The  (), or German Customs Union, was a coalition of German states formed to manage tariffs and economic policies within their territories. Organized by the 1833  treaties, it formally started on 1 January 1834. However, its foundations had been in development from 1818 with the creation of a variety of custom unions among the German states. By 1866, the  included most of the German states.  The Zollverein was not part of the German Confederation (1815-1866).

The foundation of the  was the first instance in history in which independent states consummated a full economic union without the simultaneous creation of a political federation or union.

Prussia was the primary driver behind the creation of the customs union. Austria was excluded from the  because of its highly protectionist trade policy, the unwillingness to split its customs territory into the separate Austrian, Hungarian and Galician-Lodomerian ones, as well as due to opposition of Prince von Metternich to the idea. By the founding of the North German Confederation in 1867, the  covered states of approximately , and had produced economic agreements with several non-German states, including Sweden–Norway. After the founding of the German Empire in 1871, the Empire assumed the control of the customs union. However, not all states within the Empire were part of the  until 1888 (Hamburg for example). Conversely, though Luxembourg was a state independent of the German Reich, it remained in the  until 1919.

Background

The splintering of territory and states over generations meant that by the 1790s in the German-speaking Holy Roman Empire in Central Europe, there were approximately 1800 customs barriers. Even within the Prussian state itself, there were, at the beginning of the 19th century, more than 67 local customs and tariffs, with as many customs borders. To travel from Königsberg in East Prussia to Cologne, for example, a shipment was inspected and taxed about 80 times. Each customs inspection at each border slowed the shipment's progress from source to destination, and each assessment on the shipment reduced profit and increased the price of goods, dramatically stifling trade.

When France defeated the Second Coalition, made up of Russian, Austrian and German forces, and annexed territories up to the Rhine, there was a general consolidation of the myriad of tiny states in Germany in the Mediatization of 1803. This was also called the Principal Conclusion of the Extraordinary Imperial Delegation (or, in German, , usually called the ). This last piece of major legislation enacted by the Holy Roman Empire re-arranged the map of Central Europe, especially in the southwestern territories. The  resulted in the secularization of many ecclesiastical territories, and the so-called mediatization, i.e. the annexation to larger neighboring territories, of many of the formerly free imperial territories, including most of the imperial cities. Considerable portions of the Habsburg family territories in southwestern Central Europe were "mediatized", or given as compensation, to the princes and dukes who had lost territories in the French expansion. Most of the imperial cities, imperial abbeys, and ecclesiastical states and cities were mediatized or secularized in 1803. With the final dissolution of the Holy Roman Empire in 1806, most of the remaining tiny principalities were annexed by larger neighbors.

Historians have analyzed three Prussian goals in the development of the : first, as a political tool to eliminate Austrian influence in Germany; second, as a way to improve the economies; and third, to strengthen Germany against potential French aggression while reducing the economic independence of smaller states. The  created a larger market for German-made farm and handicraft products and promoted commercial unification under fiscally sound economic parameters. While the Union sought to limit trade and commercial barriers between and among member states, it continued to uphold the protectionist barriers against outsiders.

According to economic historian Florian Ploeckl, the commonly accepted view among economic historians is that Prussia was motivated to create Zollverein in order to achieve economies of scale in customs administration, thus leading to substantial fiscal savings.

Initial efforts at a single-toll system

During the Napoleonic Era, efforts in the Rhineland toward economic unity had mixed success. The Confederation of the Rhine, and the other satellite creations of Napoleonic France, sought to establish autarky in European trade. By 1806, as Napoleon I sought to secure his hegemony in Europe, the Continental System offered a semblance of unified effort toward a widespread domestic market for European goods. However, the main purpose of the Continental System was military, not economic. Napoleon wanted a trade embargo against Britain, through which he hoped to wreck the British economy. The combination of war and isolation from Britain's trading system destroyed markets for external raw materials and for manufactured goods, resulting in the near ruin of the Central European economy. Especially hard hit were the trading economies of the Lowlands and Rhineland states, which had relied heavily upon imports of raw materials from throughout the world, and on the export of finished products. The domestic markets in Central Europe were not large enough to sustain consumption of their own production. These problems were dramatically exacerbated by the numerous excise taxes and tolls which were the main source of state income. Reduction in trade meant the near bankruptcy of the smaller states.

At the Congress of Vienna in 1814 and 1815, diplomatsprincipally those from the Great Powersconfirmed the remapping of Europe, and broadly, the rest of the world, into spheres of influence. Central Europe, or German-speaking Europe, remained largely within the influence of the Austrian Habsburgs, balanced at the periphery by the Russian empire in the east, and the French in the west. Prussia was expected to play some role in these spheres of influence, but the ambiguities of the Austrian and Prussian relationship were unresolved. The German states retained autonomy; however, the old imperial institution of the Reichstag was converted to the form of a Confederation Diet, to meet in Frankfurt. The Habsburg archdukes, now Emperors of Austria, were to serve as permanent presidents of this institution. Isolated voices, such as Joseph Görres and Freiherr vom Stein, called for the abolition of domestic tolls and the creation of a German tariff on imports. The mandate from the Vienna Congress, however, established the German Confederation, but did not deal with the economic circumstances, nor did it make any effort to achieve economic and trade standardization. Instead, the articles that established the Confederation suggested that trade and transportation questions be discussed at a later date.

Problems with unifying the customs and toll agreements
Prussia and the central and southwestern states of Hesse-Kassel and Hesse-Darmstadt, Württemberg, Baden, and Bavaria were leaders in the modernization of the toll system within the German states. In the Prussian case, the experience of the Confederation of the Rhine in removing customs barriers offered an example of how it could be done, and Hans, Count von Bülow, who until 1811 had been the Finance Minister in Westphalia, and who had accepted this position in 1813 in Prussia, modeled the Prussian customs statutes on those of the former states of the Confederation. The addition of territory to the existing Prussian state made elimination of customs barriers a powerful factor in Prussian politics. The significant differences between "old" Prussia and the newly acquired territories complicated the debate. The "newer" Prussian provinces in the Rhineland and Westphalia, with their developing manufacturing sectors, contended with the heavily agricultural territories of "old" Prussia. The dissimilarities in the two sides of Prussia confirmed regional perceptions for the need for their own political and administrative units, which became an important element of the customs debate. Within "old" Prussia itself, the customs statutes from 1818 reduced domestic customs barriers. After 1818, goods coming into Prussia and leaving Prussia were charged a high tariff. Goods moved freely within the state itself. The Prussian toll was therefore very simple and efficient. Manufactured goods were heavily taxed, especially textiles, and the most important taxes were for food, necessities and luxury goods.

Similarly, in the southwest German states, it became urgent to integrate the newly acquired territories into the states' existing economic systems. The territorial growth of the southwestern middle-sized states, in particular the two Hessian principalities, but also the growth of Baden and Württemberg, had split the territorial continuity of Prussia; the Prussian state was no longer linked entirely by territory, but rather was separated from many of its newer acquisitions by territories newly acquired by other states. These states often saw their own interests as conflicting generally and specifically with Prussian expansionism, and resented Prussian dominance and authority. Furthermore, these newly expanded states, usually referred as "middle-sized states" (or, in German, ), faced problems in integrating their newly acquired territories and populations into an existing political, economic and legal structure.

These problems were exacerbated by European wide economic woes following the Napoleonic Wars. Unemployment and high prices, especially for foodstuffs, characterized an economy not yet converted back to peacetime needs. The problem in Britain was particularly severe and the British response created a ripple effect that worsened problems in the German states: In trying to manage the post-war economy, the British government was caught between the Malthusian understanding of the relationship of wages, prices, and population, and the Ricardian model. On the one hand, adherents to the Malthusian model believed it was dangerous for Britain to rely on imported corn, because lower prices would reduce wages, and landlords and farmers would lose purchasing power. On the other hand, adherents to the Ricardian model thought that Britain could use its capital and population to advantage in a system of free trade. The problems in Britain established precedent for problems in the German states; the British limitation on grain imports, through the Corn Laws, blocked economic recovery in the German states, particularly in eastern Prussia, by limiting the amount of grain that could be imported into Britain. Not only did the Corn Laws keep the price of grain in Britain high, they undermined the viability of Junker producers in east Prussia, and limited their access to external markets.

The commercial reform efforts sponsored by Bavaria in 1856 led to the General German Commercial Code in 1861 that was quickly approved by a majority of the confederation. It proved highly successful in reducing barriers and increasing trade.

1820s and 1830s

At the close of the Napoleonic Wars, Germany was made up of 39 states, among them four city-states. Having abolished its own internal tariffs in 1818, Prussia began inviting individual states to eliminate tariffs, with the agreements setting the foundation for Zollverein cementing strong economic ties between the various Prussian and Hohenzollern territories, and ensuring economic contact between non-contiguous holdings of the Hohenzollern family, also the ruling family of Prussia. It was formed to remove the various obstacles (such as different weights and measures in German states) to economic exchange and growth by the new commercial classes, creating a national unity in economic matter at a time when Germany was divided.

Surmounting the domestic customs, and the individual states' dependence on those customs as their primary source of income, proved to be a difficult problem. The myriad of customs barriers restricted trade and hampered the industrial development, but the rulers of the states were reluctant to forgo their income from the customs. The impasse was overcome through external forces. With the repeal of the Continental System, the German tradesmen stood in direct conflict with the English industry. A united German Trade and Tradesmens Union demanded protection from English exports. Their spokesman, the economist Friedrich List, feared that the German people would end up as "drawers of water and hewers of wood for Britain". Similarly, Karl Friedrich Nebenius, later president of the Ducal Ministry in the Grand Duchy of Baden and the author of Baden's 1819 proposed customs initiative with the German Confederation, offered a widely publicized description about the difficulties of surmounting such protections:

In 1820, Württemberg planned to start a customs union among the so-called Third Germany: the middle-sized German states, including itself, Baden, Bavaria, and the two Hessian states (Hesse-Darmstadt and Hesse-Kassel). This customs union excluded both Austria and Prussia, primarily because the two major German powers were considered too overbearing. Plans foundered on the differing interests of the affected states. While the economic development in Baden proceeded relatively well, with its long borders and well entrenched infrastructure for trade, economic development in Bavaria lagged well behind it, and the Bavarian regime enacted a protective tariff on goods produced outside its border. The result was a short lived trade agreement between Baden and Hesse-Darmstadt. Nevertheless, a second agreement, reached in Stuttgart in 1825, established rapport between Württemberg and Bavaria, with the foundation of the South German Customs Union. In opposition to the Prussian activities, Hanover, Saxony, Hesse, and other states (Austria, France, Great Britain, and the Netherlands), developed their own economic agreements. While they promised one another not to join the Prussian union, they did develop trade agreements of their own. The Union remained unsuccessful, because it only sought to maintain the status quo, not to fix the problems created by toll barriers. In 1834, Baden and Württemberg joined the Prussian union, which was renamed the German Customs Union. The Tax Union or Steuerverein was formed in 1834 as a customs union first of the Duchy of Brunswick and the Kingdom of Hanover, then with the Grand Duchy of Oldenburg in 1836.

By 1835, the German Customs Union had expanded to include the majority of the states of the German Confederation, even Saxony, the Thuringian states, Württemberg and Baden, Bavaria, and the Hessian states. Functionally, it removed many internal customs barriers, while upholding a protectionist tariff system with foreign trade partners.

Timeline

The original customs union was not ended in 1866 with outbreak of the Austro-Prussian War, but a substantial reorganization emerged in 1867. The new Zollverein was stronger, in that no individual state had a veto. When eventually Hamburg acceded to the Customs Union in 1888 it negotiated the exemption of an area of 4 square miles at the centre of its port, which remained outside of the Zollverein. Bremen (which includes Bremerhaven) had a similar agreement.

Impact

Economic impact
According to one study, "The Zollverein was the most important institutional development for Germany's economic unification during the middle of the 19th century. It had a strong impact on regional development, changing regional fortunes by the opening and closing of markets."

Role in the unification of Germany

According to economic historians Helmut Böhme and H.-U. Wehler, the Zollverein set the groundwork for the unification of Germany under Prussian guidance. This traditional view is disputed by historians such as Hans-Joachim Voth who contend that far from allowing Prussia to increase its political influence over the smaller states, the customs union may have had the contrary effect: many governments used the increased revenue brought by the customs union to try to consolidate their independence. The smaller states entered the customs union for purely fiscal reasons, and as the events of 1866 were to demonstrate, membership in the Zollverein did not in the least lead to any form of political commitment toward Berlin, as many states remained suspicious of Prussia and generally pro-Austrian.

The impact of the Zollverein on German unification may have been more incidental because it never intended to be a political platform but focused on the economy. As it constituted the main feature of Berlin's "German policy" for many years, Prussian ministers and other government officials became accustomed to think in terms of Germany as a whole and to look beyond specifically Prussian benefits when looking for a consensus across Germany.

According to revisionist historians, the Zollverein may not even have been instrumental in bringing about Prussia's economic preeminence in Germany. They argue that nothing seems to indicate that industrial investments increased decisively during the period in Prussia, or that the customs union played a significant role in reducing the dominance of agriculture in the kingdom's economy.

In literature

In 1840 the poet August Heinrich Hoffmann von Fallersleben published, in his Unpolitische Lieder, a song entitled Der deutsche Zollverein which ironically compares the economic advantages of a customs union to the political unity which the German Confederation had failed to achieve.

References

Further reading

 W. O. Henderson, The Zollverein (1959).
 David T. Murphy, "Prussian aims for the Zollverein, 1828–1833", Historian, Winter 1991, vol. 53(2) pp. 285–302.
 Arnold H. Price, The Evolution of the Zollverein, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1949.
 James J. Sheehan, German History, 1770–1866 (1993).

19th century in Germany
Economy of Prussia
Customs unions
1834 establishments in Germany
Intergovernmental organizations established by treaty
Germany–Luxembourg relations
Legal history of Germany
Organizations established in 1834
Pan-Germanism

Zollverein


Wilhelm Friedrich Ludwig Freiherr von Koenig-Warthausen (* 25. Januar 1793 in Stuttgart; † 9. Januar 1879 ebenda) war Soldat, Justizbeamter und Landtagsabgeordneter in Württemberg.

Familie
Sein Vater Carl Friedrich Wilhelm von Koenig (* 1748; † 22. Juni 1821 in Stuttgart) war Geheimer Oberjustizrat beim 1. Senat des Oberjustizkollegiums in Stuttgart, zuletzt Direktor der Ausstandskommission in Stuttgart. Seine Mutter war Friederike Sophie Elisabeth Heigelin (* 1766).

Er heiratete 1821 Elise Friederike Brastberger (1797–1824) und 1826 als zweite Ehefrau Sophie Ernestine Freiin Varnbüler von und zu Hemmingen (1809–1837). Seine vier Kinder, davon drei aus zweiter Ehe, kamen alle in Ulm zur Welt. Aus der ersten Ehe stammt der spätere Landtagsabgeordnete Freiherr Wilhelm Koenig von Königshofen (1822–1891).

Leben
Wilhelm von Koenig-Warthausen besuchte das Gymnasium in Stuttgart. Noch vor Beendigung der Schulzeit wurde er auf Befehl von König Friedrich von Württemberg im Frühjahr 1811 zum Militär eingezogen und dem Infanterieregiment Nr. 4 Franquemont zugeteilt. Im Januar 1812 wurde er als Leutnant zum Leib-Chevauxlegers-Regiment Nr. 1 Herzog Heinrich, Ulm versetzt. Mit diesem nahm er im Verband der württembergischen Truppen an Napoleons Russland-Feldzug teil. Er überlebte die militärische Katastrophe und nahm 1814 als 21-Jähriger seinen Abschied vom Militär, um in Heidelberg und Tübingen Rechtswissenschaften zu studieren.

Nach Bestehen der Dienstprüfung wurde er 1819 zunächst als Referendär II. Klasse dem Gerichtshof in Esslingen zugeteilt, kam aber bereits am 3. Dezember 1819 als Assessor zum Gerichtshof in Ulm. In den 20 Jahren seiner dienstlichen Tätigkeit in Ulm stieg er am zum Justizrat und zum Oberjustizrat auf. 1823 wurde er vom König in den württembergischen Freiherrenstand erhoben. Am 14. November 1839 wurde er in Stuttgart zum Obertribunalrat ernannt. Von 1849 bis 1857 gehörte der Königliche Kammerherr als vom König berufenes Mitglied dem Württembergischen Staatsgerichtshof an.

Er erwarb 1829 sowohl das Rittergut Warthausen (Oberamt Biberach) als auch von seinem Schwiegervater das Rittergut Fachsenfeld (Oberamt Aalen).

Wilhelm von Koenig-Warthausen ist auf dem evangelischen Friedhof in Fachsenfeld bestattet.

Politik
1832 wurde er in Ulm für die Ritterschaft des Donaukreises als Abgeordneter in die Zweite Kammer des württembergischen Landtags gewählt, der nur vom 15. Januar bis zum 22. März 1833 tagte. Von 1844 bis 1848 gehörte er, wiederum für die Ritterschaft des Donaukreises, erneut dem Landtag an.

Ehrungen
 1813 Ritterkreuz des Militär-Verdienst-Ordens
 1838 Ritterkreuz des Ordens der württembergischen Krone,
 1856 Kommenturkreuz 2. Klasse des Friedrichs-Ordens
 1857 Kommenturkreuz des Ordens der Württembergischen Krone
 Kriegsgedenkmünze

Literatur

Einzelnachweise

Weblinks
 Biografie im Oberschwaben-Portal

Landtagsabgeordneter (Württemberg, Zweite Kammer)
Träger des Ordens der Württembergischen Krone (Komtur)
Kommentur II. Klasse des Friedrichs-Ordens
Träger des Württembergischen Militärverdienstordens (Ritter)
Freiherr
Person (Stuttgart)
Württemberger
Deutscher
Geboren 1793
Gestorben 1879
Mann

Wilhelm von König-Warthausen


أماني البلوشي (18 نوفمبر 1984  -)، مذيعة كويتية.

حياتها الفنية
بدأت تقديم البرامج في قناة الراي وذلك بتقديم برنامج «رايكم شباب» عام 2004، عام 2007 اتجهت إلى تقديم البرامج الموسيقية على ذات القناة مثل «music club» و«duet 2». في سبتمبر 2011 أتجهت إلى قناة الوطن وقدمت عدة برامج تلفزيونية.

من البرامج الذي قدمتها
 رايكم شباب.
 music club.
 duet 2.
 سبوت لايت.
 جد ولعب - الموسم السابع.

المراجع

بلوش
مذيعات كويتيات
مواليد 1405 هـ
مواليد 1984

أماني البلوشي


Maurice-Paul-Emanuel Sarrail () a fost un general francez din Primul Război Mondial. Vederile politice deschis socialiste ale lui Sarrail l-au făcut o raritate în cadrul corpului ofițeresc al Armatei Franceze a celei de-a Treia Republici, dominat înainte de război de catolici, conservatori și monarhiști și au reprezentat motivul principal pentru care el a fost numit la comanda frontului aliat de la Salonic.

La începutul războiului, Sarrail a comandat Corpul al VI-lea, apoi Armata a III-a în Ardeni și jurul orașului Verdun, unde armata condusă de el a jucat un rol important în fazele finale ale Primei bătălii de pe Marna și a reușit să apere orașul Verdun (mai târziu locul unei bătălii importante purtate în 1916). El a fost destituit pentru proastă conducere, în mijlocul vacarmului politic din iulie 1915.

Campania din Salonic – proiectată din mai multe motive strategice prezentate de Sarrail – a fost destinată inițial să sprijine Serbia, după ce Bulgaria a intrat în război de partea Puterilor Centrale, iar mai târziu (după ce campania de la Gallipoli eșuase) să ofere Franței o șansă pentru a-și afirma influența economică și politică asupra Greciei și a Imperiului Otoman aflat în declin. Sarrail a ajuns să comande o forță aliată multinațională în mijlocul intrigilor politice și a unei stări de război civil aparent în Grecia, a cărui rege Constantin era progerman, în timp ce primul ministru Venizelos era proaliat și dornic, de asemenea, să câștige părți ale teritoriului turcesc din vestul Anatoliei. În ciuda mai multor acțiuni ofensive, forțele lui Sarrail nu au reușit nici să ocupe Bulgaria și nici să prevină ocuparea de către Puterile Centrale a Serbiei în 1915 sau a României în 1916.

Sarrail a fost destituit de la comanda frontului din Salonic în decembrie 1917. Mai târziu, el a jucat un rol în reprimarea de către francezi a Marii Revolte Siriene de la mijlocul anilor 1920.

Biografie

Începutul carierei
Sarrail s-a născut la Carcassonne și a urmat cursurile Academiei de la Saint-Cyr, absolvind pe locul III în 1 octombrie 1877. El a fost repartizat ca sublocotenent în trupele de infanterie. Avansarea sa în cadrul regimentului și promovarea în grad a urmat cursul normal. El a fost promovat locotenent în octombrie 1882, căpitan în 1887, și chef-de-bataillon (maior) în 1897. În 1901 a fost numit comandant al École Militaire d'Infanterie (Saint Maixent), unde cadeții erau transformați în ofițeri republicani loiali.

În 1902 a fost promovat la gradul de locotenent-colonel. Din 1904 și până în 1906 el a fost comandantul militar al Palais Bourbon, care adăpostea Camera Deputaților, și a fost promovat la gradul de colonel în 1905. În 1907 a devenit director de infanterie în Ministerul de Război, deținând această funcție timp de patru ani. A fost promovat general de brigadă în 1908. În 1911 a fost promovat general de divizie când prietenul său radical socialist Caillaux a format primul său guvern și în 1 noiembrie 1913 a fost numit la comanda Corpului al VIII-lea.

Spre deosebire de mulți ofițeri francezi, Sarrail a fost francmason și dreyfusard. După ce a venit la putere în 1914 un guvern centru-stânga, el urma să fie numit în toamna aceluiași an în funcția de comandant-șef în locul generalului Joffre, dar războiul a izbucnit înainte ca această numire să aibă loc.

Primul Război Mondial: Frontul de Vest 1914-1915

Bătălia din Ardeni
La Virton în Ardeni, în august 1914, el a comandat Corpul VI, parte a Armatei a III-a a lui Ruffey. Corpul VI a fost întărit cu o divizie suplimentară de infanterie și s-a confruntat cu Corpul VI Rezervă German. Corpul lui Sarrail a fost singurul corp din Armata a III-a care a rezistat puternicelor contraatacuri germane (celelalte fiind Corpul V al lui Brochin și Corpul IV al lui Victor-Rene Broelle). El a fost în cele din urmă obligat să se retragă pentru a evita să fie încercuit. Sarrail le-a spus militarilor din Divizia 42, care formau ariergarda, că "au dat dovada de cran (curaj)".

Pe 30 august Sarrail a fost promovat ca succesor al lui Ruffey la comanda Armatei a III-a.
La începutul lunii septembrie Corpul IV a fost scos de sub comanda sa și a fost atașat noii Armate a VI-a a lui Maunoury aflată în apropierea Parisului.

Luptele din jurul Verdunului

La începutul lunii septembrie Sarrail, împreună cu Franchet d'Esperey (Armata a V-a) și cu Foch (Armata a IX-a), au primit ordinul (Instruction Generale No 5) de a opri retragerea și de a fi pregătiți pentru contraatac. Cu toate acestea, în timpul Bătăliei de pe Marna, spre deosebire de ceilalți generalii francezi, Sarrail a primit ordinul simplu de a bloca înaintarea Armatei a V-a Germane a prințului moștenitor Wilhelm, care se afla în fața lui, în apropiere de Verdun.

Salonic

În ianuarie 1916 Sarrail a primit comanda tuturor forțelor aliate forțelor de pe teatrul de război macedonean. S-a hotărât că nu se va întreprinde nicio acțiune militară la Salonic fără acordul britanicilor. Șeful Statului Major Imperial Britanic William Robertson suspecta că prezența aliată la Salonic, pe care francezii doreau ca britanicii să o întărească, a fost continuată doar pentru a-i oferi un post se comandă lui Sarrail, ceea ce nu era chiar adevărat – Joffre spera să atragă România în război de partea aliaților. Pe 4 martie 1916, la două zile după ce germanii au atacat Verdunul, Joffre – spre iritarea lui Robertson – i-a ordonat lui Sarrail să "studieze" o ofensivă care să blocheze acolo trupele Puterilor Centrale. Sarrail i-a răspuns că avea nevoie de 21 de divizii și se afla în imposibilitatea de a efectua o operațiune majoră înainte de sosirea sârbilor. În luna martie trupele regaliste grecești au primit ordin să nu se opună forțelor austro-ungare și bulgare.

Pe 10 martie Joffre i-a scris lui Sarrail că prezența lui la Salonic a fost concepută ca o cacealma pentru a imobiliza o parte din forțele Puterilor Centrale, în timp ce avea, în același timp, scopul de a atrage Grecia și România de partea Aliaților, dar, în același timp, comandantul militar francez făcea "pregăti reale" pentru o ofensivă majoră. La Conferința Aliată din 12 martie, Rusia și Serbia au făcut presiuni pentru declanșarea unei ofensive majore la Salonic, dar nu s-a obținut acordul englezilor și francezilor. Joffre i-a dat permisiunea lui Sarrail (pe 20 aprilie) să facă o "demonstrație" de forță, dar cinci zile mai târziu i-a scris lui Robertson și i-a propus declanșarea unei ofensive majore. Nu s-a obținut însă acordul britanicilor.

Joffre și Robertson au fost îndemnați să atace, în timp ce în același timp se dorea păstrarea concentrării forțelor pe Frontul de Vest. În lunile iunie și iulie Joffre (care dorea să-l țină pe Sarrail cât mai departe de Franța) a încercat din nou să obțină acordul britanicilor pentru o ofensivă  majoră la Salonic. Italienii erau o sursă de conflicte, în timp ce guvernul grec încerca să obstrucționeze aprovizionarea, iar rezerviștii Armatei Grecești comiteau acte de sabotaj. Ca parte a angajamentului pentru intrarea României în război, Sarrail a primit în cele din urmă ordinul de angajare într-o ofensivă majoră. Lloyd George, care devenise în luna iunie ministru de război al Marii Britanii, a fost de acord să angajeze trupele britanice de la Salonic într-o astfel de ofensivă.

O ofensivă aliată a fost planificată pentru data de 1 august, dar pe 25 iulie România a solicitat o amânare. În cele din urmă, pe 17 august, s-a convenit că Sarrail ar trebui să atace pe 20 august, iar românii pe 28 august.
Generalul Victor Cordonnier, ales de Sarrail de pe o listă scurtă de trei persoane a lui Joffre, a sosit la Salonic pe 11 august pentru a prelua comanda contingentului francez. Dar forțele bulgare au atacat primele pe 17 august, întărite de două divizii germane aduse din Munții Vosgi până la râul Vardar. Pe măsură ce moralul bulgarilor se năruia, au fost aduse în continuare batalioane germane din Champagne, Polonia și Vosgi, precum și unele tunuri grele de la Verdun. Bulgarii au început o ofensivă majoră împotriva flancurilor stâng și drept ale lui Sarrail – având inițial succes în atacul flancului drept. Forțele lui Sarrail au oprit ofensiva cu dificultate până în data de 28 august și Sarrail și-a refăcut planurile încercând să evite atacarea germanilor în dreptul râului Vardar.

Căderea Bucureștilor (6 decembrie) nu doar a scos din discuție un atac româno-rus în Bulgaria, dar, de asemenea, a făcut posibil un atac al Puterile Centrale asupra Salonicului. Unul dintre ultimele ordine oficiale ale lui Joffre (11 decembrie) a fost să-i comande lui Sarrail să înceteze ofensiva și să stabilească o puternică poziție defensivă, din care puteau fi lansate mai mult ofensive în viitor. Generalul Pierre Roques, ministrul de război al Franței, a sosit într-o misiune de informare la Salonic, după ce Marea Britanie, Italia și Rusia au făcut presiuni pentru destituirea lui Sarrail. Spre surpriza primului ministru Briand și a lui Joffre, Roques a revenit în Franța cu sugestia ca forțele lui Sarrail să fie mărite până la un efectiv de treizeci de divizii care să fie pregătite pentru un atac împotriva Bulgariei. El nu l-a lăudat în mod special pe Sarrail, dar a recomandat ca Sarrail să nu-i mai raporteze lui Joffre. Elaborat pe fundalul rezultatelor dezamăgitoare ale campaniei de pe Somme și a ocupării unei mari părți a României, raportul lui Roques i-a discreditat în continuare pe Briand și Joffre și a solicitat convocarea unei adunări parlamentare cu ușile închise. Pe 27 noiembrie, Consiliul de Miniștri s-au reunit pentru a dezbate revocarea decretului din 2 decembrie 1915, care îl plasase pe Sarrail sub comanda lui Joffre, fiind inițiate astfel o serie de manevre politice care au condus la demisia lui Joffre.

Eșecul ofensivei Aliaților pe frontul din Macedonia a fost resimțit cu amărăciune de către trupele române, care au scandat în mod ironic: "O Sarrail, Sarrail, Sarrail,/ Noi ne batem și tu stai!". Cu toate acestea, România a contribuit, de asemenea, în mod parțial la eșec, netrimițând 150.000 de soldați către Bulgaria pentru a susține ofensiva lui Sarrail, așa cum fusese stabilit într-o convenție militară încheiată pe 23 iulie la Chantilly.

Britanicii încă mai sperau la o reconciliere între facțiunile grecești și considerau că un regat grecesc s-ar afla mai puțin sub influența franceză decât o republică. Cu toate acestea, pe 21 decembrie, guvernele britanic și francez au recunoscut Guvernul Provizoriu al Greciei de la Salonic. Până la sfârșitul anului, cea mai mare parte a României a fost invadată și speranțele Aliaților în colapsul Austro-Ungariei s-au năruit. Germanii s-au referit la Salonic ca la un "lagăr de concentrare", iar Sarrail a fost extrem de sensibil cu privire la compararea situației sale cu încercuirea trupelor lui Bazaine la Metz în 1870. Felicitările de Crăciun din 1916 – scrise în limba franceză și conținând portretul lui Sarrail – au fost trimise de trupele britanice, franceze și italiene de la Salonic propriilor familii.

Destituirea
După ce Franța a scăpat la limită de o criză politică și militară în 1917, asocierea lui Sarrail cu politicienii socialiști Caillaux și Malvy, suspectați acum de contacte trădătoare cu germanii, i-a pecetluit soarta.

Odată ce a devenit prim-ministru Clemenceau a trecut rapid la destituirea lui Sarrail. El a făcut situația frontului de la Salonic principalul subiect de discuție la prima ședință a Comitetul de Război (6 decembrie), spunând: "Sarrail nu poate rămâne acolo". Clemenceau și Philippe Pétain (comandant-șef al forțelor franceze pe Frontul de Vest) îl preferau pe Franchet d'Esperey ca succesor al lui Sarrail, dar Foch (șeful Marelui Stat Major) l-a susținut pe Guillaumat pentru acest post și i-a convins mai întâi pe  Pétain și apoi pe primul ministru. Clemenceau l-a informat pe Sarrail că a fost destituit pe 10 decembrie.

Un comunicat de presă din 11 decembrie a anunțat că Sarrail "a trebuit să se confrunte cu mari dificultăți și a efectuat servicii importante". Nu au existat urmări politice ale destituirii sale și el nu a mai luat parte la operațiunile militare ulterioare.

Sfârșitul carierei
Sarrail s-a retras la casa lui de la țară din Montauban pentru a-și scrie memoriile. Relatarea operațiunilor de la Salonic a fost publicată la scurt timp după sfârșitul Primului Război Mondial sub titlul Mon Commandement en Orient.

Când aliații politici ai lui au revenit la putere în 1924 el a fost trimis în Siria ca înalt comisar francez. A fost rechemat în Franța pe 30 octombrie 1925, după ce a ordonat bombardarea Damascului în timpul Marii Revolte Siriene.

El a devenit Mare Ofițer al Legiunii de Onoare în noiembrie 1914 și a fost distins cu Marea Cruce a aceluiași ordin în ianuarie 1916. I s-a acordat Médaille militaire în septembrie 1917.

El a murit pe 23 martie 1929, la Paris, la câteva zile după mareșalul Foch.

Clayton l-a descris pe Sarrail ca "un general competent, dar nu și excepțional".

Referințe

Lectură suplimentară
 Cassar, George H. (2011). Lloyd George at War, 1916–18. Anthem Press, London. ISBN 978-0-857-28392-4

 Haythornthwaite, Philip J. (1994). În Primul Război Mondial Sourcebook.  Arme și Armuri de Presa, de la Londra. ISBN: 1-85409-102-6

Legături externe
 Maurice Sarrail la Firstworldwar.com

Nașteri în 1856
Decese în 1929
Generali francezi
Socialiști francezi
Marea Cruce a Legiunii de onoare
Mari Ofițeri ai Legiunii de onoare
Greci ai primului război mondial
Istoria Siriei

Maurice Sarrail


Millet Kütüphanesi, İstanbul'un Fatih ilçesinde bulunan Feyzullah Efendi Medresesi'nde 1916 yılından beri hizmet veren kütüphanedir.

Günümüzde "Millet Yazma Eser Kütüphanesi" adını taşır; bir araştırma ve ihtisas kütüphanesi konumundadır. Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı, Kütüphaneler ve Yayımlar Genel Müdürlüğü'ne bağlıdır. Kütüphanede 28 farklı dilde çoğunluğu nadide 6 bin 998 yazma, 20 bin 605 Arap harfli basma eser olmak üzere toplam 27 bin 603 eser bulunur.

Kütüphanenin bir bölümü sergi salonu olarak düzenlenmiştir. Sergi bölümünde hat levhalar, ferman ve beratlar sergilenmektedir. Hat levhalar arasında Sultan II. Mahmut'un yazdığı levhalar da vardır. Türk dilinin ilk sözlüğü olan Kâşgarlı Mahmud'un Dîvânü Lugati't-Türk adlı eserinin tek yazması bu kütüphanede bulunmaktadır.

Tarihçe
Feyzullah Efendi Medresesi'nde yer alan kütüphane, 1916 yılında, Ali Emiri Efendi'nin 16.000'i aşkın nadir eserden oluşan özel kitap koleksiyonunu bağışlaması ile kuruldu.  Ali Emîrî Efendi'nin bağışladığı kitaplar arasında,  Arap harfli Türkçe gazete ve mecmua koleksiyonları,  kırk altı adet padişah fermanı ile Türk dilinin ilk sözlüğü olan Kâşgarlı Mahmud'un Dîvânü Lugati't-Türk adlı eserinin tek yazması da vardır.

Bağışladığı kitapların yanı sıra Feyzullah Efendi Vakfı'ndaki 2189 yazma esere sahip olan kütüphaneyi Ali Emiri Efendi "kütüphane nazırı" unvanı ile idare etmiş; onun ölümüden sonra kütüphane müdürü sıfatıyla idareciler atanmıştır. 1924 yılından itibaren Reşid Efendi, Carullah Efendi, Hekimoğlu Ali Paşa ve Pertev Paşa Kütüphaneleri gibi önemli vakıf kütüphanelerinin kitapları burada toplandı. Vakıf kütüphanelerinin kitapları 1962 yılında Süleymaniye Kütüphanesi'ne devredildikten sonra Milllet Kütüphanesi, İl Halk Kütüphanesi oldu.  1981 yılında İl Halk Kütüphanesi Simkeş Binası'na taşınınca Millet Kütüphanesi, Fatih İlçe  Kütüphanesi olarak hizmet vermeye devam etti. Koleksiyonundaki yeni eser kitapların Sakarya Üniversitesi Kütüphane ve Dokümantasyon Merkezine devredilmesinden sonra 1993'te   araştırma ve ihtisas kütüphanesi konumuna geldi.

Başkanlığını1983-2003 arasında Mehmet Serhan Tayşi yaptı.

Kütüphane, 1999 yılındaki Marmara depreminde ağır hasar gördü.  Depremin ardından kapandı ve  eserler Beyazıt Devlet Kütüphanesi'ne taşındı.  2000 yılında başlayan, Suna ve İnan Kıraç Vakfı'nın desteklediği restorasyon çalışmalarından sonra Millet Kütüphanesi 2008'de tekrar Şeyhülislam Feyzullah Efendi Medresesi'nde hizmete girdi.

Kütüphane binası
Kütüphane, 1700-/1701 yılında Erzurumlu Şeyhülislâm Seyyid Feyzullah Efendi tarafından Dârü'l Hadis olarak yaptırılmış olan  "Feyziyye Medresesi"nde hizmet vermektedir. İnşa tarihinden bu yana çeşitli tamirler görmüş olan yapı 1894'teki İstanbul zelzelesi ve daha sonra Fatih yangınında hasar görünce Evkaf Nâzırı Şeyhülislâm Mustafa Hayri Efendi'nin gayretleriyle tamir ettirilmiş ve Feyzullah Efendi'nin vakfettiği kitaplar Evkaf-ı Hümâyun Nezâreti tarafından koruma altına alınmıştır.

Toplam 1650metrekare alan üstüne kurulan medrese, (L) şeklinde ön kısmı revaklı on küçük oda ile karşısında taş avludan merdivenle çıkılan simetrik, kubbeli iki salondan oluşan ana bina olmak üzere iki bölümden oluşmaktadır.

Bahçesinde şadırvanı, kuyusu ve ayrıca yan yüzünde bulunan kitabeli çeşmesiyle Osmanlı mimarisinin klasik döneminin sonuna aittir.

Kaynakça

Fatih'teki kütüphaneler
Yazma eser kütüphaneleri
1700'lerde mimarlık
İskenderpaşa, Fatih

Millet Yazma Eser Kütüphanesi


El Tratado de Buena Vecindad y Cooperación Amistosa entre la República Popular China y la Federación Rusa (FCT) es un acuerdo estratégico que fue firmado por los líderes de las dos potencias internacionales, Jiang Zemin y Vladímir Putin, el 16 de julio de 2001.

Visión general
El tratado bosqueja los grandes rasgos que han de servir de base para unas relaciones pacíficas, cooperación económica, así como dependencia diplomática y geopolítica. Controversialmente, el Artículo 9 del tratado puede ser visto como un pacto de defensa, y otros artículos (A7 y A16) apuntan a incrementar la cooperación militar, incluyendo el compartir "know-how militar" (A16), es decir, acceso chino a tecnología militar rusa.

El tratado también comprende un enfoque de cooperación mutua en tecnología ambiental, regulaciones y conservación de la energía; además de sinergias en sus mercados financieros y comercio. El documento afirma la posición rusa sobre el Taiwán como "una parte inalienable de China" (A5), y destaca el compromiso de asegurar la "unidad nacional y la integridad territorial" en los dos países (A4).

Beneficios

Los analistas han atribuido motivos subyacentes, y percibido mutuos beneficios del FCT por diversos factores.

China

 China desarrolló y modernizó sus fuerzas armadas, gran parte  de la cual estaba obsoleta. Este proceso puede ser acelerado con el entrenamiento militar ruso y su tecnología.

 China desea obtener un nivel estable consistente y financiable de embarques de combustibles, especialmente petróleo. Este objetivo puede ser mejor satisfecho con compras y despachos de petróleo ruso, incluyendo la construcción de un Óleoducto transiberiano.

 China desea obtener apoyo para su postura sobre Taiwán.

Rusia

 Rusia se empecina en obtener recursos de capital, de los cuales tiene necesidad como consecuencia de las severas pérdidas ante especuladores internacionales durante el proceso de disolución soviética. Este esfuerzo puede ser complementado significativamente a través del uso de capital chino. Concordantemente:
 Rusia desea encontrar fuentes de empleo para su fuerza calificada.
 Rusia desea vender su tecnología militar y experiencia.
 Rusia desea vender sus grandes reservas de petróleo y gas natural.

Temor de la globalización de Estados Unidos

Tanto la RPC como Rusia temen la penetración de los Estados Unidos (especialmente con posterioridad a la fortalecida posición geopolítica que siguió a los ataques del 11 de septiembre de 2001) involucrando áreas que ellos consideraban como pertenecientes a sus respectivas esferas de influencias e intereses nacionales: para la RPC, esto mayoritariamente involucra el estatus político de la República de China, sirviendo como un estado cliente de los Estados Unidos, mientras que para Rusia involucra el tener varias Repúblicas Soviéticas como estados clientes de Estados Unidos. Algunos de estos países no tienen fronteras con ninguno de los dos, sin embargo los países bálticos, Bielorrusia, Ucrania, Georgia, y Azerbaiyán limtan con Rusia; Kirguistán y Tayikistán limitan con la RPC; mientras que Kazajistán y Mongolia tienen frontera con ambos.

Competencia económica con los Estados Unidos, Japón y la Comunidad Europea

Estados Unidos, Japón y la Unión Europea son tres potencias económicas que poseen una fuerza laboral cualificada y acceso al capital. Rusia y la RPC pueden competir más efectivamente contra estas potencias en el mundo económico, con el proporcionamiento de capital chino a Rusia y con el acceso a la tecnología y capacitación rusa a China.

Véase también
 BRIC

Referencias

Enlaces externos
 Text of the Treaty — Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China
 "China, Russia Sign Good-Neighborly Friendship, Cooperation Treaty" — People's Daily
 "China, Russia Sign Good-Neighborly Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation" (details) — The Chinese Embassy in Norway
 "Anniversary of Sino-Russian Good-Neighborly Treaty Marked" — China Internet Information Center
 "China, Russia to promote military cooperation" — People's Daily
 Chinese, Russian leaders exchange new year's greetings" (2006) — Xinhua
 "Chinese president arrives in Moscow for state visit" (2005) — People's Daily
 "Hu: Sino-Russian ties enter a new phase" — Xinhua
 "Russian-Chinese border most problematic ecologically" — RIA Novosti
 "Post-Cold War Sino-Russian Relations: An Indian Perspective" — Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses
 "Challenges of the Sino-Russian Strategic Partnership" (PDF) — Center for Strategic and International Studies
 "Power Politics in Central Asia" — Harvard Asia Quarterly

Relaciones China-Rusia
Rusia
China
China en 2001
Rusia en 2001

Tratado de Amistad China-Rusia de 2001


Eventyret om dansk film er en dansk dokumentarserie i 18 afsnit fra 1996 instrueret af Svend Aage Lorentz.

Afsnit

Eksterne henvisninger

Danske tv-serier fra 1990'erne

Dokumentarserier fra Danmark

Eventyret om dansk film


Ernst Von Aster (d. 18 Şubat 1880, Berlin - ö. 21 Ekim 1948, Stokholm), Alman filozof.

Yaşamı

İlköğretimi Berlin'de okudu, Berlin Askanisches Gymnasium'da Nisan 1898 bakaloryasını vererek mezun oldu. Yüksek öğrenimini Münih ve Berlin Üniversiteleri'nde tamamladı. Doktorasını 15 Mayıs 1902'de verdi.

Münih'te Friedrich Wilhelm Üniversitesi'nde okuduktan sonra akademik öğretmen olarak Theodor Lipps'e katıldı. 1920'de Giessen Üniversitesi'nde bir kürsüye atandı. Ancak, Aster'in SPD'nin bir üyesi olması ve alenen bir pasifist olarak tanınması onun aleyhine olan itirazları arttırdı. Birinci Dünya Savaşı'nın son aşamasında, savaşın sonlanması için barış müzakereleri düzenlenmesi için çağrılar yapmıştı. Aster aynı zamanda Alman İnsan Hakları Birliği'nin yönetim kurulundaydı. 1933'te siyasi nedenlerle görevden alındı ve İsveç'e sürgüne gitti. 3 yıl kaldığı İsveç'ten, 1936'da Türkiye'ye taşındı ve burada İstanbul ve Ankara'da öğretmenlik yaptı. Ernst von Aster, şair Hildur Dixelius (1879-1969) ile evliydi.

Prof. Von Aster Grekçe, Latince, Almanca, Fransızca, İngilizce öğrendi. Ayrıca 3 yıl sürgünde kaldığı İsveç'te İsveççe öğrenmiştir.

9 Temmuz 1936 tarihinde Edebiyat Fakültesi Dekan Vekili İbrahim Hakkı tarafından Rektörlüğe yazılan dilekçede, Felsefe Bölümünde, özellikle de Felsefe Tarihi kürsüsünde profesör eksikliği duyulduğu belirtilmiştir. Felsefe Tarihi dersleri iki yıl boyunca Umumî Felsefe ve Mantık Ordinaryüsü Hans Reichenbach tarafından verilmekteydi, ancak 1936 yılında Reichenbach, kendisini bütünüyle Umumî Felsefe ve Mantık derslerine yöneltmek istediğini belirttiğinden Felsefe Tarihi kürsüsüne yurt dışından iki aday öğretim üyesi önerilmiştir. Bunlardan biri Cassirer, diğeri ise Von Aster'di. Ancak, Cassirer, Göteborg Üniversitesi ile 4 yıllığına anlaşma imzalayınca, doğrudan Von Aster'le bağlantı kurulur. Yazışmalar sonucunda Von Aster 1 Eylül 1936 tarihinde Rektörlüğe çektiği bir telgrafta, ilkece gelmek istediğini belirtir. 27 Eylül 1936 tarihinde ise kesin olarak geleceğini bildirir. 24 Ekim 1936'da Edebiyat Fakültesi Felsefe Tarihi Kürsüsü Ordinaryüslüğünde göreve başlayan Von Aster, 1937 yılında, Türk Tarih Kongresi'ne İbn Haldun üzerine bir konferansla katıldı. 1941 yılında, Hukuk Fakültesinde Hukuk Felsefesi dersleri verdi. Edebiyat Fakültesinde verdiği dersleri, Doçent M. Ş. İpşir çevirmiştir.

Prof. Reichenbach'ın Fakülte'den ayrılmasıyla her iki kürsünün de yönetimini üstlenen Von Aster 30 Aralık 1942 tarihinde Dekanlığa verdiği dilekçede, sistematik felsefenin en önemli disiplini olan Umumî Bilgi Teorisinin felsefe tarihi dersleri ile aynı elde toplanmasını doğru bulduğunu, sistematik sorunları incelemeden felsefe tarihi yapılmayacağı gibi, tarihlerini bilmeksizin sistematik sorunlarla ilgilenilmeyeceğim belirtir. Bu nedenle, söz konusu dersleri verebileceğini söyler, ama Felsefe Bölümünde duyulan öğretim üyesi eksikliğinin, Fakülte'nin diğer bölümleri için de verimli olacak bir profesörle doldurulması gerektiğini bildirir ve bu görev için Profesör Walter Kranz'ı önerir.

Uzun yıllar Edebiyat Fakültesi'nde görev yapan Von Aster'e, 1946 yılında rektörlük tarafından Türk uyruğuna geçebileceği bildirildi. 21 Ekim 1946'da yazdığı karşılıkta Von Aster, bu olanağı kendisi için büyük bir onur olarak görmekle birlikte yaşının ilerlemiş olması ve ülkesinde yoluna koyması gereken görevler olduğunu bildirerek Alman uyruğunda kaldı. 21 Ekim 1948 tarihinde izinli olarak gittiği İsveç'te vefat etti.

Eserleri
 Prinzipien der Erkenntnislehre, 1913
 Geschichte der antiken Philosophie, 1921
 Geschichte der neueren Erkenntnistheorie, 1921
 Geschichte der englischen Philosophie, 1927
 Marx und die Gegenwart, 1929
 Philosophie der Gegenwart, 1935
 Geschichte der Philosophie, 1990

Ayrıca bakınız
İstanbul Üniversitesi Felsefe Bölümü
1933-1945 senelerinde Türkiye'ye sürgün

1880 doğumlular
1948 yılında ölenler

Ernst von Aster


é um estúdio de animação japonês subsidiário da produtora de animação Twin Engine.

Em 2015, o produtor anterior de Noitamina da Fuji TV, Kōji Yamamoto, fundou o estúdio depois que ele criou sua própria produtora, Twin Engine, em 2014. Geno Studio é uma subsidiária completa da Twin Engine, e a maioria de sua equipe veio do  extinto estúdio Manglobe.

Séries de anime

OVAs
Golden Kamuy (2018–2020)

Filmes
Genocidal Organ (2017, adquirido do estúdio Manglobe)

ONAs
Star Wars: Visions - Lop & Ochō (2021)

Ligações externas
 Site oficial

Estúdios de animação do Japão
Empresas fundadas em 2015

Geno Studio


ත්‍රිපිටකයේ සූත්‍ර පිටකයට අයත් කොටසකි. මෙහි සූත්‍ර 34ක් වේ. බුදු රජාණන් වහන්සේගේ සමකාලීන දාර්ශනිකයන්ගේ මත පිළිබඳ විස්තර අඩංගු වන්නේ ද  දීඝ නිකායේය.

සුත්‍ර නම් වශයෙන් මෙසේවේ. (ඉදිරියෙන් වරහන්තුල වෙනම දක්වා නැති සියළු සූත්‍ර බුද්ධ භාෂිතවේ)

1 කොටස
 බ්‍රහ්මජාල සූත්‍රය
 සාමඤ්ඤපල සූත්‍රය
 අම්බට්ඨ සූත්‍රය
 සෝණදණ්ඩ සූත්‍රය
 කූටදන්ත සූත්‍රය
 මහාලී සූත්‍රය
 ජාලිය සූත්‍රය
 කස්සප සීහනාද සූත්‍රය
 පොට්ඨපාද සූත්‍රය
 සුභ සූත්‍රය (ආනන්ද රහතන් වහන්සේ)
 කේවට්ට සූත්‍රය
 ලෝහිච්ච සූත්‍රය
 තේවිජ්ජ සූත්‍රය

2 කොටස
 මහාපදාන සූත්‍රය
 මහා නිද්දේස සූත්‍රය
 මහා පරිනිබ්බාන සූත්‍රය (දේශනාකල පුද්ගලයා නොදනී)
 මහා සුදස්සන සූත්‍රය
 ජන වසභ සූත්‍රය
 මහා ගෝවින්ද සූත්‍රය
 මහා සමය සූත්‍රය (දේශණාකල පුද්ගලයා නොදනී)
 සක්ක පඤ්හ සූත්‍රය
 මහා සතිපට්ඨාන සූත්‍රය
 පයාසි සූත්‍රය (කුමාර කාශ්‍යප රහතන්වහන්සේ)

3 කොටස
 පාටිකා සූත්‍රය
 උදුම්බරික සූත්‍රය
 චක්කවත්ති සූත්‍රය
 අග්ගඤ්ඤ සූත්‍රය
 සම්පසාදනීය සූත්‍රය (සැරියුත් රහතන්වහන්සේ)
 පාසාදික සූත්‍රය
 ලක්ඛණ සූත්‍රය
 සිඟාලෝවාද සූත්‍රය
 ආටානාටිය සූත්‍රය (දේශණාකල පුද්ගලයා නොදනී)
 සංගීති සූත්‍රය (සැරියුත් රහතන්වහන්සේ)
 දසුත්තර සූත්‍රය (සැරියුත් රහතන්වහන්සේ)

දීඝ නිකාය


AEGEE, (Fransızca: Association des États Généraux des Étudiants de l'Europe), Avrupa Öğrencileri Forumu, Avrupa'nın en büyük öğrenci organizasyonlarından biridir. Adını demokrasinin doğum yerlerinden biri olan Ege Denizi'nden (Aegean Sea) ve Fransız Devrimi'nin şafağında kurulan ilk parlamentodan, "Etats Généraux"dan alır.

AEGEE hakkında genel bilgi
AEGEE, Avrupa'daki toplumlar ve ülkeler arasında zorla yaratılmış düşmanlık ve önyargılardan arınmış bir Avrupa fikrini gençlerin oluşturabileceği düşüncesinden hareket ederek, farklı kültür ve milletlerden gelen gençler arasında işbirliği ve dayanışmayı geliştirmek için ekonomik ve politik olarak bağımsız gençlik etkinlikleri düzenlemektedir. AEGEE, Avrupa'daki tüm ülkelerin sahip olduğu çeşitlilikleri ve farklılıkları bir kültürel zenginlik olarak gören, kendi ülkelerinde, şehirlerinde ve Avrupa'da sivil toplum alanında aktif olan gençlerin bir araya getirdiği Avrupa'nın en büyük disiplinlerarası öğrenci kuruluşudur. AEGEE bütünleşmiş bir Avrupa'yı, sınırlarötesi işbirliğini, ve akademik bir çevre içinde entegrasyonu savunur. Herhangi bir politik partiye veya siyasi görüşe bağlı olmayıp, ulusal düzeyde değil, sadece yerel bazda örgütlenir (AEGEE-Adana, AEGEE-İstanbul, AEGEE-Ankara gibi).

Avrupa'nın farklı ülkelerinde ve bu ülkelerin farklı şehirlerinde üyelerin ve gönüllülerin bir araya geldiği, çalışma yürüttükleri lokaller bulunmaktadır.

AEGEE 1985 yılında Paris'te birkaç üniversite öğrencisinin girişimiyle kurulmuştur. Kuruluştaki temel amaç, o dönemlerde oldukça gündemde olan 'Avrupa' kimliğini ve kavramını Avrupalı gençler arasında tartışmaya açmak ve geleceğin Avrupa'sını bu tartışmalar sonucunda şekillendirmektir.

Başlangıçta sadece o dönemki adıyla Avrupa Ekonomik Topluluğu ülkelerine açık olan AEGEE, Avrupa'nın sadece Avrupa Ekonomik Topluluğu ile sınırlanamayacağı görüşünün etkisiyle diğer ülkelere de yayılmış, Sovyet Bloğu'nun çökmesinin hemen ardından da Doğu Avrupa ve Balkanlar'daki gençlere ulaşmaya başlamıştır.

Mihail Gorbaçov (Eski SSCB Devlet Başkanı), Vaclav Havel (Çek Cumhuriyeti Cumhurbaşkanı), Árpád Göncz (Macaristan Cumhurbaşkanı), Catherine Lalumière (Avrupa Konseyi Genel Sekreteri), Jacques Santer (Avrupa Birliği Başkanı), Bronisław Geremek (Polonya Dışişleri Bakanı ve AGİT Eski Başkanı), Kenneth Edwards (Avrupa Rektörler Konferansı Başkanı) AEGEE'nin Avrupa çapındaki hamileri arasında yer almaktadır.
AEGEE, kâr amacı gütmeyen bir organizasyon olup, herhangi bir politik taraf tutmaz. Bütün projeler ve aktiviteler, Gönüllü olarak çalışan üyeler tarafından yürütülmektedir. AEGEE'nin dört temel çalışma alanı vardır. Bunlar;

 Barış ve İstikrar
 Yüksek Öğrenim
 Aktif Vatandaşlık
 Kültürel Değişim

olarak tanımlanır.

AEGEE, ülke bazlı değil, şehir bazlı örgütlenmiştir. Bunun temel sebebi, birleşik bir Avrupa düşüncesinin savunucu olmasıdır. AEGEE'nin bu düşünceye yönelik belli amaç ve politikaları vardır;
 Barış yolunda bütün engelleri, düşmanlıkları, sonradan yaratılmış bölünmeleri ve zorla varsayılan farklılıkları aşmış bir Avrupa oluşturmak.
 Avrupa kültür ve uygarlığının anlaşılması ve tanımlanması için çalışmak ve öğrenci hareketliliği ile birlikte Avrupa anlayışını gençler arasında yaygınlaştırmak.
 Bölgesel özelliklere ve kültürel farklılıklara saygı gösterirken, bunların Avrupa üst kimliğiyle bir sentezini oluşturmak.
 Özgürlük, demokrasi, insan hakları, hoşgörü, hukukun üstünlüğü gibi kavramların daha uygulanabilir olması için çalışmak.
 Eğitimin temel bir hak olduğu anlayışını yerleştirmek ve bundan herkesin yararlanabilmesi için çaba göstermek.
 Avrupa'nın bugününe ve geleceğine şekil verirken Avrupa dışı kültürleri de tanımak ve desteklemek, onların da güvenliğine ve mutluluğuna katkıda bulunan açık bir Avrupa yaratmak.
 Refahın sağlanması yolunda yaratıcılığın ve gelişmenin desteklenmesi, çevrenin korunması ve dünyanın yoksun uluslarına yardım edilmesi yönünde çaba sarfetmek.

Tarihçe
Dernek, 1985'te ilk EGEE etkinliğinde doğmuştur: Kurucusu Frank Biancheri tarafından Paris'te düzenlenen ve Paris, Leiden, Londra, Madrid, Milano ve Münih'ten öğrencilerin katıldığı bir toplantı.

1987'de AEGEE-Europe, François Mitterrand'ı Avrupa Komisyon tarafından finanse edilen bir öğrenci değişim programı olan Socrates'in finansal olarak desteklenmesini sağlayarak büyük bir başarıya imza atmıştır.

1988'de, dernek EGEE olan ismini AEGEE olarak değiştirmiştir.

1989'da AEGEE Doğu Avrupa'daki Demir Perde'nin ilerisine açılabilen ilk Avrupa kurumlarından biriydi.

1992'de AEGEE - İstanbul, AEGEE ağına kabul edilmiş ve böyle Türkiye'deki ilk lokal olmuştur.

1995'te merkez ofis Brüksel'e taşınmış,aynı yıl Ankara AEGEE ağına kabul edilmiştir. ve Ağ Türkiye'deki diğer şehirlerin katılımına açılmıştır.

1998'de AEGEE, Kıbrıs'a ilk gezisini düzenlemiştir; AEGEE-Magusa (Famagusta) 2001'de ağa katılmıştır.

2001 ve 2002'de AEGEE, Balkanlar ve Akdeniz bölgesinde, barış ve sürekliliğe odaklanan çeşitli büyük projeler düzenlemiştir.

2003, AEGEE'nin Kafkaslar'a düzenlediği ilk alan gezisini görmüştür. AEGEE-Avrupa, Kıbrıs'taki ara bölgede ilk uluslararası öğrenci konferansını düzenlemiştir.

Nisan 2009, AEGEE-Europe Genel Kurulu "Agora", yaklaşık 600 Avrupalı öğrencinin katılımıyla, AEGEE-Mağusa tarafından Lefkoşa'da düzenlenmiştir.

Her yıl güz ve bahar dönemi olmak üzere iki defa düzenlenen, AEGEE'nin en büyük etkinliği olarak kabul edilen Agora'nın 2018 Güz Dönemi buluşması, 2-7 Ekim tarihleri arasında İstanbul'da gerçekleşmiştir.

Etkinlikler
AEGEE, çoğunluğu dört ana eylem alanından (Aktif Vatandaşlık, Yüksek Eğitim, Barış ve Süreklilik, Kültürel Değişim) biriyle bağlantılı olan, çok çeşitli projeler düzenler.

Kaynakça

Dış bağlantılar
 AEGEE.org (AEGEE-Europe)
 AEGEE.tv
 Tüm Avrupadaki AEGEE yerel örgütleri

Belçika merkezli öğrenci kuruluşları
Belçika merkezli kâr amacı gütmeyen kuruluşlar
Belçika merkezli uluslararası kuruluşlar
1985'te kurulan kuruluşlar
1985'te Belçika'da kurulan oluşumlar

Avrupa Öğrencileri Forumu


Qara Osman o Kara Osman o Qara Yoluq Osman o a veces Uthman (en turco: Kara Yülük Osman Bey) ( 1350/55 - Erzurum, 1435) fue un líder de la federación tribal turcomana de los Aq Qoyunlu reinó desde 1378 hasta 1435 en lo que hoy Azerbaiyán, Irak y Turquía a finales del  y principios del .

Primeros años
Se desconocen el lugar de nacimiento y el año, pero dado que se dice que tenía unos 80 años al momento de su muerte, se supone que su año de nacimiento está entre 1350 y 1355. Su apodo Kara Yülük significaba sanguijuela negra. Su familia se había trasladó en la segunda mitad del  desde Azerbaiyán hacia Anatolia y se instaló en Erzincan y Bayburt. Su abuelo Tur Ali Bey realizó varias redadas contra el Imperio de Trebisonda.

Según fuentes bizantinas y Aq Qoyunlu, era el hijo de Fakhr al-Din Kutlu Bey, emir de los turcomanos Bayandur y de la princesa trapisondesa María Hatun, hija, a su vez, del emperador Basilio de Trebisonda y de su segunda esposa Irene. Osman se casó, a su vez, con otra princesa trapisondesa, su prima, hija de su tío materno Alejo III de Trebisonda, como era la costumbre, y obtuvo el control de Diyarbakır en 1402.

Kutlu Bey amplió su influencia hacia Erzincan e interfirió en el conflicto de los gobernantes Mutahharten de Erzincan y del Beylicato de Eretna. El mismo Kutlu Beg había utilizado a sus hijos en varios lugares como mayordomos. De esta manera Osman Bey reunió en Ergani su primera experiencia en administración y gobierno. Cuando Kutlu Bey murió en 1388, su hijo mayor Ahmad Bey asumió el liderazgo de la tribu. Mutahharten quiso explotar este cambio de poder, para derrotar y someter a los Aq Qoyunlu, traicionando a Ahmad Bey y llamando a los Qara Qoyunlu para apoyarlo. Qara Qoyunlu era otra confederación tribal turcomana, que dominó grandes áreas desde Mosul hasta Erzurum y se convirtió en archirrival de los Aq Qoyunlu. Con la ayuda de los Qara Qoyunlu, Mutahharten pudo vencer a Ahmad Bey, quien luego buscó refugio con sus hermanos en Sivas, capital del Beylicato de Eretna. Osman Bey había llevado a cabo redadas por su cuenta durante un tiempo y también entró en conflicto con los Qara Qoyunlu. Más tarde, ayudó al bey Kadi Burhan al-Din de Eretna en sus campañas y así fortaleció su dominio, sin embargo más tarde, ambos se enfrentaron. Este conflicto terminó con la ejecución de Kadi Burhan al-Din en 1399. Este incidente sorprendió a los gobernantes de la región, y así fue como los otomanos se vieron favorecidos a la hora de tomar Sivas. Osman Bey buscó nuevos partidarios contra Qara Qoyunlu y se alió con los mamelucos de Egipto. Pero poco tiempo después, el emir turco-mongol Timur de Transoxiana comenzó sus campañas a Irán y Anatolia. Osman Bey esperó a Timur en Karabag en 1399, cuando el resto de los líderes turcomanos, especialmente su rival, el bey Qara Qoyunlu Qara Yusuf, se enfrentaron al caudillo turco-mongol. Osman Bey ayudó a Timur 1400 a tomar Sivas. Más tarde, en 1402, Osman también encontró en la batalla de Ankara cuando Timur derrotó a los otomanos y condujo al sultán Bayezid I en cautiverio, lo que sacudió el equilibrio de poder en Anatolia.

Reinado
Debido a sus servicios a Timur, Osman Bey en 1403 recibió Diyarbakır como feudo. De este modo, Osman Bey sentó las bases para el futuro estado Aq Qoyunlu. Con la retirada de los timúridas, comenzó a conquistar más áreas en el este y sudeste bajo su control. En 1405 saqueó Birecik (en territorio mameluco egipcio). Como Qara Yusuf había retomado su impulso conquistador, Osman Bey tuvo que enfrentarse a la Qara Qoyunlu para contraatacarla. Cuando ninguna de las partes pudo ganar la partida, concluyeron un pacto de no agresión. Osman Bey se movió contra Mardin en 1408. Los Artúquidas de Mardin pudieron defender a esta ciudad con la ayuda de los mamelucos y asediar a su vez a Osman Bey en su capital, Diyarbakir. Pero Osman Bey fue capaz de defenderse y vencer a los sitiadores. En el mismo año, capturó Urfa. Cuando atacó a Mardin una vez más, los Ortoqids esta vez pidieron ayuda a Qara Yusuf, quien expulsó a Osman Bey. La confederación Kara Koyunlu tomó muchas áreas pertenecientes a Osman Bey, incluyendo Erzincan, y al final en 1418 el derrotado Osman Bey tuvo que huir hacia los territorio mamelucos. Qara Yusuf murió en 1420 y su sucesor Qara Iskander luchó contra Osman Bey, quien aprovechó el cambio de trono, para contraatacar y saquear las áreas de Harput, Malatya y Mardin en el beylicato de Dulkadir. Cuando dirigió sus acciones contra los mamelucos, estos se dirigieron en 1429 contra Urfa y la sitiaron. El hijo de Osman Bey, Habil Bey, negoció con los mamelucos, porque el asedio causaba gran hambre y angustia. La ciudad se entregó a los mamelucos, con el compromiso de no saquear la ciudad, pero los mamelucos rompieron su palabra, saqueado y asesinando y tomando prisionero a Habil Bey, siendo este enviado a El Cairo, donde más tarde murió en cautiverio. Osman Bey al no poder salvar a su hijo, comenzó a invadir las zonas fronterizas, lo que condujo en 1433 a otra nueva campaña de los mamelucos, en la que el sultán mameluco Barsbay participó personalmente. El 28 de mayo de 1433, los mamelucos llegaron a Diyarbakir y comenzaron el asedio. Pero Osman Bey pudo resistir a los mamelucos durante varios días, lo que finalmente obligó a Barsbay a llegar a un acuerdo con Osman Bey. Barsbay se aseguró el vasallaje de Osman Bey y se retiró en julio a El Cairo vía Urfa y Birecik. La situación cambió cuando el timúrida Shahruj (hijo del emir Timur) inició una campaña contra los Qara Qoyunlu. Shahruj conquistó lugares como Erzincan, Bayburt, Meyyafarikin y Harput y sometió a los gobernantes locales.

Muerte
Después de algún tiempo Qara Iskander recuperó su fuerza, atacó en 1434 a los Shirvanshahs y devastó sus tierras. Esto requirió a Shahruj, quien luchó contra Qara Iskander varias veces. Comenzó a hostigar al líder Qara Qoyunlu con Osman Bey. En 1434, las fuerzas de Osman Bey pudieron tomar Erzurum, Bayburt, İspir y Tercan. Mientras tanto, Shahruj se mudó a Tabriz, la capital de Qara Iskander, por lo que este huyó en dirección a Erzurum. Antes de llegar a Erzurum, Osman Bey lo interceptó en el camino, en la subsiguiente batalla, el líder Aq Qoyunlu resultó herido y murió poco después. El mismo Qara Iskander no sería asesinado hasta 1438.

Familia

Esposas y concubinas
Tuvo una esposa:
 Despina Hatun (¿? - ¿?), su prima hermana, hija de su tío materno, el emperador Alejo III de Trebisonda y de su esposa Teodora Cantacucena.
También tuvo muchas concubinas de nombres y origen desconocidos.

Hijos
 Ibrahim Bey (¿? - ¿?);
 Habil Bey (¿? - ¿1429?);
 Ali Bey (¿? - 1438), sucesor de su padre e hijo de Despina Hatun;
 Hamza Bey (¿? - 1444);
 Uweis Bey (¿? - ¿?);
 Hasan Bey (¿? - ¿?);
 Ya'qub Bey (¿? - ¿?).

Hijas
 Ruqiyya (¿? - ¿?), casada en 1401 con Sayyid Ahmad, hijo del líder timúrida Miran Shah.

Referencias

Nacidos en el siglo XIV
Musulmanes
Gobernantes de Ak Koyunlu

Kara Yülük Osman


Jolanda di Savoia ist eine italienische Gemeinde (comune) mit  Einwohnern (Stand ) in der Provinz Ferrara in der Emilia-Romagna. Die Gemeinde liegt etwa 28,5 Kilometer ostnordöstlich von Ferrara.

Geschichte
Die Gemeinde wurde 1911 nach der Prinzessin von Italien, Jolanda Margherita von Savoyen, der ersten Tochter Viktor Emanuels III., benannt. Bis 1903 hieß die Gemeinde Le Venezie.

Geographie
Auf dem Gebiet der Gemeinde befindet sich im Weiler Contane der tiefste Punkt Italiens. Die Höhe wird auf Karten des Militärgeographischen Institut Florenz mit 3,44 m unter NN angegeben.

Persönlichkeiten
 Rubens Fadini (1927–1949), Fußballspieler

Weblinks

Einzelnachweise

Ort in der Emilia-Romagna

Jolanda di Savoia


Ardhendu Bhattacharya (* 1955 in Shillong; † 1992) war ein indischer Filmregisseur.

Leben
Bhattacharya absolvierte ein Postgraduiertenstudium in Philosophie an der Visva-Bharati University in Shantiniketan und ging danach ans Film and Television Institute of India. Er drehte Dokumentarfilme in Bombay und Guwahati und arbeitete daneben als Philosophie-Dozent an der Gauhati University. Sein einziger Spielfilm Manik Raitong entstand 1984 nach einer volkstümlichen Legende der Khasi. Er gilt als erster Farbfilm in der Sprache Khasi und wurde mit einem National Film Award ausgezeichnet. Bhattacharya war als Regisseur der Fernsehverfilmung von Birendra Kumar Bhattacharyas Roman Mrityunjaya vorgesehen. Das Projekt von Doordarshan kam jedoch wegen seines frühen Todes nicht mehr zustande.

Literatur
 Eintrag zu Ardhendu Bhattacharya in Ashish Rajadhyaksha, Paul Willemen: Encyclopaedia of Indian Cinema, S. 64

Weblinks

 U Manik Raitong - the first Khasi coloured film

Filmregisseur
Dokumentarfilmer
Inder
Geboren 1955
Gestorben 1992
Mann

Ardhendu Bhattacharya


Konrad 2., også kaldet Konrad den Ældre () (ca. 990–4. juni 1039) var tysk konge fra 1024, konge af Italien fra 1026, Tysk-romersk kejser fra 1027 og konge af Burgund fra 1033.

Han var den første tyske konge af det Saliske dynasti.

Tysk-romerske kejsere

Konrad 2. (Tysk-romerske rige)


La Carretera de Nebraska 8 (en inglés: Nebraska Highway 8) y abreviada NE 8, con una longitud de , es una carretera estatal de sentido oeste-este ubicada en el estado estadounidense de Nebraska. La Carretera de Nebraska 8 se inicia en su término occidental de la Carretera de Nebraska 14 en Superior y su extremo oriental se encuentra en U.S. Route 73 en Falls City. Se ejecuta a través de la parte sur de los condados de Nebraska y está siempre dentro de  de la frontera de Kansas.

Cruces
Los principales cruces de la Carretera de Nebraska 8 son las siguientes:

Véase también

Referencias

Enlaces externos
 Lista de Autopistas por estado
 The Nebraska Highways Page: Carreteras de Nebraska del 1 al 30
 Carreteras de Nebraska: NE 1-10

Carreteras estatales de Nebraska
Condado de Gage
Condado de Jefferson (Nebraska)
Condado de Nuckolls
Condado de Pawnee (Nebraska)
Condado de Richardson
Condado de Thayer

Carretera de Nebraska 8


Placocarpa, monotipski biljni rod iz porodice Rubiaceae, dio potporodice Cinchonoideae.

Jedina vrsta je P. mexicana, grm visine oko 1 metar iz sjeveroistočnog Meksika.

Izvori

Cinchonoideae
Flora sjeveroistočnog Meksika

Placocarpa


الذواقة  هي ثقافة فن الطبخ المثالي وارتباطه بالفنون الجميلة والاغذية والمشروبات. هي كلمة تطلق كذالك على الشخص الذي لديه ذوق مترف في تذوق الطعام، يشار اليه كخبير الاطعمة أو ذواق.

مهنة التذوق بدأها ملوك وحكام اهتموا بالأكل الراقي، والانيق، والشهي. هناك حكام خافوا من أن يسممهم اعداؤهم أو منافسوهم فاستاجروا ذواقة واكالة يتذوقون الطعام ويأكلونه مسبقا، واستعملوا كذلك الكلاب والقطط. وزاد الاهتمام في الوقت الحالي بنوعية الاكل وتصنيعه، تعبئته، وتصديره.

صارت نوعية الطعام علما قائما بذاته، ويدرس في الجامعات، وينال فيه الناس شهادات الماجستير والدكتوراه. وصار الهدف ألا يكون منظر الطعام قبيحا، وألا تكون رائحته كريهة، وطبعا، الا يكون غير صحي. ويشترك في ذلك ذواقون وشمامون. تتفوق النساء على الرجال في القدرة على التذوق. ويتفوق الأفارقة والآسيويون على الأوروبيين في ذلك، أيضا. وتوجد، وسط كل شعب، نسبة الربع التي لا تقدر على ان تفرز بين ذوق وذوق. ونسبة النصف متوسطة الذوق، ونسبة الربع من نوع «سوبر تيسترز» (ذواقون عظماء).

يجمع كثير من الذواقين «اتحاد الذواقين العالمي»، والذي له فروع في اربعين دولة تقريبا.

مراجع

فنون الطبخ
مهن

ذواقة


up2date, also known as the Red Hat Update Agent, is a tool used by older versions of Red Hat Enterprise Linux, CentOS and Fedora Core that downloads and installs new software and upgrades the operating system. It functions as a front-end to the RPM Package Manager and adds advanced features such as automatic dependency resolution. The file  specifies where up2date will search for packages.

Tool
By default, Red Hat Enterprise Linux's up2date retrieves packages from a Red Hat Network (RHN) server, though users can add directories full of packages or even Debian and yum repositories if they wish.

up2date on Fedora Core defaults to  retrieving packages from yum repositories. Again, other sources can be added (apart from RHN, which is Red Hat Enterprise Linux Specific).  As of Fedora Core 5 and Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5, up2date is no longer shipped with the distribution; yum is used instead.

CentOS's up2date downloads packages from yum repositories on the CentOS Mirror Network .

See also

 Package management system

References

External links
 up2date at redhat.com
 yum/up2date transitioning from up2date to yum

Free package management systems
Linux package management-related software
Red Hat software

Up2date


Mahieu ist der Familienname folgender Personen:

 Jacques de Mahieu (1915–1990), französischer Schriftsteller der Nouvelle Droite und SS-Mann
 Jesse Mahieu (* 1978), niederländischer Hockeyspieler
 Wiro Mahieu (* 1964), niederländischer Jazzmusiker

Mahieu


Hoda Khamosh, née en 1996, est une journaliste et une poète afghane, mais aussi une  défenseuse des droits des femmes.

Biographie
Hoda Khamosh est née en 1996 en Iran où ses parents s'étaient réfugiés à la suite de la première arrivée des talibans au pouvoir. Alors qu'elle est encore enfant, sa famille revient en Afghanistan, dans leur province d'origine, le Pawan, au nord de Kaboul.  Elle suit une formation de journaliste.

Puis elle travaille comme présentatrice en 2015 pour plusieurs chaînes de radio locales, et pour le quotidien Mandegar en tant que journaliste à Kaboul. Elle écrit aussi des poèmes.
Depuis le retour au pouvoir des talibans en août 2021, elle reste dans le pays et organise des séances d'éducation pour les filles qui ne sont plus acceptées dans les écoles. Fin 2021, elle figure sur la liste de la BBC des 100 personnalités féminines de l'année dans le monde (100 Women). En 2022, elle est invitée à la conférence d'Oslo le 23 janvier. Elle s'exprime à la tribune en rappelant la disparition de deux militantes féministes, Tamana Zaryab Paryani et Parwana Ibrahimkhel, depuis le 19 janvier.

Notes et références

Naissance en 1996
Naissance en Iran
Poétesse afghane
Journaliste afghane
Féministe afghane
100 femmes de la BBC

Hoda Khamosh


Codd's twelve rules are a set of thirteen rules (numbered zero to twelve) proposed by Edgar F. Codd, a pioneer of the relational model for databases, designed to define what is required from a database management system in order for it to be considered relational, i.e., a relational database management system (RDBMS). They are sometimes referred to as "Codd's Twelve Commandments".

History

Codd originally set out the rules in 1970, and developed them further in a 1974 conference paper. His aim was to prevent the vision of the original relational database from being diluted, as database vendors scrambled in the early 1980s to repackage existing products with a relational veneer. Rule 12 was particularly designed to counter such a positioning.

While in 1999, a textbook stated "Nowadays, most RDBMSs ... pass the test". another in 2007 suggested "no database system complies with all twelve rules." Codd himself, in his book "The Relational Model for Database Management: Version 2", acknowledged that while his original set of 12 rules can be used for coarse distinctions, the 333 features of his Relational Model Version 2 (RM/V2) are needed for distinctions of a finer grain.

Rules
Rule 0: The foundation rule:
For any system that is advertised as, or claimed to be, a relational data base management system, that system must be able to manage data bases entirely through its relational capabilities.

Rule 1: The information rule:
All information in a relational data base is represented explicitly at the logical level and in exactly one way by values in tables.

Rule 2: The guaranteed access rule:
Each and every datum (atomic value) in a relational data base is guaranteed to be logically accessible by resorting to a combination of table name, primary key value and column name.

Rule 3: Systematic treatment of null values:
Null values (distinct from the empty character string or a string of blank characters and distinct from zero or any other number) are supported in fully relational DBMS for representing missing information and inapplicable information in a systematic way, independent of data type.

Rule 4: Dynamic online catalog based on the relational model:
The data base description is represented at the logical level in the same way as ordinary data, so that authorized users can apply the same relational language to its interrogation as they apply to the regular data.

Rule 5: The comprehensive data sublanguage rule:
A relational system may support several languages and various modes of terminal use (for example, the fill-in-the-blanks mode). However, there must be at least one language whose statements are expressible, per some well-defined syntax, as character strings and that is comprehensive in supporting all of the following items:
Data definition.
View definition.
Data manipulation (interactive and by program).
Integrity constraints.
Authorization.
Transaction boundaries (begin, commit and rollback).

Rule 6: The view updating rule:
All views that are theoretically updatable are also updatable by the system.

Rule 7: Relational Operations Rule / Possible for high-level insert, update, and delete:
The capability of handling a base relation or a derived relation as a single operand applies not only to the retrieval of data but also to the insertion, update and deletion of data.

Rule 8: Physical data independence:
Application programs and terminal activities remain logically unimpaired whenever any changes are made in either storage representations or access methods.

Rule 9: Logical data independence:
Application programs and terminal activities remain logically unimpaired when information-preserving changes of any kind that theoretically permit unimpairment are made to the base tables.

Rule 10: Integrity independence:
Integrity constraints specific to a particular relational data base must be definable in the relational data sublanguage and storable in the catalog, not in the application programs.

Rule 11: Distribution independence:
The end-user must not be able to see that the data is distributed over various locations. Users should always get the impression that the data is located at one site only.

Rule 12: The nonsubversion rule:
If a relational system has a low-level (single-record-at-a-time) language, that low level cannot be used to subvert or bypass the integrity rules and constraints expressed in the higher level relational language (multiple-records-at-a-time).

See also
 IBM System R

References

Further reading

Data modeling
Database theory
Relational model

Codd's 12 rules


An Rhynchospora modesti-lucennoi in uska species han Liliopsida nga ginhulagway ni Santiago Castroviejo. An Rhynchospora modesti-lucennoi in nahilalakip ha genus nga Rhynchospora, ngan familia nga Cyperaceae. Ginklasipika han IUCN an species komo nangangarat-an. Waray hini subspecies nga nakalista.

Mga kasarigan

Rhynchospora

Rhynchospora modesti-lucennoi


The Salt Lake City Stars are an American professional basketball team in the NBA G League based in West Valley City, Utah, and are affiliated with the Utah Jazz. Before the 2016-17 season, they were based in Boise, Idaho. Playing their home games at the Maverik Center, the Stars serve as a developmental platform for aspiring basketball players, fostering a closer relationship with the Utah Jazz organization.

History

Idaho Stampede
The team was founded as a member of the Continental Basketball Association in 1997 and was league runner-up in the 2003–04 season, losing to the Dakota Wizards. After the 2005–06 season, the Stampede announced that the team would be joining the NBA Development League. From 2005 to 2015, the team played as the Idaho Stampede at the CenturyLink Arena in Boise. Before then, they played home games at the Ford Idaho Center in Nampa. The Stampede's sole NBA affiliate is the Utah Jazz, with whom they originally had a hybrid partnership. However, on March 24, 2015, the Utah Jazz and the Idaho Stampede announced that the Jazz had purchased the Stampede, becoming the 8th NBA team to become owners of their D-League affiliate.  They also had past affiliations with the Denver Nuggets, Seattle SuperSonics, Toronto Raptors and most recently the Portland Trail Blazers, with the Jazz taking sole affiliation after the 2013–2014 season.

Move to Salt Lake City
The team was purchased by the Jazz on March 24, 2015, and signed a one-year lease at CenturyLink Arena. Shortly after the Jazz bought the Stampede, rumors abounded about the team's relocation to Orem, Utah to be closer to the parent club; coincidentally, Orem was home to the D-League's Utah Flash from 2007 until 2011 (the team now plays in Wilmington, Delaware as the Delaware Blue Coats).  These rumors were not far off, as on April 4, 2016, the Utah Jazz and the D-League announced that the Stampede would relocate to Salt Lake City for the 2016–17 season and would be renamed the Salt Lake City Stars. The Stars would play at the Bruin Arena at Salt Lake Community College in Taylorsville, Utah for five seasons.

On October 10, 2022, it was announced that the team will be moving into the Maverik Center as their home arena beginning with the 2022-2023 season.

Season-by-season

Current roster

Notable players

 Alaa Abdelnaby – F/C; formerly of the Portland Trail Blazers, Milwaukee Bucks, Boston Celtics, Philadelphia 76ers, and Sacramento Kings as well as Papagou BC (Greece), the Omaha Racers (CBA), and Olympique Antibes (France) (now color analyst for CBS Sports Network)
 Lance Allred – PF; currently playing overseas; played in the NBA for the Cleveland Cavaliers
 Rafer Alston – PG; retired; previously played for the Milwaukee Bucks, Toronto Raptors, Miami Heat, Orlando Magic, and New Jersey Nets
 Roberto Bergersen - former Boise State basketball player; helped lead the Idaho Stampede to their first NBA Development League championship
 Allen Crabbe – G/F; previously played for the Portland Trail Blazers, Brooklyn Nets, Atlanta Hawks, and Minnesota Timberwolves
 Sundiata Gaines – PG; currently plays overseas
 Richard Howell - PF/C in the Israeli Basketball Premier League
 Nathan Jawai – C; currently plays overseas; formerly with the Minnesota Timberwolves and Toronto Raptors
 Tyus Jones - PG; currently plays for the Memphis Grizzlies; formerly with the Minnesota Timberwolves
 Coby Karl - SG formerly of the Los Angeles Lakers, Cleveland Cavaliers, and Golden State Warriors; former Boise State basketball player; son of NBA head coach George Karl; formerly head coach for the South Bay Lakers of the NBA G League
Michale Kyser (born 1991) - basketball player for Hapoel Holon in the Israeli Basketball Premier League
 Randy Livingston – PG; former head coach for the team
 Scott Machado (born 1990) - basketball player in the Israeli Basketball Premier League
 Josh McRoberts - PF; formerly with the Portland Trail Blazers, Indiana Pacers, Los Angeles Lakers, Orlando Magic, Charlotte Bobcats, Miami Heat, and Dallas Mavericks
 CJ McCollum – SG with the New Orleans Pelicans, formerly with the Portland Trail Blazers
 C. J. Miles - SF; formerly with the Utah Jazz, Cleveland Cavaliers, Indiana Pacers, Toronto Raptors, Memphis Grizzlies, and Washington Wizards
 Patrick Mills – PG; currently with the Brooklyn Nets; formerly with the Portland Trail Blazers and San Antonio Spurs
 Mike Taylor – PG/SG; currently plays overseas
 Antoine Walker – PF; formerly of the Boston Celtics, Dallas Mavericks, Atlanta Hawks, Miami Heat, and Minnesota Timberwolves; Retired
 Spud Webb - PG; formerly of the Atlanta Hawks, Sacramento Kings, Minnesota Timberwolves, and Orlando Magic

Awards and honors

NBA assignments

NBA affiliates

Idaho Stampede
 Denver Nuggets (2009–2012)
 Portland Trail Blazers (2007–2014)
 Seattle SuperSonics (2006–2008)
 Toronto Raptors (2008–2009)
 Utah Jazz (2006–2007, 2011–2012, 2014–2016)

Salt Lake City Stars
Utah Jazz (2016–present)

References

External links

Basketball teams established in 2016
Basketball teams in Utah
2016 establishments in Utah
Taylorsville, Utah
West Valley City, Utah
Sports in Salt Lake City

Salt Lake City Stars


The General Electric GAU-8/A Avenger is a 30 mm hydraulically driven seven-barrel Gatling-style autocannon that is primarily mounted in the United States Air Force's Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II. Designed to destroy a wide variety of ground targets, the Avenger delivers very powerful rounds at a high rate of fire. The GAU-8/A is also used in the Goalkeeper CIWS ship weapon system, which provides defense against short-range threats such as highly maneuverable missiles, aircraft, and fast maneuvering surface vessels. The GAU-8/A is currently produced by General Dynamics.

History
The GAU-8 was created as a parallel program with the A-X (or Attack Experimental) competition that produced the A-10. The specification for the cannon was laid out in 1970, with General Electric and Philco-Ford offering competing designs. Both of the A-X prototypes, the YA-10 and the Northrop YA-9, were designed to incorporate the weapon, although it was not available during the initial competition; the M61 Vulcan was used as a temporary replacement. Once completed, the entire GAU-8 assembly (correctly referred to as the A/A 49E-6 Gun System) represents about 16% of the A-10 aircraft's unladen weight. Because the gun plays a significant role in maintaining the A-10's balance and center of gravity, a jack must be installed beneath the airplane's tail whenever the gun is removed for inspection in order to prevent the aircraft from tipping rearwards.

The gun is mounted slightly to the port side with the active firing cannon barrel on the starboard side at the 9 o'clock position and on the aircraft's center line. The front landing gear is positioned to the starboard side. The gun is loaded using Syn-Tech's linked tube carrier GFU-8/E 30 mm Ammunition Loading Assembly cart. This vehicle is unique to the A-10 and the GAU-8.

The A-10 with its GAU-8/A gun entered service in 1977. It was produced by General Electric, though General Dynamics Armament and Technical Products has been responsible for production and support since 1997 when the division was sold by Lockheed Martin to General Dynamics.

Design
The GAU-8 itself weighs , but the complete weapon, with feed system and drum, weighs  with a maximum ammunition load. It measures  from the muzzle to the rearmost point of the ammunition system, and the ammunition drum alone is  in diameter and  long. Power for operating the gun is provided by twin hydraulic motors pressurized from two independent hydraulic systems. The magazine can hold 1,174 rounds, although 1,150 is the typical load-out. Muzzle velocity when firing armor-piercing incendiary rounds is 1,013 m/s, almost the same as the substantially lighter M61 Vulcan's 20 mm round, giving the gun a muzzle energy of just over 200 kilojoules.

The standard ammunition mixture for anti-armor use is a five-to-one mix of PGU-14/B Armor Piercing Incendiary, with a projectile weight of about 14.0 oz (395 grams or 6,096 grains) and PGU-13/B High Explosive Incendiary (HEI) rounds, with a projectile weight of about 13.3 oz (378 grams or 5,833 grains). The PGU-14/B's projectile incorporates a lightweight aluminum body, cast around a smaller caliber depleted uranium penetrating core. In 1979, the Avenger was tested against M47 Patton tanks and caused "severe damage".

An innovation in the design of the GAU-8/A ammunition is the use of aluminum alloy cases in place of the traditional steel or brass. This alone adds 30% to ammunition capacity for a given weight. The projectiles incorporate a plastic driving band to improve barrel life. The cartridges measure  in length and weigh  or more.

The Avenger's rate of fire was originally selectable, 2,100 rounds per minute (rpm) in the low setting, or 4,200 rpm in the high setting. This rate was later changed to a fixed rate of 3,900 rpm. At this speed it would take 18 seconds of sustained fire to empty the magazine. In practice, the cannon is limited to one and two-second bursts to avoid overheating and conserve ammunition; barrel life is also a factor, since the USAF has specified a minimum life of at least 20,000 rounds for each set of barrels. There is no technical limitation on the duration the gun may be continuously fired, and a pilot could potentially expend the entire ammunition load in a single burst with no damage or ill effects to the weapons system itself. However, this constant rate of fire would shorten the barrel life considerably and require added barrel inspections and result in shorter intervals between replacement.

Each barrel is a very simple non-automatic design having its own breech and bolt. Like the original Gatling gun, the entire firing cycle is actuated by cams and powered by the rotation of the barrels. The seven-barrel carriage assembly itself is driven by the aircraft's dual hydraulic system.

The GAU-8/A ammunition feed is linkless, reducing weight and avoiding a great deal of potential for jamming. The feed system is double-ended, allowing the spent casings to be returned to the ammunition drum. Additionally, returning empty cases to the drum has less effect on the aircraft's center of gravity than ejecting them. The feed system is based on that developed for later M61 installations, but uses more advanced design techniques and materials throughout, to save weight.

Firing system

Accuracy
The GAU-8/A is extremely accurate and can fire up to 3,900 rounds per minute without complications. The 30-mm shell has twice the range, half the time to target, and three times the mass of projectiles fired by guns mounted in comparable close air support aircraft.

The muzzle velocity of the GAU-8/A is about the same as that of the M61 Vulcan cannon, but the GAU-8/A uses heavier ammunition and has superior ballistics. The time of flight of its projectile to  is 30 percent less than that of an M61 round; the GAU-8/A projectile decelerates much less after leaving the barrel, and it drops a negligible amount, about  over the distance. The GAU-8/A precision when installed in the A-10 is rated at "5 mil, 80 percent", meaning that 80 percent of rounds fired will hit within a cone with an angle of five milliradians; this equates to a  diameter circle at the weapon's design range of .  By comparison, the M61 has an 8-milliradian dispersion.

Recoil
Because the gun's recoil forces could push the entire plane off target during firing, the weapon is mounted laterally off-center, slightly to the port side of the fuselage centerline, with the active firing barrel lying directly on the aircraft's centerline. The firing barrel also lies just below the aircraft's center of gravity, being bore-sighted along a line 2 degrees below the aircraft's line of flight. This arrangement accurately centers the recoil forces, preventing changes in aircraft pitch or yaw when fired. This configuration also leaves space for the front landing gear, which is mounted slightly off-center on the starboard side of the nose.

The GAU-8/A utilizes recoil adapters. They are the interface between the gun housing and the gun mount. By absorbing (in compression) the recoil forces, they spread the time of the recoil impulse and counter recoil energy transmitted to the supporting structure when the gun is fired.

The A-10 engines were initially susceptible to flameout when subjected to gases generated in the firing of the gun. When the GAU-8 is being fired, the smoke from the gun can make the engines stop, and this did occur during initial flight testing. Gun exhaust is essentially oxygen-free, and is certainly capable of causing flameouts of gas turbines. The A-10 engines now have a self-sustaining combustion section. When the gun is fired, the igniters come on to reduce the possibility of a flameout.

The average recoil force of the GAU-8/A is 10,000 pounds-force (45 kN), which is slightly more than the output of each of the A-10's two TF34 engines of 9,065 lbf (40.3 kN).  While this recoil force is significant, in practice a cannon-fire burst slows the aircraft by only a few miles per hour in level flight.

Variants
Some of the GAU-8/A technology has been transferred into the smaller 25 mm GAU-12/U Equalizer, which was developed for the AV-8B Harrier II aircraft.  The GAU-12 is about the same size as the 20 mm M61. GE has also developed the GAU-13/A, a four-barreled weapon using GAU-8/A components, which has been tested in podded form as the GPU-5/A.  The Avenger also forms the basis for the Dutch-developed Goalkeeper CIWS naval air-defense gun. No current or contemplated aircraft other than the A-10 carries the full-up Avenger system.

Specifications

 Precision: 80% of rounds fired at  range hit within a  diameter circle.
 Ammo:
 PGU-14/B API Armor Piercing Incendiary (DU)
 PGU-13/B HEI High explosive incendiary
 PGU-15/B TP Target Practice
Armor penetration of Armor-Piercing Incendiary ammunition, BHN-300 RHA, attack angle 30 degrees from vertical:
 76 mm at 300 meters
 69 mm at 600 m
 64 mm at 800 m
 59 mm at 1,000 m
 55 mm at 1,220 m

See also
 Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-6-30
 List of aircraft weapons
 List of multiple-barrel firearms
 T249 Vigilante
 Type 730 CIWS

References

Bibliography
 Spick, Michael. The Great Book of Modern Warplanes, Salamander Books, 2000. .

External links

 General Electric GAU-8/A Avenger on USAF National Museum site
 GAU-8 Avenger, Hill Aerospace Museum, fas.org
 General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems GAU-8/A page
 Video of the GAU-8 Avenger test firing

Aircraft guns
Rotary cannon
Multi-barrel machine guns
30 mm artillery
Military equipment introduced in the 1970s
Cold War weapons of the United States

GAU-8 Avenger


An Dendrobium carronii in uska species han Liliopsida nga ginhulagway ni Peter S. `Bill' Lavarack ngan Phillip James Cribb. An Dendrobium carronii in nahilalakip ha genus nga Dendrobium, ngan familia nga Orchidaceae. Waray hini subspecies nga nakalista.

Mga kasarigan

Mga sumpay ha gawas

Dendrobium

Dendrobium carronii


Seiichiro Okuno (født 26. juli 1974) er en tidligere japansk fodboldspiller.

Han har spillet for flere forskellige klubber i sin karriere, herunder Yokohama Flügels og Omiya Ardija.

Eksterne henvisninger

Fodboldspillere fra Japan

Seiichiro Okuno


An Alocasia decipiens in uska species han Liliopsida nga ginhulagway ni Heinrich Wilhelm Schott. An Alocasia decipiens in nahilalakip ha genus nga Alocasia, ngan familia nga Araceae. Waray hini subspecies nga nakalista.

Mga kasarigan

Alocasia

Alocasia decipiens


An Zeuxine gracilis in uska species han Liliopsida nga syahan ginhulagway ni Jacob Gijsbert Samuel van Breda, ngan ginhatag han pagkayana nga asya nga ngaran ni Carl Ludwig von Blume. An Zeuxine gracilis in nahilalakip ha genus nga Zeuxine, ngan familia nga Orchidaceae. Waray hini subspecies nga nakalista.

Mga kasarigan

Mga sumpay ha gawas

Zeuxine

Zeuxine gracilis