Echosmith er en amerikansk pop-gruppe bestående af de tre søskende Graham, Noah og Sydney Sierota. Deres første album Talking Dreams, udkom den 1. oktober 2013. I 2016 forlod deres bror Jamie Sierota bandet for at hellige sig sit barn.

Diskografi

Referencer

Eksterne henvisninger

Musikgrupper fra USA
Musikgrupper fra 2009

Echosmith


(109435) Giraud est un astéroïde de la ceinture principale.

Description
(109435) Giraud est un astéroïde de la ceinture principale. Il fut découvert le  à Goodricke-Pigott par Roy A. Tucker. Il présente une orbite caractérisée par un demi-grand axe de 3,19 UA, une excentricité de 0,07 et une inclinaison de 21,4° par rapport à l'écliptique.

Articles connexes
 Liste des planètes mineures (109001-110000)
 Ceinture d'astéroïdes

Références

Planète mineure découverte en 2001
Astéroïde de la ceinture principale
Giraud
Objet céleste découvert par Roy Tucker
Objet céleste découvert à l'observatoire Goodricke-Pigott

(109435) Giraud


Simha Arom (Düsseldorf, 16 de agosto de 1930) es un etnomusicólogo franco-israelí, experto en la música del África central, especialmente de la República Centroafricana.

Arom tuvo en sus primeros contactos con los pigmeos a mediados de la década de 1960, y quedó fascinado por ellos. Entre 1971 y 1987 hizo visitas periódicas a los akas, cuya música estudió y se esforzó por conservar, consciente de cómo la modificación rápida de las formas de vida en África amenazaba con terminar con su tradición oral. En 2003, la tradición oral aka fue proclamada Obra Maestra Oral y Herencia Intangible de la Humanidad por la Unesco.

Aparte de sus estudios africanos, Simha Arom se interesó por otras músicas de la tradición oral, como la liturgia judía (incluida la música de los judíos etíopes, los llamados Beta Israel o falashas) o el buzuki griego.

Ha realizado numerosas grabaciones sonoras y audiovisuales de la polifonía y polirritmia del África Central y de otras tradiciones orales que ha investigado.

Simha Arom es director emérito de investigación en el Centro Nacional de Investigación Científica (CNRS) y miembro de la Sociedad Francesa de Etnomusicología (SFM). Entre los numerosos reconocimientos que ha recibido por su labor, en 2008 recibió el premio de etnomusicología Fumio Koizumi..

Influencia en la música contemporánea
Numerosos compositores contemporáneos se han inspirado en las músicas estudiadas por Arom para sus propias composiciones. Es el caso de Luciano Berio, György Ligeti, Steve Reich, Fabien Levy o Joël Merah.

Publicaciones

Libros
 Contes et chantefables ngbaka-ma'bo (République centrafricaine). París: Selaf, "Bibliothèque" 21-22, 1970.
 Les mimbo, génies du piégeage et le monde surnaturel des Ngbaka-Ma'bo (République centrafricaine). París. Selaf, "Bibliothèque" 44-45, 1975 (en colaboración con Jacqueline M. C. Thomas).
 African Polyphony and Polyrhythm. Structure and Methodology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.
 La fanfare de Bangui. Éditions La Découverte, 2009.

Artículos
Son muy numerosos los artículos científicos publicados por Arom en los que da a conocer sus investigaciones.

Grabaciones sonoras
Arom ha publicado más de treinta discos en los que recoge la música tradicional de distintos pueblos y países, en especial la de los pigmeos africanos y la de Grecia o Israel.

Películas
 L'arc musical ngbaka, 16 mm, blanco y negro, 1970, CNRS-Comité du film ethnographique (11 minutos).
 Les enfants de la danse, 16 mm, color, 1970, CNRS-Comité du film ethnographique (en colaboración con Geneviève Dournon) (13 minutos).
 Ango: une leçon de musique africaine, video, 1997, CNRS Images/Média (36 minutos).

Enlaces externos

Notas

Musicólogos de Francia
Etnomusicólogos
Africanistas
Nacidos en Düsseldorf

Simha Arom


Rise of Nations is a real-time strategy video game developed by Big Huge Games and published by Microsoft Game Studios in May 2003. Designed as a fusion of concepts from turn-based strategy games with the real-time strategy genre, the game's development was led by Brian Reynolds, who founded Big Huge Games following his involvement in the development of the turn-based strategy games Civilization II and Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri. In contrast to previous historical real-time strategy games, Rise of Nations is based on the entirety of history, taking place from the ancient era to the modern age, and features eighteen civilizations, playable across eight ages of world history. The game features several innovations on the real-time strategy genre, introducing novel features such as territory and attrition influenced by the turn-based strategy genre.

Rise of Nations received positive reception upon release, with praise directed to its novel features in the genre and broader scope of gameplay. Several contemporary and retrospective publications have nominated the game in lists of the best strategy games of the year and of all time.

An expansion titled Rise of Nations: Thrones and Patriots, was released in 2004, featuring additional  monuments, nations, governments, and campaigns. A spin-off title with a fantasy theme, Rise of Legends, was released in 2006. Big Huge Games was acquired by 38 Studios in 2009, who sold the rights to Rise of Nations to Microsoft following their closure in 2012. Rise of Nations was published by Microsoft as a digital re-release as Rise of Nations: Extended Edition by developer SkyBox Labs in 2014 for Steam and Xbox.

Gameplay

The core of Rise of Nations'''s gameplay centers around the concept of "territory". The area near the player's settlements is considered their territory, and players may only construct buildings within their territory or that of an ally (with the exception of the Lakota). A nation's borders can be expanded by the creation and expansion of cities  and forts, a technology tree, and obtaining access to certain rare resources. Other technologies and resources cause enemy units within a nation's borders to suffer attrition over time, which can eventually destroy an unsupplied invasion force.

People in Rise of Nations gather resources, or build or repair damaged buildings. All of the six resource types in Rise of Nations are infinite in supply.

Any of the game's nations can be played during any age, regardless of that nation's fate throughout actual history. Each of the 18 civilizations in Rise of Nations has 4 to 8 unique units. Some unique units are based on units that those nations would have, if they were not destroyed in real-life. For example, the Native American nations (the Aztecs, Maya, and Inca) have unique units in the Modern and Information ages which resemble real-world Iberian-South American guerrillas. There are 4 end conditions: capture, territorial superiority, wonder victory, or score victory.

Gameplay focuses heavily on creating a balance between offense, defense, and economy.  Generalship is also needed in this game like most RTS games; this includes a knowledge of the troops and what they are good at fighting. For example, pikemen are better than cannon at killing cavalry. Terrain plays a major part in this game and knowing the terrain is an important asset in battle. Generals can also be created from a fort to aid an army.

Five tactical formations are also available, including the ability to compress or expand the line of battle. When a formation is chosen, the selected units automatically reposition themselves accordingly, typically with faster moving units in the front and slower moving, vulnerable units in the rear.

In a manner similar to chess, slight strategic mistakes early in the game can turn into major tactical problems later on. For example, if a player starts with the nomad setting where no city is built at the start, it is wise to scout for an area that has resources before building a city, for without resources there is no army and the player will lose.

A single-player campaign, Conquer the World, is included in the game. It is comparable to the board game Risk, except that attacks are resolved with a real-time battle, which can last as long as 90 minutes depending upon the scenario. The player can also purchase reinforcements or bonus cards and engage in diplomacy with other nations. Bonus cards and reinforcement cards must be deployed from the Map screen. If the Player attacks a Nation's capital from the Map screen and wins, all of the territory belonging to that Nation come under the control of the Player and that Nation is eliminated. The campaign starts at the Ancient Age and progresses slowly over the course over the campaign to end at the Information Age (present day). During a battle it may be possible to advance to the next available age and upgrade units for the battle.Rise of Nations uses an Elo rating system to rank players.

 Units
There are more than 100 different units in Rise of Nations, ranging from the Ancient Age Hoplite to the Information Age Stealth Bomber. Military units are created at certain structures: the Barracks, Stable/Auto Plant, Siege Factory/Factory, Dock/Shipyard/Anchorage, Airbase, Missile silo, and Fort/Castle/Fortress/Redoubt.

Most Infantry units operate in squads of three, and when a player builds an infantry unit, three soldiers are produced, rather than just one soldier. Exceptions to this rule are: Scout and Special Forces units, armed civilians, flamethrowers, and machine gunners.

Unit types, such as Light Infantry, Heavy Infantry, and Ranged Cavalry, can be upgraded as the player advances through the ages. These upgrades usually represent revolutionary changes in their particular field. For example, the Arquebusier of the Gunpowder Age becomes the Musketeer of the Enlightenment Age, representing the great advantage of flintlock muskets over the earlier matchlock muskets and showing increased attack power and reload speed. Also, each nation gets its own set of unique units. For example, the Greeks can build Companion cavalry; the Russians can build Red Guards infantry and T-80 tanks; the British can build Longbowmen, Highlanders, and Avro Lancaster Bombers; and the Germans get the Tiger and Leopard tanks. In the Thrones and Patriots expansion pack, the Americans can build various Marine units.

Because of the wide variety of units in the game, players have the opportunity to create an army customized to their tastes. Most units have a cost that is roughly equal to that of their peers. Additionally, most units use only two resource types, making the creation of diverse armies easier and almost required. Terraced costs further contribute to the incentive for a diverse army, as each additional unit a player creates of a single type will cost slightly more than the last.

 Wonders
Wonders are important buildings in the game. They are real-life structures ranging from the Colossus and the Pyramids to the Supercollider and Space Program. They provide various benefits such as improving resource gathering or making units cheaper. Building wonders can also allow a player to win the game if 'wonder victory' is chosen as a custom setting of the game, as each wonder is worth a preset number of "Wonder Points". Wonders can be built starting in the Classical Age. The only exception is the Egyptians, who can make wonders an age earlier. As you progress in the game the wonders become more expensive, but generate more points. For example, the Supercollider is worth eight times as much as the Pyramids in terms of Wonder Points.

 Multiplayer
GameSpy originally used to host the game but currently does not host the game on their servers. The LAN networking, implemented on both platforms, provides a system for people on the same network to play together. There is also a Direct-IP option, allowing non-networked players to connect without the use of GameSpy. Cross-platform play is not supported between Windows and Mac users.

The game is currently available on Steam which makes multiplayer games simple to create.

 Development and release Rise of Nations was developed by Big Huge Games, a studio founded by lead developer Brian Reynolds in April 2000. Reynolds and other key development staff had previously worked with Sid Meier under MicroProse and Firaxis Games, developing turn-based strategy games including those in the Civilization series. Designer Doug Kaufman stated that the decision of Reynolds to lead an independent project was the belief that turn-based strategy games were "on the decline" and the resistance from Firaxis Games to support a proposal to explore real-time gameplay elements in the Civilization series. Rise of Nations was developed by a team of twenty-five full staff and several additional contractors, with the core team largely composed of the former developers from MicroProse and Firaxis Games.

In August 2000, Big Huge Games secured a publishing deal with Microsoft to develop multiple titles. The game was announced as the flagship project of Big Huge Games and showcased at the Microsoft International Games Festival at Las Vegas in February 2002. Previews of Rise of Nations were also shown by Microsoft at several events, including Gen Con in August 2002, and E3 in May 2003. Microsoft released a public beta of Rise of Nations in February 2003 with a competition to receive one of 1,000 beta copies of the game. In March 2003, Microsoft announced a minor delay of the game from the originally planned release date of April 22 to May 20 to allow the development team to refine the game. The gold master of Rise of Nations was finalised in April 2003, and released on May 20 for North America and May 23 for Europe.

 Design

The development process for Rise of Nations involved considerable use of "prototyping and iteration" to introduce novel features to the real-time strategy format. Lead developer Brian Reynolds stated that the game was developed by brainstorming "ten random ideas" of "cool things to do in a real-time game...those things that didn't work we took out, and some of them worked really well." Reynolds stated that the inclusion of attrition, national borders, and city capture were features adopted from the turn-based strategy game genre. One idea abandoned in early development, the inclusion of different models of government, later became a core component of the Thrones and Patriots expansion. In other areas, prototyping led to refining and "radical scaling back" aspects of gameplay that were not working, including a complex technology tree, described by Reynolds as "a disaster" and "totally unworkable", simplifying the design of technology to be "more distinct" and "exclusive".Rise of Nations was developed with the core design objective of ensuring that rounds of the game could be played within a short timeframe. Brian Reynolds stated that Microsoft required Big Huge Games to demonstrate the "feasibility" of the game's progression, as "no-one could imagine very well that you could do a history game of all of history and not have it take six hours to play. To this end, they even had software milestones to achieve along the way to prove (the game) could play within an hour." Reynolds stated that some of the key challenges of implementing this pacing were "developing enough different types of artwork" between eras, and creating balanced gameplay across the large amount of unit types in the game, acknowledging "we erred in making aircraft and the offensive units in general too powerful".

The 'Conquer the World' campaign of Rise of Nations formed a major undertaking in the development process, taking over six months to integrate in the game. Designer and scenario editor Ike Ellis stated that the developers abandoned an original plan to involve a chain of linear single player scenarios, stating the idea was "too boring" and that the game lacked "graphic scale small enough to make it work around individual characters". Ellis stated that the design of the mode was heavily influenced by the board game Diplomacy, with the use of supply centers forming the foundation of the mode. Producer Tim Train stated that combat in Rise of Nations was developed with an "epic" and "more strategic" scope, and determined the preference in gameplay design towards "directing armies and troops" and away from "a smaller focus with only a few units on the screen" and the inclusion of special units and abilities.

 Audio

The soundtrack of Rise of Nations was composed by Duane Decker, who had previously worked on sound for the MechWarrior series of games. Decker described the soundtrack as a "combination of world music with unique cinematic music styles", featuring "some very expressive performances on rare, ethnic
instruments and mixes in modern elements." Decker's composition process involved considerable research of "unfamiliar" world music styles, stating "I listened to everything from Irish whistle, to Russian balalaika, to Tuvan throat singers", and was composed as a combination of sampled and live instruments. A DVD of the soundtrack, containing a Dolby Digital 5.1 and DTS 5.1 surround sound stereo mix of the game opening cinematics, and production interviews, was released on June 24, 2003. The soundtrack was released by Sumthing Else, the company of musician and executive producer, Nile Rodgers, who had expressed interest in releasing soundtracks of Microsoft titles. The soundtrack is unique as the first video game soundtrack to be released on the DVD format in surround sound.

 Reception

 Sales Rise of Nations and its expansion pack Rise of Nations: Thrones and Patriots have received combined sales of over 1 million copies. In the United States, Rise of Nations sold 420,000 copies and earned $15.9 million by August 2006, after its release in May 2003. It was the country's 35th best-selling computer game between January 2000 and August 2006. Combined sales of all Rise of Nations-related games released between January 2000 and August 2006 had reached 700,000 units in the United States by the latter date.

 Critical reviews Rise of Nations received a unanimously positive reception from critics, with review aggregation website Metacritic stating the game received "generally favorable reviews" at an average score of 89%. Many critics praised the innovative design of the game for its fusion of real-time strategy game with turn-based strategy features. Writing for Eurogamer, Rob Fahey praised the game as an "innovative and massively enjoyable strategy title that incorporates many of the best elements of two well-loved genres...and this combination has yielded one of the most accessible, playable and deep strategy games of all time." Elliott Chin of GameSpot stated the "two distinct styles of strategy have come together in the form of a truly excellent game", stating "what really sets Rise of Nations apart are all the new concepts it introduces..(making) the game deeper and in many ways more enjoyable than any other real-time strategy game to date." PC Gamer stated that "Rise of Nations genuinely pushes the genre forward by introducing, and then perfectly using, some very cool gameplay mechanics such as the impact of national borders, attrition, alliances, and how cities are captured."

The 'Conquer the World' mode of Rise of Nations received particular attention. Writing for GameSpy, William Abner stated that the mode was "an absolute blast...it's a great minigame that an infinite amount of replay value for the solo gamer. It helps make Rise of Nations a complete game." Rob Fahey of Eurogamer stated the mode was "an excellent substitute for a linear campaign mode, although we're a little disappointed at how simple the turn-based boardgame play is." GamePro stated that the mode was a "great twist on the usual story mode", but critiqued the "deja vu" and "lack of variety" after successive rounds in this mode. Elliott Chin of GameSpot praised the mode as "enjoyable, if a bit simple, (as) it adds a substantial single-player component to the game," whilst noting that "this campaign, which is really just a glorified version of Risk, isn't as developed as the actual real-time game."

Reviewers were also mixed on the ease of use of combat mechanics of the game. Whilst IGN praised the "extremely good interface", "commonsense approach to grouping units" and "automation applied to non-military units", IGN noted that "things can become pretty unwieldy in massive battles", describing multiplayer battles as a "nearly mindless clickfest." Di Luo of Computer Gaming World observed combat to feature too many "overwhelming" mechanics, stating "throw in attrition, supply, spies and commandos into the mix, and you'll probably need four hands and eight eyes to manage everything properly at normal speed settings." Rob Fahey of Eurogamer noted the game's speed "makes it a little too tricky to pull off tactical moves, with frantic mouse clicking required in combat to get your units to perform flanking manoeuvres and the like."

Some critics of the game noted that Rise of Nations lacked depth in its variety of ages and nations due to the broad scope of the game. GameSpy remarked that the game was "bloated with features, options and units." Game Informer critiqued the variation of abilities across nations, stating "such a varied array of nationalities is a beautiful thing, but not all nations are created equal. Some have excellent bonuses incorporated with them, and others are decidedly ho-hum." Similarly IGN stated "yes, there are many races available, but none of them have a personality as such...(they) look the same, since they only employ three different graphic sets...so the racial distinctions feel abstract, rather than part of an immersive experience." However, John Dewhurst for PC PowerPlay noted that "harsh critics could label its diversity too light to be truly immersive and they may have a point. However, for once, a game trying to do too many things is its greatest asset."

 Accolades

 GameSpy 2003 Game of the Year - PC RTS
 GameSpy Top 10 RTS Games
 Best PC Game of 2003 by GameSpotGameSpot named Rise of Nations the best computer game of May 2003.Rise of Nations won PC Gamer USs 2003 "Best Real-Time Strategy Game" award, and was a runner-up in the magazine's "Best Game of 2003" category, which went to Knights of the Old Republic. The publication's William Harms called it "a blueprint for the genre's future" and "how RTS games should be made from here on out". Computer Games Magazine named Rise of Nations the fifth-best computer game of 2003, and presented it with an award for "Best Interface". The editors wrote that the game "succeeds in a big way, and is about as addictive as they come." The editors of Computer Gaming World nominated Rise of Nations for their 2003 "Strategy Game of the Year" award, but it lost to Age of Wonders: Shadow Magic.

During the 7th Annual Interactive Achievement Awards, the Academy of Interactive Arts & Sciences nominated Rise of Nations for four awards: "Game of the Year", "Computer Game of the Year", "Computer Strategy Game of the Year", and "Outstanding Innovation in Computer Gaming".

 Retrospective reception Rise of Nations has received a favorable retrospective reception. Several publications cited the game as one of the best strategy games of all time, including PC Gamer, who praised the game's "smartly-introduced elements from turn-based strategy games like Civilization, and Rock Paper Shotgun, praising it as a "complex and rewarding game" and "the closest thing to a real-time take on Civilization that we've seen", and PC PowerPlay, who praised the game as "cohesive and elegant", stating "the real accomplishment is that it manages to make a flowing tech tree from (the) Stone Age to (the) Information Age and keeps the action pumping the whole time."

The game was included in the 2010 book 1001 Video Games You Must Play Before You Die, with contributor Alec Meer praising the game for the "speed, focus, and its tightness" of its gameplay, stating "the key is that it takes the core model of turn-based strategy games...then implants it at the warlike heart of a real-time strategy game." Also writing for Rock Paper Shotgun, Nate Crowley stated Rise of Nations was an underappreciated game that "just hasn't stuck around in the collective understanding of the RTS pantheon, praising the game as "well-balanced, diverse in its offering of civ-specific perks, and a superb choice for fast-paced, messy multiplayer games."

 Legacy

In a postmortem of the game in 2003, Brian Reynolds discussed that the developer was "extremely happy with how Rise of Nations turned out", highlighting the game's development team and design approach, and the level of support from publisher Microsoft. Reynolds stated that the failure to identify a "clear idea of the kind of game we were making" in the first year of development, and difficulty with the design of linear scenarios leading to the decision to design the Conquer The World mode, were major lessons learned in the development period for the game. In a retrospective for Rock Paper Shotgun in 2007, Reynolds stated he was "hugely proud of" the game, linking the game's commercial success to its innovations on the "merging of two genres", whilst noting the game featured some minor disappointments, including the "cool but half-way polished" city capture system, and the potential to have developed "better graphics" for the game.Rise of Nations was influential to the development of Age of Empires 4. Executive producer Shannon Loftis stated that as the game was influential as a "spiritual successor" to the Age of Empires franchise, and lessons learned from its development assisted in setting expectations for the content of Age of Empires 4.

 Expansions and sequels

 Thrones and Patriots

On April 28, 2004, Big Huge Games released the expansion pack Rise of Nations: Thrones and Patriots. The game includes several additional nations, units, wonders, and campaigns, and new features, including the selection of governments that influence gameplay mechanics. In October 2004, a Gold Edition of the game was released for Windows and Macintosh, combining the original game with the Thrones and Patriots expansion.

 Rise of Legends

In May 2006, Big Huge Games released Rise of Nations: Rise of Legends, a fantasy-themed spin-off with similar gameplay.

 Extended Edition Rise of Nations: Extended Edition was an enhanced re-release of the main game and its expansion released by SkyBox Labs for Steam on June 12, 2014, and for the Windows 10 Store on September 14, 2017, including Xbox Live achievements and cross-play with the Steam version. Graphical changes to the game included updated textures, lighting and water. Other changes to the game included Steamworks integration, adding cloud saves, Steam Trading Cards, achievements, Twitch integration and multiplayer with Elo ranked matches to the game.

 Cancelled sequels

Following release, Microsoft cancelled its deal with Big Huge Games to produce successive Rise of Nations titles, including plans to develop Rise of Nations 2. In addition, 38 Studios developed an unreleased Rise of Nations game, titled Rise of Nations: Tactics, following their acquisition of Big Huge Games in 2009. Tactics was a completed but unreleased title, discovered following the examination of 38 Studios servers by liquidators prior to auction of the company's assets. Developer Stuart Jeff, who worked on Tactics for the studio, described the game was a mobile turn-based strategy game for iOS inspired by Advance Wars with multiplayer and social networking features, but left the studio before the game was complete. Development was later led by Andy Johnson, who stated the game needed "three months of proper development time" for the game to launch at the time 38 Studios ceased operations in 2012. Assets and intellectual property for the Rise of Nations'' games were sold to an unknown buyer in December 2013, which later reverted to Microsoft.

Notes

References

External links
 Official website for Rise of Nations: Extended Edition
 Rise of Nations: Gold Edition, from MacSoft

2003 video games
Microsoft games
Microsoft franchises
MacOS games
Panhistorical video games
Real-time strategy video games
Video games developed in the United States
Video games with expansion packs
Video games with historical settings
Windows games
Video games with Steam Workshop support
MacSoft games
Multiplayer and single-player video games
SkyBox Labs games
Big Huge Games games
Westlake Interactive games

Rise of Nations


O experimento de Eddington foi um teste observacional da teoria da relatividade geral de Albert Einstein, organizado pelos astrônomos britânicos Frank Watson Dyson e Arthur Stanley Eddington em 1919. As observações foram do eclipse solar de 29 de maio de 1919 e foram realizadas por duas expedições, uma para a ilha africana de Príncipe e outra para a cidade brasileira de Sobral. O objetivo das expedições era medir o desvio gravitacional da luz das estrelas que passava perto do Sol. O valor desse desvio havia sido previsto por Einstein em um artigo de 1911; no entanto, essa previsão inicial se mostrou incorreta porque se baseava em uma teoria incompleta da relatividade geral. Einstein posteriormente melhorou sua previsão após finalizar sua teoria em 1915 e obter a solução de suas equações por Karl Schwarzschild. Após o retorno das expedições, os resultados foram apresentados por Eddington à Royal Society de Londres e, após alguma deliberação, foram aceitos. A ampla cobertura da imprensa dos resultados levou à fama mundial de Einstein e suas teorias.

Eddington foi o maior divulgador em sua época da relatividade no Reino Unido. Ele conhecia a fundo as entranhas da teoria. Ele a usou em seus trabalhos. É provável que ele não tivesse dúvidas sobre sua validade. Talvez, ele acreditasse que experimentos posteriores, mais precisos, acabariam comprovando-a - em tempo: isso só aconteceu muito depois.

Esse experimento foi um dos primeiros a confirmar a relatividade geral e a mostrar que a gravitação de Newton era apenas um caso específico da teoria mais geral. O experimento também teve um grande impacto na divulgação científica e na popularização da física moderna.

Contexto
A relatividade geral de Einstein ainda não era amplamente aceita pela comunidade científica e pelo público em geral. A teoria havia sido publicada em 1916, mas enfrentava dificuldades para ser testada experimentalmente, especialmente durante a Primeira Guerra Mundial (1914-1918), que limitava a comunicação e a colaboração entre os cientistas. Além disso, a teoria desafiava os conceitos clássicos da física newtoniana e exigia um alto grau de abstração matemática para ser compreendida.

Nesse cenário, o experimento de Eddington foi uma oportunidade única de verificar uma das previsões mais surpreendentes da relatividade geral: o desvio da luz pela gravidade. O eclipse solar de 1919 oferecia a chance de observar as estrelas próximas ao disco solar e medir o quanto elas pareciam se deslocar de suas posições originais devido à curvatura do espaço-tempo causada pela massa do Sol. Esse efeito era muito pequeno e só podia ser detectado com instrumentos precisos e condições favoráveis.

O experimento também teve um aspecto político e ideológico, pois envolvia a cooperação entre cientistas britânicos e alemães em um momento de tensão pós-guerra. Eddington era um pacifista convicto e admirador das ideias de Einstein, enquanto Dyson era mais cético e pragmático. Ambos tiveram que enfrentar dificuldades técnicas, logísticas e burocráticas para realizar as expedições e analisar os dados.

O experimento de Eddington foi um marco na história da ciência, pois foi o primeiro a confirmar a relatividade geral e a dar visibilidade mundial a Einstein e sua teoria. O experimento também estimulou o desenvolvimento da astrofísica e da cosmologia modernas, que passaram a usar a relatividade geral como ferramenta para estudar os fenômenos mais extremos do universo.

Teoria

A teoria do experimento de Eddington foi a teoria da relatividade geral de Albert Einstein. Essa teoria é uma generalização da teoria da relatividade especial, que trata dos fenômenos físicos envolvendo objetos que se movem com velocidades próximas à da luz. A relatividade geral incorpora a gravitação como uma propriedade do espaço-tempo, que é a estrutura geométrica que descreve o palco onde ocorrem os eventos físicos. Segundo a relatividade geral, o espaço-tempo é curvo e dinâmico, e sua curvatura é determinada pela distribuição de massa e energia no universo. A curvatura do espaço-tempo, por sua vez, afeta o movimento dos corpos e da luz, gerando os fenômenos gravitacionais que observamos.

Expedições e observações
Sobral

Príncipe

Ver também
Einstein and Eddington – telefilme britânico de 2008

Experiências científicas
Expedições científicas
Relatividade geral
História da ciência

Experimento de Eddington


Bottom-up may refer to:

 Bottom-up analysis, a fundamental analysis technique in accounting and finance
 Bottom-up parsing, a computer science strategy
 Bottom-up processing, in Pattern recognition (psychology)
 Bottom-up theories of galaxy formation and evolution
 Bottom-up tree automaton, in data structures
 Bottom-up integration testing, in software testing
 Top-down and bottom-up design, strategies of information processing and knowledge ordering
 Bottom-up proteomics, a laboratory technique involving proteins
 Bottom Up Records, a record label founded by Shyheim
 Bottom-up approach of the Holocaust, a viewpoint on the causes of the Holocaust

See also
 Bottoms Up (disambiguation)
 Top-down (disambiguation)
 Capsizing, when a boat is turned upside down
 Mundanity, a precursor of social movements
 Social movements, bottom-up societal reform
 Turtling (sailing)

Bottom-up


آلة تبريد (تستعمل إحدى دورتي التثليج الأساسيتين)
 التبريد تقليل درجة الحرارة بشكل عام، مثلا باستعمال مبادل حراري

التبريد (توضيح)


Vermont/Sunset es una estación subterránea en la línea B del Metro de Los Ángeles y es administrada por la Autoridad de Transporte Metropolitano del Condado de Los Ángeles. La estación se encuentra localizada en la Avenida Vermont y Sunset Boulevard en East Hollywood, California.

Conexiones de autobús
Servicios del Metro
Metro Local: 2, 175, 204, 206, 217, 302
Metro Rapid: 754

Otros servicios locales
LADOT DASH: Hollywood
LADOT Griffith Observatory Shuttle (fines de semana solamente)

Referencias

Enlaces externos

 Información general de la estación

Estaciones de Metro de Estados Unidos inauguradas en 1999
Estaciones de la Línea B (Metro de Los Ángeles)

Vermont/Sunset (Metro de Los Ángeles)


Der Dom Santa Maria Assunta e San Liberale in Castelfranco Veneto wurde 1724–1746 nach Plänen von Francesco Maria Preti an der Stelle einer romanischen Kirche erbaut und ist ein Beispiel klassizistischer Architektur.
Die Statuen auf dem kleinen Kirchplatz, Piazza San Liberale, stammen von Orazio Marinali (1643–1720).

Lage und Namensgebung
Der Dom liegt in der befestigten Altstadt Castelfrancos, direkt an der Stadtmauer. Er ist Maria Himmelfahrt und dem heiligen Liberale geweiht.

Architektur
Der Dom ist das Hauptwerk des zur Zeit der Erbauung 23-jährigen Pretis, dessen Grabplatte sich im Kirchenschiff befindet. Preti demonstrierte an ihm die Theorie des harmonischen Mittels, wonach z. B. die Höhe des Mittelschiffes der harmonische Mittelwert zwischen seiner Länge und Breite ist. Der Kirchenbau ist von der schlichten Formensprache Andrea Palladios inspiriert, wie sie sich insbesondere bei Il Redentore in Venedig zeigt, und kombiniert mit klassizistischer Kühle. Der Dom hat den Grundriss eines lateinischen Kreuzes mit einschiffigem Kirchenschiff und Kuppel über der Vierung.

1892 bis 1893 wurde die Fassade nach einem Entwurf Pio Finazzis verändert. Zwei Paare dorischer Halbsäulen in Kolossalordnung, die auf hohen Säulenpostamenten aufgesockelt sind, gliedern den dominanten portikusartigen Mittelrisalit der Fassade in drei Teile und tragen den Architrav mit  Triglyphenfries. Darunter befindet sich in einem Tondo die lateinische Inschrift: MARIAE D.N. CAELO RECEPTAE AC D.LIBERALI PATR. Die Fassade wird gekrönt von einem Dreiecksgiebel mit drei Statuen, der Jungfrau Maria und Heiligen. Die einzige Öffnung ist das Eingangsportal, das ebenfalls mit einem einfachen Dreiecksgiebel abschließt und mit dem Platz durch eine Freitreppe verbunden ist.
Der Campanile aus Ziegelmauerwerk mit Zinnenkranz war ursprünglich ein Wehrturm, dem ein Glockengeschoss mit rundbogigen Schallöffnungen aufgesetzt wurde.

Ausstattung
In den Seitenschiffen befinden sich zahlreiche Altäre. Der Dom beherbergt Kunstwerke über die Pala di Castelfranco von Giorgione aus der Cappella Costanzo des ursprünglichen Baus hinaus. Das Altarbild des Hochaltars in der Apsis vom Hauptaltar des Vorgängerbaus zeigt Abstieg Christi in den Limbo (1551) von Giovanni Battista Ponchini (1500–1570), einem Mitarbeiter Paolo Veroneses. In der rechten Apsis befindet sich das Martyrium des Heiligen Sebastian von Palma il Giovane. Der Altar im rechten Querschiff mit der Darstellung der von Wolken und Engeln getragenen Himmelfahrt Mariä und den Heiligen Liberal und Johannes Nepomuk stammt vom Bildhauer Giuseppe Torretti (1694–1743), dem Lehrmeister Antonio Canovas. Am ersten Altar hinten links ist das Martyrium des Heiligen Bartholomäus von Antonio Zanchi zu sehen.

Die Sakristei links hinter der Apsis beherbergt eine umfangreiche Bildergalerie, die vorwiegend Bilder aus Castelfranker Kirchen enthält, die im 19. Jahrhundert profaniert worden sind,  u. a. aus dem Vorgängerbau San  Liberale. Hauptwerke sind Werke Veroneses aus der abgebrochenen Villa Soranzo.
sieben Freskenfragmente (1551) von Paolo Veronese für die Villa Soranza Sanmichelis in S. Andrea Oltre il Muson, die von Filippo Balbi 1815 vor dem Abbruch der Villa entnommen wurden. Es sind dies Abbildungen der Justitia (Gerechtigkeit) und Temperantia (Mäßigung) an der rechten Wand und das Deckenfresko Tempo e Fama (Zeit und Ruhm).

Christus in Emmaus von Paolo Piazza (1560–1620)
Darbringung Marias im Tempel von Palma il Giovane.

Orgel
Die Orgel, die auf den beiden Sängertribünen aufgestellt ist, wurde 1784 von dem Orgelbauer Gaetano Callido erbaut, und im Jahre 1908 durch den Orgelbauer Domenico Malvestio umfassend restauriert. Das rein mechanische Instrument hat 22 Register auf zwei Manualwerken und Pedal.

Literatur
Reclams Kunstführer. Oberitalien Ost. Bearb. von Erich Egg, Erich Hubala u. a. Stuttgart 1965. S. 117–120.
Castelfranco Veneto von Lanfranco Lionella, Giacinto Ceccetto und Gabriela Delphini Cittadella 2008 S. 39–46

Weblinks

Città del Castelfranco Veneto – Duomo

Einzelnachweise

Castelfranco Veneto
Castelfranco Veneto
Castelfranco Veneto
Erbaut in den 1740er Jahren
Klassizistisches Bauwerk in Venetien
Castelfranco
Castelfranco Dom
Castelfranco Veneto

Dom von Castelfranco Veneto


Apisa este un gen de insecte lepidoptere din familia Arctiidae.

Specii

 Apisa alberici
 Apisa arabica
 Apisa bourgognei
 Apisa cana
 Apisa canescens
 Apisa cinereocostata
 Apisa cleta
 Apisa connexa
 Apisa crenophylax
 Apisa endoxantha
 Apisa fontainei
 Apisa grisescens
 Apisa hildae
 Apisa histrio
 Apisa holobrunnea
 Apisa homoerotica
 Apisa homopunctata
 Apisa kamitugensis
 Apisa kivensis
 Apisa lamborni
 Apisa lippensi
 Apisa manettii
 Apisa metarctiodes
 Apisa microcanescens
 Apisa nyasae
 Apisa pallota
 Apisa perversa
 Apisa rendalli
 Apisa sjoestedti
 Apisa subargentea
 Apisa subcanescens
 Apisa tristigma

Referințe

Legături externe

Apisa

Apisa


The Duchy of Burgundy (; ; , ) emerged in the 9th century as one of the successors of the ancient Kingdom of the Burgundians, which after its conquest in 532 had formed a constituent part of the Frankish Empire. Upon the 9th-century partitions, the French remnants of the Burgundian kingdom were reduced to a ducal rank by King Robert II of France in 1004. Robert II's son and heir, King Henry I of France, inherited the duchy but ceded it to his younger brother Robert in 1032. Other portions had passed to the Imperial Kingdom of Burgundy-Arles, including the County of Burgundy (Franche-Comté).

Robert became the ancestor of the ducal House of Burgundy, a cadet branch of the royal Capet dynasty, ruling over a territory that roughly conformed to the borders and territories of the modern region of Burgundy (Bourgogne). Upon the extinction of the Burgundian male line with the death of Duke Philip I in 1361, the duchy reverted to King John II of France and the royal House of Valois. The Burgundian duchy was absorbed in a larger territorial complex after 1363, when King John II ceded the duchy to his younger son Philip. With his marriage with Countess Margaret III of Flanders, he laid the foundation for a Burgundian State which expanded further north in the Low Countries collectively known as the Burgundian Netherlands. Upon further acquisitions of the County of Burgundy, Holland, and Luxemburg, the House of Valois-Burgundy came into possession of numerous French and imperial fiefs stretching from the western Alps to the North Sea, in some ways reminiscent of the Middle Frankish realm of Lotharingia.

The Burgundian State, in its own right, was one of the largest ducal territories that existed at the time of the emergence of Early Modern Europe. After just over one hundred years of Valois-Burgundy rule, however, the last duke, Charles the Bold, rushed to the Burgundian Wars and was killed in the 1477 Battle of Nancy. The extinction of the dynasty led to the absorption of the duchy itself into the French crown lands by King Louis XI, while the bulk of the Burgundian possessions in the Low Countries passed to Charles' daughter, Mary, and her Habsburg descendants.

Origins

The Duchy of Burgundy was a successor of the earlier Kingdom of the Burgundians, which evolved out of territories ruled by the Burgundians, an East Germanic tribe that arrived in Gaul in the 5th century. The Burgundians settled in the area around Dijon, Chalon-sur-Saône, Mâcon, Autun and Châtillon-sur-Seine, and gave the name to the region. The Kingdom of the Burgundians was annexed by the Merovingian King of the Franks, Childebert I, in 534, following their defeat by the Franks. It was recreated, however, on several occasions when Frankish territories were redivided between the sons on the death of a Frankish king.

As part of the Kingdom of the Franks, Burgundy maintained a semi-autonomous existence, with the Burgundians maintaining their own law code, the Loi Gombette. However, southern Burgundy was pillaged by the Saracen invasion of the 8th century. When Charles Martel drove the invaders out, he divided Burgundy into four commands: Arles-Burgundy, Vienne-Burgundy, Alamanic Burgundy and Frankish Burgundy. He appointed his brother Childebrand governor of Frankish Burgundy. Under the Carolingians, Burgundian separatism lessened and Burgundy became a purely geographical term, referring only to the area of the counties of the former Burgundy.

Both the Duchy of Burgundy and the County of Burgundy emerged from these counties, aided by the collapse of Carolingian centralism and the division of the Frankish domains brought about by the Partition of Verdun in 843. In the midst of this confusion, Guerin of Provence attached himself to Charles the Bald, youngest son of King Louis the Pious of the Franks, and aided him in the Battle of Fontenay against Charles's eldest brother, the Emperor Lothar. When the Frankish kingdom in the west was divided along the boundary of the Saône and Meuse (dividing geographical Burgundy in the process), Guerin was rewarded for his services by the king by being granted the administration of the counties of Chalon and Nevers, in which he was by custom expected to appoint viscounts to rule as his deputies. As a vital military defender of the West Frankish border, Guerin was sometimes known by the Latin term for "leader" – dux or "duke".

Beneficiary dukes

By the time of Richard the Justiciar (d. 921), the Duchy of Burgundy was beginning to emerge. Richard was officially recognised by the king as a duke; he also stood as individual count of each county he held (if it was not held on his behalf by a viscount). As Duke of Burgundy, he was able to wield an increasing amount of power over his territory. The term that came to be applied to the collective body of a duke's territory was ducatus. Included in the Richard's ducatus were the regions of Autunais, Beaunois, Avalois, Lassois, Dijonais, Memontois, Attuyer, Oscheret, Auxois, Duesmois, Auxerrois, Nivernais, Chaunois and Massois. Under Richard, these territories were given law and order, protected from the Normans, and served as a haven for persecuted monks.

Under Rudolph of France (also Raoul or Ralph), the son of Richard, Burgundy was briefly catapulted to a position of prominence in France, since he became King of France in 923 after acceding to the Burgundian territories in 921. It was from his territories in Burgundy that he drew the resources needed to fight those who challenged his right to rule.

Under Hugh the Black (d. 952) came the beginning of what would be a long and troubled saga for Burgundy. His neighbours were the Robertian family, who held the title of Duke of Francia. This family, wanting to improve their standing in France and against the Carolingian kings, attempted to subject the duchy to the suzerainty of their own duchy. They failed; eventually, when they appeared close to success, they were forced to scrap the scheme and instead maintain Burgundy as a separate duchy. Two brothers of Hugh Capet, the first Capetian King of France, took up the rule of Burgundy as duke. First Otto and then Henry the Venerable maintained the duchy's independence, but the death of the latter without children proved a defining moment in the history of the duchy.

Succession crisis of 1002
Henry the Venerable died in 1002 leaving two potential heirs: his nephew, Robert the Pious, King of France, and his stepson, Otto-William, count of Mâcon (kingdom of France) and count of Burgundy (kingdom of Burgundy), whom Henry had adopted. Robert claimed the duchy by his dual rights as feudal overlord and nearest blood-relative of the deceased. Otto-William disputed his claim as a potential heir, starting a war with the help of his son-in-law, Landry count of Nevers.

Had the two Burgundys been united, history would undoubtedly have taken a different course; a Burgundy united under the German Otto-William would have been within the sphere of influence of the Holy Roman Empire and would have affected the balance of power between the French and the Germans. However, it was not to be; although it took him thirteen years of bitter and prolonged battle, Robert eventually secured the duchy for the French crown by gaining control of all the Burgundian counties west of the Saône, including Dijon; prospects of a united Burgundy evaporated, and the duchy became irreversibly French in outlook.

For a time, the duchy formed part of the royal domain; but the French crown could not hope at this time to administer such a volatile territory. The realities of power combined with Capetian family feuding: Robert the Pious gave the territory to his younger son and namesake, Robert I, Duke of Burgundy. When King Henry I of France, acceding in difficult circumstances (1031), found it necessary to secure the loyalty of Robert, his brother, he further enhanced the rights given to his brother (1032). Robert was to be Duke of Burgundy; as ruler of the duchy, he would "enjoy the freehold thereof", and have the right "to pass it on to his heirs". Future dukes were to owe allegiance only to the crown of France and be overlords of the duchy, beneath the ultimate authority of the kings of France. Robert gladly agreed to this arrangement, and the era of the Capetian dukes began.

Capetian dukes

Robert found that it was largely a theoretical power that he had been granted. Between the reign of Richard the Justiciar and Henry the Venerable, the duchy had fallen into anarchy, a condition heightened by the war of succession between Robert the Pious and Count Otto-William. The dukes had given away most of their lands to secure the loyalty of their vassals; consequently, they lacked power in the duchy without the support and obedience of their vassals. In addition, the Abbot of Cluny claimed immunity from secular overlords, while the Bishop of Langres was a duke and peer of France.

Robert and his heirs were faced with the task of restoring the ducal demesne and strengthening ducal power. In this, it would be seen, the dukes were well-suited to the task: none were remarkable or outstanding men who swept all opposition away before them; rather, they were persevering, methodical, realistic, able and willing to seize any opportunity presented to them. They used the Law of Escheat to their advantage: Auxois and Duesmois fell into ducal hands through reversion, these feudatories having no heir able to administer them. They purchased both land and vassalage, which built up both the ducal demesne and the number of vassals dependent upon the dukes. They made an income for themselves by demanding cash payments in exchange for recognition of a lord's feudal rights within the duchy, by skillful management of loans from Jewish and Lombard bankers, by the careful administration of feudal dues and by the ready sale of immunities and justice.

The duchy itself benefited from the rule of the Capetians. As time passed, the state was built up and stabilised; a miniature court in imitation of the royal court at Paris grew around the dukes; the Jours Generaux, a replica of the Parlement of Paris sat at Beaune; bailiffs were imposed over the provosts and lords of the manor responsible for local government, while the duchy was divided into five bailiwicks.

The duchy became increasingly involved in the Reconquista in Spain at the end of the eleventh century, campaigning against Muslim taifas and forming marriage alliances with the Spanish royalty. Robert's daughter Constance married King Alfonso VI of León and Castile, and his grandson Henry married Theresa of León to found the Portuguese House of Burgundy. With the advent of First Crusade, the attention of Burgundian dukes shifted to the Holy Land, and Odo I, Duke of Burgundy died during the Crusade of 1101.

Under the competent leadership of Robert II (r. 1271–1306), one of the more notable dukes of the Capetian period, Burgundy reached new levels of political and economic prominence. Previously, the development of the duchy had been impeded by the bestowal of minor lands and titles on younger sons and daughters, diminishing the ducal fisc. Robert firmly ended this practice, stating in his will that he left to his eldest son and heir, Hugh, and after Hugh to his heir, "all the fiefs, former fiefs, seigneuries and revenue... belonging to the duchy". The younger children of Robert would receive only annuities; since these derived from property held by Hugh, these younger children would need to owe liege homage to ensure their income.

Hugh V died in 1315; his brother Odo IV succeeded. Himself the grandson of King Louis IX of France by his mother, Agnes of France, he would also be the brother-in-law of two French kings – Louis X, married to his sister Marguerite, and Philip VI, married to his sister Joan – and the son-in-law of a third, Philip V, whose daughter Joan III, Countess of Burgundy, he married. Previous attempts to gain territory through marriage – Hugh III and the Dauphiné, Odo III and Nivernais, Hugh IV and the Bourbonnais – had failed; Odo IV's wife Joan, however, was sovereign Countess of Burgundy and Artois, and the marriage reunited the Burgundys again.

They were not, however, reunited for long. The marriage of Duke Odo and Countess Joan in 1318 produced only one surviving child, Philip; he married another Joan, the heiress of Auvergne and Boulogne, but they again only produced a single surviving child, Philip I, Duke of Burgundy, also known as Philip of Rouvres. The elder Philip predeceased both of his parents in an accident with a horse in 1346; Countess Joan III followed him to the grave a year later, and the death of Odo IV in 1349 left the survival of the duchy dependent upon the survival of the young duke, a young child of two-and-a-half, and the last of the direct line of descent from Duke Robert I.

By inheritance, Philip of Rouvres was Duke of Burgundy from 1349. He had already been Count of Burgundy and Artois since the death of his grandmother, the Countess Joan of Burgundy and Artois, in 1347. In practice, though, the duke his grandfather had continued to rule over these counties as he had done since his marriage to Countess Joan, Philip of Rouvres being only a baby. With the old duke's death, the duchy and its associated territories were governed by the young duke's mother, Joan I, Countess of Auvergne and Boulogne, and by her second husband, King John the Good of France.

Richer promises were made to the young duke. He could expect to inherit Auvergne and Boulogne on his mother's death, and a marriage was arranged between himself and the young heiress of Flanders, Margaret of Dampierre, who could promise to bring Flanders and Brabant to her husband eventually. By 1361, aged 17, he appeared to be on track to continue the duchy's steady rise to greatness.

It was not to be, however. Philip became ill with the plague, a disease that all but inevitably promised a swift and agonising death. Fully expecting to die, the young duke made his last will and testament on 11 November 1361; ten days later, he was dead, and with him, his dynasty.

Succession crisis of 1361

Even before Philip's death, France and Burgundy had begun considering the knotty problem of the succession. By the terms of his will, the duke had stated that he directed and appointed as heirs to his "county, and to our possessions whatever they may be, those, male and female, who by law or local custom ought or may inherit". Since his domains all practiced succession by primogeniture, there was no question of his dominions passing en bloc to any one man or woman – they had come to Philip of Rouvres by different paths of inheritance, and so by the customs of the territories, they were required to pass to the next in line to inherit in each respective territory.

The counties of Auvergne and Boulogne – inherited by Philip upon his mother's death a year earlier – passed to the next heir, Jean de Boulogne, the brother of Philip's grandfather William XII of Auvergne. The counties of Burgundy and Artois passed to the sister of Philip's grandmother Countess Joan, Margaret of France, herself the grandmother of Philip's young bride Margaret of Dampierre.

The Duchy of Burgundy, however, proved a greater challenge to jurists. In the duchy, as in much of Europe at this time, two principles of inheritance were held valid: that of primogeniture and that of proximity of blood. A case of primogeniture was the succession of the English crown in 1377, which at the death of Edward III was inherited by his grandson Richard, the eldest son of his deceased eldest son Edward, rather than by his son John of Gaunt, the eldest of Edward III's sons still living. A case of proximity of blood was that of Artois in 1302, which had on the death of Count Robert II been inherited by Mahaut, his eldest living daughter, rather than by his grandson Robert, the eldest son of the count's already deceased son. In some cases, the two principles were able to mesh together: in the case of Boulogne and Auvergne, for example, John was the second son of Robert of Auvergne, Philip's great-grandfather, and the nearest ancestor to Philip to have surviving lines of descent following Philip's death. John was therefore both the most senior heir to Robert following Philip's death and also the closest to Robert by descent. In the same manner, Margaret of France was the closest heir by both primogeniture and proximity to her mother, Joan of Châlons, Countess of Burgundy and Artois, Philip's great-grandmother and, again, the nearest ancestor of Philip to have lines of descent surviving the Duke's death.

The situation for the Duchy of Burgundy, however, was not so simple. In terms of inheritance, the nearest ancestor to Philip of Rouvres to have lines of descent surviving Philip's death was his great-grandfather, Duke Robert II, the father of Odo IV. Unlike Joan of Châlons and Robert of Auvergne, however, both of whom had left only two lines of descent (allowing the cadet line to inherit without controversy following the termination of the main branch with Philip), Robert II had left three lines of descent: the main line, through Odo IV, which had ended with Philip, and two cadet lines through his daughters, Margaret and Joan. Both women were long dead. Margaret of Burgundy, the elder daughter, and the wife of Louis X of France, had died in 1315, leaving only a daughter, Joan II of Navarre. Joan of Burgundy, the younger daughter, and the wife of Philip VI of France, had died in 1348, leaving two sons, John II of France and Philip of Orléans. Out of these three, Joan of Burgundy's sons were still alive; Joan II, however, had died in 1349, leaving three sons, the eldest of whom was Charles II of Navarre.

To the jurists of the duchy, these facts presented something of a difficult legal problem, for the two claims stood more or less equally in terms of justification: Charles II, as the great-grandson of Robert II by his elder daughter, had a superior claim to John II in terms of primogeniture; John II, as the grandson of Robert II by his younger daughter, had a superior claim to Charles II in terms of proximity of blood.

Were it simply a legal issue, the King of Navarre would certainly have had as good a chance of inheritance as the King of France, and perhaps better: proximity of blood was beginning to lose force in Europe, and, as events would subsequently prove, Burgundy had no intention of being absorbed into the French royal domain. But there was more in play than a simple legal issue: the Hundred Years' War was in full flow, and the King of Navarre, as an ally of England and an enemy of France, was distasteful to the Burgundians, who in meetings of the Estates during John II's English captivity had been consistently loyal to John and his son the Dauphin, and opposed to the King of Navarre.

Furthermore, John II had the support of John of Boulogne and Margaret of France. The former was a staunch ally of the king, an alliance strengthened by the marriage between the king and Joan of Boulogne, John of Boulogne's niece. As the daughter of a former King of France and one of the last living members of the senior branch of the House of Capet, the latter was staunchly French in her sympathies; besides which, Charles II had offended her by laying claim to lands in Champagne that had formed part of her sister Joan of France's dowry in marrying Odo IV and which were deemed now to pass to Joan's sister. These lands had derived from Joan I of Navarre, Countess of Champagne, grandmother of Margaret and Joan, and as the senior heir by primogeniture of Joan I, Charles was now laying claim to them. With this triple compact between the three heirs, Charles II was shut out: the support of a co-heir carried weight in deciding inheritance, and John II had the support of both, while Charles II had the support of neither. The nobility of the duchy, in the face of this, decided in favour of John II, who took immediate possession. He had already mobilised soldiers in Nivernais to do so by force if it proved necessary, but in fact, the nobility willingly swore homage to him as their new duke, and the duchy saw only a few isolated and half-hearted acts of rebellion in favour of Charles II.

John II of France and Burgundy
The legal implications of the accession of John the Good are frequently misunderstood. It is not uncommon to read that, upon the death of Philip of Rouvres, "the Duchy of Burgundy, lying within France, therefore escheated to the French crown." This claim is simply untrue; the duchy had been granted to the heirs of Robert I, and were it not for the manner in which the descendants of Duke Robert II married and the circumstances under which Philip of Rouvres died, John II, who made his claim to the duchy as the son of Joan of Burgundy and the grandson of Robert II, rather than as the feudal overlord of all France, would never have inherited it.

The claim, however, that upon his inheritance of the duchy it was merged with the crown is more difficult to refute: for while this in itself certainly was not the case, he immediately attempted to merge the duchy into the crown by means of letters patent. He proclaimed in the relevant document that he was taking possession by virtue of his descent from the dukes and continued that as the duke, he immediately gave the duchy to the French crown, with which it was to be inseparably united (much the same as would be followed in the case of Brittany in 1532). Had this come into effect, Burgundy as an independent duchy would have ceased to exist, and John would no longer have been the duke. As a result, a definitive break in the duchy's history would have occurred.

John, however, failed to grasp the realities of the political situation within the duchy. He had already been smoothly accepted as duke. On 28 December 1361, he received the homage of the Burgundian nobility before he returned to France, leaving the Count of Tancarville as his deputy, but the Burgundian estates had, in their meeting around the time of the homage-swearing of 28 December, firmly given several pronouncements. They declared that the duchy intended to remain a duchy, that it had no intention of becoming a province of the royal domain, that there would be no administrative changes, and that it was joined to France by virtue of one man's rights and would never be absorbed into it. Most importantly, it was firmly stated that there had not been, and never would be, an annexation of Burgundy by France, merely juxtaposition – the king was also the duke, but there would be no deeper link than that.

Set against these declarations of Burgundian autonomy was the decree of John II that Burgundy was absorbed into the French crown. The latter proved to no avail. The Burgundians refused to countenance the terms of the letters patent. The king proved unequal to the task of enforcing his policy, which was far beyond his political capabilities. In the face of a non-violent but firm refusal by the Burgundians to allow the independence of their duchy to be threatened, the king quietly scrapped the letters patent, and instead turned to other means.

The king's youngest son, Philip the Bold, was also his favourite most renowned. Philip had distinguished himself in 1356 at the Battle of Poitiers, when at the age of fourteen he bravely fought alongside his father to the bitter end. It occurred to him to both honour his son and soothe the ruffled feelings of the Burgundians by investing him as Duke of Burgundy. Accordingly, the king appointed Philip governor of Burgundy in late June 1363, following which the estates of Burgundy – who had consistently opposed the previous governor, Tancarville – loyally granted him subsidies. Finally, in the final months of John the Good's reign, Philip the Bold was established as Duke of Burgundy. The king secretly created him duke on 6 September 1363 (in his dual role as duke giving his own title to his child and as king sanctioning this change in leadership) and, on 2 June 1364, following the death of King John, King Charles V issued a letters patent to publicly establish the fact of Philip's title.

Valois dukes

Under the Valois dukes of Burgundy, the duchy flourished. A match between Philip the Bold and Margaret of Dampierre – the widow of Philip of Rouvres – not only reunited the duchy with the County of Burgundy once more, as well as with the County of Artois, but also served to bring the wealthy counties of Flanders, Nevers and Rethel under the control of the dukes. By 1405, following the deaths of Philip and Margaret, and the inheritance of the duchy and most of their other possessions by their son John the Fearless, Burgundy stood less as a French fief and more as an independent state. As such, it was a major political player in European politics. The Burgundian State was reckoned to include not only the original territories of the duchy of Burgundy in what is now eastern France, but also the northern territories that came to the dukes through the marriage of Philip and Margaret.

Philip the Bold had been a cautious man in politics. His son, John the Fearless (r. 1404–1419), however, was not, and under him Burgundy and Orléans clashed as the two sides squabbled for power. The result was an increase of Burgundy's power, but the Burgundian State came to be regarded as an enemy of the French crown. From John's death, the dukes were treated with caution or outright hostility by Charles VII and his successor, Louis XI.

The last two dukes to directly rule the duchy, Philip the Good (r. 1419–1467) and Charles the Bold (r. 1467–1477), attempted to secure the independence of their state from the French crown. The endeavour failed; when Charles the Bold died in battle leaving no sons, Louis XI of France declared the duchy escheated and absorbed the territory into the French crown. Charles's daughter, Mary, inherited the rest of his domain and claimed the Duchy of Burgundy. Her heirs called themselves dukes of Burgundy, refusing to accept the loss of the duchy. The War of the Burgundian Succession took place from 1477 to 1482. Eventually, King Louis XI of France and Archduke Maximilian of Austria, Mary's widower, signed the Treaty of Arras (1482). Maximilian recognised the annexation of the Duchy and County of Burgundy and several other territories. France thus retained most of its Burgundian fiefdoms except for the affluent County of Flanders, which passed to Maximilian and Mary's descendants (but soon rebelled). With the 1493 Treaty of Senlis, Maximilian regained for his and Mary's descendants the County of Burgundy, Artois and Charolais, but the Duchy of Burgundy and Picardy were lost definitively to France.

Aftermath

In 1526, Mary's grandson Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor was restored to the title and territory by the French King Francis I, under duress as part of the Treaty of Madrid. But Francis I repudiated the Treaty as soon as he was able, and Charles V never managed to secure control of the duchy. Further, with the abdication of Charles V as Holy Roman emperor, Henry II of France argued that since the main family line of the House of Habsburg had ceased ruling the Holy Roman Empire or Austria, the claim of the title by the Spanish Habsburgs was null and void. The territory of Burgundy remained part of France from then onwards. The title was occasionally resurrected for French princes, for example the grandson of Louis XIV (Louis, Duke of Burgundy) and the grandson of Louis XV, the short-lived Louis Joseph.

The current king of Spain, Felipe, claims the title "Duke of Burgundy", and his predecessor's coat of arms included the cross of Burgundy as a supporter. The cross of Burgundy was the flag of the Spanish Empire at its height.

References

Dukedoms of France

Former duchies
States and territories disestablished in 1477
1032 establishments in Europe
1030s establishments in France
1482 disestablishments in Europe
1480s disestablishments in France
Former duchies of France
Former provinces of France

Duchy of Burgundy


Profiles in Courage is a 1956 volume of short biographies describing acts of bravery and integrity by eight United States senators. The book profiles senators who defied the opinions of their party and constituents to do what they felt was right and suffered severe criticism and losses in popularity as a result. It begins with a quote from Edmund Burke on the courage of the English
statesman Charles James Fox, in his 1783 attack upon the tyranny of the East India Company in the House of Commons, and focuses on mid-19th-century antebellum America and the efforts of senators to delay the American Civil War. Profiles in Courage was widely celebrated and became a bestseller. It includes a foreword by Allan Nevins.

John F. Kennedy, then a U.S. senator, won the Pulitzer Prize for the work. However, in his 2008 autobiography, Kennedy's speechwriter Ted Sorensen, who was presumed as early as 1957 to be the book's ghostwriter, acknowledged that he "did a first draft of most chapters" and "helped choose the words of many of its sentences". Jules Davids, who was a history professor for Kennedy's wife Jacqueline when she was a student at Georgetown University, is also acknowledged to have made key contributions to the historical research and organizational planning for the book.

In 1990, Kennedy's family created the Profile in Courage Award to honor individuals who have acted with courage in the same vein as those profiled in the book.
The book also served as the basis for an American historical anthology series of the same name that was telecast weekly on NBC from November 8, 1964, to May 9, 1965.

Background and history
Kennedy was elected to the House of Representatives in 1946, 1948, and 1950 from the state of Massachusetts. In 1952 and 1958, he was elected a senator from Massachusetts and served in the Senate until resigning after he was elected president in 1960. It was a passage from Herbert Agar's book The Price of Union about an act of courage by an earlier senator from Massachusetts, John Quincy Adams, that gave Kennedy the idea of writing about senatorial courage. He showed the passage to Ted Sorensen and asked him to see if he could find some more examples. This Sorensen did, and eventually they had enough not just for an article, as Kennedy had originally envisaged, but a book. With help from research assistants and the Library of Congress, Sorenson wrote a first draft of the book while Kennedy was bedridden with Addison's disease and recovering from back surgery during 1954 and 1955.

Summary of senators profiled
 John Quincy Adams, from Massachusetts, for breaking away from the Federalist Party.
 Daniel Webster, also from Massachusetts, for speaking in favor of the Compromise of 1850.
 Thomas Hart Benton, from Missouri, for staying in the Democratic Party despite his opposition to the extension of slavery in the territories.
 Sam Houston, from Texas, for speaking against the Kansas–Nebraska Act of 1854, which would have allowed those two states to decide on the slavery question. Houston wanted to uphold the Missouri Compromise. His and Benton's votes against Kansas–Nebraska did just that. This was his most unpopular vote, and he was defeated when running for re-election. Two years later he'd regained enough popularity to be elected Governor of Texas. However, when the state convened in special session and joined the Confederacy, Sam Houston refused to be inaugurated as governor, holding true to his ideal of preserving the Union.
 Edmund G. Ross, from Kansas, for voting for acquittal in the Andrew Johnson impeachment trial. As a result of Ross's vote, along with those of six other Republicans, Democrat Johnson's presidency was saved, and the stature of the office was preserved.
 Lucius Lamar, from Mississippi, for eulogizing Charles Sumner on the Senate floor and other efforts to mend ties between the North and South during Reconstruction, and for his principled opposition to the Bland–Allison Act to permit free coinage of silver. Lamar returned to Mississippi and gave rousing speeches that eventually led to public approval of his decisions and cemented a legacy of courageousness.
 George Norris, from Nebraska, for opposing Joseph Gurney Cannon's autocratic power as Speaker of the House, for speaking out against arming U.S. merchant ships during the United States' neutral period in World War I, and for supporting the presidential campaign of Democrat Al Smith, the first Catholic to be a major party nominee.
 Robert A. Taft, from Ohio, for criticizing the Nuremberg Trials for trying Nazi war criminals under ex post facto laws. Counter-criticism against Taft's statements was vital to his failure to secure the Republican nomination for president in 1948.

Reception
After its release on January 1, 1956, Profiles in Courage became a bestseller. The book won the Pulitzer Prize for Biography in 1957, even though it was not one of the finalists forwarded to the prize board from the selection committee. Kennedy's father Joseph asked columnist Arthur Krock, his political adviser and a longtime member of the prize board, to persuade others to vote for it.

The book returned to the bestseller lists in 1961 after Kennedy became president and again in 1963 after he was assassinated.

Profiles in Courage was the basis of a television series of the same name that aired on the NBC network during the 1964–1965 television season.

In 1956, Kennedy gave a copy of the book to Richard Nixon, who responded that he was looking forward to reading it. After being defeated by Kennedy in the 1960 United States presidential election, Nixon was advised by Mamie Eisenhower to write a book himself. Nixon visited the White House in April 1961 and got the same advice from Kennedy: writing a book would raise the public image of any public man. Nixon wrote his book Six Crises (1962) in response to Profiles in Courage.

Authorship
On December 7, 1957, journalist Drew Pearson appeared as a guest on The Mike Wallace Interview and made the claim that "John F. Kennedy is the only man in history that I know who won a Pulitzer Prize for a book that was ghostwritten for him." Wallace replied: "You know for a fact, Drew, that the book Profiles in Courage was written for Senator Kennedy ... by someone else?" Pearson responded that he did and that Kennedy speechwriter Ted Sorensen wrote the book. Wallace responded: "And Kennedy accepted a Pulitzer Prize for it? And he never acknowledged the fact?" Pearson replied: "No, he has not. You know, there's a little wisecrack around the Senate about Jack ... some of his colleagues say, 'Jack, I wish you had a little less profile and more courage.'"

Joseph P. Kennedy saw the broadcast, then called his lawyer, Clark Clifford, yelling: "Sue the bastards for fifty million dollars!" Soon Clifford and Robert F. Kennedy showed up at ABC and told executives that the Kennedys would sue unless the network issued a full retraction and apology. Wallace and Pearson insisted that the story was true and refused to comply. Nevertheless, ABC made the retraction and apology, which made Wallace furious.

According to The Straight Dope, Herbert Parmet later analyzed the text of Profiles in Courage and wrote in his book Jack: The Struggles of John F. Kennedy (1980) that although Kennedy did oversee the production and provided for the direction and message of the book, it was  Sorensen who provided most of the work that went into the end product. The thematic essays that comprise the first and last chapters "may be viewed largely as [Kennedy's] own work", however.

In addition to Kennedy's speechwriter Sorensen, Jacqueline Kennedy recruited her history instructor from Georgetown University, Jules Davids, to work on the project. Davids told a Kennedy biographer that he and Sorensen had researched and written drafts of most of the book. Kennedy's handwritten notes, which Senator Kennedy showed to reporters to prove his authorship, are now in the Kennedy Library, but are mostly preliminary notes about John Quincy Adams, a particular interest of Kennedy's, and are not a readable draft of the chapter on Adams. During the six-month period when the book was being written, Sorensen worked full-time on the project, sometimes twelve-hour days; Kennedy spent most of the same period traveling, campaigning, or hospitalized. Kennedy's preserved notes show that he kept up with the book's progress, but historian Garry Wills remarked that Kennedy's notes contain no draft of any stage of the manuscript, or of any substantial part of it.

In Sorensen's 2008 autobiography, Counselor: A Life at the Edge of History, he said he wrote "a first draft of most of the chapters" of Profiles in Courage and "helped choose the words of many of its sentences". Sorensen also wrote: "While in Washington, I received from Florida almost daily instructions and requests by letter and telephone – books to send, memoranda to draft, sources to check, materials to assemble, and Dictaphone drafts or revisions of early chapters" (Sorensen, p. 146). Sorensen wrote that Kennedy "worked particularly hard and long on the first and last chapters, setting the tone and philosophy of the book". Kennedy "publicly acknowledged in his introduction to the book my extensive role in its composition" (p. 147). Sorensen claimed that in May 1957, Kennedy "unexpectedly and generously offered, and I happily accepted, a sum to be spread over several years, that I regarded as more than fair" for his work on the book. Indeed, this supported a long-standing recognition of the collaborative effort that Kennedy and Sorensen had developed since 1953.

Craig Fehrman, author of Author in Chief: The Untold Story of Our Presidents and the Books They Wrote, wrote in 2020 that "The book's structure, research, first draft and most of its second came from [Sorensen]". According to Fehrman, "Even the book's idea came from him (Sorensen)"; after Kennedy suggested that Sorensen write a magazine article on Adams's courage as senator for publication with Kennedy's name, Sorensen suggested to Kennedy in a letter accompanying the draft article that he ask Harper & Brothers—where Michael Temple Canfield, Jacqueline Kennedy's brother-in-law, worked—if the publisher were interested in a book on the topic. They shared in profits from all work Sorensen ghostwrote for Kennedy, as agreed when the former joined the latter's staff. Kennedy wrote the preface but did not mention Sorensen. After Sorensen returned an edited draft of the preface with a request for a mention, Kennedy added a line thanking him "for his invaluable assistance". Sorensen received a $6,000 bonus, about one third of his annual salary.

After the Wallace–Pearson television appearance, Kennedy and Sorensen agreed that the rumor could ruin Kennedy's presidential plans. Sorensen swore an affidavit stating that his only role was "to assist [Kennedy] in the assembly and preparation of research and other materials upon which much of the book is based". The document said that Sorensen's work was "very generously acknowledged by the Senator in the preface", despite the credit only appearing after Sorensen asked Kennedy for it. Kennedy claimed that he had kept all of the earnings from Profiles despite the two payments to Sorensen, and that the Pulitzer was proof of his authorship. "The lies became cover for the lies", Fehrman concluded.

Fehrman further claimed the senator worked harder on promoting Profiles, signing autographs and making many public appearances for the book, than he did writing it. Kennedy tried to have it published before the end of 1955 to qualify for the Pulitzer Prizes in 1956; Profiles appeared on its original date of January 2, 1956, eligible for the 1957 prizes. Although friends and family said that the Pulitzer made Kennedy happier than his World War II Purple Heart or any other award, and Kennedy told Margaret Coit in 1953 "I would rather win a Pulitzer Prize than be president", the award caused the press to investigate Profiless authorship. In May 1957, two weeks after the award, Gilbert Seldes discussed the rumor that Kennedy had not written the book in The Village Voice. That month the Kennedys agreed to pay Sorensen more than $100,000, an amount Fehrman said was "frankly astonishing".

Though Kennedy's legacy continues to take criticism for relying on Sorensen for improving Kennedy's grammar and style, and for creating the final prose of much of the volume, contemporary Kennedy scholar and foreign policy expert Professor Fredrick Logevall wrote that in several ways Kennedy may have played the more essential role in the book, noting importantly that "Kennedy made the final choices about which figures to feature in the book.  And although Sorensen took the lead role in drafting the bulk of the chapters, with significant input on some of them from Professor Jules Davids and Jim Landis, the senator (Kennedy) was responsible for the book's architecture, themes, and arguments."  As noted earlier, Kennedy was especially critical to the first and the last chapters, as well as a large portion of Chapter 2 on John Quincy Adams.  Logevall went on to claim that Sorensen, though a highly capable writer, as a political novice didn't have Kennedy's ability to reflect on the importance and place of compromise in political life, nor was he as knowledgeable about American history as Kennedy.  According to Logevall, and attested to by both Jackie Kennedy, and many friends, Kennedy worked for many weeks on the book during his long and painful recovery from back surgery, noting, "often he worked while prone in bed, on heavy white paper in his loose, widely spaced hand; on better days he was propped up on the patio or the porch."  Further, Kennedy played a highly active role in locating research sources, for "on an almost daily basis, Sorensen recalled, Kennedy sent him instructions about 'books to ship down, memoranda to prepare, sources to check, materials to assemble.'"  Kennedy instructed Sorensen to scan more than two hundred books, journals, magazines, (and) Congressional records. Sorenson later noted, "the way Jack worked was to take all the material, mine and his, pencil it, dictate the fresh copy in his own words, pencil it again, he never used a typewriter". However, a letter which Jules David wrote in 1957, which was made public in 1997, backed claims that he and Sorensen were in fact was the key contributors to the book's history research.

In response to claims by other authors such as Fehrman and Seldes that Kennedy was deceptive in claiming the book's authorship, Logevall alleged "Kennedy had a bigger role in the writing, and certainly in the conception and framing of the book than many of these analysts suggested; the book's broad themes and overarching structure were his."  Logevall also added that it was standard for American politicians in the mid-twentieth century, as well as later, to get significant assistance on books that appeared under their name alone.  Had Kennedy denied authorship or not accepted the Pulitzer, it may have been damaging to his political career, and though much of the work of the book was indeed Sorenson's, by legal arrangement accepted by Sorensen, the authorship was indeed Kennedy's.

According to Logevall, the book's most significant contribution was not as an in-depth history, nor was it exceptional in its literary style, of which Sorensen was likely the greatest contributor.  Rather, he argues the book's value lay in its "broad interpretive claims", best told in the two chapters in which Kennedy's contribution was greatest, the first and the last. Logevall wrote that for Kennedy, the book's central theme, which he and not Sorenson selected, may have been "We can compromise our political positions, but not ourselves".  Kennedy further wrote, "We can resolve the clash of interests without conceding our ideals."  Logevall observed the ability to compromise while staying faithful to ideals was central to Kennedy's political aspirations.

Accuracy
Author David O. Stewart has questioned the accuracy of the book's chapter on the impeachment of Andrew Johnson.  Of Johnson's defenders in the Senate, Profiles in Courage stated that "Not a single one of them escaped the terrible torture of vicious criticism engendered by their vote to acquit."  However, Stewart described the supposed persecution as a "myth" and continued, "None was a victim of postimpeachment retribution. Indeed, their careers were not wildly different from those of the thirty-five senators who voted to convict Andrew Johnson." However, Ross lost his bid for re-election two years after casting a vote acquitting Johnson. There is also evidence that Edmund Ross was bribed to vote for Johnson's acquittal, which is not mentioned in Profiles in Courage.

Kennedy also praised Lucius Lamar, who, while working in the public eye towards reconciliation, privately was an instigator, according to the claim of author Nicholas Lemann, of growing racial agitation. In the profile of Lamar, Kennedy had also included a single paragraph condemning Adelbert Ames, the Maine-born governor of Mississippi from 1873 to 1876, as an opportunistic carpetbagger whose administration was "sustained and nourished by Federal bayonets". Ames' daughter, Blanche Ames Ames, was outraged, and regularly wrote to Kennedy for years afterward in protest, demanding a retraction of the "defamatory insinuations" and accused him of pandering to Southern readers. The letter-writing continued even after Kennedy had been elected to the presidency. This prompted Kennedy to turn to George Plimpton, Ames' grandson and a classmate of Robert F. Kennedy at Harvard, asking him if he could get his grandmother to cease, claiming her letters were interfering with government business. Blanche Ames Ames would eventually publish her own biography of her father in 1964.

References

External links

 Photos of the first edition of Profiles In Courage

1956 non-fiction books
American biographies
American political books
Biographies about politicians
Books about American politicians
Books by John F. Kennedy
Harper & Brothers books
Non-fiction books adapted into television shows
Pulitzer Prize for Biography or Autobiography-winning works
Impeachment trial of Andrew Johnson
Books written by presidents of the United States

Profiles in Courage


An Pothos lancifolius in uska species han Liliopsida nga ginhulagway ni Joseph Dalton Hooker. An Pothos lancifolius in nahilalakip ha genus nga Pothos, ngan familia nga Araceae. Waray hini subspecies nga nakalista.

Mga kasarigan

Pothos

Pothos lancifolius


Marstein fyr i Austevoll kommune i Vestland fylke i Norge, er et kystfyr som har vært i drift siden 1877. Det første fyr blev ødelagt under anden verdenskrig og der blev bygget et helt nyt fyrtårn i 1949. Nutidens fyr består af et hvidt stenhus og tårn, det blev automatiseret i 1987 og afbemandet i 2002.

Marstein er en holm som ligger ved mundingen af Korsfjorden, og dermed indseilingen både til Bergen og Hardangerfjorden. Placeringen er meget vejrudsat, og en række skibe er forlist ved Marstein.

Historie

Man er ikke helt sikker på, hvor navnet Marstein stammer fra, men det antages, at det er afledt af udtrykket markstein, som betyder grænsesten.

Etablering af fyret

Allerede tidligt i 1800-tallet blev det foreslået, at Marstein skulle afmærkes, og i 1838 blev der opført en varde med et kors på. Efterhånden som dampskibe overtog efter sejlskibene, øgedes trafikken, og i 1868 sendte Bergen Skipperforening en formel begæring om at der måtte etableres fyr. Der blev da bevilget penge, og arbejderne blev sat i gang i 1875. Fyrtårnet stod færdig i 1877, og 1. oktober samme år var der lys i fyret for første gang. I 1888 blev lysstyrken forstærket efter anmodning fra Bergen Skipperforening, og i 1915 blev fyret udstyrt med tågehorn.

I 1896 gik dampskibet «Siggen» på 2 252 BRT ned efter først at have grundstødt på Marsteinsbåen i dårlig sigtbarhed. Videre drev skibet ind mod Marstein og sank omkring 50 meter nord for øen på omkring 40 meters dybde. Først i 1979 blev der etableret bifyr, som markerede den frygtede Marsteinsbåen med rød sektor.

I 1923 blev et radiopejlesystem testet på Marstein og Færder fyr som de første i Norge, et koncept som da også var på udviklingsstadiet i international sammenhæng. Prøverne var vellykkede og førte til pligt om radiopejlere i alle større fartøjer.

Frem til anden verdenskrig boede fyrvogterne normalt på fyret sammen med deres familier, og de var tildels også selvforsynende med fødevarer ved at de havde grisehus og fårestald, samt et righoldigt fiskeri som de drev fra land. Eftersom fyrvogterne kunne have meget fritid, blev der bygget både i skuret nede ved kajen. Fra 1987 blev arbejdet som fyrvogter lagt om til turnusarbejde med tre heltidsstillinger, hvor fyrvogterne tjenestegjorde fire uger på fyret og havde to uger fri. Hver anden uge kom en helikopter med proviant og andre forsyninger i forbindelse med vagtskifte.

Anden Verdenskrig

Ud over at fyret har en vigtig placering i forhold til navigation, har øen også haft en vigtig strategisk placering i kontrollen med skibstrafikken til og fra Bergen. Under Anden Verdenskrig blev Marstein derfor besat af tyske styrker, og da der var flest, var 43 mand stationeret på øen. De byggede kanonstillinger og installerede antiluftskyts som nedskød mindst et britisk fly i løbet af krigen. De hårde vejrforhold var imidlertid en lige så stor trussel som militære angreb, og to af soldaterne druknede, da deres båd gik på grund på et af skærene ved øen. Tyskerne havde konfiskeret en britisk trawler, som de brugte til praktiske formål i forbindelse med operationerne på fyret; denne forliste efter at have grundstødt på Ivarsflua, som ligger mellem Litle Marstein og Stora Kalsøy.

Korsfjorden, som starter ude ved fyret, var minelagt, og 23. januar omkom fiskeren August Arnesen og sønnen Harald Arnesen, da deres fiskebåd MS «Vathne» gik på en mine ved Marstein og forliste.

23. januar 1943 gik syv motortorpedobåde (MTB) ud fra Lerwick på Shetland under ledelse af Harald Risnes med det mål at ødelægge Stordø Kisgruber ved Sagvåg som producerede svovlkis, som blev benyttet i den tyske krigsindustri. Mens fem af bådene satte kursen mot Stord, satte de to sidste kurs mod til Marstein for at iscenesætte et afledningsangreb for fjerne tyskernes opmærksomhed fra hovedmålet. De tyske styrker på Marstein opdagede de to norske både natten til 24. januar, idet de prøvde at lægge sig i ly af Lille Marstein, og de blev beskudt med kanoner. De allierede soldater besvarede ilden, og traf også tårnet med nogle skud, men uden at gøre nævneværdig skade på materiel eller personel. Den ene MTB kom imidlertid under heftig beskydning, og tyskerne ramte flere gange både over og under vandlinjen. Dramatisk blev det, da et projektil eksploderede og satte en ammunitionskasse i brand. I frygt for at alt skulle eksplodere tog to snarrådige matroser affære, åbnede kassen og fik kastet de brændende magasiner over bord. Ingen af besætningsmedlemmerne blev dræbt, men to blev såret.

Da krigen var ovre, kunne man konstatere, at to kraftige bombeangreb fra de allierede i sommeren 1940 havde givet store skader på bygningerne, mens manglende vedligehold og forkert brug også havde ødelagt meget af det tekniske udstyr. I 1949 blev der derfor igangsat en totalrenovation, hvor det gamle tårn blev nedrevet og erstattet med et nyt. Samtidig blev en beskyttelsesmur i beton bygget på vestsiden for at beskytte bygningerne mod bølgerne. Skydestillingerne fra krigen er stadig bevaret. Resterne af det gamle fyr blev dumpet ned i kløften som strækker sig på langs fra vest til øst på øen, og for hver gang der er kraftig storm skylles disse rester længere ind i kløften.

Efter krigen blev fyret en af mange observationsposter langs norskekysten under den kolde krig, og fyrvogterne fik opgaven med at rapportere om passerende russiske skibe. Blandt fyrmestrene i efterkrigstiden var Åge Telle som var 14 år gammel da han oplevede den skæbnesvangre skudveksling i Telavåg som førte til at Josef Terboven bestemte sig for at udslette bygden. Telle tjenestegjorde totalt 29 år på Marstein.

Fregatforliset
I 24. januar 1994 drev fregatten KNM «Oslo» (F 300) på grund ved Marstein fyr efter motorhavari. Skibet fik voldsom slagside, og der var tilløb til panik blandt besætningsmedlemmerne. Der var storm i området og orlogskaptjan Christian Irgens vurderede at det var sikrest at mandskabet blev på skibet.

Losbåden «Marsteinen» var første båd, som kom frem til havaristen, og man forsøgte da at kaste en slæbetrosse over til denne. Af de tre besætningsmedlemmer som blev kommanderet ud på agterdækket for at få fat i trossen blev to fejet i havet, da skibet samtidigt grundstødte. Menig Steffen Rønningen blev reddet op af en fiskebåd efter 18 minutter i det kolde vand, men kaptajnløjtnant Torbjørn Tellefsen omkom.

Fregatten blev først stabiliseret, og dagen efter slæbt af grunden, men sank længere inde i Korsfjorden. Sjøforsvaret måtte bruge 6,2 millioner kroner på oprydning af olieforurening efter forliset, og flere fiskeopdrætsanlæg blev berørt af udslippet. 17 af mandskabet søgte om, og fik landtjeneste efter forliset.

Flere andre store skibe er gået på grund ved Marstein i nyere tid. I 2014 grundstøtte det 104 meter lange fragtskib «Pallas River» ved fyret og fik en flænge i skroget.

Galleri

Kilder og henvisninger

 Marstein fyrstasjon, Norsk Fyrhistorisk Forening
 Marsteinen , Bergen og Omland Friluftsråd
 Norge Rundt-programleiar overraska av kjempebølge Yr.no, 13. mars 2015

Fyr i Vestland
Stord

Marstein fyr


"Përrallë" (în română: basm) este o melodie a Enedei Tarifa. Acest cântec va reprezenta Albania în cadrul Concursului Muzical Eurovision 2016.

Cântece din 2015
Eurovision

Përrallë


Isikia Rabici Savua (31 de março de 1952 - 30 de maio de 2011) foi um diplomata sênior das Fiji que teve uma carreira distinta nas forças militares e policiais antes de assumir seu último cargo como embaixador e representante permanente nas Nações Unidas em 4 de março de 2003.

Carreira
Savua passou dezoito anos no exército fijiano, no qual ingressou ao deixar o ensino médio em 1971. Quando se aposentou do serviço militar em 1988, alcançou o posto de tenente-coronel.

Os quatro anos seguintes (1988-1992) foram passados no Corpo Diplomático de Fiji, primeiro como conselheiro (político) da Missão de Fiji nas Nações Unidas e depois (por seis meses) como cônsul geral em Sydney, Austrália.

Em 1992, Savua ingressou na Força Policial de Fiji como vice-comissário, a segunda posição mais alta da força. Um ano depois, foi promovido ao cargo de comissário. Deveria ocupar este alto cargo até 2002.

Envolvimento no golpe de Estado de 2000
O golpe de Fiji de 2000, no qual aconteceu a deposição  do governo do primeiro-ministro Mahendra Chaudhry e do presidente Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara, ocorreu durante o mandato de Savua como Comissário de Polícia. Em entrevista à Fiji Television em 29 de abril de 2001, sua última aparição na mídia antes de ser incapacitado por um derrame, Mara acusou Savua de ter participado do planejamento do golpe. Esta alegação foi posteriormente repetida em 22 de outubro de 2004 sob privilégio parlamentar pela senadora Adi Koila Nailatikau, filha de Mara, que condenou sua nomeação como embaixador enquanto ainda estava sob investigação por supostos crimes relacionados ao golpe. Savua não foi acusado de nenhum crime e, enquanto vivo, negou as acusações.

Militares das Fiji
Representantes permanentes das Fiji nas Nações Unidas

Isikia Savua


Nuestra Señora de Soufanieh se refiere a una aparición mariana que según los testigos tuvo lugar en Soufanieh, un suburbio de Damasco en Siria.

Historia
Según el relato de los testigos, las apariciones tuvieron lugar en diciembre de 1982, y en enero, febrero y marzo de 1983. Durante las apariciones, una imagen de la Virgen María exudó un aceite milagroso, y lo mismo ocurrió con las manos y el rostro de Myrna Nazzour.

Brigid Keenan, que relató el hecho, escribió que el aceite exudado por Nazzour fue analizado y que cientos de personas, incluyendo algunos médicos y psiquiatras fueron testigos de las secreciones de Nazzour y no lograron demostrar que se tratase de un fraude. De acuerdo con su relato, a Nazzour le aparecieron estigmas en frente, manos, pies y costado, y que la Virgen se le apareció la azotea de su casa. Nazzour afirmó que la Virgen le dijo que "los cristianos deberían orar por la paz, por el amor y orar por la unidad de las iglesias cristianas". Las apariciones han sido aprobadas por la Iglesia Católica y la Ortodoxa.

Referencias

Bibliografía
Zahlaoui, Élias: Soufanieh. - in Sbalchiero, Patrick (ed.)(2002): Dictionnaire des miracles et de l'extraordinaire chrétien. - Paris: Fayard, p. 738-741.
Sbalchiero, Patrick: Damas/ Soufanieh. - in Laurentin, René/ Sbalchiero, Patrick (ed.)(2007): Dictionnaire des "apparitions" de la Vierge Marie. - Paris: Fayard, p. 1093-1097.
Touw, Johannes M.: Öl-Materialisationen und Stigmen in Soufanieh (Damaskus). - in: Resch, Andreas (1997): Paranormologie und Religion. - Innsbruck: Resch, p. 251-321.
Robert J. Fox (2002): Light from the East – Miracles of Our Lady of Soufanieh.

Enlaces externos
 Our Lady of Soufanieh
 Miracle of Damascus

Apariciones marianas
Iglesia católica en Siria

Nuestra Señora de Soufanieh


Manuel Isidoro de la Ballina (1750-1812) fue un arquitecto español.

Biografía
Nacido en 1759, fue discípulo de Juan de Villanueva, y entre sus obras más destacadas se encuentra la Real Fábrica de Tabacos (la Real Fábrica de Aguardientes y Naipes) en Madrid 1792, así como la iglesia de los Padres Agonizantes en la calle de Fuencarral en 1803. Estuvo muy vinculado al entorno del arquitecto Francesco Sabatini. Su padre era el también arquitecto Josepf de la Ballina, con el que colaboró profesionalmente en algún momento de su vida. Escribió un libro en 1802 titulado Reglas para tasar con exactitud y conocimiento la habitacion de una casa, alguna parte de ella, ó piezas que se le aumenten ó quiten, adicionadas con las tablas de los sólidos mas comunes de la cantería (1802). Falleció el 2 de noviembre de 1812.

Referencias

Enlaces externos

Ballina

Manuel de la Ballina