text:
Royal Philharmonic Orchestra

The Royal Philharmonic Orchestra (RPO) is a British symphony orchestra based in London.

The RPO was established by Thomas Beecham in 1946. In its early days, the orchestra secured profitable recording contracts and important engagements including the Glyndebourne Festival Opera and the concerts of the Royal Philharmonic Society. After Beecham's death in 1961, the RPO's fortunes declined steeply. The RPO battled for survival until the mid-1960s, when its future was secured after a report by the Arts Council of Great Britain recommended that it should receive public subsidy. A further crisis arose in the same era when it seemed that the orchestra's right to call itself "Royal" could be withdrawn.

In 2004, the RPO acquired its first permanent London base, at Cadogan Hall in Chelsea. The RPO also gives concerts at the Royal Festival Hall, the Royal Albert Hall and venues around the UK and other countries. Since the start of the 2021–2022 season, the orchestra's musical director has been Vasily Petrenko.

Origins
In 1932, Sir Thomas Beecham had founded the London Philharmonic Orchestra (LPO), which, with the backing of rich supporters, he ran until 1940, when finances dried up in wartime. Beecham left to conduct in Australia and then the US; the orchestra continued without him after reorganising itself as a self-governing body. On Beecham's return to England in September 1944 the LPO welcomed him back and, in October, they gave a concert together that drew superlatives from the critics. Over the next months, Beecham and the orchestra gave further concerts with considerable success, but the LPO players, now their own employers, declined to give him the unfettered control he had exercised in the 1930s. If he were to become chief conductor again, it would be as a paid employee of the orchestra. Beecham responded, "I emphatically refuse to be wagged by any orchestra ... I am going to found one more great orchestra to round off my career." In 1945 he conducted the first concert of Walter Legge's new Philharmonia Orchestra, but was not disposed to accept a salaried position from Legge, his former assistant, any more than from his former players in the LPO. His new orchestra to rival the Philharmonia would, he told Legge, be launched in "the most auspicious circumstances and éclat".

In 1946, Beecham reached an agreement with the Royal Philharmonic Society: his orchestra would replace the LPO at all the Society's concerts. He thus gained the right to name the new ensemble the "Royal Philharmonic Orchestra", an arrangement approved by George VI. Beecham arranged with the Glyndebourne Festival that the RPO should be the resident orchestra at Glyndebourne seasons. He secured backing, including that of record companies in the US as well as Britain, with whom lucrative recording contracts were negotiated. The music critic Lyndon Jenkins writes:

"Naturally, it quickly became known that he was planning another orchestra, at which the cry 'He'll never get the players!' went up just as it had done in 1932. Beecham was unmoved: 'I always get the players,' he retorted. 'Among other considerations, they are so good they refuse to play under anybody but me'."

Beecham's orchestra
Beecham appointed Victor Olof as his orchestral manager, and they started recruiting. At the top of their list were leading musicians with whom Beecham had worked before the war. Four had been founder members of the LPO fifteen years previously: Reginald Kell (clarinet), Gerald Jackson (flute), James Bradshaw (timpani) and Jack Silvester (double-bass). From the current LPO they engaged the oboist Peter Newbury. Beecham persuaded the veteran bassoonist Archie Camden, who had been pursuing a solo career, to return to orchestral work. The cellos were led by Raymond Clark, enlisted from the BBC Symphony Orchestra. The principal horn player was Dennis Brain, who already held the same post in Legge's Philharmonia, but managed to play for both orchestras. Jenkins speculates that as Beecham knew all Britain's orchestral leaders at first hand he decided not to try to lure any of them away. His choice was John Pennington, who had been first violin of the London String Quartet from 1927 to 1934, and had then had a career in the US as concertmaster, successively, of the San Francisco Symphony, Los Angeles Philharmonic and Paramount Pictures orchestras.

On 11 September 1946, the Royal Philharmonic assembled for its first rehearsal. Four days later it gave its first concert, at the Davis Theatre, Croydon. Beecham telegraphed a colleague, "Press virtually unanimous in praise of orchestra. First Croydon concert huge success". Beecham and the orchestra played a series of out-of-town engagements before venturing a first London concert on 26 October. The Times then spoke of "a hall filled with golden tone which enveloped the listener". Before its London debut the orchestra made its first recording and, within two years, had made more than 100.

Within a few months, Pennington was forced to resign when the British Musicians' Union discovered that he was not one of its members. He was succeeded by his deputy Oscar Lampe, "a man who eschewed most social graces but played the violin divinely", according to Jenkins. In the early days, the orchestra comprised 72 players, all on yearly contract to Beecham, giving him first call on their services, subject to reasonable notice, but not otherwise restricting their freedom to play for other ensembles. A review of the London orchestral scene of the late 1940s said of the RPO and its main rival: "The Philharmonia and Royal Philharmonic share a very serious disability: that neither is a permanently constituted orchestra. Both assemble and disperse more or less at random ... there is no style which is distinctively RPO or Philharmonia."

Brain continued to play first horn for both orchestras; otherwise, from the early 1950s, there was generally more stability of orchestral personnel. In particular, the RPO became celebrated for its regular team of woodwind principals, in which Jackson was joined by Jack Brymer (clarinet), Gwydion Brooke (bassoon) and Terence MacDonagh (oboe). The Independent described them as "arguably the finest ever wind section ... [they] became known as 'The Royal Family'."

The RPO toured the United States in 1950, the first British orchestra to visit America since the London Symphony Orchestra (LSO) in 1912. This was a long-cherished plan of Beecham's, who had been unable to take the LPO to the US in the 1930s. He arranged 52 concerts in 45 cities in 64 days. The tour was described by Brain's biographers Gamble and Lynch as a huge success. It began on 13 October in Hartford, Connecticut and finished on 15 December in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania. The concerto soloists were the pianist Betty Humby Beecham (the conductor's second wife) and orchestral principals: David McCallum (violin), Anthony Pini (cello) and the four members of the "Royal Family". In The New York Times, Olin Downes wrote of "magnificent music-making by Sir Thomas Beecham and the Royal Philharmonic". The following year, assessing all the London orchestras, Frank Howes, music critic of The Times, concluded that the RPO "comes nearest in quality and in consistency of style to the great international orchestras".

The orchestra's first appearance at the Proms took place in August 1952, conducted by Basil Cameron. Beecham made his Proms debut two years later, conducting the RPO in a programme of music by Berlioz, Schubert and Sibelius; The Times commented on "an evening of magnificent playing". In 1957, Beecham and the RPO made a European tour, beginning at the Salle Pleyel in Paris and ending at the Musikverein in Vienna.

Beecham conducted the RPO in his last concert, given at Portsmouth Guildhall on 7 May 1960. The programme, all characteristic choices, comprised the Magic Flute Overture, Haydn's Military Symphony, Beecham's own Handel arrangement Love in Bath, Schubert's Fifth Symphony, On the River by Delius, and the Bacchanale from Saint-Saëns's Samson and Delilah, with Delius's Sleigh Ride as an encore. Beecham suffered a heart attack the following month, from which he did not recover; he died in March 1961.

1961–2000
Rudolf Kempe, who had been appointed associate conductor in 1960, became principal conductor in 1961 and music director in 1962. Beecham's widow ran the affairs of the orchestra as best she could, but some senior players including Brymer and MacDonagh were unhappy with the management and they left. The orchestra reorganised itself in 1963 as a self-governing limited company, but almost immediately encountered difficulties. The Royal Philharmonic Society decided not to engage the RPO for its concerts; Glyndebourne booked the LPO instead of the RPO from 1964 onwards. The RPO was also excluded from the London Orchestral Concert Board's schedule of concerts, which meant that it was denied the use of London's main concert venue, the Royal Festival Hall. Kempe resigned, although he returned shortly afterwards. Helped by strong support from Sir Malcolm Sargent, the orchestra successfully mounted its own concerts at a cinema in Swiss Cottage, 3.5 mi to the north-west of the Festival Hall. A 1965 report to the Arts Council by a committee chaired by Alan Peacock recommended that all four independent London orchestras should receive adequate public subsidy.

The severance of the tie with the Royal Philharmonic Society in 1963 turned out to be temporary, but for three years it threatened to deprive the RPO of the "Royal" in its title. The matter was resolved in 1966, when, on the advice of Roy Jenkins who, as Home Secretary, had responsibility for such matters, the Queen conferred the title unconditionally on the orchestra.

The RPO celebrated its silver jubilee in 1971. On 15 September, the orchestra returned to Croydon, where it had made its debut 25 years earlier. The theatre in which it had first played had been demolished and the anniversary concert was therefore given at the Fairfield Halls. The programme consisted of the overture to The Marriage of Figaro, Beethoven's Emperor Concerto, and Holst's The Planets. Sir Adrian Boult conducted, and Clifford Curzon was the soloist. Five members of the original orchestra were still in the RPO for the jubilee concert: Leonard Brain (brother of Dennis), principal cor anglais; Lewis Pocock, co-principal timpani; Ernest Ineson, double bass; John Myers, viola; and Albert Pievsky, violin.

The RPO gave Kempe the title of "Conductor for Life" in 1970. Kempe stepped down from the orchestra in 1975, the year before his death. Antal Doráti succeeded Kempe as chief conductor from 1975 to 1978. As in his earlier spells with the LSO and BBC Symphony Orchestra, he was not greatly liked by his players, but raised their standard of playing and imposed discipline.

In 1984, a new threat to the orchestra emerged, where a review carried out on behalf of the Arts Council by the journalist William Rees-Mogg opined that England lacked "a great eastern symphony orchestra": the suggestion was that the RPO should move to Nottingham. Another Arts Council report of the same period recommended that the RPO should supplement the LSO as resident orchestra at the Barbican Centre; neither proposal came to fruition. During the 1980s, the British government imposed strict constraints on public spending; to make up for lost revenue, the RPO, in common with the other self-governing London orchestras, was forced into increased reliance on business sponsorship as a primary source of funds. The Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, recording this, comments, "Such sponsorship is, however, subject to changing circumstances and thus less secure in the long term."

Since 1993, the RPO has had a community and education programme, later given the title of "RPO Resound". It aims to increase "access to and engagement with world-class music-making." It has worked in venues including homeless shelters, hospices, youth clubs and prisons.

On 7 April 1994, the RPO, with guest leader Hugh Bean, was joined by the Cappella Giulia of Saint Peter's Basilica and the Accademia Filarmonica Romana, cellist Lynn Harrell and actor Richard Dreyfuss, in the Papal Concert to Commemorate the Shoah, conducted by Gilbert Levine. This concert was attended by Pope John Paul II, Chief Rabbi of Rome Elio Toaff, and President of Italy Oscar Luigi Scalfaro, and was broadcast throughout Europe via Eurovision and on PBS stations throughout the United States. It was released on CD by Justice Records and as video by Time-Warner.

21st century
The orchestra gives an annual series of concerts at the Festival Hall and, since 2004, has had a permanent home at Cadogan Hall, a former church in Chelsea, converted into a 900-seat concert hall and rehearsal space. At the Royal Albert Hall in London, the RPO gives performances ranging from large-scale choral and orchestral works to evenings of popular classics.

The RPO returned to international television on 29 July 2005, when it was joined by the London Philharmonic Choir and soloists Bozena Harasimowicz, Monica Groop, Jerry Hadley, and Franz-Josef Selig performing Beethoven's Missa Solemnis under the baton of Gilbert Levine in Cologne Cathedral. This performance was televised by Westdeutscher Rundfunk (WDR), 3sat and PBS and was released on DVD by Arthaus Musik.

The orchestra maintains a regional touring programme, taking in venues throughout the UK, and has established residencies in Aylesbury, Crawley, Croydon, Dartford, High Wycombe, Ipswich, Lowestoft, Northampton and Reading. The RPO regularly tours overseas; since 2010 it has played in Azerbaijan, Canada, China, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, Spain, Turkey and the US. In 2010–11 and two subsequent seasons the RPO was the resident orchestra for a series of concerts in Montreux, Switzerland. In 2010 the orchestra toured England, with a repertoire preponderantly of Beethoven, including the Violin Concerto in which Pinchas Zukerman was both soloist and conductor. In the same year, another tour featured Maxim Shostakovich conducting the music of his father, Dmitri Shostakovich. The RPO continues to feature at the Proms. In December 2015, RPO gave a concert with Sezen Aksu at Zorlu PSM. In November 2019, the Royal Albert Hall announced the RPO as its official associate orchestra, with an initial contract of 5 years.

The orchestra's community and education activities have continued into the 21st century. In May 2013, six youth ensembles from London boroughs and a 3,500-strong choir of children from local primary schools were given the chance to perform alongside members of the RPO at the Albert Hall. They played a piece composed by participants from all six musical ensembles.

In November 2022, three performances by the orchestra were released on streaming service On Air. Recorded at BBC Television Centre, performances of The Rite Of Spring, The Firebird and Petrushka by Igor Stravinsky were captured. In 2023, RPO musicians were selected to play at the coronation of Charles III and Camilla.

In March 2024, the RPO announced the appointment of Sarah Bardwell as its next managing director, in succession to James Williams.

Players and conductors
Among the well-known musicians who have been RPO principals in the mid-1950s and later, string players include Steven Staryk (leader, 1957–1959), Raymond Cohen (leader, 1959–1966), Alan Loveday (leader, 1967–1971), Erich Gruenberg (leader, 1972–1976), Barry Griffiths (leader, 1976–1989), Jonathan Carney (leader, 1991–1994) and Frederick Riddle (viola, 1953–1977). Among the woodwind principals have been Geoffrey Gilbert (flute, 1957–1961), James Galway (flute, 1967–1969), Antony Pay (clarinet, 1968–1978) and Michael Chapman (bassoon, 1978–1999). Principals in the brass section have included Alan Civil (horn, 1952–1955), Philip Jones (trumpet, 1956–1960), Elgar Howarth (trumpet, 1963–1969) and Martin Owen (horn, 1998–2008).

Chief conductors since Dorati have been Walter Weller (1980–1985), André Previn (1985–1992), Vladimir Ashkenazy (1987–1994), Yuri Temirkanov (1992–1998) and Daniele Gatti (1996–2009). Charles Dutoit was artistic director and principal conductor from 2009 until January 2018, when he resigned after allegations of sexual misconduct.

From 1992 to 2000, Peter Maxwell Davies was associate conductor and composer to the RPO. Other conductors with close ties to the orchestra have included Sir Charles Groves, Vernon Handley, Sir Charles Mackerras, Yehudi Menuhin, Gennady Rozhdestvensky and Leopold Stokowski. Grzegorz Nowak was appointed principal associate conductor in 2008, and in the following year, Pinchas Zukerman became the RPO's principal guest conductor.

Vasily Petrenko first guest-conducted the RPO in March 2016. In July 2018, the RPO announced the appointment of Petrenko as its new music director, with an initial contract of five years from the 2021–2022 season. In April 2024, the RPO announced the appointment of Joe Hisaishi as its next composer-in-association. In April 2024, the RPO announced the extension of Petrenko's contract as its music director through the 2029-2030 season.

Recordings

From the RPO's earliest days to the end of Beecham's life, they made numerous recordings for His Master's Voice, CBS and RCA Victor. Among the works they recorded EMI chose several to be reissued at the end of the twentieth century in its "Great Recordings of the Century" series. They included a Delius programme; a Grieg programme; French ballet music; short works by Bizet, Chabrier, Fauré and Saint-Saëns; Tchaikovsky's Symphony No 4 and Nutcracker Suite; Mozart's Jupiter Symphony, Clarinet Concerto (Brymer) and Bassoon Concerto (Brooke); and Schubert's 3rd, 5th and 6th Symphonies.

After Beecham's death, the RPO made many recordings for Decca, sometimes under pseudonyms such as the "Beecham Symphony Orchestra", the "London Festival Orchestra" and the "Metropolitan Symphony Orchestra". In the 1960s, the RPO also recorded commercially with such conductors as Sir John Barbirolli, Fritz Reiner, Charles Munch, Georges Prêtre, Kempe, Previn and Stokowski. Soloists included Earl Wild, Shura Cherkassky, Alan Civil and Luciano Pavarotti.

Igor Stravinsky recorded his opera The Rake's Progress with the RPO in 1964. Colin Davis made some of his earliest recordings with the orchestra, including Mozart and Rossini overtures, Beethoven's Seventh Symphony, and Stravinsky's Oedipus rex. From 1964 to 1979 the RPO was engaged by Decca to record Gilbert and Sullivan operas with the D'Oyly Carte Opera Company. The orchestra has also recorded for Deutsche Grammophon, Lyrita, Philips, Pye and Unicorn-Kanchana.

In 1986, the orchestra launched RPO Records, claimed to be "the world's first record label to be owned by a symphony orchestra". Recordings available on the RPO label in 2013 ranged from core symphonic repertoire and Tchaikovsky ballet scores to film music by various composers, light music by Burt Bacharach and Richard Rodgers, and an album called "Symphonic Rock", described as "Over 3 hours of classic rock anthems and pop tracks with an orchestral twist".

Non-classical work
As well as performing works from the classical repertoire, the RPO has recorded a number of film scores, including those for Powell and Pressburger's The Red Shoes and The Tales of Hoffmann. Other scores recorded by the RPO are Olivier's Richard III, The Bridge on the River Kwai, and The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes.

With Tony Bremner, Royal Philharmonic Orchestra rerecorded symphonic suites from various episodes of Star Trek: The Original Series. These recordings were released in 1985 under Label "X" in two volumes.

In 1987, the RPO established a sister ensemble, the Royal Philharmonic Concert Orchestra, which plays lighter classics. It succeeded a similar group, the Royal Philharmonic Pops Orchestra. In 1989, the RPO recorded the flamenco album "Soy Gitano" (I am a gipsy man) with Camarón de la Isla.

RPO players have been involved with many performances away from the classical repertory. In the 1960s, they pioneered the "mixed media" concert, appearing with The Nice rock band. Later non-classical ventures included Yanni Live at the Acropolis, a concert held in Greece in 1993, conducted by Shahrdad Rohani; In 1992 UEFA commissioned the orchestra and the Academy of St Martin in the Fields chorus to record the UEFA Champions League Hymn. Jamaican reggae singers John Holt and Freddie McGregor performed with the Orchestra in 2003 at the Hammersmith Apollo in London.

Notes and references

 * Notes

 * References

 * Sources

title: Royal Philharmonic Orchestra


text:
Isometric projection

Isometric projection is a method for visually representing three-dimensional objects in two dimensions in technical and engineering drawings. It is an axonometric projection in which the three coordinate axes appear equally foreshortened and the angle between any two of them is 120 degrees.

Overview
The term "isometric" comes from the Greek for "equal measure", reflecting that the scale along each axis of the projection is the same (unlike some other forms of graphical projection).

An isometric view of an object can be obtained by choosing the viewing direction such that the angles between the projections of the x, y, and z axes are all the same, or 120°. For example, with a cube, this is done by first looking straight towards one face. Next, the cube is rotated ±45° about the vertical axis, followed by a rotation of approximately 35.264° (precisely arcsin $1/√3$ or arctan $1/undefined$, which is related to the Magic angle) about the horizontal axis. Note that with the cube (see image) the perimeter of the resulting 2D drawing is a perfect regular hexagon: all the black lines have equal length and all the cube's faces are the same area. Isometric graph paper can be placed under a normal piece of drawing paper to help achieve the effect without calculation.

In a similar way, an isometric view can be obtained in a 3D scene. Starting with the camera aligned parallel to the floor and aligned to the coordinate axes, it is first rotated horizontally (around the vertical axis) by ±45°, then 35.264° around the horizontal axis.

Another way isometric projection can be visualized is by considering a view within a cubical room starting in an upper corner and looking towards the opposite, lower corner. The x-axis extends diagonally down and right, the y-axis extends diagonally down and left, and the z-axis is straight up. Depth is also shown by height on the image. Lines drawn along the axes are at 120° to one another.

In all these cases, as with all axonometric and orthographic projections, such a camera would need a object-space telecentric lens, in order that projected lengths not change with distance from the camera.

The term "isometric" is often mistakenly used to refer to axonometric projections, generally. There are, however, actually three types of axonometric projections: isometric, dimetric and oblique.

Rotation angles
From the two angles needed for an isometric projection, the value of the second may seem counterintuitive and deserves some further explanation. Let's first imagine a cube with sides of length 2, and its center at the axis origin, which means all its faces intersect the axes at a distance of 1 from the origin. We can calculate the length of the line from its center to the middle of any edge as √2 using Pythagoras' theorem. By rotating the cube by 45° on the x-axis, the point (1, 1, 1) will therefore become (1, 0, √2) as depicted in the diagram. The second rotation aims to bring the same point on the positive z-axis and so needs to perform a rotation of value equal to the arctangent of $1/undefined$ which is approximately 35.264°.

Mathematics
There are eight different orientations to obtain an isometric view, depending into which octant the viewer looks. The isometric transform from a point a$x,y,z$ in 3D space to a point b$x,y$ in 2D space looking into the first octant can be written mathematically with rotation matrices as: $$ \begin{bmatrix} \mathbf{c}_x \\ \mathbf{c}_y \\ \mathbf{c}_z \\ \end{bmatrix}=\begin{bmatrix} 1 & 0 & 0 \\   0 & {\cos\alpha} & {\sin\alpha}  \\ 0 & { - \sin\alpha} & {\cos\alpha} \\ \end{bmatrix}\begin{bmatrix} {\cos\beta } & 0 & { - \sin\beta } \\ 0 & 1 & 0 \\   {\sin\beta } & 0 & {\cos\beta }  \\ \end{bmatrix}\begin{bmatrix} \mathbf{a}_x \\ \mathbf{a}_y \\ \mathbf{a}_z \\ \end{bmatrix}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}\begin{bmatrix} \sqrt{3} & 0 & -\sqrt{3} \\ 1 & 2 & 1 \\   \sqrt{2} & -\sqrt{2} & \sqrt{2}  \\ \end{bmatrix}\begin{bmatrix} \mathbf{a}_x \\ \mathbf{a}_y \\ \mathbf{a}_z \\ \end{bmatrix} $$

where α = arcsin(tan 30°) ≈ 35.264° and β = 45°. As explained above, this is a rotation around the vertical (here y) axis by β, followed by a rotation around the horizontal (here x) axis by α. This is then followed by an orthographic projection to the xy-plane: $$ \begin{bmatrix} \mathbf{b}_x \\ \mathbf{b}_y \\ 0 \\ \end{bmatrix} = \begin{bmatrix} 1 & 0 & 0 \\   0 & 1 & 0  \\   0 & 0 & 0  \\ \end{bmatrix}\begin{bmatrix} \mathbf{c}_x \\ \mathbf{c}_y \\ \mathbf{c}_z \\ \end{bmatrix} $$

The other 7 possibilities are obtained by either rotating to the opposite sides or not, and then inverting the view direction or not.

History and limitations
First formalized by Professor William Farish (1759–1837), the concept of isometry had existed in a rough empirical form for centuries. From the middle of the 19th century, isometry became an "invaluable tool for engineers, and soon thereafter axonometry and isometry were incorporated in the curriculum of architectural training courses in Europe and the U.S." According to Jan Krikke (2000) however, "axonometry originated in China. Its function in Chinese art was similar to linear perspective in European art. Axonometry, and the pictorial grammar that goes with it, has taken on a new significance with the advent of visual computing".

As with all types of parallel projection, objects drawn with isometric projection do not appear larger or smaller as they extend closer to or away from the viewer. While advantageous for architectural drawings where measurements need to be taken directly, the result is a perceived distortion, as unlike perspective projection, it is not how human vision or photography normally work. It also can easily result in situations where depth and altitude are difficult to gauge, as is shown in the illustration to the right or above. This can appear to create paradoxical or impossible shapes, such as the Penrose stairs.

Usage in video games and pixel art
Isometric video game graphics are graphics employed in video games and pixel art that utilize a parallel projection, but which angle the viewpoint to reveal facets of the environment that would otherwise not be visible from a top-down perspective or side view, thereby producing a three-dimensional effect. Despite the name, isometric computer graphics are not necessarily truly isometric—i.e., the $x$, $y$, and $z$ axes are not necessarily oriented 120° to each other. Instead, a variety of angles are used, with dimetric projection and a 2:1 pixel ratio being the most common. The terms "3⁄4 perspective", "3⁄4 view", "2.5D", and "pseudo 3D" are also sometimes used, although these terms can bear slightly different meanings in other contexts.

Once common, isometric projection became less so with the advent of more powerful 3D graphics systems, and as video games began to focus more on action and individual characters. However, video games utilizing isometric projection—especially computer role-playing games—have seen a resurgence in recent years within the indie gaming scene.

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

title: Isometric projection


text:
Antoine Bourdelle

Antoine Bourdelle (30 October 1861 – 1 October 1929), born Émile Antoine Bordelles, was an influential and prolific French sculptor and teacher. He was a student of Auguste Rodin, a teacher of Giacometti and Henri Matisse, and an important figure in the Art Deco movement and the transition from the Beaux-Arts style to modern sculpture.

His studio became the Musée Bourdelle, an art museum dedicated to his work, located at 18, rue Antoine Bourdelle, in the 15th arrondissement of Paris, France.

Early life and education
Émile Antoine Bourdelle was born at Montauban, Tarn-et-Garonne in France on 30 October 1861. His father was a wood craftsman and cabinet-maker. In 1874, at the age of thirteen, he left school to work in his father's workshop, and also began carving his first sculptures of wood.

In 1876, with the assistance of writer Émile Pouvillon, he received a scholarship to attend the School of Fine Arts in Toulouse, though he remained fiercely independent and resisted the formal program. In 1884, at the age of twenty-four, he earned second place in the competition to enter the École des Beaux-Arts in Paris. There he worked in the studio of Alexandre Falguière and frequented the studio of Jules Dalou, who was his neighbor.

Career
In 1885 he participated in the annual Salon of artists and won an honorable mention for his work, The First Victory of Hannibal. He rented a studio at 16 Impasse du Main, next to the painters Eugène Carrière and Jean-Paul Laurens. He worked in this studio until his death. In 1887, he quit the studio of Falguièr, and, moved by the music of Beethoven, he made his first of what would eventually be some forty sculptures of the composer. In September 1893 Bourdelle joined the studio of Auguste Rodin. His collaboration with Rodin lasted fifteen years. In 1895, he received his first official commission, a war monument for the city of Montauban. His proposed plans, different from traditional monuments, created a scandal. Rodin intervened on his behalf, and the monument was finally erected in 1902.

In 1900, Bourdelle demonstrated his independence from Rodin's style with a bust of Apollo. In the same year, Bourdelle, Rodin and the sculptor Desbois opened a free school of sculpture, the Institut Rodin-Debois-Bourdelle. One of the students was Henri Matisse, who later produced some remarkable sculpture, but the school did not last long.

In 1905, Bourdelle had his first personal exhibition, in the gallery of the foundry-owner Hébrand. With the support of Hébrand and the material assistance of his foundry, Bourdelle was able to make larger works and earn greater recognition. His father died in 1906, and Bourdelle changed his first name to simply Antoine, after his father. He married his second wife, Cléopatre Sevastos (1892-1972), who was of Greek origin. She and their daughter, Rhodia, became a frequent inspiration for his works.

In 1908, Bourdelle left the studio of Rodin and set out on his own. In 1909 he exhibited a new work, Hercules the Archer at the annual Salon of the Societé Nationale des Beaux-Arts. He began to teach at the Académie de la Grande Chaumière, where his students included Giacometti, Isaac Frenkel and Adaline Kent.

In 1913 the Théâtre des Champs-Élysées was inaugurated, with decoration on the facade and the interior atrium designed by Bourdelle. This work announced the debut of the Art Deco style, and was an important step towards modernism. He was a participant in the 1913 Armory Show in New York, a founder and vice-president of the Parisian Salon des Tuileries. He remained in Paris during the First World War, working on a commission for an art patron from Argentina, Rodolfo Acorta, a monument to General Alvear, which was inaugurated in Buenos Aires in 1925. In 1929, his first major public sculpture in Paris, the monument to the Polish hero Mickiewicz, was inaugurated on Place d'Alma.

Death and legacy
Bourdelle, in poor health, died at Le Vésinet, near Paris, on 1 October 1929 and was interred in the Cimetière du Montparnasse, Paris, France.

Museums
Today the Musée Bourdelle in Paris sits amidst brick houses at 18 rue Antoine Bourdelle, a small street between the Gare Montparnasse and the offices of the famous French newspaper Le Monde. The museum consists of Bourdelle's house, studio, and garden where he worked from 1884 to 1929.

In the 1930s his widow opened his art studio for viewings. In 1949, the atelier of Bourdelle was donated by his former spouse Cléopâtre and his daughter to the city of Paris and it was opened as the Musée Bourdelle, additionally the street was renamed as rue Antoine Bourdelle.

A second museum, the Bourdelle Garden-Museum in Égreville, France was established by his daughter and son-in-law starting in 1969 and hosts another 56 of Bourdelle's sculptures in a garden setting.

Collections
His art work is in many public collections worldwide, including Musée d'Orsay (Paris), the National Museum of Western Art (Tokyo), List Visual Arts Center at MIT (Cambridge, Massachusetts), Harvard University Art Museums (Cambridge, Massachusetts), Cleveland Museum of Art, National Museum of Art of Romania, Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco, Courtauld Institute of Art (London), Galleria Nazionale d'Arte Moderna (Rome), Hermitage Museum (Saint Petersburg, Russia), Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden (Washington D.C.), Honolulu Museum of Art, Kimbell Art Museum (Fort Worth, Texas), Kröller-Müller Museum (Otterlo, Netherlands), the Minneapolis Institute of Art, Museo Nacional de Bellas Artes (Buenos Aires), the National Galleries of Scotland, National Gallery of Australia, Musée Ingres (Montauban), the Royal Museums of Fine Arts of Belgium, Middelheim Open Air Sculpture Museum (Antwerp, Belgium), and the Museum of Fine Arts (St. Petersburg, Florida), among others.

Personal life
In 1904, Bourdelle married artist Stephanie van Parys (also known as Vanparys, 1877–1945). His wife often served as a model for Bourdelle; by 1910 they had divorced. Together with van Parys they had a son, Pierre Bourdelle (c.1903–1966) and Pierre became an artist most active in the United States, and notable for his work at Cincinnati Union Terminal in 1933.

Bourdelle married in 1918 his former art student, Cléopâtre Sevastos (1882–1972), who also served as his model. Together with Sevastos they had a daughter, Rhodia Bourdelle (her married name was Dufet, Dufet–Bourdelle, 1911–2002) and she was an art curator.

Honors
In 1909 he was named Knight of the Legion of Honor, in 1919 Officier of the Legion of Honor, and in 1924 became a Commander of the Legion of Honor.

Students
Artists who studied with Antoine Bourdelle included:

 * Athanase Apartis, Greece
 * Alfredo Bigatti, Argentina
 * Jean de Botton, France
 * Lucie Bouniol, France
 * Margaret Butler (sculptor), New Zealand
 * Samuel Cashwan, United States
 * Pablo Curatella Manes, Argentina
 * Margaret Cossaceanu, Romania
 * Céline Emilian, Romania
 * Béni Ferenczy, Hungary
 * Yitzhak Frenkel, Israel, France
 * Helen Margaret George, England
 * Alberto Giacometti, Switzerland
 * Angela Gregory, United States
 * Otto Gutfreund, Czechoslovakia
 * Minna Harkavy, United States
 * Bror Hjorth, Sweden
 * René Iché, France
 * Mladen Josić, Serbia
 * Raoul Josset, France/United States
 * David Karfunkle, Austria/United States
 * Adaline Kent, United States
 * Emile Lahner, Hungary
 * Aristide Maillol, France
 * Henri Matisse, France
 * Vadym Meller, Ukraine
 * Marguerite Milward, England
 * Vera Mukhina, Russian Empire/USSR
 * Bencho Obreshkov, Bulgaria
 * Dudley Pratt, United States
 * Virginia Claflin Pratt, United States
 * Germaine Richier, France
 * Arnold Rönnebeck, Germany/United States
 * Ada Mae Sharpless, United States
 * Maria Helena Vieira da Silva, Portugal
 * Risto Stijović, Serbia
 * Sreten Stojanović, Serbia
 * Mihailo Tomić, Serbia
 * Josefina de Vasconcellos, England
 * Anna Marie Valentien, United States
 * Helen Wilson, United States
 * Louise Lentz Woodruff, United States
 * Ryumon Yasuda, Japan
 * Teodors Zalkalns, Latvia
 * José Luis Zorrilla de San Martín, Uruguay

For a first hand account of Bourdelle's teaching style see Arnold Ronnebeck's article from 1925, published in The Arts 8, no. 4 titled "Bourdelle Speaks to His Pupils: From a Paris Diary."

title: Antoine Bourdelle


text:
Talk:Deregulation

Move
I agree and made the move but somebody reversed the move without comment Tiles 01:07 May 2, 2003 (UTC)

Why we need a separate article for an deregulation in each country? Sure, the current article has only mention about dereguration in USA so I added mentioon about that in Japan and someone erased it. Why?? -- Taku 01:37 May 2, 2003 (UTC)

See above. Your contribution added very little to deregulation or to deregulation in Japan, for that matter. I suggest that we split the article into 2. Leave the page but transfer the US info to Deregulation in the United States. OK?

No. I know the article is not good enough but then we need to expand it. I mean simply put why we should not discuss Deregulation in general and talk about that only in the USA? Deregulation occurs not only in U.S. -- Taku 04:01 May 2, 2003 (UTC)

Oh, also about spliting. In wikipedia, it is more preferable to have one article discussing the same topic happening in different countries. See prefecture or district. -- Taku 04:03 May 2, 2003 (UTC)

I am happy to write an article on Deregulation in New Zealand and will add it to my "to-do" list. I do not accept that it is useful to clutter up a general page. Far better to have a decent article on deregulation with appropriate links to examples as in Revolution, where the specific circumstances of national revolutions are listed as links to articles.

I think the reason of the status of Revolution article is because if you combine them into one article, it can be too long. Now mention about deregulation in USA is very short so I don't see much motivation to split it off. I don't think having some sections corresponding each country is a cluttered. There are a lot of articles in herre. For example, prefecture, divorce and many other I don't remember. -- Taku 01:18 May 4, 2003 (UTC)

If you are happy, I am happy. When you finish the section on Deregulation in Japan we can discuss this again. Cheers Tiles 04:00 May 4, 2003 (UTC)

If someone ever writes about deregulation in Russia this page WILL be cluttered. BL 04:38, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)

California
Gray Davis said he was "deregulating" the electricity market, but I think he was lying. Rather, he was trying to "socialize" it, in the sense of moving the market away from the free market principles practiced so successfully by Pennsylvania.

Since I feel so strongly about this, I hesitate to start writing. I wouldn't like to lose my NPOV credentials. But could anyone help shed some light on what happened in California (pre-Schwarzenegger)?
 * stated intent of Davis's plan
 * actual effect
 * according to Davis
 * according to newspapers
 * according to Davis critics
 * intervention by Bush
 * current situation

The above is an outline of what should be in that article. Or did someone already write it? If so, please add a link. Thanks. --Uncle Ed 14:49, 2 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * See California electricity crisis. The real problem was the ineffective deregulation that resulted in the failure of the market.  The architects of the PJM market (Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maryland) had a clear vision of how the market should operate and put in place the appropriate rules see PJM.  In California the political process resulted in a series of compromises without a clear understanding of the risks inherent in a deregulated electricity market.  I live in New Zealand so have little or no understanding of the personalities but from here it would appear that good advice from knowledgeable people such as Prof Bill Hogan (Harvard) was ignored by the politicians in California and it would seem just that the State Governor should take the blame. Tiles 07:21, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * I think that the California electricity crisis article has POV problems, although it does acknowledge that the fateful decisions were made prior to the Davis administration. I live in California; the crisis is going to recur, because nothing substantial has been done to provide adequate electricity production and tranmission infrastructure. I will put the California electricity crisis article on my to-do list, and see if I can balance it somewhat. --Herschelkrustofsky 18:01, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * This has now been done. I think it is more balanced now; we'll see how other editors respond. --Herschelkrustofsky 00:52, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

POV
This article has a POV problem. It uses words such as "unfortunate," "more balanced approaches to regulation," etc. Rhobite 18:51, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)

There should be a distinction between deregulating tarrifs etc. (which can be justified) and dregulating safety or environmental policies (which cannot be justified) 209.197.154.157 19:58, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * It needs a lot of work generally. Be bold! - if others disagree they'll let you know. Rd232 talk 12:17, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

US deregulation
So, is there some reason why there isn't listed a deregulation in the U.S. in a positive light? Because I really doubt that all regulation is bad. 129.186.18.81 01:18, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

 * That's easy - because some Wikipedia admins don't want it to be shown in anything other than a bad light. Check out the edit histories to find where substantial arguments cited in favor of deregulation are ruthlessly expunged. --86.131.93.168 09:16, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

In fact, I posted something which was unfavorable to deregulation, and it was "ruthlessly expunged". JHobson2 (talk) 13:13, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

update on dereg discussion
A post of 10/12/07 updates the deregulation discussion to take into account published work on the origins of transport deregulation ('The Best Transportation System In the World", by Rose, Seely and Barrett, Ohio State University press, a part of a series of publications on historical perspectives on business enterprise, edited by Blackford and Kerr) and several publications by the Brookings Institute and the American Enterprise Institute in Washington (citations provided on request). Ordermaven 01:22, 13 October 2007 (UTC)Ordermaven 01:27, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

telecomm dereg edit
In late November, Npaghunie added comments which touch on important subjects, but were in a format very hard to read, had no references or sourcing, and dealt with subjects already treated at some length, with sourcing, in two existing articles – the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and Concentration of media ownership These articles, on close reading, cover in major substance the points which Npaghunie  raised, in documentable fashion.

I therefore substituted for these comments in this dereg discussion a framework for exposing the issues raised, a reference to a book treating these and related issues, and links to the existing wikipdia articles where these issues are treated. Further development could be done by sourced work on those articles.Ordermaven 22:03, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Issues with article
Many issues with the article exist, primarily the "U.S. Case Study" section, which reads like it was cribbed from the Mises Institute website. J.R. Hercules (talk) 20:20, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

J.R., the work on this page which I have done under 'ordermaven' (forgot password) was not based on the Mises Institute stuff, but on scholarly and Department of Transportation research, cited. Also on examination of National Archive and congressional files publicly available in Washington which verified the scholarly work. One could go to the records of publications of AEI and Brookings, cited on the page, where more scholarly work is available. These citations could be added. If you would like to mention or discuss specific issues which may have occurred to you, why not email? Ordermaven2 (talk) 06:40, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

 * I reverted to the previous edit (mine). The anon editor who recently edited the Argentina section apparently wasn't aware about Wikipedia's strict policy against original research. J.R. Hercules (talk) 22:54, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

The panel on the right linking this article to the series on capitalism is a quite helpful addition. Good move Ordermaven (talk) 01:31, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I removed the empty tag. Please specify which issues should be handled. According to this template's instructions, it should not be left blank. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:35, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

The description of the creation of the regulatory state is completely wrong. These regulations were not put forth to protect the consumer, but rather to protect big business from competition.Nuwriter (talk) 12:35, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Americentrism At Its Finest
Without even noticing the POV banner at the top of this article, I immediately winced when I saw that, in the section detailing deregulation "by country" there was no heading for "The United States."

Instead, as I expected to find, the United States was covered by the first half of the entire ARTICLE. I guess the US is not considered a mere "country" like all those other faraway lands.... instead, we, as a worldwide race, are supposed to always remember that the USA, an "elite entity above all others" is always first, foremost, and - without having to ever say so - the main focus of all Wiki articles.

I want to re-edit this article, but I am having trouble finding a starting point, and I have yet to read all the commentary of other users. I do intend to read it though....

And, being a US citizen, I don't mean to insult others, because I find these articles to be embarrassing to all residents of the US - myself included - and I hope that others will agree. There's a whole world out there beyond this neck of the woods. itinerant_tuna (talk) 05:15, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

-

D Modlin, as one who has spent time on this page I agree that it is now American centric. Have thought that the the best way to make it less so is to beef up the sections on other countries. There is a great deal of development internationally which could be reported on in electricity, telecommunications, and postal services. I just haven't to date taken the time to do all that. If you would like to share the load of putting more in, would be more than willing to collaborate. One can get good stuff on telecommunications in the reports of the International Telecommunications Union, available on line. http://www.itu.int/net/home/index.aspx. One can also get some stuff on electricity from Brookings Institute publications. Jim Campbell, in Washington, is an excellent source on postal matters, well plugged in to policy issues over decades. His website, with references to his publications, is www.jcampbell.com. Ordermaven (talk) 20:34, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

-

Here is my two cents: I read the entire article and many of the articles accessible by clicking on the links. I think what has happened is that an article about the Great Depression and its causes morphed into a very scanty discussion of deregulation. After reviewing all your comments and reading the article again, I would like to propose concluding the Great Depression article with some statement about deregulation emerging as a significant force under the Nixon Administration. Then, chop out all the rest and create NEW article about deregulation based on the chopped out part.

The new article would benefit from the same format as the Great Depression article, presenting different schools of thought in the beginning as the history of deregulation is explained, then proceeding to a detailed explanation of each school of thought and how it played a role in shaping the deregulation policies currently in force. Also, it is important to define what new regulations went into place simultaneously instead of adding a single sentence as an afterthought.

Disclaimer: I am not a professional financier nor an academic scholar. Like many Americans, I have a university degree and a couple decades of corporate management under my belt. I consult Wikipedia for information about topics I want to know more about. As stated above, I started reading the Great Depression article, perused several links on the 2008/2009 financial crisis, and then went back to the Great Depression article. It struck me as weird how an article on the Great Depression ended with a scantily written discourse on deregulation. That is why I suggest you create a full-blown article on deregulation and take it out of the Great Depression article altogether. Providing a link would be appropriate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.146.216.103 (talk) 12:50, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

____

unnamed, I have deleted the section on the 1921-29 'deregulation' and the great depression as it is undocumented -- has no citation to known scholarly work -- and is not supported by the discussion of the causes of the Great Depression in the linked article on the Great Depression.

Likewise have deleted the para attributing the 2007-2009 financial crisis to the repeal of the Glass-Steaball Act. The link to fast changing wiki page on the current crisis contains no such assertion, and the para had no cite to support the assertion that many have claimed such a connection. The causes of this problem are still under debate, as you know, and probably will be for some time. There may be a credible claim that the Bush Administration's generally hands-off orientation was a causative factor. I am personally inclined to think that is so. But such a statement, if offered in the article, should be referenced to scholarly work, and probably should also reflect the many other reasons offered for the phenomenon, such as the vast amount of capital in the global economy looking for application immediately preceding the bursting of the bubble. A nuanced and sourced discussion of the extent to which Bush Administration inclinations to allow very free markets fed into our current situation is possible -- indeed at some point desirable -- but probably should be developed first on the page relating to the financial crisis and should certainly be based on solid, documented sources.

Ordermaven      —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ordermaven (talk • contribs) 10:21, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

-- unnamed

1.	A careful reading of the The Richard Vietor article cited in the proposed deregulation 1921-29 section did not reveal clearly stated support either for the proposition that there was in fact a deregulation movement in 1921-29 – that is, a movement to repeal regulatory legislation -- or that any such deregulation caused a bubble which caused the great depression

2.	 The closest thing I can find to any sort of backup to this paragraph’s assertions s to the cause of the Great Depression is a paragraph in the ‘cause’ section of the ‘great depression’ page which states that the Roosevelt Administration tended to argue that the excesses of big business had led to an unstable economy. But this paragraph is one of seven putative causes listed in this page, and is not backed up in that article either by cited economic theory or cited facts. It is simply stated as the cause Roosevelt offered.

3.	The separate wiki page on causes of the great depression does not mention Roosevelt’s speeches. .

4.	If we were to pick one asserted cause of the Depression to mention, we would be obliged to note that a great many other causes have been offered, and there is no firm consensus on causes, as does the current wikipedia page on causes of the great depression.

5.	While it is true that presidents from Roosevelt through Kennedy left much of the 1930’s regulation of industry in place, a more accurate statement would point out that Truman (whose Justice Department opposed cartel price making, a central part of the transport regulatory system), Eisenhower and Kennedy each sought to roll back regulatory restraints on competition in transportation. This is set out in “The Best Transportation System in the World, Rose, Seely and Barrett, Ohio State Univ Press, 2006, pp 97 et seq.

6.	 What is supported by the Vietor cite and other sources is that the 1921-29 period was one in which there was relatively few controls on the market, at least as compared to the 1930-60 period, Roosevelt Administration put in several regulations attempting to suppress competition, attempts of this sort included in the National Industrial Recovery Act were stricken, and the ‘deregulation’ efforts of the 1970-80 period reversed much of the legislation suppressing competition while leaving in place things like the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Social Security Administration. .

I have therefore revised this paragraph to delete the unsupported language as to the ‘deregulation’ of the 1921- 29 period – the verification guidelines are clear that unsupported assertions are not to be let stand -- to include language that the Roosevelt Administration attempted to shore up a weak economy by suppressing competition in several ways, and some of these things were struck down in the 30s and others later reversed.. The edited language now refers to Great Depression and causes of great depression pages to deal with cause issues. To the extent the language deals with causes of the Great Depression, it adopts the language in the existing wikipedia pages on the Great Depression, including the reference to Roosevelt’s views, rather than creating a new or separate explanation for the Great Depression.

The Rolling Stone article cited for the assertion that Glass-Steagall elimination might be one of the causes of the 2008-9 financial meltdown does give some support for the proposed language in the paragraph relating to that crisis. However, the discussion on the Wikipedia page on the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act makes clear that there is a debate on this point, and reports that debate in a balanced fashion, as is required by the Neutral Point of View  guidelines for Wiki editing. I have added a reference to a recent edition of the Wall Street Journal which collects a number of different articles cite several argued causes for the financial crisis – a global capital excess, poor bond raters, mortgage fraud, sleepy regulators, and the Community Reinvestment Act. . I have therefore changed the language to reflect the neutral point of view, keeping the reference to the Glass Steagall Act. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ordermaven (talk • contribs) 01:14, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Controversy discussion
Set up a new section on 'controversies' to reflect opposing opposing points of view on deregulation which had been inserted in the definition section. Best to keep the definition itself simple and clean. As to the controversies, the language was not sourced but contained links to extensive and well sourced articles. So kept the links and emphasized them, rather than giving brief, partial and necessarily incomplete allusions to the extensive materials in the articles. Ordermaven (talk) 02:12, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

 * Great idea. I was just thinking of that myself and came here to propose a plan before I read the above. One dispute I'm thinking about is the one I described (in another thread) about the opposing points of view on "deregulation" as a factor in the California electricity crisis. Here are the two points of view, as near as I can tell:
 * That deregulation, i.e., the removing of government controls on the production and sale of energy, is in general a bad idea. California's crisis proved this.
 * That deregulation is in general a good idea. California's restructuring was not an example of deregulation. Rather, the government adding new restrictions on both the production and sale of energy.

 * What's the best way to describe the controversy? --Uncle Ed (talk) 15:10, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Ed, those two points of view are out there, but what has been happening is a slow, hampered, attempt by the Federal Energy Regu;atory commission to create designed competition by means of 'standard market design' templates. This is the current manifestation of long standing attempts to get common carrier transmission of competing generation sources begun with the Otter Tail Power case -- Otter Tail Power Co. v. United States. 410 U. S. 366 (1973. At this point there are a number of regtional transmission operators using at least some elements of SMD prescriptions. You can see a chart of these if you go the FERC website and click on the 'market oversight' tab. ( I tried to give you a direct link but for some reason it seems not to work)You can see a rather dense recent commentary on this effort by the Federal Trade Commission at

So a discussion of 'controversy ' as to electricity deregulation might proceed by saying that neither of these two points of view describe the evolution of regulatory and competition policy in the electric utility sector. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has not adopted the Theirer point of view that government should just back off its extensive regulatory role and let a competitive system emerge, nor has it despaired of creating effectively competitive interstate wholesale power markets which perform better than the alternatives available. Rather, it continues a long standing effort to create such an effectively competitive, efficient wholesale power market. The issue is not really electricity 'deregulation', bad or good. It is engineering wholesale power competition, how good can we make it?

Richard Vietor has written a book called 'Contrived Competition' in which he asserts that we have engaged in a program to make markets competitive by design, not just vacillate between laissez faire and strict price and entry regulation. There is some truth to this, particularly in the electric utility industry and in telecommunications in countries which formerly had state owned but now privatized communications systems.

I will look around for some book cites and FERC cites to use if you would like to pursue this approach -- ordermaven 68.49.36.102 (talk) 01:07, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Ed, here is a better cite to the FERC policy, from the FERC website. Gooc comprehensive overview of the policy and its recent historical development ordermaven 68.49.36.102 (talk) 07:37, 10 April 2009 (UTC) Ordermaven (talk) 07:39, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Added tags cleanup and unbalanced
Since it has been mentioned by others here at the talk, I Was Bold and added tags for cleanup and for unbalanced. I want to do cleanup anyway, but want to sidestep the controversy.

In my opinion (and for unbalanced I am allowed to have one)
 * The article is too americo-centric.
 * The article is very definitely POV, though it can't sometimes make its mind up which view it's taking

I will cleanup trying to skirt any genuine controversy, i.e. not change meaning just usual gnome business. I will also (as mentioned above in talk) try to balance by expanding deregulation in the UK, after all we have been doing it for over 25 years now, in fact America is still far more regulated than the UK. (And I have lived in both places, yes.) But if the POV continues, might as well scrap the article and start again.

That's my opinion, as I say for unbalanced I am entitled to one. Best wishes. SimonTrew (talk) 05:29, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

 * BTW if you wonder how I got here, I was adding as a link to electricity articles such as load balancing (electrical power). Quite frankly was appalled this was such a diatribe rather than an encyclopaedic article about deregulation. SimonTrew (talk) 05:31, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

 * OK I've balanced it a little structurally by putting the US in country order and RoI and UK under European Union. I think that it's better to keep countries in alpha order, the EU is a bit of an anomaly here I admit, RoI and UK were in their alpha places but EU is not a country. I moved legislation into respective jurisdictions and checked the refs corrected them added correct dates and titles and authors and publishers. So, as I said, wasn't going to affect the controversy, just conforming to WP:MOS. Checking external links now. SimonTrew (talk) 06:16, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Note #10 is not a source in current form —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.189.131.15 (talk) 23:50, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Ridiculous right-wing slant
The American section of this article couldn't be more imbalanced if it was lifted directly from a Republican congressional aide's memo. -- 24.191.234.242 (talk) 14:18, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree. there is a sentence in the opening paragraph that makes zero sense and is inflammatory for no reason. Deregulation is different from liberalization because a liberalized market, while often having fewer and simpler regulations, can also have regulations in order to increase efficiency and protect consumers' rights, one example being anti-monopoly legislation. However, the terms are often used interchangeably within deregulated/liberalized industries. If no one objects, I will delete it.Stregamama (talk) 15:37, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Iceland
Nothing about Iceland at all, yet it suffered one of the worst financial disasters at the hands of American bankers and corporations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rapidlaser (talk • contribs) 19:39, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Australia
Could someone add citations for the discussion of recent Australian history? DavidMCEddy (talk) 17:11, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Canada
1. Could someone add more citations, including for the claim that "Former Premier Ralph Klein based the entire deregulation scheme on the Enron model?  2.  I'm revising the last paragraph.
 * Before: "Former Premier Ralph Klein based the entire deregulation scheme on the Enron model, and continued with it even after the highly publicized and disastrous collapse of Enron because of illegal accounting practices. Illegal accounting practices at a particular company have no implication for the relative merits of instituting a more market-oriented energy system. Allowing energy production and prices to be determined by the market does not imply that illegal accounting practices will become legal or widespread."  This is subtly biased by (a) failing to mention the  California electricity crisis and (b) suggesting that the problems with Enron were primarily illegal accounting.  Illegal accounting ultimately brought Enron down.  However, the California electricity crisis, manufactured substantially by Enron, is a case study in how not to do deregulation.
 * My new version: "Former Premier Ralph Klein based the entire deregulation scheme on the Enron model, and continued with it even after the highly publicized and disastrous  California electricity crisis (and the collapse of Enron because of illegal accounting practices.)"  — Preceding unsigned comment added by DavidMCEddy (talk • contribs) 17:55, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

New Zealand – An attempt to prevent an edit war after reverting the same bad faith edit for the second time.
A few months ago I an  by. I believe this action is entirely justified, as the edit was made in bad faith and contains numerous significant issues:

 * 1) No no references for either of the claims was provided.
 * 2) The claim about the economy cited specific numbers, but didn't say what the numbers actually represent.
 * 3) The number supposedly representing the change in New Zealand's economy is many times smaller than the most likely statistic (based on the description) it could represent. The standard statistic for comparing economies and economic trends) is PPP-adjusted GDP. Between 1985 and 1992 New Zealand's increased 18% per-capita and 29% overall, not 4.7%.
 * 4) In the context of a process of deregulation that ended in 1995, there is no apparent objective reason to end the date range in 1992. Due to the fact that New Zealand's economy slumped in the early 90s, with the lowest point in 1992, that choice seems intentional. Extending the date range to 1996 (the earliest logical ending point) shows that there it was a significantly better economic period, as the PPP-adjusted GDP increased 47% per capita and 70% overall. The range should really be extended further, as many economic changes take years to bear fruit. The point being that the increase after 1992 would be reflected in whatever metric that 4.7% represents, so specifically avoiding it strongly implies an intent to mislead.
 * 5) Data from New Zealand's national statistics office refutes the claim about poverty. According to that document there was either a very small decrease or very small increase in the poverty rate during that period. Again, without a source I can't determine why this is.
 * 6) The edit removed a sentence about the economy rebounding in 1991, despite it being referenced.

That last point, in particular, is what I believe makes it clear that the entire edit was in bad faith, and that none of the information is reliable. This is backed up by the fact that my attempts to find reliable sources for the claims (both at the time I reverted the edit, and while making this post) found entirely different results. Because of all of the above, I feel that there is no reason the edit belongs on Wikipedia.

Unfortunately, a few weeks later the edit was by  with some changes:

 * 1) It did not remove the sentence about the 1991 economic rebound.
 * 2) Slightly different wording and punctuation (the addition of "Also" at the beginning being the most significant).
 * 3) The addition of a reference (formatted incorrectly) to a page about New Zealand's GDP. It provides a lot of data, but none matching the claim.
 * 4) It removed a request for citation for no apparent reason.

Since most of the issues were not addressed, I'm planning to to revert the edit again shortly after saving this post, then reference it in the. If anyone would like to to re-post that edit, I ask that they first address the above issues. My goal here is to prevent an edit war.

Rob (talk) 08:23, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree. It's got to go. bobrayner (talk) 22:43, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Deregulation
this is a method of privatization, it is when the government allow private firms to operate in some industries of the economy. Thus the government will be having a motive of discouraging statutory monopolies. For example it may allow private transport to operate in some routes of the country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darlingtonmzie (talk • contribs) 19:45, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Deregulation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110106164019/http://multiut.net/ to http://www.multiut.net/

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 20:01, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Deregulation. 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/20160304092836/http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Projects/BPEA/1989%20micro/1989_bpeamicro_peltzman.PDF to http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Projects/BPEA/1989%20micro/1989_bpeamicro_peltzman.PDF
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304092836/http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Projects/BPEA/1989%20micro/1989_bpeamicro_peltzman.PDF to http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Projects/BPEA/1989%20micro/1989_bpeamicro_peltzman.PDF

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:17, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Deregulation. 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/20080607083903/http://www.piac.ca/energy/ontario_electricity_restructuring/ to http://www.piac.ca/energy/ontario_electricity_restructuring/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120628182209/http://www.rte.ie/news/av/2011/0516/primetimeinvestigates.html to http://www.rte.ie/news/av/2011/0516/primetimeinvestigates.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090324051222/http://www.prwatch.org/prwissues/2003Q3/dereg.html to http://www.prwatch.org/prwissues/2003Q3/dereg.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081201151309/http://cei.org/gencon/025%2C01722.cfm to http://www.cei.org/gencon/025%2C01722.cfm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101103234543/http://www.usgaselectric.net/page10.html to http://usgaselectric.net/page10.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) 16:05, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Deregulation. 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/20090404155331/http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/BG1169.cfm to http://www.heritage.org/research/energyandenvironment/bg1169.cfm

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) 05:04, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Deregulation


text:
Talk:Culture of Japan

Preparing to Add to Language Section
Hello everyone, I just wanted to make a post informing any interested party that I am planning on making some contributions to the language section of the Culture of Japan page. I intend to add a statement on Ainu and Ryukyuan languages referencing both the following articles:

Pellard, Thomas (2015-02-17), "1. The Linguistic archeology of the Ryukyu Islands", 1. The Linguistic archeology of the Ryukyu Islands, De Gruyter Mouton, p. 13, doi:10.1515/9781614511151.13, ISBN 978-1-61451-115-1, retrieved 2023-10-25

Shiraishi, Hidetoshi (January 2022). "Ainu: An urban-rural indigenous language of the north". Oxford Academic. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198856610.003.0007. Retrieved 2023-10-25.

Fluoroid (talk) 22:15, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

 * Hello. I'm guessing this is part of a class assignment or similar? If so, please see Student assignments, especially Student assignments. Thanks. Grayfell (talk) 05:27, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Preparing to edit Music section
Hi everybody, I also wanted to post to inform anyone interested that I'm planning on contributing and editing the Music section of this Culture of Japan article. As a rough plan, I intend to:

-add citations where needed

-add a paragraph about origins, history, and influences

-involve both instrument names as well as artists both historical and contemporary

-verify and add to current popular music info.

Some of the sources I will be drawing from are as follows:

https://www.ifpi.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Global_Music_Report_2023_State_of_the_Industry.pdf

Matsue, Jennifer. Focus: Music in Contemporary Japan. Routledge, 2015.

Malm, William P. Traditional Japanese music and musical instruments. Kodansha International, 2000.

Keister, Jay Davis. Shaped by Japanese Music: Kikuoka Hiroaki and Nagauta Shamisen in Tokyo. Routledge, 2004.

Hughes, D.W. (2008). The Ashgate Research Companion to Japanese Music (A.M. Tokita, Ed.) (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315172354 EMcDonald at uofu (talk) 04:08, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

 * Hello. I'm guessing this is part of a class assignment or similar? If so, please see Student assignments, especially Student assignments. Thanks. Grayfell (talk) 05:27, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: MIT 398 Intercultural International Communication
— Assignment last updated by Fatima Al-Thani (talk) 10:41, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Culture of Japan


text:
Ramesses

Ramesses may refer to:

Pharaohs of the nineteenth dynasty

 * Ramesses I, founder of the 19th Dynasty
 * Ramesses II, also called "Ramesses the Great"
 * Prince Ramesses (prince), second son of Ramesses II
 * Prince Ramesses-Meryamun-Nebweben, a son of Ramesses II

Pharaohs of the twentieth dynasty

 * Ramesses III, adversary of the Sea Peoples
 * Ramesses IV
 * Ramesses V
 * Ramesses VI
 * Ramesses VII
 * Ramesses VIII
 * Ramesses IX
 * Ramesses X
 * Ramesses XI

Locations

 * Pi-Ramesses, founded by pharaoh Ramesses II on the former site of Avaris

Books

 * Ramses the Damned, an alternate title of the novel The Mummy by Anne Rice
 * The Ramses (Ramsès) series of five best-selling historical novels, by French author and Egyptologist Christian Jacq

Entertainers and artists

 * Albert Marchinsky, an illusionist whose stage name was "The Great Rameses"
 * Ramases, an early-1970s-era British musician
 * Ramsés VII, pseudonym used by Argentine singer-songwriter Tanguito (1945-1972)
 * Ramesses (band), an English sludge/doom metal band, formed by ex-Electric Wizard members Tim Bagshaw and Mark Greening
 * Ramses Shaffy (1933–2009), Dutch singer
 * Ramses Younan (1913–1966), Egyptian painter and writer

Fictional characters

 * King Ramses, a minor villain in the animated cartoon Courage the Cowardly Dog
 * Ramses Emerson, a fictional character in the "Amelia Peabody" book series by U.S. author Elizabeth Peters
 * Ramses, a summon creature in the Game Boy Advance game Golden Sun
 * Ramses XIII, protagonist of the 1895 historical novel Pharaoh by Bolesław Prus

Military

 * MV Ramses, a German blockade runner sunk by HMAS Adelaide in 1942
 * The Ramses II tank, an Egyptian main battle tank

Products

 * Ramses, a brand of condom manufactured by Durex

Sports

 * Rameses (mascot), the mascot for the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

title: Ramesses


text:
Massacre of Glencoe

The Massacre of Glencoe took place in Glen Coe in the Highlands of Scotland on 13 February 1692. An estimated 30 members and associates of Clan MacDonald of Glencoe were killed by Scottish government forces, allegedly for failing to pledge allegiance to the new monarchs, William III and Mary II.

By May 1690, the Jacobite rising of 1689 had largely been suppressed, but unrest in the Highlands consumed military resources needed for the Nine Years' War in Flanders. In late 1690, the Scottish government and Jacobite clan leaders agreed they would swear an oath of loyalty to William and Mary, in return for £12,000. However, disagreements over how to divide it meant by December 1691 none of them had taken the oath.

At this point, Lord Stair, the Scottish Secretary of State decided to make an example of the MacDonalds as a warning of the consequences for further delay. The Glencoe MacDonalds were not the only ones who failed to meet the deadline, as the Keppoch MacDonalds did not swear until early February. The Glencoe MacDonalds appear to have been singled out due to a combination of clan politics, and a reputation for lawlessness.

While similar events had been relatively common in earlier Scottish history, this was no longer the case by 1692, and the brutality of the massacre shocked contemporaries. It became a significant element in the persistence of Jacobitism in the Highlands during the first half of the 18th century, and remains a powerful symbol to this day.

Background
Some historians argue the late 17th-century Scottish Highlands were more peaceful than often suggested, in part because chiefs could be fined for crimes committed by their clansmen. The exception was the area known as Lochaber, identified as a refuge for cattle raiders and thieves by government officials, other chiefs and Gaelic poets. Four Lochaber clans were consistently named in such accounts: the Glencoe and Keppoch MacDonalds, the MacGregors and the Camerons.

Levies from all four served in the Independent Companies used by the government of James VII and II to suppress the Conventicles in 1678–80, and took part in the devastating raid led by the Marquess of Atholl that followed Argyll's Rising in 1685. Primarily directed against areas in Cowal and Kintyre settled by Lowland migrants, Atholl's raid destabilised large parts of the central and southern Highlands. As a result, the government had to use military force to restore order; James VII and II outlawed the Keppoch MacDonalds for attacking his troops at the Battle of Mulroy, before he was deposed by the November 1688 Glorious Revolution.

When James landed in Ireland to regain his kingdoms in March 1689, the Camerons and Keppoch MacDonalds joined a small force recruited by Viscount Dundee for a supporting campaign in Scotland. Dundee and 600 Highlanders died in the victory at Killiecrankie on 27 July; although organised Jacobite resistance largely ended after Cromdale in May 1690, much of the Highlands remained out of government hands. Policing them used resources needed for the Nine Years' War in Flanders, while close links between Western Scotland and Ulster meant unrest in one country often spilled into the other. Since peace in the Highlands required control of Lochaber, achieving this had wider strategic importance than might appear.

Oath of allegiance to William and Mary

After Killiecrankie, the Scottish government tried to negotiate a settlement with the Jacobite chiefs, with terms varying based on events in Ireland and Scotland. In March 1690, Secretary of State Lord Stair offered them a total of £12,000 in return for swearing an oath of allegiance to William. The chiefs agreed to do so in the June 1691 Declaration of Achallader, with John Campbell, Earl of Breadalbane, signing for the government. Crucially, it did not specify how the money was to be divided, and disputes over this delayed the oath. In addition, Breadalbane argued part of it was owed him as compensation for damage done to his estates by the Glencoe MacDonalds.

The Battle of Aughrim on 12 July ended Jacobite chances of victory in the Williamite War in Ireland, and any immediate prospects of a Stuart restoration. On 26 August, the Scottish government issued a Royal Proclamation that offered a pardon to anyone taking the Oath prior to 1 January 1692, with severe reprisals for those who did not. Two days later, secret articles began circulating which cancelled the Achallader agreement in the event of a Jacobite invasion. These were allegedly signed by all the attendees, including Breadalbane, who claimed they had been manufactured by the MacDonald chief Glengarry. Stair's letters now focused on enforcement, reflecting his belief that forged or not, none of the signatories intended to keep their word.

In early October, the Jacobite chiefs asked the exiled James II for permission to take the oath unless he could mount an invasion before the deadline, a condition they knew was impossible. A document granting his approval was sent from Saint-Germain on 12 December and received by Glengarry on 23 December, who did not share it until 28th. While his reasons for the delay are unclear, one suggestion attributes it to an internal power struggle between Episcopalian MacDonalds like Glencoe, and the Catholic minority headed by Glengarry.

As a result, it was not until 30 December that MacIain of Glencoe left for Fort William to take the oath from its military governor, Lieutenant Colonel John Hill. Since he was not authorised to accept it, Hill sent MacIain to Inveraray with a letter for Sir Colin Campbell, the local magistrate. He administered the oath on 6 January, after which MacIain returned home.

Glengarry himself did not take the oath until 4 February, while others did so by proxy, but only MacIain was excluded from the indemnity issued by the Scottish Privy Council. Stair's letter of 2 December to Breadalbane shows the decision to make him an example was taken well before the deadline for the oath, originally as a much bigger operation; '...the clan Donell must be rooted out and Lochiel. Leave the McLeans to Argyll...'

In January, Stair wrote three letters in quick succession to Sir Thomas Livingstone, military commander in Scotland; on the 7th, the intention was to '....destroy entirely the country of Lochaber, Locheal's lands, Kippochs, Glengarrie and Glenco...;' on the 9th, '...their chieftains all being papists, it is well the vengeance falls there; for my part, I regret the MacDonalds had not divided and...Kippoch and Glenco are safe.' The last, on 11 January, states; '...my lord Argile tells me Glenco hath not taken the oaths at which I rejoice....'

The Scottish Parliament passed a Decree of Forfeiture in 1690, depriving Glengarry of his lands, but he continued to hold Invergarry Castle, whose garrison included the senior Jacobite officers Alexander Cannon and Thomas Buchan. This suggests the Episcopalian Glencoe MacDonalds only replaced the Catholic Glengarry as the target on 11 January; MacIain's son John MacDonald told the 1695 Commission the soldiers came to Glencoe from the north '...Glengarry's house being reduced.'

The targeting of the Glencoe MacDonalds appears to have been driven by a variety of factors. After two years of negotiations, Stair was under pressure to ensure the deal stuck, while Argyll was competing for political influence with his kinsman Breadalbane, who also found it expedient to concur with the plan. As well as eliminating an internal rival, Glengarry was pardoned and had his lands returned by the Williamite government. At the same time, he managed to bolster his reputation for loyalty at the Jacobite court by being the last to swear.

The Massacre
In late January 1692, approximately 120 men from the Earl of Argyll's Regiment of Foot arrived in Glencoe. Their commander was Robert Campbell of Glenlyon, an impoverished local landowner whose niece was married to one of MacIain's sons. Campbell carried orders for 'free quarter', an established alternative to paying taxes in what was a largely non-cash society. The Glencoe MacDonalds had themselves been similarly billeted on the Campbells when serving with the Highland levies used to police Argyll in 1678.

On 12 February, Hill ordered Lieutenant Colonel James Hamilton to take 400 men and block the northern exits from Glencoe at Kinlochleven. Meanwhile, another 400 men under Major Duncanson would join Glenlyon and sweep northwards up the glen, killing anyone they found, removing property and burning houses. Later that evening, Glenlyon received orders from Duncanson carried by Thomas Drummond, who commanded the Argylls' Grenadier company and was thus Glenlyon's superior. His presence appears to have been to ensure the orders were enforced, since witnesses later claimed he shot two people who asked Glenlyon for mercy.

In letters written on 30 January to Hamilton and Hill, Stair expresses concern that the MacDonalds would escape if warned, and emphasises the need for secrecy. This correlates with evidence from James Campbell, one of Glenlyon's company, stating that they had no knowledge of the plan until the morning of 13 February. MacIain was killed, although his two sons escaped, and the 1695 Commission was given various figures for the number of casualties. The often-quoted figure of 38 dead was provided by Hamilton's men, who were at the opposite end of the glen from where the killing took place, while the MacDonalds themselves claimed 'the number they knew to be slaine were about 25'. Modern research estimates deaths resulting from the Massacre as 'around 30', while claims others died of exposure cannot be substantiated.

Since he arrived two hours late at 7:00 am, Duncanson joined Glenlyon only after most of the killings had been carried out, then advanced up the glen burning houses and removing livestock. Hamilton was not in position at Kinlochleven until 11:00; his detachment included two lieutenants, Francis Farquhar and Gilbert Kennedy, who often appear in anecdotes claiming they 'broke their swords rather than carry out their orders.' This differs from their testimony to the Commission and is unlikely since they arrived hours after the killings, which were carried out at the opposite end of the glen.

In May, fears of a French invasion meant the Argylls were posted to Brentford in England, then Flanders, where they served until the end of the Nine Years' War in 1697 when the regiment was disbanded. No action was taken against those involved; Glenlyon died of disease in Bruges in August 1696, Duncanson was killed in Spain in May 1705 while Drummond survived to take part in another famous Scottish disaster, the Darien scheme.

Investigation
On 12 April 1692, the Paris Gazette published a copy of Glenlyon's orders, allegedly found in an Edinburgh tavern and taken to France. Despite criticism of the government, there was little sympathy for the MacDonalds, Livingstone writing it's not that anyone thinks the thieving tribe did not deserve to be destroyed, but that it should have been done by those quartered amongst them makes a great noise. The motivation for investigating the affair was largely political; having served in the old and new regimes, Stair was unpopular with supporters of both.

In the debate that followed, Colonel Hill claimed most Highlanders were peaceful, and even in Lochaber, a single person may travell safley where he will witout harme. He argued lawlessness was deliberately encouraged by leaders like Glengarry, while the midle sort of Gentrey and Commons....never got anything but hurt from it. The 1693 Highland Judicial Commission encouraged using the law to resolve issues like cattle theft, but the clan chiefs opposed it as reducing control over their tenants.

The issue appeared settled until the English Licensing of the Press Act 1662 expired in May 1695. The result was a huge increase in the number of political pamphlets published in London, among them ''Gallienus Redivivus, or Murther will out, &c. Being a true Account of the De Witting of Glencoe, Gaffney''. Written by Jacobite activist Charles Leslie, it focused on William's alleged complicity in the 1672 death of Johan de Witt, with Glencoe and other crimes as secondary charges.

A Commission was set up to determine whether there was a case to answer under 'Slaughter under trust', a Scottish act introduced in 1587 to reduce endemic feuding. The law applied to murder committed in "cold-blood", when articles of surrender had been agreed, or hospitality accepted. It was first used in 1588 against Lachlan Mor Maclean, whose objections to his mother's second marriage led him to murder his new stepfather, John MacDonald, and 18 members of the wedding party. Interpretation varied, such as in the cases of James MacDonald, who locked his parents in their house before setting it on fire in 1597, and the killing of prisoners after the 1647 Battle of Dunaverty. Both were deemed to have been committed in "hot blood", and thus excluded.

As a capital offence and treason, it was an awkward weapon with which to attack Stair, since William himself signed the orders, and the intent was widely known in government circles. The Commission instead considered whether participants had exceeded orders, not their legality, and concluded Stair and Hamilton had a case to answer, but left the decision to William. While Stair was dismissed as Secretary of State, he returned to government in 1700 and was made an earl by the last Stuart monarch, Queen Anne. An application by the survivors for compensation was ignored; they rebuilt their houses, and participated in the 1715 and 1745 Jacobite risings. An archaeological survey in 2019 showed Glencoe was occupied until the Highland Clearances of the mid-18th century.

Aftermath and legacy

The brutality of the Massacre shocked Scottish society and became a Jacobite symbol of post-1688 oppression. Doing the Jacobite rising of 1745, Prince Charles ordered Leslie's pamphlet and the 1695 Parliamentary minutes reprinted in the Edinburgh Caledonian Mercury. Glencoe then disappeared from public view until 1850, when it was referenced by historian Thomas Macaulay in his History of England. He sought to exonerate William from every one of Leslie's charges, and is the origin of the claim that the Massacre was simply part of an ongoing feud between the MacDonalds and Clan Campbell.

Victorian era Scotland developed values that were both Unionist and Imperialist, while also being uniquely Scottish. Historical divisions meant this was largely expressed through a shared cultural identity, while Scottish history as a separate topic virtually disappeared from universities.

Modern historian Ash suggests that instead of being analysed as an historical event, this meant Glencoe was incorporated into 'the emotional trappings of the Scottish past...bonnie Scotland of the bens, glens and misty shieling, the Jacobites, Mary, Queen of Scots, tartan mania and the raising of historical statuary.' Even when the study of Scottish history re-emerged in the 1950s, Leslie's historiography continued to shape views of William's reign as disastrous for Scotland. The massacre became one of several such incidents, including the Darien scheme, the famine of the late 1690s, and the 1707 Union.

The Massacre is still commemorated in an annual ceremony by the Clan Donald Society. Initiated in 1930, this is held at the Upper Carnoch memorial, a tapering Celtic cross installed in 1883 at the eastern end of Glencoe village. Another memorial includes the Henderson Stone, a granite boulder south of Carnach, originally known as the 'Soldier's Stone'. In the late 19th century, it was renamed Clach Eanruig, or 'Henry's Stone', after the man reputed to be Piper to MacIain.

In popular culture

Glencoe was a popular topic with 19th-century poets, notably Sir Walter Scott's "Massacre of Glencoe". It was used as a subject by Thomas Campbell and George Gilfillan, as well as by Letitia Elizabeth Landon in her 1823 work "Glencoe", T. S. Eliot's "Rannoch, by Glencoe" and "Two Poems from Glencoe" by Douglas Stewart.

Examples in literature include "The Masks of Purpose" by Eric Linklater, and the novels Fire Bringer by David Clement-Davies, Corrag (known as Witch Light in paperback) by Susan Fletcher and Lady of the Glen by Jennifer Roberson. William Croft Dickinson references Glencoe in his 1963 short story "The Return of the Native". A Song of Ice and Fire author, George R. R. Martin, cites the Glencoe Massacre as one of two historical influences on the infamous "Red Wedding" in his 2000 book A Storm of Swords.

In 1962, Jim McLean wrote the song "The Massacre Of Glencoe", which was published under Duart Music. The song was later adapted and performed by The Corries, as well as adapted for the Highland Bagpipes by various artists. In 1972 the Scottish band Nazareth released the song "1692 (Glencoe Massacre)" on their album, Exercises.

Recent archaeological work

After the Massacre, the Glencoe MacDonalds rebuilt their homes; a military survey undertaken between 1747 and 1755 shows seven separate settlements along the glen, each containing between six and eleven buildings. In 2018, a team of archaeologists organised by the National Trust for Scotland began surveying several areas related to the massacre, with plans to produce detailed studies of their findings.

Work in the summer of 2019 focused on the settlement of Achadh Triachatain, or Achtriachtan, at the extreme end of the glen; home to an estimated 50 people, excavations show it was rebuilt after 1692 and still occupied in the mid-18th century. A hoard of coins was found in a house linked to MacIain in August 2023, which archaeologists believe may have been hidden there by a victim of the Massacre.

In 2021, a full-size reconstruction of one of the buildings excavated at Achtriachtan was created using traditional techniques and materials at the National Trust for Scotland Visitor Centre.

title: Massacre of Glencoe