text:
Indian Airlines Flight 814

Indian Airlines Flight 814, commonly known as IC 814, was an Indian Airlines Airbus A300 en route from Tribhuvan International Airport in Kathmandu, Nepal, to Indira Gandhi International Airport in Delhi, India, on Friday, 24 December 1999, when it was hijacked and was flown to several locations before landing in Kandahar, Afghanistan.

The aircraft was piloted by 37-year-old Captain Devi Sharan and first officer Rajinder Kumar, with 58-year-old flight engineer Anil Kumar Jaggia. The Airbus was hijacked by five masked Pakistani militants of the Harkat-ul-Mujahideen (HuM) shortly after it entered Indian airspace at about 17:30 IST. The hijackers ordered the aircraft to be flown to a series of locations: Amritsar, Lahore, and across the Persian Gulf to Dubai. The hijackers finally forced the aircraft to land in Kandahar, Afghanistan, which at the time was controlled by the Taliban. The hijackers released 27 of 176 passengers in Dubai but fatally stabbed one and wounded several others.

At that time, most of Afghanistan, including the Kandahar airport where the hijacked plane landed, was under Taliban control. Taliban militiamen fighters encircled the aircraft to prevent any Indian military intervention, which was found by current National Security Advisor Ajit Doval when he landed there. They also found two Inter-Services Intelligence (Pakistan) officers were on the apron and others soon joined them; one was a lieutenant colonel and the other a major. Doval said that if the hijackers did not have ISI support, India could have resolved the crisis.

The motive for the hijacking was to secure the release of Islamist terrorists held in prison in India – fellow HuM members Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh and Masood Azhar, and a Pakistani backed Kashmiri militant, Mushtaq Ahmed Zargar. The hostage crisis lasted for seven days and ended after India agreed to release the three terrorists. The three have since been implicated in other terrorist actions, such as the 2001 Indian Parliament attack, 2002 kidnapping and murder of Daniel Pearl, 2008 Mumbai terror attacks, 2016 Pathankot attack and the 2019 Pulwama attack.

The hijacking has been seen as one of the millennium attack plots in late December 1999 and early January 2000 by al-Qaeda-linked terrorists.

Background
Harkat-ul-Mujahideen had already perpetrated several attacks and kidnappings in order to secure the release of their leaders imprisoned in India, including Masood Azhar who had been arrested in 1994. These included the 1994 kidnappings of Western tourists in India by Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, who was captured during the act and was released with Azhar during this hijacking and went on to join the HuM splinter group Jaish-e-Mohammed founded by Azhar in 2000; 1995 kidnapping of Western tourists in Kashmir by Al-Faran (pesudonym of HuM) where most abductees were killed with one beheaded. Amjad Farooqi who was involved in the 1995 kidnapping was also one of the perpetrators of this hijacking under the alias "Mansur Hasnain".

In 1999, Sajjad Afghani, the founder of HuM who had been arrested with Azhar, was killed during a jailbreak which directly led to this hijacking and whose body was one of the hijackers initial demands.

Al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden had provided organisational support for the kidnapping in order to have their associate Azhar released.

The identities of the five hijackers have been determined to be Ibrahim Akhtar (from Bahawalpur), Shahid Akhtar Sayeed, Sunny Ahmed Qazi, Zahoor Mistry (all three from Karachi) and Shakir (from Sukkur). They had arrived in Nepal, HuM's contact-hub for attacks in India, and boarded the plane from Kathmandu Airport.

Hijacking
On 24 December 1999, Indian Airlines flight IC 814 took off from Kathmandu, Nepal, with Delhi, India as its intended destination. The flight left with 180 persons on board, including both the crew and the passengers. One of the passengers on board was Roberto Giori, the then-owner of De La Rue Giori, a company which controlled the majority of the world's currency-printing business at the time. Shortly after the flight left Kathmandu, senior steward Anil Sharma was accosted by a man wearing a ski mask, who told him that the plane was being hijacked and that he was carrying a bomb. The hijackers instructed Captain Devi Sharan to, "fly west", and accordingly the flight entered Pakistani air space, but was refused permission to land in Lahore, Pakistan, by Pakistani Air Traffic Control. On being told that there was insufficient fuel to go further, the hijackers allowed Captain Sharan to land the flight in Amritsar, Punjab, to refuel.

Subsequent intelligence reports indicated that the hijackers had purchased five tickets on the flight in Kathmandu; two first class tickets were bought directly, while three economy seats were bought through a travel agency. Indian intelligence officials believed that Dawood Ibrahim, an Indian gangster/globally wanted terrorist (hiding in Islamabad, Pakistan), had provided assistance in giving the hijackers access to the airport in Kathmandu.

Passenger accounts later stated that the hijackers ordered the crew to take away the lunch that had been served, and separated the men from the women and children, blindfolding them and threatening them with explosives if they did not co-operate.

Landing in Amritsar, India
Air Traffic Control (ATC) in India first received news of the hijacking at 4:40 pm. The Crisis Management Group of the Indian Government, led by Union Secretary Prabhat Kumar, did not convene on receiving the news that the plane had been hijacked, and information concerning the hijacking was not communicated at that time to the Intelligence Bureau or the Research and Analysis Wing. The Prime Minister of India, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, was briefed regarding the incident at 7:00 pm.

At 6:04 pm the Indian ATC made contact with flight IC 814, but had not received any orders on how to proceed. Captain Devi Sharan notified ATC that they were running low on fuel and had not been allowed to land in Lahore by Pakistani ATC. Sharan continued to make contact with ATC, requesting them to reach out to Pakistan and obtain permission to land, as the hijackers did not want to land in India and had already threatened to execute 10 hostages if their demands were not met. At 6:30 pm, the Indian High Commission in Pakistan requested permission for the plane to land there, but was denied.

At 6:44 pm, flight IC 814 began descent over the nearest airport in Amritsar, following a message from Captain Sharan, and was approached by local officials. The Director-General of Police for the state of Punjab, Sarabjeet Singh, later stated that he only received information regarding the hijacking when he saw it on television at 6 pm that evening. The Union Government's Home Minister, L.K. Advani, also stated later that he was informed about the incident via the news, and not by the Crisis Management Group, which had convened since then. Although he had recently stepped down as Inspector-General of Police in the area, J.P. Birdi met up with the plane, since his successor, Bakshi Ram, was on leave when the incident occurred.

On landing, IC 814 requested immediate refuelling for the aircraft. Captain Sharan later stated that he had hoped that with the assistance of Indian government, the hijacking would be prevented and that the plane would not have to take off again from Amritsar. In accordance with hijacking contingency plans prepared by the Crisis Management Group, a local committee consisting of the District Collector, the senior-most police and intelligence officials, and the airport manager had been created; they were instructed to delay the refuelling of the plane for as long as possible. These orders had been received by the committee from the Central Government at 6:40 pm, however, a phone call received with contradictory orders delayed initial response. This phone call was later established to have been an attempted hoax. A note sent to the local committee advised them to ensure the delay by any possible means, including deflating the aircraft tires if necessary.

Between landing and take-off again at 7:50 pm, Captain Sharan made contact with the ATC four times, informing them that the hijackers were armed with Kalashnikov rifles and had begun killing hostages, and requested them to refuel the plane as fast as possible to prevent any additional deaths. The hijackers had refused to communicate with local police officials while the plane was in Amritsar. Later accounts indicated that the hijackers, who were upset by the delay in refuelling, attacked Satnam Singh, a German citizen on board the plane, with a knife, causing him several wounds to the neck.

At 7:45 pm, local Punjab Police Commandos were placed on standby and ordered by the Crisis Management Group to accompany the fuel-reloading vehicles towards the plane, with the intention of deflating the plane tires in order to immobilize the plane. A fuel tanker was sent to block the aircraft's path but was ordered by the ATC to slow down as the driver was approaching the plane at a high speed. On receiving this order, the tanker came to an abrupt halt. Later, it was revealed that this approach caused the hijackers to suspect that the refuelling process would prevent their departure, and they ordered Captain Sharan to take off immediately, resulting in the plane narrowly avoiding hitting the fuel tanker on the runway. Five passengers had been placed in seats towards the front with their hands bound, and the hijackers threatened that these hostages would be executed if the plane did not take off immediately. The plane left Amritsar at 7:49 pm, and Captain Sharan announced the departure to the ATC, stating, "We are all dying." Commandos from the Indian special forces unit, the National Security Guard, arrived at the airport just as IC 814 departed.

Later, it was revealed that there were efforts by ex-RAW chief A. S. Dulat and others to cover up the real motives of why the plane was not immobilised and why there were no commando-operation to neutralise the threat. The RAW officer named Shashi Bhushan Singh Tomar, husband of Sonia Tomar, was boarded on the plane, who was a brother-in-law of N. K. Singh, secretary to then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and he ensured that the plane would be let off and no commando operation would be carried out to ensure his brother-in-law's safety. According to RAW officer, R. K. Yadav, author of Mission RAW, days before the hijacking, U. V. Singh, another RAW operative in Kathmandu informed Tomar that Pakistani terrorists were planning to hijack an Indian plane and he ordered Singh to check the veracity of his report where Singh vouched for its reliability but Tomar rebuked him and told him not to spread rumours. Later, Tomar was found on the same plane which was hijacked and became the cause of failure of the operation. The then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee was kept in the dark until around 7:00 pm, a full hour and 40 minutes since the hijacking of IC 814 and he learned of the hijacking only after disembarking from the aircraft in the VIP bay of Palam Technical Area.

Landing in Lahore, Pakistan
On approaching Lahore, Pakistan, Flight IC 814 requested permission to land and was denied by Pakistani ATC, which turned off all lights and navigational aids at the airport to prevent a landing. As the plane had not been refuelled in Amritsar, and was running out of fuel, Captain Sharan attempted to crash-land without navigational aids and lights, nearly landing on a highway. Following this, Pakistani ATC turned on navigational aids and allowed the plane to land in Lahore at 8:07 pm.

India had, on receiving the information that the plane had landed in Lahore in Pakistan, sought a helicopter to transport the Indian High Commissioner, G. Parthasarthy in Islamabad, Pakistan, to Lahore airport, and had requested Pakistani authorities to ensure that the plane did not leave Lahore. Pakistani forces turned off runway lights again to prevent the plane from departing after it had been refuelled, and surrounded the plane with special forces commandos. They also attempted to negotiate with the hijackers to release women and children aboard the flight, but were denied. The Indian High Commissioner, G. Parthasarthy, was provided with a helicopter but only arrived in Lahore after Flight IC 814 had been refuelled and allowed to leave. Indian Foreign Office officials reached out for confirmation of reports that passengers on board had been killed, but did not receive a response from Pakistani authorities regarding this.

Landing in Dubai, UAE
Upon departure from Lahore, the crew set course for Kabul, Afghanistan. However, with Kabul Airport not having any night landing facilities that time, the hijackers attempted a landing in Oman; the Sultanate's authorities refused their request and the hijackers instead settled for neighboring Dubai, UAE (about 1,250 miles distance from Lahore). After Dubai International Airport denied permission, the flight was allowed to land at Al Minhad Air Base. The hijackers released 27 passengers, including a critically injured 25-year-old male hostage, Rupin Katyal, who had been stabbed by the hijackers multiple times. Rupin had died before the aircraft landed in Al Minhad Air Base. Indian authorities wanted Indian commandos trained in hijack rescue to assault the aircraft but the UAE government refused permission.

Landing in Kandahar, Afghanistan
After the aircraft landed in Kandahar, Taliban authorities offered to mediate between India and the hijackers, which India believed initially. Since India did not recognise the Taliban regime, it dispatched an official from its High Commission in Islamabad to Kandahar. India's lack of previous contact with the Taliban regime complicated the negotiating process.

However, the intention of the Taliban was under doubt after its armed fighters surrounded the aircraft. The Taliban maintained that the forces were deployed in an attempt to dissuade the hijackers from killing or injuring the hostages but some analysts believe it was done to prevent an Indian military operation against the hijackers. IB chief Ajit Doval claimed that the hijackers were getting active ISI support in Kandahar and that the ISI had removed all the pressure the Indians were trying to put on the hijackers, meaning that their safe exit was guaranteed and they had no need to negotiate an escape route. Doval also mentioned that if the hijackers were not getting active ISI support in Kandahar then India could have resolved the hijacking.

While in Kandahar, the plane's engine remained continuously on to protect everyone from the bitterly cold winter nights of Afghanistan.

Negotiations
On December 25 and 26, India discussed their approach to negotiations internally, while passengers on board Flight IC 814 awaited a decision. Passengers later stated that they received irregular meals and had limited access to drinking water and sanitation facilities, and that the hijackers utilised the public announcement system on board the plane to proselytize to the passengers.

On December 25, Indian Airlines provided a special relief plane, which flew back 27 passengers who had been released, as well as the body of Rupin Katyal, who had been killed while the plane was in Dubai, and Satnam Singh, who had been attacked by the hijackers in Amritsar and had suffered knife wounds to the neck.

Home Minister L. K. Advani had opposed exchanging the hostages for release of the hijackers, as this would affect public opinion of the government, while External Affairs Minister Jaswant Singh advocated negotiation with the Taliban. On December 27, the Indian government sent a team of negotiators headed by Vivek Katju, Joint-Secretary in the Ministry of Home Affairs, along with Home Ministry official Ajit Doval and C.D. Sahay from the Cabinet Secretariat.

Negotiations did not progress, as Taliban officials initially refused to allow Indian special forces to attempt a covert operation, and declined to allow their own special forces to do so as well. To prevent any military action, Taliban officials surrounded the aircraft with tanks, and on December 27, a Taliban official speaking to a local newspaper stated that the hijackers should either leave Afghanistan or put down their weapons. Indian officials interpreted this statement as an understanding that Taliban officials would arrest the hijackers if they surrendered, and began to negotiate with them concerning their demands. These demands included the release of 36 prisoners, the body of HuM founder Sajjad Afghani and US$200 million, but was ultimately reduced during negotiations to three prisoners: On December 30, Research and Analysis Wing Chief A.S. Dulat communicated with Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Farooq Abdullah, to convince him to release two prisoners as demanded by the hijacker. These prisoners were currently being held in Kashmiri jails. Abdullah was opposed to releasing the prisoners, warning Dulat of the long-term consequences, but eventually agreed to the demands of the Indian government. Mushtaq Ahmad Zargar was released from a Srinagar prison and flown with Sheikh and Azhar to Kandahar.
 * Maulana Masood Azhar – who founded Jaish-e-Muhammed in 2000, which gained notoriety for its alleged role in the 2001 Indian Parliament attack and 2008 Mumbai attacks, which led to death of hundreds of people, along with the 2019 Pulwama Attack which led to the death of 44 CRPF personnel.
 * Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh – who was arrested in 2002 by Pakistani authorities for the abduction and murder of Daniel Pearl. Sheikh, who had been imprisoned in connection with the 1994 Kidnappings of Western tourists in India, went on to murder Daniel Pearl and also allegedly played a significant role in planning the September 11 attacks in the United States.
 * Mushtaq Ahmed Zargar – who has played an active role since release in training Islamic militants in Pakistan administrated Jammu & Kashmir.

By this time, the hostages had been allowed to deboard the plane by the hijackers, and the hijackers had also surrendered their weapons. Passenger accounts indicated that the hijackers asked the passengers to show their gratitude to the Afghanistan government, following which money was collected and handed to one of the passengers, Anuj Sharma, who was instructed to use it to commission a memento of the hijacking for a museum in Kandahar.

However, instead of arresting the hijackers and the three prisoners who had been handed over to them, Taliban authorities drove them to the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, to Quetta in Pakistan.

Flight Number
Indian Airlines suspended all flights to and from Kathmandu after the hijack. During subsequent talks with Nepalese authorities, India demanded that Nepal hand over the security at Kathmandu airport to Indian agencies, which Nepal refused. Indian Airlines resumed its Kathmandu services after 5 months of suspension on 1 June 2000, after Nepal assured India of full security at Kathmandu's airport. Nepal agreed to the installation of an additional X-ray machine as well as a final check of passengers by Indian security personnel at the airport. The airline retained the same flight number; IC 814, which continued to be in usage until 26 February 2011 when the IC code was retired by Air India upon the completion of the merger between the two carriers. The hijacked Airbus A300, registered VT-EDW, was returned to Indian Airlines in January 2000. It was withdrawn from use in 2002 and scrapped at Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj International Airport in December 2003.

Trial
The case was investigated by Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), which charged 10 people (out of whom seven, including the five hijackers, were still absconding and are in Pakistan). On February 5, 2008, a special anti-hijacking Patiala House Court sentenced all three accused, namely Abdul Latif, Yusuf Nepali, and Dilip Kumar Bhujel, to life imprisonment. They were charged with helping the hijackers in procuring fake passports and taking weapons on board. However, CBI moved Punjab and Haryana High Court demanding the death penalty (instead of life imprisonment) for Abdul Latif. The case came up for regular hearing in high court in September 2012, but the CBI's application was rejected. Also, Abdul Latif's application for parole was rejected in 2015. On 13 September 2012, the Jammu and Kashmir Police arrested terror suspect Mehrajuddin Dand, who allegedly provided logistical support for the hijacking of IC-814 in 1999. He allegedly provided travel papers to the hijackers. The Punjab and Haryana High Court ultimately convicted two persons for the attack, sentencing them to life imprisonment. They appealed against this sentence to the Supreme Court of India.

On 10 July 2020, one of the accused, Abdul Latif Adam Momin, along with 18 other persons including an employee of the passport office, was acquitted by a Sessions Court in Mumbai of charges relating to the fabrication of passports in connection with the hijacking incident.

The hijacked aircraft became the largest piece of evidence involved in the subsequent criminal investigation from the Punjab courts, where the hijack case was being heard, who deemed that the aircraft was vital for investigation. The detectives got fingerprints of the hijackers from it. A model of the plane, complete with seat numbers, was created to be produced in court and a court official was trained to assemble it, as it was unwieldy.

On 1 March 2022, one of the hijackers, Mistry Zahoor Ibrahim, was killed in a drive-by shooting in Karachi, Pakistan. Ibrahim was held responsible for the murder of the passenger Rupin Katyal. The gunmen who killed Ibrahim were never identified.

Political aftermath
The incident is seen as a failure of the BJP government under Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, with IB chief Ajit Doval saying that India would have had a stronger negotiating hand if the aircraft had not been allowed to leave Indian territory. Doval, the IB chief, who led the four-member negotiating team to Kandahar, described the whole incident as a, "diplomatic failure," of the government in their inability to make the US and the UAE use their influence to help secure a quick release of the passengers.

External Affairs Minister Jaswant Singh also received criticism for praising the Taliban for their co-operation after the hostages had been returned.

Relatives of the passengers aboard Flight IC 814 also raised public protests at being denied information about the passengers' health and status, twice entering briefings and meetings of government officials by force, to demand information, and holding press conferences to criticize the government. A message from Kandahar ATC was circulated to the public, stating that the plane was being regularly cleaned, and that the passengers were being provided with food, water, and entertainment; this was later proven to be false, according to passenger accounts.

Support to Northern Alliance and US invasion of Afghanistan
India had started to conduct supply operations to Panjshir in Afghanistan. Arms, ammunition and aircraft were provided to the Northern Alliance. India also provided logistical support to Ahmad Shah Massoud. The leader of the Alliance had visited India on multiple occasions to fine-tune strategies to take on the Taliban. During the US invasion of Afghanistan, Indian government allowed its military facilities to be used for strikes against Afghanistan and provided intelligence information on training camps of Islamic militants in Afghanistan.

In popular culture
Captain Devi Sharan (Commander of IC814) recounted the events in a book titled Flight into Fear – A Captain's Story (2000). The book was written in collaboration with journalist Srinjoy Chowdhury. Flight engineer Anil K. Jaggia also wrote a book specifically depicting the events that unfolded during the hijacking ordeal titled ''IC 814 Hijacked! The Inside Story''. The book was written in collaboration with Saurabh Shukla. The flight purser, Anil Sharma, has also written a detailed report of the hijack based on his experience in his book, IA's Terror Trail. Indian Airlines, India's sole domestic airline up to 1993, was hijacked 16 times, from 1971 to 1999.

The 2003 Bollywood film Zameen is loosely based upon the IC 814 hijacking and also Operation Entebbe of the Israel Defense Forces in Uganda. Hijack is a 2008 Indian Hindi-language action thriller film by Kunal Shivdasani based on the hijacking and stars Shiney Ahuja, Esha Deol and Ishitha Chauhan in the lead roles. Kandahar, a 2010 Indian Malayalam-language war film by Major Ravi is based on the hijacking. The political situation is portrayed from an Indian perspective in the film. Payanam, a 2011 Indian action thriller film by Radha Mohan is also loosely based on Indian Airlines hijacking but takes place at the Tirupati Airport in Andhra Pradesh. Yodha, a 2024 Indian action thriller film directed by Sagar Ambre and Pushkar Ojha about an Indian sky marshal also references the hijack.

title: Indian Airlines Flight 814


text:
User talk:24.64.223.203

Proposed deletion of Social pyramid

The article Social pyramid has been proposed for deletion  because of the following concern:
 * Is unsourced, unencyclopedic, and apparent OR, narrowly defining a broader topic. Delete for now and start over when an editor comes along who knows what they are talking about.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Joja lozzo  01:23, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

List of Gears and vehicles in Xenogears listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of Gears and vehicles in Xenogears. Since you had some involvement with the List of Gears and vehicles in Xenogears redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 06:13, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

List of factions in Xenogears listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of factions in Xenogears. Since you had some involvement with the List of factions in Xenogears redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 06:18, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

List of towns and locations in Xenogears listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of towns and locations in Xenogears. Since you had some involvement with the List of towns and locations in Xenogears redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 06:19, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

A.G.W.S. listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect A.G.W.S.. Since you had some involvement with the A.G.W.S. redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 03:05, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Executive Committee Director listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Executive Committee Director. Since you had some involvement with the Executive Committee Director redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 03:10, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of David Kennedy (musician)

The article David Kennedy (musician) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "subject is non-notable background musician in a side project of notable musicians, the only sources used prior to today were social media (IG/myspace) posts and WP:PROMO material regarding the types of instruments he has used"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

''' This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. ''' Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

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

title: User talk:24.64.223.203


text:
Soyuz TM-32

Soyuz TM-32 was a crewed Soyuz spaceflight which was launched on April 28, 2001, and docked with the International Space Station two days later. It launched the crew of the visiting mission ISS EP-1, which included the first paying space tourist Dennis Tito, as well as two Russian cosmonauts. The Soyuz TM-32 remained docked to the station until October; during this time it served as the lifeboat for the crew of Expedition 2 and later for the crew of Expedition 3. In October it landed the crew of ISS EP-2, who had been launched by Soyuz TM-33.

Docking with ISS

 * Docked to ISS: April 30, 2001, 07:58 UTC (to nadir port of Zarya)
 * Undocked from ISS: October 19, 2001, 10:48 UTC (from nadir port of Zarya)
 * Docked to ISS: October 19, 2001, 11:04 UTC (to Pirs module)
 * Undocked from ISS: October 31, 2001, 01:38 UTC (from Pirs module)

Mission highlights
TM-32 carried a three-man crew (two Russians and one American, the latter not a professional astronaut) to the International Space Station, ISS. It docked automatically with the ISS at 07:57 UT on April 30, 2001, just a few hours after the space shuttle Endeavour on mission STS-100 undocked. The launched crew stayed for a week and returned in Soyuz TM-31, which had been docked to (or nearby) the station since November 2000 functioning as "lifeboat" for the onboard crew (Expedition 1 and 2).

As the new lifeboat for Expedition 2 and later Expedition 3, TM-32 stayed docked at the station for six months (except for a brief move between docking ports) and finally, on October 31, brought home two cosmonauts and an ESA astronaut who had arrived a week earlier in Soyuz TM-33.

title: Soyuz TM-32


text:
Medal of Honor: Frontline

Medal of Honor: Frontline is a first-person shooter video game, in the Medal of Honor series, and was published by Electronic Arts. The player character is Lt. Jimmy Patterson, from the American Office of Strategic Services. Frontline takes place during the events of the first game and chronicles Patterson's journey as he fights his way across Europe into Nazi Germany during World War II. Frontline was released in North America for the PlayStation 2 on May 29, 2002 and for the GameCube and Xbox consoles on November 7, 2002.

Developed by EA Los Angeles, the game was the first Medal of Honor by the studio after being purchased by Electronic Arts from DreamWorks SKG and Microsoft in February 2000. It is also the first game in the series without the involvement of Steven Spielberg, creator of the series. In 2010, an HD port of the game, developed by Danger Close Games, was included in the "Limited Edition" PlayStation 3 version of Medal of Honor.

Gameplay
Frontline is a first-person shooter where players take control of the protagonist player character in a first-person perspective where they fight through levels set during the Second World War against the Wehrmacht using historical weaponry of the era, performing a series of military operations. Briefings take place at the start of each mission, which advance the plot and introduce new characters. Each mission is structured through a number of linear levels, each with differing locations, levels of action and styles of gameplay. Initially the player character begins on the frontlines during D-Day backed up by other computer AI-controlled soldiers with an emphasis on fast action-orientated gun-based gameplay. As the story progress however, the player character is sent on a variety of other missions including a number of covert and undercover operations in locations such as military bases, German-occupied towns and manors, submarines and countryside settings. The player character is tasked with objectives during levels that range from infiltration, espionage, rescue and recon. Because of the variety between missions and locations, gameplay changes pace. While many missions involve Allied assaults on German targets others include elements of stealth and exploration. For example, one selections of missions has the player detach from an allied raid to infiltrate a German U-boat in order to get to a secret facility while another has them rendezvous and sneak into a German headquarters in disguise to rescue an operative. Many missions are performed solo but also sometimes include an AI companion for backup. Health is determined by a health bar that can be replenished using a selection of "medikits" found throughout levels with varying degrees of effect.

During missions, players can earn medals at the end of each level by meeting requirements such as completions of objectives, eliminating a number of enemies and maintaining a percentage of health throughout, all represented by a bronze, silver or gold star.

Plot
Frontline starts with Lieutenant James Steven "Jimmy" Patterson storming Omaha Beach as a part of Operation Overlord, after which the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) sends him to disrupt German U-boat operations. Patterson stows away aboard the fictional U-Boat U-4902 and infiltrates the German U-boat base in Lorient, France, destroying 4902 and two more U-boats and crippling the port; during his infiltration, he crosses paths with an SS Hauptsturmführer named Rudolf Ulbricht von Sturmgeist conducting an inspection, but Sturmgeist, unaware of Patterson's presence, leaves shortly before the base is destroyed.

Shortly after Patterson completes his mission in Lorient, the OSS discovers that the Germans are building a secret weapon, but their contact in the Dutch Resistance goes missing. Patterson is sent to drop with the 82nd Airborne during Operation Market Garden to find him, meeting up with the Resistance and learning the contact is being held in a Nazi-occupied manor. After infiltrating the manor, Patterson locates the contact and rescues him from German custody.

The OSS learns from the contact that the secret weapon is a highly advanced jet fighter called HO-IX, which has the potential to change the tide of airpower over Europe if it reaches production. Patterson is sent to sabotage the aircraft's production, however en route he is instructed to cross the Nijmegen Bridge, disarm the explosives wired to the bridge, and send supplies to the besieged British 1st Airborne Division trapped in Arnhem. The OSS makes contact with Patterson again, informing him that they have tracked down Sturmgeist, and learned he is the officer in charge of the HO-IX project. Patterson is sent to Emmerich to track Sturmgeist, pursuing him aboard the SS Officer's personal armored train, but Patterson is unable to catch him before he escapes by decoupling the engine.

Patterson abandons the stopped train and proceeds to the secret aircraft facility outside Gotha on foot, destroying vital German supplies in a railroad depot before proceeding to the facility where the secret aircraft is being held. Once there, Patterson sabotages the facility and production lines, broadcasts the location of the facility to the Allies, and confronts Sturmgeist and his guards in the hangar of the HO-IX, killing him and using the HO-IX to escape the facility as it is destroyed by an Allied bombing raid.

Soundtrack
Medal of Honor: Frontline Original Soundtrack Recording is the soundtrack album for the game. The music was composed by Michael Giacchino in early 2001. The score was performed by the Northwest Sinfonia and recorded by Steve Smith at the Bastyr Chapel, between June 11 and June 15, 2001.

Different from the score releases of Medal of Honor and Medal of Honor: Underground, the CD album for Frontline was only available through EA Games' online store. A digital release was followed in 2005.

Parts of the soundtrack would also be re-used in several later games of the series, such as the Medal of Honor: Allied Assault Expansion Packs Spearhead and Breakthrough, Medal of Honor: Infiltrator, Medal of Honor: Pacific Assault, Medal of Honor: Vanguard and ''Medal of Honor: Airborne.

Reception
By July 2006, the PlayStation 2 version of Medal of Honor: Frontline had sold 2.5 million copies and earned $95 million in the United States alone. Next Generation ranked it as the eighth-highest-selling game launched for the PlayStation 2, Xbox or GameCube between January 2000 and July 2006 in that country. The PlayStation 2 version also received a "Double Platinum" sales award from the Entertainment and Leisure Software Publishers Association (ELSPA), indicating sales of at least 600,000 copies in the United Kingdom; and a "Gold" certification from the Verband der Unterhaltungssoftware Deutschland (VUD), for sales of at least 100,000 units across Germany, Austria and Switzerland.

The game received "generally favorable" reviews according to video game review aggregator Metacritic. GameSpot named Frontline the best video game of May 2002. It won GameSpot's annual "Best Sound on PlayStation 2" award and was a runner-up for "Best Music on PlayStation 2" and "Best Graphics (Technical) on PlayStation 2". It received further nominations in the "Best Shooter", "Best Music" and "Best Sound" categories among GameCube games, and "Best Music" and "Best Sound" among Xbox games.

During the 6th Annual Interactive Achievement Awards, the Academy of Interactive Arts & Sciences awarded Medal of Honor: Frontline with "Outstanding Achievement in Original Music Composition" and "Outstanding Achievement in Sound Design"; it also received a nomination for "Console First-Person Action Game of the Year".

High-definition remaster
At E3 2010, a high-definition version of Frontline, developed by Danger Close Games, was announced. The remastered version of Frontline was included in the PlayStation 3 version of Medal of Honor (2010) with updated gameplay options and also trophies support and remastered with high-definition graphics. The player has the option to play with the classic gameplay, such as dual stick turning/strafing controls and dual button weapon switching, or modern based gameplay with iron sights, single stick looking and strafing, and button press crouching controls. In August 2011, Frontline was released for PlayStation Network.

title: Medal of Honor: Frontline


text:
Simutrans

Simutrans is a cross-platform simulation game in which the player strives to run a successful transport system by constructing and managing transportation systems for passengers, mail and goods by land (rail, road, tram, monorail, maglev), air (airplanes) and water (ship) between places. Like OpenTTD, Simutrans is an open-source transportation game based on the Transport Tycoon idea.

Development history
Simutrans was originally written by Hansjörg Malthaner in 1997. Around 2004 he retired from development, and an international community of volunteers took over the development. Simutrans was developed internally as a closed source game until 2007, when the software was relicensed under the Artistic License 1.0.

Simutrans has been ported to Microsoft Windows, Linux, BeOS/Haiku, Mac OS X, and AmigaOS 4.x, which make use of several graphics libraries such as GDI (Windows only), SDL (all versions) or Allegro (BeOS only). It is portable to any architecture using GCC and one of the aforementioned libraries. Simutrans has multilingual support.

The current stable release of Simutrans is version 124.0 as of May 5, 2024. There is a popular branch of the code called Simutrans-Extended, which aims to extend the basic game. Simutrans-Extended was formerly called Simutrans-Experimental, but changed its name in 2017 to make clear that it is a distinct fork of Simutrans and not a testing branch. Nightly builds for Simutrans and the main PakSets are also released for both standard and Extended versions.

Overview and features
The main goal in Simutrans is to provide an efficient transport system for passengers, mail and goods to be transported to their desired destinations fast and with minimal transfers and at the same time making the company grow avoiding bankruptcy or excess administration.

Simutrans has a number of factory chains that are interconnected with other chains, for example, a coal mine produces coal for a coal power plant, and an oil rig produces oil for an oil power plant. The goods produced by these factories may be distributed to smaller factories or shops, such as gasoline to a gas station, coming from a gas storage facility, which retrieves the gas from an oil refinery, and so on.

Supplying a factory with electric power will increase the production and allows for fine-tuning the economy. Passengers and mail are transported between different cities and tourist attractions, and may use several methods of transportation to reach their destinations.

The Simutrans executable can run many different paksets, which is a package containing files called paks. Paks are files with graphic and data files that Simutrans uses to determine the objects in the game, their resolution, appearance, and behavior. Gaming experience is therefore very dependent on the pakset used.

Simutrans currently features 12 AI players, and has an online capability similar to OpenTTD since version 110.0. The terrain in Simutrans is freely-modifiable, and different layers like tunnels and bridges can be stacked, allowing for subways or highways to be constructed. It has a day and night cycle, different climates and seasons. Nearly all modes of transportation exist in Simutrans. At least buses/trucks, trains, and ships are always provided. If defined in the pakset, aircraft, monorails and maglevs can also be used.

Simutrans features an online multiplayer mode. Players can join an online game using the in-game server browser. Simutrans-Extended also features an online mode, including a long-term semi-persistent online server in which the game world typically lasts over a year before being reset.

Customization
The Simutrans executable must load a pakset which contains the game's objects. Over the years several paksets have been created. An overview is given on the official page.

Simutrans can easily be expanded or modified. Simple modification can be done via editing the personal config file. Since the objects in the game just consist of a simple image and a short description file, it is very easy to create a house or add a train. Thus many contributed objects for all graphic sizes exist. The user can also add height maps and citylists which add city names into the game. Even deep modifications of the game mechanics are possible via the config file, like a setting to prevent stockpiling at factories or changing the economic model simulation.

Critical reception
GameDaily's Big Download considered Simutrans to be one of the best freeware games, highlighting the logical system of routing passengers and freight to their destinations, decent AI opponents and the support for custom aesthetics or rules-sets. However, the sometimes unreliable vehicle pathfinding was criticized, particularly with respect to alternate routes and switches for train lines. The sound effects were deemed to be unengaging, and new players may be baffled by the range of transportation possibilities.

Another review from Amiga Future came to very similar conclusions (apart from the lack of sound support on Amiga OS). In particular the depth of simulation and the stability were highlighted.

Between 2007 and June 2017 Simutrans was downloaded from SourceForge over 5.6 million times.

title: Simutrans


text:
Organum

Organum is, in general, a plainchant melody with at least one added voice to enhance the harmony, developed in the Middle Ages. Depending on the mode and form of the chant, a supporting bass line (or bourdon) may be sung on the same text, the melody may be followed in parallel motion (parallel organum), or a combination of both of these techniques may be employed. As no real independent second voice exists, this is a form of heterophony. In its earliest stages, organum involved two musical voices: a Gregorian chant melody, and the same melody transposed by a consonant interval, usually a perfect fifth or fourth. In these cases the composition often began and ended on a unison, the added voice keeping to the initial tone until the first part has reached a fifth or fourth, from where both voices proceeded in parallel harmony, with the reverse process at the end. Organum was originally improvised; while one singer performed a notated melody (the vox principalis), another singer—singing "by ear"—provided the unnotated second melody (the vox organalis). Over time, composers began to write added parts that were not just simple transpositions, thus creating true polyphony.

Early organum
The first document to describe organum specifically, and give rules for its performance, was the Musica enchiriadis (c. 895), a treatise traditionally (and probably incorrectly) attributed to Hucbald of St. Amand. The oldest methods of teaching organum can be found in the Scolica and the Bamberg Dialogues, along with the Musica enchiriadis. The societies that have developed polyphony usually have several types of it found in their culture. In its original conception, organum was never intended as polyphony in the modern sense; the added voice was intended as a reinforcement or harmonic enhancement of the plainchant at occasions of High Feasts of importance to further the splendour of the liturgy. The analogue evolution of sacred architecture and music is evident: during previous centuries monophonic Mass was celebrated in abbatial churches; in the course of the 12th and 13th centuries the newly consecrated cathedrals resounded with ever more complex forms of polyphony. Exactly what developments took place where and when in the evolution of polyphony is not always clear, though some landmarks remain visible in the treatises. As in these instances, it is hard to evaluate the relative importance of treatises, whether they describe the 'actual' practice or a deviation of it. As key-concept behind the creative outburst that manifested in the 11th and 12th centuries is the vertical and harmonic expansion of dimension, as the strongly resonant harmony of organum magnified the splendour of the celebration and heightened its solemnity.

The earliest European sources of information concerning organum regard it as a well-known practice. Organum is also known to have been performed in several different rites, but the main wells of information concerning its history come from Gregorian chant. Considering that the trained singers had imbibed an oral tradition that was several centuries old, singing a small part of the chant repertory in straightforward heterophony of parallel harmony or other ways of "singing by the ear" would come naturally. It is made clear in the Musica enchiriadis that octave doubling (magadization) was acceptable, since such doubling was inevitable when men and boys sang together. The 9th-century treatise Scolica enchiriadis treats the subject in greater detail. For parallel singing, the original chant would be the upper voice, vox principalis; the vox organalis was at a parallel perfect interval below, usually a fourth. Thus the melody would be heard as the principal voice, the vox organalis as an accompaniment or harmonic reinforcement. This kind of organum is sometimes called parallel organum, although terms such as sinfonia or diaphonia were used in early treatises.

The history of organum would not be complete without two of its greatest innovators, Léonin and Pérotin. These two men were "the first international composers of polyphonic music". The innovations of Léonin and Pérotin mark the development of the rhythmic modes. These innovations are grounded in the forms of Gregorian chant, and adhere to the theoretical rhythmic systems of St. Augustine. It is the composers' love for cantus firmus that caused the notation of the tenor line to stay the same, even when the methods of penning music were changing. It was the use of modal rhythm, however, that would make these two men great. Modal rhythm is defined clearly as a succession of (usually) unequal notes arranged in a definite pattern. The Notre-Dame composers' development of musical rhythm allowed music to be free from its ties to text. While it is well known that Léonin composed a great deal of organum, it was the innovations of Pérotin, who spent much of his time revising the organum purum of Léonin, that caused generations of organum and motet composers to exploit the principles of the rhythmic modes.

Notre-Dame school
Cultural and intellectual life flourished in Paris during the 12th century with the University of the Sorbonne having become a reputed institution that attracted many students, not all of them French. The construction of Notre-Dame Cathedral on the Île de la Cité took place between 1163 and 1238 and this period coincides with the various phases of development of the Paris style of organum. The Cathedral of Notre-Dame and the University of Paris served as the center of musical composition and as a transmitter of musical theory in the 12th and 13th centuries. The presence of Léonin and Pérotin at the Notre-Dame School made Paris the centre of the musical world in the 12th century. Léonin, magister cantus of Notre-Dame, compiled the Magnus Liber Organi de Gradali et Antiphonario. Léonin wrote organa dupla based on existing chants like the Alleluia and the gradual of the mass and responsory and Benedicamus Domino of Vespers for the major liturgical ceremonies in the yearly cycle. In hindsight, this turned out to be a major event, as this was the first large-scale project attributable to a single composer. Not only is it a compilation for practical use during mass and office compassing the ecclesiastic year, the first of its kind; it also introduces the use of the rhythmic modes as a creative principle. Thus, when in a discussion of organum of the Paris School the word "modal" or "mode" is used, it refers to the rhythmic modes and specifically not to the musical modes that rule over melody.

In Léonin's Organa de Gradali et Antiphonario two forms of organum technique are evident: organum purum and discantus. Benedicamus Domino is a good example of the principles used. "Benedicamus" is usually mixed syllabic—neumatic in that it has mostly one note or maybe two per syllable of text, which is set in florid organum over a sustained tenor. "Domino" is in its Gregorian form set in melismatic style with three or more notes to a syllable and here both tenor and duplum proceed in discantus set in the six rhythmic modes, to be finalized with a florid cadence over a sustained tenor. Thus, in larger texts, depending on how the words were set to music, syllabic parts (having no ligatures and therefore non-modal) end up as organum purum: the tenor sustains each single note of the chant over which the organal voice drapes a new florid line, written mostly in ligatures and compound neumes. Starting from a consonant, mostly the octave, sometimes lead in by 7–8 over 1, the duplum line explores the harmonious interplay with the tenor, building up to a change of harmony at the end of a melisma where another syllable is produced at a different pitch. Where the Gregorian chant is no longer syllabic but uses ligatures and melismas, both voices proceed in a rhythmic mode. This section of discantus is concluded, on the last syllable of a word or phrase, by a copula, in which the tenor sustains either the penultimate or the last tone and the duplum switches back to a florid cadence, to conclude on a consonance. Thus, in organum duplum of Léonin these compositional idioms alternate throughout the complete polyphonic setting, which is concluded in monophonic chant for the last phrase. Thus, three different styles in the organaliter section are alternated and linked according to the text, leaving the last part of the text to be sung choraliter in monophonic chant. The verse of the chant is worked out according to the same principles.

The relevant contemporary authors who write about the organum of the Notre-Dame school, Anonymous IV, Johannes de Garlandia, the St. Emmeram Anonymous and Franco of Cologne, to name a few, are not always as clear as could be desired. Nevertheless, much information can be distilled from the comparative research of their writings. Organum purum is one of three styles of organum, which is used in section where the chant is syllabic thus where the tenor can not be modal. As soon as the chant uses ligatures, the tenor becomes modal and it will have become discant, which is the second form. The third form is copula (Lat. coming together) which in the words of Johannes de Garlandia "is between organum and discant". and according to Waite a bridge section between modal and non-modal sections. It seems that for most instances we can take Garlandia literally where he says 'between' organum and discant. In organa dupla, the copula is very similar to a short, cadential organum purum section but in organa tripla or conducti it is seen that irregular notation is used. Either the last notes of ligatures are affixed with a plica which divides the notes in smaller values, or a series of disjunct rests is used in jolting succession in both parts, creating what is also called hocket. These features also can be frequently found in two-part discantus on special cadences or a preparation of a cadence, where they are also referred to as "copulae". Garlandia states simply: "a copula is where are any number of lines are found". referring to the plicae or rest-signs. Thus organum duplum on a texted chant as a gradual, responsory or the verse of an Alleluia can be schematized as follows:

 * beginning of text set to organum: organaliter:
 * organum purum >> copula >>
 * discantus >> copula >>
 * organum purum >> copula >>
 * discantus >> copula >>
 * closing lines of text choraliter

In the Notre-Dame repertory the Alleluia itself is only composed organaliter in the opening section, before the Jubilus, the protracted vocalization of the last syllable, which is to be sung choraliter, and as such is absent from all extant original manuscripts. The above stated general principles have been used freely, as in Alleluia V. Dies sanctificatus, where "dies" starts off with a little melisma which is judiciously set as a large non-modal florid section over all the notes of the tenor on "di(-es)", reserving discantus for "nò(-bis)" instead of having a short section in discantus right away at the beginning.

Pérotin "is the best composer of discantus", according to Anonymous IV, an English student, writing ca.1275, who has provided at least a few morsels of factual information on Paris Organum and its composers. Pérotin further developed discantus in three part Organum (Organum Triplum) where both organal voices are in discantus. Note that organum purum is not possible in three-part organa, all three parts are modal and need to be organized according to the rhythmic modes. Pérotin even went as far as composing two four-part organa (quadrupla), "Viderunt omnes" and "Sederunt principes" which were performed in Notre-Dame in 1198 on New Year's Day and in 1199 on the feast of St Stephen (a decree of Odon de Sully, Bishop of Paris, exists which stipulates the performance of 'organa tripla vel quadrupla') Apart from organa, Pérotin extended the form of the Aquitanian versus which was henceforth called conductus. Any conductus is a new composition on new texts and is always composed in the rhythmic modes. Perotin set several texts by Philippe le Chancelier, while some texts refer to contemporary events. Two-part conductus form the larger part, though conductus exist for one to four voices. Three and four part conductus are, by necessity, composed throughout in discantus style. As in organa tripla, handling three voices (or four) precludes the kind of rhythmic freedom found in dupla. In conductus the distinction is made between 'cum littera' and 'sine litera', texted sections and melismatic sections. The texted parts can sometimes go beyond the modal measure and then fall back into regular mode in the melismatic section. Again according to Anonymous IV, Pérotin wrote a number of replacement clausulae from organa dupla by Léonin. As the tenor in organa dupla in discant sections proceeds always in the 5th mode (all longs in a rhythmic group ordine), Pérotin, who was a generation removed from Léonin, saw fit to improve them by introducing different modes for the tenor and new melodic lines for the dupla, increasing the rhythmic organization and diversity of the section. However, in the largest compilation of Notre-Dame repertoires (F) no less than 462 clausulae exist, many recurrences of the same clausulae (Domino, et gaudebit in variant settings, according to. 'written in a variety of styles and with varying competence' A further innovation was the motellus, to be found in W2, in which the upper part of a discant section is supplied with a new text, so that when the tenor utters a single syllable of chant, the upper part will pronounce several syllables or words. As such it reminds of the prosulae that were composed, replacing a long melisma in a chant with new, additional words. This would have been the first instance of two different texts being sung in harmony. In turn, the motellus gave birth to the motet which is a poly-textual piece in discant, which obviously sparked a lot a creativity as it soon became a prolific form of composition.

The organa that were created in Paris were disseminated throughout Europe. The three main sources are W1, St. Andrews, Wolfenbüttel 677, olim Helmstedt 628; the large and illuminated copy made in Florence, owned by Piero de Medici, the Pluteo 29.1 of the Bibliotheca Mediceo-Laurenziana (F), which is by far the most extensive copy of the repertory. Finally W2, Wolfenbüttel 1206, olim Helmstedt 1099, which was compiled the latest (and contains the greatest number of motets).

There are arguments that support a relative freedom of rhythm in organa dupla but others who say that the interpretation of the music should always be according to modal or Franconian principles. Willi Apel and William G. Waite insisted upon a rigorously modal interpretation. Though Waite in his dissertation, notably in chapter 4: The notation of organum duplum' acknowledged that in organum duplum and monophonic conducts relative freedom may have been taken, he transcribed a selection of the Magnus Liber Organi of Léonin into strict modal rhythm. Apel argued that the long values for dissonances (in violation of the basic principle of consonance) produced by modal rhythms in Notre-Dame organa, can be reconciled by a statement made by several medieval theorists that "the tenor pauses, if a dissonance appears". Debates on interpretation are ongoing. However, Waite was working in the 1950s, and his point of view has been supplanted by newer research: "...but [Waite's] view that the entire corpus [of the Magnus Liber Organi] should be transcribed according to the rhythmic modes is no longer accepted" (Peter Jeffery in the Notation Course Medieval Music 1100–1450, Princeton).

In the range of forms of compositions found in the later two manuscripts that contain the Notre-Dame repertory (F and W2) one class of distinction can be made: that which is (strictly) modal and that which is not. Organum duplum in its organum purum sections of syllabic setting, the cum littera sections in two-part conductus, copulae in general and monophonic conductus would be that part of the repertory which is not strictly modal. In monophonic song, be it chant or a conductus simplex by Perotin, there is no need to vary from the classical standards for declamation that were a rooted tradition at the time, going back to St. Augustine's De Musica. It has been firmly established by extensive research in chant traditions (Gregorian Semiology) that there is a fluency and variability in the rhythm of declamatory speech that should also govern chant performance. These principles extend to the not strictly modal sections or compositions, as a contrasting quality with musica mensurabilis.

As Parisian Organum is rooted in Gregorian chant tradition, it is categorized under Ars antiqua which is thus called in contrast to the Ars nova which embarked on new forms that were in every sense original and no longer based on Gregorian chant and as such constituted a break with the musical practice of the ancients.

title: Organum