The Allied invasion of Italy was the Allied amphibious landing on mainland Italy that took place from 3 September 1943, during the Italian campaign of World War II. The operation was undertaken by General Sir Harold Alexander's 15th Army Group (comprising General Mark W. Clark's American Fifth Army and General Bernard Montgomery's British Eighth Army) and followed the successful Allied invasion of Sicily. The main invasion force landed around Salerno on 9 September on the western coast in Operation Avalanche, while two supporting operations took place in Calabria (Operation Baytown) and Taranto (Operation Slapstick).

Background

Allied plan

Following the defeat of the Axis powers in North Africa in May 1943, there was disagreement between the Allies about the next step. British Prime Minister Winston Churchill wanted to invade Italy, which in November 1942 he had called "the soft underbelly of the axis" (American General Mark W. Clark would later call it "one tough gut"). Churchill pointed out that Italian popular support for the war was declining and an invasion would remove Italy from the Axis, thus weakening Axis influence in the Mediterranean Sea and opening it to Allied traffic. This would allow the reduction of shipping capacity needed to supply Allied forces in the Middle East and Far East theaters at a time when the disposal of Allied shipping capacity was in crisis and permit an increase of British and American supplies to the Soviet Union. In addition, it would tie down German forces. Joseph Stalin, the Soviet leader, had been pressing Churchill and Roosevelt to open a "second front" in Europe, which would lessen the German Army's focus on the Eastern Front, where the bulk of its forces were fighting in the largest armed conflict in history against the Soviet Red Army.

However, the U.S. Army Chief of Staff General George C. Marshall and much of the American staff wanted to avoid operations that might delay the main invasion of Europe, which had been discussed and planned as early as 1942, and which finally materialized as Operation Overlord in 1944. When it became clear that no cross-channel invasion of occupied France could be undertaken in 1943, both parties agreed to an invasion of Sicily, codenamed Operation Husky, with no commitment made to follow-up operations. After the highly successful outcome of the Sicilian campaign had become clear, both Churchill and Franklin D. Roosevelt, the U.S. President, accepted the necessity of continuing to engage the Axis in the interval before the start of the campaign in northwest Europe. These discussions had been going on since the Trident Conference held in Washington, D.C. in May, but it was not until late July, with the fall of Italian Fascist Prime Minister Benito Mussolini, that the Joint Chiefs of Staff instructed General Dwight D. Eisenhower, the Supreme Allied Commander in the Mediterranean theater, to go ahead at the earliest possible date.

Despite the success of the Sicilian campaign, a significant number of Axis forces managed to avoid capture and escape to the mainland. The Axis viewed this as a success. More importantly, in late July, the fascist government fell and Mussolini was removed as head of the Italian government, which then began approaching the Allies to make peace. It was believed a quick invasion of Italy might hasten an Italian surrender and produce quick military victories over the German troops that could be trapped fighting in a hostile country. However, Italian fascist (and more so German) resistance proved relatively strong, and fighting in Italy continued even after the fall of Berlin in April 1945. In addition, the invasion left the Allies in a position of supplying food and supplies to conquered territory, a burden that would otherwise have fallen on Germany. As well, Italy occupied by a hostile German army would have created additional problems for the German commander-in-chief (C-in-C),  Albert Kesselring.

The Allies had originally planned to cross from the island of Sicily into the "arch" area (Taranto) of the Italian mainland, envisioning a limited invasion of the Italian "boot", whence they would advance up the western coast, anticipating a strong defense by both German and Italian forces. The overthrow of Mussolini and the Fascists made a more ambitious plan feasible, and the Allies decided to make their invasion two-pronged by combining the crossing of the British Eighth Army under General Sir Bernard Montgomery into the mainland with the simultaneous seizure of the port of Naples further north. Although the Americans were mindful of Napoleon's maxim that Italy, like a boot, should be entered from the top, the range limits of Allied fighter aircraft based in Sicily reduced their choices to two landing areas: one at the Volturno River basin to the north of Naples and the other south of Naples at Salerno (though separated from Naples by the mountainous Sorrento peninsula). They chose Salerno because it was closer to their air bases. In addition, Salerno had better surf conditions for landing; its harbor allowed transport ships to anchor close to the beaches, which were narrower for the rapid construction of exit roads; and there was also an excellent pre-existing road network behind them.
Operation Baytown was the preliminary step in the plan in which the British Eighth Army would depart from the port of Messina, Sicily, across the narrow Straits and land near the tip of Calabria (the "toe" of Italy), on 3 September 1943. The short distance meant landing craft could launch from there directly, rather than be carried by ship. The British 5th Infantry Division (Major-general Gerard Bucknall) of XIII Corps, under Lieutenant-General Miles Dempsey, would land on the north side of the "toe" while its 1st Canadian Infantry Division (Major-General Guy Simonds) would land at Cape Spartivento on the south side. Montgomery was strongly opposed to Operation Baytown. He predicted it would be a waste of effort since it assumed the Germans would give battle in Calabria; if they failed to do so, the diversion would not work, and the only effect of the operation would be to place the Eighth Army  south of the main landing at Salerno. He was proved correct; after Operation Baytown, the British Eighth Army moved 480 km north to the Salerno area against no opposition other than engineering obstacles.

Plans for the use of Allied airborne forces took several forms, all of which were cancelled. The initial plan to land glider-borne troops in the mountain passes of the Sorrento Peninsula above Salerno was abandoned on 12 August. Six days later it was replaced by Operation Giant, in which two regiments of the U.S. 82nd Airborne Division (Major General Matthew Ridgway) would seize and hold crossings over the Volturno River. This was at first expanded to include the entire division, including an amphibious landing by the 325th Glider Infantry Regiment, then deemed logistically unsupportable and reduced to a two-battalion drop at Capua to block the highway there. The Italian surrender on 3 September led to the cancellation of Operation Giant I and its replacement by Operation Giant II, a drop of the 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment on  and Cerveteri airfields,  northwest of Rome. This was intended to aid Italian forces in saving Rome, possibly the most historically important city in the world, from German razing, a condition of the Italian armistice. Because the distance from the Allied beachheads precluded any substantial Allied support of the airborne troops, Brigadier General Maxwell D. Taylor, the acting assistant division commander (ADC) of the 82nd Airborne Division, was spirited into Rome to assess the willingness of Italian troops to cooperate with the Americans. Taylor's judgment was that the operation would be a trap and he advised cancellation, which occurred late on the afternoon of 8 September after pathfinders had already taken off aboard their troop carrier aircraft.

The main landings (Operation Avalanche) were scheduled to take place on 9 September, during which the main force would land around Salerno on the western coast. It would consist of the U.S. Fifth Army, under Lieutenant General Mark W. Clark, comprising the U.S. VI Corps under Major General Ernest J. Dawley, the British X Corps under Lieutenant-General Richard McCreery, with the 82nd Airborne Division in reserve, a total of eight divisions and two brigade-sized units. Its primary objectives were to seize the port of Naples to ensure resupply, and to cut across to the east coast, trapping Axis troops further south. The naval task force of warships, merchant ships and landing craft totaling 627 vessels came under the command of Vice Admiral Henry K. Hewitt. Following the disappointing air cover from land-based aircraft shown during the battle of Gela in the Sicily landings, Force V of  and four escort carriers augmented the cruisers , , , and fourteen destroyers of Hewitt's command. Cover for the task force was provided by Force H, a group of four British battleships and two fleet carriers with destroyers in support, which was directly subordinate to the C–in–C Mediterranean Admiral Sir Andrew Cunningham.

In the original planning, the great attraction of capturing the important port of Taranto in the "heel" of Italy had been evident and an assault had been considered but rejected because of the very strong defenses there. However, with the signing of the armistice with the Italians on 3 September, the picture changed. It was decided to carry the British 1st Airborne Division (Major-General George Hopkinson) to Taranto using British warships, seize the port and several nearby airfields and follow up by shipping in Lieutenant-General Charles Allfrey's British V Corps and a number of fighter squadrons. The airborne division, which was undergoing training exercises in two locations  apart, was ordered on 4 September to embark on 8 September. With such short notice to create plans, Operation Slapstick was soon nicknamed Operation Bedlam.

The Avalanche plan using less than half the troops landed during Operation Husky was daring, considering possible resistance by six German divisions. The Fifth Army would be landing on a very broad  front, using only three assault divisions (one American, the 36th, under Major General Fred L. Walker, in VI Corps, and two British: the 46th, under Major-General John Hawkesworth, and 56th (London), under Major-General Douglas Graham, in X Corps), and the two corps were widely separated, both in distance () and by the Sele River. Clark initially provided no troops to cover the river, offering the Germans an easy route to attack, and only belatedly landed two battalions to protect it. Furthermore, the terrain was highly favorable to the defender. Planning for the Salerno phase was accomplished in only forty-five days, rather than the months that might be expected. A U.S. Army Ranger force, under the command of Lieutenant Colonel William O. Darby, consisting of three U.S. Ranger battalions (the 1st, 3rd and 4th), and two British Commando units, under Brigadier Robert Laycock (consisting of No. 2 (Army) Commando and No. 41 (Royal Marine) Commando), was tasked with holding the mountain passes leading to Naples, but no plan existed for linking the Ranger force up with X Corps' follow-up units. Finally, although tactical surprise was unlikely, Clark ordered no naval preparatory bombardment or naval gunfire support take place, despite experience in the Pacific Theater demonstrating it was necessary. (Major General Walker, commanding the U.S. 36th "Arrowhead" Division, believed the defenders, from Traugott Herr's LXXVI Panzer Corps, were too scattered for it to be effective.) The element of surprise was further limited by belated discovery of naval minefields off Salerno requiring landing craft to spend two hours traveling  from the transports to the landing beaches.

On the German side, Kesselring lacked the strength to push the Salerno landing back, and was refused two panzer divisions from northern Italy to assist him.

Operation Avalanche was planned under the name Top Hat and supported by a deception plan, Operation Boardman, a false threat of an Allied invasion of the Balkans.

Axis defensive organization
In mid-August, the Germans had activated Army Group B under Erwin Rommel with responsibility for German troops in Italy as far south as Pisa. Army Command South under Albert Kesselring continued to be responsible for southern Italy and the German High Command formed a new army headquarters to be Army Command South's main field formation. The new German 10th Army headquarters, commanded by Heinrich von Vietinghoff, was activated on 22 August. The German 10th Army had two subordinate corps with a total of six divisions which were positioned to cover possible landing sites. Under Hermann Balck's XIV Panzer Corps was the Hermann Göring Airborne Panzer Division (under Wilhelm Schmalz), 15th Panzergrenadier Division (Eberhard Rodt) and 16th Panzer Division (Rudolf Sieckenius); and under Traugott Herr's LXXVI Panzer Corps was 26th Panzer Division (Heinrich Freiherr von Luttwitz), 29th Panzergrenadier Division (Walter Fries) and 1st Parachute Division (Fritz-Hubert Graser). Von Vietinghoff specifically positioned the 16th Panzer Division in the hills above the Salerno plain.

Battle

Operations in southern Italy

On 3 September 1943, the British Eighth Army's XIII Corps, commanded by Lieutenant-General Miles Dempsey and composed of the 1st Canadian and British 5th Infantry Divisions, launched Operation Baytown under General Bernard Montgomery's direction. Opposition to the landings was light and the Italian units surrendered almost immediately. Albert Kesselring and his staff did not believe the Calabria landings would be the main Allied point of attack, the Salerno region or possibly even north of Rome being more logical. He had already therefore ordered General Traugott Herr's LXXVI Panzer Corps to pull back from engagement with the Eighth Army, leaving only 29th Panzergrenadier Division's 15th Panzergrenadier Regiment in the 'toe' of Italy. By 3 September, most of this unit was in prepared positions at Bagnara Calabra, some  from the landings which it had orders to hold until 6 September. After this they were to withdraw to join the rest of the 29th Panzergrenadier Division which was concentrating at Castrovillari, some  to the rear. The Krüger Battle Group (two battalions of 71st Panzergrenadier Regiment, 129th Reconnaissance Battalion and detachments of artillery and engineers) under 26th Panzer Division, would then stand at Nicotera, roughly  up the coast from Bagnara.

On 4 September, the British 5th Infantry Division reached Bagnara Calabra, linked up with 1st Special Reconnaissance Squadron (which arrived by sea) and drove the 3rd Battalion, 15th Panzergrenadier Regiment from its position. On 5 September the allies flew above Soveria Mannelli (central Calabria) and bombed all along the downstream area of the town, where Nazi bases and warehouses stood. Fortunately, the urban area was barely damaged. On 7 September, contact was made with the Krüger Battle Group. On 8 September, the 231st Independent Brigade Group, under Brigadier Robert "Roy" Urquhart, was landed by sea at Pizzo Calabro, some  behind the Nicotera defenses. They found themselves attacked from the north by a mobile force from 26th Panzer Division and from the south by the Krüger Battle Group which was withdrawing from the Nicotera position. After an initial attack that made no headway, the Krüger Battle Group veered away but the northern attack continued throughout the day before the whole German force withdrew at dusk.

Progress was slow as demolished bridges, roadblocks and mines delayed the Eighth Army. The nature of the countryside in the toe of Italy made it impossible to by-pass obstacles and so the Allies' speed of advance was entirely dependent on the rate at which their engineers could clear obstructions. Thus, Montgomery's objections to the operation were proved correct: the Eighth Army could not tie down German units that refused battle and the main obstacle to their advance was the terrain and German demolitions of roads and bridges.

By 8 September, Kesselring had concentrated Heinrich von Vietinghoff's 10th Army, ready to make a rapid response to any Allied landing. In Calabria, Herr's LXXVI Panzer Corps had two divisions concentrated in the Castrovillari area. Its third division, 1st Parachute Division (1. Fallschirmjäger-Division), was deployed toward Taranto. The rearguard in the toe was BattleGroup von Usedom, comprising a single battalion (1/67th Panzergrenadier Regiment) with detachments of artillery and engineers. Meanwhile, Balck's XIV Panzer Corps was positioned to face possible landings from the sea with 16th Panzer Division in the Gulf of Salerno, the Hermann Göring Division near Naples and the 15th Panzergrenadier Division to the north in the Gulf of Gaeta.

On 8 September (before the main invasion), the surrender of Italy to the Allies was announced, first by General Eisenhower, then in the Badoglio Proclamation by the Italian government. Italian units ceased combat and the Navy sailed to Allied ports to surrender. The German forces in Italy were prepared for this and implemented Operation Achse to disarm Italian units and occupy important defensive positions.

Operation Slapstick commenced on 9 September. The first echelon of the British 1st Airborne Division arrived on four British cruisers, a U.S. cruiser, and the British fast minelayer . The Italian battleships Andrea Doria and  with two cruisers passed by, en route to surrender in Malta. There were no Germans in Taranto and so disembarkation was unopposed. The only casualties occurred when Abdiel, at anchor, struck a mine and sank in minutes, with 168 killed and 126 injured. On 11 September, as patrols were sent further afield, there were some sharp encounters with elements of the German 1st Parachute Division. But 1st Parachute could do little but skirmish and fall back because most of its strength was attached to the 26th Panzer and Hermann Göring Divisions at Salerno. Major-General George Frederick Hopkinson, General Officer Commanding (GOC) of the British 1st Airborne Division, was killed in one of these actions. By 11 September the ports of Bari and Brindisi, still under Italian control, were occupied.

Salerno landings

Operation Avalanche–the main invasion at Salerno by the American Fifth Army under Lieutenant General Mark Clark–began on 9 September 1943, and in order to secure surprise, it was decided to assault without preliminary naval or aerial bombardment. However, as Admiral Henry Hewitt, the amphibious force commander, had predicted, tactical surprise was not achieved. As the first wave of Major General Fred L. Walker's U.S. 36th Infantry Division approached the Paestum shore at 03:30 a loudspeaker from the landing area proclaimed in English: "Come on in and give up. We have you covered." The Allied troops attacked nonetheless.

Major General Rudolf Sieckenius, commander of the 16th Panzer Division had organised his forces into four mixed arms battle groups which he had placed roughly  apart and between  back from the beaches. The Dőrnemann group was just east of Salerno (and therefore were opposite Major General John Hawkesworth's British 46th Infantry Division when it landed), the Stempel battle group was between Pontecagnano and Battipaglia (and so faced Major General Douglas Graham's British 56th Infantry Division), the Holtey battle group was in a reserve role at Persano on the Sele river which formed the corps boundary between Lieutenant General Richard McCreery's British X Corps and Major General Ernest Dawley's U.S. VI Corps, while the von Doering battle group responsible for the Albanella to Rutino sector was  south-east of Ogliastro, somewhat south of the U.S. 36th Division's beaches.

The British X Corps, composed of the British 46th and 56th Infantry Divisions and a light infantry force of U.S. Army Rangers and British Commandos of Brigadier Robert "Lucky" Laycock's 2nd Special Service Brigade, experienced mixed reactions to its landings. The U.S. Rangers met no opposition and with support from the guns of  seized their mountain pass objectives while the Commandos, from No. 2 (Army) Commando and No. 41 (Royal Marine) Commando, were also unopposed and secured the high ground on each side of the road through Molina Pass on the main route from Salerno to Naples. At first light units of No. 2 Commando moved towards Salerno and pushed back a small force of tanks and armoured cars from the 16th Panzer Reconnaissance Battalion. The British Commandos captured the town of Salerno after some serious fighting that cost 40 (Royal Marine) Commando and 41 Commando nine killed and thirty-seven wounded.

The two British infantry divisions, however, met determined resistance and had to fight their way ashore with the help of naval bombardments. The depth and intensity of German resistance forced British commanders to concentrate their forces, rather than driving for a linkup with the Americans to the south.

At Paestum, the two lead battalions of the 36th (Texas) Division (from the 141st and 142nd Infantry Regiments) received stiff resistance from two companies of the von Doering group. German observers on Monte Soprano directed fire onto the landing craft. LST 336 took 18 hits, and some LCTs and DUKWs sheered away to avoid German shellfire. The division had not been in combat before and as a result of the Italian surrender, there was a general belief amongst the soldiers that the landings would be routine. The 141st Infantry lost cohesion and failed to gain any depth during the day which made the landing of supporting arms and stores impossible, leaving them without artillery and anti-tank guns. However, the 142nd Infantry fared better and with the support of the 143rd Infantry, the reserve formation which had landed by 08:00, were able to push forward. Minesweepers cleared an inshore channel shortly after 09:00; so by late morning destroyers could steam within  of the shoreline to shell German positions on Monte Soprano. USS Philadelphia and Savannah focused their  guns on concentrations of German tanks, beginning a barrage of naval shells which would total eleven-thousand tons before the Salerno beachhead was secured.

By the end of the first day the Fifth Army, although it had not gained all its objectives, had made a promising start: the British X Corps' two assault divisions had pushed between  inland and the special forces had advanced north across the Sorrento Peninsula and were looking down on the Plain of Naples. To the south, the U.S. 36th Division had established itself in the plain to the right of the Sele river and the higher ground to a depth of , although the 141st Infantry was still stuck near the beach. However, the XIV Panzer Corps commander, Hermann Balck, had seen the 16th Panzer Division's battle groups perform as intended and he had ordered both the Hermann Göring Division south to the battle and later in the day had been able to order 15th Panzergrenadier likewise. Meanwhile, to the south, the 29th Panzergrenadier Division from LXXVI Panzer Corps had also been directed to Salerno. Neither side had gained the initiative.

Luftwaffe response
Luftwaffe planes began strafing and bombing the invasion beaches shortly after 04:00 on the morning of 9 September before X Corps seized the Montecorvino airfield  inland later that day destroying three dozen German planes; but failure to capture the high ground inland left the airfield within easy range of German artillery and therefore unusable by Allied aircraft. On 10 September German bombers began targeting Admiral Hewitt's flagship  while the ship was serving as General Clark's headquarters. The flagship called thirty "red alerts" over a period of 36 hours in response to 450 Luftwaffe sorties. Admiral Hewitt reported: "Air situation here critical." The aircraft carriers had intended to withdraw on 10 September, but remained with the invasion shipping so their Supermarine Seafires could provide the air cover invasion planners had expected to operate from Montecorvino.

Eighty-five Allied vessels were hit by German bombs off Salerno. Fritz X glide bombs dropped by Dornier Do 217s disabled USS Savannah and narrowly missed USS Philadelphia on the morning of 11 September. The following morning Clark moved his headquarters ashore, and Hewitt transferred with his staff to the small amphibious force flagship  so the large Ancon with its conspicuous antenna array could retire to North Africa.

Consolidation of the beachhead

The Allies fought to expand their beachhead for three days while the Germans defended stubbornly to mask the build-up of their reinforcements for a counter-offensive. On 10 September, Clark visited the battlefield and judged that it was unlikely that X Corps would be able to push quickly east past Battipaglia to link with VI Corps. Since X Corps' main line of thrust was to be north towards Naples, he decided to move the VI Corps left hand boundary north of the Sele river and move the bulk of Major General Troy Middleton's U.S. 45th Division into the gap. In view of the enemy reinforcements approaching from the north he also ordered a battalion-sized mixed arms group to reinforce the Rangers the next day. Over the same period, German reinforcements filtered into the battlefield. Units, short of transport and subjected to other delays, arrived piecemeal and were formed into ad hoc battle groups for immediate action. By 13 September, all the immediately available reinforcements had arrived including additional elements from the 3rd Panzergrenadier Division which had been released by Generalfeldmarschall Kesselring from further north near Rome. By contrast, the Allied build-up was constrained by the limited transport available for the operation and the pre-determined schedule of the build-up based on how, during the planning phase, it had been anticipated the battle would develop. By 12 September, it had become clear that the Fifth Army had an acute shortage of infantry on the ground. On 12 September, General Sir Harold Alexander, the 15th Army Group commander, reported to General Sir Alan Brooke, the Chief of the Imperial General Staff (CIGS), in London: "I am not satisfied with the situation at Avalanche. The build-up is slow and they are pinned down to a bridgehead that has not enough depth. Everything is being done to push follow-up units and material to them. I expect heavy German counter-attack to be imminent."

By 12 September, X Corps had taken a defensive posture because every battalion was committed and there were no reserves available to form an attack. In the south, the 36th Division made some progress but towards midday a counterattack by elements of the 29th Panzergrenadier Division overran the 1st Battalion, 142nd Infantry Regiment.

German counterattacks
On 13 September, the Germans launched their counteroffensive. While the Hermann Göring battle groups attacked the northern flank of the beachhead, the main attack was on the boundary between the two Allied Corps which ran roughly from Battipaglia to the sea, with the greatest weight due to fall on the VI Corps side On the morning of 13 September elements of Major General Walker's 36th Division attacked and captured Altavilla in the high ground some  behind Paestum, but a counterattack forced them to withdraw as darkness fell. During the afternoon, two German battlegroups, the Kleine Limburg and the Krüger, had attacked Persano and overrun the 1st Battalion, 157th Infantry before crossing the Sele to engage the 2nd Battalion of the 143rd Infantry and virtually wipe it out.

The battle groups continued their strike south and south-west until reaching the confluence of the Sele and its large tributary the Calore, where it was stopped by artillery firing over open sights, naval gunfire and a makeshift infantry position manned by artillerymen, drivers, cooks and clerks and anyone else that Major General Walker could scrape together. Clark's staff formulated various evacuation plans: Operation Brass Rail envisioned Clark and his 5th Army headquarters staff leaving the beachhead to establish headquarters afloat aboard . Operation Sealion envisioned shifting British X Corps to Paestum with VI Corps, while the alternative Operation Seatrain envisioned shifting VI Corps to the X Corps sector. The navy protested that reversing the landing process would be impossible since loading beached landing craft would make them heavier and unable to withdraw from the beach. Advice from superiors and subordinates convinced Clark to continue fighting, and he later denied seriously considering evacuation.

The U.S. VI Corps had by this time lost the best part of three battalions, and so the forward units of both its divisions were withdrawn to reduce the length of the defensive line. The 45th Division consolidated at the Sele - Calore position while the 36th Division was on the high ground on the seaward side of the La Caso stream (which flowed into the Calore). The new perimeter was held with the assistance of Major General Matthew Ridgway's 82nd Airborne Division. Two battalions (roughly 1,300 paratroopers) of Colonel Reuben Tucker's 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment (PIR), after the cancellation of Giant II, had been assigned to execute the final version of Operation Giant I at Capua on the evening of 13 September. Instead, they jumped inside the beachhead, guided by Rebecca/Eureka beacons and moved immediately into the line on the right of VI Corps. The next night, with the crisis past, 2,100 paratroops of Colonel James Gavin's 505th PIR also parachuted into the beachhead and reinforced the two battalions of the 504th. A clear sign of the crisis passing was when, on the afternoon of 14 September, the final unit of 45th Division, the 180th Infantry Regiment, landed, Clark was able to place it in reserve rather than in the line. The 325th Glider Infantry Regiment, reinforced by the 3rd Battalion, 504th PIR, landed by sea on 15 September. A night drop of 600 paratroops of the 509th Parachute Infantry Battalion to disrupt German movements behind the lines in the vicinity of Avellino was widely dispersed and failed, incurring significant casualties. In the X Corps sector the lead elements of Major General George Erskine's British 7th Armoured Division began to land, along with the 23rd Armoured Brigade.

With strong naval gunfire support from the Royal Navy and well-served by Fifth Army's artillery, the reinforced and reorganized infantry units defeated all German attempts on 14 September to find a weak spot in the lines. German losses, particularly in tanks, were severe. On 14 September and the following night, Tedder ordered every available aircraft to support the Fifth Army, including the strategic bomber force. Over 1,000 tons of bombs were dropped during the daylight hours.

On 15 September both the 16th Panzer and 29th Panzergrenadier Divisions went on the defensive, marking the end to the thrust towards Paestum. Further north the Schmalz group of the Hermann Göering Division achieved surprise, attacking the 128th (Hampshire) Brigade (comprising three battalions, the 2nd, 1/4th and 5th, of the Hampshire Regiment), of the British 46th Division, on the high ground east of Salerno. The armoured column following up was intercepted and driven back, leaving the German infantry exposed.

The Allied bomber effort continued on 15 September, although slightly less intensively than the previous day, as did the naval bombardment. The arrival of the British battleships  and , with  guns, off the beaches provided the Allied troops with a morale boost, although Valiant was not required to shoot and Warspites 29 rounds were awe-inspiring but a minor contribution to the 2,592 naval rounds fired that day.

On 15 September, Kesselring reported to the Oberkommando der Wehrmacht that the Allied air and naval superiority had forced LXXVI Panzer Corps onto the defensive, and that a decisive success would depend on the attack by XIV Panzer Corps. If this failed, the 10th Army must break off the battle to avoid being 'mangled'.

On 16 September, the Schmalz group renewed its efforts on the X Corps front but with no more success, although No. 2 Commando suffered casualties, including 31-year-old Captain Henry Wellesley, the then-Duke of Wellington, who was killed. The Allied air forces and navies continued to batter enemy targets, although during an air attack by Dornier Do 217 K-2 bombers armed with Fritz X radio-controlled glide bombs, Warspite was hit and disabled, which required her to be towed to Malta for repair.

Eighth Army ordered to apply pressure
On 9 September, Montgomery's formations had been strung out along the coastal roads in the 'toe' of Italy. The build-up across the Straits of Messina had proved slow and he was therefore short of transport. On 9 September, he decided to halt his formations in order to reorganise before pushing on but General Alexander replied on 10 September that "It is of the utmost importance that you maintain pressure upon the Germans so that they cannot remove forces from your front and concentrate them against Avalanche". This message was further reinforced on 12 September by a personal visit from Alexander's Chief of Staff, Brigadier A. A. Richardson. Montgomery had no choice, and while reorganising the main body of his troops, sent light forces up the coast which reached Castrovillari and Belvedere on 12 September, still some  from the Salerno battlefield. On 14 September, he was in a position to start a more general advance, and by 16 September the British 5th Infantry Division had reached Sapri,  beyond Belvedere, where forward patrols made contact with patrols from VI Corps' 36th Division.

German withdrawal

On 16 September, von Vietinghoff reported to Kesselring that the Allied air and naval superiority were decisive and that he didn't have the power to neutralize it. 10th Army had succeeded in preventing troops from being cut off, and continuing the battle would just invite heavy losses. The approach of the Eighth Army was also posing a threat. He recommended breaking off the battle, pivoting on Salerno to form a defensive line, preparatory to a withdrawal on 18/19 September. Kesselring's agreement reached von Vietinghoff early on 17 September.

General Hermann Balck, commanding XIV Panzer Corps - the principal armoured formation near Salerno - wrote that his tanks 'suffered heavily under Allied naval gunfire, with which [they] had nothing to counter'. This encouraged a retreat from areas which were covered by Allied naval gunfire.

Overall commander of forces in the Salerno area, General Vietinghoff, reported to his superior that his attacks 'were unable to reach their objective owing to the fire from naval guns and low-flying aircraft'. Allied air and naval support, superior to German support, was able to aid the Allied advance to a substantial degree.

Salerno mutiny

The Salerno battle was also the site of the Salerno Mutiny instigated by about 500 men of the British X Corps, which had by this time suffered over 6,000 casualties, who, on 16 September, refused assignment to new units as battle casualty replacements. They had previously understood that they would be returning to their own units from which they had been separated during the fighting in the North African campaign, mainly because they had been wounded. Eventually, the corps commander, Lieutenant-General Richard McCreery, persuaded about half of the men to follow their orders. The remainder were court-martialled. Three NCOs who led the mutiny were sentenced to death but the sentence was not carried out and they were eventually allowed to rejoin units.

Further Allied advances

With the Salerno beachhead secure, the Fifth Army began its attack northwest towards Naples on 19 September. The day afterwards, Major General Ernest J. Dawley, the U.S. VI Corps commander, was relieved of his command by Clark and replaced by Major General John P. Lucas. The U.S. 82nd Airborne Division, after suffering serious casualties near Altavilla, was shifted to British X Corps, joining the U.S. Army Rangers and the British 23rd Armoured Brigade on the Sorrento Peninsula to flank the German defenses at Nocera Inferiore, Sant'Antonio Abate, and Angri, which the British 46th Infantry Division attacked. The British 7th Armoured Division, passing through the 46th Division, was assigned the task of taking Naples, while the newly landed U.S. 3rd Infantry Division took Acerno on 22 September and Avellino on 28 September.

The Eighth Army made good progress from the "toe" in spite of German demolitions and linked with the British 1st Airborne Division at Taranto. Its left linked up with the Fifth Army's right on 16 September. The Eighth Army now concentrated its forces east of the Apennine Mountains and pushed north along the Adriatic coast through Bari. On 27 September, the Eighth Army captured the large airfield complex near Foggia, a major Allied objective.

At the same time British X Corps made good progress; they pushed through the mountain passes of Monti Lattari and captured a vital bridge over the Sarno River at Scafati. They then surrounded Mount Vesuvius and prepared to advance on Naples. German troops occupying that city provoked a rebellion by the population, which started on 27 September. With the swift advance by X Corps and Naples in rebellion the Germans were forced to evacuate. On 1 October, "A" Squadron of the 1st King's Dragoon Guards entered the city, the first Allied unit to do so. The entire Fifth Army, now consisting of five American and three British divisions, reached the line of the Volturno River on 6 October. This provided a natural defensive barrier, securing Naples, the Campanian plain and the vital airfields on it from a German counterattack.

Meanwhile, on the Adriatic Coast, the Eighth Army advanced to a line from Campobasso to Larino and Termoli on the Biferno river.

Aftermath

The 10th Army had come close to defeating the Salerno beachhead. The stubborn initial resistance by 16th Panzer Division's battlegroups and the Germans' ability to reinforce them by land more quickly than the Allies could land follow-up forces by sea or air had almost tipped the battle. The Fifth Army planners had concentrated the main weight of its forces in X Corps on its left-wing, in line with its major objective of advancing on Naples. This had left its right-wing too thinly manned to defend X Corps' right flank and left a particular weakness at the corps boundary. In the end, the Germans, aware of the limited time available to deal with the Salerno landings because of the inevitable arrival in due course of the Eighth Army, were obliged to make hurried and uncoordinated attempts to force a quick decision and had failed to break through Allied lines and exploit the gains in the face of total Allied air superiority and artillery and naval gunfire support. The Allies had been fortunate that at this time Adolf Hitler had sided with the view of his Army Group commander in Northern Italy, Generalfeldmarschall Erwin Rommel, and decided that defending Italy south of Rome was not a strategic priority. As a result, Kesselring had been forbidden to call upon reserves from the Northern Army Group.

The success of the 10th Army in inflicting heavy casualties, and Kesselring's strategic arguments, led Hitler to agree that the Allies should be kept away from German borders and prevented from gaining the oil resources of the Balkans. On 6 November, Hitler withdrew Rommel to oversee the build-up of defenses in northern France and gave Kesselring command of the whole of Italy with a remit to keep Rome in German hands for as long as possible.

By early October 1943, the whole of southern Italy was in Allied hands, and the Allied armies stood facing the Volturno Line, the first of a series of prepared defensive lines running across Italy from which the Germans chose to fight delaying actions, giving ground slowly and buying time to complete their preparation of the Winter Line, their strongest defensive line south of Rome. The next stage of the Italian campaign became for the Allied armies a grinding and attritional slog against skillful, determined and well-prepared defenses in terrain and weather conditions which favoured defense and hampered the Allied advantages in mechanised equipment and air superiority. It took until mid-January 1944 to fight through the Volturno, Barbara and Bernhardt lines to reach the Gustav Line, the backbone of the Winter Line defenses, setting the scene for the four battles of Monte Cassino which took place between January and May 1944.

Clark's award
Lieutenant General Mark W. Clark, the U.S. Fifth Army commander, was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross, the second-highest U.S. award for valor in combat, for his front-line leadership during this crisis. He was frequently seen in the most forward positions encouraging the troops. However, in the opinion of historian Carlo D'Este, Clark "mistakenly believed he had saved the Allied invasion by his leadership, when in fact it was precisely his inexperience that precipitated most of the problems the invasion force faced."

See also
 Allied invasion of Italy order of battle
 European Theatre of World War II
 Military history of Italy during World War II

Footnotes

References

 Terdoslavich, William. "Nothing Goes Right in Italy", in Fawcett, Bill, ed. How to Lose WWII, pp. 156–60. New York: Harper, 2000.

Further reading

External links

 Winter Line Stories Original stories from the front lines of the Italian Campaign by US Army Liaison Officer Major Ralph R. Hotchkiss
 Royal Engineers Museum Royal Engineers and Second World War (Italy)
 Summary of the Italian Campaign
 University of Kansas Electronic Library Bad link

 Map of Europe during the Allied invasion of Italy (omniatlas.com)

1943 in Italy
September 1943 events
Italy
Battles of World War II involving Italy
Italy
United States Army Rangers
Italy
Italian campaign (World War II)
Italy
Italy
History of Salerno
Invasions of Italy
Italy
Italy
Military history of Canada during World War II
Italy
Italy
Italy
Italy
Italy
Allies of World War II

Allied invasion of Italy


Gürer Aykal (22 Mayıs 1942, Çifteler, Eskişehir) Türk orkestra şefi. 1988'den beri Cumhurbaşkanlığı Senfoni Orkestrası'nın şefliğini, ayrıca Borusan İstanbul Filarmoni Orkestrası'nın genel müzik direktörlüğünü ve daimi şefliğini yapmaktadır.

Yaşam öyküsü
Eskişehir Mahmudiye'de doğdu. Müziğe babasının verdiği derslerle başlayan sanatçı, 1953 yılında Ankara Devlet Konservatuvarı'na girmiş, Necdet Remzi Atak'ın öğrencisi olarak keman bölümünü bitirdikten sonra kompozisyon bölümüne geçerek Adnan Saygun'un sınıfından mezun olmuştur.

Eğitim
Şeflik öğrenimini yurt dışında yapan Aykal, 1969'da kompozisyon bölümünü bitirip orkestra yönetim uzmanlığı için devlet bursu ile İngiltere'ye gönderildi. Londra'da Guildhall Müzik Okulu yüksek yöneticilik sınıfında ve Royal Academy'de; İtalya'da Academia Chiciana ve Roma'daki Santa Cecilia'da çalışmalarını tamamladı. Orkestra şefliği alanında tecrübelerinden yararlandığı isimler arasında George Hurst, Andre Prévin ve Franco Ferrara gibi ünlü şefler vardır.

İngiltere'de Royal Academy'yi bitirdiğinde, bu diplomayı 21 yıl içinde almayı başaran ilk kişiydi. Türkiye'de yasal olarak atanan ilk orkestra şefi oldu ve Cumhurbaşkanlığı Senfoni Orkestrası'nın şef yardımcılığına atandı. Santa Cecilia Konservatuvarı'ndan onur derecesiyle mezun olmuştur.

Kariyer
Sanatçı, 1973 yılında yurda dönmüş, kazandığı başarılarla "Devlet Sanatçısı" unvanıyla onurlandırılmıştır (1981). 1999'da kendi isteğiyle Cumhurbaşkanlığı Senfoni Orkestrası'ndan ayrıldı, bu dönem Borusan İstanbul Filarmoni Orkestrası'nı kurdu. 2000–2004 yılları arasında Antalya Orkestrası'nı kurup geliştirdi. ABD'de toplam 16 yıl şeflik ve genel müzik direktörlüğü yapan Aykal, 1991–2003 yılları arasında El Paso Teksas Senfoni Orkestrası Daimi Şefliği'ni ve Genel Müzik Direktörlüğü'nü yürüttü ve ayrıca "Profesör Emeritus" unvanı aldı. Cumhurbaşkanlığı Senfoni Orkestrası'nın daimi şefi Gürer Aykal, Mimar Sinan Güzel Sanatlar Üniversitesi'ne (MSGSÜ) kadrolu profesör olarak atandı (2006). Aynı zamanda konservatuvarın 'Kompozisyon ve Orkestra Şefliği Anasanat Dalı Başkanlığı' görevini de üstlenen Gürer Aykal, Borusan İstanbul Filarmoni'nin Daimi Şefliği görevini ve Genel Müzik Direktörlüğünü de yürütüyor.

Aykal'ın eğitimci yönü, yurt içi ve yurt dışında diğer üniversitelerdeki orkestra şefliği profesörlüğünü de kapsamaktadır. ABD'de Indiana (Bloomington) Üniversitesi, Teksas Tech ve UTEP Üniversiteleri'nde ileri orkestra şefliği dersleri veren Aykal hâlen Bilkent Üniversitesi'nde bu görevi sürdürmektedir.

Uluslararası performanslar
Yurt dışında da birçok orkestrayı konuk şef olarak yöneten Aykal'ın kariyerinde yer alan orkestralardan bazıları şunlardır:

 Londra Filarmoni,
 Moskova Devlet Senfoni,
 Dublin Radyo Senfoni,
 Bergen Senfoni,
 Norddeutsches Rundfunk Senfoni,
 Helsinki Filarmoni,
 Kurku Senfoni,
 Palermo Senfoni,
 Nürnberg Senfoni,
 New York Festival,
 Lübeck Senfoni,
 Rochester Filarmoni NY,
 Singapur Senfoni,
 Bloomington Filarmoni,
 Prag Senfoni,
 Sofya Senfoni,
 Bratislava Senfoni,
 Varşova Radyo Senfoni,
 Kraków Senfoni.

Çoğunluğu Cumhurbaşkanlığı Senfoni Orkestrasıyla eşlik ettiği ünlü solistlerden bazıları şöyle sıralanabilir:

 André Navara,
 Pierre Fournier,
 Alicia Dela Rocha,
 M. Andre,
 İgor Oyştrak,
 Viktor Pikayzen.
 Maxim Vengerov

Gürer Aykal, Türk bestecilerinin bazı yapıtlarının dünyada ilk seslendirilişini de gerçekleştirmiştir. Bu yapıtlar arasında Adnan Saygun'un 4. Senfoni'si, Atatürk'e ve Anadolu'ya Destan'ı, Conserto da Camera'sı, 2. Piyano Konçertosu, Orkestra çeşitlemeleri; Necil Kazım Akses'in 2. Senfoni'si, "Bir Divandan Gazel"i; Ferit Tüzün'ün Çayda Çıra Bale Suiti; İstemihan Taviloğlu'nun "Klarnet Konçertosu"; Muammer Sun'un "Hıdırellez" bale müziği ve "Kurtuluş" filminin müziği bulunmaktadır.

Ödüller
 1981: Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Devlet Sanatçısı unvanı

Notlar

Kaynakça
 Röportaj - CEO's Dergisi Şubat 2003
 Biyografi - Kültür Bakanlığı Resmî Sitesi Arşivi

Dış bağlantılar
 BBC Türkçe ile 1983 yılında yapılan röportaj

1942 doğumlular
Eskişehir doğumlu sanatçılar
Türk orkestra şefleri
Devlet Sanatçıları
Cumhurbaşkanlığı Senfoni Orkestrası sanatçıları
Devlet Senfoni Orkestrası sanatçıları
Yaşayan insanlar
Bilkent Üniversitesi öğretim üyeleri
Hacettepe Üniversitesi Ankara Devlet Konservatuvarında öğrenim görenler
Devlet Opera ve Balesi Genel Müdürleri

Gürer Aykal


L'Indice MOEX Russie est un indice action de la bourse de Moscou.

Présentation
L'indice MOEX Russie a été créé le . Sa valeur, de 100 roubles à l'origine, est calculée en temps réel et est exprimée en roubles.

Histoire
Le 24 février 2022, premier jour de l'invasion de l'Ukraine par la Russie l'indice MOEX chute de plus de 40 %. Ce sera aussi le dernier jour de cotation pour les valeurs moscovites avant le 23 mars 2022.

Composition

La composition de l'indice MOEX Russie est revue le 3ème vendredi des mois de mars, juin, septembre et décembre.

Liste des 43 titres composant l'indice MOEX au .

Bibliographie
 .

Notes et références

Références

Économie en Russie

Indice MOEX Russie


Horst Weber (* 21. Februar 1934 in Aachen; † 24. Februar 2012 in Garmisch-Partenkirchen) war ein deutscher Jazzproduzent und Mitbegründer des Jazzlabels enja.

Weber lernte das Schneiderhandwerk. Zunächst arbeitete er als Entwurfsschneider und Modedesigner, unter anderem freiberuflich für das Deutsche Mode-Institut, für das er während der 1960er Jahre auch nach Japan reiste; dabei knüpfte er Kontakte zur japanischen Jazzszene. Daneben war er in der Region Aachen als Konzertveranstalter aktiv, bevor er Ende der 1960er Jahre nach München zog. 1971 gründete er dort gemeinsam mit Matthias Winckelmann das Plattenlabel enja; als erstes Album veröffentlichten sie Black Glory, eine Aufnahme des Pianisten Mal Waldron aus dem Münchner Jazzclub Domicile. Später folgten Alben von Albert Mangelsdorff, Terumasa Hino, Masahiko Sato, Chet Baker, Charles Mingus oder Abdullah Ibrahim. Mit Gerd Filtgen schrieb Weber eine Biographie über Charles Mingus. 1986 trennten sich Winckelmann und er, weil sie zu unterschiedliche Vorstellungen von der Arbeitsintensität und der weiteren Ausrichtung der Produktionen hatten, und gründeten eigenständige Labels unter der alten Dachmarke. Den gemeinsamen Katalog von damals 350 Alben teilten sie sich auf, indem sie auswürfelten, wer künftig auf seinem Enja-Label welche Künstler veröffentlichen dürfe. Weber setzte zunächst weiter auf Produktionen aus Japan und aus München. Anfang der 2000er Jahre übergab Weber die Leitung seines Labels an Werner Aldinger und zog sich aus dem laufenden Geschäft zurück.

Schriften
 Horst Weber, Gerd Filtgen Charles Mingus: sein Leben, seine Musik, seine Schallplatten. Oreos 1984

Weblinks
 Nachruf in Jazzthing
  Jazz-Szene trauert um Horst Weber in Mediabiz/Musikwoche 5. März 2012

Einzelnachweise

Labelbetreiber
Jazz-Produzent
Deutscher
Geboren 1934
Gestorben 2012
Mann

Horst Weber (Jazzproduzent)


La golondrina aliblanca o golondrina ala blanca (Tachycineta albiventer) es una ave residente en clima tropical y subtropical de América del Sur.

Distribución

Habita desde Panamá, Colombia, Venezuela y la isla Trinidad hasta el norte de la Argentina. Esta especie no es migratoria.

Descripción

El adulto de la golondrina aliblanca es de 13,2 cm de largo y pesa 17 g. Es irisado con azul verdoso en la parte superior, blanco en la parte inferior, la cola y los bordes de las plumas secundarias. Ambos sexos son similares, pero plumaje de los jóvenes es de color gris pardo por encima, aparte de la cola blanca. Su llamado es un chirrido áspero.

Las golondrina aliblanca son fácilmente distinguidas en relación con la golondrina bicolor, la que ocurre dentro de su distribución, por el blanco de sus alas; esto es carente en las demás Tachycineta. Las golondrinas aliblanca también tienen un pico más grande que las especies norteamericanas.

Hábitat

La golondrina aliblanca se encuentra generalmente cerca del agua, y se alimenta principalmente de insectos voladores. Normalmente se encuentran en parejas o en pequeños grupos. Esta golondrina construyen sus nidos con plumas de otras aves y algunas semillas en el hueco de un árbol, entre las rocas o en estructuras artificiales y empolla de 3 a 6 huevos blancos. Se encontró un nido en la Reserva Cuyabeno (Ecuador) el 30 de agosto de 2003, el cual contenía recién nacidos.

Referencias

  (2000): Forty-second supplement to the American Ornithologists' Union Check-list of North American Birds. Auk 117(3): 847–858. DOI: 10.1642/0004-8038(2000)117[0847:FSSTTA]2.0.CO;2
 BirdLife International 2004. Tachycineta albiventer. 2006 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.  Consultado el 10 de enero de 2012.
  (1991): A guide to the birds of Trinidad and Tobago (2nd edition). Comstock Publishing, Ithaca, N.Y.. ISBN 0-8014-9792-2
  (2006): Notes on breeding birds from the Cuyabeno Faunistic Reserve in northeastern Ecuador. Boletín de la Sociedad Antioqueña de Ornitología 16(2): 46-57. PDF fulltext
  (2003): Birds of Venezuela. Christopher Helm, London. ISBN 0-7136-6418-5
  (1989): Swallows and martins: an identification guide and handbook. Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 0-395-51174-7

Aves de América del Sur
Animales descritos en 1783
albiventer
Taxones descritos por Pieter Boddaert

Tachycineta albiventer


In der Liste der Kulturdenkmale in Flaxweiler sind alle Kulturdenkmale der luxemburgischen Gemeinde Flaxweiler aufgeführt (Stand: 26. September 2022).

Kulturdenkmale nach Ortsteil

Beyren

|}

Buchholz

|}

Flaxweiler

|}

Gostingen

|}

Niederdonven

|}

Oberdonven

|}

Legende: PCN – Immeubles et objets bénéficiant des effets de classement comme patrimoine culturel national; IS – Immeubles et objets inscrits à l'inventaire supplémentaire

Weblinks

Quelle
 Liste des immeubles et objets beneficiant d'une protection nationales, Nationales Institut für das gebaute Erbe, Fassung vom 12. September 2022, S. 41 f. (PDF)

Flaxweiler
!Kulturdenkmal

Liste der Kulturdenkmale in Flaxweiler


A quadtree is a tree data structure in which each internal node has exactly four children. Quadtrees are the two-dimensional analog of octrees and are most often used to partition a two-dimensional space by recursively subdividing it into four quadrants or regions. The data associated with a leaf cell varies by application, but the leaf cell represents a "unit of interesting spatial information".

The subdivided regions may be square or rectangular, or may have arbitrary shapes. This data structure was named a quadtree by Raphael Finkel and J.L. Bentley in 1974. A similar partitioning is also known as a Q-tree.

All forms of quadtrees share some common features:
 They decompose space into adaptable cells.
 Each cell (or bucket) has a maximum capacity. When maximum capacity is reached, the bucket splits.
 The tree directory follows the spatial decomposition of the quadtree.

A tree-pyramid (T-pyramid) is a "complete" tree; every node of the T-pyramid has four child nodes except leaf nodes; all leaves are on the same level, the level that corresponds to individual pixels in the image. The data in a tree-pyramid can be stored compactly in an array as an implicit data structure similar to the way a complete binary tree can be stored compactly in an array.

Types
Quadtrees may be classified according to the type of data they represent, including areas, points, lines and curves. Quadtrees may also be classified by whether the shape of the tree is independent of the order in which data is processed. The following are common types of quadtrees.

Region quadtree
The region quadtree represents a partition of space in two dimensions by decomposing the region into four equal quadrants, subquadrants, and so on with each leaf node containing data corresponding to a specific subregion. Each node in the tree either has exactly four children, or has no children (a leaf node). The height of quadtrees that follow this decomposition strategy (i.e. subdividing subquadrants as long as there is interesting data in the subquadrant for which more refinement is desired) is sensitive to and dependent on the spatial distribution of interesting areas in the space being decomposed. The region quadtree is a type of trie.

A region quadtree with a depth of n may be used to represent an image consisting of 2n × 2n pixels, where each pixel value is 0 or 1. The root node represents the entire image region. If the pixels in any region are not entirely 0s or 1s, it is subdivided. In this application, each leaf node represents a block of pixels that are all 0s or all 1s. Note the potential savings in terms of space when these trees are used for storing images; images often have many regions of considerable size that have the same colour value throughout. Rather than store a big 2-D array of every pixel in the image, a quadtree can capture the same information potentially many divisive levels higher than the pixel-resolution sized cells that we would otherwise require. The tree resolution and overall size is bounded by the pixel and image sizes.

A region quadtree may also be used as a variable resolution representation of a data field. For example, the temperatures in an area may be stored as a quadtree, with each leaf node storing the average temperature over the subregion it represents.

Point quadtree
The point quadtree is an adaptation of a binary tree used to represent two-dimensional point data. It shares the features of all quadtrees but is a true tree as the center of a subdivision is always on a point. It is often very efficient in comparing two-dimensional, ordered data points, usually operating in O(log n) time. Point quadtrees are worth mentioning for completeness, but they have been surpassed by k-d trees as tools for generalized binary search.

Point quadtrees are constructed as follows. Given the next point to insert, we find the cell in which it lies and add it to the tree. The new point is added such that the cell that contains it is divided into quadrants by the vertical and horizontal lines that run through the point. Consequently, cells are rectangular but not necessarily square. In these trees, each node contains one of the input points.

Since the division of the plane is decided by the order of point-insertion, the tree's height is sensitive to and dependent on insertion order. Inserting in a "bad" order can lead to a tree of height linear in the number of input points (at which point it becomes a linked-list). If the point-set is static, pre-processing can be done to create a tree of balanced height.

Node structure for a point quadtree
A node of a point quadtree is similar to a node of a binary tree, with the major difference being that it has four pointers (one for each quadrant) instead of two ("left" and "right") as in an ordinary binary tree. Also a key is usually decomposed into two parts, referring to x and y coordinates. Therefore, a node contains the following information:
 four pointers: quad['NW'], quad['NE'], quad['SW'], and quad['SE']
 point; which in turn contains:
 key; usually expressed as x, y coordinates
 value; for example a name

Point-region (PR) quadtree
Point-region (PR) quadtrees are very similar to region quadtrees. The difference is the type of information stored about the cells. In a region quadtree, a uniform value is stored that applies to the entire area of the cell of a leaf. The cells of a PR quadtree, however, store a list of points that exist within the cell of a leaf. As mentioned previously, for trees following this decomposition strategy the height depends on the spatial distribution of the points. Like the point quadtree, the PR quadtree may also have a linear height when given a "bad" set.

Edge quadtree
Edge quadtrees (much like PM quadtrees) are used to store lines rather than points. Curves are approximated by subdividing cells to a very fine resolution, specifically until there is a single line segment per cell. Near corners/vertices, edge quadtrees will continue dividing until they reach their maximum level of decomposition. This can result in extremely unbalanced trees which may defeat the purpose of indexing.

Polygonal map (PM) quadtree
The polygonal map quadtree (or PM Quadtree) is a variation of quadtree which is used to store collections of polygons that may be degenerate (meaning that they have isolated vertices or edges).
 A big difference between PM quadtrees and edge quadtrees is that the cell under consideration is not subdivided if the segments meet at a vertex in the cell.

There are three main classes of PM Quadtrees, which vary depending on what information they store within each black node. PM3 quadtrees can store any amount of non-intersecting edges and at most one point. PM2 quadtrees are the same as PM3 quadtrees except that all edges must share the same end point. Finally PM1 quadtrees are similar to PM2, but black nodes can contain a point and its edges or just a set of edges that share a point, but you cannot have a point and a set of edges that do not contain the point.

Compressed quadtrees
This section summarizes a subsection from a book by Sariel Har-Peled.

If we were to store every node corresponding to a subdivided cell, we may end up storing a lot of empty nodes. We can cut down on the size of such sparse trees by only storing subtrees whose leaves have interesting data (i.e. "important subtrees"). We can actually cut down on the size even further. When we only keep important subtrees, the pruning process may leave long paths in the tree where the intermediate nodes have degree two (a link to one parent and one child). It turns out that we only need to store the node  at the beginning of this path (and associate some meta-data with it to represent the removed nodes) and attach the subtree rooted at its end to . It is still possible for these compressed trees to have a linear height when given "bad" input points.

Although we trim a lot of the tree when we perform this compression, it is still possible to achieve logarithmic-time search, insertion, and deletion by taking advantage of Z-order curves. The Z-order curve maps each cell of the full quadtree (and hence even the compressed quadtree) in  time to a one-dimensional line (and maps it back in  time too), creating a total order on the elements. Therefore, we can store the quadtree in a data structure for ordered sets (in which we store the nodes of the tree).

We must state a reasonable assumption before we continue: we assume that given two real numbers  expressed as binary, we can compute in  time the index of the first bit in which they differ. We also assume that we can  compute in  time the lowest common ancestor of two points/cells in the quadtree and establish their relative Z-ordering, and we can compute the floor function in  time.

With  these assumptions, point location of a given point  (i.e. determining the cell that would contain ), insertion, and deletion operations can all be performed in  time (i.e. the  time it takes to do a search in the underlying ordered set data structure).

To perform a point location for  (i.e. find its cell in the compressed tree):
 Find the existing cell in the compressed tree that comes before  in the Z-order. Call this cell .
 If , return .
 Else, find what would have been the lowest common ancestor of the point  and the cell  in an uncompressed quadtree. Call this ancestor cell .
 Find the existing cell in the compressed tree that comes before  in the Z-order and return it.
Without going into specific details, to perform insertions and deletions we first do a point location for the thing we want to insert/delete, and then insert/delete it. Care must be taken to reshape the tree as appropriate, creating and removing nodes as needed.

Some common uses of quadtrees
 Image representation
 Image processing
 Mesh generation
 Spatial indexing, point location queries, and range queries
 Efficient collision detection in two dimensions
 View frustum culling of terrain data
 Storing sparse data, such as a formatting information for a spreadsheet or for some matrix calculations
 Solution of multidimensional fields (computational fluid dynamics, electromagnetism)
 Conway's Game of Life simulation program.
 State estimation
 Quadtrees are also used in the area of fractal image analysis
 Maximum disjoint sets

Image processing using quadtrees
Quadtrees, particularly the region quadtree, have lent themselves well to image processing applications. We will limit our discussion to binary image data, though region quadtrees and the image processing operations performed on them are just as suitable for colour images.

Image union / intersection
One of the advantages of using quadtrees for image manipulation is that the set operations of union and intersection can be done simply and quickly.

Given two binary images, the image union (also called overlay) produces an image wherein a pixel is black if either of the input images has a black pixel in the same location. That is, a pixel in the output image is white only when the corresponding pixel in both input images is white, otherwise the output pixel is black. Rather than do the operation pixel by pixel, we can compute the union more efficiently by leveraging the quadtree's ability to represent multiple pixels with a single node. For the purposes of discussion below, if a subtree contains both black and white pixels we will say that the root of that subtree is coloured grey.

The algorithm works by traversing the two input quadtrees ( and ) while building the output quadtree . Informally, the algorithm is as follows. Consider the nodes  and   corresponding to the same region in the images.
 If  or  is black, the corresponding node is created in  and is colored black. If only one of them is black and the other is gray, the gray node will contain a subtree underneath. This subtree need not be traversed.
 If  (respectively, ) is white,  (respectively, ) and the subtree underneath it (if any) is copied to  .
 If both  and  are gray, then the corresponding children of  and  are considered.

While this algorithm works, it does not by itself guarantee a minimally sized quadtree. For example, consider the result if we were to union a checkerboard (where every tile is a pixel) of size   with its complement. The result is a giant black square which should be represented by a quadtree with just the root node (coloured black), but instead the algorithm produces a full 4-ary tree of depth . To fix this, we perform a bottom-up traversal of the resulting quadtree where we check if the four children nodes have the same colour, in which case we replace their  parent with a leaf of the same colour.

The intersection of two images is almost the same algorithm. One way to think about the intersection of the two images is that we are doing a union with respect to the white pixels. As such, to  perform the intersection we swap the mentions of black and white in the union algorithm.

Connected component labelling
Consider two neighbouring black pixels in a binary image. They are adjacent if they share a bounding horizontal or vertical edge. In general, two black pixels are connected if one can be  reached from the other by moving only to adjacent pixels (i.e. there is a path of black pixels between them where each consecutive pair is adjacent). Each maximal set of connected black pixels  is a connected component. Using the quadtree representation of images, Samet  showed how we can find and label these connected components in time proportional to the size of the  quadtree. This algorithm can also be used for polygon colouring.

The algorithm works in three steps:
 establish the adjacency relationships between black pixels
 process the equivalence relations from the first step to obtain one unique label for each  connected component
 label the black pixels with the label associated with their connected component
To simplify the discussion, let us assume the children of a node in the quadtree follow the Z-order (SW, NW, SE, NE). Since we can count on this structure, for any cell we know how to navigate the quadtree to find the adjacent cells in the different levels of the hierarchy.

Step one is accomplished with a post-order traversal of the quadtree. For each black leaf  we look at the node or nodes representing cells that are Northern neighbours and Eastern neighbours (i.e. the Northern and Eastern cells that share edges with the cell of ). Since the tree is organized in Z-order, we have  the invariant that the Southern and Western neighbours have already been taken care of and accounted for. Let the Northern or Eastern neighbour currently under consideration be . If  represents black pixels:
 If only one of  or  has a label, assign that label to the other cell
 If neither of them have labels, create one and assign it to both of them
 If  and  have different labels, record this label equivalence and move on
Step two can be accomplished using the union-find data structure. We start with each unique label as a separate set. For every equivalence relation noted in the first step, we union the  corresponding sets. Afterwards, each distinct remaining set will be associated with a distinct connected component in the image.

Step three performs another post-order traversal. This time, for each black node  we use the union-find's find operation (with the old label of ) to find and assign  its new label (associated  with the connected component of which  is part).

Mesh generation using quadtrees
This section summarizes a chapter from a book by Har-Peled and de Berg et al.

Mesh generation is essentially the triangulation of a point set for which further processing may be performed. As such, it is desirable for the resulting triangulation to have certain properties (like non-uniformity, triangles that are not "too skinny", large triangles in sparse areas and small triangles in dense ones, etc.) to make further processing quicker and less error-prone. Quadtrees built on the point set can be used to create meshes with these desired properties.

Consider a leaf of the quadtree and its corresponding cell . We say  is balanced (for mesh generation) if the cell's sides are intersected by the corner points of neighbouring cells at most once on each side. This  means that the quadtree levels of leaves adjacent to  differ by at most one from the level of . When this is true for all leaves, we say the whole quadtree is balanced (for mesh generation).

Consider the cell  and the  neighbourhood of same-sized cells centred at . We call this neighbourhood the extended cluster. We say the quadtree is well-balanced if it is balanced, and for every leaf  that contains a point of the point set, its extended cluster is also in the quadtree and the extended cluster contains no other point of the point set.

Creating the mesh is done as follows:
 Build a quadtree on the input points.
 Ensure the quadtree is balanced. For every leaf, if there is a neighbour that is too large, subdivide the neighbour. This is repeated until the tree is balanced. We also make sure that for a leaf with a point in it, the nodes for each leaf's extended cluster are in the tree.
 For every leaf node  that contains a point, if the extended cluster contains another point, we further subdivide the tree and rebalance as necessary. If we needed to subdivide, for each child  of  we ensure the nodes of 's extended cluster are in the tree (and re-balance as required).
 Repeat the previous step until the tree is well-balanced.
 Transform the quadtree into a triangulation.
We consider the corner points of the tree cells as vertices in our triangulation. Before the transformation step we have a bunch of boxes with points in some of them. The transformation step is done in the following manner: for each point, warp the closest corner of its cell to meet it and triangulate the resulting four quadrangles to make "nice" triangles (the interested reader is referred to chapter 12 of Har-Peled for more details on what makes "nice" triangles).

The remaining squares are triangulated according to some simple rules. For each regular square (no points within and no corner points in its sides), introduce the diagonal. Note that due to the way in which we separated points with the well-balancing property, no square with a corner intersecting a side is one that was warped. As such, we can triangulate squares with intersecting corners as follows. If there is one intersected side, the square becomes three triangles by adding the long diagonals connecting the intersection with opposite corners. If there are four intersected sides, we split the square in half by adding an edge between two of the four intersections, and then connect these two endpoints to the remaining two intersection points. For the other squares, we introduce a point in the middle and connect it to all four corners of the square as well as each intersection point.

At the end of it all, we have a nice triangulated mesh of our point set built from a quadtree.

Pseudocode
The following pseudo code shows one means of implementing a quadtree which handles only points. There are other approaches available.

Prerequisites
It is assumed these structures are used.

 // Simple coordinate object to represent points and vectors
 struct XY
 {
     float x;
     float y;

     function __construct(float _x, float _y) {...}
 }

 // Axis-aligned bounding box with half dimension and center
 struct AABB
 {
     XY center;
     float halfDimension;

     function __construct(XY _center, float _halfDimension) {...}
     function containsPoint(XY point) {...}
     function intersectsAABB(AABB other) {...}
 }

QuadTree class
This class represents both one quad tree and the node where it is rooted.

 class QuadTree
 {
     // Arbitrary constant to indicate how many elements can be stored in this quad tree node
     constant int QT_NODE_CAPACITY = 4;

     // Axis-aligned bounding box stored as a center with half-dimensions
     // to represent the boundaries of this quad tree
     AABB boundary;

     // Points in this quad tree node
     Array of XY [size = QT_NODE_CAPACITY] points;

     // Children
     QuadTree* northWest;
     QuadTree* northEast;
     QuadTree* southWest;
     QuadTree* southEast;

     // Methods
     function __construct(AABB _boundary) {...}
     function insert(XY p) {...}
     function subdivide() {...} // create four children that fully divide this quad into four quads of equal area
     function queryRange(AABB range) {...}
 }

Insertion
The following method inserts a point into the appropriate quad of a quadtree, splitting if necessary.

 class QuadTree
 {
     ...

     // Insert a point into the QuadTree
     function insert(XY p)
     {
         // Ignore objects that do not belong in this quad tree
         if (!boundary.containsPoint(p))
             return false; // object cannot be added

         // If there is space in this quad tree and if doesn't have subdivisions, add the object here
         if (points.size < QT_NODE_CAPACITY && northWest == null)
         {
             points.append(p);
             return true;
         }

         // Otherwise, subdivide and then add the point to whichever node will accept it
         if (northWest == null)
             subdivide();
         // We have to add the points/data contained in this quad array to the new quads if we only want
         // the last node to hold the data

         if (northWest->insert(p)) return true;
         if (northEast->insert(p)) return true;
         if (southWest->insert(p)) return true;
         if (southEast->insert(p)) return true;

         // Otherwise, the point cannot be inserted for some unknown reason (this should never happen)
         return false;
     }
 }

Query range
The following method finds all points contained within a range.

 class QuadTree
 {
     ...

     // Find all points that appear within a range
     function queryRange(AABB range)
     {
         // Prepare an array of results
         Array of XY pointsInRange;

         // Automatically abort if the range does not intersect this quad
         if (!boundary.intersectsAABB(range))
             return pointsInRange; // empty list

         // Check objects at this quad level
         for (int p = 0; p < points.size; p++)
         {
             if (range.containsPoint(points[p]))
                 pointsInRange.append(points[p]);
         }

         // Terminate here, if there are no children
         if (northWest == null)
             return pointsInRange;

         // Otherwise, add the points from the children
         pointsInRange.appendArray(northWest->queryRange(range));
         pointsInRange.appendArray(northEast->queryRange(range));
         pointsInRange.appendArray(southWest->queryRange(range));
         pointsInRange.appendArray(southEast->queryRange(range));

         return pointsInRange;
     }
 }

See also
 Adaptive mesh refinement
 Binary space partitioning
 Binary tiling
 Kd-tree
 Octree
 R-tree
 UB-tree
 Spatial database
 Subpaving
 Z-order curve

References
Surveys by Aluru and Samet give a nice overview of quadtrees.

Notes

General references

  Chapter 14: Quadtrees: pp. 291–306.

Trees (data structures)
Database index techniques
Geometric data structures

Quadtree


Medoševići su naseljeno mjesto u općini Čajniču, Republika Srpska, BiH. Nalaze se istočno od Bezujnog, rječice Bezujanke i jugozapadno od Batotića. Sjeverno je rječica Janjina.

Godine 1985. pripojeni su naselju Bezujnom (Sl.list SRBiH, br.24/85).

Stanovništvo

Izvori

Naselja u Republici Srpskoj
Čajniče

Medoševići


Sub ploaia de foc este un film românesc din 1975 regizat de Alexandru Boiangiu.

Prezentare

Note

Legături externe

Vezi și
 1975 în film

Filme românești
Filme în limba română
Filme din 1975

Sub ploaia de foc


Premijer liga Nogometnog saveza Bosne i Hercegovine je svoje prvo izdanje imala u sezoni 1998./99., te je to ukupno peta sezona prvog ranga natjecanja za klubove pod inegerencijom NS BiH.
Bilo je predviđeno da prvih pet momčadi igra zajedničko doigravanje s prva tri kluba iz 1. lige Herceg-Bosne, ali je doigravanje otkazano.
Prvenstvo je osvojila momčad Sarajeva.

Ljestvica

Poveznice
 Prva nogometna liga Herceg-Bosne 1998./99.

Izvori
 rsssf.com, Bosna i Hercegovina 1998./99.
 sportsport.ba, Premijer liga NS BiH 1998./99., ljestvica
 sportsport.ba, Premijer liga NS BiH 1998./99., rezultati
 claudionicoletti.eu, Bosna i Hercegovine - ljestvice 1. ranga nogometnog prvenstva (1993./94. - 1999./2000.)

1998-99
 NS 1

Premijer liga NS BiH 1998./99.


The Lady of Elche (in Spanish, Dama de Elche in Valencian, Dama d'Elx)  is a limestone bust that was discovered in 1897, at La Alcudia, an archaeological site on a private estate two kilometers south of Elche, Spain. It is now exhibited in the National Archaeological Museum of Spain in Madrid.

It is generally known as an Iberian artifact from the 4th century BC, although the artisanship suggests strong Hellenistic influences. According to The Encyclopedia of Religion, the Lady of Elche is believed to have a direct association with Tanit, the goddess of Carthage, who was worshiped by the Punic-Iberians.

Sculpture

The bust, originally colored represents a woman wearing an elaborate headdress and large wheel-like coils (known as rodetes) on each side of the face. The opening in the rear of the sculpture indicates it may have been used as a funerary urn.

Other artifacts associated with Iberian culture are the Lady of Guardamar—which has similar wheel-like rodetes and necklaces―or the Lady of Baza. While the Lady of Elche is a bust, there are indications that it was part of a seated statue, similar to the Lady of Baza (with which it shares similar necklace pendants) or a standing one like the Gran Dama Oferente from Cerro de los Santos (Montealegre del Castillo, Albacete).

These three figures and the Bicha of Balazote are exhibited in the same Iberian art hall in the National Archaeological Museum of Spain in Madrid.

Discovery and repatriation

The sculpture was found on 4 August 1897, by a young worker, Manuel Campello Esclapez. The popular version of the story differs from the official report by Pere Ibarra (the local keeper of the records) which stated that Antonio Maciá found the bust. Ibarra's version of the discovery story, was that farm workers clearing the southeast slope of La Alcudia for agricultural purposes, discovered the sculpture. The bust was quickly nicknamed "Reina Mora" or "Moorish Queen" by locals.

An archaeological site is now located where the bust of Elche was discovered. Evidence has been found there of an Iberian-Punic settlement, a Roman sewer, walls and Roman houses, and mosaics. One mosaic shows an effigy of Saint Abdon, belonging to a Christian basilica of the 5th century. The latter archaeological evidence is supported by the codices of the councils of Toledo where it discusses an audience with bishops from Illici (Elche).

Dr. Campello, owner of the farm, was married to Asunción Ibarra, daughter of Aureliano Ibarra Manzoni, a 19th century humanist and amateur archeologist. Ibarra Manzoni had found a number of objects and Iberian vestiges on his own farmland and in other places in the municipality of Elche. He built up a valuable collection, which he bequeathed to his daughter Asunción. He provided instructions that she make the necessary arrangements for the collection to be offered for sale to the Real Academia de la Historia after her death, to be located finally at the National Archaeological Museum. The will specified that the collection be sold in its entirety. The family placed the Lady on their balcony so that it could be viewed by all of the residents of Elche.

Don Pedro Ibarra invited French archaeologist Pierre Paris to his home to see the Mystery Play of Elche. When the archaeologist saw the Iberian bust, he recognized its worth and notified the Louvre in Paris. The Louvre offered a large sum of money for the time: 4000 francs, and purchased the sculpture within a few weeks of its discovery. Despite opposition from Doña Asuncion, the Iberian bust was sold. On 30 August 1897, the sculpture was sent to the Louvre.

For 40 years the Dama de Elche was exhibited at the Louvre. After the start of World War II in 1939, as a precaution, the sculpture was transferred for safe-keeping to the castle of Montauban near Toulouse. The Vichy government negotiated the statue's return to Spain with Franco's government. In 1941 it was returned through an exchange of works (which also included the Immaculate Conception of the Venerable Ones (or Immaculate Conception of Soult) by Murillo, the twin sphinxes of El Salobral and several pieces of the Treasure of Guarrazar, and the Iberian sculptures of Osuna. In return Spain transferred to France a portrait of Mariana of Austria by Velázquez (the Prado kept another existing version of the portrait, which was considered of superior quality) and a Portrait of Antonio de Covarrubias by El Greco.  Since 1941, the Lady of Elche has been officially owned by the Museo del Prado (catalog number E433).

The discovery of the Lady of Elche initiated a popular interest in pre-Roman Iberian culture. She appeared on a 1948 Spanish one-peseta banknote and was mentioned in William Gaddis's The Recognitions (1955).

In 1971 it was transferred from the Prado to the National Archaeological Museum of Spain, where it is currently exhibited.

Exhibitions in Elche

In 1965 the Dama de Elche returned briefly to Elche, on the occasion of the seventh centenary of Mystery Play of Elche.

On 19 January 2006, the Minister of Culture of Spain, Carmen Calvo, issued a decision to temporarily lease the Lady to its hometown. From 18 May 2006, to 1 November 2006. the Dama de Elche presided over the inauguration of the Museum of Archaeology and History of Elche (in the Palace of Altamira) and the exhibition From Ilici to Elx, 2500 Years of History that took place in different locations in the city. It was represented by an exact replica afterwards.

Contentions of forgery
The bust was first accused of being a forgery in 1906, in an essay called Las esculturas del Cerro de los Santos, cuestión de autenticidad by archeologist José Ramón Mélida.

In 1995, art historian John F. Moffitt (1940-2008), published Art Forgery: The Case of the Lady of Elche (University Press of Florida) in which he contended that the statue was a forgery, citing its stylistic differences from ancient Iberian prototypes. Moffitt suggested that the sculpture could be the work of well-known forger Francisco Pallas y Puig (1859-1926), commissioned by the landowner, Manuel Campello Antón (1833-1904) to coincide with a visit from French archaeologist Pierre Paris, who purchased the sculpture for the Louvre. Moffitt discussed the sculpture in the context of a "golden age" of forgery in the nineteenth and early twentieth century, which followed a growing cultural interest in collecting art and artifacts.

Experts in Spanish archaeology have rejected Moffitt's theory and accept the Lady of Elche as a genuine ancient Iberian work. Antonio Uriarte of the University of Madrid has stated: "Decade by decade, research has reinforced the coherence of the Lady within the corpus of Iberian sculpture. The Lady was found more than a century ago, and many of its features, not then understood, have been confirmed by subsequent finds. For example, the use of paint in Iberian sculpture was unknown when the Lady appeared." A Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC) study on the Lady of Elche's micropigmentation published in 2005 concluded that the trace pigments on the statue were consistent with ancient materials and that no modern pigments had been found.

Throughout the 20th century, other similar iberian busts will be discovered in the southwest of Spain, such as the Lady of Baza, the Lady of Caudete, the Lady of Guardamar or the Lady of Cerro de los Santos.

In 2011, María Pilar de Luxán, the author of the 2005 study, analyzed microparticles within the back hole of the Dama de Elche utilizing electron microscopy and X-ray dispersive spectrometry. Luxán deduced that the particles belonged to the ashes of human bones and that they compared with those of the Iberian period. She concluded that the statue was used as a funerary urn in the Iberian period, thus guaranteeing its antiquity and confirming the hypothesis about its function.

In 2017, Sonia Gutiérrez Llore, chair of the Department of Archaeology at the University of Alicante and director of the University's Institute of Investigation in Archaeology and Historical Heritage-INAPH, wrote about the many discrepancies in the narrative surrounding the sculpture's origin as it evolved into idealized, national symbol. "A story has been built around the Lady that has avoided the obvious uncertainties, if not true contradictions," Gutiérrez Llore said, "but that by dint of being transmitted to future generations has ended up becoming the dominant historical memory, considered truthful, traditional and unquestionable."

In modern culture
The Lady of Elche stands as a statue representing Phoenicia as one of the Seafaring Nations at the Alexander Hamilton Custom House facade.

French artist James Tissot based figures in several of his turn-of-the-century paintings on the Lady of Elche.

Dama de Elche was depicted on the 1948 1 Peseta banknote.

The Dama de Elche makes an appearance in Part III of William Gaddis's 1955 novel The Recognitions, when the character Wyatt Gwyon examines a one peseta note and calls the engraving of the bust a "beautiful thing".

A large prominent sculpture "La Dama Ibérica" based on The Dama de Elche and created by the Spanish sculptor Manolo Valdés in 2007 overlooks a major intersection in the downtown region of Valencia, Spain.

In the 2022 Marvel Cinematic Universe film Thor: Love and Thunder, the Lady of Elche appears as one of the gods invited to Omnipotence City, played by Nicole Milinkovic.

See also
 Dama del Cerro de los Santos
 Carthaginian Iberia
 Contestani
 Iberians
 Lady of Guardamar

References

Province of Alicante
1897 archaeological discoveries
Archaeological discoveries in Spain
4th-century BC sculptures
4th-century BC artifacts
Iberian art
Elche
Busts in Spain
Collection of the National Archaeological Museum, Madrid
Sculptures of women in Spain
Limestone sculptures
Sculptures in Madrid
Phoenician sculpture
Tanit
Forgery controversies

Lady of Elche


مامادو بالدي ( في فيلينغارا)  لاعب كرة قدم سنغالي يلعب حاليا في نادي الدرجة الثانية كليرمونت الفرنسي منذ 2007 حيث يجيد اللعب في خط الدفاع .

بدأ بالدي مسيرته الرياضية في نادي بوردو سنة 2004 ثم تمت إعارته إلى نادي ليجيا فارزافا البولندي في موسم 2006/2007 .

روابط خارجية

مراجع

لاعبو كرة قدم رجالية سنغاليون
لاعبو كرة قدم رجالية مغتربون في بولندا
لاعبو كرة قدم رجالية مغتربون في فرنسا
لاعبو وسط كرة قدم رجالية
أشخاص على قيد الحياة
أشخاص من كولدا
رياضيون سنغاليون مغتربون في بولندا
رياضيون سنغاليون مغتربون في فرنسا
سنغاليون مهاجرون إلى غينيا الاستوائية
غينيون استوائيون من أصل سنغالي
قلوب دفاع كرة قدم
لاعبو بوردو
لاعبو كرة قدم سنغاليون
لاعبو كرة قدم سنغاليون مغتربون
لاعبو كرة قدم غينيون استوائيون
لاعبو كرة قدم غينيون استوائيون مغتربون
لاعبو كرة قدم مغتربون في بولندا
لاعبو كرة قدم مغتربون في فرنسا
لاعبو كليرمونت
لاعبو ليغيا وارسو
لاعبو منتخب غينيا الاستوائية لكرة القدم
لاعبو منتخب غينيا الاستوائية لكرة القدم للشباب
متجنسون في غينيا الاستوائية
مواليد 1406 هـ
مواليد 1985

مامادو بالدي


Conacul Sturdza Cantacuzino-Pașcanu din Popești este un conac boieresc construit în secolul al XIX-lea pe locul unui conac mai vechi de către familia boierilor Mavrocordat în satul Popești din comuna omonimă (județul Iași).

Ansamblul Conacului Cantacuzino - Pașcanu din Popești a fost inclus pe Lista monumentelor istorice din județul Iași din anul 2015 la numărul 1473, având codul de clasificare . El este format din următoarele două obiective:
 Conacul Cantacuzino - Pașcanu - datând din secolul al XVIII-lea și având codul IS-II-m-B-04229.01
 Biserica "Sf. Ilie" (fostă "Sf. Varvara") din Popești - datând din 1776 și având codul IS-II-m-B-04229.02

Istoric

Prima atestare documentară a satului Popești este într-un uric din 12 august 1426 al domnitorului Alexandru cel Bun (1400-1432). El a făcut parte din Ținutul Cârligăturii. Moșia Popești a aparținut o lungă perioadă familiei Mavrocordat. În jurul anului 1776, boierii din familia Mavrocordat a construit Biserica "Sf. Varvara" din Popești, ca biserică de conac boieresc.

La 24 martie 1883, principele Alexandru Gh. Mavrocordat (4 iunie 1844 - 18 martie 1907) s-a căsătorit cu Lucia Cantacuzino-Pașcanu (19 mai 1862 - 26 martie 1930). După căsătorie, Alexandru Mavrocordat a dărâmat vechiul conac și a ridicat cu meșteri italieni un palat cu 36 camere, în stil neoclasic. Cei doi soți au avut împreună trei copii, care s-au născut în conacul de la Popești: Olga (1884-1971), Maria (1885-1976) și George (1887-1907).

Principele Alexandru Gh. Mavrocordat a murit la Paris, la 18 martie 1907, iar sicriul cu rămășițele sale pământești au fost depuse în temelia Bisericii "Nașterea Maicii Domnului" din Miroslava, pe latura de sud, sub o placă de marmură. Patru luni mai târziu, a decedat și fiul său, Gheorghe Al. Mavrocordat, care a fost înmormântat în biserica din Popești.

După moartea principelui, moșiile familiei au fost administrate de văduva sa, Lucia Cantacuzino-Pașcanu. Ea a murit în 1930 și a fost înmormântată în biserica din Popești; prin testament, moșia Popești a trecut la fiica ei, Olga. Aceasta se căsătorise în 1908 cu prințul Mihail Sturdza, nepotul fostului domnitor ai Moldovei, Mihail Sturdza (1834-1849). În 1930, Olga Sturdza era proprietară a 250 ha de teren de cultură și 58,88 ha d teren inexpropriabil la Popești, ea având și alte proprietăți. În urma reformei agrare din 1945, suprafața moșiei Popești a fost redusă la 50 de hectare.

După instaurarea regimului comunist, prin Decretul 83/1949, castelul a fost trecut abuziv in proprietatea statului. Principesa a fost obligată să se mute la București, de unde a fost ridicată și arestată în anul 1953, împreună cu nora sa, Ileana Manu-Sturdza, sub învinuirea că au vândut lemne de pe fosta lor proprietate (pădurea Hangu). După nouă luni de detenție la penitenciarele Mislea și Jilava, au fost eliberate. În anul 1957 i s-a permis să plece din România și s-a stabilit la castelul soțului său de la Dieppe (Franța), unde a murit în 1971. Ea a lăsat ca moștenire domeniile de la Popești nepotului său, Dimitrie Sturdza (n. 1938), care locuia în Elveția.

În castelul din Popești s-a instalat un fost sanatoriu TBC și apoi o anexă a Spitalului "Sfânta Maria" pentru copii retardați sau infectați cu HIV, imobilul ajungând într-o stare avansată de degradare. În 1995 centrul social a fost mutat din conac. În mai 1998, prințul Dimitrie Sturdza a formulat către Judecătoria Iași o cerere de retrocedare a castelului din Popești și a celor 50 ha de pământ lăsate moștenire de către bunica sa. Cererea a fost admisă în noiembrie 1998, Judecătoria dispunând punerea în posesie. Începând din 1999, s-au efectuat lucrări de consolidare și restaurare coordonate de arhitectul Nicolae Munteanu, dorind să se redea castelului înfățișarea originară.

Note

Monumente istorice din județul Iași

Conacul Cantacuzino-Pașcanu din Popești


في الحسابيات الابتدائية، الحمل هو رقم ينقل من عمود إلى آخر ذو مرتبة أعلى عند إجراء خوارزمية الحساب (algorithm of calculation) .
مثال على الحمل هي عملية الجمع التي تجري باستخدام الورقة والقلم:
   ¹
   27
 + 59
 ----
   86
حيث 7 + 9 = 16 ويصبح الرقم 1 هو الحمل.

عكس الحمل هو الاستعارة كما في عملية الطرح التالية:
 −1
   47
 - 19
 ----
   28
حيث هنا 7 - 9 = -2 تتحول إلى (10 - 9) + 7 = 8 بعد استعارة 10 من الخانة الأعلى قيمة.

مراجع

حسابيات ابتدائية
حسابيات حاسوبية

حمل (رياضيات)


Tonje Haug Lerstad (født 9. Oktober 1996 i Trondheim, Norge) er en norsk håndboldspiller, der spiller for Byåsen Håndball Elite.

Hun deltog ved, Junior-VM i håndbold 2016 (kvinder), hvor Norge sluttede som nr. 5, Junior-VM i håndbold 2014 (kvinder), som nr. 13 og U/17-EM i håndbold 2013 (kvinder), hvor Norge sluttede som nr. 7.

Referencer

Håndboldspillere fra Norge

Tonje Haug Lerstad


Pentium Pro, Intel tarafından geliştirilen ve üretilen ve 1 Kasım 1995'te tanıtılan altıncı nesil bir x86 mimarili mikroişlemcidir.  P6 mikro mimarisini (bazen i686 olarak adlandırılır) tanıtmış ve orijinal Pentium'un yerini alması amaçlanmıştır. Pentium ve Pentium MMX sırasıyla 3.1 ve 4.5 milyon transistöre sahipken, Pentium Pro 5.5 milyon transistör içeriyordu.  Daha sonra sunucu ve üst düzey masaüstü işlemci olarak daha dar bir role indirgenerek kullanılmış ve 1996'da trilyon kayar nokta işlemi saniyede (teraFLOPS) performans işaretine ulaşan ilk bilgisayar olan ASCI Red gibi süper bilgisayarlarda kullanılmıştır. Pentium Pro, hem çift hem de dört işlemcili konfigürasyonlarda çalışabilmekteydi. Nispeten büyük dikdörtgen Soket 8 ile tek bir form faktörüyle piyasaya sürüldü. Pentium Pro'nun yerini 1998'de Pentium II Xeon aldı.

Intel işlemciler

Pentium Pro