text:
Anglo-Dutch Treaty of 1824

The Anglo-Dutch Treaty of 1824, also known as the Treaty of London (Verdrag van Londen), was a treaty signed between the United Kingdom and the Netherlands in London on 17 March 1824. The treaty was to resolve disputes arising from the execution of the Anglo-Dutch Treaty of 1814. For the Dutch, it was signed by Hendrik Fagel and Anton Reinhard Falck, and for the British, George Canning and Charles Williams-Wynn.

History
The Anglo-Dutch Treaty of 1824, designed to solve issues arising from British occupation of Dutch colonial possessions during the Napoleonic Wars, as well as trading rights existing for hundreds of years in the Spice Islands between the two nations, addressed a wide array of issues but did not clearly describe limitations of expansion by either side in maritime Southeast Asia.

Partition of the Johor Empire.png

🇬🇧 Under British influence:

{{Legend|#DA70D6|Johor Sultanate}} {{Legend|#7F92FF|Pahang Kingdom}} {{Legend|#B200FF|Singapore}}

🇳🇱 Under Dutch influence:

{{Legend|#9370DB|Indragiri Sultanate}} {{Legend|#DAFF7F|Riau-Lingga Sultanate}} ]] The British establishment of Singapore on the Malay Peninsula in 1819 by Sir Stamford Raffles exacerbated tensions between the two nations, especially as the Dutch claimed that the treaty signed between Raffles and the Sultan of Johor was invalid and that the Sultanate of Johor was under the Dutch sphere of influence. Dutch trading rights in British India and former Dutch possessions in the area were also points of contention. In 1820, under pressure from British merchants with interests in the Far East, negotiations to clarify the situation in Southeast Asia started.

Negotiations between Castlereagh, Canning's predecessor, and Fagel started on 20 July 1820. The Dutch were adamant that the British should abandon Singapore, but Castlereagh was unsure exactly how Singapore had even been acquired. At first, only noncontroversial issues such as free navigation rights and the elimination of piracy were agreed upon. Discussions on the subject were suspended on 5 August 1820, and did not resume until 1823, when the commercial value of Singapore was understood by the British.

Negotiations resumed in December 1823, centred around establishment of clear spheres of influence in the region. The Dutch, realising that the growth of Singapore could not be curbed, pressed for an exchange in which they would abandon their claims north of the Strait of Malacca and their Indian colonies in exchange for confirmation of their claims south of the strait, including the British colony of Bencoolen. The final treaty was signed on 17 March 1824 by Fagel and Canning.

The treaty was ratified by the UK on 30 April 1824 and by the Netherlands on 2 June 1824. The ratifications were exchanged at London on 8 June 1824.

Terms

 * Subjects of the two nations were permitted to trade in territories of British India, British Ceylon and modern-day Indonesia, Singapore and Malaysia on the basis of "most favoured nation" but had to obey local regulations.
 * Fees charged on the subjects and ships of the other nation were limited.
 * No further treaties with Eastern states that excluded trade with the other nation were to be made.
 * Civil and military forces were not to be used to hinder trade.
 * Piracy was to be opposed, no hiding places or protection to pirates were to be provided and the sale of pirated goods was not to be allowed.
 * Officials were not allowed to open new offices on East Indies islands without permission from their government in Europe.
 * British subjects to be given trade access with the Maluku Islands, in particular with Ambon, Banda and Ternate.
 * The Netherlands ceded all establishments on the Indian Subcontinent (Dutch India from 1609) and any rights associated with them.
 * The UK ceded its factory of Fort Marlborough in Bencoolen (Bengkulu) and all the British possessions on the island of Sumatra to the Netherlands and would not establish another office on the island or make any treaty with its rulers.
 * The Netherlands ceded the city and fort of Malacca and agreed not to open any office on the Malay Peninsula or to make any treaty with its rulers.
 * The British withdrew its opposition to the occupation of the island of Billiton by the Netherlands.
 * The Netherlands withdrew its opposition to the occupation of the island of Singapore by the British.
 * The British agreed not to establish any office on the Carimon Islands or on the islands of Batam, Bintan, Lingin, or any of the other islands south of the strait of Singapore, or to make any treaties with the rulers of these places.
 * All transfers of property and establishments were to take place on 1 March 1825, with the return of Java to the Netherlands, as according to a Convention on Java of 24 June 1817, was settled, apart from a sum of 100,000 pounds sterling, which was to be paid by the Netherlands in London before the end of 1825.

Implications
The Anglo-Dutch Treaty of 1824 officially demarcated two territories: Malaya, which was ruled by the United Kingdom; and the Dutch East Indies, which was ruled by the Netherlands. The successor states of Malaya are Malaysia and Singapore, and the successor state of the Dutch East Indies is Indonesia. The line that separated the spheres of influence between the British and the Dutch ultimately became the border between Indonesia and Malaysia (with a small segment becoming the border between Indonesia and Singapore). The subsequent colonial influence also affected the Malay language that was commonly spoken as a regional language between these islands, diverging into Malaysian and Indonesian variants.

title: Anglo-Dutch Treaty of 1824


text:
List of Medieval European scholars

This is a list of philosophers and other scholars, historians and preachers – very much overlapping activities – working in the Christian tradition in Western Europe during the medieval period, including the early Middle Ages. See also scholasticism.

A

 * Abbo of Fleury (or Abbon), (945–1004)
 * Abélard, Pierre, (1079–1142)
 * Abner of Burgos, (1270–1348)
 * St Acca of Hexham, (660–740)
 * Adam of Bremen
 * Adam de Buckfield
 * Adam Parvipontanus
 * Adam de Wodeham
 * Adam Pulchrae Mulieris/Adam de Puteorumvilla
 * Adelard of Bath
 * Adomnan of Iona, (c. 624–704)
 * Adrian of Canterbury, (or Hadrian, born before 637, died 710)
 * Aelfheah, (died 1012)
 * Ailred of Rievaulx
 * Ælfric of Eynsham (the Grammarian), (died c. 1010)
 * Æthelbert of York, (sometimes Æthelberht, Albert, Ælberht, Aethelberht, or Ælbert; died 780)
 * Aethelwulf, (poet)
 * Alain, bishop of Auxerre
 * Alain de Lille / Alanus de Insulis / Montepessulano, (c. 1128–1202)
 * Albert of Saxony
 * Albric of London
 * Alberich of Reims
 * Albert of Saxony, (1316–1390)
 * Albertus Magnus
 * Alcuin of York, (c. 735–804)
 * King Aldfrith of Northumbria, (died 705)
 * Aldhelm of Malmesbury, (c. 639–709)
 * Alexander of Hales, (died 1245)
 * Alexander Nequam/Neckam/of St Alban's
 * Alfred of Sareshel/Alfredus Anglicus
 * Alphonsus Maria de Liguori
 * Amalric of Bena/Bène, (died c. 1204–1207)
 * Aimoin, (born c. 965—died after 1008)
 * St Anno of Cologne, (c 1010–1075)
 * Anselm of Laon, (died 1117)
 * Anselm of Canterbury, (1034–1109)
 * Ardengus
 * Arnaldus de Villa Nova
 * Arnold Fitz Thedmar, (1201–1274/5)
 * Arnulf of Lisieux, (1104/9–1184)

B

 * Bartholomaeus Arnoldi von Usingen
 * Bartholomew of Bologna
 * Bartolus de Saxoferrato
 * Bede, (672/673–735)
 * Benedict Biscop, (c. 628–690)
 * Benedict of Nursia
 * Bernard of Chartres
 * Bernard of Clairvaux, (1090–1153)
 * Bernard Silvestris
 * Bero Magni de Ludosia
 * Berthold of Moosburg
 * Boetius of Dacia
 * St Boisil, (d 664)
 * Bonaventure
 * Burgundio of Pisa
 * Jean Buridan, (died c. 1359)
 * Byrhtferth of Ramsey, (fl. c. 986 – c. 1016)

C

 * Cesare Cremonini, (1550–1631); alias Caesar Cremoninus
 * St Chad of Mercia, (died 672)
 * Clarembald of Arras
 * St Colman of Lindisfarne, (605–675)
 * St Cummian Fada, (591–661/2)
 * Cuthbert Tunstall

D

 * Daniel of Morley
 * Dante Alighieri, (1265–1321)
 * David Cranston
 * David of Dinant
 * Denys the Carthusian
 * Domingo Bañez
 * Dudo of Saint-Quentin
 * (John) Duns Scotus, (c. 1266–1308)
 * Saint Dunod, (mid 6th–early 7th c)
 * Saint Dunstan, (908–988)
 * Durand of St Pourçain

E

 * St Eadberht of Lindisfarne, (died 698)
 * Ecgbert of York, (or Egbert, died 766)
 * Meister Eckhart
 * Eddius Stephanus, (Stephen of Ripon)
 * Edmund of Abingdon
 * Elias Burneti of Bergerac
 * Everard of Ypres

F

 * Faritius (or Faricius) (died 1117)
 * Fernando de Córdoba (1425–1486)
 * Finan of Lindisfarne, (died 611)
 * Florence of Worcester (died 1118)
 * Francis of Marchia
 * Francis of Meyronnes
 * Francisco Suárez (1548–1617)
 * Fulbert of Chartres (952–1028)

G

 * Gabriel Biel
 * Gaetano of Thiene
 * Garlandus Compotista
 * Gaunilo(n) of Montmoutiers
 * Geoffrey Gaimar
 * Geoffrey of Monmouth, (c. 1095 – c. 1155)
 * Gerard of Abbeville
 * Gerard of Cremona
 * Gerbert of Aurillac, (Pope Sylvester II),(946–1003)
 * Gerho of Reichersberg
 * Gersonides, (1288–1344)
 * Gilbert of Poitiers
 * Gildas, (6th c)
 * Giles of Rome
 * Giovanni Girolamo Saccheri
 * Girolamo Savonarola
 * Gonsalvo of Spain
 * Godfrey of Fontaines
 * Goscelin of Canterbury or St Bertin, (c. 1040 – c. 1106)
 * Pope Gregory I
 * Gregory of Rimini
 * Guerric of Saint-Quentin
 * Guido Terrena

H

 * Hadrian of Canterbury (see Adrian)
 * Heinrich Totting von Oytha
 * Henry Aristippus
 * Henry Bate
 * Henry of Ghent
 * Henry of Harclay
 * Henry of Huntingdon, (1080–1160)
 * Henry of Langenstein
 * Hermann of Carinthia
 * Hermann of Reichenau, (1013–1054)
 * Hervaeus Natalis
 * Heymeric of Camp
 * Honorius Augustodunensis/*Honoré d'Autun (1080–1151)
 * Hrabanus: Rabanus
 * Hugh of St. Cher
 * Hugh of St. Victor

I

 * Isidore of Seville, (c. 560–636)
 * Ivo of Chartres

J

 * James the Deacon, (died after 671)
 * James of Metz
 * James of Venice
 * James of Viterbo
 * Jacques de Vitry
 * (St) Jan Kanty/John Cantius, (1390–1473)
 * Jan Standonck
 * Jean Buridan, (c. 1295–1363)
 * Jean de la Rochelle
 * Jerome of Prague
 * Joachim of Flora
 * Jocelin, Bishop of Soissons
 * Jodocus Trutfetter
 * Johann Eck
 * Johann von Goch
 * Johann Ruchrat von Wesel
 * John Baconthorpe
 * John Blund
 * John Cantius
 * John Capreolus
 * John Dumbleton
 * John Fisher
 * John of Fordun, (before 1360 – c. 1380)
 * John Gerson, (1363–1429)
 * John Halgren of Abbeville
 * John of Jandun
 * John Mair
 * John of Mirecourt
 * John Pagus
 * John of Paris
 * John Peckham
 * John Poinsot
 * John Punch
 * John of Reading
 * John of Salisbury, (c. 1115–1180)
 * John of Wallingford,(fl. 1195–1215)
 * Johannes Scotus Eriugena
 * John of Seville
 * John of Worcester, (died c. 1140)
 * John Wyclif, (born 1324)
 * Juan Caramuel y Lobkowitz
 * Juan de Mariana
 * Julian of Toledo, (642–690)

L

 * Luis de Molina
 * Lupus Servatus (also known as Servatus Lupus) (c. 805–c. 862)

M

 * Máeldub (also Maildubh, Maildulf or Meldun), (died c. 675)
 * Manegold of Lautenbach
 * Marianus Scotus, (1028–1082/3)
 * Marsilius of Inghen
 * Marsilius of Padua
 * Martin of Dacia
 * Matthew of Aquasparta
 * Matthew Paris, (1200–1259)
 * Mechthild of Magdeburg (c. 1207–c. 1282/1294)
 * Melchior Cano
 * Michael of Massa
 * Michael Servetus (1509 or 1511 to 1553)
 * St Minnborinus of Cologne, (fl 974–986)

N

 * Nennius, (9th c)
 * Nicholas of Amiens
 * Nicholas of Autrecourt
 * Nicholas of Cusa
 * Nicole Oresme

O

 * Odo of Châteauroux
 * Orderic Vitalis, (1075–1142)
 * St Oswald of Worcester or York, (925–992)
 * Otric

P

 * Paul of Pergula
 * Paul of Venice
 * Peter Abelard, (1079–1142)
 * Peter Alfonsi
 * Peter Auriol
 * Peter of Auvergne
 * Peter le Bar
 * Peter of Candia
 * Peter of Capua the Elder
 * Peter Ceffons
 * Peter of Corbeil
 * Peter Damian
 * Peter Helias
 * Peter Lombard
 * Peter Olivi
 * Peter of Pisa
 * Peter of Poitiers (Chancellor)
 * Peter de Rivo
 * Peter of Spain (usually identified with Pope John XXI)
 * Peter the Venerable
 * Pierre d'Ailly
 * Pierre de Maricourt
 * Philip the Chancellor
 * Plato of Tivoli
 * Prévostin of Cremona

R

 * Rabanus Maurus Magnentius (also Hrabanus or Rhabanus), (780–856)
 * Radbertus
 * Radulphus Brito
 * Radulphus de Longo Campo
 * Ralph of Beauvais
 * Ralph de Diceto, (c. 1120 – c. 1202)
 * Ralph Strode
 * Ramon Lull
 * Raoul Ardens
 * Ratramnus
 * Raymond Féraud
 * Raymond Gaufredi
 * Reginald of Durham, (died c. 1190)
 * Reginald Pecock
 * Remigius of Auxerre (c. 841–908)
 * Richard Brinkley
 * Richard of Campsall
 * Richard of Devizes, (fl late 12th c)
 * Richard l'Evêque
 * Richard Fishacre
 * Richard Ferrybridge
 * Richard Fitzralph
 * Richard de Fournival
 * Richard Kilvington
 * Richard of Middleton
 * Richard Rufus of Cornwall
 * Richard of Saint-Laurent
 * Richard of St. Victor, (died 1173)
 * Richard Swineshead
 * Robert Blund
 * Robert of Courson
 * Robert of Gloucester, (fl.1260–1300)
 * Robert Grosseteste, (c. 1175–1253)
 * Robert Holcot
 * Robert Kilwardby, (died 1279)
 * Robert of Melun
 * Robert Pullus
 * Robert de Sorbon, (1201–1274)
 * Robert of Torigni, (1106–1186)
 * Robertus Anglicus
 * Roger Bacon, (1214–1294)
 * Roger Marston
 * Roger of Hereford, (active c. 1178 – 1198)
 * Roger of Wendover, (died 6 May 1236)
 * Roland of Cremona
 * Roscelin of Compiègne

S

 * Saxo Grammaticus, (c. 1150 – c. 1220)
 * Servatus Lupus (see Lupus Servatus)
 * Siger of Brabant, (1240–1284)
 * Simon of Faversham
 * Simon of Tournai
 * Snorri Sturluson, (1179–1241)
 * Stephen Langton, (c. 1150–1228)
 * Stephen of Ripon, (died 709)
 * Francisco Suárez, (1548–1617)
 * Svend Aggesen, (born c. 1145)
 * Symeon of Durham, (died after 1129)
 * Symphorien Champier, (1471–1539)

T

 * Theodore of Tarsus (or Canterbury), (602–690)
 * Theodoric of Freiberg (c.1250 – c.1311)
 * Theodulf of Orléans, (c. 750/60–821)
 * Thierry of Chartres/Theodoricus Carnotensis
 * Thietmar of Merseburg, (975–1018)
 * Thomas Aquinas, (1225–1274)
 * Thomas Becket, (1118–1170)
 * Thomas Bradwardine, (c. 1290–1349)
 * Thomas of Chobham
 * Thomas of Erfurt
 * Thomas Gallus
 * Thomas à Kempis, (1380–1471)
 * Thomas Netter of Walden
 * Thomas of Sutton
 * Thomas Wykes of Osney, (1222–1292)
 * Thomas Wilton
 * Tilmo, (fl 690)
 * St Tysilio or Sulio, (died 640)

U

 * Ulrich of Strassburg
 * Urso of Salerno

V

 * Vital du Four
 * St Vitalian, (600–672)
 * Vitello, (1230–1314)

W

 * Walter Burley
 * Walter Chatton
 * Walter of Château-Thierry
 * Walter of Mortagne
 * Walter of Oxford, (died 1151)
 * Warner of Rouen
 * Wilfrid, (c. 633–709/710)
 * William of Alnwick
 * William of Auvergne
 * William of Auxerre
 * William de Brailes, (active 1230–1260)
 * William of Champeaux
 * William of Conches
 * William of Durham
 * William of Falagar
 * William Heytesbury
 * William of Jumieges
 * William of Lucca
 * William of Malmesbury, (1080–1143)
 * William de la Mare
 * William of Moerbeke
 * William of Ockham, (c. 1285–1349)
 * William of Poitiers, (1020–1090)
 * William of Saint Albans, (fl. 1170)
 * William of Saint-Amour
 * William of Sherwood
 * William of Ware
 * Witelo
 * William of Poitiers

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

title: List of Medieval European scholars


text:
Treaty of London

The Treaty of London or London Convention or similar may refer to:

 * Treaty of London (1358), established a truce between England and France following the Battle of Poitiers
 * Treaty of London (1359), which ceded western France to England
 * Treaty of London (1474), an alliance between England and Burgundy against France
 * Treaty of London (1518), a non-aggression pact between Burgundy, France, England, the Holy Roman Empire, the Netherlands, the Papal States and Spain
 * Treaty of London (1604), a conclusion of the Anglo-Spanish War
 * Treaty of London (1641), between England and Scotland
 * Treaty of London (1700), also known as the Second Partition Treaty
 * Convention of London (1786), which allowed British settlers in Belize to cut and export timber
 * Convention of London (1814), or the Anglo-Dutch Treaty of 1814, which returned some colonies to the Netherlands
 * Treaty of 1818 or London Convention of 1818, between the United States of America and the United Kingdom
 * Treaty of London (1824) or Anglo-Dutch Treaty of 1824, which resolved disputes from the 1814 treaty
 * Treaty of London (1827), an alliance between Britain, France, and Russia, for the end of Ottoman action in Greece
 * Treaty of London (1832), which followed the London Conference of 1832, between Britain, France and Russia, creating an independent Kingdom of Greece
 * Treaty of London (1839), which recognised the independence and neutrality of Belgium
 * Convention of London (1840), which granted Muhammad Ali Pasha hereditary control over Egypt
 * London Straits Convention (1841), which closed the Bosporus and the Dardanelles to warships
 * Convention of London (1861), between Britain, France and Spain, which agreed upon a course of action towards obtaining loan repayments from Mexico
 * Treaty of London (1864), which united the Ionian Islands with Greece
 * Treaty of London (1867), which guaranteed the neutrality of Luxembourg
 * Treaty of London (1871), between Prussia, Austria, Turkey, Britain and Italy, which reversed the neutralization of the Black Sea
 * London Convention (1884), between the United Kingdom and the South African Republic
 * Treaty of London (1890), between the United Kingdom, the German Empire and the Kingdom of Portugal, over territorial claims in Southern Africa
 * Convention for the Preservation of Wild Animals, Birds and Fish in Africa (1900)
 * Treaty of London (1913), which ended the First Balkan War
 * Treaty of London (1915), between the Entente powers and the Kingdom of Italy
 * London Naval Treaty (1930), which established limits on naval fleets and construction programmes
 * Convention Relative to the Preservation of Fauna and Flora in their Natural State (1933)
 * London Convention on the Definition of Aggression (1933)
 * Second London Naval Treaty (1936), which furthered naval arms control limits
 * Anglo-Soviet Treaty, signed in London on 26 May 1942
 * London Protocol (1944), agreement between the Allies of World War II on dividing Germany into three occupation zones after the war
 * Treaty of London (1945), the legal basis for the Nazi trials
 * Treaty of London (1946), which ended the British mandate over Transjordan
 * Treaty of London (1949), which created the Council of Europe
 * Treaty of London (1956), which promised independence to British Malaya
 * London Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter (1972)

title: Treaty of London


text:
Abhay Ashtekar

Abhay Vasant Ashtekar (born 5 July 1949) is an Indian theoretical physicist who created Ashtekar variables and is one of the founders of loop quantum gravity and its subfield loop quantum cosmology. Ashtekar has also written a number of descriptions of loop quantum gravity that are accessible to non-physicists. He is an Evan Pugh Professor Emeritus of Physics and former Director of the Institute for Gravitational Physics and Geometry at Pennsylvania State University.

In 1999, Ashtekar and his colleagues were able to calculate the entropy for a black hole, matching a 1974 prediction by Stephen Hawking. Oxford mathematical physicist Roger Penrose has described Ashtekar's approach to quantum gravity as "The most important of all the attempts at 'quantizing' general relativity." Ashtekar was elected as Member to National Academy of Sciences in May 2016.

Biography
Abhay Ashtekar grew up in several cities, including Mumbai, in the state of Maharashtra, India. After completing his undergraduate education in India, Ashtekar enrolled in the graduate program for gravitation at the University of Texas at Austin. He went on to complete his PhD at the University of Chicago under the supervision of Robert Geroch in 1978 and held several appointments at Oxford, Paris, Syracuse before settling at Pennsylvania State University.

He married Christine Clarke in 1986 and the two have a son, Neil Ashtekar.

Religious views
Abhay Ashtekar is an atheist, though he enjoys reading on Indian and other eastern philosophy, namely the Tao and the Zen traditions. Furthermore, he believes to be inspired from the Bhagavad Gita as regards his attitude towards work.

Books

 * 1) A. Magnon and A. Ashtekar, Translation from French of Élie Cartan's work, "Sur les variétés à connexion affine et la théorie de la relativité généralisée" with a commentary and foreword by A. Trautman, Bibliopolis, Naples, 1986, 199 pages.
 * 2) A. Ashtekar, Asymptotic Quantization. Bibliopolis, Naples, 1987, 107 pages.
 * 3) A. Ashtekar, (with invited contributions) New Perspectives in Canonical Gravity. Bibliopolis, Naples, 1988, 324 pages.
 * 4) A. Ashtekar and J. Stachel, Editors; Conceptual Problems of Quantum Gravity. Proceedings of the 1988 Osgood Hill Conference (Birkhauser, N. Y., 1991), 602 pages.
 * 5) A. Ashtekar, Lectures on Non-perturbative Canonical Gravity, (Notes prepared in collaboration with R.S. Tate), (World Scientific Singapore, 1991), 334 pages.
 * 6) A. Ashtekar, R.C. Cohen, D. Howard, J. Renn, S. Sarkar and A. Shimony (Editors), Revisiting the Foundations of Relativistic Physics, Festschrift in honor of John Stachel, Boston Studies in Philosophy of Science, Volume 234, (Kluwer Academic, 2003).

title: Abhay Ashtekar


text:
Talk:South Bohemian Region

Untitled
Budéjovický kraj the same territory as what was previously known as Jiro Cesky? If so the old name should be mentioned, and if not perhaps a short explanation of the difference would be helplfull. -- Infrogmation

 * According to obsolete names of Jihoceský are Budejovický and Ceskobudejovický. Can anyone from Czechia conform this? andy

 * Checked this at the official sites. The Czech regions naming conventions is a big mess - in 2000, the (I guess 10) former communist era regions have been transformed into 14 new regions (incl. Prague), and some of them changed their name the following year. This was the case of Ceskobudejovicky -> Jihocesky region. Matt Borak 08:38, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Moravia-Silesia which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 09:15, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:South Bohemian Region


text:
Staurakios

Staurakios (Stauracius, early 790s – 11 January 812), was the shortest-reigning Byzantine emperor, ruling for 68 days between 26 July and 2 October 811.

He was born in the early 790s, probably between 791 and 793, to Nikephoros I and an unknown woman. Nikephoros seized the throne of the Byzantine Empire from Empress Irene in 802, and elevated Staurakios to co-emperor on 25 December 803. On 20 December 807, a bride show was held by Nikephoros to select a wife for Staurakios, which resulted in his marriage to Theophano of Athens, a kinswoman of Irene. Little else is known of him until he came to take the throne upon the death of Nikephoros.

Staurakios took part in an invasion of the Bulgarian Khanate in 811, alongside his father and brother-in-law. Although initially successful, with the Byzantines laying siege to the Bulgarian capital of Pliska and defeating a relief force, they were soon ambushed by Khan Krum, and trapped in a small valley. The Bulgarians then attacked, starting the Battle of Pliska on 26 July 811, wherein much of the Byzantine army was destroyed, and Nikephoros was slain. Carried back to Constantinople by litter, Staurakios was declared emperor despite his severe injuries from the battle, which included the severing of his spine. While this was done to maintain legitimacy in the succession, the question of his successor was hotly debated. His reign was short due to the political uncertainties surrounding his wounds; he was usurped by his brother-in-law, who acceded to the imperial throne as Michael I Rhangabe, on 2 October 811. After being removed from power, he was sent to live in a monastery, where he stayed until he died, either of gangrene or poisoned by his sister, Prokopia, on 11 January 812.

Early life and background
Staurakios was born in the early 790s, probably between 791 and 793, to Nikephoros I and an unknown woman. The historian J. B. Bury stated that he was likely younger than his sister Prokopia. Staurakios was named after his paternal grandfather. His father was likely the same Nikephoros as the one who had been strategos of the Armeniac Theme before being deposed for supporting Empress Irene ((r. 797 – 802)). He was also possibly logothetēs tou genikou (finance minister) at the time of Staurakios' birth, as he achieved this rank by 797. Nikephoros revolted against Irene on 31 October 802 AD, and seized the throne for himself, exiling Irene to a convent on the island of Principo. Treadgold comments that this was "a bloodless and relatively harmonious transfer of power", and that while Nikephoros seized the throne from Irene, he did not displace her regime, but rather usurped it for himself. Staurakios was around 10–12 years old at the time Nikephoros became emperor. At the beginning of his rule, Nikephoros had strong support from the bureaucracy, and superficially positive relations with the army and clergy.

Treadgold suggests that Nikephoros had witnessed "a good deal of financial mismanagement" before he seized power, but was unable to prevent it at that time. Indeed, one of his first acts as emperor was to seize control of a secret treasury reserve from Irene. Soon after, he took measures to increase the treasury, such as canceling tribute payments to the Abbasid Caliphate, an "exorbitant and humiliating payment", accepting the risk of war. Later, he ended the suspension of urban tariffs and estate taxes that Irene had implemented. Treadgold comments that the suspension of Irene's popular fiscal policies was bold, and risked reducing his own popularity, but that Nikephoros must have considered them too expensive to continue, and was aware that the capital was relatively undertaxed compared to the rest of the empire. He took similar efforts to tackle the issue of corruption, founding a new court where he heard complaints levied by the poor against the elites. While his supporters praised him for championing the poor, opponents declaimed him for his measures against the wealthy. Some of these opponents also alleged greed, but Treadgold comments that this likely referred to the effort Nikephoros put into collecting revenues, as the man himself was famously austere.

Reign as co-emperor
Staurakios was not given an official government position upon his father's accession to the throne, but, in the summer of 803, a general named Bardanes Tourkos revolted against Nikephoros, prompting a change of course. Originally strategos of the Thracesian Theme, Nikephoros had consolidated the five major themes of Asia Minor —Anatolic, Armeniac, Bucellarian, Opsikion, and Thracesian — under Bardanes' control as monostrategos of the combined area. When the Abbasid Caliphate began preparations for an attack that summer, Nikephoros was unable to take command due to an injury sustained in May, the role fell to Bardanes, who advanced his troops and began preparations. There, his troops grumbled over Nikephoros' financial policies, which included the reinstatement of the estate tax on soldiers; by comparison, Bardanes was considered to be very charitable in dividing war spoils, and thus they declared him emperor on July 19. Treadgold comments that although the rebellion theoretically commanded nearly half of the army, Bardanes seemed to lack the commitment to become emperor, and soon discussed terms with Nikephoros, who swore not to harm Bardanes or his soldiers if Bardanes would surrender and enter the monastery, which Bardanes did in early September. Although Nikephoros abided by his pledge not to harm the surrendered men, he did seize a significant amount of money and property from the leaders of the rebellion, and fined four of the themes a year of salary, and exiling some bishops to the remote island of Pantelleria, near Sicily. Nikephoros soon negotiated a moderate deal with the Abbasid Caliph Harun al-Rashid, including a small tribute payment.

Although his revolt was put down by early September, it convinced Nikephoros to consolidate his hold on the throne and secure the succession, by declaring Staurakios co-emperor and heir, which he did on Christmas Day of 803. Staurakios was crowned by the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople Tarasios in the Hagia Sophia. By making Staurakios emperor, Nikephoros removed any question of the imperial succession and increased his own legitimacy—although Staurakios, now somewhere between the ages of 11 and 13, was not yet old enough to actually exercise power. The contemporary chronicler Theophanes the Confessor stated that Staurakios was "completely unfit in appearance, strength, and judgment for such an honor", but this is likely a reflection of Theophanes' own animosity toward Nikephoros and Staurakios. While opponents of Nikephoros decried Staurakios as sickly, Treadgold comments that any health issues he may have had did not prevent later participation in military campaigns; opponents also presented his obedience to his father as a failing.

When Tarasios died in 806, Nikephoros selected a man named Nikephoros, who was residing in a monastery, to succeed him. For the installation ceremony of Nikephoros as patriarch, where the new patriarch was tonsured, Staurakios was sent to represent his father. That same year, the Byzantine Empire faced a massive invasion from the Abbasid Caliphate, which forced Nikephoros to accept humiliating peace terms, paying an annual tribute of 30,000 nomismata and six great gold medals, three for Nikephoros and three for Staurakios.

Except for the installation ceremony of Patriarch Nikephoros, Staurakios is not mentioned in the sources until 807, when his father arrange Staurakios' marriage, and thus held an imperial bride show to select a wife on 20 December 807. This was the second recorded Byzantine bride show, after the one held by Constantine VI ((r. 780 – 797)) by his mother, Empress Irene. During the bride show, Theophano of Athens was selected, likely due to the fact that she was a kinswoman of Irene, and therefore would help add legitimacy to both Nikephoros' and Staurakios' rule. According to Theophanes, she was chosen despite the fact that she was already engaged to a man, whom she had slept with premaritally, and was not the most beautiful of the women presented at the bride show. Staurakios and Theophano married that same month.

After his marriage, Staurakios is not mentioned again until 811, when Nikephoros prepared his invasion of the Bulgarian Khanate in May of that year. The Bulgarians had been a serious threat to the empire since the reign of Constantine IV ((r. 668 – 685)), who launched a calamitous attack against them. Tensions rose between 808 and 811, resulting in outright warfare. Nikephoros led the campaign over the Balkan Mountains and into the Bulgarian Khanate alongside Staurakios, who by now was in his late teens, and many senior imperial officials. The campaign saw great success at first, with the Byzantine forces attacking the Bulgarian capital of Pliska, defeating first the 12,000-strong garrison of the city, and then a relief force of 15,000 sent by Khan Krum ((r. 803 – 814)). In correspondence sent to Constantinople, Nikephoros credited his success to the strategic advice of Staurakios. The victorious Byzantine forces began to march back to the Byzantine Empire, but a desperate Krum managed to trap the Byzantine army in a small valley with palisades, before launching a massive assault two days later, on 26 July 811. The Battle of Pliska resulted in a Bulgarian massacre of the Byzantine forces. Much of the Byzantine army was destroyed, and Nikephoros himself was slain.

Rule as sole emperor
The remaining Byzantine forces, including a severely wounded Staurakios, retreated to Adrianople over three days. Staurakios' spine had been severed during the battle, which along with his demonstrated lack of ability, led the uninjured influential figures in the empire to consider the issue of Nikephoros' successor. Chiefly they were three who had traveled with Nikephoros and Staurakios, the magistros (lit. Master of Offices, by this time honorific) Theoktistos, the Domestic of the Schools Stephanos, and Nikephoros' son-in-law, the kouropalates (high-ranking court official) Michael Rhangabe. The severity of Staurakios' wounds led to speculation as to whether he would live, although eventually those assembled judged he would make the best candidate, as the legitimate successor, and declared him emperor. The historian George Ostrogorsky comments that this was done "in strict conformity with the principle of legitimacy", and that the final settlement of the succession was to take place in Constantinople, where Staurakios would crown his successor. This was the first time a Byzantine emperor was installed outside of Constantinople, due to the urgency of the situation.

Staurakios gave a speech to the surviving troops, where he insulted Nikephoros' military judgment, before being acclaimed by the army. The historian Christian Laes comments that it is difficult to assess the condition that Staurakios was in, and how he was able to deliver his virulent speech. Almost immediately after Staurakios acceded to the throne, Michael was pressured to usurp it, due to the legitimacy granted to him by his marriage to Staurakios' sister Prokopia and his military abilities. Theoktistos and others attempted to convince Michael to take the throne, although he repeatedly refused at this time, citing an oath of loyalty he had made to both Nikephoros and Staurakios, as well as his family ties to Staurakios via his marriage to Prokopia. The historians Edward Foord and George Finlay comment that the army seemed willing to stand by Staurakios, but for his mortal wounds posing a threat to the succession of the empire, and the enemies that had been made by the severe fiscal policies of Nikephoros. As Finlay argues, a change in administration implied a change of emperor, causing many who would profit from a change of ruler to support Michael.

Staurakios was brought by litter to Constantinople. By this time, it had been discovered that he had blood in his urine, and was paralyzed from the waist down. In spite of his ill health, Staurakios endeavored to assert his authority, including rebuffing the attempts of the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople, Nikephoros I, to have funds that Nikephoros had collected returned to the church. Laes comments that "Possibly, a link between Staurakios’ bad condition and his father’s sins was thus established" by Patriarch Nikephoros' insistence that Staurakios placate God and compensate those who his father had harmed.

The severity of his injury, and the lack of any children to nominate as heirs led to a debate about who would succeed him, as his impending death was considered a certainty. Ostrogorsky comments that an interregnum was seen as particularly undesirable due to the imminent danger from the Abbasid Caliphate and the Bulgarian Khanate, and that a return to normality was therefore essential. The delay of Staurakios in selecting a successor caused passionate dispute within the capital. Staurakios' sister Prokopia backed her husband Michael, while Empress Theophano was put forth as a candidate for the succession; she may have hoped to take the throne the same way her kinswoman Irene had. The only proof of such intrigues given by contemporary historians comes from records that Staurakios became hostile to Theoktistos and Michael, which would suggest he was aware of their plottings, and that he suspected Prokopia of conspiring to kill him. Staurakios reportedly wavered between two possible options for his succession. The first, to make Theophano empress-regnant, and the second, attested in a ninth-century chronicle, to institute a form of imperial democracy. Bury dismisses the second option as the machinations of Staurakios' addled brain, and furthermore questions the authenticity of the report. The historian Aikaterina Christophilopoulou argued that Bury's narrative of an imperial democracy stems from a misunderstanding of a passage from Theophanes. Instead, the proper reading seems to be that Staurakios feared that crowning his wife might lead to a civil war, or the empowering of the chariot factions. After hearing of the options Staurakios was considering, Patriarch Nikephoros began to align himself with Stephanos, Theoktistos, and Michael. Afraid of the possibility of a public uprising due to the lack of an heir, Staurakios declared Theophano his successor. This decision united the chief leaders and officials of the Byzantine Empire behind Michael, as they did not desire to return to the uncertainty which had pervaded Irene's rule, due to her ruling despite being a woman. On 1 October 811, Staurakios summoned Stephanos, whom he trusted likely because Stephanos was the first to proclaim Staurakios emperor. He proposed blinding Michael, unaware that Stephanos supported him. Stephanos assured Staurakios of the strength of his position, and dissuaded him from having Michael blinded, saying he was too well protected to attempt it. Stephanos, after swearing he would not reveal the discussion to anyone else, organized a coup to bring Michael to power. Stephanos gathered the remaining tagmatic forces and senate at the Great Palace of Constantinople, and declared Michael emperor. Michael first proposed that future emperor Leo V the Armenian ((r. 813 – 820)) take the throne, but agreed to accept the crown himself when Leo promised to support him. Michael gained the full support of Patriarch Nikephoros by forging an agreement wherein he promised to uphold Orthodoxy, to not persecute Christians, or use violence against clergy or monks. At dawn on the morning of 2 October, Michael was publicly proclaimed emperor in the Hippodrome of Constantinople, and crowned a few hours later by Patriarch Nikephoros, at the pulpit of the Hagia Sophia. Upon hearing of this, Staurakios hastened to abdicate, fearing his execution otherwise; his reign was one of the shortest in Byzantine history. Staurakios summoned his relative, the monk Simeon, and was tonsured and dressed in monastic garb. Staurakios also sent a letter of protest to Patriarch Nikephoros for his role in the coup d’état; Nikephoros answered in person, writing alongside Michael and Prokopia, and assured Staurakios that he had not betrayed him, but rather protected him. Staurakios was unimpressed and informed the Patriarch that "you will not find him [Michael] a better friend", meaning that Michael would not be more useful to Nikephoros than Staurakios himself had been. Staurakios lived another three months before dying of gangrene on 11 January 812. He was buried in the Monastery of Braka, which was given to Theophano by Prokopia. There were allegations that he was poisoned by his sister Prokopia, rather than dying of gangrene, reported by the Syriac sources—the Chronicle of 813 and Michael the Syrian—and the chronicle of the Petros of Alexandria. Theophanes considered these rumors possible and mentions that Theophano herself considered these rumors to be true. According to the De Ceremoniis, a 10th-century book describing Byzantine courtly protocol and history written by Constantine VII, Staurakios was buried in a white marble sarcophagus that would later be shared with Theophano.

Historiography
Because of the brevity of Staurakios' reign, and the shortcomings and bias of the sources, much of his life is unknown. The main source for the reigns of both Nikephoros I and Staurakios is Theophanes' Chronographia, which was tainted by Theophanes' dislike of the former, although it does hint that Staurakios possessed a talent for military strategy. Although many historians believe that both Nikephoros and Staurakios have been falsely portrayed as malevolent, few other sources exist for their reign. Most other sources take the form of short references, which provide little insight, and include many errors, especially the Syriac Chronicle of 813. While Michael the Syrian, Bar Hebraeus, Michael Psellos, and the Chronicle of 813 all record the events immediately before the death of Staurakios, the death itself, and ascribe a cause, they are generally inaccurate. Indeed, the Chronicle of 813 even mistakes the time of death of Staurakios, giving it as two months into his reign, rather than nearly six months after the battle. Petros of Alexandria, in his A Brief Survey of Years, which in most areas merely gives the length of reigns for the Byzantine emperors, mentions the alleged poisoning of Staurakios by Prokopia.

Numismatics

The solidus coins of the joint reign of Nikephoros and Staurakios are similar to those of the Isaurian dynasty, in that they show the junior emperor (Staurakios) on the reverse, and senior emperor (Nikephoros) on the obverse. On them, Staurakios is given the title of despotes, and Nikephoros labeled as basileus. Both wear a chlamys and carry an akakia, however, Nikephoros holds in his right hand the cross potent, whereas Staurakios holds a globus cruciger. There are, oddly, no silver coins minted for the joint reign of the two. The numismatist Philip Grierson comments that one would expect miliaresia to be struck for the coronation of Staurakios, but speculates that "...the explanation is to be found in Nikephoros' penurious habits". No known coins were minted for the sole reign of Staurakios, perhaps because it was not considered worthwhile to make new coin dies for the mortally wounded emperor. Grierson makes the comment that the discovery of nomismata for Empresses Zoë Porphyrogenita ((r. undefined – undefined)1042) and Theodora Porphyrogenita ((r. undefined – undefined)1042) reveals that a reign of roughly two months might justify a mint in creating coins for the ruler, and therefore coins of Staurakios might exist, yet undiscovered; however, Grierson considers it equally likely that the dying emperor simply continued to mint the old coins, under his father's name. The numismatist Maria Vrij comments that "producing new coins in the emperor’s name can hardly have been a pressing concern, since his very survival was not certain". She also stated the possibility that the absence of coins for the sole reign of Staurakios might be a result of a "dearth of archaeological material", but stated that as time passes without the discovery of such coins, the possibility becomes more remote, but is "technically possible and therefore worth acknowledging."

Legacy
Staurakios largely existed in the shadow of Nikephoros; little is known about him. Staurakios only reigned for just over two months, and was therefore unable to leave a mark on the empire as his father had done. Hints from the Chronographia suggest that Staurakios wielded strategic understanding, and perhaps that Staurakios was as strong-willed as his father, but his character is otherwise unknown. For these reasons, historian Matthew Marsh comments that "he remains a brief and shadowy figure in the history of the Empire". Both Nikephoros and Staurakios were generally successful in maintaining the borders of the Byzantine Empire, although they did not achieve much military success, occasionally being forced to make humiliating concessions to powerful enemies, such as the Abbasid Caliph Harun al-Rashid.

title: Staurakios


text:
Men Behaving Badly

Men Behaving Badly is a British sitcom that was created and written by Simon Nye. It follows the lives of Gary Strang (Martin Clunes) and his flatmates Dermot Povey (Harry Enfield; series 1 only) and Tony Smart (Neil Morrissey; series 2 onwards). It was first broadcast on ITV in 1992. A total of six series were made, along with a Christmas special and a trilogy of episodes that make up the feature-length "last orders".

The series was filmed in and around Ealing in West London. The setting, however, is implied to be South London, and many references are made to Surrey. It was produced by Hartswood Films in association with Thames for the first two series on ITV. They also assisted with production of the third series onwards that aired on the BBC, after Thames had lost their regional ITV franchise for London at the end of 1992 to Carlton Television.

Men Behaving Badly became highly successful after being moved to a post-watershed slot on BBC1. It won the Comedy Awards' best ITV comedy and the first National Television Award for Situation Comedy.

Plot summary
Gary and Dermot are two London-based, beer-guzzling flatmates who typically spend most of their time in front of the television or in pursuit of women. When Deborah, an attractive single woman, moves into the flat above, both men become obsessed with her, despite Gary already having a steady girlfriend, Dorothy.

When series two begins, it is revealed Dermot has left to travel the world, leading Gary to look for a new flatmate. Record stall owner Tony Smart then moves in and, although Gary is unsure of him at first, the two soon become good friends, revelling in a second childhood, hours of TV and mindless talks about women. Tony quickly becomes obsessed with Deborah and, unlike with Dermot, she initially shows an interest in return. However, Tony's immaturity quickly drives her to distraction, and his pursuit of Deborah becomes increasingly one-sided.

Gary manages an office selling security equipment for a dead-end company. His staff of ageing employees are the meek George and lifelong spinster Anthea, who regularly drive him to frustration with their old-fashioned views. Tony stumbles through a range of jobs including as a model, barman, mime artist and postman, after his record stall (literally) collapses.

Dorothy is an intelligent and mature nurse, and it is stated one of the main reasons she went out with Gary was because he annoyed her parents. She and Gary frequently split up and are occasionally unfaithful, including one night when Dorothy sleeps with Tony, but they always end up back together. Tony has many girlfriends but his true feelings are for Deborah, whom he initially just wants to have sex with, but quickly falls in love with, in spite of her generally poor treatment of him. Deborah is often disappointed by Tony's juvenile behaviour, but can also see his good side. The two finally end up in a relationship in series six.

Although Dorothy initially dislikes Deborah (disparagingly referring to her as "Miss Wet Dream" in series two), the two bond over their shared frustration at the two men and develop a strong friendship, eventually becoming flatmates themselves.

Cast

 * Martin Clunes plays Gary Strang, manager of a security sales office with two old-fashioned, middle-aged subordinates. He owns the flat that he shares with Dermot, and later Tony. He is in a long-term, albeit off-and-on, relationship with Dorothy. Gary is arrogant and immature for his age, which frequently annoys Dorothy.
 * Harry Enfield plays Dermot Povey, Gary's original flatmate, in series one. Dermot is forever failing to pay his rent and is desperately in love with Deborah. He leaves for a round-the-world motorbike tour. Unlike Tony, Dermot seems to come from a similar background to Gary.
 * Neil Morrissey plays Tony Smart from series two onwards. Tony is Gary's womanising flatmate, who is infatuated with Deborah. He is well meaning but has a habit of annoying those around him with his thoughtless comments and off-the-wall behaviour. He also has musical ambitions which are not matched by his abilities.
 * Leslie Ash plays Deborah Burton, an attractive blonde woman who lives in the flat above Gary and Tony. Deborah works in a restaurant, and although attracted to Tony, his immaturity, devil-may-care attitude and other aspects of his character push her away.
 * Caroline Quentin plays Dorothy Martin/Bishop, Gary's outspoken girlfriend. She is a nurse who initially lives with her parents, before moving in with Gary and Tony in series five. She later makes friends with Deborah, eventually becoming her flatmate.
 * Ian Lindsay plays George, an employee with old fashioned views at Gary's security firm. George is married to the unseen Marjorie, with whom he has a son.
 * Valerie Minifie plays Anthea, an employee at Gary's security firm with views similar to George. Anthea is a lifelong spinster.
 * Dave Atkins plays Les, the landlord of The Crown, Gary and Tony's local pub, who is briefly Tony's boss. His appalling hygiene standards are matched by the run down and unkempt nature of the pub.
 * John Thomson plays Ken, Les' successor as landlord of The Crown, from series five onwards. He knows nothing about the pub trade, admitting he got the job because his brother-in-law was sleeping with the personnel officer at the brewery, and his attempts to modernise the pub are undermined by his lack of experience in the role. He is also briefly Tony's boss.

Episodes
The show aired for six series and 42 episodes, including a Christmas special titled "Jingle Balls", which was broadcast at Christmas 1997. A final short run of three 45-minute episodes was made in 1998 to conclude the series.

Series one was the only series to feature Dermot, played by Harry Enfield before Neil Morrissey joined the cast as Tony. The episodes of the first two series are about 24 minutes long because they were shown on ITV and time was needed for advertisements. When the show began on the BBC, the episodes were about four minutes longer.

Production
Men Behaving Badly is based on Simon Nye's 1989 book of the same title. Producer Beryl Vertue first considered it for a film before deciding it was suited for television adaptation. Harry Enfield, already a well-known comedian, was cast first. He had seen Martin Clunes perform in a play and recommended him for the other lead.

Enfield felt out of place in the sitcom and announced he was leaving after the first series. When Thames Television found out, their immediate reaction was to end the series, and they had to be persuaded to put on a second series, with Neil Morrissey replacing Enfield. After Thames lost their television franchise, ITV decided that a peak viewing figure of seven million was insufficient and withdrew support. Incensed, Vertue approached the BBC who agreed to broadcast the show.

In 1994, the BBC aired the first of a further four series. The shift to a new station and a later time slot meant, as the BBC claimed, the show could indulge in "more colourful language and behaviour". The show became highly successful on BBC1, drawing a cult following.

In 2002 it was revealed that Simon Nye and the cast had agreed to revive the series for three further specials the following year, in which Vertue wanted the show to focus on how Gary and Dorothy were coping with parenthood. The idea was shelved the following year after Caroline Quentin became pregnant. In October 2014, Clunes and Morrissey returned to the characters of Gary and Tony for the first time since 1998 in a sketch for Channel 4's "The Feeling Nuts Comedy Night" and Stand Up to Cancer telethon.

The first series featuring Enfield has never been repeated on the BBC, although the second ITV series has been shown.

Reception
A BBC article suggests that Gary and Tony were "a reaction against the onset of the caring, sharing 'new man'. It appeared to revel in a politically incorrect world of booze, burps and boobs". Critics Jon Lewis and Penny Stempel have stated that the show "allowed male viewers to indulge in vicarious laddism, whilst allowing female viewers to ridicule the bad but lovable Tony and Gary". They further commented that "it was also a genuine sitcom in that the humour came from the characters and their context". Simon Nye remarked: "I don't do mad, plot-driven farragoes. You have to allow your characters time to talk."

Men Behaving Badly boosted the acting careers of all four of the main cast. The final episode in 1998 drew 13.9 million viewers. The show was criticised by the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents for its portrayal of a "lad's culture of boozing and irresponsibility".

Book and audio releases
A companion guide to the show, The A–Z of Behaving Badly was released on 1 November 1995. It features many handy tips from Gary and Tony and was written by Simon Nye. On 27 July 2000, two audio compilations were released featuring eight shows from series three and four.

A script book entitled The Best of Men Behaving Badly was released on 5 October 2000. It contains 25 of the 42 scripts, along with some new material, black and white pictures, and introductions by Simon Nye.

Home media
All six series are available on region 2 DVD separately, and a complete collection featuring all six series is also available. The 1997 Christmas special and final trilogy 'Last Orders!' are also available on DVD.

While the rest of the series was shot in 4:3, the 3 episodes making up 'Last Orders!' are the only ones filmed in widescreen. However, the episodes are cropped for the DVD release. Owing to licensing difficulties, the music at the beginning of episode one 'Hair' and the rave in episode five 'Cardigan' had to be changed for the Series 5 DVD.

The entire series is also currently available on Netflix UK, featuring the original broadcast episodes now licensed by BBC Studios. The episode "Jingle Balls!/The Big Christmas Box" is listed as the 7th episode of Series 6 under the title "Merry Christmas". "Last Orders!" is available to view in widescreen for the first time since broadcast.

U.S. version
The series was remade for American television, broadcast on NBC 1996–1997, and starred Rob Schneider, Ken Marino, Ron Eldard and Justine Bateman. The humour was not appreciated by US audiences and the remake was cancelled after two seasons. The original series was eventually screened in the US on BBC America as British Men Behaving Badly. In Australia, where the British version was screened under its original title on the ABC, the US series was broadcast as It's a Man's World on the Seven Network.

title: Men Behaving Badly


text:
Gustave Kahn

Gustave Kahn (21 December 1859, in Metz – 5 September 1936, in Paris) was a French Symbolist poet and art critic. He was also active, via publishing and essay-writing, in defining Symbolism and distinguishing it from the Decadent Movement.

Personal life
Kahn was a Jew from Lorraine. He chose sides with Émile Zola in the Dreyfus affair. His wife Elizabeth converted to Judaism as a protest against antisemitism, changing her name to Rachel.

Poetry
Kahn claimed to have invented the term vers libre, or free verse. He was in any case one of the form's first European exponents. His principal publications include Les Palais nomades (1887), Domaine de fée (1895), and Le Livre d'images (1897). He also made a valuable contribution to the movement's history with his book Symbolistes et décadents (1902).

Other work
In addition to his poems, Kahn was a public intellectual who wrote novels, plays, and literary criticism. He was also extremely influential as a publisher of symbolist writing. Together with Félix Fénéon and Leo d'Orfer, both critics, Kahn founded and then directed La Vogue in 1886. Through that magazine, Kahn and his partners were able to influence the careers of developing decadent writers such as Jules Laforgue, as well as to inject new life into the careers of established figures such as Arthur Rimbaud, whose Les Illuminations manuscript was published in its pages. Together with Jean Moréas, he also founded and directed Le Symboliste, a short-lived journal intended as a counter-point to Anatole Bajule's Le Décadent, which they viewed as a false and exploitative publication that represented a vain, shallow mockery of symbolist thought. He played a key role in a number of other periodicals, including La Revue Indépendante, La Revue Blanche and Le Mercure de France.

He was also an art critic and collector who stayed current with developments in painting and sculpture until his death. He wrote a widely-read obituary for neo-impressionist painter Georges Seurat, in which he suggested a symbolist approach to interpreting the artist's work.

He also played a role in a number of debates on public issues, including anarchism, feminism, socialism, and Zionism. In the 1920s he was (head)editor of  Menorah, a Jewish bimonthly magazine which folded in 1933.

In 1903, American composer Charles Loeffler set four of Kahn's poems to music for piano and voice. The poems were from Les Palais Nomades: Timbres Oublies, Adieu Pour Jamais, Les Soirs d'Automne, and Les Paons.

After his death, his manuscripts were placed in the collection of the library of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

Quotation

 * Les Paons

 * Se penchant vers les dahlias,
 * Des paons cabraient des rosaces lunaires,
 * L'assouplissement des branches vénère
 * Son pâle visage aux mourants dahlias.

 * Elle écoute au loin les brèves musiques
 * Nuit claire aux ramures d'accords,
 * Et la lassitude a bercé son corps
 * Au rythme odorant des pures musiques.

 * Les paons ont dressé la rampe ocellée
 * Pour la descente de ses yeux vers le tapis
 * De choses et de sens
 * Qui va vers l'horizon, parure vermiculée
 * De son corps alangui.
 * En l'âme se tapit
 * le flou désir molli de récits et d'encens.

Principal works

 * Palais nomades (1887)
 * Les Chansons d'amant (1891)
 * Domaine de fée (1895)
 * Le Roi fou (1896)
 * La Pluie et le beau temps (1896)
 * Limbes de lumières (1897)
 * Le Livre d'images (1897)
 * Premiers poèmes (1897)
 * Le Conte de l'or et du silence (1898) translated by Brian Stableford as The Tale of Gold and Silence (2011) ISBN 978-1-61227-063-0
 * Les Petites Ames pressées (1898)
 * Le Cirque solaire (1898) translated into English by Sam Kunkel as The Solar Circus (First To Knock, 2023)
 * Les Fleurs de la passion (1900)
 * L'Adultère sentimental (1902)
 * Symbolistes et décadents (1902)
 * Odes de la "Raison" (1902 réédité aux Editions du Fourneau 1995)
 * Contes hollandais (1903)
 * La Femme dans la caricature française (1907)
 * Contes hollandais (deuxième série) (1908)
 * La Pépinière du Luxembourg (1923)
 * L'Aube enamourée (1925)
 * Mourle (1925)
 * Silhouettes littéraires (1925)
 * La Childebert (1926)
 * Contes juifs (1926 réédité chez "Les Introuvables" 1977)
 * Images bibliques (1929)
 * Terre d'Israël (1933)

title: Gustave Kahn


text:
Karl Menninger

Karl Augustus Menninger (July 22, 1893 – July 18, 1990) was an American psychiatrist and a member of the Menninger family of psychiatrists who founded the Menninger Foundation and the Menninger Clinic in Topeka, Kansas.

Biography
Menninger was born on July 22, 1893, in Topeka, Kansas, the son of Florence Vesta (Kinsley) and Charles Frederick Menninger. In addition to studying at Washburn University, Indiana University and the University of Wisconsin–Madison, he also studied medicine at Harvard Medical School. He graduated from the school cum laude in 1917. While at Washburn, he was a member of the Alpha Delta Fraternity, a local group. In 1960 he was inducted into the school's Sagamore Honor Society.

Beginning with an internship in Kansas City, Menninger worked at the Boston Psychopathic Hospital and taught at Harvard Medical School. In 1919, he returned to Topeka where, together with his father, he founded the Menninger Clinic. By 1925, they had attracted enough investors, including brother William C. Menninger, to build the Menninger Sanitarium. His book, The Human Mind, which explained the science of psychiatry, was published in 1930.

The Menninger Foundation was established in 1941. After World War II, Karl Menninger was instrumental in founding the Winter Veterans Administration Hospital, in Topeka. It became the largest psychiatric training center in the world. He was among the first members of the Society for General Systems Research.

In 1946 he founded the Menninger School of Psychiatry. It was renamed in his honor in 1985 as the Karl Menninger School of Psychiatry and Mental Health Science. In 1952, Karl Targownik, who would become one of his closest friends, joined the Clinic.

Personal life
Menninger married Grace Gaines in 1916, with whom he had three children: Martha, Julia and Robert. The couple divorced in February 1941. Menninger remarried on September 9, 1941, taking Jeanette Lyle as his wife. Together they adopted a daughter named Rosemary in 1948. He died of abdominal cancer July 18, 1990, four days before his 97th birthday.

In popular culture

 * Author Chaim Potok quoted Menninger on the dedication page of his novel, The Chosen (1967).
 * Renee Richards quoted Menninger on the dedication page of her memoir, Second Serve (1983).
 * In the 1995 biographical film Killer: A Journal Of Murder, Menninger is portrayed by John Bedford Lloyd, as the psychiatrist in charge of testing the sanity of serial killer Carl Panzram.
 * Karl Menninger figures in the French film (in the English language) Jimmy P: Psychotherapy of a Plains Indian (2013), portrayed by Larry Pine.

Work
During his career, Menninger wrote a number of influential books. In his first book, The Human Mind, Menninger argued that psychiatry was a science and that the mentally ill were only slightly different from healthy individuals. In The Crime of Punishment, Menninger argued that crime was preventable through psychiatric treatment; punishment was a brutal and inefficient relic of the past. He advocated treating offenders like the mentally ill.

His subsequent books include The Vital Balance, Man Against Himself and Love Against Hate.

Honors

 * In 1981, Menninger was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by Jimmy Carter.
 * In 1985, the Menninger School of Psychiatry was named for him.

Letter to Thomas Szasz
On October 6, 1988, less than two years before his death, Karl Menninger wrote a letter to Thomas Szasz, author of The Myth of Mental Illness.

In the letter, Menninger said that he has just read Szasz's book Insanity: The Idea and Its Consequences. Menninger wrote that neither of them liked the situation in which insanity separates men from men and free will is forgotten. After recounting the lack of scientific method in psychology over the years, Menninger expressed his regret that he did not come over to a dialogue with Szasz.

Publications
Menninger wrote several books and articles. A selection:
 * 1930. The Human Mind. Garden City, NY: Garden City Pub. Co.
 * 1931. From Sin to Psychiatry, an Interview on the Way to Mental Health with Dr. Karl A. Menninger [by] L. M. Birkhead. Little Blue Books Series #1585. Girard, Kansas: Haldeman-Julius Press.
 * 1938. Man Against Himself. New York: Harcourt, Brace.
 * 1942. Love Against Hate
 * 1950. Guide to Psychiatric Books; with a Suggested Basic Reading List. New York: Grune & Stratton.
 * 1952. Manual for Psychiatric Case Study. New York: Grune & Stratton.
 * 1958. Theory of Psychoanalytic Technique. New York: Basic Books.
 * 1959. A Psychiatrist's World: Selected Papers. New York: Viking Press.
 * 1963. The Vital Balance: The Life Process in Mental Health and Illness. New York: Viking Penguin.
 * 1968. Das Leben als Balance; seelische Gesundheit und Krankheit im Lebensprozess. München: R. Piper.
 * 1968. The Crime of Punishment. New York: Penguin Books.
 * 1972. A Guide to Psychiatric Books in English [by] Karl Menninger. New York: Grune & Stratton.
 * 1973. Whatever Became of Sin?. New York: Hawthorn Books.
 * 1978. The Human Mind Revisited: Essays in Honor of Karl A. Menninger. Edited by Sydney Smith. New York: International Universities Press.
 * 1985. Conversations with Dr. Karl Menninger (sound recording)

title: Karl Menninger


text:
Empty product

In mathematics, an empty product, or nullary product or vacuous product, is the result of multiplying no factors. It is by convention equal to the multiplicative identity (assuming there is an identity for the multiplication operation in question), just as the empty sum—the result of adding no numbers—is by convention 0|zero, or the additive identity. When numbers are implied, the empty product becomes one.

The term empty product is most often used in the above sense when discussing arithmetic operations. However, the term is sometimes employed when discussing set-theoretic intersections, categorical products, and products in computer programming.

Definition
Let a1, a2, a3, ... be a sequence of numbers, and let

 * $$P_m = \prod_{i=1}^m a_i = a_1 \cdots a_m $$

be the product of the first m elements of the sequence. Then

 * $$P_m = P_{m-1} a_m$$

for all m = 1, 2, ... provided that we use the convention $$P_0 = 1$$. In other words, a "product" with no factors at all evaluates to 1. Allowing a "product" with zero factors reduces the number of cases to be considered in many mathematical formulas. Such a "product" is a natural starting point in induction proofs, as well as in algorithms. For these reasons, the "empty product is one" convention is common practice in mathematics and computer programming.

Relevance of defining empty products
The notion of an empty product is useful for the same reason that the number 0|zero and the empty set are useful: while they seem to represent quite uninteresting notions, their existence allows for a much shorter mathematical presentation of many subjects.

For example, the empty products 0! = 1 (the factorial of zero) and x0 = 1 shorten Taylor series notation (see zero to the power of zero for a discussion of when x = 0). Likewise, if M is an n × n matrix, then M0 is the n × n identity matrix, reflecting the fact that applying a linear map zero times has the same effect as applying the identity map.

As another example, the fundamental theorem of arithmetic says that every positive integer greater than 1 can be written uniquely as a product of primes. However, if we do not allow products with only 0 or 1 factors, then the theorem (and its proof) become longer.

More examples of the use of the empty product in mathematics may be found in the binomial theorem (which assumes and implies that x0 = 1 for all x), Stirling number, König's theorem, binomial type, binomial series, difference operator and Pochhammer symbol.

Logarithms and exponentials
Since logarithms map products to sums:

 * $$\ln \prod_i x_i = \sum_i \ln x_i$$

they map an empty product to an empty sum.

Conversely, the exponential function maps sums into products:

 * $$e^{\sum_i x_i} = \prod_i e^{x_i}$$

and maps an empty sum to an empty product.

Nullary Cartesian product
Consider the general definition of the Cartesian product:

 * $$\prod_{i \in I} X_i = \left\{ g : I \to \bigcup_{i \in I} X_i \mid \forall i\ g(i) \in X_i \right\}.$$

If I is empty, the only such g is the empty function $$f_\varnothing$$, which is the unique subset of $$\varnothing\times\varnothing$$ that is a function $$\varnothing \to \varnothing$$, namely the empty subset $$\varnothing$$ (the only subset that $$\varnothing\times\varnothing = \varnothing$$ has):

 * $$\prod_\varnothing{} = \left\{ f_\varnothing: \varnothing \to \varnothing \right\} = \{\varnothing\}.$$

Thus, the cardinality of the Cartesian product of no sets is 1.

Under the perhaps more familiar n-tuple interpretation,

 * $$\prod_\varnothing{} = \{ \},$$

that is, the singleton set containing the empty tuple. Note that in both representations the empty product has cardinality 1 – the number of all ways to produce 0 outputs from 0 inputs is 1.

Nullary categorical product
In any category, the product of an empty family is a terminal object of that category. This can be demonstrated by using the limit definition of the product. An n-fold categorical product can be defined as the limit with respect to a diagram given by the discrete category with n objects. An empty product is then given by the limit with respect to the empty category, which is the terminal object of the category if it exists. This definition specializes to give results as above. For example, in the category of sets the categorical product is the usual Cartesian product, and the terminal object is a singleton set. In the category of groups the categorical product is the Cartesian product of groups, and the terminal object is a trivial group with one element. To obtain the usual arithmetic definition of the empty product we must take the decategorification of the empty product in the category of finite sets.

Dually, the coproduct of an empty family is an initial object. Nullary categorical products or coproducts may not exist in a given category; e.g. in the category of fields, neither exists.

In logic
Classical logic defines the operation of conjunction, which is generalized to universal quantification in predicate calculus, and is widely known as logical multiplication because we intuitively identify true with 1 and false with 0 and our conjunction behaves as ordinary multiplier. Multipliers can have arbitrary number of inputs. In case of 0 inputs, we have empty conjunction, which is identically equal to true.

This is related to another concept in logic, vacuous truth, which tells us that empty set of objects can have any property. It can be explained the way that the conjunction (as part of logic in general) deals with values less or equal 1. This means that the longer the conjunction, the higher the probability of ending up with 0. Conjunction merely checks the propositions and returns 0 (or false) as soon as one of propositions evaluates to false. Reducing the number of conjoined propositions increases the chance to pass the check and stay with 1. Particularly, if there are 0 tests or members to check, none can fail, so by default we must always succeed regardless of which propositions or member properties were to be tested.

In computer programming
Many programming languages, such as Python, allow the direct expression of lists of numbers, and even functions that allow an arbitrary number of parameters. If such a language has a function that returns the product of all the numbers in a list, it usually works like this: (Please note:  is not available in the   module prior to version 3.8.)

This convention helps avoid having to code special cases like "if length of list is 1" or "if length of list is zero."

Multiplication is an infix operator and therefore a binary operator, complicating the notation of an empty product. Some programming languages handle this by implementing variadic functions. For example, the fully parenthesized prefix notation of Lisp languages gives rise to a natural notation for nullary functions:

(* 2 2 2)  ; evaluates to 8 (* 2 2)    ; evaluates to 4 (* 2)      ; evaluates to 2 (*)        ; evaluates to 1

title: Empty product


text:
Capital (economics)

In economics, capital goods or capital are "those durable produced goods that are in turn used as productive inputs for further production" of goods and services. A typical example is the machinery used in a factory. At the macroeconomic level, "the nation's capital stock includes buildings, equipment, software, and inventories during a given year."

Capital goods have also been called complex product systems (CoPS). The means of production is as a "...series of heterogeneous commodities, each having specific technical characteristics ..." in the form of a durable good that is used in the production of goods or services. Capital goods are a particular form of economic good and are tangible property. Capital goods are one of the three types of producer goods, the other two being land and labour. The three are also known collectively as "primary factors of production". This classification originated during the classical economics period and has remained the dominant method for classification.

Capital can be increased by the use of the factors of production, which however excludes certain durable goods like homes and personal automobiles that are not used in the production of saleable goods and services.

In Marxian critique of political economy, capital is viewed as a social relation. Critical analysis of the economists portrayal of the capitalist mode of production as a transhistorical state of affairs distinguishes different forms of capital:
 * constant capital, which refers to capital goods
 * variable capital, which refers to labor-inputs, where the cost is "variable" based on the amount of wages and salaries paid during an employee's contract/employment,
 * fictitious capital, which refers to intangible representations or abstractions of physical capital, such as stocks, bonds and securities (or "tradable paper claims to wealth")

Adam Smith defined capital as "that part of man's stock which he expects to afford him revenue". In economic models, capital is an input in the production function. The total physical capital at any given moment in time is referred to as the capital stock (not to be confused with the capital stock of a business entity). Capital goods, real capital, or capital assets are already-produced, durable goods or any non-financial asset that is used in production of goods or services.

In narrow and broad uses
Classical and neoclassical economics describe capital as one of the factors of production (alongside the other factors: land and labour). All other inputs to production are called intangibles in classical economics. This includes organization, entrepreneurship, knowledge, goodwill, or management (which some characterize as talent, social capital or instructional capital).

Many definitions and descriptions of capital goods production have been proposed in the literature. Capital goods are generally considered one-of-a-kind, capital intensive products that consist of many components. They are often used as manufacturing systems or services themselves. Examples include hand tools, machine tools, data centers, oil rigs, semiconductor fabrication plants, and wind turbines. Their production is often organized in projects, with several parties cooperating in networks.

This is what makes it a factor of production:
 * The good is not used up immediately in the process of production unlike raw materials or intermediate goods. (The significant exception to this is depreciation allowance, which like intermediate goods, is treated as a business expense.)
 * The good can be produced or increased (in contrast to land and non-renewable resources).

These distinctions of convenience have carried over to contemporary economic theory. Adam Smith provided the further clarification that capital is a stock. As such, its value can be estimated at a point in time. By contrast, investment, as production to be added to the capital stock, is described as taking place over time ("per year"), thus a flow.

Earlier illustrations often described capital as physical items, such as tools, buildings, and vehicles that are used in the production process. Since at least the 1960s economists have increasingly focused on broader forms of capital. For example, investment in skills and education can be viewed as building up human capital or knowledge capital, and investments in intellectual property can be viewed as building up intellectual capital. Natural capital is the world's stock of natural resources, which includes geology, soils, air, water and all living organisms. These terms lead to certain questions and controversies discussed in those articles.

A capital good lifecycle typically consists of tendering, engineering and procurement, manufacturing, commissioning, maintenance, and (sometimes) decommissioning.

Capital goods are a major factor in the process of technical innovation: "All innovations—whether they involve the introduction of a new product or provide a cheaper way of producing an existing product—require that the capital goods sector shall produce a new product (machine or physical plant) according to certain specifications."

Capital goods are a constituent element of the stock of capital assets, or fixed capital and play a key role in the economic analysis of "... growth and production, as well as the distribution of income..."

Immaterial capital goods
Capital goods can also be immaterial, when they take the form of intellectual property. Many production processes require the intellectual property to (legally) produce their products. Just like material capital goods, they can require substantial investment, and can also be subject to amortization, depreciation, and divestment.

Differences from consumer goods
People buy capital goods to use as static resources to make other goods, whereas consumer goods are purchased to be consumed.

For example, an automobile is a consumer good when purchased as a private car.

Dump trucks used in manufacturing or construction are capital goods because companies use them to build things like roads, dams, buildings, and bridges.

In the same way, a chocolate bar is a consumer good, but the machines that produce the candy are capital goods.

Some capital goods can be used in both production of consumer goods or production goods, such as machinery for the production of dump trucks.

Consumption is the logical result of all economic activity, but the level of future consumption depends on the future capital stock, and this in turn depends on the current level of production in the capital-goods sector. Hence if there is a desire to increase consumption, the output of the capital goods should be maximized.

Importance
Capital goods, often called complex products and systems (CoPS), play an important role in today's economy. Aside from allowing a business to create goods or provide services for consumers, capital goods are important in other ways. In an industry where production equipment and materials are quite expensive, they can be a high barrier to entry for new companies. If a new business cannot afford to purchase the machines it needs to create a product, for example, it may not be able to compete as effectively in the market. Such a company might turn to another business to supply its products, but this can be expensive as well. This means that, in industries where the means of production represent a large amount of a business's start-up costs, the number of companies competing in the market is often relatively small.

Investment required
The acquisition of machinery and other expensive equipment often represents a significant investment for a company. When a business is struggling, it often puts off such purchases as long as possible, since it does not make sense to spend money on equipment if the company is not around to use it. Capital spending can be a sign that a manufacturer expects growth or at least a steady demand for its products, a potentially positive economic sign. In most cases, capital goods require a substantial investment on behalf of the producer, and their purchase is usually referred to as a capital expense. These goods are important to businesses because they use these items to make functional goods for customers or to provide consumers with valuable services. As a result, they are sometimes referred to as producers' goods, production goods, or means of production.

In international trade
In the theory of international trade, the causes and nature of the trade of capital goods receive little attention. Trade-in capital goods is a crucial part of the dynamic relationship between international trade and development. The production and trade of capital goods, as well as consumer goods, must be introduced to trade models, and the entire analysis integrated with domestic capital accumulation theory.

Modern types of capital
Detailed classifications of capital that have been used in various theoretical or applied uses generally respect the following division:
 * Financial capital, which represents obligations, and is liquidated as money for trade, and owned by legal entities. It is in the form of capital assets, traded in financial markets. Its market value is not based on the historical accumulation of money invested but on the perception by the market of its expected revenues and of the risk entailed.
 * Social capital, which in private enterprise is partly captured as goodwill or brand value, but is a more general concept of inter-relationships between human beings having money-like value that motivates actions in a similar fashion to paid compensation.
 * Instructional capital, defined originally in academia as that aspect of teaching and knowledge transfer that is not inherent in individuals or social relationships but transferable. Various theories use names like knowledge or intellectual capital to describe similar concepts but these are not strictly defined as in the academic definition and have no widely agreed accounting treatment.
 * Human capital, a broad term that generally includes social, instructional and individual human talent in combination. It is used in technical economics to define "balanced growth", which is the goal of improving human capital as much as economic capital.
 * Public capital is a blanket term that attempts to characterize physical capital that is considered infrastructure and which supports production in unclear or poorly accounted ways. This encompasses the aggregate body of all government-owned assets that are used to promote private industry productivity, including highways, railways, airports, water treatment facilities, telecommunications, electric grids, energy utilities, municipal buildings, public hospitals and schools, police, fire protection, courts and still others. However, it is a problematic term insofar as many of these assets can be either publicly or privately owned.
 * Natural or ecological capital is the world's stock of natural resources, which includes geology, soils, air, water and all living organisms. Some natural capital assets provide people with free goods and services, often called ecosystem services. Two of these (clean water and fertile soil) underpin our economy and society and make human life possible.

Separate literatures have developed to describe both natural capital and social capital. Such terms reflect a wide consensus that nature and society both function in such a similar manner as traditional industrial infrastructural capital, that it is entirely appropriate to refer to them as different types of capital in themselves. In particular, they can be used in the production of other goods, are not used up immediately in the process of production, and can be enhanced (if not created) by human effort.

There is also a literature of intellectual capital and intellectual property law. However, this increasingly distinguishes means of capital investment, and collection of potential rewards for patent, copyright (creative or individual capital), and trademark (social trust or social capital) instruments.

Building on Marx, and on the theories of the sociologist and philosopher Pierre Bourdieu, scholars have recently argued for the significance of "culinary capital" in the arena of food. The idea is that the production, consumption, and distribution of knowledge about food can confer power and status.

Interpretations
Within classical economics, Adam Smith (Wealth of Nations, Book II, Chapter 1) distinguished fixed capital from circulating capital. The former designated physical assets not consumed in the production of a product (e.g., machines and storage facilities), while the latter referred to physical assets consumed in the process of production (e.g., raw materials and intermediate products). For an enterprise, both were types of capital.

Economist Henry George argued that financial instruments like stocks, bonds, mortgages, promissory notes, or other certificates for transferring wealth is not really capital, because "Their economic value merely represents the power of one class to appropriate the earnings of another" and "their increase or decrease does not affect the sum of wealth in the community".

Some thinkers, such as Werner Sombart and Max Weber, locate the concept of capital as originating in double-entry bookkeeping, which is thus a foundational innovation in capitalism, Sombart writing in "Medieval and Modern Commercial Enterprise" that:
 * The very concept of capital is derived from this way of looking at things; one can say that capital, as a category, did not exist before double-entry bookkeeping. Capital can be defined as that amount of wealth which is used in making profits and which enters into the accounts.

Karl Marx adds a distinction that is often confused with David Ricardo's. In Marxian theory, variable capital refers to a capitalist's investment in labor-power, seen as the only source of surplus-value. It is called "variable" since the amount of value it can produce varies from the amount it consumes, i.e., it creates new value. On the other hand, constant capital refers to investment in non-human factors of production, such as plant and machinery, which Marx takes to contribute only its own replacement value to the commodities it is used to produce.

Investment or capital accumulation, in classical economic theory, is the production of increased capital. Investment requires that some goods be produced that are not immediately consumed, but instead used to produce other goods as capital goods. Investment is closely related to saving, though it is not the same. As Keynes pointed out, saving involves not spending all of one's income on current goods or services, while investment refers to spending on a specific type of goods, i.e., capital goods.

Austrian School economist Eugen Boehm von Bawerk maintained that capital intensity was measured by the roundaboutness of production processes. Since capital is defined by him as being goods of higher-order, or goods used to produce consumer goods, and derived their value from them, being future goods.

Human development theory describes human capital as being composed of distinct social, imitative and creative elements: This theory is the basis of triple bottom line accounting and is further developed in ecological economics, welfare economics and the various theories of green economics. All of which use a particularly abstract notion of capital in which the requirement of capital being produced like durable goods is effectively removed.
 * Social capital is the value of network trusting relationships between individuals in an economy.
 * Individual capital, which is inherent in persons, protected by societies, and trades labour for trust or money. Close parallel concepts are "talent", "ingenuity", "leadership", "trained bodies", or "innate skills" that cannot reliably be reproduced by using any combination of any of the others above. In traditional economic analysis individual capital is more usually called labour.
 * Instructional capital in the academic sense is clearly separate from either individual persons or social bonds between them.

The Cambridge capital controversy was a dispute between economists at Cambridge, Massachusetts based MIT and University of Cambridge in the UK about the measurement of capital. The Cambridge, UK economists, including Joan Robinson and Piero Sraffa claimed that there is no basis for aggregating the heterogeneous objects that constitute 'capital goods.'

Political economists Jonathan Nitzan and Shimshon Bichler have suggested that capital is not a productive entity, but solely financial and that capital values measure the relative power of owners over the broad social processes that bear on profits.

title: Capital (economics)