Its a very different approach to those currently in development, but could theoretically offer three times as much power for the same weight.

This is something that doesn't have to happen in our marine protected areas. It could end tomorrow, if we choose it to, and it would be to the benefit of every living thing on the planet, director Toby Nowlan told IFLScience.

The supersized plane will measure over 108 meters (354 feet) in length.

Seahorse reproduction is pretty complicated.

It took a surprisingly long time for us to work out that *people* need *people blood*.

A recent telescope upgrade has delivered spectacular new insights into the mysterious solar atmosphere.

Mars Express captured new images of water, ice, volcanic activity, dust deposits, and mesas all in the same area.

The authors say its proof a one-size-fits-all approach doesnt work with this condition.

Everyone knows that King Charles I was the least successful of Englands many Kings and Queens. The idea is traditional, well-argued, and practically undisputed. The view that Charless rule was a complete failure, from start to finish, is shared by many notable modern historians. Perhaps it is time to consider the alternative. In this article, we will take a moment to explore the controversial idea that King Charles I was a competent King; that he was not so bad after all.King Charles I: Forever Condemned?The Eve of the Battle of Edge Hill, by Charles Landseer, 1642. Source: Google Arts and CultureHistorian Barry Coward once described King Charles I as the most incompetent Monarch of England since King Henry VI. Robert Hutton went a step further, claiming that King Charles I was the worst King since the Middle Ages. John Phillips Kenyon managed to explain the reputation of King Charles Ieffectively and without biasin a few simple words: Charles Stuart was a man of contradiction and controversy.We may ask ourselves, was King Charles I really the worst King since King Henry VI, or even since the Middle Ages? Is he really deserving of the title of Englands Worst King? Is it possible that King Charles I lost his throne, and later his head, through no particular fault of his own? Is it unreasonable to argue that he was actually no worse than any other Monarch England had ever known? In order to arrive at a fair conclusion, we must venture back to the beginning of the story and evaluate both sides of the argument from a neutral perspective.King Charles I: A Most Incompetent King?Charles Facing the High Court of Justice, 1680s. Source: The Internet ArchiveKing Charles I. This poor Stuart Monarch is often mentioned in the same breath as the other traditionally unsuccessful Kings and Queens of England: Ethelred the Unready, King John, Edward V, Richard III, King Henry VIII, Lady Jane Grey, and King Edward VIII. They all make it onto the long list of unfortunates and disappointments. These are the figures who have been, whether fairly or unfairly, labeled by historians as Britains Royal failures.Why are they on the list? Ethelred the Unready lost his Kingdom to the Danish invader, Sweyn Forkbeard, and went down in history as the ill-advised or ill-prepared. King John signed the Magna Carta in 1215, and in doing so established the rule of law that limited the power of any King of England. Staining his reputation even further, it was he who was responsible for losing the original crown jewels in an estuary known as the Wash.King John Signing the Magna Carta, by James William Edmund Doyle, 1864. Source: Wikimedia CommonsKing Edward V was never crowned and is remembered only as one of the ill-fated Princes in the Tower. Not only did Richard III lose his Crown at the Battle of Bosworth Field, but he has also gone down in history, perhaps wrongly, as a nephew-killing usurper.Jane Grey was Queen for only nine days. King Henry VIII is now remembered only for his inability to keep a wife. Centuries later, Edward VIII put his heart before the throne and abdicated in order to marry Wallis Simpson, the woman he loved.And finally, what about King Charles I? What did he do to earn such a poor reputation? It is no secret that he also lost his crown. But things were slightly worse than that. You see, Charles was executed after being tried for treason the only King in British history ever to have the honor. Could this be why King Charles I has been singled out as the biggest failure of all?Why Is King Charles I Remembered as a Failure?Execution of Charles I, 1700-50. Source: The British MuseumOn the 13th day of January during the year 1649, British history was made. At two oclock in the afternoon, on a particularly cold winters day, King Charles I was executed outside the Banqueting House of Whitehall. Even in the 21st century, this event is still considered by many historians as one of the most significant and controversial in British History.When King Charles I appeared before the crowds, he was described by his loyal servant, Thomas Herbert, as the saddest sight he ever saw. Despite his sorry appearance, King Charles I went bravely to his death. Notably, he even requested a second shirt. Moments before his execution, he was determined that he should not tremble before the audience; neither from the cold nor from fear.His only comfort was that he had spent his last days and nights residing at Saint James Palace, accompanied by his most loving and loyal friends, and he had even been granted a final visit from his children. After the death of King Charles I, Oliver Cromwell took his Place as the newly styled Lord Protector of the Realm. Oliver Cromwell, by Samuel Cooper, 1656. Source: The National Portrait Gallery, LondonThe Dutch Diplomat, Abraham de Wicquefort, recorded the progression of events that followed. Immediately after the death of the late King, he began, Oliver had no sooner made himself Sovereign, under the Quality of Protector, than all the Kings of the Earth prostrated themselves before this idol.And that was that; the supposed end of an era of Kings and Queens who enjoyed Royal rule. This is what King Charles I is remembered for; losing his throne, his crown, and his head. Had it not been for the restoration of the Monarchy, King Charles may very well have lost the throne for all the Kings and Queens of England who were yet to come.What Did He Do Wrong? (Four Notable Reasons For His Unpopularity)King Charles I Insulted By Cromwells Soldiers, by Paul Delaroche, 1837. Source: Wikimedia CommonsThere are several reasons why King Charles I became unpopular, and gained such a bad reputation, throughout his reign. The first notable reason was that King Charles I was married to a dedicated Catholic, and many thought he harbored Catholic tendencies and sympathies himself.Due to his great love for Henrietta Maria, many people in England thought that he was heavily influenced by her beliefs. Just five years after their wedding, King Charles I began his campaign to make great changes to the established Protestant Church to make the Church of England feel more Catholic. Extreme Protestantsnow known as Puritansbegan to retaliate. They even wrote pamphlets attacking both the Church and the monarchy.The second notable reason was that King Charles I did not let the Scots have their own prayer book. Sometime during the year 1637, King Charles I decided that everyone in Britain should be using the English prayer book, and that included the Scottish population. When they refused, he sent an army to force them. This made him hugely unpopular in Scotland and lost much of his Northern support.The third notable reason was King Charles Is lack of interest in public welfare. King Charles I lost much of his support from the common people due to his seeming lack of interest in public welfare issues. Such issues included the imposition of drainage schemes in the Fens, which affected many thousands of people.Henrietta Maria of France, workshop of Anthony van Dyck, 1636-8. Source: RKD ImagesFinally, the last notable reason is that King Charles I dissolved Parliament. King Charles I believed strongly in something called the Divine Right of Kings. He knew that he had been appointed by God to rule over England, and truly believed that nobody had the right to question him. His decisions, on all and any matter, were final and should not be challenged. Essentially, he and his family were above the law.When faced with any opposition, King Charles I dissolved Parliament. When Parliament is dissolved, a monarch rules alone. Dissolution is the official term for the end of a Parliament, and therefore when it occurs, every seat becomes vacant. The formal end to the parliamentary session is called prorogation.King Charles I dissolved Parliament three times within the first four years of his rule; the last dissolution lasted eleven years. This period is known as the personal rule of King Charles I.Interestingly, on June 15, 1626, when King Charles I dissolved parliament for the second time, he was asked by a group of peers if he would consider delaying the dissolution; King Charles I replied, Not by a second.What Did He Do Right? Notable AccomplishmentsKing Charles I, by Gerrit van Honthorst, 1628. Source: The National Portrait Gallery, LondonThe first notable accomplishment of King Charles I was his successful development and improvement of the organization of the Royal Navy. It is likely that King Charles I inherited his deep interest in the Royal Navy from his father. Throughout his reign, King James I had worked greatly on its expansion.Following in his fathers Kingly footsteps, King Charles I continued this work by investing in shipbuilding, purposely increasing the number of warships in Britain, and improving the rule and organization of members of the Royal Navy.King Charles I was one of the first Kings to truly appreciate Britains Naval capability, and so he made every effort to strengthen it further. He also recognized the importance of a navy, not only for border security but also for the protection of foreign trade.Contemporary engraving of HMS Sovereign of the Seas, 17th century. Source: Wikimedia CommonsSecondly, King Charles I had great success in creating lasting peace. Unlike many of his predecessors, King Charles I was focused on peace rather than on war. He had a particular interest in bringing about and maintaining tranquillity in England. He successfully brought about the signing of two significant Treaties: the Treaty of Susa in 1629 and the Treaty of Madrid with Spain in 1630.Together, these two Treaties effectively ended Englands involvement in the costly and unwanted Thirty Years War, which had become an undoubted drain on British finances and resources.King Charles I managed to secure a period of peace that allowed him to focus on what really mattered to him; the Kingdom of Britain. An end to foreign warfare meant that Charles could concentrate on the business that concerned him. Even more importantly, he could redirect the funds that were being used for the military, and in doing so secure greater economic stability in England.King Charles I in Three Positions, by Anthony Van Dyck, 1635-6. Source: Google Arts & CultureThe third notable accomplishment of King Charles I was his levying of the Ship Money Tax. This point could be seen as controversial; the levying of the Ship Money Tax could be seen as a disaster as equally as it could be seen as an achievement. The Ship Money Tax was a simple method of raising funds. The tax was collected from coastal towns in Britain; the money was used to support the maintenance and expansion of the Royal Navy. This tax was thrust upon the innocent people who happened to live beside the sea and it was thought that this would be a cause close to their hearts.However, while the Kings people had willingly paid the tax during wartime, they were surprised to find themselves still paying up when peace had arrived and settled. To say that this was a source of controversy may be an understatement.The tax undoubtedly contributed to the strengthening of Englands Naval defenses, but it also eventually became a point of contention. The people wondered if this could have been an abuse of Royal power.The fourth notable accomplishment of King Charles I was his patronage of arts and architecture. This accomplishment may seem frivolous compared with the other issues of the era, but King Charles Is patronage of the arts has contributed significantly to the history of the British Royal family. The collection of art that Charles acquired throughout his life and reign laid the foundation for what has since become known as the Royal Collection, the largest collection of privately owned art in the world.Dukes of Mantua Coat of Arms, created by MostEpic. Source: Wikimedia CommonsBetween the years of 1627 and 1628, King Charles I purchased the entire art collection of the Duke of Mantua, which included pieces by Titian, Raphael, and Caravaggio. His collection grew further, and he later acquired works by Holbein, Tintoretto, Durer, and Rembrandt. By the time of his death, King Charles I owned a collection that was estimated to include nearly 1,800 paintings.King Charles I also had a great interest in architecture and made an outstanding impact on the landscape of England. He commissioned the construction of several buildings, many of which are still treasured by the people of Britain in the 21st century.One of the most famous of King Charles Is commissions is the Queens House in Greenwich, which was designed by the famous and renowned architect Inigo Jones. Another fine example is the Banqueting House in Whitehall, which was also designed by Inigo Jones but is even more famous for its elaborate ceiling painted by Peter Paul Rubens.Inigo Jones, by William Hogarth, 1757-8. Source: ArtUKFinally, King Charles I promoted religious tolerance in England. Throughout his reign, the level of religious tolerance and accommodation in Britain changed dramatically. As we know, issues surrounding the Christian religion had been major problems throughout British history, and therefore the efforts Charles made to remedy any potential problems should not be underplayed.For example, in 1633, King Charles I issued the Declaration of Sports, which permitted certain recreational activities to be performed on Sundays after Church services. This may seem like a small gesture, but it held significant meaning for 17th-century Church-goers.The declaration struck a fine balance between religious observance and allowing people some leisure time and entertainment; Charles was making a point. He was generous, he was lenient, and he was keen to reduce religious tensions in any way he could.The Opinion of a Fellow Monarch: Queen Victoria on King Charles IElizabeth Stuart with her Sister Anne, by Anthony van Dyck, 1637. Source: National Galleries, ScotlandAs a young woman, Queen Victoria (who ruled between 1837 and 1901), took a great interest not only in King Charles I but also in his ill-fated daughter, Elizabeth Stuart (1635-1650). Elizabeth Stuarts story was a particularly sad one which is perhaps why Queen Victoria took pity on her.After her fathers execution, Elizabeth was moved by the New Parliament, ruled by Oliver Cromwell, to the Isle of Wight. However, during the journey, Elizabeth caught a cold which quickly developed into pneumonia. She died in September at Carisbrooke Castle, and with a blatant lack of respect, her gravestone was marked only with the initials ES.It is obvious that Queen Victoria took exception to this ill-treatment of her fellow royals. 200 years later, she commissioned a white marble statue of Elizabeth and a plaque that reads: To the memory of the Princess Elizabeth, daughter of King Charles I, who died at Carisbrooke Castle on the eighth of September 1650, and is interred beneath the Chancel of this Church, this monument is erected as a token of respect for her virtues and in sympathy of her misfortunes, by Victoria R.The Lasting Legacy of King Charles IKing Charles I Statue, Charring Cross, cast 1633, photo by Tony. Source: FlickrThe lasting legacy of King Charles I is a testament not only to his life and reign but also to his character. Despite being labeled as one of the great failures of British history, a daily remembrance of him is kept by thousands, whether they are aware of it or not.Perhaps most famously of all, a statue of King Charles I stands proudly at Charring Cross in London. Even to this day, its location is considered the center point of London. Historically, Charring Cross has been used to define the heart of the city, and a plaque near the statue indicates that road signage distances to London are measured from that exact point.In this fine depiction by the French sculptor Hubert Le Sueur, Charles sits on his horse and looks towards his place of execution. From there, Charles watches the city of London as it moves and changes throughout the centuries.An inscription beneath King Charles Is statue reads: This bronze statue was made in 1633 for Lord Treasurer Weston by Hubert Le Sueur; it was acquired for the Crown and set up here in 1675; the carved work of the pedestal being executed by Joshua Marshall.On Saturday the 6th of May in 2023, another man called Charles was crowned King of England. King Charles III was crowned at Westminster Abbey; he was the 40th Monarch to be crowned King in that location since 1066. During his Coronation procession, it was necessary for King Charles III to pass the King Charles I statue directly in his carriage. This was the precise moment that photographers and cameramen took advantage of, much to the satisfaction and delight of history enthusiasts.The Black Rod ritual, performed at the state opening of Parliament to commemorate Charles Is invasion, photo by Jessica Taylor. Source: FlickrOne King watched another en route to his Coronation; it was almost as if he were giving him his blessing. Viewers held their breath as they watched. The moment was so rare, so moving, so poignant, and so patriotic that it brought tears to the eyes of the nation.King Charles I is also remembered annually in Parliament. His unprecedented 1642 invasion of the House of Commons Chamber (a violation of the liberties of Parliament and his unsuccessful attempt to arrest five members of Parliament) is annually commemorated at the state opening of Parliament.The life and reign of King Charles I has also inspired many works of non-fiction, including White King: Charles I, Traitor, Murderer, Martyr, by Leanda de Lisle (2018), The Fall of Charles I, by Jane Hayter-Hames (2022) and Charles Is Private Life, by Mark Turnbull (2023).A particularly amusing portrayal of King Charles I can be found in the Horrible Histories series, Slimy Stuarts.King Charles I: Was He or Wasnt He Englands Worst Monarch?King Charles I, by Anthony Van Dyck, 1633. Source: The Royal CollectionAlthough some historians may not yet have been convinced that King Charles I was a good King, maybe it is time to at least consider the idea that he did possess many of the good qualities essential for a successful rule.One more recent historian who has been convinced of King Charles Is successes as King is Kevin Sharpe, who devoted much of his academic work to improving the reputation of Charless life and reign. Sharpe described Charles as a dynamic man of conscience.Unfortunately, it is likely that the nature of his ultimate undoing will ensure he remains known, throughout the centuries to come, as the worst Monarch England has ever known. This does not change the fact that, according to most sources, King Charles I was a genuinely kind and likable person. For a king of his era, he had an unusually happy marriage. He harbored a great love for his wife, Henrietta Maria of France. He was an excellent husband and a loving father to his many children. He also had a strong faith and was determined to stand up for what he believed in.He was united with all the Kings that had gone before him in knowing that, Princes are not bound to give account of their actions, but to God alone. William Laud, the Archbishop of Canterbury and Head of the Church of England described King Charles I as a mild and gracious Prince who knew not how to be, or how to be made great.Maybe this is how King Charles I should be remembered: as a polite, refined, determined, loyal, clever, and accomplished man who had all the makings of a good King, but who had been dealt the misfortune of ruling at a time of major conflict and great change in Britain.

From the seat of government in Cusco, the Inca managed a vast territory stretching over 770,000 square miles. Controlling this expanse of territory and the 12 million inhabitants within demanded consistent communication, yet South America boasted no horses for rapid transit and a mountainous terrain that would have limited the usefulness of such animals anyway. Instead, the Inca developed an impressive network of roads and an innovative system of relay runners, chasquis, who could cover 1,250 miles in a week.Qhapaq an: The Legendary Inca RoadsA man walking on an ancient Inca road with the ruins of a tambo, or shelter, to his right. Source: UNESCOThough its center was in Cusco and many of its remaining marvels are found in Peru today, the Inca Empire extended far beyond the modern-day borders of the country. Tawantinsuyu, realm of the four parts, the Quechua word for this land, was the largest empire in the pre-Columbian Americas. The Inca began to expand beyond Cusco in the 13th century and would ultimately build an empire that spanned from present-day southwestern Colombia to just beyond Santiago, Chile, and from the Pacific coast eastward into what are today parts of Bolivia and Argentina.Map of the Inca Empire indicating which territories were conquered by each Sapa Inca. Source: Marsh, Erik & Kidd, Ray & Ogburn, Dennis & Durn, Vctor. (2017). Dating the Expansion of the Inca Empire: Bayesian Models from Ecuador and Argentina.To interconnect this vast kingdom, the Inca built a road network covering over 18,000 miles called the Qhapaq an, today a UNESCO World Heritage Site. It consisted of two long main roads, one running along the coast and the other from north to south through the Andes, with many branches. The system is a testament to the organization and architectural mastery of the Inca, who were able to build roads, many of which remain today, through varying terrain, including coastal lands, jungles, and mountains. Scholars believe this extensive system of roadways, linking all parts of the empire, enabled the Inca to successfully administer their vast territory, using the roads for cultural exchange, trade, and mobilization. But the Inca had another trick up their sleeve that relied on these roads: a masterful means of maintaining rapid and efficient communication.Who Were the Chasquis?Illustration of a chaski from Felipe Guaman Poma de Ayalas El primer nueva cornica y buen gobierno, 1615. Source: National Museum of the American Indian, Smithsonian Institution, Washington DCChasquis (or chaskis), from the Quechua language meaning one who gives and receives, were selected for their essential role as official messengers in their youth. Always boys, they were chosen from among the empires fastest and fittest. Spanish chronicler Felipe Guaman Poma de Ayala also claimed that they were the sons of local leaders, curacas, to ensure loyalty; while this would make sense, given their responsibility in carrying potentially secret information, this claim is not made by other chroniclers.While speed was essential for this position, given the varied landscapes they would have to traverse, only being a fast runner was not enough. Those selected to be chasquis also had to be both strong and agile enough to climb through the mountainous terrain and have great endurance to maintain a steady pace over several miles of sometimes rugged terrain, as well as strong lungs to adapt to the higher altitudes. Beyond their physical abilities, they must have excellent memoriesfor both the messages they would deliver and the routes they would take. Chasquis began training at a very young age. Martn de Muruas account of the chasquis claimed that as part of this preparation, they were fed very little to ensure they remained thin and light on their feet.Chasquis were government employees, as it were. The Inca Empire did not use currency; its inhabitants were expected to provide tribute and labor to the government, called mita, in exchange for the services the government provided. The chasquis service was their mita, and in return, chroniclers note that they were fed from the governments stores, and their families were protected while they were on duty. They were also permitted to chew coca leaves to aid their work, a practice usually reserved for the empires nobility and religious ceremonies. Should a chasqui become lazy and fail to fulfill his duty, the punishment was severe: he would be beaten and his legs broken, as a reminder and warning to others.Relay: How the Chasqui System WorkedAn Inca quipu, a knotted cord writing system that was sometimes carried by chasquis to deliver messages. Peru, 1300-1532 CE. Source: Museo Larco, Pueblo LibreGiven the expanse of the Inca Empire, sending a single messenger on a lengthy trek made little sense. It would take weeks for a single runner to carry a message the 1,000+ miles from Cusco to one of the other major government centers, like Tomebamba in present-day Ecuador. Instead, the Inca created a relay system to swiftly move messages and small packages through the empire. Who created the system is unknown, with the Spanish chroniclers each claiming a different Sapa Inca was responsible.Along the many miles of roads, the Inca built relay stations, chaskiwasi, at regular intervalsmost chroniclers put the distance at about 1.5 miles, depending on the terrain (some chroniclers appear to have conflated the chaskiwasi and tambos, larger shelters built further apart along the same roads that also had storehouses and could be used by chasquis as well as other travelers). A number of chasquis would operate each station and be ready to run day or night. These stations were built in an elevated position so the runners on duty could see incoming messengers as well as smoke signals, which were sometimes used to send alerts from other stations. Garcilaso de la Vega described the chasquis in his history chronicle, Comentarios Reales de los Incas, as carrying shell trumpets (pututu) to announce their arrival so the next runner would be ready to go. Other aspects of their dress noted by various chroniclers included white feather headdresses, sandals, a sling, a club, and a small bag.A shell trumpet, or pututu, of the kind the chasquis used to announce their arrival. Peru, 1500-1800 CE. Source: Museum of Fine Arts, BostonWhen a runner arrived, the next chasqui in line would join him on the road, and they would run together for a period while information was exchanged. If there was a verbal message to be relayed, it was repeated several times to ensure nothing was lost in the message before the next runner moved on. Longer messages might come in the form of quipus, the Incas unique knotted cord writing system. These did not have to be read by the chasquisthat was the job of specially trained quipucamayocsimply delivered to the correct person. There are even tales of the relay system being used to transport live marine animals when the Sapa Inca was in the mood to dine on seafood.Because these messages were vital to the functioning of the empire and often contained privileged information, the loyalty of the chasquis was essential. Revealing the contents of a message, impeding a fellow chasqui, or delivering a false message was punishable by death.Invasion: Chasquis and the Spanish ConquestInka sandals, c. 14501532 CE, Peru, photo by RA Whiteside. Source: National Museum of the American Indian, Smithsonian Institution, Washington DCSince all of the recorded history of the chasquis comes from the Spanish chronicles, its clear the system was still functioning when the Spanish began their conquest of South America and that it was also so remarkable as to merit the attention of these early historians. It stands to reason that something as pedestrian as mail delivery would have to be noteworthy to make the history books, and indeed all of the most well-known accounts of the period describe the chasqui system in detail, expressing amazement over its efficiency and the distance these runners could cover in short periods of time.It seems logical that the Spanish would also want to take advantage of these relay couriers, but after the conquest, one key to the system, the Qhapaq an, quickly fell into disrepair. Not only was the Inca maintenance system disrupted, but the most heavily used roads began crumbling under the weight of horses and carts, which they werent designed for.Evidence suggests that the chasqui system also largely disappeared within a few decades of the colonizers arrival. Some records attest to it being revived and used to cover smaller regions in service to the new Spanish government, but noting that it was no longer as successful, perhaps due to the documented refusal of the Spanish governors to pay their chasquis as promised.By the 17th century, Martn de Murua is recorded lamenting the good old days of the chasqui system, noting that the modern chasquis were expected to run longer distances, disrupting the efficiency of the original system. What is unclear from existing records is whether the Spanish purposefully upended the system only to regret it, the chasquis themselves allowed the system to die out as the roads so essential to their work crumbled and their new employers failed to pay them, or some combination of the two.Legacy: Chasqui in the Modern DayCover of the childrens book Run, Little Chaski!, a tale about a new chasqui in the ancient Inka Empire. Source: Barefoot BooksRespect for the honorable work of the ancient chasquis persists to the modern day. A quick Google search reveals a variety of commercial products named in their honor, everything from snack foods to yarn. A particularly popular use of chaski (or chasqui) has been for newspapers and journals delivering news and analysis related to Latin American history and politics. Another common modern usage is for running clubs, races, and other athletic endeavors that employ the chasquis ancient skills.In parts of the Andes popular among tourists, hotels and hostels offering a cozy place to rest frequently use the name chaskiwasi. The chasquis have even escaped the bonds of Earth, thanks to the Peruvian Chasqui I nanosatellite deployed at the International Space Station in 2023. Though their service ended some 400 years ago, the Inca chasquis have never been forgotten.