text:
Roman dictator

A Roman dictator was an extraordinary magistrate in the Roman Republic endowed with full authority to resolve some specific problem to which he had been assigned. He received the full powers of the state, subordinating the other magistrates, consuls included, for the specific purpose of resolving that issue, and that issue only, and then dispensing with those powers immediately.

A dictator was still controlled and accountable during his term in office: the Senate still exercised some oversight authority and the rights of plebeian tribunes to veto his actions or of the people to appeal them were retained. The extent of a dictator's mandate strictly controlled the ends to which his powers could be directed. Dictators were also liable to prosecution after their terms completed.

Dictators were frequently appointed from the earliest period of the Republic down to the Second Punic War (218–201 BC), but the magistracy then went into abeyance for over a century. It was later revived in a significantly modified form, first by Sulla between 82 and 79 BC and then by Julius Caesar between 49 and 44 BC, who became dictator perpetuo just before his death. This later dictatorship was used to effect wide-ranging and semi-permanent changes across Roman society. After Caesar's assassination in 44, the office was formally abolished and never revived.

Traditional dictatorship
The reasons for which someone might be appointed dictator were varied. The purpose of the dictatorship was to return Rome to the status quo before some threat emerged. The dictatorship existed "to eliminate whatever had arisen that was out of bounds and then eliminate themselves so that normal operation of the ordinary government" could resume.

Origin
The abolition of the Roman monarchy c. 509 BC, according to tradition, devolved the royal powers onto two annually elected consuls. The creation of the dictatorship is part of this tradition, which is somewhat confused. Its original title was magister populi, "master of the infantry". His lieutenant was the magister equitum, "master of the horse". The dictator may have also been called the praetor maximus, as mentioned by Livy, referring to an old law requiring the praetor maximus to put a nail into the wall of a temple on the ides of September.

It is not certain who the first dictator was or in what year he was appointed. Livy gives two versions: in one, the first dictator was Titus Larcius in 501 BC. His other version states that the first dictator was Manius Valerius Maximus, although Livy thought this improbable, as he had not previously been consul and, had a Valerius been desired, Manius' father, Marcus, who was consul in 505 BC, could have been chosen instead. However, few modern scholars put much faith in these traditional accounts: by the time Roman history started being written down, the dictatorship as a military commander had already lapsed out of living memory.

The dictatorship seems to have been conceived as a way to bypass normal Roman politics and create a short-term magistrate with special powers, serving to defend the Republic in war, or otherwise to cow internal civil unrest, especially if such unrest imperilled the conduct of war. There are broadly two views on the dictatorship's origin: that it descends from the Latins, or that it was a uniquely Roman institution.

The Roman view stresses that the dictatorship is said to have existed from the earliest years of the Republic, created as "an integral part of the republican constitution". And while other Latin cities had dictatorships, they emerged from their abolished monarchies as ordinary magistrates rather than as an extraordinary magistrate only appointed in time of crisis. Others have argued that the dictatorship existed as a means to slip through the inefficiency of a new collegiate magistracy, arguing that the Romans would not have made it – with regal powers – an integral part of their constitution in the immediate aftermath of the monarchy's abolition, confining it therefore to a peripheral and extraordinary role. Other scholars have advanced theories that the consuls came after the dictatorship rather than before.

The Latin view argues that the dictatorship emerged from the need to rotate command between Latin states in the role of commanding the Latin League's united armies. While Rome was not a formal member of the League, it did require the Latins to serve in Rome's wars under a Roman commander, which could have been a dictator appointed for the occasion. One argument of this is the siege of Veii: for nine years of siege, Rome did not resort to a dictator, until the last year when Etruscan intervention compelled Rome to call in its Latin allies. Moreover, it is plausible that the dictatorship was borrowed from other Latin municipalities that had a dictator serving as a military commander. This view also stresses continuity between the Roman kingdom and the succeeding republic, with the dictatorship as a bridge between the two periods.

Nomination
The dictator was the only important official in the Roman state that was appointed. The power to appoint a dictator vested in the consuls, one of whom could nominate a man to serve in the office; he did not need to consult his colleague, and no other magistrates had such authority. A dictator, however, could be created by comitial legislation at the proposal of other magistrates, as Sulla and Caesar later were.

Consular nomination occurred in a nocturnal ritual, usually preceded by advice from the Senate asking for a specific person to be appointed, but this was not strictly necessary. A vote of the people could be held, but this was unusual, perhaps except in cases with a non-consular nominator. In the case of Quintus Fabius Maximus Verrucosus, the people may have created him dictator directly by legislation. After c. 300 BC most attested dictators were ex-consuls; it does not appear, however, that this emerged from any kind of legislation, as implied in Livy, to that effect.

Dictatorial powers likely extended beyond the term of the nominating magistrate, and most dictators are recorded to have given up their powers as quickly as possible. Customary law may have required dictators to give up their powers immediately after completion of their assigned task.

A dictator could be nominated for different reasons, or causae. These causae were akin to provinciae, spheres of command assigned to a magistrate which bound their freedom of action. The various causae were:

 * rei gerundae causa, "for the conduct of the matter", used for military emergencies,
 * comitiorum habendorum causa, for holding the comitia, or elections, when the consuls were unable to do so;
 * clavi figendi causa, to create a dictator for an important religious rite involving the driving of a nail into the wall of the Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus, as a protection against pestilence;
 * for quelling of sedition;
 * for establishing a religious holiday;
 * for holding the Roman games, an ancient religious festival;
 * for investigating certain actions; and,
 * in one extraordinary case, for appointment of senators, after the Battle of Cannae.

These reasons could be combined (e.g., seditionis sedandae et rei gerundae causa, for quelling sedition and for war). However, by the middle Republic the historical record clearly shows that dictators were appointed more as temporary extraordinary magistrates to do some very specifically defined action before resigning, acting as proxies or substitutes for the ordinary magistrates of that year; the historicity of the dictators appointed in the early period to quell sedition—who usually took the side of the protestors—is also debated.

The Romans were not consistent in classifying specific threats and then appointing a dictator if they met some criteria. Rather, they judged the matter subjectively such that a dictator in military matters would only be appointed if there were converging threats from multiple enemies, all-consuming ongoing wars, or extinction-level threats to the city which could be handled by a man "whose empowerment with the dictatorship offered more assurance of success than the incumbent magistrates". Alternatively, dictators might be appointed if another consul-like magistrate was needed.

Normally there was only one dictator at a time, although a new dictator could be appointed following the resignation of another. A dictator could be compelled to resign his office without accomplishing his task or serving out his term if there were found to be a fault in the auspices under which he had been nominated. After nomination, a dictator would have his imperium ratified by comitia curiata—bringing that matter before the Assembly himself—in a manner akin to that of the consuls.

Insignia
Like other curule magistrates, the dictator was entitled to the toga praetexta and the sella curulis. The dictator, however, was accompanied by twenty-four lictors rather than the normal twelve lictors of the consul. However, within the pomerium he may have displayed twelve.

In a notable exception to the Roman reluctance to reconstitute the symbols of the kings, the lictors of the dictator never removed the axes from their fasces, even within the pomerium, symbolising their power over life and death and setting the dictator apart from the ordinary magistrates. the lictors of other magistrates could not bear fasces at all when appearing before the dictator.

The Latin theory of the dictatorship's origin has also suggested that the twenty-four lictors emerged from the uniting of "two governments". It may have also simply signalled that a dictator's imperium was superior to that of the consuls or that he was endowed with the power of both consuls. As the kings had been accustomed to appear on horseback, this right was forbidden to the dictator unless he first received permission from the comitia.

Powers and limitations
The full extent of the dictatorial power was considerable, but not unlimited. It was circumscribed by the conditions of a dictator's appointment, as well as by the evolving traditions of Roman law, and to a considerable degree depended on the dictator's ability to work together with other magistrates. The precise limitations of this power were not sharply defined, but subject to debate, contention, and speculation throughout Roman history.

In the pursuit of his causa, the dictator's authority was nearly absolute. However, as a rule he could not exceed the mandate for which he was appointed; a dictator nominated to hold the comitia could not then take up a military command against the wishes of the Senate. Dictators could carry out functions which fell outside the scope of their initial appointments, but only at the direction of the Senate; this included the drawing of funds from the public treasury, which a dictator could only do with the Senate's authorisation.

The imperium of the other magistrates was not vacated by the nomination of a dictator. They continued to perform the duties of their office, although subject to the dictator's authority, and continued in office until the expiration of their year, by which time the dictator had typically resigned. Dictatorial power also did not override that of the tribunes. While some sources assert there was no appeal to the tribunes from a dictator's actions, other sources document the extent of a dictator's powers within the pomerium, appeals against dictatorial action, and threats by tribunes to veto elections held by dictators.

Most authorities hold that a dictator could not be held to account for his actions after resigning his office. However, there are cases where this is asserted in the literary sources and the surviving text of the lex repetundarium implies the dictator and his magister equitum could be prosecuted after their terms ended. Rather, some modern scholars hold the position that unaccountability is a "legalistic illusion".

Some sources, both ancient and modern in summaries of the office, assert that the dictator was limited to a term for six months, but this is contradicted by recorded practice and Livy has a dictator object to a six-month limitation explicitly as objectionably unorthodox.

Decline and disappearance
Before the First Punic War starting in 264 BC, when Rome established hegemony over Italy, dictators were overwhelmingly appointed to conduct military campaigns and also appointed regularly. However, these dictators were not given the best commands—they rarely won triumphs: only five of some 75 triumphs between 363 and 264 BC—suggesting that they functioned as substitutes for the ordinary magistrates. The middle Republic also shows significant use of the dictatorship to hold elections in place of consuls: this occurred twelve times during the First Punic War and eight times during the following Second. Magistri equitum had a knack of winning elections when held by dictators, which may explain why this limited dictatorship also fell into abeyance.

In domestic affairs, the dictators were at times—according to tradition—appointed to resolve issue between the patricians and the plebeians during the so-called Conflict of the Orders. In this role, the dictators always took the side of the plebs, implying that the later tradition of the dictatorship as a tool of patrician tyranny is a post-Sullan anachronism. Their efforts may have been decisive in that legislation passed in the Assemblies called by dictators did not need the approval of the Senate, serving to break impasses between an obstinate patrician-heavy Senate and popular demands.

After the Second Punic War and the Third Macedonian War, all major wars were then conducted by promagistrates and usually lasted several years, making the short term of the dictatorship unsuitable. Moreover, the fact that these conflicts occurred far from Rome radically limited the possibility of panicked tumult that could result in a dictatorial appointment. The rise of prorogation also meant that the Romans had, by jettisoning the annual term, more generals in the field than they had in the past. These promagistrates resembled archaic dictators as well, being exempt from normal consular responsibilities while being assigned a limited task—provincia—to complete.

At the same time, the new promagistrates also meant the consuls could spend more time in Rome, meaning it became less necessary to appoint dictators to conduct elections. During the various wars of the 140s BC, the ability to have more commanders under praetorian or proconsular leadership meant it was possible to keep at least one consul in Rome while the other fought abroad. Even when the Senate wanted to act against men such as Tiberius Gracchus or Gaius Gracchus, dictators were not appointed: in the former, the consul refused to act, precluding a dictatorial nomination, and in the latter, the Senate authorised the consul to use force via the so-called senatus consultum ultimum.

The religious purpose of the dictatorship in undertaking rituals to appease the gods in cases of pestilence or other disasters also was replaced. Dictators appointed to appease the gods was highly reactive but, over time, the accumulation of precedent formalised a spiritual process. Instead of an ad hoc approach, the Senate would advise—in moments of need—consultation of the Sibylline Books and direct implementation of the Books' recommendations.

Late republican dictatorship
The new dictatorships of Sulla and Caesar differed greatly from the traditional dictatorship. The long period of abeyance in which the dictatorship had lain meant that men like Sulla and Caesar were no longer bound by the chains of centuries of tradition requiring any man appointed to the dictatorship—traditionally a man trusted by all Romans—to act for all Romans, resolve the issue to which he was appointed, and then immediately resign.

Lucius Cornelius Sulla
Following Sulla's civil war, Lucius Cornelius Sulla had the dictatorship revived. In 82 BC the consuls were absent from the city, he induced the comitia centuriata, called by Lucius Valerius Flaccus as interrex, to pass a law directly appointing Sulla as dictator to write laws and reconstitute the state (legibus scribundis et rei publicae constituendae); he was also given immunity for all actions (including those past and future)

After significant changes to the laws and proscriptions, he completed this task on 1 January 79 BC and resigned to take up an ordinary consulship. This dictatorship aligned with one aspect of the archaic dictatorship—restoring stability—as the state was, in fact, in a shambles after the domination and proscriptions of Lucius Cornelius Cinna, Gaius Marius, and Gnaeus Papirius Carbo. "Sulla never aimed at permanent tyranny"; wishing his settlement to succeed, and conceiving of it in quasi-republican terms, he resigned the dictatorship in place of ordinary magistrates. Sulla's reforms and proscriptions did stabilize a republic—albeit on radically reformed grounds with Sulla as a "law-giver" who gave Rome "a new constitution that would put an end to political and social strife"—and restore somewhat free elections for the next few decades, at an enormous cost. But the precedent that he set by twice marching on Rome with his armies would prove an equally destabilizing influence.

Between Sulla and Caesar
After Sulla's dictatorship, there are a few cases where a dictatorship was supposedly considered as a means of effecting regime change.

One version of the supposed First Catilinarian conspiracy c. 65 BC (which itself is now held in modern scholarship to be fictitious) related by Suetonius would have had the creation of a dictatorship led by Marcus Licinius Crassus with Julius Caesar as magister equitum. Suetonius' version of events may be anachronistic, with Crassus and Caesar's involvement being an embellishment. Regardless, the suggestion of a dictatorship "belongs, perhaps to a late-republican school of thought that saw the antiquated office of the consulship as an ineffective path to the mastery of Rome" with the dictatorship as an "obvious tool for republican regime change" informed by Sulla's proscriptions and reforms. The phraseology of how Crassus would supposedly have been elevated to the dictatorship also suggests it was seen as an available instrument for ambitious factional leaders to force through self-serving change.

The later consulship of Pompey in 52 BC also is reported to have been initially intended as a dictatorship; it was, however, aborted by his election as sole consul (without colleague) to restore order. Scholars disagree as to the reasons why Pompey was made sole consul: ancient sources (Appian, Dio, and Plutarch) all believed this occurred to deny him a dictatorship; "recent scholarship has emphasised Pompey’s consulship rather as a means of resolving a political impasse". If this were an abortive dictatorship, it would have been "a final echo of the archaic dictators" with the sole goal of restoring order to the city.

Caesar
Caesar also revived the dictatorship during the Civil War, first to hold the elections—in which he was returned as consul for the following year—and on multiple occasions between October 48 BC and his death in 44. It is unclear which of Caesar's acts were undertaken under his overlapping dictatorial, proconsular, consular, or private authority. Unlike the consulship, which was limited by hundreds of years of precedent, the dictatorship, by virtue of its "separat[ion] from its foundations by 120 years of disuse", as well as Sulla's example, offered Caesar a position that gave him vast, ill-defined, and largely unconstrained powers. His dictatorship built on that of Sulla's as well: he changed the number of magistracies and reformed the state, but Caesar's dictatorship was administrative rather than one given up at the completion of a task. To that end, shortly before his death Caesar had himself appointed dictator perpetuo, i.e., in a dictatorship that continued each year without the need to seek the senate's approval or appointment by one of the consuls. This new and transformed dictatorship, endowed with a kingly power, ended with Caesar's assassination.

Abolition

After Caesar's death, it became unlawful to propose, vote for, or accept any dictatorship. Any person who became dictator also could be summarily executed. Essentially, the title was cursed and excised from the republican constitution. Curiously, the person who did this was not one of the liberatores but rather, Caesar's own former magister equitum, Mark Antony. Antony's supporters lionised him for having rid the Republic of this instrument of tyranny.

The need for the dictatorship—especially as an instrument of pseudo-royal power—was clearly already gone: in 22 BC, a senatorial delegation begged Augustus to accept the dictatorship, and Augustus refused, knowing that the title would bring only hatred, and that his own informal authority, "encumbered by neither ancient nor recent precedent", would be sufficient.

Magister equitum
The dictator's lieutenant was the magister equitum, or "master of the horse". The first act of a dictator was to choose this lieutenant, usually at his own discretion. It was customary for the dictator to nominate a magister equitum, even if he were appointed for a non-military reason.

The magister equitum was also a curule magistrate, with powers to summon the Senate and perhaps also powers to summon the Assembly; however, he had only six lictors, symbolizing his subordination to the dictator, and his expectation of quickly vacating office. The magister equitum was necessarily subordinate to the dictator, although this did not always prevent the two from disagreeing.

In theory, the magister equitum was commander of the cavalry, but he was not limited to that role. The dictator and magister equitum did not always take the field together; in some instances the magister equitum was assigned the defense of the city while the dictator took an army into the field, while on other occasions the dictator remained at Rome to see to some important duty, and entrusted the magister equitum with an army in the field.

title: Roman dictator


text:
The Neverending Story

The Neverending Story (Die unendliche Geschichte) is a fantasy novel by German writer Michael Ende, published in 1979. The first English translation, by Ralph Manheim, was published in 1983. It was later adapted into a film series.

Plot
The book centres on a boy, Bastian Balthazar Bux, an overweight and imaginative child who is neglected by his father after the death of Bastian's mother. While escaping from some bullies, Bastian bursts into the antiquarian book store of Carl Conrad Coreander, where he finds his interest held by a book called The Neverending Story. Unable to resist, he steals the book and hides in his school's attic, where he begins to read.

The story Bastian reads is set in the magical land of Fantastica, a place of wonder ruled by the benevolent and mysterious Childlike Empress. A great delegation has come to the Empress to seek her help against a formless entity called "The Nothing". The delegates are shocked when the Empress's physician, a centaur named Cairon, informs them that the Empress is ill, and has chosen a boy warrior named Atreyu to find a cure. Upon finding Atreyu, Cairon gives him AURYN: a powerful amulet that protects him from all harm. At the advice of the giant turtle Morla the Aged One, Atreyu sets off in search of an invisible oracle known as Uyulala, who may know the Empress's cure. In reaching her, he is aided by a luckdragon named Falkor, whom he rescues from the shapeshifting creature Ygramul the Many. By Uyulala, he is told the only thing that can save the Empress is a new name given to her by a human, who can only be found beyond Fantastica's borders.

Through reading the story, Bastian becomes increasingly disturbed by hints that the characters are somehow aware that he is reading their adventures, being able to hear or even see him at points. As Falkor and Atreyu search for the borders of Fantastica, Atreyu is flung from Falkor's back in a confrontation with the four Wind Giants and loses AURYN in the sea. Atreyu lands in the ruins of Spook City, the home of various creatures of darkness. Wandering the dangerous city, Atreyu finds the werewolf Gmork, chained and near death, who tells him that all the residents of the city have leapt voluntarily into The Nothing. There, thanks to the irresistible pull of the destructive phenomenon, the Fantasticans are becoming lies in the human world. The wolf also reveals that he is a servant of the force behind The Nothing and was sent to prevent the Empress's chosen hero from saving her. Gmork then reveals that when the princess of the city discovered his treachery against the Empress, she imprisoned him and left him to starve to death. When Atreyu announces that he is the hero Gmork has sought, the wolf laughs and succumbs to death. When approached, Gmork's body instinctively seizes Atreyu's leg in his jaws, preventing him from escaping the Nothing. Meanwhile, Falkor retrieves AURYN from the sea and arrives in time to save Atreyu from the rapid approach of The Nothing.

Falkor and Atreyu go to the Childlike Empress, who assures them they have brought her rescuer to her; Bastian suspects that the Empress means him, but cannot bring himself to believe it. When Bastian refuses to speak the new name, to prompt him into fulfilling his role as savior, the Empress herself locates the Old Man of Wandering Mountain, who possesses a book also entitled The Neverending Story, which the Empress demands he read aloud. As he begins, Bastian is amazed to find the book he is reading is repeating itself, beginning once again whenever the Empress reaches the Old Man — only this time, the story begins with Bastian's meeting with Coreander, his theft of the book, and all his actions in the attic. Realizing that the story will repeat itself forever without his intervention, Bastian names the Empress "Moon Child", and appears with her in Fantastica, where he restores its existence through his own imagination. The Empress has also given him AURYN, on the back of which he finds the inscription "Do What You Wish".

For each wish, Bastian loses a memory of his life as a human. Unaware of this at first, Bastian goes through Fantastica, having adventures and telling stories, while losing his memories. In spite of the warnings of Atreyu and Bastian's other friends, Bastian uses AURYN to create creatures and dangers for himself to conquer, which causes some negative side effects for the rest of Fantastica, such as the rampage of the dragon "Smerg" and the birth of the Shlamoofs winged insane clown creatures. After being abetted by the wicked sorceress Xayide, and with the mysterious absence of the Childlike Empress, Bastian decides to take over Fantastica as emperor. During his coronation ceremony he is stopped by Atreyu, whom Bastian grievously wounds in a battle so fierce it results in the destruction of the Ivory Tower. Bastian then enters "The City of Old Emperors", inhabited by human beings who came to Fantastica earlier but could not find their way out, eking out a meaningless existence there. Ultimately, a repentant Bastian is reduced to two memories: that of his father, and of his own name. After more adventures, Bastian must give up the memory of his father to discover that his strongest wish is to be capable of love and to give love to others.

After much searching, and having lost his final pre-Fantastican memory (his name and knowledge of himself), Bastian is unable to find the Water of Life with which to leave Fantastica with his memories. After an attack by the Slamoofs he is rescued by Atreyu. Of his own volition, Bastian lays down AURYN at his friend's feet, and Atreyu and Falkor enter AURYN with him, where the Water of Life demands to know Bastian's name, and if Bastian has finished all the stories he began in his journey, which he has not. Only after Atreyu gives Bastian's name and promises to complete all the stories for him does the Water of Life allow Bastian to return to the human world, along with some of the mystical waters. After drinking the Water of Life, Bastian returns to his original form, and feels comfortable and happy with it. He returns to his father, where he tells the full tale of his adventures, and thus his father is restored from his grief. Afterward, Bastian confesses to Coreander about stealing his book and losing it, but Coreander denies ever owning such a book. He reveals he has also been to Fantastica, that the book has likely moved into the hands of someone else and that Bastian—like he did—will eventually show people the many ways to Fantastica.

Editions
The Neverending Story was first published under the title Die unendliche Geschichte in 1979 by West German publisher Thienemann Verlag. It was number one on West Germany's highly respected Der Spiegel bestseller list for 113 weeks, and remained on the list for 332 weeks. The original edition was printed using red and green text: red writing to represent the story lines which take place in the human world, and green writing to represent the events taking place in Fantastica. The illustrations by Roswitha Quadflieg that begin each chapter are drawn in both colors to illustrate how the two worlds intertwine. It was initially only printed as a hardcover, not paperback, because Ende wanted the book to look as much as possible like the book that Bastian steals from Mr. Coreander in the story.

The English version, translated by Ralph Manheim, was published simultaneously in the United Kingdom and United States in 1983. Several other English-language editions have since been published, with a variety of covers and lettering styles. As of 2010, The Neverending Story has been translated into 36 languages, and sold more than eight million copies worldwide.

In 1998 Der Niemandsgarten (English: The No Man's Garden) was published. This anthology of Michael Ende's unpublished works includes insight on the creation of The Neverending Story and has been translated into Japanese but not English. Also unavailable in English is Aber das ist eine andere Geschichte – Das große Michael Ende Lesebuch (English: But that is Another Story: The Big Michael Ende Reader), which contains the previously unpublished chapter "Bastian erlernt die Zauberkunst" (English: "Bastian learns the art of magic").

Reception
A survey conducted by German filmmaker Ulli Pfau found that The Neverending Story appeals particularly to readers aged 18–35. It remains most successful in Germany and Japan, while the 1984 film tends to be better-known among English-speaking audiences.

Early reviews of the English-language edition included positive reviews in Library Journal and Kirkus Reviews, the latter calling The Neverending Story an "appealing, delicately wrought, engrossing adventure—for children of all ages". A less positive review in gaming magazine White Dwarf took issue with the appearance of the physical book, writing that "despite plush production the artwork is grotty, while the promised 'shimmering copper-coloured silk' binding looks like plain red cloth to me. A good buy, though, unless you suffer from red/green colour blindness".

In subsequent years the text of The Neverending Story has been analyzed from several different viewpoints. In The Rhetoric of Character in Children's Literature, literary critic Maria Nikolajeva states that "the two parts of the novel repeat each other" in that Bastian becomes a hero but then in the second half he "acts not even as an antihero but as a false hero of the fairy tale" and the characters of Bastian and Atreyu can also be seen as mirror halves. Helmut Gronemann's Fantastica—the Realm of the Unconscious explores the novel from a Jungian point of view, identifying archetypes and symbols in the story. Additionally, some religious groups have analyzed the text for occult messages and imagery.

Music
The album Wooden Heart by Listener was based on or heavily influenced by The Neverending Story, as has been confirmed by the band. Different songs represent different ideas of the plot or characters, which can be seen on the band's lyric page for the album.

The Spanish indie rock band Vetusta Morla derived its name from the ancient turtle in the novel, and the Spanish boyband Auryn derived its name from the medallion given to Atreyu and Bastian. The metalcore band Atreyu also derives its name from a character in The Neverending Story.

The band Bayside released a song called "They Looked Like Strong Hands" on their self titled album in 2005, referencing the speech Rockbiter gives to Atreyu.

The hip-hop artist Homeboy Sandman references Atreyu and Falkor in his 2019 song "Far Out".

British pop singer Limahl sang the English version of the song on the soundtrack of the film in 1984.

Audiobook
A German dramatized audioplay under the title Die unendliche Geschichte (Karussell/Universal Music Group 1984, directed by Anke Beckert, music by Frank Duval, 3 parts on LP and MC, 2 parts on CD).

In March 2012 Tantor Media released an unabridged audiobook of The Neverending Story narrated by Gerard Doyle.

Film
The NeverEnding Story was the first film adaptation of the novel. It was released in 1984, directed by Wolfgang Petersen and starring Barret Oliver as Bastian, Noah Hathaway as Atreyu, and Tami Stronach as the Childlike Empress. It covers only the first half of the book, ending at the point where Bastian enters Fantastica (renamed "Fantasia" in the film), and features characters who look markedly different from how they are described in the book (most notably Bastian, who is very self-conscious about his weight in the book, but is depicted as slender in the film). Ende, who was reportedly "revolted" by the film, requested they halt production or change the film's name, as he felt it had ultimately and drastically deviated from his novel; when they did neither, he sued them and subsequently lost the case.

The NeverEnding Story II: The Next Chapter, directed by George T. Miller and starring Jonathan Brandis and Kenny Morrison, was released in 1990. It used plot elements primarily from the second half of Ende's novel, but told a new tale. Ende has dismissed both the 1984 film and its 1990 sequel as "gigantic melodrama made of kitsch and commerce, plush and plastic".

The NeverEnding Story III, directed by Peter MacDonald and starring Jason James Richter, Melody Kay and Jack Black, was released in 1994 in Germany. This film was primarily based only upon the characters from Ende's book but had an original story. The film was lambasted by film critics for its poor and laughable dialogue and special effects and was a box-office bomb. In addition, the US release went straight to video and received a limited theatrical run in 1996.

In March 2024, Michael Ende Productions, in association with See-Saw Films, announced plans for a series of films based on the book.

Novels
From 2003 to 2004, the German publishing house AVAinternational published six novels of different authors in a series called Legends of Fantastica, each using parts of the original plot and characters to compose an entirely new storyline:

Stage
The world première of the stage production took place in 2012 in Brisbane, Australia, by the Harvest Rain Theatre Company.

In Germany, The Neverending Story has been variously adapted to a stage play, ballet and opera, which premiered both at Trier and at Weimar Nationaltheater on 10 April 2004, and was subsequently staged at Linz Landestheater on 11 December. The scores to both the opera and the ballet versions were composed by Siegfried Matthus. The opera libretto was by Anton Perry.

In Canada, the novel was adapted to stage for the Stratford Festival for the 2019 season adapted by David S. Craig with original music by Hawksley Workman.

Television
The 1995 animated series was produced by Canadian animation studio Nelvana, under the title of The Neverending Story: The Animated Adventures of Bastian Balthazar Bux. The animated series ran for two years, and had a total of twenty-six episodes. Director duties were split between Marc Boreal and Mike Fallows. Each episode focused on Bastian's further adventures in Fantastica, largely different from his further adventures in the book, but occasionally containing elements of them.

Tales from the Neverending Story, a one-season-only TV series that is loosely based on Ende's novel, was produced in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, through December 2000 to August 2002 and distributed by Muse Entertainment, airing on HBO in 2002. It was aired as four two-hour television movies in the US and as a TV series of 13 one-hour episodes in the United Kingdom. The series was released on DVD in 2001.

Google Doodle
On 1 September 2016, a Google Doodle created by Google artist Sophie Diao commemorated the first publication of the work, on the 37th anniversary.

Video games
Ocean Software released a text adventure in 1985 for the ZX Spectrum, Amstrad CPC, Commodore 64, and Atari 8-bit computers.

A video game based on the second film was released in 1990 by Merimpex Ltd under their Linel label and re-released by System 4 for the ZX Spectrum and Commodore 64.

The Ende-inspired video game AURYN Quest was released in 2002.

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

title: The Neverending Story


text:
Battle of the Standard

The Battle of the Standard, sometimes called the Battle of Northallerton, took place on 22 August 1138 on Cowton Moor near Northallerton in Yorkshire, England. English forces under William of Aumale repelled a Scottish army led by King David I of Scotland.

King Stephen of England, fighting rebel barons in the south, had sent a small force (largely mercenaries), but the English army was mainly local militia and baronial retinues from Yorkshire and the north Midlands. Archbishop Thurstan of York had exerted himself greatly to raise the army, preaching that to withstand the Scots was to do God's work. The centre of the English position was therefore marked by a mast (mounted upon a cart) bearing a pyx carrying the consecrated host and from which were flown the consecrated banners of the minsters of York, Beverley and Ripon: hence the name of the battle. This cart-mounted standard was a very northerly example of a type of standard common in contemporary Italy, where it was known as a carroccio.

King David had entered England for two declared reasons:
 * To support his niece Matilda's claim to the English throne against that of King Stephen (married to another niece)
 * To enlarge his kingdom beyond his previous gains.

David's forces had already taken much of Northumberland apart from castles at Wark and Bamburgh.

Advancing beyond the Tees towards York, early on 22 August the Scots found the English army drawn up on open fields 2 mi north of Northallerton; they formed up in four 'lines' to attack it. The first attack, by unarmoured spearmen against armoured men (including dismounted knights) supported by telling fire from archers, failed. Within three hours, the Scots army disintegrated, apart from small bodies of knights and men-at-arms around David and his son Henry. At this point, Henry led a spirited attack with mounted knights; he and David then withdrew separately with their immediate companions in relatively good order. Heavy Scots losses are claimed, in battle and in flight.

The English did not pursue far; David fell back to Carlisle and reassembled an army. Within a month, a truce was negotiated which left the Scots free to continue the siege of Wark castle, which eventually fell. Despite losing the battle, David was subsequently given most of the territorial concessions he had been seeking (which the chronicles say he had been offered before he crossed the Tees). David held these throughout the Anarchy, but on the death of David, his successor Malcolm IV of Scotland was soon forced to surrender David's gains to Henry II of England.

Some chronicle accounts of the battle include an invented pre-battle speech on the glorious deeds of the Normans, occasionally quoted as good contemporary evidence of the high opinion the Normans held of themselves.

Background
David had gained the Scottish throne largely because of the support of his brother-in-law Henry I of England, and he had attempted to remodel Scotland to be more like Henry's England. He had carried out peaceful changes in the areas of Scotland over which he had effective control and had conducted military campaigns against semi-autonomous regional rulers to reassert his authority; in administration, in warfare, and in the settling of regained territory, he had drawn on the talent and resources of the Anglo-Norman lands. The death of Henry I in 1135, weakening England, made David more reliant on his native subjects, and allowed him to contemplate winning control over substantial areas of northern England.

Henry I had wished his inheritance to pass to his daughter Matilda, and in 1127 made his notables swear an oath to uphold the succession of Matilda (David was the first layman to do so). Many of the English and Norman magnates and barons were against Matilda because she was married to Geoffrey V, count of Anjou. On Henry's death, Stephen, younger brother of Theobald, count of Blois, seized the throne instead.

When Stephen was crowned on 22 December, David went to war. After two months of campaigning in northern England, a peace treaty ceding Cumberland to David was agreed. Additionally, David's son Henry was made Earl of Huntingdon, David declining to swear the required oath of loyalty to Stephen, since he had already sworn allegiance to Matilda.

In spring 1137, David again invaded England: a truce was quickly agreed. In November, the truce expired; David demanded to be made earl of the whole of the old earldom of Northumberland. Stephen refused and in January 1138 David invaded for a third time.

David invades Northumberland
David first moved against English castles on the Tweed frontier. Norham Castle belonged to the Bishop of Durham and its garrison was under-strength; it quickly fell. Having failed to rapidly seize the castle at Wark on Tweed, David detached forces to besiege it and moved deeper into Northumberland, demanding contributions from settlements and religious establishments to be spared plunder and burning.

Scots slave-raiding and Anglo-Norman alarm
The actions of the army that invaded England in early 1138 shocked the English chroniclers. Richard of Hexham records that:

"an execrable army, more atrocious than the pagans, neither fearing God nor regarding man, spread desolation over the whole province and slaughtered everywhere people of either sex, of every age and rank, destroying, pillaging and burning towns, churches and houses."

Monastic chroniclers often deplore depredations made by foreign armies and sometimes even those of their own rulers but some Scots forces were going beyond normal Norman 'harrying' by systematically carrying off women and children as slaves.

"Remember what they did in the lands across the Tyne, and hope for nothing gentler if the Scots conquer. I am silent about the slaughter, the rapine, the fires that the enemy employed in something like a human way. I would tell such acts as no stories tell and no histories relate of the fiercest tyrants. I would tell them, I say, if words did not fail before such horror, or the listener flee. They spared no age, rank or sex. The high born, boys as well as girls were led into captivity"

In contemporary Britain, this was regarded as a useful source of revenue, like (and not significantly more reprehensible than) cattle-raiding.

"Then (horrible to relate) they carried off, like so much booty, the noble matrons and chaste virgins, together with other women. These naked, fettered, herded together; by whips and thongs they drove before them, goading them with their spears and other weapons. This took place in other wars, but in this to a far greater extent."

The practicalities of this would support the chroniclers' tales of sexual abuse of the slaves and casual slaughter of unsalable encumbrances:

"For the sick on their couches, women pregnant and in childbed, infants in the womb, innocents at the breast, or on the mother's knee, with the mothers themselves, decrepit old men and worn-out old women, and persons debilitated from whatever cause, wherever they met with them, they put to the edge of the sword, and transfixed with their spears; and by how much more horrible a death they could dispatch them, so much the more did they rejoice.'" In February, King Stephen marched north with an army to deal with David. David successfully evaded him, and Stephen returned south.

Scots raid into Craven and the Battle of Clitheroe
In the summer, David's nephew William fitz Duncan marched into Yorkshire and harried Craven; on 10 June, he met and defeated an English force of knights and men-at-arms at the battle of Clitheroe. He also destroyed the recently founded Calder Abbey in Copeland. The choice of targets has no obvious strategic logic; it may be pertinent that William eventually inherited both the Honour of Skipton in Craven, and the Lordship of Copeland, previously held by his father-in-law William de Meschines and which should have passed to him on the death of William de Meschines' son Ranulph Meschin, the founder of Calder.

Peace feelers fail; David enters Yorkshire
By late July David had crossed the river Tyne and was in "St Cuthbert's land" (the lands of the Bishop of Durham). With him were contingents from most of the separate regions of his kingdom, amounting to more than 26,000 men (many sources say this is wrong, that it was more like 16,000). Eustace fitz John had declared for David and handed over to him Alnwick Castle in Northumberland. The garrison of Eustace's castle at Malton to the North East of York began to raid surrounding areas in support of David (or Matilda). The magnates of Yorkshire gathered in York to discuss the worsening crisis: Archbishop Thurstan of York (who, as will presently appear, greatly exerted himself in this emergency), William of Aumale, Walter de Gant, Robert de Brus, Roger de Mowbray, Walter Espec, Ilbert de Lacy, William de Percy, Richard de Courcy, William Fossard, Robert de Stuteville Much irresolution was caused by distrust of each other, arising from suspicions of treachery, by the absence of a chief and leader of the war (for their sovereign, king Stephen, encompassed by equal difficulties in the south of England, was just then unable to join them), and by their dread of encountering, with an inadequate force, so great a host However, urged by the 70-year-old Thurstan ('Lieutenant of the North' in addition to his ecclesiastical duties; Walter Espec was High Sheriff of Yorkshire), to stand and fight and if needs be die in a holy cause, they agreed to gather their forces and return to York, where they were joined by reinforcements from Nottinghamshire under William Peverel and Geoffrey Halsalin, and from Derbyshire led by Robert de Ferrers. They advanced to Thirsk, from where they sent Robert de Brus and Bernard de Balliol (recently arrived with a few mercenaries sent by King Stephen) on an embassy to David, whose army was now approaching the River Tees and North Yorkshire.

The emissaries promised to obtain the earldom of Northumberland for Henry, if the Scots army withdrew. Ailred of Rievaulx gives de Brus a speech in which he tells David that the English and the Normans have always been his true friends (against the Gaels), and without their help he may not be able to keep his kingdom together. Whatever was initially said, it ended in hard words being exchanged. Having failed to persuade David to withdraw, the emissaries returned to Thirsk, with de Brus angrily withdrawing his homage to David. David's forces crossed the Tees and moved south. The English forces moved northwards and took up a defensive position to the north of Northallerton.

Battlefield and English dispositions
Moving south from the Tees David's army would have had the high ground of the North Yorkshire Moors on its left, and the River Swale on its right. Nearing Northallerton, the distance between hills and river is about 8 mi, much of it low-lying and (then) poorly drained. The road to Northallerton from the Tees (the Great North Road) therefore approaches the town along a ridge of slightly higher ground running north–south. Minor ups and downs break the line of sight along the ridge, but the 'ups' are hills only in relation to the low ground on either side of the ridge. The English army deployed across this ridge about 2 mi north of Northallerton in a single solid formation with the armoured men and most of the knights (who had dismounted, and sent their horses to the rear) to the front supported by the archers and the more lightly equipped men of the local levies. The barons stood with the remaining dismounted knights at the centre of the line around the standard. Their left is thought to have straddled the road, with its flank protected by a marsh; it is not known if the low ground to the east of the ridge was similarly boggy, or if the English formation extended that far.

Scots arrive and deploy
John of Worcester says that David intended to take the English by surprise, there being a very close mist that day. Richard of Hexham says simply that the Scots became aware of the standard (and by implication the army underneath it) at no great distance.

"In front of the battle were the Picts [ie the Galwegians]; in the centre, the king with his knights and English; the rest of the barbarian host poured roaring around them. The king and almost all his followers were on foot, their horses being kept at a distance.'"

Ailred of Rievaulx gives the eventual deployment of the Scots as being in four 'lines'. The Galwegians [from Galloway in south-west Scotland] – described by a later chronicler as "men agile, unclothed, remarkable for much baldness [shaven heads?]; arming their left side with knives formidable to any armed men, having a hand most skillful at throwing spears and directing them from a distance; raising their long lance as a standard when they advance into battle" – were in the first line. "The second line the King's son Prince Henry arranged with great wisdom; with himself the knights and archers, adding to their number the Cumbrians and Teviotdalesmen ... The men of Lothian formed the third rank, with the islanders and the men of Lorne [in the South-West Highlands]. The King kept in his own line the Scots and Moravians [men from Moray in North-East Scotland]; several also of the English and French knights he appointed as his bodyguard."

Henry of Huntingdon's account of the battle would imply that the men of Lothian with their 'long spears' were in the first line; however, the generally accepted view is that the long spears were those of the Galwegians.

Scots argue
Ailred says (but this may be a literary device) that this order of battle was decided at the last minute; David had intended to attack first with his knights and armoured men-at-arms, but had faced strong protests from the Galwegians that they should be given the honour of attacking first, since they had already demonstrated at Clitheroe that the vigour of their attack was sufficient to rout Normans in armour. David, however, paid more attention to the counter-argument of his Normans; that if the Galwegians failed the rest of the army would lose heart. The Galwegians resumed their protest, and the debate was not aided by a mormaer (one of David's native 'great lords') asking why David listened to 'foreigners' when none of those with armour on would this day outdo the mormaer who wore no armour. And Alan de Percy, base-born son of the great Alan – a most vigorous knight, and in military matters highly distinguished – took these words ill; and turning to the earl he said, 'A great word hast thou spoken, and one which for thy life thou canst not make good this day.' Then the king, restraining both, lest a disturbance should suddenly arise out of this altercation, yielded to the will of the Galwegians.

Anglo-Normans orate
Both Ailred and Henry of Huntingdon report a speech made to the Anglo-Normans before battle was joined. The speech may well be a literary device of the chroniclers, to present the reasons why it was fit and proper that the Normans should win, rather than accurate reportage of an actual speech. Ailred of Rievaulx says the speech was made by Walter Espec, Sheriff of York (and founder of Rievaulx). Henry of Huntingdon and after him Roger of Hoveden say the speech was made by Radulf Novell, bishop of Orkney as the representative of Thurstan.

The speaker first reminds the Normans of the military prowess of their race (especially when compared to the Scots):

"Most illustrious nobles of England, Normans by birth, ... consider who you are, and against whom, and where it is, you are waging war; for then no one shall with impunity resist your prowess. Bold France, taught by experience, has quailed beneath your valour, fierce England, led captive, has submitted to you; rich Apulia, on having you for her masters, has flourished once again; Jerusalem so famed, and illustrious Antioch, have bowed themselves before you; and now Scotland, which of right is subject to you, attempts to show resistance, displaying a temerity not warranted by her arms, more fitted indeed for rioting than for battle. These are people, in fact, who have no knowledge of military matters, no skill in fighting, no moderation in ruling. There is no room then left for fear, but rather for shame, that those whom we have always sought on their own soil and overcome ..have ...come flocking into our country.'"

He next assures them that God has chosen them to punish the Scots:

"This .. has been brought about by Divine Providence; in order that those who have in this country violated the temples of God, stained the altars with blood, slain his priests, spared neither children nor pregnant women, may on the same spot receive the condign punishment of their crimes; and this most just resolve of the Divine will, God will this day put in execution by means of your hands. Arouse your spirits then, ye civilized warriors, and, firmly relying on the valour of your country, nay, rather on the presence of God, arise against these most unrighteous foes'"

Any keenness of the Scots to attack is because they don't understand the superiority of Norman equipment:

"And let not their rashness move you, because so many insignia of your valour cause no alarm to them. They know not how to arm themselves for battle; whereas you, during the time of peace, prepare yourselves for war, in order that in battle you may not experience the doubtful contingencies of warfare. Cover your heads then with the helmet, your breasts with the coat of mail, your legs with the greaves, and your bodies with the shield, that so the foeman may not find where to strike at you, on seeing you thus surrounded on every side with iron.'"

Furthermore, the Scots' advantage in numbers is no advantage at all, especially when they are up against properly trained Norman knights:

"[I]t is not so much the numbers of the many as the valour of the few that gains the battle. For a multitude unused to discipline is a hindrance to itself, when successful, in completing the victory, when routed, in taking to flight. Besides your forefathers, when but few in number, have many a time conquered multitudes; what then is the natural consequence of the glories of your ancestry, your constant exercises, your military discipline, but that though fewer in number, you should overcome multitudes?'"

These preliminaries over, the battle began.

Galwegian attack is held and fails
The battle began with a charge by the Galwegian spearmen who

"after their custom gave vent thrice to a yell of horrible sound, and attacked the southerns in such an onslaught that they compelled the first spearmen to forsake their post; but they were driven off again by the strength of the knights, and [the spearmen] recovered their courage and strength against the foe. And when the frailty of the Scottish lances was mocked by the denseness of iron and wood they drew their swords and attempted to contend at close quarters'"

The English archery caused disorganisation and heavy casualties in the Scottish ranks. Ailred records the bravery and determination of the Galwegians, together with its ineffectiveness:

"like a hedgehog with its quill, so would you see a Galwegian bristling all round with arrows, and nonetheless brandishing his sword, and in blind madness rushing forward now smite a foe, now lash the air with useless strokes."

The Galwegians finally fled after the death of two of their leaders (Domnall and Ulgric); the men of Lothian similarly broke after the earl of Lothian was killed by an arrow

The King retreats; Prince Henry attacks
David wished to stand and fight, but was forced onto his horse and compelled to retire by his friends. Ailred simply says that the English were advancing; Henry of Huntingdon says that David's 'line' had been progressively melting away. Prince Henry led mounted men in a charge on the Anglo-Norman position, as or just after the Scots foot broke. According to Ailred, Henry successfully broke through and attacked the horse-holders in the rear of the Anglo-Norman position; the 'unarmed men' (i.e. unarmoured men) were dispersed, and only rallied by a claim that the Scottish king was dead. Since Prince Henry was unsupported and the rest of the army was withdrawing, for the most part in great disorder, he hid any banners showing his party to be Scottish, and retreated towards David by joining the English pursuing him. Henry of Huntingdon is keener to stress Henry's inability to shake the armoured men; again the attack ends in flight:

"Next, the king's troop ... began to drop off, at first; man by man, and afterwards in bodies, the king standing firm, and being at last left almost alone. The king's friends seeing this, forced him to mount his horse and take to flight; but Henry, his valiant son, not heeding what he saw being done by his men, but solely intent on glory and valour, while the rest were taking to flight, most bravely charged the enemy's line, and shook it by the wondrous vigour of his onset. For his troop was the only one mounted on horseback, and consisted of English and Normans, who formed a part of his father's household. His horsemen, however, were not able long to continue their attacks against soldiers on foot, cased in mail, and standing immoveable in close and dense ranks; but, with their lances broken and their horses wounded, were compelled to take to flight."

Scots' rout and casualties
The battle lasted no longer than between prime and terce, i.e. between daybreak and mid-morning. In Northern England at the end of August sunrise is roughly 6 a.m. and hence the battle lasted no more than 3½ hours; by not long after 9 a.m. all elements of the Scottish army were in retreat or flight. No numbers are given for total English losses but they are said to have been light; of the knights present, only one was killed. Scottish casualties during the battle proper cannot be separated from losses whilst fleeing in the 10 or so hours of daylight remaining. The chroniclers talk variously of the fugitives scattering in all directions, of their attempting to cross the Tees where there was no ford and drowning, of their being found and killed in cornfields and woods, and of fighting between the various contingents. Richard of Hexham says that of the army which came forth from Scotland, more than ten thousand were missing from the re-mustered survivors. Later chroniclers built upon this to claim 10–12,000 Scots killed. John of Worcester gives more details on the fortunes of the Scots knights

"But of [David's] army nearly ten thousand fell in different places, and as many as fifty were captured of his picked men. But the king's son came on foot with one knight only to Carlisle, while his father scarce escaped through woods and passes to Roxburgh. Of two hundred mailed knights whom [David] had, only nineteen brought back their hauberks; because each had abandoned as booty to the foe almost everything that he had. And thus very great spoils were taken from his army, as well of horses and arms and raiment as of very many other things."

End of the campaign
David regrouped his forces at Carlisle; the nobles of Yorkshire did not move North against him, and their local levies dispersed to their homes rejoicing at the victory. Thus, although militarily the battle was a "shattering defeat", it did not reverse David's previous gains. David had the only army still under arms and was left to consolidate his hold on Cumberland and Northumberland. On 26 September Cardinal Alberic, bishop of Ostia, arrived at Carlisle where David had called together his kingdom's nobles, abbots and bishops. Alberic was there as a papal legate to resolve a long-running dispute as to whether the bishop of Glasgow was subordinate to the archbishop of York. However, Alberic also addressed more temporal matters: he persuaded David to refrain from further offensive action until Martinmas (11 November) whilst continuing to blockade Wark to starve it into submission, and the 'Picts' to (also by Martinmas) return their captives to Carlisle and free them there. At Martinmas, the garrison of Wark surrendered on the orders of the castle's owner (Walter Espec), conveyed by the abbot of Rievaulx. The garrison had eaten all but two of their horses; King David rehorsed them and allowed them to depart with their arms.

Another peace agreement
Negotiations between David and Stephen continued over the winter months, and on 9 April David's son Henry and Stephen's wife Matilda of Boulogne met each other at Durham and agreed a settlement. Henry was given the earldom of Northumberland and was restored to the earldom of Huntingdon and lordship of Doncaster; David himself was allowed to keep Carlisle and Cumberland. However, Stephen was to retain possession of the strategically vital castles of Bamburgh and Newcastle, and Prince Henry was to perform homage for his English lands, while David himself was to promise to "remain loyal" to Stephen at all times. Stephen released those who held fiefs in the lands Henry now held to do homage to Henry, saving only their fealty to Stephen.

Northern England under Scottish rule
This arrangement lasted for nearly 20 years, and would appear to have been beneficial to both sides. David was able to benefit from the resources of Northern England (for example, the lead mines of the northern Pennines gave him silver from which he was able to strike his own coinage). Northern England did not become involved in the civil war between supporters of Stephen and those of Matilda, although magnates with holdings further south were drawn in. This included David, who despite his promise to Stephen was a loyal supporter of Matilda, but he did not go South with a Scottish army. The new southern border of David's realm appeared to be permanently secured in 1149, when Matilda's son Henry was knighted by David at Carlisle "he having first given an oath that, if he became king of England, he would give to [David] Newcastle and all Northumbria, and would permit him and his heirs to possess in peace without counter-claim for ever the whole land which lies from the river Tweed to the river Tyne."

Status quo restored
However, Prince Henry died in 1152, King David in 1153, and King Stephen in 1154. This brought to the throne of Scotland a 14-year-old Malcolm IV of Scotland now facing a young Henry II of England who had at his command the resources not only of an England free from civil war, but also of much of Western France. In 1157, Malcolm travelled to Chester to do homage to Henry who declared that "the king of England ought not to be defrauded of so great a part of his kingdom, nor could he patiently be deprived of it ..."

"And [Malcolm] prudently considering that in this matter the king of England was superior to the merits of the case by the authority of might … restored to him the … territories in their entirety, and received from him in return the earldom of Huntingdon, which belonged to him by ancient right. Things being so arranged, England enjoyed for a time her ease and security in all her borders. And the king ruled more widely than all who were known to have ruled in England till that time, that is from the furthest bounds of Scotland as far as to the Pyrenees."

Significance of the battle
The battle did not stop David achieving his declared war aims. We now know that achieving those aims while England was in turmoil did not prevent all David's gains having to be surrendered when Henry II made the Scottish monarch an offer he could not refuse. Unless David had other undeclared aims and ambitions which defeat at the Standard thwarted, therefore, the battle had no long-term significance.

In historical fiction

 * In Walter Scott's Ivanhoe (1820), Cedric the Saxon refers to this battle and describes it as "a day of cleaving of shields, when a hundred banners were bent forwards over the heads of the valiant, and blood flowed round like water, and death was held better than flight."
 * George Shipway gives a fictional account of the Battle of the Standard in his 1969 novel Knight in Anarchy.
 * In his novel Lord of the Isles, Nigel Tranter places his hero, Somerled, in the vanguard of the Scottish charge.

Modern secondary sources

 * Aird, William M., "Sweet Civility and Barbarous Rudeness" A view from the frontier, Abbot Ailred of Rievaulx and the Scots p. 63 onwards in Ellis Steven G et al. (eds) Imagining Frontiers, Contesting Identities, (Pisa, 2007), ISBN 88-8492-466-9
 * Baker, D., Aelred of Rievaulx and Walter Espec pp. 91–98 in Haskins Society Journal 1989, 1
 * Bartlett, Robert, England under the Norman and Angevin Kings, 1075–1225, (Oxford, 2000)
 * Beeler, John, Warfare in England 1066–1189 (New York, 1966) [narrative of battle pp. 84–95]
 * Bliese J. R. E., The Battle Rhetoric of Aelred of Rievaulx pp. 99–107 in Haskins Society Journal 1989, 1
 * Bradbury, J., The Routledge Companion to Medieval Warfare, Routledge (2004) ISBN 978-0-203-64466-9
 * Burton, Janet, The Monastic Order in Yorkshire, 1069–1215, Cambridge University Press,(Cambridge,1999), ISBN 0-521-55229-X
 * Clancy, M. T., England and its Rulers, 2nd ed., (Malden, MA, 1998)
 * Davies. R. R., The First English Empire: Power and Identities in the British Isles, 1093–1343, (Oxford, 2000)
 * Duncan, A. A. M., The Kingship of the Scots 842–1292: Succession and Independence, (Edinburgh, 2002)
 * Duncan, A. A. M., Scotland: The Making of the Kingdom, (Edinburgh, 1975)
 * Gransden, Antonia, Historical Writing in England, Routledge, (London, 1974), ISBN 0-415-15124-4
 * Green, Judith A., "Anglo-Scottish Relations, 1066–1174", in Michael Jones and Malcolm Vale (eds.), England and Her Neighbours: Essays in Honour of Pierre Chaplais (London, 1989)
 * Green, Judith A., "David I and Henry I", in the Scottish Historical Review. vol. 75 (1996), pp. 1–19
 * Moffat, Alistair, The Borders, Birlinn, (Edinburgh, 2007), ISBN 1-84158-466-5
 * Oram, Richard, David: The King Who Made Scotland, (Gloucestershire, 2004)
 * Powicke, M., Aelred of Rievaulx and his Biographer, (Manchester, 1922)
 * Ritchie R. L. G., The Normans in Scotland (Edinburgh, 1954)(narrative of battle is pp. 256–270)
 * Strickland, Matthew, Anglo-Norman Warfare: Studies in Late Anglo-Saxon and Anglo-Norman Military Organization and Warfare, (Woodbridge, 1992), ISBN 0-8511-5328-3
 * (Victoria County History) A History of the County of Cumberland : Volume 2 (1905)

title: Battle of the Standard


text:
Jeannette Charles

Jeannette Dorothea Louise Charles (née Clark; 15 October 1927 – 2 June 2024) was a British actress noted for her portrayals of Queen Elizabeth II, with The Guardian branding her "the Queen's most famous lookalike".

Background
Jeannette Clark was born in Marylebone, London, in 1927. Her father, Alfred, was a restaurateur, and her mother, who was born Yetta Wonsoff, was a Dutch immigrant originally from Poland. Clark was noted for her resemblance to then-Princess Elizabeth as early as age eleven.

She had always aspired to an acting career, but could not afford the cost of attending RADA, and had trouble getting audiences to overlook her resemblance. She instead became an au pair, living in Midland, Texas, US, in the early 1950s. While there, she met Ken Charles, a fellow British expat who was working as an oil engineer; they married in 1957 and lived across North America, South America, and Africa as part of his job, before returning to the United Kingdom from Libya in 1969.

Career
Charles and her family settled in Essex. In 1972, a painting she commissioned of herself in her forties (as a present for her husband) was displayed by the artist at the Royal Academy in London, where it was taken to be a portrait of the Queen. On the assumption the painting was of the Queen, it was disqualified as portraits had to be painted from life. When it was revealed that it was not the Queen, Charles (as the actual subject of the painting) received a great deal of press attention, and started receiving offers to portray the Queen in print advertisements.

After studying the Queen's voice, as well as her appearance, Charles began making in-character personal appearances at trade shows and corporate events, and soon broadened into film. Charles played the role of Queen Elizabeth II in many films including Secrets of a Superstud (1976), Queen Kong (1976), The Rutles' movie All You Need Is Cash (1978), National Lampoon's European Vacation (1985), The Naked Gun: From the Files of Police Squad! (1988) and Austin Powers in Goldmember (2002). Foreign governments hired her to stand in for the Queen during preparations for state visits, to allow officials to rehearse protocol.

Charles was a monarchist and refused offers she felt would be disreputable to the Queen as well as herself, such as declining to pose for a Playboy centrefold. Once, when invited to an event in which Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother would also be present, she did not agree to appear until she received confirmation from Clarence House that the Queen Mother would not be offended.

Charles also appeared as a semi-regular in Spike Milligan's Q series on BBC Television and appeared on Channel 4's Big Brother 10 to surprise the Brazilian contestant Rodrigo Lopes (who thought he was meeting the real Queen Elizabeth II for a task).

Charles also appeared in Saturday Night Live episode Season 2, Episode 20 in 1977 and Mind Your Language episode Season 2, Episode 2, "Queen for a Day", in 1978. She published a memoir in 1986.

Later life and death
Charles retired in 2014, and lived in Danbury, Essex. She died in a care home Great Baddow on 2 June 2024, at the age of 96. Her husband Ken, with whom she had three children, had died in 1997.

Partial filmography

 * Leos Leiden (1976) – The Queen
 * Secrets of a Superstud (1976) – The Lady
 * Queen Kong (1977) – HM The Queen (uncredited)
 * All You Need Is Cash (or The Rutles) (1978) – A Queen of England
 * National Lampoon's European Vacation (1985) – Queen Elizabeth
 * Nipagesh Bachof (1987) – Queen of England
 * The Naked Gun: From the Files of Police Squad! (1988) – Queen Elizabeth II
 * The Parent Trap (1998) – Queen Elizabeth II (deleted scene)
 * Tusenårsfesten (1999) – Queen Elizabeth II
 * Austin Powers in Goldmember (2002) – Queen Elizabeth II

title: Jeannette Charles


text:
Leclerc tank

The Leclerc is a third-generation French main battle tank developed and manufactured by Nexter Systems. It was named in honour of Marshal Philippe Leclerc de Hauteclocque, a commander of the Free French Forces, who led the 2nd Armoured Division in World War II.

The Leclerc is in service with the French Army, Jordanian Army and the United Arab Emirates Army. In production since 1991, the Leclerc entered French service in 1992, replacing the AMX-30 as the country's main armoured platform. With production now complete, the French operate 222 Leclercs (with 184 more in storage, for a total of 406), while the United Arab Emirates (UAE) possesses 388.

Of the units in French service, 200 will be upgraded to the Leclerc XLR standard with deliveries expected to begin in 2022.

History
In 1964, studies were initiated about a possible replacement vehicle for the AMX-30 main battle tank: the Engin Principal Prospectif. In 1971, in view of the inferiority of the AMX-30 in comparison to the new generation of Soviet tanks about to be introduced, the Direction des Armements Terrestres ordered the beginning of the Char Futur project. In 1975, a working committee was created, and in 1977 it agreed on a list of specifications. In February 1980 however, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed with West Germany involving the joint development of a MBT, called the Napoléon I in France and Kampfpanzer III in Germany. Fundamental disagreements about its desired configuration led to a failure of this cooperation in December 1982. It was announced that a purely French battle tank would be developed, called "EPC" (Engin Principal de Combat). The importation of foreign equipment, like the M1 Abrams, the Leopard 2, or the Merkava, had been studied and rejected.

In contrast to most Western programmes of the time, more emphasis was placed on active than passive protection to limit overall vehicle mass. Mobility for evading enemy fire and fire control systems were given particular attention. Nevertheless, it was a stated design goal to achieve at least double the protection against KE-penetrators in comparison to the level attained in then-current MBTs of the fifty-ton weight class, the latter indicated at about 400 mm RHA equivalency. The higher level of protection would also protect against shaped charges. Partnership with a foreign state was sought to limit unit cost, and found when the UAE ordered 436 vehicles, adding to the 426 units already planned for the French Army.

In 1986, the project was started under the name "Leclerc", and six prototypes were swiftly built. Mass production started in 1990 with the four-unit Batch 1, used mainly for comparative tests in foreign countries. The 17 units of Batch 2 shipped with turret and hull armour improvements, but were diagnosed with engine and suspension problems and quickly retired. Batch 3 followed with further improvements and used to define the doctrine of use as well as instruction. Batches 4 and 5 were better built, eliminating recurring powerplant problems, and are still in service after having been refitted in the late 1990s.

The second series started with Batch 6, with an added climate control system in the right rear of the turret. Batch 7 introduced a transmission system to the command vehicle, and a data system giving instantaneous vision of the state of all battle tanks and acquired targets. It also incorporated minor improvements in the visor. Batch 8 units had a modernised electronic system, and Batch 9 replaced the ATHOS thermal imaging with a SAGEM Iris providing better resolution.

In 2003, the Greek army sought to acquire a new tank and tested the T-80U, T-84, Leclerc, M1A2 Abrams, Challenger 2E and Leopard 2A5. The Leclerc received a perfect score at the firing range, with 20 rounds fired from 1500 and at 2000 m away. Its hunter-kill test performance was weaker, with the Leclerc scoring 13 out of 20, compared with 17 for the Leopard. Both the Leclerc and Leopard sustained a nine-round-per-minute firing rate, higher than those of the other tanks. The Leclerc achieved a 500 km range, higher than the others. But price tags seemed to be a determining factor and the Greek Army selected the Leopard.

All previous Leclerc batches were to be modernised to Batch 9 standards as of 2005. In 2004, Batch 10 was presented, incorporating a new armor package and information systems that could share the location of enemy and friendly units with all vehicles on the battlefield. This was the beginning of the 96-unit third series. By 2007, 355 tanks were to have been operational, 320 of them incorporated in four regiments, each with 80 Leclercs.

, after a French defence review, each of the four regiments operated 60 Leclerc tanks for a total of 240 in operational units; with a further 100 in combat ready reserve. Due to financial cuts, only 254 tanks were fully operational in 2011.

Main Ground Combat System
In 2015, Nexter Systems merged with German Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (KMW), maker of the Leopard 2 tank, to form KMW+Nexter Defense Systems (KNDS), and the German Ministry of Defence announced plans to develop a new tank jointly with France as a successor to both the Leopard 2 and Leclerc tanks, named Main Ground Combat System (MGCS). At the 2018 Eurosatory, KNDS presented a technology demonstrator tank combining the hull of a Leopard 2A7 with the lighter, two-man turret of a Leclerc.

System architecture definition and technology demonstration phase was to be completed by 2024, with production and testing to start in 2028.

UAE bribery allegation
In September 2018, Der Spiegel reported that an intermediary in the $3 billion-plus UAE tank sale was paid a commission of nearly US$200 million, and that part of the sum may have been used to bribe government officials.

Primary
The Leclerc is armed with a 120 mm version F1 smoothbore gun designed by the arsenal of Bourges (EFAB) under the designation of CN120-26. Its barrel is 52 calibres long instead of the 44 calibre common on most main battle tanks of its generation, giving the projectile a higher muzzle velocity.

The Modèle F1 is compatible with 120x570mm NATO ammunition. This gun features a magnesium alloy thermal sleeve and an automatic loading mechanism. Elevation (+20°), depression (-8°), and turret traverse (360°) are electrically powered. The Leclerc EMAT used by the French Army relies on compartment overpressure for barrel fume extraction while the UAE tropicalized Leclerc uses a compressed-air fume extraction system.

Autoloader
Located inside the turret bustle, the autoloader is designated CHA (Chargement Automatique, "automatic loading") and was designed by Creusot-Loire Industrie. The autoloader itself weighs 500 kg (empty) and has a total volume of 1.68 m$3$ (1.40 × 2.40 × 0.50 m). In case of ammunition cooking off, the deflagration is vented by two blow-out panels.

The autoloader allows the reloading of the gun while firing on the move, providing it a sufficient rate of fire to deal with six targets in one minute. The nominal firing sequence is below 8 seconds and the repetition rate (loading two ammunition of the same type one after another) is below 6 seconds. The autoloader is managed by a TM Motorola 68021 microprocessor.

The autoloader consists of a continuous link carrier magazine made of 22 cells and a rammer assembly. It can accommodate all types of ammunition that are to the NATO standard. Up to six different types of ammunition can be selected. The cell positions the selected round for loading. At the same time, the main gun is decoupled from the stabilization system, indexed to 1.8° elevation and locked in alignment with the loading gutter. Then, a telescopic rammer pushes the round from the cell into the gun breech via a fiberglass gutter. After loading, the weapon is automatically driven back to the specified angle in accordance with the fire control system. In case of a power outage, the conveyor can be put into motion by using a hand-cranked electric generator.

The ammunition is normally inserted in the autoloader through a port in the rear wall of the turret bustle. A control panel allows the autoloader cells to be rotated to present a new empty cell. Two barcode readers identify the introduced ammunition in order to manage its position in the conveyor at any time. If the ammunition does not have a barcode, its type is entered through the control keyboard. It is possible to replenish the autoloader under armor, through a port in the inner bulkhead by using the 18 rounds cylinder located to the right of the driver's position.

Secondary
The Leclerc is also equipped with a 12.7 mm coaxial M2 heavy machine gun and a turret-mounted 7.62 mm machine gun, whereas most other NATO tanks use 7.62 mm weapons for both their coaxial and top machine gun mounts; the major exception is the American M1 Abrams, which has a 7.62 mm coaxial machine gun and two top-mounted machine guns, one 7.62 mm and one 12.7 mm.

Fire control and observation
The last 96 MBT XL Leclerc tanks have the ICONE TIS battle management system with digital communication system which integrates data from other tanks and upper levels of command. Since 2009, all the Leclerc tanks in service (S2 and SXXI) have ICONE BMS. The digital fire control system can be operated independently by the gunner or the commander, and it offers real time integrated imaging from all of the tank's sensors and sights, including the gunner's SAVAN 20 stabilised sight, developed by SAGEM.

The Leclerc tank features the HL 60 gunner's primary sight from SAGEM. The sight has two day channels; a direct one with ×3.3 and ×10 magnification (×14 in case of the UAE version) and a video channel with ×10 magnification. The thermal channel offers ×3 and ×10 magnifications. The Athos thermal imager has a detection range of 5000 m, can recognize targets at 2500 m and identify them at 2000 m. The laser range finder is of the Nd:YAG type. No emergency or auxiliary sights are mounted.

The tank commander can observe the surroundings through 7 episcopes and the SFIM HL 70 stabilized panoramic sight. The HL 70 is equipped with a day channel at ×2.5 and ×10 magnification and a night channel with ×2.5 magnification. The UAE tropicalized Leclerc uses the improved HL 80 panoramic sight which features an electronic zoom ×2 and a laser range finder of the YAG type. The image intensifier is replaced by an Alis thermal imager. The Leclerc SXXI uses the HL 120 panoramic sight that incorporates an Iris thermal imager. Both sights are also equipped with a semi-auto tracker for target acquisition. The combination of the gunner's primary sight and commander's panoramic sight allows the Leclerc to operate in a hunter-killer mode.

Thermal signature
A feature of the Hyperbar system used by the V8X1500 engine is that it does not emit visible smoke during acceleration, allowing to reduce the infrared signature of the tank. The exhaust temperature of the TM-307B gas turbine never exceeds 370°, whatever the engine speed.

Ballistic
The AMX-APX armament institution was responsible for the studies related to the configuration and the integration of the new ballistic protection concepts.

Original protection requirements were sent by the EPC project manager to AMX-APX on February 8, 1980. The protection of the future French main battle tank must guarantee a certain degree of invulnerability against 125 mm APFSDS and 130 mm shaped-charges warheads over its frontal arc. The whole fighting compartment must be protected against RPG-7 warheads and all-around protection should be provided against threats such as 30 mm autocannons.

Stéphane Ferrard (1947-2015), a military historian and French journalist, stated in his book, "The Leclerc System", that:

"Over its 60-degree frontal arc, the tank should be able to withstand multiple impacts of APFSDS ammunition belonging to the largest caliber currently available on the market."

The turret and the hull are made of welded steel plates with a thickness ranging from 30 mm to 50 mm on which removable composite armor modules are mounted. Twelve modules surround the turret (six per side); they are numbered 1 to 6, starting from the front end. The modules are covered by an anti-slip coating made of fiberglass. The turret bustle that contains the autoloader is protected on both sides against 30 mm armor-piercing rounds and shoulder-fired anti-tank weapon such as the RPG-7. The composite storage boxes around and on the turret play a triple role: carrying the tool set, reducing radar cross-section and acting as spaced armor.

Structural self-sealing fuel tanks are located to the right forward part of the hull, in front and above the ammunition drum. Six heavy ballistic side skirts protect the front third of the hull sides; each is made of a composite panel covered by a steel outer shell.

SXXI
At the end of 1990s, a study was initiated to protect the Leclerc tank against the latest threats. These included ATGMs with tandem shaped-charge warheads capable of penetrating more than 1000 mm of RHA steel, as well as long-rod APFSDS with a length-to-diameter ratio of 30:1 with penetration performance exceeding 700 mm of RHA.

The technical approach consisted of replacing the passive composite modules protecting both sides of the turret bustle with lighter, reactive modules, incorporating semi-reactive layers. This weight-saving measure allowed the use of titanium in the ballistic protection of the turret frontal arc. It also shifted the center of gravity towards the front of the turret, closer to the traverse axis, facilitating the dynamic laying of the turret drives.

Block 10 and 11 (T10 and T11) Leclerc SXXI tanks are recognizable by their add-on ceramic armor plates bolted on the top of the reactive modules, protecting both sides of the autoloader compartment.

Passive counter-measures
Fourteen 80 mm dispensers of the Lacroix GALIX self-defence system are mounted onto the rear part of the turret. The French Army uses four types of ammunition:
 * Galix 3: three smoke grenades creating an opaque screen in the visual range for 50 seconds
 * Galix 4: two fragmentation grenades
 * Galix 6: one infrared decoy with a burn time of 10 seconds
 * Galix 13: three smoke grenades creating an opaque screen in the visual and infrared ranges for 30 seconds

Propulsion
The Leclerc has an eight-cylinder SACM (now Wärtsilä) V8X-1500 1,500 hp Hyperbar diesel engine and a SESM (now Renk AG) automatic transmission, with five forward and two reverse gears. The official maximum speed by road is 71 km/h and 55 km/h cross country (speeds in excess of 80 km/h were reported on road). The maximum range is given as 550 km, and can be extended to 650 km with removable external tanks. The "hyperbar" system integrates a small Turbomeca TM 307B gas turbine in the engine, acting both as a turbocharger and an APU giving auxiliary power to all systems when the main engine is shut down. The Hyperbar name comes from the unusually high boost pressure of 7.5 bar and the resulting mean effective pressure of 32.1 bar. For comparison, the turbocharged diesel engine in a typical passenger car has a mean effective pressure of about 20 bar. In addition, with boost available even when idling, this arrangement also works as an antilag system.

With a combat weight of 56 tons, the Leclerc is one of the lighter main battle tanks in the world, though still considerably heavier than Soviet and later Russian designs; this gives it one of the best power-to-weight ratios among Western tanks (27 hp per ton) and makes it one of the fastest MBTs of its generation (0 to 32 km/h in 5 seconds).

The engine exhaust, exiting at the rear left, is cooled to reduce the thermal signature of the Leclerc. Transmission is hydromechanical, with five forward and two reverse gears. Fuel tanks carry 1,300 litres and act as extra protection for the tank; two 200-litre external tanks can be fitted on the rear of the hull, though they have to be jettisoned before entering combat because they limit turret rotation.

The gearbox is equipped with a hydrokinetic retarder, which can slow the Leclerc down at a deceleration rate of 7 m/s2 (0.7 g) which is automatically used over 30 km/h.

Operational history
The four regiments which operate the Leclerc are:
 * 1e régiment de chasseurs stationed near Verdun, part of the 7th Armoured Brigade
 * 4e régiment de dragons stationed in Carnoux-en-Provence, part of the 7th Armoured Brigade
 * 12e régiment de cuirassiers stationed in Olivet, part of the 2nd Armoured Brigade
 * 501e régiment de chars de combat stationed in Mourmelon-le-Grand, 2nd Armoured Brigade

In service since 1992 (after the Persian Gulf War), the Leclerc has mostly seen deployment in low-intensity conflicts, including 15 Leclerc stationed in Kosovo (KFOR) and 13 others deployed in south Lebanon until 2010 for the UNIFIL peacekeeping operations, during which their performance was judged satisfactory by French officials.

As of August 2015, Leclerc tanks of the UAE were deployed in combat operations in Yemen (near Aden) as part of the Saudi-led coalition. It is estimated that 70 Leclerc MBTs were deployed by the UAE in Yemen, 15 of them equipped with the AZUR package. During one month, three tanks were damaged, two by antitank mines and one by an RPG, which damaged the grid without piercing the hull. One of the episcopes was hit by a ATGM, possibly of Konkurs or Konkurs-M type, killing the driver and injuring the commander's legs. None of these tanks were completely destroyed.

During the Iron Spear exercise, October 2019, Leclerc tanks crewed by the Lynx 6 Tactical Inter-Service Sub-Group (S-GTIA) participated in an inter-alliance exercise and surpassed the American M1A2 Abrams, German, Spanish and Norwegian Leopard 2s, Italian C1 Ariete and Polish PT-91.

As part of Mission Aigle, Leclerc tanks of the 1st Chasseur Regiment, 7th Armoured Brigade were deployed to Romania in November 2022. Currently, there are 13 tanks deployed with the Battle Group Forward Presence.

Built
Séries 1: original production model, 134 produced.

S1OP Série 1 Opérationnelle: refers to the 82 serviceable Leclerc S1 that were upgraded to the RT5 standard.

Séries 2: perfected model with the ability to be deployed in desert environments, 176 produced.
 * new NBC system which integrates a hybrid air conditioner.
 * independent air conditioning unit installed on the back roof behind the gunner's hatch.
 * In order to balance the turret with the addition of the air conditioner, the turret frontal armor is thickened a few centimeters ahead of the commander's station.
 * revised sprocket cooling fins.
 * extra splash guard added to the front hull.
 * Remote operated hydraulic track tensioner.
 * bolt-on appliqué armour on each hull sponsons.
 * Athos thermal camera on the gunner's sight is replaced by the new Iris thermal camera since the block 9 (T9).
 * SIT ICONE battlefield management system added in 2009

S2OP Série 2 Opérationnelle: refers to the 137 serviceable Leclerc S2.

Séries XXI: 96 produced.
 * New composite front armour package containing titanium. Turret bustle composite armor has been replaced by a lighter explosive reactive armour.
 * Turret storage bins have been tailored for the larger armor package.
 * The commander has now the HL 120 panoramic sight which now features a laser rangefinder and the Iris thermal camera.
 * Higher electrical turret output.
 * IFF indicator.
 * SIT ICONE battlefield management system.

Leclerc XLR: modernization project of the French Army Leclerc S2 and SXXI. 18 Leclerc will be retrofitted to the XLR standard in 2023, 200 Leclerc XLR are expected by 2029.
 * Common SCORPION vetronics such as the SICS battlefield management system and CONTACT radio and Blue force tracking.
 * New fire control system adapted to the new 120 mm HE M3M multi-mode programmable high-explosive round.
 * FN Herstal T2B remote weapon station.
 * Obsolescence management of the V8X1500 engine, especially its Turboméca TM-307B turbomachine.
 * Mine protection belly plate.
 * BARRAGE IED jammer.
 * Add-on composite side armour modules from the AZUR urban warfare kit.
 * Slat armour.

Tropicalized Leclerc version sold to the UAE; it is fitted with:
 * EuroPowerPack with the 1,100 kW MT883 diesel engine built by the German MTU Friedrichshafen company - the UAE has interests in this company and preferred the engine to be built by them.
 * Extended hull with increased fuel capacity.
 * Externally mounted diesel auxiliary power unit with a tank infantry telephone fitted on its armored box.
 * Redesigned engine compartment (louver, access panels).
 * Engine-driven mechanical heavy-duty air-conditioning mounted in the left part of the hull.
 * HL-80 commander panoramic sight with Alis thermal camera and laser rangefinder.
 * ATO (Armement Télé-Opéré) remote-controlled weapon station for a 7.62 mm FN MAG machine-gun operated under-armour by the HL-80 panoramic sight.
 * Leclerc Battlefield Management System (LBMS).
 * Completely automated driving and turret functions with pictograms on the buttons for use by crew with only basic training.
 * Thermal tarp.
 * Some bustle storage bins are replaced by baskets.

Leclerc T4: Prototype with an elongated turret built in 1996. It was armed with a 140 mm smoothbore gun designed by the arsenal of Bourges (EFAB). In order to avoid being scrapped, the prototype turret was restored in the 2010s and mounted on a former Leclerc hull which was used in its last years as a towing vehicle. Following its restoration, the tank was nicknamed Terminateur (Terminator) by the director of the technical section of the French Army (Section Technique de l'Armée de Terre or STAT), who did everything to preserve this technological demonstrator. In 2017, the Terminateur was presented with the experimental Scorpion camouflage.

Leclerc EPG Engin Principal du Génie: "main engineering vehicle": armoured engineering, one prototype built in 2001

Leclerc MARS (Moyen Adapté de Remorquage Spécifique): Leclerc S1 converted into an armoured recovery vehicle due to decreased order of Leclerc DNG (20 instead of 30). The main gun, the sights and the autoloader are removed to make it 5 tonnes lighter. Leclerc DNG Dépanneur Nouvelle Génération: recovery tank deployed as of 2004

Leclerc AZUR Action en Zone URbaine: urban warfare kit for actions in urban areas. Some elements of the kit such as the add-on composite armour were bought by the UAE Army for their tropicalized Leclerc operating in Yemen.

Proposed concept

 * Leclerc PTG (Poseur de Travure du Génie): proposed bridgelayer variant developed in 1996, no prototypes were built.
 * Leclerc 'Flakpanzer' SPAAG: Early 1990s proposal of a Leclerc fitted with a turret derived from that of the German Flakpanzer Gepard. It was imagined as armed with twin 35 mm Oerlikon KDA autocannons and two twin pack Mistral SAM launchers (total of four ready missiles). It was not adopted for service due to post-Cold War defence cutbacks.
 * Leclerc Crotale: A proposal from the same time period to fit the Crotale NG SAM system to a Leclerc chassis. Intended primarily to protect armored formations on the move against aerial attack. Again not proceeded with due to cutbacks. No prototype known to have been built.
 * Leclerc Koufra, or Leclerc T40: A proposal from the late 2000s to convert existing Séries 1 vehicles into a 'heavy' reconnaissance scout, primarily for urban warfare. The conversion included a brand new turret incorporating a CTA CT40 Case Telescoped Weapon System (CTWS) as well as grenade launchers, along with provision for two side-mounted anti-tank missiles.

Classified manual leak
In October 2021, in an attempt to win an argument in the official forums of the war simulation game War Thunder, a crewman allegedly leaked excerpts of the tank's classified manual. Forum moderators quickly removed the documents from their website, stating that they could not use the said classified documents due to legal problems that would ensue.

Operators

 * 🇫🇷 France: 222 + 17 armoured recovery vehicles.
 * UAE: 354 tanks (originally 436)
 * 🇯🇴 Jordan: 80 Tanks were donated by UAE.

Potential operators

 * 🇮🇳 India: In January 2022 Nexter officials were contacted by India on participating in the Future Ready Combat Vehicle program with the proposal of the Leclerc XLR MBT.
 * 🇭🇷 Croatia: In April 2022 talks were held between Nexter representatives and Croatian delegation about possible acquisition of Leclerc XLR tanks for Croatian Army.
 * 🇺🇦 Ukraine: In January 2023, French President Macron stated that he was considering sending Leclerc tanks to the Ukrainian Ground Forces.

title: Leclerc tank


text:
Merire

Police Sergeant Major Merire BEM from Gomema village, Waria, Morobe Patrol Post, Lae was a member of the Royal Papuan and New Guinea Constabulary who joined the police force in 1936. On the occasion of the Japanese landings at Madang in 1942, he was able to move all the residents with their supplies into the forest to avoid capture. His subsequent observations as far along the coast as Finschhafen served to guide U.S. bombing raids on Japanese positions.

Merire was captured on several occasions, but always managed to escape with new information. When Australian troops initiated a recapture of the island, his service as a guide was invaluable. For his efforts he was awarded the British Empire Medal, and in 1952 was featured on a stamp of Papua New Guinea.

title: Merire