text:
Arthur Jensen

Arthur Robert Jensen (August 24, 1923 – October 22, 2012) was an American psychologist and writer. He was a professor of educational psychology at the University of California, Berkeley. Jensen was known for his work in psychometrics and differential psychology, the study of how and why individuals differ behaviorally from one another.

He was a major proponent of the hereditarian position in the nature and nurture debate, the position that genetics play a significant role in behavioral traits, such as intelligence and personality. He was the author of over 400 scientific papers published in refereed journals and sat on the editorial boards of the scientific journals Intelligence and Personality and Individual Differences.

Jensen was controversial, largely for his conclusions regarding the causes of race-based differences in IQ.

Early life and education
Jensen was born August 24, 1923, in San Diego, California, the son of Linda Mary (née Schachtmayer) and Arthur Alfred Jensen, who operated and owned a lumber and building materials company. His paternal grandparents were Danish immigrants and his mother was of half-Polish Jewish and half-German descent.

As a child, Jensen was interested in herpetology and classical music, playing clarinet in the San Diego Symphony orchestra.

Jensen received a B.A. in psychology from the University of California, Berkeley in 1945 and went on to obtain his M.A. in psychology in 1952 from San Diego State College. He earned his Ph.D. in clinical psychology from Columbia University in 1956 under the supervision of Percival Symonds on the thematic apperception test. From 1956 through 1958, he did postdoctoral research at the University of London, Institute of Psychiatry with Hans Eysenck.

Upon returning to the United States, he became a researcher and professor at the University of California, Berkeley, where he focused on individual differences in learning, especially the influences of culture, development, and genetics on intelligence and learning. He received tenure at Berkeley in 1962. He concentrated on the learning difficulties of culturally disadvantaged students.

Jensen had a lifelong interest in classical music and was, early in his life, attracted by the idea of becoming a conductor himself. At 14, he conducted a band that won a nationwide contest held in San Francisco. Later, he conducted orchestras and attended a seminar given by Nikolai Sokoloff. Soon after graduating from Berkeley, he moved to New York, mainly to be near the conductor Arturo Toscanini. He was also deeply interested in the life and example of Gandhi, producing an unpublished book-length manuscript on his life. During Jensen's period in San Diego he spent time working as a social worker with the San Diego Department of Public Welfare.

IQ and academic achievement
Jensen's interest in learning differences directed him to the extensive testing of school children. The results led him to distinguish between two separate types of learning ability. Level I, or associative learning, may be defined as retention of input and rote memorization of simple facts and skills. Level II, or conceptual learning, is roughly equivalent to the ability to manipulate and transform inputs, that is, the ability to solve problems.

Later, Jensen was an important advocate in the mainstream acceptance of the general factor of intelligence, a concept which was essentially synonymous with his Level II conceptual learning. The general factor, or g, is an abstraction that stems from the observation that scores on all forms of cognitive tests correlate positively with one another.

Jensen claimed, on the basis of his research, that general cognitive ability is essentially an inherited trait, determined predominantly by genetic factors rather than by environmental conditions. He also contended that while associative learning, or memorizing ability, is equally distributed among the races, conceptual learning, or synthesizing ability, occurs with significantly greater frequency in some races than in others.

Jensen's most controversial work, published in February 1969 in the Harvard Educational Review, was titled "How Much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement?" It concluded, among other things, that Head Start programs designed to boost African-American IQ scores had failed, and that this was likely never to be remedied, largely because, in Jensen's estimation, 80% of the variance in IQ in the population studied was the result of genetic factors and the remainder was due to environmental influences.

The work became one of the most cited papers in the history of psychological testing and intelligence research, although a large number of citations consisted of rebuttals of Jensen's work, or references to it as an example of a controversial paper.

After the paper was released, large protests were held, demanding that Jensen be fired. Jensen's car tires were slashed, the university police provided him with plain-clothes bodyguards, and he and his family received threats that were considered so realistic by the police that they temporarily left their house. Jensen was spat on and was prevented from delivering lectures by disruptive protests. The editorial board of the Harvard Educational Review for a time refused to let him have reprints of his article, and said that they had not solicited the section on racial differences; Jensen later provided correspondence in which the board had requested he do so.

In a later article, Jensen argued that his claims had been misunderstood:

"...nowhere have I 'claimed' an 'innate deficiency' of intelligence in blacks. My position on this question is clearly spelled out in my most recent book: 'The plain fact is that at present there exists no scientifically satisfactory explanation for the differences between the IQ distributions in the black and white populations. The only genuine consensus among well-informed scientists on this topic is that the cause of the difference remains an open question.' (Jensen, 1981a, p. 213)."

Jensen was among the most frequent contributors to the German journal Neue Anthropologie, a publication founded by the neo-Nazi Jürgen Rieger, and served alongside Rieger on this journal's editorial board.

In 1994 he was one of 52 signatories on "Mainstream Science on Intelligence," an essay written by Linda Gottfredson and published in The Wall Street Journal, which declared the consensus of the signing scholars on the meaning and significance of IQ following the publication of the book The Bell Curve. Jensen received $1.1 million from the Pioneer Fund, an organization frequently described as racist and white supremacist in nature. The fund contributed a total of $3.5 million to researchers cited in The Bell Curve's most controversial chapter "that suggests some races are naturally smarter than others" with Jensen's works being cited twenty-three times in the book's bibliography.

Death
He died on October 22, 2012, at his home in Kelseyville, California, at age 89.

Support
Paul E. Meehl of the University of Minnesota, after being honored by the APA, wrote that Jensen's "contributions, in both quality and quantity, certainly excelled mine" and that he was "embarrassed" and "distress[ed]" that APA refused to honor Jensen because of his ideology.

Sandra Scarr of Yale University wrote that Jensen possessed an "uncompromising personal integrity" and set the standard for "honest psychological science". She contrasted him and his work favorably to some of his critics, who she called "politically driven liars, who distort scientific facts in a misguided and condescending effort to protect an impossible myth about human equality".

Steven J. Haggbloom, writing for Review of General Psychology in 2002, rated Jensen as one of the 100 most eminent psychologists of the 20th century, based on six different metrics chosen by Haggbloom.

Francis Crick considered that there was "much substance to Jensen's arguments."

In 1980 Jensen published a book in defense of the tests used to measure mental abilities, titled Bias in Mental Testing. Reviewing this book, psychologist Kenneth Kaye endorsed Jensen's distinction between bias and discrimination, saying that he found many of Jensen's opponents to be more politically biased than Jensen was.

Although a critic of Jensen's thesis, economist Thomas Sowell, criticizing the taboo against research on race and intelligence, wrote:

"Professor Jensen pointed out back in 1969 that black children's IQ scores rose by 8 to 10 points after he met with them informally in a play room and then tested them again after they were more relaxed around him. He did this because 'I felt these children were really brighter than their IQ would indicate.' What a shame that others seem to have less confidence in black children than Professor Jensen has had."

Criticism
Melvin Konner of Emory University, wrote: "Statements made by Arthur Jensen, William Shockley, and other investigators in the late 1960s and early 1970s about race and IQ or social class and IQ rapidly passed into currency in policy discussions. Many of these statements were proved wrong, but they had already influenced some policymakers, and that influence is very difficult to recant."

Lisa Suzuki and Joshua Aronson of New York University wrote that Jensen had largely ignored evidence which failed to support his position that IQ test score gaps represent genetic racial differences.

Paleontologist and evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould criticized Jensen's work in his 1981 book The Mismeasure of Man. Gould writes that Jensen misapplies the concept of "heritability", which is defined as a measure of the variation of a trait due to inheritance within a population (Gould 1981: 127; 156–157). According to Gould, Jensen uses heritability to measure differences between populations. Gould also disagrees with Jensen's belief that IQ tests measure a real variable, g, or "the general factor common to a large number of cognitive abilities" which can be measured along a unilinear scale. This is a claim most closely identified with Charles Spearman. According to Gould, Jensen misunderstood the research of L. L. Thurstone to ultimately support this claim; Gould, however, argues that Thurstone's factor analysis of intelligence revealed g to be an illusion (1981: 159; 13-314). Gould criticizes Jensen's sources including his use of Catharine Cox's 1926 Genetic Studies of Genius, which examines historiometrically the IQs of historic intellectuals after their deaths (Gould 1981: 153–154).

Neutral responses
According to David Lubinski of Vanderbilt University, the "extent to which [Jensen's] work was either admired or reviled by many distinguished scientists is unparalleled."

After Jensen's death, James Flynn of the University of Otago, a prominent advocate of the environmental position, told The New York Times that Jensen was without racial bias and had not initially foreseen that his research would be used to argue for racial supremacy and that his career was "emblematic of the extent to which American scholarship is inhibited by political orthodoxy", though he noted that Jensen shifted towards genetic explanations later in life.

Bias in Mental Testing
Bias in Mental Testing (1980) is a book examining the question of test bias in commonly used standardized tests. The book runs almost 800 pages and has been called "exhaustive" by three researchers who reviewed the field 19 years after the book's publication. It reviewed in detail the available evidence about test bias across major US racial/ethnic groups. Jensen concluded that "the currently most widely used standardized tests of mental ability -- IQ, scholastic aptitude, and achievement tests -- are, by and large, not biased against any of the native-born English-speaking minority groups on which the amount of research evidence is sufficient for an objective determination of bias, if the tests were in fact biased. For most nonverbal standardized tests, this generalization is not limited to English-speaking minorities." (p. ix). Jensen also published a summary of the book the same year which was a target article in the journal Behavioral and Brain Sciences to which 27 commentaries were printed along with the author's reply.

Straight Talk about Mental Tests
Straight Talk about Mental Tests (1981) is a book written about psychometrics for the general public. John B. Carroll reviewed it favorably in 1982, saying it was a useful summary of the issues, as did Paul Cline writing for the British Journal of Psychiatry. In 2016, Richard J. Haier called it "a clear examination of all issues surrounding mental testing".

The g Factor
The g Factor: The Science of Mental Ability (1998) is a book on the general intelligence factor (g). The book deals with the intellectual history of g and various models of how to conceptualize intelligence, and with the biological correlates of g, its heritability, and its practical predictive power.

Clocking the Mind
Clocking the Mind: Mental Chronometry and Individual Differences (2006) deals with mental chronometry (MC), and covers the speed with which the brain processes information and different ways this is measured. Jensen argues mental chronometry represents a true natural science of mental ability, which is in contrast to IQ, which merely represents an interval (ranking) scale and thus possesses no true ratio scale properties.

Joseph Glicksohn wrote in a 2007 review for Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology that "The book should be perused with care in order to ensure the further profitable use of [reaction time] in both experimental and differential lines of research."

Douglas Detterman reviewed it in 2008 for Intelligence, writing that "the book would make a good introduction to the field of the measurement of individual differences in cognitive tasks for beginning graduate students." Eric-Jan Wagenmakers and Han van der Mass, also writing for Intelligence in 2018, faulted the book for omitting the work by mathematical psychologists, advocating standardization of chronometric methods (which the authors consider problematic because it can hide method variance), and because it does not discuss topics such as the mutualism model of the g-factor and the Flynn effect. They describe the book's breadth as useful, despite its simplistic approach. Jensen was on the editorial board of Intelligence when these reviews were published.

Awards
In 2003, Jensen was awarded the Kistler Prize for original contributions to the understanding of the connection between the human genome and human society. In 2006, the International Society for Intelligence Research awarded Jensen its Lifetime Achievement Award.

Interviews

 * "Profiles in Research. Arthur Jensen. Interview by Daniel H. Robinson and Howard Wainer." Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Fall 2006, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 327–352
 * Intelligence, Race, and Genetics: Conversations with Arthur R. Jensen. (2002) Frank Miele (of Skeptic Magazine). Westview Press. ISBN 0-8133-4008-X

Selected articles, books, and book chapters

 * Jensen. A. R. (1973). Educational differences. London. Methuen. google books link
 * Jensen, A. R. (1993). Spearman's g: Links between psychometrics and biology. In F. M. Crinella, & J. Yu (Eds.), Brain mechanisms: Papers in memory of Robert Thompson (pp. 103–129). New York: Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.
 * Jensen, A. R. (1996). Giftedness and genius: Crucial differences. In C. P. Benbow, & D. J. Lubinski (Eds), Intellectual talent: Psychometric and social issues (pp. 393–411). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University.
 * Jensen, A. R. (1998) The g factor and the design of education. In R. J. Sternberg & W. M. Williams (Eds.), Intelligence, instruction, and assessment: Theory into practice. (pp. 111–131). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
 * Jensen, A. R. (2002). Psychometric g: Definition and substantiation. In R. J. Sternberg, & E. L. Grigorenko (Eds.). The general factor of intelligence: How general is it? (pp. 39–53). Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum.
 * Rushton, J. P., & Jensen, A. R.. (2005). Thirty years of research on Black-White differences in cognitive ability. Psychology, Public Policy, & the Law, 11, 235–294. (pdf)
 * Rushton, J. P., & Jensen, A. R. (2003). African-White IQ differences from Zimbabwe on the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised are mainly on the g factor. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 177–183. (pdf)
 * Rushton, J. P., & Jensen, A. R. (2005). Wanted: More race-realism, less moralistic fallacy. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11, 328–336. (pdf)
 * Jensen, A. R. (1998) The g factor and the design of education. In R. J. Sternberg & W. M. Williams (Eds.), Intelligence, instruction, and assessment: Theory into practice. (pp. 111–131). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
 * Jensen, A. R. (2002). Psychometric g: Definition and substantiation. In R. J. Sternberg, & E. L. Grigorenko (Eds.). The general factor of intelligence: How general is it? (pp. 39–53). Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum.
 * Rushton, J. P., & Jensen, A. R.. (2005). Thirty years of research on Black-White differences in cognitive ability. Psychology, Public Policy, & the Law, 11, 235–294. (pdf)
 * Rushton, J. P., & Jensen, A. R. (2003). African-White IQ differences from Zimbabwe on the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised are mainly on the g factor. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 177–183. (pdf)
 * Rushton, J. P., & Jensen, A. R. (2005). Wanted: More race-realism, less moralistic fallacy. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11, 328–336. (pdf)
 * Rushton, J. P., & Jensen, A. R.. (2005). Thirty years of research on Black-White differences in cognitive ability. Psychology, Public Policy, & the Law, 11, 235–294. (pdf)
 * Rushton, J. P., & Jensen, A. R. (2003). African-White IQ differences from Zimbabwe on the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised are mainly on the g factor. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 177–183. (pdf)
 * Rushton, J. P., & Jensen, A. R. (2005). Wanted: More race-realism, less moralistic fallacy. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11, 328–336. (pdf)

title: Arthur Jensen


text:
A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum

A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum is a musical with music and lyrics by Stephen Sondheim and book by Burt Shevelove and Larry Gelbart.

Inspired by the farces of the ancient Roman playwright Plautus (254–184 BC), specifically Curculio, Pseudolus, Miles Gloriosus, and Mostellaria, the musical tells the bawdy story of a slave named Pseudolus and his attempts to win his freedom by helping his young master woo the girl next door. The plot displays many classic elements of farce, including puns, the slamming of doors, cases of mistaken identity (frequently involving characters disguising themselves as one another), and satirical comments on social class. The title derives from a line often used by vaudeville comedians to begin a story: "A funny thing happened on the way to the theater".

The musical's original 1962 Broadway run won several Tony Awards, including Best Musical and Best Author (Musical). A Funny Thing has enjoyed several Broadway and West End revivals and was made into a successful film starring the original lead of the stage musical, Zero Mostel.

Original Broadway
A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum opened on Broadway on May 8, 1962, at the Alvin Theatre, and then transferred to the Mark Hellinger Theatre and the Majestic Theatre, where the show closed on August 29, 1964, after 964 performances and 8 previews.

The show's creators sought Phil Silvers for the lead role of Pseudolus, but he turned them down, allegedly because he would have to perform onstage without his glasses, and his vision was so poor that he feared tripping into the orchestra pit. He is also quoted as turning down the role for being "Sgt. Bilko in a toga". (Silvers eventually played the role – wearing his glasses – in a 1972 revival. In the film, he played Marcus Lycus.) Milton Berle also passed on the role. Eventually, Zero Mostel was cast.

During out-of-town tryouts the show attracted little business and did not play well. Jerome Robbins, to whom the show had originally been offered but who turned it down, was called in to give advice and make changes. In the interim, Joshua Logan was invited to direct, but according to Sondheim was rejected "because he wanted too much male nudity." It was then offered to veteran director George Abbott, who found it to be difficult to handle alone. The biggest change Robbins made was adding a new opening number to replace "Love Is in the Air" and introduce the show as a bawdy, wild comedy. Stephen Sondheim wrote the song "Comedy Tonight" for this new opening. From that point on, the show was a success.

It was directed by George Abbott and produced by Hal Prince, with choreography by Jack Cole and uncredited staging and choreography by Robbins. The scenic and costume design was by Tony Walton. The wardrobe is on display at the Costume World Broadway Collection in Pompano Beach, Florida. The lighting design was by Jean Rosenthal. Along with Mostel, the musical featured a cast of seasoned performers, including Jack Gilford (Mostel's friend and fellow blacklist member), David Burns, John Carradine, Ruth Kobart, and Raymond Walburn. The young lovers were played by Brian Davies and Preshy Marker. Karen Black, originally cast as the ingenue, was replaced out of town.

The show won six Tony Awards, including Best Musical, Best Actor (Mostel), Best Supporting Actor (Burns), Best Book, and Best Director. The score, Sondheim's first Broadway production for which he wrote both music and lyrics, did not earn a nomination.

London
The show was presented twice in London's West End. The 1963 production and its 1986 revival were staged at the Strand Theatre and the Piccadilly Theatre respectively, and starred Frankie Howerd as Pseudolus and Leon Greene as Miles Gloriosus in both. In the 1963 production, Kenneth Connor appeared as Hysterium, 'Monsewer' Eddie Gray as Senex and Jon Pertwee as Marcus Lycus. In the 1986 revival, Patrick Cargill was Senex with Ronnie Stevens as Hysterium and Derek Royle as Erronius.

In 2004 there was a limited-run revival at the Royal National Theatre, starring Desmond Barrit as Pseudolus, Philip Quast as Miles Gloriosus, Hamish McColl as Hysterium and Isla Blair as Domina (who had previously played Philia in the 1963 production). This production was nominated for the 2005 Olivier Award, Outstanding Musical Production.

Motion picture adaptation
Both Mostel and Gilford re-created their Broadway roles for the 1966 musical film directed by Richard Lester. Leon Greene reprised his West End role (Miles Gloriosus), while Phil Silvers portrayed Lycus, Michael Crawford portrayed Hero, and Michael Hordern played Senex. Buster Keaton made his final film appearance in the role of Erronius.

Broadway revivals
A revival opened on Broadway at the Lunt-Fontanne Theatre on April 4, 1972, and closed on August 12, 1972, after 156 performances. Directed by co-author Burt Shevelove the cast starred Phil Silvers as Pseudolus (later replaced by Tom Poston), Lew Parker as Senex, Carl Ballantine as Lycus and Reginald Owen as Erronius. Larry Blyden, who played Hysterium, the role created by Jack Gilford, also co-produced. "Pretty Little Picture" and "That'll Show Him" were dropped from the show, and were replaced with "Echo Song" (sung by Hero and Philia), and "Farewell" (added for Nancy Walker as Domina, as she and Senex depart for the country). "Echo Song" and "Farewell" had been added to a production staged in Los Angeles the previous year and were composed by Sondheim. They had to close soon after Phil Silvers suffered a stroke. The show won two Tony Awards, Best Leading Actor in a Musical for Silvers, and Best Featured Actor in a Musical for Blyden.

The musical was revived again with great success in 1996, opening at the St. James Theatre on April 18, 1996, and closing on January 4, 1998, after 715 performances. The cast starred Nathan Lane as Pseudolus (replaced by Whoopi Goldberg and later by David Alan Grier), Mark Linn-Baker as Hysterium, Ernie Sabella as Lycus, Jim Stanek as Hero, Lewis J. Stadlen as Senex, and Cris Groenendaal as Miles Gloriosus. The production was directed by Jerry Zaks, with choreography by Rob Marshall. Lane won the 1996 Tony Award for Best Leading Actor and the Drama Desk Award, Outstanding Actor in a Musical; the production was nominated for the 1996 Tony Award and Drama Desk Award, Revival of a Musical.

Every actor who has opened in the role of Pseudolus on Broadway (Zero Mostel, Phil Silvers, and Nathan Lane) has won a Best Leading Actor Tony Award for his performance. In addition, Jason Alexander, who performed as Pseudolus in one scene in Jerome Robbins' Broadway, also won a Tony for Best Actor in a Musical.

Other productions
The original Australian production with American actor Jack Collins as Pseudolus opened at the Theatre Royal in Sydney in July 1964, and toured other Australian cities through 1965.

A production was directed by Stephen R. Buss at Boise State University in 1995, starring James B. Fisk, Randy Davison, Karen Wennstrom and Daniel Taylor.

In 1998, Jon English starred as Pseudolus in Essgee Entertainment's production that opened New Year's Day at the State Theatre, Melbourne and toured Australia and New Zealand, closing September 1999.

The Stephen Sondheim Center for the Performing Arts produced a limited-run revival of the musical from January 11 to 27, 2008. The production was directed by Randal K. West, with Justin Hill as musical director and Adam Cates as choreographer. The cast featured Richard Kind as Pseudolus, Joel Blum as Senex, Stephen DeRosa as Marcus Lycus, Sean McCall as Hysterium, and Steve Wilson as Miles Gloriosus. It also featured Diana Upton-Hill, Ryan Gaffney, Stephen Mark Crisp, Jack Kloppenborg, and Margret Clair.

The Chung Ying Theatre Company in Hong Kong staged a Cantonese version of the musical at Kwai Tsing Theatre, to celebrate the company's 30th anniversary. It was directed by Chung King Fai and Ko Tin Lung and ran from March 14 to 21, 2009.

The Stratford Shakespeare Festival in Stratford, Ontario, Canada production ran from June 11 to November 7, 2009, with Des McAnuff directing and Wayne Cilento as choreographer. Bruce Dow originally performed the role of Pseudolus, but was forced to withdraw from the entire 2009 season due to an injury, and the role was then performed by Seán Cullen as of September 5, 2009. Stephen Ouimette played Hysterium. Mirvish Productions presented the earlier Stratford production at the Canon Theatre, Toronto, in December 2010 through January 2011. Bruce Dow and Sean Cullen were alternates in the lead role.

In October 2012 the play opened at Her Majesty's Theatre, Melbourne, Australia, with Geoffrey Rush as Pseudolus, Magda Szubanski as Domina and Shane Bourne as Senex.

A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum was produced at the Two River Theater in Red Bank, New Jersey from November 14, 2015 to December 13, 2015 with an all-male cast (Paul Castree, Eddie Cooper, Kevin Isola, David Josefsberg, Max Kumangai, Graham Rowat, Manny Stark, Bobby Conte Thornton, David Turner, Michael Urie, Tom Deckman, and Christopher Fitzgerald).

Plot
In ancient Rome, some neighbors live in three adjacent houses. In the center is the house of Senex, who lives there with wife Domina, son Hero, and several slaves, including head slave Hysterium and the musical's main character Pseudolus. A slave belonging to Hero, Pseudolus, wishes to buy, win, or steal his freedom. One of the neighboring houses is owned by Marcus Lycus, who is a buyer and seller of beautiful women; the other belongs to the ancient Erronius, who is abroad searching for his long-lost children (stolen in infancy by pirates).

One day, Senex and Domina go on a trip and leave Pseudolus in charge of Hero. Hero confides in Pseudolus that he is in love with the lovely Philia, one of the courtesans in the House of Lycus (albeit still a virgin). Pseudolus promises to help him win Philia's love in exchange for his own freedom. Unfortunately (as the two find out when they pay a visit on Lycus), Philia has been sold to the renowned warrior Miles Gloriosus, who is expected to claim her very soon. Pseudolus, an excellent liar, uses Philia's cheery disposition to convince Lycus that she has picked up a plague from Crete, which causes its victims to smile endlessly in its terminal stages. By offering to isolate her in Senex's house, he is able to give Philia and Hero some time alone together, and the two fall in love. But Philia insists that, even though she is in love with Hero, she must honor her contract with the Captain, for "that is the way of a courtesan." To appease her, he tells her to wait ("that's what virgins do best, isn't it?") inside, and that he will have the captain knock three times when he arrives. Pseudolus comes up with a plan to slip Philia a sleeping potion that will render her unconscious. He will then tell Lycus that she has died of the Cretan plague, and will offer to remove the body. Hero will come along, and they will stow away on a ship headed for Greece. Satisfied with his plan, Pseudolus steals Hysterium's book of potions and has Hero read him the recipe for the sleeping potion; the only ingredient he lacks is "mare's sweat", and Pseudolus goes off in search of some.

Unexpectedly, Senex returns home early from his trip, and knocks three times on his own door. Philia comes out of the house, and, thinking that Senex is the Captain, offers herself up to him. Surprised but game, Senex instructs Philia to wait in the house for him, and she does. Hysterium arrives to this confusion, and tells Senex that Philia is the new maid that he has hired. Pseudolus returns, having procured the necessary mare's sweat; seeing that Senex has returned unexpectedly and grasping the need to keep him out of the way, Pseudolus discreetly sprinkles some of the horse-sweat onto him, then suggests that the road trip has left Senex in dire need of a bath. Taking the bait, Senex instructs Hysterium to draw him a bath in the long-abandoned house of Erronius. But while this is happening, Erronius returns home, finally having given up the search for his long-lost children. Hysterium, desperate to keep him out of the house where his master is bathing, tells the old man that his house has become haunted – a story seemingly confirmed by the sound of Senex singing in his bath. Erronius immediately determines to have a soothsayer come and banish the spirit from his house, and Pseudolus obligingly poses as one, telling Erronius that, in order to banish the spirit, he must travel seven times around the seven hills of Rome (thus keeping the old man occupied and out of the way for quite a while).

When Miles Gloriosus arrives to claim his courtesan-bride, Pseudolus hides Philia on the roof of Senex's house; told that she has "escaped", Lycus is terrified to face the Captain's wrath. Pseudolus offers to impersonate Lycus and talk his way out of the mess but, his ingenuity flagging, he ends up merely telling the Captain that Philia has disappeared, and that he, "Lycus", will search for her. Displeased and suspicious, Miles insists that his soldiers accompany Pseudolus, but the wily slave loses them in Rome's winding streets.

Complicating matters further, Domina returns from her trip early, suspicious that her husband Senex is "up to something low." She disguises herself in virginal white robes and a veil (much like Philia's) to try to catch Senex being unfaithful. Pseudolus convinces Hysterium to help him by dressing in drag and pretending to be Philia, "dead" from the plague. Unfortunately, it turns out that Miles Gloriosus has just returned from Crete, where there is of course no actual plague. With the ruse thus revealed, the main characters run for their lives, resulting in a madcap chase across the stage with both Miles and Senex pursuing all three "Philia"s (Domina, Hysterium, and the actual Philia – all wearing identical white robes and veils). Meanwhile, the courtesans from the house of Marcus Lycus – who had been recruited as mourners at "Philia"'s ersatz funeral – have escaped, and Lycus sends his eunuchs out to bring them all back, adding to the general pandemonium.

Finally, the Captain's troops are able to round everyone up. His plot thoroughly unraveled, Pseudolus appears to be in deep trouble – but Erronius, completing his third circuit of the Roman hills, shows up fortuitously to discover that Miles Gloriosus and Philia are wearing matching rings which mark them as his long-lost children. Philia's betrothal to the Captain is nullified by the unexpected revelation that he is her brother, and, as the daughter of a free-born citizen, she is freed from Marcus Lycus. Philia weds Hero with Erronius' blessing; Pseudolus gets his freedom and the lovely courtesan Gymnasia; Gloriosus receives twin courtesans to replace Philia; and Erronius is reunited with his children. A happy ending prevails for all – except for poor Senex, stuck with his shrewish wife Domina.

Characters

 * Pseudolus: A Roman slave, owned by Hero, who seeks to win freedom by helping Hero win the heart of Philia. The slave name Pseudolus  means "Faker". While originally written as a male role, it has been performed by female actors as well.
 * Hero: Young son of Senex who falls in love with the virgin, Philia.
 * Philia: (Greek for "love") A virgin in the house of Marcus Lycus, and Hero's love interest. Her name is also a homophone of the Latin word "Filia", which means daughter. This foreshadows her status as the daughter of Erronius.
 * Hysterium: (Latin for "Hysterical", or "Anxious", the suffix "-um" makes the name neuter, and the character's gender is often mistaken throughout the piece) The chief slave in the house of Senex.
 * Senex: (Latin for "old man") A henpecked, sardonic Roman senator living in a less fashionable suburb of Rome.
 * Domina: (Latin for "mistress") The wife of Senex. A manipulative, shrewish woman who is loathed by even her husband.
 * Marcus Lycus: A purveyor of courtesans, who operates from the house to the left of Senex. (Name based on Lycus, the pimp in Plautus's Poenulus.)
 * Miles Gloriosus: (Latin for "boastful soldier", the archetype of the braggart soldier in Roman comedies) A captain in the Roman army to whom Marcus Lycus has promised Philia.
 * Erronius: (Latin for "wandering") Senex's elderly neighbor in the house to the right. He has spent the past twenty years searching for his two children, kidnapped in infancy by pirates.
 * Gymnasia: (Greek for "Athletic", with the connotation of nakedness) A courtesan from the house of Lycus with whom Pseudolus falls in love.
 * Tintinabula: (Latin for "Bells") A jingling, bell-wearing courtesan in the house of Lycus.
 * Vibrata: (Latin for "Vibrant") A wild, vibrant courtesan in the house of Lycus.
 * Geminae: (Latin for "Twins") Twin courtesans in the house of Lycus.
 * Panacea: (Greek for "Cure All") A courtesan in the house of Lycus.
 * Proteans: Choristers who play multiple roles (slaves, citizens, soldiers, and eunuchs). They accompany Pseudolus in "Comedy Tonight". On Broadway, three people played all of these roles.

Songs
Act I
 * "Comedy Tonight" – Pseudolus and Company
 * "Love, I Hear" – Hero
 * "Free" – Pseudolus and Hero
 * "The House of Marcus Lycus" – Lycus, Pseudolus and Courtesans
 * "Lovely" – Philia and Hero
 * "Pretty Little Picture" – Pseudolus, Hero, and Philia
 * "Everybody Ought to Have a Maid" – Senex, Pseudolus, Hysterium and Lycus
 * "I'm Calm" – Hysterium
 * "Impossible" – Senex and Hero
 * "Bring Me My Bride" – Miles Gloriosus, Pseudolus and Company

Act II
 * "That Dirty Old Man" – Domina
 * "That'll Show Him" – Philia
 * "Lovely" (reprise) – Pseudolus and Hysterium
 * "Funeral Sequence" – Pseudolus, Miles Gloriosus and Company
 * "Finale" – Company

Cut songs: Notes:
 * "Love Is in the Air" – Prologus (Played by Senex) and Proteans (Originally intended as the opening number, replaced with "Comedy Tonight". The song was later featured in the film The Birdcage (1996) where it was performed by Robin Williams and Christine Baranski.)
 * "Invocation and Instructions to the Audience" (Another version of the opening number. Used in subsequent revues of Sondheim songs and was sung by Nathan Lane in the musical The Frogs.)
 * "I Do Like You" – Pseudolus and Hysterium
 * "There's Something About a War" – Miles Gloriosus
 * "Echo Song" – Philia and Hero
 * "Your Eyes Are Blue" – Hero
 * "The Gaggle of Geese" – Erronius
 * "What Do You Do With a Woman?" – Hero

"Pretty Little Picture" is frequently dropped from productions, and one verse of "I'm Calm" is also often trimmed. A song for Domina entitled "Farewell" was added for the 1972 revival as she and Senex depart for the country. "Echo Song" was reinstated in the same revival.

1996 Broadway revival
.

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


text:
Aleuts

Aleuts (Алеуты) are the Indigenous people of the Aleutian Islands, which are located between the North Pacific Ocean and the Bering Sea. Both the Aleuts and the islands are politically divided between the US state of Alaska and the Russian administrative division of Kamchatka Krai. This group is also known as the Unangax̂ in Unangam Tunuu, the Aleut language. There are 13 federally recognized Aleut tribes in the Aleut Region of Alaska. In 2000, Aleuts in Russia were recognized by government decree as a small-numbered Indigenous people.

Etymology
In the Aleut language, they are known by the endonyms Unangan (eastern dialect) and Unangas (western dialect); both terms mean "people". The Russian term "Aleut" was a general term used for both the native population of the Aleutian Islands and their neighbors to the east in the Kodiak Archipelago, who were also referred to as "Pacific Eskimos" or Sugpiat/Alutiit.

Language
Aleut people speak Unangam Tunuu, the Aleut language, as well as English and Russian in the United States and Russia respectively. An estimated 150 people in the United States and five people in Russia speak Aleut. The language belongs to the Eskaleut language family and includes three dialects: Eastern Aleut, spoken on the Eastern Aleutian, Shumagin, Fox and Pribilof Islands; Atkan, spoken on Atka and Bering islands; and the now extinct Attuan dialect.

The Pribilof Islands has the highest number of active speakers of Unangam Tunuu. Most native elders speak Aleut, but it is rare for common people to speak the language fluently.

Beginning in 1829, Aleut was written in the Cyrillic script. From 1870, the language has been written in the Latin script. An Aleut dictionary and grammar have been published, and portions of the Bible were translated into Aleut.

Tribes
Aleut (Unangan) dialects and tribes:

 * Attuan dialect and speaking tribes:
 * Sasignan (in Attuan dialect)/Sasxnan (in Eastern dialect)/Sasxinas (in Western dialect) or Near Islanders: in the Near Islands (Attu, Agattu, Semichi).
 * Kasakam Unangangis (in Aleut, lit. 'Russian Aleut') or Copper Island Aleut: in the Commander Islands of Russian Federation (Bering, Medny).
 * ? Qax̂un or Rat Islanders : in the Buldir Island and Rat Islands (Kiska, Amchitka, Semisopochnoi).
 * Atkan dialect or Western Aleut or Aliguutax̂ (in Aleut) and speaking tribes:
 * Naahmiĝus or Delarof Islanders : in the Delarof Islands (Amatignak) and Andreanof Islands (Tanaga).
 * Niiĝuĝis or Andreanof Islanders : in the Andreanof Islands (Kanaga, Adak, Atka, Amlia, Seguam).
 * Eastern Aleut dialect and speaking tribes:
 * Akuuĝun or Uniiĝun or Islanders of the Four Mountains : in the Islands of Four Mountains (Amukta, Kagamil).
 * Qawalangin or Fox Islanders : in the Fox Islands (Umnak, Samalga, western part of Unalaska).
 * Qigiiĝun or Krenitzen Islanders : in the Krenitzin Islands (eastern part of Unalaska, Akutan, Akun, Tigalda).
 * Qagaan Tayaĝungin or Sanak Islanders : in the Sanak Islands (Unimak, Sanak).
 * Taxtamam Tunuu dialect of Belkofski.
 * Qaĝiiĝun or Shumigan Islanders : in the Shumagin Islands.

Population and distribution

Aleuts historically lived throughout the Aleutian Islands, the Shumagin Islands, and the far western part of the Alaska Peninsula, with an estimated population of around 25,000 prior to European contact. In the 1820s, the Russian-American Company administered a large portion of the North Pacific during a Russian-led expansion of the fur trade. They resettled many Aleut families to the Commander Islands (within the Aleutsky District of the Kamchatka Krai in Russia) and to the Pribilof Islands (in Alaska). These continue to have majority-Aleut communities.

According to the 2000 census, 11,941 people identified as being Aleut, while 17,000 identified as having partial Aleut ancestry. Prior to sustained European contact, approximately 25,000 Aleut lived in the archipelago. The Encyclopædia Britannica Online states that more than 15,000 people have Aleut ancestry in the early 21st century. Aleuts suffered high fatalities in the 19th and early 20th centuries from Eurasian infectious diseases to which they had no immunity. In addition, the population suffered as their customary lifestyles were disrupted. Russian traders, and later Europeans, married Aleut women and had families with them.

After contact with Russia
After the arrival of Russian Orthodox missionaries in the late 18th century, many Aleuts became Christian. Of the numerous Russian Orthodox congregations in Alaska, most are majority Alaska Native or Native Alaskan in ethnicity. One of the earliest Christian martyrs in North America was Saint Peter the Aleut.

Russian traders "took Aleut women and children hostage" to force Aleut men to hunt foxes and sea otters so the Russians could have their pelts, and often additionally enslaved Aleut men.

Recorded uprising against the Russians
In the 18th century, Russia promyshlenniki traders established settlements on the islands. There was high demand for the furs that the Aleuts provided from hunting. In May 1784, local Aleuts revolted on Amchitka against the Russian traders. (The Russians had a small trading post there.) According to the Aleuts, in an account recorded by Japanese castaways and published in 2004, otters were decreasing year by year. The Russians paid the Aleuts less and less in goods in return for the furs they made. The Japanese learned that the Aleuts felt the situation was at crisis. The leading Aleuts negotiated with the Russians, saying they had failed to deliver enough supplies in return for furs. Nezimov, leader of the Russians, ordered two of his men, Stephanov (ステッパノ ) and Kazhimov (カジモフ ) to kill his mistress Oniishin (オニイシン ), who was the Aleut chief's daughter, because he doubted that Oniishin had tried to dissuade her father and other leaders from pushing for more goods.

After the four leaders had been killed, the Aleuts began to move from Amchitka to neighboring islands. Nezimov, leader of the Russian group, was jailed after the whole incident was reported to Russian officials. (According to Hokusa bunryaku (北槎聞略), written by Katsuragawa Hoshū after interviewing Daikokuya Kōdayū.)

Aleut genocide against the Nicoleño Tribe in California
According to Russian American Company (RAC) records which were translated and published in the Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology, a 200-ton otter hunting ship named Il’mena with a mixed-nationality crew, including a majority Aleut contingent, was involved in conflict resulting in a massacre of the indigenous natives of San Nicolas Island.

In 1814, to obtain more of the commercially valuable otter pelts, a Russian company brought a party of conscripted Aleut hunters to the coastal island of San Nicolas, near the Alta California-Baja California border. The locally resident Nicoleño nation sought a payment from the Aleut hunters for the large number of otters being killed in the area. Disagreement arose, turning violent; an Aleut was killed, and in retaliation Aleuts killed a number of Nicoleño (the exact amount is unknown). In 1835, the remaining Nicoleños were removed from the island, except for one woman and possibly her child, who were left behind. In 1853 that woman, later christened Juana Maria, was found and taken to Santa Barbara. She may have been the last living Nicoleñan, as what happened to the others after they were brought to the mainland is unknown (Juana Maria, the Lone Woman of San Nicolas).

Internment during World War II
In June 1942, during World War II, Japanese forces occupied Kiska and Attu Islands in the western Aleutians. They later transported captive Attu Islanders to Hokkaidō, where they were held as prisoners of war in harsh conditions. Fearing a Japanese attack on other Aleutian Islands and mainland Alaska, the U.S. government evacuated hundreds more Aleuts from the western chain and the Pribilofs, placing them in internment camps in southeast Alaska, where many died of measles, influenza and other infectious diseases which spread quickly in the overcrowded dormitories. In total, about 75 died in American internment and 19 as a result of Japanese occupation. The Aleut Restitution Act of 1988 was an attempt by Congress to compensate the survivors. On June 17, 2017, the U.S. Government formally apologized for the internment of the Unangan people and their treatment in the camps.

The World War II campaign by the United States to retake Attu and Kiska was a significant component of the operations in the American and Pacific theaters.

Population's decline
Before their way of life was changed by major influences from the outside world, approximately 25,000 Aleuts were located on the archipelago. Foreign diseases, harsh treatment and disruption of aboriginal society soon reduced the population to less than one-tenth this number. The 1910 Census count showed 1,491 Aleuts. In the 2000 Census, 11,941 people identified as being Aleut; nearly 17,000 said Aleuts were among their ancestors.

Housing
Aleuts constructed partially underground houses called barabara. According to Lillie McGarvey, a 20th-century Aleut leader, barabaras keep "occupants dry from the frequent rains, warm at all times, and snugly sheltered from the high winds common to the area". Aleuts traditionally built houses by digging an oblong square pit in the ground, usually 50 by or smaller. The pit was then covered by a roof framed with driftwood, thatched with grass, and then covered with earth for insulation. Inside trenches were dug along the sides, with mats placed on top to keep them clean. The bedrooms were at the back of the lodge, opposite the entrance. Several families would stay in one house, with their own designated areas. Rather than fireplaces or bonfires in the middle, lanterns were hung in the house.

Subsistence
Aleuts survived by hunting and gathering. They fished for salmon, crabs, shellfish, and cod, as well as hunting sea mammals such as seal, walrus, and whales. They processed fish and sea mammals in a variety of ways: dried, smoked, or roasted. Caribou, muskoxen, deer, moose, whale, and other types of game were eaten roasted or preserved for later use. They dried berries. They were also processed as alutiqqutigaq, a mixture of berries, fat, and fish. The boiled skin and blubber of a whale is a delicacy, as is that of walrus.

Today, many Aleut continue to eat customary and locally sourced foods but also buy processed foods from Outside, which is expensive in Alaska.

Ethnobotany
A full list of their ethnobotany has been compiled, with 65 documented plant uses.

Visual arts
Customary arts of the Aleuts include weapon-making, building of baidarkas (special hunting boats), weaving, figurines, clothing, carving, and mask making. Men as well as women often carved ivory and wood. Nineteenth century craftsmen were famed for their ornate wooden hunting hats, which feature elaborate and colorful designs and may be trimmed with sea lion whiskers, feathers, and walrus ivory. Andrew Gronholdt of the Shumagin Islands has played a vital role in reviving the ancient art of building the chagudax or bentwood hunting visors.

Aleut women sewed finely stitched, waterproof parkas from seal gut and wove fine baskets from sea-lyme grass (Elymus mollis). Some Aleut women continue to weave ryegrass baskets. Aleut arts are practiced and taught throughout the state of Alaska. As many Aleut have moved out of the islands to other parts of the state, they have taken with them the knowledge of their arts. They have also adopted new materials and methods for their art, including serigraphy, video art, and installation art.

Aleut carving, distinct in each region, has attracted traders for centuries, including early Europeans and other Alaska Natives. Historically, carving was a male art and leadership attribute whereas today it is done by both genders. Most commonly the carvings of walrus ivory and driftwood originated as part of making hunting weapons. Sculptural carvings depict local animals, such as seals and whales. Aleut sculptors also have carved human figures.

Aleuts also carve walrus ivory for other uses, such as jewelry and sewing needles. Jewelry is made with designs specific to the region of each people. Each clan would have a specific style to signify their origin. Jewelry ornaments were made for piercing lips (labrum), nose, and ears, as well as for necklaces. Each woman had her own sewing needles, which she made, and that often had detailed end of animal heads.

The main Aleut method of basketry was false embroidery (overlay). Strands of grasses or reeds were overlaid upon the basic weaving surface, to obtain a plastic effect. Basketry was an art reserved for women. Early Aleut women created baskets and woven mats of exceptional technical quality, using only their thumbnail, grown long and then sharpened, as a tool. Today, Aleut weavers continue to produce woven grass pieces of a remarkable cloth-like texture, works of modern art with roots in ancient tradition. Birch bark, puffin feathers, and baleen are also commonly used by the Aleuts in basketry. The Aleut term for grass basket is qiigam aygaaxsii. One Aleut leader recognized by the State of Alaska for her work in teaching and reviving Aleut basketry was Anfesia Shapsnikoff. Her life and accomplishments are portrayed in the book Moments Rightly Placed (1998).

Masks were created to portray figures of their myths and oral history. The Atka people believed that another people lived in their land before them. They portrayed such ancients in their masks, which show anthropomorphic creatures named in their language. Knut Bergsland says their word means "like those found in caves." Masks were generally carved from wood and were decorated with paints made from berries or other natural products. Feathers were inserted into holes carved out for extra decoration. These masks were used in ceremonies ranging from dances to praises, each with its own meaning and purpose.

Tattoos and piercings
The tattoos and piercings of the Aleuts demonstrated accomplishments as well as their religious views. They believed their body art would please the spirits of the animals and make any evil go away. The body orifices were believed to be pathways for the entry of evil entities. By piercing their orifices: the nose, the mouth, and ears, they would stop evil entities, khoughkh, from entering their bodies. Body art also enhanced their beauty, social status, and spiritual authority.

Before the 19th century, piercings and tattoos were very common among Aleuts, especially among women. Piercings, such as the nose pin, were common among both men and women and were usually performed a few days after birth. The ornament was made of various materials, a piece of bark or bone, or an eagle's feather shaft. From time to time, adult women decorated the nose pins by hanging pieces of amber and coral from strings on it; the semi-precious objects dangled down to their chins.

Piercing ears was also common. The Aleuts pierced holes around the rim of their ears with dentalium shells (tooth shells or tusk shells), bone, feathers, dried bird wings or skulls and/or amber. Materials associated with birds were important, as birds were considered to defend animals in the spirit world. A male would wear sea lion whiskers in his ears as a trophy of his expertise as a hunter. Worn for decorative reasons, and sometimes to signify social standing, reputation, and the age of the wearer, Aleuts would pierce their lower lips with walrus ivory and wear beads or bones. The individual with the most piercings held the highest respect.

Tattooing for women began when they reached physical maturity, after menstruation, at about age 20. Historically, men received their first tattoo after killing their first animal, an important rite of passage. Sometimes tattoos signaled social class. For example, the daughter of a wealthy, famous ancestor or father would work hard at her tattoos to show the accomplishments of that ancestor or father. They would sew, or prick, different designs on the chin, the side of the face, or under the nose.

Aleut clothing

Aleuts developed in one of the harshest climates in the world, and learned to create and protect warmth. Both men and women wore parkas that extended below the knees. The women wore the skin of seal or sea-otter, and the men wore bird skin parkas, the feathers turned in or out depending on the weather. When the men were hunting on the water, they wore waterproof parkas made from seal or sea-lion guts, or the entrails of bear, walrus, or whales. Parkas had a hood that could be cinched, as could the wrist openings, so water could not get in. Men wore breeches made from the esophageal skin of seals. Children wore parkas made of downy eagle skin with tanned bird skin caps. They called these parkas kameikas, meaning 'rain gear' in the English language.

Sea-lions, harbor seals, and sea otters are the most abundant marine mammals. The men brought home the skins and prepared them by soaking them in urine and stretching them. The women undertook the sewing. Preparation of the gut for clothing involved several steps. The prepared intestines were turned inside out. A bone knife was used to remove the muscle tissue and fat from the walls of the intestine. The gut was cut and stretched, and fastened to stakes to dry. It was then cut and sewn to make waterproof parkas, bags, and other receptacles. On some hunting trips, the men would take several women with them. They would catch birds and prepare the carcasses and feathers for future use. They caught puffins (Lunda cirrhata, Fratercula corniculata), guillemots, and murres.

It took 40 skins of tufted puffin and 60 skins of horned puffin to make one parka. A woman would need a year for all the labor to make one parka. Each lasted two years with proper care. All parkas were decorated with bird feathers, beard bristles of seal and sea-lion, beaks of sea parrots, bird claws, sea otter fur, dyed leather, and caribou hair sewn in the seams.

Women made needles from the wing bones of seabirds. They made thread from the sinews of different animals and fish guts. A thin strip of seal intestine could also be used, twisted to form a thread. The women grew their thumbnail extra long and sharpened it. They could split threads to make them as fine as a hair. They used vermilion paint, hematite, the ink bag of the octopus, and the root of a kind of grass or vine to color the threads.

Gender
Russian travelers making early contact with the Aleuts mention traditional tales of two-spirits or third and fourth gender people, known as ayagigux̂ (male-bodied, 'man transformed into a woman') and tayagigux̂ (female-bodied, 'woman transformed into a man'), but it is unclear whether these tales are about historical individuals or spirits.

Boats
The interior regions of the rough, mountainous Aleutian Islands provided little in terms of natural resources for the Aleutian people. They collected stones for weapons, tools, stoves or lamps. They collected and dried grasses for their woven baskets. For everything else, the Aleuts had learned to use the fish and mammals they caught and processed to satisfy their needs.

To hunt sea mammals and to travel between islands, the Aleuts became experts of sailing and navigation. While hunting, they used small watercraft called baidarkas. For regular travel, they used their large baidaras.

The baidara was a large, open, walrus-skin-covered boat. Aleut families used it when traveling among the islands. It was also used to transport goods for trade, and warriors took them to battle.

The baidarka (small skin boat) was a small boat covered in sea lion skin. It was developed and used for hunting because of its sturdiness and maneuverability. Aleut baidarka resembles that of a Yup'ik kayak, but it is hydrodynamically sleeker and faster. They made the baidarka for one or two persons only. The deck was made with a sturdy chamber, the sides of the craft were nearly vertical and the bottom was rounded. Most one-man baidarkas were about 16 ft long and 20 in wide, whereas a two-man was on average about 20 ft long and 24 in wide. It was from the baidarka that Aleut men would stand on the water to hunt from the sea.

Weapons
The Aleuts hunted small sea mammals with barbed darts and harpoons slung from throwing boards. These boards gave precision as well as some extra distance to these weapons.

Harpoons were also called throwing-arrows when the pointed head fit loosely into the socket of the foreshaft and the head was able to detach from the harpoon when it penetrated an animal, and remain in the wound. There were three main kinds of harpoon that the Aleuts used: a simple harpoon, with a head that kept its original position in the animal after striking, a compound (toggle-head) harpoon in which the head took a horizontal position in the animal after penetration, and the throwing-lance used to kill large animals.

The simple Aleut harpoon consisted of four main parts: the wooden shaft, the bone foreshaft, and the bonehead (tip) with barbs pointed backward. The barbed head was loosely fitted into the socket of the foreshaft so that when the animal was stabbed, it pulled the head away from the rest of the harpoon. The sharp barbs penetrated with ease, but could not be pulled out. The bone tip is fastened to a length of braided twine meanwhile; the hunter held the other end of the twine in his hand.

The compound harpoon was the most prevalent weapon of the Aleuts. Also known as the toggle-head spear, it was about the same size as the simple harpoon and used to hunt the same animals, however, this harpoon provided a more efficient and lethal weapon. This harpoon separated into four parts. The longest part was the shaft with the thicker stalk closer to the tip of the harpoon. The shaft was fitted into the socket of the fore shaft and a bone ring was then placed over the joint to hold the two pieces together, as well as, protecting the wooden shaft from splitting. Connected to the fore shaft of the harpoon is the toggle head spear tip. This tip was made of two sub shafts that break apart on impact with an animal. The upper sub shaft held the razor stone head and attached to the lower sub shaft with a small braided twine loop. Once the tip penetrates the animal the upper sub head broke off from the rest of the shaft, however, since it was still connected with the braided loop it rotated the head into a horizontal position inside the animal's body so that it could not get away from the hunter.

The throwing lance may be distinguished from a harpoon because all its pieces are fixed and immovable. A lance was a weapon of war and it was also used to kill large marine animals after it has already been harpooned. The throwing lance usually consisted of three parts: a wooden shaft, a bone ring or belt, and the compound head that was made with a barbed bonehead and a stone tip. The length of the compound head was equivalent to the distance between the planes of a man's chest to his back. The lance would penetrate the chest and pass through the chest cavity and exit from the back. The bone ring was designed to break after impact so that the shaft could be used again for another kill.

Burial practices
They buried their dead ancestors near the village. Archeologists have found many different types of burials, dating from a variety of periods, in the Aleutian Islands. Aleuts developed a style of burials that were accommodated to local conditions, and honored the dead. They have had four main types of burials: umqan, cave, above-ground sarcophagi, and burials connected to communal houses.

Umqan burials are the most widely known type of mortuary practice found in the Aleutian Islands. The people created burial mounds, that tend to be located on the edge of a bluff. They placed stone and earth over the mound to protect and mark it. Such mounds were first excavated by archeologists in 1972 on Southwestern Unmak Island, and dated to the early contact period. Researchers have found a prevalence of these umqan burials, and concluded it is a regional mortuary practice. It may be considered a pan-Aleutian mortuary practice.

Cave burials have been found throughout the eastern Aleutian Islands. The human remains are buried in shallow graves at the rear of the cave. These caves tend to be next to middens and near villages. Some grave goods have been found in the caves associated with such burials. For example, a deconstructed boat was found in a burial cave on Kanaga Island. There were no other major finds of grave goods in the vicinity.

Throughout the Aleutian Islands, gravesites have been found that are above-ground sarcophagi. These sarcophagi are left exposed, with no attempt to bury the dead in the ground. These burials tend to be isolated and limited to the remains of adult males, which may indicate a specific ritual practice. In the Near Islands, isolated graves have also been found with the remains, and not just the sarcophagus, left exposed on the surface. This way of erecting sarcophagi above ground is not as common as umqan and cave burials, but it is still widespread.

Another type of practice has been to bury remains in areas next to the communal houses of the settlement. Human remains are abundant in such sites. They indicate a pattern of burying the dead within the main activity areas of the settlement. These burials consist of small pits adjacent to the houses and scattered around them. In these instances, mass graves are common for women and children. This type of mortuary practice has been mainly found in the Near Islands.

In addition to these four main types, other kinds of burials have been found in the Aleutian Islands. These more isolated examples in include mummification, private burial houses, abandoned houses, etc. To date, such examples are not considered to be part of a larger, unifying cultural practice. The findings discussed represent only the sites that have been excavated.

The variety of mortuary practices mostly did not include the ritual of including extensive grave goods, as has been found in other cultures. The remains so far have been mainly found with other human and faunal remains. The addition of objects to "accompany" the dead is rare. Archaeologists have been trying to dissect the absence of grave goods, but their findings have been ambiguous and do not really help the academic community to understand these practices more.

Not much information is known about the ritual parts of burying the dead. Archeologists and anthropologists have not found much evidence related to burial rituals. This lack of ritual evidence could hint at either no ritualized ceremony, or one that has not yet been revealed in the archaeological record. As a result, archaeologists cannot decipher the context to understand exactly why a certain type of burial was used in particular cases.

Notable Aleuts

 * John Hoover (1919–2011), sculptor
 * Carl E. Moses (1929–2014) businessman, state representative, who served from 1965 to 1973 as both a Republican and Democrat,
 * Jacob Netsvetov (1802–1864), Russian Orthodox saint and priest
 * Sergie Sovoroff (1901–1989), educator, iqya-x (model sea kayak) builder
 * Eve Tuck, academic, indigenous studies
 * Olga (Arrsamquq) of Alaska (1916-1979) Eastern Orthodox Saint and Matushka
 * Peter the Aleut (1800–1815), Eastern Orthodox Saint and martyr

In popular culture
In Snow Crash, a science fiction novel by American writer Neal Stephenson, a central character named Raven is portrayed as an Aleut with incredible toughness and hunting skill. The story is about revenge due in part to perceived mistreatment of the Aleuts.

title: Aleuts


text:
Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act

The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) was signed into law by President Richard Nixon on December 18, 1971, constituting at the time the largest land claims settlement in United States history. ANCSA was intended to resolve long-standing issues surrounding aboriginal land claims in Alaska, as well as to stimulate economic development throughout Alaska.

The settlement established Alaska Native claims to the land by transferring titles to twelve Alaska Native regional corporations and over 200 local village corporations. A thirteenth regional corporation was later created for Alaska Natives who no longer resided in Alaska. The act is codified in chapter 33 of title 43 of the US Code.

Alaskan statehood
When Alaska became a state in 1959, section 4 of the Alaska Statehood Act provided that any existing Alaska Native land claims would be unaffected by statehood and held in status quo. Yet while section 4 of the act preserved Native land claims until later settlement, section 6 allowed for the state government to claim lands deemed vacant. Section 6 granted the state of Alaska the right to select lands then in the hands of the federal government, with the exception of Native territory. As a result, nearly 104.5 e6acre from the public domain would eventually be transferred to the state. The state government also attempted to acquire lands under section 6 of the Statehood Act that were subject to Native claims under section 4, and that were currently occupied and used by Alaska Natives. The federal Bureau of Land Management began to process the Alaska government's selections without taking into account the Native claims and without informing the affected Native groups.

It was against this backdrop that the original language for a land claims settlement was developed.

A 9.2-magnitude earthquake struck the state in 1964. Recovery efforts drew the attention of the federal government. The Federal Field Committee for Development Planning in Alaska decided that Natives should receive $100 million and 10% of revenue as a royalty. Nothing was done with this proposal, however, and a freeze on land transfers remained in effect.

Founding of the Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN)
In 1966, Emil Notti called for a statewide meeting inviting numerous leaders around Alaska to gather and create the first meeting of a committee. The historic meeting was held October 18, 1966 - on the 99th anniversary of the transfer of Alaska from Russia. Notti presided over the three-day conference as it discussed matters of land recommendations, claims committees, and political challenges the act would have in getting through congress. Many respected politicians and businessmen attended the meeting and delegates were astonished at the attention which they received from well-known political figures of the state. The growing presence and political importance of Natives was evidenced when members were able to gain election to seven of the sixty seats in the legislature.

When the group met a second time early in 1967, it emerged with a new name, The Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN), and a new full-time President, Emil Notti. AFN went on to profoundly change the human rights and economic stability of the Alaska Native population.

Native Land Claims Task Force
In 1967, Governor Walter Hickel summoned a group of Indigenous leaders and politicians to work out a settlement that would be satisfactory to Natives. The group met for ten days and asked for $20 million in exchange for requested lands. Among the other task force proposals were an outright grant of 1,000 acres per native village resident; a revenue-sharing program for state land claims and national mineral development projects; secured hunting and fishing rights on public lands; and a Native Commission to administrate state and federal compliance with the provisions of the claims settlement. They proposed receiving 10% of federal mineral lease revenue for ten years, once the freeze which had been placed on land patents to allow oil exploration was lifted.

Oil
In 1968, the Atlantic-Richfield Company discovered oil at Prudhoe Bay on the Arctic coast, catapulting the issue of land ownership into headlines. In order to lessen the difficulty of drilling at such a remote location and transporting the oil to the lower 48 states, the oil companies proposed building a pipeline to carry the oil across Alaska to the port of Valdez. At Valdez, the oil would be loaded onto tankers and shipped to the contiguous states.

The plan had been approved, but a permit to construct the pipeline, which would cross lands involved in the land claims dispute, could not be granted until the Native claims were settled. Hearings were held for the first time before the United States House's Subcommittee on Indian Affairs in July 1968. Among those who attended the hearings were officials and legislators, as well as Laura Bergt, Roger Connor, Thoda Forslund, Cliff Groh, Barry Jackson, Flore Lekanof, Notti, and Morris Thompson.

Government negotiations and policy
In 1969, President Nixon appointed Hickel as Secretary of the Interior. The Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN) protested against Hickel's nomination, but he was eventually confirmed. He worked with the AFN, negotiating with Native leaders and state government over the disputed lands. Offers went back and forth, with each rejecting the other's proposals. The AFN wanted rights to land, while then-Governor Keith Miller believed Natives did not have legitimate claims to state land in light of the provisions of the Alaska Statehood Act. On July 8, 1970, Nixon delivered a speech reversing the Indian termination policy in favor of allowing tribal self-determination. The following month, he established the National Council on Indian Opportunity, headed by Vice President Spiro Agnew, which included eight Native leaders: Frank Belvin (Choctaw), Bergt (Iñupiat), Betty Mae Jumper (Seminole), Earl Old Person (Blackfeet), John C. Rainer (Taos Pueblo), Martin Seneca, Jr. (Seneca), Harold Shunk (Yankton-Sioux), and Joseph C. "Lone Eagle" Vasquez (Apache-Sioux).

During the state administration of Governor William A. Egan positions were staked out upon which the AFN and other stakeholders could largely agree. Native leaders, in addition to Alaska's congressional delegation and the state's newly elected Governor Egan, eventually reached the basis for presenting an agreement to Congress. Bergt attended a March 1971 conference of the National Congress of American Indians in Kansas City, Missouri and was able to persuade Agnew there to meet with national officials, herself, Christiansen, an Alaska State Senator; Al Ketzler, chair of the Tanana Chiefs Conference; and Don Wright, president of the Alaska Federation of Natives a week later. That meeting held on March 12, marked a turning-point in negotiations with the various parties. The proposed settlement terms faced challenges in both houses but found a strong ally in Senator Henry M. Jackson from Washington state. The most controversial issues that continued to hold up approval were methods for determining land selection by Alaska Natives and financial distribution.

With major petroleum dollars on the line, pressure mounted to achieve a definitive legislative resolution at the federal level. In 1971, the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act was signed into law by President Nixon. It abrogated Native claims to aboriginal lands except those that are the subject of the law. In return, Natives retained up to 44 e6acre of land and were paid $963 million. The land and money were to be divided among regional, urban, and village tribal corporations established under the law, often recognizing existing leadership.

Alaskan officials were originally divided on the bill, though by 1970, with Interior Secretary Walter Hickel, Governor William Egan, Representative Nick Begich & Senators Ted Stevens & Mike Gravel all backing the bill, the opposition died down. Stevens was particularly strongminded, and was key in the bill's passage. Stevens, a freshman Senator for most of the fight, would later remark: "ANCSA was my baptism of fire as a Senator from Alaska.... It didn't occur to me that some Senators had the opportunity to ease into their jobs. Life in the Senate for me was fast-paced from the beginning.... With my experience working in the Department of the Interior and with the Statehood Act, and my faith in the determination and unity of purpose of Alaska's Native people, I believed from the beginning that a settlement could be achieved.... My memories of the Congressional action as ANCSA took shape aren't of a battle as much as they are of long hours of tough, hard negotiating, often two steps forward and one step back...."

Effect of land conveyances
In 1971, barely one million acres of land in Alaska were in private hands. ANCSA, together with section 6 of Alaska Statehood Act, which the new act allowed to come to fruition, affected ownership to about 148.5 e6acre of land in Alaska once wholly controlled by the federal government. That is larger by 6 e6acre than the combined areas of Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland and Virginia.

When the bill passed in 1971, it included provisions that had never before been attempted in previous United States settlements with Native Americans. The newly passed Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act created twelve Native regional economic development corporations. Each corporation was associated with a specific region of Alaska and the Natives who had traditionally lived there. This innovative approach to native settlements engaged the tribes in corporate capitalism.

The idea originated with the AFN, who believed that the Natives would have to become a part of the capitalist system in order to survive. As stockholders in these corporations, the Natives could earn some income and stay in their traditional villages. If the corporations were managed properly, they could make profits that would enable individuals to stay, rather than having to leave Native villages to find better work. This was intended to help preserve Native culture.

Native and state land selection
Alaska Natives had three years from passage of ANCSA to make land selections of the 44 e6acre granted under the act. In some cases Native corporations received outside aid in surveying the land. For instance, Doyon, Limited (one of the 13 regional corporations) was helped by the Geophysical Institute of the University of Alaska. The Institute determined which land contained resources such as minerals and coal. NASA similarly provided satellite imagery to aid in Native corporations finding areas most suited for vegetation and their traditional subsistence culture. The imagery showed locations of caribou and moose, as well as forests with marketable timber. In total about 7 e6acre were analyzed for Doyon. Natives were able to choose tens of thousands of acres of land rich with timber while Doyon used mineral analysis to attract businesses.

The state of Alaska to date has been granted approximately 85% or 90 e6acre of the land claims it has made under ANCSA. The state is entitled to a total of 104.5 e6acre under the terms of the Statehood Act. Originally the state had 25 years after passage of the Alaska Statehood Act to file claims under section 6 of the act with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Amendments to ANCSA extended that deadline until 1994, with the expectation that BLM would complete processing of land transfers subject to overlapping Native claims by 2009. Nonetheless, some Native and state selections under ANCSA remained unresolved as late as December 2014.

Criticism of ANCSA
There was largely positive reaction to ANCSA, although not entirely. The act was supported by Natives as well as non-Natives, and likewise enjoyed bipartisan support. Natives were heavily involved in the legislative process, and the final draft of the act used many AFN ideas.

Some Natives have argued that ANCSA has hastened cultural genocide of Alaska Natives. Some Natives critiqued ANCSA as an illegitimate treaty since only tribal leaders were involved and the provisions of the act were not voted on by indigenous populations. One native described it as a social and political experiment. Critics have also argued that Natives so feared massacre or incarceration that they offered no resistance to the act.

Others have argued that the settlement was arguably the most generous afforded by the United States to a Native group. They note that some of the largest and most profitable corporations in the state are the twelve created by ANCSA. Other critics attacked the act as "Native welfare" and such complaints continue to be expressed.

The corporation system has been critiqued, as in some cases stockholders have sold land to outside corporations that have leveled forests and extracted minerals. But supporters of the system argue that it has provided economic benefits for indigenous peoples that outweigh these problems.

Selected provisions of ANCSA

 * Native claims in Alaska were extinguished by means of section 4 of ANCSA.
 * In exchange for abrogating Native claims, approximately one-ninth of the state's land plus $962.5 million were distributed to more than 200 local Alaska Native "village corporations" established under section 8, in addition to 12 land-owning for-profit Alaska Native "regional corporations" and a non-land-owning thirteenth corporation for Alaska Natives who had left the state established under section 6.
 * Of the compensation monies, $462.5 million was to come from the federal treasury and the rest from oil revenue-sharing.
 * Settlement benefits would accrue to those with at least one-fourth Native ancestry under sections 3(b) and 5(a).
 * Of the approximately 80,000 Natives enrolled under ANCSA, those living in villages (approximately two-thirds of the total) would receive 100 shares in both a village and a regional corporation.
 * The remaining one-third would be "at large" shareholders with 100 shares in a regional corporation with additional rights to revenue from regional mineral and timber resources.
 * The Alaska Native Allotment Act was revoked but with the proviso that pending claims under that act would continue to be processed under section 18. Successful applicants would be excluded under ANCSA by section 14(h)(5) from land to be used for a primary residence.
 * The twelve regional corporations within the state would administer the settlement.
 * A thirteenth corporation composed of Natives who had left the state would receive compensation but not land.
 * Surface rights to 44 e6acre were patented to the Native village and regional corporations under sections 12(c), as well as 14(h)(1) and (8).
 * The surface rights to the patented land were granted to the village corporations and the subsurface right to the land were granted to the regional corporation, creating a split estate pursuant to section 14(f).

Alaska Native regional corporations
The following thirteen regional corporations were created under ANCSA:
 * Ahtna, Incorporated
 * The Aleut Corporation
 * Arctic Slope Regional Corporation
 * Bering Straits Native Corporation
 * Bristol Bay Native Corporation
 * Calista Corporation
 * Chugach Alaska Corporation
 * Cook Inlet Region, Inc.
 * Doyon, Limited
 * Koniag, Incorporated
 * NANA Regional Corporation
 * Sealaska Corporation
 * The 13th Regional Corporation

Additionally, most regions and some villages have created their own nonprofits providing social services and health care through grant funding and federal compacts. The objectives of these nonprofits are varied, but focus generally on cultural and educational activities. These include scholarships for Native students, sponsorship of cultural and artistic events, preservation efforts for Native languages, and protection of sites with historic or religious importance.

Alaska Native village and urban corporations
ANCSA created about 224 village and urban corporations. Below is a representative list of village and urban corporations created under ANCSA:
 * Ukpeaġvik Iñupiat Corporation, village corporation for Utqiaġvik
 * Bethel Native Corporation, village corporation for Bethel
 * Cape Fox Corporation, village corporation for Saxman
 * Deloycheet, Inc., village corporation for Holy Cross
 * Huna Totem Corporation, village corporation for Hoonah
 * Haida Corporation, village corporation for Hydaburg
 * Goldbelt, Inc., urban corporation for Juneau
 * Paug-Vik, Inc. Ltd., village corporation for Naknek
 * Chenega Corporation, village corporation for Chenega
 * Afognak Native Corporation, village corporation for Afognak and Port Lions
 * Kavilco Incorporated, village corporation for Kasaan
 * Klukwan, Inc., village corporation for Klukwan
 * The Kuskokwim Corporation, village corporation for Aniak, Crooked Creek, Georgetown, Kalskag, Lower Kalskag, Napaimute, Red Devil, Russian Mission, Sleetmute and Stony River
 * Natives of Kodiak, Inc., urban corporation for Kodiak
 * Ounalashka Corporation, village corporation for Unalaska
 * Ouzinkie Native Corporation, village corporation for Ouzinkie
 * Shee Atika, Incorporated, urban corporation for Sitka

title: Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act


text:
Adoptionism

Adoptionism, also called dynamic monarchianism, is an early Christian nontrinitarian theological doctrine, subsequently revived in various forms, which holds that Jesus was adopted as the Son of God at his baptism, his resurrection, or his ascension. How common adoptionist views were among early Christians is debated, but it appears to have been most popular in the first, second, and third centuries. Some scholars see adoptionism as the belief of the earliest followers of Jesus, based on the epistles of Paul and other early literature. However, adoptionist views sharply declined in prominence in the fourth and fifth centuries, as Church leaders condemned it as a heresy.

Definition
Adoptionism is one of two main forms of monarchianism (the other being modalism, which considers God to be one while working through the different "modes" or "manifestations" of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, without limiting his modes or manifestations). Adoptionism denies the eternal pre-existence of Christ, and although it explicitly affirms his deity subsequent to events in his life, many classical trinitarians claim that the doctrine implicitly denies it by denying the constant hypostatic union of the eternal Logos to the human nature of Jesus.

Under adoptionism, Jesus is divine and has been since his adoption although he is not equal to the Father per "my Father is greater than I" and as such is a kind of subordinationism. (However, the quoted scripture can be orthodoxically interpreted as the fact that in the Trinity the Father is the source without origin, while the Son eternally receives the divinity from the Father.) Adoptionism is sometimes but not always related to a denial of the virgin birth of Jesus.

Adoptionism and high Christology
Bart Ehrman claims that the New Testament writings contain two different Christologies, namely a "low" or adoptionist Christology, and a "high" or "incarnation Christology". The "low Christology" or "adoptionist Christology" is the belief "that God exalted Jesus to be his Son by raising him from the dead", thereby raising him to "divine status". The other early Christology is "high Christology," which is "the view that Jesus was a pre-existent divine being who became a human, did the Father's will on earth, and then was taken back up into heaven whence he had originally come," and from where he appeared on earth. The chronology of the development of these early Christologies is a matter of debate within contemporary scholarship.

According to the "evolutionary model" or evolutionary theories proposed by Bousset, followed by Brown, the Christological understanding of Christ developed over time, from a low Christology to a high Christology, as witnessed in the Gospels. According to the evolutionary model, the earliest Christians believed that Jesus was a human who was exalted, and thus adopted as God's Son, when he was resurrected, signaling the nearness of the Kingdom of God, when all dead would be resurrected and the righteous exalted. Adoptionist concepts can be found in the Gospel of Mark. As Daniel Johansson notes, the majority of scholars hold Mark's Jesus as "an exalted, but merely human figure", especially when read in the apparent context of Jewish beliefs. Later beliefs shifted the exaltation to his baptism, birth, and subsequently to the idea of his eternal existence, as witnessed in the Gospel of John. Mark shifted the moment of when Jesus became the son to the baptism of Jesus, and later still Matthew and Luke shifted it to the moment of the divine conception, and finally John declared that Jesus had been with God from the beginning: "In the beginning was the Word".

One notable passage that may have been cited by early adoptionists was what exactly God said at Jesus's baptism; three different versions are recorded. One of them, found in the Codex Bezae version of Luke 3:22, is "You are my son; today I have begotten you." This seems to be quoted in Acts 13:32–33 as well (in all manuscripts, not just Bezae) and in Hebrews 5:5. Quotes from second and third century Christian writers almost always use this variant as well, with many fourth and fifth century writers continuing to use it, if occasionally with embarrassment; Augustine cites the line, for example, but clarifies God meant an eternal "today". Ehrman speculates that Orthodox scribes of the fourth and fifth century changed the passage in Luke to align with the version in Mark as a defense against adoptionists citing the passage in their favor.

Since the 1970s, these late datings for the development of a "high Christology" have been contested, and a majority of scholars argue that this "high Christology" existed already before the writings of Paul. According to the "New Religionsgeschichtliche Schule", or the Early High Christology Club, which includes Martin Hengel, Larry Hurtado, N. T. Wright, and Richard Bauckham, this "incarnation Christology" or "high Christology" did not evolve over a longer time, but was a "big bang" of ideas which were already present at the start of Christianity, and took further shape in the first few decades of the church, as witnessed in the writings of Paul. Some 'Early High Christology' proponents scholars argue that this "high Christology" may go back to Jesus himself.

According to Ehrman, these two Christologies existed alongside each other, calling the "low Christology" an "adoptionist Christology, and "the "high Christology" an "incarnation Christology". Conversely, Michael Bird has argued that adoptionism did not first emerge until the 2nd century as a result of later theological debates and other socio-religious influences on the reading of certain biblical texts.

New Testamental epistles
Adoptionist theology may also be reflected in canonical epistles, the earliest of which pre-date the writing of the gospels. The letters of Paul the Apostle, for example, do not mention a virgin birth of Christ. Paul describes Jesus as "born of a woman, born under the law" and "as to his human nature was a descendant of David" in the Epistle to the Galatians and the Epistle to the Romans. Christian interpreters, however, take his statements in Philippians 2 to imply that Paul believed Jesus to have existed as equal to God before his incarnation.

Shepherd of Hermas
The 2nd-century work Shepherd of Hermas may also have taught that Jesus was a virtuous man filled with the Holy Spirit and adopted as the Son. While the Shepherd of Hermas was popular and sometimes bound with the canonical scriptures, it did not retain canonical status, if it ever had it.

Theodotus of Byzantium
Theodotus of Byzantium (fl. late 2nd century), a Valentinian Gnostic, was the most prominent exponent of adoptionism. According to Hippolytus of Rome (Philosophumena, VII, xxiii) Theodotus taught that Jesus was a man born of a virgin, according to the Council of Jerusalem, that he lived like other men, and was most pious. At his baptism in the Jordan the "Christ" came down upon the man Jesus, in the likeness of a dove (Philosophumena, VII, xxiii), but Jesus was not himself God until after his resurrection.

Adoptionism was declared heresy at the end of the 3rd century and was rejected by the Synods of Antioch and the First Council of Nicaea, which defined the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity and identified the man Jesus with the eternally begotten Son or Word of God in the Nicene Creed. The belief was also declared heretical by Pope Victor I.

Ebionites
Adoptionism was also adhered to by the Jewish Christians known as Ebionites, who, according to Epiphanius in the 4th century, believed that Jesus was chosen on account of his sinless devotion to the will of God.

The Ebionites were a Jewish Christian movement that existed during the early centuries of the Christian Era. They show strong similarities with the earliest form of Jewish Christianity, and their specific theology may have been a "reaction to the law-free Gentile mission". They regarded Jesus as the Messiah while rejecting his divinity and his virgin birth, and insisted on the necessity of following Jewish law and rites. They used the Gospel of the Ebionites, one of the Jewish–Christian gospels; the Hebrew Book of Matthew starting at chapter 3; revered James the brother of Jesus (James the Just); and rejected Paul the Apostle as an apostate from the Law. Their name (Ἐβιωναῖοι, derived from the Hebrew אביונים, meaning the poor or poor ones) suggests that they placed a special value on voluntary poverty.

Distinctive features of the Gospel of the Ebionites include the absence of the virgin birth and of the genealogy of Jesus; an Adoptionist Christology, in which Jesus is chosen to be God's Son at the time of his Baptism; the abolition of the Jewish sacrifices by Jesus; and an advocacy of vegetarianism.

Spanish Adoptionism
Iberian Adoptionism was a theological position which was articulated in Umayyad and Christian-held regions of the Iberian peninsula in the 8th and 9th centuries. The issue seems to have begun with the claim of archbishop Elipandus of Toledo that – in respect to his human nature – Christ was adoptive Son of God. Another leading advocate of this Christology was Felix of Urgel. In the Iberian peninsula, adoptionism was opposed by Beatus of Liebana, and in the Carolingian territories, the Adoptionist position was condemned by Pope Hadrian I, Alcuin of York, Agobard, and officially in Carolingian territory by the Council of Frankfurt (794).

Despite the shared name of "adoptionism" the Spanish Adoptionist Christology appears to have differed sharply from the adoptionism of early Christianity. Spanish advocates predicated the term adoptivus of Christ only in respect to his humanity; once the divine Son "emptied himself" of divinity and "took the form of a servant" (Philippians 2:7), Christ's human nature was "adopted" as divine.

Historically, many scholars have followed the Adoptionists' Carolingian opponents in labeling Spanish Adoptionism as a minor revival of "Nestorian" Christology. John C. Cavadini has challenged this notion by attempting to take the Spanish Christology in its own Spanish/North African context in his study, The Last Christology of the West: Adoptionism in Spain and Gaul, 785–820.

Scholastic Neo-adoptionism
A third wave was the revived form ("Neo-adoptionism") of Peter Abelard in the 12th century. Later, various modified and qualified Adoptionist tenets emerged from some theologians in the 14th century. Duns Scotus (1300) and Durandus of Saint-Pourçain (1320) admit the term filius adoptivus in a qualified sense. In more recent times the Jesuit Gabriel Vásquez, and the Lutheran divines Georgius Calixtus and Johann Ernst Immanuel Walch, have defended adoptionism as essentially orthodox.

Modern adoptionist groups
A form of adoptionism surfaced in Unitarianism during the 18th century as denial of the virgin birth became increasingly common, led by the views of Joseph Priestley and others.

A similar form of adoptionism was expressed in the writings of James Strang, a Latter Day Saint leader who founded the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Strangite) after the death of Joseph Smith in 1844. In his Book of the Law of the Lord, a purported work of ancient scripture found and translated by Strang, he offers an essay entitled "Note on the Sacrifice of Christ" in which he explains his unique (for Mormonism as a whole) doctrines on the subject. Jesus Christ, said Strang, was the natural-born son of Mary and Joseph, who was chosen from before all time to be the Savior of mankind, but who had to be born as an ordinary mortal of two human parents (rather than being begotten by the Father or the Holy Spirit) to be able to truly fulfill his Messianic role. Strang claimed that the earthly Christ was in essence "adopted" as God's son at birth, and fully revealed as such during the Transfiguration. After proving himself to God by living a perfectly sinless life, he was enabled to provide an acceptable sacrifice for the sins of men, prior to his resurrection and ascension.

The Christian Community, an esoteric Christian denomination informed by the teachings of Rudolf Steiner, assumes an adoptionist Christology that treats Jesus and the Christ as separate beings until they are joined at baptism. "Steiner's Christology is discussed as a central element of his thought in Johannes Hemleben, Rudolf Steiner: A Documentary Biography, trans. Leo Twyman (East Grinstead, Sussex: Henry Goulden, 1975), pp. 96-100. From the perspective of orthodox Christianity, it may be said that Steiner combined a docetic understanding of Christ's nature with the Adoptionist heresy."

title: Adoptionism


text:
Apollinarism

Apollinarism or Apollinarianism is a Christological heresy proposed by Apollinaris of Laodicea (died 390) that argues that Jesus had a human body and sensitive human soul, but a divine mind and not a human rational mind, the Divine Logos taking the place of the latter. It was deemed heretical in 381 and virtually died out within the following decades.

History
The Trinity had been recognized at the First Council of Nicaea in 325, but debate about exactly what it meant continued. A rival to the more common belief that Jesus Christ had two natures was monophysitism ("one nature"), the doctrine that Christ had only one nature. Apollinarism and Eutychianism were two forms of monophysitism. Apollinaris's rejection of Christ having a human mind was considered an over-reaction to Arianism and its teaching that Christ was a lesser god.

Theodoret charged Apollinaris with confounding the persons of the Godhead and giving in to the heretical ways of Sabellius. Basil of Caesarea accused him of abandoning the literal sense of the scripture, and taking it up wholly with the allegorical sense. His views were condemned in a Synod at Alexandria, under Athanasius of Alexandria, in 362, and later subdivided into several different heresies, the main ones of which were the Polemians and the Antidicomarianites.

Apollinaris, considering the rational soul and spirit as essentially liable to sin and capable, at its best, of only precarious efforts, saw no way of saving Christ's impeccability and the infinite value of Redemption, except by the elimination of the human spirit from Jesus' humanity, and the substitution of the Divine Logos in its stead. Apollinarism was declared to be a heresy in 381 by the First Council of Constantinople.

Neo-Apollinarianism
Christian philosopher William Lane Craig has proposed a neo-Apollinarian Christology in which the divine Logos completes the human nature of Christ. Craig says his proposal is tentative and he welcomes critique and interaction from other scholars.

Craig also clarifies "what I called a Neo-Apollinarian Christological model" by stating that "What I argue in my Neo-Apollinarian proposal is that the Logos brought to the human body just those properties which would make it a complete human nature – things like rationality, self-consciousness, freedom of the will, and so forth. Christ already possessed those in his divine nature, and it is in virtue of those that we are created in the image of God. So when he brought those properties to the animal body – the human body – it completes it and makes it a human nature. Against Apollinarius, I want to say that Christ did have a complete human nature. He was truly God and truly man. Therefore his death on our behalf as our representative before God was efficacious."

title: Apollinarism