text:
Palate

The palate is the roof of the mouth in humans and other mammals. It separates the oral cavity from the nasal cavity. A similar structure is found in crocodilians, but in most other tetrapods, the oral and nasal cavities are not truly separated. The palate is divided into two parts, the anterior, bony hard palate and the posterior, fleshy soft palate (or velum).

Innervation
The maxillary nerve branch of the trigeminal nerve supplies sensory innervation to the palate.

Development
The hard palate forms before birth.

Variation
If the fusion is incomplete, a cleft palate results.

Function in humans
When functioning in conjunction with other parts of the mouth, the palate produces certain sounds, particularly velar, palatal, palatalized, postalveolar, alveolopalatal, and uvular consonants.

Etymology
The English synonyms palate and palatum, and also the related adjective palatine (as in palatine bone), are all from the Latin palatum via Old French palat, words that like their English derivatives, refer to the "roof" of the mouth.

The Latin word palatum is of unknown (possibly Etruscan) ultimate origin and served also as a source to the Latin word meaning palace, palatium, from which other senses of palatine and the English word palace derive, and not the other way round.

As the roof of the mouth was once considered the seat of the sense of taste, palate can also refer to this sense itself, as in the phrase "a discriminating palate". By further extension, the flavor of a food (particularly beer or wine) may be called its palate, as when a wine is said to have an oaky palate.

title: Palate


text:
Data haven

A data haven, like a corporate haven or tax haven, is a refuge for uninterrupted or unregulated data. Data havens are locations with legal environments that are friendly to the concept of a computer network freely holding data and even protecting its content and associated information. They tend to fit into three categories: a physical locality with weak information-system enforcement and extradition laws, a physical locality with intentionally strong protections of data, and virtual domains designed to secure data via technical means (such as encryption) regardless of any legal environment.

Tor's onion space, I2P (both hidden services), HavenCo (centralized), and Freenet (decentralized) are four models of modern-day virtual data havens.

Purposes of data havens
Reasons for establishing data havens include access to free political speech for users in countries where censorship of the Internet is practiced.

Other reasons can include:
 * Whistleblowing
 * Distributing software, data or speech that violates laws such as the DMCA
 * Copyright infringement
 * Circumventing data protection laws
 * Online gambling
 * Pornography
 * Cybercrime

History of the term
The 1978 report of the British government's Data Protection Committee expressed concern that different privacy standards in different countries would lead to the transfer of personal data to countries with weaker protections; it feared that Britain might become a "data haven". Also in 1978, Adrian Norman published a mock consulting study on the feasibility of setting up a company providing a wide range of data haven services, called "Project Goldfish".

Science fiction novelist William Gibson used the term in his novels Count Zero and Mona Lisa Overdrive, as did Bruce Sterling in Islands in the Net. The 1990s segments of Neal Stephenson's 1999 novel Cryptonomicon concern a small group of entrepreneurs attempting to create a data haven.

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

title: Data haven


text:
List of public art in Dublin

This is a list of public art on permanent public display in Dublin, Ireland. The list applies only to works of public art accessible in a public space; it does not include artwork on display inside museums. Public art may include sculptures, statues, monuments, memorials, murals and mosaics.

Public art in Dublin is a significant feature of the cityscape. The city's statues and other monuments have a long history of controversy about their subjects and designs, and a number of formerly prominent monuments have been removed or destroyed. Some of the city's monuments have nicknames, though many are not in popular use.

City North East
This area of the city is bounded to the west by O'Connell Street, Parnell Square East, North Frederick Street, and Lower Dorset Street. To the north it is bounded by the Royal Canal, and to the south by the Liffey Quays. To the east it includes the North Wall.

City North West
This area of the city is bounded to the east by O'Connell Street, Parnell Square East, North Frederick Street, and Lower Dorset Street. To the north and west it is bounded by the North Circular Road and to the south by the Liffey Quays.

City South East
This area of the city is bounded to the west by Westmoreland Street, Trinity College, Grafton Street, St. Stephens Green West, and Harcourt Street. To the north it is bounded by the Liffey Quays, and to the south by the Grand Canal. To the east it includes Irishtown and Ringsend. Locations within this area with their own article subsections such as St. Stephen's Green are excluded.

City South West
This area of the city is bounded to the east by Westmoreland Street, Trinity College, Grafton Street, St. Stephens Green West, and Harcourt Street. To the north it is bounded by the Liffey Quays, and to the south by the Grand Canal. To the west it is bounded by the South Circular Road.

title: List of public art in Dublin


text:
O'Connell Street

O'Connell Street is a street in the centre of Dublin, Ireland, running north from the River Liffey. It connects the O'Connell Bridge to the south with Parnell Street to the north and is roughly split into two sections bisected by Henry Street. The Luas tram system runs along the street.

During the 17th century, it was a narrow street known as Drogheda Street, named after Henry Moore, 1st Earl of Drogheda. It was widened in the late 18th century by the Wide Streets Commission and renamed Sackville Street (Sráid Saicfil) after Lionel Sackville, 1st Duke of Dorset. In 1924, it was renamed in honour of nationalist leader Daniel O'Connell, whose statue by John Henry Foley stands at the lower end of the street facing O'Connell Bridge.

The street has played an important part in Irish history and features several important monuments, including statues of O'Connell and trade union leader James Larkin, as well as the Spire of Dublin. It formed the backdrop to one of the 1913 Dublin lock-out gatherings, the 1916 Easter Rising, the Irish Civil War of 1922, the destruction of Nelson's Pillar in 1966 and the Dublin riots of 2006 and 2023. In the late 20th century, a comprehensive plan was begun to restore the street to its original 19th-century character.

Location
O'Connell Street is located on the north side of Dublin city, and runs northwards from O'Connell Bridge towards Parnell Square. The street is approximately 1980 ft long and 150 ft wide, with two broad carriage ways at either side of a central pathway occupied by various monuments and statues. It has previously been part of the N1, a major road from Dublin to Belfast. There are two Luas tram stops along the street, O'Connell GPO and O'Connell Upper. The street has a number of bus stops for Dublin Bus and other bus companies, with many cross-city and north-bound services stopping there.

Drogheda Street
O'Connell Street evolved from the earlier 17th-century Drogheda Street, laid out by Henry Moore, 1st Earl of Drogheda. It was a third of the width of the present-day O'Connell Street, located on the site of the modern eastern carriageway and extending from Parnell Street to the junction with Abbey Street.

Sackville Street (Gardiner's Mall)
In the 1740s, the banker and property developer Luke Gardiner acquired the upper part of Drogheda Street extending down to Henry Street as part of a land deal. He demolished the western side of Drogheda Street creating an exclusive elongated residential square 1050 ft long and 150 ft wide, thus establishing the scale of the modern-day thoroughfare.

A number of properties were built along the new western side of the street, while the eastern side had many mansions, the grandest of which was Drogheda House rented by the sixth Earl of Drogheda and sat on the corner of Cathedral Street. Gardiner also laid out a mall down the central section of the street, lined with low granite walls and obelisks. It was planted with trees a few years later. He titled the new development Sackville Street after the then Lord Lieutenant of Ireland Lionel Cranfield Sackville, Duke of Dorset. It was also known as 'Sackville Mall', and 'Gardiner's Mall'. However, due to the limited lands owned by the Gardiners in this area, the Rotunda Hospital sited just off the street at the bottom of Parnell Square – also developed by the family – was not built on axis with Sackville Street, terminating the vista. It had been Gardiner's intention to connect the new street through to the river, however, he died in 1755, with his son Charles taking over the estate.

Work did not start until 1757 when the city's planning body, the Wide Streets Commission, obtained a financial grant from Parliament. For the next 10 years work progressed in demolishing a myriad of dwellings and other buildings, laying out the new roadway and building new terraces. The Wide Streets Commission had envisaged and realised matching terraces of unified and proportioned façades extending from the river. Because of a dispute over land, a plot on the northwest of the street remained vacant; this later became the General Post Office (GPO) which opened in 1814.

In 1764, an English traveller named John Bush visited Dublin and made the following assessment of the street: "There are on this side (north of the Liffey) many spacious and regular streets: one in particular in the north-east part of the town. Sackville-Street, about 70 feet wide or nearly, with a mall enclosed with a low wall...". Bush, however, bemoaned the failures of the builder for not having aligned the street with the Rotunda Hospital at its northern end.

The street became a commercial success upon the opening of Carlisle Bridge, designed by James Gandon, in 1792 for pedestrians and 1795 for all traffic.

19th century
Sackville Street prospered in the 19th century, though there was some difference between the Upper and Lower streets. Lower Sackville Street became successful as a commercial location; its terraces are ambitiously lined with purpose-designed retail units. Consequently, a difference between the two ends of the street developed: the planned lower end is successful and bustling next to the river, and the upper end features a mixture of less prominent businesses and old townhouses. Upon his visit to Dublin in 1845, William Makepeace Thackeray observed the street was "broad and handsome" but noted the upper section featured less distinctive architecture and had a distinct lack of patronage.

During the 19th century, Sackville Street changed in character from the Wide Streets Commission design into a boulevard of individual buildings. One of the world's first purpose-built department stores was such a building: Delany's New Mart 'Monster Store' which opened in 1853 was later purchased by the Clery family. It also housed the Imperial Hotel. Across the road, another elaborate hotel was built next to the GPO: the Hotel Metropole, in a high-French style. Similarly, the Gresham Hotel opened on numbers 21 and 22 in 1817 to the north of the street in adjoining Georgian townhouses and was later remodelled, as it became more successful.

As the fortunes of Upper Sackville Street began to improve in the second half of the century, other businesses began to open such as Turkish baths, later to be incorporated into the Hammam Hotel. Standard Life Assurance built their flagship Dublin branch on the street, while the Findlater family opened a branch of their successful chain close to Parnell Street, as did Gilbey's Wine Merchants. The thoroughfare also became the centre of the Dublin tramways system, with many of the city's trams converging at the Nelson Pillar. By 1900, Sackville Street had become an important location for shopping and business, which led to it being called "Ireland's Main Street".

During the 19th century, the street began to be known as "O'Connell Street" though this was considered by some to be a "nationalist" name. Dublin Corporation was anxious as early as the 1880s to change the name but faced considerable objections from residents and business owners on the street. With the unveiling of the O'Connell Monument on the street in 1882 and subsequent renaming of the Carlisle Bridge as O'Connell Bridge in his honour, it marked "an important move away from commemorating only members of the Castle administration or the British royal family" in the street, according to a 2003 report commissioned by Dublin City Council.

Despite objections, the Corporation passed a resolution to rename the street in December 1884, but in 1885, aggrieved locals, with the Attorney General of Ireland arguing their case, secured a Court order holding that the Corporation lacked the powers to make such a change. The necessary powers were granted in 1890, but it may have been felt best to allow the new name to become popular; over the years the name O'Connell Street gradually gained popular acceptance, and the name was changed officially, without any protest, in 1924.

Easter Rising and Independence
On 31 August 1913, O'Connell Street saw the worst incident in the Dublin lock-out, a major dispute between workers and the police. During a speech given by workers' rights activist James Larkin, police charged through the attending crowd and arrested him. The crowd began to riot, resulting in two deaths, 200 arrests and numerous injuries.

During the Easter Rising of 1916, Irish republicans seized the General Post Office and proclaimed the Irish Republic, leading to the street's bombardment for a number of days by the gunboat Helga of the Royal Navy and several other artillery pieces which were brought up to fire on the north of the street. The thoroughfare also saw sustained small arms and sniper fire from surrounding areas. By Saturday, the rebels had been forced to abandon the GPO, which was burning, and held out in Moore Street until they surrendered.

Much of the street was reduced to rubble, the damaged areas including the whole eastern side of the street as far north as Cathedral Street, and the terrace in between the GPO and Abbey Street on the western side. In addition, during the chaos that accompanied the rebellion, the inhabitants of the nearby slums looted many of the shops on O'Connell Street. The events had a disastrous impact on the commercial life of the inner city, causing around £2.5 million worth of damage. Some businesses were closed up to 1923 or never reopened.

In the immediate aftermath of the Rising, the destruction of the street resulted in the majority of major claims to the Property Losses (Ireland) Committee. The Dublin Reconstruction (Emergency Provisions) Act 1916 was drafted with the aim of controlling the nature of reconstruction in the local area. The aim was to rebuild in a coherent and dignified fashion, using the opportunity to modernise the nature of commercial activity. Under the act, the city was to approve all construction and reject anything that would not fit with the street's character. The reconstruction was supervised and by City Architect Horace T. O'Rourke. With the exception of its Sackville Street façade and portico, the General Post Office was destroyed. A new GPO was subsequently built behind the 1818 façade. Work began in 1924, with the Henry Street side the first to be erected with new retail units at street level, a public shopping arcade linking through to Princes Street, and new offices on the upper floors. The Public Office underneath the portico on O'Connell Street reopened in 1929.

O'Connell Street saw another pitched battle in July 1922, on the outbreak of the Irish Civil War, when anti-treaty fighters under Oscar Traynor occupied the street after pro-treaty Irish National Army troops attacked the republican garrison in the nearby Four Courts. Fighting lasted from 28 June until 5 July, when the National Army troops brought artillery up to point-blank range, under the cover of armoured cars, to bombard the Republican-held buildings. Among the casualties was Cathal Brugha, shot at close range. The effects of the week's fighting were largely confined to the northern end of the street, with the vast majority of the terrace north of Cathedral Street to Parnell Square being destroyed, as well as a few buildings on the north-western side. In total, around three-quarters of the properties on the street were destroyed or demolished between 1916 and 1922. As a result, only one Georgian townhouse remains on the street into the 21st century.

Because of the extensive destruction and rebuilding, most of the buildings on O'Connell Street date from the early 20th century. The only remaining original building still standing is No. 42, which has been owned by the Royal Dublin Hotel since 1972. This house was originally the home of the State physician and professor of anatomy at Trinity College, Robert Robinson and later Daniel O'Connell's Catholic Commercial Club. The building dates from 1752 and was designed by Richard Cassels. There were plans to incorporate the house into the hotel to provide additional bars and function space in 1975 and 1978, but the work was never carried out. Permission was sought in 1982 to demolish the house, but this was refused. Apart from the GPO building, other significant properties rebuilt after the hostilities include the department store Clerys which reopened in August 1922. and the Gresham Hotel which reopened in 1927.

Regeneration
Despite improvements to the street's architectural coherence between 1916 and 1922, the street has since suffered from a lack of planning. Like much of Dublin of that time, property speculators and developers were allowed to construct what were widely accepted to be inappropriately designed buildings, often entailing the demolition of historic properties in spite of its Conservation Area status. Frank McDonald dates the turn in the Street's fortune as the blowing up of Nelson's Pillar, contending that the loss of the pillar led to a decline in the character and overall cohesion of the area. The loss of the Pillar was also the loss of a significant landmark, a meeting place, and a popular tourist spot on the north side of the city. Several Victorian and 1920s buildings were demolished in the 1960s and 1970s. One of the earliest examples was the demolition of two house facades by CIÉ in 1961 to make way for the passenger information bureau. The new structure has a glazed curtain wall with stained glass panels by Evie Hone. Another demolition was of Gilbey's at the northern end of the street. This building featured a high Victorian romanesque facade, a porch, and a crested roof. It was demolished in March 1973, with two stone heads of Gladstone and Palmerston salvaged and set in above the new entrance. Originally designed as a mixed development with retail and offices, the entire building was rented by Dublin City Council from 1975, and then set out the ground floor as a sound-proofed council chamber.

The Metropole and Capitol cinemas next to the GPO were demolished in 1973, McDonald noting this removed the central social hub of O'Connell Street. As well as being cinemas, the Capitol had lounges, meeting rooms, cafes and a restaurant, while the Metropole had a ballroom, restaurants and bars. The site was levelled and redeveloped for British Home Stores. It occupied the site, with Mothercare and Habitat, until 1992 when it closed the store. It was then taken over by a branch of Penney's. Findlater's grocer and wine merchant's premises on the corner of O'Connell Street and Cathal Brugha Street was demolished in 1972 and replaced with a five-storey office block with retail at ground level. This is among the newer buildings that disrupted the proportions that had been strictly enforced across the streetscape by O'Rourke during the reconstruction in the 1920s.

Among the last intact Wide Streets Commission buildings on the street dating from the 1780s, numbers 40 and 41 were demolished in 1968 to make way for the Royal Dublin Hotel. Designed by Patrick Carr, it was the first hotel built in Dublin since the Gresham in the 1920s and opened in 1970. This hotel was in turn demolished after its closure in 2008 and has remained a vacant site. Along with the other vacant site beside the former Carlton Cinema, and the Carlton itself have been part of a plan to develop the site as a large shopping centre that would connect with Moore Street. The so-called "Carlton site" encompasses almost six acres facing onto O'Connell, Moore, Parnell and Henry Streets. This vacant site immediately to the right of the Carlton was Gill's bookshop and a branch of Penney's until 1979 when it was purchased by the Bank of Ireland. Gill's was destroyed by fire while vacant and later collapsed in September 1979, leading to both buildings being levelled. Many of the older buildings were replaced with fast-food restaurants, shops and offices, that continue to be the main features along O'Connell Street in the 21st century.The street was given attention with Dublin City Council's O'Connell Street Integrated Area Plan (IAP) which was unveiled in 1998 with the aim of restoring the street to its former status. The plan was designed to go beyond simple cosmetic changes, and introduce control of the wider area beyond the street's buildings, including pedestrian and vehicle interaction, governance and preservation of architecture. Work on the plan was delayed, and reached approval in June 2003.

The main features of the plan included the widening of footpaths and a reduction in road space, removing and replacing all trees, a new plaza in front of the GPO, and new street furnishings including custom-designed lampposts, litter bins and retail kiosks. The plan included the Spire of Dublin project, Dublin's tallest sculpture; constructed between December 2002 and January 2003, occupying the site of Nelson's Pillar. Numerous monuments were restored, including those of late 19th century Irish political leader Charles Stewart Parnell, radical early 20th-century labour leader Jim Larkin, prominent businessman and nationalist MP Sir John Grey, and the most challenging of all: the conservation of the O'Connell Monument standing guard at the southern entrance to the thoroughfare. This project was worked on for a number of months by an expert team of bronze and stone conservators before being unveiled in May 2005.

All public domain works were completed in June 2006, finalising the principal objective of the IAP at a cost of €40 million. The loss of mature trees during this work has been cited as exposing and further highlighting the issues with the streetscape. Work was disrupted by a riot centred on the street which erupted on 25 February 2006. A protest against a planned Loyalist march degenerated into vandalism and looting, with building materials from the works in progress being used as weapons and for smashing windows and fixtures.

O'Connell Street has been designated an Architectural Conservation Area and an Area of Special Planning Control. This means that no buildings can be altered without Dublin City Council's permission, and fast food outlets, takeaways, cafes and amusement arcades are strictly controlled.

In June 2015, Clerys suddenly closed after it was bought out by investment group Natrium Ltd, with the loss of over 400 jobs. In 2019, plans were announced to turn the premises into a four-star hotel.

The street is used as the main route of the annual St. Patrick's Day Parade, and as the setting for the 1916 Commemoration every Easter Sunday. It also serves as a major bus route artery through the city centre. The modern tram, the Luas, has undergone an extension and trams now run once again through O'Connell Street. It only travels in one direction, the return loop, to link the system at St. Stephen's Green, runs via Marlborough Street, parallel with and east of O'Connell Street.

Flora and fauna
In his 1937 book "The Way That I Went", Irish naturalist Robert Lloyd Praeger noted that "undoubtedly the most interesting zoological feature that Dublin has to offer is the Wagtail roost on O'Connell Street". Early in the winter of 1929, a number of pied wagtails settled in a London plane tree on the north side of Nelson's Pillar. The next autumn, approximately two thousand of the same species of bird re-appeared, occupying three or four adjacent trees in the same area. Praeger noted that "...so large a colony in such apparently unsuitable surroundings is remarkable".

Statues

Current and former monuments on O'Connell Street from south to north include:

Daniel O'Connell: designed and sculpted by John Henry Foley and completed by his assistant Thomas Brock. Construction began in 1866 and the monument was unveiled in 1883.

William Smith O'Brien: by Thomas Farrell. Originally erected in 1870 on an island at the O'Connell Bridge entrance to D'Olier Street, it was moved to O'Connell Street in 1929.

Sir John Gray: by Thomas Farrell. Both the plinth and statue were carved entirely of white Sicilian marble, it was unveiled in 1879. Gray was the proprietor of the Freeman's Journal newspaper and as a member of Dublin Corporation was responsible for the construction of the Dublin water supply system based on the Vartry Reservoir.

James Larkin: by Oisín Kelly. A bronze statue atop a Wicklow granite plinth, the monument was unveiled in 1980.

Anna Livia: by Eamonn O'Doherty. Constructed in granite and unveiled on 17 June 1988, it became quickly known for its nickname "The Floosy in the Jacuzzi". It was removed in 2001 as part of the reconstruction plans for O'Connell Street and moved to the Croppies' Acre Memorial Park in 2011.

Nelson's Pillar, a 36.8 m (121 ft) granite Doric column erected in 1808 in honour of Admiral Lord Nelson, formerly stood at the centre of the street on the site of the present-day Spire of Dublin. Blown up by republican activists in 1966, the site remained vacant until the erection of the Spire in 2003.

Father Theobald Mathew: by Mary Redmond. The foundation stone was laid in 1890, and the monument was unveiled in 1893. In 2016, the statue was removed to cater for the Luas tram extension to the north of the city. It was restored in 2018 to a new location near The Spire.

Charles Stewart Parnell: Parnell Monument by Irish-American sculptor Augustus Saint-Gaudens. The 37 ft high obelisk sits on a Galway granite pylon, was organised by John Redmond and paid for through public subscription and unveiled in 1911 at the junction with Parnell Street, just south of Parnell Square.

title: O'Connell Street


text:
Spire of Dublin

The Spire of Dublin, alternatively titled the Monument of Light (An Túr Solais), is a large, stainless steel, pin-like monument 120 m in height, located on the site of the former Nelson's Pillar (and prior to that a statue of William Blakeney) on O'Connell Street, the main thoroughfare of Dublin, Ireland.

History
Following the bombing of Nelson's Pillar by former IRA members in 1966, and subsequent controlled demolition six days later of what was left, the site remained vacant for years as no decision could be reached on a suitable replacement. Eventually, the Anna Livia monument was installed on the site to celebrate the 1988 Dublin Millennium celebrations.

In 1998, as part of a planned multi-million euro re-development of O'Connell Street (as well as a memorial to the upcoming millennium and the aspirations of Ireland in the midst of its Celtic Tiger economic boom), a competition was launched to find a replacement for Nelson's Pillar. O'Connell Street had been in decline for a number of years due to the proliferation of fast-food restaurants, the opening of bargain shops using cheap plastic shop fronts, and proliferation of derelict sites along both sides of the road. The re-development plan, which was aimed for completion by 2004, hoped to move the street "away from the image of fast-food restaurants, to (that of) a 'family' place to go". As part of the project to improve the overall streetscape, a new granite plaza was promised and the number of trees in the central reservation, which had overgrown and obscured views and monuments, was reduced dramatically. This was controversial, as the trees had been growing for a century. Statues were cleaned and in some cases relocated. Shop owners were required to replace plastic signage and frontage with more attractive designs. Traffic was re-directed where possible away from the street and the number of traffic lanes was reduced to make it more appealing to pedestrians. The centrepiece of this regeneration was to be the replacement monument for Nelson's Pillar.

The Spire, or Spire of Light, was chosen from a large number of submissions in an international competition by a committee chaired by the Lord Mayor of Dublin, Joe Doyle. Following an appeal by an objector, the plans were taken to the High Court, meaning that the monument was not ready for the Millennium celebrations in the year 2000. On 28 December 2000, after an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) had been carried out, Environment Minister Noel Dempsey announced that construction of the Monument of Light, or The Spike, had been approved and that construction of the monument would take nineteen months to complete. The announcement constituted a defeat for An Taisce, Ireland's non-governmental organisation active in the areas of the environment and built heritage, which had called for the spire's height to be reduced. Dempsey noted that Dublin Corporation had previously failed to complete an EIS in its haste to complete the monument quickly.

The spire was designed by Ian Ritchie of Ian Ritchie Architects, who sought an "Elegant and dynamic simplicity bridging art and technology". The contract was awarded to SIAC-Radley JV and it was manufactured by Radley Engineering of Dungarvan, County Waterford, and erected by SIAC Construction Ltd & GDW Engineering Ltd. The Anna Livia monument was eventually moved away to make room for the Spire in 2001.

In December 2015, to coincide with the Irish premier of Star Wars: The Force Awakens, a large temporary Lightsaber hilt was installed at the base of the Spire to light the Spire blue at night.

In May 2024, The Portal was opened. It creates a visual bridge connecting Dublin and New York with a live videostream of The Spire shown to New Yorkers, while the portal in New York is broadcast from the Flatiron Building.

Construction
The first section was installed on 18 December 2002. Construction of the sculpture was delayed because of difficulty in obtaining planning permission and environmental regulations. The Spire consists of eight hollow stainless steel cone sections, the longest being 20 m, which were installed on 21 January 2003. It is an elongated cone of diameter 3 m at the base, narrowing to 15 cm at the top. The total weight of the eight sections amounts to 133.15 tonnes. It features two tuned mass dampers inside the fifth section from the bottom, designed by engineers Arup, to counteract sway. The steel underwent shot peening to alter the quality of light reflected from it.

The pattern around the base of the Spire is based on a core sample of rock formation taken from the ground where the spire stands and the DNA double helix. The pattern was applied by bead blasting the steel through rubber stencil masks whose patterns were created by water jet cutting based on core sample drawings supplied by the contractor. The design around the 10 m lower part of the Spire was created by the architects making a 3D pattern model combining the core sample and double helix and then digitally translated to a 2D image drawing supplied to the contractor and used by specialists for cutting the masking material.

At dusk, the base of the monument is lit and the top 10 m is illuminated through 11,884 holes through which light-emitting diodes shine.

Reception
Some opposition initially greeted the monument. Supporters compare it to other initially unpopular urban structures such as the Eiffel Tower, while detractors complain that the Spire has little architectural or cultural connection to the city. Irish intellectual Desmond Fennell believed that the Spire symbolised Ireland's diminishing sense of nationhood, writing that 'on reflection [on the Spire], I recognised that it was at least an honest statement of the Republic's state of mind after its prudent self-effacement during the Northern War and during the past-effacing enrichment of the Celtic Tiger boom. It stood for, represented, and said nothing."

Complaints were also aired about the danger posed by the monument to low-flying aircraft, as well as the absence of a Christian message. It has inspired a number of nicknames, as is common with public art in Dublin, including the stiletto in the ghetto, the pin in the bin, the stiffy by the Liffey,   the spire in the mire,   or the spike.

Award nominations
The monument has been nominated for the following awards:
 * 2003 British Construction Industry International Award finalist
 * 2004 RIBA National Award & Stirling Prize shortlist
 * 2005 Mies Van der Rohe Prize list

title: Spire of Dublin


text:
Fraktur

Fraktur is a calligraphic hand of the Latin alphabet and any of several blackletter typefaces derived from this hand. It is designed such that the beginnings and ends of the individual strokes that make up each letter will be clearly visible, and often emphasized; in this way it is often contrasted with the curves of the Antiqua (common) typefaces where the letters are designed to flow and strokes connect together in a continuous fashion. The word "Fraktur" derives from Latin frāctūra ("a break"), built from frāctus, passive participle of frangere ("to break"), which is also the root for the English word "fracture". In non-professional contexts, the term "Fraktur" is sometimes misused to refer to all blackletter typefaces – while Fraktur typefaces do fall under that category, not all blackletter typefaces exhibit the Fraktur characteristics described above.

Fraktur was often characterized as "the German typeface", as it remained popular in Germany and much of Eastern Europe far longer than elsewhere. In Germany, utilizing more modern typefaces would prove controversial until 1941, when the Nazi government rendered any transition involuntary by banning the use of Fraktur typefaces.

Characteristics
Besides the 26 letters of the ISO basic Latin alphabet, Fraktur usually includes the Eszett $⟨ß⟩$ in the $⟨ſʒ⟩$ form, vowels with umlauts, and the long s $⟨ſ⟩$. Some Fraktur typefaces also include a variant form of the letter r known as the r rotunda, and many include a variety of ligatures which are left over from cursive handwriting and have rules for their use. Most older Fraktur typefaces make no distinction between the majuscules $⟨I⟩$ and $⟨J⟩$ (where the common shape is more suggestive of a $⟨J⟩$), even though the minuscules $⟨i⟩$ and $⟨j⟩$ are differentiated.

One difference between the Fraktur and other blackletter scripts is that in the lower case $⟨o⟩$, the left part of the bow is broken, but the right part is not. In Danish texts composed in Fraktur, the letter $⟨ø⟩$ was already preferred to the German and Swedish $⟨ö⟩$ in the 16th century.

In the Latvian variant of Fraktur, used mainly until the 1920s, there are additional characters used to denote Latvian letters with diacritical marks. Stroked letters $⟨Ꞡ ꞡ⟩$, $⟨Ꞣ ꞣ⟩$, $⟨Ł ł⟩$, $⟨Ꞥ ꞥ⟩$, $⟨Ꞧ ꞧ⟩$ are used for palatalized consonants ($⟨Ģ ģ⟩$, $⟨Ķ ķ⟩$, $⟨Ļ ļ⟩$, $⟨Ņ ņ⟩$, $⟨Ŗ ŗ⟩$) stroked variants of $⟨s⟩$ and $⟨ſ⟩$ distinguish voiced and unvoiced sibilants or affricates ($⟨S ſ⟩$ for voiced [z], $⟨Ꞩ ẜ⟩$ for unvoiced [s], $⟨ſch⟩$ [ž] / $⟨ẜch⟩$ [š], $⟨dſch⟩$ [dž] / $⟨tẜsch⟩$ [č]), while accents ($⟨à⟩$, $⟨â⟩$, $⟨ê⟩$, $⟨î⟩$, $⟨ô⟩$, $⟨û⟩$) together with digraphs ($⟨ah⟩$, $⟨eh⟩$ etc.) are used for long vowels ($⟨Ā ā⟩$, $⟨Ē ē⟩$, $⟨Ī ī⟩$, $⟨Ō ō⟩$, $⟨Ū ū⟩$). Stroked variants of $⟨s⟩$ are also used in pre-1950 Sorbian orthography.

Origin
The first Fraktur typeface arose in the early 16th century, when Emperor Maximilian I commissioned the design of the Triumphal Arch woodcut by Albrecht Dürer and had a new typeface created specifically for this purpose, designed by Hieronymus Andreae. Fraktur types for printing were established by the Augsburg publisher Johann Schönsperger at the issuance of a series of Maximilian's works such as his Prayer Book (Gebetbuch, 1513) or the illustrated Theuerdank poem (1517).

Fraktur quickly overtook the earlier Schwabacher and Textualis typefaces in popularity, and a wide variety of Fraktur fonts were carved and became common in the German-speaking world and areas under German influence (Scandinavia, Estonia, Latvia, Central Europe). In the 18th century, the German Theuerdank Fraktur was further developed by the Leipzig typographer Johann Gottlob Immanuel Breitkopf to create the typeset Breitkopf Fraktur. While over the succeeding centuries, most Central Europeans switched to Antiqua, German speakers remained a notable holdout.

Use

Typesetting in Fraktur was still very common in the early 20th century in all German-speaking countries and areas, as well as in Norway, Estonia, and Latvia, and was still used to a very small extent in Sweden, Finland and Denmark, even though other countries typeset in Antiqua. Some books at that time used related blackletter fonts such as Schwabacher; however, the predominant typeface was the Normalfraktur, which came in slight variations.

From the late 18th century to the late 19th century, Fraktur was progressively replaced by Antiqua as a symbol of the classicist age and emerging cosmopolitanism in most of the countries in Europe that had previously used Fraktur. This move was hotly debated in Germany, where it was known as the Antiqua–Fraktur dispute. The shift affected mostly scientific writing in Germany, whereas most belletristic literature and newspapers continued to be printed in Fraktur.

The Fraktur typefaces remained in use in Nazi Germany, when they were initially represented as true German script; official Nazi documents and letterheads employed the font, and the cover of Hitler's Mein Kampf used a hand-drawn version of it. However, more modernized fonts of the Gebrochene Grotesk type such as Tannenberg were in fact the most popular typefaces in Nazi Germany, especially for running text as opposed to decorative uses such as in titles. These fonts were designed in the early 20th century, mainly the 1930s, as grotesque versions of blackletter typefaces. The Nazis heavily used these fonts themselves, although the shift remained controversial; in fact, the press was at times scolded for its frequent use of "Roman characters" under "Jewish influence" and German émigrés were urged to use only "German script". On 3 January 1941, the Nazi Party ended this controversy by switching to international scripts such as Antiqua. Martin Bormann issued a circular (the "normal type decree") to all public offices which declared Fraktur (and its corollary, the Sütterlin-based handwriting) to be Judenlettern (Jewish letters) and prohibited their further use. German historian Albert Kapr has speculated that the regime viewed Fraktur as inhibiting communication in the occupied territories during World War II.

After 1941
Even with the abolition of Fraktur, some publications included elements of it in headlines. More often, some ligatures ch, ck from Fraktur were used in Antiqua-typed editions up to the offset type period. Fraktur saw a brief resurgence after the war, but thereafter fell out of common use.

Fraktur is today used mostly for decorative typesetting: for example, a number of traditional German newspapers such as the Frankfurter Allgemeine, as well as the Norwegian Aftenpoſten, still print their name in Fraktur on the masthead (as indeed do some newspapers in other European countries and the U.S.) and it is also popular for pub signs and the like. In this modern decorative use, the traditional rules about the use of long s and short $⟨s⟩$ and of ligatures are often disregarded.

Individual Fraktur letters are sometimes used in mathematics, which often denotes associated or parallel concepts by the same letter in different fonts. For example, a Lie group is often denoted by G, while its associated Lie algebra is $$\mathfrak{g}$$. A ring ideal might be denoted by $$\mathfrak{a}$$ (or $$\mathfrak{p}$$ if a prime ideal) while an element is $$a \in \mathfrak{a}$$. The Fraktur $$\mathfrak c$$ is also sometimes used to denote the cardinality of the continuum, that is, the cardinality of the real line. In model theory, $$\mathfrak{A}$$ is used to denote an arbitrary model, with A as its universe.

Fraktur is still used among traditional Anabaptists to print German texts, while Kurrent is used as hand writing for German texts. Groups that use both forms of traditional German script are the Amish, Old Order Mennonites, Hutterites, and traditional Plautdietsch-speaking Mennonites who live mostly in Latin America today.

Typeface samples

In the figures below, the German sentence that appears after the names of the fonts (Walbaum-Fraktur in Fig. 1 and Humboldtfraktur in Fig. 2 reads, Victor jagt zwölf Boxkämpfer quer über den Sylter Deich. It means "Victor chases twelve boxers across the Sylt dike" and contains all 26 letters of the alphabet plus the umlauted glyphs used in German, making it an example of a pangram.

Unicode
Unicode does not encode Fraktur as a separate script. Instead, Fraktur is considered a "presentation form" of the Latin alphabet. Thus, the additional ligatures that are required for Fraktur typefaces will not be encoded in Unicode: support for these ligatures is a font engineering issue left up to font developers.

There are, however, two sets of Fraktur symbols in the Unicode blocks of Mathematical Alphanumeric Symbols, Letterlike Symbols, and Latin Extended-E. The long s, ß, and the umlauted vowels are not encoded, as the characters are meant to be used in mathematics and phonetics, so they are not suitable for typesetting German-language texts.

 * 𝔄 𝔅 ℭ 𝔇 𝔈 𝔉 𝔊 ℌ ℑ 𝔍 𝔎 𝔏 𝔐 𝔑 𝔒 𝔓 𝔔 ℜ 𝔖 𝔗 𝔘 𝔙 𝔚 𝔛 𝔜 ℨ
 * 𝔞 𝔟 𝔠 𝔡 𝔢 𝔣 𝔤 𝔥 𝔦 𝔧 𝔨 𝔩 𝔪 𝔫 𝔬 𝔭 𝔮 𝔯 𝔰 𝔱 𝔲 𝔳 𝔴 𝔵 𝔶 𝔷
 * 𝕬 𝕭 𝕮 𝕯 𝕰 𝕱 𝕲 𝕳 𝕴 𝕵 𝕶 𝕷 𝕸 𝕹 𝕺 𝕻 𝕼 𝕽 𝕾 𝕿 𝖀 𝖁 𝖂 𝖃 𝖄 𝖅
 * 𝖆 𝖇 𝖈 𝖉 𝖊 𝖋 𝖌 𝖍 𝖎 𝖏 𝖐 𝖑 𝖒 𝖓 𝖔 𝖕 𝖖 𝖗 𝖘 𝖙 𝖚 𝖛 𝖜 𝖝 𝖞 𝖟

LaTeX
LaTeX does not use Unicode to typeset letters in fraktur: it has its own method. The command used to specify fraktur is \mathfrak{◌}.

For example, \mathfrak{Fraktur} produces $$\mathfrak{Fraktur}$$. Or, in a real example, "Given ideals $\mathfrak{a}, \mathfrak{b}$ of a commutative ring R, the R-annihilator of $(\mathfrak{b} + \mathfrak{a})/\mathfrak{a}$ is an ideal of R called the ideal quotient of $\mathfrak{a}$ by $\mathfrak{b}$ and is denoted by $(\mathfrak{a} : \mathfrak{b})$; it is an instance of idealizer in commutative algebra."

title: Fraktur


text:
Haram (site)

Haram (حَرَم) is one of several similar words originating from the triliteral Semitic root Ḥ-R-M. The word literally means "sanctuary," commonly used by Muslims to refer to Al-Masjid Al-Haram and Prophet Mohammad's Mosque. There are certain rules which Muslims within these two areas must follow.

Another meaning of the word which was used in the past but has since fallen out of use, include an "inviolable/protected zone," referring to an area in which the number of residing families was limited, attributed to the idea of carrying capacity and early forms of nature reserves, and to the prayer hall of the mosque.

Etymology
The Arabic language has two separate words, ḥaram (حَرَم) and ḥarām (حَرَام) both derived from the same triliteral Semitic root Ḥ-R-M. Both of these words can mean "forbidden" and/or "sacred" in a general way, but each has also developed some specialized meanings (ḥarām most often means "forbidden by law" ). A third related word derived from the same root, that is ḥarīm (حَرِيْم), most directly corresponds to English "harem". This article covers the word ḥaram (with short vowels in the singular form).

Protected zone

As used in Islamic urban planning, the word ḥaram means "inviolate zone", an important aspect of urban planning in Muslim civilization. Such protected areas were sanctuaries, or places where contending parties could settle disputes peacefully. Towns were usually built near a river which provided drinking and domestic water (upstream) and carried away waste and sewage (downstream). Muslims claim to have introduced the idea of carrying capacity, and clearly sometimes did limit the number of families in any given town. The harams were typically positioned to ensure access to parkland and nature (which were given another name, hima), to restrict urban sprawl, protect water-courses and watersheds and oases. In this respect the rules strongly resembled modern zoning laws, with the same purposes.

The distinction between haram and hima is thought by some modern scholars to have been necessary due to a different means of deciding which regions were to have restrictions - the selection of haram was considered to be more up to the community while the selection of hima had more to do with natural characteristics of the region, which were considered to be best respected by jurists. This idea probably arises from two different obligations of the Muslim to respect the ijmaʿ (consensus of neighbors within Islam) and practice Khilafah (Stewardship of nature under Allah). It may or may not reflect actual means of decision making historically. As a protected and inviolate zone, haram is also employed referring to the consecrated space in a mosque where rituals and prayer take place: it is the prayer hall.

Holy site
Ḥaram can also mean a site of high sanctity. The two sites whose Islamic sanctity are unchallengeably the highest of all are Al-Masjid al-Haram in Mecca (which is called Ḥaraman Āminan (حَرَمًا آمِنًا, "Sanctuary (which is) Secure") in the Quran (28:57; 29:67 ), and the Prophet's Mosque in Medina, so the Arabic dual form al-ḥaramān (ٱلْحَرَمَان) or al-ḥaramayn (ٱلْحَرَمَيْن) refers to these two places, both of which are in the Hejazi region of the Arabian Peninsula. Since 1986, the Saudi monarchy has disclaimed all royal titles except "Custodian of the Two Holy Sanctuaries" or "Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques" (خَادِم ٱلْحَرَمَيْن ٱلشَّرِيْفَيْن).

In addition, the term ḥaram is commonly used to refer to certain other holy sites, such as the Masjid Al-Aqsa (ٱلْحَرَم ٱلشَّرِيْف) in Jerusalem — though over the protests of some, such as Ibn Taymiyyah, who declared that the only places which could be legitimately called "ḥaram" were Mecca, Medina, and probably also the valley of Wajj in Taif, thus rejecting other places like Hebron and even Jerusalem. In fact, one of the Islamic names of Jerusalem, thālith al-ḥaramayn (ثَالِث ٱلْحَرَمَيْن, literally "the third of the two holy places") resolves the tension between the unchallengeable pre-eminence of Mecca and Medina versus the desire to recognize Jerusalem as having a special status in Islam in a somewhat paradoxical manner. Jerusalem, being home to Masjid Al-Aqsa (one of the few mosques that are mentioned by name in the Quran, and consequently one of the most important mosques) is normally seen as being holy in its own right.

title: Haram (site)


text:
Hima (environmental protection)

A ḥima (حمى ḥima), meaning "inviolate zone" or "private pasture", refers to an area set aside for the conservation of natural capital, typically fields, wildlife and forests - contrast ḥaram, which defines an area protected for more immediate human purposes.

Background
According to the Quran, a Muslim has a specific obligation to practice stewardship over nature, and each species of animals is said to be "its own nation". "Human beings are God's representatives on earth. This means that if they are not charged with maintaining the world, or rending to it, they must at least not destroy it".

The selection of ḥimas was thus a religious rather than community obligation, and was often undertaken by the ulema.

There are five types of ḥima:
 * 1) areas where grazing of domestic animals is prohibited
 * 2) areas where grazing is restricted to certain seasons
 * 3) beekeeping reserves where grazing is restricted during flowering
 * 4) forest areas where cutting of trees is forbidden
 * 5) reserves managed for the welfare of a particular village, town or tribe (see also ḥaram, although that term usually refers more to water protection measures)

There are good examples of ḥima in the Middle East, some adopted by the Islamic prophet, Muhammad.

In The Hadiths
Directly referenced is Sahih Al-Bukhari, Vol. 1, Hadith No. 49, stating: Narrated An-Nu'man bin Bashir: I heard Allah's Messenger (pbuh) saying, "Both legal and illegal things are evident but in between them are doubtful (unclear) things, and most of the people have no knowledge about them. So whoever saves himself from these unclear things, he saves his religion and his honor. And whoever indulges in these unclear things is like a shepherd who grazes (his animals) near the Hima (the private pasture) of someone else, and at any moment he is liable to get in it. (O people!) Beware! Every king has a Hima and the Hima of Allah (SwtA) on earth is His illegal things (ie, His forbidden things). Beware! There is a piece of flesh in the body if it becomes good (ie, reformed), the whole body becomes good, but if it gets spoiled, the whole body gets spoiled and that is the heart."

title: Hima (environmental protection)


text:
Navigation Acts

The Navigation Acts, or more broadly the Acts of Trade and Navigation, were a long series of English laws that developed, promoted, and regulated English ships, shipping, trade, and commerce with other countries and with its own colonies. The laws also regulated England's fisheries and restricted foreign—including Scottish and Irish—participation in its colonial trade. While based on earlier precedents, they were first enacted in 1651 under the Commonwealth.

The system was reenacted and broadened with the Restoration by the Navigation Act 1660, and further developed and tightened by the Navigation Acts of 1663, 1673, and 1696. Upon this basis during the 18th century, the Acts were modified by subsequent amendments, changes, and the addition of enforcement mechanisms and staff. Additionally, a major change in the very purpose of the Acts in the 1760s—that of generating a colonial revenue, rather than only regulating the Empire's trade—would help lead to major rebellions, and significant changes in the implementation of the Acts themselves.

The Acts generally prohibited the use of foreign ships, required the employment of English and colonial mariners for 75% of the crews, including East India Company ships. The Acts prohibited colonies from exporting specific, enumerated, products to countries other than Britain and those countries' colonies, and mandated that imports be sourced only through Britain.

Overall, the Acts formed the basis for English (and later) British overseas trade for nearly 200 years, but with the development and gradual acceptance of free trade, the Acts were eventually repealed in 1849. The laws reflected the European economic theory of mercantilism which sought to keep all the benefits of trade inside their respective Empires, and to minimize the loss of gold and silver, or profits, to foreigners through purchases and trade. The system would develop with the colonies supplying raw materials for British industry, and in exchange for this guaranteed market, the colonies would purchase manufactured goods from or through Britain.

The major impetus for the first Navigation Act was the ruinous deterioration of English trade in the aftermath of the Eighty Years' War, and the associated lifting of the Spanish embargoes on trade between the Spanish Empire and the Dutch Republic. The end of the embargoes in 1647 unleashed the full power of the Amsterdam Entrepôt and other Dutch competitive advantages in European and world trade. Within a few years, English merchants had practically been overwhelmed in the Baltic and North sea trade, as well as trade with the Iberian Peninsula, the Mediterranean and the Levant. Even the trade with English colonies (partly still in the hands of the royalists, as the English Civil War was in its final stages and the Commonwealth of England had not yet imposed its authority throughout the English colonies) was "engrossed" by Dutch merchants. English direct trade was crowded out by a sudden influx of commodities from the Levant, Mediterranean and the Spanish and Portuguese empires, and the West Indies via the Dutch entrepôt, carried in Dutch ships and for Dutch account.

The obvious solution seemed to be to seal off the English markets to these unwanted imports. A precedent was the Act the Greenland Company had obtained from Parliament in 1645 prohibiting the import of whale products into England, except in ships owned by that company. This principle was now generalized. In 1648 the Levant Company petitioned Parliament for the prohibition of imports of Turkish goods "...from Holland and other places but directly from the places of their growth." Baltic traders added their voices to this chorus. In 1650 the Standing Council for Trade and the Council of State of the Commonwealth prepared a general policy designed to impede the flow of Mediterranean and colonial commodities via Holland and Zeeland into England.

Following the 1696 act, the Acts of Trade and Navigation were generally obeyed, except for the Molasses Act 1733, which led to extensive smuggling because no effective means of enforcement was provided until the 1760s. Stricter enforcement under the Sugar Act 1764 became one source of resentment among merchants in the American colonies towards Great Britain. This, in turn, helped push the American colonies to rebel in the late 18th century, even though the consensus view among modern economic historians and economists is that the "costs imposed on [American] colonists by the trade restrictions of the Navigation Acts were small."

Historical precedents
Some principles of English mercantile legislation pre-date both the passage of the Navigation Act 1651 and the settlement of England's early foreign possessions. A 1381 Act passed under King Richard II provided "that, to increase the navy of England, no goods or merchandises shall be either exported or imported, but only in ships belonging to the King's subjects." The letters patent granted to the Cabots by Henry VII in 1498 stipulated that the commerce resulting from their discoveries must be with England (specifically Bristol). Henry VIII established a second principle by statute: that such a vessel must be English-built and a majority of the crew must be English-born. Legislation during the reign of Elizabeth I also dealt with these questions and resulted in a large increase in English merchant shipping. Soon after actual settlements had been made in America, these early requirements illustrate the English theory then held regarding the governmental control of maritime commerce.

With the establishment of overseas colonies a distinct colonial policy began to develop, and the principles embodied in the early Navigation and Trade Acts also had some more immediate precedents in the provisions of the charters granted to the London and Plymouth Company, in the various royal patents later bestowed by Charles I and Charles II, as well as in the early regulations concerning the tobacco trade, the first profitable colonial export. An Order in Council of 24 October 1621 prohibited the Virginia colony to export tobacco and other commodities to foreign countries. The London Company lost its charter in 1624; the same year a proclamation, followed by Orders in Council, prohibited the use of foreign ships for the Virginia tobacco trade. These early companies held the monopoly on trade with their plantation; this meant that the commerce developed was to be England's. The Crown's purpose was to restrict to England the future commerce with America; it is well shown in the patent granted by Charles I to William Berkeley in 1639, by which the patentee was "to oblige the masters of vessels, freighted with productions of the colony, to give bond before their departure to bring same into England ... and to forbid all trade with foreign vessels, except upon necessity."

As early as 1641 some English merchants urged that these rules be embodied in an act of Parliament, and during the Long Parliament, movement began in that direction. The Ordinance for Free Trade with the plantations in New England was passed in November 1644. In 1645, both to conciliate the colonies and to encourage English shipping, the Long Parliament prohibited the shipment of whalebone, except in English-built ships; they later prohibited the importation of French wine, wool, and silk from France. More generally and significantly on 23 January 1647, they passed the Ordinance granting privileges for the encouragement of Adventurers to plantations in Virginia, Bermudas, Barbados, and other places of America; it enacted that for three years no export duty be levied on goods intended for the colonies, provided they were forwarded in English vessels. Adam Anderson noted that this law also included "security being given here, and certificates from thence, that the said goods be really exported thither, and for the only use of the said plantations". He concluded: "Hereby the foundation was laid for the navigation acts afterward, which may be justly termed the Commercial Palladium of Britain."

The English were well aware of their inferior competitive trading position. Three acts of the Rump Parliament in 1650 and 1651 are notable in the historical development of England's commercial and colonial programs. These include the first Commission of Trade to be established by an Act of Parliament on 1 August 1650, to advance and regulate the nation's trade. The instructions to the named commissioners included consideration of both domestic and foreign trade, the trading companies, manufacturers, free ports, customs, excise, statistics, coinage and exchange, and fisheries, but also the plantations and the best means of promoting their welfare and rendering them useful to England. This act's statesmanlike and comprehensive instructions were followed by the October act prohibiting trade with pro-royalist colonies and the first Navigation Act the following October. These acts formed the first definitive expression of England's commercial policy. They represent the first attempt to establish a legitimate control of commercial and colonial affairs, and the instructions indicate the beginnings of a policy which had the prosperity and wealth of England exclusively at heart. The 1650 Act prohibiting trade with royalist colonies was broader, however, because it provided that all foreign ships were prohibited from trading with any English plantations, without license, and it was made lawful to seize and make prizes of any ships violating the act. This Act, sometimes referred to as the Navigation Act 1650, was hastily passed as a war measure during the English Civil Wars, but it was followed by a more carefully conceived Navigation Act 1651 the following year.

Navigation Act 1651
The Navigation Act 1651, long titled An Act for increase of Shipping, and Encouragement of the Navigation of this Nation, was passed on 9 October 1651 by the Rump Parliament led by Oliver Cromwell. It authorized the Commonwealth to regulate England's international trade, as well as the trade with its colonies. It reinforced long-standing principles of national policy that English trade and fisheries should be carried in English vessels.

The Act banned foreign ships from transporting goods from Asia, Africa or America to England or its colonies; only ships with an English owner, master and a majority English crew would be accepted. It allowed European ships to import their own products, but banned foreign ships from transporting goods to England from a third country elsewhere in the European sphere. The Act also prohibited the import and export of salted fish in foreign ships, and penalized foreign ships carrying fish and wares between English posts. Breaking the terms of the act would result in the forfeiture of the ship and its cargo. These rules specifically targeted the Dutch, who controlled much of Europe's international trade and even much of England's coastal shipping. It excluded the Dutch from essentially all direct trade with England, as the Dutch economy was competitive with, not complementary to the English, and the two countries, therefore, exchanged few commodities. This Anglo-Dutch trade, however, constituted only a small fraction of total Dutch trade flows.

Passage of the act was a reaction to the failure of the English diplomatic mission (led by Oliver St John and Walter Strickland) to The Hague seeking a political union of the Commonwealth with the Republic of the Seven United Netherlands, after the States of Holland had made some cautious overtures to Cromwell to counter the monarchical aspirations of stadtholder William II of Orange. The stadtholder had suddenly died, however, and the States were now embarrassed by Cromwell taking the idea too seriously. The English proposed the joint conquest of all remaining Spanish and Portuguese possessions. England would take America and the Dutch would take Africa and Asia. But the Dutch had just ended their war with Spain and already taken over most Portuguese colonies in Asia, so they saw little advantage in this grandiose scheme and proposed a free trade agreement as an alternative to a full political union. This again was unacceptable to the English, who would be unable to compete on such a level playing field, and was seen by them as a deliberate affront. The Act is often mentioned as a major cause of the First Anglo-Dutch War, and though there were others, it was only part of a larger English policy to engage in war after the negotiations had failed. The English naval victories in 1653 (the Battles of Portland, the Gabbard and Scheveningen) showed the supremacy of the Commonwealth navy in home waters. However, farther afield the Dutch predominated and were able to close down English commerce in the Baltic and the Mediterranean. Both countries held each other in a stifling embrace.

The Treaty of Westminster (1654) ended the impasse. The Dutch failed to have the Act repealed or amended, but it seems to have had relatively little influence on their trade. The Act offered England only limited solace. It could not limit the deterioration of England's overseas trading position, except in the cases where England herself was the principal consumer, such as the Canaries wine trade and the trade in Puglian olive oil. In the trade with America and the West Indies, the Dutch kept up a flourishing "smuggling" trade, thanks to the preference of English planters for Dutch import goods and the better deal the Dutch offered in the sugar trade. The Dutch colony of New Netherlands offered a loophole (through intercolonial trade) wide enough to drive a shipload of Virginian tobacco through.

Post-Restoration Navigation Acts to 1696
Like all laws of the Commonwealth period, the 1651 act was declared void on the Restoration of Charles II, having been passed by 'usurping powers'. Nonetheless, with benefits of the act widely recognized, Parliament soon passed new legislation which enlarged its scope. While the act of 1651 applied only to shipping, or the ocean carrying business, the 1660 act was the most important piece of commercial legislation as it related to shipbuilding, to navigation, to trade, and to the benefit of the merchant class. The 1660 act is generally considered to be the basis of the "Navigation Acts", which (with later amendments, additions and exceptions) remained in force for nearly two centuries. The navigation acts entitled colonial shipping and seamen to enjoy the full benefits of the otherwise exclusively English provisions. "English bottoms" included vessels built in English plantations, particularly in America. There were no restrictions put in the way of English colonists who might wish to build or trade in their own ships to foreign plantations or other European countries besides England, provided they did not violate the enumerated commodity clause. Some of the most important products of colonial America, including grain of all sorts and the fisheries of New England, were always non-enumerated commodities.

Navigation Act 1660
The Navigation Act 1660 (12 Cha. 2. c. 18), long-titled An Act for the Encourageing and increasing of Shipping and Navigation, was passed on 13 September by the Convention Parliament and confirmed by the Cavalier Parliament on 27 July 1661. The act broadened and strengthened restrictions under Cromwell's earlier act. Colonial imports and exports were now restricted to ships "as doe truly and without fraud belong onely to the people of England ... or are of the built of and belonging to" any of the English possessions. Additionally, ships' crews now had to be 75% English, rather than just a majority, and ship captains were required to post a bond to ensure compliance and could recoup the funds upon arrival. The penalty for non-compliance was the forfeiture of both the ship and its cargo. The act provides that violations of the navigation act were to be tried in "any court of record," but it also authorizes and strictly requires all commanders of ships of war to seize non-English ships and deliver them to the Court of Admiralty.

The act specified seven colonial products, known as "enumerated" commodities or items, that were to be shipped from the colonies only to England or other English colonies. These items were tropical or semi-tropical produce that could not be grown in the mother country, but were of higher economic value and used in English competitive manufacturing. The initial products included sugar, tobacco, cotton wool, indigo, ginger, fustic, or other dyeing woods. Previously only tobacco export had been restricted to England. Additional enumerated items would be included in subsequent navigation acts, for example the cocoa bean was added in 1672, after drinking chocolate became the fashion.

In a significant bow to English merchants and to the detriment of numerous foreign colonists, section two of the act declared that "no alien or person not born within the allegiance of our sovereign lord the King, his heirs and successors, or naturalized or made a free denizen, shall... exercise the trade or occupation of a merchant or factor in any of the said places" (i.e. lands, islands, plantations, or territories belonging to the King in Asia, Africa, or America), upon pain of forfeiting all goods and chattels.

Passage of the Navigation Act 1660 act was immediately followed by the Customs Act 1660 (12 Cha. 2. c. 19), which established how the customs duties would be collected by the government, as well as for subsidies (tunnage and poundage) for royal expenses. These acts of revenue, previously established under the Commonwealth, were similarly reauthorized with the restoration. The 1660 customs act was tightened by the Customs Act 1662 (14 Cha. 2. c. 11). It also emphatically defines "Englishmen" under the Navigation Acts: "Whereas it is required by the [Navigation Act 1660] that in sundry cases the Master and three-fourths of the Mariners are to be English, it is to be understood that any of His Majesty's Subjects of England, Ireland, and His Plantations are to be accounted English and no others."

Other acts relating to trade were passed in the same session of Parliament and reiterated previous acts. These include the Exportation Act 1660 (12 Cha. 2. c. 32), which bans the export of wool and wool-processing materials, and the Tobacco Planting and Sowing Act 1660 (12 Cha. 2. c. 34), which prohibits growing tobacco in England and Ireland. The former act was intended to encourage domestic woolen manufacturing by increasing the availability of domestic raw materials; the latter act was passed to limit competition with the colonies and protect the plantations' main crop, as well as to protect this regulated royal revenue stream. With the kingdoms of England and Scotland still separate, passage of the English act lead to the passage of a similar navigation act by the Parliament of Scotland. After the Act of Union 1707, Scottish ships, merchants, and mariners enjoyed the same privileges.

Navigation Act 1663
The Navigation Act 1663 (15 Cha. 2. c. 7), long-titled An Act for the Encouragement of Trade, also termed the Encouragement of Trade Act 1663 or the Staple Act, was passed on 27 July. This strengthening of the navigation system now required all European goods, bound for America and other colonies, had to be trans-shipped through England first. In England, the goods would be unloaded, inspected, approved, duties paid, and finally, reloaded for the destination. This trade had to be carried in English vessels ("bottoms") or those of its colonies. Furthermore, imports of the 'enumerated' commodities (such as tobacco and cotton) had to be landed and taxes paid before continuing to other countries. "England", as used here, includes Wales and Berwick-upon-Tweed, though those places were little involved in colonial trade. The mercantile purpose of the act was to make England the staple for all European products bound for the colonies, and to prevent the colonies from establishing an independent import trade. This mandated change increased shipping times and costs, which in turn, increased the prices paid by the colonists. Due to these increases, some exemptions were allowed; these included salt intended for the New England and Newfoundland fisheries, wine from Madeira and the Azores, and provisions, servants and horses from Scotland and Ireland.

The most important new legislation embedded in this Act, as seen from the perspective of the interests behind the East India Company, was the repeal of legislation which prohibited export of coin and bullion from England overseas. This export was the real issue behind the Act, as silver was the main export article by the East India Company into India, exchanging the silver into cheap Indian gold. This change had major implications for the East India Company, for England and for India. The majority of silver in England was exported to India, creating enormous profits for the individual participants, but depriving the Crown of England of necessary silver and taxation. Much of the silver exported was procured by English piracy directed against Spanish and Portuguese merchant ships bringing silver from their colonies in the Americas to Europe. It was later revealed that the Act passed Parliament due to enormous bribes paid by the East Indian Company to various influential members of Parliament.

An act tightening colonial trade legislation, and sometimes referred to as the Navigation Act 1670, is the Tobacco Planting and Plantation Trade Act 1670 (22 & 23 Cha. 2. c. 26). This act imposes forfeiture penalties of the ship and cargo if enumerated commodities are shipped without a bond or customs certificate, or if shipped to countries other than England, or if ships unload sugar or enumerated products in any port except in England. The act requires the governors of American plantations to report annually to customs in London a list of all ships loading any commodities there, as well as a list of all bonds taken. The act states that prosecutions for a breach of the navigation acts should be tried in the court of the high admiral of England, in any of the vice-admiralty courts, or in any court of record in England, but while the act again hints at the jurisdiction of the admiralty courts, it does not explicitly provide for them. In a move against Ireland, the act additionally repealed the ability of Ireland (in the 1660 act) to obtain the necessary bond for products shipped to overseas colonies.

The specifically anti-Dutch aspects of the early acts were in full force for a relatively short time. During the Second Anglo-Dutch War the English had to abandon the Baltic trade and allowed foreign ships to enter the coasting and plantation trade. Following the war, which ended disastrously for England, the Dutch obtained the right to ship commodities produced in their German hinterland to England as if these were Dutch goods. Even more importantly, as England accepted the concept of neutrality, it conceded the principle of "free ships make free goods" which provided freedom from molestation by the Royal Navy of Dutch shipping on the high seas during wars in which the Dutch Republic was neutral. This more or less gave the Dutch freedom to conduct their "smuggling" unhindered as long as they were not caught red-handed in territorial waters controlled by England. These provisions were reconfirmed in the Treaty of Westminster (1674) after the Third Anglo-Dutch War.

Navigation Act 1673
The so-called Navigation Act 1673 (25 Cha. 2. c. 7), long-titled An Act for the incouragement of the Greeneland and Eastland Trades, and for the better secureing the Plantation Trade became enforceable at various dates in that year; the act is short titled the Trade Act 1672. The act was intended to increase English capability and production in the northern whale fishery (more accurately in Spitsbergen), as well as in the eastern Baltic and North Sea trade, where the Dutch and Hansa dominated commerce and trade. The act also closed a significant loophole in the enumerated goods trade as a result of the active inter-colonial trade.

To promote whaling and production of its oil and whalebone etc., the act relaxed the 1660 act's restrictions on foreigners, allowing up to half the crew, if on English ships, and dropped all duties on these products for the next ten years. It also allowed foreign residents and foreigners to participate in this trade if imported to England in English ships. Colonial ships and crews engaged in this trade had to pay a low duty, with foreign ships paying a high duty. To promote the eastern trade then monopolized by the chartered and poorly performing Eastland Company, the act opened their trade with Sweden, Denmark, and Norway to foreigners and English alike. It also allowed any Englishman to be admitted into the Eastland Company on paying a minor fee. The act was a mortal blow to Eastland's royal charter.

To better secure their own plantation trade from considerable illegal indirect trade in enumerated products to Europe, by way of legal inter-colonial trade, the act instituted that customs duties and charges should be paid on departure from the colonies, if traveling without first obtaining the bond required to carry the goods to England. The purpose of the act was to stop the carrying of plantation goods to another plantation with their subsequent shipment to a foreign country on the grounds that the 1660 act's requirements had been fulfilled. This change was a considerable advance toward the systematic execution of the previous acts, and increased much needed royal revenue given the recent Stop of the Exchequer. To better collect the customs revenue the act established that these were now to be levied and collected by the Commissioners of Customs in England. Also, if a ship arrived with insufficient funds to pay the duties, customs official could accept an equivalent proportion of the goods as payment instead.

Navigation Act 1696
The so-called Navigation Act 1696 (7 & 8 Will. 3. c. 22), long-titled An Act for preventing Frauds and regulating Abuses in the Plantation Trade, became effective over in the next few years, due to its far reaching provisions; the act is short-titled the Plantation Trade Act 1695. It contains new restrictions on colonial trade, and several different administrative provisions to strengthen enforcement and consolidate the earlier acts.

In tightening the wording of the 1660 act, and after noting the daily "great abuses [being] committed ... by the artifice and cunning of ill disposed persons", this act now required that no goods or merchandise could be imported, exported, or carried between English possessions in Africa, Asia and America, or shipped to England, Wales, or Berwick upon Tweed, except in "what is or shall bee of the Built of England or of the Built of Ireland or the said Colonies or Plantations and wholly owned by the People thereof ... and navigated with the Masters and Three-Fourths of the Mariners of the said Places onely". To enforce this change, the act required the registration of all ships and owners, including an oath that they have no foreign owners, before the ship would be considered English-built. Exceptions were introduced for foreign-built ships taken as prize, or those employed by the navy for importing naval stores from the plantations. The deadline for the registration of ships was extended by the Registering of Ships Act 1697 (9 Will 3 c. 42) In a significant tightening of the navigation enforcement system, section 6 of the act establishes that violations are to be tried in any of His Majesties Courts att Westminster or [in the Kingdome of Ireland or in the Court of Admiralty held in His Majesties Plantations respectively where such Offence shall bee committed att the Pleasure of the Officer or Informer or in any other Plantation belonging to any Subject of England]... Revenue generated was to be split in thirds between the King, the Governor, and the one who informed and sued.

Previously, most of the customs collection and enforcement in the colonies was performed by the governor or his appointees, commonly known as the "naval officer," but evasion, corruption and indifference were common. The 1696 act now required all current governors and officers to take an oath that all and every clause contained in the act be "punctually and bona fide observed according to the true intent and meaning". Governors nominated in the future were required to take this oath before assuming office. To tighten compliance among colonial customs officials, the act required that all current and future officers give a security bond to the Commissioners of the Customs in England to undertake the "true and faithfull performance of their duty". Additionally, the act gave colonial customs officers the same power and authority as of customs officers in England; these included the ability to board and search ships and warehouses, load and unload cargoes, and seize those imported or exported goods prohibited or those for which duties should have been paid under the acts. Commissioners of the treasury and of the customs in England would now appoint the colonial customs officials. Due to colonial "doubts or misconstructions" concerning the bond required under the 1660 act, the 1696 act now mandated that no enumerated goods could be loaded or shipped until the required bond was obtained. The act was followed by a special instruction about the oaths and proprietary governors who weren't directly under royal control to post a bond to comply; this was considered by the Board of Trade and issued on 26 May 1697.

Since the colonies previously had passed much of their own legislation and appointments, the act included several sections to tighten English control over the colonies generally. The act mandated that all colonial positions of trust in the courts or related to the treasury must be native born subjects of England, Ireland or the colonies. It also enacted that all laws, bylaws, usages or customs in current or future use in the plantations, which are found to be repugnant to the navigation acts in any way, are to be declared illegal, null and void. The act additionally declared that all persons or their heirs claiming any right or property "in any Islands or Tracts of Land upon the Continent of America by Charter or Letters Patent shall not in the future alienate, sell or dispose of any of the Islands, Tracts of Land, or Proprieties other than to the Natural Born Subjects of England, Ireland, Dominion of Wales or Town of Berwick upon Tweed without the License and Consent of His Majesty". Colonial-born subjects were not mentioned. Such a sale must be signified by a prior Order in Council.

With this act the government did start to institute admiralty courts and staff them in more and new places; this established "a more general obedience to the Acts of Trade and Navigation." John Reeves, who wrote the handbook for the Board of Trade, considered the 1696 act to be the last major navigation act, with relatively minor subsequent acts. The system established by this act, and upon previous acts, was where the Navigation Acts still stood in 1792, though there would be major policy changes followed by their reversals in the intervening years.

Molasses Act 1733
The 1733 Molasses Act levied heavy duties on the trade of sugar from the French West Indies to the American colonies, forcing the colonists to buy the more expensive sugar from the British West Indies instead. The law was widely flouted, but efforts by the British to prevent smuggling created hostility and contributed to the American Revolution. The Molasses Act was the first of the Sugar Acts. The Act was set to expire in 1763, but in 1764 it was renewed as the Sugar Act, which caused further unrest among the colonists.

Repeal
The Navigation Acts were repealed in 1849 under the influence of a free trade philosophy. The Navigation Acts were passed under the economic theory of mercantilism, under which wealth was to be increased by restricting colonial trade to the mother country rather than through free trade. By 1849 "a central part of British import strategy was to reduce the cost of food through cheap foreign imports and in this way to reduce the cost of maintaining labour power" (van Houten). Repealing the Navigation Acts along with the Corn Laws eventually served this purpose (towards the end of the century).

Effects on Britain
The Acts caused Britain's (before 1707, England's) shipping industry to develop in isolation. However, it had the advantage to British shippers of severely limiting the ability of Dutch ships to participate in the carrying trade to Britain. By reserving British colonial trade to British shipping, the Acts may have significantly assisted in the growth of London as a major entry port for American colonial wares at the expense of Dutch cities. The maintenance of a certain level of merchant shipping and of trade generally also facilitated a rapid increase in the size and quality of the Royal Navy, which eventually (after the Anglo-Dutch Alliance of 1689 limited the Dutch navy to three-fifths of the size of the English one) led to Britain becoming a global superpower, which it remained until the mid-20th century. That naval might, however, never limited Dutch trading power – because the Dutch enjoyed enough leverage over overseas markets and shipping resources (combined with a financial power that was only overtaken by Britain during the 18th century) to enable them to put enough pressure on Britain to prevent them from sustaining naval campaigns long enough to wrest maritime concessions from the Dutch.

Effects on American colonies
The Navigation Acts, while enriching Britain, caused resentment in the colonies and contributed to the American Revolution. The Navigation Acts required all of a colony's imports to be either bought from Britain or resold by British merchants in Britain, regardless of the price obtainable elsewhere. In the 1772 Gaspee affair, colonists attacked and burned a British navy ship enforcing the Navigation Acts off the coast of Rhode Island.

Historian Robert argues that the impact of the Acts on the economies of the Thirteen Colonies was minimal; the cost was about £4 per £1,000 of income per year. The average personal income was about £100 per year. However, says that although the net burden imposed by the Acts was small in size, their overall impact on the shape and growth rate of the economy was significant since the Acts differentially affected different groups, helping some and hurting others.

Walton concludes that the political friction caused by the Acts was more serious than the negative economic impact, especially since the merchants most affected were politically the most active. The Navigation Acts were also partially responsible for an increase in piracy during the late 17th and early 18th centuries: merchants and colonial officials would buy goods captured by pirates below market value, and colonial governors such as New York's Fletcher would commission privateers who openly admitted they intended to turn pirate.

points out that the political issue is what would have been the future impact of the Acts after 1776 as the colonial economy matured and was blocked by the Acts from serious competition with British manufacturers. In 1995, a random survey of 178 members of the Economic History Association found that 89 percent of economists and historians would generally agree that the "costs imposed on [American] colonists by the trade restrictions of the Navigation Acts were small."

notes that timber was not one of the "enumerated commodities" included in the Acts, and so New Englanders could continue the wine islands commerce in timber that began around 1642 without upsetting England. By the 1660s, the wine islands region, namely Madeira, was the dominant trading partner in timber with the New England colonies.

Effect on Ireland
The acts were resented in Ireland and damaged its economy, as they permitted the importation of English goods into Ireland tariff-free and simultaneously imposed tariffs on Irish exports travelling in the opposite direction. Other clauses completely prohibited the exportation of certain goods to Britain or even elsewhere, resulting in the collapse of those markets. The Wool Act 1699, for example, forbade any exports of wool from Ireland (and from the American colonies) so as to maximise the English trade.

"Free trade or a Speedy Revolution" was a slogan of the Irish Volunteers in the late 18th century.

title: Navigation Acts


text:
Talk:River Tay

All the names are River Almond, River Isla, River Braan, River Tummel, River Lyon; River Spey, River Dee and River Tweed. Note that in wikifying the page the links have incorrectly attributed the towns and villages to being in England. These towns are in Scotland.

"The main tributaries of the River Tay are the Almond, Isla, Braan, Tummel and Lyon. Like the Spey, Dee and Tweed, the Tay is a famous salmon river." I'm not qulified to provide links to these rivers mentioned here from the article. Are they the River Almond or Almond River, etc.? Could someone who knows more about these rivers fill in the appropriate links? -Frecklefoot

"The highest ever flood at Perth occurred in 1814, when *ice* the river rose 7 m above the usual level, partly caused by a blockage of ice under the Smeaton Bridge" Looks like the first "ice" here needs to be removed. - Dduck

River Tay article states it is 7th longest river in the UK but the Rivers of Great Britain article states it is 6th; anyone know which is correct? River Wye has simular problem - Carlwev 03:46, 9 December 2006 (UTC).

 * Rivers of Great Britain has only just been changed - to remove the River Aire from 6th. Finavon 14:58, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Water catchment area
This is a UK river so it is appropriate to use UK terminology - see reference 1 of Drainage basin. The full term Water catchment area might be better, and is already redirected. Finavon 21:02, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

 * "The main tributaries of the River Tay are the Rivers Almond, Isla, Earn, Shockie, Ordie, Braan, Tummel and Lyon."

 * Suggest you replace with:

The main tributaries of the River Tay are the Rivers Earn, Braan, Tummel, Almond, Isla, Shee, Garry, Tilt, Lochay, Lyon, Dochart, Fillan, Errochty, Ericht, Blackwater, Ardle, Turret, Gaur, Ruchill and Dean Water. Significant stillwaters include the Lochs Tay, Earn, Tummel, Rannoch, Laidon, Garry, Ericht, Errochty, Faskally, Dochart and Lubhair. Significant salmon producing burns include the Shochie, Ordie and Machny.

The River Tay boasts the highest flow of any river in the United Kingdom, being the equivalent of the Rivers Thames and Severn combined, as well as holding the UK record for the largest atlantic salmon salmo salar a fish of 63lb caught by Miss Ballantyne in 1922. --Taysider 17:56, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

 * Suggesting to whom? Remember, it's the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit, so go ahead. - Dudesleeper · Talk 22:17, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Bridges
I thought it might be useful to list all of the bridges that cross the Tay from its source to its mouth at the North Sea. I'm going to list those that cross it in Perth in the relevant article but I might not be able to do it here for a while, so anyone else is welcome to. - Dudesleeper · Talk 11:44, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Source
I reverted an edit today changing the source to be Ben Lui. I accidentally marked my revert as due to vandalism, whereas of course that was a good faith edit. I reverted it because it doesn't agree with the Origin article that explains how to interpret that field in the infobox. I apologise for any confusion. Merenta (talk) 19:38, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Map of the course of River Tay
Is there a decent map of the course of River Tay that we migth add to provide context for this article? N2e (talk) 23:55, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Amount of water
When I watched the programme Coast_(TV_series) on April 24 2013, a fact disclosed on this programme was that the River Tay secretes more water into the sea than the Thames and Severn combined. This is an interesting piece of information which should go in this article somewhere. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 20/w:18, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I heard the same claim on TV recently and wondered what the figures were. I was mildly surprised by the claim, but not incredulous, as the highlands of Scotland get a lot more rain (per unit area) than the south of England.  Also, the size of the Thames and Severn estuaries could be misleading, as these are enlarged by the downward movement of southern England since the last Ice Age.  Still, it would be nice to see the figures.109.148.240.136 (talk) 11:43, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Meaning of name?
Could we get some consideration of what "Tatha" means? Even if the consensus is "no-one really knows", it's a bit jarring that the history of this storied watercourse starts in the 19th century. I consulted the entry for Loch Tay on this point as well; no light there, either. Laodah 19:45, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Discharge
Where did you source the discharge information for the Tay? Please provide a source. I work for SEPA's flooding department and the highest discharge SEPA has ever measured on the Tay is just under 1500 cubic meters per second, significantly lower than what is stated here.--Colinmotox11 (talk) 20:18, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

 * Then edit the article! That's how Wikipedia works...  Catfish  Jim  and the soapdish  11:46, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

On Wikipedia, users are encouraged to post on the talk page and seek agreement before making edits such as that. Colinmotox11 (talk) 19:10, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Navigation
The transport section would logically include discussion of ship or boat movements on the river, but only ferries seem to have any mention: conversely, if there are rapids or waterfalls that inhibit such use, they too would be notable. Are there canals and locks? Diversions or dams for water mills or hydro-electric reservoirs? Historically this would have been key to commerce, defence, and migration, to name but a few. LeadSongDog come howl!  15:15, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I’m confused; you’d like to see mentions of the things the river doesn’t have? Seasider53 (talk) 16:34, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I would expect to see a statement on the extent of navigability, both by ships and by small boats. On most rivers this is limited by various obstructions, both natural and artificial. Such obstructions may in turn be artificially bypassed or removed. The construction or removal of these obstructions or bypasses are historically relevant events for the communities along a river, just as they are for bridges: access to and from the sea is access to and from the world, which in turn drives local economies. LeadSongDog come howl!  14:22, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Length
There appears to be some confusion in the article around giving the length for the river between the stated source at Ben Lui and its mouth. The coordinates in the infobox for the mouth are for its confluence with the River Earn at the western end of the Firth. Now I have painstakingly measured the length to that point and it emerges as 154km / 96 miles. The length given for the Tay in the info box is 188km / 117 miles, which would put its mouth some way east of the A92 bridge, in fact 4km east of Broughty Castle/Tayport narrows which is roughly off Fife's Tentsmuir Point. This is almost the 190km quoted for its length in the body of the article. I measure the total length to the Tay Road Bridge as 179km / 111 miles and to Tentsmuir as 187.5km / 116.5miles which ties in very closely with the quoted fugure BUT that has to be tied into the right location being described. I'd be confident of the accuracy of my figures to within better than 1%. This is of course original research on my part so cannot be included in the article but it does at least give an idea of what a true figure should look like if and when an editor finds a suitable reference out there!

The seaward end of many British rivers is taken at the county limit which in the case of the Tay would be about 156km / 97 miles from its source, to the immediate west of Mugdrum Island. If the river is considered to end at the Earn confluence or the county limit then there is perhaps no place for the material on the rail and road bridges at Dundee (beyond a brief link) as they are far to the east of the terminus of the river 'proper'. Of course it's not quite that simple and the Firth can be considered a part of the river as well as an arm of the North Sea. cheers Geopersona (talk) 20:27, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Having found a figure in 'Headwaters', I've entered that into the main body of the text and into the infobox but they convert differently and one is metric first, the other imperial first - the 'Headwaters' reference gives the figure as 193km or 120 miles. That needs sorting yet.Geopersona (talk) 09:53, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:River Tay


text:
César de Choiseul, 1st Duke of Choiseul

César de Choiseul, 1st Duke of Choiseul, comte du Plessis-Praslin (1602 – 23 December 1675) was a Marshal of France and French diplomat, generally known for the best part of his life as the maréchal (marshal) du Plessis-Praslin.

He came of an old family of Choiseul, which arose in the valley of the Upper Marne in the 10th century and divided into many branches, three of the names of which, Hostel, Praslin and du Plessis, were borne, at one time or another, by César. Entering the army at the age of fourteen as proprietary colonel of an infantry regiment, he shared in almost all the exploits of the French arms during the reign of Louis XIII. He took part in the siege of La Rochelle, survived the defence of the island of Re against the attacks of the English under the Duke of Buckingham, and accompanied the English forces to Italy in 1629.

In 1630 he became the French ambassador to the court of Duke Victor Amadeus I of Savoy, and engaged in diplomatic and administrative work in Italy until 1635, when the Franco-Spanish War broke out. In the war that followed, Plessis-Praslin distinguished himself in various battles and sieges in Italy, including the action called the "Route de Quiers" and the celebrated four-cornered operations round Turin. In 1640 he became governor of Turin, and in 1642 lieutenant-general, and after further service in Italy he became a Marshal of France (1645) and second in command in Catalonia, where he took Roses.

During the first war of the Fronde (1648–1649), he assisted Condé in the brief siege of Paris (January 1649); and in the second war of the Fronde (1650–1653), remaining loyal to the queen regent Anne of Austria and the court party, he won his greatest triumph in defeating Turenne and the allied Spaniards and rebels at Retbel (or Blanc-Champ) in 1650.

He then held high office at the court of Louis XIV, became minister of state in 1652, and in November 1665 was created duc de Choiseul. He was concerned in some of the negotiations between Louis and Charles II of England which led to the treaty of Dover (1670), and died in Paris on 23 December 1675.

Food historians generally attribute the "invention" of praline to Lassagne, officer of the table to Marechal du Plessis, duke of Choiseul-Praslin

title: César de Choiseul, 1st Duke of Choiseul