text:
Arrian

Arrian of Nicomedia (Greek: Ἀρριανός Arrianos; Lucius Flavius Arrianus; c. 86/89)

was a Greek historian, public servant, military commander, and philosopher of the Roman period.

The Anabasis of Alexander by Arrian is considered the best source on the campaigns of Alexander the Great. Scholars have generally preferred Arrian to other extant primary sources, though this attitude has changed somewhat in light of modern studies into Arrian's method.

Arrian's life
Arrian was born in Nicomedia (present-day İzmit), the provincial capital of Bithynia. Cassius Dio called him Flavius Arrianus Nicomediensis. Sources provide similar dates for his birth, within a few years prior to 90, 89, and 85–90 AD. The line of reasoning for dates belonging to 85–90 AD is because of Arrian being made a consul around 130 AD, and the usual age for this, during this period, being 42 years of age. (ref. pp. 312, & SYME 1958, ibid.). His family was from the Greek provincial aristocracy, and his full name, L. Flavius Arrianus, indicates that he was a Roman citizen, suggesting that the citizenship went back several generations, probably to the time of the Roman conquest some 170 years before.

Sometime during the second century AD (117 to 120 AD) while in Epirus, probably Nicopolis, Arrian attended lectures of Epictetus of Nicopolis, and proceeded within a time to fall into his pupillage, a fact attested to by Lucian. All that is known about the life of Epictetus is due to Arrian, in that Arrian left an Encheiridion (Handbook) of Epictetus' philosophy. After Epirus, he went to Athens, and while there, he became known as the "young Xenophon" as a consequence of the similarity of his relationship to Epictetus as Xenophon had to Socrates.

For a period, some time about 126 AD, he was a friend of the emperor Hadrian's, who appointed him to the Senate. He was appointed to the position consul suffectus around 130 AD, and then, in 132 AD (although Howatson shows 131), he was made prefect or legate (governor) of Cappadocia by Hadrian, a service he continued for six years. Historian Cassius Dio states that not long after the Bar Kokhba revolt in Judea had been quelled, in 135 AD, King Pharasmanes II of Iberia caused the Alani to invade neighbouring territories, including Cappadocia, where their advance was robustly halted by Arrian's legions.

"A second war was begun by the Alani (they are Massagetae) at the instigation of Pharasmanes. It caused dire injury to the Albanian territory and Media, and then involved Armenia and Cappadocia; after which, as the Alani were not only persuaded by gifts from Vologaesus, but also stood in dread of Flavius Arrianus, the governor of Cappadocia, it came to a stop."

Arrian referred to himself as "the second Xenophon", on account of his reputation and the esteem in which he was held. Lucian stated him to be:

"a Roman of the first rank with a life-long attachment to learning"

This quality is identified as paideia (παιδεία), which is the quality considered to be of one who is known as an educated and learned personage, i.e., one who is highly esteemed and important.

Works
He produced eight extant works (cf. Syvänne, footnote of p. 260). The Indica and the Anabasis are the only works completely intact. His entire remaining oeuvre is known as FGrH 156 to designate those collected fragments that exist.

Periplus of the Euxine Sea
This work is the earliest extant work that is dated with any confidence. It is a writing addressed to Emperor Hadrian.

Discourses of Epictetus and Enchiridion of Epictetus
Arrian was a pupil of Epictetus around 108 AD, and, according to his own account, he was moved to publish his notes of Epictetus' lectures, which are known as Discourses of Epictetus, by their unauthorized dissemination. According to George Long, Arrian noted from Epictetus' lectures for his private use and some time later made of these, the Discourses. Photius states that Arrian produced two books the Dissertations and the Discourses. The Discourses are also known as Diatribai and are apparently a verbatim recording of Epictetus' lectures.

The Enchiridion is a short compendium of all Epictetus' philosophical principles. It is also known as a handbook, and A Mehl considers the Enchiridion to have been a vade mecum for Arrian. The Enchiridion is apparently a summary of the Discourses.

JB Stockdale considered that Arrian wrote eight books of which  and the remaining ones became the Discourses. In a comparison of the contents of the Enchiridion with the Discourses, it is apparent that the former contains material not present within the latter, suggesting an original lost source for the Enchiridion.

Homiliai Epiktetou
Friendly conversations with Epictetus (Homiliai Epiktetou) is a 12 book work mentioned by Photius in his Bibliotheca, of which only fragments remain.

Anabasis of Alexander
The Anabasis of Alexander comprises seven books. Arrian used Xenophon's account of the March of Cyrus as the basis for this work.

Ta met' Alexandron
History of the Diadochi or Events after Alexander is a work originally of ten books; a commentary on this work was written by Photius (FW Walbank, p. 8).

Three extant fragments are the Vatican Palimpsest (of the 10th century AD), PSI 12.1284 (Oxyrhynchus), and the Gothenburg palimpsest (of the 10th century also), these possibly stemming originally from Photius.

The writing is about the successors of Alexander the Great, circa 323 – 321 or 319.

Parthica
A lost work of seventeen books, fragments of Parthica were maintained by the Suda and Stephanus of Byzantium. The work survives only in adaptations made later by Photius and Syncellus. Translated, the title is History of the Parthians. Arrian's aim in the work was to set forth events of the Parthian war of Trajan. The writing mentioned that the Parthians trace their origins to Artaxerxes II.

Bithyniaca
A work of eight books, Bibliotheca (via Photius) states it is the fourth to have been written by Arrian.

Nicomediensis Scripta minora
A work translated a Nicodemian script (minor).

Indica
Indica is a work on a variety of things pertaining to India, and the voyage of Nearchus in the Persian Gulf. The first part of Indica was based largely on the work of the same name of Megasthenes, the second part based on a journal written by Nearchus.

Techne Taktike
Written 136/137 AD (in the 20th year of Hadrian ), Techne Taktike is a treatise on Roman cavalry and military tactics, and includes information on the nature, arms and discipline of the phalanx. The hippika gymnasia is a particular concern of Arrian in the treatise.

Another translation of the title is Ars tactica, which, in Greek, is Τέχνη τακτική.

This work has generally been considered in large part a panegyric to Hadrian, written for the occasion of his vīcennālia, although some scholars have argued that its second half may have had practical use.

Kynēgetikos
Cynegeticus (Κυνηγετικός), translated as A treatise on hunting with hounds, On Hunting, or On Coursing, is a work about the Celtic sport of coursing hare with sighthounds, specifically the Celtic greyhounds: in Greek (plural) ouertragoi, in Latin (plural) vertragi.

The work was inspired by and designed as an addition to an earlier exposition made by Xenophon, whom Arrian recognised to be the Ancient Greek authority on the subject of hunting with scent hounds.

Ektaxis kata Alanon
Ektaxis kata Alanon (Ἔκταξις κατὰ Ἀλανῶν) is a work of a now fragmentary nature; the title is translated as Deployment against the Alani or The order of battle against the Alans or referred to simply as Alanica. It is thought not have been written as a presentation of facts but for literary reasons. Pertaining to the relevant historical facts, though, while governor of Cappadocia, Arrian repelled an invasion of the Alani sometime during 135 AD, a struggle in which Arrian's two legions were victorious.

Within the work, Arrian explicitly identified the particular means of pursuing warfare as being based on Greek methods.

Ektaxis kata Alanon is also translated as Acies contra Alanos. The work was known for a time as A History of the Alani (Alanike via Photius ). A fragment describing a plan of battle against the Alani was found in Milan around the 17th century which was thought at that time to belong to the History.

Biographical series
There were also a number of monographs or biographies, including of Dion of Syracuse, Timoleon of Corinth, and Tilliborus, a brigand or robber of Asia Minor, which are now lost.

Sources, transmission, translations and publications
Everything known of his life derives from the 9th century writing of Photius in his Bibliotheca, and from those few references which exist within Arrian's own writings. The knowledge of his consulship, is derived at the least from literature produced by Suidas. Arnobius (c. 3rd century AD ) mentions Arrian. Arrian was also known of by Aulus Gellius. Pliny the Younger addressed seven of his epistles to him. Simplicius made a copy of the Encheridion, which was transmitted under the name of the monastic father Nilus during the 5th century, and as a result found in every monastery library.

Nicholas Blancard made translations of Arrian in 1663 and 1668.

The voyage of Nearchus and Periplus of the Erythrean Sea were translated from the Greek by the then Dean of Westminster, William Vincent, and published in 1809. Vincent published a commentary in 1797 on The voyage of Nearchus. The work was also translated into French by M. Billecocq, under the auspices of the government (cf. p. 321).

title: Arrian


text:
Nearchus

Nearchus or Nearchos (Νέαρχος; c. 360 – 300 BC) was one of the Greek officers, a navarch, in the army of Alexander the Great. He is known for his celebrated expeditionary voyage starting from the Indus River, through the Persian Gulf and ending at the mouth of the Tigris River following the Indian campaign of Alexander the Great, in 326–324 BC.

Early life
A native of Lato in Crete and son of Androtimus, his family settled at Amphipolis in Macedonia at some point during Philip II's reign (we must assume after Philip took the city in 357 BC), at which point Nearchus was probably a young boy. He was almost certainly older than Alexander, as were Ptolemy, Erigyius, and the others of the ‘boyhood friends’; so depending on when Androtimus came to Macedonia Nearchus was quite possibly born in Crete. Nearchus, along with Ptolemy, Erigyius and Laomedon, and Harpalus, was one of Alexander's ‘mentors’ – and he was exiled by Philip as a result of the Pixodarus affair (A 3.6.5; P 10.3). It is not known where the exiles went, but they were recalled only after Philip's death, on Alexander's accession.

Conquests of Alexander the Great
After their recall, these men were held in the highest honour. Nearchus was appointed as satrap of Lycia and Pamphylia in 334/3 BC (A 3.3.6), one of the earliest of Alexander's satrapal appointments. Nearchus' naval blockade of Persian fleets threatening the Aegean Sea was successful in aiding Alexander's conquest of Phoenicia, Egypt and Babylonia. In 328 BC he was relieved of his post and rejoined Alexander in Bactria (northern Afghanistan), bringing with him reinforcements (A 4.7.2; C 7.10.4, but does not mention Nearchus himself). After the siege of Aornos in present-day Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan, Nearchus was sent at the head of a reconnaissance mission – especially to find out about elephants (A 4.30.5–6).

Indus River Voyage
In 326 BC, Nearchus was made admiral of the fleet that Alexander had constructed at the Hydaspes (A 6.2.3; Indica 18.10). However, his trierarchy was a financial responsibility – that is, Nearchus put up the money for the boats (Heckel, p. 229); and there were plenty of other trierarchs in the Indus fleet who were not natural-born sailors. Strabo recounts that the Himalayan range of Emodus was close to the construction of the fleet near Taxila, providing ample supplies of fir, pine and cedar timber. Initially, the fleet progressed down the Hydaspes much like a triumphal military parade, accompanied by a land-based entourage of the main armed forces of Alexander including cavalry, elephants and loot trains. At the confluence of the Acesines and Indus Rivers, Alexander founded a city called Alexandria-on-the-Indus, assigning it to the satrapy of Oxyartes (father of Roxana) and populating it with Thracian troops.

Some of the ships were damaged, and Nearchus was instructed to remain behind to oversee repairs, before continuing down the river. This perhaps indicates some knowledge of shipbuilding, but he could hardly have been the only one qualified. The voyage down the Indus River lasted from 326 to 325 BCE and resulted in the capture of native Indian towns. By the time the Macedonians had reached Pattala (modern Bahmanabad in Sindh, Pakistan), Nearchus prepared to lead 17–20,000 men for an expedition into the Persian Gulf, while Alexander continue through the Gedrosian desert. Nearchus was not the only Greek naval officer to have pursued a voyage down the Indus River—this was also done by Scylax of Caryanda under the commission of Darius the Great, according to Herodotus.

Nearchus remained in command of the fleet for the voyage from the Indus to the Persian Gulf, which he recorded in detail (and which was used extensively for Arrian’s Indica). Again, although he was the admiral, in command of the fleet, great seamanship was not required – the naval responsibilities were Onesicritus’. Nearchus compiled the story of his expedition into a written work—the Indike—which is now lost but informs some of the content in Arrian's Indica and Strabo's Geographica. This work likely consisted of two parts: one detailing India's frontiers, size, population, castes, fauna, flora, cultures and militaries, and the other describing his home-bound voyage toward Babylon. Nearchus described, according to Arrian, how commodities like rice, sugarcane and cotton fabrics and textiles were cultivated, manufactured and traded in the Indus Valley.

Persian Gulf Voyage
Nearchus began by setting out from Patala, although monsoon rains and heavy winds delayed his reaching the Arabian Sea. To wait out the adverse weather, the Macedonian fleet camped near the mouth of the Indus and Arabius Rivers, building stone walls as fortification against hostile natives and subsisting off of briny water, mussels, oysters and razor-fish. After 24 days, Nearchus continued on to the harbor of Morontobara (Manora Island just off the coast of modern Karachi, Pakistan). About Morontobara, Arrian writes:

 * Then making their way through two rocks, so close together that the oar-blades of the ships touched the rocks to port and starboard, they moored at Morontobara, after sailing some three hundred stades. The harbour is spacious, circular, deep, and calm, but its entrance is narrow. They called it, in the natives' language, 'The Ladies' Pool,' since a lady was the first sovereign of this district. When they had got safe through the rocks, they met great waves, and the sea running strong; and moreover it seemed very hazardous to sail seaward of the cliffs. For the next day, however, they sailed with an island on their port beam, so as to break the sea, so close indeed to the beach that one would have conjectured that it was a channel cut between the island and the coast. The entire passage was of some seventy stades. On the beach were many thick trees, and the island was wholly covered with shady forest. About dawn, they sailed outside the island, by a narrow and turbulent passage; for the tide was still falling. And when they had sailed some hundred and twenty stades they anchored in the mouth of the river Arabis. There was a fine large harbour by its mouth; but there was no drinking water; for the mouths of the Arabis were mixed with sea-water. However, after penetrating forty stades inland they found a water-hole, and after drawing water thence they returned back again. By the harbour was a high island, desert, and round it one could get oysters and all kinds of fish. Up to this the country of the Arabians extends; they are the last Indians settled in this direction; from here on the territory, of the Oreitans begins.

At Morontobara, Leonnatus (one of Alexander's Generals) had defeated the local Oreitans and deposited a food supply from which Nearchus' fleet subsisted. Resupplied, Nearchus reached the Hingol River (in Makran, Balochistan) and destroyed the native population. Nearchus had arrived at the country of the Icthyophagoi -- 'Fish-Eaters' -- who inhabited the barren coastal region of Makran, between the Arabian Sea and the Gedrosian Desert and found the harbor of Bagisara (modern Ormara Port).

In the next stage of the expedition, Nearchus and his fleet sheltered first at Colta, then Calima (Kalat), Carnine (Astola Island), Cysa and Mosarna. At Mosarna, a Gedrosian sailor joined their fleet and directed them to Gwadar, where they found date-palms and gardens. They ransacked the city of Chah-Bahar and anchored the fleet at a promontory dedicated to the Sun God, called Bageia. Nearchus continued on to the Persian Gulf at the Straits of Hormuz. After many adventures, Nearchus arrived in Carmania in Southern Iran, meeting up with Alexander after the latter's crossing of the Gedrosian desert. Here they noted that the area was well-cultivated with corn (grain), vines and trees (apart from the olive tree cherished by Greeks). At the Straits of Hormuz, Nearchus and Onesicritus saw the peninsula of Oman in Arabia, but did not venture there. Oman was a satrapy of the Achaemenid Empire before Alexander's conquest. During the voyage, Nearchus was reputedly the first Greek commander to visit Bahrain, which was called Tylos by the Greeks. His visit marked the start of Bahrain's inclusion within the Hellenic world, which culminated in the worship of Zeus (as the Arab sun god, Shams) and Greek being spoken as the language of the upper classes. Bahrain even hosted Greek athletic contests. Nearchus recorded that Bahrain was a prosperous commercial island, stating: "'That in the island of Tylos, situated in the Persian Gulf, are large plantations of cotton tree, from which are manufactured clothes called sindones, a very different degrees of value, some being costly, others less expensive. The use of these is not confined to India, but extends to Arabia.'"The Macedonians visited many ports in the Persian Gulf such as Harmozeia, Qeshm Island, Cape Ra's-e Bostâneh, Qeys Island, Band-e Nakhîlû, Lâzeh Island (where they encountered pearl-hunters), the Bandar-e Shîû promontory, Nây Band, Kangan, the Mand River, Bûsher, the Dasht-e Palang River, Jazireh-ye Shîf and the Marun River. They finally reached the mouth of the Tigris River in 324 BCE.

After reaching the Tigris River, Nearchus went as far as the Euphrates before turning back to rejoin Alexander at Susa, in early 324 BC. He and Onesicritus received a golden diadem for their actions. Nearchus married the daughter of Barsine and Mentor (A 7.4.6), and received a crown as recognition of his exertions (A 7.5.6). He then took the fleet up to Babylon, where he gave Alexander the Chaldeans’ warning not to enter the city (P 73.1–2).

Later life
Nearchus had a place in Alexander's final plans, as he was to be the admiral of the fleet to conquer Arabia, a land Alexander wished to conquer to fortify trade and transportation in the Persian Gulf between Babylon and India. These plans were cut short by the king's death.

In the initial arguments over the rule of the empire Nearchus supported Heracles, Alexander's son by Barsine – the king's mistress was now his mother-in-law. Once order broke down he joined Antigonus' camp. His last mention is as an adviser to Demetrius in 313/2 BC (D 19.69.1); what happened after that is not known, although he probably retired to write his history. Nearchus wrote a history of his voyages together with a description of India entitled Indica. This text is now lost, but its contents are known from information included by Strabo and other later authors. An account of his voyage is given in Arrian's own Indica, written in the 2nd century AD. Pliny the Elder wrote that Nearchus founded the town of Arbis during his voyage.

Legacy
The hellenic navy named in 1980 a Fletcher class destroyer under the name of the navarch (D-65). Later on in 1992 the Hellenic navy named the second C.F Adams destroyer Nearchus ( D-219). In 27 September 2022 the hellenic navy announced that the second FDI frigate will be named Nearchus as well.

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

title: Nearchus


text:
Shotgun debugging

Shotgun debugging can be defined as:
 * A process of making relatively un-directed changes to software in the hope that a bug will be perturbed out of existence.
 * Using the approach of trying several possible solutions of hardware or software problem at the same time, in the hope that one of the solutions (typically source code modifications) will work.

Shotgun debugging has a relatively low success rate and can be very time-consuming, except when used as an attempt to work around programming language features that one may be using improperly. When combined with domain expertise and a strong intuition for the underlying codebase, it can be a good starting point to gut-solve a buggy piece of code a few times before formally researching the corresponding error message. When used in this way, it may be a valuable technique that is faster than browsing through the Internet searching a particular error message every time.

Examples
Shotgun debugging can occur when working with multi-threaded applications. Attempting to debug a race condition by adding debugging code to the application is likely to change the speed of one thread in relation to another and could cause the problem to disappear. This is known as a Heisenbug. Although apparently a solution to the problem, it is a fix by pure chance and anything else that changes the behavior of the threads could cause it to resurface — for example on a computer with a different scheduler. Code added to any part of the program could easily revert the effect of the "fix".

title: Shotgun debugging


text:
VLAN

A virtual local area network (VLAN) is any broadcast domain that is partitioned and isolated in a computer network at the data link layer (OSI layer 2). In this context, virtual refers to a physical object recreated and altered by additional logic, within the local area network. Basically, a VLAN behaves like a virtual switch or network link that can share the same physical structure with other VLANs while staying logically separate from them. Between network devices, VLANs work by applying tags to network frames and handling these tags in networking systems – creating the appearance and functionality of network traffic that is physically on a single network but acts as if it is split between separate networks. In this way, VLANs can keep network applications separate despite being connected to the same physical network, and without requiring multiple sets of cabling and networking devices to be deployed.

VLANs allow network administrators to group hosts together even if the hosts are not directly connected to the same network switch. Because VLAN membership can be configured through software, this can greatly simplify network design and deployment. Without VLANs, grouping hosts according to their resource needs the labor of relocating nodes or rewiring data links. VLANs allow devices that must be kept separate to share the cabling of a physical network and yet be prevented from directly interacting with one another. This managed sharing yields gains in simplicity, security, traffic management, and economy. For example, a VLAN can be used to separate traffic within a business based on individual users or groups of users or their roles (e.g. network administrators), or based on traffic characteristics (e.g. low-priority traffic prevented from impinging on the rest of the network's functioning). Many Internet hosting services use VLANs to separate customers' private zones from one other, allowing each customer's servers to be grouped in a single network segment no matter where the individual servers are located in the data center. Some precautions are needed to prevent traffic "escaping" from a given VLAN, an exploit known as VLAN hopping.

To subdivide a network into VLANs, one configures network equipment. Simpler equipment might partition only each physical port (if even that), in which case each VLAN runs over a dedicated network cable. More sophisticated devices can mark frames through VLAN tagging, so that a single interconnect (trunk) may be used to transport data for multiple VLANs. Since VLANs share bandwidth, a VLAN trunk can use link aggregation, quality-of-service prioritization, or both to route data efficiently.

Uses
VLANs address issues such as scalability, security, and network management. Network architects set up VLANs to provide network segmentation. Routers between VLANs filter broadcast traffic, enhance network security, perform address summarization, and mitigate network congestion.

In a network utilizing broadcasts for service discovery, address assignment and resolution and other services, as the number of peers on a network grows, the frequency of broadcasts also increases. VLANs can help manage broadcast traffic by forming multiple broadcast domains. Breaking up a large network into smaller independent segments reduces the amount of broadcast traffic each network device and network segment has to bear. Switches may not bridge network traffic between VLANs, as doing so would violate the integrity of the VLAN broadcast domain.

VLANs can also help create multiple layer 3 networks on a single physical infrastructure. VLANs are data link layer (OSI layer 2) constructs, analogous to Internet Protocol (IP) subnets, which are network layer (OSI layer 3) constructs. In an environment employing VLANs, a one-to-one relationship often exists between VLANs and IP subnets, although it is possible to have multiple subnets on one VLAN.

Without VLAN capability, users are assigned to networks based on geography and are limited by physical topologies and distances. VLANs can logically group networks to decouple the users' network location from their physical location. By using VLANs, one can control traffic patterns and react quickly to employee or equipment relocations. VLANs provide the flexibility to adapt to changes in network requirements and allow for simplified administration.

VLANs can be used to partition a local network into several distinctive segments, for instance:
 * Production
 * Voice over IP
 * Network management
 * Storage area network (SAN)
 * Guest Internet access
 * Demilitarized zone (DMZ)

A common infrastructure shared across VLAN trunks can provide a measure of security with great flexibility for a comparatively low cost. Quality of service schemes can optimize traffic on trunk links for real-time (e.g. VoIP) or low-latency requirements (e.g. SAN). However, VLANs as a security solution should be implemented with great care as they can be defeated unless implemented carefully.

In cloud computing VLANs, IP addresses, and MAC addresses in the cloud are resources that end users can manage. To help mitigate security issues, placing cloud-based virtual machines on VLANs may be preferable to placing them directly on the Internet.

Network technologies with VLAN capabilities include:
 * Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM)
 * Fiber Distributed Data Interface (FDDI)
 * Ethernet
 * HiperSockets
 * InfiniBand

History
After successful experiments with voice over Ethernet from 1981 to 1984, W. David Sincoskie joined Bellcore and began addressing the problem of scaling up Ethernet networks. At 10 Mbit/s, Ethernet was faster than most alternatives at the time. However, Ethernet was a broadcast network and there was no good way of connecting multiple Ethernet networks together. This limited the total bandwidth of an Ethernet network to 10 Mbit/s and the maximum distance between nodes to a few hundred feet.

By contrast, although the existing telephone network's speed for individual connections was limited to 56 kbit/s (less than one hundredth of Ethernet's speed), the total bandwidth of that network was estimated at 1 Tbit/s (100,000 times greater than Ethernet).

Although it was possible to use IP routing to connect multiple Ethernet networks together, it was expensive and relatively slow. Sincoskie started looking for alternatives that required less processing per packet. In the process, he independently reinvented transparent bridging, the technique used in modern Ethernet switches. However, using switches to connect multiple Ethernet networks in a fault-tolerant fashion requires redundant paths through that network, which in turn requires a spanning tree configuration. This ensures that there is only one active path from any source node to any destination on the network. This causes centrally located switches to become bottlenecks, limiting scalability as more networks are interconnected.

To help alleviate this problem, Sincoskie invented VLANs by adding a tag to each Ethernet frame. These tags could be thought of as colors, say red, green, or blue. In this scheme, each switch could be assigned to handle frames of a single color, and ignore the rest. The networks could be interconnected with three spanning trees, one for each color. By sending a mix of different frame colors, the aggregate bandwidth could be improved. Sincoskie referred to this as a multitree bridge. He and Chase Cotton created and refined the algorithms necessary to make the system feasible. This color is what is now known in the Ethernet frame as the IEEE 802.1Q header, or the VLAN tag. While VLANs are commonly used in modern Ethernet networks, they are not used in the manner first envisioned here.

In 1998, Ethernet VLANs were described in the first edition of the IEEE 802.1Q-1998 standard. This was extended with IEEE 802.1ad to allow nested VLAN tags in service of provider bridging. This mechanism was improved with IEEE 802.1ah-2008.

Configuration and design considerations
Early network designers often segmented physical LANs with the aim of reducing the size of the Ethernet collision domain—thus improving performance. When Ethernet switches made this a non-issue (because each switch port is a collision domain), attention turned to reducing the size of the data link layer broadcast domain. VLANs were first employed to separate several broadcast domains across one physical medium. A VLAN can also serve to restrict access to network resources without regard to physical topology of the network.

VLANs operate at the data link layer of the OSI model. Administrators often configure a VLAN to map directly to an IP network, or subnet, which gives the appearance of involving the network layer. Generally, VLANs within the same organization will be assigned different non-overlapping network address ranges. This is not a requirement of VLANs. There is no issue with separate VLANs using identical overlapping address ranges (e.g. two VLANs each use the private network ). However, it is not possible to route data between two networks with overlapping addresses without delicate IP remapping, so if the goal of VLANs is segmentation of a larger overall organizational network, non-overlapping addresses must be used in each separate VLAN.

A basic switch that is not configured for VLANs has VLAN functionality disabled or permanently enabled with a default VLAN that contains all ports on the device as members. The default VLAN typically uses VLAN identifier 1. Every device connected to one of its ports can send packets to any of the others. Separating ports by VLAN groups separates their traffic very much like connecting each group using a distinct switch for each group.

Remote management of the switch requires that the administrative functions be associated with one or more of the configured VLANs.

In the context of VLANs, the term trunk denotes a network link carrying multiple VLANs, which are identified by labels (or tags) inserted into their packets. Such trunks must run between tagged ports of VLAN-aware devices, so they are often switch-to-switch or switch-to-router links rather than links to hosts. (Note that the term 'trunk' is also used for what Cisco calls "channels" : Link Aggregation or Port Trunking). A router (Layer 3 device) serves as the backbone for network traffic going across different VLANs. It is only when the VLAN port group is to extend to another device that tagging is used. Since communications between ports on two different switches travel via the uplink ports of each switch involved, every VLAN containing such ports must also contain the uplink port of each switch involved, and traffic through these ports must be tagged.

Switches typically have no built-in method to indicate VLAN to port associations to someone working in a wiring closet. It is necessary for a technician to either have administrative access to the device to view its configuration, or for VLAN port assignment charts or diagrams to be kept next to the switches in each wiring closet.

Protocols and design
The protocol most commonly used today to support VLANs is IEEE 802.1Q. The IEEE 802.1 working group defined this method of multiplexing VLANs in an effort to provide multivendor VLAN support. Prior to the introduction of the 802.1Q standard, several proprietary protocols existed, such as Cisco Inter-Switch Link (ISL) and 3Com's Virtual LAN Trunk (VLT). Cisco also implemented VLANs over FDDI by carrying VLAN information in an IEEE 802.10 frame header, contrary to the purpose of the IEEE 802.10 standard.

Both ISL and IEEE 802.1Q perform explicit tagging – the frame itself is tagged with VLAN identifiers. ISL uses an external tagging process that does not modify the Ethernet frame, while 802.1Q uses a frame-internal field for tagging, and therefore does modify the basic Ethernet frame structure. This internal tagging allows IEEE 802.1Q to work on both access and trunk links using standard Ethernet hardware.

IEEE 802.1Q
Under IEEE 802.1Q, the maximum number of VLANs on a given Ethernet network is 4,094 (4,096 values provided by the 12-bit VID field minus reserved values at each end of the range, 0 and 4,095). This does not impose the same limit on the number of IP subnets in such a network since a single VLAN can contain multiple IP subnets. IEEE 802.1ad extends the number of VLANs supported by adding support for multiple, nested VLAN tags. IEEE 802.1aq (Shortest Path Bridging) expands the VLAN limit to 16 million. Both improvements have been incorporated into the IEEE 802.1Q standard.

Cisco Inter-Switch Link
Inter-Switch Link (ISL) is a Cisco proprietary protocol used to interconnect switches and maintain VLAN information as traffic travels between switches on trunk links. ISL is provided as an alternative to IEEE 802.1Q. ISL is available only on some Cisco equipment and has been deprecated.

Cisco VLAN Trunking Protocol
VLAN Trunking Protocol (VTP) is a Cisco proprietary protocol that propagates the definition of VLANs on the whole local area network. VTP is available on most of the Cisco Catalyst Family products. The comparable IEEE standard in use by other manufacturers is GARP VLAN Registration Protocol (GVRP) or the more recent Multiple VLAN Registration Protocol (MVRP).

Multiple VLAN Registration Protocol
Multiple VLAN Registration Protocol is an application of Multiple Registration Protocol that allows automatic configuration of VLAN information on network switches. Specifically, it provides a method to dynamically share VLAN information and configure the needed VLANs.

Membership
VLAN membership can be established either statically or dynamically.

Static VLANs are also referred to as port-based VLANs. Static VLAN assignments are created by assigning ports to a VLAN. As a device enters the network, the device automatically assumes the VLAN of the port. If the user changes ports and needs access to the same VLAN, the network administrator must manually make a port-to-VLAN assignment for the new connection.

Dynamic VLANs are created using software or by protocol. With a VLAN Management Policy Server (VMPS), an administrator can assign switch ports to VLANs dynamically based on information such as the source MAC address of the device connected to the port or the username used to log onto that device. As a device enters the network, the switch queries a database for the VLAN membership of the port that device is connected to. Protocol methods include Multiple VLAN Registration Protocol (MVRP) and the somewhat obsolete GARP VLAN Registration Protocol (GVRP).

Protocol-based VLANs
In a switch that supports protocol-based VLANs, traffic may be handled on the basis of its protocol. Essentially, this segregates or forwards traffic from a port depending on the particular protocol of that traffic; traffic of any other protocol is not forwarded on the port. This allows, for example, IP and IPX traffic to be automatically segregated by the network.

VLAN cross connect
VLAN cross connect (CC or VLAN-XC) is a mechanism used to create Switched VLANs, VLAN CC uses IEEE 802.1ad frames where the S Tag is used as a Label as in MPLS. IEEE approves the use of such a mechanism in part 6.11 of IEEE 802.1ad-2005.

title: VLAN


text:
Talk:Sola fide

Article's head summary does not match the body
There is a real problem with this article, in that the head section says that Sola Fide is a protestant thing that is in distinction to Catholics and Orthodox, and yet the section on Ecumenical approaches clearly states that in fact the Lutherans and Catholics actually have no dispute and that also the Lutherans and Orthodox agree, though using different concepts

(The preamble to the Cathlic/Lutheran agreement[] says that the Lutherans agree that the Catholics don't actually hold what Luther was railing against, and the Catholics say that the Lutherans don't actually teach what the Councils anethematized...)  (I am not sure whether that leaves Calvinists, but predestinations are not really sola fide in the same way, anyway, are they?)

So what this means is that the summary at the top positively inteferes understanding with the real positions, as nutted out over the last 400 years. I think the best thing is to point out what the churches claim is their own positions and agreement, and make it clear that some claims of divisions are historically/religiously motivated, or based on understandings/misunderstandings by both sides that continue on. Rick Jelliffe (talk) 04:52, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Terminology
Two things bother me about terminology:

1) A few places "salvation" and "justification" seem to get interchanged. Alister McGrath has noted in a few places that in the 16th Cent, Protestants took salvation to include both justification and sanctification, whereas Catholics used the term justification to include both. Also Protestants took faith to mean primarily "trust", whereas Catholics often understood them to mean intellectual belief.

E.g. in the start of the "Roman Catholic view", it is said "The Roman Catholic view tends to exclude sola fide as grounds for justification, holding instead that good works are also necessary for salvation." The switch from justification to salvation is problematical. Protestants believe that good works are part of the overall work of regenerating a person. However they are seen as the consequence of Christ working with us, which happens because we are united to him in faith. Thus good works are part of the overall process of salvation, but not of justification. So the switch from justification to salvation could cause confusion.

2) In the section on "status of the doctrine" there is talk of "faith" meaning "faithfulness". Some people may have claimed that justification is by faithfulness, but I'm not aware of them. The more common view, which I don't see on the page, is that "faith" is understood as "trust". This is the famous "fiduciary faith." It's hard to imagine a page of sola fide that doesn't mention this. [There are lots of references, but a good one would be http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?2617&collectionID=783&contentID=57253&shortcutID=20289. "Justifying faith is trust in Christ and his redemptive work." ]

Hedrick (talk) 16:45, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Views of other groups

 * Other groups believe that faith is sufficient for salvation but not necessary.

I suppose that this is true, and interesting; but I think it is irrelevant. Is it necessary for neutrality, or even balance, to say that besides sola fide believers there are believers in something different? Mkmcconn 22:20 Oct 8, 2002 (UTC)

 * I don't think it's necessary for neutrality or balance, but sometimes it helps to explain an idea by contrasting it with related or opposing ideas. In this case though, I'm inclined to leave it out unless there's a concrete example of an actual group that believes this. All I can think of is some form of universalism, in which case it wouldn't matter if you had faith or not. Wesley

 * Your point is especially valid for for Roman Catholicism, since the doctrine is formulated in contrast to the Catholic view (or at least, the Protestant understanding of the Catholic view); and that reference should be left in for that reason - unlike this one.

The article says that Restorationist groups deny sola fide. This is not true of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, which is usually considered Restorationist yet fully accepts sola fide / justification by faith alone. Colin MacLaurin 17:17, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Romans 3:28
Regarding Luther's change to Romans 3:28, this was discussed in a book by an Orthodox theologian (name escapes me now) but independently confirmed by my wife, who was able to compare two German translations of the passage, one in a Luther translation of the NT and another in a Zwingli translation. Should be confirmable by anyone else with access to the same. Wesley 04:07, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Correct phrasing
The word "apparently" in the subtitles are misleading and very subjective. Some of those verses have many different interpretation from many different churches. (at least it wasn't apparent to me --;;) I changed it.. but i think someone needs to come up with a better word choice.. Highwind 00:39, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Would "Alleged support for sola fide in the NT" and "Alleged rejection of sola fide in the NT" be any better? This would suggest or emphasize that the NT doesn't contradict itself so much as different groups' interpretations of the NT contradict each other. Hopefully someone else will have a better idea. Wesley 03:47, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * I like that~ cool! Highwind 08:16, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Unclear text used for explaining Catholic view
The section on Catholic teaching includes a quote from the Catachism ''"No one can merit the initial grace which is at the origin of conversion. Moved by the Holy Spirit, we can merit for ourselves and for others all the graces needed to attain eternal life, as well as necessary temporal goods."

However, I think this misses a vital thing: that quote is a summary s. 2025, but the full section emphasizes something directly relevant to what it means in the context of sola fide: ''2010. Since the initiative belongs to God in the order of grace, no one can merit the initial grace of forgiveness and justification, at the beginning of conversion. Moved by the Holy Spirit and by charity, we can then merit for ourselves and for others the graces needed for our sanctification, for the increase of grace and charity, and for the attainment of eternal life. Even temporal goods like health and friendship can be merited in accordance with God's wisdom. These graces and goods are the object of Christian prayer. Prayer attends to the grace we need for meritorious actions. ''

So I think that the use of s2025 rather than 2010 actually causes confusion rather than clarifying the Catholic teaching.

So my proposal is to use the 2010 text. Furthermore, I think there is a real problem that because the "ground rules" of Catholic teaching are not clearly stated, people go off on tangents that particular words can support, but are not the intent. So I propose to collect material from the Catechism into a clearer "ground rules" list.Rick Jelliffe (talk) 04:40, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Sola Fide: has the meaning changed? Do Catholics agree?
This doctrine is accepted by many Protestants, including Lutherans and Baptists, and is rejected by Catholics.

I think it would be more accurate to say "This doctrine, as it is here defined, is... rejected by Catholics." Catholics do accept it when it is understood to mean "a person is only justified by faith," "only a person with faith can be justified," or "without faith it is impossible to be justified." Johnaugus

 * After seeing your comment, I modified the passage in question. However, during this process I came to the conclusion that the first paragraph in this section is probably not a fair description of sola fide.  Instead, it waters down this doctrine to the point that all Catholics and traditional Protestants would agree with what it says.
 * I suspect that some Protestants have modified this doctrine over the years, and this page really needs to distinguish Luther's original teaching (and perhaps different claims of what Luther's teaching meant) from the views of Protestants today.
 * The big sticking point is -- what does "faith" mean? If the word "faith" is never defined, anyone can believe in salvation by faith alone.  The paragraph I am complaining about avoided the word "faith" entirely.
 * I'd love to hear a Protestant view on this, especially from a traditional Reformed or LCMS believer. As a Catholic, when I hear Protestants today say "You are not saved just by believing -- you need to have a saving faith, not just any faith," it sounds to me as if they are saying "Faith alone doesn't save; this faith needs to be made active through your works."   My question is:  if Luther heard them say this, would he interpret it as I am interpreting it? Lawrence King 07:01, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * The big sticking point is -- what does "faith" mean? If the word "faith" is never defined, anyone can believe in salvation by faith alone.  The paragraph I am complaining about avoided the word "faith" entirely.
 * I'd love to hear a Protestant view on this, especially from a traditional Reformed or LCMS believer. As a Catholic, when I hear Protestants today say "You are not saved just by believing -- you need to have a saving faith, not just any faith," it sounds to me as if they are saying "Faith alone doesn't save; this faith needs to be made active through your works."   My question is:  if Luther heard them say this, would he interpret it as I am interpreting it? Lawrence King 07:01, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I'd love to hear a Protestant view on this, especially from a traditional Reformed or LCMS believer. As a Catholic, when I hear Protestants today say "You are not saved just by believing -- you need to have a saving faith, not just any faith," it sounds to me as if they are saying "Faith alone doesn't save; this faith needs to be made active through your works."   My question is:  if Luther heard them say this, would he interpret it as I am interpreting it? Lawrence King 07:01, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * In a well-know theology textbook, "Christian Theology: An Introduction" (as well as other places, but this is the most accessible), the Church historian Alister McGrath maintains that the issue was at least in part a misunderstanding based on terms. The usual Protestant definition classified salvation into justification and sanctification. Justification is our status before God. It is the result of pure grace, which we receive in faith. But having been forgiven by God and placed in a right relationship with him, Christ work within us to renew us, and we are expected to show this in good works. However Trent, along with other Catholic works, used justification for the whole process. They also tended to understand faith as intellectual belief. So Catholics understood Protestants as saying that all of salvation was based on intellectual belief. That's not at all what Protestants meant. The traditional definition of "faith" in this context is "trust". Note that faith is not the *cause* of justification, but the way we receive it. That is, God puts us in a right relationship with himself by grace, through Christ's death. He does this before we are in a position to do anything on our own. All we can do is receive this, trusting him for our justification. For Calvin at least faith established a union with Christ (he called it a "mystic union"). Through that, Christ works to transform us. This transformed person then does good works because we now love God and our fellow man. The debate was never whether Christians do good works. It was logical order in which various things happened. Protestants wanted to make sure that action was seen as a result of God's work with us, and not a precondition. The reason is that good works tend to have a different flavor if they are done in response to God's love or if they are done because we think we have to do them in order to get to the point where God will justify us, or to maintain our status before God. I believe that currently Catholics normally believe that God initiates the process. So if you sort out the terminology, they might well agree with Protestants in how things start (although they may tend to involve Baptism in a slightly different way). (This may not have been true in the 16th Cent. A common Catholic view was that we were expected to do what we could on our own, and God would then respond with grace.) However I think there's still a difference in what happens ongoing. The theoretical difference, which I think is still present, is that Catholics see grace as something that is infused into us. Our ongoing status before God depends upon that. Any mortal sin breaks that relationship. And there are enough mortal sins that this is not something that happens only rarely to unusually bad people. Protestants believe that our status before God is entirely due to his grace. And that grace is seen as God's commitment to us, i.e. it's external to us rather than infused in us. If we disobey, he may discipline us, but we don't cease being justified. Calvin's mystical union is probably a fairly close analog to the Catholic infused grace. Because of our union with Christ, he works in us. But it is never envisioned as something that's truly resident in us. Rather, Christ works in us through his union with us, but from outside. That's why no matter how we sin, Christ's grace can still remain. In some current scholarship (particularly N.T.Wright) this is seen as God's faithfulness to his covenant. Wright understands justification in Paul's letters as being the recognition of our status before God rather than the status itself. However when he draws out the implications of his view, the role of faith and obedience isn't very different from the traditional Protestant one. Hedrick (talk) 17:09, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

 * Those ideas of salvation by faith alone which are intended to contrast with the traditional Catholic view, are well-expressed by the confessional documents quoted in the article. While I do believe that the Catholic and the Protestant views are gradually approaching one another, they have not yet merged.  Trent is (generally speaking) being much more liberally interpreted by both parties, than in the past.   And, Protestants are less typically presenting their view of salvation in a piece-meal fashion - which has caused, and still does cause, differences of understanding and aggravates the disagreement.  The sides are listening more carefully to one another - and doing so is less likely to raise accusations of betrayal.  It is good to understand one another better.  But, while it's difficult for anyone on either side to represent their side with authority (especially the Protestant side), "traditional Reformed or LCMS" believers, for example, are not convinced that the Reformation was not necessary.  Mkmcconn (Talk)  08:37, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The question is not just what "faith" means (does it include hope, love, and faithfulness or is it mere assent?), but how "only/alone" works in the overall phrase (the difference between "a person is only justified by faith and cannot be justified without it" and "faith, and faith alone, justifies a person"). Depending on the answers to questions like these, Catholics agree or disagree with the doctrine. Even many Protestants seem to disagree over the meaning of sola fide. Mkmcconn: though you say "Those ideas of salvation by faith alone which are intended to contrast with the traditional Catholic view, are well-expressed by the confessional documents quoted in the article," several of those quotes could be interpreted to agree with Catholic doctrine. It really does matter what each group means by "faith" and how they intend "only/alone" to work in the overall construction. Johnaugus

 * I can agree that "it really does matter what each group means by 'faith'", and it is certainly no secret that Protestants disagree with one another over the meaning of sola fide. But, I really think that you are over-simplifying.  None except anti-nomians believe that faith by itself justifies (nuda fide, I think is the derogatory term).  Both, Catholics and Protestants believe that "full" faith is a principle of faithfulness, not bare assent to propositions.  Both parties have been aware of these similarities from the beginning; and yet, the disagreement is as strong as ever.

 * As the final few ecumenical quotes indicate, there are attempts to interpret and explain Protestant documents of faith in such a way that a Roman Catholic would not necessarily disagree with them. However, these attempts are only partially successful, and suspected by some very vocal critics of being after all a brute exercise in distortion.  And anyway, all of these works intentionally avoid specifics either of Protestant or of Catholic doctrine and practice - not surreptitiously, but because they are young efforts.

 * By the way, the article on Faith is terrible. The  Catholic view is no longer even explicitly represented there. Maybe you could spearhead a rewrite.  Mkmcconn (Talk)  16:39, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

When you say "Both, Catholics and Protestants believe that 'full' faith is a principle of faithfulness, not bare assent to propositions" I do not disagree, as you seem to think. Antinomians are very rare in my experience, though they exist. As I said before, there's more than one question in the sola fide issue: what "faith" means and how "only/alone" works in the overall phrase. "A person is only justified by faith and cannot be justified without it" is different from "faith, and faith alone, justifies a person," but either construction can be understood in more than one way depending on what "faith" means.

And I don't think I'm "oversimplifying." The sola fide issue isn't the only one. There are many different conceptions of "justification" among different Christians too. So even if everyone agreed to the same meaning (or meanings?) of sola fide, not all differences would be solved yet. I wish it were easier for all our sakes, but it's not. :(

Thanks very much for the heads-up on the Faith article. If it's something I can help improve, I will try! Johnaugus

I think it is important that when studying the solas, one understands all of them before attempting to draw a conclusion on it's meaning. For example, Lutherans believe that a person is saved by God's grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. The Roman Catholic Church, while at times using similar language, still officially holds that faith, in order to save, must be accompanied by (or "infused with") some "work" or "love" active within a Christian.

The "Protestant Distinctive" heading
Mkmcconn, I agree with the changes you made in this section, except for one thing: the headings.

I had changed "A Protesant Distinctive" to "The doctrine of sola fide". This was a lame title, but I do feel this section needs a general title. The first paragraph describes the meaning of the doctrine. This paragraph does not describe or defend the claim that this doctrine is distinctively Protestant.

So the "Protestant Distinctive" heading should be a subheading above the second paragraph, which does say who believes it.

Also, consider this: Luther clearly believed that Paul taught sola fide, and Luther very likely believed that Augustine taught sola fide. Unless you are willing to call Paul and Augustine "Protestants", then the statement that "sola fide is a Protestant distinctive" is a bit controversial. In any event, I think this claim shouldn't be the over-heading of a major section. Lawrence King 06:07, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I also think it is a little imprecise to say that all Protestants believe this. I'm certainly not a Methodist theologian, but by my reading of the doctrine of the Evangelical United Brethren Church, it's not faith alone, but faith with a penitent heart. That's a subtle distinction that puts it closer to the Catholic faith theologically than to many other Protestant faiths. Similarly, the Methodist Church does not teach that once saved, you are always saved, and as the table says, Wesley believed in the need for continued sanctification, which contradicts the description of it as an event. In much the same way, the Catholics believe that baptism is just the start of a spiritual journey, not the destination. I'd be very curious to understand, then, how the Methodist Church is described as believing in sola fide and the Catholic faith is not. I'm sure there are some subtle distinctions I'm missing here, but it seems to me that if you drew a map of faith and put a dot for the Catholic faith in New York, belief-wise, you'd mark Methodists somewhere near D.C., with most of the other Protestant faiths somewhere near Adelaide.... 68.165.1.189 (talk) 05:22, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Correction/addition request
The NRSV Bible states in its introduction to Habakkuk (perhaps presumptuously) that the doctrine is based on Hab 2.4b, which was the influence for Rom 1.17 (cited in the article), and also Gal 3.11. Perhaps someone with more knowledge on the subject could find a way to insert the potential influence in the article. Eduardo Cuellar 18 Aug 2005

 * There are probably enough such verses to warrant a separate list of "Old Testament verses used to support Sola fide." Psalm 50 (51 in most English Bibles) and Micah 6:6-8 are two that come to mind. Wesley 06:11, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

History
There is nothing here from the standpoint of history, particularly social history, historical theology, etc. As if doctrine just pops out of a realm of pure abstraction and exists in hermetic bubbles of thought. Dan Knauss

I'm not sure I understand your statement in regards to the lack of historical theology within this document. Sola Fide is one of the core statements and teaching of the reformation, heavily emphasized by Martin Luther. While I would agree that there is only brief mention here, there is a link to the Wikipedia publication on Martin Luther, which goes into much more detail.

Couldn't find a place to add this, but wanted to make mention - you cited the Articles of Religion from the Methodist Episcopal church, however in many places this is still a seperate denomination. It was not involved in the merger with the Evangelical United Brethren and the Methodist church which formed The United Methodist Church. Just thought I'd point that out —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robert fulton1 (talk • contribs) 09:01, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Biased Point of View
If this page is to conform to the neutral point-of-view pillar of Wikipedia it needs to explain why some Christians don't follow the protestant belief of sola fide. If you would like to explain why refuting sola fide should NOT be on this page then start here.

J.H 15:24, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

This article reads as a defence to Roman Catholicism. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Fabiodrn (talk • contribs).

The phrase "... See how a person is justified by works and not by faith alone." was previously inaccurately representing itself as biblical text from James 2. Doesn't the New Testament verses provided under "New Testament verses used to refute sola fide" provide an adequate refutal?

Krb106 19:15, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, the Roman Catholic position and other positions relative to sola fide need to be presented. We have to imagine ourselves as explaining what sola fide is to someone who never heard of it in the manner of an encyclopedia. All sides would need to be presented with the "narrator" being the neutral observer. Something like that as neutral point of view.--Drboisclair 04:22, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

removed section: Salvation verses outside of faith and works
While I would prefer to remove the entire section that lists verses, can the inclusion of these two verses be justified?
 * 1 Corinthians 7:15d-16
 * God has called us to live in peace. 16How do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or, how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?
 * 1 Timothy 2:15
 * Yet she shall be saved through child bearing; if she continue in faith and love and sanctification with sobriety.

What scholar anywhere would interpret these verses as having anything to do with the instrumental means of justification, which is the subject of this article? — Mark (Mkmcconn) ** 00:28, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I would agree to the removal of this section for the reasons stated. I guess that the rationale for having it in there is that some interpreted the passages to mean that they leave room for one receiving salvation in a way other than through faith alone. These passages are a bit unclear, so they need to be interpreted in the light of the clear passages ("Scripture interprets Scripture").--Drboisclair 04:19, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Bible verses
The section on Bible verses is quite long. Both sides should be reduced IMHO, and the various interpretations of the verses given from reliable sources to demonstrate how each side understands them. --Fl e x (talk|contribs) 16:02, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

 * It should stay and please understand that Calvinism is after Luther in precidents. The reason why it should stay is because other articles reference this so they don't have to compile a list. The list is actually valid. It is precisely what Sola fide should is about. Presenting the case in the context of Sola scriptura. (F0xfree 09:28, 30 November 2006 (UTC))

I'm not saying the lists should be eliminated, just reduced. I'm sure Catholics et al. have something to say about the "Pro" verses and Protestants have something to say about the "Con" verses. Just listing verses without any explanation as to how they are understood is not exceedingly helpful, IMHO.

As for the template, Calvinism considers the solas an essential part of its theology, too. It was listed first in the text so that it would appear second (in left-to-right reading order). For that reason, I have restored the template. --Fl e x (talk|contribs) 14:43, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

 * These verses need to stay, but be written into paragraphs so they can be understood.Rogue Commander 22:30, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

More on the Calvinism template
F0xfree wrote on my talk page:

 * Hi there. I think it would be much better to display Calvanism in the historical passages that cover it rather than putting it next to Luther because there are thousands of other denominations that should be included if we use your standard. Please respond. Thanks you.

I would suggest that we should be consistent: either add all templates at the point of the historical passages or keep them all above. While the distinctive was emphasized by Luther, it is not exclusive to Lutheranism, and Calvinism is a broad term for the theology of the Reformed churches, which is a sizable group. --Fl e x (talk|contribs) 16:52, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

 * But why are not all Protestant denominations included then? (F0xfree 06:33, 1 December 2006 (UTC))

Conceivably more could be included, though not many place as much stress on the doctrine as do the Luteran and Reformed churches. --Fl e x (talk|contribs) 01:46, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Biased View in "Protestant Distinctive"?
"The doctrine, though never defined explicitly in the scriptural texts, holds that it is not through personal goodness that sinners are reconciled to God."

Hi! I copied this quote from the "Protestant Distinctive" section because I think that someone may want to edit that section in order to gain more neutrality on the issue since this line seems to imply a leaning towards the Catholic POV. Namely, it undermines Protestants and claims that they have no "scriptual" standing. I feel that it would be better if this section said that Protestants often use Ephesians 2:8-9 ("For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast") as a defense for sola fide. But, I'm new so please respond either way with your thoughts! 204.95.32.3 20:57, 17 July 2007 (UTC)Kobukson

 * I'm a protestant, and I think it's fine as is. The doctrine isn't spelled out explicitly as we put it forth (e.g., Rom 3.28 says "justified by faith" [n.b., no "alone"]), but rather it seems (at least to me and other protestants) to be the general teaching on the subject. --Fl e x (talk/contribs) 20:39, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Given the appearance of a non-NPOV in the current edition of this section, I replaced the Protestant Distinctive section with a "Justification in Lutheranism" section. If at any point you want to reintroduce the old section, I don't mind, but I feel that the Lutheranism section deserves to be placed first since it is the best sourced part of the article.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 17:18, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Joint Baptist-Catholic statement
I remember a while back there was a joint statement from the Pope as well as an association of Baptists on this matter. I was wondering if anyone knows what that statement said exactly? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.52.215.67 (talk) 17:07, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Okay, my bad I was thinking of the Lutheran World Federation/Catholic Church statement. But apparently it's not unofficial, or at least this statement isn't:

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_31101999_cath-luth-official-statement_en.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.52.215.67 (talk) 17:21, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Contrasting Passages
I have deleted a section titled "Contrasting Passages" as it was little more than a transcribed sermon refuting the Catholic position. It might be salvageable with some editing, but didn't add anything, and was written in the first person. 128.143.247.164 (talk) 19:34, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Sola fide and Intellectualism
There should maybe be non-original research about the relationship between sola fide and contemporary trends in intellectualism. One of the most frequent criticisms of sola fide is to link it with the concept of fideism, which is almost to say that it is the root cause of anti-intellectualism within Evangelical circles in modern America today, as well as a factor of religious fundamentalism in general. ADM (talk) 15:51, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Structure
The article needs to be restuctured. It is a bit of a mess right now. -- Secisek (talk) 16:52, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Wow. My thoughts exactly.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 03:25, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Ephesians 2:8-10
I was looking through the scripture verses used to support and to oppose sola fide and I noticed that Ephesians 2:8-10 was listed under support. Shouldn't it be Ephesians 2:8-9 under support and Ephesians 2:10 under oppose? Especially since the Catholic view section cites those verses as one of the reasons that the Catholic Church opposes sola fide? Looking for input. Thanks. Farsight001 (talk) 00:28, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

If you study the passages closely, you will see that we are only saved by his grace, and not by works, to avoid boasting. But works are still crucial, since God chose us for salvation for the purpose of good works. After all, Eph 2:8,9 shows one aspect of salvation, which is justification. This is part of the salvation package; we are regenerated, justified, sanctified, and glorified. Eph 2:10 focuses on sanctification.Nuvitauy07 (talk) 04:14, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Merge Discussion
Did you know that Justification by Faith redirects to here but Justification by faith redirects to Justification (theology). Looks like these should be merged? filceolaire (talk) 12:09, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * While that is strange, I don't think merging would solve anything--just make both pages more convoluted. Both these pages are a big mess. Catholic & Protestant apologists keep on adding material to support their position or alternatively, mess with their opponent's position. I don't see any of that stopping. What we need is someone with a reasonably fairminded (not a denominational or Rationalist based apologetic history) history of theology book(s) to go through and rewrite both articles. Justification (theology) would very much benifit from a purely historical look on what Christians believed about Justification over the ages. Only a historical approach to the article will unify currently disparate sections.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 03:24, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Maybe you could have an excerpt on Sola fide in Justification (theology), but I think the article has enough information to be self-sustaining... (70.15.6.140 (talk) 22:31, 13 October 2009 (UTC)Andrew)

I think non-Protestant Christians would find this suggestion that Sola Fide and Justification (the theological concept)are one and the same highly insulting. It certainly seems one-sided. It totally would leave out Orthodox and Catholic Christians... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.114.196.69 (talk) 02:19, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

I am currently writing an paper on the reformation and the article is pretty biased towards the catholic point of view. Protestants don't disregard good works, but rather see them a rung of ladder towards faith. Someone needs to rewrite it a little. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hashjihad (talk • contribs) 03:12, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree. This article is sort of a mess. I agree that the best overall organization would be historical. What we really need is a short version of McGrath's book. As to a separate article, it's pretty common for Wikipedia articles to have a couple of pargraphs that get expanded into a separate article, but that's no quite what is going on here.

Starting with scriptural sections, as this does, makes sense in theory but not in reality. Justification wasn't an explicit theme in the Gospels, so the way you apply the Gospels is going to depend upon your point of view. That's even true of Paul. There are dozens of readings of Paul, each with theological implications. There are Hebrew terms used in the OT, but Christian doctrinal treatments of justification have only the loosest connection with the OT context. If you're going to start with the OT, as the article does, you'd want someone who really knows current OT scholarship to present it as free as possible from the later arguments. I don't think any of the contributors so far could do that. So it's probably safer to structure it according to the history of the doctrine, or even just on the major doctrinal positions for which we can find contributors.

You can see how I'd prefer to deal with this issue by the article on Imputed Righteousness, the first three sections of which are from me. But that would require a degree of cooperation that may be hard to get.

Hedrick (talk) 21:37, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Disagree - I would disagree with a merge between Justification (theology) and sola fide. Each of the other five solas] has their own page, and sola fide deserves its own. And I believe there is enough that could be said about the general topic of Justification, regardless of how it is earned, to justify its own page. That being said, I'm certain that there is plenty of opportunity to link the two pages at appropriate points because they are related.

Agree - I would agree with a merge of concept between Justification by faith / Justification by Faith. Both pages should exist as redirects, and both should point to the same page. Sola fide would indicate that Justification is simply by faith alone, whereas Justification (theology) allows for Justification by faith, by faith + works, or even by works alone, or for that matter, even other methods that I haven't covered here. In this case, I would argue that both redirect pages should point directly to sola fide, with a redirect template placed at the top of the sola fide page that looks like this: Dawynn (talk) 15:06, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. -- Radagast 3 (talk) 07:37, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with Dawynn.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 06:21, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

I disagree that they should be merged. They are related but they are not the same thing. Justification is not done by faith alone, and that is what sola fide is. They are separate in the Christian faith and should be separate in their understanding. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.120.70.10  (talk • contribs)  22:50, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

I also oppose the merge; since the consensus is not to merge, I'm removing the tags. -- Radagast 3 (talk) 07:37, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Sola fide. 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/20080512021427/http://www.ctsfw.edu/library/files/pb/577 to http://www.ctsfw.edu/library/files/pb/577
 * Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuTopic_topicID=19&cuItem_itemID=11833
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150214094857/http://www.wlsessays.net/files/MeierJames.pdf to http://wlsessays.net/files/MeierJames.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150214094857/http://www.wlsessays.net/files/MeierJames.pdf to http://wlsessays.net/files/MeierJames.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150214094857/http://www.wlsessays.net/files/MeierJames.pdf to http://wlsessays.net/files/MeierJames.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140725061927/http://www.orlutheran.com/html/methodism.html to http://www.orlutheran.com/html/methodism.html

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) 23:23, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Section Sola fide and the Early Church Fathers
Many of the quotes, about 15 are not from primary sources. The primary sources and translations are widely available. However, many of the quotes reference what someone says that someone said as part of a biased commentary on the matter. The Church Fathers writings are well documented but none of these are referenced. This section should perhaps be removed as the editor likely copied and pasted from some site as a repository quotes for others to copy and paste in debates. This is not the purpose for the wikipedia. Perhaps this page can be cleaned up by creating a page purely for such quotes, after these have been cleaned and the bogus quotes removed. DeusImperator (talk) 10:14, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

"Introduction"
This portion is a mess, editors. I even smell well-organized vandalism since last time I made edits.

Those with no citations will be removed. - MainBody (talk) 05:00, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

The Place of Works
The assertion "This excludes, for example, the Catholic doctrine that men are saved by faith and works." is unsupported and a caricature of its teaching. A concordance search of the occurrences of "works" in the Cathechism of the Catholic Church turns up only 3 places where the word "faith" is nearby. The first, CCC 1021, refers to Christ's judgement according to one's works; the second (CCC 1815) is a quotation of Jas 2:26 ("faith apart from works is dead"); the third (CCC 1966) refers to "grace ... given ... through faith ... [which] works through charity". No mention of works as a part of justification. I am therefore removing this statement. Firstrock (talk) 14:56, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Agreed. This article has a clear anti-Catholic bias. --PluniaZ (talk) 21:16, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Obviously, Catholic.com is spinning the story. Not mentioning Faith-Works Salvation by words doesn't exclude the nature of the Catholic faith-plus-works teaching. Read carefully the Catechism (CCC) Par2010, Par2027, and Par2036 and Par2068. In Roman Catholicism, human efforts are means to obtain/complete salvation. - MainBody (talk) 18:47, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Remove Section Sola fide and the Early Church Fathers
After reviewing the section regarding Sole Fide and the Early Church Fathers, I believe it would be best to remove the section. By letting the quotes stand on their own, it removes context that would be unreasonable for the average person to understand off-hand. Due to its complex history, it is far too easy for an individual to anachronistically see their views in Church Fathers, and proof-texting them in this article only contributes to that issue. I will give a few examples of what I am talking about.

Currently, the only quote from Justin Martyr in the article is this: Justin Martyr (d. 165) in his Dialogue with Trypho: “No longer by the blood of goats and of sheep, or by the ashes of a heifer. . . are sins purged, but by faith, through the blood of Christ and his death, who died on this very account.”

This, standing on its own, would falsely lead someone reading this article to believe that Justin Martyr believes in sola fide. However, Justin clarifies his position in his other works, such as in his first apology:

Chapter XII: "...seeing that we hold this view, that it is alike impossible for the wicked, the covetous, the conspirator, and for the virtuous, to escape the notice of God, and that each man goes to everlasting punishment or salvation according to the value of his actions."

Chapter XVI: "And let those who are not found living as He taught, be understood to be no Christians, even though they profess with the lip the precepts of Christ; for not those who make profession, but those who do the works, shall be saved, according to His word: Not every one who says to Me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven, but he that does the will of My Father which is in heaven. For whosoever hears Me, and does My sayings, hears Him that sent Me..."

Emphasis mine. Another good example is Augustine. It is quoted in the article, and it puts his other quotes in context:

"Although it can be said that God’s commandments pertain to faith alone, if it is not dead [faith], but rather understood as that live faith, which works through love."

In a sense, Augustine would affirm faith alone, but his definition of "faith" is different than the modern protestant concept - his by definition includes working through love (more similar to an Eastern orthodox perspective) which distinguishes it from the doctrine of sola fide even if it uses those exact words.

And even to that extent, with the quotes I provided, there will be people who disagree with my interpretations of them. Which gets to my main point: there really is no way to objectively present these quotes and add all of the context one would need short of just linking every single work any of those church fathers have made, which would be a convoluted mess.

My recommendation is to keep the part about Catholic and Protestant scholars alike agreeing there were certainly church fathers that taught sola fide, and if there needs to be anything else in that section, quotes from those scholars expressing their opinions of which church fathers did. Having the quotes stand on their own really serves no purpose in the context of this article and doesn't provide anything really meaningful to it; we can leave the proof-texting of church fathers to religious apologists.

To clarify: I do believe that some of this quotes on their own accurately represent the belief of the individual, but most of them are missing so much context that they are essentially redundant at best or misleading at worst.

I would be interested in other viewpoints and opinions on this.

Justalittleflower (talk) 20:37, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

 * I agree. It is original research.  Remove it.  WP:NOR. --PluniaZ (talk) 22:22, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

 * I've gone ahead and removed it, but now the section has a little bit of a protestant bias (mentions that some church fathers believed in sola fide, but does not include the catholic/orthodox response to that proposition.) If you can think of a way to balance it that would be great, or maybe we should just scrap the section altogether. Justalittleflower (talk) 01:01, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

 * Yes, the rest of the text you say was according to James Buchanan (minister) belief, that it's not the general catholic or protestant belief. I removed the controversial text. The article needed bias. Rafaelosornio (talk) 01:40, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

 * I agree with the current version of the article. There's no need for the section at all. The Buchanan reference was polemical and obscure. --PluniaZ (talk) 03:27, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

there are two important lessons here
I can't believe I'm spending any time on this. I waded through this mess of an article as much as I could stand, and then I waded through the Talk page (even though it lacked the usual comic relief of 10,000-word arguments over US vs UK spelling). But I am actually completely serious here: This all teaches me two important lessons: 1) A man doesn't need to know what *he himself* thinks (much less understanding opposing views) to have a good knock-down dragged-out fight on an issue; 2) ultimately, the only thing that reallyalacarte (talk) 00:58, 21 January 2023 (UTC) matters is whether the home team or the away team is represented.

 * What's going on? (Rev) Bastique ☎ call me! 01:40, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Origins of the Term
This section plays fast and loose: e.g.

''Historically, the expression—"justification by faith alone"— has appeared in a number of Catholic bible translations: the Nuremberg Bible (1483) in Galatians 2:16 ("δικαιοῦται ἄνθρωπος ... διὰ πίστεως Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ") has "nur durch den glauben", and the Italian translations of 1476, 1538, and 1546 have "ma solo per la fede" or "per la sola fede". The official Italian Bible of the Catholic Church, La Sacra Bibbia della Conferenza Episcopale Italiana (2008), in Galatians 2:16, reads in part: "but only through faith in Jesus Christ" (ma soltanto per mezzo della fede).''

"Only through faith" is not the same as "through faith alone". "Only through" is not the same as "faith alone." Both deny alternatives to faith, but the the former does not exclude needed adjuncts to or outworkings of faith, as the second does.

The section needs to be edited with a more exacting eye, IMHO.Rick Jelliffe (talk) 18:04, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sola fide


text:
Marabout

A marabout (مُرابِط) is a descendant of the Prophet Muhammad (Arabic: سـيّد, romanized: sayyid and Sidi in the Maghreb) and a Muslim religious leader and teacher who historically had the function of a chaplain serving as a part of an Islamic army, notably in North Africa and the Sahara, in West Africa, and (historically) in the Maghreb. The marabout is often a scholar of the Qur'an, or religious teacher. Others may be wandering holy men who survive on alms, Sufi Murshids ("Guides"), or leaders of religious communities.

The term "marabout" is also used for the mausolea of such religious leaders (cf. maqam, mazar, in Palestine also wali/weli).

Muslim religious teachers

Muslim tariqah (Sufi religious brotherhoods) are one of the main organizing forms of West African Islam, and with the spread of Sufi ideas into the area, the marabout's role combined with local practices throughout Senegambia, the Niger River Valley, and the Futa Jallon. Here, Sufi believers follow a marabout, elsewhere known as a murshid "Guide". Marabout was also adopted by French colonial officials, and applied to most any imam, Muslim teacher, or secular leader who appealed to Islamic tradition.

Today marabouts can be traveling holy men who survive on alms, religious teachers who take in young talibes at Qur'anic schools, or distinguished religious leaders and scholars, both in and out of the Sufi brotherhoods which dominate spiritual life in Senegambia.

In the Muslim brotherhoods of Senegal, marabouts are organized in elaborate hierarchies; the highest marabout of the Mourides, for example, has been elevated to the status of a Caliph or ruler of the faithful (Amir al-Mu'minin). Older, North African based traditions such as the Tijaniyyah and the Qadiriyyah base their structures on respect for teachers and religious leaders who, south of the Sahara, often are called marabouts. Those who devote themselves to prayer or study, either based in communities, religious centers, or wandering in the larger society, are named marabouts. In Senegal and Mali, these Marabouts rely on donations to live. Often there is a traditional bond to support a specific marabout that has accumulated over generations within a family. Marabouts normally dress in traditional West African robes and live a simple, ascetic life.

Syncretic spiritualists
The spread in sub-Saharan Africa of the marabout's role from the eighth through thirteenth centuries created in some places a mixture of roles with pre-Islamic priests and divines. Thus many fortune tellers and self-styled spiritual guides take the name "marabout" (something rejected by more orthodox Muslims and Sufi brotherhoods alike). The recent diaspora of West Africans (to Paris in particular) has brought this tradition to Europe and North America, where some marabouts advertise their services as fortune tellers. An eshu of Quimbanda, Marabô, is believed to have carried this esoteric and shamanic role into Brazil. Contemporary marabouts in Senegal advertise on television and have hot lines.

 * Liliane Kuczynski. Les marabouts africains à Paris. CNRS Editions, Paris (2003) ISBN 978-2-271-06087-7
 * Magopinaciophilie: An article discussing Europeans who collect calling card like advertisements by "marabouts".
 * L'officiel du Marabout: Parisian advertisement collection.
 * Magopinaciophiles: A collection of French flyers.

Pre-French colonization
Marabouts have been prominent members of Wolof society since the arrival of Sufi brotherhoods from the Maghreb in the 15th century. Their advanced knowledge of the Quran and esteemed reputation have often allowed them to act as traders, priests, judges, or magicians in conjunction with their roles of community religious leaders. Additionally, because of their ability to read and write, village chiefs would frequently appoint marabouts as secretaries or advisers as a means to communicate with neighboring rulers.

The marabouts' expanding influence in politics paired with their unique allegiance of the Muslim community eventually posed a real threat to the chiefs who had appointed them. In 1683, rising tensions between chiefs and the Muslim population led to a Muslim revolt in the Wolof kingdom of Cayor, which concluded with the installation of a marabout as Damel. In the years following the revolt, relations between marabouts and Wolof chiefs remained relatively calm until a period of militant Islam in the Wolof states in the middle of the 19th century. Militant marabouts primarily of Tukulor(l origin, called "warrior marabouts," completely rejected the authority of local chiefs and sought to install a theocratic Muslim state. As the authority of chiefs and royal armies were undermined by propaganda and military force used by the warrior marabouts, Muslim resistors turned to local marabouts for guidance and protection from their oppressors. After three decades of war and conflict, the warrior marabouts were gradually ousted from the Wolof states as French colonists began to take a tighter hold on the region. As confidence in the leadership abilities of chiefs and rulers declined as a result of the conflict, marabouts emerged as the most trusted and revered source of leadership in Wolof communities.

Post-French colonization
French colonizers had difficulties adjusting to ruling over Muslim societies. Particularly in West Africa, constructing institutions of colonial rule that did not favor certain constituencies while neglecting others proved to be a tricky task. The French opted for forms of indirect rule through the local aristocracy in an effort to maintain order and keep administrative costs down, but found that many subjects detested these colonial chiefs and rulers and tended to gravitate towards their local marabouts. Marabouts were admired for their transparency and righteousness as they were known to renounce political powers, while ensuring economic, social, and religious stability within their communities. Since the judgment of marabouts is so influential, the success or failure of a politician would be almost entirely contingent on the support of more prominent marabouts. Because of this, politicians would try to appease marabouts by agreeing to promote their Sufi brotherhood's best interests in turn for their endorsement, with some politicians believing that winning an election would be impossible without the support of a marabout. This political dynamic, based on patronage and exchanges, would lead to a somewhat of an alliance between marabouts and the French colonizers. Along with endorsing certain politicians in exchange for favors, French colonial administrators sought out marabouts and heads of Sufi brotherhoods to act as intermediaries between colonial administrators and West African Muslims to ensure appropriate allocation of power and resources to avoid any potential conflict.

Post-independence
After Senegal gained its independence from France in 1960, marabouts and leaders of Sufi Brotherhoods (also marabouts), or the Khalife-Général, have continued to play influential roles in Senegalese politics. Some have questioned the utility of having clientelist relationships between marabouts and government officials in a modern democracy. The new "grandson" generation of marabouts has cultivated a more independent and secular political outlook and have proven that they are willing to question the authority of their predecessors. In Senegal's 1988 presidential election, Khalife-Général Abdou Lahatte Mbakke supported Abdou Diouf for reelection. Both as public endorsement and as a reward for installing new roads and street lamps in Touba while in office, the Khalife-Général declared a ndiggël (a binding command issued by the Khalife-Général to all members of the Mouride Brotherhood) that proclaimed that all men must vote for Diouf. Although multiple Khalife-Général have issued 'ndiggël politique ' in support of a presidential candidate in previous elections, several marabouts of the "grandson" generation openly rejected the command by voting for the opposition instead. These marabouts believed that the ndiggël violated their secular political rights, which was a sentiment shared among many other Mourides in Touba.

In 1997, a rural council of Touba Mosquée in Senegal issued a set of new taxes meant to fund an ambitions development project in the holy city. City merchants promptly voiced their displeasure of the new taxes and threatened to kick the rural council, whose members were all appointed by the Mouride Khalife-Général, out of the city. Although tax revolts are not uncommon elsewhere, this incident was particularly noteworthy as the merchants' blatant refusal exhibited a departure from typical state-society relations in Senegal. Declining economic performance in Senegal may lead to more taxes in the future, which means political actors may have to adjust or fundamentally alter their clientelist relationships with marabouts and Khalife-Général.

Maghreb

The term marabout appears during the Muslim conquest of the Maghreb. It is derived from the Arabic murābiṭ "one who is garrisoned": religious students and military volunteers who manned ribats at the time of the conquest. Today, marabout means "saint" in the Berber languages and refers to Sufi Muslim teachers who head a lodge or school called a zāwiya associated with a specific school or tradition, called a "way, path" (طريقه).

The pronunciation of that word varies by language. For example, it is pronounced amrabadh in Tarifit. Marabouts are known as sidi (سيدي) in Maghrebi Arabic. Many cities in Morocco got their names from local marabouts, and the name of those cities usually begins with "Sidi" followed by the name of the local marabout. Modern Standard Arabic for "saint" is "walī" (ولي).

A marabout may also refer to a tomb (قُبّة qubba "dome") of a venerated saint, and such places have become holy centers and places of pious reflection.

Some Zāwiyas linked with specific marabouts
Note zāwiyas are not places of formal pilgrimage, which are limited in Islam to the Hajj and to Jerusalem, but are rather places of reflection and inspiration for the pious.

Morocco
In Morocco:
 * Sidi Ali el Goumi
 * Sidi Rhaj Amar (Arabda)
 * Sidi Allal el Behraoui
 * Sidi Abdelah ben Hassoun
 * Sidi Moulay Idriss
 * Sidi fath
 * Sidi el Arbi ben sayyeh
 * Sidi Ahmed Tijani
 * Sidi Moulay Ali sherif
 * Sidi Hajj Hamza Qadiri Boutchichi
 * Sidi Sheikh Abdul Qadir Jilani
 * Sidi Abdel Kader el Alami
 * Sidi Moulay Ibrahim
 * Sidi Mohammed Ben Aissa
 * Sidi Ahmed Ben Idris Al-Fassi (Idrissiya and Sanoussiya)
 * Ahmad u Musa
 * Sidi Abu Lhcen Shadili
 * Sidi Moulay Abdeslam ibn Mchich Alami (Jbala)
 * Sidi Muhammad al-Arabi al-Darqawi
 * Sidi Muhammad ibn Sulayman al-Jazuli al-Simlali
 * Sidi Abu Abdallah Mohammed Amghar
 * Sidi Abu Abdallah al-Qaim bi Amrillah
 * Sidi Muhammad ben Issa al-Barnusi al-Fasi Zarruq
 * Sidi Moulay Outman (Khaldy-yeen, Beni Arouse), Morocco
 * Sidi Mbarek (Khaldy-yeen, Beni Arouse), Morocco
 * Sidi Heddi (Khaldy-yeen, Beni Arouse), Morocco
 * (alternatively) Zawiyas:
 * Zaouïa Naciria
 * Zaouïa Cherqaouia
 * Zaouia Aïssaouia
 * Zaouia Tidjaniya
 * Zaouia Idrissiya
 * Zaouia Sanoussiya
 * Zaouia Al Qadiriya
 * Zaouia Al Alamiya
 * Zaouia Jazouliya semlaliya
 * Zaouia Hamdouchia
 * Zaouia Sidi Outman (Khaldyeen, Beni Arouse), Morocco

Algeria
In Algeria:
 * sidi Mohand Rezag Ou Assous from akfadou bejaia
 * Sidi Ahmed al Tijani of 'Aïn Madhi, around Laghouat Province founder of Tijaniyyah
 * Sidi Ahmed ou Saïd du hameau Mestiga, village of Adeni in Kabylia (between Tizi Ouzou and L'Arbaâ Nath Irathen)
 * Sidi M'hamed Bou Qobrine Founder of the Rahmaniya (Algiers and Bounouh)
 * Sidi Abder Rahman El Thaelebi, founder of the Thaalibiya (Algiers)
 * Sidi M'hend oumalek (Tifrit nait oumalek)
 * Sidi Moh'Ali oulhadj (Tifrit n'Aït el Hadj)
 * Sidi Harrat Benaissa El Idrissi (Zemmora, Relizane)
 * Sidi Abd-Allah ben Mançour
 * Sidi Abdelkader djilali (tizi-ouzou)
 * Sidi Abid Echerrif (Guentis)
 * Sidi Abou AbdAllah Ech Choudi El Halloui
 * Sidi A'hmed el Mejdoub
 * Sidi Bel Abbes (namesake of Sidi Bel Abbès)
 * Sidi Ben-Ali (Aïn el Hout - Tlemcen)
 * Sidi Ben-Ali (Nédromah)
 * Sidi Ben-Azzouz (Borj Ben Azzouz)
 * Sidi Bicinti el basco
 * Sidi Bou Adjami
 * Sidi Boudarga
 * Sidi Boudjemaa
 * Sidi Brahim
 * Sidi Daoudi
 * Sioud anta' El-Eubbad es-Saffi
 * Sidi En-Naceur
 * Sidi Et Toumi
 * Sidi Hamadouche
 * Sî ibn 'Alî Sharîf (Akbou)
 * Sidi Mohammed Ben Omar El Houari
 * Sidi Mohammed bou Semah'a,
 * Sidi Moh'amed Ou'l Il'afian.
 * Sidi Moulebhar
 * Sidi Qadir
 * Sidi Bel-Ezrag
 * Sidi Serhane
 * Sidi ghiles (tipaza)
 * Sidi Soumeymane Ben Abdallah
 * Zaouia de Sidi Benamar (Fillaoussenne)
 * Sidi-Wahhab
 * Sidi Yahia el Aidly (Akbou)
 * Sidi Yakkout
 * Oulad bel Kacem

Tunisia
In Tunisia:
 * Zaouïa de Sidi Ben Azzouz. Nefta
 * Zaouïa de Sidi Bouteffaha. Béja
 * Zaouïa de Sidi Salah Zlaoui. Béja
 * Zaouïa de Sidi Abdelkader. Béja
 * Zaouïa de Sidi Bou Arba. Béja
 * Zaouïa de Sidi Taieb. Béja
 * Zaouïa de Sidi Baba Ali Smadhi. Béja
 * Zaouïa de Sidi Ali El Mekki
 * Zaouïa de Sidi El Mazri. Monastir
 * Zaouïa de Sidi Bou Jaafar. Sousse
 * Zaouïa de Sidi Abdel Hamid. Sousse

France
In France:

 * Sidi Bel Hadj El Maafi, French-Algerian imam and marabout who saved Jews during World War II

title: Marabout