text:
Backstroke

Backstroke or back crawl is one of the four swimming styles used in competitive events regulated by FINA, and the only one of these styles swum on the back. This swimming style has the advantage of easy breathing, but the disadvantage of swimmers not being able to see where they are going. It also has a different start from the other three competition swimming styles. The swimming style is similar to an upside down front crawl or freestyle. Both backstroke and front crawl are long-axis strokes. In individual medley backstroke is the second style swum; in the medley relay it is the first style swum.

History
Backstroke is an ancient style of swimming, popularized by Harry Hebner. It was the second stroke to be swum in competitions after the front crawl. The first Olympic backstroke competition was the 1900 Paris Olympics men's 200 meter.

Technique
In the initial position, the swimmer performing backstroke lies flat on the back; arms stretched with extended fingertips, and legs extended backwards.

Arm movement
In backstroke, the arms contribute most of the forward movement. The arm stroke consists of two main parts: the power phase (consisting of three separate parts) and the recovery. The arms alternate so that one arm is always underwater while the other arm is recovering. One complete arm turn is considered one cycle. From the initial position, one arm sinks slightly under water and turns the palm outward to start the catch phase (first part of the power phase). The hand enters downward (pinkie finger first) then pulling out at a 45-degree angle, catching the water.

During the power phase the hand follows a semi-circular path from the catch to the side of the hip. The palm is always facing away from the swimming direction, while remaining straight as an extension of the arm, and the elbow always points downward towards the bottom of the pool. This is done so that both the arms and the elbow can push the maximum amount of water back in order to push the body forward. At the height of the shoulders, the upper and lower arms should have their maximum angle of about 90 degrees. This is called the Mid-Pull of the power phase.

The Mid-Pull phase consists of pushing the palm of the hand as far down as possible with the fingers pointing upward. Again, the goal is to push the body forward against the water. At the very end of the Mid-Pull, the palm flaps down for a last push forward down to a depth of 45 cm, creating the finish of the power phase. Besides pushing the body forward, this also helps with the rolling back to the other side as part of the body movement. During the power phase, the fingers of the hand can be slightly apart, as this will increase the resistance of the hand in the water due to turbulence.

To prepare for the recovery phase, the hand is rotated so that the palms point towards the legs and the thumb side points upwards. At the beginning of the recovery phase of the one arm, the other arm begins its power phase. The recovering arm is moved in a semicircle straight over the shoulders to the front. During this recovery, the palm rotates so that the small finger enters the water first, allowing for the least amount of resistance, and the palms point outward. After a short gliding phase, the cycle repeats with the preparation for the next power phase.

Variants
A variant is to move both arms synchronized and not alternating, similar to an upside down breast stroke. This is easier to coordinate, and the peak speed during the combined power phase is faster, yet the speed is much slower during the combined recovery. The average speed will usually be less than the average speed of the alternating stroke. This stroke is commonly called the elementary backstroke. This elementary backstroke swim was used in the 1900 and 1908 Olympics. The backcrawl swim supplanted the elementary backstroke swim after 1908 as the competitive back swim and it is now referred to as the backstroke.

Another variant is the old style of swimming backstroke, where the arm movement formed a complete circle in a windmill type pattern. However, this style is not commonly used for competitive swimming, as a lot of energy is spent on pushing the body up and down instead of forward. Furthermore, the added strain on the shoulder is considered less than ideal and can lead to injuries.

It is also possible to move only one arm at a time (paused stroke), where one arm moves through the power and recovery phases while the other arm rests. This is slow, but it is used frequently to teach students the movement, as they have to concentrate on only one arm. This drill technique can work well with the swimmer holding a float, however it is important not to overuse this drill as a "paused stroke" can easily become habitual and can be challenging to unlearn.

Leg movement
The leg movement in backstroke is similar to the flutter kick in front crawl. The kick makes a large contribution to the forward speed, while significantly stabilizing the body.

The leg stroke alternates, with one leg sinking down straight to about 30 degrees. From this position, the leg makes a fast kick upward, slightly bending the knee at the beginning and then stretching it again in the horizontal. However, there are also frequent variants with four or only two kicks per cycle. Usually, sprinters tend to use 6 kicks per cycle, whereas long-distance swimmers may use fewer.

Variants
It is also possible to use a butterfly kick, although this is rare except after the initial start and after turns. The dolphin kick is essential for many top athletes because it is the fastest part of the race. It may also constitute the majority of the race (i.e., in the 100 yard backstroke the swimmer may kick underwater dolphin for 15 yards per length which equates to as much as 60 yards kicking in a 100 yd race). A great example of this is Olympic gold medallist Natalie Coughlin. Breaststroke kicks are most comfortable if the arms are used synchronized, as the breaststroke kick makes it more difficult to compensate for the rolling movement with alternating arm cycles. The butterfly kick can be done slightly to one side depending on the rolling motion of the body.

Breathing
Breathing in backstroke is easier than in other strokes, as the mouth and nose are usually above water. Competitive swimmers breathe in through the mouth during the recovery of one arm, and breathe out through the mouth and nose during the pull and push phase of the same arm. This is done to clear the nose of water.

Body movement
Due to the asynchronous movement of the arms, the body tends to roll around its long axis. By taking advantage of this rolling motion, swimmers can increase their effectiveness while swimming backstroke. The overall position of the body is straight in the horizontal to reduce drag. Beginners frequently let their posterior and thighs sink too low, which increases drag. To avoid this, the upper legs have to be moved to the extreme down position at each kick even with a little help by the back and the foot tips have to be fixed in the extreme lower position and the head is held out of the water to act as a counter-weight.

Start
The backstroke start is the only start from the water. The swimmer faces the wall and grabs part of the start block or the wall with their hands. Ideally, there are grips on the block for this purpose. The legs are placed shoulder width apart on the wall with both heels slightly off the wall. Just before the starting signal, the swimmer pulls their head closer to the start block, while keeping the knees bent at a 90-degree angle. Some swimmers prefer to keep one foot slightly lower than the other during the start.

For the takeoff, the swimmer pushes their hands away from the block and swings their arms around sideways to the front. At the same time, the swimmer throws their head to the back. The swimmer then pushes away from the wall with their feet. Ideally, the swimmer's back is arched during the airborne phase so that only the feet and the hands touch the water while the rest of the body is above the water line. This reduces drag and permits a faster start. On September 21, 2005, FINA modified the backstroke start rule regarding toes below the water line. The feet can now be above the water, but not above or curled over the lip of the pool gutter.

After the start, the swimmer is completely underwater. Due to increased resistance at the surface, experienced swimmers usually swim faster underwater than at the surface. Therefore, most experienced swimmers in backstroke competitions stay under water up to the limit set by FINA (15 meters after the start and after every turn). Most swimmers use a butterfly kick underwater, as this provides more forward movement than the flutter kick. The underwater phase includes the risk of water entering the nose, so most swimmers breathe out through the nose to stop water from entering.

The swimmer's head must break the surface before 15 m under FINA rules. The swimmer starts swimming with one arm, followed by the other arm with half a cycle delay. The swimmer continues in regular swimming style, staying on the back for the entire time except the turns.

Turn and finish
Approaching the wall presents swimmers with the problem of not seeing where they are going. Most competitive swimmers know how many strokes they need for a lane, or at least how many strokes after the signal flags or the change in color of the separating lines. Turning the head is also possible, but slows the swimmer down.

Prior to September 1992 swimmers had to touch the wall on their back before initiating the turn or rolling off their back in order to turn. After September 1992 when approaching the wall, the swimmer is allowed to turn to their breast and make one push/pull phase with one arm or simultaneous double arm pull. Next, the swimmer makes half a tumble turn forward, resting the feet against the wall. The arms are in the forward position at this time, and the swimmer pushes their body off the wall. Similar to the start, the swimmer can remain up to 15 m under water, with most swimmers using a butterfly kick for speed. This rule change allowed for faster turns.

For the finish, the swimmer must touch the wall while lying on their back, less than 90 degrees out of the horizontal, and must not be completely submerged. 2020 USA Swimming Rulebook, 101.4 BACKSTROKE, Finish — Upon the finish of the race, the swimmer must touch the wall while on the back.

Competitions

There are three common distances swum in competitive backstroke swimming, both over either a long course (50 m pool) or a short course (25 m pool). The United States also employs short-course yards (25-yard pool). Other distances are also swum on occasions.
 * 50 m backstroke
 * 100 m backstroke
 * 200 m backstroke

Backstroke is also part of the medley over the following distances:
 * 100 m individual medley (short course 25 m pool only)
 * 200 m individual medley
 * 400 m individual medley
 * 4 × 100 m medley relay

Below are the official FINA rules which apply to swimmers during official competitions.
 * Before the starting signal, the swimmers shall line up in the water facing the starting end, with both hands holding the starting grips. Standing in or on the gutter or bending the toes over the lip of the gutter is prohibited.
 * At the signal for starting and after turning, the swimmer shall push off and swim upon his back throughout the race except when executing a turn as set forth in SW 6.4. The normal position on the back can include a roll movement of the body up to, but not including 90 degrees from horizontal. The position of the head is not relevant.
 * Some part of the swimmer must break the surface of the water throughout the race. It shall be permissible for the swimmer to be completely submerged during the turn, and for a distance of not more than 15 meters after the start and each turn. By that point, the head must have broken the surface.
 * During the turn, the shoulders may be turned over the vertical to the breast after which a continuous single arm pull or a continuous simultaneous double arm pull may be used to initiate the turn. Once the body has left the position on the back, any kick or arm pull must be part of the continuous turning action. The swimmer must have returned to the position on the back upon leaving the wall. When executing the turn there must be a touch of the wall with some part of the swimmer's body.
 * Upon the finish of the race, the swimmer must touch the wall while on the back in his/her respective lane. Competitive swimmers frequently swing their arm back and down into the water, bringing the head and upper body with it. This creates a large amount of forward momentum into the wall. A single dolphin kick can be used to keep the some part of the swimmer above water, and therefore, legal.

title: Backstroke


text:
Sicilian Expedition

The Sicilian Expedition was an Athenian military expedition to Sicily, which took place from 415–413 BC during the Peloponnesian War between Athens on one side and Sparta, Syracuse and Corinth on the other. The expedition ended in a devastating defeat for the Athenian forces, severely impacting Athens.

The expedition was hampered from the outset by uncertainty in its purpose and command structure—political maneuvering in Athens swelled a lightweight force of twenty ships into a massive armada, and the expedition's primary proponent, Alcibiades, was recalled from command to stand trial before the fleet even reached Sicily. Still, the Athenians achieved early successes. Syracuse, the most powerful state in Sicily, responded exceptionally slowly to the Athenian threat and, as a result, was almost completely invested before the arrival of back-up in the form of Spartan general Gylippus, who galvanized its inhabitants into action. From that point forward, however, as the Athenians ceded the initiative to their newly energized opponents, the tide of the conflict shifted. A massive reinforcing armada from Athens briefly gave the Athenians the upper hand once more, but a disastrous failed assault on a strategic high point and several crippling naval defeats damaged the Athenian soldiers' ability to continue fighting and maintain morale. The Athenians attempted a last-ditch evacuation from Syracuse. The evacuation failed, and nearly the entire expedition was captured or was destroyed in Sicily.

The effects of the defeat were immense. Two hundred ships and thousands of soldiers, an appreciable portion of Athens' total manpower, were lost in a single stroke. The city's enemies on the mainland and in Persia were encouraged to take action, and rebellions broke out in the Aegean. Some historians consider the defeat to have been the turning point in the war, though Athens continued to fight for another decade. Thucydides observed that contemporary Greeks were shocked not that Athens eventually fell after the defeat, but rather that it fought on for as long as it did, so devastating were the losses suffered. Athens managed to recover remarkably well from the expedition materially, the principal issue being the loss of manpower rather than the loss of ships.

Athens and Sicily
Although Athens had never involved itself deeply in Sicilian affairs, it had ties there before the onset of the Peloponnesian War, dating back to at least the mid-5th century BC. To small Sicilian cities, Athens was a potential counter to the powerful city of Syracuse, which was strong enough to potentially dominate the island. Syracuse, like Sparta and its Peloponnesian allies, was a Dorian city, while most of Athens's allies on the island were Ionian. Another source of conflict was the close relationship of Syracuse and other Dorian cities of the west to Athens's great commercial rival, Corinth. To the Athenians, Sicily was a threat—an unencumbered Syracuse might send grain or other aid to the Peloponnesians—as well as a venue for possible conquests.

In 427 BC, Athens had sent twenty ships, under the command of Laches, in response to an appeal for help from Leontini. That expedition, operating from a base at Rhegium, remained in the area for several years, fighting alongside Athens's local allies against the Syracusans and their allies, without achieving any dramatic successes. In 425, the Athenians planned to reinforce their contingent with an additional forty triremes, but that fleet never reached Sicily, as it became caught up in the pivotal Battle of Pylos on the way there. By the time that fleet reached Sicily in late summer, Athens's Sicilian allies had grown weary of stalemated warfare, and agreed to negotiate with Syracuse and its allies. At the Congress of Gela, the Sicilian cities made peace on the basis of "Sicily for the Sicilians", and the Athenian fleet left for home.

State of the War
In 415, Athens and Sparta had been formally at peace since 421, when the Peace of Nicias had brought the Archidamian War to a close. The terms of that peace, however, had never been fulfilled; Sparta had never surrendered Amphipolis to Athens, as required by the treaty, and in return the Athenians had held Pylos. More recently, Athenian and Spartan troops had fought at the Battle of Mantinea in 418, with Athens supporting Argos, Mantinea, and other Peloponnesian cities in an attempt to establish a stable anti-Spartan alliance in the Peloponnese. That attempt, largely orchestrated by the Athenian nobleman Alcibiades, would have destroyed Sparta's control over the Peloponnesian League had it succeeded. Alcibiades rebounded politically from this defeat, and was elected as a general in the spring of 417. Control of Athens' foreign policy remained divided between a "peace party" (or pro-Spartan party) led by Nicias, and a "war party" led by Alcibiades.

Appeal from Segesta
The peace established in Sicily at the Congress of Gela did not last long. Shortly after the Congress, Syracuse intervened in an episode of civil strife between the democratic and oligarchic parties in Leontini, supporting the oligarchs. Before too long, the prospect of foreign domination had united the Leontinians, and the two parties united in war against Syracuse. Athens had sent an emissary to Sicily in 422 to sound out the possibility of renewing the war against Syracuse, but achieved nothing. In 416, however, a second Sicilian conflict provided the invitation Athens had sought in 422. The city of Segesta—an Athenian ally in the 420s—went to war against Selinus and, after losing an initial battle, sent to Athens for help. In order to win the Athenians' support, the Segestaeans claimed that they were capable of funding much of the cost of sending a fleet, offering 60 talents of uncoined silver up front, and tricking Athenian ambassadors into believing that the city was more prosperous than it actually was, by making sure that the ambassadors saw all their golden and other valuable objects in a way as if these were just part of what they had.

The debate
At Athens, the Segestan ambassadors presented their case for intervention to the assembly, where debate over the proposal quickly divided along traditional factional lines. The assembly eventually approved an expedition composed of sixty triremes, without hoplite accompaniment, commanded by Nicias, Alcibiades, and Lamachus. Thucydides reports that Nicias had been appointed against his preference, but offers no further detail regarding that debate.

Five days after that first debate, a second assembly was held to arrange the logistics of the expedition. There, Nicias attempted to persuade the assembly to overturn its previous decision regarding whether to send an expedition at all. Over the course of several speeches, Nicias raised a series of different arguments against the expedition. He reminded the Athenians that they would be leaving powerful enemies behind them if they sent a force to Sicily, and warned that they would be opening hostilities with enemies too difficult and numerous to conquer and rule. Nicias also attacked Alcibiades's credibility, claiming that he and his allies were inexperienced and self-aggrandizing young men eager to lead Athens into war for their own ends.

In response, Alcibiades dismissed the attack on himself by pointing to the good he had done for Athens as a private citizen and public leader. He rebutted Nicias's warnings about the plan for the expedition by reminding the Athenians of their obligation to their Sicilian allies, appealing to the enterprising spirit that had won Athens her empire, and pointing out that many states on Sicily would support Athens in her operations there.

The assembly was clearly leaning towards Alcibiades's side, so Nicias, judging them unlikely to cancel the expedition if he argued against it directly, chose a different tactic. He described the wealth and power of the Sicilian cities Athens would be challenging, and stated that a larger expedition than previously approved would be required, expecting that the prospect of approving such a massive expenditure would prove unappealing to the citizenry. Contrary to Nicias's plan, the assembly enthusiastically embraced his proposal, and passed a motion allowing the generals to arrange for a force of over 100 ships and 5,000 hoplites. Nicias's ploy had failed badly. His misreading of the assembly had altered the strategic situation; whereas the loss of 60 ships would have been painful but bearable, the loss of the larger force would be catastrophic. "Without Nicias's intervention," wrote Donald Kagan, "there would have been an Athenian expedition against Sicily in 415, but there could not have been a disaster."

Destruction of the Hermai
After lengthy preparations, the fleet was ready to sail. The night before they were to leave, someone destroyed many of the hermai—the stone markers representing Hermes, placed around the city for good luck. This event was taken very seriously by the Athenian people as it was considered a bad omen for the expedition, as well as evidence of a revolutionary conspiracy to overthrow the government. According to Plutarch, Androcles, a political enemy of Alcibiades, used false witness to claim that Alcibiades and his friends were responsible. Alcibiades volunteered to be put on trial under penalty of death in order to prove his innocence (wanting to avoid his enemies charging him, in his absence, with more false information), but this request was denied.

He was otherwise extremely popular and had the support of the entire army; he had also gained the support of Argos and Mantinea during the preparations. He was not charged, and the fleet sailed the next day. His opponents, however, waited for Alcibiades to set sail before they leveled the charges against him. This was because the army, his main source of support, would be absent, and his supporters would be outnumbered when the votes were cast.

Reaction in Syracuse
Many people in Syracuse, the richest and most powerful city of Sicily, felt that the Athenians were in fact coming to attack them under the pretense of aiding Segesta in a minor war. The Syracusan general Hermocrates suggested that they ask for help from other Sicilian cities, and from Carthage. He also wanted to meet the Athenian fleet in the Ionian Sea before they arrived. Others argued that Athens was no threat to Syracuse, and some people did not believe there was a fleet at all, because Athens would not be so foolish as to attack them while they were still at war with Sparta. Athenagoras accused Hermocrates and others of attempting to instill fear among the population and trying to overthrow the government.

Three generals, three strategies
At the first assembly that authorized the expedition, the Athenians named Nicias, Alcibiades, and Lamachus as its commanders; that decision remained unchanged at the second assembly. Alcibiades was the expedition's leading proponent, and the leader of the war party, Nicias its leading critic and the leader of the peace party. Lamachus, meanwhile, was a fifty-year-old career soldier, of whom the longest extant portrayal is a series of scenes in Aristophanes' The Acharnians that satirize him as a braggadocious, perpetually impoverished warrior. The reasons for the Athenians' choice are not recorded, but the assembly may have been seeking to balance the aggressive young leader with a more conservative older figure, with Lamachus added for his military expertise.

In practice, each of the three generals proposed a different strategy. Nicias proposed a narrowly circumscribed expedition; he felt that the fleet should sail to Selinus and force a settlement between Selinus and Segesta. After that, he proposed to briefly show the flag around Sicily and then return home, unless the Segestans were willing to pay for the full cost of the expanded expedition. Alcibiades proposed to first attempt to win over allies on the island through diplomacy, and then attack Selinus and Syracuse. Lamachus, meanwhile, proposed taking advantage of the element of surprise by sailing directly to Syracuse and giving battle outside the city. Such a sudden attack, he felt, would catch the Syracusans off guard and possibly induce their quick surrender. Eventually, however, Lamachus settled the three-way division of opinion by endorsing Alcibiades's plan.

Athenian landing

The Athenian fleet first sailed to Corcyra to meet up with their allies, and the ships were divided into three sections, one for each commander. Three of the ships were sent ahead to look for allies in Sicily. The fleet at this point consisted of 134 triremes (100 of which were from Athens), 5,100 hoplites (of which 2,200 were Athenians), 480 archers, 700 slingers, 120 other light troops, and 30 cavalry, as well as 130 other supply ships and all the crews of the triremes and other non-combatants.

They had little luck finding allies along the coast of southern Italy and, when the three other ships returned, they learned that Segesta did not have the money they promised. Nicias had expected this, but the other commanders were dismayed. Nicias suggested they make a show of force and then return home, while Alcibiades said they should encourage revolts against Syracuse, and then attack Syracuse and Selinus. Lamachus said they should attack Syracuse right away, as it was the predominant city-state in Sicily.

The fleet proceeded to Catania, where an Athenian ship arrived to inform Alcibiades that he was under arrest, not only for the destruction of the hermai, but also for supposedly profaning the Eleusinian Mysteries. Alcibiades agreed to return in his ship, but when they stopped in southern Italy at Thurii, he escaped and sailed to the Peloponnese, where he sought refuge in Sparta. Athens passed a death sentence in absentia, his guilt seemingly proven. In Sparta, Alcibiades gave the members of the Peloponnesian League critical information on the Athenian Empire.

In Sicily, the fleet was redivided into two parts. The first contingent, commanded by Nicias, sailed to Segesta and forced the Segestans to pay the thirty talents they had promised the Athenians for their assistance against their rival Selinus. The second contingent, under Lamachus, sailed to and stormed Hyccara, a small city allied to Selinus, and enslaved its populace. The Athenian army then marched through the Sicilian interior, to impress and negotiate with the Sicels, and returned to Catania. There they wintered and made preparations for their upcoming siege of Syracuse. When the campaigning season started, the Syracusans moved against the Athenians while they were still encamped at Catania. While the Syracusans were marching to Catania, they learned the Athenians had boarded their ships and sailed into the Great Harbour at Syracuse. The Syracusans quickly hurried back and prepared for battle.

First Battle of Syracuse
The Athenian army landed to the south of Syracuse and fortified their position. When the Syracusan army finally arrived both sides waited for the other to make the first move. Eventually the Syracusans withdrew and made camp for the night. The next morning the Athenians lined up eight men deep, with the Argives and Mantineans on the right, the rest of the allies on the left, and the Athenians themselves in the centre. The Syracusans were deployed sixteen men deep, in order to offset the advantage of the Athenians in experience. They also had 1,200 cavalry, vastly outnumbering the Athenian cavalry, although the total numbers of men were about the same. The Athenians attacked first, believing themselves to be the stronger and more experienced army, and after some unexpectedly strong resistance, the Argives pushed back the Syracusan left wing, causing the rest to flee. The Syracusan cavalry prevented the Athenians from chasing them, thereby averting a catastrophe for the Syracusans, who lost about 260 men, and the Athenians about 50. The Athenians then sailed back to Catania for the winter.

Winter of 415 – spring of 414 BC
Hermocrates suggested that the Syracusans reorganize their army. He wanted to reduce the number of generals from fifteen to three; Hermocrates, Heraclides, and Sicanus were elected and Hermocrates sent for help from Corinth and Sparta. During the winter the Athenians also sent for more money and cavalry, while the Syracusans built some forts, and a wall extending the territory of the city.

Meanwhile, diplomats from both camps went to Camarina in an attempt to form an alliance with that city. Hermocrates wanted Camarina and the other cities to unite with Syracuse against Athens, but Euphemus, the representative for the Athenians, said Syracuse only wanted to rule Camarina, and they should join with Athens if they wanted to remain free. The Camarinans decided not to join either side, although they quietly sent aid to the Syracusans, whose greater proximity and potential victory they feared more than that of the Athenians.

Athens then sent for help from the Carthaginians and the Etruscans, as both were long-standing opponents of Syracuse. Carthage opted to stay out of the conflict, but several Etruscan cities banded together and organized a small force to aid Athens. Though the Etruscan force only included three large warships and a number of warriors, it provided crucial support to the Athenians. Athens and Syracuse also tried to gain assistance from the Greek cities in Italy. In Corinth, representatives from Syracuse met with Alcibiades, who was working with Sparta. Alcibiades informed Sparta that there would be an invasion of the Peloponnese if Sicily was conquered, and that they should send help to Syracuse and also fortify Decelea near Athens. The Athenians, he said, feared nothing more than the occupation of Decelea. The Spartans took this advice into consideration, and appointed Gylippus to command their fleet.

In the spring of 414 BC, reinforcements arrived from Athens, consisting of 250 cavalry, 30 mounted archers, and 300 talents of silver, which was used to pay for 400 more cavalry from their Sicilian allies. In the summer, they landed on the Epipolae, the cliff above Syracuse, which was defended by Diomilus and 600 Syracusans. In the attack, Diomilus and 300 of his men were killed. Both sides then began building a series of walls. The Athenian circumvallation, known as "the Circle", was meant to blockade Syracuse from the rest of the island, while the Syracusans built a number of counter-walls from the city to their various forts. A force of 300 Athenians destroyed part of the first counter-wall, but the Syracusans began to build another one, this time with a ditch, blocking the Athenians from extending their wall to the sea. Another 300 Athenians attacked this wall and captured it, but were driven off by a Syracusan counter-attack in which Lamachus was killed, leaving only Nicias from the three original commanders. The Syracusans destroyed 300 m (1,000 feet) of the Athenian wall, but could not destroy the Circle, which was defended by Nicias. After Nicias defeated the attack, the Athenians finally extended their wall to the sea, completely blockading Syracuse by land, and their fleet entered the harbour to blockade them from sea. The Syracusans responded by removing Hermocrates and Sicanus as generals and replacing them with Heraclides, Eucles, and Tellias.

Spartan intervention
Soon after this, the Spartan general Gylippus, responding to the call for help, landed at Himera. He marched towards Syracuse with 700 armed sailors, 1,000 hoplites from Himera and Selinus, 100+ cavalry, and 1,000 Sicels. They built another counter-wall on the Epipolae, but were driven back by the Athenians; in a second battle, however, Gylippus defeated the Athenians by making better use of his cavalry and javelin-throwers. The Syracusans completed their counter-wall, making the Athenian wall useless. The Corinthian fleet also arrived, under the command of Erasinides.

Nicias, exhausted and suffering from illness, now believed it would be impossible to capture Syracuse. He wrote a letter to Athens, not trusting messengers to give an accurate report, and suggested that they either recall the expedition or send out massive reinforcements. He hoped they would choose to recall him, if not the whole expedition, but instead they chose to send reinforcements, under Demosthenes and Eurymedon. Eurymedon left immediately with ten ships, and Demosthenes left sometime later with a much larger force. Meanwhile, in early 413 BC Sparta acted on Alcibiades's advice to fortify Decelea, and the Athenian force sent to relieve it was destroyed.

While Eurymedon was sailing, Gylippus's 80 Syracusan ships, including 35 triremes, attacked 60 of the Athenian ships (25 of which were triremes) in the harbour. Gylippus commanded a simultaneous attack on the Athenian land forces. In the harbour, the Athenians were successful, losing only three ships while the Syracusans lost eleven. However, Gylippus defeated the Athenians on land and captured two Athenian forts. Afterwards, Gylippus succeeded in convincing all the neutral cities on Sicily to join him, but the allies of Athens killed 800 Corinthians, including all but one of the Corinthian ambassadors.

Demosthenes' arrival
Demosthenes and Eurymedon then arrived with 73 ships and 5,000 hoplites. On their arrival, 80 Syracusan ships attacked 75 of the Athenian ships in their harbour. This battle went on for two days with no result, until the Syracusans pretended to back away and attacked the Athenians while they were eating. However, only seven Athenian ships were sunk.

Demosthenes landed his forces and attacked the Syracusan counter-wall on Epipolae in a risky night engagement (against the advice of Nicias). He succeeded in breaching the wall, routing or killing some of the first Syracusan defenders but was defeated by a force of Boeotians in the Spartan contingent. Many Athenians fell off the cliff to their deaths, and some of the rest were killed as they fled down the slope. Plutarch claims the casualties from this action numbered 2,000.

Demosthenes' arrival provided little relief to the other Athenians. Their camp was located near a marsh and many of them had fallen ill, including Nicias. Seeing this, Demosthenes thought they should all return to Athens to defend Attica against the Spartan invasion that had taken Decelea. Nicias, who had opposed the expedition at first, now did not want to show any weakness either to the Syracusans and Spartans, or to the Athenians at home who he thought would have him executed, stating he would rather die by the hands of the enemy than by those of his countrymen. He hoped the Syracusans would soon run out of money, and he had also been informed that there were pro-Athenian factions in Syracuse who were ready to turn the city over to him. Demosthenes and Eurymedon reluctantly agreed that Nicias might be right, but when reinforcements from the Peloponnese arrived, Nicias agreed that they should leave.

Second Battle of Syracuse
Just as the Athenians were preparing to sail home, on August 28, there was a lunar eclipse, and Nicias, described by Thucydides as a particularly superstitious man, asked the priests what he should do. They suggested the Athenians wait for another 27 days, and Nicias agreed.

The Athenians were now in a desperate situation. On September 3, the Syracusans began to completely blockade the entrance to the port, trapping the Athenians inside. Outside Syracuse, the Athenians built a smaller walled enclosure for their sick and injured, and put everyone else (including many of the soldiers remaining on land) on their ships for one last battle, on September 9. The fleet was now commanded by Demosthenes, Menander, and Euthydemus, while the Syracusan fleet was led by Sicanus and Agatharchus of Syracuse on the wings and Pythen from Corinth in the centre. Each side had about 100 ships participating.

The Athenian ships were extremely cramped and had no room to manoeuvre. Collisions were frequent, and the Syracusans could easily ram the Athenian ships head-on, without the Athenians being able to move to ram them broadside, as they preferred. Javelin throwers and archers shot from each ship, but the Syracusans deflected Athenian grappling hooks by covering their decks with animal hides.

The battle went on for some time with no clear victor, but the Athenian center under Menander eventually broke and was routed. Instead of pursuing their fleeing opponents, Pythen turned his Corinthian ships to attack the now-vulnerable Athenian right wing under Euthydemus. Beset from multiple sides, the right wing was defeated and largely destroyed; Euthydemus was killed as he tried to escape on the nearby shore. The destruction of Euthydemus' contingent shattered what remained of the Athenian fleet's order. The Athenian ships were subsequently pushed toward the coast; most Athenian crews abandoned their trapped vessels and fled to the camp behind their wall. Seeing the vulnerable Athenians running from their beached vessels, Gylippus ordered a furious but disorganized attack on land to catch his enemies before they could reach their base. However, the Spartan-led force was confronted by the small unit of Etruscans who had been sent to aid Athens; these warriors managed to stop Gylippus's assault. Using this respite, the Athenians rallied and returned to fight alongside the Etruscans, securing several of their ships on the beach and preventing a complete catastrophe. Historian David Abulafia concluded that the Etruscans had "saved the day" for the Athenians.

Demosthenes suggested that they man the ships again and attempt to force their way out, as now both fleets had lost about half their ships and Nicias agreed. The men themselves did not want to board the ship because they were afraid. They then decided to retreat by land. Hermocrates sent some supposed informers to the Athenians to falsely report that there were spies and roadblocks further inland, so the Athenians would be safer if they did not march away. Gylippus used this delay to build the roadblocks that did not yet exist, and the Syracusans burned or towed away the Athenian ships on the beach, so that they had no way off the island.

Final Syracusan victory
On September 13, the Athenians left camp leaving their wounded behind and their dead unburied. The survivors, including all the non-combatants, numbered 40,000, and some of the wounded crawled after them as far as they could go. As they marched they defeated a small Syracusan force guarding the river Anapus, but other Syracusan cavalry and light troops continually harassed them. Near the Erineus river, Demosthenes and Nicias became separated, and Demosthenes was attacked by the Syracusans and forced to surrender his 6,000 troops. The rest of the Syracusans followed Nicias to the Assinarus river, where Nicias's troops became disorganized in the rush to find drinking water. Many Athenians were trampled to death and others were killed while fighting with fellow Athenians. On the other side of the river a Syracusan force was waiting, and the Athenians were almost completely massacred, by far the worst defeat of the entire expedition in terms of lives lost. Nicias personally surrendered to Gylippus, hoping the Spartan would remember his role in the peace treaty of 421. The few who escaped found refuge in Catana.

The prisoners, now numbering only 7,000, were held in the stone quarries near Syracuse which were considered the safest prison for such a number of men. Demosthenes and Nicias were executed, against the orders of Gylippus. The rest spent ten weeks in horrible conditions in their makeshift prison, until all but the Athenians, Italians, and Sicilians were sold as slaves. The remaining Athenians were left to die slowly of disease and starvation in the quarry. In the end some of the very last survivors managed to escape and eventually trickled to Athens, bringing first-hand news of the disaster. The specific fate of Nicias and Demosthenes is not clearly recorded, but according to Thucydides' account, both were executed after their surrender, Demosthenes due to his earlier role in the war at Pylos, Nicias due to worries of a possibility of escape through bribery and possibility of causing later harm.

Causes of the failure
Some historians have said that the Sicilian expedition was fatally flawed from the outset, that the Athenian attempt to conquer Sicily was an example of mad arrogance. Others however argue that there was nothing inherently wrong with the plan strategically, and that it would have succeeded if the Athenian leadership had not made a succession of bad tactical decisions. J. B. Bury judged that by far the biggest single reason for the expedition's catastrophic failure was the incompetence of Nicias, aggravated by the recall of Alcibiades.

Aftermath
For Athens, the expedition was a "human disaster as painful as the plague [as well as a] political disaster" which severely harmed the city's war efforts and hegemony over its allies. Sparta exploited this weakness to greatly increase the pressure on its rival over the next years, though it could not achieve a strategic breakthrough. In contrast, the Etruscans who had fought alongside the Athenians were proud of their role in the conflict. For instance, the Spurinna family of Tarquinia possibly continued to honor their involvement in the Sicilian Expedition for centuries.

Athenian reaction
In Athens, the citizens did not, at first, believe the defeat. Plutarch, in his Life of Nicias, recounts how the news reached the city:

"It is said that the Athenians would not believe their loss, in a great degree because of the person who first brought them news of it. For a certain stranger, it seems, coming to Piraeus, and there sitting in a barber's shop, began to talk of what had happened, as if the Athenians already knew all that had passed; which the barber hearing, before he acquainted anybody else, ran as fast as he could up into the city, addressed himself to the Archons, and presently spread it about in the marketplace. On which, there being everywhere, as may be imagined, terror and consternation, the Archons summoned a general assembly, and there brought in the man and questioned him how he came to know. And he, giving no satisfactory account, was taken for a spreader of false intelligence and a disturber of the city, and was, therefore, fastened to the wheel and racked a long time, till other messengers arrived that related the whole disaster particularly. So hardly was Nicias believed to have suffered the calamity which he had often predicted."

When the magnitude of the disaster became evident, there was a general panic. Attica seemed free for the taking, as the Spartans were so close by in Decelea. The defeat caused a great shift in policy for many other states, as well. States which had until now been neutral joined with Sparta, assuming that Athens's defeat was imminent. Many of Athens' allies in the Delian League also revolted, and although the city immediately began to rebuild its fleet, there was little they could do about the revolts for the time being. The expedition and consequent disaster left Athens reeling. Some 10,000 hoplites had perished and, though this was a blow, the real concern was the loss of the huge fleet dispatched to Sicily. Triremes could be replaced, but the 30,000 experienced oarsmen lost in Sicily were irreplaceable and Athens had to rely on ill-trained slaves to form the backbone of her new fleet.

In 411 BC, the Athenian democracy was overthrown in favour of an oligarchy, and Persia joined the war on the Spartan side. Although things looked grim for Athens, they were able to recover for a few years. The oligarchy was soon overthrown, and Athens won the Battle of Cynossema; however, the defeat of the Sicilian expedition was essentially the beginning of the end for Athens. In 404 BC they were defeated and occupied by Sparta.

In popular culture
John Fletcher's 90 minute radio play "The Sicilian Expedition – Ancient Athenian War Drama with Iraq War", which was broadcast on BBC Radio 3 in December 2005, is based on real events from the Peloponnesian War, particularly the Sicilian Expedition. Fletcher implies a parallel between U.S. involvement in the Iraq war and the Athenian aggression against Sicily, which in his view were both disastrous abroad and at home. In the novel The Last of the Wine by Mary Renault, the father of the main character returns from being held prisoner in the quarries of Syracuse after the failure of the expedition.

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

title: Sicilian Expedition


text:
Stealth

Stealth may refer to:

Military

 * Stealth technology, technology used to conceal ships, aircraft, and missiles
 * Stealth aircraft, aircraft which use stealth technology
 * Stealth ground vehicle, ground vehicles which use stealth technology
 * Stealth patrol unit, used by police forces in the United States and Canada
 * Stealth ship, ships which use stealth technology

Books

 * Stealth Magazine, an independent hip-hop magazine from Australia
 * The Stealth (novel), a novel by Sonallah Ibrahim

Film and television

 * Stealth (film), a 2005 action/adventure thriller
 * The Stealth (film), a 2008 3D-animated short film
 * "Stealth (The Americans)", episode of The Americans

Music

 * Stealth (album), a 2007 release by the band Scorn
 * Stealth Records, an independent record label specializing in electronic dance music
 * "Stealth", a song by Way Out West from Intensify
 * Stealth, a model of B.C. Rich guitar

Video games

 * Stealth game, a genre of video games
 * Stealth (1984 video game), a rail shooter game published by Broderbund
 * Stealth (1992 video game), a Japan-exclusive game released for the Super Famicom

Sports

 * Houston Stealth, a team in the National Women's Basketball League, active 2002–2004
 * Wichita Stealth, an arena football team, active 1999–2004
 * San Jose Stealth, a team in the National Lacrosse League, active 2004–2009
 * Washington Stealth, a team in the National Lacrosse League, active 2009–2013
 * Vancouver Stealth, a team in the National Lacrosse League, founded 2013

Technology

 * Stealth virus, elusive technologies for computer viruses
 * Mitsubishi GTO also known as the Dodge Stealth, a sports car
 * Nighthawk (roller coaster), an America roller coaster formerly known as STEALTH
 * Stealth (roller coaster), at Thorpe Park in the United Kingdom
 * Airrow A-8S Stealth, a pneumatic air rifle

Other uses

 * Crypsis, the ability of an animal or plant to avoid observation or detection by other animals
 * Stealth mode, secretive business behavior
 * Stealth tax, a new tax that is collected in a way that is not obvious
 * Stealth (transgender), passing unseen as one's desired gender in the public sphere
 * Stealth Communications, an Internet Service Provider in New York City
 * Leo Stoller (born 1946), who claims "Stealth" as a trademark

title: Stealth


text:
Askern

Askern is a town and civil parish within the City of Doncaster, in South Yorkshire, England. It is on the A19 road between Doncaster and Selby. Historically part of the West Riding of Yorkshire, it had a population of 5,570 at the 2011 Census. Askern was also known in for its Greyhound Stadium, which closed in 2022.

History
The town's name derives from the Old English askr-ærn meaning 'building made of ash' or 'building surrounded by ash trees'. Historically in the parish of Campsall, the town lies 9 mi south of Pontefract, and 7 mi north of Doncaster. Up until the middle of the 19th century, the town was in the wapentake of Osgoldcross in the West Riding of Yorkshire.

The history of Askern can be traced back to the reign of Edward III. The people of Norton complained to the Sheriff of Osgoldcross that the people of Askern had failed to keep part of Askern Pool in a clean state. As a result, the King's highway had been "overflowed and drowned so that neither horse nor foot passengers could use it".

The parish church of St Peter's dates back to 1852.

Coal mining
Then in the early years of the 20th century the quest for coal identified a good seam of coal near Askern. It was decided to access the coal from a mine built above the village, in 1911. As the mine opened the new houses were built for the workers and their families in the village. The pit was closed in 1991 due to a low in the price of coal, and the surface buildings were demolished in 1993.

Railway
Askern is on the former Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway line between Doncaster and Wakefield Kirkgate, though Askern railway station closed in 1947. The line is used mainly by goods services, as well as the four-times daily Grand Central passenger services from Bradford Interchange to London King's Cross. There have been proposals to re-open Askern railway station to passenger trains.

Bus services
Askern is served by bus service 51 to Doncaster, Carcroft, Skellow and Norton. There are also two school bus services from the town.

title: Askern


text:
List of government enterprises of Sweden

This is a list of Swedish companies owned by the Swedish state.

State-owned companies are legally in a form of aktiebolag but mainly or fully state-owned. They are expected to be funded by their sales, and not be given direct tax money. A big customer might be the state or a government agency.

Many companies originate from a former government agency. Government agencies are something different, usually funded by tax money but do also sell services, and are not an authority. The government has tried to avoid having agencies doing commercial activities, by separating out areas that compete with private companies into government-owned companies, for example within road construction. The reason is both to avoid unfair competition (because it could mean using tax money to beat private companies), and a wish to have a market economy instead of a planned economy as much as possible. Based on the tradition of avoiding "ministerial rule", the government has avoided interfering with the business of the companies, and allowed them to go international. This has been somewhat controversial. For example, Akademiska Hus which owns buildings used by universities is claiming commercial rent levels, much higher than traditionally, causing trouble for higher education.

Wholly owned

 * Akademiska Hus
 * Apoteket
 * Green Cargo
 * Göta Kanalbolag; see Göta Canal
 * Infranord
 * Jernhusen
 * Lernia
 * LKAB
 * RISE - Research Institutes of Sweden
 * Samhall
 * SBAB
 * SJ
 * Sveaskog
 * Svenska Spel
 * Casino Cosmopol
 * Swedavia
 * Svevia
 * Swedish Space Corporation
 * Systembolaget
 * Teracom
 * Vattenfall

Shared ownership

 * PostNord (60%)
 * SAS Group (21,4%)
 * Telia Company (37,3%)

Commercial government agencies
Government agencies might do activities competing with privately owned companies. They usually are funded by tax money but can also sell services. The here listed agencies are commercial, mainly funded by sales or fees.

 * Svenska Kraftnät
 * Swedish Civil Aviation Administration
 * Swedish Maritime Administration


text:
Indonesian rupiah

The rupiah (symbol: Rp; currency code: IDR) is the official currency of Indonesia, issued and controlled by Bank Indonesia. Its name is derived from the Sanskrit word for silver, (रूप्यकम्). Sometimes, Indonesians also informally use the word perak ("silver" in Indonesian) in referring to rupiah in coins. The rupiah is divided into 100 cents (sen), although high inflation has rendered all coins and banknotes denominated in cents obsolete.

The rupiah was introduced in 1946 by Indonesian nationalists fighting for independence. It replaced the Japanese-issued version of the Netherlands Indies gulden which had been introduced during the Japanese occupation in World War II. In its early years, the rupiah was used in conjunction with other currencies, including a new version of the gulden introduced by the Dutch. The Riau Islands and the Indonesian half of New Guinea (Irian Barat) had their own variants of the rupiah in the past, but these were subsumed into the national rupiah in 1964 and 1971, respectively (see Riau rupiah and West Irian rupiah).

Redenomination
A long-running proposal to redenominate the rupiah has yet to receive formal legislative consideration. Since 2010, Bank Indonesia, as the monetary authority of Indonesia, has repeatedly urged the elimination of the final three zeroes of the currency to facilitate transaction handling, saying the move would not affect its value. In 2015, the government submitted a rupiah redenomination bill to the House of Representatives, but it has not yet been deliberated. In 2017, Bank Indonesia Governor Agus Martowardojo reiterated the call, saying that if redenomination started immediately, the process could be complete by 2024 or 2025.

Current legal tender
The current rupiah consists of coins from Rp50 up to Rp1,000 (Rp1 coins officially remain legal tender but are effectively worthless and are not encountered in circulation) and banknotes of Rp1,000 up to Rp100,000. With US$1 worth Rp15,107.5 as of 3 May 2023, the largest Indonesian banknote is worth about US$6.62.

Coins
Presently, two series of coins are circulating: aluminum, and nickel coins dated between 1999, 2003, and 2010, and a new series of coins featuring Indonesia's national heroes were issued in 2016. These come in denominations of Rp100, Rp200, Rp500, and Rp1,000. Coins in circulation are mostly Rp500 and Rp1,000, whereas the smaller-denominated coins (Rp100 and Rp200) are rarely used, except in shops whose pricing requires them.

Banknotes
Currently circulating Indonesian banknotes date from 2000 (Rp1,000), 2001 (Rp5,000), 2004 (Rp20,000 and Rp100,000), 2005 (Rp10,000 and Rp50,000), 2009 (the new denomination of Rp2.000), 2010 (revised version of the Rp10,000), 2011 (revised versions of the Rp20,000, Rp50,000 and Rp100,000) and 2020 (the commemorative Rp75,000 denomination issued 2020). Notes issued in 1998–1999 ceased to be legal tender since 31 December 2008 and were exchangeable until 30 December 2018 at Bank Indonesia. Earlier notes are also no longer legal tender, due to the lack of security features and association with the Suharto regime (especially 1993 and 1995 note of the 50,000 rupiah), but could be exchanged in Bank Indonesia offices until 20 August 2010.

As the smallest current note is worth approximately US$0.067, even small transactions such as bus fares are typically conducted with notes and the Rp1,000 coin is far more common than the Rp1,000 note. The government initially announced that this would change, with a Rp2,000 note to replace the Rp1,000, with that denomination fully replaced by the equivalent coin. After a long delay, this proposal was revised so that the Rp2,000 banknotes were launched by Bank Indonesia (BI) on 9 July 2009, with the banknotes circulating as legal tender from 10 July 2009, but without withdrawing the 1,000-rupiah note.

2016 series
Following the issuance of Presidential Decree No. 31 of 5 September 2016, BI introduced seven new banknote designs featuring national heroes: On 17 August 2020, Bank Indonesia officially introduced a Rp75,000 banknote to commemorate the 75th Independence Day of Indonesia. The note featured the proclamators of Indonesia's Independence, Sukarno and Mohammad Hatta (who were also featured in the Rp100,000 note). In 2022, the BI predicts that banknotes of this series will cease to be legal tender in 2025 or 2026, with all circulating 2016-series banknotes replaced by newer 2022-series banknotes.

2022 series
Bank Indonesia introduced a new family of banknotes on 18 August 2022. Officially they were retroactively issued as legal tender on 17 August 2022 to commemorate the 77th Independence Day of Indonesia. Similar to the 2016 series, the Indonesian dances and national heroes are still featured on the notes, with some notable changes.

Security features

 * The basic materials of the banknotes is cotton fiber, because it is more flexible and not easily ripped. However, the preferable material is abacá, which is naturally plentiful in Indonesia, especially in the Talaud Islands. and is believed to increase the durability of the banknotes. In 2014, Bank Indonesia planned to use this material, but in the 2016 series, decided to print using paper which was also used to print banknotes from previous editions.
 * The minimum security features visible to the naked eye are watermarks, electrotypes and security threads with colour fibres. Extra features may be included, such as holograms, Irisafe, iridescent stripes, clear windows, metameric windows and gold patches.
 * Watermark and electrotype are made by controlling the gap of density of the fibres, which create certain images for the banknotes. This is done to raise the aesthetic quality of the notes.
 * Security threads are inserted into the note so that horizontal and vertical lines are shown from top to bottom. The threads can be varied in materials, size, colour and design.
 * Intaglio printing is used for the denomination numbers in the banknote, to help blind people recognise genuine notes and their denomination.
 * The 2010 and 2011 revised-2004/2005 note series of Rp10,000, Rp20,000, Rp50,000 and Rp100,000 introduced several new security features: use of EURion constellation rings, rainbow printing designed to change colour when viewed from different angles and tactile features for blind people and those with visual difficulties to recognise the different denominations of the notes.

Digital rupiah
Bank Indonesia initiated the Garuda Project, a project to develop Indonesia's central bank digital currency on 30 November 2022 crypto. through a white paper on its development. By passage of the omnibus law, the digital rupiah is legalised as a form of the rupiah.

History
Historically, currencies of Indonesia have been influenced by the spread of Indian and Chinese cultures. During colonial times, the currency used in what is now Indonesia was the Netherlands Indies gulden. The country was invaded in 1942 by Japan, which began printing its own version of the gulden, which remained in use until March 1946. The Netherlands authorities and the Indonesian nationalists, who were fighting for independence, both introduced rival currencies in 1946 with the Dutch printing a new gulden, and the Indonesians issuing the first version of the rupiah on 3 October 1946. Between 1946 and 1950 a large number of currencies circulated in Indonesia, with the Japanese gulden still remaining prevalent alongside the two new currencies and various local variants. This situation ended when the federal government, now in complete control following the Dutch recognition of its independence, initiated currency reforms between 1950 and 1951. The rupiah was declared the sole legal currency, with other currencies being exchanged for rupiah at rates which were often unfavourable to the holders.

Exchange rate and inflation
The rupiah has been subject to high inflation for most of its existence (which as an internationally recognised currency should be dated to 1950). Various attempts have been made to maintain the value of the currency, but all were abandoned.

1946–1949 revolutionary period
In the period from October 1946 to March 1950, Indonesian currency had no international recognition. Its value was determined on the black market.

1949–1965 foreign exchange restrictions
The exchange rate determined upon the international recognition of Indonesia's independence in 1949 was Rp3.8 to US$1. Lembaga Alat-Alat Pembayaran Luar Negeri Publication No. 26 on 11 March 1950 (effective 13 March 1950) established the Foreign Exchange Certificate System (FECS). By the trade-in certificates an export rate of Rp7.6 and an import rate of Rp11.4 was established.

The FECS was scrapped on 4 January 1952, by which time the government had been able to reduce its deficit by 5.3 billion rupiah through the exchange differential. The system was scrapped because domestic prices were being determined by the import rate, which were hurting profits from exports earned at the lower rate. Hence, the effective Rp7.6/11.4 exchange rate reverted to Rp3.8.

The ending of what amounted to an export tariff severely damaged government revenues, and as of 4 February 1952, the rupiah was officially devalued to Rp11.4, with export tariffs of 15–25% on commodities in which Indonesia was strong. Weaker commodities were not subject to tariffs, and from 1955 were actually given a premium of 5–25% to boost their export.

To control foreign exchange, the government brought in a number of measures. About 40% of the foreign-exchange requirements of importers were required to be paid to the government from April 1952, while as from September 1952, the government decided to provide only a limited amount of foreign exchange, made available every four months. These foreign-exchange restrictions, designed to provide the government with much-needed reserves, meant that some companies were operating at as low as 20% of capacity, due to lack of needed imported materials.

Further foreign-exchange restrictions were introduced over 1953–1954, with April 1953, the foreign-exchange downpayment was increased to 75%, except for raw materials at 50%. Foreign companies and their workers were placed under restrictions as to the amount of foreign exchange that could be sent home, with the amounts allowed out subject to fees of $1/undefined$%. As of November 1954, exporters were required to sell 15% of their foreign exchange earned to the government.

An increasingly complex set of tariffs on imports was unified in September 1955 with a set of extra import duties, requiring down payments to the government of 50, 100, 200, or 400% of the value of the goods.

The official Rp11.4 rate, which massively overvalued the rupiah, was a major incentive to black-market traders, and also contributed to anti-Java feeling, given that those producing raw materials on the large material-rich outer islands were not receiving fair value from their goods due to the exchange rate, diverting funds to the government in Java. The black-market rate at the end of 1956 was Rp31 to US$1, falling to Rp49 at the end of 1957, and Rp90 by the end of 1958.

In response to Sumatra and Sulawesi refusing to hand over their foreign exchange, in June 1957, a new system for foreign exchange was introduced; exporters received export certificates (BE) representing the foreign currency earned and could sell them to importers on the free market (but subject to a 20% tax). This effectively created a freely floating rupiah. The price of the certificates quickly reached 332% of face value by April 1958, i.e. Rp38, a rate at which the government chose to end the free market, fixing the price at 332% of face value.

The currency devaluation of large notes in 1959 had the official exchange rate devalued to Rp45 as of August 1959. Despite this, the fundamental issues with the fixed-exchange-rate system and severe import controls (which had cotton mills running at only 11% of capacity due to lack of imported raw materials) were not addressed, and smuggling grew, often backed by the army, while assets were moved offshore by over-invoicing.

The government maintained price controls over goods and raw materials, with the official oil price unchanged from 1950 to 1965.

After the 1959 devaluation, inflation, which had been running at 25% per annum 1953–1959, grew exponentially, with rates over 100% in 1962, 1963, and 1964, and 600% in 1965. Despite the official Rp45 to US$1 rate, two further export certificate trading systems, of March 1962 – May 1963, and then from April 1964 onwards, showed premiums of 2,678% July 1962 (an effective rate of Rp1,205), 5,100% August 1965 (Rp2,295) and 11,100% in November 1965 (Rp4,995).

1966–1971 stabilisation and growth
The last demonetisation of rupiah notes occurred in late 1965 when inflation was ravaging the economy: exports had dropped 24% in 1959–1965, real GDP growth was below population growth, and the foreign exchange reserves had fallen by over 90%. Inflation in 1965 was 635%. In late 1965, the 'new rupiah' was brought in, at 1 new rupiah to 1,000 old rupiah. The official exchange rate was set initially at Rp0.25 to US$1 as of 13 December 1965, a rate that did not represent reality, as the multiple exchange-rate system remained in place for the time being.

This was followed by the emergence of Suharto, who as of 11 March 1966, acquired executive control of Indonesia.

Suharto quickly made economic changes, establishing his "New Order", with the economic policy set by the Berkeley Mafia, his team of US-educated neoclassical economists. The policy began to be set out in November 1966, following the reaching of agreement with Indonesia's creditors in October 1966 on debt relief and loan restructuring. Economic policies were put in place to require adequate bank reserves, ending subsidies on consumer goods, end import restrictions, and to devalue the rupiah.

The 1966–1970 stabilisation program was a great success, resulting in higher economic growth, boosting legal exports (which grew 70% in US$ terms over the period), and increasing output (for instance the price of oil rose 250 times when the 1950 prices were abandoned, incentivising new exploration). By 1971, inflation had fallen to just 2%.

Despite the liberalisation efforts, Indonesia still had multiple exchange rates. A more realistic exchange rate was finally established of 378 (new) rupiah to US$1 as of April 1970. In August 1971, the exchange rate was devalued slightly, to Rp415 to US$1.

Fixed rate period 1971–1978

The exchange rate of 415 rupiah to the US dollar, which had been established in August 1971, was maintained by government intervention in the currency market, buying and selling currency as needed.

Despite the fixed exchange rate, the failure of the rice crop in 1972, exacerbated by high world rice prices and underordering by the government rice cartel, along with rising commodity prices, caused inflation to rise above 20% in 1972, peaking at over 40% in 1974. The M1 money supply increased sharply over the period due to lax credit controls, which was channelled towards favoured groups, such as pribumi, as well as corrupt government-linked businesses.

Despite the high inflation of the period, the exchange rate, which had essentially been preserved using the country's oil exports, was maintained at Rp415 until 15 November 1978.

1978–1986 devaluations
By 1978, the combination of a fall in oil prices and a decrease in foreign reserves meant that the rupiah was devalued 33% to Rp. 625 to US$1 on 16 November 1978 (although prices had increased nearly fourfold over the period).

The government abandoned the fixed exchange rate, and altered economic policy to a form of a managed float. The exchange rate was published each day. At the point of devaluation (November 1978), the trade-weighted real (local price adjusted) effective exchange rate of the rupiah against major world currencies was just over twice as high as it was in 1995 (prior to the Asian economic crisis, and free fall of the rupiah), i.e. the rupiah was highly overvalued at this point. By March 1983, the managed float had brought only an 11% fall in three and a half years to Rp702.

The continued overvaluation of the rupiah meant that Indonesia was beginning to suffer a trade deficit, as well as falling foreign exchange reserves. The government responded by devaluing the currency on 30 March by 28% to Rp970.

At this time, the 1980s oil glut put the Indonesian economy under pressure, with exports uncompetitive as a result of the overvalued currency, and oil contributing less as a result of lower global prices. On 1 June 1983, 'Pakjun 1983' brought deregulation of the banking system, and the end of the meaningless 6% official deposit rate, with a more market-based financial system. Credit ceilings were removed. Interest rates, initially 18%, remained above 15% over the period.

By September 1986, the currency had been allowed to steadily fall to 1,134 rupiah, a rate which had largely maintained purchasing power over the period. Despite this, the currency was devalued 30% on 12 September 1986 to 1,664 rupiah to US$1. As in 1983, this had been intended to boost the balance of trade: oil prices, US$29 in 1983, fell by 50% in 1986 alone, to below US$9 per barrel.

Thus, in the period from 1978 to 1986, the real exchange rate of the Indonesian rupiah fell by more than 50%, providing significant boosts to the competitiveness of Indonesia's exports.

October 1986 – June 1997: US$ real exchange parity
Although the devaluations of 1978, 1983, and 1986 had each successfully boosted the competitiveness of exports, devaluations have a destabilising effect, and the September 1986 devaluation was the last carried out by Indonesia.

According to research, despite an official seven-currency exchange basket, empirical evidence suggests that the rupiah was controlled by BI against the US$ alone, and indeed since the 1986 devaluation, the currency maintained near-constant purchasing power against the dollar until the 1997 crisis, the steady fall of the rupiah against the dollar essentially representing the difference between Indonesian inflation and US inflation; hence, by June 1997, the rupiah had fallen from its post-evaluation rate of Rp1,664 to Rp2,350, an annualized decline slightly over 3%.

First stage of the crisis – limited initial falls
The Asian financial crisis of 1997 began in Thailand in May 1997, where the government found it harder to maintain the Thai baht peg at ฿25 to US$1. By 2 July 1997, Thailand abandoned its defence of the baht, allowing it to float freely. Indonesia, which had massive foreign reserves and was seen as having a strong economy, responded on 11 July 1997, by widening its exchange rate band from 8 to 12%. Indonesia had taken similar actions in the years leading up to the crisis, in December 1995 from 2 to 3%, in response to the Mexican financial crisis, and in June and September 1996, from 3 to 5% and then 5 to 8%. These actions had been successful in the past in defending the rupiah, but on this occasion, a more serious crisis of confidence arose.

The rupiah immediately fell 7%, with foreign money quickly leaving the country. The investor confidence in Indonesia was shaken, and due to previous deregulations, much of the Indonesian stock market was owned by foreign investors. Local confidence in the currency was also undermined as the population followed suit, selling rupiah for dollars. The spot rate soon fell below the selling rate (i.e. outside the 12% exchange rate band). BI attempted to intervene but eventually abandoned the managed float on 14 August 1997, leaving the rupiah to float freely. The rupiah–dollar rate was at Rp2,436 to one dollar on 11 July. It fell to Rp2,663 by 14 August and Rp2,955 by 15 August – a 122% fall. Government debt (Bank Indonesia Certificates or SBI) rose from 12% to 30%, and overnight call rates reached 81% (per annum).

Response to the falls – crisis
At this stage, the crisis was a limited one; while the currency had fallen, the extent of the fall did not appear catastrophic. The government announced its response in September, calling for the restructuring of the banking sector, cancellation of government projects, and supporting some banks with their own liquidity. The SBI rate was reduced three times in September to around 20%. As of 24 September, the exchange rate still lingered at Rp. 2,990 per dollar.

The government response to the crisis sent mixed messages, with falling interest rates doing nothing to support confidence in the rupiah, and the rupiah continued to be sold, as companies that had been borrowing heavily in dollars had to meet their obligation. By 4 October, the currency had collapsed a further 19%, falling to Rp3,690 per dollar. It had now lost a third of its value, and now a full-blown 'crisis' existed in Indonesia.

On 8 October with the rupiah at Rp3,640 per dollar, the government decided to seek the support of the International Monetary Fund. During the month, the rupiah fluctuated in the Rp3,300–3,650 range. IMF's response was announced on 1 November 1997. Sixteen small and insolvent banks, holding a market share of 2.5%, would be closed. Private banks would be subject to improved monitoring, and some state banks would be merged. Deposits would be underwritten up to Rp20 million (about US$5,500). About 90% of all depositors held less than this amount in their bank accounts.

After this announcement, the rupiah immediately gained almost 10%, to around Rp3,300 per dollar. Soon after, however, confidence began to fall. The IMF response had only been published in summary form from the government and BI, the choice of the 16 banks being closed appeared arbitrary, and the details of the 34 others subject to special measures were not announced. The deposit guarantee was seen as inadequate, and funds were moved from private to state banks, exchanged for dollars, or transferred offshore, as confidence in the plan began to evaporate.

The rupiah steadily weakened from the middle of November, standing at Rp3,700 per dollar at the end of the month. In December, the crisis turned into a disaster. Much of the Indonesian economy was controlled by relatives of President Suharto, and of the 16 banks to be liquidated, 25% of PT Bank Andromeda was owned by Bambang Trihatmodjo, the second son of Suharto, PT Bank Jakarta was part-owned by Probosutedjo, the President's half-brother and 8% of PT Bank Industri was owned by the President's second daughter, Siti Hediati Prabowo.

The President and his family were opposed to the reforms, with Bambang Trihatmodjo beginning legal action against the government to keep his bank, particularly as directors of the insolvent banks were, if culpable, to be added to a Disgraced person's List, ineligible to work in the banking sector. Although the bank had violated its BMPK (credit limit), Bambang was given permission by BI to buy Bank Alfa, another bank, seen by many as a reward for withdrawing his lawsuit. In effect, the failed bank was reopened under a different name.

Cronyism and corruption of Indonesia clearly were winning over IMF reforms. The rupiah fell from Rp4,085 to Rp5,650 per dollar in the space of a single week. By the middle of the month, 154 banks, comprising half of the banking system, had suffered bank runs. By Christmas Eve, the rupiah stood at 5,915 per dollar, a fall of 60% since July.

The New Year had the rupiah begin at Rp5,447 per dollar. On 15 January, the second letter of intent was signed with the IMF, agreeing an accelerated reform package in return for US$43 billion of aid. The rupiah had strengthened from an all-time low of Rp9,100 per dollar on 23 January to Rp. 7,225 per dollar on 15 January. However, as it became clear Suharto had no intention of fulfilling the agreement, the rupiah plummeted by more than 50%, bottoming out at Rp14,800 per dollar on 23 January. By now, the government had issued more than Rp60 trillion, causing money supply increases and worsening inflation.

The government announced a rescue package on 26 January, ensuring that it would guarantee all existing deposits. The Indonesian Bank Restructuring Agency was set up with the goal of merging, closing, or recapitalising (before sale) banks. Four state and 50 private banks, representing nearly 40% of the sector, were placed under IBRA supervision in February 1998, resulting in the rupiah strengthening to 7,400 per dollar.

Despite the improvements, political instability quickly increased. The currency fell to around Rp10,000 per dollar.

Indonesian government began to take more drastic action, doubling its SBI rates to 45% (increasing the cost of its lending), and in April, has signed a third letter of intent with the IMF, the IBRA took over the major private banks, twinning the banks with state banks, and suspending the owners' control. The rupiah, which had strengthened to around Rp8,000, depreciated in the wake of the Jakarta riots of May 1998, and in particular the run on the Bank Central Asia, Indonesia's largest private bank, that ensued, causing the bank to be taken over by IBRA on 29 May. The SBI rate was increased to 70% in the wake of massive inflation.

The end of Suharto's rule brought a new president, B. J. Habibie, to power on 21 May 1998. Little action was seen immediately, and by 17 June, the rupiah had bottomed out at Rp16,800 per dollar. On 25 June 1998, the fourth letter of intent was signed with the IMF, which was refusing to provide aid due to breaches of its original agreement. The IMF agreed to provide an immediate US$5 billion of aid to cover basic necessities.

Audits of the banks that had been taken over showed massive bad debts, exceeding 55%. Further audits showed that the other banks were also fundamentally weak. Banking reform continued throughout 1999, with the merger of four state banks in July 1999 into Bank Mandiri, the closure of 38 banks, recapitalisation of nine, and takeover of seven more in March 1999. By this point, the total bank capital had reached a negative 245 trillion rupiah. Twenty-three further banks were recapitalised in May, and in October 1999, Bank Mandiri itself was recapitalised. Interest rates fell steadily in 1999, to an SBI of 13.1% in October. The rupiah finished the year at Rp7,900 to the US dollar.

Despite the fall of the currency of about 70% from June 1997 to December 1998, inflation of 60–70% in 1998 (which caused riots and the end of the Suharto regime after 30 years in power) meant that the real exchange rate fell only slightly.

Rupiah since 1999: relative stability
The rupiah declined from its relatively strengthened position at the end of the financial crisis, with the rupiah seeing the start of 2000 at Rp7,050 to the US dollar, but declining to Rp9,725 by the end of 2000, and reaching a low of Rp12,069 on 27 April 2001. The currency strengthened to Rp8,500 later in 2001 but ended 2001 at Rp10,505. March 2002 had the currency break below Rp10,000, from which point the currency maintained a rate in the Rp8,000s and Rp9,000s until August 2005, and in the latter half of that year, the trading range extended towards Rp11,000, but ending the year just below Rp10,000. In 2006 and 2007, the currency trade was in a relatively narrow range against the US dollar (which itself was depreciating against other currencies), of Rp8,500–9,900. This trend continued into 2008, with the currency trading between Rp9,000 and Rp9,500.

The financial crisis of 2007–2008 with the collapse in the commodities market had the US$ gain strongly against currencies backed by weakening commodities exports. With palm oil and rubber prices falling from their peak by more than half, the rupiah came under pressure, Bank Indonesia spent US$7 billion of its US$57 billion reserves in October defending the currency. Despite this, the rupiah slipped below Rp10,000 on 23 October for the first time since 2005, and then below Rp11,000 on 2 November, a mark last reached in 2001. On 13 November, BI introduced new regulations requiring foreign currency purchases over US$100,000 a month to be backed by documentation of an underlying transaction and a tax number. The rupiah closed below Rp12,000 for the first time since 1998 on 20 October, with intraday lows below Rp13,000. Subsequently, however, the cut in the Federal Reserve rate to 0–0.25% and BI support for the currency, had the rupiah strengthen slightly to a range around Rp11,000.

The catastrophic damage to the rupiah caused in 1997–1998 severely damaged confidence in the currency. Though the rupiah is a freely convertible currency, it is still regarded as a risky currency to hold. As of September 2018, the rupiah had fallen to its weakest position since the 1998 crisis with one US dollar being worth roughly Rp14,880, peaking at Rp. 15,009 on 4 September. By the time COVID-19 pandemic hit the country in March 2020, it fell even further to nearly Rp. 16,650, nearly reaching the 1998 crisis value, although it recovered as the year progressed. In April 2024, the rupiah fell again to Rp 16,000 level. It is one of the least valued currency units in the world, after the Venezuelan bolivar, Iranian rial and Vietnamese đồng.

In present-day Indonesia, when mentioning an amount of money in everyday life, the currency name is rarely used, and instead replaced by the words "thousand", "million", and "billion".

General sources

 * Cribb, Robert, "Political dimensions of the currency question 1945–1947", Indonesia 31 (April 1981), pp. 113–136.
 * Cribb, Robert, "Political dimensions of the currency question 1945–1947", Indonesia 31 (April 1981), pp. 113–136.
 * Cribb, Robert, "Political dimensions of the currency question 1945–1947", Indonesia 31 (April 1981), pp. 113–136.

title: Indonesian rupiah


text:
Alexandrian Wicca

Alexandrian Wicca or Alexandrian Witchcraft is a tradition of the Neopagan religion of Wicca, founded by Alex Sanders (also known as "King of the Witches") who, with his wife Maxine Sanders, established the tradition in the United Kingdom in the 1960s. Alexandrian Wicca is similar in many ways to Gardnerian Wicca, and receives regular mention in books on Wicca as one of the religion's most widely recognised traditions.

Origins and history
The tradition is based largely upon Gardnerian Wicca, in which Sanders was trained, and initaited, and also contains elements of ceremonial magic and Qabalah, which Sanders had studied independently.

Maxine Sanders recalls that the name was chosen when Stewart Farrar, a student of the Alex Sanders', began to write What Witches Do. "Stewart asked what Witches who were initiated via our Covens should be called; after much discussion, he came up with "Alexandrian" which both Alex and I rather liked. Before this time we were very happy to be called Witches". Conversely, the most recent edition of What Witches Do (2010) includes previously published interviews between Sanders and Farrar.

Alexandrian Wicca is practised outside of Britain, including Canada, Ireland, Portugal, Spain, the United States, Brazil and South Africa.

Practices
Alexandrian Wicca, in similarity with other traditional Wiccan practices, emphasises gender polarity. This emphasis can be seen in the Sabbat rituals, which focus on the relationship between the Wiccan Goddess and God.

As compared to Gardnerian Wicca, Alexandrian Wicca is "somewhat more eclectic", according to The Encyclopedia of Modern Witchcraft and Neo-Paganism. Maxine Sanders notes that Alexandrians take the attitude "If it works use it". Tool use and deity and elemental names also differ from the Gardnerian tradition. Skyclad practice, or ritual nudity, is practiced within the tradition, training is emphasized, and ceremonial magic practices, such as those derived from Hermetic Qabalah and Enochian magic may be part of ritual. Alex's work on his Book of Shadows continued up until his death resulting, like the Gardnerian in several different versions. Some of these derived from his teaching notes that his students received in the late 1960s and early 1970s. It is not unusual to find that earlier initiates did not receive the same books as later ones although they obtained all the information in dictated form, Sander's preferred mode of teaching.

Alexandrian covens meet on new moons, full moons and during Sabbat festivals.

Ranks and degrees
Alexandrian Wicca shares with other traditional Wicca systems the belief that "only a witch can make another witch". The process through which an individual is made a witch is called "initiation". As in Gardnerian Wicca, there are three levels, or "degrees", of initiation, commonly referred to as "first", "second", and "third" degree. Only a second or third degree witch can initiate another into witchcraft, and only a third degree witch can initiate another to third degree. A third degree initiate is referred to as a "High Priestess" or "High Priest". The Farrars published the rituals for the three ceremonies of initiation in Eight Sabbats for Witches.

Some Alexandrians have instituted a preliminary rank called "neophyte" or "dedicant." In these Alexandrian covens, a neophyte is not bound by the oaths taken by initiates, and thus has an opportunity to examine the tradition before committing to it. Neophytes are not, however, considered to have actually joined the tradition until they do take first degree. As such they would not experience certain aspects of rituals that were considered oathbound.

Relationship to other traditions
Historian Ronald Hutton records comments from British practitioners of Gardnerian and Alexandrian Wicca that distinctions between the two traditions have blurred in the last couple of decades, and some initiates of both traditions have recognized initiation within one as qualification for the other. Author Vivianne Crowley often trains her students in both traditions. In the United States, Alexandrian priestess Mary Nesnick, an initiate of both traditions, created a deliberate fusion of the two, which she named the Algard Tradition.

Janet and Stewart Farrar, both of whom were initiated into the Alexandrian tradition by the Sanderses, describe themselves as having left the tradition after the release of Eight Sabbats for Witches. They were later referred to as "Reformed Alexandrian", a description that Janet Farrar does not use preferring just to refer to herself and her initiates as witches. Chthonioi Alexandrian Wicca and the "Starkindler Line" are derived from Alexandrian Wicca, and Alexandrian Wicca was a major influence on Blue Star Wicca and Odyssean Wicca.

The High Magical and Qabalistic strands of the Alexandrian tradition also informed the Ordine Della Luna in Constantinople which, from 1967 onwards, Sanders operated as a 'side-degree' or ancillary rite to Alexandrian Wicca, most notably in collaboration with Derek Taylor in the 1980s.

title: Alexandrian Wicca