text:
Biodefense

Biodefense refers to measures to counter biological threats, reduce biological risks, and prepare for, respond to, and recover from bioincidents, whether naturally occurring, accidental, or deliberate in origin and whether impacting human, animal, plant, or environmental health. Biodefense measures often aim to improve biosecurity or biosafety. Biodefense is frequently discussed in the context of biological warfare or bioterrorism, and is generally considered a military or emergency response term.

Biodefense applies to two distinct target populations: civilian non-combatants and military combatants (troops in the field). Protection of water supplies and food supplies are often a critical part of biodefense.

Troops in the field
Military biodefense in the United States began with the United States Army Medical Unit (USAMU) at Fort Detrick, Maryland, in 1956. (In contrast to the U.S. Army Biological Warfare Laboratories [1943–1969], also at Fort Detrick, the USAMU's mission was purely to develop defensive measures against bio-agents, as opposed to weapons development.) The USAMU was disestablished in 1969 and succeeded by today's United States Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID).

The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) has focused since at least 1998 on the development and application of vaccine-based biodefenses. In a July 2001 report commissioned by the DoD, the "DoD-critical products" were stated as vaccines against anthrax (AVA and Next Generation), smallpox, plague, tularemia, botulinum, ricin, and equine encephalitis. Note that two of these targets are toxins (botulinum and ricin) while the remainder are infectious agents.

Role of public health and disease surveillance
It's extremely important to note that all of the classical and modern biological weapons organisms are animal diseases, the only exception being smallpox. Thus, in any use of biological weapons, it is highly likely that animals will become ill either simultaneously with, or perhaps earlier than humans.

Indeed, in the largest biological weapons accident known–the anthrax outbreak in Sverdlovsk (now Yekaterinburg) in the Soviet Union in 1979, sheep became ill with anthrax as far as 200 kilometers from the release point of the organism from a military facility in the southeastern portion of the city (known as Compound 19 and still off limits to visitors today, see Sverdlovsk anthrax leak).

Thus, a robust surveillance system involving human clinicians and veterinarians may identify a bioweapons attack early in the course of an epidemic, permitting the prophylaxis of disease in the vast majority of people (and/or animals) exposed but not yet ill.

For example, in the case of anthrax, it is likely that by 24–36 hours after an attack, some small percentage of individuals (those with compromised immune system or who had received a large dose of the organism due to proximity to the release point) will become ill with classical symptoms and signs (including a virtually unique chest X-ray finding, often recognized by public health officials if they receive timely reports). By making these data available to local public health officials in real time, most models of anthrax epidemics indicate that more than 80% of an exposed population can receive antibiotic treatment before becoming symptomatic, and thus avoid the moderately high mortality of the disease.

Identification of bioweapons
The goal of biodefense is to integrate the sustained efforts of the national and homeland security, medical, public health, intelligence, diplomatic, and police communities. Health care providers and public health officers are among the first lines of defense. In some countries private, local, and provincial (state) capabilities are being augmented by and coordinated with federal assets, to provide layered defenses against biological weapons attacks. During the first Gulf War the United Nations activated a biological and chemical response team, Task Force Scorpio, to respond to any potential use of weapons of mass destruction on civilians.

The traditional approach toward protecting agriculture, food, and water: focusing on the natural or unintentional introduction of a disease is being strengthened by focused efforts to address current and anticipated future biological weapons threats that may be deliberate, multiple, and repetitive.

The growing threat of biowarfare agents and bioterrorism has led to the development of specific field tools that perform on-the-spot analysis and identification of encountered suspect materials. One such technology, being developed by researchers from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), employs a "sandwich immunoassay", in which fluorescent dye-labeled antibodies aimed at specific pathogens are attached to silver and gold nanowires.

The U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) also participates in the identification and prevention of biowarfare and first released a strategy for biodefense in 2002, periodically releasing updates as new pathogens are becoming topics of discussion. Within this list of strategies, responses for specific infectious agents are provided, along with the classification of these agents. NIAID provides countermeasures after the U.S. Department of Homeland Security details which pathogens hold the most threat.

Planning and response
Planning may involve the training human resources specialist and development of biological identification systems. Until recently in the United States, most biological defense strategies have been geared to protecting soldiers on the battlefield rather than ordinary people in cities. Financial cutbacks have limited the tracking of disease outbreaks. Some outbreaks, such as food poisoning due to E. coli or Salmonella, could be of either natural or deliberate origin.

Human Resource Training Programs

To date, several endangered countries have designed various training programs at their universities to train specialized personnel to deal with biological threats(for example: George Mason University Biodefense PhD program (USA) or Biodefense Strategic Studies PhD program designated by Dr Reza Aghanouri(Iran) ). These programs are designed to prepare students and officers to serve as scholars and professionals in the fields of biodefense and biosecurity. These programs integrates knowledge of natural and man-made biological threats with the skills to develop and analyze policies and strategies for enhancing biosecurity. Other areas of biodefense, including nonproliferation, intelligence and threat assessment, and medical and public health preparedness are integral parts of these programs.

Preparedness

Biological agents are relatively easy to obtain by terrorists and are becoming more threatening in the U.S., and laboratories are working on advanced detection systems to provide early warning, identify contaminated areas and populations at risk, and to facilitate prompt treatment. Methods for predicting the use of biological agents in urban areas as well as assessing the area for the hazards associated with a biological attack are being established in major cities. In addition, forensic technologies are working on identifying biological agents, their geographical origins and/or their initial son. Efforts include decontamination technologies to restore facilities without causing additional environmental concerns.

Early detection and rapid response to bioterrorism depend on close cooperation between public health authorities and law enforcement; however, such cooperation is currently lacking. National detection assets and vaccine stockpiles are not useful if local and state officials do not have access to them.

United States strategy In October 2022, the Biden Administration published the "National Biodefense Strategy and Implementation Plan for Countering Biological Threats, Enhancing Pandemic Preparedness, and Achieving Global Health." It updates the Trump Administration's 2018 National Biodefense Strategy.

The U.S. government had a comprehensive defense strategy against bioterror attacks in 2004, when then-President George W. Bush signed a Homeland Security Presidential Directive 10. The directive laid out the country's 21st Century biodefense system and assigned various tasks to federal agencies that would prevent, protect and mitigate biological attacks against our homeland and global interests. Until 2018, however, the federal government did not have a comprehensive biodefense strategy.

Biosurveillance

In 1999, the University of Pittsburgh's Center for Biomedical Informatics deployed the first automated bioterrorism detection system, called RODS (Real-Time Outbreak Disease Surveillance). RODS is designed to draw collect data from many data sources and use them to perform signal detection, that is, to detect a possible bioterrorism event at the earliest possible moment. RODS, and other systems like it, collect data from sources including clinic data, laboratory data, and data from over-the-counter drug sales. In 2000, Michael Wagner, the codirector of the RODS laboratory, and Ron Aryel, a subcontractor, conceived the idea of obtaining live data feeds from "non-traditional" (non-health-care) data sources. The RODS laboratory's first efforts eventually led to the establishment of the National Retail Data Monitor, a system which collects data from 20,000 retail locations nationwide.

On February 5, 2002, George W. Bush visited the RODS laboratory and used it as a model for a $300 million spending proposal to equip all 50 states with biosurveillance systems. In a speech delivered at the nearby Masonic temple, Bush compared the RODS system to a modern "DEW" line (referring to the Cold War ballistic missile early warning system).

The principles and practices of biosurveillance, a new interdisciplinary science, were defined and described in the Handbook of Biosurveillance, edited by Michael Wagner, Andrew Moore and Ron Aryel, and published in 2006. Biosurveillance is the science of real-time disease outbreak detection. Its principles apply to both natural and man-made epidemics (bioterrorism).

Data which potentially could assist in early detection of a bioterrorism event include many categories of information. Health-related data such as that from hospital computer systems, clinical laboratories, electronic health record systems, medical examiner record-keeping systems, 911 call center computers, and veterinary medical record systems could be of help; researchers are also considering the utility of data generated by ranching and feedlot operations, food processors, drinking water systems, school attendance recording, and physiologic monitors, among others. Intuitively, one would expect systems which collect more than one type of data to be more useful than systems which collect only one type of information (such as single-purpose laboratory or 911 call-center based systems), and be less prone to false alarms, and this appears to be the case.

In Europe, disease surveillance is beginning to be organized on the continent-wide scale needed to track a biological emergency. The system not only monitors infected persons, but attempts to discern the origin of the outbreak.

Researchers are experimenting with devices to detect the existence of a threat:

 * Tiny electronic chips that would contain living nerve cells to warn of the presence of bacterial toxins (identification of broad range toxins)
 * Fiber-optic tubes lined with antibodies coupled to light-emitting molecules (identification of specific pathogens, such as anthrax, botulinum, ricin)

New research shows that ultraviolet avalanche photodiodes offer the high gain, reliability and robustness needed to detect anthrax and other bioterrorism agents in the air. The fabrication methods and device characteristics were described at the 50th Electronic Materials Conference in Santa Barbara on June 25, 2008. Details of the photodiodes were also published in the February 14, 2008 issue of the journal Electronics Letters and the November 2007 issue of the journal IEEE Photonics Technology Letters.

The United States Department of Defense conducts global biosurveillance through several programs, including the Global Emerging Infections Surveillance and Response System.

Response to bioterrorism incident or threat
Government agencies which would be called on to respond to a bioterrorism incident would include law enforcement, hazardous materials/decontamination units and emergency medical units. The US military has specialized units, which can respond to a bioterrorism event; among them are the United States Marine Corps' Chemical Biological Incident Response Force and the U.S. Army's 20th Support Command (CBRNE), which can detect, identify, and neutralize threats, and decontaminate victims exposed to bioterror agents. There are four hospitals capable of caring for anyone with an exposure to a BSL3 or BSL4 pathogen, the special clinical studies unit at National Institutes of Health is one of them. National Institutes of Health built a facility in April 2010. This unit has state of the art isolation capabilities with a unique airflow system. This unit is also being trained to care for patients who are ill due to a highly infectious pathogen outbreak, such as ebola. The doctors work closely with USAMRIID, NBACC and IRF. Special trainings take place regularly in order to maintain a high level of confidence to care for these patients.

Biodefense market
In 2015, global biodefense market was estimated at $9.8 billion. Experts correlated the large marketplace to an increase in government attention and support as a result of rising bioterrorism threats worldwide. Government's heightened interest is anticipated expand the industry into the foreseeable future. According to Medgadget.com, "Many government legislations like Project Bioshield offers nations with counter measures against chemical, radiological, nuclear and biological attack."

Project Bioshield offers accessible biological countermeasures targeting various strains of smallpox and anthrax. "Main goal of the project is creating funding authority to build next generation counter measures, make innovative research & development programs and create a body like FDA (Food & Drug Administration) that can effectively use treatments in case of emergencies." Increased funding, in addition to public health organizations' elevated consideration in biodefense technology investments, could trigger growth in the global biodefense market.

The global biodefense market is divided into geographical locations such as APAC, Latin America, Europe, MEA, and North America. The biodefense industry in North America lead the global industry by a large margin, making it the highest regional revenue share for 2015, contributing approximately $8.91 billion of revenue this year, due to immense funding and government reinforcements. The biodefense market in Europe is predicted to register a CAGR of 11.41% by the forecast timeline. The United Kingdom's Ministry of Defense granted $75.67 million designated for defense & civilian research, making it the highest regional industry share for 2012.

In 2016, Global Market Insights released a report covering the new trends in the biodefense market backed by detailed, scientific data. Industry leaders in biodefense market include the following corporations: Emergent Biosolutions, SIGA Technologies, Ichor Medical Systems Incorporation, PharmaAthene, Cleveland BioLabs Incorporation, Achaogen (bankrupt in 2019 ), Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Avertis, Xoma Corporation, Dynavax Technologies Incorporation, Elusys Therapeutics, DynPort Vaccine Company LLC, Bavarian Nordic and Nanotherapeutics Incorporation.

Legislation
During the 115th Congress in July 2018, four Members of Congress, both Republican and Democrat (Anna Eshoo, Susan Brooks, Frank Palone and Greg Walden) introduced biodefense legislation called the Pandemic and All Hazards Preparedness and Advancing Innovation Act (PAHPA) (H.R. 6378). The bill strengthens the federal government's preparedness to deal with a wide range of public health emergencies, whether created through an act of bioterrorism or occurring through a natural disaster. The bill reauthorizes funding to improve bioterrorism and other public health emergency preparedness and response activities such as the Hospital Preparedness Program, the Public Health Emergency Preparedness Cooperative Agreement, Project BioShield, and BARDA for the advanced research and development of medical countermeasures (MCMs).

H.R. 6378 has 24 cosponsors from both political parties. On September 25, 2018, the House of Representatives passed the bill.

Other sources

 * Department of Defense (2001). Report on Biological Warfare Defense Vaccine Research & Development Programs.  Retrieved 2005-02-25.
 * Institute of Medicine and National Research Council of the National Academies (2004). Giving Full Measure to Countermeasures: Addressing Problems in the DoD Program to Develop Medical Countermeasures Against Biological Warfare Agents. National Academy Press (Washington, D.C.).  ISBN 0-309-09153-5 (paperback).

title: Biodefense


text:
Emperor Juntoku

Emperor Juntoku (順徳天皇) (October 22, 1197 – October 7, 1242) was the 84th emperor of Japan, according to the traditional order of succession. His reign spanned the years from 1210 through 1221.

Genealogy
Before his ascension to the Chrysanthemum Throne, his personal name (his imina) was Morinari-shinnō (守成親王).

He was the third son of Emperor Go-Toba. His mother was Shigeko (重子), the daughter of Fujiwara Hanki (藤原範季)
 * Empress (chūgū): Kujō Fujiwara no Ritsushi (?) (九条（藤原）立子) later Higashiichijō-in (東一条院), Kujo Yoshitsune's daughter
 * Second daughter: Imperial Princess Taiko (諦子内親王; 1217–1243) later Gekgimon'in (明義門院)
 * Third son: Imperial Prince Kanenari (懐成親王) later Emperor Chūkyō
 * Lady-in-waiting: Toku-Naishi (督典侍), Fujiwara Norimitsu's Daughter
 * Fourth son: Prince Hikonari (彦成王; 1219–1286)
 * Sixth son: Imperial Prince Yoshimune (善統親王; 1233–1317)
 * Consort: Fujiwara Noriko (藤原位子), Bomon Nobukiyo's daughter
 * First Daughter: Imperial Princess Jōko (穠子内親王; 1216-1279）later Eianmon'in（永安門院)
 * Consort: Fujiwara Kiyotaka's Daughter
 * First Son: Imperial Prince Priest Sonkaku (尊覚法親王; 1215–1264)
 * Second Son: Imperial Prince Priest Kaku'e (覚恵法親王; b.1217)
 * Fifth son: Prince Iwakura no Miya Tadanari (岩倉宮忠成王; 1222–1279)
 * Consort: Saishō-no-Tsubone (宰相局), Priest's daughter
 * Son: Kangan Giin
 * Mother unknown:
 * Daughter: Princess Yoshiko (慶子女王; 1225-1286）
 * Daughter: Princess Tadako (忠子女王; 1232-1249）
 * Son: Prince Chitose (千歳宮; 1237-1254）

Events of Juntoku's life
Morinari-shinnō became Crown Prince in 1200. He was elevated to the throne after Emperor Go-Toba pressured Emperor Tsuchimikado into abdicating.

 * 1210 (Jōgen 1, 25th day of the 11th month): In the 12th year of Tsuchimikado-tennō's reign (土御門天皇十二年), the emperor abdicated; and the succession (senso) was received by his younger brother, the second son of the former-Emperor Go-Toba. Shortly thereafter, Emperor Juntoku is said to have acceded to the throne (sokui).

In actuality, Emperor Go-Toba wielded effective power as a cloistered emperor during the years of Juntoku's reign.

In 1221, he was forced to abdicate because of his participation in Go-Toba's unsuccessful attempt to displace the Kamakura bakufu with re-asserted Imperial power. This political and military struggle was called the Jōkyū War or the Jōkyū Incident (Jōkyū-no ran).

After the Jōkyū-no ran, Juntoku was sent into exile on Sado Island (佐渡島 or 佐渡ヶ島, both Sadogashima), where he remained until his death in 1242.

This emperor is known posthumously as Sado-no In (佐渡院) because his last years were spent at Sado. He was buried in a mausoleum, the Mano Goryo,  on Sado's west coast. Juntoku's official Imperial tomb (misasagi) is in Kyoto.

Juntoku was tutored in poetry by Fujiwara no Sadaie, who was also known as Teika. One of the emperor's poems was selected for inclusion in what became a well-known anthology, the Ogura Hyakunin Isshu. This literary legacy in Teika's collection of poems has accorded Juntoku a continuing popular prominence beyond the scope of his other lifetime achievements. The poets and poems of the Hyakunin isshu form the basis for a card game (uta karuta) which is still widely played today.

Kugyō
Kugyō (公卿) is a collective term for the very few most powerful men attached to the court of the Emperor of Japan in pre-Meiji eras.

In general, this elite group included only three to four men at a time. These were hereditary courtiers whose experience and background would have brought them to the pinnacle of a life's career. During juntoku's reign, this apex of the Daijō-kan included:
 * Kampaku, Konoe Iezane, d. 1242.
 * Sadaijin
 * Udaijin
 * Nadaijin
 * Dainagon

Eras of Juntoku's reign
The years of Juntoku's reign are more specifically identified by more than one era name or nengō.
 * Jōgen      (1207–1211)
 * Kenryaku         (1211–1213)
 * Kempō (1213–1219)
 * Jōkyū      (1219–1222)

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

title: Emperor Juntoku


text:
Indifference curve

In economics, an indifference curve connects points on a graph representing different quantities of two goods, points between which a consumer is indifferent. That is, any combinations of two products indicated by the curve will provide the consumer with equal levels of utility, and the consumer has no preference for one combination or bundle of goods over a different combination on the same curve. One can also refer to each point on the indifference curve as rendering the same level of utility (satisfaction) for the consumer. In other words, an indifference curve is the locus of various points showing different combinations of two goods providing equal utility to the consumer. Utility is then a device to represent preferences rather than something from which preferences come. The main use of indifference curves is in the representation of potentially observable demand patterns for individual consumers over commodity bundles.

There are infinitely many indifference curves: one passes through each combination. A collection of (selected) indifference curves, illustrated graphically, is referred to as an indifference map. The slope of an indifference curve is called the MRS (marginal rate of substitution), and it indicates how much of good y must be sacrificed to keep the utility constant if good x is increased by one unit. Given a utility function u(x,y), to calculate the MRS, one takes the partial derivative of the function u with respect to good x and divide it by the partial derivative of the function u with respect to good y. If the marginal rate of substitution is diminishing along an indifference curve, that is the magnitude of the slope is decreasing or becoming less steep, then the preference is convex.

History
The theory of indifference curves was developed by Francis Ysidro Edgeworth, who explained in his 1881 book the mathematics needed for their drawing; later on, Vilfredo Pareto was the first author to actually draw these curves, in his 1906 book. The theory can be derived from William Stanley Jevons' ordinal utility theory, which posits that individuals can always rank any consumption bundles by order of preference.

Map and properties
A graph of indifference curves for several utility levels of an individual consumer is called an indifference map. Points yielding different utility levels are each associated with distinct indifference curves and these indifference curves on the indifference map are like contour lines on a topographical graph. Each point on the curve represents the same elevation. If you move "off" an indifference curve traveling in a northeast direction (assuming positive marginal utility for the goods) you are essentially climbing a mound of utility. The higher you go the greater the level of utility. The non-satiation requirement means that you will never reach the "top," or a "bliss point," a consumption bundle that is preferred to all others.

Indifference curves are typically represented to be:
 * 1) Defined only in the non-negative quadrant of commodity quantities (i.e. the possibility of having negative quantities of any good is ignored).
 * 2) Negatively sloped. That is, as quantity consumed of one good (X) increases, total satisfaction would increase if not offset by a decrease in the quantity consumed of the other good (Y). Equivalently, satiation, such that more of either good (or both) is equally preferred to no increase, is excluded. (If utility U = f(x, y), U, in the third dimension, does not have a local maximum for any x and y values.)  The negative slope of the indifference curve reflects the assumption of the monotonicity of consumer's preferences, which generates monotonically increasing utility functions, and the assumption of non-satiation (marginal utility for all goods is always positive); an upward sloping indifference curve would imply that a consumer is indifferent between a bundle A and another bundle B because they lie on the same indifference curve, even in the case in which the quantity of both goods in bundle B is higher. Because of monotonicity of preferences and non-satiation, a bundle with more of both goods must be preferred to one with less of both, thus the first bundle must yield a higher utility, and lie on a different indifference curve at a higher utility level. The negative slope of the indifference curve implies that the marginal rate of substitution is always positive;
 * 3) Complete, such that all points on an indifference curve are ranked equally preferred and ranked either more or less preferred than every other point not on the curve. So, with (2), no two curves can intersect (otherwise non-satiation would be violated since the point(s) of intersection would have equal utility).
 * 4) Transitive with respect to points on distinct indifference curves. That is, if each point on I2 is (strictly) preferred to each point on I1, and each point on I3 is preferred to each point on I2, each point on I3 is preferred to each point on I1. A negative slope and transitivity exclude indifference curves crossing, since straight lines from the origin on both sides of where they crossed would give opposite and intransitive preference rankings.
 * 5) (Strictly) convex. With (2), convex preferences imply that the indifference curves cannot be concave to the origin, i.e. they will either be straight lines or bulge toward the origin of the indifference curve. If the latter is the case, then as a consumer decreases consumption of one good in successive units, successively larger doses of the other good are required to keep satisfaction unchanged.

Assumptions of consumer preference theory

 * Preferences are complete. The consumer has ranked all available alternative combinations of commodities in terms of the satisfaction they provide him.
 * Assume that there are two consumption bundles A and B each containing two commodities x and y. A consumer can unambiguously determine that one and only one of the following is the case:
 * A is preferred to B, formally written as A p B
 * B is preferred to A, formally written as B p A
 * A is indifferent to B, formally written as A I B
 * This axiom precludes the possibility that the consumer cannot decide, It assumes that a consumer is able to make this comparison with respect to every conceivable bundle of goods.

 * Preferences are reflexive
 * This means that if A and B are identical in all respects the consumer will recognize this fact and be indifferent in comparing A and B
 * A = B ⇒ A I B

 * Preferences are transitive
 * If A p B and B p C, then A p C.
 * Also if A I B and B I C, then A I C.
 * This is a consistency assumption.

 * Preferences are continuous
 * If A is preferred to B and C is sufficiently close to B then A is preferred to C.
 * A p B and C → B ⇒ A p C.
 * "Continuous" means infinitely divisible - just like there are infinitely many numbers between 1 and 2 all bundles are infinitely divisible. This assumption makes indifference curves continuous.

 * Preferences exhibit strong monotonicity
 * If A has more of both x and y than B, then A is preferred to B.
 * This assumption is commonly called the "more is better" assumption.
 * An alternative version of this assumption requires that if A and B have the same quantity of one good, but A has more of the other, then A is preferred to B.

It also implies that the commodities are good rather than bad. Examples of bad commodities can be disease, pollution etc. because we always desire less of such things.
 * Indifference curves exhibit diminishing marginal rates of substitution
 * The marginal rate of substitution tells how much 'y' a person is willing to sacrifice to get one more unit of 'x'.
 * This assumption assures that indifference curves are smooth and convex to the origin.
 * This assumption also set the stage for using techniques of constrained optimization because the shape of the curve assures that the first derivative is negative and the second is positive.
 * Another name for this assumption is the substitution assumption. It is the most critical assumption of consumer theory: Consumers are willing to give up or trade-off some of one good to get more of another. The fundamental assertion is that there is a maximum amount that "a consumer will give up, of one commodity, to get one unit of another good, in that amount which will leave the consumer indifferent between the new and old situations" The negative slope of  the indifference curves represents the willingness of the consumer to make a trade off.

Application

Consumer theory uses indifference curves and budget constraints to generate consumer demand curves. For a single consumer, this is a relatively simple process. First, let one good be an example market e.g., carrots, and let the other be a composite of all other goods. Budget constraints give a straight line on the indifference map showing all the possible distributions between the two goods; the point of maximum utility is then the point at which an indifference curve is tangent to the budget line (illustrated). This follows from common sense: if the market values a good more than the household, the household will sell it; if the market values a good less than the household, the household will buy it. The process then continues until the market's and household's marginal rates of substitution are equal. Now, if the price of carrots were to change, and the price of all other goods were to remain constant, the gradient of the budget line would also change, leading to a different point of tangency and a different quantity demanded. These price / quantity combinations can then be used to deduce a full demand curve. A line connecting all points of tangency between the indifference curve and the budget constraint is called the expansion path.

Examples of indifference curves
In Figure 1, the consumer would rather be on I3 than I2, and would rather be on I2 than I1, but does not care where he/she is on a given indifference curve. The slope of an indifference curve (in absolute value), known by economists as the marginal rate of substitution, shows the rate at which consumers are willing to give up one good in exchange for more of the other good. For most goods the marginal rate of substitution is not constant so their indifference curves are curved. The curves are convex to the origin, describing the negative substitution effect. As price rises for a fixed money income, the consumer seeks the less expensive substitute at a lower indifference curve. The substitution effect is reinforced through the income effect of lower real income (Beattie-LaFrance). An example of a utility function that generates indifference curves of this kind is the Cobb–Douglas function $$\scriptstyle U\left(x,y\right)=x^\alpha y^{1-\alpha }, 0 \leq \alpha \leq 1$$. The negative slope of the indifference curve incorporates the willingness of the consumer to make trade offs.

If two goods are perfect substitutes then the indifference curves will have a constant slope since the consumer would be willing to switch between at a fixed ratio. The marginal rate of substitution between perfect substitutes is likewise constant. An example of a utility function that is associated with indifference curves like these would be $$\scriptstyle U\left(x,y\right)=\alpha x + \beta y$$.

If two goods are perfect complements then the indifference curves will be L-shaped. Examples of perfect complements include left shoes compared to right shoes: the consumer is no better off having several right shoes if she has only one left shoe - additional right shoes have zero marginal utility without more left shoes, so bundles of goods differing only in the number of right shoes they include - however many - are equally preferred. The marginal rate of substitution is either zero or infinite. An example of the type of utility function that has an indifference map like that above is the Leontief function: $$\scriptstyle U\left(x,y\right)= \min \{ \alpha x, \beta y \}$$.

The different shapes of the curves imply different responses to a change in price as shown from demand analysis in consumer theory. The results will only be stated here. A price-budget-line change that kept a consumer in equilibrium on the same indifference curve:
 * in Fig. 1 would reduce quantity demanded of a good smoothly as price rose relatively for that good.
 * in Fig. 2 would have either no effect on quantity demanded of either good (at one end of the budget constraint) or would change quantity demanded from one end of the budget constraint to the other.
 * in Fig. 3 would have no effect on equilibrium quantities demanded, since the budget line would rotate around the corner of the indifference curve.

Preference relations and utility
Choice theory formally represents consumers by a preference relation, and use this representation to derive indifference curves showing combinations of equal preference to the consumer.

Preference relations
Let
 * $$A\;$$ be a set of mutually exclusive alternatives among which a consumer can choose.
 * $$a\;$$ and $$b\;$$ be generic elements of $$A\;$$.

In the language of the example above, the set $$A\;$$ is made of combinations of apples and bananas. The symbol $$a\;$$ is one such combination, such as 1 apple and 4 bananas and $$b\;$$ is another combination such as 2 apples and 2 bananas.

A preference relation, denoted $$\succeq$$, is a binary relation define on the set $$A\;$$.

The statement
 * $$a\succeq b\;$$

is described as '$$a\;$$ is weakly preferred to $$b\;$$.' That is, $$a\;$$ is at least as good as $$b\;$$ (in preference satisfaction).

The statement
 * $$a\sim b\;$$

is described as '$$a\;$$ is weakly preferred to $$b\;$$, and $$b\;$$ is weakly preferred to $$a\;$$.' That is, one is indifferent to the choice of $$a\;$$ or $$b\;$$, meaning not that they are unwanted but that they are equally good in satisfying preferences.

The statement
 * $$a\succ b\;$$

is described as '$$a\;$$ is weakly preferred to $$b\;$$, but $$b\;$$ is not weakly preferred to $$a\;$$.' One says that '$$a\;$$ is strictly preferred to $$b\;$$.'

The preference relation $$\succeq$$ is complete if all pairs $$a,b\;$$ can be ranked. The relation is a transitive relation if whenever $$a\succeq b\;$$ and $$b\succeq c,\;$$ then $$a\succeq c\;$$.

For any element $$a \in A\;$$, the corresponding indifference curve, $$\mathcal{C}_a$$ is made up of all elements of $$A\;$$ which are indifferent to $$a$$. Formally,

$$\mathcal{C}_a=\{b \in A:b \sim a\}$$.

Formal link to utility theory
In the example above, an element $$a\;$$ of the set $$A\;$$ is made of two numbers: The number of apples, call it $$x,\;$$ and the number of bananas, call it $$y.\;$$

In utility theory, the utility function of an agent is a function that ranks all pairs of consumption bundles by order of preference (completeness) such that any set of three or more bundles forms a transitive relation. This means that for each bundle $$\left(x,y\right)$$ there is a unique relation, $$U\left(x,y\right)$$, representing the utility (satisfaction) relation associated with $$\left(x,y\right)$$. The relation $$\left(x,y\right)\to U\left(x,y\right)$$ is called the utility function. The range of the function is a set of real numbers. The actual values of the function have no importance. Only the ranking of those values has content for the theory. More precisely, if $$U(x,y)\geq U(x',y')$$, then the bundle $$\left(x,y\right)$$ is described as at least as good as the bundle $$\left(x',y'\right)$$. If $$U\left(x,y\right)>U\left(x',y'\right)$$, the bundle $$\left(x,y\right)$$ is described as strictly preferred to the bundle $$\left(x',y'\right)$$.

Consider a particular bundle $$\left(x_0,y_0\right)$$ and take the total derivative of $$U\left(x,y\right)$$ about this point:

 * $$dU\left(x_0,y_0\right)=U_1\left(x_0,y_0\right)dx+U_2\left(x_0,y_0\right)dy $$

or, without loss of generality,

 * $$\frac{dU\left(x_0,y_0\right)}{dx}= U_1(x_0,y_0).1+ U_2(x_0,y_0)\frac{dy}{dx}$$ (Eq. 1)

where $$U_1\left(x,y\right)$$ is the partial derivative of $$U\left(x,y\right)$$ with respect to its first argument, evaluated at $$\left(x,y\right)$$. (Likewise for $$U_2\left(x,y\right).$$)

The indifference curve through $$\left(x_0,y_0\right)$$ must deliver at each bundle on the curve the same utility level as bundle $$\left(x_0,y_0\right)$$. That is, when preferences are represented by a utility function, the indifference curves are the level curves of the utility function. Therefore, if one is to change the quantity of $$x\,$$ by $$dx\,$$, without moving off the indifference curve, one must also change the quantity of $$y\,$$ by an amount $$dy\,$$ such that, in the end, there is no change in U:
 * $$\frac{dU\left(x_0,y_0\right)}{dx}= 0$$, or, substituting 0 into (Eq. 1) above to solve for dy/dx:
 * $$\frac{dU\left(x_0,y_0\right)}{dx} = 0\Leftrightarrow\frac{dy}{dx}=-\frac{U_1(x_0,y_0)}{U_2(x_0,y_0)}$$.

Thus, the ratio of marginal utilities gives the absolute value of the slope of the indifference curve at point $$\left(x_0,y_0\right)$$. This ratio is called the marginal rate of substitution between $$x\,$$ and $$y\,$$.

Linear utility
If the utility function is of the form $$U\left(x,y\right)=\alpha x+\beta y$$ then the marginal utility of $$x\,$$ is $$U_1\left(x,y\right)=\alpha$$ and the marginal utility of $$y\,$$ is $$U_2\left(x,y\right)=\beta$$. The slope of the indifference curve is, therefore,
 * $$\frac{dx}{dy}=-\frac{\beta}{\alpha}.$$

Observe that the slope does not depend on $$x\,$$ or $$y\,$$: the indifference curves are straight lines.

Cobb–Douglas utility
A class of utility functions known as Cobb-Douglas utility functions are very commonly used in economics for two reasons:

1. They represent ‘well-behaved’ preferences, such as more is better and preference for variety.

2. They are very flexible and can be adjusted to fit real-world data very easily. If the utility function is of the form $$U\left(x,y\right)=x^\alpha y^{1-\alpha}$$ the marginal utility of $$x\,$$ is $$U_1\left(x,y\right)=\alpha \left(x/y\right)^{\alpha-1}$$ and the marginal utility of $$y\,$$ is $$U_2\left(x,y\right)=(1-\alpha) \left(x/y\right)^{\alpha}$$.Where $$\alpha<1$$. The slope of the indifference curve, and therefore the negative of the marginal rate of substitution, is then
 * $$\frac{dx}{dy}=-\frac{1-\alpha}{\alpha}\left(\frac{x}{y}\right).$$

CES utility
A general CES (Constant Elasticity of Substitution) form is
 * $$U(x,y)=\left(\alpha x^\rho +(1-\alpha)y^\rho\right)^{1/\rho}$$

where $$\alpha\in(0,1)$$ and $$\rho\leq 1$$. (The Cobb–Douglas is a special case of the CES utility, with $$\rho\rightarrow 0\,$$.) The marginal utilities are given by
 * $$U_1(x,y)=\alpha \left(\alpha x^\rho +(1-\alpha)y^\rho\right)^{\left(1/\rho\right)-1} x^{\rho-1}$$

and
 * $$U_2(x,y)=(1-\alpha)\left(\alpha x^\rho +(1-\alpha)y^\rho\right)^{\left(1/\rho\right)-1} y^{\rho-1}.$$

Therefore, along an indifference curve,
 * $$\frac{dx}{dy}=-\frac{1-\alpha}{\alpha}\left(\frac{x}{y}\right)^{1-\rho}.$$

These examples might be useful for modelling individual or aggregate demand.

Biology
As used in biology, the indifference curve is a model for how animals 'decide' whether to perform a particular behavior, based on changes in two variables which can increase in intensity, one along the x-axis and the other along the y-axis. For example, the x-axis may measure the quantity of food available while the y-axis measures the risk involved in obtaining it. The indifference curve is drawn to predict the animal's behavior at various levels of risk and food availability.

Criticisms
Indifference curves inherit the criticisms directed at utility more generally.

Herbert Hovenkamp (1991) has argued that the presence of an endowment effect has significant implications for law and economics, particularly in regard to welfare economics. He argues that the presence of an endowment effect indicates that a person has no indifference curve (see however Hanemann, 1991 ) rendering the neoclassical tools of welfare analysis useless, concluding that courts should instead use WTA as a measure of value. Fischel (1995) however, raises the counterpoint that using WTA as a measure of value would deter the development of a nation's infrastructure and economic growth.

Austrian economist Murray Rothbard criticised the indifference curve as "never by definition exhibited in action, in actual exchanges, and is therefore unknowable and objectively meaningless."

title: Indifference curve


text:
Chukyo

Chukyo can refer to:

the city of Nagoya (中京 Chūkyō). Various things are named after the city:
 * Emperor Chūkyō (1218-1234), 85th emperor of Japan

 * Chūkyō Industrial Area
 * Chūkyō Metropolitan Area
 * Chūkyō Television Broadcasting
 * Chukyo University
 * Chukyo Racecourse

title: Chukyo


text:
Emperor Go-Horikawa

Emperor Go-Horikawa (後堀河天皇) (March 22, 1212 – August 31, 1234) was the 86th emperor of Japan, according to the traditional order of succession. His reign spanned the years from 1221 through 1232.

This 13th-century sovereign was named after the 10th-century Emperor Horikawa and go- (後), translates literally as "later"; and thus, he is sometimes called the "Later Emperor Horikawa". The Japanese word go has also been translated to mean the "second one;" and in some older sources, this emperor may be identified as "Horikawa, the second," or as "Horikawa II."

Genealogy
Before his ascension to the Chrysanthemum Throne, his personal name (his imina) was Yutahito-shinnō (茂仁親王), also known as Motsihito-shinnō. The third son of Imperial Prince Morisada (守貞親王) (Go-Takakura-in, 後高倉院), the second son of Emperor Takakura.

 * Empress (Jingū): Sanjō (Fujiwara) Ariuko (三条（藤原）有子) later Ankimon’in (安喜門院), Sanjo Kinfusa's daughter
 * Empress (Chūgū): Konoe (Fujiwara) Nagako (近衛（藤原）長子) Later Takatsukasa’in (鷹司院), Konoe Iezane’s daughter.
 * Empress (Chūgū): Kujō (Fujiwara) Shunshi (九条（藤原）竴子) Later Sōhekimon’in (藻璧門院), Kujo Michiie’s daughter
 * First son: Imperial Prince Mitsuhito (秀仁親王) later Emperor Shijō
 * Fourth daughter: Imperial Princess Hoshi (暤子内親王; 1232-1237)
 * Second Son: (1233)
 * Lady-in-waiting: Betto-Naishi (別当典侍), Jimyōin Ieyuki’s daughter
 * First daughter: Imperial Princess Kishi (暉子内親王; 1228-1300) later Muromachi-in (室町院)
 * Second daughter: Imperial Princess Taishi (体子内親王; 1231-1302) later Shinsenmon’in (神仙門院)
 * Lady-in-waiting: Dainagon-no-Tsubone (大納言局), Fujiwara Kaneyoshi’s daughter
 * Third daughter: Imperial Princess Akiko (昱子内親王; 1231-1246)

Events of Go-Horikawa's life
In 1221, because of the Jōkyū Incident, an unsuccessful attempt by Emperor Go-Toba to seize real power, the Kamakura shogunate completely excluded those of the imperial family descended from Emperor Go-Toba from the Chrysanthemum throne, thus forcing Emperor Chūkyō to abdicate. After the Genpei War, he, as the grandson of the late Emperor Takakura, who was also a nephew of the then-exiled Retired Emperor Go-Toba, and Chūkyō's first cousin, was enthroned as Go-Horikawa. He ruled from July 29, 1221 to October 26 (?), 1232.

 * 1221 (Jōkyū 3, 9th day of the 7th month): In the 1st year of what is now considered to have been Chūkyō-tennō's reign (仲恭天皇一年), he abruptly abdicated without designating an heir; and contemporary scholars then construed that the succession (‘‘senso’’) was received by a grandson of former Emperor Go-Toba.
 * 1221 (Jōkyū 3, 1st day of the 12th month): Emperor Go-Horikawa acceded to the throne (‘‘sokui’’).

As Go-Horikawa was only ten-years-old at this time, his father Imperial Prince Morisada acted as cloistered emperor under the name Go-Takakura-in.

In 1232, he began his own cloistered rule, abdicating to his 1-year-old son, Emperor Shijō. However, he had a weak constitution, and his cloistered rule lasted just under two years before he died.

Emperor Go-Horikawa's Imperial tomb (misasagi) is at Sennyū-ji in the Nochi no Tsukinowa no Higashiyama no misasagi (後月輪東山陵).

Kugyō
Kugyō (公卿) is a collective term for the very few most powerful men attached to the court of the Emperor of Japan in pre-Meiji eras.

In general, this elite group included only three to four men at a time. These were hereditary courtiers whose experience and background would have brought them to the pinnacle of a life's career. During Go-Horikawa's reign, this apex of the Daijō-kan included:
 * Sesshō, Konoe Iezane, d. 1242.
 * Sadaijin, Konoe Iemichi, 1204–1224.
 * Udaijin, Fujiwara Kintsugu, 1117–1227.
 * Naidaijin, Saionji Kintsune, 1171–1224.
 * Dainagon

Eras of Go-Horikawa's reign
The years of Go-Horikawa's reign are more specifically identified by more than one era name or nengō.
 * Jōkyū     (1219–1222 CE)
 * Jōō (1222–1224 CE)
 * Gennin          (1224–1225 CE)
 * Karoku          (1225–1227 CE)
 * Antei           (1227–1229 CE)
 * Kangi           (1229–1232 CE)

title: Emperor Go-Horikawa


text:
Shijō

Shijō (四条 or 四條) literally means star in Japanese. It may refer to:

Art

 * Shijō school, a Japanese school of painting

Names

 * Emperor Shijō, the 87th Emperor of Japan,
 * a Japanese surname
 * Shijō family (四条家)—a Japanese kuge family descended from the Fujiwara Hokke (藤原北家)

Places

 * Shijō Street, one of east–west streets in the ancient capital of Heian-kyō, present-day Kyoto
 * Train stations
 * Shijō Station, a train station on the Kyoto Municipal Subway Karasuma Line in Shimogyō-ku, Kyoto
 * Gion-Shijō Station, a train station on the Keihan Main Line in Higashiyama-ku, Kyoto, formerly known as Shijō Station

title: Shijō


text:
Emperor Go-Saga

Emperor Go-Saga (後嵯峨天皇) was the 88th emperor of Japan, according to the traditional order of succession. This reign spanned the years 1242 through 1246.

This 13th-century sovereign was named after the 8th-century Emperor Saga and go- (後), translates literally as "later"; and thus, he is sometimes called the "Later Emperor Saga". The Japanese word go has also been translated to mean the "second one;" and in some older sources, this emperor may be identified as "Saga, the second", or as "Saga II".

Genealogy
Before his ascension to the Chrysanthemum Throne, his personal name (his imina) was Kunihito-shinnō (邦仁親王).

He was the second son of Emperor Tsuchimikado, and second cousin of his predecessor Emperor Shijō.

 * Empress: Saionji (Fujiwara) no Yoshi-ko (西園寺（藤原）姞子) Later Ōmiya-in (大宮院), Saionji Saneuji’s daughter
 * Fourth son: Imperial Prince Hisahito (久仁親王) later Emperor Go-Fukakusa
 * First daughter: Imperial Princess Osako (綜子内親王; 1247-1269）later Gekkamon-in (月華門院)
 * Seventh son: Imperial Prince Tsunehito (恒仁親王) later Emperor Kameyama
 * Eleventh son: Imperial Prince Masataka (雅尊親王; 1254-1256)
 * Thirteenth son: Imperial Prince Sadayoshi (貞良親王; 1256-1260)
 * Princess (b.1260)

 * Consort: Imperial Princess Taishi (体子内親王; 1231-1302) later Shinsenmon’in (神仙門院), Emperor Go-Horikawa’s daughter
 * Princess (d.1281)

 * Court Lady: Saionji (Fujiwara) Kimiko (西園寺（藤原）公子), Saionji Kintsune's daughter
 * Son: Imperial Prince Priest jijo (慈助法親王; 1254-1295）
 * Daughter: Imperial Princess Etsuko (悦子内親王; 1260-1332）later Enseimon’in (延政門院)

 * Lady-in-waiting: Taira no Muneko (平棟子), Taira no Munemoto's daughter
 * Third son: Imperial Prince Munetaka (宗尊親王)

 * Handmaid?: Fujiwara Hiroko (藤原博子), Fujiwara Takatoki's daughter
 * Eighth son: Imperial Prince Priest Kakujo (覚助法親王; 1247-1336)
 * Princess
 * Sixth daughter: Imperial Princess Ekishi (懌子内親王; 1262-1294) later Gojo’in (五条院)

 * Court Lady: Fujiwara Fujiko (藤原藤子), Shijo Takahira's daughter
 * Son: Imperial Prince Priest Saijo (最助法親王; 1253-1293）

 * Court Lady: Mikushige-dono (御匣殿), Sanjo Kinfusa's daughter
 * Son: Imperial Prince Priest Chujo (忠助法親王; d.1290)
 * Sixth Son: Imperial Prince Priest Shōjo (性助法親王; 1247-1282）

 * Court Lady: Anegakoji Saneyo's daughter
 * Son: Imperial Prince Priest Jōjo (浄助法親王; 1253-1280）

 * Court Lady: Emontoku-no-tsubone (右衛門督局), Ichijo Yoshiyasu's daughter
 * Son: Imperial Prince Priest Enjo (円助法親王; 1236-1282）

 * Court Lady: Nijo-no-Tsubone (二条局), Fujiwara Toshimori's daughter
 * Second Daughter: Imperial Princess Yasuko (愷子内親王; 1249-1284）

 * Court Lady: Ichijo-dono-no-tsubone (一条殿局), Fujiwara no Kanefusa’s daughter
 * Son: Imperial Prince Priest Nin’e (仁恵法親王; 1244-1298）

 * Court Lady: Dainagon-no-Tsubone (大納言局), Nakanoin Michikata's daughter
 * Prince (1243)

 * Court Lady: Kujō Yoshihira's daughter

 * Court Lady: Minamoto no Yorimasa's granddaughter
 * Priest Shojo

 * Court Lady: Fujiwara clan's descendant
 * Second Son: Kōhō Ken'nichi (高峰顕日; 1241-1316)

Events of Go-Saga's life
He ruled from 21 February 1242, to 16 February 1246.

When Emperor Tsuchimikado moved to Tosa Province (on Shikoku), he was raised by his mother's side of the family.

Because of the sudden death of Emperor Shijō at the age of 10, the question of succession arose. Because the expectations of the court nobility and the Bakufu conflicted, the issue was bitterly contested. Kujō Michiie and the court nobility supported Prince Tadanari (忠成王), a son of Retired Emperor Juntoku, but the shikken Hōjō Yasutoki was opposed to the sons of Juntoku because of his involvement in the Jōkyū War. Michiie instead supported Tsuchimikado's son Prince Kunihito as a neutral figure for Emperor. During these negotiations, there was a vacancy on the throne of 11 days.

 * 11 February 1242 (Ninji 3, 10th day of the 1st month): In the 10th year of Shijō-tennō 's reign (四条天皇10年), the emperor died suddenly; and despite a dispute over who should follow him as sovereign, contemporary scholars then construed that the succession (senso) was received by the second son of former Emperor Tsuchimikado.
 * 19 April 1242 (Ninji 3, 18th day of the 3rd month): Emperor Go-Saga is said to have acceded to the throne (sokui).

In 1242, Prince Kunihito became emperor. In 1246 he abdicated to his son, Emperor Go-Fukakusa, beginning his reign as cloistered emperor. In 1259, he compelled Emperor Go-Fukakusa to abdicate to his younger brother, Emperor Kameyama. Imperial Prince Munetaka became shōgun instead of the Hōjō regents. Henceforth, the shōguns of the Kamakura Bakufu came from the imperial house. Still, the Hōjō regents increased their control of the shogunate, setting up the system of rule by regents.

The descendants of his two sons contested the throne between them, forming into two lines, the Jimyōin-tō (Go-Fukakusa's descendants) and the Daikakuji-tō (Kameyama's descendants). Their lines would eventually lead to the split between the Northern and Southern Courts.

In 1272, Go-Saga died.

Go-Saga's final resting place is designated as an Imperial mausoleum (misasagi) at Saga no minami no Misasagi at Tenryū-ji in Kyoto.

Kugyō
Kugyō (公卿) is a collective term for the very few most powerful men attached to the court of the Emperor of Japan in pre-Meiji eras. Even during those years in which the court's actual influence outside the palace walls was minimal, the hierarchic organization persisted.

In general, this elite group included only three to four men at a time. These were hereditary courtiers whose experience and background would have brought them to the pinnacle of a life's career. During Go-Saga's reign, this apex of the Daijō-kan included:
 * Kampaku, Konoe Kanetsune, 1242
 * Kampaku, Nijō Yoshizane, 1242–1246
 * Kampaku, Ichijō Sanetsune, 1246
 * Sadaijin
 * Udaijin
 * Nadaijin
 * Dainagon

Eras of Go-Saga's reign
The years of Go-saga's reign are more specifically identified by more than one era name or nengō.
 * Ninji  (1240–1243)
 * Kangen (1243–1247)

title: Emperor Go-Saga


text:
Emperor Go-Fukakusa

Emperor Go-Fukakusa (後深草天皇) was the 89th emperor of Japan, according to the traditional order of succession. This reign spanned the years 1246 through 1260.

This 13th-century sovereign was named after the 9th-century Emperor Ninmyō and go- (後), translates literally as "later", and thus he could be called the "Later Emperor Fukakusa". The Japanese word go has also been translated to mean the "second one"; and in some older sources, this emperor may be identified as "Fukakusa, the second", or as "Fukakusa II".

Name
Before his ascension to the Chrysanthemum Throne, his personal name (his imina) was Hisahito (久仁).

Although the Roman-alphabet spelling of the name of this 13th-century emperor is the same as that of the personal name of a current member of the Imperial family, the kanji are different:
 * Emperor Go-Fukakusa, formerly Prince Hisahito (久仁)
 * Prince Hisahito of Akishino (悠仁)

He was the second son of Emperor Go-Saga.

Issue

 * Empress: Saionji (Fujiwara) Kimiko (西園寺（藤原）公子) later Higashinijō‘in (東二条院), Saionji Saneuji's daughter
 * Second daughter: Imperial Princess Takako (貴子内親王; 1262–1273)
 * Daughter (1265-1266)
 * Third daughter: Imperial Princess Reishi (姈子内親王; 1270–1307) later Yūgimon'in (遊義門院), married Emperor Go-Uda
 * Consort: Tōin (Fujiwara) Inshi (洞院（藤原）愔子) later Genkimon-in (玄輝門院; 1246–1329), Tōin Saneo's daughter
 * Fourth daughter: Imperial Princess Hisako (久子内親王; 1272–1346) later Eiyōmon'in (永陽門院)
 * Second son: Imperial Prince Hirohito (熈仁親王) later Emperor Fushimi
 * Third son: Imperial Prince Mitsuhito (満仁親王) later Imperial Prince Priest Shonnin (性仁法親王; 1267–1304)
 * Court Lady: Saionji (Fujiwara) Aiko (西園寺（藤原）相子), Saionji Kinsuke's daughter
 * Fifth daughter: Imperial Princess Hanako/Eiko/Akiko (瑛子内親王; 1288–1352) later Yōtokumon'in (陽徳門院)
 * Court Lady: Saionji (Fujiwara) Moriko (西園寺（藤原）成子), Saionji Kintsune's daughter
 * First Son: Imperial Prince Tsunehito (常仁親王; d. 1264)
 * Fourth Son: Imperial Prince Yukihito (幸仁親王; 1269–1272)
 * Court Lady: Sanjō (Fujiwara) Fusako (三条（藤原）房子), Sanjō Kinchika's daughter
 * Fifth son: Imperial Prince Priest Gyōkaku (行覚法親王; 1274–1293)
 * Seventh son: Imperial Prince Hisaaki (久明親王)
 * Ninth son: Imperial Prince Priest Sokaku (増覚法親王)
 * Sixth Daughter: Imperial Princess Eiko (永子内親王) later Shozenmon’in (章善門院; d. 1338)
 * Court Lady: Miyoshi Tadako (三善忠子; d. 1299), Miyoshi Yasuhira's daughter
 * Sixth Son: Imperial Prince Priest Shinsho (深性法親王; 1275–1299)
 * Court Lady: Bettō-Naishi (別当典侍), Takakura Shigemichi's daughter
 * Eighth Son: Imperial Prince Priest Kojo (恒助法親王; 1288–1310)
 * Court Lady: Lady Nijō, Minamoto no Masatada's daughter
 * Prince (1273–1274)
 * unknown
 * Prince (1263–1266)

Political significance
When Go-Fukakusa ascended to the throne in 1246 at the age of four, his father Go-Saga continued to rule from his position of Retired Emperor. In 1260 Go-Saga forced Go-Fukakusa to abdicate in favor of Kaneyama. Kaneyama's son was named Crown Prince (later known as Emperor Go-Uda). Go-Fukakusa appealed to the shogunal administration in the city of Kamakura and had his own son (later known as Emperor Fushimi) named next in line after Go-Uda. During the reign of Go-Uda, Go-Fukakusa exerted power from the office of Retired Emperor. An agreement was reached by which the next emperors would alternate between descendants of Go-Fukakusa and descendants of Kameyama.

Events of Go-Fukakusa's life
Hisahito-shinnō (imperial prince of a shinnōke) (久仁親王) formally became Go-Fukakusa-tennō (imperial emperor) (後深草天皇) at the age of 2; and Go-Saga began to exercise power as cloistered Emperor.

 * 16 February 1246 (Kangen 4, 29th day of the 1st month): In the 4th year of Go-Saga-tennō's reign (後嵯峨天皇四年), he abdicated; and the succession (senso) was received by his 4-year-old son. Shortly thereafter, Emperor Go-Fukakusa is said to have acceded to the throne (sokui).

In 1259, at the insistence of Retired Emperor Go-Saga, he abdicated at the age of 15 to his younger brother, who would become Emperor Kameyama.

After Emperor Go-Uda's ascension in 1260, Saionji Sanekane negotiated with the Bakufu, and succeeded in getting Emperor Go-Fukakusa's son Hirohito named as Crown Prince. In 1287, with his ascension as Emperor Fushimi, Go-Fukakusa's cloistered rule began.

In 1290, he entered the priesthood, retiring from the position of cloistered Emperor. But, with his seventh son, Imperial Prince Hisaaki becoming the 8th Kamakura shōgun among other things, the position of his Jimyōin-tō became strengthened.

In 1304, he died. He is enshrined with other emperors at the imperial tomb called Fukakusa no kita no misasagi (深草北陵) in Fushimi-ku, Kyoto.

Kugyō
Kugyō (公卿) is a collective term for the very few most powerful men attached to the court of the Emperor of Japan in pre-Meiji eras. Even during those years in which the court's actual influence outside the palace walls was minimal, the hierarchic organization persisted.

In general, this elite group included only three to four men at a time. These were hereditary courtiers whose experience and background would have brought them to the pinnacle of a life's career. During Go-Fukakusa's reign, this apex of the Daijō-kan included:
 * Sesshō, Ichijō Sanetsune, 1246–1247
 * Sesshō, Konoe Kanetsune, 1247–1252
 * Sesshō, Takatsukasa Kanehira, 1252–1254
 * Kampaku, Takatsukasa Kanehira, 1254–1261
 * Sadaijin
 * Udaijin
 * Nadaijin
 * Dainagon

Eras of Go-Fukakusa's reign
The years of Go-Fukakusa's reign are more specifically identified by more than one era name or nengō.
 * Kangen            (1243–1247)
 * Hōji         (1247–1249)
 * Kenchō     (1249–1257)
 * Kōgen (1256–1257)
 * Shōka       (1257–1259)
 * Shōgen     (1259–1260)

title: Emperor Go-Fukakusa


text:
Bartolomeu Dias

Bartolomeu Dias (c. 1450 – 29 May 1500) was a Portuguese mariner and explorer. In 1488, he became the first European navigator to round the southern tip of Africa and to demonstrate that the most effective southward route for ships lies in the open ocean, well to the west of the African coast. His discoveries effectively established the sea route between Europe and Asia.

Early life
Bartolomeu Dias was born around 1455. His family had a maritime background, and one of his ancestors, Dinis Dias, explored the African coast in the 1440s and discovered the Cap-Vert peninsula in today's Senegal in 1445.

Tracing his biography is complicated by the existence of several contemporary Portuguese seafarers with the same name. He was clearly a seaman of considerable experience and may have been trading for ivory along the Guinea coast as early as 1478.

In 1481, Dias accompanied an expedition, led by Diogo de Azambuja, to construct a fortress and trading post called São Jorge da Mina in the Gulf of Guinea.

Indirect evidence also points to his possible participation in Diogo Cão's first expedition (1482–1484) down the African coast to the Congo River.

Voyage around Africa
In 1486 he seems to have been a cavalier of the king’s household, and superintendent of the royal warehouses; on the 10th of October in this year he received an annuity of 6000 reis from King John for “services to come”; and some time after this (probably about July or August 1487, rather than July 1486, the traditional date) he left Lisbon with three ships to carry on the work of African exploration so greatly advanced by Diogo Cão). Dias was also charged with searching for Prester John, a legendary figure believed to be the powerful Christian ruler of a realm somewhere beyond Europe, possibly in the African interior. Dias was provided with two caravels of about 50 tons each (São Cristóvão and São Pantaleão) and a square-rigged supply ship captained by his brother Diogo. He recruited some of the leading pilots of the day, including Pêro de Alenquer and João de Santiago, who had previously sailed with Cão.

No contemporary documents detailing this historic voyage have been found as almost all maritime records were destroyed in the 1755 Lisbon earthquake and ensuing tsunami. Much of the available information comes from the sixteenth-century historian João de Barros, who wrote about the voyage some sixty years later.

The small fleet left Lisbon in or around July 1487. Like his predecessor, Cão, Dias carried a set of padrões, carved stone pillars to be used to mark his progress at important landfalls. Also on board were six Africans who had been kidnapped by Cão and taught Portuguese. Dias's plan was to drop them off at various points along the African coast so that they could testify to the grandeur of the Portuguese kingdom and make inquiries into the possible whereabouts of Prester John.

The expedition sailed directly to the Congo, and from there proceeded more carefully down the African coast, often naming notable geographic features after saints that were honored on the Catholic Church’s calendar. When they weighed anchor at what today is Porto Alexandre, Angola, Dias left the supply ship behind so that it could re-provision them later, on their return voyage. By December, Dias had passed the farthest point reached by Cão, and on 8 December 1487 he arrived at the Golfo da Conceição (modern-day Walvis Bay, Namibia). After making slow progress along the Namibian coast, the two ships turned southwest, away from land. Historians have debated whether this happened because they were driven offshore by a storm or because they were deliberately trying to find more favorable winds. Whatever its cause, the change of course brought them success: the ships traced a broad arc around the tip of Africa and, on 4 February 1488, after 30 days on the open ocean, they reached the continent’s southern cape and entered what would later become known as Mossel Bay.

The ships continued east for a time and confirmed that the coast gradually trended to the northeast. Dias realized that they had accomplished Portugal's long-sought goal: they had rounded the southern cape of Africa. Dias's expedition reached its furthest point on 12 March 1488, when it anchored at Kwaaihoek, near the mouth of the Boesmans River—where they erected the Padrão de São Gregório. By then, the crew had become restless and was urging Dias to turn around. Supplies were low and the ships were battered. Although Dias wanted to continue, the rest of the officers unanimously favored returning to Portugal, so he agreed to turn back. On their return voyage, they sailed close enough to Africa’s southwestern coast to encounter the Cape of Good Hope for the first time in May 1488. Tradition has it that Dias originally named it the Cape of Storms (Cabo das Tormentas) and that King John II later renamed it the Cape of Good Hope (Cabo da Boa Esperança) because it symbolized the opening of a sea route from west to east.

At the cape, Dias erected the last of their padrões and then headed northward. They reached their supply ship in July, after nine months of absence, and found that six of that ship’s nine crewmen had died in skirmishes with the natives. The vessel had become rotten with worms, so they unloaded the supplies they needed from it, and burnt it on the beach. Few details are known about the remainder of the voyage. The ships made stops at Príncipe, the Rio do Resgate (in present-day Liberia), and the Portuguese trading post of São Jorge da Mina. Dias returned to Lisbon in December 1488, after an absence of 16 months.

The Dias expedition had explored a thousand more miles of the African coastline than previous expeditions had reached; it had rounded the southern tip of the continent, and it had demonstrated that the most effective southward ship route lay in the open ocean well to the west of the African coast-a route that would be followed by generations of Portuguese sailors. Despite these successes, Dias' reception at court was muted. There were no official proclamations, and, at the time, Dias received little in recognition of his accomplishments.

No record has yet been found of any adequate reward for Diaz: on the contrary, when the great Indian expedition was being prepared (for Vasco da Gama’s future leadership) Bartolomeu only superintended the building and outfit of the ships; when the fleet sailed in 1497, he only accompanied da Gama to the Cape Verde Islands, and after this was ordered to São Jorge da Mina.

Later years and death
Dias was later ennobled for his accomplishments, and by 1494 he was serving as a squire in the court of King John II. He also served as superintendent of the royal warehouses from 1494 to 1497.

Following Dias’s return from his successful first voyage around Africa’s southern cape, Portugal took a decade-long break from Indian Ocean exploration. King John was beset by numerous problems, including the death of his only son, a war in Morocco, and his own failing health. It was not until 1497 that another voyage was commissioned and Dias was asked to provide assistance. Drawing on his experience with maritime exploration, Dias contributed to the design and construction of the São Gabriel and its sister ship the São Rafael. These were two of the ships that Vasco da Gama used to sail around the Cape of Good Hope and continue to India. Dias participated in the first half of da Gama’s voyage but stayed behind after reaching the Cape Verde Islands.

Two years later he was one of the captains of the second Indian expedition, headed by Pedro Álvares Cabral. This flotilla was the first to reach Brazil, landing there on 22 April 1500 before continuing east to India. Dias perished in May 1500 when captaining a ship near the Cape of Good Hope: four ships, including Dias’s, encountered a huge storm off the cape and were lost on 29 May.

Personal life
Dias was married and had two sons, Simão Dias de Novais and António Dias de Novais. His grandson Paulo Dias de Novais became the first governor of Portuguese Angola and, in 1576, the founder of São Paulo de Luanda.

Legacy
The Portuguese government erected two navigational beacons, Dias Cross and da Gama Cross, to commemorate Dias and Vasco da Gama, who were the first modern European explorers to reach the Cape of Good Hope. When lined up, these crosses point to Whittle Rock, a large, permanently submerged shipping hazard in False Bay. The Bartolomeu Dias Museum Complex (also spelled "Bartholomeu"), located at Mossel Bay, features an exhibition displaying the history of early European sea voyagers who discovered sea routes. The local history 19th-century artefacts and 20th-century photographs are also displayed in this building. The building houses a life-size replica of the ship that was used by Bartolomeu Dias and his crew when they landed in Mossel Bay 1488.

title: Bartolomeu Dias


text:
Kameyama

Kameyama may refer to:

 * Emperor Kameyama (1249–1305), emperor of Japan 1259–1274
 * Kameyama, Mie, a city in Mie prefecture, Japan

People with the surname

 * Cíntia Kameyama (1965–), a Brazilian botanist, known by the botanical author abbreviation Kameyama
 * Keishi Kameyama, Japanese businessman
 * Sukekiyo Kameyama (亀山 助清), Japanese voice actor
 * Kameyama Yoshiharu (龜山 嘉治), Japanese nativist scholar

title: Kameyama


text:
Emperor Go-Uda

Emperor Go-Uda (後宇多天皇) was the 91st emperor of Japan, according to the traditional order of succession. His reign spanned the years from 1274 through 1287.

This 13th-century sovereign was named after the 9th-century Emperor Uda and go- (後), translates literally as "later"; and thus, he is sometimes called the "Later Emperor Uda," or in some older sources, may be identified as "Emperor Uda, the second" or as "Emperor Uda II."

Genealogy
Before his ascension to the Chrysanthemum Throne, his personal name (imina) was Yohito (世仁).

He was the second son of Emperor Kameyama. They were from the Daikaku-ji line.

 * Consort: Imperial Princess Reishi (姈子内親王; 1270–1307) later Yūgimon'in (遊義門院), Emperor Go-Fukakusa's daughter

 * Consort: Horikawa (Minamoto) Motoko (堀河（源）基子) later Nishika'mon-in (西華門院; 1269–1355), Horikawa Tomomori's daughter
 * First son: Imperial Prince Kuniharu (邦治親王) later Emperor Go-Nijō

 * Lady-in-waiting: Itsutsuji (Fujiwara) Chushi (五辻（藤原）忠子; 1268–1319) later Dantenmon'in (談天門院), Itsutsuji Tadatsugu's daughter
 * First daughter: Imperial Princess Shōshi (1286–1348) (奨子内親王) later Tatchimon-in (達智門院)
 * Second son: Imperial Prince Takaharu (尊治親王) later Emperor Go-Daigo
 * Third son: Imperial Prince Priest Shōen (性円法親王; 1292–1347)
 * Fourth son: Imperial Prince Priest Shokaku (承覚法親王; b. 1294)

 * Consort: Princess Mizuko (瑞子女王) later Eikamon'in (永嘉門院; 1272–1329), Prince Munetaka's daughter

 * Consort: Ichijo-no-Tsubone（一条局）, Hashimoto Sanetoshi's daughter
 * Fifth Son: Imperial Prince Priest Shosi (性勝法親王; d. 1354)

 * Consort: Princess Rinshi (掄子女王), Prince Munetaka's daughter
 * Second daughter: Imperial Princess Baishi (禖子内親王) later Sūmeimon-in (崇明門院), married Imperial Prince Kuniyoshi

 * Consort: Itsutsuji Munechika's daughter
 * Third daughter: Imperial Princess Tōshi/Chūshi (愉子内親王)

 * Consort: Kazan'in Nagamasa’s daughter
 * Princess

 * Consort: Shinsanmi-no-tsubone (新三位局)
 * Prince (b. 1307)

Events of Go-Uda's life
Yohito-shinnō became crown prince in 1268. According to the terms of the late emperor's will (Go-Saga died in 1272), in 1274, he would become emperor upon the death or abdication of Emperor Kameyama.

 * 6 March 1274 (Bun'ei 11, 26th day of the 1st month): In the 15th year of Kameyama-tennō's reign (亀山天皇十五年), the emperor abdicated; and the succession (senso) was received by his cousin.
 * 4 May 1274 (Bun'ei 11, 26th day of the 3rd month): Emperor Go-Uda is said to have acceded to the throne (sokui).

The retired Emperor Kameyama continued to exercise power as cloistered emperor.

During his reign, the unsuccessful Mongol invasions of Japan occurred, first in 1274 and again in 1281. Though they established a beachhead at Hakata, Kyushu, they were driven out within a short time.

 * 23 November 1275 (Kenji 1, 5th day of the 11th month): Hirohito-shinnō was named Crown Prince and heir to his first cousin, the Daikakuji-tō Emperor Go-Uda. This was the result of political maneuvering by Hirohito's father, the Jimyōin-tō Emperor Go-Fukakusa.

In 1287, retired Emperor Go-Fukakusa, dissatisfied with the fact that his own lineage (the Jimyōin-tō) did not control the throne, while that of his younger brother, the retired Emperor Kameyama (the Daikakuji-tō) did, persuaded both the Bakufu and the imperial court to compel the Emperor to abdicate in favor of Go-Fukakusa's son (Emperor Fushimi).

After this time, the struggle between the Jimyōin-tō and the Daikakuji-tō over the imperial throne continued. After Go-Uda's abdication, his Daikakuji-tō controlled the throne from 1301 to 1308 (Emperor Go-Nijō) and again from 1318 until the era of northern and southern courts (begun 1332) when they became the southern court (ending in 1392).

Go-Uda was cloistered emperor during the reign of his own son, Go-Nijō, from 1301 until 1308, and again from 1318, when his second son Go-Daigo took the throne until 1321, when Go-Daigo began direct rule.

 * 16 July 1324 (Genkō 4, 25th day of the 6th month): Go-Uda died at age 58.

Emperor Go-Uda's Imperial mausoleum is the Rengebuji no misasagi (蓮華峯寺陵) in Ukyō-ku, Kyoto.

Kugyō
Kugyō (公卿) is a collective term for the very few most powerful men attached to the court of the Emperor of Japan in pre-Meiji eras. Even during those years in which the court's actual influence outside the palace walls was minimal, the hierarchic organization persisted.

In general, this elite group included only three to four men at a time. These were hereditary courtiers whose experience and background would have brought them to the pinnacle of a life's career. During Go-Uda's reign, this apex of the Daijō-kan included:
 * Sesshō, Kujō Tadaie, 1274
 * Sesshō, Ichijō Ietsune, 1274–1275
 * Sesshō, Takatsukasa Kanehira,	1275–1278
 * Kampaku, Takatsukasa Kanehira, 1278–1287
 * Kampaku, Nijō Morotada, 1287–1289
 * Sadaijin
 * Udaijin
 * Nadaijin
 * Dainagon

Eras of Go-Uda's reign
The years of Go-Uda's reign are more specifically identified by more than one era name or nengō.
 * Bun'ei               (1264–1275)
 * Kenji (1275–1278)
 * Kōan            (1278–1288)

title: Emperor Go-Uda