better camouflage in natural settings.
There are common threads woven in the flag of our Nation and the dress blue uniform of our Marines. Sewn from the ideals America stands for and the resolve our Marines fight with, this is the only uniform in the U.S. military designated to include the red, white, and blue colors of the American flag. The distinctive dress blue uniform Marines wear represents the values Marines live, and has origins dating back to the American Revolution. Dress blues are worn for many events, including ceremonies with foreign officials, visits with U.S. civil officials, and formal social functions attended in an official capacity. Wherever Marines wear this uniform, they do so proudly, standing united as the moral fiber that forms the fabric of our Nation.
History of School UniformsChildren in uniform at a North Carolina public school.
Source: “About Our School,” Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools website (accessed Aug. 22, 2014)
Traditionally favored by private and parochial institutions, school uniforms are being adopted by US public schools in increasing numbers. According to a 2020 report, the percentage of public schools that required school uniforms jumped from 12% in the 1999-2000 school year to 20% in the 2017-18 school year. School uniforms were most frequently required by elementary schools (23%), followed by middle (18%), and high schools (10%). 
Proponents say that school uniforms make schools safer for students, create a “level playing field” that reduces socioeconomic disparities, and encourage children to focus on their studies rather than their clothes.
Opponents say school uniforms infringe upon students’ right to express their individuality, have no positive effect on behavior and academic achievement, and emphasize the socioeconomic disparities they are intended to disguise.
History of School Uniforms
The first recorded use of standardized dress in education may have been in England in 1222, when the Archbishop of Canterbury mandated that students wear a robe-like outfit called the “cappa clausa.” The origin of the modern school uniform can be traced to 16th Century England, when the impoverished “charity children” attending the Christ’s Hospital boarding school wore blue cloaks reminiscent of the cassocks worn by clergy, along with yellow stockings. As of Sep. 2014, students at Christ’s Hospital were still wearing the same uniform, and according to the school it is the oldest school uniform still in use. When Christ’s Hospital surveyed its students in 2011, 95% voted to keep the traditional uniforms.  Two boys from the elite English school Eton, dressed in formal school uniforms, are observed by working-class London boys in 1937.
Source: Greg Sandow, “Vacation Thoughts — Formal Dress,” artsjournal.com, Sep. 13, 2008
In later centuries, school uniforms became associated with the upper class. At one of England’s most prestigious schools, Eton, students were required to wear black top hats and tails on and off campus until 1972, when the dress codes began to be relaxed. 
School uniforms in the United States followed the traditional use of uniforms established in England and were generally limited to private and parochial schools.  One exception was found in government-run boarding schools for Native American children, first established in the late 1800s, where the children, who had been removed from their families, were dressed in military-style uniforms. 
US School Uniform Movement BeginsNative American children in uniform at the Carlisle Indian Industrial School in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, circa 1890.
Source: Jon Allen Reyhner, “Indian Boarding Schools,” californiaindianeducation.org (accessed Aug. 5, 2014)
The first US public schools known to institute uniform policies were in Maryland and Washington, DC, in the fall of 1987, with Cherry Hill Elementary School in Baltimore, MD, gaining the most publicity. These early uniform programs were voluntary, but according to a New York Times report from Dec. 1987, most parents supported the idea and “almost all” students wore the uniforms. School officials and other advocates of the new uniform policies noted improvements in students’ “frame of mind” and stated that uniforms had “sharply reduced discipline problems.” They also reported that uniforms had “already reduced the preoccupation of students with expensive designer clothing for school wear and eased the financial burden that placed on the students’ families.”  The origin of the uniform policy in Baltimore has been linked to a 1986 shooting, in which a local public school student was wounded during a fight over a pair of $95 sunglasses. 
By the fall of 1988, 39 public elementary schools and two public junior high schools in Washington, DC, had instituted mandatory uniform polices, and soon the movement spread to other states, including Connecticut and New Jersey, generally in urban schools with mainly low income and minority students. In 1988, Ed Koch, then-Mayor of New York City, expressed support for school uniforms, saying that they encourage “common respect and improve the learning environment,” and praising them because of their similarity to outfits worn in private and parochial schools. A pilot uniform program was introduced in New York City in 1989. 
The first school district in the United States to require all its K-8 students to wear uniforms was the Long Beach Unified School District, CA, in Jan. 1994. Later the same year, California Governor Pete Wilson signed a bill officially allowing schools to implement mandatory uniform policies. In accordance with the new law, Long Beach parents were given an opt-out provision.  The Long Beach Unified School District announced through a spokesman that gang activity in the area had provided an impetus for the policy: “Every large city in the U.S. has been concerned about the gangs. Their clothes really are an unofficial uniform of intimidation.” 
Bill Clinton’s Support of Uniforms
On Jan. 3, 1996, President Bill Clinton told Congress during his State of the Union speech: “[I]f it means that teenagers will stop killing each other over designer jackets, then our public schools should be able to require their students to wear school uniforms.” 42nd US President Bill Clinton delivering his 1996 State of the Union address, during which he announced his support of school uniforms.
Source: Jack Cafferty, “How Much Do State of the Union Speeches Matter?,” cnn.com, Jan. 27, 2010
On Feb. 25, 1996, President Clinton repeated his message about uniforms in his weekly radio address and during a series of media appearances. On the same day, he ordered the distribution of a school uniform manual to the country’s 16,000 school districts. The manual guided school districts in the legal enforcement of a uniform policy. In July 1998, President Clinton continued his promotion of school uniforms with a speech at the annual convention of the American Federation of Teachers, stating that uniforms help children “feel free” and reduce crime and violence. In response, according to the New York Times, then-US Senator and former US presidential candidate Phil Gramm “accused the President of a tendency toward intrusive government.” 
School Uniforms and the Law
In 1969, the US Supreme Court made a decision that would later be used by both uniform proponents and opponents to support their arguments. In Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, the Court ruled 7-2 that schools could not curtail students’ freedom of expression as long as the students’ choices were “not disruptive, and did not impinge upon the rights of others.” The students in question had worn black armbands to protest America’s involvement in the Vietnam War, and school uniform opponents use this decision to argue that students’ choice of what to wear is protected by the Free Speech Clause in the First Amendment of the US Constitution. Uniform proponents, however, cite a passage in Tinker‘s majority opinion that states, “The problem posed by the present case does not relate to regulation of the length of skirts or the type of clothing.” 
Several lower courts have made rulings related to school uniforms, often favoring uniform proponents. In a 1995 case, Bivens by Green v. Albuquerque Public Schools, a federal district judge ruled that the desire to wear “sagging pants” prohibited by the school dress code did not constitute freedom of expression because, unlike the wearing of black armbands to protest the Vietnam War, it did not convey a “message,” nor did it represent an ethnic identity: “Sagging is not necessarily associated with a single racial or cultural group, and sagging is seen by some merely as a fashion trend followed by many adolescents all over the United States.” The plaintiff had contended that his choice of outfit was an element of hip hop style favored by minorities and that it constituted a “group identity,” stating that “such intentional identification clearly must involve freedom of expression.” Cartoon satirizing the complaint that school uniforms promote conformity.
Source: graham-briggs-school-outfitters.co.uk (accessed Aug. 5, 2014)
In Mar. 1997, an Arizona state appeals court upheld Phoenix Preparatory Academy’s mandatory uniform policy, declaring it to be constitutional. This was the first time a judge had upheld a uniform policy that did not provide an “opt-out” provision. One of the students who brought suit against the school district had broken the school’s uniform restrictions by wearing a t- shirt adorned with the US flag and the slogan “I support my country.” The other student filing suit had worn a t-shirt portraying Jesus Christ and the Bible, along with the words “True Spirit” and “The School of Higher Learning.” The unanimous ruling (3-0) in Phoenix Elementary School District No. 1 v. Green found that by enforcing a uniform policy, the school “regulated the medium of expression, not the message” and found that school was “not a public forum” in which freedom of expression would be more strictly protected. The court accepted the school district’s claim that it adopted the uniform policy to serve several pedagogically “reasonable” purposes, including the promotion of “a more effective climate for learning,” “campus safety and security,” “school unity and pride,” and “modest dress.” 
In the summer of 1999, controversy erupted in Florida when Polk County Schools Superintendent Glenn Reynolds suggested that parents could be jailed if they failed to comply with the new mandatory uniform policy. Reynolds stated that parents who allow their children to be dressed out of uniform are “contributing to the delinquency of a child,” before later retracting his comments. 
In Jan. 2000, the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina, which opposes school uniforms, represented a nine year-old student who was suspended twice for his refusal to wear a school uniform because it conflicted with his family’s religious beliefs. According to court records in Hicks v. Halifax County Board of Education, the student’s great-grandmother and guardian believed that “wearing a uniform demonstrates an allegiance to the spirit of the anti-Christ, a being that requires uniformity, sameness, enforced conformity, and the absence of diversity.” The school agreed to amend its school uniform policy to allow for religious exemptions. 
In May 2008, a three-judge panel of the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 in Jacobs v. Clark County School District that the mandatory school uniform policy introduced by the Nevada district is constitutional. An 11th grade student and her parents had sued the district for refusing to allow her to wear a shirt displaying a message presenting her religious beliefs. The court ruled that the district’s uniform policy was not restricting any one viewpoint in particular, and that therefore the policy was “content neutral” and not an infringement of “pure speech.” 
In Feb. 2014, a three-judge panel of the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals found 3-0 that the uniform policy of Roy Gomm Elementary School in Reno, NV may be unconstitutional, but sent the case back to a lower court for review. The panel ruled that the school’s insistence that its uniform shirts bear the motto “Tomorrow’s Leaders” may violate First Amendment rights because it “compelled speech.”  No US states require school uniforms by statute and no states ban uniforms. Massachusetts law states that “School officials shall not abridge the rights of students as to personal dress and appearance,” but another section of the law stipulates that this provision applies only to cities and towns which “accept” it. 
Students at Charter Day School in North Carolina successfully challenged a uniform policy that prohibited girls from wearing pants or shorts to school. A federal judge ruled in Mar. 2019 that the school’s stated desire to uphold traditional values and instill discipline had no connection to requiring girls to wear skirts, jumpers or skorts. 
US Uniform Statistics
According to figures released in 2018 by the National Center for Education Statistics, the total number of public schools nationwide requiring students to wear school uniforms increased from 12% during the 1999-2000 school year to 21% during the 2015-2016 school year.  In 2015-2016, 25% of public primary schools enforced a uniform policy, as did 20% of public middle schools and 12% of public high schools.  A higher proportion of schools located in cities had mandatory uniforms in 2015-2016 than schools in suburban, town, and rural areas.  Mandatory uniforms were far more prevalent in “high-poverty” schools (in which 76% of students were eligible for reduced-cost or free lunch programs) than in “low-poverty” schools. 
Among the US cities with the highest use of school uniforms in public schools are Philadelphia (100% of schools), New Orleans (95%), Cleveland (85%), Chicago (80%), Boston (65%), and Miami (60%).  The number of schools with “strict dress codes” has also increased, from 47% in 2000 to 57% in 2010. 
Walmart as we know it today evolved from Sam Walton’s goals for great value and great customer service. “Mr. Sam,” as he was known, believed in leadership through service. This belief that true leadership depends on willing service was the principle on which Walmart was built, and drove the decisions the company has made for the past 50 years. So much of Walmart’s history is tied to the story of Sam Walton himself, and so much of our future will be rooted in Mr. Sam’s principles.
The Road to Walmart
Sam Walton was born in 1918 in Kingfisher, Oklahoma. In 1942, at the age of 24, he joined the military. He married Helen Robson in 1943. When his military service ended in 1945, Sam and Helen moved to Iowa and then to Newport, Arkansas. During this time, Sam gained early retail experience, eventually operating his own variety store.
In 1950, the Waltons left Newport for Bentonville, where Sam opened Walton’s 5&10 on the downtown square. They chose Bentonville because Helen wanted small-town living, and Sam could take advantage of the different hunting seasons that living at the corner of four states had to offer.
Inspired by the early success of his dime store, and driven to bring even greater opportunity and value to his customers, Sam opened the first Walmart in 1962 at the age of 44 in Rogers, Arkansas.
Changing the Face of Retail
Sam's competitors thought his idea that a successful business could be built around offering lower prices and great service would never work. As it turned out, the company's success exceeded even Sam's expectations. The company went public in 1970, and the proceeds financed a steady expansion of the business. Sam credited the rapid growth of Walmart not just to the low costs that attracted his customers, but also to his associates. He relied on them to give customers the great shopping experience that would keep them coming back. Sam shared his vision for the company with associates in a way that was nearly unheard of in the industry. He made them partners in the success of the company, and firmly believed that this partnership was what made Walmart great.
As the stores grew, so did Sam's aspirations. In addition to bringing new approaches and technologies to retail, he also experimented with new store formats—including Sam's Club and the Walmart Supercenter—and even made the decision to take Walmart into Mexico. Sam's fearlessness in offering lower prices and bringing Walmart's value to customers in the U.S. and beyond set a standard for the company that lives on to this day. His strong commitment to service and to the values that help individuals, businesses and the country succeed earned him the Presidential Medal of Freedom, awarded by President George H. W. Bush in 1992.
It was during Sam's acceptance remarks that he articulated what would come to be Walmart's official company purpose.
Today, "saving people money so they can live better" is the driving force behind everything we do.
10 Rules for Building a Better Business
Sam Walton believed running a successful business boils down to 10 simple rules and they helped Walmart become the global leader it is today. We continue to apply them to every part of our business. Read his 10 rules for building a better business »
Mr. Sam's Legacy
Sam Walton died in 1992, shortly after receiving the Medal of Freedom, but his legacy lives on. To this day, Walmart remains a leader in the retail industry. We are committed not just to expanding the business to better serve our customers, but also to improving the communities we serve through our efforts to constantly improve what we do and how we do it, and through the impacts we're able to achieve through the Walmart Foundation. Through this daily dedication to our business and our customers, we honor Mr. Sam.
Walmart's history is more than just the stores we've built, the partnerships we've made and the customers we've served. So much of our history is in the details. See how Walmart began, how we’ve grown and how our leadership has changed the retail industry.
Class A Uniform Inspection
Belt: worn with slacks so that tipped end passes through the buckle but no fabric can be seen.
Necktie: males will wear four-in-hand tie no shorter than 2″ above belt or longer than bottom of belt buckle also required for long sleeve shirt tie tack/clasp optional
Necktab: females will wear necktab with class A uniform and when long sleeve shirt is worn alone
Males: Leather (patent leather), oxford style, with 3 eyelets
Low quarters: Leather (patent leather), oxford style, with 3 eyelets, heel no greater than 2″
Pumps: Leather (patent leather), closed toe and heel, heel ½” to 3″, sole less than ½”
Males: worn on right breast pocket, centered left to right and between the top of the button and the top of the pocket
Females: 1-2″ above the top button, centered horizontally on wearer’s right side
Males: 1″ above notch, centered so that centerline is parallel to inside edge of lapel
Female: 5/8″ from the notch, centered between collar and lapel seam, centerline parallel to inside edge of lapel
Distinctive shoulder insignia: centered on shoulder loop, equidistant from shoulder seam to outside edge of button, with base towards shoulder seam
Regimental distinctive Insignia:
Males: 1/8″ above top of right breast pocket, ¼” above unit awards (if worn)
Females: ½” above nametape, ½” above unit awards (if worn)
Rank: Specialists and below will were non-subdued rank, centered on the collar 1″ from the point with the centerline bisecting the collar point
Service Ribbons: worn in order of precedence from left to right in one or more rows with no more than four in a row and either no space or 1/8″ between rows.
Males: centered 1/8″ above left breast pocket
Females: center on wearer’s left with bottom row parallel to the bottom of the nameplate
Unit Awards: worn with laurel leaves facing upward on wearer’s right side
Males: centered 1/8″ above right breast pocket flap
Females: centered ½” above nameplate
Devices (Appurtenances): affixed to service ribbons to denote additional awards, participation in an event, or a unique characteristic of the award
Oak Leaf Cluster: denotes succeeding awards
“V” Device: indicates act of heroism while in conflict
Numerals: in lieu of OLC, indicates succeeding awards
Clasps: for Good Conduct Medal, denote subsequent awards
Service Stars: to denote additional award or service in a named campaign
Arrowhead: indicates participation in a combat parachute jump, combat glider landing, or amphibious assault landing while performing a tactical mission
Ribbons in order of Precedence
Badges: worn in order of precedence right to left with specialty badges worn first
Males: centered 1/8″ below top of pocket 1″ apart if there is more than one
Females: centered ¼” below ribbons 1″ apart if there is more than one
Make sure uniform is cleaned and pressed
Make necessary changes to ensure proper fit
Ensure all brass is polished and free of fingerprints
Make sure shoes are serviceable and polished
Copyright © 2020 EducationDynamics. All Rights Reserved.
This is a private website that is not affiliated with the U.S. government, U.S. Armed Forces or Department of Veteran Affairs. U.S. government agencies have not reviewed this information. This site is not connected with any government agency. If you would like to find more information about benefits offered by the U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs, please visit the official U.S. government web site for veterans’ benefits at http://www.va.gov.
The sponsored schools featured on this site do not include all schools that accept GI Bill® funding or VA Benefits. To contact ArmyStudyGuide, email us.
Disclosure: EducationDynamics receives compensation for the featured schools on our websites (see “Sponsored Schools” or “Sponsored Listings” or “Sponsored Results”). So what does this mean for you? Compensation may impact where the Sponsored Schools appear on our websites, including whether they appear as a match through our education matching services tool, the order in which they appear in a listing, and/or their ranking. Our websites do not provide, nor are they intended to provide, a comprehensive list of all schools (a) in the United States (b) located in a specific geographic area or (c) that offer a particular program of study. By providing information or agreeing to be contacted by a Sponsored School, you are in no way obligated to apply to or enroll with the school.
This is an offer for educational opportunities that may lead to employment and not an offer for nor a guarantee of employment. Students should consult with a representative from the school they select to learn more about career opportunities in that field. Program outcomes vary according to each institution’s specific program curriculum. Financial aid may be available to those who qualify. The financial aid information on this site is for informational and research purposes only and is not an assurance of financial aid.
Enter to Win $1,000 for College From Lending Tree. One winner will be randomly selected per month.
Army Rolls Out Army Green Uniform Wear Guidelines, Renames Combat Patch
The U.S. Army on Tuesday rolled out a long-awaited update to its uniform wear guidelines, including the World War II-style Army Green Service Uniform and a new name for the combat patch.
The revised AR 670-1, which was last updated in 2017, will not be made official for another 30 days to allow soldiers and leaders to become familiar with the policy.
"It's been almost five years since we made an update, so it was definitely time. There [have] been a lot of changes we have . added new uniforms," Sgt. Maj. Brian Sanders, Army G-1, Uniform Policy Branch sergeant major, told reporters at a roundtable.
Soldiers have been acquiring and wearing the Army Green Service Uniform, or AGSU, since senior leaders approved it for everyday wear in late 2018, as a replacement for the blue Army Service Uniform, or ASU.
Troops have until Oct. 1, 2027, to purchase the AGSU, after which the ASU will become the Army's optional dress uniform.
"With the implementation of the Army Green Service Uniform, which is extremely important as we try and shift our culture and pay respect to the World War II generation, that really prompted the [update] to occur," Sanders said.
A significant policy update features a name change for the patch soldiers wear on their right shoulder to show wartime service.
"We also made a big change to what a lot of soldiers call the 'combat patch,'" Sanders said.
The Shoulder Sleeve Insignia Former Wartime Service will now be called the Shoulder Sleeve Insignia Military Operations in Hostile Conditions. It is authorized for soldiers who served on combat deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan, but also those who served in certain countries considered hostile areas.
"Sometimes, we go to certain locations, and we don't plan on that to be hostile conditions, but it may turn hostile," Sergeant Major of the Army Michael Grinston said. "How do we recognize those soldiers who are out doing what we have asked them to do? . So we allow them to wear the shoulder sleeve insignia for the unit. I think that is appropriate."
The new shoulder sleeve insignia is currently authorized for Somalia, Djibouti, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Jordan and Syria.
The AR 670-1 update also authorizes female soldiers who breastfeed to wear an optional undershirt designed for nursing. Service officials said in November that the Army Uniform Board will consider developing a lactation shirt for the Maternity Utility Uniform in the Operational Combat Pattern.
The update also includes guidelines for the Army's Improved Hot Weather Combat Uniform, which has been available for soldiers to purchase as an optional wear item at military clothing stores since the summer of 2019.
Army officials unveiled some uniform policy changes that did not make it into this revision of AR 670-1 because of a publishing cutoff deadline.
The service has established guidelines for the permanent wear of the non-subdued National Guard Identification Badge on the AGSU for those who have served in the National Guard Bureau for more than a year, Sanders said.
"They were able to wear the badge temporarily but, once they left [the] assignment, they were no longer able to wear it," he explained.
One possible change to the AGSU may be a return to wearing name tags, something Army leaders initially did not want for the uniform.
"When you look at the original [World War II] uniform, they didn't have name tags, and we did try to stay true to that. But after listening to the feedback of our soldiers, our leaders, spouses, people walking down the street . we kind of looked at it and said, 'Is that something we need to do?" Grinston said.
The Army is waiting for several name tag prototypes that will be considered for the AGSU.
"We have not made the final decision on the name tags . but we are looking into it," Grinston said. "We don't even know what it is going to look like."
Diving became popular in Sweden and Germany in the 18th and 19th centuries. The sport was primarily practised by gymnasts who started performing tumbling routines into the water.
In the late 19th century, a group of Swedish divers visited Great Britain. They put on diving displays that proved hugely popular and led to the formation of the first diving organisation, the Amateur Diving Association, in 1901.
Diving was included in the Olympic Games for the first time at the 1904 Games in St. Louis. The springboard and platform events have been included since the 1908 Olympic Games in London. Since the Stockholm Games in 1912, women have taken part in the diving events.
The first Olympic competitions differed from those which exist nowadays, notably with respect to the height of the platforms and springboards. The diving programme has been relatively stable since the 1928 Games in Amsterdam: men and women take part in 10-metre high-dive and 3-metre springboard events. In 2000, the Sydney Games witnessed the entrance of synchronised diving on both the springboard and the platform.
This discipline was first dominated by the USA. This domination started to waver with the participation of China at the end of the 1980s. When the American Greg Louganis, who is considered the greatest diver ever, was still in competition, the Chinese managed to achieve some victories. Since Louganis retired, China has dominated the men’s events. Lately, China’s women divers have proved themselves unbeatable.
The effectiveness of uniforms will be a subject of continuing research as more schools look for solutions to socio-economic problems of attendance, discipline, bullying, student motivation, family engagement, or economic need. And while a school uniform may be only a small part of the solution for all of these ills, they do solve one major issue, the dress code violation. As Principal Rudolph Saunders explained to Education Week (1/12/2005) that before school uniforms, “I would spend 60 to 90 minutes a day on dress-code violations."
Of course, there are always those students who will try to alter a uniform for individuality. Skirts can be rolled up, pants can be dropped below the waist, and (inappropriate?) messages on T-shirts can still be read through issued button-down shirts. In short, there is no guarantee that student wearing a school uniform will always meet the dress code standard.
The Constitution: How Did it Happen?
Just a few years after the Revolutionary War, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and George Washington feared their young country was on the brink of collapse. America’s first constitution, the Articles of Confederation, gave the Confederation Congress the power to make rules and request funds from the states, but it had no enforcement powers, couldn’t regulate commerce, or print money. The states’ disputes over territory, war pensions, taxation, and trade threatened to tear the young country apart. Alexander Hamilton helped convince Congress to organize a Grand Convention of state delegates to work on revising the Articles of Confederation.
Washington as Statesman at the Constitutional Convention, 1856
The Constitutional Convention
The Constitutional Convention assembled in Philadelphia in May of 1787. The delegates shuttered the windows of the State House and swore secrecy so they could speak freely. Although they had gathered to revise the Articles of Confederation, by mid-June they had decided to completely redesign the government. There was little agreement about what form it would take.
One of the fiercest arguments was over congressional representation—should it be based on population or divided equally among the states? The framers compromised by giving each state one representative for every 30,000 people in the House of Representatives and two representatives in the Senate. They agreed to count enslaved Africans as three-fifths of a person. Slavery itself was a thorny question that threatened to derail the Union. It was temporarily resolved when the delegates agreed that the slave trade could continue until 1808.
Writing the Constitution
After three hot summer months of equally heated debate, the delegates appointed a Committee of Detail to put its decisions in writing. Near the end of the convention, a Committee of Style and Arrangement kneaded it into its final form, condensing 23 articles into seven in less than four days.
On September 17, 1787, 38 delegates signed the Constitution. George Reed signed for John Dickinson of Delware, who was absent, bringing the total number of signatures to 39. It was an extraordinary achievement. Tasked with revising the existing government, the delegates came up with a completely new one. Wary about centralized power and loyal to their states, they created a powerful central government. Representing wildly different interests and views, they crafted compromises. It stands today as one of the longest-lived and most emulated constitutions in the world.
The founders set the terms for ratifying the Constitution. They bypassed the state legislatures, reasoning that their members would be reluctant to give up power to a national government. Instead, they called for special ratifying conventions in each state. Ratification by 9 of the 13 states enacted the new government. But at the time, only 6 of 13 states reported a pro-Constitution majority.
The Federalists, who believed that a strong central government was necessary to face the nation’s challenges, needed to convert at least three states. The Anti-Federalists fought hard against the Constitution because it created a powerful central government that reminded them of the one they had just overthrown, and it lacked a bill of rights.
The ratification campaign was a nail-biter. The tide turned in Massachusetts, where the “vote now, amend later” compromise helped secure victory in that state and eventually in the final holdouts.
The earliest evidence of boxing dates back to Egypt around 3000 BC. The sport was introduced to the ancient Olympic Games by the Greeks in the late 7th century BC, when soft leather thongs were used to bind boxers’ hands and forearms for protection.
Later, in Rome, leather thongs were exchanged for the cestus—a glove studded with metal. Unfortunately, this did not help the gladiators involved, as boxing matches of the era usually ended with the death of one of the contestants.
With the fall of the Roman Empire, boxing came to an abrupt end. It resurfaced in 17th century England, and organised amateur boxing officially began in 1880. Originally only five weight classes were contested: Bantam, not exceeding 54 kilos Feather, not exceeding 57 kilos Light, not exceeding 63.5 kilos Middle, not exceeding 73 kilos and Heavy, any weight.
When boxing made its Olympic debut at the 1904 Games in St. Louis, it was the USA, the only country entered, which took all the medals. Later, the Americans continued to dominate boxing, winning 109 medals (including 48 gold) out of the 842 up for grabs, closely followed by the Cubans and Russians.
Since its inclusion in the Olympic programme, boxing has been staged at each edition of the Games, except in 1912 in Stockholm, owing to Swedish law, which forbade the practice.
The rules have evolved since the 1980s: 1984 in Los Angeles: protective helmet obligatory 1992 in Barcelona: set-up of an electronic scoring system to strengthen the objectivity of refereeing 2007: standardised point scoring.
Women’s boxing made its debut at the 2012 London Games in London. The traditional 11 men’s events were then replaced by 10 men’s and 3 women’s events.