text:
Talk:Elbląg

Old talk of 2002
In 1945 Elbing was taken over by Poland, the native inhabitants were expelled and replaced by Poles. The city was renamed Elblag. After the fall of the Iron Curtain there is a small minority of original Elbinger inhabitants in Elbing/Elblag? today, who are now allowed to speak their native language and use their none-Polish names once again.

What a mess. I have made the following stab at clarifying and NPOVing this paragraph:

1. The "Elbing/Elblag" construction has been resolved to just "Elblag". The sentence containing it refers to post-1945, when the city was no longer named Elbing -- referring to it as so is disingenuous.

2. There's a logical contradiction in the final clause. If the "original Elbinger"s (more on that in a second) were expelled from Poland, the Polish government were obviously not in a position to keep them from speaking German. One or the other could have happened -- I assumed it was the expulsion.

3. "Original Elbinger" is also disingenuous. The city was founded in the 13th century, hence I would imagine all the "original" inhabitants died sometime before 1300 AD. Replaced with "the city's German-speaking inhabitants."

-- Paul Drye
 * yep, all those are reasonable decisions. --MichaelTinkler

 * I am somewhat uncomfortable (ok, very uncomfortable) with the whole "original" thing. It would be good to know:

 * 1) Was the expulsion forcible? or did the 4 powers say to the German-speakers that they would henceforth be living in poland, so they could leave if they didn't like it?

 * 1) How many of these German speakers had been sent in as colonists by the Nazi regime?

 * we are by no means hearing the complete story here

 * I know that this part of the article has since been changed, but are you serious with a question like "did the 4 powers say to the German-speakers that they would henceforth be living in poland, so they could leave if they didn't like it.."?

- For church records filmed by the LDS Latter Day Saints, Utah for Elbing, Westprussia, Prussia, Germany http://www.familysearch.com

Topic Germany, Preußen, Westpreußen, Elbing - Church records

Titles Kirchenbuch, 1625-1946 / Evangelische Kirche Sankt Annen Elbing Kirchenbuch, 1622-1827 / Evangelische Kirche Heiliger Leichnam Elbing Kirchenbuch, 1626-1831 / Evangelische Kirche Sankt Paulus Elbing Kirchenbuch, 1577-1816 / Evangelische Kirche Heilige Drei Könige Elbing Kirchenbuch, 1604-1877 / Evangelische Kirche. Sankt Marien Hauptkirche Elbing Kirchenbuch, 1642-1881 / Katholische Kirche Sankt Nikolai Elbing Kirchenbuch, 1744-1942 / Mennoniten Gemeinde Elbing Kirchenbuch, 1746-1809 / Preußen. Armee. Infanterie Regiment 04 Kirchenbuch, 1746-1868 / Preußen. Armee. Infanterie Regiment 14 Kirchenbuch, 1746-1920 / Evangelische Kirche. Militärgemeinde Elbing Kirchenbuch, 1871-1945 / Katholisch-Apostolische Gemeinde Elbing Kirchenbuch, 1840-1925 / Baptisten Gemeinde Elbing Record of members, 1900-1923 / Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Königsberg Branch (Ostpreußen) Record of members, 1901-1913 / Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Stolp Branch (Pommern) Record of members, 1901-1930 / Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Elbing Branch (Westpreußen)

© 2000 Intellectual Reserve, Inc. All rights reserved.

 * Just to look at, keep the url, you can check on any city

Original Elbinger are some citizens of Elbing, remaining in Eilbing after it was changed to Elblag by Poland. After the Iron Curtain fell, the Germans in Poland have minority right now, They have been able to restore their German names, The Elbinger German minority have a Elbing newspaper.

Besides, Poland had to sign a treaty, allowing German language to the Autochtones again. Maps in Europe are in both languages Danzig/Gdanzk Elbing /Elblag etc. user:H.J.

 * Not that I've ever seen. I've seen this in the Italian Tyrol/Alto Adige, where maps typically show German names alongside the Italian (Merano/Meran, Bressanone/Brixen), but all Polish maps that I've looked at -- including an atlas published recently in Poland -- have only the Polish names. --Marnen Laibow-Koser 13:42, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Not really. Poland agreed to treat the German minority in the very same way Polish minority in Germany is treated, with the exception that some of the communes have German as their official language and double names on the welcome signs. German is also one of the officially supported minorities, which means that the German candidates to the Sejm do not have to pass the 5% quota. However, German is not an official language of Poland and the German names are used only locally in several communes (mostly around Opole. I've never heard of any significant German minority in or around Elbląg. [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 17:19, Oct 22, 2004 (UTC)

--

Can I point out that there is no evidence for such a place as Old Prussi Land, in the sense of anythig besides "here lie dragons" on any map? It's just part of some nationalist ideal to give Prussia some proto-national roots, and fits in with Prussian saga literature, which seems to be at least derived, if not downright stolen, from information we have about the Saxons and Friesians before their conversion. If you look at "Old Prussian" the language, it's a Baltic, i.e., SLAVIC language. So even if all of this Old Prussi stuff fits in, it certainly doesn't mesh with a Germanic heritage...JHK

According to most popular theories, Baltic languages are not Slavic language. But of course it has nothing to do with Germanic languages. --Taw

Ok -- Let me be more specific. Baltic languages and Slavic languages both belong to the Satem stem of Indo-European languages, while the Germanic languages belong to the centum group. As such, Baltic languages aremuch more closely related to Slavic languages (and there is some linguistic argument that they are indeed offshoots, but TAW is correct, accepted theory sees them as two separate sub-groups). My point is that it's totally ridiculous to keep trying to tie the Old Prussians to Germanic roots -- which blows a lot of user:H.J.'s arguments in her "really belongs to Germany, not to Poland/Communist East" entries. JHK -- To JHK's totally ridiculous point on language.One only needs to take one look at the different Baltic languages and compare them with Slavic languages.They are completely different, unless you want to say all languages are the same ( the Nostratic Macro family and linguistic Paloeontology ).Northern and Eastern Germans all have Satem pronounciation h=K Ich =ik or ek (ego in Greek). The Satem or as it is nowadays called Indo-Iranian is derived from the ancient Indo-European Armenian-Ashkenazi-Median(Iranian)-Greek-Celtic-Germanic connection, in other words Indo-Europeans coming into Old Europe.And read what it says in the entries, the Baltic language area was once much larger. All along the Baltic Sea to Moscow. Slavs conquered many of there areas starting by 600AD and intensifying after 1000 AD with the greatest territory conquered after 1945 AD.

 * user:H.J. -- if all one had to do was compare languages and sounds, anyone could be a linguist without special training. Whether or not the Northern and Eastern Germans pronounce things differently -- which is a dialect difference, not a basic language difference, they still speak German, a Germanic language.  Baltic languages are more closely related to Slavic languages than they are to Germanic languages, according to what I have read.  One of the main reasons is that the two are Satem languages, while German is Centem.  Again, this is only according to what I've read by linguists.  Taking your point about Slavic migrations as an historian, I would think that perhaps these invasions had an effect on pronunciation in Northern and Eastern Germany  -- but it certainly doesn't change the not at all ridiculous fact that you are willing to twist facts and current scholarship in any way it suits you to prove your very biased point.
 * Since your point is not neutral, and your contributions almost never based on valid evidence or theory, excuse me if I'm not too worried by your judgement of my abilities.JHK

To Space Cadet,

I don't know what is wrong with Polish names and Polish spelling ?

My reasoning is that if the title of the article is Elblag readers would like to know how it is properly written in Polish.

Another thing writing Torun (Ger. Thorn) and so on you imply that those towns are as well Polish as German. They are Polish and they used to be German, Hanseatic, Free Towns whatever. What do you think ?

I start thinking that it might be good start another article called Elbing. Perhaps.

If you write Ger. write it in full - this is not paper encyclopedia.

To make things clear I am not a Polish nationalist, far from that. I just want to give the Polish POV to counteract H.J.

--Kpjas
 * Kpjas -- the reason we've been doing this as we have has more to do with English than Polish or German. We tend to use the form used in English for the time period in question.  THe article is titled after the Current official English name of the city, but if there is legitimate reason to use a different name for a different period, we use that.  It is very awkward, but also not abnormal -- for instance, Ancient history texts will often use Roman names for cities, rather than moder equivalents.

 * Much more important than which name is used, is that the article is correct, that the English flows well and logically, and that it is NPOV. It is an incredible waste of time and effort to worry about changing the name of the town, when there are much more important things at stake -- plus, it just incites edit and flame wars. JHK

It is right, that a seperate history should be written for Elbing. This is exactly, what I had been doning with all the German cities. Then add that since 1945 there is a place called Elblag and start that seperately.

Then people think it is right, that not only the city and country was stolen but now that the history is beeing stolen as well.

So I take all my Elbing history back, that I had input into wiki sofar. The history of Elblag starts in 1945, so write about that. user:H.J.
 * Do not just delete content. Move it if we agree, but don't just delete. Rmhermen 09:45 Aug 22, 2002 (PDT)

-- To JHK, see Old Prussian Language and descriptions of language.H.J.

user:H.J., this needs to stop. You are damaging the project and wasting our time. The city is now Elblag in English. That's what the US and British governments call it. The city's history hasn't changed because the official name has. I have reverted the article, and the Elbing article will be redirected here, as was decided months ago, when Larry worked here. JHK

Local Polish dialect
Could anyone tell me what dialect is that? Kashubian language by any chance?Halibutt 22:40, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

You mean the name of Elblag in a local Polish dialect. It the dialect of the Polish people living in the vicinity of Elblag, which is usually called Powiśle. The dialect is sometimes called Dialect of Malbork (dialekt malborski) but the natives prefer to call it Dialct of Sztum (dialekt sztumski). It has no direct connection with Cassubian language - Mestwin of Gdansk 01:32, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Question for JHK
you wrote: "Can I point out that there is no evidence for such a place as Old Prussi Land, in the sense of anythig besides "here lie dragons" on any map? It's just part of some nationalist ideal to give Prussia some proto-national roots, and fits in with Prussian saga literature, which seems to be at least derived, if not downright stolen, from information we have about the Saxons and Friesians before their conversion...."

What exactly are you trying to say here? I agree with your last sentence (which I did not copy above, but I'm not sure what your point about slavic languages and their relation to the polish people now in Elbag...

Replaced stuff
I replaced some stuff at the beginning as I expanded it a little:

The town of Elbing was founded in 1237 by the Teutonic Order near the former Truso. Dave 12:28, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Olessi edits
Hello Olessi. I see you are a distinguished editor on central Europe. Thanks for refining some of my changes. I can't say there is anything I want to seriously dispute at the moment. There are a couple of things I would like to mention though. When I first saw the article the introduction was incomprehensible, due to all those strange characters and that list of names. Those things should be in the article for those who take more of an interest in linguistics but it should not take one 20 minutes just to figure out the first sentence. Right at the moment the combination of my edits and yours have resulted in a format that isn't too bad. I notice many editors put such name lists at the end, but as I say, it doesn't look too bad where it is. The section heads serve to prevent confusion.

Second, so you want to call Elbing and Elblag the same city? Now really! Why not call Kaliningrad the same city! Why can't my neighbors here in the states with Germanic names go back to Elbing and visit all their cousins, hey? Let me ask you this. How many of the current citizens of Elblag get together on New year's eve to remember auld lang syne in Elbing?

In any case it seems to me we can go on with this. I can work with you so far, even though my perception is not yours. You can probably look forward to reading me on the other Prussian cities also, as I am interested in Prussia. My interests are more in antiquity but you can't neglect the modern; after all, people live today and not at some other time.Dave 03:38, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Hello! I should have addressed some of the changes I made on this talk page initially; I apologize for not having done so.
 * Thanks for your swift reply.Dave 03:37, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Generally, alternative names (at least for cities) are listed in the introduction of the article. Sometimes this burdens the intro considerably (Bilhorod-Dnistrovskyi) and a separate naming section is then created near the beginning (Tallinn, Mukacheve). I'm not familiar with having the names listed near the end of the article, however.
 * I've seen it more at the end than the beginning but it isn't worth the time to do a study. I like it where it is. "If it isn't broken, don't fix it." W As I say what was originally broken about it was the unreadability it helped introduce to the intro. So now it is fixed.Dave 03:37, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

 * While I agree that Truso and the city have no continuation, this is the first I have heard that Elbing and Elbląg are separate cities. Although I find it regrettable that East Prussian Germans might not be welcomed in Elbląg, it does not change the fact that the city is seen as a continuous entity from the 13th century through today. Unless you can provide some reliable sources, the assertion that Elbląg is a different city from Elbing seems like original research to me. Here are some quickly found links maintaining the continuity of the city: Britannica, Columbia, American Heritage, etc.
 * Now that you explain it that way I see what you mean. Whether or not I or anyone sees it as continuous or discontinuous has nothing to do with it. The determining factor is as you say the way it is predominantly treated.Dave 03:37, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

 * By the way, thanks for adding the information about the geography in and near the city. I would advise adding references for it if you find the time. Thanks! Olessi 21:40, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Most of what I said you can get from looking at the two interactive maps in the external links or the very common community websites that abound. They clearly show the directions north, east, south and west, and correctly depict the location of Gdansk, Frisches Haff, and so on. Also I used some material from the websites I listed under Druzno. There's nothing obscure or fancy there. But I suppose you probably mean the material on the port of Elblag, such as the draft of 1.5 m. Well, I got the whole thing off the web. There is a good site on the port. It crossed my mind to put that site in but somehow I did not.
 * I don't see much point in saying something like "for the direction and distance of Elblag from Lake Druzno, refer to the interactive map ..." For the statistics I suppose I could footnote the information and refer to the external link. I will work on locating that site and make sure it is available to the reader who wants to check it out and possibly learn more.Dave 03:37, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Since you seem skilled and to some degree authoritative I probably should explain what I am doing. I wanted to see some sort of ethnic database here, in this case some information about the Old Prussians and Truso and the Elbing vocabulary and the relationship of Elbing to the Old Prussians, Germans and Poles. Is this not a most excellent way to collect what is known and review it? On this particular article I noticed the bad format at the start. The organization seemed good but then I kept encountering errors and ambiguities, which were misleading and didn't say anything. For example, Elbing was said to be in Pogesania. But it was also in Pomesania. Then some obscure statement about the division of the dioceses was made according to which Pogesania disappeared (it didn't really). Then I realized this was like copying a manuscript. The quick summary articles were being repeated over and over but at each repetition a little more error was being introduced. Wikipedia is after all only 4 or 5 years old. So I decided to go through it correcting whatever errors I could or else this database of information would not be much good to anyone, being wrong. On a topic of this nature there are many determined partisans. So I knew I would have to do some interfacing. I'm still not sure that you are not a Polish partisan (there are also German ones and Russian ones).
 * Anyway I'm still going through it. Elbing is important historically to Americans. It was Protestant for quite a while. The Mennonites dominated it for a while also. There are a lot of immigrants from there here, or I should say descendants of immigrants. I know there is a space limitation. So it is important to put spaceworthy material in. That is one reason why I appreciate your edits. But, we can't leave any gross errors or ambiguities, now can we? What good would that be?
 * Well I need to wind down this too long comment. Gradually I'll be looking at Culm, Torun, Gdansk, Koenigsburg and all the others. Just at first glance Gdansk seemed pretty good, but I won't know until I read it in detail. That reminds me there are two more topics for your consideration:

While originally most information contributed to Wikipedia was without references, there definitely is a shift now toward sourcing contributions (see the Notes section of practically all featured articles). While general geographic data might be ok, I still would recommend sourcing it. Historical information (especially regarding the Middle Ages), should always be sourced, in my opinion, even if it is from a different language Wiki. Thanks for the "suggestion" that I might be a partisan editor- it reminds me of User:Lysy's introduction. :)

One thing I would suggest avoid doing is providing too much information here when it could be placed somewhere else. For instance, eventually I want to work on a Prussian Crusade article where the detailed history of the conquest of the Prussians would go, while details about Lübeck rights would be more fitting at Lübeck law than in this article.

Thank you for your enthusiasm for the project and happy editing! Olessi 00:12, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Ho ho ho! I feel more confident about you from the previous paragraphs. I generally agree with you. An article is certainly more useful to researchers or database builders (like me) with ample sourcing. An article often is a sort of clearing house of information, and that is good I think. But, there are a lot of persons who want to use it just for general information. They need to be able to understand it and that is a Wikipedia goal I believe. Many times expert articles have been tagged as needing to be made comprehensible.
 * I agree, as I say, with minor reservations. An article needs some continuity, some connector sentences, a brief indication of what the reader might find expanded in a linked article. Where to draw the line is a judgement of course. Too far in one direction and the article is a collection of disconnected statements. Too far in the other and the theme of the article gets lost in the morass of other topics. I thought the article before I added to it erred in the direction of disconnection. You couldn't really follow what was going on, especially as many of the linked articles were or are insufficiently developed.
 * Prussian Crusade. Good idea. I had in mind doing articles on the Prussian tribes and then going from there into the archaeology. When I started there was nothing at all. I did an article or two in which I necessarily had to talk about the Teutonic Order because there was nothing to which to link. Suddenly articles on the order began to appear, fine articles, well illustrated, not, however, as factual as they might be, written from an non-NPOV point of view, that they were always the champions of Christianity, hoorah for the good knights and all that. Nobody mentioned that the queen of Poland had to beg the knights to stop slaughtering the by then Christian Prussians. But mainly there was no comprehensive view of what the order was trying to do, how they planned to build a Baltic state, Livonia, how they invaded from both flanks, Riga and the Vistula, how the east Balts bided their time and sacrificed the west Balts, how they built the state of Lithuania and then joined it to Poland, suddenly converting to Christianity, and finally how they turned on the order when they were ready and smashed it in 1410 at Grunwald, too late for most of the Prussians. So if we are going to have an adequate historical view of the foundation of the Baltic states we certainly need and article on the Prussian Crusade and other topics. I cannot possibly do these all myself. I look forward to your articles.

 * Meanwhile I will try to take your advice. You can judge whether the inormation is sufficiently connected. Thanks for your interest.Dave 02:10, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Polish external links
The Polish external links are interesting and informative I am sure but not too many English-speakers can read them. Can't we just refer them to the Polish Wiki? It contains so much more information for the Polish readers that it seems a shame to make them read English, and the Polish sites aren't much good to the English readers.Dave 03:37, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Polish Common Law
Well, that sentence on the Book of Elblag whets the appetite by confusing the reader into a state of puzzlement. Have we any idea what language it is in? I thought the law was the Luebeck Law, according to the article. Anyway how did Prussian law get into Polish common law? And to top it all off I just can't find the Book of Elblag anywhere else besides Wikipedia. Can anyone help inform us non-Poles here?Dave 03:37, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
 * You'll find few sources in English, but there's a 1946 Polish book speaking of "Book of Elbing". Else, you got to look for Elbinger Rechtsbuch or the all-Polish name. Calling it Book of Elblag would be ahistoric, as the town was then known as Elbing, rather than the much more recent Polish Elblag. -- Matthead DisOuß   18:00, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Lead
I think the lead focuses to heavily on the history, not enough on other aspects. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:16, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Improper Italicization
There is also no reason to italicize former German names of now-Polish localities in the areas given to postwar Poland by the Potsdam Conference. In English, italics usually denote foreign (non-English) words for things or concepts, but not place names. Prior to 1945, Elbląg was officially Elbing, not Elbing, and the German name should not be italicized. Sca (talk) 17:14, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Nazi "popularity"
I have removed a gratuitous and undocumented reference to the "popularity" of the Nazi Party in Elbing. The Nazis were "popular" in nearly all German cities and towns in then-East Prussia, Danzig and Pomerania during the years just before World War II — mainly because they promised revision of the Versailles Treaty's creation of the Free City of Danzig and what then was commonly known (in Western Europe and the English-speaking world) as the Polish Corridor. Unless some evidence can be shown that the Nazis were particularly or unusually popular in Elbing, this reference is irrelevant, and seemed devised to indirectly blame the residents of old Elbing for what happened to the town in and after 1945. Much larger forces were at play. Sca (talk) 17:28, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

After 1945
Some "15th century binoculars" are mentioned. As the telescope only came in in the early 17th century, I am not sure that this is true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.26.0.42 (talk) 12:21, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 one external links on Elbląg. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120817000528/http://www.stat.gov.pl/gus/5840_13211_PLK_HTML.htm to http://www.stat.gov.pl/gus/5840_13211_PLK_HTML.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071217111917/http://www.euhe.edu.pl:80/ to http://euhe.edu.pl/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071010151636/http://www.janski.pl/uczelnia/wydzial.html to http://www.janski.pl/uczelnia/wydzial.html
 * Added tag to http://www.seminarium.elblag.opoka.org.pl/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.tainan.gov.tw/tainan/Intro.asp?nsub=L1A400

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:43, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Elbląg. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060805113641/http://www.polfracht.pl/polfracht/psal/localinf/elb/portelb1.htm to http://www.polfracht.pl/polfracht/psal/localinf/elb/portelb1.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://euhe.edu.pl/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:37, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

The pronunciation of the Polish name of the city
The transcription of the Polish name of the city at the beginning of the article is [ˈɛlblɔŋk] (with [k]) but the man in the recording says [ˈɛlblɔŋg] (with [g]). The discrepancy should be resolved in one way or another.S. Valkemirer (talk) 09:15, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
 * He actually said, with a nasal vowel and a voiced stop at the end, which is a ridiculous pronunciation that is completely outside of Standard Polish. The correct pronunciation is . I've replaced the recording. Sol505000 (talk) 13:38, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Elbląg


text:
Epistle to the Hebrews

The Epistle to the Hebrews is one of the books of the New Testament.

The text does not mention the name of its author, but was traditionally attributed to Paul the Apostle; most of the Ancient Greek manuscripts, the Old Syriac Peshitto and some of the Old Latin manuscripts have the epistle to the Hebrews among Paul's letters. However, doubt on Pauline authorship in the Roman Church is reported by Eusebius. Modern biblical scholarship considers its authorship unknown, with Pauline authorship mostly rejected. A minority view Hebrews as written in deliberate imitation of the style of Paul, with some contending that it was authored by Priscilla and Aquila.

Scholars of Greek consider its writing to be more polished and eloquent than any other book of the New Testament, and "the very carefully composed and studied Greek of Hebrews is not Paul's spontaneous, volatile contextual Greek." It has been described as an intricate New Testament book. Some scholars believe it was written for Jewish Christians who lived in Jerusalem. Its essential purpose was to exhort Christians to persevere in the face of persecution. At this time, certain believers were considering turning back to Judaism and to the Jewish system of law to escape being persecuted for believing Christ to be the Messiah. The theme of the epistle is the teaching of the person of Christ and his role as mediator between God and humanity.

According to traditional scholarship, the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, following in the footsteps of Paul, argued that Jewish Law had played a legitimate role in the past but was superseded by a New Covenant for the Gentiles (cf. Romans 7:1–6; Galatians 3:23–25; Hebrews 8, 10). However, a growing number of scholars note that the terms Gentile, Christian and Christianity are not present in the text and posit that Hebrews was written for a Jewish audience, and is best seen as a debate between Jewish followers of Jesus and proto-rabbinical Judaism. In tone, and detail, Hebrews goes beyond Paul and attempts a more complex, nuanced, and openly adversarial definition of the relationship. The epistle opens with an exaltation of Jesus as "the radiance of God's glory, the express image of his being, and upholding all things by his powerful word" (Hebrews 1:1–3). The epistle presents Jesus with the titles "pioneer" or "forerunner", "Son" and "Son of God", "priest" and "high priest". The epistle casts Jesus as both exalted Son and High Priest, a unique dual Christology.

Composition
Hebrews uses Old Testament quotations interpreted in light of first-century rabbinical Judaism. New Testament and Second Temple Judaism scholar Eric Mason argues that the conceptual background of the priestly Christology of the Epistle to the Hebrews closely parallels presentations of the messianic priest and Melchizedek in the Qumran scrolls. In both Hebrews and Qumran, a priestly figure is discussed in the context of a Davidic figure; in both cases a divine decree appoints the priests to their eschatological duty; both priestly figures offer an eschatological sacrifice of atonement. Although the author of Hebrews was not directly influenced by Qumran's "Messiah of Aaron", these and other conceptions did provide "a precedent... to conceive Jesus similarly as a priest making atonement and eternal intercession in the heavenly sanctuary".

Authorship
By the end of the first century there was no consensus on the author's identity. Over the ensuing centuries, scholars have suggested Clement of Rome, Barnabas, Paul the Apostle, Luke the Evangelist, Silas, Apollos, and Priscilla and Aquila as possible authors.

In the 3rd century, Origen wrote of the letter:

"In the epistle entitled To The Hebrews the diction does not exhibit the characteristic roughness of speech or phraseology admitted by the Apostle [Paul] himself, the construction of the sentences is closer to the Greek usage, as anyone capable of recognising differences of style would agree. On the other hand the matter of the epistle is wonderful, and quite equal to the Apostle's acknowledged writings: the truth of this would be admitted by anyone who has read the Apostle carefully... If I were asked my personal opinion, I would say that the matter is the Apostle's but the phraseology and construction are those of someone who remembered the Apostle's teaching and wrote his own interpretation of what his master had said. So if any church regards this epistle as Paul's, it should be commended for so doing, for the primitive Church had every justification for handing it down as his. Who wrote the epistle is known to God alone: the accounts that have reached us suggest that it was either Clement, who became Bishop of Rome, or Luke, who wrote the gospel and the Acts."

Matthew J. Thomas argues that Origen was not denying Paul's authorship of Hebrews in that quote, but that he was only meaning that Paul would have employed an amanuensis to compose the letter. He points out that in other writings and quotations of Hebrews, Origen describes Paul as the author of the letter.

In the 4th century, Jerome and Augustine of Hippo supported Paul's authorship: the Church largely agreed to include Hebrews as the fourteenth letter of Paul, and affirmed this authorship until the Reformation. Scholars argued that in the 13th chapter of Hebrews, Timothy is referred to as a companion. Timothy was Paul's missionary companion in the same way Jesus sent disciples out in pairs. The writer also states that he wrote the letter from "Italy", which also at the time fits Paul. The difference in style is explained as simply an adjustment to a distinct audience, to the Jewish Christians who were being persecuted and pressured to go back to traditional Judaism.

Many scholars now believe that the author was one of Paul's pupils or associates, citing stylistic differences between Hebrews and the other Pauline epistles. Recent scholarship has favored the idea that the author was probably a leader of a predominantly Jewish congregation to whom they were writing.

Because of its anonymity, it had some trouble being accepted as part of the Christian canon, being classed with the Antilegomena. Eventually it was accepted as Scripture because of its sound theology, eloquent presentation, and other intrinsic factors. In antiquity, certain circles began to ascribe it to Paul in an attempt to provide the anonymous work with an explicit apostolic pedigree.

The original King James Version of the Bible titled the work "The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews". However, the KJV's attribution to Paul was only a guess, and is currently disputed by recent research. Its vastly different style, different theological focus, different spiritual experience and different Greek vocabulary are all believed to make Paul's authorship of Hebrews increasingly indefensible. At present, modern scholarship does not ascribe Hebrews to Paul. A.J. Gordon ascribes the authorship of Hebrews to Priscilla, writing that "It is evident that the Holy Spirit made this woman Priscilla a teacher of teachers". Later proposed by Adolf von Harnack in 1900, Harnack's reasoning won the support of prominent Bible scholars of the early-20th century. Harnack believes the letter was written in Rome – not to the Church, but to the inner circle. In setting forth his evidence for Priscillan authorship, he finds it amazing that the name of the author was blotted out by the earliest tradition. Citing Hebrews 13, he says it was written by a person of "high standing and apostolic teacher of equal rank with Timothy". If Luke, Clement, Barnabas, or Apollos had written it, Harnack believes their names would not have been obliterated.

Donald Guthrie's commentary The Letter to the Hebrews (1983) mentions Priscilla by name as a suggested author.

Believing the author to have been Priscilla, Ruth Hoppin posits that the name was omitted either to suppress its female authorship, or to protect the letter itself from suppression.

Also convinced that Priscilla was the author of Hebrews, Gilbert Bilezikian, professor of biblical studies at Wheaton College, remarks on "the conspiracy of anonymity in the ancient church," and reasons: "The lack of any firm data concerning the identity of the author in the extant writings of the church suggests a deliberate blackout more than a case of collective loss of memory."

Date
The use of tabernacle terminology in Hebrews has been used to date the epistle before the destruction of the temple, the idea being that knowing about the destruction of both Jerusalem and the temple would have influenced the development of the author's overall argument. Therefore, the most probable date for its composition is the second half of the year 63 or the beginning of 64, according to the Catholic Encyclopedia.

The text itself, for example, makes a contrast between the resurrected Christ "in heaven" "who serves in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the Lord" and the version on earth, where "there are already priests who offer the gifts prescribed by the law. They serve at a sanctuary that is a copy and shadow of what is in heaven." (NIV version)

Despite this, some scholars, such as Harold Attridge and Ellen Aitken, hold to a later date of composition, between 70 and 100 AD.

Audience
German scholar Adolf Jülicher rejected the traditional view that the epistle was directed to a Hebrew congregation in Israel, concluding instead that the "only supposition that is really encouraged by the Epistle itself... is that Hebrews was addressed to the place where it first made its appearance, i.e. to Rome."

Scholars have suggested that Hebrews is part of an internal New Testament debate between the extreme Judaizers (who argued that non-Jews must convert to Judaism before they can receive the Holy Spirit of Jesus' New Covenant) versus the extreme antinomians (who argued that Jews must reject God's commandments and that Jewish law was no longer in effect). James and Paul represent the moderates of each faction, respectively, and Peter may have served as moderator.

It sets before the Jew the claims of Christianity – to bring the Jew to the full realization of the relation of Judaism to Christianity, to make clear that Christ has fulfilled those temporary and provisional institutions, and has thus abolished them. This view is commonly referred to as supersessionism. According to the theology of supersessionism, the church replaces Israel, and thus the church takes the place of Israel as the people of God. The dominant interpretation in modern Hebrews scholarship has been that the epistle contains an implicit supersessionist claim (that the Levitical sacrifices and the Levitical priests have been replaced/superseded by Christ's sacrifice). Per Bibliowicz, Hebrews scholars may be divided into those that are supportive-sympathetic to the epistle's theological message, those that are critical of the epistle's supersessionary message, and those attempting a middle ground.

Due to the importance of Hebrews for the formation of future Christian attitudes toward Jews and Judaism, a distinction must be made between the author's intent and the way in which the text was interpreted by future generations. The impact of the deployment and implementation of supersession theology is difficult to convey and  grasp. The implementation of this theological claim eventually led to the negation and disenfranchisement of Judaizing followers of Jesus, and later, of all non-Christian Jews.

Purpose for writing
Those to whom Hebrews is written seem to have begun to doubt whether Jesus could really be the Messiah for whom they were waiting, because they believed the Messiah prophesied in the Hebrew Scriptures was to come as a militant king and destroy the enemies of his people. In contrast, Jesus came as a man of no social standing who was slandered, arrested and condemned by the Jewish leaders and who suffered and was crucified by the Romans. Although he was seen resurrected, he still left the earth and his people, who now faced persecution rather than victory. The Book of Hebrews argues that the Hebrew Scriptures also foretold that the Messiah would be a priest (although of a different sort than the traditional Levitical priests) and Jesus came to fulfill this role, as a sacrificial offering to God, to atone for sins. His role of a king is yet to come, and so those who follow him should be patient and not be surprised that they suffer for now.

Some scholars today believe the document was written to prevent apostasy. Some have interpreted apostasy to mean a number of different things, such as a group of Christians in one sect leaving for another more conservative sect, one of which the author disapproves. Some have interpreted apostasy to mean a number of different things, such as a group of Christians in one sect leaving for another more conservative sect, one of which the author disapproves. Some have seen apostasy as a move from the Christian assembly to pagan ritual. In light of a possibly Jewish-Christian audience, the apostasy in this sense may be in regard to Jewish Christians leaving the Christian assembly to return to the Jewish synagogue. The focus on "purifying" the "conscience/consciousness" (9:9; 9:14; 10:2; 10:22) has also been viewed as key for the writing of Hebrews. The author writes, "Let us hold fast to our confession". The epistle has been viewed as a long, rhetorical argument for having confidence in the new way to God revealed in Jesus Christ.

The book could be argued to affirm special creation. It says that God by his Son, Jesus Christ, made the worlds. "God [...] hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son [...] by whom also he made the worlds". The epistle also emphasizes the importance of faith. "Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear".

"...the Epistle opens with the solemn announcement of the superiority of the New Testament Revelation by the Son over Old Testament Revelation by the prophets. It then proves and explains from the Scriptures the superiority of this New Covenant over the Old by the comparison of the Son with the angels as mediators of the Old Covenant, with Moses and Joshua as the founders of the Old Covenant, and finally, by opposing the high-priesthood of Christ after the order of Melchisedech to the Levitical priesthood after the order of Aaron."

Style
Hebrews is a very consciously "literary" document. The purity of its Greek was noted by Clement of Alexandria, according to Eusebius, and Origen of Alexandria asserted that every competent judge must recognize a great difference between this epistle and those of Paul.

The letter consists of two strands: an expositional or doctrinal strand, and a hortatory or strongly urging strand which punctuates the exposition parenthetically at key points as warnings to the readers.

Hebrews does not fit the form of a traditional Hellenistic epistle, lacking a proper prescript. Modern scholars generally believe this book was originally a sermon or homily, although possibly modified after it was delivered to include the travel plans, greetings and closing.

Hebrews contains many references to the Old Testament – specifically to the Septuagint text.

Christology
The Epistle to the Hebrews is notable for the manner in which it expresses the divine nature of Christ. As A.C. Purdy summarized for The Interpreter's Bible:

"We may sum up our author's Christology negatively by saying that he has nothing to do with the older Hebrew messianic hopes of a coming Son of David, who would be a divinely empowered human leader to bring in the kingdom of God on earth; and that while he still employs the figure of a militant, apocalyptic king [...] who will come again [...], this is not of the essence of his thought about Christ.

Positively, our author presents Christ as divine in nature, and solves any possible objection to a divine being who participates in human experience, especially in the experience of death, by the priestly analogy. He seems quite unconscious of the logical difficulties of his position proceeding from the assumption that Christ is both divine and human, at least human in experience although hardly in nature."

Mikeal Parsons has commented:

"If the humanity of Jesus is an important theme for Hebrews, how much more is Jesus' deity. While this theme of exaltation is asserted 'in many and various ways' we shall content ourselves by considering how the writer addresses this theme by asserting Jesus' superiority to a) angels, and b) Moses. The first chapter of Hebrews stresses the superiority of the Son to the angels. The very name 'Son' indicates superiority. This exaltation theme, in which the Son is contrasted with the angels (1:4), is expanded in the following string of OT quotations (1:5–13). While some have understood the catena as referring primarily to Christ's pre-existence, it is more likely that the verses should be understood, 'as a Christological hymn which traces the entire Christ event, including the pre-existence, earthly life, and exaltation of Christ'. The overall structure of the catena seems to point to exaltation as the underlying motif... At least it may be concluded that the superiority of the Son is demonstrated by this comparison/contrast with angels.

Peter Rhea Jones has reminded us that 'Moses is not merely one of the figures compared unfavourably to Jesus'; but rather, 'Moses and Jesus are yoked throughout the entirety of the epistle'. Allowing that Moses is much more than a 'whipping boy' for the author, the fact remains that the figure Moses is utilized as a basis for Christology. While there are several references to Moses, only two will be needed to demonstrate Jesus' superiority. The first passage to be considered is Hebrews 3:1–6. D'Angelo and others regard the larger context of this passage (3:1–4:16) to be the superiority of Christ's message to the Law. While the comparison between Jesus and the angels is based on a number of OT citations, the comparison of Jesus and Moses turns on a single verse, Nu. 12:7. Like the angels (1:14), Moses was a servant who witnessed, as it were, to the Son. In other words, 'faithful Sonship is superior to faithful servantship'. The Son is once again exalted. The exaltation theme finds expression in a more opaque way at 11:26. Here in the famous chapter on faith in which Moses is said to count 'abuse suffered for the Christ greater wealth than the treasures of Egypt'. The portrait of Moses drawn here is that of a martyr, and a Christian martyr at that. In effect, Moses joins that great cloud of witnesses who looked to Jesus as pioneer and perfecter of faith. Once again, Christ's superiority is asserted, this time over Moses and the entire Mosaic epoch.

In summary, the writer [of Hebrews] stressed the Sonship of Jesus and expressed it in a three-stage Christology of pre-existence, humanity, and exaltation."

Exegetical commentaries

 * Attridge, Harold W., Hebrews. Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press, 1989.
 * Bruce, Frederick F., The Epistle to the Hebrews. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964. Rev Ed 1990.
 * Gareth Lee Cockerill, The Epistle to the Hebrews. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2012.
 * Ellingworth, Paul, The Epistle to the Hebrews. New International Greek Testament Commentary, Eerdmans, 1993.
 * Guthrie, Donald, The Letter to the Hebrews. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1983.
 * Guthrie, George H., Hebrews''. The NIV Application Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998.
 * Heen, Erik M. and Krey, Philip D.W., eds. Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture: Hebrews. Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 2005.
 * Hughes, P.E., A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1977.
 * Hurst, L. D., The Epistle to the Hebrews: Its Background of Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.
 * Koester, Craig R., Hebrews. Anchor Bible 36. New York: Doubleday, 2001.
 * Lane, William L., Hebrews 1–8. Word Biblical Commentary Vol. 47A. Dallas, TX: Word Books, 1991.
 * --- Hebrews 9–13. Word Biblical Commentary Vol. 47B. Dallas, TX: Word Books, 1991.
 * Moffatt, James. Hebrews. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1979. (Originally Published in 1924)
 * Westcott, B.F., The Epistle to the Hebrews: the Greek text with notes and essays. New York: MacMillan, 1892.

Other books

 * Bloor, Joshua D. A. Purifying the Consciousness in Hebrews: Cult, Defilement and the Perpetual Heavenly Blood of Jesus (The Library of New Testament Studies 675; London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2023)
 * Easter, Matthew C. Faith and the Faithfulness of Jesus in Hebrews. SNTS Vol. 160. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014.
 * Hagen, Kenneth. Hebrews Commenting from Erasmus to Beze. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1981.

Articles

 * Paul Ellingworth Reading through Hebrews 1–7, Listening especially for the theme of Jesus as high priest. Epworth Review 12.1 (Jan. 1985): 80–88.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Epistle to the Hebrews


text:
Esther

Esther, originally Hadassah, is the eponymous heroine of the Book of Esther in the Hebrew Bible. According to the biblical narrative, which is set in the Achaemenid Empire, the Persian king Ahasuerus falls in love with Esther and marries her. His grand vizier Haman is offended by Esther's cousin and guardian Mordecai because of his refusal to bow before him; bowing in front of another person was a prominent gesture of respect in Persian society, but deemed unacceptable by Mordecai, who believes that a Jew should only express submissiveness to God. Consequently, Haman plots to have all of Persia's Jews killed, and eventually convinces Ahasuerus to permit him to do so. However, Esther foils the plan by revealing and decrying Haman's plans to Ahasuerus, who then has Haman executed and grants permission to the Jews to take up arms against their enemies; Esther is hailed for her courage and for working to save the Jewish nation from eradication.

The Book of Esther's story provides the traditional explanation for Purim, a celebratory Jewish holiday that is observed on the Hebrew date on which Haman's order was to go into effect, which is the day that the Jews killed their enemies after Esther exposed Haman's intentions to her husband. Since the 1890s, several academics have “agreed in seeing [The Book of] Esther as a historicized myth or ritual” and generally concluded that Purim is rooted in a Babylonian or Persian myth or festival—though which one is a subject of discussion. The details of the setting of the story are plausible and may even have some basis in actual events, but there is general agreement among scholars that the book of Esther is a work of fiction.

Two related forms of the Book of Esther exist: a shorter Biblical Hebrew–sourced version found in Jewish and Protestant Bibles, and a longer Koine Greek–sourced version found in Catholic and Orthodox Bibles.

Name
When she is introduced, in Esther 2:7, she is first referred to by the Hebrew name Hadassah, which means "myrtle tree." This name is absent from the early Greek manuscripts, although present in the targumic texts, and was probably added to the Hebrew text in the 2nd century CE at the earliest to stress the heroine's Jewishness. The name "Esther" probably derives from the name of the Babylonian goddess Ishtar or from the Persian word cognate with the English word "star" (implying an association with Ishtar) though some scholars contend it is related to the Persian words for "woman" or "myrtle".

Narrative
In the third year of the reign of King Ahasuerus of Persia the king banishes his queen, Vashti, and seeks a new queen. Beautiful maidens gather together at the harem in the citadel of Susa under the authority of the eunuch Hegai.

Esther, a cousin of Mordecai, was a member of the Jewish community in the Exilic Period who claimed as an ancestor Kish, a Benjamite who had been taken from Jerusalem into captivity. She was the orphaned daughter of Mordecai's uncle, another Benjamite named Abihail. Upon the king's orders, Esther is taken to the palace where Hegai prepares her to meet the king. Even as she advances to the highest position of the harem, perfumed with gold and myrrh and allocated certain foods and servants, she is under strict instructions from Mordecai, who meets with her each day, to conceal her Jewish origins. The king falls in love with her and makes her his Queen.

Following Esther's coronation, Mordecai learns of an assassination plot by Bigthan and Teresh to kill King Ahasuerus. Mordecai tells Esther, who tells the king in the name of Mordecai, and he is saved. This act of great service to the king is recorded in the Annals of the Kingdom.

After Mordecai saves the king's life, Haman the Agagite is made Ahasuerus' highest adviser, and orders that everyone bow down to him. When Mordecai (who had stationed himself in the street to advise Esther) refuses to bow to him, Haman pays King Ahasuerus 10,000 silver talents for the right to exterminate all of the Jews in Ahasuerus' kingdom. Haman casts lots, Purim, using supernatural means, and sees that the thirteenth day of the Month of Adar is a fortunate day for the genocide. Using the seal of the king, in the name of the king, Haman sends an order to the provinces of the kingdom to allow the extermination of the Jews on the thirteenth of Adar. When Mordecai learns of this, he tells Esther to reveal to the king that she is Jewish and ask that he repeal the order. Esther hesitates, saying that she could be put to death if she goes to the king without being summoned; nevertheless, Mordecai urges her to try. Esther asks that the entire Jewish community fast and pray for three days before she goes to see the king; Mordecai agrees.

On the third day, Esther goes to the courtyard in front of the king's palace, and she is welcomed by the king, who stretches out his scepter for her to touch, and offers her anything she wants "up to half of the kingdom". Esther invites the king and Haman to a banquet she has prepared for the next day. She tells the king she will reveal her request at the banquet. During the banquet, the king repeats his offer again, whereupon Esther invites both the king and Haman to a banquet she is making on the following day as well.

Seeing that he is in favor with the king and queen, Haman takes counsel from his wife and friends to build a gallows upon which to hang Mordecai; as he is in their good favors, he believes he will be granted his wish to hang Mordecai the very next day. After building the gallows, Haman goes to the palace in the middle of the night to wait for the earliest moment he can see the king.

That evening, the king, unable to sleep, asks that the Annals of the Kingdom be read to him so that he will become drowsy. The book miraculously opens to the page telling of Mordecai's great service, and the king asks if he had already received a reward. When his attendants answer in the negative, Ahasuerus is suddenly distracted and demands to know who is standing in the palace courtyard in the middle of the night. The attendants answer that it is Haman. Ahasuerus invites Haman into his room. Haman, instead of requesting that Mordecai be hanged, is ordered to take Mordecai through the streets of the capital on the Royal Horse wearing the royal robes. Haman is also instructed to yell, "This is what shall be done to the man whom the king wishes to honor!"

After spending the entire day honoring Mordecai, Haman rushes to Esther's second banquet, where Ahasuerus is already waiting. Ahasuerus repeats his offer to Esther of anything "up to half of the kingdom". Esther tells Ahasuerus that while she appreciates the offer, she must put before him a more basic issue: she explains that there is a person plotting to kill her and her entire people, and that this person's intentions are to harm the king and the kingdom. When Ahasuerus asks who this person is, Esther points to Haman and names him. Upon hearing this, an enraged Ahasuerus goes out to the garden to calm down and consider the situation.

While Ahasuerus is in the garden, Haman throws himself at Esther's feet asking for mercy. Upon returning from the garden, the king is further enraged. As it was the custom to eat on reclining couches, it appears to the king as if Haman is attacking Esther. He orders Haman to be removed from his sight. While Haman is being led out, Harvona, a civil servant, tells the king that Haman had built a gallows for Mordecai, "who had saved the king's life". In response, the king says "Hang him (Haman) on it".

After Haman is put to death, Ahasuerus gives Haman's estate to Esther. Esther tells the king about Mordecai being her relative, and the king makes Mordecai his adviser. When Esther asks the king to revoke the order exterminating the Jews, the king is initially hesitant, saying that an order issued by the king cannot be repealed. Ahasuerus allows Esther and Mordecai to write another order, with the seal of the king and in the name of the king, to allow the Jewish people to defend themselves and fight with their oppressors on the thirteenth day of Adar.

On the thirteenth day of Adar, the same day that Haman had set for them to be killed, the Jews defend themselves in all parts of the kingdom and rest on the fourteenth day of Adar. The fourteenth day of Adar is celebrated with the giving of charity, exchanging foodstuffs, and feasting. In Susa, the Jews of the capital were given another day to kill their oppressors; they rested and celebrated on the fifteenth day of Adar, again giving charity, exchanging foodstuffs, and feasting as well.

The Jews established an annual feast, the feast of Purim, in memory of their deliverance. Haman having set the date of the thirteenth of Adar to commence his campaign against the Jews, this determined the date of the festival of Purim.

Historicity
Although the details of the setting are entirely plausible and the story may even have some basis in actual events, there is general agreement among scholars that the book of Esther is a work of fiction. Persian kings did not marry outside of seven Persian noble families, making it unlikely that there was a Jewish queen Esther. Further, the name Ahasuerus can be translated to Xerxes, as both derive from the Persian Khshayārsha. Ahasuerus as described in the Book of Esther is usually identified in modern sources to refer to Xerxes I, who ruled between 486 and 465 BCE, as it is to this monarch that the events described in Esther are thought to fit the most closely. However, Xerxes I's queen was Amestris, further highlighting the fictitious nature of the story.

Some scholars speculate that the story was created to justify the Jewish appropriation of an originally non-Jewish feast. The festival which the book explains is Purim, which is explained as meaning "lot", from the Babylonian word puru. One popular theory says the festival has its origins in a historicized Babylonian myth or ritual in which Mordecai and Esther represent the Babylonian gods Marduk and Ishtar, while others trace the ritual to the Persian New Year, and scholars have surveyed other theories in their works. Some scholars have defended the story as real history, but the attempt to find a historical kernel to the narrative "is likely to be futile".

Interpretations
The Book of Esther begins by portraying Esther as beautiful and obedient, though a relatively passive figure. Throughout the story, she evolves into a character who takes a decisive role in her own future and that of her people. According to Sidnie White Crawford, "Esther's position in a male court mirrors that of the Jews in a Gentile world, with the threat of danger ever present below the seemingly calm surface." Esther is compared to Daniel in that both represent a "type" for Jews living in Diaspora, and hoping to live a successful life in an alien environment.

According to Susan Zaeske, by virtue of the fact that Esther used only rhetoric to convince the king to save her people, the story of Esther is a "rhetoric of exile and empowerment that, for millennia, has notably shaped the discourse of marginalized peoples such as Jews, women, and African Americans", persuading those who have power over them.

Persian culture
Modern day Persian Jews are called "Esther's Children". A building venerated as being the Tomb of Esther and Mordechai is located in Hamadan, Iran, although the village of Kafr Bir'im in northern Israel also claims to be the burial place of Queen Esther.

Artistic depictions of Esther
Throughout history, many artists have created paintings depicting Esther. Notable early portrayals include the Heilspiegel Altarpiece by Konrad Witz and Esther Before Ahasuerus by Tintoretto (1546–47, Royal Collection) which show Esther appearing before the king to beg mercy for the Jews, despite the punishment for appearing without being summoned being death. This scene became one of the most commonly depicted parts of the story.

Esther's faint had not often been depicted in art before Tintoretto. It is shown in the series of cassone scenes of the Life of Esther attributed variously to Sandro Botticelli and Filippino Lippi from the 1470s. In other cassone depictions, for example by Filippino Lippi, Esther's readiness to show herself before the court is contrasted to Vashti's refusal to expose herself to the public assembly.

Esther was regarded in Catholic theology as a typological forerunner of the Virgin Mary in her role as intercessor Her regal election parallels Mary's Assumption and as she becomes queen of Persia, Mary becomes queen of heaven; Mary's epithet as 'stella maris' parallels Esther as a 'star' and both figure as sponsors of the humble before the powerful. Contemporary viewers would likely have recognized a similarity between the faint and the common motif of the Swoon of the Virgin, seen in many depictions of the Crucifixion of Jesus. Esther's fainting became a popular subject in the Baroque painting of the following century. A notable Baroque example is Esther Before Ahasuerus by Artemisia Gentileschi.

In Christianity
Esther is commemorated as a matriarch in the Calendar of Saints of the Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod on May 24.

Esther is recognized as a saint in the Eastern Orthodox Church, commemorated on the Sunday before Christmas. "The Septuagint edition of Esther contains six parts (totaling 107 verses) not found in the Hebrew Bible. Although these interpretations originally may have been composed in Hebrew, they survive only in Greek texts. Because the Hebrew Bible's version of Esther's story contains neither prayers nor even a single reference to God, Greek redactors apparently felt compelled to give the tale a more explicit religious orientation, alluding to "God" or the "Lord" fifty times." These additions to Esther in the Apocrypha were added approximately in the second or first century BCE.

The story of Esther is also referenced in chapter 28 of 1 Meqabyan, a book considered canonical in the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church.

Music

 * Alessandro Stradella, Ester, oratorio, 1673
 * Marc-Antoine Charpentier, Historia Esther, H.396, for soloist, chorus, strings and continuo, 1677
 * George Frideric Handel, Esther, with a libretto based on a play by Jean Racine, 1718 and 1732
 * Élisabeth Jacquet de La Guerre, "Esther", for soprano and continuo, in Cantates françaises sur des sujets tirés de l’Écriture, book I, 1708

title: Esther


text:
Entamoeba

Entamoeba is a genus of Amoebozoa found as internal parasites or commensals of animals. In 1875, Fedor Lösch described the first proven case of amoebic dysentery in St. Petersburg, Russia. He referred to the amoeba he observed microscopically as Amoeba coli; however, it is not clear whether he was using this as a descriptive term or intended it as a formal taxonomic name. The genus Entamoeba was defined by Casagrandi and Barbagallo for the species Entamoeba coli, which is known to be a commensal organism. Lösch's organism was renamed Entamoeba histolytica by Fritz Schaudinn in 1903; he later died, in 1906, from a self-inflicted infection when studying this amoeba. For a time during the first half of the 20th century the entire genus Entamoeba was transferred to Endamoeba, a genus of amoebas infecting invertebrates about which little is known. This move was reversed by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in the late 1950s, and Entamoeba has stayed 'stable' ever since.

Species
Several species are found in humans and animals. Entamoeba histolytica is the pathogen responsible for invasive 'amoebiasis' (which includes amoebic dysentery and amoebic liver abscesses). Others such as Entamoeba coli (not to be confused with Escherichia coli) and Entamoeba dispar are harmless. With the exception of Entamoeba gingivalis, which lives in the mouth, and E. moshkovskii, which is frequently isolated from river and lake sediments, all Entamoeba species are found in the intestines of the animals they infect. Entamoeba invadens is a species that can cause a disease similar to E. histolytica but in reptiles. In contrast to other species, E. invadens forms cysts in vitro in the absence of bacteria and is used as a model system to study this aspect of the life cycle. Many other species of Entamoeba have been described, and it is likely that many others remain to be found.

Structure

Entamoeba cells are small, with a single nucleus and typically a single lobose pseudopod taking the form of a clear anterior bulge. They have a simple life cycle. The trophozoite (feeding-dividing form) is approximately 10-20 μm in diameter and feeds primarily on bacteria. It divides by simple binary fission to form two smaller daughter cells. Almost all species form cysts, the stage involved in transmission (the exception is Entamoeba gingivalis). Depending on the species, these can have one, four or eight nuclei and are variable in size; these characteristics help in species identification.

Classification
Entamoeba belongs to the Archamoebae, which like many other anaerobic eukaryotes have reduced mitochondria. This group also includes Endolimax and Iodamoeba, which also live in animal intestines and are similar in appearance to Entamoeba, although this may partly be due to convergence. Also in this group are the free-living amoebo-flagellates of the genus Mastigamoeba and related genera. Certain other genera of symbiotic amoebae, such as Endamoeba, might prove to be synonyms of Entamoeba but this is still unclear.

Fission
Studying Entamoeba invadens, David Biron of the Weizmann Institute of Science and coworkers found that about one third of the cells are unable to separate unaided and recruit a neighboring amoeba (dubbed the "midwife") to complete the fission. He writes:

 * When an amoeba divides, the two daughter cells stay attached by a tubular tether which remains intact unless mechanically severed. If called upon, the neighbouring amoeba midwife travels up to 200 μm towards the dividing amoeba, usually advancing in a straight trajectory with an average velocity of about 0.5 μm/s.  The midwife then proceeds to rupture the connection, after which all three amoebae move on.

They also reported a similar behavior in Dictyostelium.

Since E. histolytica does not form cysts in the absence of bacteria, E. invadens has become used as a model for encystation studies as it will form cysts under axenic growth conditions, which simplifies analysis. After inducing encystation in E. invadens, DNA replication increases initially and then slows down. On completion of encystation, predominantly tetra-nucleate cysts are formed along with some uni-, bi- and tri-nucleate cysts.

Differentiation and cell biology
Uninucleated trophozoites convert into cysts in a process called encystation. The number of nuclei in the cyst varies from 1 to 8 among species and is one of the characteristics used to tell species apart. Of the species already mentioned, Entamoeba coli forms cysts with 8 nuclei while the others form tetra-nucleated cysts. Since E. histolytica does not form cysts in vitro in the absence of bacteria, it is not possible to study the differentiation process in detail in that species. Instead the differentiation process is studied using E. invadens, a reptilian parasite that causes a very similar disease to E. histolytica and which can be induced to encyst in vitro. Until recently there was no genetic transfection vector available for this organism and detailed study at the cellular level was not possible. However, recently a transfection vector was developed and the transfection conditions for E. invadens were optimised which should enhance the research possibilities at the molecular level of the differentiation process.

Meiosis
In sexually reproducing eukaryotes, homologous recombination (HR) ordinarily occurs during meiosis. The meiosis-specific recombinase, Dmc1, is required for efficient meiotic HR, and Dmc1 is expressed in E. histolytica. The purified Dmc1 from E. histolytica forms presynaptic filaments and catalyzes ATP-dependent homologous DNA pairing and DNA strand exchange over at least several thousand base pairs. The DNA pairing and strand exchange reactions are enhanced by the eukaryotic meiosis-specific recombination accessory factor (heterodimer) Hop2-Mnd1. These processes are central to meiotic recombination, suggesting that E. histolytica undergoes meiosis.

Studies of E. invadens found that, during the conversion from the tetraploid uninucleate trophozoite to the tetranucleate cyst, homologous recombination is enhanced. Expression of genes with functions related to the major steps of meiotic recombination also increased during encystations. These findings in E. invadens, combined with evidence from studies of E. histolytica indicate the presence of meiosis in the Entamoeba.

title: Entamoeba


text:
England national football team

The England national football team have represented England in international football since the first international match in 1872. It is controlled by the Football Association (FA), the governing body for football in England, which is affiliated with UEFA and comes under the global jurisdiction of world football's governing body FIFA. England competes in the three major international tournaments contested by European nations: the FIFA World Cup, the UEFA European Championship and the UEFA Nations League.

England is the joint oldest national team in football having played in the world's first international football match in 1872, against Scotland. England's home ground is Wembley Stadium, London, and its training headquarters is at St George's Park, Burton upon Trent. Gareth Southgate was the most recent manager of the team, stepping down in July 2024 following Euro 2024.

England won the 1966 FIFA World Cup final on home soil, making it one of eight nations to have won the World Cup. They have qualified for the World Cup sixteen times, with fourth-place finishes in the 1990 and 2018 editions. England has never won the European Championship, with their best performance to date being runners-up in 2020 and 2024. As a constituent country of the United Kingdom, England is not a member of the International Olympic Committee (as English athletes compete for Great Britain), and so does not compete at the Olympic Games. England is currently the only team to have won the World Cup at senior level but not their major continental title, and the only team representing a non-sovereign country to have won the World Cup.

Early years
The England men's national football team is the joint-oldest in the world; it was formed at the same time as Scotland. A representative match between England and Scotland was played on 5 March 1870, having been organised by the Football Association. A return fixture was organised by representatives of Scottish football teams on 30 November 1872. This match, played at Hamilton Crescent in Scotland, is viewed as the first official international football match, because the two teams were independently selected and operated, rather than being the work of a single football association. Over the next 40 years, England played exclusively with the other three Home Nations—Scotland, Wales and Ireland—in the British Home Championship.

At first, England had no permanent home stadium. They joined FIFA in 1906 and played their first games against countries other than the Home Nations on a tour of Central Europe in 1908. Wembley Stadium was opened in 1923 and became their home ground. The relationship between England and FIFA became strained, and this resulted in their departure from FIFA in 1928, before they rejoined in 1946. As a result, they did not compete in a World Cup until 1950, in which they were beaten in a 1–0 defeat by the United States, failing to get past the first round in one of the most embarrassing defeats in the team's history.

Their first defeat on home soil to a foreign team was a 2–0 loss to Ireland, on 21 September 1949 at Goodison Park. A 6–3 loss in 1953 to Hungary was their second defeat by a foreign team at Wembley. In the return match in Budapest, Hungary won 7–1. This stands as England's largest ever defeat. After the game, a bewildered Syd Owen said, "it was like playing men from outer space". In the 1954 FIFA World Cup, England reached the quarter-finals for the first time, and lost 4–2 to reigning champions Uruguay.

Walter Winterbottom and Alf Ramsey
Although Walter Winterbottom was appointed as England's first full-time manager in 1946, the team was still picked by a committee until Alf Ramsey took over in 1963. The 1966 World Cup was hosted in England and Ramsey guided England to victory with a 4–2 win against West Germany after extra time in the final, during which Geoff Hurst scored a hat-trick. In UEFA Euro 1968, the team reached the semi-finals for the first time, being eliminated by Yugoslavia.

England qualified automatically for the 1970 World Cup in Mexico as reigning champions, and reached the quarter-finals, where they were knocked out by West Germany. England had been 2–0 up, but were eventually beaten 3–2 after extra time. They then failed to qualify for Euro 1972 and the 1974 World Cup, leading to Ramsey's dismissal by the FA.

Don Revie, Ron Greenwood and Bobby Robson
Following Ramsey's dismissal, Joe Mercer took immediate temporary charge of England for a seven-match spell until Don Revie was appointed as new permanent manager in 1974. Under Revie, the team underperformed and failed to qualify for either Euro 1976 or the 1978 World Cup. Revie resigned in 1977 and was replaced by Ron Greenwood, under whom performances improved. The team qualified for Euro 1980 without losing any of their games, but exited in the group stage of the final tournament. They also qualified for the 1982 World Cup in Spain; despite not losing a game, they were eliminated at the second group stage.

Bobby Robson managed England from 1982 to 1990. Although the team failed to qualify for Euro 1984, they reached the quarter-finals of the 1986 World Cup, losing 2–1 to Argentina in a game made famous by two highly contrasting goals scored by Diego Maradona – the first being blatantly knocked in by his hand, prompting his "Hand of God" remark, the second being an outstandingly skilful individual goal, involving high speed dribbling past several opponents. England striker Gary Lineker finished as the tournament's top scorer with six goals.

England went on to lose every match at Euro 1988. They next achieved their second best result in the 1990 World Cup by finishing fourth – losing again to West Germany after a closely contested semi-final finishing 1–1 after extra time, then 3–4 in England's first penalty shoot-out. Despite losing to Italy in the third place play-off, the members of the England team were given bronze medals identical to the Italians'. Due to the team's good performance at the tournament against general expectations, and the emotional nature of the narrow defeat to West Germany, the team were welcomed home as heroes and thousands of people lined the streets for an open-top bus parade.

Graham Taylor, Terry Venables, Glenn Hoddle and Kevin Keegan
The 1990s saw four England managers follow Robson, each in the role for a relatively brief period. Graham Taylor was Robson's immediate successor. England failed to win any matches at Euro 1992, drawing with tournament winners Denmark and later with France, before being eliminated by host nation Sweden. The team then failed to qualify for the 1994 World Cup after losing a controversial game against the Netherlands in Rotterdam, which resulted in Taylor's resignation. Taylor faced much newspaper criticism during his tenure for his tactics and team selections.

Between 1994 and 1996, Terry Venables took charge of the team. Hosting Euro 1996, they equalled their best performance at a European Championship, reaching the semi-finals as they did in 1968, before exiting via another penalty shoot-out loss to Germany. England striker Alan Shearer was the tournament's top scorer with five goals. At Euro 96, the song "Three Lions" by Baddiel, Skinner and the Lightning Seeds became the definitive anthem for fans on the terraces, and popularised the chant "it's coming home". Venables announced before the tournament that he would resign at the end of it, following investigations into his personal financial activities and ahead of upcoming court cases. Due to the controversy around him, the FA stressed that he was the coach, not the manager, of the team.

Venables' successor, Glenn Hoddle, took the team to the 1998 World Cup in which England were eliminated in the second round, again by Argentina and again on penalties (after a 2–2 draw). In February 1999, Hoddle was sacked by the FA due to controversial comments he had made about disabled people to a newspaper. Howard Wilkinson took over as caretaker manager for two matches. Kevin Keegan was then appointed as the new permanent manager and took England to Euro 2000, but the team exited in the group stage and he unexpectedly resigned shortly afterwards.

Sven-Göran Eriksson and Steve McClaren
Peter Taylor was appointed as caretaker manager for one match, before Sven-Göran Eriksson took charge between 2001 and 2006, and was the team's first non-English manager. Although England's players in this era were dubbed a "golden generation" and only lost five competitive matches during Eriksson's tenure, they exited at the quarter-finals of the 2002 World Cup, Euro 2004 and the 2006 World Cup. In January 2006 it was announced that Eriksson would leave the role following that year's World Cup. Steve McClaren was selected to succeed Eriksson, but was sacked on 22 November 2007 after just 18 matches in charge as England failed to qualify for Euro 2008. McClaren was criticised for his team selection in his final game - a decisive qualifier against Croatia which England lost 3-2 - particularly the decision to select inexperienced goalkeeper Scott Carson, whose mistake lead to Croatia's first goal.

Fabio Capello, Roy Hodgson and Sam Allardyce
On 14 December 2007, Italian manager Fabio Capello was appointed as McClaren's successor, becoming only the second foreign coach to take the job. At the 2010 World Cup, England were considered favourites to top their group but drew their opening two games against the United States and Algeria; this led to questions about the team's spirit, tactics and ability to handle pressure. Despite this, England progressed to the round of 16, where they were beaten 4–1 by Germany, their heaviest defeat in a World Cup finals tournament match. This match became infamous for a ghost goal when Frank Lampard hit a shot from outside the penalty area that bounced down off the crossbar and over the goal line before being cleared by German goalkeeper Manuel Neuer, with neither the referee nor the assistant opting to award a goal. Had it been given, the goal would have tied the game 2–2 with England coming from two goals down. This incident - along with similar mistakes at the tournament - lead to an apology from FIFA president Sepp Blatter and was a factor in the subsequent decision to introduce goal-line technology into football. Capello continued as England manager, leading the team's successful qualifying campaign for Euro 2012, before resigning from the role in February 2012 following a disagreement with the FA over their request to remove John Terry from the team captaincy following accusations of racial abuse against the player.

Following Capello's departure, Stuart Pearce was appointed as caretaker manager for one match, after which in May 2012, Roy Hodgson was announced as the new manager, just six weeks before Euro 2012. England managed to finish top of their group, but exited the Championship in the quarter-finals via a penalty shoot-out against Italy. In the 2014 World Cup, England were eliminated at the group stage for the first time since 1958. At Euro 2016, England were eliminated in the round of 16, losing 2–1 to Iceland in a result that has been described as among their worst ever defeats. Hodgson tendered his resignation shortly after the full-time whistle, with Sam Allardyce announced as his successor in July 2016. After one match and only 67 days in charge, Allardyce resigned from his managerial post by mutual agreement following an alleged breach of FA rules. This makes Allardyce the shortest serving permanent England manager.

Gareth Southgate
After Allardyce's resignation, Gareth Southgate, then the coach of the England under-21 team, was put in temporary charge of the national team until November 2016, before being given the position on a permanent basis at the end of that period. At the 2018 World Cup, England reached the semi-finals for the third time. After finishing second in their group, England faced Colombia in the round of 16 where they won on penalties for the first time at a World Cup, before beating Sweden in the quarter-finals. In the semi-final, they were beaten 2–1 in extra time by Croatia and finished fourth after losing the third place play-off match against Belgium. England striker Harry Kane finished the tournament as top scorer with six goals and was awarded the golden boot.

On 14 November 2019, England played their 1000th international match, defeating Montenegro 7–0 at Wembley in a Euro 2020 qualifying match.

At the delayed Euro 2020, England reached the final of a major tournament for the first time since 1966 and their first ever European Championship final appearance. After finishing top of a group including Croatia, Scotland and Czech Republic, the Three Lions would subsequently defeat Germany, Ukraine and Denmark to advance to the final. In the final held at Wembley, England were defeated by Italy on penalties after a 1–1 draw.

At the 2022 World Cup, England defeated Iran and Wales in the group stage to qualify for the round of 16. In the round of 16, the Three Lions defeated Senegal 3–0, but were eliminated by the reigning world champions France in the quarter-finals, 2–1. Harry Kane's goal against France was his 53rd for England, equalling the all-time record at the time. He would later miss an 84th-minute penalty with the chance to level the match.

At Euro 2024, England finished top of their group above Denmark, Slovenia, and Serbia. In the round of 16, England defeated Slovakia 2–1 after extra time, with Jude Bellingham notably scoring a spectacular bicycle kick in second-half stoppage time to equalise the match. In the quarter-final, England beat Switzerland on penalties after the game finished 1–1. England reached their second consecutive European Championship final after defeating the Netherlands 2–1 in the semi-final. In the final, England were defeated 2–1 by Spain, making them the first team in history to lose two consecutive European Championship finals. With three goals, Harry Kane was the joint top scorer at the tournament and shared the golden boot with five other players. Whilst the FA were willing to extend his contract further, Southgate announced his resignation as England manager on 16 July 2024, saying that it was "time for change, and for a new chapter".

Crest
The motif of the England national football team has three lions passant guardant, the emblem of King Richard I, who reigned from 1189 to 1199. In 1872, English players wore white jerseys emblazoned with the three lions crest of the Football Association. The lions, often blue, have had minor changes to colour and appearance. Initially topped by a crown, this was removed in 1949 when the FA was given an official coat of arms by the College of Arms; this introduced ten Tudor roses, one for each of the regional branches of the FA. Since 2003, England top their logo with a star to recognise their World Cup win in 1966; this was first embroidered onto the left sleeve of the home kit, and a year later was moved to its current position, first on the away shirt.

Colours

England's traditional home colours are white shirts, navy blue shorts and white or black socks. The team has periodically worn an all-white kit.

Although England's first away kits were blue, England's traditional away colours are red shirts, white shorts and red socks. In 1996, England's away kit was changed to grey shirts, shorts and socks. This kit was only worn three times, including against Germany in the semi-final of Euro 1996 but the deviation from the traditional red was unpopular with supporters and the England away kit remained red until 2011, when a navy blue away kit was introduced. The away kit is also sometimes worn during home matches, when a new edition has been released to promote it.

England have occasionally had a third kit. At the 1970 World Cup England wore a third kit with pale blue shirts, shorts and socks against Czechoslovakia. They had a kit similar to Brazil's, with yellow shirts, yellow socks and blue shorts which they wore in the summer of 1973. For the World Cup in 1986 England had a third kit of pale blue, imitating that worn in Mexico 16 years before and England retained pale blue third kits until 1992, but they were rarely used.

Umbro first agreed to manufacture the kit in 1954 and since then has supplied most of the kits, the exceptions being from 1959 to 1965 with Bukta and 1974–1984 with Admiral. Nike purchased Umbro in 2008 and took over as kit supplier in 2013 following their sale of the Umbro brand.

Home stadium
For the first 50 years of their existence, England played their home matches all around the country. They initially used cricket grounds before later moving on to football club stadiums. The original Empire Stadium was built in Wembley, London, for the British Empire Exhibition.

England played their first match at the stadium in 1924 against Scotland and for the next 27 years Wembley was used as a venue for matches against Scotland only. The stadium later became known simply as Wembley Stadium and it became England's permanent home stadium during the 1950s. In October 2000, the stadium closed its doors, ending with a defeat against Germany.

This stadium was demolished during the period of 2002–03, and work began to completely rebuild it. During this time, England played at venues across the country, though by the time of the 2006 World Cup qualification, this had largely settled down to having Manchester United's Old Trafford stadium as the primary venue, with Newcastle United's St. James' Park used on occasions when Old Trafford was unavailable.

Their first match in the new Wembley Stadium was in March 2007 when they drew with Brazil. The stadium is now owned by the Football Association, via its subsidiary Wembley National Stadium Limited.

Rivalries
England's three main rivalries are with Scotland, Germany and Argentina. Smaller rivalries with France, Wales and the Republic of Ireland have also been observed.

England's rivalry with Scotland is one of the fiercest international rivalries that exists. It is the oldest international fixture in the world, first played in 1872 at Hamilton Crescent, Glasgow. The history of the British Isles has led to much rivalry between the nations in many forms, and the social and cultural effects of centuries of antagonism and conflict between the two has contributed to the intense nature of the sporting contests. Scottish nationalism has also been a factor in the Scots' desire to defeat England above all other rivals, with Scottish sports journalists traditionally referring to the English as the "Auld Enemy". The footballing rivalry has diminished somewhat since the late 1970s, particularly since the annual fixture stopped in 1989. For England, games against Germany and Argentina are now considered to be more important than the historic rivalry with Scotland.

England's rivalry with Germany is considered to be mainly an English phenomenon—in the run-up to any competition match between the two teams, many UK newspapers will print articles detailing results of previous encounters, such as England's win in 1966 and the semi-final penalty shoot-out defeats of 1990 and Euro 96. This rivalry has diminished significantly in recent years. Germans consider Italy, the Netherlands and France to be their greater rivals, and Barney Ronay of The Guardian wrote in 2021 that the rivalry with England "isn't a close rivalry at all, not if we accept the standard definition that both sides need to be aware that it exists. Germany have won seven major tournaments. Germany have reached 15 semi-finals since the 'one World Cup' of 1966."

England's rivalry with Argentina is highly competitive. Games between the two teams, even those that are only friendly matches, are often marked by notable and sometimes controversial incidents such as the hand of God in 1986. The rivalry is unusual in that it is an intercontinental one; typically such footballing rivalries exist between bordering nations. England is regarded in Argentina as one of the major rivals of the national football team, matched only by Brazil and Uruguay. The rivalry is, to a lesser extent reciprocal in England, locally described as a grudge match although matches against Germany carry a greater significance in popular perception. The rivalry emerged across several games during the latter half of the 20th century, even though as of 2008 the teams have played each other on only 14 occasions in full internationals. The rivalry was intensified, particularly in Argentina, by non-footballing events, especially the 1982 Falklands War between Argentina and the United Kingdom. England and Argentina have not met since a friendly in November 2005.

Songs
Numerous songs have been released about the England national football team.

Media coverage
All England matches are broadcast with full commentary on talkSPORT and BBC Radio 5 Live. From the 2008–09 season until the 2017–18 season, England's home and away qualifiers, and friendlies both home and away were broadcast live on ITV Sport (often with the exception of STV, the ITV franchisee in central and northern Scotland). England's away qualifiers for the 2010 World Cup were shown on Setanta Sports until that company's collapse. As a result of Setanta Sports's demise, England's World Cup qualifier in Ukraine on 10 October 2009 was shown in the United Kingdom on a pay-per-view basis via the internet only. This one-off event was the first time an England game had been screened in such a way. The number of subscribers, paying between £4.99 and £11.99 each, was estimated at between 250,000 and 300,000 and the total number of viewers at around 500,000. In 2018, Sky Sports broadcast the England Nations League and in-season friendlies, until 2021 and ITV Sport broadcast the European Qualifiers for Euro-World Cups and pre-tournament friendlies (after the Nations League group matches end), until 2022. In April 2022, Channel 4 won the rights for England matches until June 2024, including 2022–23 UEFA Nations League matches, Euro 2024 qualifying games, and friendlies. 2022 World Cup rights remained with the BBC and ITV.

Results and fixtures
The following is a list of match results in the last 12 months, as well as any future matches that have been scheduled.

Current squad
The following 26 players were named in the final squad for UEFA Euro 2024.

Caps and goals are correct as of 14 July 2024, after the match against Spain.

Recent call-ups
The following players have also been called up to the England squad within the last twelve months.

INJ Withdrew due to injury

PRE Preliminary squad / standby

RET Retired from the national team

SUS Serving suspension

WD Player withdrew from the squad due to non-injury issue.

Most appearances
.

Top goalscorers
.

Most clean sheets
.

Manager records

 * Most manager appearances
 * Walter Winterbottom: 139

 * Highest win ratio (minimum 25 games in charge, including friendlies):
 * Fabio Capello: 66.7%

 * Most wins in major tournaments
 * Gareth Southgate: 14

 * Youngest to take job
 * Walter Winterbottom: 33 years old

 * Oldest to take job
 * Roy Hodgson: 64 years old

Team records

 * Biggest win
 * 13–0 vs. Ireland, 18 February 1882

 * Biggest defeat
 * 1–7 vs. Hungary, 23 May 1954

 * Longest unbeaten run
 * 22 games from 18 November 2020 to 29 March 2022

 * Longest winless run
 * 7 games from 11 May 1958 to 4 October 1958

 * Most consecutive wins
 * 10 games from 6 June 1908 to 1 June 1909

 * Most consecutive matches without conceding a goal
 * 7 games from 2 June 2021 to 3 July 2021

FIFA World Cup
England first appeared at the 1950 FIFA World Cup, and have subsequently qualified for a total of 16 World Cup tournaments, tied for sixth best by number of appearances. They are also placed sixth by number of wins, with 32. The national team is one of only eight nations to have won at least one FIFA World Cup title. The England team won their first and only World Cup title in 1966. The tournament was played on home soil, and England defeated West Germany 4–2 in the final. In 1990, England finished in fourth place, losing 2–1 to host nation Italy in the third place play-off, following defeat on penalties, after extra time, to champions West Germany in the semi-final. They also finished in fourth place in 2018, losing 2–0 to Belgium in the third place play-off, following a 2–1 defeat to Croatia, again after extra time, in the semi-final. The team also reached the quarter-final stage in 1954, 1962, 1970, 1986, 2002, 2006 and 2022.

England failed to qualify for the World Cup in 1974, 1978 and 1994. The team's earliest exit in the finals tournament was elimination in the first round in 1950, 1958 and, most recently, 2014. This was after being defeated in both their opening two matches for the first time, against Italy and Uruguay in Group D. In 1950, four teams remained after the first round, in 1958 eight teams remained and in 2014 sixteen teams remained. In 2010, England suffered its most resounding World Cup defeat, 4–1 to Germany, in the round of 16 stage.

UEFA European Championship
England first entered the UEFA European Championship in 1964, and have since qualified for eleven tournaments, tied for fourth-best by number of finals appearances. England's best results at the tournament were finishing as runners-up in both the 2020 (held in 2021) and 2024 editions, followed by a third-place finish in 1968 and reaching the semi-finals of 1996, a tournament they hosted. In addition, England have reached the quarter-finals on two further occasions, in 2004 and 2012.

England's worst results in the finals tournament to date have been first round eliminations in 1980, 1988, 1992 and 2000, whilst they failed to qualify for the finals in 1964, 1972, 1976, 1984 and 2008.

UEFA Nations League
England have competed in the UEFA Nations League since its inaugural season in 2018–19, when they qualified for the 2019 finals and finished third overall. To date this is their only appearance in the finals and their best performance in the competition.

Major

 * FIFA World Cup
 * Champions: 1966
 * UEFA European Championship
 * Runners-up: 2020, 2024
 * Third place: 1968
 * UEFA Nations League
 * Third place: 2019

Regional

 * British Home Championship
 * Champions (54): (including 20 shared)
 * Rous Cup
 * Champions: 1986, 1988, 1989

Awards

 * FIFA Fair Play Trophy
 * Winners: 1990, 1998, 2022

Exhibition tournament

 * England Challenge Cup: 1991
 * Tournoi de France: 1997
 * FA Summer Tournament: 2004

title: England national football team