The Aztec Empire is among the most talked about Mesoamerican societies. The prominent empire spanned between 1325 and 1521 CE and covered a significant portion of the modern-day regions of central and southern Mexico. While historians refer to the inhabitants as the Aztecs, they did not use this term to refer to themselves. Instead, they called themselves the Mexica. That said, the Aztec Empire utilized a mix of military might and diplomatic deliberations to maintain control over its vast territories.   The Rise of the Aztec Empire Celebrations held for the coronation of emperor Moctezuma II of Mexico in the Durán Codex, 1579. Source: Bibliotexa Digital Hispanica   The Aztec Empire rose in 1428 under the leadership of Itzcoatl. This was after the community formed an alliance with the Tacubans and Texcocans to defeat the Tepanecs, their most formidable rivals in the region. Montezuma was Itzcoatl’s successor. He took over leadership in 1440 and was revered as a great warrior. Today, he is widely regarded as the father of the Aztec Empire.    The Aztecs’ expansion model allowed the empire to rule over 500 small states by the early 1500s. Its population is estimated to have been between 5 and 6 million people at its height with Tenochtitlán, its biggest city, having about 140,000 inhabitants. That said, the Aztec civilization also had highly developed social structures. Its society was based on a strict caste system made up of nobles at the top and slaves and serfs at the bottom.   The Aztec Empire and Its Vast Territories Map of Tenochtitlan from Nuremberg. Source: Library of the University of British Columbia   While the Aztec Empire grew due to its conquest of neighboring regions, the expansion came at a cost. This is because the Aztec military gained power by adding men supplied by allied and defeated states. The large numbers of warriors allowed the Aztecs to easily subdue their enemies and gain new territory. With each victory, Aztec rulers demanded payment from defeated populations and took prisoners back to Tenochtitlán to be used as human religious sacrifices. The religious sacrifices angered other tribes and caused numerous uprisings. Although Montezuma squashed many of the rebellions, the constant conflicts weakened the empire.    This problem enabled Spanish invaders led by Hernán Cortes to form partnerships with other native people, most notably the Tlaxcalans, who were enemies of the Aztecs. The Tlaxcalan army contributed to the Aztecs’ downfall by helping Cortes attack the Aztecs.   European Invasion of the Aztec Empire The Meeting of Cortés and Montezuma by Unknown, ca. 1650. Source: The Library of Congress   The first European to visit Mexican territory was Francisco Hernandez de Cordoba. He arrived in Yucatan from Cuba with several ships and about 100 men in early 1517. Cordoba’s accounts of the Aztec region on his return to Cuba are believed to have compelled Diego Velasquez, the Spanish governor, to send a large contingent of soldiers back to Mexico under the command of Hernán Cortes. Subsequently, in March 1519, Cortes arrived at the town of Tabasco with about 500 soldiers. It was while there when he learned from the natives about the great Aztec Empire ruled by Moctezuma II.   After the Spaniards gained the support of the local Indians, Cortes was able to create a base at La Villa Rica de la Vera Cruz, now Veracruz, Mexico. He then moved west toward the Aztec capital. Initially, the Spaniards were welcomed and met with gifts from Montezuma. However, Cortes’ intention was to take over Tenochtitlán due to its gold and rich economy.   The Empire’s Downfall Artist’s rendering of the Templo Mayor in Tenochtitlan, unknown artist, 1900. Source: Wikimedia Commons   Unfortunately for the Aztec people, the Spanish invaders brought with them some deadly diseases when they arrived such as smallpox, and the Aztecs had no resistance to many of the European diseases. As a result, smallpox spread among the indigenous people and with time devastated the population. It is estimated that half of Tenochtitlán’s inhabitants died from the disease.    Illustration of smallpox from Dr. John D. Fisher’s “Description of the Distinct, Confluent, and Inoculated Small Pox, Varioloid Disease, Cox Pox, and Chicken Pox,” 1836. Source: Connecticut Explored or Google Books   As such, when the Spanish first attacked the Aztecs in February 1519 following a series of misunderstandings, the kingdom was greatly weakened. The lack of superior weaponry also contributed to the downfall of the Aztec Empire. While the Aztecs outnumbered the Spaniards, their weapons were no match for Spanish arms. The Spaniards possessed guns and cannons while the Aztec warriors fought using wooden shields, bows, and spears. The situation put the Aztecs at a great disadvantage in times of conflict.   Eventually, Cortes made Montezuma his prisoner and forced him into the role of a puppet king. Montezuma later on died in captivity on June 29, 1520. The Spanish led by Cortes shut down the Aztec resistance on August 13, 1521. About 240,000 people are believed to have died in the Battle of Tenochtitlan which ended the Aztec Empire. After his victory, Cortes burned down Tenochtitlan and built Mexico City where the city once stood.

  Among the kings of England there have been eight Henrys, eight Edwards, and six Georges but there has only ever been one John. His successors did not want to be associated with the stain the name had in the minds of the English people. Considering what the monk Matthew Paris penned (writing decades after John’s death) it is perhaps easy to see why. “Foul as it is, Hell itself is made fouler by the presence of John.” Is this a historical hit job, or was John really that terrible?   Succession Richard I, the Lionheart, King of England, by Merry-Joseph Blondel, 1841 Source: Westminster Abbey   John was never supposed to be king. The youngest son of Henry II and Eleanor of Aquitaine, there were many in front of him in the line of succession to sit on the throne. But, in 1183 Henry “the Young King” died of dysentery. This was followed by his brother Geoffrey dying in 1186. Suddenly, only his brother Richard and his nephew Arthur were ahead of him in line to the throne.   While Richard “The Lionheart” was away crusading, it was an open question of who would succeed him if things went south for the warrior king. Arthur was the son of John’s elder brother Geoffrey and, according to primogeniture inheritance, he had the stronger claim. However, he was still only a young child. The realities of child kingship being what they were, John was able to convince and strong-arm his way to being named as the heir apparent.   Then, on a fateful day in 1199, a crossbow bolt struck down Richard in France. Suddenly, the man who was so far away from the throne for much of his life, found himself being anointed with the holy oil and crowned king of England.   Softsword Arthur I of Britain doing homage to Philip II Augustus of France, 14th century. Source: British Library   John inherited Richard’s war in France against the formidable King Philip II “Augustus.” It is important to remember that at this point England controlled much of the west of modern-day France. It had been a long-term project of Philip Augustus to regain control over the lands he saw as rightly his. However, rather than continue to fight over his French lands, John sought to make peace.   In 1200 the treaty of Le Goulet was signed, bringing an end to the open hostilities between the two realms. The war ended on terms that were seen as more favorable to Philip than they were to John. John received recognition that he was the rightful heir to Richard over Arthur and Philip gained a promise that the traditional Plantagenet policy of encircling France through alliances with neighboring realms would cease and that Philip was formally recognized as the true feudal overlord of John’s French lands.   Signing an unfavorable treaty rather than continuing the war earned John the nickname of “Softsword.” This was a not-so-subtle dig at John’s perceived lack of military prowess but also his masculinity. The medieval world had a much different relationship to war than we do in the modern world but even today leaders can be seen as weak when signing treaties and resolving issues diplomatically.   The Disappearance of Arthur King John hunting, 14th century. Source: The British Library   Arthur led a rebellion against his uncle to press his claim to the throne but was ultimately unsuccessful in his attempt. After his defeat and capture by John, the fate of Arthur of Brittany becomes murky. It is not known for sure what happened to him, but rumors abound that there was foul play.   In the Annales De Margan, John is alleged to have gone to see Arthur after dinner the Thursday before Easter. John had been drinking heavily and was quite drunk. The chronicle is sparse on specific detail but it says that John became possessed by the Devil and slew Arthur with his own hand. Then, he tied a heavy stone to the body and dumped the boy’s body in the Seine River, only for it to be discovered by a fisherman sometime later.   Did this actually happen? The only person who knew for sure was John, and he didn’t write on the matter. However, one can see how it might have occurred. Arthur was a threat to John’s power. He’d already rebelled once and as he had a strong claim to be the rightful heir there was a chance it could happen again. On a more speculative, personal level, Arthur was beloved by the people of Brittany. Perhaps, if John really did drunkenly wander down to Arthur’s cell that fateful night, jealous rage guided his hand rather than the calculated removal of a political rival.   Taxation Battle between Philip II August and John Lackland, 14th century. Source: The British Library   In 1204, after a series of devastating military campaigns by Philip II, John lost control of Normandy, Anjou, and Poitou—the majority of his holdings on the mainland. This was a loss to John’s prestige as well as his treasury. He wanted to regain the rich lands he had lost but war was very expensive and he would need an enormous amount of money to be able to raise the army he needed to do so. After 1204, he turned his royal power toward extracting as much money as possible from his vassals and subjects.   One of the main areas that John had direct control over was royal forests. Use of these required royal approval, and they were governed under forestry law. John hiked up the fees associated with gaining approval to use forest lands and raised the penalties for those caught illegally using the forests to extortionate amounts. One of the reasons that Sherwood Forest plays a large part in the Robin Hood legend is precisely due to the impact of forestry laws on the general population.   Portrait of King John, 1620. Source: Wikimedia Commons   Scutage was a tax that could be levied on nobles and knights as a substitute for military service. John utilized this tax eleven times during his 17-year reign. As a point of comparison, scutage had been utilized only eleven times over the preceding 40 years. The noblemen hated this constant imposition. John’s brother and father had been politically astute enough to know that imposing too many taxes too fast would be counter-productive but John didn’t have the same sense the rest of his family did.   John, still needing more money, imposed a 13% tax on all goods within the country. This was an unprecedented expansion of royal power. Never before in English history had a king imposed a tax on nobles and commoners alike. The burden of taxation created a simmering resentment against the king across the land.   Papal Sanctions Pope Innocent III, 13th century fresco, photo by Carlo Raso. Source: Flickr   John continued to make everyone who mattered angry at him when the Archbishop of Canterbury died in 1205. John’s preferred candidate was loyal to him, but word came from Pope Innocent III in Rome that Stephen Langton was to be appointed to the archbishop’s throne in Canterbury. Like many secular rulers in the Middle Ages before and after him, John bristled at being told who to appoint to such an important position and he refused.   Unfortunately for John, Innocent III was perhaps one of the most formidable occupants of the chair of St Peter in the long history of the Papacy. The project of his pontificate was to increase his control over all aspects of the Church and to place popes firmly above kings in the power structure of the medieval world. Innocent would not tolerate such insolence from John, and in retaliation, he not only excommunicated the king but placed the entirety of England under Interdict.   As long as the interdict remained in effect John’s subjects could not attend mass, could not receive sacraments, and could not bury their dead in churchyards. Services deemed absolutely essential such as baptism and the last rites for the dying were permitted but the greatly reduced spiritual life of England would have been keenly felt by those affected.   In this calamity though, John saw opportunity. Like a 13th-century Henry VIII, he confiscated vast sums of wealth from the churches that sat empty and unused, infuriating priests and monks. When John finally relented and submitted to papal authority, six long years had passed.   Magna Carta The Magna Carta (originally known as the Charter of Liberties), 1215. Source: The British Library   After years of ruinous taxation, John finally had enough money to launch a campaign to retake the lands he lost in 1204. However, disaster struck when he suffered a decisive defeat at the Battle of Bouvines in 1214. Following the defeat, the nobility of England had had enough of John. He had nothing to show for his trampling of feudal custom in his quest for more money. In 1215 the barons demanded that John sign a document known as Magna Carta (Great Charter in Latin) that would reign in his power.   The Magna Carta is remembered today for clauses 39 and 40.   “(39) No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land.   (40) To no one will we sell, to no one deny or delay right or justice.”   However, much of the rest of the document is related more to protection of feudal rights from royal overreach than lofty ideals about justice and the rule of law. Those drawing up the Magna Carta were concerned with protecting themselves from John’s tyrannical rule.   When John immediately wriggled out of having to obey the Magna Carta thanks to intervention from, of all people, Pope Innocent III, the barons rose up in rebellion against John. They went so far as to invite the French prince Louis to land in England and take the throne for himself.   John’s reign ended in the midst of that catastrophic rebellion. In 1216 John died of dysentery, putting an end to 13 years of turmoil. He was succeeded by his nine-year-old son Henry.   The Verdict Herbert Beerbhom Tree as King John, by Charles A Buchel, 1900. Source: The Folger Shakespeare Library   When looking at a historical figure that is almost universally reviled, it is always good to examine the bias of the sources. During the Medieval Period, much of the history was written by churchmen, which can be problematic for historians when the subject they were writing about was actively hostile to the Church. It can be argued that John’s terrible reputation is due in large part to his six-year feud with the pope, leaving the Church in England reeling and much of their wealth confiscated.   While there may be an argument for exaggerations of John’s own personal moral failings, it is hard to look at the objective facts of John’s reign and come to a conclusion other than that he was a bad king. He managed not only to lose a huge chunk of his land to the French but was then so egregious in his collection of taxes that his own nobles preferred to invite a foreign prince to take his throne rather than suffer his incompetence and tyranny any longer.   Being a medieval king was a delicate balancing act. Kings had to weigh their own needs against the needs of their nobility, the clergy, other royal houses, and even other members of their own families. It was a difficult job at the best of times. John certainly found himself up against some of the toughest challenges the Medieval Period could throw at a monarch, and he was found wanting.   “Bad” King John certainly seems to deserve the moniker. He proves that one does not need to be great to change history. Monumental incompetence can be just as powerful a force for change.

  Homer’s Iliad tells the story of the Trojan War. Traditionally, that war has been dated to the late Bronze Age, approximately c. 1200 BCE. However, the Iliad itself was not written that early in history. There is wide agreement that Homer—or whoever the true author of the Iliad was—lived much, much later than this. Nevertheless, there is still disagreement over when exactly the Iliad was written. There are two main opinions between which scholars are divided. One opinion is that it was written in the 8th century BCE, while the other suggests it is more recent, written in the 7th century BCE.   The Controversy Over When the Iliad Was Written Wrath of Achilles, by Michel Martin Drolling, 1810. Source: Wikimedia Commons   The date of the Trojan War is usually held to correspond almost exactly with the end of the Bronze Age, which also marked the end of the Mycenaean Era. That was in the 12th century BCE. After that, Greece entered the Dark Ages, until it finally entered the Archaic Era in c. 750 BCE. Since the Iliad tells the story of the Trojan War, it obviously must have been written after the date of that event, if we assume it really happened. However, already by c. 600 BCE, there is evidence of recognition of Homer as a poet. This suggests that the Iliad must have been written before then at the latest.   This is a very wide window of opportunity in which the Iliad could have been written. Is there any way of narrowing it down? One way is by looking at ancient statements that explicitly state when Homer, the Iliad’s alleged author, lived. Since he was famous, even in ancient times, there are many statements about this.   Statue of Herodotus at Bodrum, Turkey. Source: Wikimedia Commons   The earliest direct statement regarding the date for the life of Homer comes from Herodotus. In his Histories II.53, Herodotus stated the following:   “I suppose that the time of Hesiod and Homer was not more than four hundred years before my own.” Herodotus was writing in about the middle of the 5th century BCE. Hence, this claim would mean that Homer and Hesiod, a chronicler of Greek mythology, lived in about the middle of the 9th century, or about 850 BCE. This would mean that the Iliad was composed during the Dark Ages. While early in Greece’s history, this is just about the time when the Greeks adopted the Phoenician script. Hence, it is plausible that the Iliad could have been preserved in writing not too long after Homer composed it.   On the other hand, Herodotus’ estimates are not always reliable. Furthermore, he specifically says that Homer lived “not more” than four hundred years before his time. Hence, this could have been an upper limit rather than a realistic estimate about when he lived.   Ancient Statements About the Life of Homer Capital from the tomb of Archilochus, Homer’s older contemporary, Paros Archaeological Museum. Source: Wikimedia Commons   There are a variety of ancient claims about when Homer lived. True, these are later than Herodotus’ claim. However, the fact that Herodotus used the expression “not more than four hundred years” suggests that these other statements, which are more direct and specific, might be more useful. One example is the fact that an ancient writer named Demetrius of Magnesia placed Homer at about the same time as a poet named Thaletas, or Thales of Crete.   Scholars widely agree that Thales lived in the mid-7th century BCE. The evidence for this is clear. Plutarch tells us that Thales lived in the generation after Terpander, who is recorded as winning the 26th Olympiad in the 670s BCE. This would place Thales in the latter half of the 7th century BCE. This is consistent with the fact that Glaucus of Rhegium, in the 5th century BCE, places Thales after Archilochus. This latter poet is known to have been active in the time of King Gyges of Lydia, in the first half of the 7th century.   An Assyrian relief depicting mounted Cimmerian warriors, Nimrud, c. 13th century BCE. Source: Wikimedia Commons   Therefore, it is with good reason that Thales is generally placed by scholars in the mid-7th century BCE. Since Demetrius of Magnesia placed Homer at about the same time as Thales, this would likewise place Homer in that timeframe too. Demetrius of Magnesia lived in the 1st century BCE, which is long after Herodotus. Nevertheless, this date for Homer—and thus the Iliad—is supported by Strabo. While he was a contemporary of Demetrius, he referred to a group of previous writers, called simply “the writers of chronicles.” According to Strabo, they placed Homer at or just after the time of the Cimmerian invasions, referring to the invasion of western Anatolia; this would place Homer in the early to mid 7th century BCE.   A date in this same century is supported by Theopompus in the 4th century BCE and Euporion in the following century, according to scholar Irene de Jong. For these and other reasons, many scholars believed that the Iliad was written at about this time.   Evidence From Ancient Greek Artwork Ancient Greek pottery depicting scenes of the Trojan War. Source: Rob Koopman via Flickr   One corpus of evidence that strongly supports the conclusion that the Iliad was written later than commonly believed is ancient Greek artwork. Greek pottery famously tended to depict mythological events. From the early 7th century BCE onwards, we find depictions of the Trojan War. Some might try to use this as evidence that the Iliad was written before then, placing it within the 8th century BCE, thus allowing time for the poem to circulate.   However, when we look at the evidence more closely, it is notable that we do not find any evidence of scenes specifically from the Iliad on Greek pottery at that early date. In fact, scenes specifically from Homer’s Iliad do not start to be depicted until the final quarter of the 7th century BCE. While perhaps this does not settle the matter definitively, it does argue very strongly in favor of a date no earlier than c. 650 BCE for the composition of the Iliad.   Evidence From the Iliad Itself An Archaic bronze Corinthian helmet, c. 650-600 BCE. Source: Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York   Further evidence in support of this general dating comes from the Iliad itself. There are extensive descriptions of weapons, armor, and modes of warfare. By examining these features of the poem, we can ascertain roughly when the Iliad must have been written. The basis for this line of reasoning is that the style of weapons and armor, as well as how battles were fought, changed over the centuries.   Regarding the armor that Homer describes, this fits the standard Greek hoplite equipment used from the late 8th century through the 7th century BCE. For example, the Iliad describes what appears to be the Corinthian helmet, with its plume of horsehair. The use of a bronze cuirass and a zoster—a broad metal belt—also requires a date in the late 8th or 7th century BCE. Such equipment did not exist prior to this. While this would allow for the Iliad to have been written as early as the late 8th century BCE, it cannot have been written earlier than that.   Greek krater, Geometric period, c. 750-735 BCE. Source: Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York   Something which does help us to narrow down when the Iliad was written is the way in which Homer describes the use of swords, spears, and bows and arrows. This was shown by Hans van Wees. We can compare the Iliad’s descriptions with the depictions of the use of these weapons on Greek pottery. In depictions from the Geometric period, from 900 to 700 BCE, swords are shown as being the most commonly used weapon, with bows and arrows behind swords, and spears firmly in last place. This does not match the frequency with which Homer refers to these weapons.   On the other hand, depictions dating to the first half of the 7th century BCE portray weapons with essentially the exact same frequency as Homer. Spears are shown to be by far the most common weapon, with swords almost never being shown. This corresponds perfectly to Homer, in complete contrast to the era prior to 700 BCE. Therefore, this provides strong evidence that the basis for Homer’s descriptions of warfare came from the first half of the 7th century BCE, and not the preceding century.   Was the Iliad Written in the 8th or 7th Century BCE? Depiction of warfare from the Iliad, Codex F205, c. 500 CE. Source: Wikimedia Commons   In conclusion, what do we know about when the Iliad was written? Herodotus stated that Homer lived no more than 400 years before his own time, but this was likely an upper limit and not a precise estimate. Most scholars date Homer in either the 8th or the 7th century BCE. As we have seen, there are a variety of ancient writers who placed Homer in the 7th century BCE, some of them suggesting that Homer lived in the middle of that century.   The most important evidence comes from the Iliad itself and from ancient depictions of its scenes. The descriptions of weapons and armor in the Iliad are consistent with the late 8th century or 7th century BCE, but the use of different weapons points to a more specific era. The frequency of the use of spears compared to swords overwhelmingly supports a date after 700 BCE. Furthermore, the fact that scenes from the Iliad do not appear on Greek pottery until the last quarter of the 7th century BCE is important. This strongly suggests that it was written no earlier than about the middle of the 7th century BCE.

Historic Route 66 goes from Chicago to Los Angeles. Santa Monica Pier is the western terminus. Want to ride Route 66 and let someone else handle the planning and logistics? EAGLERIDER offers both guided and self-guided Route 66 motorcycle tours. You can choose from 15-day tours that run the full length of Route 66 from Chicago to Los Angeles (there’s also a 17-day Harley-Davidson VIP Experience that begins in Milwaukee) or shorter tours, such as the 8-day Chicago to Albuquerque tour or the 9-day Albuquerque to Los Angeles tour. Route 66 mural in Pontiac, Illinois. Self-guided tours include the rental of a late-model BMW, Harley-Davidson, or Yamaha, lodging at motorcycle-friendly hotels, routing guidance that includes the EAGLERIDER Mobile Tour Guide App, and the ability to customize your trip. Prices for self-guided tours start at $1,698 for the 8-day Chicago to Albuquerque tour, $1,954 for the 9-day Albuquerque to Los Angeles tour, and $2,988 for the 15-day Chicago to Los Angeles tour. Roy’s Motel & Cafe in Amboy, California. If you want a group ride with social events, guided tours include everything that comes with a self-guided tour plus a professional tour guide, a support vehicle with luggage transportation and a spare motorcycle, fuel on riding days, daily breakfast, a welcome reception and dinner, and the EAGLERIDER World Famous Farewell Party Experience. Prices for guided tours start at $2,520 for the 8-day Chicago to Albuquerque tour, $2,979 for the 9-day Albuquerque to Los Angeles tour, $4,553 for the 15-day Chicago to Los Angeles tour, and $6,173 for the 17-day Milwaukee to Los Angeles Harley-Davidson VIP Experience tour. Related: Club EAGLERIDER Adds Tiered Memberships and Buddy Passes Oatman Highway, Arizona. You can also rent a motorcycle from EAGLERIDER and design your own Route 66 trip or other itinerary. For details about tours, rentals, Club EAGLERIDER, and more, visit the EAGLERIDER website. The post EAGLERIDER Route 66 Motorcycle Tours appeared first on Rider Magazine.

Episode 82 of the Rider Magazine Insider Podcast is sponsored by FLY Racing. Our guest is Eric Trow, a contributing editor at Rider and the head of Stayin’ Safe Advanced Rider Training. We discuss some of our favorite rides, the 100th anniversary of Route 66 and other highways, and the story behind Eric’s grandfather’s Indian Chief. You can listen to or watch Episode 82 of the Rider Magazine Insider Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Podbean, and YouTube or via the Rider Magazine Insider Podcast webpage. Please subscribe, leave us a 5-star rating, and tell your friends! Scroll down for a list of previous episodes. Ep. 81: Kyle Bradshaw, brand manager of Nelson-Rigg Ep. 80: Scott Calhoun, co-founder of Butler Maps Ep. 79: Gordon McCall, The Quail MotoFest Ep. 78: Honda Gold Wing 50th Anniversary and Daytona Bike Week Ep. 77: Greg Sermabeikian, owner of Anthony’s Leatherworks and MX Boot Resole and Repair Ep. 76: 2025 Motorcycles with Greg Drevenstedt and Kevin Duke, Editor-in-Chief of American Rider Ep. 75: Sebastian Schoepe, CEO of EAGLERIDER Ep. 74: Mike Noyes, CEO of ALIV Worldwide Ep. 73: Austin Rothbard, founder and CEO of Twisted Road Ep. 72: Hunter Leonard, Leonard Motor Works Ep. 71: Bring It Bike Show, Americade Ep. 70: Paul Guillien and Ron West, Backcountry Discovery Routes Ep. 69: 2024 Adventure Bikes with Kevin Duke, Editor-in-Chief of American Rider Ep. 68: 2024 Motorcycles with Kevin Duke, Editor-in-Chief of American Rider Ep. 67: Ellie Cooper, author of Waiting for Mango Season Ep. 66: Motorcycle Cannonball team Jonas Zahn and Brenda Kuhl, PeglegSpeedShop Ep. 65: Tom Medema, RallyForRangers.org Ep. 64: Quinn Redeker, PoliceMotorTraining.com Ep. 63: Justin Bradshaw, REVER Ep. 62: Ed Conde, New England Riders Ep. 61: Steven Goode, Great American Scenic Byway Tour benefiting the Parkinson’s Foundation Ep. 60: Eric Trow, Stayin’ Safe Ep. 59: Nick Ienatsch, Yamaha Champions Riding School Ep. 58: Inna Thorn and Tim James, Backcountry Discovery Routes Ep. 57: Tim Card, Leukemia and Lymphoma Society Fundraiser Ep. 56: Kyle Petty, Kyle Petty Charity Ride Across America Ep. 55: Guillermo Cornejo, Riders-Share.com Ep. 54: Kevin Duke, Editor-in-Chief of American Rider Ep. 53: Killboy, Killboy.com Ep. 52: Perry Steed, OperationPurpose.net Ep. 51: Forrest Hobbs, TransAmerica Trail “purist” Ep. 50: Dave Scott, Part 3 on the TransAmerica Trail Ep. 49: Gina ‘Brooklyn’ Neumann, Leather and Lace MC Ep. 48: Dave Scott on the TransAmerica Trail Ep. 47: Neale Bayly, motojournalist and philanthropist Ep. 46: Dave Scott, TransAmerica Trail Part 1 Ep. 45: C. Jane Taylor, author of Spirit Traffic Ep. 44: Moshe K. Levy, Moto Mouth Moshe Ep. 43: Can Akkaya, Superbike-Coach.com Ep. 42: Andre LaPlante, MotoVentures Ep. 41: Scott A. Williams, writer and contributor to Rider Ep. 40: Chris Peterman, Director of Motorcycles at CFMOTO USA Ep. 39: Hayley Bell, Founder and President of Global Business Development for Women Riders World Relay Ep. 38: Eric Trow, Rider Contributing Editor and Stayin’ Safe Principal Ep. 37: Bill Dragoo, Dragoo Adventure Riding Training (DART) Ep. 36: Gordon McCall, Director of Motorsports for The Quail Motorcycle Gathering Ep. 35: Rennie Scaysbrook, Pikes Peak record holder, motorcycle journalist, and racer Ep. 34: Cat MacLeod of Leod Escapes Motorcycle “Track and Tour” Ep. 33: Inna Thorn and Tim James of Backcountry Discovery Routes Ep. 32: C. Jane Taylor, author of Spirit Traffic Ep. 31: Alan Wilzig, motorcycle collector and owner of Wilzig Racing Manor Ep. 30: Scott Moreno, founder and owner of IMTBike Motorcycle Tours and Rentals Ep. 29: Greg Rice, long-distance rider and Iron Butt Rally competitor Ep. 28: Brian Case, Director of the Barber Advanced Design Center at the Barber Vintage Motorsports Museum Ep. 27: Steven Goode, motorcyclist who completed the Great American Deli Schlep to support MAZON Ep. 26: Nancy Gerloff and Mark Augustyn, creators of Mimi and Moto: The Motorcycle Monkeys Ep. 25: Jess Stone, designer of the K9 Moto Cockpit and founder of Ruffly Ep. 24: Eddie Braun, Hollywood stuntman who completed Evel Knievel’s Snake River Canyon jump, and star of the film “Stuntman” Ep. 23: Ryan McFarland, founder and CEO of Strider Bikes and All Kids Bike advocate Ep. 22: Americade interview with Bill, Gini, and Christian Dutcher Ep. 21: Peter Starr, motorcycle filmmaker, author, and MotoStarr podcast host Ep. 20: Jon DelVecchio, founder of Street Skills and author of “Cornering Confidence” Ep. 19: Lauren Trantham, founder of Ride My Road Ep. 18: Keith Code, founder and director of California Superbike School Ep. 17: Valerie Thompson, world’s fastest female motorcycle racer Ep. 16: Wayne Rainey, president of MotoAmerica and a motorcycle racing legend Ep. 15: Longhaulpaul (Paul Pelland), Chasing the Cure: a million-mile motorcycle journey for MS Ep. 14: Andy Goldfine, Aerostich founder and Ride to Work Day advocate Ep. 13: Dr. Gregory W. Frazier, America’s #1 extreme motorcycle adventurer Ep. 12: Daniel Calderon, Curator of Exhibitions at SFO Museum Ep. 11: Peter Jones, Rider columnist and author of The Bad Editor Ep. 10: Christian Dutcher, Director of Americade and Touratech DirtDaze Rally Ep. 09: Melissa Holbrook Pierson, author of The Perfect Vehicle Ep. 08: Rainer Buck, CEO of Edelweiss Bike Travel Ep. 07: Michael Lock, CEO of AMA Pro Racing Ep. 06: Alonzo Bodden, motorcycle enthusiast and comedian Ep. 05: Paul D’Orleans, publisher of The Vintagent Ep. 04: Eric Trow, Rider columnist and owner, Stayin’ Safe Advanced Riding Training Ep. 03: Clement Salvadori, traveling motorcyclist and Rider contributor Ep. 02: Kevin Wing, world-class motorcycle photographer and Rider contributor Ep. 01: Robert Pandya and Discover the Ride at the Progressive International Motorcycle Shows The post Eric Trow, Contributing Editor | Ep. 82 Rider Magazine Insider Podcast appeared first on Rider Magazine.

Former Fox News host Jeanine Pirro has advanced toward securing a long-term appointment as the chief federal prosecutor in Washington, D.C., following a Senate committee vote on July 17th to move her nomination forward.