Photios I (, Phōtios; c. 810/820 – 6 February 893), also spelled Photius (), was the ecumenical patriarch of Constantinople from 858 to 867 and from 877 to 886. He is recognized in the Eastern Orthodox Church as Saint Photios the Great.

Photios is widely regarded as the most powerful and influential church leader of Constantinople subsequent to John Chrysostom's archbishopric around the turn of the fifth century. He is also viewed as the most important intellectual of his time – "the leading light of the ninth-century renaissance". He was a central figure in both the conversion of the Slavs to Christianity and the Photian schism, and is considered "[t]he great systematic compiler of the Eastern Church, who occupies a similar position to that of Gratian in the West,"  and whose "collection in two parts...formed and still forms the classic source of ancient Church Law for the Greek Church."

Photios was a well-educated man from a noble Constantinopolitan family. Photios's great uncle was a previous patriarch of Constantinople, Saint Tarasius. He intended to be a monk, but chose to be a scholar and statesman instead. In 858, Emperor Michael III (r. 842–867) decided to confine Patriarch Ignatius in order to force him into resignation, and Photios, still a layman, was appointed to replace him. Amid power struggles between the pope and the Byzantine emperor, Ignatius was reinstated. Photios resumed the position when Ignatius died (877), by order of the Byzantine emperor. The new pope, John VIII, approved Photios's reinstatement. Catholics regard as legitimate a Fourth Council of Constantinople (Roman Catholic) anathematizing Photios, while Eastern Orthodox regard as legitimate a subsequent Fourth Council of Constantinople (Eastern Orthodox), reversing the former. The contested councils mark the end of unity represented by the first seven Ecumenical Councils.

Photios was canonized by the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople in 1847.

Secular life
Most of the popular sources treating Photios's life are written by persons hostile to him. The chief contemporary authority for the life of Photios is his bitter enemy, Nicetas the Paphlagonian, the biographer of his rival Ignatios. Modern scholars are thus cautious when assessing the accuracy of the information these sources provide. Little is known of Photios's origin and early years. It is known that he was born into a notable family and that his uncle Saint Tarasius had been the patriarch of Constantinople from 784–806 under both Empress Irene (r. 797–802) and Emperor Nikephoros I (r. 802–811). During the second Iconoclasm, which began in 814, his family suffered persecution since his father, Sergios, was a prominent iconophile. Sergios's family returned to favor only after the restoration of the icons in 842. Certain scholars assert that Photios was, at least in part, of Armenian descent while other scholars merely refer to him as a "Greek Byzantine". Byzantine writers also report that Emperor Michael III (r. 842–867) once angrily called Photios "Khazar-faced", but whether this was a generic insult or a reference to his ethnicity is unclear.

Although Photios had an excellent education, we have no information about how he received this education. The famous library he possessed attests to his enormous erudition (theology, history, grammar, philosophy, law, the natural sciences, and medicine). Most scholars believe that he never taught at Magnaura or at any other university; Vasileios N. Tatakes asserts that, even while he was patriarch, Photios taught "young students passionately eager for knowledge" at his home, which "was a center of learning". He was a friend of the renowned Byzantine scholar and teacher Leo the Mathematician.

Photios says that, when he was young, he had an inclination for the monastic life, but instead he started a secular career. The way to public life was probably opened for him by (according to one account) the marriage of his brother Sergios to Irene, a sister of Empress Theodora, who upon the death of her husband Emperor Theophilos (r. 829–842) in 842, had assumed the regency of the Byzantine Empire. Photios became a captain of the guard (prōtospatharios) and subsequently chief imperial secretary (protasēkrētis). At an uncertain date, Photios participated in an embassy to the Abbasids of Baghdad.

Photios achieved a dazzling reputation as a scholar. In a feud with Patriarch Ignatios, Photios invented a fanciful theory that people have two souls, for the sole purpose of tricking Ignatios into embarrassing himself by being seen to take it seriously, whereupon Photius withdrew his proposal and admitted he had not been serious. The historian John Julius Norwich described this as "perhaps the only really satisfactory practical joke in the whole history of theology."

Patriarch of Constantinople
Photios's ecclesiastical career took off spectacularly after Caesar Bardas and his nephew, the youthful Emperor Michael, put an end to the administration of the regent Theodora and the logothete of the drome Theoktistos in 856. In 858, Bardas found himself opposed by the then Patriarch Ignatios, who refused to admit him into Hagia Sophia, since it was believed that he was having an affair with his widowed daughter-in-law. In response, Bardas and Michael engineered Ignatios's confinement and removal on the charge of treason, thus leaving the patriarchal throne empty. The throne was soon filled with a kinsman of Bardas, Photios himself, who was tonsured a monk on December 20, 858, and on the four following days was successively ordained lector, sub-deacon, deacon and priest, and then on Christmas Day, the patronal feast of Constantinople's cathedral, Hagia Sophia, Photios's was consecrated a bishop and installed as patriarch.

The confinement and removal of Ignatios and the speedy promotion of Photios at first caused only internal controversy within the Church of Constantinople, and in 859 a local council was held, examining the issue and confirming the removal of Ignatios and election of Photios. In the same time, partisans of Ignatios decided to appeal to the Church of Rome, thus initiating ecclesiastical controversy on an ecumenical scale as the Pope and the rest of the western bishops took up the cause of Ignatios. The latter's confinement and removal without a formal ecclesiastical trial meant that Photios's election was uncanonical, and eventually Pope Nicholas I sought to involve himself in determining the legitimacy of the succession. His legates were dispatched to Constantinople with instructions to investigate, but finding Photios well ensconced, they acquiesced in the confirmation of his election at a synod in 861. On their return to Rome, they discovered that this was not at all what Nicholas had intended, and in 863 at a synod in Rome the pope deposed Photios, and reappointed Ignatius as the rightful patriarch, triggering a schism. Four years later, Photios was to respond on his own part by calling a Council and excommunicating the pope on grounds of heresy – over the question of the double procession of the Holy Spirit. The situation was additionally complicated by the question of papal authority over the entire Church and by disputed jurisdiction over newly converted Bulgaria.

This state of affairs changed with the murder of Photios's patron Bardas in 866 and of Emperor Michael III in 867, by his colleague Basil the Macedonian, who now usurped the throne. Photios was deposed as patriarch, not so much because he was a protégé of Bardas and Michael, but because Basil I was seeking an alliance with the Pope and the western emperor. Photios was removed from his office and banished about the end of September 867, and Ignatios was reinstated on November 23. Photios was condemned by the Council of 869–870, thus putting an end to the schism. During his second patriarchate, however, Ignatios followed a policy not very different from that of Photios.

Not long after his condemnation, Photios had reingratiated himself with Basil, and became tutor to the Byzantine emperor's children. From surviving letters of Photios written during his exile at the Skepi monastery, it appears that the ex-patriarch brought pressure to bear on the Byzantine emperor to restore him. Ignatios's biographer argues that Photios forged a document relating to the genealogy and rule of Basil's family, and had it placed in the imperial library where a friend of his was a librarian. According to this document, the Byzantine emperor's ancestors were not mere peasants as everyone believed but descendants of the Arsacid dynasty of Armenia. True or not, this story does reveal Basil's dependence on Photios for literary and ideological matters. Following Photios's recall, Ignatios and the ex-patriarch met, and publicly expressed their reconciliation. When Ignatios died on October 23, 877, it was a matter of course that his old opponent replaced him on the patriarchal throne three days later. Shaun Tougher asserts that from this point on Basil no longer simply depended on Photios, but in fact he was dominated by him.

Photios now obtained the formal recognition of the Christian world in a council convened at Constantinople in November 879. The legates of Pope John VIII attended, prepared to acknowledge Photios as legitimate patriarch, a concession for which the pope was much censured by Latin opinion. The patriarch stood firm on the main points contested between the Eastern and Western Churches: the demand of an apology to the Pope, the ecclesiastical jurisdiction over Bulgaria, and the addition of the filioque to the Nicene creed by the Western church. Eventually, Photios refused to apologize or accept the filioque, and the papal legates made do with his return of Bulgaria to Rome. This concession, however, was purely nominal, as Bulgaria's return to the Byzantine rite in 870 had already secured for it an autocephalous church. Without the consent of Boris I of Bulgaria (r. 852–889), the papacy was unable to enforce its claims. Photios also promoted a policy of religious reconciliation with the Armenian kingdom to the east of the empire. He sought to bridge the confessional differences between the Greek Orthodox and Armenian churches on two separate occasions, once in 862 and again in 877, but his efforts ultimately proved unsuccessful.

During the altercations between Emperor Basil I and his heir Leo VI, Photios took the side of the Byzantine emperor. In 883, Basil accused Leo of conspiracy and confined the prince to the palace; he would have even have Leo blinded had he not been dissuaded by Photios and Stylianos Zaoutzes, the father of Zoe Zaoutzaina, Leo's mistress. In 886, Basil discovered and punished a conspiracy by the domestic of the Hikanatoi John Kourkouas the Elder and many other officials. In this conspiracy, Leo was not implicated, but Photios was possibly one of the conspirators against Basil's authority.

Basil died in 886 injured while hunting, according to the official story. Warren T. Treadgold believes that this time the evidence points to a plot on behalf of Leo VI, who became emperor, and deposed Photios, although the latter had been his tutor. Photios was replaced by the Byzantine emperor's brother Stephen, and sent into exile to the monastery of Bordi in Armenia. It is confirmed from letters to and from Pope Stephen that Leo extracted a resignation from Photios. In 887, Photios and his protégé, Theodore Santabarenos, were put on trial for treason before a tribunal headed by senior officials, headed by Andrew the Scythian. Although the sources sympathetic to Photios give the impression that the trial ended without a conviction, the chronicle of Pseudo-Symeon clearly states that Photios was banished to the monastery of Gordon, where he later died. Latin sources confirm that while he did not die in a state of complete excommunication, having been reinstated by a council which was approved by Pope John VIII, his ecclesiastical career was viewed in utter disgrace by Catholic authorities and many of his theological opinions were condemned posthumously.   Yet it appears that he did not remain reviled for the remainder of his life.

Photios continued his career as a writer throughout his exile, and Leo probably rehabilitated his reputation within the next few years; in his Epitaphios on his brothers, a text probably written in 888, the Emperor presents Photios favorably, portraying him as the legitimate archbishop, and the instrument of ultimate unity, an image that jars with his attitude to the patriarch in the previous year. Confirmation that Photios was rehabilitated comes upon his death: according to some chronicles, his body was permitted to be buried in Constantinople. In addition, according to the anti-Photian biographer of Ignatius, partisans of the ex-patriarch after his death endeavored to claim for him the "honor of sainthood". Furthermore, a leading member of Leo's court, Leo Choirosphaktes, wrote poems commemorating the memory of several prominent contemporary figures, such as Leo the Mathematician and the Patriarch Stephen, and he also wrote one on Photios. Shaun Tougher notes, however, that "yet Photios's passing does seem rather muted for a great figure of Byzantine history [...] Leo [...] certainly did not allow him back into the sphere of politics, and it is surely his absence from this arena that accounts for his quiet passing."

Veneration
After his death, Photius began to be venerated as saint in environs of Constantinople. His name features in a manuscript of the Typicon of the Great Church of Constantinople dated to the middle of the tenth century, where he is referred to a saint with a day of commemoration of February 6. According to Dvornik, Photius must have been venerated as a saint in the second half of the tenth century at the very latest.

The contemporary Eastern Orthodox Church venerates Photius as a saint, with his feast day being February 6.

Assessments
Photios is one of the most famous figures not only of 9th-century Byzantium but of the entire history of the Byzantine Empire. One of the most learned men of his age, and revered – even by some of his opponents and detractors – as the most prolific theologian of his time, he has earned his fame due to his part in ecclesiastical conflicts, and also for his intellect and literary works.

Analyzing his intellectual work, Tatakes regards Photios as "mind turned more to practice than to theory". He believes that, thanks to Photios, humanism was added to Orthodoxy as a basic element of the national consciousness of the medieval Byzantines, returning it to the place it had had in the late Roman (early Byzantine) period.  Tatakes also argues that, having understood this national consciousness, Photios emerged as a defender of the Greek nation and its spiritual independence in his debates with the Western Church. Adrian Fortescue regards him as "one of the most wonderful men of all the middle ages", and stresses that "had [he] not given his name to the great schism, he would always be remembered as the greatest scholar of his time". Yet, Fortescue is equally adamant of his condemnation of Photios' involvement in the Schism: "And yet the other side of his character is no less evident. His insatiable ambition, his determination to obtain and keep the patriarchal see, led him to the extreme of dishonesty. His claim was worthless. That Ignatius was the rightful patriarch as long as he lived, and Photius an intruder, cannot be denied by any one who does not conceive the Church as merely the slave of a civil government. And to keep this place Photius descended to the lowest depth of deceit."

Writings

Bibliotheca
The most important of the works of Photios is his Bibliotheca or Myriobiblon, a collection of extracts and abridgements of 280 volumes of previous authors (usually cited as Codices), the originals of which are now to a great extent lost. The work is especially rich in extracts from historical writers.

To Photios, we are indebted for almost all we possess of Ctesias, Memnon of Heraclea, Conon, the lost books of Diodorus Siculus, and the lost writings of Arrian. Theology and ecclesiastical history are also very fully represented, but poetry and ancient philosophy are almost entirely ignored. It seems that he did not think it necessary to deal with those authors with whom every well-educated man would naturally be familiar. The literary criticisms, generally distinguished by keen and independent judgment, and the excerpts vary considerably in length. The numerous biographical notes are probably taken from the work of Hesychius of Miletus.

Some older scholarship speculated that the Bibliotheca was compiled in Baghdad at the time of Photius's embassy to the Abbasid court, since many of the mentioned works were rarely cited during the so-called Byzantine Dark Ages c. 630 – c. 800, and it was known that the Abbasids were interested in works of Greek science and philosophy. However, specialists of this period of Byzantine history, such as Paul Lemerle, have shown that Photios could not have compiled his Bibliotheca in Baghdad because he clearly states in both his introduction and his postscript that when he learned of his appointment to the embassy, he sent his brother a summary of books that he read previously, "since the time I learned how to understand and evaluate literature" i.e. since his youth. Moreover, the Abbasids were interested only in Greek science, philosophy and medicine; they did not have Greek history, rhetoric, or other literary works translated; nor did they have Christian patristic writers translated. Yet the majority of works in Bibliotheca are by Christian patristic authors, and most of the secular texts in Bibliotheca are histories, grammars or literary works, usually rhetoric, rather than science, medicine or philosophy. This further indicates that the majority of the works cannot have been read while Photios was in the Abbasid empire.

Other works
The Lexicon (Λέξεων Συναγωγή), published later than the Bibliotheca, was probably in the main the work of some of his pupils. It was intended as a book of reference to facilitate the reading of old classical and sacred authors, whose language and vocabulary were out of date. For a long time, the only manuscripts of the Lexicon were the Codex Galeanus, which passed into the library of Trinity College, Cambridge and Berolinensis graec. oct. 22, both of which were incomplete. But in 1959, Linos Politis of the University of Thessaloniki discovered a complete manuscript, codex Zavordensis 95, in the Zavorda Monastery (Greek: Ζάβορδα) in Grevena, Greece, where it still resides.

His most important theological work is the Amphilochia, a collection of some 300 questions and answers on difficult points in Scripture, addressed to Amphilochius, archbishop of Cyzicus. Other similar works are his treatise in four books against the Manichaeans and Paulicians, and his controversy with the Latins on the Procession of the Holy Spirit. Photios also addressed a long letter of theological advice to the newly converted Boris I of Bulgaria. Numerous other Epistles also survive.

Photios is also the writer of two "mirrors of princes", addressed to Boris-Michael of Bulgaria (Epistula 1, ed. Terzaghi) and to Leo VI the Wise (Admonitory Chapters of Basil I).

Photios' epitome of Philostorgius' Church History is the principal source for the work, which is now lost.

The first English translation, by Holy Transfiguration Monastery, of the "Mystagogy of the Holy Spirit" by Photios was published in 1983. Another translation was published in 1987 with a preface by Archimandrite (now Archbishop) Chrysostomos of Etna.

See also
Byzantine philosophy
Filioque clause
University of Magnaura
Bibliotheca (Photius)
Bibliotheca (Pseudo-Apollodorus)

Notes

References

Citations

Primary sources
Recent years have seen the first translations into English of a number of primary sources about Photios and his times.
 Featherstone, Jeffrey Michael and Signes-Codoñer, Juan (translators). Chronographiae quae Theophanis Continuati nomine fertur Libri I-IV (Chronicle of Theophanes Continuatus Books I-IV, comprising the reigns of Leo V the Armenian to Michael III), Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter, 2015.
 Kaldellis, A. (trans.). On the reigns of the emperors (the history of Joseph Genesios), Canberra: Australian Association for Byzantine Studies; Byzantina Australiensia 11, 1998.
 Ševčenko, Ihor (trans.). Chronographiae quae Theophanis Continuati nomine fertur Liber quo Vita Basilii Imperatoris amplectitur (Chronicle of Theophanes Continuatus comprising the Life of Basil I), Berlin: De Gruyter, 2011.
 Wahlgren, Staffan (translator, writer of introduction and commentary). The Chronicle of the Logothete, Liverpool University Press; Translated Texts for Byzantinists, vol. 7, 2019.
 Wortley, John (trans.). A synopsis of Byzantine history, 811-1057 (the history of John Scylitzes, active 1081), Cambridge University Press, 2010.

Secondary sources

Taylor, Fr. Justin (1990), essay "Canon Law in the Age of the Fathers" (published in "Readings, Cases, Materials in Canon Law: A Textbook for Ministerial Students, Revised Edition" [Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press] by Jordan Hite, T.O.R., & Daniel J. Ward, O.S.B.)

External links

Saint Photios the Great Orthodox Icon and Synaxarion (February 6)
Patriarch Photios of Constantinople Life and translations of his works
The Excerpta of Photius Photios's summary of Books 9–16 of Memnon of Heraclea's history of Heraclea Pontica
The Myrobiblion at Tertullian.Org
Catholic Encyclopedia – Photius
Greek Opera Omnia by Migne Patrologia Graeca with analytical indexes
Saint Photius the Great, Mystagogy of the Holy Spirit (English translation)
Ongoing English Translation of the Lexicon
Photii biblioteca ex recensione Immanuelis Bekkeri, Berolini typis et impensis Ge. Reimeri, 1824–25, vol. 1, vol. 2.

9th-century deaths
9th-century births
9th-century Byzantine writers
Anthologists
Christian anti-Gnosticism
Byzantine theologians
Byzantine writers
Byzantine saints of the Eastern Orthodox Church
Critics of the Catholic Church
Greek religious writers
People excommunicated by the Catholic Church
9th-century patriarchs of Constantinople
9th-century Christian saints
Byzantine letter writers
Filioque
9th-century Christian theologians
Byzantine jurists
9th-century jurists
Protospatharioi
9th-century Greek philosophers
9th-century Greek writers
9th-century Greek scientists
9th-century Greek mathematicians

Photios I of Constantinople


A carillon is a musical instrument consisting of bells. Carillons are usually in bell towers, and are made up of at least 23 bells. (If there are less than 23 bells, the instrument is called a chime.) A church in Michigan, called Kirk in the Hills, has 77 bells, the most of any carillon.

The bells in a carillon are usually made to ring using a keyboard. It is similar to the one in a piano or organ, but is made up of wooden batons that are hit with closed fists instead of pressing them with fingers (see the picture on the left). Each baton is linked to a bell with a different pitch and makes it ring out. The bell with the lowest pitch is called the "bourdon", and many carillons have pedal keyboards for the largest bells. The instrument is very heavy, and the world's heaviest carillon, which is in a New York City church, weights 91 tonnes.

Not all carillons use a keyboard. Some of them are automated, meaning they play music without a human. They can be controlled using a clockwork mechanism, similar to the one in Big Ben, so that the music plays at certain times every day. Two examples of this kind of carillon are the Spasskaya Tower of the Moscow Kremlin and the Munttoren in Amsterdam. More recent carillons, such as the one in the Peace Tower in Ottawa, are computer-controlled.

Other websites

World Carillon Federation
 The Carillon. A history of the carillon with particular attention to the carillon and carillon music in the times of Johannes Vermeer.

Bells

Carillon


Surround sound is the name of a number of technologies for sound reproduction. At the start, sound was reproduced using a single channel (called mono), later there were two channels, left and right (called stereo). Surround sound extends this idea, by adding more channels. There are speakers that surround the listener. The speakers are grouped, and each group has its own channel.  There are different setups ranging from 2 or 3 speakers/channels in the front, and two in the back, up to a setup with 24 speakers (known as 22.2)

With surround sound,  channels are treated differently, to be able to create special sound effects. In classical theatres, surround sound is not used; they may also have different speaker with different channels, but all channels are treated the same.
Sound

Surround sound


Crime and Punishment (pre-reform Russian: ; post-reform ) is a novel by the Russian author Fyodor Dostoevsky. It was first published in the literary journal The Russian Messenger in twelve monthly installments during 1866. It was later published in a single volume. It is the second of Dostoevsky's full-length novels following his return from ten years of exile in Siberia. Crime and Punishment is considered the first great novel of his mature period of writing and is often cited as one of the greatest works of world literature.

Crime and Punishment follows the mental anguish and moral dilemmas of Rodion Raskolnikov, an impoverished ex-student in Saint Petersburg who plans to kill an unscrupulous pawnbroker, an old woman who stores money and valuable objects in her flat. He theorises that with the money he could liberate himself from poverty and go on to perform great deeds, and seeks to convince himself that certain crimes are justifiable if they are committed in order to remove obstacles to the higher goals of 'extraordinary' men. Once the deed is done, however, he finds himself wracked with confusion, paranoia, and disgust. His theoretical justifications lose all their power as he struggles with guilt and horror and is confronted with both internal and external consequences of his deed.

Background

At the time Dostoevsky owed large sums of money to creditors and was trying to help the family of his brother Mikhail, who had died in early 1864. After appeals elsewhere failed, Dostoevsky turned as a last resort to the publisher Mikhail Katkov and sought an advance on a proposed contribution. He offered his story or novella (at the time he was not thinking of a novel) for publication in Katkov's monthly journal The Russian Messenger—a prestigious publication of its kind, and the outlet for both Ivan Turgenev and Leo Tolstoy. Dostoevsky, having been engaged in polemical debates with Katkov in the early 1860s, had never published anything in its pages before. In a letter to Katkov written in September 1865, Dostoevsky explained to him that the work was to be about a young man who yields to "certain strange, 'unfinished' ideas, yet floating in the air". He planned to explore the moral and psychological dangers of the ideology of "radicalism", and felt that the project would appeal to the conservative Katkov. In letters written in November 1865 an important conceptual change occurred: the "story" had become a "novel". From then on, Crime and Punishment is referred to as a novel.

In the complete edition of Dostoevsky's writings published in the Soviet Union, the editors reassembled the writer's notebooks for Crime and Punishment in a sequence roughly corresponding to the various stages of composition. As a result, there exists a fragmentary working draft of the novella, as initially conceived, as well as two other versions of the text. These have been distinguished as the Wiesbaden edition, the Petersburg edition, and the final plan, involving the shift from a first-person narrator to Dostoevsky's innovative use of third-person narrative to achieve first-person narrative perspectives. Dostoevsky initially considered four first-person plans: a memoir written by Raskolnikov, his confession recorded eight days after the murder, his diary begun five days after the murder, and a mixed form in which the first half was in the form of a memoir, and the second half in the form of a diary. The Wiesbaden edition concentrates entirely on the moral and psychological reactions of the narrator after the murder. It coincides roughly with the story that Dostoevsky described in his letter to Katkov and, written in the form of a diary or journal, corresponds to what eventually became part 2 of the finished work.

Why Dostoevsky abandoned his initial version remains a matter of speculation. According to Joseph Frank, "one possibility is that his protagonist began to develop beyond the boundaries in which he had first been conceived". The notebooks indicate that Dostoevsky became aware of the emergence of new aspects of Raskolnikov's character as the plot developed, and he structured the novel in conformity with this "metamorphosis". The final version of Crime and Punishment came into being only when, in November 1865, Dostoevsky decided to recast his novel in the third person. This shift was the culmination of a long struggle, present through all the early stages of composition. Once having decided, Dostoevsky began to rewrite from scratch and was able to easily integrate sections of the early manuscript into the final text. Frank says that he did not, as he told Wrangel, burn everything he had written earlier.

Dostoevsky was under great pressure to finish Crime and Punishment on time, as he was simultaneously contracted to finish The Gambler for the prominent Russian publisher Fyodor Stellovsky, who had imposed extremely harsh conditions. Anna Snitkina, a stenographer who later became Dostoevsky's wife, was of great help to him during this difficult task. The first part of Crime and Punishment appeared in the January 1866 issue of The Russian Messenger, and the last one was published in December 1866.

Plot

Part 1
Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov, a former law student, lives in extreme poverty in a tiny, rented room in Saint Petersburg. Isolated and antisocial, he has abandoned all attempts to support himself, and is brooding obsessively on a scheme he has devised to murder and rob an elderly pawn-broker. On the pretext of pawning a watch, he visits her apartment, but remains unable to commit himself. Later in a tavern he makes the acquaintance of Semyon Zakharovich Marmeladov, a drunkard who recently squandered his family's little wealth. Marmeladov tells him about his teenage daughter, Sonya, who has become a prostitute in order to support the family. The next day Raskolnikov receives a letter from his mother in which she describes the problems of his sister Dunya, who has been working as a governess, with her ill-intentioned employer, Svidrigailov. To escape her vulnerable position, and with hopes of helping her brother, Dunya has chosen to marry a wealthy suitor, Luzhin, whom they are coming to meet in Petersburg. Details in the letter suggest that Luzhin is a conceited opportunist who is seeking to take advantage of Dunya's situation. Raskolnikov is enraged at his sister's sacrifice, feeling it is the same as what Sonya felt compelled to do. Painfully aware of his own poverty and impotence, his thoughts return to his idea. A further series of internal and external events seem to conspire to compel him toward the resolution to enact it.

In a state of extreme nervous tension, Raskolnikov steals an axe and makes his way once more to the old woman's apartment. He gains access by pretending he has something to pawn, and then attacks her with the axe, killing her. He also kills her half-sister, Lizaveta, who happens to stumble upon the scene of the crime. Shaken by his actions, he steals only a handful of items and a small purse, leaving much of the pawn-broker's wealth untouched. Due to sheer good fortune, he manages to escape the building and return to his room undetected.

Part 2
In a feverish and semi-delirious state Raskolnikov conceals the stolen items and falls asleep exhausted. He is greatly alarmed the next morning when he gets summoned to the police station, but it turns out to be in relation to a debt notice from his landlady. When the officers at the bureau begin talking about the murder, Raskolnikov faints. He quickly recovers, but he can see from their faces that he has aroused suspicion. Fearing a search, he hides the stolen items under a large rock in an empty yard, noticing in humiliation that he hasn't even checked how much money is in the purse. Without knowing why, he visits his old university friend Razumikhin, who observes that Raskolnikov seems to be seriously ill. Finally he returns to his room where he succumbs to his illness and falls into a prolonged delirium.

When he emerges several days later he finds that Razumikhin has tracked him down and has been nursing him. Still feverish, Raskolnikov listens nervously to a conversation between Razumikhin and the doctor about the status of the police investigation into the murders: a muzhik called Mikolka, who was working in a neighbouring flat at the time, has been detained, and the old woman's clients are being interviewed. They are interrupted by the arrival of Luzhin, Dunya's fiancé, who wishes to introduce himself, but Raskolnikov deliberately insults him and kicks him out. He angrily tells the others to leave as well, and then sneaks out himself. He looks for news about the murder, and seems almost to want to draw attention to his own part in it. He encounters the police official Zamyotov, who was present when he fainted in the bureau, and openly mocks the young man's unspoken suspicions. He returns to the scene of the crime and re-lives the sensations he experienced at the time. He angers the workmen and caretakers by asking casual questions about the murder, even suggesting that they accompany him to the police station to discuss it. As he contemplates whether or not to confess, he sees Marmeladov, who has been struck mortally by a carriage. He rushes to help and succeeds in conveying the stricken man back to his family's apartment. Calling out for Sonya to forgive him, Marmeladov dies in his daughter's arms. Raskolnikov gives his last twenty five roubles (from money sent to him by his mother) to Marmeladov's consumptive widow, Katerina Ivanovna, saying it is the repayment of a debt to his friend.

Feeling renewed, Raskolnikov calls on Razumikhin, and they go back together to Raskolnikov's building. Upon entering his room Raskolnikov is deeply shocked to see his mother and sister sitting on the sofa. They have just arrived in Petersburg and are ecstatic to see him, but Raskolnikov is unable to speak, and collapses in a faint.

Part 3
Razumikhin tends to Raskolnikov, and manages to convince the distressed mother and sister to return to their apartment. He goes with them, despite being drunk and rather overwhelmed by Dunya's beauty. When they return the next morning Raskolnikov has improved physically, but it becomes apparent that he is still mentally distracted and merely forcing himself to endure the meeting. He demands that Dunya break with Luzhin, but Dunya fiercely defends her motives for the marriage. Mrs Raskolnikova has received a note from Luzhin demanding that her son not be present at any future meetings between them.  He also informs her that he witnessed her son give the 25 rubles to "an unmarried woman of immoral behavior" (Sonya). Dunya has decided that a meeting, at which both Luzhin and her brother are present, must take place, and Raskolnikov agrees to attend that evening along with Razumikhin. To Raskolnikov's surprise, Sonya suddenly appears at his door. Timidly, she explains that he left his address with them last night, and that she has come to invite him to attend her father's funeral. As she leaves, Raskolnikov asks for her address and tells her that he will visit her soon.

At Raskolnikov's behest, Razumikhin takes him to see the detective Porfiry Petrovich, who is investigating the murders. Raskolnikov immediately senses that Porfiry knows that he is the murderer. Porfiry, who has just been discussing the case with Zamyotov, adopts an ironic tone during the conversation. He expresses extreme curiosity about an article that Raskolnikov wrote some months ago called 'On Crime', in which he suggests that certain rare individuals—the benefactors and geniuses of mankind—have a right to 'step across' legal or moral boundaries if those boundaries are an obstruction to the success of their idea. Raskolnikov defends himself skillfully, but he is alarmed and angered by Porfiry's insinuating tone. An appointment is made for an interview the following morning at the police bureau.

Leaving Razumikhin with his mother and sister, Raskolnikov returns to his own building. He is surprised to find an old artisan, whom he doesn't know, making inquiries about him. Raskolnikov tries to find out what he wants, but the artisan says only one word – "murderer", and walks off. Petrified, Raskolnikov returns to his room and falls into thought and then sleep. He wakens from an eerie nightmare about the murder of the old woman to find another complete stranger present, this time a man of aristocratic appearance. The man politely introduces himself as Arkady Ivanovich Svidrigailov.

Part 4
Svidrigailov indulges in an amiable but disjointed monologue, punctuated by Raskolnikov's terse interjections. He claims to no longer have any romantic interest in Dunya, but wants to stop her from marrying Luzhin, and offers her ten thousand roubles. Raskolnikov refuses the money on her behalf and refuses to facilitate a meeting. Svidrigailov also mentions that his wife, who defended Dunya at the time of the unpleasantness but died shortly afterwards, has left her 3000 rubles in her will.

The meeting with Luzhin that evening begins with talk of Svidrigailov—his depraved character, his presence in Petersburg, the unexpected death of his wife and the 3000 rubles left to Dunya. Luzhin takes offence when Dunya insists on resolving the issue with her brother, and when Raskolnikov draws attention to the slander in his letter, Luzhin becomes reckless, exposing his true character. Dunya tells him to leave and never come back. Now free and with significant capital, they excitedly begin to discuss plans for the future, but Raskolnikov suddenly gets up and leaves, telling them, to their great consternation, that it might be the last time he sees them. He instructs the baffled Razumikhin to remain and always care for them.

Raskolnikov proceeds to Sonya's place. She is gratified that he is visiting her, but also frightened of his strange manner. He asks a series of merciless questions about her terrible situation and that of Katerina Ivanovna and the children. Raskolnikov begins to realize that Sonya is sustained only by her faith in God. She reveals that she was a friend of the murdered Lizaveta. In fact, Lizaveta gave her a cross and a copy of the Gospels. She passionately reads to him the story of the raising of Lazarus from the Gospel of John. His fascination with her, which had begun at the time when her father spoke of her, increases and he decides that they must face the future together. As he leaves he tells her that he will come back tomorrow and tell her who killed her friend Lizaveta.

When Raskolnikov presents himself for his interview, Porfiry resumes and intensifies his insinuating, provocative, ironic chatter, without ever making a direct accusation. With Raskolnikov's anger reaching fever pitch, Porfiry hints that he has a "little surprise" for him behind the partition in his office, but at that moment there is a commotion outside the door and a young man (Mikolka the painter) bursts in, followed by some policemen. To both Porfiry and Raskolnikov's astonishment, Mikolka proceeds to loudly confess to the murders. Porfiry doesn't believe the confession, but he is forced to let Raskolnikov go. Back at his room Raskolnikov is horrified when the old artisan suddenly appears at his door. But the man bows and asks for forgiveness: he had been Porfiry's "little surprise", and had heard Mikolka confess. He had been one of those present when Raskolnikov returned to the scene of the murders, and had reported his behavior to Porfiry.

Part 5
Raskolnikov attends the Marmeladovs' post-funeral banquet at Katerina Ivanovna's apartment. The atmosphere deteriorates as guests become drunk and the half-mad Katerina Ivanovna engages in a verbal attack on her German landlady. With chaos descending, everyone is surprised by the sudden and portentous appearance of Luzhin. He sternly announces that a 100-ruble banknote disappeared from his apartment at the precise time that he was being visited by Sonya, whom he had invited in order to make a small donation. Sonya fearfully denies stealing the money, but Luzhin persists in his accusation and demands that someone search her. Outraged, Katerina Ivanovna abuses Luzhin and sets about emptying Sonya's pockets to prove her innocence, but a folded 100-ruble note does indeed fly out of one of the pockets. The mood in the room turns against Sonya, Luzhin chastises her, and the landlady orders the family out. But Luzhin's roommate Lebezyatnikov angrily asserts that he saw Luzhin surreptitiously slip the money into Sonya's pocket as she left, although he had thought at the time that it was a noble act of anonymous charity. Raskolnikov backs Lebezyatnikov up by confidently identifying Luzhin's motive: a desire to avenge himself on Raskolnikov by defaming Sonya, in hopes of causing a rift with his family. Luzhin is discredited, but Sonya is traumatized, and she runs out of the apartment. Raskolnikov follows her.

Back at her room, Raskolnikov draws Sonya's attention to the ease with which Luzhin could have ruined her, and consequently the children as well. But it is only a prelude to his confession that he is the murderer of the old woman and Lizaveta. Painfully, he tries to explain his abstract motives for the crime to uncomprehending Sonya. She is horrified, not just at the crime, but at his own self-torture, and tells him that he must hand himself in to the police. Lebezyatnikov appears and tells them that the landlady has kicked Katerina Ivanovna out of the apartment and that she has gone mad. They find Katerina Ivanovna surrounded by people in the street, completely insane, trying to force the terrified children to perform for money, and near death from her illness. They manage to get her back to Sonya's room, where, distraught and raving, she dies. To Raskolnikov's surprise, Svidrigailov suddenly appears and informs him that he will be using the ten thousand rubles intended for Dunya to make the funeral arrangements and to place the children in good orphanages. When Raskolnikov asks him what his motives are, he laughingly replies with direct quotations of Raskolnikov's own words, spoken when he was trying to explain his justifications for the murder to Sonya. Svidrigailov has been residing next door to Sonya, and overheard every word of the murder confession.

Part 6
Razumikhin tells Raskolnikov that Dunya has become troubled and distant after receiving a letter from someone. He also mentions, to Raskolnikov's astonishment, that Porfiry no longer suspects him of the murders. As Raskolnikov is about to set off in search of Svidrigailov, Porfiry himself appears and politely requests a brief chat. He sincerely apologises for his previous behavior and seeks to explain the reasons behind it. Strangely, Raskolnikov begins to feel alarmed at the thought that Porfiry might think he is innocent. But Porfiry's changed attitude is motivated by genuine respect for Raskolnikov, not by any thought of his innocence, and he concludes by expressing his absolute certainty that Raskolnikov is indeed the murderer. He claims that he will be arresting him soon, but urges him to confess to make it easier on himself. Raskolnikov chooses to continue the struggle.

Raskolnikov finds Svidrigailov at an inn and warns him against approaching Dunya. Svidrigailov, who has in fact arranged to meet Dunya, threatens to go to the police, but Raskolnikov is unconcerned and follows when he leaves. When Raskolnikov finally turns home, Dunya, who has been watching them, approaches Svidrigailov and demands to know what he meant in his letter about her brother's "secret". She reluctantly accompanies him to his rooms, where he reveals what he overheard and attempts to use it to make her yield to his desire. Dunya, however, has a gun and she fires at him, narrowly missing: Svidrigailov gently encourages her to reload and try again. Eventually she throws the gun aside, but Svidrigailov, crushed by her hatred for him, tells her to leave. Later that evening he goes to Sonya to discuss the arrangements for Katerina Ivanovna's children. He gives her 3000 rubles, telling her she will need it if she wishes to follow Raskolnikov to Siberia. He spends the night in a miserable hotel and the following morning commits suicide in a public place.

Raskolnikov says a painful goodbye to his mother, without telling her the truth. Dunya is waiting for him at his room, and he tells her that he will be going to the police to confess to the murders. He stops at Sonya's place on the way and she gives him a crucifix. At the bureau, he learns of Svidrigailov's suicide, and almost changes his mind, even leaving the building. However, he sees Sonya (who has followed him) looking at him in despair, and he returns to make a full and frank confession to the murders.

Epilogue
Due to the fullness of his confession at a time when another man had already confessed, Raskolnikov is sentenced to only eight years of penal servitude. Dunya and Razumikhin marry and plan to move to Siberia, but Raskolnikov's mother falls ill and dies. Sonya follows Raskolnikov to Siberia, but he is initially hostile towards her as he is still struggling to acknowledge moral culpability for his crime, feeling himself to be guilty only of weakness. It is only after some time in prison that his redemption and moral regeneration begin under Sonya's loving influence.

Characters

In Crime and Punishment, Dostoevsky fuses the personality of his main character, Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov, with his new anti-radical ideological themes. The main plot involves a murder as the result of "ideological intoxication," and depicts all the disastrous moral and psychological consequences that result from the murder. Raskolnikov's psychology is placed at the center, and carefully interwoven with the ideas behind his transgression; every other feature of the novel illuminates the agonizing dilemma in which Raskolnikov is caught. From another point of view, the novel's plot is another variation of a conventional nineteenth-century theme: an innocent young provincial comes to seek his fortune in the capital, where he succumbs to corruption, and loses all traces of his former freshness and purity. However, as Gary Rosenshield points out, "Raskolnikov succumbs not to the temptations of high society as Honoré de Balzac's Rastignac or Stendhal's Julien Sorel, but to those of rationalistic Petersburg".

Major characters
Raskolnikov (Rodion Romanovitch) is the protagonist, and the novel focuses primarily on his perspective. A 23-year-old man and former student, now destitute, Raskolnikov is described in the novel as "exceptionally handsome, taller than average in height, slim, well built, with beautiful dark eyes and dark brown hair." On the one hand, he is cold, apathetic, and antisocial; on the other, he can be surprisingly warm and compassionate. He commits murder as well as acts of impulsive charity. His chaotic interaction with the external world and his nihilistic worldview might be seen as causes of his social alienation or consequences of it.

Despite its title, the novel does not so much deal with the crime and its formal punishment as with Raskolnikov's internal struggle – the torments of his own conscience, rather than the legal consequences of committing the crime. Believing society would be better for it, Raskolnikov commits murder with the idea that he possesses enough intellectual and emotional fortitude to deal with the ramifications, but his sense of guilt soon overwhelms him to the point of psychological and somatic illness. It is only in the epilogue that he realizes his formal punishment, having decided to confess and end his alienation from society.

Sonya (Sofya Semyonovna Marmeladova), is the daughter of a drunkard named Semyon Zakharovich Marmeladov, whom Raskolnikov meets in a tavern at the beginning of the novel. She is often characterized as self-sacrificial, shy, and innocent, despite being forced into prostitution to help her family. Raskolnikov discerns in her the same feelings of shame and alienation that he experiences, and she becomes the first person to whom he confesses his crime. Sensing his deep unhappiness, she supports him, even though she was friends with one of the victims (Lizaveta). Throughout the novel, Sonya is an important source of moral strength and rehabilitation for Raskolnikov.

Razumíkhin (Dmitry Prokofyich) is Raskolnikov's loyal friend and also a former law student. The character is intended to represent something of a reconciliation between faith and reason (razum, "sense", "intelligence"). He jokes that his name is actually 'Vrazumíkhin' – a name suggesting "to bring someone to their senses". He is upright, strong, resourceful and intelligent, but also somewhat naïve – qualities that are of great importance to Raskolnikov in his desperate situation. He admires Raskolnikov's intelligence and character, refuses to give any credence to others' suspicions, and supports him at all times. He looks after Raskolnikov's family when they come to Petersburg, falling in love with and later marrying Dunya.

Dunya (Avdotya Romanovna Raskolnikova) –  Raskolnikov's beautiful and strong-willed sister who works as a governess. She initially plans to marry the wealthy but unsavory lawyer Luzhin, thinking it will enable her to ease her family's desperate financial situation and escape her former employer Svidrigailov. Her situation is a factor in Raskolnikov's decision to commit the murder. In St. Petersburg, she is eventually able to escape the clutches of both Luzhin and Svidrigailov, and later marries Razumikhin.

Luzhin (Pyotr Petrovich) – A well-off lawyer who is engaged to Dunya in the beginning of the novel. His motives for the marriage are dubious, as he more or less states that he has sought a woman who will be completely beholden to him. He slanders and falsely accuses Sonya of theft in an attempt to harm Raskolnikov's relations with his family. Luzhin represents immorality, in contrast to Svidrigaïlov's amorality, and Raskolnikov's misguided morality.

Svidrigaïlov (Arkady Ivanovich) – Sensual, depraved, and wealthy former employer and former pursuer of Dunya. He overhears Raskolnikov's confessions to Sonya and uses this knowledge to torment both Dunya and Raskolnikov, but does not inform the police. Despite his apparent malevolence, Svidrigaïlov seems to be capable of generosity and compassion. When Dunya tells him she could never love him (after attempting to shoot him) he lets her go. He tells Sonya that he has made financial arrangements for the Marmeladov children to enter an orphanage, and gives her three thousand rubles, enabling her to follow Raskolnikov to Siberia. Having left the rest of his money to his juvenile fiancée, he commits suicide.

Porfiry Petrovich – The head of the Investigation Department in charge of solving the murders of Lizaveta and Alyona Ivanovna, who, along with Sonya, moves Raskolnikov towards confession. Unlike Sonya, however, Porfiry does this through psychological means, seeking to confuse and provoke the volatile Raskolnikov into a voluntary or involuntary confession. He later drops these methods and sincerely urges Raskolnikov to confess for his own good.

Other characters
 Pulkheria Alexandrovna Raskolnikova – Raskolnikov's naïve, hopeful and loving mother. Following Raskolnikov's sentence, she falls ill (mentally and physically) and eventually dies. She hints in her dying stages that she is slightly more aware of her son's fate, which was hidden from her by Dunya and Razumikhin.
 Semyon Zakharovich Marmeladov – Hopeless drunk who Raskolnikov meets while still considering the murder scheme. Raskolnikov is deeply moved by his passionate, almost ecstatic confession of how his abject alcoholism led to the devastation of his life, the destitution of his wife and children, and ultimately to his daughter Sonya being forced into prostitution.
 Katerina Ivanovna Marmeladova – Semyon Marmeladov's consumptive and ill-tempered second wife, stepmother to Sonya. She drives Sonya into prostitution in a fit of rage, but later regrets it. She beats her children, but works ferociously to improve their standard of living. She is obsessed with demonstrating that slum life is far below her station. Following Marmeladov's death, she uses the money Raskolnikov gives her to hold a funeral. She eventually succumbs to her illness.
 Andrey Semyonovich Lebezyatnikov – Luzhin's utopian socialist roommate who witnesses his attempt to frame Sonya and subsequently exposes him. He is proven right by Raskolnikov, the only one knowing of Luzhin's motives.
 Alyona Ivanovna – Suspicious old pawnbroker who hoards money and is merciless to her patrons. She is Raskolnikov's intended target, and he kills her in the beginning of the book.
 Lizaveta Ivanovna – Alyona's handicapped, innocent and submissive sister. Raskolnikov murders her when she walks in immediately after Raskolnikov had killed Alyona. Lizaveta was a friend of Sonya.
 Zosimov (Зосимов) – A friend of Razumikhin and a doctor with a particular interest in 'psychological' illnesses. He ministers to Raskolnikov during his delirium and its aftermath.
 Nastasya Petrovna (Настасья Петровна) – Raskolnikov's landlady's cheerful and talkative servant who is very caring towards Raskolnikov and often brings him food and drink.
 Nikodim Fomich (Никодим Фомич) – The amiable chief of police.
 Ilya Petrovich (Илья Петрович) – A police official and Nikodim Fomich's assistant, nicknamed "Gunpowder" for his very bad temper. He is the first to have suspicions about Raskolnikov in relation to the murder, and Raskolnikov ultimately makes his official confession to Gunpowder.
 Alexander Grigorievich Zamyotov (Александр Григорьевич Заметов) – Head clerk at the police station and friend to Razumikhin.
 Praskovya Pavlovna Zarnitsyna –  Raskolnikov's landlady (called Pashenka). Shy and retiring, Praskovya Pavlovna does not figure prominently in the course of events. Raskolnikov had been engaged to her daughter, a sickly girl who had died, and Praskovya Pavlovna had granted him extensive credit on the basis of this engagement and a promissory note for 115 roubles. She had then handed this note to a court councillor named Chebarov, who had claimed the note, causing Raskolnikov to be summoned to the police station the day after his crime.
 Marfa Petrovna Svidrigaïlova – Svidrigaïlov's deceased wife, whom he is suspected of having murdered, and who he claims has visited him as a ghost. In Pulkheria Alexandrovna's letter to her son, Marfa Petrovna is said to have vigorously defended Dunya against Svidrigailov, and introduced her to Luzhin. She leaves Dunya 3000 rubles in her will.
 Nikolai Dementiev (Николай Дементьев), also known as Mikolka – A house painter who happens to be nearby at the time of the murder and is initially suspected of the crime. Driven by memories of the teachings of his Old Believer sect, which holds it to be supremely virtuous to suffer for another person's crime, he falsely confesses to the murders.
 Polina Mikhailovna Marmeladova (Полина Михайловна Мармеладова) – Ten-year-old adopted daughter of Semyon Zakharovich Marmeladov and younger stepsister to Sonya, sometimes known as Polechka and Polya.

Themes

Nihilism, rationalism and utilitarianism
Dostoevsky's letter to Katkov reveals his immediate inspiration, to which he remained faithful even after his original plan evolved into a much more ambitious creation: a desire to counteract what he regarded as nefarious consequences arising from the doctrines of Russian nihilism. In the novel, Dostoevsky pinpointed the dangers of both utilitarianism and rationalism, the main ideas of which inspired the radicals, continuing a fierce criticism he had already started with his Notes from Underground. Dostoevsky utilized the characters, dialogue and narrative in Crime and Punishment to articulate an argument against Westernizing ideas. He thus attacked a peculiar Russian blend of French utopian socialism and Benthamite utilitarianism, which had developed under revolutionary thinkers such as Nikolai Chernyshevsky and became known as rational egoism.
The radicals refused to recognize themselves in the novel's pages, since Dostoevsky pursued nihilistic ideas to their most extreme consequences. Dimitri Pisarev ridiculed the notion that Raskolnikov's ideas could be identified with those of the radicals of the time. The radicals' aims were altruistic and humanitarian, but they were to be achieved by relying on reason and suppressing the spontaneous outflow of Christian compassion. Chernyshevsky's utilitarian ethic proposed that thought and will in Man were subject to the laws of physical science. Dostoevsky believed that such ideas limited man to a product of physics, chemistry and biology, negating spontaneous emotional responses. In its latest variety, Russian nihilism encouraged the creation of an élite of superior individuals to whom the hopes of the future were to be entrusted.

Raskolnikov exemplifies the potentially disastrous hazards contained in such an ideal. Contemporary scholar Joseph Frank writes that "the moral-psychological traits of his character incorporate this antinomy between instinctive kindness, sympathy, and pity on the one hand and, on the other, a proud and idealistic egoism that has become perverted into a contemptuous disdain for the submissive herd". Raskolnikov's inner conflict in the opening section of the novel results in a utilitarian-altruistic justification for the proposed crime: why not kill a wretched and "useless" old moneylender to alleviate the human misery? Dostoevsky wants to show that this utilitarian style of reasoning had become widespread and commonplace; it was by no means the solitary invention of Raskolnikov's tormented and disordered mind. Such radical and utilitarian ideas act to reinforce the innate egoism of Raskolnikov's character, and help justify his contempt for humanity's lower qualities and ideals. He even becomes fascinated with the majestic image of a Napoleonic personality who, in the interests of a higher social good, believes that he possesses a moral right to kill. Indeed, his "Napoleon-like" plan impels him toward a well-calculated murder, the ultimate conclusion of his self-deception with utilitarianism.

The environment of Saint Petersburg
Dostoevsky was among the first to recognize the symbolic possibilities of city life and imagery drawn from the city. I. F. I. Evnin regards Crime and Punishment as the first great Russian novel "in which the climactic moments of the action are played out in dirty taverns, on the street, in the sordid back rooms of the poor".

Dostoevsky's Petersburg is the city of unrelieved poverty; "magnificence has no place in it, because magnificence is external, formal abstract, cold". Dostoevsky connects the city's problems to Raskolnikov's thoughts and subsequent actions. The crowded streets and squares, the shabby houses and taverns, the noise and stench, all are transformed by Dostoevsky into a rich store of metaphors for states of mind. Donald Fanger asserts that "the real city ... rendered with a striking concreteness, is also a city of the mind in the way that its atmosphere answers Raskolnikov's state and almost symbolizes it. It is crowded, stifling, and parched."

In his depiction of Petersburg, Dostoevsky accentuates the squalor and human wretchedness that pass before Raskolnikov's eyes. He uses Raskolnikov's encounter with Marmeladov to contrast the heartlessness of Raskolnikov's convictions with a Christian approach to poverty and wretchedness. Dostoevsky believes that the moral "freedom" propounded by Raskolnikov is a dreadful freedom "that is contained by no values, because it is before values". In seeking to affirm this "freedom" in himself, Raskolnikov is in perpetual revolt against society, himself, and God. He thinks that he is self-sufficient and self-contained, but at the end "his boundless self-confidence must disappear in the face of what is greater than himself, and his self-fabricated justification must humble itself before the higher justice of God". Dostoevsky calls for the regeneration and renewal of "sick" Russian society through the re-discovery of its national identity, its religion, and its roots.

Structure
The novel is divided into six parts, with an epilogue. The notion of "intrinsic duality" in Crime and Punishment has been commented upon, with the suggestion that there is a degree of symmetry to the book. Edward Wasiolek, who has argued that Dostoevsky was a skilled craftsman, highly conscious of the formal pattern in his art, has likened the structure of Crime and Punishment to a "flattened X", saying:

This compositional balance is achieved by means of the symmetrical distribution of certain key episodes throughout the novel's six parts. The recurrence of these episodes in the two halves of the novel, as David Bethea has argued, is organized according to a mirror-like principle, whereby the "left" half of the novel reflects the "right" half.

The seventh part of the novel, the Epilogue, has attracted much attention and controversy. Some of Dostoevsky's critics have criticized the novel's final pages as superfluous, anticlimactic, unworthy of the rest of the work, while others have defended it, offering various schemes that they claim prove its inevitability and necessity. Steven Cassedy argues that Crime and Punishment "is formally two distinct but closely related, things, namely a particular type of tragedy in the classical Greek mold and a Christian resurrection tale". Cassedy concludes that "the logical demands of the tragic model as such are satisfied without the Epilogue in Crime and Punishment ... At the same time, this tragedy contains a Christian component, and the logical demands of this element are met only by the resurrection promised in the Epilogue".

Style
Crime and Punishment is written from a third-person omniscient perspective. It is told primarily from the point of view of Raskolnikov, but does at times switch to the perspective of other characters such as Svidrigaïlov, Razumikhin, Luzhin, Sonya or Dunya. This narrative technique, which fuses the narrator very closely with the consciousness and point of view of the central characters, was original for its period. Frank notes that Dostoevsky's use of time shifts of memory and manipulation of temporal sequence begins to approach the later experiments of Henry James, Joseph Conrad, Virginia Woolf, and James Joyce. A late nineteenth-century reader was, however, accustomed to more orderly and linear types of expository narration. This led to the persistence of the legend that Dostoevsky was an untidy and negligent craftsman, and to observations like the following by Melchior de Vogüé: "A word ... one does not even notice, a small fact that takes up only a line, have their reverberations fifty pages later ... [so that] the continuity becomes unintelligible if one skips a couple of pages".

Dostoevsky uses different speech mannerisms and sentences of different length for different characters. Those who use artificial language—Luzhin, for example—are identified as unattractive people. Mrs. Marmeladov's disintegrating mind is reflected in her language. In the original Russian text, the names of the major characters have something of a double meaning, but in translation the subtlety of the Russian language is predominantly lost due to differences in language structure and culture. For example, the original Russian title ("Преступление и наказание") is not the direct equivalent to the English "Crime and Punishment". "Преступление" (Prestupléniye) is literally translated as 'a stepping across'. The physical image of crime as crossing over a barrier or a boundary is lost in translation, as is the religious implication of transgression.

Reception
The first part of Crime and Punishment published in the January and February issues of The Russian Messenger met with public success. In his memoirs, the conservative belletrist Nikolay Strakhov recalled that in Russia Crime and Punishment was the literary sensation of 1866. Tolstoy's novel War and Peace was being serialized in The Russian Messenger at the same time as Crime and Punishment.

The novel soon attracted the criticism of the liberal and radical critics. G.Z. Yeliseyev sprang to the defense of the Russian student corporations, and wondered, "Has there ever been a case of a student committing murder for the sake of robbery?" Pisarev, aware of the novel's artistic value, described Raskolnikov as a product of his environment, and argued that the main theme of the work was poverty and its results. He measured the novel's excellence by the accuracy with which Dostoevsky portrayed the contemporary social reality, and focused on what he regarded as inconsistencies in the novel's plot. Strakhov rejected Pisarev's contention that the theme of environmental determinism was essential to the novel, and pointed out that Dostoevsky's attitude towards his hero was sympathetic: "This is not mockery of the younger generation, neither a reproach nor an accusation—it is a lament over it." Solovyov felt that the meaning of the novel, despite the common failure to understand it, is clear and simple: a man who considers himself entitled to 'step across' discovers that what he thought was an intellectually and even morally justifiable transgression of an arbitrary law turns out to be, for his conscience, "a sin, a violation of inner moral justice... that inward sin of self-idolatry can only be redeemed by an inner act of self-renunciation."

The early Symbolist movement that dominated Russian letters in the 1880s was concerned more with aesthetics than the visceral realism and intellectuality of Crime and Punishment, but a tendency toward mysticism among the new generation of symbolists in the 1900s led to a reevaluation of the novel as an address to the dialectic of spirit and matter. In the character of Sonya (Sofya Semyonovna) they saw an embodiment of both the Orthodox feminine principle of hagia sophia (holy wisdom) – "at once sexual and innocent, redemptive both in her suffering and her veneration of suffering", and the most important feminine deity of Russian folklore mat syra zemlya (moist mother earth). Raskolnikov is a "son of Earth" whose egoistic aspirations lead him to ideas and actions that alienate him from the very source of his strength, and he must bow down to her before she can relieve him of the terrible burden of his guilt. Philosopher and Orthodox theologian Nikolay Berdyaev shared Solovyov and the symbolists' sense of the novel's spiritual significance, seeing it as an illustration of the modern age's hubristic self-deification, or what he calls "the suicide of man by self-affirmation". Raskolnikov answers his question of whether he has the right to kill solely by reference to his own arbitrary will, but, according to Berdyaev, these are questions that can only be answered by God, and "he who does not bow before that higher will destroys his neighbor and destroys himself: that is the meaning of Crime and Punishment".

Crime and Punishment was regarded as an important work in a number of 20th-century European cultural movements, notably the Bloomsbury Group, psychoanalysis, and existentialism. Of the writers associated with Bloomsbury, Virginia Woolf, John Middleton Murry and D. H. Lawrence are some of those who have discussed the work. Freud held Dostoevsky's work in high esteem, and many of his followers have attempted psychoanalytical interpretations of Raskolnikov. Among the existentialists, Sartre and Camus in particular have acknowledged Dostoevsky's influence.

The affinity of Crime and Punishment with both religious mysticism and psychoanalysis led to suppression of discussion in Soviet Russia: interpretations of Raskolnikov tended to align with Pisarev's idea of reaction to unjust socio-economic conditions. An exception was the work of Mikhail Bakhtin, considered by many commentators to be the most original and insightful analyst of Dostoevsky's work. In Problems of Dostoevsky's Poetics, Bakhtin argues that attempts to understand Dostoevsky's characters from the vantage point of a pre-existing philosophy, or as individualized 'objects' to be psychologically analysed, will always fail to penetrate the unique "artistic architechtonics" of his works. In such cases, both the critical approach and the assumed object of investigation are 'monological': everything is perceived as occurring within the framework of a single overarching perspective, whether that of the critic or that of the author. Dostoevsky's art, Bakhtin argues, is inherently 'dialogical': events proceed on the basis of interaction between self-validating subjective voices, often within the consciousness of an individual character, as is the case with Raskolnikov. Raskolnikov's consciousness is depicted as a battleground for all the conflicting ideas that find expression in the novel: everyone and everything he encounters becomes reflected and refracted in a "dialogized" interior monologue. He has rejected external relationships and chosen his tormenting internal dialogue; only Sonya is capable of continuing to engage with him despite his cruelty. His openness to dialogue with Sonya is what enables him to cross back over the "threshold into real-life communication (confession and public trial)—not out of guilt, for he avoids acknowledging his guilt, but out of weariness and loneliness, for that reconciling step is the only relief possible from the cacophony of unfinalized inner dialogue."

English translations
 Frederick Whishaw (1885)
 Constance Garnett (1914)
 David Magarshack (1951)
 Princess Alexandra Kropotkin (1953)
 Jessie Coulson (1953)
Revised by George Gibian (Norton Critical Edition, 3 editions – 1964, 1975, and 1989)
 Michael Scammell (1963)
 Sidney Monas (1968)
 Julius Katzer (1985)
 David McDuff (1991)
 Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky (1992)
 Oliver Ready (2014)
 Nicolas Pasternak Slater (2017)
 Michael R. Katz (2017)
 Roger Cockrell (2022)
The Garnett translation was the dominant translation for more than 80 years after its publication in 1914. Since the 1990s, McDuff and Pevear/Volokhonsky have become its major competitors.

Adaptations

There have been over 25 film adaptations of Crime and Punishment. They include:
 Raskolnikow (aka Crime and Punishment, 1923) directed by Robert Wiene
 Crime and Punishment (1935 American film) starring Peter Lorre, Edward Arnold and Marian Marsh
 Crime and Punishment (1970 film) Soviet film starring Georgi Taratorkin, Tatyana Bedova, Vladimir Basov, Victoria Fyodorova) dir. Lev Kulidzhanov
 Crime and Punishment (1979 TV series) is a three-part 1979 television serial produced by the BBC, starring John Hurt as Raskolnikov and Timothy West as Porfiry Petrovich.
 Crime and Punishment (1983 film) (original title, Rikos ja Rangaistus), the first movie by the Finnish director Aki Kaurismäki, with Markku Toikka in the lead role. The story has been transplanted to modern-day Helsinki, Finland.
 Without Compassion (1994 Peruvian film) directed by Francisco Lombardi, starring Diego Bertie and Adriana Dávila Franke
 Crime and Punishment in Suburbia (2000), an adaptation set in modern America and "loosely based" on the novel
 Crime and Punishment (2002 film), starring Crispin Glover and Vanessa Redgrave
 Crime and Punishment (2002 TV film) is a 2002 television serial produced by the BBC, starring John Simm as Raskolnikov and Ian McDiarmid as Porfiry Petrovich.
 Crime and Punishment (2007 Russian TV series) (ru) was a 2007 television serial directed by Dmitry Svetozarov starring Vladimir Koshevoy as Raskolnikov. Aired on Channel One Russia.

References

Text

 Dostoevsky, Fyodor (1866). Crime and Punishment.  Translated in English by Constance Garnett.

Sources

 :
 Peace, Richard.  "Introduction", 1–16.
 Fanger, Donald. "Apogee: Crime and Punishment", 17–35.
 Lindenmeyr, Adele. "Raskolnikov's City and the Napoleonic Plan", 37–49.
 Wasiolek, Edward. "Raskolnikov's City and the Napoleonic Plan", 51–74.
 Peace, Richard.  "Motive and Symbol", 75–101.

External links

Criticisms
 University of Minnesota study guide
 Text and Analysis at Bibliomania
Text about Crime and Punishment  by Lev Oborin (in Russian)

Online text

 Full text
 Lit2Go audiobook version of the Constance Garnett translation.
 Full text in old orthography (russian)

Maps
 Mapping St. Petersburg – Crime and Punishment

1866 Russian novels
Novels by Fyodor Dostoevsky
Russian philosophical novels
Psychological novels
Existentialist novels
Russian novels adapted into films
Novels set in Saint Petersburg
Works originally published in The Russian Messenger
Novels first published in serial form
Novels set in 19th-century Russia
Novels about Russian prostitution
Russian novels adapted into plays
Crime novels
Russian satirical novels

Crime and Punishment


Biebrich Palace () is a Baroque residence (Schloss) in the borough of Biebrich in the city of Wiesbaden, Hesse, Germany. Built in 1702 by Prince Georg August Samuel of Nassau-Idstein, it served as the ducal residence for the independent Duchy of Nassau from 1816 until 1866.

History
Count Georg August Samuel of Nassau-Idstein, appointed Prince in 1688, wanted a more impressive seat of authority than his palace in Idstein in the Taunus. He moved first to Wiesbaden, and later to Biebrich (at that time a separate community from Wiesbaden). In the immediate vicinity of the Rhine, opposite the Biebricher Wörth, he began construction of a chateau. The structure was designed by the Baroque architect Julius Ludwig Rothweil and was completed in 1702. It survives today as the West Pavilion of the palace. Only four years later, a duplicate structure was built only 86 meters to the east. While the West Pavilion was reserved for the prince and his entourage, the East Pavilion served his wife.

Prince Georg August Samuel began further development of the castle in 1707. Baroque architect Johann Maximilian von Welsch linked the two pavilions with a gallery and built a circular ballroom in the exact center. The Rotunda was completed in 1721, giving Biebrich Castle its distinctive appearance.

After the death of Georg August Samuel, the House of Nassau-Idstein was extinguished and the castle came into the possession of the line of Nassau-Usingen. Prince Karl von Nassau-Usingen decided after his inauguration in 1734 to relocate his permanent residence to Biebrich. Such a residential and government office demanded further premises, so the Baroque architect Friedrich Joachim Stengel designed today's eastern wing. Only three years later, Stengel built the identical western wing. The gardens were designed by landscape architect Friedrich Ludwig von Sckell in 1817 at the request of Duke Wilhelm of Nassau.

Charlotte, Grand Duchess of Luxembourg, sold the palace to the State of Prussia in 1935. Heavily damaged during World War II, it was renovated and partly reconstructed between 1980 and 1982 by the State of Hesse. It is now used by the state government for representation purposes and houses the state's historic preservation agency.

See also
 Stadtschloss Wiesbaden

References

External links

Baroque architecture in Hesse
Baroque palaces in Germany
Palaces in Hesse
Tourist attractions in Wiesbaden
Buildings and structures in Wiesbaden
1702 establishments in the Holy Roman Empire
Royal residences in Hesse

Biebrich Palace


The Nightrider bus service is a late-night bus service that runs in Melbourne, Victoria.  NightRider buses travel between the city (City Square, Swanston Street) and Melbourne's outer suburbs every 30 minutes between 1.30am – 4.30am on Saturdays and 1.30am – 5.30am on Sundays.  NightRider also has services to the city on most routes after midnight until approximately 3.30am on Saturdays and 4.30am on Sundays, with additional services on some routes.

Transport in Melbourne
Bus transport

NightRider


Charles "Ches" McCartney (1901–1998), also known as the Goat Man, was an American  itinerant wanderer who traveled up and down the eastern United States from 1930 to 1987 in a ramshackle wagon pulled by a team of goats. He claimed to have covered more than 100,000 miles and visited all states except Hawaii: His goats couldn't swim that far, he said, and if they could, "they'd just end up eating the grass skirts off the hula dancers anyway". He was a familiar sight to many travelers and vacationers during those years, and one difficult to not notice or remember.

The main sources for biographical information about McCartney are McCartney himself and his son, and some of the often-colorful details vary. McCartney was the subject of numerous newspaper articles over the years, many of which are collected in the book America's Goat Man (Mr. Ches McCartney).

Early years
Born around the turn of the twentieth century (the exact year is unknown), McCartney ran away from his family's Iowa farm home at age 14.

In New York he met and married a Spanish knife thrower ten years his senior and became part of her act, serving as near-miss target. When she became pregnant they tried to make a living as farmers, but were wiped out at the start of the Great Depression. She left one day before dawn. McCartney married at least two more times.

At some point, while working for the WPA cutting timber, an injury from a falling tree left McCartney's left arm twisted. He was initially thought to have died in the accident, but he awakened on a mortician's table as the undertaker inserted an embalming needle in his arm.

McCartney had always been fond of goats since his days on the family farm, and he came up with the idea of using a goat cart to travel with his family and work as an itinerant preacher. His wife did not like the idea, and left. One account says that McCartney traded his wife to another farmer for an unspecified amount of goats.

Inspirations
McCartney was taken with the book Robinson Crusoe, and carried a copy of it, along with a Bible, throughout his travels—the only two books he carried. Robinson Crusoe inspired him to dress himself and his son Albert in goat skins. It also possibly inspired or validated his independent lifestyle, in which he lived off the land, the contributions of strangers, and his goats.

Travel rig
McCartney's iron-wheeled wagon was large, rickety, and garishly decorated with a clutter of objects he found and collected along the road. It contained a bed, a potbellied stove, lanterns, and lots of trash, and was pulled by a team of around nine goats, with a few trailing behind to occasionally push and serve as brakes on downhill stretches of road. His traveling goat herd sometimes numbered up to thirty. The goats were surprisingly sturdy and effective draft animals and McCartney managed to make five to ten miles a day, even pushing up Tennessee's Monteagle Mountain during a winter storm that stalled all other vehicle traffic. He claimed to have survived that cold night by pulling a couple of extra goats into the wagon with him.

Kids and doe goats rode in the wagon while bucks did the draft and push work. McCartney kept and cared for his sick and injured goats, including one which had no front legs and had learned to hop on its back legs like a kangaroo. He named all his goats, and one of his favorites, Billy Blue Horns, supposedly lived three decades.

The Goat Man usually kept his herd and rig to the sides of the roads he traveled, so while he may have slowed vehicle traffic, he rarely stopped it.

Life on the road
McCartney's diet consisted mainly of goat milk, supplemented by food given to him or bought with money he made selling scrap metal he collected, postcards of himself, or from posing for pictures. He also accepted donations for his "Free Thinking Christian Mission" based in Georgia.

McCartney had no difficulty attracting attention and visitors as he was friendly, chatty, and quick to share an inspirational sermon. By most accounts he smelled very bad, as did his goats.

Each night he camped on some tolerant landowner's property or farmer's field. He milked and fed his goats and built a large campfire that he always topped off with an automobile tire. This added acridity to the fragrance of the bivouac, but McCartney claimed the smoke effectively kept the bugs away.

There were rumors that he was rich, and legends about how it was bad luck to harm him. These didn't protect him from being mugged with increasing frequency in later years on the road.

Later years
After retiring from the road, McCartney and his son Albert Gene McCartney lived in a rusted old school bus in Twiggs County near Jeffersonville, Georgia, after the wooden shack they had been living in burned. Also on the property were an outhouse and a concrete "tomb" that supposedly housed the bodies of his father and stepmother. There was no running water or electricity.

McCartney became infatuated with the actress Morgan Fairchild and returned to the road in 1984 to hitchhike to California, ostensibly to woo her. He was mugged soon after arriving in Los Angeles, and that ended his road adventures.

Cormac McCarthy's 1979 novel Suttree, set in Knoxville, Tennessee, features a character based on McCartney.

Beginning in 1987 Ches McCartney lived out his late years in a nursing home in Macon, Georgia. In June 1998, he was given tragic news that his son (a character study in his own right) had been found shot to death on the Twiggs County property. McCartney requested that his son be buried in the tomb there, but it was found to be in disrepair. The city of Jeffersonville donated a cemetery plot to the McCartneys, and Albert Gene was buried there. The murder remains unsolved.

Less than six months after his son's death, Ches McCartney died. He was believed to be in his late nineties, but he had claimed to be 106.

References

External links
archive of 'Best Gallery of the Goat Man'
The Goat Man DLGB: Blog of the Digital Library of Georgia
GoodbyeMag.com: Romance of the Goat

Date of birth unknown
1998 deaths
People from Iowa
American loggers
Farmers from Iowa
American evangelists
Year of birth uncertain
1901 births

Ches McCartney


CoboCards is a web application for creation, study and sharing of flashcards. They also provide mobile application for Android and iOS mobile devices, to help study of flashcards on the move.

Based on the freemium model, CoboCards provides users a free account with two card sets compared to paid subscription with premium features such as unlimited card sets, Leitner system based trainer and collaborative learning.

History
CoboCards is a project of Jamil Soufan and Tamim Swaid. Tamim Swaid has developed the concept and interface of a collaboratively usable e-learning platform in his diploma thesis at the University of Applied Sciences in February 2007. In January 2010 they founded the CoboCards GmbH (limited company) together with Ali Yildirim.

CoboCards is supported by its strategic partners Prof. Schroeder (RWTH Aachen University), Prof. Oliver Wrede (University for Applied Sciences Aachen) and Prof. Klaus Gasteier (University of Arts Berlin).

With the idea of creating and studying flashcards online and offering an active control of learning progress they won the start2grow business idea competition in September 2009 (€25.000 ).

Additionally CoboCards was funded by German Authorities with approximately €100.000 .

References

External links

German educational websites
Internet properties established in 2007
Spaced repetition software
Web applications

Cobocards


Annihilationism (also called conditional immortality) is something that some Christians believe. People who are annihilationists believe that those who do not go to heaven do not live forever in hell, but instead die and no longer exist. (Annihilationists often believe that people are punished for a period of time in hell before they stop existing). Most Christians are not annihilationists. Famous Christian writers who have written in favor of annihilationism include Edward Fudge, John Wenham, and Clark Pinnock. Christians who have written against annihilationism include J.P. Moreland, Robert Peterson, and Ron Rhodes.

Groups that believe in annihilationism include Seventh-day Adventists and Jehovah's Witnesses.

Christian eschatology
Afterlife

Annihilationism


Edmund Dickinson or Dickenson (1624–1707) was an English royal physician and alchemist, author of a syncretic philosophical system.

Life
He was son of the Rev. William Dickinson, rector of Appleton in Berkshire (now Oxfordshire), by his wife Mary, daughter of Edmund Colepepper, and was born on 26 September 1624. He received his primary education at Eton College, and in 1642 entered Merton College, Oxford, where he was admitted one of the Eton postmasters. He took the degree of B.A. 22 June 1647, and was elected probationer-fellow of his college, On 27 November 1649 he had the degree of M.A. conferred upon him. Applying himself to the study of medicine, he obtained the degree of M.D. on 3 July 1656.

About this time (Dickinson later claimed) he made the acquaintance of a certain  Theodore Mundanus, an adept in alchemy about whom not much is otherwise known, who prompted him to devote his attention to chemistry. John Evelyn once went to see him and recorded the visit:

Evelyn also associated Dickinson with the Interregnum Oxford group of "virtuosi" that later contributed to the formation of the Royal Society.

On leaving college he began to practise as a physician in a house in High Street, Oxford, where he stayed for nearly two decades. The college made him superior reader of Linacre's lectures, in succession to Richard Lydall, a post which he held for some years.

He was elected honorary fellow of the College of Physicians in December 1664, but he was treated as somewhat suspect and was not admitted a fellow till 1677. In 1684 he came up to London and settled in St. Martin's Lane; he took over the house of Thomas Willis. Among his patients here was Henry Bennet, 1st Earl of Arlington, whom he cured of a hernia. By him the doctor was recommended to the king, Charles II, who appointed him one of his physicians in ordinary and physician to the household (1677). Charles took the doctor into special favour and had a laboratory built in Whitehall Palace. Here the king could retire with George Villiers, 2nd Duke of Buckingham and Dickinson, who exhibited chemical experiments. On the accession of James II (1685), Dickinson was confirmed in his office as king's physician, and held it until the abdication of James (1688).

Troubled with the stone, Dickinson retired from practice and spent the remaining nineteen years of his life in study and in the making of books. He died on 3 April 1707, aged 83, and was buried in the church of St. Martin-in-the-Fields, where a monument bearing a Latin inscription was erected to his memory.

Works
While still a young man he published a book under the title of Delphi Phoenicizantes, Oxford, 1665, in which he attempted to prove that the Greeks borrowed the story of Pythian Apollo from the Hebrew scriptures. Anthony à Wood says that Henry Jacob the Younger, and not Dickinson, was the author of this book; it appeared with a contribution from Zachary Bogan. This was followed by Diatriba de Noae in Italiam Adventu, Oxford, 1655.

Later Dickinson published his notions of alchemy, in Epistola ad T. Mundanum de Quintessentia Philosophorum, Oxford. 1686. The major work on which he spent his latest years was a system of philosophy, set forth in Physica vetus et vera (1702). He established a philosophy founded on principles collected out of the Pentateuch, in which he mixed ideas on the atomic theory with passages from Greek and Latin writers as well as from the Bible. The book attracted attention, and was published in Rotterdam (1703), and in Leoburg (1705). Cotton Mather drew on Dickinson's thinking in his Biblia Americana.

Besides these he left behind him in manuscript a treatise in the Latin on the 'Grecian Games,' which William Nicholas Blomberg published in the second edition of his biography of Dickinson, his grandfather.

Publications

Notes

References

1624 births
1707 deaths
17th-century English medical doctors
18th-century English medical doctors
English alchemists
Fellows of the Royal Society
People from Vale of White Horse (district)
17th-century alchemists
18th-century alchemists

Edmund Dickinson


Percy Bysshe Shelley (4 August 1792 – 8 July 1822) was an English poet  of the early nineteenth century. He is widely thought of as one of most important poets of the Romantic movement in English literature. Some of his poems, like Ozymandias and Ode to the West Wind, are among the most famous in English.

Shelley was born in Horsham, Sussex. He was the son of a member of Parliament. He attended the University of Oxford, for only one year; he was expelled for being an atheist. In his own time Shelley was very unpopular for his political and religious views and for his personal conduct. He married young, but left his wife to run away with Mary Godwin. After Shelley's first wife committed suicide, Shelley married Mary Godwin; she later became famous as Mary Shelley, the author of the novel Frankenstein.

Shelley left England and spent much of his life travelling in Europe, especially in Italy. He became a close friend of poet Lord Byron, who also left England and travelled in Europe because of sexual controversy at home. Shelley continued to write poetry throughout this time; he wrote several major works, like the verse drama The Cenci and long poems like Alastor and Adonais, as well as many shorter poems.

About a month before his 30th birthday, Shelley drowned in a boating accident off the coast of Italy. He was one of three important English Romantic poets of the same generation who died young; the other two were Lord Byron and John Keats.

References

1792 births
1822 deaths
Accidental deaths by drowning
British atheists
English poets
Nonviolence advocates
Writers from Sussex

Percy Bysshe Shelley


The Yenisei (Енисе́й) is a river in Siberia. It belongs to the greatest river system that flows into the Arctic Ocean. The Yenisei is the fifth-longest river in the world. It is a little shorter than the Mississippi River, but with 1.5 times the flow. It comes from Mongolia and follows a northern course to the Kara Sea. The river drains a large part of central Siberia. The longest stream following the Yenisei-Angara-Selenga-Ider is about 5539 km long. Its watershed, which includes the world's largest (by volume) lake, Lake Baikal, holds more water than any other river system.

The upper parts of the system have rapids and flooding, and pass through areas where very few people live. The middle section is controlled by a series of large hydroelectric dams. The dams were built to supply a major Russian primary industry. Partly built by gulag labor in Soviet times, industrial contamination is a big problem in the area. The area is very hard for the police to watch. Moving on through sparsely populated taiga, the Yenisei grows with many tributaries and finally reaches the Kara Sea in desolate tundra where it is covered with ice for more than half the year. As with other Siberian rivers, the flow has increased lately. People think this is because of global warming. A concern was also raised that a change in the salt in the Arctic may have a global impact on ocean currents.

Rivers of Russia
Geography of Mongolia
Siberia

Yenisei


The Onon gol (Mongolian: Онон гол, Russian: Онон) is a river in Mongolia and Russia. It is 818 km long. Its watershed is 94,010 km2. It starts at the Khentii Mountains, on the Eastern slopes. 298 km of the river is in Mongolia. It has a confluence (the place where two rivers join together) with the Ingoda River. When they meet, it makes the Shilka River. People believe that Genghis Khan was born near the upper Onon and he grew up there. The rivers Onon—Shilka—Amur makes one of the world's ten longest rivers (their lengths, in order: 818 km, 560 km, 2,874 km).

Rivers of Russia

Onon (river)


Sir Huw Pyrs Wheldon,  (7 May 1916 – 14 March 1986) was a Welsh broadcaster and BBC executive.

Early life
Wheldon was born on 7 May 1916 in Prestatyn, Flintshire, Wales. He was educated at Friars School, Bangor, at the time an all-boys grammar school, and graduated with a BSc(Econ) degree from the London School of Economics in 1938. His father, Sir Wynn Wheldon, was a prominent educationalist who had been awarded the DSO for gallantry in the First World War. His grandfather, Tomos Jones Wheldon, had been the Moderator of the Calvinist Methodist Church in Wales. His mother, Megan Edwards, was an accomplished pianist.

Military service
On the outbreak of war in 1939, Wheldon enlisted in the Buffs. He was commissioned into the Royal Welch Fusiliers in 1940, but subsequently volunteered for the airborne forces and joined the Royal Ulster Rifles, with whom he flew into Normandy. He was awarded the Military Cross for an act of bravery on D-Day + 1.

Broadcasting career
After the war Wheldon joined the Arts Council of Wales, and then in 1951 became the Arts Council's administrator for the Festival of Britain, work for which he was appointed an Officer of the Order of the British Empire (OBE) in 1952.

In 1952 he joined the BBC as a publicity officer, but he was keen to make programmes, and he made his first appearance on television running a nationwide conker competition, and thence became a familiar face on children's TV with his programme All Your Own. Future Led Zeppelin guitarist Jimmy Page was a guest on his show in 1957.

He also began to produce and present adult programmes, such as Men in Battle with Sir Brian Horrocks, and Portraits of Power with Robert McKenzie. He was also responsible for Orson Welles' Sketchbook (1955).

It was with the arts magazine programme Monitor that Wheldon truly made his mark on the cultural scene. He was the editor of the programme – in the sense in which a newspaper has an editor – and he set about moulding a team of exceptional talents, including John Schlesinger, Ken Russell, Humphrey Burton, and Melvyn Bragg.

Monitor ranged in subject over all the arts: the hundredth show was Elgar (1962), a film directed by Ken Russell and written by Wheldon, that celebrated the composer Edward Elgar. Monitor featured specially made films, sometimes just one full-length item, eventually using actors to re-enact the subjects' lives. Prior to this, only photos or location shots had been used in programmes.

Wheldon's Monitor lasted until he had "interviewed everyone I am interested in interviewing"; he was succeeded by Jonathan Miller for the series' last season.

In 1967 he was invited to deliver the MacMillan Memorial Lecture to the Institution of Engineers and Shipbuilders in Scotland. He chose the subject "Perspectives on Television".

Wheldon then entered BBC management, becoming by turns Head of Documentaries. In 1968 he became managing director, BBC TV, a position he held until compulsory retirement in 1975. During this time he again gathered a team of the talents about him, promoting fellow programme makers such as David Attenborough and Paul Fox to high executive office, and the period of his administration, which included programmes such as Dad's Army, Kenneth Clark's Civilisation, Alistair Cooke's America, and Jacob Bronowski's The Ascent of Man (the last two were co-productions with Time-Life Television).

After he retired from management Wheldon co-wrote, with J. H. Plumb, and presented Royal Heritage, a ten-part series on the history of the British monarchy as expressed through the Royal Collections. Produced by Michael Gill, it achieved immense popularity ratings in 1977, the year of the Queen's Silver Jubilee. Two other major documentaries followed, The Library of Congress and Destination D-Day.

Later life
Wheldon was knighted in 1976. Following his retirement from the BBC he became Chairman of the Court of the Governors of the London School of Economics, where he had read economics before the war. He disarmed potential sponsors of the school by eschewing flattery and opening negotiations with the bald statement that what he was after was their cash. He was also a formidable and active President of the Royal Television Society (RTS). An RTS Memorial Lecture in his name by a distinguished broadcaster is televised annually. Brian Cox gave the lecture in 2010; the following year it was given by Bettany Hughes. Other speakers have included David Attenborough, Jeremy Isaacs and, in 2005, the writer Paul Abbott. In addition to this, the British Academy of Film and Television Arts (BAFTA) dispenses a Huw Wheldon Award for Specialist Factual Programme. There are also Wheldon bursaries and awards at the LSE and the University of Wales, Bangor.

Sir Huw's lasting influence, other than as a programme maker, which was considerable, probably lies in the ways in which he articulated the needs and requirements of public service broadcasting. "To make the good popular and the popular good", "the aim is not to avoid failure, but to attempt success", "multiplicity does not mean choice", were among his favourite sayings. He also coined the term "narrowcasting".

Wheldon died of cancer in 1986, aged 69. His ashes were spread anonymously in the Royal Botanic Gardens at Kew, where he had served as a Trustee, and which he had loved.

Sir Huw Wheldon was highly regarded in the United States, where he had many friends, one of whom, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, caused Norman Podhoretz's obituary of his friend Wheldon, a version of which had first appeared in Podhoretz's syndicated column, to be entered into the Congressional Record.

Wheldon was married to the novelist Jacqueline Wheldon. They had three children. Sir Huw's son, Wynn Wheldon (named after his grandfather), is his biographer.

References

External links

 Interview with Wynn Wheldon about Huw Wheldon
 http://www.screenonline.org.uk/people/id/473425/

1916 births
1986 deaths
BAFTA fellows
Knights Bachelor
Buffs (Royal East Kent Regiment) soldiers
Royal Welch Fusiliers officers
Royal Ulster Rifles officers
Officers of the Order of the British Empire
Recipients of the Military Cross
People from Prestatyn
People educated at Friars School, Bangor
People associated with the London School of Economics
British Army personnel of World War II
Deaths from cancer in England
British broadcasters
International Emmy Directorate Award
BBC executives
Governors of the London School of Economics
Alumni of the London School of Economics

Huw Wheldon