text:
Narses

Narses (also sometimes written Nerses; ; Նարսես; Ναρσής; 478–573) was, with Belisarius, one of the great generals in the service of the Byzantine Emperor Justinian I during the Roman reconquest that took place during Justinian's reign. Narses was a Romanized Armenian. He spent most of his life as an important eunuch in the palace of the emperors in Constantinople.

Origins
Narses was born in Persarmenia—the eastern part of Armenia that had been given to Persia a little less than 100 years earlier under the Peace of Acilisene. He was a member of the Kamsarakan Armenian noble family, which was an offshoot of the House of Karen, a noble Parthian clan. His first mention in a primary source is by Procopius in AD 530. The year I of Narses' birth is unknown; historians have given dates including 478, 479 and 480. The year of his death is also unknown, with dates given between 566 and 574, making him eighty-six to ninety-six years old at his death. His family and lineage is also completely unknown, with many different stories told about his origins and how he became a eunuch.

Agathias Scholasticus of Myrina described him thus: "He was a man of sound mind, and clever at adapting himself to the times. He was not versed in literature nor practiced in oratory, [but] made up for it by the fertility of his wits," and as "small and of a lean habit, but stronger and more high-spirited than would have been believed."

Religion
Narses was reported to be a very pious man with a special devotion to the Virgin Mary. Evagrius Scholasticus in Ecclesiastica Historia reported that she would tell him the proper time to attack, and Narses would never engage in battle without her consent. Narses also was reported to be generous to the poor and zealous when it came to restoring churches. He was so devoted to prayers and vigils that "he obtained victory more by the supplications he poured forth to God, than by arms of war." Before accepting supreme command of the army, Narses built a church and monastery in Cappadocia, intent upon going there upon his retirement.

Early career
How or when Narses arrived in Constantinople, or exactly how he found a footing in the officium of the Grand Chamberlain, remains unknown. When Procopius first mentions Narses, he was serving as Emperor Justinian I's steward in 530. Narses was a high treasurer who dealt with the emperor's finances and payments from the imperial treasury. He rose through the ranks, became the commander of the emperor's eunuch bodyguard, and eventually became Grand Chamberlain (praepositus sacri cubiculi) and Master of Soldiers (magister militum). Although Theodosius II had, in 422, barred eunuchs from serving as patricians (which meant that the Grand Chamberlain "was not a magistrate, but a 'minister'" ), Justinian overturned this law, and so Narses became a patrician, too.

Nika riots
Narses had a part in quashing the Nika riots in 532; he was instructed by Justinian or Theodora to take sufficient funds to bribe the Blue Faction's leaders. Narses appealed to their factionalism, reminding them that Hypatius, the man they were about to declare emperor, was a Green, and that Justinian supported the Blues. Either the money or his words persuaded the Blue faction to support Justinian and turn against Hypatius. Narses himself may have been with the men that dragged Hypatius from the throne on the Imperial Stand.

Military career
Narses' involvement and help in suppressing the Nika Riots suddenly found him in charge of a moderately-sized army that would go to Italy to help Belisarius. The army arrived in June of 538 probably in Ancona and consisted of roughly 7,000 soldiers. (Every army that Narses commanded was made up of very diverse peoples, drawing from many of the surrounding tribes.) Procopius referred to Narses as the eunuch and keeper of the royal treasuries, and described him as "keen and more energetic than would be expected of a eunuch". Narses met with Belisarius at Firmum where a council of war was held. The council discussed what should happen regarding the Siege of Ariminum and with the commander of troops, John. Narses commented that he had already been punished for his "insolence" and that if the Goths took Rimini then it could turn the tide of the war. Belisarius and Narses led a column of troops through inland mountainous routes to descend upon Rimini from the northwest.

John owed his thanks to Narses for convincing Belisarius, and according to Procopius, commented on the relationship between the two men. "And from that time both these men [Belisarius and Narses] began to regard each other with great suspicion." During the autumn and winter months of 538–39, the Army in Italy was divided into two parties, between Belisarius and Narses. Justinian himself dispatched a letter to Belisarius, stating that "We have not sent our steward Narses to Italy in order to command the army; for we wish Belisarius alone to command the whole army in whatever manner seems to him best, and it is the duty of all of you to follow him in the interest of the state." The division however remained and the city of Milan was to fall victim to the divided command. Narses was recalled to Constantinople, but not in disgrace, as he was allowed to retain some of his barbarian guardsmen.

After being recalled, Narses seemed to have lost "none of his favour at court, [and] remained the most trusted servant and minister of the Emperor and his consort." For the next twelve years, 539–51, there is little historical reference to Narses and he seemed to work more behind the scenes. In 541, Narses was believed to have helped the Empress Theodora and Antonina (wife of Belisarius) with the overthrow of John the Cappadocian. In 545, Justinian sent Narses to the rulers of the Heruli, to recruit troops since he was popular among that barbarian nation.

Return to Italy
Finally in 551, Narses was sent back to Italy, where he was to achieve his greatest victories. Germanus, a cousin of the Emperor, was appointed by Justinian to finish what Belisarius had started a decade before. However, on his way to Italy in 550, Germanus fell ill and "abruptly reached the term of life." Narses was appointed the new commander of the army, given supreme command and returned to Italy where twelve years previously he had been recalled. Many historians believe that Narses was put in command because of his old age, so that he would never be able to rebel successfully against Justinian.

Narses' greatest asset in his newfound position was to have access to the Emperor's financial resources. With the treasury, Narses was able to amass anywhere between 20,000 and 30,000 troops. Narses also seemed to be well liked by many of the soldiers of fortune, as he had treated them "especially well". Procopius reported that Narses had built an army that in the requirement of men and arms was "worthy of the Roman Empire". The army reflected many of Narses' previous commands, in that most of the troops were barbarians.

Narses was to take more than a year to reach Italy after his appointment, as his entire army made a long march along the coast of the Adriatic Sea. Totila the Ostrogothic king controlled the sea of eastern Italy and hampered supply ships that set sail for Narses' army. John from Salona led 38 ships and Valerian sailed with 12 to meet Totila's force and bring relief to Ancona. Procopius described the subsequent Battle of Sena Gallica as a naval battle that resembled a battle on land. "There were arrows discharged and fighting at close quarters with sword and spear, just as on a battle field." The Byzantine victory at Sena Gallica was overwhelming, as 36 of the 47 Gothic ships were destroyed, and Gibal, a Gothic admiral, was captured. Historian Archibald R. Lewis pointed out that victory could only come to Narses after Totila's sea dominance was brought to an end.

There were a number of reasons that Narses' march was very slow. Totila had dispatched various troops to employ delaying tactics and the Franks were enemies of Narses' allies the Lombards, and did not allow free passage. Procopius stated that Narses was "completely bewildered", but John was familiar with that part of Italy and advised him how to continue. Using this advice, Narses was able to reach Ravenna unopposed. Totila may have believed that Narses was going to come from the sea, whence all the previous invasions had come.

Battle of Taginae
On his way to seek Totila's main army, Narses encountered a small Gothic garrison at the town of Rimini. John, who had previously been in command at Rimini when it was besieged by Gothic forces, again gave advice to Narses on how to proceed. The exact route taken was not precisely indicated by Procopius and has led to confusion on the reconstruction of the coming battles. Procopius referred to the next battle as "Busta Gallorum", but many historians now refer to it as the Battle of Taginae.

Narses sent word to Totila and gave him a chance to either surrender, or give the day in which the battle would take place. Procopius quoted Totila's response, "At the end of eight days let us match our strength." Narses was not fooled by this and preferred the tactical defensive upon meeting Totila, as his army would have been larger than that of Totila. The following battle would be Narses' ultimate victory, and would set the estimation of his military talents as not inferior to those of Belisarius.

Tactics
Narses' great success at the Battle of Taginae was to come from the disposition of his forces before the battle began. Narses arrayed his troops in a "crescent shaped" formation with mostly infantry in the middle, flanked by archers. The infantry were in fact dismounted barbarian cavalry, since many of the Goths thought that typical infantry was frail and would flee in the face of a charge. Some historians feel there may have been a political motivation by placing the Heruli and Lombards in the centre dismounted, Narses possibly suspecting them of having sympathy or admiration for Totila.

On the sides of the crescent, foot-archers were placed, and this enabled them to destroy the Gothic cavalry through enfilading fire. (This disposition of the archers and their effect upon the battle is strikingly parallel to the later Battle of Agincourt.) Next, Narses placed much of his cavalry on the immediate sides of the dismounted infantry. Normally the cavalry would have been behind the centre, but they were not meant to aid any of the struggling line. Instead they were used to deliver a surprise attack on the Goths when they became fully enveloped. Narses knew that Totila would take the advantage of attacking the "weak" centre, and therefore allowed Narses to completely destroy the Ostrogothic army. Procopius said that Totila had been "out-generalled by his own folly", because Totila had instructed his troops to only engage with spears, as he thought a quick strike would win the battle.

Totila sent wave after wave of troops, who became so disorganized by the raining arrow storm that by the time they met the dismounted infantrymen they were completely broken. The Gothic infantry never even engaged in actual combat as they hesitated to advance far enough to actually become effective. They were kept in the rear of the advance, fearing that Narses' horsemen would outflank them from the hill. Finally, Totila's cavalry was pressed backwards onto their own line of infantry, Narses then charged with his own cavalry, which had been held in reserve. The retreat quickly turned into a rout, as the Gothic cavalry rushed right over the infantry, who joined them in the withdrawal.

Totila himself was killed at this battle and Procopius gave two versions as to the fate of the Ostrogothic king. The first has Totila initially surviving the battle and fleeing the field of battle with only five of his followers. Asbad, leader of the Gepids, overtook him and drove his spear into Totila. The body was immediately taken to the village of Caprae where it was hurriedly buried. In the second version, Totila was mortally wounded in the first wave, struck by a bowman who did not even recognize his target. The first is more widely accepted by historians, as later a Gothic woman revealed where Totila was buried and the body was exhumed and positively identified.

Rome
Narses marched to Rome after the Battle of Taginae and had to conduct a short siege of the city. Narses attacked on one side with a large contingent of archers, while John assaulted another part of the walls. From Rome, Narses would work to remove all of the remaining Ostrogothic forces from Italy. The next major move that Narses undertook was to capture the treasury of Totila that was held in Cumae. Both Procopius and Agathias wrote of the strength of the fortress at Cumae. Procopius called it, "an exceedingly strong fortress," and Agathias declared it "very well fortified."

As parts of the army were sent throughout the country to deal with Teias (the son of Totila, and new Gothic king), a considerable detachment was sent to Campania to take Cumae. Teias followed the example set by Narses on his march into Italy and marched around the Imperial Army. After engaging Narses in small skirmishes for nearly two months, Teias retreated into the mountains. They maneuvered onto Mons Lactarius, where they soon faced death from starvation.

Battle of Mons Lactarius
The Goths suddenly came down the mountain in a compact phalanx, catching the army off guard who were also on foot. The reasons why the Goths attacked horseless is unknown, but the suddenness of the attack seemed to be the reason that Narses fought horseless as well. The ensuing battle was fought for two days and Procopius described the bravery of King Teias. He first introduced the battle as "a battle of great note," and the heroism displayed by King Teias was not "inferior to any of the heroes of legend." It may be noted that Procopius did not witness any of the battle, and only retold it from the account of others.

Teias led the charge towards Narses. Procopius recounts that every time his shield was filled with arrows, he received another from his man-at-arms. Finally when a spear struck his shield, he received another but was struck with a mortal blow. The soldier cut off his head to display to the Goths their king had died, but instead of disheartening the Goths, it reinvigorated them to fight for another day. The second day was much like the first, as the Goths charged and fought on foot, involving little to no tactics. Finally, the Goths sent some of their officers to Narses who said they would surrender if they were allowed to leave the country safely. Narses, who received more advice from John, accepted those terms of surrender.

Final battles
After the final defeat of the Goths, the Franks, led by the brothers Leutharis and Buccillinus, attempted to invade the recently reconquered lands. From the Liber Pontificalis: "They (The Franks) in like manner wasted Italy. But with the help of the Lord they too were destroyed by Narses. And all Italy rejoiced." For the next year or two, Narses crossed the countryside, reinstituting Byzantine rule and laying siege to towns that resisted. But as more and more Franks poured over the Alps, Narses regrouped in Rome, and once spring came, marched his army against them. The Franks, led by the two brothers, were pursuing separate routes, but plundering the whole time.

At the Battle of Casilinum, Narses put true heavy infantry in the centre, instead of dismounted cavalry. These were hand picked troops, "Ante-signani", who wore long clad coats of mail that went down to their feet. Highly trained cavalry were on the flanks, armed with everything that the army carried. On the opposing side, Agathias describes the Franks as, "Very rude and without cavalry. Their swords were worn on the left leg, and their main weapons were the throwing ax and hooked javelins." The Franks attacked Narses' centre, which was initially pushed back but was reinforced by the Herulis, who slowed the attackers.

At this point Narses had the cavalry wheel in from the flanks, but without directly engaging the Franks. Instead, he had them unleash an enormous number of arrows into the half-naked barbarians. Finally the Franks became disorganized and their tightly held formations broke down. Narses sounded a general charge that blasted their ranks, and mowed them down. The Franks were massacred and Agathias claimed that only five of them escaped from Narses that day. All three of Narses' major victories can be credited to his skillful use of combined tactics involving cavalry and archers to create and exploit disorder in his enemies. Afterwards, in the autumn of 554, the triumphant Narses returned to Rome, possibly to celebrate a formal Triumph; but Agathias, the sole source for the possibility, "does not provide even a rhetorical account of this", and gives no further detail.

Final years
For the next twelve years, Narses may have stayed in Italy and "set about to reorganize" its government. Justinian sent Narses a series of new decrees known as "pragmatic sanctions". Many historians refer to Narses in this part of his career as an Exarch. Narses completed some restoration projects in Italy but was unable to return Rome to its former splendor, though he did repair many of the bridges into the city and rebuild the city's walls.

Little is known of Narses' last years. Some historians believe he died in 567, while others assert that he died in 574, in which case he may have reached the age of 96.

Legend has it that Narses was recalled to Constantinople for turning the Romans under his rule into virtual slaves, thereby upsetting the new Emperor Justin II and his wife, the Empress Sophia. Narses then retired to Naples. In an apocryphal but often retold story, Sophia sent Narses a golden distaff with the sarcastic message that he was invited to return to the palace and oversee the women's spinning, and Narses is said to have replied that he would spin a thread of which neither she nor Justin would ever find the end. From Naples, Narses supposedly sent word to the Lombards inviting them to invade northern Italy. The historian Dunlap questions whether there was hostility between the empress and Narses. Paul the Deacon wrote that his body was returned to Constantinople; and John of Ephesus wrote that Narses was buried in the presence of the Emperor and Empress in a Bithynian monastery founded by him.

title: Narses


text:
Talk:Queen mother

In re "Queen Mother" in India
Rajmata [sic] is currently translated in the article as "Mother of the State", with the justification that 'Raj' means 'State'. However, the technical term for state/kingdom is actually 'Rajya'. Furthermore, the actual term for the King (or, rarely, if at all, Queen) Mother is "Rajamata" [ IPA: raːdʑɐmaːtaː](note the missing 'a' in the term in the article). This is technically from the same word in Sanskrit, which itself is a Sanskrit compound "राज्ञः माता या सा राजमाता।" (Translation: "She who is the King's mother is the King-mother". The translation here has the appearance of stating the obvious, but it gramatically defines the compound word in terms of the simple words whose place and meaning the compound word takes).

Basically, I think that the translation "Mother of the State" is inaccurate, with the inaccuracy being caused by the inaccurate term 'Raj' [IPA: raːdʑ] inaccurately being confused with 'State' due to lack of accurate Sanskrit transliteration of the word 'Raja' [IPA: raːdʑɐ] in "Rajamata" in the first place. The accurate term is, thus, "Rajamata", and the accurate translation is "King-Mother". Viv73 (talk) 05:35, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Queen mother


text:
Fritz Hollings

Ernest Frederick "Fritz" Hollings (January 1, 1922 – April 6, 2019) was an American politician who served as a United States senator from South Carolina from 1966 to 2005. A conservative Democrat, he was also the 106th governor of South Carolina, the 77th lieutenant governor of South Carolina, and a member of the South Carolina House of Representatives. He served alongside Democrat-turned-Republican Senator Strom Thurmond for 36 years, making them the longest-serving duo in U.S. Senate history. At the time of his death, he was the oldest living former U.S. senator. As of 2024, he is the last Democrat to hold and/or win a U.S. Senate seat in South Carolina.

Born in Charleston, South Carolina, Hollings graduated from The Citadel in 1942 and joined a law practice in Charleston after attending the University of South Carolina School of Law. During World War II, he served as an artillery officer in campaigns in North Africa and Europe. After the war, Hollings successively won election to the South Carolina House of Representatives, as lieutenant governor, and as governor. He sought election to the Senate in 1962 but was defeated by incumbent Olin D. Johnston.

Johnston died in 1965, and the following year Hollings won a special election to serve the remainder of Johnston's term. Hollings remained popular and continually won re-election, becoming one of the longest-serving senators in U.S. history. Hollings sought the Democratic nomination in the 1984 presidential election but dropped out of the race after the New Hampshire primary. He declined to seek re-election in 2004 and was succeeded by Republican Jim DeMint.

Early life
Hollings was born in Charleston, South Carolina, the son of Wilhelmine Dorothea Meyer (1888–1982) and Adolph Gevert Hollings, Sr. (1882–1940). He was of German descent. Hollings was raised at 338 President St. in the Hampton Park Terrace neighborhood from age 10 until he enrolled in college.

Education and personal life
Hollings graduated from The Citadel in 1942, receiving a Bachelor of Arts degree. He achieved an LL.B. in 1947 after 21 months at the University of South Carolina, and joined a law practice in Charleston. Hollings was a member of the Pi Kappa Phi fraternity. He was a member of the German Friendly Society of Charleston from 1976-1991.

Hollings was married to Rita Liddy "Peatsy" Hollings from August 21, 1971, until her death in October 2012. He had four children (Michael, Helen, Patricia Salley, and Ernest III ) with his first wife, Martha Patricia Salley Hollings, whom he married on March 30, 1946. He was a Lutheran. In addition, Fritz and Patricia had two sons who died.

Hollings served as an officer in the U.S. Army's 353rd and 457th Artillery units from 1942 to 1945, during World War II, and was awarded the Bronze Star for meritorious service in direct support of combat operations from December 13, 1944, to May 1, 1945, in France and Germany. He received the European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal with five Bronze Service Stars for participation in the Tunisia, Southern France, Rome-Arno, and Central Europe Campaigns.

Political career
Hollings served three terms in the South Carolina House of Representatives from 1949 to 1954. In 1950, following the notorious lynching of Willie Earle, Hollings authored a law that mandated the death penalty for lynching. No lynchings occurred in South Carolina after that law was enacted. After only one term, Hollings's colleagues elected him Speaker Pro Tempore in 1951 and 1953. He was subsequently elected Lieutenant Governor of South Carolina in 1954, and Governor in 1958 at the age of 36.

Governor of South Carolina
As governor of South Carolina from January 20, 1959, to January 15, 1963, Hollings worked to improve the state's educational system, helping to bring more industry and employment opportunities to the state. His term in office saw the establishment of the state's technical education system and its educational television network. He also called for and achieved significant increases in teachers' salaries, bringing them closer to the regional average. At the 1961 Governor's Conference on Business, Industry, Education and Agriculture in Columbia, South Carolina, he declared, "Today, in our complex society, education is the cornerstone upon which economic development must be built – and prosperity assured."

During Hollings's term as governor, the Confederate battle flag was flown above the South Carolina State House underneath the U.S. and state flags. The battle flag was placed over the dome in 1962 by a concurrent resolution of the state legislature during the commemoration of the Civil War centennial. The resolution failed to designate a time for its removal. In 2000 the state legislature voted to move the flag from above the state house to a Confederate soldiers' monument in front of the building, where it remained until 2015, when Republican governor Nikki Haley ordered it removed following the murders of nine black churchgoers by a Confederate sympathizer in the state earlier that year.

Hollings did little to either support or oppose the civil right movement as governor, and instead took pride in the lack of civil rights violence that occurred in the state. In his last address to the General Assembly on January 9, 1963, ahead of the peaceful admission to Clemson University of its first black student, Harvey Gantt, Hollings declared: "As we meet, South Carolina is running out of courts... this General Assembly must make clear South Carolina's choice, a government of laws rather than a government of men... This should be done with dignity. It should be done with law and order."

Hollings oversaw the last executions in South Carolina before the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Furman v. Georgia, which temporarily banned capital punishment. During his term, eight inmates were put to death by electric chair. The last was rapist Douglas Thorne, on April 20, 1962.

He sought the Democratic nomination for a seat in the U.S. Senate in 1962 but lost to incumbent Olin D. Johnston.

Early Senate career
Johnston died on April 18, 1965. Hollings's successor as governor, Donald S. Russell, resigned in order to accept appointment to the Senate seat. In the summer of 1966, Hollings defeated Russell in the Democratic primary for the remaining two years of the term. He then narrowly won the special election on November 8, 1966, against the Democrat-turned-Republican Marshall Parker, and was sworn in shortly thereafter. He gained seniority on other newly elected U.S. senators who would have to wait until January 1967 to take the oath of office. In 1967, he was one of eleven senators who voted against the nomination of Thurgood Marshall to become the first black justice on the U.S. Supreme Court. The following year, Hollings won the Senate seat for his first full term when he again defeated Marshall Parker but in this instance by a much wider margin.

For over 36 years (from November 9, 1966, until January 3, 2003), he served alongside Democrat-turned-Republican Strom Thurmond, making them the longest-serving state delegation duo in U.S. Senate history to date. Thurmond and Hollings generally had a good relationship despite their sometimes sharp philosophical differences, and frequently collaborated on legislation and projects for South Carolina. Hollings was also the thirteenth-longest-serving U.S. Senator.

In 1970, Hollings authored The Case Against Hunger: A Demand for a National Policy, acknowledging the Reverend I.D. Newman and Sister Mary Anthony for opening his eyes to the despair caused by hunger and helping him realize that he must do something about it. Hollings made headlines the year before when he toured poverty-stricken areas of South Carolina, often referred to as his "Hunger Tours". He was accused of drawing unwanted attention to South Carolina while other states, both northern and southern, also faced extreme poverty. Hollings knew South Carolina was not alone in its struggle and thought that if any politician was going to investigate hunger in South Carolina, it was going to at least be a South Carolinian. After a tour of an East Charleston slum, he said, "I don't want Romney and Kennedy coming here to look at my slums. As a matter of fact when I get caught up with my work, I think I may go look at the slums of Boston." For his efforts, Hollings was also accused of "scheming for the Negro vote". Hollings, who had seen plenty of white hunger and poverty and slums on his tours, responded, "You just don't make political points on hunger. The poor aren't registered to vote and they won't vote." In February 1969, however, Hollings testified as to what he had seen on his fact-finding tours in front of the Senate Select Committee on Hunger and Human Needs. Charleston's News and Courier (now The Post and Courier) reported that "Senators, members of the press corps and visitors packed in the hearing room watched and listened in disbelief as Hollings detailed dozens of tragically poignant scenes of human suffering in his state." Hollings recommended to the committee that free food stamps be distributed to the most needy, and just over a day later, Senator George McGovern announced that free food stamps would be distributed in South Carolina as part of a national pilot program for feeding the hungry.

Hollings and his first wife separated in 1970 and divorced in 1971. Their children lived with their mother, and Hollings never discussed the reason for the divorce. Later that year, he married Rita Liddy "Peatsy" Hollings (born 1935), who was 13 years his junior. She had joined his administrative staff in 1967. It was her first and his second marriage. They were married 41 years until her death in 2012.

In the 1970s, Hollings joined with fellow senators Kennedy and Henry M. Jackson in a press conference to oppose President Gerald Ford's request that Congress end Richard Nixon's price controls on domestic oil, which had helped to cause the gasoline lines during the 1973 Oil Crisis. Hollings said he believed ending the price controls (as was eventually done in 1981) would be a "catastrophe" that would cause "economic chaos".

In February 1970, during a session of debate on federal aid to school districts serving children living in public housing units, Hollings asked New York Senator Jacob K. Javits if he would support the anti-busing amendment given that it was based on New York law.

In September 1970, during a speech at the University of Georgia in Athens, Hollings declared that the United States could not afford such "leadership by political bamboozle", calling on Americans to ignore the voices of discord and unite for "meaningful changes" in society. Hollings said President Nixon had led the U.S. down a "clamorous road of drift and division" and criticized the "ranting rhetoric" of Vice President Spiro Agnew. Hollings attributed the principal blame for the disunity of the U.S. on special interest groups and "impatient minority blocs" that had shouted "non negotiable demands". Hollings linked former President Johnson and President Nixon with having both "attacked the politics of the problem rather than the problems themselves".

In February 1971, Hollings introduced Ted Kennedy in Charleston, South Carolina, ahead of his remarks calling for an end to the Vietnam War. Hollings disclosed that Kennedy had sought his advice on how to answer reporters' questions regarding a possible presidential campaign and that Kennedy believed his visit would spark speculation on the part of reporters about a campaign regardless of what he said.

In November 1971, Hollings announced his opposition to the nomination of Earl Butz for United States Secretary of Agriculture.

In 1972, Hollings and Republican William Saxbe sponsored a resolution bestowing early United States recognition on Bangladesh as the Nixon administration sought a policy of delaying recognition until "there were commensurate diplomatic benefits to the United States."

In 1977, Hollings was one of five Democrats to vote against the nomination of F. Ray Marshall as United States Secretary of Labor.

In early 1979, United States Secretary of State Cyrus Vance sought permission from a Senate Appropriations subcommittee to transfer $2million in funds for the American Embassy to the new unofficial American Institute in Taiwan. Hollings was one of four members of the committee to oppose Vance's request during the latter's appearance before the subcommittee and Hollings later sent a letter to Vance declining the request. Hollings explained that "a smooth transition to unofficial relations may be threatened" in the event of funds not being transferred to the American Institute before the American Embassy in Taiwan ceased its function by its designated date of March 1. Hollings's opposition was considered unusual given that most requests were approved and State Department officials publicly stated their wishes for Hollings and his colleagues to drop their opposition in the face of Taiwan's reluctant agreement to setting up "nongovernmental body in Washington" that would serve as the counterpart to the American Institute in Taipei.

Hollings opposed legislation in 1979 that would admit additional ethnic Chinese refugees amid increased concern regarding moves by the Vietnamese government.

In August 1979, Hollings announced his opposition to the United States-Soviet Union nuclear arms treaty, saying the treaty should be defeated unless amended with a reduction of Soviet military power. His proposal was believed to stir Russian disapproval of the treaty if implemented. Hollings also made an unsuccessful attempt to persuade the Senate Budget Committee to add $2.6billion for a recommendation for military spending that would be included in Congress's second concurrent resolution on the budget.

Presidential candidate
Hollings unsuccessfully sought the Democratic nomination for President of the United States in the presidential election of 1984. Hollings's wit and experience, as well as his call for a budget freeze, won him some positive attention, but his relatively conservative record alienated liberal Democrats, and he was never really noticed in a field dominated by Walter Mondale, John Glenn and Gary Hart. Hollings dropped out two days after losing badly in the New Hampshire Primary, and endorsed Hart a week later. His disdain for his competitors sometimes showed. He notably referred to Mondale as a "lapdog" and to former astronaut Glenn as a "Sky King" who was "confused in his capsule".

Later Senate career

On March 24, 1981, Hollings introduced legislation that if passed would restore the military draft with limited deferments and exemptions and stipulating that men aged 18 to 22 years old would be required to spend nine months of active service for basic training that potentially would precede reserve duty. Hollings's proposal granted deferments "to people on active duty, in the reserves or in advanced Reserve Officers Training Corps study; surviving sons or brothers of those killed in war or missing in action; conscientious objectors and ministers; doctors and others in vital health professions, and judges of courts of record and elected officials". Hollings stated that recruiting for the armed forces had fallen short of requirements by an estimated 23,000 people in 1979 and that he believed the draft applying to women "should be across the board" due to the issue continuing to be debated between the public and the courts.

In 1981, Hollings apologized to fellow Democrat Howard Metzenbaum after Hollings referred to him as the "senator from B'nai B'rith" on the floor. Metzenbaum, who was Jewish, raised a point of personal privilege and Hollings's remarks were stricken from the record.

In March 1985, the Senate Budget Committee approved a proposal sponsored by Hollings freezing military spending by not allowing any growth above inflation in fiscal year 1986 and bestowing three percent hikes in the following two years, Hollings after the vote saying that a pattern had been set for similar action on other budget items and predicted that the Budget Committee would also go against another Reagan administration supported position by freezing Social Security cost of living increases.

On May 1, 1985, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation rejected an amendment to a bill reauthorizing the Federal Communications Commission prohibiting public television stations from swapping channels with commercial stations, Hollings afterward stating that the vote was "a tragic abdication by Congress of its over 60-year-old responsibility to protect the public's interest in broadcasting".

In October 1985, Hollings and Republicans Phil Gramm and Warren Rudman sponsored an amendment to establish a budget deficit ceiling that would decline to zero by 1991 that was attached to a bill raising the debt limit of the federal government by more than $250billion. The amendment was approved by a vote of 75 to 24 and was stated as a possible prelude to a balanced budget in five years without a tax increase by Secretary of the Treasury James Baker.

During the 1988 presidential primaries, Hollings endorsed Jesse Jackson.

In October 1989, Hollings announced from his Washington office that he would request the General Accounting Office investigate efforts by the Federal Emergency Management Agency to provide timely assistance and funds to victims of Hurricane Hugo the previous month. Hollings charged FEMA with "stonewalling, fretting and filling out forms" and called on the federal government to become more active in trying to relieve areas devastated by Hurricane Hugo.

In April 1990, Hollings planned the compiling of the Senate Budget Committee to vote on a cut in Social Security taxes, an idea initially forwarded at the end of the previous year by fellow Democratic senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan as a way of making Congress address what he considered to be a serious problem in the management of the Social Security trust funds. Hollings sought a revenue figure which reflected the $36billion tax cut through a rollback of Social Security payroll taxes increases that were scheduled to take effect January1 and confirmed he would ask his colleagues on the budget committee to remove the trust funds from the budget deficit calculation and vote on the 1991 budget including a $300billion deficit. Hollings's plan included a five percent value-added tax on goods and services in addition to a ten percent oil import fee as well as an increase in the top income tax rate to thirty-three percent among wealthiest taxpayers. The goal was considered an uphill battle where Hollings could be outmaneuvered in committee with parliamentary tactics that would result in the precluding of a straight up-or-down vote on the Social Security tax cut. Acknowledging this, Hollings said, "They may try to block me. But we will find a bill by God to cut Social Security taxes. There will be a vote."

In January 1991, Hollings joined most Democratic senators in voting against a resolution authorizing war against Iraq.

In 1993, Hollings told reporters he attended international summits because, "Everybody likes to go to Geneva. I used to do it for the Law of the Sea conferences and you'd find those potentates from down in Africa, you know, rather than eating each other, they'd just come up and get a good square meal in Geneva." Hollings had previously caused controversy when responding to Yoshio Sakurauchi's commentary that Americans are lazy and illiterate. Hollings replied, "You should draw a mushroom cloud and put underneath it, 'Made in America by lazy and illiterate Americans and tested in Japan'."

Hollings remained very popular in South Carolina over the years, even as the state became increasingly friendly to Republicans at the national level. In his first three bids for a full term, he never dropped below sixty percent of the vote. In the 1992 election, however, he faced an unexpectedly close race against former Congressman Tommy Hartnett in what was otherwise a very good year for Democrats nationally. Hartnett had represented the Charleston area in Congress from 1981 to 1987, thus making him Hollings's congressman. His appeal in the Lowcountry – traditionally a swing region at the state level – enabled him to hold Hollings to only fifty percent of the vote.

In his last Senate race in 1998, Hollings faced Republican congressman Bob Inglis. One of the more heated moments of the race was a newspaper interview in which Hollings referred to Inglis as a "goddamn skunk". Hollings was re-elected 52%–45%.

On January 7, 2003, Hollings introduced the controversial Universal National Service Act of 2006, which would require all men and women aged 18–26 (with some exceptions) to perform a year of military service.

By 2003, Hollings realized that no Democrat could win statewide office in South Carolina's current political climate—not even as entrenched an incumbent as himself. On August 4, 2003, he announced that he would not run for re-election in November 2004. Republican Jim DeMint succeeded him.

In his later career, Hollings was moderate politically but was supportive of many civil rights bills. He voted for re-authorizing the Voting Rights Act in 1982. However, in 1967 he was one of the 11 senators who voted against the confirmation of Thurgood Marshall, the first black Supreme Court justice. Hollings later voted in favor of the unsuccessful nomination of Robert Bork and also for the successful nomination of Clarence Thomas.

On fiscal issues, he was generally conservative, and was one of the primary sponsors of the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act, an attempt to enforce limits on government spending.

Hollings and Howell Heflin of Alabama were the only two Democratic senators to vote against the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993.

Entertainment industry
As a senator, Hollings supported legislation in the interests of the established media distribution industry (such as the proposed "Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act"). His hard-line support of various client-side computer restrictions such as DRM and Trusted Computing led the Fritz chip (Trusted Platform Module, a microchip that enforces such restrictions) to be nicknamed after him. Hollings introduced the SSSCA, a draft of the later CBDTPA, which would have mandated "manufacturers of all electronic devices and software to embed government approved copy protection technology in their products". Hollings also sponsored the Online Personal Privacy Act. According to OpenSecrets, between 1997 and 2002, Hollings received more than $300,000 from the entertainment industry.

Hollings was referred to as the "Senator from Disney" for his lobbying on behalf of the entertainment industry, including industry groups like the RIAA and MPAA.

Post Senatorial life and death

In retirement, Hollings wrote opinion editorials for newspapers in South Carolina and was a regular contributor to the Huffington Post. His opinion editorials were also published every week in EconomyInCrisis.org, an independent protectionist news blog. In 2008, the University of South Carolina Press published Making Government Work, a book authored by Hollings with Washington, D.C., journalist Kirk Victor, imparting Hollings's view on the changes needed in Washington. Among other things, the book recommended a dramatic decrease in the amount of campaign spending. It also attacked free trade policies as inherently destructive, suggesting that certain protectionist measures built the United States and that only a few parties actually benefited from free trade, such as large manufacturing corporations.

The Hollings Cancer Center at the Medical University of South Carolina, in Charleston, was established in 1993.

Hollings started the Hollings Scholarship in 2005. It gave more than a hundred undergraduates from around the country a ten-week internship with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and a monetary scholarship for the school year.

Hollings helped to establish the Hollings Center for International Dialogue, an organization which promotes dialogue between the United States and Turkey, the nations of the Middle East, North Africa, and Southwest Asia, and other countries with predominantly Muslim populations in order to open channels of communication, deepen cross-cultural understanding, expand people-to-people contacts, and generate new thinking on important international issues.

Hollings was also on the board of advisors as a distinguished visiting professor of Law with the Charleston School of Law. He delivered the commencement address to the first graduating class there on May 19, 2007.

In 2008, the University of South Carolina announced their new library would be named The Ernest F. Hollings Special Collections Library. The $18-million library was built behind the Thomas Cooper Library and is home to The Irvin Department of Rare Books & Special Collections, South Carolina Political Collections, and Digital Collections. It is also home to the Dorothy B. Smith Reading Room.

On April 6, 2019, Hollings died at the age of 97 at his home in Isle of Palms, South Carolina, following a period of declining health. Future President Joe Biden delivered the eulogy at his funeral.

title: Fritz Hollings


text:
Goliath

Goliath is a Philistine warrior in the Book of Samuel. Descriptions of Goliath's immense stature vary among biblical sources, with the Masoretic Text describing him as 9 ft tall. According to the text, Goliath issued a challenge to the Israelites, daring them to send forth a champion to engage him in single combat; he was ultimately defeated by the young shepherd David, employing a sling and stone as a weapon. The narrative signified King Saul's unfitness to rule, as Saul himself should have fought for Israel.

Modern scholars believe that the original slayer of Goliath may have been Elhanan, son of Jair, who features in 2 Samuel 21:19, in which Elhanan kills Goliath the Gittite, and that the authors of the Deuteronomistic history changed the original text to credit the victory to the more famous character David.

The phrase "David and Goliath" has taken on a more popular meaning denoting an underdog situation, a contest wherein a smaller, weaker opponent faces a much bigger, stronger adversary.

Biblical accounts
In 1 Samuel 17, Saul and the Israelites are facing the Philistines in the Valley of Elah. Twice a day for 40 days, morning and evening, Goliath, the champion of the Philistines, comes out between the lines and challenges the Israelites to send out a champion of their own to decide the outcome in single combat, but Saul is afraid. David accepts the challenge. Saul reluctantly agrees and offers his armour, which David declines, taking only his staff, sling, and five stones from a brook.

David and Goliath confront each other, Goliath with his armor and javelin, David with his staff and sling. "The Philistine cursed David by his gods", but David replies: ""This day the Lord will deliver you into my hand, and I will strike you down, and I will give the dead bodies of the host of the Philistines this day to the birds of the air and to the wild beasts of the earth; that all the earth may know that there is a god in Israel and that all this assembly may know that God saves not with sword and spear; for the battle is God's, and he will give you into our hand.""

David hurls a stone from his sling and hits Goliath in the center of his forehead, Goliath falls on his face to the ground, and David cuts off his head. The Philistines flee and are pursued by the Israelites "as far as Gath and the gates of Ekron". David puts the armor of Goliath in his own tent and takes the head to Jerusalem, and Saul sends Abner to bring the boy to him. The king asks whose son he is, and David answers: ""I am the son of your servant Jesse the Bethlehemite.""

Composition of the Book of Samuel
The Books of Samuel, together with the books of Joshua, Judges and Kings, make up a unified history of Israel which biblical scholars call the Deuteronomistic History. The first edition of the history was probably written at the court of Judah's King Josiah (late 7th century BCE) and a revised second edition during the exile (6th century BCE), with further revisions in the post-exilic period. Traces of this can be seen in contradictions within the Goliath story, such as that between 1 Samuel 17:54, which says that David took Goliath's head to Jerusalem, although according to 2 Samuel 5 Jerusalem at that time was still a Jebusite stronghold and was not captured until David became king.

Structure of the David and Goliath narrative
The Goliath story is made up of base-narrative with numerous additions made probably after the exile:

 *  Original story

 * The Israelites and Philistines face each other; Goliath makes his challenge to single combat;
 * David volunteers to fight Goliath;
 * David selects five smooth stones from a creek-bed to be used in his sling;
 * David defeats Goliath, the Philistines flee the battlefield.

 * Additions

 * David is sent by his father to bring food to his brothers, hears the challenge, and expresses his desire to accept;
 * Details of the account of the battle;
 * Saul asks who David is, and he is introduced to the king through Abner.

Goliath's height
The oldest manuscripts, namely the Dead Sea Scrolls text of Samuel from the late 1st century BCE, the 1st-century CE historian Josephus, and the major Septuagint manuscripts, all give Goliath's height as "four cubits and a span" (6 ft), whereas the Masoretic Text has "six cubits and a span" (9 ft). Many scholars have suggested that the smaller number grew in the course of transmission (only a few have suggested the reverse, that an original larger number was reduced), possibly when a scribe's eye was drawn to the number six in line 17:7.

Goliath and Saul
The underlying purpose of the story of Goliath is to show that Saul is not fit to be king (but that David is). Saul was chosen to lead the Israelites against their enemies, but when faced with Goliath, he refuses to do so; Saul is a head taller than anyone else in all Israel (1 Samuel 9:2), which implies he was over 6 ft tall and the obvious challenger for Goliath, yet David is the one who eventually defeated him. Also, Saul's armour and weaponry are apparently no better than Goliath's: ""David declares that when a lion or bear came and attacked his father's sheep, he battled against it and killed it, [but Saul] has been cowering in fear instead of rising up and attacking the threat to his sheep (i.e., Israel).""

David's speech in 1 Samuel 17 can be interpreted as referring to both Saul and Goliath through its animal imagery. When this imagery is considered closely, David can be seen to function as the true king who manipulates wild beasts.

Elhanan and Goliath
In 2 Samuel 21, verse 19, the Hebrew Bible tells how Goliath the Gittite was killed by "Elhanan the son of Jaare-oregim, the Bethlehemite". The fourth-century BC 1 Chronicle 20:5 explains the second Goliath by saying that Elhanan "slew Lahmi the brother of Goliath", constructing the name Lahmi from the last portion of the word "Bethlehemite" ("beit-ha’lahmi"), and the King James Bible adopted this into 2 Samuel 21:18–19, but the Hebrew text at Goliath's name makes no mention of the word "brother". Most scholars dismiss the later 1 Chronicles 20:5 material as "an obvious harmonization" attempt.

Goliath and the Greeks
The armor described in 1 Samuel 17 appears typical of Greek armor of the sixth century BCE; narrative formulae such as the settlement of battle by single combat between champions has been thought characteristic of the Homeric epics (the Iliad) rather than of the ancient Near East. The designation of Goliath as a איש הביניים, "man of the in-between" (a longstanding difficulty in translating 1 Samuel 17) appears to be a borrowing from Greek "man of the  (μεταίχμιον)", i.e., the space between two opposite army camps where champion combat would take place. Other scholars argue the description is a trustworthy reflection of the armaments that a Philistine warrior would have worn in the tenth century BCE.

A story very similar to that of David and Goliath appears in the Iliad, written circa 760–710 BCE, where the young Nestor fights and conquers the giant Ereuthalion. Each giant wields a distinctive weapon—an iron club in Ereuthalion's case, a massive bronze spear in Goliath's; each giant, clad in armor, comes out of the enemy's massed array to challenge all the warriors in the opposing army; in each case the seasoned warriors are afraid, and the challenge is taken up by a stripling, the youngest in his family (Nestor is the twelfth son of Neleus, David the seventh or eighth son of Jesse). In each case an older and more experienced father figure (Nestor's own father, David's patron Saul) tells the boy that he is too young and inexperienced, but in each case the young hero receives divine aid and the giant is left sprawling on the ground. Nestor, fighting on foot, then takes the chariot of his enemy, while David, on foot, takes the sword of Goliath. The enemy army then flees, the victors pursue and slaughter them and return with their bodies, and the boy-hero is acclaimed by the people.

Goliath's name
Tell es-Safi, the biblical Gath and traditional home of Goliath, has been the subject of extensive excavations by Israel's Bar-Ilan University. The archaeologists have established that this was one of the largest of the Philistine cities until destroyed in the ninth century BC, an event from which it never recovered. The Tell es-Safi inscription, a potsherd discovered at the site, and reliably dated to between the tenth to mid-ninth centuries BC, is inscribed with the two names ʾLWT and WLT. While the names are not directly connected with the biblical Goliath (, GLYT), they are etymologically related and demonstrate that the name fits with the context of the late tenth- to early ninth-century BC Philistine culture. The name "Goliath" itself is non-Semitic and has been linked with the Lydian king Alyattes, which also fits the Philistine context of the biblical Goliath story. A similar name, Uliat, is also attested in Carian inscriptions. Aren Maeir, director of the excavation, comments: "Here we have very nice evidence [that] the name Goliath appearing in the Bible in the context of the story of David and Goliath… is not some later literary creation."

Based on the southwest Anatolian onomastic considerations, Roger D. Woodard proposed *Walwatta as a reconstruction of the form ancestral to both Hebrew Goliath and Lydian Alyattes. In this case, the original meaning of Goliath's name would be "Lion-man," thus placing him within the realm of Indo-European warrior-beast mythology.

The Babylonian Talmud explains the name "Goliath, son of Gath" through a reference to his mother's promiscuity, based on the Aramaic גַּת (gat, winepress), as everyone threshed his mother like people do to grapes in a winepress (Sotah, 42b).

The name sometimes appears in English as Goliah.

Jewish
According to the Babylonian Talmud (Sotah 42b) Goliath was a son of Orpah, the sister-in-law of Ruth, David's own great-grandmother (Ruth → Obed → Jesse → David). Ruth Rabbah, a haggadic and homiletic interpretation of the Book of Ruth, makes the blood relationship even closer, considering Orpah and Ruth to have been full sisters. Orpah was said to have made a pretense of accompanying Ruth but after forty paces left her. Thereafter she led a dissolute life. According to the Jerusalem Talmud, Goliath was born by polyspermy, and had about one hundred fathers.

The Talmud stresses Goliath's ungodliness: his taunts before the Israelites included the boast that it was he who had captured the Ark of the Covenant and brought it to the temple of Dagon, and his challenges to combat were made at morning and evening to disturb the Israelites in their prayers. His armor weighed 60 tons, according to rabbi Hanina; 120, according to rabbi Abba bar Kahana; and his sword, which became the sword of David, had marvelous powers. On his death it was found that his heart carried the image of Dagon, who thereby also came to a shameful downfall.

In Pseudo-Philo, believed to have been composed between 135 BCE and 70 CE, David picks up seven stones and writes on them his father's name, his own name, and the name of God, one name per stone; then, speaking to Goliath, he says: ""Hear this word before you die: were not the two woman from whom you and I were born, sisters? And your mother was Orpah and my mother Ruth ..."" After David strikes Goliath with the stone he runs to Goliath before he dies, and Goliath says: "Hurry and kill me and rejoice." David replies: "Before you die, open your eyes and see your slayer." Goliath sees an angel and tells David that it is not he who has killed him but the angel. Pseudo-Philo then goes on to say that the angel of the Lord changes David's appearance so that no one recognizes him, and thus Saul asks who he is.

Islam
Goliath appears in chapter 2 of the Quran (2: 247–252), in the narrative of David and Saul's battle against the Philistines. Called in Arabic (جالوت), Goliath's mention in the Quran is concise, although it remains a parallel to the account in the Hebrew Bible. Muslim scholars have tried to trace Goliath's origins, most commonly with the Amalekites. Goliath, in early scholarly tradition, became a kind of byword or collective name for the oppressors of the Israelite nation before David. Muslim tradition sees the battle with Goliath as a prefiguration of Muhammad's battle of Badr, and sees Goliath as parallel to the enemies that Muhammad faced.

Modern usage of "David and Goliath"
In modern usage, the phrase "David and Goliath" has taken on a secular meaning, denoting an underdog situation, a contest where a smaller, weaker opponent faces a much bigger, stronger adversary; if successful, the underdog may win in an unusual or surprising way.

Theology professor Leonard Greenspoon, in his essay, "David vs. Goliath in the Sports Pages", explains that "most writers use the story for its underdog overtones (the little guy wins) ... Less likely to show up in newsprint is the contrast that was most important to the biblical authors: David's victory shows the power of his God, while Goliath's defeat reveals the weakness of the Philistine deities."

The phrase is widely used in news media to succinctly characterize underdog situations in many contexts without religious overtones. Contemporary headlines include: sports ("Haye relishes underdog role in 'David and Goliath' fight with Nikolai Valuev"—The Guardian ); business ("On Internet, David-and-Goliath Battle Over Instant Messages"—The New York Times ); science ("David and Goliath: How a tiny spider catches much larger prey"—ScienceDaily; politics ("Dissent in Cuba: David and Goliath"—The Economist ); social justice ("David-and-Goliath Saga Brings Cable to Skid Row"—Los Angeles Times ).

Aside from the above allegorical use of "David and Goliath", there is also the use of "Goliath" for a particularly tall person. For example, basketball player Wilt Chamberlain was nicknamed "Goliath", which he disliked.

In popular culture
American actor Ted Cassidy portrayed Goliath in the TV series Greatest Heroes of the Bible (1978). Italian actor Luigi Montefiori portrayed this 9ft 0in-tall giant in Paramount's 1985 live-action film King David as part of a flashback. This film includes the King of the Philistines saying: "Goliath has challenged the Israelites six times and no one has responded." It is then on the seventh time that David meets his challenge.

Toho and Tsuburaya Productions collaborated on a film called Daigoro vs. Goliath (1972), which follows the story relatively closely but recasts the main characters as kaiju.

In 2005, Lightstone Studios released a direct-to-DVD movie musical titled "One Smooth Stone", which was later changed to "David and Goliath". It is part of the Liken the scriptures (now just Liken) series of movie musicals on DVD based on scripture stories. Thurl Bailey, a former NBA basketball player, was cast to play the part of Goliath in this film.

In 2009, NBC aired Kings, which has a narrative loosely based on the biblical story of King David, but set in a kingdom that culturally and technologically resembles the present-day United States. The part of Goliath is portrayed by a tank, which David destroys with a shoulder-fired rocket launcher.

In 1975, Kaveret recorded and released a humorous interpretation of the Goliath story, with several changes made such as Goliath being the "Demon from Ashkelon", and David randomly meeting Goliath rather than dueling each other on a battlefield.

Italian Goliath film series (1960–1964)
The Italians used Goliath as an action superhero in a series of biblical adventure films (peplums) in the early 1960s. He possessed amazing strength, and the films were similar in theme to their Hercules and Maciste movies. After the classic Hercules (1958) became a blockbuster sensation in the film industry, the 1959 Steve Reeves film Terrore dei Barbari (Terror of the Barbarians) was retitled Goliath and the Barbarians in the United States, (after Joseph E. Levine claimed the sole right to the name of Hercules); the film was so successful at the box office, it inspired Italian filmmakers to do a series of four more films featuring a beefcake hero named Goliath, although the films were not really related to each other. Note that the Italian film David and Goliath (1960), starring Orson Welles, was not one of these, since that film was a straightforward adaptation of the biblical story.

The four titles in the Italian Goliath series were as follows:
 * Goliath contro i giganti/Goliath Against the Giants (1960) starring Brad Harris
 * Goliath e la schiava ribelle/Goliath and the Rebel Slave (a.k.a. The Tyrant of Lydia vs. The Son of Hercules) (1963) starring Gordon Scott
 * Golia e il cavaliere mascherato/Goliath and the Masked Rider (a.k.a. Hercules and the Masked Rider) (1964) starring Alan Steel
 * Golia alla conquista di Bagdad/Goliath at the Conquest of Baghdad (a.k.a. Goliath at the Conquest of Damascus, 1964) starring Peter Lupus

The name Goliath was later inserted into the film titles of three other Italian muscle man movies that were retitled for distribution in the United States in an attempt to cash in on the Goliath craze, but these films were not originally made as Goliath films in Italy.

Both Goliath and the Vampires (1961) and Goliath and the Sins of Babylon (1963) actually featured the famed superhero Maciste in the original Italian versions, but American distributors did not feel the name Maciste had any meaning to American audiences. Goliath and the Dragon (1960) was originally an Italian Hercules film called The Revenge of Hercules.

title: Goliath


text:
Euler's identity

In mathematics, Euler's identity (also known as Euler's equation) is the equality $$e^{i \pi} + 1 = 0$$ where
 * $$e$$ is Euler's number, the base of natural logarithms,
 * $$i$$ is the imaginary unit, which by definition satisfies $$i^2 = -1$$, and
 * $$\pi$$ is pi, the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its diameter.

Euler's identity is named after the Swiss mathematician Leonhard Euler. It is a special case of Euler's formula $$e^{ix} = \cos x + i\sin x$$ when evaluated for $$x = \pi$$. Euler's identity is considered to be an exemplar of mathematical beauty as it shows a profound connection between the most fundamental numbers in mathematics. In addition, it is directly used in a proof that $\pi$ is transcendental, which implies the impossibility of squaring the circle.

Mathematical beauty
Euler's identity is often cited as an example of deep mathematical beauty. Three of the basic arithmetic operations occur exactly once each: addition, multiplication, and exponentiation. The identity also links five fundamental mathematical constants:
 * The 0|number 0, the additive identity
 * The 1|number 1, the multiplicative identity
 * The number $π$ ($π$ = 3.1415...), the fundamental circle constant
 * The number $e^{ix} = cos x + i sin x$ ($e$ = 2.718...), also known as Euler's number, which occurs widely in mathematical analysis
 * The number $e$, the imaginary unit such that $$i^2=-1$$

The equation is often given in the form of an expression set equal to zero, which is common practice in several areas of mathematics.

Stanford University mathematics professor Keith Devlin has said, "like a Shakespearean sonnet that captures the very essence of love, or a painting that brings out the beauty of the human form that is far more than just skin deep, Euler's equation reaches down into the very depths of existence". And Paul Nahin, a professor emeritus at the University of New Hampshire, who has written a book dedicated to Euler's formula and its applications in Fourier analysis, describes Euler's identity as being "of exquisite beauty".

Mathematics writer Constance Reid has opined that Euler's identity is "the most famous formula in all mathematics". And Benjamin Peirce, a 19th-century American philosopher, mathematician, and professor at Harvard University, after proving Euler's identity during a lecture, stated that the identity "is absolutely paradoxical; we cannot understand it, and we don't know what it means, but we have proved it, and therefore we know it must be the truth".

A poll of readers conducted by The Mathematical Intelligencer in 1990 named Euler's identity as the "most beautiful theorem in mathematics". In another poll of readers that was conducted by Physics World in 2004, Euler's identity tied with Maxwell's equations (of electromagnetism) as the "greatest equation ever".

At least three books in popular mathematics have been published about Euler's identity:
 * Dr. Euler's Fabulous Formula: Cures Many Mathematical Ills, by Paul Nahin (2011)
 * A Most Elegant Equation: Euler's formula and the beauty of mathematics, by David Stipp (2017)
 * Euler's Pioneering Equation: The most beautiful theorem in mathematics, by Robin Wilson (2018).

Imaginary exponents
Fundamentally, Euler's identity asserts that $$e^{i\pi}$$ is equal to −1. The expression $$e^{i\pi}$$ is a special case of the expression $$e^z$$, where $i$ is any complex number. In general, $$e^z$$ is defined for complex $(1 + iπ⁄N)^{N}$ by extending one of the definitions of the exponential function from real exponents to complex exponents. For example, one common definition is:

 * $$e^z = \lim_{n\to\infty} \left(1+\frac z n \right)^n.$$

Euler's identity therefore states that the limit, as $(1 + iπ⁄N)^{N}$ approaches infinity, of $$(1 + i\pi/n)^n$$ is equal to −1. This limit is illustrated in the animation to the right.

Euler's identity is a special case of Euler's formula, which states that for any real number $(1 + iπ⁄N)^{N}$,

 * $$e^{ix} = \cos x + i\sin x$$

where the inputs of the trigonometric functions sine and cosine are given in radians.

In particular, when $z$,

 * $$e^{i \pi} = \cos \pi + i\sin \pi.$$

Since

 * $$\cos \pi = -1$$

and

 * $$\sin \pi = 0,$$

it follows that

 * $$e^{i \pi} = -1 + 0 i,$$

which yields Euler's identity:

 * $$e^{i \pi} +1 = 0.$$

Geometric interpretation
Any complex number $$z = x + iy$$ can be represented by the point $$(x, y)$$ on the complex plane. This point can also be represented in polar coordinates as $$(r, \theta)$$, where r is the absolute value of z (distance from the origin), and $$\theta$$ is the argument of z (angle counterclockwise from the positive x-axis). By the definitions of sine and cosine, this point has cartesian coordinates of $$(r \cos \theta, r \sin \theta)$$, implying that $$z = r(\cos \theta + i \sin \theta)$$. According to Euler's formula, this is equivalent to saying $$z = r e^{i\theta}$$.

Euler's identity says that $$-1 = e^{i\pi}$$. Since $$e^{i\pi}$$ is $$r e^{i\theta}$$ for r = 1 and $$\theta = \pi$$, this can be interpreted as a fact about the number −1 on the complex plane: its distance from the origin is 1, and its angle from the positive x-axis is $$\pi$$ radians.

Additionally, when any complex number z is multiplied by $$e^{i\theta}$$, it has the effect of rotating z counterclockwise by an angle of $$\theta$$ on the complex plane. Since multiplication by −1 reflects a point across the origin, Euler's identity can be interpreted as saying that rotating any point $$\pi$$ radians around the origin has the same effect as reflecting the point across the origin. Similarly, setting $$\theta$$ equal to $$2\pi$$ yields the related equation $$e^{2\pi i} = 1,$$ which can be interpreted as saying that rotating any point by one turn around the origin returns it to its original position.

Generalizations
Euler's identity is also a special case of the more general identity that the $N$th roots of unity, for $z$, add up to 0:

 * $$\sum_{k=0}^{n-1} e^{2 \pi i \frac{k}{n}} = 0 .$$

Euler's identity is the case where $n$.

A similar identity also applies to quaternion exponential: let $x$ be the basis quaternions; then,
 * $$e^{\frac{1}{\sqrt 3}(i \pm j \pm k)\pi} + 1 = 0. $$

More generally, let $N$ be a quaternion with a zero real part and a norm equal to $x = π$; that is, $$q=ai+bj+ck,$$ with $$a^2+b^2+c^2=1.$$ Then one has
 * $$e^{q\pi} + 1 = 0. $$

The same formula applies to octonions, with a zero real part and a norm equal to $n > 1$. These formulas are a direct generalization of Euler's identity, since $$i$$ and $$-i$$ are the only complex numbers with a zero real part and a norm (absolute value) equal to $n = 2$.

History
While Euler's identity is a direct result of Euler's formula, published in his monumental work of mathematical analysis in 1748, Introductio in analysin infinitorum, it is questionable whether the particular concept of linking five fundamental constants in a compact form can be attributed to Euler himself, as he may never have expressed it.

Robin Wilson states the following. "We've seen how it [Euler's identity] can easily be deduced from results of Johann Bernoulli and Roger Cotes, but that neither of them seem to have done so. Even Euler does not seem to have written it down explicitly – and certainly it doesn't appear in any of his publications – though he must surely have realized that it follows immediately from his identity [i.e. Euler's formula], . Moreover, it seems to be unknown who first stated the result explicitly...."

title: Euler's identity


text:
Artificial Intelligence Markup Language

Artificial Intelligence Markup Language (AIML) is an XML dialect for creating natural language software agents.

History
The XML dialect called AIML was developed by Richard Wallace and a worldwide free software community between 1995 and 2002. AIML formed the basis for what was initially a highly extended Eliza called "A.L.I.C.E." ("Artificial Linguistic Internet Computer Entity"), which won the annual Loebner Prize Competition in Artificial Intelligence three times, and was also the Chatterbox Challenge Champion in 2004.

Because the A.L.I.C.E. AIML set was released under the GPL, and because most AIML interpreters are offered under a free or open source license, many "Alicebot clones" have been created based upon the original implementation of the program and its AIML knowledge base. Free AIML sets in several languages have been developed and made available by the user community. There are AIML interpreters available in Java, Ruby, Python, C++, C#, Pascal, and other languages (see below ). A semi-formal specification and a W3C XML Schema for AIML are available.

Since early 2013, The A.L.I.C.E foundation has been working on a draft specification for AIML 2.0.

Elements of AIML
AIML contains several elements. The most important of these are described in further detail below.

Categories
Categories in AIML form the fundamental unit of knowledge. A category consists of at least two further elements: the pattern and template elements. Here is a simple category:

When this category is loaded, an AIML bot will respond to the input "What is your name" with the response "My name is Michael N.S Evanious."

Patterns
A pattern is a string of characters intended to match one or more user inputs. A literal pattern like

WHAT IS YOUR NAME

will match only one input, ignoring case: "what is your name". But patterns may also contain wildcards, which match one or more words. A pattern like

WHAT IS YOUR *

will match an infinite number of inputs, including "what is your name", "what is your shoe size", "what is your purpose in life", etc.

The AIML pattern syntax is a very simple pattern language, substantially less complex than regular expressions and as such less than level 3 in the Chomsky hierarchy. To compensate for the simple pattern matching capabilities, AIML interpreters can provide preprocessing functions to expand abbreviations, remove misspellings, etc.

The AIML syntax itself is at least as complex as finite state machines and as such at least of level 3 in the Chomsky hierarchy. This is because a state correlates to one topic. To implement that behavior, the topic should have a "*" Pattern to make sure, that the state is not left accidentally. A state transit is implemented with the state2 Tag. This way, the bot will be able to "remember" the topic talked about or even user privileges, which are gained during the chat.

Templates
A template specifies the response to a matched pattern. A template may be as simple as some literal text, like

My name is John.

A template may use variables, such as the example

My name is.

which will substitute the bot's name into the sentence, or

You told me you are  years old.

which will substitute the user's age (if known) into the sentence.

Template elements include basic text formatting, conditional response (if-then/else), and random responses.

Templates may also redirect to other patterns, using an element called srai (Symbolic Reduction in Artificial Intelligence). This can be used to implement synonymy, as in this example (where CDATA is used to avoid the need for XML escaping):

The first category simply answers an input "what is your name" with a statement of the bot's name. The second category, however, says that the input "what are you called" should be redirected to the category that matches the input "what is your name"—in other words, it is saying that the two phrases are equivalent.

Templates can contain other types of content, which may be processed by whatever user interface the bot is talking through. So, for example, a template may use HTML tags for formatting, which can be ignored by clients that don't support HTML.

title: Artificial Intelligence Markup Language