The Battle of Shanghai () was the first of the twenty-two major engagements fought between the National Revolutionary Army (NRA) of the Republic of China (ROC) and the Imperial Japanese Army (IJA) of the Empire of Japan at the beginning of the Second Sino-Japanese War. It lasted from August 13, 1937, to November 26, 1937, and was one of the largest and bloodiest battles of the entire war, later described as "Stalingrad on the Yangtze", and even regarded by some historians as the first battle of World War II. After over three months of extensive fighting on land, in the air and at sea, the battle concluded with a victory for Japan. Both sides accused each other of using chemical weapons during the battle, both without evidence.

Since the Japanese invasion of Manchuria in 1931 followed by the Japanese attack of Shanghai in 1932, there had been ongoing armed conflicts between China and Japan without an official declaration of war. These conflicts finally escalated in July 1937, when the Marco Polo Bridge Incident triggered the full advance from Japan. Dogged Chinese resistance at Shanghai was aimed at stalling Japanese advance, giving much needed time for the Chinese government to move vital industries to the interior, while at the same time attempting to bring sympathetic Western powers to China's side. During the fierce three-month battle, Chinese and Japanese troops fought in downtown Shanghai, in the outlying towns, and on the beaches of the Yangtze River and Hangzhou Bay, where the Japanese had made amphibious landings.

Chinese forces were equipped primarily with small-caliber weapons against much greater Japanese air, naval, and armor power. In the end, Shanghai fell, and China lost a significant portion of its best troops, while failing to elicit any international intervention. However, the resistance of Chinese forces over three months of battle shocked the Japanese, who had been indoctrinated with notions of cultural and martial superiority, and largely demoralized the Imperial Japanese Army, who believed they could take Shanghai within days and China within months.

The battle can be divided into three stages, and eventually involved around one million troops. The first stage lasted from August 13 to August 22, 1937, during which the NRA attempted to eradicate Japanese troop presence in downtown Shanghai. The second stage lasted from August 23 to October 26, 1937, during which the Japanese launched amphibious landings on the Jiangsu coast and the two armies fought a Stalingrad-like house-to-house battle, with the Japanese attempting to gain control of the city and the surrounding regions. The last stage, ranging from October 27 to the end of November 1937, involved the retreat of the Chinese army in the face of Japanese flanking maneuvers, and the ensuing combat on the road to China's capital, Nanjing.

Prelude

Ōyama Incident

On 9 August, Lieutenant  of the Japanese Special Naval Landing Forces came speeding in a car up to the gate of Hongqiao Airport. As he was stopped by a Chinese guard, the lieutenant attempted to drive past the gate. The guard stopped him again and Ōyama shot and killed the guard. Other Chinese guards returned fire, and Ōyama was killed in the shootout.

Access to Hongqiao Airport was a violation of the terms agreed by China and Japan under the terms of the ceasefire signed in 1932. It is still unknown whether Ōyama attempted to enter the military airport. The incident heightened the tensions between the Chinese and Japanese forces in Shanghai. On 10 August, the Japanese Consul General demanded that the Chinese withdraw the Peace Preservation Corps and dismantle their defense works around the city. He also made it clear that the Imperial Japanese Army regarded the shooting of a Japanese officer as humiliating, and that any further incident would escalate the situation. In response to the incident, the Japanese began sending in reinforcements to Shanghai. Facing the increasing Japanese military presence in Shanghai, Chinese troops were also being deployed to the Shanghai area beginning on 11 August.

Final efforts at negotiation

On 12 August, representatives from the United Kingdom, France, United States and Italy along with Japan and China participated in the joint conference held in Shanghai to discuss the ceasefire terms. Japan demanded the withdrawal of Chinese troops from Shanghai, while the Chinese representative Yu Hung-chun dismissed the Japanese demand, stating that the terms of ceasefire have already been violated by Japan. The major powers did not wish to see another January 28 Incident, which greatly disrupted foreign economic activities in Shanghai. On the other hand, Chinese citizens feverishly welcomed the presence of Chinese troops in the city. In Nanjing, Chinese and Japanese representatives met for the last time for final efforts at negotiation. The Japanese demanded that the Chinese withdraw all Peace Preservation Corps from Shanghai and all regular troops from the vicinities of the city. The Chinese insisted that the Japanese demand of a unilateral Chinese withdrawal was unacceptable since the two countries were already fighting a war in North China. At last Mayor Yu made it clear that at most the Chinese government would concede that the Chinese troops would not fire unless fired upon. Japan on the other hand placed all responsibility on China because of Chinese deployment of troops around Shanghai. Negotiation was impossible and there was no alternative other than the spread of war into Central China.

Order of battle

First phase (13 August – 22 August)

Urban fighting

Around 9 am on August 13, the Chinese Peace Preservation Corps exchanged small arms fire with Japanese troops in the Zhabei, Wusong, and Jiangwan districts of Shanghai. At about 3 pm the Japanese army crossed over the Bazi Bridge (八字橋) in Zhabei and attacked various centers in the city. The 88th Division retaliated with mortar attacks. Sporadic shooting continued through the day until 4 pm, when Japanese headquarters ordered ships of the Third Fleet stationed in the Yangtze and the Huangpu River to open fire on Chinese positions in the city. Late that night, Chiang Kai-shek ordered Zhang Zhizhong to begin Chinese offensive operations the next day. The next morning the Republic of China Air Force (ROCAF) began bombing various Japanese targets and Chinese ground forces attacked at 3 pm. On the same day, August 14, the Chinese government issued the Proclamation of Self-Defense and War of Resistance (自衛抗戰聲明書), explaining the government's resolution against Japanese aggression. The Battle of Shanghai had officially begun.

American correspondent Edgar Snow described the scenes of the battle while observing from the international zone, "It was as though Verdun had happened on the Seine, in full view of a Right Bank Paris that was neutral; as though a Gettysburg were fought in Harlem, while the rest of Manhattan remained a non-belligerent observer."

Zhang Zhizhong's initial plan was to have the numerically superior Chinese forces attack the Japanese by surprise and push them into the Huangpu River, then blockade the coast to deny the Japanese the opportunity to land reinforcements at the Huangpu wharves between Yangshupu and Hongkou. The 88th Division was to attack Japanese army headquarters near Zhabei, and the 87th Division was to attack the reinforced Kung-ta Textile Mill, where the Japanese naval command was located. Zhang estimated it would take one week to achieve these objectives; however, the operation ran into trouble when his troops were fought to a standstill just outside the Shanghai International Settlement. Japanese strongholds were fortified with thick concrete, barbed wire, machine guns and were resistant to 150mm howitzers, the only heavy weapons the Chinese possessed. Chinese troops could only advance, under the cover of machine gun fire, by getting close enough to the emplacements to kill those within with hand grenades. The Chinese advance was greatly slowed and the element of surprise was lost.

Lacking the heavy weapons to destroy the Japanese bunkers directly, Zhang Zhizhong decided to encircle them instead. On August 16, he ordered his men to take the streets surrounding the Japanese strongholds. Every time a street was successfully cleared, the Chinese would set up a sandbag blockade, gradually surrounding each stronghold and closing off all possible routes of escape. The tactic was successful at first and the Chinese were able to destroy many emplacements and outposts in a single day. However, the Japanese then deployed tanks in the broad streets, enabling them to easily repel Chinese attacks and defeat the encircling strategy. On August 18 the Chinese attack was called off.

On August 18, Chen Cheng reached the front lines to discuss the situation with Zhang Zhizhong. They decided to send the newly arrived 36th Division into the fray, attacking the Hueishan (匯山) docks on the northern side of the Huangpu River. Meanwhile, the 87th Division broke through Japanese lines at Yangshupu, and pushed onto the Hueishan docks along with the 36th Division. On August 22, the tanks of the 36th Division reached the docks, but were unable to hold the position for long. The Chinese troops were insufficiently trained in coordinating infantry-tank tactics, and the troops were unable to keep up with the tanks. Without sufficient infantry to protect them, the tanks were vulnerable to Japanese anti-tank weapons and artillery in close quarters and became useless when they entered the city center. The few troops who did manage to keep up with the tanks through the city blocks were then trapped by Japanese blockades and annihilated by flamethrowers and intense machine gun fire. While the Chinese almost succeeded in pushing the Japanese down the Huangpu River, the casualty rate was exceedingly high. During the night of August 22 alone, the 36th Division lost more than ninety officers and a thousand troops. 36th staff officer Xiong Xinmin saw a Chinese suicide bomber stop a Japanese tank column by exploding himself beneath the lead tank.

On August 22, the Japanese 3rd, 8th, and 11th Divisions made an amphibious assault under the cover of naval bombardment and proceeded to land in Chuanshakou (川沙口), Shizilin (獅子林), and Baoshan (寶山), towns on the northeast coast some fifty kilometers (31 miles) away from downtown Shanghai. Japanese landings in northeast Shanghai suburban areas meant that many Chinese troops, who were deployed in Shanghai's urban center, had to be redeployed to the coastal regions to counter the landings. Thus, the front line was lengthened from metropolitan Shanghai along the Huangpu River to the northeast coastal districts. The Chinese offensive in the urban center had ground to a halt, and the fighting in downtown Shanghai essentially became a stalemate with both sides suffering heavy losses and making minimal changes in the front line. The Chinese divisions were able to hold on to Zhabei, Jiangwan, and other downtown positions for three months, until situations in other areas made it strategically impossible to continue defending them.

Air operations

The frontline fighter aircraft of the Chinese Air Force at the beginning of full-scale hostilities consisted primarily of Curtiss Hawk IIs and Hawk IIIs (many license-built at the CAMCO plant at the Jianqiao Airbase) and the Boeing P-26 Model 281 Peashooter. The Chinese pilots in particular used the Hawk IIIs in various multi-role combat operations against Imperial Japanese positions in and around Shanghai, while the P-26 primarily provided escort cover.

On August 14, the ROCAF bombed the Japanese Navy flagship Izumo. In what became known as "Black Saturday", bombs from ROCAF aircraft fell in the Shanghai International Settlement. While the Chinese pilots were instructed not to fly over the Shanghai International Settlement, the Japanese flagship was berthed right in front of it in what may amount to using the civilian enclave as a human shield; 700-950 Chinese and foreign civilians were killed outright, with a total of 3,000 of civilian deaths and injuries resulting from the accidental release of the bombs, with most of the death occurring at the Great World entertainment centre, where civilian refugees had gathered after fleeing from the fighting. The bombing was not an intended attack on the International Settlement: the four errant bombs were intended for the Japanese cruiser Izumo, which was moored nearby in the Whangpoo (Huangpu) river, adjacent to the Bund. Two exploded in Nanking Road and two in front of the Great World Amusement Centre on Avenue Edward VII, killing an estimated 2,000 shoppers and passers-by. Japanese planes responded to the attack on Izumo and the 4th Flying Group of the ROCAF, based in Henan, under the command of Captain Gao Zhihang (高志航), shot down six Japanese planes, while suffering zero losses. (In 1940 the government announced August 14 would be Air Force Day to raise the morale of the Chinese populace.) From August 15 to 18, the Chinese fought the numerically superior Japanese air force in intense air battles that saw two Japanese squadrons destroyed. China was fighting the air war with every airplane in its possession, some of them purchased second-hand from various countries. It was not able to produce any planes of its own to replace those lost in combat and was always running low on replacement parts and supplies. Japan, in contrast, had a robust aviation industry able to design and manufacture technologically advanced planes and could easily make good their losses. Thus, it was impossible for China to sustain an air war with Japan, however, the Chinese Air Force were given a much-needed lifeline with many new replacement fighter aircraft under the new Sino-Soviet Treaty as the initial inventory of American-made aircraft were gradually lost through attrition. In the Shanghai campaign, the ROCAF is said to have shot down 85 Japanese airplanes and sunk 51 ships, while losing 91 of its own airplanes, just under half of its entire air force at the time.

Other developments

On August 15, the Japanese formed the Shanghai Expeditionary Army (SEF), composed of the 3rd and 11th Divisions, under the command of General Iwane Matsui. On August 19, Japanese Prime Minister Fumimaro Konoe announced that the Sino-Japanese conflict could only be resolved through war, regardless of any attempts at negotiation by third party nations. Konoe said that the initial plan of localized "containment" around the Shanghai region had now escalated to total war, with the ultimate goal of forcing the Chinese government to fully cooperate with the economic and political demands of Japan. On August 23, the Japanese began the bombing campaign over Nanjing, and various cities in Central China. The Shanghai Expeditionary Army also arrived on the same day.

At the beginning of the battle, Zhang Zhizhong, as the commander of the 5th Army and the Nanjing-Shanghai war zone, was responsible for conducting Chinese operations. The failure of the initial Chinese offensive greatly dismayed Chiang Kai-shek and his staff. Chiang criticized Zhang's failure to make sufficient preparations, especially the procurement of weapons capable of penetrating Japanese bunkers, before sending the troops in massive waves, which resulted in unsustainable casualties in many divisions right from the start. Zhang was also criticized for his overconfidence and his penchant for holding press conferences for both foreign and Chinese reporters in the cosmopolitan city. Chiang Kai-shek and his staff, the most prominent including Chen Cheng and Gu Zhutong, began taking over command duties from Zhang. Chiang Kai-shek himself would eventually become the commander of the third war zone which covers the entirety of Shanghai. Regardless, the Chinese offensives against the Japanese garrison failed despite outnumbering the Japanese troops, due to the lack of heavy weaponry and artillery support.

Second phase (23 August – 26 October)

As the Chinese forces began to withdraw from the Shanghai area, more Japanese troops began to land near Shanghai, inflicting heavy casualties on the Chinese side. The fighting spread across from Shanghai metropolis all the way to the township of Liuhe, near the coast where the majority of the Japanese landings occurred. A manoeuvre Japan had also performed in the 1932 battle and therefore should have been expected.

The perceived strength of the Chinese response resulted in major reinforcement for Japanese units. The 9th, 13th, and 101st Divisions, the 5th Heavy Artillery Brigade, and a brigade-strength mixture of smaller units were ordered from Japan to Shanghai by Imperial General Headquarters on 11 September 1937.

Japanese landing (23 August – 10 September)

On August 23, the SEF, led by Iwane Matsui, landed in Liuhe, Wusong (吳淞), and Chuanshakou. Chiang Kai-shek had expected these coastal towns to be vulnerable to Japanese landings and ordered Chen Cheng to reinforce the area with the 18th Army. However, the Chinese were no match for Japanese firepower. The Japanese almost always began their amphibious assaults with heavy naval and air bombardment of the Chinese coastal defense works and trenches. It was not unheard of for the Chinese to lose an entire garrison to such bombardments. However, the Chinese would reinforce almost immediately to counter the Japanese troops who had just made their landing after the bombardment.

In the two weeks that followed, the Chinese and Japanese troops fought bitter battles in the numerous towns and villages along the coast. The Chinese troops fending off the amphibious assaults had only their small-caliber weapons to depend on, and were not sufficiently supported by the ROCAF and the almost nonexistent Chinese navy. They paid heavily for the defense. An entire regiment could be reduced to just a few men in action. In addition, Chinese coastal defense works were hastily constructed and did not offer much protection against enemy attacks, as many trenches were newly constructed during lulls in fighting. Moreover, the sandy soil of the coastal region meant that it was difficult to construct sturdy fortifications. Many trenches would collapse due to rain. The Chinese raced against time to construct and repair these defense works despite constant Japanese bombardment. Logistics difficulty also meant it was hard to transport the necessary construction materials to the front line. The Chinese often had to turn to bombed-out houses to obtain bricks, beams, and other such materials. However, the Chinese fought against great odds and tried to hold on to the coastal villages as long as they could. It was commonplace for the Japanese to successfully occupy the towns in the day under heavy naval support, only to lose them during the night to Chinese counterattacks.

Such attacks and counterattacks continued well into late August, when the fall of Baoshan, a vital coastal town, seemed imminent. Chiang Kai-shek ordered the remaining troops of the 98th Division to defend the town. One battalion, under Yao Ziqing (姚子青), was assigned to the task. The situation in Baoshan was grim, as the Japanese had surrounded the town on September 5. However, Yao ordered his men to defend to the death. Japanese artillery strikes reduced the town to rubble, and Yao was killed in house-to-house fighting. On September 6 Baoshan fell. The entire battalion, except for one soldier, was killed in action. The Chinese would continue to sustain this level of casualties throughout the Shanghai campaign.

Combat around Luodian (11 September – 30 September)

On September 11, with the fall of Baoshan, the Chinese Army moved into defensive positions around the small town of Luodian (羅店), the transportation center connecting Baoshan, downtown Shanghai, Jiading, Songjiang and several other towns with highways. The successful defense of Luodian was strategically paramount to the security of Suzhou and Shanghai; as early as August 29, German adviser Alexander von Falkenhausen had told Chiang Kai-shek that the town must be held at all costs. The Chinese concentrated some 300,000 soldiers there, while the Japanese amassed more than 100,000 troops, supported by naval gunfire, tanks, and aircraft.

The carnage and intensity of the resulting battle earned the fight for Luodian the nickname "grinding mill of flesh and blood" (血肉磨坊). Japanese assaults typically began at daybreak with concentrated aerial bombing, followed by the release of observation balloons to pinpoint the exact location of remaining Chinese positions for artillery and naval strikes. Japanese infantry would then advance under smoke screens, with armored support. Japanese planes would also accompany the infantry and strafe Chinese reinforcements. The battle for Luodian was marked by bloody street fighting, with the close combat making the Chinese the equals of the Japanese.

Chinese defense was stubborn even in the face of overwhelming firepower. During the night, Chinese soldiers mined the roads connecting the coastal towns to Luodian and engaged in night combat to cut off Japanese advance troops. At daybreak, the Chinese would garrison the foremost defensive lines with comparatively few troops in order to reduce casualties resulting from intense Japanese bombardments. The Chinese would then emerge from rear positions to engage the enemy when the Japanese land offensive started after naval and artillery strikes had ceased.

Despite their numerical superiority, the defense of Luodian would prove impossible for the Chinese. The Japanese superiority of firepower forced the Chinese into a passive position, from which they could not mount counter-attacks until the Japanese were practically on top of them. Because of this, the decision was made to defend the entire town to the death, a tactic which greatly accelerated the attrition rate within the Chinese ranks. The casualty rate of General Chen Cheng's army group was more than fifty percent. By the end of September, the Chinese had been almost bled dry and were forced to give up Luodian.

Battle for Dachang (1 October – 26 October)

On October 1, on advice from his commanders, Japanese Prime Minister Fumimaro Konoe decided to integrate the North China and Central China Theaters and launch an October offensive to subjugate the Chinese government and end the war. By this time, the Japanese had increased troop strength in the Shanghai region to more than two hundred thousand. Japanese troops also invaded the town of Liuhang (劉行), south of Luodian. Thus, the frontline moved further south onto the banks of the Wenzaobang River. The Japanese aim was to cross the Yunzaobang and take the town of Dachang (大場), which was the communications link between Chinese troops in downtown Shanghai and the northwest outlying towns.

If Dachang fell, Chinese troops would have to give up their positions in downtown Shanghai and regions east of the Huangpu River to avoid encirclement by the Japanese. The defense of Dachang was vital to how long the Chinese army could continue fighting in the Shanghai war zone; for this, Chiang Kai-shek mobilized whatever remaining troops he could find.

The two armies engaged in seesaw battles, with little changes in the frontline along the Yunzaobin River. From September 11 to October 20, the Japanese army was able to advance only five kilometers. At the most intense moments, positions would change hands five times a day. On October 17, the Guangxi Army under Li Zongren and Bai Chongxi finally arrived to join Chiang Kai-shek's Central Army in the battle for Shanghai. The Chinese then staged a final counteroffensive in an attempt to fully consolidate Chinese positions around Dachang and retake the banks of the Yunzaobin River. However, the counteroffensive was poorly coordinated and again the Chinese succumbed to superior Japanese firepower. The Japanese utilized some 700 artillery pieces and 150 bombers for the Dachang operation and the town was totally reduced to rubble. The fighting was so fierce that the Chinese casualty rate per hour was sometimes in the thousands, and some divisions were incapacitated in a matter of just a few days. The fighting continued until October 25, when Dachang finally fell. By then, Chinese troops had no option but to withdraw from downtown Shanghai, which they had held for almost three months.

Third Phase (27 October – 26 November)

Chinese withdrawal from Shanghai city

Starting the night of October 26, the Chinese began withdrawing from Shanghai's urban center. Because Dachang and other vital suburban towns had been lost already, Chiang Kai-shek ordered the Chinese troops to retreat from Zhabei, Jiangwan (江灣), and other positions that the troops had held for seventy-five days without faltering. However, Chiang ordered one battalion of the 88th Division remain in Zhabei to defend the Sihang Warehouse on the northern bank of the Suzhou Creek.

Chiang wanted the Chinese military presence to remain in Shanghai as long as possible to have a positive reflection on the ongoing Nine-Power Treaty conference that was in session in Brussels, with the hopes for possible intervention from Western powers. The rest of the Chinese troops crossed the Suzhou Creek and regrouped to engage the Japanese troops.

Fighting around Suzhou Creek

Chiang's original plan was to fight in areas south of the Suzhou Creek and inflict as many Japanese casualties as possible. However, through three months of intense fighting, Chinese troop strength had been greatly reduced. Most units had their strength halved, and as a result a division had the fighting capability of less than two regiments. By now, the Chinese army needed between eight and twelve divisions to match the fighting strength of just one Japanese division. Thus, Chinese commanders were pessimistic about the outcome of the Suzhou Creek combat.

Li Zongren, Bai Chongxi, Zhang Fakui and other commanders insisted that the Chinese troops should enter the Wufu and Xicheng defense lines to protect Nanjing, but Chiang wanted the Chinese troops to continue fighting on the southern bank of Suzhou Creek. On October 28, Chiang arrived in the battlefield to boost the morale of his troops. However, the situation was bleak. On October 30, the Japanese crossed Suzhou River and the Chinese troops were in danger of encirclement. The Chinese army was at its limit of endurance.

Japanese landings at Jinshanwei

As early as October 12, the Japanese chiefs of staff had already formulated plans to force a landing in Jinshanwei (金山衛), a town located on the northern bank of Hangzhou Bay, south of the Shanghai region. The Jinshanwei landings would facilitate a northward push into Shanghai, to complement the landings in northeastern towns, such as the ones around Baoshan between late August and mid-September, which brought about a southward push.

Chiang Kai-shek was aware of the Japanese plan to encircle his army in Shanghai from the north and the south, and had already ordered his commanders to take precautions of the possible Japanese landings at Jinshanwei. However, the impending fall of Dachang in late October forced Chiang to redeploy the Chinese divisions originally stationed along the northern coast of Hangzhou Bay.

As a result, the lack of Chinese defenses allowed the Japanese 10th Army Corps, composed of units diverted from the Battle of Taiyuan in the North China Theater, to land easily in Jinshanwei on November 5. Jinshanwei was only forty kilometers away from the banks of Suzhou River where the Chinese troops had just retreated from the fall of Dachang.

Road to Nanjing

Decision to take Nanjing

In October, the SEF was reinforced by the Japanese 10th Army commanded by Lieutenant General Heisuke Yanagawa. On 7 November, Japanese Central China Area Army (CCAA) was organized by combining the SEF and the 10th Army, with Matsui appointed as its commander-in-chief concurrently with that of the SEF. After winning the battles around Shanghai, the SEF suggested the Imperial General Headquarters in Tokyo to attack Nanking.

The CCAA was rearranged and Lieutenant General Prince Asaka (Yasuhiko), an uncle of Emperor Hirohito, was appointed as the commander of the SEF, while Matsui stayed as the commander of CCAA overseeing both the SEF and the 10th Army. The real nature of Matsui's authority is however difficult to establish as he was confronted with a member of the imperial family directly appointed by the Emperor. In anticipation of the attack on Nanking, Matsui issued orders to his armies that read:

Nanjing is the capital of China and the capture thereof is an international affair; therefore, careful study should be made so as to exhibit the honor and glory of Japan and augment the trust of the Chinese people, and that the battle in the vicinity of Shanghai is aimed at the subjugation of the Chinese Army, therefore protect and patronize Chinese officials and people, as far as possible; the Army should always bear in mind not to involve foreign residents and armies in trouble and maintain close liaison with foreign authorities in order to avoid misunderstandings.

On December 2, Emperor Showa nominated one of his uncles, Prince Asaka, as commander of the invasion. It is difficult to establish if, as a member of the imperial family, Asaka had a superior status to general Iwane Matsui, who was officially the commander in chief, but it is clear that, as the top-ranking officer, he had authority over division commanders, lieutenant-generals Kesago Nakajima and Heisuke Yanagawa.

Japanese advance toward Nanjing
After securing control of Shanghai, the Japanese army began its advance towards Nanjing on November 11, 1937, approaching the city from different directions.

The Japanese advance to Nanjing can be characterized as a "forced march". Almost all units covered the distance of almost 400 kilometers in about a month. Assuming that capture of the Chinese capital would be the decisive turning point in the war, there was an eagerness to be among the first to claim the honor of victory.

The Japanese army was engaged by Chinese soldiers on a number of occasions on the way to Nanjing. As a general rule, they were heavily outnumbered. As the Japanese came closer to Nanjing, the fighting grew in both frequency and severity.

Chinese retreat from Shanghai

Japanese landings at Jinshanwei meant that the Chinese army had to retire from the Shanghai front and attempt a breakout. However, Chiang Kai-shek still placed some hope that the Nine-Power Treaty would result in a sanction against Japan by Western powers. It was not until November 8 that the Chinese central command issued a general retreat to withdraw from the entire Shanghai front. All Chinese units were ordered to move toward western towns such as Kunshan, and then from there enter the final defense lines to stop the Japanese from reaching Nanjing.

By then, the Chinese army was utterly exhausted, and with a severe shortage of ammunition and supplies, the defense was faltering. Kunshan was lost in only two days, and the remaining troops began moving toward the Wufu Line fortifications on November 13. The Chinese army was fighting with the last of its strength and the frontline was on the verge of collapse.

In the chaos that ensued many Chinese units were broken up and lost contact with their communications officers who had the maps and layouts to the fortifications. In addition, once they arrived at Wufu Line, the Chinese troops discovered that some of the civilian officials were not there to receive them as they had already fled and had taken the keys with them. The battered Chinese troops, who had just emerged from the bloodbath in Shanghai and were hoping to enter the defense lines, found that they were not able to utilize these fortifications.

The Wufu Line was penetrated on November 19, and the Chinese troops then moved toward Xicheng Line, which they were forced to give up on November 26 in the midst of the onslaught. The "Chinese Hindenburg Line", which the government had spent millions to construct and was the final line of defense between Shanghai and Nanjing, collapsed in only two weeks. The Battle of Shanghai was over. However, fighting continued without a pause on the road to China's capital and the ensuing combat immediately led into the Battle of Nanjing.

By early December, Japanese troops had reached the outskirts of Nanking.

After its success in the Battle of Shanghai, Japan did not immediately occupy the Shanghai International Settlement or the Shanghai French Concession, areas which were outside of China's control due to the treaty port system. Japan moved into these areas after its 1941 declaration of war against the United States and the United Kingdom. It seized most of the banks in these areas of Shanghai and declared that the Nationalist currency fabi had to be exchanged for bank notes of the Wang Jingwei regime.

Aftermath

Loss of Central Army military strength

Even though the Battle of Shanghai was only the first of the twenty-two major battles fought between China and Japan, Chiang Kai-shek's decision to send his best troops into the battle had significant repercussions. At the outbreak of the war, the Chinese NRA boasted a standing army of some 1.75 million troops, but the combat strength was significantly lower as the majority of the Chinese troops were poorly trained and poorly equipped.  Only about 300,000 were comparatively better trained. These troops were reorganized into some 20 newly formed divisions. Of these, around 80,000 had belonged to the German-trained divisions that composed the elite units of Chiang Kai-shek's Central Army. However, even these divisions were not sufficiently supported by combined arms. Thus, out of a grand total of almost two million men-in-arms, less than one hundred thousand Chinese troops were able to fight Japan on more or less equal terms.

Chiang Kai-shek's decision to commit his elite divisions to fight in Shanghai caused his elite units to suffer some sixty percent casualties in the three-month bloodbath. In one single blow, Chiang also lost some 10,000 of the 25,000 junior officers trained by the Whampoa Military Academy between 1929 and 1937, in addition to some tens of thousands of potential military officers. Chiang Kai-shek's Central Army was never to recover from these devastating losses. By the time the 88th Division, arguably the best of these elite divisions, began its defense of Nanjing, it had been reduced to seven thousand men, of whom three thousand were new recruits to replace the losses.

Losses to the Nationalist army's very small stock of armor were also significant. The Chinese deployed three tank battalions in the battle and its immediate aftermath. The 1st Battalion had 32 VCL Amphibious Tanks and some 6-ton Vickers Mark E tanks. The 2nd Battalion also in Shanghai had 20 Vickers Mark E tanks, 4 VCL Tanks and Carden Loyd tankettes. The 3rd Battalion had 10 Panzer I light tanks, 20 CV35 tankettes, and some Leichter Panzerspähwagen armored cars. Almost all of these were lost during the battles in Shanghai and later on in Nanjing.

The heavy casualties inflicted on Chiang's own military strength forced him to rely more on non-Whampoa generals, who commanded the provincial armies and many of whom had questionable loyalty to Chiang. Because of the reduction in his military power, Chiang lost some of his political leverage over local warlords. In effect, Chiang Kai-shek was effectively only the head of a loose coalition, rather than the commander-in-chief of a united fighting force. The sapping of China's best fighting men also made the planning and execution of subsequent military operations difficult. In essence, Chiang Kai-shek's concerted pre-war effort to build a truly effective, modernized, national army was greatly devastated by the sacrifices made in the Battle of Shanghai.

International response

A major reason that the Chinese army held onto the city as long as it did, even though it was on the brink of collapse, was that China was hoping for Western intervention in the Sino-Japanese War. Western nations had been paying little attention to China's plight since they were preoccupied with the situation in Europe. In addition, most Western nations had little prospect that their intervention would help China in the long run because they believed that China would eventually lose. If China was deemed militarily weak, economically backward, and politically disunited by Western powers, it would not make sense for them to help China when it seemed bound for defeat by Japan.

Thus, Chiang Kai-shek had to devote everything China had to offer to make sure the Western powers knew that the present conflict between China and Japan was a major war, not a collection of inconsequential "incidents" as had been the case previously. Based on this political strategy, Chiang Kai-shek had to order his troops to fight to the death in an attempt to arouse international sympathy and cause the international community to adopt measures that would help China and sanction Japan.

On September 12, one month after the Battle of Shanghai began, China formally brought the case against Japan to the League of Nations. Again, the League was not able to formulate any effective sanctions against Japan other than an October 4 statement that gave China "spiritual support". The United States was not a member of the League and Great Britain and France were reluctant to challenge Japan. Of all the major Western powers, only the United States seemed able to act more since it was not embroiled in the volatile European affairs.

In addition, on October 5, President Franklin D. Roosevelt gave the Quarantine Speech, calling for the United States to help nations fight against aggressor nations. This speech had a tremendous effect on raising China's morale. Because America seemed willing to confront Japan, the British representative suggested to close the League case and convene the Nine Power Treaty Conference. Since the Nine-Power Treaty was signed as a result of the Washington Naval Conference of 1922, the opening of the Conference automatically brought the United States into the effort to rein in Japanese aggression.

American entry into the international response brought new hope to the Chinese, and Chiang Kai-shek again reiterated the need for his troops to hold on to Shanghai to prove that China was indeed worth fighting for. By mid-October, the Chinese situation in Shanghai had become increasingly dire and the Japanese had made significant gains. The vital town of Dachang fell on October 26 and the Chinese withdrew from metropolitan Shanghai.

However, because the Nine Power Treaty Conference was to begin in early November, Chiang Kai-shek ordered his troops to stay in the Shanghai battlefield, instead of retreating to the Wufu and Xicheng Lines to protect Nanjing. He also left one lone battalion to defend the Sihang Warehouse in metropolitan Shanghai. Chiang also visited the frontlines to encourage his troops.

Because Shanghai was the most important Chinese city in Western eyes, the troops had to fight and hold on to the city as long as possible, rather than moving toward the defense lines along nameless towns en route to Nanjing. On November 3, the Conference finally convened in Brussels. While the Western powers were in session to mediate the situation, the Chinese troops were making their final stand in Shanghai and had all hopes for a Western intervention that would save China from collapse.

Nine-Power Treaty Conference

Effects
In terms of its long-term effects on the war of attrition, the Battle of Shanghai bought enough time for the Chinese government to move some of its vital industries to Wuhan and Xi'an, and from there to Chongqing, China's wartime capital after the fall of Nanjing and Wuhan. The difficulty in dismantling and relocating thousands of tons of machinery and factory equipment, especially in the heat of Japanese bombing campaigns, meant that the Chinese government fell short of its goal of moving the entire industrial base from the Shanghai region.

Many factories were destroyed during the fighting and ceased to be functional. Of the nearly twelve hundred factories and workshops of all sizes, only slightly more than ten percent were moved out of Shanghai. However, as insignificant as they were, these factories formed the core of China's wartime industry, especially in the bleak days of the blockade of the entire Chinese coast, the closure of the Burma Road, and the low tonnage of supplies flown over the Hump.

Chiang Kai-shek's strategy of bringing the fight to Shanghai to force Japan to adopt an east-to-west direction of attack also prevented Japan from cutting right into Central China. As a result, the Battle of Wuhan was delayed for almost a year, and the time bought gave the Chinese government breathing space to recuperate and relocate more resources to Chongqing. Overall, even though Chinese losses were irreparable, the strategy of trading "space for time" proved its worth.

The Battle of Shanghai was a military defeat but a high point for Chinese nationalism. The beginning of full-scale war meant that China would no longer stand idly and allow Japan to conquer its territories piece by piece as it had done in the past. It also demonstrated China's resolve not to surrender even in the face of overwhelming firepower. However, Chiang Kai-shek's order to have his troops make one death stand after another greatly sapped his strength and directly caused his army's inability to defend Nanjing for even two weeks.

In his memoir, General Li Zongren pointed out that Chiang's staff had proposed that the Chinese army reserve around ten divisions along the Wufu Line to protect Nanjing and felt it made no difference if Shanghai could be held for a few months longer at the expense of huge casualties. However, as China was not able to defeat Japan single-handedly, Chiang believed the best option was to bring the western powers into the war by eliciting international sympathy being committed to the resistance in Shanghai.

In his correspondence with Hu Shih, Chiang wrote that China was capable of withstanding six months of combat before changes in the international situation would have to end the war. This may have also caused Chiang to devote all of his best troops in the first battle of what would eventually become a prolonged war. However, while Chiang's initial assessment was overly optimistic, China continued to fight for eight more years until Japan finally surrendered after the atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the Soviet invasion of Manchuria.

See also

 Events preceding World War II in Asia
 Jinan incident (May 1928)
 Huanggutun incident (Japanese assassination of the Chinese head of state Generalissimo Zhang Zuolin on 4 June 1928)
 Second Sino-Japanese War
 Japanese invasion of Manchuria
 Mukden Incident (18 September 1931)
 January 28 Incident (Shanghai, 1932)
 Defense of the Great Wall (1933)
 Marco Polo Bridge Incident (7 July 1937)
 Assassination of Tomomitsu Taminato (1936)
 Great Way Government (Shanghai, 1937–1938)
 Shanghai Ghetto
 Defense of Sihang Warehouse

References

Citations

Sources

 Van de Ven, Hans, "The Battle of Shanghai". Chapter five in

External links

 "Japan-China: Sailors Ashore". Time. August 30, 1937.
   taken from the French cruiser Lamotte-Picquet, anchored in the harbor

National Archives (USA) film, "On the Japanese bombing and occupation of Shanghai". total run time = 10:20

Conflicts in 1937
1937 in Shanghai
1937 in Japan
Shanghai 1937
Invasions of China
Invasions by Japan
Urban warfare
Articles containing video clips
Military history of Shanghai

Battle of Shanghai


Pampulha je područje Belo Horizontea osam kilometara od centra grada; jedinstven primjer grada-vrta stvorenog od 1942. – 1944. godine sa sjajnim istoimenim umjetnim jezerom i modernim vilama, te sjajnom crkvom sv. Franje Asiškog (Igreja de Sao Francisco de Assis); djelo suradnje arhitekta Oscara Niemeyera, urbanista Roberta Burle Marxa i drugih inovativnih brazilskih umjetnika. Tu se nalaze ekološki i zoološki park, te stadion Atletico Mineira, poznat kao Mineirão, najveći stadion u državi Minas Gerais, u čijem kompleksu je i dvorana Mineirinho, najveća u Brazilu.

Pampulha je upisana na UNESCO-ov popis mjesta svjetske baštine u Amerikama 2016. godine kao "moderni kompleks postignut smjelom uporabom betona spajajući arhitekturu, hortikulturu i kiparstvo u skladnu cjelinu. Također, odražava utjecaje lokalnih tradicija, brazilske klime i prirodnog okoliša na modernu arhitekturu".

Tadašnji gradonačelnik Belo Horizontea, Juscelino Kubitschek želio je razviti područje sjeverno od grada, zbog čega je angažirao mladog i već poznatog arhitekta Oscara Niemeyera koji je dizajnirao skup zgrada oko umjetnog jezera Pampulhe, uključujući kasino, dvoranu za ples, jedriličarski i golf klub, te hotel. Pampulha je otvorena 16. svibnja 1943., u nazočnosti predsjednika Getulia Vargasa. Kasino je kasnije postao Umjetnički muzej Pampulhe 1957. god.

Pampulha je znamenitost koja je snažno utjecala na povijest urbanizma, između ostalog izgled brazilske prijestolnice, Brasilije, koje je djelo istih autora.

Izvori

Poveznice

 Le Havre (Francuska)
 Stambena naselja berlinske moderne (Njemačka)

Urbanizam
Moderna arhitektura
Svjetska baština u Brazilu

Pampulha


Michael Eugene Archer (), cunoscut sub numele de scenă D'Angelo, este un cantautor, instrumentist și producător american de R&B și neo-soul. D'Angelo s-a născut în Richmond, Virginia și este fiul unui preot penticostal. A început să cânte la pian în copilărie, iar la vârsta de 18 ani a câștigat concursul de talente amatoare de la Teatrul Apollo din Harlem timp de trei săptămâni la rând. După o scurtă perioadă ca membru al formației hip hop I.D.U., a devenit cunoscut unui public mai larg în 1994, scriind și producând piesa "U Will Know".

Albumul său de debut, Brown Sugar, a fost lansat în iulie 1995. Acesta a primit recenzii foarte bune și a înregistrat vânzări de peste două milioane de exemplare. Alături de artiști precum Erykah Badu, Lauryn Hill, Maxwell și Angie Stone, D'Angelo a devenit parte a mișcării neo soul. După o pauză de aproape cinci ani, D'Angelo a lansat Voodoo, în ianuarie 2000. Albumul a debutat pe locul 1 în Billboard 200, iar single-ul "Untitled (How Does It Feel)" a fost un succes uriaș în topurlie R&B. Piesa a câștigat un Grammy pentru Cea mai bună interpretare R&B masculină, iar Voodoo a câștigat premiul pentru Cel mai bun album R&B.

După lansarea piesei "Untitled (How Does It Feel)", D'Angelo a început să devină din ce în ce mai stânjenit în privința statutului său în creștere de sex-simbol. A urmat o perioadă de probleme personale, inclusiv alcoolismul, și o pauză muzicală de paisprezece ani. În decembrie 2014, D'Angelo și-a lansat cel de-al treilea album de studio, Black Messiah. Albumul a fost un succes din punct de vedere critic și a înregistrat performanțe bune în topurile muzicale, atingând locul cinci în Billboard 200.

Primii ani
D'Angelo, pe numele său adevărat Michael Eugene Archer, s-a născut pe data de 11 februarie 1974 în Richmond, Virginia. Este fiul unui predicator, și a fost crescut într-un mediu penticostal. Talentul muzical al lui Archer a fost descoperit încă din copilărie. La trei ani, fratele său Luther, în vârstă de 10 ani, l-a văzut cântând la pianul familiei. După formarea grupului muzical Michael Archer and Precise și succesul în competiția Amateur Night din Apollo Theater al Harlem, New York, D'Angelo a renunțat la liceu și s-a mutat în New York City, cu scopul de a-și dezvolta cariera muzicală. Grupul s-a bucurat de un succes minor în Richmond, având în repertoriu coveruri soul, dar și piese originale, în timp ce D'Angelo și-a dezvoltat talentul de textier. Performanțele la Amateur Night au adus grupului trei victorii consecutive și premii în bani. După întoarcerea în Richmond, D'Angelo a fost inspirat să producă un album, și a început să compună material, după o scurtă perioadă ca membru al grupului hip hop I.D.U. (Intelligent, Deadly but Unique).

Cariera

1991–1995: Brown Sugar
În 1991, D'Angelo a semnat un acord publicistic cu EMI Music, atrăgând atenția executivilor companiei printr-o casetă demo. După o audiție impresionantă – un recital de pian de trei ore – D'Angelo a semnat un contract de înregistrare cu compania în anul 1993. Gary Harris a fost omul de A&R responsabil pentru semnarea sa, în timp ce managerul Kedar Massenburg a asistat la negocierea contractului.

Primul succes semnificativ a fost în 1994, sub forma singleului "U Will Know". D'Angelo a scris și produs piesa pentru supergrupul R&B Black Men United, formație ce avea în componență cântăreți de R&B precum Brian McKnight, Usher, R. Kelly, Boyz II Men, Raphael Saadiq și Gerald Levert. D'Angelo a compus muzica pentru "U Will Know", în timp ce fratele său, Luther Archer, a scris versurile. Apărută prima data în filmul Jason's Lyric (1994), piesa a urcat pe locul 5 în Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Singles & Tracks, respectiv locul 28 în Billboard Hot 100. Videoclipul lui "U Will Know" l-a înfățișat pe D'Angelo ca dirijorul corului; un rol pe care l-a jucat din nou în cadrul premiilor Soul Train, unde piesa a fost interpretată live. În același an, a scris și produs piesa "Overjoyed" pentru Corul de băieți din Harlem, care a apărut pe albumul lor de studio The Sound of Hope (1994).

În 1995 a lansat primul album de studio, Brown Sugar. Deși inițial vânzările au fost lente, albumul a devenit un succes. A debutat pe locul șase în Billboard Top R&B Albums în 22 iulie 1995. A atins locul patru pe 24 februarie 1996, și a petrecut un total de 54 de săptămâni în top. Brown Sugar a stat 65 de săptămâni și în Billboard 200, atingând locul 22. A avut vânzări de 300,000 de exemplare în primele două luni de la lansare. Cu ajutorul celor patru singleuri, printre care și "Lady", premiat cu discul de aur, albumul a atins vânzări de 500,000 de unități în Statele Unite în octombrie 1995. Pe 7 februarie 1996 a primit discul de platină de la Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), pentru vânzări de peste un milion de exemplare în Statele Unite. Vânzările totale sunt estimate a fi între 1.5 milioane și peste două milioane de exemplare.

1996–2000: Perioada sabatică și Voodoo
După succesul primului său album, Brown Sugar (1995), D'Angelo a luat o pauză de patru ani și jumătate de la scena muzicală, în care nu a lansat niciun material solo. După doi ani petrecuți în turneu, prmovând Brown Sugar, D'Angelo s-a găsit în pană de idei. Acesta a comentat mai târziu: "Chestia cu pana de idei e că vrei să scrii al dracului de mult, [dar] piesele nu vin așa. Ele vin din viață. Deci trebuie să trăiești ca să scrii." De-a lungul perioadei sabatice, a lansat în general coveruri și remakeuri, printre care și un cover alături de Erykah Badu al piesei "Your Precious Love" de Marvin Gaye și Tammi Terrell, pentru coloana sonoră a filmului High School High (1996). D'Angelo a apărut într-un duet, "Nothing Even Matters", alături de Lauryn Hill, pentru albumul acesteia de debut, The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill (1998).

Mult-așteptatul succesor al lui Brown Sugar, Voodoo, a fost lansat în 2000 prin Virgin Records. Voodoo a primit recenzii extrem de bune din partea criticilor contemporani de muzică, care l-au numit o "operă de artă" respectiv cel mai bun proiect al lui D'Angelo. Albumul a debutat pe primul loc în topul Billboard 200, înregistrând vânzări de 320,000 de exemplare în prima săptămână. A intrat în Billboard 200 pe 12 februarie 2000 și a rămas în top timp de 33 de săptămâni consecutive. Până în 2005, albumul a vândut peste 1.7 milioane de exemplare în Statele Unite, conform Nielsen SoundScan. În 2001, Voodoo a câștigat Premiul Grammy pentru Cel mai bun album R&B, acesta a fost acordat lui D'Angelo și Russell Elevado, inginerul său de sunet.

Primele două singleuri, "Devil's Pie" și "Left & Right", au atins locurile 69 respectiv 70 în topul Billboard Hot 100. Piesa din urmă a fost orientată comercial către radiourile hip hop, datorită prezenței rapperilor Redman și Method Man. Conform producătorului videoclipului "Left & Right", piesa și videoclipul au trecut neobservate datorită refuzului MTV de a difuza melodia, ca pedeapsă pentru nerespectarea termenului inițial al premierei. Al cincilea single, "Feel Like Makin' Love" a avut un succes mai mic, atingând locul 109 în Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs. "Send It On", al patrulea single de pe album, s-a bucurat de un succes moderat, ajungând pe locul 33 al topului Billboard Pop Singles. Al treilea single, "Untitled (How Does It Feel)" a devenit cel mai mare succes comercial, atingând locul 25 în Billboard Hot 100, respectiv locul doi în topul R&B. Videoclipul scandalos a ajutat la popularizarea melodiei și a lui D'Angelo. Billboard a scris despre videoclip: "E pură sexualitate. D'Angelo, plin de mușchi și strălucitor, este filmat de la șold în sus, dezbrăcat, dar arătând destul pentru a crea o pasiune aproape oricărei femei care îl vede. Doar videoclipul poate face melodia una din cele mai mari ale anului ce urmează." A primit trei nominalizări la ediția din 2000 a MTV Video Music Awards: Videoclipul anului, Cel mai bun videoclip R&B, și Cel mai bun videoclip masculin.

2001–2013: A doua perioadă sabatică, probleme personale și al treilea album
Spre sfârșitul turneului mondial de promovare al albumului Voodoo, problemele personale ale lui D'Angelo s-au agravat, afectându-i concertele. A devenit tot mai conștient și incomod în privința statutului său de sex-simbol, iar după turneu, D'Angelo s-a întors acasă, unde a dispărut din ochii publicului. Apropiații acestuia au menționat impactul comercial al videoclipului "Untitled (How Does It Feel)" și al turneului Voodoo ca factori ce au dus la absența lui D'Angelo din scena muzicală. Fostul său manager, Dominique Trenier, și-a exprimat dezamăgirea față de impactul videoclipului într-un interviu cu revista Spin: "până în ziua de azi, în memoria populației obișnuite, el e tipul dezbrăcat".

Conform managerului său de turneu, Alan Leeds, experiența "i-a luat încrederea, deoarece nu e convins de motivul pentru care e susținut de fani". După sinuciderea prietenului său apropiat, Fred Jordan, în aprilie 2001, D'Angelo a început să aibă probleme cu alcoolul. Alcoolismul său s-a agravat, iar planurile pentru un album live și o colaborare cu Soultronics au fost anulate. Devenind nerăbdători, executivii de la Virgin au refuzat să-i finanțeze următorul album solo, așteptat în 2004.

Până în anul 2005, a fost părăsit de prietenă, avocatul său a devenit nemulțumit de el, și a pierdut contactul cu majoritatea familiei sale. De asemenea, a renunțat la managerul Dominique Trenier și managerul de turneu Alan Leeds. După un accident de mașină și o arestare pentru conducere sub influența alcoolului, respectiv posesie de marijuana, D'Angelo a părăsit Virgin Records în anul 2005, urmând să se interneze la centrul de reabilitare Crossroads din Antigua. În 2005, contractul său de înregistrare a fost preluat de către J Records, după zvonuri cum că D'Angelo ar fi semnat cu Bad Boy Records. Deși nu a produs niciun material solo, D'Angelo a colaborat cu diverși artiști ai genului R&B și hip-hop între perioada dintre albume, apărând în proiecte precum: The Shining (2006) de J Dilla, Tha Blue Carpet Treatment (2006) de Snoop Dogg, Finding Forever (2007) de Common, și The Renaissance (2008) de Q-Tip.

Următorul album al lui D'Angelo a fost amânat extensiv. Producția pentru succesorul lui Voodoo stagna, deoarece lucra în mare parte singur pe parcursul anului 2002. D'Angelo a încercat să cânte la fiecare instrument pentru proiect, dorind control creativ complet, asemenea lui Prince. Materialul rezultat a fost descris de către Russell Elevado ca fiind "Parliament/Funkadelic îi întâlnește pe Beatles și Prince, iar în tot acest timp e această energie de tip Jimi Hendrix". Cu toate acestea, cei care au ascultat piesele le-au considerat neterminate. În anii ce au urmat, problemele personale ale lui D'Angelo s-au înrăutățit, ducând la dependențe de droguri și alcool. În ianuarie 2005 a fost arestat și acuzat pentru posesie de marijuana și cocaină. Au început să circule fotografii de profil cu artistul, realizate de către poliție, care îl înfățișau nesănătos și supraponderal, opusul celui musculos din perioada promovării albumului Voodoo. În septembrie 2005, la o săptămână după acuzațiile pentru posesie, acesta a fost implicat într-un accident de mașină, zvonindu-se că a fost rănit grav. Cu toate acestea, avocatul său a declarat după o săptămână că acesta este în regulă, continuând prin a spune că "este nerăbdător să termine înregistrările pentru opera sa de artă soul, pe care lumea a așteptat-o cu răbdare".

Nu au mai fost dezvăluite detalii despre album până în 2007, când Questlove a făcut publică o melodie incompletă, pe radioul Triple J din Australia. Intitulată "Really Love", piesa a avut influențe acustice și de swing. Publicarea melodiei ar fi înrăutățit relația dintre cei doi. Pe 24 iunie 2008, D'Angelo a lansat o compilație cu piese de pe cele două albume de studio, Brown Sugar și Voodoo. Intitulată The Best So Far..., aceasta a conținut și piese rare, inclusiv un DVD cu videoclipuri nelansate.

Spre sfârșitul lui noiembrie 2011, D'Angelo a anunțat o serie de concerte în Europa, programate pentru anul 2012. Turneul a început pe data de 26 ianuarie 2012 în Stockholm, Suedia, și s-a terminat pe 10 februarie.  Turneul a cuprins o selecție de hituri de pe cele două albume ale sale, respectiv piese noi de pe următorul album, care era aproape finalizat. A cântat în premieră patru piese noi: "Sugah Daddy", "Ain't That Easy", "Another Life" și "The Charade", care au fost bine primite. Pe 1 septembrie 2012, D'Angelo a interpretat în cadrul festivalului Made In America, organizat de Jay Z, unde a cântat piesele "The Charade" și "Sugar Daddy". Pe 7 octombrie, RCA Music Group a anunțat că va destrăma J Records, Arista Records și Jive Records. După acest eveniment, D'Angelo și toți artiștii semnați sub casele respective își vor lansa materialele viitoare prin RCA Records.

2014–prezent: Black Messiah
D'Angelo a lansat cel de-al treilea album de studio, Black Messiah, în decembrie 2014. Acesta dorea să îl lanseze în 2015, dar verdictele controversate din cazurile protestelor din Ferguson și Eric Garner l-au determinat să îl lanseze mai devreme. Pe 12 decembrie 2014, managerul lui D'Angelo, Kevin Liles, a distribuit prin YouTube un teaser de 15 secunde al albumului. Două zile mai târziu, a fost lansată piesa "Sugah Daddy", care făcea parte din repertoriul live al lui D'Angelo încă din 2012. După o audiție exclusivă a albumului în New York, Black Messiah a fost lansat în format digital pe 15 decembrie, prin iTunes, Google Play Music și Spotify. Lansarea neașteptată a albumului a fost comparată cu lansarea albumului Beyoncé din anul 2013. Pe 13 ianuarie 2015, piesa "Really Love" a fost lansată către radiurile din Statele Unite.

Albumul a fost primit extrem de bine de către critici, având un scor mediu de 95/100 din 30 de recenzii pe Metacritic. Black Messiah a debutat pe locul cinci în Billboard 200, înregistrând vânzări de 117,000 exemplare în prima săptămână în Statele Unite. În a doua săptămână, albumul a căzut pe locul 25 și a vândut 40,254 exemplare. În Marea Britanie a debutat pe locul 47 în UK Albums Chart, cu vânzări de 7,423 exemplare în prima săptămână. Pentru promovarea albumului, D'Angelo a anunțat turneul The Second Coming. Din trupa sa, The Vanguard, fac parte toboșarul Chris Dave, basistul Pino Palladino, chitariștii Jesse Johnson și Isaiah Sharkey, vocaliștii Kendra Foster, Jermaine Holmes și Charles "Redd" Middleton, respectiv Cleo "Pookie" Sample la clape. Partea europeană a turneului a început la Zurich pe 11 februarie 2015 și s-a terminat la Bruxelles pe 7 martie.

În iunie 2015, D'Angelo a confirmat pentru Rolling Stone faptul că lucra la material pentru un nou album, numindu-l un "acompaniator" pentru Black Messiah. În 2016, Black Messiah a câștigat premiul pentru Cel mai bun album R&B, iar piesa "Really Love" i-a adus premiul pentru Cea mai bună piesă R&B și o nominalizare pentru Cea mai bună înregistrare a anului. Black Messiah, albumul omonim al lui Beyoncé (2013) și To Pimp a Butterfly (2015) de Kendrick Lamar au pus baza lansărilor politice din 2016, printre care se numără albumul Anti de Rihanna, The Life of Pablo de Kanye West și Lemonade de Beyoncé.

D'Angelo a interpretat piesa "Sometimes it Snows in April" a lui Prince în cadrul emisiunii Tonight Show a lui Jimmy Fallon. A fost acompaniat în realizarea tributului de către Maya Rudolph și Gretchen Lieberum.

Arta
Într-un interviu din 1995, D'Angelo a discutat despre influența lui Prince asupra înregistrării primului său album, menționând: "Eram unul dintre tipii care citeau creditele albumelor, și am realizat că Prince a fost un artist adevărat. A scris, produs, și interpretat, și asta e calea pe care vreau s-o urmez". Conform lui D'Angelo, influența hip hop prezentă pe album "provenea din mișcarea Native Tongues - Tribe Called Quest, Gang Starr și Main Source". Într-un interviu cu jurnalistul Touré, datat februarie 1999, D'Angelo a discutat inspirațiile originale de a produce muzică, spunând: "Sunetul și textura muzicii mele vor fi afectate de motivația mea de a le face". De-a lungul producției celui de-al doilea album, D'Angelo a înregistrat numeroase ore de material nelansat, atât original cât și coveruri ale artiștilor care l-au influențat. Numiți colectiv "Yoda" de către D'Angelo, printre artiști se numără cântărețul soul Al Green, muzicianul funk George Clinton și pionierul Afrobeatului, Fela Kuti.

Viața personală
În anii '90 a fost implicat romantic cu cântăreața soul Angie Stone, al cărei album de debut l-a produs în 1999. Aceștia au un fiu împreună, Michael, născut în 1998.

Discografie
 Albume de studio
 Brown Sugar (1995)
 Voodoo (2000)
 Black Messiah (cu The Vanguard) (2014)

Turnee
 Brown Sugah Tour (1996)
 The Voodoo World Tour (2000)
 Occupy Music Tour (2012)
 The Liberation Tour (2012)
 The Second Coming Tour (2015)

Premii și nominalizări

Premii Grammy

Referințe

Legături externe

D'Angelo on imeem

Nașteri în 1974
Cântăreți de muzică soul americani
Muzicieni ai EMI Records
Câștigătorii premiilor Grammy
Americani în viață
Cântăreți neo soul

D'Angelo


Vangildisbætur er nálgun við útreikning skaðabóta sem eiga að setja kröfuhafa í sömu stöðu fjárhagslega eins og hann hefði aldrei gert viðkomandi samning. Meðal kostnaðarliða sem kröfuhafinn gæti fengið bættan með þessum hætti er kostnaður við samningsgerð, kostnað vegna samningsslitanna sjálfra, innkaupsverð sérhæfs búnaðar sem hann hefði ella ekki keypt, gjöld sem ekki fást endurgreidd, og missir hagnaðar vegna annarra samninga sem hann náði ekki að efna eða gera af þeim sökum.

Kröfuréttur
Lögfræði

Vangildisbætur


An Schoenus benthamii in uska species han Liliopsida nga ginhulagway ni Ferdinand von Mueller. An Schoenus benthamii in nahilalakip ha genus nga Schoenus, ngan familia nga Cyperaceae. Waray hini subspecies nga nakalista.

Mga kasarigan

Schoenus

Schoenus benthamii


The year 1607 in science and technology involved some significant events.

Astronomy
 Johannes Kepler records the appearance and motion of a comet, later to be known as Comet Halley.

Medicine
 Giovanni Antonio Magini defends the use of astrology in medicine in his De astrologica ratione (published in Venice).

Technology
 Howitzers are invented, by a Frenchman.

Zoology
 Edward Topsell's bestiary The Historie of Foure-Footed Beasts is published in London by William Jaggard.

Births
 between 31 October and 6 December – Pierre de Fermat, French mathematician (d. 1665)

Deaths
 6 January – Guidobaldo del Monte, Italian mathematician (born 1545)
 28 June – Domenico Fontana, Italian architect (born 1543)
 22 August – Bartholomew Gosnold, English explorer and privateer (born 1572)
 Georg Bartisch, German physician and ophthalmologist (born 1535)

References

17th century in science
1600s in science

1607 in science


Psychological pain, mental pain, or emotional pain is an unpleasant feeling (a suffering) of a psychological, non-physical origin. A pioneer in the field of suicidology, Edwin S. Shneidman, described it as "how much you hurt as a human being. It is mental suffering; mental torment." There is no shortage in the many ways psychological pain is referred to, and using a different word usually reflects an emphasis on a particular aspect of mind life. Technical terms include algopsychalia and psychalgia, but it may also be called mental pain, emotional pain, psychic pain, social pain,
spiritual or soul pain,  or suffering. While these clearly are not equivalent terms, one systematic comparison of theories and models of psychological pain, psychic pain, emotional pain, and suffering concluded that each describe the same profoundly unpleasant feeling. Psychological pain is widely believed to be an inescapable aspect of human existence.

Other descriptions of psychological pain are "a wide range of subjective experiences characterized as an awareness of negative changes in the self and in its functions accompanied by negative feelings", "a diffuse subjective experience ... differentiated from physical pain which is often localized and associated with noxious physical stimuli", and "a lasting, unsustainable, and unpleasant feeling resulting from negative appraisal of an inability or deficiency of the self."

Cause
The adjective 'psychological' is thought to encompass the functions of beliefs, thoughts, feelings, and behaviors, which may be seen as an indication for the many sources of psychological pain. One way of grouping these different sources of pain was offered by Shneidman, who stated that psychological pain is caused by frustrated psychological needs.  For example, the need for love, autonomy, affiliation, and achievement, or the need to avoid harm, shame, and embarrassment. Psychological needs were originally described by Henry Murray in 1938 as needs that motivate human behavior. Shneidman maintained that people rate the importance of each need differently, which explains why people's level of psychological pain differs when confronted with the same frustrated need. This needs perspective coincides with Patrick David Wall's description of physical pain that says that physical pain indicates a need state much more than a sensory experience.

In the fields of social psychology and personality psychology, the term social pain is used to denote psychological pain caused by harm or threat to social connection; bereavement, embarrassment, shame and hurt feelings are subtypes of social pain.  From an evolutionary perspective, psychological pain forces the assessment of actual or potential social problems that might reduce the individual's fitness for survival. The way people display their psychological pain socially (for example, crying, shouting, moaning) serves the purpose of indicating that they are in need.

Neuropsychology
Physical pain and psychological pain share common underlying neurological mechanisms. Brain regions that were consistently found to be implicated in both types of pain are the anterior cingulate cortex and prefrontal cortex (some subregions more than others), and may extend to other regions as well. Brain regions that were also found to be involved in psychological pain include the insular cortex, posterior cingulate cortex, thalamus, parahippocampal gyrus, basal ganglia, and cerebellum. Some advocate that, because similar brain regions are involved in both physical pain and psychological pain, pain should be seen as a continuum that ranges from purely physical to purely psychological. Moreover, many sources mention the fact that many metaphors of physical pain are used to refer to psychologically painful experiences. Further connection between physical and psychological pain has been supported through proof that acetaminophen, an analgesic, can suppress activity in the anterior cingulate cortex and the insular cortex when experiencing social exclusion, the same way that it suppresses activity when experiencing physical pain, and reduces the agitation of people with dementia. However, use of paracetamol for more general psychological pain remains disputed.

Borderline personality disorder

Borderline personality disorder (BPD) has long been believed to be a disorder that produces the most intense emotional pain and distress in those who have this condition. Studies have shown that borderline patients experience chronic and significant emotional suffering and mental agony. Borderline patients may feel overwhelmed by negative emotions, experiencing intense grief instead of sadness, shame and humiliation instead of mild embarrassment, rage instead of annoyance, and panic instead of nervousness. People with BPD are especially sensitive to feelings of rejection, isolation and perceived failure. Both clinicians and laymen alike have witnessed the desperate attempts to escape these subjective inner experiences of these patients. Borderline patients are severely impulsive and their attempts to alleviate the agony are often very destructive or self-destructive. Suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, eating disorders (anorexia nervosa, binge eating disorder, and bulimia nervosa), self-harm (cutting, overdosing, starvation, etc.), compulsive spending, gambling, sex addiction, violent and aggressive behavior, sexual promiscuity and deviant sexual behaviors, are desperate attempts to escape this pain.

The intrapsychic pain experienced by those diagnosed with BPD has been studied and compared to normal healthy controls and to others with major depression, bipolar disorder, substance use disorder, schizophrenia, other personality disorders, and a range of other conditions. Although the excruciatingly painful inner experience of the borderline patient is both unique and perplexing, it is often linked to severe childhood trauma of abuse and neglect. In clinical populations, the rate of suicide of patients with borderline personality disorder is estimated to be 10%, a rate far greater than that in the general population and still considerably greater than for patients with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. However, 60–70% of patients with borderline personality disorder make suicide attempts, so suicide attempts are far more frequent than completed suicides in patients with BPD.

The intense dysphoric states which patients diagnosed with BPD endure on a regular basis distinguishes them from those with other personality disorders: major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, and virtually all known DSM-IV Axis I and Axis II conditions. In a 1998 study entitled "The Pain of Being Borderline: Dysphoric States Specific to Borderline Personality Disorder", 146 diagnosed borderline patients took a 50-item self-report measure test. The conclusions from this study suggest "that the subjective pain of borderline patients may be both more pervasive and more multifaceted than previously recognised and that the overall "amplitude" of this pain may be a particularly good marker for the borderline diagnosis".

Feelings of emptiness are a central problem for patients with personality disturbances. In an attempt to avoid this feeling, these patients employ defences to preserve their fragmentary selves. Feelings of emptiness may be so painful that suicide is considered.

See also
 Emotion
 Psychological trauma
 Psychosomatic medicine

References

Emotion
Suffering
Borderline personality disorder
Limbic system

Psychological pain


ناصر السباعي لاعب كرة قدم سوري من مواليد حمص، يلعب مع الكرامة الحمصي.

روابط خارجية

مراجع

لاعبو كرة قدم رجالية مغتربون في لبنان
لاعبو كرة قدم رجالية سوريون
لاعبو كرة قدم رجالية سوريون مغتربون
لاعبو كرة قدم رجالية مغتربون في إندونيسيا
أشخاص على قيد الحياة
أشخاص من حمص
رياضيون سوريون مغتربون في الهند
رياضيون سوريون مغتربون في إندونيسيا
رياضيون سوريون مغتربون في لبنان
رياضيون من حمص
لاعبو الدوري 1
لاعبو الدوري السوري
لاعبو الدوري اللبناني لكرة القدم
لاعبو الدوري الهندي للمحترفين
لاعبو بالي يونايتد
لاعبو برسيب باندونغ
لاعبو كرة قدم رجالية مغتربون في الهند
لاعبو كرة قدم سوريون
لاعبو كرة قدم مغتربون سوريون
لاعبو كرة قدم مغتربون في إندونيسيا
لاعبو كرة قدم مغتربون في لبنان
لاعبو كرة قدم من حمص
لاعبو نادي الكرامة
لاعبو نادي تشرتشل براذرز
لاعبو نادي طرابلس
مدافعو كرة قدم رجالية
مواليد 1405 هـ
مواليد 1406 هـ
مواليد 1985
مواليد في حمص

ناصر السباعي


Diese Liste der Frauen in den Aufsichtsräten der DAX-Unternehmen zeigt die Anzahl der Aufsichtsratsmitglieder der 40 DAX-Unternehmen mit dem jeweiligen Frauenanteil mit Stand Juni 2022 (siehe auch Frauen in DAX-Vorständen); weil die Rechtsform der Gesellschaft über die Zusammensetzung des Aufsichtsrats entscheiden kann, wird sie hier explizit angegeben:

Adidas AG
Die nächste Aufsichtsratswahl findet turnusmäßig im Jahr 2024 statt. Er hat 16 Mitglieder, davon 6 Frauen (37,5 %):
 Petra Auerbacher* (seit 9. Mai 2019)
 Birgit Biermann* (seit 1. September 2022)
 Jackie Joyner-Kersee (seit 2021)
 Kathrin Menges (seit 8. Mai 2014)
 Beate Rohrig* (seit 9. Mai 2019)
 Jing Ulrich (seit 9. Mai 2019)

Airbus SE
Der Aufsichtsrat von Airbus besteht aus 11 Mitgliedern, vier davon sind Frauen (36,4 %).
 Catherine Guillouard
 Amparo Moraleda
 Claudia Nemat
 Irene Rummelhoff

Allianz SE
Der Aufsichtsrat von Allianz besteht aus 12 Mitgliedern, fünf davon sind Frauen (41,7 %)
 Sophie Boissard (seit 3. Mai 2017)
 Christine Bosse (seit 15. August 2012)
 Gabriele Burkhardt-Berg* (seit 9. Mai 2012)
 Rashmy Chatterjee (seit 4. Mai 1922)
 Martina Grundler* (seit 1. April 2016)

ausgeschieden:
 Ira Gloe-Semler (9. Mai 2012 – 1. April 2016)
 Renate Köcher (29. April 2003 – 3. Mai 2017)

BASF SE
Der Aufsichtsrat der BASF SE besteht nach der Satzung aus zwölf Mitgliedern. Die Amtszeit des Aufsichtsrats hat mit Ablauf der Hauptversammlung am 3. Mai 2019 begonnen, in der die Anteilseignervertreter im Aufsichtsrat neu gewählt worden sind. Sie endet mit Ablauf der Hauptversammlung, die über die Entlastung der Aufsichtsratsmitglieder für das vierte volle Geschäftsjahr nach dem Beginn der Amtszeit beschließt, also der Hauptversammlung 2024. In den Aufsichtsrat wurden vier Frauen (33,3 %) gewählt.
 Dame Alison J. Carnwarth (seit 2. Mai 2014)
 Tatjana Diether (seit 4. Mai 2018)
 Alessandra Genco (seit 29. April 2022)
 Natalia Mühlenfeld (seit 29. April 2022)

ausgeschieden:
 Renate Köcher (6. Mai 2003 bis 30. Mai 2008)
 Eva Kraut* (2002 bis 2008)
 Anke Schäferkordt (seit 17. Dezember 2010)
 Denise Schellemans* (seit 14. Januar 2008)
 Ellen Schneider* (1998 bis 2001)

"Der Aufsichtsrat einer börsennotierten Europäischen Gesellschaft (SE), der aus derselben Zahl von Anteilseigner- und Arbeitnehmervertretern besteht, ist nach § 17 Abs. 2 SE-Ausführungsgesetz zu jeweils mindestens 30 % aus Frauen und Männern zusammenzusetzen. Der Aufsichtsrat der BASF SE besteht derzeit aus drei Frauen und neun Männern. Zwei der sechs von der Hauptversammlung gewählten Vertreter der Aktionäre sind Frauen. Die Mindestquote ist nach der gesetzlichen Bestimmung des § 17 Abs. 2 SE-Ausführungsgesetz nicht sofort, sondern erst bei erforderlichen Neubesetzungen, das heißt Neuwahlen, zu beachten. Im Jahr 2016 ist das von den Arbeitnehmern gewählte Aufsichtsratsmitglied Wolfgang Daniel aus dem Aufsichtsrat ausgeschieden. An seiner Stelle ist Waldemar Helber als bereits Ende 2013 bis zum Ablauf der Hauptversammlung 2019 gewähltes persönliches Ersatzmitglied für Wolfgang Daniel nachgerückt und ohne weiteren Bestellungsakt, das heißt ohne Wahl, in den Aufsichtsrat eingetreten. Im Einklang mit den gesetzlichen Anforderungen wird die gesetzliche Mindestquote spätestens nach der nächsten regulären Aufsichtsratswahl im Jahr 2019 erreicht."

Bayer AG
Der Aufsichtsrat der Bayer AG besteht aus 20 Mitgliedern, 9 davon sind Frauen (45,0 %).
 Simone Bagel-Trah (seit 29. April 2014)
 Ertharin Cousin (seit Oktober 2019)
 Yasmin Fahimi* (seit Oktober 2022)
 Barbara Gansewendt* (seit April 2022)
 Colleen A. Goggins (seit 28. April 2017)
 Heike Hausfeld* (seit April 2017)
 Kimberly Mathisen (seit September 2022)
 Andrea Sacher* (seit September 2020)
 Claudia Schade* (seit April 2022)

ausgeschieden:

 Roswitha Süßelbeck* (Ersatzmitglied für Karl Josef Ellrich von 1. Juli 2010 bis 7. Februar 2012)
 Sue H. Rataj (27. April 2012 – 28. April 2017)
 Petra Kronen* (Juli 2000 – April 2017)
 Sabine Schaab* (Oktober 2017 bis zu ihrem Tod im August 2020)
 Johanna W. (Hanneke) Faber (April 2016 – April 2021)
 Petra Reinbold-Knape* (27. April 2012 – April 2022)
 Fei-Fei Li (April 2021 – August 2022 )

Beiersdorf AG
Der Aufsichtsrat der Beiersdorf AG besteht aus 12 Mitgliedern, davon 4 Frauen (33,3 %).

 Manuela Rousseau* (seit Juni 1999), stellvertretende Vorsitzende
 Hong Chow (seit 20. April 2017)
 Christine Martel (seit 26. April 2012)
 Kirstin Weiland* (seit 17. April 2019)

ausgeschieden:

 Beatrice Dreyfus (29. Januar 2016 – 20. April 2017; davor bereits vom 19. April 2011 bis 26. April 2012)
 Eva Eberhartinger (30. April 2009 – 17. April 2014)
 Elke Gabriel* (30. April 2009 – 17. April 2014)
 Isabelle Parize (17. April 2014 – 28. Januar 2016)
 Regina Schillings* (17. April 2019 – 1. April 2021)

BMW AG
20 Mitglieder, davon 6 Frauen (30 %)
 Christiane Benner (seit 2014)
 Rachel Empey (seit 2021)
 Susanne Klatten (seit 15. Mai 1997)
 Dominique Mohabeer (seit 1. Juni 2012)
 Anke Schäferkordt (seit 14. Mai 2020)
 Sibylle Wankel (seit 2022)

ausgeschieden:
 Verena zu Dohna-Jaeger (von 2019 bis 2021)
 Simone Menne (Mai 2015 bis April 2021)
 Brigitte Rödig (Juli 2013 bis Oktober 2021)
 Maria Schmidt (2008 bis 30. Juni 2013)
 Renate Köcher (8. Mai 2008 – 14. Mai 2020)

Brenntag SE
Der Aufsichtsrat besteht aus 6 Mitgliedern, zwei davon sind Frauen (33,3 %)
 Doreen Nowotne (seit 3. März 20210) Vorsitzende des Aufsichtsrats
 Stefanie Berlinger (seit 9. Juni 2015)

Commerzbank AG
Der Aufsichtsrat umfasst 20 Mitglieder, davon 9 Frauen (45,0 %).

 Heike Anscheit* (seit 3. Mai 2017)
 Sabine U. Dietrich (seit 30. April 2015)
 Jutta A. Dönges (seit 13. Mai 2020)
 Monika Fink* (seit 8. Mai 2018)
 Kerstin Jerchel* (seit 8. Mai 2018)
 Alexandra Krieger* (seit 15. Mai 2008)
 Daniela Mattheus (seit Mai 2021)
 Caroline Seifert (seit Mai 2021)
 Gertrude Tumpel-Gugerell (seit 1. Juni 2012)

Ausgeschieden:
 Barbara Priester* (15. Mai 2008 – 3. Mai 2017)
 Margit Schoffer* (19. April 2013 – 3. Mai 2017)
 Beate Mensch* (19. April 2013 – 8. Mai 2018, früher Beate Hoffmann)
 Anja Mikus (30. April 2015 – 13. Mai 2020)
 Victoria Ossadnik (8. Mai 2018 –  Mai 2021)

Continental AG
Der Aufsichtsrat setzt sich aus zwanzig Mitgliedern zusammen, darunter folgende sechs Frauen (30,0 Prozent):
 Christiane Benner* (seit 1. März 2018, stellvertretende Vorsitzende)
 Dorothea von Boxberg (seit 2022)
 Isabel Corinna Knauf (seit 26. April 2019)
 Carmen Löffler* (seit 16. September 2021)
 Sabine Neuß (seit 25. April 2014)
 Elke Volkmann* (seit 25. April 2014)
Ausgeschieden:
 Maria-Elisabeth Schaeffler-Thumann (5. Februar 2009 bis April 2022)
 Gudrun Valten* (28. April 2017 bis 27. April 2019)
 Kirsten Vörkel* (25. April 2014 bis 15. September 2021)

Covestro AG
Der Aufsichtsrat setzt sich aus 12 Mitgliedern zusammen, davon 6 Frauen (41,7 %).

 Petra Kronen* (seit Oktober 2015), stellvertretende Vorsitzende
 Christine Bortenlänger (seit Oktober 2015)
 Lise Kingo (seit April 2021)
 Irena Küstner* (seit Oktober 2015)
 Petra Reinbold-Knape* (seit Januar 2020)
 Regine Stachelhaus (seit Oktober 2015)

Daimler Truck
Der Aufsichtsrat umfasst 20 Mitglieder, sechs davon sind Frauen (30,0 %)

 Laura Ipsen (seit 2021)
 Renata Jungo Brüngger (seit 2021)
 Carmen Klitzsch-Müller* (seit 2021)
 Claudia Peter* (seit 2021)
 Andrea Reith* (seit 2021)
 Marie Wieck (seit 2021)

Deutsche Bank AG
Der Aufsichtsrat umfasst 20 Mitglieder, sechs davon sind Frauen (30,0 %).
 Mayree Carroll Clark (seit 24. Mai 2018)
 Manja Eifert* (seit 7. April 2022)
 Martina Klee* (seit 2008)
 Gabriele Platscher* (seit 2003)
 Michele Trogni (seit 24. Mai 2018)
 Dagmar Valcárcel (seit 1. August 2019)

ausgeschieden:
 Katherine Garrett-Cox (seit 26. Mai 2011)
 Henriette Mark* (2003)
 Karin Ruck* (8. Mai 2003 – 23. Mai 2013)
 Marlehn Thieme* (2008 – 23. Mai 2013)
 Renate Voigt* (30. November 2011 – 23. Mai 2013)
 Suzanne Labarge (29. Mai 2008 – 30. Juni 2014)
 Sabine Irrgang (16. April 2014 – 24. Mai 2018)
 Louise M. Parent (1. Juli 2014 – 24. Mai 2018)
 Dina Dublon (seit 1. November 2013 – Mai 2018)
 Katherine Garrett-Cox (26. Mai 2011 – 10. März 2020)

Deutsche Börse AG
Der Aufsichtsrat setzt sich aus 16 Mitglieder zusammen, sechs davon sind Frauen (37,5 %). Die Amtsdauer eines Mitglieds des Aufsichtsrats beträgt drei Jahre.
 Nadine Brandl (vormals Absenger)* (seit 16. Mai 2018)
 Anja Greenwood* (seit 17. November 2021)
 Shannon A. Johnston (seit 18. Mai 2022)
 Susann Just-Marx* (seit 15. August 2018)

 Barbara Lambert (seit 16. Mai 2018)
 Clara-Christina Streit (seit 8. Mai 2019)

ausgeschieden:
 Birgit Bokel* (bis 2012)
 Irmtraud Busch* (16. Mai 2012 – 13. Mai 2015)
 Monica Mächler (16. Mai 2012 – 16. Mai 2018)
 Marion Fornoff* (seit 16. Mai 2012 – 15. August 2018)
 Ann-Kristin Achleitner (seit 11. Mai 2016 – 8. Mai 2019)

 Jutta Stuhlfauth* (16. Mai 2012 – 17. November 2021)
 Amy Yip (13. Mai 2015 – 19. Mai 2021)

Deutsche Post AG
Der Aufsichtsrat besteht aus 20 Mitgliedern, 8 davon sind Frauen (40,0 %)
 Andrea Kocsis* (Stellvertretende Vorsitzende, seit 29. Mai 2007)
 Ingrid Deltenre (seit 18. Mai 2016)
 Gabriele Gülzau* (22. März 2018)
 Luise Hölscher (seit März 2022)
 Ulrike Lennartz-Pipenbacher* (seit 17. August 2017)
 Simone Menne (seit 27. Mai 2014)
 Stefanie Weckesser* (seit 17. März 2000)
 Katja Windt (seit 25. Mai 2011)

ausgeschieden:

 Anke Kufalt* (seit 6. Mai 2008 – 14. Mai 2018)
 Helga Thiel* (seit 6. Mai 2008 – 1. August 2017)
 Sabine Schielmann* (seit 27. Oktober 2010 – 14. Mai 2018)

Deutsche Telekom AG
Der Aufsichtsrat besteht aus 20 Mitgliedern, 10 davon sind Frauen (50,0 %)

 Katja Hessel (seit 7. April 2022)

 Helga Jung (seit 25. Mai 2016)
 Nicole Koch* (seit 1. Januar 2016)
 Dagmar P. Kollmann (seit 24. Mai 2012)
 Petra Steffi Kreusel* (seit 1. Januar 2013)
 Kerstin Marx* (seit 1. Mai 2020)
 Susanne Schöttke* (seit 7. April 2022)
 Nicole Seelemann-Wandtke* (seit 5. Juli 2018)
 Margret Suckale (seit 28. September 2017)
 Karin Topel* (seit 1. Juli 2017)

ausgeschieden:

 Sari Baldauf (1. November 2012 – 2018)
 Monika Brandl* (6. November 2002 – Juni 2018)
 Sylvia Hauke* (3. Mai 2007 – 2018)
 Sibylle Spoo* (4. Mai 2010 – 31. Dezember 2021)

E.ON SE
Der Aufsichtsrat besteht aus 20 Mitgliedern, 6 davon sind Frauen (30,0 %).

 Katja Bauer* (seit April 2022)

 Carolina Dybeck Happe (seit 8. Juni 2016)
 Szilvia Pinczésné Márton* (seit 9. Mai 2018 )
 Karen de Segundo (seit 30. April 2008)
 Elisabeth Wallbaum* (seit 1. Januar 2016)
 Deborah Wilkens (seit 1. Oktober 2019)

ausgeschieden:

 Gabriele Gratz* (2005 bis 31. Dezember 2013)
 Monika Krebber* (seit 24. September 2019)
 Silvia Smátralová (seit 8. Juni 2016)
 Baroness Denise Kingsmill, CBE (seit 6. Mai 2011)

Fresenius SE & Co. KGaA
Der Aufsichtsrat besteht aus 12 Mitgliedern, 5 davon sind Frauen (41,7 %).
 Stefanie Balling* (seit 13. Mai 2016, früher Stefanie Lang)
 Grit Genster (seit 28. August 2020)
 Frauke Lehmann* (seit 13. Mai 2016)
 Iris Löw-Friedrich (seit 13. Mai 2016)
 Susanne Zeidler (seit 2022)

ausgeschieden:

 Hauke Stars (13. Mai 2016 – 31. Januar 2022)

Hannover Rück
Der Aufsichtsrat besteht aus 9 Mitgliedern, 5 davon sind Frauen (55,5 %).
 Natalie Bani Ardalan* (seit 2019)
 Frauke Heitmüller* (seit 2012)
 Ilka Hundeshagen* (seit 2019)
 Ursula Lipowsky (seit 2018)
 Andrea Pollak (seit 2011)

HeidelbergCement AG
Der Aufsichtsrat  besteht aus 12 Mitgliedern, 6 davon sind Frauen (50,0 %).
 Barbara Breuninger* (seit 5. April 2018)
 Birgit Jochens* (seit 9. Mai 2019)
 Ines Ploss* (seit 9. Mai 2019)
 Margret Suckale (seit 25. August 2017)
 Sopna Sury (seit 12. Mai 2022)
 Marion Weissenberger-Eibl (seit 3. Juli 2012)
ausgeschieden:

 Gabriele Kailing* (7. Mai 2014 – 9. Mai 2019)

Henkel AG & Co. KGaA
Der Aufsichtsrat besteht aus 16 Mitgliedern, davon sieben Frauen (43,7 %).
 Simone Bagel-Trah (seit 14. April 2008, Vorsitzende seit 18. September 2009; davor bereits 30. April 2001 – 2005)
 Jutta Bernicke* (seit 14. April 2008)
 Birgit Helten-Kindlein* (seit 14. April 2008), stellvertretende Vorsitzende seit 2018
 Barbara Kux (seit 3. Juli 2013)
 Simone Menne (seit 17. Juni 2020)
 Andrea Pichottka* (seit 26. Oktober 2004)
 Martina Seiler* (seit 1. Januar 2012)

ausgeschieden:

 Angelika Keller* (1. Januar 2017 – April 2018)

Infineon AG
Der Aufsichtsrat besteht aus 20 Mitgliedern, 7 davon sind Frauen (35,0 %).
 Xiaoqun Clever (seit 20. Februar 2020)
 Annette Engelfried* (seit 12. Februar 2015)
 Susanne Lachenmann* (seit 12. Februar 2015)
 Géraldine Picaud (seit 16. Februar 2017)
 Melanie Riedl* (seit 20. Februar 2020)
 Margret Suckale (seit 20. Februar 2020)
 Diana Vitale* (seit 12. Februar 2015)

ausgeschieden:
 Doris Schmitt-Landsiedel (25. Januar 2005 – 16. Februar 2017)
 Kerstin Schulzendorf* (seit 12. Februar 2015)
 Renate Köcher (25. Januar 2005 – 19. Februar 2020)

Mercedes-Benz Group
Der Aufsichtsrat besteht aus 20 Mitgliedern, davon 7 Frauen (35,0 %)

 Sari Baldauf (seit 2008)
 Nadine Boguslawski* (seit 2021)
 Liz Centoni (seit 2021)
 Dame Veronica Anne ("Polly") Courtice (seit 2022)
 Helene Svahn (seit 2021)
 Monika Tielsch* (seit 2021)
 Elke Tönjes-Werner* (seit 2013)

Merck KGaA
Der Aufsichtsrat besteht aus 15 Mitgliedern (Stand August 2023), fünf davon sind Frauen (33,3 %).
 Birgit Biermann* (seit 14. Juli 2022)
 Gabriele Eismann* (seit 9. Mai 2014)
 Renate Koehler (seit 26. April 2019)
 Anne Lange* (seit 26. April 2019)
 Helga Rübsamen-Schaeff (seit 9. Mai 2014)
ausgeschieden:

 Crocifissa Attardo* (seit 1. Oktober 2009)
 Michaela Freifrau von Glenck (28. März 2008 – 25. April 2019)

 Mechthild Auge* (25. März 2009 – 25. April 2019)
 Edeltraud Glänzer* (28. März 2008 – 15. Mai 2022)
 Helene von Roeder (26. April 2019 – Mai 2023)

MTU Aero Engines AG
Der Aufsichtsrat besteht aus 12 Mitgliedern, davon vier Frauen (33,3 %).

 Christine Bortenlänger (seit 2018)
 Anita Heimerl* (seit 2018)
 Heike Madan* (seit 2016)
 Marion Weissenberger-Eibl (seit 2013)

Münchener Rück AG
Der Aufsichtsrat besteht aus 20 Mitgliedern, 8 davon sind Frauen (40,0 %).
 Ann-Kristin Achleitner (seit 3. Januar 2013)
 Ruth Brown* (seit 30. April 2019)
 Ursula Gather (seit 30. April 2014)
 Angelika Judith Herzog* (seit 1. Juli 2021)
 Anne Horstmann* (seit 30. April 2014, Stellvertretende Vorsitzende)
 Renata Jungo Brüngger (seit 3. Januar 2017)
 Carinne Knoche-Brouillon (seit 28. Januar 2021)
 Gabriele Mücke* (seit 30. April 2019)

ausgeschieden:
 Dina Bösch* (2009 – 30. April 2014)
 Annika Falkengren (20. April 2011 – 30. April 2014)
 Benita Ferrero-Waldner (12. Februar 2010 – 28. April 2021)
 Eva-Maria Haiduk* (30. April 2019 – 30. Juni 2021)
 Silvia Müller* (2009 – 30. April 2014)
 Ina Hosenfelder* (30. April 2014 – 30. April 2019)
 Beate Mensch* (30. April 2014 – 30. April 2019)
 Angelika Wirtz* (30. April 2014 – 30. April 2019)
 Gabriele Sinz-Toporzysek* (30. April 2014 – 31. Januar 2022)

Porsche AG
Der Aufsichtsrat besteht aus 20 Mitgliedern, sechs davon sind Frauen (30,0 %)

 Jordana Vogiatzi* (seit 2014) stellvertretende Vorsitzende des Aufsichtsrates
 Micaela le Divelec Lemmi (seit September 2022)
 Melissa Di Donato Roos (seit September 2022)
 Hauke Stars (seit September 2022)
 Nora Leser* (seit 2021)
 Vera Schalwig* (Seit 2021)

Porsche SE
Der Aufsichtsrat besteht aus 10 Mitgliedern, darunter eine Frau (10,0 %).

 Marianne Heiß

Qiagen N.V.
Der Aufsichtsrat besteht aus 7 Mitgliedern, 2 davon sind Frauen (28,6 %).

 Elaine Mardis
 Elizabeth E. Tallett

Rheinmetall
Der Aufsichtsrat besteht aus 16 Mitgliedern, 5 davon sind Frauen (31,3 %).

 Britta Giesen (seit 11. Mai 2021)
 Susanne Hannemann (seit 15. Mai 2012)
 Louise Öfverström (seit 10. Mai 2022)
 Dagmar Muth* (seit 1. Juli 2015)
 Barbara Resch* (seit 1. Juli 2020)

RWE AG
Der Aufsichtsrat besteht aus 20 Mitgliedern, 6 davon sind Frauen (30,0 %).
 Sandra Bossemeyer* (seit 2. März 2016)
 Ute Gerbaulet (seit 27. April 2017)
 Monika Kircher (seit 15. Oktober 2016)
 Dagmar Paasch* (seit 15. September 2021)
 Helle Valentin (seit 28. April 2021)
 Marion Weckes* (seit 20. April 2016)

ausgeschieden:
 Anja Dubbert* (seit 27. September 2019)
 Martina Koederitz (20. April 2016 – 27. April 2017)
 Monika Krebber* (2. März 2016 – 18. September 2019)
 Christine Merkamp* (20. April 2011 – 2. März 2016)
 Dagmar Mühlenfeld (seit 20. September 2007)
 Dagmar Schmeer* (11. Dezember 2008 – 2. März 2016)
 Maria van der Hoeven (20. April 2016 – 14. Oktober 2016)

SAP SE
Der Aufsichtsrat besteht aus 18 Mitgliedern, 9 davon sind Frauen (50,0 %).
 Manuela Asche-Holstein* (seit 2021)
 Aicha Evans (seit 30. Juni 2017)
 Gesche Joost (seit 20. Mai 2015)
 Monika Kovachka-Dimitrova* (seit 15. Mai 2019)
 Margret Klein-Magar* (seit 23. Mai 2012, Stellvertretende Vorsitzende)
 Christine Regitz* (seit Februar 2015)
 Friederike Rotsch (seit 17. Mai 2018)
 Heike Steck* (seit 15. Mai 2019)
 Jennifer Xin-Zhe Li (seit 2022)

ausgeschieden:
 Anja Feldmann (23. Mai 2012 – Mai 2019)
 Diane Greene (17. Mai 2018 – 9. Dezember 2020)
 Christiane Kuntz-Mayr* (2009 – Februar 2015)
 Christa Vergien-Knopf* (seit 15. Mai 2019)
 Inga Wiele* (23. Mai 2012 – 6. Juli 2014)

Sartorius AG
Der Aufsichtsrat besteht aus 12 Mitgliedern, 5 davon sind Frauen (41,7 %)

 Annette Becker (seit September 2002)
 Daniela Favoccia (seit April 2017)
 Petra Kirchhoff (seit Oktober 2010)
 Ilke Hildegard Panzer (seit April 2017)
 Sabrina Wirth (seit März 2022)

Siemens AG
Der Aufsichtsrat besteht aus 20 Mitgliedern, 6 davon sind Frauen (30,0 %).
 Andrea Fehrmann* (seit 31. Januar 2018)
 Bettina Haller* (seit 1. April 2007)
 Nathalie von Siemens (seit 27. Januar 2015)
 Dorothea Simon* (seit 10. Januar 2017)
 Dame Nemat Shafik (seit 31. Januar 2018)
 Birgit Steinborn* (seit 24. Januar 2008), 1. stellv. Vorsitzende

ausgeschieden:

 Nicola Leibinger-Kammüller (24. Januar 2008 – 2021)
 Güler Sabancı (23. Januar 2013 – 31. Januar 2018)
 Sibylle Wankel* (1. April 2009 - 30. September 2017)

Siemens Energy
Der Aufsichtsrat besteht aus 20 Mitgliedern, sechs davon sind Frauen (30,0 %).

 Christine Bortenlänger (seit 25. September 2020)
 Andrea Fehrmann* (seit 10. November 2020)
 Nadine Florian* (seit 10. November 2020)
 Hildegard Müller (seit 25. September 2020)
 Laurence Mulliez (seit 25. September 2020)
 Geisha Jimenez Williams (seit 25. September 2020)

Siemens Healthineers AG
Der Aufsichtsrat besteht aus 10 Mitgliedern, 2 davon sind Frauen (20,0 %).

 Marion Helmes (seit 1. März 2018)
 Nathalie von Siemens (seit 1. März 2018)

Symrise AG
Der Aufsichtsrat besteht aus 12 Mitgliedern, 4 davon sind Frauen (33,3 %)

 Ursula Buck
 Jeannette Chiarlitti*
 Andrea Pfeifer
 Andrea Püttcher*

Volkswagen AG
Der Aufsichtsrat besteht aus 20 Mitgliedern, 6 davon sind Frauen (30,0 %).
 Hessa Sultan Al-Jaber (seit 22. Juni 2016)
 Daniela Cavallo* (seit 11. Mai 2021)
 Marianne Heiß (seit 14. Februar 2018)
 Simone Mahler* (seit 12. Mai 2022)
 Daniela Nowak* (seit 12. Mai 2022)
 Conny Schönhardt* (seit 21. Juni 2019)

ausgeschieden:
 Birgit Dietze* (1. Juni 2016  – 21. Juni 2019)
 Annika Falkengren (3. Mai 2011 - 14. Februar 2018)
 Babette Fröhlich* (25. Oktober 2007 – März 2016)
 Ulrike Jakob* (10. Mai 2017 – Mai 2022)
 Louise Kiesling (30. April 2015 – 9. Dezember 2022 (verstorben))
 Bertina Murkovic* (10. Mai 2017 – Mai 2022)
 Ursula Piëch (19. April 2012 – 25. April 2015)
 Julia Kuhn-Piech (Mai 2015 – 7. Oktober 2015)

Vonovia SE
Der Aufsichtsrat besteht aus 10 unabhängigen Mitgliedern, 5 davon sind Frauen (50,0 %).
 Ute Geipel-Faber (seit 1. November 2015)
 Daniela Gerd tom Markotten (seit Mai 2023)
 Hildegard Müller (seit 18. Juni 2013)
 Ariane Reinhart (seit 13. Mai 2016)
 Clara-Christina Streit (seit 18. Juni 2013), Vorsitzende des Aufsichtsrates seit Mai 2023

Zalando SE
Der Aufsichtsrat besteht aus 9 Mitgliedern, 5 davon sind Frauen (55,5 %)

 Jade Buddenberg* (seit Mai 2022)
 Jennifer Hyman (seit Juni 2020)
 Anika Mangelmann* (seit Juni 2022)
 Mariella Röhm-Kottmann (seit Mai 2019)
 Cristina Stenbeck (April 2014 – Mai 2016 und seit Mai 2019), Vorsitzende des Aufsichtsrates
Die mit einem *Sternchen gekennzeichneten Personen sind Vertreterinnen der Arbeitnehmerseite.

Siehe auch
 Frauenanteile in Aufsichtsräten
 Frauenanteile in Vorständen und Aufsichtsräten
 Frauenanteile in der Berufswelt
 Diversity Management (Teil des Personalwesens)
 gläserne Decke (qualifizierte Frauen können kaum in Top-Positionen vordringen)
 Frauenquote (Quotenregelung bei der Besetzung von Gremien oder Stellen)

Weblinks
 Thomas Dillmann: Gendergerechte Sprache wird in DAX-Unternehmensberichten zurückgedreht. In: PR-Journal.de. 19. Oktober 2020 (15 Unternehmen nutzten 2019 in Geschäftsberichten nur generische Maskulinformen zur Personen- und Funktionsbezeichnung).
 FidAR – Frauen in die Aufsichtsräte: Offizielle Website.
 Verband der Deutschen Unternehmerinnen (VdU): Mehr Frauen in Aufsichtsräten und Kontrollgremien In: VdU.de. (Projektseite).
 Vereinigung für Frauen im Management (fim): Offizielle Website (Business-Netzwerk für Führungs-Frauen aus den unterschiedlichsten Branchen).

Einzelnachweise

!Aufsichtsrate
!Frauen in Aufsichtsraten
Frauen in Aufsichtsraten
Frauen in Aufsichtsraten
Aufsichtsrat