George II of Abkhazia

George II (, Giorgi II), of the Anchabadze (Anosid) dynasty was a king of Abkhazia from 923 to 957 AD. His lengthy reign is regarded as a zenith of cultural flowering and political power of his realm. Despite being independent and locally titled as a "Mepe" (king), he is also regarded as "Exousiastes", the title that was addressed to him by Byzantines.
George II continued the expansionist policy of his predecessor, aiming primarily at unification of Georgia. It took him, however, some time to assume full ruling powers as his half-brother also claimed the crown.
Life.
In 923, King Constantine III of Abkhazia () died, and George, then George II Abkhazia succeeded him. However, Bagrat, George's youngest brother, also claimed the crown, the latter engineered a coup with the support of a party of nobles, most importantly his father-in-law, Gurgen II of Tao (). The conflict lasted for nearly seven years and ended with the sudden death of Bagrat in 930. To secure the allegiance of the local nobility in central Georgia, George appointed his son Constantine as a duke/viceroy of Kartli in 923, but the latter too, revolted against him in 926. In response, George entered in Kartli and placed the rock-hewn city of Uplistsikhe under siege. He lured Constantine by treachery and had him blinded and castrated. In the same year, he installed another son, Leon (the future king Leon III), as a duke/viceroy of Kartli.
George II aided by the rebellious Kakhetian (Gardabanian clan) nobles proceeded to campaign against the Kvirike II, Prince-bishop of Kakheti. He succeeded in dispossessing Kvirike of his principality in the 930s. To secure his supremacy over Kartli, George allied himself with the Georgian Bagratids of Tao-Klarjeti, and gave his daughter, Gurandukht to Gurgen Bagrationi in marriage. Soon Kvirike returned to offensive and incited rebellion in Kartli. George sent a large army under his son, Leon, but the king died amid the expedition, and Leon had to make peace with Kvirike, ending his campaign inconclusively.
Cultural life.
George was also known as a promoter of Orthodox Christianity and a patron of Georgian Christian culture. He helped to establish Christianity as an official religion in Alania, winning the thanks of Constantinople. In the first half of the 10th century he founded Khopa (Gudauta district) and Kiacha (Ochamchire district) cathedrals, as well as Ckhondidi cathedral (Martvili district) to counter the Greek cathedrals, and, by virtue of this, new cathedrals were a mainstay of the central state-power against external and internal enemies.
Character.
"The Georgian Chronicles" describes him:
“"He had all the virtues, courage and boldness; was faithful to God, was famous as the builder of the churches, merciful towards the poor, generous, modest, full of noble features and kind"”.Quote from Byzantine patriarch Nicholas Mystikos's letter addressed to King George, written immediately after his accession on the throne.“"...You (George), an intelligent, sensible man..."”
18th century Georgian historian Vakhushti Bagrationi describes him:“"George was the God-Fearing and pious king, stately, bold and courageous, merciful, generous, church builder, kind to orphans and widows"”.
Family.
George married a certain Helen:


Paulus Arek

Paulus Arek (3 December 1929 – 22 November 1973) was a Papua New Guinean politician and trade unionist. He served as a member of the House of Assembly between 1968 and 1973, and as Minister for Information from 1972 to 1973.
Biography.
Arek was born in Wanigela in 1929. He attended a local Anglican mission school and Sogeri Secondary School. After completing his education, he began working as a teacher at Sogeri. Around two years later, he married Ethel Breda.
After moving to Manus Island in 1954, he became headmaster of a school in Popondetta in 1956. The following year he was appointed head at a school in Iokea, before transferring to one in Daru in 1958. After a misdemeanour, he was sent to a school on the Fly River, before returning to Popondetta at a lower level a year later.
Arek contested the Popondetta constituency in the 1964 elections, but was defeated by Edric Eupu. He then became head of Popondetta Primary School, as well as founding and serving as president of the Northern District Workers' Association and the Popondetta Workers' Club. He also served as vice-president of the Higituru Local Government Council, becoming its vice-president.
He ran for election again in the Ijivitari constituency in 1968, this time winning election to the House of Assembly. Sitting as an independent, during his first term as an MHA he served as chair of the Select Committee for Constitutional Development. In 1970 he became the first president of the Federation of Papua New Guinea Workers' Associations. Although he gained a reputation as a diplomatic and responsible politician, he was known to have a quick temper and an alcohol addiction.
After being re-elected in 1972 (defeating Eupu), Arek was appointed Minister of Information in the new government. After the elections he joined the People's Progress Party. As Minister of Information, he oversaw the establishment of NBC PNG.
Following a long illness with cancer, Arek died in Port Moresby General Hospital in November 1972; he was survived by his wife and eight children. He was buried in Port Moresby. His brother Sergius won the resulting by-election for the Ijivitari constituency.


Ross Cordy

Dr. Ross H. Cordy was the branch chief of archaeology in the State of Hawaii's Historic Preservation Division, having headed that office and program for 16 years. He is currently the Humanities Division chair at the University of Hawaii-West Oahu where he teaches Hawaiian and Pacific Islands studies courses and a few archeology courses. Cordy is a volunteer archeology instructor for the Waianae High School - Hawaiian Studies Program, where he teaches hands-on archeology, history and historic preservation issues.
He has conducted research on Hawaiian archaeological and historical topics since 1968. He has done fieldwork throughout the Hawaiian Islands, on all the major Micronesian Islands, and in the Society Islands, and taught at universities in New Zealand. His writings include more than 80 published articles, books and monographs and numerous manuscript papers on a wide variety of Pacific subjects.
Cordy was raised in Davis, California, and received his BA from University of California, Santa Barbara, MA from University of Michigan and Ph.D from University of Hawaii-Manoa. Cordy is part of a family of researchers and academics. His sister, Dr. Ann Cordy Ph.D is a textile specialist who has studied Oceanic textiles. His mother, Elizabeth Cordy M.A., was also a textile specialist. His father, Dr. Donald R. Cordy, was a founding member of the UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine. He chaired the pathology department from 1960 until 1969. His wife, Diona Naboa, was the Oahu, Kauai, and Molokai archaeologist for the State Historic Preservation Office of Hawaii for five years and is currently the historic preservationist specialist for the State Department of Transportation in charge of environmental review, permitting, and compliance in state and federal law. His cousin, Alana Cordy-Collins, was an anthropologist and archaeologist who specialized in Peruvian prehistory, and her father was Mayanist Napoleon Cordy.


Al-Layth

Al-Layth ibn Ali ibn al-Layth (died 928) was amir of the Saffarid amirate from 909 until 910. He was the son of Ali ibn al-Layth and nephew of the first two Saffarid rulers, Ya'qub ibn al-Layth and Amr ibn al-Layth.
Biography.
In 890 al-Layth and his brother al-Mu'addal helped their father 'Ali escape from imprisonment at the hands of the latter's uncle, the Saffarid amir Amr ibn al-Layth. The three of them fled to Khurasan, where they entered the services of the leading anti-Saffarid in that region, Rafi' b. Harthama. 'Ali died in 893, and the brothers continued to serve Rafi'. After Rafi' was defeated and killed in 896 they were captured by 'Amr, who however treated them well.
Following 'Amr's capture by the Samanids in 900, the slave ("ghulam") commander Sebük-eri began establishing ties with al-Layth, who had gone into hiding in Sistan. As the son of 'Ali, who had originally been designated as the successor to Ya'qub ibn al-Layth al-Saffar, he was a possible contender for the amirate, and gained supporters in the army. Despite this, he at first remained loyal to 'Amr's successor, Tahir b. Muhammad. He participated in the abortive 900-901 campaign to recover Fars from the Abbasid Caliphate and another more successful campaign that took place in around 904.
For the next few years following reoccupation of Fars, al-Layth accompanied Sebük-eri. In 907 or 908 Sebük-eri sent him on a military expedition against Makran, whose ruler, the Ma'danid 'Isa b. Ma'dan, had not paid tribute due to the Saffarids for the last several years. Al-Layth was able to gain the tribute owed, but when he returned Sebük-eri ordered him back to Makran and took his son hostage in an effort to compel him to obey. Instead, al-Layth launched a rebellion in Kerman, which was administered by Sebük-eri, and gained aid from Tahir, but his army abandoned him when Sebük-eri's force approached. Al-Layth was forced to flee to Sistan with few supporters but a large amount of wealth he had gained from plundering the towns of Kerman.
Al-Layth reached the capital Zarang in late 908 and occupied part of the city, despite Tahir's attempts to dislodge him. Tahir was eventually forced to withdraw from the area, and al-Layth was hailed as amir in March 909. He began his reign by sending an army under the command of his brother to enforce his authority in Afghanistan, which resulted in the capture of Sebük-eri's brother Ghalib. Al-Mu'addal then campaigned in Ghazna and, together with support sent by his brother, imposed al-Layth's authority in parts of Afghanistan by the end of the year.
In February 910 al-Layth left Zarang at the head of an expedition against Sebük-eri. By May he had defeated Sebük-eri on the field and released his son from captivity, and the conquest of Fars proceeded in earnest. Sebük-eri, however, was a caliphal vassal and received support from the Abbasids. Al-Layth's representative in Fars was defeated by Abbasid forces under Mu'nis al-Khadim in August, forcing al-Layth to come to terms, and he left Fars for Kerman. Sebük-eri, however, refused to make peace with the Saffarid, and with Abbasid help he defeated and captured both him and his son; al-Mu'addal managed to escape to Kerman. The captives were sent to Baghdad; al-Layth remained in prison until his death at Raqqa in 928.


Battle of Apamea

The Battle of Apamea was fought on 19 July 998 between the forces of the Byzantine Empire and the Fatimid Caliphate. The battle was part of a series of military confrontations between the two powers over control of northern Syria and the Hamdanid emirate of Aleppo. The Byzantine regional commander, Damian Dalassenos, had been besieging Apamea, until the arrival of the Fatimid relief army from Damascus, under Jaysh ibn Samsama. In the subsequent battle, the Byzantines were initially victorious, but a lone Kurdish rider managed to kill Dalassenos, throwing the Byzantine army into panic. The fleeing Byzantines were then pursued, with much loss of life, by the Fatimid troops. This defeat forced the Byzantine emperor Basil II to personally campaign in the region the next year, and was followed in 1001 by the conclusion of a ten-year truce between the two states.
Background.
In September 994, Michael Bourtzes, the Byzantine military governor ("doux") of Antioch and northern Syria, suffered a heavy defeat at the Battle of the Orontes at the hands of the Fatimid general Manjutakin. This Fatimid victory shook the Byzantine position in Syria, and posed a grave threat to its Arab vassal, the Hamdanid Emirate of Aleppo. To prevent its fall, Emperor Basil II himself intervened in the region in 995, forcing Manjutakin to retire to Damascus. After capturing Shayzar, Hims, and Rafaniya, and building a new fortress at Antartus, the emperor withdrew, leaving Damian Dalassenos as the new "doux" of Antioch.
Dalassenos maintained an aggressive stance. In 996 his forces raided the environs of Tripoli and Arqa, while Manjutakin, again without success, laid siege to Aleppo and Antartus, but was forced to withdraw when Dalassenos with his army came to relieve the fortress. The next year, Dalassenos repeated his raids against Tripoli, Rafaniya, Awj, and al-Laqbah, capturing the latter. At the same time, the inhabitants of Tyre, under the leadership of a sailor named Allaqa, rose up in revolt against the Fatimids and requested Byzantine assistance; further south, in Palestine, the Bedouin leader Mufarrij ibn Daghfal ibn al-Jarrah attacked Ramlah.
Siege of Apamea and the Fatimid relief expedition.
In early summer 998, Dalassenos learned that a catastrophic fire had broken out in Apamea and destroyed most of its provisions, so he marched towards the city. The Aleppines too endeavoured to seize Apamea and arrived there first, but withdrew at the approach of Dalassenos, who could not permit a vassal to grow too strong and intended to capture the town for the emperor. Although ostensibly allied with the Byzantines, the Aleppines left the provisions they had brought with them to be collected by the inhabitants of Apamea, aiding them in their resistance. Subsequent events are presented by several authors, including the brief narrative of John Skylitzes and the more extensive accounts of the Christian Arab Yahya of Antioch and the Armenian Stephen of Taron. Arab accounts also survive, all apparently drawing upon the work of the 11th-century historian Hilal al-Sabi; the most detailed version is preserved by Ibn al-Qalanisi.
The governor of Apamea, al-Mala'iti, called for aid upon the Fatimids. According to Ibn al-Qalanisi, the eunuch regent Barjawan appointed Jaysh ibn Samsama to command the relief army, naming him governor of Damascus and giving him a thousand men. Before confronting the Byzantines, the Fatimids had to deal with the revolt of Tyre and the rebellion of Ibn al-Jarrah. The Byzantines attempted to aid the besieged at Tyre by sending a fleet, but it was beaten off by the Fatimids, and the city captured in June. Ibn al-Jarrah's revolt was also suppressed, and Jaysh ibn Samsama returned to Damascus, where he stayed for three days to gather his forces for the relief of Apamea. There he was joined by the troops and volunteers from Tripoli, assembling a force numbering 10,000 men and 1,000 Bedouin riders of the Banu Kilab tribe. According to Skylitzes, the Fatimid army comprised the forces of Tripoli, Beirut, Tyre, and Damascus. Meanwhile, Dalassenos was vigorously pursuing the siege, and the inhabitants of Apamea had been reduced to famine, being forced to eat cadavers and dogs, which they bought for the price of 25 silver "dirhams" (according to Abu'l-Faraj, two gold "dinars") a piece.
Battle.
The two armies met on the large plain of al-Mudiq (cf. Qalaat al-Madiq), surrounded by mountains and located near the Lake of Apamea, on 19 July. According to Ibn al-Qalanisi, the Fatimid army's left wing was commanded by Maysur the Slav, governor of Tripoli; the centre, where the Daylamite infantry and the army baggage train were located, was under the command of Badr al-Attar; the right was commanded by Jaysh ibn Samsama and Wahid al-Hilali. According to all accounts, the Byzantines charged the Fatimid army and drove it to flight, killing some 2,000 and capturing the baggage train. Only 500 "ghilman" under Bishara the Ikhshidid remained steadfast and held firm against the assault, while the Banu Kilab simply abandoned the fight and began looting the battlefield. At that point, a Kurdish rider, named variously as Abu'l-Hajar Ahmad ibn al-Dahhak al-Salil by Ibn al-Athir and Ibn al-Qalanisi, and Bar Kefa by the Byzantine sources and Abu'l-Faraj, rode towards Dalassenos, who was near his battle standard on top of a height and was accompanied only by two of his sons and ten men of his retinue. Believing the battle won and that the Kurd wanted to surrender, Dalassenos took no precautions. As he approached the Byzantine general, Ibn al-Dahhak suddenly charged. Dalassenos lifted his arm to shield himself, but the Kurd launched his spear at him. The general wore no cuirass, and the blow killed him.
Dalassenos' death changed the tide of the battle: the Fatimids took heart and, shouting "the enemy of God is dead!", turned on the Byzantines, who fell into panic and fled. The garrison of Apamea too sallied forth, completing the Byzantine debacle. The sources give various numbers for the Byzantine dead: Maqrizi mentions 5,000, Yahya of Antioch 6,000, and Ibn al-Qalanisi as many as 10,000 dead. Most of the remaining Byzantines (2,000 according to Ibn al-Qalanisi) were taken prisoner by the Fatimids. These included several senior officers, including the famed Georgian "patrikios" Tchortovanel, a nephew of Tornike Eristavi, as well as the two sons of Dalassenos, Constantine and Theophylact, who were bought by Jaysh ibn Samsama for 6,000 "dinars" and spent the next ten years as captives in Cairo. Stephen of Taron gives a slightly different account of the battle, whereby the victorious Byzantines were surprised by an attack by the regrouped Fatimids on their camp and that one of Dalassenos's brothers and one of his sons were killed, as well as the general himself. This version is commonly rejected by modern scholars.
Aftermath.
Dalassenos' defeat forced Basil II to personally lead yet another campaign in Syria the following year. Arriving in Syria in mid-September, the emperor's army buried their fallen in the field of Apamea and then captured Shayzar, sacked the fortress of Masyaf and Rafaniya, torched Arqa, and raided the environs of Baalbek, Beirut, Tripoli and Jubayl. In mid-December, Basil returned to Antioch, where he installed Nikephoros Ouranos as "doux", although according to his self-description as the "ruler of the East", his role seems to have been more extensive, with plenipotentiary military and civilian authority over the entire eastern frontier. In 1001, Basil II concluded a ten-year truce with the Fatimid Caliph al-Hakim.


USS Bobolink (AM-20)

USS "Bobolink" (AM-20/AT-131/ATO-131) was a acquired by the United States Navy for the dangerous task of removing mines from minefields laid in the water to prevent ships from passing.
"Bobolink" was launched on 15 June 1918 by Baltimore Dry Dock and Shipbuilding Company, in Baltimore, Maryland; sponsored by Miss Elsie Jean Willis; and commissioned 28 January 1919, with Lieutenant Frank Bruce in command.
World War I minefield clearance.
"Bobolink" departed Norfolk, Virginia in April 1919 to join Division 2, North Sea Minesweeping Detachment, at Kirkwall, Orkney Islands. While sweeping in the North Sea on 14 May 1919, a mine exploded close by, causing considerable damage to the stern and killing Bruce, Frank M., LT. The USS Bruce (DD-329) was named for Lt. Bruce. Her repairs at the Devonport Dockyard, England, took six months and she returned to Norfolk in January 1920.
Postwar operations.
Between 1920 and 1931, "Bobolink" served with the Fleet Base Force, Scouting Fleet, on the U.S. East Coast and participated in fleet problems, concentrations, and joint Army-Navy maneuvers. On 3 March 1932, she arrived on the U.S. West Coast and was thereafter based at San Diego. She operated along the western seaboard between San Francisco and San Quentin Bay, Mexico, with the Fleet Train and various destroyer divisions. In 1935, she took part in the annual exercises and fleet problems held off Hawaii. Between January and March 1939, she participated in fleet problems in the Caribbean and then returned to San Diego, arriving there on 13 May 1939.
World War II operations.
In September 1940, "Bobolink" joined the Train, Base Force, United States Fleet, at Pearl Harbor. She remained there until September 1942. "Bobolink" was present during the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941, laying in dock next to six destroyers near the district HQ. Following the attack, she served as a salvage vessel and minesweeper. Between 20 May and 2 July 1942, she was converted to an ocean-going tug (redesignated AT-131 on 1 June 1942). Remaining at Pearl Harbor until September 1942, "Bobolink" then steamed to the South Pacific and operated out off Guadalcanal, Solomon Islands; Espiritu Santo, New Hebrides; and Noumea, New Caledonia, as a tug until February 1944. In particular, she helped rescue survivors and assisted several crippled U.S. warships in the aftermath of the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal. She arrived at Long Beach, California, 4 March 1944 for overhaul and returned to Pearl Harbor on 29 June 1944. "Bobolink" was reclassified ATO-131 on 15 May 1944.
Decommissioning.
She served in Hawaiian waters until the fall of 1945, and then returned to Mare Island Navy Yard, where she was decommissioned 22 February 1946. She was sold through the Maritime Commission 5 October 1946.
"Bobolink" received one battle star for operations during World War II.


Battle of Shaggy Ridge

The Battle of the Shaggy Ridge was part of the Finisterre Range campaign, consisting of a number of actions fought by Australian and Japanese troops in Papua New Guinea in World War II. Following the Allied capture of Lae and Nadzab, the Australian 9th Division had been committed to a quick follow up action on the Huon Peninsula in an effort to cut off the withdrawing Japanese. Once the situation on the Huon Peninsula stabilised in late 1943, the 7th Division had pushed into the Markham and Ramu Valleys towards the Finisterre Range with a view to pushing north towards the coast around Bogadjim, where they would meet up with Allied forces advancing around the coast from the Huon Peninsula, before advancing towards Madang.
A series of minor engagements followed in the foothills of the Finisterre Range before the Australians came up against strong resistance centred around the Kankiryo Saddle and Shaggy Ridge, which consisted of several steep features, dotted with heavily defended rocky outcrops. After a preliminary assault on a forward position dubbed The Pimple in late December 1943, the Australians renewed their assault in mid-January 1944 and over the course of a fortnight eventually captured the Japanese positions on Shaggy Ridge and the Kankiryo Saddle, after launching a brigade-sized attack up three avenues of advance. In the aftermath, the Australians pursued the Japanese to the coast and subsequently took Madang, linking up with US and Australian forces.
Prelude.
Strategic situation.
By late 1943 and early 1944, Australian and US forces had begun offensive actions in New Guinea, having stemmed the tide of the Japanese advance during the fighting in 1942. In September 1943, the Allies had secured Lae and Nadzab with simultaneous advances from the 7th and 9th Divisions. Shortly afterwards, the 9th Division had landed on the Huon Peninsula and had subsequently secured Finschhafen and began clearing inland. By October 1943, the next objective for the Australians was Shaggy Ridge, a series of high positions on the inland route from Dumpu to Madang, which was held by Japanese infantry, supported by artillery and engineers. As part of this advance the 7th Division set out through the Ramu Valley into the Finisterre Range, during which a series of minor engagements were fought, including those around John's Knoll and Trevor's Knoll, as the Japanese withdrew to their main defensive line, which was centred around the Kankiryo Saddle and Shaggy Ridge.
Shaggy Ridge was a long spur dotted by several rocky outcrops, which the Australians dubbed "Green Pinnacle", "The Pimple", "Green Sniper's Pimple" and "McCaughey's Knoll". To the north and north-west of Shaggy Ridge, two high features were identified as "Prothero I" and "Prothero II", while the Kankiryo Saddle to the north-east joined Faria Ridge and divided the Faria River from the Mindjim River. The Japanese had established numerous strong posts and positions along the ridge, blocking the Australian advance towards the coast, where they were aiming to secure Bogadjim and Madang. The ridge dominated the area around it, standing at , and in clear weather offered observation as far north as Madang, although largely the area was covered in thick fog which greatly reduced visibility. The sheer nature of the terrain meant that there was only a single track along the ridge line which was, and according to author Lachlan Grant, "in places...only wide enough for one man to pass with sheer drops on either side".
Opposing forces.
The area was defended by elements of the Imperial Japanese Army's 78th Infantry Regiment, supported by the 26th Artillery Regiment and the 27th Independent Engineer Regiment, which formed part of a detachment under the command of Major General Masutaro Nakai, who was subordinated to the 18th Army. These units were roughly at half strength, although Australian intelligence estimates put the number of troops around Kankiryo and Shaggy Ridge at around 3,000.
Against this, the Australian forces were drawn from the 7th Division, which due to limited resources only pushed two brigades forward at any one time; initially these were the 21st and 25th Brigades, although they were later replaced by the 15th and 18th Brigades. These forces would subsequently rotate throughout the fighting. With the exception of the 15th Brigade, which was a Militia formation, these were all Second Australian Imperial Force units. These elements were supported by artillery from the 2/4th Field Regiment, equipped with eleven Ordnance QF 25-pounders and 7,000 rounds, and aircraft from the Royal Australian Air Force and United States Army Air Force.
Assault on the Pimple.
In late December 1943, the Australian offensive to take Shaggy Ridge began, focused on an attack on The Pimple. The Pimple was one of three rocky outcrops, held by the Japanese on the ridge line. The 2/16th Battalion of the Australian 21st Brigade had been reinforced with hundreds of new troops, after earlier losses. It proceeded up the southern slopes towards The Pimple, with air support. The area was bombarded with a preparatory artillery and aerial barrage. The attack was successful, driving the Japanese off the position on 27–28 December 1943. Australian troops held it against further counter-attacks, and further attacks were followed up against the other positions. This allowed the Australians to gain a foothold on the position, and in the process they gained a position that had been holding them up for the past two months; nevertheless, the Japanese continued to hold Shaggy Ridge in strength.
Battle.
In early January 1944, the Australian effort to gain the position was renewed as two fresh brigades – the 15th and 18th – arrived to relieve the 21st and 25th Brigades. They subsequently launched Operation Cutthroat, aimed at securing the Kankiryo Saddle at the northern end of Shaggy Ridge, joining Faria Ridge, Shaggy Ridge, and the two Protheroe features. Brigadier Frederick Chilton's 18th Brigade was chosen for the attack; Chilton's force consisted of three infantry battalions – the 2/9th, 2/10th and 2/12th – and was supported by the 2/2nd Pioneer Battalion. Supplies were subsequently brought forward by jeep to a position dubbed "Guy's Post", in order to shorten the lines of communication, and artillery was also brought forward from the 2/4th Field Regiment.
A series of actions then followed as the Australians assaulted the position from three points, carrying out the operation in four phases. On the right of the assault, early on 20 January, the 2/10th began its advance up Sprogg's Spur, to the east of Shaggy Ridge, in the first phase, pushing towards Cam's Saddle, which ran south-west towards Faria Ridge; they were supported by air strikes along the ridges from the Protheros to Shaggy Ridge. A brief engagement occurred around mid morning, which was defeated by a short artillery barrage and then an infantry assault. The 2/10th was subsequently able to gain Cam's Saddle and by nightfall had dug-in and was postured towards the west, ready for a further effort along the Faria Ridge. Elsewhere, around Geyton's Hill, as, on the left of the assault, a patrol from the 2/2nd Pioneers crossed over the Mene River on 19 January and reconnoitred ahead of the 2/12th through Prothero I to Kankiryo. Finding only light resistance there, they nearly secured the position themselves.
The 2/12th struggled over the river amidst heavy rain, and then established themselves on Canning's Saddle, the following day they attacked Prothero I. Advancing silently up the steep slopes, they were able to surprise the Japanese defenders, creeping to within of the objective before they were noticed by the Japanese defenders, at which point the Australians charged the position. Heavy fighting followed with units to the flanks; however, by night fall on 21 January, the 2/12th had secured Prothero I, silencing a Japanese mountain gun which had fired at them at point blank range from the back door of a bunker, causing 50 casualties, including the battalion commander, Lieutenant Colonel Charles Bourne. Later, they repelled a Japanese attempt to retake the position during the night. The plan then called for the 2/12th to push south-east along Shaggy Ridge to the Kankiryo Saddle. Elsewhere, the 2/9th took the central position, attacking north-west up Shaggy Ridge securing positions at Green Sniper's Pimple on the southern part of McCaughey's Knoll, with a frontal attack, as part of the first phase in their advance through to the Kankiryo Saddle.
On 22 January, Japanese artillery began firing on the 2/12th's position, but it was unable to prevent them from taking Prothero II. Meanwhile, a small patrol from the 2/2nd Pioneers began exploiting the area to the north-east of Prothero II and subsequently managed to install itself in a position on the eastern extremity of Kankiryo Saddle. To the south, the 2/9th carried out reconnaissance around the area in front of their position around Green Sniper's Pimple, and located several Japanese bunkers. Deciding on an indirect approach, an Australian patrol was sent to the flanks and under the cover of heavy artillery, they scaled the steep sides of McCaughey's Knoll to take the position with the element of surprise. Earlier, the 2/10th had taken several attempts to secure Cam's Hill, including an unsuccessful assault on the Japanese rear with a flanking move through the Faria River. Throughout the night, the Japanese launched several unsuccessful counter-attack attempts, but these were repelled and on 24 January, the 2/9th and 2/12th Infantry Battalions continued to converge, squeezing the Japanese defenders between them. As a result, the Japanese were forced to abandon positions around the top of the Faria River and the Kankiryo Saddle and they began to withdraw to Crater Hill. The following day, patrols from the 2/10th and 2/12th Infantry Battalions determined that the Japanese were digging in on that position, and throughout the day the 2/9th attempted to outflank the position, attacking from behind while the 2/10th and 2/12th assaulted frontally from the south. These proved unsuccessful and during 26 January, the 2/9th sent two companies across Kankiryo Saddle, securing the 4100 feature before coming under heavy fire from the Japanese on Crater Hill, where they had dug-in strong defences along several sharp ridges.
Aftermath.
Following the capture of the Kankiryo Saddle on 26 January, the remnants of the Japanese defenders withdrew to Crater Hill, to the north-east of the previously abandoned position. The 4100 feature was taken without opposition that day by the 2/9th, but Crater Hill remained in Japanese possession, its forbidding approaches, hampering efforts to clear it. Instead of risking heavy casualties in a hurried follow-up attack, Chilton chose to slowly attrite the Japanese position with indirect fire and aerial attacks over the course of four days. On 29 January, the 2/9th and 2/10th commenced their attack, having surrounded the position from three sides. Due to inaccurate maps, several artillery savos fell on the advancing Australians, wounding several officers, including a couple of British Army officers that had been attached to the Australian battalions on exchange. Over the course of the next couple of days the Australians kept up the pressure on the Japanese defenders with fighting patrols, and small scale assaults to reduce Japanese positions around the feature. Finally, on 1 February 1944, the 2/9th made it to the crest of the hill, and subsequently found that the Japanese had disinvested themselves from the position, having fallen back to Paipa. Following its occupation, Crater Hill was surveyed by the Australians and they found that there were over 40 foxholes or pillboxes inside the position across a frontage of to a depth of ; in addition there were 110 strong points on the ridges leading to it.
Throughout the first week of February, the Australian units were redeployed to new positions: the 2/10th around the 4100 feature across the Kankiryo Saddle and stretching to Crater Hill; the 2/9th from Shaggy Ridge to the Protheros and the 2/12th from Lake Hill to McCullough's Ridge. In the following days patrols were sent out and exploited the surrounding areas, pushing towards Paipa, clearing up isolated pockets of Japanese as they went. Casualties during the fighting to secure Shaggy Ridge amounted to up to 500 Japanese killed, and 46 killed and 147 wounded for the Australians. In the aftermath, the Australians undertook a brief operational pause, as supplies were brought up and troops were rotated – the 15th Brigade relieved the 18th – before the Australians advanced towards Bogadjim, pursuing the Japanese forces as they withdrew. After effecting a link up with US forces advancing west from Saidor, which had been secured in February 1944 as part of the Huon Peninsula campaign, the Australians eventually secured Madang in April 1944.


Battle of Garni

The Battle of Garni was fought in 1225 near Garni, in modern day Armenia, then part of the Kingdom of Georgia. The invading Khwarazmid Empire was led by Jalal ad-Din Mingburnu, its last Sultan, who was driven from his realm by the Mongol Empire and was trying to recapture lost territories. The battle ended with a Khwarezmid victory and is marked as a disastrous event in Georgian history due to betrayal. As a result, the royal court of Georgian Queen Rusudan (1223–1245) moved to Kutaisi and the country was exposed to subsequent looting during the Mongol invasion.
Prelude.
Jalal ad-Din Mingburnu sent an abasement letter to Queen Rusudan demanding subordination of Georgia under his rule. At the same time, he assembled a huge military force, asking for troops from his allies and nobles across the empire. The purpose was to completely crush the Kingdom of Georgia and take all its dominions successfully ceding its existence. The Georgian court and leadership had notes and reports about a possible intervention but did not consider it necessary to take measures since that threat was not taken seriously. Instead, the nobility replied by sending a letter that reminded Jalal ad-Din of his crushing defeat against the Mongols, while having no idea how strong his empire already was by then. In 1225, a large Khwarezmid army crossed the Georgian border and soon both parties met on the battlefield.
Strength.
Under the command of Queen Rusudan, messengers were sent out to all regions of the Kingdom of Georgia in order to gather troops. During that period the kingdom had the potential to raise around 100,000 men in total including mercenaries. However the Georgians had reserved some forces for security reasons, thus leaving around 60–70,000 men for battle. The strength of the invading army far exceeded that of Rusudan's forces. According to the unknown Georgian chronicler named "jamtaaghtsereli", the army of Jalal ad-din was 140,000 men strong. Armenian sources say that the Muslim coalition deployed up to 200,000 men.
Disposal.
A Georgian vanguard of around 20,000 men led by the Toreli brothers - Shalva Akhaltiskheli and Ivane Akhaltsikheli rushed towards the Khwarazmid forces to secure areal dominance. While the Khwarazmians were disposed on lower ground and flat lands, the Georgian who had arrived earlier were deployed wisely on top of surrounding plateaus and established a strategic advantage for the arriving main army. General Mkhargrdzeli with his more than 50,000 warriors arrived in time and initially kept himself in the background being expected by the other commanders to react on any attack against his vanguard while remaining unnoticed by the enemy.
Battle.
The battle began with Jalal ad-Dins left wing attacking the Georgian vanguard and it did not take long for his main forces to be ordered into fight. By that time, Shalva Toreli-Akhaltiskheli and Ivane Toreli-Akhaltsikheli had already sent several messengers to the commander of the main Georgian army asking him to strike the Khwarezmid rear as the vanguard was able to stabilize the front lines. Despite the crucial advantage of the terrain, relief for the vanguard became critically necessary. Mkhargrdzeli's army had still not replied and his Georgian army's main body remained absolutely stationary. A nearly perfect opportunity to force its enemy to fight against being encircled or caught in a pincer movement, was wasted. Soon the Georgian vanguard was breaking apart and finally got completely overrun. Commander Mkhargrdzeli then ordered his troops to abandon the battlefield entirely, leaving the other two commanders Shalva and Ivane Akhaltsikheli in their enemies' hands. Once again internal conflicts and personal feuds between Georgian grand feudal lords decisively crippled the Georgian kingdom's defences and its leaders power.
After the battle Tbilisi was sacked, allegedly a hundred thousand citizens were put to death for not renouncing Christianity.
A quarter of the Georgian army was annihilated, leaving the country poorly steeled against an upcoming Mongol invasion. The capture of Dvin brought about the end of Georgia's medieval heyday.


Sultan al-Atrash

Sultan al-Atrash, (March 5, 1891 – March 26, 1982) (), commonly known as Sultan Pasha al-Atrash () was a prominent Arab Druze leader, Syrian nationalist and Commander General of the Syrian Revolution (1925–27). He fought against the French. One of the most influential figures in Syrian and Druze history, he played a major role in deciding the destiny of Jabal al-Druze and of Syria in general.
Family.
Sultan al-Atrash was born in al-Qrayya, a village 20 km south of Suwayda known for the famous Druze family of Al-Atrash, which had nominally governed the region since 1879. His father Zuqan led a fierce battle against the Ottomans near Al-Kefr in 1910, where he faced the forces of Sami Pasha al-Farouqi. He was captured and later executed in 1911. His son, Mansur al-Atrash was an active member in the Syrian Regional Branch of the Ba'ath Party until the 1966 Syrian coup d'état led to the downfall of Michel Aflaq, Salah al-Din al-Bitar, Munif al-Razzaz and the classical Ba'athists in general.
His granddaughter, Naila Al Atrash, is a dramatist and activist against the Assad regime.
Role in the Arab revolt.
Sami Pasha used military force and trickery and succeeded at last in occupying Jabal el Druze. He sent hundreds of young Druze to fight in the Balkans, Sultan among them. However, during the first World War, the Ottomans left Jabal el Druze in peace as they feared rebellion. Sultan was then able to get in touch with Pan-Arab movements and especially with the Arab Revolt in Hijaz. As the revolt started he raised the Arab flag on the citadel of Salkhad and on his own house.
When Arab forces reached Aqaba, he sent a thousand men to join the revolt. He joined them himself, with another 300 men, when they reached Bosra. His forces were the first to enter Damascus and raise the Arab revolt flag on the government house on September 29, 1918.
Sultan was a good friend of the Hashemite Emir Faisal, leader of the Arab forces in the revolt, and was awarded the title of Emir and the rank of a General in the Syrian army, the equivalent of the title of Pasha. Faisal, later king of Iraq, helped Sultan a lot during his years in exile.
The newly independent kingdom of Syria didn't survive for long, as it was occupied by France after the Battle of Maysalun on July 24, 1920. Sultan was gathering his men to fight the French but the quick succession of events cut his efforts short, as French forces entered Damascus and the country was divided into five states, Jabal el Druze being one of them.
The Adham Khanjar incident.
On July 7, 1922, French soldiers captured Adham Khanjar, a Lebanese Shiite rebel who was seeking refuge at Sultan's house while he was away. Khanjar was wanted for attempting to assassinate General Gouraud. Upon his arrival home, Sultan demanded the release of Khanjar, but the French refused. A few days later, Sultan and his men attacked a French convoy they thought to transport Khanjar, who was in fact sent to Damascus by airplane. The French responded by destroying his house and ordering his arrest. Sultan fled to Jordan and subsequently launched raids against French posts. Ten months later, he returned, having been pardoned by the French.
The Syrian Revolution of 1925–27.
In 1925 Sultan Pasha al-Atrash led a revolt which broke out in the Druze Mountain and spread to engulf the whole of Syria and parts of Lebanon. This is considered one of the most important revolutions against the French mandate, as it encompassed the whole of Syria and witnessed fierce battles between rebel and French forces.
On August 23, 1925 Sultan Pasha al-Atrash officially declared revolution against France, and soon fighting erupted in Damascus, Homs and Hama. Al-Atrash won several battles against the French at the beginning of revolution, notably the Battle of al-Kafr on July 21, 1925, the Battle of al-Mazraa on August 2, 1925, and the battles of Salkhad, Msfirah and as-Suwayda. The Druze were defeated in the latter two battles. After rebel victories against France, it sent thousands of troops to Syria and Lebanon from Morocco and Senegal, equipped with modern weapons, compared to the few supplies of the rebels. This dramatically altered the results and allowed the French to regain many cities, although resistance lasted until the spring of 1927. The French sentenced Sultan al-Atrash to death, but he had escaped with the rebels to Transjordan and was eventually pardoned. He returned to Syria in 1937 after the signing of the Franco-Syrian Treaty. He was met with a huge public reception.
Role after the revolution.
Al-Atrash participated actively in the Levant Crisis, that led to Syrian independence. In 1948 he called for the establishment of a unified Arab Liberation Army of Palestine, for which hundreds of young people had already volunteered and sent to participate in during the 1948 Arab–Israeli War.
During the reign of Adib Shishakli, al-Atrash was often harassed because of his opposition to government policy. He left the Druze Mountain for Jordan in December 1954, and came back when Al-Shishakli's regime fell. Al-Atrash supported the political union of Egypt and Syria in 1958, and firmly opposed the process of separation in 1961. He is also known for his contributions to social life and development in the Druze Mountain.
Popularity.
Sultan Pasha al-Atrash, is one of the most popular of recently prominent leaders in Arab and Syrian history, especially among the Druze.
Many statues of Al-Atrash exist in main squares on Druze Mountain, and his photos hang in many houses in the region. Al-Atrash is also prominent in local folklore, including many poems and popular songs. For several reasons the Druze consider him a symbol of patriotism, courage and secularism:
During the period of Syrian-Egyptian unity, on a visit to the Suwayda province President Gamal Abdel Nasser honored Sultan Pasha al-Atrash by awarding him the highest medal of the United Arab Republic. In 1970, Syrian President Hafez al-Assad Honored Sultan Pasha al-Atrash for his historic role in the Syrian Revolution.
Death.
Sultan Pasha al-Atrash died on March 26, 1982 from a heart attack.
His funeral was attended by more than a million people, and the President of Syrian Arab Republic Hafez al-Assad issued an individual letter mourning al-Atrash as the General Commander of the Syrian Revolution.


Maiana

Maiana is an atoll in Kiribati and is one of the Central Gilbert Islands. Maiana is south of the capital island of South Tarawa and has a population of 1,982 . The northern and eastern sides of the atoll are a single island, whilst the western edge consists of submerged reefs and many uninhabited islets, all surrounding a lagoon. The atoll is long and is very narrow, with an average width of less than and a total land area (including uninhabited islets) of .
Geography.
Most of the 2,027 people who live on Maiana live on the main island; the largest village is Bubutei, at the southern tip of the main island, which is home to 489 people or almost a quarter (24%) of the island's total population. The population of Maiana is roughly stable and has been around 2,000 people since 1985.
Climate change.
Many parts of Maiana suffer from coastal erosion, with the villages of Tekaranga and Tematantongo being particularly affected. Drought is another serious concern as the island's limited freshwater supply comes entirely from the shallow freshwater lens, which becomes salty close to the coast especially during drought periods. Like all of the atolls of Kiribati, Maiana is at serious risk from sea level rise, as even small changes in sea level can cause accelerated erosion and threaten infrastructure, agriculture and water supplies.
Administration.
Maiana is administered by an Island Council based in Tebangetua village. The Maiana constituency elects two representatives to the national House of Assembly in the capital of South Tarawa. Until you 2016, the MPs for Maiana are Dr. Anote Tong and Teiwaki Areieta. Dr. Tong was also the President of Kiribati. His son, Vincent Tong, is elected MP in April 2020. Apart from that, the local people of Maiana also have their ruling system that survive from the past. Unimwane Ruling System (Elders or old men ruling system). All villages from Tebikerai to Bubutei have their unimwane represent their villages to the Unimwane Council Body. This body called Tebau-ni-Maiana (The Crown of Maiana, sometimes called the most upper chamber of the Island). Among all Te Unimwane, they will choose the most aging one (older one) as their Baatua (Head of them). They execute rules of the Island that binding people together to follow. This rules and regulations based on the culture and religious belief of Maiana. For example, Uriam Kauongo was a Baatu before he died.
Myths and legends.
There are different stories told as to the creation of Maiana and the other islands in the Gilberts. An important legend in the culture of Maiana is that spirits who lived in a tree in Samoa migrated northward carrying branches from the tree, "Te Kaintikuaba", which translates as the tree of life. It was these spirits, together with Nareau the Wise who created the islands of Tungaru (the Gilbert Islands).
History.
The island was surveyed in 1841 by the US Exploring Expedition.
Maiana Post Office opened around 1925.
Maiana Ferry Disaster.
On 13 July 2009, the vessel Uean Te Raoi II, owned by the Catholic Parish of Maiana and travelling from Bwairiki in Tarawa, capsized and foundered off Maiana with the loss of 35 lives.


Muhammad ibn Ali Rawandi

Muhammad bin Ali Rawandi (), was a Persian historian who wrote the "Rahat al-sudur wa ayat al-surur" during the fall of the Great Seljuk Empire and the subsequent invasion by the Kharwarzmian empire.
Rawandi was from a scholarly family from Rawand near Kashan, and studied Hanafi fiqh in Hamadhan from 1174 to 1184. As a calligrapher, Rawandi was brought to court to craft a "Quran" for Toghrul III and gained the sultan's favor. After Toghrul's incarceration, Rawandi gained the patronage of Shihab al-Din al-Kashani, who urged him to write the "Rahat al-sudur". Rawandi had intended to dedicate his book to Süleymanshah II, but dedicated it to Kaykhusraw I, following the latter's accession as Sultan of Rum. Later the "Rahat al-sudur" was translated into Turkish during the reign of Murad II.
Modern era.
In 1921, the "Rahat al-sudur" was published by Muhammad Iqbal. It was recognized by Iqbal, Edward G. Browne and Mirza Muhammad Qazwini as a source in other texts, namely "Jami al-tawarikh", "Rawdat al-safa" of Mir Kwand and "Tarikh-i guzida" of Hamdallah Mustawfi.


Abbasid Revolution

The Abbasid Revolution, also called the Movement of the Men of the Black Raiment, was the overthrow of the Umayyad Caliphate (661–750 CE), the second of the four major Caliphates in early Islamic history, by the third, the Abbasid Caliphate (750–1517 CE). Coming to power three decades after the death of the Muslim prophet Muhammad and immediately after the Rashidun Caliphate, the Umayyads were a Arab empire ruling over a population which was overwhelmingly non-Arab. Non-Arabs were treated as second-class citizens regardless of whether or not they converted to Islam, and this discontent cutting across faiths and ethnicities ultimately led to the Umayyads' overthrow. The Abbasid family claimed to have descended from al-Abbas, an uncle of the Prophet.
The revolution essentially marked the end of the Arab empire and the beginning of a more inclusive, multiethnic state in the Middle East. Remembered as one of the most well-organized revolutions during its period in history, it reoriented the focus of the Muslim world to the east.
Background.
By the 740s, the Umayyad Empire found itself in critical condition. A dispute over succession in 744 led to the Third Muslim Civil War, which raged across the Middle East for two years. The very next year, al-Dahhak ibn Qays al-Shaybani initiated a Kharijite rebellion that would continue until 746. Concurrent with this, a rebellion broke out in reaction to Marwan II's decision to move the capital from Damascus to Harran, resulting in the destruction of Homs – also in 746. It was not until 747 that Marwan II was able to pacify the provinces; the Abbasid Revolution began within months.
Nasr ibn Sayyar was appointed governor of Khurusan by Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik in 738. He held on to his post throughout the civil war, being confirmed as governor by Marwan II in the aftermath.
Khurusan's expansive size and low population density meant that the Arab denizens – both military and civilian – lived largely outside of the garrisons built during the spread of Islam. This was in contrast to the rest of the Umayyad provinces, where Arabs tended to seclude themselves in fortresses and avoided interaction with the locals. Arab settlers in Khorasan left their traditional lifestyle and settled among the native Iranian peoples. While intermarriage with Arabs elsewhere in the Empire was discouraged or even banned, it slowly became a habit within eastern Khorasan; as the Arabs began adopting Persian dress and the two languages influenced one another, the ethnic barriers came down.
Causes.
Support for the Abbasid Revolution came from people of diverse backgrounds, with almost all levels of society supporting armed opposition to Umayyad rule. This was especially pronounced among Muslims of non-Arab descent, though even Arab Muslims resented Umayyad rule and centralized authority over their nomadic lifestyles. Both Sunnis and Shias supported efforts to overthrow the Umayyads, as did non-Muslim subjects of the empire who resented religious discrimination.
Discontent among Shia Muslims.
Following the Battle of Karbala which led to the massacre of Husayn ibn Ali, the grandson of Muhammad, and his kin and companions by the Umayyad army in 680 CE, the Shias used this event as a rallying cry of opposition against the Umayyads. The Abbasids also used the memory of Karbala extensively to gain popular support against the Umayyads.
The Hashimiyya movement (a sub-sect of the Kaysanites Shia) were largely responsible for starting the final efforts against the Umayyad dynasty, initially with the goal of replacing the Umayyads with an Alid ruling family. To an extent, rebellion against the Umayyads bore an early association with Shi'ite ideas. A number of Shi'ite revolts against Umayyad rule had already taken place, though they were open about their desire for an Alid ruler. Zayd ibn Ali fought the Umayyads in Iraq, while Abdallah ibn Mu'awiya even established temporary rule over Persia. Their murder not only increased anti-Umayyad sentiment among the Shia, but also gave both Shias and Sunnis in Iraq and Persia a common rallying cry. At the same time, the capture and murder of the primary Shi'ite opposition figures rendered the Abbasids as the only realistic contenders for the void that would be left by the Umayyads.
The Abbasids kept quiet about their identity, simply stating that they wanted a ruler from the descendant of Muhammad upon whose choice as caliph the Muslim community would agree. Many Shi'ites naturally assumed that this meant an Alid ruler, a belief which the Abbasids tacitly encouraged to gain Shi'ite support. Though the Abbasids were members of the Banu Hashim clan, rivals of the Umayyads, the word "Hashimiyya" seems to refer specifically to Abd-Allah ibn Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah, a grandson of Ali and son of Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah.
According to certain traditions, Abd-Allah died in 717 in Humeima in the house of Mohammad ibn Ali Abbasi, the head of the Abbasid family, and before dying named Muhammad ibn Ali as his successor. Although the anecdote is considered a fabrication, at the time it allowed the Abbasids to rally the supporters of the failed revolt of Mukhtar al-Thaqafi, who had represented themselves as the supporters of Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya. By the time the revolution was in full swing, most Kaysanite Shia had either transferred their allegiance to the Abbasid dynasty (in the case of the Hashimiyya), or had converted to other branches of Shi'ism and the Kaysanites ceased to exist.
Discontent among Sunni Muslims who were non-Arab.
The Umayyad state is remembered as an Arab-centric state, being run by and for the benefit of those who were ethnically Arab though Muslim in creed. The non-Arab Muslims resented their marginal social position and were easily drawn into Abbasid opposition to Umayyad rule. Arabs dominated the bureaucracy and military, and were housed in fortresses separate from the local population outside of Arabia. Even after converting to Islam, non-Arabs or "Mawali" could not live in these garrison cities. The non-Arabs were not allowed to work for the government nor could they hold officer positions in the Umayyad military and they still had to pay the jizya tax for non-Muslims. Non-Muslims under Umayyad rule were subject to these same injunctions. Racial intermarriage between Arabs and non Arabs was rare. When it did occur, it was only allowed between an Arab man and a non-Arab woman while non-Arab men were generally not free to marry Arab women.
Conversion to Islam occurred gradually. If a non-Arab wished to convert to Islam, they not only had to give up their own names but also had to remain a second-class citizen. The non-Arab would be "adopted" by an Arab tribe, though they would not actually adopt the tribe's name as that would risk pollution of perceived Arab racial purity. Rather, the non-Arab would take the last name of "freedman of al-(tribe's name)", even if they were not a slave prior to conversion. This essentially meant they were subservient to the tribe who sponsored their conversion.
Although converts to Islam made up roughly 10% of the native population – most of the people living under Umayyad rule were not Muslim – this percent was significant due to the very small number of Arabs. Gradually, the non-Arab Muslims outnumbered the Arab Muslims, causing alarm among the Arab nobility. Socially, this posed a problem as the Umayyads viewed Islam as the property of the aristocratic Arab families. There was a rather large financial problem posed to the Umayyad system as well. If the new converts to Islam from non-Arab peoples stopped paying the jizya tax stipulated by the Qur'an for non-Muslims, the empire would go bankrupt. This lack of civil and political rights eventually led the non-Arab Muslims to support the Abbasids, despite the latter also being Arab.
Even as the Arab governors adopted the more sophisticated Iranian methods of governmental administration, non-Arabs were still prevented from holding such positions. Non-Arabs were not even allowed to wear Arabian style clothing, so strong were the feelings of Arab racial superiority cultivated by the Umayyads. Much of the discontent this caused led to the Shu'ubiyya movement, an assertion of non-Arab racial and cultural equality with Arabs. The movement gained support among Egyptians, Arameans and Berber people, though this movement was most pronounced among Iranian people.
Repression of Iranian culture.
The early Muslim conquest of Persia was coupled with an anti-Iranian Arabization policy which led to much discontent. The controversial Umayyad governor Al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf was upset at the usage of Persian as the court language in the eastern Islamic empire, and ordered all written and spoken Persian to be suppressed in both government and even among the general public, by force if necessary. Contemporary historians record that al-Hajjaj contributed to the death of the Khwarezmian language, closely related to Persian. Once the Umayyads expanded into Khwarezm, a stronghold of east Iranian civilization, al-Hajjaj ordered the execution of anyone who could read or write the language, to the point that only the illiterate remained.
Discontent among non-Muslims.
Support for the Abbasid Revolution was an early example of people of different faiths aligning with a common cause. This was due in large part to policies of the Umayyads which were regarded as particularly oppressive to anyone following a faith other than Islam. In 741, the Umayyads decreed that non-Muslims could not serve in government posts. The Abbasids were aware of this discontent, and made efforts to balance both its Muslim character as well as its partially non-Muslim constituency.
Persecution of Zoroastrians was part of state policy during the Umayyad era. Al-Hajjaj allegedly killed all Zoroastrian clergy upon the conquest of east Iranian lands, burning all Zoroastrian literature and destroying most religious buildings. The non-Muslim aristocracy around Merv supported the Abbasids, and thus retained their status as a privileged governing class regardless of religious belief.
Events.
Buildup.
Beginning around 719, Hashimiyya missions began to seek adherents in Khurasan. Their campaign was framed as one of proselytism. They sought support for "a member of the House of the Prophet who shall be pleasing to everyone", without making explicit mention of the Abbasids. These missions met with success both among Arabs and non-Arabs, although the latter may have played a particularly important role in the growth of the movement. A number of Shi'ite rebellions – by Kaysanites, Hashimiyya and mainstream Shi'ites – took place in the final years of Umayyad rule, just around the same time that tempers were flaring among the Syrian contingents of the Umayyad army regarding alliances and wrongdoings during the Second and Third Fitna.
At this time Kufa was the center for the opposition to Umayyad rule, particularly Ali's supporters and Shias. In 741–42 Abu Muslim made his first contact with Abbasid agents there, and eventually he was introduced to the head of Abbasids, Imam Ibrahim, in Mecca. Around 746, Abu Muslim assumed leadership of the Hashimiyya in Khurasan. Unlike the Alid revolts which were open and straightforward about their demands, the Abbasids along with the Hashimite allies slowly built up an underground resistance movement to Umayyad rule. Secret networks were used to build a power base of support in the eastern Muslim lands to ensure the revolution's success. This buildup not only took place right on the heels of the Zaydi Revolt in Iraq, but also concurrently with the Berber Revolt in Iberia and Maghreb, the Ibadi rebellion in Yemen and Hijaz, and the Third Fitna in the Levant, with the revolt of al-Harith ibn Surayj in Khurasan and Central Asia occurring concurrently with the revolution itself. The Abbasids spent their preparation time watching as the Umayyad Empire was besieged from within itself in all four cardinal directions, and School of Oriental and African Studies Professor Emeritus G. R. Hawting has asserted that even if the Umayyad rulers had been aware of the Abbasids' preparations, it would not have been possible to mobilize against them.
Revolt of Ibn Surayj.
In 746, Ibn Surayj began his revolt at Merv without success at first, even losing his secretary Jahm bin Safwan. After joining forces with other rebel factions, Ibn Surayj drove Umayyad governor Nasr ibn Sayyar and his forces to Nishapur; the two factions double-crossed each other shortly thereafter, with Ibn Surayj's faction being crushed. Western Khorasan was controlled by Abdallah ibn Mu'awiya at the time, cutting Ibn Sayyar in the east off from Marwan II. In the summer of 747, Ibn Sayyar sued for peace, which was accepted by the remaining rebels. The rebel leader was assassinated by a son of Ibn Surayj in a revenge attack while at the same time, another Shi'ite revolt had begun in the villages. The son of the remaining rebels signed the peace accord and Ibn Sayyar returned to his post in Merv in August of 747 – just after Abu Muslim initiated a revolt of his own.
Khorasan phase.
On 9 June 747 (Ramadan 25, 129AH), Abu Muslim successfully initiated an open revolt against Umayyad rule, which was carried out under the sign of the Black Standard. Close to 10,000 soldiers were under Abu Muslim's command when the hostilities officially began in Merv. On 14 February 748 he established control of Merv, expelling Nasr ibn Sayyar less than a year after the latter had put down Ibn Surayj's revolt, and dispatched an army westwards.
Newly commissioned Abbasid officer Qahtaba ibn Shabib al-Ta'i, along with his sons Al-Hasan ibn Qahtaba and Humayd ibn Qahtaba, pursued Ibn Sayyar to Nishapur and then pushed him further west to Qumis, in western Iran. That August, al-Ta'i defeated an Umayyad force of 10,000 at Gorgan. Ibn Sayyar regrouped with reinforcements from the Caliph at Rey, only for that city to fall as well as the Caliph's commander; once again, Ibn Sayyar fled west and died on 9 December 748 while trying to reach Hamedan. Al-Ta'i rolled west through Khorasan, defeating a 50,000 strong Umayyad force at Isfahan in March 749.
At Nahavand, the Umayyads attempted to make their last stand in Khorasan. Umayyad forces fleeing Hamedan and the remainder of Ibn Sayyar's men joined with those already garrisoned. Qahtaba defeated an Umayyad relief contingent from Syria while his son al-Hasan laid siege to Nahavand for more than two months. The Umayyad military units from Syria within the garrison cut a deal with the Abbasids, saving their own lives by selling out the Umayyad units from Khorasan who were all put to death. After almost ninety years, Umayyad rule in Khorasan had finally come to an end.
At the same time that al-Ta'i took Nishapur, Abu Muslim was strengthening the Abbasid grip on the Muslim far east. Abbasid governors were appointed over Transoxiana and Bactria, while the rebels who had signed a peace accord with Nasr ibn Sayyar were also offered a peace deal by Abu Muslim only to be double crossed and wiped out. With the pacification of any rebel elements in the east and the surrender of Nahavand in the west, the Abbasids were the undisputed rulers of Khorasan.
Mesopotamia phase.
The Abbasids wasted no time in continuing from Khorosan into Mesopotamia. In August 749, Umayyad commander Yazid ibn Umar al-Fazari attempted to meet the forces of al-Ta'i before they could reach Kufa. Not to be outdone, the Abbasids launched a nighttime raid on al-Fazari's forces before they had a chance to prepare. During the raid, al-Ta'i himself was finally killed in battle. Despite the loss, al-Fazari was routed and fled with his forces to Wasit. The Siege of Wasit took place from that August until July 750. Although a respected military commander had been lost, a large portion of the Umayyad forces were essentially trapped inside Wasit and could be left in their virtual prison while more offensive military actions were made.
Concurrently with the siege in 749, the Abbasids crossed the Euphrates and took Kufa. The son of Khalid al-Qasri – a disgraced Umayyad official who had been tortured to death a few years prior – began a pro-Abbasid riot starting at the city's citadel. On 2 September 749, al-Hasan bin Qahtaba essentially just walked right in to the city and set up shop. Some confusion followed when Abu Salama, an Abbasid officer, pushed for an Alid leader. Abu Muslim's confidante Abu Jahm reported what was happening, and the Abbasids acted preemptively. On Friday, 28 November 749, before the siege of Wasit had even finished, As-Saffah, the great-grandson of Muhammad's uncle, al-Abbas, was recognized as the new caliph in the mosque at Kufa. Abu Salama, who witnessed twelve military commanders from the revolution pledging allegiance, was embarrassed into following suit.
Just as quickly as Qahtaba's forces marched from Khorosan to Kufa, so did the forces of Abdallah ibn Ali and Abu Awn Abd al-Malik ibn Yazid march on Mosul. At this point Marwan II mobilized his troops from Harran and advanced toward Mesopotamia. On 16 January 750 the two forces met on the left bank of a tributary of the Tigris in the Battle of the Zab, and nine days later Marwan II was defeated and his army was completely destroyed. The battle is regarded as what finally sealed the fate of the Umayyads. All Marwan II could do was flee through Syria and into Egypt, with each Umayyad town surrendering to the Abbasids as they swept through in pursuit.
Damascus fell to the Abbasids in April, and in August Marwan II and his family were tracked down by a small force led by Abu Awn and Salih ibn Ali (the brother of Abdallah ibn Ali) and killed in Egypt. Al-Fazari, the Umayyad commander at Wasit, held out even after the defeat of Marwan II in January. The Abbasids promised him amnesty in July, but immediately after he exited the fortress they executed him instead. After almost exactly three years of rebellion, the Umayyad state came to an end.
Tactics.
Ethnic equality.
Militarily, the unit organization of the Abbasids was designed with the goal of ethnic and racial equality among supporters. When Abu Muslim recruited mixed Arab and Iranian officers along the Silk Road, he registered them based not on their tribal or ethno-national affiliations but on their current places of residence. This greatly diminished tribal and ethnic solidarity and replaced both concepts with a sense of shared interests among individuals.
Propaganda.
The Abbasid Revolution provides an early medieval example of the effectiveness of propaganda. The Black Standard unfurled at the start of the revolution's open phase carried messianic overtones due to past failed rebellions by members of Muhammad's family, with marked eschatological and millennial slants. The Abbasids – their leaders descended from Muhammad's uncle Al-‘Abbas ibn ‘Abd al-Muttalib – held vivid historical reenactments of the murder of Muhammad's grandson Husayn ibn Ali by the army of the second Umayyad ruler Yazid I, followed by promises of retribution. Focus was carefully placed on the legacy of Muhammad's family while details of how the Abbasids actually intended to rule were not mentioned. While the Umayyads had primarily spent their energy on wiping out the Alid line of the prophetic family, the Abbasids carefully revised Muslim chronicles to put a heavier emphasis on the relationship between Muhammad and his uncle.
The Abbasids spent more than a year preparing their propaganda drive against the Umayyads. There were a total of seventy propagandists throughout the province of Khorasan, operating under twelve central officials.
Secrecy.
The Abbasid Revolution was distinguished by a number of tactics which were absent in the other, unsuccessful anti-Umayyad rebellions at the time. Chief among them was secrecy. While the Shi'ite and other rebellions at the time were all led by publicly known leaders making clear and well-defined demands, the Abbasids hid not only their identities but also their preparation and mere existence. As-Saffah would go on to become the first Abbasid caliph, but he did not come forward to receive the pledge of allegiance from the people until after the Umayyad caliph and a large number of his princes were already killed.
Abu Muslim al-Khorasani, who was the primary Abbasid military commander, was especially mysterious; even his name, which literally means "father of a Muslim from the large, flat area of the eastern Muslim empire" gave no meaningful information about him personally. Even today, although scholars are sure he was one real, consistent individual, there is broad agreement that all concrete suggestions of his actual identity are doubtful. Abu Muslim himself discouraged inquiries about his origins, emphasizing that his religion and place of residence were all that mattered.
Whoever he was, Abu Muslim built a secret network of pro-Abbasid sentiment based among the mixed Arab and Iranian military officers along the Silk Road garrison cities. Through this networking, Abu Muslim ensured armed support for the Abbasids from a multi-ethnic force years before the revolution even came out in the open. These networks proved essential, as the officers garrisoned along the Silk Road had spent years fighting the ferocious Turkic tribes of Central Asia and were experienced and respected tacticians and warriors.
Aftermath.
The victors desecrated the tombs of the Umayyads in Syria, sparing only that of Umar II, and most of the remaining members of the Umayyad family were tracked down and killed. When Abbasids declared amnesty for members of the Umayyad family, eighty gathered in Jaffa to receive pardons and all were massacred.
In the immediate aftermath, the Abbasids moved to consolidate their power against former allies now seen as rivals. Five years after the revolution succeeded, Abu Muslim was accused of heresy and treason by the second Abbasid caliph al-Mansur. Abu Muslim was executed at the palace in 755 despite his reminding al-Mansur that it was he (Abu Muslim) who got the Abbasids into power, and his travel companions were bribed into silence. Displeasure over the caliph's brutality as well as admiration for Abu Muslim led to rebellions against the Abbasid Dynasty itself throughout Khorasan and Kurdistan.
Although Shi'ites were key to the revolution's success, Abbasid attempts to claim orthodoxy in light of Umayyad material excess led to continued persecution of Shi'ites. On the other hand, non-Muslims regained the government posts they had lost under the Umayyads. Jews, Nestorian Christians, Zoroastrians and even Buddhists were re-integrated into a more cosmopolitan empire centered around the new, ethnically and religiously diverse city of Baghdad.
The Abbasids were essentially puppets of secular rulers starting from 945, though their rule over Baghdad and its surroundings continued until 1258 when the Mongols sacked Baghdad, while their lineage as nominal caliphs lasted until 1517, when the Ottomans conquered Egypt (the seat of the Abbasid caliphate after 1258) and claimed the caliphate for themselves. The period of actual, direct rule by the Abbasids lasted almost exactly two-hundred years.
One grandson of Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik, Abd ar-Rahman I, survived and established a kingdom in Al-Andalus (Moorish Iberia) after five years of travel westward. Over the course of thirty years, he ousted the ruling Fihrids and resisted Abbasid incursions to establish the Emirate of Córdoba. This is considered an extension of the Umayyad Dynasty, and ruled from Cordoba from 756 until 1031.
Legacy.
The Abbasid Revolution has been of great interest to both Western and Muslim historians. According to State University of New York professor of sociology Saïd Amir Arjomand, analytical interpretations of the revolution are rare, with most discussions simply lining up behind either the Iranic or Arabic interpretation of events. Frequently, early European historians viewed the conflict solely as a non-Arab uprising against Arabs. Bernard Lewis, professor emeritus of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton University, points out that while the revolution has often been characterized as a Persian victory and Arab defeat, the caliph was still Arab, the language of administration was still Arabic and Arab nobility was not forced to give up its land holdings; rather, the Arabs were merely forced to share the fruits of the empire equally with other races.
C.W. Previté-Orton argues that the reasons for the decline of the Umayyads was the rapid expansion of Islam. During the Umayyad period, mass conversions brought Iranians, Berbers, Copts, and Assyrians to Islam. These "clients," as the Arabs referred to them, were often better educated and more civilised than their Arab masters. The new converts, on the basis of equality of all Muslims, transformed the political landscape. Previté-Orton also argues that the feud between the Arabs in Syria and the Arabs in Mesopotamia further weakened the empire.
The revolution led to the enfranchisement of non-Arab people who had converted to Islam, granting them social and spiritual equality with Arabs. With social restrictions removed, Islam changed from an Arab ethnic empire to a universal world religion. This led to a great cultural and scientific exchange known as the Islamic Golden Age, with most achievements taking place under the Abbasids. What was later known as Islamic civilization and culture was defined by the Abbasids, rather than the earlier Rashidun and Umayyad caliphates. New ideas in all areas of society were accepted regardless of their geographic origin, and the emergence of societal institutions that were Islamic rather than Arab began. Though a class of Muslim clergy was absent for the first century of Islam, it was with the Abbasid Revolution and after that the Ulama appeared as a force in society, positioning themselves as the arbiters of justice and orthodoxy.
With the eastward movement of the capital from Damascus to Baghdad, the Abbasid Empire eventually took on a distinctly Persian character, as opposed to the Arab character of the Umayyads. Rulers became increasingly autocratic, at times claiming divine right in defense of their actions.
Historiography.
An accurate and comprehensive history of the revolution has proven difficult to compile for a number of reasons. There are no contemporary accounts, and most sources were written more than a century after the revolution. Because most historical sources were written under Abbasid rule, the description of the Umayyads must be taken with a grain of salt; such sources describe the Umayyads, at best, as merely placeholders between the Rashidun and Abbasid Caliphates.
The historiography of the revolution is especially significant due to Abbasid dominance of most early Muslim historical narratives; it was during their rule that history was established in the Muslim world as an independent field separate from writing in general. The initial two-hundred year period when the Abbasids actually held de facto power over the Muslim world coincided with the first composition of Muslim history. Another point of note is that while the Abbasid Revolution carried religious undertones against the irreligious and almost secular Umayyads, a separation of mosque and state occurred under the Abbasids as well. Historiographical surveys often focus on the solidifying of Muslim thought and rites under the Abbasids, with the conflicts between separated classes of rulers and clerics giving rise to the empire's eventual separation of religion and politics.


Dubai International Jazz Festival

The Dubai International Jazz Festival is an annual music festival which is held in February and takes place in Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
2011 Dubai International Jazz Festival.
The 2011 Dubai International Jazz Festival was held between the 16th and 24 February 2011 at Dubai Media City and featured the following performers:
February 16, 2011
Mica Paris, Alison Moyet, Jools Holland
February 17, 2011
Mindi Abair & Peter White, Macy Gray, Lifehouse
February 18, 2011
Jessy J, Joshua Radin, Train
2012 Dubai International Jazz Festival.
The 2012 Dubai International Jazz Festival was held between the 16th and 24 February 2012 at the Festival Park at the Dubai Festival City. It featured the following performers:
February 16, 2012
Michael Roach, Acoustic Alchemy, James Blunt
February 17, 2012
Jimmy Thomas & Samantha Antoinette, Jonathan Butler, Jools Holland And His Rhythm & Blues Orchestra, Mezzotono
February 23, 2012
Sandi Thom, Spyro Gyra, Jason Mraz
February 24, 2012
Dirty Robbers, Brett Dennen, James Morrison
2016 Dubai International Jazz Festival.
The 2016 Dubai International Jazz Festival was held between the 24th and 26 February 2012 at the Festival Park at the Dubai Festival City. It featured the following performers:
February 24, 2016
Scott Bradlee's Postmodern Jukebox, James
February 25, 2016
David Gray, Toto, Chris Botti feat Sting
February 26, 2016
La Bomba de Tiempo, Santana


Sharaf al-Din Fazlullah Qazvini

Sharaf al-Din Fazlullah Qazvini (died 1339) was the author of the Persian language "Mu‘jam fi athar muluk al-Ajam", a history of ancient Iran.


USS Baltimore (C-3)

The fourth USS "Baltimore" (C-3) (later CM-1) was a United States Navy cruiser, the fifth protected cruiser to be built by an American yard. Like the previous one, , the design was commissioned from the British company of W. Armstrong, Mitchell, and Company of Newcastle. "Baltimore" was an all-around improvement on "Charleston", somewhat larger with more guns, thicker armor, and better machinery.
Design.
"Baltimore" was built to plans purchased from Armstrong, a British manufacturer, which were similar to an unsuccessful Armstrong bid for the Spanish cruiser "Reina Regente". Unlike the preceding "Charleston", these plans included a modern triple expansion engine designed by Humphrys, Tennant & Co. "Baltimore"s initial cost for hull and machinery was $1,546,172.13.
"Baltimore" was armed with four /35 caliber Mark 4 guns in sponsons on either side of the bow and stern, and six /30 caliber Mark 3 guns in sponsons along the sides. Secondary armament was four 6-pounder () guns, two 3-pounder () Hotchkiss revolving cannon, two 1-pounder () Hotchkiss revolving cannon, and two .45 caliber (11.4 mm) Gatling guns. Four 14-inch (356 mm) torpedo tubes were included in the design but never mounted.
"Baltimore" had gun shields and a thick armored conning tower. The armored deck was up to on its sloped sides and elsewhere.
The as-built engineering plant included four coal-fired cylindrical boilers producing steam for two horizontal triple expansion engines totaling for a designed speed of , although was achieved on trials. "Baltimore" was among the first US Navy ships with the more powerful and efficient triple expansion engines. Unlike some contemporary designs, no sails were fitted. "Baltimore" carried 400 tons of coal for a range of at ; this could be increased to 850 tons for .
Refits.
"Baltimore" was rebuilt between 1900 and 1903 with the armament replaced by 12 /40 caliber Mark 7 guns, the 8-inch guns being removed. The secondary armament was replaced (or augmented) by six /50 caliber guns. The boilers were replaced with eight Babcock & Wilcox boilers. In 1913 and 1914 she was converted into a minelayer at the Charleston Navy Yard with four 6"/40 guns and a capacity of 180 mines. In an armament upgrade for World War I, between 1917 and 1918, her guns were replaced with four /51 caliber guns and two 3-inch (76 mm)/50 caliber anti-aircraft guns.
Construction and Service history.
She was launched on 6 October 1888 by William Cramp & Sons Ship and Engine Building Company, in Philadelphia, sponsored by Mrs. Theodore D. Wilson, wife of Chief Constructor Theodore D. Wilson; and commissioned on 7 January 1890, with Captain W. S. Schley in command.
Pre-Spanish–American War.
"Baltimore" became the flagship of the North Atlantic Squadron on 24 May 1890, and, from 15 to 23 August, conveyed the remains of the late Captain John Ericsson from New York City to Filipstad in Värmland, Sweden.
After cruising in European and Mediterranean waters with the European Squadron, she arrived at Valparaíso, Chile on 7 April 1891 to join the Pacific Squadron. She protected American citizens during the Chile revolution and landing men at Valparaíso on 28 August. Her activities in Chile around this time became known as the "Baltimore" Crisis where two United States Navy sailors from its crew were stabbed in front of the True Blue Saloon on October 16, 1891. Arriving at the Mare Island Navy Yard on 5 January 1892, she cruised on the west coast of the U.S. until 7 October and then returned to the Atlantic. She took part in the naval rendezvous and review in Hampton Roads during March and April 1893, prior to the World's Columbian Exposition. Proceeding via the Suez Canal, she cruised as flagship of the Asiatic Station from 22 December 1893 to 3 December 1895, protecting American interests. Returning to Mare Island on 21 January 1896, she went out of commission on 17 February.
Spanish–American War.
Recommissioned on 12 October 1897, "Baltimore" sailed on 20 October for the Hawaiian Islands and remained there from 7 November 1897 to 25 March 1898. She then joined Commodore George Dewey's squadron at Hong Kong on 22 April. The squadron sailed from Mirs Bay, China on 27 April for the Philippines, and on the morning of 1 May entered Manila Bay and destroyed the Spanish fleet stationed there. "Baltimore" was second in line behind . In the Battle of Manila Bay, "Baltimore" was commanded by future Rear Admiral Nehemiah Dyer, who had served with Farragut at Mobile Bay.
"Baltimore" remained in the Philippines on the Asiatic Station as the Spanish–American War transitioned into the Philippine–American War, convoying transports and protecting American interests until 23 May 1900, when she sailed for the United States, via the Suez Canal, arriving at New York on 8 September. In one instance, just before the outbreak of the Philippine–American War, the "Baltimore" sailed for Iloilo City accompanying troops whose mission was to occupy the city before General Martin Delgado's forces, loosely part of Emilio Aquinaldo's Philippine Revolutionary Army, could do so. When the American forces arrived, General Delgado already occupied the city in the name of the Federal State of the Visayas. After several weeks of a tense but peaceful stand-off, American troops and ships, including the "Baltimore" withdrew to Manila without landing on either Panay or Guimaras islands.
Pre-World War I.
Between 27 September 1900 and 6 May 1903, "Baltimore" was out of commission at New York Navy Yard. From 5 August to 23 December, she served with the Caribbean Squadron, North Atlantic Fleet, taking part in summer maneuvers off the coast of Maine, in the Presidential Review at Oyster Bay, New York (15–17 August), and in Santo Domingo waters. From 28 May to 26 August 1904, she was attached to the European Squadron and cruised in the Mediterranean. On 26 September, she sailed from Genoa, Italy, for the Asiatic Station and spent the next two years cruising in Asiatic, Philippine, and Australian waters.
"Baltimore" returned to New York on 24 April 1907 and went out of commission at New York Navy Yard on 15 May. On 20 January 1911, she was placed in commission in reserve and served as a receiving ship at Charleston Navy Yard (30 January 1911 – 20 September 1912). From 1913 to 1914, she was converted to a minelayer at the Charleston Navy Yard and recommissioned on 8 March 1915. From 1915 to 1918, she carried out mining experiments and operations in the Chesapeake Bay and along the Atlantic coast.
World War I.
At the time of the American entry into World War I, "Baltimore" was training personnel. Early in March 1918, she was detailed to assist in laying a deep minefield off the north coast of Ireland in the North Channel. She arrived at the Clyde on 8 March, and, from 13 April to 2 May, laid approximately 900 mines in the North Channel. On 2 June, she joined Mine Squadron 1 at Inverness, Scotland, and for four months participated in laying the North Sea Mine Barrage between the Orkney Islands and Norway by laying a total of 1,260 mines:
On 28 September, "Baltimore" sailed from Scapa Flow, Orkney Islands back to the U.S. She carried out mining experiments in the vicinity of the Virgin Islands until the end of the year.
Inter-war period.
In September 1919, she joined the Pacific Fleet, received the designation CM-1 (cruiser minelayer), and remained on the West Coast until January 1921. She then proceeded to Pearl Harbor, where she was subsequently placed out of commission on 15 September 1922. She then served as a receiving ship at Pearl Harbor, and was present during the Japanese attack there on 7 December 1941. She was sold for scrapping on 16 February 1942, but she was eventually towed out to sea and scuttled on 22 September 1944. In August 2017, the wreck was discovered by Hawaii Undersea Research Laboratory (HURL) off the south shore of Oahu. In September 2017, the Baltimore was revisited by the Okeanos Explorer and surveyed in detail for photogrammetry.


Abd al-Rahman Shahbandar

Abd al-Rahman Shahbandar (; ALA-LC: "‘Abd al-Raḥman al-Shahbandar"; November 1879 – July 1940) was a prominent Syrian nationalist during the French Mandate of Syria and a leading opponent of compromise with French authority. His devotion to Arab nationalism dated to the days of the Committee of Union and Progress and its "Turkification" policies. He supported the Arab Revolt during World War I and briefly headed the foreign ministry under Emir Faisal.
When France occupied Syria in July 1920 he fled the country. Shahbandar returned in 1921 and organized the Iron Hand Society to agitate against French rule. This was the first Syrian nationalist group to emerge in Damascus during the Mandate and Shahbandar organized its spread to Homs and Hama. In April 1922, the French arrested him and other Iron Hand leaders for incitement against their rule. The arrests triggered several days of demonstrations and bloody confrontation between protesters and French forces in Damascus. Nonetheless, the French tried Shahbandar for subversive activities and sentenced him to 20 years of imprisonment.
After serving 1½ years of his sentence the French sent him into exile where he joined the activities of the Syrian-Palestine Congress based in Cairo. The French allowed him to return to Syria in 1924. The following year Shahbandar guided the formation of Syria's first nationalist party, the People's Party. He then helped organize the spread of the Syrian Revolution from Jabal Druze to the rest of Syria. He eluded the French authorities and moved to Jabal Druze for the duration of the revolt. There he and Sultan al-Atrash formed a provisional government. When the revolt collapsed in 1927 Shahbandar fled to Transjordan and from there to Egypt.
In 1937 a French amnesty allowed him to return from exile and he directed his supporters to oppose the Franco-Syrian Treaty on the grounds that it granted France privileges that detracted from Syrian sovereignty. He was joined by powerful Syrian politicians such as Munir al-Ajlani. He also directed a political campaign to discredit the National Bloc government of Prime Minister Jamil Mardam Bey. During World War II the French considered cooperating with Shahbandar because of his opposition to the National Bloc and because of support for him from Britain and the Hashemites. In June 1940 he was assassinated in Damascus. The French accused several prominent National Bloc figures, including Jamil Mardam and Saadallah al-Jabiri, of plotting the murder and they fled to Iraq. While Shahbandar was one of Syria's most popular leaders he never built up an organization that would perpetuate his political legacy.


Battle of Koprukoy

The Battle of Koprukoy was part of the Caucasus Campaign during World War I between the Russian Empire and the Ottoman Empire, and occurred as the Russians were advancing to Erzurum. The Russians achieved total surprise and broke through the Ottoman defenses, sending the Third Army retreating towards Erzurum.
The Third Army was well positioned. There were two lines of defenses, carefully positioned to take advantage of the terrain, with wire obstacles to impede the attackers covered by machine guns backed up by artillery. The weakness of the position was a lack of reserves to deal with a break-through by the Russian Army.
The Russians had good information about the nature of the Ottoman defenses, including the lack of reserves. General Yudenich decided to break through at the boundary between the northern and central sectors of their line, near the Cakir-baba ridge. With great secrecy the 4th Caucasian Rifle Division was positioned to make the decisive attack.
The Russian plan started with a number of diversionary attacks that tied down Ottoman troops and local reserves on January 10, 1916. Those attacks often suffered high casualties but accomplished their goal. After several days of fighting the Ottoman commander, Abdul Kerim Pasha, moved his only reserve, the 17th Division, to what he thought was the Russian main attack.
The Ottomans launched their counterattack on January 13. At four o'clock that day, with artillery fire from the 34h Division, the 102nd Regiment captured Sansor Tepe. It was to continue the battle with the 28th Division of the IXth Corps and the 18th and 34th Divisions of the XIth Corps. The 33rd Division was to advance from the south of the Aras river and then turn north, cross the river, and suddenly attack the Russian front.
However, on January 14 Yudenich launched his attacks near the Cakir-baba ridge. Most Ottoman forces were out of position to stop it. Against heavy resistance and very bad weather the Russians advanced. By January 15, they were on the verge of breaking through. Yudenich, anticipating it, sent the Siberian Cossacks to that sector, as they were the only horsed unit that could operate in such weather. However, on the night of the 16th-17th the Ottomans withdrew. The Siberian Cossacks did annihilate the rear guard, but most of the Ottomans withdrew into the Erzurum fortress to the west. The Third Army had lost about 20,000 out of the 65,000 soldiers it had started the battle with. The Russian Army lost about 10,000 and 2,000 more with severe frostbite out of 75,000.