Grahovo (Serbian Cyrillic: Грахово) is a field and historical region in western Montenegro. The region's area roughly comprises 219 km2, west of Rudine, in the centre between Petrovići and Cuce, from the top of Orjen mountain to the west of the Ostrog Monastery.

Etymology
The name Grahovo is composed of Serbo-Croatian grah (bean) (from Proto-Slavic *gorxъ) and -ovo (from Proto-Slavic *-ovъ), a suffix used in Slavic languages to indicate a placename, thereby making the name of Grahovo, 'place of beans'.

Geography
Grahovo field is a small karst field in the northwestern part of Montenegro, not far from the border with Bosnia and Herzegovina northeast of Orjen. It covers an area of 6.4 km2, stretches for 7 kilometers and is 1.5 kilometers wide. The altitude of the field is 695–780 meters. It is close to the Risan Bay, which is 6.5 km away. Northeast of the field is the vast karst plateau of Katun Karst and Banjan, and to the west rises Orjen (1894 m) and its branches.

The field was formed in limestones of Cretaceous age, on the border with dolomites, and its bottom was covered with fluvioglacial deposits of the Orient Glacia, with an average thickness of 10 meters. Grahovo field belongs to the group of periodically flooded karst fields, so there are well-developed industries such as farming and livestock.

The Grahovo river flows through it, on which an artificial lake for watering was built. It has an average temperature of 2 °C in January and 23 °C in July. The annual rainfall is 2895 mm. The fields occupy 50% of the field area, and the rest are meadows.

On the northern edge of the field is the springs of Grabovica, Grahovo River and Čeline. There is also an archeological site in the field - the Petkovići necropolis and the Grahovo settlement. A Stećak can be found in the Saint Nikola Church of Grahovo.

In the past, the borders to the south and east were different. The region was inhabited by the Riđani a tribe-clan that had assimilated or migrated by the end of the 17th century. Mountain ranges, Mt. Njegoš and Mt. Somina form a natural border to the north. Brekovac, Bratogošti, and Tisovac extend down to Trebišnjica and Bilećko Lake from the northwest to the southwest border. The southern and eastern boundaries of Banjani travel over hilly terrain, with no major natural barriers.

The Region of Grahovo is determined by the following settlements that were part of the Municipality which was abolished in 1960, The settlements are Balosave, Bare, Broćanac, Vilusi, Grahovac, Grahovo, Gornje Polje, Dolovi, Zagora, Zaslap, Jabuke, Nudo, Podbužer, Riječani and Spila.

History

Pre-Slavic
The Western Goths invaded this area in 459, and the Eastern Goths conquered 488/489; years and managed it for about half a century (488-536), when it became part of the Byzantine state again.The movements of various peoples were constantly taking place. Already at the end of VI and start of the 7th century; after the destruction of Doclea (602), and the areas of the Slavs, who penetrate the Balkan Peninsula and inhabit it.The geographical names of settlements and buildings also speak of these diameters. Sites that have survived to this day, and bear the Illyrian-Romanesque or some mixed Illyrian-Romanesque and Slavic names (Balosave, Broćanac, Bobijerna, Deljevac, Droškorica, Katalina, Kurjaj, Mirotin, Maočići, Skorča, Gora, Tospude, etc.). It is interesting that the names of the villages and some larger ones localities (except Vilus and Spila) Slavic: Grahovo, Grahovac, Zaslap. Rijeka, Bara and so on. Slavs form their own social organizations. Among the most earlier it mentions Onogost (after the priest Dukljanin, created in the time of X to XII centuries).

Pre-Ottoman History
Grahovo was first mentioned in 1318, then in a Kotor document in 1377, and then again in 1399. Vilusi was mentioned in a Kotor Document in 1440. During the medieval period, it was inhabited by the Catholic Albanian Mataruge tribe. The region was settled by the Riđani specifically the territories of Krivošije and Cerovo Ždrijelo near Grahovo. According to traditional belief, the tribe Riđani and other brotherhoods extensively tried to emigrate towards the fertile lands of the Grahovo field, However they faced resistance from the Mataruge natives. Mataruge attacked settlers and travelers on the Risan-Grahovo route.

Ottoman History
During the times of the Ottoman Empire, After the establishment of the Nahija of Riđani, it's seat was in Grahovo. The tribe was governed by its vojvoda (of Drobnjaci and Banjani) or by their knez (Prince of Riđani). In 1466 the subaşi of Riđani was Širmerd. In 1469 Riđani were one of the "Vlach" tribes that participated in the kidnapping of a young male and female population of Konavle and Herzegovina. They sold them to Ottoman subaşi, vojvodas, martoloses and Muslims in Trebinje who sold them as slaves. Riđani were registered in the first Ottoman defter (tax registry) of the Sanjak of Herzegovina, as part of the Novi kadiluk (modern-day Herceg Novi). One of the knezes (princes) of Riđani in the Ottoman period was Sinan, who was also chieftain of Banjani, and son-in-law of Ali Paša Hercegović.

In 1499 the Church of Saint Nikola was built by the Vujačić, Bulajić and Vučetić brotherhoods, remains in the time of the Risan prince Mirko Vujačić, when it was built by Ragusan investors.

In 1614, Mariano Bolizza wrote that Grahovo was situated in a beautiful plain, and commanded by Mile Perin. The settlement had 90 houses, out of which 70 were of the Serbian rite, and 20 were Turkish (Muslim). The town had 200 men in arms.

Grahovo remained part of the Ottoman Empire from 1465 until 1858

Venetian-Turkish conflicts
In 1649 the tribes of Nikšići, Riđani and Drobnjaci rebelled against the Ottomans  capturing Risan, and Grahovo. This had been the first time Grahovo was ever liberated from Ottoman rule, Thus handing it over to the Republic of Venice. In mid-17th century their chieftain was Radul of Riđani. Riđani distinguished themselves in the struggle against the Ottomans, particularly during the late 17th-century Morean War. Riđani slowly fled west to Herzegovina, especially after the Ottomans established Nikšić as their stronghold, while remnants of Riđani with newly immigrated Uskoks formed three tribal societies: Krivošije, Grahovo and Nikšićke Rudine.

In 1687, A Prince named Ilija Balotić from the Drobnjaci tribe sent a letter to the town of Grahovo which according to him he would relieve the town and provide it with 100 families, of which 200 men were able to fight in the war. Another one of his writings conclude that he would attempt to strengthen the Grahovo field with 500 Soldiers, as to which they would guard places which were the most important. It was ordered by Ilija Balotić that with the Nikšići tribe, which demanded to have high salaries, that they would move into the Grahovo field on the day of Saint Nikola. The settlers will build and share homes with each other which will be organized and supported by Calvary Bolica, and Captain Krsto Zmajević from Perast. Since they showed their loyalty to the Campaign.

The joint Montenegrin-Venetian forces took control of Grahovo for 13 years, During their reign, Grahovo became an operation base for their troops in Herzegovina where they launched many attacks in Korjenići and Gacko. Grahovo remained under Venice until 1699 when the Ottomans annexed it during the Karlovac Peace deal.

The significance of the attack on the Herzegovinian Turks was undertaken in 1738 by the citizens of Grahovo, Pivljani, Moračani , and Drobnjaci. The Riđani, as an old tribe, once inhabited the area from the togost to the glaciers above Risan. In anti-Turkish movements throughout the 17th century, especially in the Morean War, the tribe played a prominent role. Since the founding of the Turkish city in Niksic, it has begun, like the Niksic tribe, to weaken and displace, mostly in other parts of Herzegovina. From the rest of the population and new settlers, Uskoks, three smaller tribal groups were formed from the middle of the eighteenth century - Krivošije, Grahovo, and Nikšić Rudine, while a part of the territory of Riđa was appropriated by Čevljani and Cuce. The name Riđani remained in the name of only one village in the Nikšić field. The karst area of Grahovo, which stretches between Krivošije, Cuce, Banjani, and Nikšićki Rudini, was, as a border zone, the reason for frequent conflicts between Montenegrins and Turks. After the conflicts of 1836, 1852, and 1858.

Grahovo Drama
Main articles: (Battle of Grahovo) (Battle of Grahovac)After the rise of Petar II Petrović-Njegoš to power in the Prince-Bishopric of Montenegro, members of the Grahovo tribe, led by vojvoda Jakov Daković refused to pay haraç to the Ottoman authorities and joined the rest of Montenegrins in guerrilla warfare in Ottoman-controlled Herzegovina, expressing the desire to unite with Montenegro. In response, Ali-paša Rizvanbegović, vizier of Herzegovina, attacked Grahovo in 1836 known as the Battle of Grahovo. The battle that ensued took place when a band of around 300 young men led by Joko Petrović-Njegoš, arrived at Grahovo and decided to attack the Ottoman army without waiting for reinforcements. The Ottomans retreated at first, and then ambushed the Montenegrins near the Čelina stream (Čelinski Potok), resulting in Ottoman victory and 70 Montenegrin casualties, including nine members of the House of Petrović-Njegoš, including the Prince-Bishop's teenage brother.

Four years after the Montenegrin defeat at Grahovo, seeking revenge for the death of his brother, Njegoš plotted the assassination of Smail-aga with the assistance of the local Christians from Herzegovina who lived on the territory under Smail-aga's control. Njegoš ordered a Montenegrin tribal leader, Novica Cerović, to ambush Smail-aga Čengić, the Ottoman commander who was responsible for killing Njegoš's brother Joko.

In late September 1840, Montenegrins attracted Čengić and his army deep into their territory, organized an ambush, and murdered them by attacking their camp during the night. The assault occurred in the village of Mljetičak, north of Nikšić. In the ensuing clash, Smail-aga was shot and killed, after which his severed head was brought to Cetinje. As a sign of his gratitude, Njegoš made Cerović a senator.

On 28 April 1858 Ottoman commander Hussein Pasha captured the villages of Vilusi and Grahovo and continued his advance towards Grahovac, a small village located on a plateau elevated slightly above the captured area. The core of Montenegrin resistance was in Grahovac, which was the main bastion of Montenegrin defense according to military plans. The fighting itself started on 29 April, early in the morning. The Ottomans attacked Grahovac while Montenegrins were stubbornly defending, determined not to retreat at any cost. Most of 3,000 Ottoman and 1,000 Montenegrin casualties were made on that day. On 30 April, Hussein Pasha offered a truce to Montenegrin commander-in-chief Grand Duke Mirko Petrović-Njegoš, but he refused it, although he did allow the Ottomans time to bury their dead. He also refused to send men to disrupt the Ottomans supply of water. Although this would have given him a tactical advantage, he considered it a dishonourable move.

On 1 May, the fighting started again as the Ottomans got military support from Bosnia. But this time, Montenegrins took charge and attacked the Ottomans, forcing them into a successive retreat. The biggest problem for Montenegrins was a well-armed Ottoman artillery, which was constantly bombarding their positions with cannons. Eventually, Montenegrins decided to charge across the battlefield and take over the cannons. After they saw two of the commanders, Serdar (Count) Đuro Kusovac and priest Luka Jovović, being killed while charging, the rest of the Montenegrin troops, including the guardsmen, began a rapid advance with a shout: "Forward, to avenge our commanders". The offensive was successful, and by capturing Ottoman cannons, Montenegrins had officially won the battle. This major victory had had even more diplomatic significance. The glory of Montenegrin weapons was soon immortalised in the songs and literature of all the South Slavs, in particular the Serbs in Vojvodina, then part of Austria-Hungary. This Montenegrin victory forced the Great Powers to officially demarcate the borders between Montenegro and Ottoman Empire, de facto recognizing Montenegro's centuries-long independence. Montenegro gained Grahovo, Rudine, Nikšići, more than half of Drobnjaci, Tušina, Uskoci, Lipovo, Upper Vasojevići, and part of Kuči and Dodoši.

Prince Danilo granted all of the battle survivors the "Grahovo medal", and Mirko Petrović-Njegoš was proclaimed "Grand Duke of Grahovo". In 1864 King Nicholas I built the Church of the Ascension on the  site of Hussein Pasha's headquarters, and in 2008, the Montenegrin government revealed an obelisk which honours the battle and its participants. Both on the church and the obelisk read the famous quotation from Petar II Petrović-Njegoš's The Mountain Wreath: The monument to your bravery is Montenegro and its freedom.

International Red Cross
In Nikšićka Župa and Grahovo, the International Red Cross formed the first hospitals, a month and a half after Montenegro became a member of the International Red Cross in Geneva.

Royal Status
The Region is home to the Daković family which were titled as the Princes of Grahovo, the first mentioned was Jakov Daković. Although there is little information about his personal  biography, He participated in battles against the Ottoman Empire, and was killed in 1853.  After the battles of Grahovo and Grahovac, the Petrović Njegoš head, Mirko Petrović Njegoš, was awarded the Grand Prince of Grahovo, Most Montenegrin Kings and descendants of Royals were titled as Grand Prince of Grahovo even till this day (see: Boris, Hereditary Prince of Montenegro).

Christmas Awakening
Due to the large spread propaganda against the King of Montenegro, Nikola Petrović-Njegoš, Most of the population was against the Zelenaši Uprising of 1919. For unity, Nikola was left disappointed. When the uprising in Montenegro started, Captain Stojan Popović from Belgrade came to Grahovo and organized units against the rebellion.  However, Grahovo was raided, burnt to the ground, looted and sacked. This was not what Grahovo expected as they had been largely for unity with Serbia. Grahovo was called to defeat the Zelenaši and they followed with it. Over 400 Soldiers and Officers were put to defeat the local Cuce Rebels. Akim Daković forced the Cuce to send 4 officers for peace negotiations. The Brđani raided Cuce in response and torched the area, After the Cuce found out, they called for Grahovo to help them.

World War Two
A monument of Sava Kovačević was erected on the view of the field Grahovo.

Yugoslavia
During Yugoslavia, Its population was the highest in 1953, Following censuses showed a consecutive decrease in its inhabitants. Most of the population started to slowly leave the area and most notably a stream of emigration followed with the 1979 Earthquakes of Montenegro.

Literature
During the times of the 19th to 20th century, in honor of the Battle of Grahovo and the Battle of Grahovac the Birth of Freedom-Grahovo was written.

"At that time, at the plant

              the tribe intended for us;

              evil is reaching us

              and it came upon us.

              Military parachute

              Grahovo was ours;

              a cross and a moon on his face

              green quarreled.

               Kosovo is irrigated

               with the blood of nine Jugovićs,

               Grahovo was soaked with the

               blood - of ten Petrovićs.

               Suffering, suffering, death

               by Zeman Ali Pasha

               tirelessly - and persistently

               our hands are shining.

               Grahovac finishes everything,

               our Grahovac miracle new;

               he avenges evil and penance,

               what is happening in Kosovo. "

          (King Nikola, "Grahovsko kolo" 1913)

The legend of Dubnica and Milica Bulajić

A Turk, a fugitive from Korjenić, the owner of a large part of the land in Grahovac, stared at Milica, the daughter of Prince Bulajić from Grahovo. Milica did not want to become a Turk or follow him, even though he was seen loudly, but she told him in front of the people: "Make a well in Bar, and bring the living water to Ševrljug below Grahovac, and then you will be my master." When she heard that the prince's daughter was torturing and forcing the heavens, she told him: "If they work like this I will curse you for the tears and sweat of the people, and I will be cursed for the people who have brought misfortune on them and trampled on their faith. commands ". Beg agreed to this without discussion, continued the construction and in a year and a half finished the work to the satisfaction of the people of Grahovlje, the prince and his daughter. On the solemn day, when the water supply system was opening, in the presence of the fugitive, his entourage, the prince and the citizens of Grahovlje, young Milica inspected the water supply system - a gift from her fiancé. Then, with her father and the young fugitive, she climbed on the voat and watched the clear water of Ševrljug flow into the well. The people rejoiced and played, the prince rejoiced, and the young fugitive shone with pleasure. And just at that moment, young Milica spread her arms and shouted: "Goodbye father, goodbye and you, brothers, and don't mention me badly." People ran to stop her, and she screamed and jumped headlong into the well and drowned. in the presence of the fugitive, his entourage, the prince and the citizens of Grahovlje, young Milica inspected the water supply - the gift of her fiancé. Then, with her father and the young fugitive, she climbed on the voat and watched the clear water of Ševrljug flow into the well. The people rejoiced and played, the prince rejoiced, and the young fugitive shone with pleasure. And just at that moment, young Milica spread her arms and shouted: "Goodbye father, goodbye and you, brothers, and don't mention me badly." People ran to stop her, and she screamed and jumped headlong into the well and drowned. in the presence of the fugitive, his entourage, the prince and the citizens of Grahovlje, young Milica inspected the water supply - the gift of her fiancé. Then, with her father and the young fugitive, she climbed on the voat and watched the clear water of Ševrljug flow into the well. The people rejoiced and played, the prince rejoiced, and the young fugitive shone with pleasure. And just at that moment, young Milica spread her arms and shouted: "Goodbye father, goodbye and you, brothers, and don't mention me badly." People ran to stop her, and she screamed and jumped headlong into the well and drowned.

The song "Oj Junaštva Svijetla Zoro Oj" originates from the Battle of Grahovo, First recorded in 1863, It was a component song of the "Battle of Grahovo or blood feud in Montenegro" (Бој на Грахову или крвна освета у Црној Гори) heroic play in three parts.

Demographic History of Grahovo
Kovačevići have 150 homes originating from Bosnia, The Bulajić have 110 homes, originating from Kuči. The Vujačići have 65 homes, originating from the Kuči.

Economy

19th century
In 1875 a hospital was created in Grahovo that had 60 beds and 4 doctors. In Grahovo there has been a postal service since 1896, and a telegraph service since 1907. There were over 100 people engaged in trading in the area of Grahovo. With the disappearance of border traffic near the then town of Grahovo, the economic decline of the place began and this decline is still visible to this day. The population of the town halved of which were engaged in trade and service activities, even the number of houses was halved since then. The same was the case with the then town of Vilusi.

Modern
The economy of Grahovo is supported mostly by cafes, a hotel and Agriculture of the field. Grahovo used to have 17 cafes and shops, billiards were played here between the two world wars, there was also street lighting, and each village had its own library. In addition, there was the local football club "Iskra". A Russian family (Tjuševskij) have recently moved into Grahovo from Orsk, Russia.

Gallery

Articles and Notable People

People from Grahovo may include

 Sava Kovačević, World War II resistance fighter
 Nikola Kovačević, Montenegrin communist politician
 Žarko Bulajić, Montenegrin communist politician
 Veljko Bulajić, Yugoslav film director
 Filip Kovačević, Montenegrin author
 Jakov Daković Prince of Grahovo
 Anto Daković Prince of Grahovo
 Đuro Milutinović Blind Guslar of the Grahovo Tribe
 Petar Zimonjić Metropolite of Bosnia
 Marko Daković Politician and Leader of United Serb Youth of Montenegro
 Veljko Kovačević Montenegrin General and writer
 Mehmed Aga Rizvanagić was an Ottoman Agha and descended from the Kovačevići in Grahovo
 Marko Vujačić politician and writer of Montenegro
 Drago Obrenov Kovačević a Montenegrin Harambaša and Hajduk, known as a hero
 Gavrilo Princip by paternal ancestry of the Jovičević brotherhood

Settlements and Sites may include

 Grahovo Lake A semi Lake-River northeast of Gornje Polje
 Grahovo, Nikšić Historical settlement and center of the Grahovo Region with a small town
 Grahovac, Nikšić Historical Settlement near Grahovo, featured the Battle of Grahovac
 Dolovi, Nikšić Settlement in The Nikšić municipality north of Gornje Polje and near the border of Bosnia and Herzegovina
 Vilusi, Nikšić Historical Settlement east of Dolovi, Nikšić
 Gornje Polje   A Historical settlement part of the field of Grahovo
 Saint Nikola Church of Grahovo Church in the Grahovo field
 Church of the Holy Savior (Grahovac) Church in Grahovac

Battles and Conflicts may include

 Battle of Grahovo
 Battle of Grahovac

Culture and other organizations

 Grahovo Tribe tribal and historical region

References

Clarifications

Notes

Bibliography

External links

Regions of Montenegro
Montenegro

Grahovo (region)


Arthur George Onslow, 3rd Earl of Onslow (25 October 1777-October 1870) was a British peer. He was the eldest child of the 2nd Earl and his wife Arabella Mainwaring-Ellerker (died 1782).

On 21 July 1818 he married Mary Fludyer, eldest daughter of George Fludyer of Ayston, County Rutland, esquire and of Lady Margaret Fane, daughter of the 9th Earl of Westmoreland. They had two children -
Mary Augusta (b. 4 June 1819)
Arthur George (16 June 1820 - 2 August 1856, predeceased), married 1 August 1850 Lady Katherine Anne Cust (born 1822), 4th daughter of John, 1st Earl Brownlow. They had 3 daughters.

The 3rd Earl's wife predeceased him on 1 March 1830. His son died without surviving male issue of his own. On the Earl's death, the Earl was succeeded by his grandnephew, William (b. 1853).

He had a large Napoleonic collection and reportedly, on visiting the Louvre with Paul Delaroche in 1848, he commented on the implausibility and theatricality of David's painting Napoleon Crossing the Alps, which had recently been reinstalled. He commissioned Delaroche to produce a more accurate version which featured Napoleon on a mule, entitled Bonaparte Crossing the Alps.  Two versions survive, one at Liverpool and one at the Louvre. Elizabeth Foucart-Walker asserts that in fact the Louvre version of the ensuing work was produced first as it was already in America by 1850, when the Liverpool painting was produced. Stephen Bann suggests that Arthur George's meeting with Delaroche may have occurred, but Delaroche chose to produce two works that are almost identical and send one to America.

References

Arthur George Onslow, 3rd Earl of Onslow in Debrett's Peerage for 1840
Debrett's for 1861

1777 births
1870 deaths
3
Surrey Militia officers

Arthur Onslow, 3rd Earl of Onslow


Isabella Santacroce (born April 30, 1970 in Riccione) is an Italian novelist.

Biography

Isabella Santacroce was born and lives in Riccione. Her literary startup began in the 1990s with her debut novel Fluo, the first book of the trilogy  "Trilogia dello spavento" (trilogy of the frightened) (the other two are Destroy and Luminal). Destroy in  particular is of interest in Italy, described by  Alessandro Baricco as a "book to read, if Enrico Brizzi is talented, there is double talent in the book".

Santacroce was grouped together with the Giovani Cannibali, (young Cannibals) a literary movement developed at the end of the Nineties (representative of that is the volume Gioventù Cannibale (young cannibals) published by Einaudi), formed by Italian young writers. Among them, Tiziano Scarpa, Aldo Nove, Niccolò Ammaniti, Enrico Brizzi, Tommaso Labranca, Tommaso Ottonieri, Luca Ragagnin and others together with Santacroce, give birth in 1997 to a philosophical-literally movement called,  il Nevroromanticismo, (the neuralromanticism) which means to express the unquiteness of existence.

In November 1998 Polo Books published  Kurt Cobain and Courtney Love. Canzoni maledette, a collection of her translations of the most representative texts and songs regarding the rock band  Nirvana and Hole.
Her book Luminal, about two young prostitutes on the run from their pimp, was adapted into an award-winning movie directed by Andrea Vecchiato, starring Denis Lavant, and scored by Michael Nyman
After the end of the Trilogy of Frighten, Isabella Santacroce continued to work on the language remaining faithful to her own themes. In 2001 she published for Mondadori Lovers. The theme of this book is Love in its various forms: Love of family, love between man and woman, Homosexual love, and unrequited love which inexorably leads to death. The language adopted in the book tries to get as close as possible to writing made of sounds, named by the author a writing for pure feeling.

In 1999 started her collaboration with the Italian singer Gianna Nannini, which produced the album Aria in 2002,  the cartoon Momo alla conquista del tempo, where the writer collaborated for texts. She helped with the writing of lyrics for the other Gianna Nannini's CD "Grazie" (Thanks), published in 2006.

In January 2004 Revolver, dedicated to Andrea Vecchiato, was published, an intense and violent romance, in which the writer talks about the history of a love not returned between the protagonist Angelica and a thirteen-year-old boy. In this book and in the next one Zoo published in February 2006, Santacroce tries to make the obscures zones of existence come outside into the light, she tells what we usually try to hide. Family is described as an "horrible carnival", which deserves to be destroyed. 2007 is the year of "V.M.18",  romance in which she talks about the totally unruled lives of three 14-year-old girls in a  college, this book signs the next change in the narrative style of Santacroce, defined by critics "seventeenhundreds".

Works
 Fluo. Storie di giovani a Riccione (Castelvecchi, 1995; Feltrinelli, 1999)
 Destroy (Feltrinelli, 1996)
 Luminal (Feltrinelli, 1998)
 Lovers (Mondadori, 2001)
 Revolver (Mondadori, 2004)
 Dark Demonia (Mondadori, 2005)
 Zoo (Fazi, 2006)
 V.M.18 (Fazi 2007)
 Lulù Delacroix (Rizzoli 2010)
 Amorino (Bompani 2012)

Notes

External links
 official site of the author

20th-century Italian novelists
21st-century Italian novelists
1970 births
Living people

Isabella Santacroce


Henry Davis McHenry (February 27, 1826 – December 17, 1890) was a U.S. Representative from Kentucky, son of John Hardin McHenry.

Born in Hartford, Kentucky, McHenry attended the public schools at Hartford, and was graduated from the law department of Transylvania University, Lexington, Kentucky, in 1845.
He was admitted to the bar in 1845 and commenced practice in Hartford.
He served as member of the Kentucky House of Representatives 1851-1853 and 1865-1867.
He served in the Kentucky State Senate 1861-1865.
He served as member of the Democratic National Committee from 1872 until his death.

McHenry was elected as a Democrat to the Forty-second Congress (March 4, 1871 – March 3, 1873).
He resumed the practice of his profession in Hartford.
He served as delegate to the State constitutional convention in 1890.
He died in Hartford, Kentucky, December 17, 1890.
He was interred in Oakwood Cemetery.
The town of McHenry, Kentucky is named in his honor.

References

1826 births
1890 deaths
Democratic Party Kentucky state senators
Democratic Party members of the Kentucky House of Representatives
Transylvania University alumni
Kentucky lawyers
People from Hartford, Kentucky
Democratic Party members of the United States House of Representatives from Kentucky
19th-century American politicians
19th-century American lawyers

Henry D. McHenry


Happidrome is a 1943 British comedy film directed by Philip Brandon and starring Harry Korris, Robbie Vincent and Cecil Fredericks. It was a spin-off from the Happidrome BBC radio series which was popular at the time. The film was made at the Riverside Studios in Hammersmith, and produced by the musical star Jack Buchanan. The sets were designed by the art director William Hemsley.

Synopsis
Mr Lovejoy, a struggling actor-manager returns to a small provincial town with plans to put on a show. Despite having debts there during the previous visit, he is cunningly able to keep his show on the road and gains free advertising in a newspaper by announcing that local talent will be cast. In the meantime he acquires two incompetent assistants, Enoch and Ramsbottom, and Bunty Meadows, an eager would-be star also wangles her way into the company. A statuesque but domineering Russian prima donna also joins the cast.

Bunty's determination to become a leading lady has a disastrous effect on the opening night which is supposed to be a serious play about Ancient Rome, but quickly descends into a total farce. With the audience extremely amused, the show is quickly rebilled as a comedy.

Cast
 Harry Korris as Mr Lovejoy
 Robbie Vincent as Enoch
 Cecil Fredericks as Ramsbottom
 Bunty Meadows as Bunty Mossup
 Lisa Lee as Tanya / Josephine
 Jennie Gregson as Mrs Bane
 Muriel Zillah as Muriel
 Connie Creighton as Connie
 Marie Lawson as Marie
 Olga Stevenson as Miss D'Orsay
 Joss Ambler as Mr Mossup
 Valentine Dunn as Mrs Mossup
 Bryan Herbert as Newspaper editor
 Arthur Hambling as Jones Jnr.
 Leslie 'Hutch' Hutchinson as himself
 Cairoli Brothers as Themselves
 Billy Wells as Ivan

References

Bibliography
 Richards, Jeffrey. Films and British National Identity: from Dickens to Dad's Army. Manchester University Press, 1997.

External links

1943 films
1943 comedy films
British comedy films
British black-and-white films
Films shot at Riverside Studios
Films set in England
Films about theatre
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer films
1940s English-language films
1940s British films

Happidrome (film)


Golden Rule Insurance Company was a provider of health insurance based in Indianapolis with operations in 40 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. It was acquired by UnitedHealth Group in November 2003.

It was closely involved in the establishment of health savings accounts (HSA) and the related tax incentives. The company funded millions of dollars to prominent members of the Republican Party such as Newt Gingrich to support HSAs and to fight broader reform.

Membership in Federation of American Consumers and Travelers (FACT) was required to buy certain insurance products.

The company was named after the Golden Rule.

History
The company was founded in 1940.

In 1976, J. Patrick Rooney became CEO. In the 1980s, he moved the company from Lawrenceville, Illinois to Indianapolis. He retired from the company in 1996.

In 1981, the company sued the Educational Testing Service (ETS) and the Illinois Department of Insurance, claiming that the ETS examination for Illinois insurance agents discriminated against members of minority groups. The parties reached a settlement.

In August 1991, the company announced that it would pay half of the tuition for 500 low-income children in Indianapolis.

The company was acquired by UnitedHealth Group in 2003.

The current CEO is Patrick F. Carr who started in 2012.

References

Financial services companies established in 1940
Financial services companies disestablished in 2003
1940 establishments in Illinois
2003 mergers and acquisitions
Defunct health care companies of the United States

Golden Rule Insurance Company


Football Manege is a multi-use indoor arena in Minsk, Belarus.  It is mostly used for football matches as well as for tennis competitions.  The Manege holds 3,000 people and was opened in December 2002.

Football use
Minsk Football Manege is frequently used by Belarusian football teams during post- and pre-season months in winter (mostly from December until March) for practice and friendly matches. Recently it has been used by some teams as home venue for Belarusian Cup games as well as for Belarusian Super Cup games that are played in February and March.

Tennis use
Football Manege has found its use by Belarus Davis Cup team on a numerous occasions as a home venue for tennis matches in World Group and Group One Euro/African Zone of Davis Cup.

External links
 Official website

Football venues in Belarus
Sport in Minsk
Buildings and structures in Minsk

Football Manege (Minsk)


The Palazzo Barbarigo Minotto (also called Palazzo Minotto Barbarigo) is a 15th-century palace on the Grand Canal in Venice, northern Italy, next to the much larger Palazzo Corner.  Built in the Venetian Gothic style, it was originally two palaces, Palazzo Barbarigo and Palazzo Minotto, later joined together. The Barbarigo palace was owned by  the Barbarigo family for several centuries and was the birthplace of Gregorio Barbarigo, who once refused the Papal Crown. It was later owned by the Minotto and Martinengo families.

Three staterooms face the Grand Canal and another three face Rio Zaguri. In the first half of the 18th century frescoes and paintings by Giovanni Battista Tiepolo, Francesco Fontebasso and Carpoforo Tencalla were commissioned by Pietro Barbarigo. Its chapel has  Louis XIV Style elm flooring inlaid with olive-root marquetry. The palace's doors, are in the same style, banded in walnut with bronze handles shaped as vine leaves. The floors of the staterooms are a blend of terrazzo paving and Venetian "pastellone" paving.

Description

The palace is actually formed by two different buildings, merged in the 17th century. The ancient part, a 15th-century Venetian-Gothic architecture featuring 12th century Byzantine friezes, was originally known as Palazzo Minotto; the newer part, Palazzo Barbarigo, was built in the 17th century.

On the occasion of Gregorio Barbarigo's marriage with the keen and cultured Caterina Sagredo, in 1739, the greatest artists of the time were called to embellish the palace in both its parts, which had been unified by then. Among these the great master Gianbattista Tiepolo, Francesco Fontebasso, Gerolamo Mengozzi Colonna, and Carpoforo Mazzetti.

In 1741 was hired the Ferrarese quadraturist Mengozzi Colonna, who painted the domestic chapel located in a recess of the building and hidden by two wooden leaves. Around it a Louis XIV elm flooring inlaid with olive-root and other prized wood marquetry. The following year Mengozzi Colonna intervenes also on the central hall (portego) designing the beautiful Venetian terrazzo pavings.

The palace's doors are Louis XIV style, banded in walnut and with bronze handles shaped as vine leaves.

Gianbattista Tiepolo started his work here in 1741, painting the monochromes and two of the overdoors that frame the central canvas, "The triumph of Virtue and Nobility over Ignorance". The original oil painting is now part of Cà Rezzonico's collection and has been replaced here with a  20th-century copy.

The whole pictorial decoration represents the cultural interests of Gregorio and Caterina, freshly married. Four monochromes represent Sciences: History, Astronomy, Geography and Astrology. The other four, with mixtilinear framings represent the Arts: Painting, Sculpture, Music and Poetry. The frescoes in the overdoors depict Merit and Abundance.
This whole cycle is  influenced by the neoclassical trend that conquered the whole city during that period, through its ornamental motives, ancient-looking sculptures, sarcophagi, amphorae and vases, together with the "Olympic grace" of its figures.
The parlor is also known as "the room of Wisdom", since it exalts the commissioner's idea of the arts and sciences giving wealth and nobility.

The central oil on canvas was painted by Tiepolo in 1744-1745. Next to the two female figures representing Virtue and Nobility there is a young page holding a drape of their vest: it is probably a portrait of the painter's son, Giuseppe Maria. Behind him we notice another figure, supposedly a self-portrait of the artist himself. Ignorance, defeated, falls down dragging with her a winged genie who is holding a bat, allegory of Vice. This celebrative representation, dear to the masters of the house, is also an example of Tiepolo's artistic maturity, highly influenced by Veronese models.

Carpoforo Mazzetti, pupil of another Ticinese artist, Abbondio Stazio, molded the stuccos in the rocaille style alcove. The decorations originate from the central opening where the bed is placed, branching out on both sides to reach the doors, adorned with mirrors. Above them, the crest and its shield-carrying angels overlook the room.

Mazzetti worked also on the dining room's stuccos, where he represented mythological scenes in pale colours and very realistic and colourful animals to adorn the ceiling.

Musica a Palazzo, a cultural association of classical musicians, has leased the piano nobile since 2005 and uses it for small-scale opera productions.

See also
The Barbarigo family owned several other palaces in Venice which still bear their name, most notably the Palazzo Barbarigo. The others are Palazzo Barbarigo alla Maddalena, Palazzo Barbarigo della Terrazza, and Palazzo Barbarigo Nani Mocenigo.

References

Sources

 Elementi per la Ricostruzione dell'attività artistica di Gerolamo Mengozzi Colonna  in "Bollettino dei Musei Civici Veneziani", 1983-1984.
 Piana Bistrot Annalisa, Ritornano a Palazzo Barbarigo i monocromi di GiambattistaTiepolo,in "Arte Veneta",n.49, 1996.
 Muraro Michelangelo, L'Olympe de Tiepolo in Gazette de Beaux – Arts",1960.
 Magrini Marina, Il Fontebasso nei Palazzi Veneziani,in "Arte Veneta",1974
 Pedrocco Filippo,  Ca' Rezzonico, museo del Settecento veneziano, Venezia : Marsilio, 2001. - 78 p. : ill. ; 24 cm.
 Giuseppe Tassini, Curiosità veneziane, ovvero Origini delle denominazioni stradali di Venezia, Rist. – Venezia, Filippi, 1990.
 Judith Martin, No Vulgar Hotel: The Desire and Pursuit of Venice, 2007,

Palaces in Sestiere San Marco
Palaces on the Grand Canal (Venice)
Gothic architecture in Venice
Houses completed in the 12th century
Houses completed in the 17th century
Barbarigo family

Palazzo Barbarigo Minotto


The chart below shows the current enlisted rank insignia of the United States Army, with seniority, and pay grade, increasing from right to left. The enlisted ranks of  corporal (E-4) and higher are considered non-commissioned officers (NCOs). The rank of specialist is also in pay grade E-4, but does not hold non-commissioned officer status; it is common that a soldier may never hold the rank of corporal, and instead be promoted from specialist to sergeant, attaining junior NCO status at that time.

In the beginning, U.S. Army enlisted rank was indicated by colored epaulets. The use of chevrons came into being in 1821, with the orientation changing over time from point-down to point-up and back again, to the point-down orientation seen in the American Civil War. Around the turn of the 20th century, point-up wear of chevrons returned and has remained so.

History

1775–1821: epaulets

From the creation of the United States Army to 1821, non-commissioned officer (NCO) and staff non-commissioned officer (SNCO) rank was distinguished by the wearing of usually worsted epaulets.

From 1775 to 1779, sergeants and corporals wore one epaulet on the right shoulder, corporals of green color, sergeants of red color.

In 1779, (SNCOs) were authorized two silk epaulets, sergeants two worsted and corporals one worsted on the right shoulder. The color was white (infantry), yellow (artillery), or blue (dragoons). In practice it seems the prescribed blue epaulettes for cavalry NCO never came in wide use while the wearing of white epaulettes prevailed.

By 1783/84, the Continental Army was discharged. For a few weeks, only 55 artillerymen at West Point and 25 men at Fort Pitt were to remain. In August 1784, the 700 men strong First American Regiment (including two companies of artillery) was organized as kind of an army substitute. In October 1786 by approval of Congress, this force should expand to a Legionary Corps of additional infantry, rifle troops, artillery, and dragoons. But this project never materialized. In 1791, the Second Regiment of Infantry was raised and organized as the First Regiment. Both units amalgamated in 1792 with the Legion of the United States, including artillery and dragoons (the first federal mounted force since the discharge of the Continental Light Dragoons in 1783), that then transformed into the US Army in 1796.

Uniform regulations dated January 30, 1787 prescribed, SNCOs wore two silver silk epaulets, sergeants two worsted and corporals one worsted. In the same year, the epaulets' color of cavalry NCOs officially changed from blue to white. At that time the federal mounted force of two troops of dragoons existed only on paper and never got beyond the planning stage (see above).

In 1799, red worsted epaulets were prescribed for all NCOs in all branches: SNCOs on both shoulders, sergeants on the right shoulder, corporals on the left. Chief musicians were identified by two white epaulets. Shortly after, in the year 1800, the color of the epaulets was changed to yellow, for chief musicians in to blue. In reality, the artillery NCOs ignored the order of 1799 and maintained their yellow epaulets, as did a company of bombardiers, sappers, and miners recruited during the War of 1812. In 1802 the infantry NCOs switched back to their former white epaulets. By 1808 dragoons were wearing white and riflemen yellow. SNCOs probably wore two worsted epaulettes with crescent, sergeants two plain worsted epaulettes, and corporals wore one epaulette on the right shoulder.  Sergeants were given two epaulets once again in 1812.

1821–1832: chevrons and "wings" vs. epaulettes
From 1821 to 1832, enlisted personnel wore dark blue "wings" trimmed in yellow (infantry, in white) on each shoulder and a horizontal row of four yellow (infantry, white) buttons on each cuff. This precluded the use of epaulets.  Rank was shown by a single, point up, chevron.  Sergeants major and quartermaster sergeants wore the chevron on both upper sleeves, principal musicians and sergeants on both lower sleeves and corporals on the right upper sleeve.  The chevrons were yellow for artillery and white for infantry.  The regulations prescribe black chevrons for riflemen but that regiment had been abolished.

In 1825 this system was changed.  Sergeants major, quartermaster sergeants and principal musicians now wore a chevron and an arc on both upper sleeves, sergeant a chevron on both upper sleeves and corporals a chevron on both lower sleeves.

1832–1851: epaulettes and slash flaps
The above system was superseded in 1832. At that time, enlisted personnel wore a pair of yellow (infantry, white) cloth epaulets with 2 1/2" long and 1/2" in diameter gold (possibly silver for infantry) fringe for senior NCOs, 1/4" diameter worsted fringe for sergeants and 1/8' inch worsted fringe for corporals (privates wore very short fringe). Senior NCOs wore a coat with two rows of ten buttons that ended 3 1/2" above the knees, while all other enlisted personnel had single-breasted coats with nine buttons that ended 7" above the knees.  Senior NCOs would have worn a crimson colored sash and a yellow or white aiguillette.

In addition, there were on the cuffs a slash flap with yellow (infantry, white) lace and a vertical row of several golds (infantry, silver) buttons depending on grade: senior sergeants wore four flaps and buttons, sergeant wore three flaps and buttons, corporals and privates wore two flaps and buttons. A sergeant-major of artillery had a red plume on the dress hat and a sergeant major of infantry a white plume; quartermaster sergeants in both branches had a light blue plume. Principal or chief musicians were only in the infantry and wore a white plume. A first or orderly sergeant had no plume but wore the uniform of a sergeant with a red waist sash.

By 1834 the epaulets for senior NCOs were the same as those for lieutenants (gold for artillery or silver for infantry with 1/8" wide fringe).  Unlike lieutenants the fringe was worsted in yellow for artillery and white for infantry.

When a regiment of dragoons was added in 1833, the prescribed uniforms had a simple pointed cuff and metal shoulder scales.  Senior NCOs were distinguished by aiguillettes and yellow sashes.  Sergeants wore three yellow point down chevrons on both upper sleeves and corporals two.  The yellow sash was also worn by first sergeants.

By 1839 ordnance sergeants wore the uniform of an artillery sergeant major with no aiguillette and a dark blue trouser stripe.

In 1845, horse artillery companies were allowed dragoon-like uniforms with red chevrons.

Chevrons on fatigue jackets 1833-1847
The use of the sergeant's and corporals's chevrons by dragoons beginning in 1833 is described in regulations as part of the description of the dress coat. This would seam to indicate that they were not worn on the fatigue jacket .  However a price list from the era shows higher prices for sergeant's and corporal's jackets due to the addition of the chevrons.  Therefore, it is probable that sergeants and corporals wore the chevrons on their fatigue jackets with first sergeants and senior NCOs being distinguished by their sashes.

This would have also applied to the Regiment of Mounted Riflemen created in 1846, especially since they were only allowed the fatigue jackets.

It is also possible, if not probable, that sergeants and corporals of other branches were wearing chevrons on their jackets prior to 1847.

Chevrons 1851-1902

In 1851 the army did a major overhaul of its uniforms.  This introduced colors for each branch.  Chevrons were to be of these colors.  The 1851 colors were Saxony blue for infantry (changed to sky blue by 1857), red for artillery, yellow for engineers, orange for dragoons, green for mounted riflemen and crimson for ordnance.

Chevrons were now worn point down.

In 1872 the construction of chevrons was changed to a single piece of colored cloth with the chevrons and arcs outlined in heavy black stitching.  At this time engineers switched from yellow that they had shared with cavalry since 1858 to red with the stitching done in white. This began the concept of some branches having two colors.

In 1884 the chevrons on dress uniforms were changed to a single piece of colored cloth with the chevrons and arcs made of gold lace.  Engineers added white stitching around the lace.

Chevrons were worn on coats, but were not worn on shirts.  In fact shirts are barely mentioned in regulations. During the Spanish–American War in 1898 shirts were worn without coats due to the warm climates in which it was fought.  The army allowed chevrons on shirts in July.  The large coat chevrons did not fit on shirt sleeves so soldiers began to fashion smaller versions of their chevrons.  The army gave preliminary approval of smaller chevrons in 1900.  Full implementation was superseded by a change in uniforms in 1902.

1902–present: chevrons point up

1902–1920

With the 1902 uniform change the smaller shirt sized chevrons were prescribed for all uniforms.   They were to be worn point up. The chevrons were in the branch colors on a blue, white, khaki or olive drab background.

The branch colors in 1902 were,
Cavalry: Yellow
Artillery: Red
Infantry: Light Blue
Quartermaster's Department (including USMA Detachment):	Buff
Substance Department: Grey
Medical Department & Hospital Corps: Maroon and White
Corps of Engineers: Red and White
Ordnance Department: Black and red
Signal Corps: Orange and White

There were 34 enlisted ranks to be shown in these nine colors, each on four different backgrounds.  This was more than the army's supply system could handle.  In 1904 the colored chevrons were restricted to the dress blue coat.  On olive drab, khaki and white uniforms the chevrons would be made of olive drab shirting flannel on the appropriate colored background to match the coat.

Implementation of the new chevrons was slow. In 1905 the army ordered that any of the older larger chevrons still in use would also be worn point up.

According to Army Regulations of 1904 the ranks and grades were:

12.	Regimental Sergeant Major,
	Sergeant Major Senior Grade,
	Master Electrician,
	Master Signal Electrician.

13.	Ordnance Sergeant,
	Post Commissary Sergeant,
	Post Quartermaster Sergeant,
	Electrician Sergeant,
	Sergeant First Class of the Hospital Corps,
	Signal Sergeant First Class.

14.	Regimental Quartermaster Sergeant,
	Regimental Commissary Sergeant,
	Chief Musician.

15.	Squadron Sergeant Major,
	Battalion Sergeant Major,
	Sergeant Major Junior Grade,
	Color Sergeant,
	Chief Trumpeter,
	Principal Musician,
	Battalion Quartermaster Sergeant.

16.	First Sergeant,
	Drum Major.

17.	Sergeant,
	Troop Quartermaster Sergeant,
	Battery Quartermaster Sergeant,
	Company Quartermaster Sergeant,
	Stable Sergeant.

18.	Corporal.

non-NCO	Cook
	Trumpeter,
	Musician,
	Farrier and Blacksmith,
	Mechanic,
	Artificer,
	Saddler,
	Wagoner,
	Private First Class,
	Private.

The white coat was restricted to medical personnel in 1907, the khaki coat was abolished in 1911 and the blue coat was suspended in 1917. This left only the olive on olive chevrons that were used through World War I.

Wartime reorganization left the army with 55 enlisted ranks serving in 18 branches by 1918.  Attempts were made to eliminate branch specific distinctions and the wear of chevrons was restricted to the right sleeve only in order to simplify the supply situation.

After the war the army continued these reforms by changing the insignia for a private first class from the branch insignia to a single arc and eliminating the concept of the background of a chevron had to match the garment it was worn on.

In 1920 some color was added to certain chevrons and even a white navy petty officer's eagle was added to the insignia of master engineers and quartermaster sergeants.  These new insignia were never issued due to a major change in enlisted ranks and insignia later in 1920.

1920–1942
The biggest change in the history of US Army enlisted ranks came on June 4, 1920.  On that day congress passed a law   that changed how enlisted ranks were managed.  It created seven pay grades, numbered one to seven with one being the highest,  and gave the president the authority to create whatever ranks were necessary within those grades.  Prior to this enlisted ranks had been created by law.  The laws usually laid out the size and shape of the army branch by branch, creating different ranks structures for each branch.  This law ended branch specific ranks.

The law specified what percentage of the enlisted strength of the army were allowed in each of the seven grades. The first grade would contain .6% of the army's enlisted men, the second grade 1.8%, the third grade 2%, the fourth and fifth grades 9.5%, the sixth grade 25% and the remaining 51.6% in the seventh grade.  Men in the sixth and seventh grades could be rated as specialists and get extra pay.  This replaced the specialist ranks such as cooks or artificers.  There were six classes of specialists in both grades.  Specialists first class could only be .7% of the authorized strength of the sixth and seventh grades.  Specialists second class were restricted to 1.4%, specialists third class 1.9%, specialists fourth class 4.7%, specialists fifth class 5% and specialists sixth class 15.2%.

The army implemented the new law on June 19, 1920.  The new executive authority was used to reduce the large number of ranks in use at the time to eight, plus the specialists.

Grade One was now the rank of Master Sergeant. It was created from the ranks of Regimental Sergeant Major. Sergeant Major Senior Grade, Quartermaster Sergeant Senior Grade, Master Hospital Sergeant, Master Engineer Senior Grade, Master Electrician, Master Signal Electrician, Engineer, Regimental Supply Sergeant, the senior 25% of Ordnance Sergeants, the senior 50% of Master Gunners and the Band Sergeants and Assistant Band Leader of the West Point Band.

Grade Two was now the rank of Technical Sergeant.  It came from the ranks of Hospital Sergeant, Master Engineer Junior Grade, the junior 75% of Ordnance Sergeants, Electrician Sergeant First Class, Assistant Engineer, Quartermaster Sergeant and Electrician Sergeants from the Artillery School at West Point.  Also in Grade Two the rank of First Sergeant was continued.

Grade Three was now the rank of Staff Sergeant. It came from the ranks ofSquadron or Battalion Sergeant Major, Squadron or Battalion Supply Sergeant, Sergeant Major Junior Grade, Sergeant First Class, the junior 50% of Master Gunners, Assistant Band Leader except from the West Point Band, Sergeant Bugler, Electrician Sergeant, Radio Sergeant, Color Sergeant and Sergeant of Field Music from the West Point Band.

The rank of Sergeant was placed in Grade Four.  It absorbed the ranks of BandSergeant, Stable Sergeant, Mess Sergeant and Supply Sergeant.

The rank of Corporal was placed in Grade Five.  It absorbed the ranks of Band Corporal and Corporal Bugler.

The rank of Private First Class was placed in Grade Six, and the rank of Private was placed in grade seven.  Within those two grades Musicians First Class in the West Point Band were rated as Specialists First Class. Oilers in the Mine Planter Service were rated as Specialists Second Class. Stewards and Firemen in the Mine Planter Service, Musicians Second Class in the West Point Band and all other Musicians First Class were rated  as Specialists Third Class. Chief Mechanics, Horseshoers, Cooks, Musicians Third Class in the West Point Band and all other Musicians Second Class were rated  as Specialists Fourth Class. Chauffeurs First Class, Chauffeurs, all other Musicians Third Class, Saddlers, Assistant Stewards and Deck Hands in the Mine Planter Service, Mechanics and Wagoners were rated as Specialists Fifth Class.  Buglers First Class and Buglers were rated  as Specialists Sixth Class.  The ranks of Farrier and Aviator are not listed in the order.

The new ranks were shown by olive drab chevrons on a dark blue background.  Master Sergeant's wore three chevrons and three arcs, Technical Sergeants three chevrons and two arcs, First Sergeants three chevrons two arcs and the traditional lozenge, Staff Sergeants three chevrons and one arc, Sergeants three chevrons, Corporals two and Privates First Class one.  They were worn on the left sleeve until 1921 when they were placed on both sleeves.

Specialists were to wear the insignia of their grade, one chevron for Grade six or none for Grade Seven.  Unofficially many specialists, at least in Grade Six wore one chevron with branch insignia in the angle and one to six arcs.

Khaki on dark blue chevrons were created in 1936 for use on khaki uniforms.

1942–1948

In 1942, there were several reforms. The pay was increased for all ranks for the first time in two decades, and combat pay was introduced. The rank of the first sergeant was moved to Grade One and the specialist ranks were abolished. The specialist ranks were replaced by the distinct ranks of technician third grade (equivalent to a staff sergeant), technician fourth grade (equivalent to a sergeant), and technician fifth grade (equivalent to a corporal). Technicians were inferior to non-commissioned officers of the same grade but superior to all grades below them. They had the same insignia as the regular rank of their grade, but with a cloth "T" inset below their stripes.

1948–1956

With the Career Compensation Act of October 12, 1949, the pay grades were broken up into seven "E" (enlisted and non-commissioned officer), four "W" (warrant officer), and eight "O" (officer) grades. The technician's ranks were abolished and were absorbed into their equivalent line ranks. The rank of private was divided into two ranks of private (Grade E1 and Grade E2), and private first class (Grade E3). Corporal was regraded as Grade E4. Sergeant (Grade E5) was a career soldier rank and its former three-chevron insignia was abolished and replaced with the three chevrons and an arc of the rank of staff sergeant. The rank of staff sergeant was discontinued and the rank of technical sergeant (Grade E6) was renamed sergeant first class. The ranks of first sergeant and master sergeant were placed in (Grade E7).

In 1948, the old olive on blue insignia was abolished. In their place was a new system of smaller (2 inches wide) and narrower chevrons and arcs that were instead differenced by color called the "Goldenlite" system - with subdued dark blue stripes on bright yellow backing for combat arms and yellow stripes on dark blue for support arms. They were not popular. Combat-arm NCOs found their stripes were hard to identify unless the viewer was very close, making it hard to rally and lead troops. Support-arm NCOs found their stripes too small to be easily seen at a distance, making it hard to tell their seniority at a glance. When the US Army entered the Korean War, it was found that troops in combat abandoned the new insignia. They either used the support arm stripes, purchased the old larger olive-on-blue stripes from post exchanges or Army / Navy stores, or used hand-cut or tailor-made copies. The small "Goldenlite" stripes were abandoned in February 1951 and the dark-blue-on-yellow insignia was abolished. Larger 3-inch-wide olive-drab-on-dark-blue stripes were adopted for servicemen.

In 1950, the Women's Army Corps (WAC) were issued new Goldenlite yellow-on-brown insignia for wear with the taupe WAC uniform. It was the same size as the men's small 2-inch-wide Goldenlite stripes. (Female personnel would wear the smaller 2-inch insignia until 1998, well after male personnel was issued larger, 3-inch-wide insignia in 1951.) In 1951, WACs were assigned surplus men's Goldenlite-yellow-on-dark-blue stripes for wear with olive drab or fatigue uniforms. Also in 1951, the optional white WAC dress uniform was now authorized for wear by enlisted and NCO ranks and 2-inch Goldenlite yellow-on-white stripes were created to be worn with it.

In 1955 (as stated in Army Regulation 615–15, dated 2 July 1954), new grade structures were announced reactivating the specialist rank: specialist 3rd class (E-4, or SP3), specialist 2nd class (E-5, or SP2), specialist 1st class (E-6, or SP1) and master specialist (E-7, or MSP). The specialist insignia was the same smaller and narrower size as the old Goldenlite stripes to differentiate specialists from non-commissioned officers.

1956–1985

In 1956, the Army began wearing polished black leather boots instead of the traditional unpolished russet leather (as late as the early 1980s, older soldiers who had served before 1956 said they were in the "brown boot" army.), and the army green uniform (with Goldenlite-Yellow-on-green rank stripes) was adopted. The new enlisted rank insignia were then used on all Army uniforms (e.g., green, khaki, and fatigue). Enlisted rank insignia with a blue background was worn on the army blue dress uniform and a white background on the army white uniform.

In 1957, a 2-inch-wide set of Goldenlite-yellow-on-blue stripes were worn with the new optional army blue WAC dress uniform. In 1959, a 2-inch-wide set of Goldenlite-yellow-on-green stripes were worn with the new army green WAC duty uniform; they replaced the taupe WAC service uniform by 1961. Although the WAC was disestablished in 1978, the army green WAC uniform would be in use until 1985.

In 1958, as part of a rank restructuring, two pay grades and four ranks were added: sergeant (E-5) returned to its traditional three chevron insignia, E-6 became staff sergeant, which had been eliminated in 1948 (with its previous three chevrons and one arc insignia), sergeant first class became E-7, master sergeant became E-8, which included first sergeant and specialist 8; and E-9, which included sergeant major and specialist 9. In 1959, the specialist insignia was made the same size and width as non-commissioned officer's stripes. In 1961, the wearing of large Goldenlite-yellow-on-green stripes was adopted for use on all Army uniforms (green, khaki, and fatigue) except for the Army dress blue uniform, which used large insignia with a blue background and army white uniform that used a white background. In 1965, the ranks of specialist 8 and specialist 9 were discontinued.

In 1966, the rank of Sergeant Major of the Army was established, its holder an advisor to the Army chief of staff. Considered a higher grade than sergeant major (or than command sergeant major from 1968), the Sergeant Major of the Army didn't receive its unique rank insignia until 1979. In 1968, the rank of command sergeant major was established as an assistant to the commanding officer at battalion, brigade, division, and corps levels. Also, that year the insignia of the private first class received one arc under the chevron. In 1978, the rank of specialist 7 was discontinued. In 1979, brass enlisted rank pins were created for wear on black epaulets with the Army green shirt and black "wooly-pully" sweater. In 1985, the ranks of specialist 5 and specialist 6 were discontinued.

2000–present

In 2006, the blue Army Service Uniform (ASU) was adopted to replace the army green uniform, and the yellow-on-blue stripes were reintroduced.

Subsequently, the blue uniform was returned to formal dress use only in 2020, as the army reintroduced a green daily service uniform modeled after the pinks and greens officers service uniform from World War II. The enlisted insignia on this uniform is pale tan stripes on an olive green background.

Command roles

The headquarters of each company-sized unit is assigned a senior non-commissioned officer (NCO) who, as the highest-ranking enlisted person in the company/battery/troop, monitors the enlisted personnel and is their advocate with the commanding officer. This position is known as the "first sergeant," though the person carrying that title does not have to have that rank. In a battalion or larger unit, the senior NCO is a sergeant major. The rank of sergeant major is usually carried by the senior NCO of the S-3 staff section in a battalion, regiment, or a brigade, and in most staff sections in larger units. The command sergeant major fills an advisory function, assisting the commander of a battalion, regiment, brigade, or higher formation in personnel matters. The Sergeant Major of the Army has a similar role assisting the Army Chief of Staff.

In terms of command, the rank of a person typically determines what job and command the soldier has within a unit. For personnel in US Army mechanized infantry, a Bradley infantry fighting vehicle (M2A2) is commanded by a Staff Sergeant, the gun is manned by a Specialist or Sergeant and the driver is Specialist or below. For armor, the Abrams main battle tank (M1A2) is commanded by a captain, lieutenant, sergeant first class or staff sergeant, the gunner is a staff sergeant or sergeant, and the driver and loader are specialists or below.

Forms of address

Forms of address specified in Army Regulation AR 600-20 Army Command Policy are: "Sergeant Major" and "First Sergeant" for those holding those ranks, and "Sergeant" for master sergeants, sergeants first class, staff sergeants, and sergeants. Corporals and specialists are addressed by their rank. Privates first class and privates (both PV1 and PV2) can all be addressed as "Private".

In some cases, informal titles are used. "Top" is commonly used as an informal address to first sergeants or anyone serving as a company first sergeant. In field artillery units a platoon sergeant (usually an E-7) is informally referred to as "Smoke" (from "chief of smoke", a reference to when units fired as whole batteries of between four and six guns, and the senior NCO position was "Chief of Firing Battery"). The junior E-7 position is designated as "Gunnery Sergeant" and similar to the USMC usage, is typically referred to as "Gunny". Field artillery cannon sections are led by section chiefs (usually an E-6) are often informally called "Chief". This does not seem to be common in other section-based unit subdivisions such as staff sections. In some smaller units, with more tight-knit squads, soldiers might call their squad leader "Boss", or a similar respectful term. A habit that has all but died out is the addressing of a platoon sergeant, in any unit other than artillery, being affectionately called a "platoon daddy" in casual conversation or jest (but never in any official communication of any type). In some training units (BCT and AIT or OSUT), trainees are called "Private", regardless of the rank worn. Special titles, such as "drill sergeant" and "gunnery sergeant" are specific to certain jobs (position title), and should not be confused for actual rank. Other services differ, such as the Marine Corps, which address each other by full rank.

Some terms are used jokingly when referring to a soldier's rank. For instance, specialists are sometimes jokingly referred to as "The E-4 Mafia" (referring to their pay grade of E-4), "Command Private Major", "Specialist Major", "Full-Bird Private" (from the eagle on their shield), "Sham Shield" (from their stereotype of "shamming it", or malingering), "PV4", or "Spec-4" (about the old specialist grades, which at one point went up to Specialist 9).

An E-2 Private may be referred to as "Private 2nd Class". Privates (PV2) rank insignia are sometimes called "Mosquito Wings" (from the appearance of the single chevron).

Privates are called "Buck Privates" because they are the lowest rank of private. An E-1 Private may be referred to as "E-Nothing", or "PV-Nothing" (as opposed to PV2, the next rank) due to their lack of rank insignia. E-1 Privates were also called a "Fuzzy" or "E-Fuzzy" during the War on Terror era due to the bare velcro patch-holders on the Army Combat Uniform (ACU).

Timeline of changes
This table shows changes in insignia, from 1905 until the present.

See also
 United States Army officer rank insignia
 United States warrant officer rank insignia

Explanatory notes

References

External links

 US Army Rank and Insignia
 Army Regulation 600-20—Table 1-1 lists all current enlisted ranks, the correct form of address, the associated pay grade, and the correct abbreviation.
Naval History and Heritage Command: Chevrons

American non-commissioned personnel
Military insignia
United States Army rank insignia

United States Army enlisted rank insignia


The first Persian invasion of Greece, during the Greco-Persian Wars, began in 492 BC, and ended with the decisive Athenian victory at the Battle of Marathon in 490 BC. The invasion, consisting of two distinct campaigns, was ordered by the Persian king Darius the Great primarily in order to punish the city-states of Athens and Eretria. These cities had supported the cities of Ionia during their revolt against Persian rule, thus incurring the wrath of Darius. Darius also saw the opportunity to extend his empire into Europe, and to secure its western frontier.

The first campaign in 492 BC, led by Mardonius, re-subjugated Thrace and forced Macedon to become a fully subordinate client kingdom part of Persia, after being a vassal to Persia as early as the late 6th century BC, probably in 512 BC. However, further progress was prevented when Mardonius' fleet was wrecked in a storm off the coast of Mount Athos. The following year, having demonstrated his intentions, Darius sent ambassadors to all parts of Greece, demanding their submission. He received it from almost all of them, except Athens and Sparta, both of whom executed the ambassadors. With Athens still defiant, and Sparta now effectively at war with him, Darius ordered a further military campaign for the following year.

The second Persian campaign, in 490 BC, was under the command of Datis and Artaphernes. The expedition headed first to the island Naxos, which it captured and burned. It then island-hopped between the rest of the Cycladic Islands, annexing each into the Persian empire. Reaching Greece, the expedition landed at Eretria, which it besieged, and after a brief time, captured. Eretria was razed and its citizens enslaved. Finally, the task force headed to Attica, landing at Marathon, en route for Athens. There, it was met by a smaller Athenian army, which nevertheless proceeded to win a remarkable victory at the Battle of Marathon.

This defeat prevented the successful conclusion of the campaign, and the task force returned to Asia. Nevertheless, the expedition had fulfilled most of its aims, punishing Naxos and Eretria, and bringing much of the Aegean under Persian rule, as well as the full inclusion of Macedon. The unfinished business from this campaign led Darius to prepare for a much larger invasion of Greece, to firmly subjugate it, and to punish Athens and Sparta. However, internal strife within the empire delayed this expedition, and Darius then died of old age. It was thus left to his son Xerxes I to lead the second Persian invasion of Greece, beginning in 480 BC.

Sources

The main source for the Greco-Persian Wars is the Greek historian Herodotus. Herodotus, who has been called the 'Father of History', was born in 484 BC in Halicarnassus, Asia Minor (then under Persian overlordship). He wrote his 'Enquiries' (Greek—Historia; English—(The) Histories) around 440–430 BC, trying to trace the origins of the Greco-Persian Wars, which would still have been relatively recent history (the wars finally ending in 450 BC). Herodotus's approach was entirely novel, and at least in Western society, he does seem to have invented 'history' as we know it. As the British author Tom Holland has it: "For the first time, a chronicler set himself to trace the origins of a conflict not to a past so remote so as to be utterly fabulous, nor to the whims and wishes of some god, nor to a people's claim to manifest destiny, but rather explanations he could verify personally."

Some subsequent ancient historians, despite following in his footsteps, criticised Herodotus, starting with Thucydides. Nevertheless, Thucydides chose to begin his history where Herodotus left off (at the siege of Sestos), and therefore evidently felt that Herodotus's history was accurate enough not to need re-writing or correcting. Plutarch criticised Herodotus in his essay "On The Malignity of Herodotus", describing Herodotus as "Philobarbaros" (barbarian-lover), for not being pro-Greek enough, which suggests that Herodotus might actually have done a reasonable job of being even-handed. A negative view of Herodotus was passed on to Renaissance Europe, though he remained well read. However, since the 19th century his reputation has been dramatically rehabilitated by archaeological finds which have repeatedly confirmed his version of events. The prevailing modern view is that Herodotus generally did a remarkable job in his Historia, but that some of his specific details (particularly troop numbers and dates) should be viewed with skepticism. Nevertheless, there are still some historians who believe Herodotus made up much of his story.

The Sicilian historian Diodorus Siculus, writing in the 1st century BC in his Bibliotheca Historica, also provides an account of the Greco-Persian wars, partially derived from the earlier Greek historian Ephorus. This account is fairly consistent with Herodotus's. The Greco-Persian wars are also described in less detail by a number of other ancient historians including Plutarch, Ctesias of Cnidus, and are alluded by other authors, such as the playwright Aeschylus. Archaeological evidence, such as the Serpent Column, also supports some of Herodotus's specific claims.

Background

The first Persian invasion of Greece had its immediate roots in the Ionian Revolt, the earliest phase of the Greco-Persian Wars. However, it was also the result of the longer-term interaction between the Greeks and Persians. In 500 BC the Persian Empire was still relatively young and highly expansionist, but prone to revolts amongst its subject peoples. Moreover, the Persian king Darius was a usurper, and had spent considerable time extinguishing revolts against his rule. Even before the Ionian Revolt, Darius had begun to expand the Empire into Europe, subjugating Thrace, expanding past the Danube river, conquering Paeonia, and forcing Macedon to become a client kingdom to Persia; though the latter retaining an amount of autonomy up to 492 BC. Attempts at further expansion into the politically fractious world of Ancient Greece may have been inevitable. However, the Ionian Revolt had directly threatened the integrity of the Persian empire, and the states of mainland Greece remained a potential menace to its future stability. Darius thus resolved to subjugate and pacify Greece and the Aegean, and to punish those involved in the Ionian Revolt.

The Ionian revolt had begun with an unsuccessful expedition against Naxos, a joint venture between the Persian satrap Artaphernes and the Miletus tyrant Aristagoras. In the aftermath, Artaphernes decided to remove Aristagoras from power, but before he could do so, Aristagoras abdicated, and declared Miletus a democracy. The other Ionian cities, ripe for rebellion, followed suit, ejecting their Persian-appointed tyrants, and declaring themselves democracies. Aristagoras then appealed to the states of Mainland Greece for support, but only Athens and Eretria offered to send troops.

The involvement of Athens in the Ionian Revolt arose from a complex set of circumstances, beginning with the establishment of the Athenian Democracy in the late 6th century BC.
In 510 BC, with the aid of Cleomenes I, King of Sparta, the Athenian people had expelled Hippias, the tyrant ruler of Athens. With Hippias's father Peisistratus, the family had ruled for 36 out of the previous 50 years and fully intended to continue Hippias's rule. Hippias fled to Sardis to the court of the Persian satrap, Artaphernes, and promised control of Athens to the Persians if they were to help restore him. In the meantime, Cleomenes helped install a pro-Spartan tyranny under Isagoras in Athens, in opposition to Cleisthenes, the leader of the traditionally powerful Alcmaeonidae family, who considered themselves the natural heirs to the rule of Athens. In a daring response, Cleisthenes proposed to the Athenian people that he would establish a 'democracy' in Athens, much to the horror of the rest of the aristocracy. Cleisthenes's reasons for suggesting such a radical course of action, which would remove much of his own family's power, are unclear; perhaps he perceived that days of aristocratic rule were coming to an end anyway; certainly he wished to prevent Athens becoming a puppet of Sparta by whatever means necessary. However, as a result of this proposal, Cleisthenes and his family were exiled from Athens, in addition to other dissenting elements, by Isagoras. Having been promised democracy however, the Athenian people seized the moment and revolted, expelling Cleomenes and Isagoras. Cleisthenes was thus restored to Athens (507 BC), and at breakneck speed began to establish democratic government. The establishment of democracy revolutionised Athens, which henceforth became one of the leading cities in Greece. The new-found freedom and self-governance of the Athenians meant that they were thereafter exceptionally hostile to the return of the tyranny of Hippias, or any form of outside subjugation; by Sparta, Persia or anyone else.

Cleomenes, unsurprisingly, was not pleased with events, and marched on Athens with the Spartan army. Cleomenes's attempts to restore Isagoras to Athens ended in a debacle, but fearing the worst, the Athenians had by this point already sent an embassy to Artaphernes in Sardis, to request aid from the Persian Empire. Artaphernes requested that the Athenians give him an 'earth and water', a traditional token of submission, which the Athenian ambassadors acquiesced to. However, they were severely censured for this when they returned to Athens. At some point later Cleomenes instigated a plot to restore Hippias to the rule of Athens. This failed and Hippias again fled to Sardis and tried to persuade the Persians to subjugate Athens. The Athenians dispatched ambassadors to Artaphernes to dissuade him from taking action, but Artaphernes merely instructed the Athenians to take Hippias back as tyrant. Needless to say, the Athenians balked at this, and resolved instead to be openly at war with Persia. Having thus become the enemy of Persia, Athens was already in a position to support the Ionian cities when they began their revolt. The fact that the Ionian democracies were inspired by the example of Athens no doubt further persuaded the Athenians to support the Ionian Revolt; especially since the cities of Ionia were (supposedly) originally Athenian colonies.

The city of Eretria also sent assistance to the Ionians for reasons that are not completely clear. Possibly commercial reasons were a factor; Eretria was a mercantile city, whose trade was threatened by Persian dominance of the Aegean. Herodotus suggests that the Eretrians supported the revolt in order to repay the support the Milesians had given Eretria in a past war against Chalcis.

The Athenians and Eretrians sent a task force of 25 triremes to Asia Minor. Whilst there, the Greek army surprised and outmaneuvered Artaphernes, marching to Sardis and there burning the lower city. However, this was as much as the Greeks achieved, and they were then pursued back to the coast by Persian horsemen, losing many men in the process. Despite the fact their actions were ultimately fruitless, the Eretrians and in particular the Athenians had earned Darius's lasting enmity, and he vowed to punish both cities. The Persian naval victory at the Battle of Lade (494 BC) all but ended the Ionian Revolt, and by 493 BC, the last hold-outs were vanquished by the Persian fleet. The revolt was used as an opportunity by Darius to extend the empire's border to the islands of the East Aegean and the Propontis, which had not been part of the Persian dominions before. The completion of the pacification of Ionia allowed the Persians to begin planning their next moves; to extinguish the threat to the empire from Greece, and to punish Athens and Eretria.

492 BC: Mardonius' campaign

In the spring of 492 BC an expeditionary force, to be commanded by Darius's son-in-law Mardonius, was assembled, consisting of a fleet and a land army. Whilst the ultimate aim was to punish Athens and Eretria, the expedition also aimed to subdue as many of the Greek cities as possible. Departing from Cilicia, Mardonius sent the army to march to the Hellespont, whilst he travelled with the fleet. He sailed round the coast of Asia Minor to Ionia, where he spent a short time abolishing the tyrannies that ruled the cities of Ionia. Ironically, since the establishment of democracies had been a key factor in the Ionian Revolt, he replaced the tyrannies with democracies. Mardonius' establishment of democracy here can be seen as a bid to pacify Ionia, allowing his flank to be protected as he advanced towards the Hellespont and then onto Athens and Eretria.

Thence the fleet continued on to the Hellespont, and when all was ready, shipped the land forces across to Europe. The army then marched through Thrace, re-subjugating it, since these lands had already been added to the Persian Empire in 512 BC, during Darius's campaign against the Scythians. Upon reaching Macedon, the Persians forced it to become a fully subordinate part of the Persian Empire; they had been vassals of the Persians since the late 6th century BC, but retained their general autonomy.

Meanwhile, the fleet crossed to Thasos, resulting in the Thasians submitting to the Persians. The fleet then rounded the coastline as far as Acanthus in Chalcidice, before attempting to round the headland of Mount Athos. However, they were caught in a violent storm, which drove them against the coastline of Athos, wrecking (according to Herodotus) 300 ships, with the loss of 20,000 men.

Then, whilst the army was camped in Macedon, the Brygians, a local Thracian tribe, launched a night raid against the Persian camp, killing many of the Persians, and wounding Mardonius. Despite his injury, Mardonius made sure that the Brygians were defeated and subjugated, before leading his army back to the Hellespont; the remnants of the navy also retreated to Asia. Although this campaign ended ingloriously, the land approaches to Greece had been secured, and the Greeks had no doubt been made aware of Darius's intentions for them.

491 BC: Diplomacy
Perhaps reasoning that the expedition of the previous year may have made his plans for Greece obvious, and weakened the resolve of the Greek cities, Darius turned to diplomacy in 491 BC. He sent ambassadors to all the Greek city states, asking for "earth and water", a traditional token of submission. The vast majority of cities did as asked, fearing the wrath of Darius. In Athens, however, the ambassadors were put on trial and then executed; in Sparta, they were simply thrown down a well. This firmly and finally drew the battle-lines for the coming conflict; Sparta and Athens, despite their recent enmity, would together fight the Persians.

However, Sparta was then thrown into disarray by internal machinations. The citizens of Aegina had submitted to the Persian ambassadors, and the Athenians, troubled by the possibility of Persia using Aegina as a naval base, asked Sparta to intervene. Cleomenes travelled to Aegina to confront the Aeginetans personally, but they appealed to Cleomenes's fellow king Demaratus, who supported their stance. Cleomenes responded by having Demaratus declared illegitimate, with the help of the priests at Delphi (whom he bribed); Demaratus was replaced by his cousin Leotychides. Now faced with two Spartan kings, the Aeginetans capitulated, and handed over hostages to the Athenians as a guarantee of their good behaviour. However, in Sparta news emerged of the bribes Cleomenes had given at Delphi, and he was expelled from the city. He then sought to rally the northern Peloponnesus to his cause, at which the Spartans relented, and invited him back to the city. By 491 BC though, Cleomenes was widely considered insane and was sentenced to prison where he was found dead the following day. Cleomenes was succeeded by his half-brother Leonidas I.

490 BC: Datis and Artaphernes' campaign
Taking advantage of the chaos in Sparta, which effectively left Athens isolated, Darius decided to launch an amphibious expedition to finally punish Athens and Eretria. An army was assembled in Susa, and marched into Cilicia, where a fleet had been gathered. Command of the expedition was given to Datis the Mede and Artaphernes, son of the satrap Artaphernes.

Size of the Persian force

According to Herodotus, the fleet sent by Darius consisted of 600 triremes. There is no indication in the historical sources of how many transport ships accompanied them, if any. Herodotus claimed that 3,000 transport ships accompanied 1,207 triremes during Xerxes's invasion in 480 BC. Among modern historians, some have accepted this number of ships as reasonable; it has been suggested either that the number 600 represents the combined number of triremes and transport ships, or that there were horse transports in addition to 600 triremes.

Herodotus does not estimate the size of the Persian army, only saying that they formed a "great and well-furnished army". Among other ancient sources, the poet Simonides, a near-contemporary, says the campaign force numbered 200,000, while a later writer, the Roman Cornelius Nepos estimates 200,000 infantry and 10,000 cavalry. Plutarch and Pausanias both independently give 300,000, as does the Suda dictionary; Plato and Lysias assert 500,000; and Justin 600,000.

Modern historians generally dismiss these numbers as exaggerations. One approach to estimate the number of troops is to calculate the number of marines carried by 600 triremes. Herodotus tells us that each trireme in the second invasion of Greece carried 30 extra marines, in addition to a probable 14 standard marines. Thus, 600 triremes could easily have carried 18,000–26,000 infantry. Numbers proposed for the Persian infantry are in the range 18,000–100,000. However, the consensus is around 25,000.

The Persian infantry used in the invasion was probably a heterogeneous group drawn from across the empire. However, according to Herodotus, there was at least a general conformity in the type of armour and style of fighting. The troops were, generally speaking, armed with a bow, 'short spear' and sword, carried a wicker shield, and wore at most a leather jerkin. The one exception to this may have been the ethnic Persian troops, who may have worn a corslet of scale armour. Some contingents would have been armed somewhat differently; for instance, the Saka were renowned axemen. The 'elite' contingents of the Persian infantry seem to have been the ethnic Persians, Medians, Cissians and the Saka; Herodotus specifically mentions the presence of Persians and Saka at Marathon. The style of fighting used by the Persians was probably to stand off from an enemy, using their bows (or equivalent) to wear down the enemy before closing in to deliver the coup de grace with spear and sword.

Estimates for the cavalry are usually in the 1,000–3,000 range. The Persian cavalry was usually provided by the ethnic Persians, Bactrians, Medes, Cissians, and Saka; most of these probably fought as lightly armed missile cavalry. The fleet must have had at least some proportion of transport ships, since the cavalry was carried by ship; whilst Herodotus claims the cavalry was carried in the triremes, this is improbable. Lazenby estimates 30–40 transport ships would be required to carry 1,000 cavalry.

Lindos
Once assembled, the Persian force sailed from Cilicia firstly to the island of Rhodes. A Lindian Temple Chronicle records that Datis besieged the city of Lindos, but was unsuccessful.

Naxos

The fleet then moved north along the Ionian coast towards Samos, before turning west into the Aegean Sea. The fleet sailed next to Naxos, in order to punish the Naxians for their resistance to the failed expedition that the Persians had mounted there a decade earlier. Many of the inhabitants fled to the mountains; according to Herodotus, those that the Persians caught were enslaved. The Persians then burnt the city and temples of the Naxians.

The Cyclades

Moving on, the Persian fleet approached Delos, whereupon the Delians also fled from their homes. Having demonstrated Persian power at Naxos, Datis now intended to show clemency to the other islands, if they submitted to him. He sent a herald to the Delians, proclaiming:  "Holy men, why have you fled away, and so misjudged my intent? It is my own desire, and the king's command to me, to do no harm to the land where the two gods were born, neither to the land itself nor to its inhabitants. So return now to your homes and dwell on your island." Datis then burned 300 talents of frankincense on the altar of Apollo on Delos, to show his respect for one of the gods of the island. The fleet then proceeded to island-hop across the rest of Aegean on its way to Eretria, taking hostages and troops from each island.

Karystos
The Persians finally arrived off the southern tip of Euboea, at Karystos. The citizens of Karystos refused to give hostages to the Persians, so they were besieged, and their land ravaged, until they submitted to the Persians.

Siege of Eretria

The task force then sailed around Euboea to the first major target, Eretria. According to Herodotus, the Eretrians were divided amongst themselves as to the best course of action; whether to flee to the highlands, or undergo a siege, or to submit to the Persians. In the event, the majority decision was to remain in the city. The Eretrians made no attempt to stop the Persians landing, or advancing, and thus allowed themselves to be besieged. For six days the Persians attacked the walls, with losses on both sides; however, on the seventh day two reputable Eretrians opened the gates and betrayed the city to the Persians. The city was razed, and temples and shrines were looted and burned. Furthermore, according to Darius's commands, the Persians enslaved all the remaining townspeople.

Battle of Marathon

The Persian fleet next headed south down the coast of Attica, landing at the bay of Marathon, roughly  from Athens, on the advice of Hippias, son of the former tyrant of Athens, Peisistratus. The Athenians, joined by a small force from Plataea, marched to Marathon, and succeeded in blocking the two exits from the plain of Marathon. At the same time, Athens' greatest runner, Pheidippides (or Philippides) was sent to Sparta to request that the Spartan army march to Athens' aid. Pheidippides arrived during the festival of Carneia, a sacrosanct period of peace, and was informed that the Spartan army could not march to war until the full moon rose; Athens could not expect reinforcement for at least ten days. They decided to hold out at Marathon for the time being, and they were reinforced by a contingent of hoplites from Plataea.

Stalemate ensued for five days, before the Athenians (for reasons that are not completely clear) decided to attack the Persians. Despite the numerical advantage of the Persians, the hoplites proved devastatingly effective, routing the Persians wings before turning in on the centre of the Persian line; the remnants of the Persian army left the battle and fled to their ships. Herodotus records that 6,400 Persian bodies were counted on the battlefield; the Athenians lost just 192 men and the Plataeans 11.

In the immediate aftermath of the battle, Herodotus says that the Persian fleet sailed around Cape Sunium to attack Athens directly, although some modern historians place this attempt just before the battle. Either way, the Athenians evidently realised that their city was still under threat, and marched as quickly as possible back to Athens. The Athenians arrived in time to prevent the Persians from securing a landing, and seeing that the opportunity was lost, the Persians turned about and returned to Asia. On the next day, the Spartan army arrived, having covered the  in only three days. The Spartans toured the battlefield at Marathon, and agreed that the Athenians had won a great victory.

Aftermath

The defeat at Marathon ended for the time being the Persian invasion of Greece. However, Thrace and the Cycladic islands had been resubjugated into the Persian empire, and Macedon reduced to a subordinate kingdom part of the empire; since the late 6th century BC they had been vassals of the Persians, but remained having a broad scope of autonomy. Darius was still fully intent on conquering Greece, to secure the western part of his empire. Moreover, Athens remained unpunished for its role in the Ionian Revolt, and both Athens and Sparta were unpunished for their treatment of the Persian ambassadors.

Darius therefore began raising a huge new army with which he meant to completely subjugate Greece; however, in 486 BC, his Egyptian subjects revolted, indefinitely postponing any Greek expedition. Darius then died whilst preparing to march on Egypt, and the throne of Persia passed to his son Xerxes I. Xerxes crushed the Egyptian revolt, and very quickly restarted the preparations for the invasion of Greece. This expedition was finally ready by 480 BC, and the second Persian invasion of Greece thereby began, under the command of Xerxes himself.

Significance

For the Persians, the two expeditions to Greece had been largely successful; new territories had been added to their empire and Eretria had been punished. It was only a minor setback that the invasion had met defeat at Marathon; that defeat barely dented the enormous resources of the Persian empire. Yet, for the Greeks, it was an enormously significant victory. It was the first time that Greeks had beaten the Persians, and showed them that the Persians were not invincible, and that resistance, rather than subjugation, was possible.

The victory at Marathon was a defining moment for the young Athenian democracy, showing what might be achieved through unity and self-belief; indeed, the battle effectively marks the start of a 'golden age' for Athens. This was also applicable to Greece as a whole; "their victory endowed the Greeks with a faith in their destiny that was to endure for three centuries, during which western culture was born". John Stuart Mill's famous opinion was that "the Battle of Marathon, even as an event in British history, is more important than the Battle of Hastings".

Militarily, a major lesson for the Greeks was the potential of the hoplite phalanx. This style had developed during internecine warfare amongst the Greeks; since each city-state fought in the same way, the advantages and disadvantages of the hoplite phalanx had not been obvious. Marathon was the first time a phalanx faced more lightly armed troops, and revealed how devastating the hoplites could be in battle. The phalanx formation was still vulnerable to cavalry (the cause of much caution by the Greek forces at the Battle of Plataea), but used in the right circumstances, it was now shown to be a potentially devastating weapon. The Persians seem to have more-or-less disregarded the military lessons of Marathon. The composition of infantry for the second invasion seems to have been the same as during the first, despite the availability of hoplites and other heavy infantry in Persian-ruled lands. Having won battles against hoplites previously, the Persians may simply have regarded Marathon as an aberration.

See also

References

Bibliography

Ancient sources
 Herodotus, The Histories
 Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War
 Diodorus Siculus, Library
 Lysias, Funeral Oration
 Plato, Menexenus
 Xenophon, Anabasis
 Cornelius Nepos, Lives of the Eminent Commanders (Miltiades)
 Plutarch, Parallel Lives (Aristides, Themistocles), On the Malice of Herodotus
 Pausanias, Description of Greece
 Marcus Junianus Justinus, Epitome of the Philippic History of Pompeius Trogus
 Photius, Bibliotheca or Myriobiblon: Epitome of Persica by Ctesias
 Suda lexicon

Modern sources

 Lazenby, JF. The Defence of Greece 490–479 BC. Aris & Phillips Ltd., 1993 ()
 Lloyd, Alan. Marathon:The Crucial Battle That Created Western Democracy. Souvenir Press, 2004. ()
 Davis, Paul. 100 Decisive Battles. Oxford University Press, 1999.
 Higbie, C. The Lindian Chronicle and the Greek Creation of their Past. Oxford University Press, 2003.
 Powell J., Blakeley D.W., Powell, T. Biographical Dictionary of Literary Influences: The Nineteenth Century, 1800–1914. Greenwood Publishing Group, 2001.
 Fuller, J.F.C. A Military History of the Western World. Funk & Wagnalls, 1954.
 Fine, JVA. The Ancient Greeks: A Critical History. Harvard University Press, 1983 ().
 Fehling, D. Herodotus and His "Sources": Citation, Invention, and Narrative Art. Translated by J.G. Howie. Leeds: Francis Cairns, 1989.

 Ιστορία του Ελληνικού Έθνους (History of the Greek nation volume Β), Athens 1971
 Kampouris, M. (2000). Η Μάχη του Μαραθώνα, το λυκαυγές της κλασσικής Ελλάδος (The battle of Marathon, the dawn of classical Greece). Πόλεμος και ιστορία (War and History magazine), no. 26, January 2000, Communications Editions, Athens.

External links
 The Persian Wars at History of Iran on Iran Chamber Society (archived 24 November 2010)
 Article in Greek about Salamis, includes Marathon and Xerxes' campaign (archived 20 October 2007)

490s BC conflicts
Greco-Persian Wars
Wars involving the Achaemenid Empire
Wars involving ancient Egypt
Wars involving ancient Greece
Wars involving Athens
Wars involving ancient Cyprus
Wars involving Sparta
Wars involving Macedonia (ancient kingdom)
490s BC
Invasions of Greece
Amphibious operations
Darius the Great
Invasions of Europe

First Persian invasion of Greece