text:
Talk:Lie algebra

Category theoretic definition
The definition in that section looks a bit useless and seems to say that category theory complicates things. Perhaps the category of vector spaces over k should be replaced by any braided monoidal k-linear category. The notion of a Lie algebra can be defined (and is studied) in this generality, and I guess that this is what the category theoretic definition is all about. Martin B. 92.231.13.68 (talk) 18:30, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

 * Well, apparently, someone removed this at some point. It's a shame, because the category-theoretic definition helps build insight and understanding into what is going on; once you understand Lie algebras, the cat-th defition helps you go say "a hah!" to the next level. Anyway, some other comment, up above (in Archive 1 of this talk page) noted:
 * ''The category theoretic definition provided doesn't work over a field of characteristic 2.  The correct definition is as follows:""

 * A Lie algebra is an object A in the category of vector spaces together with a morphism $$[\cdot,\cdot]:A\otimes A\rightarrow A$$ such that

 * $$[\cdot,\cdot]\circ \Delta=0$$ where $$\Delta:A\rightarrow A\otimes A$$ is the diagonal morphism, and
 * $$[\cdot,\cdot]\circ ([\cdot,\cdot]\otimes id)\circ(id+\sigma+\sigma^2)=0$$ where σ is the cyclic permutation braiding $$(id\otimes \tau_{A,A})\circ(\tau_{A,A}\otimes id)$$.

 * This is not correct since the diagonal "morphism" doesn't exist in the category of vector spaces. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.155.213.93 (talk) 17:39, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

 * (It should probably also be added that the morphism $$\tau_{A,A}:A\otimes A\rightarrow A\otimes A$$ is the interchange morphism rather than leave that as assumed knowledge.)

 * This content should be restored and expanded. 67.198.37.16 (talk) 20:03, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

 * I restored it. I did not expand it. 67.198.37.16 (talk) 20:42, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

This is a rather old thread. However, has removed this section again, because the "diagonal morphism" that was used (and is used in the above quotation) is not a morphism. This is true. I have not found how to fix this error by using alternativity. However, it can be fixed by using antisymmetry, which excludes the characteristic two. So I have rewritten the section this way, and, by the way, I have improved the style (MOS:MATH). D.Lazard (talk) 18:03, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

 * I agree and think the first response that it provides "insight" is unjustified. It's nothing more than a rephrasing of the definition that does not provide any insight. This section should be deleted.

Anticommutativity follows from what?
I am not familiar with Lie algebras, but I don't see how the anticommutativity follows from the bilinearity and alternativity properties alone, without the use of the Jacobi relation. Could a hint to why it does be added? (Or could it be added that the Jacobi relation is also necessary).

When I show anticommutativity (using all three relations), I assume that the Lie bracket with any argument z and the zero element (0) of the vector space is 0, but I am not sure that this is true.

To whoever made an edit, thank you! A few more words (not even one line) and the article has probably been made clearer to many readers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.225.98.190 (talk) 09:48, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

 * Once upon a time (maybe it was removed??) there was an explicit discussion of this. Basically, if you try to write out every possible way that an associative algebra could work, you are forced into having only two choices. Bilinearity allows only one of these two possibilities. There are similar arguments that can be made in various other kinds of algebras (not just Lie algebras) and I've noticed that, more than once, that some of these were removed; one edit summary called them "pointless philosophical ruminations". Of course, as your question shows, they are not pointless at all. I reverted that one, but I can't go run around and try to police these kinds of (destructive) edits. Perhaps someone else can find/reconstruct this argument; it can be found in the better-written textbooks. 67.198.37.16 (talk) 19:43, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Merge proposal for Classical Lie algebras
It has been proposed that classical Lie algebras be merged here.
 * Oppose: I feel that they warrant an article of their own, much like classical group displays the unique status (application and mathematics-wise) of these groups. On the technical side, the classical Lie algebras can be treated in a surprisingly uniform manner. YohanN7 (talk) 08:36, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose: Per YohanN7. There is a lot of activity w.r.t affine/non-rigid stuff, and so having a distinct article focused on the classical cases make sense, this can avoid having to jam everything into one article. 67.198.37.16 (talk) 19:31, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lie algebra. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100420004313/http://math.mit.edu/~lesha/745lec/ to http://www.math.mit.edu/~lesha/745lec/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:55, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Rotation Velocity Concern
At the end of the intro, we find ...

This is the Lie algebra of the Lie group of rotations of space, and each vector $$v\in\R^3$$ may be pictured as an infinitesimal rotation around the axis $$v$$, with velocity equal to the magnitude of $$v$$.

My concern is that the magnitude of $$v$$ represents the angle (or magnitude) of the rotation, not its velocity.

Am not confident enough in my concern to edit the page, hence am adding this topic, here.

Any thoughts? WadoNeil (talk) 10:24, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

 * As the velocity mentioned at the end of the sentence is not related to anything, I think that the module of $$v$$ might stand for the angle of rotation than for the velocity. Stefan Groote (talk) 05:01, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Lie algebra


text:
Peperomia

Peperomia is one of the two large genera of the family Piperaceae. It is estimated that there are at least over 1,000 species, occurring in all tropical and subtropical regions of the world. They are concentrated in South and Central America, but may also be found in southern North America, the Caribbean islands, Africa, Oceania, and southern and eastern parts of Asia. The exact number of species is difficult to determine, as some plants have been recorded several times with different names, and new species continue to be discovered. Peperomias have adapted to many different environments and their appearances vary greatly. Some are epiphytes (growing on other plants) or lithophytes (growing on rock or in rock crevices), and many are xerophytes (drought-tolerant, with thick succulent structures to save water) or possess underground tubers (geophytes). Most species are compact perennial shrubs or vines.

Some Peperomias have thick, waxy, succulent leaves and stems; still, others are rather delicate, with paper-thin leaves. Many species will easily sunburn, preferring filtered or indirect, bright sunlight. Most of the Peperomias have minimal to virtually non-existent root systems (species-depending), with the entire mass often being nothing more than a collection of tiny, hair-like appendages used to anchor the plant. These roots, while delicate, also enable the plants to survive in less-than-ideal conditions; however, their fragility also places them at a greater risk for root rot if water does not drain sufficiently quickly.

The genus name Peperomia was coined by Spanish botanists Ruiz López and Pavón Jiménez in 1794 after their travels in Perú and Chile. Peperomia plants do not have a widely- accepted common name, and some argue that it is better to use the genus name, as is the case with genera such as Petunia and Begonia. They are sometimes called radiator plants, a name possibly coined by L.H. Bailey because many of them enjoy bright and dry environments similar to a windowsill above a radiator. Furthermore, many individuals simply refer to the many Peperomias by their individual nicknames, such as Peperomia polybotrya being called the “Raindrop Peperomia” (due to its large, drop-shaped leaves), or P. argyreia being the “Watermelon Peperomia”, due to its leaf veining and shape resembling the look of a watermelon.

Description
Peperomias vary considerably in appearance (see gallery below) and there is no universally accepted method of categorising them, although three main groups can be distinguished. Most species are compact and usually do not exceed 12 in in height.

First are plants with decorative foliage, which often grow in rain or cloud forests as epiphytes. They are adapted to living in small shady crevices on, for example, trees, with small root systems. As they do not have access to ground water they are typically succulent to a certain degree, which in many species shows as thick, fleshy leaves which have a waxy surface and are sometimes rippled. The leaves may be oval with the leafstalk at or near the center of the leaf blade, or they may be heart-shaped or lance-shaped; their size varies from 1 - 4 in long. They may be green or striped, marbled or bordered with pale green, red or gray, and the petioles of some kinds are red. They also enjoy high air humidity, warm temperatures, and grow all year round. Examples include P. argyreia, P. caperata, P. nitida, P. obtusifolia, P. polybotrya, and P. scandens.

The second group consists of more arid-climate, succulent peperomias, which are often found in higher altitudes. They are adapted to withstanding a long warm season followed by a colder winter and very little rainfall. They store water both in their stout stems and in their succulent leaves, which typically form a sort of “tube” or “burrito”, appearing U- or V-shaped in cross-section, often with epidermal windows on the top-side. P. columella, P. ferreyrae, P. graveolens and P. nivalis fall into this category.

The third group contains geophytic peperomias. These plants have leaves that fall off in the colder dry season, survive due to their underground tubers, and grow the leaves back as more rain falls. Examples include P. macrorhiza, P. peruviana, and P. umbilicata. Currently just under 50 species of geophytic peperomias are known, but new ones continue to be discovered.

Peperomia flowers are typically unnoticeable, growing in cordlike spikes, although there are some exceptions such as P. fraseri. Most peperomia flowers seem odorless to humans but some carry a musty or even unpleasant odor, such as P. graveolens. The fruit is a berry that eventually dries out and shows the tiny pepper-like seed.

Species
There are over a thousand Peperomia species, although the exact number is unclear as some plants have been recorded several times with different names (c. 3,000 names have been used in publications) and new species continue to be discovered. At the moment Catalogue of Life lists around 1,400 recognized species.

Distribution
Peperomias are found in tropical and sub-tropical regions around the world. Northern South America and Central America host the largest number of species, but peperomias can also be found in Africa, southern Asia, and Oceania. The exact number of peperomia species continues to change as new plants are discovered and some distinct plant names, perhaps catalogued in separate geographical regions, are realised to describe the same species. Therefore, the table below gives only a rough overall impression of the worldwide distribution.

Note that many peperomias are found in wide overlapping regions, for example everywhere in tropical America or Asia, and so may have not been included in the species count for individual areas.

Horticulture
Peperomias are often grown for their ornamental foliage and many species are considered easy to grow in homes and greenhouses. Several species have been given the Award of Garden Merit by the Royal Horticultural Society. Peperomias are largely considered non-toxic and are often recommended for households with children or animals.

Out of the 1,000+ Peperomia species, currently only about 40 of them are commonly used as houseplants. These peperomias fare well in average home conditions and can relatively easily be found in stores and garden centers. Species in this basic group include P. alata, P. albovittata, P. argyreia, P. blanda, P. boivinii, P. caperata, P. clusiifolia, P. columella, P. dolabriformis, P. ferreyrae, P. fraseri, P. glabella, P. graveolens, P. griseoargentea, P. hoffmannii, P. incana, P. japonica, P. kimnachii, P. maculosa, P. metallica, P. nitida (often sold as P. scandens), P. nivalis, P. obtusifolia, P. pellucida, P. perciliata, P. pereskiifolia, P. polybotrya, P. prostrata, P. quadrangularis (syn. P. angulata), P. rotundifolia, P. rugosa, P. tetragona (syn. P. puteolata), P. tetraphylla, P. turboensis, P. urocarpa, P. verschaffeltii, P. verticillata (syn. P. rubella), and P. wheeleri.

There can be, however, several cultivars available from each species. Identifying species can be challenging as plants are often sold under marketing names, older synonyms, or under names that have not been officially accepted. This is the case, for example, with Peperomia orba (often sold as Peperomia 'Pixie'), Peperomia viridis, and Peperomia axillaris. In addition to natural species and their cultivars, some artificial hybrid varieties can also be found on the market, such as Peperomia 'Hope' (a cross between P. deppeana and P. quadrifolia).

Most species need airy, well-draining substrate and want to dry out to some extent or even completely between waterings. A typical reason for losing a peperomia is through root rot caused by over-watering. The tropical, decorative foliage plants, typically enjoy shadier conditions with more humidity. Some might even require a terrarium or a bottle garden to maintain high humidity. The arid climate succulent types should be treated similarly to cacti and other succulents: they can tolerate more light and will survive a dry cold period, during which they are watered only seldomly. The geophytic peperomias are used to experiencing a cold resting period once a year.

Food and medicine
Many peperomias are herbs in the sense that their leaves carry a spicy flavour and, when crushed, emit a strong odour. Therefore, some species, such as Peperomia pellucida are used in salads and cooking, or to flavour drinks. However, peperomia plants themselves are not suitable for human or pet consumption.

Some species, including Peperomia inaequalifolia, Peperomia congona and Peperomia pellucida , are also used in herbal medicine for various health conditions. While such folk medicine usage is common in Peru and elsewhere, the possible medicinal qualities of peperomias remain poorly investigated, although there has been a growing interest for the subject recently.

Propagation
These plants can be propagated by seeds, by cuttings, or by dividing. Peperomia cuttings of many species root easily.

Plants can be divided and repotted. They are removed and separated into smaller pieces, each with a few roots attached. Leaf or stem cuttings can also be taken in the spring or summer. The lower leaves of the shoots are removed and a cut is made below the bottom node (joint). They are then laid on a bench for an hour or two to allow a protective callus tissue to form over the cuts. They are then inserted in a propagating case with bottom heat of 70-75 F. It is best not to seal the top completely, as the plants are semi-succulent in nature and excessive humidity is detrimental. When enough roots have formed, cuttings can be planted in 3 in pots or in hanging baskets.

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

title: Peperomia


text:
Talk:Casimir III the Great

Old talk
There is an ortography error in the sentence of the first line below the section Society under the reign of Casimir, he introduced were his attempt to put the overwhelming superiority of the nobility to an end. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcosoldfox (talk • contribs) 13:43, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

isn't that strange that we called such a bastard, erotoman and cruel king the great? :))) I wonder if i shoudl put info about all this, because that would terrible damage his school-picture of all-good king szopen]]

Of course you should. Also about his double bigamy. We should give a full and true view on every topic. But this doesn't change the fact, that Casimir was indeed the great. It was him, wh brught Poland into power never seen before.

There exists a clear policy for article titles: Naming_conventions_%28names_and_titles%29. It leaves no room for "Kazimierz", which is not English, and it directs to use the numeral and the territorial designation. Moves to put an article to its NC-prescribed place can be executed by anyone. Shilkanni 23:25, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
 * You are incorrect. Please see Naming_convention.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 00:59, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Language Cleanup
I have cleaned up the language somewhat in this article --Twenex 13:56, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

see section below. Haukur 20:10, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Move request
Kazimierz III the Great to Casimir III of Poland. The first name should be in English, not in Polish. This was a medieval monarch, no one cannot claim that Kazimierz is precisely an original name, spelling was not so established at that time. Marrtel 17:50, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Poll

 * Wite Support or Oppose and an optional one-sentence reason. Longer parts of opinions then below at discussion.

 * Support. As nominator. Use English. Marrtel 17:50, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose So far I have seen the user opposes names based on opinion that they were made by "Polish nationalist minority". Such rude comments should be outside of wiki and certainly not a basis for changes.--Molobo 19:52, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. john k 20:08, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. While the notion of a "Polish cabal" and the accusations of "Polish nationalism" are less than good faith, I would say, it is not a good reason for voting against a proposal that the proponent has expressed such views. Secondly, this is a prime example of a figure which, as far as I know, is indisputable better known by his English name (Casimir III of Poland or Casimir III the Great) than the current name. Srnec 20:24, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support as per Srnec. This is the obvious name. FearÉIREANN [[Image:Map of Ireland's capitals.png|15px]]\(caint)|undefined 20:28, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Conditionally Support. Srnec's reasoning is sound, but it makes sense only if all 4 Kazimierzs are changed, along with the related disambig pages. Dpv 20:54, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. As for the first name, the analysis I did year ago at Talk:Kazimierz I the Restorer indicates that there Casimir and Kazimierz seem to be similarly popular in English texts. And certainly 'the Great' for this truly extraordinary ruler is more fitting then the much less informative 'of Poland'.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 21:56, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support Charles 21:59, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Would you like to share your reasons for support?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 22:05, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I support the harmonization to name monarchs by the anglicized form of their given names when appropriate or reasonable. Charles 22:08, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak support. Weak cause I'd rather move it to Kazimierz III of Poland.  // Halibutt 22:44, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Why? FearÉIREANN [[Image:Map of Ireland's capitals.png|15px]]\(caint)|undefined 23:14, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, why? No offence but I see this as the 'worst of both worlds' :> See below for why.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 00:54, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Because I always supported the descriptive and easy to use XXX of YYY style. As to the first name - I prefer not to latinize Slavic names at all cost. Casimir seems fine, but then consistency leaves us also with Vladislaus (or Wladislas, Ladislas, and so on), Stanislaus (or Stanislaw, Stanislas) and so on.  // Halibutt
 * I also prefer not to Latinize Slavic names at all cost. The Polish "Wladyslaw," for instance, has seen so many different Latinized/Anglicized forms that it's almost impossible to figure out what the "right" latinization is. In such cases, we should stick with the Polish.  But this isn't true for Casimir/Kazimierz, which is pretty universal. john k 10:37, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Currently running at 21-9 (with one support being "conditional" and another "weak"), can this page be moved yet? Srnec 20:28, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support per WP:Use English. AjaxSmack 02:54, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support anglicizing unconditionally in case the anglisized name has more common usage. --Irpen 03:11, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. This is English Wikipedia. See what is going on with Władysław II Jagiełło, the "most correct name", according to the Piotrus, to Jogaila of Lithuania. Juraune 06:54, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. What — mere Casimir?  KonradWallenrod 08:09, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. Otherwise, Molobo, Piotrus, Halibutt, etc will still think that they edit Polish wiki here. -- Ghirla -трёп-  12:50, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. Orionus 13:04, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Note that the user Orionus has appeared only to when the votes on monarchs started and hasn't contributed much beyond them. --Molobo 13:21, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, you are right. I am an expert in astronomy( and some links in our national wiki). But every man can have his opinion on historical questions. Am I rigth? Orionus 13:39, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Votes made by users that appeared during the vote and have dedicated themselfs solely to voting are usually discarded. --Molobo 13:48, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * "usually discarded" since when? Requested moves are publicized just because everyone can give his opinion on the matter.--Panairjdde 14:44, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * But new user votes are usually discarded. See Talk:Polish Biographical Dictionary for a RM example of that. Personally I always said that there should be a clear rule from when a user gains the right to vote. The rule of thumbs seems to be few weeks on Wiki and few hundred edits.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 15:18, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * To clarify (please keep in mind that English is not Molobo's first language): All Wikipedia editors are welcome to participate in these polls, and outside comment is both appreciated and encouraged. In some cases though, unscrupulous users have been known to create throwaway accounts (these are called sockpuppets, see WP:SOCK) in order to try and pad a vote.  So, it is routine for a reviewing admin to check that all users involved in a vote, have a history of edits somewhere on Wikipedia, over a period of more than just the last few days, to prove that they're a real account, and not a sockpuppet.  There is disagreement as to how many edits a particular user needs to have in order to be considered "real".  In some cases, 50 might be enough, though some other editors like to see a few hundred, and a few hardcore users don't trust anybody with fewer than a thousand.  ;)  But to repeat: it is not necessary to actually have edits on the article that is being discussed, in order to be able to weigh in with a poll.  And even the new users are welcome to participate and comment, even if their votes might not be given as much weight.  In Orionus' case in particular, I believe that what Molobo is referring to is the fact Orionis' first ever post was on June 11, and that he has fewer than 50 edits on the account, most of which are votes on Polish monarchs, which does seem a bit unusual for a new user to immediately jump into so many polls like that.  So I recommend Orionis spend time editing other articles around Wikipedia to build up his edit count, and until he's got a few more articles under his belt, don't be surprised if there's a raised eyebrow here and there. --Elonka 22:26, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Elonka. Really I am new in wikipedia community. And I am slightly upset with the above reaction to my votes. Originally I voted only for Jogaila (or at least Jagiello) instead of present name Władysław II Jagiełło. Next day I found an invitation to vote on Polish medieval monarchs naming. And I also expressed my opinion... Orionus 07:19, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. as per nomination --Panairjdde 14:44, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support It does say "use English" in the guidelines after all... Gryffindor  15:10, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Appleseed (Talk) 15:26, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. I'm for either Casimir III the Great or Casimir III of Poland, but we do need to get some coordination on this. - Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 15:42, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support Use English. It would be useful to discuss epithets sepately, however.  Septentrionalis 17:01, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support as per nom, use English.--Matthead 21:06, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose too many questions unanswered at present; get a general solution before embarking on one-off changes. Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:03, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. logologist|Talk 01:26, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. -- Anatopism 02:57, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose, per Angus McLellan. - Mattergy 07:13, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose Radomil talk 15:12, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong support. Every single encyclopedia I checked, lists this guy's name as Casimir, with only minor variations after that. Sokol's Polish Biographical Dictionary: Casimir III (The Great).  1979 Encyclopedia Britannica: Casimir III the Great, of Poland, Online Britannica: Casimir III, Webster's Desk Encyclopedia: Casimir III aka Casimir the Great. Columbia Online: Casimir III . This article should never have been moved to a Polish spelling. --Elonka 19:20, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * As I wrote below, I can see the reasons for Casimir over Kazimierz. But do you 'strongly support' 'of Poland' instead of 'Great'?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 19:27, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * One poll at a time. :)  For now, I strongly support getting this article off of the "Kazimierz" name, as soon as possible.  Any user who sees the article title of "Kazimierz" and tries to use it to find an article on him in their own local encyclopedia, is going to have a hard time since none of the major reference works refer to him by that name.  We can debate the "of Poland" and "the Great" decision later. In fact, I would see it as a sign of good faith if you would please change your vote in the above poll to help speed the process. --Elonka 05:34, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support - Use English. - 167.7.39.139 00:30, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. Olessi 16:00, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support --Aldux 20:46, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support, per several others. Jonathunder 07:05, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support - Use English. Jay32183 16:29, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support - This is the English-language Wikipedia.Dogface 01:07, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Discussion
but
 * 2 books use "Kazimierz III the Great"
 * 14 book use "Kazimierz III Wielki"
 * 33 books use "Kazimierz the Great"
 * 164 use "Kazimierz Wielki"
 * 46 books use "Casimir III the Great"
 * 242 use "Casimir the Great"
 * Only 19 books use "Casimir III of Poland"

I can see the argument that Casimir is slightly more popular then Kazimierz (although 286:213 is not a major diff). I certainly see no reason to adopt a veriant prefered by 19 vs 500! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 00:52, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * The use of of Poland has always been an exception to the "most common English usage" rule; we have just made that explicit. A separate poll on the Great vs. of Poland would be sensible; I'm not setting it up because I'm not sure how I would vote. Septentrionalis 17:39, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

 * The usage "Casimir III of Poland" is not his "name". Casimir is his name, "the Great" his epithet, and III his ordinal. "Of Poland" is a descriptor we use on Wikipedia to prevent ambiguity and to inform. Casimir III tells the ignorant nothing, Casimir the Great something more, but Casimir III of Poland tells us that he was a ruler of Poland, which is tells us more about him than anything else. The statement above, "...certainly 'the Great' for this truly extraordinary ruler is more fitting then the much less informative 'of Poland'," is not really true. It doesn't matter whether an author never has reason to use the full phrase "Casimir III of Poland," he is writing in context, but the title of an encyclopedia article has no context. Srnec 01:44, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * So, Lawrence of Arabia would be... a ruler of Arabia? KonradWallenrod 08:11, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

 * You mean T. E. Lawrence? john k 10:34, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

 * No, Lawrence of Arabia would be his name (Lawrence) plus his byname/epithet ("of Arabia"). Lawrence of Arabia is not his name, only part of it is part of his full name. If it were Lawrence III of Arabia, it would be proper to assume that he was the third Lawrence to rule Arabia. Srnec 15:58, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Poll results
Okay, wow, this is tough. I'll start with User:Dpv. His vote is conditional on certain other pages being moved and since I haven't even looked at those polls yet I think the only thing I can do is set it aside for a while. Other users cast an unambiguous vote for or against the proposed move. User:Halibutt was the only one to qualify his vote was "weak".

When judging the result of a poll like this there are several things to pay attention to. One is the experience of editors involved. In my opinion it takes a while to become sufficiently familiar with the way things are done on Wikipedia to give an educated view on something as arcane as the naming conventions of European royalty. To set an arbitrary minimum I'd say a month and 100 edits and I think that's still being generous. Only a couple of editors, User:167.7.39.139 and User:Orionus fall below this minimum. Newbies are, of course, welcome to participate in polls and if they offer good arguments they may sway experienced editors, but I think we have to set a minimum somewhere - that also discourages the creation of votestacking sockpuppets.

When it comes to puppets it looks to me like User:Logologist, User:Anatopism and User:Mattergy are probably all operated by the same person (look at their edit histories). People are welcome to edit using multiple accounts but when it comes to votes it's enough to express one's opinion through one of them. If User:Logologist tells me I'm mistaken we can ask for a 'checkuser' to confirm or deny the association.

When it comes to votes on individual articles I'm inclined to give more weight to the opinion of users who have edited the article in the past, in this case User:Piotrus, User:Appleseed, User:Logologist and User:Halibutt.

User:Marrtel posted notices on the talk pages of many users, soliciting their views on this poll. It seems to me that he may only have contacted people he thought likely to agree with him on the issue. This taints the poll somewhat and may mean it is not representative of the opinions of Wikipedians as a whole. I'm sure that everyone who voted did so in good faith and gave their honest opinion but the participants in the poll may not be a fair sample of those who care about the issue.

All these factors are noted in the tally below.

Oppose

 * Piotrus - experienced editor, has edited the article
 * Appleseed - experienced editor, has edited the article
 * Logologist - experienced editor, has edited the article <--Now revealed to be using sockpuppets, as established by CheckUser.see User:Mackensen on WP:ANI
 * Anatopism - experienced editor (looks like a puppet of Logologist) <--Sockpuppet No.1.
 * Mattergy - experienced editor (looks like a puppet of Logologist) <--Sockpuppet No.2.
 * Molobo - experienced editor
 * KonradWallenrod - experienced editor <--Sockpuppet No.3.
 * Radomil - experienced editor
 * Angusmclellan - experienced editor, solicited by Martell

Support

 * Marrtel - experienced editor
 * Cfvh - experienced editor
 * AjaxSmack - experienced editor
 * Ghirlandajo - experienced editor
 * Panairjdde - experienced editor
 * Elonka - experienced editor
 * Olessi - experienced editor
 * Jay32183 - experienced editor
 * John_Kenney - experienced editor, solicited by Marrtel
 * Srnec - experienced editor, solicited by Marrtel
 * Jtdirl - experienced editor, solicited by Marrtel
 * Irpen - experienced editor, solicited by Marrtel
 * Juraune - experienced editor, solicited by Marrtel
 * Gryffindor - experienced editor, solicited by Marrtel
 * Calgacus - experienced editor, solicited by Marrtel
 * Pmanderson - experienced editor, solicited by Marrtel
 * Matthead - experienced editor, solicited by Martel
 * Aldux - experienced editor, solicited by Martel
 * Jonathunder - experienced editor, solicited by Martel
 * Halibutt - experienced editor, solicited by Martell, weak support, has edited the article
 * Orionus - < 100 edits, first edit 11 June, solicited by Marrtel
 * 167.7.39.139 - 15 edits

Complex

 * Dpv - experienced editor, vote can not be processed at this time

It would be tempting to say simply that the poll is tainted and a new one should be started but I don't think that would necessarily be the best option. Holding endless polls on the names of Polish monarchs may not be the best use of our time and a new poll (perhaps an approval vote with multiple options) can just as well be held after the page is moved.

So, in order to weigh all the factors above into a decision for or against a move I've come up with an arbitrary system of multiplication modifiers.

 * Vote is marked as "weak": x 0.5
 * User seems to be a puppet: x 0.0
 * User has less than 100 edits: x 0.0
 * User was solicited to come to the poll: x 0.5
 * User has edited the article: x 2.0

If the weighted tally comes out as >60% in favor of a move I'll move the page. I have no idea if it will, I'll start counting now. Haukur 19:57, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

 * Hm, is double counting votes allowed? Charles 20:01, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

 * Okay, with this method I get:

 * Weighted oppose: 9.5
 * Weighted support: 14

 * Support percentage: 14/23.5 = 59.6%

 * Ouch. That was much closer than I would have liked but I'd best stick with what I said and not move the page. Obviously this all depends on completely arbitrary factors and if I had set any one of them differently in a direction more favorable to pro-movers the result would have gone their way. :| I hope no-one gets mad at me. I was trying to be as fair as I could and take everything into account. I personally have no opinion on the best location for this article but I believe Process is Important and we should be diligent in interpreting polls. If you want a second opinion I suggest contacting User:Nightstallion who has a lot of experience with move-requests or you can post a notice on WP:AN/WP:ANI. Haukur 20:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

That is outrageous. An overwhelming majority voted to move the page. Instead we have this cock-and-bull nonsense about weighed votes being used to overturn a clear decision. The outcome could hardly be clearer. 9 opposed. 22 Support. That is just over 29% opposed, and just under 71% supporting. That is a clear majority of a move. If one accepts the claim that two of the votes in the opposed camp were sockpuppets, as suggested, that reduces the opposed camp to 24%. How it can possibly be suggested that a situation where at most less than one in three of people voting, possibly as little as less than one in four, can oppose something and still "win" the outcome by blocking the vote, is mindboggling. In accordance with the clear vote, and the fact that the weighed majority surpassed the 60% threshhold by at least 10%, I'm moving the page in accordance with the decision of those who voted. FearÉIREANN \(caint)|undefined 20:58, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

 * Please don't act immediately, I'll post to WP:ANI and we can have broader input. Haukur 21:01, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

 * I see you have now performed the move. I've asked for input at Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents. Haukur 21:09, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure I agree with the chosen multipliers, but thanks for what appears to be a good faith effort to be fair, Haukurth. I can appreciate how much bookkeeping was involved in tallying that, not to mention doing the sockpuppet checks.  In terms of the x2 multiplier for those who have edited the article though, I think that that's a bit much, especially because it's not something that the voters were aware of.  Speaking for myself, I definitely have edited articles on European/Polish royalty, and have even created them (see August Czartoryski and Maria Amparo), and I very easily could have participated in the editing of this article, so I'm not sure it's entirely fair to give such a large discount to my vote simply because I haven't gotten around to editing this particular one yet.  But I do understand what you were trying to go for, even if I disagree with your final tally. --Elonka 21:14, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

 * Yes, maybe multiplying by two is too much. Since two users have taken issue with that already I probably won't do it again in the future. Thanks for the input! Haukur 21:23, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I do approve of your will to go deep into this discussion and analyze it in much detail. Don't let yourself be discourgaged from such approach - in the group that 'loses the vote' will always be people who will try to 'kill the proverbial messanger'. You are doing good job!--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 08:46, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Sockpuppets
I've investigated the claims of sockpuppetry. Please see here. Mackensen (talk) 14:14, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Clearly the 9 oppose votes actually are 5 6. Even by Haukur's strange calculations, that produces a clear 60%+ in favour of the move. FearÉIREANN \(caint)|undefined 18:55, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Are we throwing out 3 or 4 sockpuppet votes? And are IPs allowed to vote? Appleseed (Talk) 19:50, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I wasn't sure if the fourth vote you were talking about was Logologist's (i.e. if a sockmaster is allowed to keep his single vote), but it appears that I'm the one accused of being the fourth sock. How disheartening. Appleseed (Talk) 19:54, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Don't discount my vote just yet. I've contacted User:Jtdirl (the accuser) about this. Appleseed (Talk) 20:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Only sockpuppets should be discounted, Logologists vote should stay, IP shouldn't as well as those people with few edits. --Molobo 19:53, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

 * The English form still is favoured by the majority of voters, whether eligible by your standards or any others presented. Charles 19:54, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

The English form  Please provide evidence that this is an English form and not an imaginary creation. Please remember that Wiki isn't a democracy and voting is just a guideline. If users from country the article relates to have grounds to object the change, then it is signal that something is wrong with that the proposal, not with people from that country. --Molobo 20:25, 23 June 2006 (UTC) Care to present evidence that this is an established English form rather then imaginary creation ? Also please present counting as to the vote that overall voting achieves concensus. Also remember that Wiki isn't democracy, vote is just a guideline. --Molobo 19:58, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry. I made a typo. I should have written Anatopism (talk · contribs) -->, not Appleseed. That's what happens when one tries to watch Coronation Street and type at the same time. Apologies, Appleseed, for the error. I never meant to suggest that you are a sockpuppet. FearÉIREANN \(caint)|undefined 20:29, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you for admiting your mistake here, for a moment I was afraid this was turning into some sort of a witch hunt.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 20:33, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Legal sons
What's the position of official Polish historiography abuot the Niemirza (sp?) and second Kazimierz illegitimate son? I guess we should some info about this to article too? Szopen 08:41, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * "Legal"? СЛУЖБА (talk) 14:19, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Map?
Since Kazimierz the Great "left a country doubled in size," it might be interesting to see a map or maps illustrating his gains (and also, apparently, the loss of Silesia). Sca 17:17, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Rename
In line with almost all other Polish monarchs, this article should be renamed to Casimir III the Great. Any comments? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 06:18, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Tittle-tattles?
It's late and so maybe I'm just tired. Why is the one section near the end given the title "tittle-tattles?" It's been that way for like a year so I'm guessing there's a reason, but I'm blanking on what reason. Can someone explain?--T. Anthony (talk) 09:47, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I've removed it. It contained no sources and it was equal to Trivia. Surtsicna (talk) 16:48, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Something missing?
"His three daughters by his fourth wife were very young and regarded as of dubious legitimacy because of their father's bigamy. Because all of the five children he fathered with his first and fourth wife were daughters, he would have no lawful male heir to his throne."

Well, everyone is young when they're born, surely this needs to be put in context. I'm assuming it's referring to when Casimir died, but the paragraph about his death comes after this one. So why was them being young relevant and when? 84.114.214.144 (talk) 22:38, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

B-class review
Failed for WPPOLAND due to insufficient density of inline citations and poor coverage. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:32, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

anti-Semitic legend removed
I removed an anti-Semitic legend that was being presented as factual. There may be merit to presenting the anti-Semitic legend of blaming Esterka for Casimir's relative tolerance of Jews, however such a presentation should make clear that this is a legend (begun some 100 years after events) with no historical basis (beyond Casimir's relative tolerance to Jews and the Church's disdain of this - the figure and progeny are legends, not factual). Icewhiz (talk) 10:01, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
 * It was a legend, but calling it "an anti-Semitic legend" is sort of dumb, since, per your own source, the legend was prominent in Yiddish (Jewish) literature. Next time, instead of searching for key words which reflect your POV (in this case "Esterka antisemitic"), how about you actually bother reading YOUR OWN source? Will save trouble later on.Volunteer Marek (talk) 13:30, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
 * And the legend is notable enough so that it should be mentioned, including the fact that she was portrayed as a "Jewish folk hero".Volunteer Marek (talk) 13:32, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
 * What a coincidence seeing you here. If mentioned, the antisemitic context of its invention by a Catholic priest and subsequent used in antisemitic Polish literature should be clearly stated.  That there are uses that are not antisemitic in Jewish literature (which differ on many details), does not change the context of its invention and use in antisemitic  tracts.Icewhiz (talk) 15:12, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
 * There is no "antisemitic context of its invention". You made that up. Nobody disputes that it's a legend, first related by Dlugosz. That's all the first source you provide says. Your second source is that photographer, Janicka, again, that you drag out, every time you want to accuse Poles of being antisemitic about, well, everything. You really need to find a new hobby. It's really the tediousness and dull-mindedness of your bigotry that is tiring, not the continued indulgence of your prejudices on Wikipedia (which is par for the course around here). Your third source just says that the legend has been used in anti-semitic ways, by, well, anti-semites. That same source then goes on at length to enumerate all the NON-anti-semitic ways in which the legend has been used in both Polish and Yiddish language literature, as well as in art. That source does not actually name any "antisemitic tracts", which again, is something you made up. In case you really are having difficulty understanding what Sicher is saying, and are not just pretending to do so, so that you can excuse your - once again - blatant misrepresentation of a source: he is NOT saying the legend is anti-semitic. He is saying that USING the legend to complain about the privileged position of the Jews in the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth is anti-semitic. Why are you allowed to edit this topic area again? After all the falsifications and misrepresentations and the very blatant and obvious WP:AGENDA your edits evidence? Volunteer Marek (talk) 07:00, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * While Janicka is an excellent source - I am not citing her. The first source quite obviously expands on Długosz hate - if you continue on reading it. The second source (by Konrad Matyjaszek, not Janicka) says "permanent feature of Polish antisemitic literature". The third - "...Jan Długosz a hundred years later who begins a long anti-Semitic tradition of blaming Esterka for Casimir's extension of privileges to the Jews...". Additional sources on the antisemitic use of this in Polish literature are quite easy to find. Icewhiz (talk) 07:20, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Nah, she's not. And yes you are citing her - as a tertiary source. It's her in your second source, in a footnote. And you're obviously trying to be provocative about this "Dlugosz hate", which is also par for the course for you. What does the source actually say? Well, in the portion that's visible, it just says that 1) we don't know what Dlugosz's motivation was, 2) that Dlugosz attributed Casimir's favorable policy towards Jews to Esterka and 3) that Casimir did indeed have such a policy. So... you're making stuff up again? And your third source? You just quoted that cherry picked fragment once again, in an utterly dishonest misrepresentation of the source, which then goes on for two pages about all the non-anti-semitic uses of the legend. And which does not say the legend is anti-semitic, contrary to your false assertion.
 * If these "additional sources" are "quite easy to find", then find them and let us see them rather than keep making vacuous assertions.Volunteer Marek (talk) 07:33, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I mean, it's pretty obvious from the way you entered the sources that you've already done all kinds of searches for, quote, "Esterka antisemitic", to pedantly cherry pick stuff in accordance with your POV, and apparently this is the best you could come up with. Here, why not try this for a change: first read the sources, THEN form an opinion, not vice versa.Volunteer Marek (talk) 07:35, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:07, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Contemporary Polish banknote with the image of the king Casimir III the Great (1310-1370).jpg

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Augustus II the Strong which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 14:00, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Society under the Reigin of Casimir
Why does the article say he was "facetiously called the Peasant's King"? The examples cited seem to indicate this title was given unironically, and with full respect. 14:27, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Casimir III the Great


text:
Herbie Hancock

Herbert Jeffrey Hancock (born April 12, 1940) is an American jazz musician, bandleader, and composer. Hancock started his career with trumpeter Donald Byrd's group. He shortly thereafter joined the Miles Davis Quintet, where he helped to redefine the role of a jazz rhythm section and was one of the primary architects of the post-bop sound. In the 1970s, Hancock experimented with jazz fusion, funk, and electro styles, using a wide array of synthesizers and electronics. It was during this period that he released perhaps his best-known and most influential album, Head Hunters.

Hancock's best-known compositions include "Cantaloupe Island", "Watermelon Man", "Maiden Voyage", and "Chameleon", all of which are jazz standards. During the 1980s, he enjoyed a hit single with the electronic instrumental "Rockit", a collaboration with bassist/producer Bill Laswell. Hancock has won an Academy Award and 14 Grammy Awards, including Album of the Year for his 2007 Joni Mitchell tribute album River: The Joni Letters.

Since 2012, Hancock has served as a professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, where he teaches at the UCLA Herb Alpert School of Music. He is also the chairman of the Herbie Hancock Institute of Jazz (known as the Thelonious Monk Institute of Jazz until 2019).

Early life
Hancock was born in Chicago, the son of Winnie Belle (née Griffin), a secretary, and Wayman Edward Hancock, a government meat inspector. His parents named him after the singer and actor Herb Jeffries. He attended Hyde Park High School. Like many jazz pianists, Hancock started with a classical education. He started playing piano when he was seven years old, and his talent was recognized early. Considered a child prodigy, he played the first movement of Mozart's Piano Concerto No. 26 in D Major, K. 537 (Coronation) at a young people's concert on February 5, 1952, with the Chicago Symphony Orchestra (led by CSO assistant conductor George Schick) at age 11.

Throughout his teens, Hancock never had a jazz teacher; however, he developed his ear and sense of harmony by listening to the records of jazz pianists such as George Shearing, Erroll Garner, Bill Evans and Oscar Peterson. He was also influenced by records of the vocal group the Hi-Lo's. In his words: "by the time I actually heard the Hi-Lo's, I started picking that stuff out; my ear was happening. I could hear stuff and that's when I really learned some much farther-out voicings – like the harmonies I used on Speak Like a Child – just being able to do that. I really got that from Clare Fischer's arrangements for the Hi-Lo's. Clare Fischer was a major influence on my harmonic concept ... he and Bill Evans, and Ravel and Gil Evans, finally. You know, that's where it came from."

In 1960, he heard Chris Anderson play just once and begged him to accept him as a student. Hancock often mentions Anderson as his harmonic guru.

Hancock graduated from Grinnell College in 1960 with degrees in electrical engineering and music. Hancock then moved to Chicago, and began working with Donald Byrd and Coleman Hawkins. During this time he also took courses at Roosevelt University. Grinnell also awarded him an honorary Doctor of Fine Arts degree in 1972. Byrd was attending the Manhattan School of Music in New York at the time and suggested that Hancock study composition with Vittorio Giannini (which he did for a short time in 1960). The pianist quickly earned a reputation, and played subsequent sessions with Oliver Nelson and Phil Woods.

He recorded his first solo album Takin' Off for Blue Note Records in 1962. "Watermelon Man" (from Takin' Off) was to provide Mongo Santamaría with a hit single, but more importantly for Hancock, Takin' Off caught the attention of Miles Davis, who was at that time assembling a new band. Hancock was introduced to Davis by the young drummer Tony Williams, a member of the new band.

Miles Davis Quintet (1963–1968) and Blue Note Records (1962–1969)
Hancock received considerable attention when, in May 1963, he joined Davis's Second Great Quintet. Davis personally sought out Hancock, whom he saw as one of the most promising talents in jazz. The rhythm section Davis organized was young but effective, comprising bassist Ron Carter, 17-year-old drummer Williams, and Hancock on piano. After George Coleman and Sam Rivers each took a turn at the saxophone spot, the quintet gelled with Wayne Shorter on tenor saxophone. This quintet is often regarded as one of the finest jazz ensembles yet.

While in Davis's band, Hancock also found time to record dozens of sessions for the Blue Note label, both under his own name and as a sideman with other musicians such as Wayne Shorter, Williams, Grant Green, Bobby Hutcherson, Rivers, Byrd, Kenny Dorham, Hank Mobley, Lee Morgan, Freddie Hubbard, and Eric Dolphy.

Hancock also recorded several less-well-known but still critically acclaimed albums with larger ensembles – My Point of View (1963), Speak Like a Child (1968) and The Prisoner (1969), albums which featured flugelhorn, alto flute and bass trombone in addition to the traditional jazz instrumentation. 1963's Inventions and Dimensions was an album of almost entirely improvised music, teaming Hancock with bassist Paul Chambers and two Latin percussionists, Willie Bobo and Osvaldo "Chihuahua" Martinez.

During this period, Hancock also composed the score to Michelangelo Antonioni's film Blowup (1966), the first of many film soundtracks he recorded in his career. As well as feature film soundtracks, Hancock recorded a number of musical themes used on American television commercials for such then-well-known products as Pillsbury's Space Food Sticks, Standard Oil, Tab diet cola, and Virginia Slims cigarettes. Hancock also wrote, arranged and conducted a spy type theme for a series of F. William Free commercials for Silva Thins cigarettes. Hancock liked it so much he wished to record it as a song but the ad agency would not let him. He rewrote the harmony, tempo and tone and recorded the piece as the track "He Who Lives in Fear" from his The Prisoner album of 1969.

Davis had begun incorporating elements of rock and popular music into his recordings by the end of Hancock's tenure with the band. Despite some initial reluctance, Hancock began doubling on electric keyboards, including the Fender Rhodes electric piano at Davis's insistence. Hancock adapted quickly to the new instruments, which proved to be important in his future artistic endeavors.

Under the pretext that he had returned late from a honeymoon in Brazil, Hancock was dismissed from Davis's band. In the summer of 1968 Hancock formed his own sextet. However, although Davis soon disbanded his quintet to search for a new sound, Hancock, despite his departure from the working band, continued to appear on Davis records for the next few years. Appearances included In a Silent Way, A Tribute to Jack Johnson and On the Corner.

Fat Albert (1969) and Mwandishi era (1971–1973)
Hancock left Blue Note in 1969, signing with Warner Bros. Records. In 1969, Hancock composed the soundtrack for Bill Cosby's animated prime-time television special Hey, Hey, Hey, It's Fat Albert. Music from the soundtrack was later included on Fat Albert Rotunda (1969), an R&B-inspired album with strong jazz overtones. One of the jazzier songs on the record, the moody ballad "Tell Me a Bedtime Story", was later re-worked as a more electronic sounding song for the Quincy Jones album Sounds...and Stuff Like That!! (1978).

Hancock became fascinated with electronic musical instruments. Together with the profound influence of Davis's Bitches Brew (1970), this fascination culminated in a series of albums in which electronic instruments were coupled with acoustic instruments.

Hancock's first ventures into electronic music started with a sextet comprising Hancock, bassist Buster Williams and drummer Billy Hart, and a trio of horn players: Eddie Henderson (trumpet), Julian Priester (trombone), and multireedist Bennie Maupin. Patrick Gleeson was eventually added to the mix to play and program the synthesizers.

The sextet, later a septet with the addition of Gleeson, made three albums under Hancock's name: Mwandishi (1971), Crossings (1972) (both on Warner Bros. Records), and Sextant (1973) (released on Columbia Records); two more, Realization and Inside Out, were recorded under Henderson's name with essentially the same personnel. The music exhibited strong improvisational aspect beyond the confines of jazz mainstream and showed influence from the electronic music of contemporary classical composers.

Hancock's three records released in 1971–73 later became known as the "Mwandishi" albums, so-called after a Swahili name Hancock sometimes used during this era ("Mwandishi" is Swahili for "writer"). The first two, including Fat Albert Rotunda were made available on the 2-CD set Mwandishi: the Complete Warner Bros. Recordings, released in 1994. "Hornets" was later revised on the 2001 album Future2Future as "Virtual Hornets".

Among the instruments Hancock and Gleeson used were Fender Rhodes piano, ARP Odyssey, ARP 2600, ARP Pro Soloist Synthesizer, a Mellotron and the Moog synthesizer III.

From Head Hunters (1973) to Secrets (1976)

Hancock formed The Headhunters, keeping only Maupin from the sextet and adding bassist Paul Jackson, percussionist Bill Summers, and drummer Harvey Mason. The album Head Hunters (1973) was a hit, crossing over to pop audiences but criticized within his jazz audience. Stephen Erlewine, in a retrospective summary for AllMusic, said, "Head Hunters still sounds fresh and vital three decades after its initial release, and its genre-bending proved vastly influential on not only jazz, but funk, soul, and hip-hop."

Drummer Mason was replaced by Mike Clark, and the band released a second album, Thrust, in 1974. (A live album from a Japan performance, consisting of compositions from those first two Head Hunters releases was released in 1975 as Flood). This was almost as well received as its predecessor, if not attaining the same level of commercial success. The Headhunters made another successful album called Survival of the Fittest in 1975 without Hancock, while Hancock himself started to make even more commercial albums, often featuring members of the band, but no longer billed as The Headhunters. The Headhunters reunited with Hancock in 1998 for Return of the Headhunters, and a version of the band (featuring Jackson and Clark) continues to play and record.

In 1973, Hancock composed his soundtrack to the controversial film The Spook Who Sat by the Door. Then in 1974, he composed the soundtrack to the first Death Wish film. One of his memorable songs, "Joanna's Theme", was re-recorded in 1997 on his duet album with Shorter, 1+1.

Hancock's next jazz-funk albums of the 1970s were Man-Child (1975) and Secrets (1976), which point toward the more commercial direction Hancock would take over the next decade. These albums feature the members of the Headhunters band, but also a variety of other musicians in important roles.

From V.S.O.P. (1976) to Future Shock (1983)
In 1978, Hancock recorded a duet with Chick Corea, who replaced him in the Davis band a decade earlier. Hancock also released a solo acoustic piano album, The Piano (1979), which was released only in Japan. (It was released in the US in 2004). Other Japan-only albums include Dedication (1974), V.S.O.P.'s Tempest in the Colosseum (1977), and Direct Step (1978). VSOP: Live Under the Sky was a VSOP album remastered for the US in 2004 and included a second concert from the tour in July 1979.

From 1978 to 1982, Hancock recorded many albums of jazz-inflected disco and pop music, beginning with Sunlight (featuring guest musicians including Williams and Pastorius on the last track) (1978). Singing through a vocoder, he earned a British hit, "I Thought It Was You", although critics were unimpressed. This led to more vocoder on his next album, Feets, Don't Fail Me Now (1979), which gave him another UK hit in "You Bet Your Love".

Hancock toured with Williams and Carter in 1981, recording Herbie Hancock Trio, a five-track album released only in Japan. A month later, he recorded Quartet with trumpeter Wynton Marsalis, released in the US the following year. Hancock, Williams, and Carter toured internationally with Wynton Marsalis and his brother, saxophonist Branford Marsalis, in what was known as "VSOP II". This quintet can be heard on Wynton Marsalis's debut album on Columbia (1981). In 1984 VSOP II performed at the Playboy Jazz Festival as a sextet with Hancock, Williams, Carter, the Marsalis Brothers, and Bobby McFerrin.

In 1982, Hancock contributed to the album New Gold Dream (81,82,83,84) by Simple Minds, playing a synthesizer solo on the track "Hunter and the Hunted".

In 1983, Hancock had a pop hit with the Grammy Award-winning single "Rockit" from the album Future Shock. It was the first jazz hip-hop song  and became a worldwide anthem for breakdancers and for hip-hop in the 1980s. It was the first mainstream single to feature scratching, and also featured an innovative animated music video, which was directed by Godley and Creme and showed several robot-like artworks by Jim Whiting. The video was a hit on MTV and reached No. 8 in the UK. The video won in five categories at the inaugural MTV Video Music Awards. This single ushered in a collaboration with noted bassist and producer Bill Laswell. Hancock experimented with electronic music on a string of three LPs produced by Laswell: Future Shock (1983), the Grammy Award-winning Sound-System (1984), and Perfect Machine (1988).

During this period, he appeared onstage at the Grammy Awards with Stevie Wonder, Howard Jones, and Thomas Dolby, in a synthesizer jam. Lesser known works from the 1980s are the live album Jazz Africa (1987) and the studio album Village Life (1984), which were recorded with Gambian kora player Foday Musa Suso. Also, in 1985 Hancock performed as a guest on the album So Red the Rose (1985) by the Duran Duran spinoff group Arcadia. He also provided introductory and closing comments for the PBS rebroadcast in the United States of the BBC educational series from the mid-1980s, Rockschool (not to be confused with the most recent Gene Simmons' Rock School series).

In 1986, Hancock performed and acted in the film 'Round Midnight. He also wrote the score/soundtrack, for which he won an Academy Award for Original Music Score. His film work was prolific during the 1980s, and included the scores to A Soldier's Story (1984), Jo Jo Dancer, Your Life Is Calling (1986), Action Jackson (1988 with Michael Kamen), Colors (1988), and the Eddie Murphy comedy Harlem Nights (1989). Often he would also write music for TV commercials. "Maiden Voyage", in fact, started out as a cologne advertisement. At the end of the Perfect Machine tour, Hancock decided to leave Columbia Records after a 15-plus-year relationship.

1990s to 2000
This departure resulted in a recording hiatus and several compilations during the first half of the 1990s. Hancock resurfaced together with Carter, Williams, Shorter, and Davis admirer Wallace Roney to record A Tribute to Miles, which was released in 1994. The album contained two live recordings and studio recording songs, with Roney playing Davis's part as trumpet player. The album won a Grammy for best group album. Hancock also toured with Jack DeJohnette, Dave Holland and Pat Metheny in 1990 on their Parallel Realities tour, which included a performance at the Montreux Jazz Festival in July 1990, and scored the 1991 comedy film Livin' Large, which starred Terrence C. Carson.

Hancock's next album, Dis Is da Drum, released in 1994, saw him return to acid jazz. Also in 1994, he appeared on the Red Hot Organization's compilation album Stolen Moments: Red Hot + Cool. The album, meant to raise awareness and funds in support of the AIDS epidemic in relation to the African-American community, was heralded as "Album of the Year" by Time magazine.

1995's The New Standard found Hancock and an all-star band including John Scofield, DeJohnette and Michael Brecker, interpreting pop songs by Nirvana, Stevie Wonder, the Beatles, Prince, Peter Gabriel and others.

A 1997 duet album with Shorter, entitled 1+1, was successful; the song "Aung San Suu Kyi" winning the Grammy Award for Best Instrumental Composition. Hancock also achieved great success in 1998 with his album Gershwin's World, which featured readings of George and Ira Gershwin standards by Hancock and a plethora of guest stars, including Wonder, Joni Mitchell and Shorter. Hancock toured the world in support of Gershwin's World with a sextet that featured Cyro Baptista, Terri Lynne Carrington, Ira Coleman, Eli Degibri and Eddie Henderson.

2000 to 2009
In 2001, Hancock recorded Future2Future, which reunited Hancock with Laswell and featured doses of electronica as well as turntablist Rob Swift of The X-Ecutioners. Hancock later toured with the band, and released a concert DVD with a different lineup, which also included the "Rockit" music video. Also in 2001 Hancock partnered with Brecker and Roy Hargrove to record a live concert album saluting Davis and John Coltrane, entitled Directions in Music: Live at Massey Hall, recorded live in Toronto. The threesome toured to support the album, and toured on-and-off through 2005.

The year 2005 saw the release of a duet album called Possibilities. It featured duets with Carlos Santana, Paul Simon, Annie Lennox, John Mayer, Christina Aguilera, Sting and others. In 2006, Possibilities was nominated for Grammy Awards in two categories: "A Song for You" (featuring Aguilera) was nominated for a Grammy Award for Best Pop Instrumental Performance, and "Gelo No Montanha" (featuring Trey Anastasio on guitar) was nominated for a Grammy Award for Best Instrumental Performance, although neither nomination resulted in an award.

Also in 2005, Hancock toured Europe with a new quartet that included Beninese guitarist Lionel Loueke, and explored textures ranging from ambient to straight jazz to African music. Plus, during the summer of 2005, Hancock re-staffed the Headhunters and went on tour with them, including a performance at The Bonnaroo Music & Arts Festival. This lineup did not consist of any of the original Headhunters musicians. The group included Marcus Miller, Carrington, Loueke and Mayer. Hancock also served as the first artist in residence for Bonnaroo that summer. Also in 2006, Sony BMG Music Entertainment (which bought out Hancock's old label, Columbia Records) released the two-disc retrospective The Essential Herbie Hancock. This set was the first compilation of his work at Warner Bros., Blue Note, Columbia and Verve/Polygram. This became Hancock's second major compilation of work since the 2002 Columbia-only The Herbie Hancock Box, which was released at first in a plastic 4 × 4 cube then re-released in 2004 in a long box set. Also in 2006, Hancock recorded a new song with Josh Groban and Eric Mouquet (co-founder of Deep Forest), entitled "Machine". It is featured on Groban's CD Awake. Hancock also recorded and improvised with guitarist Loueke on Loueke's 1996 debut album Virgin Forest, on the ObliqSound label, resulting in two improvisational tracks – "Le Réveil des agneaux (The Awakening of the Lambs)" and "La Poursuite du lion (The Lion's Pursuit)".

Hancock, a longtime associate and friend of Mitchell, released a 2007 album, River: The Joni Letters, that paid tribute to her work, with Norah Jones and Tina Turner adding vocals to the album, as did Corinne Bailey Rae. Leonard Cohen contributed a spoken piece set to Hancock's piano. Mitchell herself also made an appearance. The album was released on September 25, 2007, simultaneously with the release of Mitchell's newest album at that time: Shine. River won the 2008 Album of the Year Grammy Award. The album also won a Grammy for Best Contemporary Jazz Album, and the song "Both Sides Now" was nominated for Best Instrumental Jazz Solo. That was only the second time in history that a jazz album won those two Grammy Awards.

On June 14, 2008, Hancock performed with others at Rhythm on the Vine at the South Coast Winery in Temecula, California, for Shriners Hospitals for Children. The event raised $515,000 for Shriners Hospital.

On January 18, 2009, Hancock performed at the We Are One concert, marking the start of inaugural celebrations for American President Barack Obama. Hancock also performed Rhapsody in Blue at the 2009 Classical BRIT Awards with classical pianist Lang Lang. Hancock was named as the Los Angeles Philharmonic's creative chair for jazz for 2010–12.

2010 to present
In June 2010, Hancock released The Imagine Project.

On June 5, 2010, he received an Alumni Award from his alma mater Grinnell College. On July 22, 2011, at a ceremony in Paris, he was named UNESCO Goodwill Ambassador for the promotion of Intercultural Dialogue. In 2013, Hancock joined the University of California, Los Angeles faculty as a professor in the UCLA music department teaching jazz music.

In a June 2010 interview with Michael Gallant of Keyboard magazine, Hancock talks about his Fazioli giving him inspiration to do things.

On December 8, 2013, he was given the Kennedy Center Honors Award for achievement in the performing arts with artists like Snoop Dogg and Mixmaster Mike from the Beastie Boys performing his music.

He appeared on the album You're Dead! by Flying Lotus, released in October 2014.

Hancock was the 2014 Charles Eliot Norton Professor of Poetry at Harvard University. Holders of the chair deliver a series of six lectures on poetry, "The Norton Lectures", poetry being "interpreted in the broadest sense, including all poetic expression in language, music, or fine arts". Previous Norton lecturers include musicians Leonard Bernstein, Igor Stravinsky and John Cage. Hancock's theme is "The Ethics of Jazz".

Hancock's next album is being produced by Terrace Martin, and will feature a broad variety of jazz and hip-hop artists including Wayne Shorter, Kendrick Lamar, Kamasi Washington, Thundercat, Flying Lotus, Lionel Loueke, Zakir Hussein and Snoop Dogg.

On May 15, 2015, Hancock received an honorary doctor of humane letters degree from Washington University in St. Louis.

On May 19, 2018, Hancock received an honorary degree from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.

On June 26, 2022, Hancock performed at the Glastonbury Festival.

Hancock was featured on the track "MOON" by the jazz duo Domi and JD Beck on their debut album NOT TiGHT, released July 29, 2022.

On February 4, 2023, Hancock performed at the Arise Fashion Week & Jazz Festival at Eko Hotel, Lagos, Nigeria.

Personal life
Hancock has been married to Gigi Hancock since 1968 and the couple have a daughter. In a 2019 interview, Hancock said: "Gigi is very compassionate. She really cares about other people. She spends most of her time helping her friends. She has a big heart. At the same time she won't let you get away with anything. If you try to sneak something past her, she'll call you on it in a second. She got me into the pop art scene in New York in the 1960s and I introduced her to my jazz world".

In 1985, his sister, a lyricist who wrote for him and for Earth, Wind & Fire, was killed in the crash of Delta Air Lines Flight 191.

In his memoir, released in 2014, Hancock revealed he previously battled an addiction to crack cocaine in the 1990s and that his wife and daughter helped him get sober: "This was an intervention, and I was so embarrassed, but there was another feeling creeping in, too: relief. I had been struggling with this habit, and this secret, for so long. I looked at my daughter and sobbed, wondering how I had gotten to this place but thankful that it was finally going to end".

Since 1972, Hancock has practiced Nichiren Buddhism as a member of the Buddhist association Soka Gakkai International. As part of Hancock's spiritual practice, he recites the Buddhist chant Nam Myoho Renge Kyo each day. In 2013, Hancock's dialogue with musician Wayne Shorter and Soka Gakkai International president Daisaku Ikeda on jazz, Buddhism and life was published in Japanese and English, then in French. In 2014, Hancock delivered a lecture at Harvard University titled "Buddhism and Creativity" as part of his Norton Lecture series.

Cobra automobile ownership
In 1963, at the age of 23, Hancock purchased a new 1963 AC Shelby Cobra from a dealership in New York City for $6,000. He is still its owner and thus the longest owner of a Cobra. The car– serial number CSX2006– was the sixth Cobra ever produced, making it a rare and valuable vehicle. It is one of only 75 Cobras originally produced with a 260 cubic-inch engine and the only Cobra ever equipped with a two-barrel carburetor. The car has been estimated to be worth more than $2 million. Hancock plans to give the car to his grandson.

Studio albums

 * Takin' Off (1962)
 * My Point of View (1963)
 * Inventions & Dimensions (1964)
 * Empyrean Isles (1964)
 * Maiden Voyage (1965)
 * Speak Like a Child (1968)
 * The Prisoner (1969)
 * Fat Albert Rotunda (1969)
 * Mwandishi (1971)
 * Crossings (1972)
 * Sextant (1973)
 * Head Hunters (1973)
 * Dedication (1974)
 * Thrust (1974)
 * Man-Child (1975)
 * Secrets (1976)
 * Third Plane (1977)
 * Herbie Hancock Trio (1977)
 * Sunlight (1978)
 * Directstep (1979)
 * The Piano (1979)
 * Feets, Don't Fail Me Now (1979)
 * Monster (1980)
 * Mr. Hands (1980)
 * Magic Windows (1981)
 * Herbie Hancock Trio (1982)
 * Quartet (1982)
 * Lite Me Up (1982)
 * Future Shock (1983)
 * Sound-System (1984)
 * Village Life (1985)
 * Perfect Machine (1988)
 * A Tribute to Miles (1994)
 * Dis Is da Drum (1994)
 * The New Standard (1996)
 * 1+1 (1997)
 * Gershwin's World (1998)
 * Future 2 Future (2001)
 * Possibilities (2005)
 * River: The Joni Letters (2007)
 * The Imagine Project  (2010)

Concert films

 * 2000: DeJohnette, Hancock, Holland and Metheny – Live in Concert
 * 2002: Herbie Hancock Trio: Hurricane! with Ron Carter and Billy Cobham
 * 2002: The Jazz Channel Presents Herbie Hancock (BET on Jazz) with Cyro Baptista, Terri Lynne Carrington, Ira Coleman, Eli Degibri and Eddie Henderson (recorded in 2000)
 * 2004: Herbie Hancock – Future2Future Live
 * 2005: Herbie Hancock's Headhunters Watermelon Man (Live in Japan)
 * 2006: Herbie Hancock – Possibilities with John Mayer, Christina Aguilera, Joss Stone, and more

Books

 * Herbie Hancock: Possibilities (2014) ISBN 978-0-670-01471-2
 * Reaching Beyond: Improvisations on Jazz, Buddhism, and a Joyful Life (2017) ISBN 978-1-938-25276-1

Academy Awards

 * 1986, Best Original Score, for Round Midnight

Grammy Awards

 * 1984: Best R&B Instrumental Performance, for Rockit
 * 1985: Best R&B Instrumental Performance, for Sound-System
 * 1988: Best Instrumental Composition, for Call Sheet Blues
 * 1995: Best Jazz Instrumental Performance, Individual or Group, for A Tribute to Miles
 * 1997: Best Instrumental Composition, for Manhattan (Island of Lights and Love)
 * 1999: Best Instrumental Arrangement Accompanying Vocal(s), for St. Louis Blues
 * 1999: Best Jazz Instrumental Performance, Individual or Group, for Gershwin's World
 * 2003: Best Jazz Instrumental Album, Individual or Group, for Directions in Music at Massey Hall
 * 2003: Best Jazz Instrumental Solo, for My Ship
 * 2005: Best Jazz Instrumental Solo, for Speak Like a Child
 * 2008: Album of the Year, for River: The Joni Letters
 * 2008: Best Contemporary Jazz Album, for River: The Joni Letters
 * 2011: Best Improvised Jazz Solo, for A Change Is Gonna Come
 * 2011: Best Pop Collaboration with Vocals, for Imagine

Other awards

 * Keyboard Readers' Poll: Best Jazz Pianist (1987, 1988); Keyboardist (1983, 1987)
 * Playboy Music Poll: Best Jazz Group (1985), Best Jazz Album Rockit (1985), Best Jazz Keyboards (1985, 1986), Best R&B Instrumentalist (1987), Best Jazz Instrumentalist (1988)
 * MTV Awards (5), Best Concept Video, "Rockit", 1983–'84
 * Gold Note Jazz Awards – New York Chapter of the National Black MBA Association, 1985
 * French Award Officer of the Order of Arts & Letters, 1985
 * BMI Film Music Award, Round Midnight, 1986
 * Honorary Doctorate of Music from Berklee College of Music, 1986
 * U.S. Radio Award, Best Original Music Scoring – Thom McAnn Shoes, 1986
 * Los Angeles Film Critics Association, Best Score – 'Round Midnight, 1986
 * BMI Film Music Award, Colors, 1989
 * Miles Davis Award, Montreal International Jazz Festival, 1997
 * Soul Train Music Award, Best Jazz Album – The New Standard, 1997
 * VH1's 100 Greatest Videos, "Rockit" is 10th Greatest Video, 2001
 * NEA Jazz Masters Award, 2004
 * Downbeat Readers' Poll Hall of Fame, 2005
 * Kennedy Center Honors, 2013
 * American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 2013
 * Benjamin Franklin Medal (Royal Society of Arts), 2018

title: Herbie Hancock


text:
Mystery play

Mystery plays and miracle plays (they are distinguished as two different forms although the terms are often used interchangeably ) are among the earliest formally developed plays in medieval Europe. Medieval mystery plays focused on the representation of Bible stories in churches as tableaux with accompanying antiphonal song. They told of subjects such as the Creation, Adam and Eve, the murder of Abel, and the Last Judgment. Often they were performed together in cycles which could last for days. The name derives from mystery used in its sense of miracle, but an occasionally quoted derivation is from ministerium, meaning craft, and so the 'mysteries' or plays performed by the craft guilds.

Origins
As early as the fifth century, living tableaux were introduced into sacred services. The plays originated as simple tropes, verbal embellishments of liturgical texts, and slowly became more elaborate. At an early period chants from the service of the day were added to the prose dialogue. As these liturgical plays increased in popularity, vernacular forms emerged, and travelling companies of actors and theatrical productions became common in the later Middle Ages.

The Quem quaeritis? is the best known early form of the dramas. It is a schematic dialogue between the angel at the tomb of Christ and the women who are seeking his dead body. Early forms of the responsorium were later elaborated with dialogue and dramatic action. Early performances were given in Latin, and were preceded by a vernacular prologue spoken by a herald who gave a synopsis of the events. The writers and directors of the earliest plays were probably monks or clerics.

In 1210, suspicious of the growing popularity of miracle plays, Pope Innocent III issued a papal edict forbidding clergy from acting on a public stage. This had the effect of transferring the organization of the dramas to town guilds, after which several changes followed. Vernacular texts replaced Latin, and non-Biblical passages were added along with comic scenes, for example in the Secunda Pastorum of the Wakefield Cycle. Acting and characterization became more elaborate.

These vernacular religious performances were, in some of the larger cities in England such as York, performed and produced by guilds, with each guild taking responsibility for a particular piece of scriptural history. From the guild control originated the term mystery play or mysteries, from the Latin ministerium meaning "occupation" (i.e. that of the guilds). The genre was again banned as a result of the Reformation and the establishment of the Church of England in 1534.

The mystery play developed, in some places, into a series of plays dealing with major events in the Christian calendar, from the Creation to the Day of Judgment. By the end of the 15th century, the practice of acting these plays in cycles on festival days was established in several parts of Europe. Sometimes, each play was performed on a decorated pageant cart that moved about the city to allow different crowds to watch each play. The entire cycle could take up to twenty hours to perform and could be spread over a number of days. Taken as a whole, these are referred to as Corpus Christi cycles. These cycles were often performed during the Feast of Corpus Christi.

The plays were performed by a combination of clerics and amateurs and were written in highly elaborate stanza forms; they were often marked by extravagant sets and special effects, but could also be stark and intimate. There was a wide variety of theatrical and poetic styles, even in a single cycle of plays.

English mystery plays
There are four complete or nearly complete extant English biblical collections of plays. A collection is the York cycle of forty-eight pageants; there are also the Towneley plays of thirty-two pageants, the Ludus Coventriae, and the Chester cycle of twenty-four pageants, now generally agreed to be an Elizabethan reconstruction of older medieval traditions. Also extant are two pageants from a New Testament cycle acted at Coventry. Additionally, a fifteenth-century play of the life of Mary Magdalene, The Brome Abraham and Isaac and a sixteenth-century play of the Conversion of Saint Paul exist. Besides the Middle English drama, there are a few surviving plays in Cornish: namely, the Ordinalia (which is a cycle of three plays) and Pascon Agan Aruth which both tell biblical stories, and Bewnans Ke and Bewnans Meriasek, which tell the stories of the lives of saints.

These biblical plays differ widely in content. Most contain episodes such as the Fall of Lucifer, the Creation and Fall of Man, Cain and Abel, Noah and the Flood, Abraham and Isaac, the Nativity, the Raising of Lazarus, the Passion, and the Resurrection. Other pageants included the story of Moses, the Procession of the Prophets, Christ's Baptism, the Temptation in the Wilderness, and the Assumption and Coronation of the Virgin. In given cycles, the plays came to be sponsored by the newly emerging Medieval craft guilds. The York mercers, for example, sponsored the Doomsday pageant. Other guilds presented scenes appropriate to their trade: the building of the Ark from the carpenters' guild; the five loaves and fishes miracle from the bakers; and the visit of the Magi, with their offerings of gold, frankincense and myrrh, from the goldsmiths. The guild associations are not, however, to be understood as the method of production for all towns. While the Chester pageants are associated with guilds, there is no indication that the N-Town plays are either associated with guilds or performed on pageant wagons. Perhaps the most famous of the mystery plays, at least to modern readers and audiences, are those of Wakefield. Unfortunately, we cannot know whether the plays of the Towneley manuscript are actually the plays performed at Wakefield but a reference in the Second Shepherds' Play to Horbery Shrogys is strongly suggestive. In "The London Burial Grounds" by Mrs Basil Holmes (1897), the author claims that the Holy Priory Church, next to St Katherine Cree on Leadenhall Street, London was the location of miracle plays from the tenth to the sixteenth century. Edmund Bonner, Bishop of London (c 1500 - 1569) stopped this in 1542.

Spanish mystery plays
The oldest liturgical drama in Spain is from the 12th century and kept today in Toledo Cathedral. It is a play about the Biblical Magi, three wise men from the East who followed a star and visited the baby Jesus in Bethlehem. It is believed to have been based on an earlier play written in France.

The Misteri d'Elx (in English, the Elx Mystery Play or Mystery Play of Elx) is a liturgical drama dating from the 13th century which has been enacted and celebrated every year without any known interruptions. Commemorating the Assumption of Mary, it is played on every 14 and 15 August in the Basilica de Santa María in the city of Elx (also known as Elche). The prohibition of theatrical plays in churches by the Council of Trent eventually threatened to interrupt the yearly performance of the Misteri, but in 1632 Pope Urban VIII issued a special permit for its continuation. In 2001, UNESCO declared it one of the Masterpieces of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity.

Miracle play
Miracle plays, or Saint's plays, are now distinguished from mystery plays as they specifically re-enacted miraculous interventions by the saints, particularly St. Nicholas or St. Mary, rather than biblical events. Robert Chambers, writing in the 19th century, notes that "especially in England, miracle [came] to stand for religious play in general".

Cornish language miracle plays, particularly the Ordinalia trilogy, the Beunans Meriasek, and the Bewnans Ke, were traditionally performed at the plain-an-gwarrys. To capture the attention of the audience, "the plays were often noisy, bawdy and entertaining."

Modern performances
Attention to the Medieval Mystery plays began to grow during the early 1800s, after their reference and publication by William Hone and James Heywood Markland. Notably, poet Lord Byron wrote the plays Cain and Heaven and Earth: A Mystery as modern version of medieval dramas on similar subjects. Mystery plays are produced regularly throughout the United Kingdom. The local cycles were revived in both York and Chester in 1951 as part of the Festival of Britain, and are still performed by the local guilds. The N-Town cycle was revived in 1978 as the Lincoln mystery plays, and in 1994 the Lichfield Mysteries were revived.

In 1977 the National Theatre commissioned Tony Harrison to create The Mysteries, a re-working of the Wakefield Cycle and others. It was again revived in 1985 (the production was filmed for Channel 4 Television), and as a part of the theatre's millennium celebration in 2000. The productions won Bill Bryden the Best Director title in both the 1985 Evening Standard Theatre Awards and the 1985 Laurence Olivier Awards, the year the three plays first appeared together in performance at the Lyceum Theatre.

In 2001, the Isango Ensemble produced an African version of the Chester Cycle at the Garrick Theatre in London as The Mysteries – Yiimimangaliso, performing in a combination of the Xhosa language, Zulu, English, Latin, and Afrikaans. They revived an adapted version of the production at Shakespeare's Globe in 2015 as The Mysteries. In 2004, two mystery plays (one focusing on the Creation and the other on the Passion) were performed at Canterbury Cathedral, with actor Edward Woodward in the role of God. The large cast also included Daniel MacPherson, Thomas James Longley and Joseph McManners.

title: Mystery play


text:
Bullhead

Bullhead may refer to:

Fish

 * Certain sculpins, including:
 * European bullhead, Cottus gobio
 * Siberian bullhead, Cottus poecilopus
 * Norway bullhead, Taurulus Liljeborgi
 * Japanese fluvial sculpin or Japanese bullhead, Cottus pollux
 * Catfish of the genus Ameiurus, including:
 * Black bullhead, Ameiurus melas
 * Brown bullhead, Ameiurus nebulosus
 * Yellow bullhead, Ameiurus natalis
 * Catfish of the genus Pseudobagrus, including:
 * Dianchi bullhead, Pseudobagrus medianalis
 * Korean bullhead, Tachysurus fulvidraco (syn. Pseudobagrus fulvidraco)
 * Black bullhead, Pseudobagrus koreanus; see
 * Other catfish, including:
 * African bullhead, Lophiobagrus cyclurus
 * King's bullhead, Liobagrus kingi
 * Bullhead sharks
 * Bullhead triplefin, Trianectes bucephalus
 * Bullhead minnow, Pimephales vigilax

Places

 * Bullhead City, Arizona
 * Bullhead, South Dakota
 * Bullhead Dam, on the Colorado River between Arizona and Nevada

Other uses

 * Bullhead (album), by the Melvins
 * Bullhead (film), a 2011 Belgian film by Michaël R. Roskam with Matthias Schoenaerts
 * Bullhead rail, a particular cross-section of rail used in railway track construction
 * The Bull's Head (Barnes), a London music venue formed in 1959 as a jazz club
 * Bullheading, placing a column of heavy fluid into a well bore to prevent the flow of reservoir fluids from the well
 * Tamiya Bullhead, a toy
 * USS Bullhead (SS-332), the last US Navy ship sunk by enemy action during World War II
 * Nexus 5X, an Android device with the codename bullhead
 * Bull-headed shrike, passerine bird of eastern Asia

title: Bullhead


text:
Talk:Jagiellonian University

Mistake in the introductory section
As far as I know Jagiellonian dynasty revived the University of Krakow in 1400 not in the 17th and 18th centuries. By the way, the last Polish king of Jagiellonian dynasty died in 1572. I think someone should correct the information in the introductory section. I feel my English is not good enough to do it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.134.189.115 (talk) 18:25, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

 * Noted.,C.I.A 1117-0014A￼ NULL172254 L.A.S.D Radio listen. 2600:1700:61C2:1410:8D54:548D:B27:7D64 (talk) 23:26, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Foundation?
What year was it founded? Casimir III who? What policies of the Polish government? (i.e., is this a copyright violation? the author is making statements that must come from somewhere.) In the medieval and early modern period (i.e., through 1650) 13-16 years was quite a normal age at which to be sent to university, so if the source the author is lifting from doesn't understand that, it needs to be explained. I cut it. MichaelTinkler

This page should be moved
Why is this page here? ATM (4 Dec 2004) Jagiellonian University redirects to University of Kraków which redirects here, ie to Jagiellonian University in Kraków. IMO the article should be moved back to Jagiellonian University, since: I can't move it myself, I'm afraid only an administrator can move it to an already existing page. – [[User:Kpalion|Kpalion (talk)]] 22:48, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * 1) There are no other Jagiellonian Univerisites, AFAIK, so there would be no ambiguity;
 * 2) There are other universities in Kraków, so University of Kraków is ambiguous;
 * 3) Jagiellonian University is the name most commonly and officially used.

 * Answering User talk:Rfl: “Could you please move Jagiellonian University in Kraków to Jagiellonian University? See Talk:Jagiellonian University in Kraków for reasons. – [[User:Kpalion|Kpalion (talk)]] 22:49, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)” — Good point. I’ll move the page and update the redirects. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Rafał Pocztarski 11:08, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * I see that it has already been moved, but without the talk page, so I didn’t notice. I couldn’t be helpful this time, but please contact me in the future if there is any administrative job to be done here. Thanks. Rafał Pocztarski 11:15, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * No, actually, it has not been moved in the “Move this page”-sense but deleted and pasted into the new article. Please don’t move articles that way because the entire edit history is lost. There was over 50 edits in the last 3 years, a lot of people has done a lot of work, and now it looks like the article was written by only four people. I will fix this but next time please read: How to rename (move) a page. Rafał Pocztarski 11:44, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * The article has been moved from Jagiellonian University in Kraków to Jagiellonian University and the edit history has been restored. Rafał Pocztarski 13:22, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Alumni
Dr. Andrew Lobaczewski is missing from alumni list

Coat of arms
Hi, please note that the university's coat of arms is outdated as recent heraldry research led the university authorities to modify it. Therefore I'm removing the picture placed in the infobox. The currently used coat of arms and all admitted variations are available here. Montessquieu (talk) 21:10, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Should be moved back to Jagiellonian University in Kraków
The official name of the university, in Polish, is Uniwersytet Jagielloński w Krakowi. This directly translate to Jagiellonian University in Kraków. It is also the name on the Polish Wikipedia. The reason below are irrelevant as this is the official name on their website.

I cannot move this myself. Also next time before moving something check the facts.

 * Simplest is best. There is no other Jagiellonian, therefore no need to put lengthy name. "Official" name, if true, can be noted in the lead. See, for example, Caligula. Student7 (talk) 20:53, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Jan Kochanowski - Nominal poet
Who knows what 'nominal poet' means? How many people will understand this? --Jidu Boite (talk) 16:55, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Proposal to merge Studia etymologica cracoviensia here

 * Support Absolutely non-notable journal. if there is anything in the current article that can be based on reliable sources, then it could be merged here. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 19:00, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Against I do not agree with this statement, several high-profile researchers, who have their own wikipedia article (Georges-Jean Pinault, Frederik Kortlandt etc) have published in this journal. Phonology (talk) 09:23, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:NOTINHERITED. There are no sources to base an article on. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 12:13, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

 * Against as the peer-reviewed journal seems to reach WP:NJournals on the grounds that "The journal is considered by reliable sources to be influential in its subject area". This is established through indexing in Central and Eastern European Online Library amongst other databases, although I accept that this does not imply that it is strongly influential! Klbrain (talk) 15:50, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Jagiellonian University. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.ui.ac.id/indonesia/extra/tabelqs.pdf

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 07:07, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Name not explained
The Jagiellonian dynasty is mentioned in the first section here, but when the University name was first used is not given, and Casimir III the Great, a Piast king, was earlier than the Jagiellonian dynasty ruled in Poland, starting in March 1386.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 21:43, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Jagiellonian University. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110514110651/http://www.bj.uj.edu.pl/bjmanus/manus_e.html to http://www.bj.uj.edu.pl/bjmanus/manus_e.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050908230448/http://www.collectionscanada.ca/bulletin/015017-9903-04-e.html to http://www.collectionscanada.ca/bulletin/015017-9903-04-e.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081031022635/http://www.uj.edu.pl/IRO/NEWSLET/Newsletter35.pdf to http://www.uj.edu.pl/IRO/NEWSLET/Newsletter35.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091213152146/http://www7.uj.edu.pl/studenci/organizacje-studenckie to http://www.uj.edu.pl/studenci/organizacje-studenckie

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:07, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Amado
Hey so since you would to extort then perhaps a new solution should arise. 2600:1700:61C2:1410:8D54:548D:B27:7D64 (talk) 23:25, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Jagiellonian University