text:
List of ALCO diesel locomotive classes

The American Locomotive Company (ALCO), based in Schenectady, New York, United States produced a wide range of diesel-electric locomotives from its opening in 1901 until it ceased manufacture in 1969. This is a list of ALCO locomotive classes.

For individually notable locomotives, please see List of locomotives. There are numerous individual ALCO locomotives that are preserved in museums or heritage railways. In particular please see sublists List of preserved locomotives in the United States and List of preserved locomotives in Canada.

Century series
ALCO announced its "Century Series" of diesel locomotives in 1963 as a leap forward in power and reliability, an attempt to compete more aggressively with GM-EMD and GE in the marketplace.

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

title: List of ALCO diesel locomotive classes


text:
Talk:Nation

Edit suggestion.
"A nation is generally more overtly political than an ethnic group;[1][2]"

I propose this reads "A nation is now generally considered more political than ethnic." since this has only been true since 1960-70. For the entirety of the rest of history the opposite was true. Perhaps the line should actually reflect that now I think more on it. I will leave it to someone who is an editor here to decide, but it should definitely not read as it does as it is very misleading. Nations have always been ethnic groups, which is why First Nations is such a critical concept. 124.190.192.20 (talk) 07:00, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

 * Strongly oppose This hasn't been true since 1960-70, it's been true since the emergence of nationalism in the 18th century. The central thesis of nationalism (which created the concept of nations) is that such nations should have their identity reflected in the state, or vice-versa that a state should reflect the predominant "nation" within it. These are explicitly political claims. And neither are you correct that 'nations have always been ethnic groups'. Plenty of scholarship (eg. John Armstrong and Fredrik Baath) has set out a case for distinguishing the two concepts. Yr Enw (talk) 05:31, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

National day
National day 2405:204:550E:3956:0:0:12DA:F8A4 (talk) 11:37, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Simplistic
This article is overly simplistic. Nationalism did exist before the 18th-century. It also is not socially-constructed unlike race. I do think that someone should explain the difference between nation and ethnicity. Cbinetti (talk) 03:30, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

 * Most historians and scholars of nationalism agree nationalism did not exist before the 18th century and that it is socially constructed. But I do agree with your last point, explaining the difference might go some way towards dispelling misconceptions like the first two. Yr Enw (talk) 05:33, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Deleted section on Medieval Scottish nationalism
I deleted the following from the article because it was unsourced and I felt the section on Medieval nations was long enough. I am not opposed to putting it back in, so here it is:

''Another example of Medieval nationalism is the Declaration of Arbroath (1320), a document produced by Scottish nobles and clergy during the Scottish Wars of Independence. The purpose of the document was to demonstrate to the Pope that Scotland was indeed a nation of its own, with its own unique culture, history and language and that it was indeed an older nation than England. The document went on to justify the actions of Robert the Bruce and his forces in resisting the occupation and to chastise the English for having violated Scottish sovereignty without justification. The propaganda campaign supplemented a military campaign on the part of the Bruce, which after the Battle of Bannockburn was successful and eventually resulted in the end of England's occupation and recognition of Scottish independence on the part of the English crown. The document is widely seen as an early example of both Scottish nationalism and popular sovereignty.'' Yr Enw (talk) 14:02, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

"A nation is"... nothing per se
It by now has so many fundamentally different definitions that one cannot start with "A nation is X", unless using "an English noun" for X. The lead must reflect this from the very start, everything else is babbling and/or cheating.

The medieval Latin-speakers had one concept (at least), which still survives.

Enlightenment, followed by the French Revolution, had a very different one.

My Blut & Boden friends stick to their own.

The American tribes followed by the PC crowd have pushed trough yet another use.

The "let's please all" crowd goes with nation = self-governing country (condition: large area), or = the people living within. They've pensioned the term "nation state", only Zarathustra knows why.

So let's try to be accurate. Arminden (talk) 16:41, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Qaum
An article Qaum pertaining to the concept in Muslim world seem to have been deleted before few weeks with little discussion as per Articles for deletion/Qaum.

I am coming across relevant reliable refs relating that topic and not sure I can update this article in reference to Qaum?  Bookku   (talk) 12:02, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Nation


text:
Victoria (plant)

Victoria or giant waterlily is a genus of water-lilies, in the plant family Nymphaeaceae, with very large green leaves that lie flat on the water's surface. Victoria boliviana has a leaf that is up to 3 m in width, on a stalk up to 8 m in length. The genus name was given in honour of Queen Victoria of the United Kingdom. It pushes other water plants aside as it spreads out until only those of its kind remains. When this happens it has nearly completely cut out the sunlight from getting to any plants below the water limited only by circle packing.

Generative characteristics
All three species typically have four sepals each measuring 12 cm long by 8 cm wide. There are typically 50 to 70 petals and 150 to 200 stamens.

Publication
The first published description of the genus was by John Lindley in 1837, based on specimens returned from British Guiana by Robert Schomburgk. Lindley named the genus after the new Queen, Victoria, and the species Victoria regia. An earlier account of the species, Euryale amazonica Poeppig, in 1832 described an affinity with Euryale ferox. A collection and description was also made by the French botanist Aimé Bonpland in 1825.

The leaf is able to support a weight of up to 32 kg, suitably distributed, although the leaf surface is delicate: so much so that "a straw held 6 inches above and dropped perpendicularly upon it would readily pass through it".

title: Victoria (plant)


text:
Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic

The Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic was the collective head of state of the Russian SFSR and the permanent body of the Supreme Soviet of the Russian SFSR that was accountable to the Supreme Soviet of the Russian SFSR in its activity and, within the nominal limits prescribed by the Constitution of the Russian SFSR, performed functions of the highest state power in the Russian SFSR between 1938 and 1990. It was elected by the Supreme Soviet of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic to perform the Supreme Soviet's activities when it was not in session, which, in practice, was most of the year.

Predecessor offices
The office was created as a replacement for the Central Executive Committee of the All-Russian Congress of Soviets.

Political significance
Since the Russian SFSR enjoyed only limited autonomy within the Soviet Union until late into the perestroika period and since real executive power was in the hands of the Soviet Communist Party until 1990, the Supreme Soviet and its Presidium were mostly ceremonial. However, they became important in early 1990 when a newly elected Russian Congress of People's Deputies was split between Communist loyalists and their opponents. After days of parliamentary maneuvering, Boris Yeltsin was elected Chairman in May 1990. Soon thereafter, he resigned from the Communist Party and started building an independent power base within the Russian SFSR, which proved to be an important step on the way to the Soviet collapse in late 1991.

Officeholders

 * Aleksei Badayev (1938–1944)
 * Nikolai Shvernik (1944–1946)
 * Ivan Vlasov (1946–1950)
 * Mikhail Tarasov (1950–1959)
 * Nikolai Ignatov (1959)
 * Nikolai Organov (1959–1962)
 * Nikolai Ignatov (1962–1966)
 * Mikhail Yasnov (1966–1985)
 * Vladimir Orlov (1985–1988)
 * Vitaly Vorotnikov (1988–1990)

Note: In 1989 the position of Chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet was abolished. Instead the Chairman of the Supreme Soviet became head of the republic in addition to serving as a parliamentary speaker. Boris Yeltsin was chairman 1990–1991. In early 1991, the post of President of Russia was created and executive powers were transferred from the Supreme Soviet to the President. The responsibilities of the Supreme Soviet Chairman were limited to those of a parliamentary speaker. Boris Yeltsin won the first presidential election in June 1991 and, upon inauguration, resigned from the office of the Supreme Soviet Chairman. He was succeeded by:
 * Boris Yeltsin (May 29, 1990 – July 10, 1991)
 * Ruslan Khasbulatov (October 29, 1991 – October 4, 1993), acting Chairman from July 10, 1991

Successor offices
After the dissolution of the Soviet Union on December 25, 1991, the Russian Supreme Soviet became the acting parliament of the Russian Federation with Khasbulatov as Chairman. It was dissolved during the Russian constitutional crisis of 1993. Supreme Soviet was succeeded by:
 * Federal Assembly of Russia (1993 – present)


text:
User talk:Brtom

Hello new user and welcome to Wikipedia. A few tips for you:

 * Peruse Welcome, newcomers and associated pages
 * Sign talk page entries with ~, which is automatically converted to a name and date
 * Ask questions on Village pump
 * Have fun.

-- Alexandros 22:26, 2 Dec 2003 (UTC)

title: User talk:Brtom


text:
User talk:Bel~enwiki

Hello new user and welcome to Wikipedia. A few tips for you:

 * Peruse Welcome, newcomers and associated pages
 * Sign talk page entries with ~, which is automatically converted to a name and date
 * Ask questions on Village pump
 * Have fun.

-- Alexandros 22:26, 2 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Request for Usurpation
Hello, Bel. A request has been made at Changing username/Usurpations to usurp, or "take over", your username because you have not used it to edit, and another user would like to use it to edit. Changing username/Usurpations says that any unused username may be usurped if the user is given seven days notice to object and does not do so.

If you have an email set in your preferences, you should be getting an email from a bureaucrat or changing username clerk explaining how to consent or object to this process.

If you do not object to being renamed to a new username in order for another user to utilize the name you currently have, please log in and post a reply here saying so (you may also tell us what username you would like to be renamed to, or we will provide you with a generic one).

If you do nothing : the request will be filled after seven days, and your account will be moved to a generic username. You may request that it be moved to a new username of your choice at any time.

If you object to being renamed : please log in and make an edit to this page clearly stating that you object to usurpation.

Please note that even if your current username is usurped, you can still edit and your data will not be lost; your preferences, watchlist, and other user settings will be transferred to a new username.

Thank you for your time. Bel123456 (talk) 11:36, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Bel. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Bel~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 22:32, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 10:58, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Bel~enwiki


text:
The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich

The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany is a book by American journalist William L. Shirer in which the author chronicles the rise and fall of Nazi Germany from the birth of Adolf Hitler in 1889 to the end of World War II in Europe in 1945. It was first published in 1960 by Simon & Schuster in the United States. It was a bestseller in both the United States and Europe, and a critical success outside Germany; in Germany, criticism of the book stimulated sales. The book was feted by journalists, as reflected by its receipt of the National Book Award for non-fiction, but the reception from academic historians was mixed.

The book is based upon captured Nazi documents, the available diaries of propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels, of General Franz Halder, and of the Italian Foreign Minister Galeazzo Ciano, evidence and testimony from the Nuremberg trials, British Foreign Office reports, and the author's recollection of his six years in Germany (from 1934 to 1940) as a journalist, reporting on Nazi Germany for newspapers, the United Press International (UPI), and CBS Radio. The work was written and initially published in four parts, but a larger one-volume edition has become more common.

Content and themes
The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich is Shirer's comprehensive historical interpretation of the Nazi era, positing that German history logically proceeded from Martin Luther to Adolf Hitler; and that Hitler's accession to power was an expression of German national character, not of totalitarianism as an ideology that was internationally fashionable in the 1930s. The author summarised his perspective: "[T]he course of German history ... made blind obedience to temporal rulers the highest virtue of Germanic man, and put a premium on servility." This Sonderweg (special path or unique course) interpretation of German history, was then common in American scholarship. Yet, despite extensive references, some academic critics consider its interpretation of Nazism to be flawed. The book also includes (identified) speculation, such as the theory that SS Chief Heinrich Müller afterward joined the NKVD of the USSR.

Development history
The editor for the book was Joseph Barnes, a foreign editor of the New York Herald Tribune, a former editor of PM, another New York newspaper, and a former speechwriter for Wendell Willkie. Barnes was an old friend of Shirer. The manuscript was very late and Simon & Schuster threatened to cancel the contract several times; each time Barnes would win a reprieve for Shirer. The original title of the book was Hitler's Nightmare Empire with The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich as the sub-title. The title and cover had already been sent out in catalogs when Robert Gottlieb decided that both title and cover had to be changed. He also chose to publish the book as a single volume rather than two as originally planned. Nina Bourne decided that they should use the sub-title as the title and art director Frank Metz designed the black jacket bearing the swastika. Initially bookstores across the country protested displaying the swastika and threatened not to stock the book. The controversy soon blew over and the cover shipped with the symbol.

Success and acclaim
In the U.S., where it was published on October 17, 1960, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich sold more than one million hardcover copies, two-thirds via the Book of the Month Club, and more than one million paperback copies. In 1961, Simon & Schuster sold the paperback rights to Fawcett Publications for $400,000 (equivalent to $ million in ). It won the 1961 National Book Award for Nonfiction and the Carey–Thomas Award for non-fiction. In 1962, the Reader's Digest magazine serialization reached some 12 million additional readers. In a New York Times Book Review, Hugh Trevor-Roper praised it as "a splendid work of scholarship, objective in method, sound in judgment, inescapable in its conclusions." The book sold well in Britain, France, Italy, and in West Germany, because of its international recognition, bolstered by German editorial attacks.

Both its recognition by journalists as a great history book and its popular success surprised Shirer, as the publisher had commissioned a first printing of merely 12,500 copies. More than fifteen years after the end of the Second World War, neither Shirer nor the publisher had anticipated much popular interest in Adolf Hitler or in Nazi Germany.

Criticism
Nearly all journalists praised the book. Many scholars acknowledged Shirer's achievement but some condemned it. The harshest criticism came from those who disagreed with the Sonderweg or "Luther to Hitler" thesis. In West Germany, the Sonderweg interpretation was almost universally rejected in favor of the view that Nazism was simply one instance of totalitarianism that arose in various countries. Gavriel Rosenfeld asserted in 1994 that Rise and Fall was unanimously condemned by German historians in the 1960s, and considered dangerous to relations between America and West Germany, as it might inflame anti-German sentiments in the United States.

Klaus Epstein listed what he contended were "four major failings": a crude understanding of German history; a lack of balance, leaving important gaps; no understanding of a modern totalitarian regime; and ignorance of current scholarship of the Nazi period.

Elizabeth Wiskemann concluded in a review that the book was "not sufficiently scholarly nor sufficiently well written to satisfy more academic demands... It is too long and cumbersome... Mr Shirer, has, however compiled a manual... which will certainly prove useful."

Nearly 36 years after the book's publication, LGBT activist Peter Tatchell criticized the book's treatment of the persecution of homosexuals in Nazi Germany. In the philosopher Jon Stewart's anthology The Hegel Myths and Legends (1996), The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich is listed as a work that has propagated "myths" about the philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel.

In 2004, the historian Richard J. Evans, author of The Third Reich Trilogy (2003–2008), said that Rise and Fall is a "readable general history of Nazi Germany" and that "there are good reasons for [its] success." However, he contended that Shirer worked outside the academic mainstream and that Shirer's account was not informed by the historical scholarship of the time.

Adaptation and publication
A television adaptation was broadcast in the United States on the ABC television network in 1968, consisting of a one-hour episode aired each night over three nights.

The book has been reprinted many times since it was published in 1960. The 1990 edition contained an afterword whereby Shirer gave a brief discourse on how his book was received when it was initially published and the future for Germany during German reunification in the atomic age. The 2011 edition contains a new introduction by Ron Rosenbaum. Current in-print editions are:

 * ISBN 84-7069-368-9 (Grupo Océano, 1987 SP, hardcover)
 * ISBN 0-671-72868-7 (Simon & Schuster, US, 1990 paperback)
 * ISBN 0-09-942176-3 (Arrow Books, UK, 1990 paperback)
 * Folio Society edition (2004 hardcover)
 * ISBN 978-1-4516-4259-9 (Simon & Schuster, US, 2011 hardcover)
 * ISBN 978-1-4516-5168-3 (Simon & Schuster, US, 2011 paperback)

There is also an audiobook version, released in 2010 by Blackstone Audio and read by Grover Gardner.

title: The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich


text:
James Badge Dale

James Badge Dale (born James Badgett Dale; May 1, 1978) is an American actor. He is best known for his roles as Chase Edmunds in 24, Robert Leckie in The Pacific, Trooper Barrigan in The Departed, Luke Lewenden in The Grey, Eric Savin in Iron Man 3, and Tyrone S. "Rone" Woods in 13 Hours.

Early life
James Badgett Dale was born in New York City's Manhattan borough on May 1, 1978, the only child of actress and singer Anita Morris (1943–1994) and actor and dancer Grover Dale (born 1935). He was educated at Wonderland Avenue Elementary School in the Laurel Canyon neighborhood of Los Angeles. At the age of 10, he was picked out of his fifth grade class to audition for the role of Simon in the 1990 film Lord of the Flies. After gaining the role and spending five months filming on location in Jamaica, he returned to his schooling at Wonderland.

Career
Dale's most notable roles to date are Simon in the 1990 film Lord of the Flies and Chase Edmunds in the third season of the Fox series 24 (which he later reprised in 24: The Game). He also appeared in CSI: Miami and CSI: NY as serial killer Henry Darius. The storyline originally began in the CSI: Miami episode "Felony" and ended with the CSI: NY episode "Manhattan Manhunt", resulting in a crossover between the two shows.

In 2006, Dale was cast in the pivotal supporting role of Trooper Barrigan in The Departed. He then was cast as the lead in AMC's political thriller Rubicon which revolves around a secret society that pulls the strings on the world political stage like the alleged Illuminati and the Council on Foreign Relations. It centers on brilliant analyst Will Travers (Dale) discovering that his employers are not who they seem to be. He also stars as Robert Leckie, one of the three leads in the HBO miniseries The Pacific from executive producers Tom Hanks and Steven Spielberg.

In 2013, Dale played Eric Savin in the Marvel superhero film Iron Man 3, Captain Speke in the science fiction thriller World War Z, Dan Reid in Disney's The Lone Ranger, and the brother of Lee Harvey Oswald in Parkland. In 2014, he starred in an off-Broadway production of Small Engine Repair.

Personal life
Dale is in a relationship with actress Emily Wickersham. They have a son born in 2021.

title: James Badge Dale


text:
Nahuas

The Nahuas are one of the Indigenous people of Mexico, with Nahua minorities also in El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica. They comprise the largest indigenous group in Mexico. They are a Mesoamerican ethnicity. The Mexica (Aztecs) are of Nahua ethnicity, as are their historical enemies, the Tlaxcallans (Tlaxcaltecs). The Toltecs which predated both groups are often thought to have been Nahua as well. However, in the pre-Columbian period Nahuas were subdivided into many groups that did not necessarily share a common identity.

Their Nahuan languages, or Nahuatl, consist of many variants, several of which are mutually unintelligible. About 1.5 million Nahuas speak Nahuatl and another million speak only Spanish. Fewer than 1,000 native speakers of Nahuatl remain in El Salvador.

It is suggested that the Nahua peoples originated near Aridoamerica, in regions of the present day Mexican states of Durango and Nayarit or the Bajío region. They split off from the other Uto-Aztecan speaking peoples and migrated into central Mexico around 500 CE. The Nahua then settled in and around the Basin of Mexico and spread out to become the dominant people in central Mexico. However, Nahuatl-speaking populations were present in smaller populations throughout Mesoamerica.

Nomenclature
The name Nahua is derived from the Nahuatl word-root nāhua-, which generally means "audible, intelligible, clear" with different derivations including "language" (hence nāhuat(i) "to speak clearly" and nāhuatl  both "something that makes an agreeble sound" and "someone who speaks well or speak one's own language"). It was used in contrast with popoloca, "to speak unintelligibly" or "speak a foreign language". Another, related term is Nāhuatlācatl (singular) or Nāhuatlācah  (plural) literally "Nahuatl-speaking people".

The Nahuas are also sometimes referred to as Aztecs. Using this term for the Nahuas has generally fallen out of favor in scholarship, though it is still used for the Aztec Empire. They have also been called Mēxihcatl (singular), Mēxihcah  (plural) or in Spanish Mexicano(s)  "Mexicans", after the Mexica, the Nahua tribe which founded the Aztec Empire.

Geography
At the turn of the 16th century, Nahua populations occupied territories ranging across Mesoamerica as far south as Panama. However, their core area was Central Mexico, including the Valley of Mexico, the Toluca Valley, the eastern half of the Balsas River basin, and modern-day Tlaxcala and most of Puebla, although other linguistic and ethnic groups lived in these areas as well. They were also present in large numbers in El Salvador, Nicaragua, southeastern Veracruz, and Colima and coastal Michoacan. Classical Nahuatl was a lingua franca in Central Mexico before the Spanish conquest due to Aztec hegemony, and its role was not only preserved but expanded in the initial stage of colonial rule, encouraged by the Spaniards as a literary language and tool to convert diverse Mesoamerican peoples. There are many Nahuatl place names in regions where Nahuas were not the most populous group (including the names of Guatemala and several Mexican states), due to Aztec expansion, Spanish invasions in which Tlaxcaltecs served as the main force, and the usage of Nahuatl as a lingua franca.

The last of the southern Nahua populations today are the Pipil of El Salvador and the Nicarao of Nicaragua. Nahua populations in Mexico are centered in the middle of the country, with most speakers in the states of Puebla, Veracruz, Hidalgo, Guerrero and San Luis Potosí. However, smaller populations are spread throughout the country due to recent population movements within Mexico. Within the last 50 years, Nahua populations have appeared in the United States, particularly in New York City, Los Angeles, and Houston.

Pre-conquest period

Archaeological, historical and linguistic evidence suggest that the Nahuas originally came from the deserts of northern Mexico (Aridoamerica) and migrated into central Mexico in several waves. The presence of the Mexicanero people (who speak a Nahuatl variant) in this area until the present day affirms this theory. Before the Nahuas entered Mesoamerica, they were probably living for a while in northwestern Mexico alongside the Cora and Huichol peoples. The first group of Nahuas to split from the main group were the Pochutec who went on to settle on the Pacific coast of Oaxaca possibly as early as 400 CE. From c. 600 CE the Nahua quickly rose to power in central Mexico and expanded into areas earlier occupied by Oto-Manguean, Totonacan and Huastec peoples. Through their integration in the Mesoamerican cultural area the Nahuas adopted many cultural traits including maize agriculture and urbanism, religious practices including a ritual calendar of 260 days and the practice of human sacrifices and the construction of monumental architecture and the use of logographic writing.

Around 1000 CE the Toltec people, normally assumed to have been of Nahua ethnicity, established dominion over much of central Mexico which they ruled from Tollan Xicocotitlan.

From this period on the Nahua were the dominant ethnic group in the Valley of Mexico and far beyond, and migrations kept coming in from the north. After the fall of the Toltecs a period of large population movements followed and some Nahua groups such as the Pipil and Nicarao arrived as far south as northwestern Costa Rica. And in central Mexico different Nahua groups based in their different "Altepetl" city-states fought for political dominance. The Xochimilca, based in Xochimilco ruled an area south of Lake Texcoco; the Tepanecs ruled the area to the west and the Acolhua ruled an area to the east of the valley. One of the last of the Nahua migrations to arrive in the valley settled on an island in the Lake Texcoco and proceeded to subjugate the surrounding tribes. This group were the Mexica who during the next 300 years became the dominant ethnic group of Mesoamerica ruling from Tenochtitlan their island capital. They formed the Aztec Empire after allying with the Tepanecs and Acolhua people of Texcoco, spreading the political and linguistic influence of the Nahuas well into Central America.

Conquest period (1519–1523)
In 1519 an expedition of Spaniards sailing from Cuba under the leadership of Hernán Cortés arrived on the Mexican gulf coast near the Totonac city of Quiyahuiztlan. The Totonacs were one of the peoples that were politically subjugated by the Aztecs and word was immediately sent to the Aztec Emperor (in Nahuatl, Tlatoani) of Tenochtitlan Motecuhzoma II. Going inland the Spaniards encountered and fought with Totonac forces and Nahua forces from the independent Altepetl of Tlaxcallan. The Tlaxcaltecs were a Nahua group who had avoided being subjugated by the Aztecs. After being defeated in battle by the Spaniards, the Tlaxcalans entered into an alliance with Cortes that would be invaluable in the struggle against the Aztecs. The Spanish and Tlaxcaltec forces marched upon several cities that were under Aztec dominion and "liberated" them, before they arrived in the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan. There they were welcomed as guests by Motecuhzoma II, but after a while they took the ruler prisoner. When the Aztec nobility realized that their ruler had been turned into a Spanish puppet they attacked the Spaniards and chased them out of the city. The Spaniards sought refuge in Tlaxcala where they regrouped and awaited reinforcements. During the next year they cooperated with large Tlaxcaltec armies and undertook a siege campaign resulting in the final fall of Tenochtitlan. After the fall of Tenochtitlan Spanish forces now also allied with the Aztecs to incorporate all the previous Aztec provinces into the realm of New Spain. New Spain was founded as a state under Spanish rule but where Nahua people were recognized as allies of the rulers and as such were granted privileges and a degree of independence that other indigenous peoples of the area did not enjoy. Recently historians such as Stephanie Wood and Matthew Restall have argued that the Nahua did not experience the conquest as something substantially different from the sort of ethnic conflicts that they were used to, and that in fact they may have at first interpreted it as a defeat of one Nahua group by another.

Colonial period (1521–1821)
With the arrival of the Spanish in Mesoamerica a new political situation ensued. The period has been extensively studied by historians, with Charles Gibson publishing a classic monograph entitled The Aztecs Under Spanish Rule. Historian James Lockhart built on that work, publishing The Nahuas After the Conquest in 1992. He divides the colonial history of the Nahua into three stages largely based on linguistic evidence in local-level Nahuatl sources, which he posits are an index of the degree of interaction between Spaniards and Nahuas and changes in Nahua culture. An overview of the Nahuas of colonial Central Mexico can be found in the Cambridge History of the Native Peoples of the Americas.

Stage one (1519–c. 1550) Conquest and early colonial period
The early period saw the first stages of the establishment of churches by mendicant friars in large and important Indian towns, the assertion of crown control over New Spain by the high court (Audiencia) and then the establishment of the viceroyalty, and the heyday of conqueror power over the indigenous via the encomienda. In the initial stage of the colonial period, contact between Spaniards and the indigenous populations was limited. It consisted mostly in the mendicants who sought to convert the population to Catholicism, and the reorganization of the indigenous tributary system to benefit individual Spaniards. The indigenous system of smaller settlements' paying tribute and rendering labor service to dominant political entities was transformed into the Encomienda system. Indigenous of particular towns paid tribute to a Spanish encomendero who was awarded the labor and tribute of that town. In this early period, the hereditary indigenous ruler or tlatoani and noblemen continued to hold power locally and were key to mobilizing tribute and labor for encomenderos. They also continued to hold titles from the pre-conquest period. Most willing accepted baptism so that records for this period show Nahua elites with Christian given names (indicating baptism) and many holding the Spanish noble title don. A set of censuses in alphabetic Nahuatl for the Cuernavaca region c. 1535 gives us a baseline for the impact of Spanish on Nahuatl, showing few Spanish loanwords taken into Nahuatl.

As the Spaniards sought to extend their political dominance into the most remote corners of Mesoamerica, the Nahua accompanied them as auxiliaries. In the early colonial period, new Nahua settlements were made in northern Mexico and far south into Central America. Nahua forces often formed the bulk of the Spanish military expeditions that conquered other Mesoamerican peoples, such as the Maya, Zapotecs, and Mixtecs.

With the arrival of Christian missionaries, the first priority of the colonial authorities was eradicating indigenous religious practices, something they achieved by a combination of violence and threats of violence, and patient education. Nahua were baptized with Spanish names. The Nahua who did not abandon their religious practices were severely punished or executed. The Nahua, however, often incorporated pre-Christian practices and beliefs into the Christian religion without the authorities' noticing it. Often they kept practicing their own religion in the privacy of their homes, especially in rural areas where Spanish presence was almost completely lacking and the conversion process was slow.

The Nahua quickly took the Latin alphabetic writing as their own. Within 20 years of the arrival of the Spanish, the Nahua were composing texts in their own language. In 1536 the first university of the Americas, the Colegio de Santa Cruz de Tlatelolco was inaugurated. It was established by the Franciscans whose aim was to educate young Nahua noblemen to be Catholic priests who were trilingual: literate in Spanish, Latin and Nahuatl.

Stage two (c. 1550 – c. 1650)
There are a large number of texts by and about Nahuas in this middle period and during this period Nahuatl absorbed a large number of loanwords from Spanish, particularly nouns for particular objects, indicating the closer contact between the European sphere and the indigenous. However, Nahuatl verbs and syntax show no evidence of the impact of Spanish contact. In the mid-sixteenth century, cultural change at the local level can be tracked through the production of Nahuatl alphabetic texts. The production of a wide range of written documents in Nahuatl dates from this period, including legal documents for transactions (bills of sale), minutes of indigenous town council (cabildo) records, petitions to the crown, and others.

Institutionally, indigenous town government shifted from the rule of the tlatoani and noblemen to the establishment of Spanish-style town councils (cabildos), with officers holding standard Spanish titles. A classic study of sixteenth-century Tlaxcala, the main ally of the Spaniards in the conquest of the Mexica, shows that much of the prehispanic structure continued into the colonial period. An important set of cabildo records in Nahuatl for Tlaxcala is extant and shows how local government functioned in for nearly a century.

Regarding religion, by the mid- to late 16th century, even the most zealous mendicants of the first generation doubted the capacity of Nahua men to become Christian priests so that the Colegio de Santa Cruz de Tlatelolco ceased to function to that end and in 1555 Indians were barred from ordination to the priesthood. However, in local communities, stone-built church complexes continued to be built and elaborated, with murals in mixed indigenous-Spanish forms. Confraternities (cofradías) were established to support the celebrations of a particular Christian saint and functioned as burial societies for members. During this period, an expression of personal piety, the Church promoted the making of last wills and testaments, with many testators donating money to their local Church to say Masses for their souls.

For individual Nahua men and women dictating a last will and testament to a local Nahua notary (escribano) became standard. These wills provide considerable information about individuals' residence, kin relations, and property ownership provides a window into social standing, differences between the sexes, and business practices at the local level. showing not only that literacy of some elite men in alphabetic writing in Nahuatl was a normal part of everyday life at the local level and that the notion of making a final will was expected, even for those who had little property. A number of studies in the tradition of what is now called the New Philology extensively use Nahuatl wills as a source.

Stage three (c. 1650 – 1821) Late colonial period to independence
From the mid-seventeenth century to the achievement of independence in 1821, Nahuatl shows considerable impact from the European sphere and a full range of bilingualism. Texts produced at the local level that in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries were sometimes a mixture of pictorial and alphabetic forms of expression were now primarily alphabetic. In the late eighteenth century, there is evidence of text being written in "Nahuatlized Spanish", written by Nahuas who were now communicating in their own form of Spanish. Year-by-year accounts of major occurrences, a text known as an annal, no longer reference the prehispanic period. Local level documentation for individual Nahuas continued to be produced, in particular last wills and testaments, but they are much more simplified than those produced in the late sixteenth century.

Nahuas began to produce an entirely new type of text, known as "primordial titles" or simply "titles" (títulos), that assert indigenous communities' rights to particular territory, often by recording local lore in an atemporal fashion. There is no known prehispanic precedent for this textual form and none appears before 1650. Several factors might be at work for the appearance of titles. One might be a resurgence of indigenous population after decades recovering from devastating epidemics when communities might have been less concerned with Spanish encroachment. Another might be the crown's push to regularize defective land titles via a process known as composición. The crown had mandated minimum land holdings for indigenous communities at 600 varas, in property that was known as the fundo legal, and to separate indigenous communities from Spanish lands by more than 1,100 varas. Towns were to have access to water, uplands for gathering firewood, and agricultural land, as well as common lands for pasturage. Despite these mandated legal protections for Indian towns, courts continued to find in favor of Spaniards and the rules about minimum holdings for Indian towns were ignored in practice.

Labor arrangements between Nahuas and Spaniards were largely informal, rather than organized through the mainly defunct encomienda and the poorly functioning repartimiento. Spanish landed estates needed a secure labor force, often a mixture of a small group of permanent laborers and part-time or seasonal laborers drawn from nearby indigenous communities. Individual Indians made arrangements with estate owners rather than labor being mobilized via the community. The indigenous communities continued to function as political entities, but there was greater fragmentation of units as dependent villages (sujetos) of the main settlement (cabecera) sought full, independent status themselves. Indigenous officials were no longer necessarily noblemen.

National period (1821-present)
With the achievement of Mexican independence in 1821, the casta system, which divided the population into racial categories with differential rights, was eliminated and the term "Indian" (indio) was no longer used by government, although it continued to be used in daily speech. The creation of a republic in 1824 meant that Mexicans of all types were citizens rather than vassals of the crown. One important consequence for Nahua people and other Indigenous people was that documentation in the native languages generally ceased to be produced. Indigenous towns did not cease to exist nor did indigenous populations speaking their own language, but the Indigenous people were far more marginalized in the post-independence period than during the colonial era. In the colonial era the crown had a paternalistic stance toward the Indigenous people, in essence according them special rights, a fuero, and giving support to structures in Indigenous towns and giving Indigenous people a level of protection against those who were not Indigenous. This can be seen in the establishment of the General Indian Court where Indigenous towns and individual Indigenous people could sue those making incursions on their land and other abuses. These protections disappeared in the national period. One scholar has characterized the early national period of Nahua people and other Indigenous people "as the beginning of a systematic policy of cultural genocide and the increasing loss of native languages." Lack of official recognition and both economic and cultural pressures meant that most Indigenous peoples in Central Mexico became more Europeanized and many became Spanish speakers.

In 19th-century Mexico, the so-called "Indian Question" exercised politicians and intellectuals, who viewed Indigenous people as backward, unassimilated to the Mexican nation, whose custom of communal rather than individual ownership of land was impediment to economic progress. Non-Indigenous landowners of estates had already encroached on Indigenous ownership in the colonial era, but now liberal ideology sought to end communal protections on ownership with its emphasis on private property. Since land was the basis for Indigenous peoples'ability to maintain a separate identity,and a sense of sovereignty, land tenure became a central issue for liberal reformers. The liberal Reforma enshrined in the Constitution of 1857 mandated the breakup of corporate-owned property, therefore targeting Indigenous communities and the Roman Catholic Church, which also had significant holdings. This measure affected all Indigenous communities, including Nahua communities, holding land. Liberal Benito Juárez, a Zapotec who became president of Mexico, was fully in support of laws to end corporate landholding. The outbreak of the Mexican Revolution in Morelos, which still had a significant Nahua population, was sparked by peasant resistance to the expansion of sugar estates. This was preceded in the nineteenth century by smaller Indigenous revolts against encroachment, particularly during the civil war of the Reforma, foreign intervention, and a weak state following the exit of the French in 1867.

A number of Indigenous men had made a place for themselves in post-independence Mexico, the most prominent being Benito Juárez. But an important nineteenth-century figure of Nahua was Ignacio Manuel Altamirano (1834–93), born in Tixtla, Guerrero who became a well respected liberal intellectual, man of letters, politician, and diplomat. Altamirano was a fierce anticlerical politician, and was known for a period as "the Marat of the Radicals" and an admirer of the French Revolution. Altamirano, along with other liberals, saw universal primary public education as a key way to change Mexico, promoting for upward mobility. Altamirano's chief disciple in this view was Justo Sierra. Another prominent Nahua figure of this period was Prospero Cahuantzi, who served as governor of Tlaxcala from 1885-1911. Indigenous surnames were uncommon in post-colonial Mexico but prevalent in Tlaxcala due to certain protections granted by the Spanish government in return for Tlaxcallan support during the overthrow of the Aztecs. Cahuantzi was active in promoting the preservation of indigenous culture and artifacts at a time when Mexican government policy was generally that of suppression.

The Mexican revolutionary Emiliano Zapata (1879-1919) was likely of mixed Nahua-Spanish heritage, with ancestry going back to the Nahua city of Mapaztlán, in the state of Morelos. Zapata was evidently fluent in Nahuatl and would give speeches in the language to Nahua peasants in hopes of inspiring them to join his cause.

Mexico

The Mexican government does not categorize its citizens by ethnicity, but only by language. Statistical information recorded about the Nahua deals only with speakers of the Nahuatl language, although unknown numbers of people of Nahua ethnicity have abandoned the language and now speak only Spanish. Other Nahuas, though bilingual in Nahuatl and Spanish, seek to avoid widespread anti-indigenous discrimination by declining to self-identify as Nahua in INEGI's decennial census. Nor does the census count as indigenous children under 5 (estimated to be 11-12% of the indigenous population ). An INI-Conepo report indicates the Mexican indigenous population is nearly 250% greater than that reported by INEGI.

As of 2020, Nahuatl is spoken across Mexico by an estimated 1.6 million people, including 111,797 monolingual speakers. This is an increase from 1.4 million people speakers total but a decrease from 190,000 monolingual speakers in 2000. The state of Guerrero had the highest ratio of monolingual Nahuatl speakers, calculated at 24.8%, based on 2000 census figures. The proportion of monolinguals for most other states is less than 5%.

The largest concentrations of Nahuatl speakers are found in the states of Puebla, Veracruz, Hidalgo, San Luis Potosí, and Guerrero. Significant populations are also found in México State, Morelos, and the Mexican Federal District, with smaller communities in Michoacán and Durango. Nahuatl was formerly spoken in the states of Jalisco and Colima, where it became extinct during the 20th century. As a result of internal migrations within the country, all Mexican states today have some isolated pockets and groups of Nahuatl speakers. The modern influx of Mexican workers and families into the United States has resulted in the establishment of a few small Nahuatl-speaking communities, particularly in Texas, New York and California.

64.3% of Nahuatl speakers are literate in Spanish compared with the national average of 97.5% for Spanish literacy. Male Nahuatl speakers have 9.8 years of education on average and women 10.1, compared with the 13.6 and 14.1 years that are the national averages for men and women, respectively.

Central America
In El Salvador, it is estimated that there are 12,000 Nahuas/Pipiles. However, some indigenous organizations claim that the real population is significantly higher. Their Nawat language is endangered, but undergoing a revival.

In Honduras, different sources give estimates of 6,339 and 19,800 persons of Nahua ethnicity. They are concentrated in Olancho, in the municipalities of Catacamas, Gualaco, Guata, Jano and Esquipulas del Norte. Nawat is extinct here.

In Nicaragua, the 2005 census counted 11,113 persons of Nicarao ethnicity. The International Labour Organization estimated a population of 20,000 in 2006. However DNA analysis has also proven that the Nahua admixture in the modern Nicaraguan gene pool is much higher than expected, especially among Nicaraguan Mestizos. Fully indigenous Nahuas are mainly located in Rivas, Jinotega, and Sébaco, however they can also be found all over the western half of Nicaragua through their mestizo offspring. Nawat is extinct here.

Economy
Many Nahua are agriculturists. They practice various forms of cultivation including the use of horses or mules to plow or slash-and-burn. Common crops include corn, wheat, beans, barley, chilli peppers, onions, tomatoes, and squash. Some Nahuas also raise sheep and cattle.

Language
Nahuatl, Pipil

Dances
Netotiliztli

title: Nahuas


text:
User:TurboCamel

I'm a graduate student, working in DNA repair. Naturally, biology is my best subject and it's the only one I feel competent enough to write articles for. However, I'm also interested in history and a few other subjects, so I read other articles (and occasionally comment on them as well).

title: User:TurboCamel


text:
Cockatrice

A cockatrice is a mythical beast, essentially a two-legged dragon, wyvern, or serpent-like creature with a rooster's head. Described by Laurence Breiner as "an ornament in the drama and poetry of the Elizabethans", it was featured prominently in English thought and myth for centuries. They are created by a toad or snake's egg hatched by a chicken.

Origins
The first English mention of the cockatrice was in the 14th century John Wycliffe translation of the Bible. The word was used for the translation of various Hebrew words for asp and adder in the Book of Isaiah 11, 14 and 59.

The Oxford English Dictionary gives a derivation from Old French cocatris, from medieval Latin calcatrix, a translation of the Greek ichneumon, meaning tracker. The twelfth century legend was based on a reference in Pliny's Natural History that the ichneumon lay in wait for the crocodile to open its jaws for the trochilus bird to enter and pick its teeth clean. An extended description of the cocatriz by the 15th-century Spanish traveller in Egypt, Pedro Tafur, makes it clear that this refers to the Nile crocodile.

According to Alexander Neckam's De naturis rerum (ca 1180), the basilisk (basiliscus) was the product of an egg laid by a rooster and incubated by a toad; a snake might be substituted in re-tellings. Cockatrice became seen as synonymous with basilisk when the basiliscus in Bartholomeus Anglicus's De proprietatibus rerum (ca 1260) was translated by John Trevisa as cockatrice (1397). This legend has a possible Egyptian folk root; the eggs of the ibis were regularly destroyed for fear that the venom of the snakes they consumed would cause a hybrid snake-bird to hatch.

It is thought that a cock egg would hatch out as a cockatrice, and this could be prevented by tossing the egg over the family house, landing on the other side of the house, without allowing the egg to hit the house.

Abilities
The cockatrice has the reputed ability to kill people by either looking at them—"the death-darting eye of Cockatrice" —touching them, or sometimes breathing on them.

It was repeated in the late-medieval bestiaries that the weasel is the only animal that is immune to the glance of a cockatrice. It was also thought that a cockatrice would die instantly upon hearing a rooster crow, and according to legend, having a cockatrice look at itself in a mirror is one of the few sure-fire ways to kill it.

Cultural references
The first use of the word in English was in John Wyclif's 1382 translation of the Bible to translate different Hebrew words. This usage was followed by the King James Version, the word being used several times. The Revised Version—following the tradition established by Jerome's Vulgate basiliscus—renders the word as "basilisk", and the New International Version translates it as "viper". In Proverbs 23:32 the similar Hebrew tzeph'a is rendered "adder", both in the Authorized Version and the Revised Version.

In Shakespeare's play Richard III (c. 1593), the Duchess of York compares her son Richard to a cockatrice: "O ill-dispersing wind of misery! O my accursed womb, the bed of death! A cockatrice hast thou hatch'd to the world, Whose unavoided eye is murderous."

A cockatrice is also mentioned in Romeo and Juliet (1597), in Act 3, scene 2 line 47, by Juliet. "Hath Romeo slain himself? Say thou but 'Ay,' And that bare vowel 'I' shall poison more Than the death-darting eye of cockatrice."

Nathan Field, in the first scene of his play The Honest Man's Fortune (1647), also uses the idea that a cockatrice could kill with its eyes:"... never threaten with your eyes, they are no cockatrice's..."

In Second Nephi 24:29, a Cockatrice is mentioned.

In E. R. Eddison's high fantasy novel The Worm Ouroboros (1922), Chapter 4 has King Gorice show a cockatrice to Gro: "'Behold and see, that which sprung from the egg of a cock, hatched by the deaf adder. The glance of its eye sufficeth to turn to stone any living thing that standeth before it. Were I but for one instant to loose my spells whereby I hold it in subjection, in that moment would end my life days and thine ...' Therewith came forth that offspring of perdition from its hole, strutting erect on its two legs that were the legs of a cock; and a cock's head it had, with rosy comb and wattles, but the face of it like no fowl's face of middle-earth but rather a gorgon's out of Hell. Black shining feathers grew on its neck, but the body of it was the body of a dragon with scales that glittered in the rays of the candles, and a scaly crest stood on its back; and its wings were like bats' wings, and its tail the tail of an aspick with a sting in the end thereof, and from its beak its forked tongue flickered venomously. And the stature of the thing was a little above a cubit."

The cockatrice has also been used as a staple enemy creature in fantasy RPGs such as Fighting Fantasy and Dungeons and Dragons or computer RPGs like Dragon's Dogma (2012).

A cockatrice is mentioned in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2000) by Hermione Granger in chapter fifteen. A cockatrice involved in one of the tasks of the 1792 Triwizard Tournament escaped and injured the headmasters of the three participating schools, an incident cited as the cause for the cancellation of Triwizard Tournaments until 1994. Some translations instead state the cockatrice to be a basilisk or an "occamy", an in-universe relative of the snallygaster. Additionally, heraldry of a white cockatrice holding a broomstick on a blue and beige background is shown to be the emblem of the French National Quidditch team in the 2003 video game Harry Potter: Quidditch World Cup.

In the video game Boktai: The Sun Is in Your Hand (2003), cockatrices are among the enemies the player faces in Sol City.

In the animated series My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic (2010-2019), a cockatrice is stated to live in the Everfree Forest. In the 2011 episode "Stare Master", the cockatrice turns Twilight Sparkle and one of Fluttershy's chickens, Elizabeak, to stone using its gaze, but reverts them back after being intimidated by Fluttershy's own stare.

On the SCP Foundation collaborative writing project, cockatrices are shown in the story SCP-1013 - Cockatrice (2011). An SCP-1013 instead paralyzes its prey by staring at them, only turning their skin to stone upon biting them, after which it will peck through the calcified skin to eat their prey's fleshy innards. SCP-1013 reproduce from growths budding off of the tail of a well-fed adult. The story SCP-1013 - Cockatrice won fourth place in the site's SCP-1000 Contest, a contest that prefaced the opening of the site's second series.

A cockatrice is shown as the main antagonist in the first episode of Netflix's anime adaptation of Little Witch Academia (2017), "Starting Over". The cockatrice is also a dungeon boss in the underground labyrinth gameplay section of Little Witch Academia: Chamber of Time (2017), a video game for PC and PS4.

The Swedish Black Metal band Funeral Mist has a song named Cockatrice, in their 2018 album Hekatomb.

In heraldry
Arthur Fox-Davies describes the cockatrice as "comparatively rare" in heraldry, and as closely resembling a wyvern outside of possessing a rooster's head rather than a dragon's. The cockatrice, like the rooster, is often depicted with its comb, wattles and beak being of a different colour from the rest of its body. The cockatrice is sometimes referred to as a basilisk, but Fox-Davies distinguishes the two on the basis of the heraldic basilisk possessing a tail ending in a dragon's head, although he does not know of any arms depicting such a creature.

In continental European heraldic systems, cockatrices may be simply referred to as dragons instead.

The cockatrice was the heraldic beast of the Langleys of Agecroft Hall in Lancashire, England as far back as the 14th century.

It is also the symbol of 3 (Fighter) Squadron, a fighter squadron of the Royal Air Force.

title: Cockatrice


text:
One World (book)

One World is a manifesto and a travelogue written by Wendell Willkie, a liberal Republican, about his seven-week, 31,000-mile tour. Originally published in April 1943, it advocates for an end to colonialism, world federalism, and equality for non-whites in the United States.

One World inspired the One World movement and the World Federalist Movement — which included among its supporters Albert Einstein, Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru —and advocated strong and democratic super-national institutions. That wave of thinking foretold the postwar international order, including the United Nations System, but was also very critical of the postwar order and the UN, claiming it is insufficient to avoid another world war.

Willkie was accompanied on his tour by, among others, the publisher and editor Gardner Cowles, Jr., who ultimately assisted Willkie in the writing of One World (which was edited by Irita Van Doren).

Content of the book
It is a document of his world travels and meetings with many of the Allies' heads of state as well as ordinary citizens and soldiers in locales such as El Alamein, Russia, and Iran. The main idea of the book is that the world became one small inter-connected unit and Isolationism is no longer possible: "When you fly around the world in 49 days, you learn that the world has become small not only on the map, but also in the minds of men. All around the world, there are some ideas which millions and millions of men hold in common, almost as much as if they lived in the same town." "There are no distant points in the world any longer." What concerns "myriad millions of human beings" abroad, concerns the Americans. "Our thinking in the future must be world-wide." "If our withdrawal from world affairs after the last war was a contributing factor to the present war and to the economic instability of the past 20 years—and it seems plain that it was—a withdrawal from the problems and responsibilities of the world after this war would be a sheer disaster. Even our relative geographic isolation no longer exists… At the end of the last war, not a single plane had flown across the Atlantic. Today that ocean is a mere ribbon, with airplanes making regular scheduled flights. The Pacific is only a slightly wider ribbon in the ocean of the air, and Europe and Asia are at our very doorstep." To win the peace, "we must now plan for peace on a world basis" and "play an active, constructive part in freeing and keeping" this peace. By "peace on world basis" he meant: "When I say that peace must be planned on a world basis, I mean quite literally that it must embrace the earth. Continents and oceans are plainly only parts of a whole, seen, as I have seen them, from the air … And it is inescapable that there can be no peace for any part of the world unless the foundations of peace are made secure throughout all parts of the world." Willkie emphasized that across the world the "reservoir of goodwill" towards the United States is much larger than towards other contemporary powers: "I found this dread of foreign control everywhere. The fact that we are not associated with it in men's minds has caused people to go much farther in their approval of us than I dared to imagine. I was amazed to discover how keenly the world is aware of the fact that we do not seek—anywhere, in any region—to impose our rule upon others or to exact special privileges ... No other Western nation has such a reservoir. Ours must be used to unify the peoples of the earth in the human quest for freedom and justice." The world, he argued, is ready for this sort of world government.

Willkie anticipated military and economic integration of West Europe after the war: "The re-creation of the small countries of Europe as political units, yes; their re-creation as economic and military units, no, if we really hope to bring stabilization to Western Europe…"

He sought to extend the Atlantic Charter beyond West Europe to all world. "That was one of the reasons why I was so greatly distressed when Mr. Churchill subsequently made his world-disturbing remark, 'We mean to hold our own. I did not become His Majesty's first minister in order to preside over the liquidation of the British Empire.'"

Willkie opposed Colonialism in general, including the American: "The British are by no means the only colonial rulers." The French, Dutch, Portuguese and Belgians are in the list. "And we ourselves have not yet promised complete freedom to all the peoples in the West Indies for whom we have assumed responsibility."

He warned on the Soviet rule over East Europe: "The failure of Mr. Stalin to announce to a worried world Russia's specific aspirations with reference to Eastern Europe weighs the scales once more against the proclaimed purposes of leaders."

Willkie was also critical of the disparity between the Atlantic Charter and the domestic American racial and anti-Semitic policies—a phenomenon he labeled "domestic imperialism."

Especially emphasized is the position of China in the world after World War II; involved in a civil war between Nationalists and Communists, Willkie prophesies that whichever power achieves victory will make China a force to be reckoned with. It is the duty of the United Nations (the Allies ) to make sure that the power is friendly to American and other Allied interests but also that it is powerful enough to help the Chinese, the world's most populated nation.

Popularity
One World "became the greatest nonfiction bestseller to date in US publishing history." It spent four months atop the New York Times bestseller list beginning in May 1943 and selling over 1.5 million copies during those four months. Harold Urey wrote of it, "Wendell Willkie left a monument more enduring than granite in the words 'One World'...” The title One World could influence the title of the famous trilogy One World or None (1946), implying that this is the alternative in the atomic age. The editor of Publishers Weekly hailed One World as a 'record-breaking non-fiction best seller,' a phenomenon 'unequaled since the days of the old blue-backed 'speller'—Noah Webster's Revolutionary-era guide to the new American English. The success of the book caught Willkie by surprise and the proceeds from the book went to war relief agencies in Britain, Russia, and China. Matthew Rozsa of Salon wrote in 2022 that the book has "an unintentionally humorous subtext" because of Willkie's rumored affair with then-Chinese First Lady Soong Meiling, who was described in the book as having "a generous and understanding heart, a gracious and beautiful manner and appearance, and a burning conviction." Rozsa added that Willkie's book is still relevant because of global issues like "the climate crisis, massive inequality, the rising threat of fascism and the threat of nuclear war."

title: One World (book)


text:
Enneads

The Enneads (Ἐννεάδες), fully The Six Enneads, is the collection of writings of the philosopher Plotinus, edited and compiled by his student Porphyry (c. AD270). Plotinus was a student of Ammonius Saccas, and together they were founders of Neoplatonism. His work, through Augustine of Hippo, the Cappadocian Fathers, Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite and several subsequent Christian and Muslim thinkers, has greatly influenced Western and Near-Eastern thought.

Contents
Porphyry edited the writings of Plotinus in fifty-four treatises, which vary greatly in length and number of chapters, mostly because he split original texts and joined others together to match this very number. Then, he proceeded to set the fifty-four treatises in groups of nine (Greek. ennea) or Enneads. He also collected The Enneads into three volumes. The first volume contained the first three Enneads (I, II, III), the second volume has the Fourth (IV) and the Fifth (V) Enneads, and the last volume was devoted to the remaining Ennead. After correcting and naming each treatise, Porphyry wrote a biography of his master, Life of Plotinus, intended to be an introduction to the Enneads.

Porphyry's edition does not follow the chronological order in which Enneads were written (see Chronological listing below), but responds to a plan of study which leads the learner from subjects related to his own affairs to subjects concerning the uttermost principles of the universe.

Although not exclusively, Porphyry writes in chapters 24–26 of the Life of Plotinus that the First Ennead deals with human or ethical topics, the Second and Third Enneads are mostly devoted to cosmological subjects or physical reality. The Fourth concerns the Soul, the Fifth knowledge and intelligible reality, and finally the Sixth covers being and what is above it, the One or first principle of all.

Citing the Enneads
Since the publishing of a modern critical edition of the Greek text by Paul Henry and Hans-Rudolf Schwyzer (Plotini Opera. 3 volumes. Paris-Bruxelles, 1951–1973; H-S1 or editio major text) and the revised one (Plotini Opera. 3 volumes. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1964–1984; referred to as the H-S2 or editio minor text) there is an academic convention of citing the Enneads by first mentioning the number of Ennead (usually in Romans from I to VI), the number of treatise within each Ennead (in arabics from 1 to 9), the number of chapter (in arabics also), and the line(s) in one of the mentioned editions. These numbers are divided by periods, commas, or blank spaces.

E.g. For Fourth Ennead (IV), treatise number seven (7), chapter two (2), lines one to five (1-5), we write:

 * IV.7.2.1-5

E.g. The following three mean Third Ennead (III), treatise number five (5), chapter nine (9), line eight (8):

 * III, 5, 9, 8
 * 3,5,9,8
 * III 5 9 8

It is important to remark that some translations or editions do not include the line numbers according to P. Henry and H.-R. Schwyzer's edition. In addition to this, the chronological order of the treatises is numbered between brackets or parentheses, and given below.

E.g. For the previously given:

 * IV.7 (2).2.1-5  since treatise IV.7 was the second written by Plotinus.
 * III, 5 [50], 9, 8 since III.5 was the fiftieth written by Plotinus.

Table of contents
The names of treatises may differ according to translation. The numbers in square brackets before the individual works refer to the chronological order they were written according to Porphyry's Life of Plotinus.

First Ennead

 * I.1 [53] - "What is the Living Being and What is Man?"
 * I.2 [19] - "On Virtue"
 * I.3 [20] - "On Dialectic [The Upward Way]."
 * I.4 [46] - "On True Happiness (Well Being)"
 * I.5 [36] - "On Whether Happiness (Well Being) Increases with Time."
 * I.6 [1] - "On Beauty"
 * I.7 [54] - "On the Primal Good and Secondary Forms of Good [Otherwise, 'On Happiness']"
 * I.8 [51] - "On the Nature and Source of Evil"
 * I.9 [16] - "On Dismissal"

Second Ennead

 * II.1 [40] - "On Heaven"
 * II.2 [14] - "On the Movement of Heaven"
 * II.3 [52] - "Whether the Stars are Causes"
 * II.4 [12] - "On Matter"
 * II.5 [25] - "On Potentiality and Actuality"
 * II.6 [17] - "On Quality or on Substance"
 * II.7 [37] - "On Complete Transfusion"
 * II.8 [35] - "On Sight or on How Distant Objects Appear Small"
 * II.9 [33] - "Against Those That Affirm The Creator of the Cosmos and the Cosmos Itself to be Evil" [generally quoted as "Against the Gnostics"]

Third Ennead

 * III.1 [3] - "On Fate"
 * III.2 [47] - "On Providence (1)."
 * III.3 [48] - "On Providence (2)."
 * III.4 [15] - "On our Allotted Guardian Spirit"
 * III.5 [50] - "On Love"
 * III.6 [26] - "On the Impassivity of the Unembodied"
 * III.7 [45] - "On Eternity and Time"
 * III.8 [30] - "On Nature, Contemplation and the One"
 * III.9 [13] - "Detached Considerations"

Fourth Ennead

 * IV.1 [21] - "On the Essence of the Soul (1)"
 * IV.2 [4] - "On the Essence of the Soul (2)"
 * IV.3 [27] - "On Problems of the Soul (1)"
 * IV.4 [28] - "On Problems of the Soul (2)"
 * IV.5 [29] - "On Problems of the Soul (3)” [Also known as "On Sight"].
 * IV.6 [41] - "On Sense-Perception and Memory"
 * IV.7 [2] - "On the Immortality of the Soul"
 * IV.8 [6] - "On the Soul's Descent into Body"
 * IV.9 [8] - "Are All Souls One"

Fifth Ennead

 * V.1 [10] - "On the Three Primary Hypostases"
 * V.2 [11] - "On the Origin and Order of the Beings following after the First"
 * V.3 [49] - "On the Knowing Hypostases and That Which is Beyond"
 * V.4 [7] - "How That Which is After the First Comes from the First, and on the One."
 * V.5 [32] - "That the Intellectual Beings are not Outside the Intellect, and on the Good"
 * V.6 [24] - "On the Fact that That Which is Beyond Being Does not Think, and on What is the Primary and the Secondary Thinking Principle"
 * V.7 [18] - "On Whether There are Ideas of Particular Beings"
 * V.8 [31] - "On the Intellectual Beauty"
 * V.9 [5] - "On Intellect, the Forms, and Being"

Sixth Ennead

 * VI.1 [42] - "On the Kinds of Being (1)"
 * VI.2 [43] - "On the Kinds of Being (2)"
 * VI.3 [44] - "On the Kinds of Being (3)"
 * VI.4 [22] - "On the Presence of Being, One and the Same, Everywhere as a Whole (1)"
 * VI.5 [23] - "On the Presence of Being, One and the Same, Everywhere as a Whole (2)"
 * VI.6 [34] - "On Numbers"
 * VI.7 [38] - "How the Multiplicity of Forms Came Into Being, and on the Good"
 * VI.8 [39] - "On Free Will and the Will of the One"
 * VI.9 [9] - "On the Good, or the One"

Plotinus's original chronological order
The chronological listing is given by Porphyry (Life of Plotinus 4–6). The first 21 treatises (through IV.1) had already been written when Porphyry met Plotinus, so they were not necessarily written in the order shown.
 * I.6, IV.7,  III.1,  IV.2,  V.9,  IV.8,  V.4,  IV.9,  VI.9
 * V.1, V.2,  II.4,  III.9,  II.2,  III.4,  I.9,  II.6,  V.7
 * I.2, I.3,  IV.1,  VI.4,  VI.5,  V.6,  II.5,  III.6,  IV.3
 * IV.4, IV.5,  III.8,  V.8,  V.5,  II.9,  VI.6,  II.8,  I.5
 * II.7, VI.7,  VI.8,  II.1,  IV.6,  VI.1,  VI.2,  VI.3,  III.7
 * I.4, III.2,  III.3,  V.3,  III.5,  I.8,  II.3,  I.1, I.7

In table format, the chronological order of Porphyry corresponding each of the Ennead treatises is:

Note on the Plotiniana Arabica or Arabic Plotinus
After the fall of Western Roman Empire and during the period of the Byzantine Empire, the authorship of some Plotinus' texts became clouded. Many passages of Enneads IV-VI, now known as Plotiniana Arabica, circulated among Islamic scholars (as Al-Kindi, Al-Farabi and Avicenna) under the name The Theology of Aristotle or quoted as "Sayings of an old [wise] man". The writings had a significant effect on Islamic philosophy, due to Islamic interest in Aristotle. A Latin version of the so-called Theology appeared in Europe in 1519. (Cf. O'Meara, An Introduction to the Enneads. Oxford: 1995, 111ff.)

title: Enneads


text:
Talk:Cockatrice

Correct errors
Please feel free to correct errors all you like. This is my first page, and I'm very open to constructive criticism. -Iamthecheese

Less spoiling
The following text text was removed since it was spoiling the game:
 * as well as a formidable weapon once slain (assuming the wielder has some protection against the effects).

It is part of Nethack to die in as many stupid way as possible. Especially stupid ways involving the cockatrice. The proper way to use the dead cockatrice must be learned painfully.

APOLOGIES but could work out how to start a new section. This article has a "Modern Literature" section, and I just wondered if you wanted to add the Xanth books by Piers Antony. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.58.21 (talk) 07:57, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Cock?
A cock is a male rooster. Is it really supposed to lay eggs? (Anon.)
 * No connection, needless to say. --Wetman 10:56, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
 * The impossibility of this is actually part of the point. More detailed depictions specify the age of the rooster (normally seven years), have the egg being incubated by a snake or a toad, and I think I've seen a few "when the stars are right" or similar phrases associated with the egg-laying. Draxynnic 03:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I have a connection; back in the olden days, people thought 'cock eggs', eggs with no yolks, were lain by roosters. (In fact, it is just a fertilization disfunction) Feel free to interpret this in any way you want, as long as it is 'confirmable' and has a basis.

 * 7h3 3L173 (talk) 00:58, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

- "The last public record of a cockatrice occurs in a Church document of births and deaths in Warsaw, dated 1587. Written by monks, the entry states that two young sisters died when exposed to the breath of a cockatrice in their cellar. The document calls for God to bless the girls' family and to keep it from the evil that takes innocents.

The Dragonology book, however, says a cockatrice kills by breathing on its victims. Its breathe contains poisonous droplets. The book also says the cockatrice does not kill by looking at its prey."

The html of the first section suggests that this has been cut-and-pasted from a source with a narrower column-format. Can some public source for this assertion be located, and some identification found of "The Dragonology book"? --Wetman 06:42, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

- I find it ludicrous that the cockatrice is so immediately compared to a wyvern. If anything, a cockatrice with its associations to petrification would be more related to a basilisk. A wyvern by contrast is a semi-draconian creature, not directly related to pure dragons, that have poisonous tails. I am ashamed of the blatant lack of cryptozoological expertise on wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.237.44.113 (talk) 22:51, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

 * I think you mean venomous tails !!! 77.100.65.115 (talk) 18:06, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Duplication
The reference to the cockatrice as the original Blood Elf mount in the World of Warcraft expansion is given twice. I suggest deleting the second reference. 63.228.45.224 19:58, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Spurious "analogous" creatures
user:Wetman has removed section “Analogous creatures” and I have replaced it. It is properly referenced and relevant to the article. (From looking at the history of the article I see that user:Wetman has been removing references to such creatures since 14 December 2005.)81.158.163.199 08:23, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

 * This is a comedy riff by Anonymous User:81.158.163.199, whose edit history  here and under other IPs here and here demonstrate no healthy authentic interest in Wikipedia other than this ludibrium. The "references" are to Uncyclopedia, "article" ["Baby dragon shocks owner", a parody of Wikipedia, and to [[Nethack]]'s supposed [Olde Bestiary"]. A co-vandal, User:Ednan inserted the spurious article Drachentaube, a hoax masquerading as "heraldry" refered to here as a "reference". The intention of this insistent cooperative vandalism is to undermine the credibility of the genuine information in this article. This article needs more adult supervision. --Wetman 16:48, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

 * I have reverted. Don't turn this into an edit war, please. "Nethak" has its own Wikipedia article. As for the Uncyclopedia, "article", I included the reference to the 4-legged duck as disabiguation.  I would accept that reference being removed if it is not felt relevant.  (However, as for the "parody of wikipedia" claim, the article is supported by a link to the BBC.)  There is no evidence to support the claim that the Drachentaube is a "hoax". I think Wetman needs to prove it to be so, first. 81.158.163.199 17:11, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

 * There is no point in direct discussion with an Anonymity, but gaming Wikipedia, in order to undermine its credibility, is a form of vandalism. Vandalism needs to be dealt with. The transparent hoax Drachentaube, with its spurious "references' purports to be "heraldic", but no armorials bear this figure, which was inserted at Wikipedia Commons. --Wetman 17:24, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

 * It is perfectly legitimate to contribute to Wikipedia "anonymously" 81.158.163.199 17:27, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

 * (Experienced readers and editors know that Anonymities provide ninety per cent of the vandalism at Wikipedia. Editors who consistently log in slowly develop a reputation, good or bad.) I have invited User talk:Ednan to come and explain his image of a "Drachentaube" with an authentic heraldic usage that is not "referenced" by a link to a gamester website, currently paraded as "The Legende of the Drachentaube", Dragonlore, No.53, St. Frideswide's Day 2004, 2-4. "Dragonlore" is simply a website: www.dragonlore.co.uk/. The Wikipedia image has been taken from the website and colorized. --Wetman 20:56, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

 * Please see what I have written on the subject at Talk:Drachentaube.  Ednan 21:48, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

To round this off for future editors reading this, I cleaned up the section. The duckatrice poem and nethack creature look to be real, so were left. Drachentaube was removed due to the article being deleted (via an afd). The second duckatrice reference was removed as there weren't reliable sources. The BBC article mentioned by the anon above call him a 'Four-legged duckling' and his owners call him 'Stumpy'. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/hampshire/6371901.stm The duckling is real but he isn't a duckatrice. Polenth 02:02, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

 * It seems to resemble a early pterosaur, without the teeth.

Basilisk and salamanders?
I removed the following sentence from the first paragraph since it has no relevance on this article:
 * (Though a basilisk is often confused with a salamander, which has six limbs.)

If cockatrices, on the other hand, are confused with salamanders (and I can't imagine why), feel free to correct this sentence and re-enter it. –Adrian Lozano 21:10, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Final Fantasy fact-check
The information listed for Final Fantasy, regarding a Cockatrice being used as livestock may be incorrect. I believe it is refering to the Chocobo, which shares very few features with the Cockatrice. Briefly, it resembles a ostrich, with a parakeet head instead of the long neck. It attacks with kicks, as opposed to any sort of petrification or magical breath. It is mostly used as a riding animal, mascot, or comic relief character. It has no reptilian characteristics whatsoever. Other then being a sort of monsterous chicken-creature, it does not seem to have any relation to the Cockatrice.

Unless I am entirely mistaken about what the article refeers to, this section should be removed. --216.254.28.72 21:05, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

The article is correct. For that particular FF game they were a form of farm animal. http://www.ffcompendium.com/h/espmon/cockatrice.shtml —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.31.118.241 (talk) 11:24, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Image
We definitely need an image of this. Clerks. 13:15, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Pronunciation
I was wondering if we can get a ruling on the pronunciation. I always pronounced it with an I like in "machine," but I heard a character in a movie use a long i. That charatcter, as I recall, was a redneck type, so I'm not sure if I can take that pronunciation as correct. Thanks. --Scottandrewhutchins (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 05:37, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

 * No, cockatrice is pronounced like a cockatr-'is' as in 'is', only with a 's' sound instead of 'z'. Or my english teacher finally pronounced something wrong. If so, she owes me a dollar. (Yes, that was a joke. But this is a talk page, not the main article.) And by the way, you really shouldn't use the talk page to find pronounciations.

 * 7h3 3L173 (talk) 01:12, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Re-Catagorization
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't intros (the text that comes before the table of contents) usually smaller and meant to give a brief explanation of the article's subject? The intro seems to take up just about two thirds of the whole article. I think that the intro should be re-catagorized into at least two different sections (to be listed under the table of contents); and the actual intro should be a short paragraph, EX: "The Cockatrice is a mythological beast that..." Krakenen (talk) 05:15, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

What?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but either it's a Basilisk or it's not, And in Harry Potter's case it was a Basalisk that he killed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shreder 02 (talk • contribs) 16:03, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * What? Well, I looked up 'basilisk', and apparently basilisk can mean either something like the cockatrice or something else. I also found that some facts that should maybe be moved here? In any case, I vote that this article shouldn't be changed for that. Either way, you should read those random facts because I think it tells you something there that you missed.

 * 7h3 3L173 (talk) 01:31, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Modern fantasy fiction and games
This section is chaotic and needs much condensing or a rewrite. Also, cockatrices are encountered as far back as the original Final Fantasy. Shinobu (talk) 20:30, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Then go ahead and fix it, no one's stopping you. I'm not going to do it becaue I'm not generally good at this thing.

 * 7h3 3L173 (talk) 05:59, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

 * Now it is too long... |:(

 * 7h3 3L173 (talk) 03:53, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Link to German WP
Both Cockatrice and Basilisk link to Basilisk (Mythologie), which seems a bit odd, as they're different creatures. I don't know if there is a German equivalent to the Cockatrice, though. (The German article mentions no wings anywhere, which are supposed to be what distinguishes a cockatrice from a basilisk.) -- 87.165.232.118 (talk) 07:26, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmm... weird. It seems opinions differ country to country and time to time... And when you say that, I hope you mean the basilisk has no wings, which is what it says on the English page.

 * And why is a German equivalent to the cockatrice important?

 * 7h3 3L173 (talk) 23:35, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

 * RE no wings, yes, that's what I meant. I was trying to say that, since there is no German equivalent, the English article shouldn't link to the German wikipedia at all, rather than to the next best thing. (Maybe a short section in the text instead explaining that most languages don't have an equivalent?) -- 87.165.201.241 (talk) 01:42, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

 * Uhh... no, I think what we've got here is OK. I misunderstood you before (albeit slightly) but now I got what you're saying (I think), and umm... well, I've seen you've already edited it. I think we should leave that alone for now unless we (you, I) can find some better, definite resource. (And by that I mean the links)

 * 7h3 3L173 (talk) 05:56, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

 * Actually, Basilisk and Cockatrice are the same in German interpretation of this myth. Or, mybe more precicely, two incarnations of the same mythological creature, one developing from the other over centuries of tradition. That's, by the way, what is explained in the introducting paragraphs of the German articel. And there is also explained that mostly in the English-speaking world, Basilisk and Cockatrice are concidered to be two different creatures. However, many depictions of a "Basilisk" in ther German article actually look like a Cockatrice. So, in any way, linking this site to German "Basilisk" is completely correct.--2001:9E8:4189:4D00:6836:76C6:4223:905A (talk) 21:04, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

Darn history

 * This page needs a "History" section, where it'd be described in how it would be diffrent from a basilisk, when changes occured, what the changes were, and how old/new descriptions of the cockatrce fell in and out of use. Well, I think so anyway.

And how about a "Use as Heraldic Symbol" subsection? If anyone wants to make it:
 * It has been used in many family herald/sign/bannery stuff
 * It, as a heraldic symbol, is thought to mean danger
 * Even though it is called a cockatrice, it resembles early descriptions of the basilisk by Aristotle
 * Thought I'd share that.

 * 7h3 3L173 (talk) 04:02, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

cockatrice spoiler link is dead
Thanks a lot, Yahoo. 174.21.24.126 (talk) 05:01, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Two labored impossibilities
The following strained reaches have been moved here:
 * 1) It is also possible that the cockatrice was inspired by the misidentification of feathered dinosaur fossils like those of Archeopteryx.
 * No, Archaeoptryx is only known in the Solnhofen limestone and was first identified in the mid-19th century. The legend did not arise anywhere with a connection to Bavarian geology.--Wetman (talk) 22:25, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

 * 1) Chicken embryos are known to develop reptilian tails, but chemical hormone triggers replace it with a "normal" bird's tail by the time it hatches. It's quite possibly a rare occurrence for a chicken, or any bird for that matter, to be born with its embryonic reptilian tail.
 * Does this unsourced embryological curiosity honestly need to be debated as a source for the 12th -century cockatrice?--Wetman (talk) 22:25, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

> http://www.wired.com/medtech/genetics/magazine/17-03/st_qa —Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.34.191.54 (talk) 05:56, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Clean Up
I have cleaned up the article to make it more encyclopedic and logical. I eliminated a lot of the footnotes because they really have no place here, some being just chatty asides and others containing important material which belonged in the body of the text.

The article still needs more work. Most importantly, someone needs to relocate the Breiner article and extract the factual matter. Unfortunately as it stands - or rather droops - the article incorporates commentary about Breiner but not his actual findings.

Overall it also needs a more logical organisation.--Jack Upland (talk) 23:40, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Cockatrice/Wyvern
What's the difference between a cockatrice and a wyvern? Is it just the rooster's head of the cockatrice? VenomousConcept (talk) 14:04, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

RV: Cockatrice Bible Abilities
I removed a recent addition by USER:All Worlds who took a passage from Isaiah out of context and claimed that the Bible taught something about mythical birds that lay flying serpent eggs; merely using a set of different Bible translations as reference (see WP:OR). Examining the verse, though, it clearly describes the traits of kings Uzziah, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. The user, from glimpsing his talk page, has made other disputed edits concerning the supposed belief in and worship of mythical birds. --IronMaidenRocks (talk) 22:56, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
 * You may have noticed that was one of the edits done in an attempt to add "citations needed" at the time on that page, in this particular case, within the abilities of the legendary creature. The citation in reference was: The cockatrice was also able to fly with the set of wings affixed to its back. of which I see now should have been cited as it were and then added the additional information and cited as within that abilities section accordingly, which was not done properly in any form for whatever reason at that time.  It would seem though, we are all flawed individuals.  At any rate, I did notice that you did not return to the page the original requested "citation needed" or the issue of "able to fly" under the abilities section and which quite possibly should be the focus of all this. -- All Worlds (talk) 06:31, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I just removed the fallacious text; I wasn't aware of any previous controversy. KJV and like English texts were written millenia after the the book of Isaiah, and their specific word choice should not be used as a way of explaining the beliefs of ancient semetic peoples. The only real value such a translation has is to illustrate the ignorance of some medieval age scholars. --IronMaidenRocks (talk) 07:25, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Problem solved. --IronMaidenRocks (talk) 07:34, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Culinary usage
I was surprised not to see anything about the cockatrice as the name for a Tudor culinary speciality:

 * Cockatrice was made by cooking the front part of a capon and the back part of a small pig and sewing them together.

http://brendanconnell.wordpress.com/2007/07/13/how-to-bake-a-cockatrice/

get this...
wyvern. good morning. greetings from a german amateur mythology expert. it's like zeus & jupiter. --2A02:8070:A184:A500:9587:75DB:CE85:6677 (talk) 02:11, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Cockatrice. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110708032156/http://www.curatorscloset.blogspot.com/ to http://www.curatorscloset.blogspot.com/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081017085123/http://www.eaudrey.com/myth/cockatrice.htm to http://www.eaudrey.com/myth/cockatrice.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:01, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Cultural references
Would it be worth mentioning the use of Cockatrice as the main villain in the novel "The Book of the Dun Cow" by Walter Wangerin Jr.? It is deeply rooted in English legends of this and other creatures. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.62.68.132 (talk) 08:00, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Good Mythical Morning
What would be considered an adequate source type if one wanted to add Rhett and Link's Good Mythical Morning (whose mascot is a cockatrice and has been in every episode intro for almost a decade) to the cultural references section? I know sources like Twitter, YouTube videos, and message boards aren't acceptable. Mattevt (talk) 04:02, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

The Talking Parcel
Cockatrices are also a main feature of the children's story The Talking Parcel, by Gerald Durrell, published in 1974 2A00:23C5:B882:3E01:8CF3:38ED:6490:912B (talk) 19:40, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Cockatrice


text:
Claudine Guérin de Tencin

Claudine Alexandrine Guérin de Tencin, Baroness of Saint-Martin-de-Ré (27 April 1682 – 4 December 1749) was a French salonist and author. She was the mother of Jean le Rond d'Alembert, who later became a prominent mathematician, philosophe and contributor to the Encyclopédie, though she left him on the steps of the church a few days after his birth in November 1717.

Early life
Claudine was born in Grenoble, France where her father, Antoine Guérin, sieur de Tencin, was president of the parlement. Claudine was brought up at a convent near Grenoble and, at the wish of her parents, took the veil but broke her vows and succeeded, in 1712, in gaining formal permission from Pope Clement XI for her secularisation. She is reputed to have had a liaison, while still formally a nun, with the Irish exile soldier Arthur Dillon.

Life as a socialite
She joined her sister Mme. de Ferriol in Paris, where she soon established a salon, frequented by wits and roués. Among her numerous lovers and benefactors was the Chevalier Louis-Camus Destouches, by whom she had an illegitimate son, Jean le Rond d'Alembert. Guillaume Dubois, the future First Minister was reportedly another of her lovers, even after he became Archbishop of Cambrai; but the affair, if it existed, was conducted with discretion.

One of her liaisons did have a tragic ending. In 1726 a former lover Charles-Joseph de la Fresnaye committed suicide in her house, and Mme. de Tencin spent some time in the Châtelet and then in the Bastille in consequence, but was soon liberated as the result of a declaration of her innocence by the Grand Conseil.

From this time she devoted herself to political intrigue, especially for the preferment of her brother the abbé Tencin, who became archbishop of Lyon and received a cardinal's hat. The nature of her relationship with her brother was a subject of much speculation, but although she never troubled to deny the rumours, there seems to be no evidence that their affection was more than fraternal.

She also was involved with King Louis XV's best friend, the Maréchal de Richelieu, over whom she allegedly exercised considerable control. The correspondence between Claudine, her brother and Richelieu shows a deep involvement in the behind-the-scenes intrigues at Louis XV's court at Versailles.

Eventually, she formed a literary salon, which had among its habitués Bernard le Bovier de Fontenelle, Charles de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu, Charles-Irénée Castel de Saint-Pierre, Pierre de Marivaux, Alexis Piron and others.

Hers was the first of the Parisian literary salons which admitted distinguished foreigners. Among her English guests were Henry St John, 1st Viscount Bolingbroke and Philip Stanhope, 4th Earl of Chesterfield.

Novels
She was a novelist of considerable merit. Her novels have been highly praised for their simplicity and charm, the last qualities the circumstances of the writer's life would lead one to expect in her work. The best of them is Mémoires du comte de Comminge (1735), which was believed to have been written, as were the other two, by her nephews, MM. d'Argental and Pont de Veyle, the real authorship being carefully concealed.

Her works, with those of Marie-Madeleine de La Fayette, were edited by Etienne and Jay (Paris, 1825); her novels were reprinted, with introductory matter by Lescure, in 1885; and her correspondence in the ''Lettres de Mmes. de Villars, de La Fayette et de Tencin'' (Paris, 1805–1832).

title: Claudine Guérin de Tencin


text:
User talk:TurboCamel

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them;

 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Tip: you can sign your name with ~

snoyes 22:40, 2 Dec 2003 (UTC)

title: User talk:TurboCamel