The Battle of Hochkirch took place on 14 October 1758, during the Third Silesian War (part of the Seven Years' War). After several weeks of maneuvering for position, an Austrian army of 80,000 commanded by Lieutenant Field Marshal Leopold Josef Graf Daun surprised the  Prussian army of 30,000–36,000 commanded by Frederick the Great. The Austrian army overwhelmed the Prussians and forced a general retreat. The battle took place in and around the village of Hochkirch,  east of Bautzen, Saxony.

Historians generally consider the battle as among Frederick's greatest blunders. Contrary to the advice of his subordinates, he refused to believe that the typically cautious Austrian commander Leopold von Daun would bring his troops into battle. The Austrian force ambushed his army in a pre-dawn attack. Over 30% of Frederick's army was defeated; five generals were killed and he lost his artillery park and a vast quantity of supplies. Although Daun had scored a complete surprise, his attempt to pursue the retreating Prussians was unsuccessful. The escaped force united with another corps in the vicinity, and regained momentum over the winter.

Seven Years' War

Although the Seven Years' War was a global conflict, it took a specific intensity in the European theater based on the recently concluded War of the Austrian Succession (1740–1748). The 1748 Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle gave Frederick II of Prussia, known as Frederick the Great, the prosperous province of Silesia. Empress Maria Theresa of Austria had signed the treaty to gain time to rebuild her military forces and forge new alliances; she was intent upon regaining ascendancy in the Holy Roman Empire as well as recovering the Silesian province.  In 1754, escalating tensions between Britain and France in North America offered  France an opportunity to break the British dominance of Atlantic trade. Seeing the opportunity to regain her lost territories and to limit Prussia's growing power, Austria put aside its old rivalry with France to form a new coalition. Britain aligned herself with the Kingdom of Prussia; this alliance drew in not only the British king's European territories held in personal union, including Hanover, but also those of his relatives in the Electorate of Brunswick-Lüneburg and the Landgraviate of Hesse-Kassel. This series of political maneuvers became known as the Diplomatic Revolution.

At the outset of the war, Frederick had one of the finest armies in Europe: his troops could fire at least four volleys a minute, and some of them could fire five.  By the end of 1757, the course of the war had gone well for Prussia, and poorly for Austria.  Prussia achieved spectacular victories at Rossbach and Leuthen, and reconquered parts of Silesia that had fallen to Austria. The Prussians then pressed south into Austrian Moravia. In April 1758, Prussia and Britain concluded the Anglo-Prussian Convention in which the British committed to pay Frederick an annual subsidy of £670,000. Britain also dispatched 7,000–9,000 troops  to reinforce the army of Frederick's brother-in-law, the Duke Ferdinand of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel. Ferdinand evicted the French from Hanover and Westphalia and re-captured the port of Emden in March 1758; he crossed the Rhine, causing general alarm in France. Despite Ferdinand's victory over the French at the Battle of Krefeld and the brief occupation of Düsseldorf, successful maneuvering of larger French forces required him to withdraw across the Rhine.

While Ferdinand kept the French occupied, Prussia had to contend with Sweden, Russia, and Austria. There remained a possibility that Prussia could lose Silesia to Austria, Pomerania to Sweden, Magdeburg to Saxony, and East Prussia to Poland or Russia: for Prussia, this represented an entirely nightmarish scenario. By 1758, Frederick was concerned by the Russian advance from the east and marched to counter it. East of the Oder river in Brandenburg-Neumark, a Prussian army of 35,000 men fought a Russian army of 43,000 at the Battle of Zorndorf on 25 August 1758. Both sides suffered heavy casualties but the Russians withdrew, and Frederick claimed victory. At the Battle of Tornow a month later, a Swedish army repulsed the Prussian army but did not move on Berlin. By late summer, fighting had reached a draw.  None of Prussia's enemies seemed willing to take the decisive steps to pursue Frederick into Prussia's heartland.

Prelude
In September and early October 1758, Lieutenant Field Marshal Count Leopold Joseph von Daun and his 80,000-man army camped near the town of Stolpen. They had covered the  from Görlitz in 10 days. Frederick had left half of his army in Pomerania near Zorndorf to make sure the Russians stayed on the defensive, and rushed south— in seven days—with the remainder of his army to confront Daun in Saxony.  Upon arrival, Frederick announced that he and his army, now totaling 45,000, were ready to knock Daun's head off.  He referred to Daun as die dicke Exzellenz (the fat Excellency).

There, between Bautzen and Löbau, Frederick and Daun played their game of cat and mouse. Frederick had tried several times to draw the Austrians out of Stolpen into a battle: Daun, who seldom attacked unless he had a perfect position, had refused the bait. Frederick and his army had marched within  of the Austrians, but Daun had pulled his army away, again, refusing to be drawn into battle. Upon the Austrian withdrawal, Frederick sent troops in pursuit; these were driven off by Daun's rearguard. In frustration, Frederick shadowed Daun by maneuvering his army toward Bautzen; while there, Frederick learned that Daun had established a camp about  east of him in the hills directly east of Hochkirch. He dispatched an entire Prussian corps commanded by General Wolf Frederick von Retzow to those hills in late September; by early October, Retzow's corps was within  of the Austrians.  Frederick ordered Retzow to take the hill that commanded the area, called Strohmberg. When Retzow arrived there, he discovered that the Austrians already had laid possession with a strong force. Retzow chose not to attack; Frederick had him removed from command and arrested.

Dispositions

Hochkirch stands on a slight rise in terrain, surrounded by mildly undulating plains; the village can be seen from the distance, except from the south, where several heights abut the village and block visibility.  The church stands near the highest point, granting visibility east, west and north.

On 10 October, Frederick marched on Hochkirch and established his own camp, extending from the town north,  to the edge of the forest at the base of the Kuppritzerberg. Frederick did not plan to stay in the small village for an extended period, only until provisions—mostly bread—arrived from Bautzen, and then they would move eastward. To the east of the village, less than  distant, the Austrians' presence on the hilltop increasingly made the Prussians—except Frederick—anxious about an attack. Frederick ignored the warnings of his officers, especially his trusted Field Marshal James Keith, who thought staying in the village was suicide. "If the Austrians leave us unmolested in this camp," Keith told the king, "they deserve to be hanged." Frederick reportedly replied, "it is to be hoped they are more afraid of us than of the gallows."

Instead of worrying about a possible Austrian threat, Frederick scattered his men facing eastward, the last known location of Daun's army. The troops created an S-shaped line, north to south, adjacent to Hochkirch. The weak (west) side was guarded by an outpost of nine battalions with artillery support; the principal purpose of the infantry was to maintain contact with a deployed scout unit. Eleven battalions and 28 squadrons guarded the east side. Frederick had his best soldiers garrison the village of Hochkirch. He did not believe any attack would occur; Daun's army had been dormant in recent months, refusing to be drawn into battles.

The Imperial court in Vienna criticized Daun for his failure to act; the Empress and her ministers worried that the Russians and the French would drop out of the coalition if there were no action.  Daun, a cautious and diligent commander, took his time to make his plans. The Strohmberg, one of the heights abutting Hochkirch, anchored Daun's left flank, and he deployed the remainder of his force southward across the road between Bautzen and Loebau. This also gave him control of an important junction between Görlitz in the east and Zittau in the south. He anchored the far right end of his line in another wooded hill south of the road, the Kuppritzerberg, on the opposite side of the hill from the Prussians. Despite the proximity, the Prussians neither increased their security nor deployed their troops in response to the Austrian presence. The cautious Daun also took into account that his men were eager to fight a battle and that they outnumbered the Prussians by more than two-to-one. His men made a great production of hewing the trees in a nearby forest, action which Frederick interpreted as efforts to create field works, not, as it was actually intended, to build a road through the thick wood. Daun also had discovered a secret weakness of Frederick's. His own personal secretary had been sending Frederick information on Daun's plans, secreted in deliveries of eggs; upon discovering this, Daun promised the man his life in return for his cooperation in continuing to send Frederick misinformation. Daun's plan, which he had kept secret, was an early morning sweep through the woods with 30,000 specially picked troops, around Frederick's flank, to enclose him. The Prussian army would be asleep, both literally and figuratively, when the Austrian army struck.

Battle

Daun's battle plan took the Prussians completely by surprise. The east side of Frederick's line was the first to be attacked. Using the starless night and fog as cover, and grouped into small shock units for easier control and stealth, the Austrians fell on the Prussian battery when the church bell signaled 5:00, catching the Prussians completely off guard. Many men were still sleeping, or just waking up, when the attack started. After setting fire to the village, the Croats cut tent ropes, causing the canvas to fall on sleeping soldiers, then bayoneted the men as they struggled to free themselves from canvas and cords. Men tangled in the tents bled to death, in what today is still called Blutgasse, or Blood Alley.

Initially, Frederick thought the sounds of the battle were either an outpost skirmish or the Croats, who apparently started their days with regular firing of their weapons. His staff had trouble rousing him from bed, but he was soon alerted when Prussian cannons, captured by the Austrians, started to fire on his own camp.

While Frederick's adjutants were trying to wake him, his generals, most of whom had not slept and had kept their horses saddled and weapons ready, organized the Prussian resistance. Keith had anticipated an Austrian attack and organized a slashing counterattack on the Austrians holding the Prussian battery. Maurice von Anhalt-Dessau, another of Frederick's able generals, funneled the awakening troops to Keith. Combined, this action briefly retook the Prussian battery south of Hochkirch, but they could not hold it in the face of Austrian muskets. At 6:00, three more Prussian regiments rushed Hochkirch itself, while Prince Maurice continued directing stragglers and reinforcements into the counterattack.  The Prussians swept through the village, out the other side, and fell on the battery at bayonet point. By that point, though, most Prussian order and cohesion had been lost. The Austrians, supported by their appropriated Prussian guns, which had not been spiked, wrought havoc on the attackers. Keith was hit mid-body and knocked out of his saddle, dead as he fell.

When the early morning fog had lifted, the soldiers could distinguish friend from foe.  Prussian cavalry, which had remained saddled and ready throughout the night, launched a series of regimental counterattacks.  A battalion of the 23rd Infantry charged, but withdrew as it was surrounded flank and rear. The church yard, a walled stronghold, diverted the Austrians; Major Siegmund Moritz William von Langen's musketeers of the 19th regiment held it with determination and provided safety for retreating Prussians.  Most importantly, Langen bought time.

By this time fully awake, Frederick hoped that the battle could be retrieved and returned to the village to take command.  At 7:00, finding his infantry milling about in the village, Frederick ordered them to advance, sending reinforcements commanded by Prince Francis of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel, his brother-in-law, with them.  As Francis approached the village, Austrian cannon-fire sheared his head off his shoulders; his troops faltered, demoralized by the sight of the prince's headless body atop his spooked horse. Frederick himself helped to rally Francis' shaken troops.

By 7:30, the Austrians had retaken the burning village, but their hold on it was tenuous. Keith and Prince Francis were dead. General Karl von Geist lay among the injured. Maurice von Anhalt-Dessau had been injured and captured. By 9:00, the Prussian left wing began to collapse under the weight of the Austrian assault; the last Prussian battery was overrun and turned against them. Led by the King, they advanced against five Austrian companies of hussars commanded by Franz Moritz von Lacy. Within a dozen yards of the Austrian line of infantry, Frederick's horse was killed.  His own hussars rescued him from capture.

As he withdrew, Frederick established a fighting line north of the village, and it eventually served as a rallying point for stragglers and survivors. By mid-morning, around 10:00, the Prussians retreated to the north-west. Any pursuing troops were met with a wall of musket fire. Frederick and his surviving army were out of range of the Austrian army by the time they had reorganized. Hans Joachim von Zieten and Friedrich Wilhelm von Seydlitz, who also had remained alert all night, organized a rear guard action that prevented the Austrians from falling upon the retreating Prussians. This discouraged even the most determined Austrians; the Croats and irregulars contented themselves with pillaging the village and the Prussian bodies.

Aftermath

In five hours, Frederick lost 9,400 of the 30,000 men he brought into the battle, more than 30 percent of his army, including five generals, 101 guns, and nearly all the tents. Frederick required his generals to set an example of courage and leadership: they led from the front. The same rate of attrition applied throughout the officer corps, which lost half of its strength in the first three campaigns of the war. In addition to human losses, they lost valuable horses and draft animals, 70 munitions wagons, and, a blow to morale, 28 flags, and two standards. On the positive side, Retzow's corps of about 6,000 men, which had not arrived in time to participate in the fighting, remained intact; Frederick had pulled his troops together for an orderly retreat; and the King retained the confidence of his soldiers.

The Austrians suffered casualties and losses at about three percent. According to the Austrian historian Gaston Bodart, there were fewer troops participating than most modern sources suggest: he places Austrian participants at 60,000, losses in casualties at 5,400, approximately 8.3 percent, but other losses (to injuries, desertions and capture) at about 2,300, or 3.6 percent. They also lost three standards.  Some modern historians place the overall losses higher, at 7,300.  Notification of the battle arrived in Vienna during the celebration of the Empress's name day, to the delight of Maria Theresa and her court, gathered at Schönbrunn Palace. Daun received a blessed sword and hat from Pope Clement XIII, a reward usually granted for defeating "infidels". The Empress eventually created an endowment of 250,000 florins for Daun and his heirs.

For Daun and Lacy, it was a victory of mixed emotions; upon the discovery of Keith's body in the village church, they both broke down in tears of grief. Keith had been the best friend of Lacy's father during his service in Russia.  Similarly, the grief Frederick felt at the loss of one of his greatest friends was intense. His grief was added to when he learned a couple of days later that his beloved elder sister, Wilhelmine, who had shared their father's wrath in 1730 during the Katte affair, had died on the same day. He sulked in his tent for a week. At one point, he showed his librarian a small box of opium capsules, 18 in total, that he could use to "journey to a dark place from which there was no return." Despite having rescued his army from catastrophe, he remained depressed and suicidal.

Although Frederick demonstrated good leadership by rallying his troops against the surprise attack, Hochkirch is considered one of his worst losses, and it badly shook his equanimity.  Andrew Mitchell, the British envoy who was with them, and normally wrote positively about Frederick, attributed Frederick's loss to the contempt he had for Daun's supposedly cautious nature and his unwillingness to give credit to intelligence that did not agree with what he imagined was true: according to Mitchell, there was no one to blame but himself. That winter, Mitchell described the 46-year-old Frederick as "an old man lacking half of his teeth, with greying hair, without gaiety or spark or imagination." Frederick suffered from gout and influenza, and refused to change his uniform, which was moth-eaten and covered in food and snuff stains.

However, the situation could have been far worse for Frederick. The fabled discipline of his army held up: once the Prussians were out of the burning village, unit cohesion and discipline returned. Their discipline neutralized any strategic advantage the Austrians could have gained, and Daun's hesitation nullified the rest. Instead of following Frederick, or cutting off Retzow's division, which had not participated in the battle, Daun withdrew to the heights and positions he had occupied before the battle, so that his men might have a good rest under blankets after the fatigue of the day. After staying there for six days, they marched out in stealth to take up a new position between Belgern and Jesewitz, while Frederick remained at Doberschütz.  Ultimately, the costly Austrian victory decided nothing.

The Austrian failure to follow up with Frederick meant that the Prussians lived to fight another day.  Daun took great criticism for this, but not from the people who mattered the most, the Empress and her minister Kaunitz. For Frederick, instead of having the war decided at Hochkirch, he had the opportunity over the winter to rebuild his army. In two years of fighting (1756–1757) Frederick had lost over 100,000 soldiers to death, wounds, capture, disease and desertion. By Hochkirch, many regiments were only half-disciplined. In the winter after Hochkirch, he could only replace his soldiers with untrained men, many of whom would be foreigners and prisoners-of-war; he would be starting 1759 with a half-trained army of recruits, and seasoned soldiers who were exhausted by the slaughter. The only way he could hire men would be with British gold.

Frederick's reputation for aggressiveness meant he could still terrify the Austrians simply by showing up. On 5 November, the anniversary of his great victory at Rossbach, Frederick marched toward Neisse, causing the Austrians to abandon their siege.  A few weeks later, as Frederick marched further west, Daun took the entire army into winter quarters in Bohemia. Consequently, despite major losses, at the end of the campaign year, Frederick remained in possession of Saxony and Silesia, and his name remained feared in at least that part of Europe.

Memorials
A granite monument, inlaid with a bronze plaque, was erected by the inhabitants of Hochkirch in memory of "Generalfeldmarschall Jacob von Keith" and his achievement. The inscription reads "Suffering, Misery, Death."

Sources

Notes

Citations

Bibliography
 Anderson, Fred. Crucible of War: The Seven Years' War and the Fate of Empire in British North America, 1754–1766. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group, 2007, .
 Asprey, Robert. Frederick the Great: A Magnificent Enigma. Ticknor & Fields, 2007,
 Bassett, Richard.  For God and Kaiser: The Imperial Austrian Army, 1619–1918. Yale University Press, 2015.
 Berenger, Jean.The Habsburg Empire 1700–1918. Routledge, 2014,
 Black, Jeremy. Essay and Reflection: On the 'Old System' and the 'Diplomatic Revolution' of the Eighteenth Century. International History Review. (1990) 12:2 pp. 301–323
 Blanning, Tim. Frederick the Great, King of Prussia. New York: Random House, 2016,
 Bodart, Gaston.  Losses of Life in Modern Wars, Austria-Hungary. Clarendon Press, 1916
 Duffy, Christopher. Frederick the Great: A Military Life. New York: Routledge, Chapman & Hall, 1985.
 Horn, D.B. "The Diplomatic Revolution" in J.O. Lindsay, ed., The New Cambridge Modern History vol. 7, The Old Regime: 1713–63 (1957): pp 449–64
 Jones, Archer. The Art of War in the Western World. University of Illinois Press, 2001,
 Longman, Frederick William. Frederick the Great and the Seven Years' War. Longman, Green, and Company, 2012 (1881).
 Malleson, Col. G. B. Loudon: A Sketch Of The Military Life Of Gideon Ernest. Pickle Partners Publishing, 2016 (1872)
 Redman, Herbert J. Frederick the Great and the Seven Years' War, 1756–1763. McFarland, 2014,
 Ralli, Augustus. Guide to Carlisle. G. Allen & Unwin Limited, 1962 (1922)
  Robitschek, Norbert.  Hochkirch: Eine Studie. Verlag von teufens, Wien 1905
 Showalter, Dennis, Frederick the Great, a Military History. Frontline, 2012.
 Simms, Brendan. Europe: The Struggle for Supremacy, 1453–present. Basic Books, 2013,
 Szabo, Franz J. The Seven Years War in Europe: 1756–1763. Routledge, 2013.
 Wilson, Peter H., The Heart of Europe: A History of the Holy Roman Empire. Penguin, 2016,
 Zabecki, David. Germany at War: 400 Years of Military History (2014). Vol. I−IV, ABC-CLIO

Further reading
 Battle of Hochkirch – Chapter 14 of Thomas Carlyle's History of Friedrich II.
 Fowler, William M.  Empires at War: the Seven Years' War and the Struggle for North America.  D & M Publishers, 2009,
 Hamack, Chuck and Engling, Erik, The Battle of Hochkirch, 14 October 1758
 Lindsay, Colin. (ed) Extracts from Colonel Tempelhoffe's History of the Seven Years War, T. Cadell, 1793.
 Marston, Daniel, The Seven Years' War. Routledge, Jun 17, 2013
 Rickard, J. (17 November 2000), Battle of Hochkirch, Military History Encyclopedia of the Web. Accessed 23 Jan 2017.

Battle of Hochkirch
Battles of the Seven Years' War
Battles involving Prussia
Battles involving Austria
1758 in the Holy Roman Empire
18th century in Saxony
Battles in Saxony
Battles of Frederick the Great
Battles of the Silesian Wars

Battle of Hochkirch


Skid Row, officiellement Central City East, est un quartier défavorisé au centre de Los Angeles.

Géographie

Toponymie
Le terme de Skid Row dérive de la pratique de l'industrie du bois de construire un chemin de bûches sur lequel on fait glisser les autres bûches : les bûcherons avec les mains vides peuvent descendre les réceptionner sans effort.

Dès les années 1930, il sert à désigner les quartiers fréquentés par les bûcherons, où l'on trouve généralement de nombreux bars et maisons closes. Par extension, le terme commence à être utilisé pour désigner les lieux où se regroupent les personnes qui n'ont pas d'argent ni de travail, devenant un terme générique nord-américain pour désigner les rues défavorisées d'une ville.

Situation et topographie
Le quartier occupe cinquante pâtés de maisons, soit , juste au sud du centre de la ville de Los Angeles. Il est délimité par Third Street au Nord, Seventh Street au Sud, Alameda Street à l'Est et Main Street à l'Ouest.

Histoire

Origines du quartier : Hobo Corner
En 1876, Los Angeles devient le terminus de la ligne de train traversant le pays. La , plus tard remplacée par le parc historique d'État de Los Angeles, est à l'Est du centre-ville. En 1888, l' ouvre ses portes à l'intersection de Fourth Street et d'Alameda Street.

Des milliers d'hommes pauvres, pour beaucoup, des vétérans de la guerre de Sécession, arrivent par train à Los Angeles. Ils tendent à s'installer dans des résidences de tourisme près des deux gares, notamment l'hôtel Lowe's sur Los Angeles Street, et des bars et maisons closes ouvrent à proximité. Un bar connu des environs est l'Original Mug Saloon sur Main Street.

Dans les années 1880, l'intersection de First Street et Los Angeles Street vient à être connue sous le nom de . L'opinion populaire veut que les arrivants sans-abri aient fait leur choix en raison de la météo clémente de la ville et des nombreuses liaisons en train.

Au début du vingtième siècle, un journaliste estime que le quartier est le plus dangereux de l'Ouest à l'exception de la  de San Francisco. Le policier Jack Lennen est considéré par le Los Angeles Time comme le , arrêtant des personnes à tour de bras. Or, les hommes arrêtés sont généralement envoyés en prison pour la nuit puis relâchés dans le quartier, et la ville ne prend aucune action pour assainir le quartier, estimant que les sans-abri méritent leur sort. En l'absence d'aide gouvernementale, ce sont les associations religieuses et caritatives qui prennent le relais : l'Union Rescue Mission, la Midnight Mission et l'Armée du salut s'y installent. Au 105 North Los Angeles Street, l'Armée régulière de Dieu ouvre une pension dans un sous-sol ; elle est rapidement fermée après des plaintes de commerçants locaux qui ne veulent pas de mendiants devant leurs magasins pendant les horaires d'ouverture.

Déplacement de Hobo Corner vers Skid Row
En 1902, Pacific Electric Railway ouvre un nouveau terminus de train dans le quartier. En 1906, des lampadaires sont installés et des campagnes de déplacement des sans-abri sont mises en place. Certains habitants de Hobo Corner déménagent dans la Californie de l'Est et le Nevada pour participer à la ruée vers l'or.

Entre cette date et 1920, les sans-abri se déplacent plus à l'Est, plus près de l', dans ce qui deviendra le quartier de Skid Row.

Après-guerre
En juin 1947, le Los Angeles Police Department dirigé par Clemence B. Horrall arrête plus de . L'assistant de Horrall Joseph Reed affirme que plus de la moitié des crimes de la ville sont commis dans ce quartier et qu'aucun vol à main armée n'a lieu dans la semaine qui suit les arrestations.

Dans les années 1950, la ville de Los Angeles cherche à réhabiliter le quartier en démolissant les bâtiments insalubres aux frais des propriétaires. Le responsable du logement de la ville Gilbert Morris affirme que les services sociaux fournis gratuitement à Skid Row coûtent plus de cinq millions de dollars par an, alors que la moyenne de la ville est de 110 000 dollars par mille carré.

En juillet 1960,  de la zone est , généralement par des démolitions, les normes de salubrité de plus en plus lourdes impliquant des coûts de remise en état trop élevés. Le nombre de logements passe de 15 000 à 7 500 en 1970 : cette perte de la moitié des logements à bas prix met de nombreux habitants à la rue.

Zone de concentration des sans-abri
En 1976, la ville de Los Angeles regroupe ses services aux personnes sans-abri dans le quartier de Skid Row, appliquant une politique de . La population du quartier grandit à nouveau en raison de l'arrivée de nombreux vétérans de la guerre du Vietnam qui ont besoin des services fournis dans les environs. C'est à cette époque que la population de Skid Row, jusque-là plutôt âgée et blanche, se transforme pour une population plus jeune et d'origines variées.

En février 1987, Daryl Gates, avec le soutien du maire Tom Bradley, annonce une vague d'arrestations des personnes sans-abri de Skid Row menées par la police et les pompiers en vertu d'une loi contre le vagabondage. Le plan est rapidement abandonné en raison de l'opposition de défenseurs des sans-abri. En mai de la même année, cependant, Gates annonce la reprise du plan, et le procureur James Hahn répond qu'il refuse de juger les personnes arrêtées dans ce cadre : . Le conseiller municipal  propose quelques jours plus tard la mise en pause du plan tant que tous les résidents de Skid Row n'ont pas une offre de logement adéquate. Le conseil refuse d'abord sa proposition, puis entend la méthodologie prévue par la police de Los Angeles et ordonne l'annulation du plan.

Temps modernes

Dans les années 2000, Skid Row a la plus haute concentration de personnes sans-abri des États-Unis. Des hôtels et commissariats de banlieues proches de Los Angeles sont accusés en 2005 de se débarrasser de personnes sans-abri en les abandonnant dans le quartier, ce qui pousse Antonio Villaraigosa à lancer une commission d'enquête en septembre 2005. Sur cent cinquante cas identifiés, cinquante sont étudiés par la commission. Début 2007, un seul hôpital, Kaiser Permanente, est en procès ; en l'absence de lois claires, il est accusé de séquestration. Le sénateur d'État  fait passer une loi contre le  en février 2007. Huit autres hôpitaux sont accusés entre 2013 et 2019.

En 2002, le chef de la police William Bratton annonce un nouveau plan d'application agressive de la loi anti-vagabondage, similaire à celui de 1987. En avril 2006, la Cour d'appel des États-Unis pour le neuvième circuit donne raison à l'Union américaine pour les libertés civiles dans un procès l'opposant à la ville de Los Angeles au nom de six personnes arrêtées. La cour annonce que la police de Los Angeles ne peut pas arrêter des personnes si elles se contentent de s'asseoir, de s'allonger ou de dormir sur des trottoirs publics. La ville de Los Angeles et l'Union américaine pour les libertés civiles s'accordent dans un premier temps sur une nouvelle réglementation autorisant le fait de dormir dehors à plus de dix pieds de toute entrée de bâtiment entre 21 heures et 6 heures et demie du matin. Le 20 septembre 2006, le conseil municipal rejette le plan à la demande des entreprises locales et le 3 octobre 2006, plusieurs personnes sans-abri sont à nouveau arrêtées pendant la nuit. Le 10 octobre 2006, la ville accepte le jugement d'avril sans faire appel, acceptant tacitement le nouveau règlement. La même année, le LAPD commence l', un renforcement strict de la présence policière pendant 68 semaines consistant à arrêter toute personne brisant la loi, même de façon minime comme en traversant la rue hors des passages piétons ou en jetant des détritus sur la route. Le programme s'inspire de l'hypothèse de la vitre brisée en arrêtant les petits délits pour décourager les crimes plus sérieux. Le LAPD affirme avoir vu une réduction de 46 % du taux de criminalité en quatre ans et de 34 % des décès. Une étude indépendante suggère qu'en parallèle, le taux de sans-abri a augmenté en raison des nombreuses incarcérations les empêchant d'accéder à un logement stable.

En 2012, le juge Craig Mitchell fonde un club de course à pied dans le quartier afin d'améliorer le quotidien des habitants : policiers, personnes sans-abri et anciens prisonniers s'y côtoient. Le documentaire Skid Row Marathon est consacré à ce club.

En mai 2019, la ville de Los Angeles annule une règle limitant la quantité de possessions autorisées pour chaque personne sans-abri à , soit un peu moins d'un mètre cube. Elle continue à se débarrasser des encombrants et des meubles, mais conserve tout le reste 90 jours après saisie. Cette décision est critiquée pour ses conséquences sur la propreté du quartier et sur la santé publique et quelques mois plus tard, Skid Row est touchée d'une épidémie de fièvre typhoïde.

Démographie

Population
En 1990, le gouvernement annonce recenser les personnes sans-abri de la ville de Los Angeles, mais limitent les observations à Skid Row. Le premier recensement visuel des personnes sans-abri de l'ensemble du comté est effectué en 2015 par .

En 2019, on compte  du quartier logés. On estime que le quartier abrite également  sans-abri, un des nombres les plus élevés de . En 2020,  sans domicile fixe sont comptées dans le quartier dont  dorment dehors. Le nombre total d'habitants du quartier est de plus de 10 000 en 2019.

Criminalité
Entre 2006 et 2008, dans les deux premières années de l', on dénombre 18 000 arrestations et 24 000 amendes pour des délits sans violence, soit 69 fois plus, proportionnellement à la population, que le reste de la ville.

En 2008, les crimes commis dans Skid Row représentent 58,96 % de ceux commis dans l'ensemble du centre-ville de Los Angeles.

Infrastructures

Services publics
Le Los Angeles Fire Department a une station dans Skid Row et une voisine de Skid Row. En juin 2006, le Los Angeles Times rapporte que l'inscription historique Skid Row sur les véhicules de pompiers doit être remplacée par le nom officiel du quartier, Central City East. La population locale et les pompiers s'y opposent.

Un centre de santé publique géré par le comté de Los Angeles s'y trouve.

Les services pour personnes sans domicile fixe de Los Angeles sont concentrés dans Skid Row, qu'ils soient publics ou privés.

Transports en commun
10 lignes de bus tenues par le comté desservent le quartier.

Rues et bâtiments
Dans les années 2010, le quartier est essentiellement composé d', de foyers et de services sociaux pour personnes sans-abri.  est un complexe résidentiel ouvert en octobre 2012 pour les personnes sans-abri.

L' est un nom informel donné à une allée qui héberge de nombreux autochtones d'Amérique entre les années 1970 et 1990.

Culture

Culture locale
Le festival des arts de Skid Row est inauguré en 2009.

La , la peinture murale à l'entrée du quartier, est effectuée par des bénévoles en 2014.

Le lieu est utilisé pour le tournage de L'Arnaque, Starsky et Hutch, Baretta et Quincy. Il sert également de lieu de tournage pour les clips de Michael Jackson Beat It et The Way You Make Me Feel, ainsi que pour le clip de Where the Streets Have No Name du groupe U2.

Dans la culture
Lost Angels: Skid Row Is My Home est un documentaire d' suivant huit personnes sans-abri, dont un athlète olympique et un diplômé de Harvard, qui vivent à Skid Row. Le film dénonce les abus policiers et la criminalisation du vagabondage dans la ville.

James Ferraro sort en 2015 un album intitulé Skid Row inspiré du quartier.

Personnalités notables

 George Takei y grandit avec sa famille
 Danny Harris y vit après sa suspension pour dopage
 Nathaniel Ayers y vit après la mort de sa mère
 Johnnie Ray y commence sa carrière

Notes et références

Citations en anglais

Références

Voir aussi

Liens externes

Quartier de Los Angeles

Skid Row (Los Angeles)


بلدية سينتمينات (بالكاتالانية: Sentmenat) هي إحدى بلديات مقاطعة برشلونة، والتي تقع في منطقة كاتالونيا، شرق إسبانيا.

يبلغ عدد سكانها 7.376 نسمة وفقاً لإحصائية سنة (2007).

مراجع

بلديات في مقاطعة برشلونة
بلديات في فالس أوكيدنتل

سينمانات


Macrocoma vanstraeleni é uma espécie de escaravelho de folha da República Democrática do Congo, descrito por Selman em 1972.

Referências

vanstraeleni
Coleópteros da República Democrática do Congo
Coleópteros descritos em 1972

Macrocoma vanstraeleni


زونيانا (Ζωνιανά) هي مدينة في ريثيمني في اليونان.

يبلغ عدد سكانها حوالي 1597   نسمة.

المراجع

مدن اليونان

زونيانا


Lamia kan henvise til:

 Lamia (by) – i Grækenland
 Lamia (digt) – af John Keats
 Lamia (mytologi) – dronning af Libyen fra græsk mytologi
 Lamia (datter af Poseidon) – i græsk mytologi

Personer
 Lamia af Athen – (ca. 340 f.Kr.– efter 303 f.Kr.) hetære fra oldtidens Grækenland

Lamia


An Amorphophallus elliottii in uska species han Liliopsida nga ginhulagway ni Joseph Dalton Hooker. An Amorphophallus elliottii in nahilalakip ha genus nga Amorphophallus, ngan familia nga Araceae.

Mabibilngan ini ha Sierra Leone. Waray hini subspecies nga nakalista.

Mga kasarigan

Amorphophallus

Amorphophallus elliottii


Rakun köpeği (Nyctereutes procyonoides), Mangut olarak da bilinir, köpekgiller (Canidae) familyasından dış görünümü ile bir rakun ile köpeğin karışımından oluşmuş bir melezi andırır. Bu yüzden uzun süre köpekgiller familyasının en ilkel türü olduğu, ve köpekgiller ile rakungiller arasındaki bağlantıyı oluşturduğu kabul edilmiş olsa da günümüzde rakun köpeğinin resmen bir köpekgil olduğu ve bu rakunlara ya da sansarlara benzeyen görünümünü sonradan tesadüfen geliştirdiği bilinmektedir.

Özellikleri
Rakun köpeği dış görünümü ile bir rakun'a benzer. Uzunluğu 55 cm'ye (+15 cm kuyruk) varırken, boyu omuzuna kadar ancak 20 cm'ye ulaşır. Yumuşak tüyleri zemin olarak bej-gri renktedir, yanları, sırtı ve karın kısmı kahverengidir. Rakun köpeklerinin mevsimselliğe bağlı olarak postları tamamen yenilense de renklerinde herhangi bir değişiklik olmaz. Kış postu, yaz postundan sadece daha sık ve daha ağırdır.

Çıkardığı sesler bir köpek havlamasından daha çok kedi miyavlamasına benzer. Anne olanları tehlike olunca hırlayabilirler ve erkek hayvanlar çiftleşmek için bir dişi ararken uluyor gibi sesler çıkarırlar.

Yaşam alanı
Rakun köpeğinin doğal yayılımı Sibirya'nın doğusu, kuzeydoğu Çin ve Japonya'da dır. Ancak, 19'ncu yüzyılda kürk üretimi için Rusya'nın Avrupa kısmına da getirilmiş ve yetiştirilmeye başlanmıştır ancak rakun köpeğinin kürk üretimi için değerli olan kış postunu yalnızca hür yaşarken geliştirdiğini tespit etmişlerdir. Bu yüzden Ukrayna'da 1928 ve 1950 yılları arasında toplam 10.000 civarında rakun köpeği doğaya salınmıştır. Böylece rakun köpeği kendiliğinden batıya doğru yayılmaya başlamıştır. 1931 yılında Finlandiya'ya, 1951 yılında Romanya'ya, 1955 yılında Polonya'ya ve 1960 yılında Almanya'ya ulaşmıştır. Son yıllarda Fransa ve İtalyada gözlendiği bildirilmiştir. 2019 yılında Türkiye'de Kars'ın Sarıkamış ilçesi sınırlarında ve Allahuekber Dağlarında rakun köpeğinin ilk kez gözlendiği bildirilmiştir.

Rakun köpeği oldukça ürkek, ve yalnızca gece aktif olan bir hayvandır. Çoğunlukla ormanlarda ve sık bitki örtüsüne sahip çalılık alanlarda saklı şekilde yaşar.

Beslenme
Rakun köpeği her şey yiyici hayvanlardır: fareler, kuşlar, balıklar, sülükler, böcekler, meşe meyveleri, fındıklar, böğürtlenler ve diğer meyveler yemek listesinde yer alır. Yuvalarını yerde kuran kuşların yumurtalarını yemeyi de sever. Leş ile de beslenebilir. Genellikle ağaçlara tırmanmak yerine, yiyeceklerini yerde, özellikle çalılıklarda ve su kıyılarında arar. Ama kavisli tırnakları yardımıyla ağaçlara da tırmanabilirler.

Yaşam şekli
Rakun köpeği tekeşli bir hayat sürer. Dünyaya getirdikleri 6-10 yavruyu birlikte besleyip büyütürler.

Rakun köpeği köpekgiller familyasının tek kış uykusuna yatan üyesidir.

Doğal düşmanları
Rakun köpeğinin doğal düşmanları Avrasya vaşağı, kurt, boz ayı ve rakun köpeğinin yavrularını avlayan puhudur.

Kitap

Kaynakça

Dış bağlantılar

 Bundesjägertag thematisiert Marderhundvordringen (DLF 03.06.2005)

Asgari endişe altındaki hayvanlar
Köpekgiller
Orta Asya faunası
Rusya'daki memeliler
Sibirya faunası
İstilacı memeli türleri

Rakun köpeği


Die Wegbachsiedlung, auch Oberstadt oder Kempter Vorstadt genannt, ist ein historisches Stadtviertel der oberschwäbischen Stadt Memmingen. Es steht unter Ensembleschutz.

Lage
Die Wegbachsiedlung besteht aus dem größten Teil der Memminger Altstadt und reicht vom Weinmarkt im Norden bis zur Stadtbefestigung im Süden. Umgrenzt wird der Altstadtteil im Süden und Westen von der Stadtmauer, im Osten von der Bahnhofstraße. Im Norden bilden  Schweizerberg, Roßmarkt, Weinmarkt und die Maximilianstraße die Grenze.

Geschichte

Die Wegbachsiedlung ist ein sehr alter Stadtteil und lag vor der alten Welfenstadt. Beim Abbruch des Elsbethenklosters konnte nachgewiesen werden, dass dort bereits im 12. Jahrhundert Häuser standen. Die Kirche Unser Frauen  wird in frühesten Quellen bereits als Memminger Pfarrkirche genannt, obwohl sie am südlichen Rand der Wegbachsiedlung lag. Erstmals ummauert und damit in die Stadt Memmingen einbezogen wurde die Wegbachsiedlung im Jahre 1329. Man ummauerte den Bereich und schuf mit dem Lindauer Tor, dem Kempter Tor und dem lediglich für Fußgänger passierbaren Lindentörlein drei Stadttore. Die Hohe Wacht wurde im 15. Jahrhundert mit einem großen Rondell versehen und gehörte damit zu den am besten bewehrten Teil der Stadtbefestigung. Im südlichen Bereich der Wegbachsiedlung waren der Scharfrichter und das Frauenhaus (Bordell) untergebracht. Das Kempter Tor war das Haupttor in Richtung Süden, am Galgenberg befand sich der städtische Galgen.

Der größte Umschlageplatz für Korn in Oberschwaben war die Memminger Schranne. Diese aus drei Gebäuden bestehende Handelsanlage stand auf dem Schrannenplatz und dem Theaterplatz. Im 19. Jahrhundert wurde das Lindentörlein für den Bau eines Bahngleises zur Großen Schranne abgebrochen.

Architektur
Die Architektur der Wegbachsiedlung ist vor allem von alten Stadtbauernhöfen, Weber- und Gerberhäusern geprägt. Stadtbildprägende Gebäude sind das Siebendächerhaus, die Frauenkirche und weitere, meist kleinere Gebäude. Der zentrale Platz der Wegbachsiedlung ist der bis in die Mitte des 20. Jahrhunderts bebaute Schrannenplatz. Der östliche Teil der Wegbachsiedlung wurde im Zweiten Weltkrieg stark in Mitleidenschaft gezogen und viele der meist kleineren Wohnhäuser gingen verloren und wurden durch neue Häuser ersetzt. Der westliche Teil ist in großen Teilen noch in der Originalbebauung des 16. und 17. Jahrhunderts erhalten.

Literatur

Einzelnachweise

Ort in der kreisfreien Stadt Memmingen

Wegbachsiedlung


Beresteïska () est une station de la  Ligne Svyatochins'ko-Brovars'ka (M1) du métro de Kiev. Elle est située dans le raïon de Chevtchenko de la ville de Kiev en Ukraine.

Mise en service en 1971, elle est desservie par les rames de la ligne M1. Le service est arrêté ou perturbé depuis l'invasion de l'Ukraine par la Russie en 2022.

Situation sur le réseau

Établie en souterrain, la station Beresteïska, est une station de passage de la ligne Svyatochins'ko-Brovars'ka (M1) du métro de Kiev. Elle est située entre la station Nyvky, en direction du terminus ouest Akademmistetchko, et la station Choulyavska, en direction du terminus est, Lisova.

Elle dispose d'un quai central encadré par les deux voies de la ligne.

Histoire
La station Beresteïska est mise en service le . La station est due aux architectes B. Primak, I. Maslenkov, V. Bogdanovsky, T. Tselikovskaya,  aux artistes ET. Litovchenko, N. Litovchenko et au sculpteur B. Karlovsky.

Services aux voyageurs

Accès et accueil

Desserte
Beresteïska est desservie par les rames de la ligne M1.

Intermodalité

À proximité

Notes et références

Notes

Références

Voir aussi

Articles connexes
 Métro de Kiev
 Ligne Svyatochins'ko-Brovars'ka (M1)

Liens externes
 .
 .

Station de la ligne M1 du métro de Kiev
Station de métro mise en service en 1971

Beresteïska (métro de Kiev)


The 1st Division is an infantry division of the British Army that has been formed and disestablished numerous times since 1809 and is still currently active as the 1st (United Kingdom) Division. Lieutenant-General Arthur Wellesley raised the division for service in the Peninsular War, which was part of the Coalition Wars of the Napoleonic Wars. The division was disestablished in 1814 but reformed the following year for service in the War of the Seventh Coalition. It then fought at the Battle of Waterloo, where it repulsed numerous attacks, including the final attack of the day that was launched by the French Imperial Guard. Following the battle, the division marched into France and became part of the Army of Occupation before being disbanded a few years later.

During the mid-to late-19th century, several formations bearing the name 1st Division were formed. According to the current division's official website, three such formations form part of its lineage. The first was formed in 1854 in Ottoman Bulgaria and took part in the Battle of Inkerman and the Siege of Sevastopol as part of the Crimean War; and was disbanded after the end of hostilities. in Africa in 1879, a new division was formed for service in the Anglo-Zulu War but made little impact on the campaign and was again disbanded once fighting ended. The final division to bear the name was formed in 1899 when the Second Boer War broke out. The division was raised in England, sailed to southern Africa, and then fought in most of the major battles to lift the Siege of Kimberley. These battles saw high casualties and were a mix of victories and defeats, and the division's defeat at the Battle of Magersfontein contributed to the political crisis of Black Week. The division saw more success in 1900 but was ultimately disbanded as the British Army reacted to the end of conventional warfare and moved to combat the guerrilla tactics adopted by the Boers.

While all of the earlier formations to bear the name were raised for a particular war, a new, permanent 1st Division was formed in 1902 in the UK. It fought in the First and the Second World Wars, was converted into the 1st Armoured Division in the 1970s, fought in the Gulf War, and was renamed the 1st (United Kingdom) Division in 2014.

Napoleonic Wars

Peninsular War

During the French Revolutionary Wars and early in the Napoleonic Wars, the brigade was largest organised formation used by the British Army during campaigns. These consisted of two or more battalions grouped together under the command of a major-general, and suited the small size of the army and the operations it conducted. When needed, larger forces were assembled on an ad hoc basis; these included multiple brigades that were grouped into "lines" or "columns". As the army and its operations grew, it implemented divisions—a single formation of two or more brigades that was usually commanded by a lieutenant-general. The division concept was not new and had been used by other European armies towards the end of the Seven Years' War (1756–1763). On 18 June 1809, Lieutenant-General Arthur Wellesley (later known as the Duke of Wellington), commander of British forces in Spain and Portugal during the Peninsular War, reorganised his force into four divisions—the 1st, the 2nd, the 3rd, and the 4th.

On formation, the division consisted of one brigade of Foot Guards, one brigade of British line infantry, and two brigades of troops from the King's German Legion (KGL). Due to the inclusion of guardsmen, the division was considered a social but not a military elite and was nicknamed "The Gentlemen's Sons". The division of almost 6,000 men first saw action at the Battle of Talavera, where it formed the core of the Anglo-Portuguese Army. A brief action on 27 July 1809 resulted in 188 casualties but the main engagement of the battle took place the following day. Under intense French artillery fire, the 1st was approached by two divisions totalling 15,000 men. The British-German troops had been instructed to hold fire until the French were within close range, to deliver one volley, and then charge. Charles Oman, a historian of the Peninsular War, wrote the division followed these orders and that the leading French ranks "went down in swathes", with casualties amounting to one-third of the French force within ten minutes. The division then recklessly charged after the routed troops and ran straight into the French second line, which rebuked the British and German troops, forcing them to conduct a fighting retreat back to the main Allied position. Redeployed British forces ensured the division was not routed and the line held. By the end of the battle, the 1st had suffered 2,249 casualties.

The next engagement was at the Battle of Bussaco on 27 September 1810, where the 1st Division suffered 141 casualties. This was followed by a general retreat to the Lines of Torres Vedras and skirmishes during the Battle of Sobral. The following year, 828 casualties were suffered at the Battle of Fuentes de Oñoro (3–5 May 1811). In early 1812, the division took part in the Siege of Ciudad Rodrigo and then on 22 July fought in the Battle of Salamanca, where it formed the left wing of the army and defended the village of Arapiles. Back-and-forth fighting took place for control of the village, which resulted in 158 casualties. In September 1812, the division invested the castle at Burgos. Over the next four weeks, it repulsed several French sorties and launched two failed assaults with heavy losses. By the end of the unsuccessful siege, close to 2,000 casualties had been suffered. A general retreat from Burgos followed, during which the commanding officer Edward Paget was captured. His replacement, William Stewart, delayed part of the retreat when he ignored orders issued by Wellington.

In May 1813, a new campaign was launched. After a march north through Portugal, the Allied Army again entered Spain. The following month, the 1st Division fought in a series of battles; San Millan-Osma, Vittoria, and Tolosa, and was present during the opening days of the Siege of San Sebastián in July. In August, the division sent around 400 volunteers to assist in the storming of San Sebastián, with nearly half becoming casualties. The invasion of France followed; the division saw action at the Battle of the Bidassoa in October; it forded the Bidasoa River, pushed back the French defenders, and seized the village of Béhobie with around 160 casualties. Engagements at the Battle of Nivelle in November cost it 193 casualties, and the Battle of the Nive in December brought about a further 289 casualties. After a brief rest, the division forced the Adour in February 1814. Napoleon, Emperor of the French, had abdicated following the 1814 capture of Paris on 31 March while the 1st Division was besieging Bayonne. On 14 April, the French sortied and the division fought in the final battle of the War of the Sixth Coalition, suffering just over 700 casualties. With the war over, the formation was broken up along with the remainder of the army's divisions. The troops marched to Bordeaux, from where they either returned to the UK or were transported to North America to take part in the ongoing War of 1812.

Waterloo campaign

At the end of the fighting, British and Hanoverian troops moved into the Southern Netherlands—previously Austrian Netherlands—as part of an Anglo-Dutch effort to secure the territory while they awaited a political outcome to the war at the Congress of Vienna. On 11 April 1815, after the outbreak of the War of the Seventh Coalition upon Napoleon's return to power and the arrival of Allied reinforcements, the force in the Southern Netherlands was reorganised into divisions. The 1st Division was reformed under Major-General George Cooke and contained four foot-guard battalions, including one that had served with the division during the Peninsular War. The First British Brigade under Major-General Peregrine Maitland contained the 2nd and 3rd Battalions, 1st Regiment of Foot Guards; and the Second British Brigade, under Major-General John Byng, contained the 2nd Battalion of the Coldstream Guards and the 2nd Battalion of the 3rd Regiment of Foot Guards. The division was the only one within Wellington's new army that was composed entirely of British infantry, the other British formations included Hanoverian troops.

The 1st Division's first action of the new war came at the Battle of Quatre Bras. Arriving on the right flank at around 18:30 on 16 June 1815, by which point fighting had been ongoing for several hours, the division launched a counterattack to recapture Bossu Wood that had just been taken. The attack drove out the French but as the British troops advanced beyond the wood, they were repulsed by a second French line and forced back. Fighting continued in and around the woods and included the repulse of a French cavalry attack. Casualties reported for the period 16–17 June amounted to 46 men killed and 508 wounded. Two days later at the Battle of Waterloo, the division formed the right flank of the allied army's front line. Its four battalions were arranged on the reverse slope of the ridge that had been occupied by the Allied army. Their light infantry companies—alongside Hanoverian and Nassau troops—took up an advanced position at Hougomont, a walled farm complex within a wooded area that lay in front of the occupied ridge. The farmhouse and its surrounding area became a vital tactical location.

In the late morning, Napoleon ordered the farm complex and its environs to be captured, beginning the battle. As French troops moved forward, the guns of the 1st Division opened fire and checked several advances. They were not able to completely halt the French, who advanced into the woods and drove the division's infantry back into the farm complex. Sous-Lieutenant Legros, leading a group of French troops, used an axe to breach the gates, allowing a large number of French troops to enter the complex's courtyard. In the following melee, the gates were closed despite the efforts of additional French troops to enter, trapping those within—all of whom were eventually killed in hand-to-hand fighting or were shot by defenders within the buildings. Lieutenant-Colonel James Macdonell and Corporal James Graham were noted for their efforts. As the fighting around the farm continued, Byng's brigade was fully committed to the defence. French troops attempted to encircle Hougomont and attack from the rear. The division's guns again caused the French problems and fresh infantry were moved to check the French moves. An attempt to assault and scale the complex's northern wall and to open the gate from the inside was repulsed. French artillery fire was maintained throughout the day, causing damage to the walls, setting several buildings ablaze, and collapsing the main building's roof. A renewed attack in the late afternoon was also driven off. The final main French assault of the day, which was launched in the evening, was led by skirmishers who engaged with the Hougomont garrison while the main assault pushed past the area to the Allied-held ridge. Following the defeat of the French units, the Allied army conducted a general advance and poured into the Hougomont area to reinforce and clear the position.

Maitland's brigade, while based on the crest of the ridge, spent the entire day under heavy French cannon fire, and repulsed several attacks by cavalry and infantry. Around 19:00, the Middle Guard of the Imperial Guard launched the final French attack of the day. In preparation, Maitland's brigade was formed into a four-ranks-deep line and was ordered to lie down. The French attack, due to the disorganised manner in which the troops assembled, came in several waves. The 3rd and 4th Régiment de Chasseurs led under heavy cannon fire that diminished as they closed on the ridge, due to dwindling ammunition stocks. Wellington then reportedly shouted, "Up, Guards, make ready!". The sudden appearance of the brigade caused the French to halt and start to deploy to exchange volleys. Maitland's two battalions heavily engaged the 4th Chasseurs and forced them to retreat. The British Guards followed with a bayonet charge. The sight of these two events, in conjunction with being under heavy attack themselves, resulted in the 3rd Chasseurs also retreating. The next wave was led by the 3rd Régiment de Grenadiers, who were joined by other Middle Guard units and regular French infantry. Maitland's troops halted their chase of the Chasseurs and reformed. Both sides then engaged in a ferocious exchange of volleys. While the French were concentrated on Maitland's men, the British 2nd Division conducted a flanking manoeuvre, fired close-range volleys at the French, and charged, causing them to retreat.

During the battle, the division suffered 232 killed and 819 wounded, and four men were reported missing. The following day, in conjunction with the rest of the army, the division marched into France and arrived on the outskirts of Paris on 1 July. The French capitulated a short while later, ending the war. The 1st Division was chosen to form part of the Army of Occupation and remained in France until December 1818. It was disbanded when the British military withdrew from France and returned to the UK.

Victorian era

According to the 1st Division's official website, its lineage includes the Peninsular War, the Battle of Waterloo, the Crimean War, the Anglo-Zulu War, and the Second Boer War. Other 1st Divisions were raised during the 19th century, each on an ad hoc basis. A 1st Division was raised in 1851 under Major-General Henry Somerset, during the Eighth Xhosa War. In 1857, an expeditionary force was formed from the Indian Army for service in the Second Opium War. The force contained a 1st Division, which was under the command of Major-General John Michel. Major-General Charles Staveley took command of a 1st Division, which was around 10,000 men strong and was formed in September 1871 solely for training manoeuvres in England. During the 1882 Anglo-Egyptian War, Lieutenant-General George Willis commanded another newly established 1st Division.

Crimean War

On 28 March 1854, in support of the Ottoman Empire, the British and the Second French Empire declared war on the Russian Empire. Anglo-French forces landed at Gallipoli to be in a position to defend Constantinople if needed, and then moved to Varna on the Black Sea coast of Ottoman Bulgaria, where they were reorganised into divisions. Prince George, Duke of Cambridge was appointed to command the 1st Division. Clive Ponting, a historian of the conflict, wrote Cambridge "was chosen ... solely because he was Queen Victoria's cousin". On 14 September, the Anglo-French expeditionary landed north of Sevastopol on the Crimean peninsula. They marched south and encountered the Russians at the Alma River, which blocked further progress. During the afternoon of 20 September, on the left wing of the expeditionary force, the division saw action in the Battle of the Alma. It crossed the river, then attacked and cleared a Russian redoubt on Kourgané Hill suffering 439 casualties. The advance resumed on 23 September and the expeditionary force surrounded the Russian port in October, beginning the Siege of Sevastopol.

In October, at the Battle of Balaclava, the 1st Division moved from besieging Sevastopol to reinforce British forces in the Balaclava area due to a Russian buildup of troops. Delays in the arrival of additional infantry and a changing tactical situation resulted in the division not engaging Russian forces, and the Charge of the Light Brigade was ordered. Following the ill-fated cavalry charge, it was decided not to commit the infantry to assault Russian positions. If they were captured, the positions would have needed to be occupied by the division and it could have invoked unwanted additional Russian attacks in the area whereas the division was more needed around Sevastopol. On 5 November, the Russian Army launched a major attack known as the Battle of Inkerman. The 1st Division, containing three battalions after leaving half of its force to defend Balaclava, moved to reinforce the embattled 2nd Division. In a heavy mist, the Russian force was engaged in close-range fighting with bayonets. Throughout the morning, 582 men of the division were killed or wounded or reported missing. During the fighting, the Duke of Cambridge had his horse shot from under him and he retired from the battle. Although the battle ended in an Allied victory, it created conditions that lengthened the siege through the winter into 1855. In 1855, the Light and the 2nd Divisions saw most of the fighting. During the assault on Sevastopol in June, the 1st Division was tasked in a supporting role, and it was held in reserve in September during the Battle of the Great Redan. The expeditionary force remained in the Crimea until the war ended in 1856, after which the army demobilised.

1870s

Following the Franco-Prussian War (1870–71), the British Army reviewed and attempted to implement an organisation similar to that used by the Prussian Army. The resulting 1875 mobilisation scheme called for 24 divisions spread across eight army corps. These formations did not exist and the scheme looked for scattered units to merge in a time of crisis. This method was used to form three divisions, including the 1st, in 1871 when regular, reserve, militia, and yeomanry units—as well as volunteers from across the UK—converged on Aldershot, Hampshire, for training.

In January 1879, the Anglo-Zulu War broke out; over the following three months, back-and-forth fighting included the battles of Isandlwana and Rorke's Drift. Reinforcements were dispatched to Natal to prepare for a second invasion of Zululand, which resulted in the formation of two divisions. No. 1 Division consisted of British, colonial, and African troops, and was 9,215 men strong. The division made a slow advance into Zululand along the coastal plain, established forts and improved infrastructure as it moved, and was not engaged in combat. At the close of the campaign, the division was near Port Durnford on the uMlalazi River and accepted the surrender of neighbouring Zulus. With the war over, the division was broken up in July. Frances Colenso, who wrote about the campaign, stated: "An earlier advance and a little dash would have given the laurels of the second campaign to the 1st Division ... but it was not to be". According to Craig Stockings, Lieutenant-General Garnet Wolseley, who had arrived to oversee the final stage of the campaign, considered the division to have been "entirely irrelevant".

Second Boer War

The Second Boer War broke out on 11 October 1899 after tensions arose between the British Empire, the South African Republic, and the Orange Free State. In response, and to reinforce the British military presence in southern Africa, the British Government mobilised the Natal Field Force in the UK. This force, also known as the First Army Corps, corresponded with the I Corps of the 1875 mobilisation scheme, and included the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Divisions. On mobilisation, the 1st Division consisted of the 1st—which was later dubbed the Guards Brigade—and the 2nd Infantry Brigades. The command was given to Lieutenant-General Paul Methuen. The majority of the division departed the UK between 20 and 24 October, and arrived at Cape Town around three weeks later. Before their arrival, the Boers invaded the British Cape and Natal colonies, and besieged Kimberley and Ladysmith respectively. These moves changed the initial plan for the army corps, which had been to march on the Boer capital Bloemfontein. Instead, the majority of arriving force, which included the division's 2nd Brigade, was ordered to Natal to lift the siege of Ladysmith. The 1st Division was assigned to relieve Kimberley and allotted the 9th Infantry Brigade, which was newly formed from troops already based in southern Africa, to replace the 2nd Brigade. This brought the division to 7,726 infantry, and 850 cavalry and mounted infantry. Additional support was provided by the 3rd (Highland) Brigade, which secured the division's lines of communication.

The advance towards Kimberley started on 21 November and followed the Cape Town–Kimberley railway line. After skirmishing with Boer forces, the 1st Division encountered the first prepared defensive position near Belmont, where the Boers had entrenched themselves on several hills that dominated the railway track. During the Battle of Belmont, which was fought on 23 November, the division assaulted and captured these positions just after daybreak, although the majority of the Boers withdrew in good order. British losses amounted to 54 killed and 243 wounded; Boer losses included 80 killed and 70 taken prisoner, in addition to the capture of draft animals and supplies. Frederick Maurice, author of the British official history of the war, lauded the small-unit tactics used by the division but said Methuen failed to convert the "successful engagement into a decisive victory". Stephen Miller, a historian who has written about the war, noted the battle "was a victory of sorts" for the 1st Division but that it was not "the decisive victory Methuen had wanted" due to the lack of mounted troops. This deficiency meant the division was unable to press or attempt to encircle the retreating Boers, who were able to escape and fight again two days later.

Similar battles and outcomes occurred on 25 and 28 November, when the Boers were engaged in the battles of Graspan and Modder River. Between the two battles, 628 casualties were suffered; Boer losses are not known but are believed to be low in comparison—Maurice stated at least 40 Boers were taken prisoner and 73 dead bodies were located. After the Battle of Modder River, the Boers destroyed a railway bridge and retreated to Magersfontein. The 1st Division remained in the area to rest, receive reinforcements, and assist in the construction of a replacement bridge until 10 December. The following day, the Battle of Magersfontein took place. Despite a preliminary artillery bombardment, the 1st Division's attack failed with 948 casualties. Boer losses are estimated between 236 and 275. In conjunction with other failed attacks that occurred during the same week, the news of events at Magersfontein led to the political crisis known as Black Week.

Having failed at Magersfontein, Methuen retreated and took up position on the Riet River, which was dubbed the "Modder position". Part of the political backlash of Black Week saw Methuen's command come into question; the War Office wanted to remove him. The preferred replacement was Lieutenant-General Charles Warren, who was commanding the 5th Division and had not yet arrived in southern Africa. General Redvers Buller, commander of the First Army Corps who was also under considerable political pressure due to Black Week, defended Methuen. This defence, coupled with a changing military situation and discussions about morale resulted in no change of command. From the "Modder position", the division conducted reconnaissance and raids into Orange Free State that destroyed farms, burnt crops, and seized livestock; a precursor to the large-scale adoption of similar methods later in the war. Such tactics have been seen as war crimes in breach of the 1899 Hague Convention. In January, the 1st Division was assigned a defensive role; that month, artillery, engineers, cavalry, and most of the division's transport were transferred to new commands, as was the Highland Brigade. Rumours of Methuen having scapegoated the brigade, in addition to heavy casualties that included the loss of their commanding officer, resulted in increasing animosity among the soldiers. Their new commander noted all were relieved when the transfer took place, and Methuen privately wrote he believed none would want to serve under him again. The division was provided with four  siege guns to reinforce their defensive posture. Miller stated the division's presence prevented the Boers from attempting to invade Cape Colony during this period.

Behind the screen provided by the 1st Division, four additional divisions were assembled. On 7 February, a new offensive was launched; it lifted the siege of Kimberley on 15 February. During this offensive, the 1st Division was restricted to flank and lines of communication protection. Two days later, the division moved to Kimberley; the Guards had been transferred to a new division and the 1st Division now commanded one brigade. At Kimberley, it guarded the British forward supply base supply lines; it was also tasked with clearing the nearby area of Boer forces and supporting efforts to lift the Siege of Mafeking. To aid in these goals, a brigade of militia and a brigade of Imperial Yeomanry were attached. During March, the 1st Division advanced, seized several villages, reached Warrenton, and also repaired bridges and the railway line as they proceeded. On 5 April, a small Boer commando led by Comte de Villebois-Mareuil was defeated at the Battle of Boshof. While additional settlements were seized and patrols that took prisoners were maintained, the advance towards Mafeking ended and the town was relieved by forces that were closer. Thereafter, the division marched east, following the Vaal River, towards Kroonstad. The division covered  in 15 days, captured small Boer forces and destroyed 12,000 rounds of ammunition. The 1st Division arrived at Kroonstad on 28 May and was nicknamed the "Mobile Marvels".

In June, the division attempted to trap the elusive Boer leader Christiaan de Wet and relieve besieged Imperial Yeomanry. The first engagement occurred on 1 June near Lindley, where the division stormed Boer positions but found they had been too late to relieve the yeomanry. Skirmishing later took place without major engagements. Between 17 and 23 June, several divisions, including the 1st Division, were reorganised as the British Army reacted to the end of conventional warfare and to combat Boer guerrilla warfare tactics. Methuen's command, now a division in name only, became a flying column of five battalions with a force of 3,600 men supported by some artillery pieces and machine guns. The intention was to be more mobile and constantly searching for Boer forces. The rest of the division was transferred to similar columns or assigned to static defences to guard settlements or other vulnerable positions. The frustrating pursuit of de Wet and other Boer leaders went on for months. In September, the division lifted a Boer siege of Schweizer-Reneke, took 28 prisoners, and seized nearly 5,000 animals and 20,000 rounds of ammunition. By the end of 1900, the field divisions had ceased to exist; additional garrisons and mobile columns were formed as British strategy was further refined to counter the Boers.

Reform period
In response to the lessons learnt from the Boer War, which included the army's failings in the opening months, the Secretary of State for War St John Brodrick set out to reform the standing army. He intended to create six army corps, three of which would be composed of permanent standing formations that consisted of the army's regulars. They would be ready for immediate dispatch in the event of an imperial crisis or a European war. In 1902, three corps were formed; these would allow up to nine divisions, each of two brigades, to be created; including the reforming of the 1st Division, which was finalised on 30 September 1902 when Major-General Arthur Paget took command. The reformed division consisted of the 1st and the 2nd Brigades, each containing four infantry battalions. The division, along with the 2nd and 5th, was regarded as being ready for war on the order of mobilisation.

In 1907, the Haldane Reforms further restructured the regular army into six infantry divisions, each with three brigades. These divisions would form the basis of a British Expeditionary Force (BEF) that would be dispatched to Europe in the case of war. The reform also replaced the army corps with regional commands. The changes resulted in the 3rd Brigade being assigned to the 1st Division; in addition to two field companies of Royal Engineers, two signal companies provided by the Royal Engineers, and three artillery brigades—each containing three batteries of guns. The 1st Division was assigned to Aldershot Command, where the 1st Brigade was located. The 2nd Brigade was based at Blackdown and the 3rd Brigade was housed at Bordon.

History beyond 1909

The 1st Division subsequently fought in the First (1914–1918) and the Second World Wars (1939–1945). In February 1945, it relocated to Palestine. During the early stages of the Cold War period, the 1st Division was garrisoned in Palestine, Libya, and Egypt, before it returned to the UK in 1955. It remained there until 30 June 1960, when it was disbanded due to there being no need for an additional divisional headquarters in the UK. The following day, it was reformed when the 5th Division was renamed and took on the 1st Division's history and insignia. The new 1st Division was based in Germany as part of the British Army of the Rhine. During April 1978, a reorganisation took place and the formation was renamed the 1st Armoured Division. Under this banner, in 1990–1991, it fought in the Gulf War. When the Cold War ended, the British government restructured the army as part of its Options for Change programme, which saw the 1st Division again disbanded on 31 December 1992. In 1993, the Germany-based 4th Armoured Division was renamed the 1st (United Kingdom) Armoured Division. During the 1990s, the division was deployed to Bosnia as part of peacekeeping efforts during the Bosnian War, and in the 2000s it fought in the Iraq War. In 2014, the division was redesignated the 1st (United Kingdom) Division.

See also

 List of commanders of the British 1st Division
 List of wartime orders of battle for the British 1st Division (1809–1945)
 List of Victoria Cross recipients from the British 1st Division

Notes

Footnotes

Citations

References

Further reading

External links

Infantry divisions of the British Army in World War I
Infantry divisions of the British Army in World War II
Military units and formations established in 1809
British military units and formations of the Crimean War
Military units and formations disestablished in 1978
1809 establishments in the United Kingdom
Military units and formations of the Second Boer War

History of the British 1st Division (1809–1909)


British Forces Germany (BFG) was the generic name for the three services of the British Armed Forces, made up of service personnel, UK Civil Servants, and dependents (family members), based in Germany.  It was established following the Second World War, the largest parts of it becoming known as the British Army of the Rhine (BAOR) and RAF Germany (RAFG). Both components had the mission of defending West Germany and remained there for the rest of the Cold War.

It was the largest concentration of British armed forces permanently stationed outside the United Kingdom.  With the end of the Cold War, and the Options for Change defence review in the early 1990s, BFG as a whole was considerably reduced, with the British presence centred on the 1st Armoured Division, and supporting elements.

Following the 2010 Strategic Defence and Security Review, the permanent deployment in Germany ended in 2020.  This was after British forces personnel were scaled down over several years, with 19,100 in April 2010, and 2,850 in April 2019.  However, around 185 British Army personnel and 60 Ministry of Defence civilians will stay in Germany beyond 2020.

The remaining presence in Germany is known as British Army Germany.

History

First established following the Second World War, the forces grew during the Cold War, and consisted, by the early 1980s, of I (BR) Corps made up of four divisions; 1st Armoured Division, 2nd Armoured Division, 3rd Armoured Division and the 4th Armoured Division.

Disbandment of the British Army of the Rhine (BAOR) and Royal Air Force Germany (RAFG) in 1994, following the end of the Cold War and the Options for Change defence review in the early 1990s, reduced the strength of the British Armed Forces in Germany by almost 30,000 with just one division (1st Armoured) remaining by the late 1990s, concentrated in North Rhine-Westphalia.  The British presence was estimated to have been contributing 1.5 billion euros annually to the German economy in 2004.  Following a further spending review, one brigade was withdrawn and Osnabrück Garrison closed in 2009.

Administrative support for British service personnel in Germany and across continental Europe was delegated to United Kingdom Support Command (Germany), (UKSC(G)).  The four Army garrisons in Germany were under the direct administrative control of UKSC(G).  The General Officer Commanding UKSC(G) also functioned as head of the British Forces Liaison Organisation (Germany), which was responsible for liaising and maintaining relations with German civil authorities.

Under the 2010 Strategic Defence and Security Review, it was decided that British military units would cease to be permanent deployed in Germany by the end of 2019.  This led to a scaling down of the British military presence, and a restructuring of command and support structures.

HQ British Forces Germany was formed in January 2012, replacing the UKSC(G) and the Germany Support Group (GSG).  Rhine Garrison, which principally comprised HQ British Forces Germany in the Rheindahlen Military Complex and Elmpt Station (formerly RAF Bruggen), also reduced in size; the HQ moved to Bielefeld in July 2013 and other units returned to the UK.  The two central garrisons - Gütersloh and Paderborn - combined to form a single 'super garrison' called Westfalen Garrison in April 2014.

With the departure of Major General John Henderson in March 2015, the Commanding Officer of British Forces Germany became a brigadier's post, with Brigadier Ian Bell assuming command.

In autumn 2019, British Forces Germany effectively closed, with the last military base handed back to the German Bundeswehr in February 2020. However, some training will still be undertaken in Germany with regard to NATO capability.

Off-duty life
The British Forces Broadcasting Service (BFBS) radio services were widely available on FM across north-western Germany.

The British Army Germany rugby union team regularly played games against emerging rugby nations like Belgium, Denmark, Netherlands, Germany and Luxembourg.

During the height of "the Troubles" in Northern Ireland, the IRA targeted personnel in Germany between 1988 and 1990. The attacks resulted in the deaths of nine people, including three civilians, and many wounded. As a result, vehicles owned by personnel ceased to have distinct registration plates, which had made them easily identifiable.

Commanders
Commanders have included:
General Officer Commanding United Kingdom Support Command (Germany)
 1994–1995 Major-General Scott Grant
 1995–1997 Major-General Christopher Drewry
 1997–2001 Major-General Christopher Elliott
 2001–2003 Major-General John Moore-Bick
 2003–2006 Major-General David Bill
 2006–2009 Major-General Mungo Melvin
 2009–2012 Major-General Nicholas Caplin
General Officer Commanding British Forces Germany
 2012–2015 Major-General John Henderson
Commander British Forces Germany
 2015–2018 Brigadier Ian Bell
 2018–2019 Brigadier Richard Clements
Commander British Army Germany
 2019 Colonel Tim Hill

See also
 Germany Guard Service

References

Further reading

External links

 British Forces Germany
 BBC News: Army to scale down Germany troops, 2006-07-24
 BBC News: From occupiers and protectors to guests, 2004-07-20
 British Forces Germany (BFGNET website)

Allied occupation of Germany
British Army deployments
Germany
Joint commands of the United Kingdom

British Forces Germany


සිිවිල් නීති පද්ධතිය පදනම් වන්නේ රෝම නීතිය, විශේෂයෙන්ම ජස්ටීනියන් අධිරාජ්ය යාගේ කෝපුස් ජූරිස් සිවිලිස් නමින් හඳුන්වනු ලැබූ නීතය මතය. පසුකාලීනව මධ්යඅකාලීන නීති ශාස්තර්e ඥයින් විසින් එය වැඩිදියුණු කරන ලදී.
විවිධ රටවල රෝම නීතිය පිලිගැනීම විවිධ ආකාරයෙන් සිදුව ඇත. සමහර රටවල ව්යලවස්ථාපිත නීතිය මඟින් එය පිලිගනු ලැබ ඇති බැවින් එය පනවල ලද නීතියකි. තවත් සමර රටවල නෛතික න්යා්යවේදීන් විසින් එය යොදාගැනීම හේතුවෙන් පිලිගැනීමට ලක්ව ඇත.
මීට සමාන්තරව යුරෝපය පුරා රෝම නීතිය සම්පූර්ණයෙන් සිය ආධිපත්යeය නොදැරන ලදී. මෙම රටවල රෝම නීතිය කිසියම් නිශ්චිත කරුණක් සම්බන්ධයෙන් දේශීය නීතිය තුල පරමි තිපාදනයක් නොමැති වූ අවස්ථාවන්හිදී යොදාගනු ලැබූ ද්විතීයික මූලාශරිල යක් විය. කෙසේවෙතත් දේශීය නීතීන්ද රෝම නීතියට අනුව අර්ථ නිරූපනය කරනු ලැබූ අතර මේ හේතුවෙන් නීතියේ පරාි  ථමික මූලාශරවන ය කෙරෙහි රෝම නීතියේ බලපෑම විය.
රෝම නීතියේ පදනමට අමතරව සංගෘහිත කරනු ලැබූ විවිධ නීති සංගර ක්හයන්හිද රෝම නීතිය අන්තර්ගතව ඇත. මෙසේ නීතිය සංගෘහිත කිරීමේ සංකල්පය පැරණි බැබිලෝනියානු ශිෂ්ඨාචාරය තෙක් දිවයන්නකි.
17 සහ 18 වන සියවස්වල ස්වභාවික නීතිය සහ පුනරුද අදහස් සමඟ මෙම සංගෘහිත කිරීමේ සංකල්පය වැඩිදියුණු විය. මෙම යුගයේ දේශපාලනික පූර්වාදර්ශය පරමු ජාතන්තරශිෂවාදය, දේපළ සුරක්ෂිාතතාවය සහ නීතියේ පාලනය වැනි සංකල්පයන්ගෙන් නිරූපනය වෙයි. මෙකී පූර්වාදර්ශයට අනුව නීතිය ලේඛණගතකොට ඒකීය ස්වභාවයක් ඇතිකිරීම මඟින් නීතියේ ස්ථිරභාවයක් ඇති කිරීම අවශ්යත විය. මේ අනුව ඉහතින් සඳහන් කළ රෝම නීතියේ සිරිත් මත පදනම් වූ නීතියේ සහ පරාල  දේශීය නීතියේ පැවැත්ම අහෝසි වී නීතිය සංගෘහිත කිරීම වෙත අවධානය යොමුවූ අතර ඉහතින් දක්වන ලද දේශපාලනික පූර්වාදර්ශය සාක්ෂානත් කරගැනීම සඳහා එසේ කිරීම අවශ්යහ විය.
සංගෘහිත කිරීමට තවත් හේතුවක් වූයේ 19 වන සියවසේදී බිහිවූ ජාතික රාජ්යී පිලිබඳ සංකල්පයයි. සමස්ථ රාජ්යව කෙරෙහිම බලපවත්වන්නාවූ නීතිය ලේඛණගත කිරීම මෙහිදී අවශ්යප විය.
මෙම සංගෘහිත කිරීම සම්බන්ධයෙන් විවිධ වූ පරශප තිචාරයන් ඵල්ලවිය. සංගෘහිත කිරීම යෝජනා කර සිටි පිරිස කියා සිටියේ ස්ථිරත්වය, ඒකීයත්වය සහ නීතියේ කරහි මානුකූල සටහන් තබාගැනීම යන කාරණාවන් සඳහා එසේ කළයුතු වන බවයි. ඊට විරෝධය දැකුවූවන් කියා සිටියේ එමඟින් නීතියේ ඝනීභූතකරණයට ලක්වනු ඇතිය යන්නයි.
අවසානයේදී සංගෘහිත කිරීම සම්බන්ධයෙන් කෙතරම් විරෝධතාවයන් පැවතියද යුරෝපීය පුද්ගලික නීති සංගෘහිත කිරීම ඉදිරියට ගමන් කරන ලදී. මෙහි වඩාත් බලපෑම් සහගත වූ කිර්ගලයාදාමයන් ලෙස 1804 නැපෝලියානු සංගරකරනහය, 1900 ජර්මානු සිවිල් සංගරවූජහය සහ ස්විස් නිති සංගර‍ීතහයන් දැක්විය හැක.
19 වන සියවසේදී ජර්මනිය නැඟී එමින් සිටි බලවතා වූ බැවින් එහි නීති පද්ධතිය මනාව සංවිධානය වූවක් විය. බොහෝ ආසියානු ජාතීන් දියුණුව කරා පියනැගීමේදී සිය නීති පද්ධතියේ පදනම බවට පත්කොට ගත්තේ ජර්මානු නීති සංගරකරනහයයි. ජපානය සහ දකුණු කොරියාව මීට උදාහරණයන්ය. පසුකාලීනව ක්විං රාජවංශික යුගයේදී චීනයට ජර්මානු සිවිල් සංගරඑහිහය හඳුන්වාදෙනු ලැබූ අතර මහජන චීන සමූහාන්ඩුවේ නීතියේ පදනම බවට පත්වූයේ එයයි. තවමත් එය තායිවානය තුල සකීරචීනයව පවතී. සමහර ලේඛකයින්ගේ මතය වී ඇත්තේ කොමියුනිස්ට් රටවල පැවැති සමාජවාදී නීතියේ පදනම වූයේද සිවිල් නීතිය වන බවයි. එනම් මෙහිදී සිවිල් නීතියට මාක්ස් ලෙනින්වාදී අදහස් එකතු වී ඇත.
සිවිල් නීතියේ සමහර නෛතික ආයතනයන් මධ්යඅතන යුගයේ ඉස්ලාමීය නීතිය සහ නීති විද්යා වෙන් ආභාෂය ලබා ඇත. උදාහරණයක් ලෙස ඉස්ලාමීය හවාලා ආයතන ඉතාලි සිවිල් නීතිය සහ පරංි  ශ සිවිල් නීතිය කෙරෙහි බලපා ඇත. යුරෝපීය සිවිල් නීතියේ සීමාසහිත හවුල්කාරීත්වය නමින් හැඳින්වෙන සංකල්පය ඉස්ලාමීය නීතියෙන් නුවර්තනය කොට ගත්තකි. වර්තමාන සිවිල් නීතිය තුල කිරක සයාත්මක රෙස් ජුඩිකාටා සහ ණය මාරු කිරීම යන සංකල්පයන් රෝම නීතිය තුල නොපැවැති අතර ඒවායේ පදනමද ඉස්ලාමීය නීතිය යැයි සිතිය හැක. නියෝජිතත්වය පිලිබඳ සංකල්පයද රෝම නීතිය තුල අන්තර්ගත වූවක් නොවේ. රෝම නීතියට අනුව කිසියම් තැනැත්තකුට වෙනත් අයකුගේ නියෝජිතයකු ලෙස කටයුතු කරමින් තවත් අයකු සමග ගිවිසුම්වලට එළඹීම කළ නොහැකි විය. නියෝජිතත්වය පිලිබඳ සංකල්පය ඉස්ලාමීය නීතිවේදීන් විසින් හඳුන්වා දෙනු ලැබුවක් වන අතර පසුකාලීනව එය සිවිල් නීතිය තුලටද පැමිණ ඇත.
ඉස්ලාමීය නීතිය විසින් බටහිරට තවත් නීති මූලධර්මයන් දෙකක් හඳුන්වා දෙනු ලැබිණ. එනම් සාධාරණත්වය සහ හිතාධ්යා්ශයයි. මෙම සංකල්පයන් සිවිල් නිතියේ සහ ජාත්යමන්තර නීීතියේ pacta sunt servanda නම් සංකල්පය බිහිවීමට පුරෝගාමී විය. ඉස්ලාමීය නීතියේ තවත් බලපෑමක් නම් කුරුස යුද්ධයෙන් අනතුරුව පලස්තීන පරයධ දේශයන්හි සිට නැවත පැමිණී පරංට  ශයේ නව වන ලූවී රජු විසින් නිර්දෝෂීභාවයේ පූර්ව නිගමනය පිලිබඳ සංකල්පය යුරෝපයට හඳුන්වාදීමයි. ඊට පෙර යුරෝපීය නෛතික කිරී ංයාවලිය තුල වූයේ වගවිභාගාත්මක කරාද මයකි. මීට පරුන තිපක්ෂිව ඉස්ලාමීය නීතිය නිෙදාස්භාවයේ පූර්ව නිගමනය මත පදනම්විය.

ආශ්‍රිත
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_law_%28legal_system%29#History

නීතිය

සිවිල් නීති මූලාශ්‍ර


Les Gobelins () is a station on Line 7 of the Paris Métro. It opened on 15 February 1930 as part of a planned section of the line, which was temporarily operated as part of Line 10 until the completion of the under-Seine crossing of Line 7 from Pont de Sully to Place Monge. The station was integrated into Line 7 on 26 April 1931. The station is at the crossroads of four main roads: the Avenue des Gobelins, Boulevard Saint Marcel, Boulevard Arago and Boulevard de Port-Royal.

This station is named after the Avenue des Gobelins, which honours the Gobelin family who manufactured dyes from the mid 15th century on the banks of the nearby river Bièvre (now covered in the area). The family manufactured tapestry from 1662, until the factory (adjacent to the station) was acquired by Louis XIV.

Station layout

References

Paris Métro stations in the 13th arrondissement of Paris
Railway stations in France opened in 1930

Les Gobelins station


Aceasta este o listă de filme britanice din 1970:

Lista

Note

Legături externe
 Filme britanice din 1970 la Internet Movie Database

Vezi și
1970 în Marea Britanie
1970 în film
1970 în televiziune

 *Listă
britanice
Liste de filme britanice

Listă de filme britanice din 1970


Chequa  (Cigwe, Cigwe', Jigwe, Chigwa, Chequah, Chequa. Oblici u množinama: Cigwe'k, Jigwek, etc.), Cigwe (češće se piše Chequa ili Chequah) je ptica grom kod Potawatoma, divovska mitološka ptica uobičajena za sjeverna i zapadna plemena. Grmljavina je uzrokovana udarcima Chequainih golemih krila. Prema Potawatomi legendi, pogled Chequa je fatalan. Iako su gromovi vrlo moćna bića, Chequa rijetko smeta ljudima, a Potawatomi ljudi su je tretirali s poštovanjem.

Izvori

Indijanska mitologija (divovske ptice)
Potawatomi mitologija

Chequa


El parque nacional de Dadohaehaesang (en coreano: 다도해해상국립공원) fue designado en 1981 como el parque nacional más grande en el país asiático de Corea del Sur. La superficie total es de 2321,5 km² con 1986,6 km² de zonas marinas y 334,8 km² de superficie terrestre. Las principales atracciones de parque nacional Dadohaehaesang son Hongdo, Heuksando y Baekdo. En términos de biodiversidad posee 1541 especies de plantas, 11 especies de mamíferos, 147 especies de aves, 885 especies de insectos, 13 especies de reptiles anfibios, 154 especies de peces de aguas del océano, y 11 especies de peces de agua dulce que se creen han habitado en esta zona.

Véase también
Geografía de Corea del Sur
Geografía de Asia

Referencias

Dadohaehaesang
Áreas protegidas establecidas en 1981

Parque nacional de Dadohaehaesang


Marie-Antoinette et ses enfants, également connue sous le nom de Marie-Antoinette de Lorraine-Habsbourg, reine de France, et ses enfants est une peinture à l'huile de l'artiste française Élisabeth Vigée Le Brun, peinte en 1787, et exposée au Château de Versailles. Ses dimensions sont de .

Histoire

En , la réputation de Marie-Antoinette est ternie par l'affaire du collier de diamants. Malgré son manque d'implication personnelle dans l'affaire, l'opinion publique se retourne contre elle. Dans un effort pour améliorer la perception publique de la reine, cette année-là, Élisabeth Vigée Le Brun a été chargée par Louis XVI de peindre un portrait officiel représentant Marie-Antoinette visant à la rendre sympathique. L'accent devait être mis sur Marie-Antoinette en tant que reine et, plus important encore, en tant que mère ; ainsi, le tableau la montre entourée de ses enfants et portant de petits bijoux. Pour engager davantage la sympathie du public, Vigée Le Brun a laissé un berceau vide à la place du plus jeune enfant de la reine, Sophie-Béatrice, décédée peu de temps avant l'achèvement du tableau.

La première exposition publique du tableau devait avoir lieu au Salon d'. Cependant, en raison de l'impopularité de Marie-Antoinette à l'époque et des craintes que le tableau ne soit endommagé, Vigée Le Brun refuse de l'envoyer. Néanmoins, l'administration royale a insisté pour qu'elle le fasse et le tableau a tout de même été exposé, la réaction du public étant mitigée.

Après le Salon, jusqu'en , il est exposé dans le salon de Mars du château de Versailles. Pendant la Révolution française, il reste conservé dans les collections nationales ; depuis le règne de Louis-Philippe, la toile est confiée au musée de Versailles.

Description

Le tableau montre Marie-Antoinette vêtue d'une robe de velours rouge doublée de zibeline. Son fils cadet, le futur Louis XVII, est assis sur ses genoux et sa fille, Marie-Thérèse, est appuyée sur son bras. Son fils aîné, Louis-Joseph, alors dauphin, est près du berceau vide, destiné à sa fille cadette, Sophie-Béatrice, décédée avant l'achèvement du tableau.

La peinture est lourde de symbolisme. Sa composition générale s'inspire des représentations de la Sainte Famille de la Renaissance, comme l'a conseillé Jacques-Louis David, un peintre contemporain célèbre. Il y a des références supplémentaires plus personnelles à Marie-Antoinette, comme la Galerie des Glaces de Versailles derrière elle, ou la robe qu'elle porte, qui rappelle celle que Marie Leszczynska portait dans un portrait. Il y a aussi une armoire à bijoux sur la droite, qui évoque l'histoire de Cornelia Africana, une romaine qui disait que ses enfants étaient ses bijoux. Cette dernière référence sert à souligner l'image de Marie-Antoinette en tant que mère, plaçant ses propres enfants au-dessus des préoccupations matérielles comme les bijoux, notamment à la suite du scandale du collier de diamants.

Postérité
Le tableau est l'une des œuvres les plus emblématiques de la collection de Versailles et est considéré comme un important trésor national ; il est célèbre en France car il est souvent reproduit dans les manuels d'histoire.

Trois versions de tapisseries des Gobelins ont été produites en 1814, 1822 et 1897. La première a été donnée à l'impératrice Élisabeth d'Autriche en 1868 et la troisième à l'impératrice Alexandra Feodorovna de Russie. La deuxième tapisserie est au Palais de l'Élysée depuis 1877.

Notes et références

Notes

Références

Liens externes

Tableau d'Élisabeth Vigée Le Brun
Tableau des années 1780
Portrait de femme
Marie-Antoinette d'Autriche
Œuvre conservée au château de Versailles
Œuvre exposée au Salon de 1787
1787 en France

Marie-Antoinette et ses enfants


El proceso Mond, proceso de Mond o del proceso de carbonilo es una técnica creada por Ludwig Mond en 1890 para extraer y purificar níquel. El proceso fue utilizado comercialmente hasta finales del . Se realiza mediante la conversión de los óxidos de níquel (níquel combinado con oxígeno) en níquel puro.

Este proceso hace uso del hecho de que los complejos de monóxido de carbono con níquel para dar carbonilo de níquel son fácilmente reversibles. Ningún otro elemento forma un compuesto carbonilo en las condiciones suaves utilizadas en este procedimiento.

Fases del proceso
Este proceso tiene tres pasos:

1. El óxido de níquel reacciona con gas de síntesis a 200 °C para eliminar el oxígeno, produciendo níquel impuro. Las impurezas incluyen hierro y cobalto.

NiO (s) + H2 (g) → Ni (s) + H2O (g)

2. El níquel impuro se hace reaccionar con exceso de monóxido de carbono a 50-60 °C para formar carbonilo de níquel. No se forman los complejos con las otras impurezas metálicas

Ni (s) + 4 CO (g) → Ni(CO)4 (g)

3. La mezcla de monóxido de carbono y el exceso de carbonilo de níquel se calienta a 220-250 °C. En la calefacción, el tetracarbonilo de níquel se descompone para dar níquel puro:

Ni(CO)4 (g) → Ni (s) + 4 CO (g)

Aspectos prácticos
La descomposición puede ser manipulada para producir polvo de zinc, pero más comúnmente un sustrato existente es cubierto con níquel. Por ejemplo, los pellets de níquel se hacen dejando caer pequeñas bolitas, a través del gas caliente de carbonilo, lo que deposita una capa de níquel en los gránulos.

Este proceso también se ha utilizado para el recubrimiento de níquel sobre otros metales, cuando una forma compleja o la existencia de huecos y esquinas hace difícil conseguir buenos resultados con la galvanoplastia. Aunque los resultados son buenos, la elevada toxicidad del carbonilo de níquel y del monóxido de carbono hacen que este método no sea práctico como proceso industrial. En su lugar se emplea el método de niquelado electrolítico.

Véase también
 Metalurgia del carbonilo

Referencias

 Liptrot GF (1983) Modern Inorganic Chemistry 4th ed p386 Unwin Hyman
 Pauling, L (1964) College chemistry 3rd ed p658 Freeman
 Rawcliffe, CT & Rawson, DH (1974) Principles of inorganic and theoretical chemistry 2nd ed p409 Heinemann

Enlaces externos
 Del escandio al níquel. Principios de química: los caminos del descubrimiento. Peter William Atkins, Loretta Jones. Ed. Médica Panamericana, 2006. ISBN 9500600803. Pág. 615-616
 Níquel. Webelements. (en inglés)
  (en inglés)
 "Nickel Chemistry" de la University of the West Indies (Mona) (en inglés)

Procesos químicos
Níquel
Epónimos relacionados con la química
Inventos de Reino Unido del siglo XIX
Ciencia de 1890
Reino Unido en 1890
Carbonilos metálicos

Proceso Mond


مهرجان صيف عمّان  حدث موسمي سنوي وفعالية تشمل مدينة عمان بأكملها، حيث تنظمه أمانة عمان الكبرى برعاية تجارية من القطاع الخاص. وإلى جانب التخفيضات التي تقدمها المحال التجارية تنظم عدة فعاليات موسيقية تقدمها فرق شعبية وفنية من الأردن، والدول العربية والعالم، بهدف جذب الأردنيين والزوار العرب والأجانب إلى العاصمة الأردنية عمّان، ويشمل المهرجان جانبا ثقافيا كمعارض الفنون التشكيلية والمسرح وإقامة أسواق موسمية كسوق جارا.

مراجع

فعاليات عمان
مهرجانات في الأردن

مهرجان صيف عمان