text:
Social group

In the social sciences, a social group is defined as two or more people who interact with one another, share similar characteristics, and collectively have a sense of unity. Regardless, social groups come in a myriad of sizes and varieties. For example, a society can be viewed as a large social group. The system of behaviors and psychological processes occurring within a social group or between social groups is known as group dynamics.

Social cohesion approach
A social group exhibits some degree of social cohesion and is more than a simple collection or aggregate of individuals, such as people waiting at a bus stop, or people waiting in a line. Characteristics shared by members of a group may include interests, values, representations, ethnic or social background, and kinship ties. Kinship ties being a social bond based on common ancestry, marriage or adoption. In a similar vein, some researchers consider the defining characteristic of a group as social interaction. According to Dunbar's number, on average, people cannot maintain stable social relationships with more than 150 individuals.

Social psychologist Muzafer Sherif proposed to define a social unit as a number of individuals interacting with each other with respect to:

 * 1) Common motives and goals
 * 2) An accepted division of labor, i.e. roles
 * 3) Established status (social rank, dominance) relationships
 * 4) Accepted norms and values with reference to matters relevant to the group
 * 5) Development of accepted sanctions (praise and punishment) if and when norms were respected or violated

This definition succeeds in providing the researcher with the tools required to answer three important questions:

 * 1) "How is a group formed?"
 * 2) "How does a group function?"
 * 3) "How does one describe those social interactions that occur on the way to forming a group?"

Significance of that definition
The attention of those who use, participate in, or study groups has focused on functioning groups, on larger organizations, or on the decisions made in these organizations. Much less attention has been paid to the more ubiquitous and universal social behaviors that do not clearly demonstrate one or more of the five necessary elements described by Sherif.

Some of the earliest efforts to understand these social units have been the extensive descriptions of urban street gangs in the 1920s and 1930s, continuing through the 1950s, which understood them to be largely reactions to the established authority. The primary goal of gang members was to defend gang territory, and to define and maintain the dominance structure within the gang. There remains in the popular media and urban law enforcement agencies an avid interest in gangs, reflected in daily headlines which emphasize the criminal aspects of gang behavior. However, these studies and the continued interest have not improved the capacity to influence gang behavior or to reduce gang related violence.

The relevant literature on animal social behaviors, such as work on territory and dominance, has been available since the 1950s. Also, they have been largely neglected by policy makers, sociologists and anthropologists. Indeed, vast literature on organization, property, law enforcement, ownership, religion, warfare, values, conflict resolution, authority, rights, and families have grown and evolved without any reference to any analogous social behaviors in animals. This disconnect may be the result of the belief that social behavior in humankind is radically different from the social behavior in animals because of the human capacity for language use and rationality. Of course, while this is true, it is equally likely that the study of the social (group) behaviors of other animals might shed light on the evolutionary roots of social behavior in people.

Territorial and dominance behaviors in humans are so universal and commonplace that they are simply taken for granted (though sometimes admired, as in home ownership, or deplored, as in violence). But these social behaviors and interactions between human individuals play a special role in the study of groups: they are necessarily prior to the formation of groups. The psychological internalization of territorial and dominance experiences in conscious and unconscious memory are established through the formation of social identity, personal identity, body concept, or self concept. An adequately functioning individual identity is necessary before an individual can function in a division of labor (role), and hence, within a cohesive group. Coming to understand territorial and dominance behaviors may thus help to clarify the development, functioning, and productivity of groups.

Social identification approach
Explicitly contrasted against a social cohesion based definition for social groups is the social identity perspective, which draws on insights made in social identity theory. Here, rather than defining a social group based on expressions of cohesive social relationships between individuals, the social identity model assumes that "psychological group membership has primarily a perceptual or cognitive basis." It posits that the necessary and sufficient condition for individuals to act as group members is "awareness of a common category membership" and that a social group can be "usefully conceptualized as a number of individuals who have internalized the same social category membership as a component of their self concept." Stated otherwise, while the social cohesion approach expects group members to ask "who am I attracted to?", the social identity perspective expects group members to simply ask "who am I?"

Empirical support for the social identity perspective on groups was initially drawn from work using the minimal group paradigm. For example, it has been shown that the mere act of allocating individuals to explicitly random categories is sufficient to lead individuals to act in an ingroup favouring fashion (even where no individual self-interest is possible). Also problematic for the social cohesion account is recent research showing that seemingly meaningless categorization can be an antecedent of perceptions of interdependence with fellow category members.

While the roots of this approach to social groups had its foundations in social identity theory, more concerted exploration of these ideas occurred later in the form of self-categorization theory. Whereas social identity theory was directed initially at the explanation of intergroup conflict in the absence of any conflict of interests, self-categorization theory was developed to explain how individuals come to perceive themselves as members of a group in the first place, and how this self-grouping process underlies and determines all problems subsequent aspects of group behaviour.

Defining characteristics
In his text, Group Dynamics, Forsyth (2010) discuses several common characteristics of groups that can help to define them.

Interaction
This group component varies greatly, including verbal or non-verbal communication, social loafing, networking, forming bonds, etc. Research by Bales (cite, 1950, 1999) determine that there are two main types of interactions; relationship interactions and task interactions.
 * 1) Relationship interactions: "actions performed by group members that relate to or influence the emotional and interpersonal bonds within the group, including both positive actions (social support, consideration) and negative actions (criticism, conflict)."
 * 2) Task interactions: "actions performed by group members that pertain to the group's projects, tasks, and goals." This involve members organizing themselves and utilizing their skills and resources to achieve something.

Goals
Most groups have a reason for their existence, be it increasing the education and knowledge, receiving emotional support, or experiencing spirituality or religion. Groups can facilitate the achievement of these goals. The circumplex model of group tasks by Joseph McGrath organizes group related tasks and goals. Groups may focus on several of these goals, or one area at a time. The model divides group goals into four main types, which are further sub-categorized
 * 1) Generating: coming up with ideas and plans to reach goals
 * 2) * Planning Tasks
 * 3) * Creativity Tasks
 * 4) Choosing: Selecting a solution.
 * 5) * Intellective Tasks
 * 6) * Decision-making Tasks
 * 7) Negotiating: Arranging a solution to a problem.
 * 8) * Cognitive Conflict Tasks
 * 9) * Mixed Motive Task
 * 10) Executing: Act of carrying out a task.
 * 11) * Contests/Battles/Competitive Tasks
 * 12) * Performance/Psychomotor Tasks

Interdependence in relation
“The state of being dependent, to some degree, on other people, as when one's outcomes, actions, thoughts, feelings, and experiences are determined in whole or part by others." Some groups are more interdependent than others. For example, a sports team would have a relatively high level of interdependence as compared to a group of people watching a movie at the movie theater. Also, interdependence may be mutual (flowing back and forth between members) or more linear/unilateral. For example, some group members may be more dependent on their boss than the boss is on each of the individuals.

Structure
Group structure involves the emergence or regularities, norms, roles and relations that form within a group over time. Roles involve the expected performance and conduct of people within the group depending on their status or position within the group. Norms are the ideas adopted by the group pertaining to acceptable and unacceptable conduct by members. Group structure is a very important part of a group. If people fail to meet their expectations within to groups, and fulfil their roles, they may not accept the group, or be accepted by other group members.

Unity
When viewed holistically, a group is greater than the sum of its individual parts. When people speak of groups, they speak of the group as a whole, or an entity, rather than speaking of it in terms of individuals. For example, it would be said that "The band played beautifully." Several factors play a part in this image of unity, including group cohesiveness, and entitativity (appearance of cohesion by outsiders).

Types
Donelson R. Forsyth distinguishes four main types of groups: primary groups, social groups, collectives, and categories.

Primary groups
Primary groups are small, long-term groups characterized by high amounts of cohesiveness, of member-identification, of face-to-face interaction, and of solidarity. Such groups may act as the principal source of socialization for individuals as primary groups may shape an individual's attitudes, values, and social orientation.

Three sub-groups of primary groups are:

 * 1) kin (relatives)
 * 2) close friends
 * 3) neighbours

Social groups
Social groups are also small groups but are of moderate duration. These groups often form due to a common goal. In this type of group, it is possible for outgroup members (i.e., social categories of which one is not a member) to become ingroup members (i.e., social categories of which one is a member) with reasonable ease. Social groups, such as study-groups or coworkers, interact moderately over a prolonged period of time.

Collectives
In contrast, spontaneous collectives, such as bystanders or audiences of various sizes, exist only for a very brief period of time and it is very easy to become an ingroup member from an outgroup member and vice versa. Collectives may display similar actions and outlooks.

Categories
Categories consist of individuals that are similar to one another in a certain way; members of this group can be permanent ingroup members or temporary ingroup members. Examples of categories include groups with the same ethnicity, gender, religion, or nationality. This group is generally the largest type of group.

Health
The social groups people are involved with in the workplace directly affect their health. No matter where they work or what the occupation is, feeling a sense of belonging in a peer group is a key to overall success. Part of this is the responsibility of the leader (manager, supervisor, etc.). If the leader helps everyone feel a sense of belonging within the group, it can help boost morale and productivity. According to Dr. Niklas Steffens "Social identification contributes to both psychological and physiological health, but the health benefits are stronger for psychological health". The social relationships people have can be linked to different health conditions. Lower quantity or quality social relationships have been connected to issues such as: development of cardiovascular disease, recurrent myocardial infarction, atherosclerosis, autonomic dysregulation, high blood pressure, cancer and delayed cancer recovery, and slower wound healing as well as inflammatory biomarkers and impaired immune function, factors associated with adverse health outcomes and mortality. The social relationship of marriage is the most studied of all, the marital history over the course of one's life can form differing health outcomes such as cardiovascular disease, chronic conditions, mobility limitations, self-rated health, and depressive symptoms. Social connectedness also plays a large part in overcoming certain conditions such as drug, alcohol, or substance abuse. With these types of issues, a person's peer group play a big role in helping them stay sober. Conditions do not need to be life-threatening, one's social group can help deal with work anxiety as well. When people are more socially connected have access to more support. Some of the health issues people have may also stem from their uncertainty about just where they stand among their colleagues. It has been shown that being well socially connected has a significant impact on a person as they age, according to a 10-year study by the MacArthur Foundation, which was published in the book 'Successful Aging' the support, love, and care we feel through our social connections can help to counteract some of the health-related negatives of aging. Older people who were more active in social circles tended to be better off health-wise.

Group membership and recruitment
Social groups tend to form based on certain principles of attraction, that draw individuals to affiliate with each other, eventually forming a group.

 * The Proximity Principle – the tendency for individuals to develop relationships and form groups with those they are (often physically) close to. This is often referred to as ‘familiarity breeds liking’, or that we prefer things/people that we are familiar with
 * The Similarity Principle – the tendency for individuals to affiliate with or prefer individuals who share their attitudes, values, demographic characteristics, etc.
 * The Complementarity Principle – the tendency for individuals to like other individuals who are dissimilar from themselves, but in a complementary manner. E.g. leaders will attract those who like being led, and those who like being led will attract leaders
 * The Reciprocity Principle – the tendency for liking to be mutual. For example, if A likes B, B is inclined to like A. Conversely, if A dislikes B, B will probably not like A (negative reciprocity)
 * The Elaboration Principle – the tendency for groups to complexify over time by adding new members through their relationships with existing group members. In more formal or structured groups, prospective members may need a reference from a current group member before they can join.

Other factors also influence the formation of a group. Extroverts may seek out groups more, as they find larger and more frequent interpersonal interactions stimulating and enjoyable (more than introverts). Similarly, groups may seek out extroverts more than introverts, perhaps because they find they connect with extroverts more readily. Those higher in relationality (attentiveness to their relations with other people) are also likelier to seek out and prize group membership. Relationality has also been associated with extroversion and agreeableness. Similarly, those with a high need for affiliation are more drawn to join groups, spend more time with groups and accept other group members more readily.

Previous experiences with groups (good and bad) inform people's decisions to join prospective groups. Individuals will compare the rewards of the group (e.g. belonging, emotional support, informational support, instrumental support, spiritual support; see Uchino, 2004 for an overview) against potential costs (e.g. time, emotional energy). Those with negative or 'mixed' experiences with previous groups will likely be more deliberate in their assessment of potential groups to join, and with which groups they choose to join. (For more, see Minimax Principal, as part of Social Exchange Theory)

Once a group has begun to form, it can increase membership through a few ways. If the group is an open group, where membership boundaries are relatively permeable, group members can enter and leave the group as they see fit (often via at least one of the aforementioned Principles of Attraction). A closed group on the other hand, where membership boundaries are more rigid and closed, often engages in deliberate and/or explicit recruitment and socialization of new members.

If a group is highly cohesive, it will likely engage in processes that contribute to cohesion levels, especially when recruiting new members, who can add to a group's cohesion, or destabilize it. Classic examples of groups with high cohesion are fraternities, sororities, gangs, and cults, which are all noted for their recruitment process, especially their initiation or hazing. In all groups, formal and informal initiations add to a group's cohesion and strengthens the bond between the individual and group by demonstrating the exclusiveness of group membership as well as the recruit's dedication to the group. Initiations tend to be more formal in more cohesive groups. Initiation is also important for recruitment because it can mitigate any cognitive dissonance in potential group members.

In some instances, such as cults, recruitment can also be referred to as conversion. Kelman's Theory of Conversion identifies 3 stages of conversion: compliance (individual will comply or accept group's views, but not necessarily agree with them), identification (member begins to mimic group's actions, values, characteristics, etc.) and internalization (group beliefs and demands become congruent with member's personal beliefs, goals and values). This outlines the process of how new members can become deeply connected to the group.

Development
If one brings a small collection of strangers together in a restricted space and environment, provides a common goal and maybe a few ground rules, then a highly probable course of events will follow. Interaction between individuals is the basic requirement. At first, individuals will differentially interact in sets of twos or threes while seeking to interact with those with whom they share something in common: i.e., interests, skills, and cultural background. Relationships will develop some stability in these small sets, in that individuals may temporarily change from one set to another, but will return to the same pairs or trios rather consistently and resist change. Particular twosomes and threesomes will stake out their special spots within the overall space.

Again depending on the common goal, eventually twosomes and threesomes will integrate into larger sets of six or eight, with corresponding revisions of territory, dominance-ranking, and further differentiation of roles. All of this seldom takes place without some conflict or disagreement: for example, fighting over the distribution of resources, the choices of means and different subgoals, the development of what are appropriate norms, rewards and punishments. Some of these conflicts will be territorial in nature: i.e., jealousy over roles, or locations, or favored relationships. But most will be involved with struggles for status, ranging from mild protests to serious verbal conflicts and even dangerous violence.

By analogy to animal behavior, sociologists may term these behaviors territorial behaviors and dominance behaviors. Depending on the pressure of the common goal and on the various skills of individuals, differentiations of leadership, dominance, or authority will develop. Once these relationships solidify, with their defined roles, norms, and sanctions, a productive group will have been established.

Aggression is the mark of unsettled dominance order. Productive group cooperation requires that both dominance order and territorial arrangements (identity, self-concept) be settled with respect to the common goal and within the particular group. Some individuals may withdraw from interaction or be excluded from the developing group. Depending on the number of individuals in the original collection of strangers, and the number of "hangers-on" that are tolerated, one or more competing groups of ten or less may form, and the competition for territory and dominance will then also be manifested in the inter group transactions.

Dispersal and transformation
Two or more people in interacting situations will over time develop stable territorial relationships. As described above, these may or may not develop into groups. But stable groups can also break up in to several sets of territorial relationships. There are numerous reasons for stable groups to "malfunction" or to disperse, but essentially this is because of loss of compliance with one or more elements of the definition of group provided by Sherif. The two most common causes of a malfunctioning group are the addition of too many individuals, and the failure of the leader to enforce a common purpose, though malfunctions may occur due to a failure of any of the other elements (i.e., confusions status or of norms).

In a society, there is a need for more people to participate in cooperative endeavors than can be accommodated by a few separate groups. The military has been the best example as to how this is done in its hierarchical array of squads, platoons, companies, battalions, regiments, and divisions. Private companies, corporations, government agencies, clubs, and so on have all developed comparable (if less formal and standardized) systems when the number of members or employees exceeds the number that can be accommodated in an effective group. Not all larger social structures require the cohesion that may be found in the small group. Consider the neighborhood, the country club, or the megachurch, which are basically territorial organizations who support large social purposes. Any such large organizations may need only islands of cohesive leadership.

For a functioning group to attempt to add new members in a casual way is a certain prescription for failure, loss of efficiency, or disorganization. The number of functioning members in a group can be reasonably flexible between five and ten, and a long-standing cohesive group may be able to tolerate a few hangers on. The key concept is that the value and success of a group is obtained by each member maintaining a distinct, functioning identity in the minds of each of the members. The cognitive limit to this span of attention in individuals is often set at seven. Rapid shifting of attention can push the limit to about ten. After ten, subgroups will inevitably start to form with the attendant loss of purpose, dominance-order, and individuality, with confusion of roles and rules. The standard classroom with twenty to forty pupils and one teacher offers a rueful example of one supposed leader juggling a number of subgroups.

Weakening of the common purpose once a group is well established can be attributed to: adding new members; unsettled conflicts of identities (i.e., territorial problems in individuals); weakening of a settled dominance-order; and weakening or failure of the leader to tend to the group. The actual loss of a leader is frequently fatal to a group, unless there was lengthy preparation for the transition. The loss of the leader tends to dissolve all dominance relationships, as well as weakening dedication to common purpose, differentiation of roles, and maintenance of norms. The most common symptoms of a troubled group are loss of efficiency, diminished participation, or weakening of purpose, as well as an increase in verbal aggression. Often, if a strong common purpose is still present, a simple reorganization with a new leader and a few new members will be sufficient to re-establish the group, which is somewhat easier than forming an entirely new group. This is the most common factor.

title: Social group


text:
Talk:Desteaptate, romane

This article is redundant with Desteapta-te, Romane!. olivier 09:03 Mar 3, 2003 (UTC)

Not anymore ^_^ - Montréalais

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

title: Talk:Desteaptate, romane


text:
Caroline Islands

The Caroline Islands (or the Carolines) are a widely scattered archipelago of tiny islands in the western Pacific Ocean, to the north of New Guinea. Politically, they are divided between the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM) in the central and eastern parts of the group, and Palau at the extreme western end. Historically, this area was also called Nuevas Filipinas or New Philippines, because they were part of the Spanish East Indies and were governed from Manila in the Philippines.

The Carolines are scattered across a distance of approximately 3,540 km, from the westernmost island, Tobi, in Palau, to the easternmost island, Kosrae, a state of the FSM.

Description
The group consists of about 500 small coral islands, east of the Philippines, in the Pacific Ocean. The distance from Yap (one of the larger Caroline islands) to Manila is 1200 mi.

Most of the islands are made up of low, flat coral atolls, but there are some that rise high above sea level.

People and culture
The indigenous inhabitants speak a variety of languages, including: the Micronesian languages of Pohnpeian, Chuukese, Carolinian, and Kosraean; the Western Malayo-Polynesian languages of Palauan and Chamorro; and the unclassified language Yapese (possibly one of the Admiralty Islands languages). There are also a significant number of inhabitants who belong to non-indigenous ethnic groups and speak other languages, including Filipinos and Japanese. The lingua franca used for trade and commerce among islanders who do not speak each other's languages is English.

The indigenous people of these islands live mainly on horticultural products, fish, many different varieties of bananas, and taro (either the "swamp" or the "purple" kind). On some islands, housing is still built using local materials such as coconut-palm thatch. As a result of missionary work over the centuries, Christianity is the religion most commonly practiced in this region of Micronesia. Nevertheless, many of the indigenous people adhere to the traditional belief in a supreme being called "Yalafar" and an evil spirit called "Can." For the most part, however, they do not engage in traditional religious rites.

The inhabitants of Yap are noted for possessing an unusual currency. Besides the ordinary shell money, there is a sort of stone coinage, consisting of huge calcite or limestone discs or wheels from 6 inches to 12 feet. in diameter, and weighing up to nearly 5 tons. These are all quarried in the Pelew Islands, 200 miles to the south, and must have been brought by native vessels or on rafts; later they were transferred on European vessels. The stones, which are rather tokens than money, do not circulate, but are piled up round about the chief's treasure-house, and appear to be regarded as public property. Some may not have been seen for some years, but the transfer of wealth is facilitated by a common understanding that a stone has a new owner.

The Micronesian navigator Mau Piailug (1932-2010) was originally from the Carolinian island of Satawal. He learned the traditional navigation techniques of the Weriyeng school, which had been preserved after other traditional techniques had been forgotten (due partly to the remoteness of the Carolinian Islands). In the 1970s, Mau shared his knowledge with members of the Polynesian Voyaging Society. This led to a revival of the practices of traditional Polynesian navigation techniques, and provided anthropologists with a greater understanding of the history of the Polynesian and Micronesian peoples.

In 1985, a study was published that examined the origin of the sidereal compass used in the Caroline Islands.

History
Different islands in the Carolines have passed down different legends about the origins and early histories of their peoples. For example, on Pohnpei, the islanders describe their history before colonial times as divided into three eras: the Mwehin Kawa or Mwehin Aramas (era of building or peopling, before 1100); the Mwehin Sau Deleur (era of the reigns of the Saudeleur, from 1100 to around 1628); and the Mwehin Nahnmwarki (era of the tribal chiefs, from around 1628 to 1885, when Spain colonized the islands).

According to Pohnpeian legend: the Saudeleur rulers originally came from beyond the islands; they were the first to bring government to Pohnpei; they imposed absolute, centralized rule on the islanders, which became increasingly oppressive over the centuries; and their arbitrary and onerous demands, along with their offenses against Pohnpeian deities, sowed resentment among Pohnpeians. Legend has it that the Saudeleur dynasty ended when another foreigner, called Isokelekel, invaded the islands, overthrew the Saudeleurs, and instituted the more decentralized nahnmwarki (tribal chief) system (which was maintained even during the later Colonial period, and still exists today).

Spanish overseas province
The first contact that European explorers had with the Caroline islands was in 1525, when a summer storm carried the Portuguese navigators Diogo da Rocha and Gomes de Sequeira eastward from the Moluccas (by way of Celebes). They ended up reaching several of the Caroline islands and staying there for several months, until January 20, 1526. Soon after, on August 22, 1526, the Spanish explorers Toribio Alonso de Salazar and Diego de Saavedra arrived in the area and recorded sighting the Island of San Bartolomé (Taongui). About 8 months later, on 1 January 1528, the explorer Álvaro de Saavedra Cerón claimed possession of the Ulithi Islands on behalf of the king of Spain. He named them the Islands of the Kings (Islas de los Reyes; Îles des Rois) after his patron and the Three Wise Men honored in the approaching Catholic feast of Epiphany. Spanish explorers visited the archipelago again in 1542 (Matelotes Islands), 1543, and 1545. In 1565, the islands were briefly visited by the first governor-general of the Philippines, Miguel Lopez de Legazpi (in office from 1565 to 1572).

Europeans did not visit the island again until 1686, when Francisco de Lezcano arrived in Yap. He called the islands Las Carolinas, in honor of Charles II of Spain. This name was later extended to include the Palau Islands and the archipelagos that British explorers, visiting them a century later (between 1788 and 1799), would come to call the Gilbert Islands and the Marshall Islands (Spaniards today call the Caroline islands Islas de las Hermanas, Hombres Pintados, and Los Jardines).

A Spanish royal decree, issued on October 19, 1707, authorized Spanish missionaries to make several expeditions to the Caroline Islands. However, in 1731, one such missionary, Juan Antonio Cantova, was killed. As a result, Spain ceased relations with the Caroline Islands. When they resumed relations in 1787, their emphasis was on trade and commerce.

In 1852, a Spanish colonel named Coello suggested to the Spanish government that effective Spanish occupation of the Caroline Islands would help the Spanish engage in trade and commerce with the Philippines, Australia, New Guinea, and the Americas. His suggestion was ignored at first, but, in 1885, a Spanish government representative called Butron signed an agreement with the tribal chiefs of Koror and Artingal establishing Spanish sovereignty over the Caroline Islands. At that point, Spain attempted to impose customs duties on commercial exchanges in the region. However, Spain's previous abandonment of the islands had allowed the establishment of German and British missions on the islands, and Germany and the United Kingdom disputed Spain's right to collect customs revenue. The European powers called on Pope Leo XIII to arbitrate this dispute. He decided that Spain would have these rights on the islands west of the 164th meridian east, and Germany would have these rights on the Marshall Islands. (He also assigned Germany the right to maintain a naval station in one of the Caroline Islands, but Germany never exercised that right.)

After the Spanish–American War of 1898, Spain sold the Carolines and the Northern Marianas to German Empire in the German–Spanish Treaty (1899) for 25 million pesetas (the equivalent of 17 million goldmarks or nearly one million pounds sterling), while reserving to itself the right to establish a coal mine in the area. Germany governed the archipelago as the Karolinen, and administratively associated it with German New Guinea.

A resort for whalers
The islands were a popular resort for whaling ships in the 19th century. The first such vessel known to have visited was the London whaler Britannia, which called at Ngatik in December 1793. Such vessels—from Britain, the United States, Australia and elsewhere—came for water, wood, and food and, sometimes, for men willing to serve as crewmen on the vessels. These ships stimulated commerce and were significant vectors for change (both good and ill). The islands most commonly visited were Kosrae, Mokil, Ngatik, Pingelap and Pohnpei.

Japanese colony
Japan invaded and occupied the islands in 1914 during World War I, installing two naval squadrons. The Western Carolines were under the squadron commanded by Rear Admiral Matsumura Tatsuo (1868–1932); the Eastern Carolines were under Vice-Admiral Yamaya Tanin (1866–1940). In 1920, after World War I, Japan received a League of Nations mandate to control the Caroline and Marshall Islands. During World War II, Japan operated a large base at Truk Lagoon which it used for expansion into the southeastern Pacific. In the latter years of that war, during the Japanese withdrawal to the Japanese home islands, the Allies effectively neutralized Truk in Operation Hailstone. After the war, the islands (together with the Marshall Islands) became trust territories of the United States. The Federated States of Micronesia gained independence in 1986, followed by Palau in 1994.

Colonial governors or officers
District officers (from 1889, styled Bezirksamtleute):

In the Western Caroline islands (Yap and Palau [and from 1907 Saipan])
 * 29 June 1886 – 18??, Manuel de Elisa
 * before November 1897 – after November 1898, S. Cortes
 * 1899–1909, Arno Senfft (b. 1864 – d. 1909)
 * 1909–19??, Rudolf Karlowa
 * 1909–1910, Georg Fritz
 * 1910–1911, Hermann Kersting
 * 1911–1914, Baumert

In the Eastern Caroline islands (Ponape, and including the Marshall Islands from 1911)
 * June 1886 – 1887, Capriles
 * 14 March 1887 – 1887, Isidro Posadillo (d. 1887)
 * October 1887 – January 1891, Luis Cadarso y Rey (d. 1898)
 * c.1894, Concha
 * before November 1897 – after November 1898, J. Fernández de Córdoba
 * 12 October 1899 – August 1901, Albert Hahl (b. 1868 – d. 1945)
 * 1 September 1901 – 30 April 1907, Victor Berg (b. 1861 – d. 1907)
 * 1907–198?, Max Girschner (acting)
 * 1908–1909, Georg Fritz
 * 1909 – 18 October 1910, Gustav Boeder (d. 1910)
 * 1910 – 7 October 1914, August Überhorst

Ecclesiastical history
Two Jesuits, Juan Antonio Cantova (also known as John Anthony Cantova) and Victor Walter, attempted missionary work there in 1731; the former was soon murdered and the latter obliged to flee. Two other Jesuits were killed later. In 1767, the Jesuits were suppressed in the Spanish dominions, and for the next 120 years there was no trace of a missionary in the islands.

After the 1886 dispute between Germany and Spain over possession of the Carolines was settled by Pope Leo XIII in favour of Spain, the king of Spain directed Spanish Capuchins to go to the islands. The royal order was issued on 15 March 1886, and the Propaganda Fide officially established that mission on 15 May 1886, dividing it into two sections, named the West Caroline's and the East Carolines. Until that time, the islands had belonged ecclesiastically to the Vicariate Apostolic of Micronesia. The Spanish Capuchins caused a catechism and prayer book to be printed in the Ponape language, and Father Anthony of Valentia wrote a small grammar and dictionary of the Yap language in 1890.

In 1899, after the Spanish priests had laid the foundations of the mission, the islands passed by purchase into the hands of Germany. Spain had contributed more than $5000 a year towards the mission, but Germany contributed no support. Spain had compelled the indigenous people to send their children to school; Germany allowed people to choose to send their children or not. As a result, many people stopped attending church and sending their children to school, and the mission's fortunes suffered. In response, the Propaganda Fide decided on 7 November 1904 to replace the Spanish Capuchins with German missionaries, and on 18 December 1905 to erect a single Apostolic prefecture in place of the two separate missions. The Very Reverend Father Venantius of Prechtal, Germany, was appointed first prefect Apostolic at that time.

In 1906, 24 missionaries (12 Fathers and 12 Brothers) were working in thirteen stations, and several Sisters of St. Francis left Luxembourg to take charge of the ten primary schools, in which a total of 262 children were enrolled. The missionaries boasted 90 adult converts that year, and reported that there were 1900 Catholics, a few Protestants, and 11,600 inhabitants who had not converted to Christianity.

On 1 July 1905, the United States sent a Jesuit from the Manila Observatory to the island of Yap to erect a meteorological station there, and appointed the Capuchin Father Callistus as its director. The station was able to identify that the East-Asiatic typhoons were originating in the Carolines. The station still makes weather observations twice a day, and sends advance notice of severe weather to Manila.

Postage stamps

During the period of German control, Germany issued postage stamps for the islands.

Transportation
Transportation within the islands is either by boat or air (if in close proximity of an airfield). Air travel is mostly domestic as most facilities cannot handle large aircraft. Caroline Islands Air is a chartered and the only domestic airline.

Flora
Three of the four species in the genus Ponapea are endemic to the Caroline Islands.

title: Caroline Islands


text:
Regions of Sweden

A region (region) is a self-governing local authority of Sweden. There are 21 regions (one of which is a municipality having the same responsibilities as a region), each corresponding roughly to a county. Regions are governed by a regional assembly (regionfullmäktige) that is elected every four years in conjunction with the general elections. The most important responsibilities of regions are the public health care system and public transportation. It is one of the principal administrative subdivisions of Sweden.

Within the same geographical borders as the regions, there are county administrative boards, an administrative entity appointed by the government. As of 2010, the different regional assemblies had a combined total of 1,696 seats.

Constitutionally, the regions exercise a degree of municipal self-government provided by the Basic Laws of Sweden. This does not constitute any degree of federalism, which is consistent with Sweden's status as a unitary state.

Within the geographic boundaries of the county there are also several smaller municipalities and administrations that exercise local self-government independent of the regions. These can also be referred to as "primary municipalities" or primärkommuner, while the regions are sekundärkommuner, "secondary municipalities". Gotland Municipality is an exception, due to its geographical boundaries, and also has the responsibilities of a region.

Historically, Stockholm was separate from counties and was not under the jurisdiction of the Stockholm County Council until 1967, and some other large cities were in counties but outside regions. The cities handled the responsibilities. The two last such cities were Malmö and Göteborg until 1998.

In January 2020, the county councils (landsting) of Sweden were officially reclassified as regions (regioner). De facto, the regions had already adopted the term "region" well before the new law was adopted.

title: Regions of Sweden


text:
Martha Washington Hotel

The Martha Washington Hotel (later known as Hotel Thirty Thirty, Hotel Lola, King & Grove New York, and The Redbury New York) was a hotel at 30 East 30th Street (later 29 East 29th Street) in the NoMad neighborhood of Manhattan in New York City. Opened in 1903 and operated as a women-only hotel for 95 years, the 13-storey structure was designed by Robert W. Gibson in the Renaissance Revival style for the Women's Hotel Company. The hotel's namesake, Martha Washington, was the first First Lady of the United States. It is a New York City designated landmark.

The facade is largely made of brick and stone and contains classical design elements such as brackets, dentils, ornate lintels, quoins, and rustication. On both 29th and 30th Streets, the facade is divided vertically into seven bays and horizontally into a two-storey base and ten-storey upper section, with a recessed top floor. The hotel originally contained several amenity areas for guests on the lower two storeys, including a lobby, dining rooms, reception rooms, and ballroom. Generally men were only permitted to enter the ground-level spaces and some of the second-storey spaces. The upper storeys originally contained 200 short-term guest rooms and 400 long-term residences, which were downsized to 250 hotel rooms by the 2020s.

The Woman's Hotel Company was established in 1897 and sought to identify a site and raise money over the following four years. Construction began in mid-1901, and the Martha Washington Hotel opened on March 1, 1903, as both a hotel and a long-term residence. Though there was initially high demand for the Martha Washington's rooms, the hotel's owners struggled to raise money and leased it out beginning in 1907. The Manger family operated the Martha Washington from 1920 to 1948, and the Sillins Hotel Corporation operated the hotel from 1950 to 1997. The hotel was converted to a mixed-sex tourist hotel in 1998 and, after a renovation, was renamed the Thirty Thirty in 2000. The hotel was further renovated in 2011, 2014, 2016, and 2019, undergoing several name and ownership changes during that decade. As The Redbury New York, it saw decreased patronage during the COVID-19 pandemic and became a temporary shelter for migrants in 2023.

Site
The Martha Washington Hotel is located at 27–31 East 29th Street in the NoMad neighborhood of Manhattan in New York City. The hotel occupies the center of a city block bounded by Madison Avenue to the west, 30th Street to the north, Park Avenue South to the east, and 29th Street to the south. The land lot is rectangular and measures 14,812 ft2, with frontage of 75 ft on 29th and 30th Streets and a depth of 197.5 ft. Nearby buildings include the Church of the Transfiguration, Episcopal and the James New York – NoMad to the west, the Emmet Building to the south, and the Colony Club building to the north. The site was assembled in 1901 from two land lots that had been occupied by the American Female Guardian Society since 1856.

Architecture
The Martha Washington Hotel was designed by architect Robert W. Gibson in the Renaissance Revival style. At the time of the hotel's construction in the early 1900s, many hotels were being built with classical architectural features because they had been designed by architects trained in Europe. Gibson, who had trained in England, incorporated classical elements such as brackets, dentils, ornate lintels, quoins, and rustication into the design.

Facade
The two primary elevations of the facade, on 29th Street to the south and 30th Street to the north, are very similar to one another. Both elevations rise twelve storeys from the ground and are divided vertically into seven bays; the top storeys are recessed from the street. The western elevation is partially visible and is made of plain brick with one-over-one sash windows, a recessed exterior light court, and a metal-sheathed section near the top.

Lower storeys
The ground floor and second floor piano nobile of both elevations are clad in rusticated blocks of limestone. A string course runs above the ground floor on both elevations. On 30th Street, each of the ground-floor bays is separated by a pier with alternating tan brick and limestone. The entrance on 30th Street is in the center bay, and there are double-height storefronts on either side. The entry doors are made of glass and metal and are topped by a glass transom window. Two of the outer bays feature marble stoops with metal railings that ascend to the storefronts. The ground floor on 29th Street is similar in design except that the entrances are in the outermost bays. The 29th Street entrances are flanked by pairs of rusticated columns, which support a pediment with a centered cartouche and a finial.

On both elevations, the second-storey piano nobile is clad with brick and contains stone quoins around the windows. The three center windows of the second storey have stone balustrades at their bottoms, as well as round arches with keystones at their tops. The four outer windows on that storey contain rectangular openings surrounded by terracotta key patterns. The lowest parts of the outer windows are clad with stone panels, while the upper sections are topped by lintels with splayed keystones. Above the second storey are protruding balconettes with iron railings, which are supported by terracotta brackets.

Upper storeys
Each window in the third through eighth storeys of the northern and southern elevations has a terracotta frame. The outermost bays of the facade are clad with brick, which is arranged to resemble a rusticated facade. The center three bays feature horizontal stone courses at regular intervals, and the middle bay contains three-part windows, some of which are arranged as Palladian windows. The remaining bays have stone windowsills and are topped by lintels with key or splayed patterns. There are decorative spandrel panels above the three central third-storey windows, and there are terracotta lunettes above the five central fourth-storey windows.

On the ninth storey of both elevations there are balconettes with iron railings in front of the outermost bays and the three center windows. All of the ninth-storey windows have terracotta lintels. On the tenth storey the windows are rectangular and have lintels with splayed patterns. Above the tenth-storey windows are keystones with brackets, as well as terracotta corbels, above which runs a horizontal terracotta string course. The eleventh storey contains a facade of terracotta panels, interspersed with windows; there is a large cornice above the eleventh storey, with modillions and dentils. There are terracotta panels on the twelfth storey.

Interior
When the hotel first opened it contained advanced mechanical equipment for its time, such as elevators, mail chutes, steam heating, and electric lighting. Every room had natural light exposure; the hotel did not have any interior light courts. Visitors of any sex could use the telegraph, telephone, or messenger services. There were also exterior fire escapes and stairwells. , the hotel contains about 143000 ft2 of space, spread across 13 stories.

Public rooms
When the Martha Washington Hotel was built the first and second floors were dedicated to communal rooms such as offices, a restaurant, dining rooms, and reception rooms. The lobby was decorated in an colonial style, with leather chairs and a buff-and-white color scheme. While the restaurant was open to the general public, there were dining rooms that could only be used by guests and residents. There were several shops, including a milliner/tailor shop, manicurist/podiatrist, shoe shiner, drug store, and newsstand. Next to the restaurant was a writing room and waiting room for men. Over the years, various spaces in the lobby were carved out to make way for storefronts.

Following a 2000 renovation, a bar and restaurant were created off the lobby. During a renovation in 2011, the hotel's ground floor was gutted, the ceiling was raised, a large glazed-ebony door was installed, and the walls were redecorated with black-and-white photographs of women. After the Martha Washington was renovated again in 2014, a new meeting and event space covering 4000 ft2 was created within the hotel. The public spaces were repainted in walnut colors, with fluted columns and blue floor tiles. There was also a long hallway, with mid-century modern furniture, leading to a check-in desk. The current design of the lobby dates to a 2019 renovation, which added seating areas enclosed with stained-glass panels, as well as blue-tinted lighting and rounded mirrors. There is also a lobby lounge next to the elevators near the entrance. The hotel has a fitness center as well.

The second storey had a tenant-only dining room, as well as several private reception rooms, when the hotel opened in 1903. Some of the reception rooms could be combined for major events. The second floor also had a library patterned after the one in George Washington's estate, Mount Vernon, with a "handsome" fireplace and a bas relief of the United States' first First Lady, Martha Washington. The library was decorated in a deep-red color scheme and ornamented with dark wood. The parlors, music rooms, tea rooms, and other spaces were designed to fit women's tastes. By 2016, the second floor included a ballroom covering 2,700 ft2 as well as a terrace of 1,700 ft2. The roof of the hotel contained a terrace that could be converted into a "summer garden and promenade" with awnings and hammocks.

Guest rooms
Originally the top ten storeys of the hotel comprised about 200 short-term guest rooms and 400 long-term residences, starting at the third floor. These were available in both single-room and multi-room en suite configurations. Each storey held between 40 and 50 units and had a reception room. The 12th floor contained employee bedrooms, while the remainder of the 12th storey and the inhabitable portions of the 13th storey contained studios with skylights. By the late 1990s, the Martha Washington had been divided into either 423 or 469 rooms.

When the hotel first opened about 36 women lived on each floor, with four communal toilets and four bathtubs on each floor. There was approximately one bathroom for every four guest rooms; most units lacked en suite bathrooms. The guest rooms were arranged so they could easily be combined into suites with two to five rooms. Some apartments were outfitted with double doors, allowing businesswomen to use these spaces as showrooms. Each bedroom had furnishings such as damask coverings and large pillows, and the hotel as a whole had custom-designed furniture such as double-faced bookcases, as well as appliances such as electric alarms. Smaller rooms had sofa beds, while larger units contained standard beds.

When the Martha Washington was renovated into a co-ed tourist hotel in 2000 the rooms were rearranged. Sources disagree on whether the hotel had 370, 350, or 262 units. The rooms were small and plain in design; a Washington Post critic described the rooms as having a bed, two side tables, an armoire, and a small dressing area. Some rooms also retained vestiges of the hotel's original use: for example, some guest rooms had sinks but not toilets or bathtubs. By 2016, there were around 255 rooms, many in different sizes and layouts. The rooms were decorated in a red, gray, black and white color scheme. with motifs relating to music and 20th-century New York City history. Each room was also equipped with mirrors, small television sets and refrigerators, and hidden speakers. Desks, nightstands, minibars, and other furniture were added in 2019, and the hotel's 259 rooms were redecorated with gray walls.

History
There was demand for women's residences in New York City as early as the mid-19th century, when most unmarried women lived in boarding houses or at home. Among the earliest women's residences in the city were the Working Women's Home at 45 Elizabeth Street, developed in the 1850s, as well as a women's hotel developed by A. T. Stewart on Park Avenue, developed in 1869. Through the 19th century, most of the city's hotels refused to admit single women at night. Between 60,000 and 70,000 businesswomen lived in the city by 1899, when philanthropist Grace Hoadley Dodge estimated that 10,000 women needed a women's hotel. When the Martha Washington Hotel was being developed in 1901, a "woman prominent in sociological work" said that nine out of ten working women lived apart from their families.

Development
The Woman's Hotel Company was established in 1897 by Charles Day Kellogg, a member of the Charity Organization Society, which was created specifically to erect hotels for businesswomen. The hotel was intended as a business enterprise rather than as a philanthropic venture. The company issued a prospectus in January 1898 and appointed a board of directors, composed of two women and six men. The next month, the Woman's Hotel Company began selling 10,000 shares at $100 each. The firm wished to build a 10- to 12-story hotel in Manhattan with 500 rooms; the company believed that the hotel could pay a 5 percent annual dividend and earn at least $150,000 per year, which could be used to fund the development of other hotels. In addition, the rooms were to be rented to "self-supporting women" such as artists, teachers, authors, and clerks, who were to pay between $3 and $8 a week. Although enough women expressed interest in the hotel to fill it to capacity before it opened, the Spanish–American War and slow fundraising delayed the hotel's construction. The company wanted to raise $400,000 but had obtained only $150,000 by October 1899, which rose to $200,000 by the last week of December.

Two hundred fifty prominent New Yorkers, including William Colford Schermerhorn, John D. Rockefeller, Olivia Sage, and Helen Gould, contributed to the Women's Hotel Company's fundraising effort, which had raised $300,000 by the beginning of 1900. When the Women's Hotel Company was incorporated in March 1900, a building committee was appointed to review potential sites; subscriptions had reached $350,000 by that June. The company announced in September that it had identified a site near Madison Avenue. In January 1901, it acquired the Female Guardian Society's building at 29 East 29th Street (just east of Madison Avenue), extending through the block to 30th Street. The firm planned to begin construction in June 1901, when the society's lease expired, and to finish the hotel by late 1902.

Robert W. Gibson was hired as the architect in April 1901, following an architectural design competition. Gibson filed plans for the hotel in June, with an estimated cost of $350,000. The Louis Weber Building Company was hired as the general contractor, while John W. Rapp received a fireproofing contract. By September, the existing structures on the hotel's site had been demolished. At the end of 1901, the Woman's Hotel Company announced that the hotel would be named after Martha Washington. James Case was hired as the hotel's manager. The contracts for decorating the guestrooms were awarded to Molka Kellogg, the daughter of Charles Kellogg, along with Clara Davidge, the daughter of Episcopal bishop Henry C. Potter. All work was complete by February 5, 1903, when hotel officials planned to open the guestrooms for public inspection; the structure had cost $800,000 to complete. The formal opening was initially set for February 15.

Operation as women's hotel
The Martha Washington Hotel opened on March 1, 1903, serving both long-term residents and short-term guests; it aimed to attract a white and middle-class clientele. At opening, there were 500 residents and 250 temporary guests, and the waiting list had 200 names. Daily fees for single rooms ranged from $1 to $2, while weekly rent for apartments was between $3 and $17. Unmarried women could rent rooms from day-to-day or for longer terms, with an average rent of $1.50 per day. Guests could also pay $6 per week for unlimited meals under what was known as the "American plan". Men and married women were allowed to use the restaurant and drawing rooms on the lower stories but could not rent rooms. This policy applied even to residents' close relatives, such as brothers and fathers, as well as men invited by the residents. Also banned from the hotel were pets, babies, and any tenant who was involved in a breach of promise lawsuit, since such suits attracted publicity that the hotel's managers did not want.

Originally, the hotel employed male bellhops and elevator operators, as the managers felt that women could not physically carry luggage. The mail clerk and the 15-member cooking team were also men, but the hotel also had waitresses and female clerks, bookkeepers, and cashiers. The hotel hired 50 waitresses and 30 chambermaids initially, although male waiters were hired in 1903. Early guests hailed from across the United States and from Europe. An article in the Star-Gazette described the Martha Washington's clientele as including "a large number of literary women", as well as students, a YWCA manager, painters, advertisers, and accountants.

1900s to 1920s
Shortly after the Martha Washington opened, Helen Gould lent 55 paintings and 7 sculptures to the hotel for decoration. Initially, guests failed to tip the waitresses, leading to a strike in mid-1903; tipping was banned completely the next June. The Martha Washington also originally banned liquor sales, though some tenants were requesting the addition of a bar by early 1904. The novelty of an all-female clientele prompted one person to write to The New York Times, complaining about the presence of "observation automobiles" near the hotel. Delays in the hotel's construction had forced the hotel's directors to cover initial expenses using their own money; by January 1904, they reported that the hotel's only income came from short-term guests. The Martha Washington hired its first female elevator operator in early 1904; that year, the hotel replaced the bellboys with female bellhops and fired the male waiters.

After the minimum room rate was raised to $12 per week in late 1905, the New-York Tribune said that "the last touch of philanthropy has disappeared from the Martha Washington". The hotel was profitable by 1906, when its directors decided to discontinue the "American plan" meals due to low patronage. Internal disputes prompted the Martha Washington's directors to consider leasing the hotel out during late 1906; some dissenters, including Charles Kellogg's daughter Lucy, wanted to assume the hotel's management. At the time, the Women's Hotel Company had not paid a dividend in five years, and there were disagreements over expenses. In January 1907, Arthur W. Edgar leased the hotel for 10 years. Edgar agreed to pay $507,000, continue operating the hotel for women only, and rent at least 25 rooms for no more than $1 a day. According to the 1910 United States census, residents were generally well-off with a median age of between 45 and 50. Edgar operated the hotel until his death in 1911, and George C. Brown operated the hotel for the next decade. By then, more New Yorkers had come to understand the concept of a women's hotel. The Martha Washington switched to a staff of all-female elevator operators in 1917. A group of investors offered $800,000 for the Martha Washington in January 1920, and William and Julius Manger of the Bell Apartment Hotel Company bought the hotel the same month. The Northern Hotel Company held a long-term lease on the hotel at the time, but the company subleased the hotel to the Mangers that March. The Mangers jointly operated the Martha Washington until William's death in 1928, upon which William's share in the hotel was transferred to his brother and to a trust fund created for his relatives.

1930s to 1960s
By 1930, an auditor for the Bell Securities Company, the holding corporation that owned the hotel, had said that the Martha Washington's future was "extremely limited" because of decreased salaries and profits. The Boone Securities Corporation, a subsidiary of Manger Hotels, bought the hotel at an auction in 1933, bidding $10,000 and taking over a $450,000 mortgage. Later the same year, the hotel's general manager E. J. Carroll obtained a liquor license, allowing the Martha Washington to serve wine. The issuance of the liquor license had come at the end of Prohibition, amid an increase in the number of women who wished to drink wine. Julius Manger continued to operate the Martha Washington by himself until his death in 1937. John B. Campbell, the Martha Washington's longtime "house mother", estimated in 1949 that he had served three million women during the preceding 22 years.

Julius Manger's son, Julius Manger Jr., sold the Martha Washington and two adjoining low-rise buildings in February 1948 to a syndicate represented by Schiff, Dorfman, Stein, and Brof. The buyers quickly resold the hotel to its managing director Edward Tilson and hotelier Sol Henkind. At the time, the hotel had 445 guest units, a restaurant, and five stores, while the adjacent buildings included four apartments, three stores, and some dormitories. The Sillins Hotel Corporation, led by Robert B. Sillins, bought a controlling stake in the hotel in 1950 and continued to rent its 450 rooms to women. Sillins planned to sand-blast the facade and renovate the lobby for $200,000, and he hired the Bell Maintenance Company to renovate the entrance. The hotel's operators took out a $100,000 mortgage loan in 1953.

Dick McCarthy and Joseph Rauti of Bay Ridge, Brooklyn, opened a restaurant called the Colonnade Room at the hotel in 1961. The restaurant, seating 250 guests, contained a cocktail lounge. A nightclub called the High Life Room opened at the hotel in April 1967. The nightclub, described as looking "somewhat like a Moorish courtyard", was placed within the hotel's former ballroom.

1970s to 1990s
By the early 1970s, the Martha Washington was one of four women's hotels in the city, along with the Allerton Hotel for Women, Barbizon Hotel, and East End Hotel. The Martha Washington's clientele consisted mostly of students and young professionals, and its occupancy rate averaged 80 to 90 percent. The hotel enforced a nighttime curfew, employed security guards, and banned male guests above the lobby. A limited number of men, such as residents' fathers and doctors, could enter the upper stories with supervision. Due to the ban on male visitors, women generally felt safe sleeping even with their doors unlocked. Nonetheless, there were still some reports of illicit activities in the late 20th century, including allegations that employees stole from residents and that prostitutes were using the exterior staircases to conduct business.

The New York City government enacted a law in 1970 that banned gender discrimination in public places, and the city's Human Rights Commission ruled in 1972 that hotels were not exempt from this law. As such, the city ordered the Martha Washington to start accepting male guests beginning in 1973. Amid opposition from figures such as New York City Council president Sanford Garelik, the New York City Council later passed an amendment exempting single-sex residential hotels from the law. Occupancy had declined to 65 percent by 1979. The New York Times described the lobby as "dark and drab", having been downsized to make way for stores, and the bedrooms as having "chipping paint and worn bedspreads". By then, the hotel's owner Martha Washington Associates was spending $500,000 to repair the property, and most residents were still relatively young, being between 25 and 40 years old.

In 1982, the Chicago Tribune described the hotel as having 451 rooms and a female manager, although it did hire some male staff such as bellhops, clerks, and engineers. At the time, there was high demand for the hotel; its manager Janis Algar said that "a lot of women from out of town don't know the neighborhoods and are reluctant to take an apartment right away". The first-floor ballroom hosted the Danceteria nightclub, which opened in May 1991 and operated until 1993; during this time, there were many reports of illegal drug use. Afterward, the Danceteria space was converted into a club called the Melting Pot, which had three bars, then became a mosque by 1998. Toward the end of the 20th century, the Martha Washington functioned as a single room occupancy building. It had been among the last women's hotels in Manhattan that were unaffiliated with a house of worship or a school. The owners had failed to pay taxes for several years and owed $160,000 in back taxes by 2000.

Late 1990s to early 2010s
Property Markets Group (PMG) bought the Martha Washington and Allerton hotels from Sillins in 1997. The group, which paid around $18 million for the Martha Washington, announced plans to convert it to a co-ed tourist hotel, saying the hotel was "underused". At the time, three-fourths of the bedrooms were empty, and most had no bathrooms. The hotel closed for renovations in August 1998 and stopped accepting new guests, although 153 long-term residents were allowed to remain there. The Martha Washington began accepting male guests that October. Many existing female residents objected, with one resident calling the new policy "a rapist's dream" because men could crawl into residents' bathrooms through the fire escapes. By the end of 1998, the Martha Washington was a standard tourist hotel; it was one of several residential hotels in the city that had been converted into tourist hotels at the end of the 20th century.

PMG undertook further renovations in 2000, spending about $49 million to upgrade the hotel. Kevin Maloney of PMG agreed to upgrade 83 tenants' rooms and allow them to continue paying the same rental rate if they endorsed a certificate of no harassment, which was required for the hotel. Another 37 tenants opposed the conversion and filed a lawsuit, claiming Maloney harassed them; despite this, Maloney received the certificate of no harassment and did not offer the dissenting tenants anything. Some residents protested against the renovations in 2000, claiming that PMG was disrupting their water and heat service and that there were construction hazards. Citylife was operating the hotel by 2000, with PMG as the owner, and continued to renovate the hotel through the end of that year. The group rebranded the Martha Washington as the Hotel Thirty Thirty in July 2000, a reference to the hotel's address at 30 East 30th Street, though media sources had reported on the new name as early as the preceding October.

The Thirty Thirty initially operated as a budget hotel and still had about 90 long-term residents by 2003. Rockpoint Group bought a majority stake in the hotel from PMG in 2006. During the mid-2000s, the Thirty Thirty operated as a medium-priced hotel with 253 rooms. The hotel was closed in 2011 for renovations, reopening that December. At that time, it was renamed the Hotel Lola, after a fictional character created by the renovation's designer Susan Jaques; this character was based partially on the 19th-century entertainer Lola Montez. The renovation cost $15 million, of which $12 million was funded by a loan issued by Citigroup Commercial Mortgage Trust. The hotel was divided into 276 rooms, which were designed in a minimalist style.

Early 2010s to present
King and Grove Hotels bought the Hotel Lola for $116 million from Rockpoint Group in June 2012 and renamed it the King & Grove New York shortly thereafter. King & Grove CEO Ed Scheetz and Chetrit Group co-owned the hotel until 2013, when Scheetz took over five of the partners' 14 properties, including the King & Grove New York. Danny Meyer announced in October 2013 that he would open a restaurant at the King & Grove New York, and he outlined plans the next year for a wood-fired pizzeria. Scheetz announced in May 2014 that King & Grove would be rebranded as Chelsea Hotels and that the King & Grove New York would be renovated and renamed back to the Martha Washington Hotel. Scheetz said he "wanted the hotel to be more upscale", and he hired Annabelle Selldorf to redesign the interiors. The $20 million project involved renovating all of the hotel's rooms, adding space for three restaurants, and moving the main entrance to 29th Street. By then, the hotel still had about 50 residents.

The renovation was completed in September 2014, and the Marta pizzeria opened later that year. Chelsea Hotels placed the Martha Washington up for sale in March 2015. The hotel was sold that November for $158 million to CIM, which planned to rebrand the hotel as the Redbury New York following a second renovation. The following year, CIM renamed the hotel the Redbury New York, and hospitality group SBE took over the hotel's management. Dakota Development and Avenue Interiors redesigned the guest rooms. The hotel was themed to the music of the nearby Tin Pan Alley and the history of the NoMad neighborhood. The first rooms reopened in April 2016, and the hotel was fully reopened that October under the Preferred Hotels & Resorts brand. The Redbury's managers hired local firm Home Studios to redesign the lobby and rooms in mid-2019.

With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in New York City in early 2020, the Redbury began serving medical professionals. The hotel was otherwise closed to the general public for much of 2020, but patronage did not fully recover after pandemic-era restrictions were lifted. Danny Meyer moved his Maialino restaurant to the Redbury in late 2022. In August 2023, the New York City government began to use the hotel as temporary migrant housing, amid a citywide migrant housing crisis caused by a sharp increase in the number of asylum seekers traveling to the city. At the time, there were 250 rooms; the hotel began accommodating families with children, and it stopped accepting reservations. Danny Meyer closed his restaurants at the Redbury that month, citing delays in the full reopening of the hotel and the migrant crisis.

Notable people and tenants
The poet Sara Teasdale stayed at the hotel during her New York visits from 1913 onward, and actress Louise Brooks relocated there from the Algonquin Hotel. The editor Louise E. Dew was a resident as well. Jean H. Norris, the first female magistrate in New York state, also lived in the hotel in the early 20th century. Although a 10-room suite at the hotel was renovated for socialite Consuelo Vanderbilt in 1907, she never lived there. Veronica Lake, one of Hollywood's most prominent actresses in the 1940s, was found to be working as a barmaid at the Martha Washington in 1962. After the story was published, several people offered Lake money and jobs in the entertainment industry, which she refused; Lake eventually was able to obtain other acting roles.

From the 1900s onward, the hotel served as the headquarters of the Interurban Women's Suffrage Council, the International Federation of Business Women, and the Committee on Women's Work of the Republican National Committee. In subsequent years, the hotel also hosted organizations such as the American Gold Star Mothers in the 1940s.

Impact
When the Martha Washington opened, Catherine King of the New York World wrote that "when you go in... you are instantly reminded of a Martha Washington fichu" and that the hotel was "a sort of beautiful, well-behaved haven where the women who now languish in boarding houses and haven't quite compassed apartments can go to live—and more". The hotel's exclusivity led The Christian Science Monitor to liken the Martha Washington to a women's club in 1910. The hotel was not noted for its design; architectural critic Christopher Gray wrote in 2012 that "the Martha Washington certainly does have a 'special character'—a requirement for landmark designation—even if that character lies in its history, not its architecture."

After the hotel was renamed the Thirty Thirty in 2000, a Washington Post critic wrote that the hotel was hard to find despite its new name, the staff were confused, and the hotel as a whole was "rough-hewn". The critic described the lobby as "well polished" but said that the guestrooms were only "slightly larger than a janitor's closet [and] are awash in the brown/green side of the Crayola box". Following the 2011 renovation, a critic for ABC News wrote: "We find the check-in process disorganized and the modern minimalist room, with gray carpeting and no pictures on the wall, stark and sterile. And our tiny bathroom is unheated." When the Redbury opened in 2016, The Telegraph praised the hotel's central location and food service, but criticized the styling and said the Redbury "is a bit short on amenities". U.S. News & World Report stated that "the hotel features a contemporary ambiance with updated guest accommodations sporting a chic new look".

The hotel building was also depicted in an opening scene for the 1967 movie Valley of the Dolls. The New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission designated the hotel as a city landmark on June 19, 2012, and the hotel was inducted into Historic Hotels of America, an official program of the National Trust for Historic Preservation, in 2016. Additionally, the National Collaborative for Women's History Sites, in collaboration with the William G. Pomeroy Foundation, placed the hotel on the National Votes for Women Trail in 2022.

title: Martha Washington Hotel


text:
Mount Rainier National Park

Mount Rainier National Park is an American national park located in southeast Pierce County and northeast Lewis County in Washington state. The park was established on March 2, 1899, as the fourth national park in the United States, preserving 236,381 acre including all of Mount Rainier, a 14,410 ft stratovolcano. The mountain rises abruptly from the surrounding land with elevations in the park ranging from 1,600 feet to over 14,000 feet (490–4,300 m). The highest point in the Cascade Range, Mount Rainier is surrounded by valleys, waterfalls, subalpine meadows, and 91000 acre of old-growth forest. More than 25 glaciers descend the flanks of the volcano, which is often shrouded in clouds that dump enormous amounts of rain and snow.

Mount Rainier is circled by the Wonderland Trail and is covered by glaciers and snowfields totaling about 35 sqmi. Carbon Glacier is the largest glacier by volume in the contiguous United States, while Emmons Glacier is the largest glacier by area. Mount Rainier is a popular peak for mountaineering with some 10,000 attempts per year with approximately 50% making it to the summit.

Park purpose
As stated in the foundation document: "The purpose of Mount Rainier National Park is to protect and preserve unimpaired the majestic icon of Mount Rainier, a glaciated volcano, along with its natural and cultural resources, values, and dynamic processes. The park provides opportunities for people to experience, understand, and care for the park environment, and also provides for wilderness experiences and sustains wilderness values."

History
Ninety-seven percent of the park is preserved as wilderness under the National Wilderness Preservation System as Mount Rainier Wilderness, a designation it received in 1988. It is abutted by the Tatoosh, Clearwater, Glacier View, and William O. Douglas Wildernesses. The park was designated a National Historic Landmark on February 18, 1997, as a showcase for the National Park Service rustic-style architecture of the 1920s and 1930s, exemplified by the Paradise Inn and a masterpiece of early NPS master planning. As a Historic Landmark district, the park was administratively listed on the National Register of Historic Places.

Native Americans
The name of the mountain itself in Lushootseed is "Tacoma", (pronounced "Taquoma") the same as a nearby city in the Puget Sound region.

The earliest evidence of human activity in the area which is now Mount Rainier National Park, is a projectile point dated to circa 4,000–5,800 BP (before present) found along Bench Lake Trail (the first section of Snow Lake Trail).

A more substantial archeological find was a rock shelter near Fryingpan Creek, east of Goat Island Mountain. Hunting artifacts were found in the shelter. The shelter would not have been used all year round. Cultural affinities suggest the site was used by Columbia Plateau Tribes from 1000 to 300 BP.

In 1963 the National Park Service contracted Washington State University to study Native American use of the Mount Rainier area. Richard D. Daugherty lead an archeological study of the area and concluded that prehistoric humans used the area most heavily between 8000 and 4500 BP. Allan H. Smith interviewed elderly Native Americans and studied ethnographic literature. He found no evidence of permanent habitation in the park area. The park was used for hunting and gathering and for occasional spirit quests. Smith also came to tentative conclusions that the park was divided among five tribes along watershed boundaries; the Nisqually, Puyallup, Muckleshoot, Yakama, and Taidnapam (Upper Cowlitz). Subsequent studies cast doubt on Smith's theory that the tribes had agreed upon boundaries before they entered into treaties with the United States in 1854–55.

Park creation
On March 2, 1899, President William McKinley signed a bill passed by Congress authorizing the creation of Mount Rainier National Park, the nation's fifth national park. It was the first national park created from a national forest. The Pacific Forest Reserve had been created in 1893 and included Mount Rainier. It was enlarged in 1897 and renamed Mount Rainier Forest Reserve. John Muir had visited Mount Rainier in 1888. Muir and nine others, including Edward Sturgis Ingraham, Charles Piper, and P. B. Van Trump, climbed to the summit in what became the fifth recorded ascent.

The trip to Mount Rainier had played a role in reinvigorating Muir and convincing him to rededicate his life to the preservation of nature as national parks. At the time national forests, called forest reserves at first, were being created throughout the American West, under the utilitarian "conservation-through-use" view of Gifford Pinchot. Muir came to be known as a "preservationist". He wanted nature preserved under the more protected status of national parks. But during the 1890s there was more public support for creating national forests than national parks. During that decade, Muir and his supporters were only able to protect one national forest as a national park. When the Pacific Forest Reserve was created in 1893, Muir quickly persuaded the newly formed Sierra Club to support a movement to protect Rainier as a national park. Other groups soon joined, such as the National Geographic Society and scientific associations wanting Mount Rainier preserved as a place to study volcanism and glaciology. Commercial leaders in Tacoma and Seattle were also in support, as was the Northern Pacific Railway. The effort lasted over five years and involved six different attempts to push a bill through Congress. Congress eventually agreed, but only after acquiring assurances that none of the new park was suitable for farming or mining and that no federal appropriations would be necessary for its management.

2006 flooding
Mount Rainier National Park closed because of extensive flooding as a result of the November 6, 2006 Pineapple Express rainstorm when 18 in of rain fell in a 36-hour period. Campsites and roads throughout the park were washed away. Power to Paradise and Longmire was disrupted. Sunshine Point Campground, just inside the Nisqually Entrance, was destroyed and has not reopened. Parts of the Carbon River Road, once a vehicle-accessible entrance to the park, also washed out. The road has since remained closed to vehicle traffic. On May 5, 2007, the park reopened to automobile traffic via State Route 706 at the Nisqually Entrance.

Closures and reservations
In November 2022, the National Park Service announced that access to the south side of the park beyond Longmire would be closed on weekdays due to inadequate staffing. Several recreation areas, including a sledding hill, were also closed for the rest of the winter season. The closure was unpopular with recreation groups and was modified in 2023 to allow winter access to Paradise from Thursdays through Mondays.

Beginning in 2024, timed entry reservations will be required for vehicles using entrances on the Paradise and Sunrise corridors during daylight hours in the peak summer months. The system was implemented due to increased crowding at the park between July and September, when 70 percent of the annual 1.6 million patrons visit and cause traffic congestion. NPS also considered using parking permits and bus shuttles from a remote parking lot similar to systems at other national parks.

Flora
According to the A. W. Kuchler U.S. Potential natural vegetation types, Mount Rainier National Park has an Alpine Meadows & Barren, or Alpine tundra (52) potential vegetation type with an Alpine Meadow (11) potential vegetation form. The park's vegetation is diverse, reflecting the varied climatic and environmental conditions encountered across the park's 12,800-foot elevation gradient. More than 960 vascular plant species and more than 260 nonvascular plant species have been identified in the park.

Fauna
Mammals that inhabit this national park include cougar, black bear, raccoon, coyote, bobcat, snowshoe hare, weasel, mole, beaver, red fox, porcupine, skunk, marmot, deer, marten, shrew, pika, elk, and mountain goat. The common birds of this park including raptors are the thrush, chickadee, kinglet, northern goshawk, willow flycatcher, spotted owl, steller's jay, Clark's nutcracker, bald eagle, ptarmigan, harlequin duck, grouse, peregrine falcon, Canada jay, golden eagle, grosbeak and finch.

Fish that inhabit the lakes, rivers, and streams within the park include bull trout, cutthroat trout, rainbow trout, mountain whitefish, and sculpins. Anadromous fish enter the park during migratory cycles. Chinook salmon and coho salmon, although rare within the park boundary, can be found spawning in the White, West Fork, Puyallup, Mowich, and Carbon watersheds. Pink salmon spawn on odd-numbered years in heavy numbers up the White River near the park boundary. Due to historical stocking and damming of rivers in and around the park, native numbers of most salmonoids are unknown.

Climate
According to the Köppen climate classification system, the best definition for Mount Rainier National Park is Mediterranean-influenced humid continental climate (Dsb) or subarctic climate (Dsc), depending on the elevation. According to the United States Department of Agriculture, the Plant Hardiness zone at Sunrise Visitor Center (6398 ft elevation) is 6a with an average annual extreme minimum temperature of -5.5 °F (-20.8 °C).

The National Park Service says that "Paradise is the snowiest place on Earth where snowfall is measured regularly." During the 1971/72 year, 93.5 ft of snow fell, setting a world record for that year. Subsequently, in the 1998/99 year, Mount Baker Ski Area received 95 ft. Paradise holds the Cascade Range record for most snow on the ground with 30.583 ft on March 10, 1956.

Major attractions
The entire park was designated a National Historic Landmark District on February 18, 1997, in recognition of the consistently high standard of design and preservation the park's National Park Service rustic-style architecture. The park contains 42 locations designated on the National Register of Historic Places, including four National Historic Landmarks.

The park's most popular natural features vary based on the season. During the spring, the remaining snow and waterfalls are visible from many trails and other portions of the park; a summertime wildflower bloom in July and August also attracts many visitors.

From 2008 to 2019, over 10,000 people per year have attempted to climb to the summit of Mount Rainier; a fee is levied by the National Park Service to fund ranger station and camp staffing as well as search-and-rescue services. , three companies are authorized to operate commercial mountain guide services in the national park for the entire year; single-trip guides are also available through 15 services that are authorized by the National Park Service. From 1967 to 1997, RMI Expeditions was the sole company authorized to organize commercial guided climbs to the summit until the program was opened to other companies to encourage competition.

Paradise

Paradise (46.79°N, -121.74°W ) is the name of an area at approximately 5400 ft on the south slope of Mount Rainier in the national park. Paradise is the most popular destination for visitors to Mount Rainier National Park. 62% of the over 1.3 million people who visited the park in 2000 went to Paradise. Paradise, near the subalpine valley of the Paradise River, is the location of the historic Paradise Inn, built in 1916; Paradise Guide House, built in 1920; and Henry M. Jackson Visitor Center, built in 1966 rebuilt in 2008.

Longmire
Longmire (46.75°N, -121.81°W) is a visitor center in Mount Rainier National Park, located 6.5 mi east of the Nisqually Entrance. The area is named after James Longmire, an early settler in Puget Sound. The area is in the Nisqually River valley at an elevation of 2761 ft between The Ramparts Ridge and the Tatoosh Range. Longmire is surrounded by old-growth Douglas fir, western red cedar and western hemlock. Longmire is the location of Mount Rainier's National Park Inn, the Longmire Museum, and the 1928 National Park Service Administration Building, which is now a Wilderness Information Center. The National Park Inn is the only accommodation in the park open all year round.

Longmire is the second most popular destination for visitors to Mount Rainier National Park after Paradise. Of the more than 1.3 million people who visited the park in 2000, 38% visited Longmire. The Cougar Rock Campground is about 2 mi north west of Longmire with 173 individual campsites and 5 group sites and open from late May through late September. Longmire is one of the starting points of the Wonderland Trail.

Sunrise
Sunrise (46.91°N, -121.64°W) is a lodge and visitor center located in the northeastern part of the park. At an elevation of 6400 ft, it is the highest point in the park that is accessible by vehicle. There are miles of trails located all around Sunrise, such as Mount Fremont, Burroughs Mountain, and Sourdough Ridge. The lodge is reachable via a 10 mi turnoff from State Route 410 near the White River entrance.

Other developed areas
Ohanapecosh is a campground (with 188 individual sites and 2 group sites, open from late May through late September), visitor center (closed during the 2013 season), and ranger station located in the southeastern portion of the park, approximately 3 mi from the park boundary off State Route 123. Located in a deep valley among old growth forest at an elevation below 2000 ft, it is the only developed area of the park without a view of Mount Rainier. The Ohanapecosh Hot Springs, Grove of the Patriarchs, and Silver Falls are all located in the Ohanapecosh area.

The Carbon River Entrance Station is located in the northwest corner of the park off State Route 165 and is the site of the only rainforest at Mount Rainier. There is a campground and a short trail through the rainforest, as well as a trail to the Carbon Glacier, one of the lowest glaciers in the contiguous United States.

Mowich Lake is the largest and deepest lake in the park, located south of Carbon at the south end of State Route 165. A campground, picnic area, and hiking trail are located near the lake.

The two major roads into the northwest quadrant of the Park were severely damaged by the floods of 2006. The ranger station at the Carbon River entrance is staffed during the summer. No motor vehicles are permitted beyond that point.

Transportation
The park is primarily accessed by vehicles; in 2021, over 1 million vehicles carried the majority of the 2.4 million visitors to Mount Rainier National Park. The Nisqually Entrance is served by State Route 706, while State Route 410 cuts across the northeast corner of the park. State Route 123 connects the southeastern side of the park to State Route 410 and U.S. Route 12.

A regional airport was proposed for several sites in southern Pierce County that would be 17 to 23 mi from the park. Its development was opposed by the park superintendent and environmental groups due to the potential effects of noise pollution and air pollution on wildlife, as well as traffic impacts around the park entrances.

title: Mount Rainier National Park


text:
Eochaid mac Domangairt

Eochaid mac Domangairt (died c. 697) was a king of Dál Riata (modern western Scotland) in about 697. He was a member of the Cenél nGabráin, the son of Domangart mac Domnaill and father of Eochaid mac Echdach; Alpín mac Echdach may be a son of this younger Eochaid.

He is named in Dál Riata king-lists, the Duan Albanach and the Synchronisms of Flann Mainistrech. In some sources he is called Eochaid Crook-Nose (Riannamail), but modern readings take this as being a garbled reference to Fiannamail ua Dúnchado rather than an epithet.

The death of Eochu nepos Domnaill (Eochaid grandson of Domnall Brecc) is reported in the Annals of Ulster for 697, slain by Fiannamail ua Dúnchado.

title: Eochaid mac Domangairt


text:
Verbandsgemeinde

A Verbandsgemeinde (plural Verbandsgemeinden) is a low-level administrative unit in the German federal states of Rhineland-Palatinate and Saxony-Anhalt. A Verbandsgemeinde is typically composed of a small group of villages or towns.

Rhineland-Palatinate
The state of Rhineland-Palatinate is divided into 163 Verbandsgemeinden, which are municipal associations grouped within the 24 districts of the state and subdivided into 2,257 Ortsgemeinden (singular Ortsgemeinde) which comprise single settlements.

Most of the Verbandsgemeinden were established in 1969. Formerly the name for an administrative unit was Amt. Most of the functions of municipal government for several municipalities are consolidated and administered centrally from a larger or more central town or municipality among the group, while the individual municipalities (Ortsgemeinden) still maintain a limited degree of local autonomy.

Saxony-Anhalt
The 11 districts of Saxony-Anhalt are divided into Verwaltungsgemeinschaften and, since 1 July 2009 also Verbandsgemeinden. Since the January 2010 government reform, there are 18 Verbandsgemeinden in Saxony-Anhalt.

title: Verbandsgemeinde